Shift to Low-Def TV by Older Guys ?
 

I watched the Bears game yesterday at a friends on his new Sony LCD hi-def TV.

The picture quality was simply amazing.

But the sharpness was so sharp, it actually had an "odd" look to it, almost an "artificial" look to my eye.

My 1982 19" Sony Trinitron has very warm colors, the detail, of course, is less sharp than new TVs, but to me - more pleasing to my eye.

Are people over 50 (like me), with an eye trained to years of low-def TV viewing, going to switch back to vintage TVs as we get older, just like many of us now prefer the analog sound of records compared to digital ?

It could very well happen. Only time will tell. I'm not even close to 50 and I plan to watch SD sets as long as I can.

About every hi-def TV to me seems like it has all the controls turned up "all the way to 11"- the color's too colorful, the image is too sharp, the whole business is "Dolly Parton"- too much too much. And motion scenes look weird- they "tear" or something, just don't look quite right. But then I'm an old poop, wish this whole HDTV nonsense would just go away.

The old vacuum tube color TVs may not have much 'definition', but the warm, rich color always brought to mind the look of movie film to me (and I am thinking carbon arc projectors).

Lots of video professionals prefer CRT monitors for color correction. Broadcast quality CRTs are disappearing rapidly, to the frustration of many.

I have a high def CRT RP and the images it produces in HD is stunning.LCDs,DLPs and the like just do not look normal to me either.There's something about the image that looks phony..cannot describe it in words.I don't think it's our age or our eyes.They just look artificial.

I think we prefer analog to digital because we exist, we hear, and we see in an analog world. Digital is an artificiality to allow easier storage, cheaper production, and pursuit oif the almighty $.

God, analog vs. digital debate finally crosses into video lines LOL.

IMO with color and everything set correctly on my DLP the picture walks all over my analog sets.

One wierd thing though, is the magnification is so great on some things that its odd. Think of the detail you see on someones face normally, then blow it up to fit a 50" tv. I can see lines on the upper lips of most news anchors that smoke. Honestly, not sure if I could see it in real life.

Evan

LCD's, Plasma's and even DLP's have very distinct looks, and yes they can easily look "too powerful".

Personally I have found myself liking Samsung's LCD's, they seem to be warm and not "too" sharp. As for DLP's Sony makes some nice ones, Plasma's I don't know to be honest.

Don't worry its not the age in your eyes, I'm 23 and notice it.

Yeah, the LCD ones seem to do this smearing the worst, that and if anything is black, it turns into a black lump with no detail at all.

For this I should spend the big bucks? :no: Not this cowboy.

All that hi-res also increases the obviousness of digital artifacts that you can see when you have DVD-read errors, or poor digital cable transmission. If you want it bad, you usually get it bad.

I like the descriptions above of "too powerful", "too colorful" and so on. High-definition TV breaks all the boundaries of traditional NTSC, but maybe it is like showing the real Grand Canyon to someone who has only seen pictures of it, or how a live NASCAR race sounds, or a real lion up close after seeing only MGM movies.

Most people, when they say they prefer analog, really mean they do not like things too real. There is a reason TV dramas have always been filmed but comedies were often on tape. Put a drama on tape and it will look like the TV news, but we know it is acting and it will seem fake. On film, with its "warm", specific look, we are already prepared for an act rather than real life.

You said the magic words- "with everything set correctly". Probably relatively few people have seen well-adjusted HDTV displays. Certainly none of the ones in retail stores are ever set up properly.

You need to drop by for a few beers some day and watch a properly adjusted Sharp Aquos... ;)

I also agree with the picture being to "powerful" and too sharp. I also agree with the idea that it appears that the controls are all the way up. This is not biased because I like my vintage color Tv sets. I personally cannot watch those sets without some kind of side effect. The picture is outstanding, but it strains the eye and i almost get a vertigo effect. Im only 24 so Im not going to factor the age thing here. Im glad this was brought up because I felt like the only one who felt this way about viewing those sets. Vintage tv or not, I like NTSC on a CRT set.

I prefer the pic on my 32" Toshiba SD down here in the cave. My wife got a 32" LG LCD and I have it tweaked for best effect. Football looks best, OTA HD looks great, but I like the CRT overall.

One of these days, when I'm home alone, I'm going to "steal" it for a bit to see what it looks like in the basement.

Reminds me of the discussion of how some older folks, back in the sixties, preferred the "soft" picture of a Motorola color tv...or generally disliked a properly adjusted NTSC set. There is something odd about these new sets that I just can't put my finger on. When I see them in the store or in someone's house I have to stop and stare, but I'm not sure I like what I see. Too bright? Too clear? I don't know. If I look too long all I see are artifacts/pixelating and I walk away.

Well i have noticed something, on the last two sets i found at thrift stores both of them had the sharpness control turned way down. One control was hidden in a out of the way area of the back. so it might have still had the factory adjustment. maybe people liked it that way back then?

My Dad has a 65" Samsung HDTV CRT projector... The last of the CRT style HD projection screen units circa 2005. He has the sharpness way down on his set as well because in HD mode it's just too sharp, especially around the edges of images in football games and nascar.. So I think Hi Def is most likely a cause of the sharpness issue.

Perhaps, but the last 2 sets I found were made in the mid 70's. 1 Zenith and 1 Sears Toshiba and I think they have never seen HD, heck they aren't even cable ready.:scratch2:

Most recent CRT TVs (including projection) have scan velocity modulation. It slows the beam down at edges of objects to make the picture look sharper. It makes the image look like someone traced around everything with a pen. I can't stand what it does to the image and I always disable it when I fix a set for myself, or to sell. One way to reduce the adverse effect on the picture is to turn the sharpness way down.

It started to show up on high end sets in the mid 80's, but it's now standard on most TVs. They have also gradually increased the strength of the SVM over the years. It was hardly noticeable on the first TVs to have it, but now it's very annoying.

'svm'?

Scan Velocity Modulation

Sharpness should be turned down on most sets. If set too high,it causes edge blooming.There's a couple of test patterns that are used to actually adjust sharpness.

If I new the new sets would last as long as my 1982 13" Montgomery Ward, maybe I'd buy into them. I'm 19, so my eyes are still decent, and I have to agree on the "odd look" issue. HD sets look completely artificial to me. Now I'm making my judgement based on retail displays, so they're probably not adjusted properly. Either way though, TV's are made with the same cheapo quality components that everything else is made of now, so I just don't want any part of it. It's all so disposable...

Besides, is there really anything on TV these days that justifies their price tag?

Clearly (pun intended), age has nothing to do with whether people like HD displays or not. I am 47, and last spring I replaced my 720p projector with a 1080p model because the old one was not detailed enough. I watch high-def movie discs on a 92" screen, and I sit about 8 to 9 feet from the screen. For casual viewing, I have a 1080p 42" LCD hanging on the wall behind where the big screen pulls down. I can read text just fine on a 1920x1080 Windows desktop on that LCD (or the 92" screen, for that matter). I have a really good pair of glasses... :)

Hi Chris, Good discussion.

My point on age was not really related to the quality of our vision.

I've been watching TV (too much) for 50 years, most of that time on Zenith color tube sets of my youth and more recently - Sony Trinitrons. Over the years, you develop an appreciation (based on your own experience) for what is a good picture and bad picture.

To my eye, the HD TVs I have seen are too sharp and too bright.

This is just a statement of personal preference. I may get a HD TV someday, but for now, I like my old low-def Trinitron.

Cheers, Snade

That's because they're designed to be brighter and sharper than the set that's sitting next to them at Best Buy. This war has been going on for a long time, so things are really out of hand now. If you saw a properly adjusted set in one of these displays, you'd laugh at it for being dim and soft with dull color. In the home, a properly adjusted HD TV (with a good signal) should look similar to a movie screen.

I have on occasion adjusted one set in a store display to have correct color and contrast settings. Once I had the set looking good, id did then appear weak and washed out compared to the adjacent sets. Most of the flat panel sets I have seen do not look very good at all and are never adjusted correctly at the store. Perhaps at home they would look better but I just have no interest in buying one. I would prefer to stick to tube color sets from now on. At least I know I can service them. What's the point of finding a great flat panels TV only to have to throw it out in a few years because parts are not available.

LCD technology really isn't good enough yet for TV. Even the "fastest" LCDs still show noticeable ghosting or blurring during fast action scenes when compared side by side with CRTs. But damn....the convenience size wise is definitely a HUGE selling factor.

As for analog vs. digital...

...consider the fact that all video and film is recorded at a specific "frame rate" and even older television displays had certain "characteristics that are analogous to digital :saywhat:" mainly relying on "tricking" the brain into thinking that it is seeing a fluid "analog" image it comes down more to the quality of the image being transmitted rather than the domain.

At one time audio was about reproducing a linear analog recording. Video has never been like this.

Amen to that. I already have two friends that want me to fix their fairly new flat panel TV's. Even though I told them I wasn't very interested; they want me to check them anyway. One of these sets was replaced under warranty by the mfg. They didn't wan't to claim the old one. The other one was given to the guy by a friend when it died. They have not actually made their way over here, and, I really hope they don't. I've also heard of other people having problems with these sets and not being able to get parts. All I know is that if I pay several thousand $$ for a TV; then, that sucker better work from now on. Yet, there's one of the electronic stores around here claiming that the new flat panel TV's are designed to last 15 to 25 years. All that store is doing is trying to suck people into buying these high priced sets. It's funny that there are plenty of regular old TV's that have long passed that mark and are still going.

I too will try to keep my old sets going. At least the parts are big enough to see and often easier to obtain than the speciallized parts often found in newer TV's.

That why I settled on a Sharp Aquos. It was the only LCD set I found that I could actually buy replacement backlight lamps for after the originals go too dim to be useful to light up the LCD screen. I can just take the back off and replace them myself. It's also the reason I chose it over a limited-life plasma screen. Otherwise, the internal electronics are just as serviceable as any standard set and if I bust the LCD screen, well, I'd be just as screwed as if I busted a large CRT. New TV time... :D

Me too, and I'm 41.

Agreed, it seem the picture I get on my 1982 Zenith is much better than I have seen on any HDTV.

I made the switch to plasma just over one year ago - I would NEVER go back. Watching a standard definition 19" or 25" tv is almost torturous now.

Internal electronics
 

Copy, "Otherwise, the internal electronics are just as serviceable as any standard set"
When was the last time you tried to repair a set with surface mount devices, even when you can find the parts and have a $1,600.00 solder station the board will get damaged or the smd several microns away will go bad. Then you try to buy the whole board from the overseas manufacturer and if available it is half the cost of the TV. Yes, I am old and grumpy.
Richard

I'll have to agree with that. I've cracked open various pieces of modern consumer electronics and I see all the surface mounted parts. There's no way I'm going to try to change a square surface mounted IC with 5 billion legs on it. If I can't fix it with a regular soldering iron, I'm not interested. A friend that runs a local TV shop was telling me that he needed a board for a fairly new large screen LCD set just to learn that it was "NLA" from the factory. All he could do was give the set back to the owner and let them take it up with the company. For me, I'll keep fixing the '50's through the '80's stuff that actually have parts that are more generic in nature and that are easier to see. I know I'm sick of all this modern, throw away, non repairable garbage that has done nothing but shut down American TV plants and close TV shops all over the country.

i have a 106" dlp infocus hd projector. that is the main set in our home. movies and sporting events look great,however, the dreaded rainbow can creep on you. goldmark discovered this in his early experiments with the cbs color wheel. we also have an lcd phillips that has an absolutely amazing picture. possibly the best i ve ever seen. i am currently watching my chromacolor in the bedroom. dlp,lcd,hd,is remarkable,but i am still enthralled with the picture and quality of this old set. 25vdmp22 that produces beautiful tones and clarity. i watch this set everyday now. cant wait to get back on my roundie.nice picture,just hard to keep going.who needs hd anyway?

I wish there was a way to capture the picture I get on some of my sets, and display it without having to rely on everybody's computer monitor. I can only say that I've had "non-TV" people rave at this picture displayed on my Over-The-Air NTSC sets, the newest being from 1990. I'm sure that some of it has to do with the relatively smaller screen sizes (27" at the most).

I think the only reason for HDTV has to be increased screen size. I know there are people out there with 32' wide "media" rooms, but I'm in a house that pre-dates TV anyways, so why do I need a 64" screen? Watching TV (or DVDs) just isn't that big a part of my life. I prefer to spend my down time on the internet anyways, and when I do rent a DVD, I'm usually squeezed in with my girlfriend in a less-than-ideal viewing position. I prefer that my TV remains in a box, lest I start getting far too involved with it. I'd jump off the roof if I ever found myself caring about who won some idiotic game show.

But I have seen HD and big-flat-screen sets at restaurants/bars and in friend's houses. For the most part, I think they look lousy. The reds on a team jersey seem to "float" around like it's in another dimension. The artifacts are way too obvious, the video equivalent of audio compression.

Since there is no such thing as a local station/programming anymore, I don't know if I'll care that much when analog goes away. :scratch2:

Should a LCD or plasma HDTV ever make it to my home, a strategically placed 8,5Kv zap on the HDMI socket with the electric horse fence HV generator (just after the warranty expires of course) will send the damn thing to the landfill :D

Only old, big boxy TVs with round cornered CRTs here!

By the way, i'm 28