NMR Instrument Choice: JEOL or Bruker?
RICHARD A BLATCHLY
I am faced with a decision about which NMR to buy for a teaching environment.
I have some strong ideas, but would like to solicit net.opinion about the
relative strengths and weaknesses (iyho) of these two systems:
1) JEOL 270 MHz, multinuclear, VT, with new Eclipse console (SGI main
computer, MIPS 4000 slave for aquisition, etc.).
Pros: I really like the processing software. They have used object-
oriented programming to build a great windowed environment, with very
flexible and intuitive processing. The hardware looks like very high
quality standard hardware. We were able to achieve quite good resolution
and s/n in the demo. The headquarters is close (Peobody Ma).
Cons: There does not seem to be a super-strong hardware development
effort going on. Some of the repairs would be very expensive (4K for
a probe insert...).
2) Bruker 250 MHz DPX , multinuclear, VT, with SGI computer. This is a new
system at this field strength, and is similar to the console they use at
600 and 750 MHz. It will be introduced at Pittcon. The main features that
I see as relevant are the sophisticated pulse programmer, and the digital
signal processing. The latter uses oversampling and digital filtering to
(according to their literature and a couple of articles in J. Mag. Res)
eliminate spectral folding and increase S/N.
Pros: Very nice, state of the art hardware. Solid, stable performance,
good resolution and s/n.
Cons: I have always (as one who's used Bruker stuff for 15 years) found
their software the most arcane in the industry, with the JEOL light-pen
system close behind. UX-NMR (current operating system) is a big
improvement over DIS-NMR (or DAT-NMR) but it looks like it is still too
easy to get lost looking for the right mode.
If you've gotten this far, you are probably the person I want to answer [:-)].
Remembering that this will be used primarily in a teaching environment, I
am soliciting comments freeform, and on these issues:
Is there any record of JEOL slighting service? I have heard
allegations, but
no current users with problems. (Let's limit this to recent past).
Is this digital technology really worth suffering the software for
mostly
routine stuff?
Will the Bruker software people ever really change, as the saleperson
claims?
The good news for us, and for any other NMR purchaser around, is that the
bang for the buck these days is unbelievable. A year ago, we were looking at
the Bruker AC system for about the same as the DPX. Also, given that we have
no
NMR at Keene State (NH) right now, we feel that we will be winners either way
this goes.
Thanks for your comments, either posted, or by email: rbla...@keene.edu
Rich Blatchly
Keith Warren Rickert
> Cons: I have always (as one who's used Bruker stuff for 15 years) found
> their software the most arcane in the industry, with the JEOL light-pen
> system close behind. UX-NMR (current operating system) is a big
> improvement over DIS-NMR (or DAT-NMR) but it looks like it is still too
> easy to get lost looking for the right mode.
> Will the Bruker software people ever really change, as the saleperson
>claims?
Having used a Bruker AMX for the last 3 years, with UX-NMR, I actually
find that the software is reasonably easy to use. I havent used
the JEOL in question, so I can't compare. But I've had little difficulty
teaching people how to use the UXNMR software, or in using it
after long periods away from it; neither of those is true for
DIS-NMR or the other NMRs I've used.
YMMV of course.
The complaint I have, software wise, is that the rest of the
OS running on the ZMX console is poorly documented and rather
inflexible. Theres something very odd with some of their standard
suite of Unix utilities, which can make it difficult to work with
the moment you start doing something outside of UXNMR
Keith
--
Keith Rickert | "That was only one of the many occasions on which
ric...@cco.caltech.edu | I met my death - an experience I don't hesitate
ke...@imppig.caltech.edu | strongly to recommend" - Baron von Munchchausen
Norbert Haider
>From: rabl...@unix.amherst.edu (RICHARD A BLATCHLY)
>Subject: NMR Instrument Choice: JEOL or Bruker?
>Date: 10 Jan 1994 14:00:06 -0500
>Folks:
>I am faced with a decision about which NMR to buy for a teaching environment.
>I have some strong ideas, but would like to solicit net.opinion about the
>relative strengths and weaknesses (iyho) of these two systems:
>1) JEOL 270 MHz, multinuclear, VT, with new Eclipse console (SGI main
>computer, MIPS 4000 slave for aquisition, etc.).
...............deleted.............
>2) Bruker 250 MHz DPX , multinuclear, VT, with SGI computer. This is a new
...............deleted.............
>Thanks for your comments, either posted, or by email: rbla...@keene.edu
>Rich Blatchly
Rich,
why don't you consider a Varian spectrometer? We purchased a new 300 MHz
instrument last year and the Varian Unity-plus 300 clearly won the match
against the Bruker AMX-300 with respect to price/performace. We like the
industry-standard computer environment (Sun SPARCstations as host computer
and for external data processing) and also the software is rather easy to
use (you have the choice of a Sunview- and an OpenWindows-based version).
The latest release of this VNMR software (4.3) now fully supports the
operation of the host computer via X-Windows. This means, that you can lock,
shim, and run every experiment via Ethernet from your desktop PC or Mac (on
which one of the standard X-Windows packages must be installed). This could
be an aspect in a teaching environment (assuming that the room where the
spectrometer is located might be too small for a bigger audience).
As we have some licenses for Bruker's 1D WinNMR processing package (running
on the PC under MS-Windows 3.1), we now developed a utility program which
converts the Varian data into the Bruker WinNMR format. Thus, our students
can process/print their spectra on PC's and do not need individual accounts
on the UNIX workstations (perhaps another aspect in a teaching environment?).
Our overall impression of the Varian Unity-plus (until now) is quite good,
and also the support from the Varian people (Darmstadt/Germany and Zug/
Switzerland) is good.
Hope this helps,
Norbert
------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Norbert Haider
Institute of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of Vienna
Waehringer Strasse 10, A-1090 Vienna, Austria
tel +43-1-3191349 fax +43-1-3107210
mail a846...@awiuni11.edvz.univie.ac.at
nha...@merian.pch.univie.ac.at
------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD A BLATCHLY
Keep those cards and letters coming in. To date, I have received 10
email replies. I'll try to summarize the results to the net, with our
decision towards the end of the week. This has been very interesting and
helpful to me.
Some clarifications. First, we looked at Varian, but they showed us
a Gemini system (motorola 68000 processor) at the same price as the JEOL
Eclipse (SGI). Bruker originally showed us an AC-300, but have responded to
our evolving needs by showing us an ARX-250 and the DPX-250 described in the
original posting. If Varian had showed us a Unity system in our price
range, we would certainly have considered it; I have two friends who both
purchased multiple Unity spectrometers (one a 600,500; the other a 600, 500,
300).
The bids are due to close tomorrow. I can't wait to get this show on
the road. [currently, we have *no* NMR. Any way we go, we win big.]
Thanks again for your comments!
Rich Blatchly
rbla...@keene.edu