Sony KD-34XS955 vs Plasma/LCD

[Mukaudio]

I discovered that my Sony Outlet (thanks to a 40% off sale) is getting rid of their Sony KD-34XS955 (34" CRT) models for only $540.

I was going to sit out the HD race until SED came online, but this seems like a pretty sweet deal. Anybody have an idea how much I would have to spend on a 50" plasma/lcd to get comparable performance to the Sony?

Thanks,

Mark.

[Rumplestiltskin]

It depends...

I discovered that my Sony Outlet (thanks to a 40% off sale) is getting rid of their Sony KD-34XS955 (34" CRT) models for only $540.

I was going to sit out the HD race until SED came online, but this seems like a pretty sweet deal. Anybody have an idea how much I would have to spend on a 50" plasma/lcd to get comparable performance to the Sony?

Thanks,

Mark.

A lot comes down to what you'll be watching. If you'll really just be watching EDTV/HDTV signals, then most LCDs or Plasmas will perform quite well. But if you watch much in the way of analog, then any CRT is going to look better than any Plasma or LCD. Unless there's a compelling reason to get a flat panel (such as space, which forced me to go LCD), then CRT is going be a perfectly fine temp solution.

[aud19]

Dang!!! I've been thinking about a bedrrom TV and can't seem to find any CRT sets left....I may have to visit some Sony stores!!!

FWIW, CRT's are still considered the PQ standard and no plasma/LCD can touch them at any price. The only thing they'll have an edge in is resolution and that's only the expensive 1080p models. LCD's also have better bright room performance and no burn in but even worse black levels.

[Rumplestiltskin]

...

Dang!!! I've been thinking about a bedrrom TV and can't seem to find any CRT sets left....I may have to visit some Sony stores!!!

FWIW, CRT's are still considered the PQ standard and no plasma/LCD can touch them at any price. The only thing they'll have an edge in is resolution and that's only the expensive 1080p models. LCD's also have better bright room performance and no burn in but even worse black levels.

I won't argue with the statement about PQ, but that comes at a price. Maybe I've been looking in the wrong places, but getting a CRT that has PQ rivaling or surpassing plasma and LCD is rather expensive, and they aren't as big as most people would like (usually 36" or smaller). As far as I'm concerned there's more to PQ than image quality, which is why I prefer LCD and plasma. Very few CRTs are as pleasing to look at, which is why I've had a 17" LCD on my home computer since 2002 (they were $700 then). It replaced a Sony Trinitron, so...

I like the picture on some of the nicer CRTs, but something inside of me just won't let me spend a grand on a tube. And from what I've seen, if you only plan to use digital, even the low-end LCDs have a very nice picture. The difference in most LCDs and plasmas is in its processor and and how it handles analog signals. Even my Sharp Aquos, which set me back over $2k, is not that great with analog cable compared to my father-in-law's Sony plasma... but he spent over $4k on that unit 8O

Anyway, I still think there are other factors that are often more important than PQ which it comes to choosing a set. Budget, installation factors, and long-term planning are what often help me pick a unit.

[aud19]

I won't argue with the statement about PQ, but that comes at a price. Maybe I've been looking in the wrong places, but getting a CRT that has PQ rivaling or surpassing plasma and LCD is rather expensive, and they aren't as big as most people would like (usually 36" or smaller). As far as I'm concerned there's more to PQ than image quality, which is why I prefer LCD and plasma.

I'd actually say the opposite is true IMO regarding price (I'd say you have to spend an awful lot more than $600 to get anything close to that Trinitron's PQ but I digress). I do have to say your comment that "there's more to PQ than image quality" is more than a little confusing though. PQ or picture quality and image quality are one and the same and VERY important for this fellow.

I do agree though that things like form factor, budget, ambient light conditions etc have a large impact on decision makiong as well. Ie: if you want to hang on a wall, install above a fireplace, watch in a bright room etc a CRT is not likely your best choice. But given that he has the space and that awesome $600 price tag.... there's nothing that will touch it at that size for price/PQ.

[Mukaudio]

Thanks everyone. Just wanted to make sure plasmas hadn't caught up to CRT in black levels and picture quality.

The price is sweet and about the only thing holding me back is the fact I will have to come up with a new rack/stand for all of my other components. The 200 lbf of the Sony will eat up almost all of the load carrying capacity of my IKEA stand.

I wonder what sort of safety margin IKEA designed for. :W If I didn't have gear sitting underneath the TV, it would be tempting to test the limits of my stand.

But I did end up buying the Sony. I just need to haul it home and get it set up.

Mark.

[aud19]

Congrats Mark :T Don't forget to calibrate it with DVE or Avia!

[Mukaudio]

Congrats Mark :T Don't forget to calibrate it with DVE or Avia!

I'm not aware of either one. I assume this is a calibration disc that you can buy?


Also, do I need to stretch the 4:3 images to prevent burn-in? Thought I heard a rumor that it wasn't good to watch 4:3 in normal view on a 16:9 CRT. I'm kind of an aspect ratio purist, but if I have to stretch to protect the TV, then so be it.

Mark.

[David Meek]

I'm not aware of either one. I assume this is a calibration disc that you can buy?

You got it. Owning and using at least one of these DVDs is every bit as important as anything else you can do with regard to having a superior home theater IMO. Here are links to info on both. Digital Video Essentials (the new version of VE) is my preference, and I've owned all three.

Digital Video Essentials
Avia

I'm kind of an aspect ratio purist, but if I have to stretch to protect the TV, then so be it.

Some of the new stretch modes are pretty impressive after a little getting used to. They don't strecth the middle portion of the image at all and gradually increase the amount of stretch at the edges, so that the majority of the image (especially the central part we focus on) looks normal, or very close to it.


Best of luck with the new set! :T

[tf1216]

Is it worth having an ISF certified professional calibrate a tv or is it better to just do it yourself with Digital Video Essentials?

[aud19]

David covered the disc info (thanks David :T) but IMO if you want the display to look/prform it's best, ISF is the way to go. DVE/AVIA are great tools at the user level and even for "maintenance" after an ISF calibration but they can't compete with the extensive improvement from a good tech and their service menu tweaks (not too mention their expensive equipment to analyze/track greyscale, colour etc).

As for burn-in.... After having the set properly calibrated by an ISF tech or even by yourself using one of the above discs, the brightness/contrast should be set at much more appropriate levels (ie:lower peak light output) which goes a LONG way to reducing any burn-in risk. As for stretch modes, I personally tend to use them for non-critical viewing like SD TV shows to minimize the risk but stick with the standard 4:3 on movies, non widescreen HD etc. It usually takes people a week or so to get used to them but afterwards it becomes second nature.