AudioNervosa
Systemic Development => Multiple Personality Disorders => Optometry Equipment => Topic started by: Carlman on July 04, 2007, 08:05:08 AM
-
I'm going to get a new flatscreen, about 46" size... I have to get it at Best Buy because I have big credit there... I took a look and the Plasma's all look pretty good and the LCD's aren't bad either...
Do the Plasma's still hum and use a lot of power? Is there any real pro or con to going one way or the other? Any special TV I should look at?
-C
-
just bought a cheap 32 for my bedroom at wally world-posted in the digital area because i am to stupid to look around for the right spot-lol
the digital hd picture is very good,regular tv isnt -
saw some vizio tv's that had a nice picture-looked at some 47-50 inchers myself,want one by football season-
visio has a 1080p 47 lcd that was very impressive
-
Thanks, Rosco... But I need details... I know there's an age-old debate about LCD's blacks not being black enough and Plasma's being crazy on noise and power... but better pictures... And I had a hard time differentiating anything at the store.
The TV will be used with a cable box... HD and digital channels... And at this point, it's 90%+ regular TV still... In July of 2007... So, even though HD TV's are about all you can buy, you can only get 10 channels in it.... and of those only about 4 or 5 actually use HD cameras and production... Sorry to be so cynical but it has to be said.
So, the flatscreen needs to:
Look good on regular tv.. (is burn-in worse on LCD or Plasma?)
Be purchased at Best Buy
Be 45-50 inches
Be quiet
Use 'normal' amounts of power (not more than a regular RPTV or CRT)
At this point, I don't care about price... I'll work backwards on that if I have to.
Thanks,
Carl
-
not sure you will find a good looking regular tv other than a crt- my 32" widescreen panny tube has a super standard picture,but i have yet to see any flat screens that do it well,seen some nice ones the last few years and the only large screen that did a good standard picture was dlp projection tv's-
i dont think burn in is a issue anymore on plasma-they all say something about no burn in on the box's-
as for power,i have noticed that plasma use a little more than lcd while searching for my big one- i have no clue how it compares to my panny because it doesnt state power consumption like the stats with newer tv's-
didnt hear any extra noise while looking at the plasma's at sams club,you stand right next to them-
fox baseball last weekend was great on my new lcd-fox does hd right as does espn-cbs blows in my area
-
The newer LCD's are putting up a good fight. Look at the Panasonics and the Sharp Aquos series. Surprisingly good black levels and some of them are even native 1080p sets. Stay away from the LG's. The pic is good for a while but the design pushes the components to their limit so long term reliability is in question.
Bryan
-
Carl,
I'm in the hunt, too. I've been putting this off for about 8 yrs :roll:.
Recently, I've been looking at several in Wal-Mart...while I'm wondering around. The best pictures I've seen since they have received their 1080P's, are a couple of Philips...one LCD (1080P) and one plasma (720P). I don't hear any humming from them, but they are up high, and in a somewhat noisy environment. I'm not sure about regular TV performance, but I don't think most HDTV's do all that great.
Here are links for each one...I'm sure BB has something very similar or a model or two up.
http://www.consumer.philips.com/consumer/catalog/tree/en/us/consumer/tv_gr_us_consumer/consumer__rs_screen_size__r_large/ce/_productId_50PFP5332D_37_US_CONSUMER/widescreen_flat_TV+50PFP5332D_37?proxybuster=UP0Q1CBBXBC3TJ0RMRESHP3HKFSEKI5P
http://www.consumer.philips.com/consumer/catalog/tree/en/us/consumer/tv_gr_us_consumer/consumer__rs_screen_size__r_large/ce/_productId_47PFL5432D_37_US_CONSUMER/digital_widescreen_flat_TV+47PFL5432D_37?proxybuster=UP0Q1CBBXBC3TJ0RMRESHP3HKFSEKI5P
Also, check on avsforum.com...where you can find a LOT of feedback concerning most models of all forms.
-
The avsforum site is great but has so much information. As a newbie to video stuff, I found the discussion about how to choose the resolution based upon viewing distance to be, well, eye opening.
In short:
- On a 27" HDTV, 1080i/p - 3.5ft away. 720p - 5.29ft away
-On a 32" HDTV, 1080i/p - 4.1ft away. 720p- 6.27ft away
-On a 37" HDTV, 1080i/p - 4.83ft away. 720p - 7.25ft away
-On a 42" HDTV, 1080i/p - 5.49ft away. 720p - 8.23ft away
-On a 50" HDTV 1080i/p - 6.53ft away. 720p - 9.8ft away.
For power consumption, see: http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-6400401-3.html?tag=arw
The cnet site also has excellent reviews, both from professionals and owners.
I was excited by all this stuff until I read more about how standard TV looks on most HDTV -- that is, maybe not as good as what I already have. Once there is more content, I'm going to look at this video stuff again.
All the flat panels are sexy though, especially compared to CRTs.
Happy viewing,
Phil
-
The seating distance to screen size thing is all personal preference. While I prefer to point folks in the range of 30 degrees of viewing angle to allow your eyes to relax, it really just depends on what you like.
I'm sitting 3.5 feet away from the 42 inch Westinghouse 1080P LCD right now. It's my office monitor ;) Decent as a computer monitor, completely blows for video. Thus the reason it's sitting here on the office desk instead of in a demo room.....
Carl,
Given that you have to buy it at Best Buy, look at the LGs and the new Toshibas that just started shipping this week. The Toshiba Cinema Series 46 incher with 120Hz refresh should be pretty decent. They likely should show up in Best Buy in the next couple weeks. They had some issue with the color setting with the 42 incher... but hopefully the 46 incher will be much better. The LGs have gotten considerably better in the past couple years. I believe they still have a 2 year warranty where most only have 90 days or 1 year. Again, if there really is a long term reliability issue, get the Best Buy extended warranty with part of that big credit.... that's likely wise regardless. I normally would never buy the extended warranty from Best Buy as it's just wasted money on a lot of things. But flat panel reliability in general is not where it needs to be compared to standard CRT tubes.... and when something does go, it's usually throw it out and get another given the cost of repair.... Given my past experience, stay as far away from Samsung as you can.... what a nightmare....
plasma still uses a touch more power than LCD when comparing same screen sizes, especially if you cut the LCD backlight off (recommended for better picture in almost every instance). LCDs generally stand up to glare better than the plasma glass. Most LCDs out now have a fast enough refresh that the ghosting and traily issues are mostly gone. Plasma still has better contrast ratio and black detail..... and that's almost universal in my experience...
-
I'd absolutely, positively get a 1080 display no matter the seating distance. Just being able to feed the display it's native resolution vs having to take a 1080 signal and downscale it to 720p will absolutely, positively, every time incur scaling artifacts.
Bryan
-
Ok, I am a bit of a dumbass regarding TV's these days.
What is considered best format to get?
Plasma
LCD
Projection
If buying now, what is best value and smartest purchase?
Is 720p display a bad purchase?
Is 1080 highly preferred?
I have regular cable TV right now and there is a digital option one can upgrade to.
I am not sure what that really means (Mediacom).
-
IMO 1080 is highly preferred. Almost all of the broadcast channel is 1080. The HD DVD and Blu Ray are 1080.
Bryan
-
Bryan-
I am out of the loop as to what the broadcast standards are, how prevalent HD is in reality, and what I am looking at in a store. :duh
You can't tell from the demo sets in a store as they are running some internal high def signal to all the screens. They all look pretty good.
Since I bought my last TV 13 years ago-then I should buy at least with the curve.
So 1080/HD.
Any significant difference in picture quality/reliability between LCD/Plasma/Projection?
Obviously LCD and Plasmas are more compact.
Thanks.
