[llogan]

I have a number of tivos and, in fact, most of my viewing of media is stuff I've recorded and DVDs. I cannot adjust my schedule so that I can be home at '7PM' to watch a particular show. For this reason, I absolutely feel that high definition is a bit of a loss for me. However, I'm only using a Sony 32" tube tv at present and I can definitely see the benefit in getting a much larger monitor/display. Front projection isn't really possible as this is my living room and there are windows both along the right and left walls of the room (living room is about 20x12, tv viewed in the short dimension). I've looked at the Mitsubishi Diamond Net Command units, the 55" version. I'm leary of going any larger because of the shortness of distance now between couch and tv. I'm also considering the Pioneer Elite units but I'm trying to figure out if plasma would suit my needs. I'm also aware that there are devices that can be used to significantly improve the feed coming from my tivos, satellite box, etc (when I mentioned line doublers, one person i was speaking to said yes this device does something like that but a lot more, signal cleanup, etc. and so forth). My problem is I have no idea what this black box device is or would be called, I only know from this person that it's estimated to run about $5k for a TV like the Mitsu Diamond NC 55". Is the Pioneer 50" plasma superior to these options?


Additionally, I am also factoring in using the tv as a computer monitor (hence the Net Command etc.) although I'm beginning to think I'll just get a 17" LCD screen and mount that next to the couch instead.


Any thoughts/help would be appreciated.

 

[JoshHB]

Here in this forum you can get only one answer to that question.


-Panasonic (anything 37", 42" or 50 what so ever)


If you really want an advice then go somewhere else....


Joshy

 

[llogan]

If you're going to tell me asking questions here is useless, then might you point me in the direction of an alternative bulletin board where you think I could get my questions answered (i still have faith I can get the answers I need here but hey I could always be wrong).

 

[JoshHB]

 http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htforum/index.php

 

[MarkTaylor]

Don't worry, you're not wrong to ask for help and advice here.


You'll probably get more specific advice on the 'black box' part over in the video processors part of this forum, but the people here will comment on that as well I'm sure.


The decision to go plasma rather than a large rear projection unit is often dictated by space. If you don't have a problem with the space aspect then that is one less reason to consider plasma.


Personally I find the image quality on plasma to be noticably better than the Toshiba rear projection set I have been using which is another point to consider.


I'm not personally familiar with the Mitsubishi so I'll leave the comparisons to people who are.


Hang on in here for a bit longer and give others a chance to respond.


Mark

 

[llogan]

You suggest that the pq is better on plasma, can you be more specific, what about the pq was/is better? Additionally, did you have your rptv calibrated? I value everyone's opinion but the variable exists if your rptv has not been calibrated and you believe that plasma pq is superior. Thanks for responding!

 

[Alan Gouger]

Hogan

This is the right forum to ask questions. Thats why we are all here. We welcome your enthusiasm.


Josh please be a little more understanding. Just because they dont choose the same equipment as you should not make them targets for bashing !

 

[Brory]

llogan,

I got an NEC 42MP3 based on many of the comments about it on this forum (despite what Joshy says about them promoting nothing but Panasonic), and I have been quite pleased with it. I do not have an HDTV tuner. For my normal viewing, I use just regular cable (using my vcr as the tuner). The cable picture isn't the best, but it wasn't good on my CRT either. I do a ton of DVD viewing, and they look really good on the set, better than my CRT (I had a 36" Sony Wega before). The most important thing here is my viewing distance. With the CRT, I could be on top of the set, and everything looked fine. With my plasma, if I am right on top of it, the picture quality breaks up a bit, but is better then the CRT from my normal viewing position. I have also hooked my laptop up directly to the NEC and it looked fine as well (I don't use it like that all the time though, to avoid burn-in). My girlfriend has a 65" Mitsubishi RPTV. The picture on it is also pretty good, but it definitely suffers from angle/glare problems vs my plasma. She has a satellite for her normal viewing, so I think her normal pq is a bit better (remember, I just use normal cable, not even digital cable). Comparing DVDs on both sets, I think the PQ is a bit better on the plasma. It seems brighter and slightly crisper. (keep in mind we have 2 different types of DVD players, so this may not be the best comparison on my part). Even with normal viewing, I think the plasma seems brighter than the Mitsubishi and I have no problem watching with full light in the room vs the Mitsubishi, which looks better in the dark with the lights off. Neither set has been professionally calibrated, but I have used Video Essentials on both of them. I'm not sure if this is helpful at all, but I thought I would through in my 2 cents worth since I was in a similar boat when I was deciding on my plasma.

 

[llogan]

I may have to move my 46 gallon saltwater aquarium if I get a plasma screen as the light diffuses out the side of the tank (doesn't matter right now as that light just bounces off the side of the tube tv, no effect on the picture). And it's LLOGAN, just fyi....and I've been following joshy's posts so it takes more than that to scare me off, although I didn't know about the other forum so now have another wonderful place to spend all of the time that I should be using to do my job....

 

[MarkTaylor]

Sorry about the lack of detail in my first post, just wanted to make sure you knew you were in the right place first


Yes, my Toshiba has been calibrated, and for a RP set I've been very happy with it. Picture problems are just those you tend to get with the RP process.


The picture brightness is great as long as you stay within a relatively limited vertical viewing angle, but I'd never have described it as exactly crisp or as sharp as you would get with a CRT which isn't really surprising.


Black levels and contrast were acceptable but again not in the same league as the best CRT sets.


I've been waiting till plasma became better than my Toshiba and that is why I've purchased now.


I'm moving up from a 40" RP set to a 50" plasma, the Pioneer 503MXE.


I couldn't have done that with an RP set as I just don't have the space.


The Pioneer to my eye gives better color rendition and produces brighter, sharper images than my Toshiba. Contrast and black levels are at least as good if not better. I considered the Panasonic, but I preferred the Pioneer which seemed to be to produce better detail in the blacks whereas the Panasonic had better over all black levels.


Obviously different screens are set-up more or less correctly so I can only comment based on the ones I saw.


Another reason to go to plasma was the fact that I am upgrading the rest of my kit at the same time to include a DVD player capable of PAL Progressive output so plasma was a logical choice since front projection was out due to lighting concerns.


Mark

 

[stereobuff]

Also take into consideration that all crt big screen's will lose picture quality from day one And the elite you mentioned is the quickest one to degrade. I have been around retail for quite some time and No Question about it the Pioneer Elite has the best picture out of the box money can buy. But it comes at a price #1 is the higher price$,and# 2 is it will loose color and pq in about a year. a noticeable amount. we may go back out to a persons house a year or so later and look at the tv and say man it looks dull That is the only way i can describe it. But again It IS the best PQ out of the box you can buy , and if you want to , and can afford it You can replace it and get a new one. My own opinion Which I have had 4 big screens All Mitsubishi in about 4 years, Notice i get rid of them about every year. And even though i have replaced them all with just a newer model (all sdtv)When i plug in the new one I can look at it and say man that is alot brighter and more rich in color than the old one. a recent projector Nec LT150.(I was kidding myself on a light issue) Is go with a plasma . It is what I'm debating right now (Which one) and what size , the prices jump alot between 42 and 50. Hope this helps just my 2 cents

 

[llogan]

looked at a Pioneer plasma 50" yesterday...all I can say is Wow...although I don't think I could possibly justify spending $13,000 on a TV. Given my need to watch a lot of prerecorded TV from my Tivo, I need to account for the expense of a video processor in my overall budget...for tv and processor I'd ideally keep it under $10,000.

 

[Ken Ross]



Originally posted by stereobuff

and# 2 is it will loose color and pq in about a year. a noticeable amount. we may go back out to a persons house a year or so later and look at the tv and say man it looks dull That is the only way i can describe it. I have had 4 big screens All Mitsubishi in about 4 years, Notice i get rid of them about every year.


stereobuff,

MAN! What are you and your client's doing to their TVs?? There is NO way a RPTV should lose a "noticeable" amount of PQ in one year. Simply no way. Plasmas and CRTs appear to have approximately the same lifetime, with a gradual fall off in brightness. If you and your clients are driving the tubes at full tilt, well that's another story. One year with settings set properly? No way.

 

[Jim Boden]

llogan:


One piece of advice based on a not-so-great personal experience. Don't assume ahead of time that you need a video processor/scaler. First, evaluate whatever you buy. If you think it would benefit from a scaler, then try out more than one from a place which has a liberal return policy.


There are many good reasons to consider a scaler, but I made the mistake of buying one at the same time as a Pioneer 503CMX. I’ve been unhappy with the scaler and discovered that the Pioneer actually looks very good without it, although the scaler does have some benefit. The problem I’m having with the scaler, however, detracts from all of its positive qualities. I have a dialogue going on at the moment with the scaler manufacturer and will be posting the experience on this forum in a different thread.

 

[Jim Boden]

Ken Ross:


I agree with your point. I had an ISF-calibrated Pioneer Elite RPTV for a few years, and never saw the problem described by stereobuff.

 

[asinshesq]

Quote:

Originally posted by llogan looked at a Pioneer plasma 50" yesterday...all I can say is Wow...although I don't think I could possibly justify spending $13,000 on a TV. Given my need to watch a lot of prerecorded TV from my Tivo, I need to account for the expense of a video processor in my overall budget...for tv and processor I'd ideally keep it under $10,000.

I'm with you -- I found that the Pioneer PQ was better than the Panasonic's in shadow detail and in color reproduction (but obviously that may be due to different calibariotns on the display sets I saw). If you decide to go the Pioneer route, look around this forum and you will find that the Pioneer elite and the 503cmx are identical sets except that the elite comes with a decorative "Urishi" frame that some people find ugly and have removed. So most people on this forum have recommended that, if you want a pioneer 50", you should go with the 503cmx. And, you can pick that up for a bit over $8k at www.dell.com (in the monitor section) tax-free and with free shipping (make sure you search for Dell coupons on 'peripherals' in Google; they will give you a 10% discount from the listed price). The Dell site is very confusing, so do a search arouddn this forum in order to understand what they are selling (the point is that you need an add-on 5002 video card for your purposes, and one of the Dell sku's has that included in the price and the other doesn't so you would have to buy it separately for $400 and the Dell sales people have no idea about any of this).


As for the PQ deteriorating over time, I've heard that the PQ deterioration was a bigger problem for earlier generation sets, but only time will tell.


As for the black box:


You're talking about a deinterlacer and scalar. I've got a Leeza, which runs about 4 to 5k. It allows me to take sdi input from an rp56 (modified) dvd and output via DVI directly to the plasma. That's an all-digital path -- the signal never has to go d/a or a/d -- as a result, the image is incredibly perfect (noticeably more resoultion and less artifacts -- more genrally, much more 'filmlike' -- than you get by using progressive out from the dvd).


I input my regular TWC digital cable into a replay. I used to feed the replay signal into the Leeza, which made the cable signal look about as good as it could given the limitations of the signal, but a downside is that when you go through the Leeza and out at the Pionee''rs native rate, you lose Pioneer's 'wide' mode (which stretches 4:3 material out to full screen to avoid burn-in in a non-linear way that makes less obvious that the image has been stretched -- basically wide mode leaves the center of the picture alone and stretches the sides more to compensate; it looks surprisingly good on most 4:3 material). I found that that tradeoff didn't work for me, so I'm back to feeding the replay direct to the monitor. There's no question that I get more pixelization and other artifacts than I did when I used the Leeza for my replay signal, but my being able to go 'wide' more than compensates from my perspective (although it does kill me that I am now using my $4k box only for dvds, which I don't watch that often anyway). It is possible that at some point the maker of Leeza (Key Digital" will add a 'wide' mode, and at that point I will go back to using the Leeza for my Replay signal.

 

[divvy]

Oh dear. I guess this points to a very real concern when it comes to posters like Josh. Ignoring him and hoping he will go away is prolly the best course of action but if someone actually takes his bad advice seriously then I think we have done a disservice to the readers of this forum by allowing such a flamer to influence a new person to the possible detriment to that person.


Fortunately this has not happened with llogan.


To address some of your posts llogan:

You do not have to spend $13000 to get the pioneer. Spend around $8000 (can't remember the exact price) and get the pioneer 503CMX instead. This is the commercial/indutrial version of the PRO1000HD that you are prolly referring to and according to a lot of posters with experience it is virtually identical to the PRO except for FCC class A and B classification and the infamous Urushi frame (a search for both in the plasma forum will yield a lot of useful info)


As for the 50 inchers, there are in fact a lot of supporters in this forum for the pioneer, panny and fujitsu. EricBee attempted a facts only thread here which you may find useful (it also contains info on the differences between the PRO and CMX pios):
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=128758


Finally, I would not expect amazing PQ with your Tivo outputs but, given your light and space contraints, I believe a plasma is the best option available today. The PQ of any one of the three plasmas in the above thread is amazing with DVD and HD content however.

 

[llogan]

I guess the next question is one of what are people's opinions as to the benefits of the deinterlacer/scaler/etc. as it relates specifically to the output coming from my tivos (I wouldn't be as concerned about improving the feed coming from a progressive scan DVD player). I just cannot imagine watching the stuff on my Tivo without using something to clean it up.


As you can see from my sig I have a satellite feed so any HD signals I'll be pulling through that and all of my tivos are DirecTivos so they have the recorded bitstream but are outputting something substantially less than 480.