 
|
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 |
68.224.105.23
my 10+ year old 32" pip tv just died.and i was thinking i could buy something to hang over the fireplace area if it was shallow enough.
then rearange the room and re-do the kitchen.
i saw at a local restaurant they have a view sonic 4?" monitor with direct tv and that is good enough for me i think.
but not sure what i need to pay attention to or look into
i like picture in picture
Follow Ups:
Hanging it over the fireplace may a good use of space but has drawbacks. It might subject the set to unacceptable heat if you use the fireplace, even while the TV is off, depending on the fireplace design. Many plasma tvs generate enough heat to be space heaters and more heat is the last thing they need. It puts the TV significantly above sitting eye level making for not so comfortable viewing. Also, be sure you can run your power and input cables to the location without them being an eyesore.I agree that unless side-by-side with HDTV, EDTV looks "good enough" if you're 10ft+ away and has a superb picture compared to standard TV. There are some super EDTV values in the stores; sets that cost over $5K last year are half that now. SED technology is coming by the end of the year and is liable to blow plasma away, so I wouldn't invest in an expensive set.
I have a few comments for you. Although it may look asthetically good above a fireplace, I caution people when they want to put their plasmas above a fireplace. Looking up is not comfortable for long term viewing. Several customers have told me they regretted putting their plasma so high and are getting headaches and stiff necks from looking up and sometimes to the side and up with chairs off center. If, however, you sit back far enough that you aren't straining at all or you have recliners that allow you to look at the monitor with your head somewhat in a lowered position, then it would not be a problem at all. Put your head in a normal straight forward position and look up and then down without moving your head. Notice how it is comfortable to look down and not up?? Just something to think about.The most confusing aspect of 42" plasmas to most consumers is the ED vs HD difference ( All 50" and larger plasmas are HD ). ED plasmas simply have larger pixels and therefore there are not as many of them in the same space as an HD with the smaller pixels. This means the ED set will not be quite as capable of reproducing the finer detail in a high definition picture. It does not mean you can not watch a real HD program. In fact at a distance of approximately 12 feet for a 42" plasma, I find it difficult to see the difference. ED sets are almost always the least expensive sets and some have very good pictures. HD plasmas will not do anything more than an ED, except that they have a smaller pixel which gives you more detail when watching HD programs. If you have a close viewing distance ( you will have to determine this on you own as your eye sight will make a difference ), say within 8 feet, or you would like to use your laptop on the plasma, an HD plasma would definately be preferable. One of the biggest benifits of plasma to me is the high contrast picture quality that does not change as you move around the room. Although DLP's and LCD are significantly better than the older traditional CRT based big screens, they are no match for a plasma. Many people have heard false rumors about plasmas only lasting a few years, but many popular HT mags and the manufacturors are doing everything they can to dispell these myths, as most plasmas are now rated in the 30,000 to 60,000 hour range. And this is only to half brightness, you don't have to throw it away, it just won't look as bright and vivid as when new. Most CRT based TV's will show their age in about ten years, but since the change is slow and gradual most people are hardly aware their TV isn't as good as it used to be. Good luck.
"...to me is the high contrast picture quality that does not change as you move around the room."Sorry, but I can't leave that comment alone!
Plasma displays almost always show a reduced or truncated contrast scale, compared with conventional CRT displays.
You can see this plainly on any of the video test discs currently avaialble. ICIA sells a DVD, for example, that contains a graduated gray scale in 100 steps, from 100% white to 100% black (I believe the same thing can be found on the Video Essentials disc). On a typical plasma display the last 8-10 steps of this scale (near black and near white) are indistinguishable from pure black and pure white, whereas on a good, properly calibrated CRT they can usually be seen. I know, I've seen this demo'd at InfoComm.
This contributes to the typical "washed-out" look of plasmas. Although plasmas have improved substantially sinced they were first instroduced, the limited contrast scale is still a liability IMO. For serious movie viewing, I prefer a CRT.
I'll grant you that the image from a plasma does not have a limited viewing angle the way a RPTV does. That, and the cool-looking, slim profile, are the only positives I can see to owning a plasma.
But then, why would anybody a piece of gear just because it "looks cool"? I'd rather own something that has a great picture.
1999?Most of what you posted is either personal opinion or incorrect. Even many of the "lesser" models made today are better than the picture you paint. Do some research and I'm sure you'll correct your comments -- if you're honest.
You can start here:
- http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/forumdisplay.php?s=0caa435be7f0257ae98d431b2be4386a&forumid=40 (Open in New Window)
and they look washed out to me. Not as contrasty as a good CRT. I still prefer my Sony RPTV.
I've yet to see a plasma at BB that was setup optimally. They all look terrible. You should look at one that is set up and calibrated.Kal (who is very happy with his plasma)
the following article is very interesting reading (see link)-I found this part of the article most useful-
"With flat-panel monitors, we can force light from a cold-cathode light source (such as a fluorescent lamp) through a light shutter (AM LCDs) made up of pixels coated with tiny precision filters and get our color images that way. Or, we can discharge electricity through pixels filled with a rare gas mixture (plasma) and watch as color phosphors are stimulated to produce RGB color imaging.
In the old days, color imaging was accomplished by tickling phosphors with an electron gun. Surprisingly, this system produced (and continues to produce) the most lifelike images of all, which is why a small number of high-end customers still prefer CRT front projectors for home-theater applications.
That's because CRTs are capable of a wide grayscale and can show images with very low luminance levels (shadow detail) as well as very high luminance levels (highlights) in the same scene. More importantly, when a CRT is idling, it is essentially shut off. I mean really shut off, as in black and not a deep gray, as you'll see with LCD, DLP, and LCoS projectors, and AM LCD and plasma monitors.
While there have been tremendous advances in color imaging with flat-panel displays, one stumbling block still remains. And that's the ability (or inability) to show a grayscale with the widest possible dynamic range."
Note that I never said that plasmas have a terrible picture or anything like that, only that they have a reduced grayscale compared with CRT (I incorrectly called it "contrast", as the article points out). That means that you can't see the blackest blacks or the whitest whites on a plasma, which is why I prefer CRT for critical viewing.
BTW, when discrete three-chip DLPs are avaiable at a reasonable price in home units, you can bet that I'll be the first kid on my block to get one.
further on in the article, Mr Putman says that there is one brand of plasma (Panasonic) whose black level and grayscale, when calibrated, approach that of a good CRT display (i.e., Mr Putnam's reference Princton CRT). I can't say that I've ever seen that brand, so perhaps there is indeed one plasma out there worthy of consideration.However, I'm still not convinced that plasma is as good a value as my Sony KP-57WS510, which I purchased a year ago for less than two grand delivered.
First, Putman is correct that the Panasonic glass does, indeed, have contrast superior to other plasma glass and, in fact, the 50" Fujitsu I have uses said Panasonic glass with superior signal processing. Performance is excellent.Second, there's no way to accommodate such a large-screen display in my room unless it is flat (plasma or LCD) or front projection. RPTVs and direct-view CRTs take up too much space and prevent me from arranging my speakers correctly.
Kal
Just a little fwiw. Firstly, the fireplace idea looks great in Architecutural Digest, but is ridiculous. A 42" Plasma, DLP, (whatever) loses the wow factor when you're 12 feet away. Way too far back, for my taste. Now if you get closer? The heat from your fireplace, plus the neck ache? Do you read me? The screen should be at eye level. Also, and it's been said, soot and heat are not a good thing on your brand spanking new plasman. I was gung ho on plasma until I seriously started considering DLP (on a suggestion from a good buddy who owned a Pioneer plasma) options. Well, you know which one I chose. Hey, there's no panacea, but the DLP did it for me. Spectacular bang for the buck. peace, warren
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 © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]