Which won't work with HD channels. I can see them on my STB viewing guide, but the TV won't play them so it has to go.
I don't understand your comment? You can view HD channels on an SD TV via any HD box. It will of course be in SD but HD channels can still look better due to their higher bit rates.
A better brand will have a better quality picture than a Sanyo.However even the best make LCD is not going to match the picture quality of a good CRT TV,especially a Sony CRT for standard definition progammes.In my opinion they do not even come close. Even HD programmes look quite good on the Sony CRTs.---For all the bashing CRT TVs seem to get these days in many ways they are superior.
How do you get an HD picture on a CRT?.
Still the CRT dinosaurs refuse to die out, expect someone to start another thread on it next week.
Still the CRT dinosaurs refuse to die out, expect someone to start another thread on it next week.
Well their was a Samsung set that could do 1080i but it had terrible geometry so I heard. Their were some HD CRT's made for the Japanese and US markets but I don't know what they were like.
Still the CRT dinosaurs refuse to die out, expect someone to start another thread on it next week.
All HD boxes output downscaled 576i (SD) on the analogue outputs. RGB at 576i can look very good thanks to the higher bitrates used to deliver it. It's not an HD picture but it is the HD channel you are viewing.
Well their was a Samsung set that could do 1080i but it had terrible geometry so I heard. Their were some HD CRT's made for the Japanese and US markets but I don't know what they were like.
Son In Law had one, compared to the LCD that replaced it it was terrible.
Well it doesn't work, where do you make it thicker if the speakers only fit on the sides or the bottom, its just not practical, if you put big speakers on the sides then suddenly you'll have people whining it won't fit anymore, too wide for that market, add to the bottom and its just a big ugly tumor on the bottom, thicken the entire unit and you waste a lot of space and material just covering empty space behind the display.
It is obvious that the modern day sets are in danger of toppling over. Speakers on the side would make a set more stable and avoid the risk of toppling over. This is acknowledged in the manual by Sony that suggests screwing the stand into the base stand.Intregated Speakers would not add that much weight compared with the 62kg that the 32" trintron weighed. The speakers on my set are 2 x 20w music power and 2 x 10w RMS - this exceeds the 2 x 10w on the Sony KDL37EX723 with the larger sets having 2 x 8w. Whilst i am not suggesting integrated speakers for the very large screens, for sizes up to say 40" it should be possible. Those with larger screens are probably more interested in the home cinema experience so would be more interested in a dedicated surround sound system. I for one would be prepared to pay a bit more for a better integrated system than have to set up an external system which is probably what I may have to do when I replace my existing set.
Even in a corner thickness makes a difference when it comes to ease of mounting or how far you can push it back to save space. While windows do affect placement, I don't see how the antenna can't be routed to wherever else you might need it. The ease of mounting these things on the wall means your options should be greater now than before.
You put the TV in the same place as a CRT set would have gone. You are not going to save any space as a base unit has a depth to it. Thats far easier than moving the antenna as that would require replastering and also moving external wiring. In our case we have one large front window, and two smaller ones at the side either side of a fireplace. I do know some folk have put their TV on a wall facing the windows, but that means that they are sitting with their backs to the windows and it means the TV is facing the window - not very condusive to viewing when the sun is out, and you cannot see what is going on in the street in this position.
Inflation can be calculated online. If you look at the price of a new tv from a decade ago even you would probably see that it makes the difference. What year did you pay £450 for that tv, and how big was it. £450 is nothing to sneeze at, and that was discounted...
Actually I was wrong - I paid £640 in December 2002 for a
28" set . Given the price of the set that I am considering (around £600) I think that a set with integrated speakers and increased stability would cost around £750, so in real terms not a lot more - probably less. They could even make em silver again (even wood ones)
Harking back to my OP, I find that having made adjustments to the Brightness,Contrast and Colour controls, the picture is much more acceptable. Oddly (?) I find that the longer the set is switched on, the better the picture seems to be.
However, the picture when playing a personally recorded VHS tape is much inferior to that which appeared on the Sony CRT. I wonder why?
Harking back to my OP, I find that having made adjustments to the Brightness,Contrast and Colour controls, the picture is much more acceptable. Oddly (?) I find that the longer the set is switched on, the better the picture seems to be.
However, the picture when playing a personally recorded VHS tape is much inferior to that which appeared on the Sony CRT. I wonder why?
Because the CRT masked most of the artefacts arising from the limited resolution of the VHS format. SD has a maximum resolution of 720 x 576 pixels, VHS can't match this so look terrible on a lcd display. DVD at 720 x 576 and a digital source should look much better on a digital TV.
Well their was a Samsung set that could do 1080i but it had terrible geometry so I heard. Their were some HD CRT's made for the Japanese and US markets but I don't know what they were like.
It could try, many of those 1080i sets could not render 1080i detail, they simply scanned the beam 1080 times and that qualified them to carry the label regardless of the detail delivered;) It was pretty tricky.
It is obvious that the modern day sets are in danger of toppling over. Speakers on the side would make a set more stable and avoid the risk of toppling over. This is acknowledged in the manual by Sony that suggests screwing the stand into the base stand.Intregated Speakers would not add that much weight compared with the 62kg that the 32" trintron weighed. The speakers on my set are 2 x 20w music power and 2 x 10w RMS - this exceeds the 2 x 10w on the Sony KDL37EX723 with the larger sets having 2 x 8w. Whilst i am not suggesting integrated speakers for the very large screens, for sizes up to say 40" it should be possible. Those with larger screens are probably more interested in the home cinema experience so would be more interested in a dedicated surround sound system. I for one would be prepared to pay a bit more for a better integrated system than have to set up an external system which is probably what I may have to do when I replace my existing set.
You put the TV in the same place as a CRT set would have gone. You are not going to save any space as a base unit has a depth to it. Thats far easier than moving the antenna as that would require replastering and also moving external wiring. In our case we have one large front window, and two smaller ones at the side either side of a fireplace. I do know some folk have put their TV on a wall facing the windows, but that means that they are sitting with their backs to the windows and it means the TV is facing the window - not very condusive to viewing when the sun is out, and you cannot see what is going on in the street in this position.
Actually I was wrong - I paid £640 in December 2002 for a
28" set . Given the price of the set that I am considering (around £600) I think that a set with integrated speakers and increased stability would cost around £750, so in real terms not a lot more - probably less. They could even make em silver again (even wood ones)
It doesn't matter what wattage it claims, it has almost no meaning when the speakers size is restricted so greatly, this is physics working against any improvement. 100 watt speakers could be claimed and if they were flat and tiny it wouldn't make any difference in sound at all, this is one of those spec lies in the electronics industry. It just means the speaker has power handling of X watts, nothing more.
Wide tv's with extra wideness due to speakers just won't sell, that market is like the market for tv's with integrated dvds, its for cheap folks that don't care about quality,, and as you saw with the crts with such integration, they combined the cheapest with the cheapest because that is what that market justified. The only way to get decent speaker sound is depth, sure you can use ribbon speakers but those require large surface area so its just as bad, in either case, it makes the product impractical and all for mediocre sound compared to home theatre or even a sound bar, so it just won't ever happen. You just can't serve a market that doesn't know what it wants. What you propose would cost more because of the nichness and would have no practical or even price benefit vs a thin panel with a nice soundbar right under it, so it doesn't and will never exist.
With inflation that set cost 770 pounds, which buys you a lot more than 28" now;)
You can get raceways for wiring that adhear to the bottom of the wall if you don't feel like replastering for antenna placement. While you don't get your space back because you have a corner placement, flat still saves space, the rear end of crts was not a corner point, so for a given size you can still fit a bigger flat panel into a corner than you would a crt. If your idea of side speakers with depth were implemented this advantage would be lost.
I've had 50"plasmas on stands that won't topple over unless you really handled them, i'm sure securing to a custom stand is pretty standard recommendation if that is what you buy. Speakers on the side would not make such units any more stable as you'd need weight on the bottom/base, not on the sides.
If you don't actually use your fireplace you can actually mount the tv at eye height straight against many fireplaces, either building a frame mount or simply using masonary anchors in the brick fireplace itself. I have a friend that has his 50" plasma mounted that way.
Well their was a Samsung set that could do 1080i but it had terrible geometry so I heard. Their were some HD CRT's made for the Japanese and US markets but I don't know what they were like.
IIRC that Samsung was an attempt to make a thinner large CRT by playing around with a shorter CRT neck. It was, as you said, pretty horrific for geometry. In fact most large CRTs really struggle with geometry principally because the power supplies weren't up to the job.
It could try, many of those 1080i sets could not render 1080i detail, they simply scanned the beam 1080 times and that qualified them to carry the label regardless of the detail delivered;) It was pretty tricky.
You only need to scan the beam 540 times per field to generate 1080i. Data monitors have been doing far in excess of that for a long time, so scanning wasn't quite such a major issue.
It was dot pitch vs cost that was the problem for the CRT HDTVs. Of course this is all academic now. Those were American TVs so not suitable for use in the UK.
It doesn't matter what wattage it claims, it has almost no meaning when the speakers size is restricted so greatly, this is physics working against any improvement. 100 watt speakers could be claimed and if they were flat and tiny it wouldn't make any difference in sound at all, this is one of those spec lies in the electronics industry. It just means the speaker has power handling of X watts, nothing more.
I think therefore we are agreed that the speakers on my CRT are better than the LED replacement when I get it simply due to the space given to them. They may not be theatre quality but for day to day viewing are fine and do a very good job in the case of a movie with a good original soundtrack.
Wide tv's with extra wideness due to speakers just won't sell, that market is like the market for tv's with integrated dvds, its for cheap folks that don't care about quality,, and as you saw with the crts with such integration, they combined the cheapest with the cheapest because that is what that market justified.
As stated above the sound quality is more than acceptable for my needs and there I say better than present day LED sets (although Panasonic appear to have put a speaker along the base of their design which is another way of giving the sound a bit of a boost, but perhaps not so good for a stereo affect.
The only way to get decent speaker sound is depth, sure you can use ribbon speakers but those require large surface area so its just as bad, in either case, it makes the product impractical and all for mediocre sound compared to home theatre or even a sound bar, so it just won't ever happen. You just can't serve a market that doesn't know what it wants.
No I know what I want. I don't want to be told what I want. I still maintain that integrated speakers with a depth of around 6 to 8 inches would make so much difference. You would still have a set that most people could carry on their own and would still have something substantially thinner than a CRT. The stand could be packaged in the box between the speakers at the rear of the set.
What you propose would cost more because of the nichness and would have no practical or even price benefit vs a thin panel with a nice soundbar right under it, so it doesn't and will never exist.
How do you know that it would be a nichness? Many people prefer plug and play and what could be better than speakers with just that little bit extra to give an accceptable stereo affect when required without the need to buy additional kit. It would be targetted at the market who are not bothered with having surround sound and don't want to go to the expense of having to buy additional kit
With inflation that set cost 770 pounds, which buys you a lot more than 28" now;).
Indeed it does. There is no doubt that the lightness and thinness of LED sets saves a small fortune in shipping costs from the point of manufacture which is why the sets are a lot cheaper. A design along the lines I propose would add a bit to the cost but would still be cheaper than it would be if we still had CRT technology, as the design would not be so thick or heavy.
You can get raceways for wiring that adhear to the bottom of the wall if you don't feel like replastering for antenna placement. While you don't get your space back because you have a corner placement, flat still saves space, the rear end of crts was not a corner point, so for a given size you can still fit a bigger flat panel into a corner than you would a crt. If your idea of side speakers with depth were implemented this advantage would be lost.
Not entirely. The biggest thing about the CRT sets is the depth of the tube. It can be difficult to get to the back of it if required. The design I propose is one that would be more stable and whilst deeper than a LED it would in now way be as deep as a CRT. You would have an area to work in. If I need to get to the back of my set I have to move the base unit forward a bit. This would not be the case with either LED or LED plus integrated speakers. I do not propose the design for anything wider than 40" which would make the design a maximum of 50" in width.[/QUOTE]
I've had 50"plasmas on stands that won't topple over unless you really handled them, i'm sure securing to a custom stand is pretty standard recommendation if that is what you buy. Speakers on the side would not make such units any more stable as you'd need weight on the bottom/base, not on the sides.
1 Install a wood screw (4 mm in
diameter, not supplied) in the TV stand.
2 Install a machine screw (M4, not
supplied) into the screw hole of the TV.
3 Tie the wood screw and the machine
screw with a strong cord (not supplied).
The length of the M4 machine screw differs
depending on the cord diameter.
Please refer to below illustration.
You really could not make it up. The modification is not an option in glass stands is it? Glad I have still got my wood one.
It is an acknowledgement from Sony that their stand is not up to the task. This is further evidenced by the You Tube video demonstration here where you can see the set wobble everytime it is touched. Imagine a household with a cat or a dog. There is an obvious high risk of unitended damage by a 4 legged friend.
If you don't actually use your fireplace you can actually mount the tv at eye height straight against many fireplaces, either building a frame mount or simply using masonary anchors in the brick fireplace itself. I have a friend that has his 50" plasma mounted that way.
Not an option.Fire used occasionally. In any case how would someone sitting at right angles to a wall see the set . A corner is the optimum viewing position in a room for a TV to be viewed at all angles.
Because the CRT masked most of the artefacts arising from the limited resolution of the VHS format. SD has a maximum resolution of 720 x 576 pixels, VHS can't match this so look terrible on a lcd display. DVD at 720 x 576 and a digital source should look much better on a digital TV.
Just curious on this one. I have some home cine movies that we had put onto video when DVD was but a twinkle in some inventor's eye. If we had video put onto DVD would that address the issue described above. What about Video boxed sets - could they be copied over or are there copyright issues?
Well as you said day to day sometimes crt speakers are passable...but for that level of sound you can get the cheapest computer speakers for 10-20 quid to do the same job, which is still better than ruining the entire units form factor just to cram in 20 quid of speaker.
You may say you know what you want but I don't think you do. What you want would cost more than a quality tv + quality speakers because it would be niche and ugly to boot, and the form factor would again limit its buyer market to even smaller niche. The manufacturers aren't stupid, if there were a market they would fill it, what people want when they make such demands is a unit that costs less than what it would in reality and do things that are impossible.
How do I know its niche? Its niche in the way that dvd players built into tv's are niche. How many top end displays have dvd players built in, whether now or back in the crt era, it was a feature for the low end, for the consumer that didn't care about much more than price. If you were bothered about quality you'd buy separate..
Both depth and width afffect what you can fit in a corner, side speakers would limit the size by default, depth of crt wasn't just depth but width of depth. Your corner isn't shaped like the back end of a crt..;)
Well yea securing anything is common sense, they make earth quake straps and the rest for tv's, or you can fashion your own solution, but it does not mean a heavier or thicker tv would be better off. Unless you bloat a flat panel up into the size and weight of a crt you still have to secure it regardless, so I'm not sure why you bring this up. Its even worse once you realize the weight is only in the front on such a design, so no matter how thick you make it, it will topple. Anyways, If you want to propose a 20" thick flat panel with anti topple extension feet jutting out in front to some company...well good luck to you with that;)
Viewing angles is not optimum in a corner, I've seen plenty on flat walls that are viewable from any reasonable angle, it depends entirely on your room setup anyways. Especially if the room is ajoining a kitchen the flat wall mount is viewable from more locations than some far off corner. Size and quality are the major factors if you are worried about viewing from a variety of locations. A 50" plasma can be viewed from quite a ways....
Have to agree with pocatello, I don't think I've ever heard integrated speakers on a tv, be it CRT, LCD, Plasma, that can compete with even cheap separate speakers.
Pay a bit more and it transforms the viewing experience. Watching without my Bose system is now almost half the pleasure.
That said, sound isn't so important to some but I think you have to weigh it up with the fact that a decent LED TV and separate sound solution is probably still cheaper than a decent CRT alone half a decade back.
Perhaps the tv makers should add sockets to each side of the tv and sell optional speakers that plug into them? Like Pioneers used to.
My 7 year old 42" plasma has clip on speakers either side of the screen that run the whole height of the cabinet ,sound is superb ,although the design looks a bit dated these days all aluminium , steel in the cabinet , with the speakers either side it looks a hell of a size beast ...and weighs a ton compared to my 42" piano black run of the mill samsung design .I agree an option to attach external speakers without an amp seems a good idea .
My 7 year old 42" plasma has clip on speakers either side of the screen that run the whole height of the cabinet ,sound is superb ,although the design looks a bit dated these days all aluminium , steel in the cabinet , with the speakers either side it looks a hell of a size beast ...and weighs a ton compared to my 42" piano black run of the mill samsung design .I agree an option to attach external speakers without an amp seems a good idea .
however 7 years ago my Hitachi plasma was £2,500 ..The Samsung was £349
Just curious on this one. I have some home cine movies that we had put onto video when DVD was but a twinkle in some inventor's eye. If we had video put onto DVD would that address the issue described above. What about Video boxed sets - could they be copied over or are there copyright issues?
Going from Video to DVD won't help because you have already lost the quality in the conversion to tape. If you had the original cine transferred to DVD by a pro equipped with the right kit then yes the results should look better.
Commercial tapes are usually protected by Macrovision copy protection so you can't easily copy to DVD.
...How many top end displays have dvd players built in, whether now or back in the crt era, it was a feature for the low end, for the consumer that didn't care about much more than price. If you were bothered about quality you'd buy separate..
B&O ....and hardly a price-driven purchase.
Your point about built-in drives though is valid if you look at the general consumer and exclude the luxury brands. Combis are pretty much a base-level product now, but the manufacturers keep flirting with it for the mid- and high-end markets. A few years ago I remember going to the LG HQ and seeing a range of panel TVs up to 42" with built-in DVD. Thomson and possibly Philips had 28" and 32" CRTs with built-in DVD players. And I'm sure I read somewhere that Panasonic were looking at a high-end panel with an integrated BD drive, but that was possibly a product for the Japanese home market only.
As for decent speakers in a flat panel TV, I'm with you that it's just not going to happen so the OP is wishing on a star. How many people actually take the time to listen to the sound on a TV in Currys?
... I find that having made adjustments to the Brightness,Contrast and Colour controls, the picture is much more acceptable. Oddly (?) I find that the longer the set is switched on, the better the picture seems to be.
All TVs take time to reach their operating temperature. 20-30 minutes is about average, but nothing too much longer. (I never calibrate TVs from cold for that reason.) The rest of the improvements are more likely to be you becoming accustomed to the picture. This is relatively easy to demonstrate when using test discs.
However, the picture when playing a personally recorded VHS tape is much inferior to that which appeared on the Sony CRT. I wonder why?
The LCD TV is having to work very hard to correct the timing issues and handle all the noise in the VHS picture before scaling it. The CRT didn't have as much work to do because the scaling wasn't required.
Concerning VHS looking poor on LCD TV's, I had a thought about this. With a CRT TV the dot going across the screen copies as closely as possible the output of the VCR in real time - tracing a line at a time. Using a LCD tv means that a whole frame must be stored and showed at once AND upscaled so the tape is being played back in a way that was not intended. The CRT displays also use a sharpness control that gives a completely different effect to that on LCD TV's in that you can sharpen up the (VHS) picture quite a bit on the CRT without too much penalty.
I would go as far as to say that as an item CRT and LCD have nothing in common at all - apart from plugging into the mains perhaps.
Comments
Ah well. My brother has a Frreview HD+ PVR - a sales' bargain - paired with a 90s' Sony CRT; the HD sound test works on his CRT!
How do you get an HD picture on a CRT?.
Still the CRT dinosaurs refuse to die out, expect someone to start another thread on it next week.
All HD boxes output downscaled 576i (SD) on the analogue outputs. RGB at 576i can look very good thanks to the higher bitrates used to deliver it. It's not an HD picture but it is the HD channel you are viewing.
Son In Law had one, compared to the LCD that replaced it it was terrible.
Yup, alive and kicking and getting great sound on the integrated speakers in my own Panny here are on his Sony when visiting my brother.:D
You put the TV in the same place as a CRT set would have gone. You are not going to save any space as a base unit has a depth to it. Thats far easier than moving the antenna as that would require replastering and also moving external wiring. In our case we have one large front window, and two smaller ones at the side either side of a fireplace. I do know some folk have put their TV on a wall facing the windows, but that means that they are sitting with their backs to the windows and it means the TV is facing the window - not very condusive to viewing when the sun is out, and you cannot see what is going on in the street in this position.
Actually I was wrong - I paid £640 in December 2002 for a
28" set . Given the price of the set that I am considering (around £600) I think that a set with integrated speakers and increased stability would cost around £750, so in real terms not a lot more - probably less. They could even make em silver again (even wood ones)
However, the picture when playing a personally recorded VHS tape is much inferior to that which appeared on the Sony CRT. I wonder why?
Because the CRT masked most of the artefacts arising from the limited resolution of the VHS format. SD has a maximum resolution of 720 x 576 pixels, VHS can't match this so look terrible on a lcd display. DVD at 720 x 576 and a digital source should look much better on a digital TV.
It could try, many of those 1080i sets could not render 1080i detail, they simply scanned the beam 1080 times and that qualified them to carry the label regardless of the detail delivered;) It was pretty tricky.
It doesn't matter what wattage it claims, it has almost no meaning when the speakers size is restricted so greatly, this is physics working against any improvement. 100 watt speakers could be claimed and if they were flat and tiny it wouldn't make any difference in sound at all, this is one of those spec lies in the electronics industry. It just means the speaker has power handling of X watts, nothing more.
Wide tv's with extra wideness due to speakers just won't sell, that market is like the market for tv's with integrated dvds, its for cheap folks that don't care about quality,, and as you saw with the crts with such integration, they combined the cheapest with the cheapest because that is what that market justified. The only way to get decent speaker sound is depth, sure you can use ribbon speakers but those require large surface area so its just as bad, in either case, it makes the product impractical and all for mediocre sound compared to home theatre or even a sound bar, so it just won't ever happen. You just can't serve a market that doesn't know what it wants. What you propose would cost more because of the nichness and would have no practical or even price benefit vs a thin panel with a nice soundbar right under it, so it doesn't and will never exist.
With inflation that set cost 770 pounds, which buys you a lot more than 28" now;)
You can get raceways for wiring that adhear to the bottom of the wall if you don't feel like replastering for antenna placement. While you don't get your space back because you have a corner placement, flat still saves space, the rear end of crts was not a corner point, so for a given size you can still fit a bigger flat panel into a corner than you would a crt. If your idea of side speakers with depth were implemented this advantage would be lost.
I've had 50"plasmas on stands that won't topple over unless you really handled them, i'm sure securing to a custom stand is pretty standard recommendation if that is what you buy. Speakers on the side would not make such units any more stable as you'd need weight on the bottom/base, not on the sides.
If you don't actually use your fireplace you can actually mount the tv at eye height straight against many fireplaces, either building a frame mount or simply using masonary anchors in the brick fireplace itself. I have a friend that has his 50" plasma mounted that way.
It was dot pitch vs cost that was the problem for the CRT HDTVs. Of course this is all academic now. Those were American TVs so not suitable for use in the UK.
I think therefore we are agreed that the speakers on my CRT are better than the LED replacement when I get it simply due to the space given to them. They may not be theatre quality but for day to day viewing are fine and do a very good job in the case of a movie with a good original soundtrack. As stated above the sound quality is more than acceptable for my needs and there I say better than present day LED sets (although Panasonic appear to have put a speaker along the base of their design which is another way of giving the sound a bit of a boost, but perhaps not so good for a stereo affect. No I know what I want. I don't want to be told what I want. I still maintain that integrated speakers with a depth of around 6 to 8 inches would make so much difference. You would still have a set that most people could carry on their own and would still have something substantially thinner than a CRT. The stand could be packaged in the box between the speakers at the rear of the set. How do you know that it would be a nichness? Many people prefer plug and play and what could be better than speakers with just that little bit extra to give an accceptable stereo affect when required without the need to buy additional kit. It would be targetted at the market who are not bothered with having surround sound and don't want to go to the expense of having to buy additional kit Indeed it does. There is no doubt that the lightness and thinness of LED sets saves a small fortune in shipping costs from the point of manufacture which is why the sets are a lot cheaper. A design along the lines I propose would add a bit to the cost but would still be cheaper than it would be if we still had CRT technology, as the design would not be so thick or heavy. Not entirely. The biggest thing about the CRT sets is the depth of the tube. It can be difficult to get to the back of it if required. The design I propose is one that would be more stable and whilst deeper than a LED it would in now way be as deep as a CRT. You would have an area to work in. If I need to get to the back of my set I have to move the base unit forward a bit. This would not be the case with either LED or LED plus integrated speakers. I do not propose the design for anything wider than 40" which would make the design a maximum of 50" in width.[/QUOTE] Plasmas are of course heavier than LED. The Sony manual available at http://www.sony.co.uk/support/en/product/KDL-37EX723
has a section headed "Preventing the TV from toppling over"
It reads
diameter, not supplied) in the TV stand.
2 Install a machine screw (M4, not
supplied) into the screw hole of the TV.
3 Tie the wood screw and the machine
screw with a strong cord (not supplied).
The length of the M4 machine screw differs
depending on the cord diameter.
Please refer to below illustration.
It is an acknowledgement from Sony that their stand is not up to the task. This is further evidenced by the You Tube video demonstration here where you can see the set wobble everytime it is touched. Imagine a household with a cat or a dog. There is an obvious high risk of unitended damage by a 4 legged friend. Not an option.Fire used occasionally. In any case how would someone sitting at right angles to a wall see the set . A corner is the optimum viewing position in a room for a TV to be viewed at all angles.
You may say you know what you want but I don't think you do. What you want would cost more than a quality tv + quality speakers because it would be niche and ugly to boot, and the form factor would again limit its buyer market to even smaller niche. The manufacturers aren't stupid, if there were a market they would fill it, what people want when they make such demands is a unit that costs less than what it would in reality and do things that are impossible.
How do I know its niche? Its niche in the way that dvd players built into tv's are niche. How many top end displays have dvd players built in, whether now or back in the crt era, it was a feature for the low end, for the consumer that didn't care about much more than price. If you were bothered about quality you'd buy separate..
Both depth and width afffect what you can fit in a corner, side speakers would limit the size by default, depth of crt wasn't just depth but width of depth. Your corner isn't shaped like the back end of a crt..;)
Well yea securing anything is common sense, they make earth quake straps and the rest for tv's, or you can fashion your own solution, but it does not mean a heavier or thicker tv would be better off. Unless you bloat a flat panel up into the size and weight of a crt you still have to secure it regardless, so I'm not sure why you bring this up. Its even worse once you realize the weight is only in the front on such a design, so no matter how thick you make it, it will topple. Anyways, If you want to propose a 20" thick flat panel with anti topple extension feet jutting out in front to some company...well good luck to you with that;)
Viewing angles is not optimum in a corner, I've seen plenty on flat walls that are viewable from any reasonable angle, it depends entirely on your room setup anyways. Especially if the room is ajoining a kitchen the flat wall mount is viewable from more locations than some far off corner. Size and quality are the major factors if you are worried about viewing from a variety of locations. A 50" plasma can be viewed from quite a ways....
Pay a bit more and it transforms the viewing experience. Watching without my Bose system is now almost half the pleasure.
That said, sound isn't so important to some but I think you have to weigh it up with the fact that a decent LED TV and separate sound solution is probably still cheaper than a decent CRT alone half a decade back.
My 7 year old 42" plasma has clip on speakers either side of the screen that run the whole height of the cabinet ,sound is superb ,although the design looks a bit dated these days all aluminium , steel in the cabinet , with the speakers either side it looks a hell of a size beast ...and weighs a ton compared to my 42" piano black run of the mill samsung design .I agree an option to attach external speakers without an amp seems a good idea .
however 7 years ago my Hitachi plasma was £2,500 ..The Samsung was £349
Going from Video to DVD won't help because you have already lost the quality in the conversion to tape. If you had the original cine transferred to DVD by a pro equipped with the right kit then yes the results should look better.
Commercial tapes are usually protected by Macrovision copy protection so you can't easily copy to DVD.
Your point about built-in drives though is valid if you look at the general consumer and exclude the luxury brands. Combis are pretty much a base-level product now, but the manufacturers keep flirting with it for the mid- and high-end markets. A few years ago I remember going to the LG HQ and seeing a range of panel TVs up to 42" with built-in DVD. Thomson and possibly Philips had 28" and 32" CRTs with built-in DVD players. And I'm sure I read somewhere that Panasonic were looking at a high-end panel with an integrated BD drive, but that was possibly a product for the Japanese home market only.
As for decent speakers in a flat panel TV, I'm with you that it's just not going to happen so the OP is wishing on a star. How many people actually take the time to listen to the sound on a TV in Currys?
The LCD TV is having to work very hard to correct the timing issues and handle all the noise in the VHS picture before scaling it. The CRT didn't have as much work to do because the scaling wasn't required.
I would go as far as to say that as an item CRT and LCD have nothing in common at all - apart from plugging into the mains perhaps.