LCD TV advice/help

[Ridge Wrecker]

I recently purchased an LCD tv. I have Direct TV and no HD programming. The picture looks like total crap, all cloudy with pixelation. I later found out that SD programming typically doesn't come in real well on LCD but this is un-watchable. Even if I had HD programming half of the channels I watch aren't available in HD. So what's up? Is everyone just watching really lousy tv and dealing with it?

I've tried both coax and composite hookups. Would it be worth investing in S-Video or component cables to try to improve the picture? Or do I need to return this, buy a tube tv and rent a crane to get up it to the second floor?

[noreaster]

LCD+SD isn't necessarily bad. It depends on the size of the LCD - if it's larger, it's more noticable. LCD have a certain number of pixels to light up, more the SD sends a signal for, so the display (or sometimes the box that's sending the signal) has to up convert- essentially guess to fill in the "missing" pixels evenly. The quality of this conversion is totally dependent on the equipment you're using. However, a digital signal will look better, even if the station isn't broadcasting in HD. My suggestion is to spring for the HD box. It's worth it, IMO. Next, use the best connection between the display and the box: HDMI or DVI, if you can, next best is component (which is different from composite, easy to confuse). S-Video is next best, followed by composite and coax, none of these are desirable if the prior options digital options are available.

[bikerdom]

http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/S-fpsYCUGMB0E/learningcenter/home/tv.html

[Ridge Wrecker]

LCD+SD isn't necessarily bad. It depends on the size of the LCD - if it's larger, it's more noticable. LCD have a certain number of pixels to light up, more the SD sends a signal for, so the display (or sometimes the box that's sending the signal) has to up convert- essentially guess to fill in the "missing" pixels evenly. The quality of this conversion is totally dependent on the equipment you're using. However, a digital signal will look better, even if the station isn't broadcasting in HD. My suggestion is to spring for the HD box. It's worth it, IMO. Next, use the best connection between the display and the box: HDMI or DVI, if you can, next best is component (which is different from composite, easy to confuse). S-Video is next best, followed by composite and coax, none of these are desirable if the prior options digital options are available.

The size of the tv really shouldn't be the issue for me since it's only 27", pretty small by todays standards. Unfortunately, my satellite receiver only has coax, composite and S-video outputs. I could spring for HD programming but it seems like kinda a waste to spend extra $ on a box and HD service for a bedroom tv that I will hardly watch. I just wanted something for the room and thought it would be easier for me to spend a little more for an LCD that was on sale.

So am I understanding correctly...

HDMI, DVI, Component = Digital
S-Video, Composite, Coax = Analog

????

[noreaster]

So am I understanding correctly...
HDMI, DVI, Component = Digital
S-Video, Composite, Coax = Analog

Very close. Component is still analog–the highest quality analog, though. Everything else is correct. In fact, since my HDTV (26" Panasonic LCD) only has one digital in (HDMI) I connect my cable box to it (a new, Comcast-provided w/ TiVo software) with component. I have a Mac mini also permanently connected to the HDTV, and it can only connect via a digital connection, so it gets the HDMI. Honestly, I cannot see a difference between the HDMI signal and the component, and I consider myself pretty sensitive to the picture quality.

Crutchfield Advisor is a great resource. Specific to this discussion on connections: http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/S-i2HlXeWTGOY/learningcenter/home/tv_signalquality.html?page=2

[Ridge Wrecker]

Crutchfield Advisor is a great resource. Specific to this discussion on connections: http://www.crutchfieldadvisor.com/S-i2HlXeWTGOY/learningcenter/home/tv_signalquality.html?page=2

I did get a chance to get a look at this website last night and it's been very helpful.

I've heard that SD quality can vary greatly based on the satellite feed and equipment. My old school DVD player looks pretty lousy but slightly better than SD channels. I did use component hookups for the DVD. I may just shell out for the HD receiver.


I also have a VGA port that I use to connect to my PC. DVDs look much better from the PC than with our expensive DVD player (via component). And the DVD on the PC is nothing special. The whole machine only cost $600. So bottom line is digital is much better.



Since I don't feel like springing for a Blu-Ray player or DVD upconverter I think I'll try hooking up my laptop to the TV and see if that improves the quality. Assuming that my laptop has the proper output. I never would have thought of that. Thanks!