I reckon that 4K will fail, just like 3D did.

The bandwidth required to stream 4K will kill ISPs, even with H265 compression, which in itself will degrade the pic quality. The BIG MOVIE industry is very keen on 4K because they reckon that everyone will re-buy their favourite films on Blueray 4K format. The whole 4K thing is a load of hype, aimed at making even more money for an industry that refuses to acknowledge the reality of life - that most people are quite happy with 1080p, and that the difference will only be noticeable to people with rooms big enough to accommodate a 60+" TV.

​What is actually on offer from the three sources you mentioned? Very little if you actually take the time to look. Sure, the content will come, but is there enough around right now to justify the jump to UHD? I'd say not, unless you're a Jonny big pants that just wants one so you can tell your mates you have a 4k (which is technically wrong in the first place) television.

On top of that, consideration needs to be taken with regards to broadband speed, as a quoted minimum of 25meg is required, although you'll maybe get away with a bit less than that.

Image quality with streamed UHD content is only very slightly better than 1080p Blu Ray, and I do mean slight, as in, you have to get right up close to your display to find the difference. It's negligible, and most people wouldn't even notice it. But then the audio on Blu Ray wipes the floor with the low bitrate garbage that comes with streamed Netflix etc. That more than makes up for the virtually indistinguishable difference in image. That's what happens when you compare physical media to streamed content, there's no competition.

UHD Blu Ray will charge this off

Okay okay I'll bite.

I'll address your last remark first, as that's the one that makes you look really silly. First off, where in my post does it suggest that I haven't used or have any experience with UHD? I regularly work with a close friend who manages a department that broadcasts live sport for Sky. They invest many millions in new tech and formats as and when they become relevant, and quite often it's in this way that it filters down to the consumer. They have been working and developing 4K for years (not UHD, you should learn the difference), and it's a 99% certainty that I was viewing it before you even knew what it was. So give it a rest with the 'Internet expert' line.

To be fair, I haven't looked at the amount of content available in UHD with the various streaming services for a few months at least, so I may be a little off the mark with that. But without starting researching it, I'd guess that it's still quite limited, when spread across the main providers.

With regards to the quality, you are talking absolute garbage. The maximum bitrate put out by Netflix UHD is less than half of that available on Blu Ray, which in most cases more than negates the extra resolution afforded by UHD. I urge anyone reading this to not be a Curry's salesman's wet dream like this bloke, and go and do some viewing of your own. It's clear that you've never ran a side by side comparison with your UHD stream and the same title on Blu Ray. Either that, or you have selective eyesight. House of Cards was shot in 4K if I remember correctly, and even the image on that looks almost the same as the Blu Ray from a normal viewing distance. Yes, get really close and you can just see the extra resolution in the light scenes, but again, it negligible. On the other hand for example, the UHD stream of Ghostbusters looks quite a lot worse than the remastered Blu Ray. Resolution is king eh? It's simple, do your research, and stop seeing what you want to see, it's all there either by way of reading about it or doing a side by side comparison. None of this is my opinion by the way, it's a visible fact, and also common knowledge in the home cinema community. It just seems that you've missed it or convinced yourself otherwise.

Do the UHD streaming services look nice? Yes they do. Does the extra resolution make them look superior to 1080p Blu Ray? No, it generally doesn't, especially in dark scenes. Do they sound as good as Blu Ray? They may if you're listening through the speakers on your television, but through any decent home cinema set up, it's not even close. I see you conveniently omitted my mention of the audio, or was that the 10% that I got correct in your opinion? Again, it's a question of bitrate, and the audio on the streaming services sounds awful next to optical media.

I get the distinct feeling this bloke was utterly convinced by the rolling UHD footage they show in stores, some of which does look stunning, and there is no doubt that the technology does offer a significant jump in image quality over 1080p. But not with the low bitrate stuff offered with the streaming services. UHD Blu Ray will fix this, but I'm not sure how well it will be adopted. I hope it takes off, but then again, I'm not sure a replacement UHD projector will be within my price range any time soon.....

Yeah I can't believe how many 3d channels there are on free view, and love the fact BBC are fully supporting it.

Oh wait...

I never said Netflix offers 1080p H265 content. I think you really are failing to be able to read.

I just told you that netflix offers no 1080p h.265 content at this moment in time, it's only 4k content and you have the cheek to say ' the only way to understand is to READ' lol, have a good day :stuck_out_tongue:

Ermmm...hence why Netflix HD looks slightly better than standard Blu Ray disc. They are using a higher resolution source and compressing it using H265 down to around 15mbps, unfortunately standard Netflix does not use H265, therefore stuck with H264 at low bit rate (and an inferior codec for compression) and thus you are never going to get as good as standard blu ray...its not rocket science.

I think the only way to fully understand is to READ. Of course blu ray looks better than H264, the same as 4K Blu Ray will look better than H265. I am comparing Netflix HD to 1080p Blu Ray because the quality of which it is streamed at a maximum of 15mbps in H265 is EQUIVALENT to being marginally better in picture quality than standard blu ray.

You have not made any point because you are failing to understand compression, failing to understand the current bottleneck of our current internet infrastructure nationwide. Not to mention also failing to understand that even at nearly double the bit rate of Netflix HD BT Ultra HD is beyond the capability of many homes.

But there again, it is useless trying to argue with anyone that does not read facts, you sound as bad as brookysm, and probably are related or using a different account.

I'm not going to bother reading the rest of your reply as I made my point, but why on earth are you comparing Netflix HD to bluray when it's only there 4k content that uses h.265??? lol of course bluray disc will look better than any h.264 file being streamed because of bandwidth issues, but If they had a 1080p movie in h.265 you would find they could easily make it identical in picture quality to the actual bluray disc and still be much smaller in size.

Do you know why Netflix HD is only marginally better than Blu ray? Did you actually read that article? Do not expect any time soon to get the best out of streaming 4K at current bit rate levels.

And yes of course I agree, the greater the compression the lesser the bit rate the lesser the quality. Did you actually also read what he said? "The bandwidth required to stream 4K will kill ISPs, even with H265 compression, which in itself will degrade the pic quality"...hence do not be expecting 4K streams to be anything near the quality you will be getting from file downloads and 4K Blu Ray. The same as anyone should not be expecting the same quality with 1080p Netflix as standard Blu Ray.

Whilst H265/HEVC offers better efficiency in compression than H264 which of course is advantageous, and offers a lossless encoding option, do not be expecting lossless encoding with current PPV streaming options.

Why are there reports that BT Ultra HD at nearly double the bit rate at 29mbps is better than Netflix HD? And there in itself lies the bottleneck, a [recommended] 45mbps minimum is recommended....our current infrastructure for internet is not cut out for that for many...so Robr8 was far from talking rubbish.

Even London is ranked [26th out 33 countries] according to a speed test database provided by Ookla.

Really? so you agree with him that h265 degrades the picture quality then? There is much more to video quality than just file size and bitrate buddy, and latest tests show h265 can reduce the size of a 4k video file by 64% maintaining the exact same video quality as a h264 file, so yes that is major, not minor lmao.

There was nothing in that statement that was rubbish that RobR8 was referring to....there is a high bandwidth required to stream 4K and the compression currently afforded to it is not showing 4K TV to its best advantage.

Of course there is a difference between 1080p and 4K, but streaming you are not going to get as massive an improvement as with downloads or physical media. I suggest you [read] this article. At least you agreed with him about the size being of importance, but bandwidth and current compression artifacts are a bottleneck despite offering minor improvements over 1080p, you want major improvements.

I reckon that 4K will fail, just like 3D did.

The bandwidth required to stream 4K will kill ISPs, even with H265 compression, which in itself will degrade the pic quality. The BIG MOVIE industry is very keen on 4K because they reckon that everyone will re-buy their favourite films on Blueray 4K format. The whole 4K thing is a load of hype, aimed at making even more money for an industry that refuses to acknowledge the reality of life - that most people are quite happy with 1080p, and that the difference will only be noticeable to people with rooms big enough to accommodate a 60+" TV.

