Choosing a television is sort of overwhelming with all the choices. So... what's really important, what makes a real improvement? There's 120Hz and 240Hz, but surely 600Hz must be so much better, right? I'm joking a little. Why would a B&O TV be better, technically? I know we love B&O here, but in quantifiable terms, what is better? Everyone seems to claim motion blur improvement with the higher frequency refresh rates. How large of a contrast ratio is useful, and at what point is it just marketing hype?

Hi Steve,

I believe looking at the specs only isn't the way to go when choosing a TV, Stereo, or house or any big investment you are about to do.

My suggestion is, bring a couple of DVDs, or Blu-ray discs..and also ask your dealer to tune in to a few HD as well as a few analog SD channels…kick back and enjoy..and figure out if you like it or not.

Regarding specs..anyone can get an old Volvo as fast as a Ferrari…but t just doesn't feel as good. At the end of the day, its about the total performance and satisfaction..

/Peter

Also with specs there is no standardization so They are meaningless unless you are comparing the same manufactures sets. Panasonic say they have a 600hz screen and Sony say 240hz. They are measuring their screen speeds differently. I have a 100hz panny and it is smoother than sony's 240 as it doesn't judder at all.

I agree with above poster. I took Up! On Blu-ray and went to 5 or 6 stores before purchasing my TV. Different strokes for different folks!

I'm not much of a movie-watcher though; I don't have blu-ray or all that many DVDs. We like sports and racing a some TV shows mostly. 

One thing that puzzles me about all this motion blur- I saw a picture showing how a moving ball, instead of a blur, would be a clear ball moving in say 3 different distinct frames. Do these sets claim to do that interpolation to make it more clear? That would be a lot of computing!

I always think you should buy the TV that gives you the best viewing pleasure in normal conditions. I would never test a TV with (for example) Pixar Animation because it looks crisp and clear on any television. Watch live sports or normal TV programs and buy the TV your eyes feel comfortable watching.

(my 2c)

I agree that any movie produce with Computer Generated Images will create a false impression.  For example I am sure most of Avatar's scenes will look great just like Up!

What we did was make up a collect of some 5 DVDs that we took for tests at B&O plus relatives' homes (one of perks of baby sitting!) that had large screen TVs from various manufacturers. We chose the DVDs on the basis of how well we knew the movies (same approach one should use for testing speakers with well known CDs).

I was able to pin point specific scenes within the first 10 minutes of each DVD that were stress points for the televisions and I used those to discriminate between the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

For example, in the moving TIMELINE the key discriminators were the title sequence for handling of black contrast, the GMC logo on the truck travelling at speed up the hill from the desert, and finally the colour of the artificial blood on the actors in the emergency room !

I can only speak for the BV10 LCD screen, but I haven't noticed any motion blur on it. The picture seems just as "fast" as on my BV5 that I had before. 

elephant:

I agree that any movie produce with Computer Generated Images will create a false impression.  For example I am sure most of Avatar's scenes will look great just like Up!

What we did was make up a collect of some 5 DVDs that we took for tests at B&O plus relatives' homes (one of perks of baby sitting!) that had large screen TVs from various manufacturers. We chose the DVDs on the basis of how well we knew the movies (same approach one should use for testing speakers with well known CDs).

I was able to pin point specific scenes within the first 10 minutes of each DVD that were stress points for the televisions and I used those to discriminate between the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

For example, in the moving TIMELINE the key discriminators were the title sequence for handling of black contrast, the GMC logo on the truck travelling at speed up the hill from the desert, and finally the colour of the artificial blood on the actors in the emergency room !

 

Excellent!  Given that B&O sell through individual franchises, it is very difficult to effectively compare.

So..... what were the results/advantages/disadvantages re picture quality that you saw re B&O v's the other sets, and which other brands did you 'audition' if I may ask?

 

Best Regards

John... 

 

elephant:

I agree that any movie produce with Computer Generated Images will create a false impression.  For example I am sure most of Avatar's scenes will look great just like Up!

The good thing about UP! is that is is great at testing speed and detail. Just as the balloons pour out of the house and floats away is an amazing test of a screens ability to produce fluid detailed images. A variety of sources is really important.

I find that as useful as certain CGI animations can be, people are naturally suspicious of them as they do tend to obscure more than they reveal. For that reason I keep "real" movies on the sets in my showrooms. 

As for actual hardware specs, the problem is that they're not standardized and, though presented as a list of numeric values, share more with ad-speak than with science. Add to that the fact that most people are in no position to interpret those values correctly and you've got the perfect storm of consumer anxiety and ignorance. I just tell people to buy what looks good (then I tell them that Bang & Olufsen looks good and hope they make the connection!)

Here's a quick article.

Surely one of the problems with auditioning TVs in a store is that one does not know if the individual sets have been optimally set up.

Adiitionally,the ambient lighting level has a marked effect on the PQ of LCD,and Plasma TVs.

It is my understanding that bright lighting favours LCD,whereas low lighting favours Plasma.

For me,a TV's ability is demonstrated by it's handling of SD material,particularly OTA transmissions,since this still constitutes the bulk of my viewing.

Beoboiinoz:

elephant:

I agree that any movie produce with Computer Generated Images will create a false impression.  For example I am sure most of Avatar's scenes will look great just like Up!

What we did was make up a collect of some 5 DVDs that we took for tests at B&O plus relatives' homes (one of perks of baby sitting!) that had large screen TVs from various manufacturers. We chose the DVDs on the basis of how well we knew the movies (same approach one should use for testing speakers with well known CDs).

I was able to pin point specific scenes within the first 10 minutes of each DVD that were stress points for the televisions and I used those to discriminate between the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

For example, in the moving TIMELINE the key discriminators were the title sequence for handling of black contrast, the GMC logo on the truck travelling at speed up the hill from the desert, and finally the colour of the artificial blood on the actors in the emergency room !

 

Excellent!  Given that B&O sell through individual franchises, it is very difficult to effectively compare.

So..... what were the results/advantages/disadvantages re picture quality that you saw re B&O v's the other sets, and which other brands did you 'audition' if I may ask?

 

Best Regards

John... 

This was almost two years ago so my memory is hazy: but I would say probably not Sony and not Samsung although I had looked at those in stores.

Picking up on one of the other posts, one of them had been very badly set up and was a mass of poorly connected cables that integrated the sound system and various other sources: those relatives struggled on a daily basis to use the equipment, on the night of the babysit their instructions were "try this, if that doesn't work try that, if that doesn't work then do A followed by B, et cetera" ... they did not quite say "... and then try kicking it" but you could sense their frustration.  And interestingly the range of electronic geniuses we were baby sitting also had not conquered the system !

So the B&O advantages were the ones we all now:

 

• ease of use including a single remote 
• sound quality
• build quality, and
• consistency of image performance across the variety of DVD programs especially colour performance

 

elephant:

The only complaints/comments they ever make are (a) number of HDMI connections and (b) the cost.

 

a) can't you get an HDMI expander?

b) they didn't have to pay for it, so no complaints necessary

jldmelb:

a) can't you get an HDMI expander?

in fact they found one on eBay for 15 dollars and were urging me to buy that