[H] Digital TV buying
I got this link from my older Brother some days ago. Thought I'd share here, since we discuss digital TV's often. http://www.screenmath.com/ Yes, I now shop for a new TV. My big Pioneer Elite PRO-98 55in RPJ has died. I may be able to fix it, but the part costs ~$450. Even post-fix, this TV is still analog only! Time to move on.. :) I am focused on 55-60-ish inch to start based on the above link's logic. Brand opinions are welcome. Looking at Samsung to start. I have viewed the Pioneer Elite offers. They appear to be all plasma. I do not believe I can live with plasma due to my living-room's ambient light problem. Yes, my first impression based of what has been shared here in the past 4 years. Best, Duncan
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
I like the Samsungs myself. I have a 52" Samsung (non-LED). Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:21 PM To: Hardware Group Subject: [H] Digital TV buying I got this link from my older Brother some days ago. Thought I'd share here, since we discuss digital TV's often. http://www.screenmath.com/ Yes, I now shop for a new TV. My big Pioneer Elite PRO-98 55in RPJ has died. I may be able to fix it, but the part costs ~$450. Even post-fix, this TV is still analog only! Time to move on.. :) I am focused on 55-60-ish inch to start based on the above link's logic. Brand opinions are welcome. Looking at Samsung to start. I have viewed the Pioneer Elite offers. They appear to be all plasma. I do not believe I can live with plasma due to my living-room's ambient light problem. Yes, my first impression based of what has been shared here in the past 4 years. Best, Duncan
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. Bobby Heid wrote: I like the Samsungs myself. I have a 52" Samsung (non-LED). Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:21 PM To: Hardware Group Subject: [H] Digital TV buying I got this link from my older Brother some days ago. Thought I'd share here, since we discuss digital TV's often. http://www.screenmath.com/ Yes, I now shop for a new TV. My big Pioneer Elite PRO-98 55in RPJ has died. I may be able to fix it, but the part costs ~$450. Even post-fix, this TV is still analog only! Time to move on.. :) I am focused on 55-60-ish inch to start based on the above link's logic. Brand opinions are welcome. Looking at Samsung to start. I have viewed the Pioneer Elite offers. They appear to be all plasma. I do not believe I can live with plasma due to my living-room's ambient light problem. Yes, my first impression based of what has been shared here in the past 4 years. Best, Duncan
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg > -Original Message- > From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- > boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM > To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com > Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying > > Don't you mean 240Hz? > Best, > Duncan > > > swzaske wrote: > > Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action > > scenes. > > > > > >snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Pre-empting the inevitable questions (the best simple explanation I could find; and it's pretty succinct and to the point but informative): http://www.everythinghdtv.com/hdtv-buyers-guide/24p If you want more detail just google 5:5 pulldown and you'll find Wikipedia articles and AVS forum posts, etc... BINO -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Greg Sevart Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:42 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg > -Original Message- > From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- > boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM > To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com > Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying > > Don't you mean 240Hz? > Best, > Duncan > > > swzaske wrote: > > Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action > > scenes. > > > > > >snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
And furthermore, this seems good too: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_14_1/feature-article-1080p-3-2007-part -1.html -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Bino Gopal Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 6:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Pre-empting the inevitable questions (the best simple explanation I could find; and it's pretty succinct and to the point but informative): http://www.everythinghdtv.com/hdtv-buyers-guide/24p If you want more detail just google 5:5 pulldown and you'll find Wikipedia articles and AVS forum posts, etc... BINO -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Greg Sevart Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 5:42 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg > -Original Message- > From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- > boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM > To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com > Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying > > Don't you mean 240Hz? > Best, > Duncan > > > swzaske wrote: > > Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action > > scenes. > > > > > >snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
I went Samsung as well.. :) From weeks of reading.. Panasonic, slightly better blacks Samsung, better, more accurate color http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/index.php On Oct 8, 2009, at 1:20 PM, DSinc wrote: I got this link from my older Brother some days ago. Thought I'd share here, since we discuss digital TV's often. http://www.screenmath.com/ Yes, I now shop for a new TV. My big Pioneer Elite PRO-98 55in RPJ has died. I may be able to fix it, but the part costs ~$450. Even post-fix, this TV is still analog only! Time to move on.. :) I am focused on 55-60-ish inch to start based on the above link's logic. Brand opinions are welcome. Looking at Samsung to start. I have viewed the Pioneer Elite offers. They appear to be all plasma. I do not believe I can live with plasma due to my living-room's ambient light problem. Yes, my first impression based of what has been shared here in the past 4 years. Best, Duncan -- JRS stei...@pacbell.net Facts do not cease to exist just because they are ignored.
