Vintage TV in 3D
 

Here's something different, A 3D photo of my Zenith TV and 1922 Victrola. Of course you'll need Red/Cyan 3D glasses to view it in 3D. Thought I would post 1 picture in the off chance any members had 3D glasses, I'll post more 3D Photos if there is any interest.
Jim

Still trying to find my 3D glasses... I know i have a pair around here somewhere. That's a pretty cool idea... your digital camera has a setting for 3D?

3D?? I just thought it was my hangover!
Marlin

I use a gadget I bought off ebay called Photo3d. You connect your digital camera to it, Take a right eye image and then a Left eye image then use the included "Photo3D" software to create a 3D image. As you can see in the photo the camera connects and slides horizontally and gives the correct distance for the 2 shots. Really easy software to use too.
Jim

Another 3D photo
 

Here's a color 3D Photo I made.

1948 RCA 648PV Projection TV/Radio/Phono Console
 

Here are some shots of the RCA 648PV that I restored in 2001.

This set looks beautiful and performs flawlessly.

My wife and I often watch old B&W movies from our CED and laserdisc collection on this TV.

-Matt

Matt:

Welcome to AudioKarma. What a beautiful set and restoration. I have the RCA projection set from 1948 without the radio and phono that I recapped a few years ago and the picture is nowhere near the picture on your set. I even put in a NOS projection tube.

Steve

Bravo Matt!! :thmbsp: What a great tv! Gives me hope on restoring one of my '49 RCA projectors.
Marlin

Matt,

That set is extrememly impressive! I've never seen one in person... only here on the internet. In any case, I've never seen one of these projection sets put out such a sharp, clear picture like yours does! You definately get 5-stars for that job!!!

Steve,

Thanks for the welcome!

In addition to re-capping, I found that I had to replace quite a few resistors in the video and HV chassis. I also performed a complete alignment. The radio was a nightmare, but that's another story....

What do you feel is better about the picture on my set? Is it the resolution brightness? If it's resolution, how do the mirrors look in your set? Any apparent cloudiness when viewed in bright light? How much light escapes through the spherical mirror? If the mirrors look fine, do you feel that you were able to obtain satisfactory results during the optical setup? I got a lot of practice on mine, as I disassembled it each time we moved (the 648PV is extrmely heavy). So with each successive re-assembly, the optical setup turned out better and better. I now feel that all aspects of the optical setup, corner to corner, are as good as they can possibly be.

If it's the brightness of the picture, that may be due to the fact that I installed a NOS 5AZP4 CRT in place of the original 5TP4. I don't really know how much of a difference there is between these tubes. John Folsom may want to step in here and fill us in (hello John).

-Matt

Charlie,

Thanks!

I like your site. I'll be spending some time there.

Truth be told though, my wife Janet is the reason that this set works as well as it does. She was able to put up with the endless stream of incoming Zenith Trans-Oceanics, but when I lugged this thing home, that was another story. It was too big to fit in with the radio collection, so it had to be placed in the living area of the house. And in order for that to happen, it better be able to carry its fair share; ie: it had better work and work well! Which of course, directly dictated the amount of effort that I would have to expend on this restoration.

-Matt

Marlin,

Thanks.

I see from your site that you have lots of hobbies too! My other vice is trucks. In particular, an early 1930 Ford Model AA stake truck that is going through a ground-up, frame-off restoration.

Let me know if I can be of any assistance when you begin the restoration of your set.

-Matt

Matt, that set is awesome!! The picture is excellent, how big is the screen??

Eric

621 pics
 

I took the 621 I got a couple weeks ago apart and took some pics. :)

First one is the top of the chassis, looks like 58 years worth of dirt!
Second one is a front shot of the chassis with the CRT in place.
Third is a message from an ancient Service Tech!
Fourth is a shot of the chassis underside.
Fifth is how you remove the safety glass.

Hokey smokes folks, do you realize this thread has been viewed over 22,000 times!
It might just be the most viewed single thread on AK!

That's got to be a glitch....the photos in message #535 have only been viewed about 5 or 6 times each, so that kind of confirms my assumption.

ASSUME

Ass (out of) You (and) Moi

Anthony

Thanks Eric!

Quoted directly from the RCA 648-PV sales literature: "....bright, clear, steady television on the big, 15-by-20-inch screen.... nearly as large as a full-size newspaper page."

Today we'd call it a 25" diagonal.

-Matt

? I was talking about the "Show us your B&W TV" thread, what are you talking about?

RCA 648-PV Horiz. Deflection chassis
 

One of the neatest looking devices in the 1940's RCA projection sets (aside from the optical barrel) is the horizontal deflection chassis, which of course contains the HV section. If you've never seen what's under the cover of this chassis, please take a look at the attached picture.

-Matt

Smoky- Oh, damn !! You done went & did it NOW !! Doncha know that stuff's magic, & not supposed to be shown ?!? I can only imagine what awful things will befall you if Gen Sarnoff's minions find out about this !!! <grin>-Sandy G.

Matt, where's your time machine? that chassis looks brand new!!

Eric, I got lucky on this one. I'm only the second owner of the set. It came from the estate of a fairly wealthy Detroiter named Walter Briggs. He founded Briggs Manufacturing, a company that made, among many other things, bodies for Ford and several other automobile manufacturers from the early 1900's until the 1950's. For you antique car people out there, yes, this is the same Briggs that is referred to in regards to the Ford Model 'A' Briggs Fordor or Briggs Town Car. Briggs built a large percentage of the Ford "Woody" station-wagon bodies.

Briggs also owned the Detroit Tigers baseball team from 1920 (with a partner until 1935 when he took full ownership) until 1956 (which, due to the time it took to settle his estate, is 4 years after he died). He of course was the Tigers owner when they won the series in '45. He built Detroit's first real baseball park, Briggs Stadium (renamed Tiger Stadium in 1961).

Because of it's unique owner, radio buffs may be interested in the radio call letters assigned to the radio pushbuttons on the set (see attached picture).

The set was pretty clean when I got it. However I did disassemble it completely during the restoration process. Every component that was not replaced was cleaned. I now wish that I had re-plated the chassis. Oh well! Maybe in my next life!

-Matt

i must say that charlie's SYLVANIA is one of the most beautiful sets i've ever seen!!

The history of this set is VERY interesting to me as I personally blame Briggs for a large part of Packard's ultimate undoing.....he convinced Packard's management that he could sell them bodies for less money than they (Packard) could build them themselves.

At first the prices WERE below what Packard could build them for, but within a short time the prices were raised and raised again till they exceeded what Packard could build them for. At this point Packard had scrapped their tools so they were stuck with having to continue buying from Briggs.

Then after the war old man Briggs died and apparently hadn't drawn up a very good will as the family was faced with ruinous inheritance taxes which forced them to sell the company (Chrysler bought it). In short order, Chrysler informed Packard that they would no longer continue to supply them with bodies.....Packard then scrambled and spent huge money on getting back into the body building buisness.....this came at the same time that they had tooled up their automatic trans and V8 engine, along with the new torsion bar suspension system. And the topper is that they lost their Korean war contracts......less money coming in and lots going out.

Trouble is that someone at Packard should've looked harder at the deal Briggs first presented them.....if Packard couldn't build bodies for less than a firm that was in business to make a profit for doing this, then why should Packard even be in the car business in the first place? I suspect that greed played a big part in this decision......one which lit a very long burning fuse.

Anthony

This is what I can add to the Briggs story, in appreciation for those great RCA TV pictures!

Here's a photo of the old Briggs factory located at Mack & St. Jean on the east side of Detroit. The Photo was taken in 1994, just before the plant was torn down. However, if you notice in the right corner of the picture, you'll see some modern Chrysler signage. That's because Chrysler built a million-square-foot addition to the plant in 1974 (This plant was also known as Mack Stamping.) The older parts of the plant fell out of use in the 70s, until the old section was eventually walled off.

In the early 90s, Chrysler was looking for someplace to build a new "niche" car, with a team concept. This car was the Viper, and I was part of that original team. The "new" mack ave. plant was spiffed up, (we actually called it New Mack) and used for this purpose. The new section is to the right, outside of the picture. Viper production moved out in 1996, and into a much smaller factory. The old building was actually "ground-up" into cement dust, and used to build a modern factory, known today as Mack Engine I (home of the 4.7L V8).

As you know Briggs was a body-builder for many different manufacturers, but by the 50s, mostly Imperial, Chrysler, Dodge, DeSoto, Plymouth and Packard. In fact, my grandfather who retired from Chrysler in 1981 after 34 years began working for Briggs at this factory after returning from WWII. During WWII, my grandmother worked in this plant, riveting airplane wings. My grandfather is in this picture,

When Chrysler purchased Briggs, they also received the rights to the LeBaron name, and the rest is history.

http://imperialclub.com/Yr/1965/Jeff...riggsPlant.jpg

Thanks Carmine. Me, Sandy G and you (along with a dog named Boo) are probably the only ones here who give a rat's patootie! LOL

Anthony

Anthony,

Not true. I care. I've been on both sides of the automotive fence, Big 3 and now parts supplier. There's no doubt that Briggs was a controversial figure and could and should be considered a scoundrel! But the U.S. auto companies got even with the suppliers long ago. Today, suppliers are asked to reduce costs by 3% to 5% per year. And many times they're asked to do it up-front; ie: if the value of the contract is $50 million over the next 3 years, they want $2 million, in cash, up-front, right now. The continuous push for unfounded cost reductions have forced a major consolidation of suppliers and has run many out of business and most into bakruptcy. Something's got to change. There are only so many ways that you can make a widget, and many of us have knocked almost all of the labor and capital eqpt. costs out of a part and we still can't make any money on them. Plus, we look forward to several more years of 3% to 5% reductions.

To be sure though, I like the auto industry. That's why I stayed in the Detroit area. For all its shortcomings and heartaches, it's still what's near and dear to my heart. Most of my friends work for the Big 3. About half of them are members of the UAW and the other half are in middle to upper management.
In fact, Carmine, it wasn't that long ago that I was in the Mack 2 plant, looking at the coolant system installed there. OK, time to get off of my soapbox.

Back to that TV set. The TV chassis' were pretty easy to get back in shape, but that radio, man, that was a different story all together....

For what its worth, I find all this fascinating. The automobile is my bread & butter. That TV, a very nice piece to begin with, is a treasure thanks to the connection. And clean-it couldn't have been that clean from the factory!

From working on cars I can see that a major difference between makes is in the components. Work the climate control knobs on the cheapest Honda, then try a Pontiac or Saturn or even a Galant. How much more did Honda pay for the cc assy? But whatever it was, it was worth it. Not the component makers fault, for sure. They have to do whatever it takes to keep food on the table, and if they don't sell to one of a handful of automakers who are they going to sell to? Refrigerators don't have turn-signal stalks & bathrooms don't have tachometers.

Car suppliers
 

This constant pressure on prices is why we get cars with great antilock brakes, fuel injection, etc with crappy plastic wheel covers, plastic door handles and crappy aluminum/plastic radiators.

I have both kinds and my experience is in at least these items(radiators, door handles, and wheel covers), the 1970s and older cars are superior to modern cars.

I now understand why I see kits for antilock brakes, fuel injection, etc. for old Mustangs and other cars.

Gimme a dual quad Packard 374 bored and stroked out to 440 and shoe horn it into a 59 Lark coupe and junk all that modern crapola that passes as cars nowadays LOL!

Anthony

DING DING DING!!! :banana:

Give that man a cigar! :naughty:

All the cost is put into "tech", an very little is left over for the "proven" basics. In fact, in this day & age of computer modeling, we can now predict exactly when some mundane part like a door hinge will fail, and design it exactly to a specification.

In the olden days raw materials were fairly cheap, and nobody concerned themselves with weight, so if a door hinge was functional at 1/4" thick, make it 1/2", just for a good margin of error. (Look at the door hinges on a 60's Imperial as an example.)

That's why you see guys like Chip Foose, and other custom builders adding tech-items to older cars... Best of both worlds.

To get back on track, it's a similar thought process to put a modern TV in an old wood cabinet.

The sad part is, most people, especially if they're young, have grown up to think that plastic hubcaps, door handles and black-cube TV sets are "modern and good", while steel car parts AND maple TV cabinets are "old and bad".

The manufacturers need to start asking the consumers if they are willing to pay for things like wooden TV cabinets (have you noticed they're not even black anymore? Silver now seems to be in vogue).

Like cars, the technology of TV has improved many-fold. Televisions are extremely cheap. Granted HDTV sets are more expensive, but you can get a decent 42" DLP HDTV for under $3000, which is $1500 less than a 1965 RCA 25" rectangular color set indexed to today's prices (they were $750 in 1965 dollars). I know that if they were available, I'd spend the extra money to get a better looking set.

Price pressure is a good thing in many respects. It instills competition, usually provides the consumer with better value for their dollars and best of all, it drives innovation.

Smoky, I so agree with you! And I think that the number of people in Birmingham that junk perfectly good "white" kitchen appliances for stainless-steel would back this up. (Not me, I still have coppertone! :yes: ) But one reason I still have the 1965 Coldspot is because I'm not about to pay $1500 for a fridge with a plastic interior when I have one that's porcelain now; low-carbon faux stainless veneer or not!

But in the mass-market, the Wal-Mart factor is so strong. This applies to cars/houses too. It must be the throw-away culture... You hear so much about how "bad" GM/Ford/Chrysler were in the 50s/60s/70s by changing platforms every three years, and trim details EVERY year. (Planned obsolesence) Yet it seems that our culture, with regard to new=good, quality--be-damned is WORSE nowadays than ever before.

Here's an example: How nice would it have been for the new Chrysler Hemi 300C to feature a black/red annodized aluminum grille (ala '59 300E) while the "standard" V6 300 carried on with the plastic-chrome-plated sewer grate it wears now? Don't tell me it's price, there's so much fat/profit on the "C" than an extra $10 per car could be either eaten, or added directly to sticker.

Here's my guess: Ralph Giles, who designed the car is 35-years-old. After reading a number of interviews, I'd argue that he equates an actual metal grille with "old and bad". The designers of the new "Charger" :thumbsdn: speak of the '68-'71 versions as cartoonish and say the front end looks like "an electric razor". So they've given us another uncreative, fat, truck-looking sedan... Thanks a lot jerks!

Give me the designers of old, like Virgil Exner and Chuck Mitchell who openly admired, and were insprired by those who came before them (Exner's classic era Imperials, and Mitchell's Duesenburg/Stutz-like Pontiacs).

[/rant]

Carmine- The '68-71 Chargers WERE cartoonish lookin'-that was the point. And I think that's why a lot of us liked 'em-and the Mustangs & Camaros/Firebirds- they were "easily-doodle-able" in 6th grade history class. I know you don't particularly like the new 300c-I kinda do, but think it looks a lot like "The Car" in that horror-TV movie.Giles prolly grew up watching "the General Lee" on TV-a '68-69 Charger-& if that wasn't cartoonish, I dunno what is. But yeah, I like the the designers of old-Mitchell, Exner, Harley Earle-the cars may have been a bit cartoonish for the pecksniffian Mr Giles, but a lot of us ate 'em up. Still do...-Sandy G.

Price pressures.
 

Yes, price pressure is good to the point that it properly improves competition. However, this same price pressure is driving jobs out of the US to take advantage of other countries cheaper costs. These same countries have no health insurance for their workers, no retirement for their workers, and few if any safety regulations for their workers.

This same effect is reducing wages, health coverage, etc for many American workers. A side affect is that less money (due to lower paying jobs avaiable) is put into programs such as Medicare and Social Security, worsening the problems with these programs.

This kind of thing benefits only the most wealthy, not the rest of us. Is this what we want?

I believe that a good start would be to insist that retailers who buy out of the US (Walmart, etc) and manufacters that move jobs out of the US provide the same kind of health, retirement, and safety benefits to their workers that are available here. I would rather pay more and know all benefit, not just a few.

Well said. I actually had a statement regarding the lack of a global level playing field when it comes to outsourcing. I didn't want to toss that political hot potato, so I removed it. But since it's already been done.....

I've been to the other side of the globe, to the largest country on earth. No health care, no social security, $0.25 to $0.65 an hour wages, government subsidized loans. We can't compete with that and we shouldn't have to. We make a big fuss about "children" working in sweat-shops and boycott those products. However, we have no qualms about driving those same childrens parents into the ground, working under unsafe and unhealthy conditions.

What has to change is the mindset that some of us use when making a purchase. You can't just shop on price. We have to insist that the things we purchase here are made in countries that provide the same kind of health, retirement, and safety benefits to their workers as we do here.

Also, for those that believe there is a technology answer to this puzzle lurking out there, or possibly improved productivity or better efficiency, here is an example: One of our facilities manufactures several components for a tier 1 automotive supplier. The material already comes from that big country I just mentioned (this is driven by the customer and not our choice). This work has now been placed on open bid by our customer (the whole world can now bid on it), and our favorite big country has gone to our customer with finished prices that are equal to what we pay for the material alone! No magic answer there folks! This battle has to be fought by the consumers. We have to insist that this type of content be kept out of products like the automobile. Sure the cars will be cheaper, but it won't do any of us any good if no one can afford to buy those cars!

I've been saying this for years....whenever I hear of another company moving production overseas with their lame excuse of "that's what my competition is doing and I need to remain competitive" I always retaliate with the above statement.

What will it matter if Cadillacs get down to $500 retail if no one can afford them because there are no jobs here?

Here's a frightening thought......just heard that THE major bearing manufacturer just moved ALL their production to china. What was the number one target in Germany during WWII? Right, the bearing factories. In other words. excect for machine tools, the main thing needed to make products are bearings....this means we're totally and completely fucked for the future. I cannot believe that this country has given away our hardcore manufacturing base. WTF are we going to do in the future? How can we survive being totally dependent on other countries for the most basic of machinery?

Make no mistake, while I may sound like a reactionary you must really ponder on the points I've made......even Martha Stewart would agree that this is NOT a good thing.

Anthony

Price pressure 2
 

It goes even further than this. Every one thinks that the Japanese car manufacterers big advantage is quality. As they are opening quite few US plants, it seems that they are essentially US manufacturers.

While their quality is one of their advantages, they have another that is probably as large. Their workforce is just being hired and they have no retirement benefits to worry about for years. GM and Ford have enormous disadvantages (and costs) in this area. I will admit that some of this problem is a direct result of their and the United Auto Workers actions, however, it is a problem that could affect all older companies and their workers.

I have no idea how to handle this, other than beefing up Goverment retirement such as has been done in Europe. I honestly do not know an answer for this one other than save all you can and hope that 1929 does not repeat.

Interesting discussion guys but it's getting way off topic and starting to turn political.
Can we get back to TV's please :D

Whatsa TV and how do you spell that?