Thanks R&S for letting me spend >2k$ on a scope that's broken by design! Luckily it was only 2k$ and not 8k$. I was aware that early adopting will give me buggy firmware, but this is quite a substantial hardware issue. Let's see how annoying this will be when using it for real. R&S care to comment?I don't think it is broken by design. If you watch the whole video, all the scopes does the same.
Now have a picture of people all across the world currently whacking their scopes, DMMS, PSU's, SMU's ....
Looking forward to future teardowns looking at whack-a-scope attenuation and for cushion mounted mainboards and connectors
Does whack-a-scope also cause peaks on any signal generator output? ... or DMMs and Power Supplies?
That could cause fun on SMU tests if they suffer too :p
Thanks R&S for letting me spend >2k$ on a scope that's broken by design! Luckily it was only 2k$ and not 8k$. I was aware that early adopting will give me buggy firmware, but this is quite a substantial hardware issue. Let's see how annoying this will be when using it for real. R&S care to comment?I don't think it is broken by design. If you watch the whole video, all the scopes does the same. You can avoid the full touchscreen interface and operate it remotely when you need to do really sensitive measurements.
So we have to consider any scope with MLCCs in the channel frontend being cheap? The manufactures should choose types which are less susceptible to microphonics at least.
Thanks R&S for letting me spend >2k$ on a scope that's broken by design! Luckily it was only 2k$ and not 8k$. I was aware that early adopting will give me buggy firmware, but this is quite a substantial hardware issue. Let's see how annoying this will be when using it for real. R&S care to comment?I don't think it is broken by design. If you watch the whole video, all the scopes does the same. You can avoid the full touchscreen interface and operate it remotely when you need to do really sensitive measurements.
It was blindly obvious to me in the first few minutes of using it, so I'd say it's a problem.
Tapping the BNC's, ok, every scope has a direct coupling at that point, fair enough.
Whacking the top of the unit, ok, don't do that, fair enough.
But a much touted touch screen being able to generate many division level impulses when tapped is unacceptable, even if some units aren't as susceptible.
Thanks R&S for letting me spend >2k$ on a scope that's broken by design! Luckily it was only 2k$ and not 8k$. I was aware that early adopting will give me buggy firmware, but this is quite a substantial hardware issue. Let's see how annoying this will be when using it for real. R&S care to comment?
Thanks R&S for letting me spend >2k$ on a scope that's broken by design! Luckily it was only 2k$ and not 8k$. I was aware that early adopting will give me buggy firmware, but this is quite a substantial hardware issue. Let's see how annoying this will be when using it for real. R&S care to comment?
This is how 8k-20k€ equipment is working ... while hitting the inputs with fingernails. Slapping the chassis produces this as well but not that high, its mostly covered by its noise.
I´ve to hit my RTB unit pretty hard before its doing this.
In normal use there s no problem with my one.
If you want this problem fixed, just talk to marketing. They'll insist upon the world's first "Low Vibration Front End".
The sales people will love because they'll be able to do side-by-side demos tapping on the competitor BNCs and showing how crap they are!
I'm serious.
LowVibTM
or the even better NoVibTM
The first manufacturer to come up with an isolated front end daughter board held in place by rubber bands will win the market I tell you.
A killing will also be had on 3rd party rubber band replacement kits in 10 years time.
Just don't try to patent it, I have prior art more than a decade back.
I also have prior art on using cotton wool, antistatic foam, sorbothane, and feminine hygine products (long story).
Pro tip, it's also possible to get helpful isolation using various jazzy PCB routing techniques.
Well this is very disappointing!
On the 16th March I paid for and placed an order for a Rohde & Schwarz RTB2K-COM4 package with TEquipment.
This was before any message appeared on their web page stating "SHIPPING TO USA ADDRESSES ONLY!".
The order was accepted and the next day I spoke to lady from TEquipment who confirmed my address and payment.
A couple of days latter I had an email conversations with TEquipment about shipping dates and was assured that I would receive a unit. In fact it was stressed that I was likely to receive one with much sooner than the quoted 3rd May.
Then just now I received a email saying:
"Unfortunately due to our contractual obligations with R & S we are unable to export any of the items sold by them and we will have to cancel the order you placed with us."
TEquipment then refunded my money that they had kindly kept in their bank for me over the last 13 days.
This whole operation by Rohde & Schwarz to only offer this promotion to the USA and Canada really stinks.
Grrr.
Well this is very disappointing!
[...]
This whole operation by Rohde & Schwarz to only offer this promotion to the USA and Canada really stinks.
Grrr.
So we have to consider any scope with MLCCs in the channel frontend being cheap? The manufactures should choose types which are less susceptible to microphonics at least.
Or mount them on their side (it works)
Not exactly production friendly though. Although if you want to really annoy your assembler, request it
Well this is very disappointing!
[...]
This whole operation by Rohde & Schwarz to only offer this promotion to the USA and Canada really stinks.
Grrr.
Maybe you can buy Octane's scope -- he seems to be regretting his purchase now (see post #706 in this thread). Win-win!
Knocked the enclosure in the picture, knocking BNC is ~ 3 div wide instead. Still, it's VERY much affected
So we have to consider any scope with MLCCs in the channel frontend being cheap? The manufactures should choose types which are less susceptible to microphonics at least.
Or mount them on their side (it works)
Not exactly production friendly though. Although if you want to really annoy your assembler, request itSorry if I am asking a dumb question... If the PCB is mounted vertical to the base of the scope (like the Keysight 1000X series), isn't it equivalent to having the multilayer caps mounted on their side?
So we have to consider any scope with MLCCs in the channel frontend being cheap? The manufactures should choose types which are less susceptible to microphonics at least.
Or mount them on their side (it works)
Not exactly production friendly though. Although if you want to really annoy your assembler, request itSorry if I am asking a dumb question... If the PCB is mounted vertical to the base of the scope (like the Keysight 1000X series), isn't it equivalent to having the multilayer caps mounted on their side?
I would guess it depends on the relative orientation between the cap and the PCB. Not the overall orientation.
So we have to consider any scope with MLCCs in the channel frontend being cheap? The manufactures should choose types which are less susceptible to microphonics at least.
Or mount them on their side (it works)
Not exactly production friendly though. Although if you want to really annoy your assembler, request itSorry if I am asking a dumb question... If the PCB is mounted vertical to the base of the scope (like the Keysight 1000X series), isn't it equivalent to having the multilayer caps mounted on their side?
I would guess it depends on the relative orientation between the cap and the PCB. Not the overall orientation. If you excite flexing vibrations in the PCB then bending a "flat" cap is easier then a cap that's higher then wide. See beams with different aspect ratios...