It's no secret that we're
big on plasma picture quality around
these parts, but with the average cost of a 50-inch set coming in $300 cheaper for plasma than LCD, there are some other reasons to consider the older technology as well. Among the myriad of plasma misconceptions, fear of burn-in is the gift that keeps on giving to LCDs, even as they move into the 40-inch regime largely vacated by plasmas. At the more pricey end of the spectrum, dynamic LED backlighting has narrowed the performance gap, but those
LED backlit sets are still quite pricey. In the end, it's good to have choice -- and as much as we support plasma, we just can't agree with the zealots that claim "death" to either technology. The competition between LCD and plasma is exactly what has brought better performance and lower prices to everyone, so we're hoping this fight goes as many rounds as possible.
posted Jul 19th 2009 11:36AM
I play my 360 on my Elite at least 2-3 hrs a day... and i've accidentally left it on the main xbox screen and went to get pizza... or taken a dump... and still, zero signs of burn-in.... my co-worker has a sammy, worse than me with taking care of his plasma... AND leaves screens on pause... zero burn-in...
But that's not 100% true...
my cousin took advantage of his panasonic plasma which his parents foolishly gave him. He would pause his games for hours at end, never turn off tube, didn't calibrate it properly and within 3 months, you could see faint outlines of the game hud, xbox live blades etc... He would just leave his game paused and go out and play or do something stupid.
Plasma burn in has virtually disappeared except in extreme cases like my cousin's above. It's not like 7 years ago when it would burn after 2 weeks. I still blame my parents and their damn specialty channel which had a neon-yellow logo in the bottom corner.
I love plasma. It's funny how LCD's are slowly becoming what plasma's always were. With their higher contrast glossy screens, improved motion, improved angles... Why not just get a plasma from the start.
But it all comes down to perception. And because Plasma's don't stack up to the LCD's in store which are running at nuclear vivid with bright neon greens, super sky blues etc... People think the picture must be dull.
And what's even sadder, is that 90% of people will keep their picture like that for the rest of the time they have their televisions. I always calibrate as close to 6500k as possible. It was a shock to my dad to try and get him to accept that this was the way people wanted televisions to view films, etc... and that vivid was unnatural.
I've owned every type of television technology so far, save for laser tv. And although I still love my very first CRT-Rear Projo HDTV, plasma will be my favorite. But even in my house it's skewered towards LCD now. My computer monitors are LCD, my televisions in the bedroom are 32" LCD's. I have a 47" LCD in my family room, while my "older" pioneer plasma is relegated to the theatre room.
I'm going to avoid this LED nonsense until OLED comes out.
i was looking to get either a 55 inch plasma, or a 55 inch samsung led tv. the price differences are only 400 dollars. the led being at 1,999. whats would be best?
I'd like to see where the hell you plan on getting a 55" Samsung LED for 1,999. The lowest I can find a 55" Samsung LED online is on Amazon for 2,899. I bet you are confusing LED with LCD. There are 55" Samsung LCD's for 1,999. But there is no way in hell you are finding an LED LCD for 1,999.
a 55" LED for 1999? where?
Even if you COULD get a 55" Samsung edge-lit LED LCD for $1999, why would you want one? The edge-lit LED LCDs are crap!
I think the new Samsung series 6 & 7 LED LCDs look fantastic. They're a little expensive but the contrast is very acceptable. They also sip power even compared to other LCDs let alone plasmas. A 46" series 6 consumes 105W which is simply unreal.
Power consumption is probably why plasma and LCD CRTs are ultimately doomed. I know some plasmas try to pull off power saving such as analysing ambient conditions to determine power consumption, but even the most sophisticated like Vieras still use double the power of an LED LCD.
The EU will soon start mandating visible energy ratings on TVs. When consumers are faced with one TV with an A or A+ rating and another (a plasmas) with a C or D, they're obviously going to favour the former.
my hhgreg right now is having a crazy sale (yes i know its an led tv i promise) at hhgreg it looks much clearer, but i do know they do some trickery so that is why i asked thank you everyone
The contrast and colors on the B6000 and B7000 series edge-lit Samsung LED LCDs are fine; and it's no contest in the power consumption area. The edge-lit LED LCDs use much less power - no argument there!
But when it all comes at the expense of uneven illumination of the screen, illumination levels that fluctuate depending on the content and absolute crap off-angle viewing, what's left to love?
I love my Kuro Elite. I play Xbox more then a human should and have NEVER had any problems.
I hope Plasma lasts a few more years. I need a new TV for my living room in a year or so and would buy another plasma in a second.
There is no doubt that plasmas look great out of the box, and there is abundant anecdotal evidence that burn-in and dimming don't exist, yet there isn't a single plasma manufacturer who is willing to step up and state that IF burn-in or dimming occurs, then it is a manufacturer's defect, and is thereby covered by warranty. Not one!!!! And the lack of that statement, especially condsidering plasma's history of burn-in and dimming, *is* a big statement. So we end up in a scenario where the masses are still concerned about these issues. Meanwhile, the boys in marketing make claims of a 30,000 hour "life span", which some consumers interpret to mean "no burn-in or dimming for 30,000 hours", while the term "life" remains undefined :-/
And so, we have fans of plasma who say there is no problem. We have manufacturer's who don't warranty these alleged issues, should they appear, and we have consumer masses who pay more to avoid these alleged issues.
Still, they look great "out of the box"!
The whole point here is that the only way to achieve permanent image retention or "burn-in" on a plasma is through gross negligence on the part of the user: leaving harshly contrasted static images on the screen for unreasonably long periods of time and so forth. Why on earth should a manufacturer cover gross user negligence under warranty?
replying to "Andy Anonymous": Apparently, mixing 4:3, 16:9 and anamorphic content, in their correct aspect ratios, for a couple of years, qualifies as "gross negligence" in some minds. Of 6 months of 14 hours per day (did you ever see Futureshop swapping out current display units with a new, identical model, because they don't look "fresh" any more?)
If manufacturers believe that burn-in and dimming do not occur under "normal use", then they can easily define what constitutes "normal use", and warranty against damage incurred under such use. They don't. And lots of consumers knows this.
Talk to pro AV shops, who do installs averaging $250K. They'll tell you the sell plasma because some customers demand it (market demand), and not because it's a recommended solution.
It all works out in the end: As long as there are enough people who want plasma (i.e., big enough market), then some manufacturers will make products for those people. Plasma is far from dead at this moment.
SteveMak,
Do LCD Manufacturers warranty pixel sticking or dead pixels?
Plasmas are at 100,000 hours now while LCD's cannot make claims above 50,000.
Either way open up any LCD manual they can potentially burn-in as well. Just check out your local airport. Burn-in can happen amongst any technology if the owner is negligent.
Also every technology dims! LCD actually dims by 30% in the first 10,000 hours. Plasma maintains 90% of it's brightness in the same span.
SteveMak, I don't think you understand plasmas very well, and it seems as though you are precisely the sort of person who contributes to the bad information which is such a thorn in plasma's side. Mixing 4:3 and 16:9 content will not cause image retention (IR). Mixing different types of content is exactly what assists in --avoiding-- IR, in fact. On the other hand, if you watch ONLY 4:3 content for days on end, that might indeed result in some degree of --temporary-- IR, but certainly nothing that can't be evened out with a few good sessions of 16:9 viewing. That's the whole point we're making here: you can't permanently burn your set in through any use anyone would consider normal. And yes, if you do persist in using it that way, that's gross negligence and should by no means be covered by the manufacturer.
Oh, and incidentally, I'm a CI, and I recommend to my customers whatever best fits their needs, whether that be plasma or LCD...and I don't know a single CI (not any good ones at any rate) who would do any differently.
Sadly, plasma IS dying. Only knowledgeable people - people who are actually doing some research and learning on their own before going to the store - are buying plasmas. If you go to a big box store and ask to buy a plasma, the sales people there will literally try to get you to buy a LCD instead. That has been my experience anyway. I'm a knowledgeable person - I know that I want a plasma, but how is Joe Schmo supposed to know that? He has the sales person telling him all the made up and false "reasons" why LCD is better. Can we really blame him for thinking the sales person might be right?
So plasma becomes a niche product. As it becomes more niche it becomes less profitable. And as it becomes less profitable, manufacturers abandon it. It's sad, but it happens all the time. The best tech dies out and no amount of screaming from enthusiasts is enough to reach the ears of the masses.
Yep. I did a bunch of research online before buying my Kuro. But I just HAD to see one in action before pulling the trigger, so went to my local Best Buy. Predictably the sales rep came walking up to me, but I was surprised. After talking for a little bit he asked me why I was looking at plasma. I explained it to him (contrast ratio, viewing angle, etc.). Realizing I knew what I was talking about, he backed off right away, telling me to let him know if I had any questions.
At that point I didn't mind talking to him and we chatted about the technology. I don't know if it is a mean thing to say or not, but he surprised me with how much he knew about the various technologies. I'm not saying that the guy doesn't do his part to push people toward one purchase over another, but still, the guy knew his shit.
!00% agree... I have seen it all the time. Some guy goes into the store to buy a television. The salesman shows him around. And skewers him towards the LCD's which are set at like 100% brightness, full vivid color and then shows him the plasma in the corner which is purposely kept near bright lights and isn't calibrated properly.
I remember hearing it myself. Just for fun I was asking around futureshop for what kind of tv I should buy. I told him I game quite a bit, maybe want to hook up my computer. And BAM right away. Get an LCD. Plasma's will burn the image in within a week. He even went so far as to say the 120 hz of LCD's allow it to process motion better than plasma.
People should do some research when buying televisions. If you are going for the absolute best buy plasma.
I really wanted to like plasma. I really, really did. I'm a bit of a nut when it comes to picture quality, and I've heard all along that plasma has a better picture.
I ended up buying an LCD, though... The Sony KDL-52XBR4. The flickering, dithering pattern, and random "noise" on plasmas drives me nuts, even on the higher end units. I wish my LCD had the viewing angle of plasmas, but I couldn't watch a TV with the artifacts that plasmas have.
Bring your Sony over and put it next to my Kuro. I just hope that the rocks you throw at your Sony won't bounce off and hit my Pioneer.
Bring your Sony over and put it next to my Kuro. I just hope that the rocks you throw at your Sony won't bounce off and hit my Pioneer.
You obviously know nothing about the KDL-52XBR4 if you think it's that bad. It's about the best LCD TV ever made.
I looked at the Kuros. Still the same distracting artifacts I've seen on other plasmas. I think it's inherent in the technology. I still like the idea of plasma better than LCD, but I haven't seen a perfect implementation yet.
I am wondering, were you sitting very, very close to the PDP to notice the dither shaping artifacts...? Pioneer last generation plasmas used true, successive PWM, so this should not be very noticeable at all. Unless, I maybe wrong, if you were shown Blueray material with 24 frames/sec, which may be more prone to dithering noise as you only get 192 subfield per second (PDPs use 8 subfields nominally so you get 480hz subfileds). And this was known to be more of a problem with Panasonic sets, not Kuro sets...
In any case, your specific SONY set, like some Panasonic and Kuro plasma sets, in direct testing, got almost perfect linear grey scale tracking. However, contrast ratio is still only a measly 35% of the Panasonic set (and I am sure even less when compared to a Kuro)....
Most people are a lot more bothered by the low contrast ratio of LCD sets and not so much by dithering noise (unless you are sitting 2 feet away from the screen or viewing 24hz material on some Panasonic sets). With LCD, you loose so much dynamic punch in the picture if the set is properly calibrated to preserve all image details... Unless the LCD set is calibrated with clipped whites, crushed blacks, and super saturated colors..., which steers away from what the director saw as the film was originally shot...
But everyone to his own...
I don't have to be sitting close to see the artifacts of plasma. The dithering is distracting, especially during scenes with a lot of motion, but it isn't the most distracting artifact for me; it's the random noise of the plasma image. Pixels that appear to flicker constantly, even with a static image... Random fluctuation of intensity of each individual pixel. Maybe part of that is my elevation where I live, but I find those problems horribly distracting. (I'm also one of those people that gets headaches from the rainbow effect of DLP.) Personally I'd rather have a little bit of gray in my image if it means it is going to be stable.
I do watch mostly 24p material, BTW.
Of course I still very much preferred the picture quality of my old 34" Sony Wega CRT HDTV over any current technology, but it couldn't do 24p and 34" really isn't very big, so I had to upgrade. (I still use CRT when editing video.) I researched for over a year before I made a purchase, and budget really wasn't much of a part of the decision.
I don't know why you guys are voting Doug's comments down. His concerns are legitimate and played a part in my decision when buying a TV. While I agree the contrast on my LCD is terrible for watching at night with the lights off, the picture looks brighter and more vivid during daytime viewing, which is when I use it the most.
My next TV will likely be a plasma though.
the xbr4 was about the best lcd ever made... back in 07'.... just under the the samsung 61, 65, 71, and 81 series that same year....
Now that it seems all LCD makers are going to highly reflective, glossy screens so their sets can be permanently in torch mode, time to re-consider plasma. I went LCD 3 years ago because LCDs came in matte screens and plasma didn't and my room has tons of windows on all sides.
I just got an LG LH90 series, and it has a matte screen. I was specifically avoiding anything with a glossy screen because of the infestation of windows in my living room, and this fit the bill nicely. It also has a great picture if you adjust it properly. Look into it.
Doug,
Are you kidding!? LCD has way more artifacting than Plasma. If you were basing this on a store feed through component video then split 100 times I can see your point. I'm glad you went with motion blur, unnatural colors, and bad viewing angles.
I think everyone should read this article:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2349236,00.asp
While it is true that PDP can suffer from dithering noise (PDPs either turn on or off a pixel, and all intermediate values have to be expressed as series of on and off pulses), but modern PDP sets use very advanced Pulse Modulation Width algorithm. Usually, the resulting dithering noise is of very high frequency and low amplitude, only visible to the human eyes if you are like 12" to 24" from the screen and viewing certain solid and static color patches... I wonder if the above commentator viewed the set too close or there are other issues with the display he tested... Compared to LCD, I personally think the small amount of dithering noise in PDP is a lot more tolerable with real world video material and under real world viewing conditions than the issues with LCD, and it is beyond just viewing angles...
Here is an article with objective, direct comparionsons with SONY, Samsung, Sharp LCD vs Panasonic plasma sets:
http://www.displaymate.com/LCD_Plasma_ShootOut.htm
Here an article explaining PDP dithering techniques:
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7522130/description.html
I like my two LCD's... but 100 % agree that Plasmas are better. I just wished these great prices were around two years ago when I bought both of my LCD's. IF you are a new buyer I would tell you two things. Buy Plasma, and do not listen to the so called smart geek squad at Best Buy.
Our best buy is so retarded, that they make the Kuro look terrible by having it connected to component cables and then placing it right near the entrance with all this light hitting it making it look like crap. But in a persons home wth controlled light, I agree with Ben... its the prettiest TV I have seen to date... now where can I get one???
I certainly agree. Unfortunately I don't think there are any more Kuro's around anymore.. Thank God I got my 60" Kuro last year. I had the choice to buy the SONY LCD, but Kuro still, to my eyes, dither shaping or not, beats any LCD hands down.
I'm a plasma fan since day 1. My current TV is a 9G Kuro and had a PHILIPS in the past. The dithering in the Kuro is TERRIBLE. I saw it the very first second I turned the TV on. And it dissaponted me heavily. But that's it. The only real advantage that LCD has over plasma (picture quality speaking, of course) is that LCD offers that perfectly steady cleaner look. And that's it. Plasma (and Kuro's by that matter) has EXTREME viewing anlges with no degradation, amazing contrast/black level, natural motion resolution with no blurring, zero image retention (let alone burn in), no banding and I could carry on.
I only wish for plasma to be perfection if it could display a picture without dithering artifacts. In the end, plasma is still a whole much better than LCD. AND IT'S CHEAPER, what's wrong with you LCD boys? :) Do you like the pain in your eyes and wallet?
Seriously? 40" Plasmas???
