Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 12/29/2011 5:29:55 PM   
Toppingfrmbottom


Posts: 6528
Joined: 6/7/2009
Status: offline 		No, not slightly rounded it's totally flat, but it's very boxy like I said, in fact it's big enough and flat enough on top to have a large stuffed toy or several small items sit on it, and it has that protruding butt, course it's not like that's unique or special to my tv lol.

I actually do mind the bulk of those tv's. It's one reason why I'd go to these slim new models that hardly take up any room.I'm liking the fact that the new tv's can be mounted on the wall on a swiveling arm or some such, because then you don't have to have anything on the floor for the tv to sit on to have it high enough to see from the bed, or you could swivel the arm left or right.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras



I'm guessing you mean the panel TVs when you talk about flat TVs. I used panel rather than flat in my opening post because there are old style tube TVs that have a completely flat screen. I assume your boxy 25 incher is an oldish model with a curved tube at the front. If so, and you don't mind the bulk of tube TVs, check out a newer completely flat screen tube set. It could offer better picture than a panel TV and could be bought for a few cents second-hand! That is if America is like Ireland where people are virtually giving away high-end flicker-free (100/120 Hz) completely flat tube TVs that would have cost up to four figures five+ years ago for less than a hundred of Euros today!


< Message edited by Toppingfrmbottom -- 12/29/2011 5:35:57 PM >

_____________________________

One world under lube with vibrators and dildo's for all! quote from the sex toy 101 book

(in reply to Anaxagoras)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 12/29/2011 5:30:04 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
quote:

A tetrode is just a triode with a screen grid and a pentode is just a tetrode with a suppressor grid.

Fine, they're all triodes with extra grids LOL.

I assume the LOL suggests scepticism. A triode is the essential amplifying device, which a screen grid was added to make it more effective for high frequency usage in the 1920's. However, it caused inefficiency and instability so a suppressor grid was added to improve efficiency. This was the pentode which Philips invented in the late 1920's so essentially they all relate to the triode even if they constitute different devices in some critical respects

quote:


The CRT guns are a four element device, also known as a tetrode at the very least. There is a cathode, then a control grid. Making the control grid less negative with respect to the cathode increases current. Similarly making the second grid more positive with respect to the cathode increases current. You might enjoy contacting those erroneous sources and correcting them, maybe I'll take care of wiki after I have a look.

I quoted you two separate sources that talked about the triode behaviour of CRTs. Odd to do that if they are tetrodes or pentodes, which have notably different characteristics!! If you think it is wrong and wish to contradict it, then quote several sources of your own. I never said I was an expert on CRTs, I'm just going by what I have read before.

So CRTs have two grids? Fine and dandy. However you talk about a "control grid" and another "grid". The control grid http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_grid is the central element in a triode. If a device has two grids that could also make it more of a variant of a triode rather than a tetrode because a tetrode isn't merely a device that has four elements. It is a valve that has a very particular type of element called a screen subsequent to the control grid. Other tetrodes actually have five elements such as the KT-66.

quote:


The CRT is actually more efficient than an incandescent lamp. I believe I mentioned that quite a bit of power is used by the deflection circuits, and actually without them the CRT would be the most efficient by far of any of the current technologies.

So what? Again I say that comparing a traditional filament lamp with a CRT was just a very basic parallel for illustrative purposes since the technologies have the same origin.

quote:


But going into a skid here to get back on topic...........

Since a direct view LCD is backlit and black is produced by blocking light, obviously better contrast can be achieved. The technology has gotten better over the years as well and in the last few using LED backlighting has saved watts and money, which will trickle down to the consumer price as soon as the manufacturers have enough money (LOL).

Good this is slightly more on topic! The question was about picture quality of the different technologies. I read somewhere that plasma is supposed to have better contrast, and this was confirmed by an excellent technician I know. The blocking of a back light might give stronger overall contrast but not necessarily a more subtle one which may be more important since that is critical for realism. BTW, have you not seen that in the last ten years panel TVs have gone down to a fraction of their original prices?

quote:


I'm probably cutting my own throat here but when these things break half the time just throw them out. The deal is this, if it does NOTHING or has NOTHING at all on the screen you might want to have a shop look at it. There will be a charge for this, some places charge as high as $80 in the US due to the complexity and cost of parts. If you DO have something on the screen but it is fucked up you are better off canning it. Either that or you could make a deal with a shop that if they can't fix it for what you are willing to pay they just keep it, but that opens the door to abuse.

Basically there are two types of sets to avoid. Not at all cost but they are a bit less desirable. Plasmas and LCD based projection TVs. Other than that it doesn't much matter. Get the longest extended warranty you can and save the box.

You are probably right. Think the US is expensive? Its worse here. It means basically dumping a lot of goods as they are hardly worth repairing. With cheaper and cheaper goods today it is a rubbish in, rubbish out policy. Apparently lot of the extended warranties are supposed to be a waste of money as they are not sufficiently long enough most of the time.

quote:


ETA : Now was the latter part of that on topic enough ?

Yes, well done. Horray, its cookie time...

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 12/29/2011 6:12:43 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Snort
I loved the picture on my old 36 inch Sony CRT, but that thing was HEAVY. Now, I'm happy with my plasma. A CRT that big would need a crane to install...

A 36 inch CRT is an impressive beast, and quite rare. I doubt 42 or so inch CRTs (if thats the size of your plasma) were made but if they did no doubt Termy will correct me! lol



quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
CRT tellies are for pansies, Anax.

Oh the finesse of your witty repartee! Are you in the running to play the leading role in the next Bernard Manning biopic?

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 12/29/2011 6:15:32 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake
Lotta ground been covered. I would like to add three thoughts.

1/ The mid-priced Philips 32" LCD (1080p) unit MAY be faulty.

I had hoped it was but I got two at a special price lol and both are the same. Also some of the artifacts in the picture that I mentioned were also seen in a few other panel TVs so I thought it probably wasn't a fault. The TVs have an "anti-judder" feature but as with a lot of these features (e.g. flicker-free) it can sometimes make the picture worse!

quote:


2/ When selecting a new display, you MUST observe the unit, same make, model, product number, in action before you buy. This, to determin if the screen finish is glossy or flat. A glossy screen might seem better, because it is shiny. But, it is in fact inferior, because it is shiny. A glossy screen reflects light well. This pollutes the picture with room light, making it difficult to see. A flat screen does not reflect light well, so you can see the picture much better.

I agree but they were bought for others. I was told what was the preferred unit and put the money down. On the face of it, it is a very elegant TV in terms of appearance which explains the preference.

< Message edited by Anaxagoras -- 12/29/2011 6:19:12 PM >

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to FrostedFlake)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 12/29/2011 6:34:47 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ashjor911
throu the fillips with the garbage, get one of the LCD from "Sony or samsung" & you will find the differance..

I bought the TVs for others so its a good thing I don't have to throw it out. I heard good things about Samsung and Sony LCDs but Philips models, such as their "Ambilight" editions, have had pretty good reviews. I used to buy Philips products a lot. They had excellent research and development and their prices weren't too high compared to Sony etc.

quote:


a Plasma screen, "from how i understand it its a living cells which can die after some time. & its price is way to high.

There are concerns about the life-span of plasmas but I believe they offer the best quality of all panel TVs. However, I haven't compared the technologies enough to say for certain.

quote:


now, almost 70% of the LCD TV have almost 70% of the TV from Samsung
"samsung did buy the half of sony for LCD Corp. 2 days ago"

then i have to ask you thins.
why did you buy Philips, when you can buy the Samsung ... the source?

I thought LCD TVs that were OEM (original equipment manufacturer), and rebadged were made by less well known manufacturers like Mirai but I don't keep up with this technology.

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to ashjor911)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 12/29/2011 7:15:22 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
Oh the finesse of your witty repartee! Are you in the running to play the leading role in the next Bernard Manning biopic?


No. I'm too much of a woofter.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Anaxagoras)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 12/30/2011 10:58:36 AM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Toppingfrmbottom
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
I'm guessing you mean the panel TVs when you talk about flat TVs. I used panel rather than flat in my opening post because there are old style tube TVs that have a completely flat screen. I assume your boxy 25 incher is an oldish model with a curved tube at the front. If so, and you don't mind the bulk of tube TVs, check out a newer completely flat screen tube set. It could offer better picture than a panel TV and could be bought for a few cents second-hand! That is if America is like Ireland where people are virtually giving away high-end flicker-free (100/120 Hz) completely flat tube TVs that would have cost up to four figures five+ years ago for less than a hundred of Euros today!

No, not slightly rounded it's totally flat, but it's very boxy like I said, in fact it's big enough and flat enough on top to have a large stuffed toy or several small items sit on it, and it has that protruding butt, course it's not like that's unique or special to my tv lol.

I actually do mind the bulk of those tv's. It's one reason why I'd go to these slim new models that hardly take up any room.I'm liking the fact that the new tv's can be mounted on the wall on a swiveling arm or some such, because then you don't have to have anything on the floor for the tv to sit on to have it high enough to see from the bed, or you could swivel the arm left or right.

If your CRT telly is a completely flat screen then it must not be very old, and you probably have a good idea of what a fairly recent good quality CRT can offer so it makes sense to go with a panel TV if you find the picture quality better.



quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
Oh the finesse of your witty repartee! Are you in the running to play the leading role in the next Bernard Manning biopic?

No. I'm too much of a woofter.

If thats true then I think it would make a surreal classic!

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to Toppingfrmbottom)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 12/31/2011 9:33:37 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline 		Seems the thread is largely done, and I find myself and Termy the only one agreeing on this issue lol but I thought I would post a few interesting links after googling the topic at length the other day!

Looking at a detailed comparison of the pros and cons on a wiki entry almost none of the disadvantages of CRT relate to picture quality, whilst for Plasma and LCD there are a few disadvantages in relation to its primary function: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_CRT,_LCD,_Plasma
Both plasma’s and LCD’s have a limited colour depth, and their own native display resolution whilst CRTs don’t. This means modern HD panels won’t look as good unless you feed a high-resolution image. Upscaling video images for the panel always makes them more dirty than the original. It also mentions the motion issues for LCD but exaggerates the contrast ratios for plasma as do manufacturers.

The TV I mentioned is a Philips 32PFL5406H, which seems to be a reasonable set as these things go but not 1080p - its an LED which is the same as an LCD but with different backlighting for the screen http://lcdtvbuyingguide.com/led-vs-lcd-scorecard.html#scorecard

BTW the opening post wasn't meant as a dis against panel TVs. They have very definite advantages in terms of bulk, energy efficiency and weight. I was just questioning if they were actually better in terms of picture. In a way it makes sense that panel TVs mightn't be as good because CRT technology was fairly intensively developed for reproducing realistic moving images since the 1930's. Plasma and LCD technology was around since the 60's. They were used for simple graphical devices like early computer displays from the 1970's but weren't intensively developed for this more demanding purpose until the 1990's if I recall what I read correctly.

Happy New Year!

< Message edited by Anaxagoras -- 12/31/2011 9:35:03 PM >

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to Anaxagoras)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 1/1/2012 7:50:09 AM   
MercTech


Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline 		Most of the CRT televisions would have a maximum resolution much lower than LCD or plasma models. The driver circuits were just never installed for better resolution. And, ghosting of motion is much less evident at lower resolution.

Now, a CRT computer monitor tied to a tuning device shows much higher resolution than a CRT television.

In the modern market, I'd go with the LCD models. There are fewer contortions to go through getting multiple inputs at higher resolution. the footprint is smaller than the equivalent size in a CRT. And, they use less power and put out much less waste heat.

What I would look for in a television... built in ATSC tuner (over the air digital television), multiple DVI inputs (so you can connect the computer, DVD player, and Xbox without having to use an external switch box or switching cables)

The wifi enabled televisions have some nifty features for streaming video but if you have a gaming machine attached or have your computer attached for large screen capability you already have streaming capability and having it built into the television would be redundant.

3D TV is a big hype on the higher end models. But, I just prefer the flat screen and not having to sit upright with a pair of glasses on to watch the movie. But, 3D TVs do have a 120hz scan rate that makes for better graphics if you want to play video games on the large screen. Depends on what you do with your display device.

Just some thoughts on televisions...
Stefan

(in reply to Anaxagoras)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 1/1/2012 2:45:39 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech
Most of the CRT televisions would have a maximum resolution much lower than LCD or plasma models. The driver circuits were just never installed for better resolution. And, ghosting of motion is much less evident at lower resolution.

Hi Stefan. Its true that CRT TVs are mainly standard-definition. It would be nice to have HD capability but at the sizes they come in (up to 32 or more rarely 36 inches), it seems that the added definition of a HD signal cannot be appreciated. That requires a bigger screen from my limited experience (when I briefly looked at two similar SD and HD plasma screens some years ago when HD was newish), and according to what I have heard from a few others and read in reviews online anyway. Some even hold that its just up to ED or Extended-Defintion (720p) images that can be visibly appreciated on screens of around 50 inches! It seems that the benefit of HD signals for more moderately sized LCD HD screens is that they conform to their innate resolution so they will look better regardless (even with upscaled standard-defintion images). It leads to the thought that HD may be redundant unless people use really big screens, and instead high quality (low compression) SD or ED should be the objective. Just my tuppence, no doubt others will disagree...

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to MercTech)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 1/2/2012 4:24:23 AM   
MadAxeman


Posts: 4171
Joined: 8/28/2008
From: UK
Status: offline 		Anyone who is pentode should not wear sandals.
Change yer damn socks too.

_____________________________

Hitman for the Subby Mafia

(in reply to Anaxagoras)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs - 1/3/2012 4:13:44 PM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline 		6C33C, 6C45Pi, 6H30Pi and 6AS7 (IIRC).

Those do a decent job with the damping, even when wired for tolerable power efficiency.

While I would love to discuss amp design, tube or not, I'm more curious about whether you have the skills to do a proper job of custom CRT circuitry. It strikes me that the 1" white phosphor types with electrostatic deflection could likely be squeezed for more performance with modern circuitry to support them. Given a color filter, those could be combined in a lightfield approach to make an insane projector or backlit screen for use with 3D video. Add suitable prisms on actuators to adjust the aspect ratio, and you're looking at something that can really excel.

Of course, that's nowhere near what the technology could do if anyone cared to still advance the state of the art, at the expense of being harder to mass produce. Ceramics and metals instead of glass. TEM cathode. Monochromated electron beam. Multigrid progressive deflection. Spot focusing grids and coils. Calibrated transfer curves with digital correction of phase and amplitude. Mask free sapphire surface. Thermal control. Emission control. Active cancellation of magnetic fields, interference and microphonics. All vertical orientation with optics that combine both color, angle and polarization states from multiple screens before either projecting or displaying, again with prisms and such for optimal aspect ratio. If you want to get into litography, the manufacturing technology can do lenticular pixels for multibeam illumination and thus seamless 3D from one source.

It's not something you could sell in large quantities, given the sheer bulk of a CRT, but if you had the gear, you could sell some that are decidedly future proof (multiple angle 3D viewing without glasses, 16384x9216 pixels, 100Hz progressive scan with phase correlated motion control and RGBCMY gamut). Unfortunately, to those that have such manufacturing gear, it is always going to be more cost effective to use that gear to produce something that has more potential for large quantity sales.

A bit of a pity for those who would like to see the "perfect" display with "infinite" durability, as most of the weaknesses of a CRT can, unlike those of an LCD, be corrected for, including digitally cancelling all distortions if one does calibration up front and regulates the relevant parameters.

Even more to the point, many of the supporting technologies are now far more mature than they used to be. The problem with field emission displays and the like isn't just that they're having trouble finding ways to ramp up production. It's also that they're building new technology, rather than using the state of the art to really nail existing technology.

It can be compared to microprocessor fabrication. Back when 0.5µm was bleeding edge, the supporting tech was also rougher. Making 22nm now means dealing with the current generation supporting tech being pushed to its limits when doing 22nm. But if you wanted to make a 0.5µm fab now, the supporting tech would be so mature that nailing it is downright trivial. Hell, a copper halide laser can drill at that feature size! In fact, I probably have most of the gear on hand to make a 0.5µm fab, save for the copper halide laser and vacuum system, not that I would foresee a market for such a thing.

What is 'good enough' is virtually always the enemy of that which is perfect, or even just significantly better.

3D with some electrostatic CRTs could still be viable, though, if you have the skills.

Health,
al-Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 32
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: CRT TVs versus Panel TVs Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.078