Seems like plasmas are still the top choice when it comes to the best set as the HD Guru chose the new V10 series as the best panel out. The 54" at a retail price of $2500.00 is a very attractive price point also and makes it a very good value.

http://hdguru.com/the-new-king-of-hdtv-displays-panasonics-tc-p54v10-reviewed/458/

This paid advertisement brought to you by Kellogg's, Underoos (They're FUN to wear!) and the letter "C". ;)

This paid advertisement brought to you by Kellogg's, Underoos (They're FUN to wear!) and the letter "C". ;)

Heck, even I didn't anticipate that card to be played that quickly. :p

Hmmm, the LCD crowd must be trying to hackt he site, none of the pages will load....

I am glad to see the panny get a good review, but what I didn't get was how on earth he could (yet again) claim that It outperforms the 9G kuro.
We all know it doesn't according to the calibration charts.

They did this same thing with the G10. They claimed it was the best.
And also with the panny professional model.

I am glad to see the panny get a good review, but what I didn't get was how on earth he could (yet again) claim that It outperforms the 9G kuro.
We all know it doesn't according to the calibration charts.

Can you tell how a speaker or amplifier sounds by looking its frequency response? Calibration chart won't tell you how noisy the picture is or how the display copes with gradations. The list could go on.

That guy seems to declare every new tv he touches to be "The new King!" of all HDTVs. The V10 isn't even the best Panasonic.

Can you tell how a speaker or amplifier sounds by looking its frequency response? Calibration chart won't tell you how noisy the picture is or how the display copes with gradations. The list could go on.

oh, my bad.
I thought this was a science forum where measurements matter.

That guy seems to declare every new tv he touches to be "The new King!" of all HDTVs. The V10 isn't even the best Panasonic.

Then in your opinion, which model is the best Panny plasma?

FYI, the V10 is enjoying quite alot of high praise from other reviewers
as well as users.
Forget about the Guru :rolleyes:

then in your opinion, which model is the best panny plasma?

Fyi, the v10 is enjoying quite alot of high praise from other reviewers
as well as users.
Forget about the guru :rolleyes:

th-50vx100u
&
th-65vx100u

oh, my bad.
I thought this was a science forum where measurements matter.

You are measuring only one aspect of display while eyes are measuring all aspects. You should have more measurements than just calibration chart to tell anything meaningful about a display.

I have also noticed that the HDGuru's "best" designation changes frequently. However in his defense I must point out that the state of the art in video reproduction does advance incrementally and he does a good job of keeping abreast of the changes. It is also true that the HDGuru, or any other A/V web site or printed A/V publication, had best frequently say good things about a product they are loaned for test purposes, or the loans soon stop happening.

But I also have a bit of a conceptual issue with medium-sized plasma displays such as the current test of the TC-P54V10. For my purposes and my tastes, medium plasma displays have little real purpose.

There really are two applications for video displays. One is a home theater application where you seek the "total immersion" experience where the display subtends a large angle of your vision. The optimal viewing distance for this 54" plasma display, based upon the HDGuru's seating chart, and the viewing guidelines from the SMPTE and THX are between 5 and 8 feet (approximately, the reccomendations are similar but not identical). At that rather close viewing distance, you could fit two people on a couch. Any more seats, and you have excessive geometric distortion from the viewing angles. Ideally, the two seats would be in the center of a surround sound "sweet spot". The room should ideally be in near total darkness to avoid distractions.

The second purpose of a video display is the simple, all-to-common occupation called "watching TV". This is a lesser level of interaction with the video and actually is but a part-time occupation, you can read or converse or nibble or even work. The basic parameter of "watching TV" is that you be further away and that the screen occupy a lesser area in your total view. This is a distinctly and different experience from the total immersion of a theater experience (commercial or home theater).

The "watching TV" experience requires a display with a native refresh rate compatible with 30Hz and 60Hz video materials. The only plasma technology that offers this capability is the (out of production) Pioneer Kuros with user-selectable 60Hz/72Hz refresh, and also 120Hz/240Hz LCD displays. Within these two choices there is room for a preference for LCD or Plasma. However the Panasonic HDTV model TC-P54V10 is a singularly POOR choice for "watching TV", it's fixed 72Hz refresh will compromise motion smoothness with video material that originates as 30Hz frame rates (1080i60) and 60Hz frame rates (720p60). As a Home Theater display, the TC-P54V10 is not a bad choice for up to two people on a couch, and provided all you want it for is watching 24Hz video sources. But the TC-P54V10 HDTV is a poor TV display.

Gary I knew I could count on you to chime in with some talk about refresh rates ;) But,

However the Panasonic HDTV model TC-P54V10 is a singularly POOR choice for "watching TV", it's fixed 72Hz refresh will compromise motion smoothness with video material that originates as 30Hz frame rates (1080i60) and 60Hz frame rates (720p60). As a Home Theater display, the TC-P54V10 is not a bad choice for up to two people on a couch, and provided all you want it for is watching 24Hz video sources. But the TC-P54V10 HDTV is a poor TV display.
Not sure where you got the idea that this TV has a fixed 72 Hz refresh rate. This TV has options for 48, 60, and 96 Hz. Quite clearly discussed in the linked review, and discussed ad nauseum in the 2009 anticipation thread and owner's thread.

jeff

I am glad to see the panny get a good review, but what I didn't get was how on earth he could (yet again) claim that It outperforms the 9G kuro.
We all know it doesn't according to the calibration charts.

They did this same thing with the G10. They claimed it was the best.
And also with the panny professional model.

I took it to mean it is the best of current production or best moving forward, excluding the 9g Pio's

The "watching TV" experience requires a display with a native refresh rate compatible with 30Hz and 60Hz video materials. The only plasma technology that offers this capability is the (out of production) Pioneer Kuros with user-selectable 60Hz/72Hz refresh, and also 120Hz/240Hz LCD displays. Within these two choices there is room for a preference for LCD or Plasma. However the Panasonic HDTV model TC-P54V10 is a singularly POOR choice for "watching TV", it's fixed 72Hz refresh will compromise motion smoothness with video material that originates as 30Hz frame rates (1080i60) and 60Hz frame rates (720p60). As a Home Theater display, the TC-P54V10 is not a bad choice for up to two people on a couch, and provided all you want it for is watching 24Hz video sources. But the TC-P54V10 HDTV is a poor TV display.
Wow.... I don't know where you pulled that bit of gross misinformation from, but the "native" refresh rate of the TC-P54V10 is 60Hz, as it is for just about every plasma sold in North America. 72Hz isn't available on this set. When viewing a 24p source, such as a BD movie, the user can adjust the refresh rate to 48, 60, or 96Hz.

Also, the kuro that you mentioned used a "native" refresh rate of 72Hz. For 60Hz content, it would do a reverse 3:2 pulldown.

Gary I knew I could count on you to chime in with some talk about refresh rates ;) But,

Not sure where you got the idea that this TV has a fixed 72 Hz refresh rate. This TV has options for 48, 60, and 96 Hz. Quite clearly discussed in the linked review, and discussed ad nauseum in the 2009 anticipation thread and owner's thread.

jeff

OK, I should not have skimmed the review so fast. But this TC-P54V10 Plasma (and last year's Kuro's) still lack compatibility with BOTH film at 24fps AND video at 30/60fps. That is, UNLESS the user sits there and switches back and forth between the 60Hz and 96Hz modes, every time the video feed changes. Because both film-source and video source materials are commonly used for video broadcasts, and the HDGuru does say that this set does a proper job of 3:2 pulldown from an ATSC broadcast stream.

I'm willing to guess that not many bother. Instead they accept compromised motion smoothness, either from video material when the set is refreshing at 96Hz, or film material when the set is refreshing at 60Hz. I am intimately familiar with this annoyance, I have to switch my Home Theater projector manually between 60Hz and 72Hz. It is a blessed relief from this annoyance when you own a display with 120Hz/240Hz refresh, which displays BOTH film and video with uncompromised motion smoothness.

What I did in my Home Theater was to define a macro that switches video modes with a minimum of fuss. What Panasonic needs to do is to assign a remote key to switch between film/video modes. Maybe they actually did that, but the review does not say so.

But this TC-P54V10 Plasma (and last year's Kuro's) still lack compatibility with BOTH film at 24fps AND video at 30/60fps. That is, UNLESS the user sits there and switches back and forth between the 60Hz and 96Hz modes, every time the video feed changes

Wrong. Kuros have four options available allowing the owner to decide how each signal type will be handled, and they can be set to automatically output a 24fps source at 72hz and 30/60fps sources at 60hz without further user intervention. The G10 that I played with seemed to work in a similar fashion, only locking in at 48hz (or 96hz with the V10) when a 24fps source was detected.

Wrong. Kuros have four options available allowing the owner to decide how each signal type will be handled, and they can be set to automatically output a 24fps source at 72hz and 30/60fps sources at 60hz without further user intervention. The G10 that I played with seemed to work in a similar fashion, only locking in at 48hz (or 96hz with the V10) when a 24fps source was detected.
Correct. I have no idea where Gary'a pulling his misinformation from, but there is no need to toggle. 30/60 fps sources are displayed at 60Hz, and that's it. The V10 has a 24p Direct In setting for handing 24p content, where the user can set the refresh rate at 48, 60, or 96Hz. No toggling is required.

I'd like to touch on his assertion re: 120/240Hz LCDs though... it would be grossly naive to assume that just because a display refreshes at 120Hz that it is capable of 5:5 pulldown. Gary is well aware of this, as he's participated in threads discussing 3:2 pulldown in some 120Hz displays. LCD manufacturers have made alot of headway in implementing 5:5 pulldown this year, but it needs to be noted that there are still 120Hz displays that are only capable of 3:2.

You do notice they are comparing an 8G kuro vs a 12g viera. I still think the 8g blows it away calibrated and the 9G knocks them all out silly with no competitor to step toe to toe with. :D Funny thing is although the Panny is specified to have 96hz the Kuro is still much smoother with insane detail and color without flicker.

I'm getting my information from the HDGuru review linked to in the first article. Quote:
"When fed a 24 Hz signal (movie film based content), from a Blu-ray player or (limited) DirecTV HD content, the V10 provides the option of choosing 48 Hz, 60 Hz or 96 Hz display." (Underline is mine.)

The meaning of this text is simply that the display refresh rates must be manually selected by the viewer. The display does not dynamicly switch refresh rates to adjust to the source frame rate. I understand the input-specific "Direct-In" setting allows you to select compatibility with a 24Hz disk player on a particular HDMI input - that's a usefull enhancement, but it DOES NOT MEAN that with a mixed film/video ATSC broadcast signal, the display refresh rate changes automaticly - it can only be changed by the viewer, and only when he recognizes the compromised motion on-screen. This problem exists in both Kuro and Panasonic TC-P54V10.

Furthermore, if the disk player is used for BOTH 24Hz Blu-Ray and conventional 60Hz DVDs, the "Direct In" setting on that input would have to be toggled between ON and OFF by the viewer manually - the same setting will not work for both. If you have one 24Hz player on one input and a 60Hz player on another, not a problem.

By contrast, a 120Hz or 240Hz LCD offers native display rate capability with both 24fps film source and 30/60Hz video, because these two display frame rates are integer multiples of all three source frame rates 24/30/60Hz. No manual refresh rate switching by the user is required.

When it comes to correct 3:2 pulldown (which is a test that the HD Guru has been running for as long as he has published) any set rated with a "Pass" in this category can recognize the 2:3 pattern of film source frames within the 60Hz broadcast signal and use the 3:2 pulldown feature to reconstruct the original 24fps source video signal. What happens next depends upon the display. On a 120Hz or 240Hz LCD video display, nothing needs to happen, because the native frame rate allows an even display of source frames (5:5 or 10:10).

YES I know of older 120Hz displays which do not perform 5:5 correctly. None remain in current production. Early 120Hz displays decreased black levels with a technique called BFI (Black Frame Insertion) but handled video exactly as did 60Hz displays - no possibility of smooth motion with 24fps source - in fact in that generation of display, no 24Hz source compatibility.

The two LCD technology leaders Sony and Samsung have typically shipped HDTVs where 3:2 pulldown worked and 5:5 display worked. Samsung unfortunately went through a period in early 2008 when this was not true, several models shipped right after the switch from the Micronas frame rate converters used in the 2007 Samsung models to the Samsung in-house frame rate converter chipset. But by mid-2008 this was corrected on new designs. Sony has always been good with this featrure AFAIK.

This problem exists in both Kuro and Panasonic TC-P54V10.

Not correct.

Not correct.

Do you have a source article where it claims either plasma set will automaticly switch display frame rates to match the source video frame rate? It certainly DOES NOT say that in the HD Guru review.

By contrast, 120Hz/240Hz LCDs offer multiple source frame rate compatibility naturally by virtue of the fact that the display refresh is an integer multiple of the source frame rates used. No automatic or manual refresh rate switching is ever required.

I do not trust everything in HD Guru articles. They sometimes make erroneous statements and draw questionable conclusions.

Below are the results for a 9G Kuro as tested by a member of this site:

Here are my Pure Cinema refresh frequency results for each setting on the PRO-141FD.

Advance
480i 60 – 71.93 Hz
480p 60 - 71.93 Hz
576i 50 – 75.00 Hz
720p 60 - 71.93 Hz
1080i 60 - 71.93 Hz
1080p 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080p 24 - 71.93 Hz


Smooth
480i 60 – 59.94 Hz
480p 60 - 59.94 Hz
576i 50 – 60.01 Hz
720p 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080i 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080p 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080p 24 - 59.94 Hz


Standard
480i 60 – 59.94 Hz
480p 60 - 59.94 Hz
576i 50 – 75.00 Hz
720p 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080i 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080p 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080p 24 – 71.93 Hz


Off
480i 60 – 59.94 Hz
480p 60 - 59.94 Hz
576i 50 – 75.00 Hz
720p 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080i 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080p 60 - 59.94 Hz
1080p 24 - 59.94 Hz

And the G10 I played with has a 3:2 pulldown setting. Toggling this setting will enable/disable 48hz playback when fed 24fps sources. When I set it for 48hz playback while watching 60fps material, nothing discernable occured. When 24fps material was displayed, the tell-tale 48hz flicker that the Panasonics are notorious for became apparent. I haven't spent much time with a V10, but I would imagine that their 96hz mode functions the same way.

You are inferring information that is not stated in the HDGuru article.

The option to select from the three refresh rates is available only when 24p content is being displayed. There is no further adjustment required.

If a 30p or 60i input is sent to the display, it will refreash at 60Hz. When a 24p input is again selected, the refresh rate adjusts to whatever was previously selected for 24p- i.e., 96Hz.

I have also noticed that the HDGuru's "best" designation changes frequently. However in his defense I must point out that the state of the art in video reproduction does advance incrementally and he does a good job of keeping abreast of the changes. It is also true that the HDGuru, or any other A/V web site or printed A/V publication, had best frequently say good things about a product they are loaned for test purposes, or the loans soon stop happening.

But I also have a bit of a conceptual issue with medium-sized plasma displays such as the current test of the TC-P54V10. For my purposes and my tastes, medium plasma displays have little real purpose.



Hmmm? In the past you've spoken about the HD Guru as the only one you trust and now he's kind of wishy washy ( HDGuru's "best" designation changes frequently) and biased cause he needs free TVs given to him. Wouldn't ranking one over the other piss off the other manufacturers and risk it to the point that he may not get free TVs to test?

As for the highlighted portion of your post, that clearly indicates your strong bias against plasma even though they continually come out on top or near the top by most reviewers. You really need to have a more open mind and realize that not everyone fits in the same category as you. :)

I am glad to see the panny get a good review, but what I didn't get was how on earth he could (yet again) claim that It outperforms the 9G kuro.
We all know it doesn't according to the calibration charts.

They did this same thing with the G10. They claimed it was the best.
And also with the panny professional model.

I have to agree. Gary can't review TVs worth a damn.

I'm not sure that Gary wrote that review. Michael Fremer - whoever he is - is named at the bottom. Other reviews reference Gary by name.

That guy seems to declare every new tv he touches to be "The new King!" of all HDTVs. The V10 isn't even the best Panasonic.

What about when he proclaimed to Kuro as the best ever. I guess that's OK with you.

Anyway, I told you about those so-called "Professional" reviewers before, they're nothing but hacks, they get paid to write nice things about TV's.

Hmmm? In the past you've spoken about the HD Guru as the only one you trust and now he's kind of wishy washy ( HDGuru's "best" designation changes frequently) and biased cause he needs free TVs given to him

I told you not trust anyone them. They are the enemies of scientific/objective comparsions. When are you folks going to wake up.

I told you not trust anyone them. They are the enemies of scientific/objective comparsions. When are you folks going to wake up.You're not paranoid if they really are out to get you.

I'm getting my information from the HDGuru review linked to in the first article. Quote:
"When fed a 24 Hz signal (movie film based content), from a Blu-ray player or (limited) DirecTV HD content, the V10 provides the option of choosing 48 Hz, 60 Hz or 96 Hz display." (Underline is mine.)

