Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Electronics Repair (sci.electronics.repair) Discussion of repairing electronic equipment. Topics include requests for assistance, where to obtain servicing information and parts, techniques for diagnosis and repair, and annecdotes about success, failures and problems. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#42
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 22:05:48 -0000, "Benderthe.evilrobot"
wrote: True. But the reason to replace them ALL is that if you only replace the one(s) causing a problem, another will fail later, then another still later. It is much easier to do them all at once than to have to repair the same unit over and over as they fail one after another. Been there, done that. So have I. I can totally understand what you are saying. However, I am not so sure about whether I would want to replace all of them in certain parts of a radio or tv. Here are my thoughts on this. Lets take my Hallicrafters SX-99 (which I paid for but dont have yet). That radio is 62 years old. (made in 1955). The seller said it works fine, (and I was sent a video of it working. I did detect a very slight hum. (But the video's audio is not the greatest). So, as soon as I get it and play around with it, I will replace the electrolytics in the power supply and any other 'lytics (if there are others). Even if there is no hum, I'd replace them, just based on age. However, this is a working radio. I ask myself if I really want to replace all the other (small) caps. [Then I say to myself.... if it works, dont fix it]. But, I know there are caps in specific circuits more likely to fail, than in other circuits. Those would be caps connected to the high plate voltages, especially at the audio output tubes and in the power supply. I also know that if those short out, they can damage other parts, such as tubes, resistors, and more. So, I would likely consider replacing those. I might even consider replacing ALL the caps in the power supply, and all audio stages, and feel safe doing that, since those caps are not real critical as far as affecting the overall performance of the radio, even if the new caps are a little different in their capacitance. Where I do NOT feel comfortable changing them, are in all RF and IF stages. The reason is that I know that a cap/coil circuit plays a big part in the inductance, which affects the radio alignment. I am not equipped to align the radio coils, and would prefer to leave them alone, as long as the radio is getting good reception. I also know that those RF and IF stages do not operate on as high voltages as do the audio output stages. So, once again, I ask myself, "Do I really want to risk throwing this radio out of alignment, when it's working fine, and knowing those caps are not as likely to fail". I answer myself "Probably not".... (As long as the radio is working well, dont screw up a good thing.... Then too, if the caps in those circuits are .05 or .003, I WANT a .05, not a .047. (And it seems that ..05 is no longer made). So, if I'm satisfied with the performance of this radio, I will replace the 'lytics regardless. I may also replace all caps AFTER the volume control, as well as all caps in the power supply. But I will likely NOT touch any caps in the RF and IF stages. That's my thinking on all of this right now. Not just for this radio, but anything..... Now, if it were simply an audio amplifier, I'd likely replace all the caps, because audio is not all that critical. |
#43
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On 2/4/2017 4:28 AM, wrote:
Lets take my Hallicrafters SX-99 (which I paid for but don't have yet). That radio is 62 years old. (made in 1955). The seller said it works fine, (and I was sent a video of it working. I did detect a very slight hum. (But the video's audio is not the greatest). However, this is a working radio. I ask myself if I really want to replace all the other (small) caps. [Then I say to myself.... if it works, dont fix it]. To quote a good friend of mine, "There are only two kinds of paper dielectric capacitors. Those that are bad, and those that are going to be bad." Where I do NOT feel comfortable changing them, are in all RF and IF stages. The paper caps in the RF and IF stages are bypassing and coupling capacitors. They need to be changed as well. I answer myself "Probably not".... (As long as the radio is working well, don't screw up a good thing.... Then too, if the caps in those circuits are .05 or .003, I WANT a .05, not a .047. (And it seems that .05 is no longer made). "Working" is a subjective thing. Known failure prone parts are just a time bomb waiting to convert working to not working. And possibly causing collateral damage when they fail. Back then, they liked "round numbers." Then the industry standardized on incremental changes. As a matter of course, .02 now is .022, .03 is .033 and .05 is .047. Unless you're playing with tuned audio filters, the difference is statistically zero. -- Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi http://www.foxsmercantile.com |
#44
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On 2/3/2017 8:47 PM, Carter wrote:
On 2/3/2017 5:16 PM, wrote: On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 14:08:37 -0500, Nick Danger wrote: On 2/2/2017 9:13 PM, Jim Mueller wrote: While tube electronics may survive a nuclear war, it is irrelevant. There won't be any electricity to run them. The power plants are controlled by computers. Likewise, having your own generator won't help either. Many of the new ones are also semiconductor based, and you won't be able to get gas to run them since the pumps at the gas station are run by electricity which won't be available. Solar cells are also semiconductors and the inverters used with them also use semiconductors. So, if there is a WW3, don't count on ANYTHING electrical working. Seeing as you brought up WW3, for those of you that may not know it, a new president singlehandedly advanced the Doomsday Clock by 30 seconds just last week. Heck of a job! Yes, precisely why I feel WW3 is a lot closer and more likely than before. This has nothing to do with my own political party preferences, or anything else, just the "person" himself (president). However, lets NOT get into a political discussion on here. Seems like everywhere on the internet has turned to politics lately. But I still do not feel safe, with the current state of the world and the current US president. It seemed a lot safer before, even though the world in general seems a lot worse than it was in the last few decades. On 2/3/2017 5:45 PM, Tom Biasi wrote: It's a very complex issue. Your feelings are just that, yours. Sorry, personal, individual "feelings" has NOTHING to do with moving the Doomsday Clock ahead. The whole world might take exception, do ya think? No |
#45
Posted to sci.electronics.repair
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
"I found a company that made an electrochemical equivalent. It was
housed in a glass cylinder, similar to a common 3AG glass fuse. Inside was some chemical solution. When a few volts of DC was applied, electrolytic action caused one end to slowly turn dark, thus indicating the amount of time that the DC was applied. Sorry, but I couldn't find the vendor or an equivalent online. When the required maintenance was performed, the indicator would be replaced as it could not be reset. " They used something similar in time lapse video recorders. When those links or whatever went, you are required to replace the video head. |
#46
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
|
#47
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
|
#48
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 12:10:54 -0500, Michael Black wrote:
However, this is a working radio. I ask myself if I really want to replace all the other (small) caps. [Then I say to myself.... if it works, dont fix it]. YOU ask around about the radio. There's a point where capacitors got better, so the bypass capacitors may not need replacing. With some old radios, it even happened during the production run, so the specific radio early in the run may need the capacitors replaced, while later the capacitors were better and don't need replacing. SOme specific radios may have some problem that is common, so there'll be warnings "change this capacitor right away, or else it may take other things with it". Those may not be that the capacitor is likely to fail, but that if the capacitor fails, it can do damage. What you are saying here is true for almost everything produced. All cars have certain common problems specific to the brand/model. Same for other machinery, and for electronics and even plumbing faucets and so on... I would like to find out what problems are specific to the Hallicrafters SX-99. Where is a good place to look? SOme vintage and/or models of radios suffer because the capacitors inside the IF transformers go bad over time. Asking about the radio will uncover that sort of thing. There were periods when a brand of capacitor came along and got heavy use, only later it's discovered that they don't have long life. It's those that are the issue, not "all capacitors". I'd be interested in which of the old caps were known to have "issues". or to fail. Sure, they are all old (in any tube equipmnent), and they are paper caps, which are no longer made, but I'm sure some brands were better or worse than others. And just because newer caps are made from plastics rather than paper, does not necessarily make them better. Plastics can have issues too. Not to mention that everything made today is made for a short lifespan. Considering that, if most of the old paper caps still work, 50, 60, or 70 years later, they obviuosly were not poorly made or a poor design. I always say, "New does not necessarily mean Better". Today, this is quite apparent in a lot of things. Old cars far outlast the new ones, old homes were built better than new ones, and while many will disagree, I'll take Windows XP, or even Windows 98, (I use both) any day over Windows 8.x or 10. So, often times, new is NOT better and sometimes it's worse. Where I do NOT feel comfortable changing them, are in all RF and IF stages. The reason is that I know that a cap/coil circuit plays a big part in the inductance, which affects the radio alignment. I am not equipped to align the radio coils, and would prefer to leave them alone, as long as the radio is getting good reception. But those low value capacitors are the ones least likely to go bad. Any capacitor can go bad, but generally this is about old types of capacitors. Nobody uses paper capacitors anymore, but those were used for audio coupling and bypass capacitors decades ago, and not only can go bad, but have limitations based on how paper capacitors are made. One thing I've noticed is that all caps seem to be a lot smaller these days. (For the same value and voltage). I'm taking a wild guess, when I figure this is because paper was thicker than the plastic materials used today. But is this really better? Thinner means that high voltages have a shorter distance to arc across, causing a short. And which of these plastics will still be good in 5 years, or 20 or 50 years? Paper caps seem to have passed the test of time. We wont know if these newer materials pass the test of time or not, until we get there. I'm not saying any material is better or worse, because I am only guessing, but it does appear that old technology, made from things like steel, wood, brick and other natural materials, are lasting longer than most plastics. It's like when Chevy started using plastic timing gears in their engines, which soon proved to fail much sooner than the old steel ones. So, are the newer caps really better? I dont know... I can only go with the advice of those in the repair end of the business, and that is all based on time. The manufacturers always claim they have a better product, because they want to make sales, so their words mean nothing. When I finally do get to recapping this radio, I am still clueless what type of modern caps to use. In the old days, they were all paper caps, and it just came down to knowing which manufacturer had a better reputation. But now there are multiple different plastics in use, which makes it a lot harder to know what to use. Small value capacitors (like below .001uF) are much more likely to be ceramic or mica, which generally are okay, at least after a certain point in time. I don't think those are included in the "change all the capacitors" except if the radio is really old, or a specific model has some known problem. Yes, if you change the low value capacitors, you risk upsetting alignment or calibration, and you may inadvertently shift wiring that needs to stay where it is. Any component can go bad. This is about doing most of it all at the same time because once the radio is apart most of the work is done. And some capacitors are way more likely to give trouble. Michael |
#49
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 08:56:42 -0600, Foxs Mercantile
wrote: However, this is a working radio. I ask myself if I really want to replace all the other (small) caps. [Then I say to myself.... if it works, dont fix it]. To quote a good friend of mine, "There are only two kinds of paper dielectric capacitors. Those that are bad, and those that are going to be bad." Everything will fail some time in the future..... It dont matter what it is. But will it be tomorrow, or 100 years from now? So, somtime in the future, every paper cap, as well as every modern cap is going to fail. But at my age, I only have to think 2 or maybe 3 decades at most into the future. After that, it's someone else's problem. |
#50
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 12:13:30 -0500, Michael Black wrote:
And with names like "Black Beauty" and "Orange Drop", who would question at the time that they weren't good products? Michael It could have been PURPLE HAZE! LOL |
#51
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On 2/4/2017 12:13 PM, Michael Black wrote:
And with names like "Black Beauty" and "Orange Drop", who would question at the time that they weren't good products? Michael I know from years of personal experience that "Black Beauties" were *notoriously* bad. However, I always thought the Orange Drops were pretty good. Not so? |
#52
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 14:39:13 -0500, Nick Danger
wrote: On 2/4/2017 12:13 PM, Michael Black wrote: And with names like "Black Beauty" and "Orange Drop", who would question at the time that they weren't good products? Michael I know from years of personal experience that "Black Beauties" were *notoriously* bad. However, I always thought the Orange Drops were pretty good. Not so? Back in the mid 60's into the 70s, I was told the black beauties were one of the better caps made. But after reading a lot of websites about caps, it now appears they have proven to be bad. On the other hand, back then, and still now, it appears that the orange drops were highly rated, as well as being some of the most costly. Except for one poster in this thread, I have never heard anything bad about them. One of the websites I was reading said they are one of the brands to consider for recapping, but went on to say that there are cheaper caps which work just as well. Back then, I used a lot of orange drops as replacements and I never had problems with them. I will say that I did not always like the fact that their wires come out of the bottom, since for non-circuit board applications, they were a little clumbsy to fit into some places, versus the tubular caps with wires on the ends. |
#53
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
|
#54
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
wrote in message ... On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 21:12:30 -0000, "Benderthe.evilrobot" wrote: wrote in message And what are these newer ones made from? I know the mica and ceramic caps are reliable and last almost forever. I've seen loads of ceramic caps fail - but mostly in TV horizontal scan sections where the frequency is over 15kHz and high voltage pulse conditions. This got worse with ever increasing PC monitor resolutions. AFAICR; mica caps were pretty reliable - in most of the places I found them, they were used for precision and a specific tempco. I could see them failing in the HV sections of ol CRT televisions and monitors. Alot of stuff seemed to fail at those high voltages. I've never seen mica in TV or monitor HV sections - and I can't think of any advantage from using them for that. |
#55
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
wrote in message ... On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 22:05:48 -0000, "Benderthe.evilrobot" wrote: True. But the reason to replace them ALL is that if you only replace the one(s) causing a problem, another will fail later, then another still later. It is much easier to do them all at once than to have to repair the same unit over and over as they fail one after another. Been there, done that. So have I. I can totally understand what you are saying. However, I am not so sure about whether I would want to replace all of them in certain parts of a radio or tv. Here are my thoughts on this. Lets take my Hallicrafters SX-99 (which I paid for but dont have yet). That radio is 62 years old. (made in 1955). The seller said it works fine, (and I was sent a video of it working. I did detect a very slight hum. (But the video's audio is not the greatest). The whole thread is based on a bit of a generalisation - you have to apply a bit of common sense. Generally; coupling and decoupling caps close to tubes that run hot are good candidates. Caps that may affect tuned circuits tend to be close to small signal tubes that run much cooler. |
#56
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On 03 Feb 2017 02:13:07 GMT, Jim Mueller wrote:
The old electrolytic capacitors you are talking about don't sound like the oil filled variety. Indeed, if they are electrolytic, they aren't oil filled. Oil filled capacitors aren't polarized and many of them are good today. They were the high quality capacitors used in military and I always thought those were oil filled, but I see I was wrong. I looked on the web too, and it appears that most of them were filled with a boric acid solution, which is not really harmful. They all had the tiny vent hole in the top, and had a large threaded mounting on the bottom, which required a sizable nut. It's been years since I touched one of them. I only remember (vividly) getting sprayed by one of them many years ago. It was boiling hot and it hurt like hell. After that incident, I just replaced them before I even pluggd in anyting that had that type of cap. (Or put a soup can over them temporarily) They were probably the worst caps ever made. Here is a pic I found online. https://antiqueradio.org/art/Midwest18-3621.jpg |
#57
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Fri, 03 Feb 2017 16:26:47 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: Sigh. My collection of test equipment looks more like a museum than a working test bench. I also find myself fixing 40+ years old test equipment as I do fixing radios etc. Looking at the old stuff, all it does is make me feel old and tired. Thats all I have too, and some of it has not been used in years and may likely no longer work. I'm not looking to get heavily into this stuff anymore. My eyes are not that good anymore either. I just want a project or two so I have something useful to do indoors during these long cold midwest winters. In the warm weather I am mostly outdoors working on building stuff and fixing antique machinery. But in winter it's either stare at the lousy programming on tv, waste a lot of time reading (a lot of crap) on the internet, or do something with rewards, which means restoring some ancient electronics. I'll never fit in with the current cellphone/facebook crowd..... --- I overheard a young guy bragging about his new Iphone. I walked up and told him I had something better, AN EARPHONE! |
#58
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On 2/4/2017 12:13 PM, Michael Black wrote: And with names like "Black Beauty" and "Orange Drop", who would question at the time that they weren't good products? Michael On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 14:39:13 -0500, Nick Danger wrote: I know from years of personal experience that "Black Beauties" were *notoriously* bad. However, I always thought the Orange Drops were pretty good. Not so? On 2/4/2017 2:49 PM, wrote: Back in the mid 60's into the 70s, I was told the black beauties were one of the better caps made. But after reading a lot of websites about caps, it now appears they have proven to be bad. I discovered that from experience. BBs were notoriously leaky, both electrically and physically. On the other hand, back then, and still now, it appears that the orange drops were highly rated, as well as being some of the most costly. I never worried about the cost -- I always figured the labor to put in a good one or to put in junk was the same. Except for one poster in this thread, I have never heard anything bad about them. Ditto and thus the reason for my original question. One of the websites I was reading said they are one of the brands to consider for recapping, but went on to say that there are cheaper caps which work just as well. Back then, I used a lot of orange drops as replacements and I never had problems with them. True in my case too. I also used them along with 88 mh toroidal telephone loading coils to make Mark / Space filters for radio teletype decoders --and the orange drops were very stable. (I know, I'm dating myself in this day and age of software/sound card RTTY decoders). :-) |
#59
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On 2/4/2017 4:58 PM, Nick Danger wrote:
True in my case too. I also used them along with 88 mh toroidal telephone loading coils to make Mark / Space filters for radio teletype decoders --and the orange drops were very stable. (I know, I'm dating myself in this day and age of software/sound card RTTY decoders). :-) You and me brother. You and me. ;-) As a side note, I'm still playing with RTTY and using a real machine. A Lorenz Lo-15c. ;-) -- Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi http://www.foxsmercantile.com |
#60
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On 2/4/2017 1:49 PM, wrote:
Back then, I used a lot of orange drops as replacements and I never had problems with them. I will say that I did not always like the fact that their wires come out of the bottom, since for non-circuit board applications, they were a little clumsy to fit into some places, versus the tubular caps with wires on the ends. They are good parts. A bit over priced however. And yes, radial leads instead of axial. Can be an issue when you're replacing axial lead parts. -- Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi http://www.foxsmercantile.com |
#61
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 15:26:31 -0600, oldschool wrote:
On 03 Feb 2017 02:13:07 GMT, Jim Mueller wrote: The old electrolytic capacitors you are talking about don't sound like the oil filled variety. Indeed, if they are electrolytic, they aren't oil filled. Oil filled capacitors aren't polarized and many of them are good today. They were the high quality capacitors used in military and I always thought those were oil filled, but I see I was wrong. I looked on the web too, and it appears that most of them were filled with a boric acid solution, which is not really harmful. They all had the tiny vent hole in the top, and had a large threaded mounting on the bottom, which required a sizable nut. It's been years since I touched one of them. I only remember (vividly) getting sprayed by one of them many years ago. It was boiling hot and it hurt like hell. After that incident, I just replaced them before I even pluggd in anyting that had that type of cap. (Or put a soup can over them temporarily) They were probably the worst caps ever made. Here is a pic I found online. https://antiqueradio.org/art/Midwest18-3621.jpg Progress is incremental. Those capacitors had major advantages over what came before. The "dry" electrolytics that followed them had further advantages. That's how things go. -- Jim Mueller To get my real email address, replace wrongname with dadoheadman. Then replace nospam with fastmail. Lastly, replace com with us. |
#62
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 04:28:09 -0600, oldschool wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 22:05:48 -0000, "Benderthe.evilrobot" wrote: True. But the reason to replace them ALL is that if you only replace the one(s) causing a problem, another will fail later, then another still later. It is much easier to do them all at once than to have to repair the same unit over and over as they fail one after another. Been there, done that. So have I. I can totally understand what you are saying. However, I am not so sure about whether I would want to replace all of them in certain parts of a radio or tv. Here are my thoughts on this. Lets take my Hallicrafters SX-99 (which I paid for but dont have yet). That radio is 62 years old. (made in 1955). The seller said it works fine, (and I was sent a video of it working. I did detect a very slight hum. (But the video's audio is not the greatest). So, as soon as I get it and play around with it, I will replace the electrolytics in the power supply and any other 'lytics (if there are others). Even if there is no hum, I'd replace them, just based on age. However, this is a working radio. I ask myself if I really want to replace all the other (small) caps. [Then I say to myself.... if it works, dont fix it]. But, I know there are caps in specific circuits more likely to fail, than in other circuits. Those would be caps connected to the high plate voltages, especially at the audio output tubes and in the power supply. I also know that if those short out, they can damage other parts, such as tubes, resistors, and more. So, I would likely consider replacing those. I might even consider replacing ALL the caps in the power supply, and all audio stages, and feel safe doing that, since those caps are not real critical as far as affecting the overall performance of the radio, even if the new caps are a little different in their capacitance. Where I do NOT feel comfortable changing them, are in all RF and IF stages. The reason is that I know that a cap/coil circuit plays a big part in the inductance, which affects the radio alignment. I am not equipped to align the radio coils, and would prefer to leave them alone, as long as the radio is getting good reception. I also know that those RF and IF stages do not operate on as high voltages as do the audio output stages. So, once again, I ask myself, "Do I really want to risk throwing this radio out of alignment, when it's working fine, and knowing those caps are not as likely to fail". I answer myself "Probably not".... (As long as the radio is working well, dont screw up a good thing.... Then too, if the caps in those circuits are .05 or .003, I WANT a .05, not a .047. (And it seems that .05 is no longer made). So, if I'm satisfied with the performance of this radio, I will replace the 'lytics regardless. I may also replace all caps AFTER the volume control, as well as all caps in the power supply. But I will likely NOT touch any caps in the RF and IF stages. That's my thinking on all of this right now. Not just for this radio, but anything..... Now, if it were simply an audio amplifier, I'd likely replace all the caps, because audio is not all that critical. I think that there is a misunderstanding here. The statement to replace all the capacitors actually means all the electrolytic and paper capacitors. Usually ceramic and mica capacitors are still good and nobody replaces those unless they are proven to be bad. The paper capacitors in the IF and RF stages need to be replaced even if the radio "works". Leaky capacitors change the voltages on the tubes causing them to work at less than their best performance. Also, these capacitors are used as supply bypasses and AVC filter capacitors. They do not affect the alignment of the set; the ceramic and mica capacitors may. Their value is not particularly critical; pick the closest modern value. Consider the value issue. If the radio has a .05 uF, 20% capacitor in it, its actual value can be anywhere from 0.04 uF to 0.06 uF. A modern 0.047 uF 10% capacitor can be between .0423 uF and 0.0517 uF. So the 0.047 uF capacitor can be closer to 0.05 uF than the old one marked with that value. As for life expectancy, there was a time in the late '50s and early '60s when both paper and plastic film capacitors were used. The paper capacitors I have from that period are universally bad while the plastic film ones are almost always good. Plastic film has passed the test of time. As for what type of plastic film to use, polyester (AKA Mylar) is the cheapest and has the poorest performance. But it is still better than the paper capacitors of old so it is suitable for use just about anywhere a paper capacitor was formerly used. Polycarbonate (no longer made) and polypropylene are better but more expensive. Polystyrene capacitors are also very good and inexpensive but are usually seen only in small values and are frequently not seen at all. They also have the problem that they melt at lower temperatures than other plastic capacitors and solvents dissolve them. Still, within their limitations, they are excellent. -- Jim Mueller To get my real email address, replace wrongname with dadoheadman. Then replace nospam with fastmail. Lastly, replace com with us. |
#63
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
Wow, this thread has really taken off. It's almost like the old days of
Usenet! -- Jim Mueller To get my real email address, replace wrongname with dadoheadman. Then replace nospam with fastmail. Lastly, replace com with us. |
#64
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On 04 Feb 2017 23:46:23 GMT, Jim Mueller wrote:
