LCD Question

[earth station]

I made a visit to Circuit City today, saw a 42" SONY projection TV w/LCD display.

Anyone have one of these type of HDTVs? I would like to know what is different about this than a regular LCD. It's a thin panel tv like an LCD but was label projection w/LCD display. You don't have to be centered to see it like other projection TVs. It looked quite nice. It doesn't have DVI but does have HDMI. On sale for $2200.

 

[mini1]

check www.avsforum.com for the best reviews on new HDTV's. post your question in their high traffic forums.

 

[mike123abc]

The 42" projection LCD from Sony is like 14 inches thick. The only real drawbacks I have seen is off angle viewing brightness not as great as a flat panel LCD and the size/thickness of the unit (the unit is also quite wide).

 

[Carl B]

LCD rear projection TVs have several inherit problems, which many folks can live with and ignore. Viewing angle is severely limited; only slightly better that a CRT/RP. Blacks are "crushed", that is you can't discern shades of black very well in dark scenes. If you are too close, you may see the pixels, which makes it seem like you are watching the scene through a screen door. Pixels burn out giving you spots on your screen. Most LCD/RPs don't have a native resolution that matchs any ATSC standard (i.e., 480p, 720p, 1080i), which means the TV is always converting the signal it receives. Some do those conversions better than others and some have more problems with one input resolution versus another.

 

[TyroneShoes]

If you really don't know, or even if you just think you know, then please refrain from answering. This does a real disservice to folks who are trying to learn the truth. What was true of last year's models, or what was rumored, is not at all relevant. Below are the real, actual facts regarding Sony LCDRP sets today:

Absolute black level and ability to render detail in dark areas of the picture are two totally separate things, both of which should be considered separately, even though they can together contribute to a perception of poor performance.

Blacks are NOT crushed on Sony LCDRP sets when adjusted properly. Black detail is equivalent to Sony CRT sets, which are the best out there. Placing them side by side proves that beyond the shadow of a doubt.

The absolute black level on any RP set may be higher than on a LCD (direct) or plasma, because it is impossible to totally prevent light leak inside the cabinet. This makes adjustment critical by comparison, but when adjusted properly, there is satisfactory absolute black, as well as satisfactory and equivalent detail in dark areas of the picture. It will NOT be at quite the "blackness" of a CRT or plasma, but damned close when adjusted carefully and properly.

RP's do suffer from falloff at wide viewing angles, and it is important to position them exactly at seated eye height, as the vertical angle is even more critical, at 25-35 degrees. Viewing from improper angles as well as misadjustment can both contribute to the myth of poor black performance. Positioned in the sweet spot, however, PQ, brightness, and black performance is all but equivalent to plasma.

Pixels do NOT burn out on LCD. They are not individual systems like TI micro-mirror, but are formed once and have no moving parts or at-risk individual electronic components, so they can't possibly burn out. It is true that some dead pixels may be created during manufacturing, just like in plasma, but they can't and don't accumulate over time. They might try to sneak a few past the customer, but simply check closely and demand a different set if the one they try to sell you has dead pixels. Once you get a good one, pixels can't die later.

Sonys have a native rez of 768, and the scaler in them is extremely good, much better than some displays that scale everything to 720 or 1080. With that native rez and pixel fill factor approaching that of DLP or plasma, they have little issue with SDE as have previous models, and PQ-wise they are not only highly competitive with other formats, but are becoming the format of choice. Especially since the price is right.

 

[Paradox-SJ]

If you really don't know, or even if you just think you know, then please refrain from answering. This does a real disservice to folks who are trying to learn the truth. What was true of last year's models, or what was rumored, is not at all relevant. Below are the real, actual facts regarding Sony LCDRP sets today:

Absolute black level and ability to render detail in dark areas of the picture are two totally separate things, both of which should be considered separately, even though they can together contribute to a perception of poor performance.

Blacks are NOT crushed on Sony LCDRP sets when adjusted properly. Black detail is equivalent to Sony CRT sets, which are the best out there. Placing them side by side proves that beyond the shadow of a doubt.

The absolute black level on any RP set may be higher than on a LCD (direct) or plasma, because it is impossible to totally prevent light leak inside the cabinet. This makes adjustment critical by comparison, but when adjusted properly, there is satisfactory absolute black, as well as satisfactory and equivalent detail in dark areas of the picture. It will NOT be at quite the "blackness" of a CRT or plasma, but damned close when adjusted carefully and properly.

RP's do suffer from falloff at wide viewing angles, and it is important to position them exactly at seated eye height, as the vertical angle is even more critical, at 25-35 degrees. Viewing from improper angles as well as misadjustment can both contribute to the myth of poor black performance. Positioned in the sweet spot, however, PQ, brightness, and black performance is all but equivalent to plasma.

Pixels do NOT burn out on LCD. They are not individual systems like TI micro-mirror, but are formed once and have no moving parts or at-risk individual electronic components, so they can't possibly burn out. It is true that some dead pixels may be created during manufacturing, just like in plasma, but they can't and don't accumulate over time. They might try to sneak a few past the customer, but simply check closely and demand a different set if the one they try to sell you has dead pixels. Once you get a good one, pixels can't die later.

Sonys have a native rez of 768, and the scaler in them is extremely good, much better than some displays that scale everything to 720 or 1080. With that native rez and pixel fill factor approaching that of DLP or plasma, they have little issue with SDE as have previous models, and PQ-wise they are not only highly competitive with other formats, but are becoming the format of choice. Especially since the price is right.

Yeah! what he said....and they look darn good too. In fact I have two of them and I LOVE them. I had mine setup by an ISF technican and let me tell you I would have anything else. Well maybe a LCOS but I dont have a speare 20g's spend

 

[toto]

All microdisplays have some brightness fall off, but the brightness is more 'even' and the fall off is much wider angle than a conventional RPTV. Microdisplays have user replaceable bulbs which gives the owner an opportunity to restore the full brightness of the set, periodically. They are lighter in weight, than comparable size plasma sets and considerably lighter on the budget. Probably the hottest technologies available for the consumer today. And the Sony Grand Wegas are some of the best in quality and in value for the dollar.

 

[Carl B]

Yes, I know. I almost bought one myself before doing numerous side-by-side comparisons and confirming what I saw with the technical discussions in AVS Forum. Since then, I've listened to the laments of folks I know who purchased the LCD/RPs.

But, since I didn't personally attack you, just offerred up some things for the prospective buyer to look at, where do you get off telling me not to post? Are you a Sony rep or just overly sensitive about your purchase?

Sony is reasonably successful selling LCD/RP primarily because of the Sony name. Even with that, they have had to discount the pricing below comparable DLP to get sales volume. Meanwhile, other major electronics companies are "biting the bullet" and paying the TI licence fee to do DLP. Eighteen months ago, the only DLPs commonly stocked were Samsungs. Now there are DLP choices from big name Japanese electronics firms.

DLPs have their critics, but their principal criticism, rainbows, aren't seen by most people (e.g., no one I know has seen rainbows while watching a DLP). Because of the TI license fee, LCD/RPs can compete on price, but DLPs are clearly the superior technology.

As to not having problems with the non-native resolution, baloney! None of the first generation of up-scaling DVD players work with the Sony LCD/RPs. Now, some of them offer a 768 rez upscale output. Also, no matter how good the scaler, the best HD PQ will always be from a signal at the native resolution, not from a scaled version of the non-native resolution. So the DLP/RP's have their best HD PQ with a 720p signal (e.g., ESPN-HD SNF), not from a scaled 1080i input. But, if your HDTV is 768 native, you are always watching a scaled HD picture, which is never as good as it could be.

 

[korsjs]

. Eighteen months ago, the only DLPs commonly stocked were Samsungs. Now there are DLP choices from big name Japanese electronics firms.
.

i though samsung was a big japanese company. when i lived in japan, they had all kind of samsung signs in neon lights. they had a huge one right when you walked out of the airport.

 

[Carl B]

To the best of my knowledge, Samsung is a Korean company.

 

[JOHNnDENVER]

DLP the superior technology??? I think not. I have yet to see a DLP RPTV match the newest versions of the Sony LCD RPTV. But thats just me. The new Sony's allow you to go way off axis too, a big improvement over previous generation.

Then again, I am a rainbow see'r and man does it bother me.

 

[HOT ROD#1]

Sony LCD RPTV is a very good model.

 

[riffjim4069]

I purchased the Sony KDF-42WE655 (the set you're refering to) back in September. Great set, but I replaced it with it's bigger brother, the KDF-50WE655. It's a great set (we love it), but my first choice was a Mits WD-52525/725. However, the set is in a brightly lighted room and the Sony's matte screen finish performs excellent under this condition; never a problem with screen glare. Anyway, we have nothing but good things to say about this set.

 

[Carl B]

Get a copy of the latest Consumer Reports with their largest review to date of micro-display DTVs.

 

[gredneck]

I'll add my 2 cents.
I own a 60" Sony Grand wega XBR.
I stumbled across this tv by accident at circuit city the picture was astonishing
compared to the other TVs in that size category.
I went back the next morning and talked the salesperson into switching the programming
from discovery hd theater to direct tv.
the end result was this tv had the best picture.
and even today when I have company over the, comments on the picture are : WOW
that's a nice picture.
top it all off the tv weighs 147 lbs.! and I needed a tv stand!

 

[Stargazer]

How much did it cost you? Is that one of those tv's that was going for around $7k-8k?

 

[toto]

The fourth generation Grand Wegas are brighter, crisper, and have a wider viewing angle than JVC HD-ILA's, or the lastest generation DLPs (Samsung, RCA Scenium). All are great sets

 

[TyroneShoes]

...I've listened to the laments of folks I know who purchased the LCD/RPs.

But, since I didn't personally attack you, just offerred up some things for the prospective buyer to look at, where do you get off telling me not to post? ...

Sony is reasonably successful selling LCD/RP primarily because of the Sony name. Even with that, they have had to discount the pricing below comparable DLP to get sales volume...

DLPs have their critics, but their principal criticism, rainbows, aren't seen by most people...DLPs are clearly the superior technology.

...if your HDTV is 768 native, you are always watching a scaled HD picture, which is never as good as it could be.

In the first place, vague anecdotal evidence, which seems to fly in the face of empirical evidence and the concensus of owners in the forums, holds little water. I typically don't bother commenting on other folks posts, but when the ideas are just so wacky and out of touch with reality as are these, it's hard to resist, especially when it appears that I've been purposely baited.

Secondly, no one told anyone not to post. Only a moderator can do that. Personal attack? I didn't notice one from either direction, yet. There would probably be little doubt if I actually had, but then I would never do that. I merely suggested that folks please not cloud the issue with what appear to be opinions masquerading as facts but are quite obviously just opinions based on fantasy (and opinions not widely held) as that is not helpful. So again, nothing personal, but please, if the shoe fits, just don't. You're welcome to your opinions, but in my opinion, posting them by some folks is counter-productive to what the rest of us know and are trying to do here. It boils down to a case of gentlemen agreeing to disagree, and nothing more.

That being said, as further examples of how twisted some folks' reasoning is, Sony has 34% of the display market, far more than anyone else. That is NOT an opinion. They don't have to discount or do anything other than deliver superior products to do that. Since a 60XS still commands $3700 on the street (the same price it had the week it was released in October) which is hundreds more than many same-size competitors, I can't see where that constitutes discounting.

You get what you pay for. The "Sony name" is only as good as the product, so saying that Sony is successful because of their name is in essence saying that they have a successful name because the products always back it up. They are not successful because of the name, the name has always had worth because they have always been successful at delivering superior products. I have no allegiance to Sony or the Sony name, just to superior products. Show me an RCA DLP with a better picture, and I'm there. At that point, to hell with Sony, as far as I'm concerned, but then they really don't apparently have much to worry about in that regard.

DLP rainbows might not be visible to some, but they are still always there, whether they are seen or not, and the sad thing is that owners start to notice them just after the 30-day grace period runs out. Even folks who don't consciously see them complain of headaches because of them. They are never there on LCDRPs because they don't exist there. Clearly the superior technology according to who? Not to the vast majority of forum posters, or the vast majority of owners, for that matter. A clearly superior technology would quickly dominate. None has. (Who has the highest market share again?) IMO, both DLP and LCDRP are legitimate formats, and both are good products. So neither of the two of us has yet to trash DLP, which unfortunately can not be said about the two of us regarding LCDRP. It deserves defending, too.

768 is always scaled, but even scaled (at least on a Sony) it looks better than some native displays I have seen. The Sammy DLPs in particular seem to have a lot of motion artifacts that LCDs don't seem to have, even when natively doing 720. Maybe that's due to DLP, or maybe it's just due to processing that sucks, or maybe even a little of both. Who knows? I would rather have a set that scales 100% of the time exquisitely well than a set that scales poorly half the time (since half of what is received must be scaled by definition) and does native poorly the other half of the time. If the scaler loss is insignificant to the point of invisibility, and other factors in other native sets are not insignificant, then I will always prefer a well-scaled picture in that scenario, as, all else being equal, it will always be the BEST picture. Case closed.