Help required....I'm buying a new TV in a couple of weeks and not sure which is better. Plasma certainly seems to have the best picture but I've heard they're unreliable

I will be going for between 37-42" if thats any help.

Thanks in advance.

I've got no idea, but the Home Entertainment Equipment forum members might have......

My parents just bought a new LCD tv and were told at the time that the plasma in a plasma tv dies after about 5 years and needs replacing and that a plasma uses about 4 times as much electricity as an LCD tv.

Check this out......


The link....

Many of us feel that traditional CRT sets offer far superior reproduction for normal standard definition television pictures. I would not buy either.
Last edited by Spot : 02-12-2006 at 15:02

That may be so but I recently gave my 19" CRT monitor away even though it was still in perfect condition.......

It was just too big and I was able to buy a 19" wide screen HD LCD monitor for £129......what more could I ask.....it's perfect.....

General rule:

For TVs under 42" - LCD
For TVs over 42" - Plasma

Ive got a 32" Samsung R7 LCD which is great - there is a 40" version that you might want to look at.
-Chris

Also bear in mind that if you use a PVR or a games console and you leave the Pause button on for too long, the image on screen will "burn in" to the Plasma Screen. It will eventually wear off but can be very annoying when viewing othe channels.

I would go for LCD personally.

It really depends on what you are using for the source of your picture and how large.
LCDs get exponentially more expensive with size because the bigger panels get lower yields (i.e they have to throw more away at test because the number of dead pixels exceeds the quality minima). Other than that the differences are:

Plasma
---------
+ better blacks
+ better viewing angles

LCD
-----
+ more reliable (no screen burn either)
+ lower power consuption

Basically, up to 36", LCD has the edge (and are generally better visually)
Above this, unless you want to break the bank, stick with plasma.

*However*, I'll warn you now, if you are used to watching digital (SD) on a CRT, you will probably hate the picture on a flat panel - they show up every macroblock! You might be better waiting for H.264 content to become more prevalent (at which point the panels will be much cheaper anyway).

Your parents were lied to by the salesperson. Plasma TVs have a 60,000 hour lifespan, don't use any more power than an LCD, and in terms of picture quality from different viewing angles, plasma wins hands down, with a viewing angle of about 160 degrees, without loss of contrast and colour. Overall, taking everything into consideration, an LCD screen isn't worth the money it costs. I certainly would never consider buying an LCD.

Here is a website that gives you all the information you need about LCD and Plasma, so will be useful to anyone, including the OP, who is considering buying one, but isn't sure which one to buy.
http://www.plasma-lcd-facts.co.uk/home/

I presume you are referring to a computer monitor which is a different kettle of fish, Lcd monitors and tvs are much better at at displaying higher resolutions such as the output of a computer or a hd broadcast but they are not as good at displaying the standard definition that tv is broadcast at. Thats because when a standard tv picture is displayed that's supposed to be at about 480 lines it has to be stretched across up to about 1080 lines in some of the better lcd screens. Computer displays are at much higher resolutions than standard tv broadcasts so thats why they look a lot better on lcd screens.
I'm sure someone can explain it better, just look at the two next to eachother next time your in a tv shop and the difference is glaringly obvious.

Plasma doesn't have any screen burn either, http://www.plasma-lcd-facts.co.uk/myths/screen-burn/

Nor do they have a higher power consumption. In fact, if anything, it is LCD screens which use more power, NOT Plasma screens.
http://www.plasma-lcd-facts.co.uk/myths/energy-use/
Last edited by 3REs2hUp : 02-12-2006 at 16:08

That link is just "Pro Plasma propaganda"....A few days ago I was talking with a Plazma dealer who admitted "burn in" is a problem he has recent customers complaining about it.

If you read the manuals from Plazma makers they warn about leaving the picture frozen and channel logos...If Burn in was not a problem such warnings would not be needed.....Just as they are not needed on CRT TV's.


Motto...Beware of sales hype

Also, there are still people around who think the earth is flat.

My plasma set has a far superior picture than any TV I've ever owned, even on standard channels, never mind HD.

Thats a complete myth, modern plasma tv's should last for 20 years of normal every day use.

Early Plasmas had some problems, mainly with screen burn which have been largely resolved, but Plasma's do NOT have to be refilled.

They do use a lot of power though, but so do LCD's, they have too to power a 42"+ Screen

In what way are they "pro plasma propaganda?" Each of the 3 companies involved in putting the website together make and sell both Plasma and LCD, and it even says on the site that LCD screens are better for screens less than 37 inches. So in what way is that "pro plasma propaganda?"

As for burn-in, I myself have a 43 inch Pioneer plasma which, despite getting maximum usage since I got it a year and a half ago, certainly never had problems with burn-in.

The website doesn't actually say there is no burn-in. It says that burn-in has been "largely eliminated," which doesn't mean it can't still happen, hence the warnings in the manuals. It is unlikely to happen, but not impossible, and they have to cover their backs because we are living in a sue nation.

Here's the relevant exert from the website regarding burn-in:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Myth
Plasma TVs are seriously prone to burn in.

Fact
In the early days, plasma TVs were susceptible to screen burn. However, this issue has been largely eliminated thanks to greater use of built-in screen-saving systems and major phosphors improvements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

And many of you either haven't experienced the alternatives to CRT or need to make an appointment with an optician as soon as possible. So you are doing yourself out of a superior viewing experience due to your ignorance, so well done. Still, your loss. No skin off my nose.

I used to say I would never buy a widesreen TV, but my open mind decided to look into them when it came time for a new TV, and it's the best thing I ever done, in terms of visual home entertainment.

While I watch most of my tv using a small 15" LCD tv, I also still own a 20+ year old 14" portable CRT tv with a very good picture, but the long lifespan of the tv is most likely down to the poor quality of the programming broadcast, meaning it hardly ever gets switched on..

On the other hand I've gone through dozens of CRT monitors for my PC yet my most recent LCD monitor has outlasted each of the CRT monitors which usually die with a dimming picture, or has resolution switching problems.

I can't speak for plasma since I don't spend any real time with a plasma display, again I've heard all the bad rumours and I've seen some less than stunning displays in the local electronics store but I also have seen a few really good displays, which gives me hope that plasma is a good technology, the lack of any real complaints even on digital spy seems to bear witness to the fact that plasma isn't bad.
Last edited by mikeydb : 03-12-2006 at 10:00

Whereas my 21" CRT monitor has been running fine for years. Buy once, buy right, buy quality.

And 42" screen? maybe PLACSDMA!

Recent case confirmed by Plazma dealer guy has screen burn in of the logo on sky sports. Manuals give no indication that "burn in" is a problem of the past. They try to mention it as little as possible. I wnder why!!! Not rocket science to know why really. Makers that sell both Plazma and LCD want to sell both dont't they!!!!All Hype to sell the plazma technology along with LCD ..

The day Plazma manufacturers dont feel the need to warn buyers that leaving a static image for a mere 20 min will result in image retention and even shorter times will kick in screen saver functions like dimming the picture after a picture is frozen for a mere 3 minutes then that will be the day I believe the hype...

Sorry!!!! But from an honest dealer the horses mouth so to speak image retention is far far from gone away...After all they are the guys that get the complaints...

Well they must be buying cheep plasma screens then, which, as such, would be cheeply manufactured, hence the problems. As I always say, you get what you pay for, and I've never had any problems with mine, and it's on for at least 12 hours a day, and has been since I bought it.

Are these budgie type screens different from lcd and plasma then? lol "cheep cheep" - geddit?
Sorry stewbob - I couldn't resist. (It's "cheap" by the way )

Nowadays I think there's very little difference between a good LCD and a good plasma in terms of image quality. That's what the magazines say anyway. LCD's are a bit sharper than plasma which tend to be a bit soft - more cinematic some say. The blacks are better on plasma for the simple reason that the LCD relies on a backlight to illuminate the picture and there is always some tendency for this to leak through. It's a diminishing problem though. The angle of view isn't much different either.

I bought an LCD because, in my experience at work, I have never had an LCD fail in many years. Plasmas are a different matter - we've had several die. The dealers say that the modern ones are now more reliable. This may be true but I guess it'll be a few years before we know for sure. The other thing is power consumption. If you look at the manufacturers quoted figures LCDs use less power, like for like. Some say that this because the power consumption tests are done using a white screen and this means that the plasma is using more power than usual. On a black screen it's power consumption would be much less, whereas, for an LCD, the main power user is the backlight which is on all the time. I'm dubious about this though. The heat coming from a plasma must use up a lot of power - you can feel it.

Oops. I never realised my mistake there, or I'd have corrected it. Simple mistake. Thanks for pointing it out though.
Last edited by 3REs2hUp : 05-12-2006 at 19:30