Feral Industries A-422 TBC bad output?
5 Attachment(s)
Recently picked up a Feral A-422 Model Frame TBC / Proc Amp. Wondering if anyone has any experience with this particular unit and can tell me if there is something wrong setting wise or if it's shot.
It seems to have lots of white/bad pixels when ever the system is engaged. I have tried adjusting all the settings and nothing seems to change the image. I have attached a few images to demonstrate what is going on. If the unit is switched off or unplugged, then the video appears normal. This is happening on both Composite and S-Video I took a quick look at the board, and visually nothing looks to be wrong with it, it is super clean. Hoping someone out there might have some ideas. Thanks in advance! |
Post a short clip, I don't know what problems from stills taken from a TV screen.
|
3 Attachment(s)
Quote:
-- merged -- Here is a short clip of the video artifacts / noise I am seeing. When the unit is switched off or in bypass mode it clears up. -- merged -- Update on this unit. Since I couldn't find any sort of service manual or info, I started looking up the different components on the board. I found what seemed to be the Video Signal Decoding and Encoding chips (circled in red on the attached image). On a whim I decided to pull both chips, verify there was no damage, and reseat to make sure there was a solid connection. After doing this, the issues seem to be resolved. I am no longer getting the random pixel noise on the output. I need to do some further testing, but so far it looks promising. Proc amp controls seem to be working, as well as bypass mode. Fingers crossed this is a fully working unit now. Now if I can only find some sort of manual, hopefully someone out there might have one |
Hey Zinkatres!
Question for you, how did you pull and reseat the chips? Do you have pictures? I want to try this with my TBC, because it looks like I might have a similar issue. https://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/vcr...bc-1000-a.html |
Quote:
Fortunately for me, the chips in question on my unit are in PLCC sockets, so they were easy to remove with e PLCC chip puller. I am not very familiar with the TBC-1000 board so I looked up a picture. I don't see the same kind of chips on it, most of yours appear to be soldered on. I also see a large amount of capacitors, which if haven't been changed, are probably more likely to be the cause of your issues from what I read on your post. I would tend to start there if you haven't already |
3 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://a.co/d/1QJcK2O I would also watch a quick tutorial on pulling PLCC chips if you've never done one before, just to be on the safe side. I believe the video encoder chip is the Conexant Bt86 chip. The Phillips chip next to it might also have a hand it the processing, although I can't make out the model to be sure. Unfortunately these are direct soldered and would take a good bit of soldering skill to remove and replace |
I haven't watched the video sample yet but from the new pictures it looks like frame store chip issues, Yes bad connection on the chip pins could trigger data corruption in a form of weird looking pixels or blocks of pixels, Removing the chips from sockets cleans off the contact area, You should have given them a good clean with contact cleaner or alcohol.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
WARNING! :warning:
Both of you are starting to go down a labyrinth rabbit hole, and it can result in fully failed TBCs. Not just malfunctioning, but fully non-functional permanently. You must proceed with caution, or you'll flush $K of gear down the e-toilet. The TBC-1000 model is not a TBC, but multiple variant TBCs under that same umbrella model number. These units are not all interchangeable, not identical, and in some cases not even fully similar. Same for other DataVideo models, especially the TBC-3000. If DataVideo had been smart, it would have been TBC-1000, 1001, etc. Shared model numbers has always been a bad problem in the AV world. Capture cards, VCRs, TBCs. As another example, the AG-1980P has wildly different variations, and should have been 1980, 1981, etc. (Feel free to ask deter about how irritating this fact is, trying to repair AG1980 decks.) I know it was done to save on marketing costs (cheapness from OEMs), but it was heavily misleading to consumers long-term. That said, I need to reply to a few things here... Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Site design, images and content © 2002-2024 The Digital FAQ, www.digitalFAQ.com
Forum Software by vBulletin · Copyright © 2024 Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.