TV equipment...time for a rethink?

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
From AV Forums regarding Plasma:

About Plasma TVs : when to choose a Plasma television, and why. Plus we bust some myths about Plasma TVs. An aricle from the experts at AVForums.

Since tube (CRT) technology has been superseded by flat screen TVs, there are really only two TV technologies available right now, and these are Plasma and LCD. They are two competing technologies, each with their advantages and disadvantages. Note that LED TVs are LCD TVs with LED back or edge lighting.
Both Plasma and LCD technologies manage to produce high quality images when correctly manufactured and set up within the home.

Plasma is a self-emitting technology meaning it creates its own light, very much like the old CRT TVs. This helps the technology produce realistic blacks in the picture.
LCD technology uses a backlight which is usually a strip of lights (LED lights in 'LED TVs') to the side or back of the screen. Because this light shines through the LCD panel (which opens pixels to allow light through) it is more difficult for LCDs to produce a deep black on screen at the same time as showing shadow detail.
This approach also means that the amount of light shown across the LCD screen is not uniform and can show pools (or cones) of light spill on screen.
Plasma on the other hand, being self-illuminating, can achieve far more consistent light uniformity.
Because of the image strong points, Plasma TVs have found a large fan base with movie enthusiasts for displaying pictures that are accurate and natural.

When to choose a Plasma TV?

Choose Plasma when picture quality is paramount. Plasmas in almost all cases are able to produce images that have rich deep blacks with good shadow detail, excellent motion resolution and accurate colours - so are often the first choice for the discerning viewer.
Choose Plasma when you want a screen larger than 40 inches. Plasma does not come in sizes smaller than this, so in those cases where you want a smaller screen your only choice at this time is LCD. Plasma is available in sizes up to 152 inches, with the most popular sizes being 42 and 50 inches.
If you have a room where you can control the lighting, or amount of light that comes into the room then Plasma technology is for you. Because of how the technology works it is much better suited than LCD to watching movies in dimmed conditions. An LCD in the same conditions is likely to have lighter blacks and worse screen uniformity because it uses a backlight. Since Plasmas are made from glass (two sheets of glass bonded together with a vacuum containing gas), they may not work as well as LCD in bright conditions. This has been an issue in the past with light hitting a Plasma screen and washing the image out. Most new Plasma models are fitted with a filter that rejects ambient light and stops the image from being washed out. However, Plasma is not as bright as LCD and in some cases where you want a screen in a bright room such as a conservatory or very open room, you may find that LCD will give you a more consistent picture. It has to be noted that a TV in such a room will never give you the best possible image quality and will be a compromise. The amount of light in the room where you use your TV will influence how good the picture is.
Choose Plasma when you need a wide viewing angle. When you have people sitting further off to the side of the TV, Plasma is preferable since its picture does not degrade. An LCD TV's picture, on the other hand, looks worse the further to the side of the TV (or 'off axis') you sit.
Choose Plasma where you are going to watch a lot of sports or fast moving images. Amongst Plasma's strengths is motion resolution where images do not smear or blur as soon as the action on screen speeds up. This also means that, unlike LCD, technically Plasma does not need motion interpolation systems to help produce natural motion. Typical Plasma models will resolve up to 1080 lines of information compared to an average of 300-400 lines on an LCD or LED LCD TV. (Note there are some exceptions to this with certain individual models).
The vast majority of Plasma screens also have low input lag which means that those who like to play video games on their TVs will benefit in most cases with Plasma over LCD.

Common misconceptions about Plasma 're-gassing', lifespan, screen burn and more.

Plasmas do use gas, but it never escapes and they never require 're-gassing'. Anyone telling you that Plasmas need re-gassing is spreading an urban myth. This is still a favourite tactic with many sales staff and is completely wrong.
Both Plasmas and LCDs have a good lifespan. Some manufacturers quote lifespans of 100,000 hours, which at 8 hours per day is 34 years. In other words you will probably replace your TV before it gets close to half its lifespan.
Screen burn is another term used by sales staff who may try to push a customer towards LCD (or LED) instead of Plasma. Screen burn is more or less a thing of the past and will only ever happen if the Plasma TV is abused, i.e. used in dynamic mode with contrast up full and left on a TV channel with bright logos for a few days. Most modern Plasma screens can stand up to hours of gaming or news channel viewing if done so with appropriate picture settings and for normal periods of time.
Image retention is usually mistaken for screen burn but is a natural by-product of Plasma technology and is not permanent. It is usually seen if the TV is used for a few hours of gaming or news channel viewing where there are static images on screen. After changing from gaming or the news channel, there are graphics or text boxes still seen as a faint 'ghost' over the picture. Image retention usually disappears within a few minutes. The severity of the problem does vary from manufacturer to manufacturer with the effect disappearing from most modern screens within a few minutes. The vast majority of people never notice image retention.
Plasma TVs do not produce a softer image than LCD TVs. Both will show HD images with the same clarity. Any differences come down to other factors like added sharpness by the video processing of the TV.
Although several TV manufacturers like Sony, Hitachi, Philips and Toshiba have abandoned Plasma technology, others like Panasonic, Samsung and LG continue to develop it. Plasma is by no means a dying technology. Many users and professionals still regard Plasma as the technology for critical viewing.
Plasma TVs are not particularly power hungry if they are set up correctly. They do generally use more power than LCDs, but because the technology is self-illuminating it means that power function is never close to the maximum rated output for any length of time, whereas LCD stays at the same level when switched on (as the backlight is usually constant). Correct calibration can reduce power consumption by up to 50% in some cases (THX research, 2009).

Plasma TV prices
Plasma has often been seen as a premium technology because it is available in screen sizes over 40 inches and not in smaller sizes. It is also more expensive to produce and manufacture and has to be built in large numbers. However, as production techniques from manufacturers like Panasonic have improved, this has allowed Plasma to be more affordable to the mass market. With the introduction of LED Backlit LCD TVs which command a price premium for being slim, Plasma has become even more cost effective in performance and price terms. A quality Plasma screen these days costs the same or even less than a competing LED LCD model.

Black levels on Plasma TVs
Black levels are considered by many to be a strong point of any TV. In all cases this must also mean that shadow detail (details just above absolute black) must also be seen. To obtain a black that doesn't look grey on screen, some TVs such as LCDs and some low end Plasmas can show blacks that appear black, but which cover over the shadow detail (an effect referred to as clipping). Some LCD and LED LCDs also add in a technique called global dimming where the backlight is switched off or dimmed down to try and create black. Global dimming affects the whole screen. Plasma, because it is self-illuminating, can in most cases (when set up correctly) achieve a black level which looks natural and shows the correct amount of shadow detail. It also means that mixed scenes (an image with very dark areas along with some bright areas) look more natural on a Plasma screen than on an LCD.

Better motion on Plasma TVs
Plasma technology handles motion very well and it is a plus point of the technology as it was designed for showing moving images. There is usually no need to add motion processing to Plasma screens like there is for LCD models. It is true that some recent LCD and LCD LED TVs have improved their motion response with fast moving images, but in this area Plasma is usually still better.

Best settings for your Plasma TV
Copying settings from owners of a similar Plasma TV is a futile exercise as each screen (even the same model) varies considerably. So one set of settings that may work for one owner, will look completely different to another. However there have been recent improvements to the picture presets these days, with some that aim to try and get as close as possible to the industry standards. The industry standards are the settings that film makers and TV producers use when making their programs and movies for home viewing. This means that white and all the colours match the movies you watch on your TV. THX certified Plasma TVs have at least one preset in the picture menus which set the colour gamut and white colour as correct as possible so you can watch all your TV and film material on your TV with (close to) correct colours and white point. All you have to do is make sure the brightness and contrast settings are set for your room using the test patterns found on some DVDs and Blu-rays. THX picture mode is not just for using with THX certified DVDs as suggested in some manufacturers' manuals. It is designed to be used with everything you watch on TV.
Some Plasmas also have a picture wizard feature that will walk users through a basic calibration on the TV.
To get the best from your TV we would always recommend a professional calibration. This is especially true if you have gone for one of the more expensive screens and you want to get the very best out of your investment.

