"Sony Color TV Console LV-1901. Introduced in May 10th of 1975 with a price tag of $2,495. The first Betamax VCR ever. Included a 19" Sony Trinitron TV plus an SL-6200 X-1 only Betamax in a beautiful teakwood cabinet. Had a built-in 24-hour timer, a second TV tuner, and a camera input. It is said that this unit started home video. Sales of the LV-1901 suffered for the same reason as sales of the earlier Cartrivision system. The integrated TV meant purchasers either got redundant televisions, or had to dispose of their existing TV. Sony fixed this problem a few months later with the introduction of the stand-alone SL-7200."
Remember in the early 80's my friend and I drawing lots to see who would go in the video store and rent an X-rated movie (he lost). We got the video home and with the rest of my brothers and sisters sleeping, popped in the movie (quietly!), only to find the vertical hold kept rolling because (I learned later) the tape was encoded with Macrovision (copy guard). Then I realized the 17 inch Midland brand color TV we had did NOT have a vertical hold control (ARRRGH!).
Went downstairs and got the old Zenith black and white and hooked it up. Still remember the movie too....
"Sony Color TV Console LV-1901. Introduced in May 10th of 1975 with a price tag of $2,495. The first Betamax VCR ever. Included a 19" Sony Trinitron TV plus an SL-6200 X-1 only Betamax in a beautiful teakwood cabinet. Had a built-in 24-hour timer, a second TV tuner, and a camera input. It is said that this unit started home video. Sales of the LV-1901 suffered for the same reason as sales of the earlier Cartrivision system. The integrated TV meant purchasers either got redundant televisions, or had to dispose of their existing TV. Sony fixed this problem a few months later with the introduction of the stand-alone SL-7200."
$2500 back then is something like $11,000 today! And for standard definition video and only a 19" 4:3 screen?!!! Nope, fuck nostalgia when it comes to that TV.
Just because most of you, have thin TV's, & they look pretty slick doesn't make them great, a lot of today's technology are built so weak & light there kind of shit, dud's within a year or too sometimes a little longer.
More weight to a TV better the sound, picture isn't every think, but you have to pay at least £2500 for excellent sound & a great picture, any think lower in price ain't cutting it, there built cheap especially the parts in-side.
Oh man this picture looks like the Philco portable TV that was in the "playroom." Five kids and only one TV in the house. It was brown or taupe in what for us was a b&w world. Try doing all that today. With a sixth kid on the way. What I remember was our Dad coming home from work on a Friday at 6pm (as usual) and bringing it down to the kitchen and placing it on the counter opposite the feeding trough a/k/a kitchen table a/k/a Dad's auxiliary desk on the weekends (at the head of the table, where else?). It was Nov. 22, 1963. The plane was arriving from Dallas.
I'm looking at this clunky, obsolete thing that cost $2495 in 1975 ($11,130 in today's money), and I want one! I can feel the home video craze all over again. I was 13 in 1975, and if I had seen this unaffordable dream machine, I would have gone mad.
Just because most of you, have thin TV's, & they look pretty slick doesn't make them great, a lot of today's technology are built so weak & light there kind of shit, dud's within a year or too sometimes a little longer.
More weight to a TV better the sound, picture isn't every think, but you have to pay at least £2500 for excellent sound & a great picture, any think lower in price ain't cutting it, there built cheap especially the parts in-side.
Yeah I'm pretty ticked off. My $2000 dollar TV, speakers just went and it's only a couple of years old. And no I didn't blow out the speakers by maxing out the volume. Also I came close to breaking the cheap plastic stand when I had to force it into place. And since we are on that topic, it's about time they put decent speakers in TV's and include a built in browser so you can surf the internet. My other TV came with a dead pixel right out of the box.
I'm looking at this clunky, obsolete thing that cost $2495 in 1975 ($11,130 in today's money), and I want one! I can feel the home video craze all over again. I was 13 in 1975, and if I had seen this unaffordable dream machine, I would have gone mad.
Well, I did go mad! I saw it in a dept. store and stood in front of it, watched it, touched it!!! But there was no way my now divorced parents (I was 16 and living with my mother), was ever going to buy that. It was for rich people, and as the post above said, it didn't sell well.
Still, in 1979/80, I got my first VCR with my own money. It cost me $900, and my mother thought me INSANE!!!!! My father didn't get himself a VCR until the mid-eighties and even then I had to talk him into it.
Just because most of you, have thin TV's, & they look pretty slick doesn't make them great, a lot of today's technology are built so weak & light there kind of shit, dud's within a year or too sometimes a little longer.
More weight to a TV better the sound, picture isn't every think, but you have to pay at least £2500 for excellent sound & a great picture, any think lower in price ain't cutting it, there built cheap especially the parts in-side.
Yeah I'm pretty ticked off. My $2000 dollar TV, speakers just went and it's only a couple of years old. And no I didn't blow out the speakers by maxing out the volume. Also I came close to breaking the cheap plastic stand when I had to force it into place. And since we are on that topic, it's about time they put decent speakers in TV's and include a built in browser so you can surf the internet. My other TV came with a dead pixel right out of the box.
Meanwhile, my 46" plasma Panasonic (now 8 years old), Pioneer A/V receiver (age 7), my first Blu-ray player (age 9) and a Panasonic DVD recorder I got back in 2003 are all working fine.
Some of us are just liked by our electronic things, I guess.
