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

You're right it does. I'm glad you pointed that out. Hey Ryle, where were the dings on the one you returned? Could you describe them to me? We bought from the same guy, I'm wondering if I ended up with it.

I think this thing has a geometry problem. I can't adjust the top right corner properly. All other corners and sides are straight to the edges of the case, but I got a slant on the top right side. There's no geometry adjust for a single corner either.
 
I'm afraid that kind of asymmetry has pretty much been par for the course in my experience. I adjust the geometry controls to try and split the difference between the corners the best that I can...
 
RumblePen said:
You're right it does. I'm glad you pointed that out. Hey Ryle, where were the dings on the one you returned? Could you describe them to me? We bought from the same guy, I'm wondering if I ended up with it.

I think this thing has a geometry problem. I can't adjust the top right corner properly. All other corners and sides are straight to the edges of the case, but I got a slant on the top right side. There's no geometry adjust for a single corner either.
Click to expand...
i actually took a picture of it before i sent it back. i doubt u got mine, you would be very upset, they were big dings. i dont remember it having geometry issues, though the corners were bit fuzzy.

Thankfully my replacement is perfect in all ways. just hope it lasts many many years! hehe
 
Now I'm really confused about my monitor. I left it unplugged for about 12 hours and then started just beating the sides of it and plugged it the power back in and it worked. So I unplugged it and went to plug my computer in and turn it on and it doesn't work again. I then unplug the vga to it once more and try just the monitor itself and now I'm back to the screen not powering on. Maybe something is just loose on the inside or it has something to do with me keeping it unplugged for a while.
 
Jesus! my back hurts just looking at the pics...I remember the tremendous weight of my Sony 27" tv that I used to have. My back and my 66lb 42" plasma bow to the greatness of the PQ you get on that thing however. I still haven't seen any lcd (or plasma) that can match a really good crt for overall picture quality.
 
joemama said:
Jesus! my back hurts just looking at the pics...I remember the tremendous weight of my Sony 27" tv that I used to have. My back and my 66lb 42" plasma bow to the greatness of the PQ you get on that thing however. I still haven't seen any lcd (or plasma) that can match a really good crt for overall picture quality.
Click to expand...


Reading this comment really resonates for me, considering I think its a damn shame that monitor makers have all but abandoned CRTs before coming out with a technology in the same ballpark price with a picture just as good.

Now, in the next few years with high definition content requiring HDCP compatability, people will be forced to "upgrade" to inferior technologies, for higher cost, just to view it.
 
I have narrowed my problem down even further but still do not know what to do. I left the monitor unplugged from power for >12 hours and then plugged only the power back in today and it turned right on. However, it only stayed on for about 5-10 seconds and then shut off. This sounds like it would be an easy fix for someone who knew what they were doing but I do not have any experience with this stuff :(. I'm guessing it's a problem with the power supply or capacitor of some sort, but I'm not sure.
 
To those that have windas running and want to dramatically increase the contrast on their FW900's i have discovered how to do it.

You need to edit a variable called C_MAX_B_MAX

I increased the value from 101 to 151 and i now have PLENTY of contrast. :)

There are some side effects to be aware of though. When you turn the contrast up high it will now cause a fair amount of blooming. Which isn't a problem while gaming or watching movies but it makes windows look like crap, so for general use you'll want to turn it way down.

Also right now when i turn my contrast above 80 i can see the edges of yellow/orange text/objects start to bleed red. So there is a point where too much is too much (which i have obviously gone past lol). You'll probably have to try several values in order to find the sweet spot. Just don't go any higher than i did.
 
I believe the general rule is higher contrast = shortened CRT lifespan , at least according to digital video essentials..the dvd also mentions "blooming" being very bad for a CRT which is why I never run any of my CRTs with maxed out contrast.
 
Yes that could very well be the case. So do it at your own risk. To me its worth it, i was always kinda ticked at how much better games and movies looked on my G520P with the picture effect modes that boost the contrast. Now i barely notice a difference between the two monitors.

You also have a G520P right? don't you think it looks better in some ways?
 
Deetox said:
Yes that could very well be the case. So do it at your own risk. To me its worth it, i was always kinda ticked at how much better games and movies looked on my G520P with the picture effect modes that boost the contrast. Now i barely notice a difference between the two monitors.

You also have a G520P right? don't you think it looks better in some ways?
Click to expand...

Yea the G520P does look great using the Dynamic brightness mode with gaming & movies although I have to turn the contrast level down a tad to prevent blooming, Actually It seems Dynamic mode does a little more than just boost contrast levels, the gamma and color saturation also seem to get a slight boost. My FW900 already begins to bloom if I go above 95 contrast as it is (and is very bright) so im not sure if I'd get very good results boosting the max contrast.. but it may be worth a try sometime.
 
I switched to BNC today and ATI made it a real bitch. I installed the monitor driver from Sony. Tried the one that comes with XP again. Unistalled my ATI drivers. Installed the newest ones. Had to install the monitor drivers over again. And it still says "default monitor" in the Catalyst Control Center, even though the monitor is listed correctly in the Hardware manager. I had to disable the checkbox that says "Use EDID or driver defaults" and manually set the maximum res and refresh. But why doesn't this sumabitch ATI driver not recognize my monitor driver that's installed and listed in the hardware manager?

Also, do you think it's a good idea to run this thing at 1920x1200 at 85hz? I believe the monitor has no problem with this, but my 9700 Pro supposedly does. The max refresh at the res is listed at 75hz according to ATI support pages, but the driver will let me pick 85.

Oh yeah, I haven't fully retested my picture yet, but I can see right off the bat that my geometry problems are gone after switching to BNC. All four corners go right to the bezel now.

One more question. What should the vertical and horizontal sync be set to? Couldn't find it in the manual. My ATI drivers have it set to H- V+.
 
I got my BNC cable today, hooked it up but there is slight smear on the the right side of all desktop objects makeing it look bit blurry, could it be the cable? maybe bad one. or my monitor is just bad with BNC?. or install the monitor drivers.

kinda sucks, even though i dont play consoles rarely i would like to have my xbox hooked up. but with how it is id rather stick with VGA for comp.

T_T
 
Try moving the BNC cables around or take them out and reinsert, this may have an effect on the image quality.
 
kemist1117 said:
Try moving the BNC cables around or take them out and reinsert, this may have an effect on the image quality.
Click to expand...

This is true ..this blurring symptom happens every once in awhile on mine until I twist the BNC connections on the monitor, for me its always the Red cable thats causing the issue.
 
mathesar said:
This is true ..this blurring symptom happens every once in awhile on mine until I twist the BNC connections on the monitor, for me its always the Red cable thats causing the issue.
Click to expand...

Yea recently i fiddled with Windas and also adjusted focus and reinserted BNC cables. I'm not sure if the focus was off slightly; it was definitely close to being correct if it was off at all, but the focus has seemed better after. Also, using a vga cable on my 6800gt showed less blurring than my dvi-bnc cable showed, but it was also dimmer and color was slightly different (for normal use i have a rig with an x1900xt and use dvi-bnc, but that rig doesnt have a serial port so windas was used on the other rig and i tested both cables). So i dont really know what i did, but it does look a bit better. Also i found that my g2 setting in windas wasnt really off that much. It was at 149 and when i lowered it to 125 my display got super dim, even with brightness and contrast at 100, it was even really dim at 140 so i set it at 147 and that looked ok. My display was made in 2000 though so it could be that it has aged more than others. Also my display looks good after tweaking but thats with the RGB green and green drive set much lower than the red and blue, which i guess is common.

/rant off
 
I was going to get a Dell 2407fpw but that is way out of my price range right now, so I am thinking I may get this monitor instead, I'm just dont know where to get one in Australia though, if any aussies here know what I can get on for $500 or less please pm me or contact me on [email protected] , thanks.
 
