Is it worth the cost to calibrate a budget system?

Status
Not open for further replies.

usernametaken

Standard Member
I own a Bravia KDL-32P3000 connected via HDMI to a Sony RHT-G800 surround sound stand amp thing :rolleyes:

Connected to the Stand via HDMI is a PS3, the signal is passed through to the LCD.

Connected to the TV component is a Nintendo Wii.

Conected to the Scart is a Sony SLV-SE810 VCR.

The TV has built in freeview and normal tuners.

I do not have any other sources going in to the system at this time.

I am wondering if it is worth having a professional come and calibrate my system. I have already had a fiddle with the user settings and the difference is amazing compared to how the screen was delivered. With this in mind I am wondering how much more performance can be had from the display given the improvement so far from my (at best) poor tinkering.

My only reservation is whether or not it is worth calibrating a display that is considered budget (even though picture quality for sets in this range is apparently led by this model)?

Thanks for reading :thumbsup:
 

ijd

Established Member
surely a well calibrated budget set will look far better than a poorly calibrated high end set, surely only you know the answer, you will need to weigh up the cost of calibration against the possible benefits of having it done, any improvement has a cost and some major improvements cost a little, just as some very expensive mods have little improvement on quality,
we all know a half decent £20 scart has a major impact on old analogue systems pro rata a mains cable costing £100 or more could be seen as little if any improvement
 

usernametaken

Standard Member
surely a well calibrated budget set will look far better than a poorly calibrated high end set
:thumbsdow

If it were that obvious then everyone would be buying budget sets and using the saved money to have the sets calibrated, therefore still saving money over the cost of a superior set without sacrificing picture quality. (in the case of monitors at least - i know features such as connections would still differ greatly on LCDs and Plasmas etc ;) )

surely only you know the answer, you will need to weigh up the cost of calibration against the possible benefits of having it done, any improvement has a cost and some major improvements cost a little
:thumbsdow

two things here,
one, 'no I don't know the answer, hence the question.'

two, 'I don't know enough about calibration to say whether or not it will have a large impact; that said I do know from reading what others on this forum have said that improvements vary from set to set which is why I have asked.'

It may be the case that my particular set lacks features which allow advanced calibration (as i have heard some do) or that it is limited by the panel it uses and therefore calibration will not be cost effective while a TV that uses a superior panel would see a far greater benefit. Again I don't know the answer to these questions hence me asking here.

I'm not suggesting I am clueless when it comes to AV equiptment, just that in this particular area (calibration) I would appreciate some guidance from those who may have experience with my particular set.

:lesson:

What I would ask is that if you intend to answer please keep your comments constructive and avoid making generalisations, yes replacing a component or link in the chain could improve the picture but this isn't a question of replacing a component and asking what difference will it have, it is instead trying to improve on what you already have - Calibration can only work to improve the picture within the limitations imposed by the hardware I already have and THAT is where this question comes from.
 
Last edited:

ijd

Established Member
maybe you missed my point, a lot of sets out of the box are adjusted high, with dynamic contrast set on, colours vivid etc, check sets on display in shops, these settings give a wow factor, and compared to the old worn out sets people have at home look so much better, it is only after living with the set for a short while you realise the picture is not right, A budget set that has for all intense and purposes been adjusted to look its best can and indeed will look better than a far superior set that has been poorly set up.

As far as is it worth it, well you know how much money you have in the bank,
perhaps it is a bit of a rhetorical question, is it worth spending £100 or so on having a set calibrated or spending the extra money on a set to start with.
There are also many posts on here where some say it is worth every penny, and some would argue it is a waste of time, you yourself have adjusted your set and made considerable ground, and probably unlikely to get an improvement worth the money, There are also those people whom attempt adjustment and come on here looking for default settings to try to restore the picture to something watchable.

As far as not generalising, unless you start a specific owners thread, you are unlikely to get specific answers, and as you list a few pieces of equipment,
Trying to find someone who has the exact equipment narrows your chances of specific answers dramatically so I would suggest you are going to have to accept generalisation, even if you did find someone with that equipment they may have a different opinion as to what is worth doing or not.

Finally you asked a question, I tried to help you to think along the right lines, I dont expect thanks for the answer as I just like to help people out.
But I dont expect arrogance either, Unless you change that attitude you will find this a lonely and unhelpful forum
 

usernametaken

Standard Member
a lot of sets out of the box are adjusted high, with dynamic contrast set on, colours vivid etc, check sets on display in shops, these settings give a wow factor, and compared to the old worn out sets people have at home look so much better, it is only after living with the set for a short while you realise the picture is not right, A budget set that has for all intense and purposes been adjusted to look its best can and indeed will look better than a far superior set that has been poorly set up.

As far as is it worth it, well you know how much money you have in the bank,
perhaps it is a bit of a rhetorical question, is it worth spending £100 or so on having a set calibrated or spending the extra money on a set to start with.
There are also many posts on here where some say it is worth every penny, and some would argue it is a waste of time, you yourself have adjusted your set and made considerable ground, and probably unlikely to get an improvement worth the money, There are also those people whom attempt adjustment and come on here looking for default settings to try to restore the picture to something watchable.

This could have quite easily been your orignal reply, why it wasn't i don't know, only you do. The fact that it wasn't however is what prompted my less than warm response. I find it infuriating that people presume they can say and act as they want on the internet because it is annonymous, especially when it is people who should know better.

As far as not generalising, unless you start a specific owners thread, you are unlikely to get specific answers, and as you list a few pieces of equipment,
Trying to find someone who has the exact equipment narrows your chances of specific answers dramatically so I would suggest you are going to have to accept generalisation, even if you did find someone with that equipment they may have a different opinion as to what is worth doing or not.

By generalising I mean the tried and tested "if you pay more for a component or a link in the chain then the overall quality of the system is bound to improve" response that is so common these days. This response actually has no bearing what so ever on my question of "Is it worth the cost to calibrate a budget system?"
Its akin to you asking, "is it worth me having the engine in my budget car tuned for better performance?" and me replying with, "well we all know that if you replace the filters on an engine the performance will improve".

It's neither helpful to you nor does it give you anything to work with moving forward. A more helpful response would be,
"I have a budget car and after paying x to have the engine tuned I think the performance increase is fantastic."
OR
"I have tuned several budget cars and since they are limited by their engine it really isn't worth you having it tuned since the performance gain will be minimal, especially with the engine you have which is also used in XYZ cars - see these posts for users with this engine and their experiences."

I have a budget set, I simply wanted to know does anybody with a budget system have any experience with calibration? Are there any ISF guys here who have any experience with Budget systems (mine in particular if possible or perhaps others in a similar price range, or that use similar components?) and can comment on the improvement vs cost?

Finally you asked a question, I tried to help you to think along the right lines, I dont expect thanks for the answer as I just like to help people out.
But I dont expect arrogance either, Unless you change that attitude you will find this a lonely and unhelpful forum

Thats very true, I did ask a question and the response was neither relevant nor helpful, you assumed I knew the asnwers to the questions I posed and instead of attempting to answer or point me in the right direction you went on to discuss the relative merits of replacing a link in the chain as opposed to working with what I already have which was the question.

You missunderstood what I was asking; you answered as you felt appropriate and I corrected you. You have now given me the response which should have been your original post and for that you have my thanks, as for the rest of your comments, they are irrelevant. If you don't take the time to read my question and instead of being constructive simply shoot me down then you should expect me to respond in kind.

I wont pretend to be grateful for unhelpful comments and I will correct others where necessary. Likewise I am more than willing to accept responsibility for my actions and appologise where I am at fault. This was one such case, your intial reply missed the point entirely and you simply wrote what you wanted to without actually taking the time to think about a your response, you say that you tried to help but that isn't the case at all. Your second post is your attempt at trying to help and like I said I am grateful, it's constructive and you make a valid point. Your first post however is nothing more than you beating down a newbie who you feel should know better, if this had been the case then fine, but you missed the mark entirely.

This thread is a prime example of how forums can be lonely and unhelpful, you feel you are in a position to make the comments you made freely and without any thought about how they affect others. Why should a new poster know the things you have said are common knowledge? Why should a new poster have to put up with responses like yours that are wholly unhelpful? They shouldn't and by simply pointing this out I derail my own thread and ruin any chance of getting a constructive response.

That aside I hope that you will think in future before posting and work with new members to bring them to your level of knowledge instead of looking down on them and posting as if they should know better which helps no-one.
It isn't arrogance to defend oneself, however your first post was the very definition of arrogance, you presumed you were in a position to answer without really taking the time to look at the question, you made assumptions about my level of knowledge and you response was delivered in a wholly overbearing manner.

I will now ask a mod to close this thread since it is unlikely that it will get back on topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The latest video from AVForums

Amazon Fire TV Cube Gen 3 Review: Coming Soon
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom