TDS-1002b Any good? Comments?
Anthony Fremont
hobby usage? Any horrible "features" that didn't make it to the marketing
brochures?
Since all my stuff is ancient and I'm tired of being publicaly embarassed
(;-) I've decided to seriously consider some upgrades. My old Hitachi
V650-F has been great, but it's sadly in need of a calibration and the
controls/switches are a bit flakey at times. After talking with some local
cal shops, I've decided that my $250 could be better spent somewhere else.
I called Tucker about a used HP they had on their site, but alas they were
all sold out. After yacking with Jerry for a couple of minutes he tossed
out the idea of a TDS-1002b. I've looked at the specs and man I feel like
I've been living under a rock. It looks like these things almost make
thinking a thing of the past. I've never even used a DSO before, so I'm a
bit shy about trying something new but they certainly look handy. Any
advice?
Joerg
at a client. TDS220, one of the big TDSes, etc. Long story short I am
not too enthused. The 220 even spits out noise that bothers us so has to
be turned off at times. The bandwidth gets reduced at the lower input
ranges. I've asked them to acquire a used 2465 and that's what I am now
using most of the time. Worked great 20 years ago, still works great ;-)
--
Regards, Joerg
John Larkin
Go for color. It's absolutely worth it. TDS2002 or 2012 are very nice.
My personal scope is a TDS2012 and it does 95% of what I need done.
It's the size of a shoe box, and you can lift it with one finger.
Once you play with a color digital scope for a while, an old analog
scope will feel primitive. The variable persistance, single-shot
capture, cursors, signal averaging, math, FFT spectrum analysis, and
frequency measurement are great. The screen photographs great with a
digital camera, too.
Agilent has a (chinese-rebranded) color scope for $999, I think, and
it looks OK. Anybody got comments?
John
Joerg
AFAIR Spehro had checked out Atten's stuff. A lot of times the innards
are very similar among several brand names except that the Chinese
originals often come with those bonbon colored buttons.
I still prefer analog scopes. For noise and stuff nothing beats them.
Then only downside are the regular requests to turn the lights off which
doesn't exactly make me very popular at clients. But we find stuff where
digital scopes don't stand a chance. The other downside is that you
almost have to resort to EBay to obtain a really good scope because they
don't make them no more.
My favorite here in the lab: Ye olde 7000 series mainframe. It's like
driving a tank. Love it. Documenting stuff is another matter. The
digital camera results don't look too professional and the old Polaroid
method might not be environmentally sensitive enough these days. Plus I
always found that messy.
David L. Jones
That is the Agilent 3000 series, and Rigol are the designer and
manufacturer, you can (usually) get the exact same scope a bit cheaper
from Rigol, and other makers rebadged.
I've got one of the Rigol's and it's pretty good for the price, it can
hold it's own in the entry level DSO market. I like the mask
triggering options and digital filtering. Sadly it cannot dump the
screen to USB memory stick, that must be done on the PC via the
software.
Response time is on par with the other entry level scopes.
Basicaly all the entry level DSO's are the same, Tek, Agilent, Rigol,
Goodwill et.al only a few features and a few $$$ seperate them, the
choice is amazing.
One thing with DSO's is the memory depth, that should be your #1
requirement, you will never regret going for the scope with the
deepest memory.
However, recently there have been a couple of entry level mixed signal
DSO come onto the market like the Rigol 1000 series:
http://www.rigolna.com/products_osc_DS1000_spec.aspx
Also rebadged under "ApLab" and probably others.
I have two mixed signal Agilents (6000 series, 54600 series) and I
will never go back, mixed signal scopes are fantastic, especially if
you are thinking about getting a logic analyser anyway. Certainly
worth shelling out a few $$$ more for.
In 10 years time every DSO on the market will have mixed signal
capability.
Although one can also ague there are plenty of cheap and excellent PC
based logic analysers on the market today, so its not needed in a
scope.
Dave :)
David L. Jones
There is a big divide in "response time" between the low end DSO's and
the proper "analog replacement" high end DSO's, but if that's all you
can afford, you get used to it.
The features available on todays entry levels DSO's are fantastic, and
you won't go back.
Just the simple ability to be able to single shot capture a waveform
you will find invaluable, and wonder how you ever got along without
it.
BUT you will still need a nice analog scope in addition, so it's worth
upgrading there too, plenty on eBay at good prices.
My Tek TDS-210 has been going for almost a decade now, so they can
last that long.
Dave :)
Anthony Fremont
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 13:29:23 -0600, "Anthony Fremont"
> <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> Anybody got one? Do they suck? Will it last thru 10 years of
>> off-and-on hobby usage? Any horrible "features" that didn't make it
>> to the marketing brochures?
>>
>> Since all my stuff is ancient and I'm tired of being publicaly
>> embarassed (;-) I've decided to seriously consider some upgrades.
>> My old Hitachi V650-F has been great, but it's sadly in need of a
>> calibration and the controls/switches are a bit flakey at times.
>> After talking with some local cal shops, I've decided that my $250
>> could be better spent somewhere else.
>>
>> I called Tucker about a used HP they had on their site, but alas
>> they were all sold out. After yacking with Jerry for a couple of
>> minutes he tossed out the idea of a TDS-1002b. I've looked at the
>> specs and man I feel like I've been living under a rock. It looks
>> like these things almost make thinking a thing of the past. I've
>> never even used a DSO before, so I'm a bit shy about trying
>> something new but they certainly look handy. Any advice?
>>
>
> Go for color. It's absolutely worth it. TDS2002 or 2012 are very nice.
> My personal scope is a TDS2012 and it does 95% of what I need done.
> It's the size of a shoe box, and you can lift it with one finger.
Oh man, here we go. ;-) The cheapest color one is $250 more (25%). I know
I'd really like the color better, but I was hoping that the PC interface
might provide that for free. I now see that Tek has a 10 year/lifetime
warranty, so spending the extra cash now wouldn't seem so bad in the long
run. After all it's only another $2/month when taken over time. ;-) I
fall into the "for a few dollars more" trap every time. It's not like I
have money to throw around, but I learned a long time ago that cheap tools
cost you allot more in the long run.
> Once you play with a color digital scope for a while, an old analog
> scope will feel primitive. The variable persistance, single-shot
> capture, cursors, signal averaging, math, FFT spectrum analysis, and
> frequency measurement are great. The screen photographs great with a
> digital camera, too.
That's a pretty good sell. :-) I like the USB interfaces allot. Thanks
for your input, I appreciate it. :-)
> Agilent has a (chinese-rebranded) color scope for $999, I think, and
> it looks OK. Anybody got comments?
Hmm, that sounds interesting if it's good.
David L. Jones
Ok, I just had a look on eBay, and you won't believe what you can get
a new no-name asian DSO for these days:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=130062006419
Seller looks a bit dodgy though.
Anyone know where else you can buy these?
They also go under the "Lilliput" name.
Probably complete garbage, but would be interesting to see what you
get for the price.
Dave :)
John Larkin
Dinasaur! I find that digital scopes are a lot more likely to find
infrequent events, and *save* then for you. Then you set the cursors,
walk down the hall, get your digital camera, and snap the
I-told-you-so masterpiece.
I sometimes use a 7000-series for tricky stuff. The 7A22 plugin
(differential, switchable bandwidth down to 100 Hz, 10 uV/cm) is
magical for low-level stuff. And the 7104 (1 GHz, microchannel plate)
can be handy. But for most stuff, a color DSO is light-years ahead of
some old analog beast.
And I get confused when all the traces are green.
Last week, we saw a bunch of "wideband" noise on a power rail. So we
hit the FFT button, and, lo, we see a big frequency line every 200
KHz, all in the neighborhood of 100 MHz. Try that on an analog scope!
John
Anthony Fremont
> I currently have the "pleasure" to work with similar (but older)
> scopes at a client. TDS220, one of the big TDSes, etc. Long story
> short I am not too enthused. The 220 even spits out noise that
> bothers us so has to be turned off at times. The bandwidth gets
Do you mean like down the probe cable, out the probe tip and into your
circuit, or do you mean accoustical noise?
Anthony Fremont
> Ok, I just had a look on eBay, and you won't believe what you can get
> a new no-name asian DSO for these days:
> http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=130062006419
> Seller looks a bit dodgy though.
That just can't be right. Even the Chinese can't make them that cheap, can
they?
> Anyone know where else you can buy these?
> They also go under the "Lilliput" name.
>
> Probably complete garbage, but would be interesting to see what you
> get for the price.
Somebody bought it, I wonder if they'll admit it? ;-)
David L. Jones
I recon it's Joerg!
I don't know what price the Rigol goes for in the US, but here in Oz
it's AU$995 for the base model 60MHz Mono unit. That's about US$750.
I was about to say that was cheap, but I just checked the TDS1002 and
that can be had for US$750 too!:
http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=tds1002&btnG=Search+Froogle
Dave :)
Jim Yanik
news:12u9anv...@news.supernews.com:
radiated electrical noise,from the switcher supply.
BTW, *NO* TDS series scopes come with component level schematics or parts
lists,and are repaired by module-exchange only,until its dropped from
"long-term product support"(LTPS),then you can't get ANY service except for
calibration.
TEK wants then serviced only at TEK.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
Jim Yanik
news:0489u25nmo2d8n3jf...@4ax.com:
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 20:54:45 GMT, Joerg
><notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>
>>I still prefer analog scopes. For noise and stuff nothing beats them.
>>Then only downside are the regular requests to turn the lights off which
>>doesn't exactly make me very popular at clients. But we find stuff where
>>digital scopes don't stand a chance. The other downside is that you
>>almost have to resort to EBay to obtain a really good scope because they
>>don't make them no more.
>
> I still love my trusty, 20+ year old Tek 2235 dual trace 100MHz CRO.
> The only problem I've ever had with it was bad focus, due to degraded
> carbon comp resistors in the focus chain. Replacing them with modern
> metal film parts brought it back to normal.
>
actually,the 0.5w carbon FILM resistors were the ones failing,and the
real,authentic TEK mod was to replace with carbon COMP parts.
Jim Yanik
better read that TEK warranty CAREFULLY.
Joerg
> Joerg wrote:
>
>
>
>>I currently have the "pleasure" to work with similar (but older)
>>scopes at a client. TDS220, one of the big TDSes, etc. Long story
>>short I am not too enthused. The 220 even spits out noise that
>>bothers us so has to be turned off at times. The bandwidth gets
>
>
> Do you mean like down the probe cable, out the probe tip and into your
> circuit, or do you mean accoustical noise?
>
Nope, it look like EMI from a switcher or something like that in there.
It was pretty loud and messing up some analog circuitry on a breadboard.
The good old Tektronix 2465 did not do that at all.
Anthony Fremont
> radiated electrical noise,from the switcher supply.
>
> BTW, *NO* TDS series scopes come with component level schematics or
> parts lists,and are repaired by module-exchange only,until its
> dropped from "long-term product support"(LTPS),then you can't get ANY
> service except for calibration.
>
> TEK wants then serviced only at TEK.
With a 10 year (minimum) warranty, is that really an issue? Or am I
seriously overestimating the value of the warranty?
David L. Jones
wrote:
It's the LCD screen, the TDS series scopes are famous for this.
Put the probe near the screen and you'll see it.
Dave :)
Anthony Fremont
> "Anthony Fremont" <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote in
>> Oh man, here we go. ;-) The cheapest color one is $250 more (25%).
>> I know I'd really like the color better, but I was hoping that the PC
>> interface might provide that for free. I now see that Tek has a 10
>> year/lifetime warranty, so spending the extra cash now wouldn't seem
>> so bad in the long run. After all it's only another $2/month when
>> taken over time. ;-) I fall into the "for a few dollars more" trap
>> every time. It's not like I have money to throw around, but I
>> learned a long time ago that cheap tools cost you allot more in the
>> long run.
>
>
> better read that TEK warranty CAREFULLY.
Thanks for the reply. I read the whole thing. Unless I missed something,
it reads pretty much like any other. I understand their definition of
"lifetime" and have no problem with that, ten years is fine. Is there
something in specific that you mean?
Joerg
True, for once-in-a-blue moon glitches they really work well. But that's
a rare case here in the lab.
> I sometimes use a 7000-series for tricky stuff. The 7A22 plugin
> (differential, switchable bandwidth down to 100 Hz, 10 uV/cm) is
> magical for low-level stuff. And the 7104 (1 GHz, microchannel plate)
> can be handy. But for most stuff, a color DSO is light-years ahead of
> some old analog beast.
>
> And I get confused when all the traces are green.
>
The 7000 series is usually more blueish than green ;-)
> Last week, we saw a bunch of "wideband" noise on a power rail. So we
> hit the FFT button, and, lo, we see a big frequency line every 200
> KHz, all in the neighborhood of 100 MHz. Try that on an analog scope!
>
T'is what spectrum analyzers are for. I often just use a communications
receiver. It has a 300Hz crystal filter that drops to -60dB at 600Hz or
so and has (so far) fished out just about any polluting carrier. The
only issue with that is that I have now worn down the rotary encoder
bearings and I am not looking forward to this repair. Maybe after a
couple of really good top shelf margaritas but the weather ain't right
for that yet.
I always get a kick out of it when I find a bus contention for the
digital guys that way.
Joerg
Could be. I even had that on an expensive Agilent EMI (!) analyzer.
Couldn't believe it. Anyhow, ye olde analog scope simply does not do
that. There I have peace of mind that it won't mess with my prototypes.
After all, lab equipment is supposed to maintain radio silence since you
can shield a prototype while probing around.
Jim Yanik
I'd read the warranty carefully.It should be on their site.
Besides,by the time the warranty expires,any support will be gone.
LTPS -was- ending 6 years after last catalog appearance for an item.
(and repair prices climb steeply during the last part of that 6 yrs,to
"encourage" you to buy a new scope)
It may have changed;I haven't kept current.
Jim Yanik
news:X_3Fh.2396$BE2...@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:
> Anthony Fremont wrote:
>> Joerg wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I currently have the "pleasure" to work with similar (but older)
>>>scopes at a client. TDS220, one of the big TDSes, etc. Long story
>>>short I am not too enthused. The 220 even spits out noise that
>>>bothers us so has to be turned off at times. The bandwidth gets
>>
>>
>> Do you mean like down the probe cable, out the probe tip and into your
>> circuit, or do you mean accoustical noise?
>>
>
> Nope, it look like EMI from a switcher or something like that in there.
Yes,that scope has a purchased switcher PS.
> It was pretty loud and messing up some analog circuitry on a breadboard.
> The good old Tektronix 2465 did not do that at all.
>
>
"loud" infers an audible noise,"strong" noise would not infer audio.
Joerg
> Joerg <notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote in
> news:X_3Fh.2396$BE2...@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net:
>
>
>>Anthony Fremont wrote:
>>
>>>Joerg wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I currently have the "pleasure" to work with similar (but older)
>>>>scopes at a client. TDS220, one of the big TDSes, etc. Long story
>>>>short I am not too enthused. The 220 even spits out noise that
>>>>bothers us so has to be turned off at times. The bandwidth gets
>>>
>>>
>>>Do you mean like down the probe cable, out the probe tip and into your
>>>circuit, or do you mean accoustical noise?
>>>
>>
>>Nope, it look like EMI from a switcher or something like that in there.
>
>
> Yes,that scope has a purchased switcher PS.
>
Aha...
Well, it got to the point where I just had to turn it off. Of course, a
scope becomes quite useless when in that operational status ;-)
>
>>It was pretty loud and messing up some analog circuitry on a breadboard.
>>The good old Tektronix 2465 did not do that at all.
>>
>>
> "loud" infers an audible noise,"strong" noise would not infer audio.
>
Sorry, that was local slang. Out here, loud is also used for things like
shirts when they are of some extremely bright color.
Anthony Fremont
> "Anthony Fremont" <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote in
> I'd read the warranty carefully.It should be on their site.
> Besides,by the time the warranty expires,any support will be gone.
> LTPS -was- ending 6 years after last catalog appearance for an item.
> (and repair prices climb steeply during the last part of that 6 yrs,to
> "encourage" you to buy a new scope)
> It may have changed;I haven't kept current.
Here is what I found:
http://www.tek.com/service/warranties/warranty-18.html
It's not much longer than many of my posts. ;-) It seems to read lifetime
parts and labor where lifetime is the greater of 10 years mininum or 5 years
after discontinuance of the model. No coverage for abuse, normal wear and
tear of mechanicals, yada yada. Non transferrable (actually is for 3 years
I believ, but rules apply) No unauthorized service allowed. I pay to ship
to them, they ship it back. Seems pretty reasonable considering. Certainly
seems to make it worthwhile to buy new vs. used and to buy from an
authorized dealer.
Anthony Fremont
For a refurb with almost no warranty. :-( Looks like Agilent will give you
color for $1100, but Tek wants about $1270 for theirs. If you want data out
of the Agilent that will be more money too. It appears that the feature set
of the Tek is richer than the 3000 series Agilent, but the Agilent claims 4K
"points" vs. 2.5K on the Tek. Spiffy stuff for sure. :-)
Joerg
Yeah, but the trend to render products "out of support" at a rapidly
increasing clip often gives people second thoughts about buying new. In
fact, one of my client buys about everything used if they can get a
decent price. Mostly EBay. I must say they are rather successful.
David L. Jones
> David L. Jones wrote:
> > On Feb 28, 8:06 am, "Anthony Fremont" <spam-...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >> David L. Jones wrote:
> >>> Ok, I just had a look on eBay, and you won't believe what you can
> >>> get a new no-name asian DSO for these days:
> >>>http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=130062006419
> >>> Seller looks a bit dodgy though.
>
> >> That just can't be right. Even the Chinese can't make them that
> >> cheap, can they?
>
> >>> Anyone know where else you can buy these?
> >>> They also go under the "Lilliput" name.
>
> >>> Probably complete garbage, but would be interesting to see what you
> >>> get for the price.
>
> >> Somebody bought it, I wonder if they'll admit it? ;-)
>
> > I recon it's Joerg!
>
> > I don't know what price the Rigol goes for in the US, but here in Oz
> > it's AU$995 for the base model 60MHz Mono unit. That's about US$750.
> > I was about to say that was cheap, but I just checked the TDS1002 and
> > that can be had for US$750 too!:
> >http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=tds1002&btnG=Search+Froogle
>
> For a refurb with almost no warranty. :-(
Bugger.
> Looks like Agilent will give you
> color for $1100, but Tek wants about $1270 for theirs. If you want data out
> of the Agilent that will be more money too. It appears that the feature set
> of the Tek is richer than the 3000 series Agilent, but the Agilent claims 4K
> "points" vs. 2.5K on the Tek. Spiffy stuff for sure. :-)
The Goodwill GDS series are sold in the US under the Instek brand:
http://www.instek.com/GDS-806S.htm
US$755 RRP
US$659 on Froogle:
http://froogle.google.com/froogle?q=gds-806s&btnG=Search+Froogle&lmode=online&scoring=p
125K sample memory is excellent and blows the Tek away. 320x200
display is not excellent these days, same as my old TDS-210, however
the new Tek1002b is no better with it's 1/4 VGA screen.
USB is optional though, but RS232 and PC software is free.
You can get the 100MHz colour model Instek for a similar price to the
Tek1002b 60MHz mono.
For home use those I wouldn't spend the extra on colour, I'd spend it
on bandwidth instead.
Full Goodwill/Instek range is here:
http://www.goodwill.com.tw/product-e.asp?p1sn=4&p2sn=4
Dave :)
John Devereux
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 20:54:45 GMT, Joerg
> <notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>
>>AFAIR Spehro had checked out Atten's stuff. A lot of times the innards
>>are very similar among several brand names except that the Chinese
>>originals often come with those bonbon colored buttons.
>>
>>I still prefer analog scopes. For noise and stuff nothing beats them.
>>Then only downside are the regular requests to turn the lights off which
>>doesn't exactly make me very popular at clients. But we find stuff where
>>digital scopes don't stand a chance. The other downside is that you
>>almost have to resort to EBay to obtain a really good scope because they
>>don't make them no more.
>>
>>My favorite here in the lab: Ye olde 7000 series mainframe. It's like
>>driving a tank. Love it. Documenting stuff is another matter. The
>>digital camera results don't look too professional and the old Polaroid
>>method might not be environmentally sensitive enough these days. Plus I
>>always found that messy.
>
>
> Dinasaur! I find that digital scopes are a lot more likely to find
> infrequent events, and *save* then for you. Then you set the cursors,
> walk down the hall, get your digital camera, and snap the
> I-told-you-so masterpiece.
What's all this about a camera? You should be able to do a "screen
print" directly to a PNG graphics file.
> I sometimes use a 7000-series for tricky stuff. The 7A22 plugin
> (differential, switchable bandwidth down to 100 Hz, 10 uV/cm) is
> magical for low-level stuff. And the 7104 (1 GHz, microchannel plate)
> can be handy. But for most stuff, a color DSO is light-years ahead of
> some old analog beast.
>
> And I get confused when all the traces are green.
>
> Last week, we saw a bunch of "wideband" noise on a power rail. So we
> hit the FFT button, and, lo, we see a big frequency line every 200
> KHz, all in the neighborhood of 100 MHz. Try that on an analog scope!
>
> John
>
--
John Devereux
Anthony Fremont
Looks like Instek has some new models out now with 1GSa/s to replace the
GDS-800 series. The GDS-2000(all color) series has a USB port in the front
for flash drive and one in the back for printing. Only a 3 year warranty
though, but the price is better than the Tek. It also has a TFT screen
which should look better in bright light if I'm not mistaken. The GDS-2102
is US$1165 ($1295 msrp) for 2-channel/color/100MHz/RS-232/USB
http://www.instek.com/scope.html
http://www.instek.com/GDS-2000.htm
What do you think?
Anthony Fremont
Now I'm checking out the Rigol stuff. Looks like the Rigol 1000 series is
about 5-6" deep like the Tek, but has only 400MSa/second, but does have 1M
(yes that's an M) points. They also claim a TFT display. The Rigol 5000
series is about a foot deep (like the Instek) but has 1GSa/second ability.
They don't specify the display type, so I assume that means that it's not
TFT. Looks to have the typical set of features, maybe a bit richer set than
the Tek? The DS1102C (100MHz/2-channel) is catching my fancy right now at
$999. The logic-analyzer (MSO?) version (DS1102CD) would really be nice,
but for the money, I think the Intronix LogicPort might be a better way to
go for that functionality.
Anyone else used a Rigol? Does anyone know if the 5000 series is newer than
the 1000 series? The biggest downside I see to the Rigol right now is
finding a distributor in the US. I only found these places:
http://www.testsolu.com/html/contact.php
http://www.ntecusa.com/sales/dsp_model.cfm?modelID=20795
Same pricing. Anyone dealt with either of them before?
Looks like it's coming down to the Instek GDS-2102 (100MHz/2-channel) or the
Rigol DS1102C.
Joel Kolstad
news:X_3Fh.2396$BE2...@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
> Nope, it look like EMI from a switcher or something like that in there. It
> was pretty loud and messing up some analog circuitry on a breadboard. The
> good old Tektronix 2465 did not do that at all.
We have some of the current Agilent DC power supplies that are digitally
controlled (wherein you set the regulated voltage/current using an encoder
knob, you can memorize settings, there's a GPIB interface, etc.), and it makes
several highly-visible birdies on a spectrum analyzer. :-( For RF boards I
still use the older HP "all linear" power supplies... which I find nicer to
use in the common case where you don't need to memorize 10 different settings.
---Joel
Joerg
One reason why this client of mine bought those "older" supplies on EBay
as well. They are clean. Monday I almost did the usual, trudging over to
the stationary room to get some C-cells I could solder in series when I
glanced at the lab supply. Ah, it's an old analog one, I don't need to
do the battery spiel here.
John Larkin
It's a lot easier to just snap a pic. Plus, I can add a post-it on the
bezel to document the situation in the same pic. There's nothing worse
than having 10 different pictures and not remembering what they
represent.
John
John Devereux
I suppose this documentation system does then stay compatible with
ye olde aforementioned 7000 series...
--
John Devereux
Steve Sousa
"Anthony Fremont" <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:12ub6g3...@news.supernews.com...
> Anthony Fremont wrote:
>
> Anyone else used a Rigol? Does anyone know if the 5000 series is
> newer than the 1000 series? The biggest downside I see to the Rigol
> right now is finding a distributor in the US. I only found these
> places:
> http://www.testsolu.com/html/contact.php
> http://www.ntecusa.com/sales/dsp_model.cfm?modelID=20795
> Same pricing. Anyone dealt with either of them before?
>
> Looks like it's coming down to the Instek GDS-2102 (100MHz/2-channel)
> or the Rigol DS1102C.
Have you seen the agilent/rigol Vs Tek review on the tek site? it might
be biased but it's worth a look, you'll be surprised.....
Best Regards
Steve Sousa
Joerg
The 7000 series are mighty fine scopes. Some day when I have time and
find an old Polaroid enclosure I might build a digital camera setup that
you could simply hinge onto the screen bezel. Somehow those kinds of
pictures are more lively than the bland computer plots. Just like real
picture in a real movie versus that animated stuff that the kids watch.
John Larkin
The Tek TPS2024 200 MHz digital scope is stunning. All four channels,
and the external trigger, are individually electrically isolated. And
battery power is standard, even more overkill. And it's a beautiful
ergonomic design.
Imagine clipping your probe ground lead onto a bus that's 200 volts
off ground, and looking at millivolt signals relative to that.
John
David L. Jones
> Anthony Fremont wrote:
> > David L. Jones wrote:
> >> On Feb 28, 11:48 am, "Anthony Fremont" <spam-...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> >>> Looks like Agilent will give you
> >>> color for $1100, but Tek wants about $1270 for theirs. If you want
> >>> data out of the Agilent that will be more money too. It appears
> >>> that the feature set of the Tek is richer than the 3000 series
> >>> Agilent, but the Agilent claims 4K "points" vs. 2.5K on the Tek.
> >>> Spiffy stuff for sure. :-)
>
> >> The Goodwill GDS series are sold in the US under the Instek brand:
> >>http://www.instek.com/GDS-806S.htm
> >> US$755 RRP
> >> US$659 on Froogle:
>
> >> 125K sample memory is excellent and blows the Tek away. 320x200
> >> display is not excellent these days, same as my old TDS-210, however
> >> the new Tek1002b is no better with it's 1/4 VGA screen.
> >> USB is optional though, but RS232 and PC software is free.
> >> You can get the 100MHz colour model Instek for a similar price to the
> >> Tek1002b 60MHz mono.
>
> >> For home use those I wouldn't spend the extra on colour, I'd spend it
> >> on bandwidth instead.
>
> >> Full Goodwill/Instek range is here:
> >>http://www.goodwill.com.tw/product-e.asp?p1sn=4&p2sn=4
>
> > Looks like Instek has some new models out now with 1GSa/s to replace
> > the GDS-800 series. The GDS-2000(all color) series has a USB port in
> > the front for flash drive and one in the back for printing. Only a 3
> > year warranty though, but the price is better than the Tek. It also
> > has a TFT screen which should look better in bright light if I'm not
> > mistaken. The GDS-2102 is US$1165 ($1295 msrp) for
> >http://www.instek.com/GDS-2000.htm
>
> > What do you think?
>
> Now I'm checking out the Rigol stuff. Looks like the Rigol 1000 series is
> about 5-6" deep like the Tek, but has only 400MSa/second, but does have 1M
> (yes that's an M) points. They also claim a TFT display. The Rigol 5000
> series is about a foot deep (like the Instek) but has 1GSa/second ability.
> They don't specify the display type, so I assume that means that it's not
> TFT. Looks to have the typical set of features, maybe a bit richer set than
> the Tek? The DS1102C (100MHz/2-channel) is catching my fancy right now at
> $999. The logic-analyzer (MSO?) version (DS1102CD) would really be nice,
> but for the money, I think the Intronix LogicPort might be a better way to
> go for that functionality.
>
> Anyone else used a Rigol? Does anyone know if the 5000 series is newer than
> the 1000 series?
The 1000 mixed signal series is the newer series. The 5000 was their
first offering.
As mentioned in another post I have a Rigol 5102 in the lab, and
whilst I haven't used it much, it is not a bad scope. It has some very
nice features like digital filtering and masking, but you can't dump
the screen to USB key, but I think you can on the newer 1000 series?
> The biggest downside I see to the Rigol right now is
> finding a distributor in the US. I only found these places:http://www.testsolu.com/html/contact.phphttp://www.ntecusa.com/sales/dsp_model.cfm?modelID=20795
> Same pricing. Anyone dealt with either of them before?
>
> Looks like it's coming down to the Instek GDS-2102 (100MHz/2-channel) or the
> Rigol DS1102C.
No contest, the 1M sample memory (512K/channel) of the Rigol wins
hands down. The lower 400MS/s sample rate is still high enough (just).
The Instek beats the Tek with it's 25K memory, but both get crapped on
by the Rigol.
You can do sooooo much more with that extra memory, you won't ever
regret it.
Dave :)
Anthony Fremont
> "Anthony Fremont" <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> Looks like it's coming down to the Instek GDS-2102 (100MHz/2-channel)
>> or the Rigol DS1102C.
>
> Have you seen the agilent/rigol Vs Tek review on the tek site? it
> might be biased but it's worth a look, you'll be surprised.....
Lemme see, a $3000 4 channel Tek compared with a $2000 2 channel Agilent
(that's really a $1000 Rigol in disguise), yep completely "fair and
balanced" on that count. ;-) I didn't notice Tek pointing out how the
Agilent can do almost twice the number of automatic calculations. ;-)
Examining the disclaimers, I'm of the opinion that some of their "facts" may
have been changed in later Agilent/Rigol firmware releases. Granted the Tek
has its advantages too. For example the Tek has an on-screen clock. That's
gotta help John keep his post-it photographs in order. (;-) Seriously, I'm
sure the Tek is a fine scope, it's just too rich for my blood.
Anthony Fremont
Ok, after I did some more looking I figured it out. I didn't figure they
would double the size of the case on a later model.
> As mentioned in another post I have a Rigol 5102 in the lab, and
> whilst I haven't used it much, it is not a bad scope. It has some very
> nice features like digital filtering and masking, but you can't dump
> the screen to USB key, but I think you can on the newer 1000 series?
It is my understanding that yes, you can dump to a memory stick plugged into
the front. There is a port in the back for a printer as well. What scope
do you primarily use?
>> The biggest downside I see to the Rigol right now is
>> finding a distributor in the US. I only found these
>> places:http://www.testsolu.com/html/contact.phphttp://www.ntecusa.com/sales/dsp_model.cfm?modelID=20795
>> Same pricing. Anyone dealt with either of them before?
>>
>> Looks like it's coming down to the Instek GDS-2102
>> (100MHz/2-channel) or the
>> Rigol DS1102C.
>
> No contest, the 1M sample memory (512K/channel) of the Rigol wins
> hands down. The lower 400MS/s sample rate is still high enough (just).
I kinda wish it had a higher sample rate, but most of what I do is so far
removed from the upper bandwidth of the scope that I really don't think it
should be an issue. Since I've never used a DSO before, I don't have much
"feel" for all these numbers and their significance. I'm figuring it out
though. :-) The comparisons on the TEK site are interesting and
informative, even if they might be tilting things just a wee bit.
> The Instek beats the Tek with it's 25K memory, but both get crapped on
> by the Rigol.
> You can do sooooo much more with that extra memory, you won't ever
> regret it.
It might already be spent. ;-) Have you seen the Intronix LogicPort
analyzer, it looks way cool with built in datastream decoding for SPI, I2C,
serial ASCII and "more". 34 channels, should be more than enough for my
needs.
The Rigol DS1102CD (note the 'D' on the end) has a 16 port logic analyzer.
They want $500 for the option though. :-( The Intronix is less expensive
and more functional (excepting that you could set up complex triggers with
the analyzer built into the scope) Or do you think it would be wiser to go
with the integrated analyzer.
http://www.pctestinstruments.com/
There, I'm all set:
DMM: Extech MM-560
Oscilloscope: Rigol DS1102C
Logic Analyzer: Intronix LogicPort
Now all I need is about $1600 to pay for it all. Paypal donations accepted
;-)
David L. Jones
My primary scope is an Agilent MSO6032A (mixed signal 300MHz), with an
older model Agilent 54621D mixed signal scope as the secondary. The
Rigol brings up the rear as a cheapie throw around scope. Had a Tek
3000 series as well, but it was lost in transit.
> >> The biggest downside I see to the Rigol right now is
> >> finding a distributor in the US. I only found these
> >> places:http://www.testsolu.com/html/contact.phphttp://www.ntecusa.com/sales/...
> >> Same pricing. Anyone dealt with either of them before?
>
> >> Looks like it's coming down to the Instek GDS-2102
> >> (100MHz/2-channel) or the
> >> Rigol DS1102C.
>
> > No contest, the 1M sample memory (512K/channel) of the Rigol wins
> > hands down. The lower 400MS/s sample rate is still high enough (just).
>
> I kinda wish it had a higher sample rate, but most of what I do is so far
> removed from the upper bandwidth of the scope that I really don't think it
> should be an issue. Since I've never used a DSO before, I don't have much
> "feel" for all these numbers and their significance. I'm figuring it out
> though. :-) The comparisons on the TEK site are interesting and
> informative, even if they might be tilting things just a wee bit.
Ideally you want the sample rate to be at least 10 times the
bandwidth, so you can get some half-decent waveform resolution at the
bandwidth limit. So for a 100MHz scope you want 1GS/s.
400MS/s for a 100MHz scope is still ok, at least you won't be aliasing
and you'll have a couple of points of detail at the full bandwidth.
But I'd rate the Rigol as only having a 40Mhz single shot bandwidth in
this case, compared with the 100MHz single shot bandwidth on a 1GS/s
unit. But this a reasonable trade-off when you get the massive extra
sample memory.
The GDS-800 series Goodwills are only 100MS/s for 100MHz bandwidth
which is next to useless, you'd have to use interleaved (repetitive)
sampling for anything over 20MHz or so.
The only other thing you need to know is that memory depth is just as
important as sample rate!
I do not know how I ever survived without a deep memory scope.
> > The Instek beats the Tek with it's 25K memory, but both get crapped on
> > by the Rigol.
> > You can do sooooo much more with that extra memory, you won't ever
> > regret it.
>
> It might already be spent. ;-) Have you seen the Intronix LogicPort
> analyzer, it looks way cool with built in datastream decoding for SPI, I2C,
> serial ASCII and "more". 34 channels, should be more than enough for my
> needs.
>
> The Rigol DS1102CD (note the 'D' on the end) has a 16 port logic analyzer.
> They want $500 for the option though. :-( The Intronix is less expensive
> and more functional (excepting that you could set up complex triggers with
> the analyzer built into the scope) Or do you think it would be wiser to go
> with the integrated analyzer.http://www.pctestinstruments.com/
I'm pro-mixed signal scopes, they are just so versatile, and you don't
need a PC to run it. But for home use a PC based logic analyser might
be a good compromise, there are at least half a dozen good USB logic
analysers on the market. Whichever one you get, make sure it has an
external trigger input/output so you can connected it to the scope.
> Now all I need is about $1600 to pay for it all. Paypal donations accepted
Does the wife know about this?
Dave :)
Anthony Fremont
> On Mar 1, 1:59 pm, "Anthony Fremont" <spam-...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> It is my understanding that yes, you can dump to a memory stick
>> plugged into the front. There is a port in the back for a printer
>> as well. What scope do you primarily use?
>
> My primary scope is an Agilent MSO6032A (mixed signal 300MHz), with an
OMG, is that ever sweet! No wonder you don't mess with Rigol much.
> older model Agilent 54621D mixed signal scope as the secondary. The
> Rigol brings up the rear as a cheapie throw around scope. Had a Tek
> 3000 series as well, but it was lost in transit.
Lost in transit...hmm...
>>>> The biggest downside I see to the Rigol right now is
>>>> finding a distributor in the US. I only found these
>>>> places:http://www.testsolu.com/html/contact.phphttp://www.ntecusa.com/sales/...
>>>> Same pricing. Anyone dealt with either of them before?
>>
>>>> Looks like it's coming down to the Instek GDS-2102
>>>> (100MHz/2-channel) or the
>>>> Rigol DS1102C.
>>
>>> No contest, the 1M sample memory (512K/channel) of the Rigol wins
>>> hands down. The lower 400MS/s sample rate is still high enough
>>> (just).
>>
>> I kinda wish it had a higher sample rate, but most of what I do is
>> so far removed from the upper bandwidth of the scope that I really
>> don't think it should be an issue. Since I've never used a DSO
>> before, I don't have much "feel" for all these numbers and their
>> significance. I'm figuring it out though. :-) The comparisons on
>> the TEK site are interesting and informative, even if they might be
>> tilting things just a wee bit.
>
> Ideally you want the sample rate to be at least 10 times the
> bandwidth, so you can get some half-decent waveform resolution at the
> bandwidth limit. So for a 100MHz scope you want 1GS/s.
That sounds like a reasonable rule of thumb.
> 400MS/s for a 100MHz scope is still ok, at least you won't be aliasing
> and you'll have a couple of points of detail at the full bandwidth.
> But I'd rate the Rigol as only having a 40Mhz single shot bandwidth in
> this case, compared with the 100MHz single shot bandwidth on a 1GS/s
> unit. But this a reasonable trade-off when you get the massive extra
> sample memory.
Sounds like you really go for the deep memory. I assume the scope captures
even when it's not triggering so that you can go back and look at the events
preceding the trigger. Is that right?
> The GDS-800 series Goodwills are only 100MS/s for 100MHz bandwidth
> which is next to useless, you'd have to use interleaved (repetitive)
> sampling for anything over 20MHz or so.
They have some new scopes that do 1GS/s that are replacing the 8xx scopes.
Still _only_ 25K points though.
http://www.instek.com/GDS-2000.htm
> The only other thing you need to know is that memory depth is just as
> important as sample rate!
> I do not know how I ever survived without a deep memory scope.
Yep, you like the big memory. ;-)
>>> The Instek beats the Tek with it's 25K memory, but both get crapped
>>> on by the Rigol.
>>> You can do sooooo much more with that extra memory, you won't ever
>>> regret it.
>>
>> It might already be spent. ;-) Have you seen the Intronix LogicPort
>> analyzer, it looks way cool with built in datastream decoding for
>> SPI, I2C, serial ASCII and "more". 34 channels, should be more than
>> enough for my needs.
>>
>> The Rigol DS1102CD (note the 'D' on the end) has a 16 port logic
>> analyzer. They want $500 for the option though. :-( The Intronix
>> is less expensive and more functional (excepting that you could set
>> up complex triggers with the analyzer built into the scope) Or do
>> you think it would be wiser to go with the integrated
>> analyzer.http://www.pctestinstruments.com/
>
> I'm pro-mixed signal scopes, they are just so versatile, and you don't
> need a PC to run it. But for home use a PC based logic analyser might
> be a good compromise, there are at least half a dozen good USB logic
> analysers on the market. Whichever one you get, make sure it has an
> external trigger input/output so you can connected it to the scope.
I can't find anything stating that the LogicPort has a trigger out. It
samples real fast, so maybe they think you don't need a scope with it. It
doesn't have a real deep buffer (2K x 34 pins), but should be fine for most
things I can think of doing with it. I can't imagine needing 34 pins.
>> Now all I need is about $1600 to pay for it all. Paypal donations
>> accepted
>
> Does the wife know about this?
Shhh she doesn't do USENET. ;-)
doug
>
> No contest, the 1M sample memory (512K/channel) of the Rigol wins
> hands down. The lower 400MS/s sample rate is still high enough (just).
>
> The Instek beats the Tek with it's 25K memory, but both get crapped on
> by the Rigol.
> You can do sooooo much more with that extra memory, you won't ever
> regret it.
>
> Dave :)
>
I am curious about why the deep memory is so important to you. This
comes up because I have only had a very small number of times where
more than the 2k or so on the Tek would have made a difffernce. I do
fpga design, general digital design, rf design, if design and low
noise low frequency work. I cannot remember ever being unhappy that
I did not have a meg of channel memory.
David L. Jones
Correct.
All DSO's will default to having the trigger point at half way in the
buffer, so you get 50% pre-trigger info and 50% post-trigger info. But
you can set it to 100% pre or post data, or anywhere in between.
> > The GDS-800 series Goodwills are only 100MS/s for 100MHz bandwidth
> > which is next to useless, you'd have to use interleaved (repetitive)
> > sampling for anything over 20MHz or so.
>
> They have some new scopes that do 1GS/s that are replacing the 8xx scopes.
> Still _only_ 25K points though.http://www.instek.com/GDS-2000.htm
25K points is still very very useful.
> > The only other thing you need to know is that memory depth is just as
> > important as sample rate!
> > I do not know how I ever survived without a deep memory scope.
>
> Yep, you like the big memory. ;-)
You will too one day, trust me!
