Finally getting into the 20th century, LCD HDTV

[kornphlake]

Yeah I know LCD HDTVs are 21st century tech, but I feel like I'm the last kid on the block to get one. Honestly I don't really want one that bad, but it's time to replace some furniture and the old tube TV has to go as well.

I've been reluctant to upgrade to a HDTV because there were so many problems a few years ago with expensive flat panels only lasting a few years before having some problems. Not little things like the colors look washed out or a pixel burns out, things like the tv quits working. I expect any tube TV would have lasted at least 10 years before having any problems, are the flat panel TVs to this same level of quality yet? Any to steer clear of?

I haven't done much research yet, I'd like something 32" or larger, 1080p, composite inputs are necessary as I still have hundreds of movies on VHS I'd like to watch from time to time but not enough to replace them with DVD or Blu-Ray. Something with DVI or VGA would be nice, but honestly by the time I'm ready to setup a HTPC I'll probably have a video card with HDMI out. I do plan on connecting the TV to a 2.1 stereo setup so I'd like stereo output. Budget is $450, no more than $500. I really am more concerned about the durability and longevity of the TV than features.

Wal-mart had a Visio set that looked like it would fit the bill, not that I am constrained to doing my shopping at Wal-Mart, but it's a quick and convenient place to compare prices.

 

[s44]

I still have hundreds of movies on VHS I'd like to watch from time to time but not enough to replace them with DVD or Blu-Ray.

Buy this ($140 shipped). Seriously.

(1) It's not much more than a plain ol' Blu-Ray player.
(2) It will make your videotapes look much, much better.

 

[smitbret]

Don't get caught up on 1080p. At your price range, the tvs will be small enough that you won't see the difference unless you're using it as a computer monitor. If you're willing to plunk down $550 or so, there are a couple of 42" plasmas that would be great as a main television.

As far as reliability, if you get any kind of brand name, reliability and length of service will not be issues worth concerning yourself over.

 

[montypythizzle]

Sometimes there are 50" Samsung plasmas (not sure on model) for around 700 or cheaper at Wal-Mart.

 

[kalrith]

If you're willing to plunk down $550 or so, there are a couple of 42" plasmas that would be great as a main television

this

Sometimes there are 50" Samsung plasmas (not sure on model) for around 700 or cheaper at Wal-Mart.

or this.

You, like most people, will likely think that 42-50" is HUGE for a TV, but it really isn't. You get used to the size very quickly. If you went with a 32" TV, that would look like the "right" size for about a week, and then it would look too small.

BTW, what's your viewing distance?

 

[montypythizzle]

Sometimes there are 50" Samsung plasmas (not sure on model) for around 700 or cheaper at Wal-Mart.

Oh just saw the budget, eh.

However the ones I am talking about, I am not sure if they are always there, but they do go on sale regularly about once a month. Considering I bought an LG 50" for around 1500 total about 3 years ago or so and that was on the bottom end of price at that time it is pretty cheap.

 

[kornphlake]

I don't like the way a TV larger than about 32" imposes itself in a room. If I have to live with a behemoth of a television, I'd prefer it to be as small of a behemoth as possible.

Our current TV is a 23" that we moved from the bedroom to the living room when the old 27" kicked the bucket. I honestly didn't miss the couple of inches a 32" is going to feel huge. If 720p is the way to go, I'll save money and buy a 32" 720p and put the savings toward an upgraded programming package with Dish.

Again in the store I can't tell any difference between a plasma and LCD except the price, and in my home without one TV sitting next to another I doubt I'd see any difference either. Is plasma more reliable than LCD? I'd rather have something that will last until it's obsolete than have something that will break before I'm done using it.

 

[s44]

I don't like the way a TV larger than about 32" imposes itself in a room.

That's because you've never had HDTV.

We're not telling you to get 720p, plasma, or LCD. We're telling you to *get the largest screen you can afford*.

No one has ever decided a few weeks after that their new TV was too big. Many have found the opposite, however.

Furthermore, no flatscreen sucks up room space like a big deep tube did.

 

[CrimsonWolf]

I don't like the way a TV larger than about 32" imposes itself in a room. If I have to live with a behemoth of a television, I'd prefer it to be as small of a behemoth as possible.

Our current TV is a 23" that we moved from the bedroom to the living room when the old 27" kicked the bucket. I honestly didn't miss the couple of inches a 32" is going to feel huge. If 720p is the way to go, I'll save money and buy a 32" 720p and put the savings toward an upgraded programming package with Dish.

Again in the store I can't tell any difference between a plasma and LCD except the price, and in my home without one TV sitting next to another I doubt I'd see any difference either. Is plasma more reliable than LCD? I'd rather have something that will last until it's obsolete than have something that will break before I'm done using it.

No, it's not going to feel huge. Because of the aspect ratio difference between 16:9 and 4:3, it's hard to compare directly standard and widescreen sizes. The TV measure is a diagonal corner-to-corner measure, and the width of widescreen TVs exaggerates their measurements. A jump from 23" standard to 32" widescreen sounds big, but it really isn't. The 32" widescreen is only about 2" taller than the 23" standard. Your only major boost will be from being able to fill the whole screen with 16:9 content rather than being stuck with a little bar.

I'm going to join the choir and recommend getting the biggest screen you can afford. Maybe try to save for a 42". Hell, Newegg has a 42" Panasonic 720p plasma for $500 + $60 shipping, which is pretty close to your budget.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16889187120

There are pros and cons to plasma vs. LCD, but they aren't a big deal unless you're really gung-ho about TVs. A TV from any major brand should be reliable, and several generations have passed for both plasmas and LCDs so a lot of the kinks are worked out. Make sure its 720p, though nearly everything should be. Don't worry about 1080p for the TV sizes you're looking at.

 

[kornphlake]

I don't want a bigger TV. Why is that so hard for people to understand?

 

[kalrith]

I don't want a bigger TV. Why is that so hard for people to understand?

Because most of us were in the same situation in the past, and we either:

a) bought the size of TV we wanted and later upgraded to a larger TV because the 1st one was too small

or

b) listened to our online companions and bought a much larger TV than we originally wanted (and sometimes still upgraded to a larger TV )

To quote an old evangelist, "You can listen and learn or you can live and learn."

Frankly you can go out and get a 32" TV, view it from 10 feet away, and then make an epic thread on how there's absolutely no difference in PQ between BD and DVD. We're only trying to help you realize that with the higher resolution of HD, you'll most likely want a TV large enough to notice the advantage of spending $500+ on a new TV. Also, a 32" HDTV is the equivalent of a 26" SDTV, so you're not really even upgrading.

You might actually be better served by buying a $50 CRT off of craigslist. Your VHS tapes would look worse on an HDTV anyways.

Edit: I had a 27" CRT and thought that a 32" HDTV would be perfect. After a lot of research and viewing sessions at Best Buy, I decided on a 50". OMG, it was massive for about a month. After that it was perfect, and I still wish it were larger when watching letterbox films.

 

[montypythizzle]

Heh the same with me Kalrith, thought oh wow 32" is going to be perfect, and came home with that 50" Plasma, well after about 2 weeks of research.

 

[smitbret]

Because most of us were in the same situation in the past, and we either:

a) bought the size of TV we wanted and later upgraded to a larger TV because the 1st one was too small

or

b) listened to our online companions and bought a much larger TV than we originally wanted (and sometimes still upgraded to a larger TV )

To quote an old evangelist, "You can listen and learn or you can live and learn."

Frankly you can go out and get a 32" TV, view it from 10 feet away, and then make an epic thread on how there's absolutely no difference in PQ between BD and DVD. We're only trying to help you realize that with the higher resolution of HD, you'll most likely want a TV large enough to notice the advantage of spending $500+ on a new TV. Also, a 32" HDTV is the equivalent of a 26" SDTV, so you're not really even upgrading.

You might actually be better served by buying a $50 CRT off of craigslist. Your VHS tapes would look worse on an HDTV anyways.

Edit: I had a 27" CRT and thought that a 32" HDTV would be perfect. After a lot of research and viewing sessions at Best Buy, I decided on a 50". OMG, it was massive for about a month. After that it was perfect, and I still wish it were larger when watching letterbox films.

Having followed this thread throughout the day, the Craigslist purchase is probably the best advice for you. There's no really sense in dropping $500 on a tv that will not give you any benefit over what you have now. In fact, you will probably be disappointed because, as mentioned, SD frequently looks worse on an HDTV.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I don't want a bigger TV. Why is that so hard for people to understand?

I feel you. Sometimes there are good reasons to not get the biggest TV possible.

Take my rents for instance: they wanted to get a HDTV but had an entertainment system that was worth as much as my car that matched everything else in the room- replacing it was a no-go.

So we went brick and mortar shopping for the exact dimensions of the TV space in the entertainment center, and ended up with a 40 inch Samsung that fit perfectly and that they really enjoy.

Me personally- I wish my 42 inch was bigger. But I am a TV snob (thanks LASIK)- I won't watch things on VHS (or heck, DVD!) unless it is the only copy on the planet. I refuse to go to the theater to watch movies because the local movie theater is tuned less (video and audio-wise) then my system. I obsess on the difference in my collection between 4GB HDTV rips and 10GB compressed Blu Ray rips, and I have put big money into an HTPC recently to maximize my viewing experience.

You are not like that, and that is cool. Much better in fact for you- you have money for other hobbies.

My advice: If you are a Sam's Club member, get one from there. I notice the Vizios at my local Sams are a generation newer than the next door Wal-Mart- better value. But if you aren't then just be patient and hunt Wal-Mart/Office Depot/Target/Sears for deals and worry about a contrast ratio over every other spec (as its the most important to most people- much more so than the 720p v 1080p thing).

Good luck.

 

[alcoholbob]

Clearly he doesn't care. Even if a bigger TV had 10x the price/performance and features I don't think he really cares. It comes down to preference. Me personally, I can't stand a small screen. 82" TV in the living room, and a 47" LCD as a computer monitor (I sit like 4 feet away, LOL).

 

[smitbret]

My advice: If you are a Sam's Club member, get one from there. I notice the Vizios at my local Sams are a generation newer than the next door Wal-Mart- better value. But if you aren't then just be patient and hunt Wal-Mart/Office Depot/Target/Sears for deals and worry about a contrast ratio over every other spec (as its the most important to most people- much more so than the 720p v 1080p thing).

Good luck.

True, so true. Just ignore 'Dynamic Contrast Ratio'. Although, I suspect you'll be happy with just about any decent brand name.