SkyGlass Awful

[lfcg]

@Satele 

Baseless and ridiculous, why is my experience with sky glass baseless and ridiculous?

And if I want to say less than HD quality then I will and I would expect an AV expert like yourself to get it. Because obviously you are, can you list your equipment again just so everybody is clear!

[lfcg]

@Satele 

Erm I think you posted that 🤣.

I was actually saying that maybe £17 a month for a tv might not even register with people, I'm sorry I forgot I need to spell it out don't I, I'm not assuming any person can or can't afford anything, but if somebody thinks £17 a month is nothing to worry about then I will keep the tv.

[SimonW]

---

@Melancholic wrote:

It might sound crappy, but are Sky holding back for V2 of their Glass TV. For example,  I love my Apple products, but I know they are sitting on tech for each release, that's how they keep people like me coming back.

Sky started out with HD, then + came along, before Q and I fully expect a Q V2 coming along in the next couple of years with UHD minis; with Glass it can clearly be done. We all have expectations, but 20 years ago we couldn't record a TV show without a VCR and a cassette which only had three hours of recording time.

---

Firms aren't sitting on tech in the way you think, tech changes so much in such a short space of time that if they do by the time they release their product it's out of date. If something isn't added it's because its not ready or because there is a logistical reason.

If there was something Sky had access to that would make the product better they would have it in. I suspect the problem here is simply at the price they were willing to pay Sky haven't had access to anything better. Will be interesting to see Comcasts version as they actually went with Hisense making the panels and I suspect that will make their version better as Sky have basically done what was common for High street firms did in the early 2000's and gone to a firm with no real heritage but who have bought some heritage by licencing the use of brands that previously had a name that meant something (or in Some cases the stores even licenced the brand name themselves and stuck it on white goods). Hisense may sell very competitively priced goods but they are using that Chinese tactic of producing good products for the price range to get a foothold so you would expect the panels Comcast get to be better.

On the Q version 2 I doubt we get that. Distribution down the internet is generally going to be cheaper for both them and the broadcasters and offer more freedom. There is a reason why Sky Glass was able to secure HD versions of channels that aren't broadcasting HD via any other standard broadcast method. As we move towards 8K it will be much more flexible for services. The thing holding them back right now is home internet speeds but with both Openreach scaling up their FTTP deployment, VM also starting to be much more serious about expanding after it being almost non-existent since before NTL and Telewest merged and all the alt-nets laying networks. In the town, I live we already have a small number of properties with FTTP from openreach and currently have THREE separate Alt-nets laying their own cable to off 1 gig FTTP.  Sky Q is likely if they can solve the current major issues to go the way of Sky+, they will support those already on it but they will limit new customers access to it to those who simply can't get the required internet speed. They certainly aren't going to develop new hardware though and they will need new hardware as the Sky Q main box is by all account unable to even send 4K to mini-boxes even if the mini-box could support it, adding that support into new boxes would be expensive for a service they are most likely planning to kill off as soon as they feel they can

[Melancholic]

@SimonW 

I get that tech is evolving quickly, but Sky have hardly reinvented the wheel with Glass. They are offering basic services that are available on my 2016 LG TV. Instead of a box like Apple or a stick like Amazon, or even their own NOW TV, they have decided to put their services in a TV. Tonight I watched a football game in 4K HDR via am Apple TV box I bought two years ago, for a £5 per month subscription, on said foreamentioned TV.

The lack of bluetooth options is a prime example. Nothing revolutionary, but all equivalent value TVs would allow a a bluetooth headset to be connected at the least. It's worth noting that Comcast's TVs start from $298, so I don't expect a World beating set.

I won't dismiss Glass, because there is a market for it and I am intrested to see how it develops, but it's not a cheap solution and it is missing some basic stuff for the price point.

[SimonW]

---

@Satele wrote:

---

@lfcg wrote:

@Satele 

Ok you are correct of course.

If your happy with a wishy washy sub standard less than HD picture when it should be uhd hdr then I'm happy for you.

It's been done to death when you put up the last post I take it.

I guess I was unlucky twice with a fault unit......then another faulty unit!!

---

And there's the point, there is absolutely nothign sub-standard or less than HD picture quality (whatever that means) about my set.

The point I'm making is that myself and others have got sets that function exactly as expected and with great quality. Enough to keep me from going back to my 6 month old 65" Ambilight.

---

If you don't think the picture is substandard then you need to go get your eyes checked. 

I'm upstairs having been watching the football while everyone else is watching soaps on the main TV and I have a 4-year-old 50inch Hisense, LED TV. Cost about £350 so nothing wonderful. However if I walk to the left of the TV I don't see any noticeable washout on the right hand side until I reach about 40 degrees.  Same if I walk to the left, the right starts to show some washing out at around 40 degrees.

The Sky Glass was washing out significantly for me being just a little off centre, something in the 5-10 degrees range. Poor viewing angles isn't a faulty set issue, that's a fundamental panel issue. You see it on pictures people have been posting, even those who are raving about the picture quality, if their photo is off centre just a little you can see it washing out.

And that's before you get to HDR, it doesn't have the nits to show the full range, now you generally don't find TV's on sale that do but there are two tactics they use to handle HDR without enough nits, you either clip the HDR range at the TV's max which means not only get the full dynamic range but it can also blow out the picture when its above the nits of what the TV can handle. The other is you move the average brightness down so the peak of the range is at the TV's peak nits. This gives you closer to the full dynamic range and at times more detail in the picture BUT  it makes the image darker. If you have enough nits that's not a problem, the Glass doesn't, it only just meets the HLG minimum do if you try and watch the football even with the backlight taken off auto and cranked up the highest you have a dull picture. Again that's not a fault set, that's an inherent problem with the panel being used.

No one was expecting a TV that rivals those that cost over a grand but the bare minimum is it should be comparable with a TV and Soundbar bundle that costs the same price as the Glass does and it fails that, mainly in the panel. It helps turn what should have been a killer product for the price to a bit of a dud that the reasonably good soundbar (something you would maybe spend between £200 and £400 on) can't help but make up for

[sceptic101]

@Satele No. To clarify, I think the new TV is a big plus point to Glass (besides all it's other features) for many potential subscribers as they potentially have an older/outdated TV they would like to replace. Others may already have a modern TV but still take Glass as they really want the new service. The first group are more likely to want to keep it than the second, and assuming they are staying with Sky I think those spreading the payments are probably more likely to keep it than those who forked out the whole amount up front. Also just because someone decides to spread the payments does not mean they cannot afford it...!

[SimonW]

---

@Melancholic wrote:

@SimonW 

I get that tech is evolving quickly, but Sky have hardly reinvented the wheel with Glass. They are offering basic services that are available on my 2016 LG TV. Instead of a box like Apple or a stick like Amazon, or even their own NOW TV, they have decided to put their services in a TV. Tonight I watched a football game in 4K HDR via am Apple TV box I bought two years ago, for a £5 per month subscription, on said foreamentioned TV.

The lack of bluetooth options is a prime example. Nothing revolutionary, but all equivalent value TVs would allow a a bluetooth headset to be connected at the least. It's worth noting that Comcast's TVs start from $298, so I don't expect a World beating set.

I won't dismiss Glass, because there is a market for it and I am intrested to see how it develops, but it's not a cheap solution and it is missing some basic stuff for the price point.

---

I know they aren't reinventing the wheel but my point is they aren't sitting on something that makes the product great to help sell a V2 because those things in 2 years won't be a selling point. They have put out a substandard piece of hardware for logistical reasons not to make the next product appealing(ie its the panel they could get for the low price they were willing to spend). Anything missing now isn't going to be seen as a big win for Sky in 2 years time.

And I'm not expecting the Comcast one to be a world-beater but I certainly would have more faith in a Hisense $300 panel than a TP Vision £649 one as in my experience Hisense panels are better than their price point suggests, not where you are getting a panel that looks like its a £1000 but you are paying under £400 but better than the majority of panels in sets around that same price. I can't help but feel if Sky had been willing to spend more  and gone with someone like Hisense for the panels we would have a panel that feels more worthy in a TV and Soundbard content of this price 

[Chrisee]

@SimonW you need to read the details of the Comcast TVs as detailed in articles like this one before jumping to conclusions. It is apparently based on the Hisense budget A6G range which is very much a basic LED TV with low peak brightness under 300nits and no local dimming. It is unclear if the Comcast branded units will have VA or IPS panels as the A6G range uses both in its different sizes. This is R'tings review of the base range which is hardly stellar giving a 6.5 overall rating. 

Your assessment of the Glass as substandard is not born out by the increasing number of reviews but you are entitled to your opinion of course . If Sky had launched the same Hisense based models in the UK your criticisms would be merited but you are not comparing like with like. Glass has a FALD VA panel with a Quantum dot layer which will have narrower viewing angle than a IPS panel but in all other respects is superior. However I can find no support for your earlier comment of a 10 degree viewing angle. Sky quote 78 degrees which is in line with most reviews of these types of panels and seems much more likely.

[Anonymous]

---

@lfcg wrote:

@Satele 

Baseless and ridiculous, why is my experience with sky glass baseless and ridiculous?

And if I want to say less than HD quality then I will and I would expect an AV expert like yourself to get it. Because obviously you are, can you list your equipment again just so everybody is clear!

---

Because you don't agree with them obviously...

[Rayner2210]

Agreed. . Sky Glass is a step backwards. Unless your a bum sat at home watching TV Live all day, that's the only way to watch your programs in their intended HD or UHD viewing. Far too many programs (Sports and ITV) Your watching downgraded on catch up. F1 only available in HD unless Live. And even worse all ITV programs in SD only... its going backwards.

I have the 65" White Glass TV, and my previous 58" 4k Panasonic now in the bedroom. Wife was watching her program in SD on itvhub last night.. hardly utilising the hardware.

I'm going back to Q today.

[SimonW]

---

@Chrisee wrote:

@SimonW you need to read the details of the Comcast TVs as detailed in articles like this one before jumping to conclusions. It is apparently based on the Hisense budget A6G range which is very much a basic LED TV with low peak brightness under 300nits and no local dimming. It is unclear if the Comcast branded units will have VA or IPS panels as the A6G range uses both in its different sizes. This is R'tings review of the base range which is hardly stellar giving a 6.5 overall rating. 

Your assessment of the Glass as substandard is not born out by the increasing number of reviews but you are entitled to your opinion of course . If Sky had launched the same Hisense based models in the UK your criticisms would be merited but you are not comparing like with like. Glass has a FALD VA panel with a Quantum dot layer which will have narrower viewing angle than a IPS panel but in all other respects is superior. However I can find no support for your earlier comment of a 10 degree viewing angle. Sky quote 78 degrees which is in line with most reviews of these types of panels and seems much more likely.

---

First lets deal with the viewing angles, at no point did I say the image becomes 'unviewable' at 10 degrees but it does start to wash out before you reach 10 degrees offset. I've seen it in person on not just my set but a couple of others, I've also seen it in pictures people are posting even those who are claiming how good the screen is. Sorry but anyone who thinks a screen where about 1/3 of the screen becomes noticeably less vibrant when you move off being dead centre is a complete and utter joke especially at the price being paid as this isn't supposed to be a budget panel at this price, even taking the sound into account that adds value it should be pushing more the lower end of the midrange.  Even some of the Samsungs and LG LED tv's that use wide-viewing angles as a selling point see colour washout happen at the 30-40 degree range and some FALD VA panels in TV's from the likes of Vizio and TCL start to see it at under 20 degrees so any marketing when it comes to viewing angles is generally meaningless,

And nowhere have I said that Hisense will blow people away but I have more trust in Hisense putting together a balanced package that gets the best out of the parts than we have here. (I would also point out RTings ratings are obviously on a scale, an absolute budget set is obviously going to get a worse rating automatically, it's not an awful rating for the price range) Glass may have some things that on paper sound good and more premium but as we see in tech all the time just because you have the buzz words doesn't mean it performs better in the real world, it's all about the total package. In my experience Hisense seem to know the limitations of their TV's and put together a package that gets the best out of what they have, Sky/TP Vision doesn't seem to. For example, lets look at the HDR, if they were clipping HDR than 630 would produce a really pleasing HDR image, certainly better than cheaper TV's with fewer nits but they are treating it like it's well within the required range for certification and not just scrapping in and rather than clipping it's lowering the Average brightness to try and give it a more complete dynamic range but by doing that on a panel that's only just scrapping into the certification range means its going to largely be too dark and lifeless, they need a few hundred more nits at the very least to make that approach work with this panel. What good is less blowing out at the upper end if the average picture is too dark to see the details properly at the range the TV is usually operating in on HDR content? Most people spending this kind of money are less bothered about not getting the full range and some blowing out at the top end than a dark picture on average scenes.

IMHO we would see fewer complaints about the hardware even with what's on paper a more budget set if they hadn't been seemingly so bothered about hitting some buzz words on for a tiny costs. When the football was more enjoyable to watch via the puck on a cheap Hisense upstairs than the main living room TV that's a problem

[bdavbdav]

@SimonW i Hope sky are listening - the HDR issues can be so easily fixed in software. I hope they do. 

[TimmyBGood]

---

@bdavbdav wrote:

the HDR issues can be so easily fixed in software.

---

Not the peak brightness though: that's a hardware limitation based on the backlight specification.

[Anonymous]

@bdavbdav how can the HDR issues be settled with a software update, if the hardware is insufficient? If sky change the broad cast standard from HLG to Dolby Vision or HDR plus then they can make great improvements. Sky can complete all the software updates they like, but if they stick with HLG and hardware of NITS of 630, I fail to see what a software update can achieve 

[tarbat]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

@bdavbdav how can the HDR issues be settled with a software update, if the hardware is insufficient? If sky change the broad cast standard from HLG to Dolby Vision or HDR plus then they can make great improvements. Sky can complete all the software updates they like, but if they stick with HLG and hardware of NITS of 630, I fail to see what a software update can achieve 

---

Sky could continue to use HLG broadcasts and provide a software "fudge". They could provide two HLG picture settings.

1. ACCURATE : The current HLG EOTF

2. BRIGHT : A "fudged" HLG EOTF that fixes reference white at 203 nits at the expense of reduced luminance range for specular highlights.