Why Thin?

No its a another victim of the we don't want it to last as we need you to
buy new ones fad.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Adrian C" wrote in message
...
Seems to be a race on, on who can make the thinnest flat panel TV.

Ok, so the things wall mountable - and could look good stuck on a wall -
but in most homes the TV is going to stand up and replace a rather fatter
box, and a bit of bulge could be easily lost in positioning.

Making an especially thin TV pushes the price up, requires smaller special
parts, has heat dissipation issues, requires stronger cabinet materials to
avoid flexing, and compromises socket choices and their location. Make the
cabinet a bit bigger, and ye could have a user replaceable backlight, and
slot in modules for tuners, media players and other accessories.

Is the TV another victim of the 'size 0' model fad?

--
Adrian C

On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 11:52:09 +0100, Adrian C
wrote:


Is the TV another victim of the 'size 0' model fad?

When I bought my Sony TV last October I was torn between the 503
(Standard LCD) and 703 / 713 (edgelit LED) thin model. Two reputable
dealers strongly recommended the cheaper CFL 503 thicky. I wasn't
disappointed.

I now note, a few months down the line, that CFLs are old hat ,energy
hungry, low contrast, and you are strongly recommended to buy an
edge-lit LED model which is superior in every possible way.

Seems to be on the lines of 'drop XP instantly and start using Windows
7 before you catch every virus known to man and have your credit cards
and bank details stolen forever.'

Ah and then I need to dump my £5 HDMI cable for the superior £50
burned-in O2-free etc etc etc.

Final sco Marketing 1, Sensible Engineering 0

GrahamC

wrote...

Wasn't there a make that could double up as a picture frame so they
could be disguised as paintings or similar? Or am I remembering one of
those Tomorrows World like applications that nobody really bothered to
follow up.

No; they were real.
http://www.vxm.com/NXT.html

Wharfedale produced the models you remember.
http://goo.gl/CmoRV

More ambitious models also appeared.
http://www.vickers-hifi.co.uk/retail/icon.html
http://goo.gl/8KXbv

The technology is now being promoted by this lot,
http://www.hi-wave.com/


--
Ken O'Meara
http://www.btinternet.com/~unsteadyken/

In article ,
wrote:
On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 16:52:55 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote:



Decades ago I was introduced to electrostatic speakers. They were
flat. Flat thin screens with flat thin speakers is not likely to
happen but it's not impossible.

Snag is a speaker diaphragm has to move air. Either by having a large
area and not moving far in and out, or a smaller area with longer
travel. Electrostatics need a large area.

And you then need extra spacing to avoid arcing, and for external covers
for dust, user-protection, etc. So not really very 'thin' by the time
you've made a practical domestic speaker.

Wasn't there a make that could double up as a picture frame so they
could be disguised as paintings or similar? Or am I remembering one of
those Tomorrows World like applications that nobody really bothered to
follow up.

Quads have a sort of figure of 8 pattern, and don't like being hard up
against a wall. So I'd guess this applies to any electrostatic.

--
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional

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

In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:


Quads have a sort of figure of 8 pattern, and don't like being hard up
against a wall. So I'd guess this applies to any electrostatic.

In principle you could make an electrostatic bipole rather than a dipole.
But so far as I know, no-one has. As you say, for 'conventional'
electrostatic dipoles putting with a neaby wall behind them will probably
ruin the sound.

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

I have four of these in my living room driven by my home cinema setup.
I find them very acceptable sound-wise and play the "spot the speakers"
game with visitors! (They usually can't spot them)

Bob

On 02/07/2011 12:40, UnsteadyKen wrote:

wrote...

Wasn't there a make that could double up as a picture frame so they
could be disguised as paintings or similar? Or am I remembering one of
those Tomorrows World like applications that nobody really bothered to
follow up.

No; they were real.
http://www.vxm.com/NXT.html

Wharfedale produced the models you remember.
http://goo.gl/CmoRV

More ambitious models also appeared.
http://www.vickers-hifi.co.uk/retail/icon.html
http://goo.gl/8KXbv

The technology is now being promoted by this lot,
http://www.hi-wave.com/

In article , UnsteadyKen
wrote:

wrote...

Wasn't there a make that could double up as a picture frame so they
could be disguised as paintings or similar? Or am I remembering one of
those Tomorrows World like applications that nobody really bothered to
follow up.

No; they were real. http://www.vxm.com/NXT.html

When the NXT speakers first appeared I read though the 'technical'
documents they published that 'explained' sic how they work and what
their claimed properties were. Came to the conclusion that this was muddled
and contradictory in some places. And some statements seemed to me to be
incorrect in terms of basic physics. Perhaps because very badly worded.

So I asked the people at the company to help explain. The replies simply
reinforced my initial reactions.

Out of curiosity I then got a copy of their (very long) patent submission.
Much the same at more tedious length.

No idea what they sound like.

In the end I decided it was much like some of the patents and claims for
fancy audio cables. The documents may be long, over-complex, and often
rambling. The examiners may simply allow a patent on the basis that anyone
else can then challenge in court if they choose. Also gives scope for the
patentee to claim other things are covered later on. All good news for
lawyers. It also is useful for the ad men to have fancy technobabble and
mentions of patents to shove into the marketing blurbs.

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