Cheap LCD tvs?

[Lupus]

People have already tried with you, it's not even the same ones pointing it out to you anymore and you still don't see it. And yes at the smaller scale the SD quality will seem better then on a larger display, plasma or LCD it doesn't matter. I'm only pointing fingers at you because it doesn't matter who points out your obvious biasness you cannot take the blinkers off.

 

[SilverNodashi]

Still pointing those fingers I see. Why not go back to your posts from last week where you pointed the same fingers, to which I replied in detail? Not surprised why you haven't replied tbh, even xrapidx pointing out a factor in your childish behaviour.

Maybe I should take a picture of SD on my 19" Sinotech LCD. According to all your arguments, smaller will be better. Well not in this case. My 52cm 12 year old Goldstar (LG) CRT obliterates the 19" LCD. I will take a picture of it too. Any takers? You can also take pics of your LCDs displaying SD/sport so we can do a good comparison.

I guess you have a crappy 19" Sinotech then

My old 19" ACER LCD PC monitor gives better quality than a 54" tube.

 

[LCBXX]

An oke asks a question about buying a 32" LCD telly and other people start fighting with each other about Plasmas and CRT's?

Another day on MYBB...

 

[PostmanPot]

I guess you have a crappy 19" Sinotech then

My old 19" ACER LCD PC monitor gives better quality than a 54" tube.

If it's 60Hz and it's Sinotech/cheapie brands, it will be crap. Sure, 100Hz "higher end" Sinotech's will be better.

Which 19" Acer monitor? What aspect ratio? What content?

 

[PostmanPot]

An oke asks a question about buying a 32" LCD telly and other people start fighting with each other about Plasmas and CRT's?

Another day on MYBB...

Because "TV" (= SD TV and probably sport ("dad")) on cheapo brand 60Hz LCD's is crap. The OP ought to have a right to know, wouldn't you say? And hey, I didn't even start. I'm just explaining why others would have brought up the issues.

 

[LCBXX]

Because "TV" (= SD TV and probably sport ("dad")) on cheapo brand 60Hz LCD's is crap. The OP ought to have a right to know, wouldn't you say? And hey, I didn't even start. I'm just explaining why others would have brought up the issues.

The OP does have a right to know, but then I would imagine the OP to ask "so, what constitutes the difference between a R7000 47" and a R130000 46" telly", for example.

I just bought an apparent piece'0'shyte 32" Hisense for R2500. But I noted the use I had for it and what signal it would be receiving so nobody cares. The OP wanted a cheap 32" LCD, no? Yes, CRT/Plasma is clearer but I think the OP just wants a "flatscreen tiewie" - the sport motivation is IMO just your standard justification for getting a "lekker flatscreen tiewie"

OP, go buy the cheapest 32" LCD you can get your hands on. Just make sure it doesn't have a 6 month warranty. 3-5 Years on a cheap 32" is good since it will most probably give crap within that period. AIM products have 1 year warranties which is not good. Go for Sinotec (5yrs) or Hisense/Panavision (3yrs).

 

[Wasp_21]

The OP does have a right to know, but then I would imagine the OP to ask "so, what constitutes the difference between a R7000 47" and a R130000 46" telly", for example.

I just bought an apparent piece'0'shyte 32" Hisense for R2500. But I noted the use I had for it and what signal it would be receiving so nobody cares. The OP wanted a cheap 32" LCD, no? Yes, CRT/Plasma is clearer but I think the OP just wants a "flatscreen tiewie" - the sport motivation is IMO just your standard justification for getting a "lekker flatscreen tiewie"

OP, go buy the cheapest 32" LCD you can get your hands on. Just make sure it doesn't have a 6 month warranty. 3-5 Years on a cheap 32" is good since it will most probably give crap within that period. AIM products have 1 year warranties which is not good. Go for Sinotec (5yrs) or Hisense/Panavision (3yrs).

Lets hope the OP can give feedback after taking your advice. Unfortunately with the general nature of people being that they won't look a gift horse in the mouth, we are not going to get a negative response, however, let's hope the OP can see the difference and then let you know the LCD looks crap against the old CRT.

 

[PostmanPot]

The OP does have a right to know, but then I would imagine the OP to ask "so, what constitutes the difference between a R7000 47" and a R130000 46" telly", for example.

Fair enough, but the fact remains that a forum is a place for broad conversation, a melting pot of different ideas and positions, so they are free to ask what ever they like, same goes for input given. And in my experience, slight derails (slight because they are still very on topic) is only said in the OP's best interests, compare with posts with absolutely no substance which point fingers at others based on personal vendettas and bias which is of no help to the OP (going OT here, soz).

