After spending the last 17 years with the same 27" tube TV I'm strongly considering upgrading to a LCD TV. I'm looking for something ~42" for ~$1,500 but would be willing to spend more if there's a compelling reason to do so. With the limited knowledge I have and the research I've done so far, I'm thinking that this Philips 42" LCD HDTV (http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?Prodid=11118301&search=LCD&Sp=S&Mo=52&cm_re=1-_-Top_Left_Nav-_-Top_search&Nr=P_CatalogName:BC&Ns=P_Price|1||P_SignDesc1&N=0&whse=BC&Dx=mode+matchallpartial&Ntk=All&Dr=P_CatalogName:BC&Ne=4000000&D=LCD&Ntt=LCD&No=6&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&Nty=1&topnav=&s=1)would be a good deal.

Does anyone have any recommendations or words of wisdom for someone who isn't up on current television technology?

It might be worth the subscription price to see what ConsumerReports.org has to say.

I'm looking for something ~42" for ~$1,500 but would be willing to spend more if there's a compelling reason to do so.Why LCD? Get a Panasonic TH-42PH9UK 42" plasma (http://www.visualapex.com/plasma/Plasma_details.asp?chPartNumber=TH-42PH9UK&MFR=Panasonic) for $1,200. LCDs really can't compete for image quality at the 42" size unless you want to pay a huge premium for them.

If you want more information, here is an excellent forum for <strike>asking questions</strike> <i>searching</i>: AVS Forum (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=40).

Why LCD?
I was leaning towards LCD because they have a slightly better viewing angle, consume less power, and generate less heat. I've also read that they are less expensive to repair if something goes wrong with them. That said, the technology is progressing quickly so some of the attributes which lead me to prefer LCD over plasma may no longer be an issue.


If you want more information, here is an excellent forum for <strike>asking questions</strike> <i>searching</i>: AVS Forum (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=40).
Cool, I'll check it out, thanks.

I was leaning towards LCD because they have a slightly better viewing angle, consume less power, and generate less heat. I've also read that they are less expensive to repair if something goes wrong with them.LCDs consume less power and generate a little less heat, but neither LCD nor plasma consume a lot of power or generate a lot of heat compared to a CRT. It shouldn't be an issue in typical home use.

As for viewing angle, plasma is much better than LCD, because the light comes from the phosphors right behind the glass (just as with a CRT), not from a fluorescent tube in the back. This is also why plasma has much brighter and richer colors and better contrast, compared to an LCD.

The drawbacks of plasma is that the pixels can't be manufactured very small, so they only come in large sizes and lower resolutions, plasma requires a glass screen, and is therefore a little heavier, and plasma can suffer from temporary burn-in whereas LCD can't.

Bottom line, I would always always pick plasma for > 40".

If you are going to spend money on an HDTV, you may as well get a 1080p with 1920 x 1080 resolution. They are a little bit more expensive but the quality is much better than 720p.

Ok, some info for you.

First on any TV you get, do yourself a favor and make sure it has an HDMI port or two. The TV Tuda linked may be cheaper, but it doesn't have one.

In the not to distant future (3 years or so) Movie Studios will be lifting their self imposed moratorium on not including Copy protection (hardware based using the HDMI port) on movies. Without HDMI you'll need to get some sort of converter (quality loss) or those movies will be downsized to less than 720p.

As for the 1080p, you could spend the extra money but this is worth the read before you do (http://www.hdtvexpert.com/pages_b/reality.html) so. Plus, consider this. It has taken a decade or more for US TV stations to adopt a digital format (mandated by the government) and most of those are still standard definition. HD programs are only now becoming popular on mainstream TV durring prime time. None of those broadcast more than 720p. It's doubtful we'll see 1080p on anything but the successors to HD-DVD and Blu-ray and according to the article, chances are any TV sold today will be less than ideal for it.

The article's summary:
To summarize: There are no fast refresh (30Hz or 60Hz) 1080p production or transmission formats in use, nor are there any looming in the near future — even on the new HD-DVD and Blu-ray formats. The bandwidth is barely there for 1080i channels, and it’s probably just as well, because most TVs wouldn’t support 1080p/60 anyway — they’d just convert those signals to 1080i or 540p before you saw them.

First on any TV you get, do yourself a favor and make sure it has an HDMI port or two. The TV Tuda linked may be cheaper, but it doesn't have one.It has 3 modular ports, and you can buy an HDMI module for $100 (up to 3). The Panasonic plasma is actually not "cheap" (i.e., low quality) at all; Panasonic makes some of the best plasmas on the market.

It has 3 modular ports, and you can buy an HDMI module for $100 (up to 3). The Panasonic plasma is actually not "cheap" (i.e., low quality) at all; Panasonic makes some of the best plasmas on the market.

Cheap was used in reference to price only. Not quality. I sometimes forget that what is naturally understood in speach here in New England can be thought to mean the other elsewhere in the world. I'm sure the TV you linked is a fine TV. It's just lacking in an important feature that many first time buyers would overlook.

But, yes, you can buy a converter, as I mentioned. But, you are converting digital to analog using it. That will always mean quality loss. Plus it would require an extra box and cables you otherwise wouldn't need. I certainly wouldn't buy a TV without HDMI included, nor would I recommend a TV without it.

By whichever TV shows Michigan losing tomorrow, of course.

But, yes, you can buy a converter, as I mentioned. But, you are converting digital to analog using it. That will always mean quality loss. Plus it would require an extra box and cables you otherwise wouldn't need. I certainly wouldn't buy a TV without HDMI included, nor would I recommend a TV without it.You misunderstand. This isn't a "converter," it's a module that fits into one of three slots on the plasma, like a PCI card fits onto a motherboard. It is pure digital and takes no space outside of the plasma. The plasma I linked is the commercial/industrial version of the glass, and therefore instead of a fixed set of inputs, it's designed to accept whatever inputs the vendor requires. The only fixed input on the model is an analog VGA input.

There is a consumer version of the same Panasonic glass, but it's more expensive, uglier, and has fixed inputs. That's why most knowledgeable plasma buyers go for the commercial/industrial versions, which you cannot buy in a regular brick and mortar store.

It might be worth the subscription price to see what ConsumerReports.org has to say.
It was, thanks. Between the CS reviews, the feedback here, and things I read in the AVS Forum I'm now leaning towards getting the Westinghouse LVM-42W2 (http://shopping.yahoo.com/p:Westinghouse%20LVM-42w2%20Television:1993326298;_ylt=AgJWnM28KxmKPJtY rIe6V.8bFt0A;_ylu=X3oDMTBic2hxMGNhBGx0AzQEc2VjA3Ny ?clink=dmps/lvm-42w2/ctx=mid:6,pid:1993326298,pdid:6,pos:1,spc:14489115 ,date:20061118,srch:kw,x:).

Just a follow-up for anyone who might be getting a TV -- I got the Westinghouse LVM-42W2 (http://shopping.yahoo.com/p:Westinghouse%20LVM-42w2%20Television:1993326298;_ylt=AgJWnM28KxmKPJtY rIe6V.8bFt0A;_ylu=X3oDMTBic2hxMGNhBGx0AzQEc2VjA3Ny ?clink=dmps/lvm-42w2/ctx=mid:6,pid:1993326298,pdid:6,pos:1,spc:14489115 ,date:20061118,srch:kw,x:) and I've been using it for a couple of weeks now and I'm pretty pleased with the purchase. It generates a bit more heat than I expected but the picture is as good or better than any of the LCDs I looked at in the stores and it is positively awesome as a monitor -- EQ rocks at 42" in 1920x1080 mode.

EQ rocks at 42" in 1920x1080 mode.Has it changed? It used to zoom on a widescreen resolution, so that you'd end up with an even more cramped view than on a 4:3 display.

Has it changed? It used to zoom on a widescreen resolution, so that you'd end up with an even more cramped view than on a 4:3 display.
Yep, sadly, you do lose some vertical FOV in widescreen. I could rectify it by reducing the horizontal resolution and stretching the image to fill the screen but the 1920x1080 image quality is really nice and it would be hard to give up any of it.

So... silly question, I know. How do you watch TV on it if it doesn't have a tuner?

So... silly question, I know. How do you watch TV on it if it doesn't have a tuner?
I use my TiVO as a tuner. That's what I did even when I was using a television with a built-in tuner.

Oh! So the tuner just gets you the TV stations on the air waves? You don't need it if you have a cable box? What about just regular cable without the box?

If you are using a cable box or TiVO then the tuner is redundant. If you have cable coming out of the wall and directly into the set then the set is doing the tuning. I suppose there may be exceptions but I've never encountered them. A good rule of thumb would be to look at the remote you're using to change channels -- whichever device it shipped with is being used as the tuner (assuming it's not a universal remote).

I picked up a new LCD afew weeks ago.

http://www.olevia.com/jsp/products/detail.jsp?pid=237V for the living room. I paid $599 on sale.

It does lack 2 HDMI ports which I don't like. However, my amp has a HDMI splitter built into it, so I just switch sources thru my amp.

The image this little TV is able to create is shocking. For the price no other TV can produce what this does. ESPN HD looks as if it's coming right at me.

The speakers of the TV are ok, nothing to write home about. Just use a amp for sound.

The biggest con about this TV is the remote. NO unverisal remote will work with this, unless you have a learning remote. Which those go for 100-250 bucks.

Oh! So the tuner just gets you the TV stations on the air waves? You don't need it if you have a cable box? What about just regular cable without the box?

You won't need the cable box either...IF and only if you have basic cable. If you have Digital you still need the box. Why your looking for a tuner with a cable card input if you want to 86 the cable box all together. And this is only with cable companies that use a cable card, i.e Cablevision.

I believe Direct TV uses a cable card as well, so you could 86 the box and just hook up the line to your tuner in and insert the cable card into your TV.

Only 2-4% of North America would be able to do this. The rest will still need a box of some sort making the built in tv tuner a waste of money.

Gotcha, thanks!