my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » What was so bad about the Christie AW2?

Author Topic: What was so bad about the Christie AW2? Andrew McCrea Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 645 From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Registered: Nov 2000 posted 01-07-2006 01:56 PM                        Hey everyone. What was so bad about the AW2? Any pictures? A search of the archieves did not bring up much.  |  IP: Logged Gordon McLeod Film God Posts: 9532 From: Toronto Ontario Canada Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-07-2006 02:10 PM                     a better question would be can anyone name anything good about them  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 01-07-2006 04:44 PM                        Yes! The GOOD part is that they are gone and only a few parts are available; making what few still run (?) soon-to-be-gone as well!!! Louis  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-07-2006 10:55 PM                     We ave a customer still running 10 of them. They give little grief but I still dislike them. They are right up there with the Neurotic Platter..... Mark  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-08-2006 12:35 AM                     This sounds like a question for the King of Colusa!  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 01-08-2006 02:02 AM                     Modules, which are now dinosaurs and if available are pricey to get a hold of. That geared platter motor, if the "com" isn't worn out, would love to eat the brushes up real bad. One could go through a set of brushes in a week. Also, that formica deck can be pretty slick and if that module gets a little grumpy, the unit would sling prints without even thinking. Then you get booth clowns who would "round" out the ring pin holes to where the ring wouldn't even be centered, and most AW2 decks that I've seen where somebody drilled new ring pin holes in that particle deck. That screen door closure for the return arm loves to get out of adjustment when it wants to. Then the brain..that's another story in itself. Yet, if "cooed and burped" good enough, AW2's can be decent in themselves. AW3(r) are a blessing for Christie. -Monte  |  IP: Logged Paul Trimboli Master Film Handler Posts: 274 From: Perth Western Australia Registered: Dec 2002 posted 01-08-2006 02:36 AM                     I have worked with AW2s. What Monte said is correct. The do go through brushes, the modules seem to drift out of adjustment so the platter deck may creep when at rest (so you adjust it again and a day latter it is creeping again), those gear motors are noisy, very unforgiving if a print is not perfectly centered. They do work as a platter but you will probably find yourself thinking- Gee I wish I had a better platter!  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 01-08-2006 08:26 AM                     quote: Monte L Fullmer Modules, which are now dinosaurs and if available are pricey to get a hold of. That geared platter motor, if the "com" isn't worn out, would love to eat the brushes up real bad. One could go through a set of brushes in a week. Well, I still don't like them..... but...... If one uses the correct hardness of brush they actually will last for years. I've met several people in the last 10 years that were runnning way too soft of a brush in the motors. This will also cause premature failure of the commutator. The modules are an easy fix! I agree with Mont on the deck issue though.... Because of the number still running out here we stock most parts for them.... some parts are new...some are good used.... always rebuilt motors/modules in stock..... BTW: We do a mod to take the AW2 TO an aw 2.5.... runs alot better and uses AW-3 rollers, p.o. heads. Mark Mark  |  IP: Logged Michael Wilkinson The Entertainment King of Colusa and Beyond Posts: 89 From: Colusa, CA USA Registered: Apr 2004 posted 01-08-2006 03:22 PM                        Wow... Complaints many I see. Yes, I dealt with AW1 & 2's for several years at a theatre I worked at. Yes they were very noisy and on unfortunate rare occassion they would throw the last 30 minutes of a three hour film. But when we kept them tuned, we rarely, if ever, had problems. When I had the opportunity to take over my first theatre, the place was in need of quite a bit of work. To make matters worse-the rather sound transparent booth was equiped with a badly neglected AW2. Since I had experience in dealing with them, I decided to spend the money on other things and just tune up the existing platter. After being open for a few months it was obvious that something still had to be done about the noise issue. There were still many other bills to pay so a new platter (except maybe a used Super) was out of the question. In order to repair the existing platter, I had already taken a couple of trashed AW2's for free so I had many extra parts. Knowing how the Speco's run I decided to see if I could convert my platters to have a quite, low torque, outside ring drive. To make a long story short. What was originally intended as a temporary fix, has now been in operation-completely uneventfully-for almost 10 years. In using lower horsepower direct drive (AW1-2 build up motors are suitable) motors on the outside, I was able to make the AW2 quiet, smooth running, and much more reliable. Apparently the lower current motors must help keep the control modules from burning out as that has not occured. The system worked so well for me that I have prepared two more AW2's in the same manner for screens that I am adding. I guess I could do the 2.5 conversion too but three AW2's will be enough for me. I don't really know if I am giving the stock AW2 a fantastic review other than I think that they are reliable if well maintained. I can certainly think of worse platters. I'll take pictures of King Kong running today and post them tonight.  |  IP: Logged Darryl Spicer Film God Posts: 3250 From: Lexington, KY, USA Registered: Dec 2000 posted 01-08-2006 04:12 PM                    I remember these. Ran them back in the 80's. The biggest issue I had with them before I got to junk them was with the drive ring under the platter breaking rivets off. And yes if one went wacko the film went flying off the deck. I had this happen to me twice and it was in the last 10 mins of the movie. Both westerns Pale Rider and Silverado.  |  IP: Logged Sam D. Chavez Film God Posts: 2153 From: Martinez, CA USA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 01-08-2006 05:05 PM                       I operated a booth in the mid 70's with these platters. While I agree the AW2 was lacking a lot, it had some advantages over the AW3. First, the threading path was easier and all on one side, so on ship out night you could actually cut film coming into one platter and thread the head of the next reel onto another take up platter without dropping the film and thus, get to tear down the first three or four reels while the last of the feature was taking up on another paltter. Try that on an AW3. Also the take up and feed speed adjustments were entirely independent of each other which had some benefit. The gear motors also were intended (like those on early Norelco platters) to make the platter stop and go as directed by the take up and feed valve, ie, no coasting. Early AW3's were very good a flinging a print in the various Drive In's I did relief shifts. Something to do with interference from the snack bar equipment. Altogether a very crude device and the static charge on either a fiberglass or formica platter was truly amazing.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 01-08-2006 07:04 PM                     quote: Sam D. Chavez on ship out night you could actually cut film coming into one platter and thread the head of the next reel onto another take up platter without dropping the film and thus, get to tear down the first three or four reels while the last of the feature was taking up on another platter. Try that on an AW3. Been there, done that. The trick is to take up the first part of the movie on the lowest empty deck and take up the last part of the movie on an upper deck. You don't break the splice until it hits that first roller on the takeup cluster either. Then you must give the platter a really good spin with your right hand while pulling upward at film speed on the takeup cluster assembly. (Note: I do not advocate doing this, as it's almost impossible to do it without laying SOME marks on the print, even if they are minor.)  |  IP: Logged Monte L Fullmer Film God Posts: 8367 From: Nampa, Idaho, USA Registered: Nov 2004 posted 01-08-2006 07:13 PM                     One of the first times that I played with a AW2 was back in the fall of 1977. This was the actual first time that I ever played with any form of a platter transport system when getting used to the Cine 4X 13k reel tower system. I used to experiment with goofy things with the AW2 and the main one that can be prominant is that I put a film together that came in tails out and was in a hurry to get that print on the screen afterwards. Thus I made the print up as if it was going on a reel - with the first reel being the last reel to be wound on the deck. Then, as Sam mentioned with the one sided roller assembly, I took the lead of the film, sent it through the screen door roller, then to the rollers on the tower, over to the upper guidance roller and over to the Cine V-4E machine. I unlocked that motor from the deck and the film played out with no hitch whatsoever on the first run. Also, the fun thing with the AW2 is, that with the geared motor for takeup, it would wind that film on the ring so tight that I could lift that print off of the deck and could actually roll the print down the hallway to the other house, lift that print like a big flywheel onto the deck, over the brain (in which I knew it as the payout assembly back then...who ever heard of it being called "the BRAIN"..) and struggle to get that ring out. This is when I started to repect Christie products. -Monte  |  IP: Logged John Eickhof Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 588 From: Wendell, ID USA Registered: Jan 2000 posted 01-13-2006 10:32 AM                        I used to call the AW-1 & 2 the 'AWFUL WIND'! aside from maintaning hundreds of them on the west coast for years, I also ran 3 at a tri-plex while I was pulling shifts for the IA back in the 70s, those three were actually OK! (UA house even!) I could even get a few Zs in during the shift because the motors were decent! And they didn't howl like a bad power steering pump yet!! The biggest complaint I had was problems with the motor control modules VS line voltage..other than that the small choke on the module had a habit of breaking loos from the silicon glue, then break one or two of the tiny wires and the mod would quit! If I had to have a christie platter today, I would combine the elements of the AW-3 with the real bearings in the center of the AW-2! Instead of bronze bushings! Then there would be a decent platter! And Mark the 555 drivers were christies attempt to break away from the Minarek cards they originally contracted for on the AW-3..Minarek designed all the AW-3 motor controls, even the MUTs!!  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.