02-10-2015, 11:29 AM
Thanks - I couldn't remember how to spell Piher 
About the beige ones, there are two types:
You have the ones that are the same diameter along their length, so you could be forgiven for assuming that they are carbon-comps. But in the flesh, you can clearly see the spiral cut into the film. I brought an ice-cream tub full of them from a university auction some 20+ years back, and I use them as reasonably sympathetic replacements in transistor radios. I'm not sure who makes them, but I'm pretty convinced that it's not Philips. Any ideas?
(For clarity, I'm talking about the larger ones - e.g. see the pair of 1k resistors by the right-hand switch, next to the "P/U EARTH" print. Quad used them in their amplifiers, for what that's worth. Most of mine are the smaller version, but I do have a few in that size)
The second type look more conventional, with the classic "dog bone" shape. Philips did make resistors that looked a bit like this - without digging them out, I'd have to say that they don't look quite the same as these one. I remember salvaging loads from their tape recorders and radios. This was at a time when most were still using carbon comps.
Other components don't "feel" right to me. The mix of caps, for example. The IFTs. The trimmers. It reminds me a lot of late Hacker rather than Philips. Perhaps, as you suggest, it's late Pye - or perhaps early Philips (using up old stocks of components purchased before acquisition)? The timing is right - 1976 fits in with when Hacker started using the yellow CSA caps. Before then, Hacker went though a phase of almost exclusively using Philips electrolytics (Sovereign III era), and before that it was a goodly mix, including quite a few Japanese types. The earliest sets used the terrible blue "Daly" types, amongst others.
Physically, it doesn't "feel" like Philips either - the layout of the PCBs, the design of the metalwork. Too conventional. But I could be wrong...
Anyway, interesting stuff, but doesn't really help the OP. Could you describe the fault? It looks like reasonably straightforward circuitry, so a schematic might not be necessary...
About the beige ones, there are two types:
You have the ones that are the same diameter along their length, so you could be forgiven for assuming that they are carbon-comps. But in the flesh, you can clearly see the spiral cut into the film. I brought an ice-cream tub full of them from a university auction some 20+ years back, and I use them as reasonably sympathetic replacements in transistor radios. I'm not sure who makes them, but I'm pretty convinced that it's not Philips. Any ideas?
(For clarity, I'm talking about the larger ones - e.g. see the pair of 1k resistors by the right-hand switch, next to the "P/U EARTH" print. Quad used them in their amplifiers, for what that's worth. Most of mine are the smaller version, but I do have a few in that size)
The second type look more conventional, with the classic "dog bone" shape. Philips did make resistors that looked a bit like this - without digging them out, I'd have to say that they don't look quite the same as these one. I remember salvaging loads from their tape recorders and radios. This was at a time when most were still using carbon comps.
Other components don't "feel" right to me. The mix of caps, for example. The IFTs. The trimmers. It reminds me a lot of late Hacker rather than Philips. Perhaps, as you suggest, it's late Pye - or perhaps early Philips (using up old stocks of components purchased before acquisition)? The timing is right - 1976 fits in with when Hacker started using the yellow CSA caps. Before then, Hacker went though a phase of almost exclusively using Philips electrolytics (Sovereign III era), and before that it was a goodly mix, including quite a few Japanese types. The earliest sets used the terrible blue "Daly" types, amongst others.
Physically, it doesn't "feel" like Philips either - the layout of the PCBs, the design of the metalwork. Too conventional. But I could be wrong...
Anyway, interesting stuff, but doesn't really help the OP. Could you describe the fault? It looks like reasonably straightforward circuitry, so a schematic might not be necessary...
