1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

9986 as CRT replacement

Discussion in 'LCD & LED LCD TVs Forum' started by meg, Apr 8, 2005.

Tags:
  1. meg

    meg
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I've currently got a Sony 32" FQ80 CRT, and the DRC100 mode provides a pretty good picture.... But can someone please help explain if the picture on a 9986 will be same / worse / better? I know that, when fed a HD source, it is bound ti be better, but what about for SD pictures?

    Thank you very much in advance for help!
     
  2. Hillskill

    Hillskill
    Moderator/Games Reviewer

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    22,359
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere being wrong but staying strong
    Ratings:
    +5,387
    I have been ecstatic with the purchase of my 9986, Sky connected via an RGB is excellent. Movies on Channel 5 in particular look awesome. DVD via DVI is one of the best pictures I have seen.
     
  3. meg

    meg
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    What TV did you have before this, i.e. were you upgrading from something decent etc?

    (thanks for the quick reply btw :) )
     
  4. andy c!

    andy c!
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    65
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    You do suffer from a little motion blur on some sport, but other than that I think the picture on my 32"9986 is bettern that the toshibe 32" CRT it replaced... easily. It's miles better off DVD via DVI (Denon 2910), and al ot better off Skty+ (RGBscart by QED deployed here).

    andy c!
     
  5. jimsan

    jimsan
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,610
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Location:
    Dumfries, SW Scotland.
    Ratings:
    +9
    It depends...

    If you connect it well, with good quality equipment and decent leads the 9986 is utterly stunning. LCD's main flaw is also one of their main assets - they display exactly what you feed them. A poor quality feed will provide a poor quality image. A good quality feed will blow your socks off!

    With a CRT, however, you can feed them rubbish and they usually turn out an acceptable picture.

    So, be prepared to have to work at it a bit to get the 9986 to really work...it's worth it though.

    Jimmy
     
  6. nnicol

    nnicol
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    231
    Products Owned:
    3
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Ratings:
    +11
    Definately worth the swap. It beats the picture I had on the Panny TX32PD50 (CRT) before I sent it back. Use the advise on here for settings etc. and you can't go wrong.
     
  7. Faust

    Faust
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,148
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +633
    No! now I would take issue with you there, I had the 9986 on test for a number of weeks, and whilst I would not deny that it is good, I would not put it above my Panasonic 50Hz PL1 - truthfully. It certainly beats the Panny hands down when it comes to geometry, but superior PQ? NO.
     
  8. meg

    meg
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Faust,

    Was there a particular thing that is worse / no better in the 9986?


    Does anyone have any direct comparison experience between the 9986 and one of the Sony CRT DRC models?
     
  9. nnicol

    nnicol
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    231
    Products Owned:
    3
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Ratings:
    +11
    I'll disagree with you there about PQ on my tx32pd50 it was blocky with artifacts all over the screen. Also the tube was faulty so it went back. The second one arrived and didn't even turn on. So I got the philips and it is much better. You can't even compare your PL1 to the PD50 or pf9986. You are looking at an unprocessed 50hz picture and the others have all sorts of digital processing. Not a true comparison imo.
     
  10. superpixel

    superpixel
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    hi meg,

    this is all just "in my opinion" etc etc. but here goes:

    I have not seen any LCD that I would rather watch over my Sony 28" CRT (I tried models from Sony, Panasonic and Sharp on loan with utter disappointment, and yes I've seen the Philips). They looked great when first switched on, but it all wore off very quickly. Im not sure which 9986 you are thinking of (isnt there a 32" and 37" and maybe more?), but my opinions apply to them all...

    The LCDs have nowhere near the contrast of the CRT. They are bright, but lack depth and solidity (a 'washed out' kind of look), show smearing and artefacts, look digitised and unnatural, the blacks aren't as bad as you may think, but are definitely gray and with the lights off it ain't a pretty sight...and the picture changes rather too much depending on viewing angle.

    However, for me and my family plasma TVs are absolutely fine, and do the CRT job perfectly well. Something like the Panasonic 37PE50 at £1300 I would love to have...perfectly smooth, natural and with good contrast....whereas the LCD's would be a chore for me to watch.

    It's not like shops don't have many LCDs on display though - why not have a look and see what you think? some people obviously like them, and you may be one of them! just make sure to look at those plasmas too - I know which one I'd buy at any rate...
     
  11. MokerJoker

    MokerJoker
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    130
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +6
    Contrast ratio is the difference between bright (white) and black within a single image. The (real) contrast ratio on LCDs is twice that of a CRT or plasma. On a CRT some of the white 'bleeds' into the black.

    When measuring the difference between a completely white screen and a completely black screen, the CRT beats an LCD hands down. (And these numbers are the ones used by the manufacturers of course.)

    This does not mean a CRT is worse than an LCD. Maybe the high CR of LCD is one of the reasons that LCD looks a bit artificial. Slightly 'softer' edges give a more natural look.

    Newer models look very vivid. However, some screens look washed out when viewed from an angle.

    They can look a bit digitised and unnatural, but so do the Philips PP2 CRTs. For example Loewe always manages to display a very pleasing picture, on LCD and CRT. I haven't seen smearing on newer models and artefacts can be seen on any type of display (including 100Hz CRTs).

    I think most people watch TV with some lights on, so this is not a big issue IMHO. What's more important: A CRT can display fine detail and subtle variations in dark areas. This is one of LCD's weakest points. (Others are uneven background in dark areas and stuck pixels.)

    Having seen lots of TV's, I have to say that Philips does a pretty good job handling SD and low-quality signals. Is it better than a Sony CRT? Uhm, well, is an apple better than an orange?

    - Jerry
     
  12. Faust

    Faust
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,148
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +633
    Perhaps that is the real issue, my 50Hz Panny really is a good picture, nay excellent, and is not corrupted with digital processing, which is why I refused to buy the 100Hz Panny, watching one horse race was enough for me. As I said the Philips was a good picture, however, it is hard for me to put into words why the Panny was better, to me it just seems a more natural picture, whereas the 9986 seemed somehow artificial, does anyone know what I mean? I tried all sorts of settings but could never get away totally from that almost steel like quality to the picture. Hope that helps you decide.
     
  13. nnicol

    nnicol
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    231
    Products Owned:
    3
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Ratings:
    +11
    I had a goodmans 28" 50hz widescreen and went to the 100hz panny and was not impressed with the artifacts etc. from the digtal processing. The picture on DVD was good but didn't blow me away. There was a fault with the tv and it went back. I had to wait for a new one and by then knew a bit more on the Sky HD and DVD-HD front and went for an LCD. The philips is a lot better at coping with a poor signal than the panny and DVD is better also. There is a difference in picture between the 50 and 100hz sets and it can take time to get used to it. The philips can look plastic with the pixel plus 2 turned all the way up but when you adjust it you get a much more realistic picture. Just a matter of fine tuning the settings till you get it right and when you do the picture is brilliant.
     
  14. Faust

    Faust
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,148
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +633
    Well as I said, I had the Philips on test for a month and tried every setting in the book, and yet I could never quite match the more natural feel to the picture on the 50Hz Panasonic. This is one of the reasons I still haven't taken the plunge (apart from price that is) I am still looking for that totally natural 50Hz look I have at present with my CRT
     
  15. nnicol

    nnicol
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    231
    Products Owned:
    3
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Ratings:
    +11
    I think you might have a hard time finding one I'm afraid. Doesn't matter what you choose, plasma, LCD or CRT. You will find all the top of the range stuff is 100hz with fancy processing. It also heavily depends on the signal being fed to the screen. Poor bitrate signals will show more problems. Don't give up and keep looking.
     
  16. Faust

    Faust
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,148
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +633
    Sadly I think you are absolutely correct in your assessment of the situation. For me finding a picture that has that same natural unprocessed look as my 50Hz Panasonic has become something of a holy grail I'm afraid. It does make me quite cross when I think about it, why should I shell out serious money for a product that will not please me PQ wise as much as the product I already own at a quarter of the price? It's madness when you think about it isn't it? I suspect that lots of people have been sucked into both LCD and Plasma by the sexy styling and slick advertising associated with such products. For now though I will have to keep on looking.
     
  17. hinesle

    hinesle
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    159
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Ratings:
    +0
    Cant comment on Picture quality but IMO it is dreadful oversight not to include a digital tuner in this LCD. For me an LCD/Plasma screen must have an integrated freeview tuner in-order to even make it onto my shopping list, regardless of how good/bad picture quality may be. Consider the following

    1. An addition freeview/sky box will be required to view free-to-air transmissions
    2. Additional remote control required to operate the aforementioned box
    3. 1 less available Scart input on TV
    4. Analogue transmission will (more than likely than not) be turned off during the expected life time of the LCD

    Sorry if I have annoyed all you owners but this one factor, ok 2 if I include HDMI compatibility (but this is not the issue here) really winds me up.

    Look forward to the response :) :)
     
  18. nnicol

    nnicol
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2005
    Messages:
    231
    Products Owned:
    3
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Ratings:
    +11
    At the end of the day I don't mind not having an intergrated freeview receiver. If I was I would have bought one. As it is I have both sky and freeview anyway.
    What's the problem with the HDMI compatability? As far as I know there isn't a problem.
     
  19. jimsan

    jimsan
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,610
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Location:
    Dumfries, SW Scotland.
    Ratings:
    +9
    If you feel that a Freeview tuner is paramount then that is fine.

    However it does seem rather shortsighted to exclude the best performing LCD on the planet from your shopping list because it doesn't have a freeview tuner. Your argument that you lose one scart is valid, but it has three anyway so there really is no shortage....so you'll have to suffer the inconvenience of an extra remote and £35 out of your wallet....not the most convincing argument for turning your back on the 9986...

    But if it's important to you...

    Jimmy

    Jimmy
     
  20. jimg

    jimg
    Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    826
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +58
    Jimmy, I think he is actually as he says, trying to wind you up!
     
  21. Faust

    Faust
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,148
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    UK
    Ratings:
    +633
    I sometimes get the impression that Jimmy is somewhat biased in favour of the 9986, or is that just me being silly? Rumour has it that the 500 series from Panasonic are poised to topple the Philips crown come July. Phew! there I have said it now, publish and be dammed is what I say.
     
  22. andy c!

    andy c!
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    65
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ya pays ya money and ya makes ya choice. When you decide to spend is your decision, but if you waited 'for the next big thing' you'd never by owt ;)

    andy c!
     
  23. jimsan

    jimsan
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,610
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Location:
    Dumfries, SW Scotland.
    Ratings:
    +9
    YES! I admit it! I am biased! I am a member of the 9986 anonymous club (9986A) and I don't care! WHEEEE! How liberating....

    Hey, I did my homework and bought the 9986 and I'm chuffed to bits. It's better than I could have ever hoped and easily outperforms my old Sony 28" in nearly every way. Delighted I am.

    I should think that the likes of Panasonic could match, or even improve on the abilities of the 9986 with the 500 series and I fully expect Faust to be one of the first to try it out...possibly even unzip the old wallet Faustie??

    Anyway, this will remain to be seen, but this new Panny is really going to be up against it with the new Philips 9830 (and others) which may just move the bar up again...who knows for sure......but isn't it good that there will be this competition between the major (and minor) manufacturers pushing the technology on and on...great!

    Jimmy
     
  24. hinesle

    hinesle
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    159
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Ratings:
    +0

    Jimmy

    While I concede that the 9986 may, as you put it be “one of the best performing screens in the planet”. I refute your argument that I am being short-sighted.

    The cost of large LCD/Plasma screen for most people is a significant outlay and thus the pros and cons of every screen need to be considered prior to purchase.

    What ultimately determines an individual’s choice of screen is subject to personal preferences but for me the following are important (in order of importance).

    • Future proofing (All these are essential to make it onto my short list)
    o Inbuilt freeview
    o DVI/HDMI input being HDCP compliant
    o A Screen resolution of at least 1024 X 720 for HD TV with the ability of displaying 1080i or 720p
    • Display quality. By that I mean how good is the displayed picture
    • Manufacturer
    • Aesthetics
    • Sound
    • Cost


    While I accept the argument that the “next best thing is always around the corner” so why wait. I refuse to purchase a screen that’s native (without additional pieces electronic kit) technology is not compatible with a significant and foreseeable technological change I.E. the transition from analogue to digital terrestrial transmission in the UK.

    I have drawn my requirements for a TV and have put a full stop under them. I am now waiting for a manufacture to produce such a screen so I can make my purchase.

    As Faust stated Panasonic and Sony are scheduled to release screens in the forthcoming months that will satisfy my future proofing requirements. So ultimately who gets to market the first will get my money.

    My original post was not a personal attack on 9986 owners or indeed an intention to wind them up but rather to widen the discussion of the pros and cons of a “9986 for a CRT replacement”. So get of your box man :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
     
  25. andy c!

    andy c!
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    65
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    How many current LCD sets with the PQ of the Phillips offer more than 1 dvi or hdmi input?

    Do we exactly know what fomat sky HD is going to be put out in yet?

    Did we know this 4 months ago when I purchased my set?

    Is the Phillips set not HD ready??

    And while we are at it, the Denon 2910 into my Tosh 32" CRT via rgb scart is nowhere near as good on PQ as in to the 9986 via DVI. Sky PQ is also better, in my humble opinion. And this comarison is against a Tosh set that had a better PQ than the Panasonic or Sony equivalent when I purchased it some 2 years ago.

    The Amenricans use 'splitters' or junction boxes that output just one DVI/HDMI into your monitor, with inputs for 2 + HDMI/DVI/HD sources, and have gone this route for some time. Would you want the option to either out the picture thru such a thing, or connect all to a reciever?

    Where the Phillips did lose out was on the lack of component in via phonos, instead adding an adaptor to the DVI in plug. I am sure the next Phillips generation will cover this, but we need to wait and see exactly how the Sky HD is going to work, and actually how long it takes for them to roll this out. More relevant is whether people will pay for the extra box that Sky will probably insist on you having?!?

    regards

    andy c!
     
  26. jimsan

    jimsan
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,610
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Location:
    Dumfries, SW Scotland.
    Ratings:
    +9
    You ARE trying to wind me up!

    So out of your list of requirements for your ultimate TV the only thing missing from the 9986 is the Freeview reciever...So I am correct in stating that you have turned your back on it because you don't want to have a separate freeview STB.......OK.

    However it seems to me that a freeview tuner is such an insignificant addition to a TV of this calibre as the bulk of people who's requirements include HDCP DVI/HDMI will be looking to Sky as their main digital source. A basic internal Freeview tuner will never be able to supply HD broadcasts.

    To me a Freeview tuner should be of little importance when reviewing TV's for purchase compared to the much more significant features on your list - especially the most important one - DISPLAY QUALITY. This should be right on the top of your list of priorities.

    However, I can't really argue with you, as you are quite right to have a list of requirements, and I'm sure the new Panny could fill them and supply a decent PQ too...but it may be necessary to be slightly flexible....just don't compromise PQ for a freeview box...please!

    Jimmy
     
  27. hinesle

    hinesle
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Messages:
    159
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Ratings:
    +0
    Jimmy,

    I am genuinely not trying to wind you up but I simply could not resist the soap box dig – sorry :D . (I know owners are protective of their screens as andy_c has just demonstrated – amusing.)

    Anyway as I said what ultimately determines an individual’s choice of screen is subject to personal preferences and for me integrated freeview is a big factor

    1. I don’t have sky or ever intend on purchasing it as I don’t watch that much TV/sport
    2. I love bid-up.tv and cant go a day without watching it (ok that was a joke) but the ability to watch freeview channels is a must without cluttering up my minimalist design with addition boxes/remotes (remember the WAF is also important here)
    3. I am an avid move buff so High definition TV and HDCP/hdmi (via DVD/blueray etc) is important to me.
    4. Cable is also out of the question as I live in the sticks so my only real choice is Freeview or Web streamed TV (a thing for the future I think)
    5. There is no reason why HDTV cannot be sent via freeview as there is adequate bandwidth available its just a question of time.


    Naturally PQ is very important but so is future-proofing and to be fair they both are equally important.

    I drew my requirements list for my main TV back in July (and it has not changed) but to date no screen has been produced that meets them all. (either freeview OR DVI being notably absent).

    I’ll be the first to admit I have subsequently purchased 2 lcd screens for the bedroom /kitchen (with freeview but without DVI) as the requirement list is tailored to the given situation

    Anyway the quest for the perfect TV goes on but IMO the 9986 just isn’t it despite having
    • A good screen resolution
    • Have great PQ
    • Have DVI input
    • Look fantastic
    • Made by a reputable manufacture

    BUT it falls short because
    • It doesn’t have Freeview
    • Lacks component in via phones
     
  28. Bluestraw

    Bluestraw
    Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    272
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Ratings:
    +14
    Hi Andy,

    That is very interesting for me to hear! What model was your 32" CRT? Also, do you let the DVD player do the upscaling, or do you pass the SD progressive output and let the TV do it?

    The 9986 is getting more tempting every day!!!!!
     
  29. Hillskill

    Hillskill
    Moderator/Games Reviewer

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    22,359
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    Somewhere being wrong but staying strong
    Ratings:
    +5,387
    As an owner of a 9986 who fully intends to buy a HD Sky setup as soon as it is released, the problem of a single DVI has crossed my mind many time. The conclusion I have reached is that if you were Sky and a customer is expressing an interest in getting HD, you will bend over to backwards to make it happen. For example many people use there current Sky Box as a breakout box for all their other scart devices. Why wouldn't Sky add an extra HDMI or DVI input to the back of it's HD boxes. If you like me will be watching HD TV via a digital connection, DVDs via a digital connection and an XBox2 (Or PS3) Via a digital connection then surely we will all need some kind of adaptor/switching unit. I can't see manufacturers putting 2 x RGB Scarts, 1 x Composite, 1 x Component, 2 x HDMI (and or DVI) e.t.c into new DVDs. I will probably use an amp as my main connection hub/switcher.
    Sky will want HD to take off in a big way, I expect the new boxes to be able to be connected to most of the plasmas and LCDs that have already been sold. After-all how are you going to convince someone to shell out for a new screen just because Sky says so.
    In other-words the screen is completely future proof.
     
  30. jimsan

    jimsan
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Messages:
    1,610
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    41
    Location:
    Dumfries, SW Scotland.
    Ratings:
    +9
    To clarify a few things regarding SkyHD.

    It will be a general requirement to have DVI/HDMI connections.
    SkyHD will require a new STB that will have an HDMI (HDCP) output.
    Broadcasts will be 720p50Hz and 1080i50Hz.
    There may be a component output for limited access to non HDMI/DVI equipped sets.
    The STB will also have a Hard Disk recorder. ie Sky+HD.
    They are on schedule for 2006 launch.
    No prices yet!

    Jimmy
     

Share This Page

Loading...