Why are there no tube televisions anymore?

Don't you have any 'black crush' in the dark scenes? :)

Motion is still better on CRT sets.

Not so anymore on my 120Hz OLED, no smearing or tearing at all.

I guess most of you got that the topic title was not meant literally. It’s just interesting that there still are tube amplifiers around, and vinyl records, with which there are countless steps (even chemical and mechanical ones) between getting from the studio master tape (where the noise level by the way is the equivalent of 12 bit or less digital sampling) to the final reproduction of sound on your speakers that it’s even astonishing there is any sound quality left. :)  While we can't imagine watching a TV set with tubes anymore.

And there are so many heated debates in the audio world, on how a USB cable or a power cord improved the sound (or not), while these kind of similar discussions are far less with TV’s and image quality. That’s what struck me.

@emailists That sure looks like a nice editing console you have there. And a well calibrated screen I bet ... OLED?

You might as well ask why there are no horses and carts.

@clearthinker Yes, those are ancient technologies. And that’s my whole question, my wondering ... how come there are still ancient technologies like tubes and vinyl in use in the audiophile world, while there’s no such trend in the videophile world? If it sounds nicer (to avoid the word better) then maybe a TV set with tubes could also look nicer? If there’s a market for ’audio fuses’ because they make it sound nicer ... how come there are no ’video fuses’ that make the picture look nicer? Apparently there’s no market for that.

To gamers refresh rate is not the only factor, although the higher the better. The other factor is latency ... the delay between the moment the video info left the PC and the moment it’s displayed on screen, caused by the built in digital image processing. When watching a movie latency plays no role at all, but to competitive gamers this delay impacts their reaction time in a negative way.

Most modern TV sets have a ’gaming mode’ via which (most of the) image processing is bypassed and latency is minimized. But still there’s a delay of a couple of ms. With a CRT this latency is zero.

@mirolab The discussion ran in all kinds of directions, while I was merely wondering how come in the audio world ...

A. There still is a desire to cling to (very) old technologies like vinyl and tubes.
B. There’s a broad range of components and accessories on the market that are (very) expensive and at the same time are questionable because no one knows why or how they work, but buyers claim to hear an improvement.
C. Debates on these subjects often get heated.

... while in the video world there’s a lot less of all three of the above. New technologies are embraced as improvements and there are far less accessories like ’video fuses’ or esoteric cables on the market ... you get yourself a proper HDMI cable and that’s about it, with far less debates.

Well ... maybe the frame rates discussion and whether people can really see the difference between 120 or 240 Hz. And it’s also interesting why movie lovers prefer a 24Hz sampling frequency when watching a screen, while I assume they prefer ’analog without sampling’ while watching out of the window?

@larsman I guess that’s it ... anyone can see the difference, and/or it can be objectively measured. Unlike with audio, where someone can claim he/she hears an improvement after installing expensive accessories like cables, fuses, or floor spacers which have no scientific base for any effect ... no one can verify that claim.

If someone likes the ’warmth’ and the distortion of tubes, or the higher noise floor, the crackling, the limited dynamic range and the wow and flutter of vinyl ... then that’s a matter of taste. Just like with a TV set where only few people use the ’movie’ setting which has optimum color representation ... many have it on ’standard’, which blows up the contrast and colors ... also a matter of taste.