Sharpness of a CRT? - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 172 Old 07-14-2007, 11:24 PM - Thread Starter
 
bkchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,801
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman1972 View Post

Oh please, you don't have to grossly exaggerate to say that you like CRTs. If you actually believe that a 480i tube looks better than a Sony XBR3 LCD then you are just crazy.

And the primary thing that bothers me about the resolution is video games. I think it looks fine for watching TV and movies but when I'm playing Gears of War or something like that I just can't help wondering what the game would look like if half the pixels weren't missing. I can't get off of my mind how much detail of the game I must not be seeing. 360 is the whole reason I bought the TV in the first place. I didn't care at all about HD until then. But when it comes to games I'm a total graphics whore and come hell or high water I was determined to get a HD set so I could see the games the way they are suppose to look. The ratio between resolutions of the 970 and a SDTV is basically 2 to 1. And that difference is huge! The way the games look absolutely blow away SD. Well, the difference between 970 and true 1080i is also 2 to 1. So since the 970 blows SD away then it stands to reason that a 970 with twice the pixels would blow away what the 970 currently is. And yeah, that bothers me. When I bought the 970 I didn't know anything about 1080i CRTs not truly being 1080i. Ever since I found out it has been driving me nuts because the whole point of buying the TV in the first place was to be able to see all of the detail of the games and I'm still not.

Alright do this little test for me and maybe it will answer both our questions as to how much detail is being lost by going CRT. Head on over to gametrailers.com and download a trailer for your favorite 360 game in high definition that really shows off the graphical finesse of the game (Gears would be a great one). Then after you've watched that fire up your 360 and play the game on your 970 and tell me which one looks better. Tell me how severe or minor the loss in detail is and tell me if you think it's worth going LCD to get the extra resolution even if other things have to be sacrificed (blacks levels, shadow detail, color accuracy, etc.).
bkchurch is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 172 Old 07-14-2007, 11:37 PM
Member
 
xiaxie88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Annandale, VA
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Hi Fi world: vacuum tube vs transistor

Hi Vi world: CRT vs LCD

Basically CRT belongs to yesterday.
xiaxie88 is offline  
post #93 of 172 Old 07-14-2007, 11:43 PM
otk
AVS Special Member
 
otk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by xiaxie88 View Post

Hi Fi world: vacuum tube vs transistor

Hi Vi world: CRT vs LCD

Basically CRT belongs to yesterday.

what are you doing in "yesterday's" forum

All this noise about noise.
♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫
Finding the acoustic sweet spot.
otk is offline  
post #94 of 172 Old 07-14-2007, 11:53 PM
Member
 
xiaxie88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Annandale, VA
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Well, I must say that CRT is still better for the purpose of displaying yesterday's SDTV and DVD programs. The picture looks more smooth.

Vacuum tubes may also have one or two advantages.

That's all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by otk View Post

what are you doing in "yesterday's" forum

xiaxie88 is offline  
post #95 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 01:14 AM
Senior Member
 
Wickerman1972's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Minerva, Ohio
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It's shocking to me how emotional you guys are getting, especially otk. This reminds me of the way kids act on gaming forums when having 360 vs PS3 debates.

And otk, of course a good 480i TV may look better than a 1080p LCD with SD content because that's what it is made for whereas the LCd has to scale it to 1080p. But 1080p running on a 1080p LCD sure as hell looks better than 480i on a 480i CRT TV. I can't believe I'm in an argument about this.

And whether you want to admit it or not the newer Sony XBR LCDs look very, very good. The problem is you have to be rich to own one. They've got the XBR5 up on their site now, it's $5000. Yeah, that's ridiculous but damn, they do look sweet. You act as though LCD technology hasn't progressed at all.

And I'm the first to admit that CRT tech. is ahead of LCD tech. That's why I bought a CRT. If there was a TRUE 1080i CRT HDTV out there that I could buy ( And no, the $50,000 ones sold to movie studios don't count in my opinion. ) I'd choose it over a 1080p LCD without hesitation. The problem though is that there isn't and there never will be.
Wickerman1972 is offline  
post #96 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 08:37 AM - Thread Starter
 
bkchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,801
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman1972 View Post

It's shocking to me how emotional you guys are getting, especially otk. This reminds me of the way kids act on gaming forums when having 360 vs PS3 debates.

And otk, of course a good 480i TV may look better than a 1080p LCD with SD content because that's what it is made for whereas the LCd has to scale it to 1080p. But 1080p running on a 1080p LCD sure as hell looks better than 480i on a 480i CRT TV. I can't believe I'm in an argument about this.

And whether you want to admit it or not the newer Sony XBR LCDs look very, very good. The problem is you have to be rich to own one. They've got the XBR5 up on their site now, it's $5000. Yeah, that's ridiculous but damn, they do look sweet. You act as though LCD technology hasn't progressed at all.

And I'm the first to admit that CRT tech. is ahead of LCD tech. That's why I bought a CRT. If there was a TRUE 1080i CRT HDTV out there that I could buy ( And no, the $50,000 ones sold to movie studios don't count in my opinion. ) I'd choose it over a 1080p LCD without hesitation. The problem though is that there isn't and there never will be.

I agree this has turned quite childish, I have nothing against LCD and in fact I've seen quite a few that I think look way better than any CRT I've ever seen (one of which being the 1920x1200 Apple cinema display built into my Macbook Pro) but this wasn't meant to be a CRT vs. LCD thread and it's getting ridiculous. Both TVs have there inherent advantages and disadvantages and neither is perfect by any stretch of the imagination people so get over it.

Anyway Wickerman I still think you should go try my test my test with Gametrailers and then report back to us on exactly how much detail you think you're losing with your CRT, I know that I for one would very much appreciate it.
bkchurch is offline  
post #97 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 10:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
WJonathan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,766
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Wickerman, you do nothing but troll the forums trying to get a rise out of people with ridiculous exaggerations like "that's basically SD resolution but widescreen". If your 970 is truly "driving you nuts" then GET RID OF IT AND GET THE TV YOU WANT.
WJonathan is offline  
post #98 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 11:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RalphArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rockville MD
Posts: 2,753
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkchurch View Post


Anyway Wickerman I still think you should go try my test my test with Gametrailers and then report back to us on exactly how much detail you think you're losing with your CRT, I know that I for one would very much appreciate it.


bkchurch -

You are being kind of lazy when you have been told the resolutions. I took a 1920x1080 test pattern (available here and resized horizontally to bothe 1440 (for an SFP) and 868 for 970. You can do it yourself or look at these files

If you do it download the files (right click and save target as png as it is) to look and compare - don't open in a browser as they resize. Look at them at 100% and ignore the vertical distortion as it was all left at 1080 just like the tvs do.

(I tried putting in my avs photo gallery but they resize and compress files so you can't really assess the impact of resolution changes.
RalphArch is offline  
post #99 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 11:53 AM
otk
AVS Special Member
 
otk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by RalphArch View Post

bkchurch -

You are being kind of lazy when you have been told the resolutions. I took a 1920x1080 test pattern (available here and resized horizontally to bothe 1440 (for an SFP) and 868 for 970. You can do it yourself or look at these files

If you do it download the files (right click and save target as png as it is) to look and compare - don't open in a browser as they resize. Look at them at 100% and ignore the vertical distortion as it was all left at 1080 just like the tvs do.

(I tried putting in my avs photo gallery but they resize and compress files so you can't really assess the impact of resolution changes.

he's asking him to use his eyes and give his opinion, not stair at some numbers in an owners manual and some test patterns

it's ridiculous to buy a tv based on numbers

All this noise about noise.
♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫
Finding the acoustic sweet spot.
otk is offline  
post #100 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 11:56 AM
otk
AVS Special Member
 
otk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkchurch View Post

I agree this has turned quite childish, I have nothing against LCD and in fact I've seen quite a few that I think look way better than any CRT I've ever seen (one of which being the 1920x1200 Apple cinema display built into my Macbook Pro) .

apples and oranges

i'll take a good CRT computer monitor over any LCD junk monitor any day

All this noise about noise.
♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫
Finding the acoustic sweet spot.
otk is offline  
post #101 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 12:02 PM
otk
AVS Special Member
 
otk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wickerman1972 View Post

It's shocking to me how emotional you guys are getting, especially otk. This reminds me of the way kids act on gaming forums when having 360 vs PS3 debates.

and you think that people who are into stereo and home theater are any different?

we are nothing more than big kids playing with expensive toys

don't delude yourself

there's nothing "important" about tv or movies

it's a hobby

if you want to bash CRT, fine, just take it over to the LCD sandbox

All this noise about noise.
♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫
Finding the acoustic sweet spot.
otk is offline  
post #102 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 12:13 PM - Thread Starter
 
bkchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,801
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Ok, does anyone else have something intelligent to add to this thread? I didn't make this thread so people could make themselves feel better about the display type they bought by insulting other peoples preferences. This is getting ridiculous and quite frankly annoying and childish from both the LCD people and the CRT people.
bkchurch is offline  
post #103 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 12:54 PM
otk
AVS Special Member
 
otk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkchurch View Post

Ok, does anyone else have something intelligent to add to this thread? I didn't make this thread so people could make themselves feel better about the display type they bought by insulting other peoples preferences. This is getting ridiculous and quite frankly annoying and childish from both the LCD people and the CRT people.

you started all this you

here's an idea, why not just go buy whatever looks good to you?


All this noise about noise.
♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫
Finding the acoustic sweet spot.
otk is offline  
post #104 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 12:54 PM - Thread Starter
 
bkchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,801
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by RalphArch View Post

bkchurch -

You are being kind of lazy when you have been told the resolutions. I took a 1920x1080 test pattern (available here and resized horizontally to bothe 1440 (for an SFP) and 868 for 970. You can do it yourself or look at these files

If you do it download the files (right click and save target as png as it is) to look and compare - don't open in a browser as they resize. Look at them at 100% and ignore the vertical distortion as it was all left at 1080 just like the tvs do.

(I tried putting in my avs photo gallery but they resize and compress files so you can't really assess the impact of resolution changes.

Ok, I think that may have been helpful but what was it I was supposed to be looking for? From what I could tell the only difference between the 853 and the 1440 was the 853 was squished, other than that they look just as good. Were you trying to show me the differences in the resolutions aren't going to make that big of a difference?
bkchurch is offline  
post #105 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 06:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RalphArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rockville MD
Posts: 2,753
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkchurch View Post

Ok, I think that may have been helpful but what was it I was supposed to be looking for? From what I could tell the only difference between the 853 and the 1440 was the 853 was squished, other than that they look just as good. Were you trying to show me the differences in the resolutions aren't going to make that big of a difference?

Forget/ignore the squishing. There are three images; all 1080 pixels high; one is 1920 pixels wide; the second is 1440; the third is 868. The second and third are scaled from the first image (which is at the first link) - just like a tv would scale. There are obvious and non-subtle differences in horizontal resolution. You either opened these in a browser without downloading as I indicated (rigth click and save target as); or you aren't very observant of the detailed and obvious changes in resolution, or are looking at them at some different size than 100%. Look at the fine line areas in the three images (vertical lines) You should easily see the differences. Check the properties of the image you are viewing - it should match what I was describing but if it is something like 800x600 the its been resized by a browser or your software.

If you really don't notice a horizontal resolution change; or are satisfied with the detail in the 860 image - by all means get a 970 as that is what it can display.
RalphArch is offline  
post #106 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 07:09 PM - Thread Starter
 
bkchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,801
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by RalphArch View Post

Forget/ignore the squishing. There are three images; all 1080 pixels high; one is 1920 pixels wide; the second is 1440; the third is 868. The second and third are scaled from the first image (which is at the first link) - just like a tv would scale. There are obvious and non-subtle differences in horizontal resolution. You either opened these in a browser without downloading as I indicated (rigth click and save target as); or you aren't very observant of the detailed and obvious changes in resolution, or are looking at them at some different size than 100%. Look at the fine line areas in the three images (vertical lines) You should easily see the differences. Check the properties of the image you are viewing - it should match what I was describing but if it is something like 800x600 the its been resized by a browser or your software.

If you really don't notice a horizontal resolution change; or are satisfied with the detail in the 860 image - by all means get a 970 as that is what it can display.

I guess I'll be fine with the 970 because other than the text being slightly sharper on the 1440 image there's really no loss in detail, of course I'm still not sure what detail I'd be losing since I'm looking at a simple test pattern and this would be a much better test if it was displaying a real image at 1920x1080 then scaled to 1440x1080 and 853x1080 without squishing the image since I'm not buying this TV to look at test patterns.

Anyway I did the math earlier today and figured out 853x1080i isn't that bad because in a 720p signal I'm still resolving twice as many pixels as 480i as opposed to the three times as many pixels I'd resolves with a true 720p LCD. However the inherent color accuracy and black levels of a CRT are really worth it. AND if I feed it a 1080i signal I'm resolving just as much detail as a 720p LCD would resolve with a 720p or 1080i signal so anything in 1080i/p should be just as detailed as 720p and at 34" I don't need to be able to fully resolve anything over 720p anyway because the screens so small. If I've confused anyone tell me and I'll explain in more detail how I arrived at this conclusion.
bkchurch is offline  
post #107 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 07:14 PM
Advanced Member
 
fugiot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 837
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
No, I think we got it.

Sony XBR960n - nice to rods, mean to cones.
fugiot is offline  
post #108 of 172 Old 07-15-2007, 11:58 PM
otk
AVS Special Member
 
otk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by RalphArch View Post

Forget/ignore the squishing. There are three images; all 1080 pixels high; one is 1920 pixels wide; the second is 1440; the third is 868. The second and third are scaled from the first image (which is at the first link) - just like a tv would scale. There are obvious and non-subtle differences in horizontal resolution. You either opened these in a browser without downloading as I indicated (rigth click and save target as); or you aren't very observant of the detailed and obvious changes in resolution, or are looking at them at some different size than 100%. Look at the fine line areas in the three images (vertical lines) You should easily see the differences. Check the properties of the image you are viewing - it should match what I was describing but if it is something like 800x600 the its been resized by a browser or your software.

If you really don't notice a horizontal resolution change; or are satisfied with the detail in the 860 image - by all means get a 970 as that is what it can display.

how far away from the screen was the camera?

let's see a close up picture of a $599 LCD which is what my 970 cost brand new in the box with free delivery

close up pictures of still shots of test patterns are no indication of what a tv picture will look like in real world viewing of real material from a real viewing distance

maybe you can print those test patterns out and tape them over your over priced screen and keep your owners manual open and have dirty thoughts as you look over the res numbers

don't pull those test patterns off the screen though cuz you'll go limp when you see what you paid all that money for

All this noise about noise.
♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫
Finding the acoustic sweet spot.
otk is offline  
post #109 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 03:22 AM
Senior Member
 
Wickerman1972's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Minerva, Ohio
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by otk View Post

how far away from the screen was the camera?

let's see a close up picture of a $599 LCD which is what my 970 cost brand new in the box with free delivery

close up pictures of still shots of test patterns are no indication of what a tv picture will look like in real world viewing of real material from a real viewing distance

maybe you can print those test patterns out and tape them over your over priced screen and keep your owners manual open and have dirty thoughts as you look over the res numbers

don't pull those test patterns off the screen though cuz you'll go limp when you see what you paid all that money for

That isn't what the price of the 970 always was though. The $599 price was a clearance price after they weren't being manufactured anymore. I payed $800 for mine and some people payed $1,000 or a little more.
Wickerman1972 is offline  
post #110 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 03:54 AM
Senior Member
 
Wickerman1972's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Minerva, Ohio
Posts: 491
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
There is a bigger difference between interlaced and progressive than what I even thought. There was 10 minutes of test patterns broadcast by HDNet a few days ago and I DVRed it. The last pattern was a resolution and overscan pattern. I can't tell what the difference between 720p and 1080i is because this set doesn't actually display 720p but I did try it out on 480i and 480p and the difference was quite dramatic. The 480p looked much better than 480i, more so than I expected. Too bad Sony didn't make the 970 progressive. Even though the horizontal resolution is lower if it was progressive it probably would look equal in sharpness to a 720p flat-panel since the amount of pixels is basically the same. But wow, progressive scanning really adds a sharpness boost.
Wickerman1972 is offline  
post #111 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 04:11 AM
Newbie
 
umber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLO View Post

Don't buy a crt. Your back/muscles/shoulders will thank you.

very good suggestion
umber is offline  
post #112 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 04:25 AM
Newbie
 
umber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by xiaxie88 View Post

Hi Fi world: vacuum tube vs transistor

Hi Vi world: CRT vs LCD

Basically CRT belongs to yesterday.

which one is good ? CRT vs LCD
umber is offline  
post #113 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 04:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RalphArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rockville MD
Posts: 2,753
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by otk View Post

how far away from the screen was the camera?

let's see a close up picture of a $599 LCD which is what my 970 cost brand new in the box with free delivery

close up pictures of still shots of test patterns are no indication of what a tv picture will look like in real world viewing of real material from a real viewing distance

maybe you can print those test patterns out and tape them over your over priced screen and keep your owners manual open and have dirty thoughts as you look over the res numbers

don't pull those test patterns off the screen though cuz you'll go limp when you see what you paid all that money for

I am at a loss. There is no screen. The resolution numbers are by others using industry standards. The images are pixel-based to the approximate measured resolutions and compared to the source. At the finest (1920) they are on off pixel width lines if you cared to look. What you should be able to resolve with a well calibrated set is a maximum of the measured resolution, so my point was looking at images shows the effect of the various resolutions, which was bkchurch's question.

Not sure what your point is or why you are responding to my posts. If you have a point or a question related to my attempt to help bkchurch evaluate the impact of different resolutions at least make an attempt to understand what I was trying to do.
RalphArch is offline  
post #114 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 04:27 AM
Newbie
 
umber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by otk View Post

you started all this you

here's an idea, why not just go buy whatever looks good to you?


why are you making it a chat room?
umber is offline  
post #115 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 04:50 AM
otk
AVS Special Member
 
otk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by umber View Post

why are you making it a chat room?

what are you talking about?

All this noise about noise.
♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫
Finding the acoustic sweet spot.
otk is offline  
post #116 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 05:11 AM
otk
AVS Special Member
 
otk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,496
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
if you need to use specs and test patterns to mount your case for LCD then you've lost already

use your eyes, watch a movie, CRT is clearly superior

there is a reason why LCD had to keep constantly upping the resolution, because it's such a horrible technology

we're never going to see a 1080P CRT because the masses have bought into "flat" tv's. they no longer want a big giant heavy tv sitting in their living room and they don't give a crap about picture quality and they are willing to pay more for it

it's retarded, it makes no sense but that's what the people want and that's what the people are going to get

an inferior product for a superior price

the prices will come down eventually and eventually peoples eyes will adjust to that blurry picture. life will go on

history has shown that the better product doesn't always win. beta/vhs stereo/quad cd-r/minidisc cd/mp3 bush/kerry

All this noise about noise.
♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫♪♫
Finding the acoustic sweet spot.
otk is offline  
post #117 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 06:50 AM - Thread Starter
 
bkchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,801
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by otk View Post

if you need to use specs and test patterns to mount your case for LCD then you've lost already

use your eyes, watch a movie, CRT is clearly superior

there is a reason why LCD had to keep constantly upping the resolution, because it's such a horrible technology

we're never going to see a 1080P CRT because the masses have bought into "flat" tv's. they no longer want a big giant heavy tv sitting in their living room and they don't give a crap about picture quality and they are willing to pay more for it

it's retarded, it makes no sense but that's what the people want and that's what the people are going to get

an inferior product for a superior price

the prices will come down eventually and eventually peoples eyes will adjust to that blurry picture. life will go on

history has shown that the better product doesn't always win. beta/vhs stereo/quad cd-r/minidisc cd/mp3 bush/kerry

Dude people want LCD and plasma and other flat-panel "junk" because they want big screens which you can't achieve with CRT unless you want a TV that weighs 1000 lbs and takes up half your living room. Also higher res equals more detail and though at this size it isn't as much of an issue since anything over 720p isn't really noticeable, at bigger sizes it makes a big difference that's why flat-panels keep increasing in resolution. For the record CRT isn't perfect either as I believe has been established in this thread (geometry issues, focus, size).

Also I don't believe I've ever seen an LCD that was recieving a 720p or 1080p signal that looked in the least bit blurry in fact they were quite sharp so I have no clue what you saw. For the record you can't call me out on owning an LCD either because I'm buying a CRT.
bkchurch is offline  
post #118 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 07:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Hakemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
wait, my HDTV supports 1080p natively.. it says it right in the manual, so the 1080p CRTs do indeed exist.. (i can tell it shows it in 1080p too, because it sure isn't flickering like 1080i's interlacing.. not to mention, i have the service manual )

and infact, it does have great detail for a CRT.. it's a shame too, because it would be nice to see more CRTs that had high DPI...
Hakemon is offline  
post #119 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 07:36 AM - Thread Starter
 
bkchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,801
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hakemon View Post

wait, my HDTV supports 1080p natively.. it says it right in the manual, so the 1080p CRTs do indeed exist.. (i can tell it shows it in 1080p too, because it sure isn't flickering like 1080i's interlacing.. not to mention, i have the service manual )

and infact, it does have great detail for a CRT.. it's a shame too, because it would be nice to see more CRTs that had high DPI...

And what TV do you have because I don't know of any 1080p CRTs other than uber expensive studio monitors.
bkchurch is offline  
post #120 of 172 Old 07-16-2007, 07:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Hakemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkchurch View Post

And what TV do you have because I don't know of any 1080p CRTs other than uber expensive studio monitors.

Prima HT2778P.. It's the later revision, the one with 2 Component in's, and run on the Trident chipset...

from the service manual:

Quote:


The unit has the YPBPR terminal; it can display the HDTV signal
Support the HDTV and TIMING of the VG848 format.
Support input signal of YPbPr
Signal format TIMING of the VG848 format
480I 950
480P 978
576I 969
576P 979
1080I/60Hz 972
720P/60Hz 976
1080P/60Hz 970

These used to be sold at Sears.. good luck finding them anymore, Sears quit selling them because they were 4:3 HDTV's, and didn't have ATSC tuners...
Hakemon is offline  
Reply Direct View (single tube) CRT Displays

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


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