AVS Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm not a fan of big TVs and clearly I'm in the minority. While I understand that manufacturers need to pump the great tech into larger sets, IMHO >55" is simply massive. 40" is reasonable (deserving of high-end spec) and 32" (where I'd like to be) apparently is for the paupers who can't afford something bigger. The sub-40" class gets short shrifted on quality for some reason. My current set is a 2005 Sharp Aquos 26" with the best technology of the day. I'm ready to get a newer tv, but nothing really fits the bill (if only there were a 32" Sony XBR). Any suggestions (other than go big or go home)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
933 Posts
Not really any flagship type displays no. Even up until 2009 when Sony has the 32 inch XBR9 it slightly differed than the 40,46, and 52 inch models. As sizes get bigger and bigger I suspect this gap will get even larger. 32 inch displays anymore are often treated as entry level displays or mid tier. The flagship sizes are now starting at 46 inches and for some manufacturers in the 50 inch range somewhere.


With that being said though considering you are coming from a 2005 set you should see a nice improvement with the current
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,731 Posts
I find it annoying that the new Sharp Elite Pro sets are in 60/70 inch also best quality Plasma's are only available in gigantic sizes, for me 50 inch is MAX.


acd483, you could buy a 46 inch and shrink the screensize by using 14:9, a lot of movies have black bars and there is the 4:3 stuff, so that will shrink your screen anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Thanks guys.


The issue for me is physical space. My city apartment simply doesn't have the room for a 46" set. 40" is definitely doable so if there are top-tier models in that size I'd appreciate suggestions there too. In physical dimensions, the set can't be larger than 42" wide.


I guess I can't figure out the size race. A smaller screen size looks better because of the smaller pixels (I'm not going to be moving farther back from a larger TV) so it's no wonder so much tech needs to go into the 55"+ models, those pixels are huge. Smaller is also popular for city dwellers without a whole wall devoted to a screen. There are plenty of us out there with good money to spend (my Sharp was $2500) on a smaller product.


I've been hoping that Apple would release a TV. It would be well designed and a quality product...maybe in a few different sizes too but I'm starting to doubt the strategic benefit for Apple to do that when they can make more money licensing Air Play. That's why I'm starting the search for a new TV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,736 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by acd483 /forum/post/20880644


Thanks guys.


The issue for me is physical space. My city apartment simply doesn't have the room for a 46" set. 40" is definitely doable so if there are top-tier models in that size I'd appreciate suggestions there too. In physical dimensions, the set can't be larger than 42" wide.


I guess I can't figure out the size race. A smaller screen size looks better because of the smaller pixels (I'm not going to be moving farther back from a larger TV) so it's no wonder so much tech needs to go into the 55"+ models, those pixels are huge. Smaller is also popular for city dwellers without a whole wall devoted to a screen. There are plenty of us out there with good money to spend (my Sharp was $2500) on a smaller product.


I've been hoping that Apple would release a TV. It would be well designed and a quality product...maybe in a few different sizes too but I'm starting to doubt the strategic benefit for Apple to do that when they can make more money licensing Air Play. That's why I'm starting the search for a new TV.

The Samsung LN32D550 is not high end (probably mid range) but is reviewed well by Consumer Reports and other sources. The UN32D5500 and UN32D6000 are higher end choices but their edge-lit design is prone to uniformity issues. The LN32D550 also has some uniformity issues but nothing serious and overall PQ remains excellent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
As a car nut, shopping for cars is just fun. But shopping for TVs, I can now see why so many people loath buying a car. There's just too much competing information regarding the technology out there for sale.


For instance, I watch TV with a light on, therefore I don't need a plasma for its deep black levels so I figured a nice thin LED LCD TV would do the trick. Yet, now I'm reading about the Soap Opera Effect on LED backlit sets and I'm sure that would drive me nuts. The idea of switching back and forth for viewing modes seems silly to me. In addition, the light leak issue of the LEDs sounds frustrating. So now I'm back to thinking about a plasma.


I've also realized that I want a TV with a satin finish screen. The high gloss would be a nightmare in my apartment what with all of the city lights being reflected. Yet another box that needs to be ticked.


In addition, I'm seeing that Skype HD is available on some TVs. That would be great!


There just seems to be so much competing thought. Are there any good sights that measure TVs scientifically and cut through the marketing nonsense?


Thanks all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,736 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by acd483 /forum/post/20884201


Are there any good sights that measure TVs scientifically and cut through the marketing nonsense?

ConsumerReports.org and CNET.com are two.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top