# Is having 1080p on my new rear-projection TV important if I only have HD DirecTiVo?



## af250xxl (Jan 24, 2006)

Is having 1080p on my new rear-projection TV important if I only have HD DirecTiVo?(with good OTA HD reception of local stations)

I'm looking at a Sony 50" SXRD rear-projection with 1080p. 1920 x 1080 pixels.
List price $4000, currently $500 off.

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-CwIKTdAvHsH/cgi-bin/ProdView.asp?g=147350&I=158SR50XBR

How much of a difference is there between the 1080i and 1080p?

Thanks!


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

As there are no products on the market that can feed 1080p, including the HR10-250, I would say it doesn't matter. It matters even less when you have a TV that perfectly deinterlaces 1080i as the SXRD sets do.

The "sale" you are seeing at Crutchfield is in fact a drop in the list price of the set.

The SXRD sets are fantastic for use with the HR10 - I have the 60" model and love it.


----------



## Daytona24 (Jun 8, 2005)

If you can afford it and its the TV you want there's no harm in being prepared for 1080p, it will probably be awhile till products start coming in 1080p but it should handle everything else just fine. However If your buying it out of your price range to get 1080p though you could get a VERY good TV for less than half that.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

Any hypothetical future product that outputs 1080p will also output 1080i. With proper deinterlacing, you won't see a difference.


----------



## kkluba (Oct 18, 2002)

Does this display accept 1080p? That is important if you have hopes of doing HD-DVD as clean as possible.


----------



## jimrobinette (May 21, 2003)

Steve,

So you think that any future HD-DVD (1080p) player will most likely be able to output to 1080i? If that is the case, do you think there will be much noticeable difference between the HD-DVD picutre on a 1080p set as opposed to a 1080i set?

Thanks for all the contributions. I am a HD newbie that just bought the HR10-250 and am also looking at getting my first HD set.

Jim



stevel said:


> Any hypothetical future product that outputs 1080p will also output 1080i. With proper deinterlacing, you won't see a difference.


----------



## richtate (Jan 14, 2002)

The SXRD (lcos) sets are amazing. I'm getting a 56" Samsung DLP that will be great for OTA HDTV and for my R10-250. I'd love to spend the money for a Sony 60", especially at 1080p using the "smooth picture" technology but I just can't justify it yet. The Samsung is only a 720p native display but for my uses it will be great for some time. Plus, Amazon had it on sale for $1849 with no shipping! If you are in the market, check it out. It was a weird deal and didn't seem right to me but it's being delivered Friday. When I first saw it at Amazon it was about $2200 with $199 white glove shipping. I watched it for a few days and it dropped to the $1849 and I couldn't resist. When I checked out, the shipping was added and then removed on the invoice! My HD Tivo is ready...

If you don't have any 1080p sources, save some money for now and get a 1080i DLP. I doubt you'll be disappointed. Just stay clear of Plasma. I work in AV and we can't stand that technology but are forced to use it every day.


----------



## Mental (Feb 19, 2003)

I have the 60" SXRD and the HD DirecTivo. Wonderful combo. I don't know the policy on pricing discussions here but I have heard of the 60" coming down to near the price range you mention for the 50", albeit not globally available. PM me for details if you like.



richtate said:


> If you don't have any 1080p sources, save some money for now and get a 1080i DLP. I doubt you'll be disappointed. Just stay clear of Plasma. I work in AV and we can't stand that technology but are forced to use it every day.


 This is one part of the discussion that I don't understand. I don't think there are any 1080i DLP displays. Don't they take the 1080i input signal and deinterlace it with varying levels of quality? While there may not be able 1080p signals to feed my set, I can display every line of a 1080i signal, which a 720p display cannot.


----------



## kkluba (Oct 18, 2002)

If you have a display that accepts 1080p feeding it 1080p would be your best picture. Delivering native resolution whether it be 480p, 720p or 1080p is generally best as it bypasses any scaling/deinterlacing.

HD-DVD and BlueRay players will certainly output 1080i and other resolutions. Deinterlacing and/or scaling will then be done by your video processor in the tv or outboard.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

The current SXRD sets do not accept 1080p, but they do excellent deinterlacing of 1080i.


----------



## Sapphire (Sep 10, 2002)

stevel said:


> The current SXRD sets do not accept 1080p, but they do excellent deinterlacing of 1080i.


Neither do the 1080p DLPs.


----------



## kkluba (Oct 18, 2002)

My Sony VPL-VW100 (Ruby) projector accepts 1080p. So far the only thing I've delivered in 1080p is via a computer. Looks incredible.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

stevel said:


> The current SXRD sets do not accept 1080p, but they do excellent deinterlacing of 1080i.


In fact, they will seamlessly reinterlace 1080i into the exact same 1080p it was acquired in, assuming it was originally produced that way. (And the SXRD's ARE amazing...there are a lot of reasons other than faithful 1080i reproduction to buy one, including improved SD PQ).

That would mean the only reason to not get one (to wait for a newer model) other than the cost, would be if not accepting 1080p input directly could ever become an issue. And I think probably not, any future 1080p device worth its salt will output 1080i, making it just as good on an SXRD, I would think.


----------



## BillyBob_jcv (Feb 21, 2006)

richtate said:


> Just stay clear of Plasma. I work in AV and we can't stand that technology but are forced to use it every day.


I don't understand your aversion to plasma. A bright screen with a very wide viewing angle and excellent black levels is bad? I will agree that the SXRD sets are really nice - noticably nicer than any DLP or LCD projection units I have seen.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

Most plasmas, even the five-figure models, have a lot of trouble with grayscale linearity. They also start to degrade as soon as you take them out of the box and nothing you can do will reverse it (unlike a projector model where you can replace the bulb.)


----------



## Ein (Jul 7, 2004)

stevel said:


> Most plasmas, even the five-figure models, have a lot of trouble with grayscale linearity. They also start to degrade as soon as you take them out of the box and nothing you can do will reverse it (unlike a projector model where you can replace the bulb.)


Can you please back it up with some facts? I'm in the market for a plasma right. Your statement is contrary to what I have researched. Maybe I missed something.

The current plasma screens are rated 60K hours half life (20 years of viewing @ 8 hours per day). How many projector bulbs are replaced during that period? The color filters in the projectors degrade too.


----------



## aus (Jul 30, 2005)

Maybe he watchs a LOT of TV???

And there are DLP's that'll take a 1080p signal via the computer port. The real issue is, are the current 1080p DLP's truely 1080p??

And the new SXRD's are suppoe to take 1080p over HDMI in anticipation of PS3/BluRay. Just a rumor for now.
The price should be a little lower too. My buddy got a 60" for less than $4K at Best Buy at one point.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

Which of my statements do you disagree with? Phosphors degrade over time and cannot be refreshed. This is true for CRT and plasma. Of course, the brightness setting and hours of use will affect this. I have never heard of color filters degrading.

Grayscale problems are noted in most reviews of plasma sets, especially at lower picture levels. Detail disappears into a gray mush.

The current SXRD rear-projection sets do not accept 1080p over HDMI. I don't know about the VPL-W100. Future SXRD sets will accept 1080p, but I don't see this as an issue.


----------



## richtate (Jan 14, 2002)

In the corporate event staging business we use plasmas becuase our clients demand that we put up screens that can be hung on a wall. While it is true that the latest plasma screens are better than the original models that is not saying much. Yes, it has that cool ability to hang on the wall and you may be thrilled with the way it looks but they are hard to maintain if heaven-forbid you have any problems outside of a warranty repair you're going to go broke fixing it. The image quality is fine but there are other technologies that are much better. Yeah, I'm bitter about plasma because I've seen them at their worst. If I could justify an SXRD I'd get it but the DLP is a fantastic choice. I realize that I'll be buying lamps but it's not a tremendous expense (unless you have a Qualia) and I know that the DMD is not going to wear out or degrade over time like the phosphors in the plasma will. Plus, burn-in is still a real problem with a plasma display. Don't be surprised if plasmas disappear in the future when other, more robust technologies that can be hung on the wall finally hit the market.


----------



## kkluba (Oct 18, 2002)

stevel said:


> The current SXRD rear-projection sets do not accept 1080p over HDMI. I don't know about the VPL-W100. Future SXRD sets will accept 1080p, but I don't see this as an issue.


The VPL-VW100 front projection SXRD most definitely accepts 1080p. To my knowledge the SXRD rear projection sets do not. It has been discussed on AVS and is a bone of contention with the rear projection owners. Sony could easily make 1080p input possible but in their infinite wisdom (stupidity) they don't.


----------



## durl (Dec 1, 2005)

Someone else mentioned a lower price. I saw the 50" SXRD at Tweeter for $2999.


----------



## propman07 (Oct 15, 2001)

stevel said:


> As there are no products on the market that can feed 1080p, including the HR10-250, I would say it doesn't matter. It matters even less when you have a TV that perfectly deinterlaces 1080i as the SXRD sets do.
> 
> The "sale" you are seeing at Crutchfield is in fact a drop in the list price of the set.
> 
> The SXRD sets are fantastic for use with the HR10 - I have the 60" model and love it.


stevel-

I've got the older version (Sony KDF-60XS955), and I'm trying to remember the different formats that the HR10-250 can output. If I remember correctly, the HR10-250 has the following:

480i, 480p, 720i, 720p, and 1080i

Which one would you recommend?


----------



## rifleman69 (Jan 6, 2005)

HR10-250 does 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i



There really is no "720i"


----------



## propman07 (Oct 15, 2001)

rifleman69 said:


> HR10-250 does 480i, 480p, 720p, 1080i
> 
> There really is no "720i"


rifleman69-

Thanks for clearing that up. I have cycled through the 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i, but really couldn't see that much of a difference. Am I missing something?


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

David, 

I would suggest 1080i for your set. It is not an "older version" but rather a different technology (LCD projection vs. SXRD/LCoS), The display's native resolution is 1368x788 which doesn't match any of the ATSC formats. You should see a big difference on HD channels between 480i/p and 720p or 1080i. On SD channels you probably won't see a difference.


----------



## propman07 (Oct 15, 2001)

stevel said:


> David,
> 
> I would suggest 1080i for your set. It is not an "older version" but rather a different technology (LCD projection vs. SXRD/LCoS), The display's native resolution is 1368x788 which doesn't match any of the ATSC formats. You should see a big difference on HD channels between 480i/p and 720p or 1080i. On SD channels you probably won't see a difference.


(Slaps self in head)

I just remembered that I was checking on SD channels, and didn't see a difference....idiot!

Thanks for the info on the LCD vs. SXRD/LCoS.


----------



## darc87 (Dec 26, 2001)

stevel said:


> As there are no products on the market that can feed 1080p, including the HR10-250, I would say it doesn't matter. It matters even less when you have a TV that perfectly deinterlaces 1080i as the SXRD sets do.
> 
> The "sale" you are seeing at Crutchfield is in fact a drop in the list price of the set.
> 
> The SXRD sets are fantastic for use with the HR10 - I have the 60" model and love it.


Actually many Home Theater PCs output 1080p. I have a Samsung 1080p DLP with 1080p signal fed thru the VGA port. T2 1080p edition looks amazing. There are actually quite a few movies available at 1080p that can be ordered via windowsmedia.

darc87


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

I was referring to consumer electronics products, not computers.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

propman07 said:


> ...I have cycled through the 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i, but really couldn't see that much of a difference. Am I missing something?


It is very difficult to see any difference on moving video. Put your Tivo on a still frame and choose something (from a1080i HD OTA source, if possible) with diagonal edges. You will notice jaggies on 1080i out, but no jaggies on 720p out. I have this set as well, and it does not deinterlace as well as some newer sets (although it still has a kick-ass picture).

You will also notice NOT a huge difference between resolution of normal raster-scanned video on 1080 or 720, because typically there is not a lot of difference. The HDNet TP will show about 6 MHz rez at 720, and about 6.8 MHz at 1080, but the small print will be about as legible on one as the other, because the added jaggies on 1080 disrupt any improved rez that might be present on 720 so that they have the same effective perceived rez, even on non-raster-scanned images like those here, generated from a digital TP generator. But of course everything either on film or shot with a HD cam is raster-scanned, so it will rarely reach this resolution anyway.

