tv's

[randy41]

this is turing out to be confusing....lcd or plasma?
hd tuner or hd ready? (i think hd ready since i dont receive my tv signal from the airwaves).
i think i'm looking for the 42" range but even that is confusing because of different things i've read about it. we will be sitting 8-10' from the tv.
so any experts out there? any people with experiences?
thanks

 

[MrJimi]

Randy, try
Reviews from Epinions

Jim

 

[MadReferee]

Try this link. It compares plasma and LCD along with product reviews.

Plasma TV Buying Guide

 

[RonMar]

Plasma was the thing a few years ago and they are still popular, but they will have a shorter life than a LCD. LCD's used as TV's have come a long way in the past few years and are generally considered the way to go these days. Earlier LCD's had more limited viewing angles, but not today. I just purchased a 37" LCD HDTV that has 176 degree viewing angle. It looks good from anywhere in the room. Production standards for the larger displays are getting so good that some manufacturers are offering 0 pixel defect warranties now where older sets were allowed a certain percentage of bad pixels before the display was considered bad. Some manufacturers are releasing newer higher density/resolution displays this year so LCD prices are also comming down rather quickly.

If you are going to be pulling your signals down off an antenna, you want a TV with a HD tuner. The term "HD ready" usually refers to a monitor with the processor to decode both HDMI and component analog HD inputs but no tuner to receive Over The Air(OTA) broadcast channels. A TV with a HD Tuner also have the HDMI and analog HD inputs. There are getting to be quite a few HD channels available OTA, but the common mode of receipt is via cable or satelite. Here is a website that will show you what is available OTA in your area.
http://www.antennaweb.org
Some of the sat provider boxes also have an OTA tuner built in so a HDready display could take advantage of both.

At a viewing distance of 8-10 feet, you would probably be happy with a 32" diagonal widescreen display. In Standard Definition(SD) or regular TV resolution of 4:3, that will yield about a 27" diagonal picture. You won't get a good widescreen(16:9) 37" diagonal picture untill you feed it a HD signal either from a DVD player, SAT/Cable box or a HD OTA signal. Here is a link to a A/V forum that has quite a lot of info. If you are looking at a particular model, search this site for comparisons and others experiences with that TV.
http://www.avsforum.com

 

[randy41]

thanks ron...that was more of what i was looking for. i've read a lot of things on the internet about all this and when what you read is contradictory it gets confusing.
i live way out in the boonies and there's no way to get OTA signal without a tall antenna. i receive my tv through a dsl modem that feeds into a 'box' that is really a computer that then hooks to my tv. so i need to find out if its HD capable.

 

[RonMar]

I am in a similar situation, no real channels OTA except canadian. I don't have any experience with TV over DSL(barely have DSL where I live. You might also consider Dish Network or DirecTV for a HD source. We have had Dish Network for years. In fact, that is what started my HDTV research. The wife wanted to upgrade our dish to get the local Seattle networks instead of the ones out of LA that we currently receive. In order to do that, we need another receiver and if we are going to upgrade, we might as well go all the way and look into HD. In the case of dish, you need a HDready display in place before they will install.

 

[gordon21]

The rule of thumb I have heard is that the screen size needs to be the distance you sit from the screen divided by 3.3 if you have a 4:3 screen shape. 9' viewing distance=108" divided by 3.3 is a suggested screen size of 32" I personally find that way too conservative. At 9-10', I was using a 60" rear projection screen and just recently went to a DTV reciver and projector combo so I could get a 100" picture in the 16:9 format.

The 16:9 inch measurements have to be a lot bigger to make a valid comparison. Put a 37" 4:3 next to a 37" 16:9 and you will see what I mean. the 16:9 set will appear LOTS smaller.

I hooked up the projector to the Hi-Def-DTV box and set the resolution to 1080 and a picture size of 100". Needless to say, the picture was great. Since I already had the DTV box, my "new TV" setup only cost the $799 for the Sharp projector. 3 year warranty with express turnaround replacenment for the first 2 years.

HD is worth the extra $10 per month from DTV.

