1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

LCD vs CRT

Discussion in 'Recording' started by DISK, Dec 22, 2004.

  1. DISK

    DISK Guest

    Hello all, just wondering if when playing electric guitar in a room that has an LCD monitor running the pickups pickup the interference/noise/whatever like they do with CRT's. I usually have to record in the same room as my computer so I was wondering if I should buy an LCD.

    THanks!
     
  2. Skettalee

    Skettalee Guest

    I never had that problem with my CRT's and I think CRT's are overall better in my cases. LCD isn't as easy on the eyes when spending large amounts of time staring at your screen. CRT's are easier. Not to mention way cheaper!
     
  3. DISK

    DISK Guest

    You've never experienced the sound that guitar pickups pickup when near a CRT monitor?
     
  4. FaderJockey

    FaderJockey Active Member

    Yes it is better with gtr....Crt always makes noise. I think in my case and every studio I've been in the guys like LCD Because it's easier on the eyes. Not CRT.
     
  5. golli

    golli Active Member

    :shock: This statement is just incorrect.

    But then there's allways that first time you hear something.
     
  6. Big_D

    Big_D Well-Known Member

    For electric guitar LCD's don't have the noise issues associated with CRT's when sitting close, however that problem can be eliminated by simply backing away from the CRT or turning your back to it.

    As far as being easy on the eyes it's no contest the CRT wins hands down. LCD and Plasma displays just cannot produce as fine of an image as a CRT, although they are catching up. This is the reason most graphic artists (which I believe Skettalee is one) and CAD users choose CRT's. The finer image is easier on the eyes and the CRT doesn't require backlighting (kind of like staring at a lightbulb) like the LCD does. Too see the difference use a magnifying glass or better yet a lupe against the screen.

    LCD's are nice for normal use but if you plan on living in front of this thing go with the CRT and back away from it. :D
     
  7. golli

    golli Active Member

    Well then there is allways that second time............. :D

    But this could'nt be further from my own experience as well as those who I know, staring at a screen all day.

    Being easy on the eyes, LCD in a landslide :lol:


    As for crisper image (photoshop work etc.), CRT all the way :cool:
     
  8. Big_D

    Big_D Well-Known Member

    Really?, I would have to say my experience is exactly the opposite. Of all of the graphic artists and designers I work with none use LCD's except for presentations. Most say the finer image leads to less eye strain as is my experience (I spend about 2/3 of my day staring at one also). I guess age may have something to do with it also as my eyesight isn't what it was. I really, really hate that @#$% backlight, but too each his own.

    Well we certainly agree on this anyway :D
     
  9. DISK

    DISK Guest

    thanks for the responses guys! I know the differences between the two, I just wasn't sure if the LCD's casused the same emissions that CRT's do when it comes to guitar pickups. Sometimes I like to just sit directly in front of the screen with Sonar open and just mess around, but I can't really do that with my CRT. I am thinking that I should wait awhile longer though, until LCDs get a little closer to CRT price and quality!

    Thanks again!
     
  10. Cucco

    Cucco Distinguished Member

    Disk:

    You shouldn't have a problem at a distance of 3 feet or more (or hell, even 20 inches or more for that matter.) If you are picking up serious interference from your CRT at these distances, you should pack it up and throw it away, there is something wrong. No monitor should be giving off this much radiation - if it is, your brains are on their way to being cooked as you read this message! Granted, you don't want to set a CRT on top of your A/D converter, etc. but that's distances of just a few inches, not feet.

    Golli:
    I've gotta back up Big_D on this one. True, LCDs do a lot to eliminate flicker and radiation, but as for the eyes, the only benefit of the LCD is the apparent lack of flicker. However, that being said, the pixels are finer and more uniform on a CRT and you get a truer representation of colors and wider dynamic range (color that is). (This is why photographers, graphic artists, etc use CRTs.) Considering that it's technically impossible for many of these new technologies to create a true black, and often a true white as well, our eyes "create" color where there was none. So, even though we don't see black, our eyes tell our brains that it is black. All of this leads to strain and tension.

    Perhaps the worst display technology of them all is Plasma - but that's a whole different subject. (I can't believe people are blowing over $10,000 on these pieces of sh*t just because the commercials say they're cool!)

    J...
     
  11. Kurt Foster

    Kurt Foster Distinguished Member

    I have an LCD and I like it a lot ... I work with this kid who refuses to get a computer based DAW because he hates CRT displays ... says they hurt his eyes... When he saw my LCD, he said it was easier on his eyes ... Perhaps each type affects different peoples eyes, in different ways? I think the LCD seems to be better on my eyes ... different strokes.

    I like the space savings the LCD offers. As pointed out, they don't generate noise into single coil pick ups. They also do not generate as much heat into the control room ... and you don't need to worry about screen distortions from unshielded speakers .. I vote for an LCD display for DAW applications where high resolution is not needed.
     
  12. maintiger

    maintiger Well-Known Member

    I went from dual crt's in my old studio to dual lcd's in my new studio and I'm happy with my choice. they are not as bright, so to me at least, they are easy on the eyes. Also the saving of real state is considerable in my new smaller quarters and that helps a lot-
     
  13. soundfreely

    soundfreely Guest

    One other thing to keep in mind with LCDs is that they add a bit of latency to what you are viewing. In most cases this won't make a difference, but it can be a problem when working on audio locking to picture. Usually it is only 20-30 ms of delay and many manufacturers publish the latency time these days.

    -Erik
     
  14. DISK

    DISK Guest

    "...your brains are on their way to being cooked as you read this message!"

    -hilarious!
     
  15. sevenone

    sevenone Guest

    CRT V. LCD

    I'm not the most knowledgable as far as recording, but monitors and color I know. I spend 10-14 hrs every day in front of a monitor. I'm not just some guy that runs photoshop and calls myself an artist. Design is what pays for my recording stuff. I work in a full service coporate agency, as a senior creative designer. My monitor needs to be accurate, what I see on screen needs to print on paper.

    CRT's are killing my eyes, and will ruin yours too, if you spend alot of time close to a monitor!

    I use a Lacie Electron BlueIV 22" at my day job, and it's considered a top of the line monitor in the industry. My eyes are exaclty 23" from the screen. (just measured) I just bought a 23" Apple cinema LCD display for freelance at home, and for my project recording.

    HUGE DIFFERENCE. I don't get headaches, no more eye strain. It's unbelievable how much easier on the eyes it is than the CRT. No flicker, no radiation, no screen pinch, blur, less desk space, no interference with anything and I can sit farther away. As far as color goes, you have to calibrate a monitor for good color, something usually only pros bother with. My new LCD display is just as good or better for color accuracy when both are calibrated correctly, and I would say the LDC is more accurate in representing printed blacks and whites onscreen, for color matching with commercial printers. And as far as text on screen, there's no contest, the LCD is better. I'd put the apple display up against any CRT any day, sony, lacie, anything. But, you're talking $2000 for the Apple Display VS. $800 for the Lacie or $1200 for the Sony. To me, my eyes (i.e. career) are worth the extra cash.

    You have to spend the money, and do your research. If you're looking to only spend $200-$300 on a monitor, you're not concerned with color accuracy, refresh rates, or the ability to calibrate properly anyway. If not, there's still plenty of 17" $300-$500 LCDs that would be great in a studio, and a big improvment over CRT. I'd say 1/2 of the studios I've been, within the last 6-12 months are LCD, and many of my Design friends are going LCD.

    Other than cost, there's no real benefit of CRT over LCD these days. The technology is catching and surpassing in many areas. This was not the case even a year ago. You may want to investigate good LCDs if you haven't in the last year or so. As far as response time and latency, 12-16ms is average for 15-17" and 30ms in nearly nonexisent anymore. 20-25ms seems to be still around in 19" LCDs but you'll only really see it in a 80+fps game or a fast scene on DVD and you'll see it as a blur or ghost. It's not like the video is behind the audio. You'd never notice in average use. It's not the same Latency as a recording latency.

    Stay away from Sony, NEC in LCD you're paying for the name. Look for Samsung, Planar, Viewsonic, LG, new Apple dislays (if you have a mac - look no further) - much better for the money.

    I'll never spend another dime on a CRT, period.
     
  16. sevenone

    sevenone Guest

    CRT V. LCD

    I'm not the most knowledgable as far as recording, but monitors and color I know. I spend 10-14 hrs every day in front of a monitor. I'm not just some guy that runs photoshop and calls myself an artist. Design is what pays for my recording stuff. I work in a full service coporate agency, as a senior creative designer. My monitor needs to be accurate, what I see on screen needs to print on paper.

    CRT's are killing my eyes, and will ruin yours too, if you spend alot of time close to a monitor!

    I use a Lacie Electron BlueIV 22" at my day job, and it's considered a top of the line monitor in the industry. My eyes are exaclty 23" from the screen. (just measured) I just bought a 23" Apple cinema LCD display for freelance at home, and for my project recording.

    HUGE DIFFERENCE. I don't get headaches, no more eye strain. It's unbelievable how much easier on the eyes it is than the CRT. No flicker, no radiation, no screen pinch, blur, less desk space, no interference with anything and I can sit farther away. As far as color goes, you have to calibrate a monitor for good color, something usually only pros bother with. My new LCD display is just as good or better for color accuracy when both are calibrated correctly, and I would say the LDC is more accurate in representing printed blacks and whites onscreen, for color matching with commercial printers. And as far as text on screen, there's no contest, the LCD is better. I'd put the apple display up against any CRT any day, sony, lacie, anything. But, you're talking $2000 for the Apple Display VS. $800 for the Lacie or $1200 for the Sony. To me, my eyes (i.e. career) are worth the extra cash.

    You have to spend the money, and do your research. If you're looking to only spend $200-$300 on a monitor, you're not concerned with color accuracy, refresh rates, or the ability to calibrate properly anyway. If not, there's still plenty of 17" $300-$500 LCDs that would be great in a studio, and a big improvment over CRT. I'd say 1/2 of the studios I've been, within the last 6-12 months are LCD, and many of my Design friends are going LCD.

    Other than cost, there's no real benefit of CRT over LCD these days. The technology is catching and surpassing in many areas. This was not the case even a year ago. You may want to investigate good LCDs if you haven't in the last year or so. As far as response time and latency, 12-16ms is average for 15-17" and 30ms in nearly nonexisent anymore. 20-25ms seems to be still around in 19" LCDs but you'll only really see it in a 80+fps game or a fast scene on DVD and you'll see it as a blur or ghost. It's not like the video is behind the audio. You'd never notice in average use. It's not the same Latency as a recording latency.

    Stay away from Sony, NEC in LCD you're paying for the name. Look for Samsung, Planar, Viewsonic, LG, new Apple dislays (if you have a mac - look no further) - much better for the money.

    I'll never spend another dime on a CRT, period.
     
  17. Pez

    Pez Active Member

    lcd

    I just got a 19" Sony LCD with some new technology. Just wish I could remember what it was called. I need to go into the studio to recall the model. It really looks better than my 15" Viewsonic LCD and old NEC CRT. No comparison at all. To date I have not seen any other displays on the market quite like it. It has really spoiled me to the point where I hate to look at any other monitors. The thing is very expensive (around 600.00) but since I look at it all day long it is well worth it. Mixing for prolonged periods can easily get tedious and a good monitor really helps. Good looking gear can also help bring in clients. Appearances count more then we would like to believe in bringing in extra work.
     
  18. golli

    golli Active Member

    That depends on how you hook them up. DI vs. VGA.

    And also, each model of LCD has it's own latency spec. I´ve seen as little as 5ms in LCD's and as much as 30ms.
     

Share This Page