BULLWINKLE
Super Member
Thinking of a new TV. Can anyone direct me as to which is the better and why? The last TV I bought was 10 years ago.... I'm way out of the info. Any help appreciated.
Plasma vs. LCD????
- Thread starter BULLWINKLE
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Bob_in_OKC
Addicted Member
Take a look at the refresh rate on the plasma screens vs. that on the LCD. That's the benefit of plasma, as far as I've seen. The LCD sets I've seen in the stores generally seem to have the more-complete set of the latest features, like WiFi, but moving images should in theory look better on the plasma.
I should add that the LCD screens do seem to have a little less glare and it seems like they can produce a brighter image (but in theory not as much contrast); but in the low-light room where I watch, those things don't really factor in much.
I should add that the LCD screens do seem to have a little less glare and it seems like they can produce a brighter image (but in theory not as much contrast); but in the low-light room where I watch, those things don't really factor in much.
Last edited:
DENNYDOG
Addicted Member
Some people claim that plasmas use more energy and put off more heat. That might have been the case way back when they first came out but in reality, there isn't much difference between all the models anymore. Some plasmas actually use less energy than the same size lcds.
I would go to the store and compare picture quality, features and price and see which you like the best.
I would also recommend that you spend a little more and buy a brand name.
I don't want to make this a Walmart bashing thread but they are known for selling electronics that are made for them at the lowest price point they can be made at. Companies compete for shelf space and make equipment as cheap as they can. This can be seen by the "special" model numbers not sold in other competing stores.
I would go to the store and compare picture quality, features and price and see which you like the best.
I would also recommend that you spend a little more and buy a brand name.
I don't want to make this a Walmart bashing thread but they are known for selling electronics that are made for them at the lowest price point they can be made at. Companies compete for shelf space and make equipment as cheap as they can. This can be seen by the "special" model numbers not sold in other competing stores.
There are two main differences between plasma and LCD in my experience.
1. plasma screens are more reflective and will show lamps and other light fixtures that are on if you are looking at the screen at the reflective angle.
2. lcd screens are brighter. If you have a room with lots of ambient light, an LCD is the way to go.
Plasmas have a better picture, but you need to have the TV in a room with low ambient light to take advantage of this.
1. plasma screens are more reflective and will show lamps and other light fixtures that are on if you are looking at the screen at the reflective angle.
2. lcd screens are brighter. If you have a room with lots of ambient light, an LCD is the way to go.
Plasmas have a better picture, but you need to have the TV in a room with low ambient light to take advantage of this.
Be sure to look at the LED back/edge lit LCDs. We picked up a Samsung 40 inch a few years back - perfect TV - also very thin, light and easy to mount on the wall doesn't require stud mounting/centering with their hanger kit - hangs like a picture - easy to level - just move it like a picture since it hangs on a heavy wire - snug against the wall.
Also - from a demo perspective - it smoked all the other LCDs.
Good luck.
Also - from a demo perspective - it smoked all the other LCDs.
Good luck.
Vintage_Hi-F
Vintage Audio Geek
I'd preface that with a usually. My Sharp Aquos Quattron delivers a picture that's just as good as any plasma. LED backlighting has made huge difference. Also my sharp has more inputs that any plasma (or LCD). Two PC inputs, TWO COMPOSITE, One Component, 4 HDMI, USB, and Ethernet. Also on the refresh rate thing I've never noticed any issues of judder on any TV (be it 600hz or 60hz). Personally I find the idea a bit dubious, after all we had 60hz TV's for how long and only with in the past 10 years have I heard people complain about frame judder and jerky motion. I know this is a touchy subject for some people but if you go the plasma route I'd stick with Panasonic. Not only are they the best they are probably going to be the prominent (if not the only one) supporting it for at least the next 10 years.
DENNYDOG
Addicted Member
Ahh, the debate rages on.
Not necessarily true. Most plasmas now have anti glare screens. There really isn't much difference between the two anymore.
And as far as #2 goes, I have always felt that plasmas have a brighter image. My plasma looks fine in my living room that has many windows. These are all generalizations.
Not necessarily true. Most plasmas now have anti glare screens. There really isn't much difference between the two anymore.
And as far as #2 goes, I have always felt that plasmas have a brighter image. My plasma looks fine in my living room that has many windows. These are all generalizations.
Last edited:
Bob_in_OKC
Addicted Member
Although some people seem to think the refresh rate and response time are no big deal, that's exactly the complaint I've had with flat panel TVs the whole time they've been on the market. It's not just about the numbers, either. I suppose they've gotten a handle on motion blur, but the pixels still show, after all these years.
The old analog 1080i rear-projection sets Panasonic and Sony were making 5 to 10 years ago didn't show pixels. And on top of that, they didn't make people look like flat cut-outs the way that digital screens so often do. I think our standards are a little low on this stuff.
The old analog 1080i rear-projection sets Panasonic and Sony were making 5 to 10 years ago didn't show pixels. And on top of that, they didn't make people look like flat cut-outs the way that digital screens so often do. I think our standards are a little low on this stuff.
Vintage_Hi-F
Vintage Audio Geek
The only time I've noticed Pixels on my Sharp is if I'm running LD's and even then you have to be pretty close to notice. Response time really only comes into serious play when you're gaming, movies and TV are effected very little by it. I still say the refresh rate thing is dubious I think it had more to do with the technology behind the screen as in what you're feeding it from. There are a lot of variables here.
It would be kinda hard seeing that they don't produce pixels naturally. It's like saying LD didn't have compression artifacts like DVD did, it wouldn't becasue the medium is incapable of that. Also thous reap projection sets had issues of there own, like a very narrow viewing angle and rreally didn't work all that well in sunny rooms. Though about the cardboard cut outs, you may be looking at the wrong sets (read cheap) or they may be improperly set up. I've seen $4,000 sets that look like utter rubbish because someone didn't know how to calibrate it properly (which is a large chunk of the population).
My take as well, with Plasma being less so and therefore the winner in my living room.
BULLWINKLE
Super Member
Is there an issue of life span? Thanks for all the above input. =)
Correct - I should not have spoken an absolute. And further......am only speaking from my experience when comparing an LCD and Plasma TVs that I have bought and lived with for years.
Reds should be adjustable on TVs. Most have a Cinema setting that tends to be the most accurate, but may not look the best in your room.
EDIT - Don't base your buying decision on what the TVs look like on the showroom floor either. Most big box stores have them set as bright and vivid as possible to make them stand out. Consumer Reports is an excellent resource for research.
Last edited:
My Panasonic plasma is so old it has zero HDMI ports and 1 DVI port. 3000:1 contrast ratio and still going strong. Pretty good longevity for technology that supposedly doesn't last very long. I think Panasonic gets it right.
Phase700b
AK Lurker & Kinsman
Much good information here so far by posters, but also one needs to know about trends and marketing, plus what your needs/wants are as well as viewing environment. TV have lots of options these days, lots of capabilities and therefore lots of complexities. So. . . what to do?
I've been a bit of a video fanatic for some 27 years, but rather than go into all that I'll try and keep with the past 7 to 10. Came from a couple of Hitachi Untravison rear projection TVs up to my first flat screen in 2005 (just a 26" Philips for a bedroom). Then bought a 47' Toshiba LCD in early 2007 and took it back because of banding. Traded it for a Hitachi plasma and took it back because of screen glare and low picture brightness. Finally settled on a Mitsubishi LT46231 LCD. I really got into TV picture calibration along the way since my RPTV days which required constant convergence and fiddling to keep a decent picture on them. So... got very particular with what a TV offered for picture settings and options. The 2007 Mitsubishi still looks great and now also own a 2010 LG 42LD550 LCD for a game room. It is by far , the best I've auditioned for the money. Lots of picture options, and great calibration opportunities and stunning picture quality.
In a nut shell, what was good in or about one brand or model one year, may not translate to what is available this year. However, there are exceptions. LED (which is just an LCD TV with LED back light instead of Cold Cathode Florescent back light) may not be better than a "plain" LCD. The thin flat panel may contribute to poor LCD or plasma panel support and cause uneven picture characteristics. The larger the screen the thicker the frame should be. Remember, you don't watch the EDGE of the TV screen
. Plasma still may have significant screen glare, but offers better motion handling (sports and action movies) and sometimes greater color accuracy, but not the brightest picture in day light room conditions. Some brands are better than others.
So, I assume you want to stay in a mid price range and maybe mid sized 40" to 50". Don't buy a TV with internet options. Why? After a year, updates for the WIFi features will dry up. So get a Blu-ray player or other video streaming device that can be replaced for lots less every year or two as new web based features appear. . . a lot like smart phones. Also, many TVs have limited picture adjustments for some reason when using the built in WiFi apps and features.
The LG "LK" series is a good buy, some Panasonic LCD are very good as is the current S30 and ST30 plasmas. Do not get any 720p plasma. Cheap, but way behind in technology. I was a Samsung fan, but they have changed. Even some Insignia models are not too bad, but limited in picture adjusts and features. Stay away from "second tier" brands like Sanyo, Vizio, Zenith, RCA, etc. And there is a web site for video if you search with Google that has video based info. PM me if you want more info.
I've been a bit of a video fanatic for some 27 years, but rather than go into all that I'll try and keep with the past 7 to 10. Came from a couple of Hitachi Untravison rear projection TVs up to my first flat screen in 2005 (just a 26" Philips for a bedroom). Then bought a 47' Toshiba LCD in early 2007 and took it back because of banding. Traded it for a Hitachi plasma and took it back because of screen glare and low picture brightness. Finally settled on a Mitsubishi LT46231 LCD. I really got into TV picture calibration along the way since my RPTV days which required constant convergence and fiddling to keep a decent picture on them. So... got very particular with what a TV offered for picture settings and options. The 2007 Mitsubishi still looks great and now also own a 2010 LG 42LD550 LCD for a game room. It is by far , the best I've auditioned for the money. Lots of picture options, and great calibration opportunities and stunning picture quality.
In a nut shell, what was good in or about one brand or model one year, may not translate to what is available this year. However, there are exceptions. LED (which is just an LCD TV with LED back light instead of Cold Cathode Florescent back light) may not be better than a "plain" LCD. The thin flat panel may contribute to poor LCD or plasma panel support and cause uneven picture characteristics. The larger the screen the thicker the frame should be. Remember, you don't watch the EDGE of the TV screen
. Plasma still may have significant screen glare, but offers better motion handling (sports and action movies) and sometimes greater color accuracy, but not the brightest picture in day light room conditions. Some brands are better than others. So, I assume you want to stay in a mid price range and maybe mid sized 40" to 50". Don't buy a TV with internet options. Why? After a year, updates for the WIFi features will dry up. So get a Blu-ray player or other video streaming device that can be replaced for lots less every year or two as new web based features appear. . . a lot like smart phones. Also, many TVs have limited picture adjustments for some reason when using the built in WiFi apps and features.
The LG "LK" series is a good buy, some Panasonic LCD are very good as is the current S30 and ST30 plasmas. Do not get any 720p plasma. Cheap, but way behind in technology. I was a Samsung fan, but they have changed. Even some Insignia models are not too bad, but limited in picture adjusts and features. Stay away from "second tier" brands like Sanyo, Vizio, Zenith, RCA, etc. And there is a web site for video if you search with Google that has video based info. PM me if you want more info.
Last edited:
Bob_in_OKC
Addicted Member
In practical terms, it's not too important. The screen life is very long. I've seen claims of 100,000 hours...don't know if that's the highest. Suppose you wanted the TV to last 20 years. That would be over 13 hours a day.
whoaru99
Epic Member
That could be. One would assume that mfgs. put their best stuff in their TOTL technology which is currently 1080p.
That said, 720p can look very good and strictly from a resolution standpoint, screen size and viewing distance are the main factors for whether 1080p is actually beneficial or just extra cost.
In other words, if you sit 6-8ft from a 50" TV one should hope they got a 1080p set. OTOH, if you sit 10-12ft back, 1080p vs. 720p isn't much, if any, distinction. Sit 15ft or more back from that 50" TV and neither really outshine 480p.
