Home audio & video: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick?
- 5/1/08 2:27 AM
Plasmas last as long as any other technology
by thehifidoc - 5/1/08 8:41 PM In reply to: T.V.s by karebuI have been selling plasmas now for 10 years, my failure rate over that period of time is less than 1%. When you speak to a floor salesman, ask him if he holds any certifications in this technology area. IF he is really serious he will hold and ISF cert or at least a CEDIA level 1 or Designer cert. If he hold none of these then He is selling you based on his bonus (spiff) list. He has to feed his family too. Plasmas, like all TVs need to be calibrated out of the box. If you leave them in factory (torch mode) it will shorten the life and have a poorer quality picture. Go to the Imagingscience.com website and find a calibrator in your area by zip code. You will not be dissapointed.
LCD vs. Plasma
by wingnut4427 - 5/1/08 8:14 PM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I can only state it this plainly. PRICE !! Price is going to determine how long Plasma sticks around. If you think back in the days between Beta & VHS. Beta was clearly better than VHS in video quality BUT costed more. It's all about Price.
LCD vs. Plasma
by Sponge_2k - 5/1/08 9:28 PM In reply to: LCD vs. Plasma by wingnut4427Actually, that is a misconception. Beta was only slightly superior to VHS in terms of quality, certainly not "clearly" better, especially given the technology of the televisions of the day. Also, price is only a small part of the equation. VHS could record twice what Beta could store. Movies had to go on TWO Betamax tapes, but they could fit on one VHS. By the time Beta came out with a 2-hr. tape, VHS had figured out how to get 4 hrs. on a tape. And by then, the public preference went with VHS. You could argue VHS was clearly superior to Beta for those reasons.
Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick?
by cbsaguy - 5/1/08 9:49 PM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
When one considers all the costs associated with today's televisions (cost of hydro, repair costs - plasma's are still far more costly to repair, etc.) and the fact that eyesight declines with the aging process, there is little difference between the two. Both types have declined significantly in price since their arrival on the market but are still, nonetheless, costly. If money is no object, and just burning holes in your pockets, then go for it. I suggest, however, keep two things in mind. First, the content in that plasma screen is classified as hazardous waste, so when it finally burns out, be prepared to pay yet again in order to dispose of it accordingly (and that day is fast approaching). Second, don't start complaining when your sitting in the dark, unable to watch that big plasma because of energy brownouts and blackouts, caused by energy waste such as the excess consumption required by plasma, for what is a minimal amount of difference in viewing quality. Overall, LCD is still the more economical and environmentally friendly choice.
An LCD for HD entertainment makes sense
by Sarahcatt - 5/1/08 10:31 PM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I didn't jump on the HD or large screen band wagon until a bit over a year ago. I had pretty much owned Sony Trinitron CRTs virtually all of my adult life. I have an LCD now for the following reasons:
1. The content of television doesn't really warrant the 'best' screen. A good screen for the money is a reasonable return for the investment.
2. LCDs are less power hungry and I am trying to be less of the problem and more of the solution for the environment (and my pocketbook).
3. If I want the best quality movie, it's not going to be in my living room. I go to the theater, which I find is a good change from my living room. I do spend money there, but then, I didn't spend all my money on the 'best' HD screen.
4. I don't have any interest in sports and that goes for my entire household. I have no idea what that means with regard to television screens, but apparently that's what a lot of the vendors market to.
5. It's an all around good compromise as almost any responsible decision should be.
With gas prices I stay home and watch movies
by thehifidoc - 5/2/08 5:04 AM In reply to: An LCD for HD entertainment makes sense by SarahcattThere is no theater in town that has better picture or sound than I get in my home theater. Crank up a Runco 65 inch Plasma and experieince real performance.
Plasma now, LCD down the road
by Ironpeddler - 5/2/08 4:49 AM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
People get so passionate and finite about this, but in my opinion...until there is 100% HD content, PLASMA reproduces Standard Definition TV much better than LCD and the HD is visually perfect...PERIOD.
Plasma now, LCD down the road.
There are some LCD manufacturers that improved quality.
by 8IronBob - 5/2/08 6:29 AM In reply to: Plasma now, LCD down the road by IronpeddlerIf you think about it, Samsung has really reinvented the LCD to have the picture quality look a little better than plasma, actually. With 50K:1 DCR on the A650, as well as the glossy screen, and the Auto-Motion Plus, that really reinvents what we should think about LCD technology. I almost have to agree that others will follow later on this year, like Sony, Toshiba, LG, and Sharp. These manufacturers and companies have all agreed about what the consumer SHOULD expect from an LCD. And those companies are taking on your Pioneers and Panasonics for best picture quality from their respective technologies. It's gonna be an uphill battle for both, but with more companies behind the LCD movement, heh... It's gonna be night and day which one's gonna win out, imo.
Direct TV 85 HD channels and counting
by thehifidoc - 5/2/08 4:16 PM In reply to: Plasma now, LCD down the road by IronpeddlerDirect TV has 85 HD channels and moving on to 150 by this time next year. I almost never watch anything that is not HD. Even CNN is in HD now. I hope Fox comes soon.
My 2 cents -- For me it is LCD, without question
by tlh523 - 5/2/08 6:58 AM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I went through this choice 18 months ago. I must say the CNET buyer's guide was extreamly helpful...it brought me up to speed on the advantages, tradeoffs, etc. Anyway more to the point, for me it was the tradeoff of brightness vs. sharpness...I found the Plasma, while brighter, the colors looked artifical...However, my final short list was a Sony 46" XBR vs a Pioneer 50" Elite". The choice was difficult but in the end it was LCD for me. No regrets....I enjoy my clear 1080P resolution. I have vivid colors and awesome clarity. My only regret is that I didn't wait a year and get the Sony 52" XBR....Perhpas next fall when the prices drop with the new models coming to market, I will pickup the 52"....Will Plasma continue...no one know for sure...I hope so, so there is a competitive technology to keep a lid on LCD pricing...as the high end models are very expensive...
Proof is in the pudding!
by gretzkyv99 - 5/2/08 7:26 AM In reply to: My 2 cents -- For me it is LCD, without question by tlh523Where is the proof that plasmas use more electricity than LCD's or all those CRT's we have been using for the last 25 years. If you think your going to see a difference in your electricity bill going lcd over plasma your kidding yourself. If your that worried about energy consumption, calibrate your plasma. Yes they get hotter but this is because they are a Emissive display. Easiest way I can explain to people the difference in cost is this:
It takes an above average LCD to compete with even a average Plasma and at this point LCD's are more expensive.
An example would be taking the Samsung52a650 vs the Panasonic 50PZ85u. Similiar tv's in picture and features but Samsung is easily 600+ more. If you find energy consumption guides make sure it list the 120hz lcd's because alot of guides wont list them.
Heater
by tlh523 - 5/2/08 9:07 AM In reply to: Proof is in the pudding! by gretzkyv99One benefit of the Plasma unit is that it may lower you heating bill 
I can totally agree with that...
by 8IronBob - 5/2/08 9:55 AM In reply to: Heater by tlh523[quote="tlh523"]One benefit of the Plasma unit is that it may lower you heating bill [/quote]
I am 100% behind that one. Also, I'd much rather have a TV that I can easily handle without ruining the insides of. I mean, there are times that you would have trouble with a plasma, and can't move it around as much without moving all those parts inside a plasma, and throw things out of whack. With LCDs, you don't have to worry with internals as much, and moving the TV around is far easier, imo. Plus you don't need professional installation to put an LCD on the wall, either, since you don't have to worry about any moving parts, practically. I do hear that some LCDs do have cooling fans, but that's in the minority of all TVs in that LCD technology, and usually in slightly smaller sizes.
Huh Huh? Moving parts?
by thehifidoc - 5/2/08 4:12 PM In reply to: I can totally agree with that... by 8IronBobI ahve been moving and installing plasmas for more than 10 years and I have never heard of anything like this. Plasmas are extremely reliable and almost never break.
I'm Curious ...
by Ken Jr. - 5/2/08 11:47 AM In reply to: Poll: If you had only one HDTV choice, which would you pick? by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Are you able to check the validity of your poll results that show that your readers would pick LCD over Plasma by nearly a 2:1 ratio?
I only ask because it appears to me based on all the comments you've printed that the overwhelming preference is for plasma.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
