Sound outputs on flat screen tv's

In article ,
jamie powell wrote:
It does have a headphone socket - so jamie is wrong yet again.


Hey meathead, Did you read the bit where I said "They've omitted the 3.5
headphone jack on MOST TV models"? Are you not familiar with the
meaning of the word "most"?


You've checked them all, have you? Is it just coincidence that Googling
for 40" Samsung - the information given by the OP - shows it just happens
to have one?

Your notion that headphone sockets aren't included because of possible
copying is just one more of your fantasies.

--
*If we weren't meant to eat animals, why are they made of meat?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
jamie powell wrote:
It does have a headphone socket - so jamie is wrong yet again.


Hey meathead, Did you read the bit where I said "They've omitted the 3.5
headphone jack on MOST TV models"? Are you not familiar with the
meaning of the word "most"?


You've checked them all, have you? Is it just coincidence that Googling
for 40" Samsung - the information given by the OP - shows it just happens
to have one?

I've checked a fair few. Most (there's that word again) don't have them.


Your notion that headphone sockets aren't included because of possible
copying is just one more of your fantasies.

No fantasies here, meathead. It's what I've heard from two reliable (ie:
outside of usenet) sources though, but as I already said, it still sounds
ridiculous.
Do you even know what "ridiculous" means?

Tonyatk wrote:

I'm hard of hearing and have a inductive loop system fitted in my room
working of the loud speaker socket (3.5mm) of an old CRT TV. which is
still active when the internal speakers are in the mute condition. I need
this facility because my wife likes to read while I watch TV.

I've been looking to replace the TV with a Samsung 40 inch flat screen LCD
model. But I find that this model has no L.S. socket output. The audio
output is by a Phono socket. (I can change the plug to phono on problem).
My question is when the internal speakers are muted are the audio phono
sockets still giving output so my inductive loop system (Amplifier) will
still work.

I've asked the supplier but he says he doe's not know, and has no
facility
to try it .

Would someone with knowledge please advise me as to the best conclusion
to this problem.

Thanks in advance for any information
Tony Atkins.

I have a similar set-up for my wife using a Panasonic LCD TV.
We don't use an inductive loop, but instead use a separate amplifier with
headphones.

In our case we simply take the stereo audio output from the TV (phono
sockets) and connect this to the amp. We use the TV remote to turn down the
built in TV speakers so that they are inaudible. This does not affect the
output on the phono sockets.

--
John Aldred

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:
In article , Max Demian
wrote:
Then get yourself a decent set. Tone controls operating on a line
output is a nonsense.

As a rule this is true, but the Armstrong 626 Receiver I used to have
allowed the bass, treble and filters to operate on the line output.

I hope Jim Lesurf has got an excuse for that. ;-)

Strictly speaking, you'd have to ask Ted Rule that as the design was his
initially :-)

However the reality was as I reported in a previous posting. Armstrong did
that (and included many other features) on the basis of feedback from
customers and from asking visitors at shows, etc. At the time all the signs
were it was popular with users. I was happy to go along with it when I took
over developing/improving the 600 range.

Bear in mind that in those days if you bought a Quad 33/303 from Imhofs the
chances are they'd probably tell you to always have the HF filter in use to
cut down the HF distortion on LP. Different world to nowdays.

But that said, I left out all tone controls and filters from the 700. By
then the 'market' seemed to want these totally omitted, so that was the
commercial decision at the time. During the 80s and 90s there was a
tendency for the market to be influenced by reviewers who disliked them as
tiny alterations in frequency response made mince of their claims about
sound quality difference between amps... erm, I mean they were said to
booger up the sound quality. :-)

The company still tried to follow the customer feedback though. One of the
most common requests about the 600 was "can it have a second headphone
output?" So we put two on the 700. I did think it was a bit weird having
them on a 200Wpc amp, but it was easy enough to include them.

Personally I was intending to do another control unit that *did* have
filters and tone control, but lacked 'round tuits'. So now I tend to use
modified Quad 34 units for frequency response alterations. Nice thing about
these is that they have excellent service manuals and all the components on
the boards are neatly labelled. Makes mods easy-peasy. But PJW never gave a
hoot for what the 80s and 90s reviewers published in their fantasy fiction.
:-)

However on an old Hi-Fi amp where you might be copying disc to cassette
there is some justification for it.

Back then, that was the feeling, but stemming from even earlier days than
cassette to a large extent. The problem was that back in the 60s and into
the 70s many home tape decks had frequency responses that weren't very
flat, and probably varied with the choice of tape. The feedback was that
many users back then said they wanted the ability to alter what they sent
to the recorder. This actually helped to ensure that when you played the
recordings back they sounded more like the original. But like all such
features, could easily be misused, etc.

Later on, the situation became very different because the home recording
gear was much better. We are talking of 3-4 decades ago. Que latin tag...

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article ,
jamie powell wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
jamie powell wrote:
It does have a headphone socket - so jamie is wrong yet again.


Hey meathead, Did you read the bit where I said "They've omitted the
3.5 headphone jack on MOST TV models"? Are you not familiar with the
meaning of the word "most"?


You've checked them all, have you? Is it just coincidence that
Googling for 40" Samsung - the information given by the OP - shows it
just happens to have one?

I've checked a fair few. Most (there's that word again) don't have them.

Right. So what you really mean is most of the ones you've checked haven't
got a headphone socket, then? So nothing like the same as *most* haven't.


Your notion that headphone sockets aren't included because of possible
copying is just one more of your fantasies.

No fantasies here, meathead. It's what I've heard from two reliable (ie:
outside of usenet) sources though, but as I already said, it still
sounds ridiculous.

Do you even know what "ridiculous" means?

Yup. Applies to most of your posts.

Your 'reliable' sources were probably winding you up.

--
*My designated driver drove me to drink

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"jamie powell" wrote in message
...

Do you even know what "ridiculous" means?

We should do by now after reading your dim outpourings.

--
JohnT

"just another thicko" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 02:58:33 +0100, "Bill Wright"
wrote:


"jamie powell" wrote in message
...

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
jamie powell wrote:
The sound on the dedicated phono audio outputs (if fitted) comes from
the TV's internal DAC. (Even analogue sources get digitized within the
LCD TV, so that a short delay can be added to compensate for image
processing time.) On most sets, the volume and tone control also takes
place within the digital domain - hence it also affects the sound on
this output.

Then get yourself a decent set. Tone controls operating on a line
output
is a nonsense.

It's a fact, except on Planet Plowman obviously...

To the original poster. As you will see, egos are large in this group.
Read
my original answer and disregard the rest.

Duh yeh, everythin wot us Bill sez is right, but everythin wot every1
else sez iz just them tryin ter look gud wiv there ego like, unless
there praysin us Bill that is.






Thank you for all the replies. I'm still a bit confused, but will endeavour
to pressure the seller, into to convincing me that it will work as I want
before I buy.

Once again Thank you

Tonatk

"JohnT" wrote in message
...
"jamie powell" wrote in message
...

Do you even know what "ridiculous" means?

We should do by now after reading your dim outpourings.

Pipe down old man.
Your contributions to this group have been non-existant - merely a handful of
cynical, whiney 'Victor Meldrew-esque' one-liners in which you attack other
people.

I suspect the same has been true of your contributions to society as a whole,
and yet, ironically, "young'uns" like me will probably end up carrying you
through your old age, as you degenerate into an even more useless vegetable
than you are now - one who can't even do the basic things for himself.

"jamie powell" wrote in message
...

"JohnT" wrote in message
...
"jamie powell" wrote in message
...

Do you even know what "ridiculous" means?

We should do by now after reading your dim outpourings.

Pipe down old man.
Your contributions to this group have been non-existant - merely a handful
of cynical, whiney 'Victor Meldrew-esque' one-liners in which you attack
other people.

I suspect the same has been true of your contributions to society as a
whole, and yet, ironically, "young'uns" like me will probably end up
carrying you through your old age, as you degenerate into an even more
useless vegetable than you are now - one who can't even do the basic
things for himself.



I would feel sorry for you were it not for the fact that I think that you
are well aware that you are being gratuitously offensive. That doesn't worry
me at all, but it really should worry you.
--
JohnT

"JohnT" wrote in message
...
"jamie powell" wrote in message
...

I suspect the same has been true of your contributions to society as a
whole, and yet, ironically, "young'uns" like me will probably end up
carrying you through your old age, as you degenerate into an even more
useless vegetable than you are now - one who can't even do the basic things
for himself.

I would feel sorry for you were it not for the fact that I think that you
are well aware that you are being gratuitously offensive. That doesn't worry
me at all, but it really should worry you.

This is highly typical of the kind of skewed thinking which people like you
are beset with.
It'll be better for all concerned when the stroke finally kicks in and you
can't talk anymore.