Time to replace the big screen TV

[Stan Calow]

We bought a 70" Samsung last year from Sam's Club. Generally happy with the quality and features. I have no idea what kind of system it uses, just that it was a great price. However, I suggest that you verify total compatibility with your streaming service if you have one. Other guidance: check the sound - we found a lot of TVs had weak sound systems.

[Frank Pratt]

https://www.rtings.com/tv is an excellent TV review site.

[Bill Dufour]

My niece bought a big screen tv and it was too large for the room. You had to swivel your head to watch football.
Bill

[Tom M King]

I remember in 1968 I talked my Parents into buying our first color TV to watch the Olympics. It was a 19" Zenith, and cost $279 then.

We bought a 55" LG for one of the bedrooms in a rental house. It has an amazing picture quality compared to anything of old, and plenty good enough for me. It cost $279 last Fall.

[Bill McNiel]

FWIW - approximately a year ago I replaced two semi large flat screens after performing an insane amount of research. General result is;

Samsung QLED- better for areas with brighter ambient light. 65" for Master Bedroom.
LG OLED- better for dark rooms and has, I believe, a wider viewing angle. 55" for the Den.
Sony - adds more built in electronics and higher cost. Not worth the extra $ for us.

All three have multiple levels of products. This is where seeing them side by side helps immensely. When the difference in picture no longer affects your viewing, stop.

Make a list of priorities regarding type of usage (Gaming, sports, movies, internet, etc.). How many HDMI ports, burn in rates, etc.

Check out the reviews available on the Internet. I found several sites that had no allegiance to any particular brand.

Best pricing was at Video Only versus Best Buy, Costco, etc., at least here in the Northwest. Video Only will pay $ for old trade-ins. The sales people really know their products and never tried to "up sell" me).

Sound Bars are a really nice add but you can get by without it or add later.

Hope this helps a bit Bill

[Michael Schuch]

My TV priorities:

1) Mat screen finish instead of glossy screen finish!!!!

2) Reliability.

3) OS - user interface.

I will not buy a TV with a glossy finish on the screen! They reflect way too much light making even a very bright screen hard to watch if in a well lit room.

I have owned LG, Vizio, Samsung and off brand TV's. Samsung is my top choice for a TV and I would probably like a Sony too but I have never owned one. LG and Vizio TV's have both given me major problems early in their lives. Samsungs have lasted very well for me.

Picture quality is pretty much a non factor to me other than how glossy the screen is. I have a couple year old 4K 82" Samsung Q80 QLED in my living room and a several year old 4K Vizio 75" in my bedroom. Despite a big difference in price and age I can not really tell any difference in picture quality. The Vizio used to be in the living room but moved into the bedroom when the LG tv in the bedroom died and then the Samsung replaced the Vizio in the living room. The viewing experience between the Vizio and the Samsung is not noticeable to me.

Vizio does not keep up on their OS / UI updates making a ROKU or similar necessary. At about 3 years old the capacitors on the power supply on my 75" Vizio went bad. I replaced the cheap crappy capacitors on the PS board with quality capacitors of a higher rating to bring the Vizio back to live. There were instructions all over the internet on how to do this because it is a very common problem on Vizio TV's across all of their different models and sizes.

To me HDR is just marketing hype rather than something that will make any kind of viewing experience. Viewing a 61mp 36 bit photograph from my Sony mirrorless camera has no distinguishable difference between HDR turned on or off on my 55" Samsung TV used as a monitor connected to my workstation/PC.

QLED is a marketing ploy to cover the fact that Samsung has nothing to compete with LG's OLED sets. I see that this year Samsung has finally jumped on the OLED bandwagon. On OLED sets every pixel emits its own light. Every other LCD set is lit from the back and filters out unneeded light for each pixel. QLED is just marketing BS.

8K resolution is worthless to me. I can't tell the difference between 1080 and 4K content on my current 4K TV's. I have no use for 8K. I stare at a Curved Samsung 4K 55" TV as my monitor for software development 8 to 12 hours a day. In this role 1080 vs 4K is very noticable. But I still do not see a need for 8K.

60Hz refresh rate is plenty for my uses. The human eye is not fast enough to really see any advantage to a higher refresh rate for normal TV viewing.

TV showrooms are worthless! I CAN see how glossy a TV screen is and how much light it reflects but they don't give you the remote to test drive the OS. The OS is a big deal on how well a TV works for me. EX. Samsung has a channel guide with programming descriptions for over the air (OTA) programming. Vizio does not. On my Vizio I have to select a channel then press the info button to see the programming descriptions... VERY ANNOYING! My LG was similar. The SAMSUNG OS is MUCH better in this respect since I can get a grid of my OTA channels with the program name and program description as well as displaying the descriptions when channel surfing... MUCH BETTER! Roku's etc. do not have OTA tuners so the TV's tuner functionality make a big difference to "Me".

Any noticeable differences in actual picture quality on a showroom floor is just the screen settings. Pretty much every 4K TV has a more than acceptable picture quality for me. Picture quality stats are pretty much just hype with very little actual meaningful differences. (Exception - Viewing angle does make a difference for me).

OLED vs LCD differences are real! This LCD screen vs that LCD screen is not really significant in all but the very cheapest of the cheap TV's. OLED's are bright and beautiful but they were not worth the price premium "to me" when I bought my 82" Samsung 2 years ago.

Most TV manufactures do not make their own screens. They buy their screens from a screen manufacture and pair them with their own case and computer/controller. 3 TV's from 3 different brands having the exact same screen is not unheard of.

Just my opinions on TV's... take them for what they are worth.

[Alan Lightstone]

A lot of information from Michael, though I disagree with some of it.

I much prefer OLED TVs. We have all LG TVs. The Samsung QLEDs (which is marketing nonsense as they are not OLEDs) have the advantage in brightness, but with less contrast (no absolute blacks like OLEDs.)

HDR is stunning. We get a couple of HDR channels from DirecTV and the picture is markedly better than normal TV. It is truly amazing. My friend bought a 85" Samsung, and doesn't get HDR channels, and the picture is not nearly as nice.

TV showrooms are totally worthless. The TVS are set absurdly bright with the contrast turned up all the way. They do nothing to show you which sets are good.

Most TV sound is awful. I have sound bars on all my TVs. Even more important as you get older and your hearing gets worse.

For a very bright room, you can make a good argument for the Samsung QLED vs an OLED as they are significantly brighter. That being said, even in our brightest room, the OLEDs do just fine.

8K is worthless now. And perhaps always. Difference in resolution can't be seen unless you are uncomfortably close to the set. All marketing nonsense, and no 8K broadcasts out there that I know of.

Just one man's opinion.

[Michael Schuch]

A lot of information from Michael, though I disagree with some of it.

I much prefer OLED TVs. We have all LG TVs. The Samsung QLEDs (which is marketing nonsense as they are not OLEDs) have the advantage in brightness, but with less contrast (no absolute blacks like OLEDs.)

I would love to have an OLED TV someday! From everything I have seen they have a superior picture to LCD screens. They have that pop like old plasma sets used to have.

I completely agree QLED is just marketing BS!

HDR is stunning. We get a couple of HDR channels from DirecTV and the picture is markedly better than normal TV. It is truly amazing. My friend bought a 85" Samsung, and doesn't get HDR channels, and the picture is not nearly as nice.

This is not my experience but I could be wrong. I think most current sets support HDR so I don't believe the point is worth arguing about. When I bought my Samsung a couple of years ago the price difference for HDR was significant and I paid the extra for HDR. I don't believe this is still the case.

TV showrooms are totally worthless. The TVS are set absurdly bright with the contrast turned up all the way. They do nothing to show you which sets are good.

Most TV sound is awful. I have sound bars on all my TVs. Even more important as you get older and your hearing gets worse.

I should have mentioned that it has probably been 35 years since I listened to a TV program through a TV sets speakers. I have an old AVR receiver with good speakers on both of my main sets. I doubt I would watch TV at all without quality sound to back it up. My experience with the latest AVR tech is that it is also mostly hype which I don't find is worth spending my money on... besides I have always purchased all of my AVR receivers used and a generation or two old.

For a very bright room, you can make a good argument for the Samsung QLED vs an OLED as they are significantly brighter. That being said, even in our brightest room, the OLEDs do just fine.

8K is worthless now. And perhaps always. Difference in resolution can't be seen unless you are uncomfortably close to the set. All marketing nonsense, and no 8K broadcasts out there that I know of.

Just one man's opinion.

[Perry Hilbert Jr]

We replaced our still working TV with a massive sony 75 or 80 inch, (IDK). She bought it. I don't watch much regular TV. I do watch quite a bit of You Tube and other instructional videos along with some documentary app that came with the big TV, She watches the Sony multiple times more than I do. I watch the old 55 inch Samsung most. The thing I liked about the samsung was that I could surf the internet without a computer. It was a bit slow, but I even posted on this forum from that Samsung and the wireless keyboard I linked to it. The computer chips for the TV can't be that expensive. I do not understand why they use such limited capacity chips in most TV's. My Samsung in the Kitchen is only a 32 inch, but when cooking (I am retired but Mrs. still works) I have videos playing. Sometimes wood turning, sometimes cooking, or old 1950's TV shows. My cell phone is linked to the Kitchen Samsung. I can use the tv like a slide projector using my phone and have done so for presentations to groups, It isn't power point, but it works.

[Kev Williams]

Much appreciate all the replies, gained some new insight on current TV tech - However, this morning I stumbled onto a way to shut down the USB input, and it worked, so new TV plans are on hold for awhile...

Xmas maybe?

[Bill Dufour]

Decades ago I read that by the time you can afford the best quality stereo system and speakers your ears can no longer hear the difference. I bet eyesight is similar?
Bill D

[Mike Soaper]

https://www.rtings.com/tv is an excellent TV review site.

Agree

I think it was there that someone said on some google based tvs the tv's user changed setup/preferences are saved on their google account, which could be good or bad depending upon how much you like google

[Jerome Stanek]

My first big screen TV was an RCA color 25 inch back in 1971. It was $595 at that time. We saved up by putting my National guard pay in a seperate account until we had enough to buy it.

[Michael Drew]

I have a home theater with a 4K projector and 110" screen and entirely too much money invested in a 7.4.2 Atmos sound system. That is where the quality of the display really matters to me, but I also have a TV in my great room where we spend most of our "veg time" watching brain numbing tv shows and Sunday football games..... I totally agree with Michael about anti-glare screens. Unless you have the TV in a light controlled room, glare will obliterate any descent picture the display might be capable of. HDR does look spectacular in my theater, but it's completely light controlled, with dark matt painted walls and ceiling. Big difference.

Samsung is generally the display manufacture I lean towards, although, LG and Sony make good products too. If you watch sports, you'll want a display that had good motion control. The faster refresh rates, like 120hz help, but some displays have pretty good tech that can trick your mind into not seeing motion (like a football through the air). My great room TV is ab 65", 4K Samsung. Don't remember the model, but it has a great picture. It was an "open box" sale unit I found at Best Buy. 50% off. Best Buy usually has these open box sales units that are worth consideration. They are generally one or two models behind the latest and greatest model, might be a store display unit, but will usually come with a fool warranty, or a Best Buy warranty.