Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/24/2013 3:14:47 PM EST
Pros or cons of the new format?
Looking at a Sony or Samsung 65"
Thanks
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 6:52:03 PM EST
Originally Posted By oscardeuce:
Pros or cons of the new format?
Looking at a Sony or Samsung 65"
Thanks
View Quote


Pointless.

No content, HDMI standard needs to be updated to properly support the format, tv's are expensive. Wait 2-4 years.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 6:56:57 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/24/2013 6:57:21 PM EST by DragoMuseveni]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 501st:


Pointless.

No content, HDMI standard needs to be updated to properly support the format, tv's are expensive. Wait 2-4 years.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 501st:
Originally Posted By oscardeuce:
Pros or cons of the new format?
Looking at a Sony or Samsung 65"
Thanks


Pointless.

No content, HDMI standard needs to be updated to properly support the format, tv's are expensive. Wait 2-4 years.

Not only is there no content there is nothing to store said content on other than a hard drive.
And forget about having enough bandwidth over cable TV or internet streaming.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:07:34 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/26/2013 9:03:14 AM EST by CLICKBANGBANG]
I'm potato.

$4 large for a TV? I'd say, nope.

If you are set for it, spend $2k on the screen, and $2k on the sound
.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:10:17 PM EST
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/65-class-64-1-2-diag--led-1080p-120hz-smart-hdtv/8815227.p?id=1218901329523&skuId=8815227&st=categoryid$abcat0101001&cp=1&lp=4

Just get this OP. I bought this exact model a few weeks ago for $1600 something.

There are better things to spend money on besides a TV with jizzmos that won't work as they should.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:18:24 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DragoMuseveni:

Not only is there no content there is nothing to store said content on other than a hard drive.
And forget about having enough bandwidth over cable TV or internet streaming.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DragoMuseveni:
Originally Posted By 501st:
Originally Posted By oscardeuce:
Pros or cons of the new format?
Looking at a Sony or Samsung 65"
Thanks


Pointless.

No content, HDMI standard needs to be updated to properly support the format, tv's are expensive. Wait 2-4 years.

Not only is there no content there is nothing to store said content on other than a hard drive.
And forget about having enough bandwidth over cable TV or internet streaming.


This.
Unless you are an "early adopter", skip if until the technology is stabilized and becomes more widely available, especially the media end.
My gut feeling is this will grow legs, unlike 3D, that has pretty much been a joke.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:20:13 PM EST
its a waste right now.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:26:17 PM EST
50 " 4k TV for 1100 dollars with great reviews!

http://www.amazon.com/Seiki-Digital-SE50UY04-50-Inch-120Hz/dp/B00BXF7I9M

You're welcome.

If you want it in 39" for 699 it's there too.


Don't say 13'ers are good for nothing
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:36:59 PM EST
I think we paid 1,400 for a 46inch.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:52:43 PM EST
Buy PVS14s instead.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:53:42 PM EST
The tech is not there to back it up yet. Bluray at 1080P is not even close to the same resolution. exponentially more pixels. virtually the only thing main stream right now that actually is 4 k is movie theaters. IMO 4k is not worth it and likely will not be for several more years.
The reason for that is a) market support b) bandwidth. just about three years ago sony finally won the blu-ray vs hd-dvd fight and now sony has its blu-ray tech EVERYWHERE not something that is going away quickly ( don't believe me, more DVD's are still sold annually than Blu-ray IIRC) additionally, not only does 4k require a new tv, as long as we still have a physical market (i.e. disks) for media, people will also have to purchase a new player of some type. trust me people are loathe to give up electronics that 3 years ago were top of the line stuff with $$$ price tags.
pointB) bandwidth. we are seeing a paradigm shift (albeit somewhat surprisingly slow) to streaming media. as i mentioned earlier 4k has exponentially more information to transmit than 1080p video, combine that with the fact that 4k stuff will likely be packaged with the latest dolby twelve thousand point 1 channel audio and you're looking at a metric shit ton of data for a standard length movie. if i had to guess i would say probably at least 5x what a typical blu-ray is. probably more.
heres the kicker. your ISP wants a piece of that action. lets assume for a minute that everybody switched from 1080p netflix streams to 4k streaming overnight. you would be demanding 5x or more data for the same content. ya know how the more people you have on your wireless network at home, the slower everything is? same idea. As a result, ISP are already starting to charge more (some times drastically more) for data usage. both to deter excess use and begin piling money for infrastructure update.
verizon has dropped unlimited data entirely from plans and their network now prohibits you from downloading files greater than two mb. and if you do go over your data limits, big overages for you. Cable one, an isp in my area offers 20Mbps internet connection, and it is screaming fast, way faster than DSL. but the plan has limits. I broke it one time. Guess who no longer has cable internetz?

so to summarize, the market is not ready for yet another revolution in resolution, and with a shift toward internet based media, it is likely to be cost and or bandwidth prohibitive for the time being. In other words, don't fo.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:54:12 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By HingleMcCringleberry:
Buy PVS14s instead.
View Quote


this
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:57:53 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By silverknife1:

snip
View Quote

It makes me ill to see a good write up ruined by a lack of paragraphs.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:58:28 PM EST
No but I have had a $5 shake
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:58:41 PM EST
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 7:58:53 PM EST
I just want one for a computer monitor.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 8:02:25 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By USMC88-93:
I just want one for a computer monitor.
View Quote


I hadn't thought of that actually. Now that you mention it, that would be about the most useful application for the next 2 or 3 years. the GPU's we are seeing these days have way more than enough processing power to run 4k. but it also needs to be supported by the OS, the motherboard, the specific GPU, and whatever program/game you are trying to run at 4k. haven't been following PC's enough recently to know if this is on the radar.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 8:04:33 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By silverknife1:


I hadn't thought of that actually. Now that you mention it, that would be about the most useful application for the next 2 or 3 years. the GPU's we are seeing these days have way more than enough processing power to run 4k. but it also needs to be supported by the OS, the motherboard, the specific GPU, and whatever program/game you are trying to run at 4k. haven't been following PC's enough recently to know if this is on the radar.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By silverknife1:
Originally Posted By USMC88-93:
I just want one for a computer monitor.


I hadn't thought of that actually. Now that you mention it, that would be about the most useful application for the next 2 or 3 years. the GPU's we are seeing these days have way more than enough processing power to run 4k. but it also needs to be supported by the OS, the motherboard, the specific GPU, and whatever program/game you are trying to run at 4k. haven't been following PC's enough recently to know if this is on the radar.


PC's have supported 4k for a number of years.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 8:06:25 PM EST
I have a 43" Pioneer Elite PRO-810 $3799.00 for...
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 8:07:18 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By silverknife1:


I hadn't thought of that actually. Now that you mention it, that would be about the most useful application for the next 2 or 3 years. the GPU's we are seeing these days have way more than enough processing power to run 4k. but it also needs to be supported by the OS, the motherboard, the specific GPU, and whatever program/game you are trying to run at 4k. haven't been following PC's enough recently to know if this is on the radar.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By silverknife1:
Originally Posted By USMC88-93:
I just want one for a computer monitor.


I hadn't thought of that actually. Now that you mention it, that would be about the most useful application for the next 2 or 3 years. the GPU's we are seeing these days have way more than enough processing power to run 4k. but it also needs to be supported by the OS, the motherboard, the specific GPU, and whatever program/game you are trying to run at 4k. haven't been following PC's enough recently to know if this is on the radar.



TV's suck for computer monitor's compared to a dedicated computer monitor, unless you don't do any video editing or gaming.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 8:09:22 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By m1afan1000:

It makes me ill to see a good write up ruined by a lack of paragraphs.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By m1afan1000:
Originally Posted By silverknife1:

snip

It makes me ill to see a good write up ruined by a lack of paragraphs.


this is the internetz, aint no one got time for paragraphs. some of the grammar stuff does bug me though, especially the your/you're thing. that makes me snort in derision!
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 8:13:40 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ReconB4:



TV's suck for computer monitor's compared to a dedicated computer monitor, unless you don't do any video editing or gaming.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By ReconB4:
Originally Posted By silverknife1:
Originally Posted By USMC88-93:
I just want one for a computer monitor.


I hadn't thought of that actually. Now that you mention it, that would be about the most useful application for the next 2 or 3 years. the GPU's we are seeing these days have way more than enough processing power to run 4k. but it also needs to be supported by the OS, the motherboard, the specific GPU, and whatever program/game you are trying to run at 4k. haven't been following PC's enough recently to know if this is on the radar.



TV's suck for computer monitor's compared to a dedicated computer monitor, unless you don't do any video editing or gaming.


hey now, are you accusing me of trying to use a TV as a monitor? please, I would never stand for such foolishness. I merely said i haven't been following the pc market close enough over the last few years ( i was sort of into it in high school, i have an ATI 4850 in my computer and it was hot shit when i got it) to know where 4k is respectively. Just that it is likely the best application for that resolution for a while.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 10:42:51 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By CLICKBANGBANG:
$4 large for a TV? I'd say, nope.

If you are set for it, spend $2k on the screen, and $2k on the sound.
View Quote



"4k" is the newest tech I believe, not the price. I just learned about it after reading this thread myself. I'm waiting for mainstream OLED.
Link Posted: 10/24/2013 10:48:29 PM EST
Originally Posted By oscardeuce:
Pros or cons of the new format?
Looking at a Sony or Samsung 65"
Thanks
View Quote

I saw both of those at Best Buy a few weeks back, and I was pretty blown away!

Do want, but I just can't get past that price tag. I'm with alot of others here. Give it a few years or so and let the price and technology stabilize.

I'm actually thinking about holding off on the whole theater system just for that very reason.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 10:27:03 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By -DesertFox-:

I saw both of those at Best Buy a few weeks back, and I was pretty blown away!

Do want, but I just can't get past that price tag. I'm with alot of others here. Give it a few years or so and let the price and technology stabilize.

I'm actually thinking about holding off on the whole theater system just for that very reason.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By -DesertFox-:
Originally Posted By oscardeuce:
Pros or cons of the new format?
Looking at a Sony or Samsung 65"
Thanks

I saw both of those at Best Buy a few weeks back, and I was pretty blown away!

Do want, but I just can't get past that price tag. I'm with alot of others here. Give it a few years or so and let the price and technology stabilize.

I'm actually thinking about holding off on the whole theater system just for that very reason.


If you want the theater experience but it is only the TV holding you back you might want to reconsider (considering of course that you have the money to drop on a theater).
It does not matter what you buy or when you buy it, two years from now it will be stone age tech If you are looking for the theater experience, IMO it is more than a tv. you need good sound. you need a good amplifier and you need good speakers capable of handling the range of sounds necessary. you could go right now and order your 4k tv and not spend another dollar, but imo the lack of good sound cannot be compensated for by the picture alone. its really about the whole package

As far as sound goes, you need a minimum of 5.1 two left, right, center and two rear for surround. The dolby algorithms for structuring surround sound are awesome, but you have no idea until you've experienced a properly set up system. more than 6.1 is better, but then you also have to spend more money on speakers to handle all the channels, have to space in your theater to mount all of them, and spend more on an amp capable of handling the 9.1, 9.2, 11.1, 11.2 etc etc stuff that is out now. also IMO that .1/.2 is CRITICAL. for those not in the know in dolby language, 5.1 means 5 mid range speakers 1 subwoofer. for me not having a sub is sacrilege. it really breaks the whole experience.

As far as tv's 1080p TVS already look awesome, and in a few years when prices of 4k tech drops a bit you can just drop a 4k tv in and voila your'e all up to date. Assuming of course that you did your due diligence on a sound system. I also assume that you already have a TV that could be used until such time

Another factor for a "theater" is to actually have a theater room with stageable/ controllable lighting. Ideally no windows and a closeable doorway. people don't realize it, but controlling ambient light can really change your theater experience. this theater room should also be somewhat symmetrical so that sound can be distributed evenly. If you don't have such a place no big deal, its just icing on the cake.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 10:34:53 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By silverknife1:


If you want the theater experience but it is only the TV holding you back you might want to reconsider (considering of course that you have the money to drop on a theater).
It does not matter what you buy or when you buy it, two years from now it will be stone age tech If you are looking for the theater experience, IMO it is more than a tv. you need good sound. you need a good amplifier and you need good speakers capable of handling the range of sounds necessary. you could go right now and order your 4k tv and not spend another dollar, but imo the lack of good sound cannot be compensated for by the picture alone. its really about the whole package

As far as sound goes, you need a minimum of 5.1 two left, right, center and two rear for surround. The dolby algorithms for structuring surround sound are awesome, but you have no idea until you've experienced a properly set up system. more than 6.1 is better, but then you also have to spend more money on speakers to handle all the channels, have to space in your theater to mount all of them, and spend more on an amp capable of handling the 9.1, 9.2, 11.1, 11.2 etc etc stuff that is out now. also IMO that .1/.2 is CRITICAL. for those not in the know in dolby language, 5.1 means 5 mid range speakers 1 subwoofer. for me not having a sub is sacrilege. it really breaks the whole experience.

As far as tv's 1080p TVS already look awesome, and in a few years when prices of 4k tech drops a bit you can just drop a 4k tv in and voila your'e all up to date. Assuming of course that you did your due diligence on a sound system. I also assume that you already have a TV that could be used until such time

Another factor for a "theater" is to actually have a theater room with stageable/ controllable lighting. Ideally no windows and a closeable doorway. people don't realize it, but controlling ambient light can really change your theater experience. this theater room should also be somewhat symmetrical so that sound can be distributed evenly. If you don't have such a place no big deal, its just icing on the cake.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By silverknife1:
Originally Posted By -DesertFox-:
Originally Posted By oscardeuce:
Pros or cons of the new format?
Looking at a Sony or Samsung 65"
Thanks

I saw both of those at Best Buy a few weeks back, and I was pretty blown away!

Do want, but I just can't get past that price tag. I'm with alot of others here. Give it a few years or so and let the price and technology stabilize.

I'm actually thinking about holding off on the whole theater system just for that very reason.


If you want the theater experience but it is only the TV holding you back you might want to reconsider (considering of course that you have the money to drop on a theater).
It does not matter what you buy or when you buy it, two years from now it will be stone age tech If you are looking for the theater experience, IMO it is more than a tv. you need good sound. you need a good amplifier and you need good speakers capable of handling the range of sounds necessary. you could go right now and order your 4k tv and not spend another dollar, but imo the lack of good sound cannot be compensated for by the picture alone. its really about the whole package

As far as sound goes, you need a minimum of 5.1 two left, right, center and two rear for surround. The dolby algorithms for structuring surround sound are awesome, but you have no idea until you've experienced a properly set up system. more than 6.1 is better, but then you also have to spend more money on speakers to handle all the channels, have to space in your theater to mount all of them, and spend more on an amp capable of handling the 9.1, 9.2, 11.1, 11.2 etc etc stuff that is out now. also IMO that .1/.2 is CRITICAL. for those not in the know in dolby language, 5.1 means 5 mid range speakers 1 subwoofer. for me not having a sub is sacrilege. it really breaks the whole experience.

As far as tv's 1080p TVS already look awesome, and in a few years when prices of 4k tech drops a bit you can just drop a 4k tv in and voila your'e all up to date. Assuming of course that you did your due diligence on a sound system. I also assume that you already have a TV that could be used until such time

Another factor for a "theater" is to actually have a theater room with stageable/ controllable lighting. Ideally no windows and a closeable doorway. people don't realize it, but controlling ambient light can really change your theater experience. this theater room should also be somewhat symmetrical so that sound can be distributed evenly. If you don't have such a place no big deal, its just icing on the cake.

It's not just the TV, although the price tag is a big reason. I think the biggest thing holding me back is rather the fact that it isn't at the top of the priority list, yet.

Believe me, I'm looking into it all. Surround sound, lighting and the whole bit. I'm still looking into it, of course. It's just not a necessity as of yet. I'm thinking when I am, I'll be able to afford it. It's just that the price tag is mighty hard to swallow when there is other more important needs.

Link Posted: 10/25/2013 10:36:14 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 501st:


Pointless.

No content, HDMI standard needs to be updated to properly support the format, tv's are expensive. Wait 2-4 years.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 501st:
Originally Posted By oscardeuce:
Pros or cons of the new format?
Looking at a Sony or Samsung 65"
Thanks


Pointless.

No content, HDMI standard needs to be updated to properly support the format, tv's are expensive. Wait 2-4 years.


I agree. It will be great for PC gaming once they make one for a reasonable price that is 120hz.
Link Posted: 10/25/2013 10:49:18 PM EST
[Last Edit: 10/25/2013 10:50:45 PM EST by scott69916]
I have an asus 4k 27" for my pc. It's good for more open games (strategy / fuck around) but for serious competitive play its just too much screen. Fantastic for work/multitasking. Good for movies IF you can find some in 4k (which you cant), makes 1080p look like a joke. Ive never run 1080p, I never understood why it became the gold standard for HD 5 years ago when there has always been better resolutions for atleast a decade prior. 4k has been around for a very long time, its a damn shame they stopped making CRT monitors. If they kept on going, we'd be at 8 or 16k pixels by now.

In the lagging-behind TV/Movie world, 4K will be replacing 1080p very soon. Prolly within a few years. Its already being implemented in most movies theaters around here, so the TV manufacturers and DVD makers will follow. Its going to be hilarious when the TV companies start advertising 4K monitors as "ground breaking innovations!" LOL
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:38:22 AM EST
Did some serious TV shopping last month. Just about pulled the trigger on the Sony 65" 4k. Decided to wait a few more years for 4k to improve, or skip 4k and wait for 8k. I watch a lot of football and the 120hz refresh rate on the current 4k sets has noticeable blur and lag. Ended up with a 64" 8500 Samsung plasma. It is, or will be, upgradable to play at 4k with a expansion module, 600hz refresh rate, and the absolute best picture I have ever seen.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:43:16 AM EST
I got a Samsung LED 3D with 240hz refresh. Never used the 3D (needed special glasses that they don't make anymore), but the refresh was very noticeable from 120hz.
about a 50" in size.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:44:42 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By silverknife1:
The tech is not there to back it up yet. Bluray at 1080P is not even close to the same resolution. exponentially more pixels. virtually the only thing main stream right now that actually is 4 k is movie theaters. IMO 4k is not worth it and likely will not be for several more years.
The reason for that is a) market support b) bandwidth. just about three years ago sony finally won the blu-ray vs hd-dvd fight and now sony has its blu-ray tech EVERYWHERE not something that is going away quickly ( don't believe me, more DVD's are still sold annually than Blu-ray IIRC) additionally, not only does 4k require a new tv, as long as we still have a physical market (i.e. disks) for media, people will also have to purchase a new player of some type. trust me people are loathe to give up electronics that 3 years ago were top of the line stuff with $$$ price tags.
View Quote



