Originally Posted by jlsavs
Okay ... in a nutshell ..., the voltage is increased to counter the aging/dimming of the phosphors ... this is likely an attempt at maintaining the brightness , but the blacks rise as a necessary evil by-product of keeping a bright panel.
Sounds like the 2010 panels could be upping the voltage from day one ... ie. but doing it much more gradually (so the viewing doesn't see a shocking "overnight" MLL rise) ... but nonetheless leaving you with the same poor black level at 500 hours ...
So why wouldn't ALL plasma panels need more voltage juice as they age ? ... AND why don't all makers (even Kuro's) of pdp's suffer the same black rise ?
Either there is something very specific about panny panels/phosphors (which I doubt) ... OR panny's approach (to ageing pdp's) is way different than the makers.
I was going to post something very similar. BTW, I am literally days away from making my first HDTV purchase, and I was dead set on getting the G10. I now have major reservations in making that purchase.
So is this voltage increase to preserve the fidelity of aging components not standard with all manufacturers of plasma? Do Panasonic panels have a longer rated life, at 100,000 hrs. until half brightness, than other plasma brands? If not, why would Panasonic need to integrate such maintenance. As someone else mentioned, is "background brightness" referring to the emptiness of picture activity, where letterbox / black bars exist, or is this pertaining to blacks that are displayed to create the viewable image?
The official response is peculiar and vague. Are they saying that the issue with the current panels is black levels are accelerated by approximately 2 years in as little as 1000 hrs.? If components need to "stabilize" as they put it, why would this process need to take several years? When they said the 2010 models would implement a gradual increase, are they telling me that the "true black level" of my Panasonic will not be realized until 2 years later? In that respect, I feel the black level is initially deceiving, as what one experiences in the beginning is not the product's actual representation or intention. This is ESPECIALLY true if other Plasma manufacturers do not employ this method and their blacks remain consistent from day 1.
If the blacks really do rise that much in as little as 2 years to stabilize (their preferred method according to Panasonic), and even more unfortunate for those who have this happen in only 1000 hrs., maybe I should just purchase the b650? Besides, I would rather KNOW what I'm buying (again, assuming other plasma's black levels remain relatively consistent). After this level increase, it would appear that Samsung's plasmas have better blacks??? The set I plan to INVEST in may need to last me 5 years. Even if I waited for the 2010's, I wouldn't want a product that would look superior to other plasma brands for a few years, only to have to spend the next 3-5 years or more
with an inferior display. I would prefer consistency if available.
I have a hard time believing Panasonic was / is trying to pull some skulduggery and give the impression to customers and professional reviewers alike that their blacks were indeed superior over others, only to have some voltage increase over time added to preserve the panel's life to industry standard, but something isn't adding up to me.
I mean heck, here I was ready to purchase one of their TV's based on the reputation and knowledge base I have gathered in the last few weeks regarding the Panasonic brand. This forum and CNET......both places I have utilized in order to make the best purchasing decision I can with what money I have.
Right now, I'm not so sure. Just when I thought things were becoming clear, a fog of doubt has rolled in and obscured my judgment.