Questions about TV's

[grampi]

I may be getting a new TV soon and I haven't bought one in a while so I thought I'd ask the experts in here the questions I have.

This may be a dumb question, but here goes. I was at Sears the other day looking at their TV's. They had several 50"+ HD TV's for around the $1400-$1800 price range. They also had several plasma TV's in this size range priced from around $3500-$6500. Paying particular attention to picture quality, I noticed the big screen TV's had just as nice of a picture as the Plasmas had. Is the price of the plasmas so much higher than the big screen TV's simply because they come in so much smaller of a package? Granted, it would be nice to hang a plasma on the wall, but my living room is plenty big enough for a regular big screen TV and I can't see how a plasma would be worth 2-3 more money just because of its size. Now if its picture quality was a lot better as well, then maybe I could justify the price difference, but just because it's smaller doesn't warrant the much higher price. Is size the only difference between a plasma and a regular HD big screen TV?

Also, what's the best big screen non-plasma HD TV available? Thanks.

[Dale M]

Hi.. I am in No way one of the resident experts on here, but have a New 53 " Panasonic
Tau projection Tv,, You mentioned at Sears the picture quality looked to be the same for the bigger Projection Tv's as the Plasma's , Im sure that if they looked that close then they must have had a DVD demo disc playing thro them,, My expierence with my set is that the picture quality is Great when watching a DVD,, but watching normal cable tv or even digital tv is no where near great,,, if you have HD cable then you will get a better picture then I do. I dont have that and the local (shaw) cable company only has 6 channels broadcast in HD if you do suscribe and also have the HDTV box.So only 6 channels with not alot on any of them hasnt been enough to make me switch from digital to HD..
From what I have seen plasma picture quality is very good even with normal cable so if the cost difference from projection TV's to plasma TV's isnt of a huge concern then I would go plasma,,
My 2 Cents
Dale M :)

[grampi]

Hi.. I am in No way one of the resident experts on here, but have a New 53 " Panasonic
Tau projection Tv,, You mentioned at Sears the picture quality looked to be the same for the bigger Projection Tv's as the Plasma's , Im sure that if they looked that close then they must have had a DVD demo disc playing thro them,, My expierence with my set is that the picture quality is Great when watching a DVD,, but watching normal cable tv or even digital tv is no where near great,,, if you have HD cable then you will get a better picture then I do. I dont have that and the local (shaw) cable company only has 6 channels broadcast in HD if you do suscribe and also have the HDTV box.So only 6 channels with not alot on any of them hasnt been enough to make me switch from digital to HD..
From what I have seen plasma picture quality is very good even with normal cable so if the cost difference from projection TV's to plasma TV's isnt of a huge concern then I would go plasma,,
My 2 Cents
Dale M :)

I guess my source should be another concern. I won't have cable, I will be receiving all my TV channels through DirecTV satellite. Do they broadcast in HD? Also, do most HD TV's now days come with the HD receiver built-in?

[Dale M]

Hi
Im Not sure if your Satellite company broadcasts in HD or not, but bet they probably have some type of HD broadcasts,,Make a phone call or hit their web site to check that out,,
HDTVs dont have a built in Reciever, they are HD ready they say,,they are able to display
in HD if You have the proper HD box,, Your Satellite company if they broadcast in HD will have the HD receiver that you rent and buy.

Dale M

[grampi]

Hi
Im Not sure if your Satellite company broadcasts in HD or not, but bet they probably have some type of HD broadcasts,,Make a phone call or hit their web site to check that out,,
HDTVs dont have a built in Reciever, they are HD ready they say,,they are able to display
in HD if You have the proper HD box,, Your Satellite company if they broadcast in HD will have the HD receiver that you rent and buy.

Dale M

Then one of people I talked to a couple of years ago at Circuit City lied because he said that within a year, all HD TV's would come with the HD receiver built-in. They should.

