Products > Test Equipment
Test Equipment Anonymous (TEA) group therapy thread
mnementh:
OMG... laying the drama on a little thick, doncha think? :-DD
The original point still obtains... the 2465 showed the glitch as easily as focusing a microscope. He had to have an idea what the problem was to set up the DSO to show it.
The analog scope STILL holds value for just this reason; you don't have to outwit it to get useful results.
mnem
*witling*
Specmaster:
--- Quote from: mnementh on June 01, 2018, 09:32:03 pm ---OMG... laying the drama on a little thick, doncha think? :-DD
The original point still obtains... the 2465 showed the glitch as easily as focusing a microscope. He had to have an idea what the problem was to set up the DSO to show it.
The analog scope STILL holds value for just this reason; you don't have to outwit it to get useful results.
mnem
*witling*
--- End quote ---
I tend to agree with you here, but it has to be said that in the first screen shots, we weren't comparing apples with apples as the 2465 set at 20mV / div and the DSO set to 50mV div. I also tend to think (as a none user/owner of a DSO other that a lowly DSO138) that the screen is a bit off putting as the traditional CRO is a 8 x 10 grid and the DSO is a 8 x 15 grid and I suspect thats could be a trap for a new player as I suspect that they would try to replicate the imagery shown on a CRO on DSO which is never going to look the same as the display is going to look stretched width-ways. Also the image on the 2465 is considerably cleaner looking than the DSO and TBH I would have expected the DSO to have been the cleaner image seeing as it set to a higher v/div, lifting it further away from any background noise factor :-//
tautech:
--- Quote from: mnementh on June 01, 2018, 09:32:03 pm ---OMG... laying the drama on a little thick, doncha think? :-DD
The original point still obtains... the 2465 showed the glitch as easily as focusing a microscope. He had to have an idea what the problem was to set up the DSO to show it.
The analog scope STILL holds value for just this reason; you don't have to outwit it to get useful results.
mnem
*witling*
--- End quote ---
Small difference; lowly DSO vs TOL professional CRO, fair comparison do you think ? :palm:
Little example of irregular glitch spotted, confirmed and searched for and triggered on.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1204x-e-released-for-domestic-markets-in-china/msg1370717/#msg1370717
Try that with your CRO. :P :horse:
bd139:
Yes. If you evaluate on price point, spend $10k on a scope now and compare to a 2465 :)
Specmaster:
Seeing as the Tek 2465 seems to hail from 1989 and the Siglent I think from 2014?, there has been 25 years of development since the 2465 so its perfectly logical to have expected that the lowly Siglent was or ought to have been almost upto or equivalent to the specs of 2465 as performances and specs have risen in general at an alarming rate in that time. I'd have thought that was considered to be top level in 1989 ought to have been the entry level today given that time of evolution. In most other sciences that seems to be the case, Hi-Fi, TV, Radio, Cars and cameras etc.
In that light, the "lowly" Siglent is only lowly when compared to what is on offer today and that must be way beyond what the 2465 offered back in the day??
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version