[BobInfo]

What kind of tv's do you guys have? I want to upgrade our family tv from the 32" Sharp to like a 42 or 47". Any recommendations?

[smax013]

Be forewarned...that is kind of like asking "what is your favorite desert?" or "what is the best car?" You will get a TON of different answers depending difference people's preferences and biases.



I would suggest that you might want to do a little research on TV and narrow down some key features/function/etc so that you can narrow down what people might suggest. Do you have a price range? Do you want a 1080p set or will a 720p set be fine? etc.



Personally, I tend to like Samsung TVs (and computer monitors) right now. They seem to do an excellent job AND keep the prices reasonable. But that is just my personal preference.

[rgreen4]

In the living room I have a 55" Hitachi Plasma (1080i) that is almost 3 years old. It is hooked to a satellite receiver with DVR. In the office behing me when I am on the computer is a Sharp 32" LCD, that is only 720p, but does a good job. I normally have them tuned to the same station, and if I miss something in the office, I go back into the living room and review it. The Plasma is like the new computer monitors and the notebook screens starting 4-5 years ago with the bright screen. You do have to be careful of the reflective qualites, but it is a brighter image.
LCD TV's are now getting this type of screen, although the matte finish they have always had are not bad.
Sony's are good, but I'm not sure they are worth the premium price. Sharp, Samsung, Hitachi are all good. Stay with name brands, and deal with a stable vendor. Pay attention to the number and types of inputs. My Sharp only has two inputs, but for where I have it, it is ok. The Hitachi as befits it's premium status has 5 inputs, as well as over the air and cable card connections (worthless where I am, although a benefit in some areas). On the 5 line inputs, 1&2 are component/S-Video, 3&4 are HDMI/S-Video and 5 is S-Video only and on the side for quick connection. The ones that are a combo, you can either use the HD (component or HDMI) or the S-Video. They also have composite video input on each which I ignore as it is totally useless on HDTV. Resolution of composite is horrible on 55".
If the TV does not have HDMI inputs, look at another one. HDMI is definitely the high resolution connection today. (My new 24" monitor is HDMI or VGA).
Message was edited by: rgreen4 to correct wording about composite video.

[smax013]

rgreen4 said:

They also have component video input on each which I ignore as it is totally useless on HDTV. Resolution of component is horrible on 55".

I believe you meant to say composite video (a single yellow "RCA" connector) rather than component (three "RCA" connectors...red, blue, and green). Component is almost as good as HDMI...but composite is useless for HDTV resolutions (it does not even handle 480i as well as S-video does).



Number of inputs and type of inputs will heavy depend on the individual. If you have the intent to hook up a bunch of video devices (such an AppleTV, a cable/satellite box with an HDTV signal (and/or DVR), a BluRay DVD player, AND a video game console like either a PS3 or Xbox 360, and a old VCR), then a bunch of connections, especially HDMI, will be desireable. If you only need to hook up a cable/satellite box, then fewer input connections might be fine.



And be VERY careful with "glossy" screens. Yes, they can be more vibrant in color and picture...but they can be a MAJOR pain in the rear in terms of reflections and glare on the screen if you are not careful (i.e. if you have the TV in a room with a lot of windows)...to point of being unwatchable in some situations. I have used computer laptops with "glossy" screens that are completely unuseable when there is a light source that creates glare on the screen.

[rgreen4]

Thank you for catching my wording error, which I have corrected with edit comment.

I believe that the accepted sequence from worst to best is: Composite, S-Video, Component, HDMI. Of course DVI is not normally listed as it is not commonly found on TV's, but would probably class with HDMI. In fact, some video cards with DVI out have a sound connection so the sound signal can be handled by the DVI connection. DVI to HDMI conversion cables and adapters are commonly available.

[smax013]

rgreen4 said:

Thank you for catching my wording error, which I have corrected with edit comment.

You missed the second instance of it in the following sentence (i.e. the sentence after the one you corrected). :)

rgreen4 said:

I believe that the accepted sequence from worst to best is: Composite, S-Video, Component, HDMI. Of course DVI is not normally listed as it is not commonly found on TV's, but would probably class with HDMI. In fact, some video cards with DVI out have a sound connection so the sound signal can be handled by the DVI connection. DVI to HDMI conversion cables and adapters are commonly available.

You forgot Coax at the beginning...but Coax is kind of a weird one...it can be bad in analog terms, but can still be rather good in digital terms (after all, that HDTV signal comes from the satellite dish or from the cable company is usually a coax cable when it comes into the satellite or cable box).



DVI is basically "interchangeable" with HDMI. Both are generally digital high res connections (there is an analog DVI connection). And it is becoming more and more common on TVs...at least, I tend to see a LOT of LCD TVs with either a VGA or DVI connect that is kind of intended for use with a computer.

[rgreen4]

I did not include Coax as technically it is not a video signal but a transmission signal. Even when used between something like a cable or satellite box, the output signal is a TV signal for either channel 3 or 4, and then the TV must use the tuner to receive and convert it. It would then have the SD over the air resolution which is about as good as the composite, which isn't saying much.

[eltigre]

I trust that you will find one where the picture looks good to you. One practical matter in a new HDTV is to make sure it has adequate HDMI connections.

Since you may be using the HDTV for connecting all your HD video ,pictures from Cameras and even a PC, you will want to use HDMI since that is the HD standar.

Some of the older sets on sale, may only have 1 HDMI input which in general will not be enough. then you have to add an secondary HDMI switch like me to connect all your HD sources.

[Flashorn]

Hey Bobinfo!!



Welcome to PCWorld!



If you would like to read a review of about 125 TVs that were

put through rigorous testing click on this link"

HDGuru.com-TV Exclusive .

These are all 2008 models and I believe one from 2009.



FLASHORN. !http://forums.pcworld.com/legacyimages/
1!

[coastie65]

Personally, I have a 42" 1080p Toshiba Regza. I am happy with it and it does have 4 HDMI ports which is good. It didn't break the bank either, did leave a bit of a dent though. To be honest though, I also like the Sharp Aquos as well as Samsung as both are really good in my opinion. coastie65

[BobInfo]

Yea, you're right. I should've been a little more specific of what type of tv I'm trying to find. I'm definitely looking for 1080p, so I can get the best HD picture possible, a low response time-high refresh rate - so like 120Hz, and obviously it has to be HDtv compatible, and like I already said - about 42-47" in screen size. I was looking at the Sony Bravia 46", and the Vizio XVT 47", and the Samsung Series 7 . Sony seems too expensive for me (the 46" Sony was a few thousand dollars more than the Vizio I was looking at, and they were similar in specs and features!), and I haven't heard too many good things about Samsung. I've read a lot of great reviews on the new XVT series and in the stores, it looks great.

[smax013]

BobInfo said:

Yea, you're right. I should've been a little more specific of what type of tv I'm trying to find. I'm definitely looking for 1080p, so I can get the best HD picture possible, a low response time-high refresh rate - so like 120Hz, and obviously it has to be HDtv compatible, and like I already said - about 42-47" in screen size. I was looking at the Sony Bravia 46", and the Vizio XVT 47", and the Samsung Series 7 . Sony seems too expensive for me (the 46" Sony was a few thousand dollars more than the Vizio I was looking at, and they were similar in specs and features!), and I haven't heard too many good things about Samsung. I've read a lot of great reviews on the new XVT series and in the stores, it looks great.

I tend to look at the "customer" reviews of various sites to see how customer view products. Now, you must take some of it with a grain of salt...not all reviews/evaluations are equal. I tend to look at the overall rating and then read through a bunch of the reviews. Usually there are some detailed reviews that offer some decent insight. For example, here is the Circuit City page for the 46" Samsung Series 7:



www.circuitcity.com/ssm/Samsung-46-Series-7-LCD-HDTV-LN46A750/sem/rpsm/oid/206155/catOid/-12867/rpem/ccd/productDetail.do



Considering that its overall rating is a 4.9 out of 5, it starts off looking rather good. I would then read through a bunch of the individual reviews.



Personally, I have found Samsung TVs and monitors to be very good and are very reasonably priced. They will not always be the cheapest, but many times you get what you pay for when you go for the absolute cheapest. And I have found that MANY, MANY people fee that Sony TVs are nice, but that you can find other brands that do just as well for less.



In the end, research and opinion of others is good...but YOU should make the decision based upon the information you have AND how you think the picture looks by looking at it in person...as well as whether or not it has the features you want. The reality is that different people have different tastes when it comes to picture quality...what looks right to me might not be what looks right to you.