The Peach Meme: on Crts, Pixels and Signal Quality (again)
Posted3 months agoActive3 months ago
datagubbe.seTechstory
calmmixed
Debate
60/100
CrtsDisplay TechnologyRetro GamingEmulation
Key topics
Crts
Display Technology
Retro Gaming
Emulation
The article discusses the characteristics of CRT displays and their impact on image quality, sparking a discussion on the nostalgia and technical aspects of CRTs versus modern displays.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Moderate engagementFirst comment
1h
Peak period
10
2-4h
Avg / period
2.8
Comment distribution25 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 25 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Oct 13, 2025 at 10:13 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Oct 13, 2025 at 11:18 AM EDT
1h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
10 comments in 2-4h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Oct 14, 2025 at 6:18 AM EDT
3 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45568555Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 12:29:33 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
It is insane how much space they take up. Landfills must be full of these huge things.
People also forget that most video game CRTs ran at a headache-inducing 60hz, which had an unpleasant strobe effect.
The IPS panel was cheaper (19" vs 27" diagonal), larger, lighter and widescreen (both were 1200 vertical lines).
I'm not saying they are better because the numbers are bigger, either. The subjective feel of using the screens is much improved, plus just about everything surrounding it (the menus, the colors & calibration, the interfaces).
And the comparison to the LCD at the time is irrelevant -- I was making the comparison between modern high-DPI LCD and OLED monitors and CRTs.
I would not be surprised if OLEDs are better; I've never seen an OLED panel in person.
I'd take my HP EliteDisplay 1440P monitor over any of these ultra high refresh rate monitors, all day, every day.
Dell & HPs "Business" monitors are made to be stared at all day, and I can use them all day without any eye fatigue. They also come calibrated from the factory.
Interestingly, my old Asus 24" monitor is very close to them, but that monitor is also designed to be used for longer hours (better panel, blue light filter, flicker free backlighting, etc.).
I can definitely appreciate the draw of the old monitors, and I wouldn't mind owning a few myself for when I get the fancy, but it feels like a very 'vinyl' sort of impulse. There are certainly attractive factors, but I think in the pursuit of those people are willing to overlook the inherent flaws. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's an interesting quirk of psychology.
I think LCD/OLED is definitely an improvement, though I've never been a fan of the 'softness' in comparison to the rigidity of the glass CRT screen. It's always seemed fragile to me.
I know some pixel artists did great work with CRTs, but I still dislike the fuzzy look.
This is about artists working in this medium, and how they had to resort to tricks so that the pixel art looked good on CRTs. Newer technologies expose how flawed the workarounds are.
An old video game just looks and feels right on a CRT in a way that it doesn't on a modern hd tv, to me at least. That doesn't necessarily mean it looks "better", however you might define it.
It's like listening to a record. Records are lower quality than CDs or other digital options due to limitations of the analog technology, but they can still be a real joy to listen to on an older stereo system. There is a certain warmth, a little bit of crackle or pop, maybe a different dynamic range and other things that make a record sometimes more enjoyable, even though the "quality" is technically far lower. I think sometimes we can get lost in the technical specifications of pixel density or color range or audio bitrate and end up missing out on things that can prove the human experience.
A couple other random things about CRTs: there are so many that are 4:3 or standard aspect ratio instead of the widescreen that dominates today. Watching something 4:3 that fills the whole screen (without the black letterboxing of a widescreen) feels so good and makes me miss the aspect ratio. On the flip side, I also want to find one of the HD CRTs that is widescreen to run some of my more modern devices through.
https://www.retrotink.com/shop/retrotink-4k
I remember this from decades ago, there were big differences even in new ones.
Where the silent ones not necessarily were satisfactory for cats, since their hearing is more sensitive, and perceives higher frequencies.
OTOH some cats really like to sleep atop of them, maybe because of the warmth? Or what the electrostatics do to their fur?
I think hard drives are similar. There was something pleasing about the the 30MB ESDI in my first computer, but as hard drives got larger and faster, they also got more scratchy-sounding. Now I have a cheap PCIe M.2 adapter, and the sound it makes is like the newer hard drives, only less rhythmic. That alone makes it an irritant.
A similar (but likely louder and more irritating) high-pitched noise was weaponized as the "Mosquito" teen repellent device.
Also, with 4K+ high refresh displays we are getting closer and closer to emulate the look of CRTs!
I almost find this argument compelling, but I'm still as fascinated as when I was a kid with what makes an image on a crt look different from the pixels in my head.