[doolallylhama]

I recently bought a new 32 inch digital full-HD TV to replace my old 26-inch. i think my old 26-inch was about 5 or 6 years old, so it was getting on a bit. My new one was £299 quid. Not a huge amount, admittedly, but enough to get a decent one, I thought.

So i plugged in my new TV and the picture was great. But I couldn't believe how lousy the sound was. Compared to my old TV (which had speakers facing outwards from each side of the screen) this one was a bit tinny. It didn't project out into the room like my old one. It seemed like all the sound was concentrated at the TV.

Okay, I thought, no problem... I'll just buy some external speakers. So i bought some new ones, and that's when things started getting worse. I admit that I'm a bit of a newbie when it comes to TVs, but i didn't realise that you couldn't just plug speakers into new TVs anymore. It didn't even occur to me that the TV wouldn't have the right output hole. My TV only had a single digital output (it didnt even have a headphone socket), and of course the speakers were analog. So they wouldn't work.

Okay, I thought, not a problem... I'll just buy a digital to analog convertor. So I got one of those and that fixed it. I now had sound coming out the speakers... except I couldn't change the volume with the TV remote. The sound that came out the speakers would remain constant, even when I had the TV on mute. It was then I discovered that this was normal... the volume coming out the digital out is always the same. Huh? Who was the clever guy who thought that was a good idea? That just doesn't make sense to me at all. The only way I could change the volume was with the knob on the speakers, which was too much hard work (I'm very lazy, you see)

I did some more research, and eventually decided that it wasn't worth the hassle to get good sound. So I have now sent the TV back and gone back to using my old 26-inch.

After looking at all the other TVs on offer, I couldn't be sure whether I would have exactly the same problems. It seems that TV's are built so thin these days that you don't get decent sized speakers anymore. My old TV was chunky, and had speakers on each side of the screen, facing out, which I am sure is the reason why the sound is so good. It looks like manufacturers these days would much prefer to have a very small frame, so they hide the speakers behind the screen. I couldn't find a single TV on sale (argos, pc world) tha had speakers on the side.
And on top of that... they do away with all the useful audio outputs, so you can't even link it up to your hifi/speakers without shelling out a fortune for hi-tech audio gear.

Why can't we go back to the old days? When good speakers were a selling point, and not something to be hidden away at the back, and when even your old granny could hook it up to her hi-fi without having a load of problems with compatibility.

Am I just a newbie, who was expecting too much for £299?

[bobcar]

The emphasis now is on making TVs thinner so there is no room for decent speakers.

The solution is to get a home cinema for the sound. If you don't want the separate speakers then there are decent soundbars out there that will massively improve on your TV's sound. Obviously that is extra cost but when you next change the TV you at least won't have to change the sound system.

[doolallylhama]

but won't you still have the same problem with the volume?

there is only one digital out hole on the TV, and if the volume is constant presumably i would need to alter the volume on the soundbar with a seperate remote.

is there any actual way to plug something in to the digital out (speakers/soundbar) and have the volume match whatever is coming out of the TV? Surely that is something that every customer would want and expect. I can't believe that manufacturers would do away with it by removing all the old audio out sockets

[jjne]

Not really.

You could use the headphone jack on some TVs, but this would yield sub-optimal sound in any case.

Best solution to this is a home cinema, and a Logitech remote -- these cost around £30 and can control multiple devices, and have "Activities" which can automagically set the correct buttons to do the correct things dependent on what source you're watching at the time.

So, with everything off, you press "Activities -> Watch Sky", for example. It switches on your TV, Sky box and soundbar, selects the correct HDMI input on the TV, routes the volume controls on the remote to control the soundbar and the channel selectors, coloured buttons etc to control the sky. Then to turn them all off, you just click the off button, and everything receives the standby command.

It'll do the same with up to typically 15 separate devices, so you end up with one remote that does everything without having to remember a load of keypresses to switch everything on.

Put that together with a home cinema and it'll blow your old setup five ways to Christmas.

[doolallylhama]

that does sound pretty handy... but it is more expense. i've already spent 300 quid on the TV, after which i had to spend 80 quid on speakers, 30 quid for a digital/audio convertor and ten quid for the lead to connect them together (or something like that). and now i'll need to spend 30 quid on the remote and another 100 quid for the soundbar.
(the speakers i already bought dont have a remote, just a volume knob, so i couldn't just stick with them)

so that's another 250 quid on top of the 300 pounds i've already spent on the TV! just to get decent sound, which should have been included in the first place. if i just spent that 550 quid on the TV in the first place I could have bought a 40-inch 3D one, i reckon

my real gripe is that modern TVs dont seem to care as much about the sound as they do the picture. but surely it is integral to your enjoyment? what is the deal with that?
i really can't believe that audio quality has gotten worse since my 5-year old TV

[ProDave]

MY real gripe is customers ACCEPT the present offering of tv's with such dire speakers.

As long as customers accept them, manufacturers will keep on making them and shops will keep on selling them.

ONLY when large numbers return tv's to the dealer as "not fit for purpose" will it get fed back to the manufacturers that they are not acceptable.

So the OP complaining on HERE is just perpetuating the problem. He needs to address his complaint to the dealer who sold it, who will stop stocking that model if enough people reject them.

But I can't see that ever happening.

Personally I think ALL tv's should have speaker sockets so you can just plug in a pair of decent external speakers.

[doolallylhama]

i agree 100%. but to be fair, i said in my first post that i've already returned the TV. so i didn't just accept it

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by ProDave

ONLY when large numbers return tv's to the dealer as "not fit for purpose" will it get fed back to the manufacturers that they are not acceptable.

You live in a dream world :P

It's NOT going to happen - charging MORE for a TV with a considerably larger cabinet to contain decent speakers means it wouldn't sell.

The sets are intended for surround sound, get used to it

Or just stick a pair of PC speakers in the earphone socket (when they have one), it makes a HUGE difference with a pair of speakers you might have just knocking about.

[jjne]

Originally Posted by doolallylhama

so that's another 250 quid on top of the 300 pounds i've already spent on the TV! just to get decent sound, which should have been included in the first place. if i just spent that 550 quid on the TV in the first place I could have bought a 40-inch 3D one, i reckon

The problem is that the sound quality of the £550 TV won't be any better.

In any case the figures aren't quite as bad as you think.

http://www.sainsburys.co.uk/sol/shop...ma_system.html

£130, which will also give you Blu-Ray, in case you don't already have it (that's worth about £50 on its own). It's a Samsung, so the quality is reasonable.

That plus the remote isn't much more than £150, and will give you a fully-fledged home cinema setup. Not quite as good as a dedicated setup, but far better sound than your last TV.

I'd say that this sort of money is something you should be factoring in to the overall cost. You might spend £100 just to get a TV with marginally better squeakers -- is it really worth bothering with?

You can, of course, go a lot cheaper than this. I have a 32" in our bedroom now, and the sound was typically weak, and also hissy at low volumes which was driving me nuts. I bought a Bush DVD+amplifier+soundbar+'subwoofer' for thre princely sum of £40 on an Argos eBay special. Yes, the sound is coarse compared with my proper setup downstairs, but it's actually quite listenable for what it is.

[doolallylhama]

unfortunately i've already sent the TV back now, and ive lost interest in the whole thing because of all the hassle, which is a bit depressing.
why can't it just be good out of the box? like most other stuff is. you don't buy a bicycle, and then have to replace the wheels to ride it. or buy a computer, and have to replace the keyboard before you can type anything

Note to manufacturers: Customers would really like to buy TVs that have both a good picture and sound, without having to fork out for a load of extra stuff on top.

[iangrad]

Any TV for lets say under circa £600 has all the emphasis put into tuner , screen / graphics , connectivity , ultra slim cabinet & low power consumption is never going to have good sound . You are meant to build your system & budget to include a ARC compliant sound bar at the very least .

[chrisjr]

Originally Posted by doolallylhama

unfortunately i've already sent the TV back now, and ive lost interest in the whole thing because of all the hassle, which is a bit depressing.
why can't it just be good out of the box? like most other stuff is. you don't buy a bicycle, and then have to replace the wheels to ride it. or buy a computer, and have to replace the keyboard before you can type anything

Note to manufacturers: Customers would really like to buy TVs that have both a good picture and sound, without having to fork out for a load of extra stuff on top.

Those of us contributing to this thread are probably in something of a minority. Over the years I have stopped being amazed by some of the really crappy kit I have found people listening to.

In my experience sound quality is not a priority for many people. They simply cannot hear distortion that has me cringing in horror or whatever.

Worst case I saw was some cheap and nasty system that had a 5 or 6 band graphic equaliser and the owner had cranked all the sliders to the top oblivious to how awful it made it sound (and it wasn't great with the eq set to 0 either!).

So I am not overly surprised the built in sound on a TV is pretty horrid. I really don't think that proverbial "man in the street" gives a toss.

Then again it's got to be a good 30yrs since I last listened for more than 5 minutes to the speakers in any telly I've owned

[Orbitalzone]

Yep as Nigel says, it ain't gonna happen.

TV's will only continue to get thinner and have smaller speakers.... if you give people the choice of a TV with larger speakers that mean you've got 4 inches of plastic edge beyond the picture to allow for larger speakers or offer a super thin with 1cm surround which one will most people buy?

[late8]

There's no room for a decent speaker.... And no point.


If you have a HD TV with DVD or Bluray then a sound system is a must. I hope one day they will drop speakers altogether from tvs

[iangrad]

I am surprised that Panasonic with there VT , DT & WT range and Samsung on es8000 range are not brave enough to omit the speakers and offer sound bar or home cinema kit as a option !

[jjne]

Originally Posted by iangrad

I am surprised that Panasonic with there VT , DT & WT range and Samsung on es8000 range are not brave enough to omit the speakers and offer sound bar or home cinema kit as a option !

In the last few years of us actually having access to true Hitachi gear, they launched a range of TVs without speakers, and without a tuner.

I can only imagine that the venture was a total flop -- which is a great shame as I completely agree with you.

To the OP, televisions -- decent ones -- are massively, massively cheaper than they were 5 or 10 years ago. Something has to give somewhere.

Previously to get a half-decent 32" screen you'd be spending £600-800 (and that's only a few years ago). Spend that now, and you get the TV with 3D and smart features, a Blu-Ray player, a good set of speakers and a reasonable mid-spec DTS receiver.

(£400 for the TV, £50 for the Blu-Ray, £200 for the speakers and £150 for the receiver).

I know which I'd rather have.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by iangrad

I am surprised that Panasonic with there VT , DT & WT range and Samsung on es8000 range are not brave enough to omit the speakers and offer sound bar or home cinema kit as a option !

Such schemes have happened numerous times over many decades, every single attempt has been an absolute flop.

Probably the most 'successful' was Sony Profeel, and that was a complete disaster as well.

[doolallylhama]

how can you say that sound isn't integral to the total product, though? i appreciate that nothing will change, and that this is probably the way that it's going to be from now on, so i will have to get used to it, but how can they relegate decent sound to the status of an "optional add-on"?

you need sound to watch TV. in fact, for a lot of the stuff on TV, i would argue that the sound is even more important than the picture -- for example, lots of people listen to radio channels on their TV now, where the picture serves no purpose whatsoever. and do we really need a top-notch picture to watch the news?

selling a TV with lousy sound is like selling a car with lousy brakes. or a house without a kitchen.

[Orbitalzone]

But a TV with lousy speakers won't kill you unlike a car with lousy brakes!

The problem is it's all driven by price and style, no manufacturer will risk making a bulkier TV with decent speakers as it'll look crap next to all those slimline Samsungs, the sound is not what sells TV's it's the price and the styling and it's only when the customer tries the TV at home they'll notice any problem.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that slimline TV's have pretty lousy sound that compares to a £8 clock radio!

[doolallylhama]

yup, you're right. it's all style over substance these days. that is what sells the best -- if it looks good then people will want it.
that is why Apple sells so many iphones, ipods and ipads -- because they all look so good (although, in those examples, the underlying products are also good)

but it would be nice if manufacturers could get back to selling top-notch products first and foremost, instead of so-so ones in a pretty box.

the experience i had of buying my £299 TV was a bit like this: waking up on Christmas morning and seeing a pretty present under the tree, wrapped up in sparkly expensive paper, getting all excited about it, only to open it and discover that it was a pair of socks.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by doolallylhama

the experience i had of buying my £299 TV was a bit like this: waking up on Christmas morning and seeing a pretty present under the tree, wrapped up in sparkly expensive paper, getting all excited about it, only to open it and discover that it was a pair of socks.

So you buy a low cost cheap TV, then complain about poor quality sound

I'd be more impressed if you'd bought a higher spec set, THEN complained about the poor sound

But even though better sets do tend to have better sound, it's still pretty crappy.

[doolallylhama]

well i'm comparing it to my original set -- which is about 5 or 6 years old. and that was just a 26-inch. the sound quality on the modern TV is worse.

Previously to get a half-decent 32" screen you'd be spending £600-800 (and that's only a few years ago). Spend that now, and you get the TV with 3D and smart features, a Blu-Ray player, a good set of speakers and a reasonable mid-spec DTS receiver.

i suppose this is right. i was probably expecting too much for £299.

[1saintly]

Originally Posted by jjne

In the last few years of us actually having access to true Hitachi gear, they launched a range of TVs without speakers, and without a tuner.

I can only imagine that the venture was a total flop -- which is a great shame as I completely agree with you.
.

Panasonic have been and still do a panel only option
http://panasonic.net/prodisplays/pro...ema/vx300.html

The guys on AVForums Love them.
Of course the price of the panel alone is never mine tuners\speakers etc.
But if you can afford the panel then the extra cost isnt a worry.

[bobcar]

Originally Posted by doolallylhama

but it would be nice if manufacturers could get back to selling top-notch products first and foremost, instead of so-so ones in a pretty box.

A top notch product will entail a sound system so there is no point in including better speakers if that is what you are after. What you are losing out on is mediocre sound.

Incidentally and in answer to your earlier question I have a separate sound system and the TV controls the sound as you wanted. I use a universal remote but even with the TV remote the Viera Link lets the TV do the controlling via HDMI.

Most of the time with a "top notch" system you will want the sound to come from the PVR or Blu-ray player rather than the TV anyway though even here the TV controls the sound level on my setup.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by bobcar

Most of the time with a "top notch" system you will want the sound to come from the PVR or Blu-ray player rather than the TV anyway though even here the TV controls the sound level on my setup.

The wonders of CEC-HDMI

Perhaps the biggest 'wonder' though is that it's a universal standard, and all CEC compliant devices will work with any other.