How many of you haven't fallen for the LCD meme?
I am thinking of going back to CRTs, I am tired of this shit tier image quality
What are some good CRT monitors that are made in [current year]?
>>53467852
CRT monitor is to LCD what vinyls are to CDs
>>53467852
The only real reason you can have to go back to CRT is the fact that there is no display lag on them. Or you could just buy a decent LED screen with minimal display lag.
![[Coalgirls]_Mai_Otome_06_(960x720_Blu-Ray_FLAC)_[C1442B2A].mkv_snapshot_00.54_[2010.05.07_02.24.42].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/q0OLCAF.jpg "[Coalgirls]_Mai_Otome_06_(960x720_Blu-Ray_FLAC)_[C1442B2A].mkv_snapshot_00.54_[2010.05.07_02.24.42].jpg")
>>53467852
made in [current year]
>>53467916
CRT at any resolution looks better than LCD at the same resolution, they are too bulky though so not worth it
>you will never own an FW900
>>53467852
>i took the bait
>but you aint getting a pic
stop buying $99 LCD specials from walmart.
>>53467916
Playing old games with LCD is pretty shitty also
>CRT
Enjoy eye cancer. What's next, vinyl records will come back into style?
>>53468472
>eye cancer
please elaborate
I roll a Viewsonic A90f, it's pretty nice. I use 1280x1024 @ 75Hz with newer computers, 1024x768 @ 100Hz for my retro PC. It can go up to 1600x1200 @ 60Hz, but the flicker bothers me at that low refresh rate so I'd prefer to cut back on resolution.
monitor on the right looks better tho
Just consider for a moment that the Sony FW900 cost $2400 originally (IIRC) and weighs around 100 lbs.
My 144Hz monitor cost me $280 and weighs less than 10 lbs.
As much as I'd love to go back to CRTs, I don't have the money for it.
>>53467916
>The only real reason you can have to go back to CRT is the fact that there is no display lag on them
High refresh rate + low input lag + decent color + viewing angle + very low ghosting/motion blur
No LCD will give you all of those. For the strobed effect that CRTs create, you have to basically give up on good color.
>>53468987
>>53468987
>High refresh rate + low input lag + decent color + viewing angle
Mine has those, I'm happy with that.
>bought r9 390
>has no analog output
>can't use my 21" CRT
>integrated intelHD 4600 can only output 1600x1200@60hz instead of 1600x1200@95
I love this CRT yet I can't use it anymore
I can use it at 1280x1024@95 but it isn't as sharp
just kill me senpai
>>53468686
CRT burns your eyes after long usage
>>53469064
/v/ is that way >>>/v/
>>53468987
Don't forget the energy waste per month as well.
Really let's cut the crap and say why we're all here:
>The only real reason why you use a CRT in 2016 is because it's the height of the irony and special snowflake age and you want to pretend to be superior to all those "LCD normies"
>>53467852
How many of you haven't fallen for the CRT meme?
I'm thinking of going to LCDs, they don't weigh a ton, they don't have cancer-causing chemicals in them, they can fit on my desk, a decent non-shit panel can blow any CRT out of the water, they don't draw a ton of power and produce a ton of heat, etc etc.
>High refresh rate + low input lag + decent color + viewing angle + very low ghosting/motion blur
You mean like pretty much every decent IPS panel built in the past 5 years?
>>53469128
There's literally no reason to go back to CRT other than the meme factor.
>>53469075
How does it burn my eyes?
I used CRTs for almost 15 years, since a kid, and shitty ones, well the last one was kinda decent, an LG Flatron which supported 85Hz, but even that one was starting to make my eyes/head hurt after longs hours lately, so I switched to a shitty LCD with worse image quality sure, but it doesn't hurt me nearly as much and got used to it anyway.
My health > Image quality.
I'll wait for OLEDs to become standard and cheap., no rush.
>>53469151
Magic and shit.
>>53469063
Why don't you buy an adapter ?
>>53469168
an active adapter would generate lag
the purpose of the CRT is no lag
>>53469034
>Mine has those
Your LCD or CRT?
I've never seen an LCD with good color that could strobe the backlight.
>>53469111
>Don't forget the energy waste per month as well
I live in Ontario, so that's not a big deal.
CRTs are just like vacuum tube amplifiers (excluding guitar amps). There's a real perceivable difference that only a very small number of people will actually care about.
>>53469128
>You mean like pretty much every decent IPS panel built in the past 5 years?
the 120+hz ones don't stobe the backlight, which makes a big difference.
IPS also has this annoying edge glow when you look at black things in a dark room.
input lag also tends to be really bad on anything that's not a gaming branded 120+hz one.
>>53469151
X-rays.
>>53469216
>small number of people
Gee look it's the same shit audioturd hipsters say.
>"I can just hear better than people"
>"I can just see better than people"
The sad part about this is in every comparison and picture of this the CRT is always some $3,000 high end thing and the LCD is just some consumer class that costs 30.
>>53469216
>input lag also tends to be really bad on anything that's not a gaming branded 120+hz one.
has input lag even been a problem for pc monitors in the last +3 years or so?
even TVs are starting to get comparable to pc monitors in that regard now days.
>want to use my crt as a second monitor with my 30" dell monitor.
>video card only has a dac on the connector I use for the dell
>hdmi dac dongle connectors only do 1600x1200@60hz
The monitor is capable of that res at 75hz
>>53469296
>has input lag even been a problem for pc monitors in the last +3 years or so
I haven't bought a monitor in 5 years, so I don't really know. I assume most people don't care that much, so anything not branded for gaming probably isn't optimized for it.
>>53469292
with audiophiles it's less that they can hear better than other people and more that they were willing to buy a pair of $400 headphones, which sound drastically better than a pair of ipod earbuds. There are also a lot of people that just don't care all that much.
>>53469322
>mfw I'm enjoying 1600x1200@85hz CRT which I paid 10€ for
CRTs will not be truly beaten in every category by flat panels until 120Hz 4K OLED monitors are a thing.
>>53469511
1080p 120hz OLED beats a CRT
>>53469511
but CRTs are beaten in the resolution category.
Also, why only 120hz? OLED can go beyond that.
>>53469357
>so anything not branded for gaming probably isn't optimized for it.
I haven't seen a non-gaming monitor having a listed response time of over 5 ms in a couple of years now, and even those $100 TN monitors you see in local warehouses have around 2 ms of listed response time.
I don't expect those numbers to be accurate but I can't tell a difference when it comes to input lag between new monitors these days, and that is coming from a guy who is picky about the responsiveness and motion quality of his monitors. I think the 60hz refresh rate eats up most of the input lag in modern monitors.
I can however notice it on certain older monitors and especially TVs. I've worked quite a bit with PC service so I have had my fair share of trying out several different setups.
>>53469732
>listed response time of over 5 ms
gray to gray response is not the same thing as input latency. It's a measure of ghosting.
Look at some PRAD review to see how latency actually is.
It's definitely not for the meme factor. I still use this beast of a monitor because I'm too poor to afford the newest graphics card that can run everything at native resolution. On LCD monitors anything other than native resolution looks like shit.
>>53467866
worse in every single way?
>>53470201
>worse in every single way?
If you can't hear the MP3 compression artifacts in a high hat strike, then your headphones suck.
>>53470412
flac
marginally less stupid than vinyl
>>53470474
Does anyone sell CDs burned with FLAC? Are CDs big enough to fit an album encoded to FLAC?
>>53467852
>entire image is blue
>better image quality
You can have your contrast and your response times. But you will never have good color reproduction.
Imo buy an OLED, best of all worlds with no tradeoff (except currently lifespan and cost)
>>53468361
im thinking about getting one for about 25$
