LCD or Plasma TV.

[padi56]

Can anybody tell me why anybody would want to spend five times more on a Flat-screen LCD or Plasma TV, when the bleeding stands take up just as much space as the old CRT models?

The bloody things need to be so wide though because if not they blow over like a capsizing Schooner the first time some one opens a door near them. And whats more the bloody DVD players and accessories are still sharing a similar footprint to the CRT TV's too.I expect in time, when they've juiced as much as they can with the flat telly's. Next will come the slimline accessories which will last long enough for the next wave of emperors new electronics to hit the stores. These LCD monitors and TV's, and they look very stylish,Until you turn the buggers on.The picture quality, compared to a CRT picture, not as good IMO. Even these new High Definition TV's don't seem to be all that they're cracked up to be. I was looking at one in Dixon's today, and quite frankly, I was less disappointed when Labour won the last election.Try as they might, subdue you as they will try, tempt you as they try, rob you of your cash as they try, but even in this digital age, they still haven't really beaten a technology that was invented several decades ago.My mate has a huge flat screen TV and hated the stand so much he spent a small fortune having the TV mounted, and the wiring hidden in the wall. He had a recess built for the accessories too. Nice finish, but the TV picture still looked pretty average to me.There is a serious point here though - new technology often means an excuse to hike prices totally unrealistically. There's very attractive a decent flat screen CRTs to be had very cheaply right now.The picture quality on my mates new Panasonic 42" plasma screen telly, pales into insignificance compared to my old 38" Sony Wega CRT!!!

Sure... cuz they look really cool.

I believe you are correct with regards to picture quality. I have a fantastic retailer of high end audio/vidoe that I deal with, and they are quite up front about the differences between the technologies. Some are better than others, but there are 2 key things with regards to selection that most people don't consider and should:

1/ Ambient lighting

2/ Perceived rather than absolute resolution

If you understand the principles behind those two issues, then you will select the right TV.

I personally have a rear projection TV that for my surroundings does a fantastic job, at a fraction of the price of the newer technologies (at least at the time I bought it). It is a mature technology that has had a lot squeezed out of it over the years. Some will say it's too bog and bulky, but quite frankly I don't live in a closet so space is not an issue, and I have no desire to mount it over my fire place......

I expect that unless something drastic happens, when I replace this current TV it will not be with an LCD or Plasma, but with a DLP technology of some sort.

The shop I deal with has put on several seminars on audio and video that I have attended over the years, and although audio is more my forte, I found the video sessions quite fascinating. The person who put on one seminar I went to was a represnetative from Runco, and he explaind in some detail the techniques used by less genuine retailers to tune the colour temperature of the sets in the store in such a way to make the model they wanted to sell look "better" than the rest to most people's eyes. It proved to me that the phrase "seeing is believing" is not always true........

[Goodwatch]

Yes, the colour and brightness trick is an old one. But video, as well as audio is perceptive and subjective. There is some kind of general understanding what sounds and looks 'good', but there's no definitive answer. Mind you, this is my own opinion. I’m doing some testing now because I have digital television for 5 days now. I switch back and forth between the analogue signal and the digital signal through the set-top box. But a real comparison is already hindered by the fact that the digital signal is fed by Scart (RGB conversion) and the analogue through the TV tuner first. To make things even worse I’m a sceptic onand even suspect my cable operator to deliberately deteriorate the analogue signal (more static) to make the digital signal look even better. For now, all I can say I have 5 channel surround sound with some programmes and a tighter picture quality (the operator claims DVD quality, whatever this means). Like Padi, I have a good quality (and 100 Hhz.) CRT TV. (Philips). I say the 100 Hhz. feature has always struck me as the most useful, the picture is rock steady even from the corner of your eye where the vision is most susceptible to flickering.

I’m old enough to remember the curtains had to be drawn if we wanted to watch TV! The sets of those days weren’t able to produce enough light (contrast) to be viewed in day light.

I know my next TV set will be a flatscreen. And I will mound it on the wall with all the cables running through another room. I’ve seen prototypes with hard disc recorders as part of the set, the next step will be a HD recorder AND a slot mounted Blue Ray player/recorder. And another kind of screen, like a large version of the organic displays now popping-up on cell phones. (O-led display). But here come’s the dilemma: when to buy? There will always be something around the corner, something new.

[padi56]

Wait Frans mate stick with the CRT until it goes bang,I expect in the next few months CRT will be dead as a Dodo.Simply because now the fashion,is plasma LCD,and they can charge more.But what I have seen up to now,will not even get close to my Sony Wega 100 Hhz.In any environment and twiddled and tuned, by the lord god plasma LCD himself.

[Launch Mini]

Go with the LCD projection or DLP.
I agree, once you put all your components under your set, you need all that space anyway.
Thin Tv = Thin wallet

What about the difference in price with LCDs and plasmas? I see brands like Sony, say for a 42" LCD going for $3,000 while a 42" LCD from a 'low end' brand like Citizen for eg., going for half that. I know they boost the colours to make them look good, but do the parts mostly come from the same sub-contractors? How much are you paying for 'Sony' 'Pioneer' or 'LG' as opposed to a lesser known or even unknown brands?

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Atomic

What about the difference in price with LCDs and plasmas? I see brands like Sony, say for a 42" LCD going for $3,000 while a 42" LCD from a 'low end' brand like Citizen for eg., going for half that. I know they boost the colours to make them look good, but do the parts mostly come from the same sub-contractors? How much are you paying for 'Sony' 'Pioneer' or 'LG' as opposed to a lesser known or even unknown brands?

Sharp,Matsushita Electric are the world's biggest maker of liquid-crystal displays.While LG.Philip's are the second biggest,LG is the biggest in CRT,while samsung are the largest supplier for the chip components.So unless your TV is a Sony, most properly screen or tube components,tuners, etc,parts are made by the top two.

Originally Posted by padi56

Sharp,Matsushita Electric are the world's biggest maker of liquid-crystal displays.While LG.Philip's are the second biggest,LG is the biggest in CRT,while samsung are the largest supplier for the chip components.So unless your TV is a Sony, most properly screen or tube components,tuners, etc,parts are made by the top two.

So you're saying that if you don't buy a Sony (all in-house?) then bascially you're getting the same components... just different packaging/branding. Right?

[padi56]

Unless maker of the set completely manufacture all the components.I would say yes, whether there are different grades of components.That I don't know but would doubt it.A bit like ETA they are the biggest Swiss manufacturer of in-house,movements as Seiko the biggest in-house Japan.Take your optical drive in your computer or stand alone DVD or CD player.Only 3 makers for the laser drive,optics,Lite-on, samsung, and BenQ,even Sony don't make there own,so what ever well known brand you buy,it will have the optics from one of these 3.

Originally Posted by padi56

Unless maker of the set completely manufacture all the components.I would say yes, whether there are different grades of components.That I don't know but would doubt it.A bit like ETA they are the biggest Swiss manufacturer of in-house,movements as Seiko the biggest in-house Japan.Take your optical drive in your computer or stand alone DVD or CD player.Only 3 makers for the laser drive,optics,Lite-on, samsung, and BenQ,even Sony don't make there own,so what ever well known brand you buy,it will have the optics from one of these 3.

Interesting.. that's what I thought. Cuz I've seen the pic quality of some Samsung and other 'low end' brands and they've been just as good as the more recognized brands... but half the cost. And the sales bozos tell you that the big brands are made better. Yeah... right. Maybe Sony and maybe LG but the rest... I doubt it.

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

But video, as well as audio is perceptive and subjective. There is some kind of general understanding what sounds and looks 'good', but there's no definitive answer. Mind you, this is my own opinion.

As I said audio is more my thing, but I would not necessarily agree that it is as subjective as you may think. Back in the late 80's Ian Paisley did some work with the National Research Council (NRC) in Canada to define more clearly the specific characteristics that are considered "good" by listeners. This research is widely considered to be the best of it's kind, and certainly drives a lot of speaker design today (including Mirage speakers, designed by Paisley and that I have had 2 versions of - in my view sound better than speakers more than 3 times their cost).

In my personal opinion, too many audiophiles consider good sound to be something that is quite artificial in nature. Although this is a personal thing and someone could no doubt argue that they prefer this kind of sound, the NRC studies proved that what a vast majority of people consider "good sound" is based on three main characteristics:

1/ Flat frequency response and wide bandwidth

2/ Low distortion

3/ Wide dispersion

Most speaker designs today have 1 and 2, but lack 3. The effect of this is a "not natural" effect that is far removed from the sound of a live performance. This is accentuated by the heavy digital processing done on the majority of audio recordings made today, however a good speaker design can compensate for a lot of that.

The key no matter what your preference is a balanced system (this would aply to video as well). I have heard some very expensive systems that sound like crap, where some inexpensive systems that are well balanced sound great.

Okay, enough of my ramblings......I forget this is a WIS site and not a AIS site (Audio Idiot Savant).

