Two or less Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 How come TVs set up in stores look so crappy? For that reason, I am honestly not even tempted to get one yet. Not sure but everytime i go to Best buy or something, their tv's make it look even better then mine. lol I think this is one of those things that once you get it, relax and watch, you'll know what i mean. The picture is just unreal on sports and tv shows.
sweeper Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 How come TVs set up in stores look so crappy? For that reason, I am honestly not even tempted to get one yet. A lot of the time places like Best Buy will either split an HDMI signal to avoid using a blu ray or whatever player on each TV (which degrades the signal). Or they simply use a less than 1080p source feed, which more than anything showcases the flaws of the feed, not the TV. I have noticed that plasmas tend to do a better job of displaying 720p and 1080i feeds though.
cdexchange Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 50" Samsung Plasma here, bought in April '08. Got a crazy deal on Amazon, $1099 with no sales tax and FREE SHIPPING. They brought it right into my living room, took it out of the box, plugged it in to make sure everything worked, and removed all the packing material and cardboard. It could not have been a better experience or a better deal. Only downside now is that Amazon does collect sales tax now if you're in NYS...I bought mine shortly before they started doing that. B-)
Sabre Dance Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 I'm looking around for one right now, but I'm one of those researcher types. So, I'll ask you guys. What, besides size, made you get the LCD/Plasma/LED you got? I'm thinking the Panasonic plasma 58" S1 model right now. My 43"" Hitachi rear-projection TV bit the dust last week, so I wanted a replacement/upgrade. I went with the 54" Panasonic G10 plasma. Top-ten in CNET reviews, awesome picture. I looked at the Samsung LEDs, but they are more expensive ($150 more for a 46" than what I paid for the 54") and the picture was more "granular". Hooked up a Blu-Ray player last night and enjoyed full 1080p viewing. Can't wait for the first Sabres game Saturday night - HD all the way!
Sabre Dance Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 How come TVs set up in stores look so crappy? For that reason, I am honestly not even tempted to get one yet. Two things: All of the TVs on the display floor are in "Vivid" picture mode - brightness and color are cranked up very high. Sometimes this is too much for the source material. Second, they usually have all of the TVs hooked up to one source and when the signal is being split among 20 or 30 TVs, the picture quality suffers. If you can find one hooked up directly to a Blu-Ray player, have the salesperson fire up a disc (and put the TV in "Normal" or "Standard" picture mode). You will be impressed.
Stoner Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Guys with their big trucks and big TVs. SPS. Sad.
Sabre Dance Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Guys with their big trucks and big TVs. SPS. Sad. The TV may be big, but I drive a Mini.... ....and no, that's not a euphemism.
korab rules Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 I run a 52" Samsung LCD in my living room - It is BIG, but fits the 18' x 20' room just fine. Hockey in HD is just frigging phenomenal. Now I bitch and moan when I have to watch it in SD. Love the true 16 x 9 aspect ratio of full HD, which gives you a view of more ice at once. I have a 40" Samsung LCD in the bedroom, but that is mostly for the wife so she can watch her crappy reality shows when hockey is on. Just renewed the center ice package. Can't wait for tonight!
Two or less Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 just ordered center ice too for like the 5th year in a row or something. Can't wait. Too bad the two Canadian games are not in HD, atleast in my area on TW.... i'll probably watch Caps/Boston and then Vancouver/Flames. That should be a great game. Montreal/Toronto should be a real good game too but i just love watching Ovechkin and with him being in HD, it's case closed. ps. to those with NHL Network, they are extending their hours this year of NHL On the Fly. In the past they've been on from 9pm or sometimes 10pm until end of the night. This season, they will be on at 8pm nightly live until 2am. And they got rid of that god awful studio they had the past few years. Kevin Weekes also joins their staff, which is pretty cool, he's a good hockey reporter i think from the little that i have seen him in the past.
carpandean Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 I don't want to jump on you here, but not all of this is quite right. Especially the LED part. I think you may be really confused about what the LED's do. http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/whats-an-led-tv/ I also think you bought into the LCD hype. Unfortunately, many people have and have pushed plasma's out of the smaller set market and no they only occupy the larger screen size space. Actually, I was aware of the technology difference, including that they are still LCDs. Though, admittedly, I should have specified that the edge-lit are the particularly thin ones. I was, perhaps, too vague with my choice of words. To me, a "better picture" can be achieved by improving one of a list of attributes including contrast. As for the "new technology" comment, LEDs themselves are not new, but LCD TVs using LED backlighting are, to my knowledge, a new technological combination. It is quite possible that most LCDs TVs will eventually utilize LED backlighting and they will become more appropriately priced. To me, though, the differences aren't worth the extra cost, unless you need on of the ultra-thin one. Perhaps, with increased computing power (and/or reduced cost of that power) to handle more precise LED control, the differences will become worth it. Plasma and LCD still have their individual advantages, but the differences have certainly thinned through improved technology. Under the right conditions, equivalent Plasmas may be setup to create a generally better image, but LCDs seem to be more robust to varying conditions. Without exception, though, every plasma that I looked at in the store actually seemed to have a worse picture than the equivalent LCDs next to them. Maybe that was because Best Buy didn't take the time to optimize the settings or maybe it was due to the setting being less than ideal. I don't know, but I went there thinking that I would buy a plasma and ended up changing my mind (note: they were having a big sale and were understaffed, so it was definitely not a case of someone selling me on LCD.) A lot of the time any picture flaws can be attributed to the source feed I've found. 1080p blu rays look absolutely flawless on both my tv and my parents (they have a 42ish inch LCD with I believe 120 refresh), but as the quality goes down the TV's are so crisp they definitely showcase the flaws in lesser resolution feeds. I would definitely agree with this. With the right feed, my LCD looks amazing, but with an old show/commercial on a non-HD channel, it looks horrible. You definitely see all of the flaws of the original signal, especially coming from a 15 year old, 27", non-HD, CRT TV.
korab rules Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Actually, I was aware of the technology difference, including that they are still LCDs. Though, admittedly, I should have specified that the edge-lit are the particularly thin ones. I was, perhaps, too vague with my choice of words. To me, a "better picture" can be achieved by improving one of a list of attributes including contrast. As for the "new technology" comment, LEDs themselves are not new, but LCD TVs using LED backlighting are, to my knowledge, a new technological combination. It is quite possible that most LCDs TVs will eventually utilize LED backlighting and they will become more appropriately priced. To me, though, the differences aren't worth the extra cost, unless you need on of the ultra-thin one. Perhaps, with increased computing power (and/or reduced cost of that power) to handle more precise LED control, the differences will become worth it. Plasma and LCD still have their individual advantages, but the differences have certainly thinned through improved technology. Under the right conditions, equivalent Plasmas may be setup to create a generally better image, but LCDs seem to be more robust to varying conditions. Without exception, though, every plasma that I looked at in the store actually seemed to have a worse picture than the equivalent LCDs next to them. Maybe that was because Best Buy didn't take the time to optimize the settings or maybe it was due to the setting being less than ideal. I don't know, but I went there thinking that I would buy a plasma and ended up changing my mind (note: they were having a big sale and were understaffed, so it was definitely not a case of someone selling me on LCD.) I would definitely agree with this. With the right feed, my LCD looks amazing, but with an old show/commercial on a non-HD channel, it looks horrible. You definitely see all of the flaws of the original signal, especially coming from a 15 year old, 27", non-HD, CRT TV. Plasma is superior to LCD in the right environment, but if you are going to put it in a room that gets daylight, LCD is much more flexible. If you have a designated media room with no windows or where you can black out the windows, Plasma is an easy choice. The sad thing is, the best TV in the world will look like #%^$#! if the feed is crap. 90% of the content I view is less than full 1080p. But when it is... The good thing is that even when the HD channels are carrying a 480 signal, it still looks better than it does on the SD channel.
Sabre Dance Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Plasma is superior to LCD in the right environment, but if you are going to put it in a room that gets daylight, LCD is much more flexible. If you have a designated media room with no windows or where you can black out the windows, Plasma is an easy choice. Actually, I have my (new) plasma set in a room that gets afternoon sun and has a fair-sized picture window. Although we have sheer curtains on the window (closed almost all the time) and drapes (never closed), the light coming in doesn't seem to wash out the picture. I was concerned on this point prior to purchase, but right now it seems like a non-issue...
sweeper Posted October 2, 2009 Report Posted October 2, 2009 I get a fair amount of sunlight when I'm watching something during the day also (mainly football I suppose), and if I put the screen on the "vivid" setting it's fine. It's a bit too much at night though. LCD's are definitely better in a bright room, but aside from maybe being thinner, that's the only real advantage in my opinion.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.