So CRT really looks better than LCD?

LCD...better than a Sony Trinitron?

Someone clearly doesn't know, and doesn't bother to read articles providing facts about CRT's superiority. I would so use a Trinitron monitor and TV (We still use a 4:3 one in a bedroom and still has great picture) if I had the room for it, and I didn't sit in front of a computer all day long.

JuggaloRandall should be the one leaving it alone as he clearly is trying to make his errant opinion fact. The best CRT's were/are better than any LCD produced today in terms of picture quality. Saying they were only better for SD is nonsense. He also states he buys many cheap TV's which would obviously skew his opinion to whatever the quality he gets out of his cheap TV's.

JuggaloRandall should be the one leaving it alone as he clearly is trying to make his errant opinion fact. The best CRT's were/are better than any LCD produced today in terms of picture quality. Saying they were only better for SD is nonsense. He also states he buys many cheap TV's which would obviously skew his opinion to whatever the quality he gets out of his cheap TV's.

rastan

[QUOTE="rastan"]

JuggaloRandall should be the one leaving it alone as he clearly is trying to make his errant opinion fact. The best CRT's were/are better than any LCD produced today in terms of picture quality. Saying they were only better for SD is nonsense. He also states he buys many cheap TV's which would obviously skew his opinion to whatever the quality he gets out of his cheap TV's.

brown_flame

[QUOTE="rastan"]

JuggaloRandall should be the one leaving it alone as he clearly is trying to make his errant opinion fact. The best CRT's were/are better than any LCD produced today in terms of picture quality. Saying they were only better for SD is nonsense. He also states he buys many cheap TV's which would obviously skew his opinion to whatever the quality he gets out of his cheap TV's.

brown_flame

He stated opinions only. CRT's aren't in production cause majority rules. People will take smaller and lighter instead of quality now-a-days.

[QUOTE="brown_flame"][QUOTE="rastan"]

JuggaloRandall should be the one leaving it alone as he clearly is trying to make his errant opinion fact. The best CRT's were/are better than any LCD produced today in terms of picture quality. Saying they were only better for SD is nonsense. He also states he buys many cheap TV's which would obviously skew his opinion to whatever the quality he gets out of his cheap TV's.

ChubbyGuy40

He stated opinions only. CRT's aren't in production cause majority rules. People will take smaller and lighter instead of quality now-a-days.

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="brown_flame"] Jugallo stated the facts and experiance, i think they are valid points, and as for CRT or LCD either being superior, then how come the latter is in production and crt is biting the dust. im not for or against, i just stated a fact. :)brown_flame

He stated opinions only. CRT's aren't in production cause majority rules. People will take smaller and lighter instead of quality now-a-days.

Of course you couldn't find CRTs. I don't recall any CRT...TV, being advertised as 1080p with DVI or HDMI inputs. Multiple websites, Cnet being the obvious one since nvidiaAMD (Yeah thats right :P) already posted it, prove that CRTs have the best picture, especially in black levels. No ghosting, input lag, no "fixed" resolution, superior refresh rates, superior brightness, superior colors/contrast, and almost perfect blacks (if not perfect.)

It was the monitors that were regarded and known really. They would never mass produce huge TV versions of them because no one would be able to lift the damn thing! Size and weight killed the CRT. Not the supposed superior LCD, cause it isn't.

That said, it's been proven multiple times that CRT technology still provides the best picture. The closest thing we've seen to a top of the line CRT are the Pioneer Kuro Elites and Panasonic plasmas.

Mitsubishi's DLPs are no joke either. I find those more pleasing to look at than LCDs and LEDs. Also it's 3D abilties always get good remarks/reviews.

nvidiaAMD (Yeah thats right :P)ChubbyGuy40

:P

Everything about CRTs are superior to LCDs save for size, weight, energy efficiency, and long-term reliability of image quality.

The real issue is that you can no longer find high quality CRTs made.

[QUOTE="XaosII"]

Everything about CRTs are superior to LCDs save for size, weight, energy efficiency, and long-term reliability of image quality.

The real issue is that you can no longer find high quality CRTs made.

godzillavskong

[QUOTE="godzillavskong"][QUOTE="XaosII"]

Everything about CRTs are superior to LCDs save for size, weight, energy efficiency, and long-term reliability of image quality.

The real issue is that you can no longer find high quality CRTs made.

I've seen some good looking CRT's , but I'm not so sure they beat out LCDs and Plasmas. I haven't really seen any, or know that there are any that are HD capable. I remember the Sony Wega model, which was a tube television, but flat in the front. It had a really impressive picture. I think what doomed the CRTs is their size, and now everyone wants to mount their flat panel on the wall. Good luck mounting a CRT to your wall! lolgodzillavskong

I find it extremely hard to believe a CRT beats a plasma. I can't believe the richness in color of some plasmas. Also with CRT monitors they constantly gave me headaches so I am glad I am no longer using one.

DeViLzzz

iamdanthaman
"The TC expects to get better sound from his new LCD TV? not unless you buy a separate home theater system. My brother refuses to use the speakers on his TV for anything because they sound so bad."

Surely, an LCD TV has at least better sound than an average CRT! Clearer? More quality? More detailed? Sharper, like the picture?

[QUOTE="JuggaloRandall"][QUOTE="NVIDIATI"] An idiot for stating a fact backed with proof from a reputable source (Cnet)? :roll: If you want more proof there are loads of other reputable sources with the same information disproving burn in.

NVIDIATI

iamdanthaman
"The TC expects to get better sound from his new LCD TV? not unless you buy a separate home theater system. My brother refuses to use the speakers on his TV for anything because they sound so bad."

Surely, an LCD TV has at least better sound than an average CRT! Clearer? More quality? More detailed? Sharper, like the picture?

TheDarkSpot

[QUOTE="TheDarkSpot"]

iamdanthaman
"The TC expects to get better sound from his new LCD TV? not unless you buy a separate home theater system. My brother refuses to use the speakers on his TV for anything because they sound so bad."

Surely, an LCD TV has at least better sound than an average CRT! Clearer? More quality? More detailed? Sharper, like the picture?

iamdanthaman

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="JuggaloRandall"] Dude just leave it alone. I guarntee I have had way more TV's and monitors than you. I generally buy cheap tv's all the damn time. Your trying to be cool and act like you know your facts, but honestly your just spreading crap. CRT will never beat LCD's picture. The only thing CRT does better than LCD is show Standard Def. People like me STILL have a CRT and a LCD tv. I use them both for different things. Just admit it, your argument is not valid.JuggaloRandall

[QUOTE="JuggaloRandall"][QUOTE="NVIDIATI"] Okay so I'm spreading crap backed from reputable sources...Right. And you judge CRT from your experience which you just stated "I generally buy cheap tv's all the damn time." So basically you've never owned a proper CRT :| saying things like "the only thing CRT does better than LCD is show Standard Def" you know there are 16:9 CRT HDTVs too. Instead you jump in with no facts or anything and bash my credibility.

NVIDIATI

I have another question. I understand that getting an HDTV fixes the hard-to-read-small-letters problem that people experience on a normal CRT(at least I do).
But I have another problem. Whenever someone starts talking, I have to completely face the character who has opened their mouth to be able to hear properly. For example, in MASS EFFECT 2, when I'm running around and one of my teammates starts talking something, I can barely hear anything when he/she is VERY CLOSE behind me. Sometimes only thanks to the subtitles I can notice that someone's speaking. When they are standing at my side I can hear them only SLIGHTLY better. I have to completely face whoever is talking to be able to hear them at their original tone. Everything's fine during cutscenes. And this happens in every game.
Does HDTV fix this also? Or is it an unknown problem unlike the hard-to-read-small-letters problem?

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="JuggaloRandall"] Im gonna bash your credibility all day long because I know what is up. I have owned a HD CRT TV and it was the most terrible TV I had ever owned. Terrible over scan issues. After about 2 months that tv went out to the garage and sat. As for aspect ratios, I don't really give a damn. Your honestly crazy if you think CRT is superior over LCD. JuggaloRandall

I have another question. I understand that getting an HDTV fixes the hard-to-read-small-letters problem that people experience on a normal CRT(at least I do).
But I have another problem. Whenever someone starts talking, I have to completely face the character who has opened their mouth to be able to hear properly. For example, in MASS EFFECT 2, when I'm running around and one of my teammates starts talking something, I can barely hear anything when he/she is VERY CLOSE behind me. Sometimes only thanks to the subtitles I can notice that someone's speaking. When they are standing at my side I can hear them only SLIGHTLY better. I have to completely face whoever is talking to be able to hear them at their original tone. Everything's fine during cutscenes. And this happens in every game.
Does HDTV fix this also? Or is it an unknown problem unlike the hard-to-read-small-letters problem?

TheDarkSpot

You really have to watch something with a lot of motion on a HD CRT, plasma and LCD side by side to appreciate the difference.

I have no problem reading small text in Mass Effect 2 or any other game on my CRT HDTV.

And as far as your sound problem goes, either get a surround system, or make sure you have your Xbox set to output audio in stereo.

CRTs have distortion lines in the image, they look like gray waves. LCD does not. I prefer my LCD over my old CRT but CRT does have advantages like viewing angle and more accurate color reproduction. LCDs are improving and Plasma is a stop-gap solution until they refine LCDs more.

Hey I feel like bumping this thread :P since I like this discusion and can contribute to it.

I own a viewsonic professional series 17" CRT monitor it was top dog for it's time and I have the dell 2209WA which was also the top dog and is still as good as LCD monitors get in sub $500 category. Image quality wise it's not even a comparison the CRT wins even today despite being significantly older than the 2209WA. BUT I would much rather have 22 inches of widescreen goodness over 17 inches of 4:3 but that obviously doesnt mean LCD is superior tech, it's just that I wanted a bigger monitor and they didnt made CRT's anymore so I couldnt do anything about that. Anyways I'll copy paste some pros and cons of both of my monitors from another thread.

CRT:

Pros

- Incredible contrast and deep blacks

- Flexible resolution

- High refresh rates

- Perfect viewing angles

- No input lag

Cons

- Very stressful on the eyes. When viewing in the dark it gets almost impossible to watch without lowering the brightness to levels where it no longer has a superior contrast

- Reflective screen. Add the problem of using it in the dark and you could have some problem at hand

- Geometry and convergence issues

- Image sharpness is quite inferior

- Flicker can still be noticible to a keen eye on high refresh rates

- Loud speakers nearby can cause flickering that can sometimes take a long time to stop again

- Looks very ugly compared to other techs and is much more bulkier so you better not plan on moving around a CRT all that often

I have not included 4:3 as a con because there is a widescreen CRT so clearly it's not a limitation with the technology and this is not really a discussion of what one should buy in 2011 but more like what IS the better technology. I have also not included heat and power consumption because honestly they shouldnt be a factor to a power user. However I have now come to believe that looks matter in technology and that's why I included the last con, it's the least important but a con nonetheless.

Now onto IPS LCD:

Pros

- Incredible brightness and colours, the vividness of the colours is just supreme

- Image sharpness is the best in the industry

- Matte finish

- Digital connection ensures the picture fits the screen 100% perfectly

- The ability to run in either landscape or portrait mode

- Looks much sexier and is easy to carry around

Cons

- Really poor viewing angles when the screen is all dark, you can see the edges glowing which is just pathetic. I cant even keep a desktop background with dark ends as the glow really annoys. Because of this dynamic contrast preset becomes almost neccesary for games like doom 3 and metro 2033 but nevertheless the contrast still remains quite inferior

- Average blacks

- Native resolution

- 60Hz refresh rate

- Input lag however insignificant can still bother the purist

Now when we look at the first con of both, we can see that both have some major major problems and I really cant say which one is better. If only CRT's were easier on the eyes or IPS had uniform black levels throughout the screen we could have had a clearer winner.

Yes CRT will beat out a LCD. A CRT can have some very deep blacks allowing for an almost unlimited contrast ratio.

It goes like this CRT>Plasma>LCD (Some plasmas namely the new Panasonic VT20 and 25 come close,while plasmas such as the Pioneer Elite Kuro come into CRT level with near absolute blacks and almost perfect colour accuracy). Though when it comes down to it CRT is better than LCD.

Though CRTs obviously have limitations such as power consumption, weight and screen size. There is a reason Videophiles still like CRTs.

NVIDIATI

Hey I feel like bumping this thread :P since I like this discusion and can contribute to it.

I own a viewsonic professional series 17" CRT monitor it was top dog for it's time and I have the dell 2209WA which was also the top dog and is still as good as LCD monitors get in sub $500 category. Image quality wise it's not even a comparison the CRT wins even today despite being significantly older than the 2209WA. BUT I would much rather have 22 inches of widescreen goodness over 17 inches of 4:3 but that obviously doesnt mean LCD is superior tech, it's just that I wanted a bigger monitor and they didnt made CRT's anymore so I couldnt do anything about that. Anyways I'll copy paste some pros and cons of both of my monitors from another thread.

CRT:

Pros

- Incredible contrast and deep blacks

- Flexible resolution

- High refresh rates

- Perfect viewing angles

- No input lag

Cons

- Very stressful on the eyes. When viewing in the dark it gets almost impossible to watch without lowering the brightness to levels where it no longer has a superior contrast

- Reflective screen. Add the problem of using it in the dark and you could have some problem at hand

- Geometry and convergence issues

- Image sharpness is quite inferior

- Flicker can still be noticible to a keen eye on high refresh rates

- Loud speakers nearby can cause flickering that can sometimes take a long time to stop again

- Looks very ugly compared to other techs and is much more bulkier so you better not plan on moving around a CRT all that often

I have not included 4:3 as a con because there is a widescreen CRT so clearly it's not a limitation with the technology and this is not really a discussion of what one should buy in 2011 but more like what IS the better technology. I have also not included heat and power consumption because honestly they shouldnt be a factor to a power user. However I have now come to believe that looks matter in technology and that's why I included the last con, it's the least important but a con nonetheless.

Now onto IPS LCD:

Pros

- Incredible brightness and colours, the vividness of the colours is just supreme

- Image sharpness is the best in the industry

- Matte finish

- Digital connection ensures the picture fits the screen 100% perfectly

- The ability to run in either landscape or portrait mode

- Looks much sexier and is easy to carry around

Cons

- Really poor viewing angles when the screen is all dark, you can see the edges glowing which is just pathetic. I cant even keep a desktop background with dark ends as the glow really annoys. Because of this dynamic contrast preset becomes almost neccesary for games like doom 3 and metro 2033 but nevertheless the contrast still remains quite inferior

- Average blacks

- Native resolution

- 60Hz refresh rate

- Input lag however insignificant can still bother the purist

Now when we look at the first con of both, we can see that both have some major major problems and I really cant say which one is better. If only CRT's were easier on the eyes or IPS had uniform black levels throughout the screen we could have had a clearer winner.

Gambler_3

At least VA panels have comparable black levels.

Ya I know IPS blacks are bad but so is CRT on your eyes and it can significantly affect your enjoyment out of a display. And IPS panel beats CRT in image quality on a big bright picture with it's superior brightness. I am not saying IPS can compare overall to the picture of CRT because it cant but I am just saying CRT isnt the undisputed king as some people would think.

If you wanna get really nitpicky you can say that having curved edges and not fitting the screen 100% is a pretty major IQ shortcoming.

And VA panels have bad viewing angles which kinda makes them not suitable as an all round multimedia display. But whether they are inferior to IPS for gaming is something I am not sure. I will have to give them a try someday to see.

Just so you know CRTs use digital connections too so it isn't just a LCD thing. Vivid doesn't equal better. It can't match a CRT in colors still. A Sharp Quattron is really vivid but its picture is really crap.

I really want one of those Sony FW900s but I have no desk space for it :(

Though we have HD LCD's, I still prefer my 50" CRT for the 360...-GeordiLaForge-

Dear lawd people still have those projection CRTs?

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]Though we have HD LCD's, I still prefer my 50" CRT for the 360...ChubbyGuy40

Dear lawd people still have those projection CRTs?

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]Though we have HD LCD's, I still prefer my 50" CRT for the 360...-GeordiLaForge-

Dear lawd people still have those projection CRTs?

Pfft 3d is soooo a fad.

BRING ON VIRTUAL REALITY! /body is ready

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"][QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

Dear lawd people still have those projection CRTs?

ChubbyGuy40

Pfft 3d is soooo a fad.

BRING ON VIRTUAL REALITY! /body is ready

I think you're overrating an IPS ability to produce colours. I'd take a good plasma's (a la Kuro/VT30) colours of an IPS' anyday of the week. Same applies to CRT colours. The black levels on IPS panels are atrocious. We're talking 1.5 cd/m² for many of the the high end S-IPS etc.. That also leaves a really low contrast ratio (like 600:1 etc..) I would say OLED > CRT > Plasma > H-IPS > S-IPS = VA > TN

At least VA panels have comparable black levels.

Mozelleple112

My monitor has contrast of around 800 whereas the high end ultrasharp has around 1300.

And the blacks arent THAT bad now even on the entry level IPS like mine.

Seems like you need to check some good IPS monitor. As I said it's not the blacks themselves which are that bad on my monitor but the glow on the edges which ruins it and necessitates the use of dynamic contrast.

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="-GeordiLaForge-"]Though we have HD LCD's, I still prefer my 50" CRT for the 360...-GeordiLaForge-

Dear lawd people still have those projection CRTs?

This should clear things up:

http://oi53.tinypic.com/157eqab.jpg

Yup.

This should clear things up:

http://oi53.tinypic.com/157eqab.jpg

blakostructor

[QUOTE="blakostructor"]

This should clear things up:

http://oi53.tinypic.com/157eqab.jpg

Mozelleple112

This should clear things up:

http://oi53.tinypic.com/157eqab.jpg

blakostructor

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"][QUOTE="blakostructor"]

This should clear things up:

http://oi53.tinypic.com/157eqab.jpg

NVIDIATI

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="Mozelleple112"] Great pic. And with that being said OLED >> CRT > Plasma >>> LCD.Mozelleple112

Why did they leave the market anyway?Marka1700

Why did they leave the market anyway?Marka1700