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

CRT vs LCD/DLP?

docjackson1
04-01-2005, 08:57 PM
i have been looking for a hi-def tv, and i have been looking at tv's at all the usual places. correct me if i am wrong, but the picture of a crt hi-def set seems as good as a lcd or a dlp, and concerning programing that is filmed in low light, it seems even better than the lcd/dlp. am i wrong? if my observations are correct, and you have the room, why then not buy the much less expensive hi def crt?

dmar
04-02-2005, 07:20 AM
i have been looking for a hi-def tv, and i have been looking at tv's at all the usual places. correct me if i am wrong, but the picture of a crt hi-def set seems as good as a lcd or a dlp, and concerning programing that is filmed in low light, it seems even better than the lcd/dlp. am i wrong? if my observations are correct, and you have the room, why then not buy the much less expensive hi def crt?
your observations are correct as far as I am concerned. I have An RCA hd 56"
CRT and it performs exceptionally well. I have alot of light in my living room and the picture looks outstanding.

RSawdey
04-02-2005, 08:06 AM
Because the CRT is interlaced & burnable, while LCD is progressive & burn proof.

Spicy Mikey
04-02-2005, 08:43 AM
Hi DocJackson1,

I'm new to the HD research (and this forum) myself but I seem to be one step ahead of you so here's my experiences. Hope it helps you in your decision making;

My 8 year old Hitachi UltraVision 60" broke last month (great TV for it's time) and I was forced to get a new one. Being out of the TV market for 7 years there was lots to learn. I spent about 2 weeks doing research looking at the new CRT RPT's and all the new options that weren't available 7 years ago (Plasma, LCD, LCOS, DLP). They all seemed promising but they all had their own significant drawbacks. The drawbacks of each have been discussed in these forums extensively (which helped me very much during my research) so I won't restate them here.

I have a large home and a large family room. I already have a custom wall unit that has plenty of depth to accomodate another 25" deep CRTRPT -- depth was not an obstacle. We do gaming in the house (Xbox, etc) but we don't use it on the family room TV -- burn-in was not a realistic concern. For me and my family it came down to picture quality.

When I did the personal research and comparisons at my Sound Advice store the answer to the PQ question was obvious. A good high quality CRT configured properly is still the winner (by a nose in some cases but the winner none the less). Of course, the operative words here are "configured properly". Unlike SD, HD brings out the inherent flaw in an analog display such as a CRT RPT and they don't perform as well as pure digital TV's right out of the box. My salesman (and friend) at the local Sound Advice store here in Orlando stressed the importance of doing a full convergence and geometry adjustment after delivery for the TV to reach it's full potential.

In the end I ended up purchasing a Mitsubishi WS65813. It's a 65" CRT based RPTV with 9" guns. I'm a fairly technical guy so I got the Service Menu codes (Menu 0357 and Menu 0359) to do my own fine tuning adjustment of RGB convergence and geometry. It took a couple hours to do the adjustment but the results in the end were WOW. You can probably hire an ISF technician to do it for you for under $500.

Bottom Line; If your top priority is PQ then you should still seriously consider a CRT based TV at this time (RPT or Direct view). Just remember, get a good one that allows adequate tuning and DO the fine tuning after it's out of the box.

Hope my experience and thought process helps you decide. Good luck in your search

docjackson1
04-02-2005, 09:58 AM
yes, thank you mikey-after spending weeks at looking at lcd/dlp sets, that were twice the price of a crt set, and that seemed to have no better picture, and known flaws (lights that burn out, so so non hd picture) it seemed that if you have the room, the crt is the way to go. by the way, i also have an 8 yr old hitachi ultravision-great picture.

Spicy Mikey
04-02-2005, 10:27 AM
Good point about the "so so non-HD". That was another PQ issue for me when making my decision given the fact that 80% of what I watch is still SD. I think it should be an important factor for anyone who is lookng for an all purpose family room entertainment center.

I can tell you that my new Mits Ws65813 does an excellent job on the SD broadcasts. It's even better then my old pure analog Hitachi Ultravision. Be careful though. My gut tells me we cannot make a blanket statement that CRTs will do a better job at SD then DLPs, etc. I'm no expert at the inner workings of the different technologies (maybe someone else can shed some light) but I suspect the quality of SD programs on ANY HD set is more related to the quality of the upconversion algorithms and circuitry then the final display technology. My guess is manufacturers can affort to invest a bit more money in that area of the TV when making a CRT based unit since the technology costs are initially lower for the display system. In other words, maybe the DLP's, LCD's, and Plasmas do a crappy job on SD because their's less investment in that area by the manufacturer to help keep the price point down for the overall unit. In the case of my new Mits it was both. The upconversion was superior to what I saw on other TV's, plus it has three native display decoders (480i, 480p and 1080i). Best of both worlds.

Just do your homework. I saw that advice time and time again on this forum when I was doing my research. I took that advice and am glad I did. Deciding on a TV isn't rocket science but when you're making a long-term purchase you want to be sure you understand what works for YOUR situation and make the appropriate decision.

hibeta
04-02-2005, 10:04 PM
I also had a Hitachi Ultravision that went kaput early in 2004. I spent the better part of the year researching all the options and decided to wait.....until late in 2004 when Sony xs955 released (rp lcd). Naturally everyone will have an opinion, but the xs955 has a picture that is better than most other tv's i've seen and is quite a bit better than my Hitachi was. I do play videogames and was getting burn-in on my Hitachi, so the lcd will work better for me in that respect as well. Keep in mind that the picture that you see in the retail outlets can be improved once you have the set at home and adjust the settings.

iserum
04-03-2005, 12:16 AM
i have 55 inch SONY RP LCD, these new RP LCD are lot better than old models, I do not see any shadows issue with these tvs i have use the THX optimizers to do the settings and black levels are very good too. i would suggest people to go to the store and compare new LCD projections with DLP, personally i think LCD Projection has very good picture, when i went to the store i wanted to buy DLP but SONY 55 inch RP LCD has far better picture sitting next to SAMSUNG DLPs.

zeepackman
05-29-2005, 09:20 PM
Interlaced and burnable, interlaced and burnable, every time someone asks why not go CRT, someone always pops up with "interlaced and burnable!" The "i" in 1080i stands for interlaced, it's just as much an ATSC standard as the"p" is. I've had both, and unless you're up there examining every millimeter of the screen, the difference for the most part is virtually non-existent. Some networks' signals are native 720p, some 1080i, therefore either type of TV is going to have some converting to do at one point or another, but unless you've gone with the absolute bottom of the line set, they handle it quite well and the average Joe will not be up in arms over the difference. As far as burnable, sure, if you haven't done any research at all, or taken the time to read your set's manual, and you let CNN or ESPN with their tickers across the bottom sit on your screen 24/7, or pause a game while you go off to work all day, then you're going to have a problem. But it's made to sound like it's inevitable, when actually, it is easily preventable, and with the slightest care taken, you'll never see it occur. That said, the move is certainly away from CRT, the old boy's just don't present the manufacturer's with the type of profit that they used to when they were the newest thing on the block. They are too reliable, don't have a bunch of moving parts whizzing around inside, and you usually won't wake up some day and find it dead long before it's time. Of course the new ones aren't really dead, the little red light just indicates it's feeding time, a brand new fresh $200+ lamp will do the trick. Yeah, the CRT can also go down the tubes, but generally after a fairly long, productive life, and about the time you need to upgrade anyway. The day is coming that DLP and LCD and maybe by then even something we don't have yet, will be what we have for TV, the Circuit City's and Best Buy's will have a whole section just for replacement lamps, going there every year or so to bring the tube back to life will become a part of normal every day life, you'll probably keep a spare around and they'll pop in and out just like that. But for right now, things haven't shaken out well enough yet. HLN went to HLP and to HLR in no time at all. I'm sure there was an "O" and a "Q" in there we just never heard about. You want good HD, CRT is fine, you want fairly acceptable SD which is still 3/4 of what we watch, CRT will give it to you. You want to pay twice as much, maybe not know whether your set or type of display will be around after all is said and done, maybe not find your lamp because not enough were sold to make it worthwhile for anybody to keep up with them, then jump in now. I'll stick with "interlaced and burnable" for the time being, I can handle one and avoid the other. Like I said, I know I'll be making that jump, but right now, if you want the best of HD and SD worlds, CRT is still the one to beat.

CatManDoo
05-29-2005, 09:53 PM
Interlaced and burnable, interlaced and burnable, every time someone asks why not go CRT, someone always pops up with "interlaced and burnable!"
Those are just 2 of the reasons; there are some others too. :eek: I like the "spatial resolution" of my 1920x1080 CRT, but I hate when the camera "pans" and causes motion blur that 60fps progressive sets can better handle. LCD viewing angles are much better, unless you want a dozen people seated in the same chair at eye level right in front of the TV. (Keep in mind I'm referring to CRT rear projection sets that cost under $10 grand and not Direct View CRT's). If you don't mind a small picture size (max 34"), keep in mind that the very inexpensive Direct View CRT's blow away any RP CRT's for PQ at even double the price. Plus they have virtually NO maintenance and no bulbs. No one set is perfect for everyone, so thank God we're in America with more TV options at CC/BB than you'll find entrees on the menu in a restaurant.

RSawdey
05-30-2005, 08:18 PM
hahaha
<<<<<<<<<<
But for right now, things haven't shaken out well enough yet. HLN went to HLP and to HLR in no time at all.
>>>>>>>>>>
The last letter is the MODEL YEAR... they change that once a year... they skip the 'O' and 'Q' because it can be confused with a zero. I have an HLM... Samsung has sold more DLP TVs than all other manufacturers combined, they must be doing something right!

The 'long productive' life of CRTs used for projection is much less than direct view sets... they're run VERY bright since they've got to light a very big screen. This also makes the CRT based RPTVs suffer burn in much more easily than direct views. Running at moderate brightness & contrast will slow the burn in effect, but doesn't stop it...

What are the OTHER problems with CRT? Well, lets start with your $500 convergence... note that none of the other technologies NEED converged... very large, deep, heavy sets that eat huge amounts of power... and speaking of $200 lamps, how much does it cost to retube your 9" guns?

CRTs give good color & blacks, when properly calibrated... but they're all interlaced - a flaw avoided by ALL other technologies...

rc1951
05-31-2005, 03:59 PM
hahaha
<<<<<<<<<<
But for right now, things haven't shaken out well enough yet. HLN went to HLP and to HLR in no time at all.
>>>>>>>>>>
The last letter is the MODEL YEAR... they change that once a year... they skip the 'O' and 'Q' because it can be confused with a zero. I have an HLM... Samsung has sold more DLP TVs than all other manufacturers combined, they must be doing something right!

The 'long productive' life of CRTs used for projection is much less than direct view sets... they're run VERY bright since they've got to light a very big screen. This also makes the CRT based RPTVs suffer burn in much more easily than direct views. Running at moderate brightness & contrast will slow the burn in effect, but doesn't stop it...

What are the OTHER problems with CRT? Well, lets start with your $500 convergence... note that none of the other technologies NEED converged... very large, deep, heavy sets that eat huge amounts of power... and speaking of $200 lamps, how much does it cost to retube your 9" guns?

CRTs give good color & blacks, when properly calibrated... but they're all interlaced - a flaw avoided by ALL other technologies...


Well I guess you don't like CRT rear projection.

If people wait 2-3 years then plasma or lcd or clcd or dlp will get better. I have no doubt that as HDTV advances, yet another type of tv will emerge to beat them all and so on and so on.

Fact- plasma deos not last as long. Not quite as good a picture right now. Costs at least twice as much. You will need to replace it 5 years down the road.
Fact- you also must change out the bulb for a DLP.
Fact- industry average of 80,000 hours for a CRT rear projection.
Fact- CRT special adjustments cost $250.00 not 500.00 if you need it.

Fact- five years from now, who knows what will develope as far as the best tv set type will be.

I do not think that anyone thinking of buying a CRT rptv before they are all gone is doing anything stupid at all.
It's a choice, a low price for HDTV right now and when the whole market shakes out ( 5-7 years) your CRT rptv will still be working when you make the BIG move to a 100 inch wall mounted 3d TV with smell-o-vision and THX sound, sold by the Brick as long as you order a new bedroom set.

In other words buying expensive "now" in such a volatile market "IS STUPID"

If your rich, then it does not matter, if you not rich the "yes, that old fashioned CRT RPTV" is the cheapest way to get HDTV and that big beautiful picture.

You can get a CRT RPTV for $1500 and the prices are still droping.
I full expect that next boxing day the last of the CRT RPTV's will go for $999.99 ( 46-53 inch) while plasma will still be at $3000+
That's serious money and lets not forget the TAX MAN.

RSawdey
05-31-2005, 09:36 PM
You can get a $1000 CRT RPTV or an $1800 plasma, NOW!

Spicy Mikey
06-07-2005, 06:41 AM
I do not think that anyone thinking of buying a CRT rptv before they are all gone is doing anything stupid at all.
It's a choice, a low price for HDTV right now and when the whole market shakes out ( 5-7 years) your CRT rptv will still be working when you make the BIG move to a 100 inch wall mounted 3d TV with smell-o-vision and THX sound, sold by the Brick as long as you order a new bedroom set.

I agree with you. There's nothing wrong with the new technologies (especially if you are limited on depth space. But I think the demise of CRT's is greatly exaggerated. I replaced my CRT RPTV this year and went around searching for replacements. I checked out all the technology but -- in the end -- decided to stay with CRT one more round. The picture was still slightly better then DLP and LCD (especially with SD pictures) and it cost significantly less. That last point was a big plus. Since 80% of what my family watches is still SD (and will be for several more years) I needed a TV that would bridge the gap. My Mits comes with a native 480 AND 1080 decoder and it switches automatically to the proper one based on the incoming signal. Thus, it does both equally well. No need to convert any signals, no ghosting, no black background weirdness.

I supect my next TV in 5+ years won't be a CRT based unit but it's still the way to go for now. Can't wait for that 3d smell-o-vision :)

imustbecrazy
06-07-2005, 08:19 AM
$1800 plasma, NOW, I would guess is EDTV a.k.a. 480p will nt do 720p or 1080i.

delyan
06-07-2005, 03:07 PM
i have been looking for a hi-def tv, and i have been looking at tv's at all the usual places. correct me if i am wrong, but the picture of a crt hi-def set seems as good as a lcd or a dlp, and concerning programing that is filmed in low light, it seems even better than the lcd/dlp. am i wrong? if my observations are correct, and you have the room, why then not buy the much less expensive hi def crt?

The CRT has better hi-def picture than LCD or DLP, but the largest CRT hi-def TV that I know is 34in. And all these new thin TVs look much better on the outside compared to the bulky CRT TVs.

RSawdey
06-07-2005, 05:58 PM
CRTs are interlaced, isn't that bad enough?

Spicy Mikey
06-07-2005, 09:00 PM
No, they definitely come bigger then 34 inch. I have a 65inch Mits CRT but I'm not sure they come much bigger then that.

Interlaced, progressive, whatever. The picture looks the same to me whether it's in 720p or 1080i. At that point I think people are over analyzing things. Take the extra cash you'll save with a CRT, put it in your pocket, and enjoy the movie!

delyan
06-10-2005, 01:31 PM
we are in the hi-def era now. hi-def means widescreen.

RSawdey
06-11-2005, 06:05 AM
No, they definitely come bigger then 34 inch. I have a 65inch Mits CRT but I'm not sure they come much bigger then that.

Interlaced, progressive, whatever. The picture looks the same to me whether it's in 720p or 1080i. At that point I think people are over analyzing things. Take the extra cash you'll save with a CRT, put it in your pocket, and enjoy the movie!

He meant direct view CRT, not a CRT based RPTV. Biggest direct view currently made is 34".

You will have a hard time telling the two formats apart, because your TV only produces one res & converts the other... both end up displayed at the native res of the display. To properly compare the two formats, you need to see 720p on a 720p native display, and 1080i on a 1080i native display... as well as seeing the crossconverted results. Progressive scan & 60 Hz framerate is FAR better for Gamebox & PC use.

camelot
06-11-2005, 06:49 PM
I have a Sony 53HS10 thats a 53" CRT RPTV and its about 5 years old. Its suffering from quite bad burn in from an MTV logo of all things. I calibrated it myself over the years, always watched the brightness/contrast levels etc, but watching a few hours a day of MTV ruined it for me. I'll never buy a CRT RPTV again. I wouldnt mind so much if i had everything cranked up and it was on 24/7 but it wasnt.

mrdirty007
06-12-2005, 01:39 PM
for the money crt is the way to go :bowdown:

RSawdey
06-12-2005, 08:39 PM
Progressive scan has lots of advantages...