General Forum

Re: Lack of tall stands for current TVs

tournedos — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 02:27:03 GMT

The stand would need to weigh two or three times as much, before the center of gravity of the combination would be substancially lower than in the middle. Now it's still a 2 m long very heavy pole standing on its end. I wouldn't want to have one around if I had kids unless it was bolted to the floor.

Agree with the looks of BV1 on the pole, though. Not sure I'd like the BV7 that way unless it had a good amount of free space around it.

Re: Lack of tall stands for current TVs

Dave — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 23:09:05 GMT

tournedos:

Must be the safety aspect. I've always seen those as a liability court case waiting to happen...

Ever tried tipping over a BC1? The stand weighs as much as the TV... i really agree with this post, the BV7 would have been fantastic up high

Re: Lack of tall stands for current TVs

TripEnglish — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:41:51 GMT

Getting squashed by your $18,000 television is a very exclusive way to die.

Re: Lack of tall stands for current TVs

tournedos — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:45:23 GMT

Must be the safety aspect. I've always seen those as a liability court case waiting to happen...

Lack of tall stands for current TVs

vikinger — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 09:19:45 GMT

The BV1/BC1 television on a tall stand provided a very elegant solution for high-mounting of TVs in bedrooms or games-rooms without the need to drill or chase walls to conceal cables. Why wasn't this type of stand extended into the current TV range?

I can only think that some LCD panels tend not to be very viewable from below due to the crystal construction/ orientation, (although that might be addressable with vertical tilt), and maybe there are now more health and safety concerns about the consequences of a tall TV on a stand being knocked over (although that could be dealt with by floor bolting/ fixing.)

Any reasons? (Also, any reasons why STB haven't stepped-in with an elegant tall pole stand?)

Graham