Originally posted by: DLeRium
LCD Projections vs. LCD screens = Intel Pentium 2 vs Core 2 Duo.
With $4000, I would get a plasma. I don't see why everyone starts recommending DLPs and all the sort.
Didn't we just have an LCD vs Plasma debate? The consensus was if you have the money, you're going to shoot for LCDs or Plasmas, and if you really have the money, Plasma. $4000 is not some mini budget TV expense. I bought my Bravia XBR2 for under $4000, so I believe you should be going for something high end like a Pioneer Elite.
Edit: Ok, if you insist on 60" that's what you'll get. I had room for a 60" TV to replace our aging projection tube systen, and well I decided that getting something smaller but of higher quality is more important to me than another monstruous decent image quality screen. I settled on the Sony Bravia 46" XBR2 for that reason. The Pioneer Elite was a close 2nd choice. I regret not getting the Pioneer.
DLeRium,
I'm not sure if there's any confusion about technology names, but just to make sure:
Bravia XBR2 = LCD.
XBR2 = SXRD/LCoS (SXRD is Sony's name for the LCoS technology, which is a rear projection like a DLP, but different and without the rainbow effect).
XBR3 = rumored to be LCD/LCD rear projection
XBR5 = rumored to be SXRD
I'm not gonna talk about LCD rear projection because LCD rear projection as I understand it, well, sucks.
I don't know what the ATOT consensus is, but I read a lot of AVS forum (and TV technology is more their thing than ATOT's) and from what I read, many people prefer LCoS/DLP over plasma and certainly over LCD in the sub $3k and even sub $4k range. LCoS/DLP (well, I mainly know about LCoS because I'm interested in the Sony SXRD) have blacker blacks and more vibrant colors, 1080p, 1:1 pixel mapping so they're usable as PC monitors. They just aren't as thin and the viewing angles aren't as good.
I think LCD has the worst picture quality out of all the new technologies (blacks aren't as black, colors aren't as vibrant). It just happens to be convenient (thin, better viewing angles, no burn-in, no rainbows, usable as a PC monitor, etc).
Plasmas (in the < $3k range) are also more convenient but I don't think their PQ is as good as LCoS either. They also suffer from image retention and aren't as effective as PC monitors because 1:1 pixel mapping is more difficult to achieve. In the < $3k range, an LCoS of equal price as a plasma would look better AND be a bigger screen. Perhaps the Pioneer Elites look better than LCoS, but they also cost significantly more, and the screen is smaller.
Bottom line: A 60" LCoS is by no means a "monstrous decent image." If properly calibrated, it can look AMAZING and certainly better than LCD's. It's main drawbacks are that it's not as thin and the viewing angles aren't as good. But in no way are you compromising PQ for size. You're only compromising convenience.