# New Lcd Tv - Picture Blocky, Basic Or Lcd Faults



## benallenuk (Aug 1, 2005)

Hi Guys, Ive just got a new TV. An el-cheap 'o' Beko. I used to record everything in basic as it looked fine on my 32" CRT, but now all the recordings look terrible on the new LCD.

Is this because its a cheap LCD TV, or just what happens when you view basic recordings through an LCD TV. I was thinking that CRT's are a little more forgiving.

Advice Please.

Thanks

Ben


----------



## Tivo_noob (Jan 28, 2006)

Have you got Mode 0 set up, this made a MASSIVE difference to the quality my LCD displayed


----------



## BrianHughes (Jan 21, 2001)

LCDs will show up any defects in the signal you're giving them. You're quite right that CRTs are more forgiving. You need to up the quality of your recordings.

If you were happy with basic on the CRT you may be happy enough now with Medium or Best. However if you've now become sensitised to picture quality investigate Mode 0 as mentioned above. It takes a bit of fiddling to implement though.


----------



## Nebulous (Nov 28, 2005)

Also, if your using RGB out from tivo you might find that the picture looks bleached out on bright scenes. giving a poor look to the picture. 

Tivos overdrive the RGB signals to make it look better on CRTs but LCDs hate it, most just clip the peaks losing the detail in the process.

If so try the iicsetw hack to alter the registers in the output chip. This made a big difference on mine :up:


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

benallenuk said:


> Hi Guys, Ive just got a new TV. An el-cheap 'o' Beko.


Getting an LCD to use with a Tivo was a bad start. Getting a cheap one was the icing on the cake.

Even the best LCDs tend to look naff with analogue sources and the cheap ones are just plain awful. Which corners do you think they can cut in order to get the prices down?

I would have gone for a plasma from a well-known maker. In fact, that's just what I did. My 42in Panasonic looks fine with mode 0 Tivo.


----------



## benallenuk (Aug 1, 2005)

hi, thanks for the replies. I'll tell you now that a student loan doesn't stretch enough for a 42" plasma, ive bought a 20" beko 4:3 LCD TV, only cost me £100 for ebay, so a good bargain. ive got mode zero installed already, just only use it when watching live TV, as soon as tivo decides to record a program or suggestion, it goes to basic. I?ve also got the TV connected via composite, so will buy an all pins connected scart lead tomorrow, also install the fix someone mentioned above. I might even consider turning the notch up to medium quality. Is there a way to adjust all the season passes in one go, rather than changing them all separately to medium quality?

Cheers

Ben


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

Surely with 120Gb you have enough disk space to use mode0 all the time?

You should definitely connect using RGB scart and you should try turning off all mpeg noise reduction and other image processing on the screen, if possible.


----------



## mikerr (Jun 2, 2005)

Best advice for LCDs is to turn the contrast *down*, and sharpness *down*

With CRTs you wanted maximum sharpness and contrast, as they are low contrast naturally.
LCDs are naturally high contrast in themselves, so turn it down.


----------



## The Obo (Feb 22, 2005)

frogster said:


> Surely with 120Gb you have enough disk space to use mode0 all the time?
> 
> You should definitely connect using RGB scart and you should try turning off all mpeg noise reduction and other image processing on the screen, if possible.


I agree. Why would anyone ever want to record anything in BASIC anyway?? (other than radio) - it's like watching an old VHS tape!


----------



## sanderton (Jan 4, 2002)

You record in Basic it will look like pile of...

If you thought Basic was Ok previously, Mode 0 will probbaly be overkill for you. Medium however improves motion encoding but does not up the resolution; you have to go to High to get a resolution improvement. IIRC NTL, like Freeview, uses lower resolution settings by default anyway.

As for chnaging them all at once, you can write a short script to do it, but unless you have 00s and are used to scripting it will be quicker to do it by hand!


----------



## ndunlavey (Jun 4, 2002)

I'm a bit concerned about this. My old 32" CRT TV is on its last legs, and I was going to replace it with a 32" LCD. Is the consensus that LCD TVs don't go well with TiVo unless you install some hacks?


----------



## sanderton (Jan 4, 2002)

ndunlavey said:


> I'm a bit concerned about this. My old 32" CRT TV is on its last legs, and I was going to replace it with a 32" LCD. Is the consensus that LCD TVs don't go well with TiVo unless you install some hacks?


LCDs don't go well with any form of digital standard definition television. With TiVo, at least you have the option to try to improve things a bit.

