High Def Forum
Thank you for visiting. This is our website archive. Please visit our main website by clicking the logo above.

Need major helping picking a CRT and resolution issues..

EddieDZ
01-26-2006, 02:36 PM
Hi, my first post, finally after reading stuff on here for about a week..

Anyway let me get to my point, Im looking for a new TV that falls in the price range of around 1k and is no bigger then say 30"-34"(prefer 34"), i know the CRT's provide the best PQ and are inexpensive, i dont care about the heaviness and bulkiness. my only problems are:

-I never knew HDTV CRT's couldnt DISPLAY 720p?! yet they can display 1080i?!

-Can a HDTV CRT display 480p?! heck can a HDTV CRT display "progressive scanning" at all!?

Im looking for a TV maining for gaming, especially the nex-gen consoles like the PS3 and Xbox360, i know the Xbox360 outputs at 720p but with a CRT would the "upconvert" to 1080i look better?!?!??! but also for viewing digital cable and MAYBE upgrading to HD via my cable company in the future, im not in a crazy rush to get HD channels since there arent many at all that im interested in, my kids mostly watch Treehouse and i mostly watch G4techTV, I have lots of DVD's too though!?

I've narrowed my picks to the following HDTV CRT's:

Samsung Wide Slimfit 30" HDTV

Toshiba 30"/34" Diagonal Theaterwide HD Monitor FST Pure

Panasonic 34"/30" Diagonal Tau Series PureFlat HDTV Monitor

not sure about the model numbers since some like the slimfit has like 3 different models of the same kind...

I've read many things online from research for the past few months and read the Samsung having problems and the Toshiba having problems..havent found much on the panasonic though and i didnt mention Sony because they dont sell them around my area (Futureshop and The Source) but the Sony is and would be my first choose since i've only read POSITIVE things about it and not a single negative thing at all..

anyway onto another subject really quickly(which i think i will make a seperate thread about)...RESOLUTION..

Does 720p look better, same or worst then 1080i, for gaming?!

the only things i know about this are/is that 720p runs at 60fps and 1080i at 30fps....but the 1080i looks much more clear and crisp. what about 480p how good does that look?! is there a massive difference from seeing 720p and 480p and 1080i!?!?.. this is the only thing holding me back is this darn resolution issue lol, if 1080i is better looking then 720p then i will more then likely go with one of those CRT's, but if 720p IS WITHOUT A DOUBT better much better for gaming especially then i think i will have no choice but to look else where, maybe a plasma.

again i will also be watching digital cable and many DVD movies...

please help me!!

1080PsF
01-27-2006, 03:42 AM
Check out the Sony KD-34XBR960N

This is from thier site.

Twin View® Picture & Picture Using Multi-Image Driver (MID™-X), Twin View allows you to watch two programs side by side with the ability to zoom in on one picture and listen to the program in the selected window. You can watch pictures from two different sources (1080i, 720p, 480p, or 480i) simultaneously

http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?CategoryName=tv_hdtv_tube_34%22to36%22&ProductSKU=KD34XBR960N&TabName=feature&var2=

Porcupine
01-27-2006, 04:34 AM
1080PsF, links like that are garbage. They only tell you what a HDTV *can* do, not what it does well or how it does it, which is what concerns EddieDZ. He is asking the same questions I did when I first came to this forum. A lot of my questions are still unanswered so I'm particularly interested in this thread. I'll try to answer what I can.

> I never knew HDTV CRT's couldnt DISPLAY 720p?! yet they can display 1080i?!

It is equally hard to display 720p vs 1080i. They are competing display modes and essentially output the same amount of information per second. Neither is completely superior over the other. It turns out that due to difference in technology, it is easier for LCDs to display 720p than 1080i, and easier for tubes to display 1080i than 720p, and that is why things turn out this way. This is because LCDs are inherently progressive to begin with (interlacing makes nothing easier for them) but it is expensive to give them high resolution. Tubes can be given high resolution more cheaply but giving them higher-scan capability is expensive (1080i is the equivalent of 540p).

> Can a HDTV CRT display 480p?! heck can a HDTV CRT display "progressive scanning" at all!?

In theory there is not too much reason why tube TV's couldn't change their display mode and resolution, like a typical computer monitor. But none of them do (I think) and I'm not entirely sure why. Fortunately, 1080i is the exact same thing (sorta) as 540p, so when playing DVDs and regular TV, tube TVs just go down to 540p automatically without having to do anything fancy.

Now what I don't understand is how 480p becomes 540p. 60 lines of wastage is no joke. I would expect slight "black bars" to appear at the top and bottom of the screen in this mode, like slight letterboxing. But this never happens on any HDTV (I just bought mine). There could be 3 reasons for this I can think of: 1) The HDTV image is simply blown up slightly by default so that 60 lines of wastage would never be visible, this would be bad sorta 2) The HDTVs not only display at 540p (which is easy) but can also blow up their scanlines in an analog manner to get rid of the "black bars", this would be best 3) The HDTVs digitally up-convert and re-scale DVDs from 480p to 540p, this would be the worst

Which of those 3 options is the correct one? Anyone know?

> Im looking for a TV maining for gaming, especially the nex-gen consoles like the PS3 and Xbox360, i know the Xbox360 outputs at 720p but with a CRT would the "upconvert" to 1080i look better?!?!??!

You are like me. From what I've heard the XBox360 and PS3 can all support all the various output modes. But not all games will support each mode natively. But if they don't, the gaming machine and/or TV will be able to digitally re-scale the image so that it does. The problem is, you never want to digitally re-scale anything if you can avoid it because you lose quality. Supposedly the XBox360 primarily favors 720p mode, therefore if you want an XBox360 you should buy a LCD HDTV. Supposedly the PS3 favors the 1080i mode so you should buy tube HDTVs for it. I think LCDs are stupid for gaming due to the pixel recharge lags introduced, so tube HDTVs are no question for me.

CRT "upconverting" a 720p image to 1080i will definitely look worse, not better. True native 720p images vs true native 1080i images are about the same in overall quality, but incompatible formats.

> I have lots of DVD's too though!?

Me too. My tube HDTV is only for gaming and DVDs.

> Samsung Wide Slimfit 30" HDTV

Having just shopped for a HDTV myself the past month, in my opinion the Samsungs are garbage, especially the Slimfits. I'm not sure why this is but in the store when looking at them their inferiority could not be more obvious. The pic quality is horrible.

> Toshiba 30"/34" Diagonal Theaterwide HD Monitor FST Pure

Toshiba and Sonys were the best consumer tubes I think. I bought Toshiba 30". It's the ONLY compact HDTV monitor out there that doesn't have stupid speakers on the sides to waste floor space. Plus the image is the best quality rivaled only by Sony. Sony's HDTVs use "Trinitron" technology though which is different from all other normal tube HDTVs. Toshiba is the king of "normal" tube HDTVs I think (technology is called shadow mask).

> Panasonic 34"/30" Diagonal Tau Series PureFlat HDTV Monitor

These looked nice to me also. Reasonably slim design, next best to Toshiba, and slightly cheaper.

> I've read many things online from research for the past few months and read the Samsung having problems and the Toshiba having problems..

The only Toshiba problems people are mentioning is in regards to accepting certain particular digital cable company's HD signals. But if you are like me and don't have digital cable you won't care.

> But the Sony is and would be my first choose since i've only read POSITIVE things about it and not a single negative thing at all..

Here are two negatives. One they are HUMONGOUS and fat and ugly with the fat huge speakers on the sides. Two, "Trinitron" technologies have their drawbacks as well as their strengths....but I'll leave that to others who are more knowledgeable to go into the particulars...

> Does 720p look better, same or worst then 1080i, for gaming?!

Gaming or TV, the arguments are really the same. Both are about equally good IF the source material matches the TV mode.

> the only things i know about this are/is that 720p runs at 60fps and 1080i at 30fps....but the 1080i looks much more clear and crisp.

The 1080i will only look more clear and crisp on a non-moving image. If the image moves somewhat, you get equal resolution per field (1/60th of a second) on both 1080i and 720p. 1080i has more horizontal resolution than vertical resolution, per field.

To me the issue between 1080i and 720p is only a matter of whether or not you like interlacing. I hate interlacing, therefore I much prefer 720p. But I hate LCDs which have pixel recharge problems, so in the end I favor 1080i (but this is not due to liking the mode itself).

> again i will also be watching digital cable and many DVD movies...

Oh, uh, then if you buy Toshiba try making sure you figure out the issues it has with digital cable. People seem to be able to resolve it though after some difficulty, or never encounter it to begin with....

I think people send their Toshibas back too soon. If something goes wrong people blame the TV when often it is other things causing the problem.

pc-hdexplorer
01-27-2006, 08:24 AM
Where is it written that CRT HDTVs cant display 720P as 720P? I know ESPN (a 720P station) looks great on my CRT HDTV (Samsung 26" Dynaflat widescreen). If it had somehow been converted to an interlaced mode I doubt there'd be as much detail in the picture. I might be wrong but I doubt it :)

Once you get your new CRT HDTV home don't be dismayed if the picture looks gaudy and way too red out of the box. Mine did, but I was able to quickly and easily adjust the color, contrast and brightness settings to near perfection (or so it appears to my eye). Theres quite a bit of guidance on how to do this on the web. On my particular set, I wound up with Contrast: 46; Brightness: 55; Sharpness: 0; Color: 35; Tint: G52------R48

EddieDZ
01-27-2006, 03:25 PM
Wow thanks for that great informative reply Porcupine. Its funny cause the more i look/research more into this matter..the more lost i get.. at first i didnt know anything between anything, now i kinda understand more so i have been able to narrow my choices down.. NOW its the opposite and i seem to keep adding more choices to my options.. let me explain.

I know I do not want a projection TV nor a TV larger then 37" due to space and distance i will be sitting to the TV.. I never thought he LCD's where any good due to the fact that they cant display true blacks and i hate the way they look if you try to view them from an angle, the color gets all funky so i had narrowed it down to plasma and CRT's.. now that i've found out more(like CRT's not displaying 720p but rather upconverting it to 1080i) im second thinking about the LCD's cause i also just found out the LCD's have the most number of pixels and are not as expensive as the plasma 37"(which has less pixels) so the LCD's would and do display true 720p.

pc-hdexplorer, CRT's are incapable of displaying true 720p, they can recieve 720p singals but they upconvert it to 1080i...

so heres another thing i just learned.. 1080i is equal to 540p..which leads me to believe 540p is better then 480p correct?!?! it only makes sense.

yea i dont actually have an xbox360 nor will i ever get one, im waiting for the PS3 without a doubt, but i didnt know the ps3 favors 1080i as its native display output..i thought it was 1080p(which i dont know why sony would do that since there arent many 1080p HDTV out there and if they are they're very expensive) I seen an sharp Aquos 45" on futureshop flier with 1080p! for $6,500(canadian)

what does pixel recharge problem mean on LCD's? the only negatives i read about for LCD's are the lack it can display excellent black levels, not great viewing angles and they can become very pricey over 40"

godson
01-29-2006, 10:43 PM
I'm not sure if what my tv does is what your talking about but i recently bought an Insignia 30" crt-hd for my bedroom and it seems to switch modes at the change of channels...if i'm on INHD(1080i) it clearly says that on the display...if i'm on ESPNHD(720p),it also clearly states that on the display...it even takes a second to switch display modes when but it seems to in fact be doing that...only when I go to analog channels does it,what I believe, to be upconverting,to 480p,as per set on my cable box settings....I dunno for sure,my 1st crt-hd,so maybe not all whats going on...

pc-hdexplorer
01-30-2006, 07:17 AM
EddieDZ, I think you might be learnin some facts that ain't true :), especially 1080i being equal to 540P. Now that one I really question because at 1080i the display shows 540 lines one millisecond and then 540 Different lines the next millisecond. So your eye tends to see close to 1080 different lines because its too hard to distinguish separate images only a few milliseconds apart. :)

In the Sony 34" CRT the number of lines of resolution vertically is around 1400. Compare that to the 768 currently available on most LCDs.

EddieDZ
01-30-2006, 03:39 PM
well yea ok maybe its not exactly true 540p lol.but IT IS 540 lines which still is alittle better then only 480...

yea i read afew CRT's with "lines" of 800 and the sony CRT's being the ones with the most lines.. WHICH STILL!!!!! makes me think why the heck cant they display 720p if they have enough lines....makes no sense to me....i think i still rather favor the LCD abit more because of the fact they can truly display pure HD (720p) rather then scalling and re-scalling etc.. its all good i still got alot of time to think about between both LCD & CRT.. thx

Porcupine
01-30-2006, 04:02 PM
Yeah 540p is better than 480p but people don't really think of them as two separate modes. They are fairly similar numbers, it's just that some wise-ass out there who decides upon our conventions decided he wanted to use slightly different numbers for the newer technology products.

I don't know that much about plasmas but they are too expensive for me to even consider. Although they are much cheaper now than before. The cheap plasmas are low quality though like you said (less pixels, or other problems).

Actually what you heard about Sony doing 1080p might be correct. It is actually wise idea to compute invisibly at 1080p even if only 1080i is displayed and half your computations are wasted. This is for various computer/aliasing issues, not really TV issues.

Sony PS2 got a LOT of heat when it came out because it is the only current-generation console that computes natively in 480i. All other consoles (GameCube, XBox, even Dreamcast) computer natively in 480p. Therefore half their computations were wasted on a normal TV, but the result was a slightly less-pixelated, less-jaggedy look. It then becomes a matter of subjective opinion whether or not the game machine inventors think wasting twice your machine computational power is worth it just to get a slightly less-jaggedy look. It's not as if the GC, Xbox, and DC output twice as much information, most of their efforts are wasted. But still experience showed that indeed this method of "over-computation" was worth it even if it seems wasteful. If you recall the days when the PS2 was getting attacked for "jaggedy images"...this is the same issue.

Porcupine
01-30-2006, 04:07 PM
Actually, the 1400 lines of horizontal resolution on the Sony's has nothing to do with the 768 of LCDs.

For one, the 768 of LCDs refers to the vertical resolution...LCDs are technically 768p (not 720p, but again no one cares about such a small difference so people call it the same thing). LCDs are like 1360x768 or something (I forget the correct horizontla number).

CRTs are *supposed* to be 1920 x 1080 (interlaced though) but they are not in reality. CRTs have funny technology. The Sony's are good so they sort of have like 1400 x 1080 screen resolution. But actually it is sort of more because you have 3 little (red, green, blue) phosphors for each line. So in some cheesy sense it is 4200 x 1080 (although 1920 x 1080 is the limit of the information being sent). Also I think the phosphors can actually glow with varying intensity even within one phosphor so in a REALLY cheesy sense CRTs are Infinity x 1080 resolution. But that's REALLY cheesy. In reality CRTs are effectively I dunno, like probably 1000 x 1080 to 1920 x 1080 I guess (1400 lines might be enough to be considered reasonably like 1920).

Porcupine
01-30-2006, 04:09 PM
Pixel recharge refers to when people complain LCD screens are blurry or leave after-images when images move on them. They also take a while to display a new image when you try to. This delays your reaction time in videogames by like 1 frame or more, which sucks and I find unacceptable. Also if the image is all motion-blurred when something is moving in a game it makes it harder to see what's going on.

Newer LCDs have much faster recharge times but even the best still have recharge times of around 1 frame, which is unacceptable to me. I think CRTs have recharge times of 0 frames. They are instant, which LCDs will never achieve due to being a different technology.

EddieDZ
01-31-2006, 08:41 AM
i wonder why then LCD's are "ideal for gaming".... i wouldnt know, after seeing the Xbox360 on stand playing hooked up to a 23" samsung LCD HDTV i was blown away!!! the crystal clear crips image, the colors, the progressive scanning lol...it all blew me away, not once did i ever notice any delay or ghosting or whatever...it was very very smooth..MUCH smoother then my 27" standard 11yr TV lol..and i was playing a FPS call of duty 2... every time i pass by the mall i hop on over to Ebgames JUST to play that game and i gotta tell you, im loving that LCD HDTV more and more lol..

Porcupine
01-31-2006, 03:41 PM
Stupid people say that LCDs are ideal for gaming. :P They actually should be the WORST for gaming.

Good LCDs have quick pixel recharge times and if you did not notice motion-blurring that means you saw a good LCD. But even the best ones take 16 ms (1 frame) or so to recharge. To most people this is unnoticeable but to the trained eye this is still bad. Even if unnoticeable though, your reactions will still be slowed by that amount of time (1 frame) while playing a game because it simply takes that much extra time for the image to update (compared to a CRT). In theory, if you were really sharp you might even notice that the image is lagging behind your sound by 16 milliseconds, etc. Most people won't notice these things though.

But bad/cheap/old LCDs had AWFUL recharge times, I'm not even sure how bad. But almost everyone noticed. You should find the super junkiest LCD you can and check it out. :) Then, simply be aware that even though new/good LCDs seem to have gotten rid of that problem, in reality it is still there just reduced. Then it is your personal call whether you find that acceptable or not. To me even 0.1 ms lag is not acceptable.

I do agree though that LCDs have excellent image quality. I've always liked progressive scan and I personally prefer 720p over 1080i. If I could choose between a 720p CRT or a 1080i CRT (I can't though since 720p CRTs don't exist) I would choose the 720p one.

However, what is even more important is to choose the type of TV that matches the source. So for XBox360, Bill Gates decided he likes 720p so you should buy LCD. For PS3, Sony decided they like 1080i/p (supposedly) so it may be better to buy CRT (though LCD might be okay too, I think it is easier to convert 1080i to 720p than the other way around).

Porcupine
01-31-2006, 03:43 PM
I've also wondered why I rarely see "ghosting" on LCDs. I don't think ghosting is a problem specific to CRTs. I think good CRTs wouldn't ghost even a bit. Like, my CRT monitor doesn't ghost at all so it is good. My crappy 30" HDTV Toshiba ghosts fairly badly but ohwell....stupid Toshiba. I do find the ghosting acceptable though on that TV (it's not THAT bad).

Porcupine
01-31-2006, 03:44 PM
Oh, look at a super old farty regular GameBoy black and white. See how the image motion-blurs super bad? That's what is meant by pixel recharge time, I think.

EddieDZ
01-31-2006, 08:41 PM
thats why im favoring LCD's alittle bit more then CRT's...but if i get one it will be without a doubt a Sharp and they are running with less then 12ms response time(some are testing at 6-8ms!!) and to me that is unbelievable and totally unnoticable..i would understand 16ms being 1frame noticeable..but less then 12 c'mon now, u gotta admit thats pretty good(not CRT standards but good for LCD).

