Ot: Lcd Tv

[hypnos]

Our main television is kaput. So, as much as it kills me, it is time to buy another. Good excuse to step-up to HDTV. I've ruled out plasma because the noticable glare off the glass screen will drive me to drink, even more. For my main living area, LCD seems the best choice. Looking for something around 40". What should I get? Opinions, please.

Thanks. Jeff

[old_school]

We put a 42" Sharp Aquos in the bar last year after a plama died. The set is on some 14+ hours/day and the remote gets more than its share of abuse. So far so good ...

[saab2000]

My brother and I did a lot of research on this. The king is still the king. Sony makes a good TV. They ain't cheap, but they are very, very good.

[dave thompson]

Building on what old_school said, the Sharp Aquos has a fantastic picture and offers probably the most bang for the buck.

[csm]

Samsung. supposedly made in the same s korea factory as the sony units but are a couple hundred less.
I am watching now. sopranos replays of the last season. episode 1.
great stuff.

[djg21]

Our main television is kaput. So, as much as it kills me, it is time to buy another. Good excuse to step-up to HDTV. I've ruled out plasma because the noticable glare off the glass screen will drive me to drink, even more. For my main living area, LCD seems the best choice. Looking for something around 40". What should I get? Opinions, please.

Thanks. Jeff

Sony Bravia XBR4. Skip the XBR5. It's the same TV with a different bezel and some other uneccesary stuff for more $$$.

[pdxmech13]

I bought a Samsung shortly after someone posted stuff about HD on this forum. Ended up with a 40" even though I intended getting a 32" (girl friends can be sweet). We had a problem with the casing on the top of our unit and Samsung ordered a part and had a technician come by to fix it. Needless to say it was the wrong part and after another 2 weeks Samsung asked if it would be ok to send a new TV. We said sure and the one that arrived was an upgrade and the newest model that was going to be released in a few month's. Great customer service and so far so good. :banana:

[bigbill]

We have a 52" Samsung on the wall. The picture is incredible, especially on HD channels. I spent a while comparing the picture between Plasma and LCD and I really liked the LCD. With the new technology, there really isn't any difference in the life of the display.

[DarrenCT]

i've got a samsung 42" and its awesome. menu is easy to use and pictures is awesome

[MarleyMon]

If you are getting HD programming through satelite or cable (both heavily compressed)
you might consider a 720p set.
Save money & still great picture.
I like Sony, Sharp & Samsung - all look good.

[SoCalSteve]

Sony XBR...accept no substitute.

They are the very best, bar none.

I have a 32" Sony XBR LCD in my office, amazing picture.

Just sayin'

Steve

[Tobias]

Samsung, Sony, and Sharp all nice -- I prefer picture of newest Samsung.
Definetely 1080P -- you'll want it for for Blu-ray later on -- if within your budget.
Also nice if within budget is 120 HZ. Makes a difference for high-speed sports and fast action shots.

[benb]

I went from a Sony 27" regular TV to a Samsung 40" 1080p LCD last year.

There are 2 things that make me sometimes wish I had stuck with Sony...

1) My TV actually crashes like a computer.. requires unplugging it from the wall.. it's rare but it happens.. 3-4 times in a year?

2) After a year Samsung will start sending you the warranty extension forms.. my TV was $1800 before the coupons/deals. Samsung wants $250/yr for extending the warranty.. what does that say about their reliability?

However at the time I bought my TV there was one feature Samsung was killing Sony on.. VGA inputs so you can hook a computer up... and the price difference was pretty large..

Get a Blu-Ray player.. can't believe I waited so long..

[rbtmcardle]

Last September we bought this KDL-52XBR4 for the den and this KDL-40V3000 for the bedroom, looks like its been replaced by the 40W3000 but has the same processing system as the higher end XBR series for substantially less, not quite as many bells and whistles or fancy packaging but the same picture, did I mention the unbelievable picture

Oh and by the way, remember it will cost a couple of hundred more for the wall mount

[M.Sommers]

Bro, there are plasmas that have a built-in, anti-glare shield.

