These are such disparate technologies at this point I'm not sure there are any current threads which discuss this. (From what I understand, a few years ago CRT PQ was still blowing plasmas away in terms of black levels, etc.)

Is this still true? I have a SONY KD-36XS955 and I love the picture (I even played with the service menu to get it perfect). However, my wife hates it because it is utterly impossible to move at about 240lbs. I am considering pacifying her and getting a Kuro (maybe Panny), and it is a done deal if the picture quality is truly better now than the CRT. I'd feel like a fool however, giving up what I think is a great TV for a possibly lesser PQ.

Yeah, I could check them out in store, but it's too hard to compare if not side-by-side, and you have to have a lot of time to get the store models even remotely calibrated. I could buy one... bring it home and compare... but that's why I'm writing here first. I prefer not to do that if there's already an accepted answer about quality differences at this point.

Thanks to anyone with info.

These are such disparate technologies at this point I'm not sure there are any current threads which discuss this. (From what I understand, a few years ago CRT PQ was still blowing plasmas away in terms of black levels, etc.)

Is this still true? I have a SONY KD-36XS955 and I love the picture (I even played with the service menu to get it perfect). However, my wife hates it because it is utterly impossible to move at about 240lbs. I am considering pacifying her and getting a Kuro (maybe Panny), and it is a done deal if the picture quality is truly better now than the CRT. I'd feel like a fool however, giving up what I think is a great TV for a possibly lesser PQ.

Yeah, I could check them out in store, but it's too hard to compare if not side-by-side, and you have to have a lot of time to get the store models even remotely calibrated. I could buy one... bring it home and compare... but that's why I'm writing here first. I prefer not to do that if there's already an accepted answer about quality differences at this point.

Thanks to anyone with info.

I was in your boat until yesterday. I have loved my KV34XBR800 for the past 6 years. Every time I went to the store, I would think that nothing topped that picture. Yesterday, given the current pricing on Kuros, I took the plunge and bought the 50" Elite. It is phenomenal. Not only is the picture quality as good or better, but the added size just creates a striking image.

I say go for it and don't look back.

joeyjoey:

Last August I jumped into a Pioneer Elite 111FD after 8 years or so with a Sony 32XBR250 CRT that had been ISF calibrated shortly after it was purchased.

When I got the 111FD I had the 32XBR close by and did some comparisons and the 111FD pretty much trounced the CRT in every respect but possibly the overall black level in which the 111FD was more or less equal to the CRT, maybe even a bit better. The 111FD black level on a totally black screen had a bit more of a "glow" than the CRT, but then again 50 inches vs less than 30 inches inthe 16:9 mode for the Sony XBR, so the size may be a factor. In terms of resolution, colour balance, grey scale, etc the 111FD is fantastic. The brightness of the 111FD (contrast set at 27 which is on the low side compared to most published settings) is about the same as the 32XBR in my light controlled "theatre". I do not like a "BRIGHT" picture.

The size increase and picture depth on many Blu-ray titles is jaw dropping...I do not think you can go wrong. I tend to use the Pure mode and have the greyscale settings set as per the wonderful work D-nice has done and posted on the Elite forum pages....

Go for it
P.E.Hannon

These are such disparate technologies at this point I'm not sure there are any current threads which discuss this. (From what I understand, a few years ago CRT PQ was still blowing plasmas away in terms of black levels, etc.)

Is this still true? I have a SONY KD-36XS955 and I love the picture (I even played with the service menu to get it perfect). However, my wife hates it because it is utterly impossible to move at about 240lbs. I am considering pacifying her and getting a Kuro (maybe Panny), and it is a done deal if the picture quality is truly better now than the CRT. I'd feel like a fool however, giving up what I think is a great TV for a possibly lesser PQ.

Yeah, I could check them out in store, but it's too hard to compare if not side-by-side, and you have to have a lot of time to get the store models even remotely calibrated. I could buy one... bring it home and compare... but that's why I'm writing here first. I prefer not to do that if there's already an accepted answer about quality differences at this point.

Thanks to anyone with info.

I would say pick up something like the 5020 and wait SED. SED is just an advanced flat panel CRT. The 5020 should hold you over if and when this technology comes out.

Thanks for the replies everyone. I think I'm going to go for it. I just have to hope I can still find some in stock with all the recent price drops.

I've owned the Sony KD-34XS955 with that phenomenal SFP tube.
I loved it despite a massive defect, and fiddled with the remote countless nights just tweaking the picture.
When it was on, it just STUNG your eye that only a SFP owner would understand.
The Kuro, with a high quality feed, gets really close, with an obvious size and geometry advantage. Resolution and quite possibly color, on the elites that is, are also pluses.
Does it hit me with same type of emotion and immersion as my now gone Sony? No, it just lacks that little something I can't quite grasp (finest shades in the deepest colors?) but it's still an awesome display that has the saturation and an almost semi-gloss rich paint quality to the picture that comes closest to the crt.

These are such disparate technologies at this point I'm not sure there are any current threads which discuss this. (From what I understand, a few years ago CRT PQ was still blowing plasmas away in terms of black levels, etc.)

Is this still true? I have a SONY KD-36XS955 and I love the picture (I even played with the service menu to get it perfect). However, my wife hates it because it is utterly impossible to move at about 240lbs. I am considering pacifying her and getting a Kuro (maybe Panny), and it is a done deal if the picture quality is truly better now than the CRT. I'd feel like a fool however, giving up what I think is a great TV for a possibly lesser PQ.

Yeah, I could check them out in store, but it's too hard to compare if not side-by-side, and you have to have a lot of time to get the store models even remotely calibrated. I could buy one... bring it home and compare... but that's why I'm writing here first. I prefer not to do that if there's already an accepted answer about quality differences at this point.

Thanks to anyone with info.

How much moving of the set does you or wife do?
The pioneer and panny both will look as good or better especially with the additional size. The more modern form factor can't be underestimated either.
#1. elite 111/151
#1a. pioneer 5020/6020
#2. panasonic 800u/850u

I got a 151 last week from Axxis Audio a sponsor here.

You won't be disappointed with the picture quality of the Kuro. It's not better across the board than your Sony CRT (and don't let anyone tell you otherwise) but the numerous advantages of screen size, form factor, better resolution (not motion rez unfortunately), etc. will probably win out.

I had a Sony directview HDTV and a Sony FW900 CRT monitor which could do 1080p. I am still nostalgic about those displays despite the newer plasmas and RPTV that I now own. They had a gorgeous picture, deep blacks with lots of detail, and the colors looked smooth and natural without the dithering and banding you get on plasmas. Plus, as a gamer, fast motion on these displays was awesome, you noticed how the picture stayed sharp even during fast panning.

You won't be disappointed with the picture quality of the Kuro. It's not better across the board than your Sony CRT (and don't let anyone tell you otherwise) but the numerous advantages of screen size, form factor, better resolution (not motion rez unfortunately), etc. will probably win out.

I had a Sony directview HDTV and a Sony FW900 CRT monitor which could do 1080p. I am still nostalgic about those displays despite the newer plasmas and RPTV that I now own. They had a gorgeous picture, deep blacks with lots of detail, and the colors looked smooth and natural without the dithering and banding you get on plasmas. Plus, as a gamer, fast motion on these displays was awesome, you noticed how the picture stayed sharp even during fast panning.

Yep.

You won't be disappointed with the picture quality of the Kuro. It's not better across the board than your Sony CRT (and don't let anyone tell you otherwise) but the numerous advantages of screen size, form factor, better resolution (not motion rez unfortunately), etc. will probably win out.

I had a Sony directview HDTV and a Sony FW900 CRT monitor which could do 1080p. I am still nostalgic about those displays despite the newer plasmas and RPTV that I now own. They had a gorgeous picture, deep blacks with lots of detail, and the colors looked smooth and natural without the dithering and banding you get on plasmas. Plus, as a gamer, fast motion on these displays was awesome, you noticed how the picture stayed sharp even during fast panning.

36" Sony vs 50" Pioneer Kuro? No contest, even if like you said the picture was better on the Sony (I'm not convinced of that). The fact that you're getting a 50" set in return that's much easier to fit into the surrounding environment more than makes up for any slight difference in picture quality. To me it's a no brainer. :)

36" Sony vs 50" Pioneer Kuro? No contest, even if like you said the picture was better on the Sony (I'm not convinced of that). The fact that you're getting a 50" set in return that's much easier to fit into the surrounding environment more than makes up for any slight difference in picture quality. To me it's a no brainer. :)

I'm totally convinced. You might find it hard to believe, but there are some of us not as impressed with the Kuro as others.

And, just as the old Sony's better than the Kuro, or any plasma for that matter, it's also better than any LCD.

I'm totally convinced. You might find it hard to believe, but there are some of us not as impressed with the Kuro as others.

:confused::eek::confused::eek::confused::eek:

And, just as the old Sony's better than the Kuro, or any plasma for that matter, it's also better than any LCD.

I won't argue with you. I really wish Sony would jump into SED. SED would bring Sony back to its glory. Can you imagine nano sized "trinitrons" doing their thing in a SED based flat panel.:D:D:D

Display technology Utopia!!

I'm totally convinced. You might find it hard to believe, but there are some of us not as impressed with the Kuro as others.

Then you'd be wrong. You send so many mixed signals in this forum it's hard to really keep up with what you believe anymore auditor, but if you don't like the Kuro then don't get one. Simple as that as I have always suggested for people to see the one's they are interested in with their own eyes and make a decision. It's much better than making false claims in this forum such a plasmas are dead. :D

PS- if you prefer a 36" set that weighs close to 200 lbs and takes up a larger foot print than a modern set that's about double the size then so be it.

Then you'd be wrong. You send so many mixed signals in this forum it's hard to really keep up with what you believe anymore auditor, but if you don't like the Kuro then don't get one. Simple as that as I have always suggested for people to see the one's they are interested in with their own eyes and make a decision. It's much better than making false claims in this forum such a plasmas are dead. :D

PS- if you prefer a 36" set that weighs close to 200 lbs and takes up a larger foot print than a modern set that's about double the size then so be it.

I do believe plasma is dead. I stand by that. I believe its on life support at best.

I don't dislike the Kuro, its a fantastic display, especially the elite series. I dislike the company Pioneer because I believe they're displays are overpriced and some of the marketing tactics leaves a lot to be desired.

Pioneer does make the best plasmas, but not at the premium price, they're not that good.

I do believe plasma is dead. I stand by that. I believe its on life support at best.

I don't dislike the Kuro, its a fantastic display, especially the elite series. I dislike the company Pioneer because I believe they're displays are overpriced and some of the marketing tactics leaves a lot to be desired.

Pioneer does make the best plasmas, but not at the premium price, they're not that good.

Well, it's very obvious you don't own a Kuro.

I owned a 34960....even if my Kuro was 34" it would look better overall.

Auditor...if 'anyone' on this whole board ever talked half as disparagingly about any other set you would lambaste them.....I would like nothing more, and think its' only right/fair, that you own in home a kuro before you post another 1k times about them like you know.

Hey, Laservue is great but so overpriced....oh wait, I have never owned one so I should just shut up.

I do believe plasma is dead. I stand by that. I believe its on life support at best.

I don't dislike the Kuro, its a fantastic display, especially the elite series. I dislike the company Pioneer because I believe they're displays are overpriced and some of the marketing tactics leaves a lot to be desired.

Pioneer does make the best plasmas, but not at the premium price, they're not that good.

If plasma is on "life support" which competing technology in comparison is alive and thriving. Life support or not, which technology can produce an equal picture at an equal size?

I am about the biggest anti snake oil person as you will find and also extremely vocal about my thoughts on poor marketing practices. Dont think i am not vocal on elites because I own one. To the contrary the companies I lash out most against are ones from which I have owned or currently own products from i.e. Logitech, Denon, Monster, Richard Grey, Sony

What has pioneer done?

When you say "they are not that good" what is that compared too? A calibrated 9G elite is near perfect...are you saying other displays can produce a better result after being calibrated? last time I checked all other competitors were a full generation behind elites which in my book allows them to charge a "premium" price.

Personally I dont think the elites are over priced at all.

I think I pretty much disagree with everything you posted.

Well, it's very obvious you don't own a Kuro.

No I don't own a Kuro. Just not to pick on Pioneer, Sony is overpriced as well.

God knows we wouldn't want you to be one sided.

If plasma is on "life support" which competing technology in comparison is alive and thriving. Life support or not, which technology can produce an equal picture at an equal size?

You may not like this, but LCD is alive and well.

I am about the biggest anti snake oil person as you will find and also extremely vocal about my thoughts on poor marketing practices. Dont think i am not vocal on elites because I own one. To the contrary the companies I lash out most against are ones from which I have owned or currently own products from i.e. Logitech, Denon, Monster, Richard Grey, Sony

What has pioneer done?

1) I believe their displays are overpriced.

2) They introduced 6020 9th G panel and the Elite 151 9th G panel, both are essentially the same display, except that the non-elite has limited user controls for fine tunning of the display. In order to get those controls you have jump up to the Elite lines usually at premium price over the 6020. For a 6020 that cost near 5k or more you shouldn't have to spend more to get more refined user controls.

3) The advantage that Pioneer displays have over others is black level. They decided that their displays should priced higher because of better black levels. I say not because, prior to the Kuro, Pioneer and other display manufacturers were depriving us something that we deserve in a display to begin with. We left CRT to come over to their digital displays, however when we left CRT we also left deep black production. Why charge me extra for better blacks? Would charge me a premium price for reds, blue, or greens?



When you say "they are not that good" what is that compared too? A calibrated 9G elite is near perfect...are you saying other displays can produce a better result after being calibrated? last time I checked all other competitors were a full generation behind elites which in my book allows them to charge a "premium" price.

I'm saying not as good as twice plus the price of the competeting plasma brands. That's my opinion, others might differ.

Personally I dont think the elites are over priced at all.

Well we greatly disagree.

I think I pretty much disagree with everything you posted.

That's quite alright.

No I don't own a Kuro. Just not to pick on Pioneer, Sony is overpriced as well.

So is a Ferrari. What are you gonna do?

You may not like this, but LCD is alive and well.

why would you say I may not like that? LCDs are selling well, but Plasma is not on "life support" in comaprison. A comment like that seem like perhaps you have some reason to not like Plasma and its almost as if you are spitting venom on it for some reason.

Perhaps I am miss reading.



1) I believe their displays are overpriced.
I do not, and would have paid more. If more people in the market of high end displays agreed with you then me perhaps they wouldnt be around selling them.

2) They introduced 6020 9th G panel and the Elite 151 9th G panel, both are essentially the same display, except that the non-elite has limited user controls for fine tunning of the display. In order to get those controls you have jump up to the Elite lines usually at premium price over the 6020. For a 6020 that cost near 5k or more you shouldn't have to spend more to get more refined user controls.

The 6020 is worth every dime and many other displays dont offer the amount of control the Elite has (that actually works) in comparison. I am not sure if you realize but many picture adjustments on displays dont actually work in the sense they get the display close to ISF/THX. The elite does.

My Panasonic (both of them) could not, and my Fujitsu only did an "ok" job. The Pioneer elite is near perfect. Again I challenge you to post a display which can achieve the same results as the elite when properly calibrated.



3) The advantage that Pioneer displays have over others is black level. They decided that their displays should priced higher because of better black levels. I say not because, prior to the Kuro, Pioneer and other display manufacturers were depriving us something that we deserve in a display to begin with. We left CRT to come over to their digital displays, however when we left CRT we also left deep black production. Why charge me extra for better blacks? Would charge me a premium price for reds, blue, or greens?
Contrast is the most important part of an image...even more so then lines of resolution. Kuro is unsurpassed and therefor they should charge more for that. You ask if they should charge more for better reds, greens etc? Of course, and because the elite is better a reproducing them they charge more..and should. Make no mistake that the Kuros color reproduction is ahead of its competition...turn to some of the calibration reports posted in any of the Pioneer threads.




I'm saying not as good as twice plus the price of the competeting plasma brands. That's my opinion, others might differ.

Nothing in this hobby is based on dollar for dollar incremental increases. To say its not worth twice as much is subjective. HIgh end is always priced way above low end and entry level high end. I will say that I find some aspects of the elites to be 5 times better, some 2 times better etc.


We will dissagree....but I dissagree with you because of three different displays I have had professionally calibrated and how much better the Elite does over the others. How many displays including the Elite have you had professionally calibrated? What is your reference for saying a display is priced to high or low? The reference I use is how accurate the display can reproduce color and its ability to handle and display a signal...you?

2) They introduced 6020 9th G panel and the Elite 151 9th G panel, both are essentially the same display, except that the non-elite has limited user controls for fine tunning of the display. In order to get those controls you have jump up to the Elite lines usually at premium price over the 6020. For a 6020 that cost near 5k or more you shouldn't have to spend more to get more refined user controls.

3) The advantage that Pioneer displays have over others is black level. They decided that their displays should priced higher because of better black levels. I say not because, prior to the Kuro, Pioneer and other display manufacturers were depriving us something that we deserve in a display to begin with. We left CRT to come over to their digital displays, however when we left CRT we also left deep black production. Why charge me extra for better blacks? Would charge me a premium price for reds, blue, or greens?

For someone who has such a vehement stance about these dislpays, you need to get your facts straight - those two paragraphs are rife with misinformation. I'm not just talking about the overly-inflated prices that you quoted - there's the incorrect assertions about what's required to calibrate a 5020/6020 as well. Plus whining that Pioneer is charging a premium for technology that they paid to develop and their competitors can't reproduce is just plain silly in a free-market economy.

Can we get back to the thread? already Op i have a RCA 38" widescreen 16x9 weights alot and has an excellent picture, around more then 4 months ago i replaced it with a pioneer elite pro-111

just about everything except motion resolution was surpassed. and while i play games on my elite every day (my sis/cousin do as well this tv hardly gets any hrs of rest) i did notice if i focus slightly on panning its slower but almost IMPOSSIBLE to notice if you dont know what i mean.

the pioneer is over 900 lines and its the only tv on the market currently to have the highest lines on a flat screen.

its a small trade for a 38" vs a 50" very well worth it get the elite while its on sale.

OP,

Check out the "Don't throw away your CRT RPTV" thread in the RPTV forum. I have the Sony 34XBR960 and love it. Awesome black levels and no issues on fast gaming motion. However, after several years looking at a 34 inch screen, I wanted to go bigger and figured the only way was Plasma/LCD.

Stumbled across the CRT RPTV thread and found out that lots of people are ditching perfectly good CRT RPTVs. So I went on Craigslist and picked up a Mit 65815 with 9inch CRT guns. Had a ISF tech come out and calibrate. I paid about 1/3 to 1/2 what a Elite Kuro would cost. Sure it's big and bulky but that's a non issue for me.

One of the pluses is that I now have a 65inch screen on the super cheap. And I'm all about bang for buck:) With the savings I picked up a new receiver (Sony DA53000ES). Match that up with my Take 5.1 classic speakers and I have a half-decent surround sound exp. All for the same cost or less then if I went Kuro Elite.

Long winded way of saying don't feel like you have to sink a ton of money into Plasma/Lcd to get big screen experience. If you can deal with the disadvantages of CRT RPTV then you can get a great deal. Also, if the size is too much check out DLP RPTV, still a great screen size to cost factor.

As a person who just sold a hitachi 57inch s500 rp hd crt and gave away a sony 35 inch xbr crt and replaced with 2 kuros- I have not one regret. Geometry (including overscan), fine detail and blacks are all superior. I enjoy all hd sources more with the kuros- those being mot 6416 pvrs, tosh hd dvd, ps3 bd and jvc dvhs. Good as it was I would never go back to crt.

Those Hitachis were great RPTVs but they couldn't resolve full HD detail. They are much softer than 1080p fixed-pixel displays, no doubt about that, but I still enjoy watching the one my in-laws have. It's dated but still lovely in its own way, colors and motion are better than what I get at home ;)

OP,

Check out the "Don't throw away your CRT RPTV" thread in the RPTV forum. I have the Sony 34XBR960 and love it. Awesome black levels and no issues on fast gaming motion. However, after several years looking at a 34 inch screen, I wanted to go bigger and figured the only way was Plasma/LCD.

Stumbled across the CRT RPTV thread and found out that lots of people are ditching perfectly good CRT RPTVs. So I went on Craigslist and picked up a Mit 65815 with 9inch CRT guns. Had a ISF tech come out and calibrate. I paid about 1/3 to 1/2 what a Elite Kuro would cost. Sure it's big and bulky but that's a non issue for me.

One of the pluses is that I now have a 65inch screen on the super cheap. And I'm all about bang for buck:) With the savings I picked up a new receiver (Sony DA53000ES). Match that up with my Take 5.1 classic speakers and I have a half-decent surround sound exp. All for the same cost or less then if I went Kuro Elite.

Long winded way of saying don't feel like you have to sink a ton of money into Plasma/Lcd to get big screen experience. If you can deal with the disadvantages of CRT RPTV then you can get a great deal. Also, if the size is too much check out DLP RPTV, still a great screen size to cost factor.

A lot of people forget just how good a calibrated CRT (RPTV or fp) can look. They do have a couple of advantages over even the Kuro but at a fraction of the price. I had thought about going that same route but the thing is, these used CRT displays need TLC, and they'll need new guns down the road... hopefully the calibrators and service will be available. Also I'm a PS3 gamer, and in the case of the Mits with 9" guns, no 720p support so I'd have wanted a scaler, which aren't cheap, so I ended up going with a 60A3000.

But ya, RPTVs are still relevant for videophiles who can't go the FP route. Bigger is better, which is another thing people in the flat panel boards forget... a 34 inch XBR960 isn't a "big screen" theater experience but a 50 inch Kuro is... but at the same time, a 65 inch plus RPTV is just that more viewing area. You can get 60 inch plasmas, but you will pay an arm and a leg for them. Like 3-4x what you will pay for an RPTV. And I hesitate to say that you get 3-4x the performance out of them.

I still love my plasmas but I'm just saying, they are not the end-all display technology. Nothing is, really, each tech has its downside, so it's all about deciding what's acceptable to you, and how much you can afford.

the pioneers have the best scaling/procsesing/de/interlacing amog all tvs that make SD look excellent give the size change from a smaller crt tube to a 50" or bigger

As much as I loved my 30XS955, the picture on my Pio is better. I thought the Sony had the best pic I had seen, and despite its small size was leary of moving up, but have not 1 regret.

I sold my Sony30XS955 on Craigslist for $375, I paid $800 in 2004. This guy drove 3.5 hrs site unseen to buy. He picked up the tv and drove right back home. He wanted a 2nd set for his home. The cable card also was abig factor.

The friend who bought my 57 inch hitachi uses it for hd gaming and loves it. Don't get me wrong- it is a great set and untill I saw the kuro I was convinced lcd and plasma could never look as good as my hd crts. This was great tech and still holds up well to modern sets - even with all the drawbacks mentioned. Newer is not better which is why I waited so long to go fp.

the pioneers have the best scaling/procsesing/de/interlacing amog all tvs that make SD look excellent give the size change from a smaller crt tube to a 50" or bigger

Among all TVs? I dunno about that. I think the 08 Hitachis, to my eye, are on-par if not better processing than the Kuros. And what about Runco or other boutique plasmas? The Kuros do have pretty good processing, though, not arguing that they don't.

Its been said that the kuro processing is at or defeats high end outboards. so yes i think the pioneer are the best processing, D-nice can confirm that its lost somewhere in the thread

Among all TVs? I dunno about that. I think the 08 Hitachis, to my eye, are on-par if not better processing than the Kuros. And what about Runco or other boutique plasmas? The Kuros do have pretty good processing, though, not arguing that they don't.

Its been said that the kuro processing is at or defeats high end outboards. so yes i think the pioneer are the best processing,

Pioneer KURO PDP-5020FD gets 79/130 from HQV (processing) benchmark, that's a pretty low score considering that Samsung LN52A750 gets 125/130 from the same bench.

Pioneer KURO PDP-5020FD gets 79/130 from HQV (processing) benchmark, that's a pretty low score considering that Samsung LN52A750 gets 125/130 from the same bench.

That's very interesting.

Pioneer KURO PDP-5020FD gets 79/130 from HQV (processing) benchmark, that's a pretty low score considering that Samsung LN52A750 gets 125/130 from the same bench.

Interesting. Do you have the source and a link to it as it would be interesting to read.

You won't be disappointed with the picture quality of the Kuro. It's not better across the board than your Sony CRT (and don't let anyone tell you otherwise) but the numerous advantages of screen size, form factor, better resolution (not motion rez unfortunately), etc. will probably win out.

I had a Sony directview HDTV and a Sony FW900 CRT monitor which could do 1080p. I am still nostalgic about those displays despite the newer plasmas and RPTV that I now own. They had a gorgeous picture, deep blacks with lots of detail, and the colors looked smooth and natural without the dithering and banding you get on plasmas. Plus, as a gamer, fast motion on these displays was awesome, you noticed how the picture stayed sharp even during fast panning.

Amen to that. Couldn't have said it better.

+2 i want to see those readings, and i think it is for all pioneers but theirs a chance that its for elites only? no i thinik it is for all pioneer tvs.

Interesting. Do you have the source and a link to it as it would be interesting to read.

Interesting. Do you have the source and a link to it as it would be interesting to read.

PCMAG website has those readings.

HQV Benchmark score: 79/130 Kuro 5020
HQV Benchmark: 125 (out of 130) Samsung A750

Source confirmed.

"the LN52A750 delivered one of the highest scores on the HQV Benchmark test DVD I've recorded to date" [PC Mag].

HQV Benchmark score: 79/130 Kuro 5020
HQV Benchmark: 125 (out of 130) Samsung A750

Source confirmed.

"the LN52A750 delivered one of the highest scores on the HQV Benchmark test DVD I've recorded to date" [PC Mag].

What does this mean in real viewing?

To most people, not a whole lot, especially when considering that most of the decoding will be done by the source player, whether it's DVD, Blu-ray, or whatever it may be. It's nice to have a TV capable of doing proper decoding, but it's definitely not a deal maker or breaker, in my opinion.

I thought the HQV Benchmark test included motion handling?
I guess I was wrong.