Tvs

So you spent £2500 minus your discount because your Kuro uses more power than the newer sets? That's some crazy economic thinking there! 

By the way - if you've set the picture up properly, you'll find the set uses a lot less power too. The standard brightness and contrast settings are normally way too high. Please don't say you have it set on DYNAMIC mode?

I'm not looking to change until 65" 4K OLED sets are around the price i paid for my 5090 Kuro (£1600). Could be a long wait tho so i'll just enjoy the Pioneer until then. 

Hi mr rackit  thank you for you advise I have not  got rid of my kuro  I love it trying a smart tv  lg have the new oled , It seems ok for family viewing you can see it from any angle very expensive you have very good taste the kuro is the best of the lot regards

Pretty much true Rupert. I'm looking into a new tv at the moment and the led's are rubbish. Best get a plasma whilst they're still going.

We have a Panasonic LED and it's excellent. Far better than the Panasonic plasma it replaced and only uses 40w of power.

The big problem with TVs is actually being able to judge between different sets that have been set up properly. 

I've a 65" Panasonic plasma as our main display and a 32" Sony LED in the kitchen. Both required a fair bit of setting up to get them looking decent (the Panasonic, in particular, has a huge range of adjustments), but the difference between the sets out of the box with the standard settings and what I finished up with is quite dramatic.

Both types of TVs have excellent pictures and I suspect, if I used similar-sized sets to make the comparison, there wouldn't be much between them in terms of picture quality.

If you really want to see a TV at its best, invest in a proper external video processor from the likes of Lumagen & have it set up by an ISF certified expert.

Hi the thing now with tvs now is how much power they use , we need a large one for home cinema so it as to be led But plasma as to be the best picture .

When I buy my Naim, I don't base my decision on the power consumption. 

I'm looking for a 55". I have generally kept my eye on two led models Panasonic TX-L55WT65B 55 £1,900 and a Sony KDL55W905 £1,800. Both top of the range and have both always looked great in the brightly lit showrooms of the usual shops.

I went to TPS near Manchester who have an excellent reputation and specialise in Panasonic. They seemed to have the whole Panasonic (only make there) range on display, all playing the same good signal and blu ray. All calibrated to the best picture they think possible. The showroom is pretty dark, so good for viewing.

What struck me was how bad the cheaper end of the market tv's looked. The blacks are really washed out, poor viewing angles, harsh colour reproduction, etc. When I say cheaper, I mean £1,200, so not cheap! The 3 top of the range (55", 60" and 65") plasmas looked great and the top of the range 55" led looked okay, but not great.

I was only interested in 55" so it came down to the two top Panasonics; plasma TX-P55VT65B or led TX-L55WT65B, both similarish price. Tested with blu ray new Bond film, first impression of the led was it actually looked ok, but perhaps a bit lacking in tonal range, processed edgy look to faces and a definite blue/grey tint in the blacks (which bothered me, the more I looked at it). The plasma was absolutely jet black (couldn't see borders), smoother graduation in highlights and far more dynamic range. Skin tones were more real/smooth. The more I compared the two models, the differences became greater. The plasma was way better.

When you say LED you really mean LED backlit LCD. The technology in these mean that you will never get a great picture in normal rooms. True LED (OLED) looks good but the technology needs to stabilise for a year or two more (and then the price will drop).

I know the Pioneer Kuro Plasmas usesmore juice than LED/LCD sets but i don't watch a huge amount of tv but when it's on i just want the best picture quality i can afford. The £1600 i paid seemed a huge amount at the time (2009) but the sets i've seen since costing almost as much and more, makes me think it wasn't too bad a price after all in terms of picture v price.

As you say, some of the £1200 tv sets aren't so hot and i wonder if they're pretty much the same panels as the £6-800 priced sets but with more 'features' added on and possibly a nicer looking design? 

The only feature i was looking for was a great picture and i think the Pioneer delivers on that score. 

If it lasts until 65" 4K OLED (and programming to match) sets are at same price point, then i'll be happy. 

all hail pioneer it will last  well made get a smart tv for other uses I know got both,

A great picture in normal rooms??

No idea what this may mean. The picture from my backlit led/lcd is better than my dlp...in the same room.

Marc

I assume that you do know what a great picture may be.

A normal room would be one that normal people sit down and watch television in. They are not brightly lit.

It is nice that you like the picture from your LCD screen. 

* * * * * * *

I have wanted to have my screens properly calibrated but it has been impossible to find anyone to do this. Finally I decided to get the TV calibration software for my Spyder 4 and although it isn't super sophisticated it has produced a noticeably better picture on both my Panasonic and (getting a bit old now) Pioneer.

I haven't purchased one yet, because none of them match the quality of my 7 year old Pioneer. They are bigger, so more impressive, but lack the skin tone realsm and a few more issues. 3d on the tv is a gimmick too.