TV for arcade, CRT or LCD?

[ATWindsor]

I'm looking for a TV for my Arcade-project, and I'm looking for advice. The Arcade will be used for MAME and in addition other emulators. My concern is picture quality, frankly I don't care all that much if it looks "authentic" or anything, I just want it too look as good as possible with the source material (for instance with SNES-emulator I use Antialiasing to make the games appaear less pixelated).

I have narrowed doan my options to basically 3 choices

1. Keep my old TV or monitor: I have an old Sony TV, or monitor might be a better word, It has no tuner, but i seems to have 5 coaxial input-connectors, and som kind of tranparent plate outside the screen itself. So it seems like some kinde of old-schhol monitor-thing. Its 28 inches.

+
Cheap
Right Size
4:3
Good(?) Inputs

-
Only 50 Hz
Heavy
Difficult to replace in case it breaks?

2: Buy a 100 Hz CRT 28 Inch TV from somewhere. Would be less of a strain on the eyes (particualary since one is near the monitor), but might be difficult to get a hold of, and costs more than the monitor I already own. The monitor also has pretty thin edges, due to no inbulit speakers. Wich most TVs will have.

+
Reasonably Cheap
4:3

-Bulky
Difficult to replace in case it breaks?

3: The third option is buying a 32 Inch LCD. The problem is that they are not 4:3, giving me only the equvalent of a 26 inch 4:3. And also I have to hide the edges of the screen somehow. It will also be the most expensive solution. On the other hand its reasonably future-proof, and the screen is a lot thinner.

+
"Future-proof"
Small Screen
Non-flickering
Easy to set up with PC

-
Expensive
Widescreen
Makin it look good with "hiding" outer edges might be difficult
Cabinet must be "unnaturally" wide?

I have also considered making the cabinett in a way such that it will fit a 28 inch TV now, but later may be sligtly modified to fit a 32 WS. The 32 WS will be wider, but the left and right edge of the 32 Ws kan go "behind" the frame of the cabinet itself. Since that part of the picture is not used. However I'm not sure how easy it will be to make that look good.

Any input is very welcome.

AtW

[Ummon]

Too bad you missed the big debate a while back. Do a search for 'arcade vga on LCD' and you should find it. And 100hz CRT TV? I didn't know they made those.

[ATWindsor]

Are you talking about this thread? http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=74411.0

If thats the one, I frankly din't find it to useful for my problem.

And yeah, at least here in europe 100 hz TVs was popular a few years before LCD became the norm

AtW

[Ummon]

No, no. It was far rougher and more drawn out than that. It originally had to do with using an arcade VGA with an LCD, but turned into an LCD vs CRT thing. It ended up having a lot of info though. Anyways, it's a simple set of questions that have to be balanced: is arcade authenticity important? ^ are PC games and functions important?

Wanting it "to look as good as possible" means different things to different people. If you aren't totally familiar with what is arcade authentic, then you might want to become so, to know what you think is 'good'.

[DJ Infinity]

If I had to do it all over again I would use a LCD for my first Mamecab as I am not a "purist" as far as mame goes. If I were skilled at woodworking I'd make this one unit.

[ATWindsor]

No, no. It was far rougher and more drawn out than that. It originally had to do with using an arcade VGA with an LCD, but turned into an LCD vs CRT thing. It ended up having a lot of info though. Anyways, it's a simple set of questions that have to be balanced: is arcade authenticity important? ^ are PC games and functions important?

Wanting it "to look as good as possible" means different things to different people. If you aren't totally familiar with what is arcade authentic, then you might want to become so, to know what you think is 'good'.

I tried to find the discussion, but unfortantly I seem to be a bit to inept at searching, so I didn't find anything

I'm not going to use the arcade for PC-games (at least not much), its for emualting Arcade-games and other "old-school"-systems (snes, amiga and so on). I guess what I mean by "as good as possible" is a smooth/non-pixelated as it can, upscaling is good, I don't need scanlines and so on. A bit of blurring is ok if the final result is more pleasing to the eye than huge sharp pixels. But I'm in no way a purist that needs things to look "arcade-authentic" for the sake of athenticity. If the authentic look is more pleasing to the eye, by all means, if not, I will go for a "modern" look. I don't know if that really helps in understandig what kind of look I'm after, but it's not so easy to explain.

AtW

[Ummon]

If the authentic look is more pleasing to the eye, by all means, if not, I will go for a "modern" look. I don't know if that really helps in understandig what kind of look I'm after, but it's not so easy to explain.

AtW

Try the following:

Go to your computer monitor and using a Mame version before the re-write (pre .108), take Bubbles and Donkey Kong and select 'hardware stretch' and 'scanlines 50%' (and de-select  'switch resolutions to fit' if it's already checked). The games will appear dim and kind of ruddy, but the overall appearance is what native scanlines look like. Now imagine it having an almost neon glow.

Since a CRT television is very close to an arcade monitor, especially when running at 15khz, this will be the most like the above. If you don't like scanlines, then you could pick any of the other options that fit your convenience. Especially if you go LCD, you could make something like what DJ Infinity showed.

[ATWindsor]

I tried mame32 version 103 now, to do as you said. But for some reasons I get scanlines on the display no matter if I choose scanlines or not in those games in 103. Is there some setting there I have to choose to be rid of the scanlines? (except the "Use scanlines"-option of course)

AtW

[Level42]

I think 100Hz TVs were a Euro thing, or at least a thing for countries that have 50 Hz mains.
100Hz did (in the end) do a proper job of hiding the bad flickering that is caused by the low refresh rate of the pictures. The first 100Hz TV's however had bad problems when large things were moving on screen (or when panning the camera etc.). I hated it and waited long to get a 100Hz. Only when it was mature enough to handle this kind of data. I still have a 16:9 CRT TV, and I will keep it for as long as it will run.
I still prefer a tube. Nothing beats a tube. yet.

Anyway, in the US (and other countries using 60Hz.) this was less of an issue for 2 reasons:
1) 60 Hz gives a steadier picture
2) hardly any 16:9 TV's

And here's an important point: most of the classic arcade games run at 60 Hz. This combined with the fact that most classics have a black background will give a steady picture on a 50Hz TV/monitor too. No need to worry about the 50/60Hz. any TV that is at least a bit modern can handle the 60Hz. signal (f.i. the TV I used for my Galaxian cab is about 13 years old and has no problem with it.

I would always prefer the authentic look of a CRT. But that's all personal taste.

[Ummon]

I tried mame32 version 103 now, to do as you said. But for some reasons I get scanlines on the display no matter if I choose scanlines or not in those games in 103. Is there some setting there I have to choose to be rid of the scanlines? (except the "Use scanlines"-option of course)

AtW

In the game properties (right-click on the game name and select 'properties'), on the 'display' tab select 'none' in the drop-down menu, and uncheck the box. Both have to be done. Toggle between 'none', 'RGB sharp', and '50% scanlines'.

[ATWindsor]

I think 100Hz TVs were a Euro thing, or at least a thing for countries that have 50 Hz mains.
100Hz did (in the end) do a proper job of hiding the bad flickering that is caused by the low refresh rate of the pictures. The first 100Hz TV's however had bad problems when large things were moving on screen (or when panning the camera etc.). I hated it and waited long to get a 100Hz. Only when it was mature enough to handle this kind of data. I still have a 16:9 CRT TV, and I will keep it for as long as it will run.
I still prefer a tube. Nothing beats a tube. yet.

Anyway, in the US (and other countries using 60Hz.) this was less of an issue for 2 reasons:
1) 60 Hz gives a steadier picture
2) hardly any 16:9 TV's

And here's an important point: most of the classic arcade games run at 60 Hz. This combined with the fact that most classics have a black background will give a steady picture on a 50Hz TV/monitor too. No need to worry about the 50/60Hz. any TV that is at least a bit modern can handle the 60Hz. signal (f.i. the TV I used for my Galaxian cab is about 13 years old and has no problem with it.

I would always prefer the authentic look of a CRT. But that's all personal taste.

Ok, so my 28" monitor/TV-thing should handle running at 60 Hz, i guess that makes sense (but with a lower resolution maybe?). I think it can handle both NTSC and PAL-signals too. (when i ran it with TV-out i even used 800*600). The fact that the games themself run at 60 hz isn't really that important for me I think, the reason for 100 Hz is less flicker, and nothing more (for me). Is there a way to check what refresh-rates and resolutions the TV can handle in a reasonably reliable way? Maybe 60 Hz would be ok, but I think i react stronger to flicker when I'm closer to the monitor, and in a cabinett the distance probably would be no more than 1 meter.

When it comes to the "scanline-test", I prefer running without scanlines on my LCD-monitor. But I always find scanlines to be more "intruding" when added artifically. On a "real" tv its more blurred, and less noticable, so it's not so bad too look at.

AtW

[Level42]

I think 100Hz TVs were a Euro thing, or at least a thing for countries that have 50 Hz mains.
100Hz did (in the end) do a proper job of hiding the bad flickering that is caused by the low refresh rate of the pictures. The first 100Hz TV's however had bad problems when large things were moving on screen (or when panning the camera etc.). I hated it and waited long to get a 100Hz. Only when it was mature enough to handle this kind of data. I still have a 16:9 CRT TV, and I will keep it for as long as it will run.
I still prefer a tube. Nothing beats a tube. yet.

Anyway, in the US (and other countries using 60Hz.) this was less of an issue for 2 reasons:
1) 60 Hz gives a steadier picture
2) hardly any 16:9 TV's

And here's an important point: most of the classic arcade games run at 60 Hz. This combined with the fact that most classics have a black background will give a steady picture on a 50Hz TV/monitor too. No need to worry about the 50/60Hz. any TV that is at least a bit modern can handle the 60Hz. signal (f.i. the TV I used for my Galaxian cab is about 13 years old and has no problem with it.

I would always prefer the authentic look of a CRT. But that's all personal taste.

Ok, so my 28" monitor/TV-thing should handle running at 60 Hz, i guess that makes sense (but with a lower resolution maybe?). I think it can handle both NTSC and PAL-signals too. (when i ran it with TV-out i even used 800*600). The fact that the games themself run at 60 hz isn't really that important for me I think, the reason for 100 Hz is less flicker, and nothing more (for me). Is there a way to check what refresh-rates and resolutions the TV can handle in a reasonably reliable way? Maybe 60 Hz would be ok, but I think i react stronger to flicker when I'm closer to the monitor, and in a cabinett the distance probably would be no more than 1 meter.

When it comes to the "scanline-test", I prefer running without scanlines on my LCD-monitor. But I always find scanlines to be more "intruding" when added artifically. On a "real" tv its more blurred, and less noticable, so it's not so bad too look at.

AtW

If I were you I'd definitly use that Sony. Resolution will not be different in 50 or 60Hz, there's no relation. If it can handle NTSC than you're fine for sure, but the TV system is not of importance when using it as a monitor for RGB signals. NTSC and PAL are merely ways to "encode" and "decode" TV signals so they can be transmitted through the air.

Because the games (most of the classics) run at 60 Hz. you won't really need 100Hz. In 60 Hz., the picture is already much more stable, simply because there are 5 more pictures drawn per second (10/2 because TV's interlace). That may not sound like a lot, but it's enough for our eye.
The eye needs about 24 pictures per second to let it seem real. When you've got a 50Hz signal, you get 50 Half-pictures = 25 full pictures. On film, this looks very stable because you get to see the complete image at once. With a CRT, the picture is drawn dot-by-dot, which gives it more flicker.

(If you want to check this, find a 50 Hz. TV and instead of looking straight at it, look at it in the corner of your eye.(so get your face at an angle with the TV and look straight ahead where the TV is not. Now, you should notice the flickering much more clearly then when you look straight at it. That's because the edges of our eyes are more "focussed" on moving things than the center. That's from the times we had to run from things like lions, but it's still handy when crossing the street now....)


Anyway......the thing I always remembered from playing arcade games in the early 80's was that I was so amazed by the great picture quality. We didn't have any RGB playback devices then (except the Laserdisc, but who owned a Laserdisc in Europe ?) so I thought the quality was so good looking AND stable. I only found out the reason why years and years later (the games running at 60 Hz.) All TV's were 50 Hz. then.

I've got a 25" monitor in my Jamma cab. It looks absolutely fine when running the games. Of course it sucks for displaying windows, but that's only normal.  So if the classics are your goal, you'll be fine with the Sony.

[ATWindsor]

Well, first of all, 24 Fps is only enough for film due to motion blur, 24 sharp pictures per second is easily more "sluggish" than more pics. However the source material here is 60 Fps. I find it important to clearly distinguish between:

1 Framerate of material
2. Refreshrate of monitor

On an LCD you are (more or less) set if the refreshrate of the monitor is the same (or a multiple) of the material. However, on a CRT, the main reason for high reresh in my eyes is to remove flickering, it desn't matter if the source material is 50 fps, 50 Hz will fliker a lot. 60 Hz will also flicker, no matter i the source material is running at 24 fprs, 50 fps or 60 fps. On a computer-monitor i can cleraly see (straight on) the diffrence between 85 Hz and lower, and i have also tried blind-testing 100 hz vs 85 Hz, I can also sense that diffrence, but it's not that big. The question is then 1. How high can my TV/monitor Go on refresh-rate 2. How bothersome is the flickering on the said refreshrate? (may be less than normal due to dark clours in games)

And are you sure resolution of the monitor is not effected by scanrate? I thought most CRTs could "make" a given number of lines per second, and therfore higher refrshe= fewer lines per drawing= lower resolution.

AtW