The meaning of this text is simply that the display refresh rates must be manually selected by the viewer. The display does not dynamicly switch refresh rates to adjust to the source frame rate. I understand the input-specific "Direct-In" setting allows you to select compatibility with a 24Hz disk player on a particular HDMI input - that's a usefull enhancement, but it DOES NOT MEAN that with a mixed film/video ATSC broadcast signal, the display refresh rate changes automaticly - it can only be changed by the viewer, and only when he recognizes the compromised motion on-screen. This problem exists in both Kuro and Panasonic TC-P54V10.

Furthermore, if the disk player is used for BOTH 24Hz Blu-Ray and conventional 60Hz DVDs, the "Direct In" setting on that input would have to be toggled between ON and OFF by the viewer manually - the same setting will not work for both. If you have one 24Hz player on one input and a 60Hz player on another, not a problem.

By contrast, a 120Hz or 240Hz LCD offers native display rate capability with both 24fps film source and 30/60Hz video, because these two display frame rates are integer multiples of all three source frame rates 24/30/60Hz. No manual refresh rate switching by the user is required.

When it comes to correct 3:2 pulldown (which is a test that the HD Guru has been running for as long as he has published) any set rated with a "Pass" in this category can recognize the 2:3 pattern of film source frames within the 60Hz broadcast signal and use the 3:2 pulldown feature to reconstruct the original 24fps source video signal. What happens next depends upon the display. On a 120Hz or 240Hz LCD video display, nothing needs to happen, because the native frame rate allows an even display of source frames (5:5 or 10:10).

YES I know of older 120Hz displays which do not perform 5:5 correctly. None remain in current production. Early 120Hz displays decreased black levels with a technique called BFI (Black Frame Insertion) but handled video exactly as did 60Hz displays - no possibility of smooth motion with 24fps source - in fact in that generation of display, no 24Hz source compatibility.

The two LCD technology leaders Sony and Samsung have typically shipped HDTVs where 3:2 pulldown worked and 5:5 display worked. Samsung unfortunately went through a period in early 2008 when this was not true, several models shipped right after the switch from the Micronas frame rate converters used in the 2007 Samsung models to the Samsung in-house frame rate converter chipset. But by mid-2008 this was corrected on new designs. Sony has always been good with this featrure AFAIK.

I think of myself as tech-litterate but I find this to be way too complicated. Sometimes having too many choices and features actually take you away from the experience? I just imagine myself with a new AV setup and sit down with my family to watch something and I need to remember all the settings.... I appreciate the knowledge everyone has accumulated on the subject but honestly with my busy life it's too much for me.

I just want to sit down and enjoy great movies.

Frankie

I think of myself as tech-litterate but I find this to be way too complicated. Sometimes having too many choices and features actually take you away from the experience? I just imagine myself with a new AV setup and sit down with my family to watch something and I need to remember all the settings.... I appreciate the knowledge everyone has accumulated on the subject but honestly with my busy life it's too much for me.

I just want to sit down and enjoy great movies.

Frankie

Ditto.

Mike

oh, my bad.
I thought this was a science forum where measurements matter.

Measurements does matter, a lot, but it's not all about measurements. One could fine tune a piano with a frequency meter to "perfect" measures, and still pianos need to be professionally calibrated to "non-perfect" frequencies, since they sound better that way.

One may show a paper with graphs of 2.2 gammas and 0.0000000000x lumens for blacks, but maybe another display just "looks better" for whatever reason, having a "worse" figures.

Many things account to picture quality, and indeed color accuracy, greyscale and black levels are probably the main ones... but one should wonder if maybe a slightly non-perfect greyscale could be better, even being less accurate, and definitely one should wonder if a difference of 1/100th in cd/m2 makes a difference when the display is not just in a pitch black room...

If you want to be scientific do not assume a small set of measurements as the whole picture quality "fact". Just find a general way to measure picture quality.

I think of myself as tech-litterate but I find this to be way too complicated. Sometimes having too many choices and features actually take you away from the experience? I just imagine myself with a new AV setup and sit down with my family to watch something and I need to remember all the settings.... I appreciate the knowledge everyone has accumulated on the subject but honestly with my busy life it's too much for me.

I just want to sit down and enjoy great movies.

Frankie

The technology of the A/V hobby has always been too complicated for the comfort of non-techies. In the days of analog electronics this meant that there was a thriving fringe business selling things like magical cables and low-resistance silver wire and silver solder and gold-plated hardware. Not to mention resistors, capacitors, and other components where one particular construction was said to have "purer, more natural sound" than other cheaper alternatives. I am by profession an Electrical Engineer with 40+ years in this hobby and I used to refer to such things as "voodoo electronics". For the record, I do NOT believe that you can "hear" the electrolytic power supply capacitors as some will claim. Nor do I believe that the species of wood in your wall studs or the type of wallboard fastener used make audible contributions to your Home Theater.

The spread of digital electronics throughout the A/V space has not simplified the level of technical understanding needed to make sense of it all. Instead some of the bleeding edge technology has gotten insanely complex. The science of flat panel displays is one such. In this sub-forum for example, you will find threads debating the relative merits of LCD vs. Plasma. The average person who wants to participate in such a discussion probably does not understand that LCD displays come in four major flavors (IPS, TN, PVA, MVA) or that there are another 6-9 significant variations on the basic panel types (S-IPS, H-IPS, S-PVA, etc.). Then there are backlighting variations (CCFL, RGB LED, White LED) and even construction differences for backlights that further complicate the display (2-dimensional array vs. edge-lit). Of course, if you REALLY want to understand the performance of edge-lit LED backlighting, you better brush up on the Physics of optical waveguides.

As always, you are faced with two choices. You can either make the effort to understand the technology and to participate meaningfully in the Forum, or you can lurk in the background, take away the bare knowledge needed to make an HDTV choice, and not participate. Then there is the third alternative, which is to come to a partial understanding of the technology under discussion, and a half-baked opinion with no justification in fact (the one we hear most often is "Plasmas are better than LCDs"), and jump into the discussion and take your lumps.

And now for a change of topic: I've been watching this thread and I'd now like to interject that I STILL think that Gary Merson (aka the HDGuru) does the best overall job with testing HDTVs. For those of you who think I ever said anything different, I invite you to re-read my words. I simply observed that his "Best HDTV" changes frequently. That is not a criticism, it happens because he is testing high-end and state-of-the-art video technology. He is also quite up-front when he states his PREFERENCE for plasma technology over LCD. This in spite of the fact that the best overall HDTV he tested in 2008 was the LED-backlit LCD model Samsung LN-46A950, and the best overall HDTV he tested in 2007 was the LED-backlit LCD model Samsung LN-T4081F.

Yes, there ARE other review sites (CNET always springs to mind, they are the only site to test more than the HD Guru's 125 HDTVs) but they are less objective and depend upon the opinions of multiple editors/reviewers, and both lack consistent results and have been known to change the relative rankings of the sets reviewed with little rhyme or reason.

Read the reviews on the HD Guru site or CNET or any of the numerous review sites where they attempt to do more rigorous reviews (but end up testing less than 20 HDTVs per year and thus can't even keep abreast of technology trends) with several grains of salt. My point here is simple: there really and truely is little technical reason to rate one technology as "better" or "worse" - we clearly are at a point in time where a well-executed design of either display type will enjoy a brief period as "best HDTV".

YES there is room for a preference for one display technology over the other. My own opinion is that people who grew up viewing filmed material shown upon a 60Hz, 480i resolution, (direct-view or rear projection) CRT analog television with Telecine processing are pre-disposed to prefer plasma over LCD, because plasma has the comforting look of glowing phosphors that they have seen all their lives, and the 60Hz display has the comforting motion judder of Telecine film processing, and it just FEELS right to them.

But I also think that LCDs have surpassed the Plasma technology in the ability to display a convincing rendition of the real world - one that is not distorted by the familiar technical limitations of film. Whether you call it "soap opera effect" or "too real" or whatever else, the LCD display can create a better image than film can record in most parameters (everything except resolution). In the near future as 4K digital projectors and 4K digital intermediate movie files and 3D technology overtake and surpass film in popularity, the standards for "best video technology" will be reset.

After that reset takes place, there will still be people stubbornly clinging to the old tech of Plasma, just as today some cling to vinyl over CDs, or vacuum tube electronics over semiconductors.

It's a big hobby. There is room for preference, even though there are fewer valid reasons to prefer one technology over the other today.

YES there is room for a preference for one display technology over the other. My own opinion is that people who grew up viewing filmed material shown upon a 60Hz, 480i resolution, (direct-view or rear projection) CRT analog television with Telecine processing are pre-disposed to prefer plasma over LCD, because plasma has the comforting look of glowing phosphors that they have seen all their lives, and the 60Hz display has the comforting motion judder of Telecine film processing, and it just FEELS right to them.

But I also think that LCDs have surpassed the Plasma technology in the ability to display a convincing rendition of the real world - one that is not distorted by the familiar technical limitations of film. Whether you call it "soap opera effect" or "too real" or whatever else, the LCD display can create a better image than film can record in most parameters (everything except resolution). In the near future as 4K digital projectors and 4K digital intermediate movie files and 3D technology overtake and surpass film in popularity, the standards for "best video technology" will be reset.

After that reset takes place, there will still be people stubbornly clinging to the old tech of Plasma, just as today some cling to vinyl over CDs, or vacuum tube electronics over semiconductors.

It's a big hobby. There is room for preference, even though there are fewer valid reasons to prefer one technology over the other today.

Please Gary, don't pigeon hole owners of plasma. I could state that I feel those that have chosen LCD are those that have grown up on cartoons and like the bright colors and almost neon effect that an LCD portrays so well, but that's just as foolish as your above statement. and then to compare plasma's to tube or vinyl is a complete joke. It's hard to take someone seriously when they post with so many flaws in their opinion. :rolleyes:

After that reset takes place, there will still be people stubbornly clinging to the old tech of Plasma, just as today some cling to vinyl over CDs, or vacuum tube electronics over semiconductors.
To piggyback on maxdog's comment; Gary don't you recognize the littlest bit of hypocrisy in statements like this? On one hand you say, "there's room for preference", but then you go on (and on, and on, and on :p) about how frame interpolation is the wave of the future (it's purely personal preference), how plasma is "old tech" (look for plasma to survive longer than LCD when OLED emerges), how everyone is used to telecine judder (there isn't any on most TV shows and sports), and how film is some outdated medium (despite the fact that there are artistic reasons for it, same reason we still have painters when cameras are available).

These are all personal opinions of yours that are routinely stated as facts in your giant posts. Or if they're not stated as facts, they're put out as opinions that could only be disagreed with by saps who aren't as educated/experienced/enlightened as you. All that nonsense detracts from the valid points you do make.

jeff

So many mis-statements in one message. Motion judder exists on any display that refreshes at 60Hz when the video source is 24fps film. Just because you have never noticed such, doesn't mean Telecine judder is not present - it only means that you grew up watching such judder on analog TV, and are not sensitized to it.

Didn't I explicitly say that there is little technical reason to prefer one display technology over the other? Didn't I also plainly say that there was so little superiority that either technology could however briefly be considered the "best HDTV"? I believe you will find both of those statements in message #34.

I have indeed expressed my preference for material that is recorded at greater than 24fps, such as live sports at 30fps or 60fps. I have indeed expressed a preference for the clearer-than-film appearance of frame interpolation in a video feed, to correct the limitations of the 24fps film standard. I've made no secret of my PREFERENCES here. But I own LCDs because of the SD/4:3 video sources I own (because I don't want to risk burn-in on a Plasma with black sidebars) and for the frame interpolation features that don't exist in a form I consider usable or especially beneficial on a Plasma set, and because of the very bright ambient light in my family room that washes out a plasma screen and shows nasty reflections to boot.

Those ARE valid reasons to prefer an LCD over a Plasma set, no matter how much one would prefer to deny such. But nowhere have I ever said that I would not own a Plasma at some point. That point will only come after the Plasma refresh rate has been raised to 120Hz or greater, after good effective frame interpolation engines have been incorporated into such a Plasma panel, and finally after reasonably priced 72" or larger panels make them candidates to replace my front projector.

Under those conditions I might select a plasma - as long as even better tech and features were not available in LCD or OLED or whatever else is in play at that point in time. But make no mistake - as I have said more than once, I see no reason one flat panel technology is better than the other - my selection is based upon video features and video performance in the brightly lt room I have.

My real preference for Home Theater is to watch a really large screen in a darkened room. I'll have such a dedicated room in my next house - but today I have to rearrange furniture to use my projector, the Home Theater doubles as the formal living room. Being naturally lazy I watch more films on my 46" LCD HDTV than on my 96" projector screen - but I do sit close enough for the immersive theater experience in the family room.

There's reasoning, and then there's pseudoreasoning. Unfortunately Gary, your posts on this particular subject rely heavily on pseudoreasoning. I don't feel that your faulty logic is intentional, but the net result is the same regardless.

As the tuner was not tested, the review should have, at most, called it the best HD monitor. It was not tested as a TV!