Ever buy a cheap LED TV?

[bersaguy]

I bought a 32 inch Vizio LED for my bedroom about 2 years ago at Walmart while on sale for 149.00 and it works great and have not had 1 minutes trouble with it. Have DVD player on it and complete surround sound on it and it works great.

[tnguy]

Cheap tvs are one thing but cheap cables( video) are another. Better get the Monster cables for your next purchase( as the cables aside from the power one isn't included in the box). Best picture and sound quality and they are guaranteed to work.

 

Pfft, nonsense. Unless the cable is complete trash, it'll be good enough. I buy all my hdmi cables off ebay as cheap as I can get them and not one hasn't been up to the job.

 

+1 on Vizio too. Ours must be five years old now and has been faultless.

Edited November 17, 2013 by tnguy

[TripleDigitRide]

I guess I'm too picky. Just got back from looking at TV's, and the picture quality on just about everything under around $400 is blah. I guess I can't be too surprised. I've been spoiled by high-end TV's for too many years. Looks like I'm going to find a great deal, or increase my budget.

[TripleDigitRide]

I went ahead and bought this one. 

 

http://www.walmart.com/ip/RCA-42-LED42C45RQ-Class-LED-1080p-60Hz-3.4-ultra-slim-HDTV/21097470

 

It had some decent reviews, and Best Buy is selling the exact TV for $459. If it's a decent TV, I'd say that's a good deal.

[Guest Razz]

Cheap tvs are one thing but cheap cables( video) are another. Better get the Monster cables for your next purchase( as the cables aside from the power one isn't included in the box). Best picture and sound quality and they are guaranteed to work.

No, no, NO!

Are you a salesman at an electronics store? Monster Cable is the biggest scam I've ever seen, especially for HDMI cables.

I also do no agree with people who say buying cheap tvs is the way to go. If all you can afford is cheap, then by all means, buy what you can. If you can afford better quality, do so. There is a difference. There are a lot of anecdotal quips about "I can't tell the difference" and that's fine...but there is a difference. There is a reason the high end tvs are expensive and it's not just so companies can take more of your money.

[TripleDigitRide]

No, no, NO!

Are you a salesman at an electronics store? Monster Cable is the biggest scam I've ever seen, especially for HDMI cables.

I also do no agree with people who say buying cheap tvs is the way to go. If all you can afford is cheap, then by all means, buy what you can. If you can afford better quality, do so. There is a difference. There are a lot of anecdotal quips about "I can't tell the difference" and that's fine...but there is a difference. There is a reason the high end tvs are expensive and it's not just so companies can take more of your money.

What he said. Monster Cable IS a scam, and those who don't know better continue to fall for it. They are a complete ripoff. 

And there IS definitely a difference between low-end and high-end TV's. All you have to do is stand back about 10' from the wall of TV's at any electronics retailer. You should see a clear difference in the picture qualities. 

 

I spent a good amount of time in the stores, trying to adjust the pictures on some of the lower-end models. It just wasn't cutting it. Once I got up to the $400 range, I was beginning to find some options I could tolerate for a bedroom TV. The thing is, not everyone has been spoiled by years of high-end TV's, so the picture quality on the low-end TV's are just fine, if not great. 

 

[TripleDigitRide]

Here's a good read for those who still believe the Monster Cable hype.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/04/the-great-cable-rip-off-for-visual-learners/

[Sam1]

My last few TV's have been $1500+, but we are looking for a cheaper ($300+/-) for the bedroom. I'd prefer 39"-40", LED, 1080p, 120Hz (will settle for 60Hz). I'd love a Smart TV, but not many of those in our price range. 

 

Anyone had any luck with the cheaper TVs? One that you didn't regret?

 

Any vizio is awesome, I will swear by that brand.  We've got 3 in our house now, a 6 year old 32", 3 year old 47" and a few month old 47" led and can't think of one bad thing to say about any of them.

[Sam1]

Here's a good read for those who still believe the Monster Cable hype.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/04/the-great-cable-rip-off-for-visual-learners/

 

 

But the salesman said they were much better!  I just get the free comcast ones, we're not running a 65 foot 3d imax screen lol

[hipower]

Here's a good read for those who still believe the Monster Cable hype.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/04/the-great-cable-rip-off-for-visual-learners/

Pic of me hanging head in shame. When I bought my first HD years ago, I feel for the hype, I confess. I'm shallow, gullible, and shiny things get my attention.

But I did learn. When helping put together a set for my inlaws, I found they had bought a cheap set from Radio Shack.

Imagine the crow I ate afterwards. I told them how much they needed the wonder cables. It wasn't a pleasant evening as we watched some great pictures on those "cheapo" cables.

[Guest Riciticky]

I went ahead and bought this one. 

 

http://www.walmart.com/ip/RCA-42-LED42C45RQ-Class-LED-1080p-60Hz-3.4-ultra-slim-HDTV/21097470

 

It had some decent reviews, and Best Buy is selling the exact TV for $459. If it's a decent TV, I'd say that's a good deal.

After all the vizio reviews? You know wal mart will take it back don't you?

[TripleDigitRide]

Pic of me hanging head in shame. When I bought my first HD years ago, I feel for the hype, I confess. I'm shallow, gullible, and shiny things get my attention.

But I did learn. When helping put together a set for my inlaws, I found they had bought a cheap set from Radio Shack.

Imagine the crow I ate afterwards. I told them how much they needed the wonder cables. It wasn't a pleasant evening as we watched some great pictures on those "cheapo" cables.

Don't feel bad. I fell for it when I purchased my first gaming system. The dog chewed through the cables, and I was forced to buy the cheap cables. I was more upset that the Monster Cables were no better than the cheap ones, than I was at the dog for chewing them.

[TripleDigitRide]

After all the vizio reviews? You know wal mart will take it back don't you?

I went to Wal-Mart and Best Buy to check out the TV's. Some of the Vizio's had a decent picture, but they were more than I wanted to spend on a bedroom TV. Like most other brands, not all Vizio's are created equal.  If the TV I ordered doesn't cut it, I'm going to wait until I can justify the higher cost of a worthwhile TV.

Edited November 17, 2013 by TripleDigitRide

[nightrunner]

Not saying you need monsters but there is a difference in hdmi cables. They affect the refresh rate as much as anything. It may not be very noticeable under most circumstances but some are better than others.

[TripleDigitRide]

Not saying you need monsters but there is a difference in hdmi cables. They affect the refresh rate as much as anything. It may not be very noticeable under most circumstances but some are better than others.

There are two different kind of HDMI cables; Standard and High Speed. The refresh rate of your TV has nothing to do with the cable. The maximum rate through ANY cable and into your TV is 60Hz. Your TV cannot accept anything greater. It is the job of your TV to convert the signal to its advertised rated refresh rate. 

This guy explains it much better than I can.

http://www.audioholics.com/audio-video-cables/120-hertz-hdmi-cables

 

Whether your display's internal refresh rate is 120 Hertz or some other rate, the signals coming in are running at frame rates determined by the sources of those signals. This typically means 30 Hertz for interlaced formats like 1080i, 60 Hertz for progressive formats like 720p or 480p, or 24 Hertz for certain players that support 1080p/24. Those signal frame rates, not your display's internal refresh rate, are what your cable must handle. If a salesman is trying to push that monstrously expensive "120Hz HDMI cable" into your hands--probably at a buck or more per Hertz - it's time to keep your wallet in your pocket.

 

Edited November 17, 2013 by TripleDigitRide

[Wyldk2]

I disagree with this. I use the cheapest HDMI cables that I can find. It's almost as bad a debate as "Mac vs Windows" or "Ford vs Chevy", but personally I don't see paying more than $2-$3 for an HDMI cable.

I'm guessing you don't have the best picture your tv can produce then?, Ok, do what you want it is your money and your tv. But you don't put regular unleaded gas in a race car, so why the cheap POS cables?

 

Reason I say this is i recently attended a Product imformation seminar on Monster. Don't get me wrong, I used to buy the cheaper cables all the time but thinking i may change up since the Monsters have a guarantee on them. One cable that is guaranteed to work, and free upgrades if the technology ever exceeds the capacity of the cable.

[tnguy]

*chuckle*

[TripleDigitRide]

For the record, I am extremely please with the TV. The picture is beyond my expectations.

The FedEx guys said they must be popular, because mine was the 6th one he had delivered today.

[Wyldk2]

Good. Now i found out Plasmas are going out (prices are dropping), LED's are replacing the LCD's and OLED's are going to replace LED's one of these days.

 

Funny thing is, I remember when Plasmas were the hot TV, and they cost a small fortune the first few years out.

[Sam1]

I'm guessing you don't have the best picture your tv can produce then?, Ok, do what you want it is your money and your tv. But you don't put regular unleaded gas in a race car, so why the cheap POS cables?

Reason I say this is i recently attended a Product imformation seminar on Monster. Don't get me wrong, I used to buy the cheaper cables all the time but thinking i may change up since the Monsters have a guarantee on them. One cable that is guaranteed to work, and free upgrades if the technology ever exceeds the capacity of the cable.

My free hdmi cables from Comcast are 1.4, and if anything is ever better than that, they'll give me some more free new ones.

Having a $100 cable is sort of like having a Corvette stingray with the engine limited to 55mph... No matter what that engine is capable of, it will still only go 55.

[whitewolf001]

I have a Vizio 50" Plasma, tis awesome, just has a lil blue line running down the right side of the screen but was free so I'm not going to complain.

[bersaguy]

Just went 5 days ago to Walmart and bought a new TV for my living room since my 15 year old Magnavox bit the gust and bought another Vizio  52 inch LED. Works great and remarkable easy set up. It was on sale for $349.00.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Possibly in the near future when (rich) folks start hooking 4K monitors up to computers via hdmi and they expect to get their money's worth out of the pixels, then PERHAPS some of the cheap cables won't be up to the job. But if a cheap cable works in the task assigned, then why fix what ain't broke?

 

If you like excellent digital audio, then the money would be better spent buying vintage vinyl hard drives to store the digital audio on, for that beautiful analog sound graced with "space" and "air".

[tnguy]

Possibly in the near future when (rich) folks start hooking 4K monitors up to computers via hdmi and they expect to get their money's worth out of the pixels, then PERHAPS some of the cheap cables won't be up to the job. But if a cheap cable works in the task assigned, then why fix what ain't broke?

 

If you like excellent digital audio, then the money would be better spent buying vintage vinyl hard drives to store the digital audio on, for that beautiful analog sound graced with "space" and "air".

 

 

When that happens, I expect a fair amount of the expensive cables will turn out not to be up to the job either.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

When that happens, I expect a fair amount of the expensive cables will turn out not to be up to the job either.

 

If 4K monitors ever come down out of the stratospheric price range, I'll be eager to find out. The reason 1080p monitors are so cheap and the price has never significantly fallen for many years on 2560 wide monitors, I believe is that the better quality 1080p panels work just as good for TV or computer, so the 1080p has huge manufacturing advantage of scale, even though a 1920 X 1080 display is IMO a TERRIBLE dimension for a general duty computer monitor, especially if you work a lot with text.

 

1080 ain't quite enough vertical pixels for me, for serious text editing, but on the other hand if you rotate the monitor, then 1920 is getting near tall enough, but dangit 1080 ain't wide enough either. :) There is much to be said for huge perfectly square monitors for computer work, if anyone would make such a beast. Because there are most likely as many applications that need lots of vertical space, as there are which need lots of horizontal space, so perfectly square would not bias against either class of applications.

 

Just saying, in a few years if 4K catches on, maybe manufacturing advantage of scale will drive em down cheap enough that I could justify the expense.