Best Buy's final year selling CRT TVs in stores...

[kx250rider]

Originally Posted by NowhereMan 1966

I dunno, maybe me turning 40 this year might have a small part in that, but overall, I feel like an old geezer when I walk in there.

Join the club ... It's coming for me in March. Once in awhile, I will take one of those Realistic Lifetime gold-pinned tubes into the Radio Shack to see what the 17-year-old Iranian salesboy will say when I ask for him to replace it, and if he doesn't believe it's bad, please test it on the Micronta Tube Tester...

Charles

[Whirled One]

Originally Posted by Carmine

BUT my other gripe (as stated before) is this stupid 16:9 aspect ratio!

Yeah, I gotta agree with that. I was just thinking about this the other day as a matter of fact, and wondering if I was the only person who actually prefers the 4:3 aspect ratio for TV displays... Even computer monitors are going "widescreen" these days, which seems all the more puzzling to me (though I can understand some advantages to a wide-aspect display on a small laptop where you want to shave off some depth from the casing size)

Once analog NTSC goes off the air, I wonder if the TV manufacturers will even still offer sets with a 4:3 aspect ratio...

[MarkWilson]

Plasma and LCD have yet to impress me on picture quality. I think everyone is so hyped up on the idea that it is "FLAT" rather than actually looking/comparing the picture to a crt. Clearly the crt's will win. The only plasma that I've ever seen that was outstanding was a screen made by HP. I saw it at CEDIA last year and what made the biggest difference was the processing speed. No jerky movements with color and clarity that I've yet to see on any screen. But most average consumers have no idea what they are looking at anyway.

[andy]

Originally Posted by MarkWilson

Plasma and LCD have yet to impress me on picture quality. I think everyone is so hyped up on the idea that it is "FLAT" rather than actually looking/comparing the picture to a crt. Clearly the crt's will win. The only plasma that I've ever seen that was outstanding was a screen made by HP. I saw it at CEDIA last year and what made the biggest difference was the processing speed. No jerky movements with color and clarity that I've yet to see on any screen. But most average consumers have no idea what they are looking at anyway.

I agree that nothing beats a properly adjusted good quality CRT, but that's far from what most people have. The way most people use their TVs, Plasma, LCD, and DLP often actually have a better picture. When you have the contrast at maximum and the color way too high, CRTs tend to bloom and defocus. At least other display technologies don't suffer from that. They can deliver the eye scorching brightness people demand better than most CRTs.

[ha1156w]

Here's a question for the group....my 1992 Panasonic 20" just bit the dust -- short in the CRT, making an out-of-control brightness in the picture. Looks like overexposed, purple film stock or something. What would you buy as the replacement? Given that the 20" CRT set is going the way of the do-do, time is apparently limited for finding one. I'm not yet on the flat-panel crowd, as with the rest of the board. Any suggestions before I start the hunt?

Thanks!
HA1156w in TX

[devoid]

Two words. Used Sony. OK four. Check flee bay.

[ha1156w]

Hmmm....from what I've read in other threads, I thought Sony had poor picture tube life, especially in the 26" sets. Is there a particular cutoff date that I need to keep in mind?

Thanks!

[andy]

Originally Posted by ha1156w

Hmmm....from what I've read in other threads, I thought Sony had poor picture tube life, especially in the 26" sets. Is there a particular cutoff date that I need to keep in mind?

Thanks!

Sony CRTs have never been outstanding as far as life is concerned. They stopped making the 26" sets about 20 years ago, so there's not too much to worry about unless you're looking for something that old.

I wouldn't seek out an old Sony unless you have the time to find one with a good CRT. 80's Sonys were great when new, but they usually looked tired after 10-15 years of hard use.

For a 90's TV, a Sony would be an excellent choice.

Just use your eyes and don't buy it unless it has a good picture. The usually symptoms of a bad CRT are poor gray scale, poor focus, poor contrast, and the picture flashing on and off.

[kx250rider]

And adding to the tips from Andy, which I agree with, you should perform the cold start test on any Sony, new or old. With the TV totally cold (been off at least a few hours, and preferably unplugged, turn it on and watch carefully how the picture first comes on. It should pop on within 5 or 6 seconds, and fade into full brightness and good focus very quickly. If it kind of gradually sharpens from a blurry, off-color picture over a period of a minute or 2, the CRT is about shot. And as Andy pointed out, a LONG delay in "popping on" after you already hear audio, and/or the picture flashing black & back on will indicate a very weak CRT on some Sony sets, including the XBR sets of the 90s.

Charles

[colortrakker]

Originally Posted by andy

For a 90's TV, a Sony would be an excellent choice.

Not so sure about that, if the pro models are any indication. We've got some pro-model Sonies at work that can't be 5 years old yet and they've already lost guns. Blue and red go first. Granted, they're on 24/7, but so are our Belgian-made Barcos, which still look terrific.

And I saw a mid-'90s 20" Trinitron at a thrift recently with a weak blue gun. I can't think it was a fluke.

[Pete Deksnis]

[1] Let's see... YUPPY CAR PRIUS: Fossil fuel => reciprocating engine => electric generator => battery => electric motor => wheels.

How stupid is that? How can that chain be efficient? Is there creative engineering there somewhere!?

MY CAR YARIS: Fossil fuel => reciprocating engine => wheels.

Hmmm.

It costs less, has to be more reliable, is more powerful, weighs less, and averages 39 mpg.

Hmmm.

What would the mileage be for one of those pipsqueak hybrid vehicles if it used its reciprocating engine without all that other junk to drive the wheels directly...?

[2] My first sight of a plasma TV was in an up-scale store. Breathtaking. The price tag? My first house cost only $2000 more, and it was on a lagoon.

Then I moved in closer and saw all those little plasma pixels. I don't know how they spec 'em (and quite frankly, I don't care) but any standard dot-pitch technique has to be embarrassing. They're not small, they were huge.

Plasma sets have perfect convergence; from there on, its downhill, IMO.

[3] CRTs: They're certainly through as a consumer product. The old RCA Lancaster CRT plant where the 15GP22's were made closed this year for a reason.

Hmmm. Talk about poor 15GP22 reliability. I Wonder if some fifteen-year-old today will be able to find a working 2006 plasma in fifty years.

[4] CRTs: I think HD helped -- it didn't cause it of course, but it is a factor in the downturn of the CRT. You've probably seen pictures of my 38-in. wide-screen CRT set. It weighs in officially at 216 pounds, and that doesn't count the base and all the HT gear in there. Thank goodness it's on hardwood flooring and the rug rolls back so I can slide it out.

[5] I'm with you Chad. If I had to buy a new set it would be a DLP. Especially now that they've broken the 720p barrier.

[6] and finally, wide-screen formats: A hi-def ATSC image can be, and usually is, highly pleasing when in its 16X9 (1:77 or so) aspect ratio. Can't appreciate a DVD though in 2:35 or whatever ratio. FILL UP MY SCREEN for goodness sake! It's what I paid for! And I'm not cool with having you burn in my CRT with your half-assed odd-ball aspect ratios from a movie house release.

Pete

[electronjohn]

kx250rider brought up a very valid point regarding the latest TV technology effectively being shoved down our throats: excessive power consumption. The proliferation of plasma and LCD sets have significantly contributed to a 4-6% increase in electricity demand...an increase not attributable to national economic growth. Toss in the vexing problem of maintaining efficient power factor caused by millions of computers left on 24/7, as well as the fact that the US power grid is right "on the bubble", and we're mixing up a recipe for electrical disaster. Rolling nationwide brownouts/blackouts, anyone?

[Jeffhs]

Originally Posted by kx250rider

I have yet to see ANY non-CRT set with any kind of decent picture.

Charles

That is exactly why I intend to hold on to my two 19" CRT sets, as long as they work as well as they do now. (Both sets have excellent, razor-sharp pictures, despite being seven and 11 years old respectively.) I already have digital cable, so when the FCC outlaws analog telecasting, all I'll have to do is call the cable company and have them install a new ATSC cable converter. I'm willing to tolerate the blank spaces above and below the picture, as long as I can get the same cable channels I'm getting at this time. Who knows, maybe by then the technology will have advanced to the point where cable operators will have SDTV cable boxes, for people such as myself who still own and use analog sets. There are already SDTVs available (from RCA/Thomson), so I don't see why Motorola, the major cable box manufacturer, couldn't make a SDTV converter box, which, after all, is just a TV set without the video/audio circuitry and CRT.

