Would you consider CRT technology superior to LCD or Plasma? - Page 10 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews

Forum Jump: 
 2Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #271 of 301 Old 05-18-2014, 09:29 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 5,188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by P719C1 View Post

The FED displays sounded promising (and to a lesser extent the similar SEDs), offering the best of all worlds except for the lack of multisync capability, but if I recall correctly there were legal and manufacturing issues with them, and the display manufacturers had just invested so much in LCD and plasma technology that they were reluctant to immediately produce something that would put both to shame.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ID4 View Post

FED spindt can be " multisync", working like CRT in "analog-mode", some links:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2138644&goto=nextnewest
FED Patent:

http://www.google.com/patents/US6559602?hl=en
I'm surprised at people still bring up the FED myth that they would have been CRT quality.

FED needed to do PWM -- essentially tantamount to multiple-pulsing / temporal dithering -- so you would still have plasma-like or DLP-like pixel noise, especially in dark colors. In real CRT tubes, the massive gun allowed the beam spot to have a peak 5000cd/m2 illumination, which allows squeezing a lot of light into ultrashort time periods (aka "low persitence") with adequate average brightness levels. In a proper CRT, the electron dot is so bright that when the electron beam stops scanning (i.e. deflection goes AWOL), it actually is too bright to stare at and burns a hole through the shadow mask. True tube CRT scanning overexposes in high speed video, showing how ultrabright the electron beam dot is, in a real CRT tube. But the tiny microguns in FED couldn't do that, so the persistence is longer (much, much more motion blur than CRT) in order to compensate for the lack of energy behind each pixel. The dimmer pulses had to be sustained via multiple-pulsing, lengthening persistence which increases motion blur, and creating temporal-dithering side effects. Talking to retired researchers who used to play with FED confirms this. Because of the PWM and the inability to do concentrated peak brightness at low single-pulse persistence, FEDs are NOT CRT quality motion. CRTs had fast response and low persistence. Where FED has fast response but high persistence. Which unfortunately creates motion blur (same problem for OLED motion blur). Fast pixel response doesn't fully eliminate motion blur if you still have high persistence. Now, let's talk a proper low-persistence rolling-scan OLED (e.g. like the one Oculus DK2 uses), but capable of <1ms persistence, and we're talking a proper and worthy CRT heir!

FED had temporal noise artifacts (ala plasma/DLP)
FED had high persistence despite fast response
FED had much more motion blur than CRT
Stop spreading the FED myth that it is CRT quality

P.S. Used to own an NEC XG135 CRT projector, DiamondVision CRTs, and many other 21" CRTs

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #272 of 301 Old 05-19-2014, 07:13 PM
Member
 
P719C1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Western Hemisphere
Posts: 176
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post


I'm surprised at people still bring up the FED myth that they would have been CRT quality.

FED needed to do PWM -- essentially tantamount to multiple-pulsing / temporal dithering -- so you would still have plasma-like or DLP-like pixel noise, especially in dark colors. In real CRT tubes, the massive gun allowed the beam spot to have a peak 5000cd/m2 illumination, which allows squeezing a lot of light into ultrashort time periods (aka "low persitence") with adequate average brightness levels. In a proper CRT, the electron dot is so bright that when the electron beam stops scanning (i.e. deflection goes AWOL), it actually is too bright to stare at and burns a hole through the shadow mask. True tube CRT scanning overexposes in high speed video, showing how ultrabright the electron beam dot is, in a real CRT tube. But the tiny microguns in FED couldn't do that, so the persistence is longer (much, much more motion blur than CRT) in order to compensate for the lack of energy behind each pixel. The dimmer pulses had to be sustained via multiple-pulsing, lengthening persistence which increases motion blur, and creating temporal-dithering side effects. Talking to retired researchers who used to play with FED confirms this. Because of the PWM and the inability to do concentrated peak brightness at low single-pulse persistence, FEDs are NOT CRT quality motion. CRTs had fast response and low persistence. Where FED has fast response but high persistence. Which unfortunately creates motion blur (same problem for OLED motion blur). Fast pixel response doesn't fully eliminate motion blur if you still have high persistence. Now, let's talk a proper low-persistence rolling-scan OLED (e.g. like the one Oculus DK2 uses), but capable of <1ms persistence, and we're talking a proper and worthy CRT heir!

FED had temporal noise artifacts (ala plasma/DLP)
FED had high persistence despite fast response
FED had much more motion blur than CRT
Stop spreading the FED myth that it is CRT quality

P.S. Used to own an NEC XG135 CRT projector, DiamondVision CRTs, and many other 21" CRTs

Oh yeah . . . . I remember this thread!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't temporal noise artifacts invariably unavoidable on digital displays, or anytime any digital video processing comes into the picture?

As far as the tradeoff of phosphor persistence versus temporal light output, I'm sure that could (relatively) easily be worked out through further R&D. Rather than multipulsing, why not step up voltage (approaching the order of CRT voltages) distributed to each electron gun? On that front, power consumption is the only practical limitation I can think of off the top of my head (2 million+ heating elements can't be the most energy-efficient thing in the world I'd imagine).

I'm sure nobody wants to invest in that kind of R&D when they could get similar results from an OLED, just as long as they can develop blue LEDs that will last just long enough for the average consumer in the throw-away society to be placated so by the time the display starts rotting he wants to "upgrade" to the latest model anyway.... At that point it becomes an issue of return on investment.
P719C1 is offline  
post #273 of 301 Old 05-19-2014, 10:23 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 5,188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by P719C1 View Post

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't temporal noise artifacts invariably unavoidable on digital displays, or anytime any digital video processing comes into the picture?
Only on per-pixel multiple-pulse-driven digital displays such as plasma, DLP, FED, and any digital display tech that depends on repeated pixel actuation in the same refresh cycle. It depends on how the display is driven. For example, you can avoid temporal noise when driving an OLED, as the pixel can be driven directly to its final color value, actuated once per refresh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by P719C1 View Post

why not step up voltage (approaching the order of CRT voltages) distributed to each electron gun?
You'll need to push a lot of power to the pixel, and that's harder to do over tiny row/column wires in a digital display. Especially harder at 4K resolutions with those tinier wires. And high voltage could leak/arc everywhere. It was much simpler with just a single, large electron gun. To get great light output at ultrashort persistences (<1ms) for minimum motion blur (CRT-league) you need to shine the pixel really bright to compensate for the long dark cycle between refreshes.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #274 of 301 Old 05-20-2014, 02:18 PM
Senior Member
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 343
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Eliminate PWM noise: sit your ass at a comfortable viewing distance.
LiquidSnake is offline  
post #275 of 301 Old 05-20-2014, 03:50 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,850
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 64
lol reminds me of trying to convince my friend he shouldn't get a 70" LED for his small living room since the pic will look like crap that close. Bigger isn't always better but that seems to be the prevailing mentality. rolleyes.gif

Floydage is offline  
post #276 of 301 Old 05-21-2014, 05:43 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 5,188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post

Eliminate PWM noise: sit your ass at a comfortable viewing distance.
When there exists displays without PWM noise, we don't really want to. biggrin.gif

Being on topic, I have to hand it to CRT here -- CRT has no PWM noise.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #277 of 301 Old 05-21-2014, 07:43 PM
Senior Member
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 343
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post

When there exists displays without PWM noise, we don't really want to. biggrin.gif

When those displays are all larger than 40 inches, we absolutely do want to.

Unless of course this is you.



In which case, carry on. PWM really is the silliest thing to get upset about with displays of this size. For that matter, I, and I think a lot of other people, would have loved to have actually seen FED or SED displays, PWM "noise" and all, for ourselves. The phosphors should not be significantly different and the delivery method to them the only vector, if its results were anything at all similar to a plasma it would have easily been a better alternative to any LCD.
LiquidSnake is offline  
post #278 of 301 Old 05-21-2014, 09:13 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 5,188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post

When those displays are all larger than 40 inches, we absolutely do want to.
The newly released OLED displays have no PWM noise. Also, plasma doesn't go 4K like OLED, LCD and E-Cinema projectors, where PWM noise becomes small enough. Some of us hate rainbows, others hate motion blur, others hate flicker, yet other hates the pixel noise. There are variances in our vision sensitivities, that cause different parts of the crowd to be picky about different things. Look at all the plasma-haters versus LCD-haters, etc.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #279 of 301 Old 05-21-2014, 09:38 PM
Senior Member
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 343
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post

The newly released OLED displays have no PWM noise.

