Be Excellent To Each Other

I'm going to treat myself to a new telly in the post-christmas sales - finally entering the high-definition world in the process.

Assume I know pretty much nothing about the pro's and cons of LCD and plasma and suchlike, what sort of things would I be wanting with a budget of about £400 - £500?

I use avforums they have great reviews..

I have a samsung 40" a5 series (the wife likes the look of samsungs)not too bad at all. Sound is not too great so had to get a home cinema system to compensate

sony are great but more expensive

Apparently anything over 32" should be plasma. Not sure why, it's just what I saw lots of times when recently hunting for my new TV.

In the end I got one of these here.



It's a 42" Samsung plasma. It's HD, but not the highest form of HD. From looking around you'll be hard pushed to get something that big that does true 1080p any way.

Model number is PS42A457P1D And I got it for 480 quid in a Dabs.com sale about three months back. Looking back there now it's 499, but still a cracking buy.

I googled the model # and spent a good few hours reading up, the picture quality and color thing (something about grays and blacks on plasmas) is rated very highly, the only downside being the quite frankly terrible sound. Mind you, in a flat TV at this price something has to give.. That being that to cram in the speakers was obviously an afterthought and they're tinny and lack any kind of wallop.

To temporarily resolve this I put on a pair of Altec Lansing 2.0 speakers I had kicking around, and it improved dramatically. In the new year I intend to go 2.1, just so that the satelites and hidden sub can be more discrete.

Inputs and outputs are very well taken care of, it has a proper stereo RCA out, aswell as a headphone out. You can also disable the onboard speakers in the menu, a nice touch I thought

HTH

That used to be true... but the new LCD screens are a lot better than they were. The new samsung A series are all 1080p

You can have issues with plasma.

http://www.avforums.com/forums/lcd-televisions/883239-samsung-le-a556-557-558-559-full-hd-3xhdmi-30-000-1-dynamic-contrast-part-2-a.html

SPECS
FULL HD 1080P(1920X1080)
3XHDMI 1.3
30.000:1 dynamic contrast ratio(32",37" 15.000:1)
24P
USB
DNIE +

Coming in 32",37",40",46",52

Yeah I did check into all the pros and cons.. Apparently Plasmas 'settle' shortly after being powered up and the color and stuff falls out and you have to up them. I can't say I have noticed that at all tbh.

I've not looked at more recent LCDS but I always thought they were a bit cold and lacked contrast, and also looked a bit 'pixelly'. I know the pixelations are down to the digital signal being low on bandwidth, but it's alot less notable on Plasma.. I suppose plasma is a bit more warm and fluffy and thus tends to anti alias the pixelly stuff.

The biggest downside (apparently) to plasma is the gas expires after about ten years. But then Ive never held onto any TV for that long, and certainly wouldn't bother with a 500 pound one.. Few grand yeah, then it might be worth a recharge.

lcd vs plasma guide


http://www.which.co.uk/advice/lcd-vs-pl ... /index.jsp

LOL what a totally biased article.
So they think that LCD wins in every single category?

I wonder what they have on their TV stand at home.

is that why they say it is a draw? Which are independent


edit: plus was the first one i googled

edit2: http://www.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/lcdtv-plasmavslcd.shtml

I wouldn't bother with a plasma, to be honest. LCDs are better for gaming, anyway.

Samsung LCDs are the way to go. I bought one and about 5 people bought one upon seeing mine. I used to sell a lot of them at work as well. We never sold anyone a plasma for the simple fact they were more expensive, and don't really work as well. LCD used to have problems at high sizes due to yield problems and leccy draw amongst other things but they've fixed all that these days.

There's loads of us on here who've been through the HDTV buying process now though, and we've all been educated by the other forumites, so pick a model you like, post it, and we can tell you if it's worth it or not.

That I would totally agree with.

Whilst my 22" PC LCD is lovely for gaming it's pretty average for watching movies and media.

I've not put a gaming device up the bottom of the plasma yet but I've heard they're a bit ropey.. I suppose it's horses for courses tbh. I didn't need my TV for anything else other than watching TV on. So I got a Topfield PVR (great toy, mum loves it and it's currently full of Taggart and Midsomer Murders lmao) and intend to order a Freesat box once I cancel Sky in the spring.. That way I get to half inch the dish (well it'll be mine anyway) so setting up freesat will be easy. Simply disconnect and discard the Sky box, plug in the Freesat one and I'm off

In the states I had a 67" DLP projection TV, and it was simply amazing for watching movies on. Games, though, left alot to be desired (although granted that putting a gamecube on it and not a HD console wasn't the best way to see how the HD was).

I'd still rather have an LCD for TV, as well. Much better value for money.

Got a Samsung 'pebble' 20" combi telly and monitor, one of every conceivable input. Lovely for 360, PC when I need one, no digital tuner though. Like a knob though, once you are stuck with an LCD HDTV you'll wish it was at least 2" bigger. I'm thinking of donating mine to the lounge then getting a 26/8" for the XBox room.

OK, almost every rule of thumb I'm about to give you can be broken by a specific example but these things are broadly true.

Plasmas perform (in terms of picture quality and contrast) slightly better at the very top end, consume more power, are heavier (try wall mounting a 50" plasma, takes some serious engineering), and wear out after prolonged use. They are generally more expensive than LCDs at the same screen size, although not always.

You almost certainly want an LCD.

Sony or Toshiba are good high-end brands to watch for if you get a deal on them, Samsung or LG are good second-tier vendors. You may find very little price difference between them now though. 1080p doesn't matter below 50" screen size unless you sit bizarrely close to your TV, so if you see any good deals on a 1366x768 resolution LCD snap them up. Some of them do indeed have poor speakers (the ones on my Tosh are OK but they have only been used for five minutes as I route all sound through my amp) so be braced to find yourself shopping for a 5.1 system in the coming months.

LCDs are not just normally cheaper for the same number of checked boxes, they're also half the power consumption per inch - seriously, my Sony KDL-46W4000 46" LCD is rated at a maximum 225W, nearest-equivalent Panasonic plasmas are up above 450W. >200W is plenty eye-popping for me, for something that's on a few hours a day...

On top of that, the best picture settings involve dropping the backlight to minimum (and turning as much processing off as possible), and it's still perfectly watchable in broad daylight with the blinds open.

Edit: To respond to the good Doctor's post above - I agree wrt 720p/1080p, it's marginal for TV and film on mine at 9-ish feet. Console detail is slightly more distinguishable. If I weren't an idiot I'd be more than comfortable with a Samsung, being the same glass with their own slightly inferior electronics - as I said originally, as much as possible of which I turn off anyway!

I can lift my telly on my own; weight-wise it's pretty light, but the size of it makes it just barely manageable. The speakers are surprisingly good, more than acceptable for TV and even films. I'm still intending to get round to wiring up my amp with 5.1 speakers Real Soon Now that it's all laid out and I finally have a stand though.

Yeah but that's peak power draw, which is in the default eye-blistering "shop" mode [1] you get when you unpack it. Wikipedia:

Although it's tagged [citation needed] this aligns with what I've read elsewhere. Plasmas still draw more power, but as time goes on the gap between them and LCDs narrow -- as indeed it does in other areas such as contrast ratios (as LCDs draw closer to what used to be a significant advantage of plasma displays).

[1] a lot of consumer studies show that, confronted with a Honkin' Wall O' Tellies like in Currys, most people are drawn to the brightest ones. The staff in the stores never to anything to tweak the pictures, so out of the box they always default to huge brightness.

Added - What native 1080p console material do you have?

The PS3 XMB, mostly - it's ridiculously fine-detailed. Not a great example, I admit. I suppose any 1080p source (like a BluRay) with high-contrast text will be as good, such as the player-generated subtitles for The Orphanage and Pan's Labyrinth. Wipeout HD is the only game I've got for the PS3 as yet, but with its dynamic-framebuffer shenanigans it doesn't count. I wouldn't know what demos off PSN I've tried are 1080p native.

Not sure what 360 stuff I tried when that was plugged into it that might be 1080p (if the 360 even supports it properly as opposed to upscaling from 720p internally, which I'm not sure of), and now it's back up in the bedroom. There's certainly nothing noticeable between 720p (upscaled to 768p), 1080i (downscaled to 768p) or 1360x768 (when the VGA cable was working) in stuff like Forza, sat a few feet away from the 26in Bravia there.

There is almost nothing on the 360 that isn't 720p, I was being slightly tricksy There are a very small number of games. You're right about the XMB though -- that's a fine use of 1080p.

I had my eyes opened to 1080p-vs-720p when I saw my mate's 50" Pioneer 720p plasma, which cost the thick end of three grand. Only 720p but it looks fantastic. Then I did all the maths involving subtended arc angles and whatnot at typical viewing distances and realised that below 50" the differences are very, very marginal.

what would be the point of buying a 720p when 1080p arn't that much more...

If the price difference is small, not much, as you say. And that is broadly true today, but you might get a banzai closeout deal on an obsolete 720p model.

If you can find one now... pretty hard to find a samsung 720p just had a quick look. I think it is the r models that were 720p

Wipeout, mind, does look spectacular sat on the floor even 4 feet in front of it.

Remember a TV that accepts a 1080 signal isn't the same as being a 1080 picture. My screen accepts a 1080 signal and it looked better at 1080 being scaled down a little than 720 being scaled up (it's in my bedroom so I do sit fairly close).

Of course now NXE added the proper resolution to the VGA cable it's no longer an issue, as it's on it's native res, and that's the way I prefer it.

I have one of these. It's bloody lovey, but sadly outside of the £500 budget.

Would you like your very own one (sans smoke)?

Of course the 360 itself provides the sound of wind blowing down your chimney.

Remember kids, if buying an HDTV and it only has an SD capable tuner in it and you don't have Sky HD, you are a moron. I know there isn't any HD DTV transmissions at the moment (barring tests in London), but there will be and if you are spending a grand on a TV you might want to use it for more than 2 years without sticking another bloody box beneath it.

That is all.

I'm really hoping there should be sarcasm tags here.

so do I... I use a standard sky+ box..... as I refuse to pay sky £200 and an extra £10 a months for only a handful of channels

WTF should there be? HD on digital terrestrial has been trialled and the specs are known. HD services on digital terrestrial will be launching on a region by region basis as frequencies become clear (starting in the North West in a few months). Are you seriously suggesting people with no other means of receiving HD broadcasts (ie can't have or won't have Sky) go out and buy technology on the one hand claims to be HD Ready but only come equipped with SD tuners that cannot be upgraded?

Well bully for you, but totally missing the point I was making by a mile.

HD on terrestrial digital will be a reality for people as their analogue transmissions are turned off from the main sites. So the good people of the North West will be getting it early to the middle of next year.

HDTV's are still being sold with SD only digital tuners in them.

If HD terrestrial transmissions are soon to be on us, it makes sense to ensure that TV has a tuner that can either be upgraded to HD, or is HD.

There will be a shit storm at some point in the future where people who've purchased HDTV's find that their shiny new toy requires yet another 100 quid box to receive the free to air digital terrestrial transmissions.

I'd hope that Sky would drop their premium for HD content once the free-to-air stuff is out in the wild.

No I did not miss the point, but I was not going to pay the extra for HD tuner in my TV nor a HD Sky+

To be honest I don't think I have ever used the inbuilt freeview tuner in the TV yet.

I don;t think there will be a shit storm, as it will be years if ever untill all tv transmission is HD

When this happens I will gladly buy a shiny new HD sky box.

I'm not convinced there'll be a shit storm on a large scale. I suspect those who haven't bothered to find out if their tv can receive HD signals won't be that bothered that they can't. In many cases they'll be blissfully ignorant and assume everything they watch on their fancy big, flat telly is HD anyway. Most people who actually care will have made whatever arrangements they deem appropriate.

I see what you're saying Chinny but I don't agree with your conclusions. For one, I don't think there's anything wrong with getting a HDTV for HD gaming and SD television -- I did exactly that with my first one for six months. Indeed, the Freeview tuner in my Toshiba seems to work black voodoo magic on the signal, because it's the best SD source I've ever seen.

For two, it'll be years before we see DVB-2 tuners shipping in TVs, and that's a long time to put off a purchase. They won't appear until well after HD terrestrial starts broadcasting, I claim; look at Freesat. That's been switched on for six months now, and the specs known for a year, do any HDTVs integrate a Freesat tuner?

And finally, even if you do go down the integrated tuner route, you probably still won't get PVR functionality without a STB, and that's pretty key these days I think.

I think there'll be as many people bothered about it as people who bought a GX4000.

Heh.
I have a 15 year old CRT telly (with teletext and it claims to have stereo but I don't believe it). It can sort of get BBC2 on channel 46 if the weather is right, via a massive roof mounted aerial. And that's it. That's courtesy of a half megawatt transmitter on the tallest structure in Scotland.

Terrestrial digital HD = LOL

Seeing as the SD stuff is still a shitty MPEG, yes, I see your LOL and raise you a ROFLCOPTER.

Freesat has broadcast free-to-air HD channels since May though, with no change in the Sky HD pricing structure in that time.

How many TV's have ever had a satellite receiver in them? I doubt you'll see many if any with built in Freesat decoders. And there are quite a few TV's around with built in PVR's now.

Freesat has been broadcasting HD for a while.

Sky will not drop the premium charge unless they really have to. Remember the switch to Sky Digital?

Yeah but that was when the only satellite reception in the UK was Sky, who wouldn't licence the crypto. There is a much better business case for Freesat decoders than for Freeview HD ones[1]. So far only Panasonic do this though.

Not enough for my liking, as the choice (when I advised a friend) came down to "clearly inferioir panel + low rent single-tuner PVR" or "much better screen" for the same wonga.

[1] out now, not soon; uses Sky dishes and cabling so a lot of people already have most of what they need; much better coverage of the country than Freeview will ever manage, even after analogue switch-off.

Thanks for the advice, Doc - we're going to be looking for a 42-46" TV OF DOOM in the January sales, so that's all good to know.

From a quick read around it's going to be fucking years before terrestrial HD signals are rolled out to any significant degree, and a while longer after that before SD transmissions start getting scaled back to make room for it. I think it might be a worthwhile consideration for the telly after the one someone is looking to buy right now.

We must be a forum full of morons, then.

So fucking annoying, that. I would be so much happier with a satellite tuner card in the back of my Media Center PC than a stupid set-top box, but Sky won't let me.

No. I'm talking about making sure that the telly has an HD compatible tuner built in, not just buying an HD telly.

I do feel that way today, my brain is not working...

And how foolish do I feel for buying a 1080p HD ready TV last year when I should have waited till 2012