Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

HDTV set reviews?

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 3:58:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

I am in the market for a new TV, something 50" or over and either LCD or
DLP. I have a few models I have looked at and I am trying to find a
good website that has reviews on it. So far I have struck out. I'd
appreciate any help I could get.

BTW, so far, I am interested in:
Mitsubishi 52" WD 52525
Toshiba 52" 52HM84
RCA 50" HD50LPW42
Panasonic 50" PT 50LC14

If anyone has any opinions on those TV's or those brands, please feel
free to chime in.

Thanks!
--
Jim S.

More about : hdtv set reviews

Anonymous
August 26, 2004 6:37:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

If you can hold off, Consumer Reports comes out with a great HDTV
Review magazine. It has all the screen sizes, methods and brands
listed form #1 to #10 and the CR best buy. The magazine came out in
November 2003.

It looks like other brands are offering some DLP sets although Samsung
was first with a good selection. One problem being the bulb
replacement may cost up to $350 when needed. I read that somewhere.
You would think bulb prices would come down.

The Sony 34" KD-34XBR960 is a top direct view set. I spent two months
looking at various reviews and comments. Last November's issue of
Consumer Reports said the KV-34XBR910 was the set to compare other
hdtv sets too. About the time I was to order I found at cnet.com
site that showed the new listing of Sony sets. That's when I switched
to the newer 960. Its was only when the new set went up for sale did
Sony list it on their homepage, SonyStyle.com. If you buy any new
hdtv set be sure to open the sets menu and set it to 1080 for best
performance.

Try Google and search for, sony shows, toshiba shows, samsung shows to
try to find the newest models and release dates.

Your right about wanting the larger screen 42" is ok but the 52" would
be much better. People don't realize the newer receivers and all the
newer hdtv's have a enhancing chip. Even the regular satellite shows
look great.

The trend seems to be headed for the wide screen sets, especially for
dvd rentals. HBO and others have also been showing more widescreen
movies. Football games in HD widescreen are very impressive like
Monday Night Football.

Be careful below, some sites may not be that current. I do trust
Consumer Reports best.

Watch for the (sets date) that are reviewed . Before you buy be sure
you go to the manufactures homepage to see if you buying the newest
model number.

Look at some dlp sets like at Best Buy. Ask the salesman which sets
are dlp. Dlp sets give a great sharp picture. The newest models have
improved color, more contrast and plenty of brightness. No worry of
burn-in. Steer clear of RCA now that Thompson bought them
out. They have also had some quality issues but may improve.

click electronics and computes when this page loads:
http://www.consumerreports.org/main/home.jsp?bhfv=7&bhq...
more hdtv stuff:
http://products.consumerguide.com/cp/electronics/browse...
a sony list of new model sets coming out now:
http://att.com.com/4520-8900_7-5123305-1.html?tag=promo...
some interesting good stuff here:
http://www.hometheaterfocus.com/televisions/tv-shopping...
i think i see some HDTV reviews here below:
http://att.com.com/Televisions/2001-6475_7-0.html?tag=g...
epinions is interesting. type in any model your interested in to see
if other owners have made comments on the set. You can read what
others have experienced with various hdtv sets they have purchased.
http://www.epinions.com/elec-Video-Televisions-All

hdtvfan


On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:58:36 -0500, "Jim S."
<quint_75@nowayinhellcharter.net> wrote:

>I am in the market for a new TV, something 50" or over and either LCD or
>DLP. I have a few models I have looked at and I am trying to find a
>good website that has reviews on it. So far I have struck out. I'd
>appreciate any help I could get.
>
>BTW, so far, I am interested in:
>Mitsubishi 52" WD 52525
>Toshiba 52" 52HM84
>RCA 50" HD50LPW42
>Panasonic 50" PT 50LC14
>
>If anyone has any opinions on those TV's or those brands, please feel
>free to chime in.
>
>Thanks!
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 5:51:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

hdtvfan wrote:

> If you can hold off, Consumer Reports comes out with a great HDTV
> Review magazine.

DO NOT TRUST Consumer Reports with ANY product as high-tech
as an HDTV .. they are INCAPABLE of good reviews of such things.



> The Sony 34" KD-34XBR960 is a top direct view set. I spent two months
> looking at various reviews and comments. Last November's issue of
> Consumer Reports said the KV-34XBR910 was the set to compare other
> hdtv sets too.

Utterly false. It may well be the standard of direct view
sets, but is not in the league of the larger projection sets. Not
even the same league. I've seen both together, believe me.


