Big Screen tv Q

univera

DJ, if you aren't in a hurry, I think you will see a very competive market once the holiday season kicks in. T.V.'s have already dropped a good bit and competition is going to be tight other than top of the line models. You obviously need to make sure your new set has a built in tuner if you are staying with satellite and don't get locals. I saved over $800.00 buying my LCD on Ebay, just make sure you do your homework on prices and use a reputable seller. Stay away from New York sellers and watch for required insurance prices not listed in the upfront costs. I used gear4less and was pleased. They are out of Tennessee and ship directly from their in stock warehouse. No affiliation, just happy with my purchase. If you go LCD, look at the Sony XBR2. Best set out there. No PIP, however...

shawn474

I agree with univera. Wait a little while, do some more research, get some more opinions and see where you're at when the holiday price drops come. The built in tuner is alittle more up front but saves money in the long run. The thing with DirecTv is that they OFFER the local channels in HD. However, in no way do they guarantee that you will receive any or all of the local channels. When I signed up for the HD package, I received the HD channels (discovery, espn, etc.), but only received CBS in HD for my local channels. Read your agreements carefully and they do not guarantee the locals, unless they have changed their policy in the last 6 months or so.

Good luck with the hunt.

Shawn

PolkThug

univera wrote:

Why buy a 4:3 set when it is destined to become outdated. Eventually, everything will be HD.

Maybe in 20 years this will be true. Right now there are millions of working 4:3 TV's and advertisers and networks know this. Sadly, networks have been in no hurry to offer true HD material. With the exception of Discovery HD and a couple others, most of the content on the 'HD Channels' isn't true HD. At least we've got MNF, Jay Leno and Conan O'brien.

Then, to make matters worse, when the cable company does receive true HD material, they may compress it for what I can only guess are bandwidth issues(?) and we end up with lovely things like macroblocking, loss of detail, etc. /rant

bobman1235

Almost all primetime shows on all of the major networks are now HD (whether compressed or not, still a vastly superior picture to standard 4:3). Nearly every new show I've watched recently is broadcast in HD : Lost, 24, My Name is Earl, Prison Break, the Sopranos. Not to mention nearly all sports. Primetime is really the only thing that "counts" to networks. Maybe the local Kansas network affiliates are ripping you off with regard to HD content, but the trend is definitely pushign towards HD on most shows.

4:3 TVs will always be "usable" in one for or another, but they're certainly becoming outdated at a rapid pace, and it's ridiculous to spend more than 200 bucks on a new one right now, with the trend pushing hard towards HD and widescreen content.

PolkThug

bobman1235 wrote:

Almost all primetime shows on all of the major networks are now HD (whether compressed or not, still a vastly superior picture to standard 4:3). Nearly every new show I've watched recently is broadcast in HD : Lost, 24, My Name is Earl, Prison Break, the Sopranos. Not to mention nearly all sports. Primetime is really the only thing that "counts" to networks. Maybe the local Kansas network affiliates are ripping you off with regard to HD content, but the trend is definitely pushign towards HD on most shows.

That's exactly what they want you to think.

Just because they put it into 16:9 format does not mean it is in true HD.

Disc Jockey

Dang, you guys are a wealth of information I'm not in any hurry, the only reason I was jumping into to it was the great price I could get on the Sony and the Pio elite that I first asked about. Now that I'm not heading that way, I can take as much time as I want and as you said, do a little research and wait for the holiday sales.

I will probably have to just wait for Dish to add HD in my area. I don't think I can pick them up here over the air either as there is this big stone mountain between me and the antennas. I'm pretty sure the sat companies are under some government pressure/timeline to offer all local markets in HD so it will come.

And Dish offers Kung Fu HD so I got that going for me:rolleyes:

bobman1235

Who "wants me to think" taht way? Is it some vast conspiracy? Are you just arguing semantics for any specific reason? Besides, didn't this whole conversation start as widescreen vs 4:3, not HD vs non-HD?

Honestly, my TV displays standard def pretty ****. There's an obvious and noticable difference between 480i and 720p taht goes far beyond widescreen. Now if they're compressing the signal that's one thing, I'm sure one person's HD isn't quite as good as another's, and I've seen evidence of that, but a good number of shows are in HD and I'm not too stupid to not see the difference.

scottvamp

PolkThug wrote:

That's exactly what they want you to think.

Just because they put it into 16:9 format does not mean it is in true HD.

Even the HD channels (like CBS or Fox) when not wide screen (Surviver) are for supieror to standard def. and HD widescreen material is over the top better.....

PolkThug

bobman1235 wrote:

Who "wants me to think" taht way? Is it some vast conspiracy? Are you just arguing semantics for any specific reason? Besides, didn't this whole conversation start as widescreen vs 4:3, not HD vs non-HD?

Honestly, my TV displays standard def pretty ****. There's an obvious and noticable difference between 480i and 720p taht goes far beyond widescreen. Now if they're compressing the signal that's one thing, I'm sure one person's HD isn't quite as good as another's, and I've seen evidence of that, but a good number of shows are in HD and I'm not too stupid to not see the difference.

I guess if you think its "HD" that's all that really matters.

bobman1235

Sure! Ignorance is bliss man!

PhantomOG

When I bought my HD set back in June '01, HBO HD was the only "HD" I could get on my tv. Fast forward 5 years and now almost all primetime tv is HD, along with many HD channels (about 13 here with TW). There's no way in hell its going to take 20 years before HD becomes standard. I'd say 5 more years tops. And if I'm looking to buy a tv now, there's absolutely no reason NOT to get an HD set. I just saw the new Sony SXRD XBR2 over the weekend. Wow, even SD programming looked phenomenal on that thing.

PhantomOG

bitchin' about not enough HD programming is one thing, but advising someone who's about to buy a new TV to NOT get HD is ridiculous in my opinion. Besides, you can't even get a non-HD TV >36" anyways can you??? So what's the point.

shawn474

The bottom line is even the "compressed" HD signals kick the crap out of analog signals as far as picture quality are concerned. Try listening to your programming in Mono and then use Dolby Digital. I equate analog signals and HD the same way. It IS a huge difference and it IS worth it for the vast majority of the general population. Whether or not you believe it to be "true HD" and furthermore ,whether it REALLY is or isn't, is a moot point considering the fact that it still is better than analog.

PolkThug

PhantomOG wrote:

bitchin' about not enough HD programming is one thing, but advising someone who's about to buy a new TV to NOT get HD is ridiculous in my opinion. Besides, you can't even get a non-HD TV >36" anyways can you??? So what's the point.

Are you talkin' to me? Who told him not to buy an HDTV?

PolkThug

PhantomOG wrote:

When I bought my HD set back in June '01, HBO HD was the only "HD" I could get on my tv. Fast forward 5 years and now almost all primetime tv is HD, along with many HD channels (about 13 here with TW). There's no way in hell its going to take 20 years before HD becomes standard. I'd say 5 more years tops.

To put things in perspective, I was first pitched to buy an HDTV in 1999, after all "everything will be HD in a few years." Seven years later and here we are.

For the record, when I personally refer to "HD", I'm referring to legitimate 1920x1080 or 1280

univera

Once again, Bobman speaketh the truth. No way this will take 20 years. People with all these new sets will demand better pictures. Plus, everything is moving towards A/V needs. That is apparent to all of us who enjoy two channel, with all the crap mini speaker systems out there.

Who needs a HD MTV? I never thought so, but it looks damn good, even with the screendoor effects I see frequently. HBO HD doesn't look great, but its still better than most channels. And, I concur on the better sound. ESPN analog vs. ESPN HD can't compare. The sound is much more involving and clear. Plus, why not stretch a picture to full screen and get more picture. As mentioned above, some channels look better than others in suppossed HD, but they all look better than standard def.