im telling ya the only thing still keeping me thinking of CRT's is the great inexpensive price! lol, the black levels i dont mind since i find on really good LCD's they look pretty good, but i mind afew things from CRT's.. the bulkiness, heaviness and fact that it doesnt display 720P, flickeriness, cant connect to a computer and none-perfect image geometry. lol

godson
02-01-2006, 01:12 AM
In the thread titled crt displaying 720p that guy rbnicki(spl) said that some specialized models,not sure what models fall under that catagory,will display 720p as a native resolution....but some models as in the Insignia 30 CRTHD will convert the signal to 1080i and the picture is excellant...perhaps look that thread over for some more insight

pc-hdexplorer
02-01-2006, 02:14 PM
Its 1400 lines Vertically, NOT horizontally on the Sony 34 inch CRT. There are no pixels per se in a CRT screen but the 1400 rows allow the Sony CRT to display much more detail, at least with a 1080i signal, than most current LCDs (typically 768 rows of pixels vertically)

Porcupine
02-03-2006, 08:05 PM
pc-hd no you are wrong. Actually the Sonys have INFINITE vertical "pixels"...since they use aperture grille technology and not shadow mask they don't even have pixels in the vertical direction, although of course they are still limited by the 1080 scanlines. The 1400 lines that people refer to ARE horizontal pixels/lines of resolution.

Porcupine
02-03-2006, 08:11 PM
12 ms sounds pretty good, and yeah I don't mind the black levels of LCDs either. But the tubes are half as expensive so that is a good reason. And yeah LCDs probably don't have annoying geometry and convergence problems like on tubes.

I think all this is partially because no one is making a "quality" tube these days though. Probably not even Sony is. A quality tube is something like a CRT monitor. They have invisible dot pitch, no convergence problems, no response time like LCDs, virtually no geometry problems, and can change display resolution at will.

I think the problem is that if someone made a 30" version of a computer monitor it would cost $3000 dollars and weigh 500 pounds (because it would be about 4 feet deep, if you scale up the size). I think if you make a tube deep that gets rid of all geometry problems. It would be perfect though. :D

RSawdey
02-04-2006, 03:30 PM
Here's the one & only widescreen progressive scan CRT monitor I know of... it's 34", $2000, 223 pounds. It's basically a multisync PC monitor.

http://www.digitalconnection.com/products/directview/dm7352sf.asp

1080PsF
02-04-2006, 04:00 PM
pc-hd no you are wrong. Actually the Sonys have INFINITE vertical "pixels"...since they use aperture grille technology and not shadow mask they don't even have pixels in the vertical direction, although of course they are still limited by the 1080 scanlines. The 1400 lines that people refer to ARE horizontal pixels/lines of resolution.

What do you mean by no pixels in the vertical direction? One scan line would equal one vertical pixel so a CRT monitor has 1080 vertical pixels that are visible and there are a total of 1125 scan lines/vertical pixels including vertical blanking. The 1400 lines of resolution that you are speaking of are you talking about the number of horizontal pixels or are you talking about the true lines of resolution that you would measure off a D.E.L. chart? The number horizontal pixels that are visible in a CRT would be 1920 but the total number of horizontal pixels including horizontal blanking in a 1080i/29.97 signal would be 2200 pixels. :o

Porcupine
02-04-2006, 05:54 PM
> What do you mean by no pixels in the vertical direction? One scan line would equal one vertical pixel so a CRT monitor has 1080 vertical pixels that are visible

Yeah any CRT monitor whether aperture grille or shadow mask based will technically have 1080 vertical pixels since that is their number of scanlines. What I was referring to was the fineness of the dot pitch on the shadow mask/aperture grille. Shadow masks "sort of" may have a more limited "true" vertical (as well as horizontal) resolution due to the size of the holes in the shadow mask. I'm not sure about the actual official terminology of these things, sorry. Aperture grille CRTs don't have holes, they only have vertical stripes so they really do have 1080 (or infinite, if there were more scanlines, which there aren't) resolution in the vertical direction.

> The 1400 lines of resolution that you are speaking of are you talking about the number of horizontal pixels or are you talking about the true lines of resolution that you would measure off a D.E.L. chart?

I think I am referring to what you call true lines of resolution. The actual number of horizontal pixels is always 1920 because that is what the HD format specifies.