• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

Question New HDTV poor quality

Copplepot

Active Member
We've just got a new Techwood 49" HD TV after our Bush Ultra HD 4K broke. Both Tv's were pretty much the same price range (£250 >£300+) and obviously the 4k will look better but the new Techwood looks dreadful. It's nothing to do with settings as the quality doesn't change just the brightness, contrast etc. Reviews were really good and had a nice coupon.

I tried a HD 4K video on youtube which looks a lot better (Obviously didn't run great)

Best way to describe the quality is that there's significant colour banding, blacks don't look black and it looks looks the TV doesn't have enough pixels to cope (hence the bad colours)

I'm assuming the aerial (£10 amazon) is the main culprit here, if we were to invest in a HD freeview box is this likely to give the quality you'd expect? Netflix looks how I'd expect it.

Either the reviewers all work for AO.com or are they're doing something different. :D For the price I wasn't expecting anything amazing but the normal channels aren't up to par. (Had 3 cheap TV's, happy with all aside from this)

Thank you
 
Last edited:

JayCee

Distinguished Member
The aerial has nothing to do with your poor picture and there's no such thing as an analogue aerial.
If the built-in Netflix also looks bad that just confirms and points to a poor quality TV.
 

Sloppy Bob

Distinguished Member
The bigger your TV and the higher the resolution of it. The worse poor quality sources look.

Blacks not looking black just points to a low-quality panel.
 

EndlessWaves

Distinguished Member
The bigger your TV and the higher the resolution of it. The worse poor quality sources look.

His new TV is lower resolution than his previous one.

It sounds like it's a TV software issue with the image processing applied to the tuner's signal. You could try resetting the TV and fiddling around with the settings, or just return it and replace it with something better.
 

Copplepot

Active Member
Thanks guys

His new TV is lower resolution than his previous one.

It sounds like it's a TV software issue with the image processing applied to the tuner's signal. You could try resetting the TV and fiddling around with the settings, or just return it and replace it with something better.

Thanks will give this a try.
unmiss-sound-button-muted-e74d67a0c85c3548f07d7564782a269c.svg


I was aware that at this price range it's not going to be amazing but there's not a single review under 4 stars and all mentioning the quality so I gave it a shot.
 

noiseboy72

Distinguished Member
Probably because most buyers at this price point are not critical viewers, will turn the colour and brightness up as far as possible and are only concerned about how big the picture is...

You can sometimes improve the picture quality by going through a basic setup. Reducing brightness and backlight levels will improve black levels, but "jaggies" and compression effects are usually down to poor internal processing of the off-air image. Reducing the colour vibrance settings can help to disguise this to a certain extent.
 

Copplepot

Active Member
Probably because most buyers at this price point are not critical viewers, will turn the colour and brightness up as far as possible and are only concerned about how big the picture is...

You can sometimes improve the picture quality by going through a basic setup. Reducing brightness and backlight levels will improve black levels, but "jaggies" and compression effects are usually down to poor internal processing of the off-air image. Reducing the colour vibrance settings can help to disguise this to a certain extent.

I guess so, my mother said she can't tell the difference! The good news is she's happy with it and I rarely, if ever watch TV.

I did go through the avforum guide but with this TV in particular settings don't seem to have much an impact.

Worst case, at least Netflix/prime/YouTube all look ok.
 

nenito2k

Active Member
@Copplepot

what where you expecting buying a 50" at 300 £ ? excuse my french, but when you buy crap...you get crap !
in order to have at least a decent PQ you need to spend over 600£ ! and even then it won't do HDR well...nor have precise color reproduction...
 

Copplepot

Active Member
@Copplepot

what where you expecting buying a 50" at 300 £ ? excuse my french, but when you buy crap...you get crap !
in order to have at least a decent PQ you need to spend over 600£ ! and even then it won't do HDR well...nor have precise color reproduction...

As mentioned above I've owned several large tv's at this price point and been happy with the quality, why would I need to spend double that?

What's good quality to me, isn't the same for everyone else. As the 99% of positive reviews show for my current tv (which I don't find great)
 

nenito2k

Active Member
well....just get another one then if you can change it...
 

Copplepot

Active Member
well....just get another one then if you can change it...

I'm in two minds, I don't actually watch TV but the other people are very pleased with it. May be more hassle than it's worse.

£250 is probably the lowest for a 50" but I'm shocked at the difference £50 can make.
 

Loopthrough

Well-known Member
A Hisense Roku TV at Argos would have been a much better TV all round at a fairly similar price.

If you’re stuck at AO, anything from Hisense, Samsung, Sony (there’s still a FHD WF663 50” model doing the rounds here and there) would have given you much better performance all round.

My pick when on a budget will always be Hisense now.

ALSO... Freeview SD channels are notoriously poor quality and many of the programmes are shot/edited in a low contrast look (stuff on CBS Reality, Horror Channel, etc) often has this washed out look.

The levels of video compression used on Freeview are shocking. Much worse than a DVD and most YouTube SD uploads!
 

MaryWhitehouse

Well-known Member
@Copplepot

what where you expecting buying a 50" at 300 £ ? excuse my french, but when you buy crap...you get crap !
in order to have at least a decent PQ you need to spend over 600£ ! and even then it won't do HDR well...nor have precise color reproduction...

Not true. My Hisense 65 at £450 has great picture and good enough HDR.
 

Loopthrough

Well-known Member
What model? I'd be amazed if any Hisense at that price can even begin to pump out HDR.
It's all relative, isn't it?

Reviewers and hardcore TV enthusiasts say x thousand nits are required for the best HDR and highlights, but in most people's real world viewing that's just too bright/not required for a normal evening's viewing.

The "HDR Lite" these mainstream TVs (which reviewers often call "Budget"!) pump out still offers a visible improvement in brightness and depth over SDR which is enough for many people to enjoy and be happy with.

Which I think is always something to remember.

A true budget TV is a Vestel from a supermarket or those (apologies for the language) Cello or no-name Tongfang things.
 

MaryWhitehouse

Well-known Member
What model? I'd be amazed if any Hisense at that price can even begin to pump out HDR.

Then be amazed lol. I’ve had Panasonic plasmas and more expensive Samsung lcds and while not as good as the Panasonic it’s a good tv. Wouldn’t bother anything between this and a OLED for £1000 plus more. 65b7100.
 

LCDseeker

Distinguished Member
Then be amazed lol. I’ve had Panasonic plasmas and more expensive Samsung lcds and while not as good as the Panasonic it’s a good tv. Wouldn’t bother anything between this and a OLED for £1000 plus more. 65b7100.

I am lol I had a Hisense U7A and the HDR was woeful on that. In fact I'd say non existent. The 7100 isn't capable of true HDR, in fact I'm amazed manufacturers, they all do it, are even allowed to state these sort of sets can produce HDR.
 

LCDseeker

Distinguished Member
It's all relative, isn't it?

Reviewers and hardcore TV enthusiasts say x thousand nits are required for the best HDR and highlights, but in most people's real world viewing that's just too bright/not required for a normal evening's viewing.

The "HDR Lite" these mainstream TVs (which reviewers often call "Budget"!) pump out still offers a visible improvement in brightness and depth over SDR which is enough for many people to enjoy and be happy with.

Which I think is always something to remember.

A true budget TV is a Vestel from a supermarket or those (apologies for the language) Cello or no-name Tongfang things.

It is required for true HDR although I agree it is all relative, especially if you're nudging towards to 700-800 nits area. But for these sorts of sets they shouldn't be allowed to advertise them as HDR capable.
 

MaryWhitehouse

Well-known Member
I was watching Fantastic Beasts 4k last night and it was very good. Yes I can pick holes, but not at that price.
 

LCDseeker

Distinguished Member
I was watching Fantastic Beasts 4k last night and it was very good. Yes I can pick holes, but not at that price.

I'm not knocking the Hisense brand, for the money you can't beat them, although ours didn't last two years. But they can't produce HDR as they can't get bright enough.
 

MaryWhitehouse

Well-known Member
I'm not knocking the Hisense brand, for the money you can't beat them, although ours didn't last two years. But they can't produce HDR as they can't get bright enough.

I guess that partially depends on your expectations and viewing environment. As to reliability with a RS warranty I don’t care too much.
 

nenito2k

Active Member
how can people say HDR is great...when they don't even know how HDR looks like in reality ?
@MaryWhitehouse no offense but @LCDseeker is totally right...
90% of the people on this planet don't know how HDR should look like...and that includes me...because we all have seen tv's that have very low nits...period
 

MaryWhitehouse

Well-known Member
how can people say HDR is great...when they don't even know how HDR looks like in reality ?
@MaryWhitehouse no offense but @LCDseeker is totally right...
90% of the people on this planet don't know how HDR should look like...and that includes me...because we all have seen tv's that have very low nits...period

No offence but I don’t care what you think 😁
 

The latest video from AVForums

Fidelity in Motion's David Mackenzie talks about his work on disc encoding & the future of Blu-ray
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom