Going to possibly need a new tv- advice

[mazinz]

Hello,
Let me give you a quick background for my current scenario:

Right now I am still using (and like) a crt/analog tv set. Back in the early 2000's I had to have it repaired. The picture would shrink to 1 inch in size (horizontally and then fade out to black leaving the sound playing over a black screen). The problem would come and go and got worse as time went on. I had the tv repaired and all was fine until this morning, when for about 1 second the problem returned (but it then snapped out of it back to a normal picture again).

If (for arguments sake) I am unable to find/get my nice crt repaired, I could use some advice about getting a new tv.

The specs (roughly) for my current analog set are Mitsubishi- 27 inch screen, has both rca inputs and output as well as SVHS input. The set was pretty nice in the 1990's, had a few neat features (pic in pic and snap shot) and it saddens me that I might finally have to let it go


what I am after:
My space is limited and I really do not need to be blown out of my seat. I am looking for something still within the 25-36 inch range. No larger than that. I also still work with a lot of old analog sources (like betamax), so I would need a set that can handle the analog signal ok without making it look 100 times worse than it is and be able to properly handle interlaced material since a few HD sets I have seen cannot do that too well. I also need something that does not get motion jitters from fast movement and in that sense I know I have to look for a lower number for refresh rate if I recall correct? And lastly and this being the killer- I need something that hopefully still has at least analog rca input jacks on the set.

I cannot spend a few thousand on a tv and my funding sources are sort of limited to something like Bestbuy since it would go on their store card. However if the set I am after is out there and not at a place like Bestbuy, please by all means let me know where to look. I should also mention I am in the US

Thanks for any and all info

[usually_quiet]

Most flatscreen TVs do a fine job with interlaced signals from most HD sources and high bitrate SD sources like commercial DVDs, but analog tapes and low-bitrate SD sources always look worse than on an SD TV because HDTVs enlarge the picture, magnifying defects.

You should probably look for a plasma TV, but there are not many to choose from and the most highly regarded makers of such TVs have discontinued their production. Most are large. The LG 42PN4500 is a 42" model, and that is as small as you are likely to find.

[Edit] Remember, standard flat screen TVs are 16:9 aspect ratio so you need something with a larger diagonal measurement to fit a 4:3 picture area about the same size as your old TV had.

[LMotlow]

Rule 1: Don't trust what you see in showrooms. Most showrooms display in-store video tracks that are designed to mask display defects. Try a showroom in a store that feeds HD cable or DVD/BluRay movies all day.

Rule 2: Effective viewing angle specs and contrast specs are marketing department fantasies. Take with very large grain of salt.

The nearest equivalent to your 27" CRT with analog source would be a 32" HDTV (which shows 4:3 sources at about the same size as a 24" CRT), or a 39"-40" HDTV (which equates to about a 27" CRT with 4:3 source). If you consider the new 4K in those screen sizes, don't waste your money: at that screen size you won't see a difference unless you place your nose on the screen.

S-video inputs: Outta luck, guy. Not found any more, and neither is plain composite. HDTV's still have component inputs, usually one input of which is used for composite input, I forget which one. You can get around that if you have an old DVD recorder or something with an s-video or composite input and a component or HDMI output, but it's a clunky way of doing it.

Not all HDTV's are created equal. Some play nice with interlace/telecine/upsampling, some don't play so nice. Forget the cheaper brands on that score, although some of the better Vizio TV's seem to do well (but some don't). The best reviews I've seen and the best experience I've had personally for handling telecine, good motion control, etc., are from SONY and Samsung. Having sent two Samsungs to the recycle dump after they crapped out before their warranties gave up, I wouldn't recommend them. LG seems to be popular, although I don't know why with their anemic black levels and second-rate motion handling, but you can always try one of their higher-end models in the 32"-40" range, which seem to have better black levels. Brands like Toshiba are no longer quality names, and old handles like Magnavox, RCA, etc., are generic and could come from anywhere. Panasonic is one brand that refuses to cater to us old CRT lovers; what they do to old analog source should be outlawed -- a shame, since Panasonic made some nice CRT's back then (for instance, Mitsubishi's were from the Panasonic congolomerate but with a different name and higher price tag).

Plasmas have come a long way down from a few years ago. LG still makes some starting at 42", but it doesn't handle interlace well and has anemic black levels that are nowhere near the richness of your Mitsubishi (or my former Toshiba). Until the plasma elements get some maturity on them through use for a while, you can get screen burn-in from playing too much 4:3 material.

One way around getting more inputs and some higher-end chips to handle interlace, telecine, etc., is to get a a/v good receiver -- most of them still accepts lots of inputs, and mostly they output decent HDMI to the new TV's as progressive material. Unfortunately the better a/v receivers from Denon and Yamaha cost about $500 and up.

Yep, I miss my old CRT too.

[mazinz]

Thank you both for the replies. Though highly doubtful I am hoping the problem I saw today was just a fluke thing. I know the tv inside needs a dusting and that is something I do know how to do and perhaps possibly a reason why the problem came back for the briefest of seconds......

But...
The one set I did not see mentioned was Sharp? I ask because I see this 32" LED (assuming they are the lcd replacement) set at bestbuy that does have composite in as well as other current inputs, but again not totally sure if I should be avoiding something by the specs? Not seeing it person and I am just looking around online now should my current set go down sooner than later. The few plasmas BB did have left (website) were all too big for the space I have and going by LMotlow's info I should be avoiding Plasma anyway

this is the Sharp set I mentioned above
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/sharp-32-class-31-1-2-diag--led-1080p-hdtv-black/5420105.p...&skuId=5420105

[orsetto]

I faced the same transition from high-quality CRT to flat-panel LCD about five years ago. It was bumpy, to say the least: if you have an enormous collection of standard-def VHS/Beta (or DVDs made on a DVD recorder), the crap playback of this material on modern TVs is a bitter pill. They make you feel like an utter fool for wasting years (or decades) collecting this material, only to have it be rendered almost unwatchable. So be prepared: you're in for a jarring, disappointing period of adapting your eyes to the new reality. After a couple months, you begin to forget how much better this stuff played on CRT, and it eventually becomes tolerable. But it never has quite the same enjoyment as it did on CRT: in the back of your mind, you'll always be thinking "wow, this really looks like sh*t".

Expect to make a couple trips back to Best Buy to exchange various TVs. They don't like it, but tough: the new TVs require an in-home audition for anyone with a lot of SD recordings. I had to go thru four sets of different brands/sizes before I finally compromised with a Sony 32" EX500 (no longer made) which I dedicate exclusively to SD content. After acquiring the Sony, I also picked up a Panasonic and then a Samsung for other rooms that were primarily connected to HD sources. Panasonic, like LG, is all over the place when it comes to PQ: each model is different, and there are huge sample variations within the same model. Samsung is fairly consistent: very bright, contrasty and punchy. Sometimes thats great, sometimes its awful: depends on what you're watching. No current models have S-video connections, most are reduced to a single multipurpose analog connection which can be either composite OR component, but not both simultaneously. Composite looks pretty bad: if you can lay hands on a DVD recorder or A/V receiver that converts composite to HDMI, connect your VCRs thru those devices. Analog passed thru HDMI allows the TV to maximize SD picture quality, it looks noticeably better than direct composite.

The biggest visual issue I have with most LCD displays and SD material is motion slop: in medium shots or closeup, an actor turns their head and instead of clean movement you see multiple shadowy lagging frames of the movement, like jello, which is headache-inducing and smears detail even more. Of the sets I tested out, the Sony EX500 series had the least amount of this artifact, with Panasonic a close second and Samsung far behind. But the actual screens and backlight systems change every six months: my (or anyone's) recommendations are always obsolete. For instance, my Sony and Panasonic have CCFL backlights, and my Samsung is one of the early LED models. CCFL is superior for SD display but not as "impressive" in-store as LED (plus LED is much more profitable for mfrs), so CCFL is pretty much gone now and all sets are LED backlit.

One advantage of LED backlight designs is much thinner frames around the screens: the older CCFL tvs typically had a 1.5-2 inch frame. This made a nominal 32" TV a bit too large for some living spaces. Today, most 32" TVs are nearly frameless, so will fit nearly anywhere an older 27" CRT was placed (aside from some cabinets). You will find the widest selection of screen specs and prices in the 32" to 42" sizes, as these are most popular. Below 32", the selection of good-quality screens is limited, with most stores carrying only Samsung (who to their credit, are more consistent with quality control on smaller TVs than larger).

One last bugaboo to look out for is a "high refresh rate" feature with names like TruMotion, MotionFlow, etc. These double or quadruple the standard 60Hz refresh rate to 120Hz or 240Hz, and often have piggybacked features that further smooth the picture. Some people love this smooth "soap opera" presentation, others find it extremely weird when watching material that was not shot in HDTV. Hard to explain until you see it: it makes movies shot on film look like super-clean video. If you think this might bother you, try to find a TV limited to 60Hz refresh or one that has an off setting for the feature (more and more new models do not let you disable it).

[usually_quiet]

The few plasmas BB did have left (website) were all too big for the space I have and going by LMotlow's info I should be avoiding Plasma anyway

I question how a plasma TV (no back lighting) could have worse black levels when compared with an LED TV (back lit with LED lights), but too big is too big. Burn in can be an issue with LED TV too, but it is less pronounced.

[mazinz]

I faced the same transition from high-quality CRT to flat-panel LCD about five years ago. It was bumpy, to say the least: if you have an enormous collection of standard-def VHS/Beta (or DVDs made on a DVD recorder), the crap playback of this material on modern TVs is a bitter pill. They make you feel like an utter fool for wasting years (or decades) collecting this material, only to have it be rendered almost unwatchable. So be prepared: you're in for a jarring, disappointing period of adapting your eyes to the new reality. After a couple months, you begin to forget how much better this stuff played on CRT, and it eventually becomes tolerable. But it never has quite the same enjoyment as it did on CRT: in the back of your mind, you'll always be thinking "wow, this really looks like sh*t".

Expect to make a couple trips back to Best Buy to exchange various TVs. They don't like it, but tough: the new TVs require an in-home audition for anyone with a lot of SD recordings. I had to go thru four sets of different brands/sizes before I finally compromised with a Sony 32" EX500 (no longer made) which I dedicate exclusively to SD content. After acquiring the Sony, I also picked up a Panasonic and then a Samsung for other rooms that were primarily connected to HD sources. Panasonic, like LG, is all over the place when it comes to PQ: each model is different, and there are huge sample variations within the same model. Samsung is fairly consistent: very bright, contrasty and punchy. Sometimes thats great, sometimes its awful: depends on what you're watching. No current models have S-video connections, most are reduced to a single multipurpose analog connection which can be either composite OR component, but not both simultaneously. Composite looks pretty bad: if you can lay hands on a DVD recorder or A/V receiver that converts composite to HDMI, connect your VCRs thru those devices. Analog passed thru HDMI allows the TV to maximize SD picture quality, it looks noticeably better than direct composite.

The biggest visual issue I have with most LCD displays and SD material is motion slop: in medium shots or closeup, an actor turns their head and instead of clean movement you see multiple shadowy lagging frames of the movement, like jello, which is headache-inducing and smears detail even more. Of the sets I tested out, the Sony EX500 series had the least amount of this artifact, with Panasonic a close second and Samsung far behind. But the actual screens and backlight systems change every six months: my (or anyone's) recommendations are always obsolete. For instance, my Sony and Panasonic have CCFL backlights, and my Samsung is one of the early LED models. CCFL is superior for SD display but not as "impressive" in-store as LED (plus LED is much more profitable for mfrs), so CCFL is pretty much gone now and all sets are LED backlit.

One advantage of LED backlight designs is much thinner frames around the screens: the older CCFL tvs typically had a 1.5-2 inch frame. This made a nominal 32" TV a bit too large for some living spaces. Today, most 32" TVs are nearly frameless, so will fit nearly anywhere an older 27" CRT was placed (aside from some cabinets). You will find the widest selection of screen specs and prices in the 32" to 42" sizes, as these are most popular. Below 32", the selection of good-quality screens is limited, with most stores carrying only Samsung (who to their credit, are more consistent with quality control on smaller TVs than larger).

One last bugaboo to look out for is a "high refresh rate" feature with names like TruMotion, MotionFlow, etc. These double or quadruple the standard 60Hz refresh rate to 120Hz or 240Hz, and often have piggybacked features that further smooth the picture. Some people love this smooth "soap opera" presentation, others find it extremely weird when watching material that was not shot in HDTV. Hard to explain until you see it: it makes movies shot on film look like super-clean video. If you think this might bother you, try to find a TV limited to 60Hz refresh or one that has an off setting for the feature (more and more new models do not let you disable it).

About three years back my PC crt monitor died and so I picked up a small 20" LED Insigna. In some sense I am used to how some of my analog material will look to a degree, but if I can keep a crt tv I will. I have seen the infamous "soap opera" effect and I will stay away from sets with that sort of "feature". Actually going back to about 2003/2004 a friend of mine whose dad was rich and a huge tech geek had some sort of monster tv and at times certain scenes from whatever type of movie or show would appear as if it was SOV (shot on video). It was pretty odd, though not sure what it may have been called back then or if the same terms were always around, but yeah I did not like it too much (though seeing some films if it could play a whole film just like that might be interesting in terms of a visual experiment)

I am taking quite a few notes with this thread and worse comes to worse I might hit up a Salvation Army/Savers type place and just pick up a lesser cart or see if I can snag something reputable off ebay instead of going the headache route and being not fully satisfied with an HD set (then again Ebay can be a bigger headache).

Still fingers crossed that my original problem today was just some odd fluke

[fritzi93]

this is the Sharp set I mentioned above
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/sharp-32-class-31-1-2-diag--led-1080p-hdtv-black/5420105.p...&skuId=5420105

I did a quick search of the model number at AVS and it seems there is no official thread (yet). Nor could I find any in-depth reviews. It's 60 Hz so you don't get motion interpolation, and movie content will have pulldown judder, if that matters to you. This is a pretty basic no-frills TV.

Well, Sharp makes mostly mid-tier TVs (and specialize in really BIG TVs). They're a major panel supplier in their own right, so you (probably) don't have to worry about participating in the panel lottery. They've never used IPS panels (very good off-axis, lousy blacks/contrast). My Sharp has pretty good blacks for an LED/LCD, and good viewing angles (about 45 degrees each side of dead-on).

For what you're willing to spend, it seems like a decent enough choice.

[mazinz]

this is the Sharp set I mentioned above
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/sharp-32-class-31-1-2-diag--led-1080p-hdtv-black/5420105.p...&skuId=5420105

I did a quick search of the model number at AVS and it seems there is no official thread (yet). Nor could I find any in-depth reviews. It's 60 Hz so you don't get motion interpolation, and movie content will have pulldown judder, if that matters to you. This is a pretty basic no-frills TV.

Well, Sharp makes mostly mid-tier TVs (and specialize in really BIG TVs). They're a major panel supplier in their own right, so you (probably) don't have to worry about participating in the panel lottery. They've never used IPS panels (very good off-axis, lousy blacks/contrast). My Sharp has pretty good blacks for an LED/LCD, and good viewing angles (about 45 degrees each side of dead-on).

For what you're willing to spend, it seems like a decent enough choice.

Thanks for that info. I can spend no more than the $600 or so range if that helps with anything. I was searching by size of the Tv set. In my case 32 inch would be ideal

If you mean by judder that I will notice jerky movements as if it was doing a bad framerate conversion, then yes that would bother me. However from my understanding, higher refresh rates on these sets can cause even more noticeable problems on there own unless you are watching something like a fast paced sporting event or playing video games

I just cleaned out the amount of dust from the set almost two hours ago (used compressed air for help and the reason I am letting stay unplugged for at least another hour). Hopefully it was just dust hitting something this time around....

[fritzi93]

Better TVs with 120 Hz refresh (or a multiple thereof) may be able to do IVTC on telecined movie content, in addition to interpolation. My Sharp 70LE640U can, and it was by no means their best model in 2012. Blu-Rays and DVDs can be played from standalone at 24 fps X5= 120, without telecine. I have my HTPC video card set at 60 Hz, and the IVTC feature is very obvious on panning shots when comparing it On/Off with the same 24 fps MKV.

I happen to like motion interpolation. It's very much improved these days over earlier models (I also have a 47" Philips from 2007, and interpolation on that one introduces too many artifacts for my taste). I'll take any reduction in motion blur I can get. Most 240 and 480 Hz sets will have some variation of black frame insertion as well.

What I'm saying is that processing is a helluva lot better on even mid-tier LED/LCD sets these days. You're not going to get very good processing on cheap sets, and probably not on many small sets (32" is now considered "small") in any case. IMO, as a sample-and-hold tech, LCD benefits considerably from that processing. Plasma is emissive like CRTs and does not need such jiggery-pokery nearly so much (I also have a plasma and motion is excellent, even though it's 60 Hz), but plasma is nearly dead now.

If you're one of those purists who despise such trickery, then it won't matter.

[fritzi93]

I think your idea of looking into what you can find used at Goodwill, etc, is a good one. I have so many TVs because I get the upgrade bug every few years. I can't bear to sell any of them them because used TVs aren't worth much at all.

Who knows what you may find? Maybe a used plasma (if really cheap) would be worth the risk. IMO, my SD stuff looks best on my old plasma.

[jimdagys]

I recently bought a nice Toshiba 19 inch TV with remote and audio/video input for $1.50 at a local thrift shop. These TVs were made to last 15 to 20 years. Also Craigslist has a lot of TVs in the "free" category. The newer flat screen TVs generally are not built to last long (not more than 4 years). I see a lot of these flat screen TVs folded in half and stuffed in the trash bin. They are similar to cell phones, basically throwaway disposable items. And now with the new flat screen "Smart TVs", a large quantity of people will be throwing away their 3 year old flat screen TVs to get the latest "Smart TV".

[LMotlow]

The longevity of new TV's is variable, depending on model and construction. I wouldn't expect any of them to perform well for as long as a well made CRT, but I've had my SONY LCD for 5 years and my Samsung plasma for 8 years. Any TV will likely last longer if it's properly calibrated rather than played using the usual factory "volcano" settings with juiced up contrast, saturation, and brightness. I re-calibrate my TV's and PC monitors 3 times a year, and they all seem to be getting on pretty well.

Like I say, it depends on the model and how it's used.

I have to go with orestto: the new TV's are crap compared to a first-class CRT. That's just the way it is now. The guy who convinced consumers that those jelly-bean LCD's could be used as TV sets for displaying motion video has to be one of the greatest con artists of all time. Philips cured most of the LCD motion problems with the simple device of making the backlight flicker 30 times a second. But those sets didn't look as bright in a showroom, even though they looked fine in a living room. Instead, you gotta pay more bucks for foolishness like 120Hz motion and all that junk, which plainly looks phoney. Yep, I know, you have geometry and other problems with big CRT's and all that, but it's a tradeoff of fixing old problems and adding new ones. Now that OLED's are hitting the market, let's hope the price goes down. Meanwhile I keep the SONY for SD and the plasma for wide screen. And now and then I crank up my old 1992 Hitachi CRT in the bedroom to see what a good ole 4:3 movie really looks like with a good DVD.

The only really good CRT's left are pro sets and medical stuff, which are maintained at phenomenal cost and hit the dust over time, one by one. You can buy a used CRT if you want, but that just prolongs the inevitable for a little while.

[usually_quiet]

The lifespan figures I see around here seem exaggerated. The only CRT TV in the family that lasted 20 years was owned by cousins of mine who watched about 2-3 hours of TV per day. The others, used 4-5 hours per day, lasted 10 years or less before something started going bad. The oldest LCD in the family will be 7 years old in May and is still working perfectly.

[mazinz]

Everything is still a toss up- if the problem starts to return- try and see if i can still get it fixed or get a new tv which is why I started this thread or go with the ebay/Craig's list/Salvation. I did see one set from Panasonic that was compared with the current cart I own now (that was an old post from 1996 and not on this forum), and it even offers the same style and inputs (svhs, rca jacks)- selling for only $30.00 with a local pickup about 40 mins away. The downside is that I am not feeling a good vibe from this auction and I do not want to get something to have it work for a week and then dump it and for the fact that i really have no place to put it in the meantime

Worse comes to worse - if my set picture does go and I cannot get it repaired, I do have a rescue 13" old Sharp (or it is a Samsung) with the manual turn dial channels that still works great so I can at least view something-- then worry about snagging an older or newer set at that time. I just like to get things prepared first should the inevitable hit sooner than later

Cleaning the tv set helped a bit. It has been running a little cooler and getting dust off the circuit board and capacitors never hurts anything

[mazinz]

Just giving an update- I did find a Tv repair shop by me who could fix the set. The part that was going (vertical chip) was a common issue for my Mitsubishi set of the time. He does have the part and if all goes well and nothing else is wrong with it, will be bringing it back home today in about an hour or so. Hopefully it will then last another 12 years and by that time HD sets should have a lot more ironed out (hopefully)

[newpball]

Hopefully it will then last another 12 years and by that time HD sets should have a lot more ironed out (hopefully)

You need another 12 years for HD sets to iron out?

Man, some people on this site are sometimes better than the comedy channel!

[mazinz]

Hopefully it will then last another 12 years and by that time HD sets should have a lot more ironed out (hopefully)

You need another 12 years for HD sets to iron out?

Man, some people on this site are sometimes better than the comedy channel!

yup, if you read most of the other posts- they do not do the best job on SD/older analog material and I wont compromise that if I do not have to. I never cared about the nice "pop" with HD or how some blus do look. Fact is these HD sets do not handle older vhs/beta/etc material well and that is more important to me

Analog sets also do not need fancy BS gimmicks and true motion/soap opera crap to compensate like HD sets do because they cannot handle fast motion too well either, so yes, give it a few more years and some of that crap should be ironed out by then. Till then I will be staying with my analog set- thank you

[lingyi]

Check out your local Craigslist or Freecycle for CRTs. For less than $50 (often free), you can easily get a 32" or larger CRT. Even if your repair works, it would be a good idea to get one as a spare since CRTs will be getting harder to find as the years go by.

As far as better handling of SD in the future, not going to happen. The trend is larger screens with higher resolution which means more digital manipulation of SD material. I love Betamax too, but have resigned myself that with the exception of a very, very small percentage of what I had on tape is available on DVD or Blu-Ray.

[newpball]

The trend is larger screens with higher resolution which means more digital manipulation of SD material.

It does not have to be. No one is stopping you from viewing a 23 inch 4:3 video inside a 70 inch widescreen HD TV.

All this SD looks better on some crappy old CRT (and no I am not talking about calibrated studio CRT monitors) is sheer nonsense. It looks 'better' because it is fuzzier.

[fritzi93]

If you're really that wedded to CRT, get some spares now.

Last Summer I took a 27" CRT (still working) to our local transfer station/recycling center. I struck up a conversation with a guy there:

- Is there a fee?
- Nope, just put it on the skid over there.
- What do you do with them?
- See that big metal building over there? It's stuffed with them.
- I thought they could be recycled.
- I guess so but everybody is getting rid of them. So we're storing them.

I didn't pursue it any further, but my guess is that any facility actually recycling CRTs (as opposed to storing them) is simply overwhelmed by the volume. If I wanted to, I could go back to the transfer station and they'd be delighted to sell me any CRT they have for a few bucks. But I should think you could pick one up at Goodwill or a used goods value type store for very very cheap.

[mazinz]

The trend is larger screens with higher resolution which means more digital manipulation of SD material.

It does not have to be. No one is stopping you from viewing a 23 inch 4:3 video inside a 70 inch widescreen HD TV.

All this SD looks better on some crappy old CRT (and no I am not talking about calibrated studio CRT monitors) is sheer nonsense. It looks 'better' because it is fuzzier.

Most HD sets up convert material that should not be up converted, that is one issue. Another is the motion speed/rate which was already discussed in previous posts here, another is that some do not handle interlaced material well at all, and some have a crap analog conversion so you actually do see more artifacts and noise than what is really in your picture. And of course also higher risk of screen burn if viewing a lot of 4:3 material. Nothing more depressing than seeing some old 4:3 shows from the 60's and 70's cropped to 16x9 for HD viewing on tv stations. Sorry until I have no other choice, I have no real use for an HD set, my analog one is just fine

As I mentioned in a few years some of those issues should be resolved with HD sets (more so in terms of motion and higher speed refresh rate)

However- Don't get me wrong, I am not blind that somethings really do like nice with the HD pop (example a lot of the Scream Factory blu's are done pretty well) but it is not enough for me to buy everything again in some HD format and to get a tv to view it that way. Dvd is fine (and that I have a ton of)and blu on my analog set is fine as well. Grandma's anniversary from 86 has no need to be up-converted and in HD. I also do not have to worry about screen burn on analog as much as I would using an HD set counterpart

If you're really that wedded to CRT, get some spares now.

Last Summer I took a 27" CRT (still working) to our local transfer station/recycling center. I struck up a conversation with a guy there:

- Is there a fee?
- Nope, just put it on the skid over there.
- What do you do with them?
- See that big metal building over there? It's stuffed with them.
- I thought they could be recycled.
- I guess so but everybody is getting rid of them. So we're storing them.

