Purchasing a new TV

[giacona]

I am going to be in the market to purchase a new TV by this time next year. I am probally going to be getting two. One for my bedroom and one from my living room which is where my main home theatre set up will be.

I'm pretty sure I want a plasma. I know I want to get at least a 40 -60 inch for the living room. The bedroom I may get a 32 - 40. Anyhow I know different features and technologies come out all the time. I want to make sure the TV's I purchase will not be obsolete tomorrow.

I'm trying to get one that will be 3d HDTV whcih I hear is new. In addition since 1080P is the norm now, I am wondering if they make any TV's that are 1440 so when it replaces 1080 I am ahead of the game. I know right now 1080 is mostly on blue ray players. Cable compaines only have a select few channels right now.

If anyone can help me or give me advice on this I would appreciate it.

 

[Midwesthonky]

I am not aware of any TVs on the market higher than 1080p. Doesn't mean they aren't out there, just that they are so rare I haven't seen anything about them. Maybe something was shown at CES and I didn't catch the article.

But...1080p is the current best standard for HDTV. And I mean there is a standard so it will last you quite a few years. Not to mention there is some argument as to if you could differentiate any higher resolution with your human eyes. Higher resolution would be more evident on bigger sets, but for 42" and below on a quality set... I doubt you could see a difference.

The biggest thing going on HDTVs now (besides 3D) is the quality of the black color and the refresh rate to avoid blurring during high speed action. The plasmas are typically better than LCD on both accounts but technology is rapidly helping LCD catch up. The newest non-3D sets announced at CES seem to focus on better black color and refresh rates improvements.

As for 3D, it is a new technology and I wonder if there is even a standard agreed to by the industry on how to broadcast that signal. Anyone know? But one thing to consider with 3D is you will need glasses. At about $100 a pop for each pair (at least for the Panasonic), it gets to be a pretty pricey feature for more than 2 viewers.

As for HD channels, DirecTV has quite a few and I really enjoyed watching it. But they were such incompetent and ignorant bastards when the satellite receiver died that I dumped them for cable. I had been a 9-year customer too and I was pissed that I knew far more about their equipment than their own tech people. My cable company is Time Warner and they have a decent selection of HD channels. At least they carry about 100 or so and the ones we watch. So it works for us. There is always the off-air signal too. But my HDTV is so old that it doesn't have a digital tuner.

Not sure I really answered your questions. Personally, I am going to wait and see about the 3D technology. I'm just not convinced as my 3D experience at the theater didn't impress me. So I plan on upgrading TV to a 1080p plasma with the best black contrast color I can find and enough HDMI inputs to satisfy future equipment additions.

 

[Greddy87]

At the moment i dont know any tvs higher then 1080p also.. Plasma's use 10x more energy, so there goes ur electricity bill.. Lcds are more effiecient and the best LED Based LCD tv at the moment would be Samsung UN55B8500.. Heres the link, check the reviews.. http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/samsung-un55b8500/4505-6482_7-33740174.html?tag=contentMain;contentBody

 

[Adam]

Plasma's use 10x more energy, so there goes ur electricity bill.. Lcds are more effiecient...

Plasmas use more energy at peak, but I don't think that they use more on average. I'm basing that on Cruthfield's reported measurements, but I believe them.

 

[Greddy87]

Adam your probably right.. What I heard this on the news was a majority of californins that have plasma tvs have seen there electricity bill sky rocket... Calling the plasma tvs, energy vampires lol..

 

[bandphan]

Adam your probably right.. What I heard this on the news was a majority of californins that have plasma tvs have seen there electricity bill sky rocket... Calling the plasma tvs, energy vampires lol..

Adam statement is correct. Plasma operates different then LCDs. Also many of the power consumption looneys take their information from displays that have not been calibrated and are in torch mode, which results in much higher energy usage numbers

http://reviews.cnet.com/green-tech/tv-consumption-chart/

 

[Halon451]

Adam your probably right.. What I heard this on the news was a majority of californins that have plasma tvs have seen there electricity bill sky rocket... Calling the plasma tvs, energy vampires lol..

This coming from the state that also wanted to ban the sale of black colored cars because it supposedly takes more energy to keep the interiors cool... just saying.

 

[njedpx3]

Consider wireless streaming BD player

... As for HD channels, DirecTV has quite a few and I really enjoyed watching it. But they were such incompetent and ignorant bastards when the satellite receiver died that I dumped them for cable. I had been a 9-year customer too and I was pissed that I knew far more about their equipment than their own tech people. My cable company is Time Warner and they have a decent selection of HD channels. At least they carry about 100 or so and the ones we watch. So it works for us. There is always the off-air signal too. But my HDTV is so old that it doesn't have a digital tuner.
....

Midwesthonky,

Nice post and I agree. However, even though a lot of us Audioholics, or maybe all of us Audioholics, are smarter than the satellite vendors, I have found their picture quality as well as fiber optics, to be far superior to cable. I currently have DishNetwork and even the standard channels have better PQ than cable.

OP if you are not buying for a year then the technology might change again, but you are thinking along the right track. Another thing to consider is streaming TV. I recently had a Panosonic DMP-BD30BK quit playing Blu Ray. Panasonic customer support is still scratching their heads after more than a month. It still plays audio CDs and standard DVDs fine and will not play BD even though I upgraded to the most current firmware. Anyway I bought a LG 390BD blu Ray player wchic will stream NetFlix, YouTube and CinemaNow. It just had another price drop on Amazon to $162.44 Anyway it comes with built in wireless ( be careful of those that say wireless ready like Samsung; an addtion $100 for wireless card). Yes, the PQ is not 1080p BD quality but probably as good or better than standard DVD and if you have NetFlix you queue up an Instant Movie on your PC, then watch it seconds later on your BD player.

Peace and Serenity,

Forest Man

 

[njedpx3]

Adam your probably right.. What I heard this on the news was a majority of californins that have plasma tvs have seen there electricity bill sky rocket... Calling the plasma tvs, energy vampires lol..

Greddy87,

What the liberal media failed to tell you was that ALL Californians have seen their eletricity bills sky rocket --- Plasma or not


Peace and Serenity,

Forest Man

 

[BoredSysAdmin]

couple of side notes: First of all as far as I'm aware plasmas TV don't come smaller than 42", so it's ether 42" plasma for your bedroom or you'd have to opt for LCD tv.
I own LG 42" plasma and thou it's only 720p - PQ is amazing - Planet Earth in 720p looks just stunning with deep blacks and very rich colors - something LCD tvs have issues with.
Pioneer seems to be big plasma innovator so - I'd go with them, granted my budget allows it.
For LCDs I think Sharp AQUOS line TV are consistently good and getting one would be wise choice.
My second choice - budget conscious are Samsung/LG.
FYI: A lot of LCD tv makers grabbed on single parameter - contrast ratio and seem to making ridiculous claims - 1:to million etc.... none of them true and plasmas always beats them easily apples to apples.

 

[Midwesthonky]

njedpx3
- I agree the picture quality of DirecTV is better than what I get from Time Warner Cable. But they wanted me to commit to a 2 year contract to replace their burned out receiver after I had been with the for 9 years. I also wanted a digital tuner since my HDTV is old enough to not have the digital tuner. I live in the midwest. When the satellite goes out to really nasty weather, I REALLY like the seeing the local broadcast to know if I should start hauling the valuable electronics to the basement...after the wife and kids of course. Yeah...after them...

As for choices, I am partial to the Pioneer Kuro but with Pioneer getting out and the price point... anyway, I'm still a fan of going and looking at the TVs. I was originally thinking hey, maybe an LCD. Then I went and looked. Plasma still beats them for the action. My personal preference and hopefully will have one by June/July or earlier.

Then maybe I'll go back to DirecTV since I will be a new customer and I get their better pricing.

 

[Greddy87]

njedpx3 --Dont shoot the msgner, I got it off ET aka Entertainment Tonight lol..

 

[Midwesthonky]

Greddy 87 - So that's where the best technical info is - Entertainment Tonight!

Hahahaha...

I was worried about the energy consumption of the plasma tvs. Then I sat down and did some math. Will I spend $20 a year in higher energy costs to have a TV I enjoy? Heck yeah!! But then that was based on some number of hour of tv viewing per day. I don't hit that average due to work so my cost impact per year is even less. Plus the newest plasmas are getting even more energy efficient.