Well after all that In the words of Bob from Rita Sue and Bob too

I thought I were great! :stuck_out_tongue::smile:

Wonder if they'll do a 4k copy with 4k sound through my 4k broadband connection :stuck_out_tongue:

Bought this exact model when it was on offer at Lidl. I returned it after 2 days, as the picture quality was unwatchable!! the image was juddery and hurt to watch - and that was watching ordinary freeview channels. They had to compromise on something for the price, AVOID, spend a little bit more for some decent quality.

​ Oh dear. Look, this isn't a subjective debate. It is what it is, you just don't seem to be grasping it.

The employment of .265 in place of .264 is irrelevant, as it isn't the limiting factor.

It's funny, because your line a few times has been referring to others as ‘Internet experts’, when you're copy and pasting specs from Blu Ray faq in your reply to cicobuff. The small amount of credibility you had evaporated at that point.

I'll cut this now. I won't be draw into a debate, as you've clearly convinced yourself, and you know what? That's fine. If you enjoy it, that's what it's all about.

Doubt it's proppa 4k for the price

You cannot begin to even be serious with this comment "how the hell do you know what comes out of the speakers when you haven't got a 4k TV or 4k Netflix?" Surely?! Are you going to tell me there is something magical that happens with the sound lol.

Because I have a Blu Ray Player, because I have a HD DVD Player, because I have Netflix, because I have an AV Receiver that tells me when bitstreaming or when fed PCM via HD DVD I can tell by pressing the info button and it telling me onscreen. Because I own Blu Rays the majority of which are True HD or DTS-HD, and know for certain Netflix and Netflix 4K highests audio codec is 5.1 DD+.

But thanks for listing the formats of which I already know, considering I have been a home cinema enthusiast for about the past 18 years...oh and you must have cut and pasted that from an old article, you missed out Dolby Atmos.

Clearly you do not give a monkeys what other people think considering what I know a lot of people think of you through private messages.

And how the hell do you know what comes out of the speakers when you haven't got a 4k TV or 4k Netflix?

From Blu Ray standards.
What audio codecs will Blu-ray support?

Linear PCM (LPCM) - up to 8 channels of uncompressed audio. (mandatory)
Dolby Digital (DD) - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory)
Dolby Digital Plus (DD+) - extension of Dolby Digital, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional)
Dolby TrueHD - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional)
DTS Digital Surround - format used for DVDs, 5.1-channel surround sound. (mandatory)
DTS-HD High Resolution Audio - extension of DTS, 7.1-channel surround sound. (optional)
DTS-HD Master Audio - lossless encoding of up to 8 channels of audio. (optional)

Note the words 'UP TO'!

Btw I couldn't give a monkeys what people think, no doubt you crying to all and sundry probably means the mods too but hey I'm still here so get over it!

My current PC screen is 4k, 1080p on a computer monitor looks horrible now.

I sit a lot further away from my TV screen though and i'm going to wait til there is an affordable 60hz UHD TV before I get one. UHD 30hz makes me shudder.

Yes far clearer considering you are literally inept. And still remain incorrect, Netflix 4K audio stream actually is 5.1 DD+ as I already stated, and exactly the same audio stream as standard Netflix. Meaning that the majority of Blu Ray (and several existing HD DVDs that had the room for anything other than DD+) have superior audio.

Yet surprisingly you never seem to learn with the insults with people, it does not go unnoticed.

Sorry allow me to rephrase for the stupid amongst us...

Netflix's 4k audio tracks in 5.1DD or Stereo depending on whatever the stream is encoded with sounds perfect fine to me even tho it is compressed...

That clear enough for you now???

You said Netflix's 4K Audio, there is no such thing.

Lay off the stupid pills - Netflix's 4k comes with audio does it not! Where did I say anything about it being 4k audio? If you actually had a 4k set and Netflix you'd see that Netflix gives you a clue in telling you what video and audio the stream you are watching is in....

Still crying fella at anyone who might listen to you?

Please explain what 4K audio is :neutral_face: it does not exist, it is exactly the same 5.1 DD+ that standard Netflix churns out. I think you need to read this [thread] it might give you an understanding where the problem of streaming lies with 4K currently and why you are not, and unlikely to get true 4K streams, and do everyone a favour, stop with the insults and pretending you know it all.

Hmmmm, odd how having done a side by side test with Breaking Bad on Blu Ray and on 4k (both UHD and 4k mean the same thing regarding consumer TV's btw, manufacturers aren't following the DCI standard that Cinemas are, just the same as they didn't do with wide-screen - you should have learnt that by now....) And Netflix looks considerably better on later episodes which to me suggests earlier episodes are upscaled to 4k. Ghostbusters hasn't and isn't available on UK Netflix, you sure your VPN was allowing enough bandwidth to view 4kk also remember that a 4k TV upscales HD and Ghostbusters remastered is a 'remastered from 4k' Blu Ray which certain Sony players and sets are supposedly good at upscaling so hardware also comes into play.

As regarding Blu Ray bitrate, that runs at a maximum 40mbps which yes you're right is more than Netflix's stream runs at but before you get all excited, standard Blu Ray uses the older poorer (compressionally) H264 codec as well as uncompressed audio but the more crammed into the disc the lesser the data throughput. Look at the difference in size between a Blu Ray rip and a stream rip - nearly 18gb for the 1st episode of Breaking Bad in 4k and Netflix is only broadcasting 4k at 30hz currently!

For Audio btw, I'm using a Sony HT-XT3 Soundbase now, previously I used a Logitech Z5500, Netflix's 4k audio still sounds pretty good to me...

As for the comment about being a Currys salesmans wet dream my father has been a TV engineer all his life so I've grown up surrounded by the latest TV tech so I have half an idea what the hell I'm taking about!

Your best bet is putting him on ignore, he won't listen to reason at best, and at worst gets himself suspended from the site by being offensively child like.

Okay okay I'll bite.

I'll address your last remark first, as that's the one that makes you look really silly. First off, where in my post does it suggest that I haven't used or have any experience with UHD? I regularly work with a close friend who manages a department that broadcasts live sport for Sky. They invest many millions in new tech and formats as and when they become relevant, and quite often it's in this way that it filters down to the consumer. They have been working and developing 4K for years (not UHD, you should learn the difference), and it's a 99% certainty that I was viewing it before you even knew what it was. So give it a rest with the 'Internet expert' line.

To be fair, I haven't looked at the amount of content available in UHD with the various streaming services for a few months at least, so I may be a little off the mark with that. But without starting researching it, I'd guess that it's still quite limited, when spread across the main providers.

With regards to the quality, you are talking absolute garbage. The maximum bitrate put out by Netflix UHD is less than half of that available on Blu Ray, which in most cases more than negates the extra resolution afforded by UHD. I urge anyone reading this to not be a Curry's salesman's wet dream like this bloke, and go and do some viewing of your own. It's clear that you've never ran a side by side comparison with your UHD stream and the same title on Blu Ray. Either that, or you have selective eyesight. House of Cards was shot in 4K if I remember correctly, and even the image on that looks almost the same as the Blu Ray from a normal viewing distance. Yes, get really close and you can just see the extra resolution in the light scenes, but again, it negligible. On the other hand for example, the UHD stream of Ghostbusters looks quite a lot worse than the remastered Blu Ray. Resolution is king eh? It's simple, do your research, and stop seeing what you want to see, it's all there either by way of reading about it or doing a side by side comparison. None of this is my opinion by the way, it's a visible fact, and also common knowledge in the home cinema community. It just seems that you've missed it or convinced yourself otherwise.

Do the UHD streaming services look nice? Yes they do. Does the extra resolution make them look superior to 1080p Blu Ray? No, it generally doesn't, especially in dark scenes. Do they sound as good as Blu Ray? They may if you're listening through the speakers on your television, but through any decent home cinema set up, it's not even close. I see you conveniently omitted my mention of the audio, or was that the 10% that I got correct in your opinion? Again, it's a question of bitrate, and the audio on the streaming services sounds awful next to optical media.

I get the distinct feeling this bloke was utterly convinced by the rolling UHD footage they show in stores, some of which does look stunning, and there is no doubt that the technology does offer a significant jump in image quality over 1080p. But not with the low bitrate stuff offered with the streaming services. UHD Blu Ray will fix this, but I'm not sure how well it will be adopted. I hope it takes off, but then again, I'm not sure a replacement UHD projector will be within my price range any time soon.....

Are Hisense regarded as 'quality'? http://www.richersounds.com/productlistmanu/ALL/HISE

So it is not worth pointing out to anyone interested in 4K that size/distance is important?
That bandwidth is important for streaming even at the bitrates that currently are standard that are substandard? And there are many areas of the country that are not even capable of the 15mbps for its H.264 encoding, which is a [problem]

That if you want to see 4K properly you have to download content or wait for Ultra HD Blu Ray Players that have just been released to hit the shops, along with content.

That if you want to see live streams of terrestrial tv shows in 4K you could be in for a long wait, not only for the stations to catch on to it, but also because of the technology behind it being limited currently for the terrestrial stations to even push it out via DVB-T, and most importantly in the future the only likely way is through streaming, once again dependant on your internet bandwidth.

Of course, to hear you talk no one should be interested in such factors, and should just plump for 4K TV anyway, because you own one and think it is great :smirk:

Why should I ? I'm not posh ? But I understand text ? Do you understand anything ? Do you read newspaper or just wait for news on tv so you can look at the pictures ? Anyway I'm not on here to argue if you have nothing remotely interesting or tv orientated then maybe you could call the Samaritans and bore them instead

Oh nooo please don't put me back on ignore....

What a deluded high opinion you hold of yourself! Laughable, like your expert knowledge of 4k....

I never said no 4K streaming anywhere, you did, you are making things up now, I think you fail to be able to read properly and try to distort, in fact that is always what you do. 4K Netflix is not far superior to Blu Ray, for a start the picture is only marginally better, and don't let me get started on the audio side of things. So once again you are wrong.

DVB-T will NEVER support and that is part of the problem there just is not the bandwidth either through aerial or satellite, and it will just lead to a subscription based service for live streaming currently at absurd cost, for the few lucky enough to have the bandwith....a further fact for you.

Anybody would think anyone that states the current problems with 4K is against it, we are not, just pointing out the facts you choose to wrongly argue against....you argue like some child against anyone that has any level of criticism on 4K TV.

Not everyone has a family to share with, so your argument is moot...not to mention to get any level of live tv is subscription based....going to say I am spouting more crap there are you?

Anyone interested in 4K is going to have to pay through the nose for content and will not be expecting anytime in the near future the likes of BBC or ITV in Ultra HD, I think those FACTS are worth pointing out.

Unless you have downloaded content and hooked up a PC/laptop to your tv and you will not have even experienced full 4K yet.

Back on ignore you go....

As I mentioned earlier, you're not making much sense. As for the 'Welcome to England' comment, you might want to check your English spelling and grammar before making these rants.

Do you research cars ? Or buy the first one the dealer shows you ?

I don't know what to say to say ? Welcome to England ? As its quite clear , I like to buy a good tv , you clearly have no interest in tv so please buy this it is perfect for you it probably won't last a year but then again you probably don't even use it enough for it to break , nice to know your stalking me though maybe I'll get a Twitter account just for you

Tbf Richer Sounds have sold quite some tat in their time including nasty budget brand products but at least they told you it was cheap rubbish!

Facts? What like no 4k streaming anywhere, currently available 4k Blu Ray players? You wouldn't know a fact if it came up and slapped you in the face fella!

Where did I say that Netflix clearly shows 4x the detail than HD? I didn't! What I said was it is far superior to Blu Ray, not just a little bit which you claim (still that's better than the original rubbish you used to spout that it was even as good as...). Netflix HD requires 2-2.5mbps, 4k minimum 15 so I guess you think all that extra data is just a load of zeros and ones stuck in there for fun?

Obviously normal boxes aren't going to support 4k, just like normal Freeview boxes didn't support HD add in the copy protection that's required (just like HD had to have/needs). Also I'm not paying through the nose for 4k content, its cheaper for the family to share a top tier sub than to have separate accounts and I use Prime for next day delivery so 4k content from them is essentially free! Bit like the 'fact' that you claim it's £15.99pm for 4k on BT when actually it's £15.99pm for BT TV which includes a load of channels not just a 4k one!

Sky are launching a new box with 4k support too next year so that will probably be the 1st broadcasted 4k content that isn't streamed but they too will have the issue of available bandwidth to beam it down and some are claiming Virgin Media are running trials too so plenty of folk will have access to 4k much sooner than you claim.

I love your so called facts, they are always half truths to total B/S that you've read and believe, quite laughable really especially when you've convinced yourself you're right even when proven wrong....

You're making no sense at all now. But I see that's a common theme with your posts.

wakkaday: If you mostly watch broadcast TV...i would risk saying no, you would be better to get a normal HD tv.

Is this tv any good

Richer sounds would never sell this they sell quality ! That's why Aldi Asda etc sell crap ! If they do sell Panasonic ( which Asda do ) it's for the same price or a "made for supermarket " model ! Jesus this isn't rocket science ? If I told you iPhones were the best mobile phone would you still argue with me that your £9 Alcatel is way better because you bought it all under one roof ?

Errr yes ? But they don't ? So what's your point ? You would probably buy a microwave if it said 4K! I like to do my research and buy a tv that I'm happy with not because it's next to the mayonaise ! It's not supermarket sweep but I'm sure if you have no interest in quality and prefer unbranded tat then fill your boots you are the Aldis marketing mans dream ! Personally I'd rather buy an open box Samsung return than buy this joke of a set ! It's like buying a Ferrari diesel ! Why would you do it ? If you want 4K and want a high street brand then get a Samsung or panny and make sure it's 50 inch or so otherwise don't get so excited but stickers on a box and price , I have an ageing Panasonic plasma that I'd rather watch batman or anything with dark colours on than an Aldi special

Gord it's worse than watching tennis trying to read this thread with you two kids, ffs just get a tape measure out and unzip and be done with it.

I am sure they are all cosied up around it at 4 feet away.

So where is your proof with the bandwidth allocated that 4K netflix is 4x the quality of standard Netflix? In your living room?

Everything I have stated is fact...its fact that you are not going to get live streams from standard boxes, it is fact you are not going to get anything other than marginal benefit from 4K Netflix over standard blu ray, it is also fact you currently have to pay through the nose for little content. You get one champions league game a week on BT Ultra HD (Which costs £15.99 a month) for those privileged enough to have the network bandwidth.

Yes, you are experiencing less than 4K whoopie doo, you are also paying through the nose for little content now and in the future when the niché market of 4K blu rays do arrive.....all fact. Infrastructure is a problem for 4K, you are not going to get it from DVB-T with its limited bandwidth...fact, there are vast areas of the UK that do not even have the 15mbps bandwidth for less than 4K streaming...fact. The current cost of experiencing less than 4K is expensive with subscriptions...fact.

BBC currently even struggles to push out HD channels with DD sound. When exactly do you think 4K is going to arrive.

I paid £428 for an LG 43UF670v from AO.com for the parents, picture quality from Freeview is bang on on it bar the usual low bitrate channels that look rubbish even on vestel sets.

"not to mention the problem of no live streams"......

The difference is I haven't just read unlike you, I'm experiencing!

Other things you're wrong about or just purveying rubbish about,

"current niche Blu Ray player's"? Very niche as currently there isn't one on sale yet on the consumer market.

4k cost more to view on Netflix, yes it does but it also comes with upto 4 users so it means me and the missus get to watch 4k, as does my parents on their 4k TV and my step daughter and the in laws get to watch Netflix too all for the costly sum of £8.99 a month...

Netflix 4k is marginally better than Blu Ray? How do you know when you've admitted you've never seen 4k Netflix running? More reading eh... It isn't, its far superior take it from someone who has watched 100's of hours of it!

Especially if it has a poor upscaling.

I have read this stupid comment, clueless?

As said do not expect any live broadcasts in 4K anytime soon, certainly not via the likes of freesat or freeview.

Read much?

The point was to show that a cheap 4K TV is going to give a vastly inferior picture when watching normal TV broadcasts.

Except that BT are showing Champions League live in 4k!

http://sport.bt.com/sport-football/tv-listings/live-events-on-bt-sport-ultra-hd-S11364000615629

As I've already said, clueless...

This is an interesting [read] (although US centric) about the adoption of 4K streaming, quality and bandwidth problems....not to mention the problem of no [live streams]

If anyone is interested in 4K right here and now, make sure you are at the right size and distance away from a relevant sized tv, ensure you have the funds (and lower your expectations to slightly better than 1080p blu ray quality) to pay 40% more for your Netflix HD subscription whilst awaiting a 4K Blu Ray player (at considerable cost) and the media (check what studios are supporting it) to get the most out of it.

Also do not expect any live broadcasts in 4K anytime soon, certainly not via the likes of freesat or freeview.

Higher resolution is the future, sadly the infrastructure for such is just not there yet.

I love the way brookysm keeps posting replies, knowing full well that I cannot read the ridiculous comments since I have it on ignore.

Says the guy who admits to have yet to see a Netflix 4k stream.....

Better to get a HD screen with decent picture decoding. I got the £475 4K TV and its fine with video files etc but broadcast TV images are dreadful.

Annnnndddd here's here! The resident know it all non 4k owning HUKD expert once again to part with the knowledge he has seen jack of but speaks it as gospel....

it is kind of ironic in a day and age where physical media is dying, and FOX is behind killing blu ray all the way. It still is proving to be the very best in both video and sound.

To the uneducated minds, at least Netflix 4K with its 'slightly' better picture quality than standard blu ray (but still compressed audio) will have that wonderful fuzzy feeling to the average layman that has splashed out his or her cash on the technology, but the dividends are poor.

To the audio and videophile, UHD Blu Ray will be milking the last drop out of the physical media in an age where UK homes still struggle with bandwidth.

Currently, whether owning a 1080p or 3840p the only way to get the most out of it is via physical media. Add into the equation the size/distance of the TV currently 4K is wasted tech in many a home. Not to mention currently the lack of content to get dividends.

Tech snob huh!
And if they suddenly started selling Sony, Panasonic and other branded TV's you'd be lining up at the door first in the que

Why not? If it's a good price for the spec, I would buy my electronics from any reputable retailer. I suppose from your comment it could be inferred that you would be happy purchasing this set from Richer Sounds if they sold it.

Doubt it will 'fail'. There are vast differences between getting consumers on board with 3D and UHD/4K.

3D was/is an add-on, only really going to work if there is material to support it. It relies on film studios bothering with it. UHD/4K on the other hand is the natural progression of the way film is recorded and then delivered to us. You don't need 4K content to use a 4K TV or reap some benefits from the better panels. The way mass manufacturing works, it won't be long before all these factories are churning out UHD/4K panels and there won't be any HD ones left to choose from. At that point we will all be having a similar conversation out 8K or whatever TVs.

You only have to look back at history and see how these corporations slowly move us all to slightly better formats, along the way squeezing out as much money from us all as they can. There is already talk of better formats, whilst slowly adding more and more 4K sets to the mix. It's not all to do with giving us a better picture, it's usually driven by income streams for big businesses.

I don't eat televisions? Shall I go to richer sounds to buy my German meats ? Have no problem with Aldi for FOOD but wouldn't buy tech there

Yet everyones happy enough to buy all their shopping there, its been voted no.1 supermarket again recently!

Not pointless at all, you might not see the full improvement 4k offers from where you're sat but most people will notice some improvement over HD.

Now whether or not this TV is actually any good is another matter....

It isn't generally available in Japan and won't be for quite some time so I don't know where you get this idea from. There's also the problem of displaying the image, currently 8k displays are fed via 4 HDMI connectors simply because there's no tech currently available that can squeeze the info required down one pipe.

