| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
 Posted: 11/23/09 7:39 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| I don't know, pilight. We spent extra for a top of the line Sony. XBR, I think. The MOST amazing picture in the entire store. But I wouldn't buy a Sony again. Wasn't long before the picture started going green. Find out there's a known problem and a class action law suit SETTLED. I got the part replaced but there's STILL a green tinge and now I'm thinking I need to get some deal going on the law suit settlement that stipulates a replacement, if I remember correctly. My sister bought an el-cheapo HD TV, I forget the brand, when I looked at her picture I was drooling. I think quality control is a problem with electronics like these TVs no matter what the brand is. |
Sony sucks.
You should never purchase based on what it looks like in the store. All that tells you is which one pays the salespeople the best commission.
Even the cheap ones look good at first. What does it look like a year down the road? |
Well who's making durable HDTVs? That's the first question. It shouldn't be a freaking mystery._________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/23/09 7:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| gpark33 wrote: |
Once they hit consumer grade, they are all somewhat similar. The professional grade leader (in my experience) is Samsung. Also, some people will say this doesn't matter b/c there isn't enough true hi-def content to support it yet, but if you are looking for longevity, I would go with 1080 rather than opting for the cheaper 720 right now. P is better than i but with either, I would wait for a deal on 1080.
Samsung, 1080. More expensive but it should have a longer, higher quality life span. |
My XBR is a hybrid between LCD and DLP. Totally 1080p and there's been 1080p content here in LA for all of the three years I've had this TV. First year it was UNREAL. Then everything turned green.  _________________ Every woman who has ever been presented with a career/sex quid pro quo in the entertainment industry should come forward and simply say, “Me, too.” - jammer The New York Times 10/10/17 |
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 67013
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/23/09 9:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I'll agree with going with 1080. It's the way things are going. A few years ago someone on another board was pushing 1080p (as against 1080i), and then it probably didn't make a difference, but things are moving in that direction because of Blu-Ray. I think that CBS, NBC, HBO and Discovery use 1080i now (and probably others, too).
|
|
Realcomplicated
Joined: 11 Jun 2009
Posts: 4281
Location: Houston, Texas
Back to top |
|
Linzin
Joined: 19 May 2007
Posts: 3046
Back to top |
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21950
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/23/09 11:22 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Linzin wrote: |
| (I don't really see a huge difference between 720p and 1080p, but then again, I'm not an expert on these things.) |
Before people spend extra on the full HD resolution, there are a couple of things they need to evaluate.
1. How much of what they plan to watch is even broadcast in full DH (1080)?
2. Will they be able to see the difference anyway?
The second part is very much dependent on (1) the size of the tv screen and (2) how far away you sit from it.
If the screen isn't particularly big, or your viewing position is not particularly close to it, then your eye won't be able to see the extra resolution anyway, even if your screen is delivering it.
If you google it, you will find dozens of screen size calculators available on the internet. They may not all agree 100% with each other, but I would strongly suggest trying a few to see what they come up with for your preferred screen size and viewing distance.
I will concur with the people nominating Samsung as a good brand of display. From my recent comparison experiences they are very close to Panasonic as the best value for money plasma screen, and they are right up there with Sharp as the best value for money LCD screen. (Depending on size of screen. For large ones they are probably tops)
I would just recommend steering clear of their current generation of "LED" LCD screens, as they cost more than their standard LCDs, and IMO give an inferior picture.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
|
|
Slovydal
Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 12205
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Back to top |
|
gpark33
Joined: 17 Oct 2005
Posts: 5116
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 12:37 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Luuuc wrote: |
1. How much of what they plan to watch is even broadcast in full DH (1080)?
2. Will they be able to see the difference anyway?
|
This is why I mentioned longevity in my post above. Right now, there's not a big difference. As networks continue to create content in higher resolutions, the gap will widen. How big it actually gets is the question.
If you have a 720 screen sitting alone in your living room, it's still going to look good.
Put your 720 next to a 1080 (which will never happen) and it will look like crap.
Watch your 720 then go to someone's house who has 1080 and you might question why you can't get that quality.
_________________
The teacher and the student.
|
|
CourtsideTix
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 4565
Location: Washington, DC
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 1:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| gpark33 wrote: |
If you have a 720 screen sitting alone in your living room, it's still going to look good.