I've had a 43" Samsung DLP since 2003, great tv set. Viewing angles is a weak point for DLP.

My next set will be the Panasonic Plasma, 50" with anti-glare screen. Worth reading:

http://buyinghdtv.blogspot.com/2007/04/panasonics-anti-glare-plasma-gets-good.html

http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/panasonic-th-50px77u/4505-6482_7-32317316.html?tag=nl.e722

Editors' Note 04/17/2008: The rating on this review has been modified from 8.0 to 7.7 due to changes in the competitive marketplace.

"In the 50-something-inch screen size, plasma still holds a price advantage over LCD, although that advantage is shrinking every day. And as LCD TVs deliver improving picture quality and boast higher native resolutions, plasmas have to compete in other areas. One new picture-quality front is the screen itself--many newer plasmas, such as the Panasonic TH-50PX77U, incorporate antiglare coatings on their glass screens. The idea is to attenuate room reflections, an area where LCD has traditionally trounced plasma. The TH-50PX77U does a solid job of cutting down glare, and the majority of its other picture-quality characteristics, especially its deep black levels, outdo most offerings from the LCD camp. If you've been holding out on plasma because you have a bright room, sets such as the TH-50PX77U might help change your mind."

[Tobias]

Samsung wants $250/yr for extending the warranty.. what does that say about their reliability?That it's excellent? Is that what you are saying, or the opposite?
It's not like they are out to lose money by extending warranty on a bad set?
My guess is they expect it not to malfunction and most of the $250 is profit.

[whammo45]

That it's excellent? Is that what you are saying, or the opposite?
It's not like they are out to lose money by extending warranty on a bad set?
My guess is they expect it not to malfunction and most of the $250 is profit.



BING BING BING, we have a winner :banana:
(pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!)

RJC

[benb]

As I see it the less reliable a product is the more expensive the warranty is going to be, as the company has to cover all the replacements they give out.

To me $250/yr on an $1800 product is an extremely expensive warranty.

If the TVs had a 1-5% failure rate I bet that warranty would be $30/yr. When it's $250/yr it makes me suspect the failure rate is more like 30-40%.

If you buy a $30,000 car does the car manufacturer give you a 1 year warranty and then ask for $9,000/yr to extend the warranty? Would you buy that car?

Not that my TV has broken.. just food for thought.. see what the competitors charge for their warranties on LCD TVs.

Serotta's lifetime warranty doesn't cost extra cause no one would buy it since the frames never seem to crack without a crash.. get it?

[Richard]

FYI, This is the repair rate, in percent reported to Consumer Reports for the years 2004 through 2007 for LCD TVs. Maybe $250 would be worth it for Hitachi or Dell, but it would be virtually pure profit for the others.

Panasonic 2
Sony 3
Sharp 3
Samsung 3
Toshiba 3
JVC 3
Philips 4
Hitachi 9
Dell 11

[Tom]

We got a Sharp Aquos LCD a couple of years ago and it works fine. I understand that plasma has advantages, but heat production and electrical consumption are much more than the same size LCD or at least used to be.

Sony's picture was noticeably better but several thousand dollars better? The programming still sucks so what's the point? Other than undersea stuff, I see no reason.

[ERDR]

sony xbr4. sharp aquos 2nd
s.

[Tobias]

To me $250/yr on an $1800 product is an extremely expensive warranty.You are right Ben, it is too expensive -- but don't listen to me because I've never bought an extended warranty on anything. I view an extended warranty as a form of insurance were a middle man is going to make a profit; and if I can afford to be "sef-insured" and take the risk myself in the long long run I should come out ahead. Thus far it's worked out well.

With a 3 percent failure rate on a $1800 (retail) TV, you are right that it's way too expensive, but mostly because of their profit. Even if they sent everyone of those 3 percent (Richard's data above) a new set (their cost is likely less than $1000) in lieu of repairing them they'd be making out like a bandit. I'll continue to pass.

[benb]

I always pass on warrantys on electronic devices too, especially when they have no moving parts.

It's just Samsung is continuously sending me the letters about the warranty lately as my TV just went out of the 1-year warranty, and these are *so* expensive that I had to mention it.

[Tobias]

Warranty offers are annoying. I get them for cars too and toss them in the trash because in addition to not making financial sense for my needs I don’t want to be put in a position of having to collect from them without any leverage.

Having a legit factory auto warranty claim denied years ago was probably the most frustrating event I’ve ever gone through. The company refused to even listen making it impossible to reason with them and the only thing left was take them to court – which I wasn’t about to do due to the low cost (and they knew that).

I’ve never bought from them again and keep hoping they go out of business. I know it sounds harsh but they deserve it.


Back to TVs. Now if only they start making smaller 1080P sets.

[Tom]

On electronics, I'm not sure they're worth it. Usually they either fail immediately or work forever. Unless, of course, you leave it plugged in during a thunderstorm and your surge protector works about as well as can be expected. If I'm watching television and I hear thunder I take it as God's way of telling me I should be spending my time more productively. I unplug the thing. I unplug it if I leave town for a couple of days and nobody's going to be home. I also unplug the cable - we had the head of network engineering here complain that her second cable box fried in less than a couple of months. The super-duper surge protector her husband liberated from the phone company apparently didn't work so well on the coax interface.

[benb]

You always want to unplug these devices or have them off on a separate switch anyway..

They don't shut off. They just "sleep" and continue to draw power. So shut them off at the surge protector or unplug them for the planets sake when you go away and save some $$.

[zap]

Hands down, best display in a proper home theater room is the Pioneer Kuro series. Plasma, best colours, deepest blacks and of course, no motion issues. This is the model that bests the best crt.

Concerning lcd's, Samsung seems to be on a roll.

Now, how about uhdv :beer:

[Ken Robb]

Less than a year ago I bought a Vizio 42" from Costco. They offer great warrantys and a no-problem return policy if you don't like the product after using it at home for up to 3 months. The limiting factor on all shows thus far has been the source. We have Time-Warner HD cable and a non-Blueray DVD player.

At the time Costco had a coupon for $300 off this model so it was $500 less than the Aquos. They were side-by-side in the store with a common input and I couldn't say one was better than the other. I have no regrets about getting a ine 42" tv for less than $1000. Vizio was introduced to our market bat Costco but has since spread to other stores so I guess they are doing ok in general.

[Acotts]

I am considering getting an HDTV as well. But I will not pay for special programming. (I would not even have cable, but the TV is in the basement and does not recieve a signal, and it cost almost nothing when paired with my internet costs. )

I really just want it for my X-Box 360 and for movies. (I am currently using a 25 inch CRT form the 80's.)

So, are any of you running the HDTV on normal cable? It seems that some TV look terrible when showing non-HD stuff on them, while others look much better.

Any suggestions?

[RPS]

So, are any of you running the HDTV on normal cable? It seems that some TV look terrible when showing non-HD stuff on them, while others look much better.

Any suggestions?I watch an older HDTV on a regular cable signal and it’s OK, but it pales by comparison to when viewed with HD antenna signal. Even a standard DVD is much better than my standard-definition cable signal.

If you live near a major city I recommend you look into an antenna for the major networks.

[hypnos]

Okay.... I ordered a Samsung 40" LCD (LN40A650). Now it is time to purge some electronics from the house. This weekend the 15 year old 32" TV, the 22 yr old 21" TV, and a 5 yr old CRT computer monitor all get taken to the recycle center. Thanks for all your opinions and information.

Jeff

[dookie]

y'all get your bikes fit, right?

whatever it is that you're watching (mine is an Optoma projector @ 106"), i suggest you get it calibrated. even a basic, self-help calibration will yield significant improvements. DVDs like 'Digital Video Essentials' (not the only one) will help you dial in both picture and sound.

well worth it, i promise!

[hypnos]

dookie,

Thank you for the tip.

Jeff