buckeyefan1

[ew110254]

Well, you gave me some good advise before on subwoofers. You recommended the HSU for the price and I hemmed and hawed and guess what.... bought the SVS. Am I happy...not really. Yeah, the sub is real powerful doesn't deliver the quality (in my opinion). I was swayed by the price and I think I got what I paid for. Anyway, enough of that.

Now, it's TV time to top out my system. LCD, plasma, display, or TV...it's just on and on. I'm thinking about 50" plasma display which is cost reasonable. But what do displays lack that regular plasma monitors provide? And maybe LCD is the way to go. I looked at several nice LCDs. I really liked the 50" Hitachi. But you just can't beat the plasma color. The Sony FWD50PX1 is reasonably priced at $3799 (on-line).

Just thought I'd get this discussion kicked off through you.

Thanks,
ew
Denon AVR-5800
Denon DVD-2900
B&W 804 mains
B&W HTM center
B&W CDM-2 rears
SVS 25-31 Pci sub

 

[jaxvon]

You know, you could always return the sub and get a Hsu...

Also, if there are any Martin-Logan dealers in your area, you might want to check out a Dynamo. They retail for $600. While it won't go as low as your SVS (or be as loud), I've heard nothing but good things about the quality of sound and smoothness of Martin Logan subs.

 

[av-man]

Well I'm not buckeyefan but I'll give it a shot.
The difference between a Plasma display and a Plasma TV is:
The display is a commercial or industrial unit. The picture capability is generally the same but the displays are not usually HDCP compliant so you wont be able to use a DVI or HDMI from anything but a computer. They also usually don't have a tuner and speakers are always optional.
I lean away from LCD. They have a bad warranty for paxel burn out sometimes you can have as many as 9 gone before they will cover it. The light output is also very low which in my opinion means a picture that is just a bit dim looking. If I were looking at something other than Plasma I would consider DLP.

Sorry for jumping in but I was bored

 

[Mark Duncan]

The only negative thing to consider, which I didn't before I bought my first HDTV (a DLP which has now been replaced by a 55" plasma) is bulb cost, and downtime while waiting on replacement bulbs. I used my DLP for a computer monitor as well as a HDTV, so it was on a large portion of the day. I was burning bulbs out anywhere from 3 months to 9 months. At 400 dollars a pop, plus 2-4 weeks downtime while I waited on the bulb, I couldn't stand it. Another negative about DLP is their warm up times. I couldn't stand to wait for it to warm up for 40 seconds everytime I turned it on. Even if you accidentally hit the power button, you had to wait again as it warmed up again. It also has a cool down stage so that if you hit the power accidentally you had to wait through the cool down stage, then the warm up stage again. I just left it on all the time... Now my plasma has a power saver feature that puts it in standby whenever I'm not using the computer. It saves many many hours on the sets life.

Mark

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

ew,

I'm probably not the guy to ask about displays. I was actually shopping today for a flat screen for my folks (fathers day). I've done a tone of reading up on all types. I own a small 20" LCD and love it, but it's mainly for PC usage. It has excellent dvd reproduction, but the tuner blows for standard def tv. I have an older 36" Toshiba CRT that has an excellent picture, and until that unit dies, I'll probably wait out the technology for a large 50+" flat screen. I prefer plasma by Pioneer Elite or Hitachi for picture, but don't care for the high price, and the recurring burn in problem. They say they have the problem licked, but every manager I talk to in high end shops says it's not licked, and never to run CNN or "bar/ticker" type programming. None of them cover screen burn in on the warranty. DLP seems to have an excellent picture, no burn in, but has the issue with bulb replacement as mentioned above. LCD has the issue of poor blacks, and slower response time, although it's getting better. 8ms is about the best, and it should be undetectable at that speed. LCD is just a lot more expensive for the largest screens (flat LCD). I almost dropped three grand on two LCD sets (37" and 32") a few days ago, until reading up on some new technology that makes the picture ultra sharp. What can I say? Just very confused about the growing pains of the move toward standardized HD television. In 5 years, it won't even be an issue.

 

[Catdaddy]

I am the opposite of Mark, myself. I had a plasma and then went DLP, though i have a 38 HD tube im very happy with, too.

The plasma picture is nice, but if you get the right DLP setup the picture is pretty nice too (I actually think that the picture i get from my projector/screen is better than what i got from my Sony.)

The big negative for me with the plasma is the burn-in. Id watch a movie for 2 hours and have to turn the tv on to a fuzzy channel just to get the letterboxing removed from the screen. I could only imagine the loss of sleep I would get from running an xbox or a pc to it.

Now, some of this was probably in my mind .. in that i was seeing things that sometimes probably werent there .. but the lack of peace of mind was enough for me to look down other pastures. No such problem in regards to peace of mind with DLP.

PLus i got the best of both worlds, got a full size screen in my media room, with a picture that im ecstatic about.

 

[ew110254]

more on that subject

Thanks guys for your input. I guess the display is not the way to go but I sure did like the price. My problem with the plasma monitors is that I'm getting way too many accessories that I don't need and am no doubt paying a premium for them. But what else is new.

I visited with a pretty knowledgeble guy at a high end video store and he told me that plasma screen burn in wasn't near as bad as people say. He did say that you need to be careful when the screen is new. Once it's broken in, he said burn in was not a problem. I was also worried about screen life, which I'd heard to be about 7-years. He said that LG now has a 16-year gaurantee for their plasma screens (true or not?).

I have a good friend that's a TV repair guy and he said to stay away (far away) from DLP because of the bulb burn-out and the very high temperatures that these TVs operate.

That still leaves possibility of plasma or LCD. Price is a definite factor here. And I really don't have to have a flat screen either since the TV is going into a console... But again, the plasma picture is just soooo much better than LCD. Anybody know about pros and cons for various brands and the bells and whistles that come with them. Like I said, I don't need a lot of accessories (picture in picture, memory stick, internal surround sound capability, etc.).

Like you Buckeye, I think that if I wait a few months, everything will be different again, and cost will no doubt continue to drop. I read your post on the new chip for LCD that's supposed to better the picture. Do you have any additional info. onm this? Like what brand, when's it coming out, etc.?

I love this forum, sure wished I'd known about it before years of trial and error!

Oh, and the SVS sub. Well you know how it is...I bought it, so I'll suffer with it for a while before I change...and save a little money at the same time for better quality.

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

I read your post on the new chip for LCD that's supposed to better the picture. Do you have any additional info. onm this? Like what brand, when's it coming out, etc.?

It's a chip for the Olevia brand of LCD's. I own their 20" and love it, and really like the customer service I've gotten from them, as well as the access to the techs if I have a question. Here's the info.
www.syntaxgroups.com/idea_tech.html