Tv Set Versus Computer Screen

[Magic Sam]

Hi,

I'm facing some kind of a dilemma today

I'm no longer watching TV, therefore my 10 years old, huge, heavy, dust collecting (but very well working, high picture quality) CRT TV set is of "little" use these days...

Yet, I still need something to display the image output of the following stuff: an hacked Wii, a Minimig, a Dreamcast, a Megadrive/Genesis, optionally my laptop, and the Pandora, in "two months"

I'd like to save some room in my small 25 square meters flat, and being able to put my laptop and that new screen on the same piece of furniture would be nice !

What would you advise me to buy ? A flat TV set (Plasma, LCD, LED, you name it), or a flat computer screen ?

I know the Minimig and the Dreamcast are compatible with computer screens, but how is the Megadrive/Genesis performing on newer displays ?

Thanks for your help !

Bye, Magic Sam

 

[mindlord]

What would you advise me to buy ? A flat TV set (Plasma, LCD, LED, you name it), or a flat computer screen ?

I know the Minimig and the Dreamcast are compatible with computer screens, but how is the Megadrive/Genesis performing on newer displays ?

Thanks for your help !

Bye, Magic Sam

There's not much difference between a flat panel TV and a flat panel monitor these days. The TV will have an HD tuner built in, and the monitor will not. The addition of an HD tuner usually also means lots of composite/DVI/HDMI connections for all your stuff. That's about the limit to it. Using a good quality flat panel TV as a computer monitor usually works out great as long as you get a quality unit.
* 1080p is a must if you're looking at TV's
* high contrast ratio is up to you, if you're sensitive to it you'll need something really high like 20000:1, if it hasn't bothered you in the pas you can get away with as low as 2000:1. Watch out for devices claiming crazy contrast ratios like 1000000:1 - That's marketspeak - Do your homework in this department if having the blackest black possible is important to you.
* if you have the money 120hz helps quite a bit, but I consider it a luxury.
* LCD. LED, Plasma is a hot button debate - I personally go for LCD because it's the significantly cheaper technology, Plasma has longevity problems, and LED while brilliant, sharp, high contrast and awesome. Is very expensive, and also has longevity problems.

I actually opted for a HD CRT rear projection TV for my living room to hook my computer and video games to. Being CRT it has it's own set of problems, but it works great for my video gaming needs. It behaves like an old school CRT when it needs to for the PS2, Genesis, and friends.

It's been my experience that any gaming technology PS2 or older looks like pixel vomit when hooked to a LCD TV. I can't say how well it does on Plasma or LED. Those systems are designed to take advantage of the native resolution, interlace, and scan rate of CRT tv's, and where those elements are taken out of the equation, you get some really ugly artifacting. My nephew actually keeps a small (19 inch) CRT tv in his room just for his older systems. It really is that bad.

If anyone has any suggestions of devices to pass old systems through to clean up the image for LCD's I'd like to hear about it.

 

[Magic Sam]

Hi mindlord !

The TV will have an HD tuner built in, and the monitor will not. The addition of an HD tuner usually also means lots of composite/DVI/HDMI connections for all your stuff. That's about the limit to it. Using a good quality flat panel TV as a computer monitor usually works out great as long as you get a quality unit.

The HD tuner would be worthless to me, as I don't really plan to watch TV on that new screen. The monitor seems to be the best option in my situation, don't you think ?

* 1080p is a must if you're looking at TV's

No I'm not

* high contrast ratio is up to you, if you're sensitive to it you'll need something really high like 20000:1, if it hasn't bothered you in the pas you can get away with as low as 2000:1. Watch out for devices claiming crazy contrast ratios like 1000000:1 - That's marketspeak - Do your homework in this department if having the blackest black possible is important to you.

My old CRT TV, a Thomson "blackpearl", has a very high picture quality IMHO, and is very good at rendering levels of black. I'd be quiet disappointed if a newer product could not match that quality...

I actually opted for a HD CRT rear projection TV for my living room to hook my computer and video games to. Being CRT it has it's own set of problems, but it works great for my video gaming needs. It behaves like an old school CRT when it needs to for the PS2, Genesis, and friends.

How big (in depth) and heavy is your new TV set please ? I'm looking at something thiner than my actual one (48 cm from the front to the rear), that's the main reason why I'm looking at a replacement.

Bye and thanks for your help, Magic Sam

 

[WizardStan]

My old CRT TV, a Thomson "blackpearl", has a very high picture quality IMHO, and is very good at rendering levels of black. I'd be quiet disappointed if a newer product could not match that quality...

Be prepared to be quite disappointed then. High contrast ratios on CRTs are easy compared to LCD TVs.

 

[mindlord]

Hi mindlord !
The HD tuner would be worthless to me, as I don't really plan to watch TV on that new screen. The monitor seems to be the best option in my situation, don't you think ?

