Why dont people only make HD-CRTS if CRTS are so good?

salami1212

salami1212

salami1212

Soldato
Joined
3 Jul 2005
Posts
3,027
Well i was thinking, seeing as lcs are better because there pixels are smaller and they are more clear but they have crappy blacks and ghosting etc, why dont people just make crts with closer together pixels? im probly speaking a load of poo but if not, why do they not do that? Cheers
 
Crts can have pixels as big or as small as they want, so in that area they are better than lcds. There are hd-crts made by samsung.
 
same reason that, for arguments sake, Mercedes sell the A class as well as the SMG.

Although the SMG is the dogs nads, there is still demand for smaller, cheaper options.

Maybe?
 
This may answer your question..

'There is a great surge in consumer interest for flat panel and large screen HD-TVs,' said Graeme Packman, analyst at Understanding and Solutions. 'But the fact they are HD-ready is not the main reason people are buying them. They are more interested in the smart and elegant design, the fact that they fit better into a room, or on the wall. The fact it's HD-ready is more of a nice-to-have notion, it kind of makes it future proof'.

The fact aesthetics is driving the market is odd in the world of consumer electronics. Typically, it is the early-adopter gadget-savvy types who make up the early demand for pricey gear.
 
Last edited:
Because LCD's and plasmas look better, simple.

It's like saying why does someone pay £250 for an Aiwa with flashing lights when they could get a modest, far better sounding seperates system for a similar price.
 
salami1212 said:
Well i was thinking, seeing as lcs are better because there pixels are smaller and they are more clear but they have crappy blacks and ghosting etc, why dont people just make crts with closer together pixels? im probly speaking a load of poo but if not, why do they not do that? Cheers
Click to expand...
There's no pixel size limitation here, a CRT can display 1080p on a tiny 19" screen (although that would be rather pointless of course). The only reason there aren't many HD CRT TVs (I've seen only one) is because CRTs are terminally out of fashion and manufacturers realize they can make far more money selling you an LCD, even though the picture quality may well be worse. It's lose lose for the consumer.
 
The main problem is that a 50" HD CRT would take up a stupid amount of space, and would be so heavy it would require at least 4 guys to lift.

To appreciate HD you need a big screen, and CRTs are just too bulky
 
I believe the other problem, is that CRT technology is size limited. The bigger the screen the deeper the tube has to be to avoid misconvergence, and also there are other limitations.

Sony managed to made a 45inch CRT (I believe its still the 'largest' consumer TV/CRT ever built), but it was huge, and heavy. Not something the average person would want sitting in the front room. Modern plasma, and LCD screens are approaching the quality of CRT, while using a fraction of the power, and both technologies are very light, and thin allowing TV's that can be hung on the wall.
 
As stated above the limiting factor is the weight (of the glass I think) and power requirements.

There are a few small Hd CRT's around but nothing in wide scale availability over 40"
 
Corasik said:
while using a fraction of the power, and both technologies are very light, and thin allowing TV's that can be hung on the wall.
Click to expand...
This is a common misconception, a plasma TV uses quite a bit more power than a normal CRT.

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6475_7-6400401-3.html?tag=txt

Big HD CRT's: http://listings.ebay.com/_W0QQsocmd...action=compare&copagenum=1&coentrypage=search

Also notice how most of them are 4:3 and have F connectors instead of out poorer coax (belling lee) sockets.

EDIT- Nice 40" Sony 4:3 HD-CRT here: http://cgi.ebay.com/SONY-WEGA-KV-40...1QQihZ015QQcategoryZ11072QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
 
Last edited:
Tesla said:
This is a common misconception, a plasma TV uses quite a bit more power than a normal CRT.
Click to expand...

Thats a misconception actually.

Per inch plasma uses much less electricity than CRT, also Plasma is quoted at full draw and this only happens on a full white image - so not often. People on AVF used current/watt meters and found that plasma + lcd at the same size where generally using similar power (plasma often under) as LCD draws the same power all the time. CRT draws much more for a comparable size.
 
I think the plasma's in the link there are not the current gen either. Im pretty sure that my Panasonic 42inch HD's power rating label on the back claims 180W full draw. I've got a power tester at home, I can check it out later.

Not only that, as already mentioned above, watts/sq inch the plasma's are better than the CRT's, and the power efficient Panasonic Panel is using less power than the Sony LCD panel.

So I stick with my original position that LCD, and Plasma are both more power efficient than CRT :)
 
I own a CRT HDTV (a Samsung, as mentioned earlier). I simply couldn't afford a HD LCD or plasma that made SDTV look acceptable (I know it can look lovely on an LCD/plasma, but out of my price range mostly) amongst a few other factors.

I'm happy with the "bulk" of my CRT... it's heavy as dammit but isn't particularly deep. I'm also comfortable with 32", but yeah, if I wanted bigger it would be sooo impractical to buy a CRT and I would definitely save to get an LCD or plasma.

There are also issues, as mentioned, with geometry and blurring on the Slim Fit CRTs, but mine is problem free.
 
The Samsung slim fit breaks the 110 degree neck angle principle. Some clever people worked out it was the point where CRT tubes couldnt fuction properly - shame the only HD crt in the UK is compromised to make it appeal to the market who want flat tv's. If they made it only a little deeper it could have been a much better TV.

We tested some of them, 9 a mate went thru and not one of them did SD as good as his PW6 let alone HD. Rumour has it Samsung have dropped it aswell so it could be the end of HD crt over here before it started.
 
Flat panels are more fashionable these days. Personally I'm not keen on LCD or Plasma displays. Hopefully SED will bring the quailty of CRT with the benefits of being a flat panel. As I understand SED is based on CRT technology but instead of having 1 set of guns at the back of a tube, they have a small set of guns for every pixel on the screen about 4mm away. The prototypes have a pixel response of less than 1ms and a contrast ratio of 100,000:1. I just hope this isn't a technology that fades away.
 
My next monitor will definatley be an sed, my crt is newish so by the time it starts to fail seds will be the main display technology and plasmas and lcds will probably have started to fade out.
 
Shimmyhill said:
The Samsung slim fit breaks the 110 degree neck angle principle. Some clever people worked out it was the point where CRT tubes couldnt fuction properly - shame the only HD crt in the UK is compromised to make it appeal to the market who want flat tv's. If they made it only a little deeper it could have been a much better TV.

We tested some of them, 9 a mate went thru and not one of them did SD as good as his PW6 let alone HD. Rumour has it Samsung have dropped it aswell so it could be the end of HD crt over here before it started.
Click to expand...

I know it's got a bad rep; I've been a bit of a guinea pig. But I've been really impressed with the SD and HD image of it, and as I say I've not got any of the issues that have been mentioned all over the web about it.

Interestingly, there's a 30" American Samsung SlimFit HD-CRT: by losing 2" it avoids the lottery of issues that our models (Z409, Z419... does the Z29 have any?) can have.
 
When I bought my last CRT TV (a 36 inch Toshiba) I asked the salesman why they didn't make them any bigger. He said that CRT was getting to a point where it was uneconomical to make them bigger due to their weight/size and delivery costs. It took 2 people to lift it. Consider that every now and then a delivery man is going to have an accident and sue for personal injury... and you see why all of a sudden the manufacturers lost interest in CRT. Not just that, but massive warehouses are required to store the stock. And shipping costs more because you can only fit so many in a single shipping container. Just everything about CRT was becoming uneconomical.

That and CRT technology has been superceded now by Plasma/LCD. People just don't want a quarter of their living room being occupied by a TV.

I don't believe "SED" is the be-all end-all of display technologies. There is a fundamental flaw in that they still haven't figured out how to prevent the vacuum from causing the screen to implode when the screens get large (i.e. past 60 inches or so)
 
Last edited:
NathanE said:
I don't believe "SED" is the be-all end-all of display technologies. There is a fundamental flaw in that they still haven't figured out how to prevent the vacuum from causing the screen to implode when the screens get large (i.e. past 60 inches or so)
Click to expand...

Couple of battons screwed to the front of the screen should do it :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom