Is 720P format dead?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

BTW, will you ever figure out when to properly use the carriage return key?

rw

Baby steps E, baby steps. He has to learn to think first, then the carriage return key.

[kevlarus]

BTW, will you ever figure out when to properly use the carriage return key?

rw

Now that you told him about it, he'll over use it just like the caps key.

[Woochifer]

Supported by PANASONIC I bet.
Just like the guy Wooch quoted until I was able to prove that he worked for 20 years for Panasonic

What guy would that be? If you're referring to Gary Merson of HD Guru.com, cite your source on that. First, you were claiming that the blue color of that website proves that he's a paid Panasonic shill. At least that claim had the oh-so-slightest measure of truth to it -- indeed HD Guru's website is colored blue!

This latest claim that Merson worked for Panasonic for 20 years is just laughably false. Just like all your claims that motion resolution tests don't exist, that photographic evidence of LCD's inferior viewing angles is imaginary, that every test result is somehow conspired against Vizio, etc.

The info from Merson's website about motion resolution, viewing angles, and color accuracy coincides with what several other professional review sites say. It's not just one guy, but a whole body of tests and reviews that support his conclusions.

PANASONIC STILL HAS QUITE an investment in PLASMA.
Not that I CARE, plasma is DEAD

Of course you don't care. You don't care so much that you never talk about plasma ... EVER!

[RGA]

Holy crap you video guys sure take this seriously

Anyway - I am looking for the cheapest possible decent 40 inch LCD - I'll be playing video games on it a lot and I'm not really a videophile. Yikes I have a Sony 1080i ( that seems to be nice enough).

The LCDs are coming down in price and this is the one I'm looking at. http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product/...c8e2272f00en02

I'll check out some competitors but Best-Buy usually has the best prices. Blu-Ray will be handled by a PS3 - but I tend to download and watch from my laptop so quality is never that great - I'd probably want a forgiving tv if there is such a thing. My Sony has 120hz while the Samsung is 60hz. But not really sure any of this is visible.

I remember years ago when I was buying a printer and looking at the dots per inch or whatever and there were two models and one had twice the pixels but as the salesman noted - that's all fine and good but no human eye can detect the added pixels anyway so you're paying for something that uses more ink and tends to clog up more for better numbers nobody can see. (and of course I see that link with the audio world where just because something has better numbers doesn't mean anyone can hear it.

I figure Samsung and Sony are pretty solid brands - LG is said to be good but a saleman I trust said they seem to get a lot more of them back for failing - though he liked the picture. Anyway, any thought on the above linked Samsung for good or ill.

[Woochifer]

Holy crap you video guys sure take this seriously

Anyway - I am looking for the cheapest possible decent 40 inch LCD - I'll be playing video games on it a lot and I'm not really a videophile. Yikes I have a Sony 1080i ( that seems to be nice enough).

The LCDs are coming down in price and this is the one I'm looking at. http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product/...c8e2272f00en02

Can't really go wrong with a Samsung. Generally, they will at least give you solid performance and reliability, and for the most part, they make the right decisions with how they design their sets.

That particular model has 1080p resolution, but it lacks 120 Hz refresh rate, which means that you'll lose more resolution with moving images and get some juddering with film-based sources.

I'll check out some competitors but Best-Buy usually has the best prices. Blu-Ray will be handled by a PS3 - but I tend to download and watch from my laptop so quality is never that great - I'd probably want a forgiving tv if there is such a thing. My Sony has 120hz while the Samsung is 60hz. But not really sure any of this is visible.

Downloads will be heavily compressed, with a data rate barely higher than with a DVD. It might be technically 720p or even 1080i/p resolution, but you'll see a lot of visible macroblocking and other visual artifacts at that level of compression. No TV can make up for lack of bits.

If you're already watching a 120 Hz TV, you might want to reconsider going to 60 Hz. The juddering effect is a byproduct of the 2:3 pulldown process that's used to render a 24-frame film segment onto a video format that natively displays at 60 frames. That juddering will be visible on any 60 Hz TV, while a 120 Hz TV with true 5:5 frame repeating will eliminate that (as far as I know, Sony has correctly implemented it with all of their 120 Hz TVs). Also, if you use the motion interpolation feature (Sony calls it Motionflow) and like it, the absence of that smoothing effect will be very noticeable.

Why are you upgrading from the Sony?

I remember years ago when I was buying a printer and looking at the dots per inch or whatever and there were two models and one had twice the pixels but as the salesman noted - that's all fine and good but no human eye can detect the added pixels anyway so you're paying for something that uses more ink and tends to clog up more for better numbers nobody can see. (and of course I see that link with the audio world where just because something has better numbers doesn't mean anyone can hear it.