I think part of the problem is DVD upconvert. I know all the Videophiles will jump in and yell at me but for most people they bought a blue-ray player and were surprised how well their DVD's looked on it. There is a difference but its not like going from VHS to DVD.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:48:29 AM EST
Something to be understood about the new 4k TVs is how they measure the resolution to get 4K. Traditionally it has meant resolution in the vertical plane. 480, the original resolution for Americans TVs, was how many lines of scanning was in the vertical. Then they added 720 and next 1080. Some computer screens are now using 1920 or something like that. Again this was all measured in the vertical. With the new 4K TVs they have now switched to measuring in the horizontal. Since most TVs are now in wide screen format it is obvious that we will see larger numbers being advertized. The 4K TVs are actually only around 3700 and not truly 4k. But again this is not as large a jump as to be expected. It is easier to show larger numbers just by switching from vertical numbers to horizontal numbers.

The TVs do offer increased clarity but at a much higher cost as usual for any new tech.

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:57:35 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BeerPimp:



I think part of the problem is DVD upconvert. I know all the Videophiles will jump in and yell at me but for most people they bought a blue-ray player and were surprised how well their DVD's looked on it. There is a difference but its not like going from VHS to DVD.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By BeerPimp:
Originally Posted By silverknife1:
The tech is not there to back it up yet. Bluray at 1080P is not even close to the same resolution. exponentially more pixels. virtually the only thing main stream right now that actually is 4 k is movie theaters. IMO 4k is not worth it and likely will not be for several more years.
The reason for that is a) market support b) bandwidth. just about three years ago sony finally won the blu-ray vs hd-dvd fight and now sony has its blu-ray tech EVERYWHERE not something that is going away quickly ( don't believe me, more DVD's are still sold annually than Blu-ray IIRC) additionally, not only does 4k require a new tv, as long as we still have a physical market (i.e. disks) for media, people will also have to purchase a new player of some type. trust me people are loathe to give up electronics that 3 years ago were top of the line stuff with $$$ price tags.



I think part of the problem is DVD upconvert. I know all the Videophiles will jump in and yell at me but for most people they bought a blue-ray player and were surprised how well their DVD's looked on it. There is a difference but its not like going from VHS to DVD.


That's a big part of it. I've got a media server that is primarily stocked with 480p content from my DVD collection and with my Xbox 360 providing up conversion to 1080p, I'm hard pressed to notice the difference between that and 1080p content once I'm sucked into the movie. I can obviously tell the difference but once you are "into" a movie, your brain starts to care less.

There be even less of a gap between 1080p up converted to 4k and true 4k. I'm not even sure people will be able to tell the difference period.

The real application for 4k will be gaming where your eyes are constantly picking up small details in a scene (like some sniping fag in the distance) rather than movies where your brain is focused on the entire scene as a whole.

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 8:59:37 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By thylaughingman:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/65-class-64-1-2-diag--led-1080p-120hz-smart-hdtv/8815227.p?id=1218901329523&skuId=8815227&st=categoryid$abcat0101001&cp=1&lp=4

Just get this OP. I bought this exact model a few weeks ago for $1600 something.

There are better things to spend money on besides a TV with jizzmos that won't work as they should.
View Quote

I just bought this in 60" for $1600 :(

Great TV. Highly recommend it.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:01:42 AM EST
Waste of money right now, IMO.
Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:01:44 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By fistpoint:



"4k" is the newest tech I believe, not the price. I just learned about it after reading this thread myself. I'm waiting for mainstream OLED.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By fistpoint:
Originally Posted By CLICKBANGBANG:
$4 large for a TV? I'd say, nope.

If you are set for it, spend $2k on the screen, and $2k on the sound.



"4k" is the newest tech I believe, not the price. I just learned about it after reading this thread myself. I'm waiting for mainstream OLED.


Well, dang. I'm potato the whole thing.

Link Posted: 10/26/2013 9:02:33 AM EST
$1200 or so for a 55" Vizeo from Costco about 2 yrs ago.

Unlikely I ever need 'more' TV than what I am looking at. Coupled with Comcast HD service ... it rates 10/10.
Top Top