What tv to buy

16
Posted 7th Jan
So, I'm hopefully going to be able to upgrade my 8 year old 42" LG 3D tv this year and I was looking at 55" and 65" options. Budget is about £500.

I quite like the Philips ambilight tvs but there are so many options and other good deals on Hisense and LG tv's.

£500 is quite a low budget so my thinking was that I'm not going to get an excellent tv in that price range for the size I'm looking for which is why I was looking at the Philips options as the ambilight is a pretty cool feature. That being said, it still needs to be a good tv.

Can anyone provide any insight on all the different options please? I'll be using it for Sky Q, blu ray movies (I collect them) and some gaming (primarily fifa).

Thanks in advance
Community Updates
Ask

Groups

16 Comments
Have you physically seen the Philiips and others?
My criteria in order is:-
Sound quality (with and without extra hardware)
Picture quality
( I can hear better than I can see) (so many people choose on picture quality seen in a showroom without hearing what the telly sounds like)
Channels available without spending any further money.
Features

Tellies can cost a lot of money so make a salesman earn their commission by helping you to choose one. By all means search the net for good deals afterwards and then return to showroom to haggle.
tardytortoise07/01/2020 10:50

Have you physically seen the Philiips and others?My criteria in order …Have you physically seen the Philiips and others?My criteria in order is:-Sound quality (with and without extra hardware)Picture quality( I can hear better than I can see) (so many people choose on picture quality seen in a showroom without hearing what the telly sounds like)Channels available without spending any further money.FeaturesTellies can cost a lot of money so make a salesman earn their commission by helping you to choose one. By all means search the net for good deals afterwards and then return to showroom to haggle.


Thanks very much. I've heard the guys at Richer Sounds are quite clued up so I think I need to go in one day and have a look.

Regarding your criteria, I've got a separate 5.1 set up so it'll be more about the picture quality for me.
porradude07/01/2020 11:00

Thanks very much. I've heard the guys at Richer Sounds are quite clued up …Thanks very much. I've heard the guys at Richer Sounds are quite clued up so I think I need to go in one day and have a look.Regarding your criteria, I've got a separate 5.1 set up so it'll be more about the picture quality for me.



Yeah I have the 5.1 also and I agree Richer Sounds is a good retailer - although they don't necessarily sell tellies from all manufacturers. No harm in checking Currys out even just as a comparator - you might get lucky and find someone equally clued up.
jimmy_the_fridge07/01/2020 11:12

Comment deleted



then you are wrong! My vision is so poor it does not matter one jot what the quality of the picture is - my eyes are simply not capable. I am not blind or partially sighted even - yet. I have what is regarded as Low Vision. Thank goodness for being able to dictate into forums like this.

I am also colour blind so getting a picture with better colour definition makes no difference between me being able to distinguish one colour from another - thank goodness for professional snooker players who don't try and hide the brown ball amongst the reds!
tardytortoise07/01/2020 11:05

Yeah I have the 5.1 also and I agree Richer Sounds is a good retailer - …Yeah I have the 5.1 also and I agree Richer Sounds is a good retailer - although they don't necessarily sell tellies from all manufacturers. No harm in checking Currys out even just as a comparator - you might get lucky and find someone equally clued up.


If you have 5.1 why is the tv's sound quality your top priority? It basically should always be picture quality as no tv's have great sound.
dcx_badass07/01/2020 12:29

If you have 5.1 why is the tv's sound quality your top priority? It …If you have 5.1 why is the tv's sound quality your top priority? It basically should always be picture quality as no tv's have great sound.



I was merely pointing out that when buying a new telly the sound quality is a bigger criteria for me than the picture quality. At the time I made that comment, I had no idea the OP already had 5.1 and it did not matter whether I had it or not. Many people (not that many now perhaps) buy a new telly without good quality sound and find they need to add soundbar or whatever later. I was trying to point out that every single one of us are different to each other - a fact which it is a great pity many others do not recognise or appreciate. It is this great diversity which yes does say there is nothing wrong whatsoever in me choosing sound over picture as the greatest criteria for choosing a new telly. I fully acknowledge many other people will find the opposite to be true for them.
Generally speaking a £500 TV is not going to be high end and you may find that you are not happy with the image quality.
Jumping from a 55 to a 65 will make everything bigger and any issues more noticeable, particularly given that you may have to downgrade the spec to jump up the size.
OF course, if you are watching good quality sources such as Blu-Ray, gaming, HD then you should be ok. However if you watch SD channels you may find it an issue.
You could of course enter the used market and get a higher spec TV for a lower price (and potentially one with warranty).
smashed07/01/2020 13:15

Generally speaking a £500 TV is not going to be high end and you may find …Generally speaking a £500 TV is not going to be high end and you may find that you are not happy with the image quality.Jumping from a 55 to a 65 will make everything bigger and any issues more noticeable, particularly given that you may have to downgrade the spec to jump up the size.OF course, if you are watching good quality sources such as Blu-Ray, gaming, HD then you should be ok. However if you watch SD channels you may find it an issue.You could of course enter the used market and get a higher spec TV for a lower price (and potentially one with warranty).


Appreciate the reply and noted too. I'll be honest, being a Sky customer, almost everything I watch is in HD so I think I'll be fine.

I guess I was just wondering why a +/- £500 Philips ambilight isn't as good as a Hisense or LG in the same price bracket?
Personally would look at Samsung from experience with the nice added bonus of larger warranties from Richer Sounds and I think John Lewis
porradude07/01/2020 13:38

Appreciate the reply and noted too. I'll be honest, being a Sky customer, …Appreciate the reply and noted too. I'll be honest, being a Sky customer, almost everything I watch is in HD so I think I'll be fine.I guess I was just wondering why a +/- £500 Philips ambilight isn't as good as a Hisense or LG in the same price bracket?


Differences between TVs are many. Firstly the display technology, whether you opt for LCD or OLED (although OLED would already be out of your price range).

With LCD there lies differences with backlighting, whether edge or direct lit array LEDs are used and further enhancements to attempt to achieve blacks without any blooming or clouding. Then there is technologies such as LG Nano Cell and Samsung Quantum Dot which further enhance over standard backlighting by adding there own methods in enriching colour purity.

Secondly besides the display itself lies the video driver, equally as important as a decent screen. Combined with differing smart TV chipsets and arrays of inputs is why there are so many differing TV price brackets.

If you bought a Vestel or UMC television you would not be expecting the same array of picture enhancement features, would be way more prone to light 'bleed' due to cheaper backlighting arrays etc etc.

For ourselves a UMC manufactured Sharp TV is perfectly adequate for bedroom use despite these shortcomings, and for the lounge until the Plasma dies we are more than happy to continue with it.

A +/- £500 Philips ambilight may not be as good (or may even be better) than a Hisense or LG in the same price bracket depending on its smart TV capabilities, its screen and viewing angles, its video display chipset, its number of inputs, its build quality, its backlighting technology etc etc.
Edited by: "cicobuff" 7th Jan
cicobuff07/01/2020 15:01

Differences between TVs are many. Firstly the display technology, whether …Differences between TVs are many. Firstly the display technology, whether you opt for LCD or OLED (although OLED would already be out of your price range).With LCD there lies differences with backlighting, whether edge or direct lit array LEDs are used and further enhancements to attempt to achieve blacks without any blooming or clouding. Then there is technologies such as LG Nano Cell and Samsung Quantum Dot which further enhance over standard backlighting by adding there own methods in enriching colour purity.Secondly besides the display itself lies the video driver, equally as important as a decent screen. Combined with differing smart TV chipsets and arrays of inputs is why there are so many differing TV price brackets.If you bought a Vestel or UMC television you would not be expecting the same array of picture enhancement features, would be way more prone to light 'bleed' due to cheaper backlighting arrays etc etc.For ourselves a UMC manufactured Sharp TV is perfectly adequate for bedroom use despite these shortcomings, and for the lounge until the Plasma dies we are more than happy to continue with it. A +/- £500 Philips ambilight may not be as good (or may even be better) than a Hisense or LG in the same price bracket depending on its smart TV capabilities, its screen and viewing angles, its video display chipset, its number of inputs, its build quality, its backlighting technology etc etc.


That's really helpful and makes a lot of sense. Thanks for in depth info
+ 1 for Richer Sounds.
jimmy_the_fridge07/01/2020 23:25

Comment deleted



I did see the question mark,I just didn't answer perhaps as best as I could have.

Your question was:-
"Surely if you can hear better than you can see, the picture quality would be more important?"
Instead of answering "then you are wrong" I should have said "Your question is making assumptions about me without a great deal of detail that you are unaware of."
I went on to explain some of those details as a fuller answer to your question.

I can understand your dislike of my comments as needy.
I hope you will understand equally my comment of you being too judgemental.
jimmy_the_fridge08/01/2020 08:08

Comment deleted



I am sorry but when someone says "Btw don't like your own comments, it comes across as needy." I interpret that as ""dislike"" and you finding them needy. I am OK with that - your opinion is as good as anybody's opinion but don't try and pretend you meant you didn't like me liking my own comments - because you did not say that but I do accept that is what you may have wanted/meant to say.
No matter, I'm cool with it all.
jimmy_the_fridge08/01/2020 09:14

Comment deleted



Ditto - my vision may be bad but my comprehension/understanding is fine.
I challenge you to read your own comment once more but from the exact opposite point of view.
You most certainly said "Btw don't like your own comments..." As I said I am happy to accept that is not what you meant to say and that you really meant to say you disliked me liking my own comments.

Oh and just in case you were not aware there are many bits of technology these days that read out loud text - no vision required! Thank goodness lack of perfect vision is no longer a barrier as much as it used to be for all sorts of people enjoying the same things in life. You may have heard (no pun intended) of audio described TV programs, or perhaps not?
jimmy_the_fridge08/01/2020 10:40

Comment deleted



Once more, I do understand now what you were trying to convey by saying "Btw don't like your own comments, it comes across as needy" BUT I was hoping you would have accepted you could have phrased it much better. As it stands and as you meant it then it comes across as an instruction to me not to do something i.e. like my own comments. In which case replacing the word "comments" with postings would have made it clear your instruction to me. There is other phraseology you could also have used.

As you now know I originally interpreted your "Btw don't like your own comments, it comes across as needy" that you didn't like what I was saying (which as I have explained I am happy for you to say so)
Its just a pity that you have not acknowledged that my original interpretation of what you said was a fair one and that you could have phrased it much better to convey your intended meaning.
Oh well!
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text

    Discussions