Put your 720 next to a 1080 (which will never happen) and it will look like crap.
|
If the screens are smaller than about 40", you won't see the difference between 720 and 1080, and you shouldn't pay for it.
|
|
jammerbirdi
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 21046
Back to top |
|
vanyogan
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 9673
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 4:37 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Slovydal wrote: |
Consumer reports is the way to go.
Read up on what TV lasts the longest/is least likely to need repairs.
I used that info ten years ago when I bought my 32" Toshiba. It still works like new.
One day I'll upgrade to the 21st century, but that's not a priority right now.  |
My 32" Hitachi still works, [14 years old] great picture. I can't see all that well anyway! 
I had to replace my AVR bought at the same time, the replacement was basically the modern version of my old one, only a lot better sound, and it cost 33% less.
I can wait until my Hitachi dies...
The first thing I want to buy when I get some extra money is about a 500 disc CD/DVD player.
My 300 disc CD player tanked several months ago. I know everyone thinks these are obsolete. But all my CD's are in a spreadsheet by artist, genre, disc #, album title, and track title. I have it all in a three ring binder. I loved just sitting with my remote thumbing through my song book, listening to music. |
|
Slovydal
Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 12205
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 5:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| vanyogan wrote: |
My 300 disc CD player tanked several months ago. I know everyone thinks these are obsolete. But all my CD's are in a spreadsheet by artist, genre, disc #, album title, and track title. I have it all in a three ring binder. I loved just sitting with my remote thumbing through my song book, listening to music. |
I have an antique radio w/ a jack in the back to plug in a phonograph.
I've plugged a discman into it and played Jazz CD's (Miles Davis, John Coltrane) through it. Amazing sound. Brings the digital sound back to anolog - there's nothing quite like tubes...
|
|
beknighted
Joined: 11 Nov 2004
Posts: 11050
Location: Lost in D.C.
Back to top |
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21950
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 5:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
| I don't know... but... in LA electronic stores I think you might be hard pressed to find a big TV that isn't 1080p. |
The vast majority of new sets are indeed full HD (1080), and that is precisely the reason that you can get 720s so cheap at the moment. They are a dying breed.
They are still quite adequate for a lot of people though, for the reasons I mentioned earlier. There's no point paying for all those extra pixels if you can't see them.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
|
|
sambista
Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 16951
Location: way station of life
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 6:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| beknighted wrote: |
| This, seriously, is excellent advice, and you can apply it to pretty much any significant purchase - buy the best you can afford and you'll need to buy new things less often. It works for cars, clothes, furniture, you name it. |
true, but it's not always cut and dried with rapidly changing technology. it's definitely worth thinking through to make an informed choice, based on personal affordability and circumstances.
in the 720 vs. 1080 debate, it's not like 720 will be null and void; and, as someone said, the difference might be negligible for some people. as discerning as i am about music, i honestly can't tell that i'm suffering from any serious audio loss when i play my mp3s through the stereo via itunes instead of playing the actual cd. how many people choose to rip their music at the highest setting because it's the best available choice? no, most people choose something lower, more reasonable because who can afford to store all those huge music files? to me, you could almost say that 720 is to mp3s what 1080 is to uncompressed music files. most people can live with mp3s. if everyone could afford 1080, there'd be no discussion.
seems to me if real is asking about a tv on sale with brand name she's never heard of, her highest priority isn't getting top of the line. so now the considerations need to be what she can get that will be a value and not be money thrown away a year or so from now. at the rate technology is changing, that takes some research and thought.
sometimes you don't want to spend too much money for the "best" because you don't know if that technology will survive. people spent too much money upgrading their phones to 2.4ghz cordless, only to discover it was being trampled by everything else at that frequency. within a short time, they had to upgrade to 5.8ghz. who knows what may come along quickly after 1080 that might make you wonder why you spent what you did on it in the first place? already led tvs are so thin they make your new lcd look like a projection tv.
a lot of people spent top dollar for a big, honkin laptop that weighs so much it shouldn't even be called a "laptop." netbooks have arrived, and it has changed the perspective. i like my roku box because it allows me to stream movies from the internet. the box was only $99. if it had been a dime more, i wouldn't have been so eager because i know the roku box is a short-lived investment.
this particular lcd tv question is unique because the switch to digital tv has forced nearly everyone to weigh their choices.
all that to say, there's nothing wrong with thinking long and hard about it and knowing, as close as possible, what value your purchase will have down the road.
