TECH LCD or Plasma? Don't Trust the Salesperson's Answer

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,388441,00.html

LCD or Plasma? Don't Trust the Salesperson's Answer
Tuesday , July 22, 2008

NEW YORK —

LCD or plasma? If you've been shopping for a flat-panel TV, that's the big question.

According to a mystery-shopper survey, electronics salespeople don't know much about the differences, but still have a ready answer: LCD.

More than three times out of four, salespeople steer customers to a liquid-crystal display set rather than a plasma screen, according to a study by J.D. Power and Associates released Monday.

Never mind that LCD TVs are more expensive for the same size.

The survey also found that more than 37 percent of salespeople warned customers that images can "burn" into plasma screens.

"Although burn-in was once a problem with the first plasmas to hit the market, this has not been a serious issue for several years," said Larry Wu, senior director of the technology practice at J.D. Power. The longevity of plasma displays is now on par with LCDs.

Salespeople also often mentioned a plasma drawback that's still relevant: their glossy front surface can create distracting reflections of lights and windows in the room.

Even with their preference for LCDs, the salespeople rarely mentioned those TVs' advantages. Fewer than one-fourth told customers that LCD sets are lighter and consume less power than plasma.

The report was based on the experiences of more than 2,000 mystery shoppers during the last six months. It focused on sets 40 inches or larger, where plasmas are contenders.

The recommendation rate for plasmas increased over the period, from 17 percent in the first quarter to 23 percent in the second quarter.

"At most retail stores, large-screen television shoppers face an array of flat panel sets that all look essentially the same to the untrained eye, which is why recommendations from salespersons carry so much importance," Wu said.

Plasma displays were the first mainstream flat-panel display technology, but LCDs have gained ground.

Sony Corp. has stopped making plasma TVs to focus on LCDs. Samsung Electronic Co. and Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., the parent of Panasonic, still make both kinds.

Pioneer, the premier name in high-end plasma sets, has announced that it will stop manufacturing the displays, and will buy them from Matsushita instead.
 

Huntur

Inactive
The biggest decision for me was GLARE!! omfg... the LCD has NO GLARE... when compared to Plasma. I am sooo very happy with my LCD. Funny thing is tho, I only watch it for 3 hrs on Friday nights.
 
The biggest issue for me was what the picture actually looked like - the LCD sets I looked at all had that paint-by-numbers feel, motion often had echoes left, and the blacks were all horrible.

I've been VERY happy with plasma. It has to be said though that they are HEAVY and they do get good and warm after a while.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
Rear projection wouldn't be plasma OR LCD.

BTW, one of the drawbacks to LCD is the "ghosting" of fast-moving images. That's Plasma's forte. But Plasma requires a glass substrate, which is the primary factor in its weight.
 

American Rage

Inactive
I prefer plasma despite the fact that they don't last quite as long as LCD.

The reason is that LCD (at least last year's models) can't handle 'fast action' sequences without breaking up the picture. Check out what happens to a running back's legs on LCD. It looks like he's running in slo-mo b/c the picture can't keep up. This also occurs with 'action' movies. Look up Consumer Reports for more info., as they usually do a test on TVs every year.

Also, the latest Plasmas have an antiglare coating, which I could care less about b/c I prefer to watch TV with the drapes closed, i.e., in the dark.

Rear projections can look great, but have significantly shorter life than either LCD or Plasma due to bulb burnout. If I were to buy one, I'd order 2 or 3 replacement bulbs immediately to ensure the long life of my purchase.


Rage
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
There is new "120 Hz" technology for the new generation of LCDs that significantly improves the refresh for fast scenes. However those sets are still significantly more money thatn the 60 Hz models. As to lifespan, my set (I had to replace my old dying projection set in the spring) is rated at 15,000-20,000 hours. That's a LOT of TV time....
 

American Rage

Inactive
There is new "120 Hz" technology for the new generation of LCDs that significantly improves the refresh for fast scenes. However those sets are still significantly more money thatn the 60 Hz models. As to lifespan, my set (I had to replace my old dying projection set in the spring) is rated at 15,000-20,000 hours. That's a LOT of TV time....

It's my understanding that many of the LCD and Plasma models will last a 100,000 hrs or so. Don't know if it's true. But in many homes the TV stays on 16 hrs a day. If so, that's only 3 or 4 years of lifespan.

And yes, the 120 hz models are much more expensive.

I'd stick with Plasma for now, but that's just me.


Rage
 

CygnusXI

Inactive
Plasma all the way for me.

I have both, there is no contest imo.
As others have said, motion in lcd is it's downfall.


Burn in on plasmas is nonexistant now.. unless you are running airline arrival times 24/7.

Bring on carbon nanotubes!!!!
:siren:
 
Burn-in, at least temporary burn-in still exists for plasma's if you play video games. Any game with a HUD on it (aka Call of Duty) will result in burn-in on my Samsung Plasma if I play for two or more hours. The TV came with a white screen to get the burn in out, but it took me like twelve hours to burn-it out. Ever since then I keep my video game playing to one hour. Also if your looking at Samsung Plasmas, there is a problem with them heating up too much within an hour and showing pixel snowflakes in the corners. I had that happen on mine recently, but bought a small fan and run that on the back of the set and can leave that sucker on all weekend with no snowflakes. If I don't have the fan on, it takes about an hour and half for the snowflakes to start. If I could do it over again I would have bought an LCD, oh and plasmas are only good up to a certain altitude, so if you live in the mountains you might have some issues.
 

Liquis

Inactive
In the design business, and have met vendors and installers. RULE OF THUMB:
If you are getting a serious system and require a 50" (or seated away from the tv by 16-1 ft). Then Plasma is your answer. It is best for hi-def detail.

If you are not getting a serious 6-10 point surround sound system and or do not require a 50"....you should always go for the LCD...cheaper but more than sufficient. And a bit easier on the pocket book. There are not many in a middle class household who typically sits 16' away from the screen.

I hope this helps.
 
Pixel snowflakes are like a white/grey haze of pixels. I don't know what the technical term is, but from what I've read online its a misfiring of the plasma. A five dollar fan cools the set enough to keep the pixel haze from appearing, go figure. I assume it will get worse from more and more use, but there is always hope it won't! Oh and I had my TV for a year and half before the temporary burn-in problem or pixel snowflakes started appearing. Very little use most of that year and half and I followed all the recommended things for a new plasma, IE don't run on high brightness, gradually build up the use time. While I wish I bought an LCD because I've had some issues with my plasma, I still love how movies look. The sharpness is amazing especially during action sequences, oh and sports are awesome. I never used to watch golf, in fact I hate it, but when golf is on during the weekends I will sit and watch it just because it looks fantastic, its relaxing in a kind of mesmerizing way. Yeah I know I should go outside, but damn Missouri has godawful humidity filled summers.
 

gelatinous

Eyes WIDE Open
I purchased a Wal-mart store brand (I-Lo) plasma a couple of years ago. It went back in 3 days due to poor black contrast.

But I now have a Panasonic plasma that is fantastic. I looked at many LCD's and other brands of plasma, but the Panasonic easily had the best color and black contrast.
 

Uhhmmm...

Veteran Member
If you have many friends or a small room, plasma is the better option. The LCD picture washes out at angles much beyond 45% off-center. Plasma is usually fine right up to 80%. Viewing angle is a big plus for plasma.

Until recently, no plasma under 50" could do 1080p. Now, the limit is lower - perhaps 46" or smaller - but not much. So if you are looking for a 1080p plasma, plan on making it a large one!
 

ichoric

Senior Member
I bet my Sony Wega HD CRT would beat any LCD or Plasma. =) Sure, it weighs nearly 200 pounds, but it actually consumes less power than some of the newer ones, has no problem with ghosting/poor screen refreshes, no glare, and probably has a longer anticipated lifespan than LCD or Plasma.

New technology isn't always better. I really don't see the big deal with LCD and Plasma TV's. 32/36" TVs are big enough...but then again, I watch maybe 2-4 hours of TV weekly (a movie or two.)
 

Oldotaku

Veteran Member
I'm still a front-projection fan. As long as I can keep getting older projectors for $150 or so, I'll keep using them. I even have a few spare projectors in my preps.

But if I had to go with a screen, I'd be getting a plasma display. Although, I've seen some nice LCD's lately...
 

Hokey

Veteran Member
My 48 inch JVC rear projection CRT is still going strong (going on 5 years now!) but I might be getting near the end of bulb life. I don't dare move the tv in fear of breaking something now. Having said that the image quality is still tops for a 1080i set and I would much prefer the image I have with a comparable size lcd unit, even a 1080p one.

However, if a bulb breaks on this thing soon I'd have some thinking to do. Not sure what I'd do really but if DW agreed we'd probably go with a slightly smaller 42 inch panny plasma 1080p unit. The price on these is really good and I love the image clarity.

I agree about the lcd's though. Except for the expensive 120 hz models, most lcd's have motion blur and would drive you nuts if you watched any sports imo.
 

Richard

TB Fanatic
bottom line is
should I replace my CRT now or wait until LCD or plasma fully develop and problems are ironed out?
 

DrPrepper

Inactive
We went with LCD the 120HZ Samsung LNT5271. It was MUCH cheaper online - $2400 - While at Best Buy it was 3800. HUGE DIFFERENCE!

We use ours with out Mac Mini, and Drobo..

Bit torrent is your friend.....

We don't have conventional TV, their are so many News Video Podcast and online TV options now.

We download BSG, Stargate Atlantis, Dr Who, etc. The Hi Def File Versions are 700-1.3 Gig, and take about 1 to 1.5 hours to download.
 

TECH32

Inactive
Our 10 year old rear projection TV went out last month. Replaced it with a 61 inch, Samsung 1080P DLP (with LED lighting, not a bulb) that lists for $2400. I got it for $1470.

Yep - you read that right.

Circuit City had it on "sale" for just over $1900. The day I was going to buy it I did some research and found a place just down the road from them that had it on sale for $1515. Circuit City's policy is to beat competitors prices by 10% of the difference. So I walked out of there with a state-of-the-art 61in TV for less than most people pay for a 42in.

My TV room is now very happy....
 

zoose

Inactive
I looked at the LCD's and Plasmas at Wal Mart and to me the LCD's looked sharper but then I couldn't get the proper viewing angle as the place was full of zombies.

But I have a question(?)

We have DISH, normal not HDTV.

Do I need anything special to hook this TV up to my RG 6 ?
 
Top