**THE** place to look for advice is www.avsforum.com

Doug McDonald
Related resources
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 12:52:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

I think you'll be more satisfied with DLP Vs LCD. All DLP sets utilize a
basic light engine built by Texas Instruments, but each manufacturer builds
their own chassis, mirrors and screens...so each set's performance will be
somewhat different. DLP's should have superior contrast to most LCD based
sets. Also, all DLP sets will be 720p "native" resolution...if that's of
any significance to you. It is correct that all these sets will use a
projection lamp that is not cheap to replace; however, when you do that, the
overall performance of the set should remain almost unchanged over the life
of the set, Vs the aging of traditional tube based projection sets or even
LCD's.

You may wish to consider Samsung sets as they are very well priced, though
I'm not expert on them, they've been well received by several of the
reviewers.

I agree that Consumer's Report is not necessarily the "bible" on high tech
products such as HDTV. Their criteria may or may not be what makes a
difference to you. You may find some help at www.cnet.com.

Hope this helps...


"Jim S." <quint_75@nowayinhellcharter.net> wrote in message
news:412D6DFC.3A6D2DD7@nowayinhellcharter.net...
> I am in the market for a new TV, something 50" or over and either LCD or
> DLP. I have a few models I have looked at and I am trying to find a
> good website that has reviews on it. So far I have struck out. I'd
> appreciate any help I could get.
>
> BTW, so far, I am interested in:
> Mitsubishi 52" WD 52525
> Toshiba 52" 52HM84
> RCA 50" HD50LPW42
> Panasonic 50" PT 50LC14
>
> If anyone has any opinions on those TV's or those brands, please feel
> free to chime in.
>
> Thanks!
> --
> Jim S.
>
>
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 12:52:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Weekend Guru wrote:

> I think you'll be more satisfied with DLP Vs LCD.

This depends on whether you can stand the rainbows ...
some people cannot.


>
All DLP sets utilize a
> basic light engine built by Texas Instruments, but each manufacturer builds
> their own chassis, mirrors and screens...so each set's performance will be
> somewhat different. DLP's should have superior contrast to most LCD based
> sets. Also, all DLP sets will be 720p "native" resolution...if that's of
> any significance to you.

Many LCD sets are also 720p native, the main exception being Sony.

>>BTW, so far, I am interested in:
>>Mitsubishi 52" WD 52525
>>Toshiba 52" 52HM84
>>RCA 50" HD50LPW42
>>Panasonic 50" PT 50LC14
>

The RCA is inferior.

You absolutely must look at the Samsung DLPs. I have
a Panny PT40LC12 and love it, and the PT50LC14 is better.
But the Sammies are superb too, if the rainbows don't bother
you. I bought my Panny while the Sammies were vapor ...
and I can see rainbows, but they probably would not
be a showstopper.

Doug McDonald
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 4:22:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Thanks to all that have replied to my question. I have a few more, if
you don't mind:

-I keep hearing that the viewing angle for DLP TV's is pretty narrow.
How narrow are we talking about, and are the LCD TV's better?

-Is it better to get a TV with the digital tuner integrated? I am
looking at the Toshiba 52HM84 vs. the Toshiba 52HM94. The 94 comes with
ATSC/QAM Tuners and a Digital Cable Ready CableCARD Slot. Are these
worth extra money or is there any advantage of NOT having integrated
tuners?

-What exactly are the "rainbow effects" mentioned, and how bad are they?

I mainly plan on using the TV for watching DVD's, sports and some HD TV
stations. I am not (obviously) a big videophile where everything has to
be top-of-the-line. I'd like a good, solid TV that I don't have to
worry about.

Thanks so much for any help!
--
Jim S.
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 9:42:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jim S. wrote:

> Thanks to all that have replied to my question. I have a few more, if
> you don't mind:
>
> -I keep hearing that the viewing angle for DLP TV's is pretty narrow.
> How narrow are we talking about, and are the LCD TV's better?
>
> -Is it better to get a TV with the digital tuner integrated? I am
> looking at the Toshiba 52HM84 vs. the Toshiba 52HM94. The 94 comes with
> ATSC/QAM Tuners and a Digital Cable Ready CableCARD Slot. Are these
> worth extra money or is there any advantage of NOT having integrated
> tuners?

Yes there is an advantage. You don't get stuck with a bad receiver.
Since there are no good receivers on the market yet it doesn't make
sense to buy an integrated set today that is guaranteed to have an
inferior receiver in it. Buy an HDTV monitor, buy a separate receiver
now for it if you must and then sell it on Ebay and buy a fifth gen
receiver when they come out later this year.

Later next year you will be able to buy integrated sets with 5th gen
receiver technology in them. No problem, buy one, THEN, not now.
>
> -What exactly are the "rainbow effects" mentioned, and how bad are they?
>
> I mainly plan on using the TV for watching DVD's, sports and some HD TV
> stations. I am not (obviously) a big videophile where everything has to
> be top-of-the-line. I'd like a good, solid TV that I don't have to
> worry about.
>
> Thanks so much for any help!
> --
> Jim S.
>
>
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 9:42:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

> Jim S. wrote:
>
> > -Is it better to get a TV with the digital tuner integrated? I am
> > looking at the Toshiba 52HM84 vs. the Toshiba 52HM94. The 94 comes with
> > ATSC/QAM Tuners and a Digital Cable Ready CableCARD Slot. Are these
> > worth extra money or is there any advantage of NOT having integrated
> > tuners?
>
> Yes there is an advantage. You don't get stuck with a bad receiver.
> Since there are no good receivers on the market yet it doesn't make
> sense to buy an integrated set today that is guaranteed to have an
> inferior receiver in it. Buy an HDTV monitor, buy a separate receiver
> now for it if you must and then sell it on Ebay and buy a fifth gen
> receiver when they come out later this year.
>
> Later next year you will be able to buy integrated sets with 5th gen
> receiver technology in them. No problem, buy one, THEN, not now.

Wow, that's kind of what I was wondering. Is it pretty much a consensus on
this matter, or are there a lot of differing opinions?

Thanks,
--
Jim S.
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 3:40:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jim S. wrote:
> Bob Miller wrote:
>
>>
>>Yes there is an advantage. You don't get stuck with a bad receiver.

>
> Wow, that's kind of what I was wondering. Is it pretty much a consensus on
> this matter, or are there a lot of differing opinions?


No, there is no concensus.

You must understand who Bob Miller is ... his prime and probably
only goal in life it to attack the US OTA DTV transmission
system and push the European system over it.

You can and should completely ignore his advice.

Unless you plan to use your bigscreen TV in a mobile home,
his advice is silly ... the present 4th generation receivers
work great. For example, a friend of mine is using my third
generation receiver with a simple bidirectional antenna
in his basement, and he gets all stations within 40 miles
just fine.


Doug McDonald
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 4:13:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jim S. (quint_75@nowayinhellcharter.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
> Wow, that's kind of what I was wondering. Is it pretty much a consensus on
> this matter, or are there a lot of differing opinions?

Bob Miller is pretty much the only one with this opinion, since he has
an axe to grind about ATSC and 8VSB.

I have various generations of HD receivers from 1st to 4th, and they all
perform almost exactly the same, and all are wonderful. There is nothing
that a 5th generation receiver could offer me, and I do have some difficult
reception situations.

--
Jeff Rife | "You are now dead. Thank you for using Stop and
SPAM bait: | Drop, America's favorite Suicide Booth since
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | 2008."
spam@ftc.gov | -- "Futurama"
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 4:19:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:

> Jim S. (quint_75@nowayinhellcharter.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
> > Wow, that's kind of what I was wondering. Is it pretty much a consensus on
> > this matter, or are there a lot of differing opinions?
>
> Bob Miller is pretty much the only one with this opinion, since he has
> an axe to grind about ATSC and 8VSB.
>
> I have various generations of HD receivers from 1st to 4th, and they all
> perform almost exactly the same, and all are wonderful. There is nothing
> that a 5th generation receiver could offer me, and I do have some difficult
> reception situations.

Thanks for the reply. Still, would you recommend an integrated tuner, or one
that you buy separately? I'm just wondering if there are advantages to buying a
separate tuner.

Thanks!
--
Jim S.
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 6:40:37 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jim S. (quint_75@nowayinhellcharter.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
> Thanks for the reply. Still, would you recommend an integrated tuner, or one
> that you buy separately? I'm just wondering if there are advantages to buying a
> separate tuner.

If you don't spend a premium for an integrated tuner, go for it! Adding less
than $300 to the cost would be just fine, in my opinion. If you really need
some new feature that a later external tuner offers, there's nothing to stop
you from using both.

This is especially true if you get a set with an OTA tuner *and* an digital
cable tuner with CableCard slot. You really can't go wrong if you get a
set with this built in.

The advantages to an internal HDTV tuner:
- No need to use up an input, and most internal tuners have the same
quality as a DVI connection, while many sets don't have nearly enough
DVI inputs.
- Usually better integration with other inputs, and you might even be able
to do picture-in-picture for HD (it depends on the set).

The disadvantages to an internal HDTV tuner:
- None...even the cost isn't a big deal because an external STB costs
*something*, and you're not likely to be able to sell an old external
tuner for a lot if you upgrade. And, there's nothing to stop you from
buying an external tuner later.

I have a set with an built-in HDTV tuner and I probably won't buy another
TV until I can find the picture quality I want along with the built-in
HDTV tuner.

--
Jeff Rife | "He's an investment banker from Amsterdam.
SPAM bait: | Apparently he handles a lot of Bill Gates'
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov | money, so, don't say anything derogatory
spam@ftc.gov | about the Netherlands or Microsoft."
| "Oh, damn...there goes my opening joke about
| the Dutchman trying to install Windows 95."
| -- Niles and Frasier
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 8:06:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Doug McDonald <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote:

> **THE** place to look for advice is www.avsforum.com


Definitely.

You'll likely get expert advice there from people who already own the
equipment you're considering purchasing.

For advice/info on displays, go this area at AVSForum:
<http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?s=&foru...;
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 8:48:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Thanks everyone for your replies. Now I have to decide if waiting until
October for the 52HM94 (with integrated tuner) is something I can live
with.
--
Jim S.
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 10:08:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

nonex wrote:
> Doug McDonald <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>
>
>>**THE** place to look for advice is www.avsforum.com
>
>
>
> Definitely.
>
> You'll likely get expert advice there from people who already own the
> equipment you're considering purchasing.
>
> For advice/info on displays, go this area at AVSForum:
> <http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?s=&foru...;

The problem with AVSForum is that it is monitored and anything that
suggest that there is a problem with the DTV transition is censored with
a sensitivity to their sponsors.

A lot of people have gone through a whole succession of 8-VSB receivers
trying to get a decent one over the last 5 years listening to very BAD
advice put out by AVSForum.

They are incapable of allowing a discussion of the true merits of the US
modulation or the real problems that all 8-VSB receivers have had till now.

Take anything you read there with a grain of salt and get a second
opinion somewhere else. You never know what has been deleted.

Deleted post have including most foreign comment on our transition. Not
politically correct those foreigners.

I trade emails with a dozen veterans there who know how to carefully
word their post so as not to be deleted. It is an art that I didn't
learn. They try to delete anything I post.

The reality of just how bad all 8-VSB receivers to date are and have
been will become very apparent when tested against the 5th generation LG
receiver that will be out in the fourth quarter/first quarter.

There is no 8-VSB receiver on the market that should have ever been
sold. They are all alpha at best.

The 5th generation receiver is the fist that should ever have been sold.
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 10:08:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:

>
> The problem with AVSForum is that it is monitored and anything that
> suggest that there is a problem with the DTV transition is censored with
> a sensitivity to their sponsors.
>

Folks here, that is incorrect .... almost anybody can say
almost anything. The only people who are censored are
people like Bob Miller who is a broken record, saying the
same things over and over again, and showing signs of simply
attacking either because they are hired guns or have some
sort of compulsion.


> A lot of people have gone through a whole succession of 8-VSB receivers
> trying to get a decent one over the last 5 years listening to very BAD
> advice put out by AVSForum.

This is not true ... very few people in the US have trouble
receiving DTV except when the transmitters are running
below the officially allocated power. Very few indeed.
Bob Miller takes a very few special cases in very very
unusual areas and incorrectly assumes most people are like those.


> Take anything you read there with a grain of salt and get a second
> opinion somewhere else. You never know what has been deleted.

What you read there is a good cross section of the truth. It simply
has the serial regurgitative attackers like Bob Miller and
Dermot Nolan banned.



>
> Deleted post have including most foreign comment on our transition. Not
> politically correct those foreigners.

Incorrect ... Dermot has never been big there.


>
> The 5th generation receiver is the fist that should ever have been sold.

That's simply and utterly absurd ... present receivers work just
fine for almost everybody.

As an example, I lent an old Samsung to a friend ... and he put
a Radio Shack double bowtie antenna WITH THE REFLECTOR REMOVED
near the TV in his basement (with copper lined 8 inch think concrete
walls) and quickly found a spot where all local stations are totally
reliable. These vary from 11 to 35 miles, and some are running
only 1 kW. The only station he does not get in the basement
is 67 miles away.

Doug McDonald
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 10:20:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jeff Rife wrote:

> Jim S. (quint_75@nowayinhellcharter.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>
>>Wow, that's kind of what I was wondering. Is it pretty much a consensus on
>>this matter, or are there a lot of differing opinions?
>
>
> Bob Miller is pretty much the only one with this opinion, since he has
> an axe to grind about ATSC and 8VSB.
>
> I have various generations of HD receivers from 1st to 4th, and they all
> perform almost exactly the same, and all are wonderful. There is nothing
> that a 5th generation receiver could offer me, and I do have some difficult
> reception situations.
>
There are some folk who think because a receiver or even most receivers
work in their situation then they should work for everyone. Better not
ever move Jeff. You may have a nasty surprise at a new location.

The simple facts are that with all current 8-VSB receivers multipath is
a real problem in a real percentage of situations. MSTV test in 2000
suggested from 30 to 70 % of locations had unexceptable reception of
8-VSB. Since then while some claim there have been improvements in 8-VSB
receivers other suggest that they are minimal to zero.

Reality will strike with the sale of these 5th generation receivers. You
are going to hear a lot of people who are going to be real p***ed off
after having paid a lot for other earlier receivers, fought to make them
work with arcane antennas and voodoo advice and then witness the
difference with 4th gen.

This will be the first time that something with 8-VSB will approximate
fixed reception achievable with COFDM since 1999 in a fixed environment.

I am going to enjoy the response. The howling and gnashing of teeth when
many discover just how big a rip off has been promulgated on the US over
the last five years will be significant.
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 10:20:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Bob Miller wrote:
>
>
> The simple facts are that with all current 8-VSB receivers multipath is
> a real problem in a real percentage of situations.

Yes, that's true .... perhaps 5% of situations where there is
adequate power will have multipath problems with some receivers.


> MSTV test in 2000
> suggested from 30 to 70 % of locations had unexceptable reception of
> 8-VSB.

Well, not exactly .... a fair percentage of location INSIDE
A BIG CITY had problems with street level antennas with
2000 vintage receivers.

But the vast majority of situations are not like that.



> I am going to enjoy the response. The howling and gnashing of teeth when
> many discover just how big a rip off has been promulgated on the US over
> the last five years will be significant.

Utter poppycock. Virtually everybody who has bought a receiver
recently has seen it work fine. And in any case, everybody
buys from BB and CC who have a 30 day return policy.

Bob Miller seems to think that everybody lives in a city
with nothing but tall buildings and the transmitters in the
wrong place. They don't.

As you will note .... he is all-attack-mode. That's all he
does. Ignore him.

Doug McDonald
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 10:27:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Doug McDonald wrote:

> Jim S. wrote:
>
>> Bob Miller wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Yes there is an advantage. You don't get stuck with a bad receiver.
>
>
>>
>> Wow, that's kind of what I was wondering. Is it pretty much a
>> consensus on
>> this matter, or are there a lot of differing opinions?
>
>
>
> No, there is no concensus.
>
> You must understand who Bob Miller is ... his prime and probably
> only goal in life it to attack the US OTA DTV transmission
> system and push the European system over it.
>
> You can and should completely ignore his advice.
>
> Unless you plan to use your bigscreen TV in a mobile home,
> his advice is silly ... the present 4th generation receivers
> work great. For example, a friend of mine is using my third
> generation receiver with a simple bidirectional antenna
> in his basement, and he gets all stations within 40 miles
> just fine.
>
>
> Doug McDonald

Again a single instance and irrelevant.
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 10:40:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jim S. wrote:

> Jeff Rife wrote:
>
>
>>Jim S. (quint_75@nowayinhellcharter.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>>
>>>Wow, that's kind of what I was wondering. Is it pretty much a consensus on
>>>this matter, or are there a lot of differing opinions?
>>
>>Bob Miller is pretty much the only one with this opinion, since he has
>>an axe to grind about ATSC and 8VSB.
>>
>>I have various generations of HD receivers from 1st to 4th, and they all
>>perform almost exactly the same, and all are wonderful. There is nothing
>>that a 5th generation receiver could offer me, and I do have some difficult
>>reception situations.
>
>
> Thanks for the reply. Still, would you recommend an integrated tuner, or one
> that you buy separately? I'm just wondering if there are advantages to buying a
> separate tuner.
>
> Thanks!
> --
> Jim S.
>
>
BTW Jim, Bob Miller, moi, is not the only one with this opinion. How
Doug gets such b***s to say this is beyond me.

The entire TV industry is excited about the test that Sinclair and we
did in recent months with 5th generation receivers. Sinclair, myself and
such as Mark Schubin are now being seen as having the credibility to say
that these 5th generation receivers actually work because for years
people such as Doug have been leading many to buy into DTV and get stuck
with inferior technology.

The entire TV industry has lived with the understanding that 8-VSB was
not ready for prime time since 2000. Do a Google, read AVSForum and see
all the problems. They are endless. Better yet wait for the response
from those who first get 5th generation receivers.

By the way there will be a lot of new business plans that will offer
free receivers and discounted HDTV and SDTV sets next year for
subscription services. All these free receivers and HDTV/SDTV sets will
come with ONLY 5th generation receivers. These new subscription services
could not exist except for the new 5th generation receivers.

The first is already in operation and offers an 8-VSB HDTV receivers for
$19.95 with a second receiver for $4.95 a month.

http://usdtv.com/
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 10:53:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Jim S. wrote:

> Jeff Rife wrote:
>
>
>>Jim S. (quint_75@nowayinhellcharter.net) wrote in alt.video.digital-tv:
>>
>>>Wow, that's kind of what I was wondering. Is it pretty much a consensus on
>>>this matter, or are there a lot of differing opinions?
>>
>>Bob Miller is pretty much the only one with this opinion, since he has
>>an axe to grind about ATSC and 8VSB.
>>
>>I have various generations of HD receivers from 1st to 4th, and they all
>>perform almost exactly the same, and all are wonderful. There is nothing
>>that a 5th generation receiver could offer me, and I do have some difficult
>>reception situations.
>
>
> Thanks for the reply. Still, would you recommend an integrated tuner, or one
> that you buy separately? I'm just wondering if there are advantages to buying a
> separate tuner.
>
> Thanks!
> --
> Jim S.
>
>
One more thing I forgot.

http://technology360.typepad.com/technology360/2004/07/...

Dennis Haarsager thinks there is a problem with 8-VSB reception, Mark
Schubin does and Richard Bogner also.
Then there are the folks at Sinclair. ABC sent a letter to the FCC
saying that they would really prefer COFDM. The DoD wanted the nation to
use COFDM for Homeland Security and that was before 9/11. They were very
frustrated with the FCC and asked us and Sinclair to give them a
demonstration of COFDM at Ground Zero in November of 2001.

There are a few (million) besides myself that have a problem with 8-VSB.
Anonymous
August 28, 2004 3:24:05 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:cgno56$qdp$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...

< snip >
.... the present 4th generation receivers
> work great. For example, a friend of mine is using my third
> generation receiver with a simple bidirectional antenna
> in his basement, and he gets all stations within 40 miles
> just fine.

< snip >

I'm not in the TV business, so I lack access to application notes,
press releases and the like for each year's new models.

Where can I look up what constitutes a third- or fourth-generation
DTV receiver. I have a Samsung SIR-T160. What generation is
that? ... and what makes it so? ... the chipset?

Internet searching found me references to the year 2000 as third-
generation time, with breadboarded fourth-generation units being
shown in limited demonstrations.

I remember we went through this BS with phone modems, when
not all products of a rated speed were equal because of one thing
and another.

Thanks,
"Sal"
Anonymous
August 28, 2004 8:17:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

"Jim S." <quint75@nowayinhellcharter.net> wrote:

> Thanks everyone for your replies. Now I have to decide if waiting
> until October for the 52HM94 (with integrated tuner) is something
> I can live with.

I wouldn't wait, just to get an integrated tuner that probably lack
features of newer tuners in a year or so.

Example: The QAM cable card tuners (available right now) *will*
receive cable channels without an external box, but they don't work
with PPV or interactive program guides. This problem will eventually
be solved, but it will require a different tuner, requiring yet-
another-settop-box if you want these features. And AFAIK, existing
tuners don't support E-VSB.

Like computers, DTV tuners become outdated soon after they're
purchased.
Anonymous
August 31, 2004 1:03:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

I am curious why you say that. I have always felt that projection sets were
really, really, really, (once more) really bad to watch. I get the feeling
you are saying the exact opposite when you say that the 34-XBR910 is not
even in the same league as large projection sets. Are you saying the
KV-34XBR910 has worse picture quality than a projection set?

I remember watching Tyson fights back in the 80's on large SD projection
sets-it was awful. Times have changed and so have TVs, but I have seen some
of the latest HD rear projection sets and they seem to be just as bad as I
remember them. Horrible viewing angles, bad color, they seem so tacky.
Almost like really bad gaudy jewelry with oversized fake diamonds, like the
person who bought is just wanted to show that they had the biggest TV in the
town and doesn't care how bad it looks (and I am NOT directing this
personally at anybody).

Do you really rate large projection sets higher than a nice direct view CRT?
Are you basing that on size alone? I am truly surprised that projection
sets are still manufactured and people still buy them. You have got me
wondering, I need to see some new HD projection sets again.

--Dan

"Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:cglbff$t1h$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> > The Sony 34" KD-34XBR960 is a top direct view set. I spent two months
> > looking at various reviews and comments. Last November's issue of
> > Consumer Reports said the KV-34XBR910 was the set to compare other
> > hdtv sets too.
>
> Utterly false. It may well be the standard of direct view
> sets, but is not in the league of the larger projection sets. Not
> even the same league. I've seen both together, believe me.
Anonymous
August 31, 2004 1:03:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

dg wrote:
> I am curious why you say that. I have always felt that projection sets were
> really, really, really, (once more) really bad to watch. I get the feeling
> you are saying the exact opposite when you say that the 34-XBR910 is not
> even in the same league as large projection sets. Are you saying the
> KV-34XBR910 has worse picture quality than a projection set?
>

In the limit of zero picture brightness, a very dark room, and
factoring in the small size, the 34 inch XBR910 is the standard
by which all consumer CRT sets are measured.


>
> Do you really rate large projection sets higher than a nice direct view CRT?
> Are you basing that on size alone? I am truly surprised that projection
> sets are still manufactured and people still buy them. You have got me
> wondering, I need to see some new HD projection sets again.

I would rate the best DLP and LCD projection sets better than
the Sony for anything other than the darkest of dark rooms. Their
ONLY significant defect is a less than black black level. But
remember that movie theaters are nowhere near true black, nor
are most TV cameras calibrated to approach a true black.

The DLP and LCD sets give full resolution at full brightness,
which not CRT set of any kind can ... including that Sony. The
projection sets have perfectly OK brightness at any horizontal
off-axis angle you would actually use. Vertically off axis, they are
OK for any normal use.

It's not that "projection sets are still being made" its that
the DLP and LCD ones are eating the competition alive. The
CRT projection sets are not long for this world, for reasons
you describe.

And in 4 years, one person will be able to carry around a portable
40" rear projection set with no terrible problem ... it will
weight about 35 to 50 pounds.

Doug McDonald

>
>
Anonymous
August 31, 2004 1:03:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

dg wrote:
>
> I am curious why you say that. I have always felt that projection sets were
> really, really, really, (once more) really bad to watch. I get the feeling
> you are saying the exact opposite when you say that the 34-XBR910 is not
> even in the same league as large projection sets. Are you saying the
> KV-34XBR910 has worse picture quality than a projection set?

NOTE: The XBR910 set is Super....

But the new Sony KD-34XBR960 has the $2200 lower price
with 4 new features.... It's the 910 replacement...

Superb Sony Bang for the CRT Buck !!




>
> I remember watching Tyson fights back in the 80's on large SD projection
> sets-it was awful. Times have changed and so have TVs, but I have seen some
> of the latest HD rear projection sets and they seem to be just as bad as I
> remember them. Horrible viewing angles, bad color, they seem so tacky.
> Almost like really bad gaudy jewelry with oversized fake diamonds, like the
> person who bought is just wanted to show that they had the biggest TV in the
> town and doesn't care how bad it looks (and I am NOT directing this
> personally at anybody).
>
> Do you really rate large projection sets higher than a nice direct view CRT?
> Are you basing that on size alone? I am truly surprised that projection
> sets are still manufactured and people still buy them. You have got me
> wondering, I need to see some new HD projection sets again.
>
> --Dan
>
> "Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
> news:cglbff$t1h$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
> > > The Sony 34" KD-34XBR960 is a top direct view set. I spent two months
> > > looking at various reviews and comments. Last November's issue of
> > > Consumer Reports said the KV-34XBR910 was the set to compare other
> > > hdtv sets too.
> >
> > Utterly false. It may well be the standard of direct view
> > sets, but is not in the league of the larger projection sets. Not
> > even the same league. I've seen both together, believe me.
Anonymous
August 31, 2004 11:02:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

Come on guys, i'm only repeating what I read about the Sony XBR910 as
being the set that other are to be measure by. If you look that was
said in the Cnet.com web site, also Consumer Reports and some few HDTV
magazine reviews. This was back in February.

