Top
Best
New

Posted by giuliomagnifico 12/22/2025

The biggest CRT ever made: Sony's PVM-4300(dfarq.homeip.net)
281 points | 186 commentspage 2
tylervigen 12/22/2025|
This reminds me of my grandparents’ old, huge rear projection TV (RPTV). It was 4ft wide, 4ft tall (with the base), 2ft thick, and weighed 200lbs. This was the intermediary between CRTs and flat screens for me.

They had it installed in their basement. However, later they remodeled the basement stairway to add a turn. With the new layout, it would be impossible to bring back up the TV the way it was brought down. There was no other way to access the basement (it only had storm cellar windows), so they left it there when they moved.

I think about the new owners sometimes and wonder what they ended up doing. Perhaps they disassembled it, or maybe it’s still down there collecting dust.

rconti 12/22/2025||
For fairly obvious reasons, most people were unaware this set ever existed. In the 90s (~1993?), my family replaced our old 1970s-era 19" Sony Trinitron with a HUGE new TV, a 35" Toshiba.

At the time, a "big" CRT was a 32". I helped my dad transport the 35" which, from memory, was 150 or 180lbs. It was likely the largest CRT commercially available. (PVM-4300 stragglers aside).

A couple years later (1995-6?), a friend's family bought a 40" Mitsubishi, which I _thought_ was the largest CRT made. But, again, Sony aside, it probably was.

ilamont 12/22/2025||
> I helped my dad transport the 35" which, from memory, was 150 or 180lbs. It was likely the largest CRT commercially available

I helped friends move one of these old monsters out of an apartment in MIT's west campus 15 years ago. Don't remember the brand but it seemed even bigger than 35". It was shockingly huge and heavy and they lived on the top floor.

As we were doing this, I was thinking, how come the original owner didn't get a projection TV? They have been available since the 80s, the separate components were easier to manage, and the screens were far bigger.

rconti 12/22/2025|||
In addition to the reasons mentioned in the other reply, maybe you actually didn't want anything much bigger. People replacing (say) a 27" CRT might upgrade to the latest fancy 32". They wouldn't have seen the purpose of a 60" projector behemoth. Depth could have been an issue as well. CRTs are deep, but depending on the projector style, it might have been worse.
ssl-3 12/22/2025|||
Projectors (front/rear/enclosed/whatever) could produce a huge image, but they had their own issues.

In a bright room, the contrast was typically lacking.

Even on relatively late versions like the Toshiba 57HX93 (a 57" 16x9 doghouse from ~20 years ago with an integrated scaler and a 1080i input), which I personally spent some time with both in Toshiba form and as $10k Runco-branded units. Things got washed out in a bright room compared to a direct-view CRT.

And viewing angle is an issue, too: Whether front- or rear-projection, one of the tricks to improve brightness (and therefore potential contrast) is to reduce the angle of light transmission from the screen. Depending on the room layout, this can mean that people in seats off to the side might get a substantially darker image than those near the middle. (This applies to all projectors; film, CRT, DLP, LCD, front, rear, whatever -- there can be a lot of non-obvious tech that goes into a projection screen.)

And CRT projectors were fickle. Their color convergence would change based on external magnetic fields (including that produced by the Earth itself), so they needed to be set up properly in-situ. A projection set that was set up properly while facing East would be a different thing when rotated 90 degrees to instead face North: What once was carefully-adjusted to produce 3 overlapping images that summed to be pure white lines would be a weird mix of red, blue, and green lines that only sometimes overlapped.

The CRT tubes themselves were generally quite impressively small for the size of the image that they'd ultimately produce. This meant pushing the phosphor coatings quite hard, which translated into an increased opportunity for permanent image retention ("screen burn") from things like CNN logos and video game scores.

Plus: They'd tend to get blurry over time. Because they were being pushed hard, the CRTs were liquid-cooled using glycol that was supposed to be optically-clear. But stuff would sometimes grow in there. It was never clear whether this was flora or [micro]fauna or something else, but whatever it was liked living in a world filled with hot, brightly-lit glycol. Service shops could correct this by changing the fluid, but that's an expense and inconvenience that direct-view CRTs didn't have.

And they were ungainly things in other ways. Sure, they tended to be lighter (less-massive) because they were full of air instead of leaded glass, but a rear-projection set was generally a big floor-standing thing that still had plenty of gravity. Meanwhile, a front-projection rig ~doubled the chance of someone walking by occluding the view and came with the burden of a hard-to-clean screen (less important these days, but it used to be common for folks to smoke indoors) and its own additional alignment variables (and lens selection, and dust issues, and, and).

So a person could deal with all that, or -- you know -- just get a regular direct-view CRT.

Even today where projectors use friggin' laser beams for illumination and produce enormous, bright images with far fewer issues than I listed above, direct-view tech (like the flat LCD and *LED sets at any big-box) is still much more popular.

(But I do feel your pain. When I was a teenager, my parents came home from shopping one wintry night with a 36" Sony WEGA for me to help unload. Holy hell.)

ilamont 12/22/2025||
> Things got washed out in a bright room compared to a direct-view CRT.

You're right about that. A friend's dad was a gearhead and had one of those. It always seemed dim, practically unwatchable during the day and even at night it was flat which made darker films hard to watch.

But it was a mid-80s model and I figured 10 or 20 years later the tech had improved.

ssl-3 12/22/2025||
I also had a friend whose dad had a big, for the time, rear-projection set in the 80s.

It was in the room with the furniture that we weren't allowed to sit on, and we weren't allowed to think about using that TV. (I mentioned once when we were unsupervised that maybe we could turn it on and watch something, and the color drained out of his face like doing anything like that would surely result in a very painful death. After he calmed down, we went outside and played with bugs or something instead.)

