I just looked at some TV's during my lunch break.

I saw a 61" Samsung DLP (with the HD2 chip, not the new HD2+ chip) and was only vaguely impressed. Black levels were decent, but there was too much artifacting for my tastes. Though I suspect it was largely due from the source (The Mummy DVD)

What surprised me though was a 60" Panasonic LCD RPTV right next to it. It looked FAR better than the last LCD tv I saw, and at $4000 ($3000 online) that's pretty cheap for a 60" HD set.

Just thought I'd pass that thought along.

I think most of the sets larger than 46" or so give a too pixelated image for DVD for my taste. It's why I'm steering towards a smaller screen, even if it means giving up the obnoxious "holy sh*t that's a big TV factor. (which I desire!)

"Artifacting" huh huh huh

"The Mummy" hee hee hee

Nice catch. I didn't even notice the pun.

That's very true. There's a fine balance between screen size and viewing distance. The 62" NEC Plasma screen in my office looks absolutely fantastic from my desk about 18 feet away, but it's comparative size at that distance is about 13" -- similar to the laptop screen that's 18 inches away from me right now.

In non-technical terms, there are only so many pixels to go around on an LCD screen. In a smaller screen, they are packed more tightly than a big screen. That's why Sony's 42" LCD looks better than their 70". Of course the 70" does carry a pretty awesome "holy s**t" factor.

This is a serious comment, but the explanation I got was long and technical, likely causing me serious brain damage. The above nets it out.

I think he's talking about a rear-projection LCD HDTV. With any digital display TV (LCD, DLP, plasma) there's only a fixed number of pixels.

Virtually all current rear projection LCD & DLP HDTVs have a native resolution of 720p (1280 x 720), or about 921k pixels.

Optimal viewing distance for an HDTV is different from standard definition analog. You generally need to sit proportionally closer for a given screen size, else you're not seeing the extra resolution you paid for.

For this reason a larger diameter HDTV can be beneficial -- it avoids having to crowd close to the display. A larger set therefore gives more seating flexibility while retaining optimal resolution.

Here's a good viewing distance calculator:
http://www.myhometheater.homestead.com/viewingdistancecalculator.html#anchor_13194

Re Panasonic LCD vs Samsung DLP, in general the DLP is considered superior. However like Spiff, I've seen some Panasonic LCDs that look better than a DLP, side-by-side. There's such a variety of setup modes it's common that one display can be sub-optimally configured.

In general I'd say get whichever set looks the best to you, at a cost you accept. There's a tendency to over-analyze the display technology at the cost of real world issues that affect them all, or affect specific sets more than popularly-discussed issues. E.g, I've never once seen the DLP "rainbow" effect (which is discussed endlessly), but I've frequently seen "color banding" (which is rarely discussed). Another example: LCD sets supposedly have poorer black levels than DLP, but I've never seen a problem with that.

I've had the Hitachi 60V500 projection LCD for a couple months now and am very happy with it. As long as you stand back at least 8 feet the picture is very good I looked at DLP but was warned by a television tech guy to wait until they really invented it and the LCD had a better price. I'd love to see HD broadcast on it, but I"m afraid that where I live in Indiana, I'm lucky even to have cable. I also tooked at the Panasonic LCD and thought the Hitachi had a better picture. I have no problems with "ghosting" or black levels. It's a nice tv, and now it's time to upgrade the audio to go with it...why I've entered this forum.

welcome tcook,

go here to look for some people to audition for you in your area. make sure to check ALL the pages.. several people have added their names after the original list was made.

bigjohn

I've been looking at LCDs in the 15-20" range for the bedroom. I suppose the PQ on these little sets should be awesome, but I've not been terribly impressed. The flatscreen tube TVs look better IMO. We're still going to get a little LCD for its tiny size and ability to disappear into the decor, but if I cared about PQ in the bedroom I wouldn't even consider one.
I can't believe the big LCDs look any better, though I have never bothered to check.

The little LCD's do kind of look bad, IMO. But, it all depends on the source. Most people running the 15-20" LCD's are doing so with standard cable all the time. That means that they get a crap 420i image from (most likely) a non-digital cable source.

The large LCDs that most people are talking about here are teh LCD rear projectors. They take LCD technology and bounce a light beam off of a pixelated LCD chip, creating the image on teh screen, whereas with the flat panel models, you are actually viewing the LCD without any projection.

I would reccomend going with a CRT little tv. You're talking a third of the cost, and better picture in that case. But, if you've got no room, or want a tech fix, then the small LCD's can be fun.

Good explanation. I figured these guys weren't blind or crazy.
We want to be able to hide the bedroom TV when we pop for new, fancy a** furniture so the big TVs are out. We usually only listen to the news for 30 min or so each night so PQ is a total non-factor.

My parents bought a 17" one for that very purpose. My mom keeps it in the kitchen (it tucks nicely against the wall in a little windowsill-type nook). The PQ is blocky, pixelated and noisy, but she doesn't care and it definitely serves a purpose. She wouldn't have any counter space with a 17" tube tv there. Not to mention, it looks pretty neat when it's turned off...

In reply to:

---

Not to mention, it looks pretty neat when it's turned off...

---

That's got to be the quote of the year.

Joema,

Like you, I've never experienced the "rainbow" effects that apparently up to 20% of viewers see on DLP sets, at least the ones with the slow color wheels (the DLP sets with the fast color wheels eliminate the rainbow effects).

Unlike you, I consistently find the black levels of rear-projection LCD sets to be not as good as well calibrated DLP rear-pros, nor is the contrast as good--the "snap" of the image. However, the last 50-inch Hitachi rear-pro LCD I saw looked very good, almost as good as a nearby Samsung DLP, and it was much less expensive than the DLP.

I also seem to notice horizontal fast-motion artifacts more on LCD rear-pro sets--when basketball players move quickly from one end of the court to the other. But I haven't heard others complain of this. Perhaps the annoyance factor of these and other artifacts are variable from one person to another. And I find that the image quality of any of these rear-pro HDTV displays is improved by using the old three-times-the-diagonal screen size viewing distance.

Regards,

It's difficult to properly assess HDTV quality from in-store demos. Lighting conditions, source material, and calibration varies so much. Even if you take your own DVD, that's not Hi-Def. Yet what other options are there?

In general I like DLP a little better (I have a Samsung HLN-507W), however in one side-by-side demo between the 61" Samsung and the similar sized Sony Grand Wega III LCD, the Sony looked much better. LCDs are usually cheaper.

I always caution people about getting hung up on often-discussed technical differences, which they themeselves may never notice. E.g. DLP superior black level, rainbow effect, LCD "screen door" effect, etc. If you notice it, fine, but don't decide because someone else noticed it, likely in a different environment.

To me, any of the display differences or artifacts (except for color banding) are trivial next to the variation in source material quality. It's similar to Axiom speakers -- maybe there are some better speakers but what's the point if Axiom is sufficiently good that you're almost always limited by source material quality?

On my HLN-507W using Hi-Def Comcast cable, the Hi-Def source material varies from barely above analog NTSC to so clear it's like an empty picture frame hung in space. There's just huge variation in the telecine (film to video) process for file-based material. Likewise for original HD produced material, there's wide variation in quality. Maybe some of this is MPEG over-compression by the provider, or bandwidth stealing by statistical multiplexing. But with the current HD source material situation, I don't see the point of increasingly refined display technology, except as a vehicle for future developments.

When HD DVDs are finally available, and there's reasonable material available in that format (note that's two different things), then I can see true usefulness from more refined HD displays.

Re the old 1:3 screen diameter to viewing distance calculation, for HD displays you may want to sit somewhat closer than this. For this reason carefully consider the screen size and viewing distance.

Here's what I've personally seen...

1) DLP - I've never seen rainbow.
I HAVE seen digital artifacts (looks like compressed .jpg issues)
Nice black levels

2) LCD RPTV - I've seen gray black levels on some sets, and decent black levels on others. I've never seen GREAT black levels.
- You can see the "screen door" if you're about 6 inches from the screen. Who cares?

3) Plasma - Nice blacks
- Colors varied from natural to over saturated depending on the set I saw
- Biggest issue for me is the digital artifacting

4) CRT RPTV - Best blacks
- HUGE and HEAVY
- Seating position has to be dead on or you really lose pq.

5) LCoS - I've still not seen a set.

Spiff the CRTs are huge, but not any heavier than 36" tubes. Plus they're on wheels and you'll find accessing the back of the TV considerably easier than your current TV. It is true that from an angle the picture sucks, but that is also where the "VP150 suckout" lies.
Make your in-laws watch and listen from that angle.

Alan--

Have you seen a well calibrated LCD RPTV? They'll never match a CRT for black levels, but my Sony GWIII has really come to life -- and matched what I saw in DLPs -- when calibrated. The black crush has been virtually eliminated, and can clearly see details in even the darkest movies. Have never seen the motion issues you described in this TV, but that problem is *exactly* what drove me from the DLPs I saw.

For anyone else, in case you don't already read AVSForum, there are threads over there started by umr who has become pretty much *the* authority on calibrating Sony televisions. His notes on tweaks in the Service Menu in Sony LCD RPTVs are easy to follow, and make an incredible difference.

Even my wife, who would readily acknowledge that she doesn't care about this stuff, loves our Sony GWIII. Of course, she noticed the difference with the Axiom speakers as well.

Rich