Why are there no tube televisions anymore?

@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?

@rudyb - Possibly because it's easier to be objective about video than audio. You can look at two images and tell if one is sharper than the other, and I can't think of a reason why anybody would want a less sharp one. With audio, it's all about individual preferences as to what 'sounds good' - some people like one type of sound, some people prefer another, etc, and too many are convinced that they are right and others are wrong if they disagree, hence the sometimes heatedness! 

@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.

I love my eye popping colors and razor sharp 4k picture. That’s part of the entertainment. If I want realistic colors and contrast I’ll walk outside. And another thing- you can buy a $500 pair of speakers with perfectly flat frequency response and a $500 receiver with top rate THD specs and wide frequency response. Set them up in a hemianechoic room so that you have no reflections and standing waves. On paper it is the perfect stereo; in real life it is completely useless.  I know.  I tried that once. 

Ha! Back in the old days a few of us audiophiles in my neighborhood in fact noticed that the analog with the tube video amplifiers were better able to bring out detail. Of course, you have to have the convergence set right... Zenith and Setchell-Carlson made some of the better TVs in those days, before the Feds got in and limited TV power draw to 75 watts. Then the fun was over... no way they hold up to modern sets though.