Analog versus digital oscilloscopes

[ataradov]

BS. Neeeeext!

Well, to be fair we never defined what quality is. May be he is an artist and enjoys smooth curves

And if we are talking about truthful representation of the signal, then BS indeed.

[innkeeper]

it's gotta be a tube oscilloscope for the best fidelity 

[Elf]

It is impossible that digital equipment can surpass analog equipment ever, because digital equipment will always approximate, analog equipments take and return the full signal, the real signal.

Hopefully you still enjoy movies on VHS?

[raspberrypi]

This guy is just trying to make an argument. The more he posts the less he seems to know what hes talking about. Does he even own a scope? He totally missed the point people made where the digital sample rate is so fast that a human cant tell the difference. Plus an analog scope can't do screen captures which is a huge advantage.

What is he testing that a the digital scope is not good enough?

Rubbish.

[JPortici]

No digital oscilloscope could ever reach the graph quality of an analog oscilloscope. Like no compact disc could ever reach the sound quality of a vinyl disk.

and you are serious.

too young?
too old?
too noob?
or just trolling?

[borjam]

No digital oscilloscope could ever reach the graph quality of an analog oscilloscope. Like no compact disc could ever reach the sound quality of a vinyl disk.

Vinyl sounds "beautiful" because we do like its distortion. Exactly the same happens with analog tape recorders. I don't have anything against purposefully introduced distortion, but that's what it is.

Now you can buy emulations of analog gear in order to "spice" your digital recordings or "add warmth". Guess what do they do? Yes, add distortion

There's nothing wrong with it. It's just part of the creative process. But those "magical" misconceptions about sound recording won't help you. Really!

So, what happens with an analog oscilloscope? It's been explained countless times. Analog scopes naturally display an average of many sweeps.

[alsetalokin4017]

Well, analog scopes are generally heavier than their corresponding digital counterparts, so they make better doorstops. But I remember some years ago when I was using a LeCroy WaveSomething that was running its scope application on a Windows XP operating system, and was connected to our lab's LAN. I could watch YouTube videos and check my email on the oscilloscope! Try that with a Tek 7000 series.....  I don't think there's a plugin for that.     

[Gyro]

Why are you guys continuing to feed a Troll - you know they thrive on it! 

[tautech]

A digital equipment takes samples of a wave then calculates the evolution of the wave among its two samples, that means that the digital equipment is inventing the evolution of the wave among its two samples, while the wave among its two samples could be completely different. And this is what happens with digital oscilloscopes and with compact disc players. Analog oscilloscopes, as well as vinyl disc players, do not invent anything, they just return the real wave.

Yes the reconstruction of the displayed signal from data points is called interpolation, the higher sampling speeds and memory depths used give better quality reconstruction but some DSO's do it better than others.
Interpolation algorithms are more advanced these days but indeed there is the possibility of reconstruction errors BUT with a CRO and taking measurements from the graticules there is a higher chance of error from parallax error.

I'd rather the uP did that work for me and display the result on the display.
I've owned a heap of CRO's and I'm not going back. 

[djnz]

Harry Nyquist and Claude Shannon say "Hello".