TriniTuner.com  |  Latest Event:  

Forums

Sharp Aquos LCD TV

this is how we do it.......

Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods

16 cycles
3ne2nr Toppa Toppa
Posts: 5526
Joined: May 10th, 2003, 9:25 am

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby 16 cycles » January 24th, 2012, 1:57 pm

Tigerdirect has sale on Sony TV's now...

expect more retail stores to do the same as Superbowl approaches - same for living room sets /etc...

edit: was meant for HT thread...my bad

User avatar
Duane 3NE 2NR
Admin
Posts: 27139
Joined: March 24th, 2003, 10:27 am
Location: T&T
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby Duane 3NE 2NR » January 24th, 2012, 5:07 pm

crossdrilled wrote:Duane....there are so many things you are talking about that are not what I am talking about in your response to my answer to your original retort, I don't have time to explain. I talking about LCD and you come sliding in with Plasma... which I never spoke ill of.
I only mentioned plasma because you mentioned viewing angles

the more prominent points being viewing distance and aspect ratio are still very valid

talk nah :lol:

User avatar
RBphoto
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 7603
Joined: June 26th, 2007, 10:46 am
Location: Pikchatekoutin
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby RBphoto » January 25th, 2012, 7:27 am

Like I said, I don't agree with THX. That is the optimal distance to get maximum resolution from visual acuity. That is all about selling televisions (oh look, I could make out the pubic hairs in that nanny). When you look at motion pictures, you want to take in the whole scene. Our eyes do not take in the whole scene at once, and the rearer we are, the more rapidly our eyes have to move to scan the screen. I will try to find a proper viewing angle (field of view, not watching from side of the screen viewing angle Iwas talking about) calculator on the net for you guys.

User avatar
Duane 3NE 2NR
Admin
Posts: 27139
Joined: March 24th, 2003, 10:27 am
Location: T&T
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby Duane 3NE 2NR » January 25th, 2012, 11:12 am

LOL
you want to find a viewing DISTANCE calculator not a viewing angle calculator

viewing angle is the maximum angle at which the screen can be viewed at without distorting the colour, contrast, picture etc

viewing distance is the distance at which is recommended to view a particular screen.

[img]]http://myhometheater.homestead.com/files/viewing.jpg[/img]

unless you are referring to field of view, which has little to do with how far you sit from the TV, unless you are 2 inches from it

you were talking about people who buy TV's too large for their house and all they need is a 27"tv, suggesting that a 58" for example is too large - this is simply not true for HDTV's, old SD TV's maybe, but not HD.

Most viewing distance calculators for HDTVs will be around the same as THX: Take the diagonal size of the screen (usually the size it is sold at i.e. 32", 42", 58" etc) divided by 0.84 to get the number of inches you sit from the screen, divide by 12 to get the number of feet

so a 58" HD screen
58"/0.84 = 69"
69" in feet is 5.75 feet

other calculators may say around 7 or 8 feet.

You claim all people need is a 27" HDTV
lets apply our formula:
27"/0.84 = 32"
32" in feet is 2.66 feet

I'm awaiting your next statement that HD is not really necessary and is just a marketing gimmick to get us to buy TVs :lol:

User avatar
RBphoto
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 7603
Joined: June 26th, 2007, 10:46 am
Location: Pikchatekoutin
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby RBphoto » January 25th, 2012, 11:43 am

Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:HD is not really necessary and is just a marketing gimmick to get us to buy.......


HD media. (You almost got it right there chap... good to see you are listening to me... allyuh young people does take long to ketch on.. but not you). The HDTV has more to do with content creation than with viewing hardware..... but most sets look crappy when looking at overly compressed digital cable cable and direct TV (analog cable would look much better). This way, when we look at HD movies on our home thetre, we are blown away by the perceived quality.... which makes us buy more HD media, and forget how nice TV used to look when we watched analog cable on CRT's. Everything is a conspiracy with media corporations and hardware developers to lower our expectation, blow our mind with superior hardware, then when we get that hardware, to consume premium content that is not avalible for free..

User avatar
Duane 3NE 2NR
Admin
Posts: 27139
Joined: March 24th, 2003, 10:27 am
Location: T&T
Contact:

Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby Duane 3NE 2NR » January 25th, 2012, 2:06 pm

^LOL

That's like saying airplanes are crap because they dont work well when you drive them on the road

Or that stereo is crap because mono recordings sound bad when played on stereo systems

You probably hated stereo when it came out too lol

User avatar
wagonrunner
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 13491
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 9:38 am
Location: Distancing myself from those who want to raid the barn but eh want to plant the corn.
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby wagonrunner » January 25th, 2012, 2:12 pm

I'm impressed he's even come to terms with accepting "unnatural light" after the sun sets.

User avatar
crazybalhead
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10950
Joined: April 21st, 2003, 9:41 am

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby crazybalhead » January 25th, 2012, 2:13 pm

wagonrunner wrote:I'm impressed he's even come to terms with accepting "unnatural light" after the sun sets.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
RBphoto
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 7603
Joined: June 26th, 2007, 10:46 am
Location: Pikchatekoutin
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby RBphoto » January 25th, 2012, 2:22 pm

wagonrunner wrote:I'm impressed he's even come to terms with accepting "unnatural light" after the sun sets.


Consumer compact Fluorescent is the biggest hoax of all time. (not high power industrial/ commercial long bulbs eh... they are the backbone of production) Before we had great warm Tungsten incandescent bulbs which give great quality light, were cheap, non toxic and took little raw materials to manufacture. Now we have complex compact fluorescent which requires at least 20 materials to manufacture, have electronics components which are non recyclable, filled with poision, and give off poor quality, flickering green light (even the warm ones). Eddison got it right... no need to mess with perfection.

User avatar
wagonrunner
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 13491
Joined: May 18th, 2004, 9:38 am
Location: Distancing myself from those who want to raid the barn but eh want to plant the corn.
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby wagonrunner » January 25th, 2012, 2:24 pm

but edison did witchcraft dan.
the sun set. go in yuh bed.
even candles & lamps go against the natural order with their pollution. :| not so?

User avatar
RBphoto
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 7603
Joined: June 26th, 2007, 10:46 am
Location: Pikchatekoutin
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby RBphoto » January 25th, 2012, 2:41 pm

Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:^LOL

That's like saying airplanes are crap because they dont work well when you drive them on the road

Or that stereo is crap because mono recordings sound bad when played on stereo systems

You probably hated stereo when it came out too lol


Poor analogies. Audio reproduction actually gets better with advances in composites and analog technologies for reproduction, and digital signal processing for recording. I am not one of them old fashion tube amp audiophiles. They actually like the retro sound of the tubes i.e. they like the DISTORTION of the imperfect medium. However, the likes of Bose have foisted crap upon us, marketed it as a replacement for your ears, and sell us overpriced gimmics, and have people all the rave about it because they do not have the listening acuity to tell that the boosted audio is not any better than what they were hearing on their old analog systems. These same people will play MP3's from their IPOD and be happy, while discerning audiphiles will not touch them. ( I am not an audiphile BTW) Real audiphile equipment truly does get better with time. But then again, CD's have always given good quality over other consumer recording media, so people had high quality meda in conjunction to high end hardware for a long time. The opposite trend is happening in this industry where downloadable MP3's for portable devices (the content providers are provideing lower quality media at a premium) and people are touting their great player/ equipment, but plugging in their IPOD with an I tunes download to drive equipment that costs thousands. This shows that people are paying for convinience, not quality.

Airplanes are not electronics, so that analogy falls apart as well.

User avatar
geodude
Riding on 18's
Posts: 1770
Joined: February 21st, 2009, 1:22 am
Location: Hiding from the Chuna spelling police
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby geodude » January 25th, 2012, 3:29 pm

wha all this have to do with my sharp and its 3 lines?

User avatar
RBphoto
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 7603
Joined: June 26th, 2007, 10:46 am
Location: Pikchatekoutin
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby RBphoto » January 25th, 2012, 3:43 pm

geodude wrote:wha all this have to do with my sharp and its 3 lines?


UDFR wit your 3 line sharp. It is just a piece of disposable junk. Go buy a next one that will last till the warranty up.



JK :lol:

User avatar
Duane 3NE 2NR
Admin
Posts: 27139
Joined: March 24th, 2003, 10:27 am
Location: T&T
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby Duane 3NE 2NR » January 25th, 2012, 5:21 pm

crossdrilled wrote:
Poor analogies. Audio reproduction actually gets better with advances in composites and analog technologies for reproduction, and digital signal processing for recording. I am not one of them old fashion tube amp audiophiles. They actually like the retro sound of the tubes i.e. they like the DISTORTION of the imperfect medium. However, the likes of Bose have foisted crap upon us, marketed it as a replacement for your ears, and sell us overpriced gimmics, and have people all the rave about it because they do not have the listening acuity to tell that the boosted audio is not any better than what they were hearing on their old analog systems. These same people will play MP3's from their IPOD and be happy, while discerning audiphiles will not touch them. ( I am not an audiphile BTW) Real audiphile equipment truly does get better with time. But then again, CD's have always given good quality over other consumer recording media, so people had high quality meda in conjunction to high end hardware for a long time. The opposite trend is happening in this industry where downloadable MP3's for portable devices (the content providers are provideing lower quality media at a premium) and people are touting their great player/ equipment, but plugging in their IPOD with an I tunes download to drive equipment that costs thousands. This shows that people are paying for convinience, not quality.

Airplanes are not electronics, so that analogy falls apart as well.
the anology was only to show your apparent fear of advancement, which it does quite well.

People pay for songs they like, CD's forced them to buy an entire album to get a few songs they liked. iTunes at 99c per song actually works out cheaper.

BTW DVD and bluray audio exceeds CD quality as the dynamic range is far wider in the data bandwidth that blurays and even DVD's offer over CD.

User avatar
RBphoto
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 7603
Joined: June 26th, 2007, 10:46 am
Location: Pikchatekoutin
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby RBphoto » January 25th, 2012, 5:48 pm

Are the compressed files downloded from Itues the same quality as that that can be ripped from a WAV file from CD?

Jus asking. Blue ray is high quality packaged media.... I never disputed that. Only trying to show how we are being made to live with crappier tech daily, while being extorted into buying (sometimes only percieved) higher quality media. A better analogy may be that my old Nokia phone had great reception, but could do very little else besides make a call. Nowdays, until recently, the iphone could do everything under the sun EXCEPT make a bloody phone call sound good.

User avatar
Duane 3NE 2NR
Admin
Posts: 27139
Joined: March 24th, 2003, 10:27 am
Location: T&T
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby Duane 3NE 2NR » January 25th, 2012, 11:23 pm

^ never had an issue with call or audio quality on an iPhone and I've had every iteration so far

MP3 won't match CD quality, however, just as you mentioned earlier that you are no audiophile, most listeners cannot tell the difference when listening to CD and high bitrate MP3 from itunes.
iTunes can use Apple Lossless files which are CD quality, but the files are much larger though not as large as other lossless formats such as FLAC (25MB vs the usual 5MB for a 3min song in MP3 format)

User avatar
skylinechild
3ne2nr Toppa Toppa
Posts: 5693
Joined: January 13th, 2008, 11:38 pm
Location: In a Skyline

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby skylinechild » January 25th, 2012, 11:56 pm

^^ Duane...i could ask a question....i didn't mean to cut in....

if i want to buy a 46 inch tv.....using that distance calculator to find out how far one should be..."divide by .84 then 12".....i get: 4.56

Isnt that a bit too close to be sitting in front of a Tv....?

next question does this formula hold for the normal CRT type tv?

sorry abt the noob question..... :oops: :oops:

User avatar
Duane 3NE 2NR
Admin
Posts: 27139
Joined: March 24th, 2003, 10:27 am
Location: T&T
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby Duane 3NE 2NR » January 26th, 2012, 12:13 am

^ keep in mind that formula is the THX recommended viewing distance given the field of view.
http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-entert ... tv-set-up/
THX is more along the lines of "cinema experience" so even THX volume levels are very loud for casual living room watching.

try using a universal viewing distance calculator
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/view ... lator.html
there are descriptions there about maximum and recommended viewing distances.

The vast majority of CRTs were standard definition (SD).
The above viewing distances are for high definition HD screens. The higher the resolution, the sharper the image and the closer you can get.
Example: take a blurry image, look at it from far away and it looks sharper, the closer you get to it, the blurrier it gets.

taht's why viewing distances for CRTs were so far away compared to today's HDTVs

when 4K resolution TV's go mainstream (maybe by 2013) the viewing distances will get even closer!
Of course there will be a cut off point where you'd need to stop to see the entire screen!

User avatar
noshownogo
punchin NOS
Posts: 4379
Joined: January 6th, 2004, 11:51 am
Location: heavy petting!
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby noshownogo » January 26th, 2012, 7:32 am

good info here, bookmarked 8-)

User avatar
geodude
Riding on 18's
Posts: 1770
Joined: February 21st, 2009, 1:22 am
Location: Hiding from the Chuna spelling police
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby geodude » January 26th, 2012, 12:28 pm

i want a mod to clean up this thread to many ppl trolling in here :)

User avatar
RBphoto
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 7603
Joined: June 26th, 2007, 10:46 am
Location: Pikchatekoutin
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby RBphoto » January 26th, 2012, 12:58 pm

geodude wrote:i want a mod to clean up this thread to many ppl trolling in here :)


Yeah... have a talk with the admin :|

User avatar
skylinechild
3ne2nr Toppa Toppa
Posts: 5693
Joined: January 13th, 2008, 11:38 pm
Location: In a Skyline

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby skylinechild » January 26th, 2012, 4:16 pm

Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:^ keep in mind that formula is the THX recommended viewing distance given the field of view.
http://www.thx.com/consumer/home-entert ... tv-set-up/
THX is more along the lines of "cinema experience" so even THX volume levels are very loud for casual living room watching.

try using a universal viewing distance calculator
http://myhometheater.homestead.com/view ... lator.html
there are descriptions there about maximum and recommended viewing distances.

The vast majority of CRTs were standard definition (SD).
The above viewing distances are for high definition HD screens. The higher the resolution, the sharper the image and the closer you can get.
Example: take a blurry image, look at it from far away and it looks sharper, the closer you get to it, the blurrier it gets.

taht's why viewing distances for CRTs were so far away compared to today's HDTVs

when 4K resolution TV's go mainstream (maybe by 2013) the viewing distances will get even closer!
Of course there will be a cut off point where you'd need to stop to see the entire screen!


thanks duane.... :oops: :oops:

i think i will stick to my 7 inch black an white for now.....cant afford a TV.... :oops:

User avatar
RBphoto
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 7603
Joined: June 26th, 2007, 10:46 am
Location: Pikchatekoutin
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby RBphoto » February 3rd, 2012, 7:23 am

Ah yes... ah man after my own heart... 8)

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/02/ ... -about-it/

Neil Young is right: Those songs on your iPhone do sound like crap, and it’s time we demand better-sounding alternatives for our digital music.

Speaking at the D: Dive Into Media conference Tuesday, the outspoken musician expressed his deep dissatisfaction with the MP3 format and called for an end-to-end reboot of the consumer digital audio ecosystem, from file formats to playback devices.

Young’s big beef: Digital music files download quickly, but suffer a significant loss in quality. Bitrates for most tracks on iTunes average 256kbps AAC audio encoding, which is drastically inferior to the quality of recorded source material in almost every case. By Young’s estimation, CDs offer only 15 percent of the recording information contained on the master tracks. Convert that CD-quality audio to MP3 or AAC, and you’ve lost a great deal of richness and complexity.

“My goal is to try and rescue the art form that I’ve been practicing for the past 50 years,” Young said. “We live in the digital age, and unfortunately it’s degrading our music, not improving.”

Young is giving a popular voice to a problem that audiophiles, recording artists and even careful listeners have long felt — that the MP3s in your iTunes library don’t do the original recordings justice. They’re not as good as the CD version, and far inferior to an analog source like a high-quality vinyl pressing or original master tapes. But for most of us, MP3s are good enough.

