Ultrawide vs Dual Monitors

  • Thread starter Thread starter DM60
  • Start date Start date
DM60

DM60

Well-known member
Something to think about.

Ultrawide Monitor

The video really doesn't talk much about working with these, just how well it works with games and movies. On down the page there is a picture of running an app in dual screen. What many here do.

If you are think of upgrading.
 
The thing that sucks about ultra-wide, is often you give up height for width.
I hate the 16x9 aspect ratio ultra-wide monitors because of that...unless you start talking 32" and up, which at Hi-Q resolution for computer displays (not TV) are still expensive.

I prefer the 3x4 aspect ratio, because track stacking occurs vertically, not horizontally....while timelines scroll horizontally by default...so you don't need huge width, it's the height that IMO matters more for DAW use.

I currently run a pair of 21" 3x4 Dell UltraSharp monitors, and the total desktop space is more than a 32" ultra-wide....I just have to deal with the bezel down the middle.
Dell makes a killer 32" computer monitor, with 16x10 aspect ratio, which is taller than 16x9....but it ain't cheap... :( ...and I'm not that hung up about the bezel down the middle to warrant dropping $1200 on a monitor. I'll wait a bit until prices drop more.

AFA the stuff that's really for HD TV....they are not going to match the crispness and refresh rates of a high-end purely computer monitor display....but some of them approach "acceptable". Everyone has to decide with their eyes. :)
 
I used to use two 3x4 monitors, and that worked really well when I ran Logic. I'd have, say, a mixing screen on one, and track screen on the other.

I now have two 24" 16 x 10 monitors, but not side-by-side.

Because with the way Reaper works, I've discovered I only need one to record effectively, and the second monitor sits way over to left, and I use that for looking at videos in full screen that I'm editing in Vegas on the screen in front of me.

Sometimes that extra monitor is used as a 'music stand', i.e. if someone wants some lyrics up or something.

I note Miro's preference for 3x4, and I agree that you can get a better view of tracks that way. I guess, though, that you could put two 16 x 9 monitors side by side vertically.
 
gecko zzed said:
I note Miro's preference for 3x4, and I agree that you can get a better view of tracks that way. I guess, though, that you could put two 16 x 9 monitors side by side vertically.
Click to expand...

I've seen a couple of people do that, and I tried it once....it wasn't appealing, 'cuz then they were too high, and not wide enough.

The problem is that they pretty much got away from the 3x4 screens and went to 16x9, mainly as a result of television going to the letterbox view...which is great for TV....but IMO sucks, for a DAW app.
The 16 width is fine, I just wish they went 16x12. :D

My daytime coworker has a pair of 24" 16x9 set up side by side, for basic computer use stuff.
It's stupid....he spends all his time in front of one, 'cuz the two together are too wide, and it's like watching a tennis match...which is why I say that we need more vertical to match the horizontal instead of this thin letterbox format for computing. I want the shit in front of me, and not a foot off to each side. It's easier to move your eyes up/down when scanning the screen then wide L/R....IMO.

Still, a single 32" (or 42" :p) would be nice.
 
I debated this recently.
I used to have 3 x 5:4 19" monitors then I cut back to 2.
Lately I'd been thinking of upgrading and was torn between one big ass screen or two screens slightly bigger than before.

In the end I went on price and that landed me with 2 x 24" 16:10 1200p Samsungs.

Miro, you're right about the tennis match thing, but I'm so used to dual screens and was never really bothered by that.
Honestly I think I could use two more sometimes! :facepalm:

I angle them in a bit too, which helps.
 
Dell (and others) now have the single curved widescreen...which I'm not sure how well it would work for a DAW rig.

My dual 21" monitors also spread out wide, but they are 4:3 so I have some nice vertical space too, and being that they sit on my console meter bridge, they are 3' away from my nose, so I'm not having to do the tennis thing so much, but I do have to lean in sometimes when I'm looking at a plugin or something with teeny tiny text on it, otherwise the tracks and whatnot are all zoom in/out so no biggie.

It's that damn bezel down the middle that's been a thorn in my ass from the first day I started using dual monitors about 17 year ago...first at work when I was doing multimedia stuff, and then soon after I added dual monitors for my DAW rig.
Those early days, it was dual 21" CRT monitors....:eek:...damn things took up more room front-to back than they did side to side...and way hot!!! :D
 
If you noticed, and to everyone's point, anything smaller than what 30" (76.2 cm) is a waste. You don't get the gain. But a nice 36" monitor, split screen, with good side views (maybe touchscreen?) I think starts to change the equation.

I thought it was interesting and the prices are really making it something that could be considered.
 
I saw those ultra-wides in the store and it gave me pause for about 3 seconds. Then decided they aren't worth it. I do not like the compromise in height.

I have two 16x9's stacked one above the other. As in not side by side. It's a lot of real estate without the Ping-Pong broken neck thing.
 
DM60 said:
If you noticed, and to everyone's point, anything smaller than what 30" (76.2 cm) is a waste. You don't get the gain. But a nice 36" monitor, split screen, with good side views (maybe touchscreen?) I think starts to change the equation.

I thought it was interesting and the prices are really making it something that could be considered.
Click to expand...

If you could demo them at a store....take a laptop and hook the VGA/DVI/HDMI cable to the screen and then see how it looks when you pull up your DAW app up or something with a lot of fine-line graphics...and then also move the graphics like when you hit play and the timeline scrolls, etc...and then make a good assessment which one gives you the best image.

The bigger screen will be nice, but not all of those will impress AFA the graphics if they are not as crisp as when you view them on your laptop or decent quality computer monitor...and then the super-sized screen would lose its appeal quickly.

Of course...it wouldn't be a total loss...just turn it into a flat-screen TV for the studio or some other room of your house! :cool:
 
miroslav said:
If you could demo them at a store....take a laptop and hook the VGA/DVI/HDMI cable to the screen and then see how it looks when you pull up your DAW app up or something with a lot of fine-line graphics...and then also move the graphics like when you hit play and the timeline scrolls, etc...and then make a good assessment which one gives you the best image.

The bigger screen will be nice, but not all of those will impress AFA the graphics if they are not as crisp as when you view them on your laptop or decent quality computer monitor...and then the super-sized screen would lose its appeal quickly.

Of course...it wouldn't be a total loss...just turn it into a flat-screen TV for the studio or some other room of your house! :cool:
Click to expand...

I think to your point, the pixel count is what will give you the resolution you are talking about. Just short of 4K, maybe the new 4K TVs make these monitors obsolete before they are out.
 
Problem number 1 for me is also $$$. $1200 for the curved 34? I can get NICE twin 26's for half that.
Problem number 2 is I stack mine top and bottom. Shooting for a third on top. Wide doesn't do much for me there.
 
DM60 said:
I always thought that was the question. :)
Click to expand...

Well...only if the $$$ can get you what you really want/need.
My only point was to say that lots of the HDTVs are not the best solution for a computer monitor...but the newest models look promising. So it's a trade-off...dual monitors at a lower cost, or pay up for new single. Also, if you currently run say...20" or greater dual monitors....you're going to need an awful large single to give you the same or more amount of desktop space, and....my biggest issue, is the loss of vertical due to widescreen ratios...so then an even bigger single is needed to make it up.

But I'm always looking at the new stuff coming out....and the prices on high-end, large computer monitors coming down. :)
 
miroslav said:
Well...only if the $$$ can get you what you really want/need.
My only point was to say that lots of the HDTVs are not the best solution for a computer monitor...but the newest models look promising. So it's a trade-off...dual monitors at a lower cost, or pay up for new single. Also, if you currently run say...20" or greater dual monitors....you're going to need an awful large single to give you the same or more amount of desktop space, and....my biggest issue, is the loss of vertical due to widescreen ratios...so then an even bigger single is needed to make it up.

But I'm always looking at the new stuff coming out....and the prices on high-end, large computer monitors coming down. :)
Click to expand...

But, one thing we all forget, there is a page mode for monitors. Just flip on their sides and do the switch.
 
miroslav said:
You talking about rotating them vertically...?
Click to expand...

OK, my bad, it is called Portrait (page mode is what they called it for document editing). The mode is primarily used for editing documents, but might work in a stack case. You do loose some width of course. Just an idea.
 
miroslav said:
You talking about rotating them vertically...?
Click to expand...

That was an earlier suggestion somewhere within this thread . . . stick two 16x9 together on their ends

That would give an effective aspect ratio of 18 x 16, almost a square.
 
I might actually try my 16:10 24" inchers in portrait, just to see what it's like!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top