Member
Joined: 03/05/2008
Hi all, new to the forum and the world of lcd tvs. Long story short, I'm in the market for a new tv. Until today I had been completely decided on the 52' Sony Bravia XBR4. This was based on a few things: 1) I've been a Sony fan for sometime and have never had a problem with their products 2)this particular set has the features I want in the price I was willing to spend 3) Consumer reports has rated the Sony Bravia line # 1 in both 52" and 47" lcds in their most recent review.
Now then, today I decided to go around to a few of my local tv repair shops. I found some of these folks to be more knowledgable than others as one might expect. Of 5 repair shops I soke to today all 5 told me to stay far and clear away from SONY!!! I was devestated. The reasons they gave varied slightly but all shared the thought that Sony's service is horendous. 1 of the shops no longer repairs Sony sets because of a Sony restructuring that took their license away, the other 4 however refuse to service Sony sets. By the way most of these places have been in business for about 25 years on average.
They all also recommended the same brand of set to consider instead. Not that it matters but they all thought highly of the Sharp Aquos line, mitsubishi and panasonic in that order.
One of the shops went as far as to say that he had heard that Sony was facing a class action lawsuit that will result in their warranties (on TVs) "not being worth the paper they're printed on".
Any thoughts on all of this would be greatly appreciated.
Also, 2 of 5 of these shops agreed to the following statement and the other 3 stated they didn't know. Haven't been able to find a way to verify this for sure as of yet so decided to post it here:
I was told today that any 1080p (the P (progressive scan) being the key letter in this) lcd that is boasting the 120hz refresh rate (Sony calls it motionflow, other companies have other names for it) is a gimick. I was told by two of the shops that in order for a lcd to be 1080p it HAS to be 120hz. They claimed that it is a fact that not many consumers know and as such the companies are able to market it as an additional feature.
I received a much more detailed explanation that made sense to me but I am trying my best to keep this short of a novel.
Any input on either of these issues would be much appreciated, especially the later.
Thanks in advance.