| Products > Test Equipment |
| Does old test equipment really ever become truly obsolete? |
| << < (5/14) > >> |
| J-R:
--- Quote from: tggzzz on May 22, 2024, 10:55:06 pm ---Test equipment becomes obsolete when either (1) the thing it is measuring becomes obsolete, or (2) it ceases operating effectively. An example of (1) is waveform monitors for analogue TV/monitor signals. An example of (2) is unsaturated Weston standard cells. --- End quote --- But there are still people who could want those items, such as for retro-computing (1), or as a conversation piece to sit on the shelf (2). |
| David Hess:
--- Quote from: Kleinstein on May 22, 2024, 04:32:35 pm ---Old scopes really are obsolete. Even if they still work and could be used the high power consumption and maybe fan noise can be a show stopper. --- End quote --- A higher bandwidth older instrument can always show things that a lower bandwidth newer instrument will miss no matter how many extra features the newer instrument has. For most applications, an old digital storage oscilloscope is just as good as a new one, and digital storage oscilloscopes have been around for 40 years now. --- Quote from: AG6QR on May 22, 2024, 11:07:26 pm ---Tektronix scopes from the dawn of the integrated circuit age have custom chips in them, with no readily available replacement sources except other old Tektronix scopes. Too often, the same chips have failed in several scopes, so cannibalizing is not always practical. --- End quote --- Jim Williams gave the same reason for preferring older Tektronix instruments. With exception of much later models, those custom Tektronix ICs and hybrids are about the least likely parts to fail. |
| EvgenyG:
--- Quote from: pdenisowski on May 22, 2024, 11:39:36 pm ---The only gray area is where older instruments can still perform ... roughly ... the same measurements. I can use my analog HM407 scope for a lot of basic measurements, and for some of these it is not appreciably worse than a "modern" scope. But speaking as a hobbyist, I feel that there are much better and much more cost-effective solutions than buying a decades-old analog scope. --- End quote --- HM407 is a great little scope. I've got one too. Yours is in such great condition. Mine came from a Uni lab and is a bit thrashed. I replaced all rotary encoders, fully recapped (136 capacitors!!!) and cleaned it. Still does not look as great as yours, but works well, has a super sharp trace. Nothing beats its AutoSet speed and roll mode is amazing. I also quite like the quick and easy way to change scope modes with presets. I would love to get a HM1507 at some point. It is quite well made inside, fairly easy to service. I think having one analog scope is good for a lab. I don't see a reason to get more than one unless you're a vintage tech fan or want to open a museum. Unfortunately, even the HM407 won't see things that any modern high refresh waveform rate scope would easily do. |
| Vertamps:
I love electronics, iv bought alot of broken stuff and have spent time fixing for the last 15 years many of boxes. Some that have sat for 5+ years after acquiring. Getting older and making more money, im realizing that some things i should just buy new and be happy with. It depends where you are in your journey. I love my stuff, but id only save 1 or two items in a house fire. I have several professional musician friends that collect music synthesizers. After restoring several dozen vintage synths over the years iv learned if you need something to work for your job, go a buy a new one with a warranty. Vintage synths are cool, and sound great. But i went from $30 an hr to $80 an hr because it was not worth it anymore to restore old gear, my time should be spent on other things LIFE has to offer. Even though i may enjoy it at times, more often i end up cursing the obligation of restoring something. Recycling,melting down, burying and blowing up old stuff is OK. Not everything should be kept forever. Iv got alot of old test gear that im restoring. But to what end? Something is ALWAYS for sale and snickerdoodles my shelves are full, stuff lives on the floor now. Those shining objects with a buy it now button are my sweet horrible addiction. |
| CatalinaWOW:
In my world there are two definitions for obsolescence. 1. No longer useful for purpose. This can mean either that the purpose has gone away, or that support in the form of spare parts, cables, etc. are no longer available. 2. Wildly less useful than current versions of the same product, making it undesirable. Both of these are a bit fuzzy. In general the first definition has some element of number of users. A tiny market of historians or cult users of a product doesn't really qualify as purpose. So Sinclair and COSMAC computers are obsolete, loss of purpose as are original IBM PCs. But the entire world of audio enthusiasts is well served by oscilloscopes (from a performance standpoint) from just about any time from the mid-50s on, so I wouldn't call them obsolete based on loss of purpose. But a range of scopes from the late 70s and the 80s are obsolete because they can't be maintained. The second definition is where is really hits. I have a variety of oscilloscopes ranging from 1960s designs up to the present. And use the newest one almost always. Because it is small, light and has features that are useful, even though the UI is clumsy relative to many of the classic scopes. Things like viewing pre-trigger signals. Decoding serial data. And others. Weston cells are another example. When available they still provide a voltage reference that is far better than most folks really need, so in a sense still suitable for purpose. But they are no longer available or maintainable. And far less convenient than packaged standards available today. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |