Notices
Off-topic Cafe Meet the others and talk about whatever...

CHeck out the TV i just ordered!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 13, 2008 | 03:19 PM
  #21  
matt_a's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,794
From: Hanover, PA
Default

Originally Posted by burstaneurysm
I've had bad luck with Sony things just crapping out. In my experience, they just don't hold up that well.

I also hate the proprietary nature of their stuff. Want a digital camera? Hope you like MemoryStick!

Don't bother with Monster Cable either. Get any cables you need from MonoPrice. They're high quality and you don't pay the markup.
http://www.monoprice.com/home/index.asp
Yep...monoprice is a grat place for cables. I personally have had very good luck with Sony products, but I can understand how someone would be turned off ny a bad experience. I don't like their proprietary stuff either. Luckily that's not an issue with their TVs and Blu-ray Players.
Old Nov 13, 2008 | 03:19 PM
  #22  
SVicksTC's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,372
From: Spoolin a Snail
Default

Not a big fan of Bravia TV's but good pick up none the less...Hope it last for you....

As for cables do not cheap out my dad and I use monster cables all around including speaker wire....

He just picked up this badboy

http://www.plasmaconcepts.com/plasma...50/PD1039.html
Old Nov 13, 2008 | 03:19 PM
  #23  
burstaneurysm's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fail, INC
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,312
From: Forest Park, IL
Default

Originally Posted by TheQuietThings
and nothing is better than Monster
You totally drank the kool-aid, didn't you? Have you looked at any cable tests, or did you just fall for the marketing?
Old Nov 13, 2008 | 03:22 PM
  #24  
SVicksTC's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,372
From: Spoolin a Snail
Default

Well monster backs all there equipment with a protection plan up to a certain amount of money if something goes wrong and is related to their cables.....


what other companies will shell out thousands of dollars to replace tv/audio/other appliances such as guitars/amps etc if something goes wrong and is caused by the cable

AND they do stand by their word
Old Nov 13, 2008 | 03:27 PM
  #25  
burstaneurysm's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
Fail, INC
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,312
From: Forest Park, IL
Default

My Acoustic Research power conditioner cost 1/3 of what a similar Monster unit cost and it guarantees replacement of up to $20K worth of stuff if there's ever a failure.

I will say that I use Monster speaker wire. For the price (if you buy online) the markup isn't significant and it is good quality wire.

One of the best speaker wires I ever used was a set of jumper cables.
Old Nov 13, 2008 | 07:19 PM
  #26  
matt_a's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,794
From: Hanover, PA
Default

Originally Posted by burstaneurysm
My Acoustic Research power conditioner cost 1/3 of what a similar Monster unit cost and it guarantees replacement of up to $20K worth of stuff if there's ever a failure.

I will say that I use Monster speaker wire. For the price (if you buy online) the markup isn't significant and it is good quality wire.

One of the best speaker wires I ever used was a set of jumper cables.
I agree that good quality speaker wire can make a difference over poor quality wire, and Monster is good quality. It's just totally unnecessary for HDMI.
Old Nov 13, 2008 | 07:23 PM
  #27  
jpaulsTC's Avatar
Senior Member
5 Year Member

SL Member
DelMarVa
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 132
Default

that motionflow technology that sony uses is awesome. i watched transformers on one with motionflow....just cray...so lucky
Old Nov 13, 2008 | 07:26 PM
  #28  
bluaeon's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 748
From: 909 CA
Default

this thread is useless without pics

:D
Old Nov 22, 2008 | 01:58 AM
  #29  
torchedbox's Avatar
Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 89
Default

Where do you work to get the vendor accom? I work ar Circuit City and am thinking about using mine to get this tv in a 46'
Old Dec 16, 2008 | 04:58 AM
  #30  
iocca's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,318
From: Old Town S-Dale
Default

shoulda got the 52", i just ordered mine, $929.28 with 0% for 36 months
Old Dec 16, 2008 | 05:30 AM
  #31  
tCeeder's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,783
Default

nice but the contrast ratio could be a LOT better for a 1080p 40".... my 24" samsung monitor is 20k:1 and your tv is only 10k more than that.

i bought a 37' sony bravia last x-mas but returned it a day later, the quality sucked ___ to be honest. swapped it for a 37" samsung same size but much better picture.

but i guess for that price you cant go wrong, i paid 700 for my 37" on sale last year.
Old Dec 16, 2008 | 05:33 AM
  #32  
tCeeder's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,783
Default

p.s. cables are cables. there is NO difference between a 80 dollar 6ft HDMI cable and a 20 dollar 6ft HDMI cable. dont buy into that 24k plated crap its all BS. cut them both open and have a look for yourself. monster cable = waste of money

Originally Posted by matt_a
Originally Posted by teamben158
I'd look at other cables besides Monster. Over priced IMO.
Monster cables are great for Component or S-video but they are a complete waste of money for HDMI. Think about it...HDMI is purely digital. It's a series of 1's and 0's. It's either a perfect picture or no picture. Even an el'cheapo HDMI cable will give a perfect picture.
thank you.
Old Dec 16, 2008 | 06:22 AM
  #33  
GammaTNT's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,592
From: NJ
Default

good luck with your sony, my old sony tv went out after 7 years.
Now i got a 37inch panasonic lcd
Old Dec 18, 2008 | 02:41 AM
  #34  
torchedbox's Avatar
Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 89
Default

Originally Posted by tCeeder
nice but the contrast ratio could be a LOT better for a 1080p 40".... my 24" samsung monitor is 20k:1 and your tv is only 10k more than that.

i bought a 37' sony bravia last x-mas but returned it a day later, the quality sucked butt to be honest. swapped it for a 37" samsung same size but much better picture.

but i guess for that price you cant go wrong, i paid 700 for my 37" on sale last year.
Contrast ratios are just numbers to go by within one manufacturer. If you are comparing a samsung contrast with another samsung contrast it will make a difference but, you can't compare cross brand. Plus, the best way to compare the contrast is to compare the tv's side by side not by stats.
Old Dec 18, 2008 | 01:26 PM
  #35  
matt_a's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,794
From: Hanover, PA
Default

Originally Posted by torchedbox
Contrast ratios are just numbers to go by within one manufacturer. If you are comparing a samsung contrast with another samsung contrast it will make a difference but, you can't compare cross brand. Plus, the best way to compare the contrast is to compare the tv's side by side not by stats.
Exactly. First you have to know if you're looking at the Static contrast ratio or Dynamic contrast ratio. Next you have to realize that there is no set industry standard for calculating the number. One company can claim to have a 25,000:1 while another company claims to have 20,000:1 but the two might actually be the same. The bottom line is you can't get all hung up on numbers and specs. Sure, they're a good starting point to use as a guide, but the proof is in the picture. Even when you compare TVs side-by-side in a store, you have no way of knowing if someone has been playing with the picture adjustments on them. If you give me the remotes, I can make a top-of-the-line Sony or Samsung look worse than a crappy no-name bargain TV by simply screwing around with the picture settings.
Old Dec 18, 2008 | 02:06 PM
  #36  
tCeeder's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,783
Default

maybe so, but nevertheless the less expensive samsung still had a helluva lot nicer picture than the more expensive bravia, even after trying to fine tune it with the advanced settings. sony is overrated imo, except for the PS3 =P
Old Dec 18, 2008 | 02:39 PM
  #37  
matt_a's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,794
From: Hanover, PA
Default

Originally Posted by tCeeder
maybe so, but nevertheless the less expensive samsung still had a helluva lot nicer picture than the more expensive bravia, even after trying to fine tune it with the advanced settings. sony is overrated imo, except for the PS3 =P
Which Sony was it? I ask because almost their entire line of TVs are called Bravia now. It's the name they give to the imaging sensor or whatever. There are huge differences in price and specs from the least expensive Sony Bravia TVs to the top-of-the-line XBR series (which is also called Bravia).
Old Dec 18, 2008 | 02:43 PM
  #38  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

I've seen the 120hz Samsung and Sony side by side, and the Samsung is just flat out better...but not for the $1200 more it would have cost you lol.
Old Dec 18, 2008 | 03:50 PM
  #39  
matt_a's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
SL Member
 
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,794
From: Hanover, PA
Default

Originally Posted by CarbonXe
I've seen the 120hz Samsung and Sony side by side, and the Samsung is just flat out better...but not for the $1200 more it would have cost you lol.
See...that's my point. If there was a $1,200 difference in price, there is no way you were looking at comparable TVs. Both Sony and Samsung make many different models in each size. I think most people on here might think they were looking at a similar set, but they weren't. Both have "cheaper" sets and both have "better" sets. If you compare a top-of-the-line model from each company you will not see much of a price difference or a huge difference in performance. It pretty-much boils down to personal preference. I know people who have had horrible experiences with both brands.
Old Dec 18, 2008 | 10:44 PM
  #40  
CarbonXe's Avatar
Senior Member
10 Year Member
5 Year Member
teamNJCT
Fresh Crew
SL Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,638
From: Parsippany, NJ
Default

Originally Posted by matt_a
Originally Posted by CarbonXe
I've seen the 120hz Samsung and Sony side by side, and the Samsung is just flat out better...but not for the $1200 more it would have cost you lol.
See...that's my point. If there was a $1,200 difference in price, there is no way you were looking at comparable TVs. Both Sony and Samsung make many different models in each size. I think most people on here might think they were looking at a similar set, but they weren't. Both have "cheaper" sets and both have "better" sets. If you compare a top-of-the-line model from each company you will not see much of a price difference or a huge difference in performance. It pretty-much boils down to personal preference. I know people who have had horrible experiences with both brands.
The Sony was actually a little more than the Samsung, it wasn't the same one you got, it was the one model higher (50,000:1 contrast, yours is 30,000:1). The price difference I was referring to was your discount .



All times are GMT. The time now is 08:56 PM.