back to article Pimp your TV: Goggle box gadgets and gizmos

The TV has been the centre of most living rooms for over half a century now, and it's been through various incarnations. Disguised as a sideboard, proudly displayed as a piece of shining high tech, and now slimmed down to look almost like a piece of art. Early 1970s Dynatron Sandringham TV and Philips N1500 VCR There's more …

  1. Zog_but_not_the_first
    Thumb Up

    Nice little roundup

    Thanks for that - very interesting. My bugbear remains how to watch the stuff I want to watch without having several subscriptions/plug in boxes etc.

    1. Nigel Whitfield.

      Re: Nice little roundup

      Sadly that's always problematic. You can get all the catch up players on a Roku box or stick now, which is great for most people, and you can also get Netflix, Sky Store and Now TV on it as well, so potentially you could get sports and things like that. BUT - if you happen to want Amazon Prime rather than Netflix, there's no Roku app for that in the UK.

      Similarly, if you want to use Blinkbox to get some of the films, you can't call that up on the Roku, unless the films you've bought are from studios that support ultraviolet (see my last Breaking Fad for more on that sort of lunacy.

      Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of Balkanisation going on, sometimes in the name of consumer choice, which really just seems to mean you do need all those subscriptions, because everything's chopped up into smaller and smaller parcels and before too long "competition" will mean you can't watch a whole season of any sport on a single platform with one subscription.

      Just wait until some free market policy wonk gets it into their head that the same should be done with popular TV series, and you end up with Sky and ITV outbidding each other for the rights to the second half of each series of Dr Who or Holby City.

      Oh what a glorious day for free consumer choice that will be...

      1. Dr. Mouse

        Re: Nice little roundup

        Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of Balkanisation going on, sometimes in the name of consumer choice, which really just seems to mean you do need all those subscriptions, because everything's chopped up into smaller and smaller parcels and before too long "competition" will mean you can't watch a whole season of any sport on a single platform with one subscription.

        This really irritates me, too.

        Take a look at UK football. A few years ago, "all" you needed was Sky Sports and you could watch everything. Then, "competition" was brought in. You have ended up with several channels across which the games are spread. While techinically it is competition, it does mean that a football fan now needs to pay for Sky Sports, and BT Sports, and any other channels, so it costs them more.

        For real competition from a consumer point of view, it needs to be that all the games are available on all the channels, and the consumer has a choice of which subscription to pay for. As it is, all "competition" has done is screwed more money out of the consumer.

        1. Tom 38

          Re: Nice little roundup

          Take a look at UK football. A few years ago, "all" you needed was Sky Sports and you could watch everything. Then, "competition" was brought in. You have ended up with several channels across which the games are spread. While techinically it is competition, it does mean that a football fan now needs to pay for Sky Sports, and BT Sports, and any other channels, so it costs them more.

          Do I have to look at it, or can we just talk about it? One thing you have neglected to take in to account is that when it was "all" on Sky Sports, only around 10% of games were available to view on subscription services, whilst now a much larger proportion of games are available across more channels. I believe Sky currently have more live UK football than at any point in their existence. The argument is that - yes, you might pay more, but you are getting more.

          This is moot though, as no-one really watches "UK football", they watch specific teams - and in order to watch all the available matches for a specific team, you must buy one of each subscription. Almost certainly, that will cost you more money - but it might be of some value to you, if it means you can watch "your team" 5 times a year instead of 3.

  2. Brent Longborough
    Megaphone

    Rant: Why so slow, and why such a rubbish UX?

    I recently got myself a 65" SONY. The picture is lovely, and the sound is reasonable (I didn't buy all the add-ons for sound and stuff).

    But why does it it have to be so slooow? Slow to turn on, slow to change function, slow do do almost anything.

    Then there's the UI. ( warned you not to get me started...)

    The "Return button" is too close to the Down arrow, so when you're picking photos to show your Gran, you're just as likely to back up to the parent folder.

    The file navigator doesn't wrap round from right to left, nor left to right.

    There's a nasty little "New Age" fingerpad as an alternative to the conventional remote control. Of course, as the display doesn't have a mouse pointer, it's completely useless.

    So, maybe I chose the wrong brand. Or maybe they all give the UI design to the tea-lady.

    1. Nigel Whitfield.

      Re: Rant: Why so slow, and why such a rubbish UX?

      I've not played with this year's Sonys, but I gather some of them no longer have that horrible Xross bar interface that was apparently stolen from the playstation, and which used to drive me nuts every time I had to play with one.

      But generally, yes I think a lot of TV UIs are still really badly lacking, and they end up doing things that clearly make sense to the marketing department but no one else - like 'premium video' sections that include rubbish from their sponsors, while you have to hunt around to find the actual catch up players that most people will want to use.

    2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge

      Re: Rant: Why so slow, and why such a rubbish UX?

      And it boasts Android TV. I have the 50in version

      The UI is total shite and my pet grope is that despite setting it in the config, it stll tries to switch itself off after 4 hours.

      I gave up on the UI very quickly prefeering to use my Humax PVR as the primary device.

      1. DuncanL

        "my pet grope"

        You can get arrested for that...

    3. Barry Rueger

      Re: Rant: Why so slow, and why such a rubbish UX?

      God yes. Our Sony 55", bought last Christmas, has about the worst UI I've seen in many years.

      At a minimum, you can't even set which service it starts into at boot-up - we use it 99% for Netflix, yet it insists on booting to a screen telling us that it can't find the AV Player attached to Input #1.

      Honestly, aside from a great picture and decent enough audio, this thing does nothing well, and most things poorly.

      I would dearly love to root the thing and install something, anything else to replace the horrible Sony software package.

      (And I'm ignoring the random crashes that make watching anything an exercise in frustration.)

    4. John Bailey

      Re: Rant: Why so slow, and why such a rubbish UX?

      "So, maybe I chose the wrong brand. Or maybe they all give the UI design to the tea-lady."

      Usually, the latter. Because up to now, it really didn't matter much.

      Consumer electronics companies are not renowned for great UI design. The concept of on screen feedback is only now reaching them. They used to have to rely on modal push button systems.

      But in fairness. Once set up the settings were usually never seen again. Channel, volume source, done.

      Now.. The remote does more.

      Frequent retuning. Switching between far more inputs. Re routing sound from internal to external speakers.... It's a lot of stuff to get right. And all with a quite primitive remote unit.

      And no.. A super flashy whizz bang one is also not appreciated, cos people like their one for alls, and phone remote apps and whatnot.

      I'm one of em.

      One handset to rule them all, and in the drawer bind them .

      I myself went for a lower model peripheral recently, because it had just a basic IR remote. Not some flashy RF one.

      The speed however, is down to the hardware chosen. Minor functionality doesn't get top notch parts. So no umpty core 2 gig Arm processor. Instead, a bog standard low end soc, and a fairly generic digital tuner chip.

      So yes.. Slow.

      Slow to boot up. As is the case with more and more things these days. Slow to find a network connection. And slow to change channels.

      1. Tom 38

        Re: Rant: Why so slow, and why such a rubbish UX?

        Box shifting hardware manufacturers don't care about how it actually works, just the number of boxes it ticks so that a PFY can sell one using just a spreadsheet.

    5. MJI Silver badge

      Re: Rant: Why so slow, and why such a rubbish UX?

      Phew!

      My slightly older Sony is on Linux and is pretty nippy, XMB works fine, but I am used to it anyway!

  3. Efros

    Age is a bugger

    15 years ago the TV in the living room was a 21" CRT that fulfilled our needs. We could watch it comfortably from our normal sitting positions and the sound was of an acceptable quality. Fast forward a few years, 32" CRT with a reinforced TV stand (over 60 kg of TV) to enable me to read subtitles on those foreign films with questionable content that I like to watch, purely art you understand. Fast forward again 52" Flat Screen plasma, to try and keep the amount of black screen content to a minimum and avoid zooming on letterbox widescreen TV, we finally relent and buy a large format flat screen. Immediately notice we can actually read the subtitles again as opposed to guessing what the text actually says. Fast forward to today, same TV but now have to wear glasses to even read the damn subtitles... getting old sucks. *author repudiates any correlation between the state of their eyesight and the content of the art films.

