After a lot of thought, I’ve come to a decision: It’s time to change how we do TV reviews.
It’s easy to get stuck in our ways, especially when we find something that works, and many sayings reinforce this mindset. “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” “Don’t mess with success.” “Leave well enough alone.” And my personal favorite: “Perfection is the enemy of good.”
However, just as many axioms point in the other direction. “If you’re not moving forward, you’re falling behind.” “Progress always demands change.” “The best can always be better.” And perhaps the harshest of all: “If you’re not innovating, you’re dying.” (This last one has always rubbed me the wrong way because it sounds like something you’d hear from the caricature of a tech bro in Silicon Valley.)
I think the truth lives somewhere in the middle. Admittedly, for years I’ve had this nagging feeling that TV reviews — both my own and the industry’s as a whole — need to be better. So I’ve decided to do something about it.
Going forward, my TV reviews will be a little different. My goal isn’t to reinvent the wheel — it’s to make a better one. Here are the changes I’ll be making and why I believe they’re necessary.
The little things matter more
Now, more than ever, the little things matter. Sometimes they matter the most.
User experience has always been important to me, but with TVs being what they are now, it is even more significant. I think the decision between two TVs will come down to what it’s like to live with those sets.
Imagine two similarly priced OLED TVs with amazing picture quality — similar brightness, black levels, color accuracy, upscaling capabilities — side-by-side. Why choose one over the other? I think the user experience becomes the key differentiator.
If one TV is slow to start up or has sluggish menu navigation, a remote that’s super frustrating to use, and sound quality that makes dialog difficult to understand, or it takes forever to open apps (and if every time I launch an app, I have to sit through an update)? Even with its awesome picture quality, I’m probably not choosing that TV.
If the other TV has just as good a picture and the same price tag, but has smooth navigation, a snappy remote, and no frustrating delays? I’m probably choosing that TV. I’ll pick the one that I actually enjoy using.
I think remote control design is overlooked. The remote alone can make or break a user experience. I once reviewed a high-end TV where the remote was so poorly designed, it felt like a last-minute afterthought. Meanwhile, a more budget-friendly model had a remote that just made sense — well-laid-out buttons, quick response, and easy-to-use. This will factor into my recommendations going forward.
By focusing on these little things and shining a bright light on them, I hope to use whatever influence I have to encourage TV manufacturers to take these finer touchpoints more seriously. Hopefully that results in better products for everyone.
Measurements mean less than ever
Objectivity is so important in reviews — I can’t stress that enough. Data is meaningful and powerful, but it can also be misleading. As I’m coming to understand, there are increasing instances in which data, depending on how you get it, can be totally meaningless.
TV processing chips have advanced tremendously, and AI now plays a significant role in picture enhancement. That being the case, traditional testing methods — using color slides and test patterns — are becoming less reliable in determining real-world TV performance.
I’ve seen TVs that nail the test patterns but struggle with actual movies and shows. On more than one occasion I’ve tested a TV that put out incredible brightness numbers off the test slides, but when I watched an animated movie, the specular highlights were dull. That’s because AI-driven processing is designed to handle dynamic content differently than test patterns, and in some cases manufacturers have optimized their chips to “ace the exam” rather than deliver the best real-world experience.
This means that subjective evaluation — through the eyes of an expert — has never been more important. I’ll still take measurements, but they won’t be the sole deciding factor in my assessments. Real-world content performance will take priority over numbers, especially when new backlighting technologies are involved. Take Hisense’s RGB mini-LED backlight system — it’s entirely possible it will ace the color slides when all it has to do is produce one color. However the real proof comes when there are multiple colors on the screen, and color cross-talk is visible.
It’s possible that new testing patterns may soon catch up to new TV technologies, but until they do, my reviews will be mindful of any disparate results between measurements and actual movies.
It’s time to start a database
The good news: I’m reviewing more TVs each year than ever. The bad news: That’s a lot of data to keep track of.
I’m committing to creating a database that holds crucial measurement data and observational notes so that I can make better comparisons and add deeper insight to my reviews. For example, while testing the TCL QM6K, I started wondering about certain performance aspects of the 2024 TCL QM7 and I had a hard time digging up that information quickly. That’s not good enough.
In one instance I wanted to compare two OLED panels from different years to see how much progress had been made, but I had to piece together my notes from different reviews. That’s not efficient.
By organizing this valuable data, I can create a more comprehensive knowledge base — one that might even evolve into a publicly accessible resource for other reviewers and enthusiasts.
Reviewing more TVs that more people can buy
I love covering the top-tier models — the flagship OLEDs, the high-end mini-LEDs. However, with TV prices coming down and performance going up, even at mid-range price points, I need to be reviewing more TVs that the average buyer — not just the enthusiast — can afford.
I’ll never forget the time I reviewed a $500 TV that totally blew my expectations out of the water. I thought I’d be nitpicking every little flaw, but instead, I found myself genuinely impressed by how much value it offered. That’s the kind of TV a lot of people are looking for, and I need to be covering more of them.
To be clear, I’m not going to take my foot off the gas when it comes to reviewing the top models and enthusiast favorites. However, I do need to up my game, expand my coverage, and increase my efficiency so I can test more TVs across more price points.
Moving forward
So far, these are the changes I’m making to TV reviews. I’m open to hearing what others think is important or valuable — let me know.
Just remember: This isn’t about abandoning the core principles of good TV reviewing. It’s about evolving the reviews to better reflect today’s TV landscape. My goal is to help people make the best TV purchase decisions possible, while also encouraging manufacturers to refine their products in ways that truly matter.
It’s time to change how TV reviews are done. I hope others in the industry follow suit. If I can play a role in pushing this forward, that’s a change worth making.