Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

[TokaMundo]

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:26:47 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:

---
Oh, my, the little cunt's got her knickers in a bunch for being pegged
as too fucking stupid to know a crystal from a crystal oscillator and
now she's going to be insufferably rude until she gets over her fit of
pique!

No, you stupid twat, it _isn't_ a crystal, it's a crystal
_oscillator_.

Oh boy... now it appears we got a misogynist on our hands here.
You're an easy read, John boy.

If it was a crystal it would look something like this:


+--------------------
|
|
| OSC IN OSC OUT
+---+----------+-----
| |
+---[R1]---+
| |
| [R2]
| |
+---[Y1]---+
| |
[C1] [C2]
| |
GND GND

Where Y1 would be the crystal, as I explained in an earlier post.

Didn't need an explanation then... don't need one now.

You need to explain your bent mentality though.

But you don't want to hear about that, do you?

You are retarded, spell checker boy. You just can't take what you
dish out.

No, you'd rather yell
and scream and stamp your little feet over nothing.

Like you do over trivialities like spelling.

Grow the fuck up, dipass.

Go seek psychiatric help for that misogyny thing.

Hope that word isn't to big for your lame ass.

 

[TokaMundo]

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:35:16 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:

Plus, you're just as full of shit about the "someone else's schematic"
as you are about all the rest of the crap you post.

You must be _really_ stupid if you think you're going to pull that one
off, but if you want to try, let's see the message ID of the post
you're referring to, OK?

Your original post, dipshit. The title of the post. It says (from
sed for bounty hunter). Then, you again refer to the "OP" in another
post.

Make up your mind. Is it yours or someone else's.

 

[ehsjr]

cs_posting@hotmail.com wrote:

ehsjr wrote:

cs_posting@hotmail.com wrote:


The L and the C don't care about your
DC offset, so you must still think of the signal as AC in order to
understand their behavior. They don't care that the overall signal
doesn't reverse polarity, they only care that derivative of voltage
with respect to time is non-zero.


Er - there are cases where the L will be saturated by
the DC component.

Ed


What you are suggesting is a good issue to keep in mind for the real
world (and one I had overlooked).

However, what you have actually said is not true.

An inductance - a specific element we both referred to as L - will not
saturate.

You mentioned the behavior of L and C, which refers to the
way the *component* represented by C and the *component*
represented by L react. It is in your context that I used
the term L. Now, apparently, you have changed the context
to exclude consideration of the component (which will
sometimes lead to incorrect analysis) and to restrict the
term to have it refer to the property only. Therefore,
we did not refer to the same thing with the term L.

What I referred to is a circuit element that can saturate, as per
the definition for inductance.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=inductance
"1. The property of an electric circuit by which an electromotive
force is induced in it as the result of a changing magnetic flux.
2. A circuit element, typically a conducting coil, in which
electromotive force is generated by electromagnetic induction."

<snip>

If asked to solve a problem with an inductance, you treat it as such.
If asked to solve a problem with an inductor, you have to consider the
broader properties of that device, of which inductance is only one, and
not necesssarily a constant one.

I don't know where you came up with the above "rules" or whatever
you want to call them. If, in solving a problem with an inductance,
(specifically in this case, the effects of DC on an R,L,C load
impedance) no consideration is given to saturation, the solution
can be erroneous. Very specifically for the op's question,
the possibility of saturation *must* be considered, even though
the question did not include the word inductor. I think those
rules, or whatever you call them, are not correct.

Ed

 

[James Sweet]

No, he didn't say that, he's stated twice now that the tapping only
cured the no pic fault. Once he'd got the tube working then he
discovered the tuner didn't work. BTW, I have seen a vibration sensitive
IC, must have been a bond wire or something but it was an EPROM which
'looped' back to 0 intermittently when you were trying to read above
0x03fff. Tapping the chip would cause the problem to appear more
frequently and could be demonstrated in a little test jig we threw
together because it was such an unusual fault.

Oops, I missed that. Yeah it could certainly be a bad tube, but try
resoldering the neck board first, it's easy. If it still has that symptom
then just scrap it.

 

[Floyd L. Davidson]

ehsjr <ehsjr@bellatlantic.net> wrote:

cs_posting@hotmail.com wrote:
ehsjr wrote:

cs_posting@hotmail.com wrote:

The L and the C don't care about your
DC offset, so you must still think of the signal as AC in order to
understand their behavior. They don't care that the overall signal
doesn't reverse polarity, they only care that derivative of voltage
with respect to time is non-zero.


Er - there are cases where the L will be saturated by
the DC component.

Ed

That's about the same as pointing out that some capacitors
are polarity sensitive, and will effectively be a short
if the polarity is wrong. It's true, but does not enter
into the problem at this point.

What you are suggesting is a good issue to keep in mind for
the real
world (and one I had overlooked).
However, what you have actually said is not true.
An inductance - a specific element we both referred to as L -
will not
saturate.

You mentioned the behavior of L and C, which refers to the

Inductors saturate. Inductance doesn't.

To me it is obvious that by L and C, he meant the inductance and
the capacitance, not the specific inductor or capacitor.

If he'd have meant a specific device, he have had to specify a
few parameters as to just what kind of a device, no?

way the *component* represented by C and the *component*
represented by L react. It is in your context that I used
the term L. Now, apparently, you have changed the context
to exclude consideration of the component (which will
sometimes lead to incorrect analysis) and to restrict the
term to have it refer to the property only. Therefore,
we did not refer to the same thing with the term L.

Exactly, except I don't think he changed the context.

What I referred to is a circuit element that can saturate, as per
the definition for inductance.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=inductance
"1. The property of an electric circuit by which an
electromotive force is induced in it as the result of a changing
magnetic flux.
2. A circuit element, typically a conducting coil, in which
electromotive force is generated by electromagnetic induction."

A circuit element, not a component device.

snip

If asked to solve a problem with an inductance, you treat it
as such.
If asked to solve a problem with an inductor, you have to consider the
broader properties of that device, of which inductance is only one, and
not necesssarily a constant one.


I don't know where you came up with the above "rules" or whatever
you want to call them. If, in solving a problem with an inductance,
(specifically in this case, the effects of DC on an R,L,C load
impedance) no consideration is given to saturation, the solution
can be erroneous.

But saturation has nothing to do with the inductance. After the
right inductance is calculated, then a specific device has to be
chosen, and *that* is when saturation has to be considered. So
do physical size, mounting style, insulation, and perhaps other
parameters too, none of which are related to the original
"inductance" problem.

Very specifically for the op's question,
the possibility of saturation *must* be considered, even though
the question did not include the word inductor. I think those
rules, or whatever you call them, are not correct.

Could be! I don't remember the OP's question...

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://web.newsguy.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd@barrow.com

 

[Andy Cuffe]

On 18 Jun 2005 07:06:31 -0700, sidneybek@yahoo.com wrote:

Sony 5.1 A/V receiver model:STR-DE345,year:Jan 2000.No power I found
Q704=MP1620-OPY-M=Sony # 8-749-010-26=2SB1620=PNP=to be shorted base to
collector (I think) and found F901=3 amp fuse to be open.
Well I decided to remove Q704 and power up the unit with a 100 watt
bulb in place of F901 so when I powered up the unit I noticed I noticed
that the bulb lit bright for about 3 seconds then dimmed down,I did
this to see if there were any other problems before I ordered Q704.Now
when the new Q704 finally arrived I put it in and everything works
great in the stereo except it has no display.
I measured the voltages at the both front faceplate (display board)
connectors and they seem to correspond to the voltages stamped on the
board so my assumption is that IC103=UPD780206GF=100 pin quad SMT
display driver IC is defective,I hope not.
Did I burn IC103? if not anyone have any common repair tips for no
display?.Thanks in advance.

Sidney
Dartmouth,Nova Scotia
Canada

Check the voltage on the display tube. There's should be about 3-5v
AC across the two end pins and both pins should be around -30v.
Andy Cuffe

baltimora@psu.edu <-- Use this address until 12/31/2005

acuffe@gmail.com <-- Use this address after 12/31/2005

 

[Asimov]

"TDWesty" bravely wrote to "All" (18 Jun 05 10:48:27)
--- on the heady topic of "Re: Capacitor brand/type for NAD amp?"

TD> From: "TDWesty" <vwdiesels@gmail.com>
TD> Xref: aeinews sci.electronics.repair:50953 rec.audio.tech:21300

TD> I've sprayed all the switches & pots with contact cleaner, and the
TD> resistance across the terminals off all the input switches are the
TD> same - about 0.5 ohms. It is a bank of 4 switches (tape, cd, tuner,
TD> phono) soldered directly to the board, so without a desoldering tool,
TD> removal looks to be fairly tricky. Tape works fine, CD & tuner are bad
TD> in the left channel.

TD> I may try to replace the transistor for the infrasonic filter, which
TD> is apparently bypassed for the tape input. I need to find one, it is
TD> not a common one - C1845.


Add 2S prefix in front of C1845, you should find a 2SC1845 more easily.
BTW the 2SC1845 is a "General Purpose" high gain transistor and it can
be easily substituted by any with a suitable voltage that fits. Not that
critical a part for audio usage.

A*s*i*m*o*v

.... A stereo system is the altar to the god of music.

 

[Mark D. Zacharias]

sidneybek@yahoo.com wrote:

Sony 5.1 A/V receiver model:STR-DE345,year:Jan 2000.No power I found
Q704=MP1620-OPY-M=Sony # 8-749-010-26=2SB1620=PNP=to be shorted base
to collector (I think) and found F901=3 amp fuse to be open.
Well I decided to remove Q704 and power up the unit with a 100 watt
bulb in place of F901 so when I powered up the unit I noticed I
noticed that the bulb lit bright for about 3 seconds then dimmed
down,I did this to see if there were any other problems before I
ordered Q704.Now when the new Q704 finally arrived I put it in and
everything works great in the stereo except it has no display.
I measured the voltages at the both front faceplate (display board)
connectors and they seem to correspond to the voltages stamped on the
board so my assumption is that IC103=UPD780206GF=100 pin quad SMT
display driver IC is defective,I hope not.
Did I burn IC103? if not anyone have any common repair tips for no
display?.Thanks in advance.

Sidney
Dartmouth,Nova Scotia
Canada

Usually ( almost ALWAYS on these Sony's) if the one output transistor is
bad, they both are. It's possible that you also have a bad emitter resistor
or other small parts bad in the amp circuit.

That said, if the main fuse(s) for the output side of the power transformer
are blown, it will seem to turn on normally, but with no display, since
the -30V line is derived from the power amp power supply. These fuses are
often hidden under a circuit board attached to the power transformer.

Mark Z.

 

[Tim Schwartz]

Hello,

Well, that transistor is a 2SC1845, and is really common.

--Tim


TDWesty wrote:

I've sprayed all the switches & pots with contact cleaner, and the
resistance across the terminals off all the input switches are the same
- about 0.5 ohms. It is a bank of 4 switches (tape, cd, tuner, phono)
soldered directly to the board, so without a desoldering tool, removal
looks to be fairly tricky. Tape works fine, CD & tuner are bad in the
left channel.

I may try to replace the transistor for the infrasonic filter, which is
apparently bypassed for the tape input. I need to find one, it is not a
common one - C1845.

 

[John Fields]

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:04:38 GMT, TokaMundo <TokaMundo@weedizgood.org>
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:26:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:


---
Oh, my, the little cunt's got her knickers in a bunch for being pegged
as too fucking stupid to know a crystal from a crystal oscillator and
now she's going to be insufferably rude until she gets over her fit of
pique!

No, you stupid twat, it _isn't_ a crystal, it's a crystal
_oscillator_.


Oh boy... now it appears we got a misogynist on our hands here.
You're an easy read, John boy.

---
I endeavor to keep it simple for your sake.
---

If it was a crystal it would look something like this:


+--------------------
|
|
| OSC IN OSC OUT
+---+----------+-----
| |
+---[R1]---+
| |
| [R2]
| |
+---[Y1]---+
| |
[C1] [C2]
| |
GND GND

Where Y1 would be the crystal, as I explained in an earlier post.

Didn't need an explanation then... don't need one now.

---
Now that you've been shown the magic trick you claim you knew it all
along? Typical of the likes of you.
---

You need to explain your bent mentality though.

---
You mean likening you to a thoroughly disgusting, spoiled, female
brat? No explanation is necessary, it's all self-evident. All I did
was draw the parallel, _you_ supply the evidence.
---

But you don't want to hear about that, do you?

You are retarded, spell checker boy. You just can't take what you
dish out.

---
I can't take what I dish out?

LOL, you fucking idiot, what you're fumbling around trying to come up
with is: "You can dish it out but you can't take it." but, of course,
with your substandard command of the language you blurt out gibberish.
---

No, you'd rather yell
and scream and stamp your little feet over nothing.

Like you do over trivialities like spelling.

---
If it's trivial, then even you should have no problem with it.
Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case.
---

Grow the fuck up, dipass.

---
Blow me.
---

Go seek psychiatric help for that misogyny thing.

Hope that word isn't to big for your lame ass.
^^

too

---
Rather that concern yourself with the big words, you ought to make
sure you get the little ones right first. See above.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[John Fields]

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:12:10 GMT, TokaMundo <TokaMundo@weedizgood.org>
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:35:16 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:

Plus, you're just as full of shit about the "someone else's schematic"
as you are about all the rest of the crap you post.

You must be _really_ stupid if you think you're going to pull that one
off, but if you want to try, let's see the message ID of the post
you're referring to, OK?


Your original post, dipshit. The title of the post. It says (from
sed for bounty hunter). Then, you again refer to the "OP" in another
post.

---
Had you bothered to get off of your fat, lazy ass and checked the
origin of the thread you might have discovered that it started on sed
where the OP asked for a five minute timer.

Since sed is a text-only newsgroup I advised the OP that I'd have a
solution for him which I'd post to abse, (where binaries are allowed
to be posted) then when I posted, I used the same subject as in sed in
order to keep some continuity, but indicated that the _thread_ came
from sed. Not the _post_, pinhead, the thread. The clue should have
been that since the post had a binary attached to it, it _couldn't_
have come from sed
---

Make up your mind. Is it yours or someone else's.

---
Maybe now that I've spelled it out for you you can figure it out.

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[Laurence Payne]

On 18 Jun 2005 10:48:27 -0700, "TDWesty" <vwdiesels@gmail.com> wrote:

I've sprayed all the switches & pots with contact cleaner, and the
resistance across the terminals off all the input switches are the same
- about 0.5 ohms. It is a bank of 4 switches (tape, cd, tuner, phono)
soldered directly to the board, so without a desoldering tool, removal
looks to be fairly tricky. Tape works fine, CD & tuner are bad in the
left channel.

If you're not equipped for desoldering a switch, are you sure you
should be contemplating a recap?

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:04:38 GMT, TokaMundo <TokaMundo@weedizgood.org>
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:26:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:


---
Oh, my, the little cunt's got her knickers in a bunch for being pegged
as too fucking stupid to know a crystal from a crystal oscillator and
now she's going to be insufferably rude until she gets over her fit of
pique!

No, you stupid twat, it _isn't_ a crystal, it's a crystal
_oscillator_.


Oh boy... now it appears we got a misogynist on our hands here.
You're an easy read, John boy.

Hmmm...I often wondered if there was a parallel word for mysogynist, a
female who hates males because they are male. Is there such a word?

Tom

 

[John Robertson]

On 2005-06-15 19:08:46 -0700, "DataSheet" <jixjix@gmail.com> said:

http://www.DataSheet4U.com


100% Free Download .

800,000's IC DataSheet PDF.

Not bad, but I don't see the Rockwell 6532 or 6530 RIOT/RRIOTs - so
perhaps obsolete parts aren't well covered, but lots of other parts,
including CPU's, sockets, and transistors. Thanks!

John :-#)#
--
(Please post followups or tech enquires to the newsgroup) John's
Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 Call
(604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com "Old pinballers never die, they
just flip out."

 

[operator jay]

"Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cq9bb1hvmn87jgnu49lec1jnittc3dumfh@4ax.com...

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:04:38 GMT, TokaMundo <TokaMundo@weedizgood.org
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:26:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:


---
Oh, my, the little cunt's got her knickers in a bunch for being pegged
as too fucking stupid to know a crystal from a crystal oscillator and
now she's going to be insufferably rude until she gets over her fit of
pique!

No, you stupid twat, it _isn't_ a crystal, it's a crystal
_oscillator_.


Oh boy... now it appears we got a misogynist on our hands here.
You're an easy read, John boy.


Hmmm...I often wondered if there was a parallel word for mysogynist, a
female who hates males because they are male. Is there such a word?

Tom

"Woman" (just kidding)

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 10:53:52 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:12:10 GMT, TokaMundo <TokaMundo@weedizgood.org
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:35:16 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:

Plus, you're just as full of shit about the "someone else's schematic"
as you are about all the rest of the crap you post.

You must be _really_ stupid if you think you're going to pull that one
off, but if you want to try, let's see the message ID of the post
you're referring to, OK?


Your original post, dipshit. The title of the post. It says (from
sed for bounty hunter). Then, you again refer to the "OP" in another
post.

---
Had you bothered to get off of your fat, lazy ass and checked the
origin of the thread you might have discovered that it started on sed
where the OP asked for a five minute timer.

Since sed is a text-only newsgroup I advised the OP that I'd have a
solution for him which I'd post to abse, (where binaries are allowed
to be posted) then when I posted, I used the same subject as in sed in
order to keep some continuity, but indicated that the _thread_ came
from sed. Not the _post_, pinhead, the thread. The clue should have
been that since the post had a binary attached to it, it _couldn't_
have come from sed
---

Make up your mind. Is it yours or someone else's.

---
Maybe now that I've spelled it out for you you can figure it out.

339 posts so far (including this one) and zero content... just the
usual infantile squabbling.

John

 

[Tom MacIntyre]

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 12:49:43 -0500, "operator jay" <none@none.none>
wrote:

"Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cq9bb1hvmn87jgnu49lec1jnittc3dumfh@4ax.com...
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 22:04:38 GMT, TokaMundo <TokaMundo@weedizgood.org
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 15:26:47 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:


---
Oh, my, the little cunt's got her knickers in a bunch for being pegged
as too fucking stupid to know a crystal from a crystal oscillator and
now she's going to be insufferably rude until she gets over her fit of
pique!

No, you stupid twat, it _isn't_ a crystal, it's a crystal
_oscillator_.


Oh boy... now it appears we got a misogynist on our hands here.
You're an easy read, John boy.


Hmmm...I often wondered if there was a parallel word for mysogynist, a
female who hates males because they are male. Is there such a word?

Tom


"Woman" (just kidding)

That was my own (meant in fun) answer also...

Tom

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:38:32 -0700, Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net>
wrote:

On 6/17/05 3:59 PM, in article 8kj6b155soebk7unvugo5chrs2ol8t8m1p@4ax.com,
"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:45:27 -0800, floyd@barrow.com (Floyd L.
Davidson) wrote:

John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:
I'm not talking about what _I_ want to read, ...

In fact, that's all you *ever* talk about.

And "nashing" of teeth??? Tsk, tsk, tsk...

Perfect example!

---
Learn to use the language and its subtleties properly if you want to
be considered learned or, at the very least, competent in American
English.

The omission of the 'g' at the beginning of 'nashing' is inexcusable
and marks you as a churl.

This type of discussion is pointless and harmful. I've known brilliant
people, some at Bell Labs, who had difficulty spelling. Some Engineers and
Scientists had excellent command of the language (both English and
English!), but weren't as "swift" as the ones with language usage or
spelling problems. It's the luck of the draw either way.

It's quite difficult sometimes, but lets all try to be a bit nicer.

Awaiting flames.....

Don

Some people can't spell, and some people can't be nice. Luck of the
draw, as you point out.

Too bad newsreaders don't include a nice-checker. The simplest
implementation would just be a reverse spell-checker, that deleted
words like asshole and idiot and churl. Some people's posts would get
a *lot* shorter.


John

 

[John Fields]

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 10:58:38 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

Some people can't spell, and some people can't be nice. Luck of the
draw, as you point out.

Too bad newsreaders don't include a nice-checker. The simplest
implementation would just be a reverse spell-checker, that deleted
words like asshole and idiot and churl. Some people's posts would get
a *lot* shorter.

---
But a lot more confusing. Yours would read like this:

"Too bad newsreaders don't include a nice-checker. The simplest
implementation would just be a reverse spell-checker, that deleted
words like and and. Some people's posts would get
a *lot* shorter."

--
John Fields
Professional Circuit Designer

 

[TokaMundo]

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 10:37:29 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:

You mean likening you to a thoroughly disgusting, spoiled, female
brat?

Men who hate men that hate women should come find your lame ass.

You are a mere misogynistic bastard, at best.

You strike one as a jerk that fucked up a marriage, and blames it on
the woman, and women in general. You are a sad case, dipshit.