-Tony
-
Exactly. Projection is bigger but potentially the best color and deepest blacks. Plasma and LCD are getting better - LCD is generally cheaper. A decent LCD 1080p would be a reasonable priced investment IMO. I'm donating my 55" Mits Diamond and buying a 55" LCD 1080p set later this summer.
Bryan
-
A good RPTV will give a MUCH better picture at the same price per size generally. A 46" Sony is 1500 bucks... to get something with the same quality at that size you'll need to spend close to twice as much.
If you need to place your TV in a corner of a room, an rptv makes a lot of sense... that's how I ended up with one. However, along a wall, it does take a lot of room-real-estate... and the added cost of the flat screen is worth it for the floorspace you get back.... however, if you have to have a cabinet for all the gear under the TV anyway... and you have speakers on stands or towers.... how much are you really saving?
The flatscreen thing is interesting.... doesn't really save as much room as I would've thought. It takes planning to really make the most of it... in-wall speakers (thanks again, Shane) and all wiring is behind the walls... but I'll still need to put the gear in a small cabinet... should be fairly neat.
Thanks for the advice on the flatscreen... we'll see how it goes next time I get to bb...
-C
-
however, if you have to have a cabinet for all the gear under the TV anyway... and you have speakers on stands or towers.... how much are you really saving?
That's why those flat screen magazine ads never show speakers, cabinets, clutter or anything with them. It's like a 1980s architecture journal. They are trying to idealize the compactness when it isn't practical without customizing the home with built in speakers and remote electronics. :drool:
-
Oh yeah - but - you can still make it work without all of that. That's the primary reason I'm dumping my RPTV and going flat screen. I want to have decent stereo imaging up in that room too.
Low wide rack with LCD sitting back toward the wall, electronics down low out of imaging interference range, and speakers (floorstanders) pulled out a foot or so in front of the cabinet. All wiring but speaker cabling is behind the rack.
Beats the heck out of having my center image killed - not to mention the stack of componenets on top of the RPTV.
Bryan
-
OK... one more question... Is there any reason to go LCD or Plasma for a TV that will be turned on and off fairly frequently? This TV will be the 'usual' TV that gets used for sports, weather, video rentals, etc.... My wife will be using it more than me... So, it'd also be nice if it were easy to use as well.
I'll have a typical HT Receiver, dvd player, and HD cable box atttached.... Nothing else.
-C
-
Is there any reason to go LCD or Plasma for a TV that will be turned on and off fairly frequently?
Nope. :)
-
I was faced with your situation last fall. Really the choices are true LCD (thin Screen), rear projection DLP, rear projection LCD and plasma. If you want to wall mount the only choices are Plasma and Thin Screen LCD. If you plan to hook-up games to the tv or a computer I would recommend thin screen LCD. They do not suffer from screen burn-in. If you use the tv just for tv and want the best picture and best viewing angles get the plasma.
I chose the 50" Pioneer Plasma because I wanted to wall mount and I did not plan on playing games on the TV. My neighbors has a 50" Sony Rear Projection LCD and when they see my picture they claim it is far superior. I can only say that my wife and I are very happy!
Good Luck with your decision!
Ken
-
I found this link with more info on Plasma... kinda neat..
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/plasma-display1.htm
Looks to me like Plasma would fade or 'dim' over time...
-C
-
They certainly can - and they're also more susceptible to burn if you do any gaming or watch the same channels all the time with logos. LCD's are not prone to this. From a wear standpoint, plasmas are similar to CRT's. LCD's will go until they burn out.
Bryan
-
They certainly can - and they're also more susceptible to burn if you do any gaming or watch the same channels all the time with logos. LCD's are not prone to this. From a wear standpoint, plasmas are similar to CRT's. LCD's will go until they burn out.
