I noticed in the store ConsumerReports latest issue on TVs. I was wondering what do the TV experts here think of the ratings? Do you agree or disagree?
ConsumerReports TV Ratings
ConsumerReports TV Ratings
Now Available: Tech Talk Podcast with Scott Wilkinson, Episode 19 Click here for details.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgold /forum/post/18196186
Do you think CR gives fair ratings to Vizios? I've noticed they have a lot of Vizios on their "Best Buy" list in their rankings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffaloJim /forum/post/18175304
In general CR comes to much the same conclusion that we do here on this forum. You'll notice that Sony, Samsung, and the other top manufacturers are at the top while ones like Syvania and Magnavox are at the bottom. While we might argue with specific model choices, it's clear that they really do look at many of the same things that we do when reviewing LCD choices.
Jim
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgold /forum/post/18196186
Do you think CR gives fair ratings to Vizios? I've noticed they have a lot of Vizios on their "Best Buy" list in their rankings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HD_Lantern /forum/post/18223703
CR is a good source, although I'd say that the forums here on AVS is the best source, biased though I might be.![]()
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlasmaPZ80U /forum/post/18223826
Aside from calibration reports/reviews from pro calibrators, I find this forum to be a bad source for getting objective info about buying a new TV. There's plenty of bias, opinions, and pointless generalizations (especially with the LCD vs. Plasma crap). The same can be said about the 720p vs. 1080p argument, where generalizations are also made.
I believe in objectively evaluating specific models over generalizations that are often made (with strong biases). Everyone likes to justify what they bought and voice their opinions, but if I'm making a major TV purchase I want reliable information that is purely objective and not related to personal preferences or biases in any way. CNET is also a good place for reviews, though it might not be as objective as CR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frito /forum/post/18224046
The problem is most people on these forums do not have real hands on experience with enough TV brands/models to give good advice on every single one.
all anyone on these forums can do is say their thoughts and give their opinions on various TV's and if someone has a bias on something its likely because they really like that brand/model/type of display. bias can be bad for being objective but if a person has owned and used quite a few different TV's that are of recent manufacture their bias just shows what they prefer in a TV vs what others may prefer
Cnet's reviewer is pretty well known to have a bias toward plasma's most people who like to watch films in a dark room will have the same bias because they are the best flat display for that purpose just as an example not trying to bring up a plasma vs lcd discussion here or anything just putting it out there.
you really cannot get away from bias's everyones got one and people that have used more displays in depth have better experienced various TV's capabilities enough to trust their bias more than a guy that has only owned a couple LCD's etc. TV reviewers like the guy over on Cnet have used many more TV's in a normal environment than most people on these forums so his opinions in a review are to be more trusted i would suppose.
as for consumer reports idk, not paying for their service because i found the perfect TV's for me and they wouldn't provide me with the information i need to find good gaming TV's anyways, no US review sites do but there are some european sites that test TV's for input lag
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlasmaPZ80U /forum/post/18224180
CR may not be as detailed as CNET in their reviews, but I find them to be very objective and consistent in the way they rate and score the TVs they get a chance to try out overall. If you like a model not covered then you'll have to look elsewhere and for that CNET might offer the review.
One thing other than the lack of input lag testing that bothers me about CR is that they don't seem to have the best method for determining color accuracy. They don't disclose how they test color accuracy and they say some TVs have excellent color accuracy even when calibrators have identified major issues with those sets. In particular, the 2009 Panasonic Plasmas with the old THX mode and those without THX that have oversaturated greens and reds. It would be nice if they employed CNET's method for testing color that includes specific information about a display's gamut and color decoding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlasmaPZ80U /forum/post/18223826
Aside from calibration reports/reviews from pro calibrators, I find this forum to be a bad source for getting objective info about buying a new TV. There's plenty of bias, opinions, and pointless generalizations (especially with the LCD vs. Plasma crap). The same can be said about the 720p vs. 1080p argument, where generalizations are also made.
I believe in objectively evaluating specific models over generalizations that are often made (with strong biases). Everyone likes to justify what they bought and voice their opinions, but if I'm making a major TV purchase I want reliable information that is purely objective and not related to personal preferences or biases in any way. CNET is also a good place for reviews, though it might not be as objective as CR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonandabby /forum/post/18226971
My biggest CR problem is that they often don't review all of the available models. They tend to get a sampling of the middle-of-the-road and lower tier models, to find best buys for the consumers. While I love them for appliances, vacuums, etc where there really isn't enough justification to buy a premium model, I'm not quite as reliant on them for tech stuff. The most recent report, for example, didn't really look at the 8500 Samsung, which was by most accounts other accounts the best quality LCD made in 2009. I'd love to see how they compared the 8500 to e.g. the Vizio.