I don't think I'll Buy a HD RPTV 16:9 Now! Help!!!

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by WaltL, Aug 15, 2001.

  1. WaltL

    WaltL Extra

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    After reading all the posts on this forum regarding HD RPTV 16:9 sets, you guys have scared the living s**t out of me!
    I am a relative novice at all this stuff, but I do know a little [​IMG].
    I was planning on purchasing either a Toshiba or Mitsubishi 65" HDTV RPTV with a 16:9 ratio until I read all the posts talking about how with cable and satellite, some of the channels are "unwatchable". What is meant by "unwatchable"? As compared to what? The HDTV viewing? Would it really be "unwatchable" to the average person?
    I ask these questions for the simple fact that I was planning on spending $3000 (maybe a little more)on one of these sets, but most of my viewing is done watching cable and Directv (and my Directivo). And while my VCR is rarely used anymore, I do have old home tapes that I would like to have the ability to view in the future. Not to mention the fact that I still use the VCR for the PIP function! Also, we still need to tape and view our favorite shows (which my Directivo can't always do).
    Anyway, what I am trying to say is that with my TV viewing primarily being cable and satellite TV, what would be the usefulness in me purchasing one of the 16:9 sets?
    I do have a progressive scan DVD player, but I might watch 1 maybe 2 movies a week.
    Also, does anyone have any suggestions or alternatives to the models I suggested that might help my problems?
    Any help would be greatly appreciated!
    Walt
     
  2. Stefan A

    Stefan A Second Unit

    Joined:
    May 27, 2001
    Messages:
    397
    Likes Received:
    0
    First of all, the fact that it is a 16:9 T.V does not have anything to do with the pic quality - it's the size of the TV. With the bigger screen, defects in the transmission are seen more easily than on a smaller direct view. You will find that certain stations will be better than others. I wouldn't say it is unwatchable. I guess that is a vague thing - maybe watchable for me is unwatchable for someone else. Compared to DVD, or especially HDTV, it is not as clear. But you can still see the picture. Once you have the TV for a while, you will start tweaking and eventually may get an isf calibration. I think that it can eventually look a lot better than it will out of the box. If you see yourself watching much more standard programing, maybe a 4:3 would be a better choice. Personally, I would never get rid of my widescreen for a 4:3 - no matter how much TV I watched. DVD's look too good.
    Stefan Antwarg
     
  3. WaltL

    WaltL Extra

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    When I was referring to 16:9, I was referring to widescreen format vs 4:3 ratio. I understand that as the screen gets bigger, the picture may not be as clear (my 10 year old 32" RCA has a better picture than my 50" 3 year-old Hitachi).
    What I assumed they were talking about when they said "unwatchable" is how the standard format (4:3) is squeezed or compressed into the widescreen format (16:9). And the humming sounds that sometimes are heard from the Digital TV because its picking up and playing analog signals that can't be deciphered by analog TV sets.
    I may be wrong. Please correct me if I am and keep the suggestions flowing!
     
  4. Geordy

    Geordy Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 1999
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    0
    you don't need to worry about PIP...all the tv's you're looking at are 2-tuner PIP
    geordy
    ------------------
     
  5. John Morris

    John Morris Guest

    Hi Walt: IMO, when someone says that their cable TV is now unwatchable, they are saying that it looks like crap comparedto that set displaying a DVD or HDTV image. I have also been shopping and I must say that if your cable or OTA analog signal is not pristine, the sets line doubler will also double your video noise too. Still, even this picture is preferable to the same image displayed on a comparably sized analog set, which also shows scan lines. I'd recommend that you go into the stores and playwith the sets changing the video input selection and see what DVD, HDTV and analog OTA or cable input looks like. Then make your own decision...
    ------------------
    Take Care,
    merc
    ----------------
    DFAST, 5C, DVI, HDCP, SafeAudio, Macrovision and Lewinski!!!
     
  6. John-D

    John-D Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2001
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    0
    Invest in a good outboard line doubler if your TV's line doubler is not upto snuff.
    Better still, go HTPC and use dScaler
     
  7. Mark Zimmer

    Mark Zimmer Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 1997
    Messages:
    4,300
    Likes Received:
    40
    The Toshiba 65" has a very good line doubler that makes cable quite watchable, IMHO. It's not perfect, but you're not likely to be doing critical watching off of cable in the first place. Movie channels, sports etc. all look fine on my Tosh, using analog cable. Not quite as good as DVD but certainly acceptable. Terrible source material, however, like the public access stations, will look worse than your wildest dreams. The question then remains why you're watching public access [​IMG]
    The HDTV is a different issue, and I've about come to the conclusion that it's not worth worrying about. There's nothing worth watching presented in HDTV (HBO modifies the aspect ratio of its movies on its HD channels) as far as I can tell, and have taken the attitude that if HDTV ever comes, it will be a bonus, but I'm not using this TV with any intention of ever using it for HD.
    ------------------
    "This movie has warped my fragile little mind."
     
  8. GlennH

    GlennH Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 1998
    Messages:
    2,132
    Likes Received:
    7
    Real Name:
    Glenn
    It's all about the quality of the video source. My cable signal is not the best, and to me most channels are very disappointing on my 58" 16:9 Pioneer Elite RPTV. A few channels are not so bad.
    But it's more than just the size. For most cable/sat a large screen analog RPTV would probably look better than my fancy digital set with line doubler, because the line doubler just magnifies and makes the artifacts worse.
    The fact that the set looks so excellent with a high-quality source (480p DVD) just makes the cable signal look that much worse by comparison.
    The difference you see between cable/sat and DVD on a normal direct-view set is much smaller than the dramatic difference you see on a large HDTV-ready monitor. So if you need to use this set primarily for cable/sat then a HDTV may not be the best choice. For me, I wanted the best performance for DVD, so I don't regret it at all.
    It's just too bad all TV isn't HDTV. We have such a long way to go. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page