what makes pioneer kuro so special

Well if you don't appreciate it I am sure plenty of folks would buy it from you...

My Kuro is so special because it's mislabeled as a Panasonic GT30.

Not well enough if it looks as you described.

Depends on what you think special means.

Depends on what meter and calibration software you used.

Take some pictures and tell us what Kuro model you have.

People think it is special because it is the only consumer PDP that has ever done everything (color, black, grayscale, gamma, etc.) at what is deemed reference. If you think the colors are dull, you do not prefer Rec709 which is the HD standard. Nothing wrong with that.

When you say you calibrated it, how did you calibrate it and in what modes?

What are your view settings?

It isn't special. It's just a good set.

Is it dull like this?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...2#post20989572

Pics are pointless. I can make my crappy pv450 look like those. As can anyone else. I really wouldn't use that as a reason.

No, they are dull like this:


Virtually every LCD in existence, unless specifically built to not have that response, perfectly matches the reference line the Kuros don't come close to.


A camera can make any display look bright or dim depending on the exposure. Photographs are not indicative of quality at all.


What makes them special? They were very expensive compared to other televisions, the first flat panel to have remotely good black levels and Pioneer killed them off, so now you have people that never even experienced them lusting after one as if they are some magical display device because people throw around terms like reference undeservedly.

There are no consumer-grade displays out there that even come close to a reference monitor, despite how it may appear if you only look at six color measurements at 100% saturation and 8 or 9 relatively accurate greyscale measurements. If that's all that is necessary to be a reference display, the latest Samsung screens best even the Kuros as they have a functional CMS which lets them have perfect color accuracy. (at least when you look at it that way)

Exactly. That and the addition of post processing. As I said. Pictures are pointless.

I dunno - when TVs from 2007 thru 2009 look better than everything out there from 2011, thats saying something. It also speaks volumes that they are still regarded very highly in the industry and there is still heavy discussion about them going on in forums and whatever.

And, when you keep hearing about "KURO replacements", that says the mfgers are still trying to match the overall PQ of the Pioneer sets.

They arent perfect - No TV is, but they get all the important stuff right: Excellent blacks, burn-in resistance, and superb video processing.

They are special

Please do post. Pics are just an indication like screen caps for Blu rays (which people buy and validates). Sure they are not authoritative but pretty indicative, especially when you have numerous (means they are likely unprocessed or the guy's very free)


Of all people I would think you know bright/dim is not indicative of PQ


If you're not sure it explains alot. And you don't calibrate D65. You calibrate the 3 primaries. If the primaries are right you will get D65. D65 is a by-product.

I'm sorry, but how many 2nd gen Kuros have you measured? How many 2nd Gen Kuros have you measured at different stimuli levels for for color and grayscale.... beyond a 10 point grayscale and/or color? I think the answer is zero because if you actually did, the post above would have never been created.

Your chart up there is nothing more than demonstrating an ABL circuit. Have you seen the curve for a Samsung, LG or Panasonic plasma? Consumer CRTs did the same thing. At least they did in the USA. Don't know nor do I care what they did in the EU.

It's actually more than a good set as it's been a reference model for several years and majority reviewers rated it as the top set in the market when it was made and even till now would still easily be in the top 5. That makes it more than good.

Nope, they're good sets that have accurate PQ including black levels and maintain that PQ over time. If you check cnet the PQ on even 2011 Pannys and Sammys change substantially as they age. And the kuros were generally free from defects affecting other brands (IR-proneness, rising black levels, peeling screen filters, spontaneously cracking screens, etc...).

You've got it all wrong. I don't like ice cream so chocolate is a bad flavor.

For my own use, I don't really care how bright a display can go. I don't watch films in a bright room (I find it distracting) so 100 nits is the most I would ever need from a display and pretty much anything can reach that.

However, with an ABL response like this, even when the display is calibrated to 100 nits, any scenes which are intended to be bright (outdoors etc.) look dull on most plasmas, and certainly on the Kuros.

If you calibrate with a standard window pattern (approx 20-25% APL) then a bright outdoors scene could be as dim as 65 nits or so, rather than the intended 100 nits.

If you turn up the contrast so that the display reaches 100 nits in bright scenes, as they were intended to be viewed, then low APL scenes with high contrast objects (eg a car's headlights at night) are blindingly bright.



Have you done these measurements? I would be happy to look over the data if you provide it.
I no longer own one, or have access to one nearby. (anyone I knew with one locally no longer has it)

How about 10pt luminance RGBCMY measurements and 10pt saturation?
I think the results would be very interesting as the colour reproduction on the Kuros was unlike most other displays I have seen.


Even with these measurements, there are many other aspects of display quality that can not be so easily measured, at least not with anything consumers would have access to. (but are obvious to a trained eye)


I have seen the "curve" for a Panasonic plasma, they fare considerably better than the Kuros.

Consumer CRTs lost 10% brightness at most, not 40-60%. A good CRT would be less than 5%. A reference monitor was specified to lose no more than 1%.

I have 4 Kuros and have calibrated a few hundred others. Of course I've done those measurements.... like back in 2008. Find a 2nd Gen Kuro, specifically one of the KRP series, and do the measurements yourself.



Reread my original post questioning your post and you will have your answer. You can even reference what I have above if necessary.


So, you think I don't have a trained eye? Wow!


So, you are saying that a 2001 Panasonic with its dynamic drive circuitry has a more linear curve that the KRP chart above that you jacked from a well respected individual from avforums? Its quite obvious to me that you never have seen or measured a 2011 Panasonic. They are far worse in their ABL circuit management.


Measure a Sony XBR960 and see how things look with reference white set to 50fL.



Stick with the topic of consumer displays. 25K+ 24" and smaller pro CRT monitors are not a part of this discussion.

This is one of those statistics you just pulled out of your derriere. Prior to recycling my old CRT, I turned it on again to see if there was any chance I could sell it for a few bucks. I could see what was on the screen but it looked like it was halfway to an LCD with no backlight.

I am not alone in experiencing that phenomena either. CRT's get dim fast unless you shelled out big bucks for a top of the line model.

As I said. They are just good sets lol.

Using "good" when describing Pioneer plasmas means that everything else needs to be labeled "haneous crap" - If the top of the scale is "good", that is

Ok. Best. Happy? lol. We all know that scale. Good. Better. Best. The kuro was one of the best sets to buy. Still doesn't make them special.

Well special is mostly in the eye of the beholder, but if we do a poll among all TV reviewers and calibrators to see if they think the Kuro TVs are "special." I'd think you'd get a majority. This doesn't prove anything, but it's nice to know that many people think the Kuros are special for one reason or another.