Loewe Aconda 38" HDTV, VGA/RGB???

[pegglegg007]

I have the opportunity to get a Loewe Aconda 38" HDTV for $800. It retailed 2 years ago for $5,500! Anyone know about them? My seating is only 8-9 feet from the TV, do you think that would be an ok size for that distance? Is there a rule of thumb for size vs. distance?

I was reading on one site that this set only had one set of component inputs, but it also says there's a VGA/RGB (HD-15) input. Is that NOT HDTV compatable? and what is the difference between them? Sorry I'm a bit of a newbie when it comes to video. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!!!

note: I don't have a reciever that does component video switching. I have a computer which I'd like to hook up on something better than my current s-video (which I nick-named the headache maker), I also will have a HD-DVD player soon, along with a standard def DishNetwork box.

[edtyct]

The Loewe TVs were made in Germany, and they had the beginnings of a US presence for a while. Though short on features, they were built with style and care, and they performed excellently for their time, generally receiving favorable press. However, the company died, and its last vestige of support in this country died with it. Loewes can no longer be serviced. If you're made of money and can recoup your losses if the TV fails, knock yourself out. But if money happens to be an object for you, you'd do well to let it go. In this day and age, the two-year-old Loewe can give you precious little that you can't find in a more contemporary, and practical, TV, and, even beside the fact that it's an orphan, without a digital input, it's at a distinct disadvantage nowadays.

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

I thought they stopped making those 5 years ago??

Regardless: Tube CRT has potentially the best possible picture quality of all the TV technologies (in color reproduction and contrast). The downside is of course size (38" is tiny these days), weight (200lbs!), and resolution capped-out at 1080 interlaced.

The 2 best CRTs ever made were the Lowe Aconda 38" and the Sony XBR960. Both of which are now no longer produced :(, and both could run circles around todays top-of-the-line Sony XBR970 (oddly the newer XBR is just the older non-XBR 16x9 model with an HDMI input).

So I'll say, yes, the Aconda is a fine TV at that price if you can live without digital video inputs and the product isn't damaged. A good CRT can last 10+ years.

But if you buy it, be sure to spend the extra coin on a professional ISF calibration. Otherwise you might as well put budget tires on your porsche!

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

PS: Both HD-DVD and Blu*Ray players (and hih-def cable boxes) will send your TV 1080i signals via the component-video outputs. You'll need an HDMI input for 1080p. BUT since the Lowe is a 1080i monitor, that shouldn't concern you at all.

Someday you'll have to buy a digital TV, but by then the much larger screens will help you overcome the slightly inferior picture quality.

[edtyct]

With all due respect to Mr. Ninja, no TV ever made is good enough to compensate for the complete lack of consumer protection (except in very special circumstances), and no CRT gets a ten-year bill of health for just showing up at your house. CRTs in general still set the standard in black level and gamma, but the idea that no up-to-date display can possibly compete with the Loewe in performance, or possibly present an even more attractive total package, is flirting with nonsense.

Does anyone else find the notion that a good TV without ISF calibration is like a Porsche with budget tires a little strange, especially coming from someone who just recommended a $300 receiver in a $10,000 system?

So far as a CRT is concerned, an immediate ISF calibration should be reserved for models with poor geometry, convergence, color points, and white balance out of the box. Whether anyone needs, or wants, an ISF calibration requires a little more thought and consideration, especially since it costs a variable amount of money.

[pegglegg007]

I'll admit that one of the reasons I was enthused about this particular set is that it was a tube. Not only for the better picture, but for the proven technology and reliability of tubes. I'm not a tv technician, but I am an electrical engineer (though currently not practicing) and it would seem (at least on the surface) that there is very little that could go wrong with a tube in comparison to the hundreds (possibly thousands) of parts and untested technology associated with dlp, lcd, plasma, ect. In my limited experience, I've had 2 sony trinitron 20" sets one for 11 years the other for 9 and they've worked flawlessly since purchase. Likewise, I've had 2 projection monitors (53" Samsung Tantus, and a Hitachi 41") and neither of those lasted more than 2 years before crapping out in some manner. Is it valid to say that tubes are far more reliable? I guess I just assumed it to be true, but perhaps I'm naive. Or has other big screen technology advanced to the point of reliability?

also, can anyone explain the vga/rgb input, is that the same VGA that's associated with computer monitor signals?

[edtyct]

I don't think that anyone, including me, wants to go out on a limb about any particular technology's--let alone, set's--reliability, but that's the very point that I wanted to make. CRT may be largely time-tested as a technology, but it has its own inherent problems--convergence, life of tube, and integrity of the spot beam to name a few obvious ones (your Trinitrons from the glory days were asked to do a lot less than the newer HD-compatible tube sets). The operating system on the Loewes could also be a source of trouble, especially since no authorized service exists at this point (the last outpost was in my home state of Massachusetts). Ultimately, the choice is yours. Looking at it objectively, however, at a cost of $800, I see enough risk to think twice, even though the set has its strengths. I seem to recall that the Loewes had their share of breakdowns of one sort or another, but it's been a while. You might do some research on the web. The advantage that a CRT might have as a legacy technology might be negated somewhat by the support that a newer TV would carry. I wouldn't say that LCD and plasma at this point were untested, however. Both have been around long enough to avoid at least certain pitfalls. LCoS and DLP may fall more into the unproven category, but they have their champions. The element of unpredictability with the Loewe doesn't appear to be negligible. How else does a $5500 TV drop to $800 in--what did you say--2 years?

