Turn your Rigol DS1052E Oscilloscope into a 100MHz DS1102E
in [Design]
|
From: John Larkin on 7 Apr 2010 01:11 On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:38:52 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:47:27 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:17:22 -0700, >>"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 11:23:19 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 11:17:56 -0700, "Joel Koltner" >>>><zapwireDASHgroups(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >>>>>news:q90kr5pda1mtti9pea5c7tqmao0u9qvfpi(a)4ax.com... >>>>>> Rigol is like >>>>>> someone who used to leave their front door unlocked, until someone >>>>>> wandered in and stole something, so now they have to lock it. >>>>> >>>>>I think it's more like Rigol sells houses, and you bought a two-bedroom house >>>>>(although you're aware they also sell three-bedroom houses)... and one day you >>>>>notice (or Dave Jones metnions that) there's another door in your home. >>>>>There's no lock on that door, no sign on it saying, "keep out!," etc. Your >>>>>ne'er-do-well liberal democrat son moves back home after flunking out of his >>>>>liberal studies program at the local college and you get to thinking... having >>>>>that kid spend his nights in his own room rather than sleeping on the couch in >>>>>the living room every night would be nice... I wonder what's behind that door? >>>>> >>>>>:-) >>>> >>>>Not entirely the same. It costs money to build rooms, but it costs >>>>nothing to enable IP. Both have market value. >>>> >>>>But why didn't they do the 50 and even 20 MHz bandwidth limits >>>>digitally? They have 1G samples/second to work with. There are some >>>>saturation issues that might be best handled with analog limiting, but >>>>this *is* a cheap scope. >>>> >>>>John >>> >>>Perhaps the cost of the supporting hardware and algorithm development did >>>not look attractive in comparison to the varactor method. >> >>The 1052 already has user-programmable lowpass/highpass/bandpass >>digital filtering. Pretty cool. >> >>John >> >Postprocessing is not the same as input channel bandwidth limiting. >Check out the schematics of Tek analog 'scopes with input channel >bandwidth limiting. Well, they hardly had the option to do digital filtering. John
From: John Larkin on 7 Apr 2010 01:29 On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 22:11:47 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:38:52 -0700, >"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:47:27 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:17:22 -0700, >>>"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 11:23:19 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 11:17:56 -0700, "Joel Koltner" >>>>><zapwireDASHgroups(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >>>>>>news:q90kr5pda1mtti9pea5c7tqmao0u9qvfpi(a)4ax.com... >>>>>>> Rigol is like >>>>>>> someone who used to leave their front door unlocked, until someone >>>>>>> wandered in and stole something, so now they have to lock it. >>>>>> >>>>>>I think it's more like Rigol sells houses, and you bought a two-bedroom house >>>>>>(although you're aware they also sell three-bedroom houses)... and one day you >>>>>>notice (or Dave Jones metnions that) there's another door in your home. >>>>>>There's no lock on that door, no sign on it saying, "keep out!," etc. Your >>>>>>ne'er-do-well liberal democrat son moves back home after flunking out of his >>>>>>liberal studies program at the local college and you get to thinking... having >>>>>>that kid spend his nights in his own room rather than sleeping on the couch in >>>>>>the living room every night would be nice... I wonder what's behind that door? >>>>>> >>>>>>:-) >>>>> >>>>>Not entirely the same. It costs money to build rooms, but it costs >>>>>nothing to enable IP. Both have market value. >>>>> >>>>>But why didn't they do the 50 and even 20 MHz bandwidth limits >>>>>digitally? They have 1G samples/second to work with. There are some >>>>>saturation issues that might be best handled with analog limiting, but >>>>>this *is* a cheap scope. >>>>> >>>>>John >>>> >>>>Perhaps the cost of the supporting hardware and algorithm development did >>>>not look attractive in comparison to the varactor method. >>> >>>The 1052 already has user-programmable lowpass/highpass/bandpass >>>digital filtering. Pretty cool. >>> >>>John >>> >>Postprocessing is not the same as input channel bandwidth limiting. >>Check out the schematics of Tek analog 'scopes with input channel >>bandwidth limiting. > >Well, they hardly had the option to do digital filtering. > >John But I wonder what various digital scopes do at slower sweep speeds. Clock the ADC slower? Throw away samples? Interpolate? Filter? John
From: David L. Jones on 7 Apr 2010 01:58 John Larkin wrote: > On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:34:32 -0700, > "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:45:57 -0700, John Larkin >> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:28:29 -0700, >>> "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 09:58:53 +0800, "Andrew" <anbyvbel(a)yahoo.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote >>>>> in message news:kj2lr598g79va9rjpir1e1jaa0bvg90ji6(a)4ax.com... >>>>> >>>>>> If you don't like Rigol scopes, buy Tek or Agilent or LeCroy. >>>>>> >>>>>> Of course, the low-end Agilent is actually a Rigol. They rebrand >>>>>> it and sell it for about twice the price of the Rigol. How do >>>>>> you like that for rip-off-ness? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Wow, you just deprived Agilent of their hard earned cash, since a >>>>> lot of people will buy Rigol instead. >>>>> You should have kept this information to yourself. >>>> >>>> Bwahahahaha. That tidbit is kind of common knowledge around here >>>> (s.e.d). >>>> >>>> For some real interesting times go really hunting for fast analog >>>> scopes, they are available, though not inexpensive. 500 MHz is >>>> still reasonably available, for about the price of a modest car. >>> >>> Tek 7103s and 7104s, 1 GHz analog scopes with microchannel plate >>> CRTs, are fairly cheap on the used market. >>> >>> An 11801 sampler with a 12 GHz head can be had for under $2K. Nice >>> scopes. >>> >>> John >> >> John, i am talking about brand _new_ analog 'scopes. Probably with >> microchannel faceplates as well. All the old groovy Tektronix >> patents >> have expired. > > The only new analog scopes I know of are minor brands, > B&K/Instek/Kenwood sort of stuff. All the name-brand scopes are > digital now. LeCroy used to sell the 470 MHz Iwatsu scope, but I think > they gave that up. The Iwatsu SS-7840H is around $10K. And not even > color. It looks to me like digital scopes are less expensive at pretty > much every performance point. Yup, economy of scale and other factors. Iwatsu still do a 1GHz analog storage scope at $28K: http://www.tequipment.net/IwatsuTS-81000.html The 400MHz analog is $7500: http://www.tequipment.net/IwatsuSS-7840.html and the 470MHz at $12K+: http://www.tequipment.net/IwatsuSS-7847A.html Ouch! Hameg do a 200MHz analog at $2500: http://www.hameg.com/335.0.html?L=0 The Instek 200MHz one is $1800 Dave. -- ================================================ Check out my Electronics Engineering Video Blog & Podcast: http://www.eevblog.com
From: John Larkin on 7 Apr 2010 10:05 On Wed, 7 Apr 2010 15:58:46 +1000, "David L. Jones" <altzone(a)gmail.com> wrote: >John Larkin wrote: >> On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:34:32 -0700, >> "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:45:57 -0700, John Larkin >>> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:28:29 -0700, >>>> "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, 6 Apr 2010 09:58:53 +0800, "Andrew" <anbyvbel(a)yahoo.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote >>>>>> in message news:kj2lr598g79va9rjpir1e1jaa0bvg90ji6(a)4ax.com... >>>>>> >>>>>>> If you don't like Rigol scopes, buy Tek or Agilent or LeCroy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Of course, the low-end Agilent is actually a Rigol. They rebrand >>>>>>> it and sell it for about twice the price of the Rigol. How do >>>>>>> you like that for rip-off-ness? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Wow, you just deprived Agilent of their hard earned cash, since a >>>>>> lot of people will buy Rigol instead. >>>>>> You should have kept this information to yourself. >>>>> >>>>> Bwahahahaha. That tidbit is kind of common knowledge around here >>>>> (s.e.d). >>>>> >>>>> For some real interesting times go really hunting for fast analog >>>>> scopes, they are available, though not inexpensive. 500 MHz is >>>>> still reasonably available, for about the price of a modest car. >>>> >>>> Tek 7103s and 7104s, 1 GHz analog scopes with microchannel plate >>>> CRTs, are fairly cheap on the used market. >>>> >>>> An 11801 sampler with a 12 GHz head can be had for under $2K. Nice >>>> scopes. >>>> >>>> John >>> >>> John, i am talking about brand _new_ analog 'scopes. Probably with >>> microchannel faceplates as well. All the old groovy Tektronix >>> patents >>> have expired. >> >> The only new analog scopes I know of are minor brands, >> B&K/Instek/Kenwood sort of stuff. All the name-brand scopes are >> digital now. LeCroy used to sell the 470 MHz Iwatsu scope, but I think >> they gave that up. The Iwatsu SS-7840H is around $10K. And not even >> color. It looks to me like digital scopes are less expensive at pretty >> much every performance point. > >Yup, economy of scale and other factors. > >Iwatsu still do a 1GHz analog storage scope at $28K: >http://www.tequipment.net/IwatsuTS-81000.html > That's quasi-digital, with a CRT-based scan converter tube. My friend Bernard still makes this: http://www.greenfieldtechnology.com/-Data-aquisition-system-.html which uses the older kind of scan converter, two electron gun/deflection systems facing one another in one tube with some sort of charge storage film between them. This is the one Tek used to market. Goodness knows where he gets the tubes... probably old stock. I don't miss tubes, or meter needles, or analog scopes at all. John
From: Nico Coesel on 7 Apr 2010 13:11
John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 22:11:47 -0700, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:38:52 -0700, >>"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:47:27 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 21:17:22 -0700, >>>>"JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 11:23:19 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 11:17:56 -0700, "Joel Koltner" >>>>>><zapwireDASHgroups(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>news:q90kr5pda1mtti9pea5c7tqmao0u9qvfpi(a)4ax.com... >>>>>>>> Rigol is like >>>>>>>> someone who used to leave their front door unlocked, until someone >>>>>>>> wandered in and stole something, so now they have to lock it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I think it's more like Rigol sells houses, and you bought a two-bedroom house >>>>>>>(although you're aware they also sell three-bedroom houses)... and one day you >>>>>>>notice (or Dave Jones metnions that) there's another door in your home. >>>>>>>There's no lock on that door, no sign on it saying, "keep out!," etc. Your >>>>>>>ne'er-do-well liberal democrat son moves back home after flunking out of his >>>>>>>liberal studies program at the local college and you get to thinking... having >>>>>>>that kid spend his nights in his own room rather than sleeping on the couch in >>>>>>>the living room every night would be nice... I wonder what's behind that door? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>:-) >>>>>> >>>>>>Not entirely the same. It costs money to build rooms, but it costs >>>>>>nothing to enable IP. Both have market value. >>>>>> >>>>>>But why didn't they do the 50 and even 20 MHz bandwidth limits >>>>>>digitally? They have 1G samples/second to work with. There are some >>>>>>saturation issues that might be best handled with analog limiting, but >>>>>>this *is* a cheap scope. >>>>>> >>>>>>John >>>>> >>>>>Perhaps the cost of the supporting hardware and algorithm development did >>>>>not look attractive in comparison to the varactor method. >>>> >>>>The 1052 already has user-programmable lowpass/highpass/bandpass >>>>digital filtering. Pretty cool. >>>> >>>>John >>>> >>>Postprocessing is not the same as input channel bandwidth limiting. >>>Check out the schematics of Tek analog 'scopes with input channel >>>bandwidth limiting. >> >>Well, they hardly had the option to do digital filtering. >> >>John > >But I wonder what various digital scopes do at slower sweep speeds. >Clock the ADC slower? Throw away samples? Interpolate? Filter? The only way to find out is to input a signal that causes aliasing. With high samplerates, short memories and limited hardware the only way is to simply discard samples. -- Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply indicates you are not using the right tools... nico(a)nctdevpuntnl (punt=.) -------------------------------------------------------------- |