"Restoration" vs "Preservation" vs "?"
 

This has come up in a couple of threads here and elsewhere recently, and I thought the subject is important enough to merit a thread and discussion by all of us here.
What are your personal philosophies on the subject? Do you have any opinion at all? Lets get everyone talking here and see what opinions the community has. I will hold off on my $.02 and let some other people chime in first.

This was from Dave S' thread about his amazing prewar Andrea estate sale find.

This is my opinion. I believe we are caretakers of the really rare and scarce prewar and postwar sets. Every attempt should be made to document your restoration, pictures etc. I believe there is nothing wrong with cleaning of the cabinet and chassis. Although when I got a rca 8ts30 years ago I vacuumed inside the cabinet and sucked out the loose RCA label. Luckily I learned on a not so rare set to be more careful next time. Also if there are any parts missing such as knobs, grill, mask, transformmer then finding or making substitutes is OK. Now the grey area: every attempt should be mantained to keep all the original parts except the insides of capacitors, rotted wood etc. If capacitors are to be replaced then stuffing the old ones should be the first option. In the course of our collecting we will all have dozens of TVs so why must everyone be made to work? We all agree that we wouldn't put a LCD into a prewar tv but if I found a TRK12 mirror in the lid empty cabinet I might put one in until a chassis came along. Whatever is done should not harm the originality of the set. I once thought about taking the built-in bubble off my Automatic tabletop and putting it on my Automatic console but decided not to do it. The front of both sets match and I have never seen an Automatic console with the built-in bubble but have heard from one collector who claims to own one. This would have been reversable as long as I had both sets. I'm glad I didn't do that switch.

I agree that we have a duty as conservators, sometimes of a rare set or otherwise great examples of what this country is capable of.
We rarely get our time investment compensated when selling a "restored to operating set", so its a personal judgement call there. I do agree that we need to clean up and make it look good, securing labels etc.
Not everyone has the excess time to re-stuff the capacitors, so I just save the dead ones and keep other unsafe items such as rotted cords, etc in a bag concealed within the set's cabinet if possible.
Often, I focus on making the set safe, work reliably and look acceptably original again, hoping that alone will help maintain interest in it should it leave my posession.

Finding a set like Dave did means he has a great responsibility to mankind. When much is given, much is required. Seriously, he can do what he wants. If it was mine, I would clean it up first and try to find the missing parts. I would test the transformer and CRT. Then I would probably leave it alone for awhile. There would be no rush to restore it.

I found a Radiola Grand with the early cabinet within the past year and the PMs I got on it, other than offers to buy, was to not do a thing with it else risk de-valuing it. I don't know about that. I think if I got it playing with a minimum of alterations that would add to the value, not detract. Part of the fun, after finding these things, is actually showing how they work.

If your all about keeping the desirability as high as possible with collectors, then leaving them alone is probably the best option. However that means you are stuck with a bunch of shelf and floor queens that you can't do anything with other than look at.

Me, I like my sets to run and as we all know, that means capacitor replacement at the minimum, usually.

I've never had a set so valuable that I thought it prudent to restuff all the capacitors. I have restuffed some electrolytics so the top of the chassis looks original, but I've never been too concerned about what it looks like underneath as long as the work was good and safe. However if I had an extremely rare set, I would probably restuff all the paper caps also.

As far as finish goes, I try to buy sets in very good condition so I don't have to do anything to them. I like a little patina so a scratch here or a ding there doesn't really bother me. Although I do have an 8TS-30 that has a bunch of poly or something gooped on it that I'm going to have to do something with someday.

If you have to, using Howard's or something similar is fine and only refinish as a last resort. I've refinished enough sets to know that I don't really like to do it although my wife has gotten pretty good at it and likes to do it so problem solved if I come across something rough that I want.

The real answer to this question is:

"THERE IS NO REAL ANSWER"

Every situation presents it's own set of issues which enter into the decission on what to do with each particular set.

For Example: you are probably familiar with the CTC4 Hallicrafter clone set I resurected several years ago. (the story is on my web site) The set was a complete basket case and worth nothing as a collectable in the state I received it. To not restore it from the ground up would have meant that this rare set would have been lost as an example of the Hallicrafter lineage. AS caretakers it is my opinion that we have an obligation to do "what ever is reasonable and necessary" to not only preserve, but also to restore the sets in our charge.

Recently I helped a fellow collector who is restoring a very rare CBS color wheel set. The set is missing the power supply chassis and we constructed a replica steel chassis exactly like the only other known existing example. There is certainly nothing wrong with replicating parts and components that are pure unobtanium, and complete an otherwise incomplete set. And that holds true for cabinets too.

Not every set needs to be fully restored to operating condition. However it is my personal preference that the most interesting and unusual sets are always more interesting to people when they are functional.

If I had a historically significent pre-war set, I would certainly go to the extra effort to re-stuff caps and keep the underside of the chassis as close to original as possible. I would clean the cabinet and only refinish and restore if it was in very poor condition, and then I would try to refinish in a way that would be true to the way it looked when it was factory fresh.

I do not hold the same opinion of post war chassis undersides. On post war sets, I shot gun re-cap for reliability. As for post war cabinets, on a case by case basis, I do the gamut from just cleaning, to complete refinishing depending on the condition of the cabinet. To me, the set should look good first, then, if I choose to do so, I do an electronic restoration, to make it function reliably. Everyone is amazed when they see an old set opperating. Every time I show someone my RCA 21CT55 or my Moto 16CK1 in opperation, almost to a person they will say something to the effect that they can't believe a set that old can have such a beautiful picture. An operating set astounds most onlookers. And as Nuke said, showing a set in opperation is half the fun.

And as a mater of fact, an opperating set is worth more than one that dosen't function. Just look at the difference in price between opperating and non operating sets on ebay. A fully functioning restored set almost always will sell for more than one that was just unearthed from someones basement.

I've always wondered how different people make the decision whether to restore an electronic artifact or leave it in original condition.

Most of my stuff is not worthy of much debate, but I'm occasionally torn between the original / restored decision. On the one hand, I can easily imagine a hundred years from now how our best-intentioned restorations are going to be a source of dismay for collectors and historians. Yet a restored, working electronic artifact that looks and behaves like it did when it was new is a lot more enjoyable a thing for most people.

I have an Edison cylinder phonograph that has flaking varnish, partial loss of decal, worn pinstriping and green paint dots spattered on the lid. If ever there was a candidate for refinishing, this would be it. If I wanted a mint condition one, I could have bought one. I acquired this one inexpensively with defects that I intended to correct. (And I did replace the broken mainspring it came with.) Yet I look at the imperfectly reproduced Edison decals I bought and I worry about how different a restored pinstripe paint job might look and I keep trying to look at this with the eyes of a collector in 2114 (or in 3114!) That, plus of course my natural laziness and inertia has helped keep the Edison machine in original condition for the past 30 years. I think that might be a good thing, but I'm really not sure.

A friend of mine drives around a 1937 Plymouth in original (rusty with faded paint and frayed upholstery) condition. He has a ball with it.

I saw a TRK-5 with ALL original parts, including caps and tubes on display at an AWA Conference a number of years ago. The owner was adamant that he would not be "fixing" it; he was keeping it in original condition to serve as a reference for future generations. That was a new concept to me at the time, but I immediately saw the value of his decision.

This is usually a moot point since we're almost always dealing with artifacts that were manufactured by the thousands and there are already better examples in the museums than what many of us collectors are working on. And the dollar value of most of this stuff is relatively low. And the historical importance is minimal. (New experience for me, I didn't even cry when a collector friend recently bought an RCA 9-T-241 in rough condition and immediately removed the 10B and threw the rest of it away.)

Clearly, that's not the situation with the Andrea 1-F-5 I just got. It's an easy decision when one has an N.O.S. prewar television but perhaps not quite so obvious when it's a rare but beat-up, not one-of-a-kind piece with cracked veneer and rust on the chassis and perhaps a few missing parts. Its ugly right now to everyone but us hard-core TV collectors. It would look much better with the damage repaired. (Heck, they do that on million dollar old masters paintings!)

I'm glad to hear that there is a variety of viewpoints on this. I hope this discussion continues.

-- Dave Sica

I try to restuff caps in any set that is particularly rare or desirable, and will sometimes do that on more common sets if I like them or otherwise find some justification to do so. The desirability of sets changes over time so I usually bag the old caps and other parts that I change on sets that don't get cap restuffs and keep them with the set so if I sell it and the next owner wants the caps restuffed they can make it happen. I also will sometimes leave a set that works on the original parts as found...Usually because I can see more value putting the caps in to something that won't work without them.

I need to take the time to teach myself cabinet restoration, but some minor gluing and howards treatment can go a long way on some sets.

I can't believe he just tossed the chassis on that 9-T-246! The power transformers have a good deal of value not to mention the tubes and other borderline unobtainium transformers....Of course when I decide to scrap a set, which is a rare event, I try to keep every piece that could conceivably be useful in some project down the road. These sets will never be made the same way again, so failure to save parts that are only becoming rarer seems wasteful to put it mildly.

Just as with old cars, pristine restorations are a logical conclusion of beauty contests but the really interesting ones are the unrestored yet in good working order examples.

I hate to see any modern components in old technology items but I prefer to see sets (or cars) in good working order so careful stuffing gets my vote.

Old things should look genuinely old.

Peter

I think that 99.5% of the restoration is the cabinet, sides, back, inside, and top of
the chassis, and .5% would be the rarely seen bottom of the chassis. In addition
I like to see restorations documented in threads here with pictures and text. I too have
a desire "to make it work" and play. I really do prefer original finishes with its
"patina" - as long as it looks presentable. Leaving something "as found" is not
my goal as my desire to stabilize and clean it up, remove the rust, paint the
power transformers back to their original black, etc.

I guess my vote is a non-purist - make it work, stuff the cans, and just replace the
paper capacitors - but save the replaced components just in case someone
really cares.

Carl

Let's keep up this conversation and hear from people with differing points of view.

The following letter from Michael Bennett-Levy is posted on the Early Television Foundtation's website. It talks directly to the topic at hand.



Work once done cannot be reversed as a rule.

Pre-war TVs are very rare. To get one in to working order inevitably involves the replacement of some components, capacitors for a start. Modern capacitors are much smaller than old ones so one can hollow out the old ones and put the new ones inside them thus preserving the original look. Rewinding a transformer is probably acceptable but with both operations one has to 'put a soldering iron the set' and it is almost impossible to do so without leaving a trace - hence the restorer leaves a mark of his presence. Once a TV set is working then the tube has a limited life span. Pre- war tubes - especially the small ones suffer quite quickly from ion burn and replacement tubes are not plentiful to put it mildly. A set may work today with an acceptable brightness but then the set is 'only' sixty something years old and has probably not been used for fifty or more of them. What about when you and I are dead in another hundred years? What will be the historical importance of a pre-war TV set with many components changed and a burned out tube? Just as a piece of furniture design?

I've had a little over sixty pre-war TV sets through my hands since 1993. In all that number I only had two put in to working order (plus one that was already in working order from David Boynes). My experience in showing people my collection is that the experience is a mixture of nostalgia and historical and just seeing one pre-war set working for a few minutes crowns the experience for them. The analogy I think about is the Wright Brothers' Flyer in the Smithsonian in Washington. There it is hanging up the world's first powered aircraft still incredibly not yet even 100 years old! Presumably it could be got to work again and be flown but would one want to - for any reason? Thus it is with the TVs I possess. They are cleaned up as much as possible and mostly gleam - when dusted - but otherwise they remain many in the same electrical state as when they left their manufacturers.

Each person must make up his or her mind as to whether they want to put a pre-war TV in their possession back in to working order. I would not dream to criticize that choice, but for me I always tried to buy 'untouched sets' and sold on the less perfect duplicates (such luxury! Now alas gone). When Arnold Chase asked me which TRK 12/120 I wanted, (he had about eight or ten in varying states) my response was to ask him to send me the most 'untouched'. He did. It had sixty years of dust inside and outside of it.

If the tube in your Cossor has a burned out filament but is otherwise intact and with a bright white phosphor does it matter? It may be a blessing in disguise because in 100 years the phosphor will still be white and the insides perfect. For all I know one or two of the sets in my collection may have burned out filaments, but I'll never know at least until they leave my hands.

...

I say restore , unless it was a one of a kind prototype then I would start to question it , not many people can turn a tv on and say its a 1930's set , as far as restuffing that's up to the restorer , you wont see the parts when the set is on display and restuffing them just makes it look original , often I see cars with altered radios or altered rims and that's a too each his own but I'd leave it original , too many I want to hook an ipod up when you can hook the ipod to a mini transmitter and tune it in on the original radio .
life is too short enjoy it
mike

Yep. A perfectionist collector is an antique preservationists worst enemy. And while most vintage electronics aren't considered true antiques at this point, they may well be to some folks in the not so distant future.

Agree here too. By re-stuffing, all you've achieved is the equivalent of a faux finish under the chassis, all in an attempt to "have your cake and eat it too"(see above perfectionist comment).:D There's simply no substitute for leaving a significant historical item in it's "as found unmolested condition". I'd venture a guess that 2 out of 3 TV collectors today are primarily in the hobby for the enjoyment of doing their own electronic and cabinet restorations, in which case we're not doing future collectors any favor by restoring every set in our collection to a pristine finish and working condition. All that being said, IMO we TV and radio collectors are an endangered species, so I say do your best and enjoy them however you see fit.

Just remember, it's only "original" once.

In the same way the unbuilt Heathkits command a premium price, someday "virgin" TV's and radios will be looked at the same way. I get a lot of enjoyment out of taking something dead and bringing it back to life. If you look at my collection you'll see very little in mint condition. It's the same with the old cars I own: I would rather have something a little tattered that I can use whenever I want than to have something I can just stand back and look at. But I do respect those who prefer the other way.

I have to admit, I'll always pay a premium for an unspoiled set versus one that has been tinkered with (or even competently restored) by someone else. For me, the challenge is all in the restoration. I lose interest pretty quickly after that's done. Likewise, I would never buy a set that was fully restored by someone else (dang -- they got all the fun!).

Which makes me a sort of hypocrite, I guess. I want the unspoiled goodies for myself, and then I promptly destroy the set's originality (from a preservationist viewpoint) by restoring the electronics and sometimes the cabinet. My rationalization is that most of my stuff is not especially rare or valuable, so nothing precious is lost if I make it work.

I do understand and appreciate the preservationist ethic. Elli Buk's collections were auctioned off last year, and I'll bet most of the buyers were delighted that he had left those many interesting objects in the same condition as when he got them.

I don't own any pre-war TVs (or the equivalent class of radio). If I ran across something like that, I'd certainly give the question some serious thought. I do own a couple of radios that I have decided not to touch at all, except for gentle cleaning. They don't have great monetary value, but they're worth more to me if I leave them alone.

Phil Nelson
Phil's Old Radios
http://antiqueradio.org/index.html

Perhaps we should start a thread that helps to define exactly what sets are "historically significant" so that we are careful not to damage them by making them do what they were made to do in the first place. Here's my $.02; it doesn't matter if you wind up with a "pre-war" or a "post war"; a "roundie" or a lowly 21" common 50s rectangular. Frankly, I think the latter is nearly as significant as the fore-mentioned. Indeed, to most people TV is thought to have not existed before the "war", but we know different and the fact that there are examples out there that prove that the technology and manufacturing was there does make those few sets a more defined signifigance.

I have been messing with vintage electronics for about 30 years and I have never seen a "pre-war" set. So really significance is a decision and a perception of the individual who finds a set and bears the desire and skill set necessary to make it do what it was designed to do. If it doesn't do that, then it is a bunch of wood and metal that has no use. I'm not saying that all sets must work to be worth having. If you are like me, then you always have something sitting around waiting for service. I have a collection, but I am not a collector. I don't care for the attitudes that come with being a "collector." Just the whole mine is more valuable or "significant" than yours for a list of reasons just takes the fun out of it I think.

To stay more on topic though, I say it's both restoration AND preservation, and normally in that order. The degree of each is up to the individual. I personally love the smaller components that we have today and have found that in many cases I can hard wire in each piece right under that chassis where nobody is ever going to see them. I have never re-stuffed a cap, but I might like to try it on a few of my really old radios. I find radio to be a better candidate for a completely original in every way fix. A TV to me is about the viewing (and listening) experience, and if you can achieve a reasonable duplication of its original design purpose then you are done. After that it is time to enjoy watching it and polishing it up. I think it is fun to pop the back off and blow the dust out from time to time; maybe clean some tube sockets and glass.

Wow, with all this being said I just realized that my post war 2002 Magnavox playing tonight and every night without fail is pretty darned significant! Not a lot of history though.........

I bought my 1937 mirror lid set 35 years ago and whilst I've maintained it in working order for most of that time I have tended not to operate more than about once or twice a year and then for probably less than one hour at a time so I think that further deterioration of its 12" CRT over the next 100 years is unlikely to be very noticeable if its future owners treat it likewise.

It does exhibit some ion burn but you wouldn't notice it with the set switched off. As to components, it had quite a few 1940/50s replacements when I bought it and I've tried to replace these with genuine 30s resistors of correct style and I created replica capacitors to replace the "modern" nasties. I have retained the original EHT transformer winding but used its core for my replacement transformer.

If I possessed an almost unrepaired/unrestored example I think I would not want to do anything to it but find a suitable museum for it to live in.

Peter

Personally I just don't find old brown wax capacitors visually appealing.
Instead, a recapped chassis with the smaller orange and yellow capacitors
I find more appealing and it opens up the chassis by makeing it look less crowded.
When we as enthusists recap a chassis, I think we
become part of the History and our craftsmanship will show.

I advocate yet another criteria that we enhance our craftsmanship when
we do recap a chassis -- say utilize Spaghetti Tubing on all replaced capacitors,
stuff Electrolytic cans, use cloth covered wire when we rewire, and add safety
incorporating fuses and X1/Y2 capacitors.

50 or so years from now, our work restoring these radios might be studied - and preserved too.

Carl

I bought my 1937 mirror lid set 35 years ago and whilst I've maintained it in working order for most of that time I have tended not to operate more than about once or twice a year and then for probably less than one hour at a time so I think that further deterioration of its 12" CRT over the next 100 years is unlikely to be very noticeable if its future owners treat it likewise.

It does exhibit some ion burn but you wouldn't notice it with the set switched off. As to components, it had quite a few 1940/50s replacements when I bought it and I've tried to replace these with genuine 30s resistors of correct style and I created replica capacitors to replace the "modern" nasties.

I did butcher the EHT transformer but still retain the original winding although I re-used the core. My winding is not pitch covered but it is hidden within a metal can. Some of my replica capacitors also appear in the lower photo and a photo of an original TCC cap.

If I possessed an almost unrepaired/unrestored example I think I would not want to do anything to it but find a suitable museum for it to live in.

Peter

Is there anyone who feels that "restuffing" parts is in fact WORSE and should be avoided? A few of us have eluded to this in this, and other posts in the past. Are the "insides" of a capacitor any less valuable than the "shells"?

As I collect several different things I also have had to decide how to get it running again without changing the looks. I have restored many radios that people would have thrown away. I like to see things in their original state but sometimes it just dont work that way. I also restore antique flywheel engines and sometimes when you get one that looks like it has been at the bottom of a lake you do what you can to get it working again. normally I would never think of painting one if it has at least 30 % original paint but sometimes when you have a complete rust bucket or someone before you painted it I just match the paint sand blast it and start over. I do the same with my radios to a minimal point I do get them running again but I dont go as far as making the caps look original. I will repair cabinets if they are coming apart and touch up scratches. I have over 300 radios ranging from the early teens to the 50's. I have only made one cabinet for one because I did not have one and I only know of 2 others in existence. I borrowed one from a friend of mine and made a duplicate. I can barley tell the difference my self but I put a little mark on mine so I can tell the difference. is it original.... no..... but I had to preserve this radio to the best I can. Well enough of my 2 cents worth.:screwy:

Paul K

I think restuffing the electrolytics is definitely preferable to drilling holes in the chassis, mounting terminal strips for new caps and altering the wiring.

I have to echo Phil's comments above. That's the main reason I'm into this hobby as well. I mostly enjoy to finding and restoration process and lose interest once a project is done. I'm really not much of a collector I guess.

The way I look at is that these sets were meant to be maintained and used. After all, mountains of service info and spare parts were produced. Just as I wouldn't expect a vintage car to have it's original tires, oil filter, spark plugs, etc. So I don't see any harm done with replacing a few parts to keep a TV running.

As for the uber-rare sets that are museum worthy, I'd think long and hard about touching them.

I think we are all collectors, regardless of our collection philosophies.

I for one feel that I was brought into this world maybe 50-60 years too late for my intended purpose. So in a sense I'm using the old TV's and radios as my creative medium, probably in an attempt to provide a service that has no real use in today's society. I honestly feel like I have some sort of spiritual drive that keeps compelling me to studying and fixing up the old stuff, and at the same time I'm witnessing my insanity in what often seems like a huge waste of my time. I'm sure a big part of this stems from me not having an employment opportunity that's what I'd consider "very intellectually stimulating". So I suspect I'm using this nostalgic creative process as a complement to my otherwise less than satisfying lifestyle. :eek:
There, that's my self psychological diagnosis for the day (pays self $200). :)

I doubt I will ever come across any museum-worthy pieces, so I'll cross that bridge once I get to it. As for the more common prewar radios and postwar TV's, I like to replace caps and resistors with as old as I can, or at least keep the brand, if possible. Like Phil says, a piece that's already restored is no fun, and I generally avoid them. I may try re-stuffing electrolytic cans someday, where I'm probably stuck buying imported caps. Nothing ruins the mystique of a prewar set like imported parts; they often look so cheesy! However, I'm unlikely to start re-pulling TV chassis once restored, so I really won't sweat part choices I had to make. Now that there's an internet article on faking dog-bone resistors, I suppose there will be peer pressure to do that as well...

I only buy sets that have original finishes, even if they need a serious cleaning and detailing. I feel all the imperfections are part of the sets history. I want them there. It just has to simply look clean and presentable to me. As I'm not a technician, I almost immediately bring the set to my repairman to get it working. He replaces only what is necessary to make it safe and work well and does not re-stuff paper caps. It is something that doesn't concern me at all being it is under the chassis. To me having the set working is where most of the enjoyment is with these TV's! Seeing a set come to life and enjoying a classic show/movie on them is a great experience and a lot of fun. it never gets old for me.
I take care of the sets in my collection, but it's just for my own enjoyment and being a fun pastime, nothing more. If I'm indirectly being a "preservationist" that's great, but I can't honestly say that's what I'm thinking about when I add to my collection. I don't get that serious about it.
Joe

+1 on no refinishing if possible, and I'm not including "restor-a-finish" as refinishing as much as cleaning and preserving the original finish/patena is. As for the electronics, I like the neatness approach and I will restuff the electrolytics. Someday, maybe someone else will be caretaking my sets and my work can live on.

I do relate to the car analogy, do you want to drive it (safely) or look at it? What's the best approach for that "one" piece?

I find I don't watch my restored sets much after the fact, and so I often question why I'd continue doing more of them. It's an enjoyable pastime, so I basically write it off to good cheap entertainment. But I do fear I'll have trouble giving away most of what I've collected if I continue to restore the electronics of them all. For the most part I stopped restoring radio's years ago for the same reason.

I've got 6 electrically restored TVs and like Kevin stated, I rarely watch them.
I really don't need anymore in playing condition so this thread has made me question
if I should electrically restore that Dumont RA-113 TV I acquired. I'm now thinking
about just giving it a good cleaning inside, outside, chassis to make it look
nice, and maybe but not sure go as far as Howards on the cabinetry.

Still, it is a lot of fun bringing these old TVs back to working condition.

Carl

I also concur with DecoJoe and Marty about refinishing cabinets.
I onely have one TV with cabinet refinished - a Zenith Porthole- that
I purchased already refinished. It just does not have the character
of an original finish and patina.

Wow, this thread is absolutely fascinating!

I am exactly the opposite of both Kevin and Carl. I don't want them taking up needed space if I can't enjoy watching them. My favorite is an often mentioned 56 Philco that I bought about 30 years ago working original and it still works today the same as it did then. In 30 years it has seen a replacement for the original CRT (that was still viewable but dim) and I replaced a wax/paper capacitor that was causing loss of vertical height.

I find it to be phenomenal every time I watch it that I AM watching a set that was around over a decade before I was born! Then I have sets that I have recapped and I get that self gratification thing going when I watch them as they are along more normal lines of being acquired not working and likely dormant for decades. Either way to me it is all fascinating. As a more modern student of electronics, I find the concept of thermionic emission to be in ways more "high tech" than what we deal with (or don't) today. I believe that you have to understand electronics more to be able to understand what is going on in an older TV or radio than what is out there now. BUT we don't service what is out there now. We don't need to understand it. We just throw it away and get a new one. I guess if I were one of the high end engineers coming up with the latest stuff I would see it in a different light

But at my level of electronics repair I see P.LC.s (computers) controlling field devices more than anything, and it really just dumbs down what it takes to be a tech these days. Now none of the guys I work with would ever admit this. They know everything and many laugh at old technology, but I think that it is a mode of ego self protection. Because the truth be known, most of them wouldn't know where to begin servicing an electronic device be it tube type or solid state. They are mostly plug and play techs with their minds believing that everything revolves around 1s and 0s. Quite a shame...:drool:

I wonder how many of us are reading Kevin's reply and thinking the same thing. I believe the joy is in the process of restoration much more than the finished product for so many of us.

I have never done elec. restorations, but can only imagine the feeling of accomplishment when you get an old dusty chassis working again. Even though I'm a collector who loves to use all his sets, I can appreciate that stance on the subject. At this point in time I have about 9 vintage TV's and I thoroughly enjoy using each one as I rotate through them. If I have a problem with one, within the week it's on my repairman's bench. Fortunately that's not too often!

Decojoe, you are living in the era of those TV's by playing them, and dealing with
getting them repaired - no tossing and going to Best Buy to purchase a new TV:-)

Carl

Well I hope my comments didn't come off as sounding harsh or negative towards anyone's collecting efforts. I honestly think restoring these old sets is a very wholesome and educational pastime. My personal situation here in rural WI is that our local demographics will never allow for myself or family members to swiftly disperse of whatever I do bring home, so that's something that I keep in the back of my mind when I consider bringing home another treasure. I'm not sure there's any good answer to the situation other that an ongoing attempt at moderation. That, along with occasionally testing the waters by selling or giving away an older treasure.

As I think about the "restore versus preserve" question, here is an example I came up with: What if someone found a 1920s or 1930s Duesenberg, of a model that was either unknown before or maybe only the second one known to exist, that had not been touched since 1938? Even if the paint was in very good condition, would the collector community prefer to leave its original but falling-off-rotted tires and hoses on the car, and maybe moth- or rodent-eaten upholstery visible from several feet away? What if the same car was found, but in a leaky garage or barn, so its paint was in poor shape and the body had plenty of rust? Is there a "typical" level of one-time and/or ongoing work done on any such unique or near-unique vehicles from 75 or more years ago, whether those vehicles were found in 2005 or have been cared for since, say, 1950?

My experience with museums is that things almost always look "like new", or very close to it. In the case of mechanical or electronic items in museums, I always think that they would work fine as well (either from restoration or some magical condition where they never deteriorated), even if I am wrong about that. In the bigger picture, are any one of us TV collectors intending to preserve things only for the most scholarly historians in the future, or for any average person to see them and say "Wow, black-and-white video on a big, heavy wooden box! Cool!", or for someone in between?

I am mostly in the "restore with minimal externally-visible changes" group. So, I will always re-stuff can-type electrolytic capacitors, but I will use modern parts as-is under the chassis. I have a set that will force me to make a tough decision one day, because it IS a near-one-of-a-kind item: a 1956 Muntz 721CV color TV set, the only one known with a mahogany cabinet, and also likely the only one with its original tuner. Do I restore it (including re-stuffing all wax capacitors on its visible PC boards), or leave it alone? It has a (likely RCA-built) CTC-5 Super chassis, so it would not be unique in any way as a working set.

Add me to that list. After completion, I'll watch the set regularly for a month or two, then just turn it on occasionally. I don't watch much TV to begin with, so I think that Kevin was spot on when he said this:

That says it ALL right there. This is what leads many of us (me included) to have houses packed full of stuff that we see as being treasured and valuable but nobody else does. At ALL, for the most part.

We eventually end up becoming slaves to the stuff if we allow that to happen, and either way end up stacking things one atop the other in an attempt to have our own private museums or live in an era that left us long ago.

I myself have re-evaluated TV restoration and collecting as a hobby more times than I can count. Including now. This thread has made me take a serious look at myself, and what I want to do. Problem is, that it's a lot of fun and I don't wanna quit :D