Topic: Will buy an HD TV soon; Need advice

[TJ Spyke]

LCD's are generally considered the best, especially for video games. Plasma TV's have that burn-in problem with static images and that is a issue. Here is a good article on the debate (although: http://www.hdtvreviewlab.com/lcd-tv-vs-plasma

Also, don't shoo away less known brands, they often are just as good and at a cheaper price. I have a Westinghouse TV (Westinghouse is not a lesser brand, but they usually aren't mentioned when talking about TV's) and it is pretty good.

[bustin98]

LCDs have pretty much been choosen the winner by consumers, so all new advancements in tech is going to be focused on LCD. Plasma, while it may have greater potential, is dying a slow, quiet death.

LG, as far as reviews I've read, hasn't had any big black marks against it. Just compare pricing as I believe LG can be a bit more. So if a hook up can provide, I'd do some looking around on Amazon and Newegg. Stores like ABC Warehouse and hhgregg 'might' price match against the online stores, if you find the right salesman.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

DLPs run cooler, has no issues on refresh rate nor ghosting nor burning, isn't brittle, and weighs less, all at the cost being several inches thicker.  Generally priced with more screen-area-per-dollar over LCD and Plasma.

[UltimatePartyBear]

I haven't bothered to compare prices, so I don't know if these are Amazing Deals or not, but Amazon has some promo codes for some Samsung LCD HDTV sets.  The codes are good through May 15.  They offer free shipping on all of these.

Code SAMTV100 for $100 off:
Samsung LN46B550 46-Inch 1080p LCD HDTV with Red Touch of Color
Samsung LN40B650 40-Inch 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV with Red Touch of Color
Samsung LN52B550 52-Inch 1080p LCD HDTV with Red Touch of Color

Code SAMTV200 for $200 off:
Samsung LN40B750 40-Inch 1080p 240Hz LCD HDTV with Charcoal Grey Touch of Color
Samsung LN46B650 46-Inch 1080p 120Hz LCD HDTV with Red Touch of Color

Code SAMTV300 for $300 off:
Samsung LN46B750 46-Inch 1080p 240Hz LCD HDTV with Charcoal Grey Touch of Color
Samsung LN52B750 52-Inch 1080p 240Hz LCD HDTV with Charcoal Grey Touch of Color
Samsung LN55B650 55-Inch 1080p 120 Hz LCD HDTV with Red Touch of Color

[BranDonk Kong]

DLP is typically much cheaper than the same size TV in LCD or Plasma, despite having a brighter and more fluid picture, the catch - size, and terrible input lag. When I play Guitar Hero at my mom's house (61" 1080p Samsung DLP), I have to calibrate the A/V, and it ends up being something ridiculous like 40ms video and 60ms audio. On my TV (52" 1080p Samsung LCD), even if I *try* to calibrate it, it sets it to 0/0.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"and terrible input lag"

This hasn't been the case for several years, depending on the generation of the TV.  Pale's got a 61" Samsung DLP, and I've got the 56" version that debuted in 2007 (owned for just over a year).  We're both running in `Game Mode` and have no problems [visual lag] to speak of.

Edit:  All my audio is routed directly to my surround receiver.  I get no trouble from analog sources, but anything that's Dolby Digital over my optical cable gets lagged whenever the source is changed (changing channels from HD cable TV), so I have to refresh my receiver to correct it.

[UltimatePartyBear]

I find the Guitar Hero calibration pretty random.  The human element has a bigger impact than anything else.  Calibrating on my Samsung DLP (I think I have the 50" version of Pro's) sometimes comes out to 0 ms, sometimes to 50, sometimes to 11.  I ended up setting it to 20 or 25 or something manually because it felt a little better, but I suspect that's only because it's more forgiving in general.  Anyway, since the lag is caused by video processing and upscaling, the same thing will happen on any fixed pixel display, not just DLP, and only CRT is not fixed pixel to my knowledge.

[KnowsNothing]

DLP is a great technology, but it comes with its fair share of issues usually with the bulb or color wheel.  Both of my parents own Samsung DLPs (don't know which models specifically), and both have had bulbs burn out or color wheels malfunction...or both.  Luckily they were either covered by warranty or protection plan, but with no insurance a dead bulb can cost hundreds.  DLPs simply have a limited bulb lifespan, and for some that is an issue.  Furthermore, depending on your model and if you possess highly capable elven eyes, you may experience a "rainbow" effect where you can literally see the screen displaying the reds, blues, and greens in rotation.

Otherwise, thumbs up.

I have my own TV related question.  I'm thinking about purchasing an HDTV/Computer monitor combo thingy for my dorm next year...of course I'm not entirely sure yet since that might mean I'd have to upgrade my graphics card as well in order to support resolutions above 1680*1050 (which is about all my poor x1900 XT can really handle...on older games)....anyway, normally I'm pretty skeptical of screens that claim to make great monitors and televisions, but so far the Samsung t240HD (and the other related models) seem pretty nice.  I certainly wouldn't buy one at MSRP or anything, but every once in a while you can find the 24 inch model for around $250 which doesn't seem too bad...

Has anyone used one of these?  Or can anyone suggest a different product that fits my needs?  I'd like something with at least an HDTV tuner, DVI port, and component inputs...composite would be awesome as well, but that's damn near impossible to find.

[BranDonk Kong]

No, input lag is definitely an issue with DLPs, you just really won't notice it unless you're playing Guitar Hero or the likes. I refuse to use Game Mode (talking about my brother's Wii on my Mom's TV), because it's basically 480i with high contrast (it reduces the resolution in order to process the image faster), at least on this model, so I try to make up for it by calibrating. He only has composite cables, using component 480p might have less lag. Call of Duty on the 360 looks absolutely beautiful on it, however.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"using component 480p might have less lag"

Mother's Day gift?

[vudu]

I need help.  Everything I've heard from friends, family members, you guys, etc. tells me that LCD is the way to go.  But everything I've read online indicates to me that I'd be better off with a Plasma display (better contrast ratio, better color saturation, deeper blacks, wider viewing angle, cheaper for an ~46" display, etc.).  What am I missing?

LCDs have pretty much been choosen the winner by consumers, so all new advancements in tech is going to be focused on LCD. Plasma, while it may have greater potential, is dying a slow, quiet death.

This is fantastic, but completely unhelpful.    I'm looking for a TV now.  I don't care about which technology has the potential to be better in 5 years.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Get a Plasma, that is what I've had for about 2 years now and I have ZERO burn in. Just get one that has pixel orbiting and make sure you give it a good "screen burn" before you watch things with static images. You can find programs online that run a color pallette on your TV in a repeating loop. I let mine run for 150hrs total continuously (which included some basic tv watching) before playing any games to be on the safe side, and have had NO PROBLEMS. I have yet to see an LCD TV where motion blur has been eliminated completely, and that includes some of the newer models, for me that is a big problem because it bothers me quite a bit while Plasma does not have that problem.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Get DLP and save yourself the electricity-wasting marathon.  Weighs less, consumes less electricity, no blur, no burn-in, cheaper per inch of size, and produces less head than the other two options.

Any way you go, Wii's graphics are ruined.

[vudu]

DLP has even shittier viewing angles than LCD.  Plus I only need something less than 50" and I really don't want to have to **** with replacing lamps every couple of years.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"New LED DLP TVs and projectors eliminate the need for lamp replacement."

When I mention DLP, I only mean LED DLP made by Samsung.  And the viewing angles are all right.

But since you're going < 50" then get LCD to reduce your carbon footprint.  The EU considered banning plasma TV sets from retail due to their power consumption.  And save money by getting a "last year's model" TV set without the 120Hz mode, since that is only fake eye-trickery that generates mixed results depending on the video source.

Cut a square hole in a cardboard box and host puppet shows.

[GoldenPhoenix]

DLP TV bulbs tend to burn out fairly quickly don't they?

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

DLP TV bulbs tend to burn out fairly quickly don't they?

Yes, and labcoats somehow managed to produce light without Edison Globes nor Lightning (plasma) nor Fire, using tiny beings called Eledees.

[vudu]

And save money by getting a "last year's model" TV set without the 120Hz mode, since that is only fake eye-trickery that generates mixed results depending on the video source.

Really?  I was already planning on getting a 2008 model since there doesn't seem to be much difference in the 2009s, but this is the first time I've heard that 120 Hz isn't any better than 60 Hz--everything else I've read says that 120 Hz is the way to go.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

120Hz does weird things.  Essentially, it's function is to carefully compute ghost frames in between the progressive frames of a video source to provide an eye-pleasing motion blur via an artificially high framerate.

There were two sets in "120Hz Mode" sitting adjacently to one another at a Best Buy, one was running HD Fast/Furious Tokyo and the other was a HD Pirates/Carribean demo clips.  Normally, film is 24Hz which does not evenly mesh into 60Hz.  With "120Hz mode" active, the 24 frames get multiplied/interpolated/FUDGED to become 120 frames in a 1-second period.  Mathematically, 1 in every 5 frames was a real, original frame.  In both demos, when I saw objects travel/pan across the screen, some motion was ghastly super smooth but not all the all time, causing a visual disconnect.  Like fractions of each second couldn't maintain the smoothness and just jumped back to 24Hz/60Hz/regular motion.  In low speed scenes, I didn't feel a smoothness increase; it looked regular.

