 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
I usually hang out at the vinyl asylum, but i'm in the market for a new TV. It has gotten very confusing out there for us Non-video guys. I am NOT into home theater, just looking for the best quality picture I can get. I know it's a wide range, but 36" is the smallest i'm interested in and i'll go up to 50". I'm assuming HDTV does nothng for non-HDTV programming? But I understand that's where programming is headed. Do you think the extra $ are warranted? What are the pros and cons of widescreen if there are any, or is it just personal preference? Plasma is not an option. 15K on a TV?! Funny, I spent just that on my speakers and didn't even blink. Should I just look at the major players and find the best deal? Are there certain manufacturers that do some things better than others? i.e. HDTV, widescreen. Any advice would be appreciated.
Follow Ups:
...but I'm looking to replace my 10 year old Sony RPTV myself so I've been reading about, studying and investigating this area for a while now. And I've looked at LOTS of sets. The one thing to realize right away is that this is a volaitle time in HT land and being rash could quickly stick you with a 10 year investment in a boat anchor. So here are a few thoughts.CRT based TVs, either direct view or RPTV. The direct view CRTs dont do true HD, though they can look quite nice. The thing is they are heavy, big in the larger screen sizes and VERY heavy in the big screen sizes. If you buy a 4:3 set it will fit current non HD broadcasting to a T. But if you watch DVDs, put up a UHF bowtie & HD tuner to pull in HD, get HD Direct TV or HD Dish Network or buy in to HD video recorders with prerecorded movies in HD (about to launch as we speak) you will regret the choice as you will have black bands above and below the image until you junk it and buy a 16:9 tv. 16:9 sets fit all those conditions better and will give a much more satisfying viewing experience with those materials. But if you just watch sit coms in non HD then a cheap 4:3 set is still a quite viable way to go. I wont comment on the 4:3s as I dont follow them closely but in the 16:9s 34" is a common large size that has lots of competition and they sell in the $2500 to $4000 range. The Panny CT34WX50 is nice (I bought one for my bedroom) the Sonys in this size are too, but the Toshibas and Sharps I've seen in this size basically suck in terms of sharpness, convergence or color - or all of the above.
RPTVs specifically - yes these can do true HD if you get the larger tube sizes (8 or 9") tubes, but you will ususally only find those in the really large sets - 60" or larger diagonal screen sizes. The other thing about RPTVs is that practically getting them to deliver their full performance capability in the real world can be elusive. They tend to bloom, suffer from focus, convergence and geometry problems and they throw away a lot of resolution in the process. Want to avoid that? You have to crank contrast and brightness levels down to the point they dont have enough punch to be seen as well as a direct view set in a brightly lit room and carefully calibrate the set and constantly keep an eye on convergence adjustments (three picture tubes are firing onto the same screen to produce the image, if they areently perfectly aligned you get fuzzy images). But if you arent very image quality conscious and are budget constrained and dont mind the big box - you can get an awful lot of TV for the money. In this category the Pioneers and especially Pioneer Elites are about as good as it gets IMO. The Mits have their fans but they are invariably too blue with wildly exxagerated contrast levels that require professional recalibration to overcome. The Pioneers look good out of the box. They cost more than other RPTV but if I were going that route they are the only set I'd seriously consider.
The thing about all direct view and rear projection CRT based displays is that they have what I call the "CRT glow". Everything has an exxagerated illuminated from within look. Its all very punchy but not very lifelike or film like for that matter. I never really noticed it until I saw the next type of set. Plasmas.
Plasmas have come a long way very quickly as they are chip based display devices - which means they undergo revolutionary improvementis in resoultion and performance about as often as microprocessors. Yes, plasmas used to cost $15k a year and a half ago. But those sets and their succesors now commonly sell for $5,000 to $7,000 and sometimes even lower. Dell (yep, the PC guys) recently ran a sale on the Panny unit PeteW loves so much for $4,500. A far cry from $15k. The thing about plasmas IMO is that the glass in 80% of them would have been better served making windows instead of TVs. Plasmas are usually very poor at reproducing deep rich blacks and retaining detail in dark scenes compared to even pedestrian direct view and RP CRTs. They also tend to have lots of digitally based image artifacts. Sit too close and you'll literally see the screen squirm as though its covered by thousands of transluscent little worms. Or if you sit too close you'll actually be able to count the pixels. But that has started to change. The seminal product that started the revolution is the Panasonic PeteW bought. Killer blacks, stable, very low artifact image. It still loses a bit of shadow detail in dark scenes, and it is limited to roughly 480p DVD level image resoultion. But dammit if it doesnt look beautiful in person. One big reason is something it has in common with all plasmas - it doesnt have that artificial CRT glow. At their best plasmas look fundamentally more real than the other types of sets to me. On material recorded direct to video its more like looking through a window onto reality, and on film its more like seeing a projected film instead of a tv show. Now, should you buy one? Thats exactly my dilemma. And for now I'm waiting one more generation of development. Why? Well, the Pannys do black but they still dont have the shadow detail that even the cheapest CRTs provide. And in the 42" size they dont do true HD. The NECs are the same kettle of fish as they use the Panny display so picking between them is a features question. The newest Pioneers are moving into true HD resolution, but from what I've seen they do not do the Pannys blacks and have even worse shodow detail performance. And if you get too close to the new Pioneer you'll see lots of traditional "squirmy" plasma image artifacts. I would not consider any other plasma at this point - the Sonys I've seen are literally horrible.
So what to do? Well, personally after seeing the latest plasmas and the progresss in digital front projectors using the Texas Instuments technology (a whole other kettle of fish) I've made one decision already - I will never buy another CRT based viewing device. They are all boat anchors (or are about to become them). The future is a digital display (plasmas, digiatal projectors) that accept a digital signal directly from your DVD or broadcaster or PC without converting it to analog and back again as all current sets do. And believe me, there are losses througout that process. And its probably a plasma set that combines the Pioneers reolution with the Pannys black levels. Given the incredible rate of progress in plasmas that set will almost certainly be introuduced by somebody within the next year. And given the precipitous decline in plasmas it will probably cost less, a lot less, than the sets available now.
So me? I'm waiting just a little longer. Now if you just want a good cheap tv to look at sit coms this is all probably moot.
Hope this helps,
joe
NT
Joe,You've summed things up real good-like.
I find myself in agreement with almost every observation you've made - particularly those about Plasma screens. Ever since seeing the Panny 42" I've been smitten.
What I really enjoyed about your post is your description of the difference between the Plasma picture vs. "all-that-has-come-before-it." I agree with you about the amazing natural quality that a plasma can produce - a quality I'd never experienced before encountering that technology. But here's what puzzles me: It's rare that A/V people actually get around to describing that fundamental difference in quality between plasma and other screens.
In the Home Theater mags, for instance, all monitors are rated along a set of "objective" tests. The monitor either passes the tests, "does well” or is given some numerical rating on each parameter. Plasma screens are put through the same tests, of course.
Yet so little prose is spent trying to impress upon the viewer what the "experience" of viewing the monitor is like.Same goes for the A/V forums. There is much more specsmanship, and very little discussion of the subjective effect of viewing each product.
I guess I come from the touch-feely world of audiophiles, were we are always trying translate our subjective experiences to other audiophiles. And look: I had to come to an Audiophile site to finally see a decent description of video monitors!
Well done Joe. I completely agree about that unnatural "CRT-Glow" you talk about vs. the Plasmas more natural illumination. A local high-end A/V store had an HDTV feed of a baseball game playing on every type of screen, all within eye-shot (CRT, RPTV, LCDPTV, Projection, LCD, PLasma...). The HDTV feed looked great on all of them - sharp and clean. But every monitor still looked like "TV." Except the Panasonic 50" plasma. It looked more like watching a real-life game through a window than I'd have imagined was possible.
So, like you, I went through the same torturous, head-spinning regarding what to do/when to buy. How did I stop the pain? I bought the Panny 42" plasma :-)
Rich H.
Just to share my thoughts and reactions for what they are worth.First, true HDTV on a plasma screen is killer. I'm not talking about line-doubled DVD playback; I'm talking about true HDTV, which is availble from over the air broadcasts (PBS) and from DirecTV (it's an extra service; regular DirecTV is digital, but not HDTV). So, take a look at that in the store to see what real HDTV is. I think you'll decide it's quite spectacular. I know that was my and my wife's reaction.
Second, understand that HDTV broadcasting is not mandated by the Federal Communications Commission. What is mandated is digital broadcasting. Every broadcaster has a 6 Mhz piece of spectrum (which is what's required to broadcast an analog TV signal). Broadcasting an HDTV signal requires the full 6 Mhz. However, broadcasting a "standard" definition signal requires much less. So, using digital, it is possible for a broadcaster to broadcast multiple programs on a single 6 Mhz channel. The cost to broadcasters of converting to digital is quite substantial; so my guess is that they're going to look for ways to increase revenue. Multiple programs is one way to do it.
Third, understand that, right now, there are huge incompatibility problems with digital broadcasting. The modulation format chosen for digital broadcasting does not work well with cable TV; digital cable uses a different modulation system. So your digital broadcast decoder will not receive digital cable signals. Also, cable TV is not now required to retransmit local digital broadcasts, if they are retransmitting the local analog broadcast. Finally, DirecTV offers HDTV (mostly HBO, I believe) but requires both a different set-top box than the regular DirecTV box and a different dish, because you must "look at" two satellites.
My own preference from both a decorating and a viewing perspective is that plasma screens are the only way to go and that HDTV really needs at least a 42" diagonal screen to be worthwhile. CRT televisions that are that size (Sony makes a 40" 4:3) are very deep and take up a lot of room space. RPTVs are not as large; but I don't care for their image quality. One of my business partners felt the same way; and he bought a plasma TV. Also, I think 16:9 aspect ratio is the way to go for any new purchase; since it is more nearly congruent with the movie screen format.
My wife and I couldn't justify to ourselves the expenditure required for a plasma screen, given that we have a working 27" and just don't watch that much TV. And we felt that the alternatives, while cheaper, were inferior long-term solutions. The way we look at it, we're making a 10-year purchase; so you have to try to anticipate the future as best you can.
When the 12-year old 27" TV finally fails, the price of the plasmas will probably be down; some of the compatibility issues among digital formats may be sorted out; and we'll undoubtedly buy a plasma TV.
the problem is the 42" plasma displays currently available are NOT CAPABLE OF HIGH DEFINITION. (the 1024x1024 Sony is a technical exception...see link below)you must be capable of displaying AT LEAST 720p horizontal lines in a progressive scan (or 1080 lines interlaced: 540p skipped lines followed by the other 540p lines = 1080i), and the current crop of 42" plasmas only do 480 horizontal lines.
here's the deal: a 42" plasma has 852 pixels in 480 horizontal rows, for a total of 408960 pixels, which is not nearly enough.
however, the 50" plasmas have 1366 pixels in 768 horizontal rows,
for a total of 1049088 pixels. that means they have no problem doing 720 progressive "scans" of video information, in fact, the input is "rescaled" to 768 scans, so as to fill the entire screen.High Defintion CRTs are capable of much higher resolution, as are front and rear projection technologies. They can do the equivalent of over 2 million pixels, so you would think you'd get a much sharper picture, and of course if you project that on a 42" or 50" screen, you will. If you project that light on a huge screen, say 8 or 10 feet across you get something a bit less, but still very close to film.
but don't sit too close, and if your input is regular television programing, NTSC, it's gonna be ugly--downright nasty. That's why "line doublers and quadruplers and processors and scalers" are so often included or recommended as add-ons for large screen projection.
Very expensive.
plasma is something unique:
the quality of light and colors that the super-heated gas plasma emits is ....
oh man, you just have to see these things:
"Let's pretend the glass has got all soft like gauze, so that we can get through.
Why, it's turning into a sort of mist now, I declare!"--"Through the Looking-Glass" by Lewis Carroll
I should have said 43".The article you linked to, btw, is about 8 months old, an eternity in this business.
Yep, it does true HD but it doesn't do black and it seems to suffer from subtle image artifacts in dark scenes. Everytime I've seen this set at Tweeter it can't get past dark grey. I gotta believe were gonna see the Panny black level and the Pioneer resolution from one of these manufacturers soon for under $10k. Maybe well under.If I were Chris that's what I'd wait on.
joe
whew! where did that come from?well, i had my 15 minutes...
now my "state-of-the-art" plasma is old news...
the horror...
i guess i'll put a hole in the boat to let the water out
thanks for the heads-up Bruce
Not at all.You make a good point that everyone needs to watch out for -- there's a myriad of different formats 1080i, 720p, etc. etc. and it's hard to keep 'em all straight. So a buyer swimming around in all this has got to look out for the sharks and make sure he doesn't get bitten when he plunks down the rather large stack of bills that buying one of these things requires.
IIRC, the unit that my wife and I saw was the Pioneer jobbie that I linked to. I know it wasn't interlaced (I can tell the difference) and I don't think it was as big as 50 inches. (Her reaction immediately upon our walking into the store: "Oooh, that's nice and so thin, just like a picture!" (The had the display wall-mounted.) Our local PBS outlet was showing an HDTV broadcast about rennaisance painting -- quite the program to show off the virtues of HDTV.
look, chriswe got off on the wrong foot.
the first thing that came to mind when i read your post was how familiar it seems--it's just like the posts we see on the general board all the time. that's all i meant. no malice. i had no intention of mocking.
the problem with these newsgroup websites is folk seem to defalt to bad intentions of the respondents
that was and perhaps still is a common occurence on Audio Review, which is a major reason this website was born.
i'm sorry my posts are perceived that way, especially since you haven't attracted a knowledgeable response.
you say you're looking for the best quality picture you can get in the 36-50 inch range.
that would be the 37", 42" or 50" Panasonic plasma monitors. nothing else comes close. only the 50" HDTV capable. you should read the plasma tv buying guide website to find out why. you will also need a good digital tuner, and for that i recommend the Sony HD-100
together with cables you will have to spend around $6500 for the 42" model, a thousand less for the 37", and 4 thousand more for the 50"...give or take a few hundred, which includes shipping to your doorstep.
since you are into high-end audio mount the sucker right on the wall between your main speaker pair. that way you won't muck-up the center image.
but since i'm such a bad fellow...better listen to all the good advice you have from all your other contributors...
the horror...
since I'm such a nasty guy i thought i'd post some more on this.where to begin? chris, you are asking us to tell you everything we think about televisions between 36 and 50 inches. whew! that would take me dozens, perhaps a hundred hours to distill, synthesise, edit and post, or you could just spend some time with the search engine. but no, it's easier for you to ask us to do all the work.
just think how hard it is to answer: "what is the BEST loudspeaker?"
this is a typical newbe question.
well, are you looking at dynamic or planar? electrostatic or magnotronic? do you plan to listen mostly to rock or voice and piano? is your amp tube or SS?...get the idea? you should know better.
look how hard this is: say you decided to limit yourself to one category of television, the conventional cathode ray tube direct-view.
now going from brand to brand, in say, just the 36" sizes, you'd have to see them side by side being fed exactly the same signal via the same lenght of cable and connections, and even then, hope that the factory calibration of the set is equal in each case. When you go into a video store and see a wall of televisions, how the hell are you to know which has "the best possible picture?" it could very well be that it's the one with the worst looking picture, and all it needs is to be re-calibrated to some video standard and fed a signal that hasn't been attenuated by the other 50 televisions in the chain.
