Big Screen tv Q

Disc Jockey

We are thinking about a couple of used tv's 61-64", either the Pioneer Elite PRO-730HD or Sony KP61XBR300. (I can get either for about $800-$900) I currently have Dish standard service with only an S video as it's "best" video output. I have heard that these big screen tv's look pretty crappy with analog signals but the lierature on the Sony claims to have a good picture with standard signals using their DSC technology and I'm sure there's something similar with the Pio.

Is this just marketing BS or can they actually put out a good picture with analog signals? If not is there anything that will put out a good pic with s-video or do I need to upgrade to a Dish receiver that will output dvi or hdmi.

Thanks.

DJ

shawn474

In my humble opinion, I have found that in upgrading to a big screen television, it makes sense to get digital cable or digital satellite. DirecTv advertises itself as "digital quality", but it looks no better than most analog channels. The drawback of having a big screen tv is that the analog signal flaws are much more evident than on a smaller screen. Just my .02 cents, but I hear all the time of people getting big screens and being disappointed in the picture quality.

Disc Jockey

That's pretty much what I figured, just wanted to get some input from someone that knows. Thank you.

McLoki

I think it is very tv specific how good it does with analog signals.

Alot of it comes down to how far are you going to be sitting from the TV. If you are more than 12-14 feet back, most 61" tv's should look ok with standard cable. If you are sitting 6-8' away, most 61" tvs will look like crap with anything less than DVD or HD quality.

Good luck,

Michael

Disc Jockey

We will be sitting about 8-10' away but we could rearrange the room, and rewire the speaks to sit about 16-18' away but not sure if thats gonna happen.

Maybe we should look at a smaller tv. Do you have any experience/thoughts on how either of those tv's handle analog signals. The signal coming in to the reciever is digital, it's just output in analog.

Lowell_M

You might not be very happy sitting 8'-10'from a 61" TV. I have a 51" Hitachi and sit 9' away which seems just right. I could probably be a foot or two closer no problem, but the closer you get, the more you will see the pixels in the picture. I forgot the rule of thumb for viewing distance vs. screen size, but for your viewing distance, I might choose something smaller than 61". make sure you do some viewing of the TV's you are looking at from the distance you are planning on sitting from at home before you buy (if you can).

polkatese

I have a PE 520HD, connected to DirecTV 10-250HD receiver on component connection. It looks great. The PE is one amazing RPTV, and if you can get it for that price, that's an awesome price considering it was $6700 back in 2004. If you can get 730HDi, that model comes with HDMI, but 2 DVI are good enough.

Good luck!

Disc Jockey

Looks like the rule of thumb is about 2x screen width for HD and 3x for standard tv for anything 42" and up, 8-12 feet for screens 36-40" diagonal.

I'd love to get that PE but may not be the best choice unless we make some changes. Guess I've got a few decisions to think about...

Thanks for all the help!

bobman1235

I don't see it mentioned, but you cannot get HD through S-Video, only component or DVI/HDMI.

univera

My two cents....

Since you are already looking at spending at least $900.00 and the t.v. appears to be too large for your space, why not drop down in size and get a new, 40-42" screen for a little more in price? I believe there is a 1080p, Westinghouse 40 or 42" LCD t.v. available right around $1000. While not tops in picture quality, it is generally rated as a great bang for the buck set. I don't recall whether it has a built in HD tuner or not, but that may not be an issue for you if Dish t.v. gives you local stations. There are other sets around the price as well.

Bigger is not always better as you are finding out...I am all about getting a deal on a used piece, but I personally wouldn't buy a used set unless it was under a year old. No science behind that, just a gut feeling.

I found this info useful when researching my HD tv purchase. Take it for what its worth as I have seen it questioned by at least one member.

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/hitech/1137/maxing-out-resolution.html

Maurice

I sit 11' away from my 61" and its cool. You should be fine at 10', but 8' might be pushing it.

Disc Jockey

Yeah, I knew about the s-video/HD thing, that's why I was asking about picture quality with analog signals. If it was acceptable, I was going to get the tv first then upgrade to the hd receiver later. If not, then I was going to wait until I could get both at the same time.

univera, I've thought about going with a 42"ish lcd also. Had looked a little at the Westinghouse and a Vizio but I have a 37" 4:3 now and wasn't sure if a 42" was going to be enough bigger to seem like a worthwhile upgrade. Thanks for the link.

shawn474

DJ,
I have a 47" RPT Panasonic that I love (I got it for a steal). I sit about 11.5 feet away and it is plenty big for me. My parents got the 42" Samsung DLP and that is a nice set. If I could have afforded it I definitely would have got a DLP, LCD or plasma. Check out panasonic and samsung; they both have good picture quality and are reasonably priced.

Shawn

Disc Jockey

Thanks for the tip, will do. I'm thinking that around 47" is going to be the sweet spot for us in terms of size.

