Continue to Site

Welcome to our site!

Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

  • Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.

Tv screen frequency

Status
Not open for further replies.
tv sync

Nigel you are quite correct 405 line service was am video and sound when i wrote that post i should have read it before submission but alas somewhere owing to the late hour and nostalgia i got my modulations mixed up with sat systems , i have since reread it and i didnt claim that broadcasters didnt transmit sync signals of course they do but in the early days they used the mains as a timebase , tv recievers also used the mains as a time base to provide tube deflection until a station was recieved and to provide deflection should the station go of air , this was to avoid a nasty burn in on the tube face , some of the early sets where manufactured more like a cottage industry some where even built as kits from old decca and marconi ww2 surplus radar sets , another reason for using mains sync on these old sets was that unlike today where the flyback current from the yoke produces the e.h.t via a line output transformer e.h.t was produced either by stepping up the mains or some other form of inductive increase so in the absense of any sync signals eht was still present and a threat to the tube unlike todays sets where the absense of either vertical or horizontal sync can be protected by beam limiter circuits e.t.c . As for valve instability you are correct as well but i never in my post claimed that thermionic valves where stable devices in fact in my first workshop the most used tool on old sets wasnt a scope but an old pifco hairdryer fitted with a toggle switch to run hot or cold when fault finding valve stages ,you are also correct that i didnt state my country , back when i was a kid i lived in dublin the first national tv service (1959) was rte which transmitted 625 lines on vhf band 3 to most of the south and midlands , in the border counties where a lot of people had 405 line sets to pick up bbc from the north they had some small repeaters on 405 lines at band 1 and 3 the british later adapted 625 line for uhf only , Nigel i like to call a spade a spade and honestly when i recieved the email i found it extremly rude to say the least , among most tv fixers of my vintage the term used if you dissagreed with someone on a technical matter would be something like " i think you may be mistaken about that" or words to that effect , i see your profile says electronic god well im no god myself just an old tv guy , that post was my first post in this group i was trying to be friendly , there is no need to reply to this post as it is my last here .

P.s also i didnt say that sets werent synced of the incoming signal , the mains was used as sync in the absense of a transmission , and the very earliest sets did use the mains as sync thats why the hold control was used to lock the picture ,thats why there would be picture roll when you changed channel , i know valves could be unstable but not that badly when they where fully heated, later on sets improved with sync seperation due to a little device called a vic =vertical intergrater couplet module it looked like a ceramic capactor that had a bad case of the boils
 
Last edited:
re abbarue and tv pixels

NIGEL WROTE "You are also incorrect thinking about 'pixels', CRT's don't have pixels, they are a completely analogue device."

Sorry Nigel but i think you are incorrect on this matter , in fact abbarue is quite right in using the term pixel in relation to analog vacum tv tubes ,
Pixel : is an acronym for picture element also known as pels it defines the number of separate elements used to create an image and is not confined to digital infact it has always been around , human eyes have pixels known as rods and cones , colour tv tubes have around 44000 for a 26 inch set split rgb .
black and white tubes have trillions due to one single phosphor emulsion coat the detail only limited by the scan spot size , the term is also widely used in printing photos long before ccd and digital , ask any good tv (qualified ) engineer they'll tell you

**broken link removed** tv video glossary
 
hashing

Paul Obrien said:
There was a spy technique in the old CGA display days of syncing an oscillator in a receiver to the line frequency then reading the received blips caused by the on/off of the colour gun as an image. Rooms were screened to prevent this from happening. So it is an old technique, I have seen a utility for a Casio watch which flashed the screen to send data to the watch, again very old.

hello paul : this was known as hashing as opposed to hacking and it works on all high voltage tv tubes , i played about with it years ago the gear you need is simple and probably lying about your shed , 1 hf/lf reciever capable of around 10 to 15 khz , or scanner , good homebrew active attenna (plenty of designs on ham sites , 2= small portable b/w tv 3= sync injector (maybe)

you can pick up the buzz from the line stage of the target tv/monitor on your reciever then feed it with suitable coupling to the video stage in your portable , because the sync signal is to weak to pick up you can use a sync injector or some of the cheap b/w tvs have user vert and hor controls to stabilise picture , the reason the line stage gives of this info is that as the target picture causes slight voltage drop across the line tx as the picture content lightens and darkens these fluctuations can be recieved amplified and used to drive the video stage in your reciever
the screening you mentioned in the post is known as faraday caging a fine mesh of around 2.5 centimetre grid thats good at blocking signal leakage
if you try this have fun i did
 
jakester said:
NIGEL WROTE "You are also incorrect thinking about 'pixels', CRT's don't have pixels, they are a completely analogue device."

Sorry Nigel but i think you are incorrect on this matter , in fact abbarue is quite right in using the term pixel in relation to analog vacum tv tubes ,
Pixel : is an acronym for picture element also known as pels it defines the number of separate elements used to create an image and is not confined to digital infact it has always been around , human eyes have pixels known as rods and cones , colour tv tubes have around 44000 for a 26 inch set split rgb .
black and white tubes have trillions due to one single phosphor emulsion coat the detail only limited by the scan spot size , the term is also widely used in printing photos long before ccd and digital , ask any good tv (qualified ) engineer they'll tell you

I've been repairing TV's professionally for 35 years, (plus I was twice 'Sharp Electronics TV Engineer of the Year, and still hold the title) and am fully aware of how TV sets work.

However, I don't agree that 'pixels' can be accurately applied to a shadow mask tube, and even less to a monochrome tube. A pixel needs to be individually addressable, and CRT's aren't that by any means.
 
Nigel Goodwin said:
A pixel needs to be individually addressable, and CRT's aren't that by any means.

But if a color TV tube can display any color picture as taken by a TV camera, then the color pixels have to be individually addressable or else how can the picture be shown?
 
pixels

Well not many would be brave enough to disagree with professor Gordan j King .
and 35 years in tv without hearing the term pixel , maybe sharp call them pels

never seen that many sharp tvs here mostly vcr and hifi , remember one set around 1989 that came in cant remember the model number but im sure you would recognise this , it had sound and a bright white raster with flybacks , problem was a faulty rgb driver chip which was a cmos chip and unbelievably was part of the tube base my thoughts where: nice idea putting it there to cut down on noise factor but who in their right mind would put a cmos i.c less than an inch from the spark gaps , the thought crossed my mind it was someone who had just got a degree but never worked in the real world.

i wish Les Lawry johns where still alive he could have explianed that one to me !well him or the cat
 
Last edited:
pixel

eblc1388 said:
But if a color TV tube can display any color picture as taken by a TV camera, then the color pixels have to be individually addressable or else how can the picture be shown?
They are shown individually as they travel through a shadow mask (delta tube) or slot mask (pil tube) its a moot point anyway the point being that the term pixel existed long before digital and even predates tv itself in printing terms
 
jakester said:
Well not many would be brave enough to disagree with professor Gordan j King .

Never heard of him?, and wouldn't care if I had! - he can't be very important if his middle name doesn't rate a capital letter! :D

and 35 years in tv without hearing the term pixel , maybe sharp call them pels

I've obviously heard of pixels, it's a relatively 'recent' term for the picture elements on a computer graphics card or LCD/Plasma screen. In recent times it's sometimes been incorrectly used to describe the resolution of CRT's - presumably from the resolution in the specs of computer monitors?.
 
jakester said:
They are shown individually as they travel through a shadow mask (delta tube) or slot mask (pil tube) its a moot point anyway the point being that the term pixel existed long before digital and even predates tv itself in printing terms

But are they(pixels) individually addressable, albeit in a sequential manner?
 
gordon or les

Nigel Goodwin said:
Never heard of him?, and wouldn't care if I had! - he can't be very important if his middle name doesn't rate a capital letter! :D



I've obviously heard of pixels, it's a relatively 'recent' term for the picture elements on a computer graphics card or LCD/Plasma screen. In recent times it's sometimes been incorrectly used to describe the resolution of CRT's - presumably from the resolution in the specs of computer monitors?.

you have been a tv engineer for 35 yrs 35 yrs ago king wrote most of the text books that would have been used by apprentices sitting for their city and guilds papers , he was also a chief designer for thorn emi on their tx series of sets these where the last sets ever to be made in the uk the tx100 being the most succesfull you must be familiar with the tx100 being so many years in the game .

as for old les lawry johns , well that name needs no explanation im sure an old tv man like yourself is very familiar with his name
 
jakester said:
you have been a tv engineer for 35 yrs 35 yrs ago king wrote most of the text books that would have been used by apprentices sitting for their city and guilds papers

When I was at college the books were by G. N. Patchett - in fact I've got two here with me now, and certainly no mention of 'pixels' :D

he was also a chief designer for thorn emi on their tx series of sets these where the last sets ever to be made in the uk the tx100 being the most succesfull you must be familiar with the tx100 being so many years in the game .

You mean the last Thorn sets to be made in the UK?, plenty of other sets have been made (and designed) here since then!.

If he designed the TX100 he doesn't impress me greatly then! - not a bad set, but it was old before it was released. I went on a training course on the TX100, I was astonished to find Ferguson raving about their new set with the latest design - I pointed out that it used all old chips, used by other manufacturers for 4 or 5 years, most of which had now moved on to more modern designs.

Design wise I've always greatly admired the Decca sets, and the Tatung's which followed them (as Tatung bought Decca), good 'proper' TV's.

Ferguson wise I was always fond of the 3000 and 9000 series, but we dropped Ferguson during the TX100 era, because we could see the way they were going - and their imminent demise was obvious!.

It was a pity though, Ferguson/Thorn were world leaders in so much, first all transistor colour TV (they never made a valve one), first domestic use of a switch-mode PSU, first music centre, 'Cyclops' circuit in the 9000, first to change to single board colour TV's - the list goes on!.
 
eblc1388 said:
But are they(pixels) individually addressable, albeit in a sequential manner?
Yes and no , the term pixel used to describe the phospher dots on a tube does not make the person who uses that description wrong , like flip flop as opposed to flop flip a link on here places origin of pixel as the mid sixties to describe the tube dots , also when bbc 2 went colour in the mid sixties they would broadcast trade test transmissions during the day one show showed the basics of colour tv and used the term pixel
 
Nigel Goodwin said:
When I was at college the books were by G. N. Patchett - in fact I've got two here with me now, and certainly no mention of 'pixels' :D



You mean the last Thorn sets to be made in the UK?, plenty of other sets have been made (and designed) here since then!.

If he designed the TX100 he doesn't impress me greatly then! - not a bad set, but it was old before it was released. I went on a training course on the TX100, I was astonished to find Ferguson raving about their new set with the latest design - I pointed out that it used all old chips, used by other manufacturers for 4 or 5 years, most of which had now moved on to more modern designs.

Design wise I've always greatly admired the Decca sets, and the Tatung's which followed them (as Tatung bought Decca), good 'proper' TV's.

Ferguson wise I was always fond of the 3000 and 9000 series, but we dropped Ferguson during the TX100 era, because we could see the way they were going - and their imminent demise was obvious!.

It was a pity though, Ferguson/Thorn were world leaders in so much, first all transistor colour TV (they never made a valve one), first domestic use of a switch-mode PSU, first music centre, 'Cyclops' circuit in the 9000, first to change to single board colour TV's - the list goes on!.
Yes the last thorn set in uk before tomson of france bought them over scrapped the tx100 and introduced the pathetic ICC5 a poor replacement .
As for the 100 being out of date before it was released well lets have a look at that , the set was designed with radio rentals in mind as rr was part of the thorn group , the criteria for the set was fast and easy service in the field in fact about the only job you wouldnt do in the field on these was tube change .as for the chips being old well the power supply was based around the german tda4200 which i believe thorn was first set maker to use this i.c ,self osillilating psu i.c that required very few external components and was very stable , they used the bu508a and bu508d transister for the power chopper and line transistor these and variants are still widely used to this day in many new sets as is a few with the tda4200, the video /line driver/ and vertical output i.c again where all tda and relatively new to tv at the time , as for out of date the tx100 had retrofit sockets all over the place for such things as source stereo /svhs and comp video input / socket for the remote circuits which was totally upgradeable also on board support for multiband tuning for export models (phillips hit back with their system 4 sets by having a retro socket for multi system trancoders ) the 100 had a few faults like any set but most where run of the mill stockers these sets where dogs **** for second hand sales as well due to very little comebacks after a good overhaul , the last of the tx100 was the 100b which was actually a 100a even boasted a F.S.T tube a new development at the time all in all a great set , then came thomson !One thing i dont understand is if you worked for sharp uk how did you do a course with thorn on the tx100 , thorn only gave familiarity courses to radio rental group engineers at that time , i worked for r and r then and the only other support thorn gave was hard copy fault flow charts to outside firms who bought their sets

Design wise I've always greatly admired the Decca sets, and the Tatung's
 
jakester said:
Yes and no , the term pixel used to describe the phospher dots on a tube does not make the person who uses that description wrong , like flip flop as opposed to flop flip a link on here places origin of pixel as the mid sixties to describe the tube dots , also when bbc 2 went colour in the mid sixties they would broadcast trade test transmissions during the day one show showed the basics of colour tv and used the term pixel

Hey, you have missed my point.

I'm not arguing whether they should be called pixels but rather on the question if they are individually addressable.
 
jakester said:
as for the chips being old well the power supply was based around the german tda4200 which i believe thorn was first set maker to use this i.c ,self osillilating psu i.c that required very few external components and was very stable

You believe wrong! - and the chip was the TDA4600 (not the TDA4200), it had been in use for years by many other manufacturers, many of whom had discontinued using it by the time the TX100 was released.

But not a bad PSU chip, biggest problem was failure of the 'collector current simulation' resistor blowing the chopper - but by the time the TX100 came along we had got TDA4600 PSU faults well sorted out! :D

The other 'innovative features' you list were also 'old hat', copying years old features from other manufacturers.

I presume you also attended the TX100 training course?, where they sprouted all this rubbish! - I attended at Sandiacre, near junction 26 of the M1. What was the guys name?, Graham 'something' wasn't it?, he went to Pace afterwards - who were actually ex-Ferguson people.

I can remember talking to someone high up at Thorn, because they ran seperate production lines for UK and non-UK sets, and asking why they didn't make the sets multi-standard?. The reply was that it's totally impossible, it can't be done,so I asked how about all the multi-standard sets that are for sale everywhere you look - he insisted we were imagining them, even when we showed them to him. I think that was the biggest problem with Thorn?, they didn't have the common sense to see what other people were producing, they just lived in a little bubble of their own, artificially sustained by their own rental operations!.
 
eblc1388 said:
Hey, you have missed my point.

I'm not arguing whether they should be called pixels but rather on the question if they are individually addressable.
no they are not individualy addressed on colour crts they are more serialy addressed
 
jakester said:
no they are not individualy addressed on colour crts they are more serialy addressed

Isn't it true one can turn ON/OFF any individual pixel to build a picture?

That's individually addressable, to my understanding. Have you confused it with random access addressability?
 
eblc1388 said:
Isn't it true one can turn ON/OFF any individual pixel to build a picture?

That's individually addressable, to my understanding. Have you confused it with random access addressability?
I was talking about vacum crt's as in analog tv , the beam is never truly off as it s intensity can go from black level to peak white as it traverses the screen it strikes the phosphor dots in front of the slot or shadow mask or phospher emulsion if its a monochrome tube .i suppose someone could delevope a tube to do this but that would result in some very strange v/h waveforms indeed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest threads

New Articles From Microcontroller Tips

Back
Top