 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
74.230.247.140
Other than Panasonic, it seems that Plasma is only available in low end screens.
Plasma looks better and doesn't have motion artifacts (to speak of), yet it is being phased out. To my eye you have to spend a lot of money to get a LCD/LED screen that matches the quality of a Plasma, yet Plasma is getting harder to find.
Why ?
Is it because LCD and LED more easily meet green standards for energy consumption and heat generation ?
Best,
Ross
Follow Ups:
because because becauuuuuse because
because of the wonderful things it does
I don't know if they are moving away from them. Panasonic is certainly dedicated to making them. They recently opened a new factory just for plasma manufacturing. Samsung and LG also offer a handfull of plasmas. Other manufacturers selling plasmas include RCA, Insignia and Zenith.
Power consumption has been dramatically reduced on the new sets, compared to the ones made just a couple of years ago. For instance, a typical new 50" Panasonic (the TC-P50S30) consumes 106 watts when on, compared to 550 watts for our 3 year old Panasonic 50".
is what's killing picture quality for us consumers. Throw around lots of new fancy words and numbers, and the public flocks, kind of like how the public was led to flock to MP3's, mass-market receivers "good enough" for music, etc, etc.
beats, by a noticeable margin, our 4 yr old 46" "regular" slim LCD (recently sold). So I've got to give props to the backlit LED technology.
As for the 240hz, I'm pretty sure I disabled it as the effect wasn't to our liking.
"I'd like to own a squadron of tanks"
My new Panasonic Palsma, 50", List $1500, does not get hot or even warm really, and we were told it would use $24 / year electricity, based on 5 hour a day. We use it less.
Assuming only 3 hours a day at about 300 watts operation, that's around one kilowatt hour per day, if in 365 days you only used $24 worth of electricity, the per kilowatt hour price would have to be $.065... who on earth pays only six and a half cents per kilowatt hour? 5 hours operation would mean 4.4 cents per kwH.
Either you were misled, or your TV is much more efficient that any other 50" plasma on the planet, or electricity prices are artificially low where you are.....
Edits: 12/06/11
Your numbers do not match Panasonic's numbers for their 50" Viera S30. Remember, plasmas are seldom listed with average power numbers -- they nearly always list max power draw. That's not fair because power draw fluctuates with on screen brightness with plasma (average ≠ max). LCD, on the other hand, has very little power draw fluctuation (average ≈ max).
Click on the yellow Energy Guide icons under each display in the link below:
I wouldn't expect realistic energy use numbers from a manufacturer any more than realistic fuel eff. numbers from the auto manufacturers!But to be fair: so you're saying that a plasma screen doesn't often use the max power?
Also, power prices in the US do seem to be lower (artificially so, I might add) than in the rest of the world. I'm in NZ.
Edits: 12/06/11
Actual power draw with a plasma display depends on program material.
However, plasmas are rated at the max power draw. This is based on a completely white screen (this basically represents "full on" mode). So the question is, how often when a display is in use do you have a completely white screen?
Not only that, but it also assumes that brightness and contrast are at max levels. If you calibrate your set (and you should), the levels will never be at those max settings. Todays plasmas usually consume less energy in a typical situation than LCD/LED types.
That's what salespeople and fanboiz are for.
Our 50" Panasonic doesn't get hot, either. You have to almost touch the screen to feel any warmth at all. The 'heating' of Plasma TV's is way over-hyped, in my opinion.
I have a friend with a 5 year old Samsung Plasma, and he says when you get near it you can feel the heat. I was told the new ones (Panasonic) solve that ( as we can attest!) and the energy use. We'll see how that goes, hoping for the best. The Plasma TVs I saw were WAY better than any of Sony Bravias, etc.
I had a 42" Toshiba plasma set that I bought in 2006. It put out tons of heat, so much so that I had to run a window air conditioner in order to operate it in the summer (I don't have central air). The picture quality (720p) was fine except for horrendous macro blocking in dark areas. I replaced it with a Samsung 46" 1080p set that makes no heat, has better picture quality, and cost a LOT less than I paid for my old TV. I didn't even consider plasma sets due to the weight (over 110 pounds versus 40 pounds) and the heat.
110 lbs vs 40 lbs? What does a wall or decent entertainment center care? So weight has no relevance, unless you hold up your display. Which reminds me of a very short conversation I had with a Best Buy "team leader". He was trying to impress two of his underlings about DLP vs plasma. He started going on about the "advantages" of DLP sets and actually picked up a 43" Samsung to show me how little it weighed. I said, "That's nice, but most people either put their displays on an entertainment center or mount them on the wall. Not too many people hold their display in their arms when it's TV time." . The other two started laughing so hard they had to walk away.
He never spoke to me again.
As for heat, I never owned a Toshiba plasma, but my late 2003 model 50" Panasonic is only warm even after hours of gaming from the kids, a Sunday's worth of football games or a movie. Even my 42" Sylvania (made by Funai) from 2007 is barely hot after hours of use. And that's because it has no fans. The 50" Panasonic has two virtually silent fans that can only be heard at startup -- a slight "whirrr" -- but go stealth in about 5 seconds.
Thanks for the tip about the fans, I thought maybe it had a hard drive. The fan whirring is very soft.
The 42" Panasonic plasma I bought in 2007 runs very cool. After watching a long film, when I go to shut it off the air coming from the vents on top is barely perceptably warmer than room temperature.
Are going to create yet another half-assed law that outlaws plasma tv's for using too much power.
It's only a matter of time.
"Lock up when you're done and don't touch the piano."
-Greg House
This crap started a while ago. I am sure Pelosi, governor MoonBeam and the like will be the first to surrender their big screen TVs (along with their private jets) !!!
I read the LA Times article. Very interesting.Left-wing politicians and their environmentalist supporters love to compartmentalize topics - it makes it easier to promote them. But step back and look at the big picture: They don't want any new 'traditional' power plants (coal, nuclear, hydroelectric), but they want us to drive electric cars. So, where's all the power for the electric cars going to come from? Yup, you guessed it: Solar, wind, and savings in other electricity usage. They know that their solar and wind manufacturer friends aren't going to be able to provide any where near the additional supply, so they want you to cut back on usage in other activities, and are willing to force you to do it via legislation.
Meanwhile, the utility companies continue to ask for rate hikes, so, even if you manage to reduce your total usage by 20 percent over the next five years, your electric bill won't go down. It's another aspect of the squeeze on consumers: Make you cut back on product usage, but make you continue to pay the same amount of money. This is another form of what I call "hidden inflation". The same thing is happening in the grocery store. Have you noticed that you're paying the same or more for a product, but the package is smaller?
To add insult to injury, the cost of solar and wind electricity generation is much higher than traditional methods, yet that's the direction the Lefties want to take us, ostensibly to "save the planet", when actually it's just a way to put money into the pockets of their friends, at YOUR expense.
Remember Obama's immortal words during the previous Presidential campaign: "Under my plan, energy prices would necessarily skyrocket." Yet, we have Obama and the Democrats babbling on about being for the little guy, and the middle class.
Does anyone here realize that the typical nuclear power reactor generates anywhere from about 1,200 megawatts up to about 1,800 megawatts? Yet, the environmentalists would rather destroy umpteen square miles of land to build a wind or solar farm that generates less than half that amount, all the while telling the rest of us not to step on the wildflowers. It's insane. But that's one of the ridiculous things we're up against in the next election.
Edits: 12/28/11 12/28/11 12/29/11 12/29/11
.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
