CRT Televisions are still being thrown out!

[Foebane]

Originally Posted by SquawkBox

It's the Tokaï LTV-2566PS. Ok, look closely. What do you notice at the bottom left of the case (despite the low res) ? Yup, Activision logo . I have no idea why Tokaï would stick the Activision logo on one of their TV set, doesn't make much sense to me . I don't think it's a fake btw, the seller did send me another picture when I asked her to (also just asked her about the presence of the logo, but very unlikely she has a single clue about it).

I know for a fact VIC Tokaï did produce a few games during the 80's, so maybe Tokaï bosses during this period were secret admirers of the creators of Pitfall! and of so many classics for the VCS. My guess is they assumed it wasn't such a risky move after all to "borrow" the logo of another company and stick it on a very standardized product.

But... that's not the Activision logo, this is.

OK, so the Activision logo was different decades ago, but I don't think the old Activision logo had that typeface in the photo, nor would it have RGB spots that appear to be part of the logo on it as well. Besides, as I recall, the old Activision logo from the 1980s was a sort of rainbow line next to the A.

I did think there was a completely separate television manufacturer with the same name back then, but I can't see any information about any other Activision on a quick google search, not even Wikipedia returns any alternative info.

[SquawkBox]

It's a Tokaï all right, not a rebrand, here's a picture of the back :

I wasn't implying Activision had anything to do with it, just that Tokaï may have paid homage to Activision through the use of this label (which is not the traditional Activision logo, granted but probably intentional move to avoid potential legal issue). Maybe some employees from VIC Tokaï division used these TV sets to playtest games, and TV branch staff went : Hey, these portable TV's seem to be popular among Atari gamers, let's stick a bogus Activision logo on it, so buyers will be inclined to plug their VCS on it. All right, all right, a bit far fetched an hypothesis .

[Damion]

Originally Posted by Mikerochip

Not every CRT is useful though, or even half decent quality. Nevermind good quality.



Many many CRTs I've seen are a complete POS with god awwful image quality, when new, and have nothing other than composite & RF inputs.


Especially the ones sold at the end of the CRT market, ie the lesser or no name brands.


But even some of the bigger names were selling crappy quality stuff.
Just because they had scart, doesn't mean they had RGB scart.


I don't know if they were shit because they were cheap, or they were cheap because they were shit.


Either way, they sold bucketfuls. (My friend was in TV/DVD/VCR retail at the time)


Agreed, good CRT's, with a low number of hours are worth saving, but, the amount of people with the skills to repair, refurbish or even upgrade (add RGB inputs etc) older/worn out ones seems to be diminishing rapidly.


And, if they can't be returned to a good working state, why save them?


Obviously you can only check, if you can rescue them though

These are excellent, and often overlooked points. Most CRTs, especially consumer sets, were very poor quality.

In terms of PC/VGA monitors, the late Trinitron/Diamondtron models from upper tier manufacturers (Eizo, Iiyama, NEC, etc) are certainly worth saving, these can be truly fantastic for Amiga (with an Indivision*) and MiSTer, though obviously some will be sensitive to flicker, especially at 50 Hz (with brightness/contrast at appropriate levels and not having time to play for hours on end, I don't mind flicker much anymore vs LCD tradeoffs). Broadcast monitors are also a stellar choice, if you can find one, and typically won't exhibit as much flicker of course.

In terms of consumer sets, I've had good experiences with most late Trinitron TVs with component (or I suppose most of y'all have RGB SCART) inputs. You won't get the overall quality of the above mentioned options, but they can look good to great, and come in larger screen sizes. Assuming you're still young enough to lift one, it's a good choice for MiSTer duty IMO.

No matter what you get, there's a good chance you'll need to fiddle internally (if not now, soon), which is another good point, obviously even the best monitors can suffer from poor geometry and corner convergence, or require servicing (though these are worth the effort IMO).

Personally, I can't stand the lag, pixel smearing, poor black levels, and (often poor) resolution scaling that comes with using LCDs for retro-gaming, so I keep my CRTs in service for now. OLED is certainly promising, the output from my A1200 (with Indivision) is shockingly good on my 55" LG.

* The MK3 Indivision has stellar analog output quality, it's a sight to behold on a good CRT. In my experience, many Amiga scandoublers have been disappointing in this regard.

[Foebane]

Just because they had scart, doesn't mean they had RGB scart.

Short story: There is an easy way: just add a multi-region DVD player with, say, an NTSC R1 DVD in a R2 country and see if it's in colour.

Long story: At one time, I gained a colour portable from my sister with, for the first time (for me) a SCART socket. I had a R2 DVD player which I recently made multi-region for one film in R1, Miyazaki's Spirited Away, but on it, I was dismayed, when viewing through the RF (composite), a fuzzy black and white picture. But then I thought of the SCART option and remembered I had a cable in the loft, so I got it down, wired it up, and lo and behold, Spirited Away NTSC, on a British TV, in full colour! So the cable was fully RGB wired.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Damion

Most CRTs, especially consumer sets, were very poor quality.

In terms of PC/VGA monitors, the late Trinitron/Diamondtron models from upper tier manufacturers (Eizo, Iiyama, NEC, etc) are certainly worth saving, these can be truly fantastic for Amiga (with an Indivision*) and MiSTer, though obviously some will be sensitive to flicker, especially at 50 Hz (with brightness/contrast at appropriate levels and not having time to play for hours on end, I don't mind flicker much anymore vs LCD tradeoffs). Broadcast monitors are also a stellar choice, if you can find one, and typically won't exhibit as much flicker of course.

In terms of consumer sets, I've had good experiences with most late Trinitron TVs with component (or I suppose most of y'all have RGB SCART) inputs. You won't get the overall quality of the above mentioned options, but they can look good to great, and come in larger screen sizes.

That's a good example of the typically misguided, modern take on the CRT hobby. The biggest fallacy in this take (which is unfortunately prevalent just about everywhere on the net) is confusing the current ideas of "quality" with the old realities. Unlike productivity applications, retro games do not really benefit from extreme sharpness (certainly not that of VGA monitors) and thrive on softer-looking consumer sets. They can still look good even on the oft-demonised RF/Composite, never even mind S-Video, especially if you're really looking for period-appropiate experience. Eg, I can display MSX games in RGB/NTSC via MiSTer, but find myself drawn to the allegedly inferior output from the real one via Composite...it's a totally different "look". It's quite sad that it's mostly the CRT-hobbyists themselves who drive that negative perception, while ignoring the fact that in the 80/90s majority of peple have used RF/Composite and were perfectly happy with it, because they were actually enjoying the games and not being tiresome audiophile-level elitists. And the devs often have used their inferiorites to their advantage.

While it's nice to have a pro-level monitor too, for programs and certain text-heavy games, they are nigh on impossible to find for a reasonable price, and the ones asked are simply not worth it given the minuscule differences in perceivable image quality vs a decent consumer set (which doesn't necessarily have to be a Trinitron, though I do agree the early-2000 ones are great) or a mid-level VGA monitor. And these should still very easy to find, though this might vary depending on where you live. It does require a bit of patience - setting up a classifieds alert and checking it daily - and effort - you might need to do a bit of driving and go through a few duds - but I find this kind of retro CRT hunting to be fun actually. In fact I still check the ads even though I already have numerous backup sets in storage

[SquawkBox]

Modding a consumer NTSC TV for RGB input is a task that can be accomplished by a moderately gifted hobbyist :
https://absolutegamer.net/modifying-...rt-tv-for-rgb/

Here are the specifications of my 21'' Samsung TV :
https://tinyurl.com/j6mzzte6
I use it amongst other things to display MAME & Retroarch games in 240p, picture is very nice, no flickering at all when used as a monitor, plus the fact that its (relatively) flat screen (we used to designate these as "télés à coins carrés", square corners CRT TV sets) greatly enhances the experience. It doesn't receive enough playtime thought. Due to lack of room, it had to be placed on a desktop exposed to backlight and distant from my favorite sitting spot in the studio, a pity really. I would advise against PVM's bearing > 600 lines, corresponding scanlines may darken the image excessively, even for those that are scanline lovers.

[Foebane]

Why? Why bother?

Face it, nostalgists: CRTs are going fast, they're never EVER coming back, and they'll soon all fail. You'll all soon have to embrace the wonderful LCD/LED world soon, so better jump ship, folks!

[Damion]

Originally Posted by dreadnought

That's a good example of the typically misguided, modern take on the CRT hobby. The biggest fallacy in this take (which is unfortunately prevalent just about everywhere on the net) is confusing the current ideas of "quality" with the old realities.

Presumably like many here, I've been using CRTs continuously since childhood, currently have a stash of 20+ tubes in the house, and have no misperceptions about "quality" vs "old realitites". The fact is, I thought RF and composite were poor quality options back in the 80's, and couldn't wait to acquire a "real" monitor with higher quality inputs (mainly chroma/luma and eventually RGB).

Unlike productivity applications, retro games do not really benefit from extreme sharpness (certainly not that of VGA monitors) and thrive on softer-looking consumer sets.

I don't agree, but the idea of "what looks good" is completely subjective, anyway. I can understand how others may prefer a different experience.

They can still look good even on the oft-demonised RF/Composite, never even mind S-Video, especially if you're really looking for period-appropiate experience. Eg, I can display MSX games in RGB/NTSC via MiSTer, but find myself drawn to the allegedly inferior output from the real one via Composite...it's a totally different "look". It's quite sad that it's mostly the CRT-hobbyists themselves who drive that negative perception, while ignoring the fact that in the 80/90s majority of peple have used RF/Composite and were perfectly happy with it, because they were actually enjoying the games and not being tiresome audiophile-level elitists. And the devs often have used their inferiorites to their advantage.

Also subjective. I don't like RF/composite, then or now.

*edit* That said, I can understand the nostalgia factor, and there may come a time I'd like to see a C64 connected to an old consumer tube via RF for the warm fuzzies, though at the time, I had seen the better options and really couldn't wait to move on. My kids seemed to instantly acknowledge that console games (MiSTer) looked much better quality on a 17" Trinitron (31 kHz) monitor vs the 27" consumer set, but they of course have no other frame of reference, or sentiment one way or the other.

While it's nice to have a pro-level monitor too, for programs and certain text-heavy games, they are nigh on impossible to find for a reasonable price, and the ones asked are simply not worth it given the minuscule differences in perceivable image quality vs a decent consumer set (which doesn't necessarily have to be a Trinitron, though I do agree the early-2000 ones are great) or a mid-level VGA monitor.

Side by side, the differences certainly aren't miniscule, IMO. However, I do appreciate the P22 phosphors and fewer TV lines of my 20M2U's for similar reasons. Sadly, they are getting tough to find in good condition, as you mentioned. Yes, there are other quality tubes too, some of the later Toshiba slot-mask variety are also very good.

And these should still very easy to find, though this might vary depending on where you live. It does require a bit of patience - setting up a classifieds alert and checking it daily - and effort - you might need to do a bit of driving and go through a few duds - but I find this kind of retro CRT hunting to be fun actually. In fact I still check the ads even though I already have numerous backup sets in storage

Can't disagree with you here.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by Foebane

Why? Why bother?

Face it, nostalgists: CRTs are going fast, they're never EVER coming back, and they'll soon all fail. You'll all soon have to embrace the wonderful LCD/LED world soon, so better jump ship, folks!

I bet my CRTs will still be working long after I'm gone. But hey, you're right! What's the point of living when I will soon fail?

Actually my Samsung LED TV does a wonderful job of displaying composite (apart from a slight lag which might be a problem in some arcade games). It's sharper than any tube TV I ever owned, flicker fixes interlace modes perfectly, and fills in scan lines without losing contrast. But I have several other LCD TVs that are not nearly as good. My Syncmaster 940MW grossly overemphasizes edges and blurs colors in RGB! (it was much worse before I accessed the hidden service menu and turned all the peaking controls to zero). I also have a GBS820 which I have modified to upscale without 'enhancements', but the VGA picture still isn't as sharp and pure as my 1084S monitor.

The reason we bother is because CRTs won't ever be coming back, and we don't want to put up with poorer alternatives. Yes, they will eventually wear out or break down. But a set which lasted this long will probably go for a while longer, and I intend to enjoy it while I can.

[Foebane]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

The reason we bother is because CRTs won't ever be coming back, and we don't want to put up with poorer alternatives. Yes, they will eventually wear out or break down. But a set which lasted this long will probably go for a while longer, and I intend to enjoy it while I can.

Rubbish.

The "alternatives" are NOT "poorer", and if the Amiga is to be seen as a current platform, rather than as a dated retro platform, it has to move with the times, including the display technology.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by Foebane

The "alternatives" are NOT "poorer", and if the Amiga is to be seen as a current platform, rather than as a dated retro platform, it has to move with the times, including the display technology.

Indeed. I really enjoyed the arrival of LCD/plat panel screens. A lot of typical CRT problems are history now. CRTs just had so many problems. The picture was never exactly right, either it was out of focus (blur) at the edges, or in the center, the color "guns" were never calibrated quite right (red going into a slightly different spot than green, causing color ringing). You could possibly calibrate it right in one mode, then got another set of problems in another mode. You had flicker, the CRTs were quite heavy and bulky....


This all went with LCDs. Turn it on, stable picture, no flicker, proper geometry - just perfect.

[yelworC]

Bought this Philips 14" television a few days ago and use together with the led display on my Amiga 4000. Love it

Image quality is much better than it looks on the photo. Taking pictures is a pain, because it's much brighter than the led display.

[gimbal]

Originally Posted by Foebane

Why? Why bother?

Face it, nostalgists: CRTs are going fast, they're never EVER coming back, and they'll soon all fail. You'll all soon have to embrace the wonderful LCD/LED world soon, so better jump ship, folks!

Because nostalgia Nostalgia overrules any other logic.

[dreadnought]

Originally Posted by Damion

Presumably like many here, I've been using CRTs continuously since childhood, currently have a stash of 20+ tubes in the house, and have no misperceptions about "quality" vs "old realitites".

Modern CRT scene has been completely dominated by the "audiophile" kind of perception, what with the PVM craze, thicc scanline and super-sharpness fetish, etc. That's just how it is and you can find the evidence of it on every dedicated website, youtube channel, and so on. And while preference for this kind of look is indeed subjective, the historical facts - plus common sense - aren't. And it's a fact that the signal inferiorities were commonly utilised as an artistic tool, and the general softer look was basically a free anti aliasing. This is the common sense bit: why would anybody want to design an image which is blocky and slashed by a lot of horizontal black lines? The consumer sets help to alleviate it, while the VGA and (to lesser extent) studio monitors excarberate it. Not in every case of course, but generally speaking.

There is a certain element of that "audiophile" angle in every hobby, but in ours it skews the thing completely out of proportion and leads to a lot of bad advice, usually requiring big investments, which in turn puts people off - hence my occasionals post on the subject. And as it is, you don't need to spend hudreds of dollars on studio monitors and the like, and can get quite amazing results on sets which are either free or cost next to nothing (and that's not even including the "nostalgia' angle"). Unfortunately that's not what the newcomers to the hobby are going to hear in most cases.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

This all went with LCDs. Turn it on, stable picture, no flicker, proper geometry - just perfect.

What also went was most other things which made the CRT-era games look awesome. What you get on an LCD is a mostly dull and distorted (in many ways) version of the original, which at best looks like the first draft of the intended look, and at worst like total mockery.

So, it all has very little to do with nostalgia (sorry, @gimbal) and everything with the actual image quality. If I was able to reproduce the proper CRT look on an LCD display in a 1:1 fashion I'd definitely jump ship, because they are ultimately more convenient (which, btw, next to fashion, is the real reason why people are using them for old gear) and maybe keep one original set just for the sake of it. This might happen one day, what with OLEDs, shaders, lag, etc, getting better, but not yet, and definitely not when it comes to real hardware, where you often have to spend ridiculous amounts of money and build silly chains just to get some workable results (how much is the latest Retrotink again?).

As always with these discussion, it's not the actual fact of people choosing LCDs that I oppose - anybody's free to do what they like at home - but the mostly inane arguments used to rationalize it.

[UberFreak]

Originally Posted by Foebane

Rubbish.

The "alternatives" are NOT "poorer", and if the Amiga is to be seen as a current platform, rather than as a dated retro platform, it has to move with the times, including the display technology.

Not rubbish at all.
I tried going with LCD but ran back to CRT for all my retro systems.

I currently own somewhere between 20-25 CRTs in sizes ranging from 13-29 inches (monitors & TVs).
I have spare parts and know how to service them when needed.
That will possibly do for the rest of my life


My main Toshiba CRT 29" has been in use since 1995 without fail.
In that time, multiple LCD monitors and TVs failed on me.

[PortuguesePilot]

I'm not going to go into the whole "CRT's are bulky and heavy and very bad for your eyes and has tons of radiation" or "modern LCDs ruin the way classic graphics are supposed to look and let's not get started on the whole 16:9 ratio which is just ridiculous for classic games" arguments. I can understand both and actually agree with both. I prefer the way the games look on a 4:3 CRT display but I can understand the need to have our classic computers/consoles connected to a modern display via HDMI.

All I can say is that of all of my Amigas, 4 are connected to CRT monitors or TVs and only one is connected to an LCD (a 4:3 one, since I can't stand stretched/fattened graphics).

In spite of all their drawbacks (heavy, bulky, eye-damaging flickering and radiation-galore) I will hold onto my CRTs until they die out, and as someone has said above, I think I'll 'die out' before some of them will (a couple of those CRTs are Sony Trinitron).

[Foebane]

I will say one thing in favour of CRTs:

When I discovered my RGB SCART, I fell even more in love with my DVDs than ever before. I thought it was the greatest video format ever, and I'd never ever need to replace them. But time marches on, CRTs stopped being manufactured, and the DVDs looked crap on the new LCDs I had. But when I tried my first Blu-ray (albeit 720p on a 768p display) things were looking rosy again. But I had to upgrade...!

[SquawkBox]

Personally, I am not nostalgic of the 14'' monitor my first miggy was equipped with. Curved screens and those eyes of mine don't mesh, no matter how sought after is the screen, TV or monitor at issue. The reason I was eagerly looking for a 21'' CRT TV was to accomplish the 15 Khz MAME rendering small-scale miracle through the use of modded Radeon drivers. I have been using a CRT monitor for years before going for an actual miggy again, and considered it pretty satisfying (having in mind I don't play games all that much). I might be taking a few pictures of the Samsung CRT TV in action if you're curious to know about how it renders games from the overabundant RetroArch sets.

I think PVM's are a thing for frivolous reasons mostly, they are said to last longer, you get visible scanlines no matter the size (small consumer CRT TVs miss very visible scanlines) and some people don't have the patience to grab a good CRT TV through trial and error, e.q. they're being told get a Bang & Olufsen or bust, which is both silly and overkill. Having said that, after having spent 200-300 quids to get one plus the necessary cables and converters, I would bet my boots a few buyers were thoroughly disappointed with their PVM : Hair pulling complicated adjustment, potential screen burn in from previous use, and yeah, overall lack of charm compared to an old school telly / monitor.

Seeing is believing and it cannot be denied arcade, 2D, isometric 8-bit and 16-bit action games look very nice on a small or medium sized CRT TV. Retro gaming on a TFT feels too much like emulating, after a while I go, Ok, now give me the real thing! As often in life, it's best to anticipate potential issues e.q. don't do like those who bought a modded NES and then were taken short : blimey, this looks horrible on my flat screen TV now how on earth am I supposed to plug that thing for it to look good or at least decent ? Maybe OSSC pro will be a game changer, we shall have to see.

[UberFreak]

On higher res PVMs (rated at 800 lines), scanlines are more visible with some systems.
The 600-line ones look great though.
Had a 20" PVM years ago but it was huge and incredibly heavy, so I traded it and regret it ever since...

The big advantage my 14" PVM has over other monitors like the 1081/1084 etc, is the stable image geometry.
For example, the image does not expand/retract with quick brightness changes, which is an issue on all consumer TVs I've seen and most 15Khz computer monitors.

[Damion]

Originally Posted by Foebane

Rubbish.

The "alternatives" are NOT "poorer", and if the Amiga is to be seen as a current platform, rather than as a dated retro platform, it has to move with the times, including the display technology.

Wrong, they indeed are in quantifiable ways. Good luck finding an LCD that offers perfect resolution scaling, lack of pixel smearing/ghosting, near 0 input lag/latency, and the black levels associated with a good CRT. Many LCD monitors don't handle 50Hz properly even if an image is displayed, especially via a digital input. I've achieved acceptable-ish results with more expensive Eizo gaming monitors, though the lag is still present which is a problem for smooth 50Hz scrolling (critical timing for platform and pinball games, etc). Modern gaming monitors exhibit the WCG nightmare, not truly correctable for Amiga use. If you had mentioned OLED I would agree, it's very promising assuming low latency for gaming, but LCD tech is indeed typically a "poor" choice for rendering native Amiga screenmodes within a gaming context, if not an utter disaster.

What Thomas mentioned about CRT downsides is certainly true (they can be a perfectionist's nightmare), and these issues often can only be addressed to an overall level of "good enough" after condsiderable time spent fiddling, often internally. However, it's simply not correct that any single LCD eclipses a quality CRT in every metric for dealing with the output from classic computers and consoles. That's obviously ludicrous to anyone with eyes. Furthermore, anyone who follows the world of enthusuast level displays knows that like CRTs, LCDs are also an inherent basket case of defects, often returned several times until the user gets a "good one" (uneven backlight/uniformity problems which can vary 20% or more from one quadrant of the screen to another, dead pixels or pixel clusters, debris behind the screen, etc).

To be clear, within the domain of text-based work, modern PC gaming, and television (i.e., their engineered purpose), you'll have no argument from me whatsoever, although I do far prefer OLED at least for the latter indicated use.