Having had a 4k TV for 18 months now i can honestly say that 90% of this post is utter rubbish fella! There's hundreds of hours worth of 4k material available , most of it exceptionally high quality programming and streamed 4k isn't slightly better than Blu-ray its vastly superior! 25meg is the recommended speed your line should have, Netflix minimum is 15meg and I can't actually remember anytime my 4k streams have dropped in quality but that may be because my exchange isn't running at max capacity.
Like to that other idiot who constantly post rubbish on 4k Deals, you should actually try using 4k before quoting Internet experts who also haven't lived with using 4k....

3d did not fail..

my mother bought this I'm aldi Prestyn and it cost 299.99.

Unlikely anyone will have mates if they tell them they buy there TVs from Aldi

Netflix is hd ? Why would anyone stream in sd?

You missed off:
Moving pictures? We will all die
Talkies? We will all die
Television? We will all die
Colour TV? We will all die
Moving picture on a phone? We will all die

The naysayers are haters of technology.

Poor...only one scart socket.

Queues are always long ? Aldi and lidl don't have till staff ( only tills) so no change there. Still not sure why they don't have self serve tills if they don't want our money

Title is useful as most generally accept this to be '4k' and, keeping an eye on here (I want a bigger '4k' for coding), it's how I found it.

As above for the sources - but, not only that, you're going to be limited to 30hz from any external sources too on the vast majority of TVs. For that alone, I wouldn't be investing in a 4k tv for the moment in the hope of better programs available (I appreciate that for plenty of stuff you may well not notice the difference).

Yes, title needs amending as Aldi image only states UHD.

"3840 X 2160 resolution" - where's the 4K TV ?

You're not going to be Jonny Big Pants with a 4k TV from Aldi - pointless at this size anyway.

UHD Blu Ray will change that, but at the moment it doesn't exist, not to us consumers anyway. Even then, I can see uptake being slow.

oops

​What is actually on offer from the three sources you mentioned? Very little if you actually take the time to look. Sure, the content will come, but is there enough around right now to justify the jump to UHD? I'd say not, unless you're a Jonny big pants that just wants one so you can tell your mates you have a 4k (which is technically wrong in the first place) television.

On top of that, consideration needs to be taken with regards to broadband speed, as a quoted minimum of 25meg is required, although you'll maybe get away with a bit less than that.

Image quality with streamed UHD content is only very slightly better than 1080p Blu Ray, and I do mean slight, as in, you have to get right up close to your display to find the difference. It's negligible, and most people wouldn't even notice it. But then the audio on Blu Ray wipes the floor with the low bitrate garbage that comes with streamed Netflix etc. That more than makes up for the virtually indistinguishable difference in image. That's what happens when you compare physical media to streamed content, there's no competition.

UHD Blu Ray will charge this off

Bargain at that price

No decent sources except Netflix, Amazon Prime, BT....
In a little over 2 months 4k Blu-ray will be on the shelves and Sky should be showcasing their new box and channels.

But yeah, no decent sources.....

It will intriguing to see just how shoddy/non-4K spec this is.
My guess... HDMI 1.4 with no HDCP support for 4K, an awful upscaler and at least 100ms input lag.

You can barely get a decent 40" 1080p set for £240, dread to think what the picture quality of SD or even HD broadcasts will be like. Still, quite clever by aldi and will no doubt sell out.

Seems too good to be true for a 4k TV but if it isn't then it would be a bargain and the queues long.

Hdmi 2.0?

A brave move posting a deal based on an assumption. Will hold voting until confirmed.

Anyone know if it has a stand? Or is it wall mount only?

Here.

Where's that cheesbeanz guy. He seems to be an expert on this particular model.

Here is the previous thread, lots of info on there for anyone who's interested:

http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/4k-40-ultra-hd-tv-freeview-hd-3-yr-warranty-instore-aldi-299-from-sunday-13th-sept-2278045

Do you need a 4k channel to view it ????

Not online yet, only a 55" on 1st nov.
Il hold my vote

size?