I really don't think that's right, the difference is probably less than £20 a year if you watch TV for 5 hours a day on average (and I watch less). Hardly worth even considering it unless you are a green energy freak at home, and if you were, you probably wouldn't have a TV at all! My 3 year old plasma 42 incher uses between 120 and 220 watts for most of what I view - average less than 200 watts. Measured with a mains plug power meter.

Of course, if you love a dazzlingly bright picture as in showrooms, and watch with all your lights on at home, you'd use more than that but you have a choice, and I choose not to do that (it would hurt my eyes!).

and LCD fanbois screaming LCD is better too it would seem

No you are quite correct, I don't actually use that kind of resolution on a day-to-day basis, only when messing around with Full HD video. For photographic work I choose a lower resolution that gives me the benefits of less flicker and more phosphors per pixel for better colour representation.
Geometry is often brought out when discussing CRTs but when they have been set up correctly it is a non-issue.

I'm dipping my toe in here.
Agree entireley with the above comment, but the trouble for me over many years, is that CRT's generally were rarely, if ever, set up properly.
I've had no end of TV's during my sixty years. My first colour TV was a 12" Sony Trinitron and my last was a Mitsubishi 42" 4:3 monster.
Not one CRT TV I've had has all the following in perfect adjustement:
Picture geometry
Convergence
Purity
Focus
My current Sony KDL-46X4500 beets every CRT TV I've ever had.

Ive got a 40" sony LCD and that beats the previous Sony and panasonics Ive had easily.

I agree with you, I never saw a CRT with correct geometry either probably because its virtually impossible to do. My mate tried to fix his JVCs geometry and he made it even worse and never got it back to how it was.

On the other hand, Ive never seen an HDTV with incorrect geometry.

I totally agree with you. If only TV CRTs were ever made to the same quality as Monitor CRTs. I only waded into this discussion because someone was complaining that HD resolution CRTs were very expensive. CRT as a technology is very mature and still beats any other technology for overall picture quality in my book. Unfortunately very few people ever really see this because the best is reserved for monitors not TVs.
Of course CRT loses out big time on other factors though, i.e. size, weight, power, convenience, ease of set-up.

I love CRTs - they do look very good if set up correctly, and the colour is superb as well. I had a CRT monitor for my computer for many years - a few years back I replaced it with an LCD of about the same price the CRT was originally, and though there was a slight increase in sharpness, this was far outweighed by the horrid picture in non-native resolutions, the horrible uneven backlight, and the generally more washed-out colours. I have since bought a slightly better LCD monitor, but it still has the same problems as the old one but to a lesser extent - so I still prefer my old CRT, which I would use if I had the desk space any more! (I've kept it in case I ever get a bigger desk, though due to the lack of widescreen, I'd probably only use it as a secondary monitor, as I've grown to love widescreen now )

phew

Fortec Star Passion plus here - got no signal thing - added channel manually - still nothing - then spotted someone who posted "23000" figure - added that in and bingo!!!!!!

as an F1 fan - bbc1HD was important!!!

An old 405 TV set up properly will knock spots of any TV since. Same as a wind up gramophone, it has better sound than any electronic device.

re-scanned in DVB viewer and cannot find BBC ONE HD
I have to use another channel list from April this year.
Obviously I can view using that list once I change symbolic rate but is there any reason DVB Viewer does not pick this up.

Picks ITV 1 HD and CH4 HD ok.

Cheers
Frank

Perhaps the application accepts symbol rates in kilohertz (in this case, 23000), and you're entering it in megahertz (how the BBC gave it, in this case, 23)? try entering 23000 as the symbol rate instead of 23.

I don't know if it is related - but since re-tuning to get BBC HD on DVB-S2 - CH4 HD has become terrible (bad signal - high BER - cycling between OK and a plasticene mess) - it does appear to be the only Freesat channel showing problems. Are there other channels (Freesat or FTV) on the same satellite (section) so I can check? (We have light rain at the moment and it is showing "No Signal" most of the time with sporadic pictures and or sound)
To be honest - we have Freeview HD so don't normally watch HD on satellite - so I don't know when the problems actually started.
I did tune it in manually before it was launched (and just after it was launched) and it was perfect then so it is not a problem with the high frequency or the abnormal symbol rate (??).

PS I have tried re-tuning manually (on 'other sat') and it doesn't tune - trying both 12606 and 12607 (originally worked only on 12606 although it always stores 12607).

I haven't got your problem Simon but I have noticed before the odd bit of interference on CH4 in a manner that doesn't look like a signal strength problem.

I know some have said that CH4 is arranged so that there is some deliberate interference to prevent weaker reception abroad. Whether or not that's true and whether or not that can be seen occasionally in the UK I don't know. But from the 2 occasions I saw glitches they didn't look like macro blocking or any standard weak digital I've seen.

The signal condition shows very low or even non-existent signal on the strength bar and the quality occasionally (at the moment) flashes up yellow and about 30%. I use a 60cm (oval) dish which will be tighter focus on azimuth - is the channel 4 TXP on a satellite with a slightly different (or varying) azimuth - although it would cycle over 24 hours not a few seconds (guessing ??). Satellite wobbling slightly and my dish needs better alignment? I will try to find other channels on the same satellite (panel group) to see if they are problematic too or if it is just the TXP.

The problems seen are like long term signals just on the 'cliff edge' - people say the cliff edge is sharp - but we once had 14 hours of 'green plasticene' pictures in the early days of Freeview - and the interference I see is just the same - ie satellite signal hovering on the edge of the Freesat DVB cliff edge.

I am having what seems like signal problems on CH4HD and Gold radio a station i regularly have on since i had the Humax PVR this has only been the case since the update
If i check the signal strength on those channels its weaker and not as good coulalty as say BBC1HD

When I did the scan DVBviewer picked up the symbolic rate as 22000 ....changed to 23000 manually and works fine.

Another strange issue with HD channels on DVBViewer is that HD transmission showing up as as 1440x1088 25fps is filling up my 1920 by 1200 screen horizontally (so 1440 is filling 1920). Same with the 2 ITV Channel feeds off Freesat (both the 1920 and the 1440 ) take up the same screen size ....must dig deep into dvbviewer.


ANy suggestions welcome

NHK World HD same also Eurobird 1 with 27000 S/s is also showing some glitching and varying BER - perhaps they have steered the panel a bit or the power is down as they ramp up the number of TXPs??

Shame - interesting programme on the Earthquake on now!

Err that's what it's meant to do!

I see it hasn't been mentioned yet but BBC HD is switching to 1920 x1080 tomorrow to accomodate 3D, only to switch back on 6th July.

MPEG has a resolution and an aspect ratio.

1440x1080 MPEG will be transmitted with a 16x9 aspect ratio - therefore it will be mapped to your 1920x1080 TV display full screen (or to a 16x9 window on your different resolution/aspect ratio display). If your display is 1920x1020 and you have told your system and your software understands this - then it should have a small black line at the top and bottom to maintain the correct aspect ratio.

Presumably they will steal some bandwidth to transmit it on Freeview HD and cannot do this permanently - hence the return to 1440 (??). Presumably when 3D is transmitted it will simulcast on BBC1 HD too - but take longer to generate - so the peaks will not co-incide when stat-MUXing - enabling it to be shown on Freeview. No such problems on Freesat because of the excess bandwidth available now it is on DVB-S2 ??

Question is why can`t the HD channels stay at 1920x1080 after 6th July.

The BBC say that Freeview and Freesat are unconnected - but contrary to this they seem to be kept logistically the same - hence the change to 1920 will (should?) be on both and will have to return to 1440 because of the bandwidth limitations on Freeview.

So once more fairness seems to dictate its fair to spoil 1 set of viewers enjoyment just to match the bandwidth of the other when all have the choice of which service they use.

Sadly it seems to be the case, Freeview has 4 streams in the same space whereas sat only has 3 so could easily accomodate 1920 BBC One HD and BBC HD. I really fail to see why BBC would be so desparate to keep 1440 when C4 obviously don't really care about it with 1920 on C4 HD on sat and 1440 on Freeview (as well as for 2 ITV1 HD regions).

Retarded isnt it?

Imagine if pubs or food chains did this, they have one branch that makes the food/beer taste awful so they sabotage the rest of the chains so it doesnt make the other one look bad.

Completely backwards logic.