Help settle an argument among those of us who test and report on TVs for Consumer Reports. Is a TV’s sound quality important to you, or does audio totally take a backseat to the picture?
The engineers and editors in our group, screen lovers all, are engaged in a healthy but heated debate over how important sound is when you’re choosing and then using a TV.
The most ardent home-theater fans among us contend that no self-respecting videophile could live without a surround-sound system connected to their TV set. (Those are the guys—and they are all guys—who have front speakers taller than I am.) Thus, they’re convinced that sound quality doesn’t play much of a part, if any, in the selection process, especially for the biggest screens. It’s all about picture quality in their opinion.
Those who fancy themselves as everyman, or in my case everywoman, say the average joe doesn’t need or want a sound system for run-of-the-mill shows such as news and sitcoms, even if they have a 5.1 soundtrack, as most primetime programming now does. Our view is that a TV needs to have at least decent sound to satisfy consumers, though I’d agree picture quality is far more important to my enjoyment. (I readily concede that surround sound makes a huge difference with explosion-filled action and adventure movies, but that still hasn’t persuaded me to string speaker wire all over my family room.)
What’s your take? Did sound quality play much of a part when you bought a TV, and does it affect your enjoyment of the set? Is your TV now connected to a sound system? Would you buy a set with spectacular picture quality but wimpy, tinny sound?
Let us know. We’re all ears. —Eileen McCooey
Previous
Post a comment
Comments: