|
Attention Panasonic VT30/GT30/ST30 owners, I got my A-board replaced. The fluctuating brightness problem is now fixed. Anybody in this thread that orders a set and it was built before August should just call Panasonic and get it replaced. The process was easy and painless.
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2011 23:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jan 16, 2026 05:57 |
|
|
I just bought a 42" Haier for my parents during Black Friday ($299) and I seem to have some weird quality issues when using it with the Tivo or even their DVD player. Both are connected via composite or S-Video -- I didn't have an HDMI cord with me for the Tivo, but that's going to be my next move. They have basic cable. With OTA (HD), the picture quality is perfect. However, when I try out their DVD player (composite, no upscaling) or their Tivo (S-Video), there seems to be a lot of "static" in the picture. I have no idea why it's happening. Maybe I'm not used to how 480i sources look with HDTVs? The picture was very fuzzy. It's as if they are watching an old non-digital OTA source where the signal wasn't perfect. Their CRT was showing the pictures fine using the same sources, so I don't think it's a cable issue. I'm going to be bringing over an HDMI cord with me to test the Tivo, but could it be the composite inputs on the TV that are bad, or is that just how 480i is on this size TV?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2011 07:17
|
|
|
SD content typically looks like garbage on an HD display. When I got my first HDTV, I thought there was something wrong with it too. But that's just how it is. Use the best cables you can. Composite is terrible and so is s-video, upgrade those to component/HDMI and you should see an improvement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2011 07:30
|
|
|
corb01772 posted:SD content typically looks like garbage on an HD display. When I got my first HDTV, I thought there was something wrong with it too. But that's just how it is. Use the best cables you can. Composite is terrible and so is s-video, upgrade those to component/HDMI and you should see an improvement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
I ran a search but I didn't find anything on the topic: How good are "Smart TV"s at this point? My buddy has a Vizio Internet TV (or whatever), and while it's pretty cool that you can access Netflix and Hulu+ (and Facebook, but seriously, why?), it is pretty slow in doing either of these things and ultimately seems like a very crude implementation of the concept. What I am more interested in than anything is the ability to program it at a certain time and have it automatically change channels to a specific station. Is this possible with any Smart TV on the market?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 07:02
|
|
|
Rrail posted:I ran a search but I didn't find anything on the topic: The "speed" of the internet apps on my Vizio seems to be directly linked to it's connection. I was just relying on wifi, but actually running cat5 to it sped things up tremendously. As to your question, I've not seen that feature implemented in any TV I've owned; that's usually a scheduling task that your content provider has built-in. For instance, I have Cox cable and using their interace, I can schedule shows to record, change channels, or even just give me a pop-up reminder at the start of the program.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 12:16
|
|
|
C2C - 2.0 posted:The "speed" of the internet apps on my Vizio seems to be directly linked to it's connection. I was just relying on wifi, but actually running cat5 to it sped things up tremendously. Oh for real? I thought N was faster than ethernet for file transfers and the like. C2C - 2.0 posted:As to your question, I've not seen that feature implemented in any TV I've owned; that's usually a scheduling task that your content provider has built-in. For instance, I have Cox cable and using their interace, I can schedule shows to record, change channels, or even just give me a pop-up reminder at the start of the program. That is too bad. It seems like a feature a lot of people would enjoy. I would love to have my lights turn on and then 5-10 seconds later have my TV turn on and switch to CNN/BBC News while slowly increasing the volume. That would be a nice way to wake up. I'm a big fan of automating as much of my life as possible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 18:28
|
|
|
Rrail posted:Oh for real? I thought N was faster than ethernet for file transfers and the like. Faster than 10mbit ethernet: yes. Faster than 1gbit ethernet: no. Also depends on signal quality at the location of your wireless device...poorer quality signal can make it slower than even 10mbit ethernet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2011 18:47
|
|
|
I just got a 7000 Samsung series, and whenever I start watching a 3D movie/play a 3D video game the actual TV starts flickering on and off. It's only on certain movies/games though. Any idea of what could be causing this?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 02:20
|
|
|
What is the likelihood that Samsung will add Amazon Instant Video to their 2011 models?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 03:36
|
|
|
I was hunting down some deals and was all for buying a Sharp I found for $999. After digging into the information on the current state of HDTVs and I ended up tossing down $1750 for a Sony KDL55HX820 50" LED 1080p LCD, 3D, SmartTV, with Wi-Fi. Seems to be a sick TV and I am hoping it is!
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 03:53
|
|
|
If some of you guys can spare a moment and look at a couple of pictures ... http://imgur.com/a/XfulA my TV is hosed, isn't it? As in, "this is not easily or cheaply repairable"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 13:05
|
|
|
So I sat watching a buddy's HDTV a couple days ago. I am feeling that I may be watching a lot of the non-HD channels when I want to view an older movie. I couldn't get over just how polished the HD versions looked. By polished, I don't mean in a good way. Makeup was too obvious, lighting looked hella-unnatural. Groundhog Day looked like a soap opera. It may have been my brain playing tricks on me, but even the ACTING seemed more flawed when viewed in HD. Something else that really got to me: shaky cam in HD. I would like to reach through time and space and literally strangle both the cameramen as well as those who are teaching film students these "techniques". Jittery zoom in/out, simulated focus hunting with narrow depth of field, shaky camera bullshit. Do I really want to feel like I am viewing every scene through someone recording it via a handheld camera phone?  I am thinking that Hollywood is going to get a lot better at using tripods and working toward convincing lighting. Looks like they cannot get away with just making everything matte post-production. Kind of scared that the jump to HD is going to reveal too many flaws. No way in hell am I going to watch any of my old favorite westerns in HD. No way in hell... Fog Tripper fucked around with this message at 14:55 on Dec 6, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 14:52
|
|
|
Sounds like your buddy's TV had the 120Hz or 240HZ feature turned on, probably called something like TruMotion. Turning it off eliminates that soap opera effect. It's good for eliminating blur during fast motion at live events (e.g. sports) and eliminating judder during Blu-Ray playback.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 15:11
|
|
|
Lovie Unsmith posted:Sounds like your buddy's TV had the 120Hz or 240HZ feature turned on, probably called something like TruMotion. Turning it off eliminates that soap opera effect. It's good for eliminating blur during fast motion at live events (e.g. sports) and eliminating judder during Blu-Ray playback. It's actually good for neither of these things. It makes 100% of all content look like 100% pure poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2011 22:11
|
|
|
WithoutTheFezOn posted:If some of you guys can spare a moment and look at a couple of pictures ... Did you throw something at the screen?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2011 06:00
|
|
|
I purchased an 18.5 inch ACL HD 720p TV from FLUID, at the Source. It was cheap and I wasn't expecting any miracles, as I was simply upgrading from a recently-deceased Tube TV from the mid-90s, and I only really used it for playing games. Unfortunately something appears to be horribly wrong, as the image is noticeably worse than my old TV ever was. The colors appear hyper-saturated and contrasted and seem to weirdly bleed into each other, like a poorly compressed jpeg or gif, or a screenshot of a sprite-based game that has hosed up photoshop filters over it. It's incredibly distracting and messes with the depth of the image as well as generally looking blurry and garish. No amount of fiddling with the surprisingly limited image options fixed this, and now I'm wondering if I just got a piece of poo poo TV. There also occasionally appears to be artifacts in the picture. I can't seem to find informed opinions one way or the other on Fluid by googling, so do any of you know if I bought the equivalent of a Magnetbox TV? I'm loving sick of accidentally buying the worst possible item in store.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2011 08:25
|
|
|
Fatal posted:Did you throw something at the screen?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2011 11:21
|
|
|
I'm currently thinking about getting a new TV as my current one isn't HD, but since I didn't really follow what happened in this area the last years, I have no idea what model would be the best for me. I know I don't want a screen smaller than the one I got right now, so the size should be 42" or slightly above. I definitely don't want any 3D or "internet connected" thing since I have a dedicated computer hooked up to the TV. I have a Wii with component cable, and I'll need several HDMI inputs to connect PC/TV/eventual new stuff I might buy in the future. I don't know if I'd actually benefit from a TV with a refresh rate > 100Hz but I guess I need a decent response time, I use it mostly for gaming with the occasional movie/tv show. I'd prefer if it was a LCD with LED lighting to reduce the power consumption, but not if it's significantly more expensive or have a worse picture quality. I stumbled upon the Samsung UE46D5000 which looks pretty much what I need in my price range, maybe the more tech-savy goons could tell if there is something bad in the specs or if another company makes better?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2011 11:50
|
|
|
Does plasma still have its place in HDTVs? I own a ~4 year old Panasonic plasma and I'm thinking about buying this Samsung PN43D450 for the bedroom. It would see fairly light use (2 hours/day), almost always in very dim or dark light. The dimensions have it looking pretty svelte. Is there any reason to avoid plasma in favor of LCD/LED? I'd consider a 10 year service life to be adequate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2011 17:28
|
|
|
Any reason not to get this: VIZIO M421NV 42-Inch 1080p 120 Hz Edge Lit Razor LED LCD HDTV I don't need internet apps or anything like that and the reviews seem pretty good, although there are only 13 of them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2011 18:04
|
|
|
I've looked at a lot of plasmas and the quality is excellent. The only gripe people really had was burn-in, but that's not even an issue anymore really. Lighting reflections would annoy some people, but it sounds like you'll be ok with that considering the dark room. Even then, I've seen some really nice plasmas that have a glossy screen, but reflect as little light as an LCD/LED. I would go with a plasma. You won't get issues with gaming lag, the images will have stronger contrast, and not to mention you'll probably pay much less since consumers are all about new (not always better) technology and avoiding plasmas to get an LED TV.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2011 18:09
|
|
|
Bank posted:I've looked at a lot of plasmas and the quality is excellent. The only gripe people really had was burn-in, but that's not even an issue anymore really. Lighting reflections would annoy some people, but it sounds like you'll be ok with that considering the dark room. Even then, I've seen some really nice plasmas that have a glossy screen, but reflect as little light as an LCD/LED.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2011 18:33
|
|
|
We're looking at getting the 47" LG 47LK520 for $750, the 55" for $1,000, and this 55" Philips for $900: http://www.usa.philips.com/c/televisions/5000-series-140cm-55-inch-class-full-hd-1080p-digital-tv-55pfl5706_f7/prd/en/ My understanding is that the LK520 is the best 120Hz LCD in its price range, but the Philips being a 55" 120Hz for $900 is mighty tempting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2011 22:32
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:Any reason not to get this: VIZIO M421NV 42-Inch 1080p 120 Hz Edge Lit Razor LED LCD HDTV Also looking at this, my parents want to upgrade their 20 year old set and I told them I'd look into it. From what I can find this looks like the best size/quality for the price. Although, I couldn't really find it on other sites to compare.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2011 01:30
|
|
|
I'm interested in the following TV: http://tinyurl.com/7xz6tos I don't know a whole lot about HDTVs, and I haven't owned a TV in years. My price range is 750-1100. I play video games and watch movies. Could I make a better choice?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2011 02:01
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:Any reason not to get this: VIZIO M421NV 42-Inch 1080p 120 Hz Edge Lit Razor LED LCD HDTV I've owned the M470NV (has apps) since about February, and it is awesome.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2011 02:37
|
|
|
Kingtheninja posted:Also looking at this, my parents want to upgrade their 20 year old set and I told them I'd look into it. From what I can find this looks like the best size/quality for the price. Although, I couldn't really find it on other sites to compare. poo poo, that TV was under $600 earlier today. Now it's $699. It might still be a good deal though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2011 04:43
|
|
|
Goldwarf posted:It's actually good for neither of these things. It makes 100% of all content look like 100% pure poo poo. I set up the system yesterday. Turns out this is precisely what was making all look like rear end. Well, that and the input was set at like 420p. Once I tried the various ways to calibrate, it looks mighty fine. I have to say that it is really dramatic and jarring to be watching an HD program, then have non HD commercials and such come on. Was flipping through the HD channels trying to see how various stations look on it. "HDNET" was screening "The Jerk" in HD. Looked like total rear end. The grain looked like watercolors. Other stations looked great in HD. Put on "Psych" in HD. Looked excellent. Turned on the 3D emulation for it and donned my glasses (the clip-ons). Ouchies. At the very least I won't be doing that again anytime soon. Added nothing to my viewing experience. Once the HT system gets here I'll be sending in for the free Avatar 3D Blueray. Really don't care for the movie plot, but will be interesting to see how well the 3D comes across on the LG. edit: Family guy in HD was very clear, but sometimes the motion was odd looking. Also, when characters were speaking there was sometimes parts of the image that moved during the sound (if that makes sense?) Fog Tripper fucked around with this message at 15:57 on Dec 8, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2011 15:51