Bryan
Plasma used to be prone to burn in... but virtually every unit out there now (the panasonic industrial models being an exception I can think of off the top of my head) have an orbiting or anti-burn in circuit. Some dim the tv if a static image is placed up there for extended periods of time. Most have an orbit or pixel shift circuit. At a defined interval, the circuit shifts the image a pixel or two so that it doesn't burn in. It works exceptionally well. I had a Toshiba plasma that I ran 15 hours a day for nearly two years that didn't have a hint of burn in and it spent most of the time displaying a static computer desktop.
plasma does dim over time.... but almost all models on the market right now have a half life of 60,000 hours. That means that the plasma will be half as bright as it was when you first turned it on after 60,000 hours of use. Given how bright most plasma panels are, while it will be noticable, that's still a very bright panel even at half brightness.
Based on what's on the market right now, plasma still has the advantage on ansii contrast and true on/off contrast. LCD has come a LONG way, but it still isn't as good. In dark movies, plasma is going to win. In mixed content scenes, plasma is going to win. Plasma isn't as precise/sharp on defined computer desktop resolutions because of the nature of the pixel structure. A lot of plasmas have limits on the desktop resolutions they will support. Plasma has the advantage on response time. LCD doesn't use as much power. Most LCDs won't generate as much heat as an equivalent sized plasma (especially if you turn the backlight down on the LCD). On most sizes, you can get higher resolution for less money with LCD. But if you can live with a 768P panel, 50 inch plasmas are going to be cheaper than 50 inch LCDs... LCD uses a more non-reflective surface than the glass in a plasma. So LCD isn't as prone to reflection problems in highly lit rooms. I've had about equal reliability rates with both technologies... neither of them are as good as CRT based tubes.
-
After reading about SED for 2 years and waiting to see what the pricing would be, I was sad to hear Toshiba have sold their interest in the technology back to Canon, and Canon is being sued by te inventor of SED for partnering with Toshiba in the first place. I hope it's not totally dead.
http://news.com.com/Judge+rules+against+Canon+in+nanotube+TV+case/2100-1047_3-6161591.html?tag=news.1
-
After reading about SED for 2 years and waiting to see what the pricing would be, I was sad to hear Toshiba have sold their interest in the technology back to Canon, and Canon is being sued by te inventor of SED for partnering with Toshiba in the first place. I hope it's not totally dead.
http://news.com.com/Judge+rules+against+Canon+in+nanotube+TV+case/2100-1047_3-6161591.html?tag=news.1
Yeah, the blog (http://www.sed-tv-reviews.com/) has been essentially dead for a while now.
I've been waiting for the SED, too. I'm not unhappy with my Sammy DLP, but I'd love to have something better in the future room ("future room" being code for the room I'll likely never realize :().
-
I followed the SED saga a bit. Seemed like an excellent technology. I won't be holding my breath for entry into the market any time soon. Either LCD or plasma will work just fine for me when I get my simple HT setup going by the end of the year.
-
Didn't know they'd perfected the pixel shift thing. I know when they first tried it, it was really annoying to the point where it was made defeatable. Anyway, if you don't do static images it's a non-issue either way.
I do still think that the LCD is 'faster' and to my eyes (in a reasonably priced set) much easier to watch. The drawback has always been black levels - and now that's changing. Either technology can provide good quality.
Bryan
-
well i took my 32 lcd back to wally world because at times the audio and video didnt sinc up-
went looking at some 42's with split screen (football season in almost here) and ended up with the new hitachi cineform plasma :drool:
its 1080 but not the ture 1080 p-must say the pic is as close to my panny tube as any ive seen-
been on for 20 minutes or so -and im impressed with it-the swivel stand is nice-
-
well i cant hook it up to my stereo-the rca outs dont work if you use the hdmi and component inputs only with a regular cable hook up- :duh the only audio out when those are used is a digital out-guess im getting a reciever-lol
-
i can happily say -i love the picture on this tv- it does hd so well its :drool:
use my cable box for audio out so i can run my system-
it does a dam good job of enlarging the picture to fill the screen with a 4/3 braodcast ,digital shows look almost like hd when enlarged-being syracuse the heat it generates will be enjoyed 9-10 months of the year :rofl:
-
this tv is a no brainer- a great deal at 1280 bucks- it has a real good chip inside because it does size conversion as good as any tv ive seen-the hd picture is flawless when given a good quality feed like espn or fox-
if your looking at plasma's -give a good look at the hitachi's
-
this tv is a no brainer- a great deal at 1280 bucks- it has a real good chip inside because it does size conversion as good as any tv ive seen-the hd picture is flawless when given a good quality feed like espn or fox-
if your looking at plasma's -give a good look at the hitachi's
What specifically is the model number? I am in the market for an LCD or plasma in a few months.
Thanks
Nick
-
hitachi-p42t501
-
That was helpful. A few days ago, I read a review in HT magazine of the Hitachi P42H401. I am still trying to understand about pixel structures, refresh rates, ALiS, etc etc. Store displays are unfortunately pretty much useless.....
-
I just went through a few months of research and pinging my industry and sales contacts about performance, long term reliability, etc. In the end, I purchased the Sharp Aquos LC-52D92U. There is a 46" version that is identical - LC-46D92U.
This set got pretty much unanimous praise from people in the industry for reliability and quality out of the box. I've had it about a week now and finally got it calibrated. I've never seen blacks like this from anything but a high dollar CRT. Feed it a 1080 source and the picture is mind boggling. It's literally as good or potentially better than my NEC XG-135 front PJ downstairs.
It's a bit more expensive than some of the other brands but IMO it's worth it if you have the budget. The only thing I saw in a flat panel that was as good or better was the big Pioneer Pro at $10k for a 50" MONITOR.
Bryan
-
Nick:
My Pioneer 50" Plasma is great. My wife was not on board last year with my desire for a big screen tv but she now loves it. By the way HD football is as close to being at the game as it gets!
Ken
-
I'm open to either plasma or LCD. We do own a Sharp Aquos 30HV6U that we bought over 3 years ago. It was $3,000 at the time and has the bulky external box, but it's been a good performer overall. Never owned either Hitachi or Pioneer. I'd like a great picture in the soon to be HT room, but would be hesitant to spend even $2,000 for the occasional use. My wife will still use the Sharp in her room and I'll be getting a small flatscreen (20" +/-) in my room to replace my CRT. All 3 of our huge CRT's will be headed to Goodwill.
-
sharp may make the best tv-
i just cant get past the name-all i can remember when i hear sharp-is cheap cheap cheap and it aint no bird-
i also think if it says sony it must be good-and we all know thats bs-
just one of those perception things you develop from childhood i guess-
and i have a new knife with zdp 189 steel thats hitachi and its the best blade steel ive ever used-lol lol
-
rosconey, your "sharp is cheap" comment made me remember a funny story. I was in LA (Los Felis, near Glendale) with a friend, shopping in goodwill store, or dollar store or something full of cheap junk. My friend got excited about this calculator for $1. It looked brand new, made by "Sharp" so he bought it. We were dirt poor so he had to really think about it, but he said, "How bad can it be if it's made by Sharp?"
So he gets home and starts using it on his taxes. All of a sudden I hear him yelling and swearing. "Ahhhhh, Shit!"
I go in there, he is holding up the calculator. It says "Shrap" not Sharp, printed in the same SHARP font we all know. We didn't stop laughing for weeks.
-
Sharp WAS cheap - but always reliable. Now, they're pushing the envelope. I watched a $10k Pioneer side by side both calibrated against the Sharp. The difference was trivial - and the Sharp had a tuner, speakers, and was half the price. Then we put the Sony TOTL next to it - not even close. The Sony was etched, artifical, etc.
I understand completely about previous conceptions. I used to think the same of Pioneer. But today, if I was buying a mid-fi receiver, it would absolutely, positively be a Pioneer.
Just my 2 cents.
Bryan