On 19 Jun 2004 05:54:24 GMT,
[email protected] (LASERandDVDfan)
wrote:
|>|Reading your post establishes the idea that Sony TV sets are not durable.
|>
|>???
|>How you can draw that assumption from a story of damage to a Sony TV
|>during transport, I can't imagine.
|
|What you typed, verbatim.
|
|"Sony shadowmask tubes are particularly susceptible to damage after being
|dropped."
|
|You typed this. Read it, and read it again. Your wording here most certainly
|suggests what I claim about your contention.
Where in my wording does it suggest that Sony TV sets are not durable?
I simply said (in error) that Sony "shadow mask" (should have been
aperture grille) tubes are particularly susceptible to damage after
being dropped, and this is true even for a distance of 2 feet as in
the OP's case.
Let me point out to you the facts and why my statement (corrected to
aperture grille) is correct;
Both Sony (trinitron) and Mitsubishi (diamondtron) recognise the fact
that aperture grille tubes are sensitive to shock and vibration. Sony,
in their TV user manuals make note that the set should be mounted away
from shock and vibration. Not many manufacturers (of non-aperture
grille TV's) place this specific warning in their user manuals. A
perusal of a current Philips widescreen (not aperture grille) TV user
manual did not have a similar warning.
If we look at Sam Goldwasser's repair faqs
*************
http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/crtfaq.htm
"An aperture grille, used exclusively in Sony Trinitrons (and now
their clones as well), replaces the shadow mask with an array of
finely tensioned vertical wires. Along with other characteristics of
the aperture grille approach, this permits a somewhat higher possible
brightness to be achieved and is more immune to other problems like
line induced moire and purity changes due to local heating causing
distortion (doming) of the shadow mask.
However, there are some disadvantages of the aperture grille design:
Weight - a heavy support structure must be provided for the tensioned
wires (like a piano frame).
Price (proportional to weight).
Always a cylindrical screen (this may be considered an advantage
depending on your preference.
Visible stabilizing wires which may be objectionable or unacceptable
for certain applications.
Apparently, there is no known way around the need to keep the fine
wires from vibrating or changing position due to mechanical shock in
high resolution tubes and thus all Trinitron monitors require 1, 2, or
3 stabilizing wires (depending on tube size) across the screen which
can be see as very fine lines on bright images. Some people find these
wires to be objectionable and for some critical applications, they may
be unacceptable (e.g., medical diagnosis)."
*************
Lightly tap any trinitron tube item with your hand and you will notice
the picture shimmer. The same effect can not be achieved so easily
with a non aperture grille tube item. This is evidence of
suceptibility to vibration.
I am aware that the text says "high resolution tubes" so that can
include types other than trinitron as well because of the very fine
accuracy required and the small amount of deviation necessary to
effect a misalignment. Nevertheless, the last paragraph is
particularly pertinent to the shock and vibration sensitivity aspect
of aperture grille tubes.
Included in this text is the reference to a higher "weight" (than for
an equivalent non-aperture grille tube) and this factor has relevance
to the increased susceptibility for damage which can result to an
aperture grille tube compared to a shadow mask tube when dropped an
equivalent distance.
In order for the aperture grille tube to have similar strength and
resistance to implosion it has to be made of thicker glass than an
equivalent shadow mask tube. Also, because the structure used to
maintain the very fine wires of the aperture grille under tension is
bulkier than the support frame in a shadow mask tube, there is
additional weight due to this factor. Now if two similar sized tubes,
one of either type, are dropped through the same (assume 2 feet)
distance, which one do you think is going to make a bigger impact when
it stops? It seems reasonable to assume that the energy expended by
the tube with the greater weight will be commensurably greater and
therefore the probability of damage will be greater due to the need
for the force generated (F=mass x Acceleration) to be distributed
throughout the structure when it comes to rest.
Another reference which seems to suggest that aperture grille tubes
are susceptible to shock and vibration is found in Diamondtron
literarature;
***************************
"Diamondtron U2-CRT Monitors:
Misalignment of Aperture Grille:
Due to the nature of the Diamondtron U2-CRT, in rare cases, a
misalignment of the aperture grille may happen by the shock or
vibration caused during transportation. If a black vertical line
appears on the screen, apply a light shock to the side of the monitor
with your hand. If the problem persists, follow the procedure below.
(ed - Note the "during transportation". Have you seen similar
instruction to correct misalignment of the shadow mask in a shadow
mask tube following transportation?)
A. Display a full white picture and inspect the problem area.
B. Display a high-white picture that covers the problem area to shoot
a strong electron beam. Leave it for a while, until the problem
disappears.
(ed - these are attempts to generate locallised heating in the grille
in the hope that the wires will be re-aligned)
Damper Wires:
The two faint horizontal lines that may be visible on the screen are
actually the shadows of steelwires called Damper Wires. All
Diamondtron U2-CRT based monitors have these wires for structural
reasons."
***********************
Eizo also provide similar instruction for their Flexscan monitors. See
p 18 of 28 in this Flexscan T550 manual.
http://www.eizo.com/downloads/manuals/umeng/T550um.pdf
***********************
None of the above means that I am in any way critical of Sony TV's -
after all I have had one myself for more than 14 years and it is still
performing well. All I am saying is that aperture grille tubes are
particularly sensitive to shock and vibration and may sustain damage
after a drop of 2 feet. Even the manufacturer is aware of the
susceptibility to shock and is careful to give suitable instruction
regarding this point during installation. Sony TV's installed and
handled in the correct manner are as good as or better than other TV's
for a similar price. If they weren't I wouldn't have bought one.
|
|It is an accusation that clearly narrows down to the subject. You clearly
|typed that Sony picture tubes are "particularly susceptible to damage after
|being dropped." You don't cite what kind of drop and you don't cite to what
|degree, you just cite "a drop" which is a generalization. You make a clear
|accusation with a broad and general description that allows the impression that
|"Sony TVs are not durable" to be made in the first place.
The statement was pertaining to the nominated 2 feet which was in the
OP.
|
|If this was not the intended response to your statement, then you either need
|to brush up on your writing skills or you could give Micheal Moore a run for
|his money.
I think it is your apparent sensitivity to what you perceive as my
criticism of Sony TV's which is the problem more than what I actually
wrote. You not only jump to conclusions but you read into my statement
things which were not intended nor were inferred, except in your own
mind, that is.
|
|>The story is more to do with the
|>reliability of the transport company and the care which they provide
|>to the goods they are transporting.
|>
|
|If you recognize the story to be off-topic and unrelated to begin with, then
|why did you bother to bring it up in the first place?
Surely, any reasonable thinking person would read the story and
discarded the parts which were not relevant to the OP's post about
dropping his tv. OK, so I should have cut and pasted the relevant part
to make it more apparent, so I apologise for not doing so in my
original post. The person who wrote the story was in fact criticising
the transport company - that is completely obvious - but the part
relating to the damage done to the TV and the cost of repair was the
relevant part as it applies to the OP's post. The physical damage to
the TV was not noticed by the owner and it was only after inspection
by the TV service shop that it was determined that the TV had
obviously been dropped during transport. Because there was little
evidence that the TV had been subjected to physical shock (by
dropping, for example) during transport. The owner was not aware that
it was damaged other than the set failed to switch on. The only real
difference with the fault mentioned by the OP was that in his case the
set would switch on but the colour distortion in the corners was the
problem. He also stated the set was not physically damaged externally
so it seems fairly obvious that the damage sustained within the tubes
in both cases was caused by shock which did not result in other
obvious physical damage.
|
|>I am not trying give any impression other than physical shock (ie
|>dropping or rough handling) to a tv can cause internal damage to the
|>picture tube which requires this item to be replaced at great expense.
|
|Now you made it more logical, but contradictory to your original claim. Now
|you state that any TV will sustain internal damage in the picture tube from a
|severe shock, which was the statement I originally made in response to your
|statement a day ago.
It is obviously only yourself who required the clarification. How can
you say that by clarifying what I meant that I am now contradicting my
original statement?
|
|My response, as quoted:
|
|"The Epinions article you've presented doesn't support your claim against Sony
|TV sets.
As I said, I made no claims against "Sony TV's". I simply said the
tubes are susceptible to damage due to dropping, and this applies to
Mitsubishi tubes as well. Even though I didn't include them, I
suppose in your mind you can draw the conclusion that I am criticising
Mitsubishi TV's as well.
|All the article does is suggest that a TV set can be severely damaged
|by careless movers. Any other brand of TV would have yielded similar problems
|had they been mishandled in the same fashion. If there was a drop substantial
|enough to damage the mainboard and crack the casing, it's likely that the tube
|will have been damaged as well."
You are again making assumptions without any evidence. Without knowing
exactly what type and degree of mishandling was sustained it is not
possible to know how any other type of TV would have been affected.
And where in the story does it say that the mainboard was damaged and
the casing was cracked? The repairman (Kevin) swapped in a "PC logic
board" but that obviously didn't fix the problem. There is no
indication that the original board was damaged in any way. I would
assume that Kevin was simply trying the "swap and hope" method of
repair without any evidence that there was anything wrong with the
original board. The only evidence of physical damage to the TV at all
was to a decorative bezel, not exactly "the casing" in my opinion.
|
|Originally, you stated clearly and specifically that Sony picture tubes were
|"particularly susceptible," now you say that all TVs will sustain damage in a
|generalization.
|
|If you were to hold on to your argument, you would have to say that "all TVs
|would be vulnerable, but Sony TVs are more susceptible than anything else."
My original statement was
"Sony shadowmask(sic) tubes are particularly susceptible to damage
after being dropped."
To which which I then added as clarification for you;
"any tv, when dropped or roughly handled during transport (ie, dropped
such that only minor indications of physical damage were noticeable)
is highly likely to distort either the shadow mask or the aperture
grille."
This does fit your assumption that I would mean "all TV's would be
vulnerable", but note also that I qualified the degree of "dropping
by saying;
"(ie, dropped such that only minor indications of physical damage were
noticeable)" and "Unless it is established specifically what sort of
"rough handling" the particular Sony TV was subjected to"
My statements do not draw any distinction between the degree of damage
which might be caused to Sony and other types of tubes subjected to
the same treatment which you suggest it does, ie, that I must also
have meant that "Sony TV's are more susceptible than anything else".
It is obvious that I meant any tv when subjected to the same degree of
rough handling (no matter whether a Sony or any other type) would be
likely to sustain damage to the shadow mask or aperture grille. So
where is the distinction which you say I must have implied between the
different types of tube?
|Since you are not wording your recent responses like this, you're not even
|supporting your original contention anymore. Yet, you still want to get into a
|pissing contest about this.
You talk about my wording... that's a joke if ever I heard one.
|
|>Unless it is established specifically what sort of "rough handling"
|>the particular Sony TV was subjected to, we can't draw that
|>conclusion, and I did not infer what you assume I did.
|
|Then why did you make the accusation about Sony TV sets being "particularly
|susceptible" to drop damage to begin with?
See, you are wrong again. I did not say "Sony TV sets" at all. Get
your facts right before opening your mouth.
|
|>BTW, I am a strong supporter of Sony products and my household boasts
|>these items;
|
|And what relevance does this statement have to this subject?
It doesn't have any relevance other than to find out if you are an
avid supporter of Sony products who assumes that a statement made by
someone else about the suceptibility of aperture grille tubes to shock
damage must be a criticism of Sony TV's. Nothing could be further from
the truth. I love 'em, but they must be protected from shock and
vibration as Sony themselves instruct.
|
|Being a Sony supporter or not is irrelevant.
|Getting the facts straight, on the other hand, has been taking place on this
|thread.
It is relevant in order to see what your real beef is. I asked you
that question in order to establish if you have some sort of
sensitivity to criticism of Sony products. You responded in the manner
I expected...
|
|>How many Sony items do you have?
|
|Okay. Since we have to get into a pissing contest about equipment:
|
|Sony KV-27S66 television
|Sony SL-HF400 SuperBeta hi-fi VCR
|Sony SL-HF2000 SuperBeta hi-fi VCR
|Sony SL-20 Betamax VCR
|Sony SVO-160 VHS hi-fi VCR
|Sony SLV-575UC VHS hi-fi VCR
|Sony SLV-750HF VHS hi-fi VCR
|Sony MDR-600 Monitor Headphones
|Sony CPD-200GS monitor
|Sony CPD-100SF montior
|Sony SCPH-1001 PlayStation
|Sony SCPH-30000 R PlayStation 2
|Sony MDP-1000 LaserDisc player
|Sony STR-DA4ES Digital Surround Receiver
|Sony DVP-S360 DVD/CD Player
|Sony ICF-C121 Clock Radio Alarm
|Sony CDX-C560 MobileES car stereo
|Sony CRX-140E Spressa IDE CD-RW
|Sony CCD-TRV58 Hi-8 Camcorder
|Sony SPP-95 Cordless Telephone
|Sony SPP-S9101 Cordless Telephone
|Sony M-540V Microcassette Recorder
|Sony CPS-88S Multiband Radio Boombox
|Sony D-105 Portable CD Player
|Sony WM-FX403 Radio/Cassette Walkman
|Sony WM-FX38 Radio/Cassette Walkman
|Sony WM-FS191 Radio/Cassette Sports Walkman
|Sony WM-EX102 Cassette Walkman
|
|Apparently, a hell of a lot more than what you've got.
This was no attempt at a pissing contest buddy. I established what I
guessed about you. A Sony collector obviously. Why else would you
have 6 VCR's. Oh, you have a big house and you need one in each den
and entertainment area.
|
|And I totally expect a backstabbing response like "oh, you own so many Sony
|products, it's so obvious why you were in disagreement with me."
What, me backstab. You are paranoid.
You weren't exactly in disagreement with me. You made incorrect
assumptions about the intent of my original statement which was not in
any way a criticism of Sony durability as you said it was.
Anybody who has this amount of Sony products is obviously a Sony
Sycophant and I suspect you are extremely sensitive to anybody making
any statements which you perceive to be criticising a favoured
manufacturer's products. You are correct that I was trying to
establish this fact. To set your mind at rest I would have all Sony
products too if I could afford them. You seem to think I have
something against Sony when the opposite is true. On the other hand it
is obvious why you can't see that even Sony products might have some
weaknesses and a small criticism of a failure due to an accident is
perceived incorrectly as a total dislike for their products. I dare
say that you will prefer to believe it your way no matter what. So be
it.
|
|I'd hate to burst your bubble, but I also own many other electronics made by
|other brands, mainly Japanese (Pioneer, JVC, Panasonic/Technics, Toshiba,
|Yamaha, Onkyo, Mitsubishi, Akai, Hitachi, NEC), that have been as good, if not
|superior, to some of my Sony items listed.
You have no show of bursting my bubble since I didn't set out to blow
one. I can also respond with a "blow smoke up your arse" list,
(obviously not so well off as yourself though) ; Hewlett Packard,
Tektronix, Pioneer, Marantz, Meridian, Linn Sondek, Harmon Kardon,
Hakko, Gossen Metrawatt, AVO..
I know a couple who have 2 adjacent houses (one vacant) full of
obsolete computers dating from the earliest days of computing. So much
so that the only room free of a computer of any type is the main
bedroom - the wife won't let him store anything in there. They call it
a Computer Museum. Your house must be getting close to theirs in
appearance.
|
|With such experience, I can assure anyone that if they want quality
|electronics, they should buy Japanese
Your assurance is noted but it is sad that a lot of Japanese (and
European) brands are moving manufacture to mainland China and
quality/durability is suffering. The same occurred when some well
known companies moved production to Taiwan 25 - 30 years ago and it
took a number of years for the bugs to be ironed out and the quality
to come back in. There is no longer any guarantee that the once
vaunted Japanese brand name build quality is still present, unless you
first verify it for yourself. It can't be taken at face value any more
is what I am saying and I have good reason to be suspicious of
products made in China until I check them out personally.
|unless they are willing and able to blow
|a small fortune for exotic stuff from brands like Sunfire, Krell, Bryston,
|Runco, Linn, Proceed, Meridian, Bang and Olufsen, Seleco, Lexicon, and various
|other brands, many of which the general public do not know exist. - Reinhart
I have come across all of these brands, although I would hardly class
some of them as exotic. Anybody with long experience in electronics
design/construction/repair would have heard of these brands and the
fact that the general public may not have heard of them is not
surprising or unusual. Many of them are simply overpriced and are no
better in performance than more common brands in my opinion. I don't
buy brand name amplifying equipment and speakers normally and I prefer
to build my own. I did make an exception when I bought a Harmon Kardon
AVR7000 receiver though.
