If Plasma is superior to LCD, and cheaper, why is it not selling well?

[soulcougher73]

This is why.

 

[Exterous]

Ideally, you'd want to check out a TV in a dark room and properly calibrated, and that doesn't exist in a store.

Because people don't want to spend the time. When I was in college I worked at a place that had a room with calibrated selectable/multiple inputs for TV displays along with measured speaker placements and selections. Maybe 1% of the consumers spent time actually considering a purchase in there and almost always at the prodding of the staff. Maybe. Everyone else just bought stuff off the harshly lite, everything in torch mode sales floor - usually with a shitty sony HTiB. We eventually gave it up as it took time to redo the setup and calibration when the new models came out and it wasn't worth it. Somewhat depressing actually

And Samsung led the charge. They were soooooo good, people now think there are new LED TV's which are better than the old LCD's and plasmas.

Panasonic didn't help. Hey - we bought out and killed Kuro and now that we've killed off all the competition and not really innovated at all since then we are thinking of leaving the market

 

[JackBurton]

Panasonic didn't help. Hey - we bought out and killed Kuro and now that we've killed off all the competition and not really innovated at all since then we are thinking of leaving the market

Oh, I agree. But it wasn't all Panasonic's fault. Implementing the Kuro tech was most likely too expensive which would price them out of the market. They learned a lot from Pioneer (or Pioneer's demise I might say). People want cheap "good enough" TV's, not bleeding edge top of the line PQ. Why do you think Vizio does so well? People want to buy a "big screen TV" so they can brag to their friend's and say, "hey, I just bought a 60" flat panel TV." So I really can't put the full blame on Panasonic. They are producing a great product at a price point the general public will buy. And even with Panasonic's conservative approach, they're STILL losing money. Pretty sad state of affairs if you ask me.

 

[purbeast0]

wish the blacks on my projector were as good as the blacks on my st50.

 

[Eug]

I own a 42" plasma lower mid end LG (2011) and a 42" LCD lower mid end Toshiba (2007).

The plasma has better contrast and better black level. However, it has horrible glare (whereas the LCD is matte), and the plasma was a bitch to calibrate. With most of the default settings the calibration was way off so that it was hypercontrasty (if that makes sense) to the point where all detail was lost. Black levels were so low that there was no shadow detail at all, but brights whites were so bright they hurt my eyes. After a couple of hours of fiddling with settings and using Avia, I finally got it to where I like it. Unfortunately, the glare is still a huge problem during the day, and it's even a problem at night if I have candles in the background, or the fireplace going.

For the LCD, the calibration was also way off, but in a different way. The black levels sucked, more like a light grey, but you could make out details quite well, and and the whites were blown. It also has backlight seepage (or whatever the word is) in the corners, but I guess it's not so obvious if you have the brightness turned way up like so many people do. It also looks sharper than the plasma up close (but I prefer the smoothness of the plasma).

The LCD has never, ever had image retention. I got pretty significant image retention when I first got the plasma, but never burn-in. It's much less common now that I've had the TV a couple of years, and in fact the image retention decreased dramatically after a couple of weeks. However, I can sometimes still see it occasionally, like if I leave a static high contrast screen on for a long time. The retention goes away after 30 seconds after I change the screen, but it's still pretty disconcerting.

So, despite the fact that I like my plasma and plasma does offer many advantages, it also has significant issues, not the least of which are glare and image retention. However, I think people could overlook some of it if they would only have proper calibration out of the box. Calibration is also a problem on LCD, but at least for LCD, in some ways those calibration issues can be masked.

 

[boomhower]

I own a 42" plasma lower mid end LG (2011) and a 42" LCD lower mid end Toshiba (2007).

The plasma has better contrast and better black level. However, it has horrible glare (whereas the LCD is matte), and the plasma was a bitch to calibrate. With most of the default settings the calibration was way off so that it was hypercontrasty (if that makes sense) to the point where all detail was lost. Black levels were so low that there was no shadow detail at all, but brights whites were so bright they hurt my eyes. After a couple of hours of fiddling with settings and using Avia, I finally got it to where I like it. Unfortunately, the glare is still a huge problem during the day, and it's even a problem at night if I have candles in the background, or the fireplace going.

For the LCD, the calibration was also way off, but in a different way. The black levels sucked, more like a light grey, but you could make out details quite well, and and the whites were blown. It also has backlight seepage (or whatever the word is) in the corners, but I guess it's not so obvious if you have the brightness turned way up like so many people do. It also looks sharper than the plasma up close (but I prefer the smoothness of the plasma).

The LCD has never, ever had image retention. I got pretty significant image retention when I first got the plasma, but never burn-in. It's much less common now that I've had the TV a couple of years, and in fact the image retention decreased dramatically after a couple of weeks. However, I can sometimes still see it occasionally, like if I leave a static high contrast screen on for a long time. The retention goes away after 30 seconds after I change the screen, but it's still pretty disconcerting.

So, despite the fact that I like my plasma and plasma does offer many advantages, it also has significant issues, not the least of which are glare and image retention. However, I think people could overlook some of it if they would only have proper calibration out of the box. Calibration is also a problem on LCD, but at least for LCD, in some ways those calibration issues can be masked.

Plasma tech has come quite a ways since 2007. I've never had image retention issues no less burn in on my Panny and that's with a ton of MW3 and BLOPS2 gaming. Glare is certainly an issue though. If you have a room with a lot of windows plasma isn't going to be the best choice.

 

[Eug]

Plasma tech has come quite a ways since 2007. I've never had image retention issues no less burn in on my Panny and that's with a ton of MW3 and BLOPS2 gaming. Glare is certainly an issue though. If you have a room with a lot of windows plasma isn't going to be the best choice.

I bought my plasma in 2011. It was the LCD that I bought in 2007.

P.S. While I definitely prefer the picture of the plasma (aside from the glare), and actually bought the plasma to get a better picture than the LCD, nobody else in the house or any of my guests have ever complained about the LCD's image quality.

 

[Exterous]

But it wasn't all Panasonic's fault.(snip)

I know but it was easier to deal with before I knew they were thinking of killing their plasma line completely. I don't have one yet but it was my planned upgrade when my DLP finally needs more than a new bulb. And yes it is a sad state of affairs...

 

[A5]

I know everything has a limited life. What I can't stand is things which are unnecessarily designed with a hard limit to their life. I avoid SSDs, memory sticks, CDRW DVDRW, et cetra for the same reason when I can.

I'm not sure when "unnecessarily" started to mean "following the unavoidable laws of physics". Good to know.

 

[A5]

I know but it was easier to deal with before I knew they were thinking of killing their plasma line completely. I don't have one yet but it was my planned upgrade when my DLP finally needs more than a new bulb. And yes it is a sad state of affairs...

They're phasing out plasmas over the next few years to get more into OLED production. It makes sense considering that pretty much no one besides Vizio is making money off of TVs.

 

[poofyhairguy]

So, what gives?

Plasma got a bad rep early on and never shook it.

 

[JimKiler]

I bought my plasma in 2011. It was the LCD that I bought in 2007.

P.S. While I definitely prefer the picture of the plasma (aside from the glare), and actually bought the plasma to get a better picture than the LCD, nobody else in the house or any of my guests have ever complained about the LCD's image quality.

Me too I wanted a bedroom TV with about 42" and I got a good deal on a Pansonic smart Plasma for $525 even though i was shopping for an LCD. I like my plasma and love the wide viewing angle compared to my SXRD. But i still think LCD has a slight advantage to bright colors over LCD. Both are fine technologies.

 

[Number1]

The elite has spoken in here. Plasma is the nirvana of TV.
Anybody who would dare say otherwise is just an idiot.


Well, the same purist were signing the same techno babble back when Beta was competing against VHS.

Wee all know how that turned out.

So now, despite their superiority, plasma TVs are going the way of the dodos. It's a fact.

If you're a purist get one now, they won't be around for much longer.

I have one, it's for sale. The pic is beautiful except for the 2 inches wide red vertical intermittent bar across the screen. Good price and the TV emits a lot of heat so if you live in a cold climate, it will help keep your place warm.

I have already replaced it with an LCD model and the money I am saving on power is going toward my next TV. It' won't be plasma.

 

[Railgun]

I know but it was easier to deal with before I knew they were thinking of killing their plasma line completely. I don't have one yet but it was my planned upgrade when my DLP finally needs more than a new bulb. And yes it is a sad state of affairs...

Yay for more unfounded rumor and speculation...

The content of the report regarding our Plasma Display Panel (PDP) business is not something announced by Panasonic.

In regard to the PDP business, Panasonic will continue to deliver value added products, proposing new ways for our customers to enjoy their TVs. This includes taking advantage of PDP features such as the touch pen function as well as the big screen and high picture quality. In addition, for non-TV use, we are expanding our Business to Business (B2B) opportunities for the PDP business with products such as the Interactive Plasma Display.

Regarding the growth strategy for the TV business, we are looking into a variety of options, but nothing has been decided at the moment.

Regarding new products for 2013, in follow up to our global announcement in January 2013 at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in the US, we are holding subsequent local product launch events worldwide. Panasonic has been enforcing global business, aiming to sell value added products with better design and high picture quality that meet the needs of our global customers.

There will be no change of service support for PDPs, and our dealers should have no concerns about continuing to sell Panasonic PDPs."

 

[Jinny]

the panel will likely outlast the back lighting used in an LCD panel. Longevity is more than acceptable in both technologies.

the panel isn't the problem. the cheap shitty circuitry in the tv will die far before anything else.

 

[jaqie]

I'm not sure when "unnecessarily" started to mean "following the unavoidable laws of physics". Good to know.

So somehow it becomes an unavoidable law of physics that they chose to develop flash technology based SSDs instead of MRAM or SRAM or other unlimited write based ones, and such? You really need to get out more.

As for the other person saying it will outlast the backlight in LCDs... um, the backlight in current ones are LEDs, and they have a life based on how hard they are driven - they could make LEDs that last literally thousands of years with quite bright output, but they don't. Another perfect example of what I mean. Also, the backlight is replacable in the older ones, I have done so myself more than once. That is most definitely not the same thing as the base device having a set limited life to it.

 

[Fallen Kell]

myths about power consumption, image burn in, heat, weight, thickness

This about sums it up. Really image burn was the most important one for the longest time. Now it is all about weight and thickness, which is really to the detriment of LCD image quality as well if you ask me. Nothing has hurt image quality more than LED edge lit LCD panels. The uniformity of the backlight is horrible, the color spectrum took a hit as white LEDs are not actually white, but more on the blue side, and the edge lit doesn't allow you to perform localized dimming (which was the biggest image quality advantage of using LEDs in the first place).

 

[Fallen Kell]

Well, the same purist were signing the same techno babble back when Beta was competing against VHS.

Wee all know how that turned out.

Beta lost because VHS didn't require approval of content before being granted permission to produce video content on the format. Which meant that VHS had porn and Beta didn't. There was no greater innovation than having porn available at home instead of going to a theater... I mean think about it, do you really want to be surrounded by a bunch of other guys when watching that stuff? So, porn killed Beta because Sony did not allow any porn to be released on their format for the longest time as they didn't want to be associated with that.

 

[poofyhairguy]

I have already replaced it with an LCD model and the money I am saving on power is going toward my next TV.

Nice. That way in 20 years when the difference allows you to save enough to get another TV it will be OLED.

 

[Eug]

Another issue in the past was that plasmas faded with time. After as little as say 7 years, you'd have to get a new TV. Dunno about current plasmas though. I've only had my plasma 2 years.

Contrary to popular denials though, image retention is still a significant issue with some plasma TVs.

Beta lost because VHS didn't require approval of content before being granted permission to produce video content on the format. Which meant that VHS had porn and Beta didn't. There was no greater innovation than having porn available at home instead of going to a theater... I mean think about it, do you really want to be surrounded by a bunch of other guys when watching that stuff? So, porn killed Beta because Sony did not allow any porn to be released on their format for the longest time as they didn't want to be associated with that.

Porn had very little to do with why beta failed. The main issue was recording time.

 

[wirednuts]

I thought plasmas had a limited life to them set by the design of the screen?

This is why I never bought one, besides the old burn in issues.

yes. and when a plasma starts to fade, the whole unit is worthless.

when an led-lcd tv starts to die around 100,000 hours, you usually just need to replace the power supply inside and youll be good to go again.

there are still plenty of disadvantages to plasma.. but if you want the best picture quality then that's what you get. for most of us though, lcd is still plenty good enough, and if you don't factor in picture quality there is no reason plasma is better.

 

[poofyhairguy]

if you don't factor in picture quality there is no reason plasma is better.

Isn't that kinda like saying:

"As long as you don't drive it on roads my car is better than yours."

 

[Zivic]

yes. and when a plasma starts to fade, the whole unit is worthless.

when an led-lcd tv starts to die around 100,000 hours, you usually just need to replace the power supply inside and youll be good to go again.

not true... based on some of the estimates I have seen, around 50,000 hrs is the estimated span of back lighting for the LCD panels. Plasmas are rated around 100,000 hrs. regardless, you know how long that is?

50,000 / 8hrs = 6250 days = 17.12 yrs at 8 hrs of use a day every day. If your display failed after 17 yrs of use, do you really plan on replacing components?

you are correct that likely the power supply will be one of the first components to fail, but that is the same in both techs.

 

[Zivic]

if you don't factor in picture quality there is no reason plasma is better.

So LCD is better in everything except what matters in a display??

 

[jaqie]

. . . . "As long as you don't drive it on roads my car is better than yours."

Since when are roads all the places you can drive vehicles?

I grew up in the country, and I had as many offroad miles on my first car as onroad... S10 4x4, 1985 model year. And no, I didnt drive it like a lot of idiots in my high school did destroying stuff, I did a lot of farm work and nature preserve stuff. CPR ground, food plots, restoring areas and removing scrap steel from illegal dump sites in the forest, et cetra.

My point stands for the monitors too, actually. image quality is only one of many considerations to me, and getting the best image quality damn everything else is not how I buy monitors, never has been.