Anyone recently switched from 2 screens to 1? I currently run two 27” at 1980 x 1050. Thinking I’d prefer no break in the middle and more room for the speakers. But what resolution and size would be an improvement? I can’t afford megabucks but wondering if a 34” 2560 x 1440 would be better or worse.

When I switched to a wider display I went to 3440x1440 ultrawide. For me seeing more of the timeline is beneficial, and I also am less bothered by having a pane to the left that shows track information ("inspector" in Nuendo). So totally worth it for me.

Since you're looking at a narrower 2560 I'd just say that you can think about how you work and if there are things that you look at every now and then, but not all the time, then you can put those things on one of your current 27 inch monitors and put that off to the side or lower or whatever. In my case I kept my 24 inch and I keep meters and miscellaneous things that I look at every once in a while on it, and I have it set up off to my left and lower, out of range from direct reflections etc.

So I'd probably recommend 3440 over 2560, but I'd also recommend seeing if sticking with a dual screen setup by keeping the 27 inch off to the side and getting the 2560x1440 works out for you.

I run a 40" 4k screen as my primary (run at 100% DPI). I could never go back to something with fewer pixels. It does take up a lot of room, however.

My son runs a 34" curved ultrawide monitor: BenQ EX3501R . The curve helps you deal with the width. The extra screen space is super useful, especially with something like a DAW. Cost is around $550 USD. It doesn't come with a VESA mount, but there's a 100mm VESA adapter: BenQ LCD XR3501.



Pete

Consider first if you like working with single large windows or multiple medium sized windows. I used to work with two 1080p monitors and moved to a single 32" 4k, but I realized this wasn't suited to me because I like having multiple things open at once. I'll eventually revert back or get a 49" ultrawide (very expensive).

If you are like me, something like a normal ultrawide or a large high resolution monitor MAY feel restricting coming from 2 monitors, unless you scale everything very small.

With a single 34" ultrawide you will more than likely end up having A. One single window open at a time (good for people who like a large arrange window and lots of tracks), B. One larger and one skinny window, or C. Two medium sized windows. If you like working with option C, you may ultimate have less space for each window than you did throwing them onto two different monitors based on dot pitch (resolution over physical screen size).

Just giving my 2 cents because I've thought about this a lot. Another option is to get a 32" monitor or normal size ultrawide and continue using one (or both) of your monitors on the side in portrait or one on top of the main one.

You can get screen splitting software. Such as FancyZones on Windows. Similar avialable for Mac.
Gives you the functionality of multiple monitors.

Fancyzones in Windows 10, or its built-in cousin in each title bar in Windows 11.

But I never run anything full screen on this 4k display. Even when I am working in Photoshop, Rhino, Studio One, or Premiere Pro, it's very rare for me to have an app full-screen. It can be done, of course, which is a nice option. My son usually has discord and a game up, at a minimum, both 100% visible.

When I had multiple monitors, I just found it annoying to see the bezel, and to have to make a binary choice about where apps lived. To each their own :P

FWIW, I do have a second display -- a touch screen. But that's for very specific uses.

Pete

BTW, I am waiting on the day when I can get an 8k display that is similar size, maybe a bit wider :D

Pete

Great posts - thanks very much. I'm holding off because I do in fact have a few windows open sometimes. It's mainly the mix window in Cubase. I find this window design a bit of a pest, but I know that's just personal. Every time I see a video on Protools they just have the project open with a zillion skinny tracks. Cubase has mix window presets but I'm always saving them or fiddling with the view. I've resorted to mixing from subgroups which I guess is probably time efficient anyway.