Sony KV-36XBR250 36 inch TV
Out of stock |
Similar in Standard Televisions
- Screen Size: 36 inch
- Built-in Tuner: NTSC
- Screen Type: Flat Screen
Similar in Standard Televisions
More suggestions in Standard Televisions »- Overview
-
Reviews
-
Compare Prices
User ReviewRead All Reviews »
The Finest Television on the American Market!!
Pros
Outstandingly Accurate Picture, Very User Friendly, Beautiful Enclosure, Lusciously Flat
Cons
It weighs more than I do
Recommended it?
Yes
Preface
There are a lot of good non-HDTVs on the market right now worthy of praise. Some of these include entries from Panasonic, Toshiba, JVC, and SONY. Many of these are in roughly the same price range. Although not actually HD, the VEGAs tend to be on the high side of price, but there are a number of reasons for this, all of which I will describe in detail below. Why not HDTV? There are two primary schools of thought out there: 1) PRICE, which is very compelling when you really sit down and try to justify spending $4000 or substantially more (I've seen many well over $8,000) on a television. 2) FORMAT, The Big 4, as well as every other broadcasters, have had almost a decade to work this out with the only results being even firmer commitments from major networks to only do it THEIR way, whether it's HBO, MAX, or even CBS. Though the government has given them a "new" deadline of the end of the year, it is doubtful any real headway will be made, and so the drama continues. . . .now the review on the SONY KV-36XBR250!
Purchase
I purchased this TV from A&B TV in Austin. My family have been buying various products from this company for some time, so I figured I'd get the best price. I could have gotten it for less elsewhere, but I value customer service and the advantage of a local buy. They have many TVs and brands available from the very high end to absolute bottom. Most of the better TVs are located together for more convenient comparison.
When I went into the store I was expecting to pay about $1300 for the low end 36" VEGA (the S series), until I saw the FV15. It was different (better) enough that I started entertaining the idea of spending the extra $550 on it until I really started looking at the XBR. At this point I had been in the store for maybe a total of ten minutes when the salesman put in the Fifth Element and paused it when Mila Jovavich was jumping off the building after escaping the "lab" she was in. The image was frozen on 95% of the TVs in the room so rapid comparison was easy. It wasn't just the color of her hair or the set design that caught my eye, it was the complete and absolute lack of scan lines, color bleed/fade, dot crawl or any artifact at all. All of the edges of any object were exact with no line flutter or shift. The borders at the top and bottom of the screen didn't even have any ghosting present.
Simply put, I did not go into the store planning to spend 2 grand on a television, but with that one still scene, and a comparo with the other SONYs, Toshibas, Fujitsus, etc., it became rapidly obvious that the best picture WAS on the XBR VEGA. The price was substantially higher than some that were comparable, but those other TVs were exactly that, comparable, not equal. So I bought the XBR.
Picture
The image that sold me on this TV at the store was only coming off a skinny RCA cable, when I got home and ran my SONY DVD directly to the TV using a high end S-Video Monster Cable, I was floored. Nothing could have prepared me for the picture quality I was witnessing. I have watched 720 (downconverted) broadcasts as well as a 1080 (upconverted) broadcast, the picture on my screen (Matrix, DVD) was nothing short of digital quality. I understand that's a bold statement, but I say it for a reason. They had digital TVs there, right next to the VEGA, to compare against. The focus was pure and razor sharp, ALL the way to the edge. The picture was "true to life". I hate using that phrase, I think it is overused, but in this case it is the most accurate description I can make. The key differences over the FV15, the next down from the XBR, is the filter, which moves from a 3-line to a 3-D in the XBR. This results in a stiller still, reduced, if not eliminated, dot crawl, stronger and sharper color redering and better temp control. There is a slight difference in the enclosure and options. Other than those things the TVs are virtually identical. The vast improvement in the picture can be attributed not only to the difference in the filters, but also the vertical compression feature.
The vertical compression feature on this TV will make a measurable difference in picture quality when playing a DVD on a SONY player that is set to 16:9 output. What it will do, and this is almost verbatim from SONY, is it will "compress" the height of each pixel, thus actually giving you around 425-475 apparent lines of resolution instead of 325-375 that one might normally get on a standard TV as a result of the application of the anamorphic format. These differences in the numbers might not seem like a lot (they certainly didn't to me when I was TOLD), but the difference visually is unmistakable, a real jaw dropper. There are no visible scan lines, the picture is softer, but somehow more realistic, and peoples heads and bodies now appear normally shaped, which isn't something I noticed about DVD untill I saw this TV.
