[David (2)]

Most of us know that its nearly impossible to match a CRT based picture with one shown on a LCD tv. However, I think the reason why some people say otherwise maybe due to their CRT tv being not the best quality. Just the other day I had to visit a neighbour and setup their vhs-dvd combi recorder (problem = they bought the wrong format discs!). Apart from that, I was shocked by the picture quality of the tv - the colours were bleeding into each other with very obvious overlap. The picture looked soft and the backgrounds were what I call jittery - a dark background that should appear to be painted on, appeared to flicker. Remeber that this is a 28inch crt with a Sky digi box attached as well. They said about maybe getting a LCD tv in the next 6 months, and I ofcourse said that the picture quality wouldnt be as good. But then I had to stop and think about it - the Sky digi box picture is fixed - the problem is the old CRT tv, swap it for an LCD and it will most likely look a lot better.

My point is that if you have a modern CRT with good signal source, then you may indeed find a LCD tv to be slightly worse in quality. However, if your crt tv is past it, like the one I saw, then its unlikely to match the quality of even a modest LCD tv.

Dave

[Orbitalzone]

When I used to do TV servicing in home, nearly all the TV's that the customer had setup themselves would be lousy looking. Usually the brightness was at max, along with colour and contrast.

Often I'd repair a simple fault like dodgy aerial connection but the fact I'd set the colour/brightness/contrast back to 'normal' the customer would be over the moon.

Even with my slight colour blindness I could setup a TV far better than any or my customers!

[Lfc24-7]

I have a Toshiba 36ZP48 CRT TV and the picture is great! Apart from HD I have not seen a TV that I would swap it for.

[marshalflinkman]

As most people seem to think that watching 4:3 pictures stretched to fill their 16:9 set in composite is superb quality,there's not much chance of getting genuine quality references from many punters who don't even know how to find the setup menu for widescreen on their Sky box or dvd player,and they don't even know what RGB is.
And some of those that do will believe they are watching RGB even when they have it connected to a scart input on their TV that does not accept it.

But OP is correct.
When it comes to SD pictures,LCD and plasma are universally inept at displaying quality anywhere near as good as a CRT.
Thats why LCD owners rave on about HD so much.
They spend most of the time watching SD dross so with the HD they can,at last input, brings their LCD display in line with a top notch CRT

[darkpaw]

well I need to get a new telly...... not bought one for about 10 years

Should I stick to CRT? Pros and cons? As LCDs seem to be all the rage now, and frankly the range of CRT available is no longer what it used to be, although on the plus side CRTs are so much cheaper these days.

Also, on the environmentally friendly side (oh okay I just want to keep the electricity bill down)... screen size like-for-like, which consumes more power, CRT or LCD?

Cheers in advance

[diablo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orbitalzone

When I used to do TV servicing in home, nearly all the TV's that the customer had setup themselves would be lousy looking. Usually the brightness was at max, along with colour and contrast.

Do people still do that? I recall they did tend to turn up the colour to max when colour tv first came out in this country. Not noticed it much since.

I'm hoping my 6 year old widescreen JVC lasts a few more years yet before I have to choose another set. More time for the others to improve, be they LCD, SED or rear projection laser.

---

Last edited by diablo : 26-12-2006 at 03:46.

[Orbitalzone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by diablo

Do people still do that? I recall they did tend to turn up the colour to max when colour tv first came out in this country. Not noticed it much since.

I'm hoping my 6 year old widescreen JVC lasts a few more years yet before I have to choose another set. More time for the others to improve, be they LCD, SED or rear projection laser.

Not sure now as thank goodness I got out of the TV repair trade 6 years ago and never looked back!




(I'm also hoping my 6 year old CRT last another few years as I'm not at all convinced that I'd be happy with an LCD of similar size, as I sit quite close to the TV and would almost certainly notice the digital effects made more apparent on flat screen panels)

---

Last edited by Orbitalzone : 26-12-2006 at 11:27.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkpaw

well I need to get a new telly...... not bought one for about 10 years

Should I stick to CRT? Pros and cons? As LCDs seem to be all the rage now, and frankly the range of CRT available is no longer what it used to be, although on the plus side CRTs are so much cheaper these days.

None of the reputable manufacturers make CRT sets any more, your only option is a small selection of sets from cheap junk brand names.

Quote:

Also, on the environmentally friendly side (oh okay I just want to keep the electricity bill down)... screen size like-for-like, which consumes more power, CRT or LCD?

CRT is by FAR the lower, LCD takes between 2-3 times as much current, and Plasma 4-6 times as much current. However, bear ij mind the LCD or Plasma is probably a larger screen as well!.

[TV DUNIYA]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orbitalzone

When I used to do TV servicing in home, nearly all the TV's that the customer had setup themselves would be lousy looking. Usually the brightness was at max, along with colour and contrast.

Often I'd repair a simple fault like dodgy aerial connection but the fact I'd set the colour/brightness/contrast back to 'normal' the customer would be over the moon.

Even with my slight colour blindness I could setup a TV far better than any or my customers!

Just as a rough guide.
What should the settings for colour/brightness/contrast,be set at,percentage wise?
Is it best done with a testcard?
Thanks.

[Orbitalzone]

Personally I'd just set up using a good fairly static programme or testcard if you have one (I've just ordered a testcard DVD from ebay for a couple of £'s to see what use it might be.

It might be worth using BBC News or similar although don't go by Natasha Kaplinsky's skin tone! (she looks washed out on every tv!)

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TV DUNIYA

Just as a rough guide.
What should the settings for colour/brightness/contrast,be set at,percentage wise?
Is it best done with a testcard?
Thanks.

There's no 'percentage' setting, it's entirely dependent on the particular set.

The best method is to use colour bars - turn the colour completely OFF, and adjust the contrast and brightness for a good black and white picture - with the black a nice solid black, and the white a nice bright white. You should be able to see each individual shade of grey within the colour bars. Then turn the colour up until the colours look correct - it's probably best to finish the colour setting on a programme, adjusting it for good skin tones.

But always bear in mind, they are all PERSONAL settings, there's no 'right or wrong', what YOU prefer is right!.

[jer1956]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marshalflinkman

But OP is correct.
When it comes to SD pictures,LCD and plasma are universally inept at displaying quality anywhere near as good as a CRT.

That is the great myth put forward mainly by those brave souls who bought HD sets far too early.

Scaling SD is not new. People started scaling SD for use with High Resolution (much higher than HD) projectors years ago, and all the same arguments raged then. Scaling is not absoute. Some peole are willing to pay hundreds of pounds for stand alone scalers. It was a major breakthough when DLP projectors started to use Feroudja DSP's as projectors could have SD directly connected. Only videophiles would notice the "deficiencies" compared to Feroudja's stand along scalers.


So those with poor DSP's in their TV's will continue to tell eveyone that HD sets are crap for Sd, those with good scalers will shake their heads and wonder what the problem is, other than really crap DVB broadcasts which HD sets can't be blamed for. Bad DVB will always look worse the larger you make it, even on a large CRT.

[darkpaw]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

None of the reputable manufacturers make CRT sets any more, your only option is a small selection of sets from cheap junk brand names.



CRT is by FAR the lower, LCD takes between 2-3 times as much current, and Plasma 4-6 times as much current. However, bear ij mind the LCD or Plasma is probably a larger screen as well!.

Thanks

Anyway I browsed round the shops today and I must say I wasn't terribly impressed with the LCDs - I thought a lot of them looked quite grainy and the overall picture quality wasn't too great to be honest, especially at the smaller/ lower end of the market.

And the range of CRTs on the high street is abysmal now, like you say just a few cheap junk names. However on the internet I rather like the look of the Philips 21PT5409, which seems to be still available. Yes I know it's a Philips but beggars can't be choosers... and it does look quite nice...

---

Last edited by darkpaw : 28-12-2006 at 02:51.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jer1956

So those with poor DSP's in their TV's will continue to tell eveyone that HD sets are crap for Sd, those with good scalers will shake their heads and wonder what the problem is, other than really crap DVB broadcasts which HD sets can't be blamed for. Bad DVB will always look worse the larger you make it, even on a large CRT.

So what make TV's would you suggest have better scalers?.

[jer1956]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

So what make TV's would you suggest have better scalers?.

I can only quote about what i've used. I decided upon a Toshiba Regza because they use Feroudja chips. Unfortunately most companies don't publisice when they do. I only found out becuase I like to broaden my web searchs to include German and French sites. Toshiba's German and French sites have such info, the UK site does not!

[Nigel Goodwin]

I can't say recent Toshiba sets have impressed us, and certainly some of the Toshiba LCD's are just bought in from Beko!.

