I want an HDTV... where do I start?

[Luriden]

I got a job at Kmart and I'd like to splurge and buy an HDTV to celebrate not being a broke bitch for the first time in a year. My brother's TV is on its way out, so I can give him my current TV and that solves his problem as well. It won't be right away, but I'm going to hide a small portion of my next few checks away for one, depending on how much it costs.

So I don't really understand the jargon between 1080i and 1080p and HDMI and all that crap. I have a fairly small bedroom, but I'm kind of planning ahead, I'd like to have an HDTV that I could take with me to an apartment when I move out and have set in the living room as the "main TV" so to speak.

I mainly want it for HD gaming. Blu Ray doesn't really matter, I don't have a Blu Ray player and even if I did, I wouldn't buy any Blu Ray movies.

My Xbox 360 Elite came with all the HDMI hookups, and I hear that's the real cream-of-the-crop when it comes to HD.

What's a good brand, resolution, and overall price I should be looking for? I get a 10% employee discount at Kmart and Sears, so if I can get one at one of those two places that would be great, but if I can find a better deal elsewhere I'll go for that as well. But I tried searching on my own for the best deal and it gave me headaches since I don't really know what I'm looking for.

[Christuserloeser]

It should have more than one HDMI ports, a DVI port and a VGA port.

[DaMadFiddler]

Here's what you need to know:

When you see a number followed by an i or a p, that's talking about the resolution. i means Interlaced, p means Progressive. Progressive is bettter. Without getting too technical: the number is the number of scanlines (aka the vertical resolution). An interlaced signal means it alternately updates every other scanline (line of resolution), whereas progressive scan updates the entire picture each cycle. You get a slightly better picture and smoother motion from a progressive scan image, if you have a signal that makes use of it. There are three standard HDTV resolutions: 720p, 1080i, and 1080p. Most 360 and PS3 games run at 720p (though there are exceptions), and all films on Blu-Ray support up to 1080p.

The resolution listed for a set is the maximum or natural resolution; a 1080i or 1080p set has a native resolution of 1920x1080, so there is no blurring from pixel scaling. However, a 1080i/p set is also capable of displaying a 720p signal (this wasn't necessarily true of some early HDTVs, but it is true of everything on the market now).

Your next choice is between LCD and plasma; plasma sets generally have better color depth ("blacker" blacks, and a more nuanced color scale), as well as a *much* better refresh rate. However, LCDs have been improving, and use a lot less power than plasma sets.

One new feature emerging in some HD sets is 24/p, or 24 frames per second progressive scan. Basically this means the set can natively show the 24fps refresh rate used by most films (TV programs and other video sources in the US typically run at either 30 or 60, and thus a source--such as a movie--that runs at 24 has to engage an algorithm to show the frames at slightly uneven intervals. This is popularly known as 3:2 pulldown, which means it shows one frame for 3 cycles, the next frame for 2, the next at 3, etc. so that the 24fps source fits into the 60 refresh rate that the set runs at. This is what's responsible for the slight juttering {jerkiness} you may notice in slow pans and other scenes in movies). This feature is not necessary unless film jutter really bothers you, as sets that carry the feature are typically more expensive, and the difference is not noticeable to most people. Also, to take advantage of it, you would need to have a player that supports 24/p playback.

* * *
Recommendations:

You want a set that supports 1080p. You want at least a 40" screen in order to take full advantage of HDTV; smaller than that, and your eyes can't really process the full detail of the image.

You probably want a set that has at least 3 HDMI ports, so you have room to plug a few things in for the future. While component input is still used by some devices, HDMI has become the de facto standard for HD sources. Component can only carry up to a 1080i signal, whereas HDMI supports 1080p, as well as a myriad of audio options.

Choosing between LCD and plasma is up to you. As stated earlier, plasma sets have better black levels and faster refresh rates, but can't get as bright as LCDs and use more energy to run. LCDs uses less power, and has a brighter picture, but cost a little more. Samsung and Panasonic are currently considered the best brands for both types.

Before choosing a model, read a C|NET review of it: http://reviews.cnet.com They do a pretty decent job of breaking down the basics without getting too technical.

I can give a few specific model recommendations, if you give me your price range. But the above should be enough to help you find what you're looking for.

[Christuserloeser]

You get a slightly better picture and smoother motion from a progressive scan image

I agree with most of what you wrote, but that's quite an understatement: In 1080p you'll get 1080 scanlines each frame where in 1080i you'll get only 540 scanlines every other frame. That's half the resolution and half the framerate. Plus since neither LCD nor Plasma can display an Interlaced signal they got to deinterlace it first which doesn't exactly improve the image.

1080i is absolutely worthless for a modern HDTV. From what I heard this format was introduced by Toshiba who at one point sold CRT based HDTVs that could display 1080i/540p, like regular SDTVs display 480i/240p.

[DaMadFiddler]

Plus since neither LCD nor Plasma can display an Interlaced signal they got to deinterlace it first which doesn't exactly improve the image.

That's a good point that I neglected to include. I have an older rear projection TV that uses CRT lamps, which actually is one of the "Toshiba HDTVs that could display 1080i/540p" that you mentioned. I'm not used to interlaced signals being as much of a drawback, because I probably get a better picture from them than most people do.

[Luriden]

Thanks for the essay, DMF. I'll probably forget most of the technical aspects of it all, but it's good to know. I'll definitely go with 1080p, even if it's expensive, just because I want to get a TV that'll last awhile. I don't want to be disappointed in what it CAN'T do right away.

I really don't have a set price range yet. Cheap is good, but like I said before, I don't want to have to buy another HDTV for a good long while. If it's expensive then so be it, I'll be satisfied for awhile with it. However, below $1,500 would be ideal. I'm supposed to be saving up for a car, and chances are I'll probably be getting the HDTV first since I don't even have a license (and I've only driven once, so I have a LONG way to go on that) and I want instant satisfaction. I don't think my friends and family would let me slip by with a $2,500 television without getting some flack for it. At least not until I get the car.

[Ex-Cyber]

Ignore any claimed "dynamic contrast ratio" on LCDs; this is a virtually useless thing to spec (sadly in most places it is given instead of a true contrast ratio).

If you think you might ever want to use a PC on it, make sure it has a "1:1" or "dot-for-dot" mode. I don't think there is an agreed-upon name for this, but the basic idea is that it disables scaling/cropping/filtering of the image so that one logical pixel on the cable controls one physical pixel on the screen at the native resolution. Without this you can end up with screen sides cut off and other stupid problems (not much of an issue for consoles because they mostly design for overscanning TVs anyway).

This probably goes without saying, but hit Google to look for any widespread problems with the set and/or compatibility with what you plan to use on it before making a final decision. Most of the really annoying kinks are worked out by now, but things still go wrong sometimes.

[DaMadFiddler]

If you think you might ever want to use a PC on it, make sure it has a "1:1" or "dot-for-dot" mode. I don't think there is an agreed-upon name for this, but the basic idea is that it disables scaling/cropping/filtering of the image so that one logical pixel on the cable controls one physical pixel on the screen at the native resolution. Without this you can end up with screen sides cut off and other stupid problems (not much of an issue for consoles because they mostly design for overscanning TVs anyway).

The common term for this is "just scan," and most sets worth their salt have this option.

[Zealous zerotype]

I don't know if this still rings true, but I assume it most likely does is go for a DLP tv as opposed to lcd or plasma. A dlp tv is in it for the long run I know wen my dad wanted one years back I did some research and found that dlp was the best option: no dead pixels, no the screen gonig out (well ill elaborate on that point).
Basically, (few years time) when an lcd or plasma would more or less take a shit your DLP tv will too, but you just buy a replacement bulb (with hosing its just a little bit more expensive and way easier) and then slide it in and then OMG everything is back to totally awesome.

edit:
something to consider is making sure it has good blacks just turn the tv on and put it on a blank input and try and get one that is the darkest possible.

[Ex-Cyber]

something to consider is making sure it has good blacks just turn the tv on and put it on a blank input and try and get one that is the darkest possible.

That doesn't really give you a proper idea of the contrast on LCDs because of the "dynamic contrast" stuff; "black" on a totally black screen isn't necessarily the same as "black" in an actual scene because it might dim the backlight.

[DaMadFiddler]

Under 1500 is going to limit you a bit, but here are a couple of recommendations:

Plasma
46" Panasonic Viera G10. Currently on sale for $1370. Doesn't have a lot of whistles and bells (for example, there's no picture-in-picture), but has earned high marks for having almost perfect color definition.

Review: http://www.wired.com/reviews/product/pr_0422_thx_tv

EDIT: You can also get the 50" model for $1440: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/de ... R&v=glance

LCD
Samsung 46" A630. Right at the $1500 mark. This is virtually identical to the A650, which won high praise for its performance:price.

Review: http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-tvs/ ... =mncol;lst

[Lartrak]

You can get a 1080p projector for about $1500 now. If you are willing to deal with the setup hassles, it's worth a look. Basically, you need a room that is big enough and a wall you're willing to have be mostly dedicated to a screen. Or you can get a pulldown screen.

Worth a thought, at least.

[Code-Red]

32" LG 1080p. I've got one, couldn't be happier. $599 (depending on where you get it).

[DaMadFiddler]

32" LG 1080p. I've got one, couldn't be happier. $599 (depending on where you get it).

1080p is kind of silly at 32". He said he wants something that can later be used as a "main" living room TV, so I'd imagine he wants at least 40". And LG is cheap, just like Vizio, but the image quality (particularly on non-HD sources) isn't nearly as good.

[Code-Red]

32" LG 1080p. I've got one, couldn't be happier. $599 (depending on where you get it).

1080p is kind of silly at 32". He said he wants something that can later be used as a "main" living room TV, so I'd imagine he wants at least 40". And LG is cheap, just like Vizio, but the image quality (particularly on non-HD sources) isn't nearly as good.

You're kidding....right?

Both the 360 and my PC look just as good @ 32" than anything larger.... and while I was comparing televisions in-store the LG had the best picture. 32" is fine for a main room/bedroom, assuming Luriden isn't going to be living in a mansion where he is sitting 20' away from his television.

Thanks for coming out, though.

[DaMadFiddler]

32" LG 1080p. I've got one, couldn't be happier. $599 (depending on where you get it).

1080p is kind of silly at 32". He said he wants something that can later be used as a "main" living room TV, so I'd imagine he wants at least 40". And LG is cheap, just like Vizio, but the image quality (particularly on non-HD sources) isn't nearly as good.

You're kidding....right?

Both the 360 and my PC look just as good @ 32" than anything larger.... and while I was comparing televisions in-store the LG had the best picture. 32" is fine for a main room/bedroom, assuming Luriden isn't going to be living in a mansion where he is sitting 20' away from his television.

Thanks for coming out, though.

I wasn't saying that the image would be worse on a smaller set, and it's always better to have a feature than not to have it. I'm just saying that, unless you're right up against it, your eyes won't be able to take full advantage of the detail level at that screen size... and if he wanted to really experience HD content to its fullest, a larger screen size is better.

And I recommended what I felt were the best new TVs he could get within his stated price cap.

Here's a useful blog entry I found which does a pretty good job of showing ideal screen size/resolution based on distance from the set: http://www.carltonbale.com/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/

Also: I don't know what kind of games you play, but even a game like Smash Bros. (which runs at the "lowly" resolution of 480p) has made me really thankful that I splurged on the larger screen size back when I bought my TV. That game can be impossible to tell what's going on unless you have a large screen; I have a five-year-old 51" Toshiba rear projection set that I originally bought with my college roommates, and even in the studio apartment that I've lived in for the last few years, I have been really thankful for the large screen size.

[curt_grymala]

Don't know how much use it will be, but here's what I wrote from my layman's perspective after I did a lot of research and bought a new TV.
http://www.htmlcenter.com/blog/a-guide- ... elevision/

[Lartrak]

32" LG 1080p. I've got one, couldn't be happier. $599 (depending on where you get it).

1080p is kind of silly at 32". He said he wants something that can later be used as a "main" living room TV, so I'd imagine he wants at least 40". And LG is cheap, just like Vizio, but the image quality (particularly on non-HD sources) isn't nearly as good.

You're kidding....right?

Both the 360 and my PC look just as good @ 32" than anything larger.... and while I was comparing televisions in-store the LG had the best picture. 32" is fine for a main room/bedroom, assuming Luriden isn't going to be living in a mansion where he is sitting 20' away from his television.

Thanks for coming out, though.

I think a 32" widescreen is a little small for a main room TV. It depends on the size of your room though - a lot of apartment living rooms would find that perfectly fine, for example. However, I'd say it is fine for most of the setups people have in their bedrooms. For a lot of people, large computer monitor sizes (21" or so) are adequate for bedroom use.

[Nick]

This is what you should grab:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001THFRH4

I've/my parents have owned 6 HDTVs; a Dell 17" LCD (720p), Vizio Plasma (720p) at 32", Vizio LCD at 32" (720p), an older 32" Sharp Aquos LCD (1080p), a Sony SXRD 1080p 52", and a Samsung DLP 1080p 56".

I think Sony is really the best, Sharp is right up there too; Samsung can be slightly hit or miss, although I really like their smaller stuff (monitors -- have a 23" Widescreen that is the shit for the comp). I like my Samsung DLP and think it's probably the best deal out there unless you want to shell out boatloads of cash for a Sony Bravia LCD with all sorts of fancy features. DLP is heavy, though, and not something you really want in a room you'll be sleeping in -- you're gonna need like 10+ feet to watch even a 50" TV comfortably (sure, you can sit six feet away but your eyes start to get strained). I have one of the newer model Samsung DLPs; a couple years ago they had the rainbow wheel problem or w/e it's called but it's been fixed. They're really good for the price.

Pick up a Sony if you want the best. Personally, I don't think it's worth it. I think a Sharp Aquos, such as the one listed above, is perfect. That's the one I'm eying (32" version tho); I loved my 32" Aquos for my dorm room last year. Looks better than the Samsung DLP.

Order online unless there's a huge special in store. Even with your discount, Amazon is loads cheaper (generally), offers free shipping and has no tax.

In summation: Get a Sharp Aquos or Sony Bravia. Avoid Vizio. I hate that shit. If you must go cheap, pick up last year's version of the Aquos or Bravia off eBay or Craigslist. If you wait a bit while saving money, prices drop each month, typically, so by December that 40" Aquos might run you around $850, especially if Sharp introduces some new models.

[Luriden]

Kmart has an Element 1080p 40" LCD full HDTV for $600. It looks fantastic. It has 3 HDMI ports and also works as a computer monitor. I looked at the full feature list and it all looks great. The only drawback I can think of is that it's by an unknown brand. It looks great from what I saw of it though, and I've seen a lot of it since I work in Kmart electronics. I can get it for $540 with my discount.

I'm still thinking about it though. That'll take a full paycheck and a half to get, and I don't want it breaking in a few months since I've never heard of this company. Apparently it's the Kmart/Sears generic brand, so I don't know if I can trust it.