bigger screen = more real estate?

In this case, you want to make sure the larger monitor has good native resolution.  Previously I had a 50" plasma about 10 years old.  I literally could not read anything on it, so last year I upgraded.  Now I have a 60" about 4 ft from me and maybe 2 feet up.  it's very easy to read everything even from 10 feet, so I use that for track views and wave editing.  I also have a 24" about 2 feet from me I use for the console view, but it's actually much harder to read that.  I have to move my face about 1 ft to see my plugin lists, for example.  
 
Although, my eyes...they ain't too good no more...

The issue with selecting and placing displays always requires more precision than is generally applied in the back-and-forth we have in various fora.  That's because there's an interaction between the pixel density per inch (PPI), the total number of pixels (resolution is 3840x2160 for 4k), the screen size, the viewing distance, viewing height, and finally any magnification factors you'd apply to the native resolution that reduce it in a disciplined way. 
 
I have an article on my website called '4k Hooray' that walks through those factors and has multiple web links to calculation sites.  The predecessor to that article was 'The 4k in the Road', and it journaled my frustration with the transition from HD (1920x1200) displays and a WHD (2560x1600) display. 
 
Right now, I usually run my 55-inch 4k at 115% magnification in Win10, and at the first notch below native (can't remember the numbers) in macOS.  It's enough to make my eyes happy without much sacrifices in 'screen real estate' . My viewing distance is around 42 inches. 
 
For example, a 50-inch display from 10 years ago was probably still just HD (1920x1080) and so there was no real estate advantage over a smaller display, but there was the advantage of a longer viewing distance.  In my 55-inch implementation, I had to sacrifice a convenient viewing height because of my mixer, but gained the advantages of more screen real estate by laying out my track, console, and video windows in a different manner than before.
 
Don't give up. It's possible to get what you want with patience, a tape measure and some calculations. 

mariogag
It's funny,

Tack height of 0.5"is comfortable at a viewing distance of 1.5
to 2 feet....I'm using near field monitors which allows me to create
the listening triangle with my 2 19" in between.

I'm dreaming of keeping the track height as above but to get more of them
visible.

i'm also pretty sure That I need to favor height or width but not both.

......and my video doesn't have an hdmi out......(-:...

yeah, yeah, an upgrade is required!


Mario

Mario -
 
If your current displays are 1920x1080, a 38" 4K will double your real estate and keep the physical size of objects pretty darn close to what they are now.
 
This would be the same as adding 2 more 19" display above the two you have - without display boundaries mucking up the view.