New HDTV

derekson

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2010
6,243
weeba said:
 
I have a fairly similar model, i think it's basically the 2013 model of that same TV. I wasn't really looking for a smart TV but it happened to be on sale for a price where it made sense to just get it instead of the non-smart version, and I like it as a TV but I ended up getting an Apple TV to use instead of the Smart TV functions after about 2 months of dealing with the shitty UI and ridiculously lagged response trying to use it. I think mine is a UN46EH5300 or something like that.
 

weeba

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
3,537
Lynn, MA
I've got PS3, 360 and Roku as well to use.
 
The price is killer right now. Amazon is discounting Samsung 45% off, and we've been looking at a 46" Samsung for sometime now to replace a 2007 (?) 42" Vizio.
 
Hoping I can end up selling that Vizio on CL for $150 or so.
 

derekson

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2010
6,243
weeba said:
I've got PS3, 360 and Roku as well to use.
 
The price is killer right now. Amazon is discounting Samsung 45% off, and we've been looking at a 46" Samsung for sometime now to replace a 2007 (?) 42" Vizio.
 
Hoping I can end up selling that Vizio on CL for $150 or so.
 
Like I said, I'm happy with it as a TV so if you have other options for streaming sources then I'd recommend going for it. I think it has a great picture and that price seems pretty damn awesome.
 

weeba

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
3,537
Lynn, MA
derekson said:
 
I have a fairly similar model, i think it's basically the 2013 model of that same TV. I wasn't really looking for a smart TV but it happened to be on sale for a price where it made sense to just get it instead of the non-smart version, and I like it as a TV but I ended up getting an Apple TV to use instead of the Smart TV functions after about 2 months of dealing with the shitty UI and ridiculously lagged response trying to use it. I think mine is a UN46EH5300 or something like that.
 
After further review, I believe I'm going with this model:
 
http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-UN46H6203-46-Inch-1080p-120Hz/dp/B00K4UJ2TG/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1417036386&sr=8-1&keywords=samsung+UN46H6201
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
58,909
San Andreas Fault
weeba said:
Bought a Samsung UN40H5201AF [SIZE=13.63636302948px]day before Thanksgiving at Costco[/SIZE] for use in a bedroom. [SIZE=13.63636302948px]$319. [/SIZE]Took it home and set it up, piece of cake....no delivery people, no service provider in my house. Free 2 year warranty. [SIZE=13.63636302948px]Very happy with it so far. [/SIZE]
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,380
I would fucking lose it if that happened to me. T&P.
 

weeba

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
3,537
Lynn, MA
The Four Peters said:
I would fucking lose it if that happened to me. T&P.
 
The good part is it's now sold out everywhere (Amazon, Samsung direct and Target (where I bought it from). So they gave me $50, and I basically need to keep checking online for it to come back in stock, then call them to get my sale price back.
 
After fifteen years we're finally getting rid of our Sony TV, which is almost the size of a Volkswagen. We're in the market for a $500-600 flatscreen, 40"-48". We looked at but didn't love the Vizio M-Series; we do like this Sony 1080p LED TV:
 
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-KDL40W600B-40-Inch-1080p-Smart/dp/B00HPMCO46
 
We mainly watch movies (TCM, Netflix, DVDs) and live sports. Though reviews have offered some reassurance about this, I'm a little concerned about the TV's 60mHz refresh rate and whether it'll cause any blurring--of baseballs, pucks, etc. The model we looked at in the store seemed OK in this regard, but it was playing a promotional DVD of various kinds of clips; I wasn't sure how hard it was being pushed. Does anybody here have a strong opinion one way or another about Sony's flatscreens and this one in particular?
 

saintnick912

GINO!
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 30, 2004
4,968
Somerville, MA
The biggest difficulty with a 60hz model is in Blu Ray titles that are encoded at 24 frames per second. This includes most movies.

