Current state of the CRT display

But if you want CRT quality in a bigger screen check out the Pioneer Kuro plasma's

I hear that Pioneer is the best and Panasonic is also great... I just got a good deal on 50" Phillips plasma and the black level is disappointing.
 
I

I have had the pleasure of using the Dell 3007wfp and I must say that it "wow'ed" me. For graphics design, a 30" monitor is highly desirable. I very much preferred having all of my work on the one monitor versus my dual monitor setup. For gaming and movies, however, I found myself sitting further back from the monitor, effectively giving me the same effect as sitting closer to a smaller monitor.

I know what you mean, but you and everyone else seem to be overlooking the value of visible resolution, ie, you can see more because the image isn't as compressed via the small size of the display....DVD and HDTV nearly looked the same on my 19in CRT, not the case with the 26, BOTH look heaps better.

I'm thinking that for a PC monitor for the average user, a 27 1920x1200 is perfect....on the proviso you give a damn about a range of media.....I have heaps of hi-res photo's, a HDTV capture card, so along with games and DVD playback, I'm getting great value for money from a larger monitor.

If 30's come down to earth pricewise, then I'll definately get one in the future, but I wouldn't just have one 30, I'd also have another smaller LCD, as I think a 30 has it's advantages and disadvantages.

I also think that 8 bit 24's would be good as long as they don't suffer from any problems like ghosting.

Black levels are over-rated on small monitors, but very important on larger ones.
If people are viewing 24-27in LCD's in retail stores and aren't seeing good PQ, then something's wrong somewhere.

And remember, I'm not endorsing any old LCD, I'm talking about 2007-2008 8 bit panels.....I've been following the progress of HDTV/PC monitors for some time, and it's really only been 2007 that LCD got it's act together by and large.
 
you can see more because the image isn't as compressed via the small size of the display....

I sit about 1 and 1/2 feet to 2 feet away from a 20" viewable CRT at 1400x1050. At this distance, the display is not "small". I'm not missing out on detail because of size and resolution. A 24" widescreen LCD is really only a couple inches larger on each side due to the way widescreen area is measured versus 4:3. At this seating distance, I'd imagine that a 26" widescreen LCD would be about the maximum I could have before I just started sitting further away.

Most people sit much further away from their monitors than I do, however. This is the only reason why they desire such large monitors and TV's. It seems silly to me to buy a 50" TV and then set it on the other side of the room when you could get the exact same effect by sitting closer to a 30" TV.
 
I've been trying to find some cheap 21 inch crts on craigslist lately with no luck. I hope I find one soon, I think a crt would complement my lcd nicely. Crt for FPS and LCD for mmorpg and RTS.
 
The main problem with LCDs is black levels, they havent even come close to a CRT yet especially when you have them side by side (like I do now).

But if you want CRT quality in a bigger screen check out the Pioneer Kuro plasma's ..I just bought a 50" and, take it from a die-hard CRT fan, these plasmas absolutely rock and have by far the best non-crt black levels on the market.

while i wholeheartedly agree with you here i do have to say that the NEC lcd i have has the best black levels i've seen on any lcd to date, even @ 800:1 contrast ratio. use the spectraview software w/ a colormeter and its actually very close to the HP crt i have in my sig.

its actually quite impressive coming from a super picky black level snob like myself :D
 
I love my Dell (Sony) Trinitron. I have a 17" LCD for my secondary display but most of what I do is on the Trinitron (gaming, watching movies etc.). I don't see myself getting a large LCD unless my CRT craps out or I can get a good deal on a 30-incher. Until then I'm probably standing pat with what I have.
 
while i wholeheartedly agree with you here i do have to say that the NEC lcd i have has the best black levels i've seen on any lcd to date, even @ 800:1 contrast ratio. use the spectraview software w/ a colormeter and its actually very close to the HP crt i have in my sig.

its actually quite impressive coming from a super picky black level snob like myself :D

Eh I cant agree especially when you expose the NEC to a dark room (the way I like watching movies) its true black level capability is revealed here and it isnt anywhere near my FW900 CRT.

On the other hand my Kuro plasma has VERY close black levels to my XBR960 HDTV CRT (even in a dark room) which really surprised me.The Kuro is rated at a true 16,000:1 ratio which is a far cry from my NEC's 1600:1 ratio.

EDIT: Here's a pic I took awhile back with my FW900 CRT vs. NEC 20WMGX2 LCD, no lights where on in the room and I actually had the LCD's brightness set to 0! Im not trying to bash the NEC in fact it has far better black levels than my previous Dell 2001FP ..Im just saying its got a ways to go vs. a properly working CRT:

crt_left_lcd_right_blacktestrs.jpg
 
ive got a nice 19" crt i retired only because the screen is so scratched and such. is there anyway to polish the screen to a near new finish? if so ill bring back my crt
 
Which part of black levels are over-rated on small monitors don't people understand....:confused::eek::p.....good quality 720p and 1080i looks 3D like on my LCD.
 
The part where what you're suggesting doesn't make sense :D

For those who actually know something about HDTV and displays, it's common knowledge that as the screen increases in size, both the TV's specs and the signal strength need to follow.

Anyone can go and view a DVD on a 26in HDTV and come away very impressed, and that's because despite the TV's much lower specs compared to the 40in+, it's size helps hide any defects in the signal or the TV's ability.

My message is very simple, and is directed at the home multimedia user......get yourself a good quality 24-27in 8 bit panel and start enjoying it, and remember, even a 26 will make a 22-24in CRT look small because the CRT's display area is smaller than advertised, not to mention the advantage that widescreen content has on a widescreen display.

I'm not a professional PC user, so it's not for me to comment wrt that side of usage, but if you want to view hi-res photo's, HDTV, DVD and play games, you'll be on a winner.

I've been a member of this forum for a while, and have made numerous posts regarding HDTV and screen specs, and I'm vouching for my Acer 2616W....+ go into the DELL 27 thread and you'll also find high praise for that monster.

I repeat....despite CRT's superior black levels, my Acer destroys it because of superior size, brightness and VISIBLE RESOLUTION.
 
LCDs with local LED dimming backlights (different from just plain LED backlit displays) such as the 81 series Samsung display (TVs, not computer monitors) can display blacks as black as a CRT.

Pioneer also displayed newer than current Kuro plasmas at CES 2008 which have extremely high contrast dynamic (on/off) ratios, and of course much higher ANSI contrast than a CRT (ANSI contrast, also called simultaneous contrast, measures a checkerboard of black and white squares to see how much the large bright areas affect the black areas - a test CRTs are not good at.)

In other words high end contrast is coming to LCD tvs and will slowly trickle down to computer monitors. I'd say we're still ~3 years away from that though being available on affordable monitors, although I hope it comes sooner.
 
i still have an old 17'' CRT...i would upgrade to lcd but i just don't have the funds
 
I'd say we're still ~3 years away from that though being available on affordable monitors, although I hope it comes sooner.

But this sounds like you've rejected something of the size and quality of a DELL 27 just because it doesn't have CRT blacks.....but what I'm pointing out is that you could be enjoying an awesome experience via your PC monitor if you buy a good quality 8 bit panel, ideally 26-27.

As I said before, it would only take a few minutes to convince someone of the value of a good LCD, all they'd need do is see a few minutes of DVD/HDTV/games at 1920x1200{or even at 1680x1050}+ hi-res photo's.....but this idea that LCD's suck because they don't have CRT blacks is literally absurd, especially if we're refering to 2007-2008 8 bit panels.
 
Which part of black levels are over-rated on small monitors don't people understand....:confused::eek::p.....good quality 720p and 1080i looks 3D like on my LCD.

For those of us that actually care about PQ poor black levels wont cut it regardless of screen size..

In fact Ive never heard anyone even remotely attempt to claim poor black levels are Ok if its a smaller monitor.. I mean... Hello?

But hey if you're happy what with you got thats all that matters ;)
 
Well there's something very important to note here.
A good quality 8bit panel is NOT cheap at all.

A good quality 19"+ CRT monitor (grade A) cost less than 100$ used...and a high quality 21+ CRT about 200$ (if they are top shape) used but they are hard to find.

Until I win the lottery or 8bit panels drop below 300$ we'll talk.
 
I repeat....despite CRT's superior black levels, my Acer destroys it because of superior size, brightness and VISIBLE RESOLUTION.

My those are bold words. I just can't imagine your Acer destroying the Sony FW900 or even my Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070sb. Can you honestly say that the Acers image quality destroys the monitors listed above?
 

Hey, wait a minute...since so many of us here use inferior LCD screens, how can we see the difference you allegedly claim exists in your picture?

If there really is a picture.

Maybe you could just send us a printout. But not with one of those LCD printers. Use a real CRT printer. :D
 
You could try one of the glass polishing kits. But if the anit-glare coating is de-laminating or is heavily gouged, you're usually out of luck.

what would be the problem if the anti glare is totally gone? i mean in a totally dark room?
 
You are comparing a crap CRT you had to a rather expensive LCD you currently have. Get back to me when you've tried a 24" widescreen CRT monitor like the one I have. The resolution on that thing is still better than your 26" LCD. I only run my desktop at 1920x1200 at 98hz, but it goes higher than that. Last time I took this thing to a LAN party (which was Quakecon), I still had people envious of it.

Nice, 98hz. On a 2ms samsung 226BW, it's blury when I move my mouse, and the only reason I can think of it is because it's not a CRT.
 
Hey, wait a minute...since so many of us here use inferior LCD screens, how can we see the difference you allegedly claim exists in your picture?

Step one: Turn out the lights
Step two: Oh, wait.

The NEC 20wmgx2's dynamic contrast won't work on that screensaver since it has black AND white objects, so it is limited to its native...800:1? That's what 800:1 looks like with the lights out. LCD's are not suitable for dark rooms at all.
 
Hey, wait a minute...since so many of us here use inferior LCD screens, how can we see the difference you allegedly claim exists in your picture?

If there really is a picture.

Of course I also see a difference on my CRT & LCD when viewing the photo although the difference is more pronounced on the CRT, The point is when viewing both monitors *in person* the CRT clearly has much deeper black levels. If you did the same side by side test with a CRT & LCD you'd see what im talking about :)

The picture isnt edited other than being resized from my camera's original 3072x2304 resolution.

Not sure what you mean by "If there really is a picture" ..Im not here to bash LCD's, I own both so I'm just giving honest opinions from experience, Ive also tested for input lag and the LCD is around 30ms behind my CRT:

Lagtest-crt_left_lcd_on_the_right2.jpg


And one more for the heck of it:

fw900_20wmgx2.jpg
 

Metal polish (Brasso) and a soft cloth and a lot of elbow grease and you might be able to buff out some scratches if their not too deep. It'll also remove the anti glare coating so you might want to pick up a filter which would also hide any scratches.

hmm before you go descratching with polish... how about you pick up an anti glare filter (good one) and see if you can make out the scratches, I think that might actually work.
 
For those of us that actually care about PQ poor black levels wont cut it regardless of screen size..

In fact Ive never heard anyone even remotely attempt to claim poor black levels are Ok if its a smaller monitor.. I mean... Hello?

;)

You can call it poor black levels till the cow comes home, me, I'm loving the PQ despite the spec sheet.
I'm pointing out that there are a lot of people on this forum and other forums who've adopted the mentality that only when a screen meets or exceeds CRT's specs, will they be happy......well whilst you're waiting, me and others are enjoying superior performance for the reasons I've repeatedly mentioned.

There are some people who're unhappy with the black level performance of 70in SXRD Sony....so it must be pointed out that some people have self appointed themselves as videophiles, but others want an upgrade from old, small, bulky, dull CRT.

I could tell that my old PC CRT was getting dull,even my CRT TV was much brighter, but my LCD slams them both with brightness, sharpness, natural viewing angles and the ability to take advantage of higher resolution by virtue of it's extra size.
 
My those are bold words. I just can't imagine your Acer destroying the Sony FW900 or even my Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 2070sb. Can you honestly say that the Acers image quality destroys the monitors listed above?

Never seen the Sony, but my Acer destroys any small monitor, LCD or CRT....why...because of it's size, ie, the visible res/detail improves and it makes quite a difference.
I'm currently watching "So you think you can dance Australia" on TEN HD and loving it:)

Another thing.....regardless of the superiority of the CRT blacks, most if not all old CRT's will have lost brightness, not to mention that after a while you forget what CRT looked like, IOW, perceived PQ is what you focus on, and as I've said, my Acer{and I assume DELL27/Samsung 27} kick ass in every area except black levels.....+I can't notice any ghosting on mine{played Far Cry, Q4, Timeshift etc}.

When I was thinking about buying a large LCD, I was reading the large DELL27 thread....I saw some photo's of what "photo's" looked like on the DELL and thought, nahh, it can't look that good, but it does.....so I've just finished downloading 800 1920x1200 wallpapers:D
 
Payed $200 for an FW-900 about 5 years ago and it was the best money i have every spent on any computer peripheral. Still going strong, absolutely beautiful image. It also doubles as a wonderful monitor for my 360. People say you get used to using an LCD after a couple weeks. I game on my brother in law's 21" samsung LCD sometimes and can't see myself ever getting used to it.
 
For any work that relies on colour a decent quality CRT will still exceed the quality of a decent LCD. I am very happy with my 30" WFP-HC and it's by far the best LCD i've ever used.

However my old Iiyama 19" 2048x1536 @ 75hz has better colour reproduction, better blacks, a smaller dot pitch and no backlight bleed. However it is losing it's brightness which is a shame.
 
You really claim you can't make out the TFT on the right and the CRT on the left?
No. I can see it on both my CRT and LCDs. Apparently no one can see the humor, tho. Jeeez. Lighten up people! Except, LCD users, you've already gone too far.
 

If the anti-glare coating is too far gone to save you can remove it altogether. It usually involves removing the case/bezel then peeling the film off. It is often just a piece of thin plastic film. You will have to adjust the color and brightness of the monitor afterward. And, well, glare could become a problem depending on the lighting in the room.
 
You can call it poor black levels till the cow comes home, me, I'm loving the PQ despite the spec sheet.
I'm pointing out that there are a lot of people on this forum and other forums who've adopted the mentality that only when a screen meets or exceeds CRT's specs, will they be happy......well whilst you're waiting, me and others are enjoying superior performance for the reasons I've repeatedly mentioned.

There are some people who're unhappy with the black level performance of 70in SXRD Sony....so it must be pointed out that some people have self appointed themselves as videophiles, but others want an upgrade from old, small, bulky, dull CRT.

I could tell that my old PC CRT was getting dull,even my CRT TV was much brighter, but my LCD slams them both with brightness, sharpness, natural viewing angles and the ability to take advantage of higher resolution by virtue of it's extra size.

I don't think you truly understand the virtues of a CRT. I was a diehard CRT user, but had to switch over to LCD about 4 years ago, and, honestly, am satisfied with the experience my LCDs provide me with. But to claim that an LCD is superior to a CRT for the reasons you mentioned? Nonsense. The only thing that an LCD is better than a CRT for is for the larger sizes that the manufacturers make them in, viewing text, and size in terms of weight. That's about it.

Wanna put it to the test? Try playing dark moody games like Thief and Doom 3 on an LCD, then try it on a CRT. Bottom line is that LCDs simply can't handle dark immersive environments without you seeing some type of backlight bleeding/contrast/uniformity issues. Not to mention that you'll have to deal with lag, ghosting, or anything else of the sort.

And yes. Until LCD manufacturers are able to come up with an LCD that does what CRTs do, we won't be happy; actually, correct that, we CAN'T be happy. And it's not that we are not "satisfied". We merely have to put up with what we've been given until that happens. You can go ahead and enjoy your subpar experience on your LCDs/plasmas, but that still won't change the fact that for a gamer/graphics professional, an LCD can't touch a CRT.

Personally, I'm moving to a new room soon. I'm going to get another video card. So then, I'll run 4 monitors. Here's what I'll be running:

1. Viewsonic VP201b for internet/graphics work/everything in general.
2. Viewsonic VX922 for photos and sometimes games.
3. Gateway Sony Trinitron 19" CRT for competitive/dark moody gaming.
4. Overhead Sharp projector for movies/presentations.

Voila. Best of everything dudes!!!
 
Why are CRT and DLP fans constantly bugging us about blacks? Blacks are probably least important for what I do with a computer monitor.

Why are CRT people always talking about blur. Here's an experiment. Place your hand in front of your field of vision. Look straight. Now move your hand back and forth while still looking straight forward. Does your hand blur or not? If it doesn't, you are Clark Kent.
 
Why are CRT and DLP fans constantly bugging us about blacks? Blacks are probably least important for what I do with a computer monitor.

Why are CRT people always talking about blur. Here's an experiment. Place your hand in front of your field of vision. Look straight. Now move your hand back and forth while still looking straight forward. Does your hand blur or not? If it doesn't, you are Clark Kent.

Well then sir, you don't work with graphics, do you? Or maybe you actually like the muddy grays for blacks? It's not all about black point. It's about color reproduction. LCDs are limited in color reproduction compared to a CRT, PERIOD. The only LCDs that come close are SIPS based LCDs.

I take it you don't play competitive gaming do you? If you did, you'd know blur unnecessarily introduced by inferior LCD technology. The same image that is almost static on a CRT blurs on an LCD. Is that the fault of the CRT? Didn't think so. I've actually played UT2004 with some guys back in the day, and in some instances, they'd be already dead BEFORE they even saw me, because of the lag/blur/ghosting introduced by their LCDs. Granted, LCDs have come a long way, but they still can't match a CRT in terms of overall response.
 
Yep the bottom line is that EVERYTHING will work good and look good on a CRT, the same cannot be said for an LCD regardless of how large the screen is.
 
Yep the bottom line is that EVERYTHING will work good and look good on a CRT, the same cannot be said for an LCD regardless of how large the screen is.

I can't gauge whether or not you're being sarcastic. Smileys may help in this case.

If you are not:

I fail to see how screen size equates to something looking good. :rolleyes: This screams of "BIGGAR = BETTAR!!!" mentality.

LCDs can be made to look good. So can CRTs. But in the vast scheme of things, LCDs cannot equal their bulky display counterparts in certain aspects. They very well may come close, but, so far, have been unable to equal them.
 
I've still got my 19" panasonic SL-95 from 1999. Has a bit of a buzz to it now, could probably go and get it recalibrated if I knew a place that still does that... Next to it is my 21" Gateway LCD widescreen... Blacks look ... black on the crt... they don't on the LCD. Deep grey, yes but never a true black. Still, for the space it takes up on the desk and the size an LCD display can reach it's worth letting go of the old...

And yet, I still keep my CRT. :D Guess it's nostalgic.
 
Back
Top