-

Jump to content



Photo

Need RPTV size advice


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
18 replies to this topic

#1 of 19 OFFLINE   Brian Bowles

Brian Bowles

    Second Unit

  • 258 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 03 2001

Posted February 15 2003 - 02:44 AM

I am here again. I am getting real close to purchasing my RPTV. I am going to get a Toshiba HDX 57 or 65. I am not sure which one to get. I will be approximately 11 feet from the front of the couch to the front of the television. What size do you think I should get? There is a picture of the current televsion in the house gallery of my website. Here is the link: Home page

The room is 20'x18' with 12' ceilings. Although the television will go across the room. That is the reason there will only be 11 feet from the front of couch to the television. I will use the set for mostly dvd's but my wife watches mostly cable tv. We are going to have to save up for the HDTV tuner. So we will be a while without it. Also only 3 stations in our area have HDTV. Will the other stations look noticably worse on a 65" than a 57" since it is a larger set? Thanks so much for your time.

#2 of 19 OFFLINE   Alan M

Alan M

    Second Unit

  • 454 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 03 2003

Posted February 15 2003 - 03:04 AM

Your seating position is good at 11' Brian.I sit 14' away from my tosh 65,and could get a little closer.I think the 57 or the 65 would be an excellent choice,and dont think you'd be unhappy w/either.
As far as how good your cable stations will look,kinda depends on your cable.Lousy signals make for lousy pictures,so,yes,if its bad,it'll look worse the larger you go.On the other hand,strong signals(and good quality dvd's)will look good,if not great the larger you go.
Now that I read what i wrote,guess its not much help,but watching dvd's like reign of fire,lotr,and many others is absolutely awe inspiring w/a good progressive scan dvd player and the 65.

Good luck and happy shopping.

#3 of 19 OFFLINE   Joe Becker

Joe Becker

    Auditioning

  • 14 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 25 2003

Posted February 15 2003 - 07:53 AM

I sit 9.5 feet away from my 58" Pioneer. I'd prefer to be another foot away on cable, but it's just right for DVD.

#4 of 19 OFFLINE   Brian Bowles

Brian Bowles

    Second Unit

  • 258 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 03 2001

Posted February 16 2003 - 02:00 AM

Anyone else?

#5 of 19 OFFLINE   Jason Spencer

Jason Spencer

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 105 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 05 2002

Posted February 16 2003 - 02:17 AM

I have the 57H82 and sit a little over 9 feet away. It looks great on DVD/HD but cable can be a little soft and jaggy with the TW1 stretch. As far as looking at a 57" TV from this distance, it's perfect. At first it seems BIG, but you get used to it quickly. The one thing you should consider is having to move your eyes to see the whole thing. 57" at 9 feet is borderline too close to see the whole screen without excessive eye movment (and that will give you headaches and eyestrain after long viewing). But I took the plunge and think it is perfect. The main reason I went above my 36" regular TV was size, and anything less than 57 just didn't cut it for me...

If I was at 11 feet (and if I had the money) the 65" would be great! But if you're concerned about cable quality or eyestrain, the 57" would be just as good and may look a little cleaner (with non HD stuff).
-Jay

#6 of 19 OFFLINE   Rick J

Rick J

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 63 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 27 2002

Posted February 16 2003 - 02:32 AM

brian

i'm ~7-9' from my 53" depending on which couch i'm on. from 7' it's about right and from 9' i could handle bigger. my brother has a 61" and sits ~ 8' although initially it takes a little getting used to, it's right for him. if you're mainly watching movies (w/prog. scan i hope) or hd, then i definitely agree with alan...bigger is better. on the other hand, cable will definitely look worse. analog stinks! i'm also looking into a stb sometime in the near future. i guess you have to weigh your viewing habits. if you haven't yet, i'd recommend going to the store and sitting in front of those two sets for awhile at the viewing distance you'll be at and go from there. no matter what you choose, i think you'll be happy. don't forget to turn those settings down immediately after you get it...good luck! rick

#7 of 19 OFFLINE   Alan Pummill

Alan Pummill

    Screenwriter

  • 1,254 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 06 1999

Posted February 16 2003 - 02:57 AM

I'm 9.5' from my 58" Pioneer Elite PRO-620HD. The salesman that I bought this from, and who has been to my house, strongly suggested the PRO-620HD over the 64" PRO-720HD.

I am lucky that my Time Warner standard cable signal is excellent!! A friend has a 65" Mits, and he uses a dish for his local stations. He sits about 12' back from his Mits, and sorry to say, the picture is just about unwatchable. But with HD or DVD, it is fantastic!!

You need to really consider how much standard definition you watch when making your decision!! We watch a lot of standard def. TV, and it was why we picked the Elite. It has the best line-doubler and stretch modes on the market, IMHO!!
SLEEPY AL
MAGGIE MAGIC!!

#8 of 19 OFFLINE   Brian Bowles

Brian Bowles

    Second Unit

  • 258 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 03 2001

Posted February 18 2003 - 04:28 PM

So you guys think if we watch a lot of cable that the 57" might be a better choice from our viewing distance?

#9 of 19 OFFLINE   Dan_Isaacs

Dan_Isaacs

    Extra

  • 20 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2002

Posted February 19 2003 - 03:56 AM

Do you have Digital Cable? We have Time Warner Digital Cable, and they broadcast the HD signals (with the right cable box) for the local netwrok affiliates. They should also carry ESPNHD when it starts up. Check with your provider, if you haven't already.
Dan Isaacs
Dan on the web

#10 of 19 ONLINE   ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Producer

  • 5,853 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted February 19 2003 - 11:04 AM

Why don't you see for yourself?

Go to the store and see how the picture looks to you at 12-13ft eyes-to-screen distance. Make sure to see how regular cable/sat feeds look, not just DVD and HD.

Since you're making a big jump in TV size (judging from your home page's photo), you really have to make sure you (and your wife) can live w/ the PQ of regular cable/sat quality. DVD will probably look good w/ 65" at that distance, but regular cable/sat might be an issue.

If you do go w/ 57", you do have the option of sitting closer in the future when you no longer watch much regular cable/sat and have more HD content to watch. Something to factor in.

Again, see for yourself.

_Man_
Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things..." (St. Paul)

#11 of 19 OFFLINE   Alan Pummill

Alan Pummill

    Screenwriter

  • 1,254 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 06 1999

Posted February 19 2003 - 01:45 PM

I agree. The quality of the signal you receive will be a huge factor in your decision. Also, the amount of standard def. that you watch.

Sometimes on HD or DVD, I'll roll my 58" Elite out about a foot or so. It gives you that encompassing feeling that THX specs call out for!! In that case, I'm only 8.5' away!!

Are you confused yet??Posted Image
SLEEPY AL
MAGGIE MAGIC!!

#12 of 19 OFFLINE   Brian Bowles

Brian Bowles

    Second Unit

  • 258 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 03 2001

Posted February 19 2003 - 02:52 PM

Well cable tv is a big issue for my wife. She watches lots of shows on cable tv. We have comcast in this area. I know they offer digital via a box. Is that any better than regular cable tv? I would love to have bigger but I am worried my wife will hate it when she is watching her shows. That makes me kind of hesitant to get the 65" I will definitely need to go to the store and look. I am going to get a Toshiba HDX model. Anyone else? Thanks for your time and opinions.

#13 of 19 ONLINE   ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Producer

  • 5,853 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted February 19 2003 - 03:08 PM

Digital cable most likely won't look any better than regular cable. If anything, there's good likelihood that some, if not most, digital cable channels will look worse than regular cable, assuming good quality cabling from the provider to you. Most of the digital channels will probably just be digitized versions of the analog channels and may add distracting compression artifacts. It really depends.

_Man_
Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things..." (St. Paul)

#14 of 19 OFFLINE   Alan Pummill

Alan Pummill

    Screenwriter

  • 1,254 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 06 1999

Posted February 19 2003 - 10:53 PM

With my Time Warner cable, the Digital channels look much better than analog. And the HD is fantastic. The small city that I live in has recently been completely wired with fiber optic cable feeds!!!!

I guess it depends on the feed!!
SLEEPY AL
MAGGIE MAGIC!!

#15 of 19 ONLINE   ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Producer

  • 5,853 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted February 20 2003 - 04:28 AM

Alan,

I have TWC also in NYC. Which digital channels are you talking about? For me, I guess the premium channels can sometimes look pretty good and probably better than typical analog, but not always the case. However, these channels don't really have analog counterparts to compare.

_Man_
Just another amateur learning to paint w/ "the light of the world".

"Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things..." (St. Paul)

#16 of 19 OFFLINE   Alan Pummill

Alan Pummill

    Screenwriter

  • 1,254 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 06 1999

Posted February 20 2003 - 11:05 AM

HBO and the like!! Anything over channel 100 is digital!!

But the 5 HD channels I get are FANTASTIC!!
SLEEPY AL
MAGGIE MAGIC!!

#17 of 19 OFFLINE   MikeRP

MikeRP

    Supporting Actor

  • 514 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 08 2002

Posted February 20 2003 - 11:07 PM

My Time Warner Cable is terrible. So, I'm looking to upgrade to a satellite system.

Brian, I have the 57HDX82 and I sit exactly 11 feet from the set. I looked at your room and you seem to have plenty of wall area so get the 65!!!!!!! The 57 is great but I could have got the 65.

It will seem huge at first but you settle into it easily.
I was limited by space for the TV and other AV gear.

If you decide on the 57 - you'll love it too.

DVD'd are great but the cable signal is all over the place some stations look like DVD quality and most just ____!

Mike

#18 of 19 OFFLINE   Dan_Isaacs

Dan_Isaacs

    Extra

  • 20 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2002

Posted February 21 2003 - 06:16 AM

I have a stadard def RPTV, but the digital channels are great. The picture is better, and the sound is awesome. I wouldn't dare watch sports on a non-digital channel if I could help it.

And one thing that seals the Digital deal for me is that my wife loves the Gameshow network. And when HBO et al have free weekends, it's 15 channels of movies, not just one.
Dan Isaacs
Dan on the web

#19 of 19 OFFLINE   Timon Russo

Timon Russo

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 213 posts
  • Join Date: May 10 2000

Posted February 21 2003 - 06:25 AM

I sit almost 10' from my Mits 65" and its perfect. All I have is regular analog cable right now, and I think it looks quite fine. DVD looks astonishing.