Please dear lord, when I move in October, let me find a nice place that doesn't require a deposit. I want to use my current deposit to buy a TV. My 32" Samsung with now a dead pixel in the upper left corner is a nice looking TV but not plasma nice.
In my honest opinion Plasma is losing not because of their quality, which is better than LCD. Its their marketing and education. Plasmas used to burn in, not no more. People still believe the burn in though. I also remember two years ago when I bought my second of two LCD's that plasmas did not show off their info like you see when you go into stores about their LCD's. Its like right now everyone looks at me and says damn you have a 120Hrz LCD... and I look at them and say you can have it so I can go buy a Plasma thats at 600. Also again in my opinion the regular end Plasmas (not Kuro and other gods) are better than the average LCD, but teo years ago was probably not the case.
Remember people don't know anything, still at Best Buy they say LCD's are better for gaming, Plasmas have burn in, and component cables are the same as HDMI unless you get the $100 monster HDMI cable.
Plasmas add campaign should be "We're cheaper, faster, darker, just better, any questions?"
Now don't get me wrong I still like my Samsung 6 series and my LG LCD. But one wonders if one will break right now?!?
I have been researching which flat screen to get, and from what I can tell, modern plasma displays are superior in just about everyway I care about except one: Glossy screen reflectivity.
I went to the Best Buy really expecting to love the plasmas, but I realized how distracting any reflective light is, which far outweights slight differences in contrast. I plan to watch TV mostly with the lights on, and often in daytime (in a room with windows).
It also killed any desire to get a Samsung LCD which uses glossy screens.
Unless something else pops up I am looking at a Sony XBR8 which has a matte screen.
Don't punish yourself with a Sony! Look into the LG LH90 series. I just got one. It has a nice matte screen which is pretty anti-reflective and has a very nice picture. It has a lot of other nice advantages too, but I won't go on here cuz I already ranted in another post. hehe
They are both dead to me until they can offer 60+ inch screens at reasonable prices. By reasonable I mean starting at $2500 or less. I'm afraid the day of the large screen is dead. Everyone wants 40" or 55" screens or smaller, no one seems to want 65+" screens anymore.
I had 50b650 samsung plasma, the power watts it use in energy saving high mode is equal or less than same size lcd tv, it use only 120-150 watts during energy high saving, but what it suprise me picture doesn't get much affect because i did some calibration. The black level of this is very deep better than lg plasma i own and miles better than crap soyo lcd. Quality plasma ain't cheap is equal to almost a sony 120hz set, sony is making very affortable 120hz entry level lcd.
Good plasma is ALWAYS superior to good LCD. End of story. Read any reputable publication's comparison reviews of top-rated plasmas versus top-rated LCD's and the plasmas mop the floor with LCDs. Every time. It's not even close. This is in the areas of color reproduction, contrast, viewing angle (only the person that sits dead center will experience any color or contrast fidelity on LCD, everyone else will have severely distorted viewing), panel life, etc, etc, etc. Don't take my word for it. You can read these reviews in Sound and Vision Mag, Home Theater Mag, Electronic House Mag, CNet, etc. The only area where LCD truly trumps plasma is energy usage, and Panasonic, with its new Neo-PDP panels, has taken major steps to reduce power usage and bring them more in line with LCD displays, though it is not likely that they will be able to match them. Samsung and LG are also taking steps to increase PDP efficiency. Obviously, in the world that we live in today we cannot completely ignore power usage but unless your main focus is on energy efficiency then you are definitely, without a doubt, buying the visually inferior technology today if you buy an LCD display. My only hope is that the next time that I am in the market for a display that plasmas are still with us. Either that or I hope that something like OLED or SED comes along to save us all from the awful compromises that LCD brings to the table.
Oh, and for the record, when it comes to audio, loud does not equal good. So turn your frakkin' home and car sound systems down if they sound like shite! Thanks.
I was planning for over a year to pick up a Pioneer KURO, and 2 weeks ago I finally had the time and cash on hand to plunk down. But you know what I did? I opted for an LCD instead. I never thought it would happen. Hell, my wife still hasn't let me forget it. But you know what? I'm happy about it.
I got a new LG 55LH90, which is a newcomer but is very similar to LED-backlit offerings from Samsung, Toshiba and Sony (I'll just leave Vizio out of this). I decided on the LG over the others after a very informative "shootout" at http://www.valueelectronics.com/. No, I didn't purchase from them, but I got a similar price to what they're listing it for now (they weren't at the time).
The reason I defected on the coveted KURO is really a 2-part thing:
1. I was afraid of burn-in (I know, I know!). But this wasn't just unfounded nervousness, it comes from my and my family's viewing habits. The TV is regularly left paused (TiVo) for hours at a time, and the TiVo has no screensaver. Even worse, much of what we watch is still not available in HD, and I hate watching a stretched picture, so you end up with black bars. With a plasma, even a recent-generation one, it's not a great idea to view with black bars as the pixels are getting different amounts of exposure for extended periods, which ages them at different rates (please don't correct me on my terminology, I'm not that into the whole thing, so I'm sure I'm not using all the right terms, but you get the idea). It's probably even worse with gray bars, since the pixels are active displaying the same thing for long periods.
2. The power consumption was comparatively through the roof for the KURO, I looked it up. for the 50" it's upwards of 330W. The LG, by way of comparison, is about 100W lower and that's with a 55" screen! And that extra power doesn't go into the picture, it goes into heat production, which I have no interest in trying to deal with. I work my A/C hard enough as it is. As I'm replacing the bulbs in my house and yelling at the kids for not shutting lights off, I'm not keen to get a TV that uses so much power that I may as well have left my old 300W halogen floor lamp hooked up!
Now, my thoughts on the LG, in case anyone is interested. I've only had it hooked up for less than a week, but I'm pretty impressed so far. No, it's not as good as a KURO, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find anything closer that's not a Panasonic Viera. Yes, I've seen some motion ghosting once in awhile, and a little bit of noise around moving figures when the 240hz motion compensation is turned on "high". But honestly, it's not that big a deal. My old TV, a CRT-style rear projection Sony HDTV, had none of these issues so it's hard to ignore it when it happens, but it's kinda rare and only lasts for about 1 second or so. I've also noticed the "halo" around a bright figure in a dark scene caused by the local dimming of the LED array. But it's not that noticeable when you're in front of the TV, moreso when you're at an extreme angle to the side of it. Also, if you're actually watching the movie instead of looking for screen artifacts, you'll never notice it. In fact the only time I ever really see it is when my DVD screensaver kicks in, which is a moving OPPO oval on a black screen. You ask me, that's pretty good evidence that the local dimming works great.
Overall, I'm really happy with my purchase, even though I could have gotten the KURO for even cheaper now than this was. My energy bills are going to stay pretty flat instead of going way up, my TV is about half the weight the smaller KURO would have been (seriously!), and I got a really nice TV that I expect will probably last me for many years.
60 inch Kuro consumes 330 watts
55 inch LG55LH90 consumes 100 watts less.
We average 10 cents/kwh where we are in Midwest.
Brief analysis:
Assume both TVs are on for 10 hrs/day.
Kuro consumes (100 watts more/day) x (10 hrs/day) = 1000 more watt hrs/day = 1 kwh more/day. (kilo = 1000)
For each day, the Kuro would cost us (1 kwh) x (10 cents/kwh) = 10 cents more/day = $3.00 more for a month.
$ 3 over a month = less than the cost of a hamburger, for a WHOLE MONTH of daily superior viewing, with absolutely no motion artifacts. With a BIGGER 60 inch screen yet.
In fact the plasma price savings are over $1000 vs. the hyped 55 inch LED LCD’s which are trying desperately, just to get close to the native performance of plasmas, with 120 hz and the “gimmicky” 240 hz. Example: on July 11, Frys had a 60” LG Plasma LG60PS11 reduced down to $1498.
Over 6 years for both tv’s, the electricity will cost (72 months) x ($3/month) = only $216 more. The plasma’s current reduced price will cover the increased energy cost SEVERAL times over. Instantly.
Escher, thanks for supplying the wattage numbers.
For me it’s “no contest”. I’ll be buying a 60 inch plasma before the football season.
You mixed up some of your numbers. The 330W consumption of the KURO was for the 50", not the 60". And that extra wattage goes straight to heat production, which was as much a concern for me as the wasted electricity.
But the power consumption was not my only reason either. I decided against it after downloading and reading the manual for the KURO which had a section in the back about what to do to avoid burn-in. My viewing habits and those of my family violate the rules in there pretty badly. I know that it's not as susceptible to burn-in as older plasmas were, but that initial break in period is a pretty long time. What is it, 200 hours? 2000 hours? I don't remember. At 2000 hours I'd have to leave it on 24/7 for almost 3 months, which is insane but at least if I did it in the winter it'd keep my house warm.
I also wouldn't have been getting a superior picture in my particular setting. I basically watch TV in a room in the middle of a open floor plan surrounded by windows. Even at night, there's often a light behind me that's going to reflect off the screen. In that kind of setting, the plasma would have looked relatively washed out by comparison. The TV I went with is perfect for where it is I think.
The price is also way off. The current prices I'm seeing on 50" KUROs is around $2200 to $2300 at the minimum. I know this because I've been watching prices on them for over a year. This includes shipping costs from internet sellers and tax from local ones. By comparison I got my 55" LED-backlit LG for under $2400. So I only paid $100 more for a larger screen and something that was more inline with what I wanted for my setting. I'm a strong believer in research, you can find some serious deals that way and be better informed about what you're buying.
Now with all that said, I don't disagree with you about plasma's and in particular KURO's superior picture. Of course it has a superior picture. I've even examined the ISF measurements of several plasmas and LCDs after professional calibration to see how they stacked up in accuracy of color and grayscale reproduction. The KURO can't be touched. The numbers on that thing are amazing, and it makes me sad that they're discontinuing such a superior product. And if my viewing environment was a more enclosed space with controlled lighting, I would absolutely have gotten the KURO. But it's not, and that fact along with the power consumption and danger of screen burn was enough to steer me towards something that may not have as much potential for perfect image reproduction as the KURO, but it's pretty damn close for an LCD and is worlds beyond my old set that it replaced.
In the end, most of us aren't really videophiles, myself included. I may know more than a normal human should about the technology behind various kinds of displays and how to read an ISF calibration report, but that doesn't mean I'm going to be unhappy about a TV that's not absolutely perfect. Really I, like most people, just want to sit and watch some television and movies. I want to do it on a big screen, and I want it to be surrounded by lots of speakers. And I want to get the best product for the best price that fits my own needs. I'm happy with my TV, it's definitely a nice set. And if I end up moving into a bigger house after I get rich (ha!), I'll certainly include a custom movie viewing room with a big 60" KURO. Who wouldn't?
60 inch Kuro consumes 330 watts
55 inch LG55LH90 consumes 100 watts less.
We average 10 cents/kwh where we are in Midwest.
Assume both TVs are on for 10 hrs/day: you can substitute the number of hours for your particular household.
Kuro consumes (100 watts more/day) x (10 hrs/day) = 1000 watt hrs/day = 1 kwh more/day. (kilo = 1000)
For each day, the Kuro would cost us (1 kwh) x (10 cents/kwh) = 10 cents more/day = $3.00 more for a month.
$ 3 over a month = less than the cost of a hamburger, for a WHOLE MONTH of daily superior viewing, with absolutely no motion artifacts. With a BIGGER 60 inch screen yet.
In fact the plasma price savings are over $1000 vs. the hyped 55 inch LED LCD’s which are trying desperately, just to get close to the native performance of plasmas, with 120 hz and the “gimmicky” 240 hz. Example: on July 11, Frys had a 60” LG Plasma LG60PS11 reduced down to $1498.
Over 6 years for both tv’s, the electricity will cost (72 months) x ($3/month) = only $216 more. The plasma’s current reduced price will cover the increased energy cost SEVERAL times over. Instantly.
Thanks for supplying wattage the numbers.
For me it’s “no contest”. I’ll be buying a 60 inch plasma before the football season.
I apologize for the double post - a newbie error.