Basic questions, LCD vs. plasma, HDMI cables, cable box

I have some basic questions. I thought I was relatively intelligent
until I started trying to figure out some of this HDTV stuff.

I'm not sure of the plasma vs. LCD. I thought LCD looked as good when
I was in the store, but the consensus seems to be that plasma is
better. I didn't notice the low viewing angles of LCD, I did notice
them on the DLP however...the LCD seemed to be fine. The LCD seemed
to kind of "suck you in" no glare no nothing, the plasmas had a sheen
to them...maybe the picture was better though.

Plasma seems more tempermental...you have to be careful when shipping
it not to lay the set down or something like that. Also I've heard
about burn-in and some complaints about sets just failing. They're
heavier too. Although this wouldn't be on the wall.

As far as the motion problems in LCD, I didn't notice any when at
Circuit City. Maybe the motion just wasn't fast enough. Or maybe the
8ms response time is fast enough? I know on here I read that LCD only
refreshes 400 or 500 lines compared to 800 for plamsa (I think I got
the gist of that). Would that mean a 720p would be better for motion
or worse..hmmm. Also on here that I want to stay away from "torch"
mode, (as opposed to what)?

I'm looking for about a 40" TV set. Mostly for watching sports.

So I guess I'll just try to continue reading about the difference and
looking at sets in the store.

Some questions.

1. When signing up for cable or directTV do I ask for the HDTV
package? Or do I use the QAM tuner to take the signal and it will get
its own HDTV signals (which would be cheaper too). Or do I not know
what I'm talking about? I thought I read on here that the TV has its
own tuner and you want to use that instead of the one the cable
company gives you. Maybe this is related to the cable "box" and not a
HDTV package vs. QM tuner.

2. What is this HDMI cable thing? 3 HDMI inputs? "5.1" something or
other? Component? I would be hooking up the cable or Direct TV, most
likely, or maybe just an OTA antenna (rabbit ears). I would also hook
up a DVD player. Right now I have a bargain basement DVD player, non
HD...eventually maybe I'd get a HD DVD player.

These TVs say they have 2 or 3 HDMI inputs. Not sure what this means,
or if that is enough or more than enough. I would guess it would be
more than enough.

3. RElated to the HDMI thing, (or maybe not) is some kind of surge
protecter thing that you get to get a better picture. You put the
cable through there or something? This costs about $100...is this
necessary or am I just totally clueless about this too?

Thanks for any help.

LCD is better.

Plasma is so 2004.



On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:43:23 -0800 (PST), kpb
wrote:

I have some basic questions. I thought I was relatively intelligent
until I started trying to figure out some of this HDTV stuff.

I'm not sure of the plasma vs. LCD. I thought LCD looked as good when
I was in the store, but the consensus seems to be that plasma is
better. I didn't notice the low viewing angles of LCD, I did notice
them on the DLP however...the LCD seemed to be fine. The LCD seemed
to kind of "suck you in" no glare no nothing, the plasmas had a sheen
to them...maybe the picture was better though.

Plasma seems more tempermental...you have to be careful when shipping
it not to lay the set down or something like that. Also I've heard
about burn-in and some complaints about sets just failing. They're
heavier too. Although this wouldn't be on the wall.

As far as the motion problems in LCD, I didn't notice any when at
Circuit City. Maybe the motion just wasn't fast enough. Or maybe the
8ms response time is fast enough? I know on here I read that LCD only
refreshes 400 or 500 lines compared to 800 for plamsa (I think I got
the gist of that). Would that mean a 720p would be better for motion
or worse..hmmm. Also on here that I want to stay away from "torch"
mode, (as opposed to what)?

I'm looking for about a 40" TV set. Mostly for watching sports.

So I guess I'll just try to continue reading about the difference and
looking at sets in the store.

Some questions.

1. When signing up for cable or directTV do I ask for the HDTV
package? Or do I use the QAM tuner to take the signal and it will get
its own HDTV signals (which would be cheaper too). Or do I not know
what I'm talking about? I thought I read on here that the TV has its
own tuner and you want to use that instead of the one the cable
company gives you. Maybe this is related to the cable "box" and not a
HDTV package vs. QM tuner.

2. What is this HDMI cable thing? 3 HDMI inputs? "5.1" something or
other? Component? I would be hooking up the cable or Direct TV, most
likely, or maybe just an OTA antenna (rabbit ears). I would also hook
up a DVD player. Right now I have a bargain basement DVD player, non
HD...eventually maybe I'd get a HD DVD player.

These TVs say they have 2 or 3 HDMI inputs. Not sure what this means,
or if that is enough or more than enough. I would guess it would be
more than enough.

3. RElated to the HDMI thing, (or maybe not) is some kind of surge
protecter thing that you get to get a better picture. You put the
cable through there or something? This costs about $100...is this
necessary or am I just totally clueless about this too?

Thanks for any help.

There is the kind of intelligent answer you can base your $2000 plus
investment on.
Here start with this website and do your own unbiased research
http://www.hometheatermag.com/

"Duff" wrote in message
...

LCD is better.

Plasma is so 2004.



On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:43:23 -0800 (PST), kpb
wrote:

I have some basic questions. I thought I was relatively intelligent
until I started trying to figure out some of this HDTV stuff.

I'm not sure of the plasma vs. LCD. I thought LCD looked as good when
I was in the store, but the consensus seems to be that plasma is
better. I didn't notice the low viewing angles of LCD, I did notice
them on the DLP however...the LCD seemed to be fine. The LCD seemed
to kind of "suck you in" no glare no nothing, the plasmas had a sheen
to them...maybe the picture was better though.

Plasma seems more tempermental...you have to be careful when shipping
it not to lay the set down or something like that. Also I've heard
about burn-in and some complaints about sets just failing. They're
heavier too. Although this wouldn't be on the wall.

As far as the motion problems in LCD, I didn't notice any when at
Circuit City. Maybe the motion just wasn't fast enough. Or maybe the
8ms response time is fast enough? I know on here I read that LCD only
refreshes 400 or 500 lines compared to 800 for plamsa (I think I got
the gist of that). Would that mean a 720p would be better for motion
or worse..hmmm. Also on here that I want to stay away from "torch"
mode, (as opposed to what)?

I'm looking for about a 40" TV set. Mostly for watching sports.

So I guess I'll just try to continue reading about the difference and
looking at sets in the store.

Some questions.

1. When signing up for cable or directTV do I ask for the HDTV
package? Or do I use the QAM tuner to take the signal and it will get
its own HDTV signals (which would be cheaper too). Or do I not know
what I'm talking about? I thought I read on here that the TV has its
own tuner and you want to use that instead of the one the cable
company gives you. Maybe this is related to the cable "box" and not a
HDTV package vs. QM tuner.

2. What is this HDMI cable thing? 3 HDMI inputs? "5.1" something or
other? Component? I would be hooking up the cable or Direct TV, most
likely, or maybe just an OTA antenna (rabbit ears). I would also hook
up a DVD player. Right now I have a bargain basement DVD player, non
HD...eventually maybe I'd get a HD DVD player.

These TVs say they have 2 or 3 HDMI inputs. Not sure what this means,
or if that is enough or more than enough. I would guess it would be
more than enough.

3. RElated to the HDMI thing, (or maybe not) is some kind of surge
protecter thing that you get to get a better picture. You put the
cable through there or something? This costs about $100...is this
necessary or am I just totally clueless about this too?

Thanks for any help.

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:43:23 -0800 (PST), kpb
wrote:

I have some basic questions. I thought I was relatively intelligent
until I started trying to figure out some of this HDTV stuff.

It makes sense, eventually.


I'm not sure of the plasma vs. LCD. I thought LCD looked as good when
I was in the store, but the consensus seems to be that plasma is
better. I didn't notice the low viewing angles of LCD, I did notice
them on the DLP however...the LCD seemed to be fine. The LCD seemed
to kind of "suck you in" no glare no nothing, the plasmas had a sheen
to them...maybe the picture was better though.

Plasma seems more tempermental...you have to be careful when shipping
it not to lay the set down or something like that. Also I've heard
about burn-in and some complaints about sets just failing. They're
heavier too. Although this wouldn't be on the wall.

