LG's 240Hz LH90 LED TV series priced, global release dates still a mystery
By Ross Miller 
posted Apr 22nd 2009 2:03AM
posted Apr 22nd 2009 2:03AM
posted Apr 22nd 2009 2:03AM
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
it's not an LED TV, it's an LED-backlight LCD TV. there's a fundemental difference!
HELLS YES!
Samsung is doing the same thing, calling their LED BACKLIT/sidelit, whatever the hell, ILLUMINATED LCD panels "LED HDTVs".
Somebody call the FTC on their lying asses...
...she looks like she is standing in a uterus...
uhhh...not sure what uterus you're familiar with but usually they don't split off into a green and blue hole at the back and have grey laminated bases...
My thoughts exactly.
She looks more like floating.... i dont see any lower legs.
creepy.
???WTF??
I would like to stand in her uterus. (...and shes already on her knees)
And thats a matrix of how many leds? In my opinion the contrast ratio should be given for a any given pixel next to any other.
ok couple comments.
a.) what the hell is "perfect led"?
b.) the samsung 9 series tv's (among other high-end sets) also already have a 2,000,000:1 contrast ratio
c.) but it doesn't matter because once you get say, over 100,000:1, it becomes ambiguous and they can pretty much put whatever they want anyway
regardless, im glad that led backlighting and higher refresh rates are becoming more common. however, a lot of lcd tv enthusiasts would argue that 120hz is the sweet spot
couple = 2
just sayin'
A lot of people who know what they're talking about when it comes to TVs will tell you that refresh rate isn't really the problem, it's response time. Plasma's is nearly 0, LCD's is 8ms standard. Refresh rate doesn't really matter if your broadcast is only outputting 60 frames a second in the first place.
All this 120Hz, 240Hz, 600Hz (Plasmas mocking LCD by saying they have 600Hz), is just fake bullcrap.
120Hz and up actually create interpolated frames. It really does work, even on LCDs, but to me it makes everything look too smooth, worse than a soap opera. Maybe good for video games but that's it.
The 9 series Samsung was very disappointing, I was so excited when we got them in at work but after looking at it for a few minutes and realising how skewed all the colours were even after calibration my excitement died altogether.
The 'Scarlet' LG series TV (2008) were fantastic value for money, in my opinion they were better than Sony/Samsung equivalent models. So I'm really looking forward to the new LH generation TVs.. hopefully they get it right unlike the 2007 line-up.
And regarding the Hz issue - it's simply the amount of times the screen is refreshing the image. 100, 200, 650Hz does not neccesserily make anything smother, it's the frame creation which does. What 100Hz etc are for is to reduce flicker, but without the frame generation they are doing nothing to improve smoothness.
Any frame generation is a synthetic technique and can often look really good or really bad.
That's exactly what I meant by fake bullcrap. You're not really seeing a smoother image how it's intended. Interpolation of frames isn't perfect and leads to some pretty unnatural movements in scenes meant to be slower.
If you want perfect motion, get a plasma.
I'm glad refresh rates are getting higher too, but they need to start allowing 120/240Hz inputs as well. I've got my PC hooked up to my TV, and would love to run it at 120Hz
@seriousam7
couple (SOME): noun [S] two or a few things that are similar or the same, or two or a few people who are in some way connected [...]
just bitchin'
120hz TVs interpolates frames already and it looks like crap;
240hz would be double the amount of interpolated frames
I don't know why anyone would want this
film is shot at 24FPS so running film at about 120FPS or so (taking this from 120hz being 60fpsish) is about 104fake frames, giving everything a nice early 1990s TV gooey video effect....
120hz its good for games, which run around 45-60fps, but 240...wtf need 240hz you eye can't even tell the difference.
response time is important, this is just marketing BS. Give me 120hz with .5ms response and no interpolating and i will be happy
this...DO NOT WANT.
"120hz its good for games"
actually, any form of interpolation isn't good for games either. The reasons being no tv can interpolate live frames, rather they interpolate previous frames, and delay the showing of them and the playback relevant sound.
this is bad... especially if you're playing a high intensity game where response time is key.
240Hz is just marketing tech. If you want to get picky, the best would be 120Hz, with no frame interpolation so it can display both movie and tv frame rates with telecine.
Movies: 120/24 = 5
TV: 120/30 = 4
Of course 240Hz would be the same without interpolation, just more duplicated frames and a significantly higher price tag. But again, CE companies make loads of money off John Q Uninformed.
*without telecine....
damnit!
why are they in the teletubby house?
The Vizio is going to be $2000 for the 55 inch. If this LG is around $2500 for the 55 inch, then a lot of people will be tempted otherwise I guess more will look favorably to the budget Vizio.
There is a reason that they cost less
@Xlar
+10
"...around ₩3,300,000 (US $2,445) to ₩ 6,400,000 (US $4,742), depending on the model."
So the "model" on the right will cost an extra $2,297 (cheaper than the TV itself)?
ha ha
she's kneeling anyway
say, is there an Engadget hall-of-fame tech-babe photo ranking anywhere? ...now that would be good!
yummy.
I have a korean girl fetish from this blog.
http://www.reallycuteasians.com/
Why don't these fuckers stop outright lying and call them LCDs like they really are?
hey, surely you're not allowed to say the f word?? ...unless its in relation to korean babes !!!
LED TV. So fucking sad.
We are so advanced now we are using LEDs for TV. Man, I don't that's supposed to be a sarcasm or fact, because I have no idea what I'm talking about. Hey, who took my beer! Geez!
Jack
It's going to take a lot to convince me to buy another fancy new TV. First it was CRT, then plasma and then LCD....then they say you HAD to have 1080p because it was "better". Now the new thing they come up with to sell you a TV is 120HZ.
My Sony cost over 3 grand when I bought it and now that I have a Vizio as a secondary TV and it looks nearly as good, in this economy there's no way i'm buying another expensive TV. Not for 3 grand or whatever a new top of the line Sony or Samsung costs.
Vizio 50" 1080P TVs for just over a grand or so are really tempting. I have two Vizios and none of them have died yet. One makes an annoying very low buzzing when the contrast is turned down too low. I think Sony can still compete with Vizio on some models though.
But is an Asian model included with the TV?
She's the perfect height to service my TV aerial
So it's a LED backlit LCD, thanks, I thought it was new technology.
Now the Hz. Does the backlight flicker? I thought it was always on. And the LCD part does not flicker assuming it's an active matrix TFT, right? CRTs need a refresh and have a frequency but that's a different story.
So what are those 240 Hz???? A strange way of indicating a response time of around 4 ms maybe??? or does it interpolate pictures from e.g. 25 or 50 fps to 240 with some magic algorithm?
The 240Hz still technically refers to a refresh rate, not a response time.
The way LCD creates an image is this: the light source (be it fluorescent backlight, LED etc.) shines through an extremely large array of liquid crystals which only let a certain amount of light pass through, thus creating different colours for each pixel. By doing this 60, 120, or 240 times per second, you effectively get the refresh rate akin to the old CRT refresh rates. If your refresh rate is too low on an LCD (i.e. 40Hz) you will still see noticeable flicker, just like an old CRT. The blacklight itself isn't flickering, but the rate at which the colours are changing and updating gives your refresh rate.
240Hz, as you said, does interpolate pictures. It uses a prediction algorithm based on the next and current frame to 'create' frames in between. This gives the appearance of a much smoother, although sometimes unnatural image.
Refresh? mmh... DRAM needs refresh because it's content kind of "leakes" quicky, CRT needs refresh because stimulated phosphors fade quickly. But if the backlight is on (think of it as a light bulb) and an LCD pixel remains transparent (think of it as an open window) what refresh and what flicker are we talking about?
BTW, my LCD monitor is at 60 Hz and has ZERO flicker (while my older 60 Hz CRT was very flickery) (it does leave very very slight trails on the borders when moving elements but that is due to response time, the time required for an LCD pixel to change its state).
As for interpolation... good to know. I thought that was still in concept research at labs and universities. So it's a kind of a "morphing", not just blended fading between frames?
Think of it this way, an LCD's refresh rate is the number of times per second that every pixel on the screen is able to change colour. In other words, every pixel can open, close, or anything in between, up to 60 (or 120, or 240 etc.) times per second. If you wanted a 60Hz LCD to somehow display 61 colours in a second (assuming response time, which is a whole different beast in itself, was 0ms), it simply wouldn't happen, but 60 is possible.
The reason your 60Hz LCD doesn't flicker is because really, what you see on an LCD is a constantly changing image, not image replaced by image replaced by image etc. like a CRT. I misinformed you a little bit on my first post by saying that LCD flicker is exactly the same as CRT flicker, which isn't quite the case. If you managed to display a lower refresh rate on an LCD, it'd be more like a slideshow. It'd be as if you're capping the framerate at 30 frames per second instead of 60 for example. You would not notice the screen flicker (i.e. as if its turning on and off constantly) like a CRT.
I feel like I'm on the AVS forum.
damn it, more comment about the girl please!
She's boasting a flat front panel too, or maybe it's just the dress.
they really like saying "mum's the word," huh?
Mmmm.... Asian Midget, two dreams come true
Please define "THX support".
There's nothing to "support". It's a certification standard. Might as well say "UL/CE/ETL support", too.
That's what I was wondering as well. Does George Lucas come to your house to set it up?
I think "THX Support" has to do more with the girl-in-the photo's bra size.
A little fat. Not the TV of course.
But still yummy :)
Hopefully it looks better than the Sony 240 models I've seen (calibrated by Sony). They weren't even close to the Kuro plasma in PQ comparisons. The Sony also only came in the funsize portions, nothing even 65".