Just happened to spot this...

[Whirled One]

Originally Posted by Carmine

I've never actually laid my hands on a Setchel-Carlson, but don't those sets have hand-wired unitized "modules"? They find nothing that differenciates that from a Muntz???

Idiots.

??? What gave you the impression that they rated the Setchell-Carlson the same as the Muntz..??

Looking at the actual article, the Muntz was the lowest-rated set tested, and rated below the worst of the sets tested in CU's 'regular' 21" B&W TV project that year.

The best rated of the "minor-brand" sets tested was the Andrea, but even it was not considered as good as the Dumont or Zenith (or even Admiral) sets tested earlier.

From the article:
"The Andrea's ranking throws a curious light on the promotion for this brand, which has persisted in claiming special "craftsmanship" that lifts it far above the "mass-produced" reciever. Actually, the general design features of the Andrea, as well as its performance, show it to be really the same breed of cat as the "mass-produced" sets of comparable quality. CU's study of the sets included in this project reinforces the concpet that neither mass-production nor small-scale production necessarily creates good TV quality or bad TV quality."
"Such quality depends, first, on what the design engineers do at their drafting boards; and second, on the exactness with which the final design is realized in production."
"This exactness can be achieved by automatic production machines, by women wielding soldering irons, or by men from outer space-- if they could be persuaded to come down and do the job. It's simply a question of how well the job is done; not how it is done."


As for the Setchel-Carlson, it wasn't actually given any ratings for quality, since it was judged "not acceptable" due to shock hazard, in part due to the fact it was the first set they had tested in the past several years that did not have a line-cord interlock. [You can complain about that being grounds for disqualification if you want, but it does seem distinctly odd to see a TV in 1960 without a safety interlock; wasn't that a UL *requirement* by that time..?]

[Carmine]

I was never able to link to an article... Only saw the caption which stated "..brands such as Andrea, Muntz and Setchell-Carlson find nothing to justify their reputation for being better than mass-produced models."

So to me it appeared they were lumping Muntz in with Setchell-Carlson.

Which their caption, in fact, did.

[Whirled One]

...and here's the original article. From Consumer Reports, March 1960.

By the way, those of you interested in such things might want to pay a visit to your local library and take a look at the periodical stacks. [University libraries are especially good for this.] Old issues of Consumer Reports can make for a very interesting read. Try it-- you'll be glad you did.