The best solid state color TVs ever made

[JohnCT]

Originally Posted by Tube TV

Without a doubt one of these RCA's



I have one that I picked up used for $3 at a thrift shop back in 2002. I estimate that It's ran at least 70,000 hours as a surveillance monitor from 2007 to 2018 till it was having something arcing in the HV when it's cold and first startup in the morning.

It still works and outside of a bit of burn in the picture is still sharp as a tack and the colors are bright and dead on accurate. I've still have to track the arcing down and correct it.

Looks like the venerable CTC107/8/9 series. And you're correct - other than the early 1981 run where they had a lot of flybacks fail, your example was not an aberration. They were a simple and low cost design, but they could run up ridiculous hours without breaking a sweat. When I was selling new TVs in the 1980s, one of the ways I was able to get sales was to give a three year parts and labor warranty with every new TV. Up until the CTC140 (a great performer) came out, I never had to repair a single one of those.

John

[ARC Tech-109]

Very nice!

[Telecolor 3007]

I have an 2000 "Sony" Trinitron. Not necesarly relabile, because that chassi model had problems with an integrated circuit and mine had a problem with the H.V. connection on the tube, but otherwise, no problems.
The older '90's problably where more relaible.
My granfather had an 1995 U.K. assambled "Panasonic" that worked up untill around 2010. He gave it away without teeling me. The set didn't had a problem in it's entire life and it was regullary used.

[JohnCT]

Originally Posted by Telecolor 3007

I have an 2000 "Sony" Trinitron. Not necesarly relabile, because that chassi model had problems with an integrated circuit and mine had a problem with the H.V. connection on the tube, but otherwise, no problems.
The older '90's problably where more relaible.
My granfather had an 1995 U.K. assambled "Panasonic" that worked up untill around 2010. He gave it away without teeling me. The set didn't had a problem in it's entire life and it was regullary used.

Yeah, the MCZ chip. I made a ton of money with those. The problem though is that counterfeit MCZ chips hit the market so we had to buy directly from Sony or Hitachi (who used them as well).

A dirty little secret is that year in and year out, Panasonic made a more reliable TV than Sony. Sony had some great chassis but always seemed to make a clunker here and there, but I can't recall Panny ever making a clunker.

John

[DavGoodlin]

Originally Posted by JohnCT

Yeah, the MCZ chip. I made a ton of money with those. The problem though is that counterfeit MCZ chips hit the market so we had to buy directly from Sony or Hitachi (who used them as well).

A dirty little secret is that year in and year out, Panasonic made a more reliable TV than Sony. Sony had some great chassis but always seemed to make a clunker here and there, but I can't recall Panny ever making a clunker.

John

Place I worked for sold Sony, only TV-Appliance dealer selling Sony in a "city" of 75,000. Without much fanfare, they began selling Panasonic in '85. Just before the GE buying RCA debacle and selling both of those as well through the Thomsen Era.

I have to agree, even the GE PC (?) was proof Panny could improve all things SS, after doing it for Quasar a decade before much as I like Motorola SS, they could be a bear sometimes

[Telecolor 3007]

What exactly was the problem with that MCZ chip?
"Panasonic" probably knew that they couldn't make such as good picture tube as "Sony" did, so they went making more relaible chassies - good publicity?
"Samsung" made quite relaible tv sets. I know that in U.S.A. they where problematic, but the ones for Romania where pretty lasting tv sets.

[Tube TV]

Originally Posted by JohnCT

Looks like the venerable CTC107/8/9 series. And you're correct - other than the early 1981 run where they had a lot of flybacks fail, your example was not an aberration. They were a simple and low cost design, but they could run up ridiculous hours without breaking a sweat. When I was selling new TVs in the 1980s, one of the ways I was able to get sales was to give a three year parts and labor warranty with every new TV. Up until the CTC140 (a great performer) came out, I never had to repair a single one of those.

John

I think mine is a 1983-84 model if I recall. I'd love to know exactly how many hours are on it all total.

[Electronic M]

Originally Posted by Telecolor 3007

What exactly was the problem with that MCZ chip?
"Panasonic" probably knew that they couldn't make such as good picture tube as "Sony" did, so they went making more relaible chassies - good publicity?
"Samsung" made quite relaible tv sets. I know that in U.S.A. they where problematic, but the ones for Romania where pretty lasting tv sets.

They're driver chips for the scanning, HV and IIRC switch mode supplies. They tend to fail every so many years.

My DA4 chassis HD-CRT Sony has 2 of them and one blew leaving me with a dead set a few years ago...I ordered a new pair (the place sent me like 5 of them for some reason so I have spares) and somehow guessed the right one first try and fixed it with only one chip...I added a socket for that chip while I was in there so if it dies again it'll take half the time to change it.

[JohnCT]

Originally Posted by Electronic M

They're driver chips for the scanning, HV and IIRC switch mode supplies. They tend to fail every so many years.

My DA4 chassis HD-CRT Sony has 2 of them and one blew leaving me with a dead set a few years ago...I ordered a new pair (the place sent me like 5 of them for some reason so I have spares) and somehow guessed the right one first try and fixed it with only one chip...I added a socket for that chip while I was in there so if it dies again it'll take half the time to change it.

IIRC, the one closest to the flyback was the trouble maker, the other would last virtually forever.

One of the easy ways to troubleshoot them was to heat them with the back of a soldering and apply AC - if it started, the chip was bad. Thermal intermittents are such a time saver.

John

[ARC Tech-109]

Originally Posted by JohnCT

IIRC, the one closest to the flyback was the trouble maker, the other would last virtually forever.

One of the easy ways to troubleshoot them was to heat them with the back of a soldering and apply AC - if it started, the chip was bad. Thermal intermittents are such a time saver.

John
John

Depending on which way the intermittent went.

[JohnCT]

Originally Posted by ARC Tech-109

Depending on which way the intermittent went.

In the case of the MCZ chips, they always responded to heat. Icing them after they were working would cause a shutdown. Very handy.

John

[Telecolor 3007]

But why "Sony" used bad MCZ chips and the competion made better chassies?

[zeno]

Originally Posted by Telecolor 3007

But why "Sony" used bad MCZ chips and the competion made better chassies?

Could be many reasons. And I never was told by Sony what was going
on them. Either they didnt know or mods were to extensive.
Panasonic had a similar dog apx 1990. SMPS IC's were going. There
was a big kit. If you changed it & it blew again they would buy the set back.
Too bad, it was the TOTL set & had an awesome pix.

BTW after the first few generations of Sony they were just average reliability.
They got easy to fix & very predictable. Toward the end of CRT's they
got quite unreliable especially FBT's & CRT's

73 Zeno
LFOD !

[JohnCT]

Originally Posted by Telecolor 3007

But why "Sony" used bad MCZ chips and the competion made better chassies?

The chips were made by shindengen (sp?) and Sony just bought them as several companies like Hitachi and possibly Toshiba did (not sure about Toshiba, it's been many years now).

The Sonys that used the MCZ chips were not "bad" chassis specificaly, but most of the trouble we had with that chassis series was the MCZ chips, but there were also two 200V plus electrolytics on that board we used to change at the same time.

Since Hitachi had less trouble with those chips and since the Sony used two and only one near the flyback was really the one that generally failed, I think the circuit that the chip was installed in was somehow tougher on the MCZ than it should have been, but Sony never issued a bulletin for a circuit change that would increase the life time. In any case, it didn't affect every Sony and most of them were at least a few years old when they failed.

John

[Alex KL-1]

Ops, I posted in the wrong thread......