24" Widescreen CRT (FW900) From Ebay arrived,Comments.

Is there a shop in your area that services CRTs? If so, it may be a worthwhile endeavor. Sounds like it might be one of those issues where when you power it on, it turns off after a second, and you need to turn it on multiple times in order to make it stay on. There have definitely been reports of that happening with CRTs, but I can't recall what the diagnosis is. You might have some luck searching through this thread. I think it might be a faulty flyback transformer.
 
spacediver said:
Is there a shop in your area that services CRTs? If so, it may be a worthwhile endeavor. Sounds like it might be one of those issues where when you power it on, it turns off after a second, and you need to turn it on multiple times in order to make it stay on. There have definitely been reports of that happening with CRTs, but I can't recall what the diagnosis is. You might have some luck searching through this thread. I think it might be a faulty flyback transformer.
Click to expand...

Yep, he has worked on my Viewsonic p225f a couple times and doesn't sound too expensive.
Just making sure that i'm not to end up paying $500 after repairs.
 
My advice would be to ask the seller to describe the symptoms in as much detail as possible, and then speak to the repair guy and see if he thinks he's up for the challenge.
 
also, keep us updated :)

And what city do you live in? I'm sure others would like to know as it's very hard to find competent CRT techs these days!
 
wow, that's actually only a 3.5 hour drive from Toronto. This may be the motivation I need to actually get a driver's license.
 
spacediver said:
wow, that's actually only a 3.5 hour drive from Toronto. This may be the motivation I need to actually get a driver's license.
Click to expand...

hes not bad on pricing either and I asked the seller about what is wrong with it in detail and this is what he said
"1. The monitor will only power on for a few seconds before shutting off. In the past I used to be able to remedy this by turning the monitor on multiple times in a row until it was warmed up, but I do not think this is possible any longer. If it was, I would probably still be using it myself.
2. Even when I was able to get the monitor to stay on, there were issues where the screen would intermittently (every 10-30 minutes) flash either green or blue. This was a bit annoying, but I was able to ignore it for the monitor's good qualities."
 
antisphere said:
hes not bad on pricing either and I asked the seller about what is wrong with it in detail and this is what he said
"1. The monitor will only power on for a few seconds before shutting off. In the past I used to be able to remedy this by turning the monitor on multiple times in a row until it was warmed up, but I do not think this is possible any longer. If it was, I would probably still be using it myself.
2. Even when I was able to get the monitor to stay on, there were issues where the screen would intermittently (every 10-30 minutes) flash either green or blue. This was a bit annoying, but I was able to ignore it for the monitor's good qualities."
Click to expand...

Yeah, even if it was for free, I wouldn't get this monitor. It's probably shot. But hey - you're more than welcome to give it a shot though. And if you can get it working, more power to you I guess. :)
 
if it's an addressable short, then you may be in luck. Sometimes a well placed tap can remove the culprit flakes. And there's always CRT rejuvenation.
 
So, I upgraded to the GTX760 and some of my refresh rates have disappeared. I used to do 1280X800 @ 85 hz (the only option available). Now it only does 75 hz. Looking around I found this
Myramond said:
Somewhere here many links were posted to the Monitor drivers but to find them often need a lot of time since this thread is so HUGE ^^

So i uploaded it new on Mediafire, heres the link:
http://www.mediafire.com/?lsz7alvnubecjf9

This is the modded FW900 driver to work with 64 bit Windows.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And here also the Original 32 bit Driver from Sony:
http://www.mediafire.com/?8gf68npc0vsz1hb

You need 7zip or another program that can extract .7z files. If you dont have one than download 7zip for free here: http://www.7-zip.org/

When the drivers are installed than you can also use 2304x1440 @ 80Hz over BNC cable.
Click to expand...

but the links don't work anymore. Is there an active download for these?
 
Thank you. I got my refresh rate back. :D I'm just now seeing the effects from that inf file I found here also. Should've restarted my PC first.

Can you upload those drivers? I'd like to have them handy in case I need them later.
 
Ashratt, have you come across a problem where some resolutions aren't rendered natively, but are upscaled? A couple times I've picked a low resolution, like sub 1600x1200, and it would upscale to something like 1920x1440 and look very ugly.

Doesn't happen every time though... pretty strange. I have a 7850 by the way.

I can vouch for CRU though, it has solved most of my problems, including games that are desigined for 60hz but would always try launch at 85 with my monitor.
 
yes i actually had, i selected something like 1600x1024 but the osd said 2304x1440 and it looked blurry. I think it is related to the refresh rate connected with the resolution. If you select a different refresh rate (it always defaultet to the 80hz from 2304x1440 altough it could go higher) in windows it should switch the resolution.
 
There's no such thing as a native resolution or upscaling on a CRT. It probably defaulted to another mode as it could not sync with the timing parameters you fed it.

This is why you probably shouldn't use non-standard resolutions such as 1600x1024, or 1920x1440. I've no idea why someone would want to do this.
 
it defaulted to 2304x1440 for me because windows decided it was the recommended resolution and 1600x1024 is a standard resolution (and it happened with 1920x1200 too)
 
spacediver said:
There's no such thing as a native resolution or upscaling on a CRT. It probably defaulted to another mode as it could not sync with the timing parameters you fed it.

