Help me buy a new TV - Riovolution

flattop100

2008-11-14, 10:32 #1

User title: Aural Fixation
Member since Jul 2006 · 673 posts
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

Subject: Help me buy a new TV

I'm looking for something in the 40"-42" range, 1080p, hopefully 120hz. Does anyone have any advice, or website/blog suggestions?

[Image: http://www.plusfourdb.com/images/junk/flame.gif]

CAPS LOCK IS LIKE CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL.
<crunchyfrog> Get off my yard.
You have to be on your toes at a ninja funeral.
People hate failed potential an order of magnitude more than they hate mediocrity.

Nordburgh 2008-11-15, 13:47 #2

User title: Phanatic
Member since Jul 2006 · 441 posts
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

I keep hearing the prices for LCD's are supposed to come crashing down this holiday season. See this article.

I actually just picked up a Toshiba 32 inch LCD for $600. 1080p 4 HDMI inputs and it looks fantastic. All the reviews I found on the web praised it. Hooked up to my Xbox 360 and Media Center PC with Blu-Ray and I'm in HiDef heaven.

Shit it's back on sale at $600 again, free shipping.

Buy.com

I searched reviews on this unit at Newegg, Crutchfield, PriceGrabber, etc. and everyone had great things to say about it. And now that I have it I agree with the reviews.

If a 40 or 42 worked in my apt. I'd probably get the equiv. Toshiba for that size as long as the reviews were the same.

[Image: http://imagegen.last.fm/SilverWeekly/artists/Nordburgh.gif]

Peregrine 2008-11-16, 11:07 #3

User title: Endangered Species
Member since Jul 2006 · 825 posts · Location: Cleveland
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

Well the one piece of advice I can offer is this: 42" or smaller does not need to be 1080p. This is the one thing that almost all the experts agree on. The difference between 780p and 1080p is indistinguishable on TV's that are 42" or smaller. So if it's 42" or smaller you can save a few bucks while sacrificing ZERO pic quality by getting a 780p 42".

[Image: http://pfalcon.org/sigs/Siggy.jpg]

mrk (Moderator) 2008-11-16, 14:06 #4

User title: Watchman
Member since Jul 2006 · 487 posts · Location: Houston :(
Group memberships: Global Moderators, Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

I disagree; I think it's noticeable.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Highnoon 2008-11-16, 19:22 #5

Member since Jul 2006 · 356 posts · Location: USA
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

Quote by mrk:
I disagree; I think it's noticeable.

I agree with mrk. I think there is a very noticeable difference between 720p and 1080p on a 42" screen.

Peregrine 2008-11-16, 19:54 #6

User title: Endangered Species
Member since Jul 2006 · 825 posts · Location: Cleveland
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

I have no idea, personally. I've just done ass loads of research on TV's and just telling you what I found. A huge margin of people agree that there isn't enough of a difference until you get to 46+ inches.

To wit:
"Contrast, color saturation and color accuracy are all more important than resolution. Your display could very well produce a better picture because of better color saturation/contrast and have nothing to do with the bump in resolution. The difference in sets under 42" is negligible - people only think they can see a difference because *usually* they are seeing differences in contrast, color saturation and color accuracy as opposed to resolution differences."

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=768167

mrk (Moderator) 2008-11-17, 10:28 #7

User title: Watchman
Member since Jul 2006 · 487 posts · Location: Houston :(
Group memberships: Global Moderators, Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

Well, my views (ha-ha) don't necessarily reflect the views of most people--I'm a resolution-whore. I've gotten very used to 1920x1200 on a 15.4" screen, so smaller resolution on larger screens kind of bugs me.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Dominic 2008-11-17, 11:44 #8

User title: D O N ' T P A N I C
Member since Nov 2006 · 154 posts · Location: Ireland
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

I'd be one of those people who says there's no noticeable difference between a 720p and 1080p when a sub 42" screen is concerned (regarding video viewing that is)...unless...unless you are sitting with the screen less than a meter in front of you...but that is seriously retar----misguided...

On the topic of what TV to buy, i'm quite a fan of Sony when it comes to TV's..particularly their current V series (offers best value for money Vs quality within the Sony line up IMO)

[Image: http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/8431/dapgradientil9.png]

[Image: http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/7640/iaudiophilemj0.png]

[Image: http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/4673/epizengradientuu6.png]

obscure co-star 2008-11-17, 12:45 #9

User title: lurker
Member since Apr 2007 · 70 posts · Location: Iowa
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

Going by when I was shopping for my computer monitor, I'd say it all depends on the pixel size, how far you generally sit from the screen, and your personal taste.

My monitor is 20", 0.24 pixel size, 1600x1200 optimum ---bigger screen than my old television, much smaller pixel. (Partly because I'm too cheap to get a new TV.) I very carefully went looking for one of the last large CRT monitors, when they stopped making them.

If there is a lot of competition in price, specifications, or features in HD TV's, I must have missed it.

My nephews all sit 3-6 feet from the screen. [I sit 6-10 feet] At that distance, their TV has have finer pixel size for them to have a better view of the image, unless the screen is 2/3 of the size or smaller... my sister has a 30+ inch LCD, which I can barely stand to watch on, because it's widescreen and add 75 pounds to everyone in football broadcasts.

Anyway, I'm in no hurry to drop several hundred dollars on a TV --even twice as big, unless the pixel size it better than the 0.3 or larger that's all I've noticed in these.

I would think if you happen sit closer to the screen, this would be even more important. Personally, as I said, I'm waiting on some sign of innovation ---or this old TV failing (I have a 10" for back-up).

Just my take on the subject --hopefully, there's a tiny bit of help there for you...

Dude! There's no WAY that's your daughter's favorite song!
oh, uh-oh --wait, wait... Is she in a coma???

flattop100

2008-11-17, 14:48 #10

User title: Aural Fixation
Member since Jul 2006 · 673 posts
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

After some poking around, I think we decided on this. The challenge will be finding it on sale.

Thanks for all your thoughts! I'll be looking things over with this stuff in mind. http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-LN40A650-40-Inch-1080p-120Hz…

MacDancer 2008-11-17, 16:35 #11

User title: ballerina
Member since Jul 2006 · 367 posts
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

If you're looking for TVs on sale, be sure to check FatWallet. I don't pay much attention to them, but I see threads on there for large TVs all the time. Who knows, you might even see the one you picked out on there.

obscure co-star 2008-11-17, 22:36 #12

User title: lurker
Member since Apr 2007 · 70 posts · Location: Iowa
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

Oh, I almost forgot. If you're planning on hooking up to a console, make sure your pixel response time is < 8 ms. (to avoid streaking in moving images)

Sorry, if I've just been stating the obvious or playing Mr. Know-it-all. Nobody else seemed to have looked into this stuff, too much, so I thought I'd mention it.

Dude! There's no WAY that's your daughter's favorite song!
oh, uh-oh --wait, wait... Is she in a coma???

Nordburgh 2008-11-23, 08:59 #13

User title: Phanatic
Member since Jul 2006 · 441 posts
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

In reply to post #6

Quote by Peregrine on 2008-11-16, 19:54:
I have no idea, personally. I've just done ass loads of research on TV's and just telling you what I found. A huge margin of people agree that there isn't enough of a difference until you get to 46+ inches.

I agree that the majority of people will see no difference in 720p vs. 1080p when looking at sets 42" or smaller. I noticed a slight difference. But I can't use a 46" TV, my living room isn't big enough to sit far enough away from something that large and the 32" was just super cheap and after viewing that model against other LCD's at a local store it didn't make sense not to get it. It looked beautiful.

flattop100

2008-12-02, 13:10 #14

User title: Aural Fixation
Member since Jul 2006 · 673 posts
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

After a lot of consideration and buying a Consumer Reports membership, this is what we ended up with:

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Bravia-KDL-40S4100-40…?ie=UTF…

The price at Micro Center was $800, $100 less than at Target. The lady had $600 worth of gift cards, so we compensated by buying the 3-year service plan. That's probably a bad idea, but I'm paranoid about the TV wimping out.

The picture is great - "Vivid" setting is overkill. I'll be getting a diagnostic DVD and setting up the levels. Blacks are good, colors are amazing, and HDCable looks pretty damn nice. DVDs upsampled from 480 really spice up the movie without looking too artifact-y...

...which makes me only want a Blu-Ray player even more. All that definition, and no decent source material. Why are over-the-air broadcaster forced to move to HiDef, but cable providers aren't?

Cliff Notes: Great TV for a good price.

Peregrine 2008-12-02, 15:35 #15

User title: Endangered Species
Member since Jul 2006 · 825 posts · Location: Cleveland
Group memberships: Members

Show profile ·

Link to this post

They weren't FORCED to go Hi-Def... they were forced to go DIGITAL. They decided if they are going to go through the expense for that it just made financial sense to go Hi-Def.