[rmalin]

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

I would disagree, those early Sony sets looked very old fashioned.



The flatness of the tube tended to make them look 'un-natural' though - and some customers didn't like them.



Actually they were 27 inch, and while there may be some truth to the size restrictions you suggest - at the time it was widely suggested that the size limit (to 18 inches) was a restriction of the Trinitron CRT (other Japanese makers made larger sets than 18, but not Sony).

The release of 27 inch sets ended that story (although I suspect it was mostly true, and that improvements in technology made them able to make larger sizes). The obvious problems were in the thickness and weight of the glass, presumably what limited the Trinitron?.

The Pro-Feel series (like all similar releases) were an un-mitigated disaster, and lost Sony huge sums of money.



Well I can't comment on design and price, but performance (and most of all quality) are inferior to Sony (only Panasonic are in the same league as Sony).

But you pays your money, and takes your choice

All good points there Nigel. I actually liked the look of the 'Pro-Feel' televisions - all finished in silver and mounted on very smart floor stands with the tuner module underneath. I still have the original Sony brochures from that era and I reckon they still look modern today! But yes, like the Betamax VCR system, it was a bit of a disaster for Sony. (Incidentally, I owned most of the Betamax machines including all the C series from C5 to C9 and the legendary C7 as well as the portable 3000 & 4000 camera and the briiliant F1 portable recorder system. All great gear in its day.

[rmalin]

All good points there Nigel. I actually liked the look of the 'Pro-Feel' televisions - all finished in silver and mounted on very smart floor stands with the tuner module underneath. I still have the original Sony brochures from that era and I reckon they still look modern today! But yes, like the Betamax VCR system, it was a bit of a disaster for Sony. (Incidentally, I owned most of the Betamax machines including all the C series from C5 to C9 and the legendary C7 as well as the portable 3000 & 4000 camera and the briiliant F1 portable recorder system. All great gear in its day.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by rmalin

All good points there Nigel. I actually liked the look of the 'Pro-Feel' televisions - all finished in silver and mounted on very smart floor stands with the tuner module underneath. I still have the original Sony brochures from that era and I reckon they still look modern today!

There was nothing 'wrong' with Pro-Feel - except the price!.

People don't want TV 'separates', and aren't prepared to pay the premium for doing so. Various other manufacturers have done similar lines, all have flopped badly

But yes, like the Betamax VCR system, it was a bit of a disaster for Sony. (Incidentally, I owned most of the Betamax machines including all the C series from C5 to C9 and the legendary C7 as well as the portable 3000 & 4000 camera and the briiliant F1 portable recorder system. All great gear in its day.

I wouldn't have said Betamax was a disaster?, the units performed well (better than VHS), were reliable, sold in good numbers, and presumably made Sony some money?.

The only downside was that VHS won the battle for VCR's - and that was mostly down to the artificially high number of VHS machines in the UK due to all the major renters only doing VHS. The UK had the highest penetration of video in the world, it was a very large market for the size of the country.

[rmalin]

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

There was nothing 'wrong' with Pro-Feel - except the price!.

People don't want TV 'separates', and aren't prepared to pay the premium for doing so. Various other manufacturers have done similar lines, all have flopped badly



I wouldn't have said Betamax was a disaster?, the units performed well (better than VHS), were reliable, sold in good numbers, and presumably made Sony some money?.

The only downside was that VHS won the battle for VCR's - and that was mostly down to the artificially high number of VHS machines in the UK due to all the major renters only doing VHS. The UK had the highest penetration of video in the world, it was a very large market for the size of the country.

When I spoke of the Betamax format being a disaster, I was of course referring to the money and development Sony ploughed into it only for it to lose out commercially to VHS. You are quite right that it was a superior format technically and in terms of picture quality. I loved my Betamax machines, particularly the C7 which cost me around £650 30 years ago - blimey, those were the days when I could afford to spend the equivilent of several weeks wages on a new piece of equipment. I actually went to the local Sony stockist (CTS of Leamington Spa) to buy 5 of these machines (for myself and 4 colleagues) on the day the first batch were delivered. The excitement in our office was immense! I never managed to acquire the 'ski-slope' cassette changer that was an optional extra. My C9 was a fabulous machine, all sleek & slender and loaded with spec. Eventually I relented and bought a JVC 725 Hi-Fi VHS machine and then a few years later bought two S-VHS Panasonics (900 + 1000 series) for about £2k the pair. Like I said before, I've spent some dosh on equipment over the years!

[jjne]

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

I wouldn't have said Betamax was a disaster?, the units performed well (better than VHS), were reliable, sold in good numbers, and presumably made Sony some money?.

The Sony Betamax machines don't seem to have stood the test of time anywhere near as well as the Sanyo ones.

I recall those mid-1990s Panasonic machines -- they made the cheap Akuras look like a paragon of build quality by comparison

[rmalin]

Originally Posted by jjne

The Sony Betamax machines don't seem to have stood the test of time anywhere near as well as the Sanyo ones.

I recall those mid-1990s Panasonic machines -- they made the cheap Akuras look like a paragon of build quality by comparison

The Panasonic NV-900 & NV-1000 were magnificent machines. they could be linked together for 'synchro-editing' and both had drop down front panels with jog/shuttle dials, insert editing functions etc. I still think I prefer analogue editing than computer editing but sadly both machines expired and these days I edit on PC using Pinnacle software.

[jjne]

Originally Posted by rmalin

The Panasonic NV-900 & NV-1000 were magnificent machines. they could be linked together for 'synchro-editing' and both had drop down front panels with jog/shuttle dials, insert editing functions etc. I still think I prefer analogue editing than computer editing but sadly both machines expired and these days I edit on PC using Pinnacle software.

The good ones might have been magnificent, but your average £300 workaday machine was fantastic plastic. As mentioned the £170 Akura machines (the cheapest on the market at the time) were actually more reliable IME -- the trade wouldn't touch them but apart from the mode switch, they didn't seem to go wrong all that much.

The TVs were the same -- the performance was lamentable but they just kept going and going. My dad has one in his snooker shed that has been on in the background most days for the best part of 20 years and still has an as-new picture. The geometry is horrible, the sound fuzzy and the controls obstructive and basic, but all of those complaints were present from new.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by rmalin

My C9 was a fabulous machine, all sleek & slender and loaded with spec.

We had a 'pain in the bum' customer (only a couple of hundred yards from the shop) - you perhaps know the type?

Anyway, he had a really weird complaint about his C9 - I can't remember the exact fault (it was either a picture or sound problem?).

The weird thing was it ONLY happened on two programmes, Tomorrows Word and (I think?) Panorama.

Back in those days we had VERY good contacts within the BBC, and when we queried it we were told that those were the only two live programmes they broadcast.

I'm struggling remembering now, but I presume Sony came up with a mod for it, and it all got sorted eventually

We never did get told what the reason was though, and why only live programmes on BBC caused it.

[AidanLunn]

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

I wouldn't have said Betamax was a disaster?

Those of us who have seen the pictures on Sanyo Beta decks would say different Softer than a sponge under a streamroller.

[AidanLunn]

Originally Posted by jjne

The Sony Betamax machines don't seem to have stood the test of time anywhere near as well as the Sanyo ones.

Reliability-wise - and even the Sanyos seem to gobble up their idlers like there's no tomorrow.

Picture and sound-wise, I'd pick a Sony any day over a Sanyo, Toshiba or NEC.

[Soundbox]

Originally Posted by AidanLunn

Reliability-wise - and even the Sanyos seem to gobble up their idlers like there's no tomorrow.

Picture and sound-wise, I'd pick a Sony any day over a Sanyo, Toshiba or NEC.

The modern replacement Sanyo idlers are very iffy and break up. Pattern parts are always a gamble - sometimes they are better than original but sometimes not - as with the Sanyo idlers.

Sanyo VTC-M40 has a very sharp picture - very much like Sony. Sanyo VTC-6500 is crisp too - better than the VTC-5100 or VTC-M10/20.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by AidanLunn

Those of us who have seen the pictures on Sanyo Beta decks would say different Softer than a sponge under a streamroller.

We sold huge numbers of Sanyo Betamax, and while the pictures weren't as good as the FAR more expensive Sony machines, they were just as good as VHS.

In our experience people tended to BUY Betamax, and RENT VHS, presumably because of the price difference.

It takes me back - repairing huge numbers of Beta and VHS machines

[AidanLunn]

Originally Posted by Soundbox

Sanyo VTC-M40 has a very sharp picture - very much like Sony. Sanyo VTC-6500 is crisp too - better than the VTC-5100 or VTC-M10/20.

My only real experience of these has been the 5150, though I do recall replacement of a capacitor - I've forgotten which - with one of a different storage value improved the picture sharpness.

Pity these decks didn't have a picture sharpness pot as they could then produce better results than the design that eventually rolled off Sanyo's production lines.

[jjne]

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

We sold huge numbers of Sanyo Betamax, and while the pictures weren't as good as the FAR more expensive Sony machines, they were just as good as VHS.

Indeed -- we had a Sanyo VTC-5000 and a Ferguson 3V29, and to be honest there was no difference in video quality that I could see, and the Sanyo was significantly better than the Ferguson for audio quality.

The difference in audio was obvious when watching adverts -- Tyne Tees Televisions playback facilities were noisy (and remained so until 1993), so all adverts had a background hiss and slight buzz, which was noticeable because of course it would fade out at the end of the break.

The Ferguson's noise floor was higher than the broadcast, so you didn't notice the hiss. It was there for the world to hear on the Betamax recordings though.

Both were as solid as a rock, and more reliable than any VCR I've owned since.

[andys corner]

Originally Posted by jjne

The good ones might have been magnificent, but your average £300 workaday machine was fantastic plastic. As mentioned the £170 Akura machines (the cheapest on the market at the time) were actually more reliable IME -- the trade wouldn't touch them but apart from the mode switch, they didn't seem to go wrong all that much.

The TVs were the same -- the performance was lamentable but they just kept going and going. My dad has one in his snooker shed that has been on in the background most days for the best part of 20 years and still has an as-new picture. The geometry is horrible, the sound fuzzy and the controls obstructive and basic, but all of those complaints were present from new.

i mentioned earlier in the thread i had one of those, i think mine was a cx30, it was definitely an early 90s portable. designed with a ruler and not much else as i remember, my parents bought themselves a philips a year or two later which looked light years in front in terms of design but lets just say one lasted i think 8 years before the picture started deterioating, the other was left virtually unused, when it did get used it went pop within 6 months.

the philips was the one that went pop

[jjne]

CX30 rings a bell actually -- it might be the same model.

There was the 20" non-FST set as well, my dad had one of those also, I think he gave it away around 2000; that was still going strong as well.

Actually one thing I noticed about budget TVs from the 1990s; the non-FST (and often still very bulbous, as the Akura was) tubes used to last well, but the FST efforts used to break very quickly. Ironically the non-FST TVs used to be far cheaper. My dad bought his from Colorvision (remember them?) for the, at the time, astonishingly low price of £129.99. That was in 1991, when Rumbelows were charging nearly double that for a similar Osaki TV.

I'm pretty sure Akura were a Scottish company originally, and were contracting out their own designs rather than just buying in from the cheapest supplier. Their TVs were unusually dated for the time (much more so than the typical low-end stuff) and ISTR that this particular model actually had a metal insert on the remote, and an LED channel display rather than OSD, both of which were very unusual by that point. I suspect this was a design bought in from somewhere else -- possibly Akura were a small manufacturer similar to Cello now? I don't know.

I think they came in and flooded the market due to being a good 20% cheaper than everyone else, then promptly went bust a couple of years later. The Akura name still exists but it's owned by Fascin8 now. The current stuff is just rebadged Chinese imports.

[andys corner]

Originally Posted by jjne

CX30 rings a bell actually -- it might be the same model.

There was the 20" non-FST set as well, my dad had one of those also, I think he gave it away around 2000; that was still going strong as well.

Actually one thing I noticed about budget TVs from the 1990s; the non-FST (and often still very bulbous, as the Akura was) tubes used to last well, but the FST efforts used to break very quickly. Ironically the non-FST TVs used to be far cheaper. My dad bought his from Colorvision (remember them?) for the, at the time, astonishingly low price of £129.99. That was in 1991, when Rumbelows were charging nearly double that for a similar Osaki TV.

I'm pretty sure Akura were a Scottish company originally, and were contracting out their own designs rather than just buying in from the cheapest supplier. Their TVs were unusually dated for the time (much more so than the typical low-end stuff) and ISTR that this particular model actually had a metal insert on the remote, and an LED channel display rather than OSD, both of which were very unusual by that point. I suspect this was a design bought in from somewhere else -- possibly Akura were a small manufacturer similar to Cello now? I don't know.

I think they came in and flooded the market due to being a good 20% cheaper than everyone else, then promptly went bust a couple of years later. The Akura name still exists but it's owned by Fascin8 now. The current stuff is just rebadged Chinese imports.

mine had a remote the same as this
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AKURA-TV-R...ht_3929wt_2592

i think i remember colorvision, all the rental shops round here were pretty much next to eachother, we had rumbelows, visionhire, radio rentals, granada and they were i think all on the same street. we had martin dawes but that had a big shop on its own. pretty sure two of those shops are a cash converter and a cash generator now as they were big shops. pretty sure mine came from norweb although a year or so later i was old enough to go to the town with my friends on a saturday and being lads we went where there were computer games, they were inevitably always next to the tvs, akura sets always looked better than the other sets at the same pricepoint.

in that era (early 90s) i was playing keyboards and where i had lessons was also a tatung dealer, their sets were similar, not hugely up to date but nice enough (i think they gave warrantys away with those)

a guy that lived near me had a fst 'salora?' from tandy, it packed up within a few months, he got his when i got mine, i thought that was brilliant he was an idiot

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by jjne

I'm pretty sure Akura were a Scottish company originally, and were contracting out their own designs rather than just buying in from the cheapest supplier.

As far as I'm aware Akura was just a cheap foreign import. certainly you saw the exact same gear with various labels n it - for example Hinari (who 'may' have been the actual manufacturer?).

People keep mentioning Cello, they don't manufacturer anything - their products look to of cheap Chinese design and manufacture (only the Chinese design and build so poorly). Presumably Cello do an absolute minimum of assembly ijn order to claim 'made in the UK', perhaps fitting the backs, or putting them in boxes?.

[alan1302]

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

As far as I'm aware Akura was just a cheap foreign import. certainly you saw the exact same gear with various labels n it - for example Hinari (who 'may' have been the actual manufacturer?).

People keep mentioning Cello, they don't manufacturer anything - their products look to of cheap Chinese design and manufacture (only the Chinese design and build so poorly). Presumably Cello do an absolute minimum of assembly ijn order to claim 'made in the UK', perhaps fitting the backs, or putting them in boxes?.

Just out of interest the below is what Cello says about what they do:

Cello Electronics products are manufactured on a specially developed production line based in the UK. Located in the North East of England, Cello Electronics TVs are assembled to exact specifications in order to ensure that every single Cello TV is produced to the highest standard.

The UK based assembly line holds many benefits for its clients. Customers can see stock being produced and are also able to be involved in the product quality checks. Custom changes to specific Cello TVs can also be made during the production process and clients can see the meticulous quality procedures that all products go through.

[Orbitalzone]

It still sounds like Cello buy in the electronics and assemble them to the exact specifications that the Chinese OEM makers specifies (put part A into slot A, put part B into slot B, tighten bolts to this nm torq setting etc)

Custom changes most likely means they can change cabinet style, labels, branding and perhaps customisation of the onscreen menus.

A specially developed production line- that applies to almost any product made/assembled....unless they're making them on a kitchen table or standard workbench then they're making them on a customised assembly line!

I'm not having a go at Cello because it's obviously good to have them assembled in the UK giving some work to UK people but it's unlikely that the TV's are really made here rather than being assembled here.

Interestingly they're very open about who else uses their products: http://www.celloelectronics.com/reta...index/partners

At least they don't appear to be Vestel made TVs

[jjne]

Originally Posted by Orbitalzone

It still sounds like Cello buy in the electronics and assemble them to the exact specifications that the Chinese OEM makers specifies (put part A into slot A, put part B into slot B, tighten bolts to this nm torq setting etc)

In fairness most 'European' assembly lines run on exactly this principle.

When I did some design work (of testing gear for a local engineering company) for Samsung and Sanyo in the 1990s (when both had factories near where I lived), the parts wer ealmost all imported from the Far East. The casings were made in the UK but the guts were all imported.

Is it really all that different?

When I took my Cello TV apart (as I was curious about this very question), I found a power supply that appeared to be, if not an actual Vestel, a very close copy of a Vestel. Along with a Samsung panel, a "Cello" branded pair of circuit boards with "made in EU" written on them and a number of standard far-Eastern chipsets -- MTK for the DVD player and a Taiwanese DVB chipset (I think it was Sunplus).

In other words, a mish-mash of bits, pretty much exactly as most budget TVs (and indeed DVD players, Freeview boxes etc) generally are.

[jjne]

Originally Posted by Nigel Goodwin

As far as I'm aware Akura was just a cheap foreign import. certainly you saw the exact same gear with various labels n it - for example Hinari (who 'may' have been the actual manufacturer?).

According to Akura themselves in around 1993, they had a team of development engineers in Hamilton at that time. They were certainly getting into some oddball designs by that stage -- TV/alarm clock designs in the shape of a football, standalone teletext receivers and NICAM decoders etc. I don't recall anyone else importing those.

They told me that they were selling to the high street chains without any manufacturer's warranty of any sort, relying instead on dealers to provide this -- I don't know how much truth there was in this, or whether this was standard practice.

[Nigel Goodwin]

Originally Posted by alan1302

Just out of interest the below is what Cello says about what they do:

I've already read the propaganda on Cello's website

The few I've seen inside have been the cheapest poorly designed and built Chinese rubbish.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Orbitalzone

Interestingly they're very open about who else uses their products: http://www.celloelectronics.com/reta...index/partners

It's also worthwhile pointing out that Cello's list notes Argos's Bush brand as one of the brands which it manufactures TVs for. The Bush brand is one of the brands which people tend to associate solely with manufacture by Vestel...it's not the case.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jjne

In other words, a mish-mash of bits, pretty much exactly as most budget TVs (and indeed DVD players, Freeview boxes etc) generally are.

Aren't all such products a mishmash of parts? It's just that the higher end manufacturers use higher quality parts together with easier-to-use software, better remote controls and stronger parts provision and after sales support.
Here's a video of their new plant where they assemble 300k tvs a year. Apparently it's enabled them to bring in-house some areas which they previously outsourced. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8QYtcLeDyIk