Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10 Next
Beginners / Re: RF circuits and oscilloscope
« Last post by TSL on Today at 11:11:36 AM »
I was interested in learning about RF circuits and thought if I wanted to experiment with the FM band 88 to 110 MHZ, what would be the best oscilloscope to experiment and learn with?

And the question should be asked... Why do you want to experiment in the FM broadcast band ?


Blog Specific / Re: EEVblog #686 - Mailbag
« Last post by 84GKSIG on Today at 11:10:21 AM »
Also Dave, please, since you mention the uRAD and  you were one of the judges would you do a rant on the Hackaday Prize? Or is there one somewhere already?

not sure if those links cover what you were after  :-+
Maybe this op-amp from LT suites the bill:
Input Common Mode Range: V– to V– + 76V
Designing Analog Chips - Hans Camenzind. This book can be freely downloaded here:

Their server is not configured correctly and is serving a perl script instead of executing it. The book is at
Test Equipment / Re: Ridiculously small Rigol DS1000z series font size
« Last post by nuno on Today at 11:06:02 AM »
Here are the DS1000Z and DS2000 screen sizes compared
Nice, thanks for the comparison. I would live pretty well with the DS2K screen size. But I need 4 channels, and can't justify the investment in a DS4K.
I guess I will have to purchase one to play with it, but now they have those PRoC blue tooth ones and have the programmer but $50 for the mouse/programmer, I'm still undecided.

But That document states that SWD is an ARM standard and is therefore fully compliant, so maybe your programmer doesn't support SWD?

Page 9 of the previously linked document:
The SWD interface uses the Serial Wire Debug protocol developed by ARM. The CY8C42xx silicon integrates the standard Cortex M0 DAP block provided by ARM. Therefore, it complies with the ARM specification, ARM Debug Interface v5. Architecture Specification. The JTAG interface is not supported by the CY8C42xx silicon.
Beginners / Re: RF circuits and oscilloscope
« Last post by T3sl4co1l on Today at 11:01:00 AM »
If you don't have any equipment out there, you're better off buying a spec than a scope.  Or none at all, and faking it...  That's how it was done back in the day.

Scopes are better at the time domain, looking at periodic or transient signals and very wide bandwidths.  One reason you might use a scope on an RF circuit is to check the harmonic distortion of a signal.  Needless to say, you need a bandwidth many times the active frequency to observe the harmonics correctly.

Scopes are not good at observing modulation, which is not a periodic phenomenon, but manifests as blurring or jumpiness or instability in an otherwise more-or-less periodic signal.  Scopes are good at observing the demodulated signal, of course (assuming a time domain representation is more useful, that is).

The bandwidth of a $400 scope is 100-200MHz, but the bandwidth of a spec of the same class is over 500MHz.

  • Power amplifiers:       Dual Skrell Exordium heptoblocs
  • Preamplifier:               Divergent Audio 6000 SKU unitrode
  • Speakers:                   Kitsch Fortissimo magnetodynamics
  • Turntable:                   Panderholz Ostentatio adiabatic rostrum
  • Interconnects:            Supernal Ultima woven mithril
That is absolutely cool!  Thumbs up!
Sorry, I mean just use an isolated converter (it floats with the voltages you are measuring, just like a multimeter).

AFAICS without an isolated converter you will always end up using matched resistors to increase the common mode range ... and at that point you might as well just use a difference amplifier and a single ended ADC IMO. They are available for high voltages and the resistors will be much better matched than anything you can do yourself.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10 Next