[topspeed]

DirectTV has an HDTV package but the programming is severely limited. You must also cough up for the new HD stb, which ain't cheap. Not worth it in my book. Wasch24 has VOOM and seems to like it alot so you might want to consider switching providers. Woodman is the resident expert on TV's and he swears by CRT RPTV's. He also dislikes Sony due to faulty reliability. Finally, if you can wait, CEA has projected a 30-40% drop in prices for big screens this year.

Hope this helps.

[woodman]

I may be getting a new TV soon and I haven't bought one in a while so I thought I'd ask the experts in here the questions I have.

This may be a dumb question, but here goes. I was at Sears the other day looking at their TV's. They had several 50"+ HD TV's for around the $1400-$1800 price range. They also had several plasma TV's in this size range priced from around $3500-$6500. Paying particular attention to picture quality, I noticed the big screen TV's had just as nice of a picture as the Plasmas had. Is the price of the plasmas so much higher than the big screen TV's simply because they come in so much smaller of a package? Granted, it would be nice to hang a plasma on the wall, but my living room is plenty big enough for a regular big screen TV and I can't see how a plasma would be worth 2-3 more money just because of its size. Now if its picture quality was a lot better as well, then maybe I could justify the price difference, but just because it's smaller doesn't warrant the much higher price. Is size the only difference between a plasma and a regular HD big screen TV?

Also, what's the best big screen non-plasma HD TV available? Thanks.

So, what is a plasma display "worth"? FAR less than the asking price is how I'd sum it up! Value is of course in the eyes, ears, and mind of the beholder, but I've been dealing with TV sets ever since they first appeared on our planet, si I feel that I'm uniquely qualified to voice an educated opinion on the subject of what constitutes "value" in a TV set. Which is: CRT-based RPTVs represent far greater "value" than any other type of video display (except for DLP and LCD-based front projectors). If you can use a front projector, they are the biggest "bang for the buck" available today. Next come the CRT-based RPTVs. Plasma displays - after the "WOW factor" wears off, represent the bottom of the barrel. The industry has been working feverishly for half a century to produce a flat, "hang on the wall" TV display. Now that we've finally realized that dream, I must say that I'm less than totally impressed with the result. None of the flat-panel displays - whether plasma or LCD have the capability of CRTs ... none of them!

Three more comments:
I highly recommend Dish Network rather than DirecTV for a signal provider. It's a MUCH better company in every way. Thay also will set you up with an HDTV receiver for FREE (with a year's commitment to programming).

I also highly recommend Sears as a retailer to buy from. In the case of problems with a set developing, they will go farther to "make it right" than any other retailer that I know of.

As to what set is "best"? There is no such thing, but I'd pick Toshiba over the other brands as a first choice. After that, I'd pick Hitachi and then Mitsubishi. I'd avoid Sony as well as RCA, Zenith, Philips, and Panasonic.

Hope this helps you

woodman
(a great-grampi)

[kfalls]

I agree with Woodman. I'm in the process of finding a mid-priced HD RPTV. The companies represented in my area are Sony, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, Hitachi, RCA, Magnavox and Samsung. I wanted a 51" Hitachi 'S' series (S500 no HD tuner, S700 integrated HD tuner), but apparently you can't find them and Hitachi's new models aren't out yet. As an alternate I had the Mitsubishi WS55613 delivered, but it was terrible. Very out of focus and soft on SD Dishnetwork programs and the different "stretch" formats only made things worse. It's going back this evening and will hopefully be replaced by a Hitachi 57S500/S600 or a model from the 'T' series. They didn't have the 51", but I'm hoping they'll have the larger versions. I looked at these and didn't see the softness or distortions I saw with the Mitsubishi. After looking at most brands offered above I'd rate them in the following order:

Hitachi,Toshiba, Mitsubishi, Panasonic, Sony, Samsung, RCA, Magnavox

The Hitachi's have good features, picture and build quality. The Toshiba follows with just a few less features. The Mitsubishi had good features and build quality, but I didn't like the picture on SD. The Panasonics looked good, but less features and I didn't like the styling as well as the Hitachi or Toshiba. I used to be a big Sony fan until my KV36XBR250 started having the color distortion on the picture tube. I can't see spending premium cash for a product that has problems throughout their line. The RCA's looked good and were priced well, but are reported by all salepeople I spoke with as having the highest failure rate. The Maganavox had only limited models, no frills, seemed pretty generic. The salesmen didn't push the Maganovox' at all. Hope this helps.

[skeptic]

I have four KV36XBR250s. I've had them for four years and haven't had any problems with any of them and they have always delivered a bright sharp high contrast beautiful picture. I don't have a DVD player (except in my computer) so I haven't found out whether or not I'd experience any of the problems reported by those who posted in the review section of this board. Personally, I like the Trinitron picture tube and the fact that it never needs a convergence adjustment. I don't know if or how other manufacturers have gotten around that problem. Perhaps Woodman can enlighten us. Are there automatic convergence circuits?

I will be the first to admit that the attitude of Sony Corporation of America towards its customers stinks. Yes it STINKS, STINKS, STINKS, pure and simple. There is no other way to put it. In the past I've had three out of three 13 inch Trinitrons, all different models fail and a 27" trinitron fail all out of warranty all due to cold solder joints in the tuners. This was apparantly a well known problem among TV service repairmen. Sony would own none of it. I've had other minor and major problems with Sony TVs in the past too including another 27 inch that had a power supply fail. I've never had any problems with the six 19 inch trinitron sets I own however.

If you buy a Sony direct view TV set, you will probably be getting one of the better pictures out there. On the other hand, a lot of people have reported very unhappy experiences dealing with Sony for service. I've got my fingers crossed on the 36 inch sets however. Whatever you buy, you are always taking a chance.

[grampi]

Wow, I guess I'm more out of touch with the TV world than I had originally thought. You guys have thrown some acronyms at me that went right over my head; CRT, RPTV, what are these? Also, me getting the Dish Network instead of DirecTV is out of the question. I have to have the NFL ticket every year, and it's only available through DirecTV. If I read correctly, did some of you say that you have to pay for HD service? The last I heard HD was going to replace regular TV. Is this no longer true? Was it ever true? Or is HD TV just going to be yet another premium service we'll have to pay an additional fee for?

[grampi]

I wanted to add to other's comments about the quality (or lack thereof) of Sony's and Panasonic's products. I don't know what has happened to these companies over the last several years, but their products aren't built like they used to be. It's like they've gone mega cheap or something. My experience with these products is a Sony HT receiver, and a Panasonic TV, both purchased new in 1999. The Sony took a dirt nap earlier this year, and the cost to repair it was prohibitively expensive. My Panasonic 36" TV is also starting to go already. It's totally inexcusable for these components to start having problems at less than 4 years old. TV's should last at least 20 years, and I can still remember when receivers were good for 20-30 years. I don't know what is going on with these companies, but I also recommend staying away from their products.

[JStudrawa]

"You guys have thrown some acronyms at me that went right over my head; CRT, RPTV, what are these?"

CRT TV = Cathode Ray Tube TV. The TV's that you grew up on, the round glass screen ones. Known as a basic television up until Rear Projection came out.

RPTV = Rear Projection TV.

[grampi]

What about extended warranties? In the past, I haven't been much for going for them, but with the Panasonic TV I have now starting to act up already at just under 4 years old, it's got me thinking about extended warranties. If I was to go with a Toshiba or Hitachi, would you recommend an extended warranty as well?

[woodman]

What about extended warranties? In the past, I haven't been much for going for them, but with the Panasonic TV I have now starting to act up already at just under 4 years old, it's got me thinking about extended warranties. If I was to go with a Toshiba or Hitachi, would you recommend an extended warranty as well?


To buy ANY (relatively) expensive TV set today without buying all of the warranty protection you can get is just plain foolish, IMO. As someone who's spent a lifetime actually working on the beasts, I would not consider doing such a thing myself - no matter what.

Of course, if you have a sackful of money and therefore a breakdown that might cost you a bundle to deal with is no big deal, then you might be willing to take the gamble. But for anyone for whom money IS an important factor in the equation, don't buy ANY set - no matter who made it - without getting all of the protection you can get.

Hope this answers your question

[grampi]

To buy ANY (relatively) expensive TV set today without buying all of the warranty protection you can get is just plain foolish, IMO. As someone who's spent a lifetime actually working on the beasts, I would not consider doing such a thing myself - no matter what.

Of course, if you have a sackful of money and therefore a breakdown that might cost you a bundle to deal with is no big deal, then you might be willing to take the gamble. But for anyone for whom money IS an important factor in the equation, don't buy ANY set - no matter who made it - without getting all of the protection you can get.

Hope this answers your question

I've done some checking around on extended warranties and I've noticed something that seems strange to me. All of the warranties I've seen so far have been for either 2 or 4 years. This seems like an awefully short period of time for an extended warranty on a TV. Since any decently built TV should last in the neighborhood of around 20 years, one would think the basic manufacturer's warranty would be at least 4-5 years. First off, why don't TV's come with a decent manufacturer's warranty, and second, why wouldn't the extended warranties be of substantial duration, like at least 10 years? If I'm paying several hundred bucks on an extended warranty, it had better be good for much longer than 4 years.

[woodman]

I've done some checking around on extended warranties and I've noticed something that seems strange to me. All of the warranties I've seen so far have been for either 2 or 4 years. This seems like an awefully short period of time for an extended warranty on a TV. Since any decently built TV should last in the neighborhood of around 20 years, one would think the basic manufacturer's warranty would be at least 4-5 years. First off, why don't TV's come with a decent manufacturer's warranty, and second, why wouldn't the extended warranties be of substantial duration, like at least 10 years? If I'm paying several hundred bucks on an extended warranty, it had better be good for much longer than 4 years.

Boy, oh boy, gramps - you ARE way out of touch with reality when it comes to TV sets today. But then, you're not alone ... there are very, very few Americans today that "have a clue" about TV sets - their reliability - their life expectancy - their true cost - and especially about the necessity for extended warranties. I've been involved with the TV industry ever since it began, and I can give you the correct answers to your questions.

1. ... any decently built TV should last in the neighborhood of around 20 years, one would think the basic manufacturer's warranty would be at least 4-5 years.

Not any more. The TV mfgs. have been involved in a constantly, ever-growing compulsion to LOWER their set pricing over the course of the last 50 years - and cutting back on warranty coverage has been one of their #1 ways to do this. First, RCA and then Sony started to reduce the warranty on their sets to obscene levels several years back, and the rest of the industry has had no choice but to follow their lead. Today, Sony is the "king of the hill" when it comes to short warranties ... they only offer 90 DAYS warranty on some of their sets costing up to $2,000!!!!! That to my mind, is totally, and completely obscene.

2. ... why wouldn't the extended warranties be of substantial duration, like at least 10 years?

Because the companies writing such warranties would all go "belly-up" ... go broke ... leaving you holding an empty sack of worthless warranty "paper".

The simple facts are:
You can buy ANY brand ... ANY model ... and have a perfect ownership experience with it. 10 - 15 - 20 years of good performance, with not a single problem. This would (incorrectly) lead you to believe that THAT mfg. had their collective sh*t together and were making a better set than anyone else. You would be totally WRONG! Also, it should be noted that you were the only ONE (out of a thousand) owners of that particular model that had that sort of experience. The other 999 had a totally different kettle of fish to deal with.

Sets today are vastly more complicated than anything we've ever had before. At the same time, the technical support (for the servicers) from the mfg. has also been declining exponentially!

Competent technicians are getting more and more scarce as time goes on - the end result of the "let's make our sets cheaper than last year" syndrome. Where all of this will lead is anybody's guess ... I'm not overly optimistic myself.

Hope this answers your questions

[grampi]

Boy, oh boy, gramps - you ARE way out of touch with reality when it comes to TV sets today. But then, you're not alone ... there are very, very few Americans today that "have a clue" about TV sets - their reliability - their life expectancy - their true cost - and especially about the necessity for extended warranties. I've been involved with the TV industry ever since it began, and I can give you the correct answers to your questions.

1. ... any decently built TV should last in the neighborhood of around 20 years, one would think the basic manufacturer's warranty would be at least 4-5 years.

Not any more. The TV mfgs. have been involved in a constantly, ever-growing compulsion to LOWER their set pricing over the course of the last 50 years - and cutting back on warranty coverage has been one of their #1 ways to do this. First, RCA and then Sony started to reduce the warranty on their sets to obscene levels several years back, and the rest of the industry has had no choice but to follow their lead. Today, Sony is the "king of the hill" when it comes to short warranties ... they only offer 90 DAYS warranty on some of their sets costing up to $2,000!!!!! That to my mind, is totally, and completely obscene.

2. ... why wouldn't the extended warranties be of substantial duration, like at least 10 years?

Because the companies writing such warranties would all go "belly-up" ... go broke ... leaving you holding an empty sack of worthless warranty "paper".

The simple facts are:
You can buy ANY brand ... ANY model ... and have a perfect ownership experience with it. 10 - 15 - 20 years of good performance, with not a single problem. This would (incorrectly) lead you to believe that THAT mfg. had their collective sh*t together and were making a better set than anyone else. You would be totally WRONG! Also, it should be noted that you were the only ONE (out of a thousand) owners of that particular model that had that sort of experience. The other 999 had a totally different kettle of fish to deal with.

Sets today are vastly more complicated than anything we've ever had before. At the same time, the technical support (for the servicers) from the mfg. has also been declining exponentially!

Competent technicians are getting more and more scarce as time goes on - the end result of the "let's make our sets cheaper than last year" syndrome. Where all of this will lead is anybody's guess ... I'm not overly optimistic myself.

Hope this answers your questions

I told you I was out of touch! So you're telling me even though I'm probably going to be spending $1500-$2000 for a new TV, they're actually being made cheaper, and expecting this TV to last 15-20 years is unrealistic? Also, 4 years is the norm for an extended warranty and I'm supposed to be okay with spending several hundred $$$$ on one, only to have my $2000 TV go tits up at just 5 years old? Is the TV industry moving forwards or backwards?

[grampi]

?????????

[woodman]

I told you I was out of touch! So you're telling me even though I'm probably going to be spending $1500-$2000 for a new TV, they're actually being made cheaper, and expecting this TV to last 15-20 years is unrealistic? Also, 4 years is the norm for an extended warranty and I'm supposed to be okay with spending several hundred $$$$ on one, only to have my $2000 TV go tits up at just 5 years old? Is the TV industry moving forwards or backwards?

The answers to those questions are complex and varied and I just don't have enough time to cover them in detail. To sum up:

1. sets of today are technologically vastly improved over what we've had in the past

2. they are also being made cheaper - therefore the reliability is going downhill

3. for a set to "last" 15-20 years was NEVER realistic - but the chances of it happening were far greater 30 years ago than today

4. 4 years (in addition to the mfg. warranty) IS about a standard - but 5 years total coverage should put you in a fairly decent position to get good "value" from a set purchase

5. sets today are incredibly CHEAP (when compared to everything else we buy)!!!!! This is something that hardly anyone is aware of, but it's true! The first color TV set made (in 1954) cost $1,000 and had a 15" screen - no remote control - no stereo sound - required a whole lot of "fiddling" to get the picture to look "right". If you project that pricetag into today's dollars, you'd be looking at a pricetag of around $30,000 - for a set with a 15" screen and no remote control! 'Nuff said?

Hope this helps you

(great grampa)