I've been in the market for a new 32" TV for ages now. I've been looking at the Panny PD30, JVC HV32D25 and the like. One thing that keeps bugging me is that the cheapo sets always seem to have much better image quality than the expensive ones in the store. I know that the quality of the feed is very important here and that image quality will improve at home. But all the TVs there are connected on the same RF-source, so however bad the feed is, at least the playing field is level. The other day, I was playing around with a JVC HV28P37. I turned off all digital processing, DNR, ... and returned the screen to its normal aspect ratio, making it virtually identical in size to the cheap 4:3 TV next to it. And still the cheap TV looked better defined and more pleasing than the JVC, which appeared smudgy and was still showing artefacts. And it's like that for all those digitally processing TVs: pixelplus, acuity, DIST, ... Is this normal? Is this something one is supposed to live with when buying an expensive set? And more importantly: how am I ever supposed to make a good comparison between high-definition sets on RF?