My monitor is going out--Where should I buy a new CRT?

[Dave]

My monitor is currently rapidly shifting from white to various shades of off-white and yellow. (Compaq 7550 CRT)

How much longer can I expect it to last?

And what companies do you recommend for a CRT replacement? (I don't currently see the need to get a LCD, unless you can convince me.)

Note: It just stopped ( > 5 min) at a decidedly unhealthy shade of off-yellow.

[Pezzoni]

Do you mean somwhere to buy it from, or someone who makes them?

In the former case, it's a bit location specific... If you're based in the UK, then I'd personally reccomend www.ebuyer.com

In the latter, then I'm very happy with my Samsung monitor, and when it went on the blink, they replaced it promptly with no questions asked, all for free, with minimal inconvinience.

[Uraniun235]

I bought a refurbished 21" CRT a couple of years ago. They're comparatively pretty cheap these days. Make sure to get one with a Trinitron tube.

[Beowulf]

I like Viewsonic monitors

[Ar-Adunakhor]

I lean towards Samsung myself. Lots of options, great quality, respectable refresh rate, relatively low price, and I got the perfect black and silver theme to match my case. It is also quite rugged, and managed to survive a lightning strike right next to my house, (whereas my cable modem did not) and has very nice heat venting just in case you are in a cramped space.

In short, a very nice monitor all around. The only problem is when you start getting up to 19" and 21" inch they can get fairly bulky. That is a trait of all CRTs, though. I nonetheless prefer CRT monitors to LCDs, which can have myriad problems concerning intensive gaming and color display.

[FSTargetDrone]

In short, a very nice monitor all around. The only problem is when you start getting up to 19" and 21" inch they can get fairly bulky. That is a trait of all CRTs, though. I nonetheless prefer CRT monitors to LCDs, which can have myriad problems concerning intensive gaming and color display.

Is that still a problem these days, the LCD issues with gaming? I have a 3-year old Dell laptop with a widescreen display, and the games I do have installed on it don't look all that bad compared to the CRT on my main box, aside from looking slightly washed out. Then again, its native 1920 X 1200 resolution causes any games I can run on it to look "stretched" quite a bit when they are set to 1024 X 768. The bigger issue with the laptop is the crappy sound, but in any event, aren't the newer LCDs comparable to the best CRTs?

[Uraniun235]

There's been talk that some LCD screens actually introduce latency, such that when you move your mouse, it moves significantly later than it would with other screens.

Overall, response time and color accuracy aren't much of an issue any more, so long as you purchase a decent LCD monitor. If I had to buy a brand-new monitor, I'd probably grab an LCD myself, although if my 21" CRT burned out today I'd simply go grab myself another one for a couple hundred bucks.

The biggest advantage my CRT has to a comparably sized LCD is price, second biggest is not having to worry about any native resolution garbage.

[Stark]

Hey, I've got CRTs to SELL! A 19 and 21... never use the bloody things now, but you can't sell them for love OR money.

[Uraniun235]

I wish my desk was better suited to multi-monitor configurations. I have two 17s in addition to the 21 I have and it would be totally if I could throw together a triple-monitor display someday.

[Ar-Adunakhor]

Is that still a problem these days, the LCD issues with gaming? I have a 3-year old Dell laptop with a widescreen display, and the games I do have installed on it don't look all that bad compared to the CRT on my main box, aside from looking slightly washed out. Then again, its native 1920 X 1200 resolution causes any games I can run on it to look "stretched" quite a bit when they are set to 1024 X 768. The bigger issue with the laptop is the crappy sound, but in any event, aren't the newer LCDs comparable to the best CRTs?

No, though there have been huge leaps.

There are two main problems with LCDs and ghosting: hold time and response time. The response time has been getting better and better, (hence lessening the ghosting) but it is the hold time which is the barrier. Hold time refers to, essentially, the fact that LCDs retain their image after the input due to the nature of the crystals in the monitor. In contrast to this, the phosphors in CRTs discharge their energy quickly and fade to black until the next image hits, causing them to fluoresce again. This fufills the same role as a movie projector, allowing your brain to fill in the "motion" part. Now, the crystals remaining "on" in the LCD causes you to see a constant image, and because of that creates slurring (hah, new usage of that word!) in your mind. This is due to the fact it is not your brain stitching images interspaced with black together, (as with CRTs) but rather seeing the change between "frames" happen. So really, your brain is the reason ghosting happens, blame it.

Now to your question! The absolute best LCDs (basically lab rigs or tech demo rigs) can compete with CRTs, but the only reason for this is the massive processing power behind them. The huge amount of computing power stacked on these things boosts the frame rate to compensate for the sample-and-hold nature of the LCDs, jacking it up to the point there is no humanly percievable gap in the changes. This, of course, is completely unfeasable on a home computer... so ghosting remains a problem for our monitors.

However, there is yet one more solution! Flashing backlights. You see, if you flash the backlight on and off, you can replicate the "movie projector" effect of CRTs. There are two big problems with this, though. The first is that it does the exact same thing as a CRT set at around 60 Hz, creating flashing and headaches. The second is that it will burn out your backlight in half the usual time, as it is *constantly* being turned on and off to replicate the effect. Not only that, but the controller for this process is quite advanced, and drives up the cost of the machine too. Doubtless you see why this is not desirable? All the drawbacks of the old old low-refresh CRTs, higher price, and half the life of the monitor.

Well uh... this post is longer than I originally intended. If you really want to know, I can talk about the color washout on LCDs too, (which is another huge drawback, especially for graphics design and photo editing) but for now I will leave it at the ghosting problems.

[FSTargetDrone]

Well uh... this post is longer than I originally intended. If you really want to know, I can talk about the color washout on LCDs too, (which is another huge drawback, especially for graphics design and photo editing) but for now I will leave it at the ghosting problems.

No, please, go on. It's all very interesting.

One of my biggest "complaints" with the CRT I have now is its footprint. Aside from some weird issues where lately it seems it can't hold the refresh rate I want, the thing is more than 16 inches deep and throws off quite a bit of heat. I would take a slight picture quality downgrade if only to free up some desk space and cut power consumption!

[Stark]

My LCD is fast enough that while I noticed slight ghosting at high changerates than with my CRTs, I don't notice it anymore. FS2 is like the ultimate monitor test (black background, superbright weapons, huge rates of rotation) and I'd have to look to see the trails now. They are still there, though.

LCDs are very restrictive refresh/resolution, though. Games look like ass on my LCD if I have to drop the res from 12x9 for performance reasons.

[Pu-239]

Hey, what's wrong w/ free motion blur?

[Ar-Adunakhor]

No, please, go on. It's all very interesting.

One of my biggest "complaints" with the CRT I have now is its footprint. Aside from some weird issues where lately it seems it can't hold the refresh rate I want, the thing is more than 16 inches deep and throws off quite a bit of heat. I would take a slight picture quality downgrade if only to free up some desk space and cut power consumption!

Very well then.

There are four main attributes when dealing with the actual viewing of the monitor. These are: Accuracy/adjustability, resolution, contrast/brightness, and viewing angle.

When referring to accuracy and adjustability, I am referring to the ability of the monitor to reproduce the colors as output by the machine. All CRTs suffer from the fact that their cathode/anode/phosphor delivery system is suceptable to enviromental effects, such as humidity, temperature, or magnetic and electrical fields. You can even dramatically introduce this effect by bringing a magnet close to your screen... just make sure you either have a degausser or a degauss function on the monitor. Humidity and temperatures create less noticable effects, (and are usually shielded against) but they remain pertinent as they can cause the color of the entire monitor to vary. These are mainly failings of the CRT system, but can also be a failing of the analog information delivery system in the computer itself.

LCD monitors, on the other hand, do not suffer from these problems, (or at least not to the same effect, because of not being composed of metal and highly sensitive electrically charged phosphors) due to the nature of the liquid crystals and the manipulation thereof. The analog delivery system for the information, though, is still a problem. Even though the monitor itself is not suceptable to humidity and temperature, the cards, memory, system, and cables can still be. New video cards and monitors are able to reproduce pure digital delivery and images in exact detail, but these are as of yet pricey and not very compatable with most systems.

So LCDs are more accurate, aye? All in favor of the mighty LCD, eh? Not quite. While LCDs are naturally more accurate in recieving true color from the machine and displaying it, CRT monitors have a myriad of adjustments and features that (in my opinion, at least) more than make up for it. If your color is slightly off on a CRT, you can adjust the levels of flourecence and output of the rays to compensate, thereby getting much better color, defining a color, and magnifying certian colors for certian situations. So, in general, CRTs have adjusted accuracy equal to LCDs but with *far* more adaptability and usefulness.

Secondly, resolution can be a defining issue. You see, CRTs can adjust their ray output in order to resolve the picture at different sizes, (800x600, 1024x768, ect. pixels being lit up) whereas LCDs... can't. As Stark mentioned, they are very very restrictive. Why is this? To put it simply LCDs have a set number of colored lighting tints in a set area. (If you don't understand what that means, skip to contrast and brightness and come back.) When you want more pixels with CRT, you just have it fluoresce the phosphors in smaller areas. When you want more pixels with a LCD, however, you have to have specific software that "guesses" what the picture will look like when shrunk and activate the crystals accordingly. Want the screen smaller? CRT can blow up your icons by simply using larger phosphor blocks as pixels, but the LCD either (most commonly) shrinks your display window and uses the same size icons or uses software to extrapolate. The extrapolation for both shrinking and enlarging can create a massive blur effect, sometimes to the point of unreadability. Needless to say, this is not a good thing for graphics processing or gameplay.

To the third topic, contrast and brightness, I have only this to say: Backlight.

Alright, so I lied, I have a lot to say about it. Backlighting is how you see anything that is displayed on your LCD screen. It, quite literally, is a light behind the crystal matrix. This light shines through the crystal matrix, (which is composed of colored sections and crystals) and is directed by the formation of the crystals through specific colored areas on the monitor, producing images. How the crystals are formed is determined by specific electrical currents which cause them to align into precise shapes and patterns. I love modern technology. Regardless, the backlight coming through is responsible for the increased brightness of the LCD monitors in relation to the CRTs, which have to actually fork out the juice to excite the phosphors and display colors. The backlight method is much more constant, but it also creates huge contrast issues. I mean, it's basically just a big light that is always on, so it can't exactly produce shades of light and dark. This manifests in the differences between 0,0,0 and 255,255,255 (black and white) being completely controlled by the crystals, which don't -- can't -- perform the same task as a basic on/off function. This causes the differences in brightnesses to be much less recognizable, and by correlation the differences in colors to seem much less pronounced... "washed out", even. The more expensive the LCD, the more work put into ensuring that the contrast ratio is good... and to be honest, there are some exceptionally good contrast LCDs out there. They are also hideously expensive, though, (think 10k+) and still don't surpass the best CRTs.

As to viewing angles. Heh. LCDs get molested, here. You can only correctly view something on an LCD from direclty in front of it, and the more you move to the side the more it blurs and darkens. Why is this? Simply the nature of the crystals, my friend. They configure in specific patterns to shine the light through the colored areas, and those specific patterns direct it straight out. This removes the beneficial "bleed off" effect found on CRTs at the same time it sharpens the image, and if you view it from even a slight angle it can merge and distort colors. This is bad for graphics design, but untenable for gaming.

Finally, I will wrap up with two more brief items that are just as relevant as those above, if not directly related to the display. Cost and Dead Pixels.
LCDs are a relatively new technology, while cathode ray tubes have been around for decades. This drives the price of the LCD up, and creates worries about reliability in the producers, shortening your warranty in comparison to CRTs. As for dead pixels, those are when the crystals get locked or unresponsive and freeze up, displaying one color for EVER. There is no way to fix this, and if you get several of them it can really destroy your work on whatever you are doing. This applies especially to (you guessed it) graphics or games.


Now, as to your comment on the size, heat, and refresh rate. If your refresh rate is dropping it means your monitor is not functioning quite as well as it used to. (if it used to be able to get that rate, that is) Without seeing exactly how bad or good it is, knowing the brand, or yadda yadda variables ect., I can't say how long it has left. Some monitors can keep on chugging along for years after their refresh rate starts dropping, some die a week later. It's all highly variable.

Regarding the size/heat, I would say as long as you are not terribly concerned with massive action games with split-second reactions, advanced graphics work, or anything like that... go for it. LCD monitors excel in enviroments where there is no massive demand on their resources, and are found aesthetically pleasing by a large number of people. Not this person, however. I prefer the look of CRTs, as well as the superior high-end performance. Meh, to each his own.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

There's been talk that some LCD screens actually introduce latency, such that when you move your mouse, it moves significantly later than it would with other screens.

Overall, response time and color accuracy aren't much of an issue any more, so long as you purchase a decent LCD monitor. If I had to buy a brand-new monitor, I'd probably grab an LCD myself, although if my 21" CRT burned out today I'd simply go grab myself another one for a couple hundred bucks.

The biggest advantage my CRT has to a comparably sized LCD is price, second biggest is not having to worry about any native resolution garbage.

I was under the impression that the opposite was true: Limited supply of CRT's have driven prices up higher than LCD's

[Ar-Adunakhor]

I was under the impression that the opposite was true: Limited supply of CRT's have driven prices up higher than LCD's

Nah, CRTs are still much cheaper, have many more production facilites devoted to them, (especially in places where computers are just making the big splash into society) and are more readily avalible just about everywhere.

Out of curiosity, where exactly did you hear that they were in low supply?

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

I don't rightly remember. It might have been a forecast for the future.

[Uraniun235]

This is the lag I was talking about:



The screen on the left is a Dell 2405FPW. The screen on the right is some 19" Dell LCD.

Here's an example of another screen with some vicious lag: Please don't mind the stupid use of music in this video.

[Ar-Adunakhor]

I see how that might be decent for causal browsers, but it still retains the problems of the "backlight flash" method, being as it operates on the same principle of forced delay in perception. Not only that, but it seems they merely replaced the "decreased life of backlight" problem with a new "slower reaction time" problem.

Admittedly, while a delay measured in hunderedths of a second is very small, it could still be a problem when one is playing any game that incorporates a rapid display of information or the need to respond quickly. This rings especially true when you are talking about FPS or twitch fighting games, but even relatively "slow" games like RTSes rely on ~150-200 clicks per minute at higher levels of play and competition. Delay is simply unacceptable in such situations.

Nonetheless, it is an inventive solution, just not one that gamers will use.

[Zac Naloen]

The delay in that video is so slight as to be almost imperseptable to me.

Also.. i've never ever seen ghosting on my LCD and i have a sony which is over a year old an HDS-5something model, which isn't exactly new. But, maybe my brain and eyesight just aren't sharp enough for it to work lol

[Uraniun235]

The delay in that video is so slight as to be almost imperseptable to me.

Also.. i've never ever seen ghosting on my LCD and i have a sony which is over a year old an HDS-5something model, which isn't exactly new. But, maybe my brain and eyesight just aren't sharp enough for it to work lol

Not all LCDs suffer from significant ghosting; some are quite excellent for gaming. Similarly, not all LCDs suffer from lag; one of those monitors pictured IS an LCD. I'm just saying that one should do some research beforehand. I wouldn't want to tolerate that kind of lag on my system - I'd be quite irritated if my mouse cursor moved significantly later than when I actually moved my mouse.

[FSTargetDrone]

Very well then.

There are four main attributes when dealing with the actual viewing of the monitor. These are: Accuracy/adjustability, resolution, contrast/brightness, and viewing angle.

<snippage>

Most interesting. Thanks for all of that!

[Resinence]

Here is a list of CRT and LCD advantages, hope this helps.

LCD advantages

Brightness
The typical LCD monitor has a brightness of 250 to 300 nits, compared with a typical CRT brightness of 100 nits. Since an LCD acts like a shutter, it can be made brighter by increasing the brightness of the backlight. However, when the beam current of a CRT is increased to boost brightness, the beam spot size also increases, which lowers effective resolution and may yield a soft or fuzzy image.

No flicker
There is no flicker on an LCD display because, while a CRT must be refreshed, the LCD has a constant source of light over the whole screen. Once a pixel is on, it stays on until turned off.

Focus
In a CRT, the electron beam is circular when aimed directly forward, but becomes distorted when aimed up, down, left or right as it sweeps across the screen and may cause image clarity or focus issues at the screen edge.

In contrast, an LCD has millions of pixels, each one effectively independent from its neighbor, with no scanning electron beam, so distortion problems are negligible. The image is always perfectly "focused" over the entire screen.

Perfect geometry
LCD monitors provide geometrically perfect, distortion-free images-a huge advantage for advanced users such as artists and designers.

Longevity
The only item that ages on an LCD monitor is the backlight, which is composed of one or more tiny fluorescent tubes. The typical life of a backlight is 50,000 hours to the half brightness point-the point at which brightness is one-half of the original brightness, and the industry standard measure for product life.

A CRT ages in two ways: An oxide layer forms on the cathode of the electron gun, decreasing beam current; and the phosphor ages and becomes less efficient. The typical CRT half-brightness point occurs between 10,000 and 20,000 hours.

Power consumption
The power required to run an LCD is about one-third of that required for a CRT with the same screen area. In addition, the amount of heat generated by an LCD monitor is considerably less than a CRT monitor, resulting in a lower load on air conditioning. Building cooling needs may be decreased by up to 20%.

And, if an LCD monitor is used with an uninterruptible power supply, the lower power required provides precious extra minutes to store critical data and shut down gracefully in the event of a power failure.

These power-saving features of LCDs reduce the total cost of ownership.

Low emissions
An LCD is essentially emission-free, while a CRT monitor can generate electric, magnetic and even X-ray emissions due to the high-voltage power supply necessary to drive the CRT. An LCD causes no electromagnetic interference.

Ergonomics
The size, dimensions and weight of an LCD allow it to fit into locations that a CRT can't—even mounted on a wall. An average 17" CRT monitor may measure almost 17 inches deep and weigh up to 40 pounds, while an average 17" LCD takes up half the space, with a depth of just around 8 inches and a weight of 15 pounds.

In addition, some LCDs can also pivot from landscape to portrait mode to enhance certain applications, making it easier to work on spreadsheets or two-page layouts, for example.

Total cost of ownership
LCD prices have been decreasing in recent years. When the total cost of ownership is considered-including savings in power consumption and lifespan-LCDs are now less expensive than many CRTs.

Accurate color
CRTs can provide richer color in a fuller spectrum than most LCDs. In general, graphic artists prefer CRT monitors because they show truer colors and greater nuance-particularly useful for preparing files for printing and for using photo applications such as Adobe® Photoshop®.

Response time
CRTs may respond more quickly than some LCDs to videos and fast-action games. For some LCDs, pixels respond to voltage (being turned "on" and "off") more slowly than the time it takes for an electron beam to redraw a CRT screen. As a result, fast-moving images can sometimes leave visible trails, called ghosting, or appear blurry on an LCD. Modern LCDs have virtually eliminated response-time issues.

Viewing angle
CRT monitors display good brightness and color from a wide viewing angle. Some LCDs, however, look their best when you are directly in front of them, because of the way light passes through liquid crystals in the screen. Keep in mind that LCD technology is rapidly developing, increasing LCD viewing angels, so this CRT advantage doesn't hold true in every case. Check the specs of the monitors you're considering.

Multiple resolutions
CRT monitors can switch between multiple resolution settings without a significant loss in sharpness. If you need to change your monitor resolution frequently, you may be better off with CRT technology.

Lower purchase price
CRT monitors are generally less expensive at initial purchase than LCDs.

[outcast]

The delay in that video is so slight as to be almost imperseptable to me.

Also.. i've never ever seen ghosting on my LCD and i have a sony which is over a year old an HDS-5something model, which isn't exactly new. But, maybe my brain and eyesight just aren't sharp enough for it to work lol

So slight? What? It at times blatantly reacts a second later!

Anyway.

I have never come across an LCD without ghosting or in general one that i would trade my 19inch CRT for. Even though my CRT is starting to fall apart and is displaying these annyoing horizontal/diagonal lines (which change in number depending on the resolution)

Also, is it me or is it just really annoying how sales people keep hammering it into people how the human eye can't possibly see such things as ghosting on the newer monitors when most people here easily could?

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Hey Ar-Adunakhor, what about SED monitors? Supposedly they will cost about the same as LCD's and combine all the advantages of LCD's and CRT's with none of the disadvantages of either. I'm still using the same 19" Dell CRT that I've been using for 7 years now, and it's still fantastic. I thought about upgrading to LCD many times, but decided each time that the increase in portability wasn't worth the tradeoffs. SED seems like the way to go, but it also seems too good to be true. Is it a load of BS, or something we should be excited about?