[jer1956]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

I can't say recent Toshiba sets have impressed us, and certainly some of the Toshiba LCD's are just bought in from Beko!.

Well many Germans sites have rave reviews of the 66 series Regzas, and I am talking Regza, not any other part of the range. These same sites are not happy at all with the 68 100hz models.

My Regza has made in the UK on it, not Turkey!

[michaelvartan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jer1956

That is the great myth put forward mainly by those brave souls who bought HD sets far too early.

Scaling SD is not new. People started scaling SD for use with High Resolution (much higher than HD) projectors years ago, and all the same arguments raged then. Scaling is not absoute. Some peole are willing to pay hundreds of pounds for stand alone scalers. It was a major breakthough when DLP projectors started to use Feroudja DSP's as projectors could have SD directly connected. Only videophiles would notice the "deficiencies" compared to Feroudja's stand along scalers.


So those with poor DSP's in their TV's will continue to tell eveyone that HD sets are crap for Sd, those with good scalers will shake their heads and wonder what the problem is, other than really crap DVB broadcasts which HD sets can't be blamed for. Bad DVB will always look worse the larger you make it, even on a large CRT.

I've viewed LCD sets from the low depths of Comet,Curry's to the supposedly correct setups of Richer Sounds and Sevenoaks Sound and Vision and the LCD sets whether they be £1500 or £300 have one thing in common.

If its not HD the pictures are unacceptable.

Sevenoaks had a £1000 upscaling Denon dvd player which improved dvd a bit,but without a doubt SD on LCD is piss poor compared to a CRT.

Its irrelevant whether you blame low bitrate MPEG2 on DSAT or DTT,as thats what most will be viewing,they need to look decent.

Unless you are using one just for SkyHD or HDDVD then thye don't deliver the goods

---

Last edited by michaelvartan : 28-12-2006 at 21:08.

[gomezz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

Tit's probably best to finish the colour setting on a programme, adjusting it for good skin tones.

Just get that nice David Dickinson looking a ripe shade of orange

[jer1956]

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelvartan

If its not HD the pictures are unacceptable.

Sevenoaks had a £1000 upscaling Denon dvd player which improved dvd a bit,but without a doubt SD on LCD is piss poor compared to a CRT.

Well DVD upscaled/deinterlaced via my Regza has a wow factor compared to what I had on an exspensive Pansonic CRT.

But it took a lot of learning and reading chip specs on the Web to sort it out. The manual was largely useless.

Shops don't have the time to do that. The big chains (like all the ones you quoted) expect things to work from the box. That's understandable, so do most people who buy them!

[michaelvartan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jer1956

Well DVD upscaled/deinterlaced via my Regza has a wow factor compared to what I had on an exspensive Pansonic CRT.

But it took a lot of learning and reading chip specs on the Web to sort it out. The manual was largely useless.

Shops don't have the time to do that. The big chains (like all the ones you quoted) expect things to work from the box. That's understandable, so do most people who buy them!

Well if that really is necessary to get decent pictures then I don't hold out much hope for HD taking over as quickly as it should.

1)Even pro HD reports state that 42" is ideal and 32" minimum to see any improvement.

2)Sky HD is a ripoff at £10 extra per month---and thats without a decent selection of channels to view.

3)While HDDVD and Blu-Ray battle it out,the dvd market will continue to thrive at the expense of HD.

4) Buying a new tv as most people need to do to get HD quality is not an option for many.

So all the signs are that HD will remain an enthusiasts market for a very long time .

It needs either the HD disc war to end or for Sky to offer a decent HD service for anything to move on

[jer1956]

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelvartan

It needs either the HD disc war to end or for Sky to offer a decent HD service for anything to move on

The problem is SKY, or Telewest, don't control the channels needed to make HD a decent service. Until BBC1-4, ITV1-3,channel4, channel 5 etc are HD, we don't really have a HD service at all.

[michaelvartan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jer1956

The problem is SKY, or Telewest, don't control the channels needed to make HD a decent service. Until BBC1-4, ITV1-3,channel4, channel 5 etc are HD, we don't really have a HD service at all.

I know its not completely in the hands of Sky but the service,when its available will inevitably be controlled intially by Sky.

Until BBC1,ITV1 are HD the service will stall.

While the World Cup and early adopters gave the service a reasonable launch this Summer I would love to know what the takeup is currently