Joined
·
1,297 Posts
I have seen so many asking for help to buy little 27 or lower than 27 inchers.
Why the excess of small *cheapy* TVs, this is a Home Theater Forum
- Status
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
Bionic,
Very good question, and one that I too have thought about on occaision. You really don't see those types of queries on the other Display Forums. I imagine the reason being the Tubes still offer the least expensive path to good PQ, and attract the TV bargain basement crowd.
Very good question, and one that I too have thought about on occaision. You really don't see those types of queries on the other Display Forums. I imagine the reason being the Tubes still offer the least expensive path to good PQ, and attract the TV bargain basement crowd.
Joined
·
9,326 Posts
cajieboy...you are correct in your thought on why. I even have a 13" sony that I use when I need to queue something up or work with my theater and do not want to turn on my projector and scaller.
This area is for any direct view chat, not just for widescreen directview.
This area is for any direct view chat, not just for widescreen directview.
Quote:
Some of us with front projectors and screens we measure in feet (width) rather than diagonal inches would argue that your tiny 38" widescreen TV is not really a home theater-worthy display.
To quote my favorite line from Star Wars Episode 1, "...there's always a bigger fish!"
| Originally posted by Bionic Manaus I have seen so many asking for help to buy *little* 27 inchers when this is supposed to a Home Theatre Direct View forum. Why do you register for Home Theater talk then ask for as cheap as you can get Tiny TV? Are you nearly broke, have you never seen a wide screen TV, What's the problem in getting decent Wide Screen 34 inch rather than buy going out of style full frame AKA 4:3 designed by 19th and early 20th Century inventer Thomas Alva Edison (Direct Current Lightbulb) ? |
To quote my favorite line from Star Wars Episode 1, "...there's always a bigger fish!"
Joined
·
27 Posts
Sorry...I thought I logged on to Audio Visual Science Forum. I didn't realize I logged on to a HOME THEATER forum.
Quote:
What's wrong Peter, didn't you get the memo?
Sorry, couldn't resist obligatory Office Space quote because of your screen name.
| Originally posted by PeterGibbons Sorry...I thought I logged on to Audio Visual Science Forum. I didn't realize I logged on to a HOME THEATER forum. |
Sorry, couldn't resist obligatory Office Space quote because of your screen name.
Well, nobody makes a widescreen TV that gives the PQ of an "old" analog 4:3. Well, maybe an XBR, in which caseI don't have the money. I have a year old 50" widescreen HDTV and just bought a "tiny" 32" Sony analog 4:3.
I'd rather watch the Sony with the signal I'm limited to for a few years thanks. I have the money, and I have seen a widescreen, therefore I am a 4:3 analog fan. And if I lived in a small studio or one bedroom apartment, a 27" TV would be a home theater. It's all how you look at it, and what your priorities are. As soon as I get get 80% or more HDTV channel content from DirecTV with a single receiver TiVo box, I'll be ready for a big, wide screen again. Until then, I don't want my eyes to hurt watching a standard satellite signal on one of those "good" tv's.
It's appears to be a "direct view display device" forum. Not really a "I got a better set than you have" forum.
I guess I didn't get the memo either.
Who's in charge of memos anyway?
I'd rather watch the Sony with the signal I'm limited to for a few years thanks. I have the money, and I have seen a widescreen, therefore I am a 4:3 analog fan. And if I lived in a small studio or one bedroom apartment, a 27" TV would be a home theater. It's all how you look at it, and what your priorities are. As soon as I get get 80% or more HDTV channel content from DirecTV with a single receiver TiVo box, I'll be ready for a big, wide screen again. Until then, I don't want my eyes to hurt watching a standard satellite signal on one of those "good" tv's.
It's appears to be a "direct view display device" forum. Not really a "I got a better set than you have" forum.
I guess I didn't get the memo either.
Who's in charge of memos anyway?
Quote:
I am looking for a 200:10 widescreen TV. 16:9 is not widescreen enough for me. Can you help?
| Originally posted by Bionic Manaus I have seen so many asking for help to buy *little* 27 inchers when this is supposed to a Home Theatre Direct View forum. Why do you register for Home Theater talk then ask for as cheap as you can get Tiny TV? Are you nearly broke, have you never seen a wide screen TV, What's the problem in getting decent Wide Screen 34 inch rather than buy going out of style full frame AKA 4:3 designed by 19th and early 20th Century inventer Thomas Alva Edison (Direct Current Lightbulb) ? |
Joined
·
6,091 Posts
QUOTE
I have seen so many asking for help to buy *little* 27 inchers when this is supposed to a Home Theatre Direct View forum. Why do you register for Home Theater talk then ask for as cheap as you can get Tiny TV? Are you nearly broke, have you never seen a wide screen TV, What's the problem in getting decent Wide Screen 34 inch rather than buy going out of style full frame AKA 4:3 designed by 19th and early 20th Century inventer Thomas Alva Edison (Direct Current Lightbulb) ?END QUOTE
Well, I guess I'll add my two cents. With all the talk on this forum about when HD will "go mainstream" or "really take off" you'd think people would keep their mouths shut when people come here to research and can get what they can. I'd be willing to bet that people who get 27-40 inch sets will go bigger and better within several years just because they got HD with a smaller set and realized how cool and improved it really is. It's addictive. All I know is that noone that uses a direct-view to watch HD or DVD, including me, has any business telling people that their set is "cheap" or "small" because so is theirs. Period. I'll bet people from other areas of this forum laugh their asses off at us over here talking about how "great" our 27-40 inch Sony's are!! Or in Bionics case, his BIGSCREEN 38inch. What a joke!
I have seen so many asking for help to buy *little* 27 inchers when this is supposed to a Home Theatre Direct View forum. Why do you register for Home Theater talk then ask for as cheap as you can get Tiny TV? Are you nearly broke, have you never seen a wide screen TV, What's the problem in getting decent Wide Screen 34 inch rather than buy going out of style full frame AKA 4:3 designed by 19th and early 20th Century inventer Thomas Alva Edison (Direct Current Lightbulb) ?END QUOTE
Well, I guess I'll add my two cents. With all the talk on this forum about when HD will "go mainstream" or "really take off" you'd think people would keep their mouths shut when people come here to research and can get what they can. I'd be willing to bet that people who get 27-40 inch sets will go bigger and better within several years just because they got HD with a smaller set and realized how cool and improved it really is. It's addictive. All I know is that noone that uses a direct-view to watch HD or DVD, including me, has any business telling people that their set is "cheap" or "small" because so is theirs. Period. I'll bet people from other areas of this forum laugh their asses off at us over here talking about how "great" our 27-40 inch Sony's are!! Or in Bionics case, his BIGSCREEN 38inch. What a joke!
Joined
·
1,076 Posts
most people are smart and let the early adopters work out all of the kinks. For my I am quite happy with my philips 30pw850h high definition TV.
In my small apartment there really is not enough room for a larger TV and I am NOT willing to spend a wad of cash on a TV or any other equipment.
In my small apartment there really is not enough room for a larger TV and I am NOT willing to spend a wad of cash on a TV or any other equipment.
Joined
·
1,239 Posts
Did you know it's a fact that the majority of millionaires in the U.S. drive used cars? Did you know that a majority of people in America live pay check to pay check and yes alot of them do buy direct-views at Wal-mart. Did you know that those cheapy TVs usually have better black level than the ever worshiped rear projection LCD sets? Those cheapy sets also have better viewing angles than mighty RPTV CRT or DLP. I'm not saying cheapy sets are the best, but other technologies aren't perfect. Who is smarter--someone who values those other technologies or someone who values the cheapy TVs and being able to provide for their families? I may question the qualities of the different technologies, if I've got any sense at all it would probably be wise if I rarely if ever question other people's values.
When talking to average folks at my video store or elsewhere, I always refer to 4:3, AKA 1.33:1, AKA "fullframe" (a term I hate), AKA standard, as "square TV's."
For example: "What ever you do, don't buy one of those obsolete square TV's, be sure your next TV is widescreen!" "That way you won't have to worry about those annoying black-bars on movies as much." This avoids the confusing jargon that pervades HDTV. Also, I often ask the clerk if they only sell square TV's. "I'm looking for widescreen," I tell them at my local target.
Let 'em hear you in a way they'll understand
-Tim
For example: "What ever you do, don't buy one of those obsolete square TV's, be sure your next TV is widescreen!" "That way you won't have to worry about those annoying black-bars on movies as much." This avoids the confusing jargon that pervades HDTV. Also, I often ask the clerk if they only sell square TV's. "I'm looking for widescreen," I tell them at my local target.
Let 'em hear you in a way they'll understand
-Tim
It never ceases to amaze me at how people will take personal offense at someone else's value judgements. Look, we all participate in this hobby to the extent that we can with the financial resources we have available. Some people are more limited than others in terms of disposable income, which means some "creativity" is required such as buying used, going with less expensive displays, etc. Such is life.
But I also see the point in Bionic's post even if it was not delicately stated to placate the hyper-sensitive. There are people here, and a lot of them, who think bigger is better, and bigger is always more money. Don't kid yourself, I spent several hundred dollars more on my Sony KV-34XBR910 widescreen direct view than I did on my first CRT projector. Additionally, I find watching HDTV on my 34" Sony extremely enjoyable and satisfying from a viewing distance of 4 feet. Of course, a huge screen fills your field of view like a theater, but the smaller screen is no less enjoyable--it's different. So the joke is on those who think a gigantic screen is a requirement for satisfying movie watching.
Still, I think most here would agree that there is some tacit concensus on what makes for a suitable display for HDTV and DVD movie watching, and it doesn't necessarily mean by default that you need a native widescreen TV to do that. For example, I could be very satisfied watching HD and DVD movies on a Sony KV-40XBR800. There are some very nice 36" and 32" direct view sets out there that support HDTV.
I think there's room enough for everyone here. But a large part of what this forum is about is getting the most out of home theater with the resources available...within limits. I'm sure there are not many people on AVS Forum who would want it to fill up with "I got $200 to spend, what kind of home theater can I get?" sort of questions. And the minute this particular forum gets deluged with "Walmart rollback specials on 19" Samsung TVs" type threads then it will be doomed as a credible place to have any serious discussion about home theater displays.
--Jerome
But I also see the point in Bionic's post even if it was not delicately stated to placate the hyper-sensitive. There are people here, and a lot of them, who think bigger is better, and bigger is always more money. Don't kid yourself, I spent several hundred dollars more on my Sony KV-34XBR910 widescreen direct view than I did on my first CRT projector. Additionally, I find watching HDTV on my 34" Sony extremely enjoyable and satisfying from a viewing distance of 4 feet. Of course, a huge screen fills your field of view like a theater, but the smaller screen is no less enjoyable--it's different. So the joke is on those who think a gigantic screen is a requirement for satisfying movie watching.
Still, I think most here would agree that there is some tacit concensus on what makes for a suitable display for HDTV and DVD movie watching, and it doesn't necessarily mean by default that you need a native widescreen TV to do that. For example, I could be very satisfied watching HD and DVD movies on a Sony KV-40XBR800. There are some very nice 36" and 32" direct view sets out there that support HDTV.
I think there's room enough for everyone here. But a large part of what this forum is about is getting the most out of home theater with the resources available...within limits. I'm sure there are not many people on AVS Forum who would want it to fill up with "I got $200 to spend, what kind of home theater can I get?" sort of questions. And the minute this particular forum gets deluged with "Walmart rollback specials on 19" Samsung TVs" type threads then it will be doomed as a credible place to have any serious discussion about home theater displays.
--Jerome
Joined
·
6,091 Posts
Quote:
Cajieboy,
After initially being taken aback by bionics post, I'd have to agree with you. It had become a little stale around here lately. Probably time for a 16:9 vs. 4:3 thread again, especially since 4:3 is so vastly superior to 16:9!
| Originally posted by cajieboy Woodrow, Posts on here were becoming a bit ho-hum until Bionic stirred the ant pile. Pour it on! |
After initially being taken aback by bionics post, I'd have to agree with you. It had become a little stale around here lately. Probably time for a 16:9 vs. 4:3 thread again, especially since 4:3 is so vastly superior to 16:9!
Joined
·
1,297 Posts
With David Bott saying I am wrong that's enough to scare anyone from making any more comments lest I be booted again. It was just my 2 cents worth yet I get a post from the owner saying it's not a wide screen Direct View. I'll go back to where they do want wide screen and that's DVD software, adios
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
