HDTV's finally entered the realm for me

[W1GUH]

It's only 20"...but that's relatively huge, it replaced a 13" CRT.

What happened is that most of them now come with PC inputs, and the price for 20" is about $400.

HUGE improvement over the old CRT, even without HD signals. And, as a monitor for my PS2, it's night and day, same with games on my PC.

Now, I'm all set for when GTA4 is released! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

That was my main motivation...a monitor for my future PS3.

[W4INF]

I got a 32" RCA with 1080i at WallyWorld for less than $600... is a GREAT TV, we have a couple of HD channels on cable (Man, that cost a few extra bux). I enjoy the Discovery Channel in HD now, Mythbusters etc... is clear and a beautiful picture. DVDs look much better too. I am only running composite, will try HDMI soon to see if it is any better, as HDMI promises to be.

Andrew

[W3MIV]

Last August, we linked to Verizon's FiOS system for phone, TV and internet. If this system becomes available in your area, I recommend it highly; it is yielding a substantial savings over three separate services.

HD is what TV always should have been; too bad the mix of sludge and porridge that purports to be programming cannot be elevated to the same level of quality. If anything, it is getting worse. Mencken; meet Barnum.

[W4INF]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Jan. 20 2008,06:07)][SNIP] programming cannot be elevated to the same level of quality. If anything, it is getting worse. [SNIP]
Come on, Billy Mays never looked so good on HD! HA HA! True, programming sux, but thats why Discovery and History channel are a must for my household! Even that is no promise to good programming, cause infomarathonmercials are quite frequent across the bandwidth.

http://www.americanfamilydogtraining.com/BillyMays.jpg

[W1GUH]

Albert said...
Quote[/b] ]...too bad the mix of sludge and porridge that purports to be programming cannot be elevated to the same level of quality.

Of course! #I'm usually at History, NGC, TCM, or a sports event. #I hardly ever take a dip in the "sludge and porridge" on the networks, except for the Simpsons, Family Guy, and American Dad.

Anyone know why HDMI cables are so danged expensive? #But that complaint aside, besides the high-quality connection the convenience of having video and audio on one easy connector is a pleasure after the 5 RCA* plugs of component or the 3 of S-VHS.

BTW, if, like I did, you get a set with only one HDMI port, RatShack sells a 3 device switch that can be controlled by your remote, for $79.00. #Well, double that price 'cuz you'll need another HDMI cable.

*If the company no longer exists, it's nice that they've become the "official" name of a common connector. # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (W1GUH @ Jan. 21 2008,09:33)]Anyone know why HDMI cables are so danged expensive?

Mostly because Monster™ Cable, Belkin and others sell them at over inflated prices.

MonoPrice (http://www.monoprice.com) has them for much less than anyone else. They start at around $4.

[N2RJ]

By the way if you have a HDTV with a digital tuner, the best signal source (apart from Blu-Ray or HD-DVD) is an antenna.

Cable providers are also required to carry local channels in unencrypted QAM. So if you hook up your HDTV with a QAM tuner to your cable, you may get the local channels in HD if you can't get them from an antenna.

As for the advantages of HDMI -

- It's a digital signal, meaning there's no degradation due to an analog signal path (component, S-video or composite).

- It supports HDCP meaning that protected content is displayed in full resolution always, provided your TV set is HDCP compliant.

- It supports audio, including the newer lossless formats on HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.

- It supports device control (meaning your DVD player can control your TV and A/V receiver etc.)

I have a 56" Samsung DLP (1080p) and I have my Series 3 TiVo, 400 disc upconverting changer and a Toshiba HD-A30 HD-DVD player connected via HDMI. I use a switcher from monoprice.com

For an average consumer with a smaller TV set, you won't see much if any difference between component and HDMI. But with a larger set there's a difference.

At work I also have a 13 inch ED set on my desk (Sharp). It's fed QAM HD signals from master control as well as cable and other feeds in analog.

[W1GUH]

Thanks for the info. #Could saved a "bunch of money." #But they're mail order, right?

[K8ERV]

Haven't really looked into HDTV, but was told that 32" is the smallest size. Don't have room nor need for a large screen. Pls send details on your 20" set. You can email me if you wish.

tlamb@mesa.net

TOM K8ERV Montrose Colo

[W1GUH]

Quote[/b] (K8ERV @ Jan. 20 2008,12:58)]Haven't really looked into HDTV, but was told that 32" is the smallest size. Don't have room nor need for a large screen. Pls send details on your 20" set. You can email me if you wish.

tlamb@mesa.net

TOM K8ERV #Montrose Colo
LG model 20LS7D

Here's the Best Buy page about it:

LG 20LS7D at Best Buy (http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8259449&type=product&id=1169858021075)

Asking around, at that size 720p is more than sufficient.

[KC4RAN]

Once you watch a program in HD, watching it in regular definition is murder. You never realize how good it could be until you see it, then you don't want to go back.

Also, don't forget about good old broadcast TV. Here is a site (http://www.antennaweb.org/) that will help you determine who is broadcasting in HD around you, where their tower sites are, and will provide azimuth to the various towers and antenna recommendations for each. Cool site.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (W1GUH @ Jan. 21 2008,10:27)]Thanks for the info. Could saved a "bunch of money." But they're mail order, right?
Yes, but I've had no problems ordering from them.

[K0RGR]

We've had one now for quite a while - I acquired it 'for free' as a replacement for a very pricey Sony CRT that died and was unrepairable (Best Buy will come through for you if you corner them like a rat in a trap!).

I'm rather amazed at what I get over the air with just a pair of rabbit ears. I see digital TV stations where I can't even see the analog signal from the same station.

