Play Devil's Advocate on Danoff's TV Purchase

[Danoff]

Why should I not buy a Vizio M551d-A2R?

The use:
- This will be wall mounted in my livingroom until I get the kid loft (much smaller) sorted out (3-6 months), at which point it will be mostly for video games and kid movies, surrounded by cheap plastic toys.

Constraints:
- I live at high(ish) altitude - which supposedly degrades the look of plasma TVs. As such, plasma is out.
- 55 inches is the bare minimum for the livingroom, but a good size for the loft. Could go smaller for the loft.

Issues that I see:
- This is overkill for a kid room, and possibly not good enough for the livingroom. Worst of both worlds?
- What if the bracket that I use to mount this is not compatible with the TV I replace it with in my livingroom? I'm left with big ugly holes in the wall.
- I don't like reflective screens
- Vizio seems like a cut-rate brand, will it last?

 

[TB]

This is overkill for a kid room, and possibly not good enough for the livingroom. Worst of both worlds?

For TV's, when in doubt go bigger. You'll regret buying smaller but that seldom happens the other way around.

What if the bracket that I use to mount this is not compatible with the TV I replace it with in my livingroom? I'm left with big ugly holes in the wall.

Unless you gou to a COMPLETELY different side TV, the bracket will almost assuredly work. Manufacturers have been using the VESA mounting pattern for a while now.

I don't like reflective screens

I agree about glossy screens. My plasma looks great at night but during the day with ambient light, not so much. Stick with matte.

Vizio seems like a cut-rate brand, will it last?

They are indeed cheap sets but I've had at least one (and currently have three - and LCD, plasma and LED) Vizio in my house for over 7 years and the first one I bought is still working perfectly, currently residing over my fireplace (yes, I'd like a larger one there but as I already had it... See the whole go bigger thing? ).

Why should I not buy a Vizio M551d-A2R?

Looks like it gets good reviews. I say go for it. 👍

 

[Sanji Himura]

I have been using Vizio for my gaming experience for the better part of 5 years, and I don't regret a second of it. However, I must comment on the fact that you are going after a M551d-A2R instead of something that is better suited for gaming like a E500i-A1. Sure, the latter is smaller, but when you put them side by side in a latency test, I'm sure enough that the smaller TV will offer precise gaming without dropping critical inputs.

 

[Omnis]

Don't listen to this guy up here. Get the bigger TV. Gaming is not that important that you're going to miss .001% of all the frames you're seeing. It's extraordinarily hard to notice display latency. It's never been a problem for me.

My uncle's vizio is pretty good. It's 3 or 4 years old now. I would recommend them as a brand in general, but not without a good amount of research and cross-shopping. You'll probably have to calibrate it though, or look for settings on AVS. The picture presets on his TV are horribly out of whack compared to reference. And your eyeballs will catch fire if you catch a glimpse of the screen at full brightness.

 

[Tornado]

Vizio's are more of a mid-range/budget brand than a cut-rate one like Westinghouse or RCA and the like. My parents have had a Vizio 47" LCD since 2008 and they haven't had a single problem with it.

 

[Omnis]

By the way, AVS = AV Science forum. Probably the best place to do your research.

NB: CES is going on now. Please take care to see if any new models have been released. The market might change soon and you may be able to get better deals if you wait a while.

 

[TB]

You'll probably have to calibrate it though, or look for settings on AVS. The picture presets on his TV are horribly out of whack compared to reference.

Having calibrated every TV I've owned with an Avia calibration DVD, historically the Vizios I've puchased have been incredibly close color-wise, and more surprisingly brightness. I'd still second your suggrestion to calibrate it, though. 👍

 

[Danoff]

I have been using Vizio for my gaming experience for the better part of 5 years, and I don't regret a second of it. However, I must comment on the fact that you are going after a M551d-A2R instead of something that is better suited for gaming like a E500i-A1. Sure, the latter is smaller, but when you put them side by side in a latency test, I'm sure enough that the smaller TV will offer precise gaming without dropping critical inputs.

The gaming that would be done on this would be more along the lines of gran turismo or nintendo wii than online PC gaming requiring super speed.

I went to costco to look at the TV and I have to say, I wasn't terribly impressed. The glossy screen is so distracting, and there were visible artifacts on some of the images in the in-store feed that the other TVs didn't display (I'm sure they had some that the Vizio didn't have as well). I don't know, I'm not sure I can drop a grand on it. I found myself eyeing a higher priced sony.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Don't listen to this guy up here. Get the bigger TV. Gaming is not that important that you're going to miss .001% of all the frames you're seeing. It's extraordinarily hard to notice display latency. It's never been a problem for me.

My uncle's vizio is pretty good. It's 3 or 4 years old now. I would recommend them as a brand in general, but not without a good amount of research and cross-shopping. You'll probably have to calibrate it though, or look for settings on AVS. The picture presets on his TV are horribly out of whack compared to reference. And your eyeballs will catch fire if you catch a glimpse of the screen at full brightness.

It may not matter to you, but for the record, most games I play today are fighters. So having that little bit of non-latency that I can get would be a huge advantage in competition.

 

[Omnis]

TVs on display at Costco are probably as far away from ideal as you can get for making judgments.

In-store display modes for televisions are meant to be eye-catching and often the picture is totally blown out, brightness jacked way up. See if you can find one in a dark room or in typical bedroom light. If it's not too far, see if you can go to Best Buy or a magnolia room just to compare stuff for yourself. TVs are probably so different now because everything is "smart" these days. Might want to fiddle around and see what's easiest to use in addition to what displays best.

My suggestion still is to snoop around AVSForum and see what the prosumers like. You'll get an idea of common faults and things to look out for as well.

It may not matter to you, but for the record, most games I play today are fighters. So having that little bit of non-latency that I can get would be a huge advantage in competition.

Are you kidding me? We're talking about a TV here. Danoff is not practicing for Evo.

 

[LeMansAid]

- I live at high(ish) altitude - which supposedly degrades the look of plasma TVs. As such, plasma is out.

It's not the look, but more the longevity that can suffer.

You'd want to be quite sure that you can't do a plasma though, as the Panasonic ST60 is quite easily the best bang for buck picture on the market, and there's no new models coming this year..... or ever, in fact. I'm seriously considering buying one as a currently unrequired, keep in storage, backup tv. After this year, chances are that Samsung won't be doing plasmas either. This year's equivalent to the 8500 might be worth a look though, as something of very high quality at a much more competitive price than the 8500. Not out yet.

I went to costco to look at the TV and I have to say, I wasn't terribly impressed. The glossy screen is so distracting, and there were visible artifacts on some of the images in the in-store feed that the other TVs didn't display (I'm sure they had some that the Vizio didn't have as well). I don't know, I'm not sure I can drop a grand on it. I found myself eyeing a higher priced sony.

It seems that you already know that you want something more than what the Vizio will offer, and in the lcd world, Sony is very strong at the moment. One thing I'd be looking out for is which tvs run without judder while motion interpolation (soap opera effect) is disabled. In store, it's usually on by default.

If plasma happened to be in after all, I'd suggest getting the tv that will stay in the living room now, and get something for the kids after. If it's definitely out, you're under less time constraints, and lcds aren't disappearing any time soon. Unless you'd be interested in a local dimming model. The availability of those might be an issue soon.

If it were me, I'd be getting something with a really good warranty service (not just length, but also method), and at a level very much geared towards it being "only" the kids' tv. That would leave maximum license for the "tv of your dreams" in the living room, when the time comes.

It may not matter to you, but for the record, most games I play today are fighters. So having that little bit of non-latency that I can get would be a huge advantage in competition.

Hehe, obsessed with lag I chose the right time to pick up the three hdcrts I own, for next to nothing in price.

 

[bevo]

Don't listen to this guy up here. Get the bigger TV. Gaming is not that important that you're going to miss .001% of all the frames you're seeing. It's extraordinarily hard to notice display latency. It's never been a problem for me.

My uncle's vizio is pretty good. It's 3 or 4 years old now. I would recommend them as a brand in general, but not without a good amount of research and cross-shopping. You'll probably have to calibrate it though, or look for settings on AVS. The picture presets on his TV are horribly out of whack compared to reference. And your eyeballs will catch fire if you catch a glimpse of the screen at full brightness.

I've actually had 2 different LCD TVs that you couldn't play games in because of latency so it is important. Most TVs it won't matter but some are complete non gaming screens. It had to of been at least an 1/8 of a second delay if not more. Both were off brand TVs though. One came with a new camper we bought and the other was a cheap small one we bought for the kids room in the camper.

It does matter though. I wouldn't buy a tv for gaming without seeing either a review by someone that played games on it or by taking my console to the store and trying it out first.

 

[LeMansAid]

Issues that I see:
- This is overkill for a kid room, and possibly not good enough for the livingroom. Worst of both worlds?

This is what is sticking in my mind. You need to be very clear on what purpose you are aiming to fulfill, and straddling two is probably not the best idea.

As I mentioned earlier, the type of warranty for the kids' tv might be crucial. In Australia we have a mid-range brand named Hisense. Apparently if a tv fails they come to your house, remove, and replace. Done.

On latency: I have an extremely high benchmark with Sony hdcrt. While the difference in lag is noticeable, moving to my Pioneer plasma I have no real issues, despite the Pioneers not being the greatest in that regard. Disable as much processing as possible, and I'd be surprised if any bar the real duds give any trouble.

 

[Tornado]

That sounds quite a bit like the warranty Hitachi has on their 45"+ TVs. I'd have to dig the card out of my desk to check for sure.

 

[Danoff]

Starting to think Sharp LE650.

 

[LeMansAid]

Well, Sharp do seem to be putting effort into achieving quality (the whole Kuro-esque Elite thing as an example). Of course the model you point to is on the lower end, but it looks like it's good value. I assume that it'd be a direct swap for the Vizio (ie. ultimately for the kids). Though judder was mentioned in a review I saw.

Another major thing for when the time comes to getting the permanent living room tv is the type of backlighting. You'll be better served with direct backlighting over edge-lit.

 

[Danoff]

@LeMansAid

Yea the sharp would be ultimately for the kid loft. It's matte, which I'm realizing is a requirement (and a very limiting requirement at that). It's huge, probably as big as I'd ever need in that room. The problem will be getting to see it with a good input. I went by Best Buy yesterday to check it out, and I was impressed, but their feed was pretty pathetic, and they wouldn't put a better feed on it for me. Best Buy actually had a better price than I'd seen on it too.

Judder is seriously concerning. I'm picky about these kinds of things, but I'd need to see it to know whether or not it would bother me.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Are you kidding me? We're talking about a TV here. Danoff is not practicing for Evo.

My point is that even if @Danoff doesn't play fighters(or his children), a lot of rhythm games require precise timing. Since it is perfectly clear that none of you intend to listen to me, someone who does know about latency, I think I will see my way out of this discussion.

 

[Danoff]

@Sanji Himura

What do you think of the Sharp?

 

[LeMansAid]

Since it is perfectly clear that none of you intend to listen to me, someone who does know about latency, I think I will see my way out of this discussion.

Come on now. I care very much about it, and it is a huge factor in why I have a ridiculous seven tvs. I still have two Sony 4:3 crts for light guns games, and other old skool delights, and three Sony 16:9 hdcrts for when I want high res with next to no lag.

When I wrote "Hehe", I was laughing at myself, not you.

Judder is seriously concerning. I'm picky about these kinds of things, but I'd need to see it to know whether or not it would bother me.

I had a juddery lcd at one point, and it ruined movie watching for me. Once I saw it, I just couldn't un-see it. I dreaded panning shots.

Not a fan of matte tvs myself. Is it a requirement for the living room or the loft? If the loft won't require matte, it's probably the best way to test how well gloss works in the living room. I tend to consider under what circumstances I would want optimum picture, and if the issue on the table effects serious viewing (movie watching) or casual viewing (general tv) more. For me, serious movie watching happens mostly at night, when controlled lighting is far more achievable.

In order to make life even more difficult for you, I present: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57569926-221/plasma-tv-altitude-how-high-can-they-go/. Denver itself is mentioned.

 

[Danoff]

Not a fan of matte tvs myself. Is it a requirement for the living room or the loft? If the loft won't require matte, it's probably the best way to test how well gloss works in the living room.

It'll be a requirement in both rooms.

I tend to consider under what circumstances I would want optimum picture, and if the issue on the table effects serious viewing (movie watching) or casual viewing (general tv) more. For me, serious movie watching happens mostly at night, when controlled lighting is far more achievable.

Football watching tends to happen during the day, often with bright lighting - especially if you have guests.

In order to make life even more difficult for you, I present: http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-33199_7-57569926-221/plasma-tv-altitude-how-high-can-they-go/. Denver itself is mentioned.

My understanding is that the limit that the manufacturers set for their plasmas is not a hard limit - but rather a "you're gonna notice it in a big way at this point" kinda limit, and that degradation occurs gradually as you go up in altitude.

 

[LeMansAid]

Ok, I'll let go of the plasma thing, lest I become the SCJ of the plasma religion.

Go for a matte tv for the loft, after that might want to weigh it up as there may be too many trade-offs when it comes to a beauty for the living room.

All up. it's looking like the Sharp is a good fit. Sony tvs have been getting good latency results though, and if some judder is unavoidable, their motion interpolation tends to be less horrible.

Data base for latency: http://www.displaylag.com/display-database/. The Sharp is in the "Okay" section at 59ms.

 

[TB]

According to that site, the Vizio is "Great" at 38ms.

Edit: the Toshiba 55L6200U might warrant a look.

 

[Danoff]

Bought the sharp. Mixed results.

By in large, blu-ray looks great. I am having some judder issues, but it's not so profound that I think I need to upgrade - this is ultimately for the loft afterall. Otherwise blu-rays are wonderful.

Perhaps I'm just not used to seeing an hidef signal on such a large screen, but I'm impressed by how pixilated sports becomes during periods of significant motion. Thing is, the pixilation is present in still frames too - which suggests to me that it's not some sort of motion correction setting, but potentially the input signal itself.

Here's an example. Lots of pixilation on small figures moving at high speeds.

Looks great in slow motion with large figures.

 

[LeMansAid]

By in large, blu-ray looks great. I am having some judder issues, but it's not so profound that I think I need to upgrade - this is ultimately for the loft afterall. Otherwise blu-rays are wonderful.

Playing at 24 frames per second (24p) should be the best option judder wise, but you can try outputting from the player at 60hz and see what works best.

Perhaps I'm just not used to seeing an hidef signal on such a large screen, but I'm impressed by how pixilated sports becomes during periods of significant motion. Thing is, the pixilation is present in still frames too - which suggests to me that it's not some sort of motion correction setting, but potentially the input signal itself.

You meant unimpressed right? Might be compression artifacts, but I don't know how high a bandwidth your transmission uses. Motion interpolation would introduce artifacts as well, traditionally haloing among others, but it does sound logical that the interference wouldn't be there on a still. Make sure you're using the screen setting option with the least overscan (like "just" or "dot to dot"). Since you are showing a paused image I assume that you're using a pvr or some such. Chances are that 1080i resolution output will be the best available, so make sure it's not outputting 720p, as that might limit your overscan options.

Oversharpening and high contrast will only serve to emphasize pixelation. I find that it's worth grabbing a Pixar (I think all Disney actually) movie and going through the set up process. Easy way to get decent brightness, contrast, and gamma (if it's an option) settings.

Looks great in slow motion with large figures.

Lucky your guys play football with lots of padding then.

 

[Lion-Face]

https://www.gtplanet.net/forum/threads/tv-picture-settings-lots-of-pics-56k-warning.118469/

I wrote that a few years ago, handy if you just have the basics to calibrate your TV. As LeMansAid said, Pixar movies have calibration mode in them, many THX certified movies and of course Sony Blu-Ray mentioned in the thread (haven't tested any recent ones though)

Often adjusting your sharpness and noise reductions options will take car of a lot of those artifacts. But seeing as it's a sports broadcast, you will find there will likely always be some form of compression artifacts. The slower the action, the cleaner it looks.

 

[Danoff]

I wonder if this is compression related to the fact that I'm playing it recorded from a DVR (is that quality lower?) rather than watching it live. This is a dish network feed being watched from an earlier recorded broadcast.

I'm realizing that my screen judder may not be the TV but rather the playback method. I use an HTPC to play all movies, I actually don't have a blu-ray player. All of my movies are ripped in full quality (no further compression). It may be the playback software or computer causing the judder rather than the TV itself (I say this because the same mkv blu-ray file causes judder in the same place on other computers/screens). I may buy and return a blu-ray player to see if it's my HTPC setup that's the problem.

 

[LeMansAid]

In my experience, playing through an hd set top box or pvr gives the best results, as dot to dot is not an option when going direct to the tv. There should be an info button or the like on the remote that will show what resolution the tv is receiving from the dvr.

Seems logical on the judder front.

 

[Danoff]

I have it set to dot to dot on the satellite set top box DVR playback, but I think that the DVR is compressing the live HD feed for storage purposes. Right now the recorded HD image is pretty much the worst image I'm getting. I think it's DVR compression that's causing the problems... which is terrible because I can't watch anything live.

I may have to build my own DVR (PVR?).

 

[LeMansAid]

If the dvr is down converting the resolution to something that it could put on to dvd, then you would ultimately be watching an sd image.