Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests to win things like this Logitech Harmony Ultimate Remote and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

Samsung HL67A750 - can I really abuse this TV?


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#1 of 77 Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul

  • 37,617 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted January 25 2009 - 06:38 AM

Okay, after looking over the current TV landscape, I've come to the conclusion that a lot of changes have occured in just 2 years since I bought my Panasonic TH-50PX600U plasma set (now sitting in someone else's basement or room, due to its untimely liberation from stranglehold known as the Sun Domicile).

I really enjoyed the picture quality of that set, even if it was 720p, it still put out a nice sharp image (color/contrast/black levels, etc). I did look at the 1080p 50" plasma models (mainly Panasonic and Vizio, but the Panasonic pricing is still hovering around $1300-$1400 for their base 1080p plasma (TH-50PZ80U) and I didn't want to spent almost $1900 for their 800u THX offiering, or the 850u models, while it seems that Vizio offered some nice features on their new VXT505 plasma offering ($1200), the electronics seem a bit wonky at this time for purchase consideration, plus my Costco doesn't stock it anymore). The same goes for the Pioneer 5020 that has been cut down to $2000-$2200, I still just can't see myself spending that much to get 50" of viewing size. Not these days, 2 years ago, sure.

But now, I think my viewing habits have changed, and I can almost reconcile going with a DLP LED model because I want a TV I can abuse, and abuse badly, but not break the bank, and sadly, with Samsung getting out of the DLP biz, it looks like the 2008 DLP LED models are it (unless Mitsubishi hits a home run with their LaserVision TV technology, but initial reports haven't been too glorious).

LCD is still to expensive for large sizes above 52" (plus, I still find the backlighting technology to strain my eyes in extended viewing of the current LCDs), and again, my viewing habits have changed to the point that if I'm not on the couch watching the TV from 10 feet away, I'm watching it from my dining area 20 feet away (where my home PC is situated nowadays). From there I end up doing my web surfing and also watching what's on the TV in the background, so I've been really mulling over the Samsung DLP LED HL67A750 model. It's probably too much TV for my living room, but if I'm also watching it from my dining area, it's a much bigger image than my previous 50" TV viewed from 20 feet away. I've spent today moving things around to accomodate a larger sized screen (which meant raising the wire rack that hold my center channel speaker about 6" higher), and it'll be about 11" wider than my previous TV set as well, which will cut off a little bit of the hallway access, but worth it, I think.

The advantages of DLP LED's light engine is that it should be capable of same light output level for 60,000 hours (far longer than I intend on owning the TV set as that's 20 years of viewing 8 hours/day), and I don't have to worry about station bugs, 4:3 pillar boxes, any sort of image persistence or burn-in, or decaying image output (bulb DLP, or plasma). Granted, if I could get a 1080p 67" plasma for under $2000, I might get it over a DLP LED, but that's a pipe dream that may never happen. So, in effect, I suspect I should be able to abuse this TV if I inadvertently do so (fall asleep, leave it on all night, or play video games, watch one channel all day with bugs and tickers, etc.).

I understand that picture quality will take a hit (viewing angles, sparklies from silkscreen effect, etc.), but at this stage of my life, I think I can stomach the tradeoff for the ability to abuse it, while getting a big image that will be usable for my 2 main viewing situations. I will offer that I find the Mitsubishi diamond series to look a bit better, especially when you look at hair detail on people's heads, the Mits DLP (bulb-cased) seem to a look better that the DLP LED model, I'll even say that the bulb-based DLP for Samsung (A650 models) also provided better hair detail in the black levels, but I can live with it because I don't want to deal with bulb replacements or color wheels going ka-bloeey (which happened to an officemate of mine), plus I expect to do some tweaking with the video settings anyway.

Plus, going from 50" to a 67" nets me just almost 80% more image size. If I went with the HL61A750, that nets me 48% more image size over a 50" screen.

Online pricing and local pricing for the HL67A750 is dropping a bit, I saw it at Fry's for $1699 (plus another $100+ for sales tax), and online is between $1700-$1800 as well. I'm just wondering if I can hold out a little longer and pick one up for $1500 as the stores are sure to want to clear out their DLP/rear projection boxes for the sexier flatscreens for 2009. The prevailing online price for the 61" model is $1300-$1400 these days until stock runs dry, or if you lived in Texas and got in on the $999 deal at Conn's.

I think I might have read something about the 67" housing is a bit sturdier than the 61" housing, which might help in better geometry of the screen (if sagging occurs in the "box" of the TV). Also, just perhaps, a big set like this is harder to steal, unless the thieves brought a truck with them, because it ain't gonna fit in the backseat of a normal car.

I guess I've talked myself into the 67" DLP LED model, eh?
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#2 of 77 DaveF

DaveF

    Moderator

  • 13,167 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2001
  • Real Name:David Fischer
  • LocationOne Loudoun, Ashburn, VA

Posted January 25 2009 - 06:58 AM

The dollars per inch cost of DLPs are incredible. I considered them when shopping. But their terrible off-center viewing characteristics don't suit my uses at all. But if you don't care about that, they seem like a good deal, as prices plummet to maintain some marketshare in a world that's flat-panel crazy.

I'm not sure what you mean by "abuse". Are you worried about launching a Wii controller at it? I guess better to break a $1300 DLP than a $2200 Plasma.

As far as image retention or burn-in, it seems even plasmas have effectively cured these problems (based on my casual research). Do you keep you TV on all day with a CNN news scroll on the bottom?

As for size: watching a 67" from 20' away makes a lot of sense. Watching a 67" from 10' away seems like it might be pushing it (though the FP people probably disagree). But I wish I could have gone 60" (over 50") for my living room, watching about 13' away.

Anyhow, it sounds like you've found a TV with a good price and size that suits your watching habits, so enjoy and let us know how you like it. Posted Image

#3 of 77 Gregg Loewen

Gregg Loewen

    Video Standards Instructor, THX Ltd.

  • 6,316 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 09 1999
  • Real Name:Gregg Loewen
  • LocationNew England

Posted January 25 2009 - 07:56 AM

hi Pat
Keep an eye out at Fryes for the 73" Mts DLP....i saw it in LA a few months ago, on sale for $1300.

The Sonodome - circa 2001
The Newest Sonotube - circa 2001
Gregg's DVDs updated...sometimes
Lion Audio Video Consultants usually current


#4 of 77 Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul

  • 37,617 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted January 25 2009 - 08:46 AM

Abuse just means I don't want to worry about it if I happen to leave it on all the time. My old ReplayTVs were really bad about not having a screen saver, and if you watched a show, it finished, it would revert back to a static screen, which would freak me out if I happened to leave the TV on or fell asleep during the show. My old RPTV from 2002 (now retired to the bedroom) did suffer some burn-in from my ReplayTV doing what it did, and what I did. So, I was hoping for a big TV that could handle some mild abuse, and it seemed like the DLP LED model fits the bill (while trading off some PQ).

I'm not sure if I could go with a 73" TV, though 67" is really stretching it for my living room. Plus, the bulb issue is a gotcha for me, but the Mits look pretty nice when viewed on-axis. I'd be curious if the 73" model was from the Mits Diamond series. That would be a smoking price.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#5 of 77 Brett DiMichele

Brett DiMichele

    Producer

  • 3,184 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2001

Posted January 25 2009 - 09:59 AM

When I started researching to replace my last 61" RPTV, Plasma was never a consideration, nor will it ever be. Plasma technology is what it is, and no amount of pixel shifting is going to save the set from fading contrast and brightness over time, or burn in if you use it like I do.

LCD's are great but as you stated, pricing is still out of line and they are no where near as "green" as these LED DLP's either. When the 61 or 67 are powered on they use about 120 watts of power and when off? 0.080 watts if the LED power circle is on, and immeasurable when it's disabled.

Off angle viewing is fine on the set side to side (within reason for any projection technology) top to bottom angle is a bit more critical on these sets so a 20-24" stand put it about perfect. Unless you watch TV from a side room 20 degrees off angle (and who would???) it will work great in most environments.

The light engine is fantastic with a super wide gamut, you will get far more gamut out of this set than even your high end plasmas, the response time of the LED array is also faster than anything else on the market.

You won't have any issues on 24P content with this set.

Sparklies are an issue with any rear projection technology, if it bothers you, don't buy any DLP. It does not bother me as I'm used to it on bright whites.

Geometry is a touchy subject.... I do not feel ANY of these Samsung DLP's are perfect... Some are horrid some better than others. Mine seems to be decent (and for me, certainly livable) but Samsung should have and could have made a MUCH better frame... The frame is the issue here, with such an expansive screen and barely any meat to hold it, you can run into convergence issues. Just pushing back on the corner of the screens once the unit is set in place, will alter the convergence.

As for abuse.. This *IS* my computer monitor... And it's fantastic! I use a logitech MX3200 wireless keyboard/mouse combo and I am sitting about 9' away right now, running at 1024x768 and it's drop dead gorgeous... Full 1080P is a bit too high res for me and that's why I run x768.

