LCD/LED TV Discussion

Hey there!

I was thinking about moving this thread over to the Audio and Video Tech section, but honestly, it looks like a ghost town over there right now—nobody seems to be replying to anything lately. I don't think I want to sit around waiting forever for a response, and since I'm actually in a bit of a rush to get this sorted, I figured I'd just post it here...

So, I'm looking to pick up a slim LCD or LED television. I currently have my $1167, so my goal is to get the absolute best bang for my buck—ideally a larger screen with the sharpest picture quality possible. Also, having HDMI ports is a total must-have for me. If anyone could point me toward some solid recommendations, I would truly appreciate it!

Thanks so much,

You can find some pretty decent TVs in almost any big-box store these days. Most models come with at least two HDMI ports anyway. I ended up picking up a Samsung full HDTV LCD 34 with Dolby Digital Plus technology for $0.97; it was on sale during the World Cup, though the standard price is usually around $1.25. Honestly, if you grab a Samsung, Philips, or LG—as long as it's 35 inches and has Full HD with Dolby tech—you should be fine. It’s all mostly the same to me. People argue about LCD versus LED, but they’re basically the same thing in practice. I suppose LED has slightly more advanced display tech, like better pixel density, but you can't really see the difference... so, I guess you can't really go wrong. You can probably find an excellent TV for $1.25. 🙂

David Castillo89 said:You can find some really solid TVs in almost any big-box store these days. Most of them come with at least two HDMI ports. I picked up a Samsung full HDTV LCD 34 with Dolby Digital Plus technology for $0.97; it was on sale during the World Cup, whereas the regular price is $1.25. Honestly, just grab any Samsung, Philips, or LG as long as it's around 35 inches and Full HD with Dolby. They're mostly all the same. Even the distinction between LCD and LED isn't that huge in terms of picture—LED is technically more advanced, like having a tighter pixel pitch, but you won't even notice the difference, so... you can't really go wrong. You can snag an excellent set for $1.25. 🙂

Good grief. 👎

Do you even know the difference between a "standard LCD" and a LED display?

My advice? Grab a Panasonic 42" plasma while they're still out there. Price is about $1333

Forget plasma; that tech is ancient history and just wastes a ton of electricity as heat.

Just make sure you get an LCD LED with IPS technology—that way, the picture stays consistent even if you're watching from a side angle, so colors don't wash out or dim...
There are even pricier models with 3D capabilities.
Try to find one with an ATSC tuner that handles older MPEG4 and even legacy MPEG2 standards, though honestly, that'll be a tough hunt since most things only support MPEG4 now. From what I've seen, you usually have to buy an ATSC set-top box separately to get that kind of compatibility.

No LCD on the market can touch plasma when it comes to viewing angles, response times, or contrast ratios...

You can keep arguing that the tech is outdated if you want, but until something actually matches that plasma quality, an LCD isn't going to catch up.

So what if it pulls more power? Not my problem. 😉

Sadly, Panasonic is pulling the plug on the Viera plasma line this year... But if you’d ever actually sat in front of one, you wouldn't be talking like this. I own both a plasma and an LCD in the same price range, around $1500, and the plasma wins every single time. Whether it's sports or HD movies, everything just looks better on plasma, and you don't get that annoying glare you see on an LCD.

You probably have some old LCD sitting around the house that isn't even LED, let alone IPS—which is ancient history at this point. If plasma were actually any good, I’m sure Panasonic wouldn't have pulled the plug on it. The only real perk of a plasma is that you can basically turn your living room into a radiator and save a few bucks on the heating bill.

With plasma, there's no way to push the resolution any further. It's a dead end. Toss it in the junk pile...

wiredmarlin47 said:You probably have some old non-LED LCD sitting at home without IPS, which is ancient history anyway. If plasma were actually that great, Panasonic wouldn't be killing it off. Honestly, the only upside to plasma is that you could probably use the TVs as space heaters to lower your electric bill.

With plasma, you hit a ceiling on resolution and that's it. It's a dead end.

Look, you can argue your case all you want, but you're still not going to be right. Panasonic is dropping plasma because the margins aren't there anymore, not because the tech is bad. If you look at any of the forum threads, plenty of people are still buying their plasma sets even though they already own one, just to have a backup for when their current one dies. I'm not saying LCD doesn't have its perks, but plasma is objectively superior to any LCD in the same price bracket. 😉

Regardless of LED or IPS tech, plasma wins on viewing angles, response times, and contrast. Plus, it's much easier on the eyes. Sure, the glass screen can reflect light if your room is too bright, and the power draw is higher—though not as much as people claim—and then there's burn-in. But modern Panasonic models have largely fixed that, and it's easy to avoid if you actually take care of your gear.

As for resolution, 1920 x1080 is going to remain the standard for screens up to 42" for a long time.

Who knows what Panasonic has planned next? Maybe some OLED development or something else that captures that plasma magic.

Watching a football game on a plasma versus an LCD? It's night and day.

Plasma displays really hold their own when you're dealing with fast motion, like during action movies or watching a big game.
The main technical difference between standard LCD and LED is just how they light up the screen. With an old-school LCD, you've got neon tubes doing the work, whereas LEDs use those little diodes instead. An LED setup typically offers a deeper black and slightly better contrast, though honestly, on these cheaper Televisions, you might not even notice much of a difference.

Timothy Fisher79 said:...I considered placing this discussion within the Audio and Video Technology section, but since it appears that no one is responding there at all, I would likely be waiting quite some time for an answer, and my situation is rather urgent...

That is quite a lot of information, though I am curious to know what you have actually managed to discover through your efforts.

If one were to visit the AV forum dedicated to assistance and inquiries regarding new television purchases, one would find such a wealth of fresh recommendations for specific models that the question itself might have been unnecessary, provided, of course, that one puts in the requisite effort. 😉

Hey,

I spotted a Grundig LED 32 VLE 4400 BM Television $666(
) over at Kmart.

Now, does anyone actually know what they mean by advertising Hulu alongside it? Am I going to be forced into a monthly subscription just because I buy the unit?
$1333 Also, can someone confirm if this TV actually supports ATSC? I heard all TVs have been sold with that standard since 🤔 onwards.

Hulu is now built directly into Grundig LED televisions
Grundig LED TVs are officially Hulu-ready

A thread from 2013 about TVs?

We aren't exactly on the correct thread, but since the moderators didn't redirect your inquiry, I shall provide my response here...

Taylor Perez5 said:Greetings,
I found a Grundig LED 32 VLE 4400 BM Television at Kmart ($666)
Now, does anyone know what it means when they advertise Hulu alongside it? Will I be forced to pay for a Hulu subscription if I purchase this unit?
Furthermore, does this Television truly feature an ATSC tuner, given that they claimed televisions with this capability have been the standard since $1333 onwards?🤔

The Television does indeed possess an ATSC tuner, which is a significant advantage because the US is expected to transition more fully toward the ATSC broadcast standard in the near future; consequently, purchasing a receiver without this option today would be a complete mistake, at least for those who rely on over-the-air antennas.
As for Hulu, you will not be required to pay for it unless you specifically choose to do so; the CAM CI+ module is merely an optional add-on that requires activation at the local post office (otherwise, its value is roughly $30, and it should function similarly in other television models equipped with an ATSC tuner and a CI+ slot).

Fair enough. Since the question was actually answered, I’m done here. If you want to keep arguing about this, go talk about TVs instead...