Re: LCD vs CRT
- From: Roger <GetValidAddress@xxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:36:38 -0400
On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 04:23:08 GMT, "Bob (but not THAT Bob)"
<nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
scowart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
D wrote:
I bought a LG 26" LCD HDTV just yesterday as an open box from CircuitIt all depends on the quality of the signal and the quality of the LCD
City. It was a really good deal. I as of now only have regular cable,
so I don't have HD capabilities yet. I'm looking into this.
Nonetheless, it appears that my 10-year old CRT television has a better
picture than the LCD television. The tv is in fine shape by the way. Do
non-HD programs show up better on CRTs than on LCDs? I guess my
question, is what are the advantages of the CRT versus LCD...other than
size? I would consider myself a novice on this, so any help would be
appreciated. Thanks.
-D
set. My Dad purchased a 32" Panasonic LCD set and receives analog
cable. His picture quality is fantastic on most channels. But there
are some channels that just do not look good. They happen to be the
same channels that look poor on my crt HD set at home over cable. In
this case the limitation is the signal, or poor video to start with.
You're comparing HD CRT to HD LCD - so of course standard cable looks
comparable (i.e. lousy).
He's comparing a 10 yr old (hence NON-HD) CRT which was designed for
standard cable, to an HD LCD which is designed for HDTV.
I have a 14 year old 27" Hitachi that shows a great picture even
though the tuners died long ago. I use the tuner in the VCR which
works just fine. I also feed this set from tuner #2 on the 622
satellite receiver. I also have a new SamSung 40" 4092 LCD set.
I have basic cable, Good OTA antennas (at 90' with a remote pre-amp)
and a Dish Network 622 dual tuner DVR.
SD, be it off the air (analog or digital) or satellite(digital)
produces a very good image on both sets. Of course the image quality
on analog is much more dependent on the signal strength. Cable
(analog) stinks on both sets. Digital SD be it OTA or Satellite is
quite good. The most difficult part of comparisons is to make the
comparisons strictly in SD and try not to compare any of these to HD
as you know how much better an image that will give.
Brightness, contrast, and color range are at least as good if not
better on the LCD than my 19" CRT monitors. I recently gave away two
19" and one 17" CRT monitors and switched to LCDs for photo editing.
I'm using a 20" SamSung SyncMaster 204B for that. One of those 19"
monitors was less than two years old.
When I get the money for another 20" (or larger" LCD monitor, the last
19" CRT will go. Unfortunately it's "that time of the year" where I
have a lot of expenses and I still need two more large hard drives, a
KNX-80 RNAV aviation radio fixed, a *large* rotator rebuilt, and a lot
of other expenses.<sigh>
I think another 4092 would look good over my desk out in the work
shop, but that ain't a gonna happen unless I win the lottery.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
.
- References:
- LCD vs CRT
- From: D
- Re: LCD vs CRT
- From: scowart
- Re: LCD vs CRT
- From: Bob (but not THAT Bob)
- LCD vs CRT
- Prev by Date: Re: Q : dish pointing
- Next by Date: Re: Death of OTA Broadcasting
- Previous by thread: Re: LCD vs CRT
- Next by thread: changing resolution...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