you know that. what do you expect us to say?
how about this: how far away will you be sitting?
because if you're gonna be closer than 10 feet, maybe you should stick with the CRT sets. They are less expensive, are HDTV capable, often have a built-in Directv tuner, and look fabulous up close. if you get too close to a plasma you'll start seeing the individual pixells.
but you can't move the 36" sets yourself, so you'd better be sure you won't have to get behind it to adjust your wires (you most certainly will) and if you plan to put it between your expensive audio speakers then you were a fool to spend 15K on them, because your imaging is goint to hell.
so for CRTs: pros: cheap, excellent HDTV capable picture , built-in tuners, relyable established technology. cons: very heavy, bulky, limited picture size.
rear projection: pros: very cheap, big picture, HDTV capable. cons: the worst picture quality, heavy, very bulky, must view head-on from more distant position than CRT.
LCD: dead in the water...good for computer monitors
front projection: since you limit picture size to 50" it would be foolish to even think about this technology.
plasma: pros: best picture quality, relatively light for screen size, takes up no space and looks nice when not in use, has best color spectrum, has best 3-D "looking through a window" effect, won't muck-up audio image, very cool, very high WAF. cons: doesn't do black, most expensive, no tuner, long-term reliability unknown, easily portable: people will break into your house to get it, subject to burn-out if you watch network TV (the static network logos in the bottom right of your screen will permanently burn into the picture).
the aspect-ratio question is simple: you definitely want a 16:9 set.
these sets have a built-in scaler that will expand the 4:3 ratio NTSC programming to fill the screen, and zoom in on widescreen programming to shrink the black bars on the top and bottom of the display. you will like this. sure, there's some weird stretching at the edges of the anamorphic scaler that have some very funny consequences when the actor sticks her butt or shoulder over there. i find this effect very amusing. or, you can have the "Graduate" effect of the 4:3 sets: I remember watching the classic film "The Graduate" for the first time on TV: In the classic scene the first time Dustan takes Anne Bancroft to the hotel room, all you see is his nose and a bit of her kneee. is that what you like? or perhaps you would like to see the whole widescreen view, only on a 42" 4:3 set the image would be about 4 inches tall.if you buy a 4:3 set you will hate yourself.
HDTV is pretty awesome. you ought to see it for yourself. i recommend you view the free off-the-air broadcast that you can get with just a simple UHF antenna, as this is the best 1080i signal I've seen. I didn't care for the satellite HD network.
the 37" and 42" plasmas are not HDTV capable because they are fixed-pixell displays and do not have enough horizontal lines to meet the specifications. you can read more about this on the plasmatvbuyingguide website.
are there some people who do it better than others? yes. plasma has some problems, and the early technolgy gave it a bad reputation. Panasonic has addressed these issues better than anyone else, but the latest generation of sets, particularly by NEC are catching up. Some of the brands are just a repackaging of screens and or electronics made by the big boys in the game. you should search the web--there's alot written about this. keep in mind that if what you are reading is more than a few months old then it's probably out of date. plasma technology is moving very fast. it's hot!
i could go on, but imagine you're pretty pissed-off by now, and I know there are thousands of people waiting to answer all your questions, and do it without you imagining they are making fun of you.
sorry chris,i've just spent the better part of the day surfing the u to the sixth (www) trying to find the "best quality picture you can get" when i realized that you were "NOT" in to home theater...
so you aren't watching movies on this thing...
well, that changes a few things...
because that leaves pornography, video games, sit-coms, sports, and cooking shows.
you don't need HD or 16:9 aspect ratio for any of that. sure, if you're watchin' the Super Bowl or the World Series or the Olympics they will be in High Definition standard, but those few examples are exceptions that prove the rule: almost everything else is 4:3, and will remain so for the intermitable future.
i don't know of any porn in HD, but i'd be happy to do more research in this area.
with the exception of "pong", i have absolutely no knowledge of or interest in video games.
all the network programing is on video tape so you can't justify getting a high-resolution set for that...
i don't know chris...seems to me like you've eliminated everything but a regular television.
what you're looking for is the best picture in a regular 4:3 television set that's bigger than 36 ".
that would be a Proton.
next question?