The FCC forced digital TV on us, pure and simple--just made an arbitrary decision to shut off all analog TV, first by 2006, now the cutoff date is some time in February 2009. Most people I know don't care about that anyway; in fact, I don't think many people outside electronics are even aware of the cutoff date or even know the difference between digital and analog. They will probably find out what's going on when they turn on their analog TVs with antennas/rabbit ears, and find out they cannot get the stations anymore they had been getting for years. I do not think this is a nightmare scenario or something being blown out of proportion; I think it could and probably will happen in a great many cases when the analog TV stations go off the air for good in 2.5 years or so. Remember, there are still literally millions of analog televisions in use in this country today, some of which are relatively new and a great many of which are still usable even though they have a few years on them.

Everyone is going to discard their analog TVs en masse in 2.5 years and go out to get new flat-panel HDTVs as soon as the analog stations gasp their last breath? Nope, it won't happen--unless the sets are ready for the landfill anyway. As the old (?) CRT sets go bad from defective CRTs, flybacks, etc. and are put out for the trash, they will of necessity be replaced by FPs as more and more stores discontinue CRT sets, but as long as the existing sets are still out there and still being used, there will be a market for standalone ATSC set-top tuners and cable boxes. There is no reason why any analog TV in use in this country today cannot or will not work with digital signals; just use an outboard set-top ATSC tuner to replace the set's own tuner. The TVs video/sweep circuits don't care what type of signal the signal chain presents to them; they will work just as well with digital as with the present NTSC system. The only difference will be the 16:9 aspect ratio which, simply put, means that a TV picture transmitted in HD will not fill a standard TV screen vertically. I see this more and more on the networks (broadcast and cable) as we get closer to "HD-Day." The small window which pops up in the lower left corner of the screen proclaiming "Presented in NBC HD" (as well as similar notices on ABC, CBS, PBS and cable), etc. at the beginning of prime-time programming is a constant reminder to everyone in this country that NTSC's days are numbered, regardless of whether the viewers know anything about the changeover (or, for that matter, what "NTSC" means) or not. Even the NBC television station in Cleveland (channel 3) proclaims in huge letters before its newscasts that the latter are being presented in HD; the station recently moved to a new studio/office building and retooled their entire operation so that everything broadcast over that station, network as well as local, is transmitted in 16:9 high-definition. The other network stations in town (5, 8, 19, 23, 25, 43, 61) aren't making that much noise about HD, but I think they are retooling their operations for the new technology nevertheless. By February 2009 they will have to be transmitting in HD digital anyway, so they won't have a choice; it will be digital or nothing.

Some smaller TV stations, mainly independent UHF operations in smaller markets, faced with the forced conversion to HD, have gone off the air permanently in the last few years, claiming the conversion would be far too expensive; if I were a betting man, which I'm not, I'd bet those stations aren't doing all that well financially as NTSC analog operations. I think such stations may be just breaking even as it is. The conversion to HD would bankrupt them in days or weeks if not sooner, IMHO, especially if they are operating on a shoestring advertising budget.

[john_w]

Great. I have a 36" CRT that weighs about like a Volkswagon, and it's a little too large and obtrusive for my livingroom. I've been wanting to get rid of it and drop down to a 32", but I wonder if I'll get any takers now. Maybe I'll find a perfectly good 32" at the same landfill I take my current set. I wonder what those broadcast adapters will cost?

There have been times I've been impressed with the picture quality of HDTV, other times I have been really disappointed in it. I never noticed the motion issues until recently, which I seem to see on at least a few of the more expensive sets now. That's the only problem I've noticed on the more expensive ones, but it's a glaring one once you're conscious of it. I'll have to see more higher-end sets to make a final judgement, but so far I'm not that impressed.

[andy]

Originally Posted by Jeffhs

That is exactly why I intend to hold on to my two 19" CRT sets, as long as they work as well as they do now. (Both sets have excellent, razor-sharp pictures, despite being seven and 11 years old respectively.) I already have digital cable, so when the FCC outlaws analog telecasting, all I'll have to do is call the cable company and have them install a new ATSC cable converter.

You may not even have to do that. Nothing will prevent cable companies from continuing to use NTSC for as long as they want. They can simply convert ATSC local channels to NTSC at the head end. I think we will see more and more channels move to digital cable, but I doubt analog cable will disappear completely for quite some time. ATSC will never be used on cable systems because it's much less efficient than other modulation systems such as QAM.