Vizio VF550M

[pixelthis]

OKAY DOKEY.
Here is the linky for the Blu edition.
THEY HAVE ONE of each, the blu version is ten bucks more.
Don't know iffen its any different.


http://www.dvdinternational.com/pd-d...cs-blu-ray.cfm

[pixelthis]

Okay, its by Joe Kane...good enough for me.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Maybe thats what happened to me but I am pleased with my set. I don't like T's approach of just dismissing what I saw without reasons and only once we started mincing words did he indicate the parlour trick. Too late at that point. I still find him arrogant and I do not like the way he's treated others in this thread. T is right about plasma over LCD but he's got this holier than thow attitude and for whatever reason he thinks he's allowed to degrade people here that go against his opinion. He is a pompous ass and arrogant to boot and everytime he's gonna flame someone now, I'm going to be on him like glue.

My reasons even before the parlour trick were well stated. Because you have allowed you emotions to interupt your reading skills, I guess you have missed them. The television was essentially dissed by the reviewers in the article, four hated it. Three reviewers did not bother to comment on the set. The set finished second amoungst the SECOND tier of televisions in resolution. While the television had excellent color tracking (pretty easy for even a cheap television) its color intensity was not even close to accurate or it would not have been best described as "eye candy". This television motion resolution at 330 lines is amoungst the lowest in the industry, and the only television it was able to beat was a poor performing Toshiba set. There is nothing to crow about here, unless you are trying to justify a poor choice, or your expection are in line with reality. This was all stated before I even mentioned the palour trick. Get the shyt out of your eyes and read the post, think, and then respond.

As far as your opinion of me, don't care. And we will see just how good your glue sticks, but I have a feeling based on what you have presented here, that it is a VERY weak version of Elmers kids glue.

[bobsticks]

Can't we all just get along...lol...?

[pixelthis]

Can't we all just get along...lol...?

Sure, when everybody agrees with me

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Sure, when everybody agrees with me

Not a snowballs chance in hell!

[3db]

My reasons even before the parlour trick were well stated. Because you have allowed you emotions to interupt your reading skills, I guess you have missed them. The television was essentially dissed by the reviewers in the article, four hated it. Three reviewers did not bother to comment on the set. The set finished second amoungst the SECOND tier of televisions in resolution. While the television had excellent color tracking (pretty easy for even a cheap television) its color intensity was not even close to accurate or it would not have been best described as "eye candy". This television motion resolution at 330 lines is amoungst the lowest in the industry, and the only television it was able to beat was a poor performing Toshiba set. There is nothing to crow about here, unless you are trying to justify a poor choice, or your expection are in line with reality. This was all stated before I even mentioned the palour trick. Get the shyt out of your eyes and read the post, think, and then respond.

As far as your opinion of me, don't care. And we will see just how good your glue sticks, but I have a feeling based on what you have presented here, that it is a VERY weak version of Elmers kids glue.

What I got out of that read is that the 2nd tier set were so close in scoring that on another day, it could have been a different outcome and out of that 2nd tier, nobody was really strong. Thats how far back they placed behind the Sony and the Panny. I also don't like being told I was dreaming when saw what I saw. Having the parlour tricks doesn't take away the reality of what I saw. Its an illusion yes and maybe a little more TACT on your part could have avoided all of this ****e by mentioning that instead of going the personal route and saying I was dreaming and there is no way the Vizio could beat.....blah blah blah.

Part of flames on this site and I'm not pointing at you alone is that people come on here and without tact or respect throw out their **** without even thinking of how it could be interpreted. Maybe in a conversation, it would not come across like this. but reading info in a forum like this is all about interpreratattion. More thought should be put down before blowing off a few rounds just to see one talk.

[GMichael]

OKAY DOKEY.
Here is the linky for the Blu edition.
THEY HAVE ONE of each, the blu version is ten bucks more.
Don't know iffen its any different.


http://www.dvdinternational.com/pd-d...cs-blu-ray.cfm

I'm thinking that I might just go with the DVD. Not to save money though. The BR one is pretty cheap on Amazon, but I have 3 displays in my house and only 1 PS3. I don't feel like bringing it room to room to do all three.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

What I got out of that read is that the 2nd tier set were so close in scoring that on another day, it could have been a different outcome and out of that 2nd tier, nobody was really strong.

Apparently what you got out of this, and what it actually said are two different things. What is more telling is that only one person really commented on the set, another said it was not a good value, and the other three did not comment at all. This is from the individual comments. The editorial part only gave props to two areas, second in resolution amoungst the second tier sets, and an accurate color decoder. We are talking the second tier!

Thats how far back they placed behind the Sony and the Panny. I also don't like being told I was dreaming when saw what I saw.

You were dreaming. When you say that a Vizio television "tested" better ( and that is what you said) than a Sony and a Samsung (two companies that have advanced LCD technology further than anyone else throughout their entire product line) you are either dreaming, or blind as a bat. Maybe this is just a poor choice of words, or maybe you just don't know what picture quality is. You are not alone, a lot of folks don't.

Having the parlour tricks doesn't take away the reality of what I saw. Its an illusion yes and maybe a little more TACT on your part could have avoided all of this ****e by mentioning that instead of going the personal route and saying I was dreaming and there is no way the Vizio could beat.....blah blah blah.

Your reality was directly influenced by the palour trick, and that was by design. It is not really helpful for you to dictate how someone is supposed to respond. You are not God, and everyone has the own way of communicating. Since you started down this road, if you had just checked the Vizio more carefully before comming to a public forum with your misguided observations, this mess could have been avoided. Actually, I was more interested in your comments, that is what I attacked. You attacked me personally with all of this arrogant and pompous crap, stuff that neither concerns or moves me.

Part of flames on this site and I'm not pointing at you alone is that people come on here and without tact or respect throw out their **** without even thinking of how it could be interpreted.

Part of why people get flamed here is because they make uneducated and outrageous claims that are not supported by science or good common sense. If you want a country club environment so you can expouse your unscientific claims, create one. This place ain't it, and never has been.

Maybe in a conversation, it would not come across like this. but reading info in a forum like this is all about interpreratattion. More thought should be put down before blowing off a few rounds just to see one talk.

Once again, before you make outrageous claims, pehaps a little more investigation on your behalf is in order. When you made your claim, it looked to me like you were just trying to justify your purchase, and nothing more.

Just to make my point. My best friend and I went to two Costco's over the weekend. One in Santa Barbara, the other in Richmond. When we walked into the store, I told my friend to take a good look at ALL of the televisions, and tell me what he observed. In less than a minute he said all of the Vizio televisions looked brighter than the other models. Bingo!

[3db]

You were dreaming. When you say that a Vizio television "tested" better ( and that is what you said) than a Sony and a Samsung (two companies that have advanced LCD technology further than anyone else throughout their entire product line) you are either dreaming, or blind as a bat. Maybe this is just a poor choice of words, or maybe you just don't know what picture quality is. You are not alone, a lot of folks don't. !

I didn't say tested better..I said beat out the other displays and that was what I saw at Costco.. I was simply relaying what I saw..

Your reality was directly influenced by the palour trick, and that was by design. It is not really helpful for you to dictate how someone is supposed to respond. You are not God, and everyone has the own way of communicating. Since you started down this road, if you had just checked the Vizio more carefully before comming to a public forum with your misguided observations, this mess could have been avoided. Actually, I was more interested in your comments, that is what I attacked. You attacked me personally with all of this arrogant and pompous crap, stuff that neither concerns or moves me. !

I felt attacked/dismissed when you told me I was dreaming. hence the reason for the attack.. The thing is I was relaying what I saw at Costco from my personal experience. And how do you check the displays more carefully that are on display at a store? Its not like the public are given access to the remotes and even then, the sets are most likely not calibrated. Does one not purchase a display based on what they see? I was careful to look for detail and motion blurr, made sure skin tones looked natural etc.. not what picture shone the brightest.

Once again, before you make outrageous claims, pehaps a little more investigation on your behalf is in order. When you made your claim, it looked to me like you were just trying to justify your purchase, and nothing more. !

Once again, you make the mistake of interpreting incorrectly, an observation that I made while viewing displays and thinking that I had said tested. It was an observation, nothing more nothing less. Stop reading more into whats said or not said for that matter.

Just to make my point. My best friend and I went to two Costco's over the weekend. One in Santa Barbara, the other in Richmond. When we walked into the store, I told my friend to take a good look at ALL of the televisions, and tell me what he observed. In less than a minute he said all of the Vizio televisions looked brighter than the other models. Bingo!

Its a possible point... However have you considered that the displays are thrown onto the shelf without calibration? I've read on another site where Vizio was reffered to as light canons which I take to mean that they are caplable of very bright display. Could it be a possibility that the Vizio out of the box is just brighter than teh other LCD out of their box and without adjusting the levels, the Vizios will always show brighter?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I didn't say tested better..I said beat out the other displays and that was what I saw at Costco.. I was simply relaying what I saw..

It was more like bright out than beat out. This implies some sort of competition, a competition where the Vizio was given 40 yard head start in a 50 yard dash.

I felt attacked/dismissed when you told me I was dreaming. hence the reason for the attack.. The thing is I was relaying what I saw at Costco from my personal experience. And how do you check the displays more carefully that are on display at a store? Its not like the public are given access to the remotes and even then, the sets are most likely not calibrated. Does one not purchase a display based on what they see? I was careful to look for detail and motion blurr, made sure skin tones looked natural etc.. not what picture shone the brightest.

I was not interested in attacking you, but your words are a different story. How do you check displays in a store? You ask the salesman why is xx television brighter than the others. Then ask him if you can see the settings. This is how I found out about the practice in Costco and Walmart, by asking instead of assuming. Brightness affects your ability to dectect details and spot motion blur, and can hide issues with skin tones. Turn it up and you can hide a multitude of sins. You may not have been looking at brightness, but it was sure looking at you.

Once again, you make the mistake of interpreting incorrectly, an observation that I made while viewing displays and thinking that I had said tested. It was an observation, nothing more nothing less. Stop reading more into whats said or not said for that matter.

No I did not make a mistake of interpreting anything incorrectly. It does not make a difference whether it was tested or observed, with all things being equal a basic observation would not have ANY Vizio outperforming a Sony or Samsung unless things were not equal. Since I already know they are not equal, there is no way your observation was not influenced by other things, such as the brightness level. Based on the testing I have seen on Vizio panels over the years, there is no way that your casual observation could have been even close to correct. That is unless the practice of turning up the brightness was done, and since I know for a fact it is, then it did not matter if you said test or observation the conclusion would have been the same.

Its a possible point... However have you considered that the displays are thrown onto the shelf without calibration?

I already stated this point, so I don't know why you are asking this. Everyday I go to work I look at LCD's and Plasma's that are correctly calibrated, so I know by eye when things are not right, and when they are. When I go to Costco, I know their panels are not calibrated because they do not look right to my eye.

I've read on another site where Vizio was reffered to as light canons which I take to mean that they are caplable of very bright display. Could it be a possibility that the Vizio out of the box is just brighter than teh other LCD out of their box and without adjusting the levels, the Vizios will always show brighter?

That could be a possibility if I didn't actually check the settings myself. Unlike yourself, I ask to look at the settings. In every case I checked the settings on the Vizio's were set MUCH higher than the other panels. Light cannons have the ability to hide their weaknesses, which is why I have asked the sales guys at Costco to turn the panel settings down, so I can see how it compares with the rest on equal footing. Ask and you shall receive, seek and you will find. Don't ask and don't seek, and you get easily fooled as you have now found out.

[3db]

It was more like bright out than beat out. This implies some sort of competition, a competition where the Vizio was given 40 yard head start in a 50 yard dash.



I was not interested in attacking you, but your words are a different story. ....

WTF?? Stop distorting the truth. Its not my fault you assume what I mean and jump right on in the assumption without seeking clarification. And then once clarified you turn around and call me a liar?? Ever get out of your bubble??

That could be a possibility if I didn't actually check the settings myself. Unlike yourself, I ask to look at the settings. In every case I checked the settings on the Vizio's were set MUCH higher than the other panels. Light cannons have the ability to hide their weaknesses, which is why I have asked the sales guys at Costco to turn the panel settings down, so I can see how it compares with the rest on equal footing. Ask and you shall receive, seek and you will find. Don't ask and don't seek, and you get easily fooled as you have now found out.

On hindsight I should have doen all that you mentioned and I'll save it for the next time.The brightness level of my Vizio is I turned down alot and I'm very happy with its performance.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

WTF?? Stop distorting the truth. Its not my fault you assume what I mean and jump right on in the assumption without seeking clarification. And then once clarified you turn around and call me a liar?? Ever get out of your bubble??

If I had to seek clarification, then your comments were not clear. Perhaps you should think about what you are going to say before you hit the submit button. That way nobody has to make any assumptions, or ask for any clarity.

Secondly when somebody says beat out, I would not associate that to an observation but a competition. Perhaps a different choice of words would have served you better in this case. It might also help if you take responsibility for what you say, and how you say it.

I do not believe I called anyone a liar, just ignorant. How you can get liar out of ignorance is beyond me, but I guess some people have enough string to tie them together.

I am not in a bubble, I am in my house. There is a difference just in case you did not know.

On hindsight I should have doen all that you mentioned and I'll save it for the next time.The brightness level of my Vizio is I turned down alot and I'm very happy with its performance.

Had you have just said this rather than going through all of the emotion machinations, this thread would not have turned this ugly. It might be good to save this as well.

[3db]

If I had to seek clarification, then your comments were not clear. Perhaps you should think about what you are going to say before you hit the submit button. That way nobody has to make any assumptions, or ask for any clarity.

Secondly when somebody says beat out, I would not associate that to an observation but a competition. Perhaps a different choice of words would have served you better in this case. It might also help if you take responsibility for what you say, and how you say it.

I do not believe I called anyone a liar, just ignorant. How you can get liar out of ignorance is beyond me, but I guess some people have enough string to tie them together.

I am not in a bubble, I am in my house. There is a difference just in case you did not know.

Had you have just said this rather than going through all of the emotion machinations, this thread would not have turned this ugly. It might be good to save this as well.

Here is the reason why I find you so pompous and its shining through in spades right now with your last post. You will never ever admit to doing anthing wrong. You've implied that I've lied in this thread;

In post 09-18-2009, 05:35 PM "you need to learn to tell the truth" ????

You purposely twist your words in such an abigious manner.. how you interpret things doesn't make something not true. Look before you leap buddy. Th one thing I've learned from all of this is that you are a cowboy ready to shoot off a few rounds. Furthermore you are highly under quailfied to tell me how I should be clarifying myself. You are the only one out of 4 forums that I attend regualry that has given me such grief. Let those statistics sit in that thick cranium of yours for awhile and mull it over. Your not always right like you like to believe. I'm thru now. LIke a child, you will no doubt post back and cleanse yourself of all wrong doing. You may have last word if you like but this is my last post on this thread.

To the OP.. I aplogize for this going down an ugly path.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Here is the reason why I find you so pompous and its shining through in spades right now with your last post. You will never ever admit to doing anthing wrong. You've implied that I've lied in this thread;

In post 09-18-2009, 05:35 PM "you need to learn to tell the truth" ????

You purposely twist your words in such an abigious manner.. how you interpret things doesn't make something not true. Look before you leap buddy. Th one thing I've learned from all of this is that you are a cowboy ready to shoot off a few rounds. Furthermore you are highly under quailfied to tell me how I should be clarifying myself. You are the only one out of 4 forums that I attend regualry that has given me such grief. Let those statistics sit in that thick cranium of yours for awhile and mull it over. Your not always right like you like to believe. I'm thru now. LIke a child, you will no doubt post back and cleanse yourself of all wrong doing. You may have last word if you like but this is my last post on this thread.

Don't give me that implication crap, either I said it, or I didn't. If I did something wrong, I would have admitted it. Since it was you that was not clear in making your point, I will not take responsibility for that, you should. That fact that you are not shows that you have not grown to the point of personal responsibility, and you get what you get.

I do not care if you think I am pompous or whatever, the means nothing to me.

That whole last paragraph was a complete waste of time. Keep this in mind, It wasn't I that went out and got fooled by the oldest trick in the A/V book. Sometimes ignorance is bliss, other times it leads to a complete miss. You missed knucklehead, so don't cry about it, live with it.

To the OP.. I aplogize for this going down an ugly path.

Don't be sorry for being who you are.