Pioneer Kuro - Owners are delirious

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 10:00

There is someone trying to sell a Kuro for £1500 (bare in mind this is a tv that is over 16 years old).

Why would anyone pay that when they can get a 55" 4K OLED brand new with 5-6 year warranty for cheaper.

Seriously Kuro owners need to realise their tv's are worth £250 at best.

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 10:37

ph0 said:
That's just taking the biscuit.

Out of curiosity, what 55" 4K OLED set is available for under £1500?

Check on HUKD 55" 1080P's can be had for £900 ish

55" 4K can be had for under £1600

both from LG

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 11:40

hornetstinger said:
I've got a LX-5090. No way I'd sell it for £250.

Good luck getting any more for it.

Nobody wants to spend £1500 on a tv older than their children that doesn't do 4K or smart, and the list goes on and on and on.

They have had their day. Trying to sell VHS for 4K Blu Ray money.

I have an old plasma that was also reviewed highly. I know there is no point in selling it as I will never get what it's worth and I will likely keep it for the next 10 years or until it dies.

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 11:50

hornetstinger said:
Then don't buy it then.

Same for selling speakers, what so you think they're old so worth 1/10th their value?

Do you see people selling 17 year old cars for half what they were brand new?

You have to be realistic here.

Zero warranty - Paid £1500 and it blows up tomorrow. Who would do such a thing? Especially when you can get an OLED which is better for cheaper. You would have to be an idiot to think £1500 for a Kuro is a good deal.

No 4K - Everyone is buying 4K. Buying a 17 year old 1080P is akin to someone buying a VHS today. It doesn't make any sense especially for £1500 when I got a top of the range Sony 55" for £449 last year.

Come on you have to see how ridiculous the pricing is.

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:01

llamadal said:
So you want something, don't want to pay what the seller is asking /create moan thread.

You can keep repeating the same old stuff, but doesn't make it so.

I don't want it. I just thought the pricing was ridiculous. I have a 4K TV in my bedroom by LG one of their premium IPS panels. I have a 55" premium sony in the games room and a 50" panny plasma premium panel in the bedroom.

I have no need for a 17 year old Kuro at any price.

hornetstinger said:
4K is pointless unless you have a much larger screen. Don't care if "everyone is buying it" if I bought a new 50" I'd stick with 1080p. If I had a projector then I'd get 4K.

4K isn't pointless. 4K streams are akin to blu ray quality. Don't have a 4k tv then you have to use 1080P streams which are noticebly inferior to blu rays.

Show me which new 50" 1080P you would buy then? You cannot buy decent 1080p's new any more. However that just means you buy 4K instead as that can play 1080P too.

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:12

Oh yeah that has definitely convinced me to spend £1500 on a Kuro. Give over.

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:16

hornetstinger said:
don't forget you want to have a 4K mobile phone too. Anything less, well it's just crap.

How good is your eyesight anyway?

4K is pointless for 40", to be worthwhile you need a large screen projector.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/annual-tv-shootout-winner-announced-at-ce-week/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnarc...asma-tv-in-new-public-shoot-out/#459931724727

How is 4K pointless for 40"? you do know pc gamers are buying 4K monitors at 24-28".

Have you watched 4K content on a 40" tv?

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:19

Have you watched 4K content on a 40"-55" tv?

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:26

hornetstinger said:
I'd rather watch it on a projector. You do know a high resolution, small screen is pointless?

Like having a 4K mobile phone.

So you haven't watched 4K content on a 40-55" tv

So how do you know it's pointless? Because someone made a table or graph on the internet?

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:30

Armageus said:
According to that calculator though 1080P is pointless (based on the size of my TV and viewing distance) - apparently anything less than 55" isn't enough, and for 4K I would apparently need a 110" TV.

So I take it you have watched 1080P content as well as SD and it wasn't pointless?

I used to believe those tables and graphs too before I actually went and viewed 4K content on a TV. Then I had to believe my eyes.

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 12:39

Armageus said:
Exactly - I have Sky, so can swap between SD and HD versions of the same channel easily - even though neither are 1080P native, then the difference is clear to see. Even though "those tables" say my experience should be sub-optimal.

Bearing in mind that article is now nearly 4 years old and we actually have 4K blurays (rather than just poor bitrate 4k streaming). Whilst I haven't yet experience 4K bluray on a 4K screen, I am confident I could easily see the difference vs 1080P bluray on a 1080P screen.

I have a 43" 4K screen and I can tell the difference between UHD streams on amazon and HD ones. I sit approx 6 feet away as I have the tv on a cantilever mount so I pull it away from the wall and bring it closer to my seating position. If I left it in it's frame I would be about aprox 8-9 feet away and I can still tell a difference.

It's pretty clear too the difference night and day with HDR content.

Psycho Sonny · 27 Jan 2017 at 13:40

Don't OLED black levels surpass the Kuro?

Psycho Sonny · 28 Jan 2017 at 11:23

Dangerous Dave said:
It is over priced

4k offers little benefit over 1080p on 50-60" screens at normal viewing distances.

If you have seen a calibrated Kuro side by side other calibrated TV models you would understand why they still demand a high price.

I wouldn't buy one now though as the red tinge issue has killed off my last one.

Glad to see you also think the price of them isn't worth it.

However 4K offers big benefits especially if you stream sources like amazon prime and netflix. The difference is night and day. HD streams compared to UHD HDR streams is like comparing dvd to blu ray.

However I have don't own a 4k blu ray player or any 4k blu rays to test 4k blu ray vs 1080p blu ray where they very well may offer very little in benefit other than HDR but I would need to see first.

And I watch on a 43" tv as it's the max allowed in my living room :mad:

. 55" in the games room tho

Psycho Sonny · 28 Jan 2017 at 13:02

hornetstinger said:
What is your 4K compression like? 43" is too small for 4K to be worthwhile unless you view it from 5' or closer.

You would need to ask amazon and netflix

Also I can tell you for a fact it's very noticeable as the other 2 tv's I have are bigger and all 3 have similar viewing distances of around 5-8 feet.

4K is definetely worthwhile if you watch 4k streams.

If all you do is game on consoles and watch broadcast tv then no it's not worthwhile.

However 4K streams have much higher quality than HD streams. There has even been multiple reviews done by avforums and hdtvtest that say the same.

4K Resolution Is Visible vs 1080p on 55″ TV from 9′ Viewing Distance

http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/4k-resolution-201312153517.htm

"The results are now in, and an overwhelming majority of participants correctly identified the 4K TV, indicating that there exists a perceptible difference even from as far as 9 feet away on a 55in screen. Out of 49 attendees who submitted their pick to enter a prize draw, only one thought that the 1080p set was the 4K display."

So 1 person out of 49 couldn't see the difference.

I imagine they could have stepped 3 feet back and results be similar but we will never know.

Stop reading stuff on the internet and go see for yourself.