S
server
Guest
message unavailable
J
Jim Adney
Guest
On Mon, 08 Mar 2004 21:44:10 GMT Al <no.spam@here.com> wrote:
Most other components this size, including theirs, just have the
relevant numbers printed on them.
-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney jadney@vwtype3.org
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------
Okay, but why pick an identifiction method that requires a manual?
Most other components this size, including theirs, just have the
relevant numbers printed on them.
-
-----------------------------------------------
Jim Adney jadney@vwtype3.org
Madison, WI 53711 USA
-----------------------------------------------
J
Jon Elson
Guest
DarkMatter wrote:
differently. Was CBS making transistors in 1975? I seriously
doubt it. These were probably used in ICBM guidance systems or
support equipment. Only the exotic military projects could afford
transistors in 1956.
Jon
Nope, I think they are from 1956-1957, if you read the date code
differently. Was CBS making transistors in 1975? I seriously
doubt it. These were probably used in ICBM guidance systems or
support equipment. Only the exotic military projects could afford
transistors in 1956.
Jon
J
Jon Elson
Guest
Mark (UK) wrote:
Motorola MECL I series. These date back to about 1966, I think.
The patent requests were filed in 1958 and 1959, and patents were issued
starting in 1961.
here's some MECL 300 series data sheets from 1967
http://d116.com/chips/mc300/
But, I found some here dating to 1963 :
http://www.wps.com/archives/solid-state-datasheets/Motorola/MECL/
which are about the very oldest I've ever heard of.
I worked on a computer built mostly out of MECL I and a little MECL II
in 1969-1971. It was pretty fast for its time.
Jon
Well, before the 7400 TTL series there was DTL, before that RTL, and theHiya!
Seemed I got my phrasing a bit backwards there, that's not quite
what I meant!
Let's try that again....
"At what age do ICs become collectable?"
Motorola MECL I series. These date back to about 1966, I think.
The patent requests were filed in 1958 and 1959, and patents were issued
starting in 1961.
here's some MECL 300 series data sheets from 1967
http://d116.com/chips/mc300/
But, I found some here dating to 1963 :
http://www.wps.com/archives/solid-state-datasheets/Motorola/MECL/
which are about the very oldest I've ever heard of.
I worked on a computer built mostly out of MECL I and a little MECL II
in 1969-1971. It was pretty fast for its time.
Jon
J
Jon Elson
Guest
CBarn24050 wrote:
diagnostic programs. Somebody at IBM (company historian?)
paid $500 for a couple inch thick stack of them! Certainly
the most amazing eBay sale I've ever had.
(I pulled these out of the dumpster about 25 years ago!)
I have some old transistors in my gold scrap pile, but I'm going
to have to pull them out.
Jon
I had a pile of old IBM microfiche containing listings of IBM 360
diagnostic programs. Somebody at IBM (company historian?)
paid $500 for a couple inch thick stack of them! Certainly
the most amazing eBay sale I've ever had.
(I pulled these out of the dumpster about 25 years ago!)
I have some old transistors in my gold scrap pile, but I'm going
to have to pull them out.
Jon
W
Watson A.Name - \"Watt Su
Guest
"Jon Elson" <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote in message
news:404D567C.5000905@pico-systems.com...
fiche reader, because everything is online now - no need any more.
news:404D567C.5000905@pico-systems.com...
He needs a fich reader, too! The techs from Bull threw out their
fiche reader, because everything is online now - no need any more.
G
gothika
Guest
On 9 Mar 2004 00:39:30 -0800, timplee@hotmail.com (Timothy Lee) wrote:
up.
The video(yellow) cord isn't supposed to carry an audio signal, that's
the jb of the other two. The red and the white.
They're all the same. Just like you said color coded for ease of hook
up.
The video(yellow) cord isn't supposed to carry an audio signal, that's
the jb of the other two. The red and the white.
W
Wolfgang Mahringer
Guest
Hi Dale,
Dale wrote:
HTH
Wolf
--
From-address is Spam trap
Use: wolfgang (dot) mahringer (at) sbg (dot) at
Dale wrote:
That _may_ be a BC517 transistor
picture?
HTH
Wolf
--
From-address is Spam trap
Use: wolfgang (dot) mahringer (at) sbg (dot) at
C
CBarn24050
Guest
These chips can be programmed easily by any small micro (pic, avr) if you have
the time and can be bothered to write some software.
the time and can be bothered to write some software.
M
Mark (UK)
Guest
Hiya!
I ended up using that 7475 from 1969 on a Missile Command PCB (in a
socket) - and it worked!! Should I be keeping it then as a very early
TTL example?
Yours, Mark.
FSMüller wrote:
I ended up using that 7475 from 1969 on a Missile Command PCB (in a
socket) - and it worked!! Should I be keeping it then as a very early
TTL example?
Yours, Mark.
FSMüller wrote:
It depends. I would not throw away an old 74xxx Chip with a readable
date code before 1970 and I just soldered out a vintage 1101 dynamic RAM
chip with the unbelievable capycity of 256 bits. this was the time when
you were able to cout the bit in your computer...
I clipped out an ad from an old ELECTRONICS magazine (1970) that boast
this type of RAM as "state of the art".
Where are we now? 256Mbits on one chip or even more?
Nice are the the old 1702 EPROMs with nice windows, you can still count
the 2048 bits, but you need a microscope with x50 magnification.
Another item are old germanium transistors in glass cylinders that are
painted black to avoid photoelectric effects. OC70 from VALVO, now
Philips.
maybe this is nostalgia, but I like it
Frank
Jon Elson wrote:
Mark (UK) wrote:
Hiya!
what I meant!
Let's try that again....
"At what age do ICs become collectable?"
Well, before the 7400 TTL series there was DTL, before that RTL, and the
Motorola MECL I series. These date back to about 1966, I think.
The patent requests were filed in 1958 and 1959, and patents were issued
starting in 1961.
here's some MECL 300 series data sheets from 1967
http://d116.com/chips/mc300/
But, I found some here dating to 1963 :
http://www.wps.com/archives/solid-state-datasheets/Motorola/MECL/
which are about the very oldest I've ever heard of.
I worked on a computer built mostly out of MECL I and a little MECL II
in 1969-1971. It was pretty fast for its time.
Jon
F
FSMüller
Guest
It depends. I would not throw away an old 74xxx Chip with a readable
date code before 1970 and I just soldered out a vintage 1101 dynamic RAM
chip with the unbelievable capycity of 256 bits. this was the time when
you were able to cout the bit in your computer...
I clipped out an ad from an old ELECTRONICS magazine (1970) that boast
this type of RAM as "state of the art".
Where are we now? 256Mbits on one chip or even more?
Nice are the the old 1702 EPROMs with nice windows, you can still count
the 2048 bits, but you need a microscope with x50 magnification.
Another item are old germanium transistors in glass cylinders that are
painted black to avoid photoelectric effects. OC70 from VALVO, now Philips.
maybe this is nostalgia, but I like it
Frank
Jon Elson wrote:
date code before 1970 and I just soldered out a vintage 1101 dynamic RAM
chip with the unbelievable capycity of 256 bits. this was the time when
you were able to cout the bit in your computer...
I clipped out an ad from an old ELECTRONICS magazine (1970) that boast
this type of RAM as "state of the art".
Where are we now? 256Mbits on one chip or even more?
Nice are the the old 1702 EPROMs with nice windows, you can still count
the 2048 bits, but you need a microscope with x50 magnification.
Another item are old germanium transistors in glass cylinders that are
painted black to avoid photoelectric effects. OC70 from VALVO, now Philips.
maybe this is nostalgia, but I like it
Frank
Jon Elson wrote:
Mark (UK) wrote:
Hiya!
what I meant!
Let's try that again....
"At what age do ICs become collectable?"
Well, before the 7400 TTL series there was DTL, before that RTL, and the
Motorola MECL I series. These date back to about 1966, I think.
The patent requests were filed in 1958 and 1959, and patents were issued
starting in 1961.
here's some MECL 300 series data sheets from 1967
http://d116.com/chips/mc300/
But, I found some here dating to 1963 :
http://www.wps.com/archives/solid-state-datasheets/Motorola/MECL/
which are about the very oldest I've ever heard of.
I worked on a computer built mostly out of MECL I and a little MECL II
in 1969-1971. It was pretty fast for its time.
Jon
N
Nigel
Guest
"1hookedspacecadet" <rotoquad@**NoFrikkinSpam**earthlink.net> wrote in
news:NQ43c.3$JF5.1@tattler.gsu.edu:
news:NQ43c.3$JF5.1@tattler.gsu.edu:
Have you tried posting this query on rec.games.video.arcade.collecting ??
1
1hookedspacecadet
Guest
It has been discussed, no mention of a reference that would index the set in
this manner.
"Nigel" <Nigel@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:6Vi3c.344$u%1.54510@news02.tsnz.net...
this manner.
"Nigel" <Nigel@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:6Vi3c.344$u%1.54510@news02.tsnz.net...
F
FSMüller
Guest
Hi,
this is not a mains transformer, but a HF coil with a fixed tap and a
adjustable core that can be turned in or out of the coil more or less to
adjust the exact frequency needed. You need a srewdriver with a
nonconducting tip to avoid detuning the coil by the influence of the
either conducting oer even magnetic and conducting tip of the tool that
make the adjusting process very difficult.
Frank
Elias wrote:
this is not a mains transformer, but a HF coil with a fixed tap and a
adjustable core that can be turned in or out of the coil more or less to
adjust the exact frequency needed. You need a srewdriver with a
nonconducting tip to avoid detuning the coil by the influence of the
either conducting oer even magnetic and conducting tip of the tool that
make the adjusting process very difficult.
Frank
Elias wrote:
A
Al
Guest
In article <hr3q40dilmqp9bhs3g2vvgm68hjkqiguei@4ax.com>,
Jim Adney <jadney@vwtype3.org> wrote:
uF Case tol. Failure Rate (%/1000hrs) DC Leakage in uA
Code % 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001 25C 85C 125C
5.6 A 5 5001 5201 5401 5601 0.3 6 7.5
5.6 A 10 2241 2481 2721 2961 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 5 5002 5202 5402 5602 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 10 2242 2482 2722 2962 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 20 2243 2483 2723 2963 0.3 6 7.5
So a M38003/01-5001 is unique. I left out the dissipation factor for
simplicty.
As you can see, there is much more information in this code number than
just the capacitance value and the voltage. When a component is bought
to this specification, it will meet it. If you buy a random FF uF VV
volt capacitor, you have no clue as to what you have with respect to
leakage, reliability, dissipation factor and the like.
al
--
There's never enough time to do it right the first time.......
Jim Adney <jadney@vwtype3.org> wrote:
OK, let me give you a few example lines from the manual:
uF Case tol. Failure Rate (%/1000hrs) DC Leakage in uA
Code % 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001 25C 85C 125C
5.6 A 5 5001 5201 5401 5601 0.3 6 7.5
5.6 A 10 2241 2481 2721 2961 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 5 5002 5202 5402 5602 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 10 2242 2482 2722 2962 0.3 6 7.5
6.8 A 20 2243 2483 2723 2963 0.3 6 7.5
So a M38003/01-5001 is unique. I left out the dissipation factor for
simplicty.
As you can see, there is much more information in this code number than
just the capacitance value and the voltage. When a component is bought
to this specification, it will meet it. If you buy a random FF uF VV
volt capacitor, you have no clue as to what you have with respect to
leakage, reliability, dissipation factor and the like.
al
--
There's never enough time to do it right the first time.......
W
Watson A.Name \"Watt Sun
Guest
Richard wrote:
others on this website.
http://www.mpja.com/productview.asp?product=15194+PS
Here's one part of it, and the price is reasonable. Check out the
others on this website.
http://www.mpja.com/productview.asp?product=15194+PS
M
Michael Black
Guest
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?FSM=FCller?= (mueller@mrt.uka.de) writes:
I think one reason people collect vaccuum tubes is because you can often
see the insides, and the various packages have a certain visual appeal.
Many people who weren't even collecting them would keep an old transmitting
tube around because "it looks so nice" and maybe even make a lamp base out
of it.
With ICs, they tend to look the same. There are a variety of packages,
but it is the packages changes that we see, not what's inside. An ECL
divider looks no different from an op-amp, from where we stand.
So an "IC collection" likely would be along the lines of packages. Eproms,
because of the window. Gold plated ICs. Those early flatline packages.
And then age really doesn't apply, except for packages that only appeared
in the early days.
Or perhaps a collection would be of significant ICs, not their worth to
collectors but their importance to the electronic world. So the first
IC op-amp would be a "collector's item". An IC that bombed miserably too.
A 555 because of it's long life. And so on.
And one could start bootlegging ICs. Get rid of the labelling, and
put on whatever you want it to be. "Oh wow, I found a 1946 prescaler IC",
or "Now this is a collector's item, the labelling is upside down". So
long as people just want the ICs lying around, and don't we all collect ICs
that way?, one doesn't have to worry about little details like how the
insides don't match the labelling.
The only time I seriously considered "collecting transistors" was about
1974, when I found CK722s (and I have no idea if they were "originals"
or recent at the time knockoffs) at the local surplus store, and I joked
that I'd start collecting transistors. The joke was influenced by knowing
people who were serious about collecting tubes. But there wasn't really
an appeal to actually collecting them.
Michael
I think one reason people collect vaccuum tubes is because you can often
see the insides, and the various packages have a certain visual appeal.
