MAG Innovision 32" LCD TV

[flash75]

Gosh, I just registered and what a crummy "search" feature this site has! Regardless, I looked through many posts and didn't find what I was looking for.

Has anyone purchased or know anything about this LCD TV? It can be found at this link:

http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/prodde...75&catid=23244

It's $1400 cdn and the picture looks incredible from when I was looking at it at Best Buy. The thing is I am typically a brand name person and know that Sharp, Sony, and Samsung make the best LCD's, however they are also $1000 more.

Has anyone heard of MAG? Apparently that have been lcd computer monitor manufacturers for a while. From what I hear, they buy their lcd's from others like sony, panasonic, etc, and then slap them together in asia or mexico and put their own label on them. I also did a bit of research (not much i could find online), but they are made by one of the 3 largest computer manufacturers in the world - Proview?

Any help is appreciated. I sit about 7 feet so i'm thinking a 32" would be great, especially at this price point. Otherwise I will have to spend a bit more and only go with a 26" Samsung.

Furthermore, how do brands like Acer and Viewsonic compare in the LCD TV world? There is a Viewsonic 27" at Costco for $900 cdn, and an Acer 32" at The Bay for $1400. Just trying to get a feel for what other people think about this.

THANKS!

[edtyct]

It seems like these high volume computer monitor manufacturers or parts suppliers are crawling out of the woodwork to get a piece of the consumer video market. These low-profile companies don't necessarily skimp on the features, but their implementation often leaves something to be desired. A lot of technology goes into putting one of these panels together. For instance, this one mentions that it has motion-adaptive video deinterlacing, which on the surface is a good thing, and sophisticated, but how well does it perform? Does it have 3:2 pulldown for film deinterlacing? What color or shade does it use for black? How extensive are the user controls? Does it scale well? At the very least, I'd check out CNET to see if a review is available.

Every once in a while, there's a diamond in the rough among these subterranean companies, but, on the whole, you get what you pay for. Do you want to be the guy who takes the chance? Maybe you do, and maybe it will work out in your favor. But for $1300, you can leave the flawed flat-panel world and go to tried and true direct-view CRT for a 32" screen, no? The one-year warranty on the MAG isn't very long, and who is going to honor it?

Ed

[EdwardGein]

I originally had a 27" regular TV for my bedroom about a year ago & I thought I'd replace it with an widescreen HDTV about the same size. The prices were about right. When I actually went to soem stores looking at them, thank God I didn't order one online sight unseen, they're way to small, much relatively smaller than my 27". I wouldn't get one smaller than a 30" HDTV.

Can someone explain to me again, what the visual difference is between say a 30" CRT widescreen HDTV and an LCD one?

[Pyrrho]

I originally had a 27" regular TV for my bedroom about a year ago & I thought I'd replace it with an widescreen HDTV about the same size. The prices were about right. When I actually went to soem stores looking at them, thank God I didn't order one online sight unseen, they're way to small, much relatively smaller than my 27". I wouldn't get one smaller than a 30" HDTV.

Can someone explain to me again, what the visual difference is between say a 30" CRT widescreen HDTV and an LCD one?

TV screens, regardless of the type of technology used, come in two standard aspect ratios in the U.S. The old one is 4:3, and the new is 16:9. The first number in each represents the width and the second the height. It is good if you can remember your high school geometry, with the Pythagorean theorem of:

a² + b² = c²

where "a" and "b" represent the legs of a right triangle, and "c" represents the hypotenuse (which is the "diagonal" or the line opposite the right angle). With TV sizes, they are given as the diagonal measurement, regardless of which aspect ratio one has. To find out the actual width and height on a particular screen, you will need to know which aspect ratio the TV has, and then plug into the formula for "c" whatever the size is listed as being. Thus, with a 4:3 aspect ratio, one uses the formula:

(4x)² + (3x)² = c²

Solve for x, then 4x will be the width, and 3x will be the height.

For a widescreen TV, one uses the formula:

(16x)² + (9x)² = c²

Solve for x, then 16x will be the width and 9x the height.

To give an example, a 27" TV that is 4

(4x)² + (3x)² = 27²

16x² + 9x² = 729

25x² = 729

(Notice that on the left of the equation, so far, nothing about the TV size has entered the calculation, so one can use 25x² = c² for 4:3 TVs.)

x² = 29.16

x = 5.4

Thus, a 27" TV will be 21.6" wide and 16.2" tall.


An example with a widescreen, say a 32" that is 16

(16x)² + (9x)² = 32²

256x² + 81x² = 1024

337x² = 1024

(Notice that on the left of the equation, so far, nothing about the TV size has entered the calculation, so one can use 337x² = c² for 16:9 TVs.)

x² = 3.04 (this is rounded)

x = 1.74 (again, this is rounded)

So the 32" widescreen TV is approximately 27.84" wide and 15.66" tall. Notice a 32" widescreen TV is slightly smaller vertically than a 27" 4:3 TV, so if one is using a 27" 4:3 TV now, and is switching to a widescreen TV, one must get a widescreen TV that is larger than 32" in order to not have ordinary (NTSC) TV broadcasts any smaller than that to which one is accustomed. Obviously, the 32" 16:9 TV will show a much larger widescreen image than a 27" 4:3 TV.

[flash75]

Thanks for the quick reply! The reason why I want to abandon "tried and true" crt world is simply because I think the lcd picture is much nicer. There is much less flicker and i don't even want to start with geometry issues. Simply lcd has much superior geometry out of box, a nice brighter more detailed picture, and the size/weight thing too.

I think i might try my chance with the MAG. The picture did look amazing, even more so than others in the store (maybe had a better signal) and for the price, i can always return it within the month. I'll let you know!

[Pyrrho]

Thanks for the quick reply! The reason why I want to abandon "tried and true" crt world is simply because I think the lcd picture is much nicer. There is much less flicker and i don't even want to start with geometry issues. Simply lcd has much superior geometry out of box, a nice brighter more detailed picture, and the size/weight thing too.

I think i might try my chance with the MAG. The picture did look amazing, even more so than others in the store (maybe had a better signal) and for the price, i can always return it within the month. I'll let you know!

When buying an LCD TV, pay careful attention to large areas of black on the screen, and to fast motion. Those are traditionally the weak spots in low quality LCD TVs. (You don't need to sell me on LCD; I use an LCD monitor for my computer, and I will never go back to a CRT.)

[edtyct]

More power to ya. But the clarity/detail element would only be true subjectively with a the panel's pixel complement completely filled without scaling. Your're dead right about the brightness and geometery, and an LCD is not simply progressive but simultaneous. But a lot more is happening under the hood, and I'll be interested to read your impressions. A good test disk like DVE or AVIA would help get a good reading on it.

Ed

[EdwardGein]

I got my Samsung widescreen CRT 30" HDTV on sale for $700 about a year ago for my bedroom and the picture is very good & I haven't had any problems with it. If I didn't have this and knew I could get a 30 inch HD LCD for under $1000 I would, I just feel ridiculous paying lthat much as my Mitsubishi 48" widescreen HD rear projector was just $1600 including shipping & installation and is fantastic.

[flash75]

ok, so I went back to Best Buy and stared at the MAG and Insignia for a long time. Actually there were 2 Insignias and also a Panasonic near by. The MAG had the best blacks (but maybe the Insignias were set too bright). Whenever there was a black background the MAG was the only one that didn't leak any light. One of the Insignias was really bad for that. The Panasonic looked horrific it was too bright (set bad i guess). There was only one Insignia that was comparable to the MAG but the mag was still better and $300 cheaper. I did some more research. It's made by a company called ProView.

http://www.proview-usa.com/lcd2.html

This looks like it might be a diamond in the rough. I'll be picking it up tomorrow and hooking it up to some custom components on an HK DVD 22 and will let you know.

[flash75]

ok thanks to great refund policies and credit cards I purchased (and returned) 3 LCD TV's, so here are the brief reviews:

1. MAG Innovisions (Proview) RX326 32" purchased from Best Buy

This TV is actually pretty good for the $1400 cdn. The blacks are very decent and the picture colours are awesome. This would be a keeper if it wasn't for 2 things. One, is that the vertical overscan sucked and couldn't be adjusted. This was noticeable on 16:9 DVD's where there was a 1cm black bar only on the bottom. So obviously a service menu tweak was required. I couldn't get tech support or cust. service as the 1-877 number only works in the US. The other thing that bothered me but might be normal on bigger tv's was grainy images on some dvd's. Backgrounds seemed grainy and especially my seinfeld dvd's! Terrible. I was using a brand new HK 22 dvd player progressive scan with high quality component cables. I also noticed grain on a regular interlaced tv so i'm guessing it's the dvd's and this is normal?

2. Daytek 32" purchased from Coscto $1400 cdn. This TV really SUCKED. Although it didn't suffer the same vertical overscan problem as the MAG, the picture was VERY dark and dull. I couldn't stand looking at it for more than a few minutes.

3. Viewsonic 27" purchased from Costco $900 cdn. This TV is actually not bad for the size and price. My only gripes were that it was too small for my viewing distance of 7-7.5 feet AND the blacks sucked. There was always too much light coming through especially when viewing in a dark room.

Overall, I think I would have kept the MAG if it wasn't for the overscan issue. I'm going to have to research how grainy dvd's should be because I can't see it being my new HK dvd and i used a monster clean power centre. Seinfeld was terrible! I have found one more at the same price point and that is ACER, however i'm feeling it will have some problems and it might be worth spending an extra $1000 and going with Sharp or Samsung. Otherwise maybe back to a sony 30" tube?