Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Flat panel TV help.

Alex, note that Amazon has a deal now on the 46S30 for $615 rather than $727.

Thanks John,
I just sent him a txt.

And you better get the winter plasma installed, the summer stuff doesn't work in the winter but the winter works OK in the summer due to the lesser time spent watching over the summer.

what about the monster upgraded plasma? I read it would up your 768p to a 4k

And for those do-it-yourselfers, here's a way to grow your own fish plasma, and save a few bucks.

Hi dakkon,

Reviewers at Cnet are not immune to psychological bias. If they know a flat screen like the Kuro is priced at a couple thousand dollars more than a Panasonic or Samsung plasma, then the thinking goes like this, "well, it costs $4,500, so it must be better."

This kind of thinking has been disproven through years of double-blind tests of loudspeakers and amplifiers, most of which were done in Canada, in which I've participated as a professional reviewer for more than 25 years, and I believe this biased thinking exists in video reviewing as well.

A few years ago, at the Consumer Electronics Show in Vegas, I'd rush back and forth between the Pioneer demo booth and the Samsung and Panasonic booths comparing the image quality of similar-sized flat screens, and each time I'd conclude, "I just don't see it" in the Kuros. They looked very good, but as I said earlier, if anything, the Panasonics and Samsungs delivered a more vibrant picture. At the time, I thought, well, perhaps the Kuro sets weren't set up as carefully as the sets in the other demo booths.

And I'll acknowledge that I've not been in a room with different brands of plasmas set up beside the Kuro displaying an identical picture with the brand names concealed; however, my judgements of image quality have been honed over many years and I trust them. Besides, if I'd seen an obvious superiority in the Kuro image over the Panasonic and Samsung plasmas, I would have bought a Kuro.

Personal bias plays a role here as well. I like a vibrant, brilliant picture (not one with the set run in the "torch" mode used for retail stores); maybe the Cnet reviewer(s) have different criteria. I previously worked with several of the Cnet guys at a defunct electronics web site (etown) that fell victim to the .com boom and bust, and we didn't always agree on image quality of sets in the test room.

Regards,
Alan

Cnet's criteria is simple - listen with your ears and watch with your eyes.

I just scratched with my finger.

What do you think the reason for this being performed in Canada was? Do you think that the big brands have a much farther reach in the U.S.? I.E. advertising dollars with the companies that are reviewing their products?

I can understand how it would be hard to impossible for a somewhat niche market to be able to provide a truly objective and critical opinion of a product.. There are only a few manufactures of audio video gear and a limited market for people who are "really" into this stuff, if a reviewer roasts a bad product then that company would almost certainly pull any and all advertising, and not send the reviewer any more products.

I would also guess that many of the reviewers do not use "scientific" methods.. or double blind comparison to a reference product. As that is the only way you can get a true comparison with minimal bias.


On that note, Alan, i am glad you mentioned the Kuro as i was in the process of hunting one down.. They are QUITE hard to find now, new with low hours anyway... I will feel much better about buying a new generation panasonic/Samsung for about 1/2 of what the Kuro's are going for if you can find one today...

Timmies and better air...

Or, more likely, the people who developed the methodology happened to be working at or around the NRC in Ottawa at the time.