What now? (HDTV)

[G.]

OK, went to Tweeter to check out the TV's - getting ready for HDNet. In my house, the TV is basically always on. (Sad, I know.) So for me, plasma is sort of rulled out. Plus the cost (for TRUE HD) is still $6k plus. I know, I'll go with DLP! (research, research, research, ask, ask, ask, ok. DLP it is!)

Turns out that the lamps in DLP run about 5000 hrs. before burnout. Turns out that 5000 hrs. is optimistic. Turns out they cost $250.00 to replace. So for my viewing pleasure, I will get to replace a $250.00 bulb about once PER YEAR! That's the cost of a 27 inch tube TV.

OK, LCoS is not ready yet, plasma too $$ and suffer burn-in, DLP not looking good anymore, so what are my choices??

Turns out that the TV manufacturers are really moving away from tubes. Didn't have any at the last Vegas show (I forget what it's called).

Biggest tube 16:9 ratio is 36 inches (there is a 38 inch, but not at the store I was at). It is HD, but $2500.00. For a tube. Can I get a better tube value if I go 4:3?

I am hearing that people are being advised to go with 4:3. Anyone know why?

So, what do I do?

[nz_climber]

Get one of each! :p :rolleyes:

[cart7]

Plasma's and LCD's are still very expensive. Burn-out will occur but it will take awhile, unfortunately, the plasma screen won't just go out. The picture will gradually degrade after awhile. LCD's are known for pixels going out. The average LCD screen is only warrantied for 1 - 2 years and the cost to replace a LCD screen is astronomical.

Direct view sets are going the wayside as are glass based rear projectors. 36" direct view sets are extremely heavy, 300 + lbs. The tubes go out like any other and are very expensive. Rear projection sets also have 3 tubes which begin degrading almost as soon as the set is first plugged in. Average cost to replace all 3 tubes in one of these sets. $1200 - 1400.

As someone in the business (TV tech for Best Buy), I'd still suggest the DLP. The bulbs will go down in price since this is new technology anyway. The picture on the DLP's is better than any, other than a direct view. I'd suggest the Samsung line. You can get a 50" for around $3500.

Regardless of which system you choose, I'd strongly suggest the Extended service plan. With that, you won't have to worry about those DLP light bulbs for 4 years.

[KLang]

Sony has a 40" 4:3. Tweeter should have had one. It should produce a 16:9 image of 34-36". It does weigh 304 pounds.

If you want to go bigger then that and are uncomfortable with plasma, I agree that DLP is probably your best option.

[rosawendel]

DLP, hands down.
plus, the best buy and circuit city has the samsungs, and both went down another 500 bucks this week. eventually, i might even be able to afford one!

[cart7]

I need to expand further on the DLP's. The RCA and Samsung models use the DLP light engine model. An approximately 150w mercury vapor bulb (approx. 3 inches across) is aimed at a light engine chip. The light coming off the bulb is focused down using lenses to a single beam, goes through a spinning color wheel (for color) and strikes the light engine. Basically a Pentium sized chip with a thumbnail size mirror in the middle. In this mirror are cut 922,000 tiny mirrors that swivel one way to pass light and the other to block. Each mirror represents one pixel. BTW, the version 2 engine chip is already in the works at around 1.2 million mirrors. The light leaves it and is sent through more lenses till it's projected onto the screen like a normal rear projector.

The 2nd system that Panasonic and Sony uses has the same type bulb going through focusing lenses but that's were the similarities end. In these sets, the beam is broken into 3, shot through 3 tiny LCD panels( one red, one blue and the other green), then sent through the lenses again to be projected.

The Panasonic and Sony engines have more to go wrong vs. the RCA/Samsung. When purchasing one of these the bulb is the least of you're problems. If the light engine in one of these fails (regardless of brand), those engines are running approximately $2500 - 3000 to replace. :eek:

Like I said. Buy the extended service plan.

[oddlycalm]

Gotta agree with rosawendel here. I just helped a friend through the same process. The Samsung 50" is a nice piece, and it's affordable. Except for he lamp replacements, the chances of having to have repairs done is very low. TI's DLP chips have a reliability record up there with microprocessors. Don't forget, you also need the HD set top box.

BTW, the Panasonic/Sony system with the three LCD panels is really an LCD projection unit, not DLP, and you will have to adjust convergence just as in a CRT based unit. I don't have the hard numbers, but I can tell you that thos LCD panels will take a dump at some point, unlike the DLP chip.

Generally speaking, HDTV will command a premium for some time, at least until the number of units shipping brings an economy of scale to the products. For now, every component that is needed for HD from the set to the source sticks you with an extra charge. The upside is that once you have seen really well done HDTV, it really is as good as you always thought it would be... :thumbup:

oc

[Insomniac]

Biggest tube 16:9 ratio is 36 inches (there is a 38 inch, but not at the store I was at). It is HD, but $2500.00. For a tube. Can I get a better tube value if I go 4:3?

