I think this is mostly for people who actually remember what it was like to play on a CRT. I stopped playing games when LCD became the norm. I did not know why at the time, but games just seemed to suck. Its only recently with high refresh & OLED that I have become interested again. Lets not underestimate the power of social media, enough hype & maybe we could see a limited run of a new Sony modern CRT, or maybe one of these retro mom&pop shops could turn some out. Bit more complex than an analogueNT, and way harder to ship, but who knows. Maybe it would come flat packed?
I was thinking the same thing literally few days ago. Maybe some sort of a step-up from the classic CRT, but still. Same goes for tube-based audio amplifiers that are already making a comeback.
@@jhsevs Phosphor coatings can sometimes wear out. There are measurable X-Rays and Gamma Rays within a few inches in front of the CRT screen which some children place their faces right up to.
Of course they are. The problem is the sheer size the bigger u get. Its just like how analog is superior than digital in terms of quality but analog isnt nearly as versatile as digital. It comes down to cost and size.
OMG! thank you!. input lag. saturation color being able to adjust the brightness, clarity, or saturation all seperately? I think we're doing it wrong in some ways.
Holy sh*t I also had this moment. Like literally GoW 3 used to run perfectly on our CRT screen and then we bought a Full HD Tv and I was aware that some things were odd here. It was the input lag. Like literally, if you think about it. Analog cameras are also better than digital cameras, their quality of picture seems better to my eyes than any digital camera if you ask me.
@@lolindirlink $100? you're kidding right? If they are better for gaming than oled 4k hd then they will cost more then oled 4k HD. Just wait for the new 2019 CRTs for $4999.
I always felt like games looked good CRT's but I never did figure to try out modern games on it. Imagin this video blows up and CRT's make a big comeback.
Sadly they can't. Production on these would need facilities and resources that just wouldn't be cost effective these days. Plus the sheer weight and heat these things produced would be a hard to justify. Shipping would eat manufacturers alive right now.
@@ZaireXIII Yeh but if you actually put some money into it I bet with today's technology a big company could make some innovations with this old tech and reduce the from factor, it is never going to be as small as an LCD but if you could make it lighter and smaller and have a larger screen and specifically target it towards gamers and use the benefits shown in the video as the selling point while marketing it then I bet a large section of the gaming community would pick up a product like that, I know I would.
@@ZaireXIII i thought they still produced these things for medical use... whatever factory still does that could make mad cash selling it as a gaming monitor lol.
the problem is that is not meant to play with ngridia since most AAA games are consoles ports and consoles play on AMD so the games are developed for and meant to be play on amd.....
I can imagine Sony upper management desperately pulling their engineers out of retirement and getting them working on 'luxury pro gamer' CRTs RIGHT NOW. I can now see the marketing slogan being 'CRT, the new vinyl'.
I know it's just a joke, but still: CRT's are dead and won't come back just because of the weight factor. I wish it wasn't the case, but it is. Shipping alone would make it unprofitable.
Sadly not going to happen because they only care about pandering to shallow consumers who don't care about the technology and just want their TVs to be thin and sleek.
@@tpommischiefmaker It's not that. CRTs simply have a bad rep because of the radiation they emit (despite the fact that a cell phone emits around 35 times the amount a 42" CRT does)
@@DarDarBinks1986 The benefits for VGA use are progressive scan, and 100Hz+ refresh, in addition to much higher resolutions than SD CRTs for retro consoles.
Ye, we only recently achieved good black levels with oled (even abit better than CRT) but crt are still better for everything elses besides reading/writting texts i can't imagine the awsome things we could have today if that technology was still researched...
@@Oversensitive-S-poster Agreed, I remember reading about SED way back and thinking how amazing it sounded and it was very power efficient too if I remember right. 🙂
Put data to this. Show us closeups of the dots in slow motion to show how refresh compares. Measure the contrast ratios. Show us how resolution maps over a CRT compared to upscaling resolution on an OLED/LCD screen.
@@elijahdavila3684 not all of them will have seem the top end of CRT displays however. Even I only saw the top end stuff a handful of times and I am gen - x
I think this is one of the reasons why we remember those game graphics were looking much better back in the days, because today we're seeing those games again in our new LCD monitors. CRT monitors are simply the best.
@@sonyx4500 To this day i wonder where this entire "visible scanline" stuff comes from. CRT screens did not have visible lines running trough them. A CRT did not draw pixels, it drew everything based on entire "lines", that is a scanline. Those lines were drawn so fast that nobody could see it happen.
Lucky soab. My equally old IBM CRT started to die around 2005, and then I even had switched to a new rig in 2003 that I mainly used. Had to turn down resolution and refresh rates to make it work eventually. I still have, but it only runs on 640x480 60hz. I had a Samtron and a Samsung CRT, gave away both 3 and 1 years ago respectively and then finally switched to a giveaway LCD. To be fair they were all budget class.
they could. and with new microchips and such, they could make them considerably thinner and lighter..... we could even probably mount them on normal lcd vesa mounts if they truly refresh the technology. oled has the potential to match the quality of crts, with its ridiculous low .01ms response time and high refresh rates.....
It would be highly unfeasible and cost prohibitive, since they have retooled for lcd and oleds, and do not have factories that build CRT's anymore, they would have to completely rebuild And retool all those factories, And rehire or train all the workers to learn how to build them again. But at least there's still a lot of really good high definition CRT's out there that were built right before the switch to LCD Oled and plasma. But how long that will last remains to be seen, since people seem to be going back to CRT's recently.
I wonder if we could lower the weight and size with today's technology and still get all the CRT benefits like no sample and hold. It might get expensive but there's gonna be a market for it.
@@TexelGuy in many ways CRT is supreme in comparison to LCD. However, the main issue in "resurrection" of this tech will be the manufacturing. I don't think anyone produces them anymore. As a result of some big company restarts it, prices will be nuts. However, I'm sure that in a very short term afterwards we would get new tech that will reduce cost, size, weight and add new features. Everything new, is well forgotten old.
16x9 1080p CRT, at least 24 inch diag. Id slap my cash down for one. Would be a big beefy boxy boy, but id for sure get rid of my 1080p monitor for one.
It's was FED and SED technology, 2 future technology using tube killed in 2000's and which should allow to create flat display like lcd and oled display with the advantage of oled and CRT..
@@cryohellinc They should (could?) be re-engineered with modern technologies, maybe now there's a way to maintain the quality while reducing the size (not strictly as musch as an LCD), maybe some new material or way to shoot photons at a higher angle maintaining the quality, like some of the late models tried to do with half-size CRT's (I believe Samsung produced some of these back in the day). There's no market for them though, so it's likely that'll never happen, sadly.
Yeah, produce both, one side stays modern and progresses, the other sticks around in the legacy sector. I think smaller legacy-based industries still manufacture them in fact.
This is making me wonder what would have happened to the modern monitor scape, had Plasma TV's taken off instead of LCD and LED. Plasma actually looked clean, no blur, the only issue at first was burn-in but even that was virtually non-existent in the last two years of Panasonic's plasma line. We'd probably be talking about Plasma automatically maintaining that fidelity and quality of CRT, where over time. Nothing ultra thin unfortunately, but still thinner, and larger widescreen monitors at the same weight.
@Ari Vicentini If I were to get an Fw900 for gaming would the image quality in 1920 x 1080 be better then on my generic budget LCD even in games such as say The Witcher, Oblivion etc etc? Unfortuantley my old CRT screens been to the dump for years so I cant find out myself
@@hopelessent.1700 YES! exactly! it reminded of the Prince of Darkness, that future footage of the devil/anti-christ coming out of the church in particular
The problem is, technological trends rarely follow the highest content quality. Technology seems to be much more interested in convenience and outward appearance. Thats why we have soundbars instead of full tower hi-fi in most homes. Why spotify and Netflix is more popular than CD and blu-ray.
It's about achieving acceptable quality with as much convenience as possible. Fact is most people wouldn't notice the difference between the 320kbps you get on Spotify and a CD. You likely won't notice it, try an ABX test, I certainly can't ,even though I have a fairly respectable speaker system. And on that note, speakers are nice and all, but the amount of space they require can be a bit much for a lot of people. I love my 45 KG subwoofer, but I totally get why many wouldn't want the damn thing. And at the distance most people watch their TV the difference between a Blu Ray and Netflix is negligible. A CRT simply asks too much from the user for what little it does better, that's all there is to it.
@@HalfLifeHalfDead "it's about achieving acceptable quality with as much convience" Not true always, it is how it should be, however average consumer does not have the time to do research on which product is convenient/better for him, most of the times it's about gimmicks. My laptop has a glossy screen, however my TV has a matte screen, which is the complete opposite of what it should be, even now, when I go to electronic stores, they are lined with laptops with glossy screens, all of the "noo, but glossy has better display" is useless, when there is a light behind you, which it is always, even right now as I type, I can see my face crystal clear in the screen. I'm pretty sure the reason has got to do with selling the product, rather than "better display". Also planned obsocelense.
I get your point, but CD is not a good example as it has zero advantages in comparison to digital media, but you are right about the sound bar example. The sad thing is, that the successor technology of CRT, which would have given us flat monitors (like modern screens) was in development just at the time LCD panels began getting traction in the market, and unfortunately development was ditched. In other words, we could have had modern CRT monitors today with all the advantages...
@@ferez1985 CDs are typically formatted in a lossless audio format. Whilst streamed files are most often MP3s or some other lossy equivalent. You're right that CDs are not superior to other digital formats inherently. A flac file you downloaded will sound identical to any properly formated CD. They're both lossless digital audio. But your average CD will sound better than your average music steaming service due to the lossless file at a far higher bitrate compared to a heavily compressed lossy file. So my comment wasn't CDs vs digital. It was heavily compressed vs lightly compressed files. I won't comment on CRTs though since I'm unfamiliar with the advantages. My impression is that screen size would be inherently limited by bulk.
"Perfect motion." I'm an old guy. I took that for granted. It didn't need to be said. Then LCD came along. Young people don't know what they missed. Thanks for educating them, a little.
lol... Now all makes sense... I remember buying a PS3 some years ago and we will used an CRT Monitor / TV and the ps3 didnt work on our TV because it needed more than 60 Herz or something near that number... THan we bought a cheap LCD TV with the necessary herz, frequenz ... I and my brother never said it, but we both thought ... This looks worse than the PS2 on the CRT TV XDD... Lets go back XDD
Heck, most people don't ever see the true looks of things through videos. But I'm still excited to see new 4K HDR games via compressed TH-cam videos played at the 1080p video resolution setting on my 1600x900 standard dynamic range laptop.
One thing were TV monitor, where the resolution was stuck at NTSC or PAL numbers (480i and 576i) and there, i remember my PS3 wasn't the best. The games were, ok, but the overscan and certain game text were illegible. Plus certain games even forced you to play with black bar on top and bottom, and squeezing even more that already low resolution wasn't the case. On the other end, there were the PC monitor, with high resolution and all the benefits of it.
@@tyler-xo3rb vinyl most definitely died and it took consecutive years of multiplying sales for it to become relevant again - I'm willing to bet you weren't really around or paying attention to vinyl until it came back into fashion in maybe 2012
Every 4K TV at Costco looks like absolute $hit. The ONLY good looking TV there was the 1 remaining 1080p 'junk' =)) Funny the GARBAGE people will buy just because it has a larger 'number' LOL!! It does not look real, at all, because of many 'secondary' problems like crazy oversaturation & hyper fake contrast & flickering 'subsampled' type of look 2 it, like it is having trouble organizing the 'zones' or something = pathetic. Not a coherent uniform realistic look like an open window at all.
And vinyl. And hifi. Funny how technology has not evolved but barely shifted to commercial alternatives in order to stay relevant. Our grandads had better music quality than we do. How sad isnthat ?
@@Soldano999 The convenience though. Being able to access music with a large library, or just generally having desk space. Some monitors, like my Cintiq, you just couldn't have as a CRT. It would be impossible to be ergonomic. Besides, a lot of the difference in vinyl comes from the mixing. Sometimes it's more garbage on vinyl than digital releases. From my experience, speakers make a bigger difference than input anyways. I wouldn't call myself an audiophile though. No snake oil for me.
@JayJApanB: Good thing about modern audio tech is that quality speakers/monitors got cheap. JBL LSR305/308 for under $1K a pair. I can still remember when the only option at that price was Yamaha NS10's, which were only infamous because "If it sounds good on those, it'll sound good on anything". @Soldano999: Not sure about our grandfather's tech; I didn't get much experience with vinyl but I still have my Hi-MD walkman from over 10 years ago, which is the cleanest music quality I've heard outside of SACD.
You know what i went to my garage and i found my old 19"dell 993s , it's like he was waiting for me to come back, cleaned it change his faulty cable, and oh my god ! Doom, metro, control, tr.... It's insanely smooth with deep blacks great contrast! Never been so thankful for youtube !!
It's not that the Dell is so GR8, but that the flat U R currently using sux azz. The free 'HP junk' glossy screen flat I use that I got free off the street looks better than N E CRT ever, after some tweaking =)
What killed CRT screen was the market Everyone went crazy on the slim LCD Tv's Make them thinner and goal of the manufacturer became that and not picture quality 😀
@@mannamanam8233 but now that people have big beefy gaming rigs and stuff why haven't they seen more popularity in recent years? From what DF have said I'd love to buy one instead of a flatscreen monitor
@@kap1117 the technology is DEAD ... Unless someone revive it ☺ I am not saying CRT is completely dead but portion of the manufacturing for high refresh rate PC monitor is totally dead Everything is gone all the(( tolling . Machining . Lines)) More importantly supply chain is gone 😐 It's not going to come back
@@kap1117 Nobody manufactures them. They died by 2006 - nobody was buying CRTs in 2006 onwards, because 17"+ LCDs became pretty much the same price. CRTs are bulky and heavy, so I can imagine that the manufacturers and distributors were happy to kill them off. Can't have been easy to ship over from Asia in terms of costs.
@@Daz5Daz Nope, an HDMI to VGA converter works on every single HDMI device, I have one and tested all, PS4, XO, PS3, component video to HDMI converter, blu-ray player and so on on my CRT monitor.
All these people singing CRTs praises, but the day I could bring a LCD monitor to a LAN party instead of lugging around a heavy-ass CRT monitor was a great day.
Honestly and if you get a high end modern monitor you can have the quality and weight advantages. It's not like professional artists, colorists, and photographers are using old CRTs anymore and for good reason. You may have to pay a little more but imagine how much that sony CRT costed when it was new. 1920 x 1200 is too low of resolution if you want anything bigger than 20 inches anyway.
Yeah, cinema screens are at 1080p and we don't care so... I guess what you said is just true for lcd. Though mcd monitors have the huge advantage of color and overall fidelity and also being so convinient in size/weight
***stokes his crt lovingly*** which due to its colossal weight is sinking ever deeper into mother earth until it reaches its final resting place upon the planets solid iron core...
@@smallbluemachine , I remember trying to fire up my Dreamcast with House of the dead 2 and Confidential Mission back in the day after getting an LCD screen and getting rid of the CRT, and I was absolutely gutted.
Color reproduction is great. Cons are: Availability (New doesn't exist, so more its about getting lucky), size, power, heat, Sharpness (Softer edges), Picture distortions (can be calibrated), burn in, and picture degradation with time. Honestly, they are pretty great, but nothing an OLED can't do. If you find one for used, it would be a cool tv, but the main problem is it will most likely be extremely dim do to the age. OLED has better picture, sharpness, contrast, brightness
@@TUNDRA2529 Some CRT's, not all, but it is true, a lot of CRT's, especially cheap ones, had substandard phosphors and degraded quick. As far as LCD monitors go, their color temperature goes blue as the phosphors age, as well as dim as the back-light fades. ALL CRT's do age though, but not quite as fast as OLED. I am disappointed my OLED TV is already showing burned in images and contrast is washing out, it's only a couple years old and it wasn't cheap at all.
@Damian Chiliński That is correct. LED's use blue light that is colored with phosphor gel, and these shift to blue as they age. LCD monitors stopped using CCFL quite a while ago. I do have one that uses it, and it has gone warm colored from age.
Happy to see someone give CRT monitors some love and the respect it truly deserves. Even though it has been ages since I last used my sony trinitron monitor I still miss it because I also noticed how LCD monitors seems to not have caught up in many areas.
I remember playing Mass Effect on X360 in 2007 when I was in college. I went home for winter break and felt sad that I would have to finish the game on my parents' 32" 480i CRT. Once I hooked it up I realized that the slightly blurry non-HD TV really smoothed things out and the game really looked incredible on it.
Perfect motion clarity, high refresh rates, sharp even at low resolutions.... but best of all: ZERO INPUT LAG!! Great video guys, glad to see you join the CRT obsession.
@@jackburton307 there's no blur on OLED as well, however it stutters depending on content/setting. At the same time CRT flickers and has worse colour reproduction (unless it's hi-end Eizo or MAG). I'd say apples to oranges, but OLED is up to 80 inch, while good CRT 24 inch or so (TVs suck). If you really want sick motion quality just buy Kuro or Panny VT plasma.
@@puzzlemaniak420 I have the FW900 widescreen CRT. Nothing comes close to it for gaming image quality. You are right about CRT TVs... they suck. The largest they made was a 45 or 50" and the image quality sucked and the resolution was only 480p.
Some of the later ones did, for the same reason as digital displays. However, they are quite rare. Andyw: That makes little sense, as you don't need a full framebuffer to convert. At absolute most you would need a few lines. Going in the opposite direction (OSSC), you only need a few lines, even including an upscaler. That is still far better than the minimum 2 frames of processing delay for any LCD.
@@heldercosta1209 old games are way better on emulators, just look at higan with performance patches and mode 7 or epsxe and the various shaders/plugins etc
@@hellfire92837 i am aware of the existence of emulators and have tried them before... i just want the real deal, the way i remember from 20/25 years ago. I have a CRT TV but only compatible with composite. I want One compatible with component but i am having a hard time finding one.
@ "Wingman" was Logitechs sub-brand for gaming accessories. They had joysticks, gamepads and yes, a three button mouse. And no, high end ball mice with good mousepads were far superior to optical mice.
@@Koffiato no, just no. "Even more lossless" does not even make sense and shows you don't know what you are talking about. Analog information storage has always losses due to the way its saved and played back. Digital storage is flawless and the audio or video would be lossless. It has no compression, hence lossless. And LCD is not digital, you can play back a VHS or an analog VGA video on a LCD. You are confusing things. The signal is either digital or analog. If anything, we would call CRT and LCD analog, same as say a sound speaker.
I remember CRT monitors and how good the image quality could be. This tech definitely needs to be revisited to see if it's even viable in today's market. Thanks Digital Foundry for reminding us older gamers of simpler and better times
the reason they prob won't be made is because they are so EXPENSIVE to ship. I remember when i bought on used back in 2004 the thing weighed like 90lbs and box was HUGE. heck, the shipping was the same as the monitor. was like $150 ...but it was originally a $1000 monitor so it was worth it to me.
It can't happen, because people want bigger screens with big resolution and refresh rates. They justifiably don't care about the TINY input lag and marginal increase in contrast or color accuracy. OLED blows every CRT out of the water in every category except input lag, which is barely noticeable anyway.
Finally someone saying how good crt's are, hoping for a miracle and who knows, maybe DF will help push the crt technology, if we could make crt's much smaller in footprint that would be a game changer completely.
in fact just slightly before LCDs took over there was this small size CRTs tvs thing going on, where you would have a CRT that was something like 1/3 of the size and weight that you expect from a crt, but they didn't last long, i bet most people haven't even seen one
A standard CRT that you would use for say home use wouldn't look anywhere near as good as the FW900. You're comparing a standard low resolution CRT vs a professional grade monitor that retailed for $2000 on release. Its one of the very few that actually supports higher resolutions and higher refresh rates.
Remember to use high quality and short cable. Using separate RGB via concentric cables is another option, but again, high quality, well shielded and short will get the best results.
lol... Now all makes sense... I remember buying a PS3 some years ago and we will used an CRT Monitor / TV and the ps3 didnt work on our TV because it needed more than 60 Herz or something near that number... THan we bought a cheap LCD TV with the necessary herz, frequenz ... I and my brother never said it, but we both thought ... This looks worse than the PS2 on the CRT TV XDD... Lets go back XDD
It would be either to expensive or to shitty, most crt factories closed years ago, and by the time LCD/LED panels were the new thing, crts werent as good as they used to be. On TVs a trinitron from the 80s/90s was better than one made in the 00s, happened the same thing as with floppies and cassette tapes.
You'd have better luck bringing back cassette carts to replace CDs at that point, not that I'd mind I could actually buy second hand shit without it being destroyed
I only recently figured out why I never liked the new LCDS compared to the old crt I used to have. The motion blur when moving a mouse is awful. I was told its "the refresh rate".. So I go out and buy a 144hz.... still awful.. Years later buy a 240hz.. Still awful.. Month ago I bought a 360hz monitor (And the cards to support the demand) and its still AWFUL. A few dozen years of LCDS and I just recently realized why LCD suck.... motion blur Imagine moving your head left to right slowly and everything blurring instantly... Thats LCDS. Why did CRTS get taken over? I feel scammed. All the anti blur options I used on LCD come with heavy draw backs from double ghost images to physical pain and they still dont compare to the clarity of moving in a CRT
I hate these useless new TVs we've been sold a lie , let's get these CRT TVs up to this level in 2021 and pump out legit TVs from the past for the future.
@@bobshanery5152 Maybe buy oled then? It doesn't have mid frames which means instant update to next frame. If its not smooth for you then nothing ever will. Just like people who believe vinyl is better even tho its not
WHY? We have far better technology now. CRTs are big, bulky, and heavy. Flat-panels take up far less space and you can mount them on your wall. While we're at it, I bet your preferred medium for watching movies is VHS, too. Tell me, how does Detective Pikachu look on tape?
@Alan Bane Flat-screen CRTs only exposed the flaws in the technology. When you play games or watch something on that shit, lines don't always appear straight. They appear curved. The edges of the screen look concave, more so when you have scrolling backgrounds (i.e., the parallax scrolling in the old Sonic games).
@@DarDarBinks1986 That's not "far better technology", that's just *convenient technology*. I don't think digital tech has progressed to the point where you can compare music quality between a digitally recorded track to that pressed on an actual vinyl. Or comparing images taken by a digital camera versus one developed from film. Or the fact that the human genome encodes 1.5GB of data in a microscopic package (but that's not tech, I guess). Point is, digital is nowhere near analog in terms of being "better". In almost every case, analog will always come up leagues better than digital at the moment.
You know, I think this is hands down one of the best Digital Foundry videos I've seen. I grew up in the age of CRTs as standard. It's another reminder that pushing technology forward, faster isn't always the best case scenario when the new technology doesn't surpass the old.
having no blur is the most important thing what the point in higher res if as soon as anything moves the perceived resolution goes down the toilet the best we have now is super high refresh 1080p with back light strobing at 240hz and that's not quite crt quality.
I was mocked 2 years ago when i was saying all of this John , im so happy finally someone with a huge platform and credibility put it out there. *Thanks.*
CRTs will screen tear too. That has to do with a low refresh rate not syncing, hence the introduction of V-Sync with triple buffering back in the day. However, you get ZERO input lag and no motion blur.
@@bluesdealer As the CRT screen doesn't have a frame buffer (AFAIK), it still needs some time to draw the image line by line. Zero input lag isn't really possible.
Ahh man I miss my FW900, When I created the FW900 thread on HardOCP forums back in 2005 I never thought it was gain as much traction as it has over the years and is still active to this day, 14 years later! I would trade my current 27" 144hz Gsync monitor for another FW900 without even questioning it, Truly an amazing display, I paid $400 for one in 2005 but these days they're going for at least double that (if you can even find one).
I think there's interlacing on ps2, supposedly it output 2 240p image and make it 480p by interlacing. I played my ps2 on a crt using an RCA and damn images were sharp as a knife.
Brian P in theory OLED should have also better pixel response and so less motion blur than an LCD, like CRTs (I said in theory because most of OLED TVs aren’t that great but it is a software problem not hardware). I think, between modern display technologies, OLED is the one that comes closer to the strengths of CRTs. If you want an example of a good OLED screen targeted at gamers that really take advantage of it’s response times check the ROG phone 2. I hope that manufactures can fix the burn-in problem so that we could se pc OLED monitors
Personally I think just having a high end VA panel like my 55 inch Sony 930e is just as good as if not better than the high end CRTs they made. I mean it doesn't have 1440p or 4k at higher than 60hz. It doesn't have less than 20ms input lag or less than 1ms response time. It does have a much bigger screen, Sharpening engine, better blacks, gets much brighter and just better colors all around. Check out the 930e on rtings. I own a 65inch Samsung ks8000 which is great too. The Sony CRTs look way better than LCDs under a grand. Edge lit LCDs with high end backlight tech and VA panels look fantastic. The Sony X reality engine sharpens the picture and makes all the textures look better than they ever would on any display. I've done my research and done my experiments. HDR gaming is better than CRT gaming anyday. Also if you want to play ray tracing at max the 930e does 1080p at 120hz or just run in 4k60hz window mode at lower res to get the frames up. 60hz is not that bad only when the display has 144hz gsync capability and you run it at 60.
@@51m0n397 Sadly, all OLED panels sold today are still sample and hold which means motion blur. Even with black frame insertion, it's still not on par with a CRT or even a plasma. Everything else about OLEDs is excellent, I'd say, but there is still work to be done.
@@SomeRandomGuy369 Well, things aren't so black and white. There are obviously areas where modern displays outshine CRTs - that makes sense. However, the motion resolution and reproduction of low light content is something that no LCD has matched to date. It simply isn't possible with that technology.
Nathan B • yes, and some movies were on multiple discs 😂 However, the HUGE art on the paper sleeves was like my version of Vinyl Records growing up...the spines were super thin, but seeing the big pictures was like getting ready for a special event. I’ll never forget Terminator 2 on my dad’s Laserdisc (and big CRT)! But we only had like 30 movies, which was still a lot for the time.
@@JoeDower101 Yeah, the 16:10 is 1920x1200, but you can create a custom resolution of 1080p, if you don't want the 1920x1200, but it would have small bars at the top and bottom.
To think we could have had mature SED televisions by now but of course literally the worst technology won out. SED was everything you loved about CRT without being the size of a small car.
Oh no, I'd never heard of those things before, and after reading up on them they sound amazing. Looks like LCD and OLED aren't inevitable, just branches of tech we ended up on because patent trolls hampered the adoption of alternatives..
SED (surface-conduction electron-emitter display), which was based off of FED (field-emission display) died because of patent and licensing issues. Canon bought a perpetual, royalty-free, license from Nano-Proprietary, Inc. for $5.5 million. One of the only restrictions on the license was that they were not authorized to sub-license to other companies. Then Canon tried to subvert the licensing agreement by claiming that the new company they started with Toshiba was a Canon subsidiary. Nano terminated the license and sued Canon. In the end, despite Canon purchasing all shares of SED(the company) from Toshiba in an attempt to qualify it as a subsidiary, Nano walked away with Canon's $5.5 mil licensing fee and Canon walked away with nothing since their license was revoked. Too bad. If licensing had been handled differently we could have a completely different, and uniquely superior, primary display technology today.
At the time it was worse, yes. But it's 2019 and if SED was any kind of viable, it would have surfaced again. While running lower resolution content used to be a very common thing, it's not anymore. I used to HATE fixed resolution displays because of that. But while it would be useful in some instances, almost all content runs at native resolution anymore and there's no need for a display that can run lower resolution content as beautifully as CRT. And even if we went the SED route, by this point, we'd probably have moved away from it already regardless.
@Ioannis Stefanakis CRTs were vastly Superior ONLY in quality and ONLY at the time. You know what else CRTs were? REALLY FUCKING HEAVY! LCD didn't just win because they were cheaper, they won because they were A SHIT TON LIGHTER! How could you not think that was a factor?! In fact, when LCD first came out, they were, and for a while, MUCH more expensive than CRT.... Jesus....
I distinctly remember the day i swapped my 19" CRT to a 19" LCD and launched Quake 3 to test it. I thought to myself - "Wow, this is THE sh*ttiest experience playing this game i've ever had..." I actually thought my unit was defective, but unfortunately no, it's just LCD :(
The trouble with motion on LCD, OLED and any other sample-and-hold display technology is that it needs enormous content framerates and display refresh rates to look fantastic. That being said, sample-and-hold displays could be far superior to CRTs if they could somehow be coupled with ultra high framerates and refresh rates (000s/sec). 1080p resolution needs around 4kHz refresh display and 4000fps content. 4K needs double that to look amazing and 8K double that of 4K (16000fps@16kHz). So that's the challenge :))
I tried to use an old Sony 19" LCD once, but it was horrible because back then the responce time was 30ms. That is no longer an issue, but even today I still use a CRT because I think it looks better. I've been waiting for a 27" 144hz 1440p OLED for years, but I'm not sure if OLED will ever come to computer monitors.
@@AllTracTurbo OLED is already here, ASUS ProArt PQ22UC for example. Problem is they are just too expensive and refresh rates aren't good enough yet, but both will eventually be fixed for sure.
@@5Qu1Z33r That thing is a joke. I don't even think I would consider it a computer monitor. It's more like a tablet that you can plug into a computer. It's price is ludicrous, the fact that it's 4K on 22" is dumb, and it can't even reproduce colors accurately because they didn't give it enough power. Also, I think LG already has OLED TVs that are 4K 120hz.
flatscreen CRTs were a requirement for top end gaming back in the late 90s/early00s, especially in RTS and FPS games. The best CRT of all IMO was the NEC MultiSync FP2141SB...22" of pure perfection
As was the switch from analog to digital broadcasts, which coincided with the rise of HDTVs and the government and electronic companies were insisting you would lose broadcasts on an older tube tv with antenna unless you upgraded your set or bought a converter. How convenient...
If they can just solve the issues of CRTs' large depth/weight, power consumption, and burn-in over time ... the benefit of CRT is the ANALOG nature of the scan guns, making EVERY resolution look native on the screen (up to how fine the screen's RGB mesh is, width and of the scan beam and how finely it can control intensity).
How about instead of going back, we go forward to a brand new display technology that gives us the benefits of LCDs, and the few tiny benefits of the CRTs instead?
@Ioannis Stefanakis That's what I experienced last year playing SF on PS2 with CRT TV. 30fps felt like 60 on today's LCDs. That's why we didn't complain all the time about framerates back in the day like people do nowadays.
60hz looked like crap compared to 75 or 85hz on a crt. Gave me a headache. Also this is the top of the line Trinitron which provides a ridiculously sharp image compared to all other CRTs.
@@harrym-ls1je hmm I don't recall having headaches at all I used to game like crazy as a kid too. That sucks though. Also sharpness wasn't an issue back then for some reason, just needed smoothness with some AA and that fluidity of movement which it seems crt used to do great apparently.
Vanquished Void I try to keep my hearing safe but ads, shows and jackass developers always put max volume as the default. I want to fucking sue them all on it before it is too late.
I'd rather use a LCD or OLED TV. I just moved to a new house and space is at a premium with my setup. The only reason I'd ever get a tube is for games that use light guns or active shutter 3D glasses. Those won't work on a modern display or even HD CRTs.
I have an Atari Jaguar and it looked like absolute garbage on an HD TV. I remember thinking, "the Jaguar was no hidden gem, but I don't remember it looking this terrible!" So I bought an old CRT and it looks so much better.
Wait, so you're telling me that my Dad's generation of Vinyl Records and Solid Steel Bodied Cars now can add better image quality to the list with CRTs?
Please keep praising and making videos on crt displays. I've been hoping for a comeback as I have no idea how long my currently one will last. I'd love to buy a new one and if enough demand is created maybe, just maybe, someone will start production again. 👍
They'll be very expensive at first, but I'd be willing to buy a 1440P CRT that has all modern video connectors and display modes for $1,000 or maybe more.
Not even hard evidence will convince the majority of buyers that decades old technology is somehow better than the current ones. And no manufacturer is crazy enough to try and convince them otherwise. I don't think there is going to be CRT comeback anytime soon, especially considering the size of that thing, it'd be a very niche product. I can be wrong of course...
@@hvip4 They don't need to think about convincing the majority. Even if a new CRT only sold a few hundred thousand units at a high price of $1000 then it would be worth the investment. Idiots who don't know the difference between LCD and LED will be drooling over this "new" luxury product whether they understand anything about it or not.
I'm pretty sure there are still repair shops around that service CRT TVs and monitors to keep them going strong. You may want to look around online to see if any are nearby
@@FrozenwingX I want a new one with native HDMI and Displayport. It would also be great to have reassurance that should something break which wasn't repairable then a replacement could be ordered easily and instantly without having to search around auctions hoping to find something in good condition. Yesterday there was only one Sony 900 CRT on Ebay for $1,000 with scratches all over the sides and a large crack in the bezel.
i remember owning a 19" CRT monitor back in the early 2000's, paying $700 for it and loving the crap out of it. If you had a new game but your computer couldn't quite handle high details AND high resolution, you could lower the resolution then pump up the detail and it would look pretty amazing (but a bit softer). I remember being able to change the refresh rate, boosting it for Unreal Tournament deathmatches so that movement was buttery smooth...great, now I want one.
CRT just updates on a line by line basis. when you focus on your notebook which stands next to a crt you will notice lines coming down vertically. It is a laser, wrong term, that shoots the picture from the top to bottom left to right.
Because ctr works by shooting a linear laser from top to bottom they dont have motion blur by pixel persistance, a problem very common in high refresh rate monitors, ussuallt solved by black frame insertion, putting a black frame in between every frame, but it doesn't get rid off of all of it
@Digital Foundry I can confirm back when I was working at EA as a 3D artist I held on to my two DELL 24 inch CRT monitors for years well into the change over to LCD because the LCD just looked so bad, so much ghosting, terrible viewing angle, over sharp pixels, etc. After many years I eventually let them go for DELL LCD after they got to an acceptable visual point. We also moved desks a lot at EA and moving those two CRT monitors was painful.
FFS these monitors are already stupidly expensive used.... (When you find one) so well done on now doubling their value :( - EDIT - After countless idiots mentioning low prices I feel like I need to clarify that I'm talking about the Sony monitor used in this video 🙄
I had the chance to get this large Sony back in 2011 for I think around 600 bucks (most of that was shipping). I was tempted, very tempted, especially since I had the 17" version of it up until that point, because LCDs were just all rubbish in terms of image quality, latency, viewing angles and so on. Instead, after months and months of searching, I went with a less backbreaking Dell U2410f, which still weighs a metric ton, but didn't take up a whole desk on its own and came close enough. Same res, same size and a lot of ports were difficult to argue with. I'm still using it as a secondary screen, just got its larger sibling a while ago and it is great, even though I know it's not as brilliant as those old Sony CRTs.
I've been on the lookout for the Sony GDM-FW900 and other CRTs for the last 7 years or so. Traveling for work in the US from California, Texas, Washington State; never being able to find them short of people scalping for over $1000 for less quality monitors you can find used for free - $50 in other areas. I know this video will increase the prices drastically in areas where they are normally sold, but I hope it gets some people to check their storage and the like to get more of them in circulation.
Yes and no, Those deemed "legendary" like the one they have are stupid expensive but I managed to snag a 4:3 ratio CRT that allows me to play 1024x768@144hz and 2048x1536@75hz (and everything in between and below 768) for about 30 bucks. My friend got a 16:10 ratio max 1920x1200@75hz for about 100 bucks. You just gotta be patient and check craigslist, r/crtgaming and facebook marketplace every now and then and I think you can find a mid range crt that will get you 1024x768@120hz pretty easily
Plus getting spare parts and repairing them isn't as easy as it use to be. They are a fun curiosity, but totally not worth spending the insane shipping costs. Plus unless they are packed perfectly, damage is likely.
Lol expensive? Theyre like 5 bucks each on yard sales or random cafe shops that want to get rid of them. In fact i couldnt be assed to sell it just put it on a trash bin and it was gone in an hour.
I dunno about that. I use My launch PS3 for PS2 games and they look fine through HDMI. It was great the launch PS3 was fully backwards compatible. Such a joke they removed that feature.
Sony where doing spectacular Tvs and monitors when Samsung/LG/Philips where all doing coffee and washing machines. I wish more people used Sony TV's, they are just above and beyond the competition.
6:00 Wait did you just say you're using a 2080 ti? How exactly are you doing that? It was in my understanding that GPUs have stopped having any sort of analog output a few years back so in order to have this setup you'd have to have a converter right? A digital to analog converter would add some latency.
Sony CRT fan HERE...I changed to LED TV in 2014, and I miss CRT immediately: CRT dosen' t required so called native resolution material. You can't tell the actual diemension of the video, it' s like they have a ultimate upscalar built-in. CRT has excellent black level and grayscale control, high contrast, color reproduction is true to life. Handle motion, various frame without any issue, unlike modern TV. Used to owned a Profeel KV-32HV50 for a short period, best tv I've ever seen. Feed them with a HTPC, Watching "the Ring", Sadako scare the shit out of you. Playing live concert, the spotlight will shining right to you. Watching BBC documentary, those animals look living in the tv. Still remembered I had pause the video, put my hand at the screen, try to feel the texture of the astronaut shinny helmet. So silly, no kidding.
@@alerey4363 OLEDs are garbage. Looks beautiful but has burn in issues. That technology is scam. They can do better but won't sell us the best product, due to money milking.
@@Halo3VT just wait 1 more year and OLED will replace todays LCD with much more quality; just as the first LCDs were crappy 4:3 blurry screens and evolved to be panoramic ultra realistic pristine super contrast and super black same will be with OLED
i'm an happy owner of a Sony FW-900 as daily driver! The combination of appreciation about what we lost in transition to LCD and the tribute to this very model makes me feel sooo proud!
@@GreyWarden_ out of the box you can reach up to 1440p and 80hz refresh. if you lower to 1080p you can reach 100hz and if you lower to 900p you can use stereoscopic glasses in 120hz! About colors, CRTs are analog, they virtually have no color spacing limits. Contrast is the only real loss i can think of, you won't reach as bright to a modern LCD!
@@andrealotito4412 I see, is your CRT easy to find on eBay? Are there any good alternatives? I really wanna try it. Oh, and how does refresh rate compares to LCD? Say 100hz CRT vs 144-165hz LCD?
When I was a kid, I found that low-res photo looked much sharper if i set my screen to 800x600, rather than scale it full screen on 1024x768. I asked people online, and they tell me that's not sharper, it's both blurry no matter how you scale it up. (It's late 2000, most people were on LCD) You answered my question 10 years later. Thank you very much
when you judge a CRT screen, shot by a camera, uploaded to youtube, using LCD tv...
still, kindda feels better :)
On a phone, with a night shift mode turned on
I think this is mostly for people who actually remember what it was like to play on a CRT. I stopped playing games when LCD became the norm. I did not know why at the time, but games just seemed to suck. Its only recently with high refresh & OLED that I have become interested again. Lets not underestimate the power of social media, enough hype & maybe we could see a limited run of a new Sony modern CRT, or maybe one of these retro mom&pop shops could turn some out. Bit more complex than an analogueNT, and way harder to ship, but who knows. Maybe it would come flat packed?
Lol or oled screen on my samsung....
I use an oled tv
2020: everyone playing modern games on 4K LCDs
2025: everybody playing raytraced Minecraft on 2005 CRTs
WE HAVE TO GO BACK, KATE!
Laughing Octopus We were brought here for a purpose Jack!
@@laughingoctopus8556 lmao thanks for the laugh
There's only a handful of LCD's 4k tv though. There's plenty of LED's 4k tv on the other hand.
2018 vs 2019 I'd say
70s and 80s movies depicting CRT monitors in futuristic settings might be a lot more prophetic than we thought...
SpookyDollhouse I’m going to screenshot what you just said
I was thinking the same thing literally few days ago. Maybe some sort of a step-up from the classic CRT, but still. Same goes for tube-based audio amplifiers that are already making a comeback.
Skynet’s claws linger on...
🖐
✋
👍
it depends. Modern monitors are a lot more utilitarian. Much easier to mass produce and less energy usage. CRT are like craftsman monitor.
@@ramsaybolton9151 crts are also way more potentially dangerous and therefore harder to make, iirc?
Until you get a nice CRT you dont realize how good this tech was. Yes it was bulky and heavy, but you will be surprised at how good the display looks.
Is the Sony Trinitron Monitor CPD-200SF Multiscan 200SF a good one?
crt are bad for your eyes unless you watch them from far away (away = 4-6 times the size of the screen)
@@joelpichette incorrect.
@@jhsevs Phosphor coatings can sometimes wear out. There are measurable X-Rays and Gamma Rays within a few inches in front of the CRT screen which some children place their faces right up to.
Of course they are. The problem is the sheer size the bigger u get. Its just like how analog is superior than digital in terms of quality but analog isnt nearly as versatile as digital. It comes down to cost and size.
Welp, time to change the channel name to *Analog Foundry*
POINTS
Fnalog Aoundry :Kappa:
Underrated joke
Yeah, they need to try it on lamp light TVs!
AF
I've got to stop watching DF, they've got me wanting to buy an ancient CRT monitor.
Do it!
@@luuketaylor Lol...same here.
@Cinnabar Volcano Not to mention the price one would be since everyone knows about it. You'll never find one used for cheap.
it weighs like 20 kilos though LOL
Their enthusiasm is contagious. I used to play on PC only, they have already coaxed me into getting an HDR TV and a console, and now this...
You guys are bringing back the tube in "TH-cam!"
CRT is YouR Tube 😁
Why doesn't someone create YouPanel?
Joke only for the ones that know.
Nope TH-cam is dead. It's now themtube
@@imdone8243 you mean OURtube comrade!!
Where are your party papers!
To the Gulag with you!
I will never forget the day we bought an HD tv and immediately felt the input lag.. I wanted the CRT back right away
OMG! thank you!. input lag. saturation color being able to adjust the brightness, clarity, or saturation all seperately? I think we're doing it wrong in some ways.
Holy sh*t I also had this moment. Like literally GoW 3 used to run perfectly on our CRT screen and then we bought a Full HD Tv and I was aware that some things were odd here. It was the input lag. Like literally, if you think about it. Analog cameras are also better than digital cameras, their quality of picture seems better to my eyes than any digital camera if you ask me.
why i havent upgraded the 720 flat panel i use was purely for it has no input lag as i kept running on thsi after the old LG one kicked the bucket
Idk, i bought recently 43 inch tv, it's full hd tv and i never encountered input lag, i guess it depends on tv brand
@Girl On A Quest Some TVs have less than 10 ms input lag, some have more than 50 ms input lag, so it really just depends. You wouldn't notice 10 ms.
Warehouse: Full of brand new CRT monitors that didn't sell.
Owner: *sweating*
i wish I could get a Brand new CRT, the owner be like, "i can sell these to retro gamers" PROFIT
I saw ones though
@@RealBadGaming52 Look up new old stock, sometimes labeled NOS. I have 2 21 inch crt still in my basement, NOS, bought for nothing almost.
Just call them "GAMING monitors" and hit them with a +$100,- pricetag on top of it.
@@lolindirlink $100? you're kidding right? If they are better for gaming than oled 4k hd then they will cost more then oled 4k HD.
Just wait for the new 2019 CRTs for $4999.
Nothing beats that glow of a CRT monitor on a cold winter night.
@@Avistent Can it do my ready made Lasagne at the same time as I'm getting my daily dose of atoms?
@@Avistent Just 'bout 3.6 roentgen. Not great, not terrible. 😉
@@Tvv1SteR I heard it's the equivalent of a chest x-ray so if your overdue for a check-up there you go
@@jaysanchez4407 One chest x-ray is 100 µSv. Using a crt montior for a year 1 µSv
@@joeblogs8907 😑😑😑
I always felt like games looked good CRT's but I never did figure to try out modern games on it. Imagin this video blows up and CRT's make a big comeback.
LGR did some gaming on a black and white TV.
Sadly they can't. Production on these would need facilities and resources that just wouldn't be cost effective these days. Plus the sheer weight and heat these things produced would be a hard to justify. Shipping would eat manufacturers alive right now.
You're too late. The hype train started several years ago. They're not being made again, though.
@@ZaireXIII Yeh but if you actually put some money into it I bet with today's technology a big company could make some innovations with this old tech and reduce the from factor, it is never going to be as small as an LCD but if you could make it lighter and smaller and have a larger screen and specifically target it towards gamers and use the benefits shown in the video as the selling point while marketing it then I bet a large section of the gaming community would pick up a product like that, I know I would.
@@ZaireXIII i thought they still produced these things for medical use... whatever factory still does that could make mad cash selling it as a gaming monitor lol.
I'm from the future and we are all playing Half Life 3 on curved CRT monitors.
Thank you Bear, appreciate the ray of hope. How's your hoverboard, if you don't mind me asking?
>on curved CRT monitors
Well, most older CRT monitors were already curved so it's nothing new. Just that, they curve outward.
We'll get hoverboards before Half-Life 3
@@HandledToaster2 Half Life Alyx... your move.
@@andrewchamberlain5175 I said *HALF-LIFE 3*
HLA is a different game
Nvidia should bundle a CRT monitor with the 2080Ti and say "how it was meant to be played"!
The CRT would be more expensive than the 2080Ti (If it was a new unit).
@@Holammer Especially with those ''modern CRT'' with reduced weight and size, they literally cost an arm and a leg!
Hahaha 👍 Nice one bro 😁😁😁
the problem is that is not meant to play with ngridia since most AAA games are consoles ports and consoles play on AMD so the games are developed for and meant to be play on amd.....
@@thepro08 shouldn't all aaa run on vulkan then
I can imagine Sony upper management desperately pulling their engineers out of retirement and getting them working on 'luxury pro gamer' CRTs RIGHT NOW.
I can now see the marketing slogan being 'CRT, the new vinyl'.
I know it's just a joke, but still: CRT's are dead and won't come back just because of the weight factor. I wish it wasn't the case, but it is. Shipping alone would make it unprofitable.
Sadly not going to happen because they only care about pandering to shallow consumers who don't care about the technology and just want their TVs to be thin and sleek.
@@Kain652 I can see a world where they market it as limited runs.
@@tpommischiefmaker It's not that. CRTs simply have a bad rep because of the radiation they emit (despite the fact that a cell phone emits around 35 times the amount a 42" CRT does)
Random Headphone Reviews CRTs are hella expensive to produce
If somebody had told me that I would seriously be thinking of going back to a CRT in 2019 I would've called them crazy, yet here we are...
Yes, it has sent me onto Ebay trolling for old CRTs that are still useable.
If I were to game on a CRT, I'd rather use a professional or broadcast monitor for that sweet RGB video. RGB on a PVM or BVM is electric sex.
They're crazy.
@@DarDarBinks1986
The benefits for VGA use are progressive scan, and 100Hz+ refresh, in addition to much higher resolutions than SD CRTs for retro consoles.
CRT and Plasma were both far superior technologies for picture quality but they were large and expensive so they were left behind.
Now imagine if CRTs had been developing all this time...
Ye, we only recently achieved good black levels with oled (even abit better than CRT)
but crt are still better for everything elses besides reading/writting texts
i can't imagine the awsome things we could have today if that technology was still researched...
@@miraakthuri We already had the true Replacement of the CRT with SED. But Patent issues prevented it.
@@sonyx4500 i know but sadly we never got to use them so unless they ever got resurrected it will prob stay that way
@@miraakthuri Im hoping that one day we will have a true Replacement of the CRT.
@@sonyx4500 ye me too, btw i think the patent recently expired (might be wrong but i remember reading it somewhere) so maybe someone will pick it up
Everyone:
2030 I will be gaming on a paper-thin screen
Reality:
CRT's EVERYWHERE
What if there'll be paper-thin CRT screens? Screens that somehow will show image not pixel by pixel but line by line?
Or if cannon got off their asses and invested in it, SED displays would have been the perfect replacement for CRT.
@@ArthurD look up SED displays lad, such wasted potential
So all of those classic, futuristic Sci-Fi Movies with CRT monitors in them were actually accurate?!
@@Oversensitive-S-poster Agreed, I remember reading about SED way back and thinking how amazing it sounded and it was very power efficient too if I remember right. 🙂
Put data to this. Show us closeups of the dots in slow motion to show how refresh compares. Measure the contrast ratios. Show us how resolution maps over a CRT compared to upscaling resolution on an OLED/LCD screen.
Yes
CRTs have a better color gamut. This is well documented.
Sour Grapes? or Milllenial that never saw one in use?
@@phoenixx5092 The youngest millenials were born in the mid 90s and grew up in the 00's. Every one of them watched a CRT display.
@@elijahdavila3684 not all of them will have seem the top end of CRT displays however. Even I only saw the top end stuff a handful of times and I am gen - x
CRT's have a great depth, it's a shame they quit improving the tech to make cheaper tv's. They were getting slimmer near the end.
I think this is one of the reasons why we remember those game graphics were looking much better back in the days, because today we're seeing those games again in our new LCD monitors. CRT monitors are simply the best.
CRTs add scanlines to the old games and the great contrast and perfect motion clarity creates a 3D feeling. No LCD can recreate that look
@@sonyx4500 To this day i wonder where this entire "visible scanline" stuff comes from. CRT screens did not have visible lines running trough them. A CRT did not draw pixels, it drew everything based on entire "lines", that is a scanline. Those lines were drawn so fast that nobody could see it happen.
@@EximiusDux I can see scanlines at the Original Resolution of 240p
@@sonyx4500 Yeah i will never understand that. I have never seen nor owned a television or PC CRT with visible lines running trough it.
@@EximiusDux Not on normal television. I can definitely see scanlines on a CRT Monitor aswell when I lower the Resolution.
I've been using the same CRT monitor since May of 1999 and I'm glad that I finally don't look crazy anymore
i miss my uncle CRT monitor.
damn, your either dirt poor or very determined to avoid tech trends.
Lucky soab. My equally old IBM CRT started to die around 2005, and then I even had switched to a new rig in 2003 that I mainly used. Had to turn down resolution and refresh rates to make it work eventually. I still have, but it only runs on 640x480 60hz. I had a Samtron and a Samsung CRT, gave away both 3 and 1 years ago respectively and then finally switched to a giveaway LCD. To be fair they were all budget class.
MrVercettti89 did you watch the video at all?
Sony should come out with a high end gaming CRT monitor again
How it would work for Sony in sales.
Plus, how to make a thinner and larger CRT to fit modern markets.
I think technical connection might like this.
they could. and with new microchips and such, they could make them considerably thinner and lighter..... we could even probably mount them on normal lcd vesa mounts if they truly refresh the technology.
oled has the potential to match the quality of crts, with its ridiculous low .01ms response time and high refresh rates.....
It would be highly unfeasible and cost prohibitive, since they have retooled for lcd and oleds, and do not have factories that build CRT's anymore, they would have to completely rebuild And retool all those factories, And rehire or train all the workers to learn how to build them again. But at least there's still a lot of really good high definition CRT's out there that were built right before the switch to LCD Oled and plasma. But how long that will last remains to be seen, since people seem to be going back to CRT's recently.
We need modern CRT screens. I would buy one in an instant
I wonder if we could lower the weight and size with today's technology and still get all the CRT benefits like no sample and hold. It might get expensive but there's gonna be a market for it.
@@TexelGuy in many ways CRT is supreme in comparison to LCD. However, the main issue in "resurrection" of this tech will be the manufacturing. I don't think anyone produces them anymore.
As a result of some big company restarts it, prices will be nuts.
However, I'm sure that in a very short term afterwards we would get new tech that will reduce cost, size, weight and add new features.
Everything new, is well forgotten old.
16x9 1080p CRT, at least 24 inch diag. Id slap my cash down for one. Would be a big beefy boxy boy, but id for sure get rid of my 1080p monitor for one.
It's was FED and SED technology, 2 future technology using tube killed in 2000's and which should allow to create flat display like lcd and oled display with the advantage of oled and CRT..
@@cryohellinc They should (could?) be re-engineered with modern technologies, maybe now there's a way to maintain the quality while reducing the size (not strictly as musch as an LCD), maybe some new material or way to shoot photons at a higher angle maintaining the quality, like some of the late models tried to do with half-size CRT's (I believe Samsung produced some of these back in the day). There's no market for them though, so it's likely that'll never happen, sadly.
I think that we should bring back, and start producing CRT tvs again as an alternative to the HDTV.
Yeah, produce both, one side stays modern and progresses, the other sticks around in the legacy sector.
I think smaller legacy-based industries still manufacture them in fact.
I wish they would or a copy of crt because afaik correct me if im wronh producing crt tvs were quite expensive difficult and hazardous
@@paulgonzales1829 Plus CRTs are awful for the environment and really difficult to dispose of safely. As cool as the tech is, it's very impractical.
@@toddmunjo1745 theres a monitor filter now called shaderglass that can emulate crt on a modern screen, its pretty decent and really customizable
lets also remember: no input lag
Well... ~8ms of input lag + potential frametime lag. 60Hz = 16.67ms per frame, but for all intents and purposes, they are lag free.
@@Nukity no the input lag doesn't need to exist. you can raster the screen at any time.
This is making me wonder what would have happened to the modern monitor scape, had Plasma TV's taken off instead of LCD and LED. Plasma actually looked clean, no blur, the only issue at first was burn-in but even that was virtually non-existent in the last two years of Panasonic's plasma line. We'd probably be talking about Plasma automatically maintaining that fidelity and quality of CRT, where over time. Nothing ultra thin unfortunately, but still thinner, and larger widescreen monitors at the same weight.
@@ignasia7230 Makes me wish SED screens had taken off. Not as thin as lcd but close enough, and 0 motion blur as well.
But i dont understand, why did they stop making then??
Only problem is I can't tell how good that CRT monitor is by looking at it on my LCD monitor
That's why they had to elaborate on how good it looks
I'm picking one up along with a stand for FREE today lol
If the guy who is giving it away responds lol
@@t-man7749 I saw one by dumpster when I was coming home the other day 😟😱😆😂🤣
I look at it from an OLED still can't tell
@Ari Vicentini If I were to get an Fw900 for gaming would the image quality in 1920 x 1080 be better then on my generic budget LCD even in games such as say The Witcher, Oblivion etc etc? Unfortuantley my old CRT screens been to the dump for years so I cant find out myself
Makes Control look like an 80’s sci-fi, kubrickesque horror movie
I don’t see the Kubrick vibes, I’d be more willing to compare it to John Carpenter.
Stranger things vibe for sure!
But what you seen here is also recorded by a camera which is meh... You need to see it in person
@@hopelessent.1700 YES! exactly! it reminded of the Prince of Darkness, that future footage of the devil/anti-christ coming out of the church in particular
Syber-VHS also the film that mostly reminds me of is the cult classic They Live. Particularly the whole conspiracy aspect about the gov’t.
The problem is, technological trends rarely follow the highest content quality. Technology seems to be much more interested in convenience and outward appearance. Thats why we have soundbars instead of full tower hi-fi in most homes. Why spotify and Netflix is more popular than CD and blu-ray.
It's about achieving acceptable quality with as much convenience as possible. Fact is most people wouldn't notice the difference between the 320kbps you get on Spotify and a CD. You likely won't notice it, try an ABX test, I certainly can't ,even though I have a fairly respectable speaker system. And on that note, speakers are nice and all, but the amount of space they require can be a bit much for a lot of people. I love my 45 KG subwoofer, but I totally get why many wouldn't want the damn thing. And at the distance most people watch their TV the difference between a Blu Ray and Netflix is negligible.
A CRT simply asks too much from the user for what little it does better, that's all there is to it.
@@HalfLifeHalfDead "it's about achieving acceptable quality with as much convience"
Not true always, it is how it should be, however average consumer does not have the time to do research on which product is convenient/better for him, most of the times it's about gimmicks.
My laptop has a glossy screen, however my TV has a matte screen, which is the complete opposite of what it should be, even now, when I go to electronic stores, they are lined with laptops with glossy screens, all of the "noo, but glossy has better display" is useless, when there is a light behind you, which it is always, even right now as I type, I can see my face crystal clear in the screen.
I'm pretty sure the reason has got to do with selling the product, rather than "better display".
Also planned obsocelense.
I get your point, but CD is not a good example as it has zero advantages in comparison to digital media, but you are right about the sound bar example. The sad thing is, that the successor technology of CRT, which would have given us flat monitors (like modern screens) was in development just at the time LCD panels began getting traction in the market, and unfortunately development was ditched. In other words, we could have had modern CRT monitors today with all the advantages...
@@ferez1985 CDs are typically formatted in a lossless audio format. Whilst streamed files are most often MP3s or some other lossy equivalent.
You're right that CDs are not superior to other digital formats inherently. A flac file you downloaded will sound identical to any properly formated CD. They're both lossless digital audio.
But your average CD will sound better than your average music steaming service due to the lossless file at a far higher bitrate compared to a heavily compressed lossy file.
So my comment wasn't CDs vs digital. It was heavily compressed vs lightly compressed files.
I won't comment on CRTs though since I'm unfamiliar with the advantages. My impression is that screen size would be inherently limited by bulk.
True ppl prefer bezel less tv even if its edge lit than a full full array dimming with bezel.
"Perfect motion." I'm an old guy. I took that for granted. It didn't need to be said. Then LCD came along. Young people don't know what they missed. Thanks for educating them, a little.
Wow that CRT looks way better than my LCD when viewing this TH-cam video on my LCD.
So clean and sharp on my lcd screen.
lol...
Now all makes sense...
I remember buying a PS3 some years ago and we will used an CRT Monitor / TV and the ps3 didnt work on our TV because it needed more than 60 Herz or something near that number... THan we bought a cheap LCD TV with the necessary herz, frequenz ...
I and my brother never said it, but we both thought ... This looks worse than the PS2 on the CRT TV XDD... Lets go back XDD
@@majormononoke8958 I had a CRT for my PS3 till 2012. I could still see the jaggies in many HD games.
Heck, most people don't ever see the true looks of things through videos. But I'm still excited to see new 4K HDR games via compressed TH-cam videos played at the 1080p video resolution setting on my 1600x900 standard dynamic range laptop.
One thing were TV monitor, where the resolution was stuck at NTSC or PAL numbers (480i and 576i) and there, i remember my PS3 wasn't the best. The games were, ok, but the overscan and certain game text were illegible. Plus certain games even forced you to play with black bar on top and bottom, and squeezing even more that already low resolution wasn't the case. On the other end, there were the PC monitor, with high resolution and all the benefits of it.
Sony going to bring back CRT like they did vinyl...
lmao vinyl never died
No they won't. End of story.
@@tyler-xo3rb vinyl most definitely died and it took consecutive years of multiplying sales for it to become relevant again - I'm willing to bet you weren't really around or paying attention to vinyl until it came back into fashion in maybe 2012
Except crt are stupidity expensive to make
vinyl yes, but try the music cassette with a 3 head player
8k exists *
digital foundry: CRT is the future
Every 4K TV at Costco looks like absolute $hit. The ONLY good looking TV there was the 1 remaining 1080p 'junk' =)) Funny the GARBAGE people will buy just because it has a larger 'number' LOL!! It does not look real, at all, because of many 'secondary' problems like crazy oversaturation & hyper fake contrast & flickering 'subsampled' type of look 2 it, like it is having trouble organizing the 'zones' or something = pathetic. Not a coherent uniform realistic look like an open window at all.
8K is pointless
@@AM-mk3zc i got a Compaq S700 for €5 :D
@@Deathrape2001 Lower contrast manually then?
@Neon Pizza And a terrible power drain vs LCDs.
I'm glad DF is reporting on something that has been somehow forgotten for too long.
Some of us have never forgotten. I do all of my retrogaming on CRT TVs and monitors.
@@asimian8500 Me too
It would be awesome to see CRT monitors have a comeback like mechanical keyboards.
Not possible. CRTs are a super dead-end technology.
And vinyl.
And hifi.
Funny how technology has not evolved but barely shifted to commercial alternatives in order to stay relevant.
Our grandads had better music quality than we do. How sad isnthat ?
@@Soldano999 The convenience though. Being able to access music with a large library, or just generally having desk space. Some monitors, like my Cintiq, you just couldn't have as a CRT. It would be impossible to be ergonomic.
Besides, a lot of the difference in vinyl comes from the mixing. Sometimes it's more garbage on vinyl than digital releases.
From my experience, speakers make a bigger difference than input anyways. I wouldn't call myself an audiophile though. No snake oil for me.
It's still the best image a human eye can see on a display.
@JayJApanB: Good thing about modern audio tech is that quality speakers/monitors got cheap. JBL LSR305/308 for under $1K a pair. I can still remember when the only option at that price was Yamaha NS10's, which were only infamous because "If it sounds good on those, it'll sound good on anything".
@Soldano999: Not sure about our grandfather's tech; I didn't get much experience with vinyl but I still have my Hi-MD walkman from over 10 years ago, which is the cleanest music quality I've heard outside of SACD.
And this is how DF starts a new trend in gaming...
new?There are literally tens of us
hopefully the next gen of consoles is being played on CRT monitors lol.
You know what i went to my garage and i found my old 19"dell 993s , it's like he was waiting for me to come back, cleaned it change his faulty cable, and oh my god ! Doom, metro, control, tr.... It's insanely smooth with deep blacks great contrast! Never been so thankful for youtube !!
It's not that the Dell is so GR8, but that the flat U R currently using sux azz. The free 'HP junk' glossy screen flat I use that I got free off the street looks better than N E CRT ever, after some tweaking =)
@@Deathrape2001 I know this comment is old, but damn this hurts to read
@@Rusty-uz8ov Eh
I feel like I've been lied to my whole PC gaming life
What killed CRT screen was the market
Everyone went crazy on the slim LCD Tv's
Make them thinner and goal of the manufacturer became that and not picture quality 😀
@@mannamanam8233 but now that people have big beefy gaming rigs and stuff why haven't they seen more popularity in recent years? From what DF have said I'd love to buy one instead of a flatscreen monitor
@@kap1117 the technology is DEAD ... Unless someone revive it ☺
I am not saying CRT is completely dead but portion of the manufacturing for high refresh rate PC monitor is totally dead
Everything is gone all the(( tolling . Machining . Lines))
More importantly supply chain is gone 😐
It's not going to come back
Omg meanwhile guys are literally throwing these CRT screens even if they does work.
@@kap1117
Nobody manufactures them. They died by 2006 - nobody was buying CRTs in 2006 onwards, because 17"+ LCDs became pretty much the same price.
CRTs are bulky and heavy, so I can imagine that the manufacturers and distributors were happy to kill them off. Can't have been easy to ship over from Asia in terms of costs.
Do a tutorial on how to setup a CRT with a modern PC without VGA output
You can just get a vga to hdmi adapter, simple enough.
@@TheGamingDandy only if your card is capable of outputting an analogue signal.
1. Use a dongle
@@Daz5Daz there are active adapters if passive won't work
@@Daz5Daz Nope, an HDMI to VGA converter works on every single HDMI device, I have one and tested all, PS4, XO, PS3, component video to HDMI converter, blu-ray player and so on on my CRT monitor.
All these people singing CRTs praises, but the day I could bring a LCD monitor to a LAN party instead of lugging around a heavy-ass CRT monitor was a great day.
Honestly and if you get a high end modern monitor you can have the quality and weight advantages. It's not like professional artists, colorists, and photographers are using old CRTs anymore and for good reason. You may have to pay a little more but imagine how much that sony CRT costed when it was new. 1920 x 1200 is too low of resolution if you want anything bigger than 20 inches anyway.
Kraven Doomhammmer different solutions for different problems
Yeah, cinema screens are at 1080p and we don't care so... I guess what you said is just true for lcd. Though mcd monitors have the huge advantage of color and overall fidelity and also being so convinient in size/weight
And then the LAN party died :(
@@tshepp89 joop you can play online but ist not the same. Tried to organise one Lan. But everyone suddenly had no time anymore
***stokes his crt lovingly*** which due to its colossal weight is sinking ever deeper into mother earth until it reaches its final resting place upon the planets solid iron core...
Oh, i stroke every inch of my 16(and growing number of) crt babies. ! You rock bro . Keep loving this amazing beings.
How many do U USE? U should $ell all but your favorite, & maybe 1 backup =)
Earth has a CRT core I have decided.
You know what they say, ain’t no school like old school.
Tru statement
*old skool
Fixed
"and I'm the fucking headmaster."
We lost light gun games in the rush to lcd. 😭
That's been replaced by VR. Way more immersive with it's controllers.
wiser3754 - who are you trying to convince? Yourself or me?
but gained VR - btw do not buy VR with Cameras (no PS4 I only mean PC) . Steam support is best on HTC and Valve VR with the laser tech.....
@@smallbluemachine , I remember trying to fire up my Dreamcast with House of the dead 2 and Confidential Mission back in the day after getting an LCD screen and getting rid of the CRT, and I was absolutely gutted.
@@smallbluemachine As someone who has owned both, VR is 1000x better. Using a Valve Index.
So let me get this straight:
1. Looks great at all resolutions
2. high refresh rate
3. No input lag
How's color reproduction?
Color reproduction is great. Cons are: Availability (New doesn't exist, so more its about getting lucky), size, power, heat, Sharpness (Softer edges), Picture distortions (can be calibrated), burn in, and picture degradation with time.
Honestly, they are pretty great, but nothing an OLED can't do. If you find one for used, it would be a cool tv, but the main problem is it will most likely be extremely dim do to the age.
OLED has better picture, sharpness, contrast, brightness
@@TUNDRA2529 OLED doesn't age well. It has quick pixel degradation. Just saying.
@@rich1051414 so does CRTs. We're comparing CRTs to OLEDs.
@@TUNDRA2529 Some CRT's, not all, but it is true, a lot of CRT's, especially cheap ones, had substandard phosphors and degraded quick. As far as LCD monitors go, their color temperature goes blue as the phosphors age, as well as dim as the back-light fades.
ALL CRT's do age though, but not quite as fast as OLED. I am disappointed my OLED TV is already showing burned in images and contrast is washing out, it's only a couple years old and it wasn't cheap at all.
@Damian Chiliński That is correct. LED's use blue light that is colored with phosphor gel, and these shift to blue as they age. LCD monitors stopped using CCFL quite a while ago. I do have one that uses it, and it has gone warm colored from age.
Happy to see someone give CRT monitors some love and the respect it truly deserves. Even though it has been ages since I last used my sony trinitron monitor I still miss it because I also noticed how LCD monitors seems to not have caught up in many areas.
Don't underestimate the speed of electrons in a vacuum ;)
It's the best way to own a gun
And the flurolescent images of salt !
Also, don't underestimate their weight and how much space they take up...
@@jaywolfenstien what else u got on that desk? Unless your rather cramped already most peoples desks and shelves I've seen have room to spare for this
I remember playing Mass Effect on X360 in 2007 when I was in college. I went home for winter break and felt sad that I would have to finish the game on my parents' 32" 480i CRT. Once I hooked it up I realized that the slightly blurry non-HD TV really smoothed things out and the game really looked incredible on it.
Damn, you've just reminded me about the 360 VGA Cable. I had to buy one at when I was in halls at Uni too. It really did look fantastic on it too.
@@Ashby2508 IIRC the 360 originally came with the combo component/composite cable. They didn't add the HMDI connector until later revisions
Perfect motion clarity, high refresh rates, sharp even at low resolutions.... but best of all: ZERO INPUT LAG!!
Great video guys, glad to see you join the CRT obsession.
Best of all ZERO MOTION BLUR!!
There will be input lag, when you have an DAC with driving electronics which is able to push 1440p@120Hz...
@@jackburton307 there's no blur on OLED as well, however it stutters depending on content/setting. At the same time CRT flickers and has worse colour reproduction (unless it's hi-end Eizo or MAG). I'd say apples to oranges, but OLED is up to 80 inch, while good CRT 24 inch or so (TVs suck). If you really want sick motion quality just buy Kuro or Panny VT plasma.
@@puzzlemaniak420 I have the FW900 widescreen CRT. Nothing comes close to it for gaming image quality. You are right about CRT TVs... they suck. The largest they made was a 45 or 50" and the image quality sucked and the resolution was only 480p.
Some of the later ones did, for the same reason as digital displays. However, they are quite rare.
Andyw: That makes little sense, as you don't need a full framebuffer to convert. At absolute most you would need a few lines. Going in the opposite direction (OSSC), you only need a few lines, even including an upscaler. That is still far better than the minimum 2 frames of processing delay for any LCD.
That sony crt is going for almost 2000 euros on ebay...
Helder Costa for a reason
You can get an asus rog swift 4k gsync 144hz for that money
@@hellfire92837 sure... But i already have a high refresh rate monitor for my pc. I am looking for an old but good CRT for my old consoles.
@@heldercosta1209 old games are way better on emulators, just look at higan with performance patches and mode 7 or epsxe and the various shaders/plugins etc
@@hellfire92837 i am aware of the existence of emulators and have tried them before... i just want the real deal, the way i remember from 20/25 years ago. I have a CRT TV but only compatible with composite. I want One compatible with component but i am having a hard time finding one.
You can make comparison videos of crt vs lcd for every modern game. A whole new world of content for you.
The problem is we watch them on LCDs. It's like telling a blind man what seeing is.
However, you can test motion blur on your LCD
Look at this Blu Ray quality on your DVD!!!
it looks good in this video. you're welcome.
@@eSKAone- Maybe with an offscreen record could be possible to see the difference...
Cue CRT prices skyrocketing. Damn you, John.
Assuming you can even find one. Yeah, sure from Ebay but pretty much guaranteed it's broken at arrival.
Yeah, I hope this video doesn't make my endless hunt even harder to achieve :/
2019 mechanic keyboard
2020 crt gaming monitor
2021 ball mice
2022 yellowed gaming PC cases.
2023 single core processors
@@peterkiss1204 Damn, I almost forgot about those. Logitech Wingman was the best gaming mouse I've ever had.
@ "Wingman" was Logitechs sub-brand for gaming accessories. They had joysticks, gamepads and yes, a three button mouse. And no, high end ball mice with good mousepads were far superior to optical mice.
This is Gamer equivalent of Audiophile vinyls.
Yes and no. I fully understand the analogy but it's not completely accurate. Not that you said it was so good call.
the highest quality cassette tapes ftw.
no? Vinyls are objectively poorer quality, digital is truly lossless. CRTs are better then LCD. So bad comparison.
@@robosergTV Both Vinyls and CRTs are analog while LCD is digital. Also Vinyl is even more lossless because no compression
@@Koffiato no, just no. "Even more lossless" does not even make sense and shows you don't know what you are talking about. Analog information storage has always losses due to the way its saved and played back. Digital storage is flawless and the audio or video would be lossless. It has no compression, hence lossless. And LCD is not digital, you can play back a VHS or an analog VGA video on a LCD. You are confusing things. The signal is either digital or analog. If anything, we would call CRT and LCD analog, same as say a sound speaker.
I remember CRT monitors and how good the image quality could be. This tech definitely needs to be revisited to see if it's even viable in today's market. Thanks Digital Foundry for reminding us older gamers of simpler and better times
the reason they prob won't be made is because they are so EXPENSIVE to ship. I remember when i bought on used back in 2004 the thing weighed like 90lbs and box was HUGE. heck, the shipping was the same as the monitor. was like $150 ...but it was originally a $1000 monitor so it was worth it to me.
Get a plasma for free off craigslist, fool =))
@@Deathrape2001 Plasma is too big to be used as a Monitor.
It can't happen, because people want bigger screens with big resolution and refresh rates. They justifiably don't care about the TINY input lag and marginal increase in contrast or color accuracy. OLED blows every CRT out of the water in every category except input lag, which is barely noticeable anyway.
CRT monitors are not coming back - but SED, which is the development of technology, maybe. By sq.m. I would like to hope so.
Now to make a VR headset with two CRT'S. Lol
Yes, permanently damage your eyes due to electron exposure. Do it
Large noggin maneuver
Lol Can you imagine telling someone how you lost your sight. So what happened to your eyes bro? Electrons man......
Ben Heck Show/Element14 is working on that
RCA produced something like that in the 1950s. It wasn't really VR. It was a headset to watch TV with. A VR headset with tubes should be feasible.
Finally someone saying how good crt's are, hoping for a miracle and who knows, maybe DF will help push the crt technology, if we could make crt's much smaller in footprint that would be a game changer completely.
in fact just slightly before LCDs took over there was this small size CRTs tvs thing going on, where you would have a CRT that was something like 1/3 of the size and weight that you expect from a crt, but they didn't last long, i bet most people haven't even seen one
Thats why N64 , ps4 , dreamcast games look incredible during the time it was used on these tvs
I don't think that it is possible for an analog Device to display 1080p or even 1440p @ 100 or 120Hz. Does such digital analog converter exists?
SED or FED screens were being developed in the 00s that might have done this.
A standard CRT that you would use for say home use wouldn't look anywhere near as good as the FW900. You're comparing a standard low resolution CRT vs a professional grade monitor that retailed for $2000 on release. Its one of the very few that actually supports higher resolutions and higher refresh rates.
Remember to use high quality and short cable. Using separate RGB via concentric cables is another option, but again, high quality, well shielded and short will get the best results.
Brilliant! I am going back to my Sony CRT, back in the basement.
lol...
Now all makes sense...
I remember buying a PS3 some years ago and we will used an CRT Monitor / TV and the ps3 didnt work on our TV because it needed more than 60 Herz or something near that number... THan we bought a cheap LCD TV with the necessary herz, frequenz ...
I and my brother never said it, but we both thought ... This looks worse than the PS2 on the CRT TV XDD... Lets go back XDD
Someone make a modern CRT on Kickstarter! Would sell like crazy!
Wouldn't be surprised if some of the materials needed are illegal now
It would be either to expensive or to shitty, most crt factories closed years ago, and by the time LCD/LED panels were the new thing, crts werent as good as they used to be. On TVs a trinitron from the 80s/90s was better than one made in the 00s, happened the same thing as with floppies and cassette tapes.
@@helpmelivebros737 Yeah, didnt some of them use mercury?
Yeah it would be priced at twice the price of an OLED model, lol. Economy of scale wins every time unfortunately.
You'd have better luck bringing back cassette carts to replace CDs at that point, not that I'd mind I could actually buy second hand shit without it being destroyed
Oh, so that's why they use CRT's in Ripleys adventure of "Alien".
Lol.
Hahah... Ridley Scott saw the future, and it was CRT!
I remember when the 1st HD screens came out and back then I thought "there is a lot of motion blur"
I only recently figured out why I never liked the new LCDS compared to the old crt I used to have.
The motion blur when moving a mouse is awful. I was told its "the refresh rate".. So I go out and buy a 144hz.... still awful.. Years later buy a 240hz.. Still awful.. Month ago I bought a 360hz monitor (And the cards to support the demand) and its still AWFUL. A few dozen years of LCDS and I just recently realized why LCD suck.... motion blur
Imagine moving your head left to right slowly and everything blurring instantly... Thats LCDS. Why did CRTS get taken over? I feel scammed.
All the anti blur options I used on LCD come with heavy draw backs from double ghost images to physical pain and they still dont compare to the clarity of moving in a CRT
I hate these useless new TVs we've been sold a lie , let's get these CRT TVs up to this level in 2021 and pump out legit TVs from the past for the future.
I remember asking everyone why they thought something substantially lower resolution than a basic gaming monitor deserved to be called "HD"
@@bobshanery5152 Maybe buy oled then? It doesn't have mid frames which means instant update to next frame. If its not smooth for you then nothing ever will. Just like people who believe vinyl is better even tho its not
@@wadimek116 if we moved from crts directly to oleds sure
Lcds are a fucking scam
I love crts I wish they still made them with today's tech they would be amazing. It's all about that 0 input lag and no blur.
WHY? We have far better technology now. CRTs are big, bulky, and heavy. Flat-panels take up far less space and you can mount them on your wall.
While we're at it, I bet your preferred medium for watching movies is VHS, too. Tell me, how does Detective Pikachu look on tape?
@@DarDarBinks1986 Did you not read his comment? He said he's interested in 0 latency and 0 motion blur
@Alan Bane Flat-screen CRTs only exposed the flaws in the technology. When you play games or watch something on that shit, lines don't always appear straight. They appear curved. The edges of the screen look concave, more so when you have scrolling backgrounds (i.e., the parallax scrolling in the old Sonic games).
also games add blur for an option, so there are people that do like it
@@DarDarBinks1986 That's not "far better technology", that's just *convenient technology*. I don't think digital tech has progressed to the point where you can compare music quality between a digitally recorded track to that pressed on an actual vinyl. Or comparing images taken by a digital camera versus one developed from film. Or the fact that the human genome encodes 1.5GB of data in a microscopic package (but that's not tech, I guess).
Point is, digital is nowhere near analog in terms of being "better". In almost every case, analog will always come up leagues better than digital at the moment.
You know, I think this is hands down one of the best Digital Foundry videos I've seen. I grew up in the age of CRTs as standard. It's another reminder that pushing technology forward, faster isn't always the best case scenario when the new technology doesn't surpass the old.
Makes me wish ThinCRT had happened.
Good ol' CRT. Still showing the flat screen boys how it's done. Glad I still have one. Now, I need to try this.
YES!! thingCRT is basically FED technology. This sh*t should've been the norm. Not LCD, OLED or whatever.
having no blur is the most important thing what the point in higher res if as soon as anything moves the perceived resolution goes down the toilet the best we have now is super high refresh 1080p with back light strobing at 240hz and that's not quite crt quality.
I was mocked 2 years ago when i was saying all of this John , im so happy finally someone with a huge platform and credibility put it out there.
*Thanks.*
LCD: I don't have screen tearing.
CRT: What's screen tearing?
but that's wrong.
@@Blink_____ Wait. That's Illegal!
CRTs will screen tear too. That has to do with a low refresh rate not syncing, hence the introduction of V-Sync with triple buffering back in the day.
However, you get ZERO input lag and no motion blur.
@@bluesdealer As the CRT screen doesn't have a frame buffer (AFAIK), it still needs some time to draw the image line by line. Zero input lag isn't really possible.
Péter Kiss but negative latency is! *INSERT WARIO LAUGH*
Ahh man I miss my FW900, When I created the FW900 thread on HardOCP forums back in 2005 I never thought it was gain as much traction as it has over the years and is still active to this day, 14 years later! I would trade my current 27" 144hz Gsync monitor for another FW900 without even questioning it, Truly an amazing display, I paid $400 for one in 2005 but these days they're going for at least double that (if you can even find one).
Holy shit it's you :D
That thread is legendary and was (is) a valuable place for Ressource
Oh my god, I got a lot of information about CRT in the topic you opened in the forum, you are a legend man.
I really regret getting rid of my old CRT monitor back in 2007.
So is this why trying to play my PS2 on a LCD TV looks absolutely terrible?
Horrible deinterlacing and upscaling will do that.
Yea lcd makes you think youre in the wrong timeline
maybe cause you're on a ps2...
I think there's interlacing on ps2, supposedly it output 2 240p image and make it 480p by interlacing. I played my ps2 on a crt using an RCA and damn images were sharp as a knife.
Yeah, I've noticed that gen 6 and prior consoles tend to look terribly muddy and blurry on modern TVs and look much better on CRTs
oled vs plasma vs CRT. Digital foundry, please go into this rabbit hole, I'll join you :)
Oled has perfect black levels and contrast curious how motion compares plasma vs. crt.
Brian P in theory OLED should have also better pixel response and so less motion blur than an LCD, like CRTs (I said in theory because most of OLED TVs aren’t that great but it is a software problem not hardware). I think, between modern display technologies, OLED is the one that comes closer to the strengths of CRTs. If you want an example of a good OLED screen targeted at gamers that really take advantage of it’s response times check the ROG phone 2. I hope that manufactures can fix the burn-in problem so that we could se pc OLED monitors
Personally I think just having a high end VA panel like my 55 inch Sony 930e is just as good as if not better than the high end CRTs they made. I mean it doesn't have 1440p or 4k at higher than 60hz. It doesn't have less than 20ms input lag or less than 1ms response time. It does have a much bigger screen, Sharpening engine, better blacks, gets much brighter and just better colors all around. Check out the 930e on rtings. I own a 65inch Samsung ks8000 which is great too. The Sony CRTs look way better than LCDs under a grand. Edge lit LCDs with high end backlight tech and VA panels look fantastic. The Sony X reality engine sharpens the picture and makes all the textures look better than they ever would on any display. I've done my research and done my experiments. HDR gaming is better than CRT gaming anyday. Also if you want to play ray tracing at max the 930e does 1080p at 120hz or just run in 4k60hz window mode at lower res to get the frames up. 60hz is not that bad only when the display has 144hz gsync capability and you run it at 60.
@@51m0n397 Sadly, all OLED panels sold today are still sample and hold which means motion blur. Even with black frame insertion, it's still not on par with a CRT or even a plasma. Everything else about OLEDs is excellent, I'd say, but there is still work to be done.
@@SomeRandomGuy369 Well, things aren't so black and white. There are obviously areas where modern displays outshine CRTs - that makes sense. However, the motion resolution and reproduction of low light content is something that no LCD has matched to date. It simply isn't possible with that technology.
Can you please mail me a copy of this video on laserdisc?
Only beta max vhs available.
@@sirblebington Were those the things you had to flip over in the middle of the movie?
seconding this
No what is a laser disc I think you mean video tape I have a VHS, be kind and rewind
Nathan B • yes, and some movies were on multiple discs 😂
However, the HUGE art on the paper sleeves was like my version of Vinyl Records growing up...the spines were super thin, but seeing the big pictures was like getting ready for a special event. I’ll never forget Terminator 2 on my dad’s Laserdisc (and big CRT)! But we only had like 30 movies, which was still a lot for the time.
My main issue with CRT was color accuracy. But when it wasn't an issue, boy look how gorgeous that was! 7:05
If someone would made Full HD 16:9 CRT monitor, I would buy it.
Sony did make a line of 16:9 1080p TV's up until the early 2000s. The monitor they showed here is 16:10 so I don't doubt a 16:9 version exists.
They stopped around 08
@@JoeDower101 Yeah, the 16:10 is 1920x1200, but you can create a custom resolution of 1080p, if you don't want the 1920x1200, but it would have small bars at the top and bottom.
@@TheCgOrion whoa you're a genius!
*THEY EXIST*
To think we could have had mature SED televisions by now but of course literally the worst technology won out.
SED was everything you loved about CRT without being the size of a small car.
Oh no, I'd never heard of those things before, and after reading up on them they sound amazing.
Looks like LCD and OLED aren't inevitable, just branches of tech we ended up on because patent trolls hampered the adoption of alternatives..
SED (surface-conduction electron-emitter display), which was based off of FED (field-emission display) died because of patent and licensing issues. Canon bought a perpetual, royalty-free, license from Nano-Proprietary, Inc. for $5.5 million. One of the only restrictions on the license was that they were not authorized to sub-license to other companies. Then Canon tried to subvert the licensing agreement by claiming that the new company they started with Toshiba was a Canon subsidiary. Nano terminated the license and sued Canon. In the end, despite Canon purchasing all shares of SED(the company) from Toshiba in an attempt to qualify it as a subsidiary, Nano walked away with Canon's $5.5 mil licensing fee and Canon walked away with nothing since their license was revoked.
Too bad. If licensing had been handled differently we could have a completely different, and uniquely superior, primary display technology today.
@@mammlouk Wow that's awful. Just how many innovations have been hampered due to corporate greed? There HAS to be done way to put an end to this.
At the time it was worse, yes. But it's 2019 and if SED was any kind of viable, it would have surfaced again. While running lower resolution content used to be a very common thing, it's not anymore. I used to HATE fixed resolution displays because of that. But while it would be useful in some instances, almost all content runs at native resolution anymore and there's no need for a display that can run lower resolution content as beautifully as CRT. And even if we went the SED route, by this point, we'd probably have moved away from it already regardless.
@Ioannis Stefanakis CRTs were vastly Superior ONLY in quality and ONLY at the time. You know what else CRTs were? REALLY FUCKING HEAVY! LCD didn't just win because they were cheaper, they won because they were A SHIT TON LIGHTER! How could you not think that was a factor?! In fact, when LCD first came out, they were, and for a while, MUCH more expensive than CRT.... Jesus....
I distinctly remember the day i swapped my 19" CRT to a 19" LCD and launched Quake 3 to test it. I thought to myself - "Wow, this is THE sh*ttiest experience playing this game i've ever had..." I actually thought my unit was defective, but unfortunately no, it's just LCD :(
The trouble with motion on LCD, OLED and any other sample-and-hold display technology is that it needs enormous content framerates and display refresh rates to look fantastic.
That being said, sample-and-hold displays could be far superior to CRTs if they could somehow be coupled with ultra high framerates and refresh rates (000s/sec).
1080p resolution needs around 4kHz refresh display and 4000fps content.
4K needs double that to look amazing and 8K double that of 4K (16000fps@16kHz).
So that's the challenge :))
@@edfort5704 Well, i surely won't hold my breath till that happens :)
I tried to use an old Sony 19" LCD once, but it was horrible because back then the responce time was 30ms. That is no longer an issue, but even today I still use a CRT because I think it looks better. I've been waiting for a 27" 144hz 1440p OLED for years, but I'm not sure if OLED will ever come to computer monitors.
@@AllTracTurbo OLED is already here, ASUS ProArt PQ22UC for example. Problem is they are just too expensive and refresh rates aren't good enough yet, but both will eventually be fixed for sure.
@@5Qu1Z33r That thing is a joke. I don't even think I would consider it a computer monitor. It's more like a tablet that you can plug into a computer. It's price is ludicrous, the fact that it's 4K on 22" is dumb, and it can't even reproduce colors accurately because they didn't give it enough power. Also, I think LG already has OLED TVs that are 4K 120hz.
flatscreen CRTs were a requirement for top end gaming back in the late 90s/early00s, especially in RTS and FPS games. The best CRT of all IMO was the NEC MultiSync FP2141SB...22" of pure perfection
I would give just about anything to get my Multisync back, but with high refresh and Gsync support. I would literally game on nothing else.
I saw that and I didn't even know it was a CRT haha. It looks like something I might pick up honestly!
Yep, the rush to higher resolution was simply a trick to sell more TVs.
As was the switch from analog to digital broadcasts, which coincided with the rise of HDTVs and the government and electronic companies were insisting you would lose broadcasts on an older tube tv with antenna unless you upgraded your set or bought a converter. How convenient...
not really, 1080p looks so much better then 480p
not tvs dude, monitors, 2 diff things
@@Cyrus_Nagisa yes in tv world, but when it comes to these monitors any res on it looks as crisp as 4k image let alone 1080
800x600 on a crt will look much better than 1600x900 on a 1080p lcd monitor
THIS is the direction gaming monitors should go. Bring back CRTs!
If they can just solve the issues of CRTs' large depth/weight, power consumption, and burn-in over time ... the benefit of CRT is the ANALOG nature of the scan guns, making EVERY resolution look native on the screen (up to how fine the screen's RGB mesh is, width and of the scan beam and how finely it can control intensity).
How about instead of going back, we go forward to a brand new display technology that gives us the benefits of LCDs, and the few tiny benefits of the CRTs instead?
@@3dmaster205 SED TV was the one, someone could bring back one of these cancelled techs which would have been the best of all worlds.
@@MattyS54 Yes, SED monitors!!!
@@3dmaster205 "the few tiny benefits of the CRTs" Lol, you mean being better in almost every image quality aspect?
So.. THIS is why I don't remember 60fps being as bad as it seems now!
@Ioannis Stefanakis Yea cuz I swear to god games like NFS MW and other 60fps games played liquid smooth on my PC back in the day haha.
@Ioannis Stefanakis That's what I experienced last year playing SF on PS2 with CRT TV. 30fps felt like 60 on today's LCDs. That's why we didn't complain all the time about framerates back in the day like people do nowadays.
60hz looked like crap compared to 75 or 85hz on a crt. Gave me a headache. Also this is the top of the line Trinitron which provides a ridiculously sharp image compared to all other CRTs.
@@harrym-ls1je hmm I don't recall having headaches at all I used to game like crazy as a kid too. That sucks though. Also sharpness wasn't an issue back then for some reason, just needed smoothness with some AA and that fluidity of movement which it seems crt used to do great apparently.
@@undeny the flickering at 60hz was quite bad compared to the fluid 75 or 85 hz the monitor supported.
Since you're old you forgot the worst thing about crt's: High pitched noise that we all heard when young. Gave me headaches.
i would only hear that hum while the tube is warming up. after that it would disappear.
I can still hear it. No, I meant literally I can.
Ah yes, the mosquito noise that was ruinous to those that didn't ruin their ability to hear higher frequencies.
Vanquished Void I try to keep my hearing safe but ads, shows and jackass developers always put max volume as the default. I want to fucking sue them all on it before it is too late.
Loved the sound or as you call it: “noise”
For instance PSX 3D games look awful in LCD but way better in CRT
Ps2 games via component output as well
I'd rather use a LCD or OLED TV. I just moved to a new house and space is at a premium with my setup. The only reason I'd ever get a tube is for games that use light guns or active shutter 3D glasses. Those won't work on a modern display or even HD CRTs.
I have an Atari Jaguar and it looked like absolute garbage on an HD TV. I remember thinking, "the Jaguar was no hidden gem, but I don't remember it looking this terrible!" So I bought an old CRT and it looks so much better.
ps2 games break my heart
@@ressljs wow, a game made before LCDs looks better on a CRT, no way
Wait, so you're telling me that my Dad's generation of Vinyl Records and Solid Steel Bodied Cars now can add better image quality to the list with CRTs?
Please keep praising and making videos on crt displays. I've been hoping for a comeback as I have no idea how long my currently one will last. I'd love to buy a new one and if enough demand is created maybe, just maybe, someone will start production again. 👍
They'll be very expensive at first, but I'd be willing to buy a 1440P CRT that has all modern video connectors and display modes for $1,000 or maybe more.
Not even hard evidence will convince the majority of buyers that decades old technology is somehow better than the current ones. And no manufacturer is crazy enough to try and convince them otherwise. I don't think there is going to be CRT comeback anytime soon, especially considering the size of that thing, it'd be a very niche product.
I can be wrong of course...
@@hvip4 They don't need to think about convincing the majority. Even if a new CRT only sold a few hundred thousand units at a high price of $1000 then it would be worth the investment. Idiots who don't know the difference between LCD and LED will be drooling over this "new" luxury product whether they understand anything about it or not.
I'm pretty sure there are still repair shops around that service CRT TVs and monitors to keep them going strong. You may want to look around online to see if any are nearby
@@FrozenwingX I want a new one with native HDMI and Displayport. It would also be great to have reassurance that should something break which wasn't repairable then a replacement could be ordered easily and instantly without having to search around auctions hoping to find something in good condition. Yesterday there was only one Sony 900 CRT on Ebay for $1,000 with scratches all over the sides and a large crack in the bezel.
i remember owning a 19" CRT monitor back in the early 2000's, paying $700 for it and loving the crap out of it. If you had a new game but your computer couldn't quite handle high details AND high resolution, you could lower the resolution then pump up the detail and it would look pretty amazing (but a bit softer). I remember being able to change the refresh rate, boosting it for Unreal Tournament deathmatches so that movement was buttery smooth...great, now I want one.
Try more colorful games with strong black. Gears 5, Shadow of the Tomb Raider?
Silent Hill 2
You want games with strong colors and deep blacks, use an OLED with HDR. Yes I'm aware of the burn-in but if you're careful you'll avoid it.
I would love to see AC: Oddessy on it. That game can have such pretty views.
@ LCD with BFI can deliver 3840pix/sec which is better than Plasma or crt.
gears 5 looks sick on oled
I would like slo mo footage comparison between LCD I'm very intrigued by what u guys are finding
Yeah please that would be awesome!!!
I have an NEC 21" CRT and LG 165hz GSYNC LCD and at less than half the refresh the CRT is razor sharp in motion and way more responsive.
CRT just updates on a line by line basis. when you focus on your notebook which stands next to a crt you will notice lines coming down vertically. It is a laser, wrong term, that shoots the picture from the top to bottom left to right.
Because ctr works by shooting a linear laser from top to bottom they dont have motion blur by pixel persistance, a problem very common in high refresh rate monitors, ussuallt solved by black frame insertion, putting a black frame in between every frame, but it doesn't get rid off of all of it
@Digital Foundry I can confirm back when I was working at EA as a 3D artist I held on to my two DELL 24 inch CRT monitors for years well into the change over to LCD because the LCD just looked so bad, so much ghosting, terrible viewing angle, over sharp pixels, etc. After many years I eventually let them go for DELL LCD after they got to an acceptable visual point. We also moved desks a lot at EA and moving those two CRT monitors was painful.
A large part of the magic inherent in the late 90's early 2000's gaming and general PC experience was due to CRT's.
I always wondered why we are pushing for more and more higher resolutions when we havn't mastered 480p lol
Sat watching this in my office surrounded by at least 6 CRT’s, great video. 👍
FFS these monitors are already stupidly expensive used.... (When you find one) so well done on now doubling their value :( - EDIT - After countless idiots mentioning low prices I feel like I need to clarify that I'm talking about the Sony monitor used in this video 🙄
I had the chance to get this large Sony back in 2011 for I think around 600 bucks (most of that was shipping). I was tempted, very tempted, especially since I had the 17" version of it up until that point, because LCDs were just all rubbish in terms of image quality, latency, viewing angles and so on. Instead, after months and months of searching, I went with a less backbreaking Dell U2410f, which still weighs a metric ton, but didn't take up a whole desk on its own and came close enough. Same res, same size and a lot of ports were difficult to argue with. I'm still using it as a secondary screen, just got its larger sibling a while ago and it is great, even though I know it's not as brilliant as those old Sony CRTs.
I've been on the lookout for the Sony GDM-FW900 and other CRTs for the last 7 years or so. Traveling for work in the US from California, Texas, Washington State; never being able to find them short of people scalping for over $1000 for less quality monitors you can find used for free - $50 in other areas. I know this video will increase the prices drastically in areas where they are normally sold, but I hope it gets some people to check their storage and the like to get more of them in circulation.
Yes and no, Those deemed "legendary" like the one they have are stupid expensive but I managed to snag a 4:3 ratio CRT that allows me to play 1024x768@144hz and 2048x1536@75hz (and everything in between and below 768) for about 30 bucks. My friend got a 16:10 ratio max 1920x1200@75hz for about 100 bucks. You just gotta be patient and check craigslist, r/crtgaming and facebook marketplace every now and then and I think you can find a mid range crt that will get you 1024x768@120hz pretty easily
Plus getting spare parts and repairing them isn't as easy as it use to be. They are a fun curiosity, but totally not worth spending the insane shipping costs. Plus unless they are packed perfectly, damage is likely.
Lol expensive? Theyre like 5 bucks each on yard sales or random cafe shops that want to get rid of them. In fact i couldnt be assed to sell it just put it on a trash bin and it was gone in an hour.
I put my Xbox 360 on S-Video and played RDR on my Sony Trinitron CRT and the colors and smoothness of the textures and animations were amazing.
I've always said old PS1 games have been ruined by LCD. That's not how they were meant to be played.
Indeed. Even PS2 looks amazing on CRT. Not so much on LCD screens even with proper upscalers.
I dunno about that. I use My launch PS3 for PS2 games and they look fine through HDMI. It was great the launch PS3 was fully backwards compatible. Such a joke they removed that feature.
Launch ps3 here too. Looks fine on hdmi but better on crt :)
Ps1 had an official lcd screen accessory
@@rubenjorge13 It was 4:3 and low resolution, small screen too. Try play ps1 on >20 inch hd widescreen lcd.
Sony where doing spectacular Tvs and monitors when Samsung/LG/Philips where all doing coffee and washing machines.
I wish more people used Sony TV's, they are just above and beyond the competition.
I can't find one anywhere, though. I remember missing my 24" CRT after switching to an LCD flat panel. Games just felt more alive.
6:00 Wait did you just say you're using a 2080 ti? How exactly are you doing that? It was in my understanding that GPUs have stopped having any sort of analog output a few years back so in order to have this setup you'd have to have a converter right? A digital to analog converter would add some latency.
Extremely late reply but a digital to analog converter only adds about 5 lines of latency, which is equivalent to 0.17ms.
You really can't see the difference in real time.
Digital to analog converter in what resolution? I only know with 1080 output
In fact, expensive crt had digital inputs - probably this one also has: put an adapter on hdmi / dp and that's it.
@@Biriadan FYI 5 lines of latency (presumably at 60fps) would be .017ms, not 0.17ms.
0.17ms would be about 1 frame at 60fps.
I have this monitor, it’s magical.
I'll buy it for a dollar
Sony CRT fan HERE...I changed to LED TV in 2014, and I miss CRT immediately:
CRT dosen' t required so called native resolution material. You can't tell the actual diemension of the video, it' s like they have a ultimate upscalar built-in.
CRT has excellent black level and grayscale control, high contrast, color reproduction is true to life.
Handle motion, various frame without any issue, unlike modern TV.
Used to owned a Profeel KV-32HV50 for a short period, best tv I've ever seen. Feed them with a HTPC, Watching "the Ring", Sadako scare the shit out of you. Playing live concert, the spotlight will shining right to you. Watching BBC documentary, those animals look living in the tv.
Still remembered I had pause the video, put my hand at the screen, try to feel the texture of the astronaut shinny helmet. So silly, no kidding.
rechange your 2014 LCD for a top of the line 2019 OLED and you will laugh at your first sentence
@@alerey4363 OLEDs are garbage. Looks beautiful but has burn in issues. That technology is scam. They can do better but won't sell us the best product, due to money milking.
@@Halo3VT just wait 1 more year and OLED will replace todays LCD with much more quality; just as the first LCDs were crappy 4:3 blurry screens and evolved to be panoramic ultra realistic pristine super contrast and super black same will be with OLED
i'm an happy owner of a Sony FW-900 as daily driver!
The combination of appreciation about what we lost in transition to LCD and the tribute to this very model makes me feel sooo proud!
Man, I really want to try one. But what about resolution/colors, isn't it inferior? How does that compare vs. motion?
@@GreyWarden_ out of the box you can reach up to 1440p and 80hz refresh. if you lower to 1080p you can reach 100hz and if you lower to 900p you can use stereoscopic glasses in 120hz!
About colors, CRTs are analog, they virtually have no color spacing limits. Contrast is the only real loss i can think of, you won't reach as bright to a modern LCD!
@@andrealotito4412 Yes I own one aswell, and for daylight LCD is much better. But in the night and with dark content CRT is much better
@@andrealotito4412 I see, is your CRT easy to find on eBay? Are there any good alternatives? I really wanna try it.
Oh, and how does refresh rate compares to LCD? Say 100hz CRT vs 144-165hz LCD?
Lucky you!
When I was a kid, I found that low-res photo looked much sharper if i set my screen to 800x600, rather than scale it full screen on 1024x768. I asked people online, and they tell me that's not sharper, it's both blurry no matter how you scale it up. (It's late 2000, most people were on LCD)
You answered my question 10 years later. Thank you very much