television choice

[Lawman]

Nothing lasts anymore..My 20 year old t.v. has already gone out. Rather than try to get it fixed I'm thinkin bout buying a new one..I don't think they sell em anymore like the one I have so I need some advice on what to buy. I live too far from any city to get free t.v. so I use Hughes satellite and now I get way more channels than anyone could ever watch....I know there is some service I can pay extra for that will give me High definition which is sorta cool I'm sure but that's all I know..I probably would not pay too much more for high definition but I know there are options for t.v.'s...Last time I upgraded I got one with a lot less tubes and it warmed up much faster..Any information about what is available and at what cost would help...

[texasaggie97]

Lawman,

You are in for a treat. TV have come a long way in the past few years. LCD is the way to go. As you may know the DVD players are fighting right now for a new format, Blueray or HD. If you start to buy a new DVD player this is going to be the way to go pretty soon. TV is the true starting point and you need to be look for a Pioneer flat screen at least 46". I know if you make this leap you will be richly blessed and I know you will not be sorry. You need to be at least willing to get the 46" if you want to truly experience HD. I hope this helps PM if anything is not clear.

[smiller]

I think you first need to decide whether you just want to replace what you have with current technology (in which case any of a number of HD-capable LCD sets would fill the bill, and at a relatively low price as this market segment is very competitive) or move up to a true big-screen home theater in which case the sky (and the cost, and the educational requirements) is the limit.

[Deadboy]

Sony.....I have many of their products and have never been disappointed. You decide what size/features....HD is nice but the channels are still pretty limited (and who cares if you see the evening news in HD anyway)? Unless you really watch a lot of stick and ball sports I wouldn't bother....

 

Personally I have a 36" Sony WEGA flat screen and a nice surround sound system and am very satisfied.....

[RonStewart]

It is a little complicated, lawman, but the news is good.

 

Most important point - get HD.

 

There are different resolutions in HD: 720P, 1040i and 1040P. The number is related to the numerical resoltion and P or I means progressive or interlaced. Bottom line is that if your new tv is 42" or smaller, the lowest HD resolution is fine - even a fifteen-year-old does not have good enough sight to tell the difference.

 

If you can afford to, go to a smaller store to shop - a place where the staff takes time to explain things. You are in this for at least $1,000 if you can find a supreme bargain like I did, but more likely in the $2K range after you get all the cables and stuff.

 

When you go to the big-box store, they have all the TVs running off one or two feeds, and the picture will look like crap. But when you plug it in at home, it will be glorious. Football, motorsports, drama, documentaries - they all look much better.

 

Warning - you may find yourself watching more tv just because it looks so good.

 

You may need new hardware from Hughes to take advantage of HD.

 

There are different cables to connect your sattelite box to the tv. HDMI is the best. If your box is near the TV, the cheapest HDMI cable works just fine. DO NOT waste money on Monster Cable. Price HDMI cable at Radio Shack before going to the tv store.

 

Standard broadcasts can look like junk on an HD set - but I understand some do a better job of displaying old-style signals than my set does.

 

That's just off the top of my head.

[Lawman]

Thanks to all for the info. Looks like an LCD in HD will be the ticket..One last question....If I'm watching a non HD program or don't subscribe to HD which T.V. will give the best picture? (non HD LCD T.V. or H.D. capable LCD T.V.)

[smiller]

An HD-capable set will probably provide a somewhat better picture even with a non-HD source, plus HD capability doesn't cost much more these days so I'd get it even if I didn't have an HD source right now as you probably will in the future.

[Lawman]

Great! Thanks Seth....Hope you are doing well and keeping your head above water..

Billy

[smiller]

We're drying out... now I just need to take a machete to my lawn...

[RonStewart]

An HD-capable set will probably provide a somewhat better picture even with a non-HD source...

I disagree on this point. My HD tv makes standard broadcast look awful. I am told that some do a better job than others in this regard, though.

[Timmer]

I'm not sure what they're doing in Canada, but south of the Canadian border HD is broadcast in 1080i.

 

There is a significant difference in the display quality of Standard Definition (SD) on many HD sets. Check it out before you buy.

[Ken H.]

A couple of places to start your research -

 

http://www.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/

 

http://www.plasmatvbuyingguide.com

[smiller]

I disagree on this point. My HD tv makes standard broadcast look awful. I am told that some do a better job than others in this regard, though.

The problem is not with HD capability per se, but rather the typically larger screen size an HD set... standard broadcast just isn't up to the job and there's only so much you can do with it at larger screen sizes. But there's no reason I can think of why (at an equivalent screen size) an HD-capable set would look worse than a non-HD set.

[Charles Elms]

I'm not sure what they're doing in Canada, but south of the Canadian border HD is broadcast in 1080i.

 

In Baltimore Fox is broadcasting in 720p. I think some of the PBS stations are also using 720p.

 

I can't tell the difference when I change channels.

[Bob Palin]

I disagree on this point. My HD tv makes standard broadcast look awful. I am told that some do a better job than others in this regard, though.

The problem is not with HD capability per se, but rather the typically larger screen size an HD set... standard broadcast just isn't up to the job and there's only so much you can do with it at larger screen sizes. But there's no reason I can think of why (at an equivalent screen size) an HD-capable set would look worse than a non-HD set.

I think this is true, my 55" LCD has a screen height of about 26", my 32" CRT has a height of 17", the standard picture on the 15 year old CRT is much better. I wouldn't give up HD for anything though. I wish they would make an HDTV that could display the standard picture in a smaller size to avoid this problem.

[smiller]

I wish they would make an HDTV that could display the standard picture in a smaller size to avoid this problem.

That would be an interesting and effective solution. Standard NTSC is just never going to cut it at larger screen sizes and I agree that sometimes it would just be better to view a smaller picture that better suits the format... you just can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Most consumers probably wouldn't like this idea though... 'I paid for a big screen and dammit I want to watch a big screen!'

[James Clark]

I think this is true, my 55" LCD has a screen height of about 26", my 32" CRT has a height of 17", the standard picture on the 15 year old CRT is much better. I wouldn't give up HD for anything though. I wish they would make an HDTV that could display the standard picture in a smaller size to avoid this problem.

 

I see an entrepreneurial opportunity here.

 

[Mike]

lawman--

 

This is a good place to start, but I would take some time to do some research before pulling the trigger. Your new TV is likely to be with you for a few years. The Crutchfield website has some excellent resources, including this guide to TVs and HDTV.

 

I've got two HDTVs, a big ol' 61" Toshiba DLP and a Samsung 23" LCD. Both have an excellent picture (using a cable connection). There are many variations: different brands, at least five types of basic screen technology (the CRT tube, DLP, LCD, Plasma, and DLP); distinctions between monitors (or "HDTV-ready") TVs with built-in HDTV tuners; a variety of different connection technologies and, well, I guess you get the idea--it's all pretty darned complicated.

 

There are a couple of basic questions to address up front: what are the characteristics of the room and are you interested in a full home theatre setup?

 

Without going into excruciating detail, some types of HDTVs work better in some settings than others. For instance, if the room it's going to be in is fairly bright, it might be worth thinking about a plasma TV, which provides the brightest of pictures. If the room is large, but has fairly low ambient light, then a rear-projection LCD or DLP might be optimal, since you can buy more real estate (a bigger screen size) for a lower price.

 

Some of the better brands include Sony, Toshiba, Mitsubishi, Hitachi, Samsung, and Phillips. Of course, there are others. Like I said, I'm happy with my Toshiba and Samsung TVs. I've got a friend who's a big Sony fan, and has a very nice rear-projection (LCD) Sony that's got a great picture. I'd recommend obtaining HD service from your satellite company. The difference in picture quality is stunning. As far as the quality of non-HD channels, goes, it's pretty variable. I have Comcast cable and the digital (higher numerical) channels look pretty good, regardless of whether they're transmitting a digital signal. The lower analog channels are noticeably fuzzier, and on my Toshiba, it's very noticeable due to the large screen size. It's largely a function of the fact that you're taking a signal with much less resolution than HD and watching it on a much larger than normal screen. Kind of like blowing up a standard digital photo to poster size, the end result will be noticeably less crisp.

 

Anyway, best of luck. I found getting educated on HDTV was a fairly daunting task,, but once you get the basics down you'll probably have narrowed your choices to something that's manageable.

[taters]

a few months ago i bought a panasonic plasma for $1500 interest free for 36 months. it's 42" and make sure you get 1080 i. you can't go wrong with this set

[Lawman]

Mike,

Thanks for the link and thanks to all who contributed..Nothing's easy anymore in this day and age..Ain't life great? Now I have homework to do..

[Jake]

Lawman -

 

If you REALLY have a need for study material, try the AVS forum and put some coffee on. I just completed a rebuild of the family room and bought a 65" Mits DLP, but that was a month ago, and my information is now stale...

[bakerzdosen]

Just to clarify, the networks have made their own decision of which type of signal to broadcast. NBC and CBS broadcast in 1080i while Fox and ABC (and ABC owned networks such as ESPN) broadcast in 720p. I believe PBS, HBO, Showtime, and most other cable networks broadcast in 1080i

 

This page might help explain that a bit more if you don't really get what 1080i/720p/480p/480i mean.

 

My recommendation: If you're happy with your TV and you can get it fixed for <$100, get it fixed. Why? Well, here's my story:

 

I paid $1700 for my LCD HDTV a little over 3 years ago, and that was actually a really good deal. However, it's only 30" (which is fine for the bedroom where it is located). However, these days I can get a comparable 30" (or 32") LCD HDTV for $500-$600 without really looking that hard. That's a big difference for just 3 years... Things are moving so fast (in other words, prices are dropping fast), so if you want to save money, wait as long as you can.

 

Also, unless your TV is located in a room with lots of windows, don't count plasma TV's out of the picture. They are better than LCD in some regards.

 

My ultimate suggestion for buying a TV: Go to a Costco near you (I know that's not exactly easy where you live lawman), look at the TV's they have, find one in your price range that you like, buy it, and don't look back unless the thing breaks (it does happen sometimes...)

[Albert]

That's a big difference for just 3 years... Things are moving so fast (in other words, prices are dropping fast), so if you want to save money, wait as long as you can.

 

Matt,

A quick question on this point. I keep hearing about the change over to HD and how everyone's "old" tv will become obsolete. My old tv is close to obsolete now but it seems like there's going to be a surge in tv sales when this becomes a reality. Won't this have the opposite effect on prices? When the industry makes a complete change in broadcast format won't all of us who held out be at the mercy of the manufacturers who will now have a captive audience.

 

Disclaimer: I have very little knowledge regarding the new tv systems or upcoming broadcast changes (this thread is great for me). If I've inadvertently exposed my stupidity please consider it a typo.

[Lets_Play_Two]

Matt,

A quick question on this point. I keep hearing about the change over to HD and how everyone's "old" tv will become obsolete. My old tv is close to obsolete now but it seems like there's going to be a surge in tv sales when this becomes a reality. Won't this have the opposite effect on prices? When the industry makes a complete change in broadcast format won't all of us who held out be at the mercy of the manufacturers who will now have a captive audience.

 

Disclaimer: I have very little knowledge regarding the new tv systems or upcoming broadcast changes (this thread is great for me). If I've inadvertently exposed my stupidity please consider it a typo.

 

That's the nice thing about capitalism. The supply of TVs is not restricted and there are a lot of manufacturers who will be competing for those HD TV buyers, and price is the great Determinator.

[Aluminum_Butt]

Matt,

A quick question on this point. I keep hearing about the change over to HD and how everyone's "old" tv will become obsolete. My old tv is close to obsolete now but it seems like there's going to be a surge in tv sales when this becomes a reality. Won't this have the opposite effect on prices? When the industry makes a complete change in broadcast format won't all of us who held out be at the mercy of the manufacturers who will now have a captive audience.

 

Those who get their signal "over the air" and still use an analog TV will be able to get a digital-to-analog converter box. In fact, there's pending legislation (or maybe it passed) where the federal goverment will kick in $40 toward the purchase of that.

 

If you've got cable or satellite, it's likely you're already receiving a digital signal (e.g. "digital cable"). That signal is being converted to analog for your existing TV. If you still have "basic cable", you're going to have to get a new box from the cable company - along with a more expensive plan, in all likelihood.

 

Bottom line - your analog TV is *not* going to be completely useless when the switch happens. But, with so many advantages to HD and the costs coming down, I wouldn't be in the market for anything other than an HD TV at this point.

[Aluminum_Butt]

My ultimate suggestion for buying a TV: Go to a Costco near you (I know that's not exactly easy where you live lawman), look at the TV's they have, find one in your price range that you like, buy it, and don't look back unless the thing breaks (it does happen sometimes...)

 

+1

 

I think that's excellent advice. I'd guess that 95% of the population would barely be able to recognize the finer points that set a $2000 TV apart from a $1000 one (aside from size, obviously) if they were pointed out. Virtually any set out there has a picture you're going to be happy with, and enough inputs to handle the needs of the typical user.

 

The bigger point for you, lawman, is reliability. I don't think there's a significant difference between the major brands in that area, but you might go to Consumer Reports and verify that. Otherwise, look at the TV's in your price range side-by-side and pick the one with the best picture. Maybe check the remote to see if it's user friendly. Then take it home and watch it.

[rdsmith3]

Thanks to all for the info. Looks like an LCD in HD will be the ticket..One last question....If I'm watching a non HD program or don't subscribe to HD which T.V. will give the best picture? (non HD LCD T.V. or H.D. capable LCD T.V.)

 

My Sony Wega XBR Triniton (non-HD CRT) gives a much better picture with many non-HD broadcasts than does my Sharp LCD widescreen HD set. But, most channels in the NYC area broadcast in both conventional analog and HD, and my cable provider is offering more HD channels all the time. So I do not watch that much non-HD TV any more.

[glockster]

Matt,

A quick question on this point. I keep hearing about the change over to HD and how everyone's "old" tv will become obsolete.

 

Unless I've missed something, the changeover is NOT to HD but rather to digital broadcasts. Not every channel is going to broadcast in HD.

 

The Costco suggestion was an excellent one. Case in point, I just moved up to a 42" LCD from Vizio. It is even capable of 1080P which is the highest resolution available. $999 + tax. Very aggressive pricing when compared to the major players. With Costco's 90 day return policy, if you don't like it, return it.

 

I am now on my 2nd Vizio.

[tbloomq]

I would look at plasma TVs from Panasonic and Vizio. Both are very good quality and have good reputations.

 

LCDs are good as well but I tend to like the picture quality of the plasma's.

 

I would not look at DLP, rear projection or other TVs that rely on "projection" or mirror technology. I just think they add additional variables and complexity.

 

I still think that CRT based TVs will give the richest colors. It's an analog system that best fits your eyeballs which are mostly analog. I made a promise not to buy a TV that I could lift, so that made the choices a bit limited.

 

Tom

[bakerzdosen]

Matt,

A quick question on this point. I keep hearing about the change over to HD and how everyone's "old" tv will become obsolete.

 

Unless I've missed something, the changeover is NOT to HD but rather to digital broadcasts. Not every channel is going to broadcast in HD.

OK, sorry for the delay in response, but it was kinda covered here.

 

There is not switchover to HD. There is a switchover to digital signals. If you've got an older TV you like and you use an over-the-air antenna (roof, attic, or rabbit-ears) to get your broadcasts, eventually, that won't work any more. Currently most stations that have been around for a while are broadcasting two signals: digital and analog. The FCC has already auctioned off the additional bandwidth/frequency spectrum (or they are chomping at the bit to do so) that the loss of analog signals will free up. That's their motivation to get this done. So, if you want to continue to use an "old" TV, you just need a source to feed it. That could be a satellite box (think directv or dish network), cable, or an ATSC tuner. If you already have satellite or cable, you'll never notice the difference.

 

If your TV was sold without an ATSC tuner (the old ones are called NTSC), you simply need an ATSC tuner to get over the air signals. Some are in high definition. Most aren't. I'd venture to say that only 10% of all TV shows being broadcast (including on cable) are NOT in HD. Just because you get NBC/ABC/CBS/FOX in HD doesn't mean that EVERY show will be in HD. Most college football games are broadcast in HD, but regional ones aren't. Most movies and series in prime time are broadcast in HD, but any reality show and probably 95% of everything else broadcast at any other time is in SD. There's more HD out there than there was 5 years ago, but I still find myself watching about 60% SD these days.

 

However, a digital signal of SD (standard definition - what you've been watching for years) looks FAR superior. I hooked up an ATSC tuner to my (now) wife's old 20" Sony tv. Since it was downstairs, the analog (NTSC) signal it was receiving was awful, and she couldn't get many channels. However, using a $20 Silver Sensor antenna and my Samsung sir-t165, she could get every channel. AND, the picture was simply stunning. My rule of thumb is: If you like the way DVD's look on your TV, a digital picture (be it satellite, cable, or over the air) will look quite similar if the broadcast is being sent out in good quality.

 

However, with that said, HD will just blow SD away on a larger TV any day of the week.

 

And yes, IMHO, SD looks better on a CRT (tube) TV than an HD set. If you watch a LOT of SD sources, it might be worth it to look into an HD set with a good scaler (something like Philips PixelPlus for example.)

[BigArn]

a few months ago i bought a panasonic plasma for $1500 interest free for 36 months. it's 42" and make sure you get 1080 i. you can't go wrong with this set

 

I agree, I've got the same set and just love it. Best buy for the money, and non-HD format looks SO much better on this set compared to a LCD set.

[Timmer]

Plasma is wonderful, and I have a Pioneer. I would not recommend a plasma set in a room with lots of reflected light or light from large windows. You may want to consider LCD in as an alternative. Plasma screens will reflect light and that can be irritating.

[Lawman]

Okay..I did it...I know some will slam me for being a cheapo but after much looking and comparing I ended up buying a 42" H.D. Vizio LCD from Sam's for $814.00 including tax. I could have bought a much more expensive T.V. for sure but I just didn't see any reason to. The Vizio looks great and I just couldn't justify spending more for a t.v. especially since I have no plans to upgrade to H.D. service anytime soon..My satellite company only offers 25 channels in H.D. and we don't watch them much..The picture quality of the Vizio is better than I expected not having H.D. service..I'm very pleased and it didn't break the bank....Thanks all.

[Jake]

Congrats! You're no cheapo - the brightest minds in the A/V world (Sound&Vision, etc) can find no reason not to recommend that set, especially at its price point.

 

You should, however, try to obtain some OTA (Over The Air) HD programming if your local stations provide it. All you will need is an appropriate antenna, and follow the OTA instructions in the Vizio material. The picture difference will really show you what that set can do. And it's free.

 

Next, consider getting an OPPO DVD player which will upscale your DVD colleciton to the native resolution of your set - movies will never look better - until you upgrade to HD DVD/Blu Ray that is (you will need a new DVD collection for that) - but your set will be able to handle it all.

 

Good choice - enjoy.

 

EDIT - One other thing and this is a biggie: Try to find a Vizio forum and use their recommendations for tweaking the picture quality. Sets at the store are factory tuned for an overly bright and harsh picture. It will really come together once you dial it in.

[Heck]

Right on...

One thing not covered here in all these informative posts is a down side....

digital delivered television is great in one respect- you either have the picture or you dont based on signal strength of the signal (over the air TV), or in the case of cable, the over the air strength at their antenna location. The way the signal is "streamed" in a digital signal only allows single bits of information to enter your TV at a time, as opposed to the old analog signal that allows video and audio to simultaneously be broadcast on the same channel carrier. The end result of digital is that many times, the picture and audio get out of sync with each other, causing the old "asian kung-fu movie effect" except instead of voice over delay, it is actually the same signal that runs the audio anywhere up to 1/2 a second ahead or behind the video...

Mebbe I am too critical, but it drives me nuts...

Ahh...the price we pay for progress... They'll get it right some day...

 

Enjoy!!

[Bob Palin]

What system are you using that gives that synch problem? I have DISH and though maybe I've seen it once or twice in the 10 years I've had it, it's been several years at least.

[Heck]

Don't notice it much on the channels that are rebroadcasting an analog signal...Mostly on the rebroadcast of DTV or HD signals...

Oh yeah.. Provider is DirecTV... also the 2 over the air DTV stations I get. which kind of refutes the theory of just over satellite TV...

Digital is, well....Digital.

Is kind of interesting in that DirecTV has an antenna up down in Fresno where they receive all the digital channels over the air. They then send the digital info to the DirecTV head end to be rebroadcast in (you guessed it) digital format...

Kind of puts one problem on top of the other.... I have verified this by switching to over the air...if anything it makes it worse going thru the DirecTV setup.....

Also, if something goes haywire with the regular over the air transmitter, DirecTV can't broadcast the local channel either...

At least the general West and East coast network feeds go straight to DirecTV via fiber...not through the ozone.. Not so most of the local channel offerings....

[chrisolson]

Don't notice it much on the channels that are rebroadcasting an analog signal...Mostly on the rebroadcast of DTV or HD signals...

Oh yeah.. Provider is DirecTV... also the 2 over the air DTV stations I get. which kind of refutes the theory of just over satellite TV...

Digital is, well....Digital.

Is kind of interesting in that DirecTV has an antenna up down in Fresno where they receive all the digital channels over the air. They then send the digital info to the DirecTV head end to be rebroadcast in (you guessed it) digital format...

Kind of puts one problem on top of the other.... I have verified this by switching to over the air...if anything it makes it worse going thru the DirecTV setup.....

Also, if something goes haywire with the regular over the air transmitter, DirecTV can't broadcast the local channel either...

At least the general West and East coast network feeds go straight to DirecTV via fiber...not through the ozone.. Not so most of the local channel offerings....

Must be a CA thing , I've had DirecTV for years and never had that issue with HD / non-HD or off-air local or local by satelite.

[Jake]

Linky to Sync issues.

[philbytx]

Go for the gusto - Bigass DLP - Samsung around $2k

[bakerzdosen]

Congrats lawman. Enjoy it. We expect a ride tale soon.

[Heck]

Must be a CA thing , I've had DirecTV for years and never had that issue with HD / non-HD or off-air local or local by satelite.

Me too....have had DirecTV since 1994...Actually seems worse since they divorced TiVo and put their own DVR system in.. Ah well...like I said before, they'll get it eventually..

 

Enjoy being able to see nosehairs clearly now there lawman!!!

[RonStewart]

Good for you, lawman! What's to knock?