The main reason for looking at TV's is because flat panels designed as monitors usually only come with VGA/DVI inputs and rarely provide any HDMI or composite inputs for attaching devices that aren't computers. That's not to say that there aren't some monitors out there with additional inputs, but they aren't nearly as common. TV's always have additional inputs.

My old CRT TV, a Thomson "blackpearl", has a very high picture quality IMHO, and is very good at rendering levels of black. I'd be quiet disappointed if a newer product could not match that quality...

It's the difference in technologies. LCD and friends have always had contrast issuses, though not so much anymore as the technology as improved. As long as you aren't looking at bargain basement models - you're probably going to find the contrast ratio on most modern devices to be acceptable.

How big (in depth) and heavy is your new TV set please ? I'm looking at something thiner than my actual one (48 cm from the front to the rear), that's the main reason why I'm looking at a replacement.

My living room TV is big screen floor model, 147cm high, 147cm wide, 70 or so cm deep. It's suprisingly light though and two fat guys can carry it with ease. It's mostly air inside.

HD CRT type TVs are a rare a dying breed, and you'd probably have a hard time finding one that meets your needs exactly. They don't exist in 1080p - for example, just 1080i. There are other options, but I don't know how well PS2's back look on them, like DLP. It really is a matter of size to technology to budget.

I have to say though, even though I have to use it in 720p for computing. Sitting back on the couch with a wireless keyboard and mouse, on a huge screen several feet away... it's the good life.

 

[Javacat]

You give no budget, so I'm going to assume that there isn't one, in which case I say get a Dell Ultrasharp 3008WFP! It should meet all of your requirements

TBH, for the stuff you are wanting it for, nothing currently available (and I'd say under a grand) is going to beat your CRT screen. Other than the Wii (and maybe the Dreamcast), they will all look pretty bad.

 

[Mr B]

Pretty much no LCD / Plasma has the black of a cheap CRT, sadly.
An issue i've run in to, i cant seam to find a LCD/Plasma TV of reasonable quality with the ability to run Amigas video signals. The composite i think is 14'ish kHz, DB23M RGB signal from 15,6 kHz.

PAL 320×256 - 1280×512 50 Hz, 15.60 kHz
NTSC 320×200 - 1280×400 60 Hz, 15.72 kHz
Euro36 320×200 - 1280×400 73 Hz, 15.76 kHz
A2024 1024×1024 15 Hz, 15.72 kHz

DblPAL 320×512 - 640×1024 50 Hz, 29.45 kHz
DblNTSC 320×400 - 640×800 59 Hz, 29.20 kHz
Multiscan 640×480 - 640×960 60 Hz, 31.44 kHz
Euro72 640×400 - 640×800 70 Hz, 31.43 kHz
Super72 400×300 - 800×600 72 Hz, 24.62 kHz

It's no supprice that Amiga DOS games typically doesn't let you choose, and use the lowest settings, meaning 320x200 or 256 50-60Hz, and at 15.6-15.75kHz signal. So far no LCD / plasma i've tried accepts this as a valid over Scart. Some works with the composite video, but thats way to limited...

Buying a new telly is made impossible when you cling to old values.
:- )
B!

 

[SomeGuy99]

I say keep your old telly. Those old games were designed for it.

Personally, I don't even own a HD set.

 

[amishaziz]

If you have enough clear wall space, paint a silver rectangle, and get a projector, they have a good selection of inputs.

 

[Mr B]

A projector has just as bad, or worse, contrast as a LCD/Plasma, making the black more gray, then the CRT's do. Oh, and they suck in daylight...
B!

 

[lulzfish]

A projector has just as bad, or worse, contrast as a LCD/Plasma, making the black more gray, then the CRT's do. Oh, and they suck in daylight...
B!

And they're way too big to be used for any normal occasion. You'd be looking up all the time.

 

[DaveC]

Hi,

I'm facing some kind of a dilemma today

I'm no longer watching TV, therefore my 10 years old, huge, heavy, dust collecting (but very well working, high picture quality) CRT TV set is of "little" use these days...

Yet, I still need something to display the image output of the following stuff: an hacked Wii, a Minimig, a Dreamcast, a Megadrive/Genesis, optionally my laptop, and the Pandora, in "two months"

I'd like to save some room in my small 25 square meters flat, and being able to put my laptop and that new screen on the same piece of furniture would be nice !

What would you advise me to buy ? A flat TV set (Plasma, LCD, LED, you name it), or a flat computer screen ?

I know the Minimig and the Dreamcast are compatible with computer screens, but how is the Megadrive/Genesis performing on newer displays ?

Thanks for your help !

Bye, Magic Sam

First there really is no "LED TV". when they say "LED" they are talking about an LCD TV with an LED backlight instead of an LCD TV with a fluorescent bulb backlight. By the same method they should call those "Fluorescent TVs"

Older systems look like pure crap when viewed on HD TVs though. It must be the scaling algorythm they use that makes them look blurry and at the same time blocky.

Old systems will look better on CRTs as they will run at their native resolution.

 

[Orion4874]

Yeah, even not so old consoles look like crap on HD screens. I have my PS2 hooked up to a HD NEC monitor and it!s pixelated as hell! I know you want one now but I recently read an article on Engadget about a guy that found a new way to manufacture OLED's dirt cheap. A few years and they'll be around the same price as LCD's and Plasma's.

 

[Mr B]

I'm not understanding how you figure OLED tv's would be better for old consoles. The issue is that the higher resolution of todays screens make for large square pixels, making everything look darn ugly. It doesn't matter what tech is used to display it, what does matter is if there is a good scaler, that instead of blowing up every single pixel adjusts for diagonals and makes for a less blocky image. A scaler with FSAA that looks your old games look good, kinda... And you could put that in any old tech, really.
B!

 

[gp32rich]

Ah! What you need is an emulator capable of outputting HDMI .. XBox? PC? Mac?
Surprised no-one mentioned that

Then you can get whatever screen (TV for a good variety of inputs and choice of screen size, monitor to limit it to DVI/HDMI only)

 

[sam fisher]

I've recently replaced my second 19" monitor with a 32" TV which I now also use for my Xbox 360.

 

[Orion4874]

I'm not understanding how you figure OLED tv's would be better for old consoles. The issue is that the higher resolution of todays screens make for large square pixels, making everything look darn ugly. It doesn't matter what tech is used to display it, what does matter is if there is a good scaler, that instead of blowing up every single pixel adjusts for diagonals and makes for a less blocky image. A scaler with FSAA that looks your old games look good, kinda... And you could put that in any old tech, really.
B!

Well, on OLED's each pixel displays the full color spectrum unlike Lcd's for example(not sure about plasmas). Higher refresh rates and contrast ratios as well. I also seem to remember reading that the pixels in an OLED are smaller compared to other techs? Of course you'll still get some pixelation due to the resolutions but it wouldn't be as bad.

For the heck of it here's the article I mentioned earlier(as off topic as it is). http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/31/researchers-developing-oleds-as-cheap-as-newspapers/

 

[lulzfish]

Well, on OLED's each pixel displays the full color spectrum unlike Lcd's for example(not sure about plasmas). Higher refresh rates and contrast ratios as well.

Maybe you mean that OLED and CRT both generate their own light, whereas LCD can only filter existing light (either fluorescent or LED), which tends to make blacks into grey, reducing the contrast ratio.

Or you're thinking of RGB subpixels, which as far as I know, every display technology uses. Aside from maybe DLP projectors / projection displays.

 

[DaveC]

I'm not understanding how you figure OLED tv's would be better for old consoles. The issue is that the higher resolution of todays screens make for large square pixels, making everything look darn ugly. It doesn't matter what tech is used to display it, what does matter is if there is a good scaler, that instead of blowing up every single pixel adjusts for diagonals and makes for a less blocky image. A scaler with FSAA that looks your old games look good, kinda... And you could put that in any old tech, really.
B!

Well, on OLED's each pixel displays the full color spectrum unlike Lcd's for example(not sure about plasmas). Higher refresh rates and contrast ratios as well. I also seem to remember reading that the pixels in an OLED are smaller compared to other techs? Of course you'll still get some pixelation due to the resolutions but it wouldn't be as bad.

For the heck of it here's the article I mentioned earlier(as off topic as it is). http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/31/researchers-developing-oleds-as-cheap-as-newspapers/

OLED will look better than plasma but still will be blocky.

The reason is that CRTs are always 1:1 pixel mapped. CRT TVs can adjust on the fly for different scan rates and one game pixel is always 1 CRT pixel. The size of the pixel is just changed. Plus CRT TV dots are rounded on the edges (actually PC monitors have a higher scan rate and the pixels were more square due to the finer dot pitch so low res games looked blocky there too). LCDs, Plasma etc are fixed sized pixels so the only way to get the different sizes is to multiplex pixels and scale and filter. Many times this makes lower res things look "overcooked" as well as blocky.

 

[Orion4874]

Well, on OLED's each pixel displays the full color spectrum unlike Lcd's for example(not sure about plasmas). Higher refresh rates and contrast ratios as well.

Maybe you mean that OLED and CRT both generate their own light, whereas LCD can only filter existing light (either fluorescent or LED), which tends to make blacks into grey, reducing the contrast ratio.

Yeah that's what I meant but you said it better.