Best monitor for Vector games with mame

[rrcade]

So after tweaking the vector settings in mame what monitor would give the best looking picture?

Real Arcade monitor with AVGA card
Old Computer monitor (curved glass)
Flat LCD Monitor?

opinions?

[Jack Burton]

An old computer monitor would be best as vector games look better at high resolutions on raster monitors. 

[Malenko]

I'd say new LCD, but like most of these questions, there is no "right" answer just everyone's opinion.

[Ummon]

Are you wanting to build a dedicated vector cab?

[isucamper]

I can't imagine why anyone would pick a LCD over a CRT for vector games.  Ghosting, response time, and contrast on LCDs are all issues when compared to CRTs.  Definitely, out of those choices, a PC monitor would be the best with it's high resolution and natural phosper glow.

[genesim]

With newer LCD's at 120hz ghosting does not exist.

LCD's are capable of super white's and resolution beyond any PC monitor.   Scaling issues is the bottle neck...not the monitor.

[RandyT]

I can't imagine why anyone would pick a LCD over a CRT for vector games.  Ghosting, response time, and contrast on LCDs are all issues when compared to CRTs.  Definitely, out of those choices, a PC monitor would be the best with it's high resolution and natural phosper glow.

Linky.  Pay special attention to the LED models which can localize and control the brightness of the backlighting.  One of the things they consider to be a slight drawback to this type of technology, is that there is some faint blooming around bright text on black backgrounds.  This is because next to the inky blacks where the leds are extinguished, you are probably going to notice some bleed-through typical of a standard CCFL backlit LCD panel.  But the bleed-through becomes localized to areas that are being lit, and is therefore less offensive.  In the case of showing vectors, some minor glowing around the graphics would probably add to the realism, and things like phosphor persistence can be emulated in software.  The downside is that this technology seems to only be available in sizes 40" and up, and the cost will be somewhat prohibitive for a cabinet.  If they start making them smaller and cheaper, they would probably be one of the best choices for vector emulation.

RandyT

[genesim]

Hmm so I guess this takes down the whole black levels cannot be produced.    I never argued for lower models.    Hence me saying CURRENT LCD's.    Guess one is backpeddling a bit?

Like I said 50,000:1.   Not a whole lot to discuss here.

[isucamper]

With newer LCD's at 120hz ghosting does not exist.

This is absolutely, completely not true. 

For the past 3 years, I've been looking for an LCD TV to replace my Sony XBR 400 HD CRT.  While they have made leaps and bounds, to say the LCD TVs and monitors do not ghost, or blur during fast movement, or match CRTs in the contrast department... well it's just not true. 

I've tested the Samsung 650 - 950 series, the Sony XBR 2-8 series (XBR 8 is actually HORRENDOUS with the ghosting), newer TVs and monitors from Toshiba, Westinghouse, and Phillips.  All of them ghost.  All of them blur unless you put on the interpolating motion enhancement (which adds delay to the response time and in my opinion, is unusable for games).  Other TV tech blurs as well including plasma and Sony's SXRD tech.  It boils down to the progressive style in which these TVs display images.  In HDTVs (non CRT), the picture is displayed progressively, that is, one frame leads right into the next.  In CRT TVs, the picture is strobed, which reduces the blur at the retina of the eye.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDTV_blur

Some newer brands have of LCDs have tried to simulate this strobing, but by my own eyes, the tech is not there yet. 

The base test I do is to hook up one of my game consoles (either Wii, PS3, or Xbox 360) and play a side scrolling 2D game (usually Super Mario World or Castlevania Symphony of the Night).  No HDTV or monitor (that isn't CRT based) is able to display side scrolling without a significant loss of detail, either at 480p or at 1080p.  In fact, no HDTV or monitor I've tried has been able to display a 60 frames per second 3D game without blurring.  Keep in mind that if you play a 30 frames per second 3D game, there is natural blur in the frame rate, so you probably won't notice the blur induced by the TV. 

If you want, I can dig through the various threads on the AVSforums where I've posted the results of my testing.  If you do know of some magical LCD that does not blur, let me know the model, and if I can track one down I will test it.  I am as eager as the rest of you for a replacement for my 300 pound CRT. 

[RandyT]

If you do know of some magical LCD that does not blur, let me know the model, and if I can track one down I will test it.  I am as eager as the rest of you for a replacement for my 300 pound CRT. 

Some of the latest models of Plasma and LCD panels boast something they are calling "full-resolution motion" or something like that.  My 50" Panny Viera (plasma) was last year's model, so it doesn't have this.  Can't tell you how the new ones look, but instead of the 900p during fast motion that my previously "top of line" set is doing , they are now doing full 1080p.  It could be this motion processing that is looking like blur to you, as it sounds as though the image is being downsampled on the fly...which would make it blurrier (or pixelated, but fuzzier is less noticable.)  All 1080p sets look good with static images though.

In any case, if you haven't checked them out, they may be what you are looking for.  Even the 900p motion resolution models do a great job, so I'm suspecting that the 1080p versions will be even better.

RandyT

[genesim]

I guess we can agree to disagree because I see ZERO ghosting.   A LCD 120hz is updating 120 times per second.   That is displaying a film print at 5 times (24fps).    IMPOSSIBLE

No HDTV or monitor (that isn't CRT based) is able to display side scrolling without a significant loss of detail, either at 480p or at 1080p.  In fact, no HDTV or monitor I've tried has been able to display a 60 frames per second 3D game without blurring. 

Actually I play TONS of 2D games on my display with none of the so called blur but you have a problem.   You are confusing magnification of a poor source vs actual deficit of a modern display to not blur an image.

If you are using a Wii with a 480p image going through some crappy analog cables then you have missed the point.

Case in point, watch a VHS source on a HDTV and you got problems...why because it was never meant to be seen that way!   The interlaced signal is the key problem.

That said until you have tested a 120hz LCD you have not tested the best.  Google 120hz eliminates ghosting and you will get my drift.   

But like I have stated above..you can't polish a turd.   Even if there is blur, it is indicative of the coding and not the technology.   

Super Mario World?   Prime example.   It blurred on all televisions because of the console!   Dude one of my favorite games, but this is another poor example.   I challenge you to find one TV CRT or otherwise that didn't have motion blur.

In CRT TVs, the picture is strobed, which reduces the blur at the retina of the eye. 

Deficit of the display...but I have never bought this arguement.    But I respectfully agree to disagree.   This is old ground.   I urge you to check out a newer LCD 120hz display.   ANY OF THEM.   You just may change your mind.

Oh yeah, and having a good video card doesn't hurt either going out with a DVI.   So many factors...

[isucamper]

Brother, I've spent far too many hours getting far to many dirty looks from Best Buy employees for you to tell me that I haven't tested enough TVs.  Not sure what "crappy analog" cables your talking about with the Wii, but you can only get 480p if your using Component cables (please don't confuse these with Composite cables).  I have tested the newest Sony and Samsung 120Hz TVs at 480p and 1080p (HDMI and Component) and they all blur.  The blur has NOTHING to do with 60hz or 120hz.  It has to do with your retina blurring the progressive frames together.  Please read the wiki link I included in my last post. 

I'm not going to get into an all day argument here, I've got too much to do.  If you've got an LCD that you say doesn't blur, tell me the model and I'll try it out.

You need to keep in mind what a scrolling image on a CRT display looks like.  It should look like silk being pulled across a smooth surface.  Put any LCD next to that and you will see a difference.  I actually encourage you to do a side by side test before we continue this arguement. 

@Randy.  I'm not sure of what tech your speaking of, but it's been about a year since I've looked at any new Plasmas.  I do all my testing with any enhanced motion processing turned off since it adds to the response time and creates a vary unnatural, "video like" image.  I will concede that some of the 120hz motion enhancers (Samsung's in particular) do eliminate the blurring.  However, it comes at a cost that I don't think is acceptable. 

[genesim]

Component cables are crappy analog compared to a pure digital signal.    If you have done as many tests as you say then you know that a simple A/B test will give you less then stellar results.

Add to it a inferior source such as a 480p signal and you have the limiations of a scale up....not the monitor.

But we can respectfully agree to disagree.   I too have done the tests and My Sony KDL 46XBR can absolutely make the case.

But if you are going to use a crappy sidescroller as the defintion of blurring, then yes I cannot help you. 

The blur has NOTHING to do with 60hz or 120hz.

What can I say to this?   I am mean this with all respect but an image that refreshed at twice the rate which is in some cases actually many more times redrawn, the concept of blurring is ZILCH.   

It has to do with your retina blurring the progressive frames together.

This statement is troubling to me.   In most all cases of a sidescroller the image that is presented is actually interlaced.    The programmers meant it to be seen that way.   Anytime you get a signal that is not an even divisor you are going to get "blur" because the framerate cannot and will not show the picture in a 1:1 ratio.    So a Genesis sidescroller is going to blur because at any given rate you are going to see a partial frame because of the NTSC standard not comforming to the 60hz standard.

This has nothing to do with the ability of an LCD to draw the image fast enough.

If you want to truly test the ability of the display put a source that matches the refresh rate, blur does not exist.    What you are seeing is the limitation of the source.   The fact that the CRT displays are crappier will hide this obvious defficiency, but hiding isn't really approvement, it just appears to be.

But again, it is still all bull because a display that draws twice as fast is a good thing, not bad.   The 120hz display has put the slam dunk on this whole blurring concept.    There is no arguement and that is why Plasma and all other displays went bye bye.

[DJ_Izumi]

*slamming head into desk over and over and over agian*

[genesim]

Why because I have an honest discussion over a display unit?   DISPROVE ME INSTEAD OF PERSONAL ATTACKING ME!  Everything I said is true.

Componest signals cannot match a digital source.   CHECK
120hz display refreshes at a rate that is beyond what the human eye can detect.  CHECK
Using sidescrollers that were meant to be seen in an interlaced way is a poor choice for detecting blur CHECK

[genesim]

I was doing some motion tests and it really is a laugh.

So if you go with something like Ecco the Dolphin like the beggining seqeunce you get "blur" at the super fast intro..but wait, Ecco is clear as a bell??  How is this?

Mortal Kombat 4, I put the run feature on going back and forth back forth, no blurring(or so minimal not even worth mentioning)...but yet if you go with run on MK3 you get more obvious blur could it be the programming?

Of course this all doesn't make sense when you consider something like MK VS DC Universe where there is tons of fast movement particularly when the drop off the cliff.  No blur there.   Particularly looking at the background zipping past stagnate objects   Game is so clear with all the movement.   Now the Flash has intentional blur but of course what is interesting is that something like Batman spinning around in a circle doesn't blur??   Hmmmm

Sonic the Hedge Hog back and forth back and forth...nothing.

Doom 3 same deal.    You have all types of stuff jumping around the screen.   I have a video card that runs it at the highest resolution my 1080p will allow(which is 2 short of the top shelf of the game options since PC resolutions are obviousy beyond the Sony display)...NO BLUR.

This is all such horse puckey.    I remember watching old TV's and the ghosting was far worse, and we all know that old arcades are very capable of alot of this as well.   The refresh rates were so low.    It is all opinions I guess.   

If you say that you have tested tons of 60hz and 120hz and see blur in all I guess I cannot argue with you, but I hate to see you pair up one with the other.   There is a world of difference between the two.    I know for a fact that my older LCD did show blur because its response time was in the 15ms range or close to it.    HORRIBLE.    That is what most people are talking about when they talk about blur.   Newer LCD's, does not exist, and hasn't for a long time.    My LCD in my arcade has a 4ms response and I don't see it at all.   

Now the 700:1 contrast ratio...yeah the black isn't the greatest...but it still looks dang good to me!

But I do understand about time, and though I post back, it is because this subject greatly interests me.    Though some on here would rather turn it into something else, this is not my intention.

Hashing out the facts is my goal.

[isucamper]

Componest signals cannot match a digital source.   CHECK

Generally, people prefer HDMI over component because it has the ability to pass high def audio along with the video.  As far as the video, the comparison between the two is pretty subjective over which one a person might prefer (warmer analog signal or more consistant digital one).  You make it sound like a fact that digital is better, and that's not the case at all.  Component is able to pass full 1080p just like HDMI and much like how some people prefer vinyl records to CDs, some people prefer the look of high def video over component cables to HDMI. 

120hz display refreshes at a rate that is beyond what the human eye can detect.  CHECK

Ohhh... kay?  What does this have to do with anything?  The human eye cannot detect 60Hz either.  It doesn't change the fact that you are going to get motion blur on either 60hz or 120hz because of the progressive display of non CRT based HDTVs. 

Here's another link talking about the subject since you seem to refuse to read the wiki one I supplied and then you demand that I present proof on the matter.  Here's proof.  Please read it this time. 

http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/HDTV-blur  <----proof

Using sidescrollers that were meant to be seen in an interlaced way is a poor choice for detecting blur CHECK

Um.  I'm not hooking up an NES to these TVs.  There are plenty of games for the high definition systems that do side scrolling, and those are what I'm testing with.  The blur is not because of some deinterlacing process.  Please believe me when I tell you I've been playing video games for a very long time, and I know exactly what to look for. 

http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1579/Mega-Man-9/p1/
http://xboxlive.ign.com/articles/775/775220p1.html

[isucamper]

So if you go with something like Ecco the Dolphin like the beggining seqeunce you get "blur" at the super fast intro..but wait, Ecco is clear as a bell??  How is this?

Because... Echo is centered in the middle of the screen and does not move.  Everything else moves around him. 

As for your other games, go try them on a CRT and see how they look.  You have no point of reference.

You know what?  I'm done.  You win.  You're right.  LCDs have no blur.  No HDTVs blur whatsoever.  I hope everyone listens to you and not me. 

[Turnarcades]

So after tweaking the vector settings in mame what monitor would give the best looking picture?

Real Arcade monitor with AVGA card
Old Computer monitor (curved glass)
Flat LCD Monitor?

opinions?

Dude, ignore the accuracy arguement or you'll be here all year. This accuracy/tech spec war of words ruins many similar simple Arcade Monitor/PC Monitor threads as people eventually forget what you originally ask.

Building a second cab? - Use an old CRT. At the end of the day you're gonna be playing the games, not having a bunch of art critics sat round analysing it like a painting.

[genesim]

isucamper,

Calm down.   Should I do the same and say you are right too?   

We can disagree without someone pitching a fit.   

The Echo intro screen has no Echo in it.   Then he comes out and splashing through the back ground and passes up the background.   You know the part right?   That would be a point of reference.   Movement...but of course you ignore the rest of my examples.

As for trying them on a CRT display, yes I have done that many many many times.   The Genesis is my favorite system and I am most assuredly a Sega boy.   I am well aware of how the games looked emulated on a CRT screen as well as of course playing them on the NTSC standard.

But the difference between you and me is that I also have it on a new 120hz LCD screen in my house..not just walking into a store and pointing your finger when most of the time those idiots at the store actually use a COMPOSITE signal.   At best they use the Component.   Neither are proper for showing off the ability of the display unit.

Still, this seems to be a very touchy subject with so many and all I encourage is that one should get familiar with new tech and actually spend months looking at the differences as opposed to thinking you know.   You will find that you walk away with a much more informed opinion.

I have 3 CRT monitors in the house, I used to own a Plasma for several years, and I also have 4 LCD screens...each of various age.    Not to mention me having owned every kind of monitor in the past.   Years ago I would be on your side.   LCD's blurred then...but I am not stuck in the past and progress is progress.  I call it as I see it.   To each his own.

[genesim]

I didn't see your last post.   Component vs HDMI..please.   Analog cannot and willnot produce an image as well as a perfectly coded digital source made for the display.

Same thing goes for CD's and Records.   Dynamic range learn it...love it...know it.   Records are dead as Julius Ceasar and for the record DVD Audio and SACD effectively put an end to the love for the inferior source...but this is an arguement that I could definetly pass on for days..best leave this one lie..

Getting back...

LCDs often have a greater motion blur effect because the pixel in an LCD remains lit unlike the CRT phosphors that merely strobe for a very brief period of time. Reducing the time an LCD is lit has been shown to reduce motion blur due to eye tracking by decreasing the time period the backlit pixels are on.[3] NOTE: An instant strobe is required to completely eliminate the retinal blurring.

Again we are talking about refresh rates that are beyond the human eye.   Actually keeping the pixel lit is immaterial to this arguement because the pixel are changing at a much faster rate.   The problem is the source..not the display.   Doesn't matter if one is strobing if the other is pixels at a much faster rate.   The eye cannot see either so it is a crap arguement.

OLD NEWS.   And yes I did read your wiki and it is the same age old debate as well just said a little differently.   

Now do you understand?

I too have been playing video games for a very long time and it was only until recently that this debate would be argued this way by me.   

[rrcade]

So what's the best Monitor to use for Vector games with mame if I want a real blurry picture
I would like it to look as bad as possible

[genesim]

Thats what we are debating. 

Can you imagine the people out here saying you are all a bunch of frickin' nerds who need to just play the games!

I am just killing time trying to get some answers to my questions.   I would have never turned up the Gamma had it not been for the people posting, so I am glad for that.   I never really thought of it before and just chalked it up to good enough.   Never liked it though.

[ArtMAME]

I am using a brand new Billabs VGA arcade monitor in my Tempest cabinet running MAME at 640x480.  The results are great!!!  I used to have an old Pentranic SVGA arcade monitor in there but it crapped out.  The new Billabs is nice and bright and fits nicely inside the cabinet.

I would recommend one of those Billabs VGAs or an SVGA arcade monitor if you can find one and run it at 640x480 or 800x600.  It is somewhat pricey solution, but well worth it for the look as well as for the reliability.

My second choice would be a PC monitor.  The difference between running a PC and an open-frame VGA monitor is that the PC monitor lines will be smoother because of the finer dot pitch.  The arcade monitor has larger dot pitch therefore lines will look a bit ragged, but that happens in color vector monitors as well. 

So in my opinion, an arcade-type open-frame VGA or SVGA monitor running 640x480 or 800x600 in MAME looks closer to a Vector monitor than a PC monitor running the same settings.

Of course, there are exceptions.  Asteroids and Asteroids deluxe will look better on a PC monitor since B&W monitors do not have appeture grilles, so the finer dot pitch of a PC monitor will be closer to the real thing.  Still the bullets will not look great for those games in regular MAME unless you are running AAE which has special effects for Asteroids and AD such as bullet size and simulated phosphor persistance.