So, the best way to avoid a post being closed is focus only on the Technical Arguments instead of commenting about other people's posts using terms like: "idiot and a troll", "incoherent babbling", "stupidity", "you argue is silly".
Most of the things that benefit from single shot capture are digital signals which are best captured, filtered and processed by digital domain tools such as logic analysers and protocol analysers.
Most of the things that benefit from single shot capture are digital signals which are best captured, filtered and processed by digital domain tools such as logic analysers and protocol analysers.
Two examples of when single shot actually solves unusual, non digital problems.
1. Uncorrelated signals on multiple channels. Modern DSOs have dropped the 'ALT' trigger function, but a single shot can yield a clear view of uncorrelated multiple channels.
2. Noisy or unknown signals that you can't seem to trigger properly on--just slow the timebase down a bit and take a random (or triggered in some cases) single shot and then zoom in and see what is going on. When you see it, it makes it easier to figure out how to trigger on it.
See my earlier reply to David Hess. Those infrequent aberrations are captured quite well by any decent modern DSO, and then usually can be observed separately using advanced trigger techniques. So the 2467B, a very impressive and expensive instrument in its time, can merely show you occasional glimpses of your rogue signals, whereas a proper DSO can display them quite clearly in living color.
A Rigol 1054z can read up to 125MHz inside the -3db and barely anything after that. A CRO with good sensitivity up to 300-500 MHz is not so expensive.
I'll repeat one more time, I'm NOT saying that a CRO is better than a DSO (I also prefer a DSO), I'm saying that a Good CRO can do almost all the necessary work for a hobbyist and even a professional, and they cost much less than a DSO of the same bandwidth...that CROs have a lot of triggering and zoom features.
Most of the things that benefit from single shot capture are digital signals which are best captured, filtered and processed by digital domain tools such as logic analysers and protocol analysers.
Two examples of when single shot actually solves unusual, non digital problems.
1. Uncorrelated signals on multiple channels. Modern DSOs have dropped the 'ALT' trigger function, but a single shot can yield a clear view of uncorrelated multiple channels.
2. Noisy or unknown signals that you can't seem to trigger properly on--just slow the timebase down a bit and take a random (or triggered in some cases) single shot and then zoom in and see what is going on. When you see it, it makes it easier to figure out how to trigger on it.
I very frequently use single shot to capture things like startup and transient response of power supplies. I also frequently capture and save waveforms for later comparison. It's also not uncommon that I want to look at the analog aspect of a digital signal.
As for the 2465A that can display a signal beyond its specified BW, most scopes will do that if you overdrive them, the limiting factor is usually the trigger.
My digital domain tools are on my DSO.
Most of the things that benefit from single shot capture are digital signals which are best captured, filtered and processed by digital domain tools such as logic analysers and protocol analysers.
Two examples of when single shot actually solves unusual, non digital problems.
1. Uncorrelated signals on multiple channels. Modern DSOs have dropped the 'ALT' trigger function, but a single shot can yield a clear view of uncorrelated multiple channels.
2. Noisy or unknown signals that you can't seem to trigger properly on--just slow the timebase down a bit and take a random (or triggered in some cases) single shot and then zoom in and see what is going on. When you see it, it makes it easier to figure out how to trigger on it.
Amusingly, my Tek485 (nominally 350MHz) will trigger on sine waves >1GHz. The limiting factor appears to be the amplitude, because that has fallen to ~0.2 divisions. Tek made good triggering circuits
Nonetheless, an attitude that only digitising scopes are useful is incorrect. The aphorism in my .sig indicates my views.
This "Output Channel" could be a very interesting feature to add Storage Capability to an Analog Scope.
Amusingly, my Tek485 (nominally 350MHz) will trigger on sine waves >1GHz. The limiting factor appears to be the amplitude, because that has fallen to ~0.2 divisions. Tek made good triggering circuitsMy 485 is as of yet unrestored and has an aberration on the very fastest timebase, so I can't test that. On most scopes if you just keep increasing the input amplitude, you can still get a vertical amplifier response well after the trigger has given up. Perhaps the tunnel diode triggers of the 485 are exceptionally good. Trigger response on sine waves well above the specified bandwidth is not an unusual feature on scopes, but rather a necessity to ensure a stable trigger in normal operation.
QuoteNonetheless, an attitude that only digitising scopes are useful is incorrect. The aphorism in my .sig indicates my views.
OK, then compare scopes to aircraft. Gliders do fly, and certainly build skills like coordination, energy management, etc. If you just want to demonstrate that they can be made to work, you can. However, if you actually need to get somewhere, you select a conventional powered aircraft --unless you happen to live on the edge of a huge cliff overlooking your destination. I can demonstrate the abilities of an analog scope all day long, but when I need to see something there's a 99% chance I'm grabbing a DSO of some sort.
This also reminds me the RAW option, you can get the raw data, send to PC and do a lot of good work, e.g.: in the DS1054Z, the FFT is much better calculated using the PC power processing, you can even calculate a good accurate THD.
CROs seem to have reached collectable status. Every online auction I've seen in years has resulted in competition and greatly inflated prices for what you're getting as a tool.
Single shot capture is a must have nowadays.
Unfortunately their intensity grading is always or almost always horridly implemented. It neither duplicates the intensity curve of a CRT, so it cannot be used for tangential measurements, and it does not look nearly as good.
Some are bad, some newer ones are better but they definitely have a different brightness/repetition rate curve, with the DSO being a lot flatter. That means you can't tell as much by how it looks, but you can spot more infrequent signals. But it is always problematic to judge new technology by how well it replicates old--a decent entry-level DSO these days will have intensity color grading. With some setup care, the feature is very useful. Here's a picture of a pulse that repeats at 20MHz but every millionth pulse has some extra amplitude.
(Apart from that, gliders can fly higher than commercial airliners (except Concorde), often fly higher and faster than light aircraft, can travel further than you imagine, and can stay up for longer than their pilots can stay awake. But that is irrelevant to this thread)
As far as collectable status, I suspect something more general is going on because used test equipment of all types has become much rarer and more expensive over the past couple of years.
QuoteSingle shot capture is a must have nowadays.
It was a must 20 years ago yet somehow we got by, or at least I did, through various clever tricks.
That is why I gave an objective test although most people are not aware of its significance. Can a DSO with intensity grading make tangential measurements? No, or at least I have never found one which could.
What good would this be? Not all DSOs can apply standard deviation and RMS measurements to every parameter, and tangential measurements are excellent for verifying that the standard deviation or RMS measurement is accurate. When I was testing DSOs to see if they could make accurate standard deviation and RMS measurements of Gaussian noise, tangential measurement on an analog oscilloscope served to verify the signal source to better than 2%. The alternative would have been something like a sampling RMS voltmeter.
(Apart from that, gliders can fly higher than commercial airliners (except Concorde), often fly higher and faster than light aircraft, can travel further than you imagine, and can stay up for longer than their pilots can stay awake. But that is irrelevant to this thread)
It's not irrelevant, it's directly on point. Despite your glider theoretically having all those attributes on a good day, it has almost zero practical applications other than recreation. If I suddenly needed to go to Las Vegas quickly (a 200-mile straight line for me, ~300 mile/4-6 hour drive), I could go to a local airport and get a beat up rental Skyhawk (or a T182 Skylane, perhaps) and reliably be there in under two hours. That's going to be difficult to match with any glider no matter how skilled you may be.
Also, I don't know the economics angle very well, but I suspect that gliding is overall a tad more expensive then general aviation, at least here in the US.