question before buying Mitsu TV (1 Viewer)

[Kamal_K]

I am basically sold on mitsu but have a couple of questions. The first is there are 2 models I am looking at one is the WS65311(abc warehouse) and the other is the WS-A65(best buy). Does anyone know the difference and which is better. They are the same price. My second question is while I was checking out tv's at best buy I noticed the picture on the phillips 60inch widescreen model# 60PP9352 looked very sharp and clear(better than any other) also brighter. That kind of confused me because I was dead set on the mitsu. If you can recommend a RPTV that would be great, I am looking for something under 3000.00 Any help is appreciated. thanks

 

[Donny Carlyon]

The Best Buy models lack the sub-color adjustments, VSM is defeatable on the standard model and is defaulted to on with the BB model. The standard model the shield is color-tuned as to not let ambient lighting penitrate the shield. Why would you buy the BB model at the same price when it has fewer features?

 

[Kamal_K]

Regarding this--Why would you buy the BB model at the same price when it has fewer features?

are you saying that the Ws65311(abc warehouse) is a better version, I am not sure of the difference. What is VSM? I am new to all of this. thanks

 

[Jim FC]

Yes, the non-BB models are "better." The Mitsu TVs that Best Buy carries lack the features of any other retailer's Mitsus, as Danny explained.

VSM is Velocity Scan Modulation. It is essentially an artificial edge enhancement feature, but most people who want their TV to look as good and as natural as possible turn the feature off. The BB models do not allow you to do this. The other two features that are different -- the color-tuned screen shield and the color balance feature -- are much more useful than the VSM defeatability. Definitely buy the non-BB version if you have a "real" Mitsu dealer nearby, as it sounds like you do.

 

[Kamal_K]

thank you so much, this really helps. If the Mitsus are supposed to be so much better, why do you think that the picture on the phillips looked so much better. thanks again.

 

[Jim FC]

Were the TVs on the same channel? If the Philips was on an HD feed and the Mitsu was on a regular feed, that would certainly explain why the one looked better than the other. Make sure they are showing the same show. Ideally, you'll find someone willing to hook up a DVD player directly to each set, and let you compare the same DVD on each one, rather than using the full-store feed which always looks like hell.

Second, there is plenty you can do to adjust the picture, and the Philips may have had the brightness way up or something which made it more eye-catching. At BB, having the display TVs properly calibrated and set-up doesn't appear to be a major priority. Make sure that both TVs have the brightness/color/contrast/sharpness settings approximately the same (if you set everything at about 50%, even though it won't be a perfect match from TV to TV, you at least have them set-up roughly the same), and then compare TVs.

Third, at what height was each TV? This is important because RPTVs are very "beamy," meaning they are nice and bright if you are looking straight at them, but not so bright if you are looking at them at an angle. If the Philips was on a riser with the screen at eye level, and the Mitsu was sitting on the floor 2 feet below eye level, the Mitsu wouldn't look as bright unless you were sitting down in front of it.

Finally, everybody sees different things, and it just may be that you like the Philips' picture better than the Mitsu. If that's the case, you need to decide whether Mitsubishi's reputation for reliability is enough to make you pick the TV you didn't like as well.

 

[Kamal_K]

thanks jim, the mitsu was sitting below eye level and the phillips was sitting on a riser about 7 feet high, now that you mention it I suspect the brightness may have been turned up all the way. the mitsu did have some red push. I think I will stick with the mitsu. thanks again

 

[Sheldon C]

I own the 65311 and couldn't be happier. I am shocked at how good even analog cable looks. One thing I noticed is that cable looks FAR better using just the regular coax cable than going through s video from the cable box. I don't know if I have an exceptional cable feed (time warner) or what, but the coax looks very good.

I wonder how many people have been dissapointed in their cable reception because they are using s vid?

 

[Scott_AH]

My ATT dig-cable looks horrid on s-video. I was really excited when they shipped the new boxes with optical and s-video but MY GOD, the dot crawl is intense and there is always a constant upwards-moving snowiness crossing the screen. I went back to composite and the image looks absolutely better.

(Wow am I off track from Kamal's post!)

Scott