I just bought an apparent piece'0'shyte 32" Hisense for R2500. But I noted the use I had for it and what signal it would be receiving so nobody cares. The OP wanted a cheap 32" LCD, no? Yes, CRT/Plasma is clearer but I think the OP just wants a "flatscreen tiewie" - the sport motivation is IMO just your standard justification for getting a "lekker flatscreen tiewie"

Indeed, budget is budget. From my position, the bold bits of your post above are the only issues I wanted to raise. In that a 72" CRT would be a far better upgrade than a cheapo 32" LCD for specifically SD TV/sport.

OP, go buy the cheapest 32" LCD you can get your hands on. Just make sure it doesn't have a 6 month warranty. 3-5 Years on a cheap 32" is good since it will most probably give crap within that period. AIM products have 1 year warranties which is not good. Go for Sinotec (5yrs) or Hisense/Panavision (3yrs).

Yip, warranty is very important, especially on the cheapies.

 

[Nerfherder]

So its not going to look better?
My new hd tv plays normal avi files clearer then my old sd tv?
Well it looks clearer i think:-/

Yes but now we are talking about two different things....
You said he watches sport (from a SD decoder I presume) and you watch AVI's.

Those AVI's are HD and most likely being played from your computer/laptop, the quality is already high.
Now with sport, especially low quality like SD the TV has to enlarge and stretch the picture to fit the screen. Sport is particularly bad because of the changes between close ups and far away shots.

You have two options : Either get a more expensive TV that upscales the picture (plasma's do this well) or get him an HD PVR so that it does all the work for the TV.

I'm not trying to be mean but go to the TV shop and get them to feed a normal SD or even a low quality SABC signal in to one of these screens.
On the smaller LCD's it might not actually look so bad but go check it out for your self.

 

[PostmanPot]

Yes but now we are talking about two different things....
You said he watches sport (from a SD decoder I presume) and you watch AVI's.

Those AVI's are HD and most likely being played from your computer/laptop, the quality is already high.
Now with sport, especially low quality like SD the TV has to enlarge and stretch the picture to fit the screen. Sport is particularly bad because of the changes between close ups and far away shots.

You have two options : Either get a more expensive TV that upscales the picture (plasma's do this well) or get him an HD PVR so that it does all the work for the TV.

I'm not trying to be mean but go to the TV shop and get them to feed a normal SD or even a low quality SABC signal in to one of these screens.
On the smaller LCD's it might not actually look so bad but go check it out for your self.

Thank you, thank you.

From what I understand, SD TV in SA is ±240p/480i? where your average "PC" .avi's are ±480p?

 

[Wasp_21]

Yes but now we are talking about two different things....
You said he watches sport (from a SD decoder I presume) and you watch AVI's.

Those AVI's are HD and most likely being played from your computer/laptop, the quality is already high.
Now with sport, especially low quality like SD the TV has to enlarge and stretch the picture to fit the screen. Sport is particularly bad because of the changes between close ups and far away shots.

You have two options : Either get a more expensive TV that upscales the picture (plasma's do this well) or get him an HD PVR so that it does all the work for the TV.

I'm not trying to be mean but go to the TV shop and get them to feed a normal SD or even a low quality SABC signal in to one of these screens.
On the smaller LCD's it might not actually look so bad but go check it out for your self.

Much like a womans bum. Doesn't look good stretched and enlarged.

 

[Nerfherder]

Like a vagina... looks great but don't put your face too close.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

Right, so here are two videos taken on my 32" LG LCD (one of the earlier models bought years ago) in the room. It's a standard SS2 feed. The wavy lines do not appear on the TV, and are as a result of videoing the TV.

Please feel free to point out where this unbearably crap quality comes from, that even CRTs would "blow it out of the water".

Watch them at either 360p/480p for a better indication. Obviously due to the fact that it's a video recording of the TV, the result is a bit worse than viewing it in person, but even here it's enough to draw a conclusion that some of the comments here are pointless.

[video=youtube;8y6tTBWRZGo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y6tTBWRZGo[/video]


[video=youtube;fpyZCUyOi6E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpyZCUyOi6E[/video]

The guy asked for a cheap 32" LCD, because that's all he can afford. If he wanted to save up a bit more and buy a plasma then he would have asked if he should do that. So back to the topic at hand, the 32" Sinotech mentioned earlier will give you a good picture, at least on par with the current CRT, but the viewing pleasure will be enhanced due to the larger screen.

 

[PostmanPot]

Please provide model numbers/specs. I have watched a lot of sport/SD on an older Sony V Series 32" LCD and it was very good, even cricket, except faster-paced sport's motion blur was noticeable. The difference is we are comparing branded LCDs (and in my example, one step up from Sony's entry level) with cheapie brands which are known to be worse at SD/sport.

Motorsport is slow. Part of the reason why CRT is better for sport is because faster-paced sport is bad on cheap 60Hz LCDs. After listing your LCDs and their model numbers/specs, it would be appreciated if you could show us some real fast-paced sport. Perhaps golf/tennis/Brett Lee or Dale Steyn bowling? Although I'm unsure whether your camera's FPS will pick up motion blur.

Also, please show us a less popular channel than Mnet/MM/SS, as AFAIK those feeds are of a higher quality than others. I distinctly remember how bad Sky News was on a 32" Sinotech LCD I once saw - stuck in my mind. Not sure if you have time for this but it would be a nice comparison.

I find you are taking a big leap saying a cheapie 32" LCD is going to be better than CRT for SD/sport, based on your experience with non-cheapie LCDs.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

Dude I seriously don't have the time to record videos from 100 different channels and upload them to Youtube The argument here is SD sport, of which I provided an example. I'm switching channels right now and the others don't seem to be much different.

What I can do is record a couple of SD clips on my buddy's Sinotech the next time I'm there, but I can tell you now that it's not much different to those above. It's preposterous that when I made a claim then it wasn't believed, and when I provide proof then there's a host of other excuses. You mention motorsport being slow/blurry - but the clips posted are precisely that, motorsport, and seem perfectly fine!

As for the model number, it's one of the earlier LG LCDs - 32LD310 (the piece of crap only has 1 HDMI port and 1 composite input, but I got it cheap).

 

[PostmanPot]

Dude I seriously don't have the time to record videos from 100 different channels and upload them to Youtube The argument here is SD sport, of which I provided an example. I'm switching channels right now and the others don't seem to be much different.

What I can do is record a couple of SD clips on my buddy's Sinotech the next time I'm there, but I can tell you now that it's not much different to those above. It's preposterous that when I made a claim then it wasn't believed, and when I provide proof then there's a host of other excuses. You mention motorsport being slow/blurry - but the clips posted are precisely that, motorsport, and seem perfectly fine!

As for the model number, it's one of the earlier LG LCDs - 32LD310 (the piece of crap only has 1 HDMI port and 1 composite input, but I got it cheap).

My point was motorsport is slow in comparison to cricket/tennis/golf. Has nothing to do with your clips. Referring to the speed of the cars vs the speed of the balls. Referring to motion blur, something which is incredibly bad on cheapie LCDs as well as most branded 60Hz LCDs. Something which is handled better by 100+Hz LCDs, plasmas and CRTs.

Again, I will refer to my statement about comparing SD/sport on a branded 32" LCD, to that of a cheapie 32". Different ballgame.

I look forward to the vids of your friend's Sinotech. I'm assuming he also has non-HD[MI] DSTV, as I asked earlier in this thread. SD quality over HDMI is vastly improved as I'm sure you know, even on crappy 60Hz LCDs.

I will also get some videos done of a 19" Sinotech (cheapie - which funnily enough had "better" picture quality than the 19" Sinotech LED back-lit LCD) compared to a 12 year old 52cm Goldstar/LG CRT.

According to some of the logic here, because there is less stretch on a 32" than a 42", SD isn't too bad. I agree. Therefore, a 19" should be better? We'll see.

 

[I O U]

This thread has genuinely scared me into keeping the 3 CRT sets I have ! :wtf:

 

[Lupus]

Dude I seriously don't have the time to record videos from 100 different channels and upload them to Youtube The argument here is SD sport, of which I provided an example. I'm switching channels right now and the others don't seem to be much different.

What I can do is record a couple of SD clips on my buddy's Sinotech the next time I'm there, but I can tell you now that it's not much different to those above. It's preposterous that when I made a claim then it wasn't believed, and when I provide proof then there's a host of other excuses. You mention motorsport being slow/blurry - but the clips posted are precisely that, motorsport, and seem perfectly fine!

As for the model number, it's one of the earlier LG LCDs - 32LD310 (the piece of crap only has 1 HDMI port and 1 composite input, but I got it cheap).

It's like beating a dead horse, it honestly is, it doesn't matter what proof you show, you will always be wrong.

 

[PostmanPot]

It's like beating a dead horse, it honestly is, it doesn't matter what proof you show, you will always be wrong.

Please allow for genuine debate to run its course without muddying the thread. Have some respect and maturity. You are welcome to join in, however childish jibes and pointing fingers does not help any party.

Again I mention my main point - comparing branded 32" LCD to cheapie 32" LCD, which factually do not handle SD/sport as well.

Show us that you aren't that dead horse you seem to ironically refer to. Or keep your useless opinions about me (and everyone else who mentioned the same thing in this thread?) to yourself.

 

[Lupus]

Dude you've long ago given your positions and anyone who attempts to "debate" you is wrong in all regards, there is no jibes, it's basically telling anyone that there is no reason to even engage with you, as it's like beating a dead horse, cause in your mind the plasma is the ultimate and it was silly of manufacturers to even start making LCD's. No matter what the OP asks you say the same thing so what is the point. This sub-forum should be called PostmanPot's Plasma forum, as you chip in everywhere.