Damn, if only someone in the Dallas area had one of these they didn't need...I'm not crazy about getting something like this shipped. I'd rather see it myself beforehand. (Running at "native" 1920x1200...fuuuuuck.)
 
Anybody in Pittsburgh want to buy the HP version of this monitor for $225? It's pick-up only. It is experiencing severe brightness problems, and I have 2 different WinDAS cables to fix it with, but I am too fucking blind and physically unable to plug them into the port, or it would be perfect.

I would have to say to anybody thinking of buying one, make sure you have perfect vision in both eyes, and skinny fingers as steady as a surgeon.

Outside of selling this monitor or throwing it in the garbage, I would pay anybody in the Pittsburgh area that knows how to install this cable and fix it $25 to do so.

I even tried taking the case off, unfortunately it seems to be designed so that once the case is put on in the factory, you have to break it apart to remove it.

Needless to say I am extremely irritated (and my fingers ache from trying to get the goddamned cable in) at this point. I wish I had the money to get one of those 24" 1600x1200 widescreen LCDs, even though I think those displays are still inferior, at least I wouldn't have to perform brain surgery on it!

I need help before fat fingers + half blindness + increasing frustration = defenestrated monitor.
 
i have this problem too
vga to vga
ati 9800
wont recognize above 1600x1200 in xp

please PLEASE please post the fix
 
I need help before fat fingers + half blindness + increasing frustration = defenestrated monitor.
Click to expand...

Props to anyone who uses the word "defenestrate" in an internet forum.

LMFAO.
 
b761 said:
i have this problem too
vga to vga
ati 9800
wont recognize above 1600x1200 in xp

please PLEASE please post the fix
Click to expand...

Weird that you are having this problem with VGA to VGA. Does it recognize that it is a FW900 (or whatever the HP one is) in the Catalyst drivers and the Windows Hardware manager? If it lists Default Monitor in the Hardware Manager click update driver, then the option that lets you choose from a list. Then scroll to the Sony FW900 driver. Then restart.

If you can't get the FW900 recognized in the Catalyst drivers, you could always uncheck the box that says "Use Extended Indentification Driver Information or Driver Defaults" under the monitor properties in the catalyst control center. And just set the max res and refresh rate there.
 
I had an geforce 4 ti-4200 ran fine. now 6800GT works great only problem I have is a little ghosting, the minute I move the monitor away from the desk and the pc problem goes away, I suspect it's either the coaxial cable running to the tv turner or one of the speaker cables. Man I need a more powerfull card so I can run higher resolutions sometime 1900x1600 in battlefield 2 doesen't cut it. I promised myself I would wait till direct x-10 cards come out, if it happens soon I'll pick up a new duo 2 processor and I'll be happy as a cat.
 
ellover009 said:
I had an geforce 4 ti-4200 ran fine. now 6800GT works great only problem I have is a little ghosting, the minute I move the monitor away from the desk and the pc problem goes away, I suspect it's either the coaxial cable running to the tv turner or one of the speaker cables. Man I need a more powerfull card so I can run higher resolutions sometime 1900x1600 in battlefield 2 doesen't cut it. I promised myself I would wait till direct x-10 cards come out, if it happens soon I'll pick up a new duo 2 processor and I'll be happy as a cat.
Click to expand...
1900x1600 is raelly high.. why not run games at 1600x1000? get a alot more performance.

and even then 1600x1000 on a single 6800gt playing BF2 is pretty demanding. like unplayable i would think, 64player servers atleast.
 
2 gigs of ram helps the load move smoother. future plans direc x-10 card, duo 2 processor, and would be happy with a new case, I got one of those antecs that looks like a battle ship, sturdy case, you can put your feet up on it, it's starting to age a bit, I seen a big lian li case that looks nice, this one is still good, just wish it was prettier and more ergonomical on the inside.
 
RumblePen said:
Isn't it kind of odd that that ap grill wires aren't evenly spaced? Bottom one is 2/3rds up from the bottom, top one is 1/3rd from the top.

Hey, does anyone have a link to some test patterns I can use to adjust my picture when connected to Xbox 360? For 720p.
Click to expand...
You do realize 2/3 from the bottom and 1/3 from the top are the same exact spot, right? :p
 
Anybody tried out 2458x1536 resolution with this monitor like I did? It can be done up to 72 Hz, maybe 74 Hz. Keep in mind that the max. horizontal refresh is always 121 KHz, so that gives you a rough idea of what you can set the vertical refresh for any resolution.

The reason why I thought that this monitor could support up to 2458x1536 (or 2456x1536 as Nvidia drivers report it as opposed to Powerstrip) is because it officially supports 2048x1536 at a 4:3 standard aspect -- the key word here being 1536 vertical pixels.

It looks LEET especially during the editing of my enormous digital pictures, but I am afraid that if I leave it like that for long, it could damage my FW900. I can notice a little disturbance in the screen refresh at 2304x1440 or higher, even though Sony officially supports this resolution up to 80 Hz! There is also a *very* slight movement of the text borders at 2048x1280@90Hz, but it is only noticeable when you look really really close at how the monitor is redrawing the image--it's like a desert mirage. I guess that's the side-effect of running it at the max. 121 KHz horizontal refresh.

What really SUCKS though is that the text and all *tiny* details become blurry whenever I set the refresh rate at say, 80 Hz or higher in any of the high resolutions like 1920x1200 or higher. My daily usage is 2048x1280 @ 90 Hz , but sometimes 85Hz without manually starting Powerstrip (since I do not want it to boot with Windows). 90 Hz is just a little more blurry than 85 Hz.

The recommended rez. is 1920x1200 @ 85 Hz, BUT... the text is so much sharper and more crisp at 60 Hz, which is below what Sony recommends. 60 Hz always provides unbelievably sharp text and picture for any CRT's out there! Wish it was the same with higher resolutions... :(

Will this problem be solved with higher-clocked RAMDAC's that some say should be running at least 25% to 40% faster than the monitor's internal clock? I think that this monitor video bandwidth can run up to 350 MHz, which is not too bad with current video cards' RAMDAC of 400 MHz -- which explains the better picture quality than with older video cards that only sported 350 MHz ramdac's like GF4, etc..

gotta go.. later hope to hear from you guys
 
Bo_Fox said:
Anybody tried out 2458x1536 resolution with this monitor like I did? It can be done up to 70 Hz, maybe 71 Hz. Keep in mind that the max. horizontal refresh is 121 KHz, so that gives you a rough idea of what you can set the vertical refresh for any resolution.

The reason why I thought that this monitor could support up to 2458x1536 (or 2456x1536 as Nvidia drivers report it as opposed to Powerstrip) is because it officially supports 2048x1536 at a 4:3 standard aspect -- the key word being 1536 vertical pixels.

It looks LEET, but I am afraid that if I leave it like that for long, it could damage my FW900. I can notice a little disturbance in the screen refresh at 2304x1440 or higher, even though Sony officially supports this resolution up to 80 Hz!

What really SUCKS though is that the text and all *tiny* details become blurry whenever I set the refresh rate at say, 80 Hz or higher in any of the high resolutions like 1920x1200 or higher. My daily usage is 2048x1280 @ 90 Hz , but 85Hz without manually starting Powerstrip (since I do not want it to boot with Windows). 90 Hz is just a little more blurry than 85 Hz.

The recommended rez. is 1920x1200 @ 85 Hz, BUT... the text is so much sharper and more crisp at 60 Hz -- below of what Sony recommends.

Will this problem be solved with higher-clocked RAMDAC's that some say should be running at least 25% to 40% faster than the monitor's internal clock? I think that this monitor video bandwidth can run up to 350 MHz, which is not too bad with current video cards' RAMDAC of 400 MHz -- which explains the better picture quality than with older video cards that only sported 350 MHz ramdac's like GF4, etc..

gotta go.. later hope to hear from you guys
Click to expand...
i know its all personal preference, but man 2458x1536 is HIGH. id either have to quint to see text or have my face 1' away from screen. i like to lay back in my char and still beable to read at 2-3' away. I use 1600x1000
 
Bo_Fox said:
A
The recommended rez. is 1920x1200 @ 85 Hz, BUT... the text is so much sharper and more crisp at 60 Hz, which is below what Sony recommends. 60 Hz always provides unbelievably sharp text and picture for any CRT's out there! Wish it was the same with higher resolutions... :(
Click to expand...

I use 1920x1200 @ 85hz as my normal rez for desktop and for most games. Only time I run a different rez is for games without WS support, or where the idea of WS support is stretchy-people-vision. For those games (Like BFME2) I stick with 1600x1200.
 
For the last week or so my monitor makes a pretty loud "Snap!" sound after about 30-45 minutes of being powered on ,it only does it once per day and the picture is unaffected when it happens, I just find it strange that it's been doing it every day now after 30-45min from a cold power up. The sound is like the "click" you here when changing resolutions but about 3 times louder, almost scared me the last time it happened lol , anyone elses monitor make any noises during warmup?
 
I just picked up my monitor that I bought from this seller
http://cgi.ebay.com/Sony-24-Trinitr...yZ116350QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
The great thing was, she had about 70 of these and let me pick out the best one of the lot. She also had many of the silver Sony branded ones. I have mine hooked up and everything
is perfect. Nothing blurry, no scratches in the anti glare, no chips and good color.

The only downside is she will not ship. She said she had too many insurance claims.
Paul
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
ribs1 said:
I just picked up my monitor that I bought from this seller
http://cgi.ebay.com/Sony-24-Trinitr...yZ116350QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
The great thing was, she had about 70 of these and let me pick out the best one of the lot. She also had many of the silver Sony branded ones. I have mine hooked up and everything
is perfect. Nothing blurry, no scratches in the anti glare, no chips and good color.

The only downside is she will not ship. She said she had too many insurance claims.
Paul
Click to expand...

She told me the same thing. I wish I'd have known she had some of the Sony ones. Did she want more for 'em?

She had one with a big scratch on the screen that she offered me for free. With baby and baby stuff in the car I didn't have room for it. They said it was a pain to get them to the dumpster.
 
As an eBay Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
She wanted $250 for the sony branded monitors. I wish she had offered me a scratched one for free. I probably could have fixed it somehow.
Paul
 
What the heck are you guys talking about?

Does my first comment warrant any intelligent responses?
 
Here's an update: I recently tried it again after switching video cards, and could not enable 2458x1536, even through Powerstrip. The monitor would just go blank and display a signal saying "Out of Range Timings" or something like that. For some intriguing reason, I thought I could recall using that resolution with my older AGP set-up and a 6800 Ultra AGP.

It was definitely possible with my ATI video cards. I used it often for editing my digital pictures, but now I have to resort to "only" 2304x1440 with my newly installed 6800 Ultra PCI-Express. It worked with the X800XT for sure, absolutely.

It's probably the Nvidia driver that completely prohibits this higher resolution. Do any of you have a 7800 or 7900 series GeForce that you could check to see if 2458x1536 (or 2456x1536 since it is usually calculated in multiples of 8) works on your GDM-FW900? I plan on upgrading to the 7xxx series soon anyway. The 7xxx series are promoted as supporting the new HD gaming resolution, up to 2560x1600--which should be the enabling factor, I guess.
 
:mad: Hmm, I guess you guys cannot post anything as intelligent as mine. Hahahahhaha... (evil laughter) :D I challenge you... to know your Sony GDM-FW900 just as well as I do mine!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top