# LED TV Recomendation



## davesh (Aug 11, 2007)

Tivoers,

Embarrasingly we still have an old CRT telly that it in desperate need of replacement. Also embarrasingly I'm a luddite when it comes to TV technology. What I know is :

1> I like the look of the new LED backlit panels
2> that SWMBO won't put up with a TV larger than 37"
3> that it must be black ( no gold or silver )
4> that I am totally intent on continuing to use my Tivo for as long as possible ( thanks AltEPG ! ).

When it comes to 1080p, 100Hz, USB, 5ms refresh, HDMI etc what should I be looking for ? Are there any gotchas for a Tivo user ? Are there any specific tellies that are an absolute steal at the moment ?

Cheers

Dave


----------



## Heuer (Mar 15, 2004)

Buy the best you can afford but it should be 1080p to deal with all HD content and Blu-ray. Personally I would buy a Panasonic Viera 32" with LED/LCD technology TX-L32E30B LED LCD TV which is the best out there. You could consider springing for the 3D version TX-L32DT30B (uses special LCD sequential glasses controlled by the screen) because, despite the cries of "shame", the technology does work and will be everywhere shortly. For frame sequence 3D you will need a HDMI 1.4 Blu-ray player although the PS3 (probably the best Blu-ray player you can buy) has just had a software update to accommodate 3D FS.

The Viera will upscale your TiVo to make SD programmes look like HD. And I put my money were my mouth is as I have just ordered a 65" 3D Plasma from the same range.


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

With out a doubt my 46" Panasonic plasma gave a better picture than my new 47" LG 3D LED TV.

Still the LED TV eats less than 100 watts as the Panasonic used 350 to 500 watts.

The latest plasma's use a bit less.

My LG is the 47LX6900 which is now six months old so most likely obsolete 

If you get a 3D one make sure it comes with enough specs or allow another £100.00 each.

Automan.


----------



## davidshack (Aug 17, 2002)

IMO:

must:
be 1080p (resolution, resolution, resolution)
have HDMI (only connection to get the quality)
have RGB SCART (for TiVo connection)

SIZE of screen to choose is SIMPLY A FUNCTION of VIEWING distance. The eyes have an optimum angle of view: you pick a screen to watch comfortably at the distance you sit. Which is why your netbook has a 12" screen and the local cinema an (eg) 12 metre one. Remember trying to sit in the front row at the cinema? Too close: your eyes were unable to take in all the action. Remember the old TV in the corner? Too far: you had to peer at the screen & still couldn't see detail.
Got an old 35mm camera in a box somewhere? The view from its 50mm "standard" lens gives a fair idea of the eyes' comfort zone. 
.
.
People all have their own opinion (which they may defend ferociously) about screen technology. Projector? plasma? LCD? LED?

LEDs are trendy, in part because manufacturers exist to sell - so need to persuade us to buy this year's "stuff". People like them because they are slim and use less electricity. The back-lit (my preference over edge-lit) LEDS are good TVs. 
(Though I think LED best at sets sizes of [say] up to 24"?)

The latest PLASMAS are (IMHO) still head & shoulders, chest & knees the best for picture quality. But they use more electricity. Could cost a serious couch-potato what, £30 to £50 a year more? Isn't enjoying TV at its best worth that?

LCD technology is poor at showing fast movement (which is one reason larger sets have 100Hz or 200Hz refresh rates). (In simple terms "LED TVs" are LCDs illuminated by low-consumption LEDs instead of conventional tubed lights)

Personally I (only) use 1080p projectors and 120"-140" screens. Rolled-up screens & ceiling-fitted projectors are near invisible when not in use; prices have dropped dramatically (eg under £1,000 all in).

The poster who suggested 3D is coming has to be correct - but I suspect the current set pricing includes an "early-adopter" premium.
.
.

In short, choose set size based on viewing distance; make the cosmetics fit (rather than live with a poor compromise by doing it the wrong way round). Larger wall-mounted TVs can often be made acceptable to SWMBO by hanging a nice tapestry / picture so it covers the set when not in use.

A plasma at 42" (diagonal measurement remember) is actually little longer/higher than a 37" set.

Oh and be aware shops can use all sorts of tricks to make a set appear "super" on display - don't be fooled!


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

How to choose the right screen size


----------



## katman (Jun 4, 2002)

davesh said:


> 4> that I am totally intent on continuing to use my Tivo for as long as possible ( thanks AltEPG ! ).


Get the set demonstrated using a DVD player connected via RGB SCART, preferably with a disc that you know.

Way too many flat screen TVs give a superb picture with HDMI but do an awful job of displaying analogue sources.

When I chose my Toshiba I did just that and the picture is fantastic. Realistic faces rather than the "painting by numbers" skin tones seen on lots of other TVs displaying analogue.


----------



## Steve_K (May 5, 2001)

+ make sure it's at least 1080p in both axes. Some cheaper plasmas are only 768p vertically and yes you can tell the difference


----------



## Milhouse (Sep 15, 2001)

Trinitron said:


> How to choose the right screen size


I used one of the various screen-size guides, and bought a 42" wall mounted TV (the original Philips Aurea). When it arrived I thought it was absolutely huge (I previously had a 32" widescreen CRT stuck in the corner of the room) but after a couple of weeks, I became accustomed to the size of the new screen and eventually began wishing I'd been able to buy the next size up (ie. 45-47")!

So my screen-size buying guide would be... determine the biggest TV you think your room can accommodate (taking into consideration the screen size guides linked above), then buy the next size up.


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

Steve_K said:


> + make sure it's at least 1080p in both axes. Some cheaper plasmas are only 768p vertically and yes you can tell the difference


 What are you on about?

The number refers to *horizontal* resolution. Nothing else. Full HD is 1920 x 1080, but beware older screens claiming that resolution but can't handle 1080p - they downscale 1080i and 1080p to 720p then upscale it back to 1080, which is as nasty as it sounds.


----------



## Steve_K (May 5, 2001)

Trinitron said:


> What are you on about?
> 
> The number refers to *horizontal* resolution. Nothing else. Full HD is 1920 x 1080, but beware older screens claiming that resolution but can't handle 1080p - they downscale 1080i and 1080p to 720p then upscale it back to 1080, which is as nasty as it sounds.


So you've never seen 1366x768 TVs then? 

Easy to get conned into buying one as being "better than 1080p" as arguably it is in one axis but that lack of vertical resolution will make a noticeable difference. Whatever the internal workings, nothing can make a display surface look better than it really is.


----------



## Johnbyte (Nov 4, 2008)

Steve_K said:


> So you've never seen 1366x768 TVs then?


They will, however, be described as 'HD Ready' not 'Full HD'.


----------



## Steve_K (May 5, 2001)

If only it were as simple as that. "Full HD" isn't an industry defined term and it allows sales staff and selling web sites to exploit the unwary.

_Digital Europe _ are usually seen as the defining body and these are the trademarks they own








= can process HD signals







= can process HD signals and has a digital decoder







= can process HD signals and display to at least 1920x1080







= can process HD signals and display to at least 1920x1080 and has a digital decoder

Just asking for 1080p means nothing for vertical resolution.


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

Steve_K said:


> So you've never seen 1366x768 TVs then? .


Yes, but what has that got to do with:


> make sure it's at least 1080p in both axes


I've never seen references to 1080p vertical resolution. You want know why? Because it doesn't happen. You're always going to get pixel ratios of 1:1.78, ie 1280x720, 1366x768, 1920x1080 or the picture will be horribly distorted. From there it's the vertical resolution that counts and that will be 720p or 1080p. Progressive scan refers to the number of image lines delivered to the screen, that's all. LCD/LED screens can't interlace images so anything less than 1080p will be converted to 720p then upscaled to fit the screen size.


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

Go for a 3840×2160 pixel TV...

http://www.thruput.co.uk/products/monitors/56-8-Megapixel-3840x2160-Display

Be ready for the future 

Automan.


----------



## Steve_K (May 5, 2001)

You're just being picky Trinitron, I guess for the sake of it.

1080p is an ambiguous term. It literally means 1080 pixels but some use it as a shorthand for "HD Ready 1080p" which is the Digital Europe trademark.

And in that context 1080p means " . .The minimum native resolution of the display or display engine is 1080 physical lines . .." ie vertical resolution which makes


> I've never seen references to 1080p vertical resolution.


 a bit of a bizarre quote by you.

Oh and "minimum" means "at least" which is the wording I used


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

Steve_K said:


> You're just being picky Trinitron, I guess for the sake of it.


No, just stating facts.

I can see now that you are confusing vertical and horizontal. Your "1080 physical lines" vertical resolution is made up of 1,080 horizontal lines. That is referred to in all technical definitions as 'horizontal resolution', i.e. the number of horizontal lines capable of being displayed. If you have seen a display claiming 1080p vertical resolution I would like to see where you found it.

And 1080p isn't ambiguous at all. 'p' = progressive; 'i' = interlaced. It's the displays that claim to be 1920x1080 HD but don't specify the 'p' which are ambiguous. Anything claiming to be 1080p that isn't is plain wrong.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Steve_K said:


> 1080p is an ambiguous term.


No it's not, 1080p means 1920 x 1080 progressive scan.

_HD Ready_ is as an ambiguous term (anything over 720 vertical can be called that) perhaps you are confusing the two?


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Trinitron said:


> I can see now that you are confusing vertical and horizontal. Your "1080 physical lines" vertical resolution is made up of 1,080 horizontal lines. That is referred to in all technical definitions as 'horizontal resolution', i.e. the number of horizontal lines capable of being displayed. If you have seen a display claiming 1080p vertical resolution I would like to see where you found it.


Sorry, you have that backwards, a 1080p set has a vertical resolution of 1080 pixels and a horizontal resolution of 1920 pixels,


----------



## Trinitron (Jan 20, 2003)

TCM2007 said:


> Sorry, you have that backwards, a 1080p set has a vertical resolution of 1080 pixels and a horizontal resolution of 1920 pixels,


I'm not disputing that, but traditionally TV resolution is the number of horizontal lines capable of being received - so a '625 line' CRT is capable of receiving 625 horizontal lines (interlaced), and a 1080 display can receive 1080 lines. 1080p is a shorthand means of describing the delivery method, i.e. 1080 horizontal lines in a single progressive scan, not the number of pixels used to display them.

Digital Europe use that definition, not a pixel in sight:


> What do the P's & I's mean?
> Video signals are often referred to by the number of lines they use, followed by a letter "p" or "i". In high definition broadcasting you will for example find references to 720p and 1080i.
> The "p" stands for "progressive", and the "i" for "interlaced", and both of these terms are related to how the source signal is created and/or transmitted. In Europe, video sources are using 50 samples within each second, and a "p" would indicate that video signal has 50 complete snapshots, whereas an "i" says it has 50 snapshots with an alternation of the odd and the even lines.


----------



## davesh (Aug 11, 2007)

I love you guys .... and Pete isn't even chipping in. What would happen if you were all put in a room and made to talk about televisions/Tivo etc.  World War III ?

Anyway to those who responded to my queries. Thanks. Most useful and educational.

Anyway here's the plan, but you're not gonna like it ! I'm going to go on Ebay and buy a quality wide screen 32" CRT for about £20. Up to today I've been watching a 26" CRT with no widescreen so it can't really disappoint. Then in a couple of years when backlit LED tellies are £299 AND include full wireless Internet browsing I'll consider investing.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## Automan (Oct 29, 2000)

Good idea...

I just looked and my TV which was just over £1K in the January sales is now under £700 at RicherSounds 

Automan


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

Trinitron said:


> I'm not disputing that, but traditionally TV resolution is the number of horizontal lines capable of being received - so a '625 line' CRT is capable of receiving 625 horizontal lines (interlaced), and a 1080 display can receive 1080 lines. 1080p is a shorthand means of describing the delivery method, i.e. 1080 horizontal lines in a single progressive scan, not the number of pixels used to display them.
> 
> Digital Europe use that definition, not a pixel in sight:


That quote is about i vs p, so why would it mention pixels? 

"Line" is an analogue term, being short for scan line. In the digital world we use pixels.

Anyway even using the older terminology a 1080p TV has a _vertical resolution _of 1080 _horizontal lines._


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

davesh said:


> Anyway here's the plan, but you're not gonna like it ! I'm going to go on Ebay and buy a quality wide screen 32" CRT for about £20. Up to today I've been watching a 26" CRT with no widescreen so it can't really disappoint. Then in a couple of years when backlit LED tellies are £299 AND include full wireless Internet browsing I'll consider investing.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Dave


If you're sticking with TiVo as a source, that's not a bad plan.

Strongly recommend Panasonic; they were the best CRT sets. Something like a PD30 or PD50 with a Quintrix screen. Properly heavy, mind!


----------



## sjp (Oct 22, 2001)

davesh said:


> I love you guys .... and Pete isn't even chipping in. What would happen if you were all put in a room and made to talk about televisions/Tivo etc.  World War III ?
> 
> Anyway to those who responded to my queries. Thanks. Most useful and educational.
> 
> ...


might be worth holding out for a 36", that TCM bloke used to have one - just don't ask for free delivery


----------



## alek (May 22, 2008)

davesh said:


> I'm going to go on Ebay and buy a quality wide screen 32" CRT for about £20.


Go down to the local skips. There are some beautiful TVs, which cost a fortune not long ago, being dumped.

I bet there is 10 + years left in most of them.

Alek


----------



## Steve_K (May 5, 2001)

TCM2007 said:


> No it's not, 1080p means 1920 x 1080 progressive scan. . .


Yes to the industry it means 1080 progressive scanned lines but unlike "HD Ready" etc it is NOT a controlled term and to the punter off the street it's often been quoted as 1080 pixels. A seller could exploit that because it does actually ALSO mean 1080 pixels.

And that's why I posted. As I'd recently had the opportunity to "test drive" a 768 lines plasma for a week, I really didn't want to see the OP fobbed off with one no matter how many horizontal pixels it had.


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

It is a "controlled term" - a 1080p set must be 1920 x 1080, it can't be 1080 horizontal pixels. Anyone selling a TV as such would be breaching all kinds of regulations and laws.


----------



## Steve_K (May 5, 2001)

OK I'll bite. "HD Ready" is controlled by trademark, how is 1080p controlled?


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

It's a word with a defined meaning, eg http://tech.ebu.ch/docs/tech/tech3299.pdf

It's not a Lewis Carroll word, if you say a TV is 1080p then it must be 1080p!


----------



## Steve_K (May 5, 2001)

I think someone would have more chance getting TiVo into court over June 1st than get a seller over a TV dispute using that document. 

In precedence it would fall way below the discussions and documents presented at sale time. A clever seller could easily manipulate a discussion. "You say you want 1080p, that's got 1080 pixels. Now look at this HD Ready Samsung, it has 1366 pixels across the screen, much better than some of the other HD sets we've got"

If it doesn't say "HD Ready 1080p" or "HD TV 1080p" anyone would be wise to specifically clarify how many vertical lines are there. Or learn to love a 1366 x 768 (which would still be better than a 32" CRT from EBay)

And how many posts before mine said either of those terms? That's be zero then.

Enough (at least from me, GP about to restart)


----------



## TCM2007 (Dec 25, 2006)

There is zero ambiguity about the meaning of 1080p what you describe would be clear open-and-shut misselling, meet Mr Trading Standards


----------



## AMc (Mar 22, 2002)

IMHO there are sometimes sales people who will make ambiguous comments about technical aspects of TVs etc. if you're being lead in this way you are being sold a TV as opposed to buying one - leave the shop.
If you're intending buying a new TV then you would be well advised to look at the best buys and recent reviews in sites like techradar, whathifi, and avforums to get an idea of the sets that suit your budget and size. Then go to a reputable store and take a long hard look at them to decide what suits you best.

FWIW I have a 11 year old 32" Sony widescreen CRT and a 3 year old 42" 1080p Panasonic Plasma - fed the same SD pictures from Freeview they look as good as each other.
Fed an HD signal from freesat the plasma looks better - hard to argue - but there is still much less broadcast HD and a S1 Tivo can't record it anyway.

If you want a CRT then post a WANTED on your local Freegle/Freecycle/Cheapcycle mailing list and if you can collect I'm sure you'll get a nice set for nothing.


----------



## davesh (Aug 11, 2007)

I have posted an add on my local Freecycle for a 32" CRT so we'll see what happens.

Cheers

Dave


----------



## RichardJH (Oct 7, 2002)

davesh said:


> I have posted an add on my local Freecycle for a 32" CRT so we'll see what happens.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Dave


Dave PM sent


----------

