There are very few ways in which I might be described as a “stereotypical guy,” if such a thing exists. But I do like TV. A lot. Not in the sense that I spend hours every day watching it – not at all. But when I do watch it, I want the picture to be very big, and very, very pretty.
I’d never thought of this as having anything at all to do with a person’s sex, but lately, I’d started to realize that a number of women in my life – past and present – had been making fun of me for my strong desire to own a larger television. And just about every guy I’ve mentioned the issue to has said (or grunted or shouted over a beer or implied through a friendly head-butt) that a bigger TV seems like a great idea.
So, while this thread is, of course, light-hearted in nature, I’m still hoping to suss out through the joys of polling a couple of things:
Is there really a male/female divide when it comes to wanting a bigger TV?
Regardless of sex, how big IS too big, in your opinion?
Feel free, by the way, to elaborate on the sex divide (or lack thereof) on this issue, and share any other relevant thoughts you might have on the topic(s).
I’m a guy, and after about thirty seconds of watching something, I stop noticing if its on a big or small screen, so I don’t really care one way or another.
When I play video games, though, I like it to be on a bigger screen, so I’m not sure how you should count that in your poll.
A typo in the second-to-last option was just brought to my attention, and I’ve reported it to request a change. In case you get here before the fix, that’s supposed to be, “I’m a GAL, and the size of a TV doesn’t matter.”
Bought a new TV last summer. Wife would have been happy with something more modest, but I pushed for (and we ended up getting) a 65". It’s not a conspicuous-consumption thing, I just want an immersive viewing experience: I want to get vertigo when I fly over the edge of the grand canyon, and I want to see all the detail that HD has to offer.
The ideal size will of course vary depending on viewing distance; the relevant parameter is viewing angle, which incorporates both screen width and viewing distance. There are utilities (example) that can help you figure out the optimum arrangement. Using their calculator, even our 65" (at a viewing distance of 10 feet) is marginal in terms of what home theatre afficionados recommend. I tend to agree with their numbers: I wouldn’t have minded an even larger screen, but the price really goes up steeply when you get past the 60-65" sizes.
FWIW, my computer has a 30" widescreen display. Love it.
You must be Skald’s ghost writer, because you forgot another option! [Please explain yourself]
The size of the TV is dependent on where you put it and how far you sit from it. A 65" screen in my bedroom would take up half the whole wall and there wouldn’t even be enough room for me to sit back far enough from it to optimize the viewing. It would be idiotic. But a 32" or smaller as the centerpiece of a large room would likewise be a poor decision.
Depends on the viewing distance in the room. I have a 46 incher, and non-HD programming looks decent enough but I think if it was bigger I’d find non-HD programming intolerable.
I suppose it’s fair to mention that I live in a 1200-square foot room (very much like a large studio space), and there are times when I sit far away from my TV, so even now, I sometimes wish I had something larger than a 46".
But I drooled over larger TVs long before I lived in my current space.
I’m always thinking of the line from Fahrenheit 451: “I’d rather have a second wall-set put in. They say when you have your second wall-screen, it’s like having your family grow around you.”
Of course, for me it’s not a pill-induced stupor, and there’s no melancholy in it; I want two wall-sized TV sets.
I don’t want a really big TV. Then there would be less room for bookshelves in the living room. Our house is basically the place where we keep our books.
I also don’t replace TVs until they are no longer working. I hope the 27" non-LCD TV that I bought in 2002 lasts a while longer.
I just catch way more detail in a show or movie when the screen is bigger. I notice things like backgrounds, costumes, subtle acting gestures, props, etc. The smaller the screen gets the more detail I lose and the less I get out of it.
I have a 55 inch TV. When I got it, it seemed overwhelming. Now I like it, but I still probably would have gotten something smaller had I known what I know now.