For my criteria and my usage there was no better choice. I can keep static images on screen 24/7x365 and I don't have to lie in bed at night shaking in fear of the damage I could have done to the display.

Posted Image

Check it out:
Brett DiMichele
brettd@nospamyukonwaltz.com (remove nospam)

Too Much to list!
My PhotoBucket              My Buttkicker Wireless Advance Kit Review

#6 of 77 Ed Moxley

Ed Moxley

    Screenwriter

  • 2,701 posts
  • Join Date: May 25 2003
  • Real Name:Ed
  • LocationEastern NC

Posted January 25 2009 - 10:30 AM

That's the tv I want to get this spring. I can't believe Samsung is gonna stop making these! That just seems so stupid to me. DLP is the only affordable way to go over 52".................... Posted Image
Samsung HL61A750 (LED DLP)            Onkyo TX-SR805
Oppo BDP-83 Blu ray                                  Polk Audio LSi9
Polk Audio LSiC                                  Sony SS-MB100H
SVS PC12-NSD (Sub)                       ...

#7 of 77 Brett DiMichele

Brett DiMichele

    Producer

  • 3,184 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2001

Posted January 25 2009 - 02:48 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed Moxley
That's the tv I want to get this spring. I can't believe Samsung is gonna stop making these! That just seems so stupid to me. DLP is the only affordable way to go over 52".................... Posted Image


Ed,

I agree completely.... But it's easier to sell people a Plasma so they can feel like they are living the MTV Cribs lifestyle, apparently Thin is important to J6P's! (and important to the Brick and Mortars of the world, so they can keep more in the warehouse).

DLP IMHO is just now coming into it's own with the PhlatLight LED Light Engine and with more R&D, better cabinet work, better optics, these sets could get even thinner and even brighter.. Sadly we may never see that happen!
Brett DiMichele
brettd@nospamyukonwaltz.com (remove nospam)

Too Much to list!
My PhotoBucket              My Buttkicker Wireless Advance Kit Review

#8 of 77 DaveF

DaveF

    Moderator

  • 13,167 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2001
  • Real Name:David Fischer
  • LocationOne Loudoun, Ashburn, VA

Posted January 25 2009 - 04:04 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brett DiMichele
Off angle viewing is fine on the set side to side (within reason for any projection technology) top to bottom angle is a bit more critical on these sets so a 20-24" stand put it about perfect. Unless you watch TV from a side room 20 degrees off angle (and who would???) it will work great in most environments.
I would Posted Image I'm about 60-deg off axis when I'm in the kitchen, watching a Simpsons rerun while cooking. A guest is about 30-deg off center, sitting in the recliner.

Quote:
When I started researching to replace my last 61" RPTV, Plasma was never a consideration, nor will it ever be. Plasma technology is what it is, and no amount of pixel shifting is going to save the set from fading contrast and brightness over time, or burn in if you use it like I do.
Current plasmas claim 60k hour half-life, which is over 10 years of use. If these claims are even 50% correct, the fade problem is a non-issue now.

So we all have our priorities. After six years suffering curved 'straight' lines with my CRT, I was ready for a fixed-pixel display. I wanted nothing to do with geometry distortion, including projection TVs like DLP. Maybe that's been fixed. It's easy to hang onto outdated technical info.

#9 of 77 Brett DiMichele

Brett DiMichele

    Producer

  • 3,184 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2001

Posted January 25 2009 - 04:13 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveF
I would Posted Image I'm about 60-deg off axis when I'm in the kitchen, watching a Simpsons rerun while cooking. A guest is about 30-deg off center, sitting in the recliner.

Current plasmas claim 60k hour half-life, which is over 10 years of use. If these claims are even 50% correct, the fade problem is a non-issue now.

So we all have our priorities. After six years suffering curved 'straight' lines with my CRT, I was ready for a fixed-pixel display. I wanted nothing to do with geometry distortion, including projection TVs like DLP. Maybe that's been fixed. It's easy to hang onto outdated technical info.


Your viewing requirements are odd Posted Image But in your circumstances it wouldn't suprise me that DLP doesn't work, heck a few years ago, LCD wouldn't work either! Plasmas have the off angle response as long as you can tame the glare on the screen (That wouldn't be an issue for my environment).

I don't care what the plasma MFG's claim, I still don't trust the technology! I say a plasma can't be used in my environment as a "monitor" without burn in. And why have a big display I can't use with an HTPC? To me that was a priority.

Plasmas are also heavy, power hungry and they hum (I can't hear it).... Even when they are off. My DLP does hum as well (this is documented) but only if the LED array is running in torch mode. With settings from someone that had the set ISF'd it does not hum.

Geometry *IS* an issue... I can't deny it... I can even post the photos to show it's not pixel perfect at the edges. It's well within Samsung's "Specs" but if you need a 100% square image, this is not the technology for you.
Brett DiMichele
brettd@nospamyukonwaltz.com (remove nospam)

Too Much to list!
My PhotoBucket              My Buttkicker Wireless Advance Kit Review

#10 of 77 ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Producer

  • 5,816 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted January 26 2009 - 10:56 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brett DiMichele
LCD's are great but as you stated, pricing is still out of line and they are no where near as "green" as these LED DLP's either. When the 61 or 67 are powered on they use about 120 watts of power and when off? 0.080 watts if the LED power circle is on, and immeasurable when it's disabled.

How does this compare w/ CRT-based RPTVs? I've been wondering about this comparing to my old 53" Panny RPTV. If there was any significant $-savings involved on my electric bill, I probably would've gone for the Crutchfield $1300 deal on the 61" (and also gotten the $200 NFLShop credit rebate). Posted Image

_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 77 ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Producer

  • 5,816 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted January 26 2009 - 12:05 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveF
As for size: watching a 67" from 20' away makes a lot of sense. Watching a 67" from 10' away seems like it might be pushing it (though the FP people probably disagree). But I wish I could have gone 60" (over 50") for my living room, watching about 13' away.

67" from 10ft is not really pushing it at all -- surely, the resulting viewing angle is not bigger than what you get at a decent movie theater. It's in large part why we even have 1080p. Posted Image If you sit much farther away than 10ft (for that screen size), you will start to lose all the benefits of 1080p.

I currently have an old 53" CRT-based RPTV and find ~8.5ft to be a happy medium (for movie viewing pleasure anyway, assuming it's not a poor quality source, though I'd prefer to stay another foot or more away otherwise and would need a ~60"-or-so display for that).

The big FP people would actually want something closer to 1:1 ratio instead -- and it's no wonder even the best DVDs can look too soft at that ratio. Posted Image

_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)

#12 of 77 Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul

  • 37,617 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted January 26 2009 - 01:06 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Man-Fai Wong
How does this compare w/ CRT-based RPTVs? I've been wondering about this comparing to my old 53" Panny RPTV. If there was any significant $-savings involved on my electric bill, I probably would've gone for the Crutchfield $1300 deal on the 61" (and also gotten the $200 NFLShop credit rebate). Posted Image

_Man_

I've read that the DLP TVs weren't eligible for the $200 NFL shop credit, I'm sure Samsung will be inundated with unhappy people getting rejected when they send in the rebate form and UPC from the box.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#13 of 77 Brett DiMichele

Brett DiMichele

    Producer

  • 3,184 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2001

Posted January 26 2009 - 01:20 PM

Man,

Here is a great article on power use between different display technologies. Phlatlight DLP is by far, the green leader.

The basics of TV power - TV power consumption - CNET Reviews

Not sure what they used to measure consumption, they list the 61A750 @ 171 watts on, over on AVS they measured with a Kill-A-Watt around 120 from what I recall. Either way it's still WAY less than any Plasma and less than LCD as well. And if you turn the LED power button off when the set is off, the off power consumption is none.

I see why it consumed 171 watts, it was in torch mode Posted Image AUTO LED will do that! It's also far too bright in that mode.. Medium LED control brings it down to 120 watts.
Brett DiMichele
brettd@nospamyukonwaltz.com (remove nospam)

Too Much to list!
My PhotoBucket              My Buttkicker Wireless Advance Kit Review

#14 of 77 DaveF

DaveF

    Moderator

  • 13,167 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2001
  • Real Name:David Fischer
  • LocationOne Loudoun, Ashburn, VA

Posted January 26 2009 - 02:48 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brett DiMichele
Your viewing requirements are odd Posted Image But in your circumstances it wouldn't suprise me that DLP doesn't work, heck a few years ago, LCD wouldn't work either! Plasmas have the off angle response as long as you can tame the glare on the screen (That wouldn't be an issue for my environment).
Short living room, only about 15' deep Posted Image

Quote:
Plasmas are also heavy, power hungry and they hum (I can't hear it).... Even when they are off. My DLP does hum as well (this is documented) but only if the LED array is running in torch mode. With settings from someone that had the set ISF'd it does not hum.
100 lbs for 50"? Is that heavy? I just got rid of a 250 lb 36" CRT, so it's all perspective. No hum either.

They aren't especially power hungry anymore -- no more than similar LCDs and not much worse than my former 36" CRT. The '09 models promise to be even more energy efficient.
HDTV power consumption compared - TV power consumption - CNET Reviews

Quote:
Originally Posted by [URL="http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/member.php?u=18559"
Man-Fai Wong[/url]]67" from 10ft is not really pushing it at all -- surely, the resulting viewing angle is not bigger than what you get at a decent movie theater. It's in large part why we even have 1080p. Posted Image If you sit much farther away than 10ft (for that screen size), you will start to lose all the benefits of 1080p.
I'm watching a 50" from a bout 13'; I've reiterated to my wife that I wish I could have gotten the 60" (but I wasn't going to pay the 100% price premium for 10" extra). But I think for casual viewing, 67" from 10' would be too much for me. But for movie watching -- I agree, it would be superb!

#15 of 77 Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul

  • 37,617 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted January 26 2009 - 04:02 PM

In my 1.75 years of plasma TV ownership, I didn't notice my electric bill going up noticeably so. I think the power issue is a non-starter.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#16 of 77 Brett DiMichele

Brett DiMichele

    Producer

  • 3,184 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2001

Posted January 26 2009 - 04:28 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Sun
In my 1.75 years of plasma TV ownership, I didn't notice my electric bill going up noticeably so. I think the power issue is a non-starter.


It may be a "non" issue for someone, but the difference *is* measurable and the numbers don't lie. Follow the link posted on CNET and you can see power consumption figures.

That certainly wasn't on my criteria list when shopping and I doubt I will notice it since I am on a balanced plan. But for some it may matter.
Brett DiMichele
brettd@nospamyukonwaltz.com (remove nospam)

Too Much to list!
My PhotoBucket              My Buttkicker Wireless Advance Kit Review

#17 of 77 Patrick Sun

Patrick Sun

    Studio Mogul

  • 37,617 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 30 1999

Posted January 27 2009 - 01:37 AM

Put it another way, I didn't lose any sleep over how much higher my electricity bill might/would be when I was watching my plasma TV, nor did it ever make me second guess using it at any time during ownership of it. Sure, if it doubles your monthly electricity bill, it's an issue, but if it only adds $5/month to the bill, eh, not a big deal, just skip one value meal for lunch/month, a worthy sacrifice if money is that tight.
"Jee-sus, it's like Iwo Jima out there" - Roger Sterling on "Mad Men"
Patcave | 2006 Films | 2007 Films | Flickr | Comic-Con 2012 | Dragon*Con 2012

#18 of 77 DaveF

DaveF

    Moderator

  • 13,167 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 04 2001
  • Real Name:David Fischer
  • LocationOne Loudoun, Ashburn, VA

Posted January 27 2009 - 03:07 AM

BestBuy had a 60" DLP for $999 this week. I don't know if it's model you're looking for, but it was a heck of a price for the size.

Quote:
It may be a "non" issue for someone, but the difference *is* measurable and the numbers don't lie. Follow the link posted on CNET and you can see power consumption figures.
It may be measurable but also be insignificant, depending on budget and priorities. My new plasma consumes about 300W according to Cnet. Running 10 hrs/day all year, that's about $120 for electricity. If it were twice as efficient, I'd save $60 per year. I'd prefer that -- and meant to buy an '09 model this Fall, but timing and price were right and this electricity cost is acceptable. But for me, previous models that consumed 500W+ were unacceptable.

#19 of 77 ManW_TheUncool

ManW_TheUncool

    Producer

  • 5,816 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 18 2001
  • Real Name:ManW

Posted January 27 2009 - 02:36 PM

I think I've seen that CNet power consumption article before. Problem w/ the data there is they rely on default settings (often in "torch mode"), so the numbers won't help us too much in practice. If anything, the article seems to suggest that plasma comes much closer to the rest once you turn off "torch mode" and go w/ reasonable, calibration level settings -- and seems like that's why many of the newer model plasmas have much lower power consumption.

Anyway, in my case, I'd actually like to know the power consumption for my old CRT-based RPTV, and that article has no data at all for that type of display. If my old RPTV consumes substantially more power than the Samsung LED DLP, then that's one more incentive to upgrade sooner rather than later.

_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)

#20 of 77 Brett DiMichele

Brett DiMichele

    Producer

  • 3,184 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2001

Posted January 27 2009 - 04:59 PM

Man,

I couldn't find data specific to your TV but I found data by googling power usage for 3CRT RPTV and saw figures like 150 watts (which was suprising!).
Brett DiMichele
brettd@nospamyukonwaltz.com (remove nospam)

Too Much to list!
My PhotoBucket              My Buttkicker Wireless Advance Kit Review


Back to Display Devices (TVs/Projectors/Screens)


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Forum Nav Content I Follow