View Full Version : Is there a place for old tech in the 21st Century?
A lot of them have an array of tweaks to pic to suit most folk.. A lot of them are not obvious to a casual look in menu but are often there. Im still finding altering certain things like the backlight can make a tremendous difference to skintones
Of the crt tvs i preferred hitachi generated colours to sony
I get all that Nick, and agree. Your points are undoubtedly valid. However, it doesn't alter, in that respect, what I know I can see. And it's rather different from what you're suggesting
The effect can't be defeated by colour or contrast adjustments; this is something inherent in the colour producing process itself.
I am not questioning what you are seeing, I am questing the interpretation you are making of the cause of that observation. This thread within a thread started with Video tape is better than DVD, but now seems to becoming CRT's are better than LCD's which I am sure few would question other the ability to make large displays at affordable prices. A 4k CRT might be a problem as well getting the mask aligned would be far from simple.
I'd like to know what Stewart's thoughts are on this.
Thats fine, I wont trouble you with any of my thoughts any more.
I am not questioning what you are seeing, I am questing the interpretation you are making of the cause of that observation.
And that's fine, but I don't have to agree with it, do I? Instead, I can defend my alternative point of view.
This thread within a thread started with Video tape is better than DVD, but now seems to becoming CRT's are better than LCD's which I am sure few would question other the ability to make large displays at affordable prices.
Sure, it's simply the original topic, extrapolated. Nothing new or unusual there, certainly on AoS. Call it 'thread drift', if you like!
Thats fine, I wont trouble you with any of my thoughts any more.
Is that a flounce? :D
Don't be daft. ALL views are welcome. It's simply that Stewart's a professional in this area, and so I'd value his opinion most :)
Marco.
speaking as a subjectivist myself...can I ask you Marco to consider something?
What your seeing is a subjective (i.e. Your own) view of what your seeing?
Its a natural human predilection to want to justify ones own subjective observations...just look at the whole subjectivist/objectivist arguments in audio!
Nick's point (and actually he beat me to it...) and the dismissal of what he is trying to tell you kinda highlights to me your doing exactly that.
Colour theory is a complex field and (to me) I dont think on a technical level your processing the objective facts.
Nae offence!
Absolutely nothing wrong with anyone seeing (or hearing) what they see as we are all different, but You can't try and redefine how the technology works to suit your own subjective point of view. :)
Digital video (ON PAPER..specification and measurement wise) is far superior to analogue.
70mm film can look glorious in the cinema...but thats a subjective point of view.
And nostalga, warm fuzzies, any of that stuff can colour your judgement.
Having looked into the subject a fair bit when setting up my tv backlighting system, backlight colour temperature, getting the telly calibrated and all that stuff you learn that a lot of clever people have worked out the math on how to make the picture better.
As someone said earlier (Paul I think?) VHS is crap. And he would know.
CRTs can have a great picture, but a big part of that can be down to the high refresh rate and the like.
Back in the day I had some pretty good Sony Trinitrons, and my current set blows it into the weeds.
Just my subjective opinion of course, though in this case the numbers back me up too. :)
speaking as a subjectivist myself...can I ask you Marco to consider something?
What your seeing is a subjective (i.e. Your own) view of what your seeing?
Its a natural human predilection to want to justify ones own subjective observations...just look at the whole subjectivist/objectivist arguments in audio!
Indeed, and that could be happening. However, I'm convinced there's more to it than that.
Nick's point (and actually he beat me to it...) and the dismissal of what he is trying to tell you kinda highlights to me your doing exactly that.
I haven't "dismissed" it at all. I read it and considered it. I just don't think what I'm seeing in this instance (as supported earlier by John) relates to what Nick's describing. Am I not entitled to feel that way, or must I bow to everything submitted that seemingly contradicts my opinion?
Colour theory is a complex field and (to me) I dont think on a technical level your processing the objective facts.
Nae offence!
No offence taken, but that doesn't alter my opinion on this matter.
Digital video (ON PAPER..specification and measurement wise) is far superior to analogue.
70mm film can look glorious in the cinema...but thats a subjective point of view.
And nostalga, warm fuzzies, any of that stuff can colour your judgement.
And as we know, not everything on paper confirms the reality of what we experience. As an SET valve amp fan you should know that ;)
Of course nostalgia, etc, can colour your judgement (was that pun intentional? :eyebrows:) but again, I'm convinced that what I'm seeing on this matter has more to it than that.
As someone said earlier (Paul I think?) VHS is crap. And he would know.
Well that's not quite all he said. Scroll back and read his post again in its entirety.
CRTs can have a great picture, but a big part of that can be down to the high refresh rate and the like.
Back in the day I had some pretty good Sony Trinitrons, and my current high refresh rate set blows it into the weeds.
Fine, and I don't doubt you for a second, but that still doesn't alter my opinion on what I know I can see. I also care little about the numbers, as 'numbers', in my experience, don't always tell the full story.
This is getting rather tedious, isn't it, so perhaps we should just agree to disagree? :)
Marco.
Is that a flounce? :D
Nae arguments here fella, just an opinion.
No harm done Marco.
Not officially, dahling, as I don't shlip into my 'weekend frock' until tomorrow :D
No hard feelings here either, daftee. The forum would be rather boring if we always just politely agreed with each other!
Marco.
Totally.
Its always ok to politely disagree...:)
For years ( Too many) I used a Trinitron type CRT screen for design work.
Big bulky things admittedly, especially so in the necessary to needs larger sizes.
Switch over to Flat screens was met with serious complaints from most all colleagues in our profession..pretty well from the start.
There was advantage in that one could fit flat 2 screens side by side though.
However accuracy and simple line detail presentation of the Old tech Trinitron designs was (is) wayyy better.
Definitely more life in the crt images, but that was secondary to the fine detail losses.
This despite ALL claims to massively 'improved' resolution numbers.
Fairly simple proof in simply viewing the two types.. side by side.
Curiously new/young designers, who had never used a Decent CRT, have no experience of what or if, of any of this.
Simply another 'in my day' babble.
.
For years ( Too many) I used a Trinitron type CRT screen for design work.
Big bulky things admittedly, especially so in the necessary to needs larger sizes.
Switch over to Flat screens was met with serious complaints from most all colleagues in our profession..pretty well from the start.
There was advantage in that one could fit flat 2 screens side by side though.
However accuracy and simple line detail presentation of the Old tech Trinitron designs was (is) wayyy better.
Definitely more life in the crt images, but that was secondary to the fine detail losses.
This despite ALL claims to massively 'improved' resolution numbers.
Fairly simple proof in simply viewing the two types.. side by side.
Curiously new/young designers, who had never used a Decent CRT, have no experience of what or if, of any of this.
Simply another 'in my day' babble.
.
Hmnn...
Appreciate what your saying (First job used a Sony Pro monitor for running AutoCad release 9 with a digitising tablet...old man alert!) so I've also been there "back in the day" and taking all relevent points on board....sometimes though nostalga aint what it used to be.
Honestly, much happier using my current CAD multi 4K monitor setup, some things do change to be more convenient, but sometimes there is genuine progression.
Lodgesound
04-06-2016, 18:21
As a piece of engineering, and 'old tech', that is just simply stunning! :stalks: £75k? That's just mental...
As you say, the little screen is well cool. Now, even though I'm observing the colours through a modern computer screen, I can still tell by looking at them how much richer and warmer they look, compared with the colder and 'acid-toned' variety, produced by today's equipment ;)
Perhaps Stewart knows where I'm coming from here?
Marco.
Hi Marco - yes see where you are coming from. The overall quality of full bandwidth PAL as we used to see throughout Television Centre particularly in the VT recording areas was at the time second to none - always very warm, rich and even having passed through a transmission chain in a well fed reception area did look absolutely stunning.
The VTR's as you see in the picture were capable of recording the full bandwidth of the composite signal which was 5.5 MHz - their analogue response to tape of these signals was flat. On replay their Timebase Correctors would stabilise the image to within 3nS of timing so even several generations down which was required sometimes for editing the quality was nothing less than excellent.
The BBC had a policy of only ever transmitting MASTER tapes. No safety copies were made as only trained engineering staff ever handled them or the machines.
Hi Stewart,
Thanks for that. So cutting through the 'tech speak', which flies straight over my heard, and to summarise, there's a genuine reason why I'm seeing what I'm seeing, in terms of the colour thing I described earlier? :)
Marco.
For years ( Too many) I used a Trinitron type CRT screen for design work.
Big bulky things admittedly, especially so in the necessary to needs larger sizes.
Switch over to Flat screens was met with serious complaints from most all colleagues in our profession..pretty well from the start.
There was advantage in that one could fit flat 2 screens side by side though.
However accuracy and simple line detail presentation of the Old tech Trinitron designs was (is) wayyy better.
Definitely more life in the crt images, but that was secondary to the fine detail losses.
This despite ALL claims to massively 'improved' resolution numbers.
Excellent, mate. Thanks for outlining your experiences in this area, which also align with mine. As ever, with most things in life, rarely is anything newer automatically better than its predecessor in every area. There are always compromises to be had :)
Marco.
This is insane, no one has said anything that agreers with you Marco, all they have both said is that CRT's are capable of very good results (which no one is disagreeing with). They have carefully (I suspect) avoided the issue of how you can see those good results from the CRT when you are using a LCD to view the picture, which type of display you are saying is not capable of those good results. Ignoring all the other stages that picture may have gone through before it gets posted as a jpeg on the net and makes it to your laptop.
"Insane" or not, Nick, it's my opinion, and for good reason, so please respect it. Danillo also shares some of my experiences. John agreed with me earlier, too. I'll wait until Stewart returns to answer my question, thanks, before assessing things further.
Marco.
*Edited for reasons of having said something silly and OTT, my fault.
:)
Gary, that's extremely patronising, so I suggest that you delete those remarks, or I will.
What happened to the let's just 'agree to disagree' we settled on earlier? Was it all just hot air? Obviously, as far as you're concerned, it was. I won't be forced into agreeing with something I fundamentally disagree with, simply because my opinion differs from that of the so-called 'experts'!
Marco.
Can I just check, just what your opinion is as I am getting a bit lost?
Is it that LED's are incapable of producing as good results as CRT's? Or that some LED's have a worst display than some CRT's and vice versa?
If the second, then I dont think anyone is disagreeing with you. if its the former then if you can see the difference on your laptop then your observation is contradicting your assertion. I am not questioning your opinion or your observation, I am questioning the chain of logic you seem to be using to align your opinion with your reported observation.
Virtual-Symmetry
04-06-2016, 19:53
:popcorn:
I'll get to that in a moment, Nick, after Gary removes his extremely rude and patronising remarks.
I simply won't be treated like that. If someone agrees to 'agree to disagree' with me, and supposedly has moved on, to save us from falling out, as our respective opinions in this debate are poles apart, then I expect them to honour that agreement, not five minutes later make impudent and disrespectful remarks designed to belittle me.
Gary's post was totally OTT and he needs to accept that and make the necessary amends.
Marco.
I'd say, what about folk who say they can tell a good system on utube by listening to mp3 or whatever it is on a laptop. If they are all wrong then its a lot of folk...;) Personally I cant, but if they can then touche.
as for this I was under the impression Marco thought the colours were better on a sony crt, which is a subjective opinion and is ok... I dont see why your so het up about it...
PS Gary, that remark is OTT mate
Virtual-Symmetry
04-06-2016, 19:58
Its much easier to say things like 'I personally think' , 'In My opinion' etc.. No one agrees with anything i deem better but i dont give a rats arse.
as for this I was under the impression Marco thought the colours were better on a sony crt, which is a subjective opinion and is ok... I dont see why your so het up about it...
PS Gary, that remark is OTT mate
Exactly, but for some reason my subjective opinion on this occasion isn't good enough for some - and they talk about cable debates being potentially confrontational!! :doh: :rolleyes:
Marco.
Its much easier to say things like 'I personally think' , 'In My opinion' etc.. No one agrees with anything i deem better but i dont give a rats arse.
Anything I've ever written on a hi-fi forum, mate, unless I can prove differently, is always expressed as 'IMO', even if 'IMO' hasn't actually been typed :)
Marco.
I have no need for anyone to agree with me, I am more than happy for people to agree or disagree on any subject, and I think you will find I have never (to the best of my knowledge) denied the validity of someone’s opinion or observation. What I do have a problem with and its making me think I should keep my head down for a bit as I find it very hard not to point out the problem when (as it seems to be increasingly the case) people seem to disagree with themself.
Virtual-Symmetry
04-06-2016, 20:25
Thing is Internet aint real life, its words on a screen see. A lot have people have trouble deciphering between da two.
:D
Well, Nick. Allow me to ease your concerns on that one. Despite what you may think, that's certainly not what I'm doing here.
In any case, I refuse to take this discussion any further until Gary returns to deal with his earlier OTT remarks. If anyone else had addressed any member or me in that manner, they'd already be off packing their sun cream for a week's holiday.
That's not the vibe or type of behaviour we allow to exist on AoS.
Marco.
Went for a shit and came back to this...what the duck?!
Gary, that's extremely patronising, so I suggest that you delete those remarks, or I will.
What happened to the let's just 'agree to disagree' we settled on earlier? Was it all just hot air? Obviously, as far as you're concerned, it was. I won't be forced into agreeing with something I fundamentally disagree with, simply because my opinion differs from that of the so-called 'experts'!
Marco.
Scroll back to your post #267 (the offending and OTT post) and read the thread back from there. If you can't see what the problem is, then you DO have a problem.
It doesn't matter if it was addressed to Nick. It was clearly designed to be condescending towards me, and indeed Danillo, who also dares to think a little differently from you on this subject.
Marco.
I'll get to that in a moment, Nick, after Gary removes his extremely rude and patronising remark.
I simply won't be treated like that. If someone settles for 'agreeing to disagree' with me, and move on, to save us falling out, as our respective opinions in a debate are poles apart, then I expect them to honour that agreement, not five minutes later make impudent and disrespectful remarks designed to belittle me.
Gary's post was totally OTT and he needs to accept that and make amends.
Marco.
Been taken out of context, I've deleted my post, delete my membership if need be.
I'll get to that in a moment, Nick, after Gary removes his extremely rude and patronising remark.
I simply won't be treated like that. If someone settles for 'agreeing to disagree' with me, and move on, to save us falling out, as our respective opinions in a debate are poles apart, then I expect them to honour that agreement, not five minutes later make impudent and disrespectful remarks designed to belittle me.
Gary's post was totally OTT and he needs to accept that and make amends.
Marco.
Been taken out of context, I've deleted my post, delete my membership if need be.
I wont be bullied Marco.
Dont want to do do that, forget it and lets move on. :)
Bullied? Get real and give it a rest, FFS! :doh:
All I'm asking is to be allowed an opinion on this subject that's contrary to yours, without being belittled or insulted. You're in the wrong here, not me.
Marco.
Everyone's entitled to an opinon Marco, thats something to be held sacred.
Any insult implied I apologise.
Ok, I accept your apology, and glad that you agree in terms of opinions. Let's move on.
Marco.
Virtual-Symmetry
04-06-2016, 21:10
Awesome thread to keep the good chaps happy on best inter web Forum [name removed]
:rfl:
Virtual-Symmetry
04-06-2016, 21:27
Why has [banned forum name removed] been deleted? Here we go again.
Read here: http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?27571-*****-Ban-on-all-discussion-of-Richard-Dunn-(NVA)-and-The-Hi-fi-Subjectivist-*****
I thought you'd have known this by now.
Marco.
Virtual-Symmetry
04-06-2016, 21:36
Great stuff sorry but i aint got time to read controlling drivel.
What I liked about VHS tapes was the way some clown would tape over the final vital minutes of a film or TV programme, realise their mistake, then stop recording just in time for the final credits to roll. That, and the hilariously dated adverts preserved between programmes.
I took some pre-recorded VHS tapes to the Salvation Army charity shop earlier. I asked the woman there 'Do you still take these?' 'Yes', she replied 'We don't sell them ourselves, but we pass them on to someone who does'. Clearly there's a Mr Big somewehere cornering the market in used VHS tapes, awaiting the glorious day when DVDs are banned forever.
I suppose the tapes go overseas to somewhere they are still using VHS. The Isle of Wight, possibly.
twickers
04-06-2016, 22:20
It's probably Marco buying them all for taping EastEnders or summat.
walpurgis
04-06-2016, 22:21
I suppose the tapes go overseas to somewhere they are still using VHS. The Isle of Wight, possibly.
Still on BetaMax surely? ;)
Still on BetaMax surely? ;)
Still on the Home Service, the Light Programme and the Third Service, surely?
walpurgis
04-06-2016, 22:28
Not that far behind I think. I hear there's the odd car there nowadays and most kids go to school instead of working in the fields from age five.
Not that far behind I think. I hear there's the odd car there nowadays and most kids go to school instead of working in the fields from age five.
They haven't burned a witch for a couple of years. Standards are clearly slipping, but still, it's better than the rat-race keeping up with the Joneses that you get everywhere else darn sarf, except for Norfolk, of course, where they have yet to move to a cash-based economy, and the official currency is still the mangel-wurzel.
Lodgesound
05-06-2016, 08:39
As a piece of engineering, and 'old tech', that is just simply stunning! :stalks: £75k? That's just mental...
As you say, the little screen is well cool. Now, even though I'm observing the colours through a modern computer screen, I can still tell by looking at them how much richer and warmer they look, compared with the colder and 'acid-toned' variety, produced by today's equipment ;)
Perhaps Stewart knows where I'm coming from here?
Marco.
Hi Marco;
Yes I can understand what you are saying - you are observing the richness of a full bandwidth analogue PAL television signal as it was generated within equipment like this.
Also as I said earlier if you were lucky enough to live within a strong reception area this quality would carry through to a well adjusted and setup home receiver even after going through a transmission chain.
Analogue television was extremely good - compared to what you consume at home today via your aerial / freeview with the utterly pitiful data rates being propogated by even the major broadcasters the old system was streets ahead.
My thoughts this morning...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGt9jAkWie4
Which I should have done. :doh:
I would have had a problem if someone had said it to me,
sorry Bro.
No worries at all, mate. We all have bad days, and yesterday for you was completely out of character, so.... :grouphug:
Stewart, thanks for that. Nice one - I shall comment later, probably much later, as it's a simply GORGEOUS day outside and I predict a LONG and rather boozy lunch!!
Laters, chaps :cheers:
Marco.
I think, personally mind, that the technology we have today does sometimes beat the 'old'. But there is gear out there was built as a Statement, cost no object, showpiece. What I totally disagree with is this ethos that all modern gear is crud. I have some new gear both new and old that has been stunning, but the 2 best sounds I have ever heard were both new, at 2 different dealers. Both were out of my price league, this didn't mean that I didn't want to listen though. I have been to a few friends homes who stick with this train of thought that new is crud and I thought there systems were quite dire. I didn't tell them as I don't want to upset people as I know its their pride and joy. There are many bits of vintage gear I would love to try but If I was affluent enough I think the new option would be the way I would go.:rolleyes:
Virtual-Symmetry
08-06-2016, 18:33
Watching something on Digital format compared to an older tape format, i can enjoy the older more comfortably & it's exactly the same with music.
I think, personally mind, that the technology we have today does sometimes beat the 'old'. But there is gear out there was built as a Statement, cost no object, showpiece. What I totally disagree with is this ethos that all modern gear is crud. I have some new gear both new and old that has been stunning, but the 2 best sounds I have ever heard were both new, at 2 different dealers. Both were out of my price league, this didn't mean that I didn't want to listen though. I have been to a few friends homes who stick with this train of thought that new is crud and I thought there systems were quite dire. I didn't tell them as I don't want to upset people as I know its their pride and joy. There are many bits of vintage gear I would love to try but If I was affluent enough I think the new option would be the way I would go.:rolleyes:
I rather suspect this post will go unengaged :)
And what's your point, Roger?
Vince is entitled to his opinion, which incidentally I sympathise with to a degree, but no-one necessarily needs to agree or disagree with it (engage with it). It's simply his view, based on his experience, and that's fine :)
I think what most of us are talking about when we say that we prefer vintage gear to most (but not ALL modern kit), is the BEST of that stuff: the stuff that was truly superb, not just then, but still is now. Not some of the old tat out there, which undeniably there's plenty of!
I've been busy recently, but will shortly be tackling some posts here I've missed.
Marco.
walpurgis
08-06-2016, 22:08
I think, personally mind, that the technology we have today does sometimes beat the 'old'. But there is gear out there was built as a Statement, cost no object, showpiece. What I totally disagree with is this ethos that all modern gear is crud. I have some new gear both new and old that has been stunning, but the 2 best sounds I have ever heard were both new, at 2 different dealers. Both were out of my price league, this didn't mean that I didn't want to listen though. I have been to a few friends homes who stick with this train of thought that new is crud and I thought there systems were quite dire. I didn't tell them as I don't want to upset people as I know its their pride and joy. There are many bits of vintage gear I would love to try but If I was affluent enough I think the new option would be the way I would go.:rolleyes:
I use new, older and vintage gear Vince. I have no problem with doing so and get great results.
I also use a combination of vintage and modern. Perhaps there is a perception that this is primarily a vintage hi-fi site? It really isn't. I think most here use a combination of what they can afford and what works best regardless if it was designed in 2016 or 1966.
StanleyB
09-06-2016, 08:08
Vince has a point. If there weren't buyers like him to buy new gear, many of us wouldn't be able to find 2nd hand gear on eBay. We would then all be forced to buy new gear at an increased cost.
I assumed what Vince was saying was that on balance he thinks the best new gear is better than the best old gear, so given the money he would buy new, because in his opinion it is better.
Arkless Electronics
09-06-2016, 12:21
The best new gear will beat the best old gear no problem... if money is not allowed to get in the way!
The designers of today's gear have the advantage of being able to "stand on the shoulders of giants" in learning from the best aspects of the old. There is also C.A.D available which can be a huge benefit and which designers in the past had to do without. Then there is improving components in many areas (and yes "obsolescence" of some older components which are never replaced and so sometimes a compromise must be made there).
IMHO the biggest problem today is peoples expectations regarding ever increasing VFM.... people think electronics should get cheaper and cheaper in real terms year on year and this often forces the modern designer to make huge compromises in order to deliver the product at a price the market "expects". This leads to a race to the bottom... "They don't build 'em like that any more"... well they could, and better, but you would go "it costs how much:stalks::eek: You can shove it!"
Remember that in today's money a mid '70's integrated amp, which would be whooped by a NAD 3020, was probably around £800!!! (Leak Delta 30 or what have you).
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.