flat screen TV's on wall

heycal

Hall of Fame
I'm currently living in the dark ages, with big tube TV's sitting on stands. But people have these modern LCD and plasma flat screen TV's mounted on their walls, which not only save space but looks kind of sleek as well.

But my question is: where does all the accessory stuff go? The power cords, the cable box, the DVD/VCR player (if the TV doesn't have one built in) and all those cords and wires connecting it all go?
 

NickH87

Semi-Pro
With my father set up in the living/common room, he mounted his plasma on the wall, I think its a 62" but Im never in there so I am not sure, but he made a hole in the wall and snaked all of the wires through the other side where all of the equipment is. There is a lot of stuff but we have another room on the other side of the wall that is basically storage so its cool.

Another option is to snake it through the all, but have like a cabinet somewhere in the corner or something.
 

crazy8tiger

Rookie
If cutting into the wall isn't an option, you can just let the wires hang down, but have a small cabinet or something under the tv to cover the wires up and have somewhere to put your cable box.
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
Is it my imagination, or does my nearly 20year old mid-level Panasonic tube TV produce a better quality picture than these new fangled and pricey LCD sets?
 
for analog input, I have seen that the older Tv's can produce a better image. However, you put an HD broadcast on the new fangled LCD's, you will NEVER want to go back
 

naza2

New User
another option if you can't hack/cut the wall is to build another wall panel in front of the permanent wall. your tv will mount on the permanent wall with extended brackets that sticks out onto the semi-permanent wall panel. you can snake all wiring within the gaps between the permanent and semi-permanent wall.

Most people i've seen made this semi-permanent wall as a decorative panel using gypsum boards, or some kind of stone or wood finish. looks really nice if done right. the only downside is, it'll turn out to be a mini remodeling of the space instead of just upgrade in AV system i.e. more money :(
 

FastFreddy

Semi-Pro
TV

I had my Sony LCD 52 XBR5 mounted above my fireplace pretty sweet. Since I have Time Warner cable extended I do not need any cable box to hide or dvd, dvr box. I had Bestbuy do the install and hide the cable in the wall behind the tv and had someone come in and put in a outlet behind the tv to power it. So all you see is the tv on the wall no wires or boxes to see. I was watching Rob and Big show and Rob had the wires on his wall mounted tv showing it looks tacky not a clean install. Get the right adjustable bracket and have a wall strong enuff to hold the tv.
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
for analog input, I have seen that the older Tv's can produce a better image. However, you put an HD broadcast on the new fangled LCD's, you will NEVER want to go back
I don't really understand this stuff very well. What does this all mean for an average TV viewer in 2009, one with a typical but not super fancy cable package who watches CNN and Fox and tennis on ESPN or CBS when they have it and some HBO movies and series? Rents DVD's as well.

Most of this stuff is not in HD, is it? And even if it was, doesn't one need additional equipment or service to benefit from the HD broadcast?

So given all that, wouldn't that mean tube TV would provide a better picture most of the time for most of the shows than a new LCD set?
 
Last edited:

origmarm

Hall of Fame
To answer the question on the wires my brother in law installs these things often for customers and he gives them three options:

1) If it's the right type of wall: Make a hole in the wall, insert a little plastic tube and run the tube down in the gap between the wall and the "stud wall". Then run the cables through the tube. Then repair the wall.

2) If you can't make a hole on wall, run the cables on the outside of the wall and hide them with a unit/similar.

3) Again if you can't make a hole on the wall then attach a box section tube to the outside of the wall and run the cables through that. I believe they call them "cable raceways" or something like that in the US. Looks like this:


As to your questions on picture quality, this is my (limited) understanding which I hope is of use. You have three type of signal available to you:
1) Analog
2) Digital
3) Digital HD (High Definition)

The short answer is without looking at your setup I can't tell which one you have. The likelihood however is that you don't have an HD package. If you don't then it comes down to what connectors you have on your box as most cable/satelite TV today is transmitted digitally.

If you have a SCART cable, that looks like the picture here, then you are transmitting an analog signal to your TV:


The same thing if you have a standard connector (I forget the name), that looks like this:


In those two cases your picture MAY look better with a flat screen but it's not certain. The SCART is capable of decent images (notably from DVD players) but mostly it will look the same as a "normal" tube TV. The reason is that a standard TV signal "compresses" the signal. When you put this up on a big screen, the TV "fills in" the gaps. Tube TVs "fill in" differently than LCD/Plasma TVs. In essence the tube tv does it less well in theory but because the signal is rubbish to begin with the whole thing looks smoother. The digital TV does it more accurately but essentially "exposes" the flaws in the signal much better. Ironically this means you get a less good looking overall picture. From a DVD the flat screen should look better (better start signal), from a cable box it's a 50/50 shot dependent on how they compress their feed, their source quality etc..etc...

I'm limited to 4 images so I'm going to continue in the next post
 
Last edited:

origmarm

Hall of Fame
If however you have an HDMI cable (all these TVs will have the socket) you can "go digital":
The socket looks like this:

The cable looks like this:


This means that you can transmit a digital signal to your TV. This will always be better than analog, even if your signal is not HD or high definition. If you have one of these on your cable box or similar then you will get a better picture. If you get HD then you will get a significantly better picture. Here it's mainly because the signal that the boxes equipped with these outputs receive apparently has to be better (upscaled), essentially you get a better start point, the signal has more information in it. When it's HD then it's a lot better.

I hope that helps. If any other posters know any of the above to be wrong please correct me.

Cheers, Orig
 

CyBorg

Legend
I have a 14-year old tv that works perfectly fine.

What's the obsession with flat HD huge-ass tv's? You need to see some newsanchor's mole?
 

origmarm

Hall of Fame
I used to agree with you Cyborg and I still do for "general watching".

Once I saw a football game in HD though on a large screen I was convinced. That and a tennis match (Wimbledon 2008 final as it turns out). It is significantly better. There is a wow factor at how much better for me at least.

Also if you have one of these new video games consoles (which my youngest brother does), he attached it to my TV once and it was also much better than on a normal TV.

For me that essentially defines the big TV market, sports fans and video game enthusiasts. That and those that are passionate about their "home theatres".

I put myself in the sports fan bracket.
 

CyBorg

Legend
I perhaps might get a cool new tv just to watch films. Sports is quasi-fascist nonsense, except for tennis.

For now, my computer screen suffices as far as movies go. Don't like tv.
 

TenniseaWilliams

Professional
I just got a 32" lcd refurb for about $400, it replaces an old tube TV. It uses 1/4 of the power, has an embedded HD and cable tuner (the cable box it eliminates costs almost $6/month and more power/space) and has a direct computer display input. It won't burn images into the screen if the kids leave a game up on it. It is an order of magnitude lighter than the tube version, and can easily be mounted on a wall or moved around the place. It also looks nicer, and I could get great sound out of it into any decent audio system.

I wouldn't have considered the upgrade if the ancient Sony hadn't died, but it was a definite upgrade.
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
Origmarm and others - thanks for your thoughts.

To me the appeal of the flat screen is a sleeker look, taking up less space, and being able to lift the damn thing if need be. It's not simply about having the latest and greatest.
 

Patrick_St

Rookie
I just got a 32" lcd refurb for about $400, it replaces an old tube TV. It uses 1/4 of the power, has an embedded HD and cable tuner (the cable box it eliminates costs almost $6/month and more power/space) and has a direct computer display input. It won't burn images into the screen if the kids leave a game up on it. It is an order of magnitude lighter than the tube version, and can easily be mounted on a wall or moved around the place. It also looks nicer, and I could get great sound out of it into any decent audio system.

I wouldn't have considered the upgrade if the ancient Sony hadn't died, but it was a definite upgrade.

TWilliams, I have a feeling you are a cool parent.
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
If however you have an HDMI cable (all these TVs will have the socket) you can "go digital":
The socket looks like this:

This means that you can transmit a digital signal to your TV. This will always be better than analog, even if your signal is not HD or high definition. If you have one of these on your cable box or similar then you will get a better picture. If you get HD then you will get a significantly better picture.
Are you saying that an HDMI cable will improve the quality of even the analog/non-HD channels?

In any event, I was in a fancy hotel this weekend that had a flat screen LG TV. Now, maybe they didn't have the best cables or something, but the analog channels looked so much worse than they look on my 20 year old tube TV at home. As mentioned earlier, I've encountered this problem before, where the typical flat screen TV picture I see in a bar or wherever almost always has this same poor picture quality for the regular non-hd channels.
 

origmarm

Hall of Fame
Are you saying that an HDMI cable will improve the quality of even the analog/non-HD channels?

In any event, I was in a fancy hotel this weekend that had a flat screen LG TV. Now, maybe they didn't have the best cables or something, but the analog channels looked so much worse than they look on my 20 year old tube TV at home. As mentioned earlier, I've encountered this problem before, where the typical flat screen TV picture I see in a bar or wherever almost always has this same poor picture quality for the regular non-hd channels.
Sorry it's taken me a while to reply, didn't have this subscribed.

Essentially that's correct, it depends on whether your box supports this properly but it should. The difference will not be massive but it should be at least as good as a tube TV. The other thing is that this varies HUGELY by brand of TV. I recently saw a Sony TV that looked fabulous in standard def. LGs that I have seen in the past and Sharp TVs have been disappointing. I have a Toshiba which has proved good. I use this site:
http://www.trustedreviews.com/

I know it's UK but I find the reviews very good. The models may be similar. I'm not sure if the signal makes a difference though. We are on PAL whereas you guys are on NTSC. May be that NTSC does not look as good on the LCDs in standard def. I don't know enough about that to comment though I'm afraid.
 

TBobLP

Rookie
I perhaps might get a cool new tv just to watch films. Sports is quasi-fascist nonsense, except for tennis.

For now, my computer screen suffices as far as movies go. Don't like tv.
Sports are quasi-fascist nonsense?? what the hell is that supposed to mean??
 

TenniseaWilliams

Professional
Are you saying that an HDMI cable will improve the quality of even the analog/non-HD channels?

In any event, I was in a fancy hotel this weekend that had a flat screen LG TV. Now, maybe they didn't have the best cables or something, but the analog channels looked so much worse than they look on my 20 year old tube TV at home. As mentioned earlier, I've encountered this problem before, where the typical flat screen TV picture I see in a bar or wherever almost always has this same poor picture quality for the regular non-hd channels.
HDMI cables are usually preferable for digital panels, including LCD's. Positives include avoiding extra analog to digital conversions, minimizing electrical/magnetic interference along the cable, and bundling video and audio in one cable. Some resolution/mode negotiation can be done between devices as well, which is normally a plus. Future enhancements such as 3D, higher-def, copy protection, and side channel encodings will require digital connections.

There are a lot of reasons why analog channels often look bad on digital panels. High resolution displays can show just how bad the source signal is. Larger panels make source defects more obvious. Scaling issues can also add distortion.
 

fishuuuuu

Hall of Fame
I'm currently living in the dark ages, with big tube TV's sitting on stands. But people have these modern LCD and plasma flat screen TV's mounted on their walls, which not only save space but looks kind of sleek as well.

But my question is: where does all the accessory stuff go? The power cords, the cable box, the DVD/VCR player (if the TV doesn't have one built in) and all those cords and wires connecting it all go?


You can color a wire management cover as above.
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
Heycal, when you get to getting your sleek tv and your HDMI cable, can you look into Bluray dvd's especially it seems you like movies.
Can't even begin to think of that blu ray stuff...


Regarding these HDMI cables: do they help picture quality when using DVD players with HDTV sets? Or are they only helpful when watching TV shows? In other words, do you need one HDMI for the TV-cable hookup, and one HDMI for the DVD-TV hookup?
 

rommil

Legend
Can't even begin to think of that blu ray stuff...


Regarding these HDMI cables: do they help picture quality when using DVD players with HDTV sets? Or are they only helpful when watching TV shows? In other words, do you need one HDMI for the TV-cable hookup, and one HDMI for the DVD-TV hookup?
You can swap them if you don't mind that hassle but yeah it would be a hassle. HDMI cables are pricey as well.
Btw a PS3 is a great value if you are looking for a dvd/bluray player since you can play games on it too.
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
You can swap them if you don't mind that hassle but yeah it would be a hassle. HDMI cables are pricey as well.
So you're saying a HDMI cable would indeed help the DVD picture quality on an HDTV?

Aren't these HDMI cables like 20 bucks these days?
 

tricky

Hall of Fame
Sports are quasi-fascist nonsense??
They kinda are (see SEC football), but they're also a communal experience (see SEC football :D .) That's why I love it. Mass opiates rock yo!! ;)
 

rommil

Legend
So you're saying a HDMI cable would indeed help the DVD picture quality on an HDTV?

Aren't these HDMI cables like 20 bucks these days?
Yes, picture and sound.


....and you are right. I looked up on Amazon and you can find cheap HDMI cables. The ones I bought so far were the least about 35 bucks and they can go way higher than that hence I said that they are pricey.
 

