Home audio & video: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies
My LCD TV Experience
by davmax - 11/15/07 12:37 AM In reply to: I bought a plasma, and it is good by nizack05I have been holding back waiting for LCD technology to improve. I decided not to consider Plasma because of power consumption reasons and friends who have had a range of failures. Recently what might be called the third generation LCDs have been released. They have a faster response time abour 6mS, an 8000:1 contrast ratio (plasma about 10,000:1)and a wide viewing angle (some claim 180 degrees(nonsense)). I decided to buy Samsung because they make the panel and most components. I bought a LA32R81BDX 81 cm (32")with 150W consumption (approx the same as my previous CRT TV, it has a built-in tuner for HD, SD and analog meaning an integrated system covering all possibilities. By locating the lowest prices on the Internet I was able to buy a great deal at the local store.
The product in action is very pleasing with a bright colour range, very black blacks and great light output. The viewing angle is all you could desired. I believe Plasma will now be replaced by LCD.
Wow this is a busy subject.
by gabereyes - 11/14/07 10:11 PM In reply to: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies by gabereyesI think the only real diffrents is.
plasma mostly have better black with better color, but could get glare if you windows or lights are at the perfect angle from your seating.
LCD are brighter with no glare, but most lack blacks and color.
THAT IS IT everything else is not important, or is not a problem anymore.
Everyone just pulls out ever so called problems when it comes to plasma.
so I like to pull out ever so called problems on LCD to even the playing field
Most LCD's cannot do a good black level aka contrast and this gives them weak colors.
LCD's have viewing angle problems.
LCD's have motion blur.
LCD's have bright spots on the screen.
if you think that the problems listed above are not real problems anymore, I think the same for plasma.lol
good turn out thanks guy
gabe
Here is the real sales pitch
by joeyso - 11/14/07 10:35 PM In reply to: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies by gabereyesContrast Ratio means nothing to anyone because everyone cheats at measuring it and unless all you do is watch tv in a 100% completely dark room your ambient light is ruining your contrast ratio anyway.
http://www.practical-home-theater-guide.com/contrast-ratio.html
LCD tv's are brighter but that does not mean anything either because the settings from the factory are so bright that it makes anyone's tv look like crap. I would bet anyone that you would like the picture just the same or even better if turned the brightness down on your new LCD tv.
Plasmas will have better black levels. Unless you buy an led backlit LCD, then I don't know.
You don't "have" to get a new digital tv before 2009. Your cable company does not have to go digital, although they probably will. If you live where all you get is an antenna signal, ie. not satellite, no cable, then you will need a digital converter box for your old tv, more than likely you can get one for nearly or completely free, call your congressperson, when the time comes. If you "want" a new tv and you have cable or satellite, stop telling people you had to get one because of the signal change, you should not make excuses for things you want to do, you have free will, go ahead and use it.
1080p will look better to most people on televisions that are larger than 40"-42" regardless of the source. 1080p BluRays look awesome on 1080p tv's while analog tv or SD looks only marginally better versus 720p tv's.
Buy a tv from a reputable company. A non reputable company cannot fix your tv after the warranty runs out because they don't build parts. they build tvs only. If your tv breaks after the warranty you will throw it out and start over. I am giving you fair warning now so trust me on this. (some companies can't even repair tv's under warranty because of this problem, thanks Akai)
Reputable companies= Sony, Samsung, Toshiba, LG, Sharp, Panasonic, Pioneer, Runco, InFocus, Mitsubishi, Hitachi and JVC to name a few
NonReputable Companies=Anything you have a hard time pronouncing and that you have not seen before 2005, Daewoo, Apex, Akai, Westinghouse, GoVideo, RCA (sorry their name got sold to a Korean outfit this is not grandma’s RCA anymore, same with Zenith), Akira, Audiovox, Coby, Haier, Fujitsu (nice priniters but that is all), GPX, Axion, Vizio, Hyundai, Maxant, Mintek, Norcent, Polaroid (their cameras are ok), Sampo, Sansui, Sceptre, Sylvania (just good lightbulbs nothing else) and many many more. If you buy a nonrep company you are asking for trouble, if you tv dies, toss it and buy another one. Not to say all good company tv’s will last forever but your chances are much much better.