“Steve Jobs was a digital pioneer, but when he went home, he listened to vinyl.” — Neil YoungBut MP3s weren’t good enough for Steve Jobs. According to Young, even Jobs himself wasn’t satisfied with the sound quality of the iPod. The late Apple CEO, famously a music-lover and audiophile, preferred to listen to vinyl records instead of digital files. Young’s anecdote underscores what music geeks have been saying for a decade: The iPod isn’t an audiophile device, and hardware and software have reached the point where we can build something better.

Until that mythical device arrives, you can achieve a level of audio quality that both Neil Young and your snotty friend with the $20,000 stereo can get behind. You’ll have to sniff around a little to find the files, and you’ll have to invest in special software and hardware to listen to them. It’s all a matter of how far up the quality ladder — and down the audiophile rabbit hole — you want to go.

Here’s a range of options, from the lowest rung to the highest.

MP3 and AAC — If quality is a concern, but if you crave the convenience of MP3, you can always set iTunes to rip at the highest possible bitrate of 320kbps, which most people consider indistinguishable from CD-quality audio. However, some people will still find this level of quality unacceptable.

FLAC and Apple Lossless — While MP3s and AACs are “lossy” compression formats (so called because the MP3 creation software removes audio information to keep file sizes down), you can also play “lossless” songs in iTunes and on your smartphone. Lossless files are much bigger (several times larger than MP3s) but the file retains more audio information and the quality is at least as good as a CD.

The iTunes software can play Apple Lossless (ALAC) files, and you can rip your CDs to Apple Lossless inside iTunes. However, you can’t buy ALAC files from the iTunes store. Not yet, anyway. The copyright holders may loosen up soon and allow the major digital outlets to start selling lossless digital files.

For now, if you want to purchase lossless files, you have to buy music encoded as FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Codec), an open-source format that’s very popular among audiophiles. It can handle 24-bit audio, which is the same resolution at which most bands record their albums these days.

You can buy FLACs at online warehouses like HDtracks, the largest store with the biggest catalog. The files are more expensive — a FLAC version of John Coltrane’s album A Love Supreme will cost you $18 on HDtracks, as opposed to $10 on iTunes. And they’re larger too. However, the FLAC version of the album is encoded at a resolution of 96kHz and 24 bits, which is higher quality than a CD and much, much higher than MP3s and AACs.

Now, you can’t just drop those FLAC files into iTunes. You need special software to play FLACs, like Foobar2000, VLC or Cog. Alternatively, some consumer hardware players can handle the format, like Logitech’s popular line of Squeezebox devices and players from Olive.

While FLAC files are capable of holding very high-resolution audio, the quality you get in your digital download is solely dependent on how good the source material is. For that reason, one of the ways to ensure you’re getting the best quality audio is to buy FLACs directly from the artists or labels themselves. Sites like Bandcamp.com allow artists to sell FLACs directly to fans. Linn Records sells very high-resolution FLACs of its releases. And if you go to George Harrison’s website, you can buy a copy of All Things Must Pass in 96kHz/24-bit FLAC for $30.

WAV — Some purists will tell you to skip FLACs altogether and just buy WAVs. Unlike a FLAC, which has been squished down, a WAV file is an uncompressed representation of what the artist recorded in the studio. By buying WAVs, you can avoid the potential data loss incurred when the file is compressed into a FLAC. This data loss is rare, but it happens. Almost any software audio player (including iTunes) can play a WAV, but higher-resolution WAVs will require special software, so do your research.

Direct Stream Digital — The Direct Stream Digital (DSD) format was developed by Sony and Philips, and is the native format found on the company’s Super Audio CDs (SACD). DSD recording equipment can capture 2.8 million samples per second, which is 64 times the sample rate of a regular CD. Proponents of DSD will tell you it’s the closest thing to analog tape available.

If you want to download DSD files, your options are slim, but growing. Sites like DownloadsNOW.net and E-Onkyo Music from Japan offer DSD files for sale. The files are huge and pricey — around $4 or $5 per track — but the software and hardware options for playing them are actually quite accessible.

There’s a free player made by Korg called AudioGate. It will play DSD files or convert them to any format you want. You can also use AudioGate to burn DSD data disc that will play in the PlayStation3 (Yes, the PS3 has the hidden feature that plays DSD files — read all about it at ps3sacd.com). Other manufacturers are ramping up support for DSD, but most of the playback hardware still only exists on the high end, selling for $2,000 and up.

For more info, visit the DSD-Guide website.

Vinyl — In Tuesday’s rant, Neil Young let slip the surprising fact that Steve Jobs preferred to listen to vinyl around the house, leading us to believe that even the man credited with spearheading the digital music revolution was unhappy with the results.

Whether a vinyl copy sounds better than a digital copy is one of the oldest debates among audiophiles. The truth is influenced by a number of factors.

First, there’s the source material — the tracks the band laid down in the studio, and what medium they used to capture the performance. Was it analog tape? Then a vinyl pressing of that performance will probably sound better than a CD. Was it a laptop recording at 24-bits? Then a high-resolution digital copy can equal the quality of the source. Second, how good is the pressing? A clean, 200-gram vinyl disc sounds vastly superior to a thin, flimsy disc, even when the same source material is used. Third, there’s your equipment. Steve Jobs’ stereo was probably pretty kick-ass. How good is yours?

It’s likely Steve and Neil were reminiscing about the classics — The Beatles, old Dylan, recordings that were cut to analog tape. In those cases, a quality vinyl record would sound better.

If that’s the level of quality Neil is striving for, it’s attainable. The hardware exists, the software exists, and the file formats exist. But the details of how everything fits together are still murkier than those MP3s of Harvest Moon you found on Napster.

User avatar
assassin
Shifting into 6th
Posts: 2112
Joined: October 1st, 2003, 8:38 pm
Location: Streets Of Gold

Re: Sharp Aquos LCD TV

Postby assassin » February 3rd, 2012, 8:31 am

to all the ppl who talk bout this brand better and that brand not good...
i have a sharp aquos 42". bought it almost four years ago
bought it locally from CTC because of the better potential for repair/warranty rather than bringing it in and at the time they were fairly expensive
never had a problem with it to date... now looking to put it in the bedroom and get something larger for the living room

NELLY
Ricer
Posts: 29
Joined: June 2nd, 2009, 10:55 am

Sharp LCD Flatscreen TV Help!

Postby NELLY » October 12th, 2013, 11:26 pm

Hey tuners my Flat screen tv smelt like something burnt and would not power on after,just wanted to know where in Freeport area can I get my tv checked out or fixed properly or if anyone knows if there is a dealer for Sharp where it can be fixed? Anyone had this problem before and was solved? It is a Sharp Aquos LCD , Thanks for assistance given.

User avatar
Duane 3NE 2NR
Admin
Posts: 27139
Joined: March 24th, 2003, 10:27 am
Location: T&T
Contact:

Re: Sharp LCD Flatscreen TV Help!

Postby Duane 3NE 2NR » October 12th, 2013, 11:30 pm

CTC Electronics are the Authorised SHARP dealers.

http://www.ctcelectronics.com/

Galvatron
Sweet on this forum
Posts: 270
Joined: November 29th, 2006, 8:14 am

Sharp Aquos TV problems

Postby Galvatron » August 12th, 2014, 11:37 am

Lower section of tv blacked out, sometimes red.
Attachments
WIN_20140812_113018.JPG

User avatar
DFC
2NRholic
Posts: 5093
Joined: September 18th, 2006, 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Sharp Aquos TV problems

Postby DFC » August 12th, 2014, 11:40 am

o fuq that socks.

is it LED or plasma?

User avatar
fouljuice
Shifting into 6th
Posts: 2121
Joined: December 31st, 2008, 2:25 am

Re: Sharp Aquos TV problems

Postby fouljuice » August 12th, 2014, 11:56 am

CTC electronics

User avatar
JoKeR1980
punchin NOS
Posts: 3903
Joined: March 4th, 2009, 1:05 pm
Location: All over de place

Re: Sharp Aquos TV problems

Postby JoKeR1980 » August 12th, 2014, 12:42 pm

OP, PM soundwav....oh wait nm

Advertisement

Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 94 guests