TV upgrade, is this worth it?

We have a nice sound setup and use an Amazon Fire cube for NetFlix/Hulu/Prime, so the quality of the TV software for those isn't a big deal, nor is the sound. 

We currently have a 55" TV in the living room. Is a 65" going to be a big enough size upgrade to be worth it? You can get 65" 4k TVs for ~$500 these days.

Of course, I'd REALLY like to make the jump to a 75" but that would mean a lot of money on new TV stand, potentially new speakers/sub to fit in the space we have, etc. 

I would probably hold out for 75".

Or, more specifically, if I'm just upgrading for the sake of a bigger TV, then I would skip the 65". If the 55 died and you need a replacement, without redoing the entire home entertainment set up, then I would go for the 65. 
 

Another consideration, would you be upgrading from 1080 to 4K? You mentioned being happy with your streaming device. Is it 4K capable? What else would you need to upgrade to get the most out of 4K?

One consideration is viewing angle.  As the TV gets bigger, the angle increases.  If you are, to go to extreme, putting a 75" in a 6 foot room, you will get a very good view of compression artifacts and pixilation.

Also of note is that anything broadcast or streamed will be compressed, and will show artifacts.  A bit of distance blur (lower viewing angle) is not necessarily a bad thing.  4K is obviously also compressed and is not a huge of a jump as you might think.  Certainly NO reason NOT to get a 4K TV of course (if you could even find one).  8K might be useful in the future, but no reason to pay the cost for that.

I'm pretty sure only you, OP, can answer this.  How much TV do you watch?  How much is 40% more viewing area worth?

Are you asking for us to enable you?

Look at LG OLED 65".  I have and 75" wouldn't improve my experience.

So, you are saying that my 39" is too small, and thats why I can't read any of the sidebars showing the running order of races...

Streetwiseguy said:

So, you are saying that my 39" is too small, and thats why I can't read any of the sidebars showing the running order of races...

I'm being completely serious when I say yes. That size display is in a weird no-mans land. 

In reply to z31maniac :

I was just forced to upgrade. My 8 year old 1080p 50" TV died. Read lots of reviews and went with a 4k 65" Samsung. So far I'm not impressed. I need to take the time and do some calibration. Sports have tons of artifacts. MotoGP doesn't seem to display properly and is very choppy. 

I think it entirely depends on your space.  In my wee little house, my 55" is almost too big.  Admittedly, 90% of the houses a normal person would live in are decidedly larger than mine.

clutchsmoke said:

Streetwiseguy said:

So, you are saying that my 39" is too small, and thats why I can't read any of the sidebars showing the running order of races...

I'm being completely serious when I say yes. That size display is in a weird no-mans land. 

Purchased specifically based on the case dimensions, to fit in a hole I already had.  I'm not really big on electronics...

I have enough projects that I don't have time to watch TV nor do I have cable/satellite. 

aircooled said:

One consideration is viewing angle.  As the TV gets bigger, the angle increases.  If you are, to go to extreme, putting a 75" in a 6 foot room, you will get a very good view of compression artifacts and pixilation.

Also of note is that anything broadcast or streamed will be compressed, and will show artifacts.  A bit of distance blur (lower viewing angle) is not necessarily a bad thing.  4K is obviously also compressed and is not a huge of a jump as you might think.  Certainly NO reason NOT to get a 4K TV of course (if you could even find one).  8K might be useful in the future, but no reason to pay the cost for that.

It's a 55" 4k now. IIRC our eyeballs when sitting on the couch are about 12.5' from the screen which nudges toward the 75"........but then we go from a few hundred for a TV to a few thousand minimum to cover everything else I'd likely need to change.

ProDarwin said:

I'm pretty sure only you, OP, can answer this.  How much TV do you watch?  How much is 40% more viewing area worth?

 

Are you asking for us to enable you?

 

 

This is true. I was hoping maybe there had been someone who made the same upgrade and could offer their thoughts as well.

If you got a really big living room, then go for 75" :)

aircooled said:

One consideration is viewing angle.  As the TV gets bigger, the angle increases.  If you are, to go to extreme, putting a 75" in a 6 foot room, you will get a very good view of compression artifacts and pixilation.

Also of note is that anything broadcast or streamed will be compressed, and will show artifacts.  A bit of distance blur (lower viewing angle) is not necessarily a bad thing.  4K is obviously also compressed and is not a huge of a jump as you might think.  Certainly NO reason NOT to get a 4K TV of course (if you could even find one).  8K might be useful in the future, but no reason to pay the cost for that.

Ive mentioned a time or two on here, I'm not a young man... I'm also not a total Luddite... I mean, I'm an I&C tech for a living... but I understood less than have of this!!! With the confidence Aircooled, said it with, I'd say its all good advice, but... wow. really makes me feel old. I remember when my dad got our first color tv for the house!

Did not read the thread but saw this today:

75” tv for $675