24" Widescreen CRT (FW900) From Ebay arrived,Comments.

[Foe-hammer]

Can frequently switching between multiple resolutions on the FW900 cause it to fail (harder on the monitor)? I've recently "upgraded" from an HDFuryX3 to a Startech DP2VGAHD20 adapter to use with my FW900. Before, with the HDFury adapter, I was limited to just 1920x1200 @ 60 Hz resolution. With the Startech, I'm able to use a number of different higher resolutions and refresh rates. Depending on the game or application, I've frequently been switching between 1920x1200@95, 2304x1440@70, and 2506x1600@60. With the FW900 and CRTs in general, switching between resolutions seems to be akin to turning the monitor on/off repeatedly. Can this potentially reduce the life on the monitor?

Also, a few weeks ago, when playing at 19200x1200@95, all of a sudden I got an odd static-like interference that crept into the image. The image then reset momentarily, and when it came back the picture was abnormally dark and it did not fit the entire screen anymore (I had previously adjusted the image to fill the entire screen perfectly). I then started to smell electrical burn. I immediately turned off and unplugged everything on the monitor and let it sit for a week. I then took off all the FW900 housing and blew the entire monitor out (almost 20 years of dust build-up!). I then replaced the power cable and reverted back to the HDFury adapter and started it up. Everything is fine so far. No image problems or electrical burn smell. So I don't know if it was something that failed on the monitor or the Startech adapter. I wonder if pushing the FW900 at higher resolutions/refresh rates or frequently changing resolutions caused this to happen?

 

[aeliusg]

I had that one time. Did not shut down the monitor or smell any burning but yeah I had to readjust it the raster since it got smaller after the pop. It was with a regular DVI-I analog output from the card so no chance it was an adapter issue. I think it has to do with humidity and temperature because I only ever get problems with the FW900 when it gets cold (which also increases relative humidity), and yes it might be related to the flyback as well as the spark gap (hence the burning, oxidated odor). Even if other components are causing the problem further up the pipe because the high voltage is so high it can cause physical interactions that more readily alert you to issues (aside from the screen popping at you). Who knows, if it's humidity maybe the spark gap is the defective part which would be a simpler fix than coming up with new flybacks and ICs on the D-board. But I don't get problems when the area is hot (and humidity is hence lower also). Never tested high temperature and high humidity and probably would be a bad idea to do so.

 

[Enhanced Interrogator]

Can frequently switching between multiple resolutions on the FW900 cause it to fail (harder on the monitor)?

Not so far on my Lacie

I use Custom Resolution Utility and am constantly using different resolutions depending on what games I'm playing.

Like, I almost make a new resolution for every game I play, basically whatever my GPU can handle on Ultra settings plus the refresh rate I'm trying to lock to. My current list:

 

[Foe-hammer]

I had that one time. Did not shut down the monitor or smell any burning but yeah I had to readjust it the raster since it got smaller after the pop. It was with a regular DVI-I analog output from the card so no chance it was an adapter issue. I think it has to do with humidity and temperature because I only ever get problems with the FW900 when it gets cold (which also increases relative humidity), and yes it might be related to the flyback as well as the spark gap (hence the burning, oxidated odor). Even if other components are causing the problem further up the pipe because the high voltage is so high it can cause physical interactions that more readily alert you to issues (aside from the screen popping at you). Who knows, if it's humidity maybe the spark gap is the defective part which would be a simpler fix than coming up with new flybacks and ICs on the D-board. But I don't get problems when the area is hot (and humidity is hence lower also). Never tested high temperature and high humidity and probably would be a bad idea to do so.

Lots of great info! I live in Utah, so humidity was not a factor but the temperature was kind of high with the heater going in the room and the FW900 putting off a crap ton of heat after being on for 6 hours straight.

The spark gap would seem to be what caused the oxidated odor. When you say the spark gap may be the defective part and would be a simpler fix, what would that all entail to fix? Can cleaning it fix it or would it need to be replaced?

 

[aeliusg]

Lots of great info! I live in Utah, so humidity was not a factor but the temperature was kind of high with the heater going in the room and the FW900 putting off a crap ton of heat after being on for 6 hours straight.

The spark gap would seem to be what caused the oxidated odor. When you say the spark gap may be the defective part and would be a simpler fix, what would that all intel to fix? Can cleaning it fix it or would it need to be replaced?

I was brainstorming on the basis of the observations about temperature and humidity. Maybe if moisture infiltrates the spark gap that would change the breakdown voltage, but if you're in nice and arid Utah with the heater on that oughtn't be the problem. Temperature and thermal and mechanical stress on the components are usually what cause issues. So if you feel like there's an overheating problem there may well be.

Now that doesn't change what actually happens with the flyback problem which seems to be an issue of high voltage exceeding the threshold where the spark gap breaks down. Now if that happens over and over again the spark gap would necessarily fail. Maybe that's what happens in cases where the monitor pops over and over again increasingly until it does go dead. But that leaves the problem upstream where the voltage gets too high, I have no idea where that would be (among all the components that exist) and I haven't seen a proper postmortem on a failed FW900 where you would be able to find out where it went wrong. What we know is that replacing the entire D-board where the flyback sits sometimes fixes it. I haven't heard of someone dropping in a new or functioning flyback on an old board and whether that might be a long-term fix or not. Probably people like Unkle Vito know more but it may remain proprietary information until some time when it's no longer...

I did see someone on reddit talk about buying a replacement flyback for the D32 (not D24) manufactured by a German company (can't remember the name but if you search the FW900 FBT part no. it should come up). That was apparently very expensive as well (hundreds to a thousand dollars from my recollection). I think that user deleted their account later on for whatever reason also without saying whether it worked or not or if they even attempted to replace it. But supposedly the part was the same with a differing length on the anode (for the bigger D32 tube).

Edit: Part was actually for the A32 as ElBartoME states below.

If you haven't noticed already it's hard to get a straight answer on the pressing issue for the FW900 which is that it fails dead because of the flyback and associated components. The flyback itself is unobtainable apart from that D32 replacement I mentioned which is unfortunately also uber expensive even if there are parts on hand still. The D-board has a bunch of components and it's hard to tell which one is bad if it's another and we don't know if the failure takes out the flyback when it does happen or the other way around or if it's isolated.

So that was what I meant in passing by the spark gap being an easy fix if that were the only problem (not that the Sony part for it has ready replacements or that its specifications are known). There's no easy fix for these monitors, and I can understand perfectly why you would shut it down and leave it off for a week on encountering such an issue. If it were the Sunix that would be a good thing. I would go with your gut though, and if you feel like it was overheated or overworked at the time that could be a possibility. Two decades from their manufacture these guy are touchy for sure.

Oddly enough the D24 hasn't had the reputation for failing the same way or at all. You know it's the same tube (without AR film), but D24's don't seem to go bad even with a ton of hours. Now the D24 doesn't go as high and uses different deflection circuitry whereas the D32 supposedly uses the same FBT as the FW900 while having pretty much the same specs as the D24 on the typical versions (excluding A or F models which manage 1080p60 or even 72 hz as I recall). The bigger tube perhaps requires the faster FBT from a smaller screen to draw at the same rate.

So if you used the FW900 at D24 specs, would that help? Who knows. We don't have the numbers on whether the temperature and wear goes up as you increase the operating frequency. I sure don't. Lots of variables and not enough parts and sets to experiment with so eventually more and more monitors are going to drop out. What I do know is that mine was popping and all that when I had it start cold. With the heat up and the monitor toasty that wasn't happening so that's what I went with and it hadn't happened since. Then again I haven't put a lot of hours on it since then. If I run it hot all the time maybe it will end up dying sooner rather than later.

 

[ElBartoME]

I did see someone on reddit talk about buying a replacement flyback for the D32 (not D24) manufactured by a German company (can't remember the name but if you search the FW900 FBT part no. it should come up). That was apparently very expensive as well (hundreds to a thousand dollars from my recollection). I think that user deleted their account later on for whatever reason also without saying whether it worked or not or if they even attempted to replace it. But supposedly the part was the same with a differing length on the anode (for the bigger D32 tube).

I think that was me and it was a flyback from a A32. I still have it here but my original flyback is still working fine so I didn't change it yet to test if it works.

 

[aeliusg]

I think that was me and it was a flyback from a A32. I still have it here but my original flyback is still working fine so I didn't change it yet to test if it works.

Thanks, I'll correct it in case anyone else reads it.

 

[Foe-hammer]

I was brainstorming on the basis of the observations about temperature and humidity. Maybe if moisture infiltrates the spark gap that would change the breakdown voltage, but if you're in nice and arid Utah with the heater on that oughtn't be the problem. Temperature and thermal and mechanical stress on the components are usually what cause issues. So if you feel like there's an overheating problem there may well be.

Now that doesn't change what actually happens with the flyback problem which seems to be an issue of high voltage exceeding the threshold where the spark gap breaks down. Now if that happens over and over again the spark gap would necessarily fail. Maybe that's what happens in cases where the monitor pops over and over again increasingly until it does go dead. But that leaves the problem upstream where the voltage gets too high, I have no idea where that would be (among all the components that exist) and I haven't seen a proper postmortem on a failed FW900 where you would be able to find out where it went wrong. What we know is that replacing the entire D-board where the flyback sits sometimes fixes it. I haven't heard of someone dropping in a new or functioning flyback on an old board and whether that might be a long-term fix or not. Probably people like Unkle Vito know more but it may remain proprietary information until some time when it's no longer...

I did see someone on reddit talk about buying a replacement flyback for the D32 (not D24) manufactured by a German company (can't remember the name but if you search the FW900 FBT part no. it should come up). That was apparently very expensive as well (hundreds to a thousand dollars from my recollection). I think that user deleted their account later on for whatever reason also without saying whether it worked or not or if they even attempted to replace it. But supposedly the part was the same with a differing length on the anode (for the bigger D32 tube).

Edit: Part was actually for the A32 as ElBartoME states below.

If you haven't noticed already it's hard to get a straight answer on the pressing issue for the FW900 which is that it fails dead because of the flyback and associated components. The flyback itself is unobtainable apart from that D32 replacement I mentioned which is unfortunately also uber expensive even if there are parts on hand still. The D-board has a bunch of components and it's hard to tell which one is bad if it's another and we don't know if the failure takes out the flyback when it does happen or the other way around or if it's isolated.

So that was what I meant in passing by the spark gap being an easy fix if that were the only problem (not that the Sony part for it has ready replacements or that its specifications are known). There's no easy fix for these monitors, and I can understand perfectly why you would shut it down and leave it off for a week on encountering such an issue. If it were the Sunix that would be a good thing. I would go with your gut though, and if you feel like it was overheated or overworked at the time that could be a possibility. Two decades from their manufacture these guy are touchy for sure.

Oddly enough the D24 hasn't had the reputation for failing the same way or at all. You know it's the same tube (without AR film), but D24's don't seem to go bad even with a ton of hours. Now the D24 doesn't go as high and uses different deflection circuitry whereas the D32 supposedly uses the same FBT as the FW900 while having pretty much the same specs as the D24 on the typical versions (excluding A or F models which manage 1080p60 or even 72 hz as I recall). The bigger tube perhaps requires the faster FBT from a smaller screen to draw at the same rate.

So if you used the FW900 at D24 specs, would that help? Who knows. We don't have the numbers on whether the temperature and wear goes up as you increase the operating frequency. I sure don't. Lots of variables and not enough parts and sets to experiment with so eventually more and more monitors are going to drop out. What I do know is that mine was popping and all that when I had it start cold. With the heat up and the monitor toasty that wasn't happening so that's what I went with and it hadn't happened since. Then again I haven't put a lot of hours on it since then. If I run it hot all the time maybe it will end up dying sooner rather than later.

So I did a little research on CRT sparkgaps, and if I understand it correctly, a sparkgap is a protective devices intended to breakdown and divert excessive voltage away from the CRT. This is rarely due to a defective sparkgap or gas discharge tube but rather is a safety mechanism like a fuse designed to protect the internal electrodes of the CRT if the focus or screen voltage should become excessive. The sparkgap breaks down first and prevents internal arcing in the CRT.

Arcing at a sparkgap may be accompanied by total loss of picture or bad focus, brightness or focus fluctuations, or any of a number of similar symptoms. A common cause is a breakdown inside the focus divider (usually part of the flyback or tripler) but could also be due to excessive uncontrolled high voltage due to a failure of the B+ regulator or HOT snubber capacitor, or even a short inside the CRT.

So with that all being said, if a break down of the sparkgap is what caused my issue there would not be any permanent damage to my monitor, correct? As I mentioned earlier, after I let it sit for a week, unplugged and took it all apart, and blew everything out, everything seems to be working flawlessly.

 

[Stryker7314]

How hard is it to open and clean with canned air?

Queue yuge amounts of messages about electrocution.

 

[Foe-hammer]

How hard is it to open and clean with canned air?

Queue yuge amounts of messages about electrocution.

Pretty simple. Just 4 screws (2 top and 2 bottom) that screw the back into the bezel, and then the entire shell slides off from the back. There are also a few clamps/claws on the top and sides of where the bezel attaches to the shell that will need to be popped to release the shell from the bezel. From there, you can unscrew some of the tin shielding to get more access to the tube and circuit boards. Canned air will work fine, but you'll probably need at least 4 cans to do the job, lol. I used an air duster blower (https://www.amazon.com/EasyGo-Compucleaner-2-0-Electronic-Compressed/dp/B0787KXTFW?th=1) that did a good job.

Here's a good video on how to take the shell and bezel apart. To clean out the monitor, you don't need to take off the bezel, just the shell:

 

[aeliusg]

So I did a little research on CRT sparkgaps, and if I understand it correctly, a sparkgap is a protective devices intended to breakdown and divert excessive voltage away from the CRT. This is rarely due to a defective sparkgap or gas discharge tube but rather is a safety mechanism like a fuse designed to protect the internal electrodes of the CRT if the focus or screen voltage should become excessive. The sparkgap breaks down first and prevents internal arcing in the CRT.

