LG launches “PLED” TV , hybrid technology between Plasma and LED - Page 2

Originally Posted by rob80b

But then again.........
http://es.engadget.com/2012/03/28/lg...-led-a-partir/
http://translate.googleusercontent.c...003UBFfEMoh8GQ
"It seems that the war in screens created by the models of plasma and LED has its days numbered. That's at least what LG wants to achieve with their new PLED, a new technology and unveiled at CES whose name is a pun between Plasma and LED , but a new twist to this latest technology. Under the symbol Pixel Light Emitting Display (PLED), these new panels hide a new lighting system that is applied pixel by pixel instead of the entire panel backlight as in the actual screens, lighting 6.2 million independent pixels and thus obtaining pure blacks, above the LED speed (600 Mhz) and truer colors (95% of the RGB gamut). The theory is very similar to the screens Crystal LED that Sony introduced during CES 2012 in response to competition OLED models.

In addition, consumption is much lower than that of a plasma, as indicated by overcoming the manufacturer, in only 8% to that achieved by a television LED."

Originally Posted by txemix

As has been said before, PLED is just a commercial term to rebrand plasma, which seems LG Spain is trying to use to avoid plasma bad press. As said, LG applied for PLED as a trademark. Model is PM9700, hence P for plasma. Every plasma in the world can be considered a "pixel light emitting display." As for 600MHz "speed", Panasonic introduced 600MHz subfield drive, as every other plasma maker. The press note is just pointing the classic advantages of plasma technology over LCD.

As for consumption, the 6% *increase* above LED (that's what original Spanish text says), well, it may be the case under special optimal conditions, we all know plasma consumption is variable. Maybe LG achieved to lower consumption, but most press text I see just says consumption is lower to plasmas, which can be true as newer gen plasma usually has somehow reduced consumption. Other LG Spanish press notes specify "PLED" PM9700 consumption is 130W for 50" and 183W for 60" and claim that to be "40% lower to plasmas." Well, all this can be true if you chose specific other models.

So, it's all just creative advertising.

Originally Posted by chikoo

What if it actually is LCD screen lighted up by a plasma behind it instead of LED or fluorescent?

Originally Posted by sage11x

It's not. It's plasma. Regular old plasma.

Originally Posted by rogo


That certainly seems correct to me too, sage. For what it's worth, a plasma panel would make a fairly godawful LCD backlight. There'd be no reason to do that in a world where energy requirements matter to consumers and regulators. It would be an awful display power and light-wise.

Originally Posted by sage11x

I'm actually surprised they didn't do this sooner! Samsung made a mint marketing an (in some ways inferior) LCD with LED back-lighting as an entirely new display: LED display. Panasonic half-assed it with "neo pdp" but then didn't follow through by eliminating the word plasma from ever marketing sheet and advertisement the way Samsung did with LCD when promoting their LED sets.