|
|
|
TheAngryDrunk posted:poo poo, that TV was under $600 earlier today. Now it's $699. It might still be a good deal though. Dammit, well I'm going to keep looking then. Might be able to find something else.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2011 01:08
|
|
|
GroovinPickle posted:I own a ~4 year old Panasonic plasma and I'm thinking about buying this Samsung PN43D450 for the bedroom. It would see fairly light use (2 hours/day), almost always in very dim or dark light. The dimensions have it looking pretty svelte. Is there any reason to avoid plasma in favor of LCD/LED? I'd consider a 10 year service life to be adequate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2011 14:35
|
|
|
Cwapface posted:Does anybody know the difference between the PN##D### line of Samsung plasmas and the PS##D###? Is one a better/worse version than the other. I'm considering buying a PS51D550, which seems like a steal at AU$900.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2011 16:27
|
|
|
My UN46D6400 just showed up yesterday. I chose the 6400 because it was well-reviewed and the first Samsung in the line that had the ultra-thin bezel. It was $100 more than the 6300, but also had 3D, so I felt I might as well pay the premium just for the futureproof-ness along with attractiveness. I am currently running some settings I found on AVS and it looks pretty drat good. Of course some flashlighting on the edges and also some banding if I really focus on it, but it's quite a pretty picture. I played Se7en and Incredibles on it in 1080p last night and was blown away by the details and the detailed blacks (especially on a film like Se7en). For $1100 I'm more than happy so far and further tweaking will only make it better, I think. Just wanted to report in for anyone looking for a set in that size and price range.
|
|
#
?
Dec 9, 2011 18:28
|
|
|
I just picked up the LG 55LW5600 from Fry's to take advantage of the $1099 sale. Lots of positive reviews here and elsewhere. Great! Except... Right off the bat I am noticing audio sync issues - specifically, audio coming from my surround speakers noticeably prior to the corresponding video onscreen. I've got a Motorola HD cable box (Comcast) and an Xbox 360 both hooked up via HDMI to a Sony HT-SS360 surround receiver, which is then connected via HDMI to the TV. As far as I can tell from the manuals, AV sync/delay can't be adjusted with HDMI sources, so I'm at a loss here. I've seen posts regarding gaming input lag, but this affects everyday TV watching. Has anyone else experienced this issue with this set or have any ideas about what to try next? I'd hate to have to return it and get hit with the 15% restocking fee, but the sync issue is a deal-breaker.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2011 03:13
|
|
|
Trickstand posted:I just picked up the LG 55LW5600 from Fry's to take advantage of the $1099 sale. Lots of positive reviews here and elsewhere. Great! Except... Your receiver should have a audio delay setting you can try that. The set for sure has lag with local dimming on and other fancy features. Try turning off smooth vision or whatever they call the 120hz setting. It makes stuff look fake anyways. It should cut the lag. I recall there being some sort of audio sync setting in the LG's menu too, but that is for when you have optical connected to a receiver I think. Also here is a bonus tip for all LG xxLW5600/6500 owners that want no lag. First step is to turn on gaming display mode. This is obvious and for most will make games perfectly playable. Some people that are really anal will still notice a bit of lag. To get rid of it, change the input you are using label to "PC" for some reason this turns off almost all post processing done by the set. The TV will then have virtually no lag. The picture will look like rear end when you do this though. You cant have lag free gaming and have local dimming on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2011 03:46
|
|
|
