Does anybody have experience wit the PQ of SD receiver hooked up to a 32" LCD HDTV widescreen TV?
Lcd Tv
- Thread starter ralfyguy
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 34
- Views 4K
LCD's should not have become tvs. HD/SD doesn't look that great on any LCD i've seen. your best connection available for SD would be S-video if you're not using an HD receiver. otherwise component or dvi/hdmi is available on HD boxes.
Right now I have a 625 hooked up to 1990 Magnavox 46" Projection TV via S-Video. I will retire it this week and ordered a Olevia Syntax 32" LCD HDTV 16:9 Television set. The picture on the Magnavox was not bad at all, but artifacts are pretty good visible, especially on high compressed Local channels. I was just curios if the new LCD TV will look better or not. I also have a 2 year old Philips 27" non-HDTV tube TV hooked to TV2 and it looks alot better than the Magnavox concerning sharpness and artifacts. Remember that I am actually not used to look at a real fancy picture all the time with a Projection TV that old.
ralfyguy said:
Get an HD receiver. If you have DirecTV the H20's are currently free after rebate. If you have Dish you can lease a HD receiver if you don't want to buy one. All the flaws and overcompression of the signal will be very apparant with the increased resolution of your display -- even to the point of looking worse than a 20 year old analog crt.
I understand, and I would really love to upgrade to an HD-receiver, but I can't. I just signed up to DHA in October and I spent all my savings on that new TV. I doubt E* will let me upgrade that soon, even if they let me have an 811, I would DEFINATELY miss my DVR. And even IF they let me have an 942, right now I can't come up with $250 for the lease. I appreciate your advice, but I can't go there right now, even that I'd love to. I just hope it won't look too bad on the new TV, because it would make me sick that I spent all that money for it. I have an old vOom box to watch OTA HD, and I probably shouldn't hook it up to the DVI port. It will probably look so nice, that I don't want to turn on the 625 anymore.
If I were going to watch only SD, then I would get a low cost SD TV and save my money for the future. A $300 32" SD TV will look better when driven by a SD receiver than a 32" HDTV.
And it doesn't make a lot of sense to buy an HDTV now and thus be ready for the future, because in the future the HDTVs will be cheaper ... and better.
And it doesn't make a lot of sense to buy an HDTV now and thus be ready for the future, because in the future the HDTVs will be cheaper ... and better.
I have the olevia 26 inch in my bedroom, and it takes some getting used to. I have had it for about 2 months now. I have a 508 hooked up via s-video input, and the picture looks .........."OK". It's watchable. I haven't hooked up HD yet(I have an 811 in the livingroom), but im actually thinking of hooking my computer up to it to see what it can do. I can say that so far I am happy with it, and the picture "mostly" sucks cause' of dish's compression.
Edit: Just think, the 32in is bigger, so wouldn't it be safe to say that the SD picture on it will be worse? Just a little food for thought! Good luck!
Edit: Just think, the 32in is bigger, so wouldn't it be safe to say that the SD picture on it will be worse? Just a little food for thought! Good luck!
Last edited:
Well that's true that the 26" - 32" increase will make it even worse. I already ordered it and I was wanting a new TV since a long time. And I thought now is the time before I get anything else for the money. Has been a hard year for me at work, so I felt like being in for a"treat"
The TV will be here sometime next week and I hope it won't be too bad.
The TV will be here sometime next week and I hope it won't be too bad.
That's right and don't forget the HD locals from the vOom box. So far I really love my Dish service and the picture is decent, the service was reliable so far. The 625 is awesome and I can't live without it anymore. I am actually more concerned about the aspect ratio than the PQ. Means if it'll suck to look at the 4:3 broadcast on a 16:9 screen. There's various setting, but so far I looked at other TV's with the picture stretched in all kinds of variations, and I liked none of them. So I guess I'll have to stick with black bars on each side of the screen.
I missed the part about you picking up OTA HD locals. That's a different story. While I can find little worth watching on the networks, outside of sports, I don't get much use out of mine. But others seem to find them useful.
So with HD locals and DVD, you will be getting some use out of the TV.
Hard to say about the quality of the SD. It can really vary by TV type.
So with HD locals and DVD, you will be getting some use out of the TV.
Hard to say about the quality of the SD. It can really vary by TV type.
And the compression of the Sd channels, some look better than others...Plus the Analog channels you should get OTA should look fairly good...
Bombarde32 said:
This is completely false. You don't know how an LCD works, do you?
FYI: I *only* buy LCD HDTVs.
ralfyguy said:
Since LCDs are only great at their native resolution, I wouldn't expect too much. However HD picture on my HD LCDs are great - that's why I have upconverting DVD player.
dfergie, I get my locals from E*, but also OTA via vOom box, and this is in HD. I get about 20 stations here, IF they're not playing with the broadcast power all the time. It seems late in the evening they turn the power up and the signal is strong enough to watch without interruption, and early in the morning the signal strength is FULL THROTTLE. Like stations that are 75+ miles away hammer in with 95+, and then around lunch you can't watch it anymore because it is down to 39-42 which means there's no picture. Not all stations do that. Anyone have the same experience?
You'll get used to the bars, and you won't have to worry about burn-in. I think you made a great purchase. I've kept my eye on the Syntax Olevia's lately because a lot of them have been on sale. And all the reviews have been pretty good that I've read. I don't think you'll have to worry about PQ as much as you think you will. If you do get discouraged, just pop in a DVD or go to a OTA digital channel and you'll get a reminder of how good your TV can look with the proper source material.
Bombarde32 said:
You must have not looked at LCD's recently then.
I just got a 32" LCD and the pic quality is adequate in SD from my 522. For testing, I hooked it to the DVI of my 921 on my other HD set and it looks great. So, basically now I am just waiting to upgrade the upstairs set to HD receiver. Right now for the 522, I just use the S-Video connection. The DVD players looks teriffic through the component.
This is a newer fast response LCD from Philips/Magnavox and I have not seen one bit of pixelation like I was used on to on LCD's. I took my own DVD in and had the guy at the store play it to watch the sets to see how they performed.
SatinKzo I was kinda hoping you would say that it's at least adequate
So how would you compare the Sd with Hd picture then?
So how would you compare the Sd with Hd picture then?
My experience with LCD is mainly with the computer displays but the TV versions are primarily the same. In the past few years they made major improvements in LCD technology.
Today's units have wide viewing angles similar to CRTs.
Number of colors in the 16 million range.
Response time less than 16 ms (necessary to reduce motion smear).
Brighter display than CRTs or Plasmas.
Excellent contrast ratio.
The BLACK (dark) levels is still a major weak point, but better than before.
Highest in resolution and smallest pixel pitch of any display, (typically 1 to 2 mega pixels for TVs and up to 4 mega pixels for computers).
Noticeable price drop especially 37 - 46 inch displays.
Also 32 inch and lower are far more affordable compared to 3 years ago.
Uses less power than CRTs (above 32 inches) and all plasmas, rear and front projection TVs.
Even thinner and lighter (weight) than plasmas.
Today's units have wide viewing angles similar to CRTs.
Number of colors in the 16 million range.
Response time less than 16 ms (necessary to reduce motion smear).
Brighter display than CRTs or Plasmas.
Excellent contrast ratio.
The BLACK (dark) levels is still a major weak point, but better than before.
Highest in resolution and smallest pixel pitch of any display, (typically 1 to 2 mega pixels for TVs and up to 4 mega pixels for computers).
Noticeable price drop especially 37 - 46 inch displays.
Also 32 inch and lower are far more affordable compared to 3 years ago.
Uses less power than CRTs (above 32 inches) and all plasmas, rear and front projection TVs.
Even thinner and lighter (weight) than plasmas.
ralfyguy said:SatinKzo I was kinda hoping you would say that it's at least adequate
So how would you compare the Sd with Hd picture then?
The SD looks better on my LCD than on my Philips CRT it replaced. HD looks crips and clear (even the now HD lite that dish is screwing us with)
jergenf said:
Blacks look pretty good on my system, but yes, they can be lacking at times
My screen looks the same from all angles, viewable 170 degree from front
Respnse is less than 16ms, I have not seen any smearing on sports, or explosions on dvd's or anything normally occuring with fast pic movement
The older LCD's didn't always do true 1080i either, the newer ones do, so keep an eye out
