Phonoland

We bought this and would like to know about it- year, history, whatever you may supply. Can anyone help us? I believe the model # is SHF-6, and the serial # RVG 041814.
I am providing some photos and a YouTube link. I hope you will like seeing it, anyway. Thank you.
Paul

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mlHYqy ... IdEwtnZ7xg

It's a 1958 model.
Seems to be in nice shape, but has it been recently overhauled and restored?
Those sets definitely need it after 50+ years.
The transformers, rectifier, and output tubes could be in jepardy of failure if it's not been restored.

MattTech wrote:It's a 1958 model.
Seems to be in nice shape, but has it been recently overhauled and restored?
Those sets definitely need it after 50+ years.
The transformers, rectifier, and output tubes could be in jepardy of failure if it's not been restored.

Thank you. I have passed on the information stickies. I think we will be looking to have it restored in Lancaster if possible. Definitely want a safe unit.

Regards,
Paul

brickhead wrote:

MattTech wrote:It's a 1958 model.
Seems to be in nice shape, but has it been recently overhauled and restored?
Those sets definitely need it after 50+ years.
The transformers, rectifier, and output tubes could be in jepardy of failure if it's not been restored.

Thank you. I have passed on the information stickies. I think we will be looking to have it restored in Lancaster if possible. Definitely want a safe unit.

Regards,
Paul

Smart idea.
And due to the electrical codes back then, they never intalled a fuse in those sets.
I always add a safety fuse to my customer's sets per current code regulations.
It give me, and them, peace of mind.

The transformer will more likely fail due to a defect in the transformer, than because it was not protected by a fuse. Fuses may protect the surroundings, however. Capacitors should be changed to restore factory performance, not to protect transformers. I have only seen three SHORTED electrolytic power supply filter capacitors in my life. One was in a Philco 620 that had been in a chicken coop for 40 years. One was in a Motorola stereo with a hybrid chassis. One was in an old Newcomb school player with a billion hours on it.

I am unaware of ANY electrical codes that even make mention of 60+ year old electronic home entertainment equipment, much less require a fuse in one in order to pass code. Can you cite a specific code that refers to this? Are these codes in your area, or would they be nationwide? I'm not picking on anyone, I would really like to know. Thank you.

I dis-agree on transformers--I have changed (too) many that have "suffered" from an "overload situation". Proper "fusing", IMHO, would have prevented the problem to advance to the transformer, in most cases.
As for the "codes"--In the USA, there is something called "The National Electrical Code", which has been "adopted", to some degree by almost all states, but usually with tougher regulations--check with your state/city, for your area.
Ron Rich

Ron Rich wrote:I dis-agree on transformers--I have changed (too) many that have "suffered" from an "overload situation". Proper "fusing", IMHO, would have prevented the problem to advance to the transformer, in most cases.
As for the "codes"--In the USA, there is something called "The National Electrical Code", which has been "adopted", to some degree by almost all states, but usually with tougher regulations--check with your state/city, for your area.
Ron Rich

I'm with you, Ron.
Modern electronics today are required to pass various codes for safety.
Foremost is the inclusion of a fusible protection device, along with proper grounding/wiring procedures.

As a professional servicer, I have no desire to deal with liability cases from my customers due to, lets say, their house catching fire from a "vintage" something I've previously worked on for them.
So that said, the natural thing to do is to protect them, and ME, by installing safety devices and wiring that is up to current standards.
It's simply good business practice, and common sense, and my customers appreciate the peace of mind that it brings.

I've replaced many a transformer fried in a set due to a shorted capacitor or rectifier.

"Modern electronics today are required to pass various codes for safety." Perhaps. We are not talking about "modern" electronics. We are talking about 60+ year old electronics.

What if I own a Model A Ford and you change the oil in it. I drive down the road and smash into a tree, and get injured. Can I then sue you, the guy who changed my oil, because you failed to install anti-lock brakes, front and passenger air bags, and seat belts with shoulder harnesses in my Model A? Modern cars are required to have this safety equipment. Following your logic, that Model A should be equipped with the same equipment required of modern cars, and you, the servicer, should be held liable. Poppycock! When I drive my Model A, I assume certain risks. As long as you changed my oil in a manner appropriate for a Model A Ford, you have no liability. Conversely, this old RCA only needs to be equipped and repaired in a manner consistent with what practices existed when it was built. There is no electrical or other code or requirement that I have ever seen that says otherwise. It has already run 60-odd years without a fuse and has not burned up the transformer not has it burned the house down. If you want to install a fuse when you restore this equipment, and the customer is willing to pay for it, fine. The owner of the equipment assumes certain risks when he owns and operates vintage electronic equipment. With all due respect, for you guys to claim that the addition of a fuse that was not original equipment is a requirement of any type of electrical or safety code is simply not accurate. The addition of a fuse will not protect you from a lawsuit. In fact, it might be proven that the addition of a fuse that was not standard equipment actually CAUSED the failure. Your arbitrarily changing the design of the power supply from original might actually come back to haunt you. You never know what a good lawyer will claim and can prove.

Hey mister superazz88....
I dunno how you floated in here to critisize, but all your 7 meazily posts are negative critisisms, with really nothing to add to this website.
(go read them folks, you'll see what I mean)

You've already admitted to not being a professional, and know nothing much about electronics.
So why belch out your negativity towards every comment or poster that breathes?

Get a life.

It has already run 60-odd years without a fuse and has not burned up the transformer not has it burned the house down. If you want to install a fuse when you restore this equipment, and the customer is willing to pay for it, fine. The owner of the equipment assumes certain risks when he owns and operates vintage electronic equipment. With all due respect, for you guys to claim that the addition of a fuse that was not original equipment is a requirement of any type of electrical or safety code is simply not accurate. The addition of a fuse will not protect you from a lawsuit. In fact, it might be proven that the addition of a fuse that was not standard equipment actually CAUSED the failure.

Enough of this asinine nitpicking. Sixty years ago the tobacco industry was hiring "doctors" to say that smoking was 'good for you".

Consumer grade electronics had demonstrably lower standards of safety than today. A lack of fusing was only one. Hot chassis and potentially flammable components located in wood cabinets without a metal barrier were just a few things they got away with.

You have already shown your lack of knowledge and experience by stating that most transformers fail due to internal faults. Anyone with real-world experience knows that is ridiculous.

If you are going to solicit information from people be willing to listen to it. Otherwise; get lost.

Rob/NYC