Better than my 32" Sony Wega XBR?

I have the 34" Sony XBR picture tube (16:9). The punk weighs 230 lbs. Never seen a LCD that touches it-even the new XBR 120 Hz "motion flow" flat screens.

BluRays from the PS3 are a dream. We watched cars a few nights ago. It was ASTOUNDING.

Many of the responses so far discussing the advantages over CRT seem to be centered on resolution and size. I have no doubt a 32" or 36" XBR can't compete in those areas, but is anyone here saying that their flat panel set - of any type - can better a XBR in the areas of color accuracy*, shadow detail, and consistent image over a broad viewing angle?

I know moving to a flat panel will be a series of tradeoffs, but if I can't get ~95% or better of the picture quality of my XBR in a new flat panel then (for me) I'm not sure it matters how big the screen is or how many pixels it has. Ideally I'd like it to be 100% or better.

*(assume either a professional calibration or an end user who knows how to do a decent cal job with readily available utilities)

01-20-08: Tonyptony
...is anyone here saying that their flat panel set - of any type - can better a XBR in the areas of color accuracy*, shadow detail, and consistent image over a broad viewing angle?

The NBC television network still uses HD CRT displays as their reference monitors. Until I see TV networks switch to flat panel displays to quality check their programming before being broadcast, I will continue to believe CRT displays are superior in the areas you describe.

The Sony 34" CRT series, #'s 510, 910, 960, 955 were all flat, rectangular, and outstanding! No longer made but the beauty is these amazing machines can be had for as little as $300 on Craigslist and Ebay, get 'em while you can!

I stopped by a big electronics store last night. The salesperson told me that in his opinion there is no flat panel tv that equals the CRT for shadow detail. He said he bought the last XBR tv his store had for less than $500 and will not upgrade it, yet.

His feeling was the best shadow details were to be found in the Pioneer Kuro and Panasonic plasma models, but that they would not equal or better an XBR in shadow details and in comparison would block up in the shadows. His feeling was that the reasons to go to the plasma were size and high definition resolution in the mid-range (on the scale from black to white). He opined that if one wants shadow detail and a good image from an analogue source, that one should stay with the crt - assuming one has the space for same.

I love the look and size of a flat panel. I love the mid-range resolution from a high def source. The Pioneer seems pretty pricy for such rapidly changing technology (the Panasonic less so).

Does anybody know when technology will improve to provide good shadow detail in addition to all the other flat panel benefits?

Jeff