[LudwigVonDrake]

I'm in the market for a new TV, I was looking at the 42" LG here:
http://www.johnlewis.com/231575495/Product.aspx
but concerns have been raised that "its a bit big" and so I decided to have a look for something smaller.
After a bit of looking around I've discovered this 37" one:
http://www.johnlewis.com/231714529/Product.aspx
but other than the screen size (and the price!) I can't tell the difference between them.

Is there much to argue about between them? The 3D will be an added bonus, but I remember reading somewhere that "3D doesn't really work well on a 37" screen".

If anyone can point me in the right direction please!

[howardl]

Of course I don't know the size of your room,
But, When I was looking for a new TV in our not too big living room, I was a little worried that the 40" i was thinking of getting would be too big,
I bit the bullet and bought the 40"
Now, the next one will be 47" as I am confident it will fit in ok as it wont be obtrusive at all...especially the OLED tv

[LudwigVonDrake]

Well the room is 14' sq. so there should be ample distance between viewer and set, but its more how much space it will take up visually,

Like I said I can't see much difference between the 42" and the 37" above, unless I'm missing something?

[bobcar]

Originally Posted by LudwigVonDrake

Well the room is 14' sq. so there should be ample distance between viewer and set, but its more how much space it will take up visually,

Like I said I can't see much difference between the 42" and the 37" above, unless I'm missing something?

The 42" is around 29% bigger so it is significant.

[LudwigVonDrake]

^ Do you mean in picture quality? (I appreciate the physical difference ) From the spec it seems like they should be capable of the same image. Plus there's the "is 3D effective on smaller sets?" quandary.

[subversive]

my room is around 14ft sq.

I would recommend anything between 37" and 42", 46" will be slightly on the big side, but if its up against a wall, I think it would be ok.

I have a panasonic 42" from john lewis (see my thread) and to be honest, for watching movies is fantasic. I am pleased with it. I don't have sky HD box, so the picture is not as good as its SD (its all a big conspiracy..lol)...BUT the size is OK.

I was about to get a 37", but after a recommendation from a member here, who said I should get the maximun size, etc for the money I am spending, I opted for the 42".

if you are thinking of getting a 3D TV, please make sure the refresh rate is high. Also check how much the glasses cost if you bought them separately (from amazon, etc) or if you got universal ones.

If my budget was as much as yours, I would get the best one for 3D, etc. Make sure you get built in wifi.

In mine I need a dongle, which is ok, it only costs around £20 for a after market one.

I am sure you know what you want, so if something I said doesn;t sound right, just ignore it.

[LudwigVonDrake]

^ Thank you for the reply. You may have very well helped my decision with the 'max for the money' quote.

As for glasses, the LG comes with 5 free (one being clip-on which is perfect for me) so that's part of what attracted me to the LG's.

£20 isn't too bad for a dongle, not something I'll probably need from the start, but worth considering.

[subversive]

Originally Posted by LudwigVonDrake

^ Thank you for the reply. You may have very well helped my decision with the 'max for the money' quote.

As for glasses, the LG comes with 5 free (one being clip-on which is perfect for me) so that's part of what attracted me to the LG's.

£20 isn't too bad for a dongle, not something I'll probably need from the start, but worth considering.

If you are getting the 42" LG, it has built in wifi, so no dongle needed. the one I got is net ready, but no built in wifi. dongle from panasonic will cost around £49, but a netgear one will cost around £20. so makes sense to get that.

When 3D and becomes the norm, thats when I will get a 3D screen, Hopefully HD will be the norm in around a two years.

Have you seen the TV in person? check it out and see what it looks like, have some alternatives, like samsung, sony, panasonic. only other ones I would recommend.

I like the display of the LG, virtually no bevel, which makes it look quite sexy when mounted on the wall...

Good luck and let us know which one you go for....

just incase, I bought my stand from amazon, black glass stand for £49.99, they are double that in john lewis.

[LudwigVonDrake]

^Yes I've oggled the set in Currys a few times it looks amazing, and I never thought I could see 3D until I was given a proper demo.

The 3D will be a once in a while thing, and I've only really considered it as the replacement BR player I got had the ability to do 3D, so I thought I might as well. It seems that sets with 3D are becoming comparable in price with ones without which is a good thing I suppose.

[bobcar]

Originally Posted by LudwigVonDrake

^ Do you mean in picture quality? (I appreciate the physical difference ) From the spec it seems like they should be capable of the same image. Plus there's the "is 3D effective on smaller sets?" quandary.

No just 29% bigger in image area, that's quite a big chunk.

[subversive]

Originally Posted by LudwigVonDrake

^Yes I've oggled the set in Currys a few times it looks amazing, and I never thought I could see 3D until I was given a proper demo.

The 3D will be a once in a while thing, and I've only really considered it as the replacement BR player I got had the ability to do 3D, so I thought I might as well. It seems that sets with 3D are becoming comparable in price with ones without which is a good thing I suppose.

I checked out the 3D stuff too, but to be honest, I still see it as a gimmick, something "extra" for them to make you spend your cash on.

I will consider it, when I can use the 3d glasses across any tv. I went to currys too, saw the big lg tv with the fish in the water demo, it was nice....I might get one for my room, but to get a decent set, you need to spend imo at least how much you are spending.

for now, I am happy with the 1080p movies on a spanking 42 incher. haha

i wanted the basics, plus a few extras and I think the tv i got does that......

Next on the list is a bluray player with speakers, but thats another £300, so will avoid speakers and get just the player...

I would love a bose setup, but need a mortgage for that...lol..

[LudwigVonDrake]

Originally Posted by subversive

I checked out the 3D stuff too, but to be honest, I still see it as a gimmick, something "extra" for them to make you spend your cash on.

True, but at least they're not making you buy 3D separate all the time. I picked up The Avengers BR/3D pack which was only £3 more than the BR on its own. Not something I'd always do, but if its a new release and not priced over the odds then its not too bad.

Downside is that I might be tempted to double-dip with a couple of films that I wouldn't mind seeing in 3D. Luckily the January Sales aren't that far off.

Originally Posted by subversive

Next on the list is a bluray player with speakers, but thats another £300, so will avoid speakers and get just the player...

I would love a bose setup, but need a mortgage for that...lol..

Same boat here too! haha I haven't even begun to look for speakers properly yet. Might have to go down the Soundbar route.

[subversive]

Originally Posted by LudwigVonDrake

True, but at least they're not making you buy 3D separate all the time. I picked up The Avengers BR/3D pack which was only £3 more than the BR on its own. Not something I'd always do, but if its a new release and not priced over the odds then its not too bad.

Downside is that I might be tempted to double-dip with a couple of films that I wouldn't mind seeing in 3D. Luckily the January Sales aren't that far off.

Same boat here too! haha I haven't even begun to look for speakers properly yet. Might have to go down the Soundbar route.

I guess if the movies cost the same and you get the normal 2d and 3d in one, then it can't do any harm. even £3 is ok.

Give us a review when you get your telly.

Speaker wise, I think one of the best are Bose.

I was going to buy a soundbar, but the sound from the tv is fine and if I was to enhance the sound, I would opt for the full system, 2.1 or 5.1, preferably wireless if 5.1, although I don't know if its any good, but wires can be a pain to hide.

[webbie]

I find Bose way overpriced and poor quality both in sound and build. IMHO you would be better off with Onkyo, Denon, Yamaha and save a bundle.
For speakers try Mission, Kef, Tannoy, and loads more. You will have to audition them as they all sound different. IMHO all sound better than Bose which have (to my ears) huge gaps in the frequency range - particularly midrange.

[chrisjr]

Originally Posted by subversive

wise, I think one of the best are Bose.

I was going to buy a soundbar, but the sound from the tv is fine and if I was to enhance the sound, I would opt for the full system, 2.1 or 5.1, preferably wireless if 5.1, although I don't know if its any good, but wires can be a pain to hide.

You are aware that BOSE is an acronym are you not? It stands for "Buy Other Sound Equipment".

At least half of what you pay for BOSE kit is for the badge. The actual kit is pretty average if you stack it up critically against other makers.

And there is no such thing as a truly wireless speaker system. You still need wires to power the wireless speakers. So if there does not happen to be a convenient mains socket near where the speakers are located you will have to run mains wiring to them. So may as well run the speaker wire.

[bobcar]

[quote=chrisjr;61231741
And there is no such thing as a truly wireless speaker system. You still need wires to power the wireless speakers. So if there does not happen to be a convenient mains socket near where the speakers are located you will have to run mains wiring to them. So may as well run the speaker wire.[/QUOTE]

To be fair though a lot of people will have a mains socket on the other side of the room with the rear speakers. My room is like that.

[subversive]

Originally Posted by webbie

I find Bose way overpriced and poor quality both in sound and build. IMHO you would be better off with Onkyo, Denon, Yamaha and save a bundle.
For speakers try Mission, Kef, Tannoy, and loads more. You will have to audition them as they all sound different. IMHO all sound better than Bose which have (to my ears) huge gaps in the frequency range - particularly midrange.

Well, nor can I afford Bose, or the others. haha. Maybe on Friday I might, I'll find out in the evening.

Originally Posted by chrisjr

You are aware that BOSE is an acronym are you not? It stands for "Buy Other Sound Equipment".

At least half of what you pay for BOSE kit is for the badge. The actual kit is pretty average if you stack it up critically against other makers.

And there is no such thing as a truly wireless speaker system. You still need wires to power the wireless speakers. So if there does not happen to be a convenient mains socket near where the speakers are located you will have to run mains wiring to them. So may as well run the speaker wire.

My cousin has the bose system and to be honest I am impressed.

The price tag puts me off though

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by subversive

Well, nor can I afford Bose, or the others. haha. Maybe on Friday I might, I'll find out in the evening.



My cousin has the bose system and to be honest I am impressed.

The price tag puts me off though

It should - it's over priced cheap Chinese gear.

You might perhaps have notice Bose don't advertise in HiFi magazines, but in Sunday Supplements etc.

[webbie]

They don't get reviewed in the hifi mags either - because they won't send in samples to the magazines. Makes you wonder what they've got to hide....

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by webbie

They don't get reviewed in the hifi mags either - because they won't send in samples to the magazines. Makes you wonder what they've got to hide....

Everybody knows exactly what they have to hide

Any review on it would be appalling, it doesn't get anywhere near the standards required for 'HiFi'.

But it's fair enough, it does what it's made for - just that it's excessively expensive, but it's like any other 'designer' label, which is really what Bose is.

[subversive]

Is the Internet option on the TV any good?

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by subversive

Is the Internet option on the TV any good?

In what sort of way? - Internet browsing is appalling on all TV's - you don't bother trying it more than once

[subversive]

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

In what sort of way? - Internet browsing is appalling on all TV's - you don't bother trying it more than once

I actually don't know to be honest. My tv has the option to connect to the net via a dongle.

So, I wanted to explore what it had to offer, just wondering is it worth the effort or just a gimmick???

[diablo]

Originally Posted by subversive

Is the Internet option on the TV any good?

My Panasonic has an Android phone app which makes browsing on the TV a whole lot easier, seems to work pretty well.

Otherwise just using the remote and on-screen keyboard is a real pain.

However I wouldn't actually use it unless both my PCs were broken.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by subversive

I actually don't know to be honest. My tv has the option to connect to the net via a dongle.

So, I wanted to explore what it had to offer, just wondering is it worth the effort or just a gimmick???

Skype (on sets that do it) seems a pretty decent idea, as is iPlayer etc.

Most of the apps seem pretty useless though, and Internet browsing is painful. To give you some idea how bad it is - hold your hands behind your back, and then try and browse the net on your computer - it's about a similar level of 'enjoyment' as browsing on a TV