U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-04-2012, 10:24 AM
 
Location: Houston
471 posts, read 1,375,248 times
Reputation: 338

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude111 View Post
I was reading this as a guest and had to login when i read this comment!

OLDER CRT SETS ARE MUCH BETTER THAN THESE NEWER SETS!!

Any one here will still use the C.R.T tv's for every day wathcing tv? - Videokarma.org TV - Video - Visual Media Forums

Im not surprised he wanted the parts
To a lot of people including yours truly, direct-view CRTs still produce a more realistic image than the average LCD flatscreen. That's why I am saving for a plasma flatscreen, which IMO produces pretty much the same quality of image as a CRT (albeit with less efficiency, usually, than an LCD).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-04-2012, 09:11 PM
 
Location: Hawaii-Puna District
3,753 posts, read 10,000,054 times
Reputation: 2456
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJboutit View Post
Even if the parts were broken and worn out. About 2yrs ago I heard a tv repair man say to replace all the tubes it would cost $300 to $400 this is just for the tubes. I heard the last big fat tvs made from 2005 to 2007 were great tvs the earlier ones were kinda junk
Where I am in Hawaii, with electric rates around $0.45 per KWH, (4x the rate most of you pay in the US) any older TV or computer monitor is unwanted. They simply use way too much power.
My old 31" CRT TV used 320 watts - my new 46" LCD uses 210.
My old 15" CRT monitor used 220 watts and my new 20" LCD uses 18 watts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Houston
471 posts, read 1,375,248 times
Reputation: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdand3boys View Post
My old 31" CRT TV used 320 watts - my new 46" LCD uses 210.
My old 15" CRT monitor used 220 watts and my new 20" LCD uses 18 watts.
Wow, those are rather inefficient for CRTs. Our seven year old Sharp 4:3 ratio 27" television set uses 100 watts (this is printed on the back).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 02:33 PM
 
2,182 posts, read 4,706,348 times
Reputation: 1206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude111 View Post
I was reading this as a guest and had to login when i read this comment!

OLDER CRT SETS ARE MUCH BETTER THAN THESE NEWER SETS!!

Any one here will still use the C.R.T tv's for every day wathcing tv? - Videokarma.org TV - Video - Visual Media Forums

Im not surprised he wanted the parts
"Much better" is an incredible overstatement. They're MARGINALLY better for standard def input, and definitely not built for HD.

Blacks are deeper on CRT and plasmas but the gap isn't as wide as it once was. LCD/LED TVs are catching up rapidly in that department. Clarity is better on modern TVs anyway.

Besides, the space, weight and power consumption is not worth the almost unnoticeable color differences (if you're not setting them side-by-side and watching them at the same time, you'd never know the difference).

I kept my 20" flatscreen CRT monitor for a long time because it was gorgeous. I paid nearly $400 for it at the time. It looked better than the cheapo 19" LCD that replaced it, of course. However, I had a full FOOT of extra desk space. I was happy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2012, 07:06 PM
 
Location: Houston
471 posts, read 1,375,248 times
Reputation: 338
Quote:
They're MARGINALLY better for standard def input, and definitely not built for HD.
Not to get nitpicky, but the last few years CRTs were available many were capable of displaying 720 to 1080P content, along with the last round of them having 16:9 screens. In fact I'm now looking for a used 16:9 CRT for my mancave until I buy my Panasonic plasma.

One thing I cannot stand at all about LCDs, and that includes LCDs lit by LED lamps, is the use of motion interpolation systems to help eliminate ghosting ("trails"), something plasmas and CRTs don't have a problem with. Known by various trade names like AutoMotion, TruMotion or MotionFlo, it does significantly reduce ghosting, something sports fans & gamers appreciate, but the trade off is the nasty effect it imparts to the image as a whole. And that is what many HT'ers refer to as the soap opera video effect.

This is especially apparent when playing back something shot on film: instead of a smooth organic image, what you get instead is a "crystalline", fake-ish & ultimately cheezy looking (IMO) effect, basically the same thing that a video camera does to the images it captures. No thank you.

FYI: motion interpolation and frame rate - i.e. 60Hz, 200Hz, etc - are not the same thing.

Fortunately you can usually dial down the video effect or completely disable this system if desired (most of the time its controls are buried in a sub submenu in the TV's settings menu, so you'll have to dig a little bit).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2012, 11:24 AM
 
2,182 posts, read 4,706,348 times
Reputation: 1206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lije Baley View Post
Not to get nitpicky, but the last few years CRTs were available many were capable of displaying 720 to 1080P content, along with the last round of them having 16:9 screens. In fact I'm now looking for a used 16:9 CRT for my mancave until I buy my Panasonic plasma.
I agree, but we're talking about an "old broken TV out for trash" that someone took parts out of here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lije Baley View Post
One thing I cannot stand at all about LCDs, and that includes LCDs lit by LED lamps, is the use of motion interpolation systems to help eliminate ghosting ("trails"), something plasmas and CRTs don't have a problem with. Known by various trade names like AutoMotion, TruMotion or MotionFlo, it does significantly reduce ghosting, something sports fans & gamers appreciate, but the trade off is the nasty effect it imparts to the image as a whole. And that is what many HT'ers refer to as the soap opera video effect.

This is especially apparent when playing back something shot on film: instead of a smooth organic image, what you get instead is a "crystalline", fake-ish & ultimately cheezy looking (IMO) effect, basically the same thing that a video camera does to the images it captures. No thank you.

FYI: motion interpolation and frame rate - i.e. 60Hz, 200Hz, etc - are not the same thing.

Fortunately you can usually dial down the video effect or completely disable this system if desired (most of the time its controls are buried in a sub submenu in the TV's settings menu, so you'll have to dig a little bit).
I definitely agree, but like I said, the technology is getting better all the time. LCD definitely has it's drawbacks...which is why other technologies exist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2012, 12:08 PM
 
Location: God's Gift to Mankind for flying anything
5,374 posts, read 11,278,666 times
Reputation: 4210
I gave up my *100 pound* CRT monitor a while back and now have a 32 inch LG monitor, that is 1080 and 120 Hz.
I love it because I can open up plenty of windows without having to squint at my laptop on the side of the monitor.
Bonus: just one click, and I can watch TV ...

Clarity ? I can see the dirt under the finger nails of some people !!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2012, 10:33 AM
 
Location: Texas
5,070 posts, read 9,076,702 times
Reputation: 1632
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJboutit View Post
Not worth it today 3 to 4 yr ago it would have been worth it
Good place to check gold prices.

Also, it's best to click the "M" for perspective.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 07:38 AM
 
40,212 posts, read 41,799,403 times
Reputation: 16754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dude111 View Post

OLDER CRT SETS ARE MUCH BETTER THAN THESE NEWER SETS!!

Five or ten years ago they weren't nearly as good as a CRT but that has changed and as the technology evolves it will surpass CRT in every imaginable category if they haven't already.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-12-2012, 11:25 AM
 
26,158 posts, read 15,740,286 times
Reputation: 17235
Sorry but in my opinion!!!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Consumer Electronics
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:46 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top