Many people who weren't even collecting them would keep an old transmitting
tube around because "it looks so nice" and maybe even make a lamp base out
of it.
With ICs, they tend to look the same. There are a variety of packages,
but it is the packages changes that we see, not what's inside. An ECL
divider looks no different from an op-amp, from where we stand.
So an "IC collection" likely would be along the lines of packages. Eproms,
because of the window. Gold plated ICs. Those early flatline packages.
And then age really doesn't apply, except for packages that only appeared
in the early days.
Or perhaps a collection would be of significant ICs, not their worth to
collectors but their importance to the electronic world. So the first
IC op-amp would be a "collector's item". An IC that bombed miserably too.
A 555 because of it's long life. And so on.
And one could start bootlegging ICs. Get rid of the labelling, and
put on whatever you want it to be. "Oh wow, I found a 1946 prescaler IC",
or "Now this is a collector's item, the labelling is upside down". So
long as people just want the ICs lying around, and don't we all collect ICs
that way?, one doesn't have to worry about little details like how the
insides don't match the labelling.
The only time I seriously considered "collecting transistors" was about
1974, when I found CK722s (and I have no idea if they were "originals"
or recent at the time knockoffs) at the local surplus store, and I joked
that I'd start collecting transistors. The joke was influenced by knowing
people who were serious about collecting tubes. But there wasn't really
an appeal to actually collecting them.
Michael
Jon Elson wrote:
Mark (UK) wrote:
Hiya!
what I meant!
Let's try that again....
"At what age do ICs become collectable?"
Well, before the 7400 TTL series there was DTL, before that RTL, and the
Motorola MECL I series. These date back to about 1966, I think.
The patent requests were filed in 1958 and 1959, and patents were issued
starting in 1961.
here's some MECL 300 series data sheets from 1967
http://d116.com/chips/mc300/
But, I found some here dating to 1963 :
http://www.wps.com/archives/solid-state-datasheets/Motorola/MECL/
which are about the very oldest I've ever heard of.
I worked on a computer built mostly out of MECL I and a little MECL II
in 1969-1971. It was pretty fast for its time.
Jon
D
Dave Platt
Guest
Yes. >>grin<<
Composite video signals are normally intended to be carried by a cable
whose characteristic impedance is 75 ohms. The source (sending)
component, and the destination (receiving) component, present a 75-ohm
impedance to the cable, and "expect" the same. Because the impedances
are matched, there is little or no reflection of the electrical signal
when it travels from jack to plug to cable, or vice versa.
Reflections are bad - they can cause double edges or "ghosting" in the
video image.
The yellow-plug cables are made with their physical construction
controlled (carefully, or badly, depending on the brand) so that the
cable's characteristic (or "surge") impedance is 75 ohms. The
impedance is controlled by the ratio of the diameters of the inner and
outer conductor, and by the characteristics of the insulation
surrounding the inner conductor.
Standard audio interconnect cables do not usually have well-controlled
characteristic impedances. In short cables (and by "short" I mean
anything less than a good fraction of a mile) the cable's
characteristic impedance is irrelevant when audio frequencies are
involved.
I thought the 3 cables were the same, just 3 regular coaxial
That may simply mean that it's defective. Normally, a yellow-plug
composite video cable does a fine job of carrying audio signals.
It's possible that some manufacturers make their composite-video
cables with a molded-in DC blocking capacitor, in order to try to
break up ground loops, and that this capacitor is also blocking audio
signals. I'd be surprised at that, though - I've never heard of a
cable being made in this way.
--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
W
William P.N. Smith
Guest
"Walter Harley" <walterh@cafewalterNOSPAM.com> wrote:
guess the cable in question is defective.
--
William Smith
ComputerSmiths Consulting, Inc. www.compusmiths.com
Yes, there are 15KHz and 60Hz components to video signals, so I'd
guess the cable in question is defective.
--
William Smith
ComputerSmiths Consulting, Inc. www.compusmiths.com
1
1hookedspacecadet
Guest
Of the ones I have seen, generally on tvs from the 80s, the tube base is
close but not close enough. Same general shape, but sometimes with extra
tabs, other times it has too many pins. Maybe the sets I have been looking
at are too old...?
"James Sweet" <jamessweet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:20p3c.158262$Xp.660013@attbi_s54...
close but not close enough. Same general shape, but sometimes with extra
tabs, other times it has too many pins. Maybe the sets I have been looking
at are too old...?
"James Sweet" <jamessweet@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:20p3c.158262$Xp.660013@attbi_s54...