LCD's will not have as much glare. Plasmas have a glass panel on them, IT IS GLASS IT WILL REFLECT.
If you buy a tv, don't look at prices for the next 2 years, all you do is make yourself think, "Gee I should have waited." Be happy with your purchase, prices drop it is all relative.
All tv's will look different in your house, just like that new couch that you bought looks different than it did in the store.
Plasmas are "faster" because they do not have to move liquid crystals to make a certain color like LCD's do, Plasmas are as instantaneous as your tube tv is. But hey most experts will tell you that the human eye can't see the difference between 8ms and 0ms anyway so don't worry about it.
LCD and Plasmas are rated at "half life" values of 60,000 hours, 70,000 hours and even higher. This means that the second you turn on your plasma or LCD the tv will get darker and in 60,000 hours + it will be half as bright. Your tube tv that you got from your parents is the same way and I bet that looks just fine after all these years.
The most important thing to know about tv purchasing these days is the following two infallible ideas:
#1 There are only a handful of companies that build the important parts of a TV. In the LCD's - the panel, the video processor and the backlight, in plasmas, again the processor, plasma panels and power supplies. If you buy a tv from a manufacturer that does not build the parts then you will be buying 1, 2, 3 or even older technology. If you want an LCD - Get a Sony, Samsung, or Sharp LCD TV -you will get new technology from good companies that back their products. If you want a plasma then look for a Samsung, Pioneer or Panasonic - again they build the panels and keep the best tech for themselves.
#2. Go to the store and make the salesman show you analog tv stations, Standard definition channels and high definition channels. If they can't show you this on the tv you want to buy then go to a place that will show you these pictures. Don't let the guy (or girl) tell you that their system is not setup for it. Tell him, "Well my system at home is and I want to see what I am buying". Then buy what you think looks the best. I could have the best eyes in the world but I can't see what you can. Hey it's your money spend it on what you think looks good to you.
Excellent Post!
by sith_killer_99 - 11/15/07 12:33 AM In reply to: Here is the real sales pitch by joeysoThe above post sums it all up best IMO, especially the last sentence "Hey it's your money spend it on what you think looks good to you."
Excellent advise on MFG's as well.
It seems everyone has their own taste when it comes to televisions.
I have always been a big fan of LCD's. I can go into virtually any showroom and walk right up to, what I think is, the best looking television picture and without even looking I know that it is most likely an LCD. I am not opposed to Plasma, I just prefer to look of most LCD's.
Of course I also like glossy screens, it's just a personal preference.
The best advise I have read throughout all these posts is to buy from the best company...
"If you want an LCD - Get a Sony, Samsung, or Sharp LCD TV -you will get new technology from good companies that back their products. If you want a plasma then look for a Samsung, Pioneer or Panasonic - again they build the panels and keep the best tech for themselves."
Plasma vs. LCD
by cac13 - 11/15/07 1:28 AM In reply to: Here is the real sales pitch by joeysoThe only way to see the difference is to put the two together side by side & do an AB comparison like you do to shortlist a speaker. But make sure the settings are not tweaked to make one look better than another.
There is more contrast in a plasma set - light is generated by the plasma cells whereas in an LCD the light is blocked by the LCD cells. So blacks are blacker. However LCD sets are improving quickly.
The whole length of the LCD panel is backlit & there can be variations in brightness across the LCD panel if you view a scene or a test image with middle grey. The brightness will vary at different points on the screen. Some LCD sets are better than others.
The LCD manufacturers have a new "dynamic" method of measuring contrast - which is by switching off various areas of the backlight when the majority of the scene is near black in that area. If you have access to test gear you can see the effect & but on a picture probably not noticeable unless perfect viewing conditions.
Burn in is the major issue with plasma - newer sets are better & if you want to use on games then LCD probably better. CRT also suffers from burn in as many in the broadcast industry are aware but is not a problem for home use.
LCD looks sharper than plasma. No arguments. Plasma looks more like film. No arguments.
If you look at a screen using your peripheral vision, LCD suffers from jerky images that are not as noticeable as plasma. This is applicable to 50Hz sets & I cannot talk to some one with the set on in the same room when it is in my peripheral vision area without being highly distracted. Solution: Go 100Hz or 120Hz refresh.
Power difference between CRT, LCD & plasma is more dependent on screen area than technology as a generalisation. Both CRT & LCD have heaters or backlight on constantly, plasma more variable but higher for full screen white.
Lifetime of both LCD & plasma is better than CRT. The power supply is the most highly loaded module in most sets & will probably be the first item to fail. Anyway will probably be superceded technically before replacement is required.
After all of this, LCDs are cheaper to build in smaller sizes & will overtake plasmas in 42" & 47/50" next so the whole issue will disappear.
Good one!
by ffhyatt - 11/15/07 2:59 AM In reply to: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies by gabereyesI looked at both before purchasing for so long the technology actually evolved several times while I sat on the fence. In the end I did a coin toss and went with the Sharp Aquos LCD. So far so good. They all (plasma & lcd) have so many possible adjustments & tweaks that you can view as soft or hard pic you want.
In the end I'm more concerned with the service from the place I buy my equipment. I've found that if you spend alot of your hard earned dough @ a small indie retailer & they will bend over backwards to keep you coming back.
fhyatt
What About Power Steering?????????????
by Truckles - 11/15/07 3:39 AM In reply to: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies by gabereyesGreat post from gabereyes: it uncannily reflects the "myths and lies" a lot of us experienced back when the motor car was invented.
I've lost the 1908 UK forum link but did manage to save a few posts to tablet. Here are some excerpts of members' experiences back then:
Question: My wife and I own a secondhand hansom cab which has been turbo-charged with two horses. Will this new technology be better than what we have now?
Expert answer: The Motor Car performs better than a hansom cab in a well-lit environment, less well when it's dark. Flat Surface LCD (Level Car Driving) technology is superior to your existing CRT (Conventional Road Transport.)
Question: how about going uphill then?
Expert answer: next question.
Question: the salesman who showed us A Motor Car said they now have brakes. Is this important?
Expert answer: Yes. You may not appreciate this, but everyone in the trade knows that the Earth is flat. It is not possible to fall off the edge in a Motor Car.
Question: is a Motor Car environmentally friendly?
Expert answer: Definitely. There is very little smearing (of the street) because what comes out of the back of a Motor Car is different to what comes out of the back of a horse. Also, it smells nicer.
Question: which is going to be cheaper to run, a new horse and buggy or a Motor Car?
Expert answer: The Motor Car. It doesn't eat hay but instead uses something called petrol (gasoline, in America.) Experts agree that there is so much petrol in the ground, it will never, ever, run out.
Question: I don't understand these technical terms I keep hearing about. Can you help?
Expert answer: "High Definition" refers to a Motor Car with superior forward vision. "Windscreen Wiper" (Windshield in America) is the actual component which achieves this. "1080p" is £1.8s.0d, the UK cost of petrol between London and Edinburgh. "Plasma" is a model variant particularly popular with mediums. "LCD" is Light Car Development (2-seaters.) "16:9" is the maximum mph of a Motor Car compared to that of a horse. "Contrast Ratio" is how good your Motor Car looks after washing compared to how it looked before washing. (Note: A Motor Car has a much higher Contrast Ratio than a buck-board.) "VGA" is (in America) a Very Good Automobile; "WVGA" is a bumper sticker meaning We've a Very Good Automobile. "PAL" is a friend (in America) you take along for a drive. "Pixel" is a type of fairy (UK) or elf (America). "Mini D-Sub" is a Motor Car that can be used on water. "Blu-Ray" is an endangered fish in the water your Mini D-Sub drives across. "Vertical Scan Rate" is how much you can see going uphill. "Warranty" ("guarantee" in the UK) is an American colloquialism for something not worth the paper it is written on.
Question: should I stay with my existing CRT or buy a Motor Car now?
Expert answer: Buy now. The Motor Car is The Future!
Question: re your answer about "The Motor Car is The Future." If that's the case -- and seeing as how we're all living in the present -- what the heck's the point in buying today when The Motor Car will be oh so much better, and oh so much cheaper, tomorrow?
Expert answer: Whilst it's true that one day, all Motor Cars will have synchro transmission, power steering, automatic choke, key-start ignition, air con, sat nav, carpeting, anti-lock brakes and even roofs, the technology simply isn't that mature yet. The Motor Cars I am selling today are what are available today. If you don't buy, I'm out of a job. . .
Not surprisingly, many of us back then decided that in view of the myths, the lies, the cost, and the unreliability, we really would be better off sticking with Conventional Road Transport instead of throwing money away on the immature technology of The Motor Car.
CRT forward vision was excellent, performance was dependable, purchase costs were cheap, and CRT manufacturers didn't keep constantly re-inventing the damn thing and devaluing a purchaser's investment.
Of course, our horse and buggy were eventually retired when it became obvious that Motor Car technology had sufficiently matured and stabilised that investing in it made financial sense.
Hopefully, TV technology will do the same.
Until then though, we're happy to ignore all Expert Answers, all lies, all myths, and all manufacturer / retailer hype and instead stick with a product of today rather than chuck a large amount of cash at a product that arguably isn't going to be totally fit for purpose until tomorrow.
CRT Rules OK.
Burn in: A REAL issue with Plasma for SKY+, SKY HD or TIVO
by varun8 - 11/15/07 4:16 AM In reply to: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies by gabereyesI have both a 42" Plasma LCD screen from NEC and a 46" LCD screen from JVC. I must honestly say that both generate an excellent picture. The JVC is 2 years younger, so has the edge here on picture quality.
However the reason I moved teh Plasma to my bedroom and bought an LCD for teh living room was burn-in. I use Sky+ (similar to Tivo for you US guys) heavily and often Pause the recording for a phone call etc. After about 2 years of use the 'PAUSE' image was completely burnt-in to the Plasma screen to the extend that it became truly annoying when watching normal TV. I have the LCD now attached to the same unit for about 1 year and thus far I see no evidence of burn-in.
So if you feel that some aspects of your video watching habits could cause burn-in definitely go with an LCD screen.
fschoonbaert
by baseballcoach1 - 11/15/07 12:22 PM In reply to: Burn in: A REAL issue with Plasma for SKY+, SKY HD or TIVO by varun8"I have both a 42" Plasma LCD screen from NEC and a 46" LCD screen from JVC."
Can you please explain what the hell a '42" Plasma LCD screen' is?
Re:Burn in: A REAL issue with Plasma for SKY+, SKY HD or TIV
by Pannylover4ever - 11/17/07 11:52 AM In reply to: Burn in: A REAL issue with Plasma for SKY+, SKY HD or TIVO by varun8In response to fschoonbaert above
The burn in issues on Plasmas were related to the blue phosphor in the screens. Your NEC plasma screen sounds like it is several years old.
Panasonic fixed the burn in issues starting with the 7th and 8th generation screens by re-formulating the blue phosphor in the screens.
The 8th generation came out about two years ago.
I have an 8th generation plasma (the current 10UK screens are 10th generation). Even with static DVD menus, video games, my DVR and my little boy leaving the set paused or with static images on, there is no burn in evident after about 2 years worth of use.
I think a lot of the burning issues people are referring to are old issues resolved a long time ago, but are present on older screens.
Plasma TV
by markmercer - 11/15/07 4:21 AM In reply to: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies by gabereyesI am glad I did not get all the information being put forward by all you guys before I bought Plasma four years ago!
Our 36 inch Hitachi sits alongside, a VHS recorder, CD recorder and satellite receiver - the whole lot together take 190 watts. This does not cause me any sense of guilt about global warming.
The plasma screen is heavy but delivers good bright pictures though when I use it for 'slide shows' dark areas sometimes take on a slight purplish tinge and appear as a monochrome patch. Lack of dynamic range I imagine.
Connecting a lap top to show pictures reveals a serious lack of sharpness as compared with the computer monitor - so what? Ordinary TV including lettering seems very crisp.
Having read all your scary stuff I am now waiting for burn in, or gas leaks or some other failure not previously expected.
Our plasma TV did get taken out of a smashed window by burglars but brought back by the police. Maybe I should be hoping they will call again and keep it this time?!
190 watts for your plasma setup? IMPOSSIBLE
by sdc100 - 11/15/07 4:59 AM In reply to: Plasma TV by markmercermarkmercer wrote"
> Our 36 inch Hitachi sits alongside, a VHS recorder, CD recorder
> and satellite receiver - the whole lot together take 190 watts.
> This does not cause me any sense of guilt about global warming.
Having been an electronics consultant, I can guarantee that your claim of 190 watts total for all those components is impossible -- unless you're dishonestly adding their power usage in SLEEP or standby mode. Virtually all VCRs, DVD/CD recorders and cable/satellite receivers use about 30-40 watts in use so you already 90 watts without the TV. Unless your Hitachi plasma uses some technology not available to anyone else, it's not possible to ionize the gas on a 36" screen using only 100 watts.
I challenge you to list the model numbers of all 4 units and I'll look up the true power consumption of your setup.
Regardless, plasma screens are a dead technology. Unlike LCDs, there have been no significant advances in their design or manufacture (whereas the prevalence of LCDs in laptops, MP3 players, etc drive innovation). Laws banning their sale (as reported in Australia) will further kill the technology. Finally, laser TVs are right around the corner.
Aussies to ban PDP's?
by astrobuf - 11/18/07 3:15 PM In reply to: 190 watts for your plasma setup? IMPOSSIBLE by sdc100Well, you know what they say, "The Law is the last Refuge of Scoundrels"
This unadulterated BS wrt PDP's consuming vast amounts of power is pure fiction. Get your facts correct. Peak power is not actual power. By your logic, any Stero set which claims to delvier 200W/channel for a 5.1 set would be a power hog. Not so in reality now is it?
Astrobuf
Plasma Schmazma vs LCD, etc
by Looking-4-Answers - 11/15/07 4:48 AM In reply to: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies by gabereyesOK so I've read some of the posts here and just have to add my two cents worth.
Two years ago I was in the position of purchasing a new HDTV. Naturally I thought all the hype was in favor of Plasma. Oh it's so much better a picture; it's a flat screen; etc, etc. But I wanted BIG. At that time, BIG plasma was rediculously expensive and I'm an average Joe. I simply could not afford a plasma as BIG as I wanted.
I compared and compared. I went 52 inch, DLP. I know that's a projection screen but I am still very happy with it. And the picture on my HD DLPTV is brighter than any LCD was at the time I purchased it two years ago. Trust me, I looked and looked.
As for Plasma, I think Plasma still gets all the, "it's better than anything else out there" hype but I don't necessarily agree with it. One of my main considerations then, and still is today, is "glare." I have been annoyed with glare on TV screens forever. And at 54 years of age, that's a pretty long time. I don't care how few windows you have in your TV viewing room, you will get glare from that window. And if you have no windows in your room, you will most likely turn on a lamp. Trust me, you will get glare from the lamp too. With my BIG screen, HD DLPTV, glare is absolutely NOT an issue.
I know prices for Plasma have come down a bit, maybe quite a bit, in the last two years, and if I was considering either a Plasma or LCD, I would probably go with a Plasma today over the LCD all else being equal, i.e. both are "flat screen", both are the same size, etc. But I still don't like the glare you get on a Plasma.
So yes, Plasma has gotten a lot of negative hype over the few short years it's been around, but it also often gets toted as "the best." I don't necessarily agree that PLasma is the best TV out there. It's all a matter of taste.
PLASMA V. LCD
by LMC2222 - 11/15/07 4:50 AM In reply to: Plasma vs. LCD or is it Myths vs Lies by gabereyesWith less light in the room, the reflection is less with plasma. Plasma screens have reflections......LCD's don't.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
