Thursday, October 13, 2005
Member since:
October 2005
October 2005
Hey all,
This is slightly off-topic (as I'm looking primarily at tubes), but I'm working on putting an HDTV in at the center o' my HT system at home. Having researched a good deal on plasma and LCD, I eventually settled (for the moment, anyhow) on a tube, primarily due to all I've read about its image quality (black levels, contrast ratios, etc.) when compared to the majority of flat-panels. I'd likely be putting any TV I get on a stand rather than wall-mounting, so as far as I'm concerned, there's no real aesthetic reason to go flat.
Anyhow, at the moment I'm looking primarily at two sets: the Sony KD-34XBR960, and the Samsung TX-R3079WH (their slimfit model). Between Consumer Reports, CNet, and a few other postings I've seen, the Sony seems unbelievable... The Samsung seems to have a lot of geometry issues, although one of my coworkers recently picked one up and, seeing no real geometry issues, as well as some cosmetic differences between his model and what's generally described in postings, he believes that Samsung has revised their design to address the issue.
Anyhow, I'm wondering if anybody on these boards has had personal experience with either of these sets, or has any particular tips as I inch towards a purchase. Let me know! Also, feel free to berate me if you feel I'm misguided on the flat-panel issue as well. :p
This is slightly off-topic (as I'm looking primarily at tubes), but I'm working on putting an HDTV in at the center o' my HT system at home. Having researched a good deal on plasma and LCD, I eventually settled (for the moment, anyhow) on a tube, primarily due to all I've read about its image quality (black levels, contrast ratios, etc.) when compared to the majority of flat-panels. I'd likely be putting any TV I get on a stand rather than wall-mounting, so as far as I'm concerned, there's no real aesthetic reason to go flat.
Anyhow, at the moment I'm looking primarily at two sets: the Sony KD-34XBR960, and the Samsung TX-R3079WH (their slimfit model). Between Consumer Reports, CNet, and a few other postings I've seen, the Sony seems unbelievable... The Samsung seems to have a lot of geometry issues, although one of my coworkers recently picked one up and, seeing no real geometry issues, as well as some cosmetic differences between his model and what's generally described in postings, he believes that Samsung has revised their design to address the issue.
Anyhow, I'm wondering if anybody on these boards has had personal experience with either of these sets, or has any particular tips as I inch towards a purchase. Let me know! Also, feel free to berate me if you feel I'm misguided on the flat-panel issue as well. :p
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
I agree with John that HDTV tubes are still the best in picture quality. However, tubes are limited in size because they (almost) begin to weigh a ton after a certain screen size has been reached. Their size and weight also make them prone to damage when being moved, regardless of how many people you have carrying a tube TV.
When I bought an HDTV, I weighed all the factors and decided that it's time for us to leave tubes in the 20th Century. (y)
When I bought an HDTV, I weighed all the factors and decided that it's time for us to leave tubes in the 20th Century. (y)
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
I have no doubt that DLP is fabulous, Scotster, but what we're talking about here is high-definition, not standard broadcast television. It may simply be one of those Apple vs. PC or Betamax vs. VHS or Porsche vs. Ferrari or one loudspeaker over another arguments here. Even when looking at the same things, different people will prefer different qualities in them over another. There is no definitive right or wrong here, only personal preference, even in matters that would seem so purely objective.
Here's an example. When I visited Skywalker Ranch last week, the Lucas staff had set up a home theater demonstration of "Revenge of the Sith," using state-of-the-art equipment (a large, flat-screen TV using the latest technology). When I came home and watched the movie on my Sony HD tube set (XBR400), I thought the image looked better, sharper, and richer than it did on Lucas's mega-buck system. The picture at Skywalker looked slightly washed out to me and slightly soft as well. In part, it may have been a minor problem with the black levels, at which tubes still excel.
John
Here's an example. When I visited Skywalker Ranch last week, the Lucas staff had set up a home theater demonstration of "Revenge of the Sith," using state-of-the-art equipment (a large, flat-screen TV using the latest technology). When I came home and watched the movie on my Sony HD tube set (XBR400), I thought the image looked better, sharper, and richer than it did on Lucas's mega-buck system. The picture at Skywalker looked slightly washed out to me and slightly soft as well. In part, it may have been a minor problem with the black levels, at which tubes still excel.
John
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Member since:
August 2005
August 2005
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Member since:
August 2005
August 2005
John,
Don't agree with your point on CRT's being better than DLP's, well one specific one.... mine lol.
As i have said, and no doubt you have read somewhere, we don't have HDTV in the uk yet and the only way to see it is to get one of those computers that you hook up to the tv and can buy things to watch on it. In Comet where i bought my TV they were doing a demonstration of all the HDTV's in the store using these devices. I went in initially to buy the 42" Sony Rear Projection LCD tv. I read all the adverts about it and it so happened that comet were doing a special on the tv so i went with my GF. I was totally gutted when i saw the picture quality, even at 10-15 feet the picture wasn't that good. I had a look around the store and as usual every sales person in the place was at me to buy something. One of the guys started showing me the HDTV's. They were around 32" and the picture was absolutely astounding. I was thinking of signing on the dotted line when the guy accidentally hit the button that went onto a normal tv station. The picture deteriorated and he explained about how it was a HDTV and the possibilities with it. While i was getting all the "patter" my gf came back and said she seen a cracker. We went over and it was the one i ended up buying. The picture was great for the size of the tv etc but the big thing was when i saw something thru HDTV. It almost blew me away. I went up close, i'm talking a foot away from the screen, the clarity was perfect and the brightness was amazing. That was my first sample of DLP. I didnt buy the tv there and then i went home and found out what it was first. After an introduction into DLP and the colourwheel i went back and got it. In every review i read the picture got 10 out of 10 but the sound only got 6. Surround sound speakers sorted that though.
Anyway my point is that size for size the DLP picture on HDTV was way better than the CRT one, btw the tv was a toshiba if that makes any difference.
They don't make my tv anymore (Sagem Axium 50-inch 16:9 DLP flatscreen TV) but the new model is meant to be good too.....Sagem Axium HD-D45
Its actually cheaper too, about £500 gbp less
Scotster =oP
Don't agree with your point on CRT's being better than DLP's, well one specific one.... mine lol.
As i have said, and no doubt you have read somewhere, we don't have HDTV in the uk yet and the only way to see it is to get one of those computers that you hook up to the tv and can buy things to watch on it. In Comet where i bought my TV they were doing a demonstration of all the HDTV's in the store using these devices. I went in initially to buy the 42" Sony Rear Projection LCD tv. I read all the adverts about it and it so happened that comet were doing a special on the tv so i went with my GF. I was totally gutted when i saw the picture quality, even at 10-15 feet the picture wasn't that good. I had a look around the store and as usual every sales person in the place was at me to buy something. One of the guys started showing me the HDTV's. They were around 32" and the picture was absolutely astounding. I was thinking of signing on the dotted line when the guy accidentally hit the button that went onto a normal tv station. The picture deteriorated and he explained about how it was a HDTV and the possibilities with it. While i was getting all the "patter" my gf came back and said she seen a cracker. We went over and it was the one i ended up buying. The picture was great for the size of the tv etc but the big thing was when i saw something thru HDTV. It almost blew me away. I went up close, i'm talking a foot away from the screen, the clarity was perfect and the brightness was amazing. That was my first sample of DLP. I didnt buy the tv there and then i went home and found out what it was first. After an introduction into DLP and the colourwheel i went back and got it. In every review i read the picture got 10 out of 10 but the sound only got 6. Surround sound speakers sorted that though.
Anyway my point is that size for size the DLP picture on HDTV was way better than the CRT one, btw the tv was a toshiba if that makes any difference.
They don't make my tv anymore (Sagem Axium 50-inch 16:9 DLP flatscreen TV) but the new model is meant to be good too.....Sagem Axium HD-D45
Its actually cheaper too, about £500 gbp less
Scotster =oP
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Member since:
October 2005
October 2005
Thanks! This is all very helpful, and a lot of it points to the direction I've been leaning... I think the main reason I'm looking tube, apart from cost efficiency and picture quality, etc., is that I'm looking at apartment-dwelling over the next several years, and don't anticipate being in a space that would easily accommodate the larger DLPs or plasmas, in terms of viewing distance as much as anything else. And while any moving from place to place seems guaranteed to develp into an extreme workout with a tube set, to me the picture difference between this and, say, a 32-incher LCD, is worth the bother. That said, the Sony is looking mighty fine to me -- I hadn't seen that it was 1080p capable, which definitely makes a difference!
Anyhow, thanks a ton for the thoughts so far. Barring any revelations on the Samsung, it's looking Sony-ish to me.
Anyhow, thanks a ton for the thoughts so far. Barring any revelations on the Samsung, it's looking Sony-ish to me.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
According to all the tests I've read and according to my own eyesight, tubes (the oldest of the techologies) still provide the cleanest, sharpest picture available in standard or high definition. However, as you found out, the limitations of tubes are size and weight. The widest made are relatively small and they weigh a ton. If those limitations don't bother you, the 34" Sony you're looking at is the best there is. (And it will provide a true 1080p picture, which many, if not most, plasmas and LCDs won't.)
Incidentally, your viewing distance should be a major criterion. The closer you are to the screen, the more definition you need. The newer technologies (plasma, LCD, DLP, etc.) look great at a fair distance with their enormous-sized screens, but the closer you get to them, the softer and glassier the picture appears.
John
Incidentally, your viewing distance should be a major criterion. The closer you are to the screen, the more definition you need. The newer technologies (plasma, LCD, DLP, etc.) look great at a fair distance with their enormous-sized screens, but the closer you get to them, the softer and glassier the picture appears.
John
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Member since:
August 2005
August 2005
Scrap both and buy a DLP. By FAR the best quality i have ever seen on any TV, when relating to HDTV anyway.
If you really can't be swayed and want to go for the tube i recommend sony. I've had 3 sony's in my lifetime varying in size. All 3 are still going strong and the picture quality, even though it wasn't HDTV, has always been better than anything else. Do they still do trinatron?
Scotster =oP
If you really can't be swayed and want to go for the tube i recommend sony. I've had 3 sony's in my lifetime varying in size. All 3 are still going strong and the picture quality, even though it wasn't HDTV, has always been better than anything else. Do they still do trinatron?
Scotster =oP
Friday, October 14, 2005
Member since:
August 2005
August 2005
Sorry my post must have been confusing. I WAS comparing HDTV on the tube to on the DLP. In the store all the TV's that are HDTV compatible are playing HD thru a computer of some sort so i was able to compare the picture. I agree about the "black" issues with every other type of TV but if you consider that the TV i got is 50 inch and the Tube i seen was 32" the difference in picture quality was only down to the sheer size of the DLP. If the DLP was 32" i reckon the picutre in all aspects (other than blackness) would be better. The richness of colour and brightness is out of this world. The picture looked 3d for some reason too. Was watching F1 racing and it looked as if you were the driver.
Just need to see the new technology for myself when it takes off over here.
Scotster =oP
Just need to see the new technology for myself when it takes off over here.
Scotster =oP
Monday, May 22, 2006
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
In terms of total pixels presented on screen:
720 x 1280 = 921,600 pixels
1080 x 1920 = 2,073,600 pixels.
In other words, at a resolution of 1080, there is the potential for over twice as many total pixels on the screen compared to 720. Processing the pixels in progression scan helps to close the gap in picture quality, but nothing beats total pixels.
John
720 x 1280 = 921,600 pixels
1080 x 1920 = 2,073,600 pixels.
In other words, at a resolution of 1080, there is the potential for over twice as many total pixels on the screen compared to 720. Processing the pixels in progression scan helps to close the gap in picture quality, but nothing beats total pixels.
John
Monday, May 22, 2006
Member since:
August 2003
August 2003
advice?
-----------
Is 720p or 1080i better?
I've heard lots of different things.
720p is better at stills, but 1080i better in action.
720p has more information, but when I did the math:
720x1280 . . =..[921,600]
1080x1920/2=[1,036,800]
The first HD-DVD's are 1080i so 720p require conversion.
Is the technology more important than resolution? Some LCD's look a tad flat.
1080p rules?
Also, why do HD-DVD's upconvert bettr? Is it because they are newer, or something about doing it befor the TV gets it?
-----------
Is 720p or 1080i better?
I've heard lots of different things.
720p is better at stills, but 1080i better in action.
720p has more information, but when I did the math:
720x1280 . . =..[921,600]
1080x1920/2=[1,036,800]
The first HD-DVD's are 1080i so 720p require conversion.
Is the technology more important than resolution? Some LCD's look a tad flat.
1080p rules?
Also, why do HD-DVD's upconvert bettr? Is it because they are newer, or something about doing it befor the TV gets it?
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Member since:
July 2007
July 2007
I use - EXTERNAL LINK - to compair products if it can help you.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
What about the lifespan?
Everytime I've talked to anyone at a BB, C-city, Ult. Electronics, or Fry's the story is always the same: LCDs tubes last for about 4-years, DLPs tube lasts about 2-years however, if you buy some extra cooling system you can get a possible 6-years our of them. Plasmas, I've been told, should last up to 12-years like most standard TVs. I should note that Best Buy offers a tube replacement package on their LCDs -- costs extra, of course -- once the tubes die after the two-years.
I don't know about the rest of you, but my choice would be for long lifespan. And after looking at a few plasmas over the last few months, I do see a lot of improvments made from just a few years ago. In fact, a few sets threw me off as I thought they were LCDs or DLPs. The only disadvantage I've been told about is the plasma can get a lot of screen glare if you have it in a room with plenty of windows. This will be no problem for me as I like my rooms dark like my women.
to be honest, all the set styles look remarkably better than what I have and you'd have to have the eyes of a hawk to tell the difference. I mean, I can see a slight difference between the 720 over the 1080. However, I can't tell the difference between 1080i or 1080p -- I'm getting older and the eyes are not what they used to be. Nevertheless, and after much shopping, I think I'm going to stick with the plasma. I would not have said that a few years ago, but as I said, I can see that improvements have been made.
Tim (wow, that's great news!) (=
[Post edited by Tim Raynor on Jul 19, 2007]
Everytime I've talked to anyone at a BB, C-city, Ult. Electronics, or Fry's the story is always the same: LCDs tubes last for about 4-years, DLPs tube lasts about 2-years however, if you buy some extra cooling system you can get a possible 6-years our of them. Plasmas, I've been told, should last up to 12-years like most standard TVs. I should note that Best Buy offers a tube replacement package on their LCDs -- costs extra, of course -- once the tubes die after the two-years.
I don't know about the rest of you, but my choice would be for long lifespan. And after looking at a few plasmas over the last few months, I do see a lot of improvments made from just a few years ago. In fact, a few sets threw me off as I thought they were LCDs or DLPs. The only disadvantage I've been told about is the plasma can get a lot of screen glare if you have it in a room with plenty of windows. This will be no problem for me as I like my rooms dark like my women.
to be honest, all the set styles look remarkably better than what I have and you'd have to have the eyes of a hawk to tell the difference. I mean, I can see a slight difference between the 720 over the 1080. However, I can't tell the difference between 1080i or 1080p -- I'm getting older and the eyes are not what they used to be. Nevertheless, and after much shopping, I think I'm going to stick with the plasma. I would not have said that a few years ago, but as I said, I can see that improvements have been made.
Tim (wow, that's great news!) (=
[Post edited by Tim Raynor on Jul 19, 2007]
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Member since:
September 2006
September 2006
Never listen to a salesperson when it comes to "lifespan" of a TV. I work in a electronics store and the biggest profit we make is on extended warranties or service plans. Most stores max out there service plans at 5 years, because most products last more then five years. Essentially meaning you've shelled out a couple extra hundred bucks for nothing.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Member since:
March 2002
March 2002
Movielover,
So, then . . . if you work in an electronics store, what's your take on it?
Is the lifespan spew I get from every retail store a myth?
If so, what's the truth?
Tim (=
So, then . . . if you work in an electronics store, what's your take on it?
Is the lifespan spew I get from every retail store a myth?
If so, what's the truth?
Tim (=
Friday, July 20, 2007
Member since:
June 2006
June 2006
Hello Tim - here's some info for your post...
LCDs and DLP's do not have "tubes". They have various types of BULBS.
Flat Panel LCDs are rated to last 50,000 to 60,000 hours until half-brightness, and if you watch them 8 hrs a day that means the bulbs won't reach half-brightness for 15 to 20 years.
But, IF you were referring to Rear-Projection LCDs, and/or SXRD LCD (or JVC's D-ILA), and also DLP, then the sets' bulbs will last between 4000 to 6000 hrs, before expiring, but these are user-replaceable bulbs, meaning for a few hundred dollars the sets are back to "like new" quality.
Also, as far as I know, there is no way to replace the bulbs inside of flat-panel LCDs once they reach half-brightness, but surely the owner would then upgrade to a new set.
Other new sets to consider are those using LED lights, featured in Samsung's new 1080p DLP sets (with the slimmer sizes), and their forthcoming premium 1080p LED flat-panel LCDs (the 81 series this fall). LED lights in rear-projection sets (the DLP), will last around 20,000 to 25,000 hours(!), and for flat-panel LCDs even longer.
And next year, we will see a few smaller sets with OLED technology [very-thin screens with yet another form of lighting usually lasers I think] - check the web for updates about OLED. I believe both Sony and Toshiba will be releasing some small-screen OLED sets [14 to 27 inches from what I've read].
-Love Hendrix!
LCDs and DLP's do not have "tubes". They have various types of BULBS.
Flat Panel LCDs are rated to last 50,000 to 60,000 hours until half-brightness, and if you watch them 8 hrs a day that means the bulbs won't reach half-brightness for 15 to 20 years.
But, IF you were referring to Rear-Projection LCDs, and/or SXRD LCD (or JVC's D-ILA), and also DLP, then the sets' bulbs will last between 4000 to 6000 hrs, before expiring, but these are user-replaceable bulbs, meaning for a few hundred dollars the sets are back to "like new" quality.
Also, as far as I know, there is no way to replace the bulbs inside of flat-panel LCDs once they reach half-brightness, but surely the owner would then upgrade to a new set.
Other new sets to consider are those using LED lights, featured in Samsung's new 1080p DLP sets (with the slimmer sizes), and their forthcoming premium 1080p LED flat-panel LCDs (the 81 series this fall). LED lights in rear-projection sets (the DLP), will last around 20,000 to 25,000 hours(!), and for flat-panel LCDs even longer.
And next year, we will see a few smaller sets with OLED technology [very-thin screens with yet another form of lighting usually lasers I think] - check the web for updates about OLED. I believe both Sony and Toshiba will be releasing some small-screen OLED sets [14 to 27 inches from what I've read].
-Love Hendrix!
Friday, July 20, 2007
Member since:
June 2005
June 2005
wow! there's actually a post where no one says Blu Ray sucks. I'm amazed.
Friday, July 20, 2007
Member since:
April 2006
April 2006
Hahaa, not sure anyone being honest could realistically say that Blu-Ray sucks at this point. Neither could they say that about HD DVD. Both have areas for improvement for sure, but sucks is a huge stretch.
You/someone may hate one or the other for various reasons with the result being you think it sucks because it is taking away from your preferred format (or at least someone may perceive that), but the formats themselves do a very good job of delivering excellent HD images and sound when it all comes down to it.
My issues with Blu-Ray have little to do with the format and almost everything to do with Sony/BDA and the way they (Sony/DBA) have gone about pushing the product/format. I am sure some/many feel the same way about Toshiba/MS and that is fine also. Everyone has their own perspective on things.
That said, for what are relatively brand new technologies they are both preforming pretty consistently amazing. Variations in quality, while unfortunate are a reflection of the master or mastering process and not due to any limitations of the tech as far as I have seen.
Things will only get better.
Cheers,
Richard
You/someone may hate one or the other for various reasons with the result being you think it sucks because it is taking away from your preferred format (or at least someone may perceive that), but the formats themselves do a very good job of delivering excellent HD images and sound when it all comes down to it.
My issues with Blu-Ray have little to do with the format and almost everything to do with Sony/BDA and the way they (Sony/DBA) have gone about pushing the product/format. I am sure some/many feel the same way about Toshiba/MS and that is fine also. Everyone has their own perspective on things.
That said, for what are relatively brand new technologies they are both preforming pretty consistently amazing. Variations in quality, while unfortunate are a reflection of the master or mastering process and not due to any limitations of the tech as far as I have seen.
Things will only get better.
Cheers,
Richard
Friday, July 20, 2007
Member since:
September 2006
September 2006
The lifespans of TVs IMO are really more closely related to brands then any particular type of HDTV. For instance we've had to repair or replace several of our Philips Plasmas due to burn in or the TV just not working anymore. Whereas Plasmas from higher end companies we've had no problems with.
The best way to judge how long a TV will last is to look at the maximum length of the extended warranty coverage. If it's for three years for instance the store is assuming you'll have no problems for three years. Essentially they're trying to get you to pay for nothing. If you shell out two hundred dollars and never get a repair done to your TV that's two hundred dollars in the stores pocket. Are there occasions when something happens to your TV within that time? Yeah but something like ninety percent of TVs sold with an extended warranty never end up getting a repair during the Warranty period so it's a pretty safe risk.
The only TV's I'd be concerned about as far as repairs are Plasmas. Not that Plasmas have shorter lifespans but the repair costs on them are so much higher then comparable DLPs or LCDs. Usually the only thing you have to replace on a DLP is a bulb which is like five minute repair. Plasmas on the other hand are quite a bit more labor intensive.
The best way to judge how long a TV will last is to look at the maximum length of the extended warranty coverage. If it's for three years for instance the store is assuming you'll have no problems for three years. Essentially they're trying to get you to pay for nothing. If you shell out two hundred dollars and never get a repair done to your TV that's two hundred dollars in the stores pocket. Are there occasions when something happens to your TV within that time? Yeah but something like ninety percent of TVs sold with an extended warranty never end up getting a repair during the Warranty period so it's a pretty safe risk.
The only TV's I'd be concerned about as far as repairs are Plasmas. Not that Plasmas have shorter lifespans but the repair costs on them are so much higher then comparable DLPs or LCDs. Usually the only thing you have to replace on a DLP is a bulb which is like five minute repair. Plasmas on the other hand are quite a bit more labor intensive.