Yes, the VGA input is the computer RGB format. It can be transcoded to component with a separate adaptor if necessary ($150 or so), though sometimes the results aren't perfect with regard to screen position. I don't happen to remember which computer refresh rates your Loewe accepts--probably not many. The VGA input may hearken back to the first RCA satellite/OTA receiver, which guessed wrong about HD input of choice.

[westcott]

I thought they stopped making those 5 years ago??

Regardless: Tube CRT has potentially the best possible picture quality of all the TV technologies (in color reproduction and contrast). The downside is of course size (38" is tiny these days), weight (200lbs!), and resolution capped-out at 1080 interlaced.

The 2 best CRTs ever made were the Lowe Aconda 38" and the Sony XBR960. Both of which are now no longer produced :(, and both could run circles around todays top-of-the-line Sony XBR970 (oddly the newer XBR is just the older non-XBR 16x9 model with an HDMI input).

So I'll say, yes, the Aconda is a fine TV at that price if you can live without digital video inputs and the product isn't damaged. A good CRT can last 10+ years.

But if you buy it, be sure to spend the extra coin on a professional ISF calibration. Otherwise you might as well put budget tires on your porsche!

I agree with you on this one R&R and will also state that the Lowe produces some of the finest HD pictures I have ever seen on any display!!!!!

Sorry ED but most plasma and lcd flat panels or rear projection displays can not even come close to the Lowes black level and contrast. As far as support, well I would rather take my chances with a CRT from Germany than an LCD or plasma no matter the warranty. What good is a warranty if the mfg does not stand behind it and never fixes your tv (I am sure we can find several Sony and other tv owners here that could attest to this fact!).

Everybody wants that cool little set of speakers hidden away and a large flat panel display but really have no concept of what quality video is really all about and wonder why standard definition programming looks so bad on their new display.

Now there are a few flat panels that are getting closer and closer to CRT performance but not for $800 dollars. Granted, the video processing in the Lowe is not up with the times and does get points deducted for that but accurate black levels, color, superb off axis viewing angles, and awesome contrast can make up for older analog video processing.

Happy Holidays and enjoy your Lowe with pride!

[edtyct]

I have a pretty good idea of what good video quality is, and I agree that the Loewe has it. I will also agree that no $800 LCD or plasma--if it exists--will attain the black levels, gamma, and color reproduction that the Loewe does, though the black level on a 42" Panasonic plasma for about $500 more will come close enough for a lot of people. The Panasonic would also have HDMI and 2 component inputs, arguably better processing (though Panasonic's isn't great), weigh an awful lot less, hang on a wall, and carry a warranty. It would also look good off-axis and maybe even look a bit better in a room with ambient light. I'm not making a general pitch for plasma, or Panasonic, but just putting the Loewe in some perspective. Though, I'll stand by my caveats, for whatever worth they may have for anyone, I sincerely wish pegglegg the best with the Loewe if he pulls the trigger.

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

Does anyone else find the notion that a good TV without ISF calibration is like a Porsche with budget tires a little strange, especially coming from someone who just recommended a $300 receiver in a $10,000 system?
hey, I practice what I preach at least. I find the sound quality improvements to be minimal (certainly not as much difference as choice in loudspeaker or even audio mastering on a dvd) at reasonable listening levels when comparing high-end and budget surround recievers. I still say your first priority with AVRs is connectivity.


So far as a CRT is concerned, an immediate ISF calibration should be reserved for models with poor geometry, convergence, color points, and white balance out of the box. Whether anyone needs, or wants, an ISF calibration requires a little more thought and consideration, especially since it costs a variable amount of money.
Every model on the market will benefit from professional calibration. I certainly see no point in spending $300 to tweak a $200 TV, but for a refrence quality product, why not use all of its potential (I ask because most people will use a TV for thousands of hours).

[edtyct]

Every model on the market will benefit from professional calibration. I certainly see no point in spending $300 to tweak a $200 TV, but for a refrence quality product, why not use all of its potential (I ask because most people will use a TV for thousands of hours).

Not necessarily. If the white balance is within tolerance out of the box, or can be made so in the user menu, as is sometimes the case these days (especially if red, green, and blue cut and gain adjustments are available), and the color points are okay--so that flesh tones are fairly accurate--an ISF calibration may not achieve much. Also, on some sets, the color decoder resists accurate adjustment. My point was about a TV costing $800; ISF would bring it to $1300 at least. And we don't know whether the TV could benefit much from ISF calibration, on any front.

[edtyct]

Pegglegg,

I feel a little bad appearing to rain on your parade, especially since no one else who posted seems to share any of my concerns about this set. As I thought more about it, I had it in the back of my head that the Aconda's tube came from another company, maybe Philips. It turns out that it came from Thomson/RCA, which also manufactured a TV with the same tube. A little research about how it has held up might pay some dividends. More important, I found Scott Wilkinson's print review of the Aconda from 2002 that praises its picture (which was never a source of the dispute) and identifies the related RCA set. However, the review also voices a few of the concerns four years ago that may be even more pertinent now, despite the fact that Wilkinson couldn't have anticipated the inconvenience that the lack of digital inputs and other current routine features would represent. If you do decide to buy it, one definite plus, in regard to RnR Ninja's point, is that its color and white balance appeared to be close enough to professional standards out of the box to obviate the need of a fundamental calibration. Though, as a CRT, it should be expected to have drifted over time, adjustment of the user parameters according to DVE, AVIA, or other other test disk might be all that it needs to come back. You'll have to see. Other calibration options, short of hiring a technician, might be available as well if desirable. Anyway, the review is located at http://www.guidetohometheater.com/crtdisplays/61/index1.html.

Ed

[pegglegg007]

Well last night around 6pm I had made up my mind. I took all of your good advice along with many online reviews to heart, and decided it would be worth the risk of possible power supply issues (mainly because I'm an electrical engineer with some decent soldering skills) and decided to buy it. I called the gentleman who had it only to find out he sold it a few hours prior. AAARRGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!! Now I will forever be comparing what I see to that glorious tube picture. I guess that pretty much pin-holes me into the stereotype that engineers can never make a quick decision. Thanks again for all your input and advice, and if you know of anyone in the upper midwest looking to sell another Loewe please point them my way. Thanks!!!!

[The Tahitijack]

It was not ment to be.

Let's say you were able to buy the set and 8 months from now your posting here "My Lowewe blowie, what do I do?"

You then need to replace the 38" Anaconda with a plasma or lcd......so your out another +/- $1,000. Total cost of providing quality image....$1,800.

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

Who knows, maybe an XBR34-960 (with the SFP tube) is still in a crate somewhere in the bowels of a Best Buy. Then the manager will see it the same day you're at the mall and it'll be propped against the Playstation3 display with a hastily drawn sign "Clearance sale $699".

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

You can get a 38" plasma for $1000 now?

My, will wonders never cease (I remember when a 42" ED cost $8900)

[The Tahitijack]

Rock and Roll, I'm with you on this one. There was a time when I thought plasma was way out of reach of the average consumer including me. Today there are several 42" plasma's at the $1,000 price point. A 37" LCD flat panel can be had for about $1,000 today. At the rate the price of plasma is falling there should be even more in the $1,000 +/- range next summer. It pays to wait.

[westcott]

Gentlemen,

I think you miss the point of the original discussion.

The CRT we are discussing gives even the BEST plasma and lcd flat panels fits and they cost $4000 to $8000 more. I have yet to see a flat panel, rear projector, or front projector that matches the video quality of the Loewe.

[edtyct]

I think that we've lost Pegglegg, but I also think that this discussion is worth pursuing on its own merits. As the lone dissenter (at least to some extent, and mainly for reasons extraneous to "picture quality"), I have a healthy respect for CRT--particularly as exemplified by special sets like the Loewe and the Sony XBR mentioned above. But I also feel compelled to give the best of the digital technologies their due, even in the matter of pure screen performance. Foregoing the matter of features and convenience, the Loewe, as good as it is, has the same liabilities in brightness that all CRTs exhibit. In the case of the Sony XBR, which at 34" betters the Loewe in perceived sharpness, some of the vaunted superiority comes at the direct expense of already modest light output. In order to get the full benefit of the Sony's SFP, which represents a significant increase in horizontal resolution over every other direct-view CRT (the Loewe included), brightness must be restrained to levels that make almost any ambient light a major intrusion. This won't be everyone's cup of tea. Nor can any CRT match the sense of resolution permitted by a good digital flat panel, which will almost always appear sharper. Granted, digital color and white balance are often garish and impure (particularly LCD's), and black wanting, but not so much, or so routinely, at this point that they always come up seriously short relative to the great CRTs. I would even venture to say that some viewers--and not all of them hopeless dupes of hype--will prefer the total experience provided by a very good plasma or LCD over that of the Loewe, even if Westcott, Pegglegg, and Ninja aren't among them. Many plasmas and even some LCDs come with color points and color temperature that are as good as, if not better than, those of the Sony and Loewe out of the box. As the owner of a Sony 34" CRT not long ago, I found myself wanting a different experience, despite the fact that I had no serious complaints about the set per se. I've spent time with lots of technologies, and I don't see any slam dunks here on the basis of technology alone, given all of the variables. To my mind, no one is simply wrong to prefer a CRT, a plasma, an LCD, or anything else, unless they go into a purchase with a misconception about what they are getting.

[The Tahitijack]

I think ed's original comment about buying a product that has no support in the US was the best agrument againts the purchase.

Why would you spend $800 on technololgy knowing the manufacturer had left the US shutting down customer support, parts and service?