In conclusion
If you want a natural image with accurate colour, good black levels and excellent motion resolution, and your viewing conditions are appropriate, go for Plasma.
As always, there is no such thing as a perfect TV and what will suit you is determined by your viewing environment, budget and the type of material you want to view on your TV. We would always recommend that you do some research and demo the models you think will suit your needs before you spend your hard earned money.
 
RogerS":iyg1xdxm said:
Dibs-h":iyg1xdxm said:
...... Don't know what they call the RJ45 - but if you look at the connections the TV has, it will list an RJ45 connection.

HIH

Dibs

That's what's thrown me..

4 x HDMi inputs
2 x Scart inputs
1 x Component input
1 x RCA Audio-video input
1 x Optical Audio output
1 x Coaxial (aerial)
1 x PCMCIA card slot
1 x PC input
1 x USB 2.0 input
1 x Headphones
BRAVIA Internet Video
Wi-Fi Ready
SCART connectors 2
DVI Input No
HDMI Input 4
PC Input Yes
Audio output 1 x Optical Audio

Must be the Bravia Internet Video connection - these TV's are LoveFilm capable, so must be marketing blurb for RJ45, which lets face it - Joe Public, probably wonder "WTF is that?"

Spanking TV Rog - and as it's being\been superseded, well discounted at the moment<£500. The 503 is the 100Hz one and the 403 is 50Hz IIRC. Go see one in the flesh (and others) and see what you think.

Dibs.

p.s. In the stores, stay away from the Panasonic 3D Viera Tv's - especially the ones showing Women's Beach Volleyball! :mrgreen:
 
Thanks for that, Gareth. Good article. To be slightly pedantic, the author is using the wrong word here (an effect referred to as clipping). It's not 'clipping'..that refers to detail in the peak whites being lost. The proper term is 'crushing' [/pedantmode]
 
RogerS":3k22pjmh said:
Thanks for that, Gareth. Good article. To be slightly pedantic, the author is using the wrong word here (an effect referred to as clipping). It's not 'clipping'..that refers to detail in the peak whites being lost. The proper term is 'crushing' [/pedantmode]

Well I've heard both used to mean loss of highlight detail (in a broadcast equipment context). I'd say the author of that piece means "masking" really, but since it's a receiver artefact, pick a term...

Anyway, a few practical thoughts:

(1) Every plasma I've ever seen (so far) has gamma I don't like (i.e. too high). Read that as _too_ contrasty. We went for a Toshiba LCD about three years ago, for that reason. The Sony picture _was_ better at the time, but unreasonably more expensive IMHO. I wouldn't claim LCD is generally better now, I don't know, but I preferred its subtlety.

(2) The _hard_ thing for TVs to do isn't HD (from an HD source such as Blu-Ray). For that, most of 'em do 1:1 pixel mapping. HD is often shown in shops, as it's one of the easier things for a modern screen to display.

The difficult thing is to get a decent picture from standard, low-bandwidth DVB-T ("Freeview") signal. It's about the tricks used to get a good, watch-able picture from a low data rate: does lots of movement in the picture look good, or go blocky? If you have a gently-shading surface in the background, such as a smooth non-patterned wall, do you get 'contour lines, or does the TV handle it better? None of this is a function of the screen technology, but the DVB-T decoder and its tweaks, but since you can't separate one from t'other, it's best to check the *worst* signal the shop has, not the best one.

(3) slightly off-topic, I was very pleased recently when our Toshiba zombied itself by downloading the wrong firmware update overnight. OK, the incident itself wasn't pleasing, but s**t happens, so I'll cut them some slack. Tosh have an actual UK call centre, whom I contacted. They were brilliant - I could talk to someone who knew the product range at a technical level, and who understood a technical description of the fault. They established that the warranty was handled by Lewis's directly, but continued to be helpful:

The Tosh call centre passed JL information about the fault, and within an hour a support visit had been organised. Given the awkwardness of the fault, the repair contractors took the TV away to re-blow the firmware on the bench, but I had it back within three days, and it's been fine since.

The biggest plus in this was that the TV only had a two-year warranty from Toshiba, but three years from John Lewis. It's third birthday will be in November. OK, there was something of a moral obligation (they'd done it to me!), but the support process worked very well and the fix is itself guaranteed.

Needless to say I usually get expensive consumer items from JL nobody's perfect, but I find they're better than most.

Cheers,

E.
 
I haven't understood very much of this at all but I can say that I have a Sony 22" CRT TV and it's still going strong after about 15 years! Works fine with Freeview...
 
Eric The Viking":11mbezow said:
(1) Every plasma I've ever seen (so far) has gamma I don't like (i.e. too high). Read that as _too_ contrasty. We went for a Toshiba LCD about three years ago, for that reason. The Sony picture _was_ better at the time, but unreasonably more expensive IMHO. I wouldn't claim LCD is generally better now, I don't know, but I preferred its subtlety.

I find this incredibly hard to believe. Not that I am doubting you or what you are saying you saw, but that you were seeing the technology you thought you were.

A usual plasma key benefit is the natural look to the gamma and contrast. It can generate a greater dynamic range than LCD but the contrast per se is usually a key selling point. In fact the harsh picture (relatively) of LCD is the usual complaint about that technology. Plasma is usually the "subtle" technology in typical reviews and comments.

However if you are happy with the Tosh LCD then so be it, I am just very surprised. I have a high end LCD Panasonic as well (smaller for a different room) and find it very tiring on the eyes for long periods like an F1 race or a film etc.
 
I been an advocate of Panasonic plasmas since I first paid 3.5k for one 8 years or so ago. I converted my loft into a cinema room and the BIG GRIN effect whenever I started a film was fantastic. My current Panny is a 3 year old HD model (TH-42PZ80B) and I cannot fault it.

However, I've got a Samsung LCD in the living room now (Samsung UE46C6530 46-inch) - and I cannot fault it. The picture is absolutely stunning. The upside of LCD TVs is that they are ridiculously light (compared to plasmas) and incredibly thin. I don't worry at all that mine might come off the wall now (I have a cantilever bracket) :)

The only real advice you should take when buying TVs though is to go to a GOOD outlet and see them in real life. That's what made me buy the Samsung - I was stunned at the quality of the picture. You do have to go somewhere where they have the TVs setup properly though (dedicated feed).
 
softtop":3bv58wk3 said:
However if you are happy with the Tosh LCD then so be it, I am just very surprised. I have a high end LCD Panasonic as well (smaller for a different room) and find it very tiring on the eyes for long periods like an F1 race or a film etc.

I do know what a good TV picture should look like - I was trained to set up analogue monitors (although it's definitely not something I enjoy doing!!!).

At the time we were shopping (3 years ago), the plasmas we looked at were unpleasant in comparison to the Toshiba, which was by no means the cheapest in its class. We bought smaller than we could afford (40"), because it and the Sony Bravia both stood out as having better rendered pictures.

It's not just contrast. Other factors in play include: colour rendition, motion artefacts, compression artefacts, etc. As I said, the tricky thing is decoding and rendering a low-bandwidth source, like a commercial Freeview MUX. Most of the 'brassier' contenders did a pretty poor job of that.

It has to be said, too, that most broadcast TV's technical quality these days is dreadful in comparison to analogue PAL I of 25 years ago. There are notable exceptions, and I've noticed a distinct improvement over the last few years, but when DVB-T was introduced, it was horrible.

The best stuff one sees these days seems to be down-converted HD. To my eye, it's often far better than stuff originated in standard definition. I've got a Canon XL-series standard def camera, which looks dreadful next to a Sony Z1's standard-def output. To be fair, it's far easier to expose properly, focus etc. on the Sony, but that's not entirely it.

There's also a HUGE difference in the quality of LCD units too. I'm writing this at a Sony 19" panel, but there's an LG 17" right next to it, with the desktop spread across both. I can't get the colourimetry even close on the two of them. The Sony is more subtle, the colours are more correct (I've proven this experimentally), and the contrast range is smoother. The Sony also has far better blacks.

I do a lot of stills photography, and now wouldn't dare risk post-processing on either the LG or my HP laptop (arguably even worse than the LG!). It's the difference between, say, Canaletto and Warhol!

I'd reiterate: test them in the shop on a Freeview source. The ones that do that well, will most probably do everything else well too. An HD recorded source, such as BluRay, is an easy win for the salespeople and the TV manufacturers.

And yes, they're all c**p compared to a grade one hi-def cathode ray tube.

Cheers, E. (Luddite, me?)

PS: There are rumours that the manufacturers have lobbied against the reintroduction of the test card. Carol Hersee has got them worried!
 
Thanks for the reply Erik. I totally agree about a good CRT, they are things of beauty. I also agree about the variation in LCD AND plasma, in addition the dealer setups are usually very poor with contrast and saturation pumped up to max to try and impress the punters.

Luddite? I don't think so we are just appreciative of quality - I still prefer turntables to CD or computer Audio.
 
Dont take any notice of how a set looks in the shop - the settings are always to ****, and trying to compare lighting conditions is pointless - who has a bank of fluorescent tubes in their living room?
get yourself a decent plasma and a copy of digital video essentials are you are set. Ideally, I would suggest a pro calibration, but that's expensive, and many consumer sets don't have enough calibration options.

Si
 
Eric The Viking":3itxffrt said:
RogerS":3itxffrt said:
Thanks for that, Gareth. Good article. To be slightly pedantic, the author is using the wrong word here (an effect referred to as clipping). It's not 'clipping'..that refers to detail in the peak whites being lost. The proper term is 'crushing' [/pedantmode]

Well I've heard both used to mean loss of highlight detail (in a broadcast equipment context). I'd say the author of that piece means "masking" really, but since it's a receiver artefact, pick a term...

....

In all my time as a Lecturer in Broadcasting at BBC Wood Norton I never came across the term 'masking' in the context that you are suggesting. Loss of detail in the blacks has always been referred to, as far as I am aware, as crushing. However, I do accept that you guys out in the boondocks (sorry, Regions ) had your own way of looking at things. :wink:

Eric The Viking":3itxffrt said:
(1) Every plasma I've ever seen (so far) has gamma I don't like (i.e. too high). Read that as _too_ contrast....

Sorry but that is confusing things. Contrast ratio has nothing at all to do with gamma. Contrast ratio is the ratio between peak white and black level. Gamma defines the translation curve between video in and lumens out of your display. If the gamma is badly wrong in either direction then that will give black crushing or white clipping.

There is a good article here http://www.poynton.com/notes/colour_and ... rast_ratio
 
Sorry. I sit corrected, but I do know what gamma is, nontheless.

And yes, I was coining 'masking', rather than using a specific technical term, hence the quote marks. But "crushed highlights" was common parlance, as was "clipping" to mean similar visual effects, namely loss of highlight detail. The latter would be wrong it seems, but it was used. Besides which, highlight clipping is obvious and crushing (used correctly) rarely is, so you don't often hear a director complain about the latter!

Regarding gamma I quite understand: it's essentially transfer characteristic, and I play around with it every day processing photographic images. It can look, however like too much (or too little) contrast though.

Perhaps you can explain what it is about plasmas (or their setup) that causes the issues. Do they have a distinctively different gamma to CRTs? I know they're quite different to LCDs, and I wouldn't claim the 40" LCD panel we have is wonderful, but it does seem preferable (oh for a 40" CRT, my own power station, unlimited budget and a strengthened floor!).

E. (creeping off back to the attic to get on with the loft insulation :-( )
 
Eric The Viking":2868dc4y said:
Sorry. I sit corrected, but I do know what gamma is, nontheless.

And yes, I was coining 'masking', rather than using a specific technical term, hence the quote marks. But "crushed highlights" was common parlance, as was "clipping" to mean similar visual effects, namely loss of highlight detail. The latter would be wrong it seems, but it was used. Besides which, highlight clipping is obvious and crushing (used correctly) rarely is, so you don't often hear a director complain about the latter!

Regarding gamma I quite understand: it's essentially transfer characteristic, and I play around with it every day processing photographic images. It can look, however like too much (or too little) contrast though.

Perhaps you can explain what it is about plasmas (or their setup) that causes the
issues. Do they have a distinctively different gamma to CRTs? I know they're quite


different to LCDs, and I wouldn't claim the 40" LCD panel we have is wonderful, but it

does seem preferable (oh for a 40" CRT, my own power station, unlimited budget and a
strengthened floor!).
E. (creeping off back to the attic to get on with the loft insulation :-( )

I suspect there may be some convergence issues on the edges if there was a 40"CRT
in the current wide screen format. :shock:
 
i THINK (because i'm not an expert like so many on here) but a Plasma you looking through glass, an lcd you looking through plastic.
Which i would imagine would be a big difference.
 
Eric The Viking":2b4f2s5r said:
The biggest plus in this was that the TV only had a two-year warranty from Toshiba, but three years from John Lewis. It's third birthday will be in November. E.

Hi Eric

I'm a bit confused about your 3 year warranty - as far as I know, JL has given 5 years warranty on tvs for years. We have a Sony just out of warranty and a Toshiba almost 4 years old so still 1 year left. Both LCDs.

This is one of the reasons we've always bought from John Lewis (and Bainbridges as it was previously in Newcastle).

Might be worth checking your warranty / querying it with JL?

Bob
 
Lons":2sfadfgh said:
I'm a bit confused about your 3 year warranty ...
Might be worth checking your warranty / querying it with JL?

Well, I think I demonstrated earlier how bad my memory is these days! (homer)

As someone who's been taught at Wood Norton a few times, I ought to do better!

I'll dig out the paperwork when I get a moment. Lewis's are still a jolly good place to buy from for that sort of thing. Although I'm in the industry these days, we buy personal computers (Apples) from them too. The only problem I have is that their accessories always seem rather limited, but then I appreciate they have limited floor space too.

On the LCD/plasma debate, I was looking critically at ours last night. I still like it, although I haven't looked for one for a while. The backlighting is obvious if you watch with the room dark, but we rarely do that. In normal lighting it's pretty good.

I read the article Roger suggested. It seems very fair as a display technology comparison. I still maintain though that, as you're buying a package, it comes down to 'balance of aberrations', in which the decoder is quite significant.

Before digital switchover, our present set's analogue reception wasn't wonderful - nothing like as good as the CRT Sony that preceded it. Its DVB-T performance wasn't good either, compared to the Sony set-top box we have. It had trouble with degraded signal caused in late spring/summer by trees in full leaf, which the Sony happily ignored. Since DSO the signal strength has been increased at the transmitter, so that is no longer an issue.

Cheers,

E.
 
100% with you, Eric, re decoder artefacts.

And don't forget, chaps, that it's worth considering FreeSat over Freeview when it comes to HD. Why? Simple. There is a finite bandwidth available on terrestrial transmissions (Freeview) compared to FreeSat. So as they try and cram in more cr*p shopping channels AND more HD channels then the available data bitrate available per channel goes down. And digital artefacts (aka a rubbish picture) increases. You don't get that problem with FreeSat.
 
RogerS":l57am1mj said:
And digital artefacts (aka a rubbish picture) increases. You don't get that problem with FreeSat.

We had our hols in Galloway this year, near the Solway coast.

It's a truly lovely area, but a bit lacking in terrestrial TV transmitters, it seems, as our cottage had a Freesat box. The quality off sat was very good indeed (I was expecting it to not be wonderful, considering the latitude). The only downside is the time delay - only an issue if you're setting your watch, I suppose. It's also an intelligent and thoughtful idea to put a volume control on the sat receiver's remote.

I managed to tease the kids rather well by finding BBC1 West and leaving it on in the background until "Points West" came on. It took them a couple of minutes to realise what was odd!
 
Back
Top