Oscilloscope software for Linux
Circuit Breaker
I have a very simple request.
http://www.google.com/linux?q=oscilloscope brings me plenty of information
for oscilloscope software for Linux. Only two programs I could find:
Only one that will read from my soundcard, which is actually what I need,
and the others are actually more like device drivers for an external
$350 scope *kit*. For that price, I'd rather just hop out to the Radio
Splat and buy a small pen-sized probestick.
The program I found that I can use is X-Oscope. The newer versions of it
won't install (errors - too much crap to get into here) and the older
version that will install (a contributed rpm at that, mind you) is
practically worthless to me as it is slow on my system and sometimes I
have to wait up to 20 seconds for a button press to go through.
Here's what I'm looking for: O-scope software that is easy to install,
that works, that isn't slow on an AMD K6-2/300 (I can live with it if it
will run fast on a P-III 700 but I'd like to be able to use it on my
desktop machine since my laptop isn't always hooked up).
********* XOSCOPE IS NOT AN OPTION **********
I know that would be most peoples' first suggestion even though I've
already stated it won't work for me. It's the one I can't install, and
having spent two hours trying, I'm tired of it and I have other crap that
I need to get done - and I'm already behind.
I just want to know, is there some decent oscope software with a GUI out
there that will read from my soundcard's line input and/or microphone, or
am I stuck to using Konstantin Zeldovich's Winscope.exe in Micros~1?
Many TIA
--
__ ____
/ _| | _ \ Unregistered Linux User #18,000,002
| |__ | _ \
\__/ |___/ Sink the ship to reply by email.
Michael Heiming
> Hello all
> I have a very simple request.
> http://www.google.com/linux?q=oscilloscope brings me plenty of information
> for oscilloscope software for Linux. Only two programs I could find:
A search on freshmeat.net shows 11 projects, perhaps there's
something you could use.
--
Michael Heiming
Remove +SIGNS and www. if you expect an answer, sorry for
inconvenience, but I get tons of SPAM
Bill Unruh
]Hello all
You do not say what you want your oscilliscope software to actually do.
Just display on the screen?
anyway, a program which probably does not do what you want is
fouriersynth (www.theory.physics.ubc.ca/synth.html) While its primary
purpose is creation and analysis of sounds via fourier synthesis, it
does have a sound capture feature as well (or rather signal capture).
However it only does single shot capture, and is not "freerunning" like
a real oscilliscope, nor does it have triggering on the signal
level/slope like a real oscilliscope.
Since xoscilliscope is freeware, you could always rewrite it to do what
you want it to do.
Note that any soundcard based oscilliscope software will be severely
limited in its frequency range/response. Most sound cards only go to 20K
and themost expensive to 50K Hz, which is pittiful as far as
oscilliscopes are concerned. Thus, those special hardware scopes are
necessary if you want higher frequencies. Also with most soundcards
being 16 bit, their dynamic range is not great-- in theory about 90dB,
but with the noise present on most sound cards, more like 70dB which is
a factor of about 3000 in amplitude ( and at low amplitudes it is very
noisy).
Anyway, say what you want when you ask a question like this.
Note that button presses not going through are probably because the
program is busy capturing signals ( and probably badly written in not
paying attention to the button presses).
Nick
> a factor of about 3000 in amplitude ( and at low amplitudes it is very
> noisy).
>
> Anyway, say what you want when you ask a question like this.
>
>
> Note that button presses not going through are probably because the
> program is busy capturing signals ( and probably badly written in not
> paying attention to the button presses).
I wonder if it might be possible to come to more of a happy medium between
system responsiveness and capture frequency by adjusting the nice value of
the scope, possibly reniceing other system processes might help too.
(adjusting x server for ex.)
Geoff
The only one I have found is xoscope and had similar issues of slowness.
I poked around in the code and figured out why, can't remember the
details now but the timing was hardcoded for slow CPUs.
I made a couple of changes and it works nicely for me, though of course
I can't guarantee that it won't strangle your cat...
You can get my hacked version here:
http://home.pacific.net.au/~greendog/xoscope/xoscope.tar.gz
Should just work with
./configure
make
make install
configure will spit out this error, which is not a problem:
sed: can't read ./src/Makefile.in: No such file or directory
If you try it let me know how it goes.
Regards,
Geoff
Circuit Breaker
> Circuit Breaker <bagbo...@shipaol.com> wrote:
>> Hello all
>
>> I have a very simple request.
>
>> http://www.google.com/linux?q=oscilloscope brings me plenty of information
>> for oscilloscope software for Linux. Only two programs I could find:
>
> A search on freshmeat.net shows 11 projects, perhaps there's
> something you could use.
What I'm looking for is a standalone like XOscope... turns out, I recall
trying to get philoscope to install, I forget why it wouldn't - I might
give it another go. I remember CTHugha from my MS-DOS days - "An
oscilloscope on acid", I recall it being a great candidate for parties and
such as a sound-activated display, but not very useful for my purposes
(which is merely to display audio-frequency waveforms with triggering and
other nice O-scope features). The other actual o-scope programs there are
just frontends for stuff like the Radio Snatch ProbeScope... which I
might wind up buying some day, but not now ;-)
But, I want to thank you for this - it has a gkrellm plugin which although
completely useless to me would look pretty cool! ;-D
Thanks,
Circuit Breaker
> Circuit Breaker wrote:
>> [I need an audio-frequency oscilloscope but not xoscope because ]
>> [xoscope is really really slow and basically doesn't work for me.]
> The only one I have found is xoscope and had similar issues of slowness.
Well, in my search, I also found one called "xoskope" from sometime in
2000, but apparently development never got real far. Very nice looking in
the screenshots, though; too bad it wouldn't compile.
> I poked around in the code and figured out why, can't remember the
> details now but the timing was hardcoded for slow CPUs. I made a couple
> of changes and it works nicely for me, though of course I can't
> guarantee that it won't strangle your cat... You can get my hacked
> version here:
> http://home.pacific.net.au/~greendog/xoscope/xoscope.tar.gz Should just
> work with
> ./configure
> make
> make install
>
> configure will spit out this error, which is not a problem: sed: can't
> read ./src/Makefile.in: No such file or directory
>
> If you try it let me know how it goes.
One word: wow. I couldn't even get xoscope to compile on my machine yet
yours went through with no problems whatsoever. Also, it runs a whole lot
better than the rpm'd version I have did... I'm sold enough to put it on
the laptop. I like to keep windows on the laptop for the sole purposes
of gameplay and p2p (haven't found a p2p for Linux that I like yet), so
it's nice that the o-scope software I used can be replaced. Shame xoscope
isn't a more gui-like interface, but maybe after I learn how to program
some gui stuff I might take the time to make a frontend for the program or
perhaps just edit it outright and make it do what I want. I personally
feel that the xoscope layout is a bit too busy, displaying way too much
information onscreen - much of it could be displayed in a side-window or
something... anyway, that's the beauty of open source, that you were able
to make it work better for [y]our machine[s].
I'm getting aorund 11 to 23 fps, as well... wonder what it will be on a
P-III 700...
Thanks, Geoff!
Geoff
Glad it worked :o)
Getting about 400 fps here on an Athlon 2000, which is stupid as it uses
100% cpu. 60 fps would be plenty. Might take another look at it when I
get time...
Geoff
Circuit Breaker
> Glad it worked :o)
> Getting about 400 fps here on an Athlon 2000, which is stupid as it uses
> 100% cpu. 60 fps would be plenty. Might take another look at it when I
> get time...
My laptop is a Pentium-III, speedstepped down to 700 MHz, and it's pulling
about 70 to 90 fps. Running 92 to 95% CPU on mine.
Sweetly fast on the laptop, seems even faster than the windows scope I was
using before. I'll have to compare them sometime.
Each has its beneficial features... I think this is one program I'll be
working with after I develop some skills in the field; I'm taking an
object-oriented programming with C++ class now, but of course that's small
beans to this. Once I get enough confidence, though, I do plan on
redesigning this (or maybe a rewrite from scratch of a much much simpler
scope?)
Oh well, future plans I may never get to - must... set....
priorities....
Thanks again for your version, Geoff.
Geoff
> Geoff wrote:
>
>
>>Glad it worked :o)
>>Getting about 400 fps here on an Athlon 2000, which is stupid as it uses
>>100% cpu. 60 fps would be plenty. Might take another look at it when I
>>get time...
>
>
> My laptop is a Pentium-III, speedstepped down to 700 MHz, and it's pulling
> about 70 to 90 fps. Running 92 to 95% CPU on mine.
>
> Sweetly fast on the laptop, seems even faster than the windows scope I was
> using before. I'll have to compare them sometime.
>
> Each has its beneficial features... I think this is one program I'll be
> working with after I develop some skills in the field; I'm taking an
> object-oriented programming with C++ class now, but of course that's small
> beans to this. Once I get enough confidence, though, I do plan on
> redesigning this (or maybe a rewrite from scratch of a much much simpler
> scope?)
>
> Oh well, future plans I may never get to - must... set....
> priorities....
>
>
> Thanks again for your version, Geoff.
>
Put up a new verson which is speed limited to 85 fps (my refresh rate)
and only uses abou 6% cpu. If you want to change the fps just go into
display.c and change the fps variable to suit. Should make it a command
line option I guess.
http://home.pacific.net.au/~greendog/xoscope/xoscope-1.8.1.tar.gz
Should stop your laptop heating up too much...
Good luck with the C++, haven't got my head around that yet. Need to
learn perl too, hmmm.
Geoff
Bill Unruh
]Circuit Breaker wrote:
]> Geoff wrote:
]>
]>
]>>Glad it worked :o)
]>>Getting about 400 fps here on an Athlon 2000, which is stupid as it uses
]>>100% cpu. 60 fps would be plenty. Might take another look at it when I
]>>get time...
With a 1/10 sec per division, how do you get 400fps?
Or are you running at 1/10000 sec / division?
Geoff
That was running 1 ms/div.
Kevin
Circuit Breaker <bagbo...@shipaol.com> writes:
> ... Once I get enough confidence, though, I do plan on
> redesigning this (or maybe a rewrite from scratch of a much
> much simpler scope?)
If anyone (re)writes an oscilloscope program for Linux, then put
me down for an evaluator. I'm an electrical engineer that
designs ICs for use in o'scopes, and I might just be qualified to
play with o'scope software. ;-)
--
Unless otherwise noted, the statements herein reflect my personal
opinions and not those of any organization with which I may be affiliated.
Bill Unruh
]In article <pan.2004.01.11....@bellsouth.net>,
] Circuit Breaker <bagbo...@shipaol.com> writes:
]> ... Once I get enough confidence, though, I do plan on
]> redesigning this (or maybe a rewrite from scratch of a much
]> much simpler scope?)
]If anyone (re)writes an oscilloscope program for Linux, then put
]me down for an evaluator. I'm an electrical engineer that
]designs ICs for use in o'scopes, and I might just be qualified to
]play with o'scope software. ;-)
The problem is not writing the software. Making an elementary
oscilloscope program is easy. The question is what bells and whistles do
you want on it. Triggers, what kind etc.
Also, a sound card oscilloscope tops out at 50KHz, not exactly state of
the art.
Kevin
un...@string.physics.ubc.ca (Bill Unruh) writes:
> nob...@tex.kom (Kevin) writes:
> The problem is not writing the software. Making an elementary
> oscilloscope program is easy. The question is what bells and
> whistles do you want on it. Triggers, what kind etc.
Absolutely. That, and storage, and math with the waveforms,
maybe including FFTs. Lots can go into this stuff, and some of
it takes a huge amount of CPU/memory power. A typical modern
digital 'scope has more horsepower than many server class
computers.
> Also, a sound card oscilloscope tops out at 50KHz, not exactly
> state of the art.
Certainly not, but quite good for the price.
Cheers....
Terry Blunt
> In article <btvepe$6ve$1...@string.physics.ubc.ca>,
> un...@string.physics.ubc.ca (Bill Unruh) writes:
> > nob...@tex.kom (Kevin) writes: The problem is not writing the software.
> > Making an elementary oscilloscope program is easy. The question is what
> > bells and whistles do you want on it. Triggers, what kind etc.
>
> Absolutely. That, and storage, and math with the waveforms, maybe
> including FFTs. Lots can go into this stuff, and some of it takes a huge
> amount of CPU/memory power. A typical modern digital 'scope has more
> horsepower than many server class computers.
>
> > Also, a sound card oscilloscope tops out at 50KHz, not exactly state of
> > the art.
>
> Certainly not, but quite good for the price.
>
> Cheers....
Hmmm, didn't you used to be able to get prescalers for the old (expensive)
storage scopes? Maybe something like that is still practical.
--
Terry Blunt
The answer is correct... You got the question wrong.