Sony to replace my XBR960...anyone else's experience?

I would do whatever you can to fix your 960 or get them to give you (hopefully) a new one. The 970 is a significant step down, IMO. LCDs are getting better, but still don't do deep enough blacks to even come close to CRTs.

Too bad - how old is the set? I just bought a new 960 - so they are still out there.

Sony has shipped me two, count 'em, two replacement 34XBR960s (which are refurbished sets, not new, by the way). Both were grossly inadequately packed and the first one arrived in three pieces and the second came with the screen punched in.

I hope you have better luck.

Yikes!

Is the 970 very much inferior to the 960??? I am thinking about getting the 970 but if it is that bad then I might start looking for the 960. What do you think....in what ways is the 970 a step down??? Thanks

In resolution. The 960 has 1440x1080i and the 970 has 853x1080i.

I'm going through something similar...

One day in late September I powered on my 960N (it took longer than usual to power on as well) only to be horrified by the picture. Formats were screwed up, geometry was worse, the screen shook (can't think of another way to describe, maybe a slight vibration in the picture), and every single input, no mattter the source material looked like a terrible cable reception (fuzzy).

Called Sony, they referred me to a "certified" repair shop. They took my tv, got it back in late October. They took it back the same day because they didn't fix everything (screen still shook), and the picture was still fuzzy. Finally got it back yesterday (the repair guy said over the phone, "I think we fixed it"). The screen still had the same kind of noticeable vibration, and all inputs were still fuzzy. The delivery guys said it was all they could do to the tv. They also said their superviser said I probably wouldn't be satisfied, and to call Sony to push for a replacement.

I call Sony, on the phone for over an hour, talking to 2 different people. The second phone operator asked me what I wanted Sony to do, I said I wanted a replacement since it's still under warrenty. She said my case has to be transferred to the tech department for review, because only they can make a decision on whether or not I get a replacement. She also said it would take 72 hours for a decision to be made, and that I would get a call on Tuesday.

Now, I know Sony doesn't make the 960N anymore, only the 970. I do not want the 970, because I know it's a considerable step down. Plus, I paid around $1900 (i'm actually still paying on it ) for the 960N. I also don't want some crappy refurbished unit, either. Am I screwed?

If the above conditions are the full range of what works for you, then it is my belief that the answer is "yes".

Sony will not give you a new one as there are simply none to be had (by them, though there might be one or two or a few hiding in boxes at the back of some store somewhere. One poster here about a week ago said he found one and that is the first new one I recall reading about in months). You are, however, welcome to try and convince them to do so.

Additionally, I have been led to believe that refurbished ones are few and far between also; it is not like there are stacks of them sitting around in warranty depots to be selected from.

Will a refurbished set work better than the one you have now that is having some sort of problem? Possibly, maybe even probably. Given your specific situation, do you have any other choice if you wish to continue owning a 34XBR960. Almost definitely not.

Been there, done that. Sorry to be having company.

Well, what was the result of your case? Did Sony finally send you one that wasn't crap? Or, did you end up getting a different tv altogether?

Also, if they were to replace my tv, with a different one, such as lcd or rear projection, which would look better for sd sources and 480p? I have HD cable and a 360 with the HDDVD player, but I also have some sd/480p products (dvd player, ps2, gamecube, xbox)?

What ended up happening? I am in the same situation with my 960. I need to get it replaced, but I can't get Sony to make a decision. Please let us know how your situation turned out. -CK

whats so bad about the XBR 970?, looked fine to me on display, though I own a 30KVHS420...

Jesus you people really don't know anything about this TV but numbers and specs. I have a
970. My family have an SXRD (1080p), DLP (720p), and LCD (768p). I had 960 and 970 side
by side (not an inch farther) comparing them with the same HD and SD back and forth looking
for differences. The 970 is brighter with the same setting of 960. 960 doesn't have a visible
aperture grill lines that 970 has. As for the picture quality, both look the same. The 970
(853x1080i) I have now is the same picture quality as the SXRD (1920x1080p) but when
on still images, text, or anything that stays put judders a little which is the interlaced part. But
the SXRD doesn't have the same black level as the 970. So physically the 970 is better
looking than the SXRD but technically it's not. If you don't believe me, come over my house
and see for yourself.

The 970 does not look as good as the 960 to me. I have seen them both...yes the 970 is brighter with the same contrast setting, but that's where its advantage ends. BTW, the 960 is plenty bright enough.

Explain to me how much more better the picture quality gets on 960 besides the
invisible aperture grille lines?

Nothing is "bad" about the 970. However, its resolution/clarity is not as good as the 960, and is a step down from the 960.

I would say the 960 has about 50% better detail/clarity over the 970. It also uses slower decaying phosphors, which do a little bit better job of reducing flicker.

IF you really want to compare the raw picture clarity of the two, in the "Pro" modes of each, turn off all edge enhancements (Sharpness = Min and Velocity Scan Modulation = Off). This will give you a much more accurate comparison of the two.

Listen to yourself. You just said slower decaying phosphor. That right there made
970 a superior TV if you said was accurate. Slower decaying phosphor makes a lot
of image trails which cause blurriness. Do you even know what you are talking
about? 50% is not accurate at all.

Yes, I do. The slower decaying phosphors can leave slightly longer trails in dark scenes yes; however, they also do a better job of reducing flicker. It is a trade off - one that I think gives the 960 a better picture.


To my eyes it is, and I think many others will agree. Of course, it does depend on how close you sit the set. At 10+ feet, the differences wouldn't be huge to most people, I would think.

970 and 960 isn't prone to flickering like a 480i. It simply judders never flicker. Even
when you set the 970 and 960 to a non-HD material, the DRC chip will make it
progressive and 960 lines of interlacing which is very very hard to notice when you
are even sitting 6 inches away from the TV. I am not bashing you or anything, I just
don't like people giving bad, wrong, or over exaggerated opinions/expressions. Sony
also stop making Super Fine Pitch tube due to it being more prone to defects. SFP
factory stop manufacturing them and Sony also stop giving them replacement tube
for the SFP sets and have to replace them with the newer XBR970's.


See this:

No flickering when capturing in a digital camera.

All direct view CRTs have flicker - this is common knowledge.


Now how could I ever get that impression?


I challenge you to document anything I have said as being incorrect.


What are your sources for this? Links? I have heard this before, but have never seen any evidence that backs it up. I suspect it's all conjecture.

You seem like just another 970 owner who is in denial trying to convince himself your set is just as good or better than the 960.


A still image camera will not capture flicker.

Both of my CRT sets have flicker on some material. Also shimmering on certain patterns like checkerboard shirts. Both sets whether in progressive mode or interlaced I have noticed both things. You learn to live with it. I would not trade the PQ I am getting out of my Sony or Panasonic.

like.no.other., Are you sure about this? My 960 is in the shop, and it is due to get a new tube. Are you saying they are going to put a 970 tube in my 960? I find this to be unacceptable. Do you know this, or are you just assuming this because the 960 is no longer manufactured? If it is the case I feel I have some complaining to do. Thanks, CK

I wouldn't worry about. They should be putting a new 960 tube in there. If not, you'll be able to tell right away when you get it back.

They will put a Super Fine Pitch tube in it if they say they will. But Sony shut down
the factory for Super Fine Pitch tube and they will shut the 970 one too. It's very
unlikely they have another one new, maybe a backup. I am a 970 owner and no
I am not in denial because 960 has more numbers than 970. I own a lot of TV sets
from 480i all the way to 1080p all in their each native resolution. My experience is
more than you just saying 960 is better. I have seen both do work and no, not
much difference. If you still want to argue that 960 is "50% better and has slower
decay" then go ahead convince yourself that. I am telling to the potential buyer here
that they shouldn't be breaking balls to buy a used 960 and find along the way they
need replacing. Yes, I like 960's feature with i.Link, Memory Stick, and PIP. But that
doesn't need to compromise hassling over Sony's tech support.

I have seen all kinds of sets myself. To my eyes, the 960 has about 50% better clarity than the 970 or HS420 series at normal viewing distance (about 3-5 times the height of the screen).


That is your opinion, and a minority one at that. That being said, I think the 970 is very fine set. If I couldn't locate a 960 or XS955, I'd buy a 970. I'd recommend others do the same.

Really?

Since when was the Simpsons produced in 2.35:1???

its a trailer from the upcoming movie. Not from the actual series!