Matter of taste.

Smaller sets pretty much have to be LCD, because the plasma pixels are
a bit larger. Bit more of a burn-in problem, but supposed to be much
better now than previously.

LED/LCD panels will probably be the best by next year, with DLP/laser
coming up fast on the outside. But hey, all kinds of new tech hanging
just out of reach.

LCD is hot this year.


As far as the motion problems in LCD, I didn't notice any when at
Circuit City. Maybe the motion just wasn't fast enough. Or maybe the
8ms response time is fast enough?

Hey, all the engineers who brought us this stuff thought the motion
problems pretty much moot. A few people are more sensitive to this
stuff. It is different from CRTs, but it's hard to say if it's really
more of a problem. The 120hz LCDs are pretty solid, but hey, if YOU
don't see it on other sets, then don't worry about it!

I know on here I read that LCD only
refreshes 400 or 500 lines compared to 800 for plamsa (I think I got
the gist of that).

Er, um, don't know what you've got a hold of there.

720p versus 1080i is the main issue, and it holds for both. 1080p is
the high end, but the only 1080p signal comes from blue-ray disks.
The interlaced signal only refreshes half the lines per frame, but
that's true on either kind of panel.

Would that mean a 720p would be better for motion
or worse..hmmm.

When you say 720p, you're asking if the fewer-pixel screens might be
better, most panels now are either 1366x768 or 1920x1080. They both
show all materials, they interpolate in real time. Pretty impressive,
actually. A 720p broadcast would be interpolated *up* to 1080i (or
1080p?). Bottom line is, it probably matters little as far as the
screen, other factors are cable/broadcast compression, manufacturer
features for enhanced picture, etc.

[or are the broadcasts actually 768p? I never asked that question
before]

Also on here that I want to stay away from "torch"
mode, (as opposed to what)?

That's just choosing the "vivid" settings. My old folks like it.
Whether it wears on a LCD or not, is unclear to me. It might wear a
bit on a plasma.


I'm looking for about a 40" TV set. Mostly for watching sports.

So I guess I'll just try to continue reading about the difference and
looking at sets in the store.

Some questions.

1. When signing up for cable or directTV do I ask for the HDTV
package?

Yes.

Or do I use the QAM tuner to take the signal and it will get
its own HDTV signals (which would be cheaper too).

Maybe on some cable systems they already give it to you free, but on
our local Charter franchise, they've been locking up the HD just this
year. Odds are against the freebie on the cable.

Or do I not know
what I'm talking about? I thought I read on here that the TV has its
own tuner and you want to use that instead of the one the cable
company gives you.

Probably my messages you were reading.

Just a choice you can try. You still need the cable company to unlock
the signal, then you have to decide which tuner to use, the cable box
or the tv.

They do sell HD monitors, no tuner at all, save $50. But apparently
most people either want the tuner, or more likely are too confused by
it all so they buy the tuner anyway.

Maybe this is related to the cable "box" and not a
HDTV package vs. QM tuner.



2. What is this HDMI cable thing? 3 HDMI inputs? "5.1" something or
other? Component? I would be hooking up the cable or Direct TV, most
likely, or maybe just an OTA antenna (rabbit ears). I would also hook
up a DVD player. Right now I have a bargain basement DVD player, non
HD...eventually maybe I'd get a HD DVD player.

HDMI is digital connection from the cable box (or disk player).

You'd think it simple, but apparently the industry has managed to
bolix it up. I don't grok why it's any tougher than a USB cable.

So, you'd like to use HDMI from the cable box, and from your HD disk,
and (?) even from an "upconverting DVD player". But component (RBG)
cables work fine, as they have with analog sets for twenty years. And
your old S-video connections, and even yellow composite connection
cables, all work too - most LCD sets come with just scads of
connection options, and they all work. Mostly, don't worry about it.

These TVs say they have 2 or 3 HDMI inputs. Not sure what this means,
or if that is enough or more than enough. I would guess it would be
more than enough.


3. RElated to the HDMI thing, (or maybe not) is some kind of surge
protecter thing that you get to get a better picture. You put the
cable through there or something? This costs about $100...is this
necessary or am I just totally clueless about this too?

Thanks for any help.

There is a computer inside of these HD sets, and computers have
traditionally merited a surge protector. It's pretty rare that it
affects the signal. Of course the shops try to sell them to you, why
not, along with Monster cables for a hundred box a pop, and special
ergonomic chairs that hold your head at the perfect angle for HD
signals, and a partridge in a pear tree.

--

Bottom line is, you take it home, plug it in, and watch it.

Call the cable company, get the HD turned on, and they may come out
and give you a new box.

All the rest if for people who like to fiddle.

J.

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:43:23 -0800 (PST), kpb
wrote:

I have some basic questions.
....
I didn't notice the low viewing angles of LCD, I did notice
them on the DLP however...the LCD seemed to be fine. The LCD seemed
to kind of "suck you in" no glare no nothing, the plasmas had a sheen
to them...maybe the picture was better though.
....
Firstly, there is no such thing as a perfect TV or even "the best
picture". It depends on how you weight all parameters.

I like the (direct view) LCD:s that avoid glare and mirrored images.
It gives the "hole in the wall" reality feeling instead of a glass
framed picture or maybe a "glass window in the wall".
This regards impression of depth and less annoying reflections.

The antireflection coating on plasma screens varies in darkness and
there are also some (*******) LCD panels with glossy surface and the
level of light suppression varies also between "non-gloss" LCD:s so
deciding between LCD or plasma is not enough.

To achieve the really low level of black (and high contrast ratio) on
plasma, you need to control the lighting (more than I'm willing) and
viewed straight on, even objects like your own white cloths can
reflect the light from the screen and be visible.

LCD:s also need controlled lighting, but it is in terms of bias light,
so that the room doesn't get totally dark. With the better panels, and
some bias light, the "black" is black enough to be interpreted as
black.

As far as the motion problems in LCD, I didn't notice any when at
Circuit City. Maybe the motion just wasn't fast enough. Or maybe the
8ms response time is fast enough? I know on here I read that LCD only
refreshes 400 or 500 lines compared to 800 for plamsa (I think I got
the gist of that).
....
Well it is not a qustion of refreshing too few lines.
The best response times of LCD panels are now in the range that it is
the constant displaying of the picture (objects at the same position)
for 17, 20, 40 or 42 milliseconds that creates blur in our eyes when
we try to follow the motion.

I believe that plasmas might have some advantage here because they
don't emitt light the whole time. But I see the effect on plasmas too
and I'm thinking that to create bright wight they also have to emitt
light during most of the frame time. It is anyway the brightest
objects that get the most obvious smearing and/or juddering on both
LCD:s and plasmas.

If you experience smearing or judder depend on if your eyes follow the
motion or not.

The CRT:s have a shorter decay time also on bright levels so I think
this is the reason that motion like new tickers can look sharper on a
CRT.

To reduce the motion blur problem the designers have invented motion
estimated frame rate upsampling. This is called 100 or 120Hz, although
not all "100Hz" markings mean the same thing.

The objective is for "50/60" Hz material to reduce the motion blur .
When applied to film sourced material, the objective is to reduce the
judder or stroboscope effect that can be seen (on many) film scenes
due to the low frame rate on film combined with too little motion
bluring when recording the film (too short exposure times).
(I'm not refering to the judder introduced by 2:3 sequencing for 60Hz
transfers.)

The effect can be very obvious in some cartoons because in cartoons it
is possible to create picture with zero motion blur (in the material).

The 720p "thing" could be good for material like sports and conserts
if the original recording (camera up take) is done in 50/60 Hz
preogressive mode. As it is now it is a mess because the lack of
progressive high frame rate equipment that prevents the material from
being progressive all the way. It has to be progressive all the way to
avoid problems from deinterlacing.
/Jan

Den 22.12.2007 kl. 16:43 skrev kpb :

I have some basic questions. I thought I was relatively intelligent
until I started trying to figure out some of this HDTV stuff.

I'm not sure of the plasma vs. LCD. I thought LCD looked as good when
I was in the store, but the consensus seems to be that plasma is
better. I didn't notice the low viewing angles of LCD, I did notice
them on the DLP however...the LCD seemed to be fine. The LCD seemed
to kind of "suck you in" no glare no nothing, the plasmas had a sheen
to them...maybe the picture was better though.
.....................
Trust your eyes. What You like the most, go for it.;-)

Me and the wife went out to by a LCD TV. A 40" Samsung with 1920 x 1080.
The store had several TV sets running. They shifted to analog TV. Every
thought of LCD disapeared when we saw it. Only the plasma tv's were an
option to look at.

We bought a LG 42" Plasma. LG has an innovation which saves the TV for
the weight and glare of the front glass. There are no front glass which
saves 10kg in weight. Our TV weighs 24,5 Kilogrammes aproximately the same
as an LCD TV.
It kan be made to lie down frontside down on a tablecloth. The ones with
the 10 Kilogrammes glass in front can take a risk by transporting with the
frontside down.

But let us asume that the TV reaches Your home intact. So You don't need
to worry.

Plasma has a refresh time about 2 millisec. Whereas LCD has about 8
millisec. There will be a notesable difference especially in sport. But
many people watches sport on their LCD TV's.

The pictures look different. Compare plasma to an old oilpainting and LCD
to a modern acrylpaint. What look do You like? It is up to You. Trust Your
feelings. Your feelings was in favor of LCD I think.;-)

Merry Chrismas.

--
Jens "Lyrik" Bech.

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:43:23 -0800, kpb wrote:

1. When signing up for cable or directTV do I ask for the HDTV package?

If you want HDTV from them you do. Otherwise you can get your local
channels in HD free with an antenna.

Or do I use the QAM tuner to take the signal and it will get its own
HDTV signals (which would be cheaper too).

If you have the cheap basic cable and they offer the local channels over
cable, you can normally get the local digital channels via the QAM tuner
without having to sign up for the expensive digital package. In any case,
you can always get the local HDTV channels free with your own antenna. I'm
not sure and sat, but I think you have to get their HD package to get
anything in HD from them.

2. What is this HDMI cable thing? 3 HDMI inputs? "5.1" something or
other? Component? I would be hooking up the cable or Direct TV, most
likely, or maybe just an OTA antenna (rabbit ears). I would also hook
up a DVD player. Right now I have a bargain basement DVD player, non
HD...eventually maybe I'd get a HD DVD player.

You really need to learn how to use a search engine.

1-10 of 7,500,000 for define HDMI

--
Want the ultimate in free OTA SD/HDTV Recorder? http://mythtv.org
My Tivo Experience http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/tivo.htm
Tivo HD/S3 compared http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/mythtivo.htm
AMD cpu help http://wesnewell.no-ip.com/cpu.php

In article Lyrik writes:
Den 22.12.2007 kl. 16:43 skrev kpb :

I have some basic questions. I thought I was relatively intelligent
until I started trying to figure out some of this HDTV stuff.

I'm not sure of the plasma vs. LCD. I thought LCD looked as good when
I was in the store, but the consensus seems to be that plasma is
better. I didn't notice the low viewing angles of LCD, I did notice
them on the DLP however...the LCD seemed to be fine. The LCD seemed
to kind of "suck you in" no glare no nothing, the plasmas had a sheen
to them...maybe the picture was better though.
....................
Trust your eyes. What You like the most, go for it.;-)

Me and the wife went out to by a LCD TV. A 40" Samsung with 1920 x 1080.
The store had several TV sets running. They shifted to analog TV. Every
thought of LCD disapeared when we saw it. Only the plasma tv's were an
option to look at.

If they had a Sharp Aquos there, it probably would have looked
excellent.

The problem is the conversion to the panel's native display, and
getting a decent analog signal in the first place, not the LCD vs plasma.


Plasma has a refresh time about 2 millisec. Whereas LCD has about 8
millisec. There will be a notesable difference especially in sport. But
many people watches sport on their LCD TV's.

LCD (generally) doesn't refresh, it updates. The light is on all the
time on most of them. That dark time between refreshes would make
plasma have less motion blur.


Alan