43" monitor anyone?

[jdnz]

A chiropractioner said to me you always look straight ahead or down to a computer monitor, so good point.
An ultra-wide mean a much larger left-right movement however..

It really depends how big it is. Admittedly, for working, ultra wide has its cons.

I run a pair of 27" qhd monitors at work - so functionally identical in terms of width/height to one of the new 49" LG 5120x1440 monitors.

Even that wide I have zero neck issues using them all day

Naturally we make horizontal micro head movements all the time (think about what your head does moving around all day walking/running) - it's craning your head back that gives neck issues (same issues we get climbing - 'belayers neck')

[pinki]

I think this idea of parking stuff we don’t use continuously is good and means to some extent above/to the side becomes a matter of preference. To the side i.e. an ultra wide, is really no different than a dual monitor setup as I have now so I am tending to prefer this option.

[cleverr1]

I have a Samsung LC49HG90DMUXEN 49" which I use as 2 x 27" 1080p monitors. For music production I keep the arrange window and mix console separate. I didn't want higher resolution than this because several plugins I often use don't have scalable GUIs. I mix on headphones, but to use the monitors I need to wheel my chair back to get the triangle, which for some would be a big downside of ultrawides.

The horizontal head movement is normal to me since I've worked this way with two monitors for ages. It's actually a lot less strenuous than pivoting from an Atari ST screen to a mixing desk / tape transport was

32:9 aspect ratio suits me well. I've never felt the need for more than 2 screens. The iiyama Prolite X4372UHSU-B1 43" wouldn't work for me because the aspect ratio of just 2 screens would be odd and I don't know if the low refresh rate would cause eye strain.

At the end of the day it's an individual choice, maybe some would be happy to sacrifice real estate in the arrange and console space to have the benefit of static windows giving immediate access to VSTi settings etc.

[pinki]

32:9 aspect ratio suits me well. I've never felt the need for more than 2 screens. The iiyama Prolite X4372UHSU-B1 43" wouldn't work for me because the aspect ratio of just 2 screens would be odd and I don't know if the low refresh rate would cause eye strain.

Refresh rate and PWM rate are an issue though I didn't think refresh rate caused eye strain if too low.
The PWM rate is something I'm looking at though it's hard to get that spec on a monitor.
Your Samsung is not cheap!

[cleverr1]

32:9 aspect ratio suits me well. I've never felt the need for more than 2 screens. The iiyama Prolite X4372UHSU-B1 43" wouldn't work for me because the aspect ratio of just 2 screens would be odd and I don't know if the low refresh rate would cause eye strain.

Refresh rate and PWM rate are an issue though I didn't think refresh rate caused eye strain if too low.
The PWM rate is something I'm looking at though it's hard to get that spec on a monitor.
Your Samsung is not cheap!

I'm also finding it difficult to find PWM stats on monitors. My Samsung definitely uses PWM flicker @ 433Hz, whilst I can't perceive it that's not to say over time it wouldn't cause eye strain to those sensitive to said flicker.

My Samsung was a black Friday deal which at the time was around 50% more expensive than the iiyama 43" this thread is about, so similar(ish) ball park. I'm constrained by space in my tiny study/studio so as a replacement for the 2 X 23" monitors I was using at the time it made sense to upgrade to the Samsung.

Going back to my original 2 x 23" setup, (which was fine), in terms of ergonomics I'd have been happy to then experiment with 4 x 21" 1080p in a single 43" monitor.

It'd be useful to get some real world hands on info and the exact specs about the iiyama 43".

[pinki]

Iiyama say their monitors are 'flicker free'. There is no information on PWM rates unfortunately.
From what research I have done, Viewsonic's flicker-free' is coming out on top.Of course if you leave the brightness at 100% then there is no need to worry about PWM as it is not on. Then you have to deal with the over-bright screen though.

[foxache]

I've got a 34" UW and run it in 3440 x 1440, sitting just under 3 feet from it, and my only complaint is that at that resolution, some smaller text and icons can be difficult to read in software like Cubase. I'd imagine a 43" monitor would be too tall if anything, so unless it was UW and curved you'd either have to sit further back or you'd be moving your head around quite a lot to see the edges of it.

