Sony New Generation TV Making Debut in 2001

Available in October, our new KV-40XBR700 FD Trinitron® Wegatm Television boasts a 4:3 40-inch CRT, the largest in the industry. Also includes such Sony proprietary XBR® features as Digital Reality Creation Multifunction with Cinemotiontm reverse 3:2 pulldown process -- which minimizes artifacts caused when 24-frame-per-second film is transferred to 30-frame-per-second video. Cost: $4,000.

-------
Information from The Sony Card Inside eTrack (February 13, 2001)

Does anyone have any links for more information on this set?

I'd like to know if it has Sony's "16:9 mode" and if it supports progressive scan input.

$4000 for a 4x3 tube TV! Not much drooling here! Now if it was a 16x9 tube then the drooling would be extensive!

Yeah, I don't get it. Only better for off the air in bright light. And only for a while until HDTV is predominant.

If this set is anything like their other XBR Wega line, it will have a 16x9 enhanced mode, and be capable of HD resolution (1080i) and 480p resolution.

Pretty awesome. Way too expensive though. I haven't got my 27" Wega paid for yet. :) I'm going to wait a few years to get a new set. I'll probably hold of for a decent size 16x9 HD-TV tube. I hate RPTV, you have to worry too much about light and burn in. Plus video games will eventually be made in widescreen and hdtv, and video games and rptv are a bad idea due to burn in. I play games as much as I watch dvd's, so rptv's are out of the question for me.

As well as all sorts of geometry problems that they tend to have as the screen gets bigger.

Drool over a 40" 4:3 HDTV set that costs $4k? Not in this lifetime. Considering that I can get a great DLP front projector for the same money or less, this WEGA is a real low value option.

Josh, if you don't own an RPTV how can you make such a judgement? I've been playing video games on my RPTVs for years and have never burned any of them. The light issue is also over rated. Tubes are going away and fast. Chances are, your next set will be a projector of some sort. Plus, once you see a properly calibrated projector, you'd never go back to a tube. That technology is archaic.

Why?
 

I got the 43T70 for 1400 and it doesn't take up half of my livingroom like the Wegas. Not worth it to me.

I know several people that have owned RPTV's and have seen a couple that have suffered burn in due to video games. Its really only an issue with games that have a life display, or something of that sort that is in the same place all the time. If you play your games at the setting you use for movies, fairly low brightness and contrast, it probably isn't much of a problem. But games, and cable tv, look like crap with the Avia calibrations for dvds. The settings I use on my Wega for movies look great with dvds, but is simply to dark, and too soft for games and cable IMO. As for the light issue, is is noticeable on every RPTV, and especially on the cheaper ones. I'll also have to disagree that tube tv's are going away. 16x9 tubes are popular in other countries and I guarantee you they'll catch on here. Tubes simply provide a better picture, which is worth the sacrifice in size. Size doesn't matter to me since I live in an apartment. If I ever get a house and build a home theater room, I plan on keeping the HT room small. It saves money because you can have a smaller tv, and a less powerful stereo. Which is good for me because I'm not a home theater buff, I have about $1500 in my current system, and really don't plan on ever having a system worth much more than that.

[Edited by joshhinkle on 02-14-01 at 02:52 PM]

Video Game burn in
 

As said before, it's only a problem if you are displaying something that doesn't move for a long period of time. For example, playing Pac-Man or Tetris would cause burn in because there are parts of the game that do not move.

I'll spend the $4000 on a 16x9 HDTV and not waste my money on the WEGA.

That's my $0.02

[Edited by Iron Chef on 02-14-01 at 01:36 PM]

SirPablo--
That is the best link I have seen in a long time. I live in the Twin cities area and that will help me a whole lot. Those are some damn ugly muggs.......haha

Sorry I don't have anything constructive to give to this forum.

That cracks my sh|t up. HAHAHAHA

$4000 is a lot, but wait until you see it. Sony showed it in January at CES, and the thing was incredible. It is basically the 36" XBR WEGA set in a 40" design. It does have the anamorphic squeeze option. I am one of the minority who agrees with Sony's theory on 4:3 sets. The unit is HD ready, but for TV watching, almost all material is still in the 4:3 aspect ratio. 16:9 sets are still only for movie watching. Anyone who wants a set for use as a movie monitor shouldn't be buying such a small set anyway.

As soon as you find a $4000 projector that looks 1/10th as good as this thing, please let me know.

http://www.geocities.com/greenjellodvd/jello3.jpg

From an owner of two of the previously largest tube TVs, the Mitsu 40" I gotta know how much they way. My back hurts thinking about it.

for those who prefer 16:9 format, Proscan just released a 38in direct view, hdtv, 16:9 set. same price as the sony.

Ooooo! Sounds good.

How about a little history lesson here, guys?
Is Proscan a division of RCA and if so, is it suppose to be equal in quality or is it their "premium" division? (You know, like Lexus is the top division of Toyota).

ProScan has poor reliability
 

According to this months Consumers Reports,
ProScan has the worst Reliability rating as compared
to all the other Big Tube makers.

Just an FYI

When I was younger I did deliveries for a Sony/Mits dealer. The Sony will probably easily be 80-100 lbs more just in the set alone. Plus, at CES, it looked like the stand portion was built into it. It was a little like a console. I wouldn't be surprised it the Sony tipped the scales at close to 400.

By the way,....it's weigh,..not way.

http://www.geocities.com/greenjellodvd/jello3.jpg

Then you go your weigh, and he'll go his way.

Now that the spell checker is gone will you be mine too? I sure could use one that also knows grammar.

too small........

All the spell checkers in the world wouldn't help on that one. Both "way" and "weigh" are actual words. Sometimes we actually have to rely on our english skills and education to get us through life.