Was just seeing what the ideal settings would be for the Panny Tx-32LZD85 just looking at the picture settings the contrast level was way at the top whilst the colour and brightness were at half way, i havent touched the settings because im not sure whats best. I have a Sky HD Box connected via HMDI to the Panny and the contrast level on Sky is set to low and its a thompson Box. So to recap looking at the Tv now Contrast is set to about 90 clour and brightness at 50. Thanks.
Recommended Settings for Panasnic TX-32LZD85
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
kena
Well-known member
Do the THX setup available on numerous DVD's Star Wars and any THX certified disk.. Also see the Get the best from your TV video on this site. This will give you a picture that is tuned to you and your surroundings and is better that just blindly setting them to what someone else has.
Kena i havent a clue where to get THX set up i have a lot of Dvds as well but havent seen it on them and how would i go about getting a THX certified disk.
kena
Well-known member
No problems e.g. under Language Selection on Star Wars VI and is on any disk that bears the THX certification logo , check any Lucasfilms or Disney/Pixar.
Check Disks here at this site
http://www.thx.com/home/dvd/search.html
Check Disks here at this site
http://www.thx.com/home/dvd/search.html
As a very new owner of this TV I have spent several days adjusting the settings, first with a calibration DVD then tweeking it by eye. Finally I have what I consider a very good and at times stunning picture. At the moment I don't have HD so my adjustments apply to a Pace SKY+ and a Humax PVR-9200T both connected via RGB SCART.
Viewing Mode: ECO ( as far as I can tell this is the only mode that uses the ambient light sensor )
Contrast: about 90%
Brightness: about 50%
Colour: about 25%
Sharpness: 0%ÿ
These settings seem to give consistently good images from both boxes.ÿ
This TV has replacedÿa 3 1/2 year old Sharp LC-32P50E, it had 'real numbers' on all the picture settings so you could acurately define, and if required copy them, why on earth do Panasonic use an ungraduated system it makes it so difficult to repeat the settings.ÿ
Another thing, the Sharp stored all the picture settings separately for all inputs, the Panasonic doesn't, as far as I can tell. So you have to find a compromise setting that suits all input sources.
I was expecting the 100Hz Motion Picture Pro2 to have a greater effect on motion than it appears to have, the motion performance is better than the Sharp but not by as much as I was expecting. Is the 100Hz 'always on' or is it selectable?
One final comment. For all the detailed information magazines like What Hi-Fi and What Video provide in their test reports most of which is interesting but ultimately useless, ÿwhy can't they provide something useful like the picture settings they used to asses the TV's?
Viewing Mode: ECO ( as far as I can tell this is the only mode that uses the ambient light sensor )
Contrast: about 90%
Brightness: about 50%
Colour: about 25%
Sharpness: 0%ÿ
These settings seem to give consistently good images from both boxes.ÿ
This TV has replacedÿa 3 1/2 year old Sharp LC-32P50E, it had 'real numbers' on all the picture settings so you could acurately define, and if required copy them, why on earth do Panasonic use an ungraduated system it makes it so difficult to repeat the settings.ÿ
Another thing, the Sharp stored all the picture settings separately for all inputs, the Panasonic doesn't, as far as I can tell. So you have to find a compromise setting that suits all input sources.
I was expecting the 100Hz Motion Picture Pro2 to have a greater effect on motion than it appears to have, the motion performance is better than the Sharp but not by as much as I was expecting. Is the 100Hz 'always on' or is it selectable?
One final comment. For all the detailed information magazines like What Hi-Fi and What Video provide in their test reports most of which is interesting but ultimately useless, ÿwhy can't they provide something useful like the picture settings they used to asses the TV's?
idc
Well-known member
cairomike:
One final comment. For all the detailed information magazines like What Hi-Fi and What Video provide in their test reports most of which is interesting but ultimately useless, why can't they provide something useful like the picture settings they used to asses the TV's?
Different peoples preferences and different rooms mean recommended settings are not that useful. Otherwise the manufacturers would do extensive research and sell TVs with one setting. From past posts What hifi assess the TV with its out of the box setting and then what they judge to be the best overall setting for their test room, which will not necessarily be the best for you. Put two TVs next to each other and try them on the out of the box and the best setting and there will be differences and one is likely to be better than the other.
One final comment. For all the detailed information magazines like What Hi-Fi and What Video provide in their test reports most of which is interesting but ultimately useless, why can't they provide something useful like the picture settings they used to asses the TV's?
Different peoples preferences and different rooms mean recommended settings are not that useful. Otherwise the manufacturers would do extensive research and sell TVs with one setting. From past posts What hifi assess the TV with its out of the box setting and then what they judge to be the best overall setting for their test room, which will not necessarily be the best for you. Put two TVs next to each other and try them on the out of the box and the best setting and there will be differences and one is likely to be better than the other.
idc:cairomike:
One final comment. For all the detailed information magazines like What Hi-Fi and What Video provide in their test reports most of which is interesting but ultimately useless, ÿwhy can't they provide something useful like the picture settings they used to asses the TV's?
Different peoples preferences and different rooms mean recommended settings are not that useful. Otherwise the manufacturers would do extensive research and sell TVs with one setting. From past posts What hifi assess the TV with its out of the box setting and then what they judge to be the best overall setting for their test room, which will not necessarily be the best for you. Put two TVs next to each other and try them on the out of the box and the best setting and there will be differences and one is likely to be better than the other.
I understand what you are saying, but then what is the point of using any sort of calibration DVD which invariably instruct you to perform the adjustments in a darkened room, thus eliminating the room's lighting effects. Even worst, what is the point of paying £250 for ISF calibration, described in issue 344 of What Video & Hi-def TV, which uses sensors to monitor the output of the screen, again eliminating the room's effects?
Over the last year or so I've helped several friends and neighbour's set up new LCD and Plasma TV's (Sharp, Panasonic, Sony, LG and Toshiba) and without exception none had a factory setting that was particularly close to being suitable for 'normal' viewing. The worst was a Toshiba which, out of the box, had all controls set to maximum resulting in a truely awful picture.
In my view if the various mags would publish the settings they used then it would provide a new buyer with a far better starting point than any factory preset.
One final comment. For all the detailed information magazines like What Hi-Fi and What Video provide in their test reports most of which is interesting but ultimately useless, ÿwhy can't they provide something useful like the picture settings they used to asses the TV's?
Different peoples preferences and different rooms mean recommended settings are not that useful. Otherwise the manufacturers would do extensive research and sell TVs with one setting. From past posts What hifi assess the TV with its out of the box setting and then what they judge to be the best overall setting for their test room, which will not necessarily be the best for you. Put two TVs next to each other and try them on the out of the box and the best setting and there will be differences and one is likely to be better than the other.
I understand what you are saying, but then what is the point of using any sort of calibration DVD which invariably instruct you to perform the adjustments in a darkened room, thus eliminating the room's lighting effects. Even worst, what is the point of paying £250 for ISF calibration, described in issue 344 of What Video & Hi-def TV, which uses sensors to monitor the output of the screen, again eliminating the room's effects?
Over the last year or so I've helped several friends and neighbour's set up new LCD and Plasma TV's (Sharp, Panasonic, Sony, LG and Toshiba) and without exception none had a factory setting that was particularly close to being suitable for 'normal' viewing. The worst was a Toshiba which, out of the box, had all controls set to maximum resulting in a truely awful picture.
In my view if the various mags would publish the settings they used then it would provide a new buyer with a far better starting point than any factory preset.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Is hi-fi really getting better? Our technical editor ponders its progression- Started by What Hi-Fi?
- Replies: 16
-
-
The Audio Cable Fraud (With Ethan Winer)
- Started by ToppingSMSL
- Replies: 6
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram