looking for new tv
looking for something 42 inch or larger

primaraly used to watch analog cable
however hdtv source also with a ps3 with bluray
im being told any newer digital tvs rp dlp/lcd or flatpanel lcd/plasma will look bad in analog
when i say analog i mean analog not standard def digital i mean analog from cable company
thats all i have acess to as no satellite can be used were im at.
secondly the cable company has most channels still in analog about 50 of them
the other 20-30 are standard digital wich need axtra subscription and none of them interest me
and the rest are hanfull are hdtv at most

been told best choice would be not lcd as it is worse. so that leaves rp dlp or a plasma

also dont wanna have burnin playing games


which one would be better in displaying analog channels? or will lcd be better choice? any specific brands models that are known to do this better?

wanted to go as large as possible using a anologe cable source and still look good
what size will this be? been told around 42 to 50
what technology should i go with? rp lcd/dlp or flatscreen lcd/plasma?

looking for new tv
looking for something 42 inch or larger like a 50

primaraly used to watch analog cable
however hdtv source also with a ps3 with bluray
im being told any newer digital tvs rp dlp/lcd or flatpanel lcd/plasma will look bad in analog
when i say analog i mean analog not standard def digital i mean analog from cable company
thats all i have acess to as no satellite can be used were im at.
secondly the cable company has most channels still in analog about 50 of them
the other 20-30 are standard digital wich need axtra subscription and none of them interest me
and the rest are handfull are hdtv at most.

been told best choice would be not lcd as it is worse in displaying analog. so that leaves rp dlp or a plasma

also dont wanna have burnin playing games


which one would be better in displaying analog channels? or will lcd be better choice? any specific brands models that are known to do this better?

wanted to go as large as possible using a anologe cable source and still look good
what size will this be? been told around 42 to 50
what technology should i go with? rp lcd/dlp or flatscreen lcd/plasma?


just looking for best choice for viewing analog cable
looking for 42 inch min and 50 inch max

also do good hdtv via ps3 blueray for my movies
i do gaming and movies from ps3 and mostly analog chanels from cable


lookin at the panasonic 50 inch 75 series and the 600 and 60 series plasmas
also the pioneer 5014/5016 and the 5070/5071 plasma
and
sony 50 inchers the sxrd line for rear projecters
also where 42 46 and 50 inch cheaper wega line

no lcd in the 50 inch ive heard of
and i cant find any crt rear projecters anymore

room has little light in it but can open windows if need be to get more light

my main deciding factor will be viewing analog cable on the tv
any technology will do any formfactor ie rp plasma lcd dlp ect
budget will go to around $3000 if i have to cheaper if i can but definatly want best picture i can using a analog cable source.

any suggestions?

How analog looks on any type of TV depends on the processor of the TV. Some LCDs can produce a decent SD picture. Some say Olevia's 747i (47") produces a great SD picture, having seen several sets, I personally disagree. Plasmas and RPTVs are restricted by the same problem. One thing you have to understand is that 99% of the time analog on an HDTV will look worse than a traditional CRT. The basic rule of garbage in, garbage out applies.

One thing to consider is if you want 1080p to fully take advantage of Blu-ray. That being said, you have to been within about 1.5x the screen size to notice the difference between 1080p and 720p. If you are too far away, there is no need to get 1080p.

You may be interested in a JVC: "In one area, the JVC did outshine many of the HDTVs we have reviewed. The LT-46FN97 did seem to handle standard definition content better. All of this TV's video processing muscle, which reduces noise and improves scaler performance, pays off when displaying SD content. Please don't expect miracles, but the JVC does clean up SD material and makes it presentable at HD resolution. If are still watching a lot of SD programming, then you should consider the LT-46FN97. But if your daily TV diet consists of almost all SD content, then you might want to think twice before buying any HDTV. " http://www.hdtvsolutions.com/JVC_LT-46FN97_Review.htm

I own a JVC LT-40FH96 (same electronics as the XXFN97s). This set does an excellent job with all feeds. My cable is all digital now but for a year all my SD viewing on this set was analog - no problem, the JVC handled it.

Its all about video processing, not a technology in particular. When shopping ask them if they have cable and ask for a digital channel not HD, then ask for the stretch mode of every TV your looking at.

MY LCD's stretch mode did alot better job on SD than the plasma I owned. Its all about the TV not the technology.

You'll discover all TV's aren't equal.

BTW: Analog can look better than digital channels, thats all about the quality of the signal. I've seen analog look almost like HD before. Its all about quality in your questions! Your next question probably is my cable company analog any good? Probably not because its compressed and they don't have to make it good, and I haven't heard alot of good stories in this area.

any suggestions?

Learn to use better grammar?

Seriously, it helps when posts are easy to read. A "train of thought" that rambles on and on tends to get ignored.

Getting back to your question, at least what I think is your question anyway, I have a question in return; why get a big screen HDTV if you are not going to get HD cable? Seems to be a big waste of money, IMHO.

Display technology (lcd, plasma, etc) has zip to do with how will SD will display. It is the video processor (within the set) and the input signal quality that determine how well, or poor, a set will display an SD signal.

thanx for the info sofar guys

besides the lcd lg any other brands/models that are known to produce great/good results using analog cable?

all the stores ive gone to are using satellite to display the tvs so its hard to juge how my analog cable will look.

i tried to provide all the info i could so it would help with a answer
didnt mean to be overload


reason i dont get digital cable is

the cable company has most channels still in analog about 50 of them
the other 20-30 are standard digital wich need axtra subscription and none of them interest me
and the rest are handfull are hdtv at most.

none of the digital channels interst me, ill never watch them.
all the chanels i watch are on analog cable and one or 2 networks that will also be on hdtv.
sux i cant get satellite but thats the way it is

however i watch hdtv movies off my ps3. that is why i want to get a large tv
42-50 inch


so i guess what im trying to find out is

which 42 or 50 inch tv has the best video processor (within the set) to get good display of analog cable??

The new 2007 Samsung and Panasonic plasma panels are excellent. The Samsung have a QAM tuner for digital cable. That will allow you to watch the non encrypted digital, analog and HD programming without a cable set top box.
Burn in and image retention rarely happen on a properly adjusted display. The Samsung models allow for settings to prevent burn in an image retention.

but how is the analog cable performance on these?

i ment the jvc not lg

any others that have good or better performance in displaying analog cable?

or is this the best bet for watching analog cable on any tv on the market today that will also do hdtv

oldcband, I'm not saying that digital is always better than analog, that would be a lie. A high quality analog signal can look just like a digital signal. That being said, while most digital channels are compressed, most still produce a better picture than analog. Very few people enjoy a good, high quality analog signal.

Analog (SD) cable looks like crap (at least on our local cable system) even on Pioneer and Fujitsu displays; there is just not enough information present in the original source.

Have you looked at the digital channels on a good display? Ours look cleaner than the analog ones, but HD it ain't. :)

Is over the air HD an option for you? It sounds like you are just interested in the commercial networks if I understand correctly.

If you want to add a 2 or 3 thousand dollar stand alone VP from Lumagen, Anchor Bay, etc. you can make analog tolerable. Just my 2 centavos...

but if one were stuck with old analog cable

what would best model be???

anyone else??

Get an HD source. It is pointless to get an HD panel without a good source. SD will look better on your current tv.

Get an HD source. It is pointless to get an HD panel without a good source. SD will look better on your current tv.Not pointless when someone who doesn't watch any HDTV but does do games, and wants a screen size larger than 32 inches for the content that he does watch.

When i got my 42" Plasma a few years ago i was watching analog cable programs probably 90% of the time and my Panny did a very good job with it - only a little worse than the excellent 32" tube it replaced. Some of the better analog channels look almost DVD quality on my Panny, and the poorer channels like TBS and Spike while not looking as good as on the tube TV they still looked plenty good enough.

Those same channels on my 26" LCD TV don't look nearly as good as they do on my 42" Plasma, and they look equally poor on my neighbor's 32" Sony XBR LCD and even worse yet on my friend's 46" Sony XBR LCD, and they've both commented on this but they had their own good reasons why they had to go with an LCD. I'm sure the Sony's have good processors, yet the picture lacks the detail that my Plasma displays and generally look unnatural. Digital SD and HD performance however is very good and almost as good as the Plasma, but the analog stuff is a far cry worse.

SD performance on HD panels is like Porsche performance in a crowded mall parking lot. Who cares?

but if one were stuck with old analog cable....
I would ask you why that is? You say you can't get satellite...are you in a city and facing the wrong way in your building? The extra charge for a digital cable is very small compared with the cost of a large screen high-def display...what company only has analog channels at this point, and where are you???

im on the westcoast on shaw
all channels below 50ish are analog
i dont sub to others as they dont interest me
most stuff i watch will be in those chanels below 50ish that are analog

still looking for a good large tv above 42 inch perfer 46 or 50
what has best vid processer for analog cable?
leaning towards plasmas but detered because of the amount of gaming im going to do on it and might also use my pc on it too

Display technology (lcd, plasma, etc) has zip to do with how will SD will display. It is the video processor (within the set) and the input signal quality that determine how well, or poor, a set will display an SD signal.

Yeah..ok, sure. :rolleyes:
That misinformation might fly in the LCD community, but not out in the open. ;)
Plasma has a CLEAR edge with SD and you know it.

Yeah..ok, sure. :rolleyes:
That misinformation might fly in the LCD community, but not out in the open. ;)
Plasma has a CLEAR edge with SD and you know it.You are commenting on something I wrote 7 months ago? Wow!! Anyway, I think you should spend some time in research......its not the display type but the video processor (scaler), input signal quality and screen size that determine how well SD appears on a display. The edge belongs to those displays (plasma or lcd) with the better scaler.

You are commenting on something I wrote 7 months ago? Wow!! Anyway, I think you should spend some time in research......its not the display type but the video processor (scaler), input signal quality and screen size that determine how well SD appears on a display. The edge belongs to those displays (plasma or lcd) with the better scaler.

Yeah yeah..so what..7 months..you still think it is fact. ;)
A Processor is still limited by the display tech overall.
Are you going to sit there with a straight face and say the best 50"+ LCD is performing anywhere close to the same size average plasma in SD?

Guys, I just checked Shaw's site, and extended basic is $29.95, where the lowest digital package is $54.95.

It appears they don't have anything equivalent to Comcast's "Digital Starter", where it's only $2.00-$3.00 more than extended basic analog.

That's quite a difference, especially when he hardly has any interest in any channels above extended basic.

Even if they can afford a hi-def display, some people may have monthly budgets they have set that they don't want to exceed. Having that budget may be the reason he could actually afford to buy the TV.

Besides, he says he will be watching some Blu-ray on it, so it's not like he's not going to ever use it with ANY higher definition source. And maybe the QAM tuner will pick up the local HD's if they're available in the clear.

acidbaby - Panasonic plasmas are pretty good with analog, and they're also a great bang for your buck. If you wanna splurge a little, you can't go wrong with a Pioneer. I've had both, and they both handle SD and analog well.

It sounds like that particular line of JVC LCD's mentioned will do a decent job, too, as far as LCD's go.

Maybe if you can find a store that has an analog signal piped into them, you could observe with your own eyes.

I know that Circuit City and Fry's carry some of the JVC's. The Pannies are everywhere, of course.

Yeah yeah..so what..7 months..you still think it is fact. ;)
A Processor is still limited by the display tech overall.
Are you going to sit there with a straight face and say the best 50"+ LCD is performing anywhere close to the same size average plasma in SD?

You have it backwards..........a display technology is limited by its video processor. If the input signal is not properly deinterlaced, scaled, etc. etc. no matter what the technology, the picture will suffer.

You have it backwards..........a display technology is limited by its video processor. If the input signal is not properly deinterlaced, scaled, etc. etc. no matter what the technology, the picture will suffer.

Ok..let me make it simple for you: Given the same processor.....the panel tech can be the limiting factor.

Negative. Panel technology has nothing to do SD.

Negative. Panel technology has nothing to do SD.

Explain that to the poor 50"+ LCD owners who were lied to about SD quality compared to a typical plasma.;)