Plasma TV is Dead - Pioneer Exits

1

1tribeca

Audioholic
Hold you friggin horses people!!! Pioneer ain't goin' anywhere. The first clue was the headline...bulging at the seams with A/V hyperbole.

There is an announcement (official from Pioneer) coming Friday.

I think you'll find that "some" of the components of future Pioneers will contain Panny technology ie. the glass and a few other goodies. The main guts...video processing, Kuro technology etc. will remain Pioneer. Why would you not continue to make the premier panel?

It's a matter of forethought & economics. Panasonic is a HUGE company compared to Pioneer (as far as revenue and market share are concerned) So they can afford to maintain a premium product and market it accordingly. Remember, Panny has their large fingers in all kinds of profitable pie...Pioneer is pretty much a plasma & A/V component company solely.

The nearest comparison I can see at this point is like the Porsche Cayenne...it starts with a Volkswagen Toureg frame, but in the end it comes out a Porsche...fast, well built, slick, and expensive! BTW, Porsche now owns 33% of Volks...and growing...just an aside!

If you're worried, go grab an Elite PRO-110 while you can...new panel coming June/July!!
 
J

JackT

Audioholic
Nope, sorry. Clint said it was dead.

By way of review, here is a list of things that Clint DeBoer has declared dead:

1)BluRay
2)HD-DVD
3)Plasma Displays
4)Magnets
5)Peanut Butter & Jelly Sandwiches
 
1

1tribeca

Audioholic
C'mon...Clint is a good fella! Like most "rumours" there is some truth to the article. Things are definitely gonna change at Pioneer, let's just hope it's for the good and that Elite panels remain leagues above everyone else.

Prick up your ears Friday....drumroll please...
 
Duffinator

Duffinator

Audioholic Field Marshall
FWIW, Pioneer hasn't announced it's getting out of plasma.
True but I'm not sure that's the point of this article. Pioneer, which has been one of the biggest supporters of plasma technology, invested billions of dollars in plasma manufacturing while Sony, Samsung, LG, Philipps, Sharp, and on and on were investing in LCD plants. I posted articles here almost three years ago questioning Pioneers decision as being very near sighted and a bad business decision. So now, after that large committment and lots of money, they are saying they are getting out of manufacturing pdp's. So what they are admitting is they were wrong and must now go in a different direction. Three years ago capital investment was ten times as much in LCD as plasma. LCD has virtually caught up and will soon match or surpass plasma in every catagory. While Pioneer pulling out of plasma manufacturing is not the death of pdp's the writing is on the wall. How much money is Sony putting into pdp technology? Remember, regardless of PQ all of these companies are in business to make money. Pioneer isn't making much if any money so the right thing for them to do, as a publicly traded company, is to maximize shareholder wealth and make good business decision that make money.

I own a Sharp LCD and will be purchasing a new TV for my HT within the next 60 days. I was looking exclusively at Panasonic and Pioneer plasmas 58" and 60" but this news is making me rethink that. While PQ is very important I don't want to buy a technology that may well be history in two years. I'll still most likely get the new Panasonic 800 series anyway but I will once again look at LCD's before I make my purchase.
 
stratman

stratman

Audioholic Ninja
True but I'm not sure that's the point of this article. Pioneer, which has been one of the biggest supporters of plasma technology, invested billions of dollars in plasma manufacturing while Sony, Samsung, LG, Philipps, Sharp, and on and on were investing in LCD plants. I posted articles here almost three years ago questioning Pioneers decision as being very near sighted and a bad business decision. So now, after that large committment and lots of money, they are saying they are getting out of manufacturing pdp's. So what they are admitting is they were wrong and must now go in a different direction. Three years ago capital investment was ten times as much in LCD as plasma. LCD has virtually caught up and will soon match or surpass plasma in every catagory. While Pioneer pulling out of plasma manufacturing is not the death of pdp's the writing is on the wall. How much money is Sony putting into pdp technology? Remember, regardless of PQ all of these companies are in business to make money. Pioneer isn't making much if any money so the right thing for them to do, as a publicly traded company, is to maximize shareholder wealth and make good business decision that make money.

I own a Sharp LCD and will be purchasing a new TV for my HT within the next 60 days. I was looking exclusively at Panasonic and Pioneer plasmas 58" and 60" but this news is making me rethink that. While PQ is very important I don't want to buy a technology that may well be history in two years. I'll still most likely get the new Panasonic 800 series anyway but I will once again look at LCD's before I make my purchase.
I don't think that in 24 months plasmas will be extinct or deminished. I still believe Panny will hold it's course with plasma production for 2 reasons: invested capitol, economy of production. It wouldn't make business sense for Panny to get into LCD production when they're making out like bandits with plasma screens and besides LCD, like plasma, is a transitional technology. They've done well because their business model is sound: quality, high production, low margin, volume sales. If anything I'd say look to Panny and others to start investing in alternative display technology such as OLED or a hybrid in the near future.
 
Duffinator

Duffinator

Audioholic Field Marshall
I don't think that in 24 months plasmas will be extinct or deminished. I still believe Panny will hold it's course with plasma production for 2 reasons: invested capitol, economy of production. It wouldn't make business sense for Panny to get into LCD production when they're making out like bandits with plasma screens and besides LCD, like plasma, is a transitional technology. They've done well because their business model is sound: quality, high production, low margin, volume sales. If anything I'd say look to Panny and others to start investing in alternative display technology such as OLED or a hybrid in the near future.
I don't think they will be extinct but their market share will be further eroded as it has been now. I wouldn't be surprised to see Samsung and others stop selling plasmas within two years. Please define "making out like bandits". They maybe be selling lots of TV's but are they making any money? ;) You don't have to "look to Panny and others to start investing in alternative display technologies such as OLED" they have already been doing it for years. :eek:

Remember Pioneer wasn't going to make or sell LCD TV's come hell or high water three years ago. So which one happened? IMO this is a big decision that will effect the rest of the plasma industry.
 
stratman

stratman

Audioholic Ninja
Please define "making out like bandits". They maybe be selling lots of TV's but are they making any money? ;)
I can't give internal numbers, but if you do a bit of research into Matsushita's growth, you can gauge more or less. I'll talk to my analyst buddy see if he can get some internal numbers. As for the obvious, you don't hold a commanding lead for so long in a technology segment if you're hemorrhaging capitol, look at what happened to Pioneer and Toshiba. The fact that Pioneer stuck with plasma and Masushita proves that they felt comfortable with their new supplier and still have enough faith in the platform. Matsushita is also investing in LCD technology, but not as heavy as their competition, there is a strong LCD market for sub 42inch sets. Still, both technologies have their days numbered and neither will survive.
 
annunaki

annunaki

Moderator
My statement was not any sort of misinformation at all. I have played around extensively with LCD sets featuring 120hz technology. (Last week in fact) The 120hz adds an effect to the image that is not intended to be there. To be honest it is rather annoying and makes it harder to get immersed in the movie. I do not want movies shot on film appear as though they were shot with a hand-held camcorder in live action. That is the type of effect 120hz adds.

In my opinion, LCD has to come a LONG way before I will even consider purchasing one.

Besides that, they still have not fixed the black level/color uniformity, off axis viewing problems. The low res signals still look better on plasmas as well.



It is misinformative for you to state that as though it is a universal property of all LCD panels. It probably was as recently as two or three years ago, but it certainly is not anymore.

Perhaps it has been a few years since you have visited an electronics store. Two or three years ago, the effect was time smear, which was due to the decay time or hysteresis being too slow. That was fixed, as evidenced by the fact that many of LCDs from a year or two back exhibited a jerky effect with motion. There is no way that the jerky effect could occur as long as the hysteresis was too great (slow). With the hysteresis problem being fixed, all that was needed to fix the jerky effect, which was effectively due to the over-correction of the hysteresis problem, was to double the frame refresh rate. If you do that by synthesizing a complete (progressive) frame in between each time-adjacent pair of complete frames in the signal, then there can hardly be any doubt that the net effect will be an improvement in the perceived smoothness of the motion.

