TheHarvester
join:2006-08-25
Dana Point, CA
| standard Cable T.V. with an L.C.D. T.V
We are looking into getting a 42" L.C.D. TV and wondering what the picture looks like on the standard cable channels. With the limited HD channels I don't want the majority of the TV watching to have a crappy picture. My parents bought a 50" 1080 (p or I, not sure) LCD and with the Satellite service they have the picture looks poor. I know they have not done any adjustments to the picture which may be part of the problem. What are your opinions on the picture quality with the non HD channels?
I am with Cox in Orange county, Ca. |
|
wierdo
join:2001-02-16
Tulsa, OK
 ·Future Nine Corpor..
·Teliax VOIP
 ·Cox HSI
| It depends entirely on your particular TV set and the quality of your cable feed.
My old TV looked pretty so-so, my new one looks as good as any SDTV ever did, or at least very close. We have good signal strength, though. If you don't, you may have different results.
--
It's wierdo, not weirdo. Yes, I know that's not the 'proper' spelling of the similar english language word.  |
|
nmlobo
join:2002-11-02
Yorktown, VA | reply to TheHarvester
Wierdo is correct. What you experience will depend upon the video processor within the TV and your signal quality. SD on my JVC LCD is 'near' DVD quality. |
|
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| reply to TheHarvester
said by TheHarvester  :We are looking into getting a 42" L.C.D. TV and wondering what the picture looks like on the standard cable channels. With the limited HD channels I don't want the majority of the TV watching to have a crappy picture. My parents bought a 50" 1080 (p or I, not sure) LCD and with the Satellite service they have the picture looks poor. I know they have not done any adjustments to the picture which may be part of the problem. What are your opinions on the picture quality with the non HD channels? Thats because the satellite was what we call "HD-LITE"!
what comes out is only as good as whats going into it
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth |
|
TheHarvester
join:2006-08-25
Dana Point, CA | reply to TheHarvester
Thanks for the reply guys. Our picture quality now is good 99% of the time, so I assume (I know I know) the signal strength is good. Looking forward to a nice wide screen H.D.T.V. |
|
Barsoap
@qwest.net
| reply to TheHarvester
SD picture quality on an HDTV does depend, at least somewhat, on the quality of the SD signal, the size and quality of the TV, and the viewing distance.
Usually, the bigger the screen size of the HDTV, the worse SD will look.
The other thing that helps SD look worse is that you will now have HD channels to compare with the SD channels. Then, there is the whole issue of the ratio (4x3 vs 16x9). 4x3 isn't much fun on a widescreen TV, regardless if it is boxed or stretched.
After a couple of months with my new 46" LCD, about the only SD content I can tolerate is up-res'd widescreen DVD content. |
|
joako
Premium
join:2000-09-07
Gainesville, FL | reply to TheHarvester
Get a TV with a QAM tuner and you'll be able to pickup some HD or DCS stations. Note some TVs have a "digital" or "HD tuner" but only support OTA and not QAM.
--
09:F9:11:02:9D:74:E3:5B:D8:41:56:C5:63:56:88:C0 |
|
Ender3rd
join:2001-07-15
East Granby, CT
·Cox HSI
| reply to TheHarvester
I had the same concern when I purchased my LCD TV and I found what others did, that the results were somewhat mixed. When Cox went through my neighborhood and upgraded the lines on the street for 1 GHz, my signal quality improved greatly and so did my SD picture quality. Contrast and sharpness are at least as good on my LCD as they are on my 27" Panasonic Tau CRT. If you have a good quality signal coming in from the street, I doubt you will be disappointed.
--
My Jeep is not an SUV. Your SUV is not a Jeep. |
|