> >>> The Instek beats the Tek with it's 25K memory, but both get crapped
> >>> on by the Rigol.
> >>> You can do sooooo much more with that extra memory, you won't ever
> >>> regret it.
>
> >> It might already be spent. ;-) Have you seen the Intronix LogicPort
> >> analyzer, it looks way cool with built in datastream decoding for
> >> SPI, I2C, serial ASCII and "more". 34 channels, should be more than
> >> enough for my needs.
>
> >> The Rigol DS1102CD (note the 'D' on the end) has a 16 port logic
> >> analyzer. They want $500 for the option though. :-( The Intronix
> >> is less expensive and more functional (excepting that you could set
> >> up complex triggers with the analyzer built into the scope) Or do
> >> you think it would be wiser to go with the integrated
> >> analyzer.http://www.pctestinstruments.com/
>
> > I'm pro-mixed signal scopes, they are just so versatile, and you don't
> > need a PC to run it. But for home use a PC based logic analyser might
> > be a good compromise, there are at least half a dozen good USB logic
> > analysers on the market. Whichever one you get, make sure it has an
> > external trigger input/output so you can connected it to the scope.
>
> I can't find anything stating that the LogicPort has a trigger out. It
> samples real fast, so maybe they think you don't need a scope with it. It
> doesn't have a real deep buffer (2K x 34 pins), but should be fine for most
> things I can think of doing with it. I can't imagine needing 34 pins.
The 2K memory is pretty aweful these days, most USB analysers have a
lot more - shop around.
Deep memory is particually important for digital design.
> >> Now all I need is about $1600 to pay for it all. Paypal donations
> >> accepted
>
> > Does the wife know about this?
>
> Shhh she doesn't do USENET. ;-)
Or know about that secret PayPal account huh? ;-)
Dave :)
David L. Jones
It's not just me, it's almost anyone who uses a DSO, hence the trend
to larger memories in even the cheapest of DSO's.
I can't believe you have never needed more than 2K of memory in
digital design, that is one area where a large memory is essential,
but it you've never had it then you just won't know, you make do with
what you've got.
With a scope with only 2K of memory you can only get say 10 cycles on
screen and zoom in to see detail (200 points) in each cycle. With a
large memory you can turn the timebase right down and capture 5000
cycles yet still zoom in with the same resolution on any cycle. So you
can for instance see low frequency modulation on a signal, and then
zoom in to see any high frequency glitches in any one of the thousands
of cycles.
In digital design a large buffer lets you capture massive amounts of
data and zoom in with full detail on say any byte in a 1000 character
serial data stream.
For instance, last week I was debugging a GPS NMEA simulator design,
and I had to capture several entire NMEA data strings (about 30
characters of RS232 data each) and be able to analyse each bit.
Totally impossible with a scope with only 2KB of memory.
Another example from just today, I have been tracking down a digital
bug in a third party product that only occurs once every few days or
so at best. Data packets get sent once every ms, with a 2MHz data
clock, and I want to be able to capture many of these packets, yet I
also want to see fine detail in any one of those packets, and I only
get ONE shot at it every couple of days. No problem on the large
memory scope, simply set it to a slow timebase, it triggers capturing
a large amount of packets and then I can spend hours post analysing
every packet in detail.
Everyone in the company (and another company who shares our space)
comes to borrow my scope all the time because the big memory is just
so useful.
Once you have the capability you will never want to go back.
Dave :)
Tony Williams
doug <doug@doug> wrote:
> I am curious about why the deep memory is so important to you.
> This comes up because I have only had a very small number of
> times where more than the 2k or so on the Tek would have made a
> difffernce. I do fpga design, general digital design, rf design,
> if design and low noise low frequency work. I cannot remember
> ever being unhappy that I did not have a meg of channel memory.
I have a TDS 1012 and find it a little inconvenient
not being able to scroll along (say) an ARINC429
32-bit comms transmission at a reasonable resolution
on each bit.
--
Tony Williams.
Mike Harrison
>> Sounds like you really go for the deep memory. I assume the scope captures
>> even when it's not triggering so that you can go back and look at the events
>> preceding the trigger. Is that right?
>
>Correct.
>All DSO's will default to having the trigger point at half way in the
>buffer, so you get 50% pre-trigger info and 50% post-trigger info. But
>you can set it to 100% pre or post data, or anywhere in between.
Not just anywhere inbetween, as delay allows you to trigger order of magnitudes before or after the
displayed section.
>> Yep, you like the big memory. ;-)
>> >>> The Instek beats the Tek with it's 25K memory, but both get crapped
>> >>> on by the Rigol.
>> >>> You can do sooooo much more with that extra memory, you won't ever
>> >>> regret it.
Deep memory is so useful that after having it you curse any instrument you use that doesn't have it.
The biggest day-to day advantage is you often don't need to be too careful in setting up a trigger -
jsut grab a load of data and zoom in on the section of interest.
bungalo...@yahoo.com
I use the 2K Teks but we have the 20 Meg Lecroy models at work at our
EMI testing area, the Lecroy's are almost to the point where you don't
need a trigger anymore, just press the single shot button and zoom in.
Probably once or twice a year I really need the 20 Meg, mainly to
capture independent glitches that occur over a long time period or
capturing a serial bus data. Otherwise, I really don't need the
Lecroy but they are a huge productivity improvement and a joy to use.
Joerg
That's really nice. No more probe cables getting hot and letting of that
plastics stench. AFAIR they are around $3k, sounds like a pretty good value.
I have nothing against digital scopes as long as their true sample rate
is high enough. And as long as they don't spew EMI around, which many of
them unfortunately do.
David L. Jones
That's the first time I've ever heard Lecroy and "a joy to use" used
in the same sentence! :->
Speaking of Lecroy DSOs, I can't believe what they go for on eBay,
like this one for $1300, that is an insanely low price for a quad
channel 500MHz, 2GS/s, 2Mpoint DSO.
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=013&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&viewitem=&item=230095222143&rd=1&rd=1
Dave :)
David L. Jones
> >> Sounds like you really go for the deep memory. I assume the scope captures
> >> even when it's not triggering so that you can go back and look at the events
> >> preceding the trigger. Is that right?
>
> >Correct.
> >All DSO's will default to having the trigger point at half way in the
> >buffer, so you get 50% pre-trigger info and 50% post-trigger info. But
> >you can set it to 100% pre or post data, or anywhere in between.
>
> Not just anywhere inbetween, as delay allows you to trigger order of magnitudes before or after the
> displayed section.
Yes, very true. Although I don't think I've ever had to use this with
a large memory scope, but common practice with the smaller memory
ones.
Dave :)
bungalo...@yahoo.com
replaced with lecroys, maybe we just have good lecroy salemen
> Speaking of Lecroy DSOs, I can't believe what they go for on eBay,
> like this one for $1300, that is an insanely low price for a quad
> channel 500MHz, 2GS/s, 2Mpoint DSO.http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=013&sspagename=ST...
>
> Dave :)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
the older, heavy, probeless, mono "burned" screen, non usb (RS-232)
scopes don't hold their value too long, regardless of raw performance,
people like lightweight, color scopes with high modern connectivity
David L. Jones
Yup!
Many a thread has raged over the lack of "user friendliness" in the
Lecroys.
But like anything, you get used to them.
> > Speaking of Lecroy DSOs, I can't believe what they go for on eBay,
> > like this one for $1300, that is an insanely low price for a quad
> > channel 500MHz, 2GS/s, 2Mpoint DSO.http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=013&sspagename=ST...
>
> > Dave :)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> the older, heavy, probeless, mono "burned" screen, non usb (RS-232)
> scopes don't hold their value too long, regardless of raw performance,
> people like lightweight, color scopes with high modern connectivity
Very true. But to get that raw performance in a new scope you have to
spend at least 5 times that amount. So great value for those after the
best performance-per-buck.
Dave :)
Anthony Fremont
The sample rate is high though 500Msa/s, but I was most impressed by the
protocol analysis/decoding. Oh well, I find that others can do the same
thing.
The salesman from the other company just called and he doesn't have one in
stock either. He does have the DS1101CD with the 16 channel logic
analyzer.....hmm. That one captures at 200Msa/s with a 512K buffer, much
much deeper, but it costs $500 more. Hopefully the PC software will be able
to do protocol analysis/decoding. He's going to call me back with info on
shipping and maybe even a discounted price.
I pretty much read the whole user manual. It certainly has features that
I've wanted in the past. Just being able to see what happened before the
trigger will be a boon. I doubt I really "need" this scope, but I sure do
want it.
>>>> Now all I need is about $1600 to pay for it all. Paypal donations
>>>> accepted
>>
>>> Does the wife know about this?
>>
>> Shhh she doesn't do USENET. ;-)
>
> Or know about that secret PayPal account huh? ;-)
Of course not. You can just imagine how fast a bunch of engineers are
filling it up for me. ;-)
Eeyore
Anthony Fremont wrote:
> Anybody got one? Do they suck?
Read my thread TDS 1012.
If it has anything in common, it's a HUMUNGOUS PIECE OF CRAP ! To call it a
fetid turd would be KIND to it !
I have never before had so many hours of my very precious time wasted by an
utterly useless piece of shit masquarading as 'test equipment'.
Graham
Eeyore
Joerg wrote:
> I currently have the "pleasure" to work with similar (but older) scopes
> at a client. TDS220, one of the big TDSes, etc. Long story short I am
> not too enthused. The 220 even spits out noise that bothers us so has to
> be turned off at times.
AaaarrgghhhH!!!!
Yes, I also have a TDS210 here too in connection with the same project as that
TDS1012 I mentioned elsewhere.
Do I need to elaborate ? What Joerg says, I concur with. It's a heap of utterly
unmitigated fetid steaming pooh.
It has to be said it wasn't *quite* as bad as the TDS1012. Damded with faint
praise ? Yes, you got it !
Buy an decent analogue scope. There's no beating them. S/h analogue Teks are
cheap on ebay and they will eventually run out. They'll never 'wear out' most
likely though, at least not in your lifetime.
A 465 is tricky to beat but a 2465 does it !
Graham
Joerg
[...]
>
> A 465 is tricky to beat but a 2465 does it !
>
It sure does. The 2465 is what I usually recommend to clients. Then they
get them on EBay or through other places. Best scopes Tek ever made
IMHO. With those new little bread-box thingies I have the impression
they are just some kind of outsourced design. Like what HP used to do
with Yokogawa designs, except that the results, well, ...
The only downside with the 2465 series is that they are only available
used. And since they are some of the best scopes since sliced bread that
means used a lot. So all the encoder shafts are usually sloshing around
or like what happened to us you pull into delayed-trigger and hear
plastic pieces rain down behind the front panel, meaning it won't switch
back to non-delayed. Anyhow, it's best to budget in some serious
mechanical fixing. The knobs, shafts and so on are IMHO a bit on the
flimsy side.
Eeyore
Joerg wrote:
> Anthony Fremont wrote:
> > Joerg wrote:
> >
> >>I currently have the "pleasure" to work with similar (but older)
> >>scopes at a client. TDS220, one of the big TDSes, etc. Long story
> >>short I am not too enthused. The 220 even spits out noise that
> >>bothers us so has to be turned off at times. The bandwidth gets
> >
> > Do you mean like down the probe cable, out the probe tip and into your
> > circuit, or do you mean accoustical noise?
>
> Nope, it look like EMI from a switcher or something like that in there.
You're NOT KIDDING !
> It was pretty loud and messing up some analog circuitry on a breadboard.
> The good old Tektronix 2465 did not do that at all.
I'd settle for a plain vanilla no-nonsense 465B. 2465s are lovely of course.
Graham
Eeyore
"David L. Jones" wrote:
> Joerg <notthisjoerg...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
> > Anthony Fremont wrote:
> > > Joerg wrote:
> >
> > >>I currently have the "pleasure" to work with similar (but older)
> > >>scopes at a client. TDS220, one of the big TDSes, etc. Long story
> > >>short I am not too enthused. The 220 even spits out noise that
> > >>bothers us so has to be turned off at times. The bandwidth gets
> >
> > > Do you mean like down the probe cable, out the probe tip and into your
> > > circuit, or do you mean accoustical noise?
> >
> > Nope, it look like EMI from a switcher or something like that in there.
> > It was pretty loud and messing up some analog circuitry on a breadboard.
> > The good old Tektronix 2465 did not do that at all.
>
> It's the LCD screen, the TDS series scopes are famous for this.
> Put the probe near the screen and you'll see it.
Since when did the probe need to near to the screen ?
Graham
Eeyore
Joerg wrote:
> After all, lab equipment is supposed to maintain radio silence since you
> can shield a prototype while probing around.
In one's dreams these days apparently !
Graham
Eeyore
Joerg wrote:
> Joel Kolstad wrote
> > "Joerg" <notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
> >
> >>Nope, it look like EMI from a switcher or something like that in there. It
> >>was pretty loud and messing up some analog circuitry on a breadboard. The
> >>good old Tektronix 2465 did not do that at all.
> >
> >
> > We have some of the current Agilent DC power supplies that are digitally
> > controlled (wherein you set the regulated voltage/current using an encoder
> > knob, you can memorize settings, there's a GPIB interface, etc.), and it makes
> > several highly-visible birdies on a spectrum analyzer. :-( For RF boards I
> > still use the older HP "all linear" power supplies... which I find nicer to
> > use in the common case where you don't need to memorize 10 different settings.
> >
>
> One reason why this client of mine bought those "older" supplies on EBay
> as well. They are clean. Monday I almost did the usual, trudging over to
> the stationary room to get some C-cells I could solder in series when I
> glanced at the lab supply. Ah, it's an old analog one, I don't need to
> do the battery spiel here.
It wasn't a Coutant supply was it ?
Graham
Eeyore
John Larkin wrote:
> TDS2002 or 2012 are very nice.
Nice if you don't mind 1.5V of induced 48kHz !
Graham
Eeyore
Joerg wrote:
> The other downside is that you almost have to resort to EBay to obtain a
> really good scope because they don't make them no more.
Compare with CEOs prior to MBAs.
Graham
Eeyore
John Larkin wrote:
> I find that digital scopes are a lot more likely to find
> infrequent events, and *save* then for you.
You're not an analogue man at heart are you ?
Graham
Joerg
I meant "cannot shield". The old stuff is generally quiet. I prefer
older equipment because it won't have switchers and the like. In my lab
here about the only thing that is noisy is the computer so it needs to
be off at times. Well, and our Rottie who sometimes comes in for a while
because he snores.
Joerg
No, it was HP. The good stuff.
Joerg
Interesting. It just came to me: All of the potential clients that have
decided to use my services and thus became clients are under the CEO
leadership of an engineer, a scientist or at least a technical-minded
person. And for some reason they regularly blow the competition out of
the water.
Eeyore
Joerg wrote:
HP have indeed done good stuff but not IMHO as good as Tek's until I came across *THE
TDS SERIES* !!!!
AAARRGGGHHHHHHH ! KILL KILL KILL !
You know what I'd like to do ?
I'd like to get a really nice AXE. Also a decent 'stone' on which to polish its'
edge.
I would spend some time putting a very fine edge on the AXE until it could cut my own
flesh and draw blood with a mere graze.
I would them place the TDS on a solid oak bench and chop the living daylights out of
it with a thousand cuts !
That would not satisfy me however.
I would make sure I had a decent pair of Doc Marten's boots with steel toe-caps and
additional hobnails.
The chopped-up remains of the TDS I would sweep onto the floor and then stamp on up
and down for at least 5 minutes !
I would then collect the remains and transfer them to a quartz vessel where I would
mix them with aqua regia.
Once so dissolved I'd neutralise the mix and incrporate it into a load of cement. The
cement I would cast into a block and then when solid would knock to pieces with a
ball on a chain.
The pieces I would collect and feed into a rock crusher.
I would finally drop the crushed rock from a helicopter into an active volcano.
And I'd still be cross !
Graham
Eeyore
Joerg wrote:
And yet some ppl wouldn't be able to understand that.
Graham
Eeyore
Joerg wrote:
LOL !
I do recall having to switch off monochrome or EGA monitors when performing
audio tests too back 'in the days'.
This one's scanning at ~ 90 kHz so no trouble there !
Graham
John Larkin
I'm electronically promiscuous. I'll design anything.
John
doug
occasion. They are useless for digital work and I sometimes forget that
when I am at the wrong bench with the digital stuff. Low duty cycle is
a killer. The tds3000 are really nice and make it harder to go back and
use the 2465 even with its nicer user interface. No storage for
averaging or looking at noise either, just you and the phosphor.
You also mentioned the 7000 series scopes. Here you cannot give them
away. We set an entire truckload to the landfill because of that.
The only I have left has a tdr in it.
David L. Jones
wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
> > Eeyore wrote:
> > > Joerg wrote:
> > >>Joel Kolstad wrote
Or you could simply sell it on eBay and buy a lot of beer or
something :->
Dave :)
bungalo...@yahoo.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
We have the same problem with Tek 2465's, we have them stacked up in
storage to the ceiling, nobody will touch them with a ten foot pole,
one guy uses one to prop his monitor up higher in his lab, that is
about the only use they get.
John Larkin
I really like my eight or ten various TDS scopes. I rarely use my
analog scopes any more, even though I have maybe 40 of them.
John
John Larkin
>
>You also mentioned the 7000 series scopes. Here you cannot give them
>away. We set an entire truckload to the landfill because of that.
>The only I have left has a tdr in it.
The 7000s weren't super reliable, and those tiny buttons were a pain.
And the TDR was fairly primitive, tunnel diode pulsers and all that.
You can get an 11801/SD24 rig on ebay for a few kilobucks, seriously
good, quantitative TDR.
Something like a 545 or a 547 is collectable art; no 7000 series scope
is.
John
Anthony Fremont
I'll gladly pay shipping costs for a good one. :-)
krw
jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says...
> On Thu, 01 Mar 2007 23:43:47 -0800, doug <doug@doug> wrote:
>
> >
> >You also mentioned the 7000 series scopes. Here you cannot give them
> >away. We set an entire truckload to the landfill because of that.
> >The only I have left has a tdr in it.
>
> The 7000s weren't super reliable, and those tiny buttons were a pain.
> And the TDR was fairly primitive, tunnel diode pulsers and all that.
> You can get an 11801/SD24 rig on ebay for a few kilobucks, seriously
> good, quantitative TDR.
We had really good luck with a pile of 7904s. We had very few 7704s.
I only remember the DPO (a 7704 with a digitizer in the middle). The
7S11/7S12 wasn't at all bad for the early '70s.
> Something like a 545 or a 547 is collectable art; no 7000 series scope
> is.
There are *lots* of 7000 series scopes floating around. 1970 pennies
aren't worth much either.
I liked the 465 and it's siblings.
--
Keith
Joerg
I've got a real horror story about one company that decided they can do
it on their own but I can't tell it in public. Suffice it to say that
there came a loud kablouie, after which their stock price plummeted to
less than 0.1% within a few weeks. Actually, I also got a 2nd horror
story but now I am getting carried away into OT.
Terran Melconian
I'll see your shipping costs and raise you a bottle of scotch. ;-)
I can see the ad now: "Do you have unwanted analog oscilloscopes?
Don't put them down! Put them up for adoption in loving homes where
they'll get the care and attention they deserve."
Anthony Fremont
Exactly, my motivations are purely altruistic. ;-)
John Larkin
Sure. If you care about the technology, the money just happens. If you
care about the money, the technology may well not happen.
John
Joerg
Depends on who is in the lab. When I had the Viewsonic terminals our
younger dog would get up and leave after turning it on. I guess the
flyback transformer whine bothered her. She gave me "the looks" before
leaving.
Eeyore
"bungalo...@yahoo.com" wrote:
> We have the same problem with Tek 2465's, we have them stacked up in
> storage to the ceiling, nobody will touch them with a ten foot pole,
> one guy uses one to prop his monitor up higher in his lab, that is
> about the only use they get.
2465s are fetching decent money on ebay.co.uk.
I'll help you get rid of one for sure !
Graham
Joerg
Maybe offer them through your web site or EBay? Some of my clients would
probably bite. Although the recent one only needs one more 2465 and they
have some bids out. But one never knows, on EBay the common strategy
seems to put in your final bit a few milliseconds after time is up. Kind
of like the opposite from what we do to get SWA boarding passes ;-)
Joerg
> On 2007-03-02, Anthony Fremont <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>bungalo...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Mar 2, 2:43 am, doug <doug@doug> wrote:
>>
>>>We have the same problem with Tek 2465's, we have them stacked up in
>>>storage to the ceiling, nobody will touch them with a ten foot pole,
>>>one guy uses one to prop his monitor up higher in his lab, that is
>>>about the only use they get.
>>
>>I'll gladly pay shipping costs for a good one. :-)
Same here. Not that I need one right now but it would get a loving home.
>
>
> I'll see your shipping costs and raise you a bottle of scotch. ;-)
>
> I can see the ad now: "Do you have unwanted analog oscilloscopes?
> Don't put them down! Put them up for adoption in loving homes where
> they'll get the care and attention they deserve."
Yes!
Joel Kolstad
news:45E78CFD...@hotmail.com...
> Joerg wrote:
>> Interesting. It just came to me: All of the potential clients that have
>> decided to use my services and thus became clients are under the CEO
>> leadership of an engineer, a scientist or at least a technical-minded
>> person. And for some reason they regularly blow the competition out of
>> the water.
>
> And yet some ppl wouldn't be able to understand that.
I'm sure that business school 101 includes a heavy dose about how you, too,
can run a multi-national Fortune 500 technology company just fine, even if you
never understood any of that math and science stuff they tried to teach you
back in high school.
John Larkin
I'm a collector! I never sell!
I don't have many portable scopes, maybe a Kikusui or two. Mostly big
old mainframes... 535's, 545's, 547's, 7000's, a few HP180's, a few
exotics; a zillion plugins, many sampling. I do have an HP185 4 GHz
sampling scope ca 1961, with plugins and manuals; *that* is a chunk of
history, if an ugly one.
John
Joerg
My wife would have fits if I ever started doing that.
David L. Jones
Heck, I'll happily pay express postage to Australia for one!!
Dave :)
john jardine
"Anthony Fremont" <spam...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:12ueosd...@news.supernews.com...
[...]
> I pretty much read the whole user manual. It certainly has features that
> I've wanted in the past. Just being able to see what happened before the
> trigger will be a boon. I doubt I really "need" this scope, but I sure do
> want it.
>
> >>>> Now all I need is about $1600 to pay for it all. Paypal donations
> >>>> accepted
[...]
As a general comment, I'm genuinely puzzled at the large number of people
who need and seemingly make regular of, the pre trigger and pre storage
facilities of digital scopes.
Can't remember the last time I needed the facility.
Am I missing out here, or doing something wrong, or thick or summat, or
what?.
john
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
john jardine
Joerg
Guilty. I am one of them. We do a lot of pulsed ultrasound and there
such features are indispensable. But I can mostly work quite well with
analog scopes. Except when the delay-trigger clutch on ye olde 2465 fell
apart...
David L. Jones
> "Anthony Fremont" <spam-...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>
> news:12ueosd...@news.supernews.com...
> [...]
>
> > I pretty much read the whole user manual. It certainly has features that
> > I've wanted in the past. Just being able to see what happened before the
> > trigger will be a boon. I doubt I really "need" this scope, but I sure do
> > want it.
>
> > >>>> Now all I need is about $1600 to pay for it all. Paypal donations
> > >>>> accepted
>
> [...]
>
> As a general comment, I'm genuinely puzzled at the large number of people
> who need and seemingly make regular of, the pre trigger and pre storage
> facilities of digital scopes.
> Can't remember the last time I needed the facility.
> Am I missing out here, or doing something wrong, or thick or summat, or
> what?.
> john
It's a simple matter of that if you have it available you'll find a
lot of uses for it you didn't know you had before. If you don't have
it available you make do and don't realise what you are missing.
Dave :)
Hawker
following:
I sometimes need to see a signal that is hard to trigger on so I trigger
on something else, which may be later.
For example I do a lot of CCD design. I often trigger on the reset pulse
which happens at a different time than the image data I am looking for.
This helps me know that I am looking at the same pixel each time because
the image is referenced to the reset not the picture. I would hate to
think I am looking at a black reference pixel when I am actually looking
at a live data pixel.
Hawker
Anthony Fremont
That really surprises me. In my meager experience I have wanted to know
what happened _before_ the trigger many times. I, for one, can't wait to
find out. ;-)
Charlie Edmondson
engineer if I don't have an o-scope...) and could use one if it doesn't
cost much. Used is fine, I only need it to troubleshoot the occasional
board. For digital, I have a small USB signal analyzer...
Charlie