Samsung to Market Slimmer CRT Displays for Digital TV

[bruce banner]

The word is that Samsung will start producing early next year a 32" CRT TV, which will be only 13-14" deep and blow away the PQ of LCDs and Plasmas... It's expected to be priced under a $1000. That should put some pressure on LCD and Plasma prices...

http://english.chosun.com/media/photo/news/200407/200407190039_01.jpg

http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200407/200407190039.html

[Johnny5.1]

Exciting news!

[Sonikku]

Almost makes me want to hold out another year...

[norm3]

Darn, why can't this be out now.

[RandyWalters]

Too bad it'll only be 32" - i think that's just too small for a widescreen display. But this might put a serious dent in the mid-sized flat panel LCD sales !

[donrussell]

Lotsa Glare! If this can be priced below $1000 with an ATSC/CableCard tuner, it should sell well.

[bpt8056]

Originally posted by RandyWalters
Too bad it'll only be 32" - i think that's just too small for a widescreen display. But this might put a serious dent in the mid-sized flat panel LCD sales !

Give it some time. This is a new concept utilizing CRT technology and I wouldn't be surprised if they can achieve larger sizes like the LCDs. If the depth needs to be increased another inch or two, I wouldn't mind the tradeoff at all if they can get it at 34" or higher.

[Mike Rubin]

I for one wish they'd shoot for something smaller than 32". Those of us limited by cabinet space and room configuration really seem to be left out in the cold these days.

[shugazer9]

This is probably a 30 inch diag set. Id like to see a 40 incher. I almost bought one of the RCA 38s because I loved the big widescreen tube.

[norm3]

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20040719/capt.sge.odu23.190704081746.photo00.default-384x214.jpg


another story. (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/040719/photos_tc_afp/040719081850_ap01j9ny_photo0&e=2&ncid=1216)

[yshin]

has samsung taken over as the technology leader? seems like they are really innovating in all the fields.

[Rafter Man]

Check here for some more detailed information:

http://www.samsungsdi.co.kr/contents/en/main.jsp

[WOLVERNOLE]

Sort of exciting, the potential here...but as I have not been sold on Samsung's EXISTING P.Q. of direct-view CRT's (geometry issues, etc.), I wonder what the new, slimmer ones will be like. One advantage of LCD (thought Samsung says this unit is "virtually better than LCD in all areas") is that geometry is much better with LCD over direct-view units, over 27" at least.

[Waterbug]

only 3 advantages i see LCD have over CRT:

No burn ins
perfect geometry
comsume less wattages.

But CRT beat LCD in rest of other areas:
black level
contrast ratio
pixel response
refresh rate
color

[getme]

There is no burn in on direct view crt

[Sonikku]

The threat of Burn In does indeed exist for crt type televisions. It just isn't anywhere near as bad as plasma or rear projection tv's.

[Rafter Man]

Of course major advantage will be approx. 1/2 or less the price of LCD which will open it up to the mass market.

[WOLVERNOLE]

Originally posted by Waterbug
only 3 advantages i see LCD have over CRT:
No burn ins
perfect geometry
comsume less wattages.
But CRT beat LCD in rest of other areas:
black level
contrast ratio
pixel response
refresh rate
color

PRETTY GOOD LIST THERE, BUT YOU NEED TO ADD ONE MORE LCD ADVANTAGE OVER CRT...
AND THAT IS THAT NON-SHIELDED SPEAKERS (LIKE A LOT OUT THERE STILL) WILL SCREW UP A CRT SCREEN IF PLACED TOO CLOSE (WHEN SPACE IS AT A PREMIUM AND YOU NEED SPEAKERS RELATIVELY CLOSE TO THE SCREEN) CRT DEAL IN MAGNETIC FIELDS...BE CAREFUL !;)

[Sonikku]

Most speakers built for home theaters are all magneticly shielded. Seeing as how just about every home theater setup has a center channel on top of or near a crt tube speakers had to adapt.

[Venkman]

Any word on US release?

[chrisll]

I am not sure if anybody noticed:

In the product line-up plan

2005: 1280-720 (does this mean the native mode for the slim samsung is 720 P instead of 1080i like most other crt hdtvs?
...
2006: 1920x1080

[Sonikku]

If it did that'd be awesome. It would be nice to have a mainstream crt set that had a 720p native display as it's better then 1080i, but I doubt that's the case.

[Rafter Man]

First generation will be 720p and next gen will be 1080. Also, form factor will be even thinner in later models.

U.S. may start to see these Q1 2005 but will likely be later in the year before large quantities are available depending on any manufacturing issues that may come up with this new technology.

[Venkman]

Thanks, Rafter.

I guess I can hold out on my old 27 inch NON-hd philips until then. It will coincide nicely with the release of the Xbox 2...

;-)

[norm3]

Any news on these sets or others like it?

[Sonikku]

No apparently but I'm eagerly anticapating these tubes as my back just can't seem to take it when it comes to ultra heavy CRT Tubes.

[Artwood]

Message to Samsung: If you really want to take mighty sacred Sony on then hit them with a 40-inch widescreen set like this--you would totally destroy Rear projection 42-inch LCD sets with a much better picture and would also put pressure on their Plasma sets. Better still do it in concert with Toshiba killing them with SED and the one two punch will bring down the mighty giant!

I love Sony TVs, but them forcing the silver look on all sets, them hastening the demise of CRT computer direct-view displays, them not offering DLP because they won't pay Texas Instruments and wanting to make all the money, and lastly them PUSHING inferior Rear Projection LCD because they have no product, not to mention not manufacturing any dual tuner HD PVRs with Firewire outputs when they easily have the expertise to do so really GRIPES me. The best way to get HD and digital TV to moving is to make the resting on its laurels, market controling Sony, to get up and fight for Video Consumers like it once did. If it did I could see myself buying other technology made by Sony instead of lamenting the fact that this once proud company in my honest opinion now only rules Direct-view CRT. To all the REAL competing Video display companies out there--Good Luck and all the best!

[specgeorge]

Brucebanner
When you say digital do you mean HDTV?

Does W1million in japanese currency mean $1000 in usa money?

Toshiba&canon recently announced that early next your they will start a joint venture in producing SEDS a thin crt combined with a new technology called surface conduction electron emitter display. The screens will be super thin lightweight 40in to 50 in. I believe they are going to be Hdtvs. But the prices are supposed to be similar to the plasmas. I guess this set is a different technology than the samsung. Any help on this would be appreciated.

[fs123]

1mil won(south korean currency) is about $830 usd

[specgeorge]

fs123,
Thanks for the reply.
Still waiting to learn if this tv is hdtv.
Also if its any different than Toshiba&canons SEDS.

[specgeorge]

lets face it why would i want to buy a 30in or 34in widescreen crt hdtv any brand now if I can wait till next year and buy a samsung 30in flat panel crt hdtv for under $1000 or a Toshiba/canon SED 40 in flat panel crt hdtv for plasma prices. I was extremley interested in the 30in toshiba hf 84 hdtv but now Ill have to wait another year.

[dmcmahon]

Originally posted by specgeorge
Toshiba&canon recently announced that early next your they will start a joint venture in producing SEDS a thin crt combined with a new technology called surface conduction electron emitter display. The screens will be super thin lightweight 40in to 50 in. I believe they are going to be Hdtvs. But the prices are supposed to be similar to the plasmas. I guess this set is a different technology than the samsung. Any help on this would be appreciated.

SED is a completely different technology. It's an outgrowth of the failed FED technology. Basically it's a fixed-pixel display just like plasma, only instead of exciting a gas discharge to activate the phosphor, it uses a small electron emitter in a vaccuum. Effectively it's like an array of tiny 1/3-pixel CRTs. It is expected to have CRT performance in terms of things like black level, contrast ratio, gamma, and response time, but it should have the exact geometry of fixed-pixel displays, and will lack the need for "scanning" that CRTs have. There are still production and lifetime issues - I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this technology to take over the market next year. But, on the whole, it looks like the best of all possible worlds.

[Geise]

Originally posted by WOLVERNOLE
PRETTY GOOD LIST THERE, BUT YOU NEED TO ADD ONE MORE LCD ADVANTAGE OVER CRT...
AND THAT IS THAT NON-SHIELDED SPEAKERS (LIKE A LOT OUT THERE STILL) WILL SCREW UP A CRT SCREEN IF PLACED TOO CLOSE (WHEN SPACE IS AT A PREMIUM AND YOU NEED SPEAKERS RELATIVELY CLOSE TO THE SCREEN) CRT DEAL IN MAGNETIC FIELDS...BE CAREFUL !;)

And one more crt advantage aswell :)-accurate, analog scaling :D I can't believe that was left out.

[specgeorge]

dmcmahon,

thanks for your input on the SEDS,
How would you describe samsungs 32in flat panel CRT slated for next year?
Canons article on the joint venture with toshiba sounded pretty upbeat as far as production next year. They have been working on this sed thing since the 1996. As far as longevity i think you would agree that applies to dlp,lcd,plasma. At least the seds have the crt history going for them.I agree with you that it does look like the best of all the tv technologies. I hope it pans out and with a reasonable price.

[specgeorge]

I am still confused. Will the samsung 32in flat panel crt slated for next year be a hdtv set or not. Does anyone know? I cant believe they could make a set like that for under $1000.

[RandyWalters]

Originally posted by specgeorge
I am still confused. Will the samsung 32in flat panel crt slated for next year be a hdtv set or not. Does anyone know? I cant believe they could make a set like that for under $1000.

Since it's "digital" it will be HD-ready and able to display HD. It can't be digital and not be HD capable, otherwise it would be analog.

[specgeorge]

Randy,
I have analog tv hooked up to time warner cable I have DBEST package which includes DTV (digital tv) channels which come in sharper than the analog channels which are also very good. These DTV(digital tv) channels are not considered HDTV. So I get confused with the terminology digital sometimes it means HDTV and sometimes it doesn't mean HDTV.

[RandyWalters]

Originally posted by specgeorge
Randy,
I have analog tv hooked up to time warner cable I have DBEST package which includes DTV (digital tv) channels which come in sharper than the analog channels which are also very good. These DTV(digital tv) channels are not considered HDTV. So I get confused with the terminology digital sometimes it means HDTV and sometimes it doesn't mean HDTV.

I can see how the term "digital" can be confusing. Basically a digital broadcast can be HD or it can be SD (non-HD), but HD is always digital.

[specgeorge]

I think i realize now why im confused. Im thinking about the DTV(digital tv)signal that im receiving from time warner cable my tv set is not hdtv so i shouldnt be comparing it to a digital tv set. Thanks for the reply. One more question about this samsung 32 in flat panel crt. The article didn't state if it was a widescreen or not. Should we take it for granted. If it wasn't widescreen it would be a no buy for me.

[k2koq]

L.G has something similar in the works

http://www.lgphilips-displays.com/english/newsroom/news_24_08_2004.html

[irwincur]

Not a surprise since Philips and Samsung have traditionally shared technology and tube design.

[specgeorge]

k2kog,
Thanks for the LG info sounds exciting, looks like all the tv makers are going into flat panel crts. Question the article didnt mention if the set was gonna be HDTV. Do you know if it is? Please reply.
Thanks

[Venkman]

Samsung's flat is HD! I dunno if it will do 720p, maybe it will upconvert to 1080i. Fine with me!

[specgeorge]

wow i just found out that the lg flat panel crt will also be hdtv. Now we have Canon/toshiba SEDS, LGPhilip superslim crt and Samsung Slim art crt all due out first quarter 2005 Talk about progress. I got a feeling these sets will be reasonable priced for the little guys so that the hdtv market will really take off.

[specgeorge]

From what Ive been reading on the LG.philips foreign sites and the samsung foreign sites the 2 technologies are the same. The toshiba/canon SEDS are bigger 40in to 50in and thinner and appears to have a different technology better set and more money. Go with the seds for main set and the LG.philips and the samsungs for the bedroom. 2005 is only a couple of months away,cant wait.

[Artwood]

I'm for any technology that can spare mankind from the horror of RP LCD.

[k2koq]

Brief description and animation on how the technology works

http://www.canon.com/technology/detail/device/sed_display/

[norm3]

I wish these were a little bigger.

[specgeorge]

Norm3,
Toshiba/canons SEDS 40in widescreen flat panel crts will debut in early 2005. It will cost more but its a better technology.

[norm3]

ok, Thanx

[bigwiggum]

I found a little promotion site for the Samsungs
They look very interesting.
I'm not yet allowed to post link to other sites.

You should find it if you google "samsung vixlim"
It's on a samsungsdi site.

G

[vlapietra]

Here's a link to some more Samsung info.
http://neasia.nikkeibp.com/nea/200411/features_341073.html
This is exciting stuff. I wonder how much they weigh?

[specgeorge]

LgPhilips, has the same technology Theirs is called cybertube superslim 32in is slated for early 2005. less than $1000. I guess its a toss up which brand to chose. Im not a fan of the Samsungs washed out greens. It does sound exciting Ill properly grab a 32in for my bedroom.

[subysouth]

Originally posted by RandyWalters
Since it's "digital" it will be HD-ready and able to display HD. It can't be digital and not be HD capable, otherwise it would be analog.

No, no, no soup for Randy.

Just because its digital doesnt mean its HD. HD is a rather loose group of specifications implying improved resolution and widescreen profile. It has generally settled out that at minimum 1080i is required to support HD(the horizontal aspect is often left undefined.) The two current HD signals being used are 1080i and 720p.

You can have a digital moniter that produces as low as 640x480 resolution, well below even entry level HD.

Digital does not = HD.

ss

[subysouth]

All of these new technologies show excellent promise but several of them, particularly the Sansung approach is going to have the same difficult hurdles that all classic CRTs have had in producing HD.

That huge deflection angle immediately creates beam spot distortion problems over most of the screen. Curious how theyve solved that.

More importantly how are they gonna pack more phosphor blocks and increase gun speed(while maintaining that mad deflection angle and focus) vs conventional CRTs. What have they done to break these barriers that have stymied CRT manufacturers for years? I am a bit pessimistic about their ability to do this - you cant change the laws of physics. As long as you are depending on a gun(electron flashlight) to paint the image, there are huge unavoidable walls for performance.


Now this SED technology on the other hand shows some real promise. If I am understanding correctly its almost like an individual electron gun for each phosphor block. Utterly eliminating all the scan conflicts. I have often wondered why something like this wasnt possible. If they pull this off at a reasonable price, its the death knell for most of the other flat panel technologies.

ss

[subysouth]

Originally posted by norm3
I wish these were a little bigger.

Traditional CRTs have a gun speed wall that rasies its head based on tube size and number of lines attempted to be painted on it, that limits overall tube size. Without some amazing new unknown technology 34"@ 720p seem to be about it(and that wont actually happen if they cant pack the phosphor blocks on the screen, even if the line count is there.)

ss

[Geise]

Can't they just add more guns to distribute the area and work load instead of using just one for the whole screen...? I think there are computer monitors that have two guns...

[specgeorge]

Subysouth,
I agree with you regarding the seds, however i read somewhere that they will be priced similar to plasmas.
Checkon the above Vlapietra posting and click on the samsung info and you will see samsungs explanation how they have solved the problems you mentioned.
Samsung and lgphilips have been showing these sets at exhibition shows in korea and china to rave reviews i chose to take the optimistic view.

[mattburk]

I read that the SED's where going to start being produced in August of 2005, and that they will sell in the same range as plasmas. Does anyone know if august is still the target date? I am dying for a new tv, but I want it all, and this may be it, but I am tired of waiting and August seems like a long haul.

http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;986006331;fp;2;fpid;1

[subysouth]

Originally posted by Geise
Can't they just add more guns to distribute the area and work load instead of using just one for the whole screen...? I think there are computer monitors that have two guns...

There is a limit to my tech on the subject, but to my knowledge not only is there not such a set, but without seperate shielded cavities inside the same set, two guns would be all but impossible.

The electron gun is pointed at any given point on the back of the screen(and its moving very fast btw) by an electromagnetic field that is controlled by the tvs electronics to paint the image on the screen. I cant think of a way to generate 2 seperate fields and gun beams within the same vacuum cavity without them seriously interfering with each other. Just placing a speaker near and outside the vacuum cavity can deflect the beam, let alone a seperate field inside the cavity.

ss

[subysouth]

Originally posted by specgeorge
Subysouth,
I agree with you regarding the seds, however i read somewhere that they will be priced similar to plasmas.
Checkon the above Vlapietra posting and click on the samsung info and you will see samsungs explanation how they have solved the problems you mentioned.
Samsung and lgphilips have been showing these sets at exhibition shows in korea and china to rave reviews i chose to take the optimistic view.

Yea, I dont mean to be a downer, but if you understand the limitations of current CRT sets, adding more yoke deflection creates MORE problems to solve than were already there and makes solving the old ones in some ways harder(its harder to more finely focus a more deflected beam - therefore larger beam spot - therefore larger pixel - therefore lower resolution.) We also still have the inherent gun speed - pixel density issues that hamper a direct-view CRTs now from truly producing HD level resolution.

I did read what I could find on the links but it didnt say(unless I missed it) HOW they solved any of this or why this set should be able to do 720 or 1080p better than other current CRTs.

Heres the quote from vlapietra's link:
It is not a trivial task to expand the deflection angle, as one CRT engineer at a Japanese TV manufacturer explained: "Increasing the deflection angle results in a sharp rise in deflection power consumption. The shallower electron beam angle at the screen periphery causes blurring. It is quite difficult to get above about 120° while maintaining quality."

Samsung SDI resolved these problems accompanying a wider deflection angle through proprietary technology. The firm solved three key issues, namely (1) the increase in power consumption for deflection, (2) loss of electron beam focus, and (3) funnel glass cracking.


What that says is they did, but theyre not gonna tell us how, solve the deflection angle issue but doesnt say anything about the general problems of getting a "traditional style" CRT to do HD resolution(they didnt call me about those ;).)

ss

[subysouth]

Originally posted by mattburk
I read that the SED's where going to start being produced in August of 2005, and that they will sell in the same range as plasmas. Does anyone know if august is still the target date? I am dying for a new tv, but I want it all, and this may be it, but I am tired of waiting and August seems like a long haul.

http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/index.php/id;986006331;fp;2;fpid;1

The document you are quoting is the most recent on the subject I could find. I would optimistically take it as fact.

Some key points in the story you linked:

In a related move, Toshiba will phase out production of plasma display televisions in 2007 as the joint venture begins mass production with SED technology, Toshiba President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Tadashi Okamura said in an interview

SED technology offers a superior picture to LCD and plasma displays, but uses between half and one third of the power that LCD and plasma panels, according to Canon and Toshiba. The technology is a combination of CRT (cathode ray tube) and LCD technologies. As with CRTs, electrons hit a phosphor-coated screen to emit light. But instead of being shot out of a gun, electrons are drawn out of an emitter through a slit that is only a few nanometers wide. A nanometer is one-billionth of a meter.

The result is a picture that is as bright as a CRT and does not have the slight time delay sometimes seen in pictures that have rapidly moving images, the companies said. In a demonstration of 36-inch SED, plasma and LCD TVs set side-by-side, the SED picture was noticeably brighter and crisper, and images of fast-moving objects lacked the slight blur seen on the plasma and LCD screens.


I would have spun it a little better in saying a bright and dark picture(netting excellent contrast.) The response time is key as well. Looks like theyve got a winner in their hands if the the hype is to be believed. They do have physics on their side IMO.

Now if they can just get the price right....

I'm curious as to why they arent going to pursue this technology in the 26-32" range.

ss

[sethwas]

Originally posted by subysouth
I'm curious as to why they arent going to pursue this technology in the 26-32" range.


Probably so they don't compete with their own LCD's.

Does anyone know if this SED produces the eye fatigue of a traditional CRT. LCD's don't.

Seth

[subysouth]

Originally posted by sethwas
Probably so they don't compete with their own LCD's.

Does anyone know if this SED produces the eye fatigue of a traditional CRT. LCD's don't.

Seth

What kind of eye fatigue are you referring too? From what part of the image display?

If you are talking about from flicker, thats usually from choosing a less than ideal scan frequency for human eye consumption. Another source of fatigue can be from shimmer which is caused by scan line overlap.

ss

[sethwas]

No from the electron gun.
CRT's shoot elecricity into your face. When you're sitting at a computer your eyes get tired after a while from this. It's less relevant with TV since you don't sit less than 2 feet usually.
With LCD's nothing is being shot. The pixels either block or transmit a certain color and a fluorescent tube lights up the screen, but not your face.

The reason I'm asking is because if I wanted a 20" SED computer monitor would it cause eyestrain like regular CRT's.

Seth

[specgeorge]

Subysouth,
They dont have have to do.. 720 or 1800p better than current crts. They only have to do as good. Their upside is the thinness of the set.
However im still not convinced its hdtv. Samsung is calling it digital.
I have a question are you saying that the present day direct view crts hdtv ready cannot produce a true hdtv picture?

[subysouth]

Originally posted by sethwas
No from the electron gun.
CRT's shoot elecricity into your face. When you're sitting at a computer your eyes get tired after a while from this. It's less relevant with TV since you don't sit less than 2 feet usually.
With LCD's nothing is being shot. The pixels either block or transmit a certain color and a fluorescent tube lights up the screen, but not your face.

The reason I'm asking is because if I wanted a 20" SED computer monitor would it cause eyestrain like regular CRT's.

Seth

Cant say that I have ever heard of this before.....??? Do you have maybe a link or something I could read up on it?

ss

[subysouth]

Originally posted by specgeorge
Subysouth,
They dont have have to do.. 720 or 1800p better than current crts. They only have to do as good. Their upside is the thinness of the set.
However im still not convinced its hdtv. Samsung is calling it digital.
I have a question are you saying that the present day direct view crts hdtv ready cannot produce a true hdtv picture?

That is pretty much it.

IMO there is not a single tube CRT set that has the pixel density to legitimately do HD level resolution. I theorize that the newest crop of Sonys are running the smallest dot pitch on a consumer CRT that could be used as a TV that has ever been built. The info now eludes me but somewhere along the way someone told me or I read the slot pitch on these sets was .68mm. If this is correct, that nets a maximum vertical resolution of 622 lines. And I think thats feasible. Now obviously 720p is out of the question immediately(and not even being claimed,) but picture the even better fantasy of this set trying to do 1080i(or 1080 distinct vertical lines, even in an interlaced fashion.) Thats almost a full 100% line overlap on a screen with that pitch. See thats the difference, the set is throwing the 1080i at the screen, the screen itself just lacks the actual resolution to display it. But they can claim it cause theyre throwing it at the screen.

Thats why CRTs are so easy to exaggerate about. There are several seperate parameters that yield resolution and they can pick one to base their claims on.

Picture that Sampo 34" set with an even larger .82 dot pitch, it can muster only about 517 vertical lines of resolution without overlap(some overlap is ok btw say 5%.) The claims on that set are 720p. And again its throwing 720p at the screen, the screen just cant define it.

[I would like to hook that Sampo to a HTPC/scaler and run 960x540p to it though. That would look sweet.:D ]





And that brings me to the most important part of all - WHAT ACTUALLY LOOKS GOOD, and this bit is interactive.

I have installed HD on screens from 106" down to 30" crts. And the HD(lets use 720p) standard is essentially the same for both devices. Now lets stop and think about this. Lets say without a doubt you NEED 720p on a 106" screen to look good at all, but 720p in resolution would be lost on you on a 30" screen(if it could do it) unless youre three feet from it correct?

Thats the interactive part. How big is the screen and how far away is it and how good are your eyes? At about 8', the average human eye can define down to about(coincidentally) .9mm of detail. So at 8' anything smaller than .9mm in detail is lost to the average human. Know what the dot pitch is of most consumer sets? .9-1mm

So lets assume thats as good as it gets for your eyes(its at least a good place to start.) So what you need is a set that is .9mm in dot pitch at 8' and now the sets size becomes interactive based on the inherent resolution you want. (Another reason fixed pixel devices are your friend, once all this is setup its done.)

To do a full 1280x720 using the above parameters, the set needs to be 45.4" x 25.5" or a 52" diagonal screen.

To do a full 1920x1080 using the above parameters, the set needs to be 68.0" x 38.3" or a 78" diagonal screen.

If the resolution of the set is finer dot pitch, you have to move it closer to take full advantage of its resolution or have better eyes. I personally dont like to be closer than 8' from the tv. And all the parameters are fully interactive given the the above rules.

The problem I am having is the set producers are selling themselves short and offering consumers a worse product by trying to get these sets to do what they cant do. Of course if they admitted what they can do and did it, IMO it would look better, BUT it wouldnt be HD.

Hope all that makes sense.

ss

[specgeorge]

So according to you its a big hoax. The majority of consumers who purchase a hdtv set and hook it up to a hdtv signal are being ripped off. They are not getting regulation HDTV? It seems to me from reading these type of forums you will find hundreds of different opinions from unauthorized people on what the standard is for HDTV reception.

[subysouth]

Originally posted by specgeorge
So according to you its a big hoax. The majority of consumers who purchase a hdtv set and hook it up to a hdtv signal are being ripped off. They are not getting regulation HDTV? It seems to me from reading these type of forums you will find hundreds of different opinions from unauthorized people on what the standard is for HDTV reception.

Well yes and no. You are getting a better scan frequency(HD level or 480p,) somewhat higher resolution than you are used to(new Sony sets for example) and they can process the HD signal info and send it to the gun, its just in the actual production at the screen that it falls short. And yes the CRT manufacturers are significantly exaggerating the actual resolution of their sets.

Now when it comes to "fixed pixel sets" (DLP, LCD, LCoS, Plasma etc) they are straight up telling you what the resolution is and it is correct and it is HD if its 720p+ at least in the vertical measure(the horizontal is undefined by HD.)

The truth stretching is coming in the CRT(specifically direct view) arena.

ss

[subysouth]

I went and did some searching my literature for some hard numbers on these CRT set resolutions to try to demonstrate what I am talking about. As I expected finding any info(because the set manufacturers dont like to release it because it destroys their resolution claims) is difficult.

I did find one set of hard numbers that is helpful and another review thats helpful.

I found a listing for the aperature count on the shadow mask of the Panasonic CT-34WDM60 which if youre not familiar was Panny's first gen 34" HD monitor. The exact actual aperature count on this set(with some unused for visible display) is 1118x611 with a usable number somewhere near 950x540. This was on a $6500 34" set, just like the current crop, claiming to be able to produce 480p/1080i. Can you see the impossibility of producing 1080 distinct vertical lines when the absolute highest possible is 611(not withstanding a phosphor block count on the screen itself)?

Next, heres a piece of and a link to the full review for the 34XBR910:

Sony does not specify the KV-34XBR910's full resolution numbers; it does have 1080 horizontal lines, but the horizontal resolution is not stated. These days, most manufacturers of direct-view sets no longer bother to specify horizontal resolution. Still, in 1999 Sony acknowledged that their first direct-view HDTV provided 1080 lines by 900 pixels, which was less than half the horizontal resolution of the high-definition format: 1920x1080. I subsequently learned that nearly all direct-view sets have horizontal resolutions in that territory. I'd guess the KV-34XBR910's resolution is 1080 lines by something in the range of 1000–1200 pixels.

Full link:
http://www.ultimateavmag.com/directviewandptvtelevisions/104sony/

Now the interesting thing about Sony sets is that instead of having seperate round openings in the shadow mask, they have a series of vertical slits. So in theory, the horizontal resolution is limited by the number of slits, but the vertical resolution is limited by scan rate alone(how many horizontal lines can be drawn by the gun.) The problem with this in actuality is phosphor triad count and beam spot size also limit vertical resolution(and horizontal resolution if it already hasnt been limited by slit count.) If the phosphor triad size(pitch) is 1mm, thats the finest resolution the screen can produce, no matter how many lines you draw across it. See thats the trick with CRT direct view sets, any of three factors can totally limit resolution. The reviewer above is giving the Sony full credit for the 1080 vertical lines(because it is scanning them to the back of the screen,) but in actuality its not defining anywhere near that

Again IMO, the actual full resolution potential of the 34XBR910-60 is probably ~1100x620. 600p on the set(if that were an option) would be the roxor. And thats not to be scoffed at, but its not being packaged in a way that takes best advantage of its potential.

On that line, this bit did attract my attention:
The KV-34XBR910 displays all high-definition programming at 1080i unless its Digital Reality Creation (DRC) scaler is set to Progressive—in which case the display is 540p. Sony recommends using the Progressive setting only for still images and text, such as from a Memory Stick. In any case, 720p high-definition programming is converted to 1080i. In addition, DRC scales 480i signals to 960i.

If I had the set, I would spend some time A-Bing 540p vs 1080i. You are losing some of your vertical potential locking it to 540p(of a theretical 620 available,) but it might be worth it.

ss

[specgeorge]

So in laymen terms it sounds like you are saying that crt direct view hdtv sets including sony cannot show a true hdtv picture. But it will show a picture close to true hdtv and a better picture than analog/sd tv?

[subysouth]

Originally posted by specgeorge
So in laymen terms it sounds like you are saying that crt direct view hdtv sets including sony cannot show a true hdtv picture. But it will show a picture close to true hdtv and a better picture than analog/sd tv?

Yes, they cannot
Yes, including Sony
Yes, depending on your definition of close
Yes

AND

You need to be realistic whether you actually need 720p/1080i on a screen that small due to human eye limitations. The screen for MOST people would be better BIGGER versus more resolution (or attempts at more resolution:p) at a smaller size.

AND

These sets IMO would be better served if they allowed the user to use a scan rate closer to what they actually can do than taking a shot at a res they cant do. 600p on a 34" @ 8' is more resolution than most humans can define(most humans can see about 480 lines at 8' on a 34" screen.) So why are the manufacturers wasting your time trying 1080i, when 600p is about the limit of the set? Couple of reasons I think, 600p requires more scanning frequency than 1080i and because 600p isnt HD and trying 1080i kinda is. Marketing.

AND

Dont confuse higher input resolution with actual output resolution. Even a poorly executed 1080i HD signal is gonna look better on a resolution deficient set than say 480p, because there is just so much more detail, even if all of it cant be resolved by the set. But it still falls short of HD's potential because ALL the resolution isnt being seen. All that means is as a consumer, expect more or at least expect the truth.

ss

[Lew Black]

Subysouth, Great explanation. I have had an early Panasonic 36" HDset/computer monitor in my home for almost 5 years. I work at ListenUp in Denver and wanted to learn about HD back when we were getting no info from the manufacturers. This set has vertical compression when watching 16/9 and is rated at 800/600 as a computer monitor. It was obvious from the computer spec that it couldn't do close to 1080', but the picture quality on a good HD signal is still one of the best I have seen. Coincidently, I view it from 7 to 9 feet!

Another issue that isn't discussed by the TV manufacturers is the video amp. A few years ago Sony announced that their new sets would have "wide bandwidth video amps." The sets they that they introduced that year did have improved resolution, but it floored me that they had previously been selling sets billed as HD with video amps that couldn't pass the bandwidth of HD!! I can't remember, but maybe they called those sets "High Scan" to avoid misrepresention.

Bottom line, the proof is in the viewing. Though the digital sets may have more resolution in theory, the lack of black level plus the larger screen size reduces the perceived resolution. The XBR960 has the best pciture, IMHO, in our showroom. Lew

[PaulGo]

An article on perceived HD screen resolution on smaller sets.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?threadid=463757

[subysouth]

Originally posted by Lew Black
Subysouth, Great explanation. I have had an early Panasonic 36" HDset/computer monitor in my home for almost 5 years. I work at ListenUp in Denver and wanted to learn about HD back when we were getting no info from the manufacturers. This set has vertical compression when watching 16/9 and is rated at 800/600 as a computer monitor. It was obvious from the computer spec that it couldn't do close to 1080', but the picture quality on a good HD signal is still one of the best I have seen. Coincidently, I view it from 7 to 9 feet!

Another issue that isn't discussed by the TV manufacturers is the video amp. A few years ago Sony announced that their new sets would have "wide bandwidth video amps." The sets they that they introduced that year did have improved resolution, but it floored me that they had previously been selling sets billed as HD with video amps that couldn't pass the bandwidth of HD!! I can't remember, but maybe they called those sets "High Scan" to avoid misrepresention.

Bottom line, the proof is in the viewing. Though the digital sets may have more resolution in theory, the lack of black level plus the larger screen size reduces the perceived resolution. The XBR960 has the best pciture, IMHO, in our showroom. Lew

Yep, thats the most important part of the whole deal, what looks best at the screen size and distance youre viewing from. 800x600 at 7-9'(better farther) would be near life-like with a detail rich signal input(although finding a detail rich 800x600 signal outside a computer is hard.) Much more pixel resolution would be wasted unless youre closer. I've seen grown men almost weep at real 720p from a Runco CRT projector on a 70" screen. 720p on a 30" screen verges on ridiculous unless its 4' away.

What model is your Panasonic if you dont mind me asking?

I remember the days you are talking about. AV reciever manufacturers were also selling HD component switching that lacked the bandwidth to carry the signal too. I can laugh about it now, but it was not so funny at the time. HD is such a huge leap in inherent resolution and bandwidth from NTSC, it was probably a lot of wishful thinking it would happen quickly.

We've come a long way and the new Sony CRTs do look great, but I think they could look better if Sony would be more realistic about what they can do and set one scan rate accordingly and invest research in good software to get all inputs to it. Sell them as "native rate" CRTs. The native rate of this Super Fine pitch 34' set is ____x_____ and the optimal viewing distance is between.... Can you see it?

And I couldnt agree more that CRT is still king, if size is no issue, thats why I post in this forum. I'm always looking for an angle on a better direct-view CRT. But to be a really immersive HT experience, size does matter. The only technology I have seen recently that could rival is another CRT-type tech, the SED. The advantage there being shattering the size limitations that gun speed et al imposes on the tube CRTs.

ss

[subysouth]

Originally posted by PaulGo
An article on perceived HD screen resolution on smaller sets.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?threadid=463757

Couldnt agree more Paul. And its a better explanation than mine.

ss:)

[Lew Black]

"What model is your Panasonic if you dont mind me asking?"

Don't mind you asking at all. It is the CT36VG50. It was a real mess to start with and it is in the shop right now because of gross linearity problems and a bad video board. Fortunately I got an extended warranty.

One of the plus features: it is multiscan and can do 480i. I use a Sony HD100 STB with just standard cable and an antenna. When I am viewing cable the STB box outputs at 480i and I don't I don't have any scaling. I just move to the far end of the couch 'til I can't see the scan lines. :)

BTW, Don't you spend time on the NASIOC forums? Are you from the Springs? If you don't mind my asking :) Lew Black

[subysouth]

Originally posted by Lew Black
"What model is your Panasonic if you dont mind me asking?"

Don't mind you asking at all. It is the CT36VG50. It was a real mess to start with and it is in the shop right now because of gross linearity problems and a bad video board. Fortunately I got an extended warranty.

One of the plus features: it is multiscan and can do 480i. I use a Sony HD100 STB with just standard cable and an antenna. When I am viewing cable the STB box outputs at 480i and I don't I don't have any scaling. I just move to the far end of the couch 'til I can't see the scan lines. :)

BTW, Don't you spend time on the NASIOC forums? Are you from the Springs? If you don't mind my asking :) Lew Black

Lew I dont mind you asking at all. I am a NASIOC regular :). I love Subarus and HT. I live in Biloxi, MS but formerly resided in Pensacola, FL.

I did some quick math and your set I am thinking is just what I have been talking about. At 36"(assuming .9mm dot pitch which is very likely) the sweet spot on your set is nigh on exactly 800x600. You have got a winner on your hands there if you can get it rolling again. 480i is almost an insult to that set, but you probably know that. You are one of the few people that could truly benefit from a Media Center HTPC. Use a good video card and software to scale your inputs to that native 800x600 rate. Even 480i can look a shade better scaled to 800x600 with a good scaler.

Youre getting about 800x450 full ines in a 16x9 window which is nothing to scoff about and I wouldnt reccomend a raster reset either. Youre in the zone as far as what the set can do already.

ss

[Lew Black]

Knew I knew that screename. I have an "02 Gt wagon that I suped up a bit with help from Nasoic.

Anyway, I thought your math in the previous post jived with what I am seeing. Eventually I would like a widescreen with the same height. The new SED and FED may be the answer. LewBob

[sethwas]

Originally posted by subysouth
Cant say that I have ever heard of this before.....??? Do you have maybe a link or something I could read up on it?

ss

Just google "CRT eye fatigue" and the like and you'll get lots of results.

Seth

[subysouth]

Originally posted by Lew Black
Knew I knew that screename. I have an "02 Gt wagon that I suped up a bit with help from Nasoic.

Anyway, I thought your math in the previous post jived with what I am seeing. Eventually I would like a widescreen with the same height. The new SED and FED may be the answer. LewBob

Yea I've darkening the step of NASIOC for years, since before it was NASIOC. Ive got a 97GT wagon myself, slightly adjusted;) .

SED may be the answer, in the interim, enjoy that set. Its definitely one of the better ones in that its got a good resolution you theoretically can actually use to its fullest.

ss

[specgeorge]

subysouth,
Thanks for your straight forward reply to my questions. You really put your money where your mouth is. I wonder if you could elaborate on why you think the seds might be the real deal.

[subysouth]

Originally posted by specgeorge
subysouth,
Thanks for your straight forward reply to my questions. You really put your money where your mouth is. I wonder if you could elaborate on why you think the seds might be the real deal.

Lets first establish that IMO CRT is still the best option for the type of viewing I do and how I want the picture to look. Some of the other options may look better in a bright room, but for flat out best picture in a dark room and overall black level, CRT(specifically direct views) has it IMO hands down. (I havent seen the lastest crop of extreme $$$ plasmas tho to be fair.)

So lets address the traits of an ideal viewing device using CRT as the basis. For reasons we've talked about(mainly viewing distance) lets say that pixel size needs to be about .9mm at 8'(maybe smaller pitch or farther distance if your eyes are better.) If you know thats about the size the pixel needs to be, then to increase resolution, the size of the display has to increase correct? The screen of a CRT set(or any set) that could do 1280x720 and 1920x1080 at .9mm pitch at 8' has to be about 45" x 26" and 68" x 38" respectively. So to understand why SED is better, we need to understand why increasing CRT size is fundamentally difficult and these specs would be impossible with a CRT.

In HOW the CRTs phosphors are excited are its size limitations.

First, in a CRT, a gun has to physically paint the picture on the back of the screen line by line. The problem is there is a physical limit to how much distance an electron gun can travel in a given time. This is one of the big things that limits the size of current CRTs - gun speed. A gun can only cover so much linear distance in x time. Its amazing to me the speeds they already do.

Secondly since the electron gun is mounted at the center back of the CRT tube and points from this location to all points on the back of the screen, the spot that the beam creates when it strikes the screen becomes more of a problem the farther away from straight ahead its pointing. Lemme explain that, imagine if you will you are facing a blank wall and youre holding a flashlight with a round element directly in front of you 4' off the ground and pointing it at the wall. If you are pointing it directly(perpindicular in all angles) at the wall you will have a perfectly round circle on the wall. But if you hold the physical position of the flashlight steady but point it up or down or left or right, the light pattern stretches and becomes oval and covers much more area but at a lower intensity than straight ahead correct? This is an inherent problem with CRTs and becomes worse as you try to decrease the depth of the tube or increase the size of the screen. The angle the electron gun(flashlight) hits the screen(wall) gets shallower and the beam spot becomes more oval and diffuse. Its at its absolute worse in the corners. Most CRTs actually have fewer available pixels(phosphor blocks and shadow mask aperatures) at the edges, because the splattered electron beam cant use them anyway.

So how does that make SED a promising tech? Well as I am understanding it, SED is essentially similar to a CRT on the phosphor side, the phosphors are just excited differently. SED eliminates both of these huge problems by essentially attaching an electron emitter on each phosphor pixel. So instead of exciting the phosphor pixels with a electron beam that has to be moved to them(and becomes ovate in the process,) it just triggers the seperate emitters electronically. Pixel shape and intensity and density can be maintained across the entire screen and this will completely eliminate the problems with size increases(the gun is gone) and yet maintain the color quality that we've come to love in CRTs. And the icing on the cake is they should be able to be built very shallow like plasmas and LCDs. IMO the potential of this technology is huge if they can sort out the electron emission problems. I think they have.

ss

[specgeorge]

Thanks subysouth,
I believe the first set toshiba/canon seds will be a 40inwidescreen, do you think it will a big enough screen, it doesnt seem to fall into the specifications you said was needed?

[subysouth]

Originally posted by specgeorge
Thanks subysouth,
I believe the first set toshiba/canon seds will be a 40inwidescreen, do you think it will a big enough screen, it doesnt seem to fall into the specifications you said was needed?

NP:) .

At what resolution?

Basically to take full advantage of any screen size you have to position yourself correctly for your vision.

To answer your question, a 40" set (or any size set) will work fine if you put yourself at the right distance from it to take advantage of its resolution size. I like to be about 6-8' from the set, so knowing that, I can do the math and figure how big the set needs to be OR I accept something less than HD resolution but what is still at the limit of my vision anyway.

If you can tell me the resolution, I could give you a general ballpark of where you would need to be seated to take full advantage of the sets resolution if you have average eyesight.

ss

[specgeorge]

I dont know what the resulation of the seds set is going to be. My viewing distance is usally 5 to 6 feet away.

[subysouth]

Originally posted by specgeorge
I dont know what the resulation of the seds set is going to be. My viewing distance is usally 5 to 6 feet away.

At 5-6 feet away you want to be looking for about a .6-7mm pitch device.

Using .65mm:

a 1280x720 display would need to be 32.8" x 18.4" or 37.6" diag viewable.

a 1920x1080 display would need to be 49.1" x 27.6" or 56.3" diag viewable.

Now it could be larger, but it wouldnt appear razor sharp or you would need to move back.

You can see this phenomenon in a movie theater. 35mm film resolves about 2000-3000 horizontal pixels. If you get too close to the screen the image will lose sharpness because your eyes are exceeding the resolution range of the film at that distance. If you back away to the point where your eye matches the fullest resolution the film can offer at that distance, thats as good as the film will look. Further back you lose detail, further forward the image blurs.

ss

[specgeorge]

Thanks subysouth,
Since reading a little more about these seds I think there gonna be more expensive than i thought. Toshiba/canons talking about making them 50inch and up. Sounds like $4500.00.

[subysouth]

Originally posted by specgeorge
Thanks subysouth,
Since reading a little more about these seds I think there gonna be more expensive than i thought. Toshiba/canons talking about making them 50inch and up. Sounds like $4500.00.

If it fullfills the promise of screenwide consistency and resolution plus CRT black level and response, it might acutally be worth that. If it can do all that and be 50"+ that will be an amazing cry-in-your-beer picture. I cant come out of my pocket for that kinda money with the downsides to plasma(at $2000 or less 42" ED plasma is getting kinda interesting tho.) But if these sets are as good as they potentially can be, they will be pretty amazing I think and should have lifespans comparable to a standard CRT.

Might be a flat panel finally worth the investment. BTW my dad paid $800 for a 19" Zenith back in 1972 IIRC. Adjust that to today dollars and realize how good we actually have it.

ss

[norm3]

Any news on when these will be out?

[Valere]

"Samsung to Market Slimmer CRT Displays for Digital TV"


Panasonic too: http://www.homecinemachoice.com/cgi-bin/shownews.php?id=7419

It seems that by the end of the year all the CRTs will be thinner, bye bye bulky TV's?

[specgeorge]

Yes but none so far are more than 32in, We like them big in the USA. The seds will be big but they will be around 7000.oo

[RandyWalters]

Originally posted by specgeorge
Yes but none so far are more than 32in, We like them big in the USA. The seds will be big but they will be around 7000.oo

The new Vixlim Samsungs might just end up being 30" viewable in the USA. Asia and Europe include the portion of the tube normally hidden by the front of the cabinet in their screen size spec. What they call a 36" is actually a 34" in the USA, and their 32" is the exact same as our 30" size. So i'm wondering if Samsung's 32" description is whole-tube like in Asia or actually a 30" viewing area like in America?

Nonetheless, 32" or 30" sizing will relegate it to secondary TV status, like in a small bedroom or a very very small apartment. Can't see it being to popular as a living room TV for most living rooms.

A slim JVC would be nice though !

[specgeorge]

I agree.

[RandyWalters]

( Duplicate Post Deleted)

[Artwood]

The best way to GUARANTEE sales would be a 35-inch straight out of the gate and advertised during the Super Bowl--Sony owns Direct-view and the only way to get sales traction is to make mighty Goliath feel uncomfortable!