Sony's 34XBR800 receives CNET's Editors Choice Award

[Marty]

http://electronics.cnet.com/electronics/0-6342372-1304-8879879.html?tag=pdtl-list

[greggae]

Just got one last week and will be glad to compare notes etc. with others who may have one or be thinking of getting one. The HD, especially on HD Net looks fantastic!

[Spidey]

I am looking at the 34" 16:9 versus the 40" 4:3 XBR series televisions...what made you get the 16:9? Watching SD format you still have to bee concerned about burn-in...are you? Seems like the picture would be tiny on the 34" watching a 4:3 program....just curious why you guys choose a $4000 small 34" HDTV when you could have purchased...say... a Mitsubishi WS-55909 (Diamond, the best they make) for the exact same price...I am trying to decide right now between these three TV's, just wanted some opinions...thanks.

[greggae]

Spidey......first of all, I didn't pay $4,000 for the set. Going price is $2,500 and I got it considerably cheaper than that because I have a friend in the electronics business. I went with this "small" tv because I do not currently have room for a bigger one in the location where I do most of my viewing. I went with a 16:9 screen, because that is part of what HD is all about. Buying a HD set that was not 16:9 would be akin to buying one that was not color as far as I am concerned. My Hughes E-86 receiver and the Sony XBR have several options for filling the screen (full mode, zoom, full zoom, etc.) regardless of what you are watching, so I am not a bit concerned with burn in. Ironically, the only time I have side bars is when viewing ABC broadcasting in 720i or p (whichever it is). I am still playing with the machine to see if I can get around that.
So, if you got $4,000 to invest, then the Mitsubishi is just totally a different choice. Bigger investment, bigger screen, projection rather than tube.......apples and oranges to me. I know that many people think Sony's and tube tvs are a waste of money, but that is what worked best for me at the present time. When I get my home remodeling done and have some more bucks to invest, I'd hope to have a nice big plasma screen or the like in a bigger room that I plan to dedicate to my AV equipment. By that time equipment like that ought to be quite a bit cheaper. For now, I am enjoying HDNet, OTA HD broadcasts from CBS and ABC, and this weekend free movies on HBO channel 509. I'm smilin'.

[Marty]

Originally posted by Spidey
I am looking at the 34" 16:9 versus the 40" 4:3 XBR series televisions...what made you get the 16:9? Watching SD format you still have to bee concerned about burn-in...are you? Seems like the picture would be tiny on the 34" watching a 4:3 program....just curious why you guys choose a $4000 small 34" HDTV when you could have purchased...say... a Mitsubishi WS-55909 (Diamond, the best they make) for the exact same price...I am trying to decide right now between these three TV's, just wanted some opinions...thanks.

Well the $4000 34" Sony tv you are referencing has a builtin HD tuner. The one that is the subject of this thread is the same w/o the HD tuner ($2500). I rarely watch 4:3 programming in an unstretched mode so am not worried about burnin (the picture looks fine in the stretch mode). I have ample stretch modes to work with so I might as well use them. I went with the 34" 16:9 over the 40" 4:3 because I wanted to view HD as it was meant to be viewed and that really isn't possible with a 4:3 tv. I didn't go for a RPTV because I knew the Directv/local cable company's signals were not all that great and a RPTV certainly wasn't going to help matters (I was going to be sitting only a few feet away from the tv as well). Overall, I am very satisfied with my purchase. I've purchased 3 Sony tube tvs in the past 4 yrs and all are working great! This Sony also comes with a 24 month warranty (but hopefully I will never need it). I would definitely recommend this set, one of the best purchases I have ever made (of course it put me in the hole a couple of grand but everytime I look at that HD picture, its all worth it).

[Spidey]

greggae and Marty,

I agree with you both on some points...I think first off, yes, a Mitz 55909 is just a totally different investment...bigger screen and projection stinks right now for cable and Directv viewing. I also agree that simple space constraints play a big part in an investment and like you greggae I could fit a big 55" in my room but.....really the space is too small....RPTV is out for me.

However, I do disagree with Marty to say that "I wanted to view HD as it was meant to be viewed and that really isn't possible with a 4:3 tv"....it is but with bars at the top and bottom, right? And with a 40" 4:3 the size of the 16:9 format might be just as big as the 34" 16:9 TV and when watching 4:3 the image on the 34" 16:9 would be too small...if I (and my wife) couldn;t get used to stretch modes

I think both are great TV's and I was just trying to learn a little of the logic from consumers who have already made their purchase...thanks again guys!

[greggae]

Yep, Marty is talking about the KD-34XBR2. The one I have, w/o a tuner is the KV-34XBR800, the set mentioned at the beginning of this thread. My recollection is that the XBR2 also has a number of other bells and whistles not found on the 800, hence the $1500 price difference.

[Marty]

Originally posted by Spidey

However, I do disagree with Marty to say that "I wanted to view HD as it was meant to be viewed and that really isn't possible with a 4:3 tv"....it is but with bars at the top and bottom, right? And with a 40" 4:3 the size of the 16:9 format might be just as big as the 34" 16:9 TV and when watching 4:3 the image on the 34" 16:9 would be too small...if I (and my wife) couldn;t get used to stretch modes


You are correct, you would get black bars when watching HDTV on the 40" tv. What I meant by my original statement was that HDTV was not meant to have black bars on the top and bottom and thus in order for that to happen, you would need a 16:9 tv. BTW, I don't think you would have any problems adjusting to stretch modes. The one I use most for 4:3 programming is called "wide zoom" and the picture doesn't look distorted or anything like that, looks totally natural. If you haven't already, take a look at the mode on that tv at your local CC, I think its great. Let us know if you have any other questions.

[hitech-jhawk]

I am considering the purchase of the 34XBR800, but I was wondering if anyone has tried hooking up a PC to this set? I was hoping that you could connect a PC with a DVI equipped video card but after talking with Sony today, I don't think that is possible due to the HDCP feature of this interface. Has anyone tried using a VGA to component converter? I tried this on my Pioneer Elite 710HD and I couldn't get it to sync up with anything other than 640x480 and it looked awful.

If it's not possible to hook this set up with the DVI connection, I'm assuming that will be the case with any set with DVI. I know that the Panasonic LCD RPTV looks awesome hooked up to a PC, but I'm a little leary of this technology. The Sony 34XBR800 appears to be a great set, but I'm really wanting something I can hook a PC up to and surf the web, display digital camera pics, or play a high resolution PC game.