About the only real-world video where I can notice improved resolution at 1080 is on "Late Night with Conan O'Brien". He has a set with a sheer curtain with stars behind it, and the tiny specs of stars seem a bit more distinct at 1080.

Keep in mind that these are really fine differences. But there definitely is a difference. I use 720 to avoid the jaggies which would be visible 100% of the time, as a tradeoff against the potential improved rez of 1080, which would be visible and realized only a very small fraction of the time.


----------



## LoopinFool (Feb 25, 2005)

Note that when you pause 1080i on the HD TiVo, it only displays one field of the image (and doubles it). So, you're only getting a vertical resolution of 540 pixels in that case. That's the main reason you'd see jaggies when paused.
Since 720p is progressive, paused frames look exactly like frames in motion.

- LoopinFool


----------



## joetoronto (Jul 26, 2004)

richtate said:


> Just stay clear of Plasma. I work in AV and we can't stand that technology but are forced to use it every day.


you're not alone, richtate.

most people who can't afford plasma make excuses like this.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

And many people fall in love with plasma because it looks so cool hanging above their fireplace (and because it costs so much so it must be good.) Plasma certainly has its strong points, but accurate picture quality is not among them.

That said, good plasma sets can look very good, so if that's what works for you, fine. But you can get better PQ with other technologies.


----------



## pestep (Oct 25, 2002)

Raj said:


> Neither do the 1080p DLPs.


Actually, the HP 1080p sets do accept 1080p input over HDMI.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

propman07 said:


> rifleman69-
> 
> Thanks for clearing that up. I have cycled through the 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i, but really couldn't see that much of a difference. Am I missing something?


I agree I've never seen a difference between 720 and 1080 but the SD programming looks MUCH better on my tv in 1080 instead of 480i. Eliminates all the jaggies and blocking stuff.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

stevel said:


> And many people fall in love with plasma because it looks so cool hanging above their fireplace (and because it costs so much so it must be good.) .


How does one watch a tv up that high in comfort? My neck would hurt looking up all the time. Also I find in ads they show sofas etc turned at 90 degree angles to the thing, that must hurt as well  I wont even ask how hard it is to move when you change your room around....


----------



## skylark_pilot (Aug 29, 2003)

I was fully ready to pull the trigger on a plasma that goes on sale this month at Costco...but now all this anti-plasma talk is freakin' me out!!!


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

Re: Over the fireplace...

They don't. But it looks cool.

Re: pulling the trigger

If a "hang on the wall" screen is what you want, then LCD and Plasma are your choices. Plasma has a wider viewing angle than LCD, which can be important for many. Up to about 42 inches, LCD gives plasma serious competition (and uses a lot less power).

Plasma isn't bad. If it meets your needs and the cost is something you can handle, then buy it. Many models have excellent picture quality. All I'm saying is that for the money you can do even better with other technologies.


----------



## pdawg17 (Mar 1, 2003)

stevel said:


> Re: Over the fireplace...
> 
> They don't. But it looks cool.
> 
> ...


So what technology are you saying then gives the best PQ? And don't say SED because it's not around yet and won't for another 1.5 years now...


----------



## joetoronto (Jul 26, 2004)

this is getting a little on the crazy side, if you ask me.

yes, plasma is not the most "accurate" picture available. i've yet to see *any* screen available though that can produce such stunning colors and crispness.

as far as i'm concerned, it's the most visually pleasing technology out there, whether you hang it on a wall or not.

i'm hanging my 50" panasonic TH-50PHD8UK display on a wall but at eye level, not on top of the fireplace.

i have a toshiba 65" 65HDX82 RPTV that's professionally calibrated. it's also in the right setting, which RPTV's need to be, no ambient light entering the room and all seating is directly in front of the screen.

the picture is very "accurate".

having said that, i'm going to replace it with a panasonic 65" TH-65PHD8UK display, and not because i can hang it on a wall, but because i'm fortunate enough to be able to get one.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

pdawg17 said:


> So what technology are you saying then gives the best PQ? And don't say SED because it's not around yet and won't for another 1.5 years now...


LCoS, as exemplified by Sony SXRD, though JVC's D-ILA is pretty good too.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

this is turning into the lcd vs dlp vs plasma etc thread  

maybe a link


----------



## af250xxl (Jan 24, 2006)

yeah... I was also ready to bring home a new TV this weekend, one way or the other... now I'm so confused and have absolutely no idea which one I want to buy... 

Is it just me or does the current Sony 34" XBR CRT HDTV(yes, the tube thing)
have an incredible picture when sitting next to other Sony XBR TVs?(LCD flat panel
or the SXRD rear-projection model) The picture on the CRT tube TV look much
sharper and the contrasts are awesome..... Only if it wasn't only 34 inches... 

The salesman told me that the professionals still only use the 34" CRT HDTV for
critical viewing... Is this true or not? Or is he just pulling my chains?

Thanks!


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

LoopinFool said:


> Note that when you pause 1080i on the HD TiVo, it only displays one field of the image (and doubles it). So, you're only getting a vertical resolution of 540 pixels in that case. That's the main reason you'd see jaggies when paused.
> Since 720p is progressive, paused frames look exactly like frames in motion.
> 
> - LoopinFool


I don't believe that is true, as the 1080i output of a HR10 is not deinterlaced, since it is still 1080i when paused, which implies continued interlace by definition (virtually all 480i devices operate as you say, however). But whether it is true or not, what I should have mentioned that if you unpause the image, there is still no improvement on this model as well as on many other pre-2005 models. That is because of the poor deinterlace of the 60XS955, not the Tivo. Whether the picture is frozen or not, the deinterlace is the same. Either you have a poor deinterlace from the Tivo (which I do not believe) or from the set itself when the picture is frozen, or poor deinterlace from the Sony when the picture is moving. Bottom line, equal jaggies on both. Pausing the image just makes them much easier to see.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

af250xxl said:


> ...The salesman told me that the professionals still only use the 34" CRT HDTV for
> critical viewing... Is this true or not? Or is he just pulling my chains?
> 
> Thanks!


Speaking as someone who gets paid to bring folks network HD OTA (which I guess qualifies me as one of those "professionals"), I think he's maybe not pulling your chain, but certainly has drunk the Kool-aid and is trying to razzle-dazzle you a bit. "Professional" setups are of either two main varieties. The newest and coolest is based on 50" plasmas that are typically subdivided into many sections to emulate a monitor wall, and very few setups have these. Not only that, but they are rarely if ever configured to display one large image, and are normally used for production control room settings rather than for engineering quality control. The other is CRT's (and lately direct LCD's) that will fit in a regulation 19" equipment rack. That means that for a 16:9 display, a 17" diagonal is about the biggest they ever get, maybe some are 19" diagonal. I have seen some 21" SVGA monitors used on occasion in transmitter sites, I guess, but they then must sit on top of the racks. I'm afraid a 34" CRT just really has no place in a professional facility, unless it's in the boss's conference room. And most bosses aren't that professional (in a technical sense).


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

newsposter said:


> How does one watch a tv up that high in comfort? My neck would hurt looking up all the time. Also I find in ads they show sofas etc turned at 90 degree angles to the thing, that must hurt as well  I wont even ask how hard it is to move when you change your room around....


And that is exactly why if you believe that form should follow function, this looks anything but cool. All of the coolness goes away about 5 minutes into the awkward viewing.

I hate displays that are anything but centered at seated eye level, period. And I'm not really fond of displays hanging on the wall, because if you sit the proper distance from them, it becomes claustrophobic and you end up sitting with your back to 2/3rds of the room, which to me is too reminiscent of being 5 years old and sitting facing the corner as punishment. I also think built-in wall units and amores are so 1999 (not to mention the cooling problems).

I like my displays on a free-standing kiosk (a stand) at least 3 feet from the wall, and microdisplays are designed that way which leaves plasma with one single advantage, wide viewing angle, among all of its very substantial disadvantages of cost, energy use, burn-in, and the most sinister disadvantage, noisy blacks.

SXRD kills everything else available as of 2006. Wish they would have been available in 2004.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

af250xxl said:


> ...Is it just me or does the current Sony 34" XBR CRT HDTV(yes, the tube thing)
> have an incredible picture when sitting next to other Sony XBR TVs?...


 (I wanted to address this point of your post separately).

I think that for SD content on an analog channel, a CRT does indeed have advantages. And I think I know why. All NTSC delivery to CRT's has a natural "ringing" in the video, that acts very similar to the way analog image enhancers work. It is always there in somewhat equal amounts, in OTA, in CATV, and in DBS. It is not natural, in fact it is a normal unavoidable artifact of NTSC delivery as displayed on CRT. And it has a curious happy effect of actually making video have somewhat of a more 3-dimensional quality than HD (or SD) on a LCD/DLP/plasma.

And it is so ubiquitous that we no longer consciously notice it, and we have come to depend upon it being there, so that most new viewers of non-CRT displays have a sense that something familiar that helped them perceive resolution just is now missing (a feeling that disappears about a day later once overwhelmed by the majesty of the true higher resolution of HD). This also can partly explain why SD on a HD display looks as fuzzy as it does...there is no natural image enhancement helping out as there was when viewing this type of content on a CRT.

This effect is somewhat wasted on HD, as CRTs can never really get big enough to be able to allow a seating distance of 3.3 picture heights under most circumstances, so the resolution advantage is compromised in most cases, plus digital delivery doesn't have that ringing artifact. IOW it doesn't give you that false (but pleasing) perception of resolution, it gives you an accurate higher resolution.

I was forced to watch SD on my old 36" XBR for a couple days waiting for a replacement for a blown lamp (so I pulled a chair up close to lessen the separation anxiety from my 60-incher) and I developed a new-found affinity for CRTs. Not so much for the resolution, but for the ability of a CRT to present a familiar, 3-D quality not as obvious in my $4K microdisplay. In some ways they really do look better, but in most ways that is often severely over-balanced by the advantages of large non-CRT displays.

Put a CRT side-by-side with a non-CRT and display HD (to whatever resolution possible on each), and everyone will choose the non-CRT, because it is bigger and brighter, and probably sharper. Put SD on both, and many will feel that the CRT now looks better and sharper, even though smaller. CRT's suit SD well. Non-CRTs suit HD well.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

The other factor is that the smaller the screen, the "sharper" it will look.


----------



## jhimmel (Dec 27, 2002)

stevel said:


> All I'm saying is that for the money you can do even better with other technologies.


I'd stay away from such broad generalizations.
I have two plasma's. One is not even hung on a wall. I did not buy it for that reason. I did not even go into the stores expecting to buy a plasma. I wanted possibly a DLP or a RP with one of the other new technologies that supposedly have excellent picture quality (Like the Sony's). The reason is that the place where this TV was going was in a cabinet that could accommodate all types of sets. The problem with them (and the reason I walked out with another plasma) is that I wanted a screen that would look good while I was up walking around the room, not just sitting in a chair in front of the screen.

Despite WANTING to be impressed with the DLP's and the Sony's, they ALL seemed to have a viewing "sweet spot" that fell off dramatically as I stood up and walked around them in the store. The Plasma's looked good from just about any viewing angle.

I ended up with a Pioneer PDP-5060HD and I am thrilled with it. It is not hung on the wall, although it is in a custom built cabinet where only the actual screen is showing, and looks fantastic. Other technologies may offer a superior picture under strict viewing conditions, but to state that one is "better" then the other (when the truth is that each have strengths and weaknesses that need to be matched to your particular needs and desires) is just silly. Could I have gotten a 50" screen with a higher resolution for less money with one of the other technologies? Sure. Would that equate to a better viewing experience from all the seating positions in the room or while walking around and doing "stuff" while watching? Not from what I saw. Believe me, I spent quite a lot of time walking around the different TVs in the store (and probably looking a little nutty).

As far as putting them over a fireplace -
I agree, it is somewhat above optimal viewing height, although I can see it being okay in a bedroom. The 42" plasma in my bedroom is hung on the wall, and at a height that would easily sit over a fireplace. The top of the unit is actually at the height of a standard door (6'-8") and is tilted down only slightly. While lying in bed, this height works very well in my opinion. Many of my customers (I build custom homes) have Plasma's over fireplaces in their bedroom, and it seems to work very well.

Jim H.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

jhimmel said:


> I'd stay away from such broad generalizations.
> I have two plasma's. One is not even hung on a wall. I did not buy it for that r
> 
> Despite WANTING to be impressed with the DLP's and the Sony's, they ALL seemed to have a viewing "sweet spot" that fell off dramatically as I stood up and walked around them in the store. The Plasma's looked good from just about any viewing angle.


You didn't look at SXRD sets and probably looked at cheaper DLP models. I will agree that plasma looks better at extreme viewing angles than any RP technology, but some RP sets are MUCH better at this than others. The Sony SXRD models have an excellent picture from any reasonable viewing angle.

If extreme viewing angle is important to you, then plasma or direct-view CRT are the choices today.


----------



## af250xxl (Jan 24, 2006)

Ok. I think I'm going to stick with the Sony SXRD rear-projection.
Sony KDS-R50XBR1

How noisy is the fan on the back of the unit? 

Are the 50-inch and 60-inch model identical except in screen size?



Thanks again for all the advice!


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

I can not detect any noise from the fan unless I stick my head behind the TV, and even then it's very faint.

Yes, they are identical except for screen size.


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

stevel said:


> I can not detect any noise from the fan unless I stick my head behind the TV, and even then it's very faint.
> 
> Yes, they are identical except for screen size.


And price 

The 50" is selling for about $3k here in the Atlanta area.


----------



## alv (May 6, 2004)

Widescreen review a month ago did a very detailed analysis of available technologies and rated them in order of picture quality.
The results were in order from best to worst
LCoS CRT DLP(front projection) DLP (rear projection) LCD Plasma

I for one am a big fan of CRT (the marketing guys convinced many otherwise). I have a 5 year old RP CRT and I go over friends with "state of the art" new models and come home happy. I always have an urge to upgrade AV stuff but because this is an area where size won over quality, I am content at least for a few more years.


----------



## pdawg17 (Mar 1, 2003)

alv said:


> Widescreen review a month ago did a very detailed analysis of available technologies and rated them in order of picture quality.
> The results were in order from best to worst
> LCoS CRT DLP(front projection) DLP (rear projection) LCD Plasma
> 
> I for one am a big fan of CRT (the marketing guys convinced many otherwise). I have a 5 year old RP CRT and I go over friends with "state of the art" new models and come home happy. I always have an urge to upgrade AV stuff but because this is an area where size won over quality, I am content at least for a few more years.


Wow...I never would have thought it would be found that plasma is the worst picture quality available...I wonder how they came to that conclusion...since DLP/LCoS (not Sony LCoS) is cheaper than LCD/plasma, why don't more people have DLPs/LCoS?


----------



## joetoronto (Jul 26, 2004)

pdawg17 said:


> Wow...I never would have thought it would be found that plasma is the worst picture quality available...I wonder how they came to that conclusion...since DLP/LCoS (not Sony LCoS) is cheaper than LCD/plasma, why don't more people have DLPs/LCoS?


it sounds like these people rate PQ like monster rates cables.

through a machine, not through human eyes.


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

joetoronto said:


> it sounds like these people rate PQ like monster rates cables.
> 
> through a machine, not through human eyes.


Isn't the problem with monster cables precisely that people do rate them through human eyes? "Wow, those look really good!"


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

DLP is probably one of the biggest sellers. But people who want "sexy and thin" TVs have had little choice but plasma until bigger LCDs became competitive. LCOS has been very expensive until the Sony non-Qualia SXRD sets.

Widescreen Review is not a "measurement" magazine, but I have to say that I take their reviews with a shaker of salt. They're not as professional as competitors such as The Perfect Vision. Too bad Stereophile Guide to Home Theater is effectively gone - they were good too.


----------



## joetoronto (Jul 26, 2004)

bdlucas said:


> Isn't the problem with monster cables precisely that people do rate them through human eyes? "Wow, those look really good!"


lol, ya, the look of the cables.


----------



## alv (May 6, 2004)

ever cut into a cable and see how much not wire/shielding there is? lots


----------



## jhimmel (Dec 27, 2002)

bdlucas said:


> Isn't the problem with monster cables precisely that people do rate them through human eyes? "Wow, those look really good!"


Now that's funny (cause it's mostly true) 

Jim H.


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

Hey, I'm almost sold on the Sony KDS-R60XBR1, but I'm not sure where to get one.

Check out this $1500 price difference:

Crutchfield versus Nice Electronics.

A local Circuit City has a price that matches Crutchfield's... anyone have any trusted online retailers that might have a good price? I'm a little nervous with a purchase this big from a non-local store and I don't know anything about Nice Electronics...

Eli


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

Crutchfield is selling for list. They usually do, and I buy from them anyway because of their superb service and backing of the products they sell.

That said, I would buy a large TV from a local retailer only, and that's what I did. I was able to get a very good price at my local Circuit City by talking with the department manager.

I've never heard of Nice Electronics.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

If you have a local Entertainment book , be sure to check out the back of it. I had a 10% off coupon and saved a 179 over sale price on my tv at the time


----------



## jabroni (Nov 18, 2003)

I bought the Sony WEGA SXRD 50 inch 1080p television around January 2nd and it is quite simply, the most awesome TV ever. Home Theater mag gave it the highest rating amonst 6 or 7 other 1080p sets this last February. 

I would love to feed it a 1080i input other than Directv (i.e., the HD DVD) but there are no movies out yet! Some programming from Directv looks good but most of Direct's HD offerings are so compressed that the artifacts and macroblocking are hideous. This television set will greatly reveal your provider's flaws.

Good DVD's look great on this set as well.

I paid 3K for the TV because the store I went to was having a slow day and wanted to make a sale!


----------



## jib2 (May 31, 2000)

I agree with much of what has already been posted here. I bought a Sony KDS-R50XBR1 in mid-January. The list price has dropped since then. I paid $3100 and then got back $100 when the set went on sale for $2999. I bought from a local (NY metro area) retailer. The picture is gorgious. I got a HR10-250 in mid-February and the two look great together. I've also tried it with HD cable (I have local cable for internet) and it also looked great (but not better than DirecTV).

Even DVDs (480P) look excellent -- the Sony upconverts and deinterlaces very nicely. The fan is totally silent. Bulb life is expected to be up to 8,000 hours, but I don't know of anyone who has yet had a bulb failure, so it is hard to predict. (I bought a 5 year extended warranty from the retail chain that includes unlimited bulb changes, but this may have been overkill.)

The set is a true 1080p set, but only inputs 1080i -- as others have pointed out, the set deinterlaces very well, and it is unlikely you would see a difference with 1080p. Sony's 2006 models (due out in the fall) will have 1080p direct input.

Hope this helps. Good luck!


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

i confirmed last night in the entertainment book there is a 10% off 199+ TVs through 12/06. (meaning it would pay you to order the book just for that coupon) SXRD is specifically excluded and there was some other language on there but i forget now that i'm at work, what it was. It seemed most every tv would be covered though.


----------



## TivoDano (Sep 28, 2005)

I am interested in this set too and I have checked price grabber and got prices between $2200.00 - $2600.00. If your not going walk in to a store, why pay for it? You can get warrenties with these as well. So don't give up on this set because of price, just use this internet to find a good price.


----------



## ryttingm (May 17, 2005)

One thing to keep in mind. The new Sony SXRD and some of the new DLP 1080 sets have a native resolution of 1920x1080. This is double the resolution of any of the previous MD ( Micro Display - which includes DLP/LCD RP/LCOS ). Most of these new generation of 1080 sets do not accept a 1080p signal (except the HP). However, with double the resolution they will render 1080i material much better than previous generations of MD technology. In addition, most plasma/lcd direct view displays are still 720p displays. This seems to be changing, but with the soon to be released HD-DVD/Blu-ray standards, it would seem silly not to invest in a television that can support a full 2 million pixels.


----------

