Which Plasma To Select

PhantomOG

SED is starting to look stillborn as well.

LuSh

The amount of dis-information represented by nothing more then ones opinion in regards to this thread is scary. Watching an audio forum laugh and mock consumers who purchase HTIBs, Bose and the like try to understand the realm of video is a knee slapping experience.

AndyGwis

I started mine by stating "I have owned both Plasma and LCD" and used phrases like "in my opinion" and "my $ .02" as a little CYA.

As long as people aren't mistaking their "opinions" as the bottom line, indisputable truth, etc. . . then that seems fair to me. I think most people post questions here looking for opinions from like-minded peers as much as they are looking for "answers."

Holydoc

LuSh wrote:

The amount of dis-information represented by nothing more then ones opinion in regards to this thread is scary. Watching an audio forum laugh and mock consumers who purchase HTIBs, Bose and the like try to understand the realm of video is a knee slapping experience.

Lush,

Dang it! Don't tell everyone about our huge repository of mis-information and ill-informed video experts, salesmen, and peeping Toms who have only seen these TVs in showrooms or in their overly active imagination. No one will ever listen to us again!

Seriously, if the original poster, or anyone else, would like to learn more about my Panasonic TH-50PX600U Plasma TV to help them with their purchasing decisions, please don't hesitate to send me a PM. Otherwise, it appears this thread has hit the huge derail train.

tommyboy

Wow, how did I miss this thread.:eek:

Thanks lush for holding the fort:) . I remember we were on the same side of this debate a few months ago.

By the way, I love this jim brick character saying the reason LCDs are better because he sells them 10 to 1. Well, I can think of a few reason why this happens. first, maybe cause you don't know what you are talking about and tell your customers they are the best, and plasma are the dinasours of tvs:rolleyes: . Second, Plasmas are sold from 37"-60"(I know they go bigger,along with LCDs, but just for the average joe), whats the LCDs range, oh yeah 10"-60". And this is one of the big advantages to LCD. There are plenty of advantages and disadvantage to both, but to say "LCD is the BEST!" without any real evidence is just stupid(if you want real evidence, read lush's posts).

I know sony has been phasing out CRTs and Plasmas(well, they have already) but I know one thing, For people who want superior PQ, LCDs is not the answer...:mad:

Anyways, back to the original question:eek: . If I had the cash for a plasma, I would go for the Pioneer in a heartbeat. IMO (and it looks like many others) one of the best PQ plasmas have to offer.

tommyboy

Holydoc

JimBRICK wrote:

TH50PX600

this is the 1080p model of panasonic and we've had it on our sales floor for 2 months.
we actually had it on sale last week for $3299.99

After all that claiming about your knowledge and then you make an incorrect statement of fact about the very TV I own. *sigh*

Jim now you got me worried. Could it just be possible that those company representatives that deliver tvs (rather than using a freight company or their shipping trucks) and then calibrate them, uh... or the knowledgeable merchants in your store that calibrate them to display specially prepared demo DVDs, uh...or those salemen in the store that adjust the TV's picture for the lighting in the room MAY have not calibrated the TV's as well as you thought? Possible?

Most of the TVs mentioned in this thread are very good and have their pluses and minuses. I think it is now up to the OP to determine what he is really looking for.

tommyboy

janmike wrote:

Here are some facts I found just to complicate the decision process.

LCD TV disadvantages :

One problem with LCD tv screens is that they have a inherent delay problem. This is something that cannot be overcome. " It is the nature of the beast" When a fast moving object moves across a LCD screen the delay of LCD technology causes "artifacting" Basically there are trails or blockiness of the image since the screen cannot keep up. There are newer LCD panels that have lower m/s ( millisecond) times but there still is a delay. The good news is that with a good name brand LCD tv the artifacting is minimal and really wont be noticeable until you get a screen over 30 or 35 inches. At that point the delays will be noticeable and in some cases extremely annoying. Expect severe artifacting on "no name" units to the point of making the tv basically unwatchable .


Black levels: A LCD display has a backlight which shines through the lcd panels. The panels allow or block light depending on what is required to produce an image or a color. Most , if not all, LCD tv's tend to have difficulty going fully "black". Blacks tend to have a very very dark grey. This is especially true on no name units.


Field Of Vision: Even the best LCD tv has field of vision problems. When you look straight on the picture looks great, as you move to either side the picture quality diminishes and eventually disappears. Some LCD tv makers claim up to 170o field of view. This is a complete lie. To quote one major manufacturer " well it doesn't mean you have a great picture for 170 degrees, but you do have a picture" . Realistically a good LCD tv such as a Sharp Aquos will have a a 90 degree (45 each side) usable picture.


Single Usage: There are many LCD screens on the market but very few have good video processing. If a LCD screen is made as a computer monitor, it is usually very poor as a video display. If you are planning to use the unit as a tv, do not buy a computer monitor with a tuner upgrade. Stick to a unit designed for video such as a Sharp Aquos. For dual purpose, buy a lcd tv with a computer input, not a computer screen with a tuner


Extremely expensive over 35 inch,


Unbelievable amounts of no name junk units on market. Stick to name brands with proper warranties


16/9 widescreen units expensive


Cheaper no name LCD tv's have very poor picture quality and generally poor video performance


Pixel failure: This can be a problem with no name LCD screens. All the major brands have pixel policies which may allow one or two dead pixels. These are not noticeable unless you are right in front of the screen. A 20 inch lcd screen has over 300,000 pixels. so one or two dead could not be seen. No name lcd screens have extremely poor policies which can allow higher then 10%. This would make the unit unwatchable.

Digital looking picture: Many LCD screens tend to have a "digital look " to the image and therefore don't seem to reproduce colors naturally.

LCD TV Advantages:

Good for still images such as computer display, Fairly reasonable pricing below 30 inches.


Quality units have good brightness levels


No real estate: A LCD tv screen hangs on a wall and takes as little space as a picture.


Low operating cost per hour ( over 35 inch extremely expensive acquisition cost)


Long Life. Expect 30 to 50,000 hours bulb life according to Sharp ( Please note that the picture can fade over time on a LCD TV. I would expect prime performance to last closer to 20 to 30,000 hours maximum ( 13 years at 6 hours per day). Expect substantially less on a no name.

Plasma TV Screen Disadvantages:

Image retention: Plasma screens can suffer image retention ( burn in) if a still image is left on the display for a extended period of time. For example, you would not want to use a plasma screen for a computer display constantly. If you were to use a Plasma tv for Video Display and occasional use it for computer, burn in would not be a factor. Also if you were to leave the plasma tv screen on a station such as CNBC, which has constant ticker tape across the bottom, for 24 hours a day, there would be noticeable burn in when you switched to a different channel. If by error you were to burn your screen, proper name brand plasma screens do have a "white flash" utility which eliminates the burn, however it will shorten the life of the plasma. If your primary use of the plasma screen is for TV viewing and dvd, image retention will not be a factor.


Size: Plasma screens are not available below 37 inches. There were some 32 inch units available but have been discontinued. Also 60 inch and above can be very pricey but prices are coming down. For example a Zenith 60 is below 7500 now.


No tuners: Most plasma screens do not have tuners and if they do they are expensive upgrades. Some cheaper plasma tv's have optional tuners however they usually are not the best. This is not a disadvantage in most cases. Almost everyone who can afford a plasma will be using satellite, digital cable or external HD boxes. So the built in tuner would be redundant and a waste of money.


Many no name junk units on market. Stick to name brands.


Pixel failure: This can be a problem with no name plasma screens. All the major brands have pixel policies which may allow one or two dead pixels. These are not noticeable unless you are right in front of the screen. A 50 inch screen has over 983,000 pixels. so one or two dead could not be seen. No name plasma screens have extremely poor policies which can allow higher then 10%. This would make the unit unwatchable. If the plasma screen has a orbiter function, this will greatly reduce the chance of pixel failure. We have sold tens of thousands of Plasma tv screens and can count the number of units which we have had pixel problems with on one hand. It should be noted we do not sell no name units.


Early models had poor contrast. the first generation plasma tv screens had poor contrast and brightness. Do not buy a used plasma screen from a online auction such as Ebay. The units that have been out for the last two years outperform the older units by miles.

Plasma TV Screen Advantages:

Long life: the average name brand plasma tv will last 30 to 50,000 hours to half like ( brightness is 50% of original, it will still be 2 to 3 times brighter then a regular tv) This is around 20 years at 6 hours per day. Expect substantially less on a no name


Field of vision: A plasma screen tv has a field of vision of almost 180 degrees without loss of picture quality. From any angle you will have a great picture


Brightness: Plasma screens are very bright. 4 to 5 times brighter then an average tv.


Great contrast: The last two generations ( two years or so) of name brand Plasma screens have great contrast ratios. Look for a rating of 1000 to 1 or more Please note: certain manufacturers claim levels of 3 or 4000 to 1, That is a false rating and is achieved by using non standard measurement methods.


Low operating cost: A name brand plasma is cheap to operate due to long life with virtually no maintenance ( No you cannot recharge a plasma, and they don't leak gas). The cost of a nice EDTV 42 inch is well below 3 k and a 50 inch is around 5 k. 60 inch plus are still highly priced per inch. This is substantially less then a LCD TV. 42 inch plasma tv screens cost almost half of a 40 inch lcd.


Instantaneous picture response: There is virtually no delay in any name brand plasma and therefore no artifacting that is experienced on LCD screens.


Natural looking picture: A plasma screen reproduces a picture in a similar manner to a standard tv .Name brand plasma tv colors tend to be natural looking and more accurate. Mo names can tend to be weak or soft on colors.


No real estate: A plasma screen hangs on a wall and takes as little space as a picture.


Wide screen, All but one or two plasma tv screens are 16:9 wide screen. format


Upgradeability: Many plasma screens have upgradeable video cards that "future proof " your plasma

I know I don't need to quote all of this... but janmike, I think you should make a decision off this information that you found. This proves what Jim brick is trying to "disprove".

LCDs= generally longer life, wider range of screen size, lighter

Plasmas- more natural picture, brighter, Great contrast. Great viewing angles

Now which one has more advantages in PQ?

scottvamp

I have recently been researching flat panels. I was reading this web site on LCD vs Plasma. http://www.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/lcdtv-plasmavslcd.shtml

Here is my understanding.
Note: i do believe/agree the Pioneer Elite Plasma's are the best tv's on the market. If you morgage your house.

Pros and Cons

Constrast/Black Levels Advantage Plasma
COLOR ACCURACY Advantage Plasma
VIEWING ANGLES Advantage Plasma
COMPUTER USE Advantage LCD
FAST-MOVING VIDEO PLAYBACK Advantage Plasma
HIGH ALTITUDE Advantage LCD
LONGEVITY Tie
SCREEN BURN IN Advantage LCD
PRODUCTION SIZE AND COST Advantage Plasma
POWER CONSUMPTION Advantage LCD
PRICE AND RESOLUTION Toss Up

Plasma 5 LCD 4

Now i would have to say this article has to be at least 2 years old and LCD has made leaps and bounds since then.


CONTRAST / BLACK LEVELS
at the time the time the highest LCD on the market was barely 1000:1
Samsungs LCD's have a 6000:1 contrast now. Entry level of 3000:1

VIEWING ANGLES
at the time the highest LCD was 125 degrees. The Samsungs do 178 degrees with ease.

COLOR ACCURACY
Depends on room lighting. LCD's clearly better in a well lit room or at least equal.

FAST-MOVING VIDEO PLAYBACK
Clearly have been dramatically improved. Standard refresh rate is about 8 ms.
LCD's have the computer market. My 19" Xerox has a rate of 7 ms. These are CRT numbers folks.

LONGEVITY
The only wear on a LCD is Flouresent back lighting. Estamated life is 50,000 to 60,000 hours and they are replaceable. But just like "recharging plasma's"
manufactures don't want to talk about it because thier tv would last "forever". Not good for bussiness.


PRODUCTION SIZE AND COST
LCD was years after manufactering of Plasma's. LCD is catching up fast.

New score card
5 ties
Plasma 1 LCD 5

janmike

Since I started this thread I have to ask myself one question. Do I feel any more knowledgeable? Well, "Do You Punk?"

janmike

tommyboy wrote:

I know I don't need to quote all of this... but janmike, I think you should make a decision off this information that you found. This proves what Jim brick is trying to "disprove".

LCDs= generally longer life, wider range of screen size, lighter

Plasmas- more natural picture, brighter, Great contrast. Great viewing angles

Now which one has more advantages in PQ?

I'm with you on this one. I think my mind is already made up.

LuSh

Some how fact has been turned on its head in the favor of personal opinion from those who have very little experience in the video realm. I have answered a number of private messages and will continue to do so for anybody who is interested in concrete answers. I don't assume to know it all, but the people who have most strongly disagreed with me have offered no evidence but instead half truths that have confused many in this thread.

I'd like to reiterate, I own an LCD. But if I were to purchase a display, for the ultimate in picture quality it would be CRT and then plasma. LCD is further down the food chain in this regard, much like VHS was to Beta. Actually, that is the perfect example. There was no dispute which was the better format in regards to picture quality (beta hands down) but the market accepted VHS for other reasons. This is my point exactly. It appears that I have ruffled the feathers of LCD owners and LCD salesman, I make no apologies.

The very fact that some people have questioned my frame of reference (video essentials, ISF calibration and correcting and setting a proper greyscale) should open some eyes. At the very least I hope you take my advice and do some searching of your own. I think your end conclusions will equal my own.

SKsolutions

MikeC78 wrote:

Hello SK-

I agree...

I thought the new 9UK's were made in Mexico? I know the older model 8UK, which I own is made in Japan.

Mike

Thanks for the headsup. I have the 8uk too which is designed, and assembled in Japan. It's the clincher when it comes to making the choice.

The "U" models are the consumer version which have speakers and tunas. These generally have the prior generation panel to the "UK" or pro-line. So, when the 9UK comes out, the consumer model gets the "8" generation panel. I don't think this is true with the upper "X" or "6**U" models that some here have bought recently.

I don't know that I would trust a build from Mex. I suppose that it's just the assembly of the panel driver, panel, casing and wiring harnesses. How hard can that be. . . even with too much Tequila? Has anyone had any problems? That's regrettable since it is such a great value and bulletproof. You can still find the 8's online at a no-brainer pricepoint.

JimBRICK

tommyboy wrote:

Wow, how did I miss this thread.:eek:

Thanks lush for holding the fort:) . I remember we were on the same side of this debate a few months ago.

By the way, I love this jim brick character saying the reason LCDs are better because he sells them 10 to 1. Well, I can think of a few reason why this happens. first, maybe cause you don't know what you are talking about and tell your customers they are the best, and plasma are the dinasours of tvs:rolleyes: . Second, Plasmas are sold from 37"-60"(I know they go bigger,along with LCDs, but just for the average joe), whats the LCDs range, oh yeah 10"-60". And this is one of the big advantages to LCD. There are plenty of advantages and disadvantage to both, but to say "LCD is the BEST!" without any real evidence is just stupid(if you want real evidence, read lush's posts).

I know sony has been phasing out CRTs and Plasmas(well, they have already) but I know one thing, For people who want superior PQ, LCDs is not the answer...:mad:

Anyways, back to the original question:eek: . If I had the cash for a plasma, I would go for the Pioneer in a heartbeat. IMO (and it looks like many others) one of the best PQ plasmas have to offer.

tommyboy

tommyboy, do you have you tongue up Lush's arse that much you have to come on here and defend him. PLasma is a dying breed. TOSHIBA HITACHI AND SONY all have dropped the plasma lines as of the end of 2007 model year. Why must you guy CLAW on to old technology like its the greatest thing ever. This must have been the same when gas cars came out and the old farts were still arguing that steam power was the way to go.

Obviously you like to only talk tv's cause if you can honestly say you've seen a NEW plasma and a new LCD side by side and the plasma looked better than you need your eyes checked seriously

LuSh

Jim,

It is painfully obvious to most who read this thread you don't know what your talking about. Next thing youll be telling us is that LCD is better then traditional tubes...

You talk so much about being on the floor...you work in a furniture store which relies on financing. You talk about seeing the televisions side by side...yet you laugh and mock at industry standards you didn't even know existed.

You talk about products having 1080p which don't have 1080p. I'm not here debating which television is better for the OP, what I'm telling you is that plasma offers a superiour picture quality and is used in post production studios around the world...this is fact...this isn't me comparing two televisions on the floor in an overly bright and saturated enviroment.

I have compared both types of panels in a controlled enviroment, where lighting, greyscale and contrast were set properly. There is no contest. It is true that LCD has become much more popular; but what is also true is that markets shift and consumer demands change for reasons other then quality. Beta tape losing to VHS, Vinyl losing to tape and then CD, and finally redbook CD dying to newer compressed formats like MP3.

MikeC78

JimBRICK wrote:

tommyboy, do you have you tongue up Lush's arse that much you have to come on here and defend him. PLasma is a dying breed. TOSHIBA HITACHI AND SONY all have dropped the plasma lines as of the end of 2007 model year. Why must you guy CLAW on to old technology like its the greatest thing ever. This must have been the same when gas cars came out and the old farts were still arguing that steam power was the way to go.

Obviously you like to only talk tv's cause if you can honestly say you've seen a NEW plasma and a new LCD side by side and the plasma looked better than you need your eyes checked seriously

You are ridiculous...

Yada, yada, yada.... LCD is wonderful and plasma sucks!:rolleyes: Everyone is dropping Plasma because it is soo terrible and they produce a crappy picture.:rolleyes:

The real reason those manufactuars suck at producing a plasma and it costs them more to make than an LCD.

BTW, I have both... The LCD is horrible with it's black levels and it has terrible ghosting during fast frames. The LCD does produce a good picture, but to be ignorant and say that LCD has better picture quality than a Plasma is just down right retarded. You need some new glasses bud, maybe bi-focals your eyes are terrible!

BTW, Get your head out of the Sony reps ****!!

JimBRICK

lcd's rule

JimBRICK

MikeC78 wrote:

You are ridiculous...

Yada, yada, yada.... LCD is wonderful and plasma sucks!:rolleyes: Everyone is dropping Plasma because it is soo terrible and they produce a crappy picture.:rolleyes:

The real reason those manufactuars suck at producing a plasma and it costs them more to make than an LCD.

BTW, I have both... The LCD is horrible with it's black levels and it has terrible ghosting during fast frames. The LCD does produce a good picture, but to be ignorant and say that LCD has better picture quality than a Plasma is just down right retarded. You need some new glasses bud, maybe bi-focals your eyes are terrible!

BTW, Get your head out of the Sony reps ****!!

what are the model numbers of your tv's. your probably another jackass who bought a 1000 dollar lcd and a 3000 dollar plasma and argue that you 3000 dollar tv has a better picture so plasma rules

MikeC78

JimBRICK wrote:

what are the model numbers of your tv's. your probably another jackass who bought a 1000 dollar lcd and a 3000 dollar plasma and argue that you 3000 dollar tv has a better picture so plasma rules

Yep, that's me.:rolleyes:

No need to give you my model numbers, it's not a Sony so it's no good anyway. You are just another retarded jackass to add to my ignore list because you spew vomit out of your mouth.

tommyboy

scottvamp wrote:

My 19" Xerox has a rate of 7 ms. These are CRT numbers folks.

This is what I don't understand. Why does everyone consider the CRT out-dated technology but LCDs and plasma can't even give the PQ CRTs can but are proud when they come close.

At least the change from cassettes/VHS to cd/dvd was a big picture/sound upgrade.

Just curious, did you make that 5-1 score yourself?:rolleyes:

m00npie

JimBrick - I wonder what your company thinks of your actions on this forum. Do they know? Are you posting on your own time or at work? Are you representing The Brick they way they envision their employees representing them?

All I’m saying is this and please don’t take it a threat because it is not…

In various threads, you have managed to mention your name, the store you work in and the location of the store. Are you not concerned that if you act like an **** that it may get back to your employer? Perhaps someone you sold a TV to last month is now looking for Polk speakers and they come to the best source for Polk information. Suddenly they come across someone that fits the description of their salesperson… get it?

I think you can offer great information from a sales perspective. For example, you claimed that some manufactures have eliminated plasmas from their future product lines. If that’s true, then that is good information to know. But please refrain from using the sales end to make your opinion the gospel of which product is better. The folks in these forums are honestly a salesperson worst nightmare since more often then not, some folks on this forum know more than the average salesperson.

Grab a brew and relax!

JimBRICK

m00npie wrote:

JimBrick - I wonder what your company thinks of your actions on this forum. Do they know? Are you posting on your own time or at work? Are you representing The Brick they way they envision their employees representing them?

All I’m saying is this and please don’t take it a threat because it is not…

In various threads, you have managed to mention your name, the store you work in and the location of the store. Are you not concerned that if you act like an **** that it may get back to your employer? Perhaps someone you sold a TV to last month is now looking for Polk speakers and they come to the best source for Polk information. Suddenly they come across someone that fits the description of their salesperson… get it?

I think you can offer great information from a sales perspective. For example, you claimed that some manufactures have eliminated plasmas from their future product lines. If that’s true, then that is good information to know. But please refrain from using the sales end to make your opinion the gospel of which product is better. The folks in these forums are honestly a salesperson worst nightmare since more often then not, some folks on this forum know more than the average salesperson.

Grab a brew and relax!

what I do on my own time has nothing to do with my daily work at my job. I use my SALES knowledge and what I've seen on the front line to give people my Actual experience. There arent alot of people on this forum who deal with these models we are talking about EVERYDAY. like I do. I sell hundreds of thousands of dollars in electronics a year and have VERY HAPPY CUSTOMERS. I really irritates me when someone makes blanket comments on products cause they've taken sides with a product with a closed mind. I've Seen these products in every kind of room, lighting and environment and have come to my conclusions from hands on knowledge. Not reading reviews from internet websites being paid by the companies to give good ratings. My custmers are happy and well taken care of so my opinions outside of my job are that. To clarify I was the one defending myself from attacks not the one starting the attacks.

tommyboy

JimBRICK wrote:

OBVIOUSLY YOU HAVE NO IDEA what you are talking about. WE HAVE A DARK ROOM.

hahaha.... What a ****.

If you actually read lushs post, maybe you would understand what he was saying. Go ahead, say I have my "tongue up lushs ****", but at least he knows what he's talking about, you are a complete dumbass.

I worked at CC 6 months ago(and have been in there many times since). Damn, the managers worked up LCDs to be the greatest things ever. You want to know why, cause they make the biggest PMI off of it. But all of the long-time sales guys knew that CRTs are still the best in the market. They just didn't sell that way. and yes, I did see a plasma and LCD side by side, and in no way was LCD the clear winner.:eek:

I'll have to say this again, LCDs has its advantages, which might steer me towards a smaller LCD some day, but one thing it doesn't have is a superior PQ.

I'm really sorry janmike that this thread turned out this way, good luck with the TV purchase and don't forget to tell us what you get:) .

JimBRICK

and for the record if they made a high def crt tv over 40 inch I'd own that. but it would most likely be 500 pounds or more and 36 inches deep

JimBRICK

"If you actually read lushs post, maybe you would understand what he was saying. Go ahead, say I have my "tongue up lushs ****", but at least he knows what he's talking about, you are a complete dumbass.

I worked at CC 6 months ago(and have been in there many times since). Damn, the managers worked up LCDs to be the greatest things ever. You want to know why, cause they make the biggest PMI off of it. But all of the long-time sales guys knew that CRTs are still the best in the market. They just didn't sell that way. and yes, I did see a plasma and LCD side by side, and in no way was LCD the clear winner."


at Circuit city where LUSH has been saying they take the tvs out of the box turn them on and sell them. thanks for your input.

oh btw we make the same margin on a plasma as we do an lcd so selling an lcd makes no difference in profit

tommyboy

m00npie wrote:

I think you can offer great information from a sales perspective. For example, you claimed that some manufactures have eliminated plasmas from their future product lines. If that’s true, then that is good information to know. But please refrain from using the sales end to make your opinion the gospel of which product is better. The folks in these forums are honestly a salesperson worst nightmare since more often then not, some folks on this forum know more than the average salesperson.

You should read this really carefully jim brick but this pertains to you(nice post moonie). When ever you sell a lot of one product, that means you are a good salesman, but it does not mean that that product is the best on the market.

Here is a great example, I had been working in the home audio department at CC for a year. I was the top seller in audio and was really confident in what I was talking about. Well, until I started here... The people on this forum know way more than I ever did, and they aren't "on the sales floor everyday". So what I'm saying is, Believe it or not,(most) people are here know what they are talking about. When did being a salesman automatically prove you know what you are talking about.

JimBRICK

tommyboy wrote:

You should read this really carefully jim brick but this pertains to you(nice post moonie). When ever you sell a lot of one product, that means you are a good salesman, but it does not mean that that product is the best on the market.

Here is a great example, I had been working in the home audio department at CC for a year. I was the top seller in audio and was really confident in what I was talking about. Well, until I started here... The people on this forum know way more than I ever did, and they aren't "on the sales floor everyday". So what I'm saying is, Believe it or not,(most) people are here know what they are talking about. When did being a salesman automatically prove you know what you are talking about.

Oh I've never said I know everything cause I just calibrated me own tv last week with some help from a certified fellow who helped me via email for free. and my tv looks 1000 times better. I love learning new things. But as I said I've seen all these models but the pioneer. And what I've said all along is that "What I've seen" is where I've come from. And from what I've seen is that the PLasma's now are falling short of the lcd's. 2 years ago there was a difference. The plasma's had killer colour compared to the lcd but now with our newest models the colours have become fuller and more vibrant. if you could see even an sxrd projo beside the px60 panasonic plasma you'd see the whites of the sxrd kill the panasonic. But theres a group of people on this forum also have a hate on for sony as well so they attack you when you like a sony product. that panasonic px60 we have has a dynamite picture but the whites are more greys so its a meh in my opinion. so as I said before FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN. LCD is the better platform

scottvamp

JimBRICK wrote:

And from what I've seen is that the PLasma's now are falling short of the lcd's. 2 years ago there was a difference. The plasma's had killer colour compared to the lcd but now with our newest models the colours have become fuller and more vibrant. if you could see even an sxrd projo beside the px60 panasonic plasma you'd see the whites of the sxrd kill the panasonic. But theres a group of people on this forum also have a hate on for sony as well so they attack you when you like a sony product. that panasonic px60 we have has a dynamite picture but the whites are more greys so its a meh in my opinion. so as I said before FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN. LCD is the better platform

Thats what my post was exactly about. LCD's are making leaps and bounds. Same thing when i bought my 65" CRT rear projection tv three years ago. The PQ was ten times better than previous years. Its a fast moving industry. My new Samsung is jaw dropping.

LuSh

Jim...

Again...we are dealing with facts...not fantasy. I've been to CES, I've done the comparisons...The Brick stores don't use a black room, it is shaded at best. And it is one room...a dedicated Sony room...all other displays are on the floor...I could care less about panasonic, sony or toshiba. Please realize that your opinion is shared by you when an entire industry of video professionals use Plasma or CRT for reasons that are obvious...Post production houses use Plasma or CRT...weather it is CBC or Luca's studios...I've had made direct comparisions to other older technology's that offered superiour performance but weren't accepted in the market place because of other reasons.

The I'm 'using my eyes' theory is flawed and transparent to many reading this thread because it is painfully obvious that you have no understanding of basic video concepts like greyscale, kelvin measurements and how all current displays are trying to mimic the smoothness of original analog souces like film. To suggest or call me out as hack who reads other forums and then flaps my gums is also wrong. You might want to read the date below my name. I've been around awhile. Remember, you're the new guy not me. People know me and have come to understand that what I speak of is often true. If this wasn't the case I wouldn't have been posting here for so long.

While my true passion lies for Audio, I do enjoy exploring the world of video to the point where I could safely say that I have an almost equal working knowledge of both segments. As such, I have explored alot of different aspects of video. From working 3chip 1080p Runco projectors to Custom made screens from Stewart screen. My point is that I've enjoyed viewing and trying to understand many products that aren't on your sales floor. And as such feel I have a bigger grasp and scope of what is going on in the world of video. I write all of this so hopefully you can read it, take it in, realize you're new and chill out. If you're patient perhaps you might learn something on this forum and use it on the sales floor like I'm sure you have already in regards to audio. Where it is clear you are still learning the ropes and trying to understand fundamentals. Sit back, relax and take some of this stuff in.

JimBRICK

"The I'm 'using my eyes' theory is flawed and transparent to many reading this thread because it is painfully obvious that you have no understanding of basic video concepts like greyscale, kelvin measurements and how all current displays are trying to mimic the smoothness of original analog souces like film. To suggest or call me out as hack who reads other forums and then flaps my gums is also wrong. You might want to read the date below my name. I've been around awhile. Remember, you're the new guy not me. People know me and have come to understand that what I speak of is often true. If this wasn't the case I wouldn't have been posting here for so long."


that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. so what your are saying is that what you see with your eye the whole point of looking at a tv is wrong. That because a tv makes a light meter read a setting its a better tv. that is the funniest thing I have ever heard in my LIFE. Next you'll be telling me that listening to a speakers and what I hear doesnt matter its how the sound meter reads that matters. you keep spouting that you've been to CES. well if you were really there you must have noticed that PLASMA was in the background and nothing really NEW in that format was being talked about. My manager was there too and brought back alot of stuff.

As to say I work in a mostly sony store what do you know? I have 5 sony models on my floor and one is a floor model 36 high def trinitron. and thats out of 40 tv's. our dedicated home theater room has 6 models only 2 are sony. cause one is projo (sxrd) and one is XBR. so dont commnet on what I am talking about if you dont know.

How better to judge a tv than by what you are seeing? also being part of a forum for a long time doesnt mean your more knowledgable it just means that you know alot about OLD things. there are some new things in video you should look into

LuSh

Jim,

I'm going to make one last post. There will no further posts from me. It boggles my mind that I've been dumb enough to engage somebody who has very little understanding of whats going on. You've already been quoted giving wrong information on a television.

The light meter doesn't determine a televisions performance. Your eyes do. But what the light meter does is ensures that the display is performing to a level or standard so all settings are equal among all televisions. This is vital in properly being able to judge with ones eyes. With out having displays calibrated to correct settings arguing about picture performance is a moot point because nothing has balanced and you're comparing apples and oranges.

To break down this further for you, as you have had a constant struggle digesting this basic and bare bone way of testing anything in both audio or video, I will use speakers as an example. Most of the forum understands audio and therefore things should be layed out nicely for everybody to see.

If one were to compare two speakers, two amplifiers or two digital front ends, levels should be matched. The efficiency's of the speakers should be taken into consideration, the gain sections of both amplifiers and digital sources matched as well. The room would be the most cruicial. Acoustics can vary greatly from room to room. Ideally you'd want to use the same room as they give off the same acoustics. People spend money to help room acoustics and flatten frequency response. They try to ensure a flatter frequency response because this is a standard that has been put forth and followed for nearly 50 years. This is why many people recommend asking for in home auditions of high end speakers.

In the world of video it is just as important to ensure all levels are matched as well. It is called Kelvin and correcting a greyscale. These light meters dont measure the televisions performance, they match and LEVEL light to a standard. That standard is 6500k and every television is set to this standard. After televisions are set to this standard then they can truely be compared and only then.

Because you have no comprehension or working knowledge of these standards I have more or less called you out. Another poster called you out when you incorrectly identified a television as 1080p. I have already outlined my experience with televisions costing thousands more then anything found in your show room. I have given a gereral guideline on how to calibrate a television and why it is important. I have used industry standards that are still in practise today and are used in all new technologys both for today and for tommorow. I have drawn a direct analogy to video standards using audio standards. I have outlined who uses CRTS and plasmas over LCDS. I have described to you how performance in audio or video hasn't always led to a success path for certain technologys. And given you and the OP direct comparisons to older technology's.

You have told us you work in a retail audio/furniture store. And you look at the televisions all day and talk to rep's. You use your eyes. To some you might be "keeping it real"

Your evidence to support your case is overwelming. And as such I rest mine.



On a side note...here are some useful links for the OP and anybody else interested in learning.

http://www.imagingscience.com/
http://www.highdefforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=35
http://www.videoessentials.com/ (note Joe Kane usually runs a seminar at CEDIA every year)
http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_6_2/aviadvd.html