• CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Those TVs were in a lot of middle class homes. I think huge is pretty exaggerated. Having a house on the block with those 4 person 40-50 in TV’s was pretty common in a lot of areas IMO.

      • IWW4@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        They weren’t huge at all. They were huge for that day.

        Sure there was 40+ inch tvs if you were willing to shell out 10k plus.

        • jaybone@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Not that expensive at all.

          In the 90s you could get a 40in for maybe like $500.

          • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            $500 in the 90s would be equivalent to around $1000 today. That’s a very expensive TV and more than I’ve spent on displays in total across my adult life (which includes some nice IPS computer displays)

            • CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              I have a 75 in lg c1 in my theater and gaming room. Plenty of folks buy nicer displays. There are plenty of high end displays selling in volumes to support a very healthy display market.

              This was true in the past as well. As stated, you talk to most middle class Americans and they knew at least one guy hosting a Superbowl party with a big ass TV.

    • tehWrapper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Now most people need massive TVs, but still spend most of the time looking at the small screen on the phone.

      • dickalan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Not me, I will refuse to watch any movie I’ve never seen on a tiny fucking phone screen. I at least have some standards

          • dickalan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Dam. I was only able to afford the 55 inch in 2020 so I’m just rocking the CX. Which did have the hackable firmware to remove all ads from YouTube so I’m not complaining. https://rootmy.tv/

              • dickalan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 month ago

                I’m talking about sponsor block for in video ads, but that’s very cool that you can just not agree to that, are you in Europe per chance. I’m also talking about ads before the YouTube video start

      • CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Because unless you’re buying a quality panel the difference between a 45 inch and 65 is usually $150. For something that you need 3 or 4 of (tops, if you have a family or large house) that’ll last 5+ years, the value proposition is high enough to spend the extra money.

      • Rawrosaurus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Then they put that massive TV so close to where they sit that it’s just painful to actually watch anything on it because there is just no way you can get the entire image in your field of vision comfortably.

        Maybe I am old, but I miss the days when people had some sense and bought TVs actually sized for the distance they will be sitting from it.

  • cley_faye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    My next level is going back to that. Not with a huge CRT or a full-blown hifi system, but a nice place with a screen, some offline way to play music/audio, a few books maybe…

  • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I have that exact Aiwa music player.

    Last Sunday when I went back to my parents house, I noticed that the clock was blinking because there was a blackout, so I turned on and I saw that the 5 CD changer not only gets stuck but the laser doesn’t see the discs anymore 😢

    I’m sad

  • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I would never in a million years would consider this as “next level” unless there’s a MegaDrive behind those doors under the TV.

    EDIT: those seem like DVD cases by the stereo, so I’ll have to revise my previous comment and demand either a Sega Saturn, a Playstation or a Nitendo64.

      • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Oh, I was thinking this was late 90’s setup, but if that’s a PS3 then it’s like 10 years later… but isn’t that just like a book or something?

      • makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I disagree, that looks like a record player. You can see the plastic cover and what looks like part of the plate on top. There’s also a VCR and I doubt there were many instances of PS3s and VCRs being plugged into the same CRT. I don’t doubt it happened, but this is giving more late 90s/early 2000s than mid/late 2000s

    • doingthestuff@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I have a N64 plugged into the back side of my TV. It has a flush mount, as in I plugged the N64 in before I hung it on the wall.

    • Mickey7@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yes it was. The next jump after traditional records was cassettes. I find it hilarious that people are going back to records vs. digital

      • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        To be fair, if a record is made correctly, it actually has significantly more sound information than any digital recording.

        It’s hard to compete with analog since analog doesn’t really have a bitrate or anything. The precision is functionally infinite.

        Meanwhile, they gave us the Redbook standard and unless you go looking for it, pretty much everything is a similar quality or worse, digitally. Digital is convenient, but not higher quality.

        Records (true, genuinely analog records) are the Holy Grail of sound quality as far as I am concerned. The problem is that a lot of companies are taking CDs and just playing them back on to vinyl, making them sound like complete shit.

        To demonstrate the point. Have you been on hold recently? Hold music sounds like shit huh?

        What if I told you that hold music used to be kind of decent. That’s right, most companies are using VoIP, which is lower quality than the old analog phone lines of old, so anything that’s played is compressed to all hell and back. You don’t really notice it with voice, but as soon as that hold music kicks in, you can hear that something is wrong with it.

        Depending on how sensitive you are to the musical distortion of digitisation, that can be similar for CD quality content.

        I’m not crazy over vinyl, I can’t be bothered with the inconvenience of maintaining a player, and I don’t have the money they’re asking for a new player; so I’m firmly in digital media. I just understand the appeal of vinyl.

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      yes, but it was only used once because, as you can see, you had to pull the whole system out of the shelf to change records.

      • RedGreenBlue@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Last time i checked; you need to look at commercial displays or computer monitors. But they are more expensive than consumer smart TVs.

  • Krudler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m just here to point out that I look down upon everybody, as I have some arbitrary consideration in my mind that makes me and the things I think, more next-levelier than all of you and what you like

  • Jinarched@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I have two AF Toshibas. One 27 inches and the other 14. I would have more if I had a house. They are still awesome!