Do all cheaper tv sets have poor sound now,
Ancient IDTV
Posts: 10,171 Forum Member
✭✭
or are there exceptions? They all seem to have their speakers underneath now, which I presume is for aesthetic purposes rather than functionality. Adding a sound bar or other external speakers ramps up the cost, which isn't good if your budget is limited to start with.
0
Comments
1 Build in a decent size speaker
2 Create a reasonable bass response which requires a relatively large sealed box or one with a tuned bass output port.
Basically there is enough space to fit in speakers that would fit in a cheap transistor radio.
You can get reasonable sound from small speakers for the higher frequencies. If you want something with a reasonable low frequency you need a speaker with a big cone.
Think a thunderstorm sounding like a pea in tincan
If you have an existing sound system, even a relatively low cost stereo system with a separate amplifier, then put the speakers either side of the TV and connect the TV to this.
Some of the LG "cinema" range have reasonable sound as do some of last years Pana models . But you can find very tinny sound on even very costly TV's . I suppose its all down to your interpretation of the word "cheaper" LOL
What prompted this topic was......
On an impulse, I decided to replace my old bedroom tv set this week. I bought a Panasonic 32 inch set. I was genuinely shocked at how appalling the sound quality of the new set was. I tried changing the settings, and considered only listening to it using headphones (see related topic). I don't have any sound systems to use, and I didn't want to spend any more cash, so I just took the tv back the next day and got a refund. I've put the old set back into service, and I appreciate it a lot more now.
The old set is a Wharfedale 26 inch LCD set, like this......
http://www.inest.co.uk/images/XL2290.jpg
.......and it's speakers are actually rather good. It doesn't have Freeview HD and the picture quality is only alright-ish, but I hope it's going to see many more years of usage.
In my case by 'cheaper' I suppose I mean 32 inch or smaller sets priced some way below £300.
Look at the TV from the side, it will be a lot thicker than a modern TV. The trend is basically to reduce the TV to basically a picture frame you can hang on a wall.
As to rather good, it depends on your point of view. I would say the TV has a reasonable and acceptable to you audio capability.
A personal opinion, the audio is more important to me than the picture quality, a fact that the movie industry recognised a long time ago.
If you watch a movie and you get involved in the action, you tend not to notice the picture quality provided it's a reasonable quality.
However if you duck when the Japanese zeros scream from the back of your lounge to the front, and feel the Arizona blowing up you feel in the pit of your stomach, you know you have decent audio. Not a comment on the film, it does have excellent surround sound though.
It's all down to the physics. Mid to High frequency does not require much in the way of power from the amplifier, or a large loudspeaker. The amount of air required to be moved is tiny.
Low frequency bass which gives the sound the realism of real life, needs a lot of air movement. To generate this you need a large speaker (sub woofer) and a considerable amount of power.
Thanks to the fact that low frequency sounds can't be located by our ears and high frequency sounds can, it's possible to create a really good sound.
You can use tiny speakers to create the spatial sound image, and locate the low frequency sound (sub woofer), pretty well anywhere.
The TV in my lounge now is a Panasonic 32" flatscreen which cost £550 but the speakers on it are crap. However that didn't bother me when I bought it because I've used an amp and speakers for TV sound for about 20 years now.
Soundbars usually aren't wonderful I read but you can get mini systems with an amp and speakers which do a good job.