Led vs LCD TVs and 720 pixels vs 1080.

Page 6 of 7  


As I recall the OP was asking about a 32" TV, not a TV monitor. Or do you sit as close to a 32" TV as you do your computer monitor?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

First is the timing. Prices have been dropping and are expected to drop even more at Thanksgiving for the end of year sales. If you can get a 30 day price guaranty, start shopping, otherwise, it may pay to wait a week or two.
I have two HD sets, a 32" 720 and a 47" 1080. The picture quality is equal. At 32" you don't really need the 1080. Depending on location and space available, bigger really is better. We have the 32" in the bedroom, the larger in the family room.
Once you watch some shows in HD, especially the NatGeo channel with Great Migration or some of the series on Discovery, Atlas, Earth, etc, you'll enjoy them much more and try to find a way to fit a 60" set.
You did not ask about 60 Hz versus 120 Hz. For most everything, the 60Hz is perfectly acceptable. If you are a gamer or watch very fast sports, you may find a little difference with the 120.
In any case, get the biggest you can fit and afford. I have a Samsung and an LG. Both were chosen by the quality of the picture in the store. We felt they were equal or slightly better than others on display. www.lg.com has some help in decision making also If you don't already have one, if on cable get the HD DVR and you will be able to watch what you want and when you want in glorious HD.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Samsung almost always gets the best reviews when it comes to LCD TVs. IMO, they make the best LCD TV....although I prefer Plasma.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Do you mean your one set is 1080i or 1080p, only blue ray and maybe some sattelites can do 1080p, 1080 p is better
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It will do I or P depending the the signal received.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's true to some extent, but it doesn't make every price guarantee useless. I've seen many stores caring the exact same models. I've also seen what you're talking about. The bottom line is, depending on what TV you actually buy, the price guarantee could be useful.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Higgs Boson wrote:

If your going to do it get as large as you can afford 1080p w/refresh at 120. the only caveat is your standard settop box fron verizon is 480 and sucks big time w/lcd. So be prepared to upgrade to a HD box and the HD package, been there done that. hth
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

For 32" Go with Samsung or Panasonic, LCD, 720p, 60Hz. For 55" Same with LCD, LED, 1080p, 120Hz.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

m/> as well as others, has left me more confused than

Thanks to all for helpful comments. I'm leaning toward the Panasonic model suggested in this post from "Bob Vila". I don't want anything bigger than 32" for the bedroom. I've bought very few TVs over the years, and they have all been SONYs, but...all things must end...
In contrast with another comment on this thread about 720, Michael, the seemingly knowledgeable TV guy at Costco , said that 720 is just coming in on many channels (other than HBO & that ilk, which I don't get). He said 1080 as a universal is still few years away.
Per yet another comment on this thread, Michael opined that an average viewer (I guess that's me!) for non-sports events wouldn't be able to tell the diff. between 720 and 1080 at the 32" size. I asked about 1080p and 1080i. He said that 1080i is basically 720; that the "i" means interlinear; that it doesn't refresh as fast as "real" 1080.
Costco's price, w/instant rebate, is $349 until Dec. 2. Maybe I could get it a few bux cheaper elsewhere, but Costco is good to deal with on many counts, including returns.
HB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sounds about the right price for a 32". There are many in that category that would work for you so I'm sure this one will make you happy. We have a 32" in the bedroom also and it is plenty big there.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

com/> as well as others, has left me more confused than

That's in line with what all the side by side actual reviews I've read have concluded, except for the sports part. The issue with sports is fast movement, which AFAIK is not related to resolution, but other display characteristics.
I asked

The "i" means interlaced, which has already been discussed many times in this thread. And interlaced 1080i is not basicly 720 anything. Now here is a puzzlement that I never thought about before, but this thread got me thinking about. Interlacing originated with broadcast TV and was a way to reduce bandwidth. That made sense because with TV transmission, you only have X bandwith in the airwave spectrum. So, it's advantageous to reduce bandwith on any given channel so that you can accomodate more channels in the same freq range. Consequently they interlaced the display, tracing odd number lines on one pass, even number lines on the next pass and relying on the persistence of the phosphor on the CRT to keep the previous pass there long enough for it to still be visible.
But in the case of LCD or Plasma displays, AFAIK, there is exactly one pixel element for each point on the screen. So, how could they actually do interlacing at all? Do they really interlace it, or do they just all actually display only progressively, taking whatever input signal and then processing and scaling it to the display? It would seem to me if you had twice the rows on the LCD display, then you would just use them all in one pass, because I don't see any advantage to displaying one row at a time. All it would do is cut down the bandwith in the display driving circuitry, which certainly isn't a problem for modern semiconductors. So, I would think regardless of what the source is, it's always going to be displayed progressively.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

com/> as well as others, has left me more confused than

Good choice! The "i" is interlaced...it was explained to me once as interpolated? WT...!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

v.com/> as well as others, has left me more confused than

That is what "Michael" at Costco actually SAID. In my earlier post, I misquoted him with words about "refresh", etc. My bad, and I still think he was giving me the straight dope, borne out by many posts on the subject of 1080i vs 1080p.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

com/> as well as others, has left me more confused than

Do you have basic/expanded cable with a box? If so it should be noted that the TV should be set to 4:3 mode (bars on the sides of the picture).
If you use one of the "stretch" modes it's going to make people look short and fat. If you use a zoom mode it's going to crop the picture and cut off the content at the top and bottom of the screen. IOW, you might only see a persons eyeballs and part of their forehead instead of seeing their entire head. It that doesn't bother you then fine, but if it does you might want to consider a slightly bigger TV.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

v.com/> as well as others, has left me more confused than

I have FIOS from Verizon (tfui!). I'm pretty sure their box is HD, which is supposed to be why my non-HD TV cuts off 1/5 of the picture on each side. I went through the whole hierarchy up to the CEO's office, but the final verdict was that box and TV don't agree. I asked for an older box, but they said they had no more.
Somewhat alarmed about your grisly paragraph about using "stretch" mode -- presumably on new HD TV? Costco associate said there was a setting for making picture fit. I HOPE it doesn't do THAT!!! Any experience out there? TIA
HB
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

dtv.com/> as well as others, has left me more confused than

If you have an HD box, then there is no problem if most of the channels you watch are in HD. If you have a regular digital cable, yes the "stretch" setting will fill the screen, but like I said, the picture will be distorted. Zoom fills the screen but crops the picture.
http://ideas.4brad.com/how-stop-people-putting-widescreen-tvs-stretch-mode
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Higgs Boson wrote:

I have a 720p Samsung Plaasma with HD from Charter cable. Up until a few weeks ago we were using component video cables (it's what the cable company supplied). With those cables non-HD content was stretched to fill the entire screen.
I recently swithched to an HDMI cable and now the non-HD content is displayed as 4:3 with bars on the side.
This particular TV does not have a setup choice for non-HD display while an LCD we have in the other room does let us choose between several modes.
I actually prefer the stretched display. Also, non-HD content looked better through the analog component cables than it does through HDMI.
Another thing to consider if a good portion of what you watch will be non-HD is that some sets give a better picture for non-HD than others do. In other words you could have two sets that are pretty similar in picture quality when displaying HD yet one could do a much better job with non-HD than the other. Might be a good idea to sample/compare both when deciding.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That doesn't make any sense. Sounds to me like a setting on the box was wrong. I'm using component cables and 4:3 broadcasts are in 4:3. And the same if I use an HDMI cable.

I have no idea what that means. Are you talking about stretch/zoom modes? If so, I've never seen an HDTV that didn't have those modes.

So you like watching a distorted picture where everything looks short and wide?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ron wrote:

I assume it is just that the D->A conversion that happens within the cable box differs from the D>A conversion for the component input of the set.

Yes, that is what I am talking about and this set does not have them. It has a single setting for choosing 4:3 versus 16:10 and from what I can tell that setting does not affect signals coming in on the HDMI port.

It's not that noticeable after a moment or two. The human brain compensates for stuff like that. Also the percentage of stretch is not that much and many newer sets use processing where a higher stretch is used on the left and right thirds with less stretching in the middle third where the viewer's attention is normally focused.
Lastly, my plasma has anti-burn-in technology that appears to work as it is five years old and I see no signs of burn-in yet. Despite that the owners manual still recommends limiting letterbox viewing to less than 25% to avoid bars on the sides and/or top/bottom from burning in.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

That must make panning of landscape scenes pretty ugly, not to mention making a mess of any diagonal lines. No thanks.

Like NiCd "memory, Plasma "burn-in" is a thing of the distant past.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.