It should also be noted that when reverse 3:2 pulldown is applied to extract 24 original frames per second for content that was originally shot at 24 frames per second, that the ratio of original frames to frames as presented on the screen is a nice integer ratio of 1:5, which tells you that in between each time-adjacent pair of original cinematic frames, you need to synthesize four frames. Were you to simply repeat each frame four times, the effect would be very similar to the jerky motion that you see in the theater. If you have observed jerky motion with an LCD panel TV that uses a screen refresh rate of 120 Hz, the most likely explanation is that you were watching film-based content where the LCD TV had applied reverse 3:2 pulldown to extract the original 24 frames per second, but then simply repeated each frame four times in succession. If so, what you saw was very much the same as you would have seen had you watched that film-based content in a theater.
 
bandphan

bandphan

Banned
annunaki is correct the over processing with 120hz seems to do more harm than help.

stratman is also correct in that pioneer will continue to put out plasmas, and they are both correct in stating that plasma looks better that lcd.

I have yet to see any lcd that looks as good as plasma(with in well branded circles). All the negaitive talk about burn in, cost more to operate, heat factor ect, doesnt cut it for me. Ive ben on the recieving end of the "my friend says" and "consumer reports says" for along time and have come to find that you cant change peoples opinions. IMO pioneer hasnt been in the tv business in way that others have, they stuck to their niche, and the dollars are not falling in a good way so the are cutting fat to try to make it work. When they were purchasing panels from nec their processing is what made them, and i believe it will still make them, as long as the are in the game. Technology is still the driving factor for sales, so as long as new tech keeps rolling out, old tech will be questioned and put to the test and if the dollars are not there, the product will dissapear. A good buddy of mine recently told me that their company is dropping all tvs under 32" because the cant compete with the wallmarts of the world, and his company has been in florida since 77, with a pretty good rep. If the money isnt there how does a business justify their model? They dont they change it or create a new one
 
1

1tribeca

Audioholic
Anything below 40" is not worth making a premium type panel...not cost effective....with BB and other big box stores selling small size panels like LG, and other assorted garbage for wickedly low prices. In fact, here in Canada, it's next to impossible to grab the Pioneer (not Elite) panels in 42" or "50" because BB and Future Shop (same owner) has snagged them all up!! Keep in mind "Elite" is a line that is nowhere to be found outside N. America

Plasma isn't going anywhere fast!! Sure, new technologies will arise and replace the old, but LCD & plasma are still selling large numbers.

The LCDs of "today" are so far from being equal to plasma in PQ that it'll take a lot more time to equal out...if at all. By then maybe both will be toast.

Medium-sized A/V corps. like Pioneer have to brace themselves in an ever-changing marketplace...filled with takeovers by "big fish" etc. Hence the reason they bought a good amount of Sharp stock, and Sharp purchased Pioneer stock.

By the way...it was Pioneer who "pioneered" OLED technology (the used it in their car audio displays) and they sold the technology to Sony some time ago!
 
Jack Hammer

Jack Hammer

Audioholic Field Marshall
Samsung told me to only use the 120hz for live sporting events or fast action "scenes" in movies. It causes motion blurring and "3 ball effect" while using it on non'fast action scenes. I like the concept and initially was impressed with the effect, but like many, now I just leave it off. It causes more problems than it fixes.

Jack
 
K

kaiser_soze

Audioholic Intern
My statement was not any sort of misinformation at all. I have played around extensively with LCD sets featuring 120hz technology. (Last week in fact) The 120hz adds an effect to the image that is not intended to be there. To be honest it is rather annoying and makes it harder to get immersed in the movie. I do not want movies shot on film appear as though they were shot with a hand-held camcorder in live action. That is the type of effect 120hz adds.

In my opinion, LCD has to come a LONG way before I will even consider purchasing one.

Besides that, they still have not fixed the black level/color uniformity, off axis viewing problems. The low res signals still look better on plasmas as well.
The problem here is quite simply that you are taking flaws that are present in many LCD panels and attributing those flaws to all LCD panels in a universal way. By analogy, it would be as though, if some of your relatives were known to be liars, that I went around saying that the problem with your family is that you are all liars.

The off-axis viewing issue is one example of this. This is unquestionably a problem with many LCD panels, but it is definitely NOT a universal problem with LCD panels. It is logically dubious to take a flaw that is generally present in some category of thing and claim that it is universally, invariably a flaw with that category of thing. That is exactly what you are doing, and it is simply B.S.

The same applies to your claims re the 120 Hz refresh rate. The 120 Hz refresh rate is not even an intrinsic part of LCD technology. The technical property of LCD molecules that can potentially lead to motion-related artifacts, is the hysteresis of the molecule, i.e., the resolving time for it to return, from the form where it permits light to pass, to the form where it does not permit light to pass. It has been true that the hysteresis of the molecules was generally so great as to cause motion smear. This is certainly not universally true of flat-panel LCD televisions today.

It was only necessary to reduce the hysteresis to the point where motion would look the same on an LCD panel using a 60 Hz refresh rate as it does on a CRT set using a 60 Hz refresh rate. But it is manifest that the resolving time of the molecules was decreased to the point that it even offered the potential for doubling the screen refresh rate. As I previously explained, it is not difficult to imagine ways in which this could be done poorly. In particular, if reverse 3:2 pulldown is applied to film-based content to extract the original 24 frames per each second, then exactly four additional frames have to be inserted between each of those original frames. The simplest way to do that will be by simple repetition of the original frame, in which case the effect that you see on a good, state-of-the-art flat panel LCD TV is for every intent and purpose the same as what you see when you watch that film-based content in a theater. When I watch DVD's sourced from film-based content, the motion looks entirely the same as motion looks when watching a movie in a movie theater. The inherent jerkiness of fast motion captured by a 24 fps film camera is faithfully preserved.
 
Duffinator

Duffinator

Audioholic Field Marshall
Excellent post KS.

But the point of this thread is the future of the plasma technology and not to debate, once again, the merits of LCD vs. plasma. So is there a future for pdp's? I for one think it's days are numbered. And nobody has answered my question:

"Remember Pioneer wasn't going to make or sell LCD TV's come hell or high water three years ago. So which one happened?" ;)
 
J

JBElliott

Audiophyte
One of the killers of plasma television is supposed to be the 1" thick screens that will come out in the future. To 1" screens I say, so what? What's the big deal? You can hang them on the wall? Sure, but you've still got to plug cables into the television no matter how thin it is. That being the case, hanging anything on the wall and dealing with hiding the cables is a pain in the neck and will always be more difficult that putting the television on a stand on a cabinet or the light. On the other hand, if the 1" screens have can receive the A/V signals and power wirelessly (to power part some MIT scientists have developed in the past year or so), then hanging them on the wall becomes as easy as putting up a picture and bigger, heavier screens will face a lot of problems. But until that time, 1" screens don't really buy you anything.
 
Cool, a new place to direct hate-mail: http://www.ultimateavmag.com/news/308pioback/

:)

We'll know more Friday, but I suspect it will just be a formalization of this news - that Pioneer is ceasing making panels and will simply assemble plasma displays using Panasonic glass. I bet the displays will be just as good and perhaps they will even work out a deal to make Matsushita's panels even better (ie license them some technology).
 
M

Maxsunset

Audiophyte
Cool, a new place to direct hate-mail: http://www.ultimateavmag.com/news/308pioback/
Clint, the reason people are getting pissed at you is because you are making deliberately inflammatory headlines that are simply not true. No other AV new source is being as xyz about this news, mostly because they have more journalistic integrity then you obviously do, and they are also saddened that the most advanced and best plasma glass manufacturer might be ceasing production. You seem to have some sort of morbid death wish just to prove your predictions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top