I am hearing that people are being advised to go with 4:3. Anyone know why?

So, what do I do?

The reason people are recommending the 40" Wega is you get a ~36.75" 16:9 widescreen when it is in the 16:9 enhanced mode. If you still watch a good bit of 4:3 TV, you get that at 40" undistorted and you also get 1080i at 16:9 undistorted. Normally with a 16:9 TV, your choices for 4:3 are either a stretch (they usually stretch the edges), a zoom (chops off some of the top and bottom) or gray bars on the left and right. And with that 34" WS you get ~27.75" or ~31" on the 38" WS.

[Insomniac]

I almost positive the burn-in on plasmas are a non-issue now. It was when they first came out a few years ago.

You can consider LCD TVs. They are improving a good bit.

[oddlycalm]

Forgot one thing. Anyone that is advising buyers to get a 4:3 aspect ratio screen now is not doing them any favors. We've had 16:9 since 1997 mostly to watch DVD's, but with the slow but relentless move to the 16:9 standard I simply wouldn't consider a 4:3 set unless you knew it would be a 2-3yr window until it's replacement.

oc

[Insomniac]

Forgot one thing. Anyone that is advising buyers to get a 4:3 aspect ratio screen now is not doing them any favors. We've had 16:9 since 1997 mostly to watch DVD's, but with the slow but relentless move to the 16:9 standard I simply wouldn't consider a 4:3 set unless you knew it would be a 2-3yr window until it's replacement.

oc

I think it's a tough call. I advised the 40" Wega as opposed to the 34" WS. You get a larger 16:9 image plus a bigger 4:3 one. And they are both undistorted. I don't see a down side here. This whole HDTV switch has been a mess. Just think about all the people who bought TVs through ~2001-02. Unless they have the DVI interface they're screwed. A lot of people don't think the switch will happen by 2006. Even then, I believe that is for OTA networks, not cable.

[cart7]

I think it's a tough call. I advised the 40" Wega as opposed to the 34" WS. You get a larger 16:9 image plus a bigger 4:3 one. And they are both undistorted. I don't see a down side here. This whole HDTV switch has been a mess. Just think about all the people who bought TVs through ~2001-02. Unless they have the DVI interface they're screwed. A lot of people don't think the switch will happen by 2006. Even then, I believe that is for OTA networks, not cable.

Well, when you consider the Feds want everyone broadcasting in HD it would be foolish to run both broadcasting systems. Currently, all over the air waves broadcasters are forced to run dual channels, one NTSC and the other HD. If the Feds shutdown VHF channels 2 - 13 and sell them off like is proposed, all OTA broadcasting will be HD. That will be the new standard. Holding out will be futile since you'll have to switch anyway eventually. The big question will be how the goverment is going to handle the public outcry when everyone figures out they'll have to have a converter for each NTSC set to recieve the HD broadcasts. I could forsee some sort of subsidy to force box prices below $50 apiece.

Either way, the change is long overdue. The NTSC broadcast standard has been antiquated for years. When you consider it was a engineering feat just to add color to the signal and then rather cr*ppy stereo sound, that alone is indication of the need for change.

[Insomniac]

Well, when you consider the Feds want everyone broadcasting in HD it would be foolish to run both broadcasting systems. Currently, all over the air waves broadcasters are forced to run dual channels, one NTSC and the other HD. If the Feds shutdown VHF channels 2 - 13 and sell them off like is proposed, all OTA broadcasting will be HD. That will be the new standard. Holding out will be futile since you'll have to switch anyway eventually. The big question will be how the goverment is going to handle the public outcry when everyone figures out they'll have to have a converter for each NTSC set to recieve the HD broadcasts. I could forsee some sort of subsidy to force box prices below $50 apiece.

Either way, the change is long overdue. The NTSC broadcast standard has been antiquated for years. When you consider it was a engineering feat just to add color to the signal and then rather cr*ppy stereo sound, that alone is indication of the need for change.

They have already moved that date back once (maybe twice). I do not have HDTV, but if you do, can you tell me if all the content aired on a channels HDTV station is in HDTV. Things like the news? I think anytime they make the switch it will be a PITA unless they wait until 2020 and ban the sale of SDTVs immediately. However, I do think the set top boxes will be cheap. They will only need to receive the signal and downconvert it. I'm sure there will be more expensive ones that will also try and improve the picture.

I agree we need to change over. I still stand by the 40" recommendation over the 34" or 36" WS. It is HDTV (1080i) and you get full screen. In 2 years, if everything is actually in 16:9, you don't use FS but have a bigger WS picture. The price of the two are similar and you can continue to watch FS stuff at 40". You wouldn't be holding out since you have a HDTV capable TV. Buying an HDTV today, for the future is a guess. Everyone thinks/hopes it will be okay, but the only way to be sure is to buy it after everything is settled. It's kind of like buying a new computer today so you're ready for the net version of Windows. Why not wait until it actually comes out?

