AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Rear Projection Units › Why the hatred for DLP?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why the hatred for DLP? - Page 2

post #31 of 371
9/6/11 at 1:54pm
inuyasha-rules, I find it ironic how you love CRT, but don't see that DLP is the closest technology that compares to CRT. I went from a Hitachi 51" RP CRT that was professionally calibrated to a Mitsubishi 73837 DLP and have no regrets. I'm a hardcore gamer that loves CRT's, but DLP handles motion just as well. An LCD or plasma is laughable in comparison for gaming.

People have these misconceptions on DLP based on their problems in the past (rainbow effect, expensive bulbs), which I can understand. I had that same bias once too, but if you actually educate yourself, you will see that they don't have those problems anymore. Unfortunately, it is getting more rare to see them in stores so most will still be blinded by ignorance on the matter.

As for the look of rear projection jonnythan, I find LCD's and plasmas to appear too artificial. It looks like a glossy veneer, not a cinematic picture that you can be immersed in. But that is subjective, so to each their own.
Reply
Reply

Gear mentioned in this thread:

post #32 of 371
9/6/11 at 8:40pm
Quote:


Ignorance is my first reaction.

And my only reaction other than they can't be hung on walls.

Excellent idea for a thread, lets make it a 'sticky'.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 371
9/6/11 at 8:47pm
Lbear;
BTW, they are lamps, not bulbs.
Bulbs sounds as something you get from Home Depot.
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 371
9/6/11 at 11:27pm
Thread Starter 
Just got back from Costco where all they had was thin paneled LCD and Plasma. They were marketing the "thinner is better" thing like crazy. Each brand was trying to claim they were thinner than the other. It's really stupid if you think about it. It's as if the most important thing in the TV is how thin it is. The picture quality is second or third.

They had a 70" Sharp LCD on display for $2,600 + Tax = $2,800. The picture was not that great, it had a HDMI 1080i signal going to it but the picture was pretty bad compared to my DLP.

Sad that the public is being "fed" this marketing gimmick of large flat screen TVs must be 1" thick in order to be relevant.

I can understand 32" - 47" being thin because those are usually mounted on walls but when it comes to BIG SCREEN - home theater systems, you need a center/stand for the center speaker, DVD player, amplifier, etc. What's the big deal with just putting the TV on the stand?
Reply
Reply
post #35 of 371
9/7/11 at 4:26am
Quote:


Sad that the public is being "fed" this marketing gimmick of large flat screen TVs must be 1" thick in order to be relevant.

And the stupid public beleives it.

Too busy text messaging.
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 371
9/7/11 at 5:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lbear View Post

Just got back from Costco where all they had was thin paneled LCD and Plasma. They were marketing the "thinner is better" thing like crazy. Each brand was trying to claim they were thinner than the other. It's really stupid if you think about it. It's as if the most important thing in the TV is how thin it is. The picture quality is second or third.

They had a 70" Sharp LCD on display for $2,600 + Tax = $2,800. The picture was not that great, it had a HDMI 1080i signal going to it but the picture was pretty bad compared to my DLP.

Sad that the public is being "fed" this marketing gimmick of large flat screen TVs must be 1" thick in order to be relevant.

I can understand 32" - 47" being thin because those are usually mounted on walls but when it comes to BIG SCREEN - home theater systems, you need a center/stand for the center speaker, DVD player, amplifier, etc. What's the big deal with just putting the TV on the stand?

Well DLP wouldn't really work for a lot of people. My living room is 14' across and my viewing distance is about 9'. I've got a 50" plasma where the screen is about 4" from the wall - if I put a DLP in there, my viewing distance would be down to 8' or less, viewing angles from the periphery seating would be increased, and the box itself would dominate the room and look ridiculous. This is my living room, not a basement gaming room.

Each technology has its plusses and minuses. I'd first consider LCD for a bright living room or pool house, plasma for a more light-controlled living room or bedroom, front projection for a dedicated theater room, and DLP for a sizable media/gaming room. I wouldn't want to watch a DLP full-time as I dislike the picture you get from a rear-projection set (as I said, there's something about a rear-projected image that I simply don't like as much as a more direct-view tech such as plasma or FP), and DLPs look severely out of place and silly in a modern living room.
Reply
Reply
post #37 of 371
9/7/11 at 5:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

And the stupid public beleives it.

Too busy text messaging.

People who have priorities different from yours aren't "stupid."
Reply
Reply
post #38 of 371
9/7/11 at 5:47am
And people who have different priorites from yours don't think "DLP's look severely out of place and silly in a modern living room." What is a "modern living room" anyway?

Threads like this add soooo much entertainment value to message boards.
Reply
Reply
post #39 of 371
9/7/11 at 5:59am
Quote:


People who have priorities different from yours aren't "stupid."

I said nothing about "priorities".
Quote:


What is a "modern living room" anyway?

Tasteless.
Reply
Reply
post #40 of 371
9/7/11 at 6:10am
Quote:
Originally Posted by videobruce View Post

I said nothing about "priorities".

You basically said people who believe that TVs that are closer to 3" thick than 16" thick are stupid because the 16" thick TVs have a better picture.

Lots of people are happy to sacrifice a bit of picture quality (and even that's arguable when comparing DLP to a decent plasma) and cash for a thinner TV that looks much, much better sitting in a living room.
Reply
Reply
post #41 of 371
9/7/11 at 6:56am
Quote:


You basically said people who believe that TVs that are closer to 3" thick than 16" thick are stupid because the 16" thick TVs have a better picture.

That's alot of 'adding between the lines'.
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 371
9/7/11 at 7:22am
I've owned a DLP set for just over 5 years.

I loved the pq and picture size right out of the box and continue to compare every other set I see to what I have at home. Being as I have not replaced the set, the comparison I'm seeing is favorable to the DLP.

I don't care about wall mounting or depth of the cabinet. My set is on the manufacturer's matching stand, and all my components fit perfectly below the set.

The down sides are as follows -

First lamp blew right after the 1 year manufacturer's warranty expired. Fortunately, I had purchased a lamp warranty so replacement was cost free. Replacement lasted 8 months, so the 3rd lamp exhausted my lamp warranty.

Light engine went after 2 1/2 years. Was replaced at no cost with an extended warranty. Went again just before my extended warranty expired. Waiting on the part to get the set working perfectly again (white dot syndrome and repair people won't just replace the chip).

Bottom line - the DLP set I have has provided many hours of excellent entertainment. No worries about screen burn-in, blurry movement, or other such issues.

My DLP set has had more down time than any other electronic device in my house. Without an extended warranty, repairs would have cost me more than the set.

Would I buy another DLP based set? Not on your life.
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 371
9/7/11 at 9:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonnythan View Post
You basically said people who believe that TVs that are closer to 3" thick than 16" thick are stupid because the 16" thick TVs have a better picture.

Lots of people are happy to sacrifice a bit of picture quality (and even that's arguable when comparing DLP to a decent plasma) and cash for a thinner TV that looks much, much better sitting in a living room.
DLP Rear Projection is now a display technology with a minimum screen size of 73 inches. So I don't know why it is so important to compare the technology.

If you want a an HDTV set with screen of 73 inches or larger for the most port you only have DLP rear projection to choose from. Sure there are some big Panny plasmas but they are not priced at a point where middle class folks are likely to be buying.

Mitsubishi has been making picture quality improvements with each model year and the price has continued down.

I agree there is probably a lot of resentment out there based on the reliability of the pre 2007 DLPs... they were expensive to repair and the reliability was so, so at best. Reliability has gone way up, and extended warranties and lamps are now cheap. But the ill will of people who had bad experiences will never be erased.

Brick and mortar stores hated them because of how much space they took both on the retail floor and in the warehouse.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 371
9/7/11 at 10:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post
The Dlp picture I see is nothing short of breath taking and at times and boggles my mind that its so big and yet has razor sharp detail. It has a cinematic feel ( not just from size) that no Plasma or Lcd ( own one) can match in my book As a videophile my vote goes to Dlp

So haters get no love here!
Yeah...and I just love seeing RAINBOW EFFECT on them all the time....NOT! I tried DLP twice and both times returned them within a week. Maybe if they went to 3 chip system things could be a lot better. Plus Consumer Reports surveys show DLP to be far more trouble prone than similar age plasma and LCD sets. DLP is pretty close to dead for home tv use.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 371
9/7/11 at 11:19am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonnythan View Post
DLPs look severely out of place and silly in a modern living room.
The above makes no sense to me.

You can dislike them, that's fine, that's your opinion. But the above comment you made has no validity.

How is this, "severely out of place and silly in a modern living room"?

Reply
Reply
post #46 of 371
9/7/11 at 11:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lbear View Post
The above makes no sense to me. How does a flat screen, thin bezel, 73"+ flat screen look "severely out of place"?

You can dislike them, that's fine, that's your opinion. But the above comment you made has no validity.

How is this, "severly out of place and silly in a modern living room"?:
It's all well and good when you're talking about a marketing photo with a large open space, high ceiling, and a featureless wall wit nothing mounted on it. The TV looks almost wall-mounted in that image thanks to the flat light and featureless surfaces. DLPs dominate rooms in a way that plasma and LCD TVs just don't.

It's a bit different when you're talking about this, where the TV would protrude 4+ inches past the center channel and require a large piece of furniture to support it:



My dad also just went from a 60" DLP to a 65" wall-mounted plasma in his living room, and it is so much more spacious and inviting and modern looking in there I couldn't believe it. And that's in a 16x22' room.
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 371
9/7/11 at 11:28am
Thread Starter 
I also find it odd that we are in the "rear projection unit" forum and a few of the haters made their way here.

They can state their opinion, that is fine, but it strikes me odd that we are in a DLP forum and why would the haters be hanging out in this forum anyway?
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 371
9/7/11 at 11:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lbear View Post
I also find it odd that we are in the "rear projection unit" forum and a few of the haters made their way here.

They can state their opinion, that is fine, but it strikes me odd that we are in a DLP forum and why would the haters be hanging out in this forum anyway?
The thread shows up when you click "new posts."

And the thread is titled "Why the hatred for DLP?" It seems designed to elicit responses from people who aren't fans of DLP rear-projection TVs. Judging by your responses to your own thread, you should have made the title "Why the hatred for DLP? Responses from those who are not massive DLP fans not welcome."

I should have realize that this would be a DLP love-fest, and that anyone who answered the question with anything but "they are stupid idiots who believe the marketing lies" would be attacked and criticized over and over. The only proper response seems to be "DLP TVs are the best in every way, for everyone, in every situation."

Have a good day with that.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 371
9/7/11 at 11:33am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonnythan View Post
It's all well and good when you're talking about a marketing photo with a large open space, high ceiling, and a featureless wall wit nothing mounted on it. It's a bit different when you're talking about this, where the TV would protrude 4+ inches past the center channel and require a large piece of furniture to support it:



My dad also just went from a 60" DLP to a 65" wall-mounted plasma in his living room, and it is so much more spacious and inviting and modern looking in there I couldn't believe it. And that's in a 16x22' room.
I'm sorry but that does NOT look well adapted. Aesthetically that does not work. You have a center channel speaker mounted to a wall, projecting out, the cords and wires are showing. Then you have a rack in the corner of the room with a receiver. Makes no sense.

He could have simply bought a nice rack, installed the center speaker on the rack, the receiver, the cables would be hidden behind the rack, and the flat screen could have been either put on top of the rack or still mounted on the wall, but the way it looks now is not appealing, aesthetically.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 371
9/7/11 at 11:43am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonnythan View Post
T Judging by your responses to your own thread, you should have made the title "Why the hatred for DLP? Responses from those who are not massive DLP fans not welcome."

Have a good day with that.
It has to do with YOUR COMMENTS, which are not completely factual and logical. Claiming that DLPs are "ugly" and "look out of place in a modern living room" is simply a lie.

You can state your views but if you make dumb comments, they will be challenged, that is what is happening.

We get it, you don't like DLPs, but to continually beat the drum that they are ugly and out of place does not hold water because they are nothing of the sort.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 371
9/7/11 at 11:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lbear View Post
It has to do with YOUR COMMENTS, which are not completely factual and logical. Claiming that DLPs are "ugly" and "look out of place in a modern living room" is simply a lie.

You can state your views but if you make dumb comments, they will be challenged, that is what is happening.

We get it, you don't like DLPs, but to continually beat the drum that they are ugly and out of place does not hold water because they are nothing of the sort.
Nothing I said has been contrary to fact or logic.

Look, you asked a question. The answer is any combination of the following:

1) Because some people don't like the effect of looking at an image projected through a screen.
2) Because some people find the large cabinets whose screens must sit 12-16 inches from the wall unattractive, bulky, and dominating.
3) Because some people don't like dealing with the maintenance required for a DLP.
4) Because some people want to mount their TVs on the wall.
5) Because some people actually think other technologies, like plasma, produce a better picture.
6) Because some other technologies, like plasma, look better when viewed off-angle.

Some of these are facts, some of them are opinions. They represent the answer to your question.

Now tell me: did you start this thread because you wanted an answer to your question, or because you wanted to defend your choice of TV?
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 371
9/7/11 at 2:04pm
"2) Because some people find the large cabinets whose screens must sit 12-16 inches from the wall unattractive, bulky, and dominating."

This why my new 55" Toshiba LCD is still sitting in the box. A LCD tv just looks dumb sitting 12-16" away from the wall on a stand. About the ONLY place a thin tv looks fine is when mounted on a wall or in a recessed cabinet/stand. IMO.

PS.
This LCD tv was a replacement for my Toshiba DLP that the warranty company had trouble fixing. They let me keep the DLP, I fixed it within a 1/2 hr. and now my son has it.
Personally I just can't find a tv that has a picture that looks as natural as my DLP (65" Mitsu.).... LCD or Plasma. Though the old pioneer plasma and the Sony SXRD did look good to me.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 371
9/7/11 at 2:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonnythan View Post

Nothing I said has been contrary to fact or logic.

Look, you asked a question. The answer is any combination of the following:

1) Because some people don't like the effect of looking at an image projected through a screen.
2) Because some people find the large cabinets whose screens must sit 12-16 inches from the wall unattractive, bulky, and dominating.
3) Because some people don't like dealing with the maintenance required for a DLP.
4) Because some people want to mount their TVs on the wall.
5) Because some people actually think other technologies, like plasma, produce a better picture.
6) Because some other technologies, like plasma, look better when viewed off-angle.

Some of these are facts, some of them are opinions. They represent the answer to your question.

Now tell me: did you start this thread because you wanted an answer to your question, or because you wanted to defend your choice of TV?

I do believe your trying to convince DLP owners that there purchase could have been well spent else where based on your facts, having said that most who own DLP's have done there home work, I know I have! After my Pioneer Elite 64inch rptv went out 3 months back, I was faced with the choice of the fp,lcd, plasma or dlp pro's and con's. I liked when cleaned the mirror and guns on the Pioneer rptv and got a new set back and no worries about having to choose what I would consider an inferior display for my main room Lamp change + mirror cleaning = new set in my book and Am glad I have to do it As for modern appeal its beautiful and at the right hieght. It's not a picture which should be hung at eye level while standing As for the space in the picture you provided who stands or sits in the space between the tv and speakers and says wow more space
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 371
9/7/11 at 3:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by aydu View Post

I've owned a DLP set for just over 5 years.

I loved the pq and picture size right out of the box and continue to compare every other set I see to what I have at home. Being as I have not replaced the set, the comparison I'm seeing is favorable to the DLP.

I don't care about wall mounting or depth of the cabinet. My set is on the manufacturer's matching stand, and all my components fit perfectly below the set.

The down sides are as follows -

First lamp blew right after the 1 year manufacturer's warranty expired. Fortunately, I had purchased a lamp warranty so replacement was cost free. Replacement lasted 8 months, so the 3rd lamp exhausted my lamp warranty.

Light engine went after 2 1/2 years. Was replaced at no cost with an extended warranty. Went again just before my extended warranty expired. Waiting on the part to get the set working perfectly again (white dot syndrome and repair people won't just replace the chip).

Bottom line - the DLP set I have has provided many hours of excellent entertainment. No worries about screen burn-in, blurry movement, or other such issues.

My DLP set has had more down time than any other electronic device in my house. Without an extended warranty, repairs would have cost me more than the set.

Would I buy another DLP based set? Not on your life.


You should try again with Mitsubishi's service department. It seems 2007 was a bad year for DLPs. I've read alot of threads where they have replaced TVs with new ones well out of warranty. They did so for me as well. Mitsubishi cares about their customers, because they care about their reputation.
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 371
9/7/11 at 3:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post

I do believe your trying to convince DLP owners that there purchase could have been well spent else where based on your facts

Not at all. Far from it. I'm trying to explain why I personally don't like the picture on DLPs and why myself and others don't like them in general.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 371
9/7/11 at 3:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by audiofan1 View Post

[snip] ...most who own DLP's have done [their] home work...

That hits the nail on the head.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 371
9/7/11 at 3:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonnythan View Post

Not at all. Far from it. I'm trying to explain why I personally don't like the picture on DLPs and why myself and others don't like them in general.

Why do you find it necessary to speak for "others"? You would get less grief if you just spoke for yourself.

I don't like 50" 720P discount brand plasmas, but I don't claim others dislike them.
Reply
Reply
post #58 of 371
9/7/11 at 3:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Augerhandle View Post

Why do you find it necessary to speak for "others"? You would get less grief if you just spoke for yourself.

I don't like 50" 720P discount brand plasmas, but I don't claim others dislike them.

I have spoken quite clearly and explicitly for myself. I have also attempted to summarize the general objections to DLPs that others have.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 371
9/7/11 at 3:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonnythan View Post

I have spoken quite clearly and explicitly for myself. I have also attempted to summarize the general objections to DLPs that others have.


Again, maybe you should let these "others" speak for themselves.
Reply
Reply
post #60 of 371
9/7/11 at 4:02pm
At least we have answers to the OP.

In no particular order:

1) Because some people think a TV should look better off than on, i.e. hang on a wall like a picture.
2) Because two people think changing a lamp every few years is too much maintenance.
3) Because some people actually think other technologies, like plasma, produce a better picture.
4) Because some people can only watch far off-angle (over 70°), because the wife arranges the living room that way.
5) Because some people have had, or heard of, repair problems in the past (most of which were problems with other manufacturers who were also sued because of their lack of service, and no longer produce RPTVs).
6) Because some people don't watch much TV and don't really care about picture quality, as long as the TV is small and unobtrusive.
7) Because some people don't do their homework, and just go with what they heard last week.

I'm sure there are more...
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rear Projection Units

Gear mentioned in this thread:

AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Rear Projection Units › Why the hatred for DLP?