LCD VS Plasma VS DLP

tommyboy

LuSh wrote:

Two things will stick out after 20mintues of watching such calibrated televisions; Suddenly everything looks dull, you'll really notice it when a human face or grass is shown. When going back to other set's you'll truely realize how bad about 98% of the populations televisions are. Think of it like 98% of the population using graphic equalizers with "bass boost" on all the time in the world of stereo. As much as people on this forum bash HTIB users and ask "how can they do such a thing" ingnorance is often bliss and in the world of video there is as much of that going on now then ever.

Lush, I agree with your whole statement but I just wanted to quote this paragraph cause this couldn't be more true in this forum.

IMO, LCDs are the bose(well, I should prolly say satelite speakers:) ) of tvs. Yes, they look very nice and give the impression of having great picture quality, but in reality, it doesn't compare to the older, bulkier CRTs.

Just a small comparison, when I was playing call of duty 2 (for xbox360) on a sony 50 lcd projection. I was on a very dark multiplayer level, I could not see a thing because all the blacks looked the same color. Later, When I played it on my friend's 51 hitachi RPtv ( about 3-4 years old), you could easily distinguish between say a wall and its surroundings. and its not with just video games, its with any source.

IMHO, CRT look more life like and realistic, and I have yet to see a new technology that compares to that. Hopefully they can come out something soon to impress us "CRT lovers":)

sickicw

tommyboy wrote:

IMO, LCDs are the bose(well, I should prolly say satelite speakers:) ) of tvs. Yes, they look very nice and give the impression of having great picture quality, but in reality, it doesn't compare to the older, bulkier CRTs.

Just a small comparison, when I was playing call of duty 2 (for xbox360) on a sony 50 lcd projection.....

Wow. now that is just wrong. I would never compare a good LCD with bose.

Now are saying LCDs are crap, or LCD projection, because this is two different technologies?

Yes, on average plasma looks much better than LCD. Yes, CRT is about the best technology you can get right now, but it is old and noone makes large CRTs. Every TV type has a trade off, even plasmas. For me i couldn't get over the silk screen effect of the DLP tvs, and the new 1080p sony LCD looked better to me than any plasmas in the same price range.

EDIT: also, i watch most of my tv with the lights on, so i really dont have to have really deep blacks. just as long as the dark colors don't mesh together.

univera

tommyboy wrote:

Lush, I agree with your whole statement but I just wanted to quote this paragraph cause this couldn't be more true in this forum.

IMO, LCDs are the bose(well, I should prolly say satelite speakers:) ) of tvs. Yes, they look very nice and give the impression of having great picture quality, but in reality, it doesn't compare to the older, bulkier CRTs.

Just a small comparison, when I was playing call of duty 2 (for xbox360) on a sony 50 lcd projection. I was on a very dark multiplayer level, I could not see a thing because all the blacks looked the same color. Later, When I played it on my friend's 51 hitachi RPtv ( about 3-4 years old), you could easily distinguish between say a wall and its surroundings. and its not with just video games, its with any source.

IMHO, CRT look more life like and realistic, and I have yet to see a new technology that compares to that. Hopefully they can come out something soon to impress us "CRT lovers":)

Tommyboy, with all due respect, that is a ridiculous comment, totally unfounded in facts. Comparing all LCD's to Bose is complete ignorance. I may not have the video knowledge of many on this forum, but comparing your video game picture on RPTV to a PROJECTION LCD set is not even on topic. LCD, flat panels, are what is being discussed. I could care less how a video game looks on my set as I don't have any plans to waste time with that business. Additionally, comparing ONE set only to another and then universally declaring all LCD's to be **** isn't exactly a study that will hold up to scrutiny. Demo many different types of sets and the most up to date models, and then you at least have credible if not scientific observations. For the record, I am interested in everyday, normal lighting viewing.

I may not have knowledge anywhere close to what others on this site contain, but don't try to insult the intelligence of many LCD set owners on this forum or anywhere by making ridiculous, univesal declarations based on playing your video game on TWO t.v.'s. I'm not sure if you are referring to CRT's that are high def or all CRT's. If you are talking standard def LCD's vs. CRT's, than I agree. Are there bargain brand, so so LCD's out there, absolutely.

How can anyone who owns a video game console yet uses a Fisher cd/dvd player have the balls to outright compare all LCD's to Bose? Your priorities bely you.

MikeC78

I agree...

Comparing LCD displays to Bose is one ignorant comparison! I really hope you were joking, but even then that's a ridiculous comment.

Do you even own an LCD?? I happen to have an LCD and a Plasma.

Mike

tommyboy

univera wrote:

Tommyboy, with all due respect, that is a ridiculous comment, totally unfounded in facts. Comparing all LCD's to Bose is complete ignorance. I may not have the video knowledge of many on this forum, but comparing your video game picture on RPTV to a PROJECTION LCD set is not even on topic. LCD, flat panels, are what is being discussed. I could care less how a video game looks on my set as I don't have any plans to waste time with that business. Additionally, comparing ONE set only to another and then universally declaring all LCD's to be **** isn't exactly a study that will hold up to scrutiny. Demo many different types of sets and the most up to date models, and then you at least have credible if not scientific observations. For the record, I am interested in everyday, normal lighting viewing.

I may not have knowledge anywhere close to what others on this site contain, but don't try to insult the intelligence of many LCD set owners on this forum or anywhere by making ridiculous, univesal declarations based on playing your video game on TWO t.v.'s. I'm not sure if you are referring to CRT's that are high def or all CRT's. If you are talking standard def LCD's vs. CRT's, than I agree. Are there bargain brand, so so LCD's out there, absolutely.

How can anyone who owns a video game console yet uses a Fisher cd/dvd player have the balls to outright compare all LCD's to Bose? Your priorities bely you.

wow, I don't even know what to say now, because your response had nothing to do with what I was saying. Bose is a company that specializes in making satelite speakers, that was the comparison I was trying to make. The reason I used the word bose is because they say that their small speaker can reproduce the same frequency that a bigger tower speaker can, which is obviously not true at all. So, I feel that LCDs though they look nice cosmetically, just can't reproduce the contrast ratio that bigger, bulkier tube tvs.

And again, if you actually read my post, I said that was only ONE comparison., I worked at Circuit city for more than two years looking at every tv CC carried extensively. When I first started, Managers told me that LCDs were the greatest(mostly because they were the most expensive, comparing inch to inch) but after doing a lot of research and extensive viewing of ALL tvs, CRT tubes still (IMHO, just so you don't freat out again) was the superior technology... I'll say it again, THAT WAS ONE EXAMPLE. So, for what I said above, my cheap dvd player has nothing to do with my experience with televisions.


Univera, do me a favor, and stop freaking out. If you take that much offense to the comment I made (that had nothing to do with you by the way), I don't know how you have any friends.

tommyboy

sickicw wrote:

Wow. now that is just wrong. I would never compare a good LCD with bose.

Read post above...

sickicw wrote:

Now are saying LCDs are crap, or LCD projection, because this is two different technologies?

LCD projection and LCDs are when it boils down to it, the same technology. Just like CRT and CRT projections are the same technology. But for the people who don't think they are the same, I'm sorry. But I can make that same comparison between a CRT tube and a LCD flat panel and get the same results...

MikeC78

tommyboy wrote:

wow, I don't even know what to say now, because your response had nothing to do with what I was saying. Bose is a company that specializes in making satelite speakers, that was the comparison I was trying to make. The reason I used the word bose is because they say that their small speaker can reproduce the same frequency that a bigger tower speaker can, which is obviously not true at all. So, I feel that LCDs though they look nice cosmetically, just can't reproduce the contrast ratio that bigger, bulkier tube tvs.

And again, if you actually read my post, I said that was only ONE comparison., I worked at Circuit city for more than two years looking at every tv CC carried extensively. When I first started, Managers told me that LCDs were the greatest(mostly because they were the most expensive, comparing inch to inch) but after doing a lot of research and extensive viewing of ALL tvs, CRT tubes still (IMHO, just so you don't freat out again) was the superior technology... I'll say it again, THAT WAS ONE EXAMPLE. So, for what I said above, my cheap dvd player has nothing to do with my experience with televisions.


Univera, do me a favor, and stop freaking out. If you take that much offense to the comment I made (that had nothing to do with you by the way), I don't know how you have any friends.

Well, when you do a comparison with LCD and Bose there are going to be people who take offense to that comment.

CRT's have wonderful picture up to about 36', LCD's surpase that size greatly and do a good job at it and on top of it doesn't look like a mini-fridgerator.

I don't think univera was freaking out, just a little upset that you compared LCD's to Bose. With the friend issue... I don't understand that part at all. I would think that you have no friends for comparing their LCD's to Bose!:) Do you do that when you go to a friend's house who owns an LCD display?? Do you tell them that CRT's are much better and that the LCD is like a Bose? I sure hope not??

univera

Tommyboy, I didn't freak out, but admittedly, I found your comments offensive. Your quote was "LCD's are the Bose of t.v.'s." That reads pretty clearly to me.

Who wants to have someone say their gear is comparable to Bose? Your comments read pretty clearly to me. I'm not looking to burn any bridges and admittedly, the Fisher comment was below the belt. As Mike stated, if you compare anyone's gear to a piece of **** stuff, you're going to come under fire. You weren't as "clear" in your first statement as you were in your second. I'm not quite sure I understand your comment that LCD's look good "cosmetically." Do you mean the flatness/frame itself or the actual picture? How does something "give the impression" of a good picture. Either the picture looks good or it doesn't. In comparison to a CRT, I can't say. I do know people are moving away from chunky sets. Granted, this thread started as what is the best, but it developed into plasma vs. LCD.

For the record, I bought online, but consulted with a friend at Tweeter who owned the Sony and recommended the Sony. He has worked there several years and has seen most of what's come down the pipe. His recommendation in combination with my own eyes told me what I needed to hear and see. Contrast ratio isn't everything. It's like any gear; if it looks and feels good to you, numbers don't mean anything. Contrast ratio gets tossed around alot but I don't think its the end all. I believe it was a Sharp model or two that got really high marks in reviews yet it was regarded by some as being too detailed for SD and even HD at times. There are alot of factors that go into making a good picture, many of which I admittedly don't understand. I do understand what I see with my own two eyes.

Again, with all due respect, I don't think your analogy/comparison is valid, but I respect your right to post it nonetheless. I'm not pushing the Sony so much as I am pushing the fact that there is technology now that makes LCD look damn good and respectable reviews support that idea. LCD's that come close to plasmas are still in the minority, but there a few.

LuSh

I actually think he makes a great comparison. Bose isn't a bad product at all. I don't think LCD is horrible, it's just different. Industry studies have indicated that the main driving force behind home theatre and HDTV is now actually of the female gender. Flat panel televisions work on very much the same core benefits that females seek. Make no mistake, LCD and plasma WEREN'T created in order to give the end user an "upgrade" in picture performance. Ask a professional photograher if he uses a digital camera and see if he can answer with a straight face. Again there is nothing wrong with LCD or plasma but to consider them on their picture quality merits alone is being short sighted, pardon the pun.

tommyboy

univera wrote:

Tommyboy, I didn't freak out, but admittedly, I found your comments offensive. Your quote was "LCD's are the Bose of t.v.'s." That reads pretty clearly to me.

univera,

your quote from me has two very important things missing

tommyboy wrote:

IMO, LCDs are the bose(well, I should prolly say satelite speakers ) of tvs.

I don't think I have to apologize for what I said. I didn't mean to offend you, but I still don't think my remark was offensive. Bose are known for small speakers, period. Smaller speakers can't reproduce the sound of tower speakers (see now I'm repeating myself). If some people think I said bose because I might think their speakers completely suck, then they are reading my post in the wrong way.


...Thanks lush for understanding my post

tommyboy

jhw59

I just bought a 42" plasma Panasonic. The general consensus was that panasonic is the leader in this size range of plasma and I spent wayyyy to much time researching this. Prices are really coming down. My tv will probably be even cheaper next month but I was tired of waiting. Onto home theater.

asindc

I have had my Pioneer 50" plasma for three years now. I agree with the other posters who have noted the between the technologies being discussed here, plasma has fewer issues. And IMO, it gives you the most bang for the buck, especially with 1080p on the horizon. The 1080i or 720p displays have come down in price quite a bit just in the last two years. Until LCD black issues are resolved, I think the answer in clear. Plasma.