DJ

shawn474

In doing a little search, you may want to go to Best Buy or Circuit City and check out the Samsung DLP sets if you're interested. They are on sale this week. The 42" set, 46" set and 50" set are ranging between 1250 dollars and 1500 dollars. Not sure if that is in your budget, or if there are better options in that price range, but I have owned and always liked Samsung and Panasonic.
Shawn

PolkThug

Don't buy a WS TV unless you are going to watch WS material.

Disc Jockey

All, well most, of the dvd's we watch are WS but most of the regular programming is not. Can you not watch 4:3 on a WS with black bars on the sides instead of on top/bottom or does it get squished and look goofy?

bobman1235

You can have the black boxes on the sides (pillarboxing or windowboxing), or you can just stretch the image to fit your TV.

More and more shows are starting to be broadcast in HD as well, so you may find when you eventually get an HD tuner that many of the shows you are watching in 4:3 will actually be 16:9.

shawn474

You won't even notice the letterbox or black bars after 5 minutes of watching the first program.

Shawn

Disc Jockey

Ahhh, I see.

Yeah, I don't notice the letterbox bars now so don't think it would be any different with the pillarboxing.

PolkThug

Most 4:3 material looks like crap on WS dispays, even when its not stretched out.

For instance, 4:3 source material has more clarity on my 4:3 big screen then it does on my WS big screen. That's also what I observed when I used to sell TV's. TV's that are made for displaying in 4:3 are better at it than a WS displaying 4:3.

Lowell_M

PolkThug wrote:

Most 4:3 material looks like crap on WS dispays, even when its not stretched out.

For instance, 4:3 source material has more clarity on my 4:3 big screen then it does on my WS big screen. That's also what I observed when I used to sell TV's. TV's that are made for displaying in 4:3 are better at it than a WS displaying 4:3.

+1 I've noticed the same thing.

shawn474

I definitely do agree with PolkThug. That said, though, if it is true high definition that you are looking for (with Digital cable HDTV or DirecTv HDTV) there is really no other way to go than to get widescreen. I have digital cable and find myself watching the high def. channels almost exclusively for that reason. Soon, I would imagine, all signals will be digital / high def. and nobody will have anything but widescreen. Regardless of 4:3 aspect or not, widescreen or not, etc., analog signals look worse on big screens vs. smaller screens. Just food for thought and maybe assumptive on my part, but is definitely my experience owning a few of both.

Disc Jockey

Hmmm, that's good to know as it will have to double duty as a tv and "movie screen" and we watch a lot of Discovery, TLC,E!, Nick, etc in addition to the dvd's and network.

I'm interested to see how many channels Dish puts out in HD/WS and how quickly they might add more. But it's starting to seem that we would be better off waiting till we're ready to make the full plunge - tv, dish receiver and probably a new dvd player. Either that or just a somewhat larger 4:3 set but I'd hate to find myself two years down the road looking to replace it again.

Lowell_M

Honestly, I have just gotten used to the stretched-out 4:3 picture. We seem to be getting more and more HD content and I primarily watch movies on my WS anyway. To me it's more important to have the GREAT picture for HDTV and DVD's than to worry about 4:3 analog TV stations quality.

Disc Jockey

Heck, one if not two of our locals still broadcast in mono. I can probably get used to just about anything. Dish does not show my locals available in HD.

shawn474

That's what I hate about the dish. Gotta love the fact that they have you subscribe to the HD package, but will not guarantee local channels. Get cable, dude!
Shawn

Disc Jockey

Can't, wish I could but cable's not available where I live. Stuck with Dish or Dtv. :mad:

univera

Why buy a 4:3 set when it is destined to become outdated. Eventually, everything will be HD. If you enjoy Discovery like you say you do, get a widescreen set. HD Discovery channel is the best picture out there, hands down. You will be amazed at the lifelike images. You won't even care about analog as you will not enjoy watching them after seeing how good your HD channels really are. I've barely watched any analog content since getting my HD set.

scottvamp

DirectTV has all locals HD channels now... What is so hard about going to Sat?
The problem is your trying to buy a TV around an old analog box. Thats like buying a new tv around a VCR. To answer your question, ya about 15 years ago thier was a degrade in pic quality with a "big screen", that really doesn't apply now. Definatly not unwatchable by any means.

If you have never seen HD on a high quality TV at home. You have no ideal what your missing, honestly. And thats a good thing. I am so spoiled now, i have a hard time watching football if its not HD. And the standard pic is great.
Discovery channel HD is unbelieveable - jaw dropping.:eek:

Disc Jockey

There's nothing hard about going to Sat, just a matter of cost. We're used to having a pvr and the hd pvr runs about $500. Not a big deal necessarily but it does need to be budgeted for.

I was leaning toward doing it one at a time when this thread started, but I knew next to nothing about the real world considerations of a big screen and HD. Now I've about done a 180. My target screen is smaller, probably not a rptv, and I'll probably wait a bit till I can get it all done at once. That way my budget will go up and prices will go down Should only be 6 months or so anyway. Maybe less depending on what kind of mood Santa is in.

BTW, direct tv doesn't offer hd locals over the sat in all markets. Many or most, like dish, are only available with an off-air antenna.