What size TV can I fit in my wall opening?

Lord Jezo

In my condo the designers put an opening in the wall designed for TVs.




The dimensions of it are 47" wide by 35" high.

I am fed up with my 250lbs+ HD CRT and want to get a flat screen, this WEGA looks good but it's a pain in the ass to move (requires three people), I can't get behind it, and it sucks up electricity. I didn't get a flat screen when I bought this one because it was 6 years ago, they were super expensive, and their viewing angles stunk. As the opening is 4 feet off the ground we look slightly up at the tv when sitting on the couch. The top of a person's head would be about level with the opening. 6 years ago I remember flat screens being impossible to see unless you were looking straight at them so a CRT with unlimited viewing angles was the best thing I could get and at $1200 it was a bargin.

So what can I fit in this opening? What size range should I be considering? And about the viewing angles, what should I be looking at? Plasma, LCD, or LED?

Budget, maybe $1,500 give or take a few hundred. For sure not one of those $3,000+ things that are out there. Uses: gaming, media pc watching.

Chanus

Measure the diagonal... depending on the model, the screen will be about 2-4 inches smaller than the entire TV... so like if it's a 60" hole, you can probably fit a 56-58" TV in there.

Chanus

The shape of the hole makes it look like you're going to have empty space above or below the TV, though... as it doesn't look to be a widescreen (16:9, I think) aspect ratio, which is how TVs tend to be made now... You could fill that in, though.

Eat it You Nasty Pig.

If you just want like, the biggest tv you can possibly fit, find one that's 43-45 inches wide and it should fight the height easily enough (assuming it is widescreen.) There'll be display models at any major electronics store (best buy etc), so you can just bring a tape measure and make sure that way.

FightTest

Just for some notion of reference, my 40" LCD is 38.5" wide and 24" high. That's just the display, add a few inches if you were going to set it on the stand rather than mount it.

MichaelLC

I had a similar VVega. Excellent screen, but so heavy.

My Samsung 46" LCD is 43.5" x 30.5", including the stand. If it's possible to wall mount, that'd probably be better since it'd push it back a few more inches and you could put a speaker bar or whatever underneath.

LCD or LED. Like you said, you'll want one that had a good viewing angle.

Lord Palington

I remember when I got my TV the box had the actual dimensions of the television on it, both on stand and off. Looks like most models on amazon.com have at least the basic dimensions without the stand, and some of them include with stand measurements as well.

Djeet

Like Lord Palington said, you'll need to check the dimensions of the housing if you're trying to max out the tv real estate for a fixed space. Looks like LG has some 50" plasma panels that would fit but with less than an inch to spare width-wise. LCD/LED's usually aren't offered in 50", but rather 52" which is probably going to end up being too wide, so you'll probably have to shoot for a 46/47" for that tech. But don't buy before checking the box size as bezels vary in width.

Tech with the best viewing angles is plasma, though I think the high-end LED's might be getting there too (at much more cost). Plasmas are only available with glossy finish, which can cause reflections w/r/to light sources. Also plasma are usually heavier and consume more power.

Shadowfire

Djeet wrote:

Like Lord Palington said, you'll need to check the dimensions of the housing if you're trying to max out the tv real estate for a fixed space. Looks like LG has some 50" plasma panels that would fit but with less than an inch to spare width-wise. LCD/LED's usually aren't offered in 50", but rather 52" which is probably going to end up being too wide, so you'll probably have to shoot for a 46/47" for that tech. But don't buy before checking the box size as bezels vary in width.

Tech with the best viewing angles is plasma, though I think the high-end LED's might be getting there too (at much more cost). Plasmas are only available with glossy finish, which can cause reflections w/r/to light sources. Also plasma are usually heavier and consume more power.

I can't see the picture. And I may be talking out of my ass here.

My plasma gets hot. Enough to warm the room a bit and make our thermostat go a bit haywire. I would personally worry about a plasma in an enclosed space with nowhere to vent its heat. I could be very wrong about that, though.

Midshipman

Djeet wrote:

Tech with the best viewing angles is plasma, though I think the high-end LED's might be getting there too (at much more cost).

Unless you are referring to OLED panels which are still about 20 times more expensive than LCDs (like this one, so called LED tvs are just LCDs with a different kind of back-light. Having an LED vs fluorescent back-light doesn't affect the viewing angles at all, just makes the monitor thinner and potentially gives you higher dynamic range depending on how they configure it. It also saves some on power consumption. There also seem to be a lot of LED back-light TVs that cut corners on their hardware, resulting in color temperature issues or eye strain due to using a cheap inverter (causing pulsation in the back-light that can be unsynced with the screen refresh).

Personally I'd stick with a conventionally back-lit LCD vs LED back-lit model because with the bargain brands you risk the issues stated above and with high end brands like Sony/Samsung/etc, the price increase is to great for too little benefit.

Here's an example regarding the power savings of an LCD vs. LED. I looked up Samsung 46" tvs and compared their cheapest LED lit vs most expensive conventionally lit (LED for $1300 and LCD for $1000). The estimated yearly energy cost of the LCD is $18 and the LED is $14. Even if you used your TV 3 times as much as the estimated rate, it would still take you 25 years to break even on overall cost (and even longer if you actually looked at it with accounting math and accounted for the time value involved).

As for weight savings, you do get a 30 lb TV instead of a 41 lb one, but unless you plan to move your tv every couple of months, that's not a good deal either. You could pay a friend $50 a pop and have him move your TV 6 times before it starts costing more than the price difference between the two.

The only other benefit that the $1300 dollar LED lighting gets you over the $1000 regular lighting is that you get a skinnier panel. You get 1.2" for the LED vs 3.2" for the conventional. That seems significant on paper, but you'll never notice a benefit from that unless you wall mount, and even then it's a pretty minor cosmetic difference. It's not like you are going to be carrying the TV around in your pocket or packing it into your luggage.

Anyways, that's a breakdown of LED backlighting for you TV purchasing decisions.

Djeet

Sorry, was specifically comparing LCD (be it ccfl or led) vs plasma w/r/to weight and power consumption. There may be marginal power savings going LED over ccfl, but plasma (inch for inch) consumes significantly more power (and thus generates more heat as shadowfire brought up) than either. Weight concerns (IMO) speak mainly to wall mounting, so you might need to spend more to mount an equivalently sized plasma. My understanding is historically plasma has had considerably a considerable edge in viewing angles, but some of the newer LCDs (high-end, which tend to be LED lit) are closing the gap. Highest picture quality (color reproduction, black levels) seems to be the high end backlit (not edge lit) led with local dimming versus plasma (which will be considerably cheaper). Cine buffs are still all about the plasma.


There's a good thread (esp the OP) on TVs in Moe's forum (http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/141038/the-tv-thread-more-for-less/p1).

JebusUD

I have a flat screen LCD, an el cheapo brand i got off amazon on black friday. Never had any problem with the viewing angle, and I have couches all over the room.

Skoal Cat

Get a TV so big that the hole is covered by the TV. Put a mount in the hole, run cables through into it, kablammo.

And do not get an off brand TV. Go read the TV sticky in the tech forum

dlinfiniti

get a stud finder and consider your mounting options as well

Mes3

Djeet wrote:

Sorry, was specifically comparing LCD (be it ccfl or led) vs plasma w/r/to weight and power consumption. There may be marginal power savings going LED over ccfl, but plasma (inch for inch) consumes significantly more power (and thus generates more heat as shadowfire brought up) than either. Weight concerns (IMO) speak mainly to wall mounting, so you might need to spend more to mount an equivalently sized plasma. My understanding is historically plasma has had considerably a considerable edge in viewing angles, but some of the newer LCDs (high-end, which tend to be LED lit) are closing the gap. Highest picture quality (color reproduction, black levels) seems to be the high end backlit (not edge lit) led with local dimming versus plasma (which will be considerably cheaper). Cine buffs are still all about the plasma.

Plasma kills LCD. Dollar for dollar, there's no comparison. A modern plasma will add a bit more to your electric bill, but I don't think its as much as you'd imagine. Besides, the quality of the picture is worth the extra $5 a month. Haha.

I love my plasma, even it is the cheapest one on the market.

Chanus

Mes3 wrote:

Djeet wrote:

Sorry, was specifically comparing LCD (be it ccfl or led) vs plasma w/r/to weight and power consumption. There may be marginal power savings going LED over ccfl, but plasma (inch for inch) consumes significantly more power (and thus generates more heat as shadowfire brought up) than either. Weight concerns (IMO) speak mainly to wall mounting, so you might need to spend more to mount an equivalently sized plasma. My understanding is historically plasma has had considerably a considerable edge in viewing angles, but some of the newer LCDs (high-end, which tend to be LED lit) are closing the gap. Highest picture quality (color reproduction, black levels) seems to be the high end backlit (not edge lit) led with local dimming versus plasma (which will be considerably cheaper). Cine buffs are still all about the plasma.

Plasma kills LCD. Dollar for dollar, there's no comparison. A modern plasma will add a bit more to your electric bill, but I don't think its as much as you'd imagine. Besides, the quality of the picture is worth the extra $5 a month. Haha.

I love my plasma, even it is the cheapest one on the market.

It's worth noting that a plasma TV also functions as a space heater... unless they've fixed that recently.

Skoal Cat

Plasmas vs LCDs, both have pros and both have cons. We discuss the facts over in the TV thread in the Tech forum!

Creamstout

50-51" would be perfect for that opening, I would look at some of the newer samsung models here, they have a thin bezel so you'll be able to squeeze in more screen.

Djeet

JebusUD wrote:

I have a flat screen LCD, an el cheapo brand i got off amazon on black friday. Never had any problem with the viewing angle, and I have couches all over the room.

Any backlit technology is going to have contrast shift when you move enough off axis. As a whole LCD viewing angles have gotten better as the tech has evolved, but the 178 degree claims LCD manufacturers make is meaningless. Maybe you can see an image at that angle, but it's going to have poorer contrast than viewing dead-on. Plasma is not a backlit technology, and doesn't have such limitations.

That said, you can get used to anything such that it's not really noticeable. When I first got a plasma I found any small reflection to be very distracting, within a week or 2 I wouldn't notice them unless I tried to find them when the screen was displaying all black. When I'm watching a sporting event or movie on my MIL's LCD 30 degrees off axis I'm not going to notice poorer contrast cause I'm invested in the content, and I'm probably not moving around. However, if I'm looking for it, it's quite easy to see contrast wash out as I move from dead center to 30 degrees off axis.

Perhaps the contrast shift is too subtle for some, but I'm talking about this (http://reviews.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/samsung-lcd-tv/samsung-un46d6300.html) scroll down to the side-by-side comparison of dead-on vs off axis shots of Blood Diamond. Most thorough LCD reviews have remarks on viewing angles, while Plasma reviews do not because they don't have such issues. Their issues w/r/to viewing angles are not contrast fall-off, but propensity towards reflecting glare.

Skoal Cat

Here is the thread in the Tech forum
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/141038/the-tv-thread-more-for-less#Item_114
The OP has a lo of good info in it!