.
The Pro-HD X20s. I am quite happy w/ my 520.
Some people like front projectors, but they have fan noise it seems.
you shouldn't infer bad tolerance in my posts, or all you'll get is crap like that
i apologise sbrians for my rudeness.i have no excuse.
very sorry.
It depends. If the display has a good line doubler as part of it, then it can really make a significant difference in the display of standard NTSC broadcast video. I use DishNetwork as my signal source because they can provide the local stations in my area, and the difference between antenna, cable, and what arrives on the dish can easily be seen - the DishNetwork signal is far superior.The difference between HDTV and NTSC line-doubled is (subjectively, as to the way it looks) on a percentage scale - about 50% better. This can be directly compared using an HBO program that is simultaneously broadcast in standard video format and HDTV. The NTSC line doubled looks good, the HDTV looks great.
It depends. If the display has a good line doubler as part of it, then it can really make a significant difference in the display of standard NTSC broadcast video. I use DishNetwork as my signal source because they can provide the local stations in my area, and the difference between antenna, cable, and what arrives on the dish can easily be seen - the DishNetwork signal is far superior.The difference between HDTV and NTSC line-doubled is (subjectively, as to the way it looks) on a percentage scale - about 50% better. This can be directly compared using an HBO program that is simultaneously broadcast in standard video format and HDTV. The NTSC line doubled looks good, the HDTV looks great.
what kind of stereo should I buy?
how much should I spend?
what kind of speakers are good?
should I get seperates or an HT receiver?
we can't guide you unless you tell us where you are starting from, and where you want to go: iehow big is the room?
in a big room, a big-box rear projection will give you a big picture for the least money. in a smaller room, you may not want an enormous black box breathing down your neck. and how far is your viewing seat from the screen? this matters alot.
what is your source?
are you watching VHS? DVD? cable (ugh!), broadcast (and what kind of antenna do you have?), satellite? computer?
what kind of programing?
are you sports? films? sit-coms? wrestling? porn? video games? this will determine what format you should get: 4:3 or 16:9
this is alot more difficult than you think.
the video gear business is unsettled, the technologies are still new and fighting for their lives...some nitching has already established (the high-end video seems to be DLP for the moment, but don't worry, you can't afford it; while the low-end is still rear projection), and the prices are still plumeting that $20,000 50" plasma from last year can be had for under $5000 new-in-box (don't buy it until you've seen why they can't give them away).
I think you'd be crazy to buy a new video display in 4:3 format.
kinda like saying:
"Hey, I'll pay you to poke me in the eye with a stick!"
then again, this website is full of crazy folk
It's kind of difficult asking all the right questions when you're not as informed as some. Which I admitted. I did give a range of sizes I was interested in, and I don't think it takes an expert to know not to shoehorn a huge TV in a little room. I did say I was not interested in home theater, which was the best way I could describe I am only interested in basic programming i.e. no surround sound, etc. (my source is satellite by the way). I never asked who makes the best TV, but I was interested to know if certain manufacturers are better at certain technologies i.e. HDTV, wide screen etc. I don't think that's a silly question. Valid question in audio.I consider myself pretty knowledgeable when it comes to audio, especially analog and I see lots crazy posts. If I can help the person I will, without insulting him, or i'll just skip it.
you people who consider yourselves "pretty knowledgeable when it comes to audio" have a lot of nerve posting on a video site.how can you say "not interested in home theater" on a page called
Video Asylum???
are you insane?
go back to your vinyl playhouse
i'm telling all my imaginary video friends not to talk to you again
neyah!
audiophiles (especially those into analog) are not allowed to post on this asylum? Or maybe all posts should be cleared by you first to make sure they meet your standards. First you insulted me because I asked a question that you didn't approve of, they you insulted me because I am into vinyl, and then you even insulted another poster becasue of his well meaning response to my post (called it "crap" actually). I very clearly stated that right now I am only interested in the best quality picture, and which of the different types of technologies would accomplish that. I was simply looking for some info. on these technologies to best meet my needs. What is wrong with that? Who is to say that I will not get into Home theater? With "encouragement" from people like you, that probably won't happen. But who knows, maybe that's the way you want it. Do you lock non-videophiles out of your video room? or insult them when they don't know as much as you. I bet not. I welcome folks into my listening room so they can see what their favorite music can really sound like. The expressions on their faces is worth it. I still don't understand why people like you just skip over a post that they find so insulting or beneath them. Oh, one more thing, I'm always amazed at how "brave" people like you are hiding behind their computers. Would you have answered me or the other poster the same way if I was standing in front of you? Maybe you would have, but I can bet you'd be minus a few teeth right about now. Enjoy your video.
ok, so i mis-read your post.you said, > > "I am NOT into home theater," < <
and you took the extra effort to put "NOT" in all caps, which I mistook to mean you are seriously serious about no HT.
but, suddenly, mysteriously, without any sign from you or the gods, you've decided that we ought to have known that you might change your mind on this...
as it turns out, sometimes you don't always post what's really on your mind, isn't that right chris? and sometimes you read somebodies post and you take an entirely different tone than the one the author intended, isn't that right chris?> > "Any advice would be appreciated. " < < <
here's some advice you should appreciate:
"never assume malice before eliminating the possiblity of stupidity"
From your rather encouraging and truly informative posts, I'd say you have a few too many "imaginary friends".
the voices in my head just said, "Do as you are told!"why chris thinks i'm dising him only he can know...
the only reason i come to video asylum is to find out how to switch the video signal from sat. receiver to DVD without spending the next 20 years working towards a master's degree in electrical engineering...
anyone confused enough to imagine my posts factual let alone informative needs their head examined.
have you ever read any of my posts?
take this one for example...did you read this one? ha--fooled you--i didn't even write this post
dy/dx
Wow, as someone that makes his living in the world of home entertainment I am surprised by the unnecessarily aggressive comments to a simple question...fastidious at the very least. as I see it...it's not Chris that needs the help... It's you, to much TV...move away from that screen! If you don't like the post...if it's to far beneath you just skip it, based on your post's we all realize & fully understand that you have ownership over this site & anyone that posts to it. By the way, the aforementioned comments are rhetorical, you made mention of furthering your education so "I" will let "you" get busy...you clearly have lots of work ahead & I have no intention of keeping you from the realization of your goals!
...you did a nice job of answering chris' questionson behalf of all the folk at video asylum, we are thankful that you've shared everything you know about TVs in the 36 to 50 inch range.
#1 Read a few issues of WidescreenReview magazine to get a feel for what HDTV, widescreen and Home Theater can bring to your home#2 Log on to www.thedigitalbits.com and access the icon for "Anamorphic Widescreen" as it will explain "anamorphic" and "why" anything but widescreen is unacceptable to the "informed"
#3 If you get an HDTV-ready model, you will have to get an outboard HDTV receiver to get the HDTV programming (if it's available in your area), but an HDTV has the HDTV tuner built in
#4 If HDTV is not available in your area, find out when it will be
If it's not expected any time soon (2 years or less), then get an HDTV-ready model and the HDTV tuner can be purchased later#5 Both of the above models usually have better parts and, while you won't notice an enormous difference, they will look better than the average television/monitor
#6 The sales of plasma monitors increased 80% last year by units sold, but only increased 35% by dollar amount (ie; prices are dropping due to: economies of scale, technology advances, parts availability, parts supply, etc)
Don't count plasma out as an option due to price and be sure to check around -- you don't have to pay retail (ie; 15K)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
