Topic: 4k TV Recommendations

@BAMozzy I'm limited by budget and screen size due to the size of the room and space, so looking at lower end spec'd tv's (yours looks awesome). Currently at 32 but moving up to 43 - maybe like KU6000. I know that 4k isn't as impressive with smaller screens and it won't be life changing but my current tv is getting a little jittery and I need a little bit of a bigger screen for my gaming.

I am guessing Sony can't patch the HDMI because they haven't but I think they will address it at some point. I see your point about using two HDMI ports and then just swapping the PS4 input. I'll probably end up doing this - I'm just nervous because constant swapping can lead to wear and tear. Definitley first world problems and ones that are good to have!

Horizon, in the demo at one of the Sony experience events (was there for VR) was stunning and I think if the open world will look that good, it will be amazing.

@Rudy_Manchego To be honest, I would have a hard job recommending the KU series at all - especially the KU6000. HDR is much more than just levels of brightness or resolution. All the KU6000 offers is the opportunity to play HDR content but doesn't actually display HDR. It downgrades the Wide Colour Gamut to standard range - the same range your current TV has and only pushes the brightness up a bit. Some SDR TV's can actually display more brightness.

Digital Foundry has said that TV's like the KU series are not great for HDR games at all and actually say that it makes image quality worse. It seems these TV's don't 'add' to the extra contrast - i.e extend the brightness up but compress everything down so that the range between 0-100nits (the normal range of SDR content) is compressed down to 0-50nits (or lower) making the image look darker/dimmer than normal.

The KU7000 at least adds the wider colour gamut. I know you may be limited by budget but you would be better off just buying the KU6000 for 4k only. It really is nothing more than a bit brighter SDR TV as it lacks virtually all of the benefits HDR is supposed to bring. I know your budget maybe tight, but its essentially a 4k TV that will allow you to play HDR material - its more HDR compatible than HDR capable. In essence its like plugging in your PS4 Pro to a 1080p TV and getting a (very) downsampled version. You maybe better off saving a bit more by either buying a 4k TV or waiting until you have sufficient funds to buy something more suited. There is NO way this TV can come close to the look of a ZD9 and if anything will make the game look dull and certainly won't have the same colour palette.

@Rudy_Manchego I got a KS7000 - it's not exactly top end but it's not cheap either, but I don't really see the point in putting down "big" money for a half measure. I think the 49inch KS7000 is a good option if you're not wanting to spend a fortune. Why not pony up a few extra hundred for something that will go the distance if you can? Get the one you really want

@Rudy_Manchego I have to agree with @kyleforrester87 on the KS7000 (or KS8000 in the US). Its the cheapest 4k HDR10 TV and has one of the best input lag measurements so great for gaming. The KU6000 is literally just a standard 4k TV with the ability to accept a HDR input. Its not a HDR TV. I have the next model up, the KS8000 which has the same panel, same HDR capability, same input lag etc and its excellent for gaming and HDR - whether that's games or movies. Samsung has said that these models will also be updated to accept HLG (broadcast quality HDR) and Dynamic Metadata HDR10 (like Dolby Vision but open source (Free) and 10bit - DV is 12bit but no panel is yet at that level).

I know the KU is in your price range and size too but I really don't think its what you want or need. HDR isn't just about the brightness. The brightness itself is only a small part but its just part of the contrast ratio. Contrast ratio is the difference between the darkest 'blacks' and brightest highlights. HDR also has full 10bit colour - 8bit has 16m colours compared to 10bits 1bn colours. Not only that, HDR has a wider colour gamut. Colour sn't just the values of Red, Green and blue though as it also has luminescence (brightness). For example a piece of paper could have the same RGB values as white hot steel but the steel has a lot more luminescence. Having a wider colour gamut and greater contrast ratio means the colour volume is significantly increased.

Playing Horizon on a KU6000 isn't going to look significantly different from playing it on a 1080p TV at the size you are looking at. The volume of colours are not that different - both use the same colour gamut and the contrast ratio isn't that great either. You would be better off buying a 4k TV (for the increased resolution) and turning the brightness up to max - at least that way, the overall look won't be compressed and dimmer.

Buying the KS7000 maybe more expensive but at least it will offer what you want. Its not that dissimilar from the ZD9 where HDR is concerned, the TV that Sony used for showing Horizon in HDR. Both the KS and ZD9 are full HDR10 TV's, both have the wide colour gamut and necessary contrast ratio so Horizon will look virtually the same as you saw it at the PS demo.

I think if you were to buy the KU6000, thinking it could offer something similar to the demo - maybe not as bright, you will be very disappointed. I know 49" is a bit bigger than you maybe wanted but measure it up and see if it will fit, you won't regret it. Not only will you stand more chance of seeing the resolution increase, the improved PQ, but also get the benefits of HDR and a more future proof TV too.

Sorry if that's not what you wanted to hear.

@kyleforrester87 @BAMozzy Guys guys guys - you are making me feel utterly inadequate - it's like my first girlfriend all over again Just kidding... Alas, I can barely fit a 43inch tv into the space (fixed shelves). I would complain but it is housing my rather large movie collection.

I'd love to invest more in a better telly but for me at this particular time, it isn't worth it. The space and room is small, I can game relatively close to the telly and I have two small children who want to get up close and personal with the telly all the time. If I invested a grand into a telly, I'd need to take out expensive AD insurance because of the blighters. An honest selling point of the PS4 Pro for my wife was that the PSVR USB could go round the back and stop the toddler from trying to unplug it with her teeth.

I've seen the tv's I am looking at and seen them running 4k content and it does look better than my current setup so I am satisfied. It obviously isn't as glorious as higher end sets (never going to be with a 'budget' 4k tv) and trust me, the TV I saw running Horizon Zero dawn was bigger than my entire front room and more expensive than a Beckham hairstyle so I won't get there. That's like me comparing my Peugeot with a Porsche. If the game looks a quarter as good as that on my setup, well I will be happy.

I'm pretty happy with my PS4 Pro purchase (after selling my PS4 and getting a discount I get through work, it cost me under £100) since the bigger storage, quieter running and performance boost to my VR were worth it in my eyes, so any 4k gaming, even if not peak is a nice little bonus. So as it stands, my existing TV is going wonky so I gotta get what I can get and this is as good as I can. I think, if this is the worst of my problems, things are going quite well! Thanks for the advice though, it's why I like coming to this site!

@Rudy_Manchego Ahh well, if you're hamstrung by your available space you're kinda stuck I guess Whichever you go with I'm sure it'll be an improvement over what you've currently got.

@Rudy_Manchego I actually bought the KU6670 to pair with my PS4 pro and it was next to useless, I had to disable HDR on the console as any game to use it caused issues. Some were worse than others with Ratchet and Clank especially looking like it was in the 10 to 15 fps range at best even in game mode, a mode which drastically reduced picture quality but was neccesary if you didn't want lag of over a second. FFXV ran ok with HDR on and most games seemed fine without it and to be honest it can't really show it anyway, but I wouldn't recommend it and suspect you'd get a better experience with a very good 1080p tv instead.

After just 2 weeks I'd had enough and replaced it with the same KS7000 as @kyleforrester87 (it was an expensive mistake but I couldn't put up with it any longer) and my god there is a huge gulf in quality and usability between the 2 sets, Ratchet and Clank is now silky smooth and FFXV is simply stunning in HDR. The picture quality in game mode is fantastic and as silky smooth as the game is with the only downside is having to manually adjust the backlight when switching between HDR and SDR, you'll want to as it's very bright.

I really wouldn't recommend the KU series for 4K gaming as at least 1 game I tried was unplayable and from experience HDR is a much bigger game changer than the resolution increase anyway, with super sampling on 1080p even negating some of that advantage.

Whichever way you go, hopefully you'll find something suitable

HDR is always tricky to show but this shows some of the light range available
HDR off

HDR on

@carlos82 hey man, thanks for the heads up. I'm moving away from the Samsung range, just because I can't afford their best and I've heard similar from a few friends with that range. So I'll probably go with a smaller 40inch LG set which won't make much picture difference in 4k/HDR but will be better than my current set up. I defo think that HDR is going to become the gaming standard - as I can see from your pics, darer images and shading do look so much better.

Anyway, I think what I am getting from the advice is that that the original question about swapping cables about for VR with HDR isn't too much of an issue since HDR on any set I buy isn't going to be that great!!