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by Avalon

As I said audio is more my thing, but I would not necessarily agree that it is as subjective as you may think.
Okay, enough of my ramblings......I forget this is a WIS site and not a AIS site (Audio Idiot Savant).

Yes, stop before I begin and will scare off the whole forum Have had my own column in a Dutch High End magazine and partaken in many a blind and double blind test. I agree 100% with your remark about setup and balance and expensive vs. less expensive sets. The most expensive set I listened music through was a then (1988) whopping US$ 200.000! I didn't had the heart to to say it sounded well, eh, like crap. But with subjective I meant this. How can you tell a. that synthetic music sounds good or bad, or, b. a classical concert for that matter if you have never attended one? You then only know the rendition from the record, tape or CD. You may like the tune, but this is something different. Ooops, I'll stop now, nice talking to you

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Yes, stop before I begin and will scare off the whole forum Have had my own column in a Dutch High End magazine and partaken in many a blind and double blind test. I agree 100% with your remark about setup and balance and expensive vs. less expensive sets. The most expensive set I listened music through was a then (1988) whopping US$ 200.000! I didn't had the heart to to say it sounded well, eh, like crap. But with subjective I meant this. How can you tell a. that synthetic music sounds good or bad, or, b. a classical concert for that matter if you have never attended one? You then only know the rendition from the record, tape or CD. You may like the tune, but this is something different. Ooops, I'll stop now, nice talking to you

I Love my music and all my HI-FI is 100% British, two Mission Cyrus 11 amps, that have been made mono. plus two separate PSX power supply .One amp/power/supp each for right left channels,quite old now but still a hard to beat sound.Speakers TDL Studio 10 floor standing speakers with a very deep true sounding bass.Did have both a Pink Triangle Tarantella record deck with a decca LG cartridge a superb sound.
And IMO the LP still has the edge on all digital music.
My cd player is a Arcam Alpha 8SE,later had new module put in, to upgrade it to Alpha 9 its about 7 or eight years old, but still a fine sounding player.But not as good as the Pink Triangle record
deck.The most important thing with the mission amps, now they have been mono-ed is the high current output, thats what drives the speakers not so much watts.One of the best sounds I have ever heard was 15 watt valve amp, cannot remember the name,linked up to the Pink Triangle and my speakers.But the sound was unbelievable,totally the best sound I have ever heard.The sound difference between the transistor,and valve well hard to explain, so I will say difference between chalk and Dutch cheese.

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by padi56

I Love my music and all my HI-FI is 100% British, two Mission Cyrus 11 amps, that have been made mono. plus two separate PSX power supply .One amp/power/supp each for right left channels,quite old now but still a hard to beat sound.Speakers TDL Studio 10 floor standing speakers with a very deep true sounding bass.Did have both a Pink Triangle Tarantella record deck with a decca LG cartridge a superb sound.
And IMO the LP still has the edge on all digital music.
My cd player is a Arcam Alpha 8SE,later had new mod

Top notch Peter! Man oh, man, what a great forum this is, full of gems Best sound I ever heard was through a double mono 'l Audiopile Le Monstre 7 (!) Watt Class A power amp. 1.5 farad in both PSU stages and fed by a high current car battery (yes, this set once existed) and driving audiostatics. Let's rename this TUAF

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Top notch Peter! Man oh, man, what a great forum this is, full of gems Best sound I ever heard was through a double mono 'l Audiopile Le Monstre 7 (!) Watt Class A power amp. 1.5 farad in both PSU stages and fed by a high current car battery (yes, this set once existed) and driving audiostatics. Let's rename this TUAF

Think this is what makes TRF a bit special,we can talk about a wide spectrum of things,other that whats really got us all together, our love for Rolex, and most things that tick.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by padi56

Think this is what makes TRF a bit special,we can talk about a wide spectrum of things,other that whats really got us all together, our love for Rolex, and most things that tick.

Agreed, Padi!! I love to tick!!

[padi56]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

Agreed, Padi!! I love to tick!!

Thats what you get from rubbing up sheep the wrong way ticks.

[Goodwatch]

That's why I love you guys so much! Never a harsh word or bad mouthing. Incredible! Thanks to the very moderate MODS! Good show all round folks

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

That's why I love you guys so much! Never a harsh word or bad mouthing. Incredible! Thanks to the very moderate MODS! Good show all round folks

Agreed, Frans. I hope Mods from other fora are reading all of this....they could learn a thing or two and improve on their style and ways of moderating their own forum.

JJ

Originally Posted by padi56

My cd player is a Arcam Alpha 8SE,later had new module put in, to upgrade it to Alpha 9 its about 7 or eight years old, but still a fine sounding player.

