Researching HDTV Refresh rate 120 vs. 60

[Pa Jayhawk]

I am a pretty technical type person, although when it comes to Audio/Video, I still have a very good understanding but don't really splurge much. I still do not have digital cable. I just don't get that much out of it with the 90 whatever channels I already get on basic.

Time may change down the line, and I am doing research and looking to pick up either a 46" or 52" HDTV. I know that I will likely need to pick up HD channels and Digital cable to take advantage of this. Will work that out as I go along and maybe a couple years down the line. :laugh:

As technical as I am, I do have a question I am unsure of and it probably is because of my computer knowledge and lack of knowledge with the TV's. It has to do with 120 vs. 60. In doing research I get the impression that because the networks are mainly 30fps and movies are 24. So the only real benefit most people other that people trying to sell TV's see is when using it to view Movies over DVD or BlueRay so you do not encounter 3:2 Pulldown. To me it just doesn't make sense with my computer knowledge that it wouldn't also affect Sports, fast moving stuff or Games. Anyone (Eracer comes to mind :laugh have any feedback on this.

I am looking at the Sony Bravia, as I have always had good luck with the lifespan of Sony TV's and Monitors. They do have a good deal around on the 52" W series which is a 120hz. Otherwise for the money and for how I am I would likely go with a 60hz in a 46".

I guess I would also ask if anyone recommends anything to specifically look for? Kinda funny, this all started because my wife wants a LR Entertainment center Wall Unit and it would dwarf our 27" Sony Trinitron, so I told her this would likely mean getting a big screen LCD.

 

[zaphod]

you did not say what you're main viewing would be. The 120 hz is excellent for gaming, for sports and movies IMHO the technology was not caught up to the 120 hz standard. The Bravia series Sony is an excellent choice.

Check out AVSFORUM.com for discussions and tips on this topic.

I have a Bravia 50" XBR1. Just connected up a 5.1 surround with a Pioneer receiver, Klipsch synergy speakers with 10" downfiring subwoofer and Panny Bluray.

 

[Eracer]

I see you understand the reason for 120Hz, but I'll restate it anyway...

Basically, a 60Hz refresh can be divided evenly by any video signal (30fps interlaced, 60fps interlaced, or 60 fields per second progressive)

But that same 60Hz refresh rate can't be divided evenly by a 24fps film signal. Hence the need for 3:2 pulldown, which basically throws away a certain amount of information in order to get the signal timing correct.

A 120Hz refresh can be divided evenly by all video signals (30i, 60i, and 60p) and also the 24fps film signal. Thus, there is no need for 3:2 pulldown. No information thrown out = better picture.

Why is this only important for film-based signals?

Doesn't matter how many times you refresh the screen - if a signal was recorded at 60fps, that's all the information there is, and any motion artifacting will be determined by the record rate. You could refresh at 480Hz and it wouldn't give you better motion tracking.

The reason a lot of 120Hz sets look better is that they are simply better sets; in particular, they have better power supplies, which are needed to create the 120Hz refresh. This results in the side-benefit of better black levels, and better color tracking - which is good.

 

[Pa Jayhawk]

you did not say what you're main viewing would be. The 120 hz is excellent for gaming, for sports and movies IMHO the technology was not caught up to the 120 hz standard. The Bravia series Sony is an excellent choice.

Check out AVSFORUM.com for discussions and tips on this topic.

I have a Bravia 50" XBR1. Just connected up a 5.1 surround with a Pioneer receiver, Klipsch synergy speakers with 10" downfiring subwoofer and Panny Bluray.

I do watch alot of sports and is the reason I wanted to nail this down a little better. It didn't fully make sense to me if this would be affected. Thinking in the sense if it was 30fps, I am not sure I saw a benefit to it refreshing the same frame twice or 4 times. I do game, but probably not so much that it would influence my decision for the costs. I guess something I may do is hook the XBox360 or Wii up to my PC monitor, which may give me a better indication how it compares on whether I would need better.
http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktop-monitors/lcd/pro-series/vp2250wb.htm
For me I have never been one that needed entirely fluent on gaming as long as it is not Ghosting or choppy. Again, just kinda probably have lower standards than many and draw enough out. On the other hand if it is choppy that may be a issue.

Movies were the main advantage I saw, and to be real honest, I am not sure we really care much about the quality, in large part because most that we watch are downloaded to the TiVo via Amazon Unbox, which I doubt base on the size would even take advantage of this as would DVD or Blue Ray Quality. Either that or I record many off. To us convenience on movies is likely more important than quality.

Thanks for the Forum Link, will have to check it out. One of the other considerations on the series I buy is to be able to eliminate my reciever and still maintain the 5.1 surround sound. Again, I like it but don't spend enough on it to probably see a bigger benefit than that of the V series that offers 5.1.

Why is this only important for film-based signals?

Doesn't matter how many times you refresh the screen - if a signal was recorded at 60fps, that's all the information there is, and any motion artifacting will be determined by the record rate. You could refresh at 480Hz and it wouldn't give you better motion tracking.

The reason a lot of 120Hz sets look better is that they are simply better sets; in particular, they have better power supplies, which are needed to create the 120Hz refresh. This results in the side-benefit of better black levels, and better color tracking - which is good.

I might have to do a little more research on what the TiVo record rate designations do. I know it will probably entail eventually going to the HD model. Right now I don't even record shows at the highest quality on the series I have.

I did notice what you mention at the end, and the 52" one I mention is a W series and does offer much of the addition you mention. Kinda strange, they are selling it for less than the 46" W model and only about $400-500 more than the lesser model 46" V series. Right now we are trying to figure out what we can fit and still keep the Wall unit to our liking.

Thanks again guys

 

[Pa Jayhawk]

Here are the two units I am primarily looking at.
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665406592
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665405479
.. and anticipate that the cost difference is probably within $500 from looking around. To be honest, I am not really sure the 6" bigger screen means much to me. While either will fit nicely into our viewing distance of 11 feet, either one is going to be a hugh upgrade. So I guess where I am at is trying to figure out if the upgrade quality is worth $500 for someone with not terribly high standards. Also the difference in price is fairly negligible in the decision if it is a hugh difference in what we will see.

Almost seemed like a no brainer assuming we can make the 52" fit, but with my lack of knowledge was hard to tell. While they came out with newer models, I still can't figure with the 52" is so much on sale in comparison to the V series in the 46"

edit 1 - also only linked the Sony site because of specs. The comparison of price that I mention is from looking around. I guess I would also ask, has anyone bought something this big online and had it shipped? We were almost leaning towards paying a few bucks more to buy it local.

 

[FATC1TY]

Personally, I'd buy what your comfortable sitting in front of.

Since the 120 vs 60 was explained so technically, I'll skip it. For the most part, what you see, will be less.. lag, or ghosting on fast moving portions. Sports for instance, you might get a ghost line of the ball on a lesser grade tv. It bothers some, and not others.

I do alot of movie watching, sports, and games.. I own two plasmas. 50" and a 42".

Which brings me to your size question.. Depending on how far you are from the TV, is a big deal. Hows the seating in the room? Where are most people going to view it from. The same question stands for a surround sound system. Seating.

For example, when I got my 50".. I bought it because it was a great deal, and I wanted bigger. It was too big for where I had it. We were sitting less than 8 feet from the TV in my old condo. It was outrageously huge to watch. Where I have it now, we're a good 12-15 ft from the wall the TV is on. Its much better to watch, and easier to enjoy. Our seating is straight forward, but we got a plasma because of the wider viewing angle. It was a better option for the side seating we have in our living room and surroundings.

I have a 42" in our bedroom. I bought it for a song, and it was WAYYYYY to big. So big, I never watched it, ever. It sat there. In bed, it was such a bear to watch. Now it's moved in the room, and everything shuffled, and we're twice the distance away.

If your going to be close, save the $500 and put it towards a good HT set up. If your far away, you'll want something bigger, honestly.

Our surround sound set up is fantastic, and loud.. But if your not IN the living room, sitting down, in the "area".. You can hear the tv/movie, but you don't get it all. I have everything set up for us to be on the couch, and to get all the channels of HD sound.

So get a surround sound, because I'll be honest. HDTV is shit, without the sound. It's like getting a Harley frame, and a scooter motor.

Oh, and just so you won't be surprised, Standard TV looks ehh on HDTV's. You'll want to get your tv calibrated correctly, otherwise everything looks out of kilter.

I like LCD's, but Plasma is where the good prices/value comparisons are. If your not feeding it high end 1080p signals, you can skip out on the 1080p, unless the price is less than $200 to the 720p.

I have Panasonics, which are fantastic TV's. I run a 50" Panasonic 1080p plasma, Harmon Kardon receiver to klipsch speakers. DirecTV HD, XBox360 Elite, HD DVD player, Panasonic Blu-Ray player, Wii, and run my rear mounted speakers wirelessly.

It's better than watching it in a theatre, and I can do it in my boxers.

 

[Smallville]

you did not say what you're main viewing would be. The 120 hz is excellent for gaming, for sports and movies IMHO the technology was not caught up to the 120 hz standard. The Bravia series Sony is an excellent choice.

Check out AVSFORUM.com for discussions and tips on this topic.

I have a Bravia 50" XBR1. Just connected up a 5.1 surround with a Pioneer receiver, Klipsch synergy speakers with 10" downfiring subwoofer and Panny Bluray.

highdefjunkies and highdefforum are pretty good too. The former is pretty new.

 

[Eracer]

FatCity speaks truthiness...

There is an optimum screen size for LCD's and Plasmas, and bigger is not necessarily better.

The reason is that those are discrete pixel-based screens. CRT monitors are not (although some CRT's have masks which can look like a pixel.) But the folks that are buying 65" LCD, Plasma, or DLP screens for their 10-ft. TV room get it home, see big fat pixels staring back at them, and say, "HUH? This looked good in the store."

 

[Pa Jayhawk]

Which brings me to your size question.. Depending on how far you are from the TV, is a big deal. Hows the seating in the room? Where are most people going to view it from. The same question stands for a surround sound system. Seating.

For example, when I got my 50".. I bought it because it was a great deal, and I wanted bigger. It was too big for where I had it. We were sitting less than 8 feet from the TV in my old condo. It was outrageously huge to watch. Where I have it now, we're a good 12-15 ft from the wall the TV is on. Its much better to watch, and easier to enjoy. Our seating is straight forward, but we got a plasma because of the wider viewing angle. It was a better option for the side seating we have in our living room and surroundings.

...
Our surround sound set up is fantastic, and loud.. But if your not IN the living room, sitting down, in the "area".. You can hear the tv/movie, but you don't get it all. I have everything set up for us to be on the couch, and to get all the channels of HD sound.

So get a surround sound, because I'll be honest. HDTV is shit, without the sound. It's like getting a Harley frame, and a scooter motor.

Oh, and just so you won't be surprised, Standard TV looks ehh on HDTV's. You'll want to get your tv calibrated correctly, otherwise everything looks out of kilter.

I like LCD's, but Plasma is where the good prices/value comparisons are. If your not feeding it high end 1080p signals, you can skip out on the 1080p, unless the price is less than $200 to the 720p.

It is 11 feet of roughly straight on viewing (or at least straight on for my wife and I, unless we have friends over, then it ranges out to about 45*, not enough to fall out of the viewing angle, but maintains the 11 foot distance). I got a couple formulas ranging from multiplying the TV size by .2 to get the optimum feet, or by 1.5 and 2.0 to get the optimum range in inches, and while those are both less than 11 feet (9.2 or 10.4), there is no way I would be going over 52". Actually seeing a 46" and 52" in relation to the 27" instantly made me think they were too much until I did a bit of research, then spent last night in a Bennigans bar that carries the Bravia TV's and measuring off distances. :laugh: Bartender was wonder what was going on and my wife was just shaking her head and laughing.

Have had Dolby Surround or Pro Logic sound for years set up through a Home Theater receiver, so I have a pretty good understanding of that. Just never went with top of the line speakers and such. So I am guessing the 5.1 on the TV will be sufficient or equal to my current setup which is likely more than 10 years old. (May have to upgrade from my AR surround speakers that I traded a guy at work some cheap altecs straight up about 10 years ago because the altecs were shielded and he wanted them for his computer and he was tired of watching rainbows. )

It seems the TV's I am looking at are only available in 1080p even though I understand that is not currently fully utilized through cable.

How do you calibrate the TV? Is that a built in function on TV's? Never gave much thought to that, but I do calibrate my monitor with a SpyderPro Calibrator.

 

[Eracer]

I have my monitors calibrated by an ISF-certified professional. It's expensive, but worth it. Just make sure they give you the numbers when they're done.

http://www.imagingscience.com/isf-trained.cfm

 

[FATC1TY]

FatCity speaks truthiness...

There is an optimum screen size for LCD's and Plasmas, and bigger is not necessarily better.

The reason is that those are discrete pixel-based screens. CRT monitors are not (although some CRT's have masks which can look like a pixel.) But the folks that are buying 65" LCD, Plasma, or DLP screens for their 10-ft. TV room get it home, see big fat pixels staring back at them, and say, "HUH? This looked good in the store."

Yeah.. get too close to any of the new HDTV's at it looks like your watching through a screen door.

 

[FATC1TY]

It is 11 feet of roughly straight on viewing (or at least straight on for my wife and I, unless we have friends over, then it ranges out to about 45*, not enough to fall out of the viewing angle, but maintains the 11 foot distance). I got a couple formulas ranging from multiplying the TV size by .2 to get the optimum feet, or by 1.5 and 2.0 to get the optimum range in inches, and while those are both less than 11 feet (9.2 or 10.4), there is no way I would be going over 52". Actually seeing a 46" and 52" in relation to the 27" instantly made me think they were too much until I did a bit of research, then spent last night in a Bennigans bar that carries the Bravia TV's and measuring off distances. :laugh: Bartender was wonder what was going on and my wife was just shaking her head and laughing.

Have had Dolby Surround or Pro Logic sound for years set up through a Home Theater receiver, so I have a pretty good understanding of that. Just never went with top of the line speakers and such. So I am guessing the 5.1 on the TV will be sufficient or equal to my current setup which is likely more than 10 years old. (May have to upgrade from my AR surround speakers that I traded a guy at work some cheap altecs straight up about 10 years ago because the altecs were shielded and he wanted them for his computer and he was tired of watching rainbows. )

It seems the TV's I am looking at are only available in 1080p even though I understand that is not currently fully utilized through cable.

How do you calibrate the TV? Is that a built in function on TV's? Never gave much thought to that, but I do calibrate my monitor with a SpyderPro Calibrator.

I'd say if you've got 11 feet, I wouldn't go over 52". Ideally, I think a 46" would look fantastic, but the "bigger is better" part of me would opt for the 52" if the price difference wasn't much.

Viewing angle wise, I'd honestly go look at the TV you want, and try to view it from the most extreme angle you might have to watch it from. I say this because my mother has a Sony Bravia LCD. From an angle, it's terrible to watch. It's a beautiful TV, without a doubt, even though I'm just not a Sony fan. She's got a complete Sony set up, right down to the HT and Blu-ray player, and it all works great. But the viewing angle killed it for me.

I can almost watch my plasma without major distortion all the way to I'd guess around 65-70* to the side.


Sounds wise.. Your TV's sound will suck, I'll be honest. You won't be getting any 5.1 anything from it. If you want to go cheap, check out some Onkyo systems with HDMI connections. I think you can get some for under $400.. Or Yamaha makes a fantastic entry level HT set up for under $300.

If you need cables, look online. DO NOT BUT MONSTER CABLES FROM A B&M STORE!!!!! You will pay $110+ for a cable you can get for under $5 online.

I had mine ISF calibrated. You can buy a DVD to calibrate it. Others use certain Blu-ray DVD's that will allow you to calibrate your TV. It's seriously worth the money to get your TV looking as close to 5600K. The TV's your watching in the stores are in Vivid mode, have the brightness turned way up, sharpness all the way up, and the color is overdone in red. Makes the TV's vibrant and bright, and gives everyone a clay-face.

 

[Pa Jayhawk]

Thanks for all the info guys. I am leaning towards a 46", and after this thread I am also leaning towards a 120hz. Checking prices, if I go 46" I may even step up a few grades on the quality and will likely just try and keep the price point around $1800. Just under double the initial cheaper model 40" ones we were initially looking at, for me that's good. :laugh:

If you need cables, look online. DO NOT BUT MONSTER CABLES FROM A B&M STORE!!!!! You will pay $110+ for a cable you can get for under $5 online.

Kinda funny you mention that, I rolled by Circuit City this last weekend that was on its last day and they still had a bunch of higher grade audio cabling on sale for around $2-7 a cable (90% off), when it rang up it was only a $1-3. So I basically went back to the shelf and bought around $400-500 worth of cables for $30. Will eventually need it for my basement as well, so I figured if it was even remotely close it was a steal, if no I was only out $30.

The prior week I was excited to find similar quality, already opened Rocketfish cables at Best Buy on sale for 1/3 the price for having already been opened.

 

[FATC1TY]

www.monoprice.com

Very nice quality cables. I have probably 5 or 6 HDMI cables in my set up, and all of them are monoprice cables. I even have a HDMI switcher that I use, and it works fantastic.

Do yourself one big favor though, if you get all that stuff set up.

Get a Harmony remote. You'll thank me.

 

[MGP]

Hehehe... I'm a tech weenie, I design electronics for a living and I think Eracer and Fatc1ty explained it about as well as it could be explained.

I'm going through this right now myself, trying to decide on a new flat screen for my (small) living room wall.

[soapbox mode]
Sony is on my permanent boycott list, along with a few other major corporations. After the crap they pulled with the infamous "rootkit" debacle, it showed how truly arrogant they are with regards to their customers. I used to be a huge Sony fan and good customer -- probably bought $20K worth of their stuff over the years. But no more. They aren't the only ones with complete and utter disregard for their customers but change has to start somewhere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Sony_BMG_CD_copy_protection_scandal

http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2005/11/69601

http://blogs.technet.com/markrussin...d-digital-rights-management-gone-too-far.aspx

[/soapbox mode]