This is my personal experience, so I may say things that are wrong.
My sharpest monitors are the newest ones. I've got 4 of them (and a 5th that I've never tested because I don't have room to use it). One of them is an HP from the early 90's (or maybe even late 80's) and it's really blurry (and can't go over 640*480), I've got another one made by highscreen from 1996 which doesn't look that good either (colors are looking cold). Next I've got a noname one from 1998 which is actually okay, and then an Acer from 2002/2003 which looks really sharp, especially with lower res. Plus it supports high framerates (at least up to 85Hz)
Sure some monitors are better than other, but it seems that newer monitors are actually better (which isn't that surprizing since the technology is evolving). Often, when you use a lower resolution than what the monitor can display at best, it looks sharp. Let's say that you have two monitors. One can display up to 640*480 (like my HP) and the other can display up to 800*600, well it seems like the 800*600 will look sharper at 640*480 resolution. And also like I said, newer ones can sometimes display higher framerates which is actually a VERY good thing. I see the flicker at 60Hz (even though it doesn't bother me), but at 85Hz I don't, and it's more comfortable. I think that people that can't stand the CRT flicker should look for higher framerates and see if it doesn't help them.