After reading about how panels will continue to keep getting thinner it made me wonder what price premium consumers are willing to spend to have a thinner set. Are thinner panels really an issue for most? Most LCD's and plasmas are in the neighborhood of 3"-4" already and if a panel is thinner and the cost is the same sure I would choose the thinner panel, but I don't think I would pay a premium for that alone without other improvements.
Is thin in?
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
I dunno... the Samsung 8 Series is 1.9" thick, or about half what the 6 and 7 Series are, and I'm seriously considering it over the 6/7 Series based on that, even if it is a bit pricier.
Thin matters to some in laptops, why not TVs?
Thin matters to some in laptops, why not TVs?
Maybe it's just me, but my panel is about 4" thick and wouldn't really make any difference if it were thinner in the location I have it and on the stand I have. I also get concerned with the thinner it gets (and obviously the lighter) will it be less stable and increase the possibility of a tip over? If I were wall mounting it I could see where thin would be a benefit though.
Curious, why do you need it 1.9" thick?
Maybe it's just me, but my panel is about 4" thick and wouldn't really make any difference if it were thinner in the location I have it and on the stand I have. I also get concerned with the thinner it gets (and obviously the lighter) will it be less stable and increase the possibility of a tip over? If I were wall mounting it I could see where thin would be a benefit though.
Curious, why do you need it 1.9" thick?
Joined
·
338 Posts
Nobody likes a fatty!
4" isn't fat. This is fat as I had one similar to this. We've come a long ways.
![]()
http://www.laaudiofile.com/images/pro610bg.jpg
4" isn't fat. This is fat as I had one similar to this. We've come a long ways.
http://www.laaudiofile.com/images/pro610bg.jpg
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
It's being wall-mounted in a large alcove in a built-in large bookshelf that's only 7 1/2" deep. Obviously, I would not want the TV to be nearly flush with the front edge (or worse, beyond the edge) of the alcove, as that would look like crap.
![]()
I understand where you're coming from on the thin issue, it does seem a tiny bit random, but good luck on convincing anyone. The best-selling cellphone of all time is the Motorola RAZR, mainly 'cuz it was the first ultra-thin mass-marketed phone. And Apple makes a big deal out of thin on all their products- iPhone, notebooks, iPods - and sells a ton of 'em.
Face it, the masses love thin. Don't know exactly why, but they do. It's 'sexay' to them or something.
I actually don't care much about it either way, I just happen to need thin for my particular living room situation.
It's being wall-mounted in a large alcove in a built-in large bookshelf that's only 7 1/2" deep. Obviously, I would not want the TV to be nearly flush with the front edge (or worse, beyond the edge) of the alcove, as that would look like crap.
I understand where you're coming from on the thin issue, it does seem a tiny bit random, but good luck on convincing anyone. The best-selling cellphone of all time is the Motorola RAZR, mainly 'cuz it was the first ultra-thin mass-marketed phone. And Apple makes a big deal out of thin on all their products- iPhone, notebooks, iPods - and sells a ton of 'em.
Face it, the masses love thin. Don't know exactly why, but they do. It's 'sexay' to them or something.
I actually don't care much about it either way, I just happen to need thin for my particular living room situation.
Joined
·
6,225 Posts
I observed at the store that many thin sets omit the subwoofer, instead of 2.1 sound, they are 2.0 and don't sound as good.
A typical "low profile" mount is 2.75" thick, not would you want it any smaller, as the cables on the back of the set already make sharp bends. Therefore the mounted depth of a 2" set and a 4" set are not that different.
A typical "low profile" mount is 2.75" thick, not would you want it any smaller, as the cables on the back of the set already make sharp bends. Therefore the mounted depth of a 2" set and a 4" set are not that different.
Joined
·
338 Posts
I was being sarcastic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by maxdog03 /forum/post/15493588
4" isn't fat. This is fat as I had one similar to this. We've come a long ways.![]()
http://www.laaudiofile.com/images/pro610bg.jpg
I was being sarcastic.
These are all portable products though. I put a TV someplace and pick it up again when I move every couple years. Current flat panels are way more convenient than old CRTs, but going from 4" to 2" or whatever makes little difference to me. I don't watch the profile of my tv, I watch the front. If you look at the Sony Z series vs the W series, they seem to have significantly sacrificed the viewing angles to make the set thinner. That's a bit disturbing.
These are all portable products though. I put a TV someplace and pick it up again when I move every couple years. Current flat panels are way more convenient than old CRTs, but going from 4" to 2" or whatever makes little difference to me. I don't watch the profile of my tv, I watch the front. If you look at the Sony Z series vs the W series, they seem to have significantly sacrificed the viewing angles to make the set thinner. That's a bit disturbing.
Bingo. But I do think if the weight comes down it will be considered a significant advantage.
My 3.75" thick 50", at about 85 pounds, is much more than most people can handle themselves. My old CRTs were relatively easy to move around because even the ones that were significantly heavier were not nearly as awkward to handle. That is a big deal for some folks, for example students who move pretty often.
Bingo. But I do think if the weight comes down it will be considered a significant advantage.
My 3.75" thick 50", at about 85 pounds, is much more than most people can handle themselves. My old CRTs were relatively easy to move around because even the ones that were significantly heavier were not nearly as awkward to handle. That is a big deal for some folks, for example students who move pretty often.
In your example it makes perfect sense to find a thin panel. I just always find it funny how certain things are hyped when they mean very little in the over all scheme of things unless it's a necessity. Good luck with your new set when you get it as Samsung has been doing a good job in building a quality TV.
![]()
Quote:
Originally Posted by SystemShock2 /forum/post/15493690
It's being wall-mounted in a large alcove in a built-in large bookshelf that's only 7 1/2" deep. Obviously, I would not want the TV to be nearly flush with the front edge (or worse, beyond the edge) of the alcove, as that would look like crap.![]()
I understand where you're coming from on the thin issue, it does seem a tiny bit random, but good luck on convincing anyone. The best-selling cellphone of all time is the Motorola RAZR, mainly 'cuz it was the first ultra-thin mass-marketed phone. And Apple makes a big deal out of thin on all their products- iPhone, notebooks, iPods - and sells a ton of 'em.
Face it, the masses love thin. Don't know exactly why, but they do. It's 'sexay' to them or something.
I actually don't care much about it either way, I just happen to need thin for my particular living room situation.
In your example it makes perfect sense to find a thin panel. I just always find it funny how certain things are hyped when they mean very little in the over all scheme of things unless it's a necessity. Good luck with your new set when you get it as Samsung has been doing a good job in building a quality TV.
Oh, I knew you were, but figured it was the perfect opportunity to remind everyone where we were at not all that long ago. I remember bringing that beast into the house for the first time. I was thinking oh crap where's this going to fit as it sure didn't look that big in the showroom.
Oh, I knew you were, but figured it was the perfect opportunity to remind everyone where we were at not all that long ago. I remember bringing that beast into the house for the first time. I was thinking oh crap where's this going to fit as it sure didn't look that big in the showroom.
Anything more than a 27" CRT was basically impossible for one person and even a struggle for two. Just sold an old 32" JVC CRT a few months back and that thing was a beast to move for two people. My 50" plasma is simple and even my wife and I can move it if need be. My 40" LCD's are easily moved by myself and much easier than a 27" Sony that I still have. The advantage my Pioneer RPTV had was that it was on rollers so moving it around was pretty simple unless you had to go up or down a level, then it was a beast.
Anything more than a 27" CRT was basically impossible for one person and even a struggle for two. Just sold an old 32" JVC CRT a few months back and that thing was a beast to move for two people. My 50" plasma is simple and even my wife and I can move it if need be. My 40" LCD's are easily moved by myself and much easier than a 27" Sony that I still have. The advantage my Pioneer RPTV had was that it was on rollers so moving it around was pretty simple unless you had to go up or down a level, then it was a beast.
Joined
·
338 Posts
I have a 32" WS Sony HD CRT collecting dust in my garage. I plan on taking steroids and pumping some serious iron in order to get that sucker out of my house.
I have a 32" WS Sony HD CRT collecting dust in my garage. I plan on taking steroids and pumping some serious iron in order to get that sucker out of my house.
rotf, no doubt. Boy I don't miss those days at all as I'll take the flaws in today's technology any day over yesterdays TV's. There are a few in this forum that seem to want to constantly nit pick the flaws rather than enjoy the benefits of today's TV as I smile every time I sit down and watch TV.
![]()
rotf, no doubt. Boy I don't miss those days at all as I'll take the flaws in today's technology any day over yesterdays TV's. There are a few in this forum that seem to want to constantly nit pick the flaws rather than enjoy the benefits of today's TV as I smile every time I sit down and watch TV.
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
Very true. Thin = no room for a subbie. Of course, some will say they intend to hook up their TV to a sound system anyway, so it 'doesn't matter all that much'. But I personally like good sound right-out-of-the-box.
For a lot of installations that's true, but for my purposes (wall-mounting in a shallow alcove), a 2" difference is a big deal, aesthetically-speaking.
Personally, I don't know how much reason really plays into it. The mass-market sees thin, they want thin. Just seems to be the way it works, for good or ill.
x
Very true. Thin = no room for a subbie. Of course, some will say they intend to hook up their TV to a sound system anyway, so it 'doesn't matter all that much'. But I personally like good sound right-out-of-the-box.
For a lot of installations that's true, but for my purposes (wall-mounting in a shallow alcove), a 2" difference is a big deal, aesthetically-speaking.
Personally, I don't know how much reason really plays into it. The mass-market sees thin, they want thin. Just seems to be the way it works, for good or ill.
x
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
Word. I remember having to muscle my mere 24" Sony WEGA around solo when I first brought it home (guess it was approaching 100 lbs, including box), and it actually made my back sore. And that was just a 24"!! A 27" might've gotten me hurt.
![]()
I love CRT pic quality & viewing angle, but despise how much depth they take up in a room and how hard they are to move around. We're not going back to those days.
Word. I remember having to muscle my mere 24" Sony WEGA around solo when I first brought it home (guess it was approaching 100 lbs, including box), and it actually made my back sore. And that was just a 24"!! A 27" might've gotten me hurt.
I love CRT pic quality & viewing angle, but despise how much depth they take up in a room and how hard they are to move around. We're not going back to those days.
or thumb tack them up.
![]()
I guess my original point was that it seems thinness is well down the ladder of what I want improved on a set and would rather have them concentrate on more meaninful improvements. If thin is a by product then fine, but don't want to see it as an increase in cost as the benefit is marginal in most cases unless you really need a thin panel for mounting applications.
or thumb tack them up.
I guess my original point was that it seems thinness is well down the ladder of what I want improved on a set and would rather have them concentrate on more meaninful improvements. If thin is a by product then fine, but don't want to see it as an increase in cost as the benefit is marginal in most cases unless you really need a thin panel for mounting applications.
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Join the discussion
