# Plasma vs LED-LCD?



## gasteve76 (Nov 21, 2011)

Am ready to upgrade my 50" hitachi LCD but don't know if I want to go with led edge lit or plasma. I'm hesitant about plasma due to its history of burn in and short life cycle. Are new plasmas still subject to those problems? How do the new plasmas compare to LED-LCD? Any thoughts or recommendations?


----------



## mechman (Feb 8, 2007)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*

What room will it be going in? Is there a lot of light? The general rule of thumb has been LED-LCD for bright rooms and plasmas for more dark theater room type setups.

If it were me, I'd lean towards plasma over an LED edge lit display. But you need to take the room into consideration as well. 

Welcome to HTS. :wave:


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*

Plasma is also hotter and uses more energy than LCD. Burn in can also be an issue on plasma. Just some other things to keep in mind.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

Burn is is most likely furring the first 100 hours or so of use. As this is when the initial layer of phosphor burns off. 

Will you be gaming excessively or using the display as a monitor? If so the LEDay be your best bet. 

Calibration will not completely stop retention but will reduce its likelihood. 

As for power usage a heat yes it's hotter but again calibration reduces this. As for power consumption plasma is still less then old tube TVs and probably less then your existing hitachi.


----------



## tonyvdb (Sep 5, 2007)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*



rab-byte said:


> As for power consumption plasma is still less then old tube TVs and probably less then your existing hitachi.


For the smaller sizes yes but not the large displays 46" and above. Size per watt LCD is far better for consumption.


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

No argument there. I was simply pointing out that compared to TVs from 4 years lcd&plasma are more efficient.


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*

Plasmas have been getting more and more power efficient, as well, especially in the past couple of years due to the tighter consumption standards in the EU. LCDs still usually win that battle, however, we're not talking about a huge difference to your monthly power bill, even on the largest plasmas (we're talking about a difference of a few bucks per month, worst case).

Burn in is WAY less of an issue with current-model plasmas, but still, if you're a heavy gamer or tend to leave your TV on specific channels with static info like semi-permanent logos, crawl bars (ESPN and CNN are particularly bad here), etc., for hours on end every day, then I would stay away from Plasma... ditto for use as a computer monitor.

OTOH, for pure theatrical quality, your better plasmas can't be beat in terms of natural motion, color reproduction, and black levels (obviously some models are better than others and better LCDs will beat lesser Plasmas, etc.). The only LCDs that can touch Plasma in terms of black levels are the Sharp Elite's, which are still in the "insanely expensive" category.


----------



## gasteve76 (Nov 21, 2011)

The tv will be in a living room that gets lots of sunlight during the day. It will mostly be used for blue ray, sports, and regular tv watching. Limited gaming. 
Thanks for the input!


----------



## Airgas1998 (Sep 4, 2011)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*



KalaniP said:


> Plasmas have been getting more and more power efficient, as well, especially in the past couple of years due to the tighter consumption standards in the EU. LCDs still usually win that battle, however, we're not talking about a huge difference to your monthly power bill, even on the largest plasmas (we're talking about a difference of a few bucks per month, worst case).
> 
> Burn in is WAY less of an issue with current-model plasmas, but still, if you're a heavy gamer or tend to leave your TV on specific channels with static info like semi-permanent logos, crawl bars (ESPN and CNN are particularly bad here), etc., for hours on end every day, then I would stay away from Plasma... ditto for use as a computer monitor.
> 
> OTOH, for pure theatrical quality, your better plasmas can't be beat in terms of natural motion, color reproduction, and black levels (obviously some models are better than others and better LCDs will beat lesser Plasmas, etc.). The only LCDs that can touch Plasma in terms of black levels are the Sharp Elite's, which are still in the "insanely expensive" category.


if you don't think going from 350-500watts on my 65vt30, compared to about 130w on my 70" elite is a big difference....well then....


----------



## rab-byte (Feb 1, 2011)

Airgas1998 said:


> if you don't think going from 350-500watts on my 65vt30, compared to about 130w on my 70" elite is a big difference....well then....


And what do you pay per kilowatt hour?


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*



Airgas1998 said:


> if you don't think going from 350-500watts on my 65vt30, compared to about 130w on my 70" elite is a big difference....well then....


As rab-byte wrote, what do you pay per KH? And what is the average draw over an hour of real-world use, as opposed to manuf specs? Then the two numbers can be compared... as can the monthly difference in cost. I think you'll find that, while the numbers are indeed different, the real world difference in your monthly power bill ends up being closer to a rounding error than a noticeable difference. Obviously if you're watching 10+ hours per day, 7 days per week, the differences will be more noticeable, but it's still not quite as high as you might think. There was a thread on this on AVS, I believe, where this very topic was discussed and numbers were crunched. Even at 500w, that usage tends to be pretty minor compared to the current pull of your average central AC system.

And finally, of course, comparing it to a best-TV-on-the-planet, which few mere mortals can afford, is not completely fair.


----------



## MikeBiker (Jan 3, 2010)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*

I'd get a plasma before an edge-lit LED LCD. I would pick a local-dimming, back-lit LED LCD over a plasma if the main sitting area was centered. The edge-lit displays seem to have uniformity issues with intensity.


----------



## gasteve76 (Nov 21, 2011)

mechman said:


> What room will it be going in? Is there a lot of light? The general rule of thumb has been LED-LCD for bright rooms and plasmas for more dark theater room type setups.
> 
> If it were me, I'd lean towards plasma over an LED edge lit display. But you need to take the room into consideration as well.
> 
> Welcome to HTS. :wave:


So plasmas are better suited for a dark room? Is that because the glass is highly reflective? My main concern about a plasma has been burn in and relative short life. On the flip side I gave a 1yr old 46" Bravia LCD that has horizontal shadow lines visible in dark scenes. Not thrilled with it either. I think it's the backlight.


----------



## moparz10 (Sep 21, 2010)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*

I had the same problem a couple of years ago and went with plasma panasonic 58v10,had ray coronado do the calibration and never looked back.in a dark room i was extremly satisfied as well as for every day viewing.it's hard to audition displays at big box stores but plasmas just looked better to me.


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*



gasteve76 said:


> So plasmas are better suited for a dark room? Is that because the glass is highly reflective? My main concern about a plasma has been burn in and relative short life. On the flip side I gave a 1yr old 46" Bravia LCD that has horizontal shadow lines visible in dark scenes. Not thrilled with it either. I think it's the backlight.


Plasmas aren't as bright as LCD, that's why they're better suited to a dark room. LCDs just throw out a lot more light... usually with a cost: lower black levels on all but the best of the best screens.

Short life is not an issue with Plasma for anything made in the last few years. That's an old, full-resolved issue.

Burn-in is not nearly as bad as it was, but it's still an issue in certain conditions (gaming, computer use, or long term viewing of stations with lots of static content, for instance).

Nonetheless, since you said it's a pretty bright room, you'd probably be best with LCD.

I full agree with the recommendation to avoid edge-lit LCD. Local dimming is best.

Heads up re terminology (you may already know, but many don't): There is no such thing as an "LED" TV. (outside of commercial ballpark/stadium-size sets and similarly irrelevant oddball systems) They're all LCD TVs, the only distinction is how the backlight works: CFL (older tech) or LED (newer tech). The LED-based backlights can be directly behind the screen (usually preferable) or all around the edge with various "light tube" technologies to pipe the light into the middle of the screen. Most videophiles abhor edge-lit LCD because it usually brings with it many other issues (it's just not as effective as simply putting the LEDs behind the screen, and often causes a lighter halo around the screen where light leaks through). Best of all is "local dimming LED backlight" where an array of LEDs behind the LCD panel can be individually controlled to lower the light output for dark image areas.


----------



## gasteve76 (Nov 21, 2011)

Great info. Any recommendations for a good local dimming LED-LCD? Based on feedback here and my own research I think that is the way I'll go. Looking to spend around $2000


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*



gasteve76 said:


> Great info. Any recommendations for a good local dimming LED-LCD? Based on feedback here and my own research I think that is the way I'll go. Looking to spend around $2000


What size are you looking for?

Hopefully others can help you from there... I'm a plasma guy, so other than the Sharp Elite's (first LCD sets to capture my interest since their invention) which are stupidly expensive, I don't really keep up with the details of individual models in the LCD market.


----------



## gasteve76 (Nov 21, 2011)

I want 50" minimum. Not opposed to plasma, just afraid my my wife will leave a show paused too long or kids games will cause burn in. If i was always present to monitor use I wouldn't be as worried about a plasma. Really what I want is the most bang for my buck. I want to be able to fully enjoy my blue rays, hd shows and sports!


----------



## allargon (Jun 13, 2008)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*

I don't know why the debate is always plasma vs. LCD. It should be DLP vs. Plasma.

RP DLP uses less energy than LCD and works better in bright rooms. You also get more screen for the buck. You just can't hang it on the wall. The colors with RP DLP are more accurate than LCD, too.

Now, plasma has better black levels, better motion, more accurate colors and better contrast than RP DLP or LCD.


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*



allargon said:


> I don't know why the debate is always plasma vs. LCD. It should be DLP vs. Plasma.
> 
> RP DLP uses less energy than LCD and works better in bright rooms. You also get more screen for the buck. You just can't hang it on the wall. The colors with RP DLP are more accurate than LCD, too.
> 
> Now, plasma has better black levels, better motion, more accurate colors and better contrast than RP DLP or LCD.


If you're taking it that far, CRT tech, once calibrated, offers black levels that are as good or better, the BEST motion, and the most accurate colors and contrast. You also can't hang it on your wall, and won't be lifting it out of the car without help, to be sure. LOL


----------



## megageek (Oct 27, 2011)

Overall i think plasma's are still better. They are more forgiving to an inferior source, so if your going to watch alot of tv (even hd chanels look a bit poo compared to b'ray) id go the plasma! Led's are nice but the dont do any favours to sd stuff..


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*



biach said:


> Overall i think plasma's are still better. They are more forgiving to an inferior source, so if your going to watch alot of tv (even hd chanels look a bit poo compared to b'ray) id go the plasma! Led's are nice but the dont do any favours to sd stuff..


In general, yes, but in a bright room, I'm less sure.


----------



## megageek (Oct 27, 2011)

Dont think it makes much difference. Most showrooms are brightly lit so go in and ask em to flick the channel to something . You can then see the difference. 

I have a plasma and do alot of gaming and burn in has not been an issue for me. I have noticed it but play anything else for 30 seconds and its gone. I would (if you go plasma) stick with panasonic tho. Iv'e a mate who has a samsung plasma and another mate with an lg plasma. They both look alot grainier and not as smooth as my panna. If you go LED id prob stick with samsung...


----------



## mechman (Feb 8, 2007)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*



gasteve76 said:


> Is that because the glass is highly reflective?


Yes. However, newer LCD/LEDs seem to be coming out without the anti-reflective coating on them - the new Sharp Elite is this way I believe. Make sure you double check that in the showroom. :T To a lot of folks this isn't an issue. I have a 42" plasma on my porch, which is covered in windows, and I've never noticed an issue with glare. Forums (ours included  ) tend to concentrate/focus on extremes in my opinion. :T


----------



## swingin (May 11, 2011)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*

If your a gamer, dont buy a plasma, period.


----------



## MikeBiker (Jan 3, 2010)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*



swingin said:


> If your a gamer, dont buy a plasma, period.


If I was a hard-core gamer, I'd not really care what type of set I used. The computer generated graphics are not intended to depict reality, so the colors are not critical and any nonuniformity the set had would not affect the play or the visual scene.


----------



## tazz3 (Oct 26, 2011)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*

if the tv is going in a kinda bright oom get dark threather shades for the windows my st30 only sues 25 dollars a year in energy


----------



## olddog (Dec 21, 2008)

*Re: Plasma vs led-lcd?*

For what it's worth I have a 54" SAMSUNG PLASMA for 3 years in a fairley bright room (not direct Sun but bright) I used it for about 100 hours then had it calabrated. It has been trouble free and beautifull to watch. No burn in problems and I watch a lot of channels that have that little logo in the same spot and have left it on pause during dinner many times. The Tech told me if I ever did have burn in then to just put on a White Balance DVD and let it sit for a couple of hours and it would take it out. As I said though-I have never had a problem-seems there is a signal that scans the screen faster than the eye that prevents this.


----------



## Todd Anderson (Jul 24, 2009)

This issue of burn-in is way over played. We all owned crts and there was no public outcry about burn-in issues. Look, if you run a plasma as a departure/arrival screen in an airport... Then, yes, you'll get some ghosting/retention over time. Your average user is not going to experience permanent retention.

I own 2 large plasmas and two smaller LCDs. The plasmas are going on about 3 yrs old. One is in a bright room. 

Bottom line : the plasmas are awesome. Their color and smoothness of motion (not to mention their huge viewing angles) make them standout over the LCDs. I wouldn't hesitate to buy plasmas again.

As for power consumption, check the numbers for yourself. Plasmas have come a long way in that dept.


----------



## BrianSexton (Jan 12, 2012)

We bought a Panasonic plasma last December, and it now has a slight burn in from using Pandora on Viera cast...screen saver settings were applied early on, and the program itself has a screensaver, but yet, we have a very slight burn in of the Pandora logo in the upper left of the screen. Also has a slight buzz when the its displaying a lot of white/light colors.
Great color accuracy though, which is why I went plasma. Can't say I've ever seen an lcd that impressed me in regards to color accuracy.


----------

