The forum see pioneer PDP-LX5090 any news?
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Do you expect to test the 60?
Thanks Steve.
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Do you expect to test the 60?
Thanks Steve.
simon/clare Times up
- Thread starter skr1
- Start date
Clare's on holiday and Simon's deep in a very interesting AV receivers test, so you'll have to put up with me replying.
While it's hard reviewing with a gun to your head - 'Times up', indeed! - we will be publishing the review of the Pioneer as soon as it's finished.
I anticipate that being some time in the next couple of days.
While it's hard reviewing with a gun to your head - 'Times up', indeed! - we will be publishing the review of the Pioneer as soon as it's finished.
I anticipate that being some time in the next couple of days.
Andrew Everard:
Clare's on holiday and Simon's deep in a very interesting AV receivers test, so you'll have to put up with me replying.
While it's hard reviewing with a gun to your head - 'Times up', indeed! - we will be publishing the review of the Pioneer as soon as it's finished.
I anticipate that being some time in the next couple of days.
Hi Andrew i didnt load the gun see the thread pioneer pdp-lx5090.
And i didnt set the time. No offence intended.
thanks and keep up with the good work reports/tests.
Clare's on holiday and Simon's deep in a very interesting AV receivers test, so you'll have to put up with me replying.
While it's hard reviewing with a gun to your head - 'Times up', indeed! - we will be publishing the review of the Pioneer as soon as it's finished.
I anticipate that being some time in the next couple of days.
Hi Andrew i didnt load the gun see the thread pioneer pdp-lx5090.
And i didnt set the time. No offence intended.
thanks and keep up with the good work reports/tests.
skr1:
PDP-LX5090 any news?
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Preliminary tests suggest buildÿqualityÿisn't quite on a par with the LX508!
PDP-LX5090 any news?
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Preliminary tests suggest buildÿqualityÿisn't quite on a par with the LX508!
GearHunter:
skr1:
PDP-LX5090 any news?
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Preliminary tests suggest build quality isn't quite on a par with the LX508!
Do you refer to panel ,frame,stand-or-picture,sound,connections?
skr1:
PDP-LX5090 any news?
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Preliminary tests suggest build quality isn't quite on a par with the LX508!
Do you refer to panel ,frame,stand-or-picture,sound,connections?
skr1:GearHunter:
skr1:
PDP-LX5090 any news?
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Preliminary tests suggest build quality isn't quite on a par with the LX508!
Do you refer to panel ,frame,stand-or-picture,sound,connections?
The PDK-TS36B pedestal stand has impressive build quality, it swivels and tilts. The build is still Pioneer standard but not quite the pinnacle of the LX508. That's not my opinion BTW, it was gained from another review site.
The WHF reviews don't give a true feeling of how a product measures up when using professional calibration equipment. I expect WHF do indeed use such methods, for example, determining how close the LX5090 is to the D65 standard out of the box and how easy it is to achieve the D65 standard by making adjustments to the various settings.
Would it be possible for WHF to include details of test methods that are used and any results and recommended settings, or is it a case of chucking a number of DVD's, Blu-rays and SD content at a TV set and allowing the eyes be the objective judges?
The problem or trick with Pioneer panels is knowing what settings to use for the type of source material being fed into them.
skr1:
PDP-LX5090 any news?
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Preliminary tests suggest build quality isn't quite on a par with the LX508!
Do you refer to panel ,frame,stand-or-picture,sound,connections?
The PDK-TS36B pedestal stand has impressive build quality, it swivels and tilts. The build is still Pioneer standard but not quite the pinnacle of the LX508. That's not my opinion BTW, it was gained from another review site.
The WHF reviews don't give a true feeling of how a product measures up when using professional calibration equipment. I expect WHF do indeed use such methods, for example, determining how close the LX5090 is to the D65 standard out of the box and how easy it is to achieve the D65 standard by making adjustments to the various settings.
Would it be possible for WHF to include details of test methods that are used and any results and recommended settings, or is it a case of chucking a number of DVD's, Blu-rays and SD content at a TV set and allowing the eyes be the objective judges?
The problem or trick with Pioneer panels is knowing what settings to use for the type of source material being fed into them.
GearHunter:skr1:GearHunter:
skr1:
PDP-LX5090 any news?
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Preliminary tests suggest build quality isn't quite on a par with the LX508!
Do you refer to panel ,frame,stand-or-picture,sound,connections?
The PDK-TS36B pedestal stand has impressive build quality, it swivels and tilts. The build is still Pioneer standard but not quite the pinnacle of the LX508. That's not my opinion BTW, it was gained from another review site.
The WHF reviews don't give a true feeling of how a product measures up when using professional calibration equipment. I expect WHF do indeed use such methods, for example, determining how close the LX5090 is to the D65 standard out of the box and how easy it is to achieve the D65 standard by making adjustments to the various settings.
Would it be possible for WHF to include details of test methods that are used and any results and recommended settings, or is it a case of chucking a number of DVD's, Blu-rays and SD content at a TV set and allowing the eyes be the objective judges?
The problem or trick with Pioneer panels is knowing what settings to use for the type of source material being fed into them.
Intresting whf do use some of the diagnostic equipment you mention how much and to what level i dont know.
See feedback on comments on the report. But the conclusion is pioneer again have produced a top class set.
Thankyou for your comments gearhunter like you i would like to know settings .I need to know for my new set.Steve
skr1:
PDP-LX5090 any news?
Is it that bad? Shocking? Or to Good to be true?
Preliminary tests suggest build quality isn't quite on a par with the LX508!
Do you refer to panel ,frame,stand-or-picture,sound,connections?
The PDK-TS36B pedestal stand has impressive build quality, it swivels and tilts. The build is still Pioneer standard but not quite the pinnacle of the LX508. That's not my opinion BTW, it was gained from another review site.
The WHF reviews don't give a true feeling of how a product measures up when using professional calibration equipment. I expect WHF do indeed use such methods, for example, determining how close the LX5090 is to the D65 standard out of the box and how easy it is to achieve the D65 standard by making adjustments to the various settings.
Would it be possible for WHF to include details of test methods that are used and any results and recommended settings, or is it a case of chucking a number of DVD's, Blu-rays and SD content at a TV set and allowing the eyes be the objective judges?
The problem or trick with Pioneer panels is knowing what settings to use for the type of source material being fed into them.
Intresting whf do use some of the diagnostic equipment you mention how much and to what level i dont know.
See feedback on comments on the report. But the conclusion is pioneer again have produced a top class set.
Thankyou for your comments gearhunter like you i would like to know settings .I need to know for my new set.Steve
skr1:
Thankyou for your comments gearhunter like you i would like to know settings.
Edited: please do not discuss moderation.
Edited again: we did ask you not to discuss the moderation.
Thankyou for your comments gearhunter like you i would like to know settings.
Edited: please do not discuss moderation.
Edited again: we did ask you not to discuss the moderation.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram