B

big2bird

Junior Audioholic
Since I finished remodeling my house, I have permission for "THE BOSS" to get a new flat screen.
My friends at work have convinced me that SAmsung LED is my better choice/price point.
NOW, the question. I plan on 65"-75" deepending on my insanity at the time.
These are on sale now for about $2000. The 400KHTZ models are new at about 3 times that. Should I wait for these to come down in $$ next year? Is the 400KHTZ refresh rate REALLY that much of an improvement as I have been told?
I have been catching up on my analogue stereo stuff, and have not had the time to properly look into TV's yet.
Opinions hereby solicited. J
 
rgriffin25

rgriffin25

Moderator
4K is referring to the resolution not the refresh rate. Refresh rate is commonly spec'd out at 60, 120, 240, 480, and 600Hz. Be careful of Samsung LED if you have a wide seating layout in your room. While bright and vivid straight on, the Samsung sets have a limited viewing angle compared to plasma or LEDs using IPS panels such as LG's higher end sets. Some people will argue LEDs are the superior tech out there while others will lean towards plasma. I personally prefer plasma TVs for their more natural looking colors and lack of artificially enhancing the frame rate (refresh rate). It would be wise to do some research and go look for yourself.
 
B

big2bird

Junior Audioholic
Thank you for the education. I will look at them more closely.
 
M

Midwesthonky

Audioholic General
I ditto Griffin's comments.

Go spend time looking at the various tv's. Look at them when they are showing "Stuff" that you will be watching. Such as if you are a Sunday football watching person, then go watch them when games are on. Watch out for the sales tactics of "this model is brighter..." etc since most stores will artificially set the TV brightness up high to make it look brighter. Especially if they make more margin on that model.

Ultimately, it comes down to personal preference. My brother is an LCD guy. I'm a plasma. The motion on the LCD's just looks weird to my eyes where the plasma looks more realistic. Plus the plasma has better off-angle viewing. Yes the plasma is heavier and can use more energy, but if I am spending the money, I want the picture that makes me the happiest. I spent about a year or more analyzing the options and types before I finally pulled the trigger. The time was more about waiting until I thought I could get away with it (boss) than needing to do the research. But once I bought my plasma, I haven't looked back and have been thrilled with it.

As a side note, I do own an LCD tv which is in the basement as the exercise unit. So it doesn't get used anywhere as much as the primary plasma. But in that case I went for the best I could get for the given price point. Even so, I still prefer my plasma.
 
Cos

Cos

Audioholic Samurai
Keep in mind where you are going to have the TV. If its going to be in a well lit area with a lot of natural lighting, you probably would want to look towards LED TV as they tend to do better in that environment. They tend to be much brighter than their Plasma counterpart. I will say that my off angle viewing on my Sony is not great, but works just fine in my 20x18 room. The black levels and picture quality are as good as any plasma I have seen so far.

Plasma's are a great option overall and certain model Panasonics have received outstanding reviews.
 
Last edited:
B

big2bird

Junior Audioholic
Keep in mind where you are going to have the TV. If its going to be in a well lit area with a lot of natural lighting, you probably would want to look towards LED TV as they tend to do better in that environment. They ten to be much brighter than their Plasma counterpart I will say that my off angle viewing on my Sony is not great, but works just fine in my 20x18 room its in. The black levels are picture quality are as good as any plasma I have seen so far.

Plasma's are a great option overall and certain model Panasonics have received outstanding reviews.
No doubt pasmas are better, but the room has two huge windows, and being able to view it in this state is a must. This is why I have tentavely decided on LED. Now I just wonder if the 400 refresh rate is worth the $$$.
 
Cos

Cos

Audioholic Samurai
No doubt pasmas are better, but the room has two huge windows, and being able to view it in this state is a must. This is why I have tentavely decided on LED. Now I just wonder if the 400 refresh rate is worth the $$$.
You mean 4k? again or the 480 refresh rate?

As for 4K TV's I know that Sony is offering a 4k Media Delivery Service (server) that will have movies in 4K. They are also releasing the current TV 4K models minus the speakers which is a nice change if you have a home theater. As for refresh rate, I can not tell the difference between 120 vs 240 and my Sony has 960 which to me looks more like marketing because I have a 120/240/960 refresh rate and all look good to me. I do know that the Sony TVs handle 1080p/24 content like a champ.
 
B

big2bird

Junior Audioholic
You mean 4k? again or the 480 refresh rate?

As for 4K TV's I know that Sony is offering a 4k Media Delivery Service (server) that will have movies in 4K. They are also releasing the current TV 4K models minus the speakers which is a nice change if you have a home theater. As for refresh rate, I can not tell the difference between 120 vs 240 and my Sony has 960 which to me looks more like marketing because I have a 120/240/960 refresh rate and all look good to me. I do know that the Sony TVs handle 1080p/24 content like a champ.
I don't know why this site has no edit feature.
I actually mean both.
I am pretty TV ignorant as you can tell.
So if the refresh rate has no "noticable" diff, what about the 4K deal guys?
As for speakers, I don't care, as I will have surround.
 
fuzz092888

fuzz092888

Audioholic Warlord
There is an edit button. I believe it is in the lower right hand corner after you post but it disappears after a few hours (6?).
 
rgriffin25

rgriffin25

Moderator
I would hold off on 4k for a bit. You will likely pay a premium for a product that really isn't ready for prime time. By that I am referring to HDMI 2.0 and lack of content.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Tapatalk 2
 
B

big2bird

Junior Audioholic
I worked a show where they had 4K resolution 65" samsungs working. Wow, just wow.
 
J

jkgsxr

Junior Audioholic
As for refresh rate, I can not tell the difference between 120 vs 240

This is true for movies but if you are a gamer at all you will notice a difference in the refresh rate. You or the kids will appreciate the higher refresh rate. Just my 2c
 
zhimbo

zhimbo

Audioholic General
4K, up close *with 4K content*, looks great. 4K, with HD content, looks pretty much like an equivalent HD set. I mention "equivalent" because 4K TVs tend to be high-end in other features like contrast and motion processing, so they shouldn't be compared to low end or average HDTVs, but to high-end HDTVs.

There's very little 4K content available now. It might be coming sooner than I expect, but it isn't coming too soon.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top