The way you can prove it is to choose something on Sky which is both HD and SD. If you watch via SCART the HD version will usually be much better than the SD version. This shows it's the transmission not the TV. If you don't have Sky then you could watch a DVD and if that is okay again that points to the transmission.
It sounds like there is some extra image processing switched on for the Sony, this often makes the picture worse. Refresh rate isn't very important but usually Sonys are better than Samsungs.
I found that the picture on the sony looked greyed out and even after endless adjusting of picture settings and blackness settings the samsung looked better and the blacks looked more black as opposed to the sony where the blackr looked slightly purple or grey. I also think it has something to do with the fact that the screen on the sony was non reflective and the samsung screen was glossy making it look better but after trying out both the samsung is definitely better. Watching the snooker this week the balls on the table looked jagged and the lines looked pixelated but the samsung looked far clearer. At first I thought it was maybe how it was set up but after hours of playing about with the settings I couldn't get it as good as the picture on the samsung so we've decided to keep the samsung.
I don't miss the poor number of inputs (two scart and 1 composite video)
I don't miss the shiny reflective glass screen that showed reflections of any bright object or window in the room and made it hard to see the picture on a bright sunny day.
I DO like my LCD set.
But ONLY because I have an old one, about 4 years old, when they were not afraid to have speakers on the front that were large enough to be seen and large enough to have just about acceptable sound.
and ONLY because I found one that gave a good picture on both SD and HD. In the process I tried many (in fairness all cheap brands) and many were rubbish, but I stumbled upon a good one and kept it.
and ONLY because it has a nice matt black black screen finish so no reflections AND it has a nice matt black screen surround that also does not show any reflections.
I am not so convinced that the ones on sale now with their tiny invisible (tweeter) speakers and their hideous shiny black surrounds are to my liking though, so I am in no hurry to "upgrade" and hope my nice set lasts a long time.
I still have a 28" Matsui in the bedroom. I keep it for use when my SHARP LCD has to be replaced (currently on my 3rd set) It's just easier to use this than get John Lewis to let me use one of their loan sets.
.......................................
I helped a friend take her 32" Sony to the council tip last Saturday. Nothing wrong with it, but she got a new LCD.
To say it was heavy was an understatement. I ended up dragging it to the car on it screen. Her little Nissan Micra groaned under the strain once I finally got it in.
The council tip contained hundreds of CRT's and old computer monitors.
I do, all my old games consoles and computers look awful through a 42" HDTV I dont think they were ever really built (the consoles) for these kind of tellys (well that much is obvious really, but you know what I mean!)
However, do I miss the size and weight of the old CRT's? No way!!!
I do, all my old games consoles and computers look awful through a 42" HDTV I dont think they were ever really built (the consoles) for these kind of tellys (well that much is obvious really, but you know what I mean!)
However, do I miss the size and weight of the old CRT's? No way!!!
I've never really understood the difficulty made out in big entertainment goods being heavy when, in my experience at least, they are moved about as often as the kitchen/utility room white goods. Similalry the gas fire in the tied accommodation takes up the same volume in the living room as the my CRT.
I've never really understood the difficulty made out in big entertainment goods being heavy when, in my experience at least, they are moved about as often as the kitchen/utility room white goods. Similalry the gas fire in the tied accommodation takes up the same volume in the living room as the my CRT.
I have never heard of people moving CRT TV around their houses, in most cases in stays in the living room until you work out how you are going to get it down to the council tip:D
All I can say Sue is you must be a very strong lady;)
My last crt was a 36" Picture Frame Toshiba 16:9 picture frame. The limit in size of glass technology. Nice TV but if you think a 32" is heavy try a 36" 16:9 one. Replaced with a 40" LCD Sony Bravia, great pictures but compared to the built in subwoofer and seperate 5.1 speakers crap sound.
As I have a good seperate AV setup it wasn't a problem.
Son in law bought a Samsung HD capable 32" CRT about the only one ever made, terrible geometry and a equally awfull picture. HD pictures require larger displays so crt just doesn't cut it. Would I go back to crt, you have to be joking
Most of the bad reputation of LCD tv's is based on people buying el cheapo TV's from the likes of Tesco, Comet Argos etc. These have really poor off axis viewing and terrible contrast ratios. If you want to compare choose a decent make like Sony or Panasonic. Anyone remember the sublime pictures the sadly departed Pioneer Kuro plasma displays could generate ?
I've never really understood the difficulty made out in big entertainment goods being heavy when, in my experience at least, they are moved about as often as the kitchen/utility room white goods. Similalry the gas fire in the tied accommodation takes up the same volume in the living room as the my CRT.
Try screwing one flat to a wall or on a swivel bracket .
A 36" wide screen crt requires two strong men to move it (or a pair of female weight lifters :eek:).
I'm wall mounting by 50" 3D plasma this week and getting my Sony Trinitron 21" CRT back off my sister, so I can use it for my NES/SNES as these look awful on a 50" HD screen
I'm the same, as a retro gamer a CRT is a must have.
A flat screen is perfect for modern gaming and watching DVDs (I don't really bother with TV), but to play the old consoles, you need a CRT.
i regretted when i got my first LCD TV. However I upgraded to a Plasma 4 years later and the overall picture is superior to LCD.
Im in the process of another upgrade and plasma again is my best choice.
I only got rid of my £85 ebay bargain Philips 32" CRT because a fault developed with it. The TV weighed 120lb and the stand was 56lb so taking the TV to the tip was a bit of an ordeal.
I think overall my Panasonic LED is far better than the CRT and watching HD is a treat.
The best part about my widescreen CRT was that I could rest a cup of tea on it. Sadly this useful feature has been omitted by flat screen tv designers.
The best part about my widescreen CRT was that I could rest a cup of tea on it. Sadly this useful feature has been omitted by flat screen tv designers.
The drawer on your DVD player makes a good substitute
The best part about my widescreen CRT was that I could rest a cup of tea on it. Sadly this useful feature has been omitted by flat screen tv designers.
My friends wife was not amused at all when he set up their new LCD in their living room. She soon realised she couldn't put her (God awful) ornaments on the top and was not happy. :eek:
My friends wife was not amused at all when he set up their new LCD in their living room. She soon realised she couldn't put her (God awful) ornaments on the top and was not happy. :eek:
Since I gained about 3 square feet of space when I ditched my CRT and I can actually lift my TV on my own without requiring two burly blokes to move it.... no.
Seriously, it weighed a metric tonne. I kid you not.
I do agree with those who complain about non-HD sources looking crap on non-CRT though.
I have never heard of people moving CRT TV around their houses, in most cases in stays in the living room until you work out how you are going to get it down to the council tip:D
All I can say Sue is you must be a very strong lady;)
As Sue has already said exactly the same as you - that basically once the TV is in place in the living room it never gets moved again until it is disposed of, why does she have to be a very strong lady?
My 25" CRT Telly weighs 972.7 kg less than Blackjack Davys did and was put on the rack it calls home when I moved from East London to Ashford in 2010 by my removers. Prior to that it was my brother's until he upgraded to a 32" flatscreen, but he always comments on the quality of his old set when he sees how it outputs the images it gets from my other equipment on visits.
Vacuuming around the rack it and the DVD Recorder, BD Player and SD PVR is on is not that much of an effort.
Also the rack is positioned in a corner of a room so really doesn't take up so much space as to be a nuisance. I would still be using the same rack to house the DVD Recorder, BD Player and SD PVR with a 32" Flatscreen so the space argument doesn't sway me.
I keep coming back to this thread - probably as I have a CRT TV. I have just finished watching 'Naked Gun 33 1/3 The Final Insult' on a 25" CRT and ex-rental VHS tape I got from the charity shop. That had a trailer for the film 'Intersection' at the beginning and some period 90's graphics of a VHS tape mechanism working. Tomorrow I have 'The Secret Of My Success' with Michael J Fox (5 pence from PDSA).
The nature of the beast dictates that in a few years time threads like this will be lamenting the loss of LCD. There will always be someone taking longer to exit the cave.
Every time I view a CRT I wonder how anyone could prefer it. Then again, I wonder how anyone could prefer a bike over a car......The diversity makes us human, long live the differences!!:D
As for sound, the manufacturers expect their sets to be used with exterior speakers. As the vast majority of sets are used this way, I don't see the speaker size being any major problem.
Comments
I found that the picture on the sony looked greyed out and even after endless adjusting of picture settings and blackness settings the samsung looked better and the blacks looked more black as opposed to the sony where the blackr looked slightly purple or grey. I also think it has something to do with the fact that the screen on the sony was non reflective and the samsung screen was glossy making it look better but after trying out both the samsung is definitely better. Watching the snooker this week the balls on the table looked jagged and the lines looked pixelated but the samsung looked far clearer. At first I thought it was maybe how it was set up but after hours of playing about with the settings I couldn't get it as good as the picture on the samsung so we've decided to keep the samsung.
I don't miss the imperfect geometry.
I don't miss the bulk of the thing.
I don't miss the poor number of inputs (two scart and 1 composite video)
I don't miss the shiny reflective glass screen that showed reflections of any bright object or window in the room and made it hard to see the picture on a bright sunny day.
I DO like my LCD set.
But ONLY because I have an old one, about 4 years old, when they were not afraid to have speakers on the front that were large enough to be seen and large enough to have just about acceptable sound.
and ONLY because I found one that gave a good picture on both SD and HD. In the process I tried many (in fairness all cheap brands) and many were rubbish, but I stumbled upon a good one and kept it.
and ONLY because it has a nice matt black black screen finish so no reflections AND it has a nice matt black screen surround that also does not show any reflections.
I am not so convinced that the ones on sale now with their tiny invisible (tweeter) speakers and their hideous shiny black surrounds are to my liking though, so I am in no hurry to "upgrade" and hope my nice set lasts a long time.
.......................................
I helped a friend take her 32" Sony to the council tip last Saturday. Nothing wrong with it, but she got a new LCD.
To say it was heavy was an understatement. I ended up dragging it to the car on it screen. Her little Nissan Micra groaned under the strain once I finally got it in.
The council tip contained hundreds of CRT's and old computer monitors.
However, do I miss the size and weight of the old CRT's? No way!!!
I've never really understood the difficulty made out in big entertainment goods being heavy when, in my experience at least, they are moved about as often as the kitchen/utility room white goods. Similalry the gas fire in the tied accommodation takes up the same volume in the living room as the my CRT.
I have never heard of people moving CRT TV around their houses, in most cases in stays in the living room until you work out how you are going to get it down to the council tip:D
All I can say Sue is you must be a very strong lady;)
As I have a good seperate AV setup it wasn't a problem.
Son in law bought a Samsung HD capable 32" CRT about the only one ever made, terrible geometry and a equally awfull picture. HD pictures require larger displays so crt just doesn't cut it. Would I go back to crt, you have to be joking
Most of the bad reputation of LCD tv's is based on people buying el cheapo TV's from the likes of Tesco, Comet Argos etc. These have really poor off axis viewing and terrible contrast ratios. If you want to compare choose a decent make like Sony or Panasonic. Anyone remember the sublime pictures the sadly departed Pioneer Kuro plasma displays could generate ?
Try screwing one flat to a wall or on a swivel bracket
A 36" wide screen crt requires two strong men to move it (or a pair of female weight lifters :eek:).
I'm the same, as a retro gamer a CRT is a must have.
A flat screen is perfect for modern gaming and watching DVDs (I don't really bother with TV), but to play the old consoles, you need a CRT.
Im in the process of another upgrade and plasma again is my best choice.
Actually they generally specify "four man lift", although it's impossible to get more than two people on them at once.
Some of the Sony 36's weigh 120kg :eek:
I think overall my Panasonic LED is far better than the CRT and watching HD is a treat.
The drawer on your DVD player makes a good substitute
My friends wife was not amused at all when he set up their new LCD in their living room. She soon realised she couldn't put her (God awful) ornaments on the top and was not happy. :eek:
And I thought my life sucked.:)
Seriously, it weighed a metric tonne. I kid you not.
I do agree with those who complain about non-HD sources looking crap on non-CRT though.
She still uses a teasmade! :eek: O
As Sue has already said exactly the same as you - that basically once the TV is in place in the living room it never gets moved again until it is disposed of, why does she have to be a very strong lady?
My 25" CRT Telly weighs 972.7 kg less than Blackjack Davys did and was put on the rack it calls home when I moved from East London to Ashford in 2010 by my removers. Prior to that it was my brother's until he upgraded to a 32" flatscreen, but he always comments on the quality of his old set when he sees how it outputs the images it gets from my other equipment on visits.
Vacuuming around the rack it and the DVD Recorder, BD Player and SD PVR is on is not that much of an effort.
Also the rack is positioned in a corner of a room so really doesn't take up so much space as to be a nuisance. I would still be using the same rack to house the DVD Recorder, BD Player and SD PVR with a 32" Flatscreen so the space argument doesn't sway me.
Every time I view a CRT I wonder how anyone could prefer it. Then again, I wonder how anyone could prefer a bike over a car......The diversity makes us human, long live the differences!!:D
As for sound, the manufacturers expect their sets to be used with exterior speakers. As the vast majority of sets are used this way, I don't see the speaker size being any major problem.