[Dede]

A few years ago, Widescreen Review had an article about the television industry's "little secret". The fact that, because of their design, very few direct view TVs could actually display their claimed resolution.


They (WR) claimed that because of the shadow masks (mostly made-up of Invar, an iron/nickel alloy), most TV manufacturer simply couldn't build a stable shadow mask with a sufficient number of holes to achieve anywhere near HDTV resolutions.


Has this technical limitation been overcome in the last few years?

 

[dt_dc]

It's not really a secret. But no, most CRTs can not fully resolve the 1920 vertical lines (horizontal resolution) of a 1080i image because of limitations in the mask or grill. Most have around somewhere in the range of 800 - 850 vertical lines/dots/slots/whatever you want to call them.


They are all pretty much able to handle HDTV vertical resolution (number of horizontal lines).


This limitation hasn't been fully overcome ... however, the Sony XBR910 line is very exciting. Their 'Super Fine Pitch' CRT is an aperture grill with 1400 vertical lines. Still not quite 1920 ... but much closer than any other consumer-grade CRT set.

 

[ThumperBoy]

The limitation has always and still exists, but Sony is the only one this past year to come out with a new model HD CRT that dramatically improved the dotpitch and resolution for the Sony 34XBR910 model with 1400 horizontal resolution compared to the 850 or so horizontal resolution on the other standard model HD CRT sets.

 

[Jet Champion]

The grill isn't so much the fault--it's the fact that as the slots get smaller the picture invariably gets darker--you could make it bright enough and achieve the 1920 mark, but it would require an extreme amonunt of electricity.

 

[kharvel]

What about CRT computer monitors?

 

[ThumperBoy]

CRT computer monitors have smaller dot-pitch and higher resolution but they are smaller and lower brightness than big HDTV CRTs too. Much has been said about how the brightness is lower on the Sony 34XBR910 compared to the 34HS510 due to the smaller dotpitch. Its a tradeoff - in the stores the retailers always think people compare the brightness of the sets in the store and pick the brightest one.

 

[Jet Champion]

Thumperboy: is there any truth to the rumor that you're a secret emissary sent by the plasma forum to convert direct-view lovers to plasma?

 

[Orta]

Who needs converting, CRT's are an absolute pain what with their hulking weights, room dominating depths, and numerous problems. If the high quality plasmas weren't still going for eight, fifth-teen, and thirty thousand dollars, I certainly wouldn't be breaking my back trying to man handle a 200lb display that's unable to display a straight line or accurately draw a white grid over a black background.

 

[ThumperBoy]

I am a big 34" widescreen direct-view owner, but I know that the new plasma displays are superior and hope to afford one myself one day. I am not looking forward to an even larger,heavier CRT direct-view! You should be asking for lower prices on plasma displays Jet, not bigger bulkier CRTs, they are the past!

 

[Ratman]

IMO... I'll stick with direct view CRT's until plasma, sed, dlp ro whatver can produce a good bright picture from any viewing angle and can provide the resolutions expected for HD at a price that is affordable!


I go for the picture quality over the size and weight.

 

[ThumperBoy]

50" HD plasmas already meet your criteria.

 

[senator_k]

I don't think 50" HD plasmas meet the criteria "affordable" for most of us!

 

[Jet Champion]

Plasma TVs still don't offer the durability of CRT--as to weight--do you consider that a factor when you buy an SUV or a house? Plasma owners generally have heavier vehicles and heavier residences and usually can afford to shop where they can get home delivery--they sit on furniture that is rarely if ever moved and weighs much more than CRTs. Some plasma owners actually weigh MORE than CRTs! Some CRT direct-view sets actually come with an ingenious invention called the WHEEL making it easier for them to be moved about. Now I know that one of the TALKING POINTS in trying to SELL plasma displays is lighter weight, but please give me a break! It never has been a deal breaker. Sometimes wide ties and large cars have been fashionable and other times skinny ties and small cars have been fashionable--but lets' call a spade a spade and say once and for all that lighter weight is a fashionable attribute of plasmas that while sometimes might have a utility it isn't the end all and be all of displays! Despite claims to the contrary take a CRT direct-view set and a plasma display--turn them on and run them non stop until one of them reaches half brightness and I GURANTEE you it will be the plasma. The FACT that plasmas are expensive is a given! Now one day plasma will come down in price and will be more durable and will be a display for many to gladly choose--but it's not there yet for everyone though I certainly don't begrudge any from choosing it if it meets their needs.

 

[theanimala]

FYI, nearly every RPTV and plasma are in the same boat. They too do not sow the full resolution. Let's keep things fair here.

 

[Ratman]

RPTV's are about the only HDTV's that are capable of provide full HD (or better) resolution (with 9" CRTs).

 

[Jet Champion]

I am being fair--one of the things that plasma supporters always tout as being better than direct-view is resolution. No plasma display can beat the Sony XBR 910 and they're roughly equal to a Mitsubishi 73713 with 9-inch guns. Most of the lower priced plasmas are EDTV plasmas and yes alot of CRT direct-views can match them resolution wise. The only plasmas that can match direct-view CRT when it comes to black level are theFfutitsus and the Panasonics and they cost much more than direct-views and the other plasma displays can't match direct-view black levels. NO rear projection LCD displays come anywhere close to direct-view CRTs and they all exhibit much more screen door effect. I'm not bashing plasma. The Fujitsu and Panasonic HDTV models are FANTASTIC! I'm just saying they're not the MEDIUM plasma displays and until rear projection LCD improves in quality or plasma comes down in price, manufacturers could make alot of money by producing a widescreen larger than 34-inches--the last time I checked Loewe makes a 38-inch one that does fit through doors so it isn't impossible! What's POSSIBLE is the industry getting rid of Direct-View CRT and selling the gray horror world of rear projecion LCD! If that happens I would urge direct-view owners to do anything they could to afford a high priced(relatively) plasma. Join the Crusade for more and bigger widescreen Direct-View CRTs!!!

 

[senator_k]

Hey, this is slightly off-topic, but what do three-gun CRT projectors (front or rear) use instead of a shadow-mask? What is the highest horizontal resolution of the best projectors out there (of any price)?

 

[kharvel]

Rather than a plasma, I prefer a 42" LCD flat panel display.


I'll dump my direct-view Monivision for the 42" LCD when it comes down to between $1500 and $1700. Thanks.

 

[Jet Champion]

I'd agree that 1500 to 1700 flat panel LCD would be great. Guess what? It isn't going to happen any time soon. That's why I'll say til the day I die that larger widescreen CRT of 38-inches like the Loewe would be a perfect money maker for the Video display industry until flat panel LCD, plasma, or DLP drop to that level in price. I will say one thing though...if Intel isn't blowing smoke and if they can bring a set to market at $1800 then you can write off all my comments! I just don't think that will happen for awhile because even though production us starting to ramp up DEMAND is rising astronomically!

 

[ThumperBoy]

I told you before Jet, higher resolution without great geometry and convergence isn't as good as the plasma's perfect geometry and convergence. The plasma's total image quality blows direct-views away plus a larger image with smaller depth and a lot less weight.