[G.]

I was told that the tube HD units are ALL 780p and the dlp's are all 1080i. Tweeter sales guy was specific about this. They take whatever signal they get, then display it 780p or 1080i, respectively. Cart7??

Thanks for all of your help with this. :thumbup:

BTW, the 4:3 recomendation came from Playb0y advisor, with no explaination.

300 + pound TV is really a bit much. I would have to look into my entertainment cabinet a bit further. It wasn't cheap (it's very cool looking) and I would hate to have to modify it to handle the weight.

[KLang]

I was told that the tube HD units are ALL 780p and the dlp's are all 1080i. Tweeter sales guy was specific about this. They take whatever signal they get, then display it 780p or 1080i, respectively. Cart7??


You've got those reversed. For the time being, non-CRT displays are usually 720p. CRT displays are 1080i. Conversion can take place either in the set or in the set-top-box. At present, ABC and ESPN transmit 720p and the rest are all 1080i. Fox is supposed to be using 720p by the end of the year.

Non-CRT displays at 1080p are on the horizon.

edit: I wouldn't trust what a salesman says at any chain electronics store.

edit again: CRT based displays usually display both 1080i and 480p (DVD) natively.

[MAXAR RE]

I am not sure when I will be getting my next TV (hopefully this time next year, though), but I do know which one, of the current choices, that I would buy:

Sony KP-65WV700

This is a 65-inch HD-ready 1080i RPTV using CRT projectors with 7 video inputs, inclucing 1 DVI and 2 composite. It has 2 coats of Sony's anti-glare compound on it to supposedly cut down on glare and reflection by 80% over the same TV without any coating at all. You can find them on the Internet for about $2600-2800 with no tax and free shipping.

Like I said, I don't know when I can get it, but it will happen. I just bought a new house with a MASSIVe living room, and my 32" Sony will not cut it in there. In fact, during construction, when my wife and I were touring the house, she walked into the room and said (without any previous prompting or campaining from me) "We're going to need a bigger TV." BOO-YAA! :thumbup: :D :thumbup:

[oddlycalm]

I think it's a tough call. I advised the 40" Wega as opposed to the 34" WS. You get a larger 16:9 image plus a bigger 4:3 one. And they are both undistorted. I don't see a down side here.

I agree that it's not a one-size-fits-all world. The downside to a 40" screen is that you will need to sit on top of such a small screen, no more than 8ft. away. Nice for a bedroom, apartment or a small house, but even in a moderate sized room the image is small for groups of more than 3-4 people. Also, a 40" Wega weighs more than my furnace does. ;)

16:9 wasn't at tough call for me at all, and that was in April of 1997 when we went to DVD. When DLP's go to 1080 I will be transitioning from that 1997 56" widescreen to a DLP front projector with a drop down screen next. For the same money people are paying for plasma screens, one can get a nice projector and a 72" (or larger) Daylite or Stewart drop down screen. Big difference in the end result.

oc

[Insomniac]

I was told that the tube HD units are ALL 780p and the dlp's are all 1080i. Tweeter sales guy was specific about this. They take whatever signal they get, then display it 780p or 1080i, respectively. Cart7??

Thanks for all of your help with this. :thumbup:

BTW, the 4:3 recomendation came from Playb0y advisor, with no explaination.

300 + pound TV is really a bit much. I would have to look into my entertainment cabinet a bit further. It wasn't cheap (it's very cool looking) and I would hate to have to modify it to handle the weight.

Almost all TVs (I'm not counting plasma or LCDs) display one of the 2 HDTV standards 1080i or 720p and convert the other signal.

For LCDs and Plasma, you want to find out their native resolution. For example, the 42" Plasma Wega has a resolution of 1024x768. That means any signal you send to it will be converted to that resolution if it fills the entire screen.

[Insomniac]

I agree that it's not a one-size-fits-all world. The downside to a 40" screen is that you will need to sit on top of such a small screen, no more than 8ft. away. Nice for a bedroom, apartment or a small house, but even in a moderate sized room the image is small for groups of more than 3-4 people. Also, a 40" Wega weighs more than my furnace does. ;)

16:9 wasn't at tough call for me at all, and that was in April of 1997 when we went to DVD. When DLP's go to 1080 I will be transitioning from that 1997 56" widescreen to a DLP front projector with a drop down screen next. For the same money people are paying for plasma screens, one can get a nice projector and a 72" (or larger) Daylite or Stewart drop down screen. Big difference in the end result.

oc

Yeah, that's one of those TVs you place once and leave forever. :)

My thinking is a projector too. I would like to see a projector that could do both 720p and 1080i so you don't need to convert anything.