[cleverr1]

Of course if you leave the brightness at 100% then there is no need to worry about PWM as it is not on. Then you have to deal with the over-bright screen though.

Not having to worry about an over-bright screen is possibly the only benefit of age related sight issues
here - my monitor brightness is cranked up all the way to 11

[pinki]

I've got a 34" UW and run it in 3440 x 1440, sitting just under 3 feet from it, and my only complaint is that at that resolution, some smaller text and icons can be difficult to read in software like Cubase. I'd imagine a 43" monitor would be too tall if anything, so unless it was UW and curved you'd either have to sit further back or you'd be moving your head around quite a lot to see the edges of it.

I’ve worked out that I will be about 4 feet away. So from what you are experiencing on a 43” with the same resolution as you ...the text will be even harder to read but conversely my head movements will be less? Is that right? And if it is, then less resolution would make the text bigger?

[Kalamata Kid]

My experience with my Samsung 43" is not as good as I had anticipated.
Though gotta say I am glad I have it.

Often I cannot find the cursor.
Does anyone else have this issue?
I use the large yellow arrow.

[foxache]

I've got a 34" UW and run it in 3440 x 1440, sitting just under 3 feet from it, and my only complaint is that at that resolution, some smaller text and icons can be difficult to read in software like Cubase. I'd imagine a 43" monitor would be too tall if anything, so unless it was UW and curved you'd either have to sit further back or you'd be moving your head around quite a lot to see the edges of it.

I’ve worked out that I will be about 4 feet away. So from what you are experiencing on a 43” with the same resolution as you ...the text will be even harder to read but conversely my head movements will be less? Is that right? And if it is, then less resolution would make the text bigger?

Yeah that sounds right to me. Although then I think if you make the resolution bigger, it'd just be equivalent to having a smaller monitor running at a higher resolution, unless I'm missing something, e.g. I've got a 16" Macbook Pro as well as a PC and the screen on that runs at an even higher resolution than my 34" monitor, so although it's less than half the size, it can fit noticeably more than half the stuff on screen.

[foxache]

My experience with my Samsung 43" is not as good as I had anticipated.
Though gotta say I am glad I have it.

Often I cannot find the cursor.
Does anyone else have this issue?
I use the large yellow arrow.

Lol I do occasionally lose the cursor on my 34", so I can imagine it's much more of a problem on a 43". Do you use Windows? If so there is at least that setting where you can highlight the mouse cursor by pressing ctrl (I think).

[Kalamata Kid]

^^^
Yes ctrl.
But even then hard to locate the cursor.
It helps a little.

[pinki]

I've got a 34" UW and run it in 3440 x 1440, sitting just under 3 feet from it, and my only complaint is that at that resolution, some smaller text and icons can be difficult to read in software like Cubase. I'd imagine a 43" monitor would be too tall if anything, so unless it was UW and curved you'd either have to sit further back or you'd be moving your head around quite a lot to see the edges of it.

I’ve worked out that I will be about 4 feet away. So from what you are experiencing on a 43” with the same resolution as you ...the text will be even harder to read but conversely my head movements will be less? Is that right? And if it is, then less resolution would make the text bigger?

Yeah that sounds right to me. Although then I think if you make the resolution bigger, it'd just be equivalent to having a smaller monitor running at a higher resolution, unless I'm missing something, e.g. I've got a 16" Macbook Pro as well as a PC and the screen on that runs at an even higher resolution than my 34" monitor, so although it's less than half the size, it can fit noticeably more than half the stuff on screen.

This is a really useful thread!
That all makes sense. My idea was to have a big monitor on the wall, not sitting on my desk. I saw someone on Youtube doing this with a TV as a monitor, the idea being the TV screen is much cheaper than a monitor of equivalent physical size and as the distance of viewing is further, so the lower resolution is OK.
But like you say you don't get any more information with that set up, just a bigger screen on the wall.

[Kalamata Kid]

I have 43" 4K Samsung TV used as a monitor.
I mostly use the bottom half
The top half is for less used apps.

Any suggestions for a program that splits the monitor top and bottom as if they are two monitors?
When I open a DAW I want it to open on the bottom half. I also want the Windows Task Bar to be on the bottom half. All programs will open in the bottom screen and then I can move some to the top.
[/quote]