_________________
no justice, no peace.
|
|
Slovydal
Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 12205
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 6:37 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| sambista wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| This, seriously, is excellent advice, and you can apply it to pretty much any significant purchase - buy the best you can afford and you'll need to buy new things less often. It works for cars, clothes, furniture, you name it. |
true, but it's not always cut and dried with rapidly changing technology. it's definitely worth thinking through to make an informed choice, based on personal affordability and circumstances. |
I agree.
I was once advised by a computer tech to buy leaning edge - not leading edge.
Last year's model - will be new enough, while old enough to know if there are problems that would make you want to avoid it.
|
|
vanyogan
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 9673
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 7:46 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Slovydal wrote: |
| sambista wrote: |
| beknighted wrote: |
| This, seriously, is excellent advice, and you can apply it to pretty much any significant purchase - buy the best you can afford and you'll need to buy new things less often. It works for cars, clothes, furniture, you name it. |
true, but it's not always cut and dried with rapidly changing technology. it's definitely worth thinking through to make an informed choice, based on personal affordability and circumstances. |
I agree.
I was once advised by a computer tech to buy leaning edge - not leading edge.
Last year's model - will be new enough, while old enough to know if there are problems that would make you want to avoid it. |
On Computers I bought my first in about 1991t, a dos unit that was obsoleted in terms of what I needed to work at home with in about a year, I've since bought two more desktops, all obsolete, and two laptops, one about obsolete. Computers are a different animal. Now a days I focus on RAM rather than processing speed or operating system. If I didn't have to use my computer for work sometimes I be a MAC guy. Maybe i'll look into it next time, but it has not always been an option.
The way my system is setup, a TV is just a monitor. I don't have a cable box, my stuff runs through a DVR as tuner, to an AVR amplifyer, but pretty much everything goes through the AVR, so I'm not concerned with inputs outputs on the TV. My AVR is more than adequate. I think it can take about 12 different components simultaneously (not sure) and at least eight speakers, I have seven with an opening for a sub woofer. With home entertainment I'm more into sound than picture.
I think the range of purchase depends on individual expectation. My own personal expectation is quality, durability without the bells and whistles.
As a professional supply chain guy, who the last few years has been plug and play, whatever you want. That is the point, what I do is identify the expectation of the client and exceed that expectation at a reasonable cost. That is IMO what we do or should do as consumers.
I rarely have ever even programmed to record. If I want to record something I'm usually watching, I press record. My cell phone is a freebie.
I have a personal copy of Office 07, I know just enough to conclude I don't really know crap, but I do know what it can do if I want to do it.
I guess what I'm saying is just buy the way you always have and don't worry about it. Cognitive dissonance is a condition best avoided IMO. |
|
Linzin
Joined: 19 May 2007
Posts: 3046
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 8:08 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jammerbirdi wrote: |
I don't know... but... in LA electronic stores I think you might be hard pressed to find a big TV that isn't 1080p. To me this is a strange 2004 kind of conversation. But maybe I'm wrong and they're still selling 720 TVs but are you all sure this is still even part of the decision. And my philosophy is entirely different than that of some here. I don't believe in "deciding" your usage and whether you're really going to see the difference and how much actual content is out there yet, etc. If I'm shucking out near or over a thousand dollars for the one freaking television in my place, I'm going for the most advanced high quality technology standards. I bought a TV that does 1080. Before I got the Direct TV HD service I put an antenna on the roof and aimed it at the tower farm on Mt Wilson. I got 98% signal strength and like three of the local channels were already in 1080. And there was a difference between that and the HD stations that were still broadcasting HD in 720. Of course, not many stations at all were broadcasting in HD for their entire day. KCBS wasn't. KNBC wasn't. You had to tune if for the 1080 HD stuff like the Tonight Show or prime time content. Anyway. That was probably 3-4 years ago now and that's 1080.
All this thinking people.  Agonizing over resolutions. I've been caught up in that shit so many times. Go for the most advanced technology that you can afford. If you don't get the latest then it should be because you can't afford it and God knows I've been there, too. But not because you freaking FIGURED IT ALL OUT  that you don't really need it. |
For one thing, this post started off as "Is this $300 TV worth it?" so 40+ inch 1080p TVs aren't even in the equation.
But how much is "what you can afford"? I could afford to buy a thousand dollar TV if I cut back on practically everything else in my life, but why should I when I would be perfectly happy with a $400 TV? Maybe some people don't think the difference between 720 and 1080 is big enough that you need to pay the extra cash. (And yes, 720p televisions are still sold, a LOT of them, because people don't always care if they have top of the line tech as much as whether or not they can save 100 bucks.) I personally don't mind 720p at all.
Mp3 to CD is an excellent comparison. Some people will notice the difference and think mp3s are horrible and are people who listen to them fucking DEAF? Most people won't notice a difference at all, or if they do, it's not going to bother them.
I mean, some people only want the best stuff, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm not saying your philosophy doesn't work for you, but you can't just throw it out there as a one-size-fits-all, because not all people share that enthusiasm for the best.
Also, things like cars or furniture, which you can use for 10, 15 years, no problem, are not comparable to electronics. Ask the people who bought Sony Beta tape players instead of VCRs because Beta tapes were higher quality. And a $1500 laptop is still going to be shitty in two years time, just maybe not AS shitty as a $600 laptop, and even the $600 laptop can last three or four years if you treat it right. And because in the electronics market, it's not just about how well previous tech works but also the shiny OOH, WANT factor of new tech (like, what ACTUAL huge advantage does a touch screen on your phone get you? Nothing, it's just cool, and that's why people want it, not because their old cellphones don't work), getting the cutting edge technology isn't necessarily any more future proof than getting something slightly cheaper.
_________________
"This is serious. You gotta look at me like, you know, Nancy Lieberman."
-Sue Bird
|
|
scullyfu
Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 8864
Location: Niagara Falls
Back to top |
|
vanyogan
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 9673
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/24/09 8:25 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| scullyfu wrote: |
there is a difference in the refresh rate, especially if you're wanting to watch sports, 60hz is blurry compared to 120hz. it all depends on what you're going to use the set for and what you want to spend.
i would advise anyone in search of a tv to have the model you're contemplating and then googling it. there are sites that will come up where they will show you a number of online vendors and the prices they're selling the item for.
for instance, the samsung ln40b650 is the set i've been waiting for the price to drop on for over a year. yes, a year! this is a *want* purchase, not a *need* purchase. 
anyway, i just found it for under $1000 with no tax and free shipping. i'll have to wait for 3 or 4 weeks, but hey, i've waited a year, what's another 3 or 4 weeks?
google is your friend. |
Working at a gas liquids plant a few years back I was asked to buy a replacement muffler for a big ass engine, well not too big it was one of two fire water pumps. This thing was bought in 1960 or something and the and we wanted it to match the original specs.
Ended up goggling the part number and came up with a pdf drawing file. Bought that sucker... exact replacement. |
|
sambista
Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 16951
Location: way station of life
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/26/09 8:32 am ::: |
Reply |
|
real, here are two deals worth checking out:
sixth avenue electronics, where i bought my lcd tv online, is selling a Panasonic Viera TC-L32X1 32" 720p X1 Series for $399. get it for $379 using coupon code AFL5.
http://www.6ave.com/shop/Product.aspx?sku=PANTCL32X1
i thought i saw a kmart commercial on tv last night for a sony 32" lcd for $379, too. that price is confirmed here, but you better believe there'll be a line for it.
7ele tech news
for any deals you see, you'll want to check the year it was manufactured (which could affect advancements, such as viewing angle) and number of ports for component equipment.
i still think you'll see the best deals after xmas and before the super bowl.
_________________
no justice, no peace.
|
|
scullyfu
Joined: 01 Jan 2006
Posts: 8864
Location: Niagara Falls
Back to top |
| Posted: 11/26/09 10:16 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| lots of online retailers (and even some with b&m's) are starting their black friday sales now. lots of tv's on sale, too! check out best buy, target and amazon for some great deals (if its what you want, that is).
_________________
i'll always bleed Storm green.
|
|
|
|
and yeah, this is another one I forget myself now and then.