Home Theatre

Wow I am back at square one. I think I just need to find a Dlp at a decent price with two HDMI connections and can do 1080I.

LuSh

Home Theatre,

I don't know how to say this so I'm just going to say it, DLP is all but dead in the water. So much so I'd hesitate buying one now for the simple fact of bulb replacement. As much as I hate LCD technology I was forced to buy a 32" one because of space limitations. I ended up with a 32" Toshiba Regza DL66 as I didn't have extra dough for a larger size or other brand. I'm happy with the Regza (one of the few panels that isn't OEM'd to Orion by Toshiba.) After carefull calibration I've been able to get proper shadow detail ane have a set that is closer to CRT transition then I thought was possible.

Home Theatre

Why would you say DLP is dead in the water? I might just pay to have my 46 inch sent home.

univera

Lush, you crack me up. You act like owing an LCD is the equal of owning a Yugo. To like plasma better is one thing, but to "hate" LCD's is a bit much. Especially new ones that have very good blacks and little to no motion issues. The pictures are pretty damn good, especially in HD. And, if one has a bright room and wants a clean mount, LCD is the best option. In fact, you are now admitting that you got closer to CRT quality than you thought possible, so you sound like you dont' "hate" them any longer.

It isn't like they are pieces of ****. And, it's only going to keep getting better. Everyone's entitled to their opinion, but they aren't garbage. What did an LCD ever do to you?:D;) You are pretty adament about not liking them. I don't understand someone buying something they so vehemently dislike.

ND13

I've had zero issues with my LCD flat panel tv. No issues with the blacks, screen door, pixelation....none of the stuff people relate to lcds. I believe that a lot of people listen to the people that have some sort of interest in one or the other technology succeeding.

That being said, I still want to get a Plasma if I go over 50", but it'll be strictly for me...no games or kids.

polkatese

I've had my LCD for exactly a month, today. One thing I noticed, LCD seems to have a sweet spot (i.e. distance in which the picture looks its best). In my case, for this Sony 40" is about 4 feet and beyond. Going further away is not a problem, going closer to the screen, on the other hand, shows the imperfection of the technology. Compared to CRT (Pioneer Elite 53") which is a lot more film-like at all distance. But the LCD colors are a lot more vibrant. With a good source (i.e. HD-DVD) both technologies are comparable.

At the end of the day, it's an appliance that should spent most of its days being enjoyed, instead of being critiques. In two years, we'll be discussing different technologies and/or qualities. By then, your saving account will be bulging again for the next round of spending.

fredv

It is so true that information overload isn't always to make it easier to decide. I have been reading LCD vs DLP vs Plasma vs .... when my 14 years old Sony 27" CRT started acting up a few months ago. I just couldn't decide as none seemed to have the some kind of cons. Well, the Sony finally RIP last weekend. I planned to buy the Sony 46" 3LCD project when I entered BB for the price reason, $1299. Not that a deal that I couldn't refuse, but not so deep to the pocket either. At the end of the day, I returned home with the KDS-50A2000, the 50" SXRD projection for $1900 plus tax. I just picked up the 970HD from oppo, so I will be able to try the Sony in "HD" mode. Maybe my requirement isn't too big, quite honest, most of the HDTV are not $H|T, and they are not perfect either, IMHO. If you want one, just buy and enjoy :-)

Home Theatre

How do you like the Sony? What is SXRD? I hate to admit it but sony does make a great tv.

hearingimpared

I'm new to HT too. This month's Perfect Vision has an article and a Q/A about LCD vs Plazma. I've read it and the concensus I get out if it is that it is six of one, a half dozen of the other. Each has their pluses and faults. The most important thing I got out of the article is that with Plazma there are no distance issues or viewing angles. The plazmas have a wipe funtion that floods the screen with white to exorcize the ghosts.

I have the new Perfect Vision in a pdf format. . . I can send it to you but it is over 15m.

fredv

SXRD stands for Silicon X-tal Reflective Display. I think it is Sony's equivalence of the DLP technology. So far, I only played the TV with my $45 Toshita player in 480p mode. I don't think I am using what it is capble of :-) The picture looks quite good, but I don't quite get used to it after so many years of CRT. I somehow feel it is like watching movie from a computer monitor :-) On the other hand, the bigger screen does help my aging eyes quite a bit!! FWIW, this thing runs Linux undernealth, there is a GPL print bundled!!!!!

LuSh

univera:

I don't have a chip on my shoulder. After calibrating a CRT, Plasma, LCD with video essentials and seeing an LCD, Plasma and CRT display devices ISF calibrated I think I can comment with some sort of frame of reference. I'd like to hear your thoughts on your personal experiences with calibration (what disc's did you use? Did you have all sets ISF calibrated before making a final purchase decision?) I won't deny that the LCD is better then what I expected but I also won't buy into LCD is a great technology for picture reasons alone. If it makes you sleep better at night please just don't read my posts.

TheReaper

SXRD is an improved LCD projection display.

It is a tri-color lcd projection (has 3 lcd panels, one for Red, Green, and Blue). The light from the bulb is split so each lcd panel gets it's color continuously (no color wheel). The lcds filter the intensity of light for each pixel, forming three single color images (red,green,blue). The lcd filtered light is then recombined and projected on a screen.

The difference from a normal tri-color lcd projection, is that instead of passing the light through the lcd. The light is shined on the lcd, and the lcd has a reflective layer to bounce it back. The advantage of this, is eliminating the screen door effect. The pixel gaps on a normal backlit lcd contain the transitors to control the pixels. On a reflective lcd, these transistors can be mounted behind the reflective layer, minimizing the gap between pixels.

Sony then adds an extra trick to improve contrast and black level detail. The projection lens has a variable iris on it. So as the overall image is brighter or darker, the iris is adjusted to control the amount of light projected. The intensity levels sent to the lcds can then be shifted acordingly, giving better contrast and black level detail.

Lsi9

If a CRT was as big as my SXRD I don't think it would look as good, simply because of the visible lines a CRT might present. Once SED and Laser TV this discussion will be moot.

PolkWannabie

Like anything else ... To each his/her own ... and ... there is of course always something better just over the next hill ...

LSI9,

I've looked at professionally calibrated Sony's 70" XBR2 (SXRD) side by side with other 70" sets and frankly I don't like it as well for a variety of reasons ...

Lush,

My impressions from those who calibrate with professional equipment for a living are that when properly calibrated, DLP's are as good if not better then the other choices ... As far as eventual lamp burnout goes, who cares ... they're relatively inexpensive ... especially when compared to potential burn in ...

Kelley_Moore

I have the Sammy HL-S5088W calibrated by Eliab and I use the Toshiba HD-XA1. I'm not saying it's the best, but damn is it good!

Sherardp, With the exception of the surrounds, we have a very similar setup. Did you get your sets calibrated or did you do it yourself?

Kelley

LuSh

DLP would certainly be up there if you're referring to 3-chip DLP's which some company's such as Runco have altered and perfected. I was lucky enough to see a 3-Chip 1080p Runco in the Krell/Runco booth last year at CES and well, it was the most natural image I've ever laid eyes on. Having said that most DLP projector's aren't 3-Chip and therefore can only produce 1 color at any given moment of time. I'm not knocking the other technology's, I just feel CRT and then Plasma remain the best and most agree.

Systems

Hello

So do you have any recommendations for a high def crt? I'm a pretty big
Samsung and Sony fan.

Thanks

beardog03

Kelley_Moore wrote:

I have the Sammy HL-S5088W calibrated by Eliab and I use the Toshiba HD-XA1. I'm not saying it's the best, but damn is it good!

Sherardp, With the exception of the surrounds, we have a very similar setup. Did you get your sets calibrated or did you do it yourself?

Kelley

I am actually driving myself nuts trying to decidethe best way to go , as my 36" Toshiba is going out...smak the side hard enough , and the picture comes back..!!

Anyway...I was also looking at the Samsung-S5088W...good price, and it had a great picture...56"

This is the set that I`m going to start comparing to...in price and PQ

Any other sujestions ? (like how I spelled that ?!)