I've always liked and used four screens, lotta real estate. I decide to downsize to two, think two 4K monitors would be at least close in real estate (e.g., amount of tracks fit in a screen) to the four 1080s.

Right, so i pick up two 28" 4K monitors, but learn too late that at full 4K, I need the monitors way too close to my face, posing too many problems to list. HOWEVER, the primary one being that I cannot position the audio monitors and my ears in a triangle to create a proper sweet spot - the width of the screens, because they are so close to my face, precludes this.

Even at 125% resolution (Windows' recommendation), it's an issue. But they were a seemingly good deal...

My question would be, for someone wanting a lot of screen real estate (but willing to give some on that), is there a middle way? One thought I had was a single, but larger, either a 4K or UHD (the nemenclature is all over the place, but I meant the 2500 something by 1000-something, rather than 3800-something by 2500-something), monitor.

Im looking at these 34-42" monitors on Amazon, running from about $600-900. Does anyone have a setup like this?

Or any other thoughts? The most obvious is to stop trying to get the latest and greatest, I know, but you have to admit there is a real benefit to being able to see more - with a smaller screen.

Thanks in advance, if you made it this far! 👋🏼

Oh, and have TVs finally become viable PC monitors? So much cheaper - even if it has to be 60" and on the other side of the room. 😜

I use a 43" VIZIO display as my primary.  4K, works great.  Same pixel density as the 1920 x 1080s I was using, so things appear on screen the same size they did with the smaller monitors.  The end result is more real estate without squinting.  I have NOT used any scaling other than 1:1 (100%).  Love it.  Right at $400US at the time I bought it.
 
 

Thanks Bob, that's helpful. Just so I understand (a rare occurrence), the 43" Vizio is a 4K TV?

And as to pixel density, it has the same as a 1920 x 1080 computer monitor?

That would make sense - a few years back, I got an HD TV, knowing nothing about pixel density, and was obviously disappointed by the real estate!

Thanks again!

Pixel density is a function of x-y pixels AND size.  The density is per inch of display.  If you keep the density close when changing displays, the physical size of displayed windows/objects stays the same.
 
Here's a handy calculator  --  http://kingscalculator.com/en/other-calculators/pixel-density-calculator
 
The VIZIO is just a display.  It is set up to be a TeeVee display or computer display.  https://www.vizio.com/e43d2.html
 
It will also do Smartcast and other stuff I don't use it for.
 
It has one big GOTCHA - the included remote doesn't get you to advanced settings.  You have to use a smartphone app to get deep into settings.

Can you really dumb this down for me as much as possible? Does your configuration - Vizio at 4K - result in, roughly, double the real estate (by that I mean, as a random example, one track in CV per inch of screen) of a 21.5" monitor (HP, for example) at 1920 x 1080?

I appreciate your patience.

Treefight
Can you really dumb this down for me as much as possible? Does your configuration - Vizio at 4K - result in, roughly, double the real estate (by that I mean, as a random example, one track in CV per inch of screen) of a 21.5" monitor (HP, for example) at 1920 x 1080?

I appreciate your patience.

No, it doubles the number of pixels both directions, so in effect, you *quadruple* the screen real estate as far as pixels go.  4K is 3840 x 2160.  That's two 1920s wide and two 1080s high, or 2x2 1920s.
 
Here's an example of SONAR on a 4K:

 
In other words, it's awesome    A 1920 x 1080 display would only fill one quarter of this.
 
The physical dimensions determine how easy you can see things on the screen.  I was using two 1920x1080s.  I chose 43" for the 4K so that everything is roughly the same physical size.  The pixel density calc helps you understand the trade-offs for any screen sizes you are considering.
 
One gotcha to watch out for is monitor speaker placement.  The wider your display, the wider the minimum distance between the speakers.  That makes your triangle larger, pushing the sweet spot back.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Wow, that is awesome! So I could have a similar setup/real estate to my old four monitor system (regular 1920's, around 22"-23," two wide, two high), but without the attendant headaches (annoying bezels in the middle, mounting them, having to use 4 vid. card outs)?

I'm looking at the pic, and it does look as if I "melted" my four old monitors into one, resolution/real estate wise. If I'm getting this right, wow, a dream come true.

I wonder if I could just bring my laptop to BestBuy and take a look...

Thanks again, and I hope I have a clue.

That's exactly it.  I considered going from two 1920 x1080s to four, but the frames/gaps/bezels suck.  When I saw how inexpensive the 4K displays had become, it was a no-brainer for me.
 
On a single video connection.  I do have one of the 1920x1080s 'on the side' as an ancillary display, but it hardly gets used.
 
 
 

Sweet. Now how to explain to my better half why I need a fifth (actually seventh - one for remote viewing behind each of two drum kits) display, when I literally just bought two 28" 4k monitors for nearly the same price (each) as the Vizio!

Measure twice, cut once. One day I'll learn.

Thanks again, you've really helped very much.