I'm actually closing on a new house and i do work for a retailer for both of these tv's one of them is carried at my store which is the pioneer and i have up to the 850 samsung series at my strore. Any ways i'm debathing these to for an over the fireplace installation. I Watch alot of movies, own a playstation3 so that's also bluray, a 7.1 deftech/denon home theater. Anyways i'm debating with the pioneer 50inch 1080p kuro. Or the 55inch A950 series samsung for me the tv's are about 150 apart price wise. I just can't decide and want some direction on this if you have any questions that you need answered to give me an educated answer feel free to ask thank you.

I'm actually closing on a new house and i do work for a retailer for both of these tv's one of them is carried at my store which is the pioneer and i have up to the 850 samsung series at my strore. Any ways i'm debathing these to for an over the fireplace installation. I Watch alot of movies, own a playstation3 so that's also bluray, a 7.1 deftech/denon home theater. Anyways i'm debating with the pioneer 50inch 1080p kuro. Or the 55inch A950 series samsung for me the tv's are about 150 apart price wise. I just can't decide and want some direction on this if you have any questions that you need answered to give me an educated answer feel free to ask thank you.

My preference has always leaned toward plasma and hard to do much better than the Pioneer with the price being about equal, but the Samsung is a very nice set also and it's your eyes that have to make the final decision. Whichever you get home should give you an excellent experience.

I'm actually closing on a new house and i do work for a retailer for both of these tv's one of them is carried at my store which is the pioneer and i have up to the 850 samsung series at my strore. Any ways i'm debathing these to for an over the fireplace installation. I Watch alot of movies, own a playstation3 so that's also bluray, a 7.1 deftech/denon home theater. Anyways i'm debating with the pioneer 50inch 1080p kuro. Or the 55inch A950 series samsung for me the tv's are about 150 apart price wise. I just can't decide and want some direction on this if you have any questions that you need answered to give me an educated answer feel free to ask thank you.

Well I would also throw a Samsung Plasma into the mix too. The Sammy Plasmas not only are cheaper than the Pioneers but they appear to be slightly brighter, better color pop with very little tradeoff in depth of blacks IMO. Pioneers are nice and they have a very strong following but for any degragation there "may be" between them and a Samsung you would be hard pressed to find any economic logic to not choose the Samsung. I'm not sure what kind of space your dealing with over the fireplace but you may be able to move up to a 58" for the same or better cost than the other two choices.
However- - - if this set is to be used for heavy gaming than LCD is the obvious way to go.

I also was going to suggest a Samsung plasma.

The Pioneer is hard to beat.

get your eyes in front of a 950 and decide. try to see if you can turn the lights on and off to see in a variety of lighting situations.

you may like one or the other better. only you can decide.

i would go with the samsung.

very bad question lol plasma is better in every area lcd's use a glossy screen that makes the lcd so reflective (was a selling point for lcd's) now theirs no advantage to them. Oh and brighter screen and oversatured colors arent the realistic thing!.

motion blurr / motion resolution(2 diffrent things) lack of black levels viewing angles mura S & H local dimming issues zone lighting blooming innaucruate super bright whites \ poor SD content (plasma better in this area) and among more things...

Plasma wins in all these area's and since lcd again are using glossy screen so the reflective senerio is no longer a thing to hold on lcd end ;)

oh and uneven again wil happen on the LED based LCD.

get a pioneer its the best tv (well the elite is complete!)

Oh and read the title on the plasma section

5gs to spent what is best display for gaming.

you will see how EVERYONE (except auditor55 lol) said to get a pioneer plasma since money was no objection, the guy did NOT listen got an lcd was Un satisified returned and and told us...

intresting read!

good luck

Actually auditor55 thinks the Pioneer is the best available, but is not good enough.
Just he keeps arguing the flaws way too much.

Actually auditor55 thinks the Pioneer is the best available, but is not good enough.
Just he keeps arguing the flaws way too much.


Is that why whenever someone asks which to get, he says LCD?

Anyway, one thing people have neglected to mention, is the size difference between the two. While I agree with most regarding plasma, I think I would have to go with the Samsung, as I am an advocate of "always going bigger".

Like others have mentioned, look into the Samsung plasmas.

While I agree with most regarding plasma, I think I would have to go with the Samsung, as I am an advocate of "always going bigger".
.

But what will he be giving up for those extra 5 inches?

I would say go with the Samsung everyone who has bought it is in love with it and Motion Blur is almost completely gone CNET says it can achieve 1000 motion line resolution with AMP and LED Motion Plus enabled so sports will be just as good as a Plasma. Also the color seem to pop more on this tv then any other I've heard (I'm going to see it tomorrow for the 1st time) as I am heavily leaning towards its little brother the 46 inch version of the a950. I think Plasmas are solid but LCD's are more exciting and colorful and sharp to boot. Even saying that I would be over the moon to have a 9g Elite Kuro as it has better shadow detail then anything else.

I would say go with the Samsung everyone who has bought it is in love with it and Motion Blur is almost completely gone CNET says it can achieve 1000 motion line resolution with AMP and LED Motion Plus enabled so sports will be just as good as a Plasma. Also the color seem to pop more on this tv then any other I've heard (I'm going to see it tomorrow for the 1st time) as I am heavily leaning towards its little brother the 46 inch version of the a950. I think Plasmas are solid but LCD's are more exciting and colorful and sharp to boot. Even saying that I would be over the moon to have a 9g Elite Kuro as it has better shadow detail then anything else.

THe motion resolution is only 1000 when BOTH AMP AND LED Motion Plus are enabled. This means if you don't like the soap opera effect, then TUff.
Because if you turn the dreaded AMP off then there goes your motion performance.
Also, Black levels are not at the Kuro level.
Only when the screen is totally black will it do kuro level blacks.
When content is on the screen, the Kuro still outperforms it bar none. The illumination from the bright areas bleeds over into the blacks making them greyish. this reflect is called Blooming. also, Uneven LED wear is a potential problem.
The 950 is great for LCD and maybe the best, but it still is not better or even equal to the Elite 9g Kuro in overall Pq.

THe motion resolution is only 1000 when BOTH AMP AND LED Motion Plus are enabled. This means if you don't like the soap opera effect, then TUff.
Because if you turn the dreaded AMP off then there goes your motion performance.
Also, Black levels are not at the Kuro level.
Only when the screen is totally black will it do kuro level blacks.
When content is on the screen, the Kuro still outperforms it bar none. The illumination from the bright areas bleeds over into the bhlacks making them greyish. this reflect is called Blooming. also, Uneven LED wear is a potential problem.
The 950 is great for LCD and maybe the best, but it still is not better or even equal to the Elite 9g Kuro in overall Pq.

that is true about amp and smart led having to be engaged but it is also true that you don't have to max out on those effects to get the benefits of no motion blur. the review also states that at any setting (high or low) the blur is gone.

off angle viewing does effect pq but if you're not watching tv from extreme angles you get all the benefits of led.

the review also says that this lcd is the most has the most accurate colors of any tv ever reviewed by them lcd or plasma.

benefits of lcd have always been in the bright and white end of the spectrum. also ambient light performance and now add color accuracy.

lcd's are now zero-ing in on black level performance in complete darkness. with all these factors working together it makes me completely comfortable to go with an led lcd over a pioneer elite kuro.

the only thing holding me back is price.

that is true about amp and smart led having to be engaged but it is also true that you don't have to max out on those effects to get the benefits of no motion blur. the review also states that at any setting (high or low) the blur is gone..

Yes, thats true. But interpolation will still take place. This is not good for those who do not want this effect. Its basically forcing interpolation on you.
Those who are used to good motion performance (typically with CRT's and Plasmas) can spot the interpolation immediately even at low.

off angle viewing does effect pq but if you're not watching tv from extreme angles you get all the benefits of led..

LCD picture will degrade as soon as you move off center and will get worse and worse the further you go away from the center. If you look in the CONs section of the review, you will see they listed off angle viewing. they claimed that the Picture washes out and discolors from off-center.

the review also says that this lcd is the most has the most accurate colors of any tv ever reviewed by them lcd or plasma..

Both the Sammy and the Pio elite 9G are within the minimum perceivable range of color accuracy. Meaning they are both so close to spot-on, that your eyes simply cannot decifer the difference between the TV's accuracy and perfect color accuracy. Only instrumentation will.
Also, I would like to add that Cnet did say that the 950 has the most accurate color of any TV (LCD or Plasma) they have tested.
But one thing to remember is that Cnet has not reviewed the Elite 9G Kuro. Only the non-elite, which has nowhere near the color capability of the Elite 9G Kuro or especially the Signature 9G Elite.


benefits of lcd have always been in the bright and white end of the spectrum. also ambient light performance and now add color accuracy.

Yes, The 950 has the ability to be much brighter than the 111/151.
But there is simply no need to go this bright.
And the 950 performs badly in bright lighting per Cnets review. Most are very displeased with the reflectivity of Samsungs LCD's.
On a good note though, they said the A950 did maintain its black level better under bright lighting than any of the other displays, although personally they (like most people) would trade the black levels in a bright room in exchange for less-noticeable reflections. Which makes this Tv lose its "lighted situation" advantage against the 9G Elite per Cnet.
Reflections play a large part in performance in high lighting situations.


lcd's are now zero-ing in on black level performance in complete darkness. with all these factors working together it makes me completely comfortable to go with an led lcd over a pioneer elite kuro. .

LCD's are getting very good. The 950 is a testament to that.
But even Cnet states in the beginning of the performance section of the review:

"the Samsung LN46A950 delivered the best picture quality of any LCD display we've tested yet. It's by no means perfect, and we still give the overall nod to the top plasmas we've seen"

^^^
What does cnet know?

I've seen them change an overall score after a AVS member e-mails them and brought a problem to there attention.

To bad we seek others advice I'm guilty myself of it.

I've always learned the most from trial and error, doing it on my own.

^^^
What does cnet know?

I've seen them change an overall score after a AVS member e-mails them and brought a problem to there attention.

To bad we seek others advice I'm guilty myself of it.

I've always learned the most from trial and error, doing it on my own.

Very good point.
I agree 100%.
I was just pointing out a few other points of thier review since it was brought up.
Cnets scoring system IMO is too "consumer driven" . They factor Price into the review too much IMO.

If you want the best then get a Pioneer Elite....if not the 950 from Sammy(if you like LCD's) would be a good alternative.
Sammy plasmas would definitely be noticeably inferior to Kuro's.(owned and calibrated both)
-imo

But what will he be giving up for those extra 5 inches?

At what cost? Quite a bit.

I have seen the A950, and while I do like Samsung a lot (especially the PNA760 WOWZA), this panel has quite a few flaws.

My local Magnolia has a Pioneer 110, and an A950 in one of their dedicated studios, so I have the opportunity of comparing them in a home type enviornment. WIth the lights on, the A950 really did shine, but off center contrast shifts were prevelant, and so was the blooming. Mind you, when I mention off center, I do not mean extreme off center. I'm talking like normal off axis (5ft off center) viewing angles. The blacks did look inky on the widescreen bars, but again, I could see the bleeding from blooming. Once the lighst went off, the blacks went from inky to a noticable glow, and the blooming became completely annoying. Once I turned off the AMP, the blurring was again rearing it's ugly head. With the AMP on low, while artificial, wasn't that bad. It was also inferior to the 110 in noise. I put in FTF, and the Kuro did a much better job of cleaning up the image.

Funny, I actually took pictures of my own 151 and the A950 with the exact same overexposure, and someone who is well known in the LCD camp came in overexposed the Kuro picture to the point where you couldn't even see an image on the Kuro, and said that it was much more of a fair comparison.

I honestly do not care which one people think is better, I know what I know, and there is factual data to substantiate this, thanks to D-Nice.

And as to the "more" accurate colors, go look at D-nicees post calibration results. If there is such a thing as "more" perfect color, I'd like to see it, because according to his charts, it doesn't get any better.


Yes, thats true. But interpolation will still take place. This is not good for those who do not want this effect. Its basically forcing interpolation on you.
Those who are used to good motion performance (typically with CRT's and Plasmas) can spot the interpolation immediately even at low.



LCD picture will degrade as soon as you move off center and will get worse and worse the further you go away from the center. If you look in the CONs section of the review, you will see they listed off angle viewing. they claimed that the Picture washes out and discolors from off-center.



Both the Sammy and the Pio elite 9G are within the minimum perceivable range of color accuracy. Meaning they are both so close to spot-on, that your eyes simply cannot decifer the difference between the TV's accuracy and perfect color accuracy. Only instrumentation will.
Also, I would like to add that Cnet did say that the 950 has the most accurate color of any TV (LCD or Plasma) they have tested.
But one thing to remember is that Cnet has not reviewed the Elite 9G Kuro. Only the non-elite, which has nowhere near the color capability of the Elite 9G Kuro or especially the Signature 9G Elite.




Yes, The 950 has the ability to be much brighter than the 111/151.
But there is simply no need to go this bright.
And the 950 performs badly in bright lighting per Cnets review. Most are very displeased with the reflectivity of Samsungs LCD's.
On a good note though, they said the A950 did maintain its black level better under bright lighting than any of the other displays, although personally they (like most people) would trade the black levels in a bright room in exchange for less-noticeable reflections. Which makes this Tv lose its "lighted situation" advantage against the 9G Elite per Cnet.
Reflections play a large part in performance in high lighting situations.




LCD's are getting very good. The 950 is a testament to that.
But even Cnet states in the beginning of the performance section of the review:

"the Samsung LN46A950 delivered the best picture quality of any LCD display we've tested yet. It's by no means perfect, and we still give the overall nod to the top plasmas we've seen"

Notice they said plasmas? Meaning this panel isn't even better than the Panasonics, never mind the Kuro

I agree with everything you have said.

Only reason I said go for the Sammy, is because I love the immersive feel of a larger than life FP, and those were the only two panels he mentioned.

At what cost? Quite a bit.

I have seen the A950, and while I do like Samsung a lot (especially the PNA760 WOWZA), this panel has quite a few flaws.

My local Magnolia has a Pioneer 110, and an A950 in one of their dedicated studios, so I have the opportunity of comparing them in a home type enviornment. WIth the lights on, the A950 really did shine, but off center contrast shifts were prevelant, and so was the blooming. Mind you, when I mention off center, I do not mean extreme off center. I'm talking like normal off axis (5ft off center) viewing angles. The blacks did look inky on the widescreen bars, but again, I could see the bleeding from blooming. Once the lighst went off, the blacks went from inky to a noticable glow, and the blooming became completely annoying. Once I turned off the AMP, the blurring was again rearing it's ugly head. With the AMP on low, while artificial, wasn't that bad. It was also inferior to the 110 in noise. I put in FTF, and the Kuro did a much better job of cleaning up the image.

Funny, I actually took pictures of my own 151 and the A950 with the exact same overexposure, and someone who is well known in the LCD camp came in overexposed the Kuro picture to the point where you couldn't even see an image on the Kuro, and said that it was much more of a fair comparison.

I honestly do not care which one people think is better, I know what I know, and there is factual data to substantiate this, thanks to D-Nice.

And as to the "more" accurate colors, go look at D-nicees post calibration results. If there is such a thing as "more" perfect color, I'd like to see it, because according to his charts, it doesn't get any better.




Notice they said plasmas? Meaning this panel isn't even better than the Panasonics, never mind the Kuro

I agree with everything you have said.

Only reason I said go for the Sammy, is because I love the immersive feel of a larger than life FP, and those were the only two panels he mentioned.

I am a madman for a big screen also. I would take a 58-60 inch 950 (if they existed) over a 50 inch Kuro myself. I love a big screen

Notice they said plasmas? Meaning this panel isn't even better than the Panasonics, never mind the Kuro




how did you interpret that statement to mean "panasonic". was it mentioned somewhere else in the review? that seems like quite a jump in logic to me. you really live up to your name. i guess if you're gonna fight for something, logic be damned.


here is an interesting shootout/test performed by hdguru.
i always thought he was a plasma pusher but even he couldn't help but be impressed with the 950.

http://hdguru.com/will-you-see-all-the-hdtv-resolution-you-expected-125-2008-model-test-results-hd-guru-exclusive/287/

of particular interest is the part about motion resolution/blur.

he tested 125 2008 tv's and the winner is...........the samsung 950.

"The motion resolution winner, displaying all 1080 lines through processes called motion interpolation (used on all 120Hz LCD panels) and sequential LED backlight control (called Motion Plus) was the Samsung LN-46A950. It is the only display ever tested that resolved 100% of the moving image’s detail. Congratulations to Samsung’s engineering team for eliminating motion blur on an LCD display!"

he states the the pioneers resolved about 900 lines! that's quite a drop from 1080!

i guess even plasmas suffer from motion blur ;) who'da thunk!
he does mention the usual bit about having to turn on smart led and amp to achieve this but for things like sports with fast action this feature is phenominal.

i did recently check out the 950 at a magnolia to check out the smart led/amp effect and concluded that for movies, the settings "med" or "high" makes movies unnacceptable (video look) but on "low" very nice though i don't even know why anyone would want to engage it for movies. i've never seen motion blur problems with any movie ever on my sony and westinghouse lcd's.

how did you interpret that statement to mean "panasonic". was it mentioned somewhere else in the review? that seems like quite a jump in logic to me. you really live up to your name. i guess if you're gonna fight for something, logic be damned.


here is an interesting shootout/test performed by hdguru.
i always thought he was a plasma pusher but even he couldn't help but be impressed with the 950.

http://hdguru.com/will-you-see-all-the-hdtv-resolution-you-expected-125-2008-model-test-results-hd-guru-exclusive/287/

of particular interest is the part about motion resolution/blur.

he tested 125 2008 tv's and the winner is...........the samsung 950.

"The motion resolution winner, displaying all 1080 lines through processes called motion interpolation (used on all 120Hz LCD panels) and sequential LED backlight control (called Motion Plus) was the Samsung LN-46A950. It is the only display ever tested that resolved 100% of the moving image’s detail. Congratulations to Samsung’s engineering team for eliminating motion blur on an LCD display!"

he states the the pioneers resolved about 900 lines! that's quite a drop from 1080!

i guess even plasmas suffer from motion blur ;) who'da thunk!
he does mention the usual bit about having to turn on smart led and amp to achieve this but for things like sports with fast action this feature is phenominal.

i did recently check out the 950 at a magnolia to check out the smart led/amp effect and concluded that for movies, the settings "med" or "high" makes movies unnacceptable (video look) but on "low" very nice though i don't even know why anyone would want to engage it for movies. i've never seen motion blur problems with any movie ever on my sony and westinghouse lcd's.

This is only if you like interpolation.
And others, Including D-Nice (who measured 950 lines) have measured higher than 900 lines.

Interpolation is the reason. Without interpolation and AMP turned on, the samsung does very bad.
And IMO (and many many others), Interpolation drives me nuts. Too unnatural. Not everyone likes Vapors and thier movies to look like home videos. Given, with AMP set to low, its less intense but still there.
Pioneers smooth mode gives this effect but most kuro owners do not use smooth mode.

Interpolation is basically introducing fake created frames into the film.
While its a cool trick, I would preferr a set that can naturally perform well wth motion without artifacts and the unnatural feel.

Interpolation (AMP) causes too many issues and causes film to look funky. Even in LOW.

Okay, I feel like i have to chime in here to share my recent personal experience...

NOTE: I have NO agenda here at these forums and have absolutely NO bias at all. I have always been completely objectionable and open to all technologies.

That said, I'll cut to the chase. I have owned a Samsung 5281 LCD (last years 52" top of the line, LED model) for a year now. I just bought a Pioneer Elite Pro-111 50" plasma. I have alwyas gravitated towards LCD technology for may reasons and been VERY happy. However, the Pioneer is truly a much better TV. Like, so much better that I felt a teeny, tiny bit embarrassed that I was so opposed to plasmas and thought my 5281 was the king.

Please don't get me wrong, the Samsung 5281 (all all their LCD's for that matter) are excellent, excellent TV's. Really. The 5281 was quite amazing actually, as is their new 950 series. That TV wow'd me everyday for the past year. I thought I was more than happy.

Recently, I have been getting quite wrapped up in all the Pioneer 9G 'buzz' (pun intended ;) ) and decided to see for myself (which I wasn't going to let myself do because of how happy I'd been with my Samsung LCD). The only reason I went through with looking at the Pioneer is because I had the opportunity to basically get the Pro-111 for a $500 'upgrade' from my 5281. So I got curious...

I went to my local BB/Magnolia (which has an incredible staff and amazing customer service BTW - I hear people constantly complaining about their local BB so I wanted to share that mine is wonderful) and did some serious comparing. I had the Samsung 5281, the Samasung 950 and the Pioneer Pro-111 all together in a row. I set them up to optimal settings (based on my experience and advice from here) and watched.

The Pioneer looked much better all around but really shined in brighter scenes actually. I know this sounds backwards but hear me out....

Now, of course I know that LCD strengths are their brighter screen and white levels as compared to Plasmas. However, this may actually be their weakness IMHO. In brighter scenes, no matter how much I tweaked the Samsungs (until I was crushing blacks) I could not get away from a fairly significant loss of detail and a semi-washed out looking picture when directly compared to the Pioneer. Please understand that I would have NEVER noticed this if these TV's were not next to each other. But, when lined up together it was very noticeable. One of the things that the Pioneer did not do as well in at the store was the overall black level when it was a really, really dark scene but I had to attribute this to the store lighting and it's adverse effect on a plasma screen. So...I was intrigued enough at this point to take the Pioneer home and do a direct, in my conditions test.

"Not even close bud..." (Judd Nelson - Breakfast Club)...

Okay, I get home and do the best 'in home' side by side I can do with the Pioneer Pro-111 and my Samsung 5281 (that I have tweaked for a year to get looking amazing). Please know that a big part of me was really, truly hoping my Samsung would win out or at least be too close to call. But it was not the case. In fact, it was not nearly even as close as I thought it would be. :eek: The Pioneer beat my Samsung in pretty much all areas which was shocking to me.

First off, the things that really bothered me about my Samsung were the cons of the LED technology. The 'blooming' and the horrible off-axis viewing WHICH I lived with because I thought the pro's of the technology WAY outweighed the cons. I just did not know you could really have the best of both worlds until I got the Pioneer home.

Black levels - The Samsung with it's LED tech is mind blowing when there is a mostly black screen except for it's blooming issue (which is not a huge deal breaker but is noticeable). But, the black it can produce is freaky good. Now, with the Pioneer, it is just the slightest (and I mean slightest) shade lighter black than the Samsung when looking at a 80-99% black screen. However, there is absolutely no blooming in the pioneer and when viewing anything less that 80% black it actually blew away the Samsung. Black levels in anything when it was mixed in with brighter content was so much better in the Pioneer. Black bars on widescreen movies yielded a very noticeable difference. Because of the LED tech, those bars would become dark grey on the Sammy when brighter scenes would be playing. The Pioneer was pitch black and was constant. I mean completely mixing into the bezel black. In 'normal' house lighting the black level was slightly better on the Pioneer but in lower light, nighttime viewing it was MUCH different (better).

Sharpness - Here is the area that surprised me the most. Because of the shadow detail and it's richer black levels, the Pioneer provided a much, much sharper and clear picture. This is with using 'D-Nice's' setting which has 'Sharpness' turned all the way down on the Pioneer. I noticed this in the store as well. The plasma was freaky crisp (in a good way). I just cannot believe how much of a difference it was.

Color - Close, but the edge went to the Pioneer. Much more natural with better reproduction of reds.

One way to describe the difference is that the Samsung just looked like a really, really nice 'TV', while the Pioneer looked like a industry reference monitor (in a good way, not a sterile one). I still cannot beleive how different they were side by side. (and this is even before the plasma gets to 'break-in' fully).

Again, by itself, the Samsung is truly an incredible TV (I would still highly recommended it). I really did love it for the past year. I just have to be truthful and say that in my experience the Pioneer beat it in all areas. I did not want it to, but it did.

So, if I had to help someone choose between the Samsung LED LCD TV's or a Pioneer Plasma and there were NO specific reasons why someone thought they needed an LCD, then I would say it's not even close. You absolutely have to go with the Pioneer. I wish I could say that it's really very close and almost a push with the slight advantage going to the Pioneer. But in my direct experience it was not. I know some of the major reviewing sites tend to make the comparisons sound fairly close, but that was not my experience.

Unless you really have to go with an LCD, you owe it to yourself to try the Pioneer.

I am a madman for a big screen also. I would take a 58-60 inch 950 (if they existed) over a 50 inch Kuro myself. I love a big screenI agree.

When I bought my LCD I got the biggest I could afford. I really wanted the 65" Sharp, even though the PQ was better on the 52" that I got. The extra size still would have outweighed the better PQ, IMO.

It is amazing to me still how much the size seems to have shrunk now that it is at home on the wall and not on display at the store.

Okay, I feel like i have to chime in here to share my recent personal experience...


Good writup spooky.
It just about matches up with my experience with various top LCD's vs the 8G and 9G Pio's.
I (like you), did not want the pioneer to be the better performer. I mean heck, why would I? It cost me more money to eventually get the Pioneer.

Good writup spooky.
It just about matches up with my experience with various top LCD's vs the 8G and 9G Pio's.
I (like you), did not want the pioneer to be the better performer. I mean heck, why would I? It cost me more money to eventually get the Pioneer.


Thanks Chad. I felt compelled all weekend to write something up because of how crazily impressed I am with the Pioneer. I seriously and honestly cannot believe how much of an improvement I am noticing. It even passed 'the wife test'. She, of course, thought I was insane to get another new TV but was quite surprised herself at the difference. She hated to admit it but she thought the Pioneer was much better as well.

Should I get a Pioneer Elite 111? I can afford one since the prices have gone down. I was going to get the 46 inch A950 but Spooky you have me wondering my mom wants me to get a Pioneer and my dad doesn't like Plasma because he's convinced they get hot and can get burn in I of course know better I have 0 worries of burn in. If I get it calibrated is can I still use Optimum mode or will the tv only be able to use the calibrated mode?

bosng;14759866]how did you interpret that statement to mean "panasonic". was it mentioned somewhere else in the review? that seems like quite a jump in logic to me. you really live up to your name. i guess if you're gonna fight for something, logic be damned.

How? If you noticed, they used the word "plasmas". Seeing as that is the plural form of the word, it is obvious they meant more than just one brand of plasma, and since in the performance aspect of the technology, we all know that the Kuro is #1 (not talking about price, so don't bother to bring that up), and the Panasonic is #2....

Unlike some, I do not randomly advise people to purchase something because it is what I like, and if it a specific tech, or brand isn't mentioned, I never even mention it. So are far as your critique of my screen name, I commend you for resorting to school yard behavior.


here is an interesting shootout/test performed by hdguru.
i always thought he was a plasma pusher but even he couldn't help but be impressed with the 950.

So you always thought they were plasma pushers? Why, because they didn't agree with you that LCD's are better?

http://hdguru.com/will-you-see-all-the-hdtv-resolution-you-expected-125-2008-model-test-results-hd-guru-exclusive/287/

of particular interest is the part about motion resolution/blur.

he tested 125 2008 tv's and the winner is...........the samsung 950.

"The motion resolution winner, displaying all 1080 lines through processes called motion interpolation (used on all 120Hz LCD panels) and sequential LED backlight control (called Motion Plus) was the Samsung LN-46A950. It is the only display ever tested that resolved 100% of the moving image’s detail. Congratulations to Samsung’s engineering team for eliminating motion blur on an LCD display!"

he states the the pioneers resolved about 900 lines! that's quite a drop from 1080!

i guess even plasmas suffer from motion blur ;) who'da thunk!
he does mention the usual bit about having to turn on smart led and amp to achieve this but for things like sports with fast action this feature is phenominal.

Phenominal to whom? You? Purely subjective. Does not change the fact it is still an artificial enhancement, and is blatantly obvious that it is unnnatural.

i did recently check out the 950 at a magnolia to check out the smart led/amp effect and concluded that for movies, the settings "med" or "high" makes movies unnacceptable (video look) but on "low" very nice though i don't even know why anyone would want to engage it for movies. i've never seen motion blur problems with any movie ever on my sony and westinghouse lcd's.[B]

just hear out sppoky lol, if you like that pop out bright colors effect you just go into "performance" thats plenty enought bright (too bright for me) i like d65k on pure mode oh and yeah if you have calibrated later on and you have the isfccc modes you dont worry about the other modes.

first focus on getting the tv then talk later about the calibration, oh and hear out what spooky said and be prepared to be AMAZED i know I AM. get it dont hold back its that good :D oh and 950 weak compared to it

Should I get a Pioneer Elite 111? I can afford one since the prices have gone down. I was going to get the 46 inch A950 but Spooky you have me wondering my mom wants me to get a Pioneer and my dad doesn't like Plasma because he's convinced they get hot and can get burn in I of course know better I have 0 worries of burn in. If I get it calibrated is can I still use Optimum mode or will the tv only be able to use the calibrated mode?

fanaticalism can you quote it right? plz and thanks

Oh and yeah motion blurr is NOT motion resolution ~ two diffrent things, and take off those fake features then measure the 950 then :rolls eys: and even then the lcd sucks because motion blurr is visable

Good writup spooky.
It just about matches up with my experience with various top LCD's vs the 8G and 9G Pio's.
I (like you), did not want the pioneer to be the better performer. I mean heck, why would I? It cost me more money to eventually get the Pioneer.

Thanks Chad. I felt compelled all weekend to write something up because of how crazily impressed I am with the Pioneer. I seriously and honestly cannot believe how much of an improvement I am noticing. It even passed 'the wife test'. She, of course, thought I was insane to get another new TV but was quite surprised herself at the difference. She hated to admit it but she thought the Pioneer was much better as well.


My sentiments exactly.

I too owned a 5271, and sold it only after 3 months, as all of it's shortcoming's annoyed the heck out of me.

just hear out sppoky lol, if you like that pop out bright colors effect you just go into "performance" thats plenty enought bright (too bright for me) i like d65k on pure mode oh and yeah if you have calibrated later on and you have the isfccc modes you dont worry about the other modes.

first focus on getting the tv then talk later about the calibration, oh and hear out what spooky said and be prepared to be AMAZED i know I AM. get it dont hold back its that good :D oh and 950 weak compared to it



fanaticalism can you quote it right? plz and thanks

Oh and yeah motion blurr is NOT motion resolution ~ two diffrent things, and take off those fake features then measure the 950 then :rolls eys: and even then the lcd sucks because motion blurr is visable


lol Gus,

OH THE IRONY!!

After reading the thread, I'd kind of like some more opinions about the two when content and use is tossed in. I'm deciding between a Kuro and High-End LCD (XBR7/8, A950), and while I'd love the true-to-life representation of the Kuro, my primary content is video games and static/semi-static images. I know Plasmas don't have the heavy burn-in problems of old, but there's still that risk with the technology in general.

When factoring in content, which would you (AVS) recommend? Figure that the client/customer would be using the display four hours a day minimum in continual usage, with eight hours on the weekends or more. I'm curious to see if recommendations would/will change once day-to-day use is factored in, after all, context of reviews changes drastically when your use/content is thrown into the equation.

After reading the thread, I'd kind of like some more opinions about the two when content and use is tossed in. I'm deciding between a Kuro and High-End LCD (XBR7/8, A950), and while I'd love the true-to-life representation of the Kuro, my primary content is video games and static/semi-static images. I know Plasmas don't have the heavy burn-in problems of old, but there's still that risk with the technology in general.

When factoring in content, which would you (AVS) recommend? Figure that the client/customer would be using the display four hours a day minimum in continual usage, with eight hours on the weekends or more. I'm curious to see if recommendations would/will change once day-to-day use is factored in, after all, context of reviews changes drastically when your use/content is thrown into the equation.

Well I have dropped all my fears about burin-in so if that is not a concern to you and you're really just wondering about PQ, i can easily say that the Pioneer WAY outperforms my Samsung LCD for video games. That was actually the thing that made me a bit embarrassed that I thought the Samsung was the best. I played WipeOut HD on the PS3 on the Pioneer and nearly sh*t my pants at how much better it looked/moved.

Please do keep all my observations relative as the Samsung was a VERY nice TV, but I am still quite surprised at just how much better the Pioneer is. However, when you get into these high-end TV's they are all quite nice. For me, the Pioneer just has a certain something that is very noticeably better, but it does not mean the Samsung is crappy by any means.

If you are going to play 8 hours straight of video games you may want to think about LCD's though. I just have no idea on that. My gaming is 1-3 hours at a time, tops.

(and, yes, I do realize I am starting to sound like a Pioneer Plasma 'fanboy' but my gosh...they certainly make it hard not to be! :D )

Okay, I feel like i have to chime in here to share my recent personal experience...

NOTE: I have NO agenda here at these forums and have absolutely NO bias at all. I have always been completely objectionable and open to all technologies.

That said, I'll cut to the chase. I have owned a Samsung 5281 LCD (last years 52" top of the line, LED model) for a year now. I just bought a Pioneer Elite Pro-111 50" plasma. I have alwyas gravitated towards LCD technology for may reasons and been VERY happy.

care to tell us why? and what were the deciding factors between the 81 vs plasma at that time? what were your definite conclusions to spend a really nice chunk of change for the 81?


However, the Pioneer is truly a much better TV. Like, so much better that I felt a teeny, tiny bit embarrassed that I was so opposed to plasmas and thought my 5281 was the king.

this is your personal statement based on your tastes, whether that's good or bad, they are yours and plasma people agree with you but lcd people don't.

don't forget today's king is just tomorrow's old tech. improvements will always be made.

i used to be a plasma owner. found them not up to snuff and too many drawbacks for me.


Please don't get me wrong, the Samsung 5281 (all all their LCD's for that matter) are excellent, excellent TV's. Really. The 5281 was quite amazing actually, as is their new 950 series. That TV wow'd me everyday for the past year. I thought I was more than happy.

hey, people change. maybe you didn't really assess your environment fully and finally came around to realizing it now. life is full of learning experiences.



Recently, I have been getting quite wrapped up in all the Pioneer 9G 'buzz' (pun intended ;) ) and decided to see for myself (which I wasn't going to let myself do because of how happy I'd been with my Samsung LCD). The only reason I went through with looking at the Pioneer is because I had the opportunity to basically get the Pro-111 for a $500 'upgrade' from my 5281. So I got curious...

still trying to figure out what it is you were unsatisfied about the 81 that you had to "test" another tech out which you say "in the store" always looks worse than lcd.

what was the thinking?

also concerning the 500 upgrade price. i'm not sure what the price of a pro 111 is. you've had the 81 for a year now, was the bb store willing to take it back for some reason? was the pro 111 a returned set? why would they take your used 81 back?




I went to my local BB/Magnolia (which has an incredible staff and amazing customer service BTW - I hear people constantly complaining about their local BB so I wanted to share that mine is wonderful) and did some serious comparing. I had the Samsung 5281, the Samasung 950 and the Pioneer Pro-111 all together in a row. I set them up to optimal settings (based on my experience and advice from here) and watched.

i appreciate the story/experience you are sharing with us but you know this is about as hodge podge a comparison as they come right? what were the optimal settings for the 950?

you do realize that each set would perform best in different lighting situations right? especially the 2 lcd's which would perform better in a variety of lighting situations.



The Pioneer looked much better all around but really shined in brighter scenes actually. I know this sounds backwards but hear me out....

okay



Now, of course I know that LCD strengths are their brighter screen and white levels as compared to Plasmas.

ok you know this. i'm trusting you now.


However, this may actually be their weakness IMHO.

doh! you just said....that.....you knew........not only you but everbody knows lcd's are much much much better on the bright.....................never mind.


In brighter scenes, no matter how much I tweaked the Samsungs (until I was crushing blacks) I could not get away from a fairly significant loss of detail and a semi-washed out looking picture when directly compared to the Pioneer. Please understand that I would have NEVER noticed this if these TV's were not next to each other. But, when lined up together it was very noticeable.

probably a factor of some setting you inadvertently set that caused this. could happen to anyone. it is not a good idea to willy nilly start changing settings from scene to scene and adjust on the fly. the plasma set is a dim tv and will obviously saturated the colors overall. when you say brighter scenes do you mean almost totally white or a daytime bright scene with lots of contrast?

the latter is typically the type of scene that lcd trounces plasma. not even close. plasma even elite plasma is dull and blurry by comparison.



One of the things that the Pioneer did not do as well in at the store was the overall black level when it was a really, really dark scene but I had to attribute this to the store lighting and it's adverse effect on a plasma screen.

light in a store is bright. light in your house can be bright as well. controlled lighting will help you plasma perform best. if you want the greatest versatility lcd is the way to go.


So...I was intrigued enough at this point to take the Pioneer home and do a direct, in my conditions test.


great. how did you get that set home? was it new? even if it was used i find it perplexing that the store would send it home with you without doing the full exchange.

i guess you knew the manager or something because i don't see this happening for anyone. heck most of the time they won't even let you hold the remote. i'm glad you were able to do it though. but what was it that made them so trusting?


"Not even close bud..." (Judd Nelson - Breakfast Club)...

Okay, I get home and do the best 'in home' side by side I can do with the Pioneer Pro-111 and my Samsung 5281 (that I have tweaked for a year to get looking amazing). Please know that a big part of me was really, truly hoping my Samsung would win out or at least be too close to call. But it was not the case. In fact, it was not nearly even as close as I thought it would be. :eek: The Pioneer beat my Samsung in pretty much all areas which was shocking to me.


well, i hope it would. if i'm not mistaken you are comparing new technology to old. that's great for you to be able to upgrade after a year of ownership for such a low price. i still don't understand the deal though.



First off, the things that really bothered me about my Samsung were the cons of the LED technology. The 'blooming' and the horrible off-axis viewing WHICH I lived with because I thought the pro's of the technology WAY outweighed the cons. I just did not know you could really have the best of both worlds until I got the Pioneer home.


so the best of both worlds is watching at extreme angles and no blooming for some specific conditions? or is the 81 way worse than the 91? i've seen the 91 and couldn't even detect it. are you talking about off axis viewing?


Black levels - The Samsung with it's LED tech is mind blowing when there is a mostly black screen except for it's blooming issue (which is not a huge deal breaker but is noticeable). But, the black it can produce is freaky good. Now, with the Pioneer, it is just the slightest (and I mean slightest) shade lighter black than the Samsung when looking at a 80-99% black screen. However, there is absolutely no blooming in the pioneer


this is in a very dim environment i assume. the only environment a plasma is able to achieve it's best black level. anything brighter you will notice that the 81, 91, 750,650 heck even my 3 yr old sony xbr will trounce the new elites.


and when viewing anything less that 80% black it actually blew away the Samsung. Black levels in anything when it was mixed in with brighter content was so much better in the Pioneer. Black bars on widescreen movies yielded a very noticeable difference. Because of the LED tech, those bars would become dark grey on the Sammy when brighter scenes would be playing. The Pioneer was pitch black and was constant. I mean completely mixing into the bezel black.

i'll trust you here. never seen the two in a pitch black room. you say you had both side by side.



In 'normal' house lighting the black level was slightly better on the Pioneer but in lower light, nighttime viewing it was MUCH different (better).

what's your normal house lighting? windows? sunshine? lots of variances can come into play.


Sharpness - Here is the area that surprised me the most. Because of the shadow detail and it's richer black levels, the Pioneer provided a much, much sharper and clear picture. This is with using 'D-Nice's' setting which has 'Sharpness' turned all the way down on the Pioneer. I noticed this in the store as well. The plasma was freaky crisp (in a good way). I just cannot believe how much of a difference it was.

okay, now that's hard to believe. i'm glad you like it but please. plasma compared to lcd in the sharpness arena is just to embarrassing to compare. it's just so blatantly obvious lcd is better.

even motion resolution is fully realized with the 950

http://hdguru.com/will-you-see-all-the-hdtv-resolution-you-expected-125-2008-model-test-results-hd-guru-exclusive/287/

the kuro elite resolved 900 lines vs the 950's 1080 lines of motion resolution.

the features that achieve this are amp and smart led. fine for sports.

movies are a non issue.


Color - Close, but the edge went to the Pioneer. Much more natural with better reproduction of reds.

One way to describe the difference is that the Samsung just looked like a really, really nice 'TV', while the Pioneer looked like a industry reference monitor (in a good way, not a sterile one). I still cannot beleive how different they were side by side. (and this is even before the plasma gets to 'break-in' fully).

great. i'm not sure about the 81 but the 950 series as tested by hdguru states that it (950) is more accurate at color than even the elite kuro pro 111fd

http://hdguru.com/first-pioneer-elite-kuro-pro-111fd-review/252/



Again, by itself, the Samsung is truly an incredible TV (I would still highly recommended it). I really did love it for the past year. I just have to be truthful and say that in my experience the Pioneer beat it in all areas. I did not want it to, but it did.


even though i obviously don't agree with everything you said i appreciate you sharing your experience.

even though you kinda compared the 950 to the 111 in-store but only compared the 111 to the older 81 series (which by the way can be bought for cheap- relatively speaking) it's something to take in.

i've seen the 4681 go for as low as 1499. i think some people found some great deals on the 5281 in the low to mid 2k's. in bang for the buck i'd say them's some great deals.


So, if I had to help someone choose between the Samsung LED LCD TV's or a Pioneer Plasma and there were NO specific reasons why someone thought they needed an LCD, then I would say it's not even close. You absolutely have to go with the Pioneer. I wish I could say that it's really very close and almost a push with the slight advantage going to the Pioneer. But in my direct experience it was not. I know some of the major reviewing sites tend to make the comparisons sound fairly close, but that was not my experience.

Unless you really have to go with an LCD, you owe it to yourself to try the Pioneer.

i'm too tired to respond to that whole statement. i know you mean well but if you didn't notice your review went from comparing the 950-111-81 series to just the years old 81-111 comparison.

it was a subtle shift and maybe not noticeable at first. probably not intended to shift but hey, there it is.

i'm sure the 9g elites are fine tv's for those who like em. who have the right lighting conditions and habits etc etc etc.

just remember--different folks---different flavors---yada yada yada.


cheers.

Wow bosng, talk about being completely one sided.

It is blatanly obvious where you stand with your outlandish comments.

You may as well just posted "Ok, so you owned what according to most reviewers as the best LCD at the time, at went ahead an purchased what is widely known as the best plasma/flatpanel, and finally see why it receives such high praise? Yeah whatever, LCD's are better cuz I own one, and if I owned a plasma, that would be the best"

I mean seriously, do you bother to read your posts?

Regarding the detail he sees in bright scenes? That is called superior native contrast, ansi contrast, on off contrast, which no one can argue the Kuro is king of.

You argue his final comment about comparisons, yet I've seen numerous posts from arguing that the 950 is superior, from the a couple reviews that you have read. Talk about blind defense.

Look at these (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1053444). It doesn't get any better

Heres another post 5999 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1039269&page=200)

so i make outlandish comments because i don't choose the same tv you do? i seem to recall some outlandish statements from you in this very thread. sheesh. i don't even think i'm exaggerating in my comments but if we don't agree then that's fine with me.

sorry to be contrary with the set of "your" choice.

if you want to talk about superior contrast all you have to do is look at these sets side by side.

i was at a magnolia and noted that the pioneer set they had next to a samsung 750 and it was clear the lcd resolved more detail in the hair of the woman in the pioneer kuro commercial. the black were blacker as well. how do you reconcile those observations?

frankly i'm a bit surprised at some of the statements made of kuro sets. outlandish is one word.

what's wrong with pointing out in spooky's review that he was comparing a 1-2 year old set against a new one and call that uneven? just want to call a spade a spade.

when pioneer makes a tv as bright as an lcd and keep its black level performance then i'll seriously consider them. but to ignore the clear differences and drawbacks of plasma is just plain silly.

what are a couple of threads with settings supposed to prove?

This one is easy, because if you do some searching, there is actually factual data from well respected isf calibraters here on AVS to support the numbers regarding the Pioneer. It's no secret that plasmas boast naturally higher contrast ratios. There are also numbers that prove the panel with the blackest blacks in comparison to this Kuros are last years.

As to the extra detail you claim to see? It is called artificial edge enhancement from the sets displaying their dynamic range of contrast, and edge enhancement features. I actually can't believe you use what you see in at local B&M's with sets displayed in torch mode as factual data. I mean, seriously.

Funny thing is, It's weird how this turned into a Kuro vs LCD debate, I don't even know how we got here.

Just to be clear, it isn't "my choice", that I am trying to substantiate. I don't just walk into a store a say "yup, LCD's are better", and walk away with a sense of gratification because of the 10 minutes that I spend looking at them. I go a few steps further by getting them in a studio, overexposing pictures, getting readings with my "ok" colorimeter, and test patterns disc's.


Settings? Look at the calibration reports.
That's the beauty of this. One can actually obtain factual data to substantiate ones claims.

I will soon be making an attempt of calibrating (more like tinkering, seeing as I AM a novice, with mediocre equipment)a 46 A950, and running some patterns through it with my DVE BD, so aside from the mini tests that I have already ran on this thing, like testing black levels with actual content in typical circumstances (which were pretty poor btw due to blooming, which coincidentally was posted by spooky on last gens LED)

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the panel did shine when the lights were turned up completely (dim controlled lighting), it is just that once you begin to reduce the lighting, the glow, and blooming starts to show.

In any event, hopefully I can get a few hours with this set, and see what kind of numbers I get.

One more thing, going back to "panel of my choice", I am picking up an LNa650 for my sons room, since it suits his needs (he's 6)(and the prices on them are insane), which is using it as a computer monitor, watching cartoons (which the amp is actually good for), and playing loads of V-Tech educational games. I honestly do not have a preference, but I AM a stickler for performance, and right now, the Kuro is what is offering that performance, regardless if people want to admit it or not.

when pioneer makes a tv as bright as an lcd and keep its black level performance then i'll seriously consider them. but to ignore the clear differences and drawbacks of plasma is just plain silly.


I am just wondeing if you would reccomend calibrating the 950 or any of the samsung LCD's you are speaking of?

Because a proper calibration will not have the set in super bright mode to where the Tv looks like a glasscovered projector screen with a spotlight behind it.

The 9G Elite Pioneer has more than enough luminance to be calibrated properly. This is a fact.
For proper calibration, the brightness and whites are near perfect.

So whats the point of jacking it up to where LCD's brightness advantage is noticable?
Are you judging the sets by how they appear in Torch mode??

I have had some pretty bright LCD's in my day, and I still don't understand why anyone would set the backlight on blast to where its super bright. It doesn't look good that way.

Holy cannoli Bosng!?!?!? Gimme a little bit to absorb that and I'll make some attempt at a reply...

care to tell us why? and what were the deciding factors between the 81 vs plasma at that time? what were your definite conclusions to spend a really nice chunk of change for the 81?

Sure. I absolutely looked at the 81 vs. the 8G Kuros when I made my decision last year. I have been an LCD guy for years now (had a Sony 'GWII' another Sony 55" RP LCD, a smaller Phillips, a 32" Samsung LCD, etc...). I am a big gamer and have hid semi-bright rooms so I shied away from plasmas.

So, when I had the opportunity to buy a new TV last year, I looked at what I considered the two best available in each technology. I ended up with the 81 because it was, IMO, the best LCD available (and I was an LCD guy). I liked the Kuro's but in my demo'ing, I thought the complete black of the 81 was just too inviting to pass up. I ignored what were being discussed as the LED tech's downsides at the time of purchase thinking that the pro's of the TV would win out.

this is your personal statement based on your tastes, whether that's good or bad, they are yours and plasma people agree with you but lcd people don't.

don't forget today's king is just tomorrow's old tech. improvements will always be made.

i used to be a plasma owner. found them not up to snuff and too many drawbacks for me.

Ummmm...okay...!?!? Of course this is my opinion. Did I allude to it being otherwise? Sorry if I did.



hey, people change. maybe you didn't really assess your environment fully and finally came around to realizing it now. life is full of learning experiences.

Why does it sound like you are trying to justify my purchase? Yes, I changed my opinion and never gave the Pioneer a fair chance. My environment did not change however. Sorry.



still trying to figure out what it is you were unsatisfied about the 81 that you had to "test" another tech out which you say "in the store" always looks worse than lcd.

what was the thinking?

I, like most here, have OCD when it comes to electronics. :) I loved my 81, but that did not keep me from peeking in on the Pioneer 8G and 9G threads (and especially that damn Kuro screenshot one!). When I found out that I could work out a deal to get a new Pro-111 for a small upgrade fee I decided to seriously investigate.

also concerning the 500 upgrade price. i'm not sure what the price of a pro 111 is. you've had the 81 for a year now, was the bb store willing to take it back for some reason? was the pro 111 a returned set? why would they take your used 81 back?

Yes, I have some 'connections' I guess. You seem to be questioning my validity. Any reason why? Do you think that suddenly I woke up two days ago and decided to start posting at AVS with a plasma fanboy agenda? Have you read my history of posts here?



i appreciate the story/experience you are sharing with us but you know this is about as hodge podge a comparison as they come right? what were the optimal settings for the 950?

Not hodge podge at all IMO. I used the settings that I have found to be optimal on the 81, then used similar ones for the 950 (combined with settings that I have read here) and the used 'D-Nice' settings for the Kuro. no, I did not professionally calibrate all of them, but that's just it. None of then were calibrated so it was fair game.

you do realize that each set would perform best in different lighting situations right? especially the 2 lcd's which would perform better in a variety of lighting situations.

These were all in the same room. The dark room at the Magnolia store. Then I did a side by side at home with the 81 and the Pro-111. So, I was using MY lighting conditions.

okay

ok you know this. i'm trusting you now.

doh! you just said....that.....you knew........not only you but everbody knows lcd's are much much much better on the bright.....................never mind.

Hmmmmm...you do realize there are my opinions based on my experience right...?



probably a factor of some setting you inadvertently set that caused this. could happen to anyone. it is not a good idea to willy nilly start changing settings from scene to scene and adjust on the fly.

Could be, but what ever I stumbled upon, it must be the best setting combination ever because it looked much better than the LCD's. ;)

the latter is typically the type of scene that lcd trounces plasma. not even close. plasma even elite plasma is dull and blurry by comparison.

Sure, in your opinion. And that's great. I used to think the same thing until I did a side by side comparison using MY environment, MY settings and most of all MY own personal pair of eyes!



light in a store is bright. light in your house can be bright as well. controlled lighting will help you plasma perform best. if you want the greatest versatility lcd is the way to go.

Agreed to an extent. From my experience so far, the lighting needs to be fairly extreme to have the Pioneer lose out against the 81. And, for ME, my majority of viewing is at night, so, no issue. Even in the day, it would have to be close to high noon with all my shades open and house lights on to have the Pioneer look worse than the 81. And i would never do any critical watching in that environment.

great. how did you get that set home? was it new? even if it was used i find it perplexing that the store would send it home with you without doing the full exchange. i guess you knew the manager or something because i don't see this happening for anyone. heck most of the time they won't even let you hold the remote. i'm glad you were able to do it though. but what was it that made them so trusting?

Sorry you don't want to believe me. Honestly, with all due respect (seriously), you are starting to sound jealous at this point. Apparently I was dealing with people more trusting than you.

well, i hope it would. if i'm not mistaken you are comparing new technology to old. that's great for you to be able to upgrade after a year of ownership for such a low price. i still don't understand the deal though.

I knew this would come up. From what I have seen and read, the 950 series Samsung are not really much of a change over the 81 series and remember, i did compare the 950 to the Pioneer as well. In the store, with my settings, the 81 and 950 looked nearly identical. The pioneer did not (it looked better).


so the best of both worlds is watching at extreme angles and no blooming for some specific conditions? or is the 81 way worse than the 91? i've seen the 91 and couldn't even detect it. are you talking about off axis viewing?

Blooming was apparent at any angle in the 81 but was much more pronounced when even a few degrees off axis. I hear the 950 is slightly better but it did not seem so to me.

this is in a very dim environment i assume. the only environment a plasma is able to achieve it's best black level. anything brighter you will notice that the 81, 91, 750,650 heck even my 3 yr old sony xbr will trounce the new elites.

Again, in my experience it had to be a brighter environment that I would even watch TV in for the LCD to win out.

i'll trust you here. never seen the two in a pitch black room. you say you had both side by side.

Thanks for finally trusting me.


what's your normal house lighting? windows? sunshine? lots of variances can come into play.

The TV is against a wall with only one window to the far left of it. Then there are large windows on the wall to the right which are fairly close. None of them get direct sunlight. Just ambient light. Yes, the 81 looked better at the brightest point in the day, with my house lights on, during mostly dark scenes. There, I said it!



okay, now that's hard to believe. i'm glad you like it but please. plasma compared to lcd in the sharpness arena is just to embarrassing to compare. it's just so blatantly obvious lcd is better.

I was VERY surprised at this too. Seriously. I truly think that the 'blooming' blacks in the LEd TV's cause contrasty scenes to be a tad washed out and perhaps make it look a little blurry. I would only have noticed this when doing a side-by-side. Never thought the 81 was not sharp when I had it alone.

even motion resolution is fully realized with the 950

http://hdguru.com/will-you-see-all-the-hdtv-resolution-you-expected-125-2008-model-test-results-hd-guru-exclusive/287/

the kuro elite resolved 900 lines vs the 950's 1080 lines of motion resolution.

the features that achieve this are amp and smart led. fine for sports.

movies are a non issue.

great. i'm not sure about the 81 but the 950 series as tested by hdguru states that it (950) is more accurate at color than even the elite kuro pro 111fd

http://hdguru.com/first-pioneer-elite-kuro-pro-111fd-review/252/

even though i obviously don't agree with everything you said i appreciate you sharing your experience.

even though you kinda compared the 950 to the 111 in-store but only compared the 111 to the older 81 series (which by the way can be bought for cheap- relatively speaking) it's something to take in.

i've seen the 4681 go for as low as 1499. i think some people found some great deals on the 5281 in the low to mid 2k's. in bang for the buck i'd say them's some great deals.

i'm too tired to respond to that whole statement. i know you mean well but if you didn't notice your review went from comparing the 950-111-81 series to just the years old 81-111 comparison.

it was a subtle shift and maybe not noticeable at first. probably not intended to shift but hey, there it is.

i'm sure the 9g elites are fine tv's for those who like em. who have the right lighting conditions and habits etc etc etc.

just remember--different folks---different flavors---yada yada yada.


cheers.


Ummm...okay. Thanks I guess. And, yes, I do think that most here realize this is just my opinion. I have never said I am a scientist or professional TV comparer.

Wow bosng, talk about being completely one sided.

It is blatanly obvious where you stand with your outlandish comments.

You may as well just posted "Ok, so you owned what according to most reviewers as the best LCD at the time, at went ahead an purchased what is widely known as the best plasma/flatpanel, and finally see why it receives such high praise? Yeah whatever, LCD's are better cuz I own one, and if I owned a plasma, that would be the best"

I mean seriously, do you bother to read your posts?

Regarding the detail he sees in bright scenes? That is called superior native contrast, ansi contrast, on off contrast, which no one can argue the Kuro is king of.

You argue his final comment about comparisons, yet I've seen numerous posts from arguing that the 950 is superior, from the a couple reviews that you have read. Talk about blind defense.

Look at these (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1053444). It doesn't get any better

Heres another post 5999 (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1039269&page=200)

Hey fanaticalism,

The Cnet review is up on the Elite 9G kuro.
Cnet awarded its first perfect "10" in the performance category.

here is there first statement in the performance category:

"Simply put, the Pioneer Elite PRO-111FD produced the best picture of any flat-panel HDTV we've tested to date. It delivered the deepest blacks we've seen from any display as well as the most-accurate color. Video processing was superb, its glare-reducing screen is the best we've seen on any plasma TV, and we could find almost nothing to complain about in other areas. Given its superb performance, the PRO-111FD scores the first "10" we've ever awarded in overall picture quality. To us that score doesn't represent perfection--hey, nothing's perfect--but instead a picture that's solidly superior to anything else we've seen in the flat-panel HDTV category."

Hey fanaticalism,

The Cnet review is up on the Elite 9G kuro.
Cnet awarded its first perfect "10" in the performance category.

here is there first statement in the performance category:

"Simply put, the Pioneer Elite PRO-111FD produced the best picture of any flat-panel HDTV we've tested to date. It delivered the deepest blacks we've seen from any display as well as the most-accurate color. Video processing was superb, its glare-reducing screen is the best we've seen on any plasma TV, and we could find almost nothing to complain about in other areas. Given its superb performance, the PRO-111FD scores the first "10" we've ever awarded in overall picture quality. To us that score doesn't represent perfection--hey, nothing's perfect--but instead a picture that's solidly superior to anything else we've seen in the flat-panel HDTV category."

You beat me to it Chad!

For those like Bosng who like to read reviews and use it as personal experience, w/o ever even seeing the panels themselves, there you go, as perfect as it gets.

The part that got me the most was when they said that it was almost the 950's equal in fairly bright rooms, maintaining superior black level, and overall PQ. Mind you, this is using Pure mode at typical D65 luminence levels. Can you imagine what they would've thought if the set had ISF/Day Mode engaged?

One more tid bit, "better blacks in a bright enviornment than the 950" or something along those lines. Guess LCD's no longer outshine in a typically bright home enviornment?

I await whatever ridiculous response he comes up with now, although I can't imagine anything more ridiculous than his response to Spookys experience/opinion.

a picture or 2 paint a thousand words.


Posted on the german forum http://www.hifi-forum.de/

Pics from a german owner of a new led backlit 789 samsung.

http://picasaweb.google.de/OnkelMrKnister/FarbraumAutoVsFarbraumBenutzer#5249671736027169442

a picture or 2 paint a thousand words.


Posted on the german forum http://www.hifi-forum.de/

Pics from a german owner of a new led backlit 789 samsung.

http://picasaweb.google.de/OnkelMrKnister/FarbraumAutoVsFarbraumBenutzer#5249671736027169442

Nice blooming!

a picture or 2 paint a thousand words.


Posted on the german forum http://www.hifi-forum.de/

Pics from a german owner of a new led backlit 789 samsung.

http://picasaweb.google.de/OnkelMrKnister/FarbraumAutoVsFarbraumBenutzer#5249671736027169442

Nice blooming!

Oh wow lol

Nice blooming!


Yeah. The blooming is really not a big deal at all in instances of a 90% dark screen and then a bright image. I mean, it's noticable but not distracting or damaging at all. Unfortunately, what I have come to realize is that it seems to be really damaging in normal, mixed contrast content.

'Damaging' may be a strong term, but it has a negative effect that I never really noticed until I did some comparisions.

Yeah. The blooming is really not a big deal at all in instances of a 90% dark screen and then a bright image. I mean, it's noticable but not distracting or damaging at all. Unfortunately, what I have come to realize is that it seems to be really damaging in normal, mixed contrast content.

'Damaging' may be a strong term, but it has a negative effect that I never really noticed until I did some comparisions.

That is just the thing Spooky. Nothing is noticable unless you have something to compare it to. That is why we get so many blind arguments in pure defense of a specific topic, because some truly do not see, or hear what one is referencing.

At the end of the day, it is all about what makes one happy. Unfortunately for those of us on AVS, we obsess over ever little intricate detail :p

Hey fanaticalism,

The Cnet review is up on the Elite 9G kuro.
Cnet awarded its first perfect "10" in the performance category.

here is there first statement in the performance category:

"Simply put, the Pioneer Elite PRO-111FD produced the best picture of any flat-panel HDTV we've tested to date. It delivered the deepest blacks we've seen from any display as well as the most-accurate color. Video processing was superb, its glare-reducing screen is the best we've seen on any plasma TV, and we could find almost nothing to complain about in other areas. Given its superb performance, the PRO-111FD scores the first "10" we've ever awarded in overall picture quality. To us that score doesn't represent perfection--hey, nothing's perfect--but instead a picture that's solidly superior to anything else we've seen in the flat-panel HDTV category."

Those CNET hacs say that about every new display that comes out.:rolleyes:

http://hdguru.com/will-you-see-all-the-hdtv-resolution-you-expected-125-2008-model-test-results-hd-guru-exclusive/287/

the kuro elite resolved 900 lines vs the 950's 1080 lines of motion resolution.

the features that achieve this are amp and smart led. fine for sports.

movies are a non issue.



great. i'm not sure about the 81 but the 950 series as tested by hdguru states that it (950) is more accurate at color than even the elite kuro pro 111fd

http://hdguru.com/first-pioneer-elite-kuro-pro-111fd-review/252/Since you will otherwise accuse me of being biased or making up facts, I will post nothing but facts. Once you remove smart led and interpolation the motion number plummets horribly.Any other combination of the motion control settings resulted in motion blur, dropping the perfect 1080 line score down to as low as 330 lines!. Secondly, the HDguru (which you are basing all of your "facts" on) for the 111 is severely flawed. He uses the green high control, which isn't to be used for color temperature/grayscale unless it is absolutely necessary... when other calibrators don't need to on the same display. I was able to achieve near perfect (d6500K) readings from dark gray to white by boosting the “Green High” drive setting to +5 and the “Blue High” setting to +5. All remaining “Manual” white balance settings (“Red High,” “Blue Low,” “Green Low” and “Red Low”) remained at the “0” factory preset.
He prefers CS1, which means he doesn't like REC709 accurate colors very much, so that pretty much ruins anything he says about color The “Color Space 1” setting achieved a crimson red that measured almost identically (within .004 x and .001y) to that of the Panasonic TH-50pZ850U. I preferred the “Color Space 1” setting for viewing movies on Blu-ray disc and FIOS, observing higher color saturation and an overall more pleasing, more natural (albeit less accurate than the REC. 709, which is the current standard for each source) rendering of colors. I rate the color as excellent. The readings and the reference color points for DCI and Rec.709 are:

This is a VERYY big mistake by him. He uses gamma 1 which he claims is more accurate (and measures a 1.91 gamma with it... horrible), but every settings list I see has it at gamma 2 and is spot on reference. He also claims that the 9Gs have no additional 9 point gamma control (which it does through ISFccc). The rate of transition from black to white is called Gamma and can be measured and tracked. The Gamma 1 setting on the Pioneer provided the most accurate tracking, though it comes in a little too bright in the lower (darker) end, until the darkest details drops (crushes) into black. This is an improvement over the 2007 Pioneer model, which tended to crush both dark and light parts of the image. The PRO-111FD measured a Gamma of 1.91. The 2007 Elite model allowed the calibrator to correct Gamma errors with special software; Pioneer appears to have dropped the feature in this year’s Elite plasma.
Along with smaller typos, I wouldn't ever say that that is a very credible review. I don't believe he even touched the CMS, just set it to CS1/2 and measured those.

P.S. If you need more proof, here it is.

i must say i am very impressed with the zeal and dedication some of you guys have for calibrating your sets to get that perfect picture.

to go into that much detail and even noticing the settings (correct or incorrect) used by a reviewer (hdguru) and then offering up the better ones (i'll take your word on that since i have no way of seeing that myself).

kudos for that. i know you all love your sets and take this hobby seriously.

i am aware of the 950 results when not engaging those settings which is why i had to go to the store and make sure i like the image with those settings on (high,med,low)

i find that low is very nice. i would only use it to watch sports,games and maybe documentary material.

for movies it's a "gimmick" i prefer the intended look of the filmaker.

i would love to be proven wrong on the comparison of sharpness between the two sets (111 vs 950 or any good lcd) that would go a long way for me to like a plasma.

and then there's the brightness issue.

the watching with lights on issue.

the high ambient light issue.

of course there is the off axis issue

lag issue

black level issue

and many many more.

at some point you just have to decide on what you are willing to trade off.

the arguments between technologies isn't so cut and dry.

i'm going to always be open to the set that gives me more of what i can live with in a tv whether it be plasma or lcd or ?

i'd better because these things aren't cheap.

good viewing to all.

i must say i am very impressed with the zeal and dedication some of you guys have for calibrating your sets to get that perfect picture.Dedication for calibrating my set?? I haven't calibrated my set, but those are ACTUAL mistake by the HDguru and ACTUAL calibration reports.

justin get the kuro elite, i have less then 200hrs (more like 175) and i gamed r6v2 for 4-6hrs non stop with split screen with my friend on my new kuro and it did NOT have a hint of temporarly IR :D my panasonic TH-42px75u however after 700+hrs puts ir with 1hr of usuage.

Oh and the elites can go over 40ftl bright WITHOUT crushing detail whites or blacks.... so it can be VERY VERY bright for like ISFccc Day

and Isfccc night it can go beyond PURE mode in every aspect is better.

bosng you seem to like lcd alot but give the kuro elite 111 a trial even if you end up returning but im sure you wil like it, plasma really i dont see much flaws compare to lcd nevermind led backlighing from 950 (which that tv to ME really sucks)

Oh bosng the 950 doesNOT hit motion resolution natively higher then the kuro elite 111....

it was with amp and smart led and other "ADD ON" that it improved.....

you can scratch off the xbr8 because its priced at a higher price then the elite 151 which seems stupid for people to consider a lower end tv for a higher price :D

After reading the thread, I'd kind of like some more opinions about the two when content and use is tossed in. I'm deciding between a Kuro and High-End LCD (XBR7/8, A950), and while I'd love the true-to-life representation of the Kuro, my primary content is video games and static/semi-static images. I know Plasmas don't have the heavy burn-in problems of old, but there's still that risk with the technology in general.

When factoring in content, which would you (AVS) recommend? Figure that the client/customer would be using the display four hours a day minimum in continual usage, with eight hours on the weekends or more. I'm curious to see if recommendations would/will change once day-to-day use is factored in, after all, context of reviews changes drastically when your use/content is thrown into the equation.

i must say i am very impressed with the zeal and dedication some of you guys have for calibrating your sets to get that perfect picture.

to go into that much detail and even noticing the settings (correct or incorrect) used by a reviewer (hdguru) and then offering up the better ones (i'll take your word on that since i have no way of seeing that myself).

kudos for that. i know you all love your sets and take this hobby seriously.

i am aware of the 950 results when not engaging those settings which is why i had to go to the store and make sure i like the image with those settings on (high,med,low)

i find that low is very nice. i would only use it to watch sports,games and maybe documentary material.

for movies it's a "gimmick" i prefer the intended look of the filmaker.

i would love to be proven wrong on the comparison of sharpness between the two sets (111 vs 950 or any good lcd) that would go a long way for me to like a plasma.

and then there's the brightness issue.

the watching with lights on issue.

the high ambient light issue.

of course there is the off axis issue

lag issue

black level issue

and many many more.

at some point you just have to decide on what you are willing to trade off.

the arguments between technologies isn't so cut and dry.

i'm going to always be open to the set that gives me more of what i can live with in a tv whether it be plasma or lcd or ?

i'd better because these things aren't cheap.

good viewing to all.

good post.
I agree with pretty much everything you said.

You guys are definitely into your TV's far more than I will ever be, however I do have a question.

First off I still have a CRT type display, just trying to decide on witch way to go for a new set. It will be at least a 50 inch display.

In your discussion of the Plasma vs the LCD there was no mention of the new Samsung DLP rear projection sets. Is it because you feel that they are inferior to even be discussed ?

Changeling

In your discussion of the Plasma vs the LCD there was no mention of the new Samsung DLP rear projection sets. Is it because you feel that they are inferior to even be discussed ?

Changeling

For me, yes.

For everyone pretty much its flat panels these days, if your CRT is HD then the only thing that will compare to it will be high end lcd's (despite their flaws in its technology) or a pioneer plasma tv, Again also the pioneer might have small but Un noticable flaws

(any owner notice any flaws on the pioneers?)


if size is the reason the upgrade then i would stick with pioneer or something close to it, if its just to have a flat screen or new connections the forget it as your tv (again if its HD CRT TUBE) will be the best thing out there (of course behind the pioneer)


this is about current flat panels and not reference or high end tvs...

sorry guys. i almost bought all that stuff on the motion resolution test.

i now don't believe it says anything worthwhile. just a trick conjured up by a plasma group. should have known.

damn that hdguru had the wool over my eyes again.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10020262-1.html?tag=untagged

the worst part is that lcd manufacturers felt it was a big enough reason to address it.

I just purchased a Samsung LN32A450 LCD for the bedroom. It produces a nice picture but, it's not even close to being in the same league as my Pioneer 5080. After all the rave reviews on the LN32A450, I'm rather disappointed.

...
(any owner notice any flaws on the pioneers?)
...

yes, PWM noise and dither noise is for me quite visible when close up.

yes, PWM noise and dither noise is for me quite visible when close up.

Inability to produce "true" whites, noisy, looks average in moderately lit enviornments.

Accurate whites is not super bright whites AND lets say you do want bright whites they are PLENTY bright (i ususaly go down from performance/sport/optimum to pure) due to whites being too strong and bright;)

Inability to produce "true" whites, noisy, looks average in moderately lit enviornments.

Inability to produce "true" whites, noisy, looks average in moderately lit enviornments.


please don't quote me and imply i mean poor whites. my plasmas both produce very pure and clean whites. My lcd's have more trouble with whites then my plasmas.

Even if one feels the Pioneers has white bright enough (which I don't), there's still the power limited issue on plasmas that cause them to limit brightness in bright scenes. In other words, snow in a mountain settings is not going to be as white/bright as white text on an all black screen. There should be no debate about this. I have a feeling when the 10Gs come out (assuming 5 lumen tech is used) that people will start seeing the plasma limiter and the lack of brightness on most plasmas as a real issue. I for one see this as an area where plasma needs improvement.

A few months ago I bought a Samsung PN50A550. The dithering noise and horrible phosphor fringing, especially during games, drove me nuts. I returned it and put my monstrous 36" 4:3 CRT HDTV (it does 1080i/480p via component) back up.

I'm one of those extra-sensitive viewers who sees every bad effect: fringing on plasma, screen door effect and rainbows on even the newest DLP sets.

It sounds like dithering is still present even on the Elite. Is there anyone who's sensitive to green fringing who has noticed it still showing up?

It's a shame that I'm so sensitive to this stuff, but combine that with being a gamer, and I'm pretty much forced to go the LCD route, I think. Too bad, the new Elites I've seen look fantastic.

Even if one feels the Pioneers has white bright enough (which I don't), there's still the power limited issue on plasmas that cause them to limit brightness in bright scenes. In other words, snow in a mountain settings is not going to be as white/bright as white text on an all black screen. There should be no debate about this. I have a feeling when the 10Gs come out (assuming 5 lumen tech is used) that people will start seeing the plasma limiter and the lack of brightness on most plasmas as a real issue. I for one see this as an area where plasma needs improvement.

I am just not drawn to the bright blueish whites that LCD's give.
I see no reason to go past an accurate and good looking brightness.
It looks way too much like a light source rather than a picture. Thats the best way I can explain it.
Its almost like I can feel the backlight coming thru the screen.
I was at BB the other day and they were playing a sports scene where someone was skiing thru the snow really fast.
The snow was so bright and loud in some spots that I could see the backlight coming thru the screen. and when there was mixed content (like when a black background or object was close to the snow, I could see a hotspot where the snow was). This made the picture look like a piece of paper with a candle behind it.
My XBR4 was like this. It was so bright at night it was blinding. I had to turn down the backlight all the time at night.

With a plasma on the other hand, It may not be as bright and blinding, but its accurate and the pixels themselves light up instead of a backlight.

I am 100% happy with the white performance of the 151. I would probably never need more brightness but I guess it would be cool to have just in case.

I am just not drawn to the bright blueish whites that LCD's give.
I see no reason to go past an accurate and good looking brightness.
It looks way too much like a light source rather than a picture. Thats the best way I can explain it.
Its almost like I can feel the backlight coming thru the screen.
I was at BB the other day and they were playing a sports scene where someone was skiing thru the snow really fast.
The snow was so bright and loud in some spots that I could see the backlight coming thru the screen. and when there was mixed content (like when a black background or object was close to the snow, I could see a hotspot where the snow was). This made the picture look like a piece of paper with a candle behind it.
My XBR4 was like this. It was so bright at night it was blinding. I had to turn down the backlight all the time at night.

With a plasma on the other hand, It may not be as bright and blinding, but its accurate and the pixels themselves light up instead of a backlight.

I am 100% happy with the white performance of the 151. I would probably never need more brightness but I guess it would be cool to have just in case.

In my mind, anytime a display (regardless of the technology) is incapable of displaying what you see in person, then a problem exists. I'm not referring to blueish whites either. I can often times see on my 6020 that it just doesn't have enough brightness to get the job done. I'm sure the Elite is a little better in this case, but it's not quite there IMO. I'm more concerned about what things look like compared to reality moreso than being concerned about industry standards. Unless your eyesight goes downhill what you see today will be the same tomorrow. However, industry standards are not written in stone and can change.

You may feel a little differently than I do but I guarantee you that if the 10Gs are 5 lumens next year that you'll be happier with a brighter display. You may not utiltize the brightness much more than what you have now but since brightness is supposed to be more efficient my bet is that you'll see improvements in the overall picture as well.

please don't quote me and imply i mean poor whites. my plasmas both produce very pure and clean whites. My lcd's have more trouble with whites then my plasmas.

Which plasma do you own?

In my mind, anytime a display (regardless of the technology) is incapable of displaying what you see in person, then a problem exists. I'm not referring to blueish whites either. I can often times see on my 6020 that it just doesn't have enough brightness to get the job done. I'm sure the Elite is a little better in this case, but it's not quite there IMO. I'm more concerned about what things look like compared to reality moreso than being concerned about industry standards. Unless your eyesight goes downhill what you see today will be the same tomorrow. However, industry standards are not written in stone and can change.

You may feel a little differently than I do but I guarantee you that if the 10Gs are 5 lumens next year that you'll be happier with a brighter display. You may not utiltize the brightness much more than what you have now but since brightness is supposed to be more efficient my bet is that you'll see improvements in the overall picture as well.

I hope you're right about the 10g.

Accurate whites is not super bright whites AND lets say you do want bright whites they are PLENTY bright (i ususaly go down from performance/sport/optimum to pure) due to whites being too strong and bright;)

I'm sorry gus738, the inability of plasma to produce true whites is a glaring weakness of plasma. Say what you will about LCD, but display whites is not a problem for that technology. When you view clouds in the sky or white snow it should look realistic and not add some kind of strange coloration.

When we wash whites, we use bleach to maker them white. When they get so old, we might throw them because they are no longer white.

I'm sorry gus738, the inability of plasma to produce true whites is a glaring weakness of plasma. Say what you will about LCD, but display whites is not a problem for that technology. When you view clouds in the sky or white snow it should look realistic and not add some kind of strange coloration.

When we wash whites, we use bleach to maker them white. When they get so old, we might throw them because they are no longer white.True white is defined as x.3127 y.329 per the Rec709 and SMPTE-C guidelines. Every single Kuro I've come across is fully capable of coming within a dE of 2 or less for that mark at almost all stimuli levels. Have you ever seen true white on your 650? My money is on an answer of no as

You don't comprehend the definition of white
Your 650 (nor any display) doesn't come with a x.3127 y.329 right out of the box
You've never seen a properly calibrated display...regardless of tech

True white is defined as x.3127 y.329 per the Rec709 and SMPTE-C guidelines. Every single Kuro I've come across is fully capable of coming within a dE of 2 or less for that mark at almost all stimuli levels. Have you ever seen true white on your 650? My money is on an answer of no as

You don't comprehend the definition of white
Your 650 (nor any display) doesn't come with a x.3127 y.329 right out of the box
You've never seen a properly calibrated display...regardless of tech


Forget the technical formulas and LCDs for a minute. Color accuracy is one thing but displaying something like a pure white or and absolute black is much easier for even novices to notice rather than whether red is pure red or if you are really looking at a reddish orange color for example.

Do you truly believe that if you were sitting in a vacation home in Colorado looking out the window at a snow covered mountain on a sunny day with the same scene displayed on your Kuro that the white levels will match it to perfection? I must say that I don't think so. Maybe the SMTPE standard may set the color tint properly to match the white level but if the intensity of the light output on the plasma display isn't as intense then the snow covered mountain won't be as white. With the power limitations on plasma limiting brightness on bright scenes I don't see how it's possible for whites to be true whites on bright scenes (again, I'm referring to more than just the color tone of white levels).

Forget the technical formulas and LCDs for a minute. Color accuracy is one thing but displaying something like a pure white or and absolute black is much easier for even novices to notice rather than whether red is pure red or if you are really looking at a reddish orange color for example.

Do you truly believe that if you were sitting in a vacation home in Colorado looking out the window at a snow covered mountain on a sunny day with the same scene displayed on your Kuro that the white levels will match it to perfection? I must say that I don't think so. Maybe the SMTPE standard may set the color tint properly to match the white level but if the intensity of the light output on the plasma display isn't as intense then the snow covered mountain won't be as white. With the power limitations on plasma limiting brightness on bright scenes I don't see how it's possible for whites to be true whites on bright scenes (again, I'm referring to more than just the color tone of white levels).Let me dumb it down then....

Your display, and all displays for that matter, are not and never were intended to look like "reality". Sorry , but they were not and cannot, period. Once you can grasp that concept (not you in particular), you should start looking at what they are/were/suppose to represent. That is adhering to the standards. In the US that is Rec709 and SMPTE-C. BOTH standards say "true white" is x.3127 y.329. If you need an even dumb-er down explanation, get DVE on BD and go thru the tutorial.

If you truly are looking for what you are claiming is "true white" aka "reality", you need to stop looking at TV and actually go outside and enjoy "reality" :)

If you truly are looking for what you are claiming is "true white" aka "reality", you need to stop looking at TV and actually go outside and enjoy "reality" :)
Or buy an LCD.:D

Or buy an LCD.:DShow me an LCD that goes above and beyond what I just said first. Didn't think you could.

Ouch.

Show me an LCD that goes above and beyond what I just said first. Didn't think you could.
You can toss all the numbers around you want. I go by my eyeballs. Unless you have a cave for your plasma you will have problems with white levels.

Thats why big box stores like costco the plasma look so bad. But if your looking for a TV where snow looks like snow buy LCD.

Reality is not everyone have a dark room for TV or want one.

You can toss all the numbers around you want. I go by my eyeballs. Unless you have a cave for your plasma you will have problems with white levels.

Thats why big box stores like costco the plasma look so bad. But if your looking for a TV where snow looks like snow buy LCD.

Reality is not everyone have a dark room for TV or want one.Hmmm, showing your ignorance in the science of display technology, eh? I expect better from you. Not one room in my house could be classified as a cave my friend.

You can continue to spew your subjective opinion, however, it cannot and will not turmph the numbers and the standards it backs up.

Hmmm, showing your ignorance in the science of display technology, eh?* I expect better from you. Then educate me.

My local Sam's club have a Pioneer 5020 on display and I can flat out say I don't think anybody would buy it when next to it sits a Samsung LCD.

Its white level in that lighting setting is just awful.

Like I said your number BS is what it is BS. The math might be right I don't know but your eyeballs always tell the truth.

I can often times see on my 6020 that it just doesn't have enough brightness to get the job done.

You may feel a little differently than I do but I guarantee you that if the 10Gs are 5 lumens next year that you'll be happier with a brighter display.
You'll just have to wait and see if next year is better.

I know your not the kind to buy a TV by specs.

But I know my opinions aren't singing to the choir in this thread.

Your right XB.

Then educate me.

My local Sam's club have a Pioneer 5020 on display and I can flat out say I don't think anybody would buy it when next to it sits a Samsung LCD.

Its white level in that lighting setting is just awful.

Like I said your number BS is what it is BS. The math might be right I don't know but your eyeballs always tell the truth.Your post is comical at best. I've already educated you on the standard. If you did not comprehend what I posted, get a copy of DVE a watched the very dumbed down version.

Now you bring up a viewing of Sams club. Let's see....

what were the settings? Didn't think you know, so let me educate you on what you saw......

Sams Club does ZERO setting changes when the panel is pulled out of the box. Unless a customer changed the settings, which I highly doubt, you fell in love with a 10,500K grayscale, 130fL of light output that could probably provide 25% of the US daily home lighting needs, married to completely oversaturated red and green color points, laced with an S-Shaped gamma curve that was crushing shadow detail and clipping whites. All of this was wrapped up in a Samsung signature trailer trash plastic gloss black frame :)

now to the Pioneer.....
Out of the box the 5020FD is set to Standard mode which is Energy Star 3.0 compliant (if you don't comprehend what that means, look it up). standard mode on the 5020 has a 8700K grayscale married to oversaturated red and green color points, roughly 43fL of light output and a S-shaped gamma curve that is crushing blacks and almost clipping whites.

Now answer this for me, would you purchase that Samsung you saw, take it home, and use the picture mode and settings that it comes with right out of the box WITHOUT changing a single setting?

So I take it that D-Nice buys TV's by specs.

Now thats lame don't you think?

I've learned here on the AVS that specs are marketing. Is that your angle?

So I take it that D-Nice buys TV's by specs.

Now thats lame don't you think?

I've learned here on the AVS that specs are marketing. Is that your angle?I buy displays based on post calibration performance. Specs and post calibration performance are two different things. Learn the difference.

Sams Club does ZERO setting changes when the panel is pulled out of the box. Unless a customer changed the settings, which I highly doubt, you fell in love with a 10,500K grayscale, 130fL of light output that could probably provide 25% of the US daily home lighting needs, married to completely oversaturated red and green color points, laced with an S-Shaped gamma curve that was crushing shadow detail and clipping whites. All of this was wrapped up in a Samsung signature trailer trash plastic gloss black frame :)
Well, a lot of people like those kinds of settings. I have my Samsung 650 LCD calibrated as close to D65 as its going to get, and most people I know don't like the way it looks, because they're used to bright, saturated images with hyped contrast. PQ is a subjective matter, and I can respect that.

PQ is a subjective matter, and I can respect that.PQ preference is subjective. PQ is not.

So I take it that D-Nice buys TV's by specs.

Now thats lame don't you think?

I've learned here on the AVS that specs are marketing. Is that your angle?

So you state that you judge with your eyes?

So that would mean that you would be adjusting your settings every 15 minutes into the movie, to acquire that "window into reality", considering every single movie that you watch conforms to the REC 709 standard. How does this relate to what you see before you on your display? Well, let me help you. What this means, is that you may be watching a movie like Eight Below, which is apparently your favorite movie, since I have seen you reference to it quite bit. In that very movie, every scene has a variance in white levels and detail, variances that would force you to make continous adjustments throughout the movie. Since your eyeballs are "so good" at it, I am sure you know exactly which scenes these are. If your display were properly set to conform to these standards, then you would see exactly what you are supposed to see. Since every single movie that you watch, EVERY SINGLE ONE, adheres to this std.

Now, you can ramble on and on with your subjective spewage, which only works in the LCD forums, where most are first time purchasers of an HDTV panel.

And last time I checked, this site was called Audio Video Science. Not Audio Video Religion.

Bottom line white levels are a problem for plasma, its why Sony got out of plasma.

But to try to correct XB that he doesn't know what he see's is rediculous.

pq preference is subjective. Pq is not.

+1

Now answer this for me, would you purchase that Samsung you saw, take it home, and use the picture mode and settings that it comes with right out of the box WITHOUT changing a single setting?

Great comment. So true. That's why I continue to research. It is not about what it looks like in the store. It's...
what is it "capable" of acheiving?
Whether that be a Sammy or Sony LCD or Panny or Pio Plasma.

Bottom line white levels are a problem for plasma, its why Sony got out of plasma.

But to try to correct XB that he doesn't know what he see's is rediculous.

You mean in the same way they are falling behind in LCD advancement to Samsung, while still charging a premium price? I guess they will drop out of LCD's soon too, and come up with a lame excuse.

So you state that you judge with your eyes?

So that would mean that you would be adjusting your settings every 15 minutes into the movie, to acquire that "window into reality", considering every single movie that you watch conforms to the REC 709 standard.
Now, you can ramble on and on with your subjective spewage, which only works in the LCD forums, where most are first time purchasers of an HDTV panel.

And last time I checked, this site was called Audio Video Science. Not Audio Video Religion.
Fanaticalism, with all due respect his eyes are what matters. Yes I know we have been through this before.

Again here I see someone who's only issue (like mine) with the "standards" are that they are not bright enough for his preference.

It is great that your set is set so stringently by the written word of the Holy Book of Standards but from where I sit it seems that the Standards are your religion.

Life is seldom asthetic, and always subjective. If he want to adjust the PQ every 15 minutes because it doesn't meet his "subjective" standards then good for him.

Also thanks for the purely fan-boy remark about how most LCD people are just first time buyers. So the first time buyer of a plasma has a higher IQ?

PQ preference is subjective. PQ is not.
Don't agree.

PQ is purely subjective. There is nothing more subjective. For instantance if I say that I prefer NOT to watch any TV at all, for me all of the standards in the world don't' matter, so there is no PQ at all. There is no one that comes to my house to tell me that my sets are not in spec. I think my PQ is great.

Again if you are quoting from the Holy Book of Standards and feeling superior to the rest of the world because of it, the rest of the world does not care.

Don't agree.

PQ is purely subjective. There is nothing more subjective. For instantance if I say that I prefer NOT to watch any TV at all, for me all of the standards in the world don't' matter, so there is no PQ at all. There is no one that comes to my house to tell me that my sets are not in spec. I think my PQ is great.What you just said is called PQ preference. PQ is based on standards. Understand the difference.

Again if you are quoting from the Holy Book of Standards and feeling superior to the rest of the world because of it, the rest of the world does not care.Feeling superior? Comical.

enough