Buying new TV - Advice needed

Dodongo77

Dodongo77

New member
Well, I shall soon be moving into a new apartment to start my new job. After suffering through years of non-HD tube TVs, I've decided that I need to get a nice HDTV for myself.

So, I've been doing lots of research, and found that direct view CRTs are the best value. I decided that the Sony 30'' KV-30HS420 for $850 (plus tax/shipping) was the best choice. But, of course, the damned thing is a beastly 150 lbs and 23 inches deep. Therefore not condusive to being moved around if the job situation changes or if the TV needs repairs. Plus, I'd need a strong TV stand to hold the TV, so add another $150 to the cost.

My parents were trying to push me towards a 26'' CRT but I refuse to get a smaller TV. I decided to take a look into LCDs, and Costco has the Sharp 32'' LC32GA5U and the Philips 32'' 32PF7320A both for $1500 (plus tax). If I went this route, I wouldn't need to get as expensive of a stand.

So now that I've opened myself to the possibility of spending $1500 (when I had originally thought of only spending <$1000 for a TV), it has really opened up the possibilities. There's the Sony KDF-E42A10 42'' rear projection LCD that can be had for $1900 (tax/shipping already included). It looks like a really nice TV (although this is the only one I haven't checked out in person yet). Plenty of inputs, nice size, quality brand, good value. BUT, it's not exactly as mobile as the 32'' LCD. Nor does it have the benefit of being cheap like the CRT. But it's probably the best of the three.

And so at this point I dunno WTF to do. 42'' is definitely the max size I can consider since I'll be sitting ~8 feet from the TV. And I can't help but think, if I'd spend $1625 for a 32'' LCD, why not just go whole hog and spend $1900 for the Projection, after all how often am I going to be buying a TV. This, of course, is not even taking into account that I'd like to get some sort of home theater in a box setup so I can get the full HT experience.


And now the short version:
Moving into new apartment, gonna be sitting ~8 feet from the TV. Main uses: videogames, DVDs, watching TV/sports. Thought about the following options:

Sony 30'' KV-30HS420 ($900) - Direct View CRT
+cheap, good picture
-heavy, unmovable, smallest picture, need sturdy TV stand

Sharp 32'' LC32GA5U or Philips 32'' 32PF7320A ($1625) - Flat Screen LCD
+bigger screen, light/easy to move, can skimp on a stand
-not totally sold on LCD for TV, not a good value?

Sony 42'' KDF-E42A10 ($1900) - Rear projection LCD
+biggest picture, good value
-expensive, middle ground of moveability

I'm open to all opinions and any other suggestions about what to get. My mantras when shopping are to pay for quality and to get the best you can at the time without breaking the bank.
 
I just picked up a Sony 34" 34XBR960 and i cant tell you how impressed i am with it. The picture quality was very noticibly better than the other Tube HDTV's and is on par with an expensive plasma. The final cost was about 1700$, which was a bit more than i wanted to spend, but after seeing the picture in person at a few different stores i couldnt resisist. The TV is mainly hooked up to my HTPC and the HTPC does all the video and audio processing. IE, my HDTV and TV Tuner is on the PC, my DVD Player is on the PC, etc. I really think the HDTV quality is better with my HDTV Wonder than the TV's tuner, or very close.

A few things to consider if your goign to get a TV to hook up to your HTPC.

1. Projections - Dont go projection, it is very easy to burn in your windows desktop, static games, etc and ruin your TV.

2. LCD's - Be sure you know the resolution of the LCD, most of the lower priced ones actually downgrade everything to a 480p signal (IE 720x480 is the Max resolution). LCD's mostly have terrible viewing angles.

3. Plasma's - Overpriced, can have bad viewing angles, do not have a long viewing life. Can have burn in troubles. Most less expensive ones have a very low resolution.

Keeping that in mind, and after seeing the quality of the XBR 960 next to plasma's, etc. It was an easy decision to get thatover everything else.
 
I have the erlier model of the pansonic th-42pwd8uy, and sure it doesn't have enough pixels to be considered a HD, but the pixels are damn pretty and I'd take one of those over anything else you mentioned in the same price range.

I recomend hitting up a showroom and checking out the various display technologies for yourself. When I started out shopping for a new TV I was planing on HD and looking towards DLP or LCD, but after checking things out in person I came to the opinion that a good ED plasma simply has better overall image quality.
 
Hater said:
3. Plasma's - Overpriced, can have bad viewing angles, do not have a long viewing life. Can have burn in troubles. Most less expensive ones have a very low resolution.
Click to expand...
I'll agree about the resolution, but newer plasmas have long life (8 hours per day of viewing and they'll last over 20 years, iirc), and burn in isnt really an issue anymore. It was true a year or two ago though.
 
In short, you must view the TV sets in person. Go to a few stores and look at different models. You cannot select a TV based on specifications or online prices. The image quality varies so much from model to model and manufacturer to manufacturer that you never know what you will get without seeing it in action first.

I'd reccommend getting a DLP set. They offer the most bang for the buck. Samsung is the leader in DLP technology. The '67 series are going for cheap because the newer '78 series just came out.
 
I'm going tomorrow to check out that 42'' Sony at Best Buy.

From what I've read over on AVSForum, the DLPs seem to have a problem with lag/sync issues while playing games, which is sort of a deal breaker.
 
I bought the Sony 36HS420 36" 4:3 TV

It seems silly to buy one of the 16:9 TVs when you get the same screen width with the 4:3 equivalent...difference being that when you display 4:3 material (which is still the majority of programs, games, etc) you get a BIGGER picture than on the 16:9 TV

The TV I bought from the Sony store came with the matching stand included and it looks really nice.

The TV is very heavy however I haven't had any problems moving it myself...yet. You see, I have hardwood flooring in the living room and you can simply slide it and it doesn't damage the surface (must have a smooth bottom on the stand)

It has absolutely amazing picture quality and I would recommend it highly. The only thing is the sound is just average on these TVs...if you have a seperate sound system then it doesn't mean anything anyway
 
if you are interested in HDTV then you'll want a widescreen set since HDTV sources are widescreen only (720p/1080i). I wish someone had told me that before I bought my 4:3 Sony KV-32HS510

I should also point out this site for guys currently looking for a HDTV set.
http://www.drmadness.com/
 
Last edited:
MyTMouse said:
It seems silly to buy one of the 16:9 TVs when you get the same screen width with the 4:3 equivalent...
Click to expand...

I suppose I could just be missunderstanding what you meant, but display size is mesured on the diangonal; meaning a 36" 4:3 screen would be about 28.7" in width, while a 16:9 36" screen would be about 31.4" wide. So yeah you will obviously get a bigger picture with 4:3 conetent on a 4:3 display, but a 36" 16:9 TV is by all means wider than a 36"" 4:3.

Also, widescreen support in games is becoming fairly common, so being a gamer isn't really much of an excuse to avoid widescreen displays.
 
After taking a look at the Sony 42'' listed above and the Samsung 42'' DLP at Circuit City, I've definitely decided to go with the Sony.
 
Really? Did the DLP you saw have some rainbow effects or something? I have never seen a LCD that could compete with the image quality of a well calibrated DLP.
 
kyleb said:
I suppose I could just be missunderstanding what you meant, but display size is mesured on the diangonal; meaning a 36" 4:3 screen would be about 28.7" in width, while a 16:9 36" screen would be about 31.4" wide. So yeah you will obviously get a bigger picture with 4:3 conetent on a 4:3 display, but a 36" 16:9 TV is by all means wider than a 36"" 4:3.

Also, widescreen support in games is becoming fairly common, so being a gamer isn't really much of an excuse to avoid widescreen displays.
Click to expand...


Problem is Sony doesn't have a 36" HDTV CRT 16:9 TV they have a 34" which is EXACTLY the same width as the 4:3 TV so displaying widescreen format material will result in the same viewing area on both TVs.

Advantage 4:3 Tv because of the overall bigger screen IMHO
 
MyTMouse said:
Problem is Sony doesn't have a 36" HDTV CRT 16:9 TV they have a 34" which is EXACTLY the same width as the 4:3 TV so displaying widescreen format material will result in the same viewing area on both TVs.

Advantage 4:3 Tv because of the overall bigger screen IMHO
Click to expand...


The screen on a 16:9 TV is bigger than on a 4:3 TV as kyleb said. When you watch 4:3 programming in "Wide" mode, it's still bigger.

And, to Ratchet's point, only a widescreen set will display HDTV resolutions natively.

There is no reason to buy a 4:3 HD set.
 
Hater said:
A few things to consider if your goign to get a TV to hook up to your HTPC.

1. Projections - Dont go projection, it is very easy to burn in your windows desktop, static games, etc and ruin your TV.
Click to expand...

That is not true. I've had a 48" Mits HD CRT-RPTV for almost two years now, connected to my HTPC, and it doesn't show the slightest hint of burn-in.

Don't get me wrong, you have to make sure you calibrate the set and be sure to not leave it on a static image overnight, but for the most part, burn-in is a non-issue. Gaming is fantastic on this set!

Let's also not forget CRT-RPTVs still offer the best PQ of all current technologies, even the King of Videophiles himself, Joe Kane, admits the same.

Maybe in another 5 years (or less), another display technology will leap-frog CRT RPTVs, but for now, they still reign king. [But they're still big and heavy]

My folks finally got around to buying a HD set last month, 55" Mits CRT-RPTV for $1400. They absolutely love it. After I calibrated it (had to wait for 100 hours of use), they're happy they didn't go with Plasma, LCD, or DLP.

One more thing, on my 48", I sit 6-7 feet away and it's perfect. I would say 8 feet away for 55" and at least 10 feet away for 65".
 
taz291819 said:
Let's also not forget CRT-RPTVs still offer the best PQ of all current technologies, even the King of Videophiles himself, Joe Kane, admits the same.
Click to expand...
Granted, he has to be talking about sitting directly in front of one as when moving off to the side a bit the image quality drops quickly.
 
Crazy Legs said:
The screen on a 16:9 TV is bigger than on a 4:3 TV as kyleb said. When you watch 4:3 programming in "Wide" mode, it's still bigger.

And, to Ratchet's point, only a widescreen set will display HDTV resolutions natively.

There is no reason to buy a 4:3 HD set.
Click to expand...


How do you figger that? The screens are the exact same width...widescreen material is the same size on both TVs :nuts:
 
kyleb said:
Granted, he has to be talking about sitting directly in front of one as when moving off to the side a bit the image quality drops quickly.
Click to expand...

Agreed. You really only have about a 80-degree viewing angle on CRT-RPTVs.

With my 48" at 6-7 feet away, the good viewing angle only allows my love seat and my recliner. So, 3 people get good viewing, and the other two seats are outside of that 80-degrees, and indeed the PQ does drop dramatically.

Of course at 10 feet, you could easily fit a 5-person seating arrangement.

(Let's not forget about audio, the "sweet spot" normally only incorporates 2 seating positions). Gotta love Home Theaters!
 
Good point on the audio, I almost always sit right where I have everything calibrated to and never really considered how that plays in with viewing angle. I simply shied away from stuff with narrow viewing angles because I have a pretty spread out furniture arrangement and tend to have friends over for gaming quite a bit. But yeah, nothing beats a the image quality of good CRT, and that goes for rear projection CRTS as well as long as you keep within the optimal viewing angle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top