 

[randy41]

confusion time again.....i think i'll go for a screen size that makes $ sense. i dont need to be overwhelmed.


i used to have direct tv but when a lightening strike got my receiver i tried to get direct to replace it for free and they balked until i actually cancelled. so i switched to my present situation in which my local phone company provides dsl internet, local with expended calling area phone service, and dsl tv with a package price cheaper than those items were individually when i had direct tv.
so i'm not going to be changing my tv provider any time soon.

 

[frank_f15]

The rule of thumb I have heard is that the screen size needs to be the distance you sit from the screen divided by 3.3 if you have a 4:3 screen shape. 9' viewing distance=108" divided by 3.3 is a suggested screen size of 32" I personally find that way too conservative. At 9-10', I was using a 60" rear projection screen and just recently went to a DTV reciver and projector combo so I could get a 100" picture in the 16:9 format.

The 16:9 inch measurements have to be a lot bigger to make a valid comparison. Put a 37" 4:3 next to a 37" 16:9 and you will see what I mean. the 16:9 set will appear LOTS smaller.

I hooked up the projector to the Hi-Def-DTV box and set the resolution to 1080 and a picture size of 100". Needless to say, the picture was great. Since I already had the DTV box, my "new TV" setup only cost the $799 for the Sharp projector. 3 year warranty with express turnaround replacenment for the first 2 years.

HD is worth the extra $10 per month from DTV.

HUH???? i must rellay be to old for this . i have no clue what all that means hope i don't ever have to buy a new TV

 

[AndyM]

HUH???? i must rellay be to old for this . i have no clue what all that means hope i don't ever have to buy a new TV

I'm in my 30's, but as far as I'm concerned, my 19 inch Montgomery Wards television is going to stay put until it quits working. If that day comes, I'll decide whether to replace it or not... there might not be anything on television by then worth buying a new one for!

 

[gordon21]

Frank f15: It's OK to feel overwhelmed by technical jargon. How do you think about 30,000 of us felt on TBN for the first couple months. You guys with years of experience toss around all these terms and abbreviations and us new guys had to read a message three times to figure out what you are telling us.

Example: when installing your 3rd SCV, make sure not to drop any misc parts or else they might get caught in the sway chain on the lower link and get hidden behind the lynch pin. Remember to buy the model with the open center and auto return and use fresh SUDT, not UDT.

When you buy your next TV (or projector) you will come home and tell the missus "we should have done this sooner". It doesn't matter whether you watch opera or NASCAR, Billy Graham or the Playboy channel, you will be impressed and especially like the bigger images. As you get older, you don't want to watch something tiny any more. Bigger is better and your eyes will say thank you. Watching a cystal clear lifelike image the size of a sheet of plywood is better than a fuzzy image about a foot and half square. And the best part is that the popcorn for the two of you to watch a movie costs about a quarter instead of $4.50

 

[Ken_CT]

Randy41,
Whichever type you get you will be happy with, read the different reviews and decide for yourself. A couple of suggestions I would make are to make sure the tv has 2 HDMI inputs, especially if you get satelite, and buy an upconverting DVD player. I wouldn't buy an HD DVD player yet, that is a whole other topic, but the upconverting DVD players make a huge difference in the pic. They require an HDMI conection in order to work.
Size is of course up to you, but I sit about 9' from a 42" plasma and am very happy with it. Don't forget the home theater sound setup, either 5.1 or 7.1. A good sound systems makes a movie much more enjoyable. If you want to show off you new system buy a DVD (for the upconverted player) that was made by Pixar. They are 100% digital and look and sound terrific.
Ken

 

[randy41]

one of the major reasons I want a bigger screen is the getting older cant see as well reason.
i also think i have enough reward points on my credit card to get one for almost free.

 

[randy41]

so now i found out that it will be next year sometime before i can get HD.
does a non-hd signal on an lcd 32" or 37" screen look bad??

 

[RonMar]

so now i found out that it will be next year sometime before i can get HD.
does a non-hd signal on an lcd 32" or 37" screen look bad??

It depends on your signal source. The composite video Standard Definition TV channels out of my dishnetwork receiver are OK viewed in 4:3. The 16:9 analog component(R,G and B cables) HD movies from a DVD player are breathtaking. If you go and look at a TV in a store with HD input, Component analog HD is most likley the signal they are feeding the display with(total of 5 cables, 3 for the picture and 2 more for the left/right audio).

How exactly are you displaying your picture now? Using RF tuner in TV with input from the DSL box? Using Composite video/Audio from DSL TV box? If you are getting a good picture now, you will most likley get at least as good a pic on a LCD or Plasma viewed in the proper mode of 4:3 for regular SD TV.

 

[randy41]

i hook to the dsl box with a single video cable to the tv. i've got my audio out of the dsl box hooked to my stereo receiver (2 cables..one left and one right).
when we watch dvd's i use this laptop's tv out and then hook the audio to the laptop's headphone jack. the dvd looks way better on the laptop than on the tv.
the tv is tuned through the dsl box.
i am getting a good picture now so i see what you're saying...it would be at least as good.

 

[RonMar]

i hook to the dsl box with a single video cable to the tv. i've got my audio out of the dsl box hooked to my stereo receiver (2 cables..one left and one right).
when we watch dvd's i use this laptop's tv out and then hook the audio to the laptop's headphone jack. the dvd looks way better on the laptop than on the tv.
the tv is tuned through the dsl box.
i am getting a good picture now so i see what you're saying...it would be at least as good.

Sounds like you need to upgrade to a current DVD player when you get a new display. The picture difference between composite video and component analog HD are night and day. In converting from your laptop to the TV, something is obviously being lost in the translation. The LCD I bought has a few different modes of Picture In Picture, one of those being a side by side mode. I can display composite video on one side and component analog HD on the other both being output from the same DVD player. having the same picture being displayed side by side really shows the differences between the two signals. The composite is not nearly as sharp and the colors are not as vivid as the analog HD. The display I got also has a computer monitor/RGB input and I am looking at adding a KVM extender to my computer that is upstairs, and running a wireless keyboard/mouse and using it as a computer display in the living room at 1366 X 768 resolution.

 

[Doc_Bob]

this is turing out to be confusing....lcd or plasma?
hd tuner or hd ready? (i think hd ready since i dont receive my tv signal from the airwaves).
i think i'm looking for the 42" range but even that is confusing because of different things i've read about it. we will be sitting 8-10' from the tv.
so any experts out there? any people with experiences?
thanks

LCD=less power = less heat

I have Time Warner in my area, so I use their DVR with built in HD tuner, so I bought a LCD with no tuner (not easy to find). I rented the DVR from Timewarner simply bcause the things fail. My Time Warner DVR has failed 4 times <12 months. Recent one has > 6 months with no problems. I love taking it to the local TW store, drop off the old one and pick up a new one (refurbished).
Bob

 

[bmac]

i
i am getting a good picture now so i see what you're saying...it would be at least as good.

I'm not sure this is necessarily so. A mediocre picture on a small screen can be acceptable. But, when viewed on a large screen, it can look absolutely horrible.

My FIL just bought a large HD rear projection tv hooked to standard def Dish network. I haven't seen it, but my wife said the picture is hideous. Fortunately, he has a rather non-discriminating eye and thinks it looks good.

I just bought a 46" LCD (Sony). I have DirecTV HD DVR. Because this DVR model does not get the local channels in HD, the only hi def programming I recieve is the 5 or 6 HD channels that Directv provides. I cannot receive local channels OTA where I live.

Most non-HD channels still look pretty good at 1080i via HDMI. Some are pretty bad. HD is awesome.

The good news is that DirecTV is coming out with a new HD DVR that will receive my local channels in HD. I'll upgrade as soon as it is available. Also, they are scheduled to offer more in HD channels in the near future.

I see I kind of got off topic a little. Back to the point of my response, don't think that a bigger screen will necessarily give you a better picture (or even as good as the old set, for that matter). It all depends on the quality of the signal you feed the tv. With a standard def input, the old tube-type tv's often look better than the the new larger plasma or lcd HD flat screen models.