Well, based on what what Samsung is saying about OLED, plasma by inference should remain a major format for the next several years.

Apparently there are still technical and cost issues with OLED that will keep it from the market for ~5 years. Even with the financial and technical backing of Samsung, this technology is not a practical big screen competitor yet.

Samsung has also continued investment in plasma as well as lcd so those 2 formats will remain our choices for the near future.

http://www.about-electronics.eu/2009/03/30/oled-tvs-5-years-away-samsung/

Monday, March 30, 2009 - 8:58 (GMT+99)

OLED TVs 5 years away - Samsung
Filed under: TV & HDTV | by :ryan |

EngadgetHD: Hey, wait just a cotton-pickin’ minute here! Last April, we caught Samsung asserting that it figured affordable medium-to-large size OLED TVs would be available in 2009 / 2010. Now, we’ve got Samsung Europe’s new President and CEO telling us that “mainstream” OLED sets are still five years out

Once the economy hit the skids and Pioneer pulled out of the biz, there's not much incentive for rapid development of OLED. In 5 years, there may be displays that will surpass the Pioneer Elite 151, but not by much. Right now, sales are down everywhere EXCEPT for the mad scramble to snap-up the remaining Pioneer Kuro's across North America. Try to imagine, what a first, second or even third generation 55+" OLED display will cost??? Talk about premium pricing! I've give you a clue, in late December 2002, a 50" Pioneer Elite was selling for $15,000. Would you want to pay premium guinea pig early adopter prices for a first or second generation OLED, when you could buy a 16 generation plasma or LCD for a fraction of that price??

Man, OLED is looking like the next SED with the delays and such. They better
be careful or LCDs (and/or perhaps Plasma) might be just too good and too
ubiquitous to compete with by the time they come out.

Man, OLED is looking like the next SED with the delays and such. They better
be careful or LCDs (and/or perhaps Plasma) might be just too good and too
ubiquitous to compete with by the time they come out.

Unfortunately this economy makes it tough for companies to invest in new technology especially like what disco pointed out what the cost of those new technologies will cost the consumer when they first hit the market. Everyone's tightening their belts and looking only at what can be profitable.

Man, OLED is looking like the next SED with the delays and such. They better
be careful or LCDs (and/or perhaps Plasma) might be just too good and too
ubiquitous to compete with by the time they come out.

You better believe it!!! So true, OLED may be delayed so long as to even make it questionable as a viable prospect & as the successor of LCD or Plasma Tech. Although, I actually believe OLED will come about but at least a time frame much later than first thought. More like 5-7 years, and that's being conservative.

Plasma is dying as we type these words. California, the nation's largest and most progressive state, is about to band Plasma. That cannot be a good sign of the future of viability of plasma dislays. Again, plasma cannot contend with the power of the market and that market is LCD.

Plasma is dying as we type these words. California, the nation's largest and most progressive state, is about to band Plasma. That cannot be a good sign of the future of viability of plasma dislays. Again, plasma cannot contend with the power of the market and that market is LCD.

Link? and it's banned not band.

California may or may not implement restrictions on power consumption for TV's but it is in no way banning plasmas as was proven in the thread discussing it, the new plasmas will meet the tier one and possibly even tier 2 which is 4 years away.

Quit posting lies audi. :rolleyes:

Link? and it's banned not band.

California may or may not implement restrictions on power consumption for TV's but it is in no way banning plasmas as was proven in the thread discussing it, the new plasmas will meet the tier one and possibly even tier 2 which is 4 years away.

Quit posting lies audi. :rolleyes:

OK, you're right, I strike the word 'band". But all else stands true.

Plasma is dying as we type these words. California, the nation's largest and most progressive state, is about to band Plasma. That cannot be a good sign of the future of viability of plasma dislays. Again, plasma cannot contend with the power of the market and that market is LCD.

Geez, what a FUDmeister! The question of banning in California is really moot as all the Plasma PDP's I'm aware are already "Energy Star" compliant. Not to mention the new crop of 2009 displays that decrease energy use even more. The comparisons of energy use between the different video techs has become negligible and is no longer an issue if there ever was one in the first place!

Geez, what a FUDmeister! The question of banning in California is really moot as all the Plasma PDP's I'm aware are already "Energy Star" compliant. Not to mention the new crop of 2009 displays that decrease energy use even more. The comparisons of energy use between the different video techs has become negligible and is no longer an issue if there ever was one in the first place!

When I feel the heat coming from my 5020 I have doubts about how energy efficient it is. I just don't see PDP as a "green" technology.

Plasma is dying as we type these words. California, the nation's largest and most progressive state, is about to band Plasma. That cannot be a good sign of the future of viability of plasma dislays. Again, plasma cannot contend with the power of the market and that market is LCD.


What a silly post. Sheeeesh!

Jeff

What a silly post. Sheeeesh!

Jeff

Why is that newbies always come here and try to attack me? Anyway, welcome to the Audio Video Science Forum, note the word "science" that's what some of us deal with in here.

Is that "voodoo science" you're applying, or is it "science" as practiced in the 15th Century???:D

When I feel the heat coming from my 5020 I have doubts about how energy efficient it is. I just don't see PDP as a "green" technology.

Well, so long as these PDP are energy star 3.0 compliant I don't see an issue here. From what I've seen most every plasma meets that standard.:cool:

Why is that newbies always come here and try to attack me? Anyway, welcome to the Audio Video Science Forum, note the word "science" that's what some of us deal with in here.

So what science was used to make the false claim that California is banning plasma TV's? There's zero in the proposal that says plasma will be banned and yet you post it anyway.

Why is that newbies always come here and try to attack me?
Becuase new members who have yet to learn your schtick read your posts and think you're crazy :D
Anyway, welcome to the Audio Video Science Forum, note the word "science" that's what some of us deal with in here.
When I feel the heat coming from my 5020 I have doubts about how energy efficient it is. I just don't see PDP as a "green" technology.
Aren't these two statments a little contradictory? I'm pretty sure a Kill-a-Watt meter's readings would qualify as "science", and you basing an opinion about a technology on your hand's reading of a single set would not.

FWIW, here's some power consumption data from Crutchfield:
Panasonic 42G10 - 156 W
Panasonic 50G10 - 229 W
Panasonic 42S1 - 170 W
Panasonic 50S1 - 209 W
Panasonic 50PZ850 - 258 W
Sony 40XBR7 - 168 W
Sony 46XBR8 - 279 W
Sony 52V5100 - 244 W
Samsung 46B650 - 180 W
Samsung 52B550 - 189 W
Samsung 46B6000 - 107 W

I dunno, the facts seem to indicate that the current crop of Panasonics are pretty much on par with LCDs of similar sizes. The notable exception is the edge lit LED Samsung, which undercuts the plasmas and the CCFL LCDs. Of course you pay dearly, those sets are hundreds (and in some cases thousands) of dollars more expensive.

jeff

On the other hand, among the Sony models listed, note that the 46" LED lit 46XBR8 consumes 279 W, more than the 244 W of the 52" CCFL lit 52V5100. Interesting! In any case, I am not sure what to make of this, if anything.

...In any case, I am not sure what to make of this, if anything.
What I make of it are the following:
- generalizations are often incorrect and misleading :)
- plasma TVs have gotten more energy efficient, particularly this year with the Neo Panasonics (data not yet available on 2009 Samsung & LG models, for all I know they may present similar results)
- Data showing little to no difference across multiple plasma vs. LCD comparos indicates that the Plasmas are Power Hogs!!! (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=993930&highlight=plasmas+power+hogs) assertion that is prevalent around here is something of an exaggeration

jeff

ok, you're right, i strike the word 'band". But all else stands true.

it's a lie! Plasma is not being banned!


:)

Plasma is dying as we type these words. California, the nation's largest and most progressive state, is about to ban Plasma. That cannot be a good sign of the future of viability of plasma dislays. Again, plasma cannot contend with the power of the market and that market is LCD.
The reason you're attacked is because its most likely true what you say.

As companies drop out of the plasma business it is very telling. I don't know if its down to Samsung and Panasonic the only ones left now but this sign can't be good for the technology.

What if there were only two companies that made radios? Or any other product?

I guess its what you want to believe in, just like the movie "Leap of faith" some will follow right to the end.

The reason you're attacked is because its most likely true what you say.

As companies drop out of the plasma business it is very telling. I don't know if its down to Samsung and Panasonic the only ones left now but this sign can't be good for the technology.

What if there were only two companies that made radios? Or any other product?

I guess its what you want to believe in, just like the movie "Leap of faith" some will follow right to the end.

Reality oldcban, Samsung and Panasonic are not only two of the biggest but also two of the strongest manufacturers of TV's. You can follow along with your buddy audi and make up lies and post false information but it does nothing to effect the reality that plasmas are still here and only lessens your credibility even further.

Reality oldcban, Samsung and Panasonic are not only two of the biggest but also two of the strongest manufacturers of TV's. You can follow along with your buddy audi and make up lies and post false information but it does nothing to effect the reality that plasmas are still here and only lessens your credibility even further.
Lets put it this way.

I enjoy you're passion.:)

Lets put it this way.

I enjoy you're passion.:)

It ain't passion. It's reality. If and when plasma is "dead", then you can come in here and make such claim, but for right now you and audi are just making fools of yourselves as you two have become the forum joke. If that's how you want to be perceived then by all means continue. :p

What if there were only two companies that made radios? Or any other product?

You mean like DirecTV and DishTV in satellite TV? NVidia and ATI in graphics cards? Or Intel and AMD in microprocessors? Or even Pepsi and Coke in soft drinks?

Yeah, if only two companies made plasma TVs like only two companies offer any of those products and services, they'd be in the same dire financial straits as those companies. :rolleyes:

You mean like DirecTV and DishTV in satellite TV? NVidia and ATI in graphics cards? Or Intel and AMD in microprocessors? Or even Pepsi and Coke in soft drinks?

Yeah, if only two companies made plasma TVs like only two companies offer any of those products and services, they'd be in the same dire financial straits as those companies. :rolleyes:

:p:p Best quote EVER:p:p

even if only 1 company made plasma...........I will still buy that over LCD

Plasma is dying as we type these words. California, the nation's largest and most progressive state, is about to band Plasma. That cannot be a good sign of the future of viability of plasma dislays. Again, plasma cannot contend with the power of the market and that market is LCD.

It's OK, you don't have to give any thought to what he says. Audi claims to own a 9G Kuro, but I think the majority of the members on this board know better.

It ain't passion. It's reality. If and when plasma is "dead", then you can come in here and make such claim, but for right now you and audi are just making fools of yourselves as you two have become the forum joke. If that's how you want to be perceived then by all means continue. :p

Your way to emotional.;)

You mean like DirecTV and DishTV in satellite TV?

Yeah, if only two companies made plasma TVs like only two companies offer any of those products and services, they'd be in the same dire financial straits as those companies. :rolleyes:
Like the cable companies these companies masquerade as competitive with each other. Do you believe that these are competing for the good of the little fella?

Not a good example.

I could be wrong but I don't think so. Plasma is in the bottom of the 9th inning.

If plasma died tomorrow, fine. My display will still look exactly the same. It'll still present a better picture to me than any LCD has that I've ever seen.

I don't have plans to buy another TV for at least a few years, so whatever happens in the interim is meaningless. When it's time to upgrade again, I'll buy whatever happens to be the best within my price range, whether it's LCD, plasma, OLED or something else.

Crappy products win out over excellent products all the time (and no, I'm not calling LCDs "crappy"). It's all part of the nature of sales and marketing.

even if only 1 company made plasma...........I will still buy that over LCD

+1...and I'll go even further and say I'd rather buy a 2 year old "used" Pioneer Elite than a new 2009 LCD!:D

Like the cable companies these companies masquerade as competitive with each other.


Wait, now on top of everything else you're suggesting that companies like DirecTV, Dish, AT&T, Time Warner, etc.... are only pretending to compete with each other?

Wait, now on top of everything else you're suggesting that companies like DirecTV, Dish, AT&T, Time Warner, etc.... are only pretending to compete with each other?
Yes thats what I'm saying. Huge amounts are donated to campaigns all the time. If it was truly competive prices for programming would be much lower.

Yes thats what I'm saying. Huge amounts are donated to campaigns all the time. If it was truly competive prices for programming would be much lower.

Sure, that's why Direct has been putting out a full on attack ad campaign letting people know that they have ABC while Dish doesn't. Looks like you lost on this one. :rolleyes:

If plasma died tomorrow, fine. My display will still look exactly the same. It'll still present a better picture to me than any LCD has that I've ever seen.

I don't have plans to buy another TV for at least a few years, so whatever happens in the interim is meaningless. When it's time to upgrade again, I'll buy whatever happens to be the best within my price range, whether it's LCD, plasma, OLED or something else.

Agreed. I don't see the issue here. If/when my current plasma dies I'll buy something else. It's no big deal to me whether plasma TVs are still produced tomorrow morning or not. It's also no big deal to me whether plasma TVs are sold in CA tomorrow morning or not (they of course will be as explained above, but in any case it makes no difference to me -- I don't need a second plasma and I don't care what technology people I visit use, as I'm sure it's adequate and besides, I don't live there...).

Chances are IMO if my current plasma lasts a few years whatever is available to replace it will likely be better and also likely at least as affordable, if not more so.

Looks like you lost on this one. :rolleyes:
Not at all. I've owned a c-band dish since 1985 and followed the politics in this industry. I've seen where my programming once was half the price of cable or the small dish.

These companies have deep pockets and get there way. They killed c-band with there power (the ultimate technology). Yes it appears they compete but like I said if it was truly competitive you'd be paying way less.

Not at all. I've owned a c-band dish since 1985 and followed the politics in this industry. I've seen where my programming once was half the price of cable or the small dish.

These companies have deep pockets and get there way. They killed c-band with there power (the ultimate technology). Yes it appears they compete but like I said if it was truly competitive you'd be paying way less.

They are c-o-m-p-e-t-i-t-o-r-s.

No matter how you want to spin it. :D

^^^
You don't want a discussion just an arguement so I'll bow out.

Man, OLED is looking like the next SED with the delays and such. They better
be careful or LCDs (and/or perhaps Plasma) might be just too good and too
ubiquitous to compete with by the time they come out.

That is indeed a potential increasing risk the longer OLED gets delayed.

However, to be more certain about that, it'd be nice to hear from Xrox or someone of that level on whether or not OLED possesses such inherent technical advantages that even LCD or plasma with 5 more years of refinement cannot compete (though I'm sure no one knows for 100% certain, as no one knows for certain how much better LCD and plasma are going to get).

Oh, and Audie, take any "SED would beat OLED!" posts and toss 'em in the circular file, mmkay? Thanks in advance. :rolleyes:
.

^^^
You don't want a discussion just an arguement so I'll bow out.

I love discussions with intelligent posters and thank you for bowing out. :)

This conversation is ridiculous. Plasma won't disappear until Panasonic drops out. I don't see that happening until OLED becomes obtainable.

I don't get why some of the lcd fanboys are dancing and cheering like it's going to somehow change their lives if plasma ceases to exist. It's a tv. Really, if you get so much joy out of rooting for a display technology you might want to get out of the house a bit more.

FWIW, here's some power consumption data from Crutchfield:
Panasonic 42G10 - 156 W
Panasonic 50G10 - 229 W
Panasonic 42S1 - 170 W
Panasonic 50S1 - 209 W
Panasonic 50PZ850 - 258 W
Sony 40XBR7 - 168 W
Sony 46XBR8 - 279 W
Sony 52V5100 - 244 W
Samsung 46B650 - 180 W
Samsung 52B550 - 189 W
Samsung 46B6000 - 107 W

I dunno, the facts seem to indicate that the current crop of Panasonics are pretty much on par with LCDs of similar sizes. The notable exception is the edge lit LED Samsung, which undercuts the plasmas and the CCFL LCDs. Of course you pay dearly, those sets are hundreds (and in some cases thousands) of dollars more expensive.

jeff

well in a professional european review site they mention
panny TH-42PX81( european) consumes 202watts at 150cd/m2 of brightness
" TH-46PZ86FV consumes 330watts at 150cd/m2.
46inch sony xbr8 consumes only 149watts at 150cd/m2
so there is a significant difference in power consumption.

well in a professional european review site they mention
panny TH-42PX81( european) consumes 202watts at 150cd/m2 of brightness
" TH-46PZ86FV consumes 330watts at 150cd/m2.
46inch sony xbr8 consumes only 149watts at 150cd/m2
so there is a significant difference in power consumption.

What you fail to mention, and to my understanding is that w/plasma displays the energy usage is not constant and changes w/light and dark scenes, etc. Not so w/LCD, whereby their energy use is contant all the time the display is on.

What you fail to mention, and to my understanding is that w/plasma displays the energy usage is not constant and changes w/light and dark scenes, etc. Not so w/LCD, whereby their energy use is contant all the time the display is on.

well even the average power consumption of plasma is still more then lcds ,and if u want proof i can give that too.

Plasma is dying as we type these words. California, the nation's largest and most progressive state, is about to band Plasma. That cannot be a good sign of the future of viability of plasma dislays.

Has nothing to do with the vialibility of Plasma.

And has everything to do with the idiotic ideas that squeeze through that little thing most politicians call their brain.

This would be the last thing I would want politicians in my state to be worrying about in today's world. They should all be thrown out of office - absolutely worthless.

well in a professional european review site they mention
panny TH-42PX81( european) consumes 202watts at 150cd/m2 of brightness
" TH-46PZ86FV consumes 330watts at 150cd/m2.
46inch sony xbr8 consumes only 149watts at 150cd/m2
so there is a significant difference in power consumption.
That is data on last year's model - I specifically pointed out that this year's models have made gains in this regard. And we don't know how those sets were set up, what the content being displayed was, etc. I'm trying to apply some actual data & a look at multiple models to the subject, you'll have to bring more than a single data point from an unknown source if you want to contribute in a meaningful way.
well even the average power consumption of plasma is still more then lcds ,and if u want proof i can give that too.
You're going to have to. I posted real data from a good source indicating that the differences range from non-existent to small.

jeff

That is data on last year's model - I specifically pointed out that this year's models have made gains in this regard. And we don't know how those sets were set up, what the content being displayed was, etc. I'm trying to apply some actual data & a look at multiple models to the subject, you'll have to bring more than a single data point from an unknown source if you want to contribute in a meaningful way.

You're going to have to. I posted real data from a good source indicating that the differences range from non-existent to small.

jeff

well checkout www.hdtvtest.co.uk and also check out www.digitalversus.com and these are very popular website.

That is indeed a potential increasing risk the longer OLED gets delayed.

However, to be more certain about that, it'd be nice to hear from Xrox or someone of that level on whether or not OLED possesses such inherent technical advantages that even LCD or plasma with 5 more years of refinement cannot compete (though I'm sure no one knows for 100% certain, as no one knows for certain how much better LCD and plasma are going to get)..I would not even use the term "potential risk" since it has already proved to be true. OLED back in 2000 (when I was involved with it) was considered a giant leap in display technology with what seemed to be an endless list of huge advantages.

Thanks to OLEDs extremely slow TTM (time to market), both LCD and PDP have made great strides in cost, design, and performance that have continually shrunk OLEDs list of advantages. Even hardcore researchers who I talk to have, at least mentally, thrown in the towel with regards to OLED displays and see OLED lighting as its biggest potential market.

However, like a similar post I made about SED, OLED displays (when they reach market) will be considered better because they are very good at almost every measure (unlike PDP and LCD) while possibly not being the best at any one measure.

Without any speculation the number one remaining advantage of OLED technology is the potential for roll to roll, ultra low cost, size independant manufacture. Add to that, currently it is the "only" display capable of emitting no light on black portions of the screen [Demonstrated with plasma but not yet in market]

Now for fun I would like to "speculate" as to what happens during the next 5 years. While not complete here is a few thoughts that come to mind

LCD
Local dimming LCD becomes ultra thin, pixel and LED compensated, with new LC matrix to improve viewing angle, and becomes cheap
Edge-lit LCD becomes ultra cheap with new LC matrix similar to above
Blue-Phase micro-second response LCD are avialable*
* - I question the light transmission of this design.

PLASMA - assuming plasma is still around :)
All PDPs are >5lm/w with ultra thin designs
Many PDPs are capable of zero black (spacial and static)
New 10+ lm/w technology is near production
All PDPs offer optional Interpolation modes with refresh rates that are multiples of 60
Color micro and macro filters are used to achieve high contrast in high ambient light

On a personal note, IMO the demise of plasma (if that actually occurs), will make things easier for OLED and SED regardless of LCD advancement for one important reason. No matter how advanced LCD becomes it will always be a light valve display. There is an inherent advantage IMO of having an intrinsically pixel emissive display that cannot be quantified with just one measure. I personally think it is a combination of uniformity, viewing angle and spacial contrast (static). Having said that, based on the current market, obviously the modern consumer may not care about this advantage :)

Yes thats what I'm saying. Huge amounts are donated to campaigns all the time. If it was truly competive prices for programming would be much lower.

I was employed by one of the USA's largest cable providers for several years... at their corporate HQ. I can assure you that they are very much in competition regardless of your conspiracy theories.

I would not even use the term "potential risk" since it has already proved to be true. OLED back in 2000 (when I was involved with it) was considered a giant leap in display technology with what seemed to be an endless list of huge advantages.

Thanks to OLEDs extremely slow TTM (time to market), both LCD and PDP have made great strides in cost, design, and performance that have continually shrunk OLEDs list of advantages. Even hardcore researchers who I talk to have, at least mentally, thrown in the towel with regards to OLED displays and see OLED lighting as its biggest potential market.

However, like a similar post I made about SED, OLED displays (when they reach market) will be considered better because they are very good at almost every measure (unlike PDP and LCD) while possibly not being the best at any one measure.

Without any speculation the number one remaining advantage of OLED technology is the potential for roll to roll, ultra low cost, size independant manufacture. Add to that, currently it is the "only" display capable of emitting no light on black portions of the screen [Demonstrated with plasma but not yet in market]

Now for fun I would like to "speculate" as to what happens during the next 5 years. While not complete here is a few thoughts that come to mind

LCD
Local dimming LCD becomes ultra thin, pixel and LED compensated, with new LC matrix to improve viewing angle, and becomes cheap
Edge-lit LCD becomes ultra cheap with new LC matrix similar to above
Blue-Phase micro-second response LCD are avialable*
* - I question the light transmission of this design.

PLASMA - assuming plasma is still around :)
All PDPs are >5lm/w with ultra thin designs
Many PDPs are capable of zero black (spacial and static)
New 10+ lm/w technology is near production
All PDPs offer optional Interpolation modes with refresh rates that are multiples of 60
Color micro and macro filters are used to achieve high contrast in high ambient light

On a personal note, IMO the demise of plasma (if that actually occurs), will make things easier for OLED and SED regardless of LCD advancement for one important reason. No matter how advanced LCD becomes it will always be a light valve display. There is an inherent advantage IMO of having an intrinsically pixel emissive display that cannot be quantified with just one measure. I personally think it is a combination of uniformity, viewing angle and spacial contrast (static). Having said that, based on the current market, obviously the modern consumer may not care about this advantage :)


Incredibly excellent post, Xrox. Thanks much. http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/happy/happy0001.gif

However, one of your predictions... :

All PDPs offer optional Interpolation modes with refresh rates that are multiples of 60

... may cause the local motion enhancement-hater squad to take up torches and pitchforks against you. Yes, even though you said 'optional'. The haterade is indeed strong on that one, so beware. ;)

*** Also... so, really, it's already too late for OLED displays to really dominate?? And its best market will be lighting, backlighting, etc?

Wow, that's going to be a bit of a surprise for all those who were waiting breathlessly for it. Guess the moral is to not fall in love with the future so easily, eh?
.

... may cause the local motion enhancement-hater squad to take up torches and pitchforks against you. Yes, even though you said 'optional'. The haterade is indeed strong on that one.

So beware. ;)
.



I think you've mistaken most peoples position on it. Why is it a problem for some not to like the effect and who's to say it will be the same as what Samsung is using? It appears, according to others, Sony does a much better job with theirs. As it stands right now I personally don't care for the effect but my experience has only been with the Samsungs. Maybe they can improve on it or others can come up with a better application of it. Like all new things there's always room for improvement.

[quote=xrox;
On a personal note, IMO the demise of plasma (if that actually occurs), will make things easier for OLED and SED regardless of LCD advancement for one important reason. No matter how advanced LCD becomes it will always be a light valve display. There is an inherent advantage IMO of having an intrinsically pixel emissive display that cannot be quantified with just one measure. I personally think it is a combination of uniformity, viewing angle and spacial contrast (static). Having said that, based on the current market, obviously the modern consumer may not care about this advantage :)[/quote]

To paraphrase Mark Twain; the rumors of Plasma's death have been greatly exaggerated.

I have been watching the number of readers on the LCD and Plasma forums on a daily basis, and what was once a very large margin of LCD over Plasma visitors, has now shrunk considerably. Keep in mind that a lot of the LCD activity and sales are based on 32inch and smaller displays.

Something to watch for: I have noticed that there has been an increase in the number of LCD gamers, who are not happy with their displays, and more and more of them are making plasma their next purchase.

If Plasma captures a share of the gamers, then they will be capturing a valuable youth demographic.

Many young gamers do not have the disposable income to afford an LD LED LCD set, which would be the only thing that could compete, gaming performance wise, with a much less expensive Plasma display.

Keep in mind, the shakeout of the weak Plasma makers has already taken place, and the LCD field is still very crowded. They will have to go through a shakeout soon.

With just three Plasma makers, they can afford to divide a smaller pie, more than the many LCD makers can afford to divide a larger pie. GE was getting into the LCD HDTV business this year. They recently announced that they were putting those plans on hold. That indicates that they found that the LCD field is already too crowded.

Too much is being made of Pioneer quitting. They were less than three percent of the number of unit solds, last year, and they were bleeding red ink. In other words, they were a small time player, with first class engineering, and an atrocious business and marketing model.

Plasma sales, year to year, held up in the fourth quarter of 2008, but LCD sales, for the same period, took a significant drop.

I think you've mistaken most peoples position on it.

Not really. 'Haterade' seems to be an apt description, at least for some of it.

Why is it a problem for some not to like the effect

It's not a problem to not like motion enhancement. What is odd to me are the ppl who seem to be bemoaning its very existence, like it's some sort of horrible two-headed stepchild that chews on baby ducklings. The hysteria seems all out of proportion with the reality.

Don't like the ME? Turn it down, or off. Heck, on the newer sets, it's even customizable. Or, buy a set that doesn't have it at all.

None of these are terribly difficult things. Yet, somehow, some ppl seem to be acting like they're going to be lashed to a chair and their eyes propped open with toothpicks (like that guy in Clockwork Orange) and FORCED to watch motion enhancement. Yeesh. :rolleyes:

...and who's to say it will be the same as what Samsung is using? It appears, according to others, Sony does a much better job with theirs..

'Much better' seems to be a pretty big overstatement. For example, here's an excerpt from CNET's review of the XBR7:

As with other Sony 120Hz displays, we preferred the look of Standard, not High, among the XBR7's two dejudder processing modes. It preserved more of the judder of film and introduced fewer artifacts. Compared to the Low setting of the Samsung models and Smooth on the Toshiba, the Sony's Standard looked a bit more natural and smoothed motion in a subtler way.

"A bit more natural" and "subtler"? I'll buy that. But sure that doesn't sound like night-and-day-better wording. And, of course, they were using a 2008 Sammy (A650) for comparison. Who knows how the '09s will stack up?
.

Not really. 'Haterade' seems to be an apt description, at least for some of it.



It's not a problem to not like motion enhancement. What is odd to me are the ppl who seem to be bemoaning its very existence, like it's some sort of horrible two-headed stepchild that chews on baby ducklings. The hysteria seems all out of proportion with the reality.

Don't like the ME? Turn it down, or off. Heck, on the newer sets, it's even customizable. Or, buy a set that doesn't have it at all.

None of these are terribly difficult things. Yet, somehow, some ppl seem to be acting like they're going to be lashed to a chair and their eyes propped open with toothpicks (like that guy in Clockwork Orange) and FORCED to watch motion enhancement. Yeesh. :rolleyes:



'Much better' seems to be a pretty big overstatement. For example, here's an excerpt from CNET's review of the XBR7:

As with other Sony 120Hz displays, we preferred the look of Standard, not High, among the XBR7's two dejudder processing modes. It preserved more of the judder of film and introduced fewer artifacts. Compared to the Low setting of the Samsung models and Smooth on the Toshiba, the Sony's Standard looked a bit more natural and smoothed motion in a subtler way.

"A bit more natural" and "subtler"? I'll buy that. But sure that doesn't sound like night-and-day-better wording. And, of course, they were using a 2008 Sammy (A650) for comparison. Who knows how the '09s will stack up?
.

No offense intended, but it appears you take these AMP opinions to seriously. It is what it is and some like it and some don't as that's been pretty well established already. Continuing to argue about it doesn't change anything. Time to move on don't you think?

T
Keep in mind, the shakeout of the weak Plasma makers has already taken place, and the LCD field is still very crowded. They will have to go through a shakeout soon.

I would agree with that, definitely.

With just three Plasma makers, they can afford to divide a smaller pie, more than the many LCD makers can afford to divide a larger pie.

Is it going to be three, or two? Pioneer's gone. Vizio's gone. Fujitsu's long gone. LG has said that they're strongly considering leaving plasma. Is Hitachi still committed to the plasma game, or are they considering leaving too? I forget. :confused:

Too much is being made of Pioneer quitting. They were less than three percent of the number of unit solds, last year, and they were bleeding red ink. In other words, they were a small time player, with first class engineering, and an atrocious business and marketing model.

Yes, but symbolically, Pioneer was very important, all out of proportion to their marketshare. They were the standard-bearer, the sets that plasma fans could point to and go, "See? THAT'S why we're into plasma."

Them leaving is like when Bird and Magic left basketball (or Jordan later on)... the game goes on, but it's just not the same anymore.
.

No offense intended, but it appears you take these AMP opinions to seriously.

On the contrary, I don't think you understand my position.

What I'm saying is that ppl take AMP and ME too seriously, and should chill. ME is not the devil. It's just another option.

Continuing to argue about it doesn't change anything. Time to move on don't you think?

It's been my observation that opinions are more often seen as 'argumentative' when they don't square with what the observer personally believes in.

Like the ME-haters, I've merely stated my opinion. I don't seem to recall you telling any of them to 'move on', at least since I've been paying attention to the topic. But if I'm in error on this, I'm sure you'll inform me.
.

I was employed by one of the USA's largest cable providers for several years... at their corporate HQ. I can assure you that they are very much in competition regardless of your conspiracy theories.
Its nice to see someone that believes that things are working well. But with pac's for are elected officials to stay in office says another story.

Here's a link about a US Senetor that had enough about raising money.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/10/60minutes/main660368.shtml

Money talks. The little fella doesn't have a chance.

Like the ME-haters, I've merely stated my opinion.
.

Why the need to apply a label to people that hold a different opinion than you? You don't see that as a hostile or argumentative action?

Its nice to see someone that believes that things are working well. But with pac's for are elected officials to stay in office says another story.

Here's a link about a US Senetor that had enough about raising money.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/10/60minutes/main660368.shtml

Money talks. The little fella doesn't have a chance.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I did not say things were working well, just that there is a legitimate competition going on in the marketplace. Each of these companies will use any means necessary to further their own financial position, as they should in a free economy. If the system is broken, don't blame the corporations for taking advantage of it. That is their job as public companies.

And I honestly don't see what that link has to do with your claim of a false competition between various content providers.

And I honestly don't see what that link has to do with your claim of a false competition between various content providers.

Oh maybe the sentence where the good Senator says that these companies that give money are getting more than good goverment?

I don't know if these providers donate money but should be easy to find out.

That link kinda makes you think why were in such a mess don't ya think? Might be all legal but Washington is broken.

Why the need to apply a label to people that hold a different opinion than you? You don't see that as a hostile or argumentative action?

Not really. Not if the label is accurate.

Is it hostile or argumentative to call a conservative Republican a believer in 'trickle down economics', if that is what they truly believe? Or a liberal Democrat a 'wealth redistributor', if that is what they believe?

Some ppl really do hate motion enhancement. Some ppl really like it. It causes no harm to call a spade a spade, and state what we truly believe.
.

On the contrary, I don't think you understand my position.

What I'm saying is that ppl take AMP and ME too seriously, and should chill. ME is not the devil. It's just another option.



It's been my observation that opinions are more often seen as 'argumentative' when they don't square with what the observer personally believes in.

Like the ME-haters, I've merely stated my opinion. I don't seem to recall you telling any of them to 'move on', at least since I've been paying attention to the topic. But if I'm in error on this, I'm sure you'll inform me.
.

Actually I'm taking the high road and moving on. Hope to see you somwhere along the way. :)

Actually I'm taking the high road and moving on. Hope to see you somwhere along the way. :)

Whatever you wish to believe. *shrug*
.

I would agree with that, definitely.



Is it going to be three, or two? Pioneer's gone. Vizio's gone. Fujitsu's long gone. LG has said that they're strongly considering leaving plasma. Is Hitachi still committed to the plasma game, or are they considering leaving too? I forget. :confused:



Yes, but symbolically, Pioneer was very important, all out of proportion to their marketshare. They were the standard-bearer, the sets that plasma fans could point to and go, "See? THAT'S why we're into plasma."

Them leaving is like when Bird and Magic left basketball (or Jordan later on)... the game goes on, but it's just not the same anymore.
.

Three Plasma makers. Panasonic, LG, and Samsung.

LG is going to ship 3 million units this year. Pioneer shipped about 10% of that number. The LG rumor was false, and they issued an official statement refuting it. Their statement is where I got the 3 million number from.

LeBron, or Kobe would destroy Bird.

Nostalgia is a con artist that makes us forget all negatives, and recall only the few great highlights.

Three Plasma makers. Panasonic, LG, and Samsung.

LG is going to ship 3 million units this year. Pioneer shipped about 10% of that number. The LG rumor was false, and they issued an official statement refuting it. Their statement is where I got the 3 million number from.

Good to know. Three then.

LeBron, or Kobe would destroy Bird.

That's an old argument... but back in the '80s, they'd substitute 'Jordan' for LeBron or Kobe. In a game of one-on-one, sure, and they'd destroy Magic as well.

But basketball is a team sport, and Bird and Magic were great at not only playing great themselves, but making their teammates better as well. They were huge in their day, and they'd be huge today as well if they were able to play in their prime.

Ever see the playoff game where Jordan scored 63, but the Bulls still lost the game (and the series) to Bird and the Celtics? Basketball is just not an individual sport.

Jordan got a further dose of that lesson for years from the Pistons, who lacked a lot of huge stars but played great as a team, and seemed to always put away the Bulls in the playoffs. It wasn't until Jordan was finally able to get a strong team around him that he was able to win any rings.

Put LeBron or Kobe on a bad team and they wouldn't get anywhere either.

Nostalgia is a con artist that makes us forget all negatives, and recall only the few great highlights.

LOL. Bird and Magic had a lot more than a 'few' great highlights, that's for sure. ;)

And their rivalry and play elevated the popularity/profile of the league in a way that the NBA wishes they could duplicate now.
.

This conversation is ridiculous. Plasma won't disappear until Panasonic drops out. I don't see that happening until OLED becomes obtainable.

I don't get why some of the lcd fanboys are dancing and cheering like it's going to somehow change their lives if plasma ceases to exist. It's a tv. Really, if you get so much joy out of rooting for a display technology you might want to get out of the house a bit more.


Hi there,

FANTASTIC!....made me giggle:D

Apart from work and shopping for food, I have been very busy with completing my AV setup, and housing it all into a couple of support stands and so on.......bottom line during all of this is that I myself do not get out much....although I enjoy what I have.....I take what you say and I will also try my best to get out more........END OF 2009.

lOl and sincere regards

:):rolleyes::D

Most North American team sports suck these days.

It just does my heart good seeing teams from the rest of the world beating the pants off of us at our own games now.

Baseball and Basketball (which they play the way we used to play it), and Hockey (which they play the way it should be played).

But do we ever change? Hell, no. That's why I get such a kick out of it. Just to see how badly we can get embarrassed each time.

Good to know. Three then.



That's an old argument... but back in the '80s, they'd substitute 'Jordan' for LeBron or Kobe. In a game of one-on-one, sure, and they'd destroy Magic as well.

But basketball is a team sport, and Bird and Magic were great at not only playing great themselves, but making their teammates better as well. They were huge in their day, and they'd be huge today as well if they were able to play in their prime.

Ever see the playoff game where Jordan scored 63, but the Bulls still lost the game (and the series) to Bird and the Celtics? Basketball is just not an individual sport.

Jordan got a further dose of that lesson for years from the Pistons, who lacked a lot of huge stars but played great as a team, and seemed to always put away the Bulls in the playoffs. It wasn't until Jordan was finally able to get a strong team around him that he was able to win any rings.

Put LeBron or Kobe on a bad team and they wouldn't get anywhere either.



LOL. Bird and Magic had a lot more than a 'few' great highlights, that's for sure. ;)

And their rivalry and play elevated the popularity/profile of the league in a way that the NBA wishes they could duplicate now.
.


Excellent post SS!! I totally agree. :D

Most North American team sports suck these days.

It just does my heart good seeing teams from the rest of the world beating the pants off of us at our own games now.

Baseball and Basketball (which they play the way we used to play it), and Hockey (which they play the way it should be played).

But do we ever change? Hell, no. That's why I get such a kick out of it. Just to see how badly we can get embarrassed each time.

:rolleyes:

Excellent post SS!! I totally agree. :D

Thanks. :cool:

And, I know this is off-topic, but it is kinda sad how I just don't seem to care near as much about the NBA nowadays as I did in the '80s. The game just seemed better back then, and the rivalries and personalities much more interesting/intense.

I still dig college basketball come tournament time though, i.e. 'March Madness'. NC vs Mich State is going to be a good game.
.

:rolleyes:You're right. I should've said "Most professional North American team sports suck these days".

Football hasn't changed all that much really, although I still don't understand why they have to spear a guy and rupture half his internal organs and ligaments now, rather than just putting their arms around him and pulling him down like they used to - and hit him after he's made a catch so hard that he does 6 cartwheels in the air and comes down on his neck.

Most North American team sports suck these days.

It just does my heart good seeing teams from the rest of the world beating the pants off of us at our own games now.

Baseball and Basketball (which they play the way we used to play it), and Hockey (which they play the way it should be played).

But do we ever change? Hell, no. That's why I get such a kick out of it. Just to see how badly we can get embarrassed each time.

The U.S. Men's Basketball Team spanked the rest world in this past Summer Olympics.

You're right. I should've said "Most professional North American team sports suck these days".

Football hasn't changed all that much really, although I still don't understand why they have to spear a guy and rupture half his internal organs and ligaments now, rather than just putting their arms around him and pulling him down like they used to - and hit him after he's made a catch so hard that he does 6 cartwheels in the air and comes down on his neck.

This way off topic but WHAT???

Old time sports especially football and hockey they would try to kill you. The reason there are so many rules now is because of how they used to do things. Now they not only give a penalty but they also charge you with crimes.

Maybe you should look up players like Mike Milbury (he beat a fan with the guys own shoe) Funny how people either have selective memory or just don't know what they are talking about.

Why can't it be like the good old days :rolleyes:

As far as North American teams sucking like I said :rolleyes:

Maybe you should look up players like Mike Milbury (he beat a fan with the guys own shoe) Funny how people either have selective memory or just don't know what they are talking about. Man I loved hockey back in the day. It was such an emotional game that was fast and free flowing and full of rivalry and bad blood. It seems the new fan base wants to suck all the life out of the game and watch an All-Star type gentleman's game combined with excessive trapping. And then they don't even watch it because it is boring? No wonder they are in trouble.

Oh wait, we're talking about Plasma here :)

Man I loved hockey back in the day. It was such an emotional game that was fast and free flowing and full of rivalry and bad blood. It seems the new fan base wants to suck all the life out of the game and watch an All-Star type gentleman's game combined with excessive trapping. And then they don't even watch it because it is boring? No wonder they are in trouble.

Oh wait, we're talking about Plasma here :)

Each generation loves what they are first exposed to in the spring time of their lives. Music is a prime example of that, and the previous generation always says that music, or sports, or movies, or.... was always much better, when they were young, than what "the kids" are into now.

It is what I have labeled: ASS(Abe Simpson Syndrome) ;)


http://www.simpsoncrazy.com/information/lists/grampastories.shtml


I gotta to go now, young feller, I have to chase those darn kids off my lawn.

Each generation loves what they are first exposed to in the spring time of their lives. Music is a prime example of that, and the previous generation always says that music, or sports, or movies, or.... was always much better, when they were young, than what "the kids" are into now.

It is what I have labeled: ASS(Abe Simpson Syndrome) ;)


http://www.simpsoncrazy.com/information/lists/grampastories.shtml


I gotta to go now, young feller, I have to chase those darn kids off my lawn.I must be in trouble then because I'm only 35 :( Actually my point was that the same people who are so vocal about banning figting,checking,bad blood or any emotion for that matter are the same people who are and will tune out the "new" hockey because it is boring. It is like stepping in to change things to conform to you viewpoint and then dismissing the final product and leaving. Thank you very much.....

Each generation loves what they are first exposed to in the spring time of their lives. Music is a prime example of that, and the previous generation always says that music, or sports, or movies, or.... was always much better, when they were young, than what "the kids" are into now.

It is what I have labeled: ASS(Abe Simpson Syndrome) ;)


http://www.simpsoncrazy.com/information/lists/grampastories.shtml


I gotta to go now, young feller, I have to chase those darn kids off my lawn.

Darn KIDS TODAY listing to that "rock and roll" music they don't have respect for any one. Kids where so much more well behaved in the past. :D

I must be in trouble then because I'm only 35 :( Actually my point was that the same people who are so vocal about banning figting,checking,bad blood or any emotion for that matter are the same people who are and will tune out the "new" hockey because it is boring. It is like stepping in to change things to conform to you viewpoint and then dismissing the final product and leaving. Thank you very much.....

There is a LOT of that going on, not just in sports.:(

I must be in trouble then because I'm only 35 :( Actually my point was that the same people who are so vocal about banning figting,checking,bad blood or any emotion for that matter are the same people who are and will tune out the "new" hockey because it is boring. It is like stepping in to change things to conform to you viewpoint and then dismissing the final product and leaving. Thank you very much.....

Ice Hockey is not that good an example to use. It was always a niche sport, and back in the early sixties there were only about eight teams, almost all the players were Canadians, and there was very little TV coverage. The player salaries were very low, so the owners could make a profit on attendance. In those days there was very little fighting, and no designated goons, so guys like Bobby Hull,(The Golden Jet) were rarely, if ever accosted.

Hockey is trying to get back on track after overpaying for too many stars, without the TV revenues to afford them. Hell they were practically out of business for a while.

The new HDTV era is probably the first time that most people will be able to keep track of where the the puck is, so that should help them to build viewers.

I hated all the fighting that kept disrupting the flow of the game, and am glad to see it gone. I prefer the clean game that allows skilled players to flourish, and do not miss the Pro Wrestling aspects of the Goon era, one bit.

Ice Hockey is not that good an example to use. It was always a niche sport, and back in the early sixties there were only about eight teams, almost all the players were Canadians, and there was very little TV coverage. The player salaries were very low, so the owners could make a profit on attendance. In those days there was very little fighting, and no designated goons, so guys like Bobby Hull,(The Golden Jet) were rarely, if ever accosted.

The new HDTV era is probably the first time that most people will be able to keep track of where the the puck is, so that should help them to build viewers.

I hated all the fighting that kept disrupting the flow of the game, and am glad to see it gone. I prefer the clean game that allows skilled players to flourish, and do not miss the Pro Wrestling aspects of the Goon era, one bit.I could not disagree more with everything above and will leave it at that ;)

I could not disagree more with everything above and will leave it at that ;)

So you disagree with my opinion that HDTV will allow people to more easily keep track of the puck. Wow.:D

I could not disagree more with everything above and will leave it at that ;)

What he said

What he said

So you also think that HDTV will not allow viewers to more easily keep track of the puck. Amazing!

I think with Pioneer dropping out, the scramble to do an end-around that technology to surpass what they did with PQ is not as urgent. I see OLED taking its sweet time, which is OK. That will allow LCD to maximize, and plasma to gain a (hopefully) better place in the hearts and minds of most consumers.

I could easily track the puck on my 23" zenith console tv with Chromacolor :D






http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h98/tower101/1971-Nov-Zenith-Model-C4745W.jpg

I could easily track the puck on my 23" zenith console tv with Chromacolor :D

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h98/tower101/1971-Nov-Zenith-Model-C4745W.jpg

Before the NHL collapsed, one TV network tried a puck with a special tracking device, so they could illuminate the path of the puck, because so many viewers had complained about how hard it was to follow that tiny speeding disk.

Case closed. :D

I remember that it was like a blue? trail but that was for people with out the awesome Chromacolor :D

The NHL collapsed??

I remember that it was like a blue? trail but that was for people with out the awesome Chromacolor :D

The NHL collapsed??

The entire 2004-5 season was canceled, because they were bleeding red, and could no longer afford the player salary contracts. That is a collapse.

When you have to start all over, after skipping a year, you have of course collapsed, and have alienated much of your fan base. That is the reality of the situation. Case closed.:D


"Back in my day, we didn't need no stinkin' Chromacolor. The game coverage was transmitted by smoke signals, using a Black Hawks blanket, and we simulated the play on our Etch-A-Sketches. Durn kids with all their new fangled TeeVee jibber jabber." Abe Simpson

Uh guys, can we get back to arguing over plasmas and LCD's? :D

The entire 2004-5 season was canceled, because they were bleeding red, and could no longer afford the player salary contracts. That is a collapse.

When you have to start all over, after skipping a year, you have of course collapsed, and have alienated much of your fan base. That is the reality of the situation. Case closed.:D


"Back in my day, we didn't need no stinkin' Chromacolor. The game coverage was transmitted by smoke signals, using a Black Hawks blanket, and we simulated the play on our Etch-A-Sketches. Durn kids with all their new fangled TeeVee jibber jabber." Abe Simpson

Guess they should have brought in scab players then like the NFL did at least it would not have been a collapse (well by your definition anyway)


Abe that young pup at least he had fire for smoke signals. We had to draw the games in the dirt after getting the plays chiseled out on stone brought in by carrier pigeons (big pigeons). :D Those where good times.

Each generation loves what they are first exposed to in the spring time of their lives. Music is a prime example of that...

Not necessarily. The music I was exposed to early on was stuff like J Geils Band and Hall & Oates. Oh yeah, and Fleetwood Mac.

I like, but don't love, Fleetwood Mac. I'm absolutely indifferent to the J Geils Band. And I'd like to hunt down Hall & Oates and beat them with a lead pipe- our local radio station played "Maneater" endlessly one summer, every hour on the hour. You could literally set your watch to it.

Worst... song... EVER. :eek:

Kiss was also huge when I was a kid, and I think they have maybe two good songs, total. And Gene Simmons is such a douche.

Hate to admit it, but it wasn't 'til the rise of grunge and then alternative that I got rescued from musical mediocrity. Late '70s and '80s pop was enormously painful for the most part. :(
.

Plasma is dying as we type these words. California, the nation's largest and most LIBERAL, garbage, degenerate, bankrupt state, is about to band Plasma. That cannot be a good sign of the future of viability of plasma dislays. Again, plasma cannot contend with the power of the market and that market is LCD.

Ahhh, there! Fixed!

California, the nation's largest and most progressive state,

LOL this is a joke right?

Not necessarily. The music I was exposed to early on was stuff like J Geils Band and Hall & Oates. Oh yeah, and Fleetwood Mac.

I like, but don't love, Fleetwood Mac. I'm absolutely indifferent to the J Geils Band. And I'd like to hunt down Hall & Oates and beat them with a lead pipe- our local radio station played "Maneater" endlessly one summer, every hour on the hour. You could literally set your watch to it.

Worst... song... EVER. :eek:

Kiss was also huge when I was a kid, and I think they have maybe two good songs, total. And Gene Simmons is such a douche.

Hate to admit it, but it wasn't 'til the rise of grunge and then alternative that I got rescued from musical mediocrity. Late '70s and '80s pop was enormously painful for the most part. :(
.

You are not a generation. There are always exceptions to what the majority considers to be in. When Sinatra, Como, and Crosby were dominating the charts, there were always a number of people who did not care for them, and of course there was also the older crowd, which kept grumbling about how those three whipper snappers could not carry the sheet music for Enrico Caruso and John McCormack. "Darn kids with their crooning nonsense, instead of real singing, like they did back in my day." Abe Simpson:)

[QUOTE=SystemShock2;16209587]Not necessarily. The music I was exposed to early on was stuff like J Geils Band and Hall & Oates. Oh yeah, and Fleetwood Mac.

I like, but don't love, Fleetwood Mac. I'm absolutely indifferent to the J Geils Band. And I'd like to hunt down Hall & Oates and beat them with a lead pipe- our local radio station played "Maneater" endlessly one summer, every hour on the hour. You could literally set your watch to it.

Worst... song... EVER. :eek:[QUOTE/]

I think you just listened to the wrong damn radio station!! What about Led Zepplin, The Who, The Stones, Bob Dylan, Black Sabbath, AC/DC, Eric Clapton, Dire Straits, 10cc, Foreigner, Steely Dan, Genesis, The Eagles, Pink Floyd, Journey, etc., etc., etc....out of those 3 you mentioned above, I'd give props to Fleetwood Mac, and later to Stevie Nicks' solo albums.

Man I just read the entire thread, if this site had a best of section, I would vote to have this put in it.

Some very funny stuff but sad at the same time as most of the posters did not mean to be funny. :D

You are not a generation. There are always exceptions to what the majority considers to be in. When Sinatra, Como, and Crosby were dominating the charts, there were always a number of people who did not care for them, and of course there were also the older crowd that kept grumbling about how those three whipper snappers could not carry the sheet music for Enrico Caruso and John McCormack.:)

I disagree w/you too. True, older generations tend to do as you mentioned, but have you ever considered that in music, sometimes there's such a talent & sheer volume of innovative great music curve for a particular genre. Take Classical music, there was a heightened period when many composers were creating the very best music of their time that later became the standards that live on today as the best of the best. Big Band music had its heightened period in the late 1930's & 1940's. Rock is still extremely popular today, and after almost 40 years you would be hard pressed to find a city in the US that does not have an "oldie" rock station w/listeners from all age groups.

I disagree w/you too. True, older generations tend to do as you mentioned, but have you ever considered that in music, sometimes there's such a talent & sheer volume of innovative great music curve for a particular genre. Take Classical music, there was a heightened period when many composers were creating the very best music of their time that later became the standards that live on today as the best of the best. Big Band music had its heightened period in the late 1930's & 1940's. Rock is still extremely popular today, and after almost 40 years you would be hard pressed to find a city in the US that does not have an "oldie" rock station w/listeners from all age groups.


The billboard charts. That is where the generational riptides are always to be found. During the era that all the great classical music was composed, there was also a far greater amount of crappy clasical music composed, that has not survived. Classical music was the dominant music for centuries, in Europe, and there was no other form of contemporary music being created at that time, except for homespun folk songs and melodies, which had no access to the concert halls, which were completely controlled by Royalty and the landed Gentry.

Music on the radio is dying a fairly rapid death. The internet and downloads is killing it. Off course some stations are appealing to mostly an Oldies, older following, that is not into downloading onto an iPod like device. That radio format will die out, because it's core audience is rapidly aging.

Well, I have to go now, because my local Really Really Oldie Station is broadcasting a Stephen Foster Melodies, and Minstrel Tunes, Marathon.

I dream of Jennie with the light brown hair.... Ah Heaven.:D