General Forum

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

TripEnglish — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 15:44:00 GMT

John, I figured that had to be the issue. In that case your point really does stand that the Avant & a few other well forged CRT sets still blow away the flat panels. Size is not really a viable factor in the debate I suppose, but I'm still pleased as punch with my Avant and actually glad that I still have SD options in many cases as well.

As for Flappo, much of the content you described was shot in such a way that it can be remastered to suit HD transmission quite nicely. Check out Criterion's Blu-Ray offerings to see just how true this can be.

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

j0hnbarker — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 14:55:49 GMT

TripEnglish:

j0hnbarker:

moxxey:

I don't see the 'point' you are trying to make? Almost as if you're convincing yourself you don't more than a 32", HD, Blu-ray and so on.

My old BV7-32 is tiny compared to the 40". I prefer the 40". I'm not saying I want anything larger than that, but I definitely don't want to go back. Also, what happens if you have a large room? It's often better to have the larger screen.

Most movies are available in HD, most sport and so on. Fair enough most of it is SD, but I ain't going back to an old CRT on the basis of 'just because'. Move on John :)

You're already moving on before the majority of transmissions have caught up with you - that's part of the point I was making. I just don't get it. You're so far ahead of the curve that you're actually thinking about replacing a HD set that won't work in HD for the majority of transmissions here in the UK. Surely that's a bit questionable?

How big is your living room BTW? Mine is 25' long and my 28" Avant is more than enough. I do have good eyesight and good central heating though. Perhaps this is why I don't hanker after a huge screen hung on my wall??

John,

This must be a regional thing. Here in the US, most areas have HD versions of just about every channel available and nearly every program on those channels is native HD. A few years ago that point made a lot of sense, but today I can probably swear off SD and never miss a single program.

Not the case here in the UK Trip. Most content on Sky is SD, and most people I know have Sky as opposed to cable etc., so at the moment I think the point is valid. Clearly things will move on, but as to how far and how fast this process will take place, I'm not clear. When I wake up 1/3 of the Sky content is HD without requiring an additional subscription, then maybe I'll reconsider...

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

Flappo The Grate — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 14:55:23 GMT

apart from every tv show made between say 1936 and 2005 ( filmed and produced in sd )

but what's 70 years of culture between friends ?

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

TripEnglish — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 14:34:08 GMT

j0hnbarker:

moxxey:

I don't see the 'point' you are trying to make? Almost as if you're convincing yourself you don't more than a 32", HD, Blu-ray and so on.

My old BV7-32 is tiny compared to the 40". I prefer the 40". I'm not saying I want anything larger than that, but I definitely don't want to go back. Also, what happens if you have a large room? It's often better to have the larger screen.

Most movies are available in HD, most sport and so on. Fair enough most of it is SD, but I ain't going back to an old CRT on the basis of 'just because'. Move on John :)

You're already moving on before the majority of transmissions have caught up with you - that's part of the point I was making. I just don't get it. You're so far ahead of the curve that you're actually thinking about replacing a HD set that won't work in HD for the majority of transmissions here in the UK. Surely that's a bit questionable?

How big is your living room BTW? Mine is 25' long and my 28" Avant is more than enough. I do have good eyesight and good central heating though. Perhaps this is why I don't hanker after a huge screen hung on my wall??

John,

This must be a regional thing. Here in the US, most areas have HD versions of just about every channel available and nearly every program on those channels is native HD. A few years ago that point made a lot of sense, but today I can probably swear off SD and never miss a single program.

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

Michael — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 09:08:50 GMT

burantek:

bandoboy:

Ok, this is my first reply on BeoWorld, so forgive me if I make a particular "faux pas".

I currently have a 32" Avant with a standard Sky box fitted at the back, and I think the picture I get from it is nothing short of superb! Ok, if I want to play on the x-box the picture suffers a little but overall I think the picture I get from my tv beats many new LCD's hands down. Couple that with the sound that comes out of it and i'd like to see and hear a "mass produced" LCD do that!

A friend of mine recently bought an LG 42" LCD TV, he read all the relevant reviews for it and made sure he got the latest model and paid a very tidy sum for it, but the picture and sound from it are awful! Ok, plug in an x-box/ps3 and the HD cables make a difference with picture, but again a standard def picture isn;t anything close to my 9 year old Avant.

Cranking the sound up on "Guitar Hero" the other evening, ( I know, i'm old enough to know better!) and friends were just amazed. (Though doubt the neighbours were!).

I love my Avant and HD television content is not high on my agenda, and it's only available in a limited way here in the UK, so why would i want to change?

Plus I can;t find my wife's credit card to go and buy a new BV7-40. Damn, where has she hidden it!!??

.

Apparantly Burantek is speachless...

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

burantek — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 03:50:50 GMT

bandoboy:

Ok, this is my first reply on BeoWorld, so forgive me if I make a particular "faux pas".

I currently have a 32" Avant with a standard Sky box fitted at the back, and I think the picture I get from it is nothing short of superb! Ok, if I want to play on the x-box the picture suffers a little but overall I think the picture I get from my tv beats many new LCD's hands down. Couple that with the sound that comes out of it and i'd like to see and hear a "mass produced" LCD do that!

A friend of mine recently bought an LG 42" LCD TV, he read all the relevant reviews for it and made sure he got the latest model and paid a very tidy sum for it, but the picture and sound from it are awful! Ok, plug in an x-box/ps3 and the HD cables make a difference with picture, but again a standard def picture isn;t anything close to my 9 year old Avant.

Cranking the sound up on "Guitar Hero" the other evening, ( I know, i'm old enough to know better!) and friends were just amazed. (Though doubt the neighbours were!).

I love my Avant and HD television content is not high on my agenda, and it's only available in a limited way here in the UK, so why would i want to change?

Plus I can;t find my wife's credit card to go and buy a new BV7-40. Damn, where has she hidden it!!??

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

gk31ax — Fri, 08 May 2009 14:45:12 GMT

vikinguk:

Visitors invariably mistake my 32 DVD Avant for a high definition TV

LCD/ Plasma lets you go to larger screens with HD output keeping similar quality, but size for size you can't beat the B&O CRT. LCDs can't cope with fast movement quite as well. It'll be interesting to compare all with the new generation of LED TVs like the Samsung!

Vikinguk

A friend of mine who is a TV presenter came round last night, took one look at the picture on my Avant and said, wow that's a great HD picture!

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

ajames — Fri, 08 May 2009 07:53:47 GMT

I'm glad that people are buying huge LCD and Plasma screens as it brought the price of the Avant down to a price I could afford. I also get the same comments - A friend has a SONY 32" HD LCD and that's superb on Blue Ray, but on SD the Avant is better.

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

beobeo — Fri, 08 May 2009 06:58:49 GMT

timhanna:

beobeo:

Interesting thread.

Well, I'm also adicted to my BV3-32 picture quality on SD and I'm pretty much an SD consummer, so I could say I'm pretty well set up until HD becomes widely established as the standard. However, I've moved to a large detached house outside of the city. My living room is quite big and the BV3 is clearly not up to the challenge. What is the best compromise solution for somebody that needs a large screen but demands good SD quality??

I would say that BV7-40 is the best combination that will work well with both contents (If I only had the 11k euro I need to get it). Or perhaps a BV8-40?

If my living room's size was not an Issue, I could live easily another 2 years with my BV3.

Why dont you get a projector?

There's too much light in the living room and it would be difficult to keep on pulling up and down the curtains so often. I'm planning to have a projector for the attic though, for weekend usage.

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

KingStreet — Thu, 07 May 2009 09:50:55 GMT

This is a real minefield - and can be quite subjective regarding screen size/room ratio.....and as analogue SD will simply not be an option for much longer, its not just a matter of preference really.

I am continually amazed by the picture I see on my much -loved Avant 28DVD, fed content via a SKY HD box and using a decent scart.

Obviously there is no HD connectivity - but the quality of the broadcast/tuner is still a benefit over standard SKY (and the hard drive is huge). With a decent scart, the image is superb, and without HD subscription, there are still good things to see via BBC HD.

For panels, we use the factor of 4 - 5 times the screen width away for SD viewing, when planning a room layout. As others have said - a lot of the issues with panels are the "too-big-too-close" installations that are all too common.

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

timhanna — Wed, 06 May 2009 10:46:35 GMT

beobeo:

Interesting thread.

Well, I'm also adicted to my BV3-32 picture quality on SD and I'm pretty much an SD consummer, so I could say I'm pretty well set up until HD becomes widely established as the standard. However, I've moved to a large detached house outside of the city. My living room is quite big and the BV3 is clearly not up to the challenge. What is the best compromise solution for somebody that needs a large screen but demands good SD quality??

I would say that BV7-40 is the best combination that will work well with both contents (If I only had the 11k euro I need to get it). Or perhaps a BV8-40?

If my living room's size was not an Issue, I could live easily another 2 years with my BV3.

Why dont you get a projector?

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

Jandyt — Wed, 06 May 2009 10:42:00 GMT

Ditto to nearly all of you!
The Avant is truly wonderful, both with sound and with picture. 32" is all I will ever need in this house.
Oh, and I'm with j0hn on this too. So many people just get a bigger tv to out-do their pals. I live in a house, not a castle.

Andy T.

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

burantek — Wed, 06 May 2009 10:27:17 GMT

oh dear, i am setting foot in a tv thread

i have ~5 tv's running at any given time.

i would rate them from best to worst as...

1.) 30" philips crt (HD): 100% HD content / avant 32: 100% SD content

2.) 42" panny plasma: 100% HD content

3.) mx5000: 100% SD content

4.) 28" philips crt: 100% SD content

so, IMHO, the crt's still dominate whether HD or SD. the philips 30" is truly remarkable, and yes, people often ask me if the avant is HD as well.

if i could only keep one, i would miss my HD content because it would have to be the avant for everything else that it represents and does for me. i just love it.

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

Michael — Wed, 06 May 2009 10:23:05 GMT

After CRT I personally think Plasma offers the best performance. Not to mention bang for your buck right now. The Panasonic Professional plasmas are a great value and integrate well with the BS3, although I know many people are partial to Pioneer.

However, if they are still offering the discounted, Non-DVD version of the BV7-40 then I would spring for that. That was an incredible deal as it actually was cheaper than the BS3 that it came bundled with.

Re: flatscreen televisions ver picturetube televisions picture quality

beobeo — Wed, 06 May 2009 10:03:23 GMT

Interesting thread.

Well, I'm also adicted to my BV3-32 picture quality on SD and I'm pretty much an SD consummer, so I could say I'm pretty well set up until HD becomes widely established as the standard. However, I've moved to a large detached house outside of the city. My living room is quite big and the BV3 is clearly not up to the challenge. What is the best compromise solution for somebody that needs a large screen but demands good SD quality??

I would say that BV7-40 is the best combination that will work well with both contents (If I only had the 11k euro I need to get it). Or perhaps a BV8-40?

If my living room's size was not an Issue, I could live easily another 2 years with my BV3.