General Billabs information thread

[Ummon]

Recently, I did some research into the availability of the Billabs BL27CB0P digital multisync - the one everybody wants. This is what I found out:


- from Mountain coin:

 I  have a BL27CBOPu the u is a universal mount the price is 575.00 plus shipping. If you have any questions please feel free to call or email.

 
Bill Koshak
Part Manager
702-798-0900
b.koshak@mountaincoin.com



- from Billabs:

Unfortunately we no longer carry this model.  It has been replaced by a 26" (BL26C0T) LCD that would go into a 25", 27" CRT slot.
Let us know if we can be of further assistance,
 
REgards,
 
Billabs Sales - Joel


So. For those of you wanting one and having the cash, better holler now. And, for those of you who are wanting a large (apparently 4:3 though I'd make sure an ask) LCD, this may be the ticket. I'm assuming, though I deeply suggest asking whether, this LCD is a multisync, like the smaller size monitors listed on their site.

[Shoegazer]

Wow, that's amazing.  I guess I'm one of the lucky few to get a true 27" Billabs CRT, since they are higher resolution than any other arcade monitor on the market and very nice.  However, given that the future is with LCD, this is actually a better product all things considered (assuming the price is right).  So, I'm curious:

1) what is the price?
2) what is the max. resolution?
3) what is the interface (assuming DVI)?
4) when is it available?
5) is it really 4x3?
6) is the screen surface as much as my 27" CRT (I believe 26" LCD = same screen surface as 27" CRT)?

Thanks!
Shoegazer

[TOK]

I would love to have a 25" 4:3 LCD available... If it could do Standard, Medium and VGA resolutions, that'd be even better. The problem is probably going to be the price. Even the 19" arcade LCD's are ridiculously priced.
WG was over 500 for a 19"  last time I looked.

[Xiaou2]

 Lcd's are ok... but.. they have their drawbacks.

 For one... they will probably die years before your CRT.   Anything from the Tube light...
to some smt electrical issue. 

 They also have a much slower refresh rate,  less color spectrum output, 
less contrast and brightness. 

 And they wont look arcade Authentic.


 The worst part will be using an LCD in any resolution other than the Native (intended)
resolution.   LCDs do not scale the picture very well to other resolutions,  and the
picture will be a bit distorted.

 
 On the Plus..  they wont heat the cab/room as much.   They will reduce your
electric bill a little (I think).  Lots less EMF. Thinner cabs can be built.

[ahofle]

And they wont look arcade Authentic.


 The worst part will be using an LCD in any resolution other than the Native (intended)
resolution.   LCDs do not scale the picture very well to other resolutions,  and the
picture will be a bit distorted.

I have yet to see some comparison photos of an arcade LCD and arcade CRT monitor.  It would be great if they looked as good, but I am a little skeptical seeing how bad LCDs look when they are not run at their native resolution (scaled).  Just look at the Bios/POST screens when you boot your PC on an LCD.  Horrible!

[Blanka]

They also have a much slower refresh rate,  less color spectrum output, 
less contrast and brightness. 

Well have they? Could someone measure an new arcade screen on brightness (Cd/m2), Whitepoint (K), Blackpoint (Cd/m2) and maybe even gamut (RGB x,y coordinates)

And that suggested LCD replacement: I bet it is a crappy 768x1366pixel TN-TV display 16:9.

And for the non-native resolutions: I very much like blocky arcade display. The bigger the original pixels the better. Just show those pixels without any polishing as 5x5 pixel blocks! It makes the art only better visible.

Fraxxon on 1920x1200:

[TOK]

I don't find native res to be an issue at all with arcade games. My reasons for wanting LCD's are pretty much about convenience. I have two 27" games and two 25's. I move them all around myself, and since I'm getting to the point where I'm a bit landlocked for space, it seems I'm moving them more often.

The only LCD I've used is in my bartop, and that machine has been fine for almost two years. Nobody that has ever played it has made any comment about the display not looking authentic or anything. I find it a non-issue as well. New games are shipping with LCD's, and I'm looking forward to affordable choices.

If I could get drop-in 25" LCD's for all of my games for roughly the same price as CRT's, I would be moving to them as the CRT's developed issues.

[Ummon]

They also have a much slower refresh rate,  less color spectrum output, 
less contrast and brightness. 

Well have they? Could someone measure an new arcade screen on brightness (Cd/m2), Whitepoint (K), Blackpoint (Cd/m2) and maybe even gamut (RGB x,y coordinates)

And that suggested LCD replacement: I bet it is a crappy 768x1366pixel TN-TV display 16:9.

And for the non-native resolutions: I very much like blocky arcade display. The bigger the original pixels the better. Just show those pixels without any polishing as 5x5 pixel blocks! It makes the art only better visible.

Fraxxon on 1920x1200:

Dude, that looks like Atari 2600 graphics. Eww. Anyways, if it's replacing a CRT, then the LCD will have to be 4:3 - like the other, smaller models shown on their site (like I said above). Also, as those models are CGA-XGA, I'm guessing this one would be, also. Stop and think a minute.


Shoegazer, you'll have to ask them.

[Shoegazer]

Totally agree with you there.  There are definite advantages to an LCD arcade screen that make them a more compelling alternative to "true" CRTs in my opinion - and take this from someone who has used both.

Reasons:

1) They typically support much higher resolutions, which obviously are not used by most of MAME's games; however vector games are MUCH better looking, and game art, such as that provided on Mr. Do's artwork website, are so sharp you'd swear you could peel them off the monitor.  After all, game artwork providing tips or special moves sometimes gave people the advantages they needed to survive in the arcades - so why deprive ourselves of that?

2) They have a much higher MTBF than CRTs, so they last far longer.  I'm not sure where the previous comment regarding low LCD lifetimes came from, but perhaps that was based on older LCD technology that definitely had lower lifetimes.

3) They are lighter, safer, and have a much smaller profile allowing for more innovative and practical cabinets to be created, along with original designs.

4) They support more modern, advanced digital interfaces such as DVI, HDMI and DisplayPort; whereas CRTs rely on VGA which is (finally) being phased out by most computers/notebooks.

5) They are easier on the eyes, which is especially important for arcade gaming considering how close from the screen you stand.

6) They use far less power, and don't "burn-in" so you can leave them on in attract modes for extended periods of time without any concerns.

Also, the myth is definitely out there that LCDs don't look great due to their low refresh rate etc., but in my experience anything produced over the last three years looks perfectly fine, certainly competitive with CRT.  Think about it - LCD displays are the only ones you see being used with the latest console and PC games like Crysis and Gears of War - and do those games look like crap?  Also, newer LCDs (particularly LED-lit vs. CCFL-lit) are MUCH brighter than CRTs.

I hate to disagree with my esteemed colleagues on this site, but I don't think the resolution issues of an LCD are much of a problem.  If there are any possible issues with LCD technology, it's that they expose the imperfections of the original game resolutions more than a CRT, as the latter "hides" these issues better.  However, with the use of filters such as those provided by MAME, that can be mitigated - though I don't believe you'll ever reach "true" perfection.  It's akin to the old "record album vs. cd" debate - yes, there's a certain quality to records that you can't reproduce with CDs, but the advantages of CDs proved they were overwhelmingly better with all things considered.

I think the future will show that companies like Billabs, Wells Gardner and others will stop supporting CRT technology altogether and move exclusively to LCD.  These companies in the past have supported CRTs into the 21st century since many arcade cabinets were still being produced with this technology; however current arcade, gambling and bartop games are pretty much exclusively LCD as the price point has dropped to a reasonable level.  These companies will no longer continue to offer CRT as an option just to satisfy a small community such as ours.  So in short - LCD technology, learn it, love it, use it - cuz you gotta.  ;-)

Shoegazer

[Ummon]

Dude, that looks like Atari 2600 graphics. Eww. Anyways, if it's replacing a CRT, then the LCD will have to be 4:3 - like the other, smaller models shown on their site (like I said above). Also, as those models are CGA-XGA, I'm guessing this one would be, also. Stop and think a minute.

Phillips P2000... Read the Wiki!

Phillips what? I have no idea what you're referring to there. Oh....I see. That ain't arcade so it's totally irrelevant. What a lame game anyway. Next.


Shoegazer, this isn't a thread about contrasting or comparing CRTs and LCDs. I just mentioned the outlets for two different kinds of products if they were desired. The bottom line here is: if you want this kind of multisync for native res plus, then here's where you can get it. If you're wanting to check out a 27" arcade LCD, then check here. Not much to discuss.

[Shoegazer]

Well I'm sorry you feel that way but it became that.  It's still apropos of the discussion and there were several others talking about the comparative differences of the two technologies before I jumped in anyway, but if you feel strongly enough about it then just have it moved to its own thread.  No big deal, right?

Shoegazer

[wbassett]

I have a CRT in my cab and use an LCD upstairs for testing things.  Both look fine to me.

[Ummon]

Shoegazer, I wasn't jumpin on ya. I don't pay attention to X - I don't think he pays attention to me - I did give Blanka a little grief, and TOK mostly was talking about application. Yours was the largest post on it and I didn't want the thread to degenerate into the already age-old discussion of this vs that.

[Shoegazer]

No prob.. I'm pretty easygoing so as I said it's not really a big deal.  I tend to prattle on about tech that gets me far too excited than it should. 

Shoegazer

[Blanka]

Phillips what? I have no idea what you're referring to there. Oh....I see. That ain't arcade so it's totally irrelevant. What a lame game anyway. Next.

This is the philips P2000:
http://computermuseum.50megs.com/brands/p2000.htm
And in fact the game shown might look crap, it plays like the best. It easily outdoes Galaga, Phoenix and Galaxian in gameplay.

[isucamper]

I get the impression from various threads on these forums that it may not be a good idea to use native resolutions on a CRT based digital multisync monitor in a MAME cabinet, the theory being that constant switching between games and resolutions shortens the lifespan of the monitor. 

Anybody care to comment on that theory in general and in respect to the higher resolution Billabs monitor?

[protokatie]

I get the impression from various threads on these forums that it may not be a good idea to use native resolutions on a CRT based digital multisync monitor in a MAME cabinet, the theory being that constant switching between games and resolutions shortens the lifespan of the monitor. 

Anybody care to comment on that theory in general and in respect to the higher resolution Billabs monitor?

I had a multisync monitor (19 inch) for my amiga 1200. That damn thing switched sync rates so often I killed the circuits that drove the CRT in 2 weeks. (may have been a bad monitor...)

As per the MTBF for CRT and LCD.... When was the last time you had a gas discharge lamp last 25 years? There are people who will claim that LED's never die... BS!

Regardless, I STILL prefer CRT over LCD (and I am talking about EVERYTHING, not just MAME). The color gamut, the contrast, and the lack of latency. And of course, the lack of inherent bluring due to scaling of non-standard resolutions (IE non native).

LCD is getting close, but give me a well made CRT anyday... atleast for now.

[ahofle]

Agree 100%.
I use an LCD for work, web surfing, etc.  But I still prefer CRT for gaming for two reasons: lack of latency issues and no scaling when I choose a different resolution.  It's amazing to me how much money people throw away on hardware upgrades just to be able to run the latest games at their panel's native high resolution. 

[Ummon]

Agree 100%.
I use an LCD for work, web surfing, etc.  But I still prefer CRT for gaming for two reasons: lack of latency issues and no scaling when I choose a different resolution.  It's amazing to me how much money people throw away on hardware upgrades just to be able to run the latest games at their panel's native high resolution. 

Yeah, that is kinda silly, though I can understand it - they want their cake and eat it, too. While I would like to have high res capacity and all, retro gaming is more important to me.

[Blanka]

I really like the 5x5 pixel blocks from old school games on a 1600x1200 panel. It really shows all little details of the pixel designs. And it looks less dusty, the old games shine more.

[Ummon]

There may be more definition, but objects look flat to me. When run native, there seems to be a very slight depth to objects, like say as thick as a coin.

[Stiletto]

http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=85044.msg897280#msg897280

- Stiletto

[Ummon]

http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=85044.msg897280#msg897280

- Stiletto

I dunno. They're notorious for not updating their site. Can only call them.