Which LCD TVs allow sharpening to be completely disabled?

[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.