@Rudy_Manchego You have to do what's right for you and your situation at the end of the day. I just wanted to give you the information so you can then make an informed decision. I didn't want you to go out and buy a KU TV and expect it to look 'good' in HDR. Its built to the specifications of a standard TV but with the ability to receive a HDR source - like the majority of 'budget' HDR TV's. I wouldn't be surprised if future equivalent TV's are not allowed to call themselves 'HDR' - although manufacturers will probably just call them HDR compatible instead. Now that an industry 'standard' is in place, something that was only finalised after most of these were built, it will be interesting to see how similar TV's are marketed in the future. Essentially its like calling a 1200p TV, a UHD TV and saying it can play 4k!

I don't think any HDR TV (Maybe the Panasonic DX700) at 40" is really worth buying for HDR and certainly won't come close to meeting the HDR10 specifications - the industry minimum.

Eurogamer reviewed the KU6400 (KU7000 in the US) which at least has a wider colour gamut - not wide enough to pass HDR10 standards but fails on contrast ratio due to 'low' (by HDR standards at 350nits) peak brightness. As a 4k gaming screen, it might be one of the better 4k screens due to low lag but if you want HDR (either from gaming or watching movies etc), maybe check out Panasonics DX700 which also comes in 40" sizes. I haven't seen it myself but Eurogamer were quite complimentary considering its specs line up closely with the KU6400 but also has more Lag at 41ms

Most of LG's range has an IPS panel. What this means is that viewing angles are generally great for an LED panel BUT blacks suffer as a result in terms of darkness. All 'decent' HDR panels use VA panels which are not great for viewing angles (upto ~21degrees off centre) but blacks are much darker - not quite OLED dark. That may be important for you and family viewing.

HDR is certainly the future of UHD. All 4k+ TV's will no doubt be at least HDR10 compatible with some adding Dolby Vision. I expect HLG to be the standard for broadcasting HDR quality content. HDR10 and DV requires Metadata to be added in after recording so its not suitable for 'live' content - like sports for example and so broadcasters like the BBC can't offer HDR. What HLG offers is HDR to broadcasters but also doesn't affect non-HDR TV owners and thus reduces the number of 'channels' and frequencies. At the moment, BBC for example has 2 BBC1 channels, one for SD and one for HD. Add in 4k and HDR, that would take up another 2 channels/frequencies but with HLG they can send just 1 signal and all owners would be able to view the content to the best of their TV's capability.

The UHD Alliance and HDMI have both made provisions for the future and HDR. HDR standards have a minimum standard (something current HDR10 accredited TV's manage) but the standards also apply to 8k too and have evolved to include Dynamic Metadata. HDMI are introducing HDMI2.1 which has a much higher bandwidth to enable resolutions upto 10k, as well as 4k/120, Dynamic Metadata HDR and for us gamers, something similar to N-Synch and Free-synch too - something PC gamers have benefited from with specific monitors and the right connection which will now be available through HDMI. The extra bandwidth also allows for Dolby Atmos pass through via ARC - so great for AV audiophiles.

All this means is that the future is likely to be HDR based - not just in games or movies but also in broadcasted content too. It looks like the standard of 4k/8k content should be HDR based. I wouldn't be surprised if 'HDR' gets 'dropped' as part of the naming as all content will be HDR - in a similar way Consoles/games don't say HD gaming anymore as they are all HD. You don't hear Sony or MS talk about their consoles as being HD gaming. Maybe by the time the PS5 launches, all games will be HDR too - at least I will be happy if they are LOL

Just 3weeks to go and Horizon will be dropping through my door - can't wait!

@BAMozzy Not at all, thanks for the advice, particularly with regards to HDR. Knowing that at my screen size and budget this won't make much difference is handy since it actually informs whether I need to bother unplugging the tv with VR to utilize. I'll have a play around - I'll also take a look at the Panasonic as well. I think I am happy, I'm going to see some improvement on my games then my current set up (and my tv will work fault free!) but not as great as if I had a larger, more expensive version.

From what I've read, I'd agree that HDR is the future and will just become the norm in the same way HD has just become default. To me, gaming will be at the forefront. I tend to replace my TV every 3 years or so here's hoping the PS5 is unveiled sometime around then!

At the moment I'm just playing small games and some old Plus offerings as I don't want to start anything substantial before Horizon. I haven't played an open world game in over a year or so as I got burnt out after a string of open world games and playing nothing else but what I have seen of Horizon has got me pumped.

