Author Topic: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?  (Read 33554 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6446
  • Country: hr
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #75 on: September 06, 2021, 10:04:26 pm »
but I think cellphones do have more energy demand because of their OS and things they do like GPS, internet etc.
that wouldn't be the Case in a Multimeter. Also Apple proved it is possible to create RISC with very low energy demand.
So if they engineer it correctly it should be possible to last more than a day :-)

UNI-T181 will probably last more than a day (I have not checked) and has a good graphical display and like phones it use a special LiIon battery.

UNI-T-181 cannot be used while charging and battery cannot be charged outside meter and exchanged easily with a second charged one.

Metrix MTX 3293 has better battery life, it uses AA cells so can be run from primary cells and NiMh too, you can charge secondary set of NiMH batteries in external charger and simply exchange it, or you can run meter plugged in.
Metrix is actually example how it should be done...

Otherwise, UNI-T-181 is measurements wise, and usability wise very nice instrument. Apart from Joe damaging it easily with piezo sparker, which might or not be an issue, quite capable meter.
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline Markus2801A

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 107
  • Country: at
  • Pobody’s Nerfect ;-)
    • KEM InfoPage
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #76 on: September 07, 2021, 05:03:17 am »
Regarding Metrahit 30M: it has been discontinued  :'(
RS and other seller pointing to other Metrahit Series as "alternatives"
But spec wise there seems no alternative for this 1,200,000 digit display range handheld Multimeter ;-)

Why did Gossen not continue?
Teacher for electrical Engineering @ HTL and Werkmeisterschule :-)
 

Online Kleinstein

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 14072
  • Country: de
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #77 on: September 07, 2021, 05:30:40 am »
There was probably not enough demand for such a high resolution handheld meter.

I don't think the last digit would be really stable between 1 min after turn on and fully warmed up (1 hour). So the resolution is of limited value.
The benchtop 6 digit meters nearly all use a ovenized reference. This is not really practical in the cramped space.
With the compact form the temperature rise is also larger than with a more spread out bench meter.

6 digits are mainly a thing if the result is not read by eye, but directly send to a computer / memory.
The important parts are often more the ability to resolve small voltages, not the number of digits.  With modern SD ADCs the number of digits as pure resolution is not a good measure of the quality.
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline AaronLee

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 229
  • Country: kr
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #78 on: September 07, 2021, 06:23:49 am »
I don't think the last digit would be really stable between 1 min after turn on and fully warmed up (1 hour). So the resolution is of limited value.
The benchtop 6 digit meters nearly all use a ovenized reference. This is not really practical in the cramped space.
With the compact form the temperature rise is also larger than with a more spread out bench meter.

I've never looked at benchtop DMM teardowns, but from what little I know, at least some of them use a fan. Trying to use a fan in a portable DMM would likely be silly, due to size constraints and a larger draw on the battery. Also, for a non-battery powered device, and where a fan can be added to the design if necessary, there's no limit for the designer in choosing exactly the components necessary to get that increased accuracy, even if they're power hungry and generate a lot of heat.

And then you have market forces. Everyone needs a scope and handheld DMM, but not everyone needs a precison bench DMM, therefore sales volumes would be lower, less agressive competition for that market space etc.

For me personally, if I was extremely limited in what items I could have for my workbench, I'd of course need a power supply, followed by a scope and then a high precision benchtop DMM. Sure, for basic measurements I could use either a handheld or a benchtop, but for my use I have no need for the portability of a handheld. ALL my measurements are done on my workbench, and some require the high accuracy not typically found in handhelds.

Of course I realize I'm probably not in the norm, as so many members here do seem to think that a portable DMM is a necessity. Now if I needed a DMM for checking the house wiring, fixing appliances or other items that aren't practical to move onto or next to my workbench, then the workbench DMM would be impractical and a portable DMM would be necessary.

Anyways, I agree there's a much larger market for portable DMMs, but I disagree that everyone needs a handheld DMM. Rather most need, or at least prefer to have a handheld as their only DMM, if limited to only one.
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #79 on: September 07, 2021, 06:40:11 am »
UNI-T181 will probably last more than a day (I have not checked) and has a good graphical display.

Problem: I want it to last six months to a year. I don't want to be worrying about the battery every time I switch it on.


 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #80 on: September 07, 2021, 06:48:36 am »
but I think cellphones do have more energy demand because of their OS and things they do like GPS, internet etc.
that wouldn't be the Case in a Multimeter. Also Apple proved it is possible to create RISC with very low energy demand.

There are some multimeters that have OLED graphical screens. Me? I'd never buy one. They're mostly showing a single number, there's no reason an LCD can't do that.

...which leads us to another topic, why aren't LCDs on high-end meters as crisp/contrasty as the freebie DT830Bs?

(Yes, they have more segments so more multiplexing but that's not mandatory, it can be improved)
 

Offline AaronLee

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 229
  • Country: kr
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #81 on: September 07, 2021, 06:57:49 am »
There are some multimeters that have OLED graphical screens. Me? I'd never buy one. They're mostly showing a single number, there's no reason an LCD can't do that.

Are you referring to portable DMMs or all (portable and benchtop) DMMs? For benchtop DMMs, having a graphical touchscreen (OLED, graphical LCD, or whatever) which allows for various menus with nice descriptions/information about what you're doing I find to be very important. For a portable DMM, I've never had one with an OLED, nor would care for one unless it made the display easier to read.
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #82 on: September 07, 2021, 06:59:07 am »
Right now I'll settle for a meter with intelligent, zero-drama auto-power-off (ie. no "beep, beep, beep" warning!!  :palm: ) and that wakes up exactly where it was at the press of a button.

eg. my Brymen BM857.
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #83 on: September 07, 2021, 07:01:54 am »
There are some multimeters that have OLED graphical screens. Me? I'd never buy one.

Are you referring to portable DMMs or all (portable and benchtop) DMMs?

Battery powered DMMs.

If it's plugged in then obviously you can have a big touch screen, etc., no problem.

I'd still insist on LCD though, not OLED. I want my equipment to last.
 
The following users thanked this post: AaronLee

Offline PA4TIM

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1161
  • Country: nl
  • instruments are like rabbits, they multiply fast
    • PA4TIMs shelter for orphan measurement stuff
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #84 on: September 07, 2021, 09:23:00 am »
My scope (R&S, close to 5000 euro) was more expensive then my Bench DMMs (a few Keithleys) I have some experience with budget scopes and DMMs and they all were not very good so I stick to the more serious brands. But I use them professionally. But before that I already switched to good brands. The problem is that a B grade scope (200 euro) is as good as a 200 benchmeter, both are crap  ;D Bench meter were long only targeted at prof use. Like prof scopes, prof DMMs are expensive (my most used handheld DMMs were between 200 and 800 euros, my benchmeters 800 to 4500 euro) But now there are loads of ultra cheap hobby scopes, you can not compare them to serious benchmeters and you already experienced they do not come close to a Fluke, Keysight or Keithley. The reason most hobby users are fine using a cheap hobbyscope is the type of use. Rather simple ans most scopes will do. However if you have to do complex critical measurements using special triggering, fast signals etc the hobby scope will not do. I once did some reverse recovery measurements on diodes and my Rigol 100 MHz scope showed very wrong signals. My R&S was correct. Good probes cost more as cheap scopes incl probes.

But a bench DMM is not complex to use and many users use all functions. If the the UI is crap almost every user will not like it, while for the scope they do not notice that, because they only use auto and maybe some simple triggering, so all other functions can be as crap as possible (in performance and/or UI) and most people do not notices that. That is why it seems like bench DMMs are more expensive as scopes.
www.pa4tim.nl my collection measurement gear and experiments Also lots of info about network analyse
www.schneiderelectronicsrepair.nl  repair of test and calibration equipment
https://www.youtube.com/user/pa4tim my youtube channel
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline Markus2801A

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 107
  