TV

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
Don't need HD, don't need money. It's anything you can see on the internet that you'd sit and watch moved to your television screen, that's quite a game changer..

I have problems streaming SD quality at times too youtube sometimes buffers. I tried streaming from a blu-ray player with apps and it wasn't
smooth enough.
 

LeanBurn

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
1,355
Location
Alberta
I have an old Sharp Aqueos LCD dumb TV. I still have my old Yamaha 60W/ch 5.1 home theater with Energy Take 5 speaker system and a a decent Velodyne 10" sub.

I don't care to be chasing my tail and have anywhere near the cutting edge Tech. As long as it works and provides a decent listening experience I am good.
 

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
Don't forget the optical and Bluetooth audio out on current TVs..
Actually Bluetooth would be nice but a lot of TVs today are no longer putting in 1/8" stereo jacks or RCA jacks for audio output instead you get optical out or have to use HDMI ARC I think. I currently have my tv set hooked to an 80s Sony bookshelf stereo through the 1/8 inch jack and adapters and some sets I would have to purchase an optical adapter and to adjust the volume on them I think you would have to pay more for one with a remote on it. Some of the Vizios have both optical and RCA audio outputs. My bluray player I temporarily have hooked to an Onkyo 5.1 system (not HDMI) via RCA audio I added a Definitive subwoofer to the system I picked up used. There is many TVs that only have optical out and no bluetooth which makes it very hard to use headphones with you end up spending money on an adapter that costs $24-$50+ extra. In other words I/O can be a deal breaker when you look for a new tv set. What I cannot figure is why Samsung TVs cost more yet unless you buy the very top of the line you end up with LESS HDMI ports that other tv sets costing a lot less. 2 HDMI ports is not enough if you want to add a DVR and blu-ray and then some sort of other box like Roku of FireTV or something you end up hooking it up to the RCA inputs. Another thing that many people do is spend a fortune on a sound bar setup when you can pick up a 5.1 system for the same or cheaper sometimes. TV sets used to be CRT and have large wooden cabinets and large speakers like those in autos and sound rather good but these flat screens sound more like smart phone speakers on steroids than even a mediocre bluetooth speaker does.
 

StarHalo

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
10,927
Location
California Republic
I currently have my tv set hooked to an 80s Sony bookshelf stereo through the 1/8 inch jack
My bluray player I temporarily have hooked to an Onkyo 5.1 system (not HDMI) via RCA audio

Bluetooth receiver to speakers, done. Unless you have a Bluetooth speaker, then you're already done.

some sort of other box like Roku of FireTV or something

Samsung's SmartTV already has Prime Video/Hulu/Netflix installed; I have a Roku box but now have no need for it.

TV sets used to be CRT and have large wooden cabinets and large speakers like those in autos and sound rather good but these flat screens sound more like smart phone speakers on steroids than even a mediocre bluetooth speaker does.

It's not a fair comparison because the older TVs were much more expensive for their time; a current $200 32" flatscreen is at least in stereo, though doesn't really sound any better than a 19" CRT that was $500 decades ago - the same $500 gets you a 55" monster now, which will have significantly better sound than all but the diamond-level CRTs.
 

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
It's not a fair comparison because the older TVs were much more expensive for their time; a current $200 32" flatscreen is at least in stereo, though doesn't really sound any better than a 19" CRT that was $500 decades ago - the same $500 gets you a 55" monster now, which will have significantly better sound than all but the diamond-level CRTs.
Actually it is a fair comparison because many people had 26 inch console tvs with stereo speakers that sounded better than what it cost to buy a tinny sounding flat screen tv. A 55 inch monster doesn't sound as good without additional cost for a separate sound system.
There is also many stereo systems with 2 speakers and a receiver that people already have that can sound better than lower end sound bar setups.
 

StarHalo

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
10,927
Location
California Republic
Actually it is a fair comparison because many people had 26 inch console tvs with stereo speakers that sounded better than what it cost to buy a tinny sounding flat screen tv. A 55 inch monster doesn't sound as good without additional cost for a separate sound system.
There is also many stereo systems with 2 speakers and a receiver that people already have that can sound better than lower end sound bar setups.

$500 in 1980 is $1,500 in 2020, that would get you into the 70"+ category with half the budget for sound..
 

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
$500 in 1980 is $1,500 in 2020, that would get you into the 70"+ category with half the budget for sound..
It doesn't surprise me as back in the 80s people bought a tv and used it for 20 years or longer as the technology didn't change and prices of larger high end sets were too much. Now the small sets are throwaway the sound systems cost more than a 32 inch set does even a 40 inch tv is cheap compared to the additional audio system. What is needed is a TV set with built in higher quality sound perhaps even a wireless transmitter for subwoofer and satellite speakers to make it surround sound.
 

StarHalo

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
10,927
Location
California Republic
ATSC 3.0 is here - sort of. In a very limited market, early adopter kind of way. $200 to watch ATSC 3.0 channels on your networked devices (but not the TV):

 

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
Yeah they said they were working on tv tuner boxes, but TV sets won't be available till later this year and likely only a few top end models at that and there won't be many stations either broadcasting ATSC3.0 signals regardless. I was considering waiting to buy a new tv set till ATSC3.0 came out but figure it may be 5+ years away before there is enough stations using it. I was reading somewhere that perhaps in the future ATSC1.0 may even be dropped in use due to limited broadcast bandwidth that won't allow both standards to be used at once.
I figure by the time it is mainstream you will be able to buy a set top box for cheaper and IMO no sense in upgrading to one without considering a DVR one with dual tuners even one to watch a show the other to record one with.
I think the biggest thing will be improved reception as a lot of people are turned off of OTA TV due to its poor reception vs analog when they were forced to upgrade.
 

StarHalo

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
10,927
Location
California Republic
In just waiting for a lot more 8k content.

Gonna be a loooong wait; 4K broke through in 2013, seven years later you're still only seeing some special broadcasts use it, with the internet only able to manage it in some areas with definitely no rural areas, and movie availability almost exclusively limited to one of the last remaining forms of physical media. 8K requires at least four times the bandwidth, so we might be another two iterations of the internet away before wide adoption is a possibility.
 

Fish 14

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 21, 2020
Messages
1,067
I agree, it's going to be quite awhile. But when it comes it's going to be worth it. The difference between 4k and 1080 is huge. So the difference between 4k$8k should be a sizable jump as well
 

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
The main problem with 4K broadcast tv is it requires ATSC 3.0 tuners and is incompatible with ATSC 1.0 tuners and you cannot broadcast both standards on the same channel/subchannel. I'm guessing a station has to either broadcast 3.0 or 1.0 signals not both or 2 channels 3.0 and 2 channels 1.0 either one standard or the other such that once a station chooses 3.0 it loses all its customers that don't have the newer tuner available and there is a huge amount of ATSC1.0 TV sets out there including older sets with digital tuner boxes from the government free giveaway. There will be a very limited very slow rollout of stations supporting 3.0 and likely have stations sharing transmitters one transmitter broadcasting in 3.0 for 2 stations the other in 1.0 for the same stations stacking channels of both networks etc. I don't see 8K taking off anytime soon on tv sets and probably not on sets under $1000 and under 65" in size basically only high end sets and it is rather possible that there may never be an OTA rollout of 8K broadcasting of normal tv channel frequencies instead maybe they will come up with a new way to broadcast higher resolution tv like 6G wireless towers and streaming it OTA through them not via the internet but directly using a dedicated stream for each channel and devices having multifrequency for TV and phone and internet etc.
 

Fish 14

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 21, 2020
Messages
1,067
There are 8k TV's under 65 inch, but not under$1,000. I have one in my home gym.a 55 inch QLED. I see 8k being very beneficial to those who do picture editing.
 

Lynx_Arc

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
11,212
Location
Tulsa,OK
There are 8k TV's under 65 inch, but not under$1,000. I have one in my home gym.a 55 inch QLED. I see 8k being very beneficial to those who do picture editing.

For a computer monitor the higher resolution the better usually but for watching movies and tv probably overkill unless you go to a 100 inch tv set. The main issue is there probably almost nothing made in 8K resolution other than pictures.
 

Fish 14

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 21, 2020
Messages
1,067
For a computer monitor the higher resolution the better usually but for watching movies and tv probably overkill unless you go to a 100 inch tv set. The main issue is there probably almost nothing made in 8K resolution other than pictures.
Agree, at the 100 inch mark you're better off investing in a quality projector. Looking at nature scenes in 8k is amazing, I can spend hours in front of the screen looking at nature's wonders.
 

StarHalo

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
10,927
Location
California Republic
A very good primer on 12 bit TV/Dolby Vision; this is the first time I've ever heard of Dolby Vision referred to in terms of something other than brightness, interesting to see that it's simply advertised as a higher brightness standard when in fact it's providing photo-editing-grade numbers of extra colors. And yet the current TVs aren't there yet, the HDMI standard isn't there yet, more looking years ahead, more waiting..

 

ven

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
22,533
Location
Manchester UK
Previous had a 51" samsung 3d TV , then when knocked through and made the dining/living room one, widened the chimney breast a few ". So 55" 4k samsung i put up a few weeks back.Had samsung for the last 3 , never had an issue so so far just carried on with that manufacturer.
88i7xbSl.jpg
 
Top