Seperate topic but what are your thoughts on 4k Blu Rays? At first I was a bit annoyed that Sony hadn't included the 4K Blu Ray drive but I personally don't see them taking off for a good long time, if at all. If they do, Sony can always include in the next iteration. I have a lot of Blu Rays but mainly older classic films that got a proper HD clean up - Bladerunner for example just looked amazing on Blu Ray.

@Rudy_Manchego The KU series - particularly the 6400 may well be a decent option from a gaming in 4k option - excluding HDR - due to the low input lag in game mode - its half that of the Panasonic for example. However we use our TV's for more than just gaming so you would have to weigh up the pro's and con's for your own situation. It may also depend on whether you want/need 3D too as some TV's don't offer that and even fewer next year will. I believe LG and Sony are following Samsung and dropping it from their 2017 range.

On the topic of 4k Blurays, I too was a little annoyed that Sony didn't include this with the PS4 Pro - especially a 4k HDR bluray player. I do have the XB1s though so it wasn't too annoying. I can understand why - not just to keep costs down as I doubt it would have added a significant increase although would have pushed it over the $400 mark - more like $450 which would still of been (imo) reasonable considering the price of dedicated players. However what is more telling is the fact that Sony are launching their own dedicated 4k HDR Bluray player and in the past, lie when Sony launched the PS3, sales of dedicated players took a massive hit. We know from financial reports that Sony are struggling in non-gaming areas and had the Pro launched with a 4k HDR bluray player, I think it would seriously impact on the sales of its own dedicated player. Therefore its not just about saving costs. I look at it as Sony opted to upgrade its gaming capabilities whilst MS focused more on its media ability. I wouldn't be surprised though if Sony add a 4k HDR Bluray player to its PS5. That gives its dedicated player(s) a chance to sell as well as another area that is 'upgraded' and reason to buy their new console. The PS5 is likely to be an upgrade over the Pro - ie more likely to hit native 4k but if all the Media side was also 4k HDR, the only reason to upgrade is purely gaming as the Pro would already offer all 4k HDR media players.

From a gaming perspective, the player is nothing more than a storage device and works no different from a mechanical HDD in that respect. A standard Bluray has enough storage for games so adding in a 4k HDR player is only beneficial from increasing the media potential.

The main issue at the moment with 4k Blurays is that most films are made in 2k and then 'remastered' for higher resolution. No doubt this will increase as professional 4k cameras become more widespread and cheaper. This is also true for 'streamed' content. The difference between streamed and Bluray is quality. Streamed 4k looks great and better than HD BUT its also compressed so some of the finer detail and nuance is lost. This is true between standard Bluray and HD content too but with greater resolution, the difference is not so noticeable. For AV enthusiasts, the best way to watch 4k and HDR is via a dedicated Bluray player. The next best is via a Console (the XB1s) and lastly via streamed but for most people, streamed may well be sufficient.

I much prefer Physical myself - not just for the benefits of actually owning something for money etc but for the quality and the fact that I am always likely to be able to watch it. Look at how games can suddenly be removed (like the Marvel games) and if you 'deleted' these to make room, they are lost despite you buying them. I still have DVD's that are over 10yrs old. Obviously not as high quality as Blurays...

Anyway that's my take on it...

@Rudy_Manchego Take a look at the Samsung UE43KS7500, that has just won a test in What Hi-Fi for 'small' 4K sets and it is priced at £800 (in the magazine, probably cheaper if you shop around) and that has the 1000 nits for the HDR. It's a curved screen so I don't know if that would make things awkward.

Been still tracking these, mostly for HDR.... hard to make sense of it all. Seems like the Samsung Q7F still the best colour gamut but somehow the LG C7 comes out as best HDR?

Aren't OLED TVs supposedly the best right now? On the other hand, they're quite pricey, though.

@Mega-Gazz The B7/C7 are virtually the same. The reason though that OLEDs are 'better' is because they are 'pixel' perfect where as LCD's can be affected by the 'backlight' which will change the luminescence of a Pixel so not 'pixel' perfect. The Q7/9's are much brighter than OLEDs and has the best colour volume over any OLEDs - most OLEDs are around the 332m distinguishable colours but a top quality LCD will be around 442m distinguishable colours - in otherwords - around 110m MORE distinguishable colours - BUT they are not always pixel perfect because they are self emitting pixels. A pure white can be next to a perfect black but on an LCD, that 'black' maybe a bit more grey because the light behind the panel to deliver that white also impacts on the blacks.

OLEDs also only need to reach 540nits to be classified as UHD Premium - because of their perfect Blacks. LCDs need to be above 1000nits but also below 0.05nits black level. The B7 is around 650-700nits with a similar input Lag to the KS or Q series from Samsung. Coupled with the fact the image is pixel perfect with incredibly fast response times (something that beats most PC Monitors and considered the most important stat in picking a PC monitor) - even though its sacrificing some of the colour gamut and luminescence (brightness) - its probably the 'best' TV on the market for gaming as well as most viewing situations. In a bright room, the OLEDs can struggle to look much better than SDR compared to an LCD because an LCD has the extra brightness.

That doesn't mean that TV's like the KS series are poor - far from it. Pound for pound they are absolutely untouchable BUT if you are spending £2k+ then OLEDs are 'better' than LCDs. It depends on if your budget can stretch to an OLED and whether the Picture Perfect, fast response times (which affects motion - especially in 24fps movies can look really juddery) is worth the £1k+ difference and for most people, that difference is not worth it. OLEDs are still far from 'perfect' in ALL areas and circumstances and LCDs can be better in some areas too but its whether or not the Price difference is big enough to warrant the extra money on it.

In some ways its a bit like the Console market where you have to decide whether the £350 or £450 prices of the Pro or X are worth spending that money on - even though they are clearly better than the Base consoles - but you can still play all the same games etc on the cheaper models. The only thing I wouldn't compromise on though is HDR - its a much bigger deal than 4k is to 1080p. In gaming 4k is certainly much sharper than film/tv's - maybe because its 'drawn' with fine lines etc so 4k really does make a difference - especially with 4k assets too.

OLEDs are definitely worth buying if you can afford to and LG's '2017' series are the best on the market for input Lag with Panasonics being next best. Sony's A1 is good for 4k (not the best) and worse for 1080p gaming (more than 2x that of LG's and Samsungs) so comes 'last' for gaming - in fact a Q9 would probably come higher in the best gaming TV's than Sony's OLEDs because it has a similar Input Lag to the B7. The reason that OLEDs are 2017's best - is because they have improved the near black (no longer crushing shadow detail) better at handling lower quality content - less macro blocking and noise, better tone mapping to handle higher quality HDR10 content and also greatly reduced input Lag. The KS is still 2016's best and competes well with the OLEDs - even 2017 OLEDs and pound for pound are probably better in a lot of areas, not so good as others - but its incredibly difficult to find one...

@BAMozzy Thanks! Seems like here in Canada the Samsung Q7, the LG C7/B7 and the Sony 930e are all virtually the same price ($4k for 60"-65"), and I'm not seeing alot of new KS8000s. Might still wait on the price, but HDR sure is purdy.

@Mega-Gazz The KS8000 was last years version of the Q7. I assume the KS8000 is the one with feet at either end instead of 'stand' in Canada as I assume Samsung keep the same numbering as the US. In the UK that would be the KS7000 if so and the 2017 version is essentially the Q7. The Q7 is, in some areas, not as strong as the KS7000 - better in a few others. It has a slightly wider colour gamut and a faster refresh rate to improve motion blur (reduces it a bit) but its not quite as bright and also a LOT more expensive. The 55" KS7 here was around £1400 new but Samsung are charging (or were when it released) well over £2k. They 'tried' to insist that the 'rebranding to QLED' actually made the TV's significantly better but really it just gave them the idea to increase the price and put them up against the 'premium' OLEDs.

When the KS7000 launched at £1400, the B6 was around £2.7k and the £1300 difference was not worth it. Like I said the B6 was good but also had a number of 'issues' and its Game mode was 'POOR'. LG did patch that a few times and finally in March this year, it finally was 'competitive'. The B7 though is already as competitive as the KS series and LG has also improved a lot of the issues that last years OLEDs suffered with. In a lot of ways, the OLEDs have made more improvements than Samsung has with the QLEDs. Point is that pound for pound, the KS being £1300 cheaper, and much better for gaming etc was the best TV of 2016. The £1300 difference didn't buy you £1300 worth of improvements.

In 2017, with the Q series at the same price as OLEDs, you are NOT getting the same performance. If the Q7 was £1500 and the B7 was £3k, then you could say the Q7 was the better TV pound for pound but as its as expensive as an OLED - the OLED is better pound for pound.

Best times to buy - at least in the UK though - is the end of November (Black Friday - although not as big as the US and most deals tend to be on the stock that's not popular) but the best time is after Christmas and the new year sales. This is when we get to see what the next years TV's will be offering at CES. Stores are also trying to clear stock in readiness for the new ranges. Trouble is, then you may see something else due to launch later that year and how much 'better' or what new tech it has so decide to wait for them to release and drop in price - before you know it, you are fast approaching the end of the year and CES isn't too far off revealing what the new range of TV's could offer...

I really do like my KS8000 (KS9000 in the US) BUT I would happily replace it with a B7 OLED. However I am not in any rush because my KS is great and HDR looks stunning on it. I also know that HDMI 2.1 is due to launch and that can offer eARC (enhanced ARC that allows uncompressed Dolby Atmos, DTS-X etc to pass through the TV), Game VRR (the same as AMD's FreeSync that refreshes the image as soon as the next frame is ready - so we are not limited to 30 or 60fps) and HFR (High Frame Rates - 4k/120 is possible!) as well as Dynamic HDR too. With the Xbox One X offering Atmos and Game VRR and I bet the next Sony Console will too, I am content to keep my KS8000 until I can really upgrade - not take a sideways step so to to speak. That £2k to buy an OLED can be 'saved' until I can get an OLED (or micro led or 'true' QLED - any self emitting technology) with HDMI 2.1 and those features. Maybe by then OLEDs can push the Brightness and colour gamuts to match (or beat) the current QLEDs.

Its a pity that Sony's ZD9 doesn't have the greatest input lag. Its not bad as such but its behind Samsung, LG and Panasonics 4k HDR TV's. It also only has 2 HDMI's with the full 4k/60 HDR bandwidth - the other two are limited so connectivity isn't the best either but for an LCD - its a great TV...

Sony though do seem to be 'lagging' (haha) behind the big 2 - Samsung and LG - in a number of areas. Their TV's are not the best for colour gamut, only a few are 'good' enough for UHD Premium status and they also cut corners on things like HDMI inputs, input lag, built in audio quality etc. They are strong on image quality and motion but not so great on colour management options - and prices are steep too compared to equivalent 'Korean' alternatives.

HDR is awesome but we are still a way off from reaching the level that the best quality HDR content is mastered too. Certainly the level at which DV is mastered too although the Dynamic Metadata does help with tone mapping until we can reach those standards. DV and HDR10 can be mastered to 4000nits, with 12bit colour depth (10 bit for HDR10) and the full REC2020 colour gamut. Therefore there is a lot of scope for improvement. The highest Peak Brightness is around 1800nits, and 76% of the REC2020 gamut and ALL TV's are 10bit panels All UHD premium means is that a TV is below a certain black level, above the minimum peak brightness in a 10% window and at least 90% DCI-P3 or 70% REC2020 colour gamut and must have a proper 10bit panel (not an 8bit panel with software to add dithering to recreate a 10bit look by rapidly flickering between 2 colours to create the illusion of the colour they can't create with the 8bit colours). We are only into the 2nd year of HDR in any real capacity. The minimum standards were only agreed last year so I can see manufacturers trying to improve their HDR performance. Samsung focused more on increasing their Colour Gamut - helped by the QD layer - and are the only ones to hit 100% of the DCI-P3 colour gamut - which is around 75/76% of the REC2020 Colour Gamut. Sonys (for example) are around 90% of the DCI-P3 and the OLEDs are around 95-96% - as you can see, there is definite areas they can improve. Looking at the 2017 range, they really didn't make much of an improvement on their HDR Specs but, where OLEDs are concerned, made refinements on PQ and input lag - of course other aspects like HLG have been added in readiness too and maybe some improvements we don't know about as HDMI 2.0 can be upgraded to 2.1 IF the hardware was built to handle the higher bandwidth and the features that can bring but until it launches, we may not know if the hardware was built for it.

Anyway, I have waffled on yet again... LOL

I do love technology LOL

@BAMozzy thanks again, great info.

@Mega-Gazz No probs - hope it helps...