They sure don't. They just have a pricetag five times (or so) higher. FED/SED was mentioned here for the fact that it at least uses phosphors though. To hear you talk it would not have been different from a plasma. I tend to doubt your opinion on that.
Quote:
Also, plasma doesn't go 4K like OLED, LCD and E-Cinema projectors, where PWM noise becomes small enough. Some of us hate rainbows, others hate motion blur, others hate flicker, yet other hates the pixel noise. There are variances in our vision sensitivities, that cause different parts of the crowd to be picky about different things. Look at all the plasma-haters versus LCD-haters, etc.

Yeah... so? Way to drag theme off topic.
LiquidSnake is offline  
post #280 of 301 Old 05-24-2014, 09:20 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Mark Rejhon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: North America
Posts: 5,188
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post

They sure don't. They just have a pricetag five times (or so) higher. FED/SED was mentioned here for the fact that it at least uses phosphors though. To hear you talk it would not have been different from a plasma. I tend to doubt your opinion on that.
It's not an opinion, but an issue with the early displays. Certainly, if they went through a chance of engineering improvements if the tech wasn't abandoned, who knows -- but all FED displays didn't manage to reach CRT clarity (fact).
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiquidSnake View Post

Yeah... so? Way to drag theme off topic.
Apologies on that. Yeah, let's get back on topic.

Thanks,
Mark Rejhon

www.BlurBusters.com

BlurBusters Blog -- Eliminating Motion Blur by 90%+ on LCD for games and computers

Rooting for upcoming low-persistence rolling-scan OLEDs too!

Mark Rejhon is offline  
post #281 of 301 Old 05-26-2014, 09:34 AM
ID4
Member
 
ID4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
If no technology is able to equal the performance of the CRT, it is time to return to the CRT, I am very clear.

Do not understand why we have to leave behind a technology far superior to "modern" technologies.

I only see you doing everything possible to meet the standing of a CRT ... there must be a reason ...

We're talking about display technologies, and the key factors can not be the "slim" feature, that is a secondary feature as weight. I will not be carrying all day TV, no sense ignore a technology with such a good performance, and unique features just because it is not "fashion look".

Time to get back to CRT and Develop it.
ID4 is offline  
post #282 of 301 Old 05-26-2014, 09:42 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,850
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 64
"...I am very clear." OK. biggrin.gif

Just forget about anything above 38" widescreen...

Floydage is offline  
post #283 of 301 Old 05-26-2014, 10:06 AM
ID4
Member
 
ID4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 23
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floydage View Post

"...I am very clear." OK. biggrin.gif

Just forget about anything above 38" widescreen...

Ok perfect for that, I ONLY need giant screens to see films, and for that the cinema or a good proyector if best suited wink.gif.

I'm very happy with my HD CRT 32 and his perfect picture, my Triniton 22' wide for computing, my CRTs 21/25/29 for retro gaming pleasure. I don't need a GODZILLA screen to enjoy games, TV or Pictures. I only use LCD for reading webs o to program.

I don't have blur, contrast, scaling, refresh, view angle or what you want problems, Why pay for a lager screen and downgrade? only for it's giant and slim? I'm not a stupid consumerist.

We have been using CRT for decades, and had never heard of problems viewing angle, scaling, blur, dinamic-fake contrast, fixed resolutions ... really worth to downgrade? Not for me thanks wink.gif
ID4 is offline  
post #284 of 301 Old 06-02-2014, 09:36 PM
 
ChadThunder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 403
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 84 Post(s)
Liked: 63
Plasma does not have to have any noise at all, in fact it is only through the pursuit of deeper and deeper black levels which that became the standard, of the three plasmas I own and many I have seen my oldest unit the Panasonic 50PH9 gives off the most solid and CRT-like picture even at extremely close distances, and once the DVI module had been installed the graduation of color became even finer than what is possible before.

There came some minor problems with later models from Panasonic, any/most models after 2008 has been heavily influenced by the transfer of technology and 'know-how' from Pioneer

1) Injection of dither around objects in motion
2) Repeating dithering pattern across adjacent frames
3) Most common picture modes have less than 256 levels of color per sub pixel (cinema mode is much more refined)

If the user had ultimate control over all those factors (output bit depth, dither strength/pattern/frequency, persistence vs brightness) and access to higher refresh rates imo CRT would easily had its replacement a long time ago rolleyes.gif
ChadThunder is offline  
post #285 of 301 Old 06-03-2014, 10:36 PM
Senior Member
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Miami, Florida
Posts: 343
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Rejhon View Post

It's not an opinion, but an issue with the early displays.

That they implement PWM, absolutely, is fact.
Quote:
Certainly, if they went through a chance of engineering improvements if the tech wasn't abandoned, who knows -- but all FED displays didn't manage to reach CRT clarity (fact).

The notion that PWM is inherently damaging to the image, is absolutely opinion, and one that I and a lot of people don't share. This isn't anything like, for instance, frame interpolation. I get exactly why you have the opinion you do, you're a gamer. But so am I, I'm already in your world. Your blurbusting is still not good enough for me and I'll take the image on my plasma any day over lightboost when gaming--but then when I game at my plasma I'm not sitting 12" from it. If I'm getting that close then I'm at my Viewsonic CRT. Or my Sony. Or my Mitsubishi. Or my LaCie. At any rate, have you ever seen an FED/SED display in person? I think a lot of us would have preferred to have that opportunity, and it isn't like all this PWM fuss is what kept it from happening, either.
LiquidSnake is offline  
post #286 of 301 Old 06-19-2014, 09:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Floydage's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Posts: 1,850
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 64
Testing, testing, this is only a test.

Just checking - no posts within this here CRT genre since right before the site change (and yet another!). Was auto-logged off too.

Will see how it goes but I already miss the display of part of the last post in each thread and how it 'markered' when I had read them (i.e. in the forum display table).

Floydage is offline  
post #287 of 301 Old 07-11-2016, 02:54 PM
Senior Member
 
reds75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 396
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 97
Still think crts have great depth,compared to plasmas and lcds.
nx211 likes this.
reds75 is offline  
post #288 of 301 Old 07-11-2016, 05:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 17,356
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1202 Post(s)
Liked: 947
... and weight.
Ratman is online now  
post #289 of 301 Old 07-11-2016, 06:03 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Super Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,029
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Lot’s of weight.

I just updated my senior mom’s TV – a 2008 32-inch RCA SD CRT with a 2016 42-inch RCA 1080P LCD. Just about broke my back taking the CRT off the stand. And that was one of the last 32-inch SD CRTs, very light weight compared to older generation CRTs – still very heavy compared to the brand new 42-inch LCD.

Gotta say though the CRT looked better with SD material and don’t get me started about the viewing angle. On the other hand the LCD looks great with an HD signal and the convergence and geometry is perfect.
Super Eye is offline  
post #290 of 301 Old 07-14-2016, 02:28 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,354
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by reds75
Still think crts have great depth,compared to plasmas and lcds.
 
Indeed.... CRTs are absolutely georgeous!!
Dude111 is offline  
post #291 of 301 Old 07-17-2016, 02:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RLBURNSIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,902
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1355 Post(s)
Liked: 1095
CRTs had tons of great features but they also had many of flaws, beyond the trivial and largely inconsequential depth issue which is a superficial / cosmetic one.

Pros:
1) Low persistence
2) Great black levels
3) Very Low lag, even <1 frames of lag possible (up to 0.000001% lag theoretically possible).
4) Viewing angles
5) "Infinite" bit depth (analog colours = no quantization errors). Although signal to noise effectively reduced it to 11-14 bit I believe.

Cons:
1) Depth
2) Size
3) Cost
4) Weight
5) Geometry issues
6) Flicker visible during bright content
7) Outwardly curved screen, yuck
8) Flat screens required Trinitron, which had faint horizontal lines
9) Moiree (could be compensated but not perfectly in all cases)
10) 4:3 aspect ratio
11) Standard definition, low resolution

I wouldn't ever touch a low resolution CRT again, because I can't tolerate 100+ pound 36 inch, 4:3 TVs when a 46 inch UHD HDR FALD TV costs around 500 bucks.

Moiree was really annoying, as was flicker. You need like 85hz or more for it to be mostly flicker-free.
RLBURNSIDE is offline  
post #292 of 301 Old 07-17-2016, 03:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 17,356
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1202 Post(s)
Liked: 947
Bottom line.... enjoy your CRT while it lasts.
Ratman is online now  
post #293 of 301 Old 07-18-2016, 09:54 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Dude111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,354
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 286 Post(s)
Liked: 472
Yes thats the scary thing.......


VERY SCARY!!
Dude111 is offline  
post #294 of 301 Old 07-18-2016, 11:48 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 17,356
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1202 Post(s)
Liked: 947
What's scary?
Welcome to the 21st century. I know gamers love their CRT's, but it's time for acceptance and closure.
Ratman is online now  
post #295 of 301 Old 07-31-2016, 08:37 AM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by reds75 View Post
Still think crts have great depth,compared to plasmas and lcds.
It's subtle. Most people wouldn't notice it. But it's absolutely there.

Your one of a very precious few that have ever noticed it and bothered to post a comment about it.

NX211
nx211 is offline  
post #296 of 301 Old 07-31-2016, 08:47 AM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
... and weight.
I don't have to hold up my CRT when I'm watching it so for me, weight really isn't an issue.

NX211
nx211 is offline  
post #297 of 301 Old 07-31-2016, 09:27 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 17,356
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1202 Post(s)
Liked: 947
Quote:
Originally Posted by nx211 View Post
I don't have to hold up my CRT when I'm watching it so for me, weight really isn't an issue.
Ha-ha...
Seriously, I loved my F38310. But, at 216 lbs, getting it into my home, buying new stand (because the Sony stand didn't suffice), and disposal was quite a task after it died.
Ratman is online now  
post #298 of 301 Old 07-31-2016, 11:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
CruelInventions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 5,301
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 401 Post(s)
Liked: 542
Quote:
Originally Posted by nx211 View Post
It's subtle. Most people wouldn't notice it. But it's absolutely there.

Your one of a very precious few that have ever noticed it and bothered to post a comment about it.
Not even close to being true. The aspect of depth used be a point of discussion and debate quite frequently around here, back when CRT was still a practical competitor to plasma and LCD when those latter two were practically limited to 50" or smaller sizes only. Once larger sizes became affordable, those discussions dwindled. CRT was no longer a big part of the conversation anymore given the size limitations, and plasma vs lcd debates took over for the next several years, with CRT as the conversational afterthought.

So there were much fewer opportunities to talk about CRT benefits. Only a smaller percentage remained hardcore CRT devotees by then, willing to forgo the much larger sizes and other picture advancements of newer tech in order to retain their priorities of black levels and picture depth. And those two benefits were eventually minimized by later plasma tech advancements so there was even less of a reason to bring it into any conversation.

Last edited by CruelInventions; 07-31-2016 at 11:07 AM.
CruelInventions is offline  
post #299 of 301 Old 07-31-2016, 01:07 PM
Senior Member
 
nx211's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NY
Posts: 386
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Liked: 41
^
If you say the topic was discussed frequently in threads, so be it, that's great, but it's news to me. Perhaps it was discussed more in the Plasma and LCD threads then in CRT threads. I never followed Plasma and LCD model threads like I did the Direct View CRT threads, specifically the Sony 34XBR910, -960 and -970 ones.

The recent post made by a member noticing that CRT "picture depth" being superior to flat panels and my comment about it being that "precious few people notice it" was based on the very occasional reference being made, mostly by some owners of those specific Sony model sets, considering the move to higher end Plasma panels. I did follow those Sony threads closely in the past and I recall only precious few members mentioning the superior CRT picture depth, that was in the past and is still so obvious today - picture size notwithstanding. So actually that comment of mine is *very true* for the "Direct View/CRT Display" space of which this thread is a part of.

NX211

Last edited by nx211; 07-31-2016 at 04:42 PM.
nx211 is offline  
post #300 of 301 Old 08-09-2016, 10:27 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,120
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 643 Post(s)
Liked: 420
Not all Flatpanels are equal in how they show depth, and not all CRT's are either. My old 2012 Insignia LCD had no depth, neither does the 42 inch Vizio downstairs, but My Kuro has just as much depth as any CRT I've ever seen. Also from what I've seen in BB OLED has better depth perception than anything before.
Vader1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Direct View (single tube) CRT Displays



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off