LCD Screens Were A Mistake, For Gaming?

VaLLiancE

No company is safe.
Sep 11, 2013
24,353
2,789
4,031
The Delaware Valley
I have had stellar CRT's and they looked pale in comparison to my 1st 1080p LCD.
I see many pluses but they can't touch the flicker free cleanness of LCD.
 

wshowers

Certified Classic
Super Mod
Sep 11, 2013
2,890
816
1,730
I was going to talk trash about them using such old tech and nostalgia, but I've got a launch XB1 and PS4 hooked up to a Pioneer plasma and a Panasonic Plasma in my house so I can't say a word. Although I think the LCD tech in my 2016 Samsung Ks8000 has eclipsed them, they still work and look pretty good.
 

JinCA

Well-Known Member
Sep 11, 2013
13,703
5,738
3,830
I had a 36 inch Sony CRT HDTV and no other 1080p LCD matched the clarity, obviously LCD have much bigger screens and they weigh a lot less but they were never as crisp and didn't (still don't) handle motion as well. I loved that TV but it was around 220lbs and when it went to HD it went into 16x9 mode which made it the equivalent of something like a 33 inch 16x9 so it was frustrating. CRT sets and monitors also gave off radiation which we don't have to worry about with LCD so I think on balance the change was for the good but I won't pretend that LCD picture quality held up especially early on.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DarkPassenger

BDaddyK

Generation Crybaby
Supporting Member
Sep 11, 2013
8,360
1,263
3,930
Outside Boston
I had a 36 inch Sony CRT HDTV and no other 1080p LCD matched the clarity, obviously LCD have much bigger screens and they weigh a lot less but they were never as crisp and didn't (still don't) handle motion as well. I loved that TV but it was around 220lbs and when it went to HD it went into 16x9 mode which made it the equivalent of something like a 33 inch 16x9 so it was frustrating. CRT sets and monitors also gave off radiation which we don't have to worry about with LCD so I think on balance the change was for the good but I won't pretend that LCD picture quality held up especially early on.
LOL. I had that same TV, was a phuking beast to move, but had awesome picture quality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JinCA

JinCA

Well-Known Member
Sep 11, 2013
13,703
5,738
3,830
LOL. I had that same TV, was a phuking beast to move, but had awesome picture quality.
I know, I lived in fear that we'd have an earthquake and the entertainment center would collapse lol.
 

JinCA

Well-Known Member
Sep 11, 2013
13,703
5,738
3,830
Why can't CRTs be in the form of an LCD present day? CRT quality is amazing.
They tried to make thinner ones but they didn't sell well and they were nowhere near as thin as LCD's and plasma's at the time. That tech just can't be adapted to the thin lightweight sets people want these days.
 

karmakid

Hiding in your WiFi 🙃
Forum Mod
Sep 11, 2013
7,312
2,578
2,529
in front of a screen
They tried to make thinner ones but they didn't sell well and they were nowhere near as thin as LCD's and plasma's at the time. That tech just can't be adapted to the thin lightweight sets people want these days.

Lasers, the answer is always lasers?
 

GordoSan

Well-Known Member
Cornerstone Member
Sep 14, 2013
2,305
793
11,780
I have had stellar CRT's and they looked pale in comparison to my 1st 1080p LCD.
I see many pluses but they can't touch the flicker free cleanness of LCD.
They had progressive scan CRTs, Proscan being a an example.
 

GordoSan

Well-Known Member
Cornerstone Member
Sep 14, 2013
2,305
793
11,780
Right but I still noticed the image not being as smooth as a LCD.
That could possibly be, considering raster scan draws line by line. Still, most early LCD was plagued with macro-blocking and tracers until they went to 120Hz. That really changed the game for the technology, imo. I would have loved to see a 1080p CRT TV at 120Hz. I've seen some good monitors doing high frame rates, but I don't believe I have ever seen a brighter CRT HDTV do that high of a frame rate, and at 16:9.
 

VaLLiancE

No company is safe.
Sep 11, 2013
24,353
2,789
4,031
The Delaware Valley
That could possibly be, considering raster scan draws line by line. Still, most early LCD was plagued with macro-blocking and tracers until they went to 120Hz. That really changed the game for the technology, imo. I would have loved to see a 1080p CRT TV at 120Hz. I've seen some good monitors doing high frame rates, but I don't believe I have ever seen a brighter CRT HDTV do that high of a frame rate, and at 16:9.
I unlocked my old 19 inch 4:3 crt monitor and got 1600x1200/120hz

I'd like to see 10bit or higher with HDR on a CRT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GordoSan

Zer0beaT

Go Leafs Go!
Sep 11, 2013
948
160
730
I had a 36 inch Sony CRT HDTV and no other 1080p LCD matched the clarity, obviously LCD have much bigger screens and they weigh a lot less but they were never as crisp and didn't (still don't) handle motion as well. I loved that TV but it was around 220lbs and when it went to HD it went into 16x9 mode which made it the equivalent of something like a 33 inch 16x9 so it was frustrating. CRT sets and monitors also gave off radiation which we don't have to worry about with LCD so I think on balance the change was for the good but I won't pretend that LCD picture quality held up especially early on.
Yeah I had that TV too, it was for real 200 pounds and it was in my basement. I can kind of remember the day we (me and two other guys who I requested to help) took it upstairs and out to the end of the driveway.

We all ended up wearing thick winter gloves and that helped a lot with the sharp edges, but it was still a struggle getting it to the ground floor.

Great TV but damn....Plasma was/is king IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JinCA