Today is the day we start the debate.Are High end LCDS better than Composite(Non HDMI or VGA) CRTS?
>>109086030oh yeah one more thing. I do own a CRT .. so like don't say "You haven't seen a real CRT haven't you"And I can say its good... but like personally I think that a LCD HDMI/VGA tv is better than a composite CRT.. mainly because composite sucks
>>109086030LCDs are not fit for any purpose.
>>109086030>betterMy criteria are BIG and FLAT so yeah.
>>109086205Ok but look.High end lcds even from the early 2010s had a suprisengly bright max brightness.Often TVS back then espically sony had THREE different processors.One is a 8045 for taking remote inputs while the TV is off or on for power reasons,The other is a 200mhz MIPS processorAnd get this. their is a WHOLE seperate processor JUST for image tuning. a WHOLE different one. LCD units(This tv is one of the last non smart TVS ever produced)CRT while good on its own gets extremely big and bulky when it goes up in screen size. I highly doubt their is a CRT screen in screen size bigger than this realitively small high end LCD. And on top of that most used composite, so even if the display was better than LCD it was still going to look worse because welll.. composite produces a non stable image.This tv is also a "Hybrid resolution TV" It can run 1080p at 720p. With stuff like my WII U and 360 running at 1080p and then being able to be downscaled to 720p. Producing a image that would be better than if i just manually had the console running at 720p.
>>109086989Oh yeah sorry for my spelling im on a very small phone and well. I don't have much space to look back.But also that image is not photoshopped to be brighter. I can tell you its actually that bright and colorful.
I'd trade my 180hz IPS for one of those 1920x1080 CRTs
>>109087034that's the thing.. would you trade it for a composite CRT.. or a displayport/VDI crt...Because if its composite than your crazy. considering that Composite would produce a worse image than just a basic LCD monitor even if its on a CRT... if its VGA. then yeah go for it.. But its really hard to find a CRT thats 1920x1080 in 16:9 and the size of most tvs
I am the #1 CRT fan but only for monitors. I can't stand televisions. The whine and the poor picture quality, subpar electronics and lack of voltage regulation .. But for games, if I were not allowed to emulate them on my PC CRTs, I'd probably still take a CRT TV over an LCD one due to motion clarity and latency.
>>109087566I will agree that CRT montiors are 1000x better. We agree in that regard at least
>>109087566I guess you live in the US. Your TVs seem to have a third world vibe to them. Over here in the UK, even cheapest CRTs had excellent image quality. I have this 15 inch flat BEKO tv, and the image quality is stunning when hooked up to a high quality signal source, specifically I hooked it up to a HD free-sat box. Of course my CRT could not display HD, but it still greatly benefited from the high bitrate.
>>109087566I'm entirely the opposite. CRTs are only overall superior to modern monitors for very old and low-res stuff, like 240p / 480i 15kHz games. Monitors for 320x200 DOS stuff, 640x480 at most. At high res you're better off with a modern screen.
>>109087807Have you seen a 21" high-res aperture grille monitor?
>>109087566Display technologies reached a depression point in the early to mid 2000s with the advent of LCDs. Obviously, there are benefits to thin, light, and more energy-efficient LCDs across many industries. Yet, the sample-and-hold menace has played us for nearly three decades now, even plaguing the latest OLEDs. I have a 2160p 144Hz LCD, and it is visually a bad experience when accounting for motion blur and contrast. Just to have a clean image, I have to run a high native resolution at a high frame rate, and it is STILL not going to have perfect motion clarity. I run BFI on this thing too, and it still fucking sucks.I bought an adapter just yesterday. I'm fucking done with LCD shit. Hope I can find a decent CRT monitor.
>>109088236No, never owned anything that high-end. Best I have is a 1600x1200 screen, either 17" or 19" it was.
>>109089502Those couple inches make all the difference. A 19" CRT still feels like ewaste you're coping with, but a 21" unit just straight up feels like a modern display. They're slightly taller than the common 16:9 24" LCD, and have superior motion clarity and often the better static picture quality too.
alright so I did a viewing test on this.Im not sure if Sony was making space age LCD panels in 2009. But honestly im surpised. I was always told that LCD has shit viewing angles and how it sucks. But honestly no matter how hard I tried I couldn't get a reflection to show in the screen of the display.. it was always bright and readable far away. and it just looked right. https://imgur.com/a/1GSBi06
>>109087807This is a thousand percent true.its why playing Half life 2 at like 1440p looks so bad.. I remember playing it and thinking "This game looked alot more realistic" and it did. When playing Half life 2 at like 720p it looks photorealistic.. Sometimes getting a monitor of the right resolution matters more than you think. Its not a "Going up always improves things" situation.
If CRTs weren't inferior and obsolete, they'd still be making them.I tire of retarded zoomers and alphags glazing the fuck out of this obsolete garbage. Anyone who actually grew up with them knows the ONLY benefit to a CRT is you can run something below native res and have it look as "crisp" (blurry) as a native res image.
>>109092499>If CRTs weren't inferior and obsolete, they'd still be making them.Incredibly naive. The word of year of 2023 was a term describing the exact opposite that is our reality - enshittification. CRTs are objectively the superior technology for games. CRTs have vastly superior motion clarity than even 1000hz LCDs. But a dedicated gaming monitor market didn't exist until around 2012, long after all CRT manufacturing had been torn down.
>>109092665Those of us who were ACTUALLY there and ACTUALLY used CRTs do not miss them one bit. I do not care if you feel like glazing what would have been a $30,000 professional studio-grade SCART back in the day because you're too young and ignorant to know that's not what people had. CRTs are absolute shit.
>>109092683>back in the day because you're too young and ignorant to know that's not what people had.This is not an argument. We don't care how bad the average normie's 1080p60hz piece of shit office monitor is either. It does not matter how bad the 17" 70khz trash you had as a kid is, a 21" PC Trinitron is still in an entirely different performance category.And I had a 19" Dell P991 110khz Trinitron as a kid. And today I have a 21" GDM-F520 137khz Trinitron on my desk. Never really had to suffer with the average monitor.
>>109092683Maybe you lived in a third world country. We had access to many CRTs which we mostly got for free, and most of them were decent.
>>109086030>Are High end LCDS better than Composite(Non HDMI or VGA) CRTS?This is an apples to oranges comparison.If your input source is 480p or above, a good HDCRT or PC CRT monitor will be better than an old high end LCD. Better contrast ratio, better motion clarity.If your input source is 15khz then use a standard CRT.I have a normal CRT I use for 240p/480i games. Everything else I use a modern , bright 4K display for. I think HDR is even more impactful than the jump from 1080p -> 4K.If you only care about SDR content that maxes out at 1080p then you should get a Pioneer Kuro plasma.
>>109092789>consumer CRTs aka the ones actual people had were shit>BUT WHAT ABOUT THE $30K STUDIO GRADE ONES NO HUMAN BEINGS EVER HAD HUH (they're still shit)>>109092991The absolute irony of you zoomers crying "third world" while bragging about finding "decent" ewaste in a dumpster.
>>109093252>(they're still shit)No they're not
>>109091377can anyone with a CRT compare said viewing angles...Honestly the viewing angle aspect of this arugment is bs. because at all angles its beatiful.
Wii and older>CRTPS4 and older>PlasmaNew games>OLEDLCD never>>109087566>Troonhou>garbage opinionyapari ne
>>109093252>consumer CRTs aka the ones actual people had were shitBut they werent shit thoughI own 20" snoy PVM and I still prefer to play on a 28" consumer slot mask with RGB ScartAny 90s CRT TV with RGB or YUV input (which is every single consumer crt in most countries) that isnt some bottom of the barrel orion or Daewoo can produce a good and sharp 480i/240p image if calibrated properly
>>109094277>crtard so blind he can't tell how blurry, bandy, and eyerapey the image is
>>109094288Wii on a CRT isnt blurryWii 480p on a flatscreen is very blurry though
>>109094260>troonhouglass houses
>>109086030>>109086989post RGH3 wiring DO IT NOW FAGGOT
>>109094260>>109094277ranfag kill yourself
>>109094288Every single CRTfag hates this disgusting insufferable reddit faggot too. Singlehandedly killed CRT threads off /g/.
>>109086030CRTs were never good, we threw them all away for a reason
high end crt's are superior to any flattech today, lets just get that out of the way.>>109086030about composite/svhs crts. for gaming absolutely.for 'old' tv absolutely (you'd get 50/60hz content instead of 25/30). for new movie/tv content absolutely not.endgame is 150" of crttech. imagine looking around in a 3d world while things stay as sharp as in the real world, instead of getting smeared to 480p while your eyes are hurting because they can't focus on your 240hz lcd/oled panel.
>>109094671Your writing is utterly insufferable
>>109094525Mario>Timeless fun games on cheap accessible hardware>The reason most people get into retro games to begin withTohou>Mediocre games that most of the "fans" dont even play>Fandom held together with porn and LARPMario solos and its not even close
>>109094621oh I got it from ETSY. i was lazy and it was a better discount because it came with a SSD in it.>>109094671>about composite/svhs crts. for gaming absolutely.Composite is still blurry as shit compared to VGA/HDMI/DisplayportHonestly though I think your underestimating high end LCDS. they are inferior yes. But just look at how bright it is and how even far away the viewing angle still makes it viewable(ignore my shit camera)
>>109094750wait that bad apple video has a fandom? its not just a youtube song? Even the bad apple song was not even **THAT** good...
>>109094767Xbox 360 can be played on a VGA CRT Monitor btw, without a shadow of a doubt the best available monitor for the console
>>109094767Sure, but I don't play games for sharpness, I play them for immersion. Perfect motion clarity achieves this exponentially better than having 4k pixels on a screen that blurs them everything sometimes moves. Because every time those pixels blur, I'm watching a computer instead of game.
>>109094971Ill be honest, I tried a CRT as well.. and the motion was good. but like even on a LCD after 3 minutes you get used to it.Your brain can not physically comprehend most forms of motion, rather your brain fills in the gaps alot of times, does that mean that CRT is not as smooth. No.. it is more smooth than any other display ive seen. But lets not pretend that after 3 minutes you get completely used to it and that most forms of motion are fine. I do agree with you that CRT monitors do look awesome because they use VGA instead of composite and i hope to invest in one when a good deal on facebook marketplace arrives.
>>109094971The only time you can really see a difference with motion is when moving text appears. And yeah I agree. But most of the time moving text almost never appears in stuff. Most people sit down in their couch when watching tv almost a foot away. They are not being as attentive as a reviewer and can not tell the difference when it comes to motion, if LCD was such a blurry mess in motion we would had not boughten into it. Our brain fills in the gaps really well in my opinion. And I never really got the argument for motion
It's not so much that you constantly see the blur, but if you pay attention and know what to look for, you always do. Especially 2D scrollers and 3D games where you have to pay attention to the surroundings (.eg look for something).The fact that your eyes can focus and follow things moving around the screen like your hand moving in front of your face is very comforting.It's sort of a curse...better to not know and enjoy your lcd screen. And I agree, most people don't care, which is true for any subject.
>>109095058>It's sort of a curse...better to not know and enjoy your lcd screen.I used CRTs as a kid, but I didn't really comprehend the difference between them and later LCD technologies. I just played with what we had at home and didn't complicate it beyond that, especially since I didn't really play shooters, but more RPGs if anything. As I've gotten older, I've become more and more sensitive to the faults in modern sample-and-hold display technologies. For quite some time, I've thought that I'm just quite sensitive to low and dipping frame rates (and that can be nauseating for me). So, I'd do my best to maintain a high framerate with my LCD display so I don't get sick or dizzy.Yet, the aspect that I realized I can't stand is the feeling of motion persistence in EVERYTHING. It's fucking awful and so disorientating. The smoothness of a higher framerate or 'faster' information feels pointless when whatever is in motion is going to be so significantly blurred anyway that I can't track it comfortably. I'm almost 30, and this shit just gets more and more miserable as the years go by. I can't comfortably follow anything gliding across my screen even with BFI. An enemy or flying item in a 3D game, or even just text on a browser window, it's all just fucked and getting worse for me. I can't do it anymore.
>>109096857damn only 30? that sucks man
