How do you buy an HDTV from Amazon?

[pmowry]

Hello,
  I have gift cards totaling to $1,000 so I'm kind of locked in to Amazon.  But I find their web site a bit annoying for a purchase like this seeing prices of new and used mixed in.  Any ideas if there is a user setting hidden somewhere to remove 3rd party vendors or used prices?

Separately, Any suggestions on an LED TV in the $1000-$1400 price range and the 55"+ size range?  Consumer reports recommends Vizio XVT553SV, but the user reviews are all over the map.

Thanks for help on either front,

[ark_ader]

Ask Pinball Jim, he just bought a awesome HDTV recently from Amazon.

[Samstag]

On the left side of the Amazon screen find the "seller" group and check amazon.com to filter out 3rd party sellers.  If you want some of the best info on whether a TV is good or not browse avsforum.com.

I recently bought the 47" version of this LG and I'm really happy with it.  But I got it for about half what they're asking for the 55" right now.

[Green Giant]

I have always found user reviews very handy on Amazon, but make sure to read them not look at the score.

Some people give a bad review because they order a 720p HDTV and are upset it isn't 1080p.  Basically people expect something that is clearly is not and complain.


As for type of tv, are you looking for more bang for your buck or super performance?

[Richard_Nixon]

I like the reviews from CNET.com. They review quite a bit, and seem to know thier stuff. They gave that Vizio TV your looking at 4 out of 5 BTW.
Im looking at getting a Samsung 8000 plasma. I would get a 7000, since they have the same screen, just different options, but don't sell them in Canada.

[Gray_Area]

I'll have to remember this thread when I'm back in the market for a large display. Oh, wait, I alread have a large thread to look back on. Man, talk about working for the priviledge.

[shmokes]

PBJ, allow me to enlighten you so you can take care of the horror that is your TV's wall mounting, all for less than $4.

I assume you haven't seen these. I know that until I saw them, I hadn't

You don't even need a top one because it'll be behind the TV so who cares how it looks. I just have a round hole from my hole saw back there. I'll patch it up before I move out of my apartment.

By the way, when that thing says that it's "two pieces" it doesn't mean you get a top and bottom plate. It means the plate itself is two pieces. So if you want a top plate it'll double the price.

[shmokes]

Um . . . okay. Not that it matters to me beyond curiosity, but why take a pass? It could almost not possibly be easier to install. Just drill a couple holes in the wall with a hole saw, which takes two minutes. Drop the cables behind the drywall through the top hole. Gravity does 95% of the work to get them to the bottom hole, and then pull them through. Oh yeah, and then you have to mount the plate over the bottom hole which involves about 1-2 minutes twisting a screwdriver.

It's obvious that you aren't completely oblivious to the fact that dangling cables look stupid or you wouldn't have taken the trouble to ziptie them together. But the fact is, ziptied dangling cables also look stupid. Just slightly less so. I could understand your immediate dismissal if we were talking about something that was either expensive or difficult, but both the cost and effort involved in this is pretty much negligible, so your unexplained dismissive reaction is strange.

[Nephasth]

Love the beige sockets with the white face plate. [/sarcasm]

There's better temporary solutions to hide TV wires than cutting holes in the wall for 3 feet of cords...

[shmokes]

For example? We're talking about a wall mounted TV, keep in mind. Also keep in mind that we're talking about  hiding, at the very least, the TV's power cable, an HDMI cable (but likely two or three), a component cable (which is actually three thick cables, and there could be two or three component cables too, up to nine cables), possibly a TosLink optical cable (maybe two if you're using input and output), a USB cable, the cable that runs from a Wii sensor bar, the Kinect camera cable, possibly even some composite or even S-video cables, etc..

The bunch of cables running to my TV is 1.5-2" in diameter. What better way is there to hide these than this--a <$4 solution that renders the cables 100% invisible and is a breeze to install? Hell, even if all you have is a power cable and a single HDMI it defeats the purpose of wall mounting your TV. Just put the TV on a stand. The whole purpose of wall mounting a TV, 100% in every way the whole purpose of wall mounting a TV is for aesthetics. It's for a clean, nice looking installation. Dangling cables ruins it. You could use a cable run, which would improve the appearance compared to just dangling cables, but that's going to be more expensive, be less attractive, and be at least as difficult to install. Not to mention that a cable run large enough to contain all the cables the average home theater has running to the TV would look ridiculous.

But maybe I'm just not familiar with the solutions to which you're referring. A link would be helpful.

[Nephasth]

There are plenty of temporary solutions, just use your imagination. Here's one. PVC pipe cut in half. Then when you move out or move your tv you won't have gaping holes in the walls.

ETA: And if dangling cables really bother you, you should look into buying a wireless TV. I have this LG, but I have it mounted on a stand. Only wire going to the TV is the power cord. You can have your media components on the opposite side of the room and not worry about the cables. Maybe the wireless thing will catch on, maybe not.

[lordnacho]

I 'm with you shmokes.  
Wall mount with any visible wires is just fugly and defeats the entire point.  Same thing with my desktop monitors, bought a dual lcd arm and spent a little time hiding all the wires.

Heard running the tv power cable through the wall is a fire hazard though and would be an issue with insurance if anything bad happened.  You apparently are supposed to have a power outlet behind the tv, which would obviously make things more difficult.

[shmokes]

There are plenty of temporary solutions, just use your imagination. Here's one. PVC pipe cut in half. Then when you move out or move your tv you won't have gaping holes in the walls.

ETA: And if dangling cables really bother you, you should look into buying a wireless TV. I have this LG, but I have it mounted on a stand. Only wire going to the TV is the power cord. You can have your media components on the opposite side of the room and not worry about the cables. Maybe the wireless thing will catch on, maybe not.

In what world is sawing a PVC pipe in half lengthwise easier than drilling a hole through drywall? For that matter, in what world would that be a cheaper solution? For that matter, how do you propose to attach said PVC pipe to the wall? Tape? Glue? Screws? Are you trying to make the dangling cables look better or worse?

Patching a hole in a wall when you decide to move is not exactly the end of the world. You glob some Spackle into it, scrape over it with a putty knife, sand for about 30 seconds, and paint. Not the end of the world, especially considering that you're already doing the same thing for all the holes you put in the wall for wall hangings. For example all the holes you put in the wall when you installed your TV's wall bracket.

I'm telling you, if you can replace a doorknob you can install one of these things. And they cost a few dollars. And the cost and effort of repairing any wall damage when you move out is equally negligible. You simply cannot make any compelling argument to not do this. And the results speak for themselves. If you are willing to go through the trouble of installing a TV wall bracket (and it is trouble, I've done it), but unwilling to take this minimal, very simple extra step, you have some serious stubbornness issues. The results speak for themselves.

edit: fixed an obnoxious all-caps sentence

[Nephasth]

Jesus shmokes, you're touchy this morning. I didn't say the PVC pipe solution was easier, I didn't say your solution was hard. I'm not a fan of punching ~2" diameter holes in my walls is all. If you have to patch the holes later... well there goes some of your cost savings. Filling a nail/screw hole is much easier and cheaper than patching a 2" hole. I'm not willing to commit to holes of that size when the furnature gets rearranged as much as it does. You say the purpose is for aesthetics, I understand that, but if you're taking that stance you could have spent another couple bucks to get a white outlet and faceplate to match your through hole cover.

PS - After all that work, I can still see your bulge... Don't be so sensitive.

[shmokes]

The TV's wall bracket itself means you're not going to be rearranging the furniture (or at least the location of the TV). They're a pain to install and create a ton of screw holes in the wall. The extra hole in the wall makes you no more or less likely to move the TV to a new location.

And yeah, I was mildly disappointed that the plate is visible above my component stand. When I set it up I hadn't yet purchased the stand for all my home theater equipment. Without giving it much thought I just matched it to the same height as the power outlet. Your pointing it out, though, is just sort of petty. It's not like you can't see that the simple solution is mount it a bit lower than I did. You're just grasping at some way to say that these things aren't actually a good solution.

What's annoying your seeming compulsive need to say anything, no matter how absurd, so long as it's not, "Hey . . . that thing's pretty cool." Which is the obvious response to such an inexpensive, easy-to-implement solution that produces such excellent results.

[shmokes]

Nah . . . it's super easy. Once one cable is through you've got a fish line. If you add a console just twist-tie its cable to one that's already going through the wall and pull it right up.

[HaRuMaN]

Just buy a good receiver that has HDMI switching / upscaling, run one HDMI cable to the TV, and done. 

[Nephasth]

Hey... this thing is pretty cool!

[shmokes]

Just buy a good receiver that has HDMI switching / upscaling, run one HDMI cable to the TV, and done. 

Someday. Right now my receiver has no HDMI on it at all, though it's otherwise a great receiver. But my TV has like 4 or 5 HDMI ports, plus optical and coax audio out, so I'm not missing out on anything.

Even with a new receiver, though, I still wouldn't even want two cables dangling from my TV. You don't have to mount your TV. Nothing wrong with putting it on a stand. IMO, if you're going to have even a single cable showing, just put it on a stand.

Again, there's nothing wrong with putting a TV on a stand. And there is only one reason to mount the TV on the wall. Ergonomically it's usually a worse solution because people do stupid things like mounting the TV above fireplaces and the like so you have to sit with your neck craned the whole time you're watching. But the one and only reason to mount a TV to the wall is that it looks nice. The dangling cable ruins that. Two dangling cables ruin it less than the eight or ten cables I have running to my TV, but it still detracts from the setup aesthetically. And since there's nothing wrong with putting your TV on a stand, where cables are easily hidden, just do that if you aren't willing to hide the cables properly in a wall-mount solution.

Also, a new good receiver costs more than $4, of course.

[HaRuMaN]

My TV has a ton of ports also, but I got tired of having to switch TV inputs all the time.  Now it stays one input, and the receiver handles the rest.

[shmokes]

The Harmony remote solves that problem gracefully enough. While it's a slightly less elegant solution since there's sometimes a slight lag waiting for input changes when everything's powering on initially, or every now and then a command gets missed by one component or another and I have to hit the help button to resend the command, it's still a better solution than replacing what is already a very good receiver. Plus, even when I do eventually replace my receiver I'll still be using the Harmony since it is guaranteed to be an astronomically better remote than whatever my new receiver ships with.

[HaRuMaN]

My Onkyo remote (came with the receiver) worked with every component I have (minus the PS3, damn bluetooth!) and took about 10 minutes total to setup. 

[shmokes]

Then why not patch the hole you made too high and drop the exit down?

Lack of gumption, mainly.

[Samstag]

I'm going to be using one of these to hide my cables.  It has an IR repeater port so I can hide all my components in a closet.

I have an old Harmony 550 remote that simplifies all the switching going on behind the scenes.

[pmowry]

Wow, This thread took an interesting turn.

On the left side of the Amazon screen find the "seller" group and check amazon.com to filter out 3rd party sellers.  If you want some of the best info on whether a TV is good or not browse avsforum.com.

Thanks,  Can't believe I missed that Seller Tag.  It sure helps to clear out all the used items and get a better read on prices.  I tend to keep things forever.  This will be replacing a 31" CRT I've had for 16 years.  So I tend to go for bang for the buck.  The reason I'm looking now is spiff I received from work in the form of gift cards to Amazon.  So I don't have much of an option on vendor

Just buy a good receiver that has HDMI switching / upscaling, run one HDMI cable to the TV, and done. 

I have a surround sound receiver with HDMI ports that I've never tried using (no HDMI TV yet).  I was just planing on feeding it audio from the TV with an optical cable.  I was concerned about the audio being ahead of the video. Does that usually not happen?

  I'm in a rent house, but the policeman that owns the place had all the cables in place and used plates like skmokes.  But if I had to do it myself in a rental I would have used a plastic conduit on the outside of the wall. #1 because of repairs when I leave, but also it is an outside wall.

[Samstag]

I have a surround sound receiver with HDMI ports that I've never tried using (no HDMI TV yet).  I was just planing on feeding it audio from the TV with an optical cable.  I was concerned about the audio being ahead of the video. Does that usually not happen?

If you run optical from the TV to the receiver you won't get surround sound.  You'll get straight stereo without even a subwoofer channel.  It's best to run audio from each source device to the receiver.

In either case you shouldn't notice a delay in audio or video, but if you do the receiver may have a timing adjustment.

[shmokes]

If you run optical from the TV to the receiver you won't get surround sound.

I didn't know that. Is there any rational reason for this? The optical cable has plenty of bandwidth for DD or DTS. Why wouldn't the full signal be sent back down to the receiver? Is it a lag issue?

[Samstag]

I've always assumed it was some crazy law or general agreement among the manufacturers to intentionally limit it.  I'm sure it somehow infringes on their rights to sell you more cables or a pricier receiver.

But I think I'm wrong.  Just for grins I looked up the manual for the Vizio mentioned in the first post, and it looks like it actually outputs 5.1 over S/PDIF.  If that's true then maybe they've just been using cheap chips in the past and they're finally fixing it.

Just make sure you check any TV you're thinking about buying before planning your audio system around it.

[lanman31337]

Believe it or not a lot of TVs, even if they have a coax or optical out, only put out 2.0 audio thru the s/pdif connector.  Some will do 2.1, some will do 5.1, it's all in how the manufacturer does it.

[Ed_McCarron]

Love the beige sockets with the white face plate. [/sarcasm]

There's better temporary solutions to hide TV wires than cutting holes in the wall for 3 feet of cords...

Is this where I post the applicable part of NFPA 70?

NEC ARTICLE 400 Flexible Cords and Cables General 400.1 Scope.
This article covers general requirements, applications, and construction specifications for flexible cords and flexible cables.
400.8 Uses Not Permitted.
Flexible cords and cables shall not be used for the following:
(1) As a substitute for the fixed wiring of a structure
(2) Where run through holes in walls, structural ceilings, suspended ceilings, dropped ceilings, or floors
(3) Where run through doorways, windows, or similar openings
(4) Where attached to building surfaces
Exception: Flexible cord and cable shall be permitted to be attached to building surfaces in accordance with the provisions of 368.8.
(5) Where concealed by walls, floors, or ceilings or located above suspended or dropped ceilings

Code wants a real power outlet behind the TV...

[ahofle]

If you run optical from the TV to the receiver you won't get surround sound.

I didn't know that. Is there any rational reason for this? The optical cable has plenty of bandwidth for DD or DTS. Why wouldn't the full signal be sent back down to the receiver? Is it a lag issue?

It's a ridiculous copyright issue, nothing more.  It also required me to buy a new receiver. 

[ahofle]

My 2 cents on the wall mounting...I've never understood the fascination with it.  You end up having to look up while watching TV (like sitting in the front row of a movie theater) and also have to hide a bunch of cables.  It does look nice, but isn't too practical in my opinion.  I guess it makes sense in a bedroom where you are watching TV while laying in bed and need an elevated display.

[shmokes]

It doesn't have to be mounted high. Look at my pics.

[ahofle]

Another pet peeve of mine are the people that mount them above their fireplace. 

+1111!!1eleventy

It doesn't have to be mounted high. Look at my pics.

I didn't say it outright, but that's sort of my point.  Why bother with the extra expense and work of wall mounting if you don't need it mounted high?  Your setup does look nice, but I personally would have just put it on a stand on the nice cabinet you have there.

[whammoed]

I have one mounted high in the basement because a lot of the viewing is done standing up playing pool, sitting on a bar stool, ect.
I have the one in the living room mounted about 6 inches higher than what it would be on a stand on the tv cabinet.  This is what I considered the optimal height when viewing from the couch.  6 inches makes a big difference (that's what she said.)  Additionally it provides room between the tv and the cabinet to place my speakers.  I will say I think it is worth it regardless though.  My parents have theirs mounted only a few inches higher than what it would have been.  It just looks so much nicer on the wall.

[Nephasth]

6 inches makes a big difference (that's what she said.)

Yes it does. I have this stand and love it (but the old lady hates dusting the black glass). It brings the TV up to a comfortable viewing height from the couches, helps hide the wire(s) going to the TV, and still allows the TV to swivel (which makes it nice for when the little girl wants to eat her breakfast while she's watching her cartoons from the kitchen).

[HaRuMaN]

Gotta say I prefer that stand to the idea of punching two holes in the wall just to have one of them exposed anyway.

[shmokes]

 Why bother with the extra expense and work of wall mounting if you don't need it mounted high?  Your setup does look nice, but I personally would have just put it on a stand on the nice cabinet you have there.

Two reasons. One, I do think it looks cool mounted to the wall like that. But also, it's much safer if you have small children in the house. You'd be surprised at how many kids have been severely injured and killed by tipping big flat-panel TVs on top of themselves. Kids like to climb things, and the moment they get their hands on top of a flat-panel TV, that thing is coming down on top of them, no question about it. To make matters worse, the typical setup usually means that the kid will end up flat on his back on the floor while the TV  likely comes down at an angle with the top edge smashing into their chest or neck. Also, there's the issue of shattering glass.

But also it's inexpensive and looks cool, so why not.

[Green Giant]

There are several reasons I think wall mounting is just great.

1.  A cleaner more professional look, especially if you run the wires through the wall to your components.  And if the components are in a cabinet off in the corner, it looks very very cool.
2.  Much sturdier.  I don't need a kid or pet nudging that tv stand with a 50" tv that is 4" thick standing on it.
3.  MUCH MUCH CHEAPER than a nice HDTV stand.  I would take a $40 wall mount any day over a $200 tv stand.
4.  Changing the TV angle is much easier with a wall mount than a tv stand where you can't really do it.

[shmokes]

Gotta say I prefer that stand to the idea of punching two holes in the wall just to have one of them exposed anyway.

The hole isn't exposed. The plate is. And it is no more exposed than the electrical outlet two inches away from it. And it's only exposed because I mounted it higher than I should have--not because of a general defect in the solution. In any case it looks a lot nicer than it would look to have all those cables dangling down the wall. This whole argument is idiotic anyway. You don't even believe anything you're saying. You're just too much of a constant ---meecrob--- bag to say, "Hmm . . . that's pretty cool. It's not worth it for me, though, cos this is just in my bedroom and I don't care how my TV looks in there."

My initial post to you was me being friendly. But, as always. You're a ---tallywhacker---.