(untitled)

I love CRTs but they are not power efficient. >Even low res looks awesome on them >VGA Master Race? (SCART gang rise up) >Trinitron ™ Hot Wh don't you have a CRT next to your LCD Lainon? Pic related.

bzzzzzzzzzzz

brrrrrbrrrrrrzzz

>>31931 >Why don't you have a CRT next to your LCD Lainon? Is there any real advantage? Putting a cactus on your monitor doesn't count. I don't use a CRT, because: - it is big - UV light - power hog - makes noises at night - I don't have one

- it would not fit on my desk - they are very heavy - i have an lcd monitor which i found in the trash, and to my knowledge it has a higher resolution than any crt monitor i could find for a reasonable price. - my graphics card does not have a vga port - good ones are actually getting kind of hard to find because thrift stores just send them directly to the landfill instead of leaving them on their shelf for several months and then sending them to the landfill if i was into collecting old tech, or even if i just owned a house instead of a tiny apartment, i'd consider picking one up just for the hell of it. but as it stands i can't think of a reason to get one.

The only reason I don't use crts often is because of the high pitched noise that comes from them, I guess I could just have music on or something but it's still bothersome

>>31931 >can't kill >low voltage ccfl inverter LCD >no native res I wish they made LEDs with pentile matrix not just OLEDs did some asshole royally patent the thing so we can't have nice things. >>31937 hdmi/dp to vga adaptor >>31964 Some good ones don't but they respond to gprs interference. LCD also have the screeching noise with black+white pixels.

>>31932 >>31933 >>31936 >>31964 I'm tired of seeing clueless people who think all CRTs whine because they've never used a "modern" computer CRT. Consumer TV sets whine because their horizontal sweep frequency is around 15KHz, a frequency hearable by young humans. Computer monitors (EGA and above resolutions) sweep at 21KHz and above, which is beyond the human hearing range, so they aren't audible at all. >>31965 >Some good ones don't but they respond to gprs interference. I don't even know where the fuarrrk you pulled that factoid out of. Unless you're using a coat hanger for a VGA cable, you're not getting interference from any wireless device. Commercial monitors had to meet FCC regulations too, you know? I personally own about 15 CRTs, out of which 5 I use at least once a week, and none of them present any radio interference issues. Not the consumer TVs, not the cheap off-brand SVGA monitors, not the CGA TTLs, not the high dot pitch DiamondTron tube-based ones. None. Consider I live in an apartment building which is located in a very dense city (25 802.11 APs constantly fighting for 2.4GHz and 5GHz bandwidth) where GSM/GPRS, 3G/HSDPA, 4G and 5G mobile bands coexist, and where the power is dirty to the point of having to install an industrial/datacenter RCD to avoid it from constantly tripping due to the incoming harmonic components.

>>31968 >I'm tired of seeing clueless people who think all CRTs whine because they've never used a "modern" computer CRT. I've never used a modern CRT, so? I asked if there's a real advantage and listed things I consider disadvantages.

>>31968 >I don't even know where the fuarrrk you pulled that factoid out of. Unless you're using a coat hanger for a VGA cable, you're not getting interference from any wireless device. I've been in a computer room where they still used CRTs though most of the cables had been renewed and they weren't ferrited. I pulled out my trusty nokia, downloaded something over the EDGE network so I could hear the sound interference from the loud speaker - was my plan, but at the same time the image from the monitor distorted aesthetically (not sound). I then put the phone directly to the front of the monitor and the image almost seemed like warping vigorously everything's on a Type A electric socket with grounding at the main electric pole so there's lots of em soykaf even the speakers humming when idle. >Commercial monitors had to meet FCC regulations too, you know? Ever heard of picture related? Your electronics should now accept any form of undesired operations and interference be it from a digital signal sniffer that would easily log your keyboard strokes at a distance (any distance depending on the sensitivity). Most modern VGA cables lost those two chokes so to leak all the analog signals, mouse, keyboard, you name it, all to comply to "standards". The last time I'd seen a firrite choked USB cable was when I saw a micro-B data transfer cable for some 2-megapixel digital camera made in 2005 something. Then: Best practices. Now: EMSEC bad. rules rules.

>>31968 I've got 4 CRT computer monitors and used to have even more, all of which whine while on. It's not audible with headphones on, but without them it's very noticeable. They're great devices but it's definitely one of their downsides.

>>32016 >They're great devices but it's definitely one of their downsides. Other one is how easy it is to be nightwatched. If the cable had poor shielding, would leak and broadcast analog signals like it would radio tv and some guy can tune into your VGA signal, even one leaking color signal would be enough. There was an independent project that tried to do this and they were successful, streaming the target's screen. Pretty sure even if you had adequately shielded cables, you'd still need to shield the entire case or areas where the raw data just leaks everywhere. They should encrypt video signal at some point but it's here to stay for sure.