On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 15:26:31 -0600, oldschool wrote: On 03 Feb 2017 02:13:07 GMT, Jim Mueller wrote: The old electrolytic capacitors you are talking about don't sound like the oil filled variety. Indeed, if they are electrolytic, they aren't oil filled. Oil filled capacitors aren't polarized and many of them are good today. They were the high quality capacitors used in military and I always thought those were oil filled, but I see I was wrong. I looked on the web too, and it appears that most of them were filled with a boric acid solution, which is not really harmful. They all had the tiny vent hole in the top, and had a large threaded mounting on the bottom, which required a sizable nut. It's been years since I touched one of them. I only remember (vividly) getting sprayed by one of them many years ago. It was boiling hot and it hurt like hell. After that incident, I just replaced them before I even pluggd in anyting that had that type of cap. (Or put a soup can over them temporarily) They were probably the worst caps ever made. Here is a pic I found online. https://antiqueradio.org/art/Midwest18-3621.jpg Progress is incremental. Those capacitors had major advantages over what came before. The "dry" electrolytics that followed them had further advantages. That's how things go. I know the dry 'lytics were better, I have to ask what came before these wet ones with the vent hole? I really dont know... One thing I liked about those wet ones was the threaded nut on the bottom. Very easy to install and remove! Those twist tabs on the dry caps in the metal cans tended to break off quite easily, if the cap was being removed to be reused elsewhere, and if one was soldered, it was even harder. (generally one was soldered). |
#65
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 17:05:43 -0600, Foxs Mercantile
wrote: On 2/4/2017 1:49 PM, wrote: Back then, I used a lot of orange drops as replacements and I never had problems with them. I will say that I did not always like the fact that their wires come out of the bottom, since for non-circuit board applications, they were a little clumsy to fit into some places, versus the tubular caps with wires on the ends. They are good parts. A bit over priced however. And yes, radial leads instead of axial. Can be an issue when you're replacing axial lead parts. I wonder why they dont make them both radial and axial? I'd think that it's just a matter of rerouting the wires from the same innards. |
#66
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On 05 Feb 2017 00:21:42 GMT, Jim Mueller wrote:
I think that there is a misunderstanding here. The statement to replace all the capacitors actually means all the electrolytic and paper capacitors. Usually ceramic and mica capacitors are still good and nobody replaces those unless they are proven to be bad. The paper capacitors in the IF and RF stages need to be replaced even if the radio "works". Leaky capacitors change the voltages on the tubes causing them to work at less than their best performance. Also, these capacitors are used as supply bypasses and AVC filter capacitors. They do not affect the alignment of the set; the ceramic and mica capacitors may. Their value is not particularly critical; pick the closest modern value. I hear you..... Consider the value issue. If the radio has a .05 uF, 20% capacitor in it, its actual value can be anywhere from 0.04 uF to 0.06 uF. A modern 0.047 uF 10% capacitor can be between .0423 uF and 0.0517 uF. So the 0.047 uF capacitor can be closer to 0.05 uF than the old one marked with that value. OK. That makes sense... As for life expectancy, there was a time in the late '50s and early '60s when both paper and plastic film capacitors were used. The paper capacitors I have from that period are universally bad while the plastic film ones are almost always good. Plastic film has passed the test of time. As for what type of plastic film to use, polyester (AKA Mylar) is the cheapest and has the poorest performance. But it is still better than the paper capacitors of old so it is suitable for use just about anywhere a paper capacitor was formerly used. Polycarbonate (no longer made) and polypropylene are better but more expensive. Polystyrene capacitors are also very good and inexpensive but are usually seen only in small values I see where this can get confusing. I'll consider the polyester (AKA Mylar), but for the small cost difference, I'd probably prefer the best. It looks like polypropylene would be that choice. Do you have any brand names to recommend for these types? (I will be buying online, there are no electronics stores around here). and are frequently not seen at all. They also have the problem that they melt at lower temperatures than other plastic capacitors and solvents dissolve them. Still, within their limitations, they are excellent. Dont you mean they melt at a *HIGHER* temperature? I cant imagine how something could melt at a low temp? Upon reading a URL that somone posted on here, I see where the audiophliles say that some caps have better sound quality, than others. On a SW radio, I'm not really looking for "precision sound", but more so for best performance from the signal coming from the antenna to the speaker. And while some (or most) of these newer types of caps are made to be used with modern gear, containing semiconductors, which are the best choice for old tube stuff. I would think that the caps should mimic the old paper caps, because that is what these circuits were designed to use. I know the values of caps are the capcitance (in MF or MMF) and the voltage. But I know there are other factors that I know nothing about. Someone mentioned tempco (is that what I read?) in another message in this thread. What the heck is that? Either way, I do believe the caps should be similar to the original ones to work properly. Just made from better materials. -- Jim Mueller |
#67
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On 05 Feb 2017 00:42:19 GMT, Jim Mueller wrote:
Wow, this thread has really taken off. It's almost like the old days of Usenet! I miss those days. The majority of newsgroups are either dead or filled with morons or off topic political based fighting and name calling these days. There were many worthwhile newsgroups that I used to enjoy, and I wont even go there anymore. I cant understand where everyone went. I know almost everyon has an account with that miserable facebook these days (except me), but I cant say I have ever seen any useful discussions on FB. For the brief time I did connect to FB, what I saw was just a lot of links to websites dealing with world affairs, and lots of rude comments about them. Or pictures of people when they were drunk, with more rude comments.... Not to mention the 20 or more ads on each page. The day when FB becomes the entire internet, is the day I pull the plug. (And actually I cant even use FB if I did want to. My only affordable internet access is still dialup, because that's all there is in this rural area where I live, and bloated websites like FB and most of the news media sites wont even load anymore). |
#68
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
|
#69
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On 2/4/2017 8:49 PM, wrote:
On 05 Feb 2017 00:42:19 GMT, Jim Mueller wrote: Wow, this thread has really taken off. It's almost like the old days of Usenet! I miss those days. The majority of newsgroups are either dead or filled with morons or off topic political based fighting and name calling these days. There were many worthwhile newsgroups that I used to enjoy, and I wont even go there anymore. Hard to believe r.a.r+p dates back to September 1994. I was one of the founding members under my email address at the time, http://fmamradios.com/RESULT-rar+p.txt -- Bill |
#70
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tubeequipment?
On 2/4/2017 4:58 PM, Nick Danger wrote: True in my case too. I also used them along with 88 mh toroidal telephone loading coils to make Mark / Space filters for radio teletype decoders --and the orange drops were very stable. (I know, I'm dating myself in this day and age of software/sound card RTTY decoders). :-) On 2/4/2017 6:03 PM, Foxs Mercantile wrote: You and me brother. You and me. ;-) As a side note, I'm still playing with RTTY and using a real machine. A Lorenz Lo-15c. ;-) Interesting...but I never had what I presume to be a European machine. Started with a Model 15 KSR, then a Model 32 ASR and finally a Model 28 KSR -- with a home brew digital/electronic replacement for the paper tape. Today it's all pixels. |
#71
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
wrote in message ... On 04 Feb 2017 23:46:23 GMT, Jim Mueller wrote: On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 15:26:31 -0600, oldschool wrote: On 03 Feb 2017 02:13:07 GMT, Jim Mueller wrote: The old electrolytic capacitors you are talking about don't sound like the oil filled variety. Indeed, if they are electrolytic, they aren't oil filled. Oil filled capacitors aren't polarized and many of them are good today. They were the high quality capacitors used in military and I always thought those were oil filled, but I see I was wrong. I looked on the web too, and it appears that most of them were filled with a boric acid solution, which is not really harmful. They all had the tiny vent hole in the top, and had a large threaded mounting on the bottom, which required a sizable nut. It's been years since I touched one of them. I only remember (vividly) getting sprayed by one of them many years ago. It was boiling hot and it hurt like hell. After that incident, I just replaced them before I even pluggd in anyting that had that type of cap. (Or put a soup can over them temporarily) They were probably the worst caps ever made. Here is a pic I found online. https://antiqueradio.org/art/Midwest18-3621.jpg Progress is incremental. Those capacitors had major advantages over what came before. The "dry" electrolytics that followed them had further advantages. That's how things go. I know the dry 'lytics were better, I have to ask what came before these wet ones with the vent hole? I really dont know... When I was a kid, I liked taking old radios to bits. A mains reservoir electrolytic I "autopsied" had a centre electrode that was sort of like a curvy column (for maximum surface area) up the middle, the can was the other electrode, it was completely filled with electrolyte. Another old radio had a compartment under the one that housed the chassis, it contained a huge slab flat wound paper capacitor - it must've weighed at least 7lb. |
#72
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
"Jim Mueller" wrote in message eb.com... On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 04:28:09 -0600, oldschool wrote: On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 22:05:48 -0000, "Benderthe.evilrobot" wrote: True. But the reason to replace them ALL is that if you only replace the one(s) causing a problem, another will fail later, then another still later. It is much easier to do them all at once than to have to repair the same unit over and over as they fail one after another. Been there, done that. So have I. I can totally understand what you are saying. However, I am not so sure about whether I would want to replace all of them in certain parts of a radio or tv. Here are my thoughts on this. Lets take my Hallicrafters SX-99 (which I paid for but dont have yet). That radio is 62 years old. (made in 1955). The seller said it works fine, (and I was sent a video of it working. I did detect a very slight hum. (But the video's audio is not the greatest). So, as soon as I get it and play around with it, I will replace the electrolytics in the power supply and any other 'lytics (if there are others). Even if there is no hum, I'd replace them, just based on age. However, this is a working radio. I ask myself if I really want to replace all the other (small) caps. [Then I say to myself.... if it works, dont fix it]. But, I know there are caps in specific circuits more likely to fail, than in other circuits. Those would be caps connected to the high plate voltages, especially at the audio output tubes and in the power supply. I also know that if those short out, they can damage other parts, such as tubes, resistors, and more. So, I would likely consider replacing those. I might even consider replacing ALL the caps in the power supply, and all audio stages, and feel safe doing that, since those caps are not real critical as far as affecting the overall performance of the radio, even if the new caps are a little different in their capacitance. Where I do NOT feel comfortable changing them, are in all RF and IF stages. The reason is that I know that a cap/coil circuit plays a big part in the inductance, which affects the radio alignment. I am not equipped to align the radio coils, and would prefer to leave them alone, as long as the radio is getting good reception. I also know that those RF and IF stages do not operate on as high voltages as do the audio output stages. So, once again, I ask myself, "Do I really want to risk throwing this radio out of alignment, when it's working fine, and knowing those caps are not as likely to fail". I answer myself "Probably not".... (As long as the radio is working well, dont screw up a good thing.... Then too, if the caps in those circuits are .05 or .003, I WANT a .05, not a .047. (And it seems that .05 is no longer made). So, if I'm satisfied with the performance of this radio, I will replace the 'lytics regardless. I may also replace all caps AFTER the volume control, as well as all caps in the power supply. But I will likely NOT touch any caps in the RF and IF stages. That's my thinking on all of this right now. Not just for this radio, but anything..... Now, if it were simply an audio amplifier, I'd likely replace all the caps, because audio is not all that critical. I think that there is a misunderstanding here. The statement to replace all the capacitors actually means all the electrolytic and paper capacitors. Usually ceramic and mica capacitors are still good and nobody replaces those unless they are proven to be bad. That's not far different to what I said - certain types of cap you learn from experience should be regarded as suspect. More reliable types can deteriorate if they're close to the heat from power tubes. Anything that can affect RF/IF tuning shouldn't be disturbed unless you know its faulty. |
#73
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Topic drift, teletype goodies.
On 2/5/2017 9:36 AM, Nick Danger wrote:
Interesting...but I never had what I presume to be a European machine. Started with a Model 15 KSR, then a Model 32 ASR and finally a Model 28 KSR -- with a home brew digital/electronic replacement for the paper tape. Today it's all pixels. Lorenz Lo-15c http://old.fernschreibamt-hausneindorf.de/assets/images/Arbeitsplart_Lo15c.jpg I started with a Teletype Model 15 in 1972, then a Model 19 in 1974. Then got my grubby little hooks into a Model 32. I acquired the Lorenz in 2007. It used to be in the German Consulate in Los Angeles. For the terminal units, I started with a used homebrew with the classic 88 mH toroids. Then graduated to the HAL ST-6000, then the ST-8000 and currently the ST-8000A. I'm waiting for the last of the PK-232 boxes to finally die. Because 200 Hz shift is NOT equal to 170 Hz shift. Regardless of what their manual says. -- Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi http://www.foxsmercantile.com |
#74
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Topic drift, teletype goodies.
On 2/5/2017 9:36 AM, Nick Danger wrote: Interesting...but I never had what I presume to be a European machine. Started with a Model 15 KSR, then a Model 32 ASR and finally a Model 28 KSR -- with a home brew digital/electronic replacement for the paper tape. Today it's all pixels. On 2/5/2017 2:31 PM, Foxs Mercantile wrote: Lorenz Lo-15c http://old.fernschreibamt-hausneindorf.de/assets/images/Arbeitsplart_Lo15c.jpg quite impressive! I started with a Teletype Model 15 in 1972, then a Model 19 in 1974. Then got my grubby little hooks into a Model 32. I acquired the Lorenz in 2007. It used to be in the German Consulate in Los Angeles. For the terminal units, I started with a used homebrew with the classic 88 mH toroids. Then graduated to the HAL ST-6000, then the ST-8000 and currently the ST-8000A. Wow! Big bucks. HAL made nice equipment -- that I couldn't afford. I had a W6FFC (Irv Hoff?) ST-6 TU kit, a 3" home brew solid state scope from 73 magazine for a tuning indicator and a W6FFC AFSK unit (for 2 meter RTTY) all built into a Drake 4-line cabinet to match my Drake 4B line, Heathkit scope bezel, CRT, mu metal shield and Heath knobs. Was a avionics guy in the Air National Guard at the time and was able to use the Airframe sheet metal shop to create the chassis and front panel. I'm waiting for the last of the PK-232 boxes to finally die. Because 200 Hz shift is NOT equal to 170 Hz shift. Regardless of what their manual says. A PK-232 you say? I used a KAM+ that allowed you to very easily change speeds (and maybe shifts) on the fly on RTTY. As a matter of fact, that's how I worked the guy from [Russian] Georgia who was operating in NORTH Korea on rtty. Everybody was calling him using the US 60 wpm speed, but I was able to realize he was using the European speed (forgot what that was), but changed it on the fly, worked him and got the North Korea QSL to prove it. 73 |
#75
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Topic drift, teletype goodies.
|
#76
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Topic drift, teletype goodies.
On 2/5/2017 3:17 PM, Ralph Mowery wrote:
At that time there was about 20 local hams on the 220 FM band. Heh, I hung out on 145.85 MHz on AM AFSK. I still dabble with receiving rtty on the Mod 19 from time to time. That's a pretty big chunk of "e-waste" let me know when you need to "properly" dispose of it. ;-) -- Jeff-1.0 wa6fwi http://www.foxsmercantile.com |
#77
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 19:54:04 -0600, Foxs Mercantile
wrote: On 2/4/2017 7:25 PM, wrote: Do you have any brand names to recommend for these types? (I will be buying online, there are no electronics stores around here). I get mine from he http://www.tuberadios.com/capacitors/ Although they did not list the shipping cost, the cost of the caps is quite reasonable, and they do have a fairly good selection. What I am not seeing is any brand name. Who makes them? Are they US made? If the shipping is reasonable, I'd likely order from them based on your referral, but it would be nice to know a little more about them. |
#78
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Sun, 5 Feb 2017 19:14:06 -0000, "Benderthe.evilrobot"
wrote: I know the dry 'lytics were better, I have to ask what came before these wet ones with the vent hole? I really dont know... When I was a kid, I liked taking old radios to bits. A mains reservoir electrolytic I "autopsied" had a centre electrode that was sort of like a curvy column (for maximum surface area) up the middle, the can was the other electrode, it was completely filled with electrolyte. Another old radio had a compartment under the one that housed the chassis, it contained a huge slab flat wound paper capacitor - it must've weighed at least 7lb. That sort of thing I never encountered. That must have been REALLY old! Most of the stuff I worked on, was mid 40s thru 60s. I had a few of those old wooden radios that stood about 40" tall and had a round top. Those were some of the harder ones I tried to work on, and the tubes were unusual. I know those were the ones that had those wet caps with the top vent hole. I also recall that the speaker magnet was an electro-magnet and was also used as a choke for the power supply. Those were some of the oldest things I worked on. |
#79
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 19:49:33 -0600, wrote:
I miss those days. The majority of newsgroups are either dead or filled with morons or off topic political based fighting and name calling these days. There were many worthwhile newsgroups that I used to enjoy, and I wont even go there anymore. The surest sign of success is abuse and pollution. Usenet is obviously successful. I wrote this rant on Usenet "personalities" maybe 20 years ago when observed the same problems you've mentioned: http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/genesis.txt I cant understand where everyone went. Probably Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/VintageRadios/ https://www.reddit.com/r/vintageaudio/ https://www.reddit.com/r/audiorepair/ I know almost everyon has an account with that miserable facebook these days (except me), but I cant say I have ever seen any useful discussions on FB. I have a Facebook account and I'm not afraid to use it. Mostly, I hang round two local groups that deal with the usual neighborhood problems. It works fairly well, and much better than the old bulletin board outside the post office or market. It might work better if I take the time to learn how to navigate the Facebook maze. My only affordable internet access is still dialup, because that's all there is in this rural area where I live, and bloated websites like FB and most of the news media sites wont even load anymore). Check into alternatives to cable and telco internet. There are plenty of WISP's (wireless internet service providers). http://www.wispa.org/Directories/Find-a-WISP Maybe share a wireless backhaul connection with the neighbors. I setup a few such systems using various backhauls (including satellite). They were slow and clumsy, but sufficient as the alternative would have been dialup or no internet. Also, you can really cut down on the traffic by using the mobile URL's instead of the usual URL. Try it: https://m.facebook.com https://m.google.com etc... You may need to install a browser addon that fakes the user agent string, so that the web pile thinks you're using a smartphone. http://www.howtogeek.com/113439/how-to-change-your-browsers-user-agent-without-installing-any-extensions/ For example: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/user-agent-switcher/ There are others. There are also browser tweaks for dialup: http://lifehacker.com/140120/geek-to-live--how-to-survive-a-slow-internet-connection Or, you can switch to a text based browser. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_web_browser However, I'm not sure it will work with Facebook. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#80
Posted to sci.electronics.repair,rec.antiques.radio+phono
|
|||
|
|||
Why should someone replace ALL the capacitors on old Tube equipment?
