Non-gaming video quality on Sony BVM monitors?

[jrodefeld]

I recently became interested in retro gaming and I've been fascinated by all the options I never knew existed for playing older games. I never knew about RGB connectors or about the many high-end crt monitors that people have been using. I'm probably not ready to jump into the hobby just yet, but I am very curious nevertheless.

If I could buy a fantasy monitor that would seem to work best for almost everything I'd probably opt for the Sony BVM-D32E1WU. I know these are ultra rare and I'd probably have to spend around $3000 for one but I will be keeping my eye out.

What I am wondering though is if these monitors are great for non-gaming purposes? The 32" Sony BVM is very close to the size of other consumer HD CRTs like the KD-34XBR960.

Since the D32 can handle resolutions up to 1080i, I've been wondering how HD video would look on it compared to the XBR960? Has anyone done a comparison? I'd guess the D32 would be much better since it cost over $20000 when it came out.

I'm typing this on a Sony GDM-FW900 monitor so I have an appreciation for good CRTs for all kinds of content.

I like the idea of the D32 simply because it's large enough that you could theoretically watch a movie on it or game with a bunch of friends while not having to sit too close.

Another random question is whether the D32 is really as good for 240p games as is the 24" version. I'm sure the scanlines would be pretty damn thick at that size, but are they TOO thick?

Did I hear someone say there were only 1000 of the 32" BVMs ever made? I think I remember something like that. It's a long shot to track one down probably, but this is all a fantasy at this point anyway.

[tjstogy]

I don't own a BVM, but instead a 20" PVM 20L5. Video through it looks amazing, and I'm sure through the bvm it would look incredible. (But, not as good for hi def as 4k tvs... more on that later) BVM's were so good (and so expensive) that they were not made for the general public. This is good and bad- you can't sit down with a remote control (there is none) and change the volume, or switch the input to your bluray for instance. It's not really a replacement for the main television in your house, in that sense.

For me personally, I have a gaming room with my PVM and retro systems, and in a separate room I have my big plasma with surround sound/cable/modern systems. It all depends on your space and preferences. If you really want just one TV, I'd look into a nice flat screen with a framemeister- that way you can keep the functionality of your tv for hi def stuff, as well as with retro gaming.

BTW- I was on the lookout for my PVM 20L5 for a loooong time- and when I finally got it, and played a bunch on it....... it didn't change my life in any way. In fact, I recently picked up a 27" consumer TV to replace it. Bottom line, don't hold out until you find this "holy grail" monitor before you start having retro gaming fun- you may even be let down (and broke in the process). My 2c.

[Lord of Pirates]

At $3000 I think I'd start looking at CRT projectors instead, provided you have the space and games aren't a concern.

Edit: I can't compare directly to BVMs (I've never even seen one in person) but, the XBR960 is a solid display for non-game stuff. Provided you can deal with the forced processing, which I find acceptable as long as it's at the minimum setting.

[Fudoh]

Compared to movie playback on FW900 through a PC, you're limited to 1080i on a BVM and 60Hz on top of that. Something I wouldn't want for extended movie or TV sessions. On every modern display you get a cadence conversion which converts your NTSC/HD 1080i streams to 24p and after years (well, more than a decade actually) enjoying that feature, I find it very hard to watch a movie with its 3:2 pulldown intact.

This said, high-end CRTs look very nice, but in comparison: on your FW900 you can watch deinterlaced 1080i or straight Full HD sources played back in 96Hz for perfect cadences (or 120Hz if you have mixed movie/video material).

[philexile]

Hello,

I owned the XBR960. It looked pretty good, but it did have some overscan and convergence issues as I recall. This was years ago now. I bought it to play old games consoles, which didn't work out so well since it processed the image. Live and learn.

I still own a D32 and its pretty impressive for watching movies. However, there are limitations as Fudoh mentioned.

Fun fact: the FW900 used the same tube that is found in the BVM D24. The disadvantage of the FW900 is that it doesn't track the hours of use and it lacks the advance convergence/image controls of the D24.

Enjoy that FW900! I've never seen one in person.

[SNK-NEO-GEO]

Hello there.. when it comes to retrogaming everyone has their preference, depending on your eye site. I am not technical so I will tell you what I sow.

XBR960 - I had the 32 version of this one - Was a great TV and good quality picture but It does not compare to the D32.. It is like day and night when compared to colors and picture quality but again you can get an XBR960 free on craigslist.

FW900 - Best picture I have ever seen, colors are just incredible, motion is fluid, like Gsync fluid but the monitor is too small.

D32 - This one is by far the best monitor for me due to the 32" size but heavy as a cow.. When it comes to colors and motion flow, it looks close to the FW900, love this monitor for modern gaming widescreen 720p.. It is great for Anime due to the size and color. For 240p, I do not like it because I do not see the retro scanline that I like and the black borders when you are viewing 4:3 content like NES is not something that I like seeing.. I like the L5 for 240p but prefer the NEC xm29 plus for the size.

[Ikaruga11]

Fun fact: the FW900 used the same tube that is found in the BVM D24.

No it doesn't. Both are completely different tubes.

XBR960 - I had the 32 version of this one - Was a great TV and good quality picture but It does not compare to the D32.. It is like day and night when compared to colors and picture quality but again you can get an XBR960 free on craigslist.

FW900 - Best picture I have ever seen, colors are just incredible, motion is fluid, like Gsync fluid but the monitor is too small.

D32 - This one is by far the best monitor for me due to the 32" size but heavy as a cow.. When it comes to colors and motion flow, it looks close to the FW900, love this monitor for modern gaming widescreen 720p.. It is great for Anime due to the size and color. For 240p, I do not like it because I do not see the retro scanline that I like and the black borders when you are viewing 4:3 content like NES is not something that I like seeing.. I like the L5 for 240p but prefer the NEC xm29 plus for the size.

Yeah, I used to own an XBR960. I recently sold it for $600

I want to get a D24.

[SNK-NEO-GEO]

I'll leave this here...someone local (Vienna VA) go grab it:)

https://washingtondc.craigslist.org/nva ... 04268.html

[tacoguy64]

Fun fact: the FW900 used the same tube that is found in the BVM D24.

No it doesn't. Both are completely different tubes.

XBR960 - I had the 32 version of this one - Was a great TV and good quality picture but It does not compare to the D32.. It is like day and night when compared to colors and picture quality but again you can get an XBR960 free on craigslist.

FW900 - Best picture I have ever seen, colors are just incredible, motion is fluid, like Gsync fluid but the monitor is too small.

D32 - This one is by far the best monitor for me due to the 32" size but heavy as a cow.. When it comes to colors and motion flow, it looks close to the FW900, love this monitor for modern gaming widescreen 720p.. It is great for Anime due to the size and color. For 240p, I do not like it because I do not see the retro scanline that I like and the black borders when you are viewing 4:3 content like NES is not something that I like seeing.. I like the L5 for 240p but prefer the NEC xm29 plus for the size.

Yeah, I used to own an XBR960. I recently sold it for $600

I want to get a D24.

Could have sworn the FW900 and BVM24 shared the same tubes but just different chassis? But yeah, picture is nice on both.

As for non gaming purposes, wouldn't you just be better going off with the best current oled you can afford? I mean the BVMD32 would be nice to have but for that price I think I'd rather go with a bigger display.

[Nekoi]

I just recently acquired a BVM-D32E1WE. I wanted one for very similar reasons as you. A monitor that can be used for everything, playing games in 240p, watching TV and watching movies in HD. I don't have the room for a separate gaming setup. So perhaps you might be interested in my opinion.

I have been using it for little over a week now. I'm still learning how to get the most out of it. So my opinion might change a bit in the future. But this is what I'm thinking about it now.

I'm actually a little disappointed with watching HD movies on it. It is definitely big enough for watching movies. And yes the picture is very beautiful looking with really nice colors. In 720p you get a good high definition feeling. But the big catch here is, the image of the monitor is really weak. It does not have the punch of my consumer CRT TV or my LED/LCD HD TV. The brightness and contrast just can't compete with TVs. It needs a dark room. And you don't want any light hitting the screen. The darker the room the better. It looks best at night with no lights on. Only then can you see how good the picture is. It's soft, very pretty and refined. It's much more like watching a movie screened at a movie theater than watching a TV.

The monitor has a setting called sub contrast. I have never seen that setting before on another display. It's one of the most important settings on the monitor in my opinion. It is not the same as the regular contrast setting. Turn this setting up you get a stronger picture with more contrast and brightness. But turning it up also blurrs the image and you loose detail. In 720p you really can't turn it up all the way. It goes from 0 to 200. At 25 you can still see all the details. But it's quite weak in that situation. I currently have it at 80. Seems a good balance between brightness and detail. For lower resolutions (240p/480i/576i) you can turn the sub contrast all the way up without loosing detail or making it blurry. So when playing games in 240p or when watching DVDs in interlaced mode you can get a pretty strong image. I'm currently watching TV in 576i on it. The image is very interesting. It really gets the most out of that resolution without processing or scaling the image like HD TVs do. So if you're still watching a lot of DVDs, this monitor is a really interesting choice. And there still are a lot of movies out there that are not available in HD.

As for the thickness of the scanlines in 240p (or rather the thickness of the blank lines). It really is not that much different than my 28 inch CRT TV, if you turn the sub contrast all up. In higher settings the black lines almost disappear if the monitor has to display bright colors. I'm using 190 right now. Looks lovely.
Below some images to illustrate that. The first shows sub contrast at 200, the second at 100 and the last at 0. All the other settings are unchanged.





I don't regret buying it or anything. But I wouldn't pay more than 1000 EUR for it.

I have seen a website that is selling one for 3000 like you mentioned in your post. But it seems they are trying to sell it for a couple of years now, nobody is buying it at that price.

As for how many were build. I really wonder if that rumor is true. During the 3 months I was looking for one, I located 5 of them. One didn't really work anymore and had a scratch on the screen. The second one was sold before the buyer gave me any details about the monitor. And the other two were way too expensive. The one I got has a serial number with 68 at the end. Number 68 in total or perhaps number 68 of the european versions. With such a low number maybe the rumor is true.

[darcagn]

But the big catch here is, the image of the monitor is really weak. It does not have the punch of my consumer CRT TV or my LED/LCD HD TV. The brightness and contrast just can't compete with TVs. It needs a dark room. And you don't want any light hitting the screen. The darker the room the better. It looks best at night with no lights on. Only then can you see how good the picture is.

How many hours are on the tube? AFAIK, this is one of the effects of a tube being used a lot.

[Nekoi]

How many hours are on the tube? AFAIK, this is one of the effects of a tube being used a lot.

Operation time is at 42000 hours. But there is a sticker that says the tube was replaced in 2008. So who knows how many hours it exactly has.

[philexile]

No it doesn't. Both are completely different tubes.

I heard this from someone who worked on Sony monitors for a living. What's your source?

[philexile]

But the big catch here is, the image of the monitor is really weak. It does not have the punch of my consumer CRT TV or my LED/LCD HD TV. The brightness and contrast just can't compete with TVs. It needs a dark room. And you don't want any light hitting the screen. The darker the room the better. It looks best at night with no lights on. Only then can you see how good the picture is.

How many hours are on the tube? AFAIK, this is one of the effects of a tube being used a lot.

I've also been told that these monitors were meant to be used in a dark room for color correction. I prefer playing games with the lights off but it looks pretty good with them on as well.

[SNK-NEO-GEO]

But the big catch here is, the image of the monitor is really weak. It does not have the punch of my consumer CRT TV or my LED/LCD HD TV. The brightness and contrast just can't compete with TVs. It needs a dark room. And you don't want any light hitting the screen. The darker the room the better. It looks best at night with no lights on. Only then can you see how good the picture is.

How many hours are on the tube? AFAIK, this is one of the effects of a tube being used a lot.

I was thinking the same thing.. I do not see those issues on my BVM32.

[jrodefeld]

I appreciate all the responses. I'd like to clear up a few things that I didn't really express very well in my first post.

I know that it would be rather silly to use a 32" BVM as my main display for watching modern films. I'm only asking because this is not often discussed. Each technology has it's own pros and cons, and I'd expect that the 32" BVM would be the pinnacle of direct view CRT technology. I was more curious what it would look like with modern video content. I still own a Pioneer plasma screen and if I was buying a new display to watch Blu-rays on, I'd get the best OLED I could afford.

I'm curious about what SNK-NEO-GEO said about the D32 and 240p content. I was thinking that the D32 would be pretty much the ultimate gaming display for all retro consoles (and maybe even some modern consoles). I was always under the impression that the D32 was just a larger version of the D24. Is this not correct?

I was very impressed with this video posted to YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXHQvJkfy8o

Does the D32 not look like this? The reason people seek out the NEC XM29 is that it has a relatively large screen size, even though it doesn't look quite as good as a BVM. I was thinking that the D32 would be the best of both worlds. It'd have the best image quality but the size of the XM29 (or larger for widescreen games).

The D24 looks pretty good from the videos I've seen, but it's size should make it only slightly larger than my FW900 which is still fairly small. I like the FW900 for desktop use considering I'm sitting a foot or two in front of it, but it'd be way too small to sit on a couch and watch a movie or play a game with a group of friends.

[svensonson]

I just recently acquired a BVM-D32E1WE. I wanted one for very similar reasons as you. A monitor that can be used for everything, playing games in 240p, watching TV and watching movies in HD. I don't have the room for a separate gaming setup. So perhaps you might be interested in my opinion.

I have been using it for little over a week now. I'm still learning how to get the most out of it. So my opinion might change a bit in the future. But this is what I'm thinking about it now.

I'm actually a little disappointed with watching HD movies on it. It is definitely big enough for watching movies. And yes the picture is very beautiful looking with really nice colors. In 720p you get a good high definition feeling. But the big catch here is, the image of the monitor is really weak. It does not have the punch of my consumer CRT TV or my LED/LCD HD TV. The brightness and contrast just can't compete with TVs. It needs a dark room. And you don't want any light hitting the screen. The darker the room the better. It looks best at night with no lights on. Only then can you see how good the picture is. It's soft, very pretty and refined. It's much more like watching a movie screened at a movie theater than watching a TV.

The monitor has a setting called sub contrast. I have never seen that setting before on another display. It's one of the most important settings on the monitor in my opinion. It is not the same as the regular contrast setting. Turn this setting up you get a stronger picture with more contrast and brightness. But turning it up also blurrs the image and you loose detail. In 720p you really can't turn it up all the way. It goes from 0 to 200. At 25 you can still see all the details. But it's quite weak in that situation. I currently have it at 80. Seems a good balance between brightness and detail. For lower resolutions (240p/480i/576i) you can turn the sub contrast all the way up without loosing detail or making it blurry. So when playing games in 240p or when watching DVDs in interlaced mode you can get a pretty strong image. I'm currently watching TV in 576i on it. The image is very interesting. It really gets the most out of that resolution without processing or scaling the image like HD TVs do. So if you're still watching a lot of DVDs, this monitor is a really interesting choice. And there still are a lot of movies out there that are not available in HD.

As for the thickness of the scanlines in 240p (or rather the thickness of the blank lines). It really is not that much different than my 28 inch CRT TV, if you turn the sub contrast all up. In higher settings the black lines almost disappear if the monitor has to display bright colors. I'm using 190 right now. Looks lovely.
Below some images to illustrate that. The first shows sub contrast at 200, the second at 100 and the last at 0. All the other settings are unchanged.





I don't regret buying it or anything. But I wouldn't pay more than 1000 EUR for it.

I have seen a website that is selling one for 3000 like you mentioned in your post. But it seems they are trying to sell it for a couple of years now, nobody is buying it at that price.

As for how many were build. I really wonder if that rumor is true. During the 3 months I was looking for one, I located 5 of them. One didn't really work anymore and had a scratch on the screen. The second one was sold before the buyer gave me any details about the monitor. And the other two were way too expensive. The one I got has a serial number with 68 at the end. Number 68 in total or perhaps number 68 of the european versions. With such a low number maybe the rumor is true.

believe me, you wont be able to fix your problem by just adjusting sub contrast on your monitor. there are a hell of much more settings which also needs to be adjusted on this monitor. even professional technicians are adjusting this beast for up to several hours if they dont have the probe on hand.

btw: have you tried resetting the settings to factory default and adjust everything from scratch? just start with the white uniformity menu and set up the direction of the monitor.

[svensonson]

I appreciate all the responses. I'd like to clear up a few things that I didn't really express very well in my first post.

I know that it would be rather silly to use a 32" BVM as my main display for watching modern films. I'm only asking because this is not often discussed. Each technology has it's own pros and cons, and I'd expect that the 32" BVM would be the pinnacle of direct view CRT technology. I was more curious what it would look like with modern video content. I still own a Pioneer plasma screen and if I was buying a new display to watch Blu-rays on, I'd get the best OLED I could afford.

I'm curious about what SNK-NEO-GEO said about the D32 and 240p content. I was thinking that the D32 would be pretty much the ultimate gaming display for all retro consoles (and maybe even some modern consoles). I was always under the impression that the D32 was just a larger version of the D24. Is this not correct?

I was very impressed with this video posted to YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXHQvJkfy8o

Does the D32 not look like this? The reason people seek out the NEC XM29 is that it has a relatively large screen size, even though it doesn't look quite as good as a BVM. I was thinking that the D32 would be the best of both worlds. It'd have the best image quality but the size of the XM29 (or larger for widescreen games).

The D24 looks pretty good from the videos I've seen, but it's size should make it only slightly larger than my FW900 which is still fairly small. I like the FW900 for desktop use considering I'm sitting a foot or two in front of it, but it'd be way too small to sit on a couch and watch a movie or play a game with a group of friends.

the reason why ppl (or at least me) go for the nec xm29 (non-plus) is because of its tri-sync capabilities. this beauty just almost takes every signal from every console or computer such as fmt, amiga or sharp x68000.it is also a 27" 4:3 screen which means its bigger than the sony-bvmd32 in 4:3
IMO the nec xm29 is the better monitor just because its so handy even if the picture is acutally better on the sony bvm d series. it also weighs the half of it and takes less space

[SNK-NEO-GEO]

I have the NEC xm29 plus version and it is a Tri-sync, it seems to sync to about anything.. I recently got an NEC 3PG and a Mitsubishi XC-2930C.. The 3PG seems to work the same as the XM29 plus, Tri-sysnc, great picture and scaliness just like the XM29 plus. The mitsubishi, I use an EXtron RGB to sync Naomi, GroovyMame, Taito X2, colors jump out at you right away but the scaliness do not seem to be as good as the XM29 plus. What I am trying to say, there are many 27" monitors that will do the job and don't just look for the NEC XM29. I would like to one day see in person how NES Super Mario Bros looks like on a 37" that can do native 240p:)

[svensonson]

I have the NEC xm29 plus version and it is a Tri-sync, it seems to sync to about anything.. I recently got an NEC 3PG and a Mitsubishi XC-2930C.. The 3PG seems to work the same as the XM29 plus, Tri-sysnc, great picture and scaliness just like the XM29 plus. The mitsubishi, I use an EXtron RGB to sync Naomi, GroovyMame, Taito X2, colors jump out at you right away but the scaliness do not seem to be as good as the XM29 plus. What I am trying to say, there are many 27" monitors that will do the job and don't just look for the NEC XM29. I would like to one day see in person how NES Super Mario Bros looks like on a 37" that can do native 240p:)

FinalBaton might can show you some pictures of super mario running on a 37"
maybe he can also record a POV Video of it running different games on it

[FinalBaton]

FinalBaton might can show you some pictures of super mario running on a 37"
maybe he can also record a POV Video of it running different games on it

I will definitely do it when I get a camera. It'll be my pleasure!
(I feel like my phone camera doesn't do the monitor justice)

[SNK-NEO-GEO]

and that is why I said that I would like to see that in person:)..but you are on another side of the map:)

FinalBaton might can show you some pictures of super mario running on a 37"
maybe he can also record a POV Video of it running different games on it

I will definitely do it when I get a camera. It'll be my pleasure!
(I feel like my phone camera doesn't do the monitor justice)

[FinalBaton]

Didn't even know about the 3PG's existence! It's cool that there's another monitor model out there that performs just like the XM/XP series.

[Lawfer]

Compared to movie playback on FW900 through a PC, you're limited to 1080i on a BVM and 60Hz on top of that.

Can't BVM-D/A do 1080p?

[svensonson]

Compared to movie playback on FW900 through a PC, you're limited to 1080i on a BVM and 60Hz on top of that.

Can't BVM-D/A do 1080p?

only 1080i

[Lawfer]

Compared to movie playback on FW900 through a PC, you're limited to 1080i on a BVM and 60Hz on top of that.

Can't BVM-D/A do 1080p?

only 1080i

You sure? I am reading online that it supports up to 1080p 75Hz, at least on the BVM-A series.

[22point8]

Compared to movie playback on FW900 through a PC, you're limited to 1080i on a BVM and 60Hz on top of that.

Can't BVM-D/A do 1080p?

only 1080i

If it says 'CineAlta' on the casing it can do 1080 @ 24p

Like this one: http://www.broadcaststore.com/store/mod ... ?id=671081

[Lawfer]

If it says 'CineAlta' on the casing it can do 1080 @ 24p

Like this one: http://www.broadcaststore.com/store/mod ... ?id=671081

My broadcast monitor also says that it can do 1080p @ 24p, but what is "24p"? Is it basically saying it can only be used to watch movies on Blu-ray?

[svensonson]

only 1080i[/quote]

If it says 'CineAlta' on the casing it can do 1080 @ 24p

Like this one: http://www.broadcaststore.com/store/mod ... ?id=671081[/quote]

as far as I know tha F24U is a HD only which does not low-res. its a different kind of crt monitor. correct me if I am wrong

[svensonson]

Can't BVM-D/A do 1080p?[/quote]

only 1080i[/quote]

You sure? I am reading online that it supports up to 1080p 75Hz, at least on the BVM-A series.[/quote]

yes, the A-Series also up to 1080/60i only