I didn't pursue it any further, but my guess is that any facility actually recycling CRTs (as opposed to storing them) is simply overwhelmed by the volume. If I wanted to, I could go back to the transfer station and they'd be delighted to sell me any CRT they have for a few bucks. But I should think you could pick one up at Goodwill or a used goods value type store for very very cheap.

I will probably still get a backup of some sort (more so a single back up) but I am not going to over do it lets say like I would with getting a few dvd players that I know play well.

My tv, (which came back today) they were still able to get the parts needed for it (capacitor and the vertical chip). I also might look into getting said part (vert chip) and keep it it on hand

[usually_quiet]

The trend is larger screens with higher resolution which means more digital manipulation of SD material.

It does not have to be. No one is stopping you from viewing a 23 inch 4:3 video inside a 70 inch widescreen HD TV.

All this SD looks better on some crappy old CRT (and no I am not talking about calibrated studio CRT monitors) is sheer nonsense. It looks 'better' because it is fuzzier.

Most HD sets up convert material that should not be up converted, that is one issue. Another is the motion speed/rate which was already discussed in previous posts here, another is that some do not handle interlaced material well at all, and some have a crap analog conversion so you actually do see more artifacts and noise than what is really in your picture. And of course also higher risk of screen burn if viewing a lot of 4:3 material. Nothing more depressing than seeing some old 4:3 shows from the 60's and 70's cropped to 16x9 for HD viewing on tv stations. Sorry until I have no other choice, I have no real use for an HD set, my analog one is just fine

As I mentioned in a few years some of those issues should be resolved with HD sets (more so in terms of motion and higher speed refresh rate)

However- Don't get me wrong, I am not blind that somethings really do like nice with the HD pop (example a lot of the Scream Factory blu's are done pretty well) but it is not enough for me to buy everything again in some HD format and to get a tv to view it that way. Dvd is fine (and that I have a ton of)and blu on my analog set is fine as well. Grandma's anniversary from 86 has no need to be up-converted and in HD. I also do not have to worry about screen burn on analog as much as I would using an HD set counterpart

HD material looks much better on an HDTV than on an SD CRT TV. I have both.

I think some of your criticisms are unjustified. If you watch a mix of aspect ratios and don't display a static picture for many hours at a time, you won't see screen burn.

Commercial full-screen (fills the screen on a 4:3 TV) DVDs normally look great on my 720p HDTV. Noisy/low-bitrate/low resolution SD material that looks bad on my HDTV looks bad on my CRT TV too, when compared to the same material from a better source.

[mazinz]

I think some of your criticisms are unjustified. If you watch a mix of aspect ratios and don't display a static picture for many hours at a time, you won't see screen burn.

Commercial full-screen (fills the screen on a 4:3 TV) DVDs normally look great on my 720p HDTV. Noisy/low-bitrate/low resolution SD material that looks bad on my HDTV looks bad on my CRT TV too, when compared to the same material from a better source.

At one point I had an old Samsung HD set that I ended up giving to my Mother. It added in artifacts and noise that were not there beforehand. I also notice this behavior on friends HD sets. The main constant was their dvd player being a Xbox 360 or ps3 and seeing material that I know how it should look (I also own a 360), then see how it behaves on some of their sets. I was not liking it at all. I also noticed a few of them not handling interlaced material properly, though these minor quibbles went over their heads and they did not seem to notice or care.

Another aspect I do not like is the digital sheen I sometimes see as if someone took the "digital vibrance" control and turned it up on certain parts of the picture.

My analog set that I have now was a higher end model of 96 and not that cheap (Mitsubishi CS-27407) which had quite a few features not normally found on sets of the time (like color temperature and svhs jacks). It does display a good pic for an analog set which is another reason why I want to hang onto this one as long as I can. Both repair places (the one from 03 and the one from the other week) had also made comment that it displayed a good picture.

The majority of material I have here is SD (though quite a ton anamorphic) and Sd material on an SD set works better for me. Now if I had a ton of bluray or mkv h.264 type stuff (or if I was a gamer) I could understand making an effort to get an HD set if I had no other option, but on my end this is the opposite. I do not have a ton of that nor am I going to ever have a ton of that. And since they were still able to fix my analog set hallelujah

If they could not fix my set, then I would have no choice unless I found another analog in a secondhand shop, which is why I started this thread. But after reading more of the replies and seeing that much has not changed in terms of SD material on the HD sets, this led me to do what I can to preseve my current analog set up for as long as I can