DGates:
I am in disagreement with your picture quality observations.
JJK

A DVD through a high-quality upscaler does look acceptably decent, but in no way does it look nearly as good as a Blu-ray disc of the same movie.

A DVD through a high-quality upscaler does look acceptably decent, but in no way does it look nearly as good as a Blu-ray disc of the same movie.

It depends ... if you have a small enough "big screen" you may have a hard time telling the difference.

I bought a 26" LCD. When shopping for my new set I noticed that most sets of that size were 720. A did find a few that were 1080 and I bought one of those. Frankly I can't tell the difference from across the room .. AND .. the internal menu options text are way too small to read from across the room at 1080 (they must assume that the screen is physically a lot bigger than mine is)

If you're sitting 10-15 feet away from a 26" HDTV then of course you won't be able to tell the difference! Do you read the newspaper from across the room, too? I sit about 4 feet away from my 42" LCD and maybe just 5 or 6 feet away from a 55" and I can absolutely tell the difference between an upscaled DVD and a Blu-ray disc and so can everyone else.

Sitting too far away from an HDTV is a problem that needs to be addressed. Everyone got used to sitting so far from their SD televisions because if you sat to close it looked like crap. The bottom line is that you bought the wrong size TV for your room and seating arrangement. If you were sitting the correct distance from your HDTV (probably 3 feet), then you could tell the difference, too, and your internal menu options would be readable as well.

WOW!!!

Glad people are starting to see the truth about the whole HD garbage that has been going on. I remember getting yelled at for writing that the HD arena hasn't settled down yet. Looks like it still hasn't and never will. Maybe it will settle with ULTRA HD or 3D.

In fact DVinfo and this site have been predicting the HD trends completely wrong for many years. It wasn't until the young came in and gave the geezers a clue did anyone start to see the light.

Shine on.

"It wasn't until the young came in and gave the geezers a clue did anyone start to see the light."

Spoken like a cluless youngster. I remember when I thought I knew it all. Ahhh, good times...

What are you talking about? Technology never "settles down."

"Shine on, duuude."

Iv'e been watching OTA HD since 2003. I guess I don't have a clue what's going on. The "young" really don't have a clue which planet they are on.
JJK

HD isn't exactly new, my first exposure to HD television was in 1985. It was Sony's analog 1125-line system, but it was real HD.

HD isn't exactly new, my first exposure to HD television was in 1985. It was Sony's analog 1125-line system, but it was real HD.

And that's what many folks don't understand. They're actually too young to remember REAL high definition. Those of us who saw it have been ruined to what the technology was capable of. With today's transmissions, we took one step forward going to HD, but one step backward by making it digital.

Don't get me wrong. My simple over-the-air reception of NBC HD programming is pretty damn impressive. But the compression is there to remind me that a trade-off was made.

It's not so much that they have gone digital as much as it is what some TV stations have decided to do with the available 19.25 Mbps bandwidth. (OTA digital TV is strictly MPEG2.) Many stations have chosen to add additional standard definition subchannels which reduces the available bitrate for their main HD channel. Generally, these stations look like hell. A few of the stations in my market have chosen to throw everything at their one HD channel and for the most part, their programs look pretty good.

You're right about that.

If you are considering buying a 55" TV then I assume your primary source content will be good quality HD.

I have a 52" Sony XBR4 and the picture quality of BD's from my HTPC and HD content via my cable box is simply brilliant. It's also great to view photos taken with my dSLR camera.

That being said the LED LCD's with local dimming from Samsung and Sony are even more amazing. Basically everything I have with my older Sony plus much better black levels.

In my opinion the major difference between Sony and Samsung in this regard is that Sony uses a matte screen and Samsung a glossy screen. I prefer matte so I went with Sony. It comes down to personal preference.

Finally, you will most likely have this TV for a long time. It's isn't something that easy to sell and get a good portion of your investment back. And despite what people are saying about 3D TV's don't expect that technology to catch on. It gives me a headache.

So spend a few more bucks and get a good panel.

- Mark

And despite what people are saying about 3D TV's don't expect that technology to catch on. It gives me a headache.

Have you seen the latest 3D movies like Avatar? The days of headaches are long gone.

I shoot a lot of weddings each year. I don't know if shooting in 3D would ever be economical enough for me to afford it, but I think it would be so cool for someone to see their wedding day video in 3D.

Finally, you will most likely have this TV for a long time.

I suppose it all depends on how you define "long time" ... HDTV's you buy today won't last anywhere near as long as a crt TV. Too many things to go wrong and/or burn out.

That's true. Plus, we simply keep replacing stuff at a faster clip than previous generations. My uncle just replaced the RCA 35" he had for 17 years. That thing had a damn good picture, all things considered.

I can't imagine any of us will be keeping our flat-screens that long. Not because they won't last, but because we're too finicky.

How long something lasts depends on many factors, including the willingness to fix small problems rather than replace.

My 1989 Pioneer big screen that just failed also failed around 2001. I had it fixed for $300 and got another nine years out of it.

As for modern TV monitors (plasma, LCD, DLP) failing more quickly, I'm not sure why that would be, especially for this new generation that uses LEDs for the light source. About the only thing that should age is the plastics used for the screen and light transmission (may get cloudy over time), and the capacitors in the power supply. Now that we no longer have the high voltage circuitry of the CRT technology, with its high voltage diodes and flyback transformer (which is what I suspect finally failed on my set), a major reason for failures has been eliminated. And with the demise of those hot, guaranteed-to-wear-out light bulbs used with DLP rear projection, we are entering into a whole new realm of reliability.

BTW, I watched a movie (the new Star Trek) using my son's new Xbox 360 as the player. It has basic upscaling capability, and like many other people have reported, I am very impressed -- actually blown away would be a better description -- by how much better it displays the same movie. We auditioned a few minutes on my 10-year-old Pioneer DVD player, and then played the same segment on the Xbox.

Wow!

I expect that when I finally purchased a top-end upscaling player, or build my own HTPC that includes its own upscaling, that the results will be fantastic.

"And with the demise of those hot, guaranteed-to-wear-out light bulbs used with DLP rear projection, we are entering into a whole new realm of reliability."I could live with replacing the bulbs every couple of years in a DLP. It was the &%$#@! mechanical color wheels that would periodically fail that really got my goat. Sometimes they explode leaving shards of glass thruout the electronics. The final straw was when my mainboard went south.

I now have a 52" Samsung LCD (unfortunately, not the LED), and have found a new love.

...Jerry

Lets see, CRTs, high voltage failure, high voltage arcing, crt aging with lower output and brightness and contrast, linearity that isn't worth a crap even when brand new, constant decay of convergence circuits, dirty tuners and constant tuner cleaning, square corners cut off on 4 x 3 aspect, 20% overscan, constant fine tuning adjusting, poor resolution, and yearly repairs and adjustments. I'll take an LCD that doesn't work over a crt that does.
JJK

JJk,

I don't know what CRTs you are using, but I have never cleaned a tuner on mine. I had one for almost 15 years and my current one for 5 years. No cleaning required. I might have had a dirty tuner on my TV back in the 70's, but every TV I have owned since then has had electronic tuning.

I have seen many LCDs die though, usually power supply. I don't think the manufacturer's are spending money on good parts for power supplies.

Dave T2

DaveT2:
You never had to jiggle the tuner knob to get a picture?
JJK

I probably edited my response after you posted. Yeah, I remember doing that in the 70's, but the TV I bought in 78 and everyone since has had electronic tuning.

Dave T2

I did try and tell yah John!

"BTW, I watched a movie (the new Star Trek) using my son's new Xbox 360 as the player. It has basic upscaling capability, and like many other people have reported, I am very impressed -- actually blown away would be a better description -- by how much better it displays the same movie. We auditioned a few minutes on my 10-year-old Pioneer DVD player, and then played the same segment on the Xbox.

I never heard JM say "Wow!" B4? - Y'know what John, I had to re-look ALL my shop bought DVDs again with the UPSCALER. - Pure bleedin' VooDoo!

For the past 10 onths I have been watching my SD output through this process and it looks spectacular. And because it is BIG and scaled-up, it now blew away my now trashed 23" Panny CRT. Now, how COULD I have got the same, 40" CRT in my lounge?

Grazie