Oh God, how did LCD's takeover the market??? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 165 Old 01-13-2008, 07:30 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You walk through a big box store and everyone has an LCD TV. WTF is Polaroid doing in the TV market? This is atrocious. The picture quality is terrible even on HD. I could stomach it for playing a video game, but thats about it. The black level is crap, flesh tones don't look accurate, and the colors look fluorescent. And the soft edges on everything just makes me want to puke.

I was looking at the Blu-Ray kiosk that Sony has out at all the Target stores. Man, if their goal was to get me to buy a Blu-Ray player, they failed miserably. The picture on the LCD they have up looks exactly the same as a 480 analog DVD upconverted on an LCD TV, except the colors are a little brighter.

Man, you know the TV business is in the shitter when Samsung has been the leader for 2 years running.
googleme7 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 165 Old 01-13-2008, 10:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark Rain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,003
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Because people want them and they are very affordable now. Some of the higher priced LCDs look really good when properly calibrated. Back levels are still poor compared to CRT but they are getting better.

I wouldn't judge a TV set up in a store like Target because they haven't the slightest clue about setting it up properly.

Face it. CRTs are going bye bye.
Dark Rain is offline  
post #3 of 165 Old 01-13-2008, 10:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mathesar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,322
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Take a look at the Pioneer Kuro plasma's if you're looking for a bigger TV with CRT picture quality and excellent black levels.
Mathesar is offline  
post #4 of 165 Old 01-13-2008, 11:02 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Rain View Post

Because people want them and they are very affordable now. Some of the higher priced LCDs look really good when properly calibrated. Back levels are still poor compared to CRT but they are getting better.

I wouldn't judge a TV set up in a store like Target because they haven't the slightest clue about setting it up properly.

Face it. CRTs are going bye bye.


Actually, Target's displays are far far superior to that of most other big box stores. Their HD feed really shows off what the LCDs are good at: being really bright. Though, the demo I was referring to I am sure was setup by a Sony rep. It's just a display with a big Sony LCD and a Blu-Ray player that cycles through various movies. Even if it wasn't, it's one cable, so I doubt it's setup wrong, plus I have seen it in multiple stores and tt still isn't very impressive no matter where I see it.

If you want to talk truth. The truth simply is that movies shot in HD will look good on the newer technology such as LCD, but they still can't upscale older movies shot on film so that they look good on these displays. What they end up doing is uprezzing, then enhancing the edges. LCD wants to try to smooth the picture out, which basically makes all that upscaling look cloudy. LCD is piss poor at displaying good details. When you see a closeup of a person, it looks decent enough, but when the camera zooms out, you can really see it's weaknesses.

It's either too sharp or not sharp enough. Lets face it, they are big computer monitors. The LCD projectors are nice, because at least you get a huge picture as a tradeoff, but I can't see buying an LCD TV. I can understand the public being dumb enough to buy the 32" models, but I really can't understand these people who pay the same price for the 42" and up models when they could have bought a good Plasma.

I mean come on, do I want a Sanyo or a Panasonic? Hmmm, thats a tough one.
googleme7 is offline  
post #5 of 165 Old 01-13-2008, 11:03 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathesar View Post

Take a look at the Pioneer Kuro plasma's if you're looking for a bigger TV with CRT picture quality and excellent black levels.

Yup.
googleme7 is offline  
post #6 of 165 Old 01-13-2008, 11:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark Rain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,003
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by googleme7 View Post

Actually, Target's displays are far far superior to that of most other big box stores. Their HD feed really shows off what the LCDs are good at: being really bright. Though, the demo I was referring to I am sure was setup by a Sony rep. It's just a display with a big Sony LCD and a Blu-Ray player that cycles through various movies. Even if it wasn't, it's one cable, so I doubt it's setup wrong, plus I have seen it in multiple stores and tt still isn't very impressive no matter where I see it.

If you want to talk truth. The truth simply is that movies shot in HD will look good on the newer technology such as LCD, but they still can't upscale older movies shot on film so that they look good on these displays. What they end up doing is uprezzing, then enhancing the edges. LCD wants to try to smooth the picture out, which basically makes all that upscaling look cloudy. LCD is piss poor at displaying good details. When you see a closeup of a person, it looks decent enough, but when the camera zooms out, you can really see it's weaknesses.

It's either too sharp or not sharp enough. Lets face it, they are big computer monitors. The LCD projectors are nice, because at least you get a huge picture as a tradeoff, but I can't see buying an LCD TV. I can understand the public being dumb enough to buy the 32" models, but I really can't understand these people who pay the same price for the 42" and up models when they could have bought a good Plasma.

I mean come on, do I want a Sanyo or a Panasonic? Hmmm, thats a tough one.

Well, considering it's in a store with a TON of fluorescent lighting hitting the screen it's not going to look good on ANY display technology. NEVER judge a display until you get it home and under normal lighting conditions.

Film is actually higher resolution than HD. If the film transfer is done properly then a HD or Blu-ray disc should look excellent on most HDTVs. This assumes the player itself can scale and de-interlace good to 720p or 1080p. The player and the transfer must both be good or the image will suffer.

The general buying public are dumb when it comes to electronics. Most people are more familiar with LCD technology so they wind up buying them. A lot of salespeople don't know any better either and just want to get the sale and get them out of the store.
Dark Rain is offline  
post #7 of 165 Old 01-14-2008, 04:37 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Rain View Post

Well, considering it's in a store with a TON of fluorescent lighting hitting the screen it's not going to look good on ANY display technology. NEVER judge a display until you get it home and under normal lighting conditions.

Film is actually higher resolution than HD. If the film transfer is done properly then a HD or Blu-ray disc should look excellent on most HDTVs. This assumes the player itself can scale and de-interlace good to 720p or 1080p. The player and the transfer must both be good or the image will suffer.

The general buying public are dumb when it comes to electronics. Most people are more familiar with LCD technology so they wind up buying them. A lot of salespeople don't know any better either and just want to get the sale and get them out of the store.

Yeah, but truthfully I have seen LCD TV's in just about every lighting possible. In a completely dark room, they just look brighter in the dark.

The problem with the film transfer, is like you said, it's all based on where the original source is coming from. I haven't seen an upconverted film yet that looked really great on an HDTV. I just see what looks to be a transfer from a DVD that has been sharpened more, which adds grain in the large shadowy areas. I have been reading reviews from the Blu-Ray and HD-DVD movies that can be compared to their DVD releases and surprisingly even the newer movies aren't showing that big of a difference vs the DVD. Plus, now you are talking about thousands of movies that need to be re-issued in HD. You think about the stuff that just finally made it to DVD a couple of years ago. So, it's going to be a long wait to get some of the classics in HD.

You also have to factor in how the movie was shot, the lighting, etc. The fact is, movies are shot to look different than say a sporting event. The two biggest ways to sell an LCD or DLP HDTV is by showing either a football or basketball game and by showing the CG films like those from Pixar. What that does is show everything good about those models (brightness, vivid colors) while hiding everything is does poorly (shadows, detail, accurate colors).

The Pixar stuff just sucks the customer in with all the bright colors, which is why you will generally see those movies being displayed at the retail stores. Hell, you don't even need an HD player, or even an upconvert player to fool the customer into thinking you are displaying an HD image when you have Lightning McQueen up there

googleme7 is offline  
post #8 of 165 Old 01-14-2008, 04:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
xraffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathesar View Post

Take a look at the Pioneer Kuro plasma's if you're looking for a bigger TV with CRT picture quality and excellent black levels.

Never buy a plasma. The picture burns in way too easily. Get an LCD. They're better. My friend bought a plasma and he was sorry he did.
xraffle is offline  
post #9 of 165 Old 01-14-2008, 05:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark Rain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,003
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Plasmas have a 100-250 hour break-in period. I bought a 42" Samsung Plasma and have not had any issues with image retention or burn-in.
Dark Rain is offline  
post #10 of 165 Old 01-14-2008, 06:37 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You would have to really try hard to burn in a newer model plasma. I am talking same image for several days in the same spot. Even when you see what you think is burn in will eventually fade away and there is also a white screen in the service menu that can help fade light burn in. I have seen a DVD menu stay on a Plasma for several hours and after an hour or two, the ghosting is gone.

I can see it if you are playing 90% games and 10% tv, but if you are mostly movies and tv, which is the target audience for Plasma, I don't see how one could possibly burn in a Plasma unless they were constantly watching it in 4:3 and thats just silly talk anyway

Bottom line is that the Plasma should have been the successor to CRT. It's the closest technology as far as looking like a CRT. I think Panasonic is missing out on the 32" crowd. Everybody has a ****** 32" LCD out. Panasonic should have a 32" Plasma at the $650 mark. Unfortunately, I predict Panasonic will drop out of Plasma by 2010, at which point Pioneer will go down with the ship. I hope it doesn't happen, but thats what I see coming with all these people buying the cheapo LCD.
googleme7 is offline  
post #11 of 165 Old 01-14-2008, 07:39 PM
Member
 
hoffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
SED technology should be the successor to CRT if it ever makes it to market.
hoffo is offline  
post #12 of 165 Old 01-14-2008, 10:39 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mathesar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,322
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by xraffle View Post

Never buy a plasma. The picture burns in way too easily. Get an LCD. They're better. My friend bought a plasma and he was sorry he did.

It depends on which plasma your friend bought, I recently bought a Pioneer Kuro 5080HD plasma and its amazing, Better than any LCD ive seen especially when you consider black level performance in a dark room ,I also play a lot of video games (PS3 / Wii / 360) and haven't had any image retention or burn in issues.

After the break-in period its actually pretty hard to get burn in on current plasmas. The Kuro 5080 was rated #1 in a recent HDTV roundup which included all types (LCD / SXRD / DLP etc.) Here's a link with more info: Click

The picture quality on the 5080 actually surpasses my 34XBR960 in all categories except for black levels (Its very close! the only time you see a difference is on extremely dark scenes in a dark room) Bluray movies are much brighter, vivid, sharper and have that 3d "pop" effect that I just didnt get with my dim 34XBR960 CRT.
Mathesar is offline  
post #13 of 165 Old 01-14-2008, 11:19 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark Rain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,003
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffo View Post

SED technology should be the successor to CRT if it ever makes it to market.

Nope. Patent issues put a stop to it for now but some good news can be found here:

http://www.engadgethd.com/category/sed/

OLED might be the next big thing if Sony can make it affordable.
Dark Rain is offline  
post #14 of 165 Old 01-15-2008, 12:05 AM
AVS Special Member
 
like.no.other.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,560
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
FED or OLED should be the next best thing.

There is always someone out there that gives you opinion of a product that they don't even own.
like.no.other. is offline  
post #15 of 165 Old 01-15-2008, 12:15 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I don't see how you think SED should be the successor to CRT. They have been delayed for too long and have allowed the LCD to takeover the market. Second, they can still burn-in and even though purists know burn-in isn't a huge issue anymore, all it takes is a few searches on the internet or a salesman looking to move all the LCDs from the stockroom to sink SED. And lastly, they will cost like $10,000 for the first few years. Plus, you are talking about Canon and Toshiba, 2 players who have never done anything really notable in the TV market. Neither has the name recognition to takeover the market. We saw it with HD-DVD and I wanted Toshiba to win.

SED is just a better Plasma. If they are buying the lower quality of the two products in LCD vs Plasma, I don't see why they would pay more for a slightly better version of the Plasma which they aren't buying now at ridiculously low prices. When you can buy a Panasonic 42" Plasma for $999 and Walmart is still stocking the POS Sanyo & Vizio 42" LCD's at the same price, then people are obviously stupid.

Plasma is the best quality flat panel currently available, and people are buying more LCD, end of story.

In reality, Plasma should have been the successor to CRT. We never should have had LCD or DLP, and then SED should have been the successor to Plasma in like 2014 when they finally work out all the kinks. They wasted like 5 years peddling the LCD/DLP Rear Projection. They should have waited for the Laser TV.

Plasma replaces the super heavy CRT Tube. Laser TV replaces the CRT Rear Projection. All is right in the world. We should just now be seeing then end of CRT Rear Projection as they move into Laser TV.
googleme7 is offline  
post #16 of 165 Old 01-15-2008, 01:08 PM
Member
 
hoffo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I meant successor to the CRT solely in terms of the way the technology works more so than at a cost basis or availability basis. I should have been more specific but read about how SED works and you'll see that it is an evolution of CRT type technology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface...mitter_display
hoffo is offline  
post #17 of 165 Old 01-15-2008, 09:58 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoffo View Post

I meant successor to the CRT solely in terms of the way the technology works more so than at a cost basis or availability basis. I should have been more specific but read about how SED works and you'll see that it is an evolution of CRT type technology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface...mitter_display


Yeah I know how it works and it's an exciting technology, but the things that scare me away is the fact that it's made by Canon and that it's still just an improved Plasma. The last actual tv I remember seeing by a printer company was one from Epson which wasn't very good, though their projectors are a lot better.

Dollar for Dollar, and if a name brand were to pick it up, I would consider it over Plasma, but I wouldn't pay 2 or 3 times as much just to get a little better black level. The black level on Plasma isn't really black anyway, but it's good enough as a trade-off for a larger picture. I'm just not sure what people are seeing in these LCD's. Maybe people just aren't watching as many movies, I don't know.

The SED even though it is closer to how a CRT works, still isn't that much different from a Plasma. Plasma is still trying to mimic the picture of a CRT, just a different way of doing it.
googleme7 is offline  
post #18 of 165 Old 01-15-2008, 10:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark Rain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,003
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by googleme7 View Post

I'm just not sure what people are seeing in these LCD's. Maybe people just aren't watching as many movies, I don't know.

Well, a lot of people are buying the cheaper 32" LCDs to replace their broken or aging boob tube. The price point is around what they probably paid for their CRT 10-20 years ago. They haven't been able to produce Plasmas at 32" or smaller, so LCDs are it. Nobody wants another CRT since LCDs don't take up as much room and can be hung on a wall.

Considering that roughly 98% of the buying public aren't videophiles, they simply don't notice things like black level, color accuracy, etc.
Dark Rain is offline  
post #19 of 165 Old 01-16-2008, 09:14 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Rain View Post

Well, a lot of people are buying the cheaper 32" LCDs to replace their broken or aging boob tube. The price point is around what they probably paid for their CRT 10-20 years ago. They haven't been able to produce Plasmas at 32" or smaller, so LCDs are it. Nobody wants another CRT since LCDs don't take up as much room and can be hung on a wall.

Considering that roughly 98% of the buying public aren't videophiles, they simply don't notice things like black level, color accuracy, etc.

Agreed, they don't notice that stuff. Sony used to make a 32" Plasma back when they were still $5,000+ and I read that LG is mass producing 32" models in China. It's just a shame they don't have them in the U.S.

Like I said before, LCD's have become the successor to CRT, because even a 34" CRT can now only be replaced screen size wise, but an LCD. Even if you move up to a 37" Plasma, which are also rare, the price is the same as a 42" model. But, as you said everyone replacing an analog model at 27-32" are buying the LCD. Though I did read that the cheap 20" CRT's are still the biggest seller overall. It will be interesting to see how that relects on the production of CRT. It at least keeps some factories open. The 20" bedroom or small room TV is going to be a hard crowd to sell to. I don't see the LCD's coming down to $150 for 20" models. Plus, they would need to make either a 24 or 26" widescreen model just to keep from dwarfing the 20" 4:3 models, plus you have to factor in the loss in depth, so the TV will be a little further away. Even the Vizio 26" is $464 right now.

Or you can buy an Emerson 20" 4:3 "with Digital tuner" for $238 (the horror!)
googleme7 is offline  
post #20 of 165 Old 01-16-2008, 07:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ramazur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by googleme7 View Post


Plasma is the best quality flat panel currently available, and people are buying more LCD, end of story.

Last weekend I went to a BB store and watched the Green Bay Packers game in their Magnolia room. Right next to that gift form heaven, the 6k Kuro Elite, was LNT5265 for half the price. It was not even close. Just for fun (I already knew the answer) I asked a sales guy why in the last 20 minutes I didn't see white on Kuro but plenty of it on the Samsung (it was snowing and the Packers numbers are white). He immediately took the 5th ("I don't know much about TVs") because he also knew the answer, which is that plasmas can't do whites if their lives depended on it. Then, I asked him which of these two sets, if given to him by BB at no charge for a year, plus money for the electricity, would he take home. Without any hesitation it was Samsung. This is the end of my story.
ramazur is offline  
post #21 of 165 Old 01-16-2008, 08:33 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramazur View Post

Last weekend I went to a BB store and watched the Green Bay Packers game in their Magnolia room. Right next to that gift form heaven, the 6k Kuro Elite, was LNT5265 for half the price. It was not even close. Just for fun (I already knew the answer) I asked a sales guy why in the last 20 minutes I didn't see white on Kuro but plenty of it on the Samsung (it was snowing and the Packers numbers are white). He immediately took the 5th ("I don't know much about TVs") because he also knew the answer, which is that plasmas can't do whites if their lives depended on it. Then, I asked him which of these two sets, if given to him by BB at no charge for a year, plus money for the electricity, would he take home. Without any hesitation it was Samsung. This is the end of my story.


Plasmas have no problem displaying white. What you are seeing is the difference in brightness between the 2 technologies, which we have already discussed. The newer Pioneer models are supposed to improve on that, but it probably still won't be as bright as an LCD.

But, the reality is those LCD's aren't even producing an accurate white. It looks more like the fluorescent bulb from your kitchen or bathroom. It's very bright, but it's not an accurate white. Plasma displays more accurate colors, but aren't as bright. What you are essentially saying is that you chose the brightness of LCD over the black level and color accuracy of Plasma. Nothing wrong with that and you are clearly happy with your decision.

Thanks for sharing your story.
googleme7 is offline  
post #22 of 165 Old 01-16-2008, 11:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Mathesar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,322
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by googleme7 View Post

Plasmas have no problem displaying white. What you are seeing is the difference in brightness between the 2 technologies, which we have already discussed. The newer Pioneer models are supposed to improve on that, but it probably still won't be as bright as an LCD.

But, the reality is those LCD's aren't even producing an accurate white. It looks more like the fluorescent bulb from your kitchen or bathroom. It's very bright, but it's not an accurate white. Plasma displays more accurate colors, but aren't as bright. What you are essentially saying is that you chose the brightness of LCD over the black level and color accuracy of Plasma. Nothing wrong with that and you are clearly happy with your decision.

Thanks for sharing your story.


The whites on my Pioneer 5080 are certainly brighter than they are on my XBR960 CRT.

Sound & Vision recently did an article on Plasma vs. LCD, They do a detailed comparison of an Elite Kuro PRO-110FD Plasma vs. the LED backlit Samsung LN-T5281F LCD and basically the plasma wins hands down overall, It's a good read: http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/fea...-round-ii.html
Mathesar is offline  
post #23 of 165 Old 01-17-2008, 10:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ramazur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by googleme7 View Post

Plasmas have no problem displaying white....


They do and here is the best proof. Show fresh snow on a sunny day on any plasma and LNT52... and ask this question: which picture is truer? This test is all inclusive and without disclaimers or excuses (LCDs are brighter, etc.). For my money I don't care about the reasons. Just the bottom line side-by-side comparison.
ramazur is offline  
post #24 of 165 Old 01-17-2008, 12:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Artwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hoover, Alabama
Posts: 4,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Do you care about side by side comparisons that show how much LCDs suck with motion detail and motion resolution versus plasmas?

Do you care about side by side comparisons where LCDs suck when viewed at an angle?

The closet thing to direct-view CRT when it comes to black levels is a Pioneer Kuro but yes they are on the dim side.

The 2008 Panasonic plasmas will be brighter than the Kuros with blacks that aren't quite as good.

Anything you buy at the current moment post Direct-view CT will be a step down when it comes to black levels and brightness.

I think Direct-view CRT would have stayed around a little longer if Sony had produced a super fine tube 38-inch model and made it 1280X720 for perfect 720p.

When Sony threw in the towel it was all over.
Artwood is offline  
post #25 of 165 Old 01-17-2008, 03:59 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

Do you care about side by side comparisons that show how much LCDs suck with motion detail and motion resolution versus plasmas?

Do you care about side by side comparisons where LCDs suck when viewed at an angle?

The closet thing to direct-view CRT when it comes to black levels is a Pioneer Kuro but yes they are on the dim side.

The 2008 Panasonic plasmas will be brighter than the Kuros with blacks that aren't quite as good.

Anything you buy at the current moment post Direct-view CT will be a step down when it comes to black levels and brightness.

I think Direct-view CRT would have stayed around a little longer if Sony had produced a super fine tube 38-inch model and made it 1280X720 for perfect 720p.

When Sony threw in the towel it was all over.


The Panasonic's not having as good a black level as the Pioneers might not be such a bad thing anyway, because the Pioneers tend to lose pretty much all detail in extreme dark scenes.

I don't see how Sony could have made a 38 inch model. It would have problems selling because it would have to be professionally installed in most cases. I don't see the big box stores pushing that around the stock room. And the problems they had with the 40 and 36" XBR's warping on the edges were due to their weight. I also don't get the point of making it 720p when a CRT is going to look better than anything else on interlaced or regardless. Plus, 1080p will be the standard by next year. Not to mention 38 versus 34 is not a huge step up and what I would call a deal breaker. 34" is still pretty big for the average home and considering how well the 32" cheapo LCD's sell, which are going to sit further back, that has become a popular size.

My suggestion would have been for Sony to put out a 26" and 30" model CRT similar to the hi-scan models. These would sell at the big box stores and replace their 20-32" models where they used to have an entire line of any size you could want. They would have them priced slightly cheaper than the LCD's ($399 for the 26 and $499 for the 30" which is right at the same price point as the Samsung).

Then they would have the premium XBR 34" for $699 available to higher end stores or any retail stores that think they could sell it. Gradually they would add 1080p to these models as it became the standard.


Instead they ran like a scared rabbit.
googleme7 is offline  
post #26 of 165 Old 01-17-2008, 04:11 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramazur View Post

They do and here is the best proof. Show fresh snow on a sunny day on any plasma and LNT52... and ask this question: which picture is truer? This test is all inclusive and without disclaimers or excuses (LCDs are brighter, etc.). For my money I don't care about the reasons. Just the bottom line side-by-side comparison.

Like I said, I have seen everything you have mentioned. The color is more accurate on Plasma and the LCD's are brighter, I don't see the argument. The fresh snow has a more punched up color to it, because that is what LCD's do. They couldn't beat Plasma's black level, so they make their tv's brighter than Plasma. Plasma can't beat LCD's brightness, so they make their tv's blacker. The article posted above you by Mathesar talks about it in their review. Both technologies have pros and cons. The fact that Plasma tries to display a more traditional picture (ie a CRT), gives it the edge over LCD.

Will LCD ever improve to the point where it's as good as CRT? I don't think so. It's 2 completely different technologies.
googleme7 is offline  
post #27 of 165 Old 01-17-2008, 06:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Artwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hoover, Alabama
Posts: 4,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 207
Loewe and RCA both produced 38-inch sets--people bought them and they didn't require professional installations.

The reason I think Sony should have produced a 1280X720 set is that they weren't able to produce a 1920X1080 set.

The Super Fine Tube proved that 1280X720 was attainable.

And people would have bought a Sony 38-inch 16X9 set Big Time!
Artwood is offline  
post #28 of 165 Old 01-17-2008, 07:20 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
googleme7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artwood View Post

Loewe and RCA both produced 38-inch sets--people bought them and they didn't require professional installations.

The reason I think Sony should have produced a 1280X720 set is that they weren't able to produce a 1920X1080 set.

The Super Fine Tube proved that 1280X720 was attainable.

And people would have bought a Sony 38-inch 16X9 set Big Time!

If that is the case though, why isn't RCA/Thomson still making those sets and still in the CRT market? For that matter why isn't Sony still making the 34XBR? Samsung has apparently dropped out of the 30" market. The conclusion I have come to is that they can ship and stock 2:1 any LCD over almost any CRT model. Stores can sell LCD 2:1 over CRT. So, at the big box stores, the salesman aren't smart enough to explain why the CRT has a better picture and at the commission sales stores, no salesman is going to push a big CRT over the dozens of LCD he has sitting in the stockroom. Particularly companies like Tweeter who want the customer to buy flat panels so they can sell the install, cables, wall bracket, etc.


I personally would love to see a Sony 38" CRT, but I still don't see how they could pull it off in todays market. The price point would also be a killer to anyone other than the purist. It would have to be in the $999 range in my estimation, so it's going to go head to head with the cheapo 37" Vizio's. Even if they had it priced the same as the Vizios, we have already established that the average consumer can't tell the difference between a Plasma and an LCD, so I can't see them buying a superheavyweight CRT instead.

So those tv's would basically be stuck in the high end market and as I already mentioned, the high-end salesguy ain't gonna try to sell it because they won't get paid as much.
googleme7 is offline  
post #29 of 165 Old 01-17-2008, 08:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Artwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hoover, Alabama
Posts: 4,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 37 Post(s)
Liked: 207
All you have to do is put a name like Runco or B&O on it and you'd have plenty of people that would swear it was worth the money.

There have always been those type of people.
Artwood is offline  
post #30 of 165 Old 01-17-2008, 09:48 PM
Senior Member
 
Russell Burrows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: no mans land aka mexican dmz
Posts: 422
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Why no plasmas?

Gee can it be due to high power consumption?

Can it be that some folks after buying several plasmas for the house noticed that the light bill went crazy?

Can it be that those same folks got rid of the plasmas and went LCD for HDTV viewing?

DIY beats store purchased.
Russell Burrows is offline  
Reply Direct View (single tube) CRT Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off