or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Electronics for my home
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Electronics for my home - Page 2

post #16 of 32
I've seen LCDs burn in, and direct-view LCDs have a bunch of problems that plasmas don't: narrow angle of view, slow updates, and worse black levels. They're also small and expensive for the LCD panels. But plasmas are heavier and more power hungry (the bigger the plasma, the more power it takes). Their burn-in characteristics are also way exaggerrated.

--Andre
post #17 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouji
B&W Nautilus 801, and I intend to keep them for my new system.

The B&Ws are quite nice (and expensive) audiophile grade speakers. Given your interior decorating requirements, the speakers and audio equipment aren't going to be the biggest problem, the aesthetic catch for this setup is definitely going to be speaker wearing. You might get away with hiding the cabling under carpeting, especially if you purchase mid-grade flat wires, but you are definitely going to sacrifice a little performance.

For source equipment, I would consider a used Krell or the previously mentioned Music Fidelity who makes a wonderful integrated. Given the sound quality of the B&W, I would avoid matching them with tube amps, even though your retro decorating tastes sound perfect with tubes. Personally, I would opt for a Rega CD/redbook player, Krell preamp, and something like an older Naim for a power source. Good power sources, in my opinion, don't change much over the years, but they definitely have a sonic character.
post #18 of 32
Those go down to 3.5 ohms, and I think an $11,000 speaker deserves better than Marantz or Denon. In any case you need something better and stronger than a receiver.

I'd suggest a used McCormack, Mcintosh, Levinson, or the like.
post #19 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew
I've seen LCDs burn in, and direct-view LCDs have a bunch of problems that plasmas don't: narrow angle of view, slow updates, and worse black levels. They're also small and expensive for the LCD panels. But plasmas are heavier and more power hungry (the bigger the plasma, the more power it takes). Their burn-in characteristics are also way exaggerrated.

--Andre

? You can't burn-in LCD's. Plasma (and CRT) can burn-in (i.e. image retention) because they are phosphorous, LCD is not. LCD can get dead pixels, but on a large enough LCD (50" or more) there is no way you can tell; unless you like watching the TV from 5 inches away.

I watched the world cup on my 60" LCD, and the action was perfect, I know people say that LCD has a long "˜update' time, but frankly, after watching both human and motor sports plus DVD's, I can honestly say that there aren't any "˜update' problems with LCD's. Yes, black levels are still being perfected, BUT if you get a rear projection LCD, most of them now come with an iris system that opens and closes to darken the picture as needed.

Jon.
post #20 of 32
I have physically seen LCDs burn in. Prior to that I thought it was impossible, too. The circumstances were extreme: a PC login screen left on for weeks at a time.

--Andre
post #21 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew
I have physically seen LCDs burn in. Prior to that I thought it was impossible, too. The circumstances were extreme: a PC login screen left on for weeks at a time.

--Andre

The pixels couldn't "˜burn-into' anything. They could die (i.e. turn into dead pixels and not light up again), but they wouldn't stay in place. Now, you can have live pixels, which are the reverse of dead pixels, they won't turn of, and stay one particular color all the time and never change, but you can't have entire image retention on an LCD.

It has to be some kind of freak accident on a very, very cheap and badly made LCD screen exposed to extreme circumstances...even then, I really can't see it happening, its not the nature of the technology (it of course has its own set of problems).

I want to see a picture of the screen you are talking about (frankly, it has to be seen to be belived).

Jon.
post #22 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
The pixels couldn't "˜burn-into' anything. They could die (i.e. turn into dead pixels and not light up again), but they wouldn't stay in place. Now, you can have live pixels, which are the reverse of dead pixels, they won't turn of, and stay one particular color all the time and never change, but you can't have entire image retention on an LCD.

It has to be some kind of freak accident on a very, very cheap and badly made LCD screen exposed to extreme circumstances...even then, I really can't see it happening, its not the nature of the technology (it of course has its own set of problems).

I want to see a picture of the screen you are talking about (frankly, it has to be seen to be belived).

Jon.
http://www.dslwebserver.com/main/fr_...reen-burn.html
post #23 of 32
That's not a burn in, just dead pixels. And if someone is dumb enough to leave their monitor on for weeks on end they deserve to have a screwed up picture. How hard is it to turn the monitor off at the end of the day?
post #24 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddly Familiar
That's not a burn in, just dead pixels. And if someone is dumb enough to leave their monitor on for weeks on end they deserve to have a screwed up picture. How hard is it to turn the monitor off at the end of the day?
No, they aren't dead pixels. Dead pixels are black.

Also, apparently some amount of fix can be done for this problem by leaving the LCD on a plain blank white screen for a few hours (with the backlight turned down if possible)
post #25 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
It has to be some kind of freak accident on a very, very cheap and badly made LCD screen exposed to extreme circumstances...even then, I really can't see it happening, its not the nature of the technology (it of course has its own set of problems).

Like the website linked, it was also on a Dell 20-inch LCD. You should be more open-minded about these things. It didn't look like burn-in like you get with CRTs, instead it was like a smear, so it was spread out over a larger area than the feature it retained.

--Andre
post #26 of 32
Quote:
I love Naim equipment.

I second Naim kit, especially the previous generation. What speakers do you use with your Naim gear? (I have Sonus Fabers.)
post #27 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by pinchi22
I second Naim kit, especially the previous generation. What speakers do you use with your Naim gear? (I have Sonus Fabers.)

I don't have Naim (I have Cary tube amps, quite the opposite) but I've heard it in several systems and always liked it. One friend uses it with very inexpensive speakers (Sound Dynamics, IIRC) and it always sounds great.
post #28 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew
Like the website linked, it was also on a Dell 20-inch LCD. You should be more open-minded about these things. It didn't look like burn-in like you get with CRTs, instead it was like a smear, so it was spread out over a larger area than the feature it retained.

--Andre

Ok, that's not burn-in. Yes, that's a problem and the screen shouldn't look like that, but the reason we have specific terms for specific occurrences is so that we can understand each other. If you call it burn-in (another name for image retention) and it's not then of course I will raise the point, in order to ensure that I understand what you are talking about and vice-versa, its important that we are both on the same page when discussing a topic, if not its rather pointless to discuss anything at all, no?

This looks like it was caused by sheer overheating of the screen. Who leaves a screen on when not in use, anyways?

Jon.
post #29 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Yew
I've seen LCDs burn in, and direct-view LCDs have a bunch of problems that plasmas don't: narrow angle of view, slow updates, and worse black levels. They're also small and expensive for the LCD panels. But plasmas are heavier and more power hungry (the bigger the plasma, the more power it takes). Their burn-in characteristics are also way exaggerrated.

--Andre

Ya, and it's really only something you have to worry about once, right after you buy it.
post #30 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Checks
Those go down to 3.5 ohms, and I think an $11,000 speaker deserves better than Marantz or Denon. In any case you need something better and stronger than a receiver.

I'd suggest a used McCormack, Mcintosh, Levinson, or the like.

I've listened to McIntosh paired with the 801s and it was a truely incredible match. One day when I'm settled, that will be my choice of system. I'll have to defer purchasing 300 lbs. (each) speakers until I stop moving though ;p
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto › Electronics for my home