Choosing a new TV ~discuss~

Richie-from-the-Boro

Best HDTV - a compendium .. .. .. is it LCD / PLASMA ?

Nowt much between them. 99% of people are going to get Plasma or LCD

- most new TV's are over 42" so most people should buy Plasma not LCD
- most makers measure contrast differently from each other, so the contrast argument is irrelevant
- most makers measure power consumption differently, hence the debate on which uses more leccy
- viewing angle, LCD's have more issues than plasmas
- MTBF both Plasma and LCD last about the same time
- Plasma's are cheaper that LCD's
- LCD's were originally intended for static display not moving video, hence lower refresh rates
- LCD TVs don't suffer burn-in, but can still suffer from a stuck pixel hence the ' dead pixel policy '
- Plasma's can suffer from ' burn in ' if left for extended periods on a static image such as a menu
- LCD's weigh half a Plasma average, they use a little less power, and run cooler than a Plasma
- Go to Curry's in the daytime you will prefer the LCD / Curry's in the nightime you will prefer the Plasma
- most [ but not all ] set's you see in the sheds are pre-set to ' vibrant ' ? wanna sell it - dress it in it's best frock !
- a 1080p panel is best, avoid 1080i panels scaling, pixel mapping, and inter / de-interlacing will reduce 720p to less than 720p
- many top end plasma's including the panny's do not deal with SD [ 576i ] very well and that’s the Freeview / Freesat SD broadcast point
- most people would not begin to understand D65 imaging standards, let alone be able to calibrate them

Clarification for those who need it - HDTV [#1] / HD Ready [#2] / HD Compatible [#3]

clarification for the above [ weegie.geek ] will, after editing be inserted here

A - decide how much £spend, select 4 or 5 within the budget, read as many reviews / come to this and other forum's for info
B - go to a megga store (day) and compare, try to see the same sets dimly lit and you may well change your mind
C - narrow your choice to two and make your decision, but remember D & E below
D - we all have different preferences / colour / brightness / sun facing TV position / vision impairment / shape of the room / distance from the set
E - the human eye [ the ones in your head ] should make the final decision, not forum's / price / specifications etc

10 years after flat screens came out only half the UK has one, even if 3DTV does take off, it won’t become commonplace in the living room for perhaps the same or longer time span, if your a drug dealer buy three and give yourself a ' bling ' moment. OLED the plastic pixel display, has even less chance, if any of ever being seen in a recession. LED's are just LCD with a different type of backlight, but the same LED problems [ though they are showing a year on year improvement ] of poor black levels, blurry motion depiction, and narrow viewing angles.

Last comment

Price point selling of mid range [ that's the one we all buy - even though we tell ourselves we bought top~0~the~range ] TV's is aggressive, the component parts of all sets in this range means makers now have a predisposition to use cheap[er] internals and are increasingly liable to fail, over often nothing more than a 20p capacitor. Try then to get as long a warranty as you can afford, but get a copy and read the small print before you sign up to it, most have more ' cop out's ' than a politician's expense sheet.

Don't rush it, make your mind up - there's nowt much between them. 99% of people are going to get Plasma or LCD

~discuss~

edit 4 later - clarification for [ #35 Hammyman 27-06-2010, 10:53 PM ] this after editing be inserted somewhere - CRT issue:

CRTs always did and will continue to produce the best outcome from an SD feed. Plasma however seems to be the best alternative.

Screen size has a huge influence on output, two identical same brand / same tech / same input signal sets will produce a different outcome. A 21" will always look better than a 42" because the artefacts become more obviously twice the size, this is especially the case in SD because the HD output makes inequalities in the source signal input more obvious as opposed to the blurred out bit on SD CRTs.

CRTs operate interlaced @ 576i as does HDTV @ 1080i but Plasmas and LCDs work at the progressive level this gives a much better picture but introduces other issues an interlaced input feed that needs to be de interlaced can of its very self introduce unwelcome artefacts when scaling to the native 1080p. HD ready TVs as opposed to HDTVs often produce a better outcome for SD only feeds because there is less scaling to do.

Quality & bit rate, the feed issue, CRTs were designed for SD. Plasma and LCD design intention was for HD so whist SD can be accommodated [ can-we-do-it-yes-we-can] on large LCDs and Plasmas it was never a research and development requirement to make SD as good as HD, only that, it was capable of producing an acceptable picture !

Viewing distance on Plasma LCDs, same screen, same eyes, different distance. HD looks good both ways and even when close up. With SD however you would have to move away from the screen to produce better results.

weegie.geek

Ah, you started a new thread with it. I'll post my reply here too then.

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- most new TV's are over 42" so most people should buy Plasma not LCD

Eh? Plenty of people are buying screens under 42".

- most makers measure contrast differently from each other, so the contrast argument is irrelevant

Indeed, it'd be good to have a standard scale, but transparency isn't really in their interest.

- most makers measure power consumption differently, hence the debate on which uses more leccy

Check reviews, these tend to have real-world figures.

- Plasma's are cheaper that LCD's

Well it's difficult to measure like-for-like, but this is untrue, surely? I've not seen many budget plasmas, and a quick look gives LCDs of equal size and spec to Plasmas at maybe 10-20% less. It was hardly a large sample, but Plasmas don't seem to be cheaper.

- Plasma's can suffer from ' burn in ' if left for extended periods on a static image such as a menu

Have they still not fixed that?

- LCD's weigh half a Plasma average, they use a little less power, and run cooler than a Plasma

I was always under the impression that they use quite a lot less, especially the newer LED-lit ones.

Clarification for those who need it - HDTV

[#1] / HD Ready [#2] / HD Compatible [#3]

#1 can display HD images via various external & internal sources, and does have an embedded HD tuner / TV ariel HD
#2 can display HD images via various external sources, does not have an embedded HD tuner
#3 does not have a HD panel, but can accept a HD signal from audio / video in

This whole section is nonsense, sorry.

A - decide how much £spend, select 4 or 5 within the budget, read as many reviews / come to this and other forum's for info

Reviews are paramount, but stick to respected sites. Some are clearly less independent than others.

aliEnRIK

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- most new TV's are over 42" so most people should buy Plasma not LCD

Theres quite a few very good 46" and even 52" LCD screens. After that id definitely be buying a plasma

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- most makers measure contrast differently from each other, so the contrast argument is irrelevant

Even if there was a set standard, all it means is the difference between black and white is greater the higher the contrast figure. The colour is still in 8bit and so you still get the EXACT same number of colours.

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- most makers measure power consumption differently, hence the debate on which uses more leccy

Agreed. But sites like 'hdtvtest' measure them all equally. LCDs measure the same usage no matter whats onscreen. But Plasmas can vary greatly froma pure black screen to a pure white screen. Generally speaking though, the latest LCDs use far less power than the latest Plasma screens

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- LCD's were originally intended for static display not moving video, hence lower refresh rates

Not sure what your saying there. You mean higher 'pixel response times'? Plasmas and LCDs are pretty much ona par as far as 'refresh rates' are concerned. the Plasmas that advertise 600Hz are not actually refreshing the screen at 600Hz so its marketing BS.

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- Go to Curry's in the daytime you will prefer the LCD / Curry's in the nightime you will prefer the Plasma

Unfortunately, they never have them set correctly, but I understand where your coming from

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- most [ but not all ] set's you see in the sheds are pre-set to ' vibrant ' ? wanna sell it - dress it in it's best frock !

Yep. People are taken in by the 'bright in your face' screen. Its only over long periods of viewing do they realise it actually looks cr*p

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- many top end plasma's including the panny's do not deal with SD [ 576i ] very well and that’s the Freeview / Freesat SD broadcast point

No longer true. The latest Panas have very good scalers in them

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

- most people would not begin to understand D65 imaging standards, let alone be able to calibrate them

Very true.
For the basic user, they should switch off all the extra processing modes (Contrast enhance, DNR etc). Use a THX disc to calibrate contrast and brightness. Switch to 'cinema' mode and 'warm2' settings (generally speaking these are closest 'out of the box' settings, to the D65 standard)

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

the component parts of all sets in this range means they use cheap internals and often do fail over often a 2 quid capacitor.

Yep, just about every tv uses cheap components these days

Iconic

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

Price point selling of mid range [ that's the one we all buy - even though we tell ourselves we bought top~0~the~range ] TV's is aggressive, the component parts of all sets in this range means they use cheap internals and often do fail over often a 2 quid capacitor. Try then to get as long a warranty as you can afford, but get a copy and read the small print before you sign up to it, most have more ' cop out's ' than a politician's expense sheet.
~discuss~

I thought TV's were more reliable these days and most guarantees were not worth the money.

Is it worth paying £100 for a 5 year guarantee on a £400 set? John Lewis do them free and Richer Sounds charge 10%.

You should automatically get a free one year guarantee and you should be able to stretch this much longer if you quote 'fit for purpose' to the supplier. Mind you, most suppliers will try to stonewall you after a year.

Richie-from-the-Boro

Iconic wrote: »

I thought TV's were more reliable these days and most guarantees were not worth the money.

Is it worth paying £100 for a 5 year guarantee on a £400 set? John Lewis do them free and Richer Sounds charge 10%.

You should automatically get a free one year guarantee and you should be able to stretch this much longer if you quote 'fit for purpose' to the supplier. Mind you, most suppliers will try to stonewall you after a year.

If you had asked me the question at Easter I would have agreed with you. Indeed I spent at least a decade arguing the opposite.

- Most sets [ a guess based on 42" + ] purchased cost £700-900
- Extended 5 year warranties can be had for £150(-)
- The price point competition in the 40"+ area is driving down the quality of components used
- The % of sets breaking down from good manufacturers seems [ non-scientific ] to be increasing

So I agree that any extra money on extending a warranty on a sub £400 set is a waste of money, I am advocating that £10% spent on a five year extension cover for a set costing £800 to £1000 as a good idea because of the makers determined use of low tolerance cheaper electronic parts.

I recently [ it's somewhere on this forum ] had a good quality 42" 13 month old Sammy Plasma go bust, just out of warranty, because of a couple of 80 pence capacitors, the caps used had almost no tolerance whatsoever and were on the very edge of their capability when the set was designed / built.

I found that thousands or many tens of thousands worldwide had exactly the same problem Samsung denied, and continue to deny it was anything to do with them. Further trawling of the interweb identified that the ' cheap component mortality ' issue applies to other manufacturers and is not exclusive to Samsung. For this reason then I decided to revise my stubbornly held view that the warrantable option should be a serious consideration for sets costing £800+

Richie-from-the-Boro

weegie.geek wrote: »

Ah, you started a new thread with it. I'll post my reply here too then.


This whole section is nonsense, sorry. Don't be sorry weegie.geek .. .. .. criticism is welcome, can toy clarify then please !

Reviews are paramount, but stick to respected sites. Some are clearly less independent than others.

[#1] / HD Ready [#2] / HD Compatible [#3]

#1 can display HD images via various external & internal sources, and does have an embedded HD tuner / TV ariel HD
#2 can display HD images via various external sources, does not have an embedded HD tuner
#3 does not have a HD panel, but can accept a HD signal from audio / video in

This whole section is nonsense, sorry. Don't be sorry weegie.geek - criticism with clarification is welcome

I thought the HD compatible didn't have an actual HD panel but were able to accept a HD signal via / audio and video inputs / scart etc.

.. .. .. and that

HDTV & HD Ready were essentially the same thing but the HDTV has built in tuners [ SAT & Terra ] which makes HDTV the only one of the three that has the inbuilt ability to receive FTA / SAT without the need for any external input.

.. .. .. what's you take then ?

weegie.geek

None of the terms necessitate a built-in tuner.

HD Compatible = mostly used on cheaper projectors, older plasmas. Things with low resolution displays like 1024*1024 *, 800*600 etc. Anything that can't actually display 1280*720 as a minimum. HD *Compatible* because it has HDMI/displayport/component input and can accept and HD signal. It just downscales it to be able to display it.

HD Ready = Something that can display at least 1280*720 without being able to display 1080p. Basically anything that is between 1280*720 (so 720p) and 1920*1080 (so 1080p). Again these will downscale 1080p/i but not 720p.

FullHD = something that can display 1080p or above. If the panel can do 1920*1080 then it's FullHD. You won't tend to see resolutions above that in panels meant for TVs but there are some higher res panels meant for PC use that give 2650*1600 or above.

* Technically 1024*1024 is able to be labelled as HD Ready, since it has 720 or more vertical lines. To be able to use the HD Ready logo, that's all you need. A lot of people think that's pretty disingenuous. If I feed it 1280*720 then I want it to display each pixel, I don't want any scaling down at all. I know different displays have different pixel shapes, but the bottom line is that it's not able to display all 1280 horizontal lines.

Iconic

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

I recently [ it's somewhere on this forum ] had a good quality 42" 13 month old Sammy Plasma go bust, just out of warranty, because of a couple of 80 pence capacitors, the caps used had almost no tolerance whatsoever and were on the very edge of their capability when the set was designed / built.

If by 'just out of warranty' you mean 13-18 months you should have had no difficulty getting it repaired free using 'not fit for purpose' or local Trading Standards if the supplier does not agree.

I take your point about cheap parts though and I would now most probably get a 5 year guarantee for a tv over £600. I would try John Lewis first though as they give them free!

Richie-from-the-Boro

Iconic wrote: »

If by 'just out of warranty' you mean 13-18 months you should have had no difficulty getting it repaired free using 'not fit for purpose' or local Trading Standards if the supplier does not agree.

I take your point about cheap parts though and I would now most probably get a 5 year guarantee for a tv over £600. I would try John Lewis first though as they give them free!

- agreed on the John Lewis thing, they are one of the few companies that old retailers used to hold to - that of the ' spirit ' of retail shops. Trying to help a customer not just because they have to but because they want to give a good experience and earn customer loyalty by good prices and good after sales support.

aliEnRIK

John Lewis guarantee ~
Ive never used them myself, but reading on the net, MANY people have had problems when trying to claim

John_Gray

Richie

I'm sorry that I found your original post difficult to read because the pedant in me hates the use of LCD's instead of LCDs, when it is simply a plural!

Other examples: TV's, plasma's, set's, it's, forum's, LED's, cop out's and (eek!) Curry's! None of these should have an apostrophe in the context in which you use them.

(Fortunately the actual content was pretty good...!):beer: