gig@ritcv.UUCP (Gordon Goodman) (01/10/86)
Since I've gotten a few inquiries about the NAD monitor I mentioned a week ago, perhaps there are others who will find my experience of some value. While looking for a monitor that could serve double duty (VCR/TV and computer monitor), I looked at NAD's 20" monitor side by side with a 20" Sony XBR. The source was a Pioneer laser disk and the monitors were literally side-by-side. After finding an image with flesh tones, I froze the frame, and did a careful adjustment of the sets to get the most realistic flesh tones each was capable of producing. Next, leaving all adjustments unchanged (color, tint, brightness and contrast), I looked at a bright white to see if the white was tinted and found a frame with deep black to see if the black had depth. The Sony was very good but, the NAD was clearly superior (a friend who is a photographer and prints color was with me. She has a very fine sense of color and finds most tv/monitors repulsive. Both monitors impressed her, but she too thought the NAD was superior. We also felt that the NAD was a bit sharper and held onto detail in shadow better. The image was not however excessively contrasty. It just had a greater range of luminosity between the blackest black and whitest white. If anyone else has seen this monitor, I'd like to know if you had the same reaction. Even better, have you seen a monitor better than the NAD? -- Gordon Goodman School of Computer Science and Technology Rochester Institute of Technology Rochester, NY 14623