Introducing series reviews of HDTVs
What's the difference between the 42-, 46-, and 50-inch version of the 'same' TV? Not much.
(Credit: Panasonic)As you may have noticed, I've recently changed the way I do reviews of HDTVs at CNET. I call the change "series reviews," and I'm curious to know what you think. But first I'll tell you why I did it.
Individual HDTVs are typically members of a series, where the only difference on the specification sheet between various models in a manufacturer's lineup is screen size. A great example is the Panasonic TC-PS1 series, which includes six screen sizes at various price points, from 42 to 65 inches. In my review of the TC-PS1 series, I only performed a hands-on evaluation of the 42-inch model. But I also posted the review to the 46-inch and the 50-inch model, making sure to explain that I didn't actually perform hands-on evaluations of them.
Previously, we would review one screen size in a series and post a simple note (example), not a review, on the other screen sizes, basically saying that you could expect similar picture quality from all screen sizes in the series.
Why the change?
1. I simply can't perform hands-on evaluations of every screen size in a series. At best I can review one, or at most two sizes in a particular series. It's also less-constructive, given limited time and resources, to review more than one screen size in a series at the expense of reviewing other HDTVs.
2. Given my experience reviewing HDTVs, I generally do expect models in the same series, which share identical specs, to have similar picture quality regardless of size. Examples of series in which I've reviewed more than one model include nearly-identical LG PG60 series (I reviewed the 50- and the 60-inch models), the Sony KDL-XBR2 series (40-, 46-, and 52-inch models), the Panasonic TH-PZ800U series (50- and 58-inch), and the Panasonic TH-PX77U series (42- and 50-inch). The latter two did evince some differences in black-level performance from one model to the next, but overall picture quality was still very similar. That said, my application of the series concept won't be universal--in the Panasonic TC-PS1 series, for example, I'm not applying the review to the largest three models in the series, because I reviewed the smallest. When series span a large gamut of sizes, I'll judge which ones get the review on a case-by-case basis.
3. Many CNET readers use the Best HDTVs and All HDTV reviews lists to find and compare products. These lists point only to reviewed products, so unreviewed screen sizes in a series wouldn't appear on the lists, despite being perfectly viable choices. Applying a review to other screen sizes in a series makes it easier for shoppers to find the product since it allows that product to appear on the lists, which can be sorted by screen size.
4. Unfortunately, I depend on manufacturers to send review samples. Often, the manufacturer will not have the screen size I ask for, which leaves me with a tough choice: take the size offered and review it, or wait until the size I ask for becomes available. In most cases, to ensure a timely review, I'll opt for the former choice, which means that a potentially desirable screen size (such as the 46-inch and 50-inch members of the Panasonic TC-P50S1 series) would have gone unreviewed, at least until the manufacturer comes through.
On the flip side is the very legitimate protest that sounds something like: "Hey Katzmaier, it's totally misleading to post a hands-on review of a product you didn't actually touch."
That's why I make it clear that hands-on evaluations only took place on one size, and that picture quality may vary somewhat on other sizes.
For that matter, it's important to remember that performance can vary between different samples of the exact same product. My hands-on review is technically only valid for the exact TC-P42S1 I reviewed, not any of the other TC-P42S1's out there. CNET's user opinions are rife with examples of people who experience issues I didn't during my review, or people whose HDTVs don't exhibit issues I complain about. Many of those differences are due to variations between my review sample and the user's product.
Series reviews aren't perfect, I know. In a perfect world I'd be able to review every product hands-on with direct comparisons to the competition. Ideally, I'd test multiple samples of the same product to establish an average baseline, and integrate the experiences of users and other reviewers into the perfect review. That would rock. But it's not gonna happen.
In my opinion, series reviews are a good solution to the problems outlined above. They allow more readers to gain the benefit of the review, and further stress the important point that screen size is not a major factor in picture quality. Hopefully, this approach will lead to people finding the reviews more easily, and thus making more-informed buying decisions.
What do you think? Are series reviews of HDTVs a good idea, or does it just lead to more reader confusion? Let me know in comments.


David Katzmaier reviews HDTVs for CNET.
Dave, any chance you can get your hands on the Pioneer M series pro-monitor for a review?
However, that review "system" contained the caveat that different sizes of LCD screens were made by different base manufacturers, and therefore the different sizes within one product line could not be generalized as equal.
Has something changed to make this a more legitimate comparison? Are all the screen sizes within a single brand made the same place and to the same standards? Are the electronics the same for each size, and do they interact identically with the sceen?
I understand the practicality of your restrictions on the reviews. But I don't *yet* understand the impact. The BMW 750iL shares a great deal of design and basic components with the BMW330is, but I certainly would not be able to generalize a review of one to the other.
Also, this really only works for 1080p sets. For example, I own an older 720p samsung plasma in 42". 42" plasmas in 720p don't have the same native resolution as their 50" brethren (1280 pixels wide vs. 1366 pixels wide) and I feel that image quality is affected because of this.
Finally, I think that even if CNET reviews TVs by the series that the user reviews should have the option to be compiled by series or model depending on personal preference. Just my $.02
If series include different resolutions @ different screen sizes (which is increasingly uncommon these days when seemingly everything's 1080p) I'll definitely make a note. But honestly, I don't expect series like Panasonic's X1, which includes a 1366x768 50-incher and a 1024x768 42-incher, to exhibit any more visible difference in detail than two 1080p models at those screen sizes. I know that intuitively you expect to be able to see the difference of those 3000-odd pixels, but I sure can't myself in comparisons I've done.
As for user opinions, I think that's a great idea. On the back end one of CNET's major projects this year is revamping the series association system, and allowing consolidated UO's of a series is on the table.
-- David
Sick of these little TV screens.. But I love Sony TVS the best!
It may be true that the mother glass is made in a different plant altogether.
I accept that circuit boards and software won't affect the picture quality, so using the same review for multiple sizes of screens makes some sense... but as far as the panel itself is concerned, there can be significant differences: I got a Dell laptop with a Samsung-made panel that had noticeable "fish scale" pattern in parts of the screen, and people all over the net were complaining about this, and others were saying how they had LG-made panels and they were beautiful: so there was a lot of "how do I make sure I get a notebook PC with an LG-made panel" etc. etc. and these screens had otherwise identical specs as far as size and resolution were concerned.
So, it is an issue that the panel manufacturer be considered in the review, and, unless you can get assurances from the vendor that ALL the panels in the line will be manufactured in the same plant to the same 'specifications', picture quality will vary, even in the same line.
Would you please review Panasonic 65" V10, when it comes out?
As far as I know, the panel on 65" V10 is not a one sheet glass. As a result, it may require different settings than the smaller sizes in V10 series. I'd like to purchase one if it passes your tests and I'd also like to use your settings for that TV.
Thanks
I am sure that everyone would agree that your reviews have actually led to many customers buying a particular TV because of its quality.
In May of 2006, I was ready to buy my second HDTV, and decided on the Samsung LNS-4692D. You did not review this model but you did review one within the Series which helped me a lot in my decision making. So given the time constrains and number of TV's within a series I want to thank you for doing a great job.
I read your column about moving the specific settings for the TV's you review to the (sorry was it the blog cite of cnet, I don't recall exactly).
For what I remember the point was to have anyone do a search on their model and not only get other users points of view but your settings as well.
The settings posted by users are subjective, since our visual acuity is different, but you do based many or all of the settings using specialized equipment. In my opinion, this settings are more relevant and a really good starting point, and I hope that in your review you still leave an easy to find link to your settings within the review itself. I would prefer quick access to those, and the user references as additional reading, if I have the time.
Thanks Geo.
- by larrfry March 27, 2009 10:02 AM PDT
- I understand your problems.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(15 Comments)1.) I'd recommend you make it extremely clear and I mean by that there should be very bold text on every page of any review when you have reviewed a different model but you view this one model as representative of a given line. These notices need to be prominent and displayed often! In short - full notice
2.) You need to seek reasonable assurances from manufacturers' reprentatives that there are no major changes between the model reviewed and those you view as similar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2.) If you are going to extraporate