Support NeoGAF

[Oracle Dragon]

I’m looking at getting a new display for the living room. Nothing to fancy, I don't have $10K to spend.

The problem with the HDTV's I've been looking at, is while the HD content looks FANTASTIC, SDTV looks AWFUL on them. Although SDTV will never look great on any HD set, a lot of the problem must be caused from upscaling such a low resolution source to whatever the display requires (usually 720).

So wouldn't a great transition set be a EDTV with a 852x480 resolution? It could still display a progressive signal for DVD's and the occasional HD channel... but wouldn't SDTV look a lot better on it? In 5-8 years from now, when almost all channels are HD, then I would look at another set. There would be better, cheaper technology out there by that time anyways. It also doesn’t hurt that an EDTV set should be nice and cheap right now to, as compared to an HD set

This set will virtually NEVER have games played on it. 99% of its use will be TV and DVD viewing. So its lack of support for higher resolutions doesn’t really matter.

Does anyone have any experience with EDTV sets? I haven’t used or seen any myself... it was just something I was thinking of tonight before I go out looking at more TV's tomorrow.

OH - And I know that CRT HDTV sets give great SDTV picture to... but I am looking specifically for a a TV to hang on the wall... so that means LCD or Plasma.

Any advice is appreciated!

 

[themadcowtipper]

Saw this thread title and thought it was about that crappy movie....

 

[Dilbert]

I suspect that you'll still be paying quite a bit for the type of technology, but it won't be anywhere near as future compatible.

If I were you, I'd save up a bit longer and go for an HDTV.

 

[Guzim]

Saw this thread title and thought it was about that crappy movie....

It's not that bad!

 

[cubicle47b]

It's not that bad!

I agree. Obviously someone liked it as it says "Hilarious! Great Fun!" on the cover.


I was actually thinking about picking up a large EDTV myself. Sure, it won't be as amazing for HD signals as a set that's native 720p (or better) but it'll be cheaper, current TV signals will still look decent, I'll be able to play old games without crying, and it'll still be a decent quality increase over my main TV (36" Panasonic CRT).

Then, when you can pick up blueray movies and HDTV programming is mandatory I'll pick up one of those awesome carbon nano-tube flat screens.

edit: The only catch is I think I need to move out to truly enjoy it.

 

[Ryck]

I’m looking at getting a new display for the living room. Nothing to fancy, I don't have $10K to spend.

The problem with the HDTV's I've been looking at, is while the HD content looks FANTASTIC, SDTV looks AWFUL on them. Although SDTV will never look great on any HD set, a lot of the problem must be caused from upscaling such a low resolution source to whatever the display requires (usually 720).

So wouldn't a great transition set be a EDTV with a 852x480 resolution? It could still display a progressive signal for DVD's and the occasional HD channel... but wouldn't SDTV look a lot better on it? In 5-8 years from now, when almost all channels are HD, then I would look at another set. There would be better, cheaper technology out there by that time anyways. It also doesn’t hurt that an EDTV set should be nice and cheap right now to, as compared to an HD set

This set will virtually NEVER have games played on it. 99% of its use will be TV and DVD viewing. So its lack of support for higher resolutions doesn’t really matter.

Does anyone have any experience with EDTV sets? I haven’t used or seen any myself... it was just something I was thinking of tonight before I go out looking at more TV's tomorrow.

OH - And I know that CRT HDTV sets give great SDTV picture to... but I am looking specifically for a a TV to hang on the wall... so that means LCD or Plasma.

Any advice is appreciated!

Hdtv's are in the 600 range, how cheap does it have to be?

 

[cubanb]

It's not that bad!

It's no Truman Show!

 

[AB 101]

Meh.

I would ante up the extra cash for a HDTV.

The investment will pay for itself in the long run.

 

[Phoenix]

HDTV is cheap and only getting cheaper. EDTV looks great right now while the broadcasts aren't in HD because of scaling. EDTV resolution is a lot lower and closer in aspect to SD so standard definition doesn't look as bad. However times are changing and soon the world will be HD crazy from consoles and DVDs to regular TV broadcasts. A couple of years ago I might have suggested skimping because the price difference was huge, but it just isn't anymore. There is little point in taking the smaller jump to EDTV now.

I've seen lots of EDTV plasmas and they do look great when displaying the lower res EDTV stuff, but when there is a true HD signal - they leave a lot to be desired. The HD world isn't 10 years down the road... its transitioning in 24 months and will be common place in 5 years.

 

[Oracle Dragon]

HDTV is cheap and only getting cheaper. EDTV looks great right now while the broadcasts aren't in HD because of scaling. EDTV resolution is a lot lower and closer in aspect to SD so standard definition doesn't look as bad. However times are changing and soon the world will be HD crazy from consoles and DVDs to regular TV broadcasts. A couple of years ago I might have suggested skimping because the price difference was huge, but it just isn't anymore. There is little point in taking the smaller jump to EDTV now.

I've seen lots of EDTV plasmas and they do look great when displaying the lower res EDTV stuff, but when there is a true HD signal - they leave a lot to be desired. The HD world isn't 10 years down the road... its transitioning in 24 months and will be common place in 5 years.

Thanks for the answer The problem is that everyone is automatically assuming that I want EDTV because of the COST of HDTV. That’s not true. It’s just a nice *bonus* that an EDTV is cheaper. My primary concern is the quality (or lack thereof) of SDTV signals being displayed on an HD set.

Maybe it’s different in the US, where many of you are... but here in Canada HD adoption is going to be slower. Right now, the cable company where I live (Rogers) boasts the best HDTV coverage in the country... and we are only talking 5 or 6 channels out of 180... and most of them are movie channels. So for regular programs you are SOL. It will be 5+ years (this is just an estimate I am making, not a published number or anything) before its the reverse... i.e. 5 or 6 SDTV channels out of 180.

So if I was to get an EDTV set, it would only have a lifespan of 5-6 years, at most. It would be expected to be replaced. I’m not looking at buying it as my "last TV purchase I will ever need". I am looking at buying it as a suitable replacement TV, until HD content is far more prevalent than it is now. Hell, in 6 years time I could be looking at an affordable OLED or Carbon Nanotube replacement set.

My primary concern was "does EDTV look significantly better than HDTV when displaying an SDTV and/or a DVD source?". The rest doesn’t really matter at all. I am sure that its 480p display will be adequate for looking at the 6 HD channels that are available now, as well.

But if someone who owns an EDTV (or has owned) was to speak up and say "forget it man, SDTV still looks like crap", then I would of course be getting an HD set instead. That’s why I was looking for opinions

 

[Phoenix]

Of course, it does depend on your shopping habbits for TV sets. I tend to not upgrade them. They either break and I need a new one, or they rot on the shelf If you're looking at replacing one in 5-6 years then EDTV is a viable option. Your SD stuff will look great and while you won't be able to really do HD gaming and DVDs (the scaling that makes things look bad going up does have some impact when downsampling too), in 5 years you'll be ready to upgrade for the PS4, Microsoft Xbox720 Dizzy, and the Nintendo.... well the PS4 and Xbox at any rate

PS - anyone who tells you that SD stuff looks like crap on EDTV is lying to you and should not be trusted It will most definitely look worse on the HD set unless you don't display at the full screen size.