2. home-theater
  3. 1105480105

An audiophile who know NOTHING about TV

Well, I've been thinking of buying a new TV and holy crap, is this one confusing subject! First, what technology should I get: Plasma, DLP, LCD, etc. 16:9, 1080. I don't know what any of this stuff means. The funny thing is that i'm scanning consumer reports and others like it to see what is the "best" LOL. I don't think I found my SME 30 or Aesthetix IO there! I would be aghast at anyone who told me they were buying a high end piece of audio equipment like that, but here I was doing the same thing. Looking to see which had the best specs. I stopped by a best buy today and actually found someone who seemed to know what he was talking about. He asked the right questions (from what I read): What do you watch, how far do you sit, etc. I answered his questions. Not interested in surround sound at all. Mostly watch broadcast TV and lots of sports (I use dish network as my source), sit about 10 feet from the screen (need to measure, i'm just guessing), watch an occasional DVD.

So, we're moving along and he seemd to be steering me towards DLP (Samsung) but there was a Pioneer Plasma that looked great. Then he mentions that "regular" TV broadcasts look terrible!!?? You won't be able to use the whole screen? What the hell, I can't have that. Isn't most TV non High-Def? Why would you buy Plasma/DLP if this is the case? I know we are headed to high-def, but unless i'm missing something I would think I should wait before I buy. I guess I can go RP CRT but isn't that "old" technology? That's funny, coming from a guy who listens to records and has an all tube-based system LOL.

I just want the best picture and biggest picture that makes sense in my room.

Oh, the room has a lot of natural light during the day, but most watching is done at night.
cte500
mrfastguy250aol
65 posts
 
This all really depends on your budget and if you want to do light control in your room.
By far the best quality and bang for your proverbial "buck"
would be a CRT based projector, however most dealers shy away from them as they are a touch harder to set up than other types of projectors, i really dont like RPTV's as they are way too room intrusive, but if thats not your case then they have a great picture. I prefer these methods simply because they use lines of resolution rather than pixelation which personally i do not like, altho it is more behaved in hi def formats.
If youre watching mostly regular TV broadcasts you may want 4:3 aspect ratio but as you probably see in stores and forums most everything now is 16:9 which i personally prefer.
Feel free to ask me any more questions you may have and good luck!
brianmgrarcom
1,317 posts
 
You described me a month or so ago. After a trip or two my head was spinning, even after the purchase; I learned as much after as before.

Regular (SD) TV is broadcast in 4:3 aspect ratio, newer HD TV's have 16:9 aspect ratio screens, but will play in 4:3 if you don't have HD or (rather) that is the signal it is sent. If you have no plans of using HD any time soon take this into account because your big screen TV, say 52", will not be 52" in non-HD, more like 40"ish, there is a calculation but I do not remember.

The future is HD but you have to decide that. You could pick up a tube based TV "relatively" cheap and have a great picture, for SD.

I purchased a DLP TV (Mitsubishi WD-52725), one my salesman highly recommended. Some of the new TV types, like plasma, have "burn-in" issues when watching in 4:3 mode for extended periods, DLP does not.

Once I had a big TV it didn't take me long to want to experience it all, so this led to further expense of a HD (DishNetwork) receiver and a antenna for local HD channels. Watching TV in HD is quite an experience! Like you I am not much into video, but I do enjoy HD and look forward to more channels.

Remember this, a bigger screen will show the imperfections that you don't notice on the smaller screens you are used to. Tube TV's are still king as far as picture quality but you are limited on size (and quality), these TV's are going by the wayside being replaced with the newer technologies. Furthermore, quality tube TV's are getting rare.

Either buy with HD in mind or purchase a good tube TV for the time being.
elgordo
530 posts
 
Buy a copy of "HDTV For Dummies" for about $9.00 on ebay. Well worth it. I got mine from A1 Books. Good reading and it will answer all of your questions.
brianmgrarcom
1,317 posts
 
...I would like to further add, after reading some of the other replies, that it seems some replies would scare you away from the newer TV technologies. My DLP TV does blacks great, I have heard some older ones do not; colors are also great, better than any TV in my house; my new HD receiver allows me to wire it to my TV via componant and picture quality is very very good on regular TV, it is far from "it sucks", I dare say it is better than the average home (cheap TV). But as I said above, tube is still the best, but HD is a whole new experience.

Sony makes a great tube HD TV that I would of purchased because of it's high rating in picture quality but it had two drawbacks, 1) it only came in 34" (or 32", I forget) and in 4:3 mode the picture would only be 27" and 2) it had burn-in issues if left in 4:3 mode for long periods. In hinsight I am glad I didn't purchase it now. Now that I have my TV and the new receiver I am very pleased with my purchase. I much prefer the large picture of regular TV (4:3) mode to a smaller picture. No regrets here, I am very pleased; I would make the same purchase again.

A side note, I was very unhappy the first two weeks, until I removed the coax and replaced it with RCA's. Like I say, I didn't know much above TV (video). Wiring via coax is the worst, it was jaw dropping swtitching to RCA's. (My first DishNetwork receiver only had coax and RCA, no componant or HDMI.)
reubent
6,973 posts
 
I was in a similar position a while back and after studying all of the options, I chose a 42" Panasonic EDTV plasma.

Interestingly, there is an ongoing debate on AVSforum concerning the EDTV (enhanced definition) Plasma TV vs. HDTV (hi-def) Plasma. Many folks have come to the conclusion that the advantage of the HDTVs higher resolution disappeared once you had a viewing distance of more than 8 feet.

In my smallish audio/video/office/workout cave, I had a preferred furniture arrangement that only allowed 8 ft viewing distance (max) and that's with the plasma hanging on the wall. For me, getting the extra 18-22" distance was the most compelling reason for the plasma panel. Additionally, the Pannys have an SD tuner, HDTV tuner, QAM tuner (digital cable) and cablecard tuner built into the set. I also like the fact that it will work in a wide range of ambient lighting conditions, unlike some of the other choice. Add in the coolness factor and the fact that I got it for $2400 and I'm a happy camper.

There is the SD picture quality issue. I have Time Warner Cable with an HD digital cable box. The HD broadcast look spectacular and fill the 16X9 screen. The SD program material is good, but not as good as a great CRT TV. I generally watch the SD programming in a strecthed mode to fill the screen. It was a bit odd at first, but I got used to it in a couple of days.

BTW, I saved about $1800-2000 by buying the EDTV version vs. the HDTV version. I'm perfectly happy with the TV and I will likely move it into a bedroom or office once a high quality HDTV 42" plasma reaches my pricepoint.

Enjoy,

TIC
(Tom In Cincinnati)
More to discover