Yes and no. Difference between 1080p and 720p is visible, but it diminishes in importance as the screen gets smaller and your distance from the monitor increases. But, the difference between HD (720/1080) and SD (480) is quite visible. You're right in that the specs don't tell the full story, but there's simply no substitute for resolution. And with a broadcast quality HD signal or with a Blu-ray, the picture quality will simply blow away any SD source.

I figure Samsung and Sony are pretty solid brands - LG is said to be good but a saleman I trust said they seem to get a lot more of them back for failing - though he liked the picture. Anyway, any thought on the above linked Samsung for good or ill.

LG makes some good sets, but they can be hit and miss. For example, some of their 120 Hz sets don't allow you to disable the motion interpolation feature (which makes everything look like it was shot on a camcorder). IMO (and the opinion of most professional reviewers), a 120 Hz set works best when it just does the 5:5 frame repeating to reduce the juddering effect with film sources. When the motion interpolation is added to the mix, movies will look like a bad soap operas. If you like that smoothing effect, then great. But, I think it's a design flaw if a TV does not give you the option of bypassing the motion interpolation.

Samsung and Sony share a production line, with Samsung producing many of the LCD panels for Sony. Each company though uses its own designs for the video processing.

[Enochrome]

Yeah, 720p is yesterday's numbers. It does not make sense for company's to make that resolution anymore in order to keep up with consumers need for "better numbers". I personally just bought of 42" Panasonic plasma, because I missed the richness and smooth aspect of plasmas. I started out with a plasma, went to lcd ( the plasma was defective) and now am back to plasma 720p. 720, because it is well known that 50" or less, you cannot tell the difference between 720 and 1080 after 9ft.

On the topic of 1080i with a 1080p set: I watched the NBA Finals (Lakers!!!) on my friends 1080p Vizio LCD on Dish ESPN and blew my plasma away: picture looked amazing!!

I know that I am a minority here but I think 1080p LCD sets with Blue-Ray looks terrible. Well not terrible, but not as good as 1080i. Why?: the motion is so unnatural that it ruins whatever you are watching, as well it seems that actors are standing in front of green screens when I know that they are not. The technology is just mismatched, it goes for clarity over naturalness. Looking back people will laugh, or maybe they will laugh at me.

Blue-Ray pick of the week" Days of Heaven. Cinematography is beautiful.

[RGA]

Woochifer

I'm not upgrading the Sony - It was more of a family TV so my mom is keeping it. She is hard of hearing and uses the headphone outputs. It has 120hz - it's a Bravia but I forget the model number - it's a couple of years old but is a 1080i not a 1080p. I think it's fine but I'm not a videophile. It's not perfect. I suppose I could look for a similar TV. Motion is probably important if I am going to play games on it - so I may hold off a bit for 120hz

Here is a Philips which claims 240hz refresh and 1ms response time. It's a bit more than I want to spend but it's not on sale and I can wait. http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/produ...aff6bbb9ceen02

From what I have read the Philips uses a Samsung panel but that is only stated on a forum so who knows?

[pixelthis]

Yeah, 720p is yesterday's numbers. It does not make sense for company's to make that resolution anymore in order to keep up with consumers need for "better numbers". I personally just bought of 42" Panasonic plasma, because I missed the richness and smooth aspect of plasmas. I started out with a plasma, went to lcd ( the plasma was defective) and now am back to plasma 720p. 720, because it is well known that 50" or less, you cannot tell the difference between 720 and 1080 after 9ft.

On the topic of 1080i with a 1080p set: I watched the NBA Finals (Lakers!!!) on my friends 1080p Vizio LCD on Dish ESPN and blew my plasma away: picture looked amazing!!

I know that I am a minority here but I think 1080p LCD sets with Blue-Ray looks terrible. Well not terrible, but not as good as 1080i. Why?: the motion is so unnatural that it ruins whatever you are watching, as well it seems that actors are standing in front of green screens when I know that they are not. The technology is just mismatched, it goes for clarity over naturalness. Looking back people will laugh, or maybe they will laugh at me.

Blue-Ray pick of the week" Days of Heaven. Cinematography is beautiful.

Well, the problem is that a high resolution source is very unforgiving.
For instance, how do you know the actors are not standing in front of green screens?
You would be surprized at how much green screening goes on(SANTUARY is almost
entirely green screen).
AND OF COURSE THE VIZIO BLEW YOUR PLASMA AWAY, funny it was a fast action sports program, which the Vizio haters on this site claim Vizio is worst at, but was exlelent, actually, and of course the pic was better, plasma fanboys(and corporate shills)
can screan over and over about the superority of plasma, doesnt change the fact that most, when given a choice, choose LCD.
Which is demonstrated in the marketplace daily.

