TDS-1002b Any good? Comments?

[David L. Jones]

On Mar 2, 3:41 am, "bungalow_st...@yahoo.com"
<bungalow_st...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Mar 1, 3:52 am, doug <doug@doug> wrote:



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.

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.

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

 

[bungalow_steve@yahoo.com]

On Mar 1, 3:53 pm, "David L. Jones" <altz...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 2, 3:41 am, "bungalow_st...@yahoo.com"





bungalow_st...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Mar 1, 3:52 am, doug <doug@doug> wrote:

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.

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.

That's the first time I've ever heard Lecroy and "a joy to use" used
in the same sentence! :-

really, well we all like them here, the tek's are being slowly

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]

On Mar 2, 7:44 am, "bungalow_st...@yahoo.com"
<bungalow_st...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On Mar 1, 3:53 pm, "David L. Jones" <altz...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 2, 3:41 am, "bungalow_st...@yahoo.com"

bungalow_st...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Mar 1, 3:52 am, doug <doug@doug> wrote:

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.

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.

That's the first time I've ever heard Lecroy and "a joy to use" used
in the same sentence! :-

really, well we all like them here, the tek's are being slowly
replaced with lecroys, maybe we just have good lecroy salemen

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]

David L. Jones wrote:

On Mar 1, 4:43 pm, "Anthony Fremont" <spam-...@nowhere.com> wrote:

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.

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]

Eeyore wrote:


[...]

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.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[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" <notthisjoergsch@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

 

[Joerg]

Eeyore wrote:

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 !

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.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[Joerg]

Eeyore wrote:

Joerg wrote:


Joel Kolstad wrote

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@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 ?

No, it was HP. The good stuff.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[Joerg]

Eeyore wrote:

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.

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.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[Eeyore]

Joerg wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
Joerg wrote:
Joel Kolstad wrote
"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@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 ?

No, it was HP. The good stuff.

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:

Eeyore wrote:
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.

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.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

Joerg wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
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 !

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.

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]

On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 01:44:10 +0000, Eeyore
<rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

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

I'm electronically promiscuous. I'll design anything.

John