Am about to pull the trigger on a new 55" set to replace a Sony Bravia that croaked after only three years.
Looking at either LG or Samsung. My electronics repair specialist says that Sony will be getting out of the TV business soon. Apparently, they buy some of their components from LG anyway.
My 3-year old Bravia does very well on motion blur---none noticeable---and it's only 120Hz. So, do I really need to pay the extra for 240Hz?
How about LED vs. LCD? My Bravia is an LCD, but if LED is likely to be more reliable/dependable, produce less heat, etc., without compromising picture quality, I'd prefer to go that way.
Anybody have any experience with 240Hz vs 120Hz, and LCD vs. LED?
Looking at either LG or Samsung. My electronics repair specialist says that Sony will be getting out of the TV business soon. Apparently, they buy some of their components from LG anyway.
My 3-year old Bravia does very well on motion blur---none noticeable---and it's only 120Hz. So, do I really need to pay the extra for 240Hz?
How about LED vs. LCD? My Bravia is an LCD, but if LED is likely to be more reliable/dependable, produce less heat, etc., without compromising picture quality, I'd prefer to go that way.
Anybody have any experience with 240Hz vs 120Hz, and LCD vs. LED?


















. Thanks for the reply, too.
