4-year-old CRT RPTV Better PIC than DLP/LCos/LCD? (1 Viewer)

[joseAR]

I have a 4-year-old 55-inch CRT RPTV 4:3 Toshiba, and I recently viewed some new DLP/LCos/LCD 60-62 inch 16:9 RPTVs using some of my own favorite DVDs (Gladiator, Sense and Sensibility). The new RPTVs were all linked via HDMI to the dvd player (for those sets with HDMI connectors).

Frankly, I was rather dissapointed -- I really felt that my old CRT RPTV had a better, cleaner pic. I viewed all the sets -- including my own in my den (connected to a high-end Pioneer progressive scan DVD player) -- with an 11-foot distance. The LCos/LCD sets I saw had rather poor blacks so that the sets -- no matter how the stores adjusted them -- always seemed to have a slight white/foggy haze over the entire screen and the black bars. The candle-lit scenes in both dvds were particularly dissapointing. The DLP set I saw was much better in this regard but the picture of my old RPTV seemed sharper and cleaner with less noise.

When in letter box mode, my CRT RPTV has a 48-inch diagonal size or about 12 inches less than the new TVs I viewed. Does the bigger 60-inch size contribute to the apparent worsening of the picture clarity/quality? I was really expecting to be blown away by the new sets and to feel like junking my old one -- the revelation to me was how good my old set still seemed to be, its only main disadvantage was size and 4:3 layout. Will the new 1080p sets be better in this regard?

Thanks for your comments and advise!

 

[Steve Schaffer]

While 48 vs 60 inches will make difference in that any faults in the sourc material will be more obvious on the larger set, it won't make any difference as far as black level and the artifacty look that some microchip based sets have.

I have a Sony KP57-HW40 57" widescreen crt-based HD-capable set that's now also 4 years old. As far as producing a smooth film-like image with good blacks when watching dvd movies I still think it's superior to most all microchip based sets--it just does a better job of looking like projected film. For supersharp HD sports the microchip sets are much more satisfactory than they are for dvd movies.

I have seen the new 1080p Sony SXRD sets in a couple of stores but only running HD feeds, not dvds. I must say that they did look noticeably smoother than the other microchip sets in the stores and had good blacks. They cost a little over twice what one of the still available crt based rptvs of similar screen size are going for, however.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Your viewing seems to exhibit care and you are experiencing the results of a critical eye. Indeed, digitals will have contrast ratio not to CRT level, and visible pixel structure depending on viewing angle.

New-ness does not automatically correlate to picture quality, as CRT still remains at the top of the imaging heap. At best some digital displays rise to an equivalent level of overall performance (in different ways the picture will still be different, but a differet set of strengths and weaknesses), but certainly CRT has not been outpaced by any stretch by any consumer digital display.

 

[John S]

Black levels just cannot be matched digitally yet. Well maybe in 1080p displays, not sure on that one.

Make sure you Demo a most recent Sony LCD Rear Projeection as I find those to be very good.


PS: I still use and love my HD CRT Rear Projection display very much.

 

[Bill_Weinreich]

Jose... your not alone in this boat... I just brought up a similar question here . I'm just not happy with the new technologies, and unfortunately, companies are quickly dumping CRT for the new digitals. They have their reasons I'm sure.. cost, effeciency, reliability, production... list could go on....but I for one would like to stick with CRT until a technology comes along that can (in my opinion) truly match the picture quality of a CRT based display.

Personally I am hoping that Mitsubishi doesnt drop these two before I can save my pennies. Both 72" with 9"CRT's and I believe can be had for under $4k

WS-73517
WS-73615

 

[ChrisWiggles]

yeah, I'm waiting for a sony G90 to drop in price to a few grand, then I'll grab me one of those!

 

[Kirk Patrick]

i recently bought a hitachi 51 and watched it for 3 weeks before returning it because i hated the silver color, in a small condo living room it just jumps out at you when it's as large as a crt

however i am really experiencing remorse as i shop for a replacement set i find that the microdisplays with the exception of the sony a10 series all look inferior for dvd's than the hitachi

i am keeping my eye out for a black toshiba and may well grab one

for dvd's the crt picture is superb, the best in my opinion

 

[Reginald Trent]

joseAR,

Did you make adjustments to each display or are you basing your opinion on the stores preset picture?

 

[anthony_b]

I might be alone in this but, My old 48inch HD/CRT looks blurry compared to my new Sony 50A10 LCD. It's night and day.

 

[joseAR]

For each RPTV I tested, we made -- as in the store owner and technician and then my own inputs -- all kinds of adjustments to each TV to try to get the optimal mode of picture clarity and color realism. We tried several ambient lighting modes too and also tried component video connectors.Given all these permutations, I was still not satisfied with what I saw.

And when I got home 10 minutes after I finished the in-store testing, I immediately put on the dvds I tested to try out my Toshiba CRT 4:3 RPTV using a progressive scan DVD player and I confirmed that my existing 4-year-old set was not "dethroned" -- the picture clarity, color and over-all impact still felt "more right". Whatever is, I was really surprised that my old set could more than hold its own against the new "high-tech" ones.Certainly, I could not justify spending some rather big bucks just to get a bigger 16:9 set.

I reside in Asia in a country where there are no HDTV broadcasts, so my main viewing use is for DVDs. I HAVE READ several professional reviews of the SONY KDS-R60XBR1 WEGA HDTV and they are positively glowing -- and this set would now seem to address my dissatisfaction and misgivings. It is not yet available where I live so maybe this will be the answer when I can get my hands on one.

 

[Reginald Trent]

Just a few things to think about and maybe I'm missing something but...did you use the same source DVD for each TV? If so were they play through the same DVD player? Is it the brand and model as the one you used at home? I ask because different DVD players can result in different PQ.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

And did you use the same input on each TV and calibrate said input with Avia or Video Essentials? Because if you didn't, you simply haven't made an apples-to-apples comparison among the three TVs. Were you able to control the lighting in the store to match the lighting in your living room? Ditto. That's why "you have to see it in the store" has always struck me as advice of such limited utility. Unless you can do a genuine side-by-side comparison of two or three sets fed from the same source and all at least consumer-calibrated, the set that looks "best" may very well be the worst and vice versa. I've often thought after viewing TVs at Circuit City or Best Buy that my old Toshiba CRT-based NTSC RPTV still looked pretty darned good. But for the past week I've had my new 27" LCD flat panel/Computer monitor sitting on a table in my living room with its HD DVR, right next to my old Toshiba and TiVo. (The room where they normally reside took some hurricane damage and I only got the window fixed yesterday.) There's simply no comparison, even when outputting S-video to both from the same sources. Both are calibrated with VE. It is amazing how bad the LCD makes the RPTV look, even without HD source material.

Regards,

Joe

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Why does everyone here act surprised when a CRT looks better than an LCD. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone...

 

[Reginald Trent]

Maybe because the CRT is four years old and a 4X3?

 

[LanceJ]

Chris: hello, reality calling!!! Haven't you seen the colorful and loud commercials and all the print ads with all the happy people standing next to their new LCD/DLP/plasma television sets? OBVIOUSLY the TV manufacturers know what's best for us, so stop whining and try to educate yourself on the latest & *greatest* technology, huh? And anyway, these sets cost way more than those fat bloated CRTs so of course they have better images.



Seriously, "thin" may look sexy and modern but as with many other products, this is another case of trading one thing (image quality) for another (aesthetics).

Reginald: CRT technology has been around about 75 years so is very mature. So four years doesn't mean much. And especially, despite what so many marketing people want us to believe, everything that is new is NOT the best. Extreme example: sound-wise, my $240 Technics/Shure turntable/cartridge combination-REALLY old tech-can beat the crap out of a 160kbps MP3, despite the MP3 being part of a much newer technology.

IMO many corporations have become quite unscrupulous in their single-minded quest for profits, so I have gotten into the habit of being quite skeptical of new technologies until I see (or hear) for myself if they truly have useful advantages over the old stuff.

The Corporation

 

[ChrisWiggles]

lol lance!

That's my point, everyone jumps on the newest and greatest, but CRT projectors that are a decade old are still my reference for HT. I only hesitate on this because I haven't seen 1080p 3-chippers yet, but everything I've ever seen up to that, CRT is still at the top, with a few displays perhaps sharing the glory, namely the Qualia and the JVD 1080p LCOs machines.

 

[Greg Patterson]

Lance,
I would love to see you go jogging with your turn table and your entire record collection strapped to your arm. Mp3 player looks a little better in that situation huh? Thats the whole point of an MP3 player. Not high fidelity, critical listening through a component system. Everyone here is slamming new tech but totaly ignoring the improvements made over older tech. For example, viewing angle is totaly improved. In my opinion watching movies on my friends CRT sucked if I didn't sit almost dead center in front of the tv. Picture quality is only good on CRT from limited angles. How about screen brightness and also screen size. Newer tech definitely has an edge there. Have you ever seen a CRT bigger than 60" that didn't have a big problem in that area. Another big one is burn in issues. Try burning an image into a DLP. Its not going to happen. For all of these reasons I have stayed away from CRTs. The quality and reliability wasn't there for me, so I never had a big screen until earlier this year when I bought a Tosh DLP.
All of those things that I mentioned above, which are the facts of life with CRT, are not issues with my set. Are there CRTs that may have a slightly better picture in some respects? Sure. If I sit directly in front, in a totaly dark room, calibrate every few months and never play video games on it. Gee, that just doesn't seem very useful to me. Which is one of my points. New tech makes things more useful... such as being able to carry around your entire record collection in your pocket.

 

[ChrisWiggles]

Greg: indeed, these are all aspects in deciding what to purchase, because the image certainly is not the only thing. However, the original poster was comparing just image attributes, so in that sense I don't see a need to get defensive about new technologies.


That is not the case, there are changes in strengths and weaknesses. In many respects there are a lot of reasons to move to new technologies, and in others not so much. When it comes down to the image only, it is certainly misleading to think that new technologies have displaced CRT images overall. In some ways they have in the high-end, but in others not so much. I look forward to the time when new technologies can exceed CRT on/off contrast, because this is a big big need and then I think the attributes begin to stack up in favor of the newer technologies, but they have not yet.

 

[Kirk Patrick]

chris, why do you not include the 720 D-ila?

i haven't seen the 1080, is it that much better?

i very much like the d-ila and am thinking about it vs. the sony a10 (not being able to afford a qualia)

 

[ChrisWiggles]

I haven't spent that much time with 720p LCOS, but the 1080p LCOS is the only displays that really hit the smoothness of a CRT which I like. There are a lot of reasons to go with a 720dlp, but in my viewing preferences the 1080pLCOS is in another class because you can sit at 1.5x or closer that you just can't do with 720p DLP/LCD.

I'm sorry I can't help guide you so much specifically in your purchase decision, but if you like the lcos stuff I sure can understand why!

I should note that with lens smearing either in the design (say the AE900 LCD) or external like the IMX you can get that smoothness better with DLP or LCD, in addition you can also defocus a little bit but the lens stuff is a better solution.