Shopping for a new TV should be exciting, but picking the wrong brand can turn that excitement into months of frustration. With dozens of manufacturers claiming to offer the best picture quality and latest features, some brands consistently disappoint customers with poor reliability, terrible customer service, and subpar performance. These rankings, based on extensive testing and customer satisfaction surveys, reveal which TV brands deliver on their promises and which ones leave viewers wishing they’d spent their money elsewhere.
Hitachi TVs disappeared for good reason
Finding a Hitachi TV in American stores has become nearly impossible, and that’s actually good news for consumers. The brand stopped standard production in 2018, with only limited models available through licensing deals in Europe. LifeStory Research ranks Hitachi dead last among TV manufacturers, giving it just two stars for overall satisfaction. The few remaining models suffer from poor build quality and outdated technology that can’t compete with modern viewing demands.
Even when Hitachi TVs were readily available, customers frequently complained about reliability issues and limited features. The brand’s exit from the American market reflects its inability to keep pace with rapidly advancing display technology. Current Hitachi-branded TVs are manufactured by third-party companies under licensing agreements, which often results in inconsistent quality control. Anyone still considering a Hitachi TV should look elsewhere, as better options exist at every price point from brands that actually invest in research and development.
FFalcon offers rock-bottom prices with matching quality
FFalcon emerged in 2017 as TCL’s budget subsidiary, designed to create the cheapest possible smart TVs for cost-conscious buyers. While extremely low prices might seem attractive, these TVs deliver exactly what you’d expect for bargain-basement pricing. Picture quality suffers from poor color accuracy, limited brightness, and weak contrast that makes watching anything in bright rooms nearly impossible. The brand primarily serves the Australian market, making finding support or replacement parts in America extremely difficult.
FFalcon TVs represent the classic “you get what you pay for” scenario taken to an extreme. The smart TV features feel sluggish and unresponsive, while build quality issues become apparent within months of use. Even households operating on tight budgets will find better value in slightly more expensive options from established brands. The minimal savings aren’t worth the frustration of dealing with a TV that struggles with basic functions like streaming video or displaying accurate colors.
RCA trades on nostalgia while delivering disappointment
RCA once dominated American electronics, and those familiar red, white, and yellow cables still bear the company’s name. However, modern RCA TVs share little with the brand’s prestigious past except the logo. These budget-focused TVs rarely exceed smaller screen sizes and cap out at 60Hz refresh rates, making them unsuitable for gaming or high-quality video content. Picture quality consistently disappoints, with washed-out colors and poor contrast that makes viewing anything feel like watching through a dirty window.
The 60Hz limitation becomes particularly frustrating for anyone wanting to use their TV for gaming consoles or watching sports with fast motion. RCA TVs also lack modern features like HDMI 2.1 ports, limiting their compatibility with newer devices. While prices appear attractive at first glance, the limited functionality and poor performance make even cheap RCA TVs a poor investment. Customers consistently report regretting their purchase within weeks of bringing these TVs home.
Insignia keeps prices low but expectations lower
Best Buy’s house brand Insignia regularly appears as the cheapest option on store shelves, with 32-inch models selling for under $80. This aggressive pricing strategy attracts budget-conscious shoppers, but the TVs deliver exactly the bare-minimum experience that price suggests. Most models lack HDMI 2.1 ports and can’t reach the 120 FPS needed for smooth gaming or high-quality streaming. The limited feature set makes these TVs suitable only for basic cable viewing or streaming in guest rooms.
Picture quality on Insignia TVs suffers from poor brightness and color reproduction that becomes obvious when compared to virtually any other brand. The 32-inch TV market offers better alternatives for just slightly more money, making Insignia’s extreme budget positioning less attractive than it initially appears. These TVs work adequately for secondary viewing locations where quality matters less, but anyone planning to use their TV as a primary entertainment device should invest in a better brand.
Amazon’s Fire TVs prioritize selling over viewing experience
Amazon entered the TV market with Fire TV Omni Series, earning decent scores from testing outlets like Rtings with a 7.0 rating. The 55-inch Fire TV Omni Series Mini-LED costs around $899, positioning it in the middle of the pricing spectrum. However, the viewing experience comes with significant strings attached that many buyers don’t anticipate. The Fire TV interface aggressively promotes Amazon’s services and content, making navigation feel more like shopping than entertainment.
The constant upselling mirrors Amazon’s approach with Alexa devices, turning what should be relaxing TV time into a marketplace experience. While picture quality meets acceptable standards, the intrusive interface and aggressive advertising make these TVs feel less like entertainment devices and more like Amazon storefronts. Users report frustration with the busy interface and difficulty accessing non-Amazon content, making these TVs better suited for households already deeply invested in Amazon’s ecosystem.
Roku makes great streaming devices but mediocre TVs
Roku built an excellent reputation with their streaming devices, but translating that success to complete television sets has proven challenging. The Roku Pro Series QLED costs $598 for a 55-inch model and earns praise for gaming performance from testing outlets. However, many Roku TV owners suggest buying a separate TV with better display quality and adding a Roku streaming device instead. This recommendation from actual users speaks volumes about the display limitations of Roku’s television hardware.
While Rtings scores the Pro Series well for gaming with ratings of 7.8 for HDR movies and 7.7 for mixed usage, the TV struggles with bright room viewing. The streaming device interface that works brilliantly on dongles feels less polished when integrated into TV hardware. Picture quality, while acceptable, doesn’t match dedicated display manufacturers who focus exclusively on visual performance rather than software integration.
Toshiba delivers acceptable performance without excitement
Toshiba has manufactured TVs for decades, building a reputation for solid mid-range performance without standout features. LifeStory Research ranks Toshiba fifth among eight evaluated brands, placing it firmly in the middle of the pack. The standard models feature LCD screens with 4K resolution and smart functionality, plus Dolby audio support. While these specifications sound impressive on paper, real-world performance often feels underwhelming compared to more innovative competitors.
What Hi-Fi compares modern Toshiba TVs to other mid-tier brands like TCL and Amazon, suggesting similar performance levels across these manufacturers. Toshiba TVs become more attractive when found on sale, as discounts can bring mid-range features down to budget pricing. However, at full retail prices, these 4K TVs rarely offer compelling reasons to choose them over more innovative alternatives. The brand succeeds at delivering functional televisions without the excitement or advanced features that make viewing truly enjoyable.
JVC offers better specs but limited availability
JVC carries significant brand recognition from the VCR era, when those bold letters appeared on countless home entertainment devices. Modern JVC TVs actually deliver better pixel density than some competitors, including certain models from Hisense, TCL, and Samsung. However, this technical advantage gets overshadowed by the brand’s limited market presence and availability issues. Recent licensing deals with MTC have improved shelf presence, but finding JVC TVs in major retailers remains challenging.
Tech Radar suggests JVC models like the LT-32CR230 work best in secondary locations like guest bedrooms rather than primary viewing areas. This recommendation indicates the TVs function adequately but lack the performance needed for serious entertainment use. While JVC’s technical specifications look competitive on paper, real-world performance and limited availability make these bedroom TVs difficult to recommend over more readily available alternatives with better support networks.
Top-tier brands deliver the viewing experience you actually want
The television landscape clearly separates budget disappointments from premium performers, with brands like LG, Samsung, and Sony consistently earning top ratings from both professional reviewers and actual customers. LG dominates OLED technology with roughly 60% of the global market, while Samsung leads in overall U.S. market share for 2023. These manufacturers invest heavily in display technology, customer support, and regular software updates that keep TVs current for years after purchase.
Mid-tier options like TCL, Hisense, and Panasonic offer compelling alternatives that balance performance with value, often delivering premium features at more accessible prices. These brands focus on specific strengths like brightness, gaming performance, or color accuracy while maintaining reliable build quality. Even budget-conscious buyers benefit from choosing established brands over the bottom-tier options, as the slight price increase delivers dramatically better OLED TV performance and longevity that makes the investment worthwhile over time.
Television technology advances rapidly, but brand reputation remains the most reliable predictor of satisfaction and longevity. The worst-performing brands consistently cut corners on display quality, customer service, and software support, while the best manufacturers treat TVs as long-term investments in home entertainment. Smart shoppers focus on established brands with proven track records rather than chasing rock-bottom prices that inevitably lead to disappointment and premature replacement costs.