>>31931 alright OP, you sold me. now i want one, how can i get one on the right, and if i can't for a reasonable price then what do you suggest? also - do they really give you cancer or harm your vision? - can any of them go to 1080p without issue?

>>32030 scratch that. can any of them do AT LEAST 1600x1200 without sacrifice or problem?

>>32031 I had a 1600x1200 CRT for the longest time, the picture was so nice and crisp, had to give it up when moving tho.. i really miss it to be honest.

>>32030 >do they really give you cancer or harm your vision? Nah, that's a meme >>32031 >can any of them do AT LEAST 1600x1200 without sacrifice or problem? Plenty of them can. I have one that can do 1600x1200p at 100Hz while looking pretty sharp.

which is the best aspect ratio? and why is it 1.25 / 5:4

CRTs popularized ugly "computer desk", the worst kind of being corner-oriented, with towers of CD racks, a sliding keyboard shelf and a place for printer somewhere between your knees, and series of idiotic "workplace ergonomics" drawings justifying it's existence. Otherwise, you could use regular writing 60 cm deep desk before advent of flat desktop computers a-la IBM PC, any home computer and a small TV fitted snugly on top instead of typewriter, you would had to "upgrade" onto ether the atrocity described above, or something with deeper top ~80 cm-ish to accommodate both the deep CRT and a keyboard, only to become obsolete again around 2007 with no real use afterwards, it's too deep for flat screens with unused space in the back, it's too small for dining table for six.

>>32143 furniture like this is always mildly interesting to me. like those massive "entertainment consoles" from the 70s up to the 90s that had to be almost a meter deep to accommodate a massive tube TV, so they compensated for all the wasted space by filling it with niches to shove your VCR, component stereo system, tapes, etc. before that there were those bizarre phonograph cabinets with built in speakers and (later) a cassette or 8 track player. they're all in a landfill now of course, for good reason. i can't really think of any furniture that is comparable today. maybe those cheap thin "tv stands" people get at ikea? i imagine they'll go away once flat screens get cheap light enough to hang on the wall like a picture frame and there's no more need to store things like cable boxes and game consoles in the same cabinet as the tv itself because everything will be streamed to the television over wifi.

>>31931 >no viewing angle bullshit (even IPS is like kicking dead whales down the beach for this) >very good color contrast, as opposed to very soykaf color contrast >brightness can actually be set to a sufficiently low level (at least as low as 120cd/m^2 recommended by experts) >color emitted does not look like some garbage bathroom or office lighting >you dont go blind from looking at a black screen >no smearing (except from bright to black) aka "ghosting" >no motion blur >no soykaf antiglare material >high refresh rate >no input lag other minor usefuleness: >menus that actually work >literally modeswitches faster than most post-2012 LCDs sometimes i put the CRT away because: -have to audit soykafcode that is way to wide to view without widescreen without constant horizontal scrolling -fps games possibly better with widescreen (but my skill hasnt changed at all between CRT and LCD). there are some widescreen CRTs too there's noise on the screen like with any VGA connection, but the noise is less bad than temporally dithered LCDs, and less bad than the soykaf anti glare obstruction on most LCDs >>31932 >>31964 >>32016 LCDs have buzz as well, and just about all electronics for that matter. i'm not being pedantic. lots of my LCDs even newer models make high pitched noises even louder than my CRTs >>31968 15KHz, what's that, NTSC? 640x480? can't be bothered to calculate right now I've easily seen CRT monitors buzz at 1024x768, 1280x1024, and probably actually every resolution and at 300MHz pixel clock but anyway your soykaf sounds like usual hardware consumer LARP >>31936 >>31937 >CRT is not fashionable!! >- UV light oh no, but LCDs fire circularily polarized light in your face!! **lcds are soykaf and actually cause eye cancer to be honest** >>32031 none of my aperature grilles can do 1600x1200 crisp - it gets blurry. not ultra blurry but still enough to be a show stopper. needs more data though >>32143 i have a normal desk about a meter deep and 2 meters wide. it can fit 2 22" CRTs side by side and still have space for some laptops and papers, keyboars and mice those old desks sucked ass lol

>>32175 >LCDs have buzz as well they can, but only one of my LCDs buzzes and it's significantly quieter than any of my CRTs.

>>31978 >I then put the phone directly to the front of the monitor and the image almost seemed like warping vigorously Well no soykaf. This also happens to some laptops when you put a phone close to their eDP/LVDS lines. >Ever heard of picture related? Yes, mainly because it's printed on the back of many of my CRTs, and it's precisely why I mentioned FCC rules. CRTs are made to withstand interferences. >Most modern VGA cables lost those two chokes so to leak all the analog signals Most DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort cables leak their signals too. Everything does unless it's specifically TEMPEST-proof. >>32016 Only the 15KHz monitors (Trinitron TV and IBM 5153) in my setup whine audibly. >>32029 See above; consumer TMDS and LVDS signalling is also prone to this. >>32031 Most late aperture grille tubes above 17" do 1600x1200 just fine. My Trinitron CPD-E220 and LaCie ElectronBlue II 19 (DiamondTron tube) do 1600x1200 at 70Hz and 85Hz respectively. >>32136 In my opinion, 5:4 is great for office work, photo editing and pretty much anything involving static images. But I prefer 16:10. It allows opening two programs side by side with plenty of vertical real state, and watching either 4:3 or 16:9 media introduces relatively small black bars (plus 1920x1080 doesn't get scaled on a 1920x1200 display) >>32175 >15KHz, what's that, NTSC? NTSC, PAL and CGA/MDA. >but anyway your soykaf sounds like usual hardware consumer LARP What do you mean by that? I mean, of course I did "consume" some of my displays, as I had to buy them second hand. Others I got for free. And I'm not sure about the LARP part. I do actually own and use those displays. Why would anyone lie on the Internet?

>>32180 >Only the 15KHz monitors (Trinitron TV and IBM 5153) in my setup whine audibly. whine was the wrong word, it's buzzing. My 70, 96 and 132 kHz monitors all buzz.

>>32180 >Most late aperture grille tubes above 17" do 1600x1200 just fine. My Trinitron CPD-E220 and LaCie ElectronBlue II 19 (DiamondTron tube) do 1600x1200 at 70Hz and 85Hz respectively. Can confirm. I had a dual 21" CRT setup at 1600x1200 each around 2007 or so. Those were some heavy beasts, but damn did they look good. I can't remember the brand, but I got them both new and cheap, so I think they might have been old stock at the time.

Man I love crts, I can't overstate how much I love them. What other tv can you get for free that may have surround sound and cover a 4:3 aspect ratio that can be as much as 36 inches

>>32177 I'm sitting here next to a (high end) CRT monitor and there's no noise coming out of it of any kind, period. IIRC some make the noies on a white screen, so I tested that as well. I went down to 1024x768@60Hz, there was no noise. Then I went further down to 640x480@60Hz (30KHz horizontal) and there was noise (after turning the monitor off and turning it back on). Exact modeline: 640x480 (0x6d) 25.175MHz -HSync -VSync *current h: width 640 start 656 end 752 total 800 skew 0 clock 31.47KHz v: height 480 start 490 end 492 total 525 clock 59.94Hz But 30KHz is well out of audible range, and yet I can hear it. So much for the LARPer who said: >hurr durr it be 15KHz that is da audible range That would make sense, if there was something that was audible (vibrating) in the first place whose frequency was dependent on the horizontal scan rate. As usual the buzz thing is just another retarded myth. If there's any non-anecdotal data, it will simply be from cheaper monitors or some brand that had a certain defect, or some particular brand of some part that had a certain defect. Other things that make noise: computer power supply, LCDs on display in the store in 2020, lights. Also of note is that I've only seen really bad buzz on CRT TVs. On CRT computer monitors if they have buzz it's quiet. Buzz in other electronics like LCD tends to be as quiet. Also the pitch is higher than what "old people" can hear.

>>32201 >if there was something that was audible (vibrating) in the first place whose frequency was dependent on the horizontal scan rate. Which there is: The flyback transformer. https://www.quora.com/Why-do-old-box-TVs-make-a-high-pitched-sound-when-they-turn-on-and-while-they-are-running What monitor are you using? Are you hearing a whine or a hum? "The LARPer" (me) was only referring to whine. Power supply hum is common on all mains powered electronics. As stated by many lains before, both LCDs and CRTs have it.

remember kids: >CRTs flicker yes, if you set the refresh rate below 85Hz it may, otherwise it will just be like 99% of consumer electronics which flicker anyway (but not noticeable head on with eyes focused on a single spot in a still image) due to cheap PWM soykaf. off the top of my head, this includes LCDs (aside from the "flicker-free (TM)" ones), stove lights, car lights, dishwasher lights, phone screens, christmas lights, lights on store displays, mp3 player screens, the lights on CO and smoke alarms, the lights in the bathroom safety plug, and the lights on a shaver. that's not to say any of that is useful, but CRTs (and now some LCDs) flicker for a (perhaps unintended) reason: to prevent motion blur. the alternative is to render at several thousand FPS, which is not practical in any foreseeable decade >CRTs buzz yes, if you have a soykaf or old one (or some TV type crap which seems to be special), otherwise it will just be like 99% of consumer electronics which buzz anyway due to cheapness or oldness. this includes lights, power supplies (any brick what so ever may do it), and LCDs

>>32180 >15kHz I think the audible sound produced is about 15kHz too much like how a poorly grounded 60Hz produces a bass hum over subwoofers. Some films simulate those sounds, like in SEL every scene whhere's a CRT monitor, they put the same high pitch in the audio.

>>32329 Oh boy, here we go

there is nothing better to watch lain on those black shadows actually look how they should

>>32333 nice. A black crt. Something rare. I chose white mouse keyboard so it fits better into the setup. Being 96khz Horizontal Refresh and 0.25mm dot pitch, mine can easily run 1600x1200. Anything above -under 70hz would flicker too much. But it's 19", so it's fine. I'm still looking for a better CRT. Something above 100khz would be nice. A flattened 22" ViewSonic is pretty much CRT perfection.

>>32335 Or trinitron of course. But they have become rare.

>>32335 >19" shadowmask CRT on a glass desk You like living on the edge, huh? >A black crt. It's more of a dark blue. That was kind of the whole shtick of the ElectronBlue series. Specs for this bad boy state a .24mm dot pitch and a max of 108kHz Horizontal refresh (What resolution would that even be? I'm running it at 1600x1200 85Hz vertical and the OSD reports 106.2kHz). The gamma is forever fuarrrked, as the antiglare coating was suffering from delamination like on many other late Trinitron and DiamondTron monitors and I had to remove it. Still shows small enough a deviation for my needs, though. At least that's the reason why I got it as a freebie. >>32336 >Trinitron >Rare More like overpriced since they became the Gamer's Choice™ of displays. I'd say try looking locally at second hand/thrift stores, but yeah. Not an appropriate time for that.

>>32339 >>19" shadowmask CRT on a glass desk >You like living on the edge, huh? Why? It's pretty thick glass supported by thick steel legs. The crt is standing on the edge of the desk and there is a wall behind.

>>32339 >>32341 It helps that the monitor has a wide base and it's placed near a leg. Personally I wouldn't try it though and I wouldn't buy a glass desk in the first place.

>>32345 Fugg. you are scaring me, Lainon. https://youtu.be/I7X9YltoKas

>>32348 >>32345 holy fuarrrk. I won't be able to sleep this night. that's for sure https://youtu.be/7EgAUhsiRQs

>>32341 I don't know Lain, I've seen some disturbing pictures involving glass desks and heavy displays. I personally wouldn't tempt fate like that.

yeah. Thanks for the tip guys. I'm looking for a new desk right now. There are some I can pick up for free in my area. >>32354 >>32345

>>32357 While you're at it, you could look for more CRTs on there. I've had good luck finding old computer stuff for cheap (or even free) on local classified ad sites.

>>32358 I've looked everywhere was hard enough to find the one I'm using right now

You guys are making me sad that my parents made me get rid of mine when I was a kid, and I haven't been able to find one since

Suggestions on how to pick a quality CRT out used for someone with no knowledge of them? I assume obviously they're all not created equal, I see lots of people giving them away for free, but I would like to ensure I get a nice one.

>>32422 If you're looking for a video monitor (TV-type signals), Trinitrons are pretty much unbeatable in terms of quality. There are nice shadowmask TVs, but none as nice as a Trinitron. You should generally avoid silver plastic TVs, as they were made when CRTs were considered low-end and tend to feature bad build quality, unless they're high-end sets like the bigger Sony FD Trinnitrons or Panasonic Quintrix. In the case of computer monitors, you should consider the following factors: -Dot Pitch: The smaller, the better. a 19" 4:3 CRT with a 0.25mm dot pitch will display a 1600x1200 picture with no visible artifacts. Go any bigger and text will start to look blurry. This depends on the maximum resolution you're looking to display. CRTs don't have a fixed resolution, so for example an 800x600 picture will look perfectly fine on a display capable of doing 1024x768 or 1600x1200. -Refresh rate: Most people tend to notice flicker if it's under 70Hz. Most CRT displays are limited by the maximum video bandwidth their electronics are able to handle; this means most displays are capable of handling higher refresh rates at smaller resolutions. -Aperture grille vs. shadowmask: Aperture grille displays are brighter and tend to have better color reproduction, but also tend to command a premium. Thankfully, you're not just limited to Trinitron tubes when it comes to computer monitors; clones such as the Mitsubishi DiamondTron were as good if not better. Most DiamondTron tubes were sold by third parties such as Apple, though you should avoid their Studio displays as they were notorious for having bad flyback transformers and frying the computers they were connected to. Look out for seemingly normal monitors sporting DiamondTron and other kinds of aperture grille tubes. There were some very good shadowmask monitors such as those made by ViewSonic. Some recommended brands in no particular order: ViewSonic, Iiyama, Sony's GDM and CPD series, LaCie's ElectronBlue series, Mitsubishi's Diamond series. Always look up the model number and consider the specs listed above and user reliability reports; all brands made lemons, including Sony.

>>32359 I remember when everyone was trying to get rid of their CRT TV's and monitors. Now I can't find one for free to plug old game consoles into. fuarrrk.

>>32175 >LCDs cause eye cancer to be honest Citation Needed. The UV risk for users may be a meaningful source of eyestrain, given the human eye's lack of protective reactions when exposed to it. Now the question of whether CRT monitors are generally above safe exposure levels is a different one and probably varies per model.

>>32357 Metal frame looks sturdy, but I'd definitely change that plastic-laminated chipwood top with something made of glued beech or oak timber blocks 25-35mm thick and cover it in polyurethane (strongest among synthetics) varnish intended for floors. It will serve you a considerable amount of time, both the finish and the surface, in case of severe damage you plane/sand it and cover in varnish again, whence chipwood is useless once the plastic top is damaged or formaldehyde resins dry out and it peels off. Don't forget to make a cable hole somewhere in the middle back if you plan on putting the desk flush with the wall, add a tray underneath and a holder for socket multiplier on one of the legs. For ease of transportation, put some threaded inserts in the wooden top, and attach it to the frame using regular bolts. I believe the current top is already attached this way, you can salvage them out and reinsert into wood. Off-centered seating might be a problem if you use more than one monitor or if it's wide (you're using CRT, so it's not a problem?). Such desks were made for paper offices, I'd rather pick one that has thin drawers under top along it's length. You can keep all your electronic garbage, tools, writing supplies and a little paper in them without sacrificing chair movement. Maybe you can detach the drawer module and put on caster wheels aside if it's not too hideous irl. Drawers in some form or another is a must because otherwise all your stuff accumulates evenly on top and collects dust.

>>32438 just buy analog to digital converter chinksoykaf

I know I can just do that. I wanted the CRT cause I prefer the way they look on that.

>>32335 I have two 22" CRTs (one an Aperature Grille flat 22" ViewSonic) and they certainly aren't perfect. But with a few more generations they would probably have been. The imperfect flatness still stands out of you pan an image across the screen (like, with actual vsync and no judder. you'll probably never notice this since all software is broken) - it will look wobbly. Lately I've been running the ViewSonic 1600x1200@100Hz. It seems to get blurry at this point. Setting somewhere lower to like 1600x1200@85Hz fixes the issue. But then there is still a vertical almost pure white line of pixels beside each line. >>32439 Not literal cancer, it just fuarrrks your eyes. most modern LCDs literally hurt to look at on a prue black screen. like perhaps some eye muscles will fail at 50 years old instead of 90. The UV stuff is all burger conspiritard stuff. * one eye sees a completely different shade of color than the other, so it's like looking at a holographic pokemon card all day (perhaps IPS solves the issue but it doesn't solve the viewing angle problem in general) * terrible color profile emited from the backlight (also most backlights are too bright for normal usage: experts reccomend at least dropping down to 120cd/m^2) * terrible faint contrast causing eye strain * dropping brightness down to a usable level and then color calibrating may make pixel response worse * using redshift tends to make pixel response terrible like a 90s LCD * (non-strobed) LCDs have terrible motion blur causing eye strain if you try to focus on any moving object (such as scrolling text, or basically anything at all aside from a still screen) * either has some terrible cheap antiglare that brings the pixel density down to 50PPI, as well as killing the contrast, or it's completely reflective and unusable anywhere outside a closed off room LCD is dead end tech that should never have made it out of calculator screens. Quantum Dot seems like it may fix some of the issues, but pixel response and viewing angle problems will never be fixed. Motion blur will never be fixed because it requires fast pixel response (for both high refresh above 240Hz as well as strobed low refresh modes), and then you get back into the whole "oh noez i cant color calibrate my monitor or change the refresh rate because the overdrive is only tuned for one or two specific settings" fiasco. Also to be even usable an LCD has to be IPS, which also worsens the pixel response times. Strobed LCD is still soykaf from what I can tell. OLED seems to be where it's at (provided the life-extension hacks don't ruin the image from the get-go).

>>32480 A lot of these things seem far more tuning-related than fundamental drawbacks. >most modern LCDs literally hurt to look at on a prue black screen. I have never experienced this. Motion blur is true, but again I don't think the strain would be any worse than attempting to focus on moving objects on cheaper CRTs. Likewise, the glare is an annoyance, true, but I remember glare from my CRTs too, any room with sunlight was a terrible room. I looked it up and it seems like some did indeed produce UV (with little making it out because glass), most also produced x-rays, though how much actually made it out of the enclosure is harder to find out.

>>32486 continued I mean I haven't been able to find listed comparisons of CRT exposure measurements (if any), which would be useful.

Why don't I have a CRT? Hmmm..... Oh, now I remember! Because I visit out of state family often and hate having to carry that soykaf to the car. Let alone finding a place in a 2001 chevy cavalier to put the damn thing.

>>32499 inb4 people take this reply seriously. I joke I joke, I kid I kid!

>>32480 >* one eye sees a completely different shade of color than the other, so it's like looking at a holographic pokemon card all day (perhaps IPS solves the issue but it doesn't solve the viewing angle problem in general) This is true and the reason why lcd monitors only get wider but not taller and the same reason they stopped making square monitors. For example if one would view a pitchpurple, it would look off and the top or bottom would be bluish like there's a gradient. On soykafty monitors, the gradient comes from one side.This was the problem I had with phones lcd back then. >* terrible color profile emited from the backlight (also most backlights are too bright for normal usage: experts reccomend at least dropping down to 120cd/m^2) Color calibration would at least tone down brightness though, the terrible color profile is lcd companies pushing the white point to its limit that it almost all the time looks yellowish. Just calibrate it, and it would look dimmer and absolutely better. The worse the LCD the more darker the calibration would be although you won't get accurate black/whitepoint. >* terrible faint contrast causing eye strain I think it depends on the quality of lcd and if it's matte. Mine reproduces blacks fine. >* dropping brightness down to a usable level and then color calibrating may make pixel response worse You mean the color transition thing? I hate that. Sometimes when I drag a black window over white background I'd see bluish or reddish ghosting. >* using redshift tends to make pixel response terrible like a 90s LCD Nah. It's probably a Windows only problem. >* (non-strobed) LCDs have terrible motion blur causing eye strain if you try to focus on any moving object (such as scrolling text, or basically anything at all aside from a still screen) Mine is fine when scrolling vertically but idk if you meant pwm flicker which I don't have (ccfl-lit). >* either has some terrible cheap antiglare that brings the pixel density down to 50PPI, as well as killing the contrast, or it's completely reflective and unusable anywhere outside a closed off room I also think the anti-glare had turned yellowish. My calibration is 60/75/90 (r/g/b) but it still looks awesome and reproduces violets perfectly unlike most laptop LCDs in the market. lenovo makes really good monitors, laptops though suck as they use samsung or oem soykaf

We weren't kidding about the power efficiency thing. Had my CRT for years without issues, but now I'm running an external gpu I need to budget power like crazy or else the whole house shorts out. Still looks fantastic though, especially in increasingly realistic games like Forza Horizon 4 and Flight Sim 2020 where natural colours and convincing colour depth of a CRT really help sell the visuals.

>>32334 Holy hell the picture is crisp on that CRT

>>32486 >A lot of these things seem far more tuning-related than fundamental drawbacks. I only listed specific things that hurt the eyes here. I find temporal dithering (which i didn't list) for example pleasing to look at, despite that it's a fundamental drawback (image quality wise). >Motion blur is true, but again I don't think the strain would be any worse than attempting to focus on moving objects on cheaper CRTs. Focus is a non-issue on good CRTs and even half-good ones, provided you keep the resolution in the range it can support. Even if I go up to 1600x1200@100Hz, the _static_ blur that causes is still not nearly as bad as what you get from an LCD's motion blur. >>32516 >remember glare from my CRTs too, any room with sunlight was a terrible room. Yeah actually the CRTs had a lot of soykaf glare too. All the high end one's I've used recently seem to solve the problem as much as it's solvable without e-ink though. >This is true and the reason why lcd monitors only get wider but not taller and the same reason they stopped making square monitors. big doubt. >I think it depends on the quality of lcd and if it's matte. Mine reproduces blacks fine. Only VA LCDs have decent contrast. The matte just takes the contrast down further. >Color calibration would at least tone down brightness though, the terrible color profile is lcd companies pushing the white point to its limit that it almost all the time looks yellowish. I'm talking about the output of the blacklight, which is to some extent filtered by the LCD. And changing color only mildy changes brightness. >yellowish You mean blueish? >You mean the color transition thing? yep >It's probably a Windows only problem. I thought Windows doesn't even have redshift, but anyway the issue has nothing to do with OS. >Mine is fine when scrolling vertically but idk if you meant pwm flicker which I don't have (ccfl-lit). Nah, all PWM-free necessarily has motion blur. Trying to focus on a moving object on such a screen necessarily causes eye strain eventually. sage for swaying off topic

>>32589 Any CRT monitor from the early 2000's that can output at least around 1280x1024 will look that good. Pixel density is much better, so you don't need to go all the way up to 4k to get rid of visible pixels / screen door effect like you do on LCD and the like.

>>31931 because my desk is too small and I'm broke I had to leave behind a nice little 13" CRT TV when I last moved. still sad about that one.

>>32651 >>32651 If one were looking for a crt to watch lain on what would be a good brand/specs to look for?

>>32651 4k doesn't solve anything either if the screen is 50 inches wide and you view it from 3 feet away. it all depends on viewing distance and pixel density i agree CRTs seem to have better pixel density when compared to an LCD of the same size with the same resolution screen door effect is a vague term remember kids: if you display a white screen and move your head towards and away from it, and see horizontal / vertical lines as you move, you are seeing a screen door effect, and your "the resolution probem is solved" is false

>>32443 >>32357 just got this table for 5€ including the drawer

>>32345 >>32354 >>32709 >>32708

My older brother had one of those. I always liked it

>>32031 The one in the OP pic can do 2048x1536@85Hz. The sony FW900 (the single best CRT ever produced) does 2304 x 1440 @ 80Hz. And finally the Viewsonic P225F will do 2560x1920@63 Hz These will all do ~200 Hz at low res... 1024x768.

>>32781 >FW900 >best CRT ever produced it's only spcial because it's 16:10 there's better if you're not obsessed with widescreen.

>>32784 >there's better no there is not... these were the best. There was the electron blues, but they were all using same basic tubes as other good 21" when at this level like sony, Illyama, mitsubishi... was basically dimandtron or trinatron, and then how that was tuned by the circuits... all were good at that level. Yes the FW900 was one of the only 16:10 but it also had flat screen trinitron tube, excellent color accuracy, top image qualitys... these were at the top end in every aspect.

>>32781 >The sony FW900 (the single best CRT ever produced) does 2304 x 1440 @ 80Hz. >Power Consumption Operational: 170W Do you need to inform your local power company when you intend to turn on your monitor?

>>32800 >Do you need to inform your local power company when you intend to turn on your monitor? Only when you degauss them - they make a noise that seems like they have just drained all the power from the global grid!

>>32800 >170W Well considering most graphics cards will drink this just for lunch I don't think its too bad!

>>32781 >The sony FW900 (the single best CRT ever produced) This is the best way to tell someone has no experience with high end CRTs other than what they've read on Reddit/4chan. When they think the FW900 is the be-all and end-all.

>>32790 >these were at the top end in every aspect. Simply not true. My Vision Master Pro 454 has a higher max horizontal refresh rate (130kHz) than the FW900 (121kHz). >>32803 honestly this

>>32709 That stool is hardcore.

>>32811 it's only to place my feet on the actual chair is a cheapass office chair

test

>>32803 >This is the best way to tell someone has no experience with high end CRTs other than what they've read on Reddit/4chan. When they think the FW900 is the be-all and end-all.

>>32822 45yr old who grew up as a graphic designer

>>32803 >This is the best way to tell someone has no experience with high end CRTs other than what they've read on Reddit/4chan. When they think the FW900 is the be-all and end-all. 45yr old who grew up as a graphic designer and video editor from first pentium and BETA-SP tape days. I have seen my fair share of Quality CRTs and was objectively studying the IQ alot back then. >>32805 Simply not true. My Vision Master Pro 454 has a higher max horizontal refresh rate (130kHz) than the FW900 (121kHz). I still own my 454 pro from the day I got it new! It won't out res or refresh the FW900... it stops at 2048x1536@60hz or 1600x1200@85hz... notice how the image is softer at 85hz than 60hz - this is universal but very slight. I think alot of the viewing of FW900s you might have seen have been well used very high hrs samples as this will reduce contrast and colour accuracy over yrs. best monitors are the Illyama 514, LaCie, the electron blue 22 v4 and the sony FW900 as well as the SGI variants of these. There was very very little to chose between these in IQ... setup would be much more a factor at this end of the game. Other notables were that stupid cost one (name slips me... was about $7K and meant to be super print calibrated) - I never saw one in the flesh - but its the same base HW with some adjustments a jumped up price and a few accessory's... I doubt it was any more razor IQ than these other monitors. Formac did some nice ones and even Dell even did some nice trinitrons... fuarrrkin filter was stopping the post because of the word b...o...0...m,,,er - stop being so precious!

>>32825 >it stops at 2048x1536@60hz or 1600x1200@85hz not if you run custom modelines I've got mine running at 1600x1200@85Hz right now

>>32829 >I've got mine running at 1600x1200@85Hz right now meant to say running at 1600x1200@100Hz

>>32831 I'ts been some time since i used mine, maybe it did hit 100hz at 1600x1200? but I am positive you will not get more than 2048x1536@60hz... i was always wanting more res and refresh!

>>32833 I don't have any DACs with a high enough pixel clock to output higher than 2048x1536@60Hz at the moment but I should be getting one soon. I'll try once I can and report back, but there's no reason why it wouldn't work in the specs of the device.

>>32834 i might set mine up again... its mint... I'll have to have a play - I'll take 8k at 10hz if it will go there - lol

2048x1536@60Hz is pretty much the limit on the 22" monitors i have and it looks like soykaf because it gets blurry (as usual) since its way above what the monitor can support

>>32834 Most vga NVIDIAs had 400Mhz RAMDACS This should get 2048x1536@85hz...

>>32805 the bandwidth isn't the only indicator of quality (probably not one at all beyond an artifical limitation) also apparently polaroid or some other weird brand has one monitor that can do 300Hz at decent resolution

>>32846 I've currently just got a DP to VGA adapter that does 270MHz. I bought a R7 250 for cheap (400MHz RAMDAC) and I'm gonna do render offloading to use it with my 5700XT. I'd never go with an Nvidia GPU because I use Linux.

>>32833 Got the GPU and yeah, it works at 80Hz I also just discovered that it can run 1024x768i@260Hz too which is neat because 200Hz is listed as the max.

>>33013 >interlaced T_T

the maxes are usually listed for progressive scan btw. but thats interesting i might try running double rate at interlaced later

>>33235 interlaced can look pretty good on CRTs at the right res, and is great for the boost to percieved refresh rate. I don't understand the hate. Anyways, it's running 2048x1536@80 progressive, not interlaced.

>>33236 >the maxes are usually listed for progressive scan btw. Huh, on my other monitors I've been limited to the max vsync even when running interlaced with hsync headroom.

>>31932 >>31933 Change the caps you fuarrrking tards

Hello Im new, I have 2 CRT downstairs. Can some lainon tell me if they are worth getting going again? Left is a NEC MultiSync 75 from 11/00 and right is a Dell UltraScan 1600HS from 12/98. The NEC is used once in a blue moon as a spare and the Dell was my monitor until 2013. I was only 14 so couldn't appreciate it at the time, just felt old and behind everyone else.

>>33347 neither one is crazy high end but the dell can do 107 kHz which is respectable, plus it's nice and big. Fire it up and see how it looks.

>>33349 I will have to get a new powercord for the Dell. Original is lost from my Mom's ruthless spring cleaning before I moved out. Please tell me you can find new power cords?

>>33367 I've never seen a CRT that doesn't use a generic kettle power cord like this, they're cheap and easy to get.

>>33368 Ok thanks, I'm noobier at electronics than most here. I assume I couldn't use the NEC cord cause it's meant for a much smaller one? Can't believe I got caught up in the flat screen meme, I mean they're light but a desktop never moves.

>>32335 >>32339 Here is an actual black CRT from my work just for the heck of it. A Dell M783s from 2005. Its a terminal in a forgotten dept that sees pretty light use.

>>33369 No reason why you can't use the NEC's cable. I have a bunch of kettle leads for all my CRTs and I swap them around no problem.

>>31931 it's broken

>>33013 Nice... im gonna see if i can get mine up tgere! interlaced has always been a bitch to produce for but in a way it's kinda got full Res and double the frame rate! But with some issues obviously... but its not bad, its just a clever way of having more visual options on a limmited b.w.

>>33372 I had to use the NEC. No VGA cable around (NEC one is integrated) and my desk is far too small for the Dell. Its only 1152x864 @ 75hz, nothing to brag about, but way easier on the eyes. Gonna go on a huge binge of You're Under Arrest! thanks to this thing.

Noticed that my the picture gets kinda distorted on my crt when changing from dark to bright pictures. I remember fiddling around with the trimpots on the flyback trafo to adjust the sharpness. Maybe I fuarrrked something up? Is this normal?

>>33347 It's a dell trinitron. I would love to get my hands on one of those. see >>33349 107 khz is pretty nice. Where I live they sell for a lot of bux on jewbay. >>33545 hope you get the thing running again