I think the generic term RCA=bad is very biased, I would like to hear more why this statement is toss around so much.
I was in the pro A/V business for 17 years, was a Matsushita (Panasonic) systems intergrator, owned 2 successful Pro A/V and Media PC companies, designed, engineered and installed approx 15-20 million dollars of PRO audio/video gear in my lifetime, was even working with HDTVs in 1990-91 and my "crappy bad cheapo" 3 year old 36" RCA digital monitor has the best contrast ratio and true black that I have ever seen. It has worked flawlessly and every videophile type that comes to my house always comments on how great the picture is and how they cannot believe the black levels..
SO what I am trying to say is I just don't get the generic RCA bashing that I see here all the time.... maybe I am just lucky, but all I hear around this forum is "RCA= Bad", "Dish Network sucks", "522s are crappy", "921s suck", yadda, yadda, yadda. YET, my cheapo RCA kicks butt, I can only dream of the day when my Plasma could have such contrast levels, my 522 works exactly as it was intended without a glitch, my 921 works perfectly as a Satellite receiver and recorder (OK, the aspect modes could use work) which is what it is, Dish Network has always come thru for me, treated me better and given me more free stuff than any company I can think of (sure occasionally I get a CSR that doesn't know as much as I do, so what) .... so I just don't get all the quick negative nellys that pop up here all the time.
I am also very amazed that people can have a bad experience (or worse yet just repeat what they read or hear elsewhere) and automatically spout advice to others about all products from a company based on one (or even two, or none) experiences...
Off my soapbox now, and Nomex suit is on
Dave