As far as I can tell, the TV only allows adjustments for audio delay, which doesn't help considering audio is not being handled by the TV and audio is already ahead of the video. Like you said, I think that applies only when you are routing audio thru the TV. I broke out the receiver manual and under AV Sync, it says: Sony HT-SS360 manual posted:A/V SYNC (Synchronizes audio with video output) I tried Game mode still running through the receiver and it didn't help. I've tried disabling all the other settings like TruMotion, local dimming, energy save, etc. Didn't help either (and even if they did what's the point of the fancy TV with none of the fancy features). I did, however, confirm that connecting the devices directly to the TV seems to do the trick (no lag when listening through the internal TV speaker), including using the normal video settings on the TV. So I guess now I need to see about using the TV to route audio to the receiver? Can I do this (optical output) and still get 5.1 audio? I seem to remember seeing comments elsewhere that the optical out only carries a stereo signal or is mated only to the COAX input or something like that. Trickstand fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Dec 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2011 04:23
|
|
|
Trickstand posted:
Also the optical out from the tv is 2 channel only. I think almost all tvs only do only 2 channel PCM. EDIT: It looks like it has 1.4. I bet the cable box is not hdmi 1.3. I assume blurays and games are in sync as expected? Capnbigboobies fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Dec 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2011 04:46
|
|
|
I was afraid of that.  I read somewhere else that the optical out will pass audio in the format it's received, even from HDMI sources. But knowing what a merciless bitch HDCP is that didn't sound right to me. I guess I'm confused about how most people set up their surround sound systems. I went the receiver-is-the-hub route specifically because my last HDTV (Vizio 42") optical out was only mated to the coax input.(An aside, I never had any audio sync issues with the Vizio LCD, same audio setup) I have no idea what the HDMI spec on the receiver is; the spec sheet doesn't say anywhere. But, the receiver is from 2009 and according to Wiki the 1.3 spec was released in 2006. So, I'd have to assume the receiver is at least 1.3 compat. I'm assuming the auto lip sync feature in the 1.3 spec would account for my receiver not allowing audio delay adjustments on HDMI sources (because it would be unnecessary). I'm seeing other people posting about the same issue with other receivers connected to this TV. Multiple users with the same problem, but no solutions yet... EDIT: After further troubleshooting it's only getting murkier. Noting your suspicion about the set-top box (Motorola DCX3400), I went back to the Xbox 360, which is my only other HD source. Played a DVD, sync seemed fine, even with all the fancy settings on including TruMotion. Then, I played a TV show from Netflix - severe sync issue. I played another TV show from Netflix - sync was fine. I went back to the first show but this time hooked the Xbox directly to the TV via HDMI and using the internal TV speaker the sync was perfect. This is consistent with other TV shows watched on the STB: some have severe sync issues, some minor, and some seem to be dead-on. It's incredibly difficult to troubleshoot a problem when the results are inconsistent! Considering I have sync problems on 2 separate sources -- problems which disappear when the devices are connected directly to the TV -- I'd say it's safe to say that the culprit is the receiver, or at least the relationship between the receiver and the TV. The only thing that's changed in my setup is the TV, though, so it's hard to blame the receiver when I never had a problem until now. I don't mean to derail with a long troubleshooting discussion but considering the 55LW5600 seems to be a hot item lately I figured others would want to know it may have some 'issues'. Trickstand fucked around with this message at 05:42 on Dec 10, 2011 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2011 05:07
|
|
|
Trickstand posted:I was afraid of that. Xbox 360 has hdmi 1.2. I never had that issue with my LW5600 and receiver, but I was running an optical from the tv to the receiver since mine does not have HDMI ports. A quick Google of your receiver comes up with the same issue with different tvs.. The restocking fee is pretty drat rough. That's why I got my TV on Amazon, free returns and no bullshit. I sent back two LW5600's to them and Amazon didn't bat an eye. I think anybody that is thinking of a LG LW5600/6500 should buy it at a place that has no restocking fees. It seems to be a love it or hate it TV.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2011 06:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jan 16, 2026 05:57 |
|
|
Trickstand posted:I just picked up the LG 55LW5600 from Fry's to take advantage of the $1099 sale. Lots of positive reviews here and elsewhere. Great! Except...
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2011 14:34
|
|