Video Asylum

Posted by Dan G. on April 13, 2001 at 10:39:09

In Reply to: I knew you'd say that... :-) posted by Mick on April 12, 2001 at 20:05:27:

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