[SirSleepalot]

For the last three years or so, I've been watching standard def on a Sharp LC37P50E, which has a PAL-optimised 960x540 panel. So there is no image rescaling to mess things up and also the TV does not have non-defeatable sharpening, aka "edge enhancement". I reckon it's about as good as SD can be - bliss

A few days ago I replaced the old kitchen TV with a Sony KDL-32V4000, mainly because of the low price at John Lewis. I have to say, I am rather disappointed with the picture quality. I am particularly annoyed that even when the sharpness is set to minimum, it is quite obvious that sharpening is still being applied. I am very sensitive to sharpening filters and I find the "halo effect" extremely annoying, not to mention the accentuated MPEG mosquito noise.

I think I'm going to take the Sony back and get something else. But what should I get? Which 32 inch LCD TVs allow sharpening to be completely disabled? Also, I realise it will cost a lot more but I'm interested in stepping up to 1080p.

Thanks in advance!

[Alan CD]

Hi

There is a 'bug' in the software and 'Min' is not minimum. Set the sharpness to '1' and that will improve things a great deal.

Some people have set it to '2' and are very happy. The 32V4000 is a very good set and is moving off the shop shelves at a considerable rate. I had trouble in getting one!

Alan

[SirSleepalot]

Originally Posted by Alan CD

There is a 'bug' in the software and 'Min' is not minimum. Set the sharpness to '1' and that will improve things a great deal.

I read about that in the HDTVTest KDL40V4000 review. However, it says the bug only applies to HDMI inputs and I am using the built-in digital tuner. Also, the KDL40V4000 seems to be very different from the KDL32V4000 - it's a 1080p set whereas mine is only 1366x768. And the menu screens in that review look completely different to what I get on mine.

Anyway, it makes no difference whether I set the sharpness to "Min" or "1" - the sharpening is still there. So the original question still stands: what 32" TV can I buy that doesn't ruin the picture with non-defeatable sharpening?

[kennyhkw]

If u step up to a 1080 set u will prob notice even more sharpening as the TV will hav to do even more scaling to fit the picture into the screen.

[SirSleepalot]

Actually it seems to me that rescaling the 540 lines of PAL to a 1080-line panel (exactly 2x) would be easier than scaling up to 768 (a factor of 1.422).

[kennyhkw]

Originally Posted by SirSleepalot

Actually it seems to me that rescaling the 540 lines of PAL to a 1080-line panel (exactly 2x) would be easier than scaling up to 768 (a factor of 1.422).

If only things were so simple!

The scaling looks better on my 2 year old Sammy 720 than it does on my new Toshiba 1080.

[alsina]

Originally Posted by SirSleepalot

Actually it seems to me that rescaling the 540 lines of PAL to a 1080-line panel (exactly 2x) would be easier than scaling up to 768 (a factor of 1.422).

540 lines of PAL? Thought PAL was 576 lines of picture detail?

[Boostrail]

Originally Posted by alsina

540 lines of PAL? Thought PAL was 576 lines of picture detail?

Definitely Correct !
PAL = 576x720 NTSC = 480x640

Whence the 540??

[SirSleepalot]

Originally Posted by Boostrail

Definitely Correct !
PAL = 576x720 NTSC = 480x640

Whence the 540??

Overscan!

[alsina]

Sorry, have I missed something? Does the link clarify anything regards upscaling?

[SirSleepalot]

A full PAL frame is 576 lines, but when viewed on a CRT display the visible portion is around 540 lines, due to overscan. An LCD TV will crop the source image from 576 to 540 lines before scaling, so that you see the same amount of picture as you would on a CRT.

[alsina]

So how is it that television broadcasts, even in HD, tend to look 'sharper' on 720p screens?

[SirSleepalot]

I would expect 720p to look good on a 1366x768 screen because of the close match in resolution. I can't think of a good reason why SD should look worse upscaled to 1920x1080 compared to 1366x768 for the same screen size.

[alsina]

Originally Posted by SirSleepalot

I would expect 720p to look good on a 1366x768 screen because of the close match in resolution. I can't think of a good reason why SD should look worse upscaled to 1920x1080 compared to 1366x768 for the same screen size.

But however it happens, it does. Find a manufacturer (Panasonic or Sony for example) and feed their 32" 720p and 1080p sets with the same SD source and you will see what I'm getting at. The picture wil be 'sharper' and clearer on the 720p set.

[YellowSphere]

Originally Posted by alsina

But however it happens, it does. Find a manufacturer (Panasonic or Sony for example) and feed their 32" 720p and 1080p sets with the same SD source and you will see what I'm getting at. The picture wil be 'sharper' and clearer on the 720p set.

Panasonic are not a good example at the moment as they don't seem to have bothered with scaling much on this year's models.

If you compare a Sony 32V4000 to the 32W4000 the W will look much much better because of the improved processing. There's also a 32V4500 which has Bravia Engine 2, like the W, which should look just as good. I've not compared them directly, though. Also, Sony still suffer from having a little bit of edge enhancement in there even set to minimum, but only a tiny bit.

Compare a Philips 1366x768 to 1920x1080 set. Or last year, the Pioneer 508XD to the LX508, and you usually find that 1080p looks sharper. This is mainly due to 1920x1080 being a better direct approximation of a PAL signal. However, if the scaling isn't done properly, then it doesn't work. Indeed, one of the main improvements Sony seem to have made for BE2 is better scaling on 1080p models.

[SirSleepalot]

Probably the upscaling to 1080p is better quality than to 768p. Sharper does not necessarily mean better - in fact, oversharpening ruins the appearance of the picture by creating halos and emphasising compression artifacts. Hence the question I asked at the beginning of this thread.

[SirSleepalot]

So, it seems that if I want decent SD quality then I need to pay 3x the price for a Pioneer Kuro KRL-32V. I popped out to Currys this afternoon to take a look, and sure enough the SD quality is top notch. However, the screen has a horrendous glossy finish, making it almost impossible even to see the picture for all the reflections. What on Earth were they thinking? I'd actually be prepared to pay the £999 asking price if it had a proper anti-glare screen. But I already have enough mirrors in the house - I don't need another!

Other possibilities included the Panasonics, which appeared add little or no edge enhancement at the lowest sharpness setting. However the upscaling just looks... crappy.

The Sharp D65E seems like an option, but the one in the shop only had a BD player attached so I couldn't see what the SD upscaling was like.

I must say, I find this all highly frustrating

[SirSleepalot]

Originally Posted by alsina

But however it happens, it does. Find a manufacturer (Panasonic or Sony for example) and feed their 32" 720p and 1080p sets with the same SD source and you will see what I'm getting at. The picture wil be 'sharper' and clearer on the 720p set.

Hmmm, I viewed the Panasonic TX-32LXD80 side by side with the TX-32LZD80 today with a Freeview feed and didn't notice any substantial difference in sharpness or clarity between the two.

[YellowSphere]

Originally Posted by SirSleepalot

Hmmm, I viewed the Panasonic TX-32LXD80 side by side with the TX-32LZD80 today with a Freeview feed and didn't notice any substantial difference in sharpness or clarity between the two.

To me the current LZD range looks absolutely horrific on the built in freeview tuner (not been able to test with any other input really). Incredibly soft. This seems to be something to do with noise reduction, but does not apply to anywhere near the same extent on the LXD models.

[SirSleepalot]

OK, I've spent quite a bit of time evaluating the aforementioned TVs, and here are my findings:

As I said before, the Sony KDL-32V4000 applies obvious sharpening to SD input sources, even when the sharpness control is set to "Min". I find that totally acceptable so I returned the TV. (Thank goodness I bought it from John Lewis, who have a decent returns policy.)

The Pioneer KDL-32V looks fantastic with SD sources. And so it should - it costs a small fortune. Unfortunately, the screen has a glossy finish (as with so many laptop screens these days) so it's pretty much unusable in a room that gets any sunlight. No good to me, then.

The Panasonic TX32LZD85 seems not to apply sharpening to its Freeview output at the lowest sharpness setting. However, YellowSphere is completely correct - the quality of the upscaling is absolutely appalling. It looks almost as if the signal is being converted to composite video and back to digital again. And with the SCART inputs, it is obvious that sharpening is being applied even with sharpness set to minimum. I am absolutely flabbergasted that a supposedly top-flight TV set can make such a dreadful hash of displaying SD sources, and that this fact appears to pass virtually without comment in forums and product reviews. For shame!

The Sharp LC32D65E, on the other hand, does appear to disable sharpening as soon as the sharpness control is turned down to -6 or so. In fact I cannot detect any further change from -6 down to -10. Also, the quality of the upscaling is excellent - the picture looks almost as good as my old Sharp P50 540 line PAL-optimised TV. It would not surprise me to learn that the scaler is the same one used in Pioneer TVs. The picture looks as good via SCART input as it does with the built-in Freeview tuner. Top marks!

The Sharp does have some downsides, however. The onboard software is not too great. In particular, the Freeview EPG is so awful as to be virtually unusable. The viewing angle is not the best - you basically have to be right in front of the TV to get good colour response and contrast. The built-in speakers are not particularly wonderful either, sounding rather thin. However, even with all these faults I am keeping this TV, because at least it delivers a decent picture with SD. I can always use an external Freeview box and amp/speakers. Also, the price I got it for (£433 with 5-year warranty) seems like very good value indeed for a 1080p TV.

[Boostrail]

The Panasonic TX32LXD85 seems not to apply sharpening to its Freeview output at the lowest sharpness setting. However, YellowSphere is completely correct - the quality of the upscaling is absolutely appalling. It looks almost as if the signal is being converted to composite video and back to digital again. And with the SCART inputs, it is obvious that sharpening is being applied even with sharpness set to minimum. I am absolutely flabbergasted that a supposedly top-flight TV set can make such a dreadful hash of displaying SD sources, and that this fact appears to pass virtually without comment in forums and product reviews. For shame!

I think you have confused Yellowspheres statement, he was I believe referring to the 1080p LZD series. I do not think things even then are as bad as you or he make out. I do not use Freeview on this TV as have cable but have got an aerial and found that by suitable adjustment I can get an acceptable picture on freeview although I agree it could be better. SD via other inputs however is remarkably good and I would say better than most.

[SirSleepalot]

Originally Posted by Boostrail

I think you have confused Yellowspheres statement, he was I believe referring to the 1080p LZD series.

Sorry, so was I. "TX32LXD85" was a typo - I meant to write "TX32LZD85".

I do not use Freeview on this TV as have cable but have got an aerial and found that by suitable adjustment I can get an acceptable picture on freeview although I agree it could be better. SD via other inputs however is remarkably good and I would say better than most.

Really? When I plugged my external Freeview box I found that the picture was (even) worse than the built-in tuner because sharpening was being applied, even though I had set the sharpness control to minimum.