Sony LCD or Pioneer Plasma?

I DON'T THINK C-NET HAS REVIEW IT YET. Other than casually.

Best wishes,

River.

SCREENS.......DOES IT MATTER ANYMORE????

Riverledge.

ABSOLUTELY. Because they will not begin to take over manufacture until the 2009 generation (not the current one!) This is the last chance to purchase an all-Pioneer hand-assembled plasma! Now matters more than ever!

That Pioneer HDTV that won the editors award is a 720p HDTV not 1080p.

Both are good.

the Pioneer PROFHD-1 Get Shorty. That is a 1080p and also won the Editor's choice award with the same rating as the PDP-5080.

Either way, on a 50" display, depending on his seating distance, it may not matter anyway.

Is there really anyway to compare a plasma set with an LCD set or is it a matter of viewer preference? I've checked out a lot of sets in the stores and like both the Sony 52 XBR4 with the 120HZ feature, but it still blurs a little with motion and I have compared that with the new 1080p 50 inch KURO, which is out of my budget. The Pioneer 5080 is available for around $2,500.00 now, which is cheaper than the Sony. I would lose two inches of screen and the 1080p but from what I am reading sitting at a distance of about 8 feet to 11 feet from the screen I might not notice a difference between the 1080p and I believe the 768p of the KURO. The TV would be in an area which is very bright and right now washes out my old CRT with reflection. The Sony I think has a matte screen and the KURO an anti-reflective screen. I also like the Samsung sets but the screen they use will give me problems. Any suggestions on making a decision with these sets or is it all a matter of money and personal preference?

That there is no personal preference when it comes to picture. Picture is a science: white can only be one color, and that is white, not bluish-white or reddish-white nor off white, just white.

Black is the base to every color a television set produces. The deeper the black levels, the richer the colors. Far above resolution goes contrast, of which the Pioneer is virtually unlimited. The Sony exhibits grey-bluish-blacks levels common of most LCDs, advanced or not. I have seen the Samsung, and it exhibits an even more pronounced blue bias out of the box than the Sony. I have not yet the chance to calibrate.

The Motion Flow 120hz processor leves an "auora" around charcters moving in the background and fails to keep up with faster motion. The Samsung's processor is even worse, but 6ms response helps sligtly.

If you read the test results further down the page from my greyscale tracking report of both the 5080HD and the XBR4, you will see the vast inaccuracy in color the Sony gives. This has noting to do with my opinion that the Sony television is a waste of money. This is a result of scientific testing, proving one television is better than the other.

Realistically speaking, 1080p is an unnecessary waste of money at sizes 50" and under. over 50" and closer than 5.5ft? There's the purpose of 1080p. I will state on a side note that I have seen the TH-58PZ700U, and in 1080p it looks great, but with a 720p/1080i signal it has a certain grain to it not visible on the 50" model. This is also the case with the 70" sony XBR3 and the 52" XBR3. So why would I get a TV of that size that clearly lacks the processing power to make a clear image? Back to the point:

The 5080HD also has a screen filter, that absorbs 80% of the incoming light and only reflects back 20%. Reflections? Yes. Compriamise in black levels, clear whites and picture field depth? Not a chance. A matted finish takes away details in black levels normally seen on a glosssy finish screen. It also makes that picture appear 2-D-ish rather than multi-dimensional. Why would one spend more on a televisoon that gives less?

I will allot personal preference to the cosmetics of the TV. Also to fit and finish. But never to picture purity, not at all. The PDP-5080HD is the clear-cut choice for just about all purposes.

Well, here I am ready to splurge on the pdp 5010 and you go and raise the 50" or less spectre! I thought after reading your messages that 1080p, while difficult to see differences at 8-9 feet, was still your choice due to wanting to have the very best, etc. Also, if I'm anticipating a BR or HD unit in the next year or so, wouldn't I be taking full advantage of this with the 5010 rather than downscaling to 1080i? I'm trying to purchase not just for the next year, but for the next 5-10!
So, should I stick with negotiating for the 5010 or go back to the 5080 and same $1000?

C-

I am not saying the 5010 is at all a bad television. And, although differences are almost impossible to tell from 8.5-9ft, for somebody who wants assurances that they are viewing the purest possible picture, that is where the 5010 comes into play. For the average consumer looking for a casual-use TV that delivers bang-for-the-buck, this is not the right set. Is your viewing casual or discerning? By our previous conversations, it seems as though it is more discerning than not. My recommendation to you is still the 5010.

By the way, plasmas are fixed-pixel displays: Every signal they receive will ultimately be displayed in their native resolution, so although the TV may display that the incoming signal is 480i, it will be processing that image to fit the nativfe resolution of the set. I would therefore advocate that the 5080 downscales to 720p, not 1080i.

I would probably rate my viewing as leaning towards the discerning and fastidious end of the spectrum. I agree that I want the best I can get in this purchase, and I envision purchasing a blueray or HD (or mixed unit) in the future, so I do want to enjoy every bit of a 1080p signal in those circumstances. Perhaps it will be more a psychological satisfaction than a visual one, but it additionally seems to me that I'll be more robustly prepared for the near and longer term with the 5010. That remains my inclination.
BTW, I enjoyed your point x point retort to the issue of LCD's being superior to plasmas-- so much misinformation in the big-box stores I'm afraid.
Have a happy thanksgiving.

C-

Thanks for the response. I was looking at the new Sony 52 inch LCD and also at the new Samsung with LED backlighting. I know both have the 120Hz refresh, but from what I saw the motion was strange in some action scenes. I was not impressed with that. I also think that based on what we have available for source material now, broadcast and DVD, that 1080p, particulary at a certain distance or screen size may not be a crucial factor. I think the new Pioneer is exceptional, but really wonder if I need the 1080p. My main concern was watching sports, movies, SD tv, and whatever HD I can get from Direct TV. I am in a light intensive environment. Put it this way, the light washes out my current CRT during the day. Would the Pioneer you mention be up to handling the light and the viewing?

I had both sets in my home. The sony XBR4 outperformed the PDP-5080HD ridiculously. The only benefit of plasma is a cheaper price and this television isn't even cheap! AND it is only 720p. And how in the world do you say 720p and 1080p are the same? There is one thing we all know, more pixels=better resolution=better picture. I will admit that the plasma does looks just as nice when watching 720p But bluray is 1080p. The sony outperforms it in every other way. The future is 1080p/120hz/blu-ray. get used to it. Either ride the wave of change or get rolled over.

You should refre to the threads later in this conversation. Things mentioned like greyscale tracking, standard definition performance, ability to react to motion, resistivity to persistance and dead pixelage, and lifespan all play into the fact that the PDP-5080HD is better than the XBR4, not just higher contrast.

Also check S&V's recent review of the XBR5. They said it was by far the best LCD they had seen, but still no plasma-killer. And carefully read the little quib about it's standard definition performance.

You should also get your eyesight checked for any discontinuities, as there has yet to be an LCD that competes with a Plasma.

And I am not anti-Sony. I own plenty in Sony's private stack and product. They are going nowhere. That being said, could you possibly explain to me wh Sony Studios (of Sony Corp.) used 273 Pioneer plasma screens as colour-proofing monitors for the film production Casino Royale? Or how about giving reason for the fact thst Skywalker Studios (of George Lucas) uses Pioneer PureVision panels as studio reference monitors? Or how about the reason for Abbey Road Studios' use of the Pioneer panels for several years now?

Answers?

Because Pioneer is the best panel one can acquire this side of $50.000,00: that's why.

I made my desicion on going with the sony by bringing both sets into my home and doing my own comparisons on the type of media I will most likely be using the set for: Blu-ray, HD-DVD, PS3 games, web browsing, and comcast cable HD (1080I).
How did you make your decision??????
I bet you own a plasma and you make you assumptions by looking at a television in the store for 5 minutes right?
Although the pioneer is impressive, it just doesn't produce the detail that the Sony does. The color is great on the pioneer but just as good on the Sony. Detail is much much better on the sony. If all I was going to do is watch older movies I would go with the Pioneer. But I want a TV that is up to todays standards as well as the futures. And the pioneer can't even keep up with todays technology. 720p?? This means you lose alot of detail. especially when watching 1080p or 1080i sources. Granted, when watching older movies this won't matter much but most newer movies are being released at 1080p on bluray-HD-DVD. This means the pioneer will have to downscale everything to a lower resolution (which causes loss of pixels/detail). In a few years most newer HDTVs will be 1080p (EVEN PLASMA). In fact, I plan to buy a 1080p plasma when the price comes down and the burn in issue gets resolved. Burn in is a huge factor also with the Pioneer. What happens if you are surfing the net on your plasma and you fall asllep or get called away for an emergency or something and the same image stays on the screen for a long time? This can cause some damage on the pioneer. We bought 4 pioneer plasmas to display our SPC Data on the front of our production lines about 2 years ago. We had to replace all four monitors within the first year due to major burn in. Also, I have a friend whos plasma now displays a small bar at the bottom of the screen becaue this is where the information bar for his cable pops up when he changes channels. You won't have to worry about things like ths with the sony.
The pioneer is a great television don't get me wrong but it is definetly not the television some are making it out to be. It has great color accuracy but thats only one factor.
As soon as I got the Pioneer home I kept asking myself "where is this amazing ,mind blowing picture everyone keeps talking about?" I was using a rear projection KDSr60XBR1 before the pioneer and I didn't see much improvement in picture from it.
I even thought the Samsung LNT5271F was better.
The 2 best HDTVs on the market today are the XBR5 and the Samsung LNT5281F. Period.
Oh and by the way, I hear george lucas uses a nokia cellphone but that doesn't mean nokia is the best. I could go on and on about how many companys use Sony monitors but I base my opinions on actual experience and not a pioneer sales brocure.lol

There is no mistaking Plasma behind every news man or sports guy. Yeah, Samsung is now behind some NFL sports guys but that's what sales marketing is about,Product placement. Hell,it could've been K-mart brand if they came up with the money. Doesn't mean it's a better product. That is nothing but sales. They use to put black tape or take off the product label as not to advertise something that wasn't being paid for. The studios use Plasma for a better resolution,period and.

I do not work for Pioneer, nor do I work for Sony.

I test the televisions with a host of testing discs and reference material in all resolutions (including primitive and up-to-date computer resolutions, down to 800x600).

And If you think I use the venue of a sales floor to make my "assumptions", you are sadly mistaken. But of course you would have assumed that I didn't have a dark room nor the money to test several televisions at one time. But I can and do.

The Silicon Optix test disc revealed many a flaw on the XBR4. Wether it was failing the simplist of deinterlacing tests, all the way up to failing film resolution tests in every resolution save 1080p, which it scraped by the skin of it's teeth, the television failed the Silicon Optix HQV test. The Pioneer passed all tests save the ultimate jaggies test, which all teles save the Runco SC1 have failed. There was a good deal of grain visible in standard-def and high-def 720p on the XBR4 that a Sony fan (like myself) would have expected the Bravia Engine Pro to clean up. Heck, even my KD-34XBR960, at 3yrs old can do that.

I used a very standard computer monitor test, using DVI-HDMI and VGA cables. displaying resolutions from 800x600 all the way up to 7282x4096. The Sony lost resoltuion at every reolution, more severely at resolutions before 1080p. It lost the least resolution at 1920x1080, it's native resolution. The Pioneer lost some detail, mostly at resolutions past 1080p. The Pioneer lost the least resolution at 1366x768, it's native resolution. At every resolution below 1080p at a distance of 1.5ft, the Pioneer yet again bested the Sony.

As per movies, I used the DVD and BD Casino Royale. I noticed the picture looked noticibly softer on the XBR4 with the DVD, whereas the Pioneer was able to show full resolution and clarity of the DVD (I could see where S&V would complain about the lack of SD performance). The BD was definitely clearer on both teles, but the Sony's inability to produce a black level, or for that matter, black detail, really left me wanting for more. This loss in detail was only the half of it.

The Motionflow helped the Sony from other LCD's I've seen, but there was still a good deal of streaking, and , when the video processor couldn't keep up with the action, there were artifacts that looked like a form of severe pixelization on the screen. And on both film formats (24p), the Motionflow gave a fast-forwarded look to the film, making it appear unrealistically smooth.

By an abiity to reprduce blacks, the Pioneer has more natural color. Black is the base-coat for all colors a television produces, which is why deeper black levels leads to more accurate color after calibration. Without modification, Sony's black levels were of a grey level, and in which case gave a blue appearence to the screen when displaying transitions between scenes. Also, the Sony revealed a severe 25% green error Via HDMI and 15% Red on Component Video. S-Video and Composite suffered similar results. The Pioneers both faried well in this department, revealing a minor 2.5% red error on component Video and no error otherwise.

720p. This is a resolution so great that at a mere 5ft from the screen, one would not be able to tell the difference between 720 and 1080. The human eye cannot percieve deatil that fine from that distance. Further more, most people would purchase from the 50-52 class for larger rooms, where they would be more likely to view from a distance of 10-15ft, far beyond the visibility mark of 1080p. People could buy a 1080 set to say they had 1080p, but there would be no visible much less practical use for it. Thankfully, in the sam ballpark as the KDL-52XBR4/5, the Pioneer PDP-5010FD is available. This is FullHD 1080p. Very little difference between the two, as I have both sitting in my dark room currently.

And your little quib about (EVEN PLASMA) really sent me over the edge. You make it seem that the technology with more experience, development and usage is infereior to a technology that has barely been on it's feet for 20 years. Plasma technology was invented in 1973 at the University of Illinois, with help form Pioneer, which would explain why it has the upper hand in plasma performance.

The burn comment has been addressed several times before also. I have Pioneer panles dating back to 1986, none of which have suffered retention. And have you heard of Image Persistance? That is what LCD manufacturers call Burn-in on LCD teles. If one has ever been to an Airport and viewed the flight cancellation monitors (flat, usually on a wall or ceiling), there is a lot of burn-in going on there. These are LCD monitors. I will say in normal use, Retention and Persistance should not occur, so long as one is to properly break-in the television with the proper equipment and settings. I have had several televisions give Burn-in, from Maxent plasmas to LCDs. Worse than retention is the dead-pixel factor on the LCDs, my god. EVERY LCD panel I have tested was fully broken-in as described below (naturally different Tv's have different settings, but nonetheless). And somehow, even under ideal operating conditions, every LCD I have tested has had dead pixelage. This can drive one mad, looking at a little dot on the screen that just won't change!

In response to your comment on the Samsung LN-T5271:
The 5271 has quite possibly the worst color accuracy out of the box I have ever seen. Greyscale tracking revealed a +/-1,000K difference between 20 and 100 IRE, abysmal performance. After ISF calibration, it scraped a below average +/-371K. The Motion Plus LED processor was slow at best, barely helping the set's 6ms response time (The learning curb for LCD's) and black levels were bluer and greyer than the Sony KDL-52XBR4/5, which I had complained about earlier.

Let's also look at professional use. Abbey Road Studios, famous for making recordings of some of the best artists ever, uses Pioneer
plasmas as monitors. Skywalker Studios (Lucasfilm) uses Pioneer Plasmas as monitos when creating Star Wars and other recent films. And here's the real kicker: Sony Studios (who would naturally be able to get XBR5's cheap) bought 273 Pioneer plasmas as color proofing monitors for Casino Royale, a movie made to reference quality, and thereafter.

In conclusion, the Pioneer is certainly better than the Sony KDL-52XBR4/5 (as if there were ever a debate). If you are still in disbelief, read further...

Here is some useful information for those looking at breaking in their new flat panel TV:
Break In
by ns387241 - 12/6/07 8:06 AM
In reply to: Thanks for your help by corppsych
The Pioneer KURO's have approx. 200hrs of what i might call "break in". Like fine wine, your new television will look better with use. Here are some precautions and recommendations I would consider seriously when making a new flat panel purchase:

1. The television need be transported in an upright manner. Failure to do so could result in dead pixels, cracked frame, or worse yet, cracked glass.

2. Upon the arrival of the television, inspeact all areas of the chassis to assure there were no mishaps during transit. Also, allow the television to sit out of the box in the room you will be using it in for at least twice the time it was sitting in the truck. This will prevent any "cold starts" and possible damage to the set.

3. USE A POWER CONDITIONER!!! This is quite possibly a "best practice" for one who is demanding of performance and lifespan out of their set. Monster Power, Richard Grey's Power Company (RGPC), and Panamax are some brands to consider. These will remove noise from power, coax, phone and ethernet lines. Less noise in the lines mean the television has to work less to acheive a similar effect (we call this efficiency in NY). This means less grain in pictures, more vibrant, dynamic colors and resistivity to large surges and some direct hits. Power conditioners without T-2 Automatic disconnect technology or similar circuitry should have a UPS (battery backup) as an accompaniment. I use one anyway (that way you can watch the game when everyone else has lost power). Also, power conditioners wihout a grounding terminal should have the Klipsch MAGIC (Mondial Antenna Ground Isolation Circuit) Box. This will separate the ground from signal, thus eliminating any ground-induced noise, and giving more resistivity to a direct hit.

4. The initial setup of the television should be as follows:
1. Make all non-power connections

2. Plug in power conditioner (conditioner switched off)

3. Plug television into power conditioner

4. Turn on power conditoner

5. On your set, there is a soft power switch on the bottom left corner. Push it.

6. Hit menu on the remote. Go into picture settings. For the first 200hrs, these settings should apply:
Picture Mode: Standard
Brightness: 30
Contrast: 30
Color: 30
Sharpnaess: 30
Tint: 30
Pro Adjust:
Pure Cinema:
Film Mode: Advance
Text Optomization: Off
Picture Deatil:
DRE Picture: Off
Black Level: Off
ACL: Off
Enhancer Mode: 1
Gamma: 1
Color Detail:
Color Temp: Low
CTI: Off
Noise Reduction:
3DNR: Off (High for Standard Def Sources)
Field NR: Off (Low for Standard Def Sources)
7. Go into Power Control settings. Set Power Saving Mode to Mode 2. Set No Operation Shut off to Enable. Set No Signal Shut off to Enable.
8. Go into Option. Set Orbiter to Mode 2. Set Room Light Sensor to On. Set auto size to Wide Zoom. Set side Mask to Enable and Brightness sync to auto.
9. Again, these settings should be applied for the first 200hrs. Do not leave the television on for extended periods of time with no signal or a still image during "break in", as retention is likely to occur at this stage. Once broken in, the set will be wholly impervious to retention.

5. After the first 200hrs, a full ISF Calibration should be performed. I recently has the 5080HD calibrated, as it has finally reached the 200hr mark. I took all power saving options off. I also saved $8 on this month's power bill, as the televison becomes even more energy-efficient when calibrated. The thing looks beutiful. The 5010 isn't quite to the point of calibration yet, so I cannot share calibrated settings with you, but I do strongly reccommend a calibration by an ISF-Certified Technician if you demand performance like no other.

Just to let you know...
by ns387241 - 10/5/07 8:07 PM
In reply to: replying to il signo by meandmybigideas
If you actually took the time to do what I had suggested, you would have noted that specifically on Samsung's manufacturer's website (www.samsug.com), Samsung clearly states:
"Faster Frames for a Clearer Picture
This technology doubles the frame rate from 60 to 120 frames per second (120Hz LCD panel) without repeating the same image to make more frames. Instead, the TV intelligently calculates the ?middle? image between frame A and frame B and inserts it in between (Auto Motion Plus 120Hz processor), making a fluid transition from one frame to the next"
Having cleared that out of the way...for the real problem: Picture quality is a science, there is no such thing as taste when it comes to being true to the signal, which happens to be the goal of these teles. Therefore there is a right and a wrong when it comes to this industry. Now, if you can assure me that both units that you have tested are brand new out of the box, without manufacturer defect (Pioneers shouldn't have any, but everyone makes a lemon), and the seetings are as I described on the last post (WITHOUT 120HZ, WITHOUT Black level enhancer, or for that matter any professional mods found in advanced settings), you will find the greyscale tracking on the XBR4 to be something like this:
"Color temperature (Warm2 color temperature before/after calibration):
20 IRE: N/A
30 IRE: 5,470/5,878 K
40 IRE: 5,840/6,531 K
50 IRE: 6,056/6,441 K
60 IRE: 6,275/6,520 K
70 IRE: 6,304/6,661 K
80 IRE: 6,263/6,547 K
90 IRE: 6,359/6,489 K
100 IRE: 5,789/6,298 K
Brightness (100-IRE window before/after calibration): 36.0/34.4 ftL"

As you can see with the data I have collected above, the XBR4 isn't exactly spot on with the greyscale tracking. The Pioneer looks more like this:
"Color temperature (User Mode/Low Color Temperature):
20 IRE: 6,109 K
30 IRE: 6,446 K
40 IRE: 6,418 K
50 IRE: 6,425K
60 IRE: 6,455 K
70 IRE: 6,463 K
80 IRE: 6,429 K
90 IRE: 6,445 K
100 IRE: 6,441K
Brightness (100-IRE window): 31 ftL"

The difference between the two simply for color accuracy is amazing. The XBR4 has a 200-degree difference, whilst the 5080HD has about an 81-degreee difference from 20-100IRE.
These greyscale tracking measurements shown above directly measure accuracy of color, and are used so for a full ISF calibration, so the comment you made on coloration is nil.

When it comes to black levels, I have to say this:

"Kuro, Adj. Black: Being of the achromatic color of maximum darkness: Origin: Japanese"

There is a reason why Pioneer chose this name for their panels. There is currently no such thing as deeper blacks than a Pioneer Kuro on a flat TV. And for that matter, there are only a handful of front projectors that can even begin to display that level of darkness on their screens (low gain or high).
And I am not at all recommending the Samsung panels, as they are tererible with standard def (as Sony panels are also) and do not compare to Loewe and B&O panels at all. Rather I am here on this form to discuss the pros and cons of each tele at hand: Sony LCD and Pioneer Plasma. Since Pioneer is certainly the best in plasma this side of Dreamvision (SRP:$42.995,00), we should be comparing the other panels like Sharp (creator of the LCDTV), Bang and Olufsen, and Loewe for a fair comparison. This is like a BMW 3 series versus a Maserati MC12 - is a comparison really even necessary? The Pioneer, with supporting scientifically measureable and verifiable data backing it, is -of course- the winner.

Sometimes the comments here never fail to amaze me with postings that show a vast amount of knowledge in the area of Video and HDTV. I realize that you cannot subjectivy measurements. They are what they are and they equate to a level of performance. On the other hand, as I said, since some people react to the Plasmas and LCDs differently, using words such as the screen pops out at you, the effect of the pixels brings out more detail, the screen is brighter and at least the Sony screens use a Matte coating that stops reflections as well as anything I have seen, while most plasma screens are reflective, but not sure about the KURO screen. Just what criteria should I really consider when purchasing say a 52 inch Sony XBR4/5 or let's say a KURO 5080, 720P? If reflection is not a consideration, but it is for me, since if it is a glass screen it would wash out and be unwatchable in the only location I have available for it. I am not aware of how well the screen coating on the KURO works. My set is in an extremely bright room with lots of outside sunlight pouring through the blinds. If burn in is also an issue in the same ballpark for both LCD and Plasma, and if their usable hours are similar or identical, how to choose? I have been looking at the new Bravia sets XBR4/5. I like their viewing angle but can still see some artifacts in rapid motion scenes even with the 120Hz ability, maybe a slight rainbow or a lag in motion at times. In our bright room the wife would be sitting about six feet from the tv and I would be sitting about 11 feet or so from the set. So, in addition to the size, we feel that 50 inches would be good, we are also looking a little at viewing angle. I don't know what impact that would have at a 720p vs 1080p viewing experience. As I understand it, unless you are watching Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, most signals on TV's hi-def side are 720. Not sure what a standard DVD with an upconverting DVD player would look like or even what a standard DVD would look like on a Blu-Ray or HD-DVD. We did want a good replacement set and the KURO 5080 looked like an excellent set. But, I have never been able to compare it with the new Sonys. What I did see of the new 50 inch KURO Elite blew me away when I saw how wonderful water from the ocean moving over the sand looked. It was outstanding, breath taking. Now, the 5080 seems to be currently selling for close to the same price of the Sony Bravia with 120hz feature. Kuro is 50 inches and Sony is 46. Any comments on which my better choices would be and perhaps pointing out the set I would be happier with. Also, I do not have a surround sound system so a set with good sound would be a big requirement. Thanks,

oh, well.

river.

First and foremost, matte and glossy finish screens have their respective types of glare:
Glossy finish screens will reveal reflections, as it acts mostly as a mirror.

Matte finish screens, when exposed to light, reveal many performance losses. For one thing, light spreads throughout the entirety of the screen, affecting the entire panel as opposed to one or two concentrated areas of light on reflective diplays. Also, when a matte finish is exposed to light, black levels turn to grey, reds to pink; the colors wash-out and pastelize. This throws off color balance and shadow detail ability of the set. Also, picture field depth is compriamised, making the set appear to have a 2-D paper effect rather than appear multidimensional.

That being said, The KDL-46XBR4 doesn't use a matte finish screen. Sony screens are semi-gloss panels, a compriamise between glossy and matte, which will give minor effects of both, thus being the largest loss in performance of any possible combination. The worst of both worlds, as it is. The Sony may appear to be anti-reflective in the showroom under torch mode settings (Vivid), but the worst is yet to come. Try putting it on a natural mode (50-50-50).

The PDP-series Pioneers use screen filtering technology that utilizes the advantages o a glass panel (not losing performance), but at the same time combating the weak spot of a glass panel (reflective glare), by cancelling-out 80% of incoming light (when looking directly at it , look at the Sony in this respect also, it has the same reflectivity). This would be considered the best of both worlds, where performance is preserved and glare minimalized.

And the Pioneer's usable hours are 50% longer than that of any LCD, at 100,000hrs. This is approx. 45 years 'till half life.

Get the KURO, you won't regret it.

Thanks very much for the analysis of the screen types. I was not aware of the difference in technologies. If the KURO does well in bright light, it is the definitive technology. I will never have both sets at home to compare, but based on your post, it appears that the KURO would do everything I would expect it too.

many have. And high level knowledge. Your personal choices lie far beyond average bell shape curves.

It is very nice when you cut to the chase to succinctly say what one needs & can have reliance on.

After much technical discourse, labeling a Kuro as a fine choice is good. Annotating does need to indicate it still is a premium price option for most of us of the mass market.

Most of the newer pioneers are going 1080p. The newer Elites blow the 720p models away and even pioneer boasts this. But I guess you know more than pioneers also right??? And did you actually say Sony is going nowhere? LOL. And did you actually quote that ABBY ROAD and Lucas mess AGAIN??? Dude change the record cuz we already heard you say that. And did you actually just Brag that 720p has been around since the 70's LOL!!!!!!That's not worth bragging about (its 2007)
I will agree that the plasmas have great contrast and color. So you don't have to quote the brochure again and say that Sony used Pioneer plasmas to do color tests again (or again, and again, and again). But the bottom line is that the definition of High definition is a higher resolution! and 1080p is a higher resolution than 720p. PERIOD! The non-high-definition older CRT televisions had wonderful contrast and color, So are they better?? And if Burn in (image retention, whatever you want to call it)is a non-issue with Plasmas then why is it not covered under warranty and why does the manual warn you so much about it?? Oh and by the way, the reason the LCDs at the airport have burn in is because the same image has been on them for major periods of time (sometimes years) even CRTs burn in when using them like that. And the reason they use LCD instead of Plasma at airports is because the Plasmas will burn in MUCH MUCH MUCH sooner. SO basically they can't use them. Get your facts straight.
Myself, I am holding on to my 1080p 120hz LCDs (which I love and think are far superior to a 720p 1970's technology) and I am waiting until the price comes down a little on the Pioneer PRO-150FD 60" 1080p ELITE Plasma. I will be putting that one in my theater room in place of my KDSr60Xbr1. But I will still be keeping my Sony-XBR4 and MY Sam-71F Because they are great!

As 720p was not available in the 1970's. The first model that 720p was available on was the 1986 PRO-1000 Pioneer Display system.

I never said Sony was going nowhere. With BD and an awesome advertising agency on their side, they will not lose, however this has no bearing on how their sets actually perform.

I understand the difference between an HD and a FullHD television. Just because it has more pixels DOES NOT make it a better television. Would an Insignia NS-42LCD (1080p) beat a Sony KDL-40S3000? No way, not a chance. The reason behind this is that the Sony (although half the resolution) utilizes a better video processor for improved standard definition performance, a higher contrast panel and a host of settings via XMB.

Would a Sony KDL-40XBR4/5 beat a Pioneer PDP-4280HD? No way, and for the same reasons as the above statement. Pioneer has staggeringly higher contrast than any other television on the market (under $50,000.00). The Pioneer has cleaner and more defined standard definition reproduction, no blur in fast motion sequences, and no loss in performance when exposed to light.

And seeing as the best television in the world is 1366x768 and CRT-based, I would get your facts straight. Plasmas nor LCDs can compete with a well-built 9" CRTube front projector.

EVERY TELEVISION BURNS. LCD televisions suffer from image persistance about as often as plasma televisions suffer from image retention. This is a known fact. Nobody at home will be using either technology as they do at the airports, running 24/7, so I find the burn factor on either is not worth mentioning, as customers will not experience a problem at homewith this. At the very least, plasmas have ISM methods and video orbiters to prevent retention, but the LCDs do not, which would explain why I have had so many LCD TV's burn on me (used a color-proofing screens in comparison runs). I call burn in as image retention/persistance because I know what I am talking about, and, should you take the time to look that up, you'll find image persistance as an LCD term and image retention as a plasma term. Different scientific phenomena have different words to describe it. Are all apes the same? No, they all have scientific names (e.g. pongo pimeaus, **** erectus, etc.). Are all types of image burn the same? No. Get your facts straight.

If you'll read the owner's manual to the KDL-52XBR5, you'll note that image persistance is not covered by Sony either. It says the same thing for Samsung and Sharp as well. They don't cover it; yet it is a problem for those who use these screens as permenant computer monitors.

I will remind, that unless for BD/HD DVD viewing, 1080p does not exist. 120hz does not exist currently outside the limited number of games produced for PS3. Deep color only exists for BD and HD DVD, that's it. You'll never utilize those capabilities on your set for regular TV. Even after they rip out the current lines and install new higher-bandwidth fiber (in a decade or so), there won't be enough bandwidth to support all stations in 1080p, 120hz, deep color. Those tv's you have will be long gone awaiting the newest technology (OLED, Laser, whatever), which it seem like you like to be on the cutting edge, so why stop there? Why don't you just skip 1080p alltogether and wait for 1440p or 4096p?

I don't brag. If you want to hear a brag, go elsewhere. Because although I have a monster video/audio setup and various televisions, ranging from 9" tube projectors to the latest EINK screens, I do not try to do the keeping-up-with-the-Jones' thing. It's just not me. I like premium things, but the cutting edge is a dangerous place to be. I like things to be tried and true before investing in the technology. EVERY technology has it's quirks, and they are worked out over time. LCD may have it's day, sometime in the furture, but it is not this day. LCD and plasma have a long way to go before I would consider them truly better than the old 9" tube projectors. Please understand where I'm coming from. Those poor people who got stuck with betamax players kicked themselves becuase the market had not yet decided what was going to be the ew technology. This applies to BD and HD DVD, but more importantly, to LCD and Plasma. I see people all the time who regret buying an LCD, because they thought LCD's were perfect. I see the same for plasma. I think one would have to do some more research pending on what one is using the television for. For a Computer monitor, LCD. For an entertainment device, that is to go in a living room or finished basement, bright room or dark, plasma.

Also, to let you know, there is not much difference between the PRO-150FD and the PDP-6010FD, and none of the differences have to do with picture performance. The ELITE models have speakers on the side (which I would remove), gold writing on the front, and an RS-232 port. Are those differences really worth $1,000.00?

And, not to be rude, but this is posted at the bottom of the posting page for this forum:

Please note: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. Click here to review our Terms of Use. If you're new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ.

I guess we will just have to agree to diagree on this. I just perferr the sony. Its an awesome set and so is the Pioneer. But for someone to say that the pioneer is a better TV is a matter of opinion. And for someone to say that Plasma is better than LCD is a matter of opinion. Both have thier arguements. I will quote another Cnet members words "Do you know what the Best TV out there is?: Whatever TV you consider to be the best and is the best decision for you and you alone since you are the one who will be watching it" Thats a pretty simple statement but probably one of the smartest I have heard so far on here.
The 1080p was the big difference for me in this decision. Maybe my eyesight is better than most or something but I made my comparisons at normal viewing distance and I noticed a noticable (not enormous, noticeable) sharper detailed picture on the sony. Although the pioneer had some nice colors, But from what I saw The colors were almost as good on the sony. Granted I did not use instrumentation to measure the color accuracy, But I don't watch my televison with instrumentation. I will admit the Pioneer was much better with Standard Def. But I rarely ever watch standard Def anyway.
I have always preferred LCD to plasma. But after really looking into it I have learned that I really love Plasma especially for movies. SO please don't think I am a plasma hater. In fact I am going to buy one very soon. I have my eyes on two contenders:
The Pioneer PDP6010FD (which I originally thought about getting the PRO-150FD but I learned from you that it is pretty much the same as the 6010 so I will be considering the 6010 instead)
And the Panasonic TH-58PZ750U.

Do you have any info on the Panasonic? As far as plasmas go, What is the best 58-60 inch out there (money not a factor)?

Also, I have read the Terms of use policy for this forum. I have not Advertised, Posted any offensive materials, used any profanity, or personally attaked anyone. And if you feel that I have personally atttacked you then I want you to know that I was not and I apologize if it may seemed that way to you.

Chadmak09, I agree that the best TV for for a person is the one an individual thinks is the TV they feel best with visually. Now, this may not be the best TV or have the best specs. However I understand that some folks like the way that LCD's display an image.

I think that the current champion of the LCD sets, overall, are the new Sony XBR's with the 120Hz rate. My wife loves how the LCD display looks, no doubt bright and flashy, but she loves it. I think it is the best LCD on the market.

From my perspective, the Pioneer is the best flat panel I have ever seen. The debate I and the wife have is over LCD vs Plasma, probably over what looks good to each other as a TV monitor as well.

We do watch a lot of SD programming. I watch a lot of sports. As I have mentioned previously and the set we get will be in an extremely reflective situation. Based on what NS has said, the wife and I have a slight disagreement as to the type of set to get.

NS, I don't think I have ever encountered anyone with the knowledge of TV's that you have. I have enjoyed reading the posts with both you and Chadmak09. Since the set we purchase is a very large purchase for us, can you tell me if there is a reason to go with the Pioneer 5010, I believe it is, their newest or to go with the 768 resolution of the 5080? Would I notice a difference between the two? Also, the thought of the buzzing sound reported in the 5010 has troubled me a little. Is this an issue that can be resolved?

They are both fine sets and the price difference for the 5010 vs the 52 inch is currently about $300.00. We wanted something in the 50 inch range or so. If the speakers or sound that comes with the 5080 are comparable to the 5010 and if they both work well with Blu-Ray and HD-DVD, then I wonder if the extra money is worth it.

Thanks to both of you.

I would say the difference between the two sets is like night and day. Don't get me wrong, the Panasonic is an excellent set, however standard definition performance is abyssmal. The blacks aren't as deep, thus the colors aren't as accurate. The 6010 has HDMIv1.3 spec, whereas the TH-58PX700/750U has HDMIv1.2. The Pioneer consumes rougly half the power of the Panasonic, rated at about 400W v.s. around 750-800W on the Pansonic.

The sound quality is better on the Pioneer also (not that it matters too much, but some like to be able to listen to their TV speakers as well). The Pioneer's look is sleeker, and with a removeable speaker, it can fit in places the Panasonic cannot.

Performance-wise and for the sake of practicality, the PDP-6010FD would be a wise choice.

The Speaker on the PDP-5080HD is identical to the speaker on the PDP-5010FD. This is an excellent speaker for what it is.

As for BD/HD DVD, Both sets handle the information very well. Perhaps its my vision, but I have a hard time detecting differences at 5.5ft from each screen. If you are a true videophile, then get the 5010FD. I have the 5080HD for my bedrrom television, and used the extra 1500 towards the Denon AVR-4308CI for Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HDma. But that's just me I suppose.

The buzzing sound occurs on my television. It is quieter than my Runco SC-1 (which is quiet for a front projector). But it is noticible at 12ft distance. Ibelieve I had read something on the way Plasma televisions react to different altitudes (sealed gas chambers reacting to differences in pressure), where a side effect of bringing a plasma to an altitude other than that at which it was mad ecan create a buzzing sound. I talked to my Pioneer rep (Justin Kraft), who also said it was normal.

Standard definition is like night and day between the Pioneer and other sets I have seen. Even if you invest in a processor with a good upscaling chip (like the Denon AVR-4308CI, Faroudja DCDi EDGE), the ability of the television to show the multi-dimensional vividity of things will still make an entiraebly noticable difference.

-N.

Hi NS:
Got my pdp5010 today. I'm very pleased so far, and after setting it all up, I began to institute your recommended settings. However, the setting for several items (color, tint, brightness) were all at 30, which is the maximum setting.
I'm confused by this; the result isn't as pleasing a picture as leaving them at 0 (or midway mark).

Can you enlighten me (or correct the settings if they don't apply to the 5010. How do such extreme settings aid during the first 200 hrs?

Finally, do you have any idea as to what might be creating a buzzing sound emanating from the display-- seems like from the back, not the lower attached speaker. It disappears when the set is powered off to standby mode.

Thanks in advance.

C-