 
|
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 |
In Reply to: 4:3 or 16:9? posted by Mick on April 12, 2001 at 18:03:42:
so much TV and get a 16x9 for DVD and HDTV (if it ever happens).
Follow Ups:
nt
I live so far out in the sticks that we don't (and won't) have cable, I have a roof antenna that picks up ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, PBS, Warner and UPN only (but I get a good picture). We watch a lot of movies, thus why I'm getting HDTV and DVD. Maybe a sat system in the future once I learn about them.My BIG question, Rich, is what do I lose if I go Toshiba 55H70 HDTV as opposed to Toshiba 40H80? The 55H70 is only $200 more. I don't understand. I'll get horizontal bars but the DVD picture will be the same size as the 40H80. Correct??? Plus, for normal TV for the next three-four years I'll have a decent 55" screen as opposed to a 32" screen from the 40H80 (because of the vertical bars). Will I lose resolution with the DVD? Will I not be able to play some formats I don't know about?
Also, the 55H70 has TWO component video inputs, one for a progressive scan DVD, the other for DTV in the future. To me it seems a no-brainer, so I must not be understanding something.
Thanks for your help Rich. I do appreciate it!
R/ Mick
If you care enough to be researching & posting here, then you should expend the same effort finding a dealer with a full return policy- or finding a friend with a similar set, or finding a place to sit & watch one for a LONG time.
This is a real pain, but would you buy a car out of a catalogue?
Wouldn't it suck to get it & decide the seat & ride just don;t work right for you?
If you intend to spend a lot of time watching your set, and if this is a lot of money for you (ie, wife won't allow you to get a new one for 5 years) -- you really dont want one that has 1 tiny thing that bothers 5% of people but you notice it, or your wife hates it, etc. etc.For example, everyone I hear from thinks the stretch looks ok. Mostthink your brain snaps in and you adjust after a few seconds and 4:3 looks groovy on top 16:9 set. I don;t think so personally.
BAng- end of story.Other thing- and this is what you are asking- what the hell do I get for my extra dough besides a smaller screen for 4:3?
A sked myself this, and felt it was very little.
a 16:9 set looks "more exclusive/sexier/cooler, take your pic". At least to me, this can mean a lot sometimes, because at least in my experience guest rarely understand or apprecaite the true qualities of most of our addictive toys- they think they sound good or "look pretty", etc. etc. etc. So in a way, if you care about reaction- and why wouldn;t you in some ways- people buy cool cars because they're cool!- 16:9 makes you look spiffier.
Reality - 16:9 TV's seem to take up as much space as the 4:3's!, so though they are charging you more, giving you less screen, etc. - it basically "tricks" your eye into thinking it is taking up less space...I watched mostly 4:3 like you, hated stretch, and could not live with grey bar burn in or a tiny tiny image. Honestly- do you want to spend $2k on a TV, then figure out when you watch TV- which is 90% of the time, you are seeing EXACTLY what someone with a $500, 32" normal TV is seeing?
Now - the problem. The Toshiba 55H70 does NOT have an Anamorphic squeeze for the progressive input-. This means you cannot play dvd's will full anamorphic resolution, and that some % of your available space for picture, will instead be used to display black bars.
BAsically- same image, but with like 360 lines of resolution instead of 480.
Now, though the Toshiba does not take this with a progressive 480p input, it DOES take a HDTV feed, as you know, which is 1080i. It displays this in a 16:9 anamorphically squeezed (this is moot for HDTV, but here comes the point) box- with all of the resolution it can muster (anothers words just as much as a comparable Toshiba 16:9 of the same kinda level).
So... if you could only find a way to take your DVD output and make it 540p to getthe extra resolution. There are several options,they would cost money ($700-$1000), take a bit of effort, but could yield other benefits (ie- it could also be a home computer if you go HTPC, regardless the picture will surely be amazing compared to a stock TV without an external scaler/processor (along the lines of upgrading to a separate DAC-transport combo for audio). Sony sets do the squeeze, but cost more and only have 1 progressive input (however with the newest generation of receivers with component video switching at high rates that may be OK).
If you want to get this over with an have alittle extra scratch, get the 53" Sony. Most people love it. There are TONS of quibbles and problems to be found on forums (like with any fanatical following), but I generally get the sense that if dad asked for a TV that would get things done, be fantastic, not be a part-time job assembling & tweaking, and be a good value - I would say get the Sony.I have talked to several very knowledgeable ISF technicians that PREFER the Toshiba. They know it doesn ot squeeze, but think it not a biggee. They think it gives 1-the most BANG for the buck, 2- is by FAR the most tweakable (and please please please, make sure you rememeber to budget $3-500 for a real top notch ISF calibration with some tweaking. This $300-$500 will yield an improvement that would cost many many many times as much from the manufacturer. It prevents set damage. It makes things "right" in a way that most people could not get on their own without making it a job.
Based on this I personally bought the Toshiba, saved $1k over the Sony (which is almost enough for the HTPC & calibration).
(the rest is a long, long story, I never saw the Toshiba in my living room, and now have a very different set up that costs far more than any of this, and certainly more than a "rational" person with my income would spend, and it makes me happier than anything! - but we shouldnt talk about that unless you have $6k and a 15" by 15' room).
Here's the story:
On a 4:3 TV the material you watch 90% of the time is presented as well as the source with no distortion, on on a BIG screen.
Your DVD's will be as big as those on the fancy 16:9, but not as sharp. IF you saw them side by side you would know. If you never saw them together you would be DAMN happy with the 4:3 set in your home unless you start getting fanatical upgrade-itis.If you get the 16:9, the stuff you spend 90% of your time looking at (which is not a great signal to begin with!- low resolution, etc.) will be distorted, streched, cropped, on on a screen the same size as anyone else's TV, and probably the last TV that no longer satisfies you.
I have HDTV- you will NOT believe how amazingly fantastic it is. I watch tons of stuff that is total crap- just because it looks so great! Even so I still only spend 10% of my time watching HD (which is still a lot more than I expected intially- it does look killer!) because there is VERY little in HD, most things are crap shows, many have crappy upsampling, etc. etc. etc.
When you get a Sat you can get Showtime and HBO in HD. Each channel has maybe 2-3 movies an evening, some of which are upsamples that still look better than TV but are not true HD, and one or two that are real HD, but it;s a copy of their main channe lso it;s pot luck. Yes the new movies come on, but they are still repeated 69 times, etc. etc.
I love the Sopranos. CBS has tons of stuff, but I think all the shows completely suck. If you like CBS primetime, assume you will be doing tons of HD watching.Anyway, my point about HD is that it is cool beans, nice to show off, and not widespread at all. By the time there;s any kind of quantity of stuff on HD- which I think is 5 years at least, there will be better sets for much cheaper, etc. etc. etc.
Some may say killer tons of HD will come in 1 year. I think that the programming will only be widespread as a RESPONSE to the prevalence of HDTV capable sets. They will not throw tons of HD "hoping" we all march out to buy $2k sets. IFthat was true we wouldnt be still watching TV withthe same shitty resolution for the past 30 years. They do it because they respond to the most common and popular level of demand.
So, tons of shows will come when tons of sets are in homes, which means "joe sixpack" as well as people who don;t give too much of a damn about TV but do have to buy a set. To get this kinda market, these sets need to be priced where the current market is-
$300 - small TV
$500 - normal TV
$700 - nice big TV
any more than that and you are at a Circuit city or the fanatical guys house.God bless manufacturers if they can roll out HD sets at these prices, win buyers, and create a demand for programming, all within 1 year. Maybe even cost-wise they could do this and still make money, I dunno.
Regardless, if they are gonna get there in 1 year or 5, when they do get there stuff will be better, programming will be more prolific, you will get more band for your dollar, and a zillion other reasons to upgrade your set then.
I would get the 4:3 as it yield the most bang, and also cost the least bucks. Put that saved money into the bank, for your next upgrade. Once the source material catches up, or you change your viewing preferences- then re-think.
dg
I have been visiting local dealers and watching quite a lot of HDTV's. I have found none able to answer my more technical questions satisfactorily.I'll check into the Sony and I'll be studying up on what an "anamorphic squeeze" is in a little more detail. Thanks. In about a month or two I should be able to go from the 2-channel audiophile to the HT enthusiast plunge!
R/ Mick
No problem.
I was amazed at the ignorant, stupid, made up, or just wrong answers I got from tons of salesmen about TV's. I stopped talking to them, it;s not my job to educate them. Assume they don;t know anything, always want you to buy something and preferrably the most expensive. More expensive=better in saleman talk in a lot of stores and we both know that is not true.goto
www.hometheaterforum.com Look in the TV and projector area and search their archives.
I did the same 3 months ago.What sucks is that even though you are going to spend $2k literally ALL of your options have compromises (only one component in on the Sony, no anamorphic squeeze for 480p on the Toshiba) that could have been cheaply rectified by the manuf., and that consumers really deserve for spending this much...
Personally I think if you spend $2k you should have no complaints.
Of course, thats the kinda thinking that wound me up with a $7k projector rig instead of a $2300 TV- oops...I have no complaints though.
And I will tell you that my video $ spent has brough a greater return, both in absolute terms and in the "less diminishing returns" area when compared to the money I spent on audio.
You are in for a treat.dg
I personally am an electronics salesman and I don't really appreciate the stereotypes. If you had to try to keep up on ALL the new technologies on not only TV's, but all A/V gear for both home and car audio, you would see that it is not always easy to have ALL the answers. I know that there are some salesmen that don't have a clue, but that doesn't mean we are all out to get you. Some, like myself, will go the extra mile to get you the CORRECT answers if they are within my reach. If not I am not to good to say "that is a great question to be honest I am not sure". People like you do all this research because you enjoy it and get benefit from it, and that is great for you, but when I leave work after selling this stuff all day or night, I don't always feel like digging in and trying to read up on what was newly introduced today. I come here on this site to try to learn and keep up as much as I can and feel like doing. It is a shame to come here and be insulted.
or will be if it isn't yet. I'm not familiar with the 55H70. Does it unsqueeze an anamorphic DVD picture to give you more vertical picture resolution like the 40H80? Is it progressive scan capable? Does it have two progressive inputs like the 40H80 (one for HDTV and one for progressive DVD)?BTW, I stretch 4:3 when watching TV. The 40H80 and other Toshiba Theatre Wide's have a few widescreen settings for 4:3 TV. The picture is slightly distorted, but I don't really notice it. Does the 55H70 have that feature?
... and helps me think about what I should look for and consider. Thanks> > > I'm not familiar with the 55H70. Does it unsqueeze an anamorphic DVD picture to give you more vertical picture resolution like the 40H80?
This I don't know. I understand what an anamorphic lens is but do not know how anamorphic applies to DVD. I'm assuming its how a DVD unit plays back a film shot using an anamorphic lens? How is unsqueezing done? Unsqueezed to fill up the 16:9 screen I assume? Are you asking if an anamorphic picture is unsqueezed to fill a 4:3 picture? Won't this cause distortion? Why not just watch an anamorphic picture with the black horizontal bars on a 4:3?
> > > Is it progressive scan capable?
Yes, both the 55H70 and 55HX70 do.
> > > Does it have two progressive inputs like the 40H80 (one for HDTV and one for progressive DVD)?
Yes, both the 55H70 and 55HX70 have two ColorStream HD Component Video Inputs and Intelligent Digital Scan Conversion with Vector Progressive Scanning (480p), and I have no clue what I just said!
> > > BTW, I stretch 4:3 when watching TV. The 40H80 and other Toshiba Theatre Wide's have a few widescreen settings for 4:3 TV. The picture is slightly distorted, but I don't really notice it. Does the 55H70 have that feature?
Yes, I've witnessed that one. In fact, I saw a 16:9 unit stretch from 4:3 to 16:9 and the 4:3 unit stretch from 16:9 to 4:3. I suppose I'd rather see fat people than skinny people. It would make me feel better about my weight!
Mick
***This I don't know. I understand what an anamorphic lens is but do not know how anamorphic applies to DVD. I'm assuming its how a DVD unit plays back a film shot using an anamorphic lens? How is unsqueezing done? Unsqueezed to fill up the 16:9 screen I assume? Are you asking if an anamorphic picture is unsqueezed to fill a 4:3 picture? Won't this cause distortion? Why not just watch an anamorphic picture with the black horizontal bars on a 4:3?***Anamorphic DVDs (most are anamorphic releases these days) have increased vertical resolution (when your set can unsqueeze them). The increase in picture quality is more than just noticeable. This is a must have feature, and if I were you, I wouldn't even consider a set that doesn't have this feature.
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 ]
