Support NeoGAF

[Orin GA]

Im looking to get a new TV as well and have decided to get a HD CRT. Sorry Klee, not waiting for nano tube Ive bee looking at the Tau series because of the price and the Sony XBR because people seem to swear by it. Ive looked at the specifications and they seem very similiar. Of course I dont know all the Jargon outside of the Inputs and Sound so I may be missing something here.



Panasonic CT-34WX15 34" Aspect Ratio 16:9 Silver Tau Series PureFlat HDTV: $1,199.95

http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wc...ategory=Tau™ Series PureFlat TVs&displayTab=S





34" Widescreen XBR® HDTVKD-34XBR960N: $1899.00

http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INT...6"&ProductSKU=KD34XBR960N&TabName=specs&var2=


What is the difference that makes them so different in price?

 

[Deg]

Wrong forum.
edit: Actually whatever you prefer. Not much difference between the two. Sony has an extra comonent input.

 

[Kung Fu Jedi]

Yay! Another HDTV thread. Maybe we need a forum dedicated just to this!

 

[DaCocoBrova]

I have the Panny and it doesn't upconvert to 720p like the Sony does. The Panny looks better. I can't stand that Sony from an aesthetic stand point.

Are you willing to part w/ $600 for upconversion?

 

[urk]

I answered you in the thread you originally posted this in.

You should go and see the two sets in person. bring your own DVD and ask them to set it up (for that kindof money, a salesman should oblige you).

The Sony is much, much heavier. Tap the glass on it and you can hear why. Great televisions. I'm not familiar with the Panasonic, but I can't imagine it will beat out the Sony. That thing is the best HDTV going right now (picture quality) for that kind of money.

 

[ourumov]

As I said I believe the huge price is due to the Super Fine Pitch tube that improves contrast and pixels per scanline.

 

[Lord Error]

XBR960 has higher horizontal resolution. It's the 'super fine pitch' CRT, and the only TV that offers such high resolution (together with XS955 model that uses the same tube).

If that's too much money for you, go with 34HS420. Really nice tube TV too, second best there is after XBR960 basically, but not as high horizontal res. Should cost about the same as that Panasonic.

Avoid Panny CRTs as they don't support 720p signal (nothing to do with upconversion, they flat out don't support 720p signal that they'll be getting from your future next gen consoles)

 

[IJoel]

I currently own a Tau and will avoid Panasonic when I purchase my next HDTV.

Customer Service = horrible
Geometry leaves a lot to be desired.
Options menu is average.
Panasonic usually doesn't even support upscaling from 720p to 1080i on most of their sets. It just doesn't support it at all.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

^^
You have the 30" or the 34"?

For that much $$, he can go w/ a non-CRT/direct view and almost double his screen size.

 

[Deg]

I have the Panny and it doesn't upconvert to 720p like the Sony does. The Panny looks better. I can't stand that Sony from an aesthetic stand point.

Are you willing to part w/ $600 for upconversion?

Does it? Isnt 720p upconverted to 1080i?

I currently own a Tau and will avoid Panasonic when I purchase my next HDTV.

Customer Service = horrible
Geometry leaves a lot to be desired.
Options menu is average.
Panasonic usually doesn't even support upscaling from 720p to 1080i on most of their sets. It just doesn't support it at all.

They want you to buy their Plasma or LCD

 

[urk]

Are you willing to part w/ $600 for upconversion?

CRT's don't upconvert. They are analog devices. There is no degredation from one resolution to another unless you have a cheap set.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Avoid Panny CRTs as they don't support 720p signal.

I wouldn't worry about that these days. My high-def cable box has a great scaler, and I bet that 360 and PS3 do as well.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

CRT's don't upconvert. They are analog devices. There is no degredation from one resolution to another unless you have a cheap set.

What are you talking about? I said nothing about degredation. It's a CRT and does not support 720p natively, so it converts it to 1080i.

Where's the confusion?

 

[ourumov]

As I told in another thread the XBR960 is a great set...It's a pitty it isn't available on Europe... There should be better deals though...

 

[Lord Error]

I wouldn't worry about that these days. My high-def cable box has a great scaler, and I bet that 360 and PS3 do as well.

Console graphics are more 'delicate' than a video feed. I'd rather not have them being resampled twice before they get displayed. HD video feed has 'perfect' image quality, so scaling it here and there may not matter as much. If next gen consoles had 16x AA on at all times, then I wouldn't worry.

What are you talking about? I said nothing about degredation. It's a CRT and does not support 720p natively, so it converts it to 1080i.

Panny CRT doesn't covert it to 1080i. You get a black screen if you feed that TV with 720p signal.

 

[urk]

What are you talking about? I said nothing about degredation. It's a CRT and does not support 720p natively, so it converts it to 1080i.

Where's the confusion?

Well, CRT's use a ray to display images. I guess I am confused because you are using terms that apply only to fixed pixel devices. Native resolution refers to the exact number of pixels present in a display, while CRT's, being analog, write in terms of lines of resolution.

The Sony in question, to my understanding, has 1400 lines of horizontal resolution. Why would they force the set, which could easily display 720p without problem, to upconvert? It would actually be more work to implement.

Clue me in.

 

[Leatherface]

I think all of you should have an online knife fight!! =O

 

[mr2mike]

well it's not just a matter of lines of resolution with CRTs, there's also the horizntal refresh rate.

Consider that in the case of a 720p image, the beam has to scan across the screen 720x60 times per second, or 43200 times a second, while in the case of a 1080i signal, it only has to do it 540x60, or 32400 times per second.

The difference in control electronics for the beam's control are significant when trying to accomodate for such a difference

 

[Lord Error]

urk, CRTs even though analog in nature have physical limitations on how many pixels they can show per line and how many lines they can show. Thus, they have the 'native' resolution so to speak. It's just that their phosphor traids combined into a larger pixels can make any lower resolution look really good, which is not the case on something like LCD.

CRTs have finite number of phosphor triads on the screen, and there's also the pitch of the apperture grille they have (or shadow mask, depending on manufacturer). Those two things are physically limiting the horizontal and vertical resolution.

Also, if you take a close look, you can see that HDTV CRTs have a bit more dense triads and grille at the center of the screen than they do at sides. All these things are making it hard to say what exactly resolution the TV can display unless manufacturer can provide that data.

as for 1400 res on XBR TV, it's debatable. Some claim some numbers don't add up and that it's more likely they can show 1200 res. Still, that's better than next best HD CRTs which show around 1000 horizontal.

Vertical res on all Sony TVs is around 650-680 pixels if I remember correctly. For that reason they resample 720p and 1080i signal to lower resolution before displaying them (this actually should help next gen games become more anti-aliased

CRT TVs don't display 720p in progressive mode because that would require faster vertical scan than when displaying their maximum interlaced resolution. The good thing is at least on these Sony CRTs, the scanline density is big in their HD interlaced mode, and they use high speed scanning, so even though the interlace is technically there, it looks nothing like 480i interlace. It's very hard to tell the image is not in fact progressive on a typical video or game footage.

 

[urk]

urk, CRTs even though analog in nature have physical limitations on how many pixels they can show per line and how many lines they can show. Thus, they have the 'native' resolution so to speak. It's just that their phosphor traids combined into a larger pixels can make any lower resolution look really good, which is not the case on something like LCD.

CRTs have finite number of phosphor triads on the screen, and there's also the pitch of the apperture grille they have (or shadow mask, depending on manufacturer). Those two things are physically limiting the horizontal and vertical resolution.

Also, if you take a close look, you can see that HDTV CRTs have a bit more dense triads and grille at the center of the screen than they do at sides. All these things are making it hard to say what exactly resolution the TV can display unless manufacturer can provide that data.

as for 1400 res on XBR TV, it's debatable. Some claim some numbers don't add up and that it's more likely they can show 1200 res. Still, that's better than next best HD CRTs which show around 1000 horizontal.

Vertical res on all Sony TVs is around 650-680 pixels if I remember correctly. For that reason they resample 720p and 1080i signal to lower resolution before display them (this actually should help next gen games become more anti-aliased

CRT TVs don't display 720p in progressive mode because that would require faster vertical scan than when displaying their maximum interlaced resolution.

That's what I was looking for. Thanks.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Console graphics are more 'delicate' than a video feed. I'd rather not have them being resampled twice before they get displayed.

All the more reason to have the game console convert to the native resolution of the display device.

Probably less likely to lag, too.

I wouldn't feed a native 1080i set a 720p signal unless I had to, or if the source had real shitty conversion.

 

[DaCocoBrova]

Panny CRT doesn't covert it to 1080i. You get a black screen if you feed that TV with 720p signal.

I said several times that the Panny doesn't do 720p (I should know since I have one). I was talking about the Sony taking it up to 1080i.

 

[Lord Error]

All the more reason to have the game console convert to the native resolution of the display device.

Probably less likely to lag, too.

Yeah, but 1080i (1920x1080) is not a native resolution of CRT TVs. It's much less than that, so it would first get resampled in the console 720p -> 1080i then resampled again in the TV to the resolution it actually displays (depends from TV to TV).

If you feed it 720p, then it's only the TV doing one coversion to it's resolution.

Sony CRTs at least have no perceivable lag in this process btw. I can attest to that myself and many other people say so too.

That's what I was looking for. Thanks.

No problem, I added some more stuff to that post above in the meantime.

I said several times that the Panny doesn't do 720p (I should know since I have one). I was talking about the Sony taking it up to 1080i.

Sorry for misunderstanding.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Yeah, but 1080i (1920x1080) is not a native resolution of CRT TVs. It's much less than that, so it would first get resampled in the console 720p -> 1080i then resampled again in the TV to the resolution it actually displays (depends from TV to TV).

That is simply not true. Analog HDTVs (CRTs and RPTVs that are made from three CRTs) don't resample anything when showing 1080i. Any change in resolution from 1080i to the maximum display res is all a function of the analog bandwidth of the wideband video amplifier (plus the dot pitch of the shadow mask or aperture grille). This is a separate section of the processing and will occur every single time regardless of whether the source is 1080i or 720p. And it doesn't create artifacts as it is simply the analog process of rasterizing.

 

[davis]

the sony has the best image for a CRT, check out the HDTV avsforum CRT section the majority of tech geeks will tell you this. Just the price and Sony quality control problems are some things to be considered imo.

 

[Beer Monkey]

the sony has the best image for a CRT, check out the HDTV avsforum CRT section the majority of tech geeks will tell you this. Just the price and Sony quality control problems are some things to be considered imo.

I'd agree with that, and they are especially good for gamers because they don't lag and they still look pretty good when fed interlaced sources.

 

[dark10x]

I have the Panny and it doesn't upconvert to 720p like the Sony does. The Panny looks better. I can't stand that Sony from an aesthetic stand point.

Are you willing to part w/ $600 for upconversion?

Not a good suggestion. I initially took this route and ended up regretting it.

The Panny CRTs have terrible scaling capabilites and exhibited so many "tiny" flaws that drove me absolutely insane. In addition to this, the resolution is lower. The end result is simply a much lower quality picture.

I have lived with both a Panny and Sony CRT for quite a while now and I would never ever recommended the Panasonic over the Sony. The image quality on the Sony is just so far ahead of what Panasonic is doing no matter which display mode you might be using. The difference extends to the higher resolution areas. 1080i signals look considerably better on the Sony than on the Panny, no doubt about it.

 

[Lord Error]

That is simply not true. Analog HDTVs (CRTs and RPTVs that are made from three CRTs) don't resample anything when showing 1080i. Any change in resolution from 1080i to the maximum display res is all a function of the analog bandwidth of the wideband video amplifier (plus the dot pitch of the shadow mask or aperture grille). This is a separate section of the processing and will occur every single time regardless of whether the source is 1080i or 720p. And it doesn't create artifacts as it is simply the analog process of rasterizing.

How sure you are about this? With all the digital processors in these TVs I always assumed 1080i signal gets resampled down to a lower resolution. If you are right, there's only one digital resampling 720p -> 1080i taking place, be it in the console or in the TV... Still, I have to say that I'm very happy with how my TV does it, and that I don't have to worry about whether consoles will do it better or worse - I'll just pick whichever option looks or works better

 

[Beer Monkey]

How sure you are about this?

I understand very well how televisions are designed. There is no fixed effective resolution that a CRT-based television targets. In fact, the true horizontal resolution could vary based on the age of the set, what the temperature and humidity is, which production lot some of the capacitors in the amplifier came from...things are very different in the analog world, and CRT-based sets have a whole lot of analog in them.

That's not a criticism, I've got a 53" CRT-based RP HDTV and it has served me very well for the last few years. In many ways, CRT is still king.

 

[Stinkles]

Save some money, get a cheaper Sony. There are plenty of models to choose from. Lots of them are stunning.