Discussion
After five years or so of excellent service my Sony CRT TV is going to be bannished in favour of a new TV.
I wouldn't mind sticking with the Sony - but at 28" the screen isn't big enough for the main TV-watching room.
So 37" or possibly 40" it is but I am very confused about whether I should be going for a Plasma or LCD panel.
My local, independent TV/electrical retailer looked at me aghast when I asked if plasma was better and explained that plasma is all but dead and only being kept alive by a couple of manufacturers who are desperate to make some money from the investment they have made in plasma-producing plant.
Also, I have always tended to default to SOny products, but reseach suggests that people are underwhelmed with their products.
So what should I go for with a budget of up to £500?
I wouldn't mind sticking with the Sony - but at 28" the screen isn't big enough for the main TV-watching room.
So 37" or possibly 40" it is but I am very confused about whether I should be going for a Plasma or LCD panel.
My local, independent TV/electrical retailer looked at me aghast when I asked if plasma was better and explained that plasma is all but dead and only being kept alive by a couple of manufacturers who are desperate to make some money from the investment they have made in plasma-producing plant.
Also, I have always tended to default to SOny products, but reseach suggests that people are underwhelmed with their products.
So what should I go for with a budget of up to £500?
Go and look at them all with a standard def picture and see which you like the best, yes HD is out there but much of what you watch will be in SD, Plasma is far, far better at SD than LCD is.
Only down side is that the Plasma TV's are now considered quite 'thick' compared to the new breed of LCD/LED TV's.
Only down side is that the Plasma TV's are now considered quite 'thick' compared to the new breed of LCD/LED TV's.
A lot depends how much money you want to spend/if you are looking for style or substance.
The following are only general rules that I've seen broken for both better and worse on both sides but...
LCD
+ Cheaper technology, cheaper to manufacture so in general better than plasma £ for £.
+ Simpler technology so can be packaged in a smaller (i.e. thinner) box.
- Not as good at handling blacks/shadows.
- Picture quality very dependent on processing soft/hardware and this is generally where the money goes. Top sets handle fast movement seamlessly but cheaper ones can get pixelation and artefacts breaking up the picture.
Plasma
+ Not back-lit so blacks/shadows not washed-out.
+ More complex technology that can't compete on price with LCD so doesn't tend to try, focusing on quality and picture.
- More complex technology that can't compete on price.
- Only a few players left in the game but still strong following.
What you need to do is get out there, ignore the staff, ignore the stickers telling you how it has a 6 billion Hertz refresh rate, etc, etc and just look at them.
If you are looking at the top end it's worth seeking out a specialist that has set them up correctly and can show you screens in parallel with the same source and quality of connection.
If you are just on the high street you can try taking along a test DVD and asking if they can put it on.
What you ideal want is a known film that has a shadowy night scene with people in dark coats standing in the shadows (Is it just a black blob or can you see the subtle colour differences where the material of their coat folds and catches the light differently?) and also a fast action scene (Is it smooth or does it stutter/break up in to blocks? Can you watch it comfortably or is it jerky and sea-sick inducing?).
Watch the key scenes a few times looking between 2 or 3 screens then buy the one that, for you is the best compromise of price/style/performance and that you will be happy watching for the next 10+ years.
The following are only general rules that I've seen broken for both better and worse on both sides but...
LCD
+ Cheaper technology, cheaper to manufacture so in general better than plasma £ for £.
+ Simpler technology so can be packaged in a smaller (i.e. thinner) box.
- Not as good at handling blacks/shadows.
- Picture quality very dependent on processing soft/hardware and this is generally where the money goes. Top sets handle fast movement seamlessly but cheaper ones can get pixelation and artefacts breaking up the picture.
Plasma
+ Not back-lit so blacks/shadows not washed-out.
+ More complex technology that can't compete on price with LCD so doesn't tend to try, focusing on quality and picture.
- More complex technology that can't compete on price.
- Only a few players left in the game but still strong following.
What you need to do is get out there, ignore the staff, ignore the stickers telling you how it has a 6 billion Hertz refresh rate, etc, etc and just look at them.
If you are looking at the top end it's worth seeking out a specialist that has set them up correctly and can show you screens in parallel with the same source and quality of connection.
If you are just on the high street you can try taking along a test DVD and asking if they can put it on.
What you ideal want is a known film that has a shadowy night scene with people in dark coats standing in the shadows (Is it just a black blob or can you see the subtle colour differences where the material of their coat folds and catches the light differently?) and also a fast action scene (Is it smooth or does it stutter/break up in to blocks? Can you watch it comfortably or is it jerky and sea-sick inducing?).
Watch the key scenes a few times looking between 2 or 3 screens then buy the one that, for you is the best compromise of price/style/performance and that you will be happy watching for the next 10+ years.
^^^ That's what I found.
I found LEDs flawed in movement, you could see the judder on a fast pan - once you notice it, it always seems to be there if you know what I mean...
//j17 said:
A lot depends how much money you want to spend/if you are looking for style or substance.
The following are only general rules that I've seen broken for both better and worse on both sides but...
LCD
+ Cheaper technology, cheaper to manufacture so in general better than plasma £ for £.
+ Simpler technology so can be packaged in a smaller (i.e. thinner) box.
- Not as good at handling blacks/shadows.
- Picture quality very dependent on processing soft/hardware and this is generally where the money goes. Top sets handle fast movement seamlessly but cheaper ones can get pixelation and artefacts breaking up the picture.
Plasma
+ Not back-lit so blacks/shadows not washed-out.
+ More complex technology that can't compete on price with LCD so doesn't tend to try, focusing on quality and picture.
- More complex technology that can't compete on price.
- Only a few players left in the game but still strong following.
What you need to do is get out there, ignore the staff, ignore the stickers telling you how it has a 6 billion Hertz refresh rate, etc, etc and just look at them.
If you are looking at the top end it's worth seeking out a specialist that has set them up correctly and can show you screens in parallel with the same source and quality of connection.
If you are just on the high street you can try taking along a test DVD and asking if they can put it on.
What you ideal want is a known film that has a shadowy night scene with people in dark coats standing in the shadows (Is it just a black blob or can you see the subtle colour differences where the material of their coat folds and catches the light differently?) and also a fast action scene (Is it smooth or does it stutter/break up in to blocks? Can you watch it comfortably or is it jerky and sea-sick inducing?).
Watch the key scenes a few times looking between 2 or 3 screens then buy the one that, for you is the best compromise of price/style/performance and that you will be happy watching for the next 10+ years.
I found the settings in shops are certainly random and best 'played with' - worth resetting or custom setting them, certainly if you've narrowed it down to a few. The following are only general rules that I've seen broken for both better and worse on both sides but...
LCD
+ Cheaper technology, cheaper to manufacture so in general better than plasma £ for £.
+ Simpler technology so can be packaged in a smaller (i.e. thinner) box.
- Not as good at handling blacks/shadows.
- Picture quality very dependent on processing soft/hardware and this is generally where the money goes. Top sets handle fast movement seamlessly but cheaper ones can get pixelation and artefacts breaking up the picture.
Plasma
+ Not back-lit so blacks/shadows not washed-out.
+ More complex technology that can't compete on price with LCD so doesn't tend to try, focusing on quality and picture.
- More complex technology that can't compete on price.
- Only a few players left in the game but still strong following.
What you need to do is get out there, ignore the staff, ignore the stickers telling you how it has a 6 billion Hertz refresh rate, etc, etc and just look at them.
If you are looking at the top end it's worth seeking out a specialist that has set them up correctly and can show you screens in parallel with the same source and quality of connection.
If you are just on the high street you can try taking along a test DVD and asking if they can put it on.
What you ideal want is a known film that has a shadowy night scene with people in dark coats standing in the shadows (Is it just a black blob or can you see the subtle colour differences where the material of their coat folds and catches the light differently?) and also a fast action scene (Is it smooth or does it stutter/break up in to blocks? Can you watch it comfortably or is it jerky and sea-sick inducing?).
Watch the key scenes a few times looking between 2 or 3 screens then buy the one that, for you is the best compromise of price/style/performance and that you will be happy watching for the next 10+ years.
I found LEDs flawed in movement, you could see the judder on a fast pan - once you notice it, it always seems to be there if you know what I mean...
I had a Panasonic 32" CRT TV which i used for years. Then my wife decided she wanted a large flat screen so we bought a 42" LG HD LCD TV. Within a few weeks she-who-must-be-obeyed decided it wasn't big enough so we bought a 50" LG HD Plasma TV which we are still using.
I use the 42" HD LCD for my Xbox360 and PS3 and the main TV in our lounge is the 50".
Having had the opportunity to compare Plasma with LCD I would go for Plasma everytime for general viewing. Better colour range, better blacks and wider contrast range.
LCD has brilliant whites but charcoal grey instead of true black.
I am told that LG and Samsung screens are made side by side in the same factories. Both have rear facing speakers which can cause problems for volume/clarity of sound and if sited in a corner of the room (as is ours) the sound can be amplified off the walls behind it into the room, more noticable from certain parts of the room.
Most showroom TV's are set up specifically for effect, ie on "Vivid" setting to accentuate their colours and contrast. Likewise most are using a specially created demo DVD with custom recordings of exceptionally vivid hi-def images to please the eye so when testing for oneself ask to see conventional broadcast material?
edited for spellig mistooks
I use the 42" HD LCD for my Xbox360 and PS3 and the main TV in our lounge is the 50".
Having had the opportunity to compare Plasma with LCD I would go for Plasma everytime for general viewing. Better colour range, better blacks and wider contrast range.
LCD has brilliant whites but charcoal grey instead of true black.
I am told that LG and Samsung screens are made side by side in the same factories. Both have rear facing speakers which can cause problems for volume/clarity of sound and if sited in a corner of the room (as is ours) the sound can be amplified off the walls behind it into the room, more noticable from certain parts of the room.
Most showroom TV's are set up specifically for effect, ie on "Vivid" setting to accentuate their colours and contrast. Likewise most are using a specially created demo DVD with custom recordings of exceptionally vivid hi-def images to please the eye so when testing for oneself ask to see conventional broadcast material?
edited for spellig mistooks
Edited by XMG5 on Tuesday 29th June 13:44
Plotloss said:
In summary.
If plasma is available at the size of screen you are looking at, on a performance basis, it ALWAYS wins.
Although I do recall Der popping in here a couple of months ago and mentioning that he and Gandalf were sat watching one of those Phillips wide screen LCD TVs and that the picture was on a par with a lot of plasmas. If plasma is available at the size of screen you are looking at, on a performance basis, it ALWAYS wins.
rhinochopig said:
Plotloss said:
In summary.
If plasma is available at the size of screen you are looking at, on a performance basis, it ALWAYS wins.
Although I do recall Der popping in here a couple of months ago and mentioning that he and Gandalf were sat watching one of those Phillips wide screen LCD TVs and that the picture was on a par with a lot of plasmas. If plasma is available at the size of screen you are looking at, on a performance basis, it ALWAYS wins.
rhinochopig said:
Although I do recall Der popping in here a couple of months ago and mentioning that he and Gandalf were sat watching one of those Phillips wide screen LCD TVs and that the picture was on a par with a lot of plasmas.
I'm trying to go plasma with my next purchase, but I keep reading the rising black loevel threads on AVF about the Panasonics and I wouldn't entertain an LG or Samsung so that doesn't leave much choice. Been considering the new Sony 46EX703 but it has issues with 'coning' backlights, so the cheaper 46HX703 might be in the running despite the fact it's an LCD...OldSkoolRS said:
rhinochopig said:
Although I do recall Der popping in here a couple of months ago and mentioning that he and Gandalf were sat watching one of those Phillips wide screen LCD TVs and that the picture was on a par with a lot of plasmas.
I'm trying to go plasma with my next purchase, but I keep reading the rising black loevel threads on AVF about the Panasonics and I wouldn't entertain an LG or Samsung so that doesn't leave much choice. Been considering the new Sony 46EX703 but it has issues with 'coning' backlights, so the cheaper 46HX703 might be in the running despite the fact it's an LCD...
ks in my opinion, i work at a large Pana dealership (also Samsung) and we also rent LOTS of these TV's so we deal with literally thousands of the supposedly affected pannas, since the issue was raised i have actually been looking for this problem and to this date i havent had 1 reported and i havent seen it on any others either. I would consider the sound quality and panel fauilure rate to be much more of a problem. If i were in the market for a TV right now it woult be the V20 top of my list.(yes i know my spelling is bad, deal with it)
headcase said:
OldSkoolRS said:
rhinochopig said:
Although I do recall Der popping in here a couple of months ago and mentioning that he and Gandalf were sat watching one of those Phillips wide screen LCD TVs and that the picture was on a par with a lot of plasmas.
I'm trying to go plasma with my next purchase, but I keep reading the rising black loevel threads on AVF about the Panasonics and I wouldn't entertain an LG or Samsung so that doesn't leave much choice. Been considering the new Sony 46EX703 but it has issues with 'coning' backlights, so the cheaper 46HX703 might be in the running despite the fact it's an LCD...ks in my opinion, i work at a large Pana dealership (also Samsung) and we also rent LOTS of these TV's so we deal with literally thousands of the supposedly affected pannas, since the issue was raised i have actually been looking for this problem and to this date i havent had 1 reported and i havent seen it on any others either. I would consider the sound quality and panel fauilure rate to be much more of a problem. If i were in the market for a TV right now it woult be the V20 top of my list.(yes i know my spelling is bad, deal with it)
Another vote for plasma, it gives a superior picture, period.
Traditionally plasmas had lower resolution than LCD but ever since 1920x1080 plasmas appeared A few years ago there has really been no contest.
You won't go wrong with a Panasonic plasma. Consider 3D capability if you don't change your tv very often (which it sounds like you don't
)
Traditionally plasmas had lower resolution than LCD but ever since 1920x1080 plasmas appeared A few years ago there has really been no contest.
You won't go wrong with a Panasonic plasma. Consider 3D capability if you don't change your tv very often (which it sounds like you don't
)Thanks for the comments and thoughts.
No I don't change my TV very often and to be honest I am gutted that I am having to spend money on a new one when the old one isn't broken but a 28" screen size in my new living room isn't on.
It seems that the general concensus is to go plasma, so that is what I will be getting.
No I don't change my TV very often and to be honest I am gutted that I am having to spend money on a new one when the old one isn't broken but a 28" screen size in my new living room isn't on.
It seems that the general concensus is to go plasma, so that is what I will be getting.
I have just got a plasma & I do miss the sharper picture & far less reflective screen of my old LCD.
It's a bit like a modern laptop with the shiny screens v's the old matt ones. In fact it even reminds me of my old CRT.
I'd try a few demos & think carefully about reflections regarding where it will sit.
Loads more info @ AVforums.com
It's a bit like a modern laptop with the shiny screens v's the old matt ones. In fact it even reminds me of my old CRT.
I'd try a few demos & think carefully about reflections regarding where it will sit.
Loads more info @ AVforums.com
Gassing Station | Home Cinema & Hi-Fi | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff