[ThePenkethPedan]

Have had to replace my good old Sony CRT TV with a Sanyo LCD set. I find the Sanyo picture nowhere near as good as the Sony picture was: faces now seem to lack definition and depth (no cracks about 3D,please), plus there seem to be odd patches of blurring in the middle distances; foliage, for example,looks like a water-colour wash in places, a sort of misty area in parts of the screen. Sometimes the same effect occurs on football pitches. Have experimented by adjusting various elements, brilliance, contrast, colour, with a little success, but am still somewhat disappointed. Plus, vhs taping produces much inferior pictures to the reproduction on the old Sony - colours are smudged,definition is poor and jumpy lines flash across the screen, notably on `Countdown` tapings -the blue background is particularly dazzly. I wonder if it`s the LCD system or the brand which is the cause of the poorer picture.
the Sanyo isn`t a new set,btw.

[fmradiotuner1]

Its a cheap make i think.
Maybe better to look at Sony , Samsung , LG , Toshiba
Can I ask what size was your old TV and the size of the new one?

This can also make a difference.

[ThePenkethPedan]

Appreciate the validity of that point. The Sony was I think 26", the Sanyo is 32". I realise that this tends to inflate images and thus affects definition. The Sony was so good that I couldn`t imagine how HD could improve it, but with the Sanyo I`m sure it would !

[emptybox]

I like the way you say you had to replace it with a Sanyo.
I hope they haven't been made compulsory?

[in_focus]

Sanyo is now just a badge, the set is made by Vestel in Turkey. The last model they made themselves in that size was the 32LD6, not the greatest picture but reliability was up there with the best.

[Mr. Cool]

Sanyo is owned by Panasonic (who make some of the best TVs) so I think that is there cheap brand.

Edit: By April 2012 the name will be mostly phased out...

[David (2)]

other than the Sanyo being a fairly poor brand (and this does make a difference to the picture you get from an LCD), you have to remember that a modern HD Ready or FullHD LCD has a far, far greater resolution than the old CRT - this means that imperfections that were hidden by the slightly blury pic of the CRT are now on show for all to see. SD picture be they analogue, freeview, sky, cable, freesat, will be very prone to this as they are at half the quality the LCD can produce. DVD is still sd, but tends to do quite a lot better as the disc contains a lot more information to build up a more details, less compressed picture. Also channels operators like Sky and the rest have to pay for their channel space on the freeview/cable/satellite services - so we now see the picture quality taking a dive as this saves space, and thus makes things cheaper (or allows for more channels in the "saved sapce"). So HD, be it FreeviewHD, CableHD, SkyHD (and FreesatHD) is far better, but ofcourse there are only select channels in HD - they are not all HD automatically by having (for example) a SkyHD box.

With the moderate increase in screen size, really you should be sitting further away than before as well.

Touching a bit on the first issue of brand and how the pricture reproduction can vary on this issue alone, i think now we have HD, the technicians and money people at places like Sanyo (and others, inc the big ones) will start to take less care in how well their sets reproduce the SD pictures - they will siimply say that everyone has HD now. This might mean that certain picture processing for SD maybe removed to cut costs. The set can still display SD, just not as well as the previous model. Note, we have a 23in Sony LCD and a slightly bigger/newer 26in LCD Sony - the newer set doesnt do SD as well as the older one.

[Chris Frost]

It's a sad fact the majority of British TV buyers are motivated by price rather than quality. That would be okay if they were simply looking for the best deal on the best-in-class product, but most of the time its simply a question of finding the cheapest product of all.

The difference in picture quality between a budget Sony or Panasonic and most other cheaper brands including LG and Samsung is not subtle. A few weeks ago I installed a new Panasonic to replace an LG. The customer was blown away. The picture had depth and solidity that the LG just couldn't match. People looked more natural with good skin tone.

I moved the LG to another room. No matter how much I tweaked the controls it couldn't compensate for a basic limitation in the quality of the panel and the poorer video processing of the cheaper set. There's truth in the saying "You can't polish a turd"

[David (2)]

Having seen quite a few HD LCD's now (set up, in use), i was quite disapointed by my mates Toshiba (40in i think). Even on Blue ray the HD picture didnt look very HD - distance shots on films didnt contain the same level of detail as I would expect from Samsungs/Sonys/Panasonics. It was more sort of half way inbetween SD and HD in terms of what i could see.

[Peter the Great]

I didn't think Sanyo were in the TV business anymore? Their CRT's weren't bad but sadly I think their LCD's were just cheap re badged sets. I haven't seen the Sanyo name on TV's for some time though. EDIT: I have just read the OP's post properly who said it isn't new.

[Chris Frost]

Quote:

Originally Posted by David (2)

...you have to remember that a modern HD Ready or FullHD LCD has a far, far greater resolution than the old CRT - this means that imperfections that were hidden by the slightly blury pic of the CRT are now on show for all to see. SD picture be they analogue, freeview, sky, cable, freesat, will be very prone to this...

CRT was (is) perfectly capable of resolving all the detail in an SD picture. In fact it is perfectly suited to the job because there is no scaling required. A 720 / 768 / 1080p display has to scale the picture before it can be displayed. This is where much of the problem with most TVs. Their scaling is poor. Compare the picture to the same source displayed on a projector. Despite the projected image being 4x~6x larger the picture often looks better.

You're absolutely right that its not possible to rescue the dog's breakfast of highly compressed low bit rate digital channels that are just a mess of MPEG blocks, but that's a source issue rather than a problem with the display.

[David (2)]

thats missing the point......you are saying CRT is perfect for the job of SD display, but the only reason for this is that the CRT is masking the imperfections. This doesnt mean CRT is better. For example in the world of SD channels on an LCD (HD Ready), if you get rid of the compression low bit rate problems the picture is sharper as a rule of thumb than on a similar size CRT. A good SD picture can look better on the LCD. DVD shows this can be done.

[Chris Frost]

The way to measure image detail is by using a resolution chart. Sharpness isn't a good measure. As long as both TVs can resolve the same detail level from an SD resolution test chart then thats all that matters. Everything else is subjective. Compare two 1080p screens; one plasma and one LCD. The average viewer would consider the LCD sharper because of the way the panel makes its picture. But both TVs are the same resolution

[iangrad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Cool

Sanyo is owned by Panasonic (who make some of the best TVs) so I think that is there cheap brand.

Edit: By April 2012 the name will be mostly phased out...

Pana bought the battery division of Sanyo , I did not think they bought the rest of them . It would depend on who has got the rights to use the name even if Vestel is the manufacturer of the goods -- the badge is dependent on who rents the right to use in each sale area .

[Denholm]

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.

[C19th Fox]

I too have a Trinitron and I have not bothered upgrading it as I have not seen anything in the shops that matched the picture quality. It is however taking longer to start up (and is getting noisier at start up) and no doubt has a low energy rating compared with newer sets.

I have recently had my head turned by a Sony KDL-40EX723 in a shop as it is the first time that I have seen something that gets close (I had not actually been in that shop before so it could just be their aerial!). The HD picture actually appeared better but I don't like the corner onscreen logos that you get in HD. I have measured up and realise that the width would be a bit too wide for the space where the set would go so I am thinking of a 37" version.

I have seen various reviews on the KDL37EX723 which is in the same family and they confirm that the 2D quality is good although 3D appears to be poor (I am unlikely to use 3D as I wear glasses so imagine that it would not be easy to wear two pairs at the same time) but nonetheless it would be nice to have the option.

The only nagging doubt I have is sound quality - I am not to bothered about surround sound for most programme (I tend to have the Dolby setting turned off as it causes to much background noise so that I cannot hear what the main characters are saying) , but as the speakers on modern LED sets are smaller I would appreciate some thoughts on how they compare with the older sets.

Other than Sony are there other brands I should be considering? I think Wi-Fi would be an essential must these days and I would like 3D as an option.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by C19th Fox

I too have a Trinitron and I have not bothered upgrading it as I have not seen anything in the shops that matched the picture quality. It is however taking longer to start up (and is getting noisier at start up) and no doubt has a low energy rating compared with newer sets.

I have recently had my head turned by a Sony KDL-40EX723 in a shop as it is the first time that I have seen something that gets close (I had not actually been in that shop before so it could just be their aerial!). The HD picture actually appeared better but I don't like the corner onscreen logos that you get in HD. I have measured up and realise that the width would be a bit too wide for the space where the set would go so I am thinking of a 37" version.

I have seen various reviews on the KDL37EX723 which is in the same family and they confirm that the 2D quality is good although 3D appears to be poor (I am unlikely to use 3D as I wear glasses so imagine that it would not be easy to wear two pairs at the same time) but nonetheless it would be nice to have the option.

The only nagging doubt I have is sound quality - I am not to bothered about surround sound for most programme (I tend to have the Dolby setting turned off as it causes to much background noise so that I cannot hear what the main characters are saying) , but as the speakers on modern LED sets are smaller I would appreciate some thoughts on how they compare with the older sets.

Other than Sony are there other brands I should be considering? I think Wi-Fi would be an essential must these days and I would like 3D as an option.

Sony and Panasonic are the top two brands, but as an existing Sony user keeping with Sony sounds reasonable.

[pocatello]

You don't expect sound quality from modern tv's, they are monitors, you buy home theatre or a sound bar.

[C19th Fox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pocatello

You don't expect sound quality from modern tv's, they are monitors, you buy home theatre or a sound bar.

Thanks for that. I had not across a sound bar before. It seems ridicolous that TV manufacturers cannot incorporate these into their design. We don't all want TV's on the wall where you have to look up and get a stiff neck.

I won't say anything about the cost & the inconvenience of having a seperate controls for the sound settings.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by C19th Fox

Thanks for that. I had not across a sound bar before. It seems ridicolous that TV manufacturers cannot incorporate these into their design. We don't all want TV's on the wall where you have to look up and get a stiff neck.

If you fit the TV at the correct height you won't get a stiff neck, if you fit it at the wrong height, you deserve a stiff neck!

Quote:

I won't say anything about the cost & the inconvenience of having a seperate controls for the sound settings.

Making the sets a LOT more expensive, and a LOT bigger for the people who don't want surround sound is prety well a non-starter. Basically there's no room in a modern TV for any decent speakers, which is why sound is now essentially separate.

[Sue_Aitch]

Moral of the story: if you don't want separates for the sound, stick to SD CRTs

[pocatello]

Quote:

Originally Posted by C19th Fox

Thanks for that. I had not across a sound bar before. It seems ridicolous that TV manufacturers cannot incorporate these into their design. We don't all want TV's on the wall where you have to look up and get a stiff neck.

I won't say anything about the cost & the inconvenience of having a seperate controls for the sound settings.

Its not really ridiculous because you can't get around the issue of space. People like their tv thin so they can wall mount it, you can't just include a huge bulging speaker on a tv anymore. Far better for people to just get the speaker setup of their choice. No magic technology is going to solve this anytime soon.

Btw you don't mount a tv higher than eye height, those idiots that mount their tv's above their fire places and the rest are doing it wrong.

There are no separate controls for the audio if you have hdmi audio return.

And no its not expensive, when you factor inflation and the rest your trinitron crt of years ago had a price that would make your eyes bleed, and easily cover the cost of separate speakers.

[Sibeber]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter the Great

I didn't think Sanyo were in the TV business anymore? Their CRT's weren't bad but sadly I think their LCD's were just cheap re badged sets. I haven't seen the Sanyo name on TV's for some time though. EDIT: I have just read the OP's post properly who said it isn't new.

I remember having a guided tour of the Sanyo TV and VCR factory in Lowestoft in the 80's and very interesting it was too .I believe the bits used to come in from Japan etc and they bolted them together in the plant .I'm sure that factory sadly must have closed by now.

[C19th Fox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pocatello

Btw you don't mount a tv higher than eye height, those idiots that mount their tv's above their fire places and the rest are doing it wrong.

Due to windows and location of aerial and fireplace walmounting is not an option. Anyway I like a cabinet for keeping my Hi-Fi unit, DVD Player etc. I am sure I am not alone in preferring TV's to be in their traditional place in the corner of the room. It should not be beyond the realms of possibility to make a thicker set with better sound.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pocatello

And no its not expensive, when you factor inflation and the rest your trinitron crt of years ago had a price that would make your eyes bleed, and easily cover the cost of separate speakers.

Inflation has not been that great over the years since I brought the set - Cost about £450 from Littlewoods old returns unit in Peterborough. I can still remember the effort getting the thing out the car when I got home! It was not so much the weight but the size of the thing!

[C19th Fox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sue_Aitch

Moral of the story: if you don't want separates for the sound, stick to SD CRTs

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.