The DLO sets were starting to be more available. I'm thinking now the
trend will be toward DLP by 2005. Lightweight, brilliant picture,
great edge sharpness. Few drawbacks but i'm sure that will be worked
out as the sets gain popularity.

oops, here is another.
http://www.audiorevolution.com/equip/sony_34XBR_910/

cnet's comment. I'm sorry I did over look a small detail.
http://reviews.cnet.com/Sony_KV-34XBR910/4505-6481_7-30...

hdtvfan


On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 17:19:10 -0500, Dennis Mayer <Polaris1@execpc.com>
wrote:

>
>
>dg wrote:
>>
>> I am curious why you say that. I have always felt that projection sets were
>> really, really, really, (once more) really bad to watch. I get the feeling
>> you are saying the exact opposite when you say that the 34-XBR910 is not
>> even in the same league as large projection sets. Are you saying the
>> KV-34XBR910 has worse picture quality than a projection set?
>
> NOTE: The XBR910 set is Super....
>
> But the new Sony KD-34XBR960 has the $2200 lower price
> with 4 new features.... It's the 910 replacement...
>
> Superb Sony Bang for the CRT Buck !!
>
>
>
>
>>
>> I remember watching Tyson fights back in the 80's on large SD projection
>> sets-it was awful. Times have changed and so have TVs, but I have seen some
>> of the latest HD rear projection sets and they seem to be just as bad as I
>> remember them. Horrible viewing angles, bad color, they seem so tacky.
>> Almost like really bad gaudy jewelry with oversized fake diamonds, like the
>> person who bought is just wanted to show that they had the biggest TV in the
>> town and doesn't care how bad it looks (and I am NOT directing this
>> personally at anybody).
>>
>> Do you really rate large projection sets higher than a nice direct view CRT?
>> Are you basing that on size alone? I am truly surprised that projection
>> sets are still manufactured and people still buy them. You have got me
>> wondering, I need to see some new HD projection sets again.
>>
>> --Dan
>>
>> "Doug McDonald" <mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
>> news:cglbff$t1h$1@news.ks.uiuc.edu...
>> > > The Sony 34" KD-34XBR960 is a top direct view set. I spent two months
>> > > looking at various reviews and comments. Last November's issue of
>> > > Consumer Reports said the KV-34XBR910 was the set to compare other
>> > > hdtv sets too.
>> >
>> > Utterly false. It may well be the standard of direct view
>> > sets, but is not in the league of the larger projection sets. Not
>> > even the same league. I've seen both together, believe me.
Anonymous
August 31, 2004 1:05:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

hdtvfan wrote:

> Come on guys, i'm only repeating what I read about the Sony XBR910 as
> being the set that other are to be measure by.


This, or rather its successor the 960, is indeed the standard
by which HD Direct View CRT sets should be judged.

But it is not in the same overall league as DLP
or rear projection LCD.

Go to a store and compare .... be sure to use a really good
HD source ... NOT a low-def source like DVD, or an HD
program from film with little fine detail. Note first of
all that to see detail you have to set the Sony CRT set on
"pro" mode, and it looks might dim because it IS mighty
dim.

Doug McDonald
Anonymous
September 1, 2004 2:23:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.video.digital-tv (More info?)

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 09:05:16 -0500, Doug McDonald
<mcdonald@scs.uiuc.edu> wrote:

>hdtvfan wrote:
>
>> Come on guys, i'm only repeating what I read about the Sony XBR910 as
>> being the set that other are to be measure by.
>
>
>This, or rather its successor the 960, is indeed the standard
>by which HD Direct View CRT sets should be judged.
>
>But it is not in the same overall league as DLP
>or rear projection LCD.
>
>Go to a store and compare .... be sure to use a really good
>HD source ... NOT a low-def source like DVD, or an HD
>program from film with little fine detail. Note first of
>all that to see detail you have to set the Sony CRT set on
>"pro" mode, and it looks might dim because it IS mighty
>dim.
>
>Doug McDonald

I have never seen a KV-34XBR910 or the newer KD-34XBR960 on
display at any store. I bought the 960 as it was the 910 replacement.
I went with the direct view as we have about a 8 foot viewing
distance. I'm sure in a few years I will buy a nice 42" or larger DLP
set.

I would think any lower price and the new simplicity will make the
DLP's the more popular sets. Not to mention the light weight on
shipping and handling.

hdtvfan
!