Skip to main content
DEAL WATCH: Keurig K-Express | 22% off $69.99

Keurig has changed the face of coffee, and snagging one of these for less than $70 is a solid deal. Read Review

BUY NOW
  • Introduction

  • Overall Design

  • Front

  • Back

  • Sides

  • Stand/Mount

  • Controls

  • Remote Control

  • In the Box

  • Black Level

  • Peak Brightness

  • Contrast

  • Tunnel Contrast

  • White Falloff

  • Uniformity

  • Greyscale Gamma

  • Color Temperature

  • RGB Curves

  • Motion Performance

  • 3:2 Pulldown & 24fps

  • Resolution Scaling

  • Formats

  • Viewing Angle

  • Reflectance

  • Video Processing

  • Calibration

  • Video Modes

  • Connectivity

  • Placement

  • Audio Quality

  • Menu Interface

  • Instruction Manual

  • Power Consumption

  • Value Comparison

  • Blacks & Whites

  • Color Accuracy

  • Motion

  • Viewing Effects

  • Connectivity

  • Value Comparison

  • Blacks & Whites

  • Color Accuracy

  • Motion

  • Viewing Effects

  • Connectivity

  • Value Comparison

  • Blacks & Whites

  • Color Accuracy

  • Motion

  • Viewing Effects

  • Connectivity

  • Conclusion

  • Model Series Comparison

  • Photo Gallery

  • Ratings & Specs

  • Introduction
  • Overall Design
  • Front
  • Back
  • Sides
  • Stand/Mount
  • Controls
  • Remote Control
  • In the Box
  • Black Level
  • Peak Brightness
  • Contrast
  • Tunnel Contrast
  • White Falloff
  • Uniformity
  • Greyscale Gamma
  • Color Temperature
  • RGB Curves
  • Motion Performance
  • 3:2 Pulldown & 24fps
  • Resolution Scaling
  • Formats
  • Viewing Angle
  • Reflectance
  • Video Processing
  • Calibration
  • Video Modes
  • Connectivity
  • Placement
  • Audio Quality
  • Menu Interface
  • Instruction Manual
  • Power Consumption
  • Value Comparison
  • Blacks & Whites
  • Color Accuracy
  • Motion
  • Viewing Effects
  • Connectivity
  • Value Comparison
  • Blacks & Whites
  • Color Accuracy
  • Motion
  • Viewing Effects
  • Connectivity
  • Value Comparison
  • Blacks & Whites
  • Color Accuracy
  • Motion
  • Viewing Effects
  • Connectivity
  • Conclusion
  • Model Series Comparison
  • Photo Gallery
  • Ratings & Specs

Introduction

Overall Design

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

This svelt JVC model comes with a swivel base making it a good fit for wherever you would like to put it in your home. For style points, there is a blue plastic runner going along the bottom of the display that matches the blue indicator light when the set is turned on. The bezel running around the {{product.model}} screen is a couple of inches wider than what is considered chíc for televisions these days. The display is wonderfully thin, but we don't love the overall design. What if you don't like neon blue? Well then you need a different TV.

Front

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Back

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Sides

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Stand/Mount

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The stand is black metal encased in thick, clear plastic that looks quite nice from many angles. The base swivels about 32º in each direction. Any motion in the base is always a plus as you have better access to the ports in the back.

Controls

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The controls on the front of the set are touch sensitive, which we feel are unhelpful considering you may be wanting to change the volume in the dark. Also, unsightly fingerprints are a nasty side effect touch sensitive controls.

Remote Control

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The remote is large and boxy but very light. There are not too many controls going on a large surface area and it seems that JVC could have given the consumer something a little smaller. Most probably, this remote was designed for a more complex television that had space for buttons like play, stop, rewind, etc. and then stripped of unnecessary buttons for the {{product.model}}.

Ergonomically, there is a groove on the back for your index finger to keep the remote in your hand, but you won't spend much time in this position. To go from volume control to typing in your favorite channel number requires shifting up and down past the menu controls in the middle, making the layout of the buttons questionable.

In the Box

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} comes with swivel base, remote, batteries, manual and other documents.

Black Level

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The deepest black produced by the {{product.model}} is 0.08 cd/m2. Anything under 0.1 cd/m2 we consider reasonably good. The comparisons below show that the {{product.model}} was unable to get blacks as dark as similar models, but its performance is still relatively strong in this test. We hesitate to say that 0.08 is great for the {{product.model}} because of it's poor peak brightness, and thus its contrast ratio. You'll see, read on. More on how we test black level.

Peak Brightness

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Typically, a television needs to be able to output signals at 200 cd/m2 to make the picture really pop in a sunny room. The {{product.name}}, try as it might, just cannot reach this brightness. With the backlight all the way up, the {{product.name}} does not conform to Energy Star standards (according to a notice that shows when you first turn on the set). On an all white screen, with the backlight at max, the {{product.model}} only gets to be as bright as 144.76 cd/m2. Where the energy goes, we do not know.

The comparison model below tells the story well. The Panasonic TC-P42X3 is the only plasma screen television in the comparison. Its low peak brightness is expected of plasmas. The Sony and the Samsung shine brightly past the 200 cd/m2 because they are LCD televisions that have no worry of overheating when producing bright whites like a plasma would. Now, the {{product.name}} has a peak brightness similar to a plasma, yet it is an LCD display and should be able to do much better. It will be difficult to watch this set in a well lit room due to its inability to produce bright imagery. More on how we test peak brightness.

Contrast

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Contrast is merely a ratio of brightness to darkness. Given that the {{product.name}} had a low brightness and a high darkness, it is not a surprise to see it coming in last in this comparison. We have reviewed televisions with worse contrast ratios, but still, on the {{product.name}} you will see neither the brightest brights nor the darkest darks that televisions today can offer. More on how we test contrast.

Tunnel Contrast

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} did alright in our tunnel contrast test. As a square of black on the screen gets increasingly larger, we test to see how consistently dark the black square stays. There is some up and down movement on the graph here, but on a small enough scale that changes should be imperceptible. More on how we test tunnel contrast.

White Falloff

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

This is the reverse of the previous test, where we make a square of white incrementally larger and test the brightness consistency. LCDs tend to be very consistent in this test, as is mostly true with the {{product.model}}. The only aberration we see is a significant dip at the beginning of the chart, where the white square is taking up 5 and 10% of the screen. Think of a movie directed by Clint Eastwood, where many of the well-composed shots are mostly dark, with small sections of bright light telling the story. This means that on the {{product.model}}, these highlights will neither be high nor light, rather moderately washed out in a sea of cloudy black. More on how we test white falloff.

Uniformity

Greyscale Gamma

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

We measure how well a television transitions along the greyscale from black to white and give you these results in our greyscale gamma curve below. This particular curve shows that the {{product.model}} had many difficulties producing the entire range of greys.

The low black level recorded (0.08 cd/m2) for the {{product.model}} was the best quality this television had to offer, but you can see that it had the most trouble producing greys at the darkest end of the gamut. The flat parts of the line at the left side mean that there was no differentiation from one grey to another. The jumps in the line, where there are small peaks and valleys, mean that the {{product.model}} simply could not produce these values and just produced something else instead. Though this {{product.brand.name}} can get reasonably dark blacks, you will have trouble discerning detail in dark scenes and shadows.

Furthermore, the standard greyscale curve is to have a smooth, straight line slope between 2.1 and 2.2. The {{product.name}} has a curve that looks like an "S" with a slope of 3.43, deviating greatly from the agreed upon norm. More on how we test greyscale gamma.

Color Temperature

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Mostly, the color temperature for the {{product.model}} was right where it should be, except for the darkest regions. The spike that flies off the top of our chart means that the darkest values on the {{product.model}} will be drastically cooler than they should be. This spike is so far outside the perceptible error limit area that the {{product.name}} received a score of 0 in this test. Shadows will noticeably read as having a heavy tint of blueish hue due to irregular color temperature. More on how we test color temperature.

RGB Curves

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Like the greyscale curve, the RGB curve represents each of the three colors as it goes from darkest to brightest signal intensity. The lines should be smoothly curved, reaching from 0 to 100% value without any flattening and all three lines should be overlapping to demonstrate a commensurate increase in luminance.

We tried a couple of different calibrations for the {{product.name}} and with each of them, some kind of performance was lost. We increased the brightness until we could see the subtle differences in the range of dark grey values and in doing so lost distinction between the brightest red values. We then decreased the brightness enough to see all of the reds and lost the dark greys, blues and greens. We finished by bringing the brightness back up, and the contrast down a little to regain some detail at red's peak luminance. In the end, the brightest reds were sacrificed for the greater good.

You can see that the line representing the red values does not bend like the others and shows the reds to be significantly brighter than the other two colors. The reds also flat-line at the brightest values, meaning that the brightest red values cannot be differentiated, and we knew that when we calibrated. The greens and blues are fairly smooth from 0 to 100%, but they are also not exactly consistent with each other. More on how we test RGB curves.

The strips below are digital recreations of the information gathered from the RGB Curves test as compared to three similar televisions, matched against the ideal response.

Motion Performance

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

There is a setting on the {{product.model}} called "Motion 120 Hz" that creates interpolated frames and inserts them between the original frames to present motion more smoothly. This setting we turned off almost immediately because it made filmed content look like it had been shot on a home camera instead of having that cool cinema quality. However, when we got to the motion tests, the {{product.model}} just could not handle our standard battery of tests, abounding in motion and color artifacting. With "Motion 120 Hz" on, the {{product.model}} could be scored to a reasonable level and the results are recorded below with this setting engaged. Keep in mind that "Motion 120 Hz" may be good for certain types of media, like sports, but that you will probably want it off for most broadcast content.

With "Motion 120 Hz" on, there was a significant reduction in artifacting and color trailing, but the irrevocable 4% overscan still prevented the {{product.name}} from achieving high scores. Pictures moving across the screen lost detail and straight lines quickly became jagged, with little trails of their former selves following closely behind in a process called motion artifacting. The biggest problems came with high frequency patterns. This was expected due to the compression of the overscan. Small lines close to each other become banded together because overscan compression prevents the television from displaying finer distinctions in the picture. The {{product.name}} is definitely an entry-level television and is not expected to be brilliant, but it is not competing with similar models. More on how we test motion performance.

3:2 Pulldown & 24fps

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

With the "Motion 120 Hz" setting on, and "Film Mode" on, the {{product.model}} did well at 24fps. There was just a little strobing when we moved still images of high frequency patterns across the screen and the {{product.name}} performed very well with content recorded at 24fps, showing no noticeable problems. More on how we test 3:2 pulldown and 24fps.

Resolution Scaling

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

One of the first things we noticed about the {{product.name}} was that it was overscanning in its native 1080p. Let us break that down: the {{product.model}} could not properly fit a picture with a resolution of 1080 pixels by 1920 pixels, even though that is how the resolution for the television was originally designed; its native resolution. The picture overscans by 4% meaning you lose 2% on all sides of the image. The {{product.model}} is attempting to compress the signal to make the picture fit. This compression causes problems with motion and high frequency signals like moiré patterns, producing line and color artifacts that you should not have to see.

When we investigated this issue, we came to find that there were only two settings for picture size (in its native resolution and every other format). One was "Full" which caused the 4% overscan, the other was "Cinema Wide" which only further overscanned the image. We were prepared for the {{product.model}} to not perform well in our motion tests because it was stuck stubbornly trying to force an image into a frame that should fit from the start.

Trying different resolutions still resulted in the same 4% overscan. 480p and 720p made it easier for the {{product.name}} to handle high frequency patterns because of the reduction in resolution, with the most problems occurring in its native 1080p. More on how we test resolution scaling.

480p

The {{product.name}} handled 480p content very well. Small text was legible and the only problems were with the highest frequency patterns, which are hard for any television. No way to relieve 4% overscan.

720p

It did a little worse with 720p content, having problems with easier high frequency patterns and smaller text started to jumble together. It performed better than with 1080p content however, and still with 4% overscan.

Formats

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The JVC LT-42E910 accepts all NTSC standard formats.

Viewing Angle

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} has a viewing angle of 45.5º (91º total) meaning you can be 45.5º off the center of the screen before the already poor contrast ratio is halved. This range is a bit above average for an LCD screen and outperforms our comparison LCD models in the same test. The winning model, the Panasonic TC-P42X3, is a plasma screen display which tend to have much better viewing angles than LCDs.

Reflectance

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} held up well here. Shining a bright light directly at a black {{product.model}} screen came back at us like a soft, not so annoying, glow. Adding any angle to the light further diffused it and shining the light all over did not distract too much when watching content. In essence, lamps and other household lights will not reflect off the screen so much so as to impede your watching. Remember that the screen has a very low peak brightness and though electrical lights are well diffused, the {{product.model}} should not be your first choice for a well-lit room in your home.

Video Processing

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} has a couple of video processing modes some of which are helpful for certain situations. If you purchase this set, you should get familiar with toggling these options on and off.

Calibration

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Using DisplayMate software, we calibrate our televisions to give the best performance for our testing. The {{product.name}} has a straightforward menu for changing its picture settings. As stated in the Color Accuracy section, the calibration of the {{product.model}} was a juggling act between losing detail in the dark grey, blue and green values or losing detail in the bright red values. Below is a record of how we calibrated this {{product.model}}.

[

All of our calibration is done in conjunction with the DisplayMate software.

](http://www.displaymate.com/)

Video Modes

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} has three viewing modes for different types of media.

Connectivity

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

On the back right side of the display you will find all the ports: HDMI and analog inputs, as well as Analog and Digital Audio outputs. The {{product.model}} does not have cool features like internet connectivity, and no USB ports or iPod dock like you see in older JVC models.

There is a dearth of analog ports, as the Component video is a shared port with the second Composite video port. So really you can only have two analog devices plugged in at any given time, but with newer devices outputting to HDMI, this should not be a problem going forward.

One thing to note is that what used to be a USB port is now a USB service-only port that the manual warns you NEVER TO USE! because it may void the warranty on your set. This is slightly unsettling considering this USB port will fit any USB device and it is in the same place as the consumer functional USB ports on JVCs used to be. Just be careful.

This angled shot shows one of the HDMI and Composite Video ports, as well as the USB port to be avoided at the cost of warranty.

Placement

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The swivel base that comes with the {{product.model}} makes the ports on the right side and back very accessible. It is all well arranged, except for that service port which stands right in the middle of what would be a heavily connected area. You may want to electrical tape right over it so it's not even an issue. Because of this, we removed a point from its score here.

Audio Quality

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

A strange, little discussed feature of the {{product.name}} is the sub woofer built in to the back of the display. You will have a hard time finding out about this feature in the manual because it is not directly indicated. You may recognize it: it is the circular doodad outputting 15W of speaker power right in the center of the back side of the panel. The on-board stereo speakers output at 10W each. These are not bad speakers for a television, but they are certainly not as powerful as external speakers, especially considering that the power of a sub woofer in a cheap surround sound system starts at around 50W.

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The menus are a throwback to 80's quality 8-bit imagery, although the Atari probably had more aesthetic menus. The interface is simple given that there are not that many options or settings for the {{product.name}}.

Speaking of not many settings, you can see the two options for picture size below. As mentioned in the Motion section, "Full" leaves you with 2% overscan on the sides, top, and bottom even in its native 1080p. "Cinema Wide" just makes things worse.

Instruction Manual

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

There have been more comprehensive instruction manuals printed in the history of televisions than what you get with this JVC. The table of contents starts mid-way through the booklet and there is no index for reference. Features for the set are listed in one of three unrelated places with confounding descriptions such as "LED Backlight System - It realize thin profile".

However, given the lack of more complex additions, like internet connectivity and 3D imaging, the manual tells you what you need to know about setup, operation and troubleshooting of the LT-46E910, though you may be flipping pages back and forth to find each of these sections. The manual is not tabbed for easy section opening, but again, this is a straight-forward television with only 28 small pages.

A manual for so many TV models, they have to be further categorized by type.

Power Consumption

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} is a mid-range power user, costing about $23.43 for an average year's usage. It falls in the middle of the tight range in our comparison chart below.

Value Comparison

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

At a similar price, you get four more inches out of the Sony KDL-46BX420 and a far superior performance in picture display. Other than viewing angle, the {{product.name}} has no advantages over the Sony.

Blacks & Whites

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

With a contrast ratio more than four times higher than that of the {{product.name}}, the Sony KDL-46BX420 is better at both ends of the spectrum.

Color Accuracy

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The Sony easily has a better color temperature consistency, but also smoother RGB curves and a slightly more accurate color gamut compared to the rec.709 standard. There is not much to say in support of the {{product.name}} in this comparison category.

Motion

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The Sony KDL-46BX420 had a strong motion performance for an entry-level HD display and the {{product.name}} just did not. The Sony picked up some overscan when working in different resolutions, but had virutally no motion processing problems. The JVC started with overscan to begin and certainly had motion problems at every resolution. The Sony has many video processing modes for handling 24fps and the JVC did well with this type of content also.

Viewing Effects

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} had a much larger viewing angle than is expected of typical LCD screens like the Sony KDL-46BX420. You can see below that the Sony has a narrow viewing angle like other LCDs.

Connectivity

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The Sony KDL-46BX420 is a little bare when it comes to connectivity with only 2 HDMI ports and 2 Analog ports to the {{product.name}}'s 3 HDMI and 3 Analog. But the Sony does have a working USB port that won't void your warranty and if you like to view pictures from a camera on your television, it will be easier with the Sony.

Value Comparison

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} and the Samsung LN46D550 are similarly priced LCD televisions in 2011. For the cost, the Samsung is going to give you a couple more inches and much more in terms of performance, as shown by almost every one of our tests. The {{product.name}} won in our viewing angle comparison, where the Samsung did very poorly indeed.

Blacks & Whites

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The numbers don't lie, the Samsung LN46D550 wins by a landslide over the {{product.name}} in contrast ratio. Compare their peak brightness and you get an idea of why this was no contest.

Color Accuracy

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

For color temperature, this comparison is demonstrative of why the {{product.name}} scored so low. The Samsung LN46550 and the {{product.name}} have similar graphs in that they exceed the perceptible error limit towards the dark end of the spectrum. The Samsung's deviation was noticeable, but small enough for it to still score well. The {{product.name}} on the other hand was so far off the chart that it received a merciful score of 0.

These televisions were equally inaccurate when it came to matching the rec. 709 color standards. The Samsung trending heavily into blue and the {{product.name}} oversaturating the reds. The white values on the Samsung LN46550 were more accurate than the {{product.name}}.

Motion

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Neither of these TVs were top performers in our motion tests. Juddering and lagging processors were apparent in both sets. The Samsung LN46550 had an easier time with high frequency patterns and no native overscan issues.

Viewing Effects

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Viewing angle is a big win for the {{product.name}}. The Samsung's viewing angle is one of the worst we have seen and the {{product.name}} has a relatively wide viewing angle for a typical LCD screen.

Connectivity

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The Samsung LN46550 has more analog and HDMI ports than the {{product.name}} and a couple other possible connections like 2 USB ports and ethernet connectivity. The {{product.name}} is not going to connect to the internet and will not work with portable media like photos and mp3s from a USB thumb drive.

Value Comparison

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The Panasonic TC-P42X3 is a 720p plasma screen, whereas the {{product.name}} is a 1080p LCD screen. Though 1080p is a larger resolution than 720p, remember that the {{product.name}} could not properly produce its native resolution, so this is not necessarily an advantage. The debate between plasma versus LCD is somewhat nullified in this comparison because the {{product.name}} is similar to a plasma screen with a good, low black level and wide viewing angle. The Panasonic is notably cheaper than the {{product.name}} and scored a little better on most of our tests.

Blacks & Whites

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

At first glance, these two models seem to have a similar range of luminance but a very different contrast ratio. This ostensibly discrepant result is about the low end of luminance. Small differences in black producing capabilities have a large impact on contrast ratio as you can see below. The Panasonic wins, but not by a stellar margin.

Color Accuracy

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The {{product.name}} scored miserably on the color temperature test and the Panasonic TC-P42X3 had almost no problems. The {{product.name}} had nice green and blue curves, with some problems with red values. But worse was the Panasonic, which had almost no color consistency whatsoever with changes in luminance. The {{product.name}}'s colors were not as accurate as the Panasonic TC-P42X3's according to the rec. 709 color gamut. These two sets trade off in the color tests, but the {{product.name}} is a little behind.

Motion

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

While the Panasonic TC-P42X3 did not have great motion processing capabilities for a plasma screen, it still outperformed the {{product.name}} concerning motion artifacting and color trailing. It could not handle 24fps and different formats as well as the {{product.name}} LCD, which is to say that the JVC does not process motion as well as the Panasonic, but it is better able to handle a variety of signal types.

Viewing Effects

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

Though {{product.name}} had a great viewing angle for an LCD, it does not have the breadth of viewing that a plasma like the Panasonic TC-P42X3 does.

Connectivity

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The Panasonic has more options in our connectivity comparison, with USB ports, SD card slots and ethernet connectivity. It does have one fewer HDMI port and Analog input than the {{product.name}}, which could make or break your decision to buy depending on the type and number of devices you would like to connect.

Conclusion

The {{product.name}} ($1199 MSRP) is not going to be the high-end television you make into your home theater. It provides a wide viewing angle for an LCD television as well as good connectivity options with multiple HDMI and analog ports, but this is the extent of its strengths.

The {{product.name}}'s scores in our performance tests were significantly below average, especially considering its cost. Compared to other LCDs, the {{product.model}} will be difficult to watch in a sunny room due to its low peak brightness. Also, at lower luminance values this JVC's color temperature becomes very blue. The reds are too bright and read as pinkish at every luminance. High frequency patterns, like the lines on a seersucker suit, band together because the {{product.name}} is stuck on overscan. Motion is either juddery or, with the 120 Hz setting on, too smooth, making film-based content look like the worst of home movies. On top of it all, the {{product.name}} is expensive for an entry-level set. Even if you find it for much cheaper than the MSRP, you can get something better for the same price.

Earlier this month, JVC announced a new line of televisions intended for consumption later in 2011. According to Twice.com, JVC is using a new manufacturer for this line, teaming up with Amtran, the company that makes Vizio televisions. This information leads us to believe that the {{product.name}} is a shelf-filler during this interim for JVC. They are working on something better, in the meantime you can buy whatever left over parts they put together and called a TV.

Model Series Comparison

{{section_header}}{{section.name}}{{/section_header}}

The JVC LT-xxE910 series contains the LT-46E910. Both televisions are 1080p, LED-backlit displays with no internet capabilities and the same connectivity options.

{{photo_gallery "Front Tour Image", "Back Tour Image", "Sides Tour Image", "Stand Photo", "Controls Photo", "Remote Control Photo", "Connectivity Tour Image 1", "Connectivity Tour Image 2", "Connectivity Extra Photo", "Menu Main Photo", "Menu 2 Photo", "Internet Features 1 Photo", "Internet Features 2 Photo", "Internet Features 3 Photo", "Local Media Playback 1 Photo", "Local Media Playback 2 Photo"}}

Ratings & Specs

{{manufacturer_specs_table}}

Meet the tester

Christian Sherden

Christian Sherden

Staff Writer

@

Christian Sherden is a valued contributor to the Reviewed.com family of sites.

See all of Christian Sherden's reviews

Checking our work.

Our team is here for one purpose: to help you buy the best stuff and love what you own. Our writers, editors, and lab technicians obsess over the products we cover to make sure you're confident and satisfied. Have a different opinion about something we recommend? Email us and we'll compare notes.

Shoot us an email

Up next