• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Flat panel TV recommendations for mom and dad

T

techwanabe

Diamond Member
Mom and dads 32-inch tube TV recently died so my dad is on a mission to replace it. I think high cost will be a tough sell to mom, so cost needs to be kept modest. But they have a big living room so even the 32-ince TV seemed small. I think they would be plenty happy with a 720P resolution but Dad still wants to get a Sony or good brand TV. I'm suggesting they get minimum 40-inch LCD or something flat. I'm looking for recommendations that they can buy locally at Best Buy or common stores in Fairfax VA.

Thanks.
 
What's their viewing distance? A 40" is still going to be small unless they sit 5' from their TV. What's their budget? I know you'd like to find something local, but is that a requirement?

Edit: For example, my in-laws sit 13' from their 50", and I sit 9' from mine. I still wish I had a bigger TV, but the difference between watching their TV and my TV is incredible! They really need a 70"+ TV for that viewing distance.
 
Last edited:
To give them the same viewing height, you will want no smaller than a 42" TV (which has a little less height than the 32" Tube they are used to).

Don't worry about seating distance. If they are happy with the height of their 32" Tube TV and don't want anything larger, a 42-46 inch screen will be fine for them.
 
They haven't given a budget. But these are 78/79 year olds who are 'old school' and have only recently watch my 46-inch. I'm guessing the viewing distance is about 15 feet roughly. I only mentioned 40-inch because they will probably balk at the cost of much bigger.... but like I said, 720P is going to be fine for them and seem alot better than the tube TV they had - which was a good quailty tube but still it was SDTV.

I sit 8-10 feet from my 46-inch and it is "adequate" but I wish it were bigger too. They sit much further from their old smaller TV and have been ok with it. They don't watch movies much, and mostly watch news programs so thats much of the reason why the size is less important.

Yes, I'm suggesting a 40/42 inch as a minimum just so the wide screen format doesn't end up seeming any smaller than the 31/32-inch tube that just died. I think they actually said 31-inch. We were going to go out looking today but my folks canceled when they saw more snow in the forcast, which for Fairfax Virginia is a much bigger deal than Syracuse or Buffalo. The federal gov't shut down on Monday even though both Sunday and Monday were clear blue sky's - the ~28 inches that fell Fri/Sat was huge for this area.
 
Given the additional description, I think a ~$700 50" Panasonic 720p plasma would be the best choice. That's not a whole lot more than a cheap 40" LCD TV and will be worlds better in size and quality.
 
kalrith said:
Given the additional description, I think a ~$700 50" Panasonic 720p plasma would be the best choice. That's not a whole lot more than a cheap 40" LCD TV and will be worlds better in size and quality.
Click to expand...

Yeah - can't get much better than the prices Panasonic are offering on their 50+" 720p lines (If he's worried about brand name Panasonic is very well known for their Plasma lines)
 
kalrith said:
Given the additional description, I think a ~$700 50" Panasonic 720p plasma would be the best choice. That's not a whole lot more than a cheap 40" LCD TV and will be worlds better in size and quality.
Click to expand...

That 50" Panny plasma will also likely cost about twice as much to operate than a 40" LCD. If the viewers are on a fixed income, as most retired people are, then that might be an issue to consider.
 
rivethead said:
That 50" Panny plasma will also likely cost about twice as much to operate than a 40" LCD. If the viewers are on a fixed income, as most retired people are, then that might be an issue to consider.
Click to expand...

[sarcasm]You're right: plasmas consume so much more energy than LCDs, that within a couple years, you lose any cost benefit from them.[/sarcasm]

According to CNET, the Panasonic TC-P50X1 costs $55.28 per year to operate (source), and the Philips 42PFL6704D (closest size to 40" I could find with power consumption) costs $39.65 to operate (source).

So, over the course of 5 years, your parents will spend $78 more to operate a TV that's far superior in quality and size. To get an LCD in the same size and quality as that Panasonic plasma would likely cost HUNDREDS of dollars more and certainly not $78 more.

Edit: I just fed the number of Watts consumed into my utility-cost calculator, and to get CNET's numbers for those two TVs, I'd have to have my TV on for more than 9 hours every single day. So, if your parents watch half that much TV, then the difference in electricity costs over the course of 5 years would be $39 instead of $78.

Edit2: Another way to look at it is that even if they had the TV on 24/7 for 5 years straight, they'd only be spending $200 more on electricity to have the 50" Panasonic plasma compared to that 42" Phillips LCD. You can guess which one I would choose :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
sivart said:
To give them the same viewing height, you will want no smaller than a 42" TV (which has a little less height than the 32" Tube they are used to).

Don't worry about seating distance. If they are happy with the height of their 32" Tube TV and don't want anything larger, a 42-46 inch screen will be fine for them.
Click to expand...

Actually, no, it is 40". Lets do the math shall we:

Given: 32" standard 4:3 TV (measured by diagonal between corners)
Knowing it is a 4:3 ratio of width to height, and with 32" being the diagonal (or hypotenuse of the "triangle" of height, width, diagonal distance), we can determine the original height of the screen as being 19.2" (since this is conveniently a 3 4 5 triangle, 32/5 = 6.4... so the 3, which is the height is 3*6.4 or 19.2")

Maintaining the height of 19.2", converting to a 16:9 ratio of width to height, we know the width should be 34.1333" (19.2/9*16=34.13333333)

Now that we know the height and width of a 16:9 widescreen tv which has the same height as a 32" 4:3 screen, we can determine the size of the 16:9 screen by using the Pythagorean Theorem : a^2 + b^2 = c^2 for determining the length of the hypotenuse of a right triangle.

So 19.2^2 + 34.13333^2 = 1533.724421688889 (which is c^2)

The square root of 1533.724421688889 = 39.162794"
 
Last edited:
Update:

Folks ended up with the Samsung LN46B530 for $828. It is a 60hz model which should be fine for them and frankly it is almost as good as my LN46A650 I got 18 months ago for more than double the price!

Now here is a new minor issue. They are hooked up to Cox Cable service in Fairfax VA. I have the TV set at 16x9 aspect ratio and then they select HD channels between 700 and 799 on the cable box (1-100 and others are standard definition), it looks like some of the picture is chopped off - you can see some channel logo's halved etc. What is causing this and how can we get the display to show the whole picture? I have cycled through the P-size settings 4:3, screen fit, 16x9, 2x zoom, etc. Even at 4:3 with black bars on each side, the logo's are still chopped off.
 
techwanabe said:
Update:

Folks ended up with the Samsung LN46B530 for $828. It is a 60hz model which should be fine for them and frankly it is almost as good as my LN46A650 I got 18 months ago for more than double the price!

Now here is a new minor issue. They are hooked up to Cox Cable service in Fairfax VA. I have the TV set at 16x9 aspect ratio and then they select HD channels between 700 and 799 on the cable box (1-100 and others are standard definition), it looks like some of the picture is chopped off - you can see some channel logo's halved etc. What is causing this and how can we get the display to show the whole picture? I have cycled through the P-size settings 4:3, screen fit, 16x9, 2x zoom, etc. Even at 4:3 with black bars on each side, the logo's are still chopped off.
Click to expand...

Have you set up the output of the cable box correctly? How are you hooked up to the TV - HDMI?
 
ah good, decent size.
yea people underestimate how the size actually works much of the time, wide screen measurements are misleading for people used to 4:3.

what screen aspect ratio is the box outputing? might be in "zoom" mode
 
The guy from Cox Cable hooked the cable box up to the TV. Its hooked up with Component cables, but I want to switch it to the HDMI cable - but I have to order one first. I'll have to check the box. It doesn't look like it is chopping off much.
 
If this is going in the living room of a house then you should really consider going with a Mitsubishi DLP. You can get a brand new 60" for under $800 that will give a very high quality picture for that price range.
 
TV is bought and my 79 year old dad won't be taking it back to buy another TV. They are pretty happy I'm sure. This is major upgrade from their tube TV.

I'll have to check on the overscan option. I would think it would be turned off by default, yet the picture does seem chopped off a little.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top