Nickk

Rookie
Sports is quasi-fascist nonsense, except for tennis.
:)

Live sports are remarkably clear in HD, I drool over it at stores, bars, and such. I cannot justify that type of expenditure though and currently have 2 CRT TV at the house.
 

seffina

G.O.A.T.
....and you are right. I looked up on Amazon and you can find cheap HDMI cables. The ones I bought so far were the least about 35 bucks and they can go way higher than that hence I said that they are pricey.
You probably don't need expensive HDMI cables until you have a fancy HD sound system. A lot of the fancy cables are meant for a surround sound system that isn't that much in wide use yet. For example, the Dark Knight BluRay (a movie heycal didn't care for IIRC) isn't equipped with the True HD (7.1 or hd 5.1 or hd 6.1 ) surround sound and that's one of the most popular dvds. It is still dolby DTS HD. The sound is better than a regular player, of course, but you can enjoy it on a cheap cable with mid range speeds. You definitely don't need a very expensive HDMI cable if you don't have a PS3 or a BluRay player. If you don't have a BluRay or PS3 or HD Sound system, the max speed you would need is 5 Gbps. So those cheap cables will do you just fine.

A tip with some of the cheaper HDMI cables, remove them and replug them occasionally. The cheaper ones are made with plastics that can sometimes melt if used heavily. The expensive ones have more copper density and tin backings. Some of the really expensive ones have this thing called cables for life in that they'll replace your cables as the technology improves.

Also heycal, if you don't want to mount your TV to the wall, you could buy a console that has a wood panel attached to it. These will have built in wire tubes. They look pretty nice actually. But if the appeal is to put the TV on the wall then the previously mentioned options are probably better.

----------
I enjoy a lot of things on BluRay. Some of the widescreen shots in movies are simply breathtaking. As far as HD sports, tennis is great and so is American football. Didn't care much about college basketball in hd. Not necessary. I don't think most of it was broadcasted in 1080 anyway. Some TV shows definitely benefit from a HD viewing. My HDTV upconverts my laptop's video streams and files and that's a plus.

I don't do any gaming, unfortunately, and have no opinion on that. But I do know that the PS3 BluRay player gets some of the best reviews for gaming and HD movies.

Sorry for rambling on.
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
Also heycal, if you don't want to mount your TV to the wall, you could buy a console that has a wood panel attached to it. These will have built in wire tubes. They look pretty nice actually.
Do you have a picture of one of these? Not sure what you mean.
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
:)

Live sports are remarkably clear in HD, I drool over it at stores, bars, and such.
It is pretty amazing. One day, I dream of a world where tennis is always shown in HDTV and the networks lower the basic camera angle to slightly above the players instead of way high up as is usually the case.

Back to HDMI cables for a moment: If you need a one for DVD and one for cable box, I guess it might be a mistake to buy one of those low end HDTV's that only have 1 HDMI outlet?

If any one cares, here is my present plan: buy 2 very inexpensive -- probably Dynex brand from Best Buy -- 27-32" TV's for bedroom and den, for basic TV and DVD needs. (I want the TV to be the name/brand model for both, to limit the amount of learning how to operate the damn things.) I don't need serious sound or the very best picture in the world, and frankly, I could barely tell the difference between the 300 dollar and the 500 dollar sets in the store, so that's why I'm leaning toward the cheap ones, not to mention I'm not exactly John D. Rockefeller here.
 
Last edited:

mucat

Hall of Fame
For HDMI cables, monoprice is a pretty popular online store to get cables. From what I heard, you only need expensive HDMI cables if you need to run them for a very long distant.

For TVs, I would look for brand names. Most problems I heard are from people buying off-brand TVs. For plasma, only pioneer and panasonic and maybe samsung. For LCD, I am not so sure since I don't have one, Sony, samsung and maybe sharp? I am sure LCD users here can tell you. Wait for good deal and take your time. TV are getting cheaper and cheaper. It is not difficult to get a good deal nowaday. I don't think buying off-brand is a good idea in term of reliability.
 

origmarm

Hall of Fame
The only comment I would make on the TV choice heycal is that to an extent with flat panel TVs it's very much a case of you get what you pay for until you hit the very expensive stuff. Personally I would steer clear of the cheaper brands for the sake of a few hundred dollars. Cheaper plasma panels in particular are not good, the LCDs suffer less from the quality downgrade as you go from one make to another as often they are all subcontracted and the volumes are much larger due to computer panels.
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
The only comment I would make on the TV choice heycal is that to an extent with flat panel TVs it's very much a case of you get what you pay for until you hit the very expensive stuff. Personally I would steer clear of the cheaper brands for the sake of a few hundred dollars. Cheaper plasma panels in particular are not good, the LCDs suffer less from the quality downgrade as you go from one make to another as often they are all subcontracted and the volumes are much larger due to computer panels.
I am somewhat leery of off-brand cheapies in general, but in this case, the user comments for the LCD TV's I'm interested in were suprisingly good. (Unlike a couple of others I saw.) Most people were pretty satisfied with them, so I'm hoping I will be among them. Also, I'm a first time LCD flat screen guy, and I don't have huge sound and picture demands, so I'm hoping I'll be easy to please.:)

The one remaining question at this point is do I buy 2 27"'s for 300 bucks, or 2 32"'s for 389 bucks. Or one of each?
 
I am somewhat leery of off-brand cheapies in general, but in this case, the user comments for the LCD TV's I'm interested in were suprisingly good. (Unlike a couple of others I saw.) Most people were pretty satisfied with them, so I'm hoping I will be among them. Also, I'm a first time LCD flat screen guy, and I don't have huge sound and picture demands, so I'm hoping I'll be easy to please.:)

The one remaining question at this point is do I buy 2 27"'s for 300 bucks, or 2 32"'s for 389 bucks. Or one of each?
cheapskate, you do not need an LCD screen stick to your CRT, it is fine
 
Last edited:

heycal

Hall of Fame
cheapskate, you do not need an LCD screen stick to your CRT, it is fine
Well, a cheapstake would stick to the CRT, no? The thing definitely works fine so why waste money on new set?

For the record, I don't need a CRT either. No one needs a TV of any kind.
 
It is pretty amazing. One day, I dream of a world where tennis is always shown in HDTV and the networks lower the basic camera angle to slightly above the players instead of way high up as is usually the case.

Back to HDMI cables for a moment: If you need a one for DVD and one for cable box, I guess it might be a mistake to buy one of those low end HDTV's that only have 1 HDMI outlet?

If any one cares, here is my present plan: buy 2 very inexpensive -- probably Dynex brand from Best Buy -- 27-32" TV's for bedroom and den, for basic TV and DVD needs. (I want the TV to be the name/brand model for both, to limit the amount of learning how to operate the damn things.) I don't need serious sound or the very best picture in the world, and frankly, I could barely tell the difference between the 300 dollar and the 500 dollar sets in the store, so that's why I'm leaning toward the cheap ones, not to mention I'm not exactly John D. Rockefeller here.
you don't need:confused:

You are sounding worse than Al Gore, tells everyone how to live and what they need and don't need; and WANTS/DOES THE OPPOSITE. Hypocrite.
 
Last edited:

heycal

Hall of Fame
You are sounding worse than Al Gore, tells everyone how to live and what they need and don't need; and WANTS/DOES THE OPPOSITE. Hypocrite.
Look up the various definition and uses of needs, then get back to us.

But again, none of us need TV's and the like. We want them.
 
Didn't clink on the link, but it's quite possible I wanted new shoes. In fact, I want new shoes right now. I might go get me some, Mr. "anti-buy anything". What are you, some sort of commie?
no I am a socialist like you, you said you need new shoes, you should only buy what you need not what you want, your statement not mine.

How do you know when you need new shoes?
I've owned a fine pair of New Balance 652's for 9 months, playing in them an average of 2 hours a week. They still look like they are in decent condition aside from a fabric tear in the left heel area. Lately though, my knees and legs have been stiff/sore, and I'm wondering if it's due to playing more tennis in these warmer months or whether it's because my sneakers have lost some support over time, or both. So... even though my sneakers look fine, and feel okay, is it possible they need to be replaced? How do you know aside from obvious wear and tear when a shoe is past its prime?
 

heycal

Hall of Fame
I've owned a fine pair of New Balance 652's for 9 months, playing in them an average of 2 hours a week. They still look like they are in decent condition aside from a fabric tear in the left heel area. Lately though, my knees and legs have been stiff/sore, and I'm wondering if it's due to playing more tennis in these warmer months or whether it's because my sneakers have lost some support over time, or both. So... even though my sneakers look fine, and feel okay, is it possible they need to be replaced? How do you know aside from obvious wear and tear when a shoe is past its prime?
Re-reading that post, it sounds like I needed new shoes. Glad I got some.


no I am a socialist like you, you said you need new shoes, you should only buy what you need not what you want, your statement not mine.
Where did I ever say that? Go dig up that quote and get back to us, you commie pinko.
 
Re-reading that post, it sounds like I needed new shoes. Glad I got some.




Where did I ever say that? Go dig up that quote and get back to us, you commie pinko.
that link is not working:confused:

sorry, too busy buying guns that I need just in case socialist wack jobs come knocking on my door.
 

jimbo333

Hall of Fame
You only really need HD if you've got a big telly, otherwise there isn't a big difference really. Anything over 28" and HD will begin to make a diffference. By the time you get to say 42" HD looks awesome:)

I've still got a 32" CRT, which looks great!!!
 
Top