[jbaranski]

And I'm not sure which to get.  I'm liking what LG has to offer, and I Like the Vizio with Internet Apps, but I just can't be sure about the most important things, like picture quality, without asking trusted sources.  So what do I do?  Go to an audio forum.  xD
 
Anyway, if you'd oblige me, I'm looking for a 32" 1080p TV.  Beyond that, I'm flexible.  I could really use your help.
 
 
Also, if you know anything about the Energy 5.1 sound system I'd be happy to hear your thoughts on that, as well as the Onkyo A/V Receivers, as I'm probably going to buy all three items in one big purchase, or at least close together.

 

[Uncle Erik]

I'm no videophile, but I bought a new Panasonic 42" LCD in January. Can't recall the model number, but it was $550, shipped free, and no tax from B&H. 120Hz, 1080i, 24P. It looks great and works perfectly. Nothing else had those specs in that price range and I'm still delighted with it.

If your budget can accomodate $550, give it some thought. I considered 32" sets, but the extra real estate is terrific and these myopic and astigmatic eyes love the picture.

I run it through my Zana Deux and Conrad-Johnson MV-52 into the ProAc Response 2.5 clones. I may never go to the theater again.

 

[zx10guy]

Places to go to ask for advice:
 
www.avsforum.com
www.highdefjunkies.com
 
For me, I'm a plasma biggot.  I have two Pioneer Elite plasmas.  The best TVs on the market during when they were sold.  And in the case of my newest Pioneer, the 141FD signature, is still the best TV compared to any flat panel (LCD or plasma) on the market today even though the TV was discontinued about 3 years ago.
 
Also, if you're after picture quality, at the very least run a calibration DVD on the TV and adjust the picture settings.  If you're anal like I am, you'll spend the money to have a professional calibrator dial in the picture correctly.  I had both my Pioneer plasmas professional calibrated.

 

[Msulit87]

Just something to consider:  1080p resolutions don't really start to help you out until you get to larger screens like 42"+.  Usually 32" TVs have a native resolution of 720p but are CAPABLE or running a video from a 1080p source like a PS3 for instance.  It will say "1080p" on the output, but you're actually running a 720P native resolution image.  If you are planning on spending money to get a 1080p capable system then you can go a very long way with your cash if you decide to get a DLP type TV.  Otherwise, you may be looking for something more expensive and you aren't actually getting what you want. 
 
+1 for buying a calibration DVD (or BLURAY) for your system.  It's a shame to go all out and not use it right =D

 

[jbaranski]

So would it support 1920x1080 output from my PC's HDMI out?  That's why I'm going with 1080p.  Also, I'm a fan of high pixel density (my iPod Touch 4g is downright sexy).  I know I won't be THAT close, but there will be many times where I'm not more than two feet from it.
 
Also, what's a DLP type TV?

 

[Aevum]

a DLP TV is basicly a digital HD Projection TV.
 
a projection TV is like an inverse projector.
 
You have a lightsource, an inverted image on a smaller transparent display like a LCD and a large projection surface.
 
So the idea is that you can use a smaller cheaper LCD and project the image on to a projection surface.
upside : Very cheap large HDTV´s
Downside : Poor contrast. Poor colors (all the usual projection image bugs) and you need a projection distance so DLP tv´s are usualy CRT sized or bigger.
 
i remember a few years back when decent 720P LCD TV´s were starting up and were like 700-800 euros then i saw this "high end" sony TV which was 720p and dirt cheap at around 399, untill i looked in to it and saw it was DLP and what it ment,
took them forever to get rid of those PoS.

 

[jbaranski]

Okay, I figured that's what you meant, but the way I read what you wrote, it sounded like you were in favor of them, so I wasn't sure, as I know them to be crap.  At any rate, I'm probably going with a name brand 32" 1080p, which I can find for under $400.  It just depends on when I have the cash to fork over for that.

 

[Anaxilus]

Vizio makes utter crap.  Don't expect it to be a long term investment.  LG is alright.  I prefer Sharp Aquos and Sony XBRs generally.  Just recently picked up a deal for a 40" Sharp Aquos Quattron LED 1080p 120hz for $599.  Couldn't pass it up for the guest room.  Really nice once you calibrate it especially w/ yellows, oranges and light blue glows.  I don't care what people say the extra pixel or whatever does make a difference.  Watching the movie Sunshine on BluRay w/ a Quattron is an unreal experience.  Like UE I realized I can't get that image quality at most theaters.  I was put off by Quattron at CES when I saw them, too unnatural.  But at the price I decided to see if I could calibrate it.  Sure can.  Panasonic makes some good stuff too.  I highly recommend LED TVs.  Pretty darned good blacks and solid hues, thin as heck and uses little power.  The 40" Quattron LED uses 113 watts when on.  Most everything else was around 50% worse.  I've never really liked Plasmas much.  Great blacks of course and the power consumption does not do it favors, neither does the screen burn-in.  I'm an old AGP monitor guy so I'm pretty sensitive to dot pitch and screen grain.  Plasmas are just too coarse a pitch for my eyes unless I sit so far back as to not notice.  Some folks claim to be susceptible to the motion of gas in the cells.  I may or may not be, not sure.  I often don't enjoy the experience and perhaps newer plasma cells aren't subject to the affect.  Only downside to the Sharp for me so far is no PiP.  I was quite surprised by that and think it's almost a deal breaker.  But it's not my primary so no biggie.
 
I would avoid Samsung TVs as they lie about the specs and tbh I think their picture quality is subpar on the models I've seen. 

 

[pigmode]

Its about time I get a new screen. I'm wondering why to choose an lcd over an led? Isn't the led an lcd with among other things, a superior light source?

 

[purrin]

Quote:

Just recently picked up a deal for a 40" Sharp Aquos Quattron LED 1080p 120hz for $599... Watching the movie Sunshine on BluRay w/ a Quattron is an unreal experience. 

 

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

Its about time I get a new screen. I'm wondering why to choose an lcd over an led? Isn't the led an lcd with among other things, a superior light source?

Basically, can't think of a positive a CFL backlight has over an LED.
 
Quote:

 

Yes, I know.....  

 

 

[Uncle Erik]

I didn't realize that LED screens had dropped in price so much. I wanted one when I was shopping TVs about ten months ago, but liked the Panny and it was cheaper than any 40"+ of good quality. So if prices are good, get the LED. The backlight will eventually die on my set, but am reasonably sure I can DIY a replacement.

If prices drop further through the holidays, I'd sure like to pick up a 55"+ screen when the Christmas stock gets blown out in January. The 42" would be nice in the bedroom.

Considering that, the OP might want to stick it out through Thanksgiving. Man, that's coming up fast. Prices are sure to drop.

 

[leftnose]

I have those Energy speakers and they're VERY good for the price and size. The shortcoming is the subwoofer. You may want to upgrade it in the future as the one in the set runs out of gas fairly quickly. Figure another $300 somewhere down the line. I also use an Onkyo NR708 which is about 18 mos. old at this point. If you can stretch your budget, I might buy the 609 instead of the 509: 7.2 channels instead of 5.1, more HDMI inputs, analog to HDMI upscaling, and a better OSD which will make set-up much easier and every day use better.

I'm with others on this thread. 32" is too small for 1080p. Save money and get a 720p set or spend more for at least 40". You will never say to yourself, "I bought a TV that's too big!"

My TV is a 55" LED Toshiba and I like it a lot.

 

[oqvist]

Quote:

Just something to consider:  1080p resolutions don't really start to help you out until you get to larger screens like 42"+.  Usually 32" TVs have a native resolution of 720p but are CAPABLE or running a video from a 1080p source like a PS3 for instance.  It will say "1080p" on the output, but you're actually running a 720P native resolution image.  If you are planning on spending money to get a 1080p capable system then you can go a very long way with your cash if you decide to get a DLP type TV.  Otherwise, you may be looking for something more expensive and you aren't actually getting what you want. 
 
+1 for buying a calibration DVD (or BLURAY) for your system.  It's a shame to go all out and not use it right =D

You are talking about HD ready 32" monitors. They support 1080i max not 1080p. Hardly any PS 3 or 360 games are rendered even in HD ready resolution 1280x720 internally. And the odd thing about HD ready monitors is that their native resolution is 1366x768. That is one of the reason my 360 give me a higher IQ I believe since the PS 3 only gives me 1280x720 so the TV has to rescale. No extra digital filters in the world can get my PS 3 up on par to the 360 or even less the PC of course. Todays tvs has much better upscalers then my antique one though so the differences should be less.
 
I have watched a lot of 1080p TVs and being amazed how poor the image quality is on those televisions for gaming material. Bluray is hard for a tv to totally mess up so for my usage HD ready has been a better way to go particularly since text gets bigger for my PC usage. No need to rescale fonts or anything for my setup.
 
If 1080p is to much for a 32" is entirely dependant on how close you sit to it. I use mine on my PC setup. I could clearly benefit from the higher resolution however the cost in performance and less forgiving visuals are trade offs I don´t need often. If I would go for a plain home cinema tv I would probably look for a full HD plasma though  my 24" Monitors have to do now for full HD. Sitting half a metre from those let you see every little detail though the image quality is quite shoddy. Good for 3D though since you get a better 3D standard then the 3D TVs use and the response time is lightning quick without all those "image enhancing" filters.
 
As for brand I must say Sony generally have a good idea. They stay much truer then say Philips that try to tweak every single frame to look spectacular. I do like that the Philips offer back lightning. I got some other tubes though and it´s a really cheap way to enhance the visuals of your TV. Particularly LCD Tvs with less then stellar blackness if you don´t want to cheat with dynamic contrast.

 

[lilkoolaidman]

I don't care what anyone says, Vizios are very good TVs. Sure, they're not the best but of all TVs in the lower price range, they look the best to me. If you're looking for a smaller TV, plasma isn't an option since they don't come that small, but I think plasma really is the best, I believe Panasonic is one of the few companies that still makes them, since most TVs nowadays are LED. I've also noticed that Sony Bravias tend to always look good. As far as specs go, don't even pay attention, resolution doesn't mean a thing as far as the human eye is concerned and I can't notice the difference between a 60Hz refresh rate and a 120Hz. Just walk into your local Best Buy, Walmart, or whatever and see whichever one LOOKS the best. About the only thing that I look for is whether the blacks look black, and if colors are vivid (not glowing, but not washed out either). The Sharp Quattron is an interesting Idea but every time I see one, it looks unnaturally yellow, like all the people on screen have jaundice or something.