Holy Grail Display for MiSTer?

[filthyromance]

Hi all! First post - I've got an Ultimate MiSTer PRO BlisSter on the way, but before it arrives I've been thinking about display options. Would I be right in thinking there is no single Holy Grail combination of display and set up? I'll be mainly using this for Neo Geo, Arcade, MD, SNES and NES.

I have a Beovision MX4000, but this would mean getting VGA to Scart...and seeing as the MiSTer has VGA out, I thought maybe a monitor might be even better? The Dell 2007FPB crops up a lot on this forum and elsewhere, and I could use this as a second screen as well (two birds, one stone)..but it seems that it's not without drawbacks, but I don't understand the details:

"It will sync to 50hz, 60, and 70hz signals, but it seems to either drop or repeat frames on anything other than a 60hz signal."

Deep down I suppose I'm trying to re-create what I saw back in the 90s, aesthetically, and although I have a CRT my partner gives me a tough time over the potential health risks of sitting in front of it. I was even considering a SONY PVM, but it looks like a pain to connect and is also megabuck. So...here are my current options:

- The Dell, or something similar, using VGA, double up as a second screen for my mac
- The MX4000 using VGA to Scart, and a potential brain tumour
- Panasonic Viera TX-P42U20 Plasma, via HDMI (Main TV)
- Something else I've not considered...?!

What do people think?

Thanks!

[aberu]

There's never going to be a holy grail per se, but a few notable ones I've heard of are basically like you said:

1. If a CRT, then most Sony PVM/BVM CRTs are your best bet for a "perfect" CRT image.
2. If a flat screen consumer TV in your living room, the LG C1/CX OLED is highly regarded among some people I've talked to and works with 1920x1440p mode on the MiSTer even.
3. ASUS ProArt is highly regarded in terms of computer monitors because of it's low lag, compatibility with cores, and essentially perfect color representation accuracy.

There's lots more than this though. Just trying to be quite general on purpose since it's polarizing.

However, if you are just trying to recreate what you saw in the 90's, then you are talking about most likely a composite tv, which MiSTer Composite adapters all have some compatibility issues, often have rainbow artifacting or excessive dot crawl or screen scrolling without adjusting things quite a bit. So you will only be able to do this reliably with component video via the vga to component adapters that are designed for the MiSTer. Also Direct Video via an HDMI to VGA adapter that has a resistor and diode soldered up in the right way, is considered slightly better than the Analog I/O board, so something to consider there too.

[ARCADEAGES]

and although I have a CRT my partner gives me a tough time over the potential health risks of sitting in front of it.

AFAIK there are virtually no health risks for sitting in front of a CRT. Sitting behind one however does pose risk, but even then you would have to be very close to the rear.

Humans have spent the better part of 70 years sitting in front of CRTs, and no issues have become apparent.

[aberu]

and although I have a CRT my partner gives me a tough time over the potential health risks of sitting in front of it.

AFAIK there are virtually no health risks for sitting in front of a CRT. Sitting behind one however does pose risk, but even then you would have to be very close to the rear.

Humans have spent the better part of 70 years sitting in front of CRTs, and no issues have become apparent.

Excellent thing to point out as well. The myth that there are health problems from being close come from the early days of CRTs when they actually were radioactive:

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... ve/570916/

Since the 1940s, there had been long-standing concerns about radiation leaks from black-and-white picture tubes. But it wasn’t until 1967, when routine testing revealed that specific large-screen models of GE color sets were emitting “X-radiation in excess of desirable levels,” that there seemed to be any real evidence of such a risk. Scientists speculated that the high voltage required by color sets was partly to blame.

Initially, the radiation concern was limited to a single model, but by late in the year it became clear that televisions from almost every manufacturer were potentially affected—as many as 112,000 sets.

The response to the concern was swift. By late July of 1967, television-industry representatives were brought before a congressional committee, which eventually proposed a federal radiation-regulation bill (which became the 1968 Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act). Further testing was conducted by the National Center for Radiological Health (NCRH) and the Public Health Service into early 1968. The surgeon general eventually issued a statement, saying that testing showed that this low level of radiation posed only a small risk to any one set-owner’s health as long as he or she was watching a set in “normal viewing” conditions. That was understood to be maintaining “at least a six-foot viewing distance from the front of the screen and [avoiding] prolonged exposure at the sides, rear, or underneath a set.”

The crisis was eventually quieted by new policies and procedures the FDA put in place to regulate radiation emissions for all forms of electronic products. New glass plates also promised to suppress most radiation from the color-television tubes.

It hasn't been a serious problem since the early 70's. If you have a CRT made before 1969, you have a very slight chance of having a kind of overly radiation-emitting TV. Other than that, not something to worry about.

[grizzly]

This is extremely hard to describe in words on a forum and on top of that some people see flaws like this immediately and others barely see it after they are told and shown the flaw is there.

But i´ll give it a try, have you heard about the "Film Effect" and/or the "Soap Opera Effect"?
Film effect is the 24hz to 30hz conversion that gives the "movies look" using 3:2 pulldown, meaning picture 1 is shown 2 times/picture 3 is shown 3 times and repeat giving the movie look.
https://www.rtings.com/tv/tests/motion/24p

24p-playback.png (7.78 KiB) Viewed 12407 times

"Soap Opera Effect" is the "look" where the film effect is gone as in something is filmed in 30hz/60hz (and some say 48hz too that for example The Hobbit where filmed in) instead of 24hz.
And/Or it is when tv/screens do stuff like running in 120hz mode too.

The sync at 60hz put drops/repeat frames is the same thing only that a different "pulldown" system is used.
In the 24hz/60hz case it is a repeated and kinda small change 2/3/2/3/2/3 and it is inserting a third frame 30 times a second making it a into a very repeatable but kinda hard thing to see.

In other conversions it can be that one or more frames is dropped instead and to me that is WAY/WAY/WAY more noticeable and much more irritating then an inserted frame.
It can also be that the added/dropped frame is done often (like in 3/2 pulldown) or rarely like once every 5 sec or so and when it is done rarely it gets much more noticeable and "bigger".
Like the jump/skip is longer but it is not it´s just that because it rarely comes up the eye picks it up much/much easier.

In some cases it can be a combined added/drops of several frames which again is even worse.
And yes it is not 100% the same when talking monitor refreshrate but it is close.

[bazza_12]

However, if you are just trying to recreate what you saw in the 90's...

probably sounds obvious but the memory of what you saw in the 90's and what you actually saw in the 90's are probably totally different.. they are for me.

[Duffygag]

You have a Beovision, what else do you need mate

[filthyromance]

There's never going to be a holy grail per se, but a few notable ones I've heard of are basically like you said:

1. If a CRT, then most Sony PVM/BVM CRTs are your best bet for a "perfect" CRT image.
2. If a flat screen consumer TV in your living room, the LG C1/CX OLED is highly regarded among some people I've talked to and works with 1920x1440p mode on the MiSTer even.
3. ASUS ProArt is highly regarded in terms of computer monitors because of it's low lag, compatibility with cores, and essentially perfect color representation accuracy.

This is really helpful, thanks. As I thought more about what exactly it is I'm trying to achieve, I guess it would be the sharpest, most vibrant picture representation across those early 90s systems, which maybe points me back to the PVM. But also I figure that:

- I'm chasing rainbows
- I probably already have some part of what I'm looking for
- I'm overthinking it

This is extremely hard to describe in words on a forum and on top of that some people see flaws like this immediately and others barely see it after they are told and shown the flaw is there.

So yeah, I kind of understand. Is there a best way to minimize the drawbacks?

Excellent thing to point out as well. The myth that there are health problems from being close come from the early days of CRTs when they actually were radioactive:

For context - I had a Trinitron that lived inside an IKEA wardrobe (only place for it in a tiny flat). After 6 months, the back of the door was marked with a square - kinda burned the door. My partner saw it and freaked out a bit, relayed this to her Neuro doctor friend, who laughed but said those things leak radiation and that I should probably get rid. I responded with a fairly resounding 'that is total BS', and found that very article, but then found a few other things online, and realised I actually didn't know what I was talking about. Long story, it kind of spooked me, and I definitely sit closer than 6ft to the screen. (Especially as my eyesight deteriorates!). I did just find this though: https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting- ... adiation#1, which made me feel better.

probably sounds obvious but the memory of what you saw in the 90's and what you actually saw in the 90's are probably totally different.. they are for me.

This is my life, every day, haha!

You have a Beovision, what else do you need mate

I actually own 3 Beovision now, the other two at my parents place...but this latest one, I dunno, I feel like the colours are leached on it. Certainly feels that way when the Capcom Home Arcade is hooked up via a convertor, but that could be the converter I guess.

[aberu]

probably sounds obvious but the memory of what you saw in the 90's and what you actually saw in the 90's are probably totally different.. they are for me.

Yup this is important to point out as well. I however bought a composite only mid-90's budget CRT and played Shining Force II on it with my Sega Genesis and it was exactly how I remembered it, and I use that as my comparison today

But not everyone has the space in their home for this kind of thing.

[Chris23235]

As the MiSTer simulates a lot of devices that were used on a lot of different kinds of CRTs their is no holy grail. If you run the Amiga and ST cores your best choice would be an RGB 15 KHz monitor, but this wouldn't work with the ao486 core and for your NES/SNES/Genesis fix a good CRT TV would be ideal.
It always depends on what you run on the MiSTer, you always have to make compromises.

[bazza_12]

probably sounds obvious but the memory of what you saw in the 90's and what you actually saw in the 90's are probably totally different.. they are for me.

Yup this is important to point out as well. I however bought a composite only mid-90's budget CRT and played Shining Force II on it with my Sega Genesis and it was exactly how I remembered it, and I use that as my comparison today

But not everyone has the space in their home for this kind of thing.

yeah i've got a scart tv that i used to use on my amiga back in the early 90s.. and i've connected it to the mister so i hope i'm right in thinking thats the nearest it will get to what it was actually like back then.

[Jegriva]

If you live in Europe, don't be stubborn about finding a PVM, just a good top of the line consumer TV will do, thanks to the SCART connection.

[MiSTer_Kirk]

I can remember what it looked like, back in the 80s, because I still have the same CRTs I was using, back then.
Philips CM8833 - I got in late 1984.
Philips CM8833 Mk2 - I got in 1986.
Commodore 1701 - I got this in early 1987.

All still working the same as they did back then.
I would keep, and use that Bang & Olufsen MX4000. This was my holy grail CRT, back in the mid 90s, but could never afford one. They do come up on eBay, but they're always collect only, and miles away from my location.
If you see one for good money, in your area, I would get a 500 or 600 line Sony PVM - Awesome CRT. Don't get any higher like an 800 line, it might be too sharp for you. My personal favourite is the one I own, the SONY Trinitron PVM 1442 QM - its lovely. Not too big, like the 20 inchers, not too small like the 9 inchers, and has RGB.

[bazza_12]

I ended up getting a second hand monitor off ebay.. I couldn't resist as it was near to me and only £45.
The monitor is a https://www.cnet.com/products/compaq-v7 ... 255606022/
and I have to say, it's taken everything I've thrown at it - A0486/Minimig/ST/8bits/most of the arcade games (older ones it won't re-orientate but neither will my CRT TV), picture is v crisp, and it remembers different screen positions/sizes for different systems.

[filthyromance]

So the MiSTer arrived and I've tried it with two displays - my Plasma, and the Beovision MX4000 - and not surprisingly the picture looks so good on the CRT that I've decided to keep it.

From a technical point of view, do I lose any picture quality using a HDMI to RCA converter? I really don't understand cables much. I'm using HDMI out, into this https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01N5KNFD1/, and then a cheap RCA to SCART. My intuition says I must be losing something along the way. My next option would be to try the VGA to Scart cable from either Amiga Kit or Ultimate Mister.

And just stepping outside the display discussion for a second...now that the MiSTer is here and I've had a chance to play around, FUCK is this thing good! I've got almost all the mini consoles, a pretty big MegaDrive collection and some SNES stuff, but this feels like 'it' for me. Search over. The other stuff will go on shelves and this will get played everyday.

[MiSTer_Kirk]

VGA to Scart cable, for the MX4000, every time. Keep it analogue from source to destination.

[grizzly]

And just stepping outside the display discussion for a second...now that the MiSTer is here and I've had a chance to play around, FUCK is this thing good! I've got almost all the mini consoles, a pretty big MegaDrive collection and some SNES stuff, but this feels like 'it' for me. Search over. The other stuff will go on shelves and this will get played everyday.

Yep!
A tip don't blink or your vacation/job/wife and half a year will be gone

[pacoarcade]

For me the holy grail display for MiSTer is the CRT you get for free or find abandoned in the street, even with its imperfections.

[aberu]

From a technical point of view, do I lose any picture quality using a HDMI to RCA converter? I really don't understand cables much. I'm using HDMI out, into this https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01N5KNFD1/, and then a cheap RCA to SCART. My intuition says I must be losing something along the way. My next option would be to try the VGA to Scart cable from either Amiga Kit or Ultimate Mister.

Yup, you are certainly losing a lot of detail when you switch from HDMI which is a super good digital signal down to an analogue signal that is one of the lowest quality (composite video).

[filthyromance]

From a technical point of view, do I lose any picture quality using a HDMI to RCA converter? I really don't understand cables much. I'm using HDMI out, into this https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01N5KNFD1/, and then a cheap RCA to SCART. My intuition says I must be losing something along the way. My next option would be to try the VGA to Scart cable from either Amiga Kit or Ultimate Mister.

Yup, you are certainly losing a lot of detail when you switch from HDMI which is a super good digital signal down to an analogue signal that is one of the lowest quality (composite video).

Not really what I was asking. Using HDMI in this scenario looks hideous IMO. The beauty of CRT is that it softens/blends the image, but my question is really about comparing the vga to scart vs hdmi/rca/scart. I guess there’s only one way to find out! I will report back.

[grizzly]

Just for the info!
the SCART stanard have composite/S-video/RGB/component in the same plug.
So to even begin to compare any signals, what signal do the "SCART" use?
And/or what is the best signal the tv/screen can take on the SCART input?

[FoxbatStargazer]

From a technical point of view, do I lose any picture quality using a HDMI to RCA converter? I really don't understand cables much. I'm using HDMI out, into this https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B01N5KNFD1/, and then a cheap RCA to SCART. My intuition says I must be losing something along the way. My next option would be to try the VGA to Scart cable from either Amiga Kit or Ultimate Mister.

Yup, you are certainly losing a lot of detail when you switch from HDMI which is a super good digital signal down to an analogue signal that is one of the lowest quality (composite video).

Not really what I was asking. Using HDMI in this scenario looks hideous IMO. The beauty of CRT is that it softens/blends the image, but my question is really about comparing the vga to scart vs hdmi/rca/scart. I guess there’s only one way to find out! I will report back.

It looks horrendous because it is going to composite signal, which is what you are calling RCA (Yellow for video, and white and red for stereo audio.)

Worse is as I understand SCART can carry a number of different signals through the same cable, including composite. For max quality you want RGB running through it, which is what you usually get from VGA->SCART converters. Hopefully a decent HDMI->SCART would do the same.

[filthyromance]

Yup, you are certainly losing a lot of detail when you switch from HDMI which is a super good digital signal down to an analogue signal that is one of the lowest quality (composite video).

Not really what I was asking. Using HDMI in this scenario looks hideous IMO. The beauty of CRT is that it softens/blends the image, but my question is really about comparing the vga to scart vs hdmi/rca/scart. I guess there’s only one way to find out! I will report back.

It looks horrendous because it is going to composite signal, which is what you are calling RCA (Yellow for video, and white and red for stereo audio.)

Worse is as I understand SCART can carry a number of different signals through the same cable, including composite. For max quality you want RGB running through it, which is what you usually get from VGA->SCART converters. Hopefully a decent HDMI->SCART would do the same.

The hideous I was referring to was using HDMI only - HDMI to HDMI - into a modern tv. The picture I’m getting now is actually pretty good - HDMI to RCA to Scart into a CRT. Nothing horrendous about it at all. I guess I was just curious about what is happening to the signal along the way, as it’s being converted twice. And also if there was any noticeable technical benefit (ie ‘better’ picture - and by better I mean more true to the original) using vga to scart vs using hdmi to scart. As I said, I’ll buy the cables and do the tests and report my findings.

[LamerDeluxe]

Just for the info!
the SCART stanard have composite/S-video/RGB/component in the same plug.
So to even begin to compare any signals, what signal do the "SCART" use?
And/or what is the best signal the tv/screen can take on the SCART input?

It depends on what the output and input device and the cable can handle. If they can all handle RGB, the signal will be RGB, unless you set it to something else. A lot of consoles could handle RGB, most CRT televisions in Europe could handle RGB, it was usually a matter of getting a proper RGB cable. RGB will usually be able to handle 60Hz as well, but composite NTSC will not always be supported on PAL displays.

Between a 1084 monitor and a SCART RGB television there isn't much of a difference in image quality, the difference mostly being that a TV display will usually be larger. A massive advantage of 1084-like monitors is that there are knobs for H/V position and size.

[akeley]

The hideous I was referring to was using HDMI only - HDMI to HDMI - into a modern tv. The picture I’m getting now is actually pretty good - HDMI to RCA to Scart into a CRT. Nothing horrendous about it at all.

Unfortunately people on the internet like to demonize composite and often launch into hyperbole when describing it. In reality the image produced via composite depends on the source (some machines had better implementation, some worse) and usually is not so bad at all. The worst think about it are the interference artifacts, especially dot crawl, which can make the image appear as if moving, though their appearance differs depending on the scene. Overall, if you don't think about it too much (a bit like dead pixel syndrome), in games it's quite acceptable. Not recommended for OS, text-heavy games and the like.

An example from Amiga, best viewed at full size:

COMP-Supremacy-Amiga-Composite-PAL-Sony-KV21-FT1-K.jpg (2.91 MiB) Viewed 7786 times

COMP-Supremacy-Amiga-RGB-PAL-Sony-KV21-FT1-K.jpg (2.46 MiB) Viewed 7785 times

Then there's the fact that for most people in the 80s (and many well into the Nineties) CV & RF were de facto a standard. Not many folks could afford monitors, and S-Video/RGB TVs were also scarce. Game designers knew it and often utilised the artifacts in games to produce special effects (which are lost on RGB) so you're often getting a more authentic experience this way.

That said, I do of course recommend going the better signal quality whenever possible. I do like a bit of composite action sometimes on my real machines (and even RF, which can produce some truly psychedelic colours), but mainly stick with RGB, since the quality definitely benefits - mostly because of the image stability, not the detail itself. In your case it's certainly better to replace that converter chain (which might or might not introduce some lag and/or extra artifacts) with a dedicated VGA-SCART cable, so you'll get proper RGB on your TV.

[elvis]

If I didn't already have PVMs at my disposal, I would play MiSTer on a SVGA PC CRT.

These are just as sharp as PVMs, rival BVMs, can be found for a fraction of the price, and are lag and tear free on MiSTer with the line double mode.

Throw in a cheap hardware scanline generator if you like.

Here's some close up comparisons using just my phone's camera. Not the best photograph in the world, but if shows the comparison well enough. Got downvoted to hell on Imgur, which is pretty amusing.

5ksCqBM.jpeg (1.79 MiB) Viewed 9588 times

Xcw6mIW.jpeg (2.13 MiB) Viewed 9588 times

PTWx3Oh.jpeg (2.28 MiB) Viewed 9588 times

CviiLFa.jpeg (2.32 MiB) Viewed 9588 times

[akeley]

Sharpness is overrated when it comes to games and in most cases VGA monitor will lose on size & colour vibrancy to a consumer CRT TV set.

Also, nobody plays games in "macro" mode

[elvis]

Sharpness is overrated

Sharpness is subjective. I enjoy quite a lot of games on my blurry consumer CRTs, especially from the 8 bit era. Certain highly detailed 16bit titles (and newer - 2D stuff on the PS1/Saturn) I much prefer on sharper CRTs like PVMs and SVGA monitors. I certainly don't have a single display that is my favourite out of my collection of 47 CRTs. What I do have, though, is a CRT addiction.

But the point is, if you do like sharpness, there are cheaper alternatives than PVMs, at least for a short while yet.

If you don't like sharpness, even cheaper! A "street CRT" will totally fill the void, often for very cheap and/or free.

VGA monitor will lose on size & colour vibrancy to a consumer CRT TV set.

Size, yes. Colour vibrancy, no.

Consumer CRTs, especially towards the end of the 90s, shipped with TERRIBLE default settings. Oversaturated colours and white points that were way too cool. These give the illusion of "vibrancy", but really just fool consumers into thinking the screen is better than it is when sitting on a showroom floor next to a dozen other models. The problem continues to exist today in an era of LCD and OLED screens, although good YouTube channels like HDTVTest are helping people become aware of the problem, and setting them on the right path.

SVGA CRTs especially were purchased by folks like office professionals and digital photographers, and didn't sit on showroom floors as their primary form of advertising. As a result, they shipped with competent standards like sRGB, agreed on by industry heavyweights like Adobe, Microsoft, HP, Dell and the rest. What confused a lot of TV watchers about this was that it looked "duller" than their overdriven TV sets, but in fact the colour accuracy was much higher, and things like colour crush didn't occur when colour calibration was correctly applied.

You can also choose to overdrive a VGA/SVGA monitor, blow the brightness out, and set the colour temperature far too cool if you want to simulate that "vibrant" look. Having worked in the film and VFX industries for a couple of decades now, I prefer to calibrate to recognised standards, and that goes for my consumer CRTs too. I put together a YouTube series if people want to learn more about it:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=P ... fE2--66DjZ

Even for old video games, I find the lack of colour crushing especially to be the major benefit. Most people lose all definition in colours as quickly as the 50% saturation mark with their preferred settings, which throws away an enormous amount of detail.

Also, nobody plays games in "macro" mode

Of course not. But it is a fun way to see what's going on right down at the phosphor level.

[redsteakraw]

I would say a high res VGA monitor for CRT or a 1440p display as that has the most perfect integer scales from the various cores including 480p but said monitor needs to support the 4x3 resolution input. Some gaming monitors can and will do this pretty good.

[akeley]

Sharpness is subjective.

To an extent. It's a well known fact that the lack of extreme sharpness in TVs was an early substitute for antialiasing in games and that it worked really well. What's subjective is how people perceive it nowadays, and that's also the reason why anybody is free to choose their preference. But it does help to remember that modern perception is coloured by nearly two decades of the "emulator look" being a de facto standard, vs great difficulty of comparing it against the original one, which gives CRTs a bad rep. Add to that the thicc-scanline fetishizm and things can really get blown out of proportion.

Size, yes. Colour vibrancy, no.

Consumer CRTs, especially towards the end of the 90s, shipped with TERRIBLE default settings. Oversaturated colours and white points that were way too cool. These give the illusion of "vibrancy", but really just fool consumers into thinking the screen is better than it is when sitting on a showroom floor next to a dozen other models. The problem continues to exist today in an era of LCD and OLED screens, although good YouTube channels like HDTVTest are helping people become aware of the problem, and setting them on the right path.

SVGA CRTs especially were purchased by folks like office professionals and digital photographers, and didn't sit on showroom floors as their primary form of advertising. As a result, they shipped with competent standards like sRGB, agreed on by industry heavyweights like Adobe, Microsoft, HP, Dell and the rest. What confused a lot of TV watchers about this was that it looked "duller" than their overdriven TV sets, but in fact the colour accuracy was much higher, and things like colour crush didn't occur when colour calibration was correctly applied.

You are describing extremes. I don't think anybody even mildly interested in this subject would stick with the showroom settings of a CRT set or go for the overblown ones, though sometimes it's fun to mess around this way (although some sets won't let you do that in RGB mode). Anyway, it only takes few minutes with 240p suite, or certain games, to dial it all down to more reasonable levels which will be fine for 95% of gamers.

On the flipside, the pro-level VGA monitors are in the la-la land price territory these days, thus defeating your original point. And the mid-range ones, of which I have a few, are quite dull indeed, and it's not an "illusion". There's nothing you can do to bring my SyncMaster 793df to the vibrancy levels of the rather decent Trinitron it sits alongside. As for the preference, we are now entering subjectivity zone, for sure this time, but I'm pretty sure that most of people would choose the latter look, simply because that's a natural instinct. And as I said earlier, more vibrant does not equal terribly distorted with lack of detail. At least not the lack of detail you can discern without use of macro photography or sitting with your nose 5 cm from the screen, which is exactly what I was referring to in the previous post

Overall, obviously anybody can choose whatever method of displaying they wish, but the reason I sometimes make these posts is to point out that a) there is a lot of modern bias involved in this subject b) that in turn often creates a very distorted picture of this hobby (pun not intended) to beginners. While I recognise a lot of good work the likes of RetroRGB Bob or Fudoh have done, their opinions have also influenced the sometimes hyper-elitist take on CRT usage encountered in some circles (r/crtgaming springs to mind), where many people will considered you clueless if you're using composite and postulate that PVM-way is the only true way. Sufice to say this angle is not helping to convince normal folks to try out a CRT.

So, the bottom line is that a "street level" consumer CRT set - assuming you find/buy one from the higher range, in a decent nick - should be sufficent for anybody who wants to enjoy this (some will say the best) way of displaying retro games. It's the reason I got rid of my PVM when prices went wild, because my Trinitrons are simply good enough, if not better, for those like me who don't like too-pronounced scalines and pixel separation (because logically, it's not how people draw art either).

Of course, all the best to those who have the means, and space, to take this hobby to the extremes. But, it's 2021, the scalpers have wised up to this game long time ago and now even the silliest 9" PVM can cost you heaps of cash, so it's worth mentioning that the other methods can be just as good. And once you actually start playing games, instead of agonising about rather minuscule details (been there, done that), the hype factor tends to fade away anyway.