Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Wall monutef TV help needed

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
June 25, 2005 1:06:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

I am planning to buy a HDTV for the family room. I think I am going for a
42" or 50" flat to be installed on the wall. I am not technical so I am all
confused about different TVs. How do I educate myself just enough to select
one? What should I look when I am buying one?

I am going to use it watch cable TV, DVD, VCR. I also have a Telestar 5
sattelite. I like to be able to connect my laptop to watch our digital
photos.

I also want to know how high a TV can be installed. I like to install it
above fireplace. The fireplace is not used.

There are 3 plasma 42" listed on Sams Club site. a CDS for $1500, a Samsung
for $1800, and a Dell for $2800. Why such a big range? Is any of them good?

Thanks

More about : wall monutef needed

Anonymous
June 25, 2005 8:46:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Ed" <Please@DontEmail.me> wrote in message
news:c9aa4$42bcbc46$18d68135$30855@KNOLOGY.NET...
> I am planning to buy a HDTV for the family room. I think I am going for a
> 42" or 50" flat to be installed on the wall. I am not technical so I am
all
> confused about different TVs. How do I educate myself just enough to
select
> one? What should I look when I am buying one?
>
> I am going to use it watch cable TV, DVD, VCR. I also have a Telestar 5
> sattelite. I like to be able to connect my laptop to watch our digital
> photos.
>
> I also want to know how high a TV can be installed. I like to install it
> above fireplace. The fireplace is not used.

You've got a problem. The center of the (visible display) portion of the
monitor should be no higher than eye level from your planned viewing area,
when you are sitting down. Put it above the fireplace, and you'll be
straining your neck to see a poor quality image (looking up is not a good
viewing angle for any monitor). That is, unless you intend to raise your
couch up about five feet off the floor. :) 

This specific problem is the reason that when I was house shopping I
insisted that (among other things) the house I bought would NOT have a
fireplace. It serves no useful purpose unless you really LOVE fireplaces
(some people do). Other than that, a fireplace is just a major pain in the
ASS when you are trying to organize a room. That goes double if you are
trying to set up a home theater of some kind in the same room.

If the fireplace is not used, consider removing it. Have a contractor wall
in that area, as where the fireplace is, is exactly where your monitor
should be. I say that as you were planning to put the monitor ABOVE The
fireplace. That tells me that the wall where the fireplace is would be a
good location for a monitor, if it was installed somewhere in front of where
the fireplace currently is. -Dave
Anonymous
June 25, 2005 8:46:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <42bdc27f$1$62508$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net> "Dave
C." <noway@nohow.not> writes:


>You've got a problem. The center of the (visible display) portion of the
>monitor should be no higher than eye level from your planned viewing area,
>when you are sitting down. Put it above the fireplace, and you'll be
>straining your neck to see a poor quality image (looking up is not a good
>viewing angle for any monitor). That is, unless you intend to raise your
>couch up about five feet off the floor. :) 
>
>This specific problem is the reason that when I was house shopping I
>insisted that (among other things) the house I bought would NOT have a
>fireplace. It serves no useful purpose unless you really LOVE fireplaces
>(some people do). Other than that, a fireplace is just a major pain in the
>ASS when you are trying to organize a room. That goes double if you are
>trying to set up a home theater of some kind in the same room.
>
>If the fireplace is not used, consider removing it. Have a contractor wall
>in that area, as where the fireplace is, is exactly where your monitor
>should be. I say that as you were planning to put the monitor ABOVE The
>fireplace. That tells me that the wall where the fireplace is would be a
>good location for a monitor, if it was installed somewhere in front of where
>the fireplace currently is. -Dave
>

All this is correct. However, one option available is for the user to
adjust the tilt angle of the mount such that when seated at the normal
viewing location the face of the display screen is straight-on and
perfectly perpendicular to the viewer(s). Depending on viewing distance
and installed height of the screen this could require as much as
30-degrees of down-tilt for a small room, say something 8 x 10 and an
installed height of approximately 6' and a seated (viewing) height of
approx 3'. I mention that because although most wall-mount kits allow for
minor tilt adjustments, none that I'm aware of can provide 30 degrees
without modification of the bracket or shimming the mounting surface.

I can understand the need or desire to place it high enough as to be "out
of reach" of toddlers who can easily destroy the face of the screen with
one of their toys.
Related resources
Anonymous
June 25, 2005 9:36:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>
> I can understand the need or desire to place it high enough as to be "out
> of reach" of toddlers who can easily destroy the face of the screen with
> one of their toys.

Well, the proper solution to that is to remove the toddlers from the home.
(JUST KIDDING!!!) Actually, your idea to tilt the monitor down would
probably work OK. Especially if you always sat in a reclined position while
watching TV. If it was my home, I'd just remove the fireplace and put a
heavy CRT monitor where it used to be. Then you wouldn't have to worry
about the toddlers too much. That is, unless you want to strap the TV to
the wall to prevent a toddler from tipping it over. (not a bad idea) -Dave
Anonymous
June 25, 2005 10:49:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <42bdce91$0$62503$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net> "Dave
C." <noway@nohow.not> writes:

>Well, the proper solution to that is to remove the toddlers from the home.
>(JUST KIDDING!!!) Actually, your idea to tilt the monitor down would
>probably work OK. Especially if you always sat in a reclined position while
>watching TV. If it was my home, I'd just remove the fireplace and put a
>heavy CRT monitor where it used to be. Then you wouldn't have to worry
>about the toddlers too much. That is, unless you want to strap the TV to
>the wall to prevent a toddler from tipping it over. (not a bad idea) -Dave

We actually came up with a slightly different solution to the toddler
problem and one which is extremely effective and failsafe. I promise you
by all things holy, the toddler absolutely **WILL NOT** touch that screen.

Given that virtually all toddlers bounce around the house either
barefooted or in sock feet or crawling on all fours, you can (and we did)
place a 24" deep by 7' wide strip of **DEEP PILE** plastic carpet runner
in front of the new entertainment center with the CLEATS FACING UP!!

I personally guaran-Goddamn-tee that will immediately halt any toddler as
well as all cats and dogs in their tracks! More importantly the child will
immediately learn, all by itself and without any further need of
corrective instruction that the area in front of the TV is OFF LIMITS,
without their parents (who don't believe in capital punishment) having to
ever once correct them or repeatedly holler at them while sitting there
watching the child completely ignore them as it destroys the screen of a
$3000 television.

Don't misunderstand. We love children. I just have little tolerance for
parents who allow their children to be out of control or completely ignore
them while they are allowed to run at large, wreaking havoc in their wake.
We are firm believers that there is nothing nicer than a well-trained dog
and nothing worse than a rude, ill-mannered child.
Anonymous
June 25, 2005 11:10:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"nonone" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:lGeve.1024551$w62.11337@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> My hubby wanted to get a "big TV", so I did some research. I wanted a TV
> that could truly handle high definition and be usable ten years from now
> when HDTV will be the norm rather than the exception.

I stopped right there. Nothing you buy now will be acceptable ten years from
now. Think how computers were ten years ago, and at that time, those of us
that started in 1980 felt that 1995 computers were pretty darn good
(remember 8.3 file names????!). Technology changes too fast, gets too much
better, and gets too much less expensive. Don't you agree?
Anonymous
June 26, 2005 2:38:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Mr Fixit" <MrFixit@msn.com> wrote in message
news:54brb11n5aivq4gt91iq942b21im4cjepf@4ax.com...
> The bottom line is stay with recommended major brands and purchase
> whatever looks good _to you_ while staying within your price range from
> among those recommended brands. Set the max price you can afford -before-
> going in to shop and stick to your budget.
>
> The only difference between EDTV and HDTV is the difference you can see
> and appreciate. If you can't readily see that difference, or the
> difference seems only minimal, then the extra money spent for the HD model
> is money wasted (except for bragging rights).
>
> Most wall-mountable Plasma screens are EDTV and the few that are true HDTV
> are doggoned expensive, so make sure the viewable performance difference
> really is worth the price difference to you. That price difference is
> likely to be substantial, so be sure this is a 9/9 decision that both you
> and your hubby are comfortable with. Prices are also dropping and the
> technology improving. I know you're looking for a "10-yr TV" but honestly
> I/m not sure that animal exists right now. At the current rate of
> technical advancement in widescreen televisions, the set you purchase
> today could be "yesterday's news" by next year and close to being obsolete
> in 6 or 7 years.
>

Most standard tv channels are broadcast at 480i whihc is roughly equivalent
to EDTV (480p), while HDTV is broadcast at 720p or 1080i. Here is my logic
as to why HDTV is better than EDTV. On my 42" TV, there is a huge
difference between normal TV channels (EDTV at 480i) and HDTV channels (720p
and 1080i). On the Discovery HD channel, the difference is like wearing
glasses and not wearing glasses, like the difference between having black
and white TV and having color TV. Granted, you need to have a larger TV to
see the difference, but it is a big difference.

But to be fair to the EDTV folks....
If you look at the CNET ratings, the 42" lower resolution Panasonic EDTV
received top ratings although they do point out that it does have lower
resolution. The top rated Panasonic 42" EDTV is $2k at either samsclub or
costco and teh HDTV pioneer 42" is $3k, so there is a price difference, but
the price difference isn't huge. But then if you go to the Cnet ratings the
Panasonic 42" EDTV did quite well beating out other displays wiht higher
resolutions. I chose not to buy the Panasonic 42" EDTV; instead I opted for
the higher resolution display, and I am glad I did.

http://reviews.cnet.com/Home_video/4521-6531_7-5021476-...

> The only difference between EDTV and HDTV is the difference you can see
> and appreciate. If you can't readily see that difference, or the
> difference seems only minimal, then the extra money spent for the HD model
> is money wasted (except for bragging rights).

Most stores do not have a high def. signal for their TVs, so you can't see
the difference in the stores. It is utterly stupid. How are they supposed
to sell high def TVs, if they don't show people the difference between high
def. and not high def? I went to Costco and looked at my TV on display
showing a horrible standard TV picture off of standard TV. The picture
looked lousy, nothing at all like when I see Discovery HD at home on the
same model. You really won't see the high def. difference until you get the
TV home and hook it up to a good high def. channel that happens to be
broadcasting high def. signals filmed with a high def. camera (like
Discovery HD). If you don't see a difference between normal TV channels and
high def. channels, you don't have a high def. TV. (assuming the picture is
filmed and broadcast in high def.) So that leaves us using reviews or word
of mouth to decide which TV is best.

At the higher end Best Buy store they only had one TV hooked up to a high
def. satellite signal (and you will only see high def. if is on a high def.
channel filmed with a high def. camera); all the rest of the high def. TVs
were mass fed a standard 480i DVD signal. I know all of this now, I did not
know it before I bought my TV.

But Mr. Fixit is right in that you have to choose how much you are going to
pay, and there will be something better and cheaper next month.

noone
Anonymous
June 26, 2005 5:53:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Z Man" <z1z@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Yulve.10458$ik5.8715@fe12.lga...
>
> "nonone" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:lGeve.1024551$w62.11337@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > My hubby wanted to get a "big TV", so I did some research. I wanted a TV
> > that could truly handle high definition and be usable ten years from now
> > when HDTV will be the norm rather than the exception.
>
> I stopped right there. Nothing you buy now will be acceptable ten years
from
> now. Think how computers were ten years ago, and at that time, those of us
> that started in 1980 felt that 1995 computers were pretty darn good
> (remember 8.3 file names????!). Technology changes too fast, gets too
much
> better, and gets too much less expensive. Don't you agree?
>
>

I agree with you on computers, but I don't agree that TVs will be obsolete
in ten years. The technology may change fast, but changing the
infrastructure to support TV technology is whole different story. With PCs,
you only have to change one box. With TVs, you have cameras, video game
systems, recording media, over the air broadcast infrastructure, satellite
infrastructure, tuners, receivers, and on and on. It is a lot more than just
changing out one box like a PC.

TVs are a different technology than chips and memory. A color TV from the
1960s would probably work just fine today and with enough adapters, you
could hook up anything to it. So TV technology is very slowwwwww. I am
assuming the slow change is due to the infrastructure that has to
change.technology?

At the rate HDTV is going, I think we will be lucky to have HDTV the norm in
ten years. Don't they want 85% of households to have an HD tuner before they
switch over?

noone
June 26, 2005 9:18:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Thanks everyone for very informative responses.

I looked at the Pioneer on the costco.com and I liked it. Unfortunately, the
sale is over and we are not a Costco member. We are a member in Sams club.
We may become a member just for the TV. Is the Pioneer a lot better than the
Dell advertised by Sams?

We have decided against the installation over the fireplace. My wife wants
to cover the fireplace and use the wall for TV. I want to use another wall.
I agree the fireplace wall is better but it will be expensive.

We'll see what happens.

Thanks again.
Anonymous
June 26, 2005 10:51:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"nonone" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:Cryve.1030182$w62.475954@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Z Man" <z1z@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Yulve.10458$ik5.8715@fe12.lga...
>>
>> "nonone" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:lGeve.1024551$w62.11337@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> > My hubby wanted to get a "big TV", so I did some research. I wanted a
>> > TV
>> > that could truly handle high definition and be usable ten years from
>> > now
>> > when HDTV will be the norm rather than the exception.
>>
>> I stopped right there. Nothing you buy now will be acceptable ten years
> from
>> now. Think how computers were ten years ago, and at that time, those of
>> us
>> that started in 1980 felt that 1995 computers were pretty darn good
>> (remember 8.3 file names????!). Technology changes too fast, gets too
> much
>> better, and gets too much less expensive. Don't you agree?
>>
>>
>
> I agree with you on computers, but I don't agree that TVs will be obsolete
> in ten years. The technology may change fast, but changing the
> infrastructure to support TV technology is whole different story. With
> PCs,
> you only have to change one box. With TVs, you have cameras, video game
> systems, recording media, over the air broadcast infrastructure, satellite
> infrastructure, tuners, receivers, and on and on. It is a lot more than
> just
> changing out one box like a PC.
>
> TVs are a different technology than chips and memory. A color TV from the
> 1960s would probably work just fine today and with enough adapters, you
> could hook up anything to it. So TV technology is very slowwwwww. I am
> assuming the slow change is due to the infrastructure that has to
> change.technology?
>
> At the rate HDTV is going, I think we will be lucky to have HDTV the norm
> in
> ten years. Don't they want 85% of households to have an HD tuner before
> they
> switch over?

The norm for whom? For some of us, myself included, HDTV is the norm right
now. Over the past couple of years, DirecTV has periodically added hi def
channels to the point where I now don't watch standard definition. I get all
the networks ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox) in HDTV format, and I also get
Showtime and HBO. Add to that DiscoveryHD, UHD, HDNet and HDNet Movies, and
its enough TV to fill my schedule. Go one more step and add my Hidef DirecTV
Tivo, and I am normally watching HDTV almost 100% of the time I have the set
turned on. If you go back even two years, I was watching barely 10% hidef,
and that was the norm. I like this norm a lot better. I get far more
enjoyment from the enhanced video and sound. Yet, some people just don't
care. I think they should watch whatever they want. Have you ever passed by
a car blasting a loud distorted sound system that made you cringe? The
person doing that actually likes it, and that's normal for them, and fine by
me. 'Nuf said?
Anonymous
June 27, 2005 1:15:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Get the Pioneer.

In article <ba168$42bf29c9$18d68135$14310@KNOLOGY.NET> "Ed"
<Please@DontEmail.me> writes:

>Thanks everyone for very informative responses.
>
>I looked at the Pioneer on the costco.com and I liked it. Unfortunately, the
>sale is over and we are not a Costco member. We are a member in Sams club.
>We may become a member just for the TV. Is the Pioneer a lot better than the
>Dell advertised by Sams?
>
>We have decided against the installation over the fireplace. My wife wants
>to cover the fireplace and use the wall for TV. I want to use another wall.
>I agree the fireplace wall is better but it will be expensive.
>
>We'll see what happens.
>
>Thanks again.
>
Anonymous
June 27, 2005 11:24:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

I agree. I got the Pioneer. Honking box, though.

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 21:15:36 -0500, MrFixit@msn.com (Mr Fixit) wrote:

>Get the Pioneer.
>
>In article <ba168$42bf29c9$18d68135$14310@KNOLOGY.NET> "Ed"
><Please@DontEmail.me> writes:
>
>>Thanks everyone for very informative responses.
>>
>>I looked at the Pioneer on the costco.com and I liked it. Unfortunately, the
>>sale is over and we are not a Costco member. We are a member in Sams club.
>>We may become a member just for the TV. Is the Pioneer a lot better than the
>>Dell advertised by Sams?
>>
>>We have decided against the installation over the fireplace. My wife wants
>>to cover the fireplace and use the wall for TV. I want to use another wall.
>>I agree the fireplace wall is better but it will be expensive.
>>
>>We'll see what happens.
>>
>>Thanks again.
>>
June 27, 2005 11:23:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

What is Honking box?


"Scribner" <walter3ca@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fcavb1l8s35fhtg78jsjp4ianfjfc002lo@4ax.com...
>I agree. I got the Pioneer. Honking box, though.
>
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 21:15:36 -0500, MrFixit@msn.com (Mr Fixit) wrote:
>
>>Get the Pioneer.
>>
>>In article <ba168$42bf29c9$18d68135$14310@KNOLOGY.NET> "Ed"
>><Please@DontEmail.me> writes:
>>
>>>Thanks everyone for very informative responses.
>>>
>>>I looked at the Pioneer on the costco.com and I liked it. Unfortunately,
>>>the
>>>sale is over and we are not a Costco member. We are a member in Sams
>>>club.
>>>We may become a member just for the TV. Is the Pioneer a lot better than
>>>the
>>>Dell advertised by Sams?
>>>
>>>We have decided against the installation over the fireplace. My wife
>>>wants
>>>to cover the fireplace and use the wall for TV. I want to use another
>>>wall.
>>>I agree the fireplace wall is better but it will be expensive.
>>>
>>>We'll see what happens.
>>>
>>>Thanks again.
>>>
>
Anonymous
June 28, 2005 9:16:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Bigger than my car. A Costco guy had to disassemble it for me. He
says that he does it all the time.

On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 19:23:48 -0500, "Ed" <Please@DontEmail.me> wrote:

>What is Honking box?
>
>
>"Scribner" <walter3ca@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:fcavb1l8s35fhtg78jsjp4ianfjfc002lo@4ax.com...
>>I agree. I got the Pioneer. Honking box, though.
>>
>> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 21:15:36 -0500, MrFixit@msn.com (Mr Fixit) wrote:
>>
>>>Get the Pioneer.
>>>
>>>In article <ba168$42bf29c9$18d68135$14310@KNOLOGY.NET> "Ed"
>>><Please@DontEmail.me> writes:
>>>
>>>>Thanks everyone for very informative responses.
>>>>
>>>>I looked at the Pioneer on the costco.com and I liked it. Unfortunately,
>>>>the
>>>>sale is over and we are not a Costco member. We are a member in Sams
>>>>club.
>>>>We may become a member just for the TV. Is the Pioneer a lot better than
>>>>the
>>>>Dell advertised by Sams?
>>>>
>>>>We have decided against the installation over the fireplace. My wife
>>>>wants
>>>>to cover the fireplace and use the wall for TV. I want to use another
>>>>wall.
>>>>I agree the fireplace wall is better but it will be expensive.
>>>>
>>>>We'll see what happens.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks again.
>>>>
>>
>
Anonymous
July 3, 2005 2:06:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Tell you what, we installed our Sony 42" plasma over our unused fireplace,
and couldn't be happier! Our living room has nothing but La-Z-boy recliners,
so the viewing angle is absolutely perfect, much like a theater, actually.

If you do decide to it yourself, make sure you have lots of help (big guys
if possible.) My 4'11" wife helped me lift our 90 pound TV up to the mantle
over the fireplace, then she said that she didn't think that she could get
it up to the mount. There I was, holding the TV up against the wall on the
mantle, all by lonesome, while she went and grabbed our daughter (4'10" at
95 pounds) and some step stools, and all three of us finally managed to heft
it into the mount. Damn near killed her, though! I had visions of my brand
new multi-thousand dollar TV crashing to the floor, so I won't be trying
THAT again without major help!

Best of luck,

Phil

"Ed" <Please@DontEmail.me> wrote in message
news:ba168$42bf29c9$18d68135$14310@KNOLOGY.NET...
> Thanks everyone for very informative responses.
>
> I looked at the Pioneer on the costco.com and I liked it. Unfortunately,
> the sale is over and we are not a Costco member. We are a member in Sams
> club. We may become a member just for the TV. Is the Pioneer a lot better
> than the Dell advertised by Sams?
>
> We have decided against the installation over the fireplace. My wife wants
> to cover the fireplace and use the wall for TV. I want to use another
> wall. I agree the fireplace wall is better but it will be expensive.
>
> We'll see what happens.
>
> Thanks again.
>
>
!