[Woochifer]

Yeah, 720p is yesterday's numbers. It does not make sense for company's to make that resolution anymore in order to keep up with consumers need for "better numbers". I personally just bought of 42" Panasonic plasma, because I missed the richness and smooth aspect of plasmas. I started out with a plasma, went to lcd ( the plasma was defective) and now am back to plasma 720p. 720, because it is well known that 50" or less, you cannot tell the difference between 720 and 1080 after 9ft.

Well, 720p is still out there because it's less expensive and as you note, in the smaller screen sizes, you won't tell much of a difference.

On the topic of 1080i with a 1080p set: I watched the NBA Finals (Lakers!!!) on my friends 1080p Vizio LCD on Dish ESPN and blew my plasma away: picture looked amazing!!

I know that I am a minority here but I think 1080p LCD sets with Blue-Ray looks terrible. Well not terrible, but not as good as 1080i. Why?: the motion is so unnatural that it ruins whatever you are watching, as well it seems that actors are standing in front of green screens when I know that they are not. The technology is just mismatched, it goes for clarity over naturalness. Looking back people will laugh, or maybe they will laugh at me.

Sounds to me like you're watching a set with the motion interpolation switched on (Vizio calls it "Smooth Motion") and like that better. This has nothing to do with 1080p/i or LCD/plasma. Simply a feature that smooths out the motion.

1080p Blu-ray is pretty much superior to everything else because 1) it has by far the highest bitrate; and 2) natively displaying a 1080p signal on a 1080p TV requires the least amount of processing (which alters the image, and introduces all kinds of potential artifacts). Scaling a 1080p signal down for a 720p TV is not nearly as involved a process as deinterlacing a 480i/1080i signal -- so the Blu-ray should give you superior results whether you're watching a 720p or 1080p HDTV.

Personally, I hate it because the heavy handed processing required to produce that effect makes the image quality look fake.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Yeah, 720p is yesterday's numbers. It does not make sense for company's to make that resolution anymore in order to keep up with consumers need for "better numbers". I personally just bought of 42" Panasonic plasma, because I missed the richness and smooth aspect of plasmas. I started out with a plasma, went to lcd ( the plasma was defective) and now am back to plasma 720p. 720, because it is well known that 50" or less, you cannot tell the difference between 720 and 1080 after 9ft.

You are correct on the distance factor.

On the topic of 1080i with a 1080p set: I watched the NBA Finals (Lakers!!!) on my friends 1080p Vizio LCD on Dish ESPN and blew my plasma away: picture looked amazing!!

The picture may have looked amazing, but you will have to do a side by side comparison with the same material to make the claim it blows your plasma away. Plus this statement is in direct contradiction to the one you make below.

I know that I am a minority here but I think 1080p LCD sets with Blue-Ray looks terrible. Well not terrible, but not as good as 1080i.

Here is your contradiction. First you don't know if any of these sets were calibrated. Second 1080p has a higher data rate than 1080i, so unless the mastering and compression was poorly done, 1080p and 1080i look absolutely the same. Thirdly, you cannot compare two different programs, and proclaim that one resolution is better than the other. You have to have the same programming mastered identically for each resolution. If it is viewed on the same set(1080p), it will be deinterlaced and end up being 1080p in the end anyway. If you are comparing a 1080p set with a 1080i set, they would have to be calibrated to give the same visual result. Good luck in finding the difference between these resolutions, as they are essentially the same but presented differently.

Why?: the motion is so unnatural that it ruins whatever you are watching, as well it seems that actors are standing in front of green screens when I know that they are not.

This effect comes when the television is not calibrated, and has nothing to do with 1080p or 1080i.

Another problem with your statement is that most LCD televisions can accept the 24fps cadence of film. That means it should look motion wise the same as film looks in the theater. What makes motion look so unnatural is when anti-judder processing(poorly implemented) is turned on full or high.

The technology is just mismatched, it goes for clarity over naturalness. Looking back people will laugh, or maybe they will laugh at me.

Well, you'll be shocked to know that most Blu ray disc are QC on professional LCD monitors, so the technology is not mismatched at all. Clarity comes with the bump up in resolution, and the lack of 3:2 pull down for 120hz sets, and Plasmas that do 96khz processing

Blue-Ray pick of the week" Days of Heaven. Cinematography is beautiful.

I'll have to check that out.

[Woochifer]

Woochifer

I'm not upgrading the Sony - It was more of a family TV so my mom is keeping it. She is hard of hearing and uses the headphone outputs. It has 120hz - it's a Bravia but I forget the model number - it's a couple of years old but is a 1080i not a 1080p. I think it's fine but I'm not a videophile. It's not perfect. I suppose I could look for a similar TV. Motion is probably important if I am going to play games on it - so I may hold off a bit for 120hz

Actually, if that set is a LCD, it's not technically 1080i because flat panel TVs are natively progressive. The motion interpolation IMO ruins the picture quality, regardless of the source. But, the 5:5 frame repeating on a 120 Hz TV (which Sony implements correctly) will reduce the juddering effect with film-based sources. With video-based sources such as live TV or video games, I don't think that the motion interpolation will help much.

Here is a Philips which claims 240hz refresh and 1ms response time. It's a bit more than I want to spend but it's not on sale and I can wait. http://www.futureshop.ca/en-CA/produ...aff6bbb9ceen02

From what I have read the Philips uses a Samsung panel but that is only stated on a forum so who knows?

Need to watch out for the Philips sets going to the North American market because I believe that they are rebadged sets from Funai (which sells off-brand sets under several different names). These sets are separate from the ones Philips sells elsewhere in the world.

Samsung is the largest OEM panel producer in the world, so they supply a lot of different panels for different markets. Just because Samsung makes the LCD panel does not mean that they have any input into other aspects of the TV design.

Sony's relationship with Samsung is a joint venture -- meaning that many of their sets are produced in the same factory. And the panels that Samsung makes are made to Sony's specs.

[pinto79]

I don't think I have ever used 720p. I have 2 Sharp Aquos 32" LCDs that I use on my BD and HD-DVD able computer and a 46" 120hz Aquos in the living room.

My cable box puts out 1080i for HD and has a 480p mode for non-HD content.

It seems to me that it would seem like everything on the screen is bigger than it would at 1080, considering the lower resolution... Am I wrong?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I don't think I have ever used 720p. I have 2 Sharp Aquos 32" LCDs that I use on my BD and HD-DVD able computer and a 46" 120hz Aquos in the living room.

My cable box puts out 1080i for HD and has a 480p mode for non-HD content.

It seems to me that it would seem like everything on the screen is bigger than it would at 1080, considering the lower resolution... Am I wrong?

No, that is only the case with computers. 1080 looks more like film, and 480p looks more like video(haven't seen many DVD's that truely look like film)

[bobsticks]

It seems to me that it would seem like everything on the screen is bigger than it would at 1080, considering the lower resolution... Am I wrong?

Yes, you're wrong. Resolution ratings (a can-of-worms topic in its own right) is based on micro detail not the scale of the figures/items on the screen. That scale could be altered by modifying the "Wide Mode", "Full Mode", "Vertical Center" or other similar category on your machine's menu.

Don't worry about it though, if'n ya never ask a question ya never learn.

Amidst the sound and fury of this bravado-infected thread there have been a few facts shared. Let me summarize:

1) 720p(rogressive) can be utilized on fast/action based programming for smoother motion sequences. Your monitor, depending on the model, may give you the option to change between the two. Experiment for yourself and remember that often results will vary among televisions.

2) Every set will intuitively rescale the programming to its native resolution. The issue becomes whether the source material is best output by the source mechanism (Sat/Receiver/DVP/BRP) or if the monitor's chips will superscede it.

[pinto79]

I just tried it on the PC... To select 720p, the resolution changes to 1280 x 720... doesn't fit the screen properly.

That's probably the video card doing that.

Next time I watch a movie, I'll give 720 a try on the 46"...

[pixelthis]

I just tried it on the PC... To select 720p, the resolution changes to 1280 x 720... doesn't fit the screen properly.

That's probably the video card doing that.

Next time I watch a movie, I'll give 720 a try on the 46"...

It hardly matters.
The native resolution of your set is what you'll see, in the case of your 46", you will always see 1080p, regardless.
1080i will deinterlace to 1080p, and will look best on your set.
You probably have the option on your cable box for 480i material, 480p, thru,
and streach(upconvert).
480i is usually the best, because it gives you aspect control on your TV.
Finally, if your computer can handle 1920x1280, choose that, cant understand why anyone would choose anything else, except to get a bigger text, etc.
Some older stuff ruins better at 600x400.

[pinto79]

It hardly matters.
The native resolution of your set is what you'll see, in the case of your 46", you will always see 1080p, regardless.
1080i will deinterlace to 1080p, and will look best on your set.
You probably have the option on your cable box for 480i material, 480p, thru,
and streach(upconvert).
480i is usually the best, because it gives you aspect control on your TV.
Finally, if your computer can handle 1920x1280, choose that, cant understand why anyone would choose anything else, except to get a bigger text, etc.
Some older stuff ruins better at 600x400.

The computer actually handles 1920x1080 beautifully on both of my screens. I love running 2 monitors. I don't know how anyone operates with a single.

I'll try switching the cable box back to 480i for non-HD content and see if it looks any better.

[RGA]

I have found more info on the Phillips set. What intrigued me was the 90,000:1 Contrast and 1ms response and 240hz. I went and saw it at Future Shop and it looks as good if not better than all the other sets in the store - trouble is once things are split it's really not necessarily a fair comparison. Dynex which is an off brand looked better than usual too.

The poster MavrickRohan works for the company making the Philips sets and has tested them. Interesting commentary about the different models. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1256402

"Philips in USA & Canada is the same. It is run by P&F USA, which is a new company mostly consisting of ex Philips employees which is a subsidiary of Funai."


The 40 inch is $849. It's a time off for me but I'm keeping it on the radar.

[Woochifer]

I have found more info on the Phillips set. What intrigued me was the 90,000:1 Contrast and 1ms response and 240hz. I went and saw it at Future Shop and it looks as good if not better than all the other sets in the store - trouble is once things are split it's really not necessarily a fair comparison. Dynex which is an off brand looked better than usual too.

Problem with comparisons at stores is that the demo units are in all likelihood uncalibrated and either using the default settings or "showroom" levels designed to compensate for the extreme flood-lit conditions in a big box store. Either way, they're not comparable to each other, or comparable to what you'll see at home.

What you should do if haven't already done so, is calibrate your Sony using a calibration DVD. That will familiarize you with what the reference color balances, brightness, sharpness, and contrast should look like. Side benefit is that the calibration will improve the picture quality of your TV from the factory defaults.

The reason for doing this is that every TV uses a different default setting, even models from the same manufacturer. Unless the demo units in a showroom are calibrated (in my experience, only higher end stores with dedicated demo rooms will do this), you're not really doing true A-B comparisons. This is the equivalent of trying to compare speakers with all of the amps using different EQ settings -- it's just not comparable. Doing a somewhat comparable demo will require that you do some tweaking with the settings so that you're not merely looking at which TVs give you the best factory settings.

With my Panny, the factory settings look awful. But, with the settings in Cinema mode (this is usually the preset that's closest to reference levels), and dialing down the brightness and sharpness, the set looks quite good. Because I had calibrated my previous TV, I knew what a reference level is supposed to look like. With any store demo, I try to reset the TV so that it's as close a match as possible. With the levels as comparable as possible, THEN you can look for qualitative difference in picture quality.

the other thing to watch out for is the overly bright settings used in showroom demos. The high level torch mode is far brighter than you'll likely want to use at home. It's fine for standing out in a crowd (which is why so many factory defaults purposely use a high brightness and lamp level), but that's like a speaker with the treble cranked way up. Might sound good in a crowded noisy warehouse, but intolerable under normal home conditions.

The poster MavrickRohan works for the company making the Philips sets and has tested them. Interesting commentary about the different models. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1256402

"Philips in USA & Canada is the same. It is run by P&F USA, which is a new company mostly consisting of ex Philips employees which is a subsidiary of Funai."


The 40 inch is $849. It's a time off for me but I'm keeping it on the radar.

Yep, but that still makes the Philips sets in North America different from what they sell elsewhere in the world. Funai is a decent off-brand manufacturer, but they also make HDTVs for a wide range of brands such as Sylvania and Sansui.

[RGA]

I suppose my question with Philips or for that matter the off brands, is just because it's a name brand does that make it a superior product?

It's not like Sony or Samsung is any great shakes when it comes to supreme quality in other facets of their products. I get that they are said to be in the leading category for televisions but at the same time I wonder where the objective evidence would be for this.

We grow to expect certain brands to be quality and certain brands to be lesser and it becomes as comfortable as shoes when they're all using "common" parts made in the same Chinese plants. As Exotic PC noted people may buy an HP or Dell or Apple laptop but there is not one piece of the machine or screw that is actually made by HP etc in the entire machine. They get screens from one make and motherboards from Asus or what have you but the logo on the front is just that - a logo. If Sony doesn't make a single part of their laptops I am not quick to assume that their Televisions are automatically better than the no name brand since the no name brand may be the identical television for half the price. Even the engines may be better but that could be let down by poor refresh rates or some other issue. One laptop had a terrific video card but it was too slow to take advantage of it. They got to advertise how great the video card was but you needed to be cautious.

Here is an example of what I am concerned over.
http://www.xoticpc.com/really-makes-...cret-a-47.html

I remember when I bought my Pioneer LaserDisc player - there was an exact replica under the Hitachi name badge for $200 more. Even though both were made by Pioneer. Indeed, Pioneer had two machines that were identical but one had the rosewood panels and piano black finish and the "Elite" name - exact same machines however.

This is why I sometimes wonder about names like Insignia and Dynex sold at the big box chains for a couple hundred less money.

Alternatively, if one TV is 240hz, has a very fast refresh rate and higher contrast etc then it should be better than the 60hz 8ms lower contrast TV from a bigger name especially if they're both using the same screens.

In other words - the big household name brand can get away with upping the price because there is a big name logo on the front - while a TV which may be just as good or even better may be selling for less because the name appeal isn't there yet.

I think this is difficult for the average person to go into stores to buy a television because he has to get permission to recalibrate the televisions - have them set them up side by side. I don't know if that is at all practical. The smaller stores might but they can't compete remotely on price or warranty.

Like I said I am no videophile. I never bought LaserDisc for the picture quality - I bought it for Wide Screen. Having said that if I buy another TV for a given price I'd like to get the best one I can - but I am not totally convinced by just "going with the name brand".

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I suppose my question with Philips or for that matter the off brands, is just because it's a name brand does that make it a superior product?

The short answer is no

It's not like Sony or Samsung is any great shakes when it comes to supreme quality in other facets of their products. I get that they are said to be in the leading category for televisions but at the same time I wonder where the objective evidence would be for this.

Almost every review comes with measurements of certain necessary perimeters. How well the panels do on that testing is how they are rated.

For instance, I get my testing information from Displaydata. Displaydata takes all of the individually tested sets from various testing labs, and combines them together into one large report. This has been done on every new model release since the year 2000. Color accuracy, native contrast along with mechanically enhanced contrast, black levels, grey scale accuracy, and the newest test panel response time. Using standard testing procedures that the industry has adopted, all of the scores are compiled, a rating and placement are given. There is no subjective evaluation, so no bias. The same testing methods and equipment are used for all sets, so no biasing towards a specific technology.

The Digital Testing Center in Hollywood is probably the most thorough testing center in America. They test hundreds of panels, pull them apart, and through evaluating the individual parts, the processing, and how they work together they can tell if a set has been designed from the ground up to work with all of its parts, or it was just thrown together with all the parts it takes to make a set, without any consideration to how they work together.

We grow to expect certain brands to be quality and certain brands to be lesser and it becomes as comfortable as shoes when they're all using "common" parts made in the same Chinese plants. As Exotic PC noted people may buy an HP or Dell or Apple laptop but there is not one piece of the machine or screw that is actually made by HP etc in the entire machine. They get screens from one make and motherboards from Asus or what have you but the logo on the front is just that - a logo. If Sony doesn't make a single part of their laptops I am not quick to assume that their Televisions are automatically better than the no name brand since the no name brand may be the identical television for half the price. Even the engines may be better but that could be let down by poor refresh rates or some other issue. One laptop had a terrific video card but it was too slow to take advantage of it. They got to advertise how great the video card was but you needed to be cautious.

Here is an example of what I am concerned over.
http://www.xoticpc.com/really-makes-...cret-a-47.html

The same situation that happens in the computer industry happens with televisions. The panel is sourced from one OEM, the individual parts from another. The difference between a Sony, Panasonic, Pioneer(when they were in the business)Samsung and other first tier manufacturers from Vizio, Insignia, Colby, and some of the other third tier manufacturers lies in the fact that their panels are designed in house, use panels and parts designed to work together, and have the same parts from the introduction of the product line, till when it is discontinued. They design their own processing algorithms to work specifically with the panel and the parts that make it up. The third tiers panels are not designed in house, do not have consistent suppliers or parts throughout their product lines, and don't have panels and parts designed to work together. They don't even develop their own processing, its off the shelf stuff. Sony sources its panels from Samsung, hence why they have the best performing LCD panels. After the panel, Sony is number one with LED backlit and edgelit panels, consistently scoring the highest with these two product categories across their entire line. Panasonic is the number one plasma in terms of testing once Pioneer left the market.

You may source your panel from the same OEM, but what you do with it after that is what distinguishes you from your competition.

I remember when I bought my Pioneer LaserDisc player - there was an exact replica under the Hitachi name badge for $200 more. Even though both were made by Pioneer. Indeed, Pioneer had two machines that were identical but one had the rosewood panels and piano black finish and the "Elite" name - exact same machines however.

Pioneer made every Laserdisc player ever sold, even if their brand name was not on it. That is a fact. Once again, it is what you do after the basic player has been assembled that distinguishes it. Better lasers, better D/A conversion, drive stabilizing, better analog and digital circuitry, advance hookups(coaxial), audio format support all distinguish a Hitachi from a high end Pioneer.

While casually scrutinizing the two players they may have seemed identical, but look under the hood. Pioneer Elite players always had better internal parts, better D/A converters and analog stages, advanced drive stabilization, advanced hookups, and advance audio format support. They were the first to support AC-3 and Dts coherent acoustic audio formats. These are not always things that are recognized with casual viewing. The Elites always tested better than non Elite models.

This is why I sometimes wonder about names like Insignia and Dynex sold at the big box chains for a couple hundred less money. ]Alternatively, if one TV is 240hz, has a very fast refresh rate and higher contrast etc then it should be better than the 60hz 8ms lower contrast TV from a bigger name especially if they're both using the same screens.

Just to make some things clear, 240hz is the refresh rate. Secondly it all depends on the quality of the panel itself. If the 240hz has better measurements, then yes your statement is true. However, this years 240hz LED lit top of the line panel from Vizio does not outperform last years 120hz edge lit Sony and Samsung mid tier panels. So specs listed by the manufacturers rarely tell the whole story till closer scrutiny and testing occurs.

In other words - the big household name brand can get away with upping the price because there is a big name logo on the front - while a TV which may be just as good or even better may be selling for less because the name appeal isn't there yet.

Not if they don't test better. I have been getting Displaydata testing results since they first offered them, and I have never seen a third tier manufacturers panels testing better than any first tier. The fact that you are a first tier manufacturer does not come with the name at all. It comes from consistent quality, best performance, and best features implemented in the best way. Sony, Panasonic and Samsung didn't get there because of their name(Samsung has not always been synonymous with quality), they got there because of their superior products.

I think this is difficult for the average person to go into stores to buy a television because he has to get permission to recalibrate the televisions - have them set them up side by side. I don't know if that is at all practical. The smaller stores might but they can't compete remotely on price or warranty.

You have some work to do before you enter the store. Look at reviews from reputable rags like Widescreen Review, Sound and Vision, and hit online sources such as HD guru.com, UltimateAV.com which publish testing measurements. Then you hit the stores and decide from the sets that test well, fit your budget, and space requirements. A lot of times the store already has certain brands side by side, and some don't mind you adjusting the sets to give you a better idea of how good the really look.

Like I said I am no videophile. I never bought LaserDisc for the picture quality - I bought it for Wide Screen. Having said that if I buy another TV for a given price I'd like to get the best one I can - but I am not totally convinced by just "going with the name brand".

This is where you have some things quite twisted. The name brands have the R&D money to produce the best performing panels. That is a fact. They also have the repair and customer service infrastructure that the non name brands don't have. The name brands produce televisions that are better constructed, have better processing that is better implemented, better features, and have panels with better performance. In ten years of published testing, I have never seen a non name brand set outperform a set from the major brands. Even the bottom tier sets from the majors can equal, or do better than the higher tiered products from the non brand names(this especially true for Sony and Samsung).

A name can only take you so far, then you have to actually produce high quality products that earn that name. You will not be doing yourself a favor by choosing anything from the third tier manufacturers, unless the application you will be using the set for is not for critical viewing. Consider the overall price erosion from last year, you can get a mid tier panel from a major for nearly the same price as a similar screen size Vizio at some of the big box stores.

[RGA]

Thanks for the information regarding the Televisions. It's probably just easier to go with Sony/Samsung. They make less expensive ones than the Philips model. They're 8ms and 60hz but I can't find a site that sits a bunch of the models down and compares them. The Euro magazines do it with amps and speakers and probably TV's but the model numbers are different so it doesn't help much.

[pixelthis]

Thanks for the information regarding the Televisions. It's probably just easier to go with Sony/Samsung. They make less expensive ones than the Philips model. They're 8ms and 60hz but I can't find a site that sits a bunch of the models down and compares them. The Euro magazines do it with amps and speakers and probably TV's but the model numbers are different so it doesn't help much.

Sony and Samsung are basically the same thing (the same panels, anyway).
With 240 hz machines remember, all tv signals are 60hz, the tv makes up the rest,
so with a 240hz set, 75% of the pic is interpolated, or fake.
120hz looks great, but I THINK WITH 240HZ YOU ARE ENTERING THE REALM
of deminishing returns.
ALSO, there was a rumour that Phillips sets were FUNAI, but every Phillips set I have seen has been exelent, and a friend, who bought a 42" Phillips for his bedroom, likes
the pic better than his SAMSUNG that he has in his HT.
SO IF THEY are Funai, then FUNAI MAKES SOME GREAT STUFF.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Thanks for the information regarding the Televisions. It's probably just easier to go with Sony/Samsung. They make less expensive ones than the Philips model. They're 8ms and 60hz but I can't find a site that sits a bunch of the models down and compares them. The Euro magazines do it with amps and speakers and probably TV's but the model numbers are different so it doesn't help much.

Richard,
If you are sensitive to judder like I am, get a 120hz television. 3:2 pulldown does not eliminate all the judder that you get when 24fps film gets encoded at 60hz.

This crap about 240hz being fake is nonsense. My Sony XBRpro can do 60hz, 120hz, 240hz, and 480hz. Each of these settings smoothens the picture into a more film like presentation. This is not the same thing as clearmotion, trumotion, or any of the other judder processing. 60hz,120hz, and 240hz are refresh rate speeds, and describes how many times the screen updates itself in a second. This is not the same as interpolating frames designed to remove judder. Refresh rates don't add anything to the picture that is not already there.

Joe Kane puts it nicely:

“Refresh rates of incoming video signals are anywhere from about 24 pictures per second to 60 pictures per second. When displayed at their native rates on LCD displays you’ll often see lag in the motion. It looks as if detail is being smeared. This is because images from prior frames are still present as later frames come along. If the refresh rate is increased and frames of black added, you can often force the old image to go away before the new image comes along."

This is theory of course as the problem with imaging smearing(or blur) is not a refresh rate issue, it is a pixel issue. You can refresh a million times a second, but if the pixels cannot update themselves that fast, blurring will still occur. This is why I recommend panels from the first tier manufacturers, as they have put in the R&D to get their panels improved in the response time area, whereas a third tier player has no control over that perimeter because they are just buying panels on the open market.

It always helps to make decisions when seeing sets side by side. Our visual memory only lasts seconds, so any comparison made beyond that time, is completely unreliable.

And never trust anecdotal information from someone who does not believe in calibrating a set, or watching it in optimal conditions. And never take advice from someone that does not know the difference between judder preventive algorithms and refresh rates.

[RGA]

Thanks again for the input. So I guess now I want to try and figure out if the Philips is a first tier maker. The European models are supposed to be top rate and "certain" models in the west are as well.

The 5 series that I posted about. Here is what that guy who works for Philips has said

I have tested the 5505 (Pre Prod) since November 2009 ... and also did the FMF (Fast Market Feedback) test on that model ... If you don't care about internet on the TV, the 5505 has really good picture quality. Mainly because of 1D Dimming and the Scanning Backlight which makes it a 240Hz class panel. There were many changes made to improve the PQ during FMF, it also has decent speakers.

It has a static contrast ratio of 7000:1 & 10 bit (8 bit + 2 bit dithering) Color Support.

Also, FYI ... all Philips 2010 5 & 7 series TVs have Samsung panels, not LG. 2009 6 & 7 series had LG panels.

AND

The Samsung & Philips are almost identical in terms of PQ performance, its upto you really.

AND

"Digital Natural Motion" i.e. TV interpolates video frames vs. doing a simple frame repeat to achieve the panels 120Hz refresh rate is something you eventually get used to.

Film content used to be shot at 24fps simply because of technological limitations back in the day. I wish studios started shooting movies at a higher film rate. Simply because real 60 fps looks way better than 24 interpolated to 120.

You will get used to DNM, and once you do, you'll start hating the 24fps judder (which I have no clue, why people still like) ...

AND

Well, I work for P&F USA, so I have access to the entire line-up in the lab so I have tested all of them. I also personally own the 5505.

In terms of pure picture quality and black levels, the 5000 series (120Hz panel + scanning backlight = 240Hz class & 1D local dimming) beats the 7 series (120Hz panel with edge-lit LED) hands down.

The only reason why the 7000 series is more expensive is cos it is an LED panel, which also means the boards used inside the TVs are more expensive to manufacture and just cos its LED-LCD, & as of now all LED-LCDs cost more than CCFL-LCDs.



The problem for me is that I can't see any rating sites that make direct comparisons. When I look at the specs the Philips seems to beat the hell out of the other models for similar prices at Future Shop and they seem to have their own uniquely designed systems but I have no clue because my learning curve on this is so far non-existent. If the specs don't matter and it boils down the design that is not quantifiable in numbers then it makes it very difficult.

It's not like the Philips is cheaper - it's actually a $150 more than some of the same sized Sony and Samsung models. The screen is first tier Samsung, so it seems to come down to the quality of the picture but without some sort of fair comparison all that is left is the specs and they seem to be considerably better.

1ms response time - lower is better no? That suggests that motion would be a considerably better and from just looking at in store it is a lot better than my Sony Bravia 120hz 8ms model. But Woochifer noted that there is not an equal calibration - maybe mine is off and the Philips is spot on out of the box?

Then there is the Aquas that people seem to like and Panasonic supporters.

I am not opposed to buying Korean - just traded my Toyota Corolla that was a break down machine for a Kia. Love my LG phone and I lived in Korea for 2 years - so I'm quite happy to own a Samsung - but the Philips is using the same panel - so does my Sony I believe.