The Impending CRT Display Revival Will Be Televised
The Impending CRT Display Revival Will Be Televised
hackaday.com
The Impending CRT Display Revival Will Be Televised
51 comments
-
-
Look I miss CRTs too but no, don't bring those things back.
I used to go LAN Parties at the local university and...man no. in the middle of winter? yeah very nice and toasty but in the humidity filled Canadian summers? eff off buddy.
-
The only thing I miss about them is the degauss button.
-
Bwang!
-
Yeah an old with a good pseudo degauss would scratch an itch.
-
And that constant tinnitus sound they emit.
-
-
I'm a pretty avid old video game enjoyer and own multiple CRTs. Also had the pleasure of owning and maintaining a 19" Sony PVM until I traded it to a friend for a mountain of GBA games. Still keep a 13" hooked up for the occasional VHS or old game.
That said, I feel like a lot old sentiment toward emulation and modern display tech is rooted in internet opinions from 2010 or prior.
Yes, older and cheaper LCDs with a Bluetooth controller on old emulation tech pales in comparison to a Super Nintendo hooked up to the cheapest CRT ever. But both display tech and emulation tech have come a long way. High quality upscalers, ultra deep blacks, low latency game modes, insane refresh rates, FPGA, Retroarch run-ahead, cycle accurate emulators, and a dozen other breakthroughs have made retro gaming on modern panels extremely enjoyable.
-
I wouldn't use my Amiga, ST, ZX Spectrum or Mega drive on anything other than my CRT. They were designed for that pixel blur and playing on a modern TV is just not the same. I hadn't realised the difference it made until i tried it and now I can never go back to using an LCD for any of my 80s/90s devices.
However, beyond that somewhat niche use, CRTs are otherwise entirely pointless and basically a worse display experience in every concievable way when your source is anything produced after the advent of HDMI/Display Port.
-
Have you tried any of the various shaders available? I find that a good shader set gets pretty so close to my CRTs that I honestly can't tell the difference. I have a Retrotink for hardware scaling and it also has very good shader options.
-
-
My Sony Trinitron served me well back in the day - But no, I don't miss the CRT era. Just too huge and heavy. And honestly I don't remember the generic non-Trinitron CRTs being anything special, they were kind of shitty.
Anyways I thought the CRT thing is just collectors/old school gamers looking to display older media on a proper CRT? Obviously people with a lot of space, garages, basements, etc.. people in tiny rooms and apartments need not apply LOL.
This whole article seems a bit off.
-
Literally the only reason old school gamers play on CRTs is because old games were designed for the blurry low resolution displays they provided and so look kind of bad on modern crisp displays. You could just smear vasoline on a modern LCD and get roughly the same effect, but using a CRT is less messy.
-
Honestly surprised nobody has tried to sell some bolt on diffusing/screen mask for this reason
-
The look of CRT is important to retro gaming but do you know what the most important characteristic of CRTs for retro gaming is?
No input lag.
Play OG Super Mario Bros on a modern TV and let me know how long it is before you wanna smash the controller in frustration. The game just feels incredibly sloppy.
-
-
-
Dear god, no.
HOWEVER!!!
What I'd like to see are CRT-esque LCDs with the proper lenses, and blur, to emulate a CRT display.
-
Emulator users seem to like oleds for giving off the CRT look with shaders.
-
And let’s leave off the 60hz flicker. That used to bother me so much.
-
I hated it when Windows 95 or 98 reset the refresh rate to 59Hz. Flicker was obnoxious.
-
most crts i've ever used were 75Hz or more
-
-
-
I'd certainly think about a flat and slim CRT if they could manage 4k.
-
And should it be powered by nuclear wafers?
-
I prefer nuclear wessels.
But seriously, if you had read the article you would understand how it would potentially be done.
-
-
-
Everyone in the comments is forgetting about light gun games. They don't work on LCD screens
-
There are patches for the NES zapper games to make them work on modern TVs.
Edit: https://neslcdmod.com/
No Bayou Billy 🙁
-
There are a number of ways to get around that, such as the Sinden lightgun for Playstation, or ROM patches for the NES.
-
There are options now: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinden_Light_Gun
-
-
Just what we need - more power inefficient products pulling on the grid.
-
What might be useful is high quality, low latency 720p displays. A console that outputs 240p can have everything tripled to get 720p. Some of the effects applied by things like the OSSC, like scanlines, look pretty good when they do a 3x scaling.
Most old consoles output something close enough to 240p (which was never a real standard, anyway). For the ones that aren't quite on, upscaling can be done cleanly with only minimal blank space around the frame.
1440p is 2x 720p, so that works, too. You don't need your upscaling processor to be as powerful if you stick to 720p, though.
-
Im still annoyed we didn't get these.
-
somewhere vox just shivered.
51 comments
It will not. The article is nostalgia and hopium-baiting.
It's also utter garbage. We abandoned CRTs because they sucked. They're heavy, waste tons of space, guzzle power, and have terrible resolution. Even the best CRT ever made is absolutely destroyed by the worst of modern LCDs. The only advantage you could possibly come up with is that in an emergency you could beat someone to death with a CRT. Well, that and the resolution was so garbage they had a natural form of antialiasing, but that's a really optimistic way of saying they were blurry as shit.
No chance I could lift a CRT enough times over and over to beat someone to death with it.
besides input lag, and motion blur
Absolutely, in the beginning there were pros and cons, with the cheap TN-LCD having serious annoying display issues.
But with better LCD technologies like IPS arriving and improving fast together with lower prices, there is no doubt that today even a cheap IPS display is way better than any CRT can ever be. With better clarity, colors and black, and even less ghosting, because CRT definitely has ghosting too.
Back in the day my Sony 29" CRT TV weighed about 60 kg without speakers. (the speakers could be detached).
And the CRT weight increases exponentially with size, because with bigger screen the glass needs to be thicker to withstand the significant pressure of the vacuum in the tube.
So a 60" TV CRT would most likely weigh above 250 kg!! The tube alone would be more expensive to make than an entire modern TV of similar size!
But more than that, it would be very difficult to make a 60" CRT screen that doesn't flicker, and the extreme speed needed for the ray to cross the entire screen, would require enormous power to light the phosphorous surface, within the nanosecond time it has for each pixel. Even just normal HD 1980x1024 at 60 frames per second and 3 RGB subpixels per pixel, is 364.953.600 sub pixels per second, so an analogue signal that needs to control the cathode ray at that speed would require enormous power.
The result would be a 200kg+ TV with smeared/blurry images and very poor color quality, due to the inherent imprecision. and even with clever tricks to make the tubes slimmer, developed near the end of CRT popularity, it would require almost a meter distance from the wall, to make room for the huge cathode ray tube.
There is no way CRT is making a comeback, CRT is inferior in every way, for every size of display, and also in blackness, contrary to what he claims in the article.
Edit PS:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_PVM-4300
The biggest CRT ever made was 43" and weighed 199.6 kg (440 lb).
So a 60" would weigh way above 250 kg.
Also notice that even this prestige project by Sony, does NOT have a black screen, so the idea of perfect blacks on CRT as the article claims are pure idiocy.
Now-now. With CRTs resolution is not an inherent trait anyway. You could trade off update frequency for better resolution and back.
When CRTs were common, LCD displays also were heavy, wasted tons of space and guzzled power. And for some time after that they were crap for your eyes.
No, the best CRT ever made is really not that, but also costs like an airplane's wing.
An LCD display has resolution as its trait. A CRT display has a range of resolutions realistically usable with it. It doesn't have a matrix of pixels, only a surface at which particles are shot.
So, the point before I forget it. While CRTs as they existed are a thing of the past, it would be cool to have some sort of optical displays based on interference (suppose, two lasers at the sides of the screen) or whatever, allowing similarly agile resolution change, and also more energy-efficient than LCDs, and also better for one's eyes. I think there even are some, just very expensive. Removing the "one bad pixel" component would do wonders. Also this could probably be a better technology for foldable displays. As in - now you scratch a screen, you have to replace the matrix. While such a component wouldn't cost as much a whole matrix, the lasers would be the expensive part.
Anyway, just dreaming.