All posts by MikeB
Below are all of MikeB's postings, with the most recent are at the bottom of the page.
steve p: OK - since I worked today, I'm fluent (I say this a lot at work!). although I'm generally a lot more pithy.
TV's are still measured diagonally. A 42in TV panel from 10 or 5 years ago still measures 42in from corners to corner, and they are still 16 x 9 (although I did talk to a chap last week looking to replace his Philips from some years ago with an aspect ratio suitable for a modern widescreen film - a format which lasted about a year!).
However, the rest of the TV has changed. Ten years ago, the width of a 42in might have been as much as 50in or even more, because of the big surround, and perhaps speakers stuck on the side. 6 years ago, it would have been smaller, but still perhaps 41 and a half or 42in inches wide. Basically the diagonal size of the screen would have equaled the width (we tended to look like geniuses, being able to tell people the exact width without looking!).
However, look at a modern TV, say a 40, 42 or 43in (the sizes have multimpled , for reasons I cant quite fathom). Its now about 36in wide for a 40 Samsung (or even less for a curved), 37 and a half for a 42in, etc. A modern 55in is 48 and a half inches wide. So I always ask a customer what their TV's size and age is, because then I'll know the physical size.
So the width might be the smaller, but the overall screen area is the same on a current one - same screen, less surround. On the other hand, a new 32in TV will look small to someone replacing their existing 32in - not only have they got used to it, but its will be physically smaller, with its width reduced by an average of 10 percent.
At the same time, TV's have got larger. Six years ago, a 32in was almost the most popular size and in the front row, although 40-42in was probably the biggest area. Now 32in TV's are a second room/bedroom TV, and are at the back of our department. 55in TV's were relatively rare, there tended to be a fair jump in price, and there were relatively few on show. A 65in on display was a big event!
Now, the single most popular size is 48in-50in, and 55in are very common place.There are a couple of reasons for this. When flat screens came out they were pretty expensive (relatively - I try not to ask how much people paid for their 10 year old TV!), whereas they have fallen a great deal in real terms. You can buy a perfectly decent mid range 3D 55in TV from Panasonic (OK, a 2014 model) for 650 quid. That was the cost of a high end 32in six years ago (and the high end then is not high end now).
We have also expanded our living space, with people knocking through rooms, converting garages, etc. And since TV's are flat, they work fine on or against a wall, rather than in the corner, which gives you a bit more viewing distance. We can watch in HD, so we can sit a little closer. And of course we've just got used to them. A 32in TV looks huge compared with my 21in CRT (a cobblers children are never shod), although the CRT is actual 24in wide and about the same deep - its only 4 inches wider.
Since people often under purchased (under estimated the size of TV for their space), going up to a 42in does not seem so much of a stretch - it was often the right distance for a 42in in the first place. They'd just bought a 32in because they 'didn't want to overwhelm the room'.
Distance always equals size. I'm old school, and assume two and a half to three times the size of the screen away from it is a decent ratio. Which magazine has a vague but kind of useful guide, and there are any number of size guides on the net, most of which tend to be a bit macho in the sizing.
I'll always try to measure the distance a customer is from their current TV, because thats a good guide to the actual size they will need (perhaps one size up, if they got it right the first time). Its should fit perfectly, like a suit or shoes. If it does not, then its going to be uncomfortable. And I want my customers to come back and tell me 'its perfect'.
Its often surprising at just how far away people actually are from really very small TV's - they often say its a very small room, only for me to discover they are 15 feet away from the TV. Of course the reverse can be true - some people have a 46in at a distance I'd put a 32in, but the customer is always right!
In the case of 4K, they might actually be able to do that - the screen res is 4 times greater than HD, so you can sit rather closer. But much of the time you's still be watching HD footage, so perhaps try not to be too adventurous quite yet!
Once you've got the size right, your half way there. Its like buying a suit, etc. Once you've got something that fits, then you can decide what style, cut, lining, fabric, etc. But its need to fit, and need to work for you, as a design, not just as a picture (although that's the most important). A lady saw a high end Samsung some years ago, which had a very thin bezel with a small clear surround. She exclaimed 'thats like an infinity pool, but as a Television'. My reply was 'can I use that description, Madam?' Modern TV's are like that - minimalist, because thats how we like them.
| link to this comment |
Chris Norton: You havn't said what model of Sony you have, but if its like the HX895 that I've got (and I seem to remember that Dave Lindsay has a similar model), then I can understand your problem.
These machines have excellent tuners - indeed perhaps too good. My machine could/can get a signal not only from Waltham, but Talcneston, Sandy Heath and Belmont. In fact the Talcneston signal would confuse it, being just strong enough to make it want to record a BBC1 programme from that transmitter, not Waltham, but not enough to actually record. I had to put a 12db attenuator on it to kill the signal strength, which was 93%. David had a similar problem.
Looking at your position, your 15km closer to Waltham than I am, with clear line of sight - you dont really need an amp. You said that the Sony had broken up a bit on some channels, hence the retuning. I suspect that you had the same problem that I did - a very high signal strength, which led to breakups (the Sony is robust at levels that a Panasonic would scream at).
Retuning to catch Waltham rather than Belmont is tricky (my Goodmans box is awful for this), because Belmont starts on channel 22, whereas Waltham is 49. The Sony is normally fine for this, but in your case its locked on, hence your problem.
David's solutions should work - manually tune, or pull out the aerial until part way through the scan (which is what I do with the Goodmans box). However, check your signal strength. If Belmont is being pulled in strong enough to be the 'main' transmitter', your going to need to kill that signal much more. Its odd that Waltham isn't just coming up, even on the 800's.
if David's solutions dont work, try a cheap attenuator or two, and get the signal strength down to around the 70-75% mark - at that level, Belmont should come up in the 800's.
| link to this comment |
TimH: The tuners in the Samsung and the Sony might be slightly different, and so your problem might not be showing up on both of them. Sony's are really sensitive but robust (if your HX series is anything like mine), but Samsungs can be a little more skittish.
The Samsung certainly has no internal boosting , but a simple indoor aerial for about a tenner might at least give you a chance to check out the problem. The idea of splitting the signal is a good one (its what I do), because you can see what the tuners are doing seperately. Might be worth changing the fly lead on the Samsung, to see if thats causing a problem.
BTW, the Samsung model no. makes sense if you speak Samsung! Its a European model 40in TV, which came out in 2010 (J is 2015, so work backwards missing out G, since its apparently very rude in Korean). The 8 series is always pretty much the top level Samsung range, and this one has a 200hz screen, which was top notch at the time. Still a very nice set indeed! Add a Freeview HD tuner in some way, and it should fly.
| link to this comment |
Liam: Most LG's and Sony's have a generic sat. tuner built in. One or two Panasonic's have them now (used to be a lot more common). Higher level Samsung's will have one or even two Freesat tuners built in, depending on the model.
Off the top of my head, the 4K Samsungs with Freesat will be the 7000/8000 series (actually has two), and 6410's (the 10 generally denotes a white TV, and for some strange reason, Freesat bunged in). In fact this page will have the list of the ones available (although it misses out the Samsung 8000's for some reason): http://www.johnlewis.com/…3t43
As for easy switching, I'm not actually sure, since all the TV's tend to be on a central box via HDMI's, so that everything comes off one source. Panasonic's a couple of years back were pretty simple, you just hit 'source', and it would start with the Freeview tuner, go onto the Freesat tuner if it had one, and then AV1, etc. Best bet would be to look at the manual for a new TV, but since I'm working tomorrow I will try to check it out! Its a useful point, since I'd now like to know myself!
If your not too worried by Freesat v a generic tuner, you will give yourself a bigger selection. I really rated the Sony x8 series last year as a great entry 4K - looked good, great refresh, and decently priced - its looks even better this year. The x9 was all our favorite, but not cheap. I wasn't so happy with some of the entry level Pannies last year, but their x9 isn't bad - the x8 and it seem to have a similar spec in terms of the panel.
The LG 9 has a generic sat. tuner, and when I looked at it when working on Friday night its refresh wasn't all that great. Its a shame, and perhaps it was just that model/size (a 65in), but LG havn't quite hit the high notes with 4K for the past year (apart from the OLED).
Samsung has the most choice in 4K with Freesat. The 9000 series is very good (it blew the 65in LG away) on 2K, which is what I'm looking for. The 8000 series has slightly lower processing (the cynical amoungst us might argue that PQI is just old refresh rate times two), but a very good set indeed (last years 8500 really stood out). The 7000 isn't bad at all (a bit variable last year), and I'm pleasantly surprised by the 6400 series. You'd be looking at the 6410, which is a bit more that the one without Freesat, depending on size. Decent entry 4K at a decent price.
When your buying any TV, your really paying for the panel - the better it is, the better the picture and the more it costs. The two parts to that is the contrast ratio and the refresh rate - better blacks, sharper movement. If the store where your looking (and you really must look at the TV before you buy) can run film credits, thats great - its the test we use. Black background, white print and it moves - perfect test. Its tough, and its not the only test, but it will sort the wheat from the chaff. Watch a 4K on 2K/HD if poss - your going to be watching 2K content most of the time for a while, so make sure it copes as well as possible with 2K and upscaling. If it looks worse than your current TV, thats a no no.
Picks this year? Decent entry - the Samsung 6400 range, but the Freesat version is a bit more pricey that without - about 100 quid more for the 55in.
No freesat, but generic - the Sony x8, without a doubt. More expensive than Samsung at the moment, but Samsung got their models out first, so its been in the market longer. Arguably its competing with the Samsung 7000 series as well.
Top level - Sony x9 without Freesat (havn't seen it yet, but...), and the Samsung 8000 series with. They are all going to be curved, but very nice bits of kit. cash back offer by Samsung might help justify buying one. The 7000 are looking good as well.
Have a look at the Pannies as well - I havn't really compared them yet, but the x6 was pretty much par or slightly ahead of the Samsung 6 series.
JL starts Clearance on Thursday, so have a look there - they will have red tickets on them (called Branch markdowns). Generally come back from customers for various reasons, but normal warrenties, etc. I've sold a number of 2014 55in Samsung H8500's for about 1450 - thats cracking value for what your getting, so you might do well. And of course Currys will be doing some sort of summer sale, which means their prices will get matched elsewhere. Its not long after the start of the year, but Brands are already giving away free soundbars, etc.
I'll try and check about switching between tuners tomorrow - its the sort of knowledge that might come in handy!
| link to this comment |
Liam: I asked one of the full timers today, and his description of the Samsung way of switching tuners matched yours. I actually tried it out on an 55H7000 - you go to menu, then broadcast, then the aerial, then fiddle around there. A right pain. I didn't get a chance to look at the LG's, but my mate confirmed that the Panasonic's are easy ( same as about 5 years ago), and the Sony rep showed me their system, which seems very similar to the Panasonic. You flick down through the sources, and you can even choose to leave out the ones you dont use.
If your not bothered about having Freesat, then Sony or Panasonic (if you are) sounds easier. The alternative is to just get a seperate Freesat box ( less than fifty notes) and just flick between sources.
Bigger question - is that the right size and technology for the person? You'll be able to go up one size from the current TV, so a 40 to 48 switch works well, but for 4K I'd be thinking 2-2.5 times size of screen. If the person has fast broadband (20mbs plus), uses Netflix, and wants to stream movies/sport, then 4K makes sense. On the other hand, if not, then a decent mid range HD might do fine. To be fair, the prices for a 2015 40ish TV in the mid-range are around six to seven hundred, which in some cases is only about 50 to a hundred less than the 4K ones! If you really didn't care about sat. built in or 4K, then grab a UE40H6400 while you can - about to vanish but cracking value at 399.
Perhaps the Sony x83 with a Freesat box (if you didn't want to use to use the generic sat. tuner) - very good picture in 2K, 4k set, and easy to use. If not then the 7000 (we have the 40in, not the 43), but its a lot of cash to pay for a Freesat tuner that's a pain to switch to and from.
| link to this comment |
Liam: A 42in Panasonic 740 from last year would be perfect, although goodness knows how your going to get one. Its basically a mid level panel with Freesat and some nicer styling. Great simple remote, Freesat, and pretty simple to go from one source to another. They vanished late last year, although the Panasonic area rep said they couldn't keep up with demand (which was strange since they were a lot more money for much the same panel!).
Found one: Richer Sounds have them( at a good price as well). Panasonic VIERA TX42AS740B | 42 inch 3D LED Smart TV 1080p HD Freeview HD freesat HD | Richer Sounds
By the sound of it, the person using it would get on very well with a Panasonic remote, and its a decent bit of kit. Not 4K, but thats not the end of the world. However, its a 2014 model, so grab one ASAP.
| link to this comment |
Thomas tranters: Yep - different TV brands can have slightly different tuners. Your Panasonic has pretty sensitive tuners, and the breakup might be that your signal strength is too high for the tuner (check it). Sony's also tend to have fairly sensitive tuners, but are a bit less likely to break up at high strength. Of course things change from batch to batch, etc, but a good brand will generally have a decent tuner.
| link to this comment |
James lincoln: If an indoor aerial works for you, thats great, but generally, they are not that good. They are pretty small, and are of course generally right by the TV, which tends to be fairly low down. When customers ask about them, we tend to say 'they work as well as they work'. If your close to the transmitter, high on a hill, etc, then you might be OK, but one on the roof or even in the loft is liable to get a much better signal. Perhaps you should check your rooftop aerial if it does give you a worse aerial than an indoor one.
Of course to some extent you get what you pay for, but they are not generally recommended. You havn't given a post code, but it would be interesting to find out how you are getting 100% signal (quality?) in a poor area with an indoor aerial. And what sort of interference do you get?
| link to this comment |
Dominic Payer: Could be a software problem, and its always worth doing an update, and a reset. However, try changing the fly lead - if its damaged then that might account for not being able to get that particular mux. Check your signal strength before that of course, but its an easy thing to check.
| link to this comment |
Friday 12 June 2015 7:14PM
Tricia Camm: Looking at Dave Lindsay's prediction, there might have been a good reason for the previous occupants to have Sky. If you do have to go down the sat. route, Freesat would be the easiest way, with a Humax PVR instead of your BT one. You wont be able to get the BT sports channels that way, though.