Okay, its over, LCD won, everybody else go home

[pixelthis]

Dont hang me quite yet.
But it looks like the mainstream, everyday type of display is going to be hands down the LCD.
Minor complaints about "picture smear" and low contrast are just that, minor, a lot of people, when buying a set, either dont know the difference between plasma, or that there IS a difference.
Plasmas have a glass envelope full of deadly gas, the gas leaks out and you have a dead set, early plasmas had to be delivered in metal boxes, and they are more expensive and wont last as long as LCD panels.
Plasma used to have a size advantage but thats rapidly disapearing.
DLP? Great if you want to turn your living room into a cineplex with an overhead projector, sure these things come in cabinets, but you cant hang a cabinet on the wall, leading to DLP rear projection sets
selling for 1200 bucks at wallmart, although new life has been breathed into this format with "dithering" to produce 1080p pictures, but once again LCD can produce this without rube goldberg crap like that, not to mention a "color wheel" that spins several hundred revolutions a minute and a light bulb that costs several hundred dollars and needs replacing every few years.
Even in front projectors and rear projectors lcd beats DLP, lcd is cheap enough to have panels for each primary color, hence no color wheel
And LCD? Used to be expensive to produce, but economies of scale have led to lcd screens with full features for bargain basement prices, with no sacrifice in quality.
Rated to last 20 years, the pictures are bright and sharp, no glare, no problems with screen burn in like with plasma, and no bulb to replace like with DLP, AND A 37IN is selling for 900 right about now.
And you can hang it on a wall leading to the unusual occurence of wives ordering their husbands to get one instead of the automatic oppostition they usually give to guys audio-vidieo "toys".
And unlike plasma its doable to make smaller screens like computer
monitors, car displays, and even refrigerator doors.
The only thing that will even try to compete is a new display from Cano I beleive, a bank of electron emiters mounteed in a glass sleeve in vaccume, a "flat" crt really, and I might like to have one of those, but most wont.
SO the battle to replace our old but infirm friend i the CRT is over.
You served us well old friend, but nows the time for a well placed
bullet to the head and a swift burial in the back yard, soon to be joined
by Plasma, DLP, AND OTHER SUCH SCHEMES.
The CRT is dead, LONG LIVE THE LCD!!:ciappa:

[spf]

A very amusing and honest / from the heart post ....no harm in that. All I would ask is for you to view a calibrated LCoS display or projector and then ask yourself who is the real heir to CRT.

Shane

[GMichael]

The going home parts sounds good. I'm atta here.

[PeruvianSkies]

The going home parts sounds good. I'm atta here.

Yeah home sounds good.

About a year ago I bought a 30" HDTV CRT, which was on sale at the time and was a deal I couldn't refuse since I was currently using a 27" 4X3 set. I have calibrated my HDTV, which is a Toshiba that I stand by like no other. My friend bought around the same time a Aquios 37" LCD, which looks decent, but my TV has better color, depth, blacks, and overall presence. His is maybe a tinge sharper, but not by much. Yes, his is a few inches bigger, but I am using a better source. He is using a Samsung HD941 and I am now using my Parasound Halo D3, which is an unfair matchup!! lol. Anyway, while LCD might be the way of the future I still love the picture on my 30" CRT. Only problem is that it weighs a ton and takes up some serious space, but other than that it's majestic!!!!

Funny thing is he is always complaining about how good mine looks compared to his and I spent 1/4 the money!!! HE HE.

[Dusty Chalk]

pixelthis: What about the fact that it looks terrible? I mean, it's fine for testing and menus and stuff, but for watching movies on? It just hurts my eyes.

[musicman1999]

I currently use a 51 inch Toshiba CRT 51hx84,it has been ISF calibrated and i have yet to see an LCD that can match it.Now i have not seen all the LCDs but i have seen a fair number.I find they hurt my eyes with extended viewing.
I really don't think any of the current panel displays will be long lasting,in 5 or 6 years OLED or SED will be the way to go.These types are just getting started but hold much promise,CRT quality with flat panels.Hope they make it happen.

bill

[PeruvianSkies]

I currently use a 51 inch Toshiba CRT 51hx84,it has been ISF calibrated and i have yet to see an LCD that can match it.Now i have not seen all the LCDs but i have seen a fair number.I find they hurt my eyes with extended viewing.
I really don't think any of the current panel displays will be long lasting,in 5 or 6 years OLED or SED will be the way to go.These types are just getting started but hold much promise,CRT quality with flat panels.Hope they make it happen.

bill

I have been over to my friends house (the one with the 37" LCD) and we have played a few games on it with his PS3 and wow...after about 2 hours my eyes are KILLING me. The whites are especially a problem as they seem to be 'ringing' and then the motion is just ....sickening.

[hermanv]

Dont hang me quite yet.
But it looks like the mainstream, everyday type of display is going to be hands down the LCD
....edit... no bulb to replace like with DLP....edit..
LONG LIVE THE LCD!!:ciappa:Where does the light in an LCD display come from? LCD emits no light, it is lit from behind. Small sets use flourescent lamps but over 40" I think you're back to LcOS which also uses a projection lamp (as far as I know)

"Course if you can live with a tiny (<40") TV you're all set. LCD life is still a bit up in the air, it depends on your definition of "end of life" due to contrast aging and dead pixels.

For me the "screen door" effect is obvious and irritating and I still have never seen an LCD with natural green colors, just like the affordable plasma sets have very orange colored reds.

The newest LED DLP sets have no color wheel or conventional lamp, I just like the smooth but still sharp picture. I wouldn't count the DLP dead yet.

[pixelthis]

46 inch lcds are already on sale, and LCOS (liquid crystal on silicon)
is basically another version of DLP.
and LCD sets are looking better all the time, the point is that to most
the picture looks great.
I had two serious choices when I bought my lcd, a sony 34 in crt (display model) CRT from sears, could barely lift one end, or a new in the box 37in visio that weighed 56 pounds and about 3" deep.
I took it out and put it in my car trunk, didnt have to call a friend with a truck and pray I didnt brealk it or my back.
Turn the backlight down and contrast improves, the whites are as good as any other set, on CRTS the whites are always a little brown.
Does LCD have problems? A few, but this is a young format, very nice for a new type tech, can you imagine what a little refinement will do?
AND its nice to do your computing and web surfing on a 37" screen.
Heres a question, with DLP "micro displays" getting so cheap, when is
texas instruments gonna get with somebody and put out an affordable 3 chip model? Couldnt cost that much could it?
Betamax beat VHS hands down in the quality dept, and lost that little war regardless, my main point is that if a few companies dont get their act together they will lose this "shakedown " transistion to a new type display technology, if they havent already

[spf]

46 inch lcds are already on sale, and LCOS (liquid crystal on silicon)
is basically another version of DLP.
and LCD sets are looking better all the time, the point is that to most
the picture looks great.


I'm not going to argue your points since they are valid to you but just to correct: LCoS is a derivative of LCD projection, not DLP. Their (DLP and LCoS) only similarity is the use of a projection lamp. Cheers

Shane

[edtyct]

LCoS is kind of a cross between LCD and DLP. It normally doesn't use a color wheel (though an independent company is manufacturing a low-cost LCoS with a color wheel for sale at Cosco etc.) but three independent chips, and it doesn't use mirrors. But LCoS's placement of the electronics on the chips is more like DLPs, allowing for less gaps between pixels and a better black level than is normally the case with LCD.

I'm not in the flat-panel LCD fan club at the expense of everything else. I like LCoS more as a successor to CRT in the area of professional standards. But apparently Sharp has designs to capture the pro market with a special line of LCDs already in production. LCDs have improved immensely, so who knows?

LCDs out of the box are often so bright that they can hurt your eyes. Fortunately, a lot of them now come with backlighting that can be turned way down, thereby saving your eyes and permitting a calibration of brightness and contrast that does more justice to black level. Unfortunately, many people probably don't adjust the backlighting. After all, one of the big selling points of LCD is brightness that can stand up to a sunlit or lamplit room. Bright may be okay in that case but not when the lights are low.

[kexodusc]

Plasmas have a glass envelope full of deadly gas,
Where in the blue hell did you hear this? Bad info.
I can assure you Xenon and Neon are quite non-toxic, chemically inert gases. Whoever told you that needs to give their head a shake. Go back and kick them in the ass for fear mongering.

As for LCD's, I'm in the camp that thinks they still look like crap above 27", try watching hockey for an hour. But they do seem to be getting a bit better.

[hermanv]

...edit..., the whites are as good as any other set, on CRTS the whites are always a little brown.CRT sets are one of the technologies where the color temperature can be independently adjusted with a control voltage allowing for the purest whites of any technology (did you try looking with your sunglasses off? :) :) )

Does LCD have problems? A few, but this is a young format, very nice for a new type tech, can you imagine what a little refinement will do?I think LCD is over 20 years old, it is getting better, but we may be closer to the bottom of the diminishing returns curve than you think.
....new life has been breathed into this format (DLP) with "dithering" to produce 1080p pictures, but once again LCD can produce this without rube goldberg crap like thatWobulation is what DLP chips do, using their speed advantage (they are many times faster than LCD, Plasma or LcOS) to increase pixels isn't Rube Goldberg.

I do agree with you about the scarcity of 3 chip DLP, ICs are typically inexpensive and getting rid of that color wheel couldn't hurt. Ditto the projection lamp, the sets are big enough that we shouldn't need a little tiny, quick to burn-out, fan cooled and overpriced lamp.

I do remember the first projection TVs (Curved screen, projection box parked in front of the screen) boy were they ugly and so was their picture. We have come a long way and here is an example of competing technologies surviving side by side, at least for awhile.

I don't mind you can't hange them on a wall, you need a collection of other boxes (satellite or cable receiver, audio receiver, DVD player, etc) to make the home theater work anyway.

ps. Why do people hang wall mounted TVs up so high? Are they showing off? They're not comfortable to watch up that high.

[edtyct]

Hi hermanv, how's it going? You and I have talked about it before. Wobulation's fast refresh rate might circumvent certain problems intrinsic to LCD, but it is still the long route to a stated resolution, based on activating only half of the requisite horizontal pixels in rapid succession--thus adding to DLP's barrage of persistence of vision tactics. They're all ingenious, but do they have a collective effect over time? I'd like to see a DLP with full, simultaneous 1920x1080 resolution on three chips.

So far as LCD is concerned, the newer lamp options might be able to offer better chromaticity and less garish primaries. Some of that improvement is already evident, and some of it is on the way. Black levels are better than they were, given calibration and backlight restraint, and grayscale is subject to the lamp issue.

[topspeed]

Man, I just can not get into LCD's. Against my recommendations, my Dad got a Sony Bravia, which to date is the best LCD I've seen (including the Aquos). While enjoying Easter at the folk's place, we watched Planet Earth, which has some of the most startling HD imagery I've seen yet. There is simply no comparison between his LCD to my LCoS. Both sets are fully calibrated (thanks Edyct!) but there is still a graininess that every LCD I've seen has. Also, I must be really attuned to SDE, because it drives me crazy, regardless of manufacturer. PQ wise, I prefer every other technology over LCD.

[hermanv]

Hi edtyct;

It is going well, my new house is nearly finished (fire got my old one) and I've been shopping for a new HDTV to replaced my dated Toshiba 55" HD-CRT set. I'm still fence sitting, I note the LED DLP set prices have dropped like a stone but I have yet to see one, have you looked at one? Reviews are quite mixed, any comments?

I thought the newer DLP even the 1080p sets were now refreshing at 120Hz, this should help persistance issues. Nowdays the delivery system for HDTV signals seem to be the big picture quality limitation, satellite, cable and over the air are all poorer than they should be. The only solution seems to be high definition DVD. I'm still waiting for the dust to settle on the format war and for player prices to drop to at least equal to the game consoles.

My favorite Misubishi DLP has gone UP in price lately, damn them. Before I actually purchase a new HDTV, I'm still waiting for the final bill from the construction company as they can eat up a few grand without blinking an eye. In the meantime I'm still open to any technology that simultaneously looks good to me and is within budget.

My target is 1080p (true 1080p input) 55-62 inches diagonal, table mount is OK. The Sony's look pretty good but their reputation for quality has taken a major hit. All the d-ILA sets had greens that were just plain awful and while LCD colors are improving I don't think there are any direct view in my size range yet. All the affordable plasmas are either 720p or have very orangy reds.

[edtyct]

Congratulations on the house. We were building an addition to our antique all of last year. It's, shall we say, a trying process--insidious, actually. It catches up to you. Anyway, the first Samsung LED out of the gate didn't cut it. If I recall correctly, the color decoding was nearly perfect, but blacks and grays weren't up to snuff. I calibrated a Sony LCoS and was impressed enough to buy it, but I can't vouch for its reliability, though the optical block problems appear to be a thing of the past. I've had reasonably good experience with Comcast cable, probably because I don't watch it that much. But certain stations do not appear to suffer much from compression problems--Discovery HD Theater, INHD, local NESN (Red Sox, which is exquisite), MHD (MTV's hi def concert channel, which sometimes can be surprisingly fun for me, and sometimes not so surprisingly not). Certain HD programming on HBO is certainly worth a watch, even for image quality alone, though I admit to Rome and Deadwood addictions. I've been immensely impressed with a few of the HD DVD titles, but Blu-ray has largely escaped me because of its dodgy start. Good luck with the TV search. I sure do wish that it were possible to view these sets in a decent environment. Sometimes, when the stars are in alignment and the menu system comprehensive, greens and reds can fall into place fairly well. I have found that to be the case with plasmas (Hitachis and Panasonics), though companies do tend to take liberties with color decoding, even when other features are good to go. The Sony LCDs have been conspicuously orange in nature, making the more accurate reds on Sony's LCoS sets a welcome relief.

Talk to you later

[Woochifer]

Lemme guess, you just bought an LCD TV (which presumably came with a pair of fanboy glasses)? :6:

[pixelthis]

I did buy a lcd about 6 months ago, my third.
I keep the backlight at 70%, and the contrast is great, the pictures
most incredible aspect is its sharpness, after watching one for awhile crts just seem soft and fuzzy.
Mainly I was just trying to stir debate and am interested in all of your
comments.
ONE interesting thing about them is their reference to QUALITY, which is just one small aspect of a products probable success, to all of us perfectionists on this board that is key, but one thing I've learned
over the years is that the tech graveyards of the world are filled with tecnological beauty queens.
LCDS are cheap, and getting cheaper, you dont need an army to
move one, the picture is great, actually better that I have had to put up with during most of my HT years, wives love them, and the basic layout is rock solid .
I am currently using my 37in vizio to post this, is there a pixel structure? Yep, just like every other display device.
A few quirks here and there? maybe.
Perfect? Of course not!
BUT LCD is the future, everything else will become niche, if it surrives at all.
The only reason laser surrived as long as it did is masive subsidizing
from pioneer, like it or not we are all slaves to the mass market, when most buy displays quality is important but there are other considerations.
BTY, to the poster for what its worth, the BEST picture I have ever seen is a 65in mitsubishi at short circuit, my GOD what an amazing picture, and only for three grand!
The point is, not many will pay three grand for it

[Dusty Chalk]

ONE interesting thing about them is their reference to QUALITY...That's not what I heard -- the experience I've heard is that they last a fraction of the time CRTs last.
BUT LCD is the future, everything else will become niche, if it surrives at all.I really hope you're wrong about this. I would despise a future of only one type of product no matter what it was, LCD or otherwise. The population is large enough and their tastes diverse enough to support multiple smaller markets rather than just one big one.

[GMichael]

That's not what I heard -- the experience I've heard is that they last a fraction of the time CRTs last.I really hope you're wrong about this. I would despise a future of only one type of product no matter what it was, LCD or otherwise. The population is large enough and their tastes diverse enough to support multiple smaller markets rather than just one big one.

Thanks, I feel immortalized.


Originally Posted by GMichael
If I insult you, can I be in your signature also?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk
No.

[pixelthis]

That's not what I heard -- the experience I've heard is that they last a fraction of the time CRTs last.I really hope you're wrong about this. I would despise a future of only one type of product no matter what it was, LCD or otherwise. The population is large enough and their tastes diverse enough to support multiple smaller markets rather than just one big one.
I've lived in such a world, its not so bad, really, nuthin but CRT as far as the eye can see.
AND for a long time the only choice for the audiophile was the turntable
(how quickly they forget)
Dont worry, people watched tv in spite of the limitations of the display device, it was up to us fanatics to create a market for the front projector and later rear projectors, and it will always be up to us to
keep high quality alive in a world of mediocrity.
But walk into any store, LCD is ALREADY dominating, its not a question of weather or not it will win, its more a question of weather or not niche, high quality tech will be able to eeek out a living.
I saw a hitachi crt rear projection at sears for 999$, and it shocked me, these sets used to sell for thousands, now they're bargain basement, why buy one when a LCD is just as cheap?
I have a samsung dvd player that I got for the SACD audio, it is also upconverting, and designed for 1080i, in other words, CRTS!
And its not that old, either, thats how fast the world is changing, interlaced is going the way of the eight track tape, just a few years ago NOBODY thought a set capable of two millon pixels was in the immediate future, now they're on sale, a bigger acheivement than most realize:5:

[PeruvianSkies]

AND for a long time the only choice for the audiophile was the turntable
(how quickly they forget)


When was that?

[recoveryone]

Now Pixel, on this thread you speak in a more proper tone reguarding the LCD than the other one that I just posted on. I will agree that the LCD and other flat screen designs will phase out the CRT in time, but not due to a better PQ just a better/pleasing design to the massess. And due to the cheap cost of parts (which result in poorer quality) the LCD's is falling in prices faster than cell phones (and you can get a free Razor phone from dominos with a larger pizza now lol) Which leads me back to my point. CRT's always had a standard of performance which kept the price steady for years. Many people are buying LCD based soley on design and not PQ or longivity. And shows like Home Makeover just help LCD market by putting a LCD in about every room in the house. So people see this and think WOW how nice and it doesn't take up any table/shelf space. So its not about if a LCD is better, just more of a convenience. Unlike your compaision of the turntable, the CD format is better in playback resolution, durability, I was a DJ back in the day found the turntable a great tool but suffer from the source (vinly) when they came out with a turntable style CD system the turntable died due to a better sounding system not a better design with lesser ability.

[PeruvianSkies]

Now Pixel, on this thread you speak in a more proper tone reguarding the LCD than the other one that I just posted on. I will agree that the LCD and other flat screen designs will phase out the CRT in time, but not due to a better PQ just a better/pleasing design to the massess. And due to the cheap cost of parts (which result in poorer quality) the LCD's is falling in prices faster than cell phones (and you can get a free Razor phone from dominos with a larger pizza now lol) Which leads me back to my point. CRT's always had a standard of performance which kept the price steady for years. Many people are buying LCD based soley on design and not PQ or longivity. And shows like Home Makeover just help LCD market by putting a LCD in about every room in the house. So people see this and think WOW how nice and it doesn't take up any table/shelf space. So its not about if a LCD is better, just more of a convenience. Unlike your compaision of the turntable, the CD format is better in playback resolution, durability, I was a DJ back in the day found the turntable a great tool but suffer from the source (vinly) when they came out with a turntable style CD system the turntable died due to a better sounding system not a better design with lesser ability.

Yeah, and my point with asking "when was that" about Vinyl is simple...just because a product is being replaced does not mean that the new product is better. When CD came into existence it certainly took over the masses, but STILL there are die-hard audiophiles that stand by their analog gear...just look at this site for example. I agree in most cases that a properly calibrated analog setup with awesome gear will put CD to shame.

I wish that I could get CRT quality in a flat 4inch deep design that I could hang on my wall, but that just doesn't seem to be possible at this point in time. A similar argument is also being made about the HD formats taking over DVD, SACD over CD, Internet over books, etc etc.

[Carl Reid]

BUT LCD is the future, everything else will become niche, if it surrives at all.

So far I've liked this thread and agree with a number of your points... LCD is the current king and plasma will likely die... BUT I have to disagree with your vew that LCD is the future....

You are using things like Laserdisc vs DVD to justify the dominance of LCD.... but there is no relationship betweent the two...

Laserdisc vs DVD, SACD vs DVD-Audio & HD-DVD vs BlueRay are all format wars... which is a totally different issue from which kind of TV will be dominant....

Put it this way: If a consumer is an early adopter and buys an SACD player and a number of SACDs, then he will likely stick to that format because he has already invested money in a collection of SACDs.... So he is not likely to totally ditch his SACD player and get a dedicated DVD-Audio player instead (unless he wants to have to purchase his entire SACD collection all over again on DVD-A discs).... This same thing applies to DVD, Laserdisc, HD-DVD, BlueRay and even traditional redbook CDs....

LCD TV on the other hand is not linked to any specific format.... hence if I already own an LCD TV say in my bedroom, there is no format compatibility issues if I choose to buy a DLP/Plasma/CRT for the Living Room....

LCD is dominant now because it offers most of what the mass market wants for their money.... But if a new TV comes out next year that does everything better (and doesn't require some fancy new connections instead of the standard Component, S-video and HDMI on the current crop of TVs) then it will easily dominate the market and send LCD to the graveyard....

Simply put: Unlike the format wars, there is nothing to tie a consumer to a particular type of TV....

[Dusty Chalk]

...why buy [CRT] when a LCD is just as cheap?Because 'cheap' is not my criteria; 'quality of picture' is.

[musicman1999]

Dusty
Thank you for saying what needed saying.

bill

[PeruvianSkies]

Dusty
Thank you for saying what needed saying.

bill

That goes DOUBLE for me too!

[pixelthis]

Because 'cheap' is not my criteria; 'quality of picture' is.
Thats not the point, the point is that or people who cant tell the difference cheap will do fine, and their dollars will vastly outnumber yours.
Capitalism is the only true democracy, people vote with their money,
making a CRT is expensive, soon it wont be cost effective to keep making them, they are already being squeezed off the shelves,
mostly , except for a few models, they are ALREADY gone.
Even the low end 20 in market is disapearing, 20in lcds are around 166$ these days.
Its not our job to hang onto a dying display format whose fate is sealed, better to spend our energies improving what will be out there
As for people not being tied to a certain type of tv, thats not true
You can listen to music on either a CD or a turntable, but most music isnt even pressed on records anymore, so what choice do you have?
When LCD and maybe a few niche type dlp or lcos are all thats left,
how will you buy a crt when they wont even be making them?
AND just like todays generation raised on red book audio, and later mp3s, a generation is coming that wont have much patience with the inconvience and softness of CRT just for "filmlike" quality a few
videophiles claim.
I have seen this all of my life , first in audio then video, quality fanatics who think quality is enough, all the while ignoring whats going on.
You can handmake niche audio gear, but try to "handcraft"
a 30in CRT!

[recoveryone]

I see that your argument has changed and again no one here is in dispute that the flat panel display is the future. But for you to claim that LCD has a better PQ than CRT and that is the reason that CRT is dying is way off the mark. Yes one day all of us CRT die hards will be force into the other system from lack of available of CRT and their abilty to connect to the newer technology, but then we will talk about how much we miss the better PQ (unless something with better PQ comes out). But please don't sit their and state that LCD is the better display and that is the reason for the change in the market. IMHO I feel that many of us CRT fans will shift over to a projector setup once the CRT dies off since a projector is about the next closes thing to CRT level of PQ.

[GMichael]

I see that your argument has changed and again no one here is in dispute that the flat panel display is the future. But for you to claim that LCD has a better PQ than CRT and that is the reason that CRT is dying is way off the mark. Yes one day all of us CRT die hards will be force into the other system from lack of available of CRT and their abilty to connect to the newer technology, but then we will talk about how much we miss the better PQ (unless something with better PQ comes out). But please don't sit their and state that LCD is the better display and that is the reason for the change in the market. IMHO I feel that many of us CRT fans will shift over to a projector setup once the CRT dies off since a projector is about the next closes thing to CRT level of PQ.

I went the way of the projector. It has some draw backs but I always liked the room darker for TV anyhow. IMO plazma has a better PQ than projectors, but again, we're talking about another type that on the way out.
I love my projectors and I will never go back, unless something new comes along.:idea:

[Dusty Chalk]

Its not our job to hang onto a dying display format whose fate is sealed...Just like vinyl's fate was sealed? You keep telling yourself that.

LCD has not won, not as long as I still have a voice. They need to either improve the hell out of it, or come up with something better.

Maybe we should go back to laserdisc or film.

[powerlord]

When I went shopping for my set I had a budget and a size limit.Nothing over 46in. and not more than 2 grand.I demo'd at BB and CC.I tested plasma's,LCD's,and DLP's and I picked the DLP,it's picture in HD is unrivaled IMO,the LCD hurt my eyes and the Plasma's were a bit too mellow IMO,and I got my my DLP quite a bit cheaper with a full 3 year in home warranty.I will never keep a piece of electronics over 2 years,and when I sell my set,another DLP will take it's place,maybe a larger one this time.:cornut:

[spacefunk54]

Forget it mate!

Just bought my new HDTV and i can guarantee LCD is now at the bottom of my list.
Looked at everything on the market as it took a while to get the cash together, and to my eyes LCD was absolutely rubbish PQ for everything i looked at!

Dont get me wrong, I was saving up for a sony W2000, (considered the best LCD on the market at present) but even that looked rubbish, even with HD content.

Plasma was a significant improvement, but still had a few issues i could not live with.

The only way to go for me was the sony 1080p SXRD, which as stated before, once calibrated, absolutely wiped the floor with the best LCD's or plasma's, at twice the price.

If i had the money I would have got a 1080p front projector, but at £1000 including glass AV unit the 55" SXRD was a quality choice, (and it fits nice in the front room).

I cannot recommend this TV enough. It is simply superb and would never even consider a LCD after viewing this. Plus its miles cheaper than a 1080p LCD (look it up pixel! You will be surprised at your own lack of knowledge and consumer savvy! FOOL to say LCD is best. I think most cinema buffs would agree.

Anyway, like i said before, WRONG! LCD will be gone in a few years, In the meantime enjoy your blocky, pixelated, motion blurred rubbish, because i for one wont have to put up with a technology that doesnt work with a screen size over 32"

[DEVO]

If I wanted to wall mount a tv, Plasma is still my choice. It just looks the closes to a CRT. The black level, glossy picture, smooth video motion, etc. LCD has no debth of field to it. The contrast levels they advertise is just, well overrated.
If all I had was a room w/ windows all over the place, glare was going to be a problem, I would probably go to an SXRD by Sony.
Last option is if I was in that same bright room and if I was to wall mount...well then I would spare no expense and wall mound a 46" Sammy for daytime viewing, and put up a drop down screen w/ a good front projector...LCD's just do not look good yet...
I gotta run...my plasma is about 1/4 of a tank empty, so I'm going to take it to the gas station and fill it:crazy:

[hermanv]

So what do we all want in a TV today:

1920 x 1080 Individual pixels.
Pure as possible red, blue and green sources.
High contrast.
No backlight, no lenses, no mirrors.
Thin.
Power efficient (environmentally friendly).

OLED promises all of this, the first models have been displayed at CES, nothing on sale today. A 27" OLED set was less than 1/2" thick.

[GMichael]

So what do we all want in a TV today:

1920 x 1080 Individual pixels.
Pure as possible red, blue and green sources.
High contrast.
No backlight, no lenses, no mirrors.
Thin.
Power efficient (environmentally friendly).

OLED promises all of this, the first models have been displayed at CES, nothing on sale today. A 27" OLED set was less than 1/2" thick.

27"? You're kidding right? Please add big to your list. No, make that BIG! 60" and up please. Something around 92" inch is ok but 120" is better.

[hermanv]

It was a demo of a technology, of course they know that big is needed. As the sets improve I find I want bigger evey time.

[spf]

It was a demo of a technology, of course they know that big is needed. As the sets improve I find I want bigger evey time.

Yeah, the OLED tech is very prevalent in cell phones and car stereos right now and the PQ and detail is quite good for that tiny size.

[edtyct]

The problem with OLED is that the organic compound used to create the light has a relatively short life span--as short as 1/12 of the lamps currently used in most rear-projection TVs. Sony seems to think that the problem will be solved by 2008. Let's see.

[Dusty Chalk]

1920 x 1080 Individual pixels.
Pure as possible red, blue and green sources.
High contrast.
No backlight, no lenses, no mirrors.
Thin.
Power efficient (environmentally friendly).The ability to roll it up and take it with me anywhere
Cheap

I know OLED will actually do the first one, the second one almost always happens eventually with any new technology.

[pixelthis]

This "soft filmlike quality you speak of isnt "filmlike" at all, back in the
day we called it lack of resolution.
Most crts are interlaced, when theres' motion theres at best 600 lines of rez on the thing.
AND LCD hurt my eyes too, just like EVERY set I ever bought with the brightness set to "torch" mode, I turned it down to half, and the backlight down to 70 and the results were really nice.
AND theres nothing "soft" about film, really, even the prototypes that hit 2,000p have a hard time competing with film, you're just mistaking the grain in film with a crts natural deficencies.
And after about five years a CRT has gotten to the point that its not really usefull for quality display, which is what we're talking about, my brothers panny 19 in lasted 15 years and was passed around quite a bit, but you wouldnt want to watch it.
I guess my main point is that LCD is really nice for a young format,
with improvements it will really shine, although the picture is quite good now, and has certain advantages that will also make it a comercial
success.
As for the guy who got a "great price" on a dlp, lets see how "great" that is after your 2 year sell point, when it needs a 300 buck replacement bulb, your little color wheel is really getting on your nerves (along with color smear) and NOBODY wants to buy it.
Maybe you can use it for a planter:ciappa:

[powerlord]

This "soft filmlike quality you speak of isnt "filmlike" at all, back in the
day we called it lack of resolution.
Most crts are interlaced, when theres' motion theres at best 600 lines of rez on the thing.
AND LCD hurt my eyes too, just like EVERY set I ever bought with the brightness set to "torch" mode, I turned it down to half, and the backlight down to 70 and the results were really nice.
AND theres nothing "soft" about film, really, even the prototypes that hit 2,000p have a hard time competing with film, you're just mistaking the grain in film with a crts natural deficencies.
And after about five years a CRT has gotten to the point that its not really usefull for quality display, which is what we're talking about, my brothers panny 19 in lasted 15 years and was passed around quite a bit, but you wouldnt want to watch it.
I guess my main point is that LCD is really nice for a young format,
with improvements it will really shine, although the picture is quite good now, and has certain advantages that will also make it a comercial
success.
As for the guy who got a "great price" on a dlp, lets see how "great" that is after your 2 year sell point, when it needs a 300 buck replacement bulb, your little color wheel is really getting on your nerves (along with color smear) and NOBODY wants to buy it.
Maybe you can use it for a planter:ciappa:


Or, I could just have it serviced under the full 3 year warranty I bought and purchase an extended warranty,then we have a good ten year set.IMO,lcd is great for laptops.And nothing keeps good resale value these days,not even your LCD,your chasing ghosts if you think anything electronic will hold it's value after a year.:ciappa:

[pixelthis]

True enough, but I think DLP will drop more than most

[hermanv]

Interesting thread. There have been some exagerations.

1. Film quality: I have seen 70mm film on a 100 foot screen (1376" diagonal screen) no TV technology I've seen can touch this for resolution.

2. Flicker: Film flickers a lot, it is very irritating when they pan, HDTV has improved on this and will do more so in the future.

3. Color purity: Film is pretty good, but no technology where a white light is shown through a colored filter will achieve the purity of lasers or LED. CRT had phosphors whose color spectrum was fairly narrow, LCD, DLP and LCoS all shine a white light through a color filter, I believe the lack of truly pure colors will eventually doom all these technologies.

4. Life: All the newer technologies have life issues. TI claims they have never seen a DLP mirror fail due to life. However light bulbs and spinning color wheels will fail. Plasma has some issues with life, end of life is defined as 50% of new brightness, no specification sheets for plasma mention how long that might be, estimates range as low as 5,000 hours and as high as 50,000 hours. Plasmas also have a dead pixel issues. LCDs get slower, dimmer and color balance changes with age and they also get dead pixels. CRTs have burn in and filament failures. A DLP with an LED light source has a real chance, as does OLED if they fix the failure mechanism. I don't mean extend it, I mean fix it so that life is long enough to be considered undetermined like most other electronics.

Hanging it on a wall is nice, but not really a requirement. I don't begin to understand why they put speakers and an audio section in a $10,000 plasma, the owner's not gonna have surround sound? Just as true for most of the large screen technologies, 3" oval speakers don't do the job.

Anyway, nice thread.

[pixelthis]

Like I said, nothing will beat film.
So comparing a crt to film is inaccurate and a totally subjective statement at best.
In the early days of HDTV my friends would ask where they could see a demo of the new tech.
I told em to go to a movie
The human brain was a primary componet of NTSC, it filled in a lot of gaps. Once I rented a copy of a movie on VHS because they were out of the DVD, and I couldnt beleive how bad it looked, this was what I had watched for years
And you say they oughta improve LCD? Check out the new 1080p sonys direct view at your local store, they are the new gold standard.
I'm just waiting for my title loan to go through (best picture I've EVER
seen):5:

[PeruvianSkies]

Interesting thread. There have been some exagerations.

1. Film quality: I have seen 70mm film on a 100 foot screen (1376" diagonal screen) no TV technology I've seen can touch this for resolution.



Nor will it ever. Man ...70mm. I wish it were still used. Last film I saw in true 70mm was Kenneth Branaghs HAMLET, which was stunning to say the least. Ahhhh. I've managed to see these other great films in 70mm...

LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (re-release restored print)
2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (in the year 2001 no less!!!)
T2 (70mm blow-up prints)
THE LION KING (70mm IMAX blow up prints)
Jacques Tati's PLATYIME (one of the few comedies in 70mm)
MY FAIR LADY
TRON (this was actually shot in VistaVision and 70mm...the computer graphics were in Vistavision because of the clean negative that allows you to integrate effects and the live action sequences were in 70mm).

[pixelthis]

Amen to that.
I posted some things on here to stir debate, the only way you really learn something,
AND I have been listening instead of just running my mouth, very interesting responses,
thanks to all who posted:16:

[DEVO]

I'm not impressed so far w/ Samsung's newest LED DLP. Not very bright...Compared to the older models which have the existing light engine, it didn't have as good of a picture.

I would like to see what Mitsubishi is going to do w/ their new DLP and lasers. Anyone see at a show or somewhere?

Just kinda curious...

[PeruvianSkies]

I'm not impressed so far w/ Samsung's newest LED DLP. Not very bright...Compared to the older models which have the existing light engine, it didn't have as good of a picture.

I would like to see what Mitsubishi is going to do w/ their new DLP and lasers. Anyone see at a show or somewhere?

Just kinda curious...

But I thought I would throw this out there as something of interest...

One thing that I have noticed about LED light in general is that the human eye has difficulty reading it at the correct levels. The light may seem dim, but in actuality is emitting a lot more light than it seems, this is particularly noticeable when you are looking at LED through the lens of a camera. In doing so you can see just how intense the light is, but the colors are far off through the camera lens as compared to the human eye. I don't have any technical explaination for this and have not really researched into it at all, maybe someone else knows more on this subject, but I am wondering if this is related in any particular way to your observations.

[emorphien]

advancements in OLEDs or other technologies will sweep LCDs under the floor in due time

[pixelthis]

advancements in OLEDs or other technologies will sweep LCDs under the floor in due time
What I am looking foward to is the new display tech from Canon, sort of a flat screen
crt, with the advantages of both lcd and crt, a bank of emiters in a vaccume in a thin glass envelope, can hardly wait.
Oleds are exciting because some can be turned out by an inkjet printer!. But this tech has years to go before hitting the streets.
How about a regular LED backlight, with large groups of on and off leds matching light and dark areas of the LCD they are backlighting?:21:

[emorphien]

Oleds are exciting because some can be turned out by an inkjet printer!. But this tech has years to go before hitting the streets.
I have a couple years of experience in some research behind this. If it gets "perfected" it will turn the market completely on its head because manufacturing speeds and costs just simply cannot be touched by what the printing processes could attain.