Did I make the right decision?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

marvinbush911

Guest
My 4 year old AKAI 28" CRT died. So I needed a new set.

My main souces for tv and film are terrestial analog, Freeview, DVD, and AVI/DivX/MP4 etc played out via the S-Video of my Radeon 9800.

From reading this forum I leaned that despite what Joe Public might have been led to believe, CRT is still the best for SD, and that SD was going to be dominant for sometime yet.

Anyway, to cut a long story short, I decided (in light of the early AKAI death) to avoid an Ebay refurb, 2nd hand, or ex-rental, and buy new.

After much ado and obsessing, I bought a Daewoo DUB2850 online for £225 inc postage.

Did I choose wisely?
 
If you're happy with the result, then yes, grasshopper :D

Does it matter what other people think?
 
Well the TV doesn't come until Wednesday!

I guess the lure of LCD and plasma is so strong that you do feel a bit crazy for bucking the trend and buying a new CRT. Even the sales guy on the phone said 'you realise the tv IS NOT lcd don't you?', so obviously someone has bought this TV and been dissapointed that they recieved a CRT and not an LCD!

When is HD likely to be here properly?

Are formats like DivX ever likely to be HD?

So much to know and find out...
 
I certainly wouldn't be rushing toward LCD yet mate (I'm a plasma supporter).

Only you will be able to decide, once you've seen it, simple as, IMO.

Me, I don't give a toss what others think, as long as I'm happy.

Unless they're paying.

Nuff said :)

I suspect that seeing as you wanted a CRT and are not being swayed by the flat screens, you'll be your own man with your opinion :smashin:

Me, I wanted to go the flat screen route, because it's trendy.
Whilst I love my telly, the truth is it aint as good as a decent CRT.

It's just the size that does it :thumbsup:
 
Oh, as for HD, yonks, IMO.

As for DivX, well seeing as you have to compress, I can't see how you can get HD :confused:

Unless you're compressing 60 gig files down to 6 gig, that is.

And we don't have the technology to make a film take up 60 gig, as far as I know
 
I've just been reading about plasmas.:lesson:

I must admit I am still a little confused about the HDTV and digital thing.

Am I correct in thinking that this new CRT is digital ready, so I will have no problem when TV in the UK becomes digital? Is it just when HD becomes prevalent that I will only be able to see HD as SD? Or will this set not show HD as SD at all? I will have likely bought an HDTV by then, but just wondering...

What is the time frame for all these changes? I don't think manufacturers are doing anything to educate people. Seems they just want to shift LCD's.

Thanks.
 
Oh, as for HD, yonks, IMO.

As for DivX, well seeing as you have to compress, I can't see how you can get HD :confused:

Unless you're compressing 60 gig files down to 6 gig, that is.

And we don't have the technology to make a film take up 60 gig, as far as I know

Ooops. Must have written my message same timeas yours.

Ok I am happy now. Can't wait!

Through my Terratec EWX 24/96, NAD C370, and Mission M74.. everything should sound groovy....

Now if only I could understand this multi-channel business!!!!
 
Oh, as for HD, yonks, IMO.

As for DivX, well seeing as you have to compress, I can't see how you can get HD :confused:

Unless you're compressing 60 gig files down to 6 gig, that is.

And we don't have the technology to make a film take up 60 gig, as far as I know

I should clarify this one, as I haven't worded it right :thumbsdow

HD (proper) involves about 25-30 gig, minimum, for a typical film.
Seeing as DivX compresses with around a 10-1 ratio, you would need the original to be ten times that.
I can't see that happening for a long time.

As for the rest, I'll come back in a bit :)
 
I've just been reading about plasmas.:lesson:

I must admit I am still a little confused about the HDTV and digital thing.

Am I correct in thinking that this new CRT is digital ready, so I will have no problem when TV in the UK becomes digital? Is it just when HD becomes prevalent that I will only be able to see HD as SD? Or will this set not show HD as SD at all? I will have likely bought an HDTV by then, but just wondering...

What is the time frame for all these changes? I don't think manufacturers are doing anything to educate people. Seems they just want to shift LCD's.

Thanks.

First thing you need to understand is that the 'digital switchover' has nothing to do with HD. It just means that the present channels will only be transmitted digitally, and they will still be SD. 'Digital Ready' means that it has a built in Freeview box.

Limited sources of HD are currently available on Sky, Virginmedia Cable, some games machines and two versions of HD DVD players.

There are plans for a separate (from Sky) satellite HD service next year. Nobody seems very clear as what kind of box set up will be required to receive it.

Both the Sky and the Virgin Media HD boxes will output a SD version of HD broadcasts. There are reasons to believe that the performance of this SD signal is a significant impovement, but it is not HD.

When you do eventually buy a HDTV it is unlikely for some years to come that it will be a 'stand alone' piece of kit. You will still have to feed it from something else as you do currently. Freeview HD seems a bit of an uncertain possibility. Hope that is helpful.
 
Could that be it?

Looks
Slimness
Hype

A percieved upgrade aka the Emperors new clothes? Buyers convince themselves it's better?
 
I totally agree, LCDs, on the whole, are poo.
Although TBF, they are quite rapidly getting better.

Whilst I'm happy with my plasma, it's not a patch on a decent CRT.
It's just that in my room, a 42" CRT, if they even make such an animal, would be ridiculous :)
 
I have an lcd as its a bigger screen.
Sharp image.
No convergence errors.
I have HD cable and HD DVD.
I have a computer attached and use the screen as a giant monitor for internet broadband and gaming.
 
I have an lcd as its a bigger screen.
Sharp image.
No convergence errors.
I have HD cable and HD DVD.
I have a computer attached and use the screen as a giant monitor for internet broadband and gaming.

No-one is disputing that LCD is as good or way better than CRT when fed an HD signal, but how many films and broadcasts are currently available in HD? Somewhere around 150-250 films and Sky? A drop in the ocean.

Again though, from what I have read, many (most?) gamers/graphic artists/film-makers believe CRT is better than LCD.

So CURRENTLY the only things that LCD does better than CRT are aesthetics, size, weight, energy consumption, and HD. That's not too enticing a list. Yet. I'll have another looksy at the situation in 2010.

I strongly believe that many thousands of people have been duped into buying technology that they will likely never fully realise the potential of. Technology that for the most part is inferior to what it replaced. Amazing.. LCD is CURRENTLY (in most cases) a case of the Emperor's New Clothes.
 
My computer was inititally connected to my CRT TV (now in the kitchen/dining room) via S Video as that was the best connection between the two. My LCD has a PC D Sub connection so it connects like a monitor. S Video on a TV has a fuzzy image.

How many CRT TVs are designed to be monitors as well?

Also when you are used to viewing HD pictures it's difficult to go back to standard SD.

Even if you have SD the image is still upscaled to a pseudo HD.

When I look at my old CRT it looks like a portable in comparison. It's a 28" widescreen.
 
Don't dismiss everything he says. There is an advantage in being able to feed your pc to the TV and have decent image quality compared to an LCD on that purpose. I suppose in an ideal world we would have a CRT for watching SD TV, a LCD/plasma for watching movies from the PC, and a LCD/plasma for watching HD from Sky. There is a BBC HD channel, so there is a bit of HD there already.

I'm just trying to give a bit of balance to this debate. Personally I can't bring myself to buy an LCD because the pixelisation and blurring that I see in the shops (on even 32" ones from Sony) put me off. I go to my mothers and am always very impressed by her picture on her 2 year old 28" panasonic CRT.

Can somebody please explain why LCD screens give a better picture than CRT with HD material (as mentioned earlier in this thread)? Surely if they suffer from motion blur/response time issues this would still be the case with whichever material you show on it?
 
You are talking absolute rubbish.
Thanks for your input. It was stimulating and informative.

Tell me do you use a PC in a back bedroom for you posts? Wouldn't you rather be in the living room? How about that my PC feeds into my AV gear so I get the full surround sound rather than little PC speakers? or all the films and music on my PCs HDD?

It's not emperors new clothes. I can see the image on both of my TVs at the same time and I prefer the LCD's size and flexability. I also feel the LCD handles bright colours better than a plasma. I think plasmas handle blacks better.

My worry with having a plasma was image retention and purple snakes. As I was going to be using the TV for about 50% PC use then I wanted an LCD.

One of my other PCs has a 21" CRT monitor which is ok but I think you will find TV pictures don't look right on them as CRT TVs are designed for moving images CRT monitors for still images.

I'm not sure but I don't think I'd get the larger CRT TVs through the front door and round the corner into the living room.
 
Personally I can't bring myself to buy an LCD because the pixelisation and blurring that I see in the shops (on even 32" ones from Sony) put me off. I go to my mothers and am always very impressed by her picture on her 2 year old 28" panasonic CRT.

Can somebody please explain why LCD screens give a better picture than CRT with HD material (as mentioned earlier in this thread)? Surely if they suffer from motion blur/response time issues this would still be the case with whichever material you show on it?

Pixellation may be more obvious on an LCD as the image is sharp so the softer image of a CRT may be masking some of it. LCDs use tiny pixels which are difficult to see up close. If you look up close to a CRT the three colours making up the image are more obvious. If you are watching a Freeview image it has poor quality due to compression anyway. My main source is cable which seems a little better for SD.

I can't see motion blur on LCD and neither can I see the flicker on a CRT. I think some people are affected by things like that and others aren't. I used to work with someone who got headaches from fluorescent lights.
 
Thanks. Well I can see the flicker on a CRT, but its something I get used to and ignore most of the time, and forget.

The motion blur I see on my LCD PC monitor to me is very noticeable to a point where I long to hook up my old CRT PC monitor just for watching movies on it.

Is this a fair comparison to a domestic LCD TV?

I'm hoping that further from the screen in a lounge on a bigger and possibly better LCD screen I may not be able to notice the blur.

Its just the blacks look so good on my Mum's Panasonic CRT. I don't think I'll get an LCD to match it. How crazy to replace a technology with another which doesn't match it let alone improve on it.
 
Most of your TV is SD. Most of mine is a high res PC image or HD.

If you want to stay with SD fine. In the same way you could listen to medium wave while others were out there listening to FM.

Bear in mind every DVD you buy you will be buying into something that you will one day might be replacing again.

Eyesight is fine thanks. Because of my job it is checked each year!
 
Most of your TV is SD. Most of mine is a high res PC image or HD.

If you want to stay with SD fine. In the same way you could listen to medium wave while others were out there listening to FM.

Bear in mind every DVD you buy you will be buying into something that you will one day might be replacing again.

Eyesight is fine thanks. Because of my job it is checked each year!

Interesting .... discussion? ;)
I recently bought a 32" Samsung super flat CRT and although it took some time to setup and get balanced (within the engineers settings) it's streets ahead of my Dads 32" Samsung LCD. The image is smoother and more natural and I only paid £400 for it.... not the £700 my old man did!

I don't really understand why people go for thinner when they inevitably place it in the corner of the room?:confused:....OK, OK, some hang them on the wall but most I have seen are there in the corner....

Mine even has the look of an LCD, as a few friends have asked about it. It's only when they go over to it and look behind that they realise it's a CRT:thumbsup:, a thin one I agree but still a CRT.

I've also set mine up with the PC and it looks perfectly OK for surfing etc, you jut need the right pieces of hardware/software to make it work right, I have a VGA>Component converter and the image is excellent when watching DivX movies off the Hard drive.

Nope, I have to say that CRT still rules:cool: unless you live in a mansion and need 40"+ of course:D.... but then I would probably get a projector.
 
Which technology is better for a small (around 19") screen to be connected to consoles and a PC? As a student I'm not going to get a TV license so TV wont matter really.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom