Am I crazy to not care about TVs with HDR?

[Towen7]

I want to upgrade my "old" Samsung 58" plasma in the living room but only because I want a bigger, thinner display that puts off a little less heat. I'm happy with it's 1080p picture quality. I don't have or plan to get a 4K source anytime soon but I suppose I will get a 4K set if only future proofing.

I'm leaning toward a 70" Vizio E series. I don't need a flagship. I don't care much about HDR or crazy color gamuts. This set will be almost exclusively used for casual TV in the living room. Since I have dedicated HT, I just want this set to be pretty good. If it's too good I may be tempted to use the HT for movies and concerts even less than I already do.

Thoughts?

 

[Haywood]

Have you looked at the HDR sets playing HDR material? You might want to before you decide.

 

[Towen7]

I have and I like it for the most part. It's not that I don't like HDR. I don't want a reason to not watch movies in the home theater.

 

[Flint]

For me the introduction of HDR did one thing - forced content owners and content providers to pay attention to the color gamut issues we were all experiencing. The banding and other artifacts which were plaguing our viewing pleasures are getting much better now.

That said, if the price difference is small for an equally excellent TV, I would get one with HDR support. I can see the difference with good content and considering I tend to own a TV for 10+ years, I would prefer one with every capability I may want over that ten year period.

 

[Towen7]

I get it. The set I have now is close to 10 years old. The logical side of me agrees to get a set will all the feature and call it good for another 8-10 years. The practical side though is struggling with a 46% price bump for a set that will 99.9% of the time be used for very casual TV watching.

The best price I can find on a 4K set I'd want is $1,300. The best price for a similar set with HDR is $1,900.

 

[Flint]

That's a tough one.

So, how many hours are you going to put into watching this TV? Two hours a day? One hour a day? I would consider it based on how much use it will get and consider the value of getting it right.

Just like with a car. I don't do much driving right now, mostly to and from the Gym and the Airport, so my old P.O.S. pickup truck which is probably going to have wheel fall off any day now is just fine. However, if I was commuting daily to San Antonio (driving 2 hours a day round trip), I would definitely be looking for something I could be happy sitting in both going fast and sitting still in traffic, like a BMW M5 or a Tesla Model S.

So, how many hours a day will be looking at the TV and saying, "I sure am glad I spent the extra money" or "I am glad I didn't waste that extra money."

 

[mzpro5]

I get it. The set I have now is close to 10 years old. The logical side of me agrees to get a set will all the feature and call it good for another 8-10 years. The practical side though is struggling with a 46% price bump for a set that will 99.9% of the time be used for very casual TV watching.

The best price I can find on a 4K set I'd want is $1,300. The best price for a similar set with HDR is $1,900.

I am considering replacing my TV in my prime viewing area and am considering this set:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01C5TFNS...lid=3AAUQOVOTWM9L&coliid=I243N3TYUVNO8N&psc=1

Not sure what sets you were looking at/comparing but that one is currently $1500.00

 

[Towen7]

As of now the TV is on a LOT but we don't actually spend much time actively watching it. It's like digital wall-paper. My wife will "watch" a DVRed copy of her favorite soap opera every day but she has her iPad in her hand the entire time. My goal is actual to dramatically reduce the amount of time the TV is on because the majority of the time we're cooking, doing chores, or messing around on our phones, iPads, computers ...

Personally I will "actively" watch a few hours of sports on the weekends, I'll channel surf the sports and news stations when I get home from work. We do occasionally host a watch part for sporting events. When there's a new movie to watch and we want the best experience we'll migrate to the theater. but if we're looking to kill an hour before bed time we may surf the movie channels

 

[The DirtMerchant]

As of now the TV is on a LOT but we don't actually spend much time actively watching it. It's like digital wall-paper. My wife will "watch" a DVRed copy of her favorite soap opera every day but she has her iPad in her hand the entire time. My goal is actual to dramatically reduce the amount of time the TV is on because the majority of the time we're cooking, doing chores, or messing around on our phones, iPads, computers ...

Personally I will "actively" watch a few hours of sports on the weekends, I'll channel surf the sports and news stations when I get home from work. We do occasionally host a watch part for sporting events. When there's a new movie to watch and we want the best experience we'll migrate to the theater. but if we're looking to kill an hour before bed time we may surf the movie channels

I think you should buy the $1300 set and then send me $600.
"I'm glad I didn't spend the extra money on this TV."

 

[Haywood]

One thing I can tell you based on experiences with my HDR set is that the black level, contrast and color rendition is better with every piece of material I've thrown at it. Part of this is because of Sony's superb image processing, but a lot of it is simply that the HDR televisions inherently have excellent black levels and contrast ratios.

 

[Batman]

Sounds like the tv you already have will do just fine or a thinner 1080P set.....

 

[Flint]

Wait, if your goal is to reduce the amount of time the TV is on, why not get a truly crappy TV which you would only have on because the show is that important - important enough to put up with the terrible washed out and blinding quality.

 

[mzpro5]

My big problem/concern with getting a new TV is that I will not be able to use my Onkyo PR-SC 5508 receiver to pass the video signal thru.

 

[Haywood]

My big problem/concern with getting a new TV is that I will not be able to use my Onkyo PR-SC 5508 receiver to pass the video signal thru.

I'm in that boat now, but the main issue is dealing with my 2nd zone. A Harmony remote takes care of the rest. Remember that you only have to plug your HDMI 2.0/2.0a sources into the TV directly. Everything else can still pass through the receiver.

 

[Towen7]

My big problem/concern with getting a new TV is that I will not be able to use my Onkyo PR-SC 5508 receiver to pass the video signal thru.

Oh ... that's something I didn't consider. But I suppose that wouldn't really matter until and unless I get 4K and/or HDR sources. I may go receiver-less anyway and just feed the toslink output from the TV to a Sonos Playbar.

 

[mzpro5]

I'm in that boat now, but the main issue is dealing with my 2nd zone. A Harmony remote takes care of the rest. Remember that you only have to plug your HDMI 2.0/2.0a sources into the TV directly. Everything else can still pass through the receiver.

Yes but I also will have to run digital audio from sources to the receiver. I did that for a long time with my old Outlaw receiver, it is so convenient to just have the one HDMI connection.

A question if I do not have any HDR source material could I still run thru the Onkyo?

 

[Haywood]

Yes but I also will have to run digital audio from sources to the receiver. I did that for a long time with my old Outlaw receiver, it is so convenient to just have the one HDMI connection.

A question if I do not have any HDR source material could I still run thru the Onkyo?

You won't have any issues with HD material, but the vast majority of 4K material will not work. I am currently working around this issue by using the built-in apps in my TV for 4K/HDR content and leaving everything else alone. I don't have any 4K content in Plex. I don't have any 4K discs. The main downside is that I cannot mirror content that is playing directly on the TV to the set in the kitchen/dining area.

 

[Randy]

I get it. The set I have now is close to 10 years old. The logical side of me agrees to get a set will all the feature and call it good for another 8-10 years. The practical side though is struggling with a 46% price bump for a set that will 99.9% of the time be used for very casual TV watching.

The best price I can find on a 4K set I'd want is $1,300. The best price for a similar set with HDR is $1,900.

And, it is for that reason right there that my old Mitsubishi Diamond Series CRT still resides in the basement. When I hung the plasma upstairs it became the de facto display and the basement was relegated to casual viewing or just when I am in the mood for something different. Last Saturday I had a headache and went downstairs, I wanted to enjoy the dark cool basement, and watched for about 8 hours while napping in the recliner.

I cant say that I blame you for your reasoning Tom.

 

[jomari]

I get it. The set I have now is close to 10 years old. The logical side of me agrees to get a set will all the feature and call it good for another 8-10 years. The practical side though is struggling with a 46% price bump for a set that will 99.9% of the time be used for very casual TV watching.

The best price I can find on a 4K set I'd want is $1,300. The best price for a similar set with HDR is $1,900.

this one you can get via Costco for $1049.00 starting 11/18

http://www.costco.com/LG-70"-Class-(69.5"-Diag.)-4K-Ultra-HD-Smart-LED-LCD-TV-70UH6350.product.100287073.html

 

[Towen7]

It sounds weird but, besides me trying to be frugal I actually don't want this TV to be stellar and give any reason to not use my theater. I initially decided the Vizio E70 which was selling for $1,300 was good enough. You guys talked me into considering the M70 for its HDR ability. It happens to be CNET's highest rated non-OLED TV and was $1,900.
The M went on sale for $1,700 and I almost bought it. But when I went to store the E70 had been reduced to $1,000. I came to my senses and decided to keep the extra $700 to apply toward HT upgrades later.