A/V Experts - I could use a little help
 

I am looking for a big screen HD TV, and am overwhelmed by the variety and technology out there. Sales people aren't really helpful - they just want to sell me something and don't really have any clear answers to my questions.

I have managed to get a few needs identified.

I want a true 1080p capable set, I can see the difference in picture quality even though 720p and 1080i are still really good.

I want a set at least 50", but am leaning towards 60".

Wife says she does not want to spend $3,000 on a tv, which translates into focusing on one of the rear projectors over plasma and lcd flat screens.

Picture quality is the main interest I have - I will go with a 50" inch over a larger screen if the picture is noticeably better with the smaller one.

I really like the picture of the Sony KDSR60XBR2. It is the only rear projection set I went Wow! over. Unfortunately, it is $3,000 and I don't think the wife will budge.

There is a 67" Samsung (HLT6176S) at Costco for $2,800 that will be on sale early August for $2,400, but it appears that Samsung will (has?) introduced better technology?

Sony, JVC and Samsung all seem to have different technology although the picture quality seems to be pretty equivalent. Is there any that have a true advantage?

Is there anything else I should be looking at? Do you have experience / recommendations?

Thanks!

Kevin

Search this forum for info. It's my second favorite. ;)

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/index.php

I shopped for TV's for over 6 months.

TV size is based on the size of the room and more importantly viewing distance from the screen. A good rule to use is the 3.5x multiplier. If you are sitting 13' away from the screen then take 13 x 3.5 = 46. So a 46" or 50 " TV is just right. A 67" in this setting is too large and will look a little grainy (possibly) from that distance. Remember, even the best TV using HD is still not perfect from a close distance. The picture quality gets much better the farther away you get from the set. Selecting a set standing 2' in front of the screen is not realistic.

Lessor priced TV's are cheaper for a reason. Do not believe that a $1,500 TV is just as good as some of the $3,000 TV's. You will be able to tell the difference as your video source improves. The feeds in the stores suck. The only thing that matters is your source at home.

Cheap DVD players look like crap on an HD TV.

Use an antenna for local channel reception - amazing picture quality. So good you may want to cancel cable, dish, etc.

LCD is better in brightly lit rooms and tight spaces.

Plasmas are fine but are heavy, have glare on the screens from windows and get really hot.

Rear projections can have fine picture quality but are very large and cannot be mounted on a wall to free up the space on the floor below them.

Stick with the major manufacturers and buy it from a store you can return it to if you do not like it.

Standard definition sources will look better on the old tv you are getting rid of versus the brand new HD set.

Check out some of the threads we've done here- I went through this in January.

One piece of advice- don't have resolution (1080p) as your primary parameter. Its actually about 3rd or 4th on the list of specs affecting picture quality. The tv's processing makes a bigger impact, as does the contrast ratio, etc. Chances are, if you are shopping rear-projection, that most will be 1080p anyhow.

Best thing to do is view sets in your range/size parameters, hooked up directly to a high-quality source (blue-ray or HDDVD). The signal going to all of the tvs in the stores sucks, and can't be used for testing.

The Sony SXRD projection models are pretty damn impressive, and should be within your budget. Technologically, they are supposedly better than DLP, which to my eye is a little iffy. Then again, you have different eyes.

Test, test, test. That's my advice. Consider a small A/V shop instead of the big-boxes. They'll have intelligent people, and equipment hooked up correctly.

And as mentioned, watch HD over antenna when possible. On cable, the signal is compressed, and it shows. The over-air signal is digital, so its all or nothing- no static issues.

And Standard-Def will look pretty poopy on anything you get. Its just how it is.

The source equipment is really the most important part. A $5000 tv hooked up to a regular DVD player through a coax cable will look like poop. I have been in people's houses and seen setups like that. Oof.

Rammstein makes a good point I forgot to mention. The better processors will make sports look better. While viewing live sports, it takes a very fast processor to keep up with the movement of the camera. Lots of TV's have a lag that is noticeable. The larger the screen the more noticeable this lag will become.

Yay- I made a good point!!!! That calls for a stiff glass of scotch when I get home. First thing I have accomplished all week!

In all seriousness, the point that should be taken from all of this is to throw the specs out the window and let your eyes make the decisions. If a Camaro has fatter tires and more horsepower than your Porsche, it doesn't necessarily mean it feels better. Same rules apply to the tv- test drive.

If I had ordered my tv by specs, I think I would have been disappointed with the results.

Thanks, guys!

The distance from the set information is good to know. In this case, the main viewing position is a sofa about 15 ft directly in front of the set and 4 side chairs getting as close as 8 ft. Sounds like I should be looking more at 50" to accomodate all.

We don't get over the air signals where I live. Initially the source will be DirecTV through one of their HD receivers.

Just what makes for a better processor? How can I tell other than seat of the pants vision?

Again, thanks for making this comprehensible.

Kevin

Its pretty much going to be seat of the pants. There's not really a spec out there to quantify processing quality.