As far as I could tell, the old man (who was much younger than I am at this point) only ever switched it on for watching football on Sunday afternoons. But once or twice I'd wander by and -- with permission, and being careful to touch nothing -- try to watch part of the game.

It was a miserable thing to view. Big, blurry, dim, and just broadly indistinct. I didn't see the attraction compared to the perfectly-good 20" Zenith we had at home at that time that seemed so much more vibrant and useful. But the speakers sure sounded better on the projection set, so I guess there's that.

The tech did improve. The brightness did get a lot better, and so did processing (including using tricks like Velocity Scan Modulation that sought to improve brightness, at the expensive of making geometry an deliberately-dynamic thing instead of an ideally-fixed thing), and the colors improved. Things like line doublers and scalers and higher-resolution electronics to drive the tubes did improve some aspects of the blur that was apparent, even with regular NTSC sources. But those same improvements were also made in direct-view CRTs; after all, they were both the same tech.

So CRT rear-projection was as good as a person could get for a bigger-than-direct-view for a long time, but the fidelity was very seldom particularly awesome on an absolute scale -- at any pricepoint.

Competing rear-projection systems like DLP and LCD began to dwarf it in the market not long after the turn of the century. Despite their hunger for expensive light bulbs (and single-chip DLP's own inherent temporal problems), these new players were often cheaper to produce and sell, came in smaller packages (they could often rest on furniture instead needing their own floor-space), had fewer setup issues, and fared pretty well in brightness and geometry.

CRT rear-projectors then got pushed completely aside as soon as things like plasma displays became cheap-enough, and big LCDs became good-enough -- somewhere between 2006 and 2009, on my timeline.

(CRT did last a bit longer in front-projection form, for people with very serious home theaters [think positively-enormous screen, tiered seating, dedicated space, and some blank checks], but LCD caught up there soon-enough as well.)

expedition32 12/22/2025||
My first TV in the early 2000s (Xbox!) was a Siemens. Another illustrious megacorp that doesn't make televisions anymore.
sholladay 12/22/2025||
I have a Samsung SlimFit HD tube TV from 2005 or so. It’s such an interesting piece of retro tech because it is widescreen, supports 1080i, and has HDMI, but it is a CRT! It’s also quite a bit thinner than most tubes. Super unusual.

I got it because LCDs always looked terrible to me and plasmas were still very expensive.

https://www.crutchfield.com/S-WXftqFAhnMu/p_305TXR3079/Samsu...

indigodaddy 12/22/2025||
In the mid 90s (feel like it was 1996 but can't remember) my grandmother bought us a 40" Mitsubishi right before the Super Bowl. The thing was insane. Took 6 people to move it.
rationalist 12/22/2025|
The real question is, did she return it after the football game? Apparently many people used to do that?
indigodaddy 12/22/2025||
No, we kept it, until we didn't want to lug it around anymore or LCD came around..
oofoe 12/22/2025||
A very long time ago, sometime during the first geologic age, I worked at a facility on Queen Street in Toronto. On the street side of the building, we had two Flame suites (very high-end (for the time) realtime editing and effects, used for composing television commercials). Each one had a Sony Trinitron TV of about this size as the client preview monitor. They were amazing, but every time a streetcar passed outside, they would get involuntarily degaussed!
TacticalCoder 12/22/2025||
I wonder about the WAF (Wife Acceptance Factor) of that one: she's already not too thrilled about my vintage arcade cab and its 21" CRT. Arcade cab which has already been to three different countries with us and, no, the movers typically ain't that happy when they have to move it (I already moved it by myself but that's quite the endeavour).
Jolter 12/22/2025|
Presumably the wife would at least be able to watch TV on that big screen.
lanthade 12/22/2025||
Previously on HN:

The biggest CRT ever made: Sony's PVM-4300: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40754471

Overview of the KX45ED1 / PVM-4300 (Worlds Largest CRT) [video] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42588259

Interestingly that first link is to the same URL as today's yet it's from June 22 2024. The linked article however has today's date as the publish date. There's no indication that the article was updated from what was published originally.

thunderbong 12/22/2025||
Previously on HN

What happened to the world's largest tube TV? [video]

689 points, 295 comments

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42497093

haxtormoogle 12/22/2025||
I want to call false on the claim that this is s the biggest crt ever made. I used to work in a computer recycling center in the monitor testing area bak in 2007. One day a giant 60 inch blue aluminum industrial sized sony trinitron was brought in by the fork trucks for me to test. There was 2 of them from a large conference room at xerox or kodak or used by a tv station. They were bigger than an average pallet and took a forklift to move them.
jsheard 12/22/2025||
That was most likely a rear projection unit, they looked kind of like CRTs but it's different technology. Sony did make them although they weren't marketed as Trinitrons AFAIK.
bitwize 12/22/2025||
Projection displays were CRTs, but they were small (10" or so) and monochrome. Three of them—one each for the red, green, and blue channels, were each oriented and focused to project a clear image at the exact same spot on the screen, overlaying each other to form a single color image.

Projection TVs were even prone to CRT "raster burn", perhaps even more so than single-tube TVs due to the brightness of the image required, which is why Nintendo instruction booklets had stern warnings not to use their consoles with projection TVs.

db48x 12/23/2025||
Yea, but the screen you could see wasn’t a CRT tube. It was just a projection screen but unless you looked closely you’d be unlikely to notice.
vachina 12/23/2025|||
Yeah. I remember growing up with a Trinitron flat CRT that I thought was humungous. TIL 43 inches is the upper limit for CRTs.
BuffaloEric33 12/22/2025||
Tell me you lived in Rochester, NY without saying so.

Now I want a plate...

More comments...