Poopday Machine wrote:
Actually, a good CRT is going to have better blacks and shadow detail than what's out there today. An HD signal might contain more detail, but in terms of blacks LCDs/Plasmas just can't compare to a good CRT.
Good luck seeing them through the scan lines, interlacing, and low refresh rate. There's nothing actually better about CRTs.
All of these are problems with the older television technology itself, not anything inherently about CRT technology at all. The scan lines were due to the poor resolution of NTSC/PAL, same goes for interlacing and refresh rate. But on a CRT computer monitor for example, these faults mostly don't exist.
CRT televisions died out before the demands of HD and 3D, so the technology of the old TVs is far too outdated to compete with modern flat screens, but the underlying CRT technology itself is still sound, and still has its advantages. You won't find a CRT TV that beats the picture quality of an LCD overall, but there are many other factors at play aside from the CRT technology itself.
CRTs to this day still have advantages over LCDs, although the advantages have dwindled over the past few years. Still not quite to the point that I'm willing to part with my decade old CRT computer monitor yet though.
Anyway, sorry to go off topic with that rant. AviTrek's point still stands.
Mr. Laser Beam wrote:
^ And hardly anybody (actually no company that I'm aware of) makes CRT TVs anymore anyway. Definitely not in HD.
And the only ones that are available now (if any) are in the cheapo market, so the quality is actually worse than an older CRT TV. I highly doubt anyone makes them in HD.