On Sun, 05 Feb 2017 13:58:00 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote: On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 19:49:33 -0600, wrote: I miss those days. The majority of newsgroups are either dead or filled with morons or off topic political based fighting and name calling these days. There were many worthwhile newsgroups that I used to enjoy, and I wont even go there anymore. The surest sign of success is abuse and pollution. Usenet is obviously successful. I wrote this rant on Usenet "personalities" maybe 20 years ago when observed the same problems you've mentioned: http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/genesis.txt I cant understand where everyone went. Probably Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/VintageRadios/ https://www.reddit.com/r/vintageaudio/ https://www.reddit.com/r/audiorepair/ I'll have to look at those. I personally hate web based forums, but that is mostly bcause on dialup, it takes too long to load the pages. I used to go ro some of those Yahoo Groups, years ago, but even them have been taken over by spam trolls and abuse. I know almost everyon has an account with that miserable facebook these days (except me), but I cant say I have ever seen any useful discussions on FB. I have a Facebook account and I'm not afraid to use it. Mostly, I hang round two local groups that deal with the usual neighborhood problems. It works fairly well, and much better than the old bulletin board outside the post office or market. It might work better if I take the time to learn how to navigate the Facebook maze. Some people seem to like FB. I actually had an account for a very short time. After spending many hours trying to understand how to use it, (and it's not easy), I made a page for a small non-profit event that I run. It took less than one week for idiots to ruin it. Nothing posted to it had anything to do with the topic. It became a place for people to beg for money, call other people names, discuss politics, and post photos of themselves drunk. Since I could only work on it from the library or a local restaurant (using the WIFI), I finally turned the page over to another member of our group and said here is the group and the password, FIX THIS. After a week or so, they said that I had not made it limited enough, and it was beyond fixing. I told them to remove everyone from the "friends list" except the actual members of our organization. But even doing that did not seem to stop the abuse of the site (page). Out of extreme frustration, I deleted the whole thing, and said I would never touch FB again. My only affordable internet access is still dialup, because that's all there is in this rural area where I live, and bloated websites like FB and most of the news media sites wont even load anymore). Check into alternatives to cable and telco internet. There are plenty of WISP's (wireless internet service providers). http://www.wispa.org/Directories/Find-a-WISP Maybe share a wireless backhaul connection with the neighbors. I setup a few such systems using various backhauls (including satellite). They were slow and clumsy, but sufficient as the alternative would have been dialup or no internet. Also, you can really cut down on the traffic by using the mobile URL's instead of the usual URL. Try it: https://m.facebook.com https://m.google.com etc... You may need to install a browser addon that fakes the user agent string, so that the web pile thinks you're using a smartphone. http://www.howtogeek.com/113439/how-to-change-your-browsers-user-agent-without-installing-any-extensions/ For example: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/user-agent-switcher/ There are others. There are also browser tweaks for dialup: http://lifehacker.com/140120/geek-to-live--how-to-survive-a-slow-internet-connection Or, you can switch to a text based browser. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text-based_web_browser However, I'm not sure it will work with Facebook. I am a lot more limited than you could imagine. My nearest neighbor is over a mile away. The nearest small town is 5 miles, the nearest large city is 55 miles. I can not get a reliable cell phone signal here. To make a call, I have to either drive up the hill, or (in warm weather), I may go up on the roof. Because of that, I MUST keep a landline (which also takes care of my dialup needs). There is no cable. The only way might be a satellite dish. And that would cost me at least $100 per month. I dont want the tv part of it. I dont watch much tv and I only watch ME-TV (oldies). My antenna on the 35 foot tower I made from pipe, works pretty well for tv, but only gets stations from one direction, since there's a hill on my other side. I am going to check on some of these text based browsers and stuff like that though. At one time, I used a browser called "Off By One", which only displayed text and pics. But it will not work on any websites using HTTPS (secured), and many of them are using that now, even wikipedia. Thanks |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Video: Replace your car battery with capacitors! 12V BoostPack Update | Home Repair | |||
Buy or Sell your Used Construction Equipment; ie. excavators, backhoes, dozers, graders, cranes, compactors, dump trucks, heavy trucks, forestry equipment, farming equipment, mining equipment and much more.... | Home Repair | |||
Replace the tube or chuck it? | Electronics Repair | |||
Replace old fluorescent tube with brighter? | UK diy | |||
Replace PC Motherboard Capacitor:Low Impedance or ESR Capacitors? | Electronics Repair |