Page 1 of 1

Samsung: SIRT151

Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 9:01 am
by HDTV Forum
I posted a review of that model on here awhile back... here it is again:

I've owned the new SIR-T151 for a week now and wanted to write in with an excellent review. I have also used the SIR-T100 and T150. The T151 is more sensitive and stable than the T150 and vastly moreso than the T100. I am 12 miles from the towers but have very heavy obstructions - I'm on the second floor but surrounded by building at least 10 stories. I use an unamplified indoor antenna sitting on top of my TV - I tried plugging it in but actually get better reception without amplification.

The T151 is significantly smaller and lighter than the T150. I like the styling better, but that's a subjective feature. Like the previous models it does not have a fan, but it does have better ventillation, so it does not run quite as hot. The menus are virtually identical to the T150, although they have a slightly different look. Furthermore, when there is a stationary image to be displayed (such as "no signal"), the image jumps around the screen like a screensaver to reduce the risk of burn-in. Like the T150, but unlike many other receivers out there, it does allow you to stretch (no zoom, or zoom + stretch) a 4:3 program to fill the entire 16:9 screen. The only operational complaint is that you still cannot change channels while in the "check signal strength" menu. The remote abandoned the "joystick" from the T150, but the T151's remote is better designed to act as a universal remote for your entire system. I have not gotten around to programming it yet, however. Like the T150, there is also a service port for software upgrades.

With the T150, I spent several evenings playing around with the antenna to get the reception just right. Eventually, with a lot of effort, I was able to arrange it so that I could get all my local channels with only minimal dropouts (and those occurring usually when I bus or trolley went right by my window). With the T151, by contrast, I plugged it in, and everything worked perfectly with maybe 10 minutes of playing around. The Samsung receivers are widely acknowledged to be the best at locking in on weak signals. And the tuner in the T151 is by far the best of the Samsung receivers (note: I have not tried the new T160 or T165, although I assume they operate off the same terrestrial tuner as the T151). Before assuming an indoor antenna will not work for you (because of obstructions, distance from towers, etc.) you should definitely try out the T151. You can always return it if it doesn't work.

The T151 is listed at just under $400 from several reputable internet retailers - most of whom are authorized dealers so there are no warranty problems. I read somewhere that they were scheduled to hit BestBuy shelves yesterday, but that's second-hand information. In any event, this is a receiver that a lot of people are going to be curious about, so I wanted to post my impressions.

Joe

Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 9:02 am
by HDTV Forum
Regarding the increased sensitivity - I followed up with some Samsung engineering people and learned that the T151 has later firmware than is available for the T150, and also has an improved tuner chip, capable of a "high contrast ratio" (whatever that means?) of 450:1 vs. only 300:1 for the T150. By nearly any measure the T151 is a superior box. You're looking at $350-$400 for either box, although that money will get you a new T151 or a "reburbished" or "open box" T150. That said, if you know you have a strong signal and don't need the T151's increased sensitivity, the boxes are pretty much identical, so go with whatever you can get cheaper. Let me know if you have any more questions on the T151 - I really love mine, if you couldn't tell.

Joe

Posted: Sun Jun 20, 2004 9:02 am
by HDTV Forum
This is what I am currently using. Consider it the properly working version of the SIR-T150. They did remove the RGB ability on the new version. My understanding is if the 150 is software upgraded it also works well. The remote on the 151 is much better.

Richard F. Fisher