    1. tassiekev

      Re: Age is a bugger

      I knew this was happening to me this morning when I got half-way across the road and the traffic stopped to let me continue - didn't know whether to laugh or cry.

      I recently bought an Amazon Fire TV box, being a Prime member this includes the Prime Instant Video service. Poking around in the settings, I discovered the box can enlarge subtitles on a dark background making them much easier to read. Unfortunately, this only seems to work on Prime content. These are the best subtitle options I've ever seen, I wish Ofcom would mandate this system for all channels. My mother is 95 and has Glaucoma and has to sit very close to the TV to read FTA subs, I suppose at her age the increased radiation won't make much difference but it would be nice if she had the opportunity to see subtitles from a reasonable distance.

      1. Nigel Whitfield.

        Re: Age is a bugger

        The BBC has been doing a lot of research work on 'responsive subtitles' at the moment. I chatted with one of their folk at IBC, and one thing that struck me was when he said that, effectively, the rules for subtitling on digital TV really haven't changed - even things like the number of characters per line is still set based on how things used to be done in the old teletext days.

        There's an overview of it all at http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/projects/live-subtitle-quality which is worth looking into; ability to choose font, positioning and so on will all, longer term, make subtitling much, much better - but of course you have to get that out of the labs and into the equipment in people's homes.

        But certainly, a lot of clever people realise the limitations, and are working on ways to solve them.

        1. tassiekev

          Re: Age is a bugger

          Thanks, that's good news - let's hope it doesn't take too long or the traffic might get me/

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Age is a bugger

        Unless you still have a CRT (and a very old one at that), your mother won't have to worry about radiation.

    2. MJI Silver badge

      Re: Age is a bugger

      21", apart from portables, never been under 25" but then I use TVs a lot and for more than broadcast TV.

      Ever done video editing with two VCRs?

  4. Brian 3

    Some of these devices cost more than my van did, with a govt safety on it. Those speakers at the beginning seem like especially poor value.

    And +1 on the slow TV gripe. On my generic DLED TV I have plenty of time to imagine some 80's transforming robot separation and recombination sequence going on inside.

    1. Nigel Whitfield.

      The speakers are pricey, admittedly - but when we go for pimping, we go for it, as I told the magistrate only last week.

      That said, they do actually sound damn good, solid construction and decent electronics too. You could easily spend almost as much on separates if you go for high end kit

      1. Martin an gof Silver badge

        The speakers are pricey, admittedly - but when we go for pimping, we go for it, as I told the magistrate only last week.

        Well how about an article on pimping up your TV for as little money as possible, as an antidote? Or - what I tend to do - the "one up from the base model" rule.

        That Yamaha amp (I'm a big Richer Sounds fan) is a case in point - for that price, its facilities put some of the stuff I've seen reviewed here at four or five times the price to shame. How about teaming it up with some cheapish bookshelf speakers from Richer Sounds? They have the JBL Control 1 for £80 a pair at the moment. Admittedly the 1 Plus is a nicer speaker, but the Control 1 is a belter for that money, and I say that as someone who has one pair at home and a dozen or more at work.

        The Yamaha does 7.1 surround sound. They may not be ideal as a centre speaker, but the Control 1 is perfect for all the other main positions in pretty much any living room or home cinema ignoring the fact they don't exactly blend in with the wallpaper.

        Buy three pairs of Control 1s (for L, R and surround channels) and the Yamaha you mention and compared with £900 for a pair of those poxy little speakers on the first page of the article you have some £400 left to spend on a centre speaker (Richer Sounds has over a page of units under £150, though some of them look decidedly iffy) and (if you want to wake the flatmates) a powered subwoofer. Sorted.

        The thing with Richer Sounds is that most of the stuff they sell is actually worth having(*) - not like popping into Maplins or Currys and wondering what no-brand stuff they're trying to flog. If you're happy with a 5.1 surround system you would get a significant upgrade from a modern TV's built-in sound simply by doing my "one up" trick. You would probably get enough change from £500 to pay for speaker stands or mounts, a couple of HDMI and optical cables, a reel of 1.5mm2 mains flex to wire the speakers with and maybe even a film or two.

        M.

        (*)In the "good old days" they used to have a "no minisystems" rule, which has long since gone by the wayside. If you ignore their minisystems and "speaker packages" which consist mainly of 2" drivers then I stand by what I say

        1. Nigel Whitfield.

          It would indeed be a good idea to look at the budget end too, if I can persuade those who hold the purse-strings round these parts to do so.

          You're absolutely right about that Yamaha - if it was my money, I'd be buying that rather than this year's model, though in fact I have the older 667, which at 5.1 and 1080 upscaling is perfectly fine for me at the moment.

          Maybe in around 2019 (I don't think it's worth upgrading to 4k before then) I'll consider getting a more recent model.

          1. Martin an gof Silver badge

            It would indeed be a good idea to look at the budget end too, if I can persuade those who hold the purse-strings round these parts to do so.

            There's a similar argument to be made for plenty of other things, right from "how much computer can I buy for £250?" (assuming a Raspberry Pi 2 won't do 95% of the stuff you need it for) to "why should I buy the Audi over the Skoda when they're essentially the same car?"

            The difference with computers is that things change so quickly that a brilliant deal one day won't be there the next, so the surest way of getting best value is to build it yourself, which is something that most people wouldn't even consider despite it being almost as easy as following Lego instructions these days.

            The difference with HiFi kit is that everyone has opinions and it is very, very easy to find your budget ratcheted up sliver by sliver. I love the Control 1s for many purposes, but they are a little "brash" (and, erm, "American"(*)) if your preference is Baroque music played on original instruments and recorded at 192/32 using one of those skulls-with-microphones-in-the-ears. I probably wouldn't specify them for a pure stereo system that was to be used mostly for classical music.

            Nevertheless, if you ever do manage to do such an article I'll read it with interest :-)

            M.

            (*)We also use some of JBL's larger speakers at work. The biggest problem with them? The mounting bolts (not supplied) aren't metric.

        2. fruitoftheloon
          Thumb Up

          @Martin an gof

          Martin,

          yup, I thought I thought it was just me, I have been buying kit from Mr Richers' shops for a while now.

          Five years ago we nabbed some floor-standing Tannoy Eyris 2 for £500/pair which I thought was good value, then I later spotted a set of Tannoy Eyris center speakers for £500 (for 5 of them). All plugged into an Onkyo 7.1 amp

          I had a bit of an 'oops moment' whilst working away, the Mrs was expecting the delivery chappy, what we weren't expecting was five ENORMOUS boxes, when I got home and unpacked them, I didn't quite anticipate how heavy they were (40 lbs each!!), hence for the rear channel supports, the only thing that would hold them up were microwave oven brackets!

          Hence when our 46" Sharp goes the way of the Dodo, back to Richer sounds we will go.

          As we use primarlily Netflix and Amazon prime video (with seperate video server), I am looking for something that go plug into a spare HDMI socket on the amp, but needs to be able to do surround sound too. Checking out which is the best option makes my f'ing head hurt...

          Cheers,

          jay

        3. MJI Silver badge

          1 up from base model

          One of the better rules, but there are quite a few.

          1) Buy from the mid range not the bottom. OR buy bottom of the top range.

          2) If you really want to spend more, investigate, it can be worth it.

          3) Try before you buy.

          4) Rule of Sony LCD was always a W series.

          5) Is it is really cheap, it is for a reason, find that reason.

          6) Some stuff is overpriced, some is expensive, learn the difference.

          7) If you have not heard of them and they are cheap, it will be cheap junk, if expensive, probably very good.

          8) Unfortunately electronics are now disposable, plan the replacement when you buy it.

          9) Some brands are living on previous reputation, some are trying to overcome previous reputation.

          10) If you want to stream from multiple sources, consider a games console rather than multiple streaming boxes.

  5. bailey86

    Cheaper than the dali's

    Plug optical out into a http://m.richersounds.com/#!/product/CAMB-DAC-MAG-100-BLK and then that into a decent amp and speakers.

  6. fruitoftheloon
    Thumb Down

    None-for-all??

    I have been checking out stuff that would make our kit in the lounge easier to use, the nevo box looked fabby.

    Then I read the reviews on Amazon, seems like the only thing One-for-all know about customer service is how to spell it.

    Which is a shame, as it looked pretty good.

    /sad

  7. drand
    Thumb Up

    Tibo Plus 2

    Tibo Plus 2 is a cheaper alternative to the Dali Kubik. Built in amp, 2 optical in, RCA in, 3.5 in, BT4.0 with multiple remembered devices, USB power out round the back (connected to my Qi charging pad), remote control and includes a passive mate. I'm not going to spout audiophile guff about them but they sound good to me.

    At richer sounds, though I got mine slightly cheaper on Amazon. Not the loudest, but loud enough, and they do a Plus 3 with more oomph if you need it.

  8. pakman

    "...you could save up £229 and treat yourself to Sennheiser's wireless RS–175 headphone set"

    I took a chance on the Telme2 bluetooth transmitter and headphones. They work well for me, and are cheaper than the Sennheiser

  9. g e

    I can recommend the Yammy amp

    I have the older '671 model but it's a capable beast with 6 HDMI inputs plus analogue and composite and stuff. Running mine with Pioneer 5.1 surround speakers (it'll do 7.1, I think) and an active sub and it's a tip-top unit still for maybe 4 or so years old and it still receives firmware updates from Yammy, too.

  10. Kubla Cant
    Trollface

    Post-it note

    post-it notes for guests explaining how they can watch Corrie

    Dear Guest,

    If you want to watch "Corrie", I suggest you get in your car and drive home. I was under the misapprehension I was accommodating somebody with taste. The same applies to any other television programme with a nickname (I'm thinking of "Strictly", but I dare say there are others).

    1. Tom 38

      Re: Post-it note

      Crumbs! Does this mean I should stop watching Cutie (QT) for taste reasons?

  11. MJI Silver badge

    Was expecting crap

    But we got some good stuff among it instead.

    Proper AV amps are always nice to see.

    But all these little sticks and boxes for watching streaming TV, too much mess, much easier with a games console with all of the TV applications, and much more likely to be supported, my older console can still do BBC and C4 players and is a 10 year old design.

    I will be subscribing to Amamzon Prme next year for my motoring TV needs since the BBC have given up (I cannot watch anything with that ginger tw@t in it). But all I have to do is register an application on the console.

    I am managing fine with Freeview TV, Freesat HD PVR and a PS3 & PS4 for all sources.

    1. Nigel Whitfield.

      Re: Was expecting crap

      That's sound advice up to a point - as long as you actually do gaming, or use the console as a disc player.

      However, not everyone does. I have absolutely zero interest in gaming at all (or, really, in BluRay). Given the price point of the streaming devices now, I could buy three over a ten year period and probably still have spent less than on a games console. Even if I threw in a BluRay player as well, there are plenty of those under £100 (or even under £50) these days.

      Yes, you might well get longer life out of the more expensive piece of kit, but I think it's only a reasonable choice if you're actually using it for its primary purpose and playing games on it.

      If you aren't a gamer your choice is: buy a console and in ten years it may still be working, but it'll be increasingly ancient technology, or buy a new streamer every few years and get improvements along the way.

      1. MJI Silver badge

        Re: Was expecting crap

        Or the console sits there beconning, you borrow a game put it in and.............................

        You are hooked.

        As I have a HDTV I do need Bluray though.

  12. MGJ

    If the One For All device allowed me to manage my Denon 2307 receiver that would be great value for money. The Denon manual is written in an entirely different form of English and the UI is impenetrable.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Facepalm

    Er, Well, Actually, Too Expensive

    Do I look poor, fam? What's the point of earning money, if not to have nice things?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like