Bravia HX850 successor -W900A with Quantum Dot !
- Thread starter avmaxfan
- Start date
awesome , hopefully by next weekend i would have my hands on it, best part comes with 4 pair of active glasses:yahoo:
Just checked out the 55" W950 at the Koramangala Sony Center. Have to say that it's gorgeous. It couldn't play my test mkv that I had put together (it played perfectly on the Panny S60 30 minutes ago). With the other mp4 that I had on the USB, colors were off. I didn't have time to adjust (I wasn't expecting to see the W950!) so I decided to leave and return with the right test material.
- Price 2.20L (without haggling)
- Blacks were gorgeous
- Reflections were well controlled
- Colors were rich
- Sound was awesome (for a TV)
- TV itself was gorgeous in the flesh (panel and bezel were almost the same black)
More info after I do a proper demo.
BTW, just next to this beauty was the 84" 4K TV. At 17L, I thought it was well worth it. Shame about the lack of content though.
- Price 2.20L (without haggling)
- Blacks were gorgeous
- Reflections were well controlled
- Colors were rich
- Sound was awesome (for a TV)
- TV itself was gorgeous in the flesh (panel and bezel were almost the same black)
More info after I do a proper demo.
BTW, just next to this beauty was the 84" 4K TV. At 17L, I thought it was well worth it. Shame about the lack of content though.
just4kix
Well-Known Member
At Sony, you can't haggle much. That is their pricing policy. If the TV is 220K MRP, then you may be able to knock off max 5%.
In Bangalore, I recommend purchasing from Devi International - they give better discounts
gcpraveen
Active Member
Even at devi for Sony u wont get much!
just4kix
Well-Known Member
Congrats! What was the total damage to the pocket?
will pay at the time of delivery as dealer is a good freind of mineCongrats! What was the total damage to the pocket?
hopefully would get a good discount cnet reveiw is out
http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-...-6482_7-35561946.html?part=rss&tag=feed&subj=
akasmarty2003
Active Member
Now this is worrisome: DK-Cnet: picture quality not as good as last year's midrange HX850; some strange artifacts in 3D.
This makes an intresting reading Got it from avforums , i think worth sharing .......
Ok well having it setup I've tested a few things. Now please bare in mind I am EXTREMELY picky, so things I may pick up on or criticize you might not even notice or care about.
I've also compared it to the VT65 that I currently own, I am simply using netflix on both of the tvs and playing the same content (scientific I know ).
I disabled all the "enhancements" on both tvs. And used Cinema 1 on the Sony and Professional 1 on the VT65 which I calibrated using a meter so again not necessarily a fair comparison as the Sony is out of the box.
Ok well first thing that hit me is the size, I have a 50" VT65 and didn't expect much of a difference but the 55" is noticeably larger which really adds to the immersion. Secondly in terms of looks I prefer the Sony to be honest, while the single sheet of glass is slick on the Panasonic, the black thick bezel is ugly in my opinion.
The sound while decent on the Sony is not as good as the VT65, although to be fair none of them are good but the Panasonic is hands down the best with regards to built in speakers from a flat screen tv. Unless you go for a B&O or Loewe you won't get better. That I imagine won't be an issue as most of you probably use dedicated amps/receivers and speakers. The sound is better than the F8000 I had though. As truth be told that sounded like a crisp packet being scrunched together lol.
Now as usual I can't help myself and always go and stick slides on and watch a tv in the dark to check for "issues", I seem to do it all the time, so again I'm not representative of a "normal" person. Unfortunately although expected with a 0IRE slide the Sony has some clouding, I don't like it but I'm well aware that you will NOT get an lcd that has led backlighting with perfect uniformity. To be fair it's not bad at all, but obviously against the VT65 which is perfectly uniform it stands out more and makes me feel a little sad.
Some people have mentioned "pillars" "Lines" "Shadows", I have these too, but as I suspected it's the same as what I had on the ES8000 and F8000. If you look at the tv from the side you can see the led backlighting bleeding through which I think is the cause of this. Now bare in mind I've only seen two W9s, I'd say EVERY set has this but will like clouding vary in severity from set to set.
While on a black screen I've stood up and looked at the tv from the side, now luckily I don't watch the standing up looking at it from the side (and I imagine not many do ) but the blacK turns a nice shade of washed out blue. This again is hard to stomach having a VT65 but again just a limitation of the technology.
Those are the real negatives I have now onto the more positives. Firstly noise, there is none, and you don't notice it until you switch off the VT65 how loud it actually is "buzzzzzzzzz....whooooooosssssh" arggghh shut up lol. Seriously this is a positive for me.
While the black slides is a torture test for any lcd, I put a white slide up which is a torture test for any plasma. Now first things first back to noise, the VT65 sounded like it was going to explode, seriously the buzz coming out of it. Now in real world content when it goes to a bright scene, then out of it it's "buzzzz......pause.....buzzz" really annoying. With the W9 it's nothing but sheer bliss, no sound and crisp whites, the VT65 looked grey and absolutely disgusting compared to the Sony. In isolation the VT65 looks ok, but side by side it looks poor. The Sony does have a blue tinge to the whites but it's more pleasing to my eye.
Right I imagine by now most of you have given up reading, as I've written a novel on slides, and most of you don't typically watch slides on a Saturday night with the family gathered round so you'll want to know about the content.
I put some animation from Netflix firstly, and while the VT65 has so much depth to the image, I honestly thought they were going to come out of the screen on the W9. The colours were absolutely jawdropping, I was shocked to be fair. Some might still prefer the image out of the VT65 and call it more natural but for my eyes I much prefer the W9.
I then put some prison break (my fave series) and the first thing to hit me was the motion, now bare in mind ifc is disabled on the VT65 and motionflow is off on the W9. The VT65 just judders and I can see the double images as the camera pans. On the W9 it's just much smoother and no double imaging. I can't emphasize enough how pleasing it looks on the W9. Some complain about motion blur but it looks really good compared to the VT65 that is so sharp you see the double images and judder on pans where low framerate material is fed into it.
I'd also like to say how GOOD it felt to NOT see any false contouring on camera pans, honestly having them playing side by side the W9 really emphasised how many issues in my opinions the VT65 has with motion. On a similar note ZERO line bleed which is a big annoyance of mine.
I'm a big gamer (main reason for the W9) so tried battlefield 3 and panned on both and again the VT65 looked disgusting, the double imaging was headache inducing. On the Sony it looked much better, motion was just beautiful to my eyes with no noticeable double imaging due to blur. The crispness of everything too, from the HUD, to textures, just everything looked amazing. Bare in mind sharpness was at it's lowest setting on both tvs.
Seriously for gamers the W9 is the dream tv, honestly. I know some say plasmas are just as sharp as lcds as they technically display the full 1920x1080 lines, but I'm sorry side by side the VT65 looks like the screen has been smeared with vaseline.
Lastly just so some of you know, I generally watch tv in a dark environment, I have blackout blinds that with no lamp on and door closed even at 2pm on a summers day my room is PITCH black. I have only a 6500k bulb behind the tv for lighting. In this environment the flaws of the Sony (and lcds in general) are too much for me, the picture looks either too bright, and if I tone things down just looks washed out.
With more light in the room, the VT65 looks bad in comparison, the blacks look grey, image looks flat, just dull. The W9 walks all over it.
The W9 is without a doubt the best lcd I've owned, it suprised me because it looked much better to my eyes in most situations compared to the VT65. There's obviously a reason why lcds outsell plasmas, they generally look dull, dim and flat under store lighting right? It looks awesome at home right? But why does the W9 make my VT65 look like that in my own home...
Ok well having it setup I've tested a few things. Now please bare in mind I am EXTREMELY picky, so things I may pick up on or criticize you might not even notice or care about.
I've also compared it to the VT65 that I currently own, I am simply using netflix on both of the tvs and playing the same content (scientific I know ).
I disabled all the "enhancements" on both tvs. And used Cinema 1 on the Sony and Professional 1 on the VT65 which I calibrated using a meter so again not necessarily a fair comparison as the Sony is out of the box.
Ok well first thing that hit me is the size, I have a 50" VT65 and didn't expect much of a difference but the 55" is noticeably larger which really adds to the immersion. Secondly in terms of looks I prefer the Sony to be honest, while the single sheet of glass is slick on the Panasonic, the black thick bezel is ugly in my opinion.
The sound while decent on the Sony is not as good as the VT65, although to be fair none of them are good but the Panasonic is hands down the best with regards to built in speakers from a flat screen tv. Unless you go for a B&O or Loewe you won't get better. That I imagine won't be an issue as most of you probably use dedicated amps/receivers and speakers. The sound is better than the F8000 I had though. As truth be told that sounded like a crisp packet being scrunched together lol.
Now as usual I can't help myself and always go and stick slides on and watch a tv in the dark to check for "issues", I seem to do it all the time, so again I'm not representative of a "normal" person. Unfortunately although expected with a 0IRE slide the Sony has some clouding, I don't like it but I'm well aware that you will NOT get an lcd that has led backlighting with perfect uniformity. To be fair it's not bad at all, but obviously against the VT65 which is perfectly uniform it stands out more and makes me feel a little sad.
Some people have mentioned "pillars" "Lines" "Shadows", I have these too, but as I suspected it's the same as what I had on the ES8000 and F8000. If you look at the tv from the side you can see the led backlighting bleeding through which I think is the cause of this. Now bare in mind I've only seen two W9s, I'd say EVERY set has this but will like clouding vary in severity from set to set.
While on a black screen I've stood up and looked at the tv from the side, now luckily I don't watch the standing up looking at it from the side (and I imagine not many do ) but the blacK turns a nice shade of washed out blue. This again is hard to stomach having a VT65 but again just a limitation of the technology.
Those are the real negatives I have now onto the more positives. Firstly noise, there is none, and you don't notice it until you switch off the VT65 how loud it actually is "buzzzzzzzzz....whooooooosssssh" arggghh shut up lol. Seriously this is a positive for me.
While the black slides is a torture test for any lcd, I put a white slide up which is a torture test for any plasma. Now first things first back to noise, the VT65 sounded like it was going to explode, seriously the buzz coming out of it. Now in real world content when it goes to a bright scene, then out of it it's "buzzzz......pause.....buzzz" really annoying. With the W9 it's nothing but sheer bliss, no sound and crisp whites, the VT65 looked grey and absolutely disgusting compared to the Sony. In isolation the VT65 looks ok, but side by side it looks poor. The Sony does have a blue tinge to the whites but it's more pleasing to my eye.
Right I imagine by now most of you have given up reading, as I've written a novel on slides, and most of you don't typically watch slides on a Saturday night with the family gathered round so you'll want to know about the content.
I put some animation from Netflix firstly, and while the VT65 has so much depth to the image, I honestly thought they were going to come out of the screen on the W9. The colours were absolutely jawdropping, I was shocked to be fair. Some might still prefer the image out of the VT65 and call it more natural but for my eyes I much prefer the W9.
I then put some prison break (my fave series) and the first thing to hit me was the motion, now bare in mind ifc is disabled on the VT65 and motionflow is off on the W9. The VT65 just judders and I can see the double images as the camera pans. On the W9 it's just much smoother and no double imaging. I can't emphasize enough how pleasing it looks on the W9. Some complain about motion blur but it looks really good compared to the VT65 that is so sharp you see the double images and judder on pans where low framerate material is fed into it.
I'd also like to say how GOOD it felt to NOT see any false contouring on camera pans, honestly having them playing side by side the W9 really emphasised how many issues in my opinions the VT65 has with motion. On a similar note ZERO line bleed which is a big annoyance of mine.
I'm a big gamer (main reason for the W9) so tried battlefield 3 and panned on both and again the VT65 looked disgusting, the double imaging was headache inducing. On the Sony it looked much better, motion was just beautiful to my eyes with no noticeable double imaging due to blur. The crispness of everything too, from the HUD, to textures, just everything looked amazing. Bare in mind sharpness was at it's lowest setting on both tvs.
Seriously for gamers the W9 is the dream tv, honestly. I know some say plasmas are just as sharp as lcds as they technically display the full 1920x1080 lines, but I'm sorry side by side the VT65 looks like the screen has been smeared with vaseline.
Lastly just so some of you know, I generally watch tv in a dark environment, I have blackout blinds that with no lamp on and door closed even at 2pm on a summers day my room is PITCH black. I have only a 6500k bulb behind the tv for lighting. In this environment the flaws of the Sony (and lcds in general) are too much for me, the picture looks either too bright, and if I tone things down just looks washed out.
With more light in the room, the VT65 looks bad in comparison, the blacks look grey, image looks flat, just dull. The W9 walks all over it.
The W9 is without a doubt the best lcd I've owned, it suprised me because it looked much better to my eyes in most situations compared to the VT65. There's obviously a reason why lcds outsell plasmas, they generally look dull, dim and flat under store lighting right? It looks awesome at home right? But why does the W9 make my VT65 look like that in my own home...
Last edited:
Hmm. No doubt w9 will be the best led till date. But I don't want to start a plasma vs lcd fight.
As a plasma lover I only would say that the comments need not be taken seriously as the reviewer appears to be little wierd because he says he likes a bluish tint on whites.
He does not understand that real life images are not as sharp as an led portrays.
It is a matter of personal taste that some people like natural colours and picture with natural motion and others like sharper and bright picture with artificial colours and madeup motion. Thats all ,your honour!!!
As a plasma lover I only would say that the comments need not be taken seriously as the reviewer appears to be little wierd because he says he likes a bluish tint on whites.
He does not understand that real life images are not as sharp as an led portrays.
It is a matter of personal taste that some people like natural colours and picture with natural motion and others like sharper and bright picture with artificial colours and madeup motion. Thats all ,your honour!!!
Just gathered this from another forum, that the India bound version W950A is a cheaper version of W900A. Cheaper by 11%.
The difference is the monolithic design and bass box sound (?). Everything else apparently remains the same, plus the monolithic design looks better than the one on W900A.
The difference is the monolithic design and bass box sound (?). Everything else apparently remains the same, plus the monolithic design looks better than the one on W900A.
longshanks
Well-Known Member
Sony is selling inferior product in India but at a higher price than what it is being sold in USA?
avmaxfan
Active Member
That is incorrect my friend, W950 is much more expensive than W900. In Singapore the difference between W900 and W950 is more than 500 SGD. Go to Sony singapore and Hong Kong sites and compare W900 and W950 prices. W950 is a premium version of W900
+1 .
The w950 is indeed the more premium version ,its has better audio a fact backed up by the slightly increased power consumption.
Like the older flagship models with monolithic design the W950 has a opticontrast panel to reduce/eliminate the external/internal reflections respectively.
cnet uk reveiw of 40inch w905A
Sony KDL-40W905A Review | TVs | CNET UK
Sony KDL-40W905A Review | TVs | CNET UK
It appears that sony has infused a new life into led tvs by achieving very deep blacks.
Now one should get more pleasure watching a hubblecast or a nasa video showing glowing galaxies on the background of a deep black space.
Now one should get more pleasure watching a hubblecast or a nasa video showing glowing galaxies on the background of a deep black space.
alphacentury100
Well-Known Member
these are my exact thoughts too. I too prefer plasma over led period.
sony w900a taken apart
Google Translate
Google Translate
Follow HiFiMART on Instagram for offers, deals and FREE giveaways!