When you increase the source framerate, the results slightly improve since you have more real frames (they have real detail, and exist at correct points in time) occupying the display.

HD sports do benefit since it's real-life images getting a more lifelike motion blur.  Video games?  I don't know, not sure if you want blur introduced into your clear, computer-generated images.  Example:  All HDTVs in the USA are somewhat flawed by way of forcing video sources to conform to 60Hz display.  RE4 in p.scan is outputting 30fps, but regardless the TV has to display 60fps (60Hz).  The compromise is every other frame is some kind of ghost/interpolated frame, and it's painfully obvious when you aim at a vertical object (tree, column, wall corner, etc) then pan the camera around, showing ghostly edges.  120Hz is a more advanced implementation of this concept.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Not sure what your budget is, but I would check to see if this fits into it & then check the specs to make sure they fit what you're lookin for.
Westinghouse VM-42F140S 42" 1080p LCD HD Monitor - $579

[GoldenPhoenix]

DLP TV bulbs tend to burn out fairly quickly don't they?

Yes, and labcoats somehow managed to produce light without Edison Globes nor Lightning (plasma) nor Fire, using tiny beings called Eledees.

Seriously about every DLP TV I've seen has gone bad in some way quite quickly.

[vudu]

Not sure what your budget is, but I would check to see if this fits into it & then check the specs to make sure they fit what you're lookin for.
Westinghouse VM-42F140S 42" 1080p LCD HD Monitor - $579

Thanks, but my budget is about twice that.  I want a good TV that is going to last a while.  Something in the 46" area w/ good color contrast, accuracy, black levels, response time, etc.

I don't think that TV's gonna cut it.  (For example, the contrast ratio on that one is 10,000:1--I'm looking at TVs in the 40,000:1 to 100,000:1 category.  Also, from what I hear 6.5 ms response time would kill gaming.)

[BranDonk Kong]

6.5ms response time will not kill anything. That's 6.5 thousandths of a second. Just get a Samsung, they provide the LCDs for many other manufacturers anyway. If you want a bright beautiful picture, and don't mind giving up the real estate, and don't plan on sitting too far on either side of the screen (and don't want to play Rock Band or Guitar Hero "hassle-free"), then get a DLP. They're cheap, and (usually) beautiful. For $1200 you're not going to get the latest ****, but you'll probably be able to find a fantastic deal on last year's models. Avoid 120hz at all costs, until there's a reason to get it, all it does is increase the price of the TV, and ruin any movie that you're watching. The only thing that can output 1080p at 120hz is a high-end graphics card anyway.

[MikeHrusecky]

You would be remiss not to look at the 2009 Panasonic plasmas.

LCDs have improved a great deal in recent years, but that's mainly because they had the most improving to do. *Quality* plasmas are still king of video PQ. Legacy issues like burn-in are almost archaic when it comes to modern displays. It'd take many hours to permanently burn the phosphors.

If your budget is roughly $1000-ish, consider looking at the Panny TC-P46S1 (46") or TC-P42G10 (42"). The 'G10' series is more expensive but color accuracy is *superb* with proper calibration. There's also a 46" G10 (TC-P46G10), if you can handle a $1300-ish price tag.

The 2009 models also use their new "Neo PDP" tech which reduces the weight and power consumption, compared to the models they're replacing. It's not down to LCD levels, but they're a marked improvement. And blacks are about as black as you're going to get without paying a big premium for a Pioneer plasma.

I have a 2007 model Panny, and it's great. If I were in the market for one today, it would be one of those mentioned above.

[vudu]

Thanks for the info!  Both of the 46" TVs you mentioned were already in my consideration set, but it's nice to have someone agree with me.    I'm also looking at the Samsung PN46A650 or maybe the equivalent 2009 model.

I can stomach a $1,300 price point--I'm looking to spend somewhere between $1,000 and $1,500 total (including tax, etc.).  I'd prefer to get something towards the bottom of that price range, but I don't mind pushing the upper end if I'm getting a better product.  However, I don't want to spend more money just to say I bought a more expensive TV--I need to get something better for the extra dough.

As far as LCDs go, I'm currently looking at the Samsung LN46- A550, A650, B550 and B650.  Any other brands I should add to the consideration set?