This is why you probably shouldn't use non-standard resolutions such as 1600x1024, or 1920x1440. I've no idea why someone would want to do this.
Click to expand...

It could also be that Windows 7 and newer are internally tuned and developed for LCD's. If I were the posters, I would check to make sure their video drivers aren't set to up-scaling of ANY sort. BNC-5 connectors are awesome for this. Since they don't transmit the EDID, Windows won't look at the FW900 and think it's "native" resolution is 2304 x 1440.
 
Ashratt said:
it defaulted to 2304x1440 for me because windows decided it was the recommended resolution and 1600x1024 is a standard resolution
Click to expand...

Your video card is likely set to upscale. Disable all up-scaling. Whenever it sees a CRT's maximum resolution, Windows assumes it's native (and like spacediver said, CRT's have no native).
 
guys, just to be clear i have fixed it already ^^ (i only get 1 refresh rate per resolution, no gpu scaling and a bnc connection)
 
Thank you for the links. I'll see about hosting the drivers.

As far as upscaling goes, I see that when I'm not booted to windows (BIOS screen, Starting Windows screen, etc.). The monitor runs that at 2304X1440 @ 80 hz in those screens. I tested 1024X768 @60 hz in my screen properties, and the monitor runs at that resolution. I'd say it's the video card doing it.
 
For me, some games look better in 4:3 ratio. If the monitor is running 16:10, usually the window is stretched to fit. I don't like that, but I won't go to 1024X768. I usually do 1280X960.
 
Ashratt said:
I know and I think he does it just for testing purpose
(And it's actually 14:9 :p)
Click to expand...

When you use WinDAS to set up the alignment, it asks you to calibrate the size to 474x296 mm, even though the viewable area is 482.1 x 308.2 mm.

If you were to try to fill the viewable area (which is closer to 14:9) with a 16:10 resolution, you would not be rendering square pixels, and the picture would be distorted.

the new guy said:
For me, some games look better in 4:3 ratio. If the monitor is running 16:10, usually the window is stretched to fit. I don't like that, but I won't go to 1024X768. I usually do 1280X960.
Click to expand...

The only way to run a 4:3 aspect ratio without geometric distortion is to have letterboxes on the sides.

Your game is probably not reporting, or implementing, the correct resolution.
 
spacediver said:
When you use WinDAS to set up the alignment, it asks you to calibrate the size to 474x296 mm, even though the viewable area is 482.1 x 308.2 mm.
Click to expand...
I know, that's why I measured the area with a ruler (which is not easy with the glass in front) for the windas dyncv adjustment.
If you were to try to fill the viewable area (which is closer to 14:9) with a 16:10 resolution, you would not be rendering square pixels, and the picture would be distorted
Click to expand...
Again I know that's why I mainly use 1600x1024 and 2048x1313 ;)
I guess Sony had a hard time with the tube (varying aperture grill pitch) and that's why they didn't specify the outer areas as usable space? Vito probably knows something about that.
 
Last edited:
yea, I'm not sure why the viewable area doesn't match the prime mode aspect ratio (16:10).

I was wrong, the monitor does indeed support 1600x1024, my bad. It does recommend a 16:10 aspect ratio, however (though I don't see how running in 1600x1024 would cause any harm).
 
There's no benefit to running a 4:3 resolution on a 16:10 display, unless your application only supports 4:3.

In that case, you can do it, but you'll get letterboxing on the sides, or geometric distortion if you fill the screen.
 
1600 by 1024 at 100 Hz is my preference for an FW900. I wouldn't like using something else and having to letterbox...
 
I found a way to make WinDAS run under Windows 7 64-bit. :D
Turns out that ocx file needs to be registered somewhere else. Here is the command to type:
regsvr32 C:\Windows\SysWOW64\MSFLXGRD.OCX

Sorry if it's already mentioned somewhere else in this MASSIVE thread. I'm still reading through it.
 
yep, thanks for sharing this. It may have been mentioned on this thread before (not sure, but I know I saw it on a youtube video), but always good to keep things fresh here :)
 
My graphics card for some reason seems to go to a low resolution when waking the computer sometimes. Since the screen isn't sized to fit, I noticed this on the screen:

http://mojoimage.com/free-image-hosting-view-12.php?id=9916IMG_20140108_183412.jpg (sorry can't post pictures yet)

See where the bottom of the grey seems to cut off on that last line? It also twitches a bit. I've seen a Dell P1110 do the same thing. Is it anything to worry about?
 
If one were to buy a modern day production display as close and similar to the Sony GDM-FW900, which one would you recommend?
 
insoc123 said:
If one were to buy a modern day production display as close and similar to the Sony GDM-FW900, which one would you recommend?
Click to expand...

That's a tough one. I would say probably any of the top color-accurate displays that you can buy. Except that none of them hold a candle to the FW900 in terms of motion clarity and fluidity. Remember - this monitor retailed at $2500 when it hit the scene.

EDIT: It depends on what you're getting it for. Gaming? Eizo Forza FG-2421 probably, except it seems that they're having some issues (maybe?). Color matching? No clue. I guess anything that's revered for its accuracy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top