Well, you are a man of excellent taste Padi......I have an Alpha 9 CD player myself! I have had 2 Arcam intergrated amps in addition to the CD player, and I still have one of those on my "basement" system of leftover components. I also currently have an Arcam DiVA AVR300 surround receiver (yes it's only a receiver but the quality is as good as some individual components I've heard). In general I find Arcam has very nice product for the money.....

I am also a fan of their ability to be upgraded, as you did with yours - tell me, was that upgrade adding the RingDAC components? I suspect the transport wasn't changed, right?

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Avalon

Well, you are a man of excellent taste Padi......I have an Alpha 9 CD player myself! I have had 2 Arcam intergrated amps in addition to the CD player, and I still have one of those on my "basement" system of leftover components. I also currently have an Arcam DiVA AVR300 surround receiver (yes it's only a receiver but the quality is as good as some individual components I've heard). In general I find Arcam has very nice product for the money.....

I am also a fan of their ability to be upgraded, as you did with yours - tell me, was that upgrade adding the RingDAC components? I suspect the transport wasn't changed, right?

Yes Al Arcam have made some great Hi Fi,and what I like is the module build to upgrade.As far as I know just a couple of chips and circuit boards were changed by the dealer,but it is now to the same spec as Alpha 9.Remember buying a Arcam Delta 100 cassette deck early nineties,cost me a arm and two legs it was almost as good as the top range Nakamichi Dragon.But then with onset of the CD, it was a truly excellent product that was born two late.But must admit some of the Jap range of amps,are getting very good.But most of them have been made to a British design.

Originally Posted by padi56

Yes Al Arcam have made some great Hi Fi,and what I like is the module build to upgrade.As far as I know just a couple of chips and circuit boards where changed by the dealer,but it is now to the same spec as Alpha 9.Remember buying a Arcam Delta 100 cassette deck early nineties,cost me a arm and two legs it was almost as good as the top range Nakamichi Dragon.But then with onset of the CD, it was a truly excellent product that was born two late.But must admit some of the Jap range of amps,are getting very good.But most of them have been made to a British design.

No doubt the British make great equipment. My main 2-channel system is a mix of British and Canadian for the main components, and a couple of US made items (XLO speaker cable and Panamax power conditioner unit).

I'll post some pics later.

[Prince]

LCD all the way! I have a Magnavox (Phillips-made) LCD Hi-Def television, and it is fabulous!!! I was not pleased with the current plasma screens I previewed.

[Southern Jessie]

I can't remember the series - I think my amp is a 7, cd is the 7SE and the power amp is the 8 series.....all are between 6-9 years old but the quality is very good and I would recommend Arcam to anyone.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Southern Jessie

I can't remember the series - I think my amp is a 7, cd is the 7SE and the power amp is the 8 series.....all are between 6-9 years old but the quality is very good and I would recommend Arcam to anyone.

Welcome back mate,yes been a big fan of Arcam for many years,long lasting great sounding,well made real Hi-Fi products

[Launch Mini]

As for the LCD, I think the smaller ones ( under 27") are reasonably priced & work well in bedrooms, dens etc.
I wouldn't want any larger for a main set.
As for the Main set, I have an LCD Projection. Price is good , picture is great.

Originally Posted by padi56

Welcome back mate,yes been a big fan of Arcam for many years,long lasting great sounding,well made real Hi-Fi products

Here's some pics!

Overall shot of the system:



Alpha 9 CD



Simaudio Moon I5 amp with Panamax power conditioner (and surge protection):



There's also a double tape deck there that my wife used to use to dub aerobics tapes when she taught classes......I think it has to go!

Mirage OM5 speakers - love these......6 drivers in each (12 total) and each fitted with a 250W amplifier for the woofers:




Enjoy!

[JJ Irani]

That's an impressive system you have there, Al. Those speakers must sound pretty awesome...no wonder you don't have skunk problems like our Johnny....the sound from those speakers must drive them away!

Seriously, excellent set up there, pal!

[RandyS]

have not read all the replies so sorry if redundant

plasma and lcd in most cases will not convert an analog signal to the same quality as a CRT TV will, likewise, the pic of a DVD or HD signal must be seen on HDTV , LCD, Plasma, Lcos or DLP or even CRT to be appreciated, but it must be an HDTV TV...

an old Sony Wega with max lines of 480 I will not display the HD but will in many cases display the old "All in the Family" rerun off of TV Land better than my Pioneer Elite 50 inch plasma...

having said that, once you go HD you cant ever go back, the difference is like the difference between black and white and color...