Arcing at a sparkgap may be accompanied by total loss of picture or bad focus, brightness or focus fluctuations, or any of a number of similar symptoms. A common cause is a breakdown inside the focus divider (usually part of the flyback or tripler) but could also be due to excessive uncontrolled high voltage due to a failure of the B+ regulator or HOT snubber capacitor, or even a short inside the CRT.

So with that all being said, if a break down of the sparkgap is what caused my issue there would not be any permanent damage to my monitor, correct? As I mentioned earlier, after I let it sit for a week, unplugged and took it all apart, and blew everything out, everything seems to be working flawlessly.

Yeah that's all true. If it happened just once it's fine. The spark gap did its job.

 

[Petrasescu_Lucian]

Thanks, I'll correct it in case anyone else reads it.

I have successfully transferred the NX-4502 FBT and Video Board (A Board) from a virtually unused Dell P1110 to my defective FW900. Even if the FBT is not the exact same model (NX-4504 in the case of FW900) not only did it work but no focus adjustments were even necessary. The only downside is the image was compressed horizontally resembling a 4:3 aspect ratio and I had to strech it again on every resolution. The advantages are fantastic. I have the same focus that I had on my Dell, razor sharp black text on white background, the overall brightness skyrocketed with perfect blacks (maybe due to better G2 handling via the FBT) and the warmup time reduced from about 45min to 20 min max. I even have better colors, they are more vivid and contrasty, but this is probably thanks to the new A Board . The Dell P1110 was in pristine condition to boot. There wasn't even a spec of dust on the boards inside the monitor.
Hope this helps!

 

[Strat_84]

I have successfully transferred the NX-4502 FBT and Video Board (A Board) from a virtually unused Dell P1110 to my defective FW900. Even if the FBT is not the exact same model (NX-4504 in the case of FW900) not only did it work but no focus adjustments were even necessary. The only downside is the image was compressed horizontally resembling a 4:3 aspect ratio and I had to strech it again on every resolution. The advantages are fantastic. I have the same focus that I had on my Dell, razor sharp black text on white background, the overall brightness skyrocketed with perfect blacks (maybe due to better G2 handling via the FBT) and the warmup time reduced from about 45min to 20 min max. I even have better colors, they are more vivid and contrasty, but this is probably thanks to the new A Board . The Dell P1110 was in pristine condition to boot. There wasn't even a spec of dust on the boards inside the monitor.
Hope this helps!

Actually the G2 isn't handled by the FBT, but by some circuitry on the A board.
Your experiment with the FBT is interesting, but it would take an extensive monitoring period before considering it an advisable option. This is still switching a critical, very specific component for another one without any clue on the specification differences, it may work for now but lead to unpredictable problems on the long run.

 

[Enhanced Interrogator]

So what actually causes a FBT to fail? Is there corrosion on the coiled copper wire that eventually burns up and opens the circuit? If you carefully took a FBT apart, could you clean the corrosion to extend its life?

I know I'm probably asking very ignorant questions.

 

[Petrasescu_Lucian]

Actually the G2 isn't handled by the FBT, but by some circuitry on the A board.
Your experiment with the FBT is interesting, but it would take an extensive monitoring period before considering it an advisable option. This is still switching a critical, very specific component for another one without any clue on the specification differences, it may work for now but lead to unpredictable problems on the long run.

It's safe, the FBTs are interchangeable. Besides, you don't have plenty of options if your FW900's FBT is screwed, as the chances of finding an NX-4504 AND, at the same time, virtually unused as is the case of my Dell's FBT are slim to none.
The first thing I tried was to install the FW900's FBT and A Board into the Dell P1110. It worked without issues but all the problems were carried over to the Dell (very poor focus, washed out image and very long warm-up time). The image in this case was, ofcourse, horizontally streched and needed adjustment.
I've been using the FW900 for over a month and everything is rock solid. It's such a beautiful monitor!
If you happen to stumble upon a Dell P1110 I strongly recommend changing the A Board as well. You'll have to swap the white plastic connectors on the A Board as the plug on the FW900's cathode filaments doesn't match the white connector on the A Board of the Dell. You'll have to desolder and resolder but it's pretty easy (see attached pics).
Another thing to recommend is to remove the coating if it's scratched. The improvement in text clarity and color vividness outmatches the increased reflectivity but that is probably a matter of taste. In dark room conditions, the image is superior without the anti-glare coating in my opinion.

 

[aeliusg]

It's safe, the FBTs are interchangeable. Besides, you don't have plenty of options if your FW900's FBT is screwed, as the chances of finding an NX-4504 AND, at the same time, virtually unused as is the case of my Dell's FBT are slim to none.
The first thing I tried was to install the FW900's FBT and A Board into the Dell P1110. It worked without issues but all the problems were carried over to the Dell (very poor focus, washed out image and very long warm-up time). The image in this case was, ofcourse, horizontally streched and needed adjustment.
I've been using the FW900 for over a month and everything is rock solid. It's such a beautiful monitor!
If you happen to stumble upon a Dell P1110 I strongly recommend changing the A Board as well. You'll have to swap the white plastic connectors on the A Board as the plug on the FW900's cathode filaments doesn't match the white connector on the A Board of the Dell. You'll have to desolder and resolder but it's pretty easy (see attached pics).
Another thing to recommend is to remove the coating if it's scratched. The improvement in text clarity and color vividness outmatches the increased reflectivity but that is probably a matter of taste. In dark room conditions, the image is superior without the anti-glare coating in my opinion.

I have successfully transferred the NX-4502 FBT and Video Board (A Board) from a virtually unused Dell P1110 to my defective FW900. Even if the FBT is not the exact same model (NX-4504 in the case of FW900) not only did it work but no focus adjustments were even necessary. The only downside is the image was compressed horizontally resembling a 4:3 aspect ratio and I had to strech it again on every resolution. The advantages are fantastic. I have the same focus that I had on my Dell, razor sharp black text on white background, the overall brightness skyrocketed with perfect blacks (maybe due to better G2 handling via the FBT) and the warmup time reduced from about 45min to 20 min max. I even have better colors, they are more vivid and contrasty, but this is probably thanks to the new A Board . The Dell P1110 was in pristine condition to boot. There wasn't even a spec of dust on the boards inside the monitor.
Hope this helps!

Amazing work. Thanks for trying all that.
For comparison:
P1110 (G1 chassis) T902 X-4560-175-1 TRANSFORMER ASSY, FLYBACK (NX-4502//J1D4) vs. FW900 (G1W chassis) T902 1-453-348-11 TRANSFORMER ASSY, FLYBACK (NX-4504//J1D4)

No specs for either FBT are given, but the structure and surrounding parts seem fairly homologous at a glance. Maybe it's a case of a differing anode cable length again?

The service manuals for the CPD-500 (Sony badged P1110 equivalent) and FW900 are attached. Converted the P1110 manual from djvu but I included the original zip I found if there are any issues.

 

[aeliusg]

Meanwhile here's an F520 FBT which definitely does not seem as compatible and the way all the boards are layed out is completely different. So it may be a case of each chassis generation being semi-interchangeable.
T901 1-453-359-11 TRANSFORMER ASSY, FLYBACK (NX-4702/KM7E)

Attached the service manual also.

 

[Foe-hammer]

Another thing to recommend is to remove the coating if it's scratched. The improvement in text clarity and color vividness outmatches the increased reflectivity but that is probably a matter of taste. In dark room conditions, the image is superior without the anti-glare coating in my opinion.

FYI be careful with voicing that opinion. I don't disagree, but for whatever reason, some here are downright hostile in their opposition against it.

 

[Petrasescu_Lucian]

I believe this "coating vs no coating" thing is blown out of proportion. You get better text clarity and more vivid colors in a dark room. On the other hand the screen gets very reflective BUT the blacks, at least in my case, still look quite accurate even when all the lights in the room are on. To me, this sacrifice is well worth it if the coating is even lightly scratched. There are bigger issues in my opinion with the FW900. For one, there's the pixel density which is lower due to the 0.23-0.27mm grille pitch and softer focus compared to the 0.22mm of the GDM-F520.
I use these monitors on a per game basis. At the moment I play Mass Effect 3 on the F520 but I'll switch again to the FW900 for Andromeda. But everytime I switch to the F520, I'm blown away by how "dense" and micro-detailed the image is. Another aspect where there's no competition is the refresh rates, 121kHz vs 137kHz horizontal.
In all other areas I think the FW900 is a much better monitor; it's bigger, wider, brighter, more colorful even with it's coating on, better blacks, perfect convergence, better geometry and the thing is almost dead silent!

 

[Petrasescu_Lucian]

And no, I don't wanna sell my monitor, and no, it's not worth more than $1000 even if it is perfectly calibrated .
No matter how good you've been taking care of it, there are 20 years old parts in it that are a pain to find and replace, and most of them are already in poor condition. I got lucky with my Dell P1110. I paid 30 Euros for a unit that's been in storage in a 800+ monitors warehouse for over 19 years!

 

[Foe-hammer]

I believe this "coating vs no coating" thing is blown out of proportion. You get better text clarity and more vivid colors in a dark room. On the other hand the screen gets very reflective BUT the blacks, at least in my case, still look quite accurate even when all the lights in the room are on. To me, this sacrifice is well worth it if the coating is even lightly scratched. There are bigger issues in my opinion with the FW900. For one, there's the pixel density which is lower due to the 0.23-0.27mm grille pitch and softer focus compared to the 0.22mm of the GDM-F520.
I use these monitors on a per game basis. At the moment I play Mass Effect 3 on the F520 but I'll switch again to the FW900 for Andromeda. But everytime I switch to the F520, I'm blown away by how "dense" and micro-detailed the image is. Another aspect where there's no competition is the refresh rates, 121kHz vs 137kHz horizontal.
In all other areas I think the FW900 is a much better monitor; it's bigger, wider, brighter, more colorful even with it's coating on, better blacks, perfect convergence, better geometry and the thing is almost dead silent!

I couldn't agree with you more! I voiced the same opinion and got a lot of pushback for whatever reason.

What are your thoughts on cooling the FW900, to prolong its life? I was thinking about adding some exhaust fans to the outside.

 

[Strat_84]

FYI be careful with voicing that opinion. I don't disagree, but for whatever reason, some here are downright hostile in their opposition against it.

And for whatever reason, some are downright hostile supporting the bullshit of a seller that came here undercover, but of course, they're poor innocent things, nothing is their fault.

 

[Petrasescu_Lucian]

I couldn't agree with you more! I voiced the same opinion and got a lot of pushback for whatever reason.

What are your thoughts on cooling the FW900, to prolong its life? I was thinking about adding some exhaust fans to the outside.

Well, mine is only a bit warmer than room temperature. What I've found over the years is CRTs get hotter if your wall voltage is higher than normal. I keep my PC, monitors and audio DAC behind a voltage regulator that gives me 230V at all times.

 

[Stryker7314]

UPDATE: Resolved. Just had to leave it plugged in for a while, I guess something had to charge up, caps? Probably a bad sign though??

Need some help troubleshooting: fw900 was working great before, stored for about 2 years and moved a few times, and here's what I'm getting:

As you can see, when it comes on it looks excellent (video doesn't do it justice.)

I do hear a click along the left side as I'm facing it, which is why I try to move to that side while recording the video to try to capture the sound.

I used an air compressor to blow away the dust and still behaving the same, posted pics to see if anyone notices anything out of the ordinary. Pics are before blowing the dust out. The pics somehow make it look worse than it was, I was impressed with how pristine it was inside actually lol, no cobwebs or caked up dust or anything that looked like it would cause a problem, pretty much just blew away surface dust and all the boards to make sure nothing was on them.

 

[3dfan]

I believe this "coating vs no coating" thing is blown out of proportion. You get better text clarity and more vivid colors in a dark room. On the other hand the screen gets very reflective BUT the blacks, at least in my case, still look quite accurate even when all the lights in the room are on. To me, this sacrifice is well worth it if the coating is even lightly scratched

from my own experience the only thing worth i perceibed when i removed the original coating of my fw900 was increased peak brightness (luminance), but blacks became gray unless the room was completely dark, screen became dust grabber (no antistatic capabilities anymore) and reflections became a bit more notable than with the original coating, definitelly didnt like the results and started to search for a coating replacement, the most aproximate and unexpensive thing i found was a car polarized film, if any of you is interested in reading my whole story about it, search this thread by my user name and words like "polarizer",

i like to use my monitor on variable lighting conditions, i use it with dark room for dark games but on avergare i use it on a moderated natural light enviroment. the car polarizer does a good job allowing me to perciebe blacks as blacks again in a non dark room, however its a bit darker than the original cutting a bit peak luminance, fortunately nothing dramatic and screen still looks nicely brightfull enough.

so from my personal experience, i join myself to those NOT recomending to remove the original coating if it is in good condition, and the user values blacks in non dark room, i believe there is a reason why sony enginers decided to add a coating to the screen, and since its a bit dark, their reason definitelly went further than just add it to only eliminate static and reduce reflections on the screen.
i would love to be able to get the original back again on my screen.

Petrasescu_Lucian, if you want, i would like to ask you if please can take a photo of your screen monitor while its turned off and post here with those light being on, in courious to see it and would give an idea of how blacks would look under those lighting conditions you mentioned.

 

[Petrasescu_Lucian]

from my own experience the only thing worth i perceibed when i removed the original coating of my fw900 was increased peak brightness (luminance), but blacks became gray unless the room was completely dark, screen became dust grabber (no antistatic capabilities anymore) and reflections became a bit more notable than with the original coating, definitelly didnt like the results and started to search for a coating replacement, the most aproximate and unexpensive thing i found was a car polarized film, if any of you is interested in reading my whole story about it, search this thread by my user name and words like "polarizer",

i like to use my monitor on variable lighting conditions, i use it with dark room for dark games but on avergare i use it on a moderated natural light enviroment. the car polarizer does a good job allowing me to perciebe blacks as blacks again in a non dark room, however its a bit darker than the original cutting a bit peak luminance, fortunately nothing dramatic and screen still looks nicely brightfull enough.

so from my personal experience, i join myself to those NOT recomending to remove the original coating if it is in good condition, and the user values blacks in non dark room, i believe there is a reason why sony enginers decided to add a coating to the screen, and since its a bit dark, their reason definitelly went further than just add it to only eliminate static and reduce reflections on the screen.
i would love to be able to get the original back again on my screen.

Petrasescu_Lucian, if you want, i would like to ask you if please can take a photo of your screen monitor while its turned off and post here with those light being on, in courious to see it and would give an idea of how blacks would look under those lighting conditions you mentioned.

To be clear, I would NOT remove the coating if it were in perfect condition. Mine was mildly scratched, I removed it and never been more happy about it. I would not put anything back on again. I already posted pictures. See post 18175. Screen is off and all the lights in the room are on. I uploaded that picture as a worst case scenario. I pointed the camera from below the monitor to see the reflections specifically. Again, in "real life", while standing in front of it, the blacks are really good even if all the lights in the room are on because my head is perpendicular to the screen. It's hard to explain but believe me when I tell you we are making too much of a fuss about this topic. The "low" refresh rates and rather low "pixel density" compared to other 4:3 CRT monitors are aspects FAR more important than this in MY opinion.
Over 90% of CRT TVs had the "grey naked glass" look in the '90s and early 2000s and nobody complained about that

 

[SH1]

...The "low" refresh rates and rather low "pixel density" compared to other 4:3 CRT monitors are aspects FAR more important than this in MY opinion.
Over 90% of CRT TVs had the "grey naked glass" look in the '90s and early 2000s and nobody complained about that

Some of the nicer CRT televisions had a filter. I do think it's interesting if as some say, Sony chose not to apply the filter on the BVM version. In any case, I had to do something myself. Even with very low ambient light, it could not resolve black. And even a light filter such as the original or the Kantek helps address that.

Low density? That 0.23 in the center is the tightest aperture grill in existence for computer CRTs I've heard of, except for the F520. And dimensionally the FW900 is very close to that screen, except with sides the F520 doesn't even have. I don't think it's an issue. Also, last I heard the FW900 is unique among computer CRTs in actually having enough physical stripes to resolve 1920 across, because of its density and size. This is a nice discussion of that Dan's Data letters #88 from back in the day.

As to the earlier, I'm not aware of the FW900 actually being better than the F520 in any way. The opposite, except that the FW900 is close enough in picture quality combined with its more modern shape and an increase in size that can seem quite striking. Isn't it similar in surface area to a modern 24" LCD? In any case, as Maximum PC put it alas so long ago now, "...the classic Trinitron screen vibrancy across a marvelously decadent expanse".

 

[Foe-hammer]

And for whatever reason, some are downright hostile supporting the bullshit of a seller that came here undercover, but of course, they're poor innocent things, nothing is their fault.

And this exactly what I'm talking about. I wasn't supporting any seller and just giving my opinion and experience on having the AR on vs removed. I wasn't combative in the least bit until you oddly jumped my shit over it as if I had just slighted one of your family members. Anyone can go back and read our conversations on here and see how belligerent and obnoxious you were. You add a lot of good information to this page but damn, man, you sure can be an ass.

 

[Strat_84]

And this exactly what I'm talking about. I wasn't supporting any seller and just giving my opinion and experience on having the AR on vs removed. I wasn't combative in the least bit until you oddly jumped my shit over it as if I had just slighted one of your family members. Anyone can go back and read our conversations on here and see how belligerent and obnoxious you were. You add a lot of good information to this page but damn, man, you sure can be an ass.

Indeed, anyone can go back and read. Dick, ass, and all the stuff, that's friendly, no doubt. I even let you the last word when it was obvious you wouldn't add anything relevant to the AR film subject.

That being burried 2 pages away, you're starting provocation again with some filthy insinuations. If you can't behave, and that's another argument you're looking for, go ahead, my next answer will be a report to moderation.

 

[Foe-hammer]

Indeed, anyone can go back and read. Dick, ass, and all the stuff, that's friendly, no doubt. I even let you the last word when it was obvious you wouldn't add anything relevant to the AR film subject.

That being burried 2 pages away, you're starting provocation again with some filthy insinuations. If you can't behave, and that's another argument you're looking for, go ahead, my next answer will be a report to moderation.

Sigh... funny when the bully pretends to be the victim. Please do because you'll only be reporting on yourself and your belligerence needs to stop.

 

[LAGRUNAUER]

Need some help troubleshooting: fw900 was working great before, stored for about 2 years and moved a few times, and here's what I'm getting:



As you can see, when it comes on it looks excellent (video doesn't do it justice.)

I do hear a click along the left side as I'm facing it, which is why I try to move to that side while recording the video to try to capture the sound.

I used an air compressor to blow away the dust and still behaving the same, posted pics to see if anyone notices anything out of the ordinary. Pics are before blowing the dust out. The pics somehow make it look worse than it was, I was impressed with how pristine it was inside actually lol, no cobwebs or caked up dust or anything that looked like it would cause a problem, pretty much just blew away surface dust and all the boards to make sure nothing was on them.

We may be able to fix that issue.... PM me...

Unkle Vito!

 

[Foe-hammer]

To be clear, I would NOT remove the coating if it were in perfect condition. Mine was mildly scratched, I removed it and never been more happy about it. I would not put anything back on again. I already posted pictures. See post 18175. Screen is off and all the lights in the room are on. I uploaded that picture as a worst case scenario. I pointed the camera from below the monitor to see the reflections specifically. Again, in "real life", while standing in front of it, the blacks are really good even if all the lights in the room are on because my head is perpendicular to the screen. It's hard to explain but believe me when I tell you we are making too much of a fuss about this topic. The "low" refresh rates and rather low "pixel density" compared to other 4:3 CRT monitors are aspects FAR more important than this in MY opinion.
Over 90% of CRT TVs had the "grey naked glass" look in the '90s and early 2000s and nobody complained about that

Me too. I would not have removed it either but when moving a few years back a small scratch was put on the film (it was previously in perfect condition). Looking back now, I probably should not have removed the film over such a small scratch but I haven't noticed really any negative results from having it off. My biggest concern is not having the added screen protection and anti-static properties that the film provides.

What are your thoughts on the anti-static benefits of having the film on? I've only noticed slight static buildup on the screen at times when the monitor is on. At other times, there is no static buildup when the monitor is on.

 

[3dfan]

. See post 18175

thanks, thats exactly how i remember mine looked without any film on a non dark room: to my eyes i perseived a grayish screen like that instead of blacks, regardless the position of my head and settings i tried from the monitor osd

 

[mathieulh]

We may be able to fix that issue.... PM me...

Unkle Vito!

That's either a faulty capacitor or a dying flyback (most likely the former), I would do a full recap, starting with the PSU board.

 

[Stryker7314]

That's either a faulty capacitor or a dying flyback (most likely the former), I would do a full recap, starting with the PSU board.

UPDATE: Resolved. Just had to leave it plugged in for a while, I guess something had to charge up, caps? Probably a bad sign though??

Played for hours on it yesterday and hasn't shown any sign of letting up but would be nice to keep it going well with a recap, but also if it's not busted (completely) why fix it... lol

 

[manoleo]

Stryker7314 Mine had exactly the same problem as yours on the video, but leaving it plugged in didn't help. It was fixed in a repair shop and the man said there were broken circuits on the D board which were causing the problem. I still haven't opened the monitor to check what exactly was done. Just letting you know in case the problem comes back. I hope it doesn't though.

 

[Stryker7314]

Stryker7314 Mine had exactly the same problem as yours on the video, but leaving it plugged in didn't help. It was fixed in a repair shop and the man said there were broken circuits on the D board which were causing the problem. I still haven't opened the monitor to check what exactly was done. Just letting you know in case the problem comes back. I hope it doesn't though.

Thank you for the intel, will be helpful going forward. I did hear the shutoff click coming from the D board so it may be the culprit.

 

[donhonk]

I got an FW900 recently! More pics to come soon, but I have an authentic Windows 98 build that I'd like to use WinDAS on. Anyone have a premade cable recommendation for that or can build one? Got $

 

[aeliusg]

I got an FW900 recently! More pics to come soon, but I have an authentic Windows 98 build that I'd like to use WinDAS on. Anyone have a premade cable recommendation for that or can build one? Got $

Nothing premade unless someone can sell you something like what they mention here, but get yourself a reputable TTL adapter with a chip that is known to work properly with Windows 98 with whatever drivers and search the thread for the pinout. It's only three pins you really need. The 5V was to power the OEM cable, but any adapter will probably be powered off your PC.

 

[donhonk]

Nothing premade unless someone can sell you something like what they mention here, but get yourself a reputable TTL adapter with a chip that is known to work properly with Windows 98 with whatever drivers and search the thread for the pinout. It's only three pins you really need. The 5V was to power the OEM cable, but any adapter will probably be powered off your PC.

Thanks aeliusg, sounds like a fun project to build. Appreciate the link.