Quantcast

LCD Vs. Plasma

MartinLogan Owners (MLO)

Help Support MartinLogan Owners (MLO):

SugarMedia

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
733
Reaction score
0
Location
EU
I'm curious to hear some view points as to why LCD's are still quite abit more expensive than plasmas.

A friend of mine is claiming they are just simply better, and using price as the determining factor.

I don't buy it, but I also don't know much about the differences other than that I prefer the look of plasmas.
 

Scumurculum

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2006
Messages
256
Reaction score
1
Location
East Coast of the Antipodes
I too prefer the pook of plasmas but I am afraid of burn in.

Anyway I bought a DLP rear pro, which was even cheaper still and with good sources has fantastic picture quality.

I am not sure why flat screen lcds are more expensive than plasmas, I guess it is more expensive to manufacture.

Anyway I am waiting for new technology such as SED to come along.
 

Robin

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
3,292
Reaction score
0
Location
Calistoga, California
Different technologies...

I believe it is the difference between the two technologies. As Scumurculum alluded to the manufacturing technique is very different. From what I've observed, Sharp seems to have been the leader in LCD technology, slowly developing larger and larger displays along with other LCD electrical companies. Plasma development has been on-going longer than LCD development and with many more electrical companies involved. I found this rather interesting article evaluating the differences and, which is better quality etc.:

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=779


IMHO, I liked the picture quality (PQ) of Pioneer's Plasma display, over the LCD displays. :) In Japan their are only like under half a dozen plasma screen manufacturing plants. Pioneer's plant is supposed to have the very best quality plasma glass process of all of these type of plasma screen manufacturing plants, according to my research in 2002, before I purchased my Pioneer 43" plasma monitor.

Having said all of the above, I currenty, lust after Front Projection for vastly improved sonic nirvana and even better PQ. Front Projection is what commercial movie theaters employ, which IMHO is the ultimate in PQ, which I'm trying to achieve... ;)
 
D

dyazdani

Guest
Robin said:
Having said all of the above, I currenty, lust after Front Projection for vastly improved sonic nirvana and even better PQ. Front Projection is what commercial movie theaters employ, which IMHO is the ultimate in PQ, which I'm trying to achieve... ;)
I just bought an LCD front projector and it is like a whole new world in my theater. FPTV prices are very reasonable now, IMHO.

As to the question - I don't have much of a preference either way, I haven't spent a whole lot of time comparing them. I too fear burn-in on the plasma sets, but they sure do look nice. My parents just bought a 50" Samsung so I'm excited to visit and try it out.
 

Webinattor

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
136
Reaction score
0
Location
Indiana
Front Projection seems to also offer a sonic benefit. Without a large TV box in the middle, there is no defraction or bouncing around of the audio performance.

I find the large screen also seems to match the large sound field. For example, when there is a slow pan of an audio effect, it seems more natural for the sound to go from left to right, directly along with the picture.

With a small screen setup, (I'm not sure really how to describe this accurately) there is a distinct difference when a panned sound comes from the left....then you get to the TV picture in the middle...then the sound continues to the right.

With FP, everything just seems to align much better, both in an audio sense and in the visual depiction. The audio really does follow the TV screen action, since the visual is huge and often fills the expanse between both left and right speakers.
 

SugarMedia

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
733
Reaction score
0
Location
EU
Webinattor said:
Front Projection seems to also offer a sonic benefit. Without a large TV box in the middle, there is no defraction or bouncing around of the audio performance.

I find the large screen also seems to match the large sound field. For example, when there is a slow pan of an audio effect, it seems more natural for the sound to go from left to right, directly along with the picture.

With a small screen setup, (I'm not sure really how to describe this accurately) there is a distinct difference when a panned sound comes from the left....then you get to the TV picture in the middle...then the sound continues to the right.

With FP, everything just seems to align much better, both in an audio sense and in the visual depiction. The audio really does follow the TV screen action, since the visual is huge and often fills the expanse between both left and right speakers.
very interesting comment. I'm sure that's the case.

still wondering why LCD's are more expensive. Anyone?
 

Reverb

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
1,543
Reaction score
0
Location
Palm Springs, CA
Prices of LCD TV’s are still coming down; Plasma has just been more popular and has come down quicker.
 

SugarMedia

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
733
Reaction score
0
Location
EU
Sorry Robin, I didn't see your post before making my last remark.

Abd yes, I too am just near 100% fixed on getting this 43' Pioneer plasma. I have noticed though that there is a new one (2006/7?) that has a contrast of 3000:1 whereas last year's model is only 2000:1. Other than that, all the other specs seem to be about the same. They weren't side by side so it was difficult to compare the amount of difference that made, but I'm guessing it's not too bad if I can get a price break on it.
 

Robin

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
3,292
Reaction score
0
Location
Calistoga, California
Pioneer Plasma...

SugarMedia said:
Sorry Robin, I didn't see your post before making my last remark.

Abd yes, I too am just near 100% fixed on getting this 43' Pioneer plasma. I have noticed though that there is a new one (2006/7?) that has a contrast of 3000:1 whereas last year's model is only 2000:1. Other than that, all the other specs seem to be about the same. They weren't side by side so it was difficult to compare the amount of difference that made, but I'm guessing it's not too bad if I can get a price break on it.
SugarMedia,

Yes, Pioneer Plasma, is about the very best available, as far as plasma panel PQ and plasma development, IMHO... ;) Pioneer has the "Deep Cell" design technology, which allows for more plasma gases per cell. This again is due to Pioneer's plasma glass manufacturing plant. Pioneers glass panels are just manufactured differently, IMHO better... :D :p :D If you want even more bells and whistles Pioneer has their Elite 43", which offers a higher quality frame and other extras as well.
 
T

tsd2005

Guest
Robin said:
SugarMedia,

Yes, Pioneer Plasma, is about the very best available, as far as plasma panel PQ and plasma development, IMHO... ;) Pioneer has the "Deep Cell" design technology, which allows for more plasma gases per cell. This again is due to Pioneer's plasma glass manufacturing plant. Pioneers glass panels are just manufactured differently, IMHO better... :D :p :D If you want even more bells and whistles Pioneer has their Elite 43", which offers a higher quality frame and other extras as well.

Well for one there are 3 manufacturing facilities in the world for Plasma. Fujitsu, NEC (recently bought by Pioneer), and LG (I believe memory could be off).

Fujitsu makes the best panels, what others do with them afterwords is the key. Pioneer used to buy from Fujitsu, now they own the NEC plant. So their new lineup will be interesting to see compared to the older generations.

However imho there are three people that know plasma better than anyone:

1. Loewe, yes Loewe. If you can buy a used Loewe it will look better than anything but 1080p plasma. Of course overseas they have a 1080p unit (bastards).

2. Pioneer.

3. Fujitsu

The other brands just don't hold up in quality. Interesting link that ISF provided me (I'm an ISF certified tech):

http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/p.../273087528Pioneer DTV White Paper - FINAL.pdf
 

SugarMedia

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
733
Reaction score
0
Location
EU
tsd2005 said:
Interesting link that ISF provided me (I'm an ISF certified tech):
Thanks for sharing that. Quite an interesting article.
 

MarkNewbie

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
376
Reaction score
0
Location
Indiana
Had to jump in on this one. I have the 42 inch LCD and have had it for 3 years now. I wanted the plasma at first and I actually do some business with both Pioneer and Sony. Contacts at both companies 3 years ago told me not to buy plasma. Their comments were at the time, that plasma was rushed to market before it was perfected. I know early sets suffered leakage and tilting to far caused internal damage all by itself. I believe that the tilting thing is still a problem as I am in the transportation business and my firm carries these things all over the place. We get claims filed against us where there is zero damage to the box/packaging, and zero damage to the unit itself, yet it will not work. They tell us this is due to it being laid on it's face or back at some point. Samsung ships these things with a "Tip-n-Tell" monitor affixed to the box for just that reason. So if you do buy the plasma (I like the picture better on plasma too) be aware of what laying it flat can do. The salesman at my local Best Buy told me that one out of every three plasmas that they get in does not work for just that reason. I am sure that somebody will come up with a fix for it if they have not already.
 
Top