Ah, the over-the-air signals are the best, but HD over cable is right behind. Right now, my HDTV is in a part of the house I can't access thanks to my bum leg. So we moved the HD Cable box/DVR downstairs and put it on another Sony non-HD tube. It's rather amazing how much sharper the digital signals are displayed in non-HD. Those who move to set-top converter boxes should not be too disappointed, I think.

Marg Helgenberg looks old enough to be really interesting on HD. I think the panoramic shots on CSI Miami are worth owning an HD set to see!

[W1GUH]

Quote[/b] ]Ah, the over-the-air signals are the best, but HD over cable is right behind.

I've heard that multiple times, and I've got to check it out. Where I am, though, has massive multi-path problems, but maybe with digital that problem goes away?

And something I forgot to mention about the LG, and this is in the reviews. The sound sucks. But, I'd rather they put the bucks into the picture since it's so easy to run the sound through the big system.

[wa4brl]

Just as an aside...

Is anyone else here tired of the use of diagonal measure for screen size? #By the HDTV standard, all screens should 16:9 width-to-height ratio, absolutely rectangular. #Why not just specify the width & height, or just the width?

We OT's certainly recall TV sets of the 50's through 70's that had decidely rounded corners. #Heck, the earliest picture tubes were 100% circular in the 40's and early 50's. #Color tubes were still round well into the 60's. #Different manufacturers "cropped" the round (or rounded corner) tubes in differing amounts, resulting in varying picture dimensions even when using the same picture tube. #One early standard for stating picture size was square inches. #It was rather awkward in use, so diagonal measure was adopted. #It served us well for comparing "rounded picture" sets. #

With the advent of rectangular tubes -- even on the old NTSC 4:3 sets -- rectangular measure became an anachronism. #That's my humble opinion, anyway. #Personally, I think stating the width would be the most useful. #One could immediately picture the linear space a set would take up on a wall, counter, etc. #Sure, one can use trigonometry to figure it out, but the answer isn't intuitive -- whether or not you remember the old indian scout, Sohcohtoa.

What do you think?

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (wa4brl @ Jan. 21 2008,18:21)]Just as an aside...

Is anyone else here tired of the use of diagonal measure for screen size? #By the HDTV standard, all screens should 16:9 width-to-height ratio, absolutely rectangular. #Why not just specify the width & height, or just the width?

We OT's certainly recall TV sets of the 50's through 70's that had decidely rounded corners. #Heck, the earliest picture tubes were 100% circular in the 40's and early 50's. #Color tubes were still round well into the 60's. #Different manufacturers "cropped" the round (or rounded corner) tubes in differing amounts, resulting in varying picture dimensions even when using the same picture tube. #One early standard for stating picture size was square inches. #It was rather awkward in use, so diagonal measure was adopted. #It served us well for comparing "rounded picture" sets. #

With the advent of rectangular tubes -- even on the old NTSC 4:3 sets -- rectangular measure became an anachronism. #That's my humble opinion, anyway. #Personally, I think stating the width would be the most useful. #One could immediately picture the linear space a set would take up on a wall, counter, etc. #Sure, one can use trigonometry to figure it out, but the answer isn't intuitive -- whether or not you remember the old indian scout, Sohcohtoa.

What do you think?
I don't believe that the diagonal measure, while surely an anachronism, presents any particular difficulty -- HD is, after all, keeping to a known widescreen ratio, is it not?

But given the modicum of credibility in your complaint, how would you go about convincing the entire industry to change?

[K8ERV]

RAN, I checked ur site but did not find a list of HD stations.

TOM K8ERV Montrose Colo

[WB2WIK]

I'm still getting used to HD.

For example, HD on a big screen makes people look more like they actually look, which isn't necessarily a good thing.

I'm not so into seeing pore holes and makeup lines. But, I guess they're with us forever, now.

Maybe this will be the impetus for people on TV to actually be better looking, so they won't need all the makeup. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (WB2WIK @ Jan. 21 2008,20:58)]I'm still getting used to HD.

For example, HD on a big screen makes people look more like they actually look, which isn't necessarily a good thing.

I'm not so into seeing pore holes and makeup lines. #But, I guess they're with us forever, now.

Maybe this will be the impetus for people on TV to actually be better looking, so they won't need all the makeup. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
Concentrate your watching on 30s and 40s era B&W movies where they often used uncoated lenses and soft-focus portrait lenses for closeups of the leading ladies (and sometimes guys like George Brent).

Since there is nothing worth watching on most of TV except for those movies, you should be set.

We have here a 50" DLP and a few 32" LCDs -- two of which are linked to HD "cable" boxes. Only virtue to any of them, IMO, is they are thinner and take up far less space than the obese CRT wonders now passing into memory.

Progress.

[W0LPQ]

Tom, 8ERV it is there ... maybe you missed the block at the bottom where you set your location ... that says continue ... I missed it the first time.

Any regular LPDA antenna works fine for OTA.

Our set is a 26 inch Magnavox (all the room we could spare in the entertainment center). On sale at Best Buy.

[kd5kfl]

Quote[/b] ] Only virtue to any of them, IMO, is they are thinner and take up far less space than the obese CRT wonders now passing into memory.

That, and the fact that you can mount them 3 or 4" above a surface.

So I got my workbench back, but I have to watch how high the junk and clutter piles up. if I'm not careful the junk and clutter blocks the remote control or DVD drive tray.

I have 4 19" monitors on my workbench. The thing is, they all have to be different brands. Get two of the same, the Polaroid remote changes both Polaroids. So you have to Velcro them and arrange them in geographic order.