Quote:
Originally posted by SethS
Have you seen what they do?
How can anyone (without including everyone) be accused of being a rebadger anymore? Everyone must OEM something now, especially in the Plasma market. Because of the limited amount of factories that make glass, every mfgr has to make deals with other mfgrs. The difference is that Runco makes the most amount of changes for their panels. They use what they have to, the glass. Everything else is scrapped. For those that get in on a tour, it is a site to see. Most mfgrs just take what they get and slap their name on it. Runco literally strips it to the glass and rebuilds from there. It looks like an episode of monster garage in there, with a big pile of stuff that they rip off of the panel. Then they rebuild it with not only better looks, but better electronics and processing.
|
Good post Seth. Informative.
The whole Runco thing appeals to me if only because I'm an inveterate tweaker myself, always trying to push the quality of off-the-shelf stuff to a higher level when possible.
I can also see the appeal from the perspective of a calibrator.
My encounter with Runco plasmas have been hit and miss. A couple years ago when I bought my Panasonic ED plasma the Runco, which used the exact Panny model I owned, was going for $26,000 (Canadian...a 42" ED plasma, with outboard media-box/scaler). The dealer insisted that it was worth it, as Runco had completely re-done the plasma and combined with the Runco scaler it would provide an image that "you can't get with an off-the-shelf Panasonic like yours." I tested it twice (both times it was ISF'd by the guys at the store, who are certified installers). It looked very similar to the image I had at home, but I felt the image I get at home was even better (I was really unimpressed by the Runco scaling...it kind of looked like they took my Panny and screwed it up a little bit). So, not too impressive to say the least, especially considering the extraordinary price.
More recently I tested their current 43" plasma. Runco stopped using the Panny ED and went with the Pioneer 43" HD model. This time the image was great. Was it better than an off-the-shelf Pioneer? Hard to say. I've tested the Pioneer many times and the impression I got from the Runco was that it was performing at least as well as I'd ever seen the Pioneer model look. So, that's better. But for the price....as you say, it's up to the consumer.
Quote:
| For most plasma displays, there isn't a huge difference in the glass, so the difference is for the most part in the processing. |
This is interesting because my feeling after viewing an unhealthy number of plasmas is sort of the opposite. The glass, or basic panel, really seems to be the salient factor in the image of a plasma. I keep seeing certain glass used by various manufacturers, with the manufacturers claiming they've completely re-done the processing for a much better image. But to me the re-badged plasma tends to look pretty much like the original manufacturer's plasma, PQ-wise. For instance, those plasmas that use the Panny glass really look like...Panasonic plasmas to me. Likewise when I see the same NEC, Fujitsu or Pioneer glass being used among various manufacturers there is an incredible resemblance between any plasmas using the same glass/panel. And the specs on a re-badged panel generally seem the same as the original panel.
I wish I could say I've seen some truly
significant contribution via the OEM manufacturer, but I really haven't (that I'm aware of).