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Greg/Bino, Thanks for the concise answer. I only shared what I see in ads for the past many months. Now I know that "240Hz is hype." Off to look at choices, and, figure out what to do with the very large Pioneer hulk! Best, Duncan Greg Sevart wrote: 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
I have one of those DLP LED Samsungs...67-inches of gorgeousness, but no longer made. Great for high-def TV and blu ray. Watching BSG on Bluray now. Fantastic. Sometimes, old things dying works to your advantage, because I swore I would not buy another TV until my last one died. It didn't quite make it 10 years, but I paid less for this new one and have a far, far better TV and overall viewing experience. Duncan, you are lucky! DSinc wrote: Greg/Bino, Thanks for the concise answer. I only shared what I see in ads for the past many months. Now I know that "240Hz is hype." Off to look at choices, and, figure out what to do with the very large Pioneer hulk! Best, Duncan Greg Sevart wrote: 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Anthony, You are so correct. And, I value all the comments on this List much more than all the "reviews" I haveread , and may still read. I know I will be fully satisfied with whatever toy I buy. And, WE will be able to kibbutz about personal preferences (choices!) for years to come. You are already way ahead of me with "BluRay." I do know what it is, what it does, and, sorta WHY I need it. LATER! First, the TV (display). Yes, it does appear that my current view has died at a good time. Personal TV started for me in 1969 with a 19in RCA portable (?) color TV. This TV lasted until a pair of stereo geeks (actually my stereo "pushers!"), at my chosen Stereo Store, convinced me I needed to move to "component TV." This lead (1983)to me buying a Mitsubishi CRM2501 color monitor and TVR-103 tuner (which I still have). Then, in 1996, my "pushers" sat me in front of a Pioneer Elite Pro 98 (55in RPJ). OMG! Hooked, gone, bought, owned! All the above was analog; and Off-The-Air. I have never had cable or sat service. Now we all live in a mostly-fully digital world. (I do not do Amateur Radio any longer.) I look forward to the chase! And, yes, you are correct again. As I view the ads for new toys each Sunday, I keep remembering the $3500 I gladly paid in 1996 for my now dead RPJ. It has served me very well. Nice to see that unless I get really stupid, I may be able to spend fewer $$$ for new, current, technology; and, enjoy all the current benefits :) ATM, I now use a ViewSonic N2635W TFT 720p panel. Even at long viewing distance (~11ft. ATM), this panel simply blows the old 55in RPJ solidly away! Amazed, I am. Best, Duncan Anthony Q. Martin wrote: I have one of those DLP LED Samsungs...67-inches of gorgeousness, but no longer made. Great for high-def TV and blu ray. Watching BSG on Bluray now. Fantastic. Sometimes, old things dying works to your advantage, because I swore I would not buy another TV until my last one died. It didn't quite make it 10 years, but I paid less for this new one and have a far, far better TV and overall viewing experience. Duncan, you are lucky! DSinc wrote: Greg/Bino, Thanks for the concise answer. I only shared what I see in ads for the past many months. Now I know that "240Hz is hype." Off to look at choices, and, figure out what to do with the very large Pioneer hulk! Best, Duncan Greg Sevart wrote: 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Hehe, you have the big bro to my 61" one! ;) I wanted that one, but with the space that I have the 61" is almost too big, so couldn't have done the 67"; oh well! :P Blu-ray is awesome but it does HDTV really well too (and I mostly watch TV on TW cable since I have 7 DVR tuners in the LR currently! :P). And I was like you too-paying a lot less for it now and it's much nicer and bigger than my old tv. Even though I debated getting a $4-6k Pioneer Kuro Elite plasma (50 or 60"), I'm happy paying <$1k and having something this good for that much less; and yeah, my last one was the Sony WEGA XBR400 36" CRT which I paid $2500 for in 2000, so not bad when you amortize it out...if this lasts ~4 yrs then I'll be happy (and I did pay $200 for the Best Buy plan for 4 yrs, so one way or another I'll get a tv that lasts that long! ;P). Looks like $250/yr for a TV is the sweet spot (at least for me). BINO P.S. I think there are still Best Buys that have those TVs lying around out front, or maybe in the back b/c they didn't sell b/c people are buying the LCDs now just b/c they're thin...you could probably get one for a steal if you were interested Duncan...I paid $950 for my 61" (make sure it has the LED tho; model # is HL61A750) so you should probably be able to get it for less with a little negotiating. HTH! -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. Martin Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:56 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying I have one of those DLP LED Samsungs...67-inches of gorgeousness, but no longer made. Great for high-def TV and blu ray. Watching BSG on Bluray now. Fantastic. Sometimes, old things dying works to your advantage, because I swore I would not buy another TV until my last one died. It didn't quite make it 10 years, but I paid less for this new one and have a far, far better TV and overall viewing experience. Duncan, you are lucky! DSinc wrote: > Greg/Bino, > Thanks for the concise answer. I only shared what I see in ads for the > past many months. Now I know that "240Hz is hype." Off to look at > choices, and, figure out what to do with the very large Pioneer hulk! > Best, > Duncan > > > Greg Sevart wrote: >> 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps >> film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 >> that must >> be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is >> marketing. Any >> 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the >> refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, >> panel, >> and/or electronics, etc. >> >> Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. >> >> Greg >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- >>> boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc >>> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM >>> To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com >>> Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying >>> >>> Don't you mean 240Hz? >>> Best, >>> Duncan >>> >>> >>> swzaske wrote: >>>> Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action >>>> scenes. >>>> >>>> >>>> snip >> >> >> >
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Bino, Believe you mean "little bro." I did so agonize back then trying to find the extra 1.5 inches (aesthetic) I needed for the 61" Pro. Did not happen! LOL I rarely sit and do COA long term calculations. If I did, I might have never dabbled in this computer "money-pit!" So much for that logic!!! :) Still, I have so much fun with these complex systems that I only sorta understand in a very surface-mode. I read the List for the details; because I know bigger tweaks than I populate this List! Best, Duncan Bino Gopal wrote: Hehe, you have the big bro to my 61" one! ;) I wanted that one, but with the space that I have the 61" is almost too big, so couldn't have done the 67"; oh well! :P Blu-ray is awesome but it does HDTV really well too (and I mostly watch TV on TW cable since I have 7 DVR tuners in the LR currently! :P). And I was like you too-paying a lot less for it now and it's much nicer and bigger than my old tv. Even though I debated getting a $4-6k Pioneer Kuro Elite plasma (50 or 60"), I'm happy paying <$1k and having something this good for that much less; and yeah, my last one was the Sony WEGA XBR400 36" CRT which I paid $2500 for in 2000, so not bad when you amortize it out...if this lasts ~4 yrs then I'll be happy (and I did pay $200 for the Best Buy plan for 4 yrs, so one way or another I'll get a tv that lasts that long! ;P). Looks like $250/yr for a TV is the sweet spot (at least for me). BINO P.S. I think there are still Best Buys that have those TVs lying around out front, or maybe in the back b/c they didn't sell b/c people are buying the LCDs now just b/c they're thin...you could probably get one for a steal if you were interested Duncan...I paid $950 for my 61" (make sure it has the LED tho; model # is HL61A750) so you should probably be able to get it for less with a little negotiating. HTH! -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Anthony Q. Martin Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 9:56 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying I have one of those DLP LED Samsungs...67-inches of gorgeousness, but no longer made. Great for high-def TV and blu ray. Watching BSG on Bluray now. Fantastic. Sometimes, old things dying works to your advantage, because I swore I would not buy another TV until my last one died. It didn't quite make it 10 years, but I paid less for this new one and have a far, far better TV and overall viewing experience. Duncan, you are lucky! DSinc wrote: Greg/Bino, Thanks for the concise answer. I only shared what I see in ads for the past many months. Now I know that "240Hz is hype." Off to look at choices, and, figure out what to do with the very large Pioneer hulk! Best, Duncan Greg Sevart wrote: 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
HTH can 240hz be "hype"? It's an improvement over 60 and to a lesser level 120 sure, but hype? So when they stop making 120's, you'll stop buying TV's or are you just saying don't spend ape shit money to get the 240 over the 120 if buying new? 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps >>>> film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that >>>> must >>>> be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. >>>> Any >>>> 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the >>>> refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, >>>> panel, >>>> and/or electronics, etc. >>>> >>>> Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. >>>> >>>> Greg >>>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>>> From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- >>>>> boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc >>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM >>>>> To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com >>>>> Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying >>>>> >>>>> Don't you mean 240Hz? >>>>> Best, >>>>> Duncan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> swzaske wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action >>>>>> scenes. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> snip >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
The ? is, how deep are your pockets? Get 240 if it pleases you, I'm still waiting for OLED backlights. :-) Joshua MacCraw wrote: HTH can 240hz be "hype"? It's an improvement over 60 and to a lesser level 120 sure, but hype? So when they stop making 120's, you'll stop buying TV's or are you just saying don't spend ape shit money to get the 240 over the 120 if buying new? 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Stan, Please share what you mean by "OLED?" Since you seem to be a "pockets" sorta person, perhaps you can add to this very confusing matrix. I do so hope this is not another emotional rant generator. Based on my crude calcs, I am shopping a 58-6x "something" panel. Yes, this means major $$$. So What? I spent $$$ in 1996 also; and, have enjoyed my video/TV thus far...(well, until it went TU!) LOL! Now, I use a Viewsonic N2635W. Yes, smaller; but, a really nice presentation for OTA TV. And, I am still doing research. Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: The ? is, how deep are your pockets? Get 240 if it pleases you, I'm still waiting for OLED backlights. :-) Joshua MacCraw wrote: HTH can 240hz be "hype"? It's an improvement over 60 and to a lesser level 120 sure, but hype? So when they stop making 120's, you'll stop buying TV's or are you just saying don't spend ape shit money to get the 240 over the 120 if buying new? 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Most LCD's are incandescent back lit. There are LED backlights that have been coming out the last couple years and they're good but still an incomplete solution. Organic LED's don't require any backlighting because the LED's themselves provide the light and color themselves. If I'm mistaken on any of this please feel free to correct me. I only know what I've read. OLED's are the future, be pollution free and be energy cheap to operate. DSinc wrote: Stan, Please share what you mean by "OLED?" Since you seem to be a "pockets" sorta person, perhaps you can add to this very confusing matrix. I do so hope this is not another emotional rant generator. Based on my crude calcs, I am shopping a 58-6x "something" panel. Yes, this means major $$$. So What? I spent $$$ in 1996 also; and, have enjoyed my video/TV thus far...(well, until it went TU!) LOL! Now, I use a Viewsonic N2635W. Yes, smaller; but, a really nice presentation for OTA TV. And, I am still doing research. Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: The ? is, how deep are your pockets? Get 240 if it pleases you, I'm still waiting for OLED backlights. :-) Joshua MacCraw wrote: HTH can 240hz be "hype"? It's an improvement over 60 and to a lesser level 120 sure, but hype? So when they stop making 120's, you'll stop buying TV's or are you just saying don't spend ape shit money to get the 240 over the 120 if buying new? 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Stan, Thanks for the share. Perhaps I will focus on LEDs. I do not think my living room can support plasma w/o some major renovation ATM. Your use of "incandescent" is curious. Do you mean old BULB tech? Like old "filiment" stuff like current/old light bulbs? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Most LCD's are incandescent back lit. There are LED backlights that have been coming out the last couple years and they're good but still an incomplete solution. Organic LED's don't require any backlighting because the LED's themselves provide the light and color themselves. If I'm mistaken on any of this please feel free to correct me. I only know what I've read. OLED's are the future, be pollution free and be energy cheap to operate. DSinc wrote: Stan, Please share what you mean by "OLED?" Since you seem to be a "pockets" sorta person, perhaps you can add to this very confusing matrix. I do so hope this is not another emotional rant generator. Based on my crude calcs, I am shopping a 58-6x "something" panel. Yes, this means major $$$. So What? I spent $$$ in 1996 also; and, have enjoyed my video/TV thus far...(well, until it went TU!) LOL! Now, I use a Viewsonic N2635W. Yes, smaller; but, a really nice presentation for OTA TV. And, I am still doing research. Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: The ? is, how deep are your pockets? Get 240 if it pleases you, I'm still waiting for OLED backlights. :-) Joshua MacCraw wrote: HTH can 240hz be "hype"? It's an improvement over 60 and to a lesser level 120 sure, but hype? So when they stop making 120's, you'll stop buying TV's or are you just saying don't spend ape shit money to get the 240 over the 120 if buying new? 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
At 06:22 PM 10/12/2009, you wrote: OLED's are the future, be pollution free and be energy cheap to operate. but they need to solve the short life span problem... saw this today LED TVs: 10 things you need to know http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10370112-1.html?tag=nl.e703
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Wiinterlight, What is your value for a viable "life span" for this new tech? I only need 15-20 years, ATM.:) Trust me, I'll read your share for sure.. Best, Duncan Winterlight wrote: At 06:22 PM 10/12/2009, you wrote: OLED's are the future, be pollution free and be energy cheap to operate. but they need to solve the short life span problem... saw this today LED TVs: 10 things you need to know http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10370112-1.html?tag=nl.e703
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
At 09:46 PM 10/12/2009, you wrote: Wiinterlight, What is your value for a viable "life span" for this new tech? I only need 15-20 years, ATM.:) from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_light-emitting_diode Disadvantages The biggest technical problem for OLEDs is the limited lifetime of the organic materials.[44] In particular, blue OLEDs historically have had a lifetime of around 14,000 hours (five years at 8 hours a day) when used for flat-panel displays, which is lower than the typical lifetime of LCD, LED or PDP technologyeach currently rated for about 60,000 hours, depending on manufacturer and model. However, some manufacturers of OLED displays claim to have come up with a way to solve this problem with a new technology to increase the lifespan of OLED displays, pushing their expected life past that of LCD displays.[45] A metal membrane helps deliver light from polymers in the substrate throughout the glass surface more efficiently than current OLEDs. The result is the same picture quality with half the brightness and a doubling of the screen's expected life.[46] In 2007, experimental PLEDs were created which can sustain 400 cd/m² of luminance for over 198,000 hours for green OLEDs and 62,000 hours for blue OLEDs.[47] Additionally, as consequence of the fact that light emitting components of different colors have different lifetimes, it's obvious that the quality of a color picture would degrade over time since emission of each color reduces by a different amount. At some point color picture quality would become unacceptable, so overall display lifetime could be even worse than lifetime of separate components because many uses are putting certain requirements on picture quality. This can be partially avoided by adjusting color balance but this may require advanced control circuits and interaction with user, which is unacceptable for some uses. The intrusion of water into displays can damage or destroy the organic materials. Therefore, improved sealing processes are important for practical manufacturing and may limit the longevity of more flexible displays.[48]
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Sorry meant fluorescent with a dash of mercury. DSinc wrote: Stan, Thanks for the share. Perhaps I will focus on LEDs. I do not think my living room can support plasma w/o some major renovation ATM. Your use of "incandescent" is curious. Do you mean old BULB tech? Like old "filiment" stuff like current/old light bulbs? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Most LCD's are incandescent back lit. There are LED backlights that have been coming out the last couple years and they're good but still an incomplete solution. Organic LED's don't require any backlighting because the LED's themselves provide the light and color themselves. If I'm mistaken on any of this please feel free to correct me. I only know what I've read. OLED's are the future, be pollution free and be energy cheap to operate. DSinc wrote: Stan, Please share what you mean by "OLED?" Since you seem to be a "pockets" sorta person, perhaps you can add to this very confusing matrix. I do so hope this is not another emotional rant generator. Based on my crude calcs, I am shopping a 58-6x "something" panel. Yes, this means major $$$. So What? I spent $$$ in 1996 also; and, have enjoyed my video/TV thus far...(well, until it went TU!) LOL! Now, I use a Viewsonic N2635W. Yes, smaller; but, a really nice presentation for OTA TV. And, I am still doing research. Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: The ? is, how deep are your pockets? Get 240 if it pleases you, I'm still waiting for OLED backlights. :-) Joshua MacCraw wrote: HTH can 240hz be "hype"? It's an improvement over 60 and to a lesser level 120 sure, but hype? So when they stop making 120's, you'll stop buying TV's or are you just saying don't spend ape shit money to get the 240 over the 120 if buying new? 120Hz provided real value. Being a multiple of 24 (as in, standard 24fps film content), it allows for nice smooth 5:5 pulldown, vs the 3:2 that must be performed when displaying at 60Hz. 240Hz, in contrast, is marketing. Any 240Hz set that looks better than a 120Hz set has nothing to do with the refresh frequency and is simply a result of newer/better backlight, panel, and/or electronics, etc. Also note that not all 120Hz TV sets are capable of 5:5 pulldown. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of DSinc Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 7:19 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Digital TV buying Don't you mean 240Hz? Best, Duncan swzaske wrote: Try to get 120 HZ as well because it won't blur as much during action scenes. snip
Re: [H] Digital TV buying
Winterlight, Thank you. Hmm, something else to think about.. :) Interesting to be sure. Perhaps it is wise to pass on OLED until a few more technology cycles take place. Heck, I have not even seen an OLED panel yet! Direct viewing comes later after much more reading. Best, Duncan Winterlight wrote: At 09:46 PM 10/12/2009, you wrote: Wiinterlight, What is your value for a viable "life span" for this new tech? I only need 15-20 years, ATM.:) from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_light-emitting_diode Disadvantages The biggest technical problem for OLEDs is the limited lifetime of the organic materials.[44] In particular, blue OLEDs historically have had a lifetime of around 14,000 hours (five years at 8 hours a day) when used for flat-panel displays, which is lower than the typical lifetime of LCD, LED or PDP technology—each currently rated for about 60,000 hours, depending on manufacturer and model. However, some manufacturers of OLED displays claim to have come up with a way to solve this problem with a new technology to increase the lifespan of OLED displays, pushing their expected life past that of LCD displays.[45] A metal membrane helps deliver light from polymers in the substrate throughout the glass surface more efficiently than current OLEDs. The result is the same picture quality with half the brightness and a doubling of the screen's expected life.[46] In 2007, experimental PLEDs were created which can sustain 400 cd/m² of luminance for over 198,000 hours for green OLEDs and 62,000 hours for blue OLEDs.[47] Additionally, as consequence of the fact that light emitting components of different colors have different lifetimes, it's obvious that the quality of a color picture would degrade over time since emission of each color reduces by a different amount. At some point color picture quality would become unacceptable, so overall display lifetime could be even worse than lifetime of separate components because many uses are putting certain requirements on picture quality. This can be partially avoided by adjusting color balance but this may require advanced control circuits and interaction with user, which is unacceptable for some uses. The intrusion of water into displays can damage or destroy the organic materials. Therefore, improved sealing processes are important for practical manufacturing and may limit the longevity of more flexible displays.[48]
