Plasma Vs. Lcd

[bordeno]

I recently purchased the Sony XBR3 1080p (about 6 weeks ago). I spent considerable time (about a week going into, and back to stores) looking at all sets in several high line HT stores. It got down to the new Pioneer 50" Plasma 1080p and the Sony 46" XBR3 1080p. Fortunately, these were displayed next to one another in two stores . . . one in their main showing room, and another in a home theater set-up.

Plasma is not good for those who have windows/outside light issues. The glare is very evident. Any of the knowledgable people will tell you this.

I don't know what those are talking about who say that viewing sets like the XBR3 from an angle gets washed out. It just doesn't happen. Both types of sets were excellent with this issue.

Both sets were excellent, and the XBR3 had no visible trailing issues. The blacks on both sets were excellent. Sony really made improvements in this area.

The projected longevity of the XBR3 type sets is at least double that of the plasma sets.

The pictures including color and contrast of both sets were spectacular, but, I found the plasma to be actually too dark and not as realistic.

During my last 3 visits, my eye just started to immediately go to the Sony. The picture was just more exciting and balanced. (I did have the opportunity to play with the settings on both sets in one of the stores, as both were set too vivid)

I purchased at Magnolia department in Best Buy in FL (one of their first in the chain), as they were the first to get them in store to sell. Got a great price (listed at the time at $4,900), and paid $3,900 with discounts (set now lists for $4,000). The 50" Pioneer Elite 1080p plasma listed (at the time) for over ($9,000)

Now having lived with it at home, I am very happy with my purchase. After adjusting the set down (it is very vivid out-of-the-box), it is truly spectacular. The one negative thing this set shows up, are the regular cable station signals are really inferior to HD signals. So, after hooking up a new Pioneer Elite 84 receiver with HD video upscaling, the regular signal channels look great too. All are hooked up using HDMI cable.

Bottom line, is both are great sets, but, there is no comparison when you consider the price difference. If the prices were the same, however . . . I'd still buy the Sony XBR3.

Yeah the Sonys seem to be pretty much the best of the best. The Bravia LCD XBR is an incredible set. However, for less than half as much Sony offers the DLP 55" Rear Projection set, 1080p, SXRD or something like that, that is damn near as good, though it takes up more space. What a value! I got a Panasonic Plasma for my family room (no outside light issues) because it fit best in the space, but the basement is going to see a Sony DLP. They are amazing for the price and...its a Sony. :thmbsp:

 

[Duffinator]

Yeah the Sonys seem to be pretty much the best of the best. The Bravia LCD XBR is an incredible set. However, for less than half as much Sony offers the DLP 55" Rear Projection set, 1080p, SXRD or something like that, that is damn near as good, though it takes up more space. What a value! I got a Panasonic Plasma for my family room (no outside light issues) because it fit best in the space, but the basement is going to see a Sony DLP. They are amazing for the price and...its a Sony. :thmbsp:

The Sony is an LCOS or LCD chip based technology and has nothing in common with DLP other than being a chip. Sony has been riding on their reputation for a couple of decades when it comes to picture quality. But their recent SXRD and LCD XBR sets once again live up to that reputation and are IMO the best looking RPTV and LCD available today. And I'm not much of a Sony fan.

 

[Jack G]

The Sony is an LCOS or LCD chip based technology and has nothing in common with DLP other than being a chip. Sony has been riding on their reputation for a couple of decades when it comes to picture quality. But their recent SXRD and LCD XBR sets once again live up to that reputation and are IMO the best looking RPTV and LCD available today. And I'm not much of a Sony fan.

I have to agree here. I personally don't care for Sony as a company, but they do make good TVs-I have a 60" SXRD. Next year, I may buy the 70" for my family room (60" isn't big enough).
Jack

 

[Aage]

So, please help me with the "i" and "p" issue, I still don't get it.

I seem to pick up from the conversation that "p" is better than "i".
So then, is a 720p better than a 1080i?

Also, maybe it's just me, but as I look at them, it seems to me that larger screens have higher numbers? I'm not basing this on a scientific study, just casual observation.

Also, I see wild variations in the contrast numbers. Some claim 10,000:1 while others are at say 5,000:1. Are they all being held to the same method of declaring performance, or can these numbers be jiggered to make the marketing people happier...?

 

[ginovino]

Simply put--- the"P" stands for progressive and the "I" stands for Interlaced.

Interlaced is the technology used in your current and all past Standard definition televsions since the late 1940"s. Interlacing breaks the TV picture into 2 sets of scan lines from the top to bottom of the screen. Each set of scan lines is produced(painted) every 1/30th of a second. first the Odd numbered lines (1,3,5,7 through to 479), then next 1/30th of a second the Even numbered lines ( 2,4,6,8 to 480 etc). So at any given point you will have either the even or odd lines( half the picture image). The full image is never on the screen at the same time.

Progressive scanning all lines 1----480(p), 720(p), 1080(p) are produced in numeric sequence providing a smoother, cleaner and, more realistic image.

The Progressive scanning method IS the preferred method to produce the best possible image all things being equal.

However, inorder to accomodate various screen sizes, past source material, current non HD TV broadcasts, older video equipment and DVD players, manufacturers introduced interim scanning methods for 480i, 720i and 1080i.

Each of these methods look to provide you the ability to EXPAND the picture
image size on your NEW Flat screen by upconverting it for use. Nothing is miraculous here... in fact sometimes things are better left unconverted. Most folks making the transistion to HD will be disappointed with the image they became accustomed to with the plain jane TV tube. Unless the signal image coming from the network or source is sent in the the new Flat panels "native" resolution --(720p, 1080p) everything else is CONVERTED- FOR BETTER OR WORSE!

HOPE THAT HELPS YOU....:yes:

If I misspoke any part of this, AK buddies!-- please correct or add to this explanation-- thanks

 

[ginovino]

So, please help me with the "i" and "p" issue, I still don't get it.

I seem to pick up from the conversation that "p" is better than "i".
So then, is a 720p better than a 1080i?

Also, maybe it's just me, but as I look at them, it seems to me that larger screens have higher numbers? I'm not basing this on a scientific study, just casual observation.

Also, I see wild variations in the contrast numbers. Some claim 10,000:1 while others are at say 5,000:1. Are they all being held to the same method of declaring performance, or can these numbers be jiggered to make the marketing people happier...?

I failed to comment on the contrast numbers issues... many MFRs.. use hyperbole in the claims they make. Forget the numbers, READ, READ, RESEARCH, VIEW AND TUNE-OUT THE SALES FOLKS.. more often than not, you will be better informed then they are.

1080i is 720P upconverted to fit a 50" screen.. sometimes the image is fantastic with the right gear. 720i is 480P upconverted to fit a 42-43" screen.

This HDTV issue is like asking which receiver is" better" the Sansui G9000, the Pioneer SX-1250, Kenwood KR-9050, McIntosh 7100? (the G9000!!!:thmbsp: )

 

[Jack G]

1080i is 720P upconverted to fit a 50" screen.. sometimes the image is fantastic with the right gear. 720i is 480P upconverted to fit a 42-43" screen.

I'm not sure that's correct.
CRTs, either direct view, or projection, give an interlaced picture-that can be 480i or 1080i (I've never seen a 720i set-do they exist?). TVs with fixed pixels, ie Plasma, LCD, DLP, LCOS etc., have progressive resolutions-480p 720p, or 1080p-regardless of size. With fixed pixel sets, the resolution is constant, regardless of input, so if it is a low res input like 480, it will be upscaled internally to the required resolution (ie 720p or 1080p) Otherwise, a large TV of 50" or higher would look really bad, which is why the numbers seem higher with larger screens. OTOH, I've seen 1080p 42" plasmas. In a few years, 1080p will become the standard resolution for larger TVs, its already starting.
HTH
Jack

 

[ginovino]

Thanks for the clarication-- It seems a little knowledge is dangerous as in my case!

Recent reviews of the latest HD DVD players Blu-ray (Samsung/Pioneer- same unit & Panasonic) are not overally enthusiastic of their performance in anything oither than the 1080P mode. In fact their overall perfromance was less than steller for $1400+ :scratch2:

As is the cse with most new technology, inaccurate info is disseminated across all levels of the populace, retailers, writers, friends, and HD neophytes like me.

It will be some time (years) before source material (older recordings, Local broadcast, Network prgogramming and new productions will be constantly produced in a minimum of 720P , no less 1080P. Thus the Internal scaler is Critical to the viewing satisfaction of the consumer. Added to this, is to make sure your not scaling TWICE! Once through your source device and again in the TV.. This will also add to poor image reproduction.

My Pioneer Pro1140HD has 2 HDMI & 3 component inputs. I have compared source material using both types of inputs, HDMI WINS hands down!!! Even using an OPPO DVD player which provides a DVI output (i used a DVI to HDMI cable) image quality to the eye exceeds the component input ability
(speaking to this unit only). This performance may be excerbated by cable quality(oh no! here we go again!). I purchased my cables from www.Monoprice.com. Great selection, great prices and quality.

I hope my comments added to the value of this discussion.

 

[JimmyNeutron]

720 IS NOT 480 upconverted, nor is 1080i upconverted 720. 480, 720, and 1080 are all resolutions - real resolutions - that a station (ie CBS, ABC, etc) choose to broadcast their signal in. There is no 1 broadcast signal - just 3 (480, 720, 1080). 480 is what we see right now with cable, satellite, and a DVD. 720 is the minimum resolution to get you into the Hi-Def door, 1080 is pure hi-def. The "i" and "p" stand for "interlaced" and "progressive". Basically, "i" means the picture is scanned like a regular TV to paint the picture on the screen - one line at a time. The TV paints the odd lines, then the even lines. It does this at 60 times a second (60 Hz in america. Actually if you wanna get technical it's 30.1 x 2, but let's keep things real simple here). "p", or progressive, means the picture is painted at one time in one pass. An "i" picture will have scanning lines on the screen because of the passes required to paint the picture, a "p" picture will have no scan lines because they are painted at one time. Which one is better? Doesn't matter as resolution is the key. 480i/480p is what you've been seeing all along with your DVD player - not a bad picture. 720"p" is broadcast by CBS - it looks very, very good. 1080"i" is broadcast by ABC and is also very, very good. Being that 1080 is interlaced and 720 is progressive you may think that 720 is the better format, since 1080 is interlaced. In reality, the higher resolution given by 1080, even interlaced, is more than 720P and, in theory, should look better. But there are so many other factors like, digital compression, encoding/decoding, transmission hopping, etc., that are beyond your control that it really doesn't matter.

Let's complicate things a bit more. Until recently, 1080p sets have become available. This will kill the 720p vs. 1080i argument pretty quick. 1080P, with the highest resolution AND a progressive image look fantastic.

Jimmy

 

[Jack G]

Well said JN.

Recent reviews of the latest HD DVD players Blu-ray (Samsung/Pioneer- same unit & Panasonic) are not overally enthusiastic of their performance in anything oither than the 1080P mode. In fact their overall perfromance was less than steller for $1400+

Blu-ray players are not the same as HD DVD players-they are different formats, both with 1080p discs.
The Sony and the Pioneer are the same unit(made by Pioneer), not the Samsung, which is being discontinued. Yea, they have some work to do. They are trying to catch up with HD DVD PQ wise. I have an HD DVD player, and I have to admit some of the discs look really good fed to my SXRD. I've considered getting a Blu-ray player, but not at those prices.
Jack

 

[ginovino]

Thanks for the clarity... I did make a disclaimer in my earlier post! does that take me off the idiot list?

PS : you have a great website! I found nice info on the Monster HTS-3500(I have 2). Will file it away for use later.
PS#2 Monster is selling refurbs of that unit for $99.00!!!!! Great deal!!!

 

[ginovino]

Duly corrected... Same units are Sony & Pioneer(with a few more features) and the Samsung is its own product. Nevertheless these 3 units need lots of improvements for $1000++. The little OPPO outperforms both in SD reproduction !!!!! Go figure!

 

[Jack G]

Duly corrected... Same units are Sony & Pioneer(with a few more features) and the Samsung is its own product. Nevertheless these 3 units need lots of improvements for $1000++. The little OPPO outperforms both in SD reproduction !!!!! Go figure!

The prices are going to have to go down quite a bit. That said, my HD-A1 does do a better job at upscaling SD DVDs than my Oppo, which I still keep for its all-region ability.
Jack

 

[bordeno]

So, please help me with the "i" and "p" issue, I still don't get it.

I seem to pick up from the conversation that "p" is better than "i".
So then, is a 720p better than a 1080i?

Also, maybe it's just me, but as I look at them, it seems to me that larger screens have higher numbers? I'm not basing this on a scientific study, just casual observation.

Also, I see wild variations in the contrast numbers. Some claim 10,000:1 while others are at say 5,000:1. Are they all being held to the same method of declaring performance, or can these numbers be jiggered to make the marketing people happier...?

I know you already got your answers, but go to the Samsung site and have a hot cheerleader inform you about HDTV. No sh*t. :thmbsp:

 

[Aage]

I know you already got your answers,

You think? Me over here, not too sure.

but go to the Samsung site and have a hot cheerleader inform you about HDTV. No sh*t.

That sounds like more fun. Yahoo!

 

[slow_jazz]

the so called "experts" say anything over 42 inches plasma is better.

 

[Micropassatman]

the so called "experts" say anything over 42 inches plasma is better.

Yes, they are 'expert' marketing executives. i'll put my SXRD 60' up against any plasma you like. Even if it weren't for the price differential, I would still choose the LCOS set.

 

[DS1784]

This plasma, lcd thing is similar to the first few years of vcr's. you spend weeks searching for the just the right one, then you pull the trigger. WOW are we happy now. Then you sit down with next weeks newspaper and low and behold the unit you just got is now 30 percent cheaper and they throw in a $50.00 gift card to boot. whats a poor soul to do? well i will buy the LCD, but I will do it just befor s the super bowl. should be some great deals at that time.

 

[uofmtiger]

720 is the minimum resolution to get you into the Hi-Def door, 1080 is pure hi-def. The "i" and "p" stand for "interlaced" and "progressive". Basically, "i" means the picture is scanned like a regular TV to paint the picture on the screen - one line at a time. The TV paints the odd lines, then the even lines. It does this at 60 times a second (60 Hz in america. Actually if you wanna get technical it's 30.1 x 2, but let's keep things real simple here). "p", or progressive, means the picture is painted at one time in one pass. An "i" picture will have scanning lines on the screen because of the passes required to paint the picture, a "p" picture will have no scan lines because they are painted at one time. Which one is better? Doesn't matter as resolution is the key. 480i/480p is what you've been seeing all along with your DVD player - not a bad picture. 720"p" is broadcast by CBS - it looks very, very good. 1080"i" is broadcast by ABC and is also very, very good. Being that 1080 is interlaced and 720 is progressive you may think that 720 is the better format, since 1080 is interlaced. In reality, the higher resolution given by 1080, even interlaced, is more than 720P and, in theory, should look better.

1080i is better for a still picture, but progressive is supposed to be better for movement:

Why Did ESPN Choose 720p versus 1080i?

ESPN chose 720p because of the "p," which stands for progressive scan technology. Progressive scan technology paints the picture on your television screen from top to bottom on a line-by-line basis&.as in lines 1,2,3,4,5,6,7, etc. Interlace technology, the "i" in 1080i, paints the picture on an every-other-line basis, first painting lines 1,3,5,7,9 and then a split second later painting lines 2,4,6,8 and 10. Your eyes then assemble the painting into one image.

Progressive scan technology produces better images for the fast moving orientation of sports television. Simply put, with 104 mph fastballs in baseball and 120 mph shots on goal in hockey, the line-by-line basis of progressive scan technology better captures the inherent fast action of sports. For ESPN, progressive scan technology makes perfect sense.

We note with interest that when consumers now shop for DVD devices which produce the best pictures, the industry standard for quality is "progressive scan DVD players." We believe that says a great deal about our selection of 720p.

However, it is important to note that 720p and 1080i are not mutually exclusive technologies. Unlike certain incompatibilities in industries like cellular telephone service, DVD's and other products dating back to VHS versus Betamax and 8-track audio tape versus cassettes, all television sets, set top boxes and tuners are required to accept a series of formats, in which 720p and 1080i are included. Therefore, no one is excluded, and consumers with sets that inherently create pictures with progressive scan technology will automatically be able to see programs that are produced in the interlace format and vice versa. Some will debate the quality of the technologies, but we believe both 720p and 1080i produce HDTV pictures of a quality far above what most consumers have experienced over the first 50 years of television. As such, all HDTV viewers win! http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tvl...ory?

The information is out there that progresive is a better format for fast moving objects and FOX, ESPN and ABC all lean heavily on sports coverage. For a still picture, 1080i is better, but not too many programs concentrate on stationary objects.

Because of the way interlaced builds the picture, there are generally less than 720 lines on the screen at one time when there is any movement on the program source. I do not currently have the link for this, but the info is available if you want to look for it. I researched this a while back and do not remember the source.

Let's complicate things a bit more. Until recently, 1080p sets have become available. This will kill the 720p vs. 1080i argument pretty quick. 1080P, with the highest resolution AND a progressive image look fantastic.
Jimmy

1080P is the best available right now. However, screen size vs viewing distance are the main factors on whether you will actually see much difference in the picture.

http://www.carltonbale.com/blog/2006/11/1080p-does-matter/

Below is some info related to a 50 inch TV:

"720p vs. 480p start to become apparent at viewing distances closer than 14.6 feet and become fully apparent at 9.8 feet. For the same screen size, the benefits of 1080p vs. 720p start to become apparent when closer than 9.8 feet and become full apparent at 6.5 feet. In my opinion, 6.5 feet is closer than most people will sit to their 50″ plasma TV (even through the THX recommended viewing distance for a 50″ screen is 5.6 ft). So, most consumers will not be able to see the full benefit of their 1080p TV."

I am not upgrading my 720P HDTV any time soon because my viewing distance is far enough away that I could not get the benefit of seeing full 1080P resolution. However, I have a 1080P on order for the bedroom because I am close enough to the screen to see the difference.

 

[subdermis2000]

Now just to see whats coming in the way of new lcd sets in the very near future.

I was told the same thing by a retailer in June. He said sometime shortly after Xmas. Right now we're leaning towards plasma but this may tip our hand. WAF is huge on both but huger on plasma. She's actually thinking two sets, one LR, one BR.