Hey folks... Been researching the possibility of getting an HDTV. Read all kinds of reviews, etc. I have DirectTV at home already - cable is not an option way out in the country where I live. Maybe I'm from the old school, or maybe I'm just plain OLD, but I'm leaning towards a tube TV - specifically the Sony I think it's a 34" flat screen - a monster weighing in at 190lbs. Not really interested in a bigger picture - we currently have a 31" SD - and that seems big enough. So, any drawbacks to what I'm looking at? Seems to be cheaper than the plasmas, etc. From what I read, the tube CRT HDs actually give a better picture than the rest - only drawback is the size and weight, which does not matter to me. Anything I'm missing? Thanks! Craig
Nope, your dead on! CRTs are the best (at least the good ones). If only someone could get rid of their weight issues and large cabinet size. SED technology: http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/243527 Ced
you will get a better all around picture witha tube tv, but when it comes to the hd channels you will see a much sharper picture with a plasma or lcd. aside from that the only choice you have to make is wether you want to lug around a 190+ 30" tv or a 40lb 32" LCD. it also depends if you will use a LCD full capabilities, i see alot of poeple buy these fancy tv's but never use them to their full capabilities and it really is a waste of money. i use a flat screen 27" tv in my room and i love it. it comes in better than my 37" LCD, only the analog channels i have crappy cox cable. i know that satellite has all digital but even my digital channels on my cable look better on my flat tube screen. well hope this helps. if are looking for for help purchasing a lcd or plasma you can private message me i did extensive research before i bought mine.
Just realized perhaps this is the wrong forum to discuss TVs. Sorry about that. I would repost in the TV section, but that would be multiposting, guess I'll take my chances here. Yep, a guy I work with bought a 42" panny plasma a few months ago and loves it. He says the tube will never come close to the plasma - says the resolution isn't as great. But the Sony specs say 1080i....thought that was as good as it gets, other than the 1080p. Can I argue with my coworker?
@pistol44 Edit out your email addy, lest you get hammered with spam. If you want to give it to someone, then send them a PM.
Yup, everyone is right. The Sony KD-34XBR960 or 970 will give you the best HD picture on the market. Film and video games will look as good as the sources will allow. Animation won't be as vivid as on an LCD, and 34" isn't that large by today's standards, but this HD tube beats any other display type for overall picture quality. It mimics the picture from the $35K Sony broadcast studio monitors. Film editors still rely on the tube broadcast monitors as they produce the most accurate picture.
There's also Samsung's Slimfit line... apparently designed for people who like the asthetic of flat-panel displays but prefer the still-superior picture of CRT. They're also somewhat thinner than your average CRT. They only come as high as 30" at the moment, though. I've been hoping they'd release a 34" or 36" model, but no such luck. Quite frankly, though, 30" used to be considered large... I have no idea how all this 46"+ crap got started; especially the monstrosities exceeding 50"+. Sure, it looks impressive (when its off, anyway)... but that seems a bit large, even for a full 1920x1080 pixels. I, for one, would find the pixels irritatingly large if I had to sit and watch something like that every day. How often do people move around their TVs? None of my TVs have moved from their respective spots since they were first bought.
I never move my TVs once their in place. We do move the kitchen TV out when we have a large party or dinner but it's just a smaller one.
You can't call it a theater until your screen is at least 46" large! Screens are big because big screens draw you in more like when your at movies. With HDTV it seems they can also make other things like sports and sitcoms more fun too. Don't forget about the audio side. What makes me mad is when someone has a big screen hooked up to an HD source, great picture, but no surround sound. You at least have to have good stereo, right? Ced
@diabolos Hooking my new flat panel up to my amp today; unfortunately my wife won't let me have a zillion speakers everywhere. I have 4 channel surround sound and 4 large speakers that are great.
Diablos is spot on. The Home cinema experience is comprised of 50% audio and 50% video. If either element is lagging, then it greatly reduces the overall experience. You could have the best flat panel, but if you don't have surround sound, you'll lose a lot. Even if you have a crappy surround system, something is still missing.
Yeah... I had (still trying to sell) a 36" Toshiba HD Tube that I've had for a few years. I know I'm gonna be moving around a bit over the next couple years so I recentely upgraded to a 47" LCD. Weighs half as much and for movies/games it looks better. For every day tv watching the old tube was still better for all the standard def. But I agree that HD looks better overall on a plasma/lcd. And the weight advantage and mounting/placement options are nice too.
Gotta chime in here. There is no way a plasma or lcd will look better than the best HD tubes. Regular tubes, yes, the flat panels will perform better, but when measuring up the HD technolgies, the High end HD tubes are untouchable. The problem with tubes are as mentioned before: Weight, Size, and some geometry issues which can be greatly reduced with calibration. Then there's the issue Diablo pointed out. The biggest HD tube is 34" with a 16:9 ratio, this is hardly the home theatre experience. Adding good sound will take everything to the next level, but in a large room, the size is missed. When it comes to picture quality however, there is no contest. HDMI 1.3 may help shorten this gap and put flat panels closer to tube performance, but for now, the statement....... "But I agree that HD looks better overall on a plasma/lcd." ....could not be further from the truth. Two models I have in mind are "KD-34Xbr960" and "KD-34Xbr970" both Sony models.
Thanks for all the replies....that Sony xxxxxxx970 is the exact model I'm looking at. Still ain't convinced the wife yet tho - she is concerned about the cost of the TV as well as upgrading our DirectTv. I'm a little concerned too....I've called DirecTTV twice, and have got two different stories as to what we would need and what it would cost...beginning to wonder if they even know. Convincing the wife is gonna be harder than moving the 190lb TV into place, assuming it makes it to our house.
DirecTV are about to make major changes to their lineup this year, so it might be a good idea to wait before they make the changes. Dish network currently have the best channel lineup for HD content but their quality isn't as good as DirecTV. Read this article to get a sense of what i'm talking about... Satellite Customer Service Also, I have the 960 and the 970 as well as a few flat panels. My other half is a Film editor in Hollywood so we're always getting the latest top of the line gear (helps for my blog too!), and I can tell you, the 960 cant be touched for PQ with the 970 following closely behind, but the one major thing is that if you have a big room, it may be too small. Best of luck to you.
I find that the home cinema experience can be anywhere form 50-50 to 20% (Video) and 80% (Audio). I think that most of what I watch, action/sci-fi movies, have a blend of 40% video and 60% audio since the sound tracks are very engaging. With concerts, especially on DVD, the uncompressed audio track is always better than a 44.1KHz CD. The picture lacks because of all the space the audio track tacks up though. HD DVD and Blu-Ray are making recorded concerts even better with 1080p high bit-rate video and lossless studio-master-quality surround sound audio tracks. Great posting, everyone! Ced
