Q&A: What are the differences between an LCD and a Plasma television? Which lasts longer and is more economical?

4 Responses to Q&A: What are the differences between an LCD and a Plasma television? Which lasts longer and is more economical?

1. mrfixit

   October 4, 2011 at 9:07 am

   The difference between the two is the method in which the picture is produced. Plasma screens use a matrix of tiny gas plasma cells charged by precise electrical voltages to create a picture. On the other hand, LCDs or liquid crystal displays are made up of liquid crystal pushed in the space between two glass plates. A picture is produced by varying the electrical currents.

   Generally LCDs are a better value unless your’re looking for a 50in plus TV. While LCDs can give you better resolution, plasma still has the edge in terms of picture quality. Both can usaully be repaired and neither should have any health hazards.

   But in the end, the resoulution, the pixels don’t matter, its what you do with them. So make sure use use an HD input source like a Blu Ray disc player or HD TV service etc.
2. kk6644k444

   October 4, 2011 at 9:48 am

   If you want the BEST TOP is Plasma ! Plasma pictures Quality even LED TV can’t compare. but ” life ” for Plasma is shorter than LCD about 20,000 hours. and power consumption ( W ) is 26 % more than LCD .Plasma prouder heat ! But LCD given you more than acceptable pictures Quality , 90 % of TV owner choose LCD, because some good point from Plasma is not so important to every body, eg, wilder view angle ( very few people watch TV from side ). better dark/Black colour ( not many people eyes can catch the little difference ).Plasma is only made 42 inc above screen ( 32/37 have discontinue last years ) . for small size-42 & below is only LCD. 42 inc above size, Plasma is always cheaper than Big Size 50/55/65 LCD also New LED TV. but you paid 26 % more eclectic bill. and for 10 hours a day, life about 6 + year , LCD about 8 + years. Paid more to own a Worldwide TV brand, for quality + reliable , eg.Sony.Samsung.Sharp.Panasonic.Toshiba.LG.Avoid any Local/in-house brand, is cheap but not quality and subject to reliable.because such brand don’t made TV by own, all by other small manufactures in China , use low Quality LCD/Plasma Display panel;. So far non of any people reported ” health hazards ” because of TV ( CRT/LCD/Plasma ). if you willing to paid more, LED TV is Excellence as this moment . next 3-5 years will be OLED.
3. Blue

   October 4, 2011 at 9:58 am

   LCD is better way to go,less problem,less power consumption,not burn-in and last longer.
   http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fs%3Fie%3DUTF8%26node%3D724227011%252C979929011%26ref%255F%3Damb%255Flink%255F83064811%255F3&tag=computer0bd-20&linkCode=ur2&camp=1789&creative=390957
4. jf

   October 4, 2011 at 9:59 am

   Neither technology lasts longer. You have to go set by set and figure that out yourself. See how many hours the set is rated. It varies by set, not by technology. A good set would be 60,000 hours. A top tier set these days is 100,000+ (which equates to 30+ years at 8 hours a day 365 days a year).

   Neither have health hazards on their own under normal operations. Both have concerns if you decide to smash one open and have the innards leak. I would avoid doing that as its also the end of your TV.

   Both are easy and hard to repair. It depends what goes. If the screen goes, I think the LCD might be a bit easier. But even that kind of depends on the model. If one of the boards goes, then I think its model based not technology based.

   LCD vs Plasma

   LCD – is the everyman HDTV. It is cost effective, hence its popularity. It is also physically lighter than Plasma. It tends to draw less power than Plasmas as well (though good Plasmas are now competing with LCDs). It has a matte finish so is useful for rooms that have too much ambient light which can not be controlled. LCD whites are a bit brighter than Plasma whites (but how often do you crank your brightness to 100%). LCDs are considered better for gaming (but I don’t think you’d be disappointed with gaming on a modern Plasma). LCDs are sharper in SD (think evening news instead of film); this isn’t a good vs bad, its just a personal preference thing. LCDs also have a bit more muted colors; again this isn’t good vs bad, its purely personal preference.

   LCD technology has problems with fast motion though. That is why you see ones advertised with 120Hz or 240Hz refresh rates (100Hz and 200Hz in Europe). This does not come close to Plasma though. So they aren’t as good for fast motion (sports and movies). The 240Hz ones are making good strides, but right now you’re paying a HUGE premium for it.

   LCDs are also not as strong with their ability to reproduce true blacks. Their blacks tend to be a bit grey and not a true black. LCDs with LED backlighting are coming out now though. These are finally starting to bring LCDs to the Plasma level in terms of blacks. However, like the 240Hz refresh rate, you must pay a large premium for this feature at the current time.

   Plasma – they have better blacks (true black), contrast (greater ranges in blacks/whites so you get greys instead of clumps of black and white), and motion playback (their refresh rate is near instantaneous much like old CRTs were). Their overall image quality is better than that of an LCD. While prices on them are constantly dropping, they do demand a slight premium over LCDs of a similar category. The colors in Plasmas tend to have more “pop” to them; this isn’t a good vs bad thing, its just personal preference. Also for SD viewing they are a bit “softer” (think more like film less like the evening news). This isn’t a good vs bad thing, its personal preference. Most plasma owners get used to it and don’t mind it.

   Plasma’s are glass though so are glossy. They can have reflection issues if you are in a room with lots of light that you can’t control (you can’t turn off the lights and you don’t own any blinds). And good Plasma care would require you condition them. But its fairly simple to do. All you have to do is keep the brightness and contrast (picture) settings cranked way down for the first 100-200 hours, then optimize, and you’ll have an amazing TV experience.

   Plasma myth (1) – They experience burn-in. This is inaccurate, those days are gone. Just condition the gasses and then use it as normal and you’re fine. Also, the better sets have built-in features to prevent this (on top of the technology just generally being better now than say 5 years ago).

   Plasma myth (2) – They have short life spans. This is another inaccuracy. Most are now rated in the 60,000-100,000 hours range. At 8 hours a day 365 days a year that would mean a life of 20-30 years. So do you think you’ll still want/own the same TV in 15 years, let alone 30?

   Plasma myth (3) – They won’t work in high altitude because of problems for the gasses. This is again no longer an issue. Current Plasmas can be purchased and used in mile high Denver, and above, so you’ll be fine where ever you are (unless you’re living in the Himalayas).

   Plasma vs LCD – One important note though is TV size. In 42″ and above you see and get the benefit of the Plasma advantages. But 40″ and smaller and the benefits are diminishing. So if your needs are for a smaller television, LCD may be a wiser choice.

   Plasma brands – Pioneer Kuro Elite is the best, followed by Pioneer Kuro. But these can cost as much as a small car. Panasonic Viera is the next best and is much more cost effective. The Vieras can give the Kuros a run for their money (they might not win, but they are no push over in quality). After that I would look to Samsung primarily as a Plasma option. There are also some LG models that have reviewed extremely wel