reliability of Pioneer plasma sets
William Sommerwerck
The first thing I watched was "Amadeus", and though my expectations were
unnaturally high, the Pioneer handily exceeded them. Simply unbelievable.
The set has a two-year in-home warranty on parts and labor, which strikes me
as a bit short for such a product. (It really "should" be three years. Five
would be even nicer.)
I can get an extended warranty for $1000. Said warranty extends Pioneer's
warranty by only two years, but it is a complete replacement warranty.
Should the set have three service problems of any kind (even minor ones, and
they needn't be the same), or any unrepairable problem, the set will be
replaced outright.
Of course, in a little less than a year, there won't be any more Pioneer
plasmas to replace mine with. The installers said there had been major
problems with about 5% of the Pioneers. That's not a high number, but the 1
in 20 probability of losing such a major investment leaves me a bit
uncomfortable.
I don't feel like laying out another kilobuck. And though my experiences
with consumer electronics over the past 45 years has been overwhelmingly
positive (I've never had anything expensive break down -- other than my
brand K amplification), I don't like the idea of getting a bit more than 2
years' use out of a product and then having to toss it (either because the
parts aren't available, or I can't afford the repair).
This is what is called a dilemma ("two horns", in Greek).
Any views on the reliability of Pioneer plasma?
Thanks in advance.
Franc Zabkar
<grizzle...@comcast.net> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>Any views on the reliability of Pioneer plasma?
FWIW, I notice that LG plasma TVs have a 1 year warranty whereas their
LCD TVs have 3 years. This would suggest that plasma panels are
inherently less reliable than LCDs.
As you have said, Pioneer appear to be getting out of the TV business:
http://hdguru.com/pioneer-to-exit-the-tv-business/366/
Last year they began outsourcing production of plasma panels to
Panasonic/Matsushita, so a more appropriate question might be the
reliability of Panasonic panels.
On the plus side, I notice that Pioneer will sometimes sell you
individual ICs (eg scan IC) rather than the whole PCB.
You may want to check some parts prices here:
http://parts.pioneerelectronics.com/part.asp?productNum=SN755870KPZT%2DP
This article recommends against an extended warranty:
http://www.mysimon.com/4002-9375-6309568.html
"Our most recent survey found few repair problems during the first
three years of use for plasma sets from Panasonic, Pioneer, and
Samsung. ... Our surveys of thousands of consumers show that plasma
flat-panel TVs have been very reliable for the first three years --
the time covered by many extended warranties -- so there's little
sense in spending several hundred dollars for such a warranty."
- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 'i' from my address when replying by email.
William Sommerwerck
> As you have said, Pioneer appear to be getting out of the TV business:
> http://hdguru.com/pioneer-to-exit-the-tv-business/366/
It's a shame. Pioneer has made some great high-end video equipment, and they
supported LV more vigorously than anyone else. (I still have the LD-S2,
perhaps the best LV player ever made.)
> Last year they began outsourcing production of plasma panels to
> Panasonic/Matsushita, so a more appropriate question might be the
> reliability of Panasonic panels.
Actually, the problem is that Matsushita has not gotten around to building
the plant they promised.
I do find it puzzling that Matsushita could build panels more cheaply than
Pioneer. Aren't they all working from the same labor pool (wherever it might
be)?
> On the plus side, I notice that Pioneer will sometimes sell you
> individual ICs (eg scan IC) rather than the whole PCB.
That assumes you know which part is required! I'm not worried about parts or
boards as much as I am about the panel.
> "Our most recent survey found few repair problems during the first
> three years of use for plasma sets from Panasonic, Pioneer, and
> Samsung. ... Our surveys of thousands of consumers show that
> plasma flat-panel TVs have been very reliable for the first three years --
> the time covered by many extended warranties -- so there's little
> sense in spending several hundred dollars for such a warranty."
I've bought very few extended warranties, on the assumption that all the
money I save not buying them will more than cover the cost of repairing the
few items that do. This has proved to be the truth (in my experience
anyway).
Jeff Liebermann
>I don't feel like laying out another kilobuck. And though my experiences
>with consumer electronics over the past 45 years has been overwhelmingly
>positive (I've never had anything expensive break down -- other than my
>brand K amplification), I don't like the idea of getting a bit more than 2
>years' use out of a product and then having to toss it (either because the
>parts aren't available, or I can't afford the repair).
According to Wikipedia, the half life of a plasma display is about
100,000 hrs. That's 27 years at 10 hrs per day. That's the time to
where the display brightness drops to half. Have you light meter
ready.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_display>
There's quite a bit of good info in that article on plasma tv.
My very limited experience with plasma displays is that the failures
are usually in the electronics or power supply, not the tube. However,
the tube will be prematurely ruined by leaving it on the program guide
causing burn-in. Overheating, due to in the wall or cabinet
installations that lack sufficient ventilation is another culprit. Of
course, the big tube is fairly fragile and will not survive the impact
of the kids indoor baseball game.
The actual failure curve for a system has peaks at the beginning and
end of life, with a flat curve in between. The initial peak is
usually manufacturing defects and are covered under the warranty.
Those usually show up within a year. At the end of life, components
that degrade due to temperature effects or thermal cycling, will cause
failures. In between, a random assortment of failures might occur,
but the rate is very low.
The exception is the failure of Low-ESR capacitors, which tend to show
up after several years. The problem can be catastrophic as there may
be dozens of identical caps in your TV, all with the same problem.
<http://www.badcaps.net>
<http://www.capacitorlab.com/low-esr-capacitor-manufacturers/>
About 8 years after the counterfeit electrolyte and counterfeit
capacitor problems were discovered, I'm still seeing brand new
equipment with volcanic electrolytics.
The big problem with repairing a plasma TV is the size and weight. It
just can't be dragged to the service shop or warranty repair station
easily or economically. So, if a trivial part fails, it's a truck
roll and a major production. TV repairmen still make house calls, but
you'll pay handsomely for the effort. Or, you can drag it down to the
few remaining repair shops.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
William Sommerwerck
news:k1tds4544q1igqnv8...@4ax.com...
>> I don't feel like laying out another kilobuck. And though my experiences
>> with consumer electronics over the past 45 years has been overwhelmingly
>> positive (I've never had anything expensive break down -- other than my
>> brand K amplification), I don't like the idea of getting a bit more than
2
>> years' use out of a product and then having to toss it (either because
the
>> parts aren't available, or I can't afford the repair).
> My very limited experience with plasma displays is that the failures
> are usually in the electronics or power supply, not the tube. However,
> the tube will be prematurely ruined by leaving it on the program guide
> causing burn-in. Overheating, due to in the wall or cabinet
> installations that lack sufficient ventilation is another culprit. Of
> course, the big tube is fairly fragile and will not survive the impact
> of the kids indoor baseball game.
> The actual failure curve for a system has peaks at the beginning and
> end of life, with a flat curve in between.
The initial failures are called "infant mortality".
> The initial peak is usually manufacturing defects and are covered under
> the warranty. Those usually show up within a year. At the end of life,
> components that degrade due to temperature effects or thermal cycling,
> will cause failures. In between, a random assortment of failures might
occur,
> but the rate is very low.
I'll have to ask Magnolia what sorts of repairs those 5% comprise. The only
thing I'm worried about is the display panel. And although the Federal
government requires electronic parts to be available for 10 years after end
of manufacturing, I wonder whether Pioneer will have any stock of panels
after 2012. The government does not enforce these laws very well (if at all.
Picky point... "Degrade" is a transitive verb, not reflexive. You mean
"deteriorate" or "fail".
> The big problem with repairing a plasma TV is the size and weight. It
> just can't be dragged to the service shop or warranty repair station
> easily or economically. So, if a trivial part fails, it's a truck
> roll and a major production. TV repairmen still make house calls, but
> you'll pay handsomely for the effort. Or, you can drag it down to the
> few remaining repair shops.
According to Magnolia, warranties include in-home service.
b
wrote:
> Any views on the reliability of Pioneer plasma?
>
> Thanks in advance.
The pioneers I used to see were all ITT chasis, back in the day of the
CRT!
Personally, I don't think it was wise to invest in this set for
various reasons.
a)the manufacturer is getting out of the business which is bad news
for after sales support, parts etc.
b) production of plasma sets is to be ceased if it hasn't been
already. As such, it could even be seen, in tech terms, as 'old
technology'.
c)fragility and screen burn problems mentioned above.
:-/
B
William Sommerwerck
> already. As such, it could even be seen, in tech terms, as 'old
> technology'.
I'm curious as to where you got this information. It's amazing how an
"old-technology" set is generally considered to be the best direct-view TV
made.
Arfa Daily
"b" <reveren...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18395d54-6f47-4509...@k2g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
Screen burn is not so much of a problem as it was in the early days. Most
sets have a service mode which 'washes' the panel, and in many cases, will
remove all but the most 'burnt-in' burns.
On a slightly different note, anyone heard what point SED technology has
reached now ? I believed that there was some legal issue between
manufacturers at one point, but that it had been resolved, and large screen
SED based sets were due to be hitting the market by the end of last year.
Can't say that I've seen any yet. I wonder whether it has become a 'shelved'
technology as a result of the economic downturn, and the strong foothold
that LCD has now established in the market ?
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
> early days. Most sets have a service mode which "washes"
> the panel, and in many cases, will remove all but the most
> "burnt-in" burns.
After two days of hot-n-heavy viewing (Saturday and Sunday), I turned on the
"wash" mode and let it run for an hour.
> On a slightly different note, anyone heard what point SED
> technology has reached now ? I believed that there was some
> legal issue between manufacturers at one point, but that it had
> been resolved...
That's what I've heard.
... and large-screen SED-based sets were due to be hitting the
> market by the end of last year.
I'd wanted to wait for SED, but gave up when I heard about the legal
wrangling. Given the current economy and the generally strong sales of both
plasma and LCD sets, it's unlikely we'll see SED sets that soon, if ever.
> Can't say that I've seen any yet. I wonder whether it has become a
> "shelved" technology as a result of the economic downturn, and the
> strong foothold that LCD has now established in the market?
Very likely.
On the 3D front... Matsushita has announced it's working on a
frame-sequential 1080-line system that will be generally compatible with
existing players and displays. Besides the new stuff, there are lots of
classic 3D films: "Creature from the Black Lagoon" (and its first sequel),
"The Maze", "House of Wax", "Dial M for Murder", "It Came from Outer Space",
"Kiss Me, Kate", "Hondo", and that stinker de tutti stinkers, "Robot
Monster".
Jeff Liebermann
<arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>On a slightly different note, anyone heard what point SED technology has
>reached now ? I believed that there was some legal issue between
>manufacturers at one point, but that it had been resolved, and large screen
>SED based sets were due to be hitting the market by the end of last year.
>Can't say that I've seen any yet. I wonder whether it has become a 'shelved'
>technology as a result of the economic downturn, and the strong foothold
>that LCD has now established in the market ?
Patience. The patent attorneys must all be fed first. This article
covers the technology and legal wrangling (near the bottom):
<http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/525928.html>
Personally, I think LED DLP projectors are going to be a winner,
mostly because of the (eventual) low cost and small size.
After that market is saturated, 3D TV will probably be the next big
thing. Apple will probably call the required LCD shutter/viewer
glasses the "Eye-Pod" which will display 3D videos while walking down
the street and double as a heads-up information display and game
machine. The colander helmet docking station is optional.
A_H
One general principle-- the harder the salespeople push for you to buy
an item, the higher the
profit to them and lousier value to you.
In particular, all those places that push for "extended warranties",
they can often triple their profit just on the warranty part.
And collecting on the warranty can be a real hassle. Not like the
smiling attractive people in the glossy warranty brochure, you'll be
writing and calling and getting put on hold for months if you try to
collect on the warranty.
Arfa Daily
> On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:16:38 -0000, "Arfa Daily"
> <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>On a slightly different note, anyone heard what point SED technology has
>>reached now ? I believed that there was some legal issue between
>>manufacturers at one point, but that it had been resolved, and large
>>screen
>>SED based sets were due to be hitting the market by the end of last year.
>>Can't say that I've seen any yet. I wonder whether it has become a
>>'shelved'
>>technology as a result of the economic downturn, and the strong foothold
>>that LCD has now established in the market ?
>
> Patience. The patent attorneys must all be fed first. This article
> covers the technology and legal wrangling (near the bottom):
> <http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/525928.html>
>
That's interesting. I see that the original question was posted back in
2005, and it looked as though a resolution to the legal problems was
expected in fairly short order, back then.
But isn't this just typical ? The eco-bollox green mist brigade jump on
every dubious 'mis-use' of energy, such as getting 'proper' light bulbs
banned world-wide in favour of dreadful substitutes like CFLs, and here we
are with a technology that uses half the power of a CRT, a third the power
of a plasma panel, and although it doesn't state the ratio with LCDs will be
at least a third of those if not less, and which could actually make a big
difference, whilst *improving* the picture over the current flat screen
technologies, and they let it just fester as a result of one company getting
arsey with another !
Makes you wonder who has got an interest in not letting this technology out
onto the mass market ...
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
> every dubious 'mis-use' of energy, such as getting 'proper' light bulbs
Arfa, try putting a CFL in a glass or plastic fixture. You might be
pleasantly surprised.
Except for the bathroom, where the CFLs are directly exposed (above the
mirror), the others are in IKEA fixtures. You can't tell they're not
incandescent. They look great.
Arfa Daily
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:gqeitp$tgp$1...@news.motzarella.org...
I have. I currently have one in a bathroom 'globe' fitting. It takes a
quarter second to start, which although is a very short time, is still long
enough for your dumb old brain to think "sod it, the bulb's gone ..." every
single time you go in there. After it does start, for the first 20 seconds,
the light is like a candle shining through a glass of piss. After that time,
the light output ramps up until it is like standing on Venus with the sun at
your back.
The colour of the light is sick and rancid. I have another in an outside
light. During the winter, that is just about giving its full quota of light,
by the time it's dawn, and time for it to go off again.
I have another in the hallway in a Tiffany style shade. It too takes a
quarter second to strike, and again, the light output ramps up over perhaps
a minute. The colours of the glass lozenges in the shade shine in a kind of
dull way, instead of producing the vibrant colours that you associate with
this style of shade, and which you get when the fitting has a normal
incandescent bulb fitted.
My wife has one in the lamp on her side of the bed. When it's on, the room
has a strange 'green' feel to it - even though it's predominantly pink and
magnolia.
About the best one I have, is in the table light which is about 2 feet away
from me right now, and even the light from that has a slightly 'sick'
quality about it. All of these lamps are from different manufacturers. I
have tried to like them based on the fact that incandescent manufacture is
slowly ceasing. I really have. But try as I might, I can't. I don't like the
way they perform. I don't like the colour rendering index, and I
particularly don't like the utter bollox that the green mist brigade spout
about how environmentally friendly they are. They are nothing of the sort.
The only positive factor is the energy consumption, which is the only thing
about them that is rammed down everyone's throats, and the only factor that
Joe Public understands. The many negative factors involved in the
manufacture, transport, use and ultimate disposal of them, is conveniently
ignored or glossed over. They are not by any stretch of the imagination a
'replacement' technology for incandescent lamps. They are a substitute, and
not a very good one at that.
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
> quarter second to start, which although is a very short time, is still
long
> enough for your dumb old brain to think "sod it, the bulb's gone ..."
every
> single time you go in there.
My cheap Chinese CFLs from Home Despot start instantly -- faster than an
incandescent. (That's not a joke. They don't "ramp up" the way an
incandescent does. Blam, they're on)
> After it does start, for the first 20 seconds,
> the light is like a candle shining through a glass of piss.
Mine are fairly bright to start, but take about 30 seconds to reach full
brightness. The color is okay from the start.
> The colour of the light is sick and rancid. I have another in an outside
> light. During the winter, that is just about giving its full quota of
light,
> by the time it's dawn, and time for it to go off again.
Not mine. They aren't up to photographic CFLs, but they're close.
> My wife has one in the lamp on her side of the bed. When it's on, the room
> has a strange 'green' feel to it - even though it's predominantly pink and
> magnolia.
Those are Really Bad CFLs.
It's no wonder you don't like CFLs. You just haven't seen any decent ones.
Michael A. Terrell
Its caused by that 50 Hz European electricity. ;-)
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white listed, or I
will not see your messages.
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
Arfa Daily
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Ef-dnTbvHfupc1fU...@earthlink.com...
You're right William, because for *me*, I'm dubious that a *decent* one
that's readily available, actually exists, If I haven't managed to find one
in the several years that I've been trying, then it's a bit of a lost cause.
It's a f'kin light bulb for Christ's sake ! I want to be able to just go to
my supermarket and buy whatever is there, stick 'em in the fitting, and have
light that doesn't give me suicidal tendencies ... (that my eyes can
actually read under !)
I guess if you don't like 'em, you just don't. A bit like the way that you
just don't like some particular brands of audio gear, no matter what others
think of them ... :-)
And how on earth do you see the light output from an incandescent 'ramp up'
? That really *must* be as a result of that low voltage American electricity
... I can honestly say that I have never in all my years seen a traditional
incandescent bulb start slowly enough to be able to see it do so. Possible
exception to this is some halogen bulbs in decorative fittings, but as there
are not CFLs to directly replace those, it's hard to use them as a
comparison. Also, a lot of the low voltage halogens are driven these days by
'electronic transformers' which may well 'soft start', giving the ramping up
effect.
Even if you have found CFLs over there that satisfy you as to their
suitability for the job, that still doesn't address the many negative
aspects of them over incandescents, which are conveniently ignored to serve
the green lobby's arguments on end-point energy useage.
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
> that's readily available, actually exists, If I haven't managed to find
one
> in the several years that I've been trying, then it's a bit of a lost
cause.
> It's a f'kin light bulb for Christ's sake ! I want to be able to just go
to
> my supermarket and buy whatever is there, stick 'em in the fitting, and
have
> light that doesn't give me suicidal tendencies ... (that my eyes can
> actually read under !)
> I guess if you don't like 'em, you just don't.
I disagree strongly. You have GOOD REASONS not to like the ones you've seen.
> And how on earth do you see the light output from an incandescent 'ramp
up'
> ? That really *must* be as a result of that low voltage American
electricity.
I have no trouble seeing it. An incandescent bulb takes a fraction of a
second to reach full brightness, and this is plainly visible. 220V bubls
should be no different.
> ... I can honestly say that I have never in all my years seen a
traditional
> incandescent bulb start slowly enough to be able to see it do so.
That's because you assume they come on "instantly". They don't.
> Even if you have found CFLs over there that satisfy you as to their
> suitability for the job, that still doesn't address the many negative
> aspects of them over incandescents, which are conveniently ignored
> to servethe green lobby's arguments on end-point energy useage.
Such as the fact they use more materials in their manufacture? This has to
be weighed against how long they last and how much energy they (don't) use
over their lifespan.
Dave Platt
Arfa Daily <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>And how on earth do you see the light output from an incandescent 'ramp up'
>? That really *must* be as a result of that low voltage American electricity
>... I can honestly say that I have never in all my years seen a traditional
>incandescent bulb start slowly enough to be able to see it do so.
Although it's a slightly different situation, I've seen the same
phenomenon quite easily... in vehicles (cars or trucks) in which some
of the rear-facing brake indicator lights are incandescent bulbs and
others are LEDs.
In this case, when the driver hits the break, the LED indicator comes
on instantaneously, while there's an appreciable time lag and a
perceptible rise-time in the light from the incandescent bulbs.
The latter isn't all that easy to notice if you're looking only at an
incandescent bulb... but if you see an incandescent and an LED side-by-
side, driven by the same voltage, it's very obvious.
--
Dave Platt <dpl...@radagast.org> AE6EO
Friends of Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
Arfa Daily
">> Even if you have found CFLs over there that satisfy you as to their
>> suitability for the job, that still doesn't address the many negative
>> aspects of them over incandescents, which are conveniently ignored
>> to servethe green lobby's arguments on end-point energy useage.
>
> Such as the fact they use more materials in their manufacture? This has to
> be weighed against how long they last and how much energy they (don't) use
> over their lifespan.
>
>
They have many more manufacturing processes. They use many more processed
materials in their construction. It requires many more factories to make the
materials for the capacitors, resistors, inductors, semiconductors PCBs,
phosphors, and then many factories to make those materials into capacitors,
inductors etc. Then all of those components have to be shipped to whoever
makes the electronic ballast. Then that has to be shipped to the lamp
manufacturer. The glass discharge tube requires a much more complex process
to manufacture it, and coat its inside with toxic chemicals, than is needed
to make the simple glass globe of a conventional incandescent. Then that too
has to be shipped to the lamp manufacturer. When they've finally built the
thing, it has to be put in much more substantial packaging than a standard
light bulb, because the discharge tube is fragile, and its contents
potentially dangerous. Then the whole item, which weighs a lot more than a
conventional light bulb, has to be shipped to wherever it's going to be
sold. All of the many many processes involved, require workers that need to
be got to and from the factories where they work. Then when they're there,
they have to be kept warm or cool, lit, and fed. When the lamp has reached
the end of its life, it has to be taken to a collection facility, because
they are considered to be too dangerous to go into the regular household
trash. Aside from that factor, countries within the EU have a mandate to
recycle any electronic equipment. And so it all starts again, with shipping,
dismantling, recycling and all of the processes and workers which that
involves.
So no, I'm not talking *just* about the additional materials that are in
them.
And as an amusing twist of irony, guess what happened to the one in the
wife's bedside light tonight ? Yep. That's right. It failed. Totally. 10,000
hours ? Ha ! 6 months tops of 20 minutes per night ...
These things are useless shite. On a stick.
Arfa
Jeff Liebermann
<arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>The colour of the light is sick and rancid. I have another in an outside
>light. During the winter, that is just about giving its full quota of light,
>by the time it's dawn, and time for it to go off again.
I had similar opinions about CFL bulbs for quite a while. They just
looked reddish with a color temp of about 2500K. One of my former
customers is a lighting store. While working on their machines, I
asked if they had any CFL bulbs with a higher color temperature
approaching daylight at about 5500K. Nope, but some of the "natural
light" bulbs were rated at 3500K, which was worth a try. They looked
somewhat better and as an added bonus, didn't blow up after a few
weeks of operation. A few months later, the "daylight" series of
bulbs arrived at 5000K and up, which were a major improvement.
Most of the discount store CFL bulbs are unrated by color temperature.
Little wonder as I suspect they use whatever bulbs they can buy from
an assortment of vendors. No specs means no consistency.
Some of the bulbs I've used have a fairly long turn on time. This
bugs me but not enough to be concerned. I've learned to live with the
delay.
Jeff Liebermann
<arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>> Patience. The patent attorneys must all be fed first. This article
>> covers the technology and legal wrangling (near the bottom):
>> <http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/525928.html>
>That's interesting. I see that the original question was posted back in
>2005, and it looked as though a resolution to the legal problems was
>expected in fairly short order, back then.
Thanks, I didn't notice. The problem usually has nothing to do with
the newer technology. It's that the companies involved have not had
sufficient time or sales to cover their expenses for the existing
technology. It's not until the old technology has run its course,
that the new technology can be safely allowed to appear. No company
wants to compete with itself.
In this case, the big panel LCD technology is still fairly new. Sales
of big LCD panels have certainly not hit bottom. I don't have a
figure as to how many years LCD technology needs to be around before
being replaced by SED. My guess(tm) would be about 8 years total, so
from 2005, that would be 2013 before introduction.
Ummm... there's also OLED (organic LED) technology, which is really
bright, but has problems with limited lifetime (about 5 years) and
requires better package sealing:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_light-emitting_diode>
OLED products are here today:
<http://www.oqo.com/products/index.html>
Plasma displays are ruining HF reception at my house. Two of my
neighbors have them. When they're on, all I hear on 80 and 40 meters
is noise.
Arfa Daily
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 02:22:37 -0000, "Arfa Daily"
> <arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>The colour of the light is sick and rancid. I have another in an outside
>>light. During the winter, that is just about giving its full quota of
>>light,
>>by the time it's dawn, and time for it to go off again.
>
> I had similar opinions about CFL bulbs for quite a while. They just
> looked reddish with a color temp of about 2500K. One of my former
> customers is a lighting store. While working on their machines, I
> asked if they had any CFL bulbs with a higher color temperature
> approaching daylight at about 5500K. Nope, but some of the "natural
> light" bulbs were rated at 3500K, which was worth a try. They looked
> somewhat better and as an added bonus, didn't blow up after a few
> weeks of operation. A few months later, the "daylight" series of
> bulbs arrived at 5000K and up, which were a major improvement.
>
> Most of the discount store CFL bulbs are unrated by color temperature.
> Little wonder as I suspect they use whatever bulbs they can buy from
> an assortment of vendors. No specs means no consistency.
>
> Some of the bulbs I've used have a fairly long turn on time. This
> bugs me but not enough to be concerned. I've learned to live with the
> delay.
>
It's an odd thing, this CRI and colour temperature. I haven't really been
able to figure why I have no problem at all with working under linear
flourescents, no matter whether they are white, daylight or warm white, and
yet, I find there to be something fundamentally 'wrong' with the light from
CFLs, no matter what colour they are. I also have trouble reading under
them, but no problem with linear flourescents. Also, the strike up time, and
sometimes several attempts at striking of a linear, doesn't bother me a jot,
but that brief delay in startup of a CFL bugs the life out of me. Strange
...
Today, I bought two new light fittings for my lounge. Each uses G9 halogen
bulbs, so I hope that these are going to continue to be around for a while !
Arfa
Jeff Liebermann
<arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>It's an odd thing, this CRI and colour temperature. I haven't really been
>able to figure why I have no problem at all with working under linear
>flourescents, no matter whether they are white, daylight or warm white, and
>yet, I find there to be something fundamentally 'wrong' with the light from
>CFLs, no matter what colour they are.
Probably because you've been accustomed or have adapted to ordinary
flourescent lamps, as found in offices, public buildings, and most
commercial establishments interested in saving on the cost of
electricity. It does take a while as I vaguely recall complaining
about the same thing when faced with a flourescent desk lamp at home.
I also recall that there was a similar backlash going from gas lamps
to electric. Given sufficient exposure and time, methinks you could
adapter to CFL bulbs.
>I also have trouble reading under
>them, but no problem with linear flourescents. Also, the strike up time, and
>sometimes several attempts at striking of a linear, doesn't bother me a jot,
>but that brief delay in startup of a CFL bugs the life out of me. Strange
I also had to adapt to reading and working using CFL bulbs. I have a
"pole lamp" with 4 screw in lamp sockets. I started with all 4 as
incandescent bulbs. I slowly replaced the incandescent bulbs with CFL
bulbs. It took about 2 years, but I now have all CFL bulbs, and am
fully adjusted to their color temperature.
>Today, I bought two new light fittings for my lounge. Each uses G9 halogen
>bulbs, so I hope that these are going to continue to be around for a while !
Dream on. The efficiency police are active in Europe:
<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/3174452/Traditional-lightbulbs-banned-by-EU.html>
William Sommerwerck
> able to figure why I have no problem at all with working under linear
> flourescents, no matter whether they are white, daylight or warm white,
and
> yet, I find there to be something fundamentally 'wrong' with the light
from
> CFLs, no matter what colour they are. I also have trouble reading under
> them, but no problem with linear flourescents. Also, the strike up time,
and
> sometimes several attempts at striking of a linear, doesn't bother me a
jot,
> but that brief delay in startup of a CFL bugs the life out of me. Strange.
Wish I had an answer. I have several Lowell "ego" lights that use CFLs with
a CRI over 90. You can shoot photos at 5500K, and they come out fine.
Either there's something "wrong" with your color vision (which I doubt), or
you just haven't seen good CFLs. Believe me, they exist.
maa...@wf.dd.invalid
> On 22 mar, 14:55, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net>
>> Thanks in advance.
> The pioneers I used to see were all ITT chasis, back in the day of the
> CRT!
ITT/SEL probably, except for the ones that used Philips or Thomson
chassis... But that was for the European market. The North American models
might come from a different source. I think RPTV's and Plasma sets were
made by Pioneer themselves.
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Maarten Bakker.
maa...@wf.dd.invalid
> I have no trouble seeing it. An incandescent bulb takes a fraction of a
> second to reach full brightness, and this is plainly visible. 220V bubls
> should be no different.
If someone doesn't see it, have them looking at a car with LED
turn-signals and compare the result to looking at a car with incandescent
turn-signals. They will see the difference.
maa...@wf.dd.invalid
> trash. Aside from that factor, countries within the EU have a mandate to
> recycle any electronic equipment. And so it all starts again, with shipping,
> dismantling, recycling and all of the processes and workers which that
> involves.
The stuff is usually just crushed and, maybe, if you're lucky, not treated
as hazardous waste but indeed post-processed to recover some of the raw
materials.
Arfa Daily
<maa...@wf.dd.invalid> wrote in message
news:e2b15$49d0e239$d4549fe0$65...@news1.tudelft.nl...
People keep mentioning car bulbs, but we are comparing apples and oranges
here, based on the fact that they are both fruit.
One of the reasons that a car bulb is slow to reach full output, is that the
filament has to be made thick and robust for enhanced reliability and
failure proofing from vibration. That makes it have substantial thermal
inertia, so much so that you can indeed see it hot up. On the other hand,
high voltage domestic lightbulbs have no such constraints on their
filaments, as they are not going on and off all the time like a brake light
or indicator, and are not subject to vibration in normal use. This results
in the manufacturers being able to design them with a much more delicate
filament, with the result that, to all intents and purposes, the ramp up to
full output is 'instantaneous'.
Arfa
Arfa Daily
<maa...@wf.dd.invalid> wrote in message
news:eb993$49d0e2cf$d4549fe0$65...@news1.tudelft.nl...
All of which makes a mockery of the EU WEEE directive, treatment of
hazardous wastes directives, and recycling in general ... Just a load more
EU eco-bollox really !
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
the
> filament has to be made thick and robust for enhanced reliability and
> failure proofing from vibration. That makes it have substantial thermal
> inertia, so much so that you can indeed see it hot up. On the other hand,
> high voltage domestic lightbulbs have no such constraints on their
> filaments, as they are not going on and off all the time like a brake
light
> or indicator, and are not subject to vibration in normal use. This results
> in the manufacturers being able to design them with a much more delicate
> filament, with the result that, to all intents and purposes, the ramp up
to
> full output is 'instantaneous'.
I don't like disagreeing with you, but this is incorrect. You can easily see
the "ramp up" of household incandescent lights. It's about 1/10 of a second,
and is plainly visible. Some CFLs are (at least visibly) "instantaneous".
Arfa Daily
Yes Jeff, I'm fully aware of all this eco-bollox nonsense with
incandescents, but as far as I am aware, it doesn't affect halogens for
which there are no direct replacements, at this point in time. The G9 bulb
is about the size of a projector lamp or small headlamp bulb, and nothing
else would fit in a socket intended for one. Many many ceiling light
fittings this side of the pond are now 'decorative' design pieces as well as
being functional, and these invariably use bulbs like the G9 or similar pea
types in a halogen format, so unless they are going to render everyone's
modern light fittings obsolete, including ones that are on sale right now, I
can't see how they can ban this type of bulb.
see
for some examples. (That URL might be a bit long to work correctly from
here). The ones I have just bought are the "Dexter" model at the top.
Arfa
Arfa Daily
Well, maybe the driving voltage does have something to do with it then. With
double the line voltage here that you have there, I can honestly say that I
cannot see any perceivable delay between flicking the switch, and having
light. I have asked a number of people the question, and not one of them has
said that they can either. Not that that is much of a scientific test, of
course. Interestingly though, the ones that I said that I could see ramp up,
are low voltage halogens. So I wonder if the fact that low voltage bulbs
need amps through them, to get the same filament power as a line voltage
bulb does with miliamps, dictates how robust the filament needs to be, and
hence how much theremal inertia it has? I know that halogens run a hotter
filament to get slightly brighter light, but you can also see the low
voltage ones visibly cool as well, which would lend creedence to the theory
that the filament is more robust.
It is not a function of the fact that the bulbs are of a halogen type per
se, as the fittings that I have just bought also use halogen bulbs, but
unlike the fittings that they are replacing, which *were* low voltage (12v
AC nominal), these are line voltage types. They definitely appear to come on
pretty much 'instantaneously'.
So, perhaps a US 110v bulb, does take twice as long to reach 'full' output,
as a 240v one, and that is indeed enough to be able to see ?
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
output,
> as a 240v one, and that is indeed enough to be able to see ?
I don't know. A 100W 240V bulb would have 4 times the resistance, so I don't
see it "warming up" any more quickly (or slowly).
Arfa Daily
But if the filament is of a more 'delicate' CSA, that might well give it
less thermal inertia, leading to it heating quicker ? Based on what you are
saying, there is no reason why a low voltage 50 watt car bulb, should heat
any slower than a 50w 240v bulb, but obviously it does, as the ramp up time
can be very clearly seen on them.
Anybody over there got a photodiode, a storage 'scope, and the time to hook
'em together to have a look at just how long the time delay is? Once that
was known, I could do the same here to get a rough comparison.
Arfa
Eeyore
William Sommerwerck wrote:
> > b) production of plasma sets is to be ceased if it hasn't been
> > already. As such, it could even be seen, in tech terms, as 'old
> > technology'.
>
> I'm curious as to where you got this information. It's amazing how an
> "old-technology" set is generally considered to be the best direct-view TV
> made.
Power consumption. I'd expect more problems to arise if you use the TV a lot.
Graham
msg
<snip>
> Based on what you are
> saying, there is no reason why a low voltage 50 watt car bulb, should heat
> any slower than a 50w 240v bulb, but obviously it does, as the ramp up time
> can be very clearly seen on them.
>
> Anybody over there got a photodiode, a storage 'scope, and the time to hook
> 'em together to have a look at just how long the time delay is? Once that
> was known, I could do the same here to get a rough comparison.
Sure, but getting to it is the issue; I had promised to run remote controls
near a radio receiver to listen for RFI too and haven't got to that either.
Perhaps this weekend; if done I'll post the results and a link to an image
file for the waveform.
Michael
Ken
<arfa....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > Dream on. The efficiency police are active in Europe:
> > <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/3174452/Traditional-lightbulbs-banned-by-EU.html>
>
>
> Yes Jeff, I'm fully aware of all this eco-bollox nonsense with
> incandescents, but as far as I am aware, it doesn't affect halogens for
> which there are no direct replacements, at this point in time. The G9 bulb
> is about the size of a projector lamp or small headlamp bulb, and nothing
> else would fit in a socket intended for one. Many many ceiling light
> fittings this side of the pond are now 'decorative' design pieces as well as
> being functional, and these invariably use bulbs like the G9 or similar pea
> types in a halogen format, so unless they are going to render everyone's
> modern light fittings obsolete, including ones that are on sale right now, I
> can't see how they can ban this type of bulb.
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/01/energy-hog-plasma-tvs-getting-banned-from-eu.php
William Sommerwerck
The Pioneer runs surprisingly cool. And it's well-ventilated.
Eeyore
William Sommerwerck wrote:
That's an encouraging sign.
Graham
Arfa Daily
"msg" <msg@_cybertheque.org_> wrote in message
news:Qfmdnf9QTIB3wU_U...@posted.cpinternet...
I know what you mean. I think that the older you get, the less inclined you
become to actually getting off your arse and doing these things ... I have a
graphic LCD panel sitting here on the table by the side of me. There is a
board that I built hooked to it, and I have a proper professional IDE /
compiler installed on the computer. I found some routines on the net,
imported them to the IDE and compiled them and loaded them up to the PIC. It
sort of worked, but there is some issue with there being both a vertical and
a horizontal 'echo'. Could be hardware. Could be software. And there it has
sat for at least 2 years. I was really enthusiastic when I started on the
project. Now, I can't even be fagged to look a bit deeper into the routines,
to see if I can write a simple diagnostic to prove out the hardware. Very
sad really. Actually, all I want to do right now, is jet off to sunny
Florida, on holiday ... :-)
Arfa
William Sommerwerck
> That's an encouraging sign.
I was accustomed to standing close to plasma displays and feeling the heat
come off them (on the back of my hand, anyway). The Pioneer had to run
several hours to get noticeably warm, and it wasn't nearly as warm as other
sets.
Arfa Daily
"Ken" <ke...@telia.com> wrote in message
news:ijv4t4pm9l2v4k2gm...@4ax.com...
Hmmm. Interesting. I wonder if this has had any bearing on Pioneer's
decision to quit the plasma market totally ? It is also interesting that the
article cites LCD's as being much more energy efficient. Well yes, they are
more efficient than plasmas, but nothing like as efficient as CRT sets had
become. The backlighting of even a fairly modest sized LCD amounts to 80
watts or so on its own, without the power consumed by the rest of the set. A
large screen LCD uses over 100 watts to power just the backlights ...
Perhaps this latest bit of green-mist legislation in the making, will
finally kick start the involved parties into sorting out the legal wrangles
to allow the truly efficient and superior display quality SED technology to
gain a foothold as the de facto replacement for plasma.
Arfa
Michael A. Terrell
Arfa Daily wrote:
>
> I know what you mean. I think that the older you get, the less inclined you
> become to actually getting off your arse and doing these things ... I have a
> graphic LCD panel sitting here on the table by the side of me. There is a
> board that I built hooked to it, and I have a proper professional IDE /
> compiler installed on the computer. I found some routines on the net,
> imported them to the IDE and compiled them and loaded them up to the PIC. It
> sort of worked, but there is some issue with there being both a vertical and
> a horizontal 'echo'. Could be hardware. Could be software. And there it has
> sat for at least 2 years. I was really enthusiastic when I started on the
> project. Now, I can't even be fagged to look a bit deeper into the routines,
> to see if I can write a simple diagnostic to prove out the hardware. Very
> sad really. Actually, all I want to do right now, is jet off to sunny
> Florida, on holiday ... :-)
Its supposed to rain most of the week. :(
--
And another motherboard bites the dust!
Arfa Daily
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:x6udnWhoidmjdU_U...@earthlink.com...
Bright sunshine here at the moment, but I'd still rather be out your way !
Had a severe weather warning on my Weather Channel desktop for Orlando
Airport yesterday. Very heavy thunder and hail I think it said. Been a while
since I saw a good storm. We're gonna try and get out some time in May.
Based on previous visits at that sort of time, should be quite nice then ??
Arfa
Michael A. Terrell
Arfa Daily wrote:
>
> Bright sunshine here at the moment, but I'd still rather be out your way !
> Had a severe weather warning on my Weather Channel desktop for Orlando
> Airport yesterday. Very heavy thunder and hail I think it said. Been a while
> since I saw a good storm. We're gonna try and get out some time in May.
> Based on previous visits at that sort of time, should be quite nice then ??
With Florida you never know. Central Florida is under another severe
storm watch tonight.