The difficulty is that 24 doesn't divide evenly into 60, so the player or the TV has to expand the frames out with an uneven cadence. This is typically noticeable during scrolling text or panning shots.

A set that is at 120hz can just repeat the 24 frames 5 times each and get a smoother picture when properly set up.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,272
I can't believe Sony still sells 60hz tv's. I thought only the black friday no name chinese brands did that these days. 
 

saintnick912

GINO!
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 30, 2004
4,968
Somerville, MA
cahlton said:
Hey saintnick, thanks for your thoughts. I wanted to ask if you'd clarify one thing you said: Is the problem noticeable only with Blu-Rays? Or is it noticeable with any HD cable movie?
 
I believe all the cable/satellite providers do 720p/60 or 1080i/60 so that judder is already baked into the broadcast signal.  The potential for improvement exists on Blu-Rays, and potentially some other sources though I don't know if any devices/sources take advantage (Netflix could theoretically offer 24p streams for instance but I don't think they do).
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,900
Alexandria, VA
saintnick912 said:
The difficulty is that 24 doesn't divide evenly into 60, so the player or the TV has to expand the frames out with an uneven cadence. This is typically noticeable during scrolling text or panning shots.
 
 
The way this is done is kind of interesting if you're a film nerd, and important if you do any video editing/conversion work.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-two_pull_down
 

Red Sox Physicist

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
296
Natick, MA
saintnick912 said:
 
I believe all the cable/satellite providers do 720p/60 or 1080i/60 so that judder is already baked into the broadcast signal.  The potential for improvement exists on Blu-Rays, and potentially some other sources though I don't know if any devices/sources take advantage (Netflix could theoretically offer 24p streams for instance but I don't think they do).
 
TVs with decent video processors can detect and invert the 3:2 pulldown for a movie on a broadcast signal and recover the proper 24p.
 
A couple of folks posted semi-sarcastic remarks about the 60Hz refresh rate being badly out of date, but this study suggests it doesn't create motion blur, at least not with mid- to upper-end models from good brands. The writer goes so far as to say that you're spending extra money unnecessarily if you're buying a 120Hz TV:
 
http://www.displaymate.com/LCD_Response_Time_ShootOut.htm
 
Anybody disagree?
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,900
Alexandria, VA
cahlton said:
A couple of folks posted semi-sarcastic remarks about the 60Hz refresh rate being badly out of date, but this study suggests it doesn't create motion blur, at least not with mid- to upper-end models from good brands. The writer goes so far as to say that you're spending extra money unnecessarily if you're buying a 120Hz TV:
 
http://www.displaymate.com/LCD_Response_Time_ShootOut.htm
 
Anybody disagree?
 
Not me.
 

Couperin47

Member
SoSH Member
cahlton said:
A couple of folks posted semi-sarcastic remarks about the 60Hz refresh rate being badly out of date, but this study suggests it doesn't create motion blur, at least not with mid- to upper-end models from good brands. The writer goes so far as to say that you're spending extra money unnecessarily if you're buying a 120Hz TV:
 
http://www.displaymate.com/LCD_Response_Time_ShootOut.htm
 
Anybody disagree?
 
Done in 2009 with 2008 models, after setting themselves up as being very rigorous and scientific in their approach in the 'test' when we get to conclusions, suddenly we have generalizations and absolutely no actual facts. They included 2 plasma sets, yet when we get to conclusions, they disappear. Was there any detectable difference between the plasmas and the LCD sets ? If there WERE, then differences in rendering fast motion ARE detectable and they just refuse to give us any meaningful details. If they couldn't detect any such differences, then I question their whole methodology as any common fool easily detects the difference between any plasma and any LCD set. Instead we get a generalization that they pretty much couldn't see any motion rendering differences between all the sets...a laughable conclusion.
 

SumnerH

Malt Liquor Picker
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,900
Alexandria, VA
Couperin47 said:
 
Done in 2009 with 2008 models, after setting themselves up as being very rigorous and scientific in their approach in the 'test' when we get to conclusions, suddenly we have generalizations and absolutely no actual facts. They included 2 plasma sets, yet when we get to conclusions, they disappear. Was there any detectable difference between the plasmas and the LCD sets ? If there WERE, then differences in rendering fast motion ARE detectable and they just refuse to give us any meaningful details. If they couldn't detect any such differences, then I question their whole methodology as any common fool easily detects the difference between any plasma and any LCD set. Instead we get a generalization that they pretty much couldn't see any motion rendering differences between all the sets...a laughable conclusion.
 
This does not follow.  It's possible that differences in fast motion would cause such differences, but there are a whole lot of other more likely reasons that you could detect differences between LCDs and plasmas.
 

Couperin47

Member
SoSH Member
SumnerH said:
 
This does not follow.  It's possible that differences in fast motion would cause such differences, but there are a whole lot of other more likely reasons that you could detect differences between LCDs and plasmas.
 
I knew we'd come back to that, yes, of course, we can't isolate the motion blur issue in the incredibly complex judgment of overall rendering of the video image, it's even more complex than trying to judge audio...something so complex that it's quite impossible to compare, except in an immediate A/B switching environment. These guys couldn't really isolate the one issue either, then lets add the fact that a lot of present day low end LCD TVs do not allow you to completely defeat their edge enhancement and other strategies to handle these issues and I'll freely admit that many of these other issues easily overwhelm the ability to discern motion blur, the video equivalent of stressing over whether your audio amp is outputting .01 or.001 THD when there is no woofer/midrange on the planet which does not have 1 or 2 orders of magnitude greater distortion.
 
Low end 60 Hz TVs are more likely to be burdened by less sophisticated electronics throughout.  Trying to isolate any single issue like this is unrealistic today, you take the image as a package. Plasma, in theory, should have clearer fast motion, they were able to avoid all/most 'image enhancement' tricks and the result is a more natural image in many respects for most of us. I'm willing to believe that a 60 Hz set can be made that, in comparison to an identical but 120 Hz set shows almost no differences that can be directly attributed to motion blur... but there are no such sets...now do the more elaborate enhancement circuits in higher end models actually improve things or make the picture more artificial ? That's a matter of considerable debate and taste.
 
 
Trying to isolate any single issue like this is unrealistic today, you take the image as a package.
This made a lot of sense to me. Thanks to all for your thoughtful and patient answers to this question. I just ordered the 60hz 48-inch Sony and I'll let you know how it looks at home. How much calibrating of the settings should I expect to do, by the way?
 

Couperin47

Member
SoSH Member
cahlton said:
This made a lot of sense to me. Thanks to all for your thoughtful and patient answers to this question. I just ordered the 60hz 48-inch Sony and I'll let you know how it looks at home. How much calibrating of the settings should I expect to do, by the way?
 
What's the exact model ?... then see if there's a thread at the AVS forums and we can see if there are a set of average adjustments that will improve almost any particular unit out of the box.
 

Couperin47

Member
SoSH Member

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
10,736
NJ
I have the 3d version of the Sharp Aquos, or at least I believe it's the same series and it's a very nice TV.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,482
Garden City
Jim Ed Rice in HOF said:
 
What's your budget?
 
I just got back from TV shopping and I'm in love with Sony's new line of x and w TVs. I wound up deciding on the 65xbr900b but the w850b is another stunning television, especially in that size. 
 
The one benefit I noticed on almost all of Sony's TVs is their local dimming. It, at least in my viewing experience, is superior to anything Samsung is doing. I originally had my heart set on the Samsung 8550 but you really need to see what the TV looks like when it's all black.
 
I found that I agree with CNET and http://televisions.reviewed.com/ the most, review wise. PCMag seems to go in the opposite direction as my eyes.
 
The LG panels were also beautiful but it's really difficult to tell in a Best Buy and I thought their off angle viewing was pretty disappointing. Ultimately though, that's a LED issue.
 
Check out this review which uses the w850b in a few of the comparisons. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXSN-_7W-OY
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,422
Scottsdale, AZ.
I was talking to a couple of sales people in Best Buy recently. I'm in the market for a 60-70" TV for a spare bedroom but I'm not in a rush. Both said I should wait for a) after the Superbowl since I can pick up an open box item at a much reduced price as they have a lot of returns or b) wait until March when the new models come out and the older stock will be reduced significantly.
 
I'm not sure why anyone would go to the bother of getting a TV only to return a few days later just for the SB, since it seems like a lot of bother but apparently plenty of people do it.
 
I'm curious about the curved TV's , anyone have experience of them? Or it's just a fad?
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,482
Garden City
CodPiece XL said:
I was talking to a couple of sales people in Best Buy recently. I'm in the market for a 60-70" TV for a spare bedroom but I'm not in a rush. Both said I should wait for a) after the Superbowl since I can pick up an open box item at a much reduced price as they have a lot of returns or b) wait until March when the new models come out and the older stock will be reduced significantly.
 
I'm not sure why anyone would go to the bother of getting a TV only to return a few days later just for the SB, since it seems like a lot of bother but apparently plenty of people do it.
 
I'm curious about the curved TV's , anyone have experience of them? Or it's just a fad?
 
They're mostly just a fad with some small benefits. Ultimately, the cons (price, artifacts) outweigh the pros (slightly better off-angle viewing).
 

CodPiece XL

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 4, 2007
2,422
Scottsdale, AZ.
crow216 said:
 
They're mostly just a fad with some small benefits. Ultimately, the cons (price, artifacts) outweigh the pros (slightly better off-angle viewing).
 
That's what I was thinking, We also talked about 4K TV's in general. He said that he does not like what Samsung does in that that the quality of the 4K picture differs significantly depending on price and at that at least with Sony the 4K picture is the same with a TV that costs $1800 as one that costs $4500. I'll research it a bit more.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,482
Garden City
CodPiece XL said:
 
That's what I was thinking, We also talked about 4K TV's in general. He said that he does not like what Samsung does in that that the quality of the 4K picture differs significantly depending on price and at that at least with Sony the 4K picture is the same with a TV that costs $1800 as one that costs $4500. I'll research it a bit more.
 
I think you can trust the Best Buy guys to give you a very high level overview of the TVs features but in the end, you have to figure out what you want in a TV and watch it for a bit to see if it's appealing to you. 
 
I'm not too sure what you mean by the last comment. Every TV is going to look different regardless of the manufacturer. What you should really look for with all of the edge-lit LCDs is just how bad the black levels are around the edges and toward the center. You might not be able to see colors the way you want them in a best buy, but you can very easily check for flaws such as color bleeding and uniformity. 
 
1 - Ask them to put a letterbox movie on. Any of the typical superhero movies they put on are usually in letterbox.
2 - Pay attention to whether the black is actually dark grey and then pay attention to whether it's even lighter grey toward the corners. I posted a review on top that illustrates this perfectly. 
 
This is the reason why Plasmas were considered superior. LCD just cannot replicate the black levels. At the same time, Plasmas also lose many of their benefits in bright environments where LCDs and OLEDs do not. 
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,482
Garden City
Jim Ed Rice in HOF said:
Trying to stay at $2K or less, which is how I narrowed down to these three. I ventured out to Best Buy, but like you said viewing there is a tough comparison.
 
I know I love that Sony but I haven't seen the others. LG's webOS is pretty awesome though. 
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,482
Garden City
Also, as to why I love the Sony sets. Their colors. The triluminos technology is breathtaking. I can't even get my Panny plasma (gt50) to produce colors as pretty as I was at Best Buy. The combination of inky blacks, super bright whites (if you want them), almost no noticeable motion blur, and beautiful colors made it a no brainer.