Home / TVs & Audio / TV / Philips 46PFL9705H / Feature Table

Philips 46PFL9705H - Feature Table

John Archer

By John Archer



  • Recommended by TR
Philips 46PFL9705H


Our Score:


Overall Score


Scores In Detail

  • Value 8
  • Sound Quality 9
  • Features 9
  • Design 9
  • 2D Quality 10
  • 3D Quality 8


November 18, 2010, 3:13 pm

Seeing the issues the first batch of 3D sets has had I can't help but think that Philips add-on approach isn't a bad idea, especially if it ensures that the basic set itself is a good 'un.

That being said... is anyone else a tad fed up of companies effectively using early adopters as beta testers? Yes yes, we know technology probably won't be perfect and will improve (and come down in price) over time but the cross-talk issues on the cheaper 3D LCD sets really aren't acceptable considering that even the cheap ones aren't exactly impulse buys. That being said, when even a two grand set has issues (albeit much less than others) I can't help but wonder if LCD will be able to overcome crosstalk problems in a reasonable timeframe or if maybe (and I really hope that this happens) Plasma could see a comeback.


November 18, 2010, 4:43 pm


It's a growing concern for sure. (The iPhone 4's Antennagate, Glassgate and proximity bugs have made it feel quite beta, haven't they?) The dealbreaker for me here is still the HD tuner - 46 inches, upwards of two grand and yet I'm paying the price because Philips want to cut down on their SKUs. I don't distrust TR's consensus - if they say Phillips have done a great job this year then awesome. But given that your telly is a long term purchase, it shouldn't hurt to wait for the next revision. Or if they can't be bothered to tailor the product to the UK market, then people should take their custom elsewhere. Again, it's a shame because great audio is hard to find in a TV.

Hamish Campbell

November 18, 2010, 7:12 pm

Well one can understand charging a premium for early adopters to finance things.

One could perhaps also accept being somewhat a beta tester as an early adopter.

However, a bit cheeky to be both. You pay a high price for getting a substandard product? That's not how it should be. Either it's the real deal and you pay a premium, or you pay the same but have to deal with bugs.


November 18, 2010, 7:14 pm

@John Archer - John, where you say it's necessary to make regular visits to tweak the settings, is it possible to store favoured ones for various types of viewing, or has this to be done every time?


November 18, 2010, 7:26 pm

Actually I'd say the iPhone 4 problems were more like those experienced by Panasonic's latest Plasma sets - massively blown out of proportion by t'Interwebs (note how quickly 'glassgate' failed to find traction as no supporting evidence ever materialised f'instance). 3D has fundamental problems that are being made far worse by putting the tech into relatively cheap sets (especially LCD) that simply aren't up to the job of counteracting those problems.

Crosstalk is the most obvious issue but the drop in effective brightness with the glasses is up there too. It goes further than that though with stores not setup to demo the tech so a LOT of people are upgrading now and are going to find the 3D side simply doesn't work very well. That, in turn, is going to really slow adoption of these TV's and the whole thing could very well die out just as the tech problems are solved.

Maybe it's easiest to sum this up with a single piece of the 3D puzzle - the glasses. Why, in the name of sanity, did no-one hammer out a single standard so that it was possible to use your very expensive glasses on any TV? F'instance it's just me and my wife in my househould but we regularly have four friends around for a movie night (and vice versa). If we all upgrade to 3D TV we'd each have to buy six sets of glasses at a cost of £600 to each household rather than a third of that each. It's ridiculous, it removes any possibility of price competition and limits or even removes the options when it comes to finding a set of glasses that are comfortable if the standard set doesn't work for you. I'm sure in a couple of years a standard will have come along but by then it may be too late.


November 19, 2010, 1:32 am


Yeah, the idea of paying so much money, only for the set to be useless without the added cost of extortionate accessories leaves a sour taste in the mouth. That's why things like not bothering to upgrade the Freeview tuner or leaving the set with crappy audio also bothers me, because the whole point of a TV is that it's in all in one product. By the time you add several pairs of 3D glasses, an HD tuner, and a decent speaker system or soundbar, you realise you didn't buy a telly at all, but a massive, expensive, useless computer monitor. Some really like that idea - I hate it.

Incidentally, I do partially agree with the overblown nature with the iP4's problems. Nevertheless, I maintain that putting the antenna on the outside without any kind of insulating material or coating was playing with fire. (That and the extra sheet of glass.)


November 19, 2010, 5:49 am

"Basically Philips took the view that 3D wouldn’t deliver enough of an impact on a 32in screen to justify adding it to the 32PFL9705H and hiking its already premium price even higher.

"Clearly, however, a 46in screen is more than capable of delivering an immersive 3D experience. And on paper the 46PFL9705H seems unusually well qualified to deliver the 3D goods."

Very clearly Philips and TR have taken note of my comments about the suitability of larger screens for 3D and price. Given how expensive Phillips sets this size are the price of £2000 seems to suggest Phillips also noted my comments in this regard.



November 19, 2010, 4:41 pm

@Goldenguy: I would argue that the higher end you go, the more you want your TV to be like a monitor. A display device and nothing more. The more you spend on your set, the more likely you are to have an external sound system and an external tuner. For example, I recall that later model Pioneer Kuros didn't even come with inbuilt speakers, they were an optional add-on, despite the sets costing well over £2000. Pioneer knew their market.

I would also argue that no internal tuner or speaker system will ever match the capabilities of a proper PVR and home cinema system, so why bother trying.

Yes, you might have to pay a couple hundred quid for a proper Freeview HD PVR, but that's not money down the drain. For that money you can choose a better PVR than you would find in any TV set.

I'm seriously considering purchasing one of these sets, and the only thing that would irk me about that purchase would be that I've just paid good money for the Philips' excellent audio talents when I already have a superior external system. Now that really is money down the drain.

comments powered by Disqus