There is a lot of conjecture as to which is "better", colorstream or S-Video. The arguments are valid, whether its from a standpoint of separation definition, or the clarity/"vividness" of the picture/colors. My personal preference is S-Video. I believe it looks sharper, cleaner, and more true to life. I see the colorstream argument as valid, I just don't like the look; too much color, too saturated, whatever. . . its got those inputs too if you need them, as an addition to the other five. Although I never use it, the PiP feature is easy to innitiate and control and the picture is clear and easy to see. One also has the ability to choose its size as well as its position around the screen. The XBR200 put the images of PiP side by side as opposed to the traditional format of picture IN picture. I see this present set-up as more advantageous, if only from the standpoint of burn-in.
Remote and Features
For, in my opinion, the vast majority of the market, the remote with this unit should be a breeze. For those people without a dedicated receiver (decent A/V system) for Pro, DD, DTS, this remote should be a life saver. Much of the menu is "point and click", which thanks to Bill Gates, should be second nature to humans at this point. I believe I could give this remote to my grandfather and he could probably figure it out. I love my grampa, but that statement IS saying a lot, I'm sure there are those of you out there that know exactly where I'm coming from.
Like many remotes out there on the market these days it will control hundreds of different units/models of VCRs, Cable/Sat boxes, DVDs, etc. What really sets this unit apart from the rest of the so-called "universal" remotes I've been exposed to, programming it for these various functions is a simple procedure that shouldn't confuse anybody who will at least take the time to read (3 steps) the instructions, which are very nontypically SONY, i.e., they're pretty darn clear and easy to follow. All one simply has to do is find the 3 digit code, open the program mode on the remote and push 3 buttons, not much to it kids! Great remote!
The features available on the TV for picture, sound, and various other tweaks are useful, easy to get to, and easy to adjust. My favorites are the color temp (high, med, and NTSC standard) and the "modes" (Standard, Movie, Sports and Vivid). I use the mode feature constantly. Fortunately, there is just one button for this, you don't actually have to access the video menu. Movie produces a very desirable effect on picture quality on DVDs. It seems to soften slightly and it is a bit dark, so its best in low light. Vivid is great for Nintendo (no, I don't have a SONY Playstation) and livens up backgrounds making it a lot easier to see things IN the background (007, Shadows of the Empire, Rogue Squadron). Sports emphasizes colors (sometimes too much) and makes watching games on the tube a lot more fun. The greens are greener, the uniforms are brighter, the ice is whiter. . . .gimme what you got. In other words folks, I see these features as highly usable, not just fluff, though I don't use the sports setting much. The sound is quite a bit better than your average TV. In fact, for the average Joe with no A/V system, it is a fantastic sound section. It still sounds like a TV, and this is something that puzzles me, especially when I am forking out two grand! I don't use any of these features, but did fiddle with them for a few days w/o my SONY 555 (see my review) controlling things, and again, they are all pretty useful, not just fluff.
Summary
This is a fantastic television. The flat screen is outstanding and without compare in the non-HDT realm. The picture is bright, clear, and accurate. The remote is versatile and easy to use. The sound is definitely better than average. I wish there were more than ONE S-video input on the back of the unit, I don't like cables hanging off the front. You'd think for two grand they could put more than one on the back, TVs half its price have up to 3 (Toshiba, JVC, Proscan)!! The only other drawback is its weight. Don't take this lightly! This is a very large television that is also VERY HEAVY. Don't mess around, get help moving it. It seems very durable, but I wouldn't be willing to test that theory, not at $2000.00+. I strongly believe that if you get a good unit (a lot of reviews on the 200 seemed to have trouble getting a good unit the first time, guess I got lucky) you will be happy beyond words. I KNOW I will still have this TV, and be proud to own it, in 5,6, or even 7 years from now. Score another one for SONY!!
NOTE: To all of you people asking why one would spend $2000 on a non-HD TV, I have one easy answer, DOWNCONVERSION! Set top boxes for a lot of early SD-TVs were just downconverters for standard TVs with better CRTs and appropriate processors. Sony has been running R & D on a high end downconverter to be used with the XBRs that will embody the same type of 16:9 signal modification such that the DTV image would look like the present DVD quality from a SONY DVD player on that very 16:9 output mode. In other words it will be vertical compression for network TV shows that will be broadcast in widescreen format. It will provide a picture with quality equal or comparable to 480p. The box is likely to cost in the neighborhood of $600 when it released, but give it time, it will probably drop $200 (I would imagine) in the first 12 or so months of release.
>>>Service issue<<<<
If you are reading this thinking about getting the 250 (not the 400), this may interest you. Starting about a week ago there was a spot in the lower right hand corner that looked as if someone was holding a magnet to the screen except the color was uniform, not rainbow. Well this has progressed to all four corners AND the focus has gone out the window, esp in the corners. The "dropdown" menus on my digital cable are virtually illegible. I have called for it to be picked up, it IS still under warranty. They say it is something they have heard of and it should be easy, we'll see. . .
There are a lot of good non-HDTVs on the market right now worthy of praise. Some of these include entries from Panasonic, Toshiba, JVC, and SONY. Many of these are in roughly the same price range. Although not actually HD, the VEGAs tend to be on the high side of price, but there are a number of reasons for this, all of which I will describe in detail below. Why not HDTV? There are two primary schools of thought out there: 1) PRICE, which is very compelling when you really sit down and try to justify spending $4000 or substantially more (I've seen many well over $8,000) on a television. 2) FORMAT, The Big 4, as well as every other broadcasters, have had almost a decade to work this out with the only results being even firmer commitments from major networks to only do it THEIR way, whether it's HBO, MAX, or even CBS. Though the government has given them a "new" deadline of the end of the year, it is doubtful any real headway will be made, and so the drama continues. . . .now the review on the SONY KV-36XBR250!
Purchase
I purchased this TV from A&B TV in Austin. My family have been buying various products from this company for some time, so I figured I'd get the best price. I could have gotten it for less elsewhere, but I value customer service and the advantage of a local buy. They have many TVs and brands available from the very high end to absolute bottom. Most of the better TVs are located together for more convenient comparison.
When I went into the store I was expecting to pay about $1300 for the low end 36" VEGA (the S series), until I saw the FV15. It was different (better) enough that I started entertaining the idea of spending the extra $550 on it until I really started looking at the XBR. At this point I had been in the store for maybe a total of ten minutes when the salesman put in the Fifth Element and paused it when Mila Jovavich was jumping off the building after escaping the "lab" she was in. The image was frozen on 95% of the TVs in the room so rapid comparison was easy. It wasn't just the color of her hair or the set design that caught my eye, it was the complete and absolute lack of scan lines, color bleed/fade, dot crawl or any artifact at all. All of the edges of any object were exact with no line flutter or shift. The borders at the top and bottom of the screen didn't even have any ghosting present.
Simply put, I did not go into the store planning to spend 2 grand on a television, but with that one still scene, and a comparo with the other SONYs, Toshibas, Fujitsus, etc., it became rapidly obvious that the best picture WAS on the XBR VEGA. The price was substantially higher than some that were comparable, but those other TVs were exactly that, comparable, not equal. So I bought the XBR.
Picture
The image that sold me on this TV at the store was only coming off a skinny RCA cable, when I got home and ran my SONY DVD directly to the TV using a high end S-Video Monster Cable, I was floored. Nothing could have prepared me for the picture quality I was witnessing. I have watched 720 (downconverted) broadcasts as well as a 1080 (upconverted) broadcast, the picture on my screen (Matrix, DVD) was nothing short of digital quality. I understand that's a bold statement, but I say it for a reason. They had digital TVs there, right next to the VEGA, to compare against. The focus was pure and razor sharp, ALL the way to the edge. The picture was "true to life". I hate using that phrase, I think it is overused, but in this case it is the most accurate description I can make. The key differences over the FV15, the next down from the XBR, is the filter, which moves from a 3-line to a 3-D in the XBR. This results in a stiller still, reduced, if not eliminated, dot crawl, stronger and sharper color redering and better temp control. There is a slight difference in the enclosure and options. Other than those things the TVs are virtually identical. The vast improvement in the picture can be attributed not only to the difference in the filters, but also the vertical compression feature.
The vertical compression feature on this TV will make a measurable difference in picture quality when playing a DVD on a SONY player that is set to 16:9 output. What it will do, and this is almost verbatim from SONY, is it will "compress" the height of each pixel, thus actually giving you around 425-475 apparent lines of resolution instead of 325-375 that one might normally get on a standard TV as a result of the application of the anamorphic format. These differences in the numbers might not seem like a lot (they certainly didn't to me when I was TOLD), but the difference visually is unmistakable, a real jaw dropper. There are no visible scan lines, the picture is softer, but somehow more realistic, and peoples heads and bodies now appear normally shaped, which isn't something I noticed about DVD untill I saw this TV.
There is a lot of conjecture as to which is "better", colorstream or S-Video. The arguments are valid, whether its from a standpoint of separation definition, or the clarity/"vividness" of the picture/colors. My personal preference is S-Video. I believe it looks sharper, cleaner, and more true to life. I see the colorstream argument as valid, I just don't like the look; too much color, too saturated, whatever. . . its got those inputs too if you need them, as an addition to the other five. Although I never use it, the PiP feature is easy to innitiate and control and the picture is clear and easy to see. One also has the ability to choose its size as well as its position around the screen. The XBR200 put the images of PiP side by side as opposed to the traditional format of picture IN picture. I see this present set-up as more advantageous, if only from the standpoint of burn-in.
Remote and Features
For, in my opinion, the vast majority of the market, the remote with this unit should be a breeze. For those people without a dedicated receiver (decent A/V system) for Pro, DD, DTS, this remote should be a life saver. Much of the menu is "point and click", which thanks to Bill Gates, should be second nature to humans at this point. I believe I could give this remote to my grandfather and he could probably figure it out. I love my grampa, but that statement IS saying a lot, I'm sure there are those of you out there that know exactly where I'm coming from.
Like many remotes out there on the market these days it will control hundreds of different units/models of VCRs, Cable/Sat boxes, DVDs, etc. What really sets this unit apart from the rest of the so-called "universal" remotes I've been exposed to, programming it for these various functions is a simple procedure that shouldn't confuse anybody who will at least take the time to read (3 steps) the instructions, which are very nontypically SONY, i.e., they're pretty darn clear and easy to follow. All one simply has to do is find the 3 digit code, open the program mode on the remote and push 3 buttons, not much to it kids! Great remote!
The features available on the TV for picture, sound, and various other tweaks are useful, easy to get to, and easy to adjust. My favorites are the color temp (high, med, and NTSC standard) and the "modes" (Standard, Movie, Sports and Vivid). I use the mode feature constantly. Fortunately, there is just one button for this, you don't actually have to access the video menu. Movie produces a very desirable effect on picture quality on DVDs. It seems to soften slightly and it is a bit dark, so its best in low light. Vivid is great for Nintendo (no, I don't have a SONY Playstation) and livens up backgrounds making it a lot easier to see things IN the background (007, Shadows of the Empire, Rogue Squadron). Sports emphasizes colors (sometimes too much) and makes watching games on the tube a lot more fun. The greens are greener, the uniforms are brighter, the ice is whiter. . . .gimme what you got. In other words folks, I see these features as highly usable, not just fluff, though I don't use the sports setting much. The sound is quite a bit better than your average TV. In fact, for the average Joe with no A/V system, it is a fantastic sound section. It still sounds like a TV, and this is something that puzzles me, especially when I am forking out two grand! I don't use any of these features, but did fiddle with them for a few days w/o my SONY 555 (see my review) controlling things, and again, they are all pretty useful, not just fluff.
Summary
This is a fantastic television. The flat screen is outstanding and without compare in the non-HDT realm. The picture is bright, clear, and accurate. The remote is versatile and easy to use. The sound is definitely better than average. I wish there were more than ONE S-video input on the back of the unit, I don't like cables hanging off the front. You'd think for two grand they could put more than one on the back, TVs half its price have up to 3 (Toshiba, JVC, Proscan)!! The only other drawback is its weight. Don't take this lightly! This is a very large television that is also VERY HEAVY. Don't mess around, get help moving it. It seems very durable, but I wouldn't be willing to test that theory, not at $2000.00+. I strongly believe that if you get a good unit (a lot of reviews on the 200 seemed to have trouble getting a good unit the first time, guess I got lucky) you will be happy beyond words. I KNOW I will still have this TV, and be proud to own it, in 5,6, or even 7 years from now. Score another one for SONY!!
NOTE: To all of you people asking why one would spend $2000 on a non-HD TV, I have one easy answer, DOWNCONVERSION! Set top boxes for a lot of early SD-TVs were just downconverters for standard TVs with better CRTs and appropriate processors. Sony has been running R & D on a high end downconverter to be used with the XBRs that will embody the same type of 16:9 signal modification such that the DTV image would look like the present DVD quality from a SONY DVD player on that very 16:9 output mode. In other words it will be vertical compression for network TV shows that will be broadcast in widescreen format. It will provide a picture with quality equal or comparable to 480p. The box is likely to cost in the neighborhood of $600 when it released, but give it time, it will probably drop $200 (I would imagine) in the first 12 or so months of release.
>>>Service issue<<<<
If you are reading this thinking about getting the 250 (not the 400), this may interest you. Starting about a week ago there was a spot in the lower right hand corner that looked as if someone was holding a magnet to the screen except the color was uniform, not rainbow. Well this has progressed to all four corners AND the focus has gone out the window, esp in the corners. The "dropdown" menus on my digital cable are virtually illegible. I have called for it to be picked up, it IS still under warranty. They say it is something they have heard of and it should be easy, we'll see. . .
