Slightly OT: Old CRT displays vs. new LCD

My experience is that the sharpest picture of all is produced by a properly-set up (and with proper exernal circuitry) delta gun CRT. Mabybe becuase the 3 phophor areas associated with a given pixel are closer together in that sort of CRT than in an in-line gun type (including the Trinitron). However, the problem with the delta gun CRT is that it has to be set up in the position it is going to be used. Stray magnetic fields really cause nasty convergence errors. That, I suspect, is why it fell out of fashion, it was not suitable for portable TVs/monitors, and it was not suitable for sets sold by 'box-shifters' I find this is another example of a very common trend. With consumer-grade stuff (I am not talking about top-end things), it seems that 'progress' means increased convenience and often lower quality. The flat-panel monitors/TVs might well be more convenient that the older CRT ones, but they dont' give such good results. There are plenty more really off-topic examples of this, which I won;t mention. I stick with CRTs for another (obvious if you know me) reason. I understand how they work, I can get most spares down to component level. WIth the LCD and plasma displays, the cmallest part the manufacturers supply to anytone is a complete PCB, and often they're only avaialble to service agents. No thanks!. I'll stick to BU208s, TDA1170s and the like ;-) -tony