It's a different matter for HD, but for sD the flat screen technologies my be big and look cool but they are not a step up in quality from CRT at all.


----------



## ndunlavey (Jun 4, 2002)

Hmmm ... so, I want to replace the TV without hacking TiVo, I need to get another CRT? That's a bit disappointing.
Is there any possibility of having a device to sit between them to squidge (or de-squidge, whichever way round it need to be) to produce something suitable for LCD?


----------



## blindlemon (May 12, 2002)

Yes - a scaler - but it will probably cost more than the TV + TiVo put together

You can use Mode 0 with fairly low bitrates and VBR with a slightly wider gap than recommended between MinBitrate and MaxBitrate to save further space while increasing the resolution to 720x576 (although, make sure that your Mode 0 quality setting is what used to be High or Best to ensure you use one of the two available 'sharp' qualities).


----------



## ndunlavey (Jun 4, 2002)

I'm right in thinking that to get "Mode 0" I have to install all manner of hackery into TiVo, though?


----------



## blindlemon (May 12, 2002)

No. You need to install one hacked file - LJ's updated fpga driver - and make some changes to resource settings via TiVoWeb or a TCL script.

If you don't have network access then it is possible to obtain pre-configured drives with Mode 0 already enabled...


----------



## sanderton (Jan 4, 2002)

Don't get too stressed about it. Fact is standard definition pictures look pretty awful on an LCD, TiVo or no TiVo. Having a TiVo in the loop makes it slightly worse, but not much. Do the Mode 0 hacks and your back to regulation pretty awful. 

It si one of the other advanatges of MCE that the PC acts a de facto scaler, improving Freeview picture quality no end.

I won't reopen the debate about blindlemon's last point about High and Best; it was argued long and hard and I can't actually remember what the end point was1


----------



## blindlemon (May 12, 2002)

I agreed with you


----------



## Trevor73 (Feb 21, 2005)

Benallenuk, 
I just upgraded all my AV cables to Belkin PureAV (around £10-£15). The picture quality improved dramatically - No more white shadows, everything is just much clearer... I didn't expect it to make so much difference... And, yes Mode 0 is definitely a must for widescreen. 

Trevor


----------



## The Obo (Feb 22, 2005)

All the discussions here are about LCD Tvs - have you considered a plasma?

Personally, I think my 42" Panasonic SD plasma with Tivo running Mode 0 through a RGB-component converter is at least as good as my old CRT Panasonic 32" 100hz TV running RGB SCART.

And you can pick them up for about £750 now - bargain!
(not HD ready I know, but I'm waiting for REAL HD (1920x1080) not these intermediate "medium def" screens they're selling now.)


----------



## ndunlavey (Jun 4, 2002)

I've never really worked out what the differences between plasma and LCD are - I just think of them all as "flat-screen tellies".
So, do plasma screens not suffer from the same problem as LCD ones? Why's that? Would I get the same quality out of TiVo without mode 0 as I do on my current CRT?
£750 is rather more than I was hoping to spend, and 42" is rather larger than I want. Are smaller ones commensurately cheaper?

It's vaguely at the back of my mind that plasma screens might be power hungry - ISTR some talking about 1.5kW one here a while back :O


----------



## blindlemon (May 12, 2002)

I also have the 42" SD Viera plasma and Mode 0 looks great :up: Power consumption is a maximum of 390W. 

The PQ on the 37" SD Viera is identical, just smaller, and it will probably use less power. As far as PQ goes plasma is still better than LCD in a number of ways - eg. better contrast, faster response, more natural colours etc. etc. To my eye LCDs always look like PC monitors and lack the "filmic" quality that you get from a good plasma.


----------



## frogster (Jan 4, 2006)

blindlemon said:


> I also have the 42" SD Viera plasma and Mode 0 looks great :up: Power consumption is a maximum of 390W.


I have an HD 42in Viera and am as happy with the quality of Tivo mode0 on it as I was when I was using a 32in Sony CRT. Perhaps even more so.

Obviously I'd _like_ to have better recording quality but I lose no sleep from not having it and I don't regret my Panasonic plasma purchase one jot, though I admit I was worrying about it before it arrived.

DVDs upscaled to 720p look splendid, and I don't see myself buying any HD-DVD players or disks any time soon.

My rated maximum power consumption is lower than yours, and when measured in action the screen actually draws under 200W. So no more than the Sony CRT in fact.
Anyone concerned by this can do a simple test: hold the back of your hand near a working screen. Most if not all other plasma brands will feel hotter than the Viera screens do, and some feel like a one-bar fire.


----------



## benallenuk (Aug 1, 2005)

Hi guys, Ive got mode zero working and am now using RBG input. I get what you all mean about basic being rubbish quality, but i guess im used to it, I was using analogue cable (no digital in my area) since i got tivo, and we all know what rubbish quality you got through those Jerrold CATV boxes. 

Another thing is that I like to keep lots of recordings, I tend to spend a whole day catching up on tivo rather than watching it each night, so at present 38hrs of recordings wouldnt be enough.

Its only a 20" LCD, so i guess no real reason to go mad with Mode 0, scalers, better quality cables etc. Im quite happy with just being able to watch it. As soon as I have enough spare cash and I go buy the latest greatest HUGE LCD/Plasma then I worry about all the little bits and bobs.

Cheers for the advice, at least live tv is in mode zero, so thats a bonus.

Ben


----------



## ndunlavey (Jun 4, 2002)

blindlemon said:


> Mode 0 looks great


Is mode 0 necesarry for plasma devices as it is for an LCD?


> The PQ on the 37" SD Viera is identical


PQ?

Also, do plasma screens come with builtin speakers? It's niggling at me that they are just a monitor and you need to source (and find somewhere to put) external speakers.

Later ... I see that they can come fully equipped. Just found this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sony-KE-32TS2E-Plasma-Wega-television/dp/B0000AKL03/sr=1-1/qid=1164991024


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

ndunlavey said:


> Also, do plasma screens come with builtin speakers?


As with LCDs it all depends on what model you buy.

The most expensive units usually assume you will be using your own expensive home cinema sound system and so don't bother with their own speakers while the cheaper ones tend to bundle a speaker system with or even as part of the plasma telly.


----------



## Nebulous (Nov 28, 2005)

ndunlavey said:


> I've never really worked out what the differences between plasma and LCD are...


<tech mode on>
Plasma screens reproduce the picture using phosphor exited by high voltage electrons in a very similar way to a CRT. So each pixel generates its own light which radiates out to the viewer

LCD screens reproduce the picture by shining the light from a florescent back light through the pixel cells whose opacity can be altered electronically. so each pixel changes the colour of the white light passing through it, rather like looking at a stained glass window picture.
<tech mode off>

The consensus here seems to be that plasma has better colour reproduction and this is precisely because of the phosphor method.

The disadvantage of plasma is that AFAIK they are generally lower resolution. I'm a bit out of touch with the very latest models, but a year or two back, standard plasma resolutions where 848x480 whereas LCDs then where 1280x768 or 1366x768. The latest LCDs are 1920x1080. Not sure if modern plasmas are up to this yet.



ndunlavey said:


> PQ?


Picture Quality 



ndunlavey said:


> Also, do plasma screens come with builtin speakers?


Most flat screens don't have built in speakers because the manufacturers try to keep the border size and thickness of the panel as small a possible. Some do have speakers but because of these design / style constraints, they're usually puny and rubbish. And as Pete77 said, they expect most people these days to use their sound system.


----------



## sanderton (Jan 4, 2002)

Plasmas are available up to 1080 now; 768 lines is normal. 480 line sets are stictly for con artists. 

Almost all flat screens have built in speakers.


----------



## mjk (Mar 13, 2002)

ndunlavey said:


> Also, do plasma screens come with builtin speakers? It's niggling at me that they are just a monitor and you need to source (and find somewhere to put) external speakers.


It really bugs me that so many of them come with built-in speakers. All I want is a monitor - no audio, no tuner, just a really good screen and as many high quality inputs as I can get.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

mjk said:


> It really bugs me that so many of them come with built-in speakers. All I want is a monitor - no audio, no tuner, just a really good screen and as many high quality inputs as I can get.


But Mr and Mrs Average just want one of those flat screen tellies that all their chums in the road now seem to have got and have no clue about how to plum together all those messy boxes and speakers with pieces of Spaghetti. Anyhow the wife wouldn't like all that horrid extra clutter. 

I believe there are models without speakers and even some without any tuner for the purists such as yourself.


----------



## ndunlavey (Jun 4, 2002)

There's no way I'd touch a telly that didn't come with built in speakers. I don't see the point of the extra money, aggravation and untidiness of having external ones.


----------



## sanderton (Jan 4, 2002)

ndunlavey said:


> There's no way I'd touch a telly that didn't come with built in speakers. I don't see the point of the extra money, aggravation and untidiness of having external ones.


The point is sound quality and surround sound. Pretty much all DVDs and an increasing amount of broadcast TV has digital 5.1 surround sound these days. Much of the rest has Dolby ProLogic. If you're spending £00s or even £000s on a screen it makes sense to have the sound system to go with it.

Surround sound enhances programmes significantly; I think you'd be surprised!


----------



## ndunlavey (Jun 4, 2002)

Oh, I understand that - I just don't want a room with lots of little boxes scattered around it and cables trailing everywhere, and the added aggravation of setting it all up and wondering if you've got it right. My current telly came with a pair of satellite speakers in the box, and I've never bothered to even unpack them.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

ndunlavey said:


> Oh, I understand that - I just don't want a room with lots of little boxes scattered around it and cables trailing everywhere, and the added aggravation of setting it all up and wondering if you've got it right. My current telly came with a pair of satellite speakers in the box, and I've never bothered to even unpack them.


Sooner or later they are going to let them be connected via some kind of wifi system that does not suffer from interference. That will make life much easier.


----------



## sanderton (Jan 4, 2002)

Pete77 said:


> Sooner or later they are going to let them be connected via some kind of wifi system that does not suffer from interference. That will make life much easier.


You can get wireless surround speakers, they have to be plugged into the mains though.


----------



## sanderton (Jan 4, 2002)

ndunlavey said:


> Oh, I understand that - I just don't want a room with lots of little boxes scattered around it and cables trailing everywhere, and the added aggravation of setting it all up and wondering if you've got it right. My current telly came with a pair of satellite speakers in the box, and I've never bothered to even unpack them.


Set up is a one time thing, no big deal.

The boxes thing is fair enough, although the quality of the TV experience is so enhanced it more than makes up for it IMHO.


----------



## iankb (Oct 9, 2000)

Pete77 said:


> Sooner or later they are going to let them be connected via some kind of wifi system that does not suffer from interference.


Not as easy as it sounds, since audio and video streaming isn't buffered with an error-correction protocol to counteract interference, and couldn't easily be synchronised across separate sources if it were. It would require high-speed digital transfer, buffering and error-correction, with a precisely-controlled delay that is agreed between the TV and the remote speakers.

Video senders are already suffering from other uses (and other users) of the 2.4GHz band, and they are already proposing a massive increase to the permitted power and range of this band and the 5.3GHz band to allow neighbourhood network connections. We could soon find our video senders will be made obsolete.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

iankb said:


> We could soon find our video senders will be made obsolete.


I have the Matsui video sender that Currys still sell.

It always has no interference for the first 30 minutes and then interference slowly sets in which I put down to poor component quality rather than genuine wifi interference as the pattern of deterioration is always the same. I should have known there was a reason Currys was selling them for half price.............

My wifi ADSL router is on Channel 13 which in theory is isolated from the other channels along with channels 7 and 1 and especially should not interfere with video senders that run only on Channels 1 to 4.

I would love WiMax to come to the countryside here so I can get shot of BT who charge me £33 for a quarter for a line I need make no calls on if I could have a WiMax and use Voip for calls.


----------



## Rob Nespor Bellis (Feb 17, 2001)

I would only point out that the channels on a WiFi device ( 1- 13 ) are not equivalent to the channels listed on your sender device ( 1 -4 ) both occupy roughly the same frequency range but the WiFi divides it between thirteen bands and the sender between four ( which implies it requires more bandwidth than WiFi too. )

Rgds,

R.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

Rob Nespor Bellis said:


> I would only point out that the channels on a WiFi device ( 1- 13 ) are not equivalent to the channels listed on your sender device ( 1 -4 ) both occupy roughly the same frequency range but the WiFi divides it between thirteen bands and the sender between four ( which implies it requires more bandwidth than WiFi too.


Which probably explains why using my Video Sender on even Channel 1 means not being able to use my Wifi connection on anything much below Channel 11 at the same time. The Matsui video sender is such a cheap pile of rubbish that it probably bleeds its signal over an even wider channel range than it is meant to.

My neighbours upstairs use Channel 11 (the only other wireless router I can detect regularly at a high signal strength) so in theory still ought not to clash with the video sender on its Channel 1.


----------



## iankb (Oct 9, 2000)

All of these devices do not operate within a precise frequency. They operate within a bell curve where the outer edges of the bell curve overlap significantly with the neighbouring channels. With Wi-Fi networks, the equipment is able to filter-out the overlap, and use error-correction protocols to assist in that. However, with video senders, any overlap will create interference, so the selected frequencies must have bigger gaps between them.

In Europe, the biggest gap between video and Wi-Fi is probably between video sender band A (or 1), and Wi-Fi channel 13.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

iankb said:


> In Europe, the biggest gap between video and Wi-Fi is probably between video sender band A (or 1), and Wi-Fi channel 13.


Well at least I have made the correct channel choices but still I get interference problems on the video sender on channel 1.


----------



## iankb (Oct 9, 2000)

Pete77 said:


> Well at least I have made the correct channel choices but still I get interference problems on the video sender on channel 1.


You can't avoid your neighbours using Wi-Fi in the wrong mode, or using any conflicting device.

The 'Super G' (108 MBps) networks use several channels bound together and sit in the middle of the 2.4GHz band, so making it difficult to use any other part of it.

Make sure that you are using Infrastructure mode (not AdHoc mode) with your Wi-Fi, since the latter will poll through all 13 channels while looking for peers. Also, switch off SSID broadcasting, which is always good from a security point of view.

Don't use Bluetooth devices, since they aren't fixed to any specific channel within the 2.4GHz band.

DECT 'phones may also cause a problem, 'though I don't know how they lock to a spare channel.

If you occasionally get poor reception on your video sender's receiver, try turning the aerial or device. In my experience, they can suffer from very strange atmospherics at times, where they become sensitive to me moving round the room.

Oh, and don't use the microwave.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

iankb said:


> Oh, and don't use the microwave.


I already use infrastructure mode and don't broadcast the SSID. However as the sender works perfectly for the first 30 minutes after it is on each time and then gets interference the problem is almost certainly the cheapo Matsui units and their components.

I am already well aware of the issues with Microwave totally blotting out the broadcast.


----------



## ericd121 (Dec 12, 2002)

ndunlavey said:


> ...plasma screens... 42" is rather larger than I want.


I, too, am not a fan of big screens; I sent a 32" telly back, and was more comfortable with its 28" cousin.

I'm sure I read somewhere  that plasmas can't be made smaller than 32"; either for manufacturing or economical reasons.


----------



## Pete77 (Aug 1, 2006)

ericd121 said:


> I'm sure I read somewhere  that plasmas can't be made smaller than 32"; either for manufacturing or economical reasons.


Well I am a fan of big screens if only money was a matter of academic interest. However during the sales a goodish 32"plasma seems to have been about £799 and a 42" £899 so I really couldn't have seen the point of getting a 32" (not that I got either in fact).

Back in 29" and 26" 4:3 tv days the 29" always used to cost a shed load more money than a 26" for no very obvious good reason in terms of likely additional production costs.

One point about LCD and Plasma tvs is that they are surely hugely cheaper to make and distribute than conventional CRT tvs due to far less weight and storage space at the factory, in shipping and on vans etc to deliver. So surely logically LCD and Plasma tvs really ought to allow a huge reduction in television price as a far more efficient production technology. Of course no doubt the manufacturers reckon we are used to a certain price level and will go on charging it if they think they cna get away with it. This especially applies to the better quality tv brands unfortunately.


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

ericd121 said:


> I'm sure I read somewhere  that plasmas can't be made smaller than 32"; either for manufacturing or economical reasons.


Probably economic reasons.

I fitted a couple of 21" Fujitsu plasmas about 6 years ago and they were 4:3 so were perfect for the PC applications we were running on them, then they discontinued them


----------



## ericd121 (Dec 12, 2002)

katman said:


> I fitted a couple of 21" Fujitsu plasmas about 6 years ago


Are they still running?

Or did they run out of gas?


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

ericd121 said:


> Are they still running?
> 
> Or did they run out of gas?


They were still running after 5 years when they centre closed.

They were showing a rolling 3 slide powerpoint presentation for 8-10 hours per day, 5 days a week. Sadly two of the three slided were never changed so after just 3 months there were images burnt into the screens. 

Same thing used to happen to the CRT projectors when power point presentations were left on for long periods of time. They all used a corporate template and the first slide was usually displayed for about 30 minutes before the presentation started and then they would leave the last slide up when they left the room. All PCs had screesavers enabled but Powerpoint overrides them 

What a waste. If they had given me those projectors (Barco Graphics 808, and Barco Cine) I would have looked after them much more than they ever did.

On the rare occasions that I got to try a DVD out on them they looked absolutely stunning


----------

