Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
In Reply to: RE: Plasma TV posted by fantja on February 11, 2016 at 13:17:29
By what many of the review sites I frequent said, the last couple generations of Panasonics equaled or even surpassed the Pioneer sets. Panasonic did buy the rights to Pioneers technology when Pioneer quit the plasma business (Pioneer was using Panasonic panels for their Kuros, anyway).
You should know that Panasonic NEVER used the plasma technology that made Kuros unique. It was deemed too expensive [note Pio's success in the plasma biz... :)].
It was chemistry, not electronics, probably physics too, but mostly chemistry. We don't even know if Panasonic got the patent rights to use it, since it was never specifically stated AFAIK, no real point in acquiring something you won't use, but who knows how they think.
IIRC there were only 3 companies that ever made panels. Pioneer was an extremely small company in the display biz. Far far smaller than their reputation might make you think. No way they could afford their own panel factory. Just like 99% of American electronics "manufacturers"/brands can't afford their own factory. Doesn't mean much, you farm out work to people who can do it.
Edit: doh!, forgot my main point. What all us plasma lovers were looking forward to was Panasonic using this Pioneer chemistry in their subsequent models, and moving it far forward. But the writing was on the wall, LCD was cheaper, was well-marketed due to its greater affordability, and did have some "green" and size (thickness) advantages that were also promoted. Quality has never been a mass-market selling point, product looks will trump it there every time.
All true points. For me it wasn't LCD that dealt the final death blow to plasma (although LCD would've killed it eventually), it was 4k. Who in the hell wants a 600 pound plasma screen?!? Assuming the cells in the plasma glass were about as small as they could make them, the only other way to do 4k plasma was to make the screen 4 times a large ... and can you imagine the power consumption and heat?
We don't want to start that argument over again, but the reviewer that said that was comparing a four year old Kuro that had seen daily use against a brand spanking new last gen Panny. So maybe we should just agree to disagree.
I guess I'll be another one to agree to disagree. What Hornlover said above was not determined by just one review or reviewer but several and the reviewer that you are referring to calibrated both sets, the Pioneer measured virtually the same as it did 4 years prior (Minolta LS-100 light meter used in 2009, a greater precision Klein K-10 used in 2013). You are also ignoring that the Pioneer Elite Kuro cost $7,000 and the Panasonic Viera TC-P65ZT60 cost $3,800 and when you factor in that the Kuro is 60" and the Viera 65", the panasonic is less than half the cost of the Kuro.
2009 Kuro Measurements
2013 Kuro Measurements
black level 0.0015 ft-L (Klien meter measures 4 places)
white 33.6 ft-L
"But at these high measured contrast ratios, it's unlikely that there will be much of a visible difference, if any, between the two readings." Thomas J. Norton on October 15, 2013
Okay, here we go again. The claim is absurd on its face. Had Pioneer stayed in the plasma business for four more years and advanced their technology, how much better would they have been than Panny?!? The ONLY thing you can claim is that the final versions of the Panny were only as good as a four year old Pioneer! That is not something I'd be crowing about.
"The ONLY thing you can claim is that the final versions of the Panny were only as good as a four year old Pioneer!"
LOL, that IS the ONLY claim made by all those reviewers - that Panasonic had equalled in a couple of areas and SURPASSED in several the Pioneer Kuros. What is absurd is that you are now trying to change that fact with a "what if" question that is pointless. If Pioneer had stayed in the business and had made a better plasma than Panasonics Viera then no one would have made the claim. LOL
You were proven wrong in the 2014 post and you are still wrong. No matter how you spin it, "it was a 4 year old TV or what if Pioneer had stayed in the business", the conclusion remains the same - Panasonic Vieras equalled or bettered Pioneer Kuros. Nothing to argue about, it has been proven both subjectively and objectively. It is what it is.
The good news is that there will be a replacement for our plasmas that already has better picture quality than a plasma and the [OLED] technology will continue to get even better and I'm crowing about that.
Okay, crowing and pointless arguments aside, which OLED's have you seen you really liked? I saw the early entrants from Sammy and was not impressed in a favorable way, but then the viewing environment was your typical Best Buy. That's been a couple of years ago now and I really haven't personally seen any others since. Surely there must have been refinements.
At CES 2016 LG's signature series (55"-77") looked stunning and also supports HDR. OLED panels have improved with brighter displays and a wider color gamut. They also figured out how to make all the subpixel diodes last the same amount of time as well as other technical improvements. Panasonic has OLED TVs for 2016 and Sony may follow as well, which will help to bring down the price and help with even more improvements.
"LG's OLED TVs deliver the best picture quality of any TV we've ever tested, and in 2016 the company is expanding the lineup even further." -CNET
"If there were any lingering doubts about OLED being the true successor to plasma, CES 2016 shattered them. Across the show floor, new OLED TV models from LG and Panasonic managed to outshine all the competition" -THE VERGE
I do not like LCD and would not choose one over OLED but I must admit some of the best using HDR, IPS, Quantum Dot and local dimming technologies were pretty impressive (for an LCD!). Panasonic, LG and Samsung models all looked great.
mrdavis, you're not such a bad guy after all! Thanks for catching me up on the current OLED offerings. My biggest objection to the early Sammys was that they made everything look like a cartoon. Incredibly artificial looking. I have a decided predilection toward the film-look and not the video-look, and those early Sammys were just, well, awful looking to me - the video-look on steroids. However, I saw it at BB and they are certainly not known for presenting their products in a flattering manner. The sales guy that schmoozed me while I was looking was their senior TV department guy and he seemed really proud of it and told me that he'd personally overseen the tweaking of the picture. I uncharacteristically bit my tongue, thanked him for his time and left the store. I am encouraged that OLED is making progress toward being a worthy replacement for our beloved plasma screens.
Hey I really am a nice guy just ask my friends, I have all the friends money can buy!!!
Sounds like the salesman got carried away with his color and motion adjustments. You can always set the motion adjustments (blur and judder) to your taste or completely turn them off so it should not be a problem. I think OLEDs will be an excellent replacement for plasma, the picture quality looks fantastic.
Well, its not like they were able to compare it against a new Pioneer, since they were discontinued some years ago.
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: