CRT *cracks* now THAT was a display technology. They just don't make em like they used to anymore

I love CRTs but holy hell, that high pitch sound is driving me insane and the worst thing, it is not the one that everyone can hear, but the one that only I can hear.

Indeed
*cries in Pioneer Kuro*

Imagine that sound, but all the time, 24/7. That's what tinnitus is like.

Take care of your hearing, kids.

the one in the wheelchair should be connected to a Monster bottle, not O2.

I also have it, due to blood pressure, it goes away if I tilt my head sideways. Doctors said that it is something in my neck and there is not that much that can be done. I just got used to it.

Have used a Philips CRT for 18 years, and don't have tinnitus.

>tfw have tinnitus

Attached: 1451507305525.png (633x758, 180K)

On CRT TVs you can hear a ~15.7 kHz sound from the hsync, which is well within the hearing range for most people under 25 or so but most folks in their 30s or older are unlikely to be able to hear.

High-end CRT monitors had hsyncs above 100 kHz, which nobody is able to hear.

Unleas you do 15khz signal (or anything below 30khz) or work directly on coils any VGA capable monitor should work

The only reason to use a CRT is if you need to display nonsquare pixels accurately. The only reason to do that that I can think of is to play /vr/ games.

Modern display technologies have surpassed CRTs otherwise, but the ability to scan whatever modeline you want is a key niche feature of CRTs.

The only real advantage CRTs have over LCDs is latency. Other supposed advantages are either myths(black levels), or irrelevant in this day and age(non-native resolutions).

Why is it this board is full of people piping up opinions of things they don't understand?
I bet neither of you have even heard of the term 'sample-and-hold', let alone able to tell me what it means. Non-native resolutions are hardly irrelevant considering the current switch to 4K.

>sample-and-hold
CRTs have their own form of ghosting, and now with black frame insertion, LCDs outperform them in that area as well.

>Non-native resolutions are hardly irrelevant considering the current switch to 4K.
How does that make it more relevant?

Let's compare early LCD to early CRT then. Fucking 14" 640x480 pieces of utter trash.

can confirm my P1110 has an hsync of 115.2kHz with a refresh rate of 72Hz

enjoy having "black" be some silver dark grey color.

why is it that the only 3 CRTfags ive seen in non anonymous places are trannies?

enjoy watching a black screen all day admiring how blacked your monitor is instead of using it

I wonder if there's an adapter that would allow me to hook up a Raspberry Pi to a CRT TV. Would be excellent for NES games.

Unless the adaptor correctly handles custom modelines there's no point.

>true blacks
>infinite resolution
>unbeatable latency
>unbeatable refresh rate
Yup

>>true blacks
This is a dumb meme perpetuated by zoomers who have never actually used a CRT in their life.

Attached: IMG_8515.jpg (800x600, 92K)

more like a constant roaring sound to me

>I'm too poor to afford VA monitor: the post

>I'm too stupid to read a post before replying to it: the post

The reason it looks like that is because the flash from the camera is exciting the phosphorus.
In a dark room, which is the only scenario where it makes a difference, the CRT has "true blacks".

>Muh VA
It still has blacklight bleed, though it's not as bad as IPS (without a polariser).

For the record I have the exact same CRT as in that photo, and I stopped using it when I switched to an sPVA monitor.
As much as I like CRTs they are not practical as every day displays and even the best ones have degraded over time.

>But early LCDs were bad!!!11
No, cheap ones were. Just like CRTs.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_T220/T221_LCD_monitors

Attached: 735px-IBM_T221.jpg (735x599, 110K)

No more reason to use a CRT since there are, 4k 120Hz+, 10-bit LCD screens.
Anything lower than that, and CRT starts to show a few advantages.

Present this 120+hz 4k you speak of.

> This model's internal refresh rate is always 41 Hz
Dumb nigger. It was a flawed product.

>hey, let's take a picture of it so that the room lighting perfectly reflects in the crt, that will show them

The lighting is the same on both. That's the point. CRTs don't work well in lit rooms, you have to treat them like projectors.

>CRT *cracks*

If your CRT is crackling you likely have a bad cathode, user

I've had it as long as I can remember and never damaged my hearing. FeelsBadMan

>what are specular highlights
You can tell from the gradient in the lighting on the CRT that the angle is chosen so as to maximize them.

For real though, CRT was very ahead of its time. High end CRT monitors had 75Hz refresh rates and virtually 0 response time. Until around 2015 ALL LCD monitors were fucking dogshit with on average response times of 10-20ms which nullified the higher than 30Hz refresh rate.

Even "1ms" monitors from today may actually have 2-4ms of average real world response time but it's less noticeable at up to 120Hz refresh rate.

The only technology that can compete with CRT is OLED and we aren't gonna see that in cheap monitors for a while.

>"OLEDs also have a much fasterresponse timethan an LCD. Using response time compensation technologies, the fastest modern LCDs can reach response times as low as1 msfor their fastest color transition, and are capable ofrefresh frequenciesas high as 240Hz. According to LG, OLED response times are up to 1,000 times >faster than LCD,[73]putting conservative estimates at under 10 μs (0.01 ms), which could theoretically accommodate refresh frequencies approaching 100kHz (100,000Hz). Due to their extremely fast response time, OLED displays can also be easily designed to be strobed, creating an effect similar to CRT flicker in order to avoid thesample-and-holdbehavior seen on both LCDs and some OLED displays, which creates the perception of motion blur.[74]"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OLED

Attached: Screenshot_2018-11-06-09-45-37(1).jpg (603x885, 206K)

The specular highlight is only really affecting the bezel. Both screens are facing the light source, evenly lit, and receiving the same amount of light. CRTs just don't perform well in lit rooms.

Attached: LL.jpg (1024x768, 80K)

>Ghosting
Only visible in certain situations, namely green objects moving over highly contrasting colours at extremely fast rates.
>Relevant
Some content is 1080p, some is 4K, hell even some is still 720. If there was a CRT that could support 4K (which there would be if the technology still lived) they would be extremely useful.

Nobody's going to talk about the toxic chemicals they used and the fact there were fucking x-rays coming out of them?

CRT blacks are way better in dark conditions. Granted, in a bright room 'some' LCDs can rival them for blacks, but in the right context CRTs can produce pure black. LCD black on the other hand is off-grey or blue.

>Some content is 1080p
1080p is evenly divisible into 4K.

>Hey bro i just scored this top notch CRT, check out my blacks!
What a stupid fucking meme considering the 'good' CRTs can't do anything blacker than murky grey.

Also shit like has to be trolling. Infinite resolution? Are you fucking kidding? How do you think CRTs produce colors retard(s)?

Attached: CRT_blacks.jpg (5344x3006, 505K)

>that image
How will delusional crt fags defend this?
I remember visiting gramma like 10 years ago and she still had crt and holy shit it sucked ass.
I can't even imagine what kind of hipster you have to be to buy something so awful today.

I've seen ancient tn panels with better black levels than this lol.

Integer scaling helps but 1080p on 4K screens looks soft and the upscaling can make a mess of motion. In theory it could look good but in practice it never does. 720p is also scalable to 4K.

*degausses*

Plasma would do better but too bad it's dead.

toxic chemicals true but x-ray radiation only happened in the early CRTs but generally all the x-rays produced would stay inside the electron gun casing.

They do. It's called AMOLED and has exactly the same advantages and disadvantages as CRT had.

the average person gets 10 times as much background radiation in a day than you would get from using a CRT for a year.
just use it in the dark

>CRTs can only do grey
When will this stupid meme die? Kids that have never used a CRT in a dark room. It's not a perfect use case but it's a thousand times better than your shitty-in-every-way-but-sharpness LCD.

Attached: 1541140507994[1].jpg (3280x2460, 960K)

480p display technology has no place in 2018. Not to mention flickering and other bullshit associated with it.

Plasma, like CRT, is shithouse except in dark rooms. You literally can't have blinds open to use them. Also they had crap dot pitch, useless for computer usage. Lastly, they consumed truckloads of electricity which, even if you don't care about your power bill, would act like a space heater warming up your room, so uncomfortable for use in temperate to tropical climates. Good riddance.

>Let's compare early LCD to early CRT then. Fucking 14" 640x480 pieces of utter trash.
Not a fair comparison, LCD came out long after and by that time higher resolutions were easier to implement as technology progressed.
If CRT came out at the same time as LCD the resolutions would be similar.

>Granted, in a bright room 'some' LCDs can rival them for blacks
Even a small amount of ambient light is enough for a high end CRT to be outperformed by consumer grade modern LCDs.

>but in the right context CRTs can produce pure black.
Theoretically, but you need to have a completely unlit and light treated room. Even if you turn the lights off, if you have white walls, this will be enough for brighter elements of the picture to turn the blacks grey.

>LCD black on the other hand is off-grey or blue.
It's grey, but the "black" of an LCD is typically a darker grey than the "black" of a CRT.

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1920x1080, 175K)

>Not to mention flickering and other bullshit associated with it.
flickering is objectively superior for motion. also if your CRT can only do 640x480 then its shit and you should get a better one.
>consumed truckloads of electricity
only about 2.5x the average LCD

I still use my 1080p plasma every day for films and some games. Still can't be beaten for cinema unless you shell out for a projector.
>Watching films with the blinds open
At least the motion, colour accuracy and blacks aren't garbage.

>just use it in the dark
basement dwelling NEETs detected

Ive had a dozen different crts over the years, you are either a zoomer or delusional. LCDs are cheaper, lighter, burn less energy, crisper, have greater image persistence (no 60Hz flicker eyestrain), better/easier ergonomics (convenient VESA), better pixel geometry (unless you're emulating old games) and less high pitched whine. When microLED techs come out in a decade there will literally be nothing left CRT is any good for.

Can totally relate, to anyone who thinks user is just overstating stuff, please don't do the mistakes I did.

I've got some really bad tinnitus (when it does flare up, that is) from a combo of low blood pressure and hearing damage.

Playing rock guitar is cool and all, but not worth it without ear protection.

Not nearly to the same degree as CRT. high quality AMOLED/OLED has to be intentionally abused to have any kind of burn-in. CRT would have burn in from normal use.

rtings.com/tv/learn/permanent-image-retention-burn-in-lcd-oled

Attached: 11-21tube3.jpg (800x609, 23K)

Whereas by contrast an LCD in a dark room looks terrible. Glowing, uneven backlight. They all have bleed to some extent, though the highest end Eizos etc have very limited bleed.
The PVMeme in the pic tends to have a greyer screen than most other CRTs also. From someone who regularly uses CRTs, if properly calibrated (especially gamma) they can give virtually perfect blacks as long as there's no light being reflected.

I'm not saying we should all switch to CRT because plebs don't care about motion quality, colour accuracy etc. They also consume more power and are bulky, expensive to make and hard to ship. The technology is still fantastic though.

>NEET
I bet I earn more than you kid
>Geometry
I'll give you that. Can be an issue but generally not a problem on curved sets
>Sharpness
The only quality related factor LCDs excel at
>Ergonomics, mounting
Again, yeah, but what does that have to do with image quality?
>High pitched whine
Only 15Khz CRTs and those with bad flybacks.

Mannnn, it wasn't THAT bad. I had a 40" plasma back in the day and it only measured ~250W at the wall on full brightness. Brightness was shit but it's not like you'll watch tv with the blinds fully open anyway.

If you want something to use in a dark room, just get a projector. CRTs are literally only good for playing retro games. They are an inferior display technology for every other use.

Just use proper nearest neighbour scaling in your media player instead of relying on the screen's built in scaler.

>Not 19 inch 800x600
Were you poor?

Attached: 1367604204642.jpg (403x403, 19K)

I'd like to speak to the person who makes these pictures.

CRT's are suitable for sprite based games. Try to imagine if pic related was on an LCD. It would lose color, black levels, image depth, and most of all, flawless response times. A local arcade near me replaced CRT's with cheap LCD panels. It's acceptable for older 3D games on NAOMI or Model 3 hardware, but it looks really fucking bad on anything predating 1998.

Attached: 5d601442cc541f4e66f67bf389cb720c9142207b.jpg (640x480, 78K)

Compared to cheap chink LCD (which most people own), absolutely. There are however high end LCD displays with 1ms response time and high contrast ratios. Oled displays are still better than both though.

Attached: acd82715035cfacbf53ae1250daf6db8.png (720x480, 30K)

Just looked up the response time for my tab S4. How the FUCK did they cram a gaming monitor on this thing?

Attached: Screenshot_2018-11-06-10-47-32(1).jpg (720x849, 149K)

Even soul crushing 50 to 80% gray that isn't even mentioned on LCD panels is fast af.

Attached: Screenshot_2018-11-06-10-52-14(1).jpg (720x985, 175K)

I'm almost 19 and I've NEVER seen someone with a crt.

For technology so hyped up here you'd think people would be using it for something.

Pathetic.

notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-ThinkPad-X1-Yoga-OLED-Convertible-Review.169458.0.html

Because oled is superior.

Attached: Comb06112018110212.jpg (1440x851, 181K)

Unironically Guitar Hero on a CRT is an experience that can't be described. Everything is basically instant and the only excuse you have is being bad at the game.

if its old and you used it as a kid someone is going to say it's the best thing ever and they dont make them like they used to

Do you wanna know how I know you can't even afford an oled monitor?

I dont understand the "true blacks" thing
I used CRTs for 20 years and LCDs have darker blacks, thats one of the only good things about them

>t. Has never played GH on a CRT

I play guitar hero on my ViewSonic XG2401 144hz
exactly the same as CRT

Guitar hero works fine on any TV because there's a calibration setting dumbass

>he is poor
lol

"Calibration" isn't the same as no lag.

I'm interested in buying a CRT TV for playing old consoles, they really look pretty bad on an LCD. What tips can you give me, Jow Forums? what to look for and what to avoid?

>they really look pretty bad on an LCD
no they dont

the 26 inch Trinitrons with S-video boomers are throwing away for free
dont fall for the pvm/bvm rgb meme

Have you ever played a real SNES on LCD?

They look exactly as they've been made to look by the developers.

ive played an emulated snes on an lcd
the differences between them is really overblown

>pvm/bvm rgb

I don't even know what this is. I don't know how easy it will be to find a decent triniton in my country, but I'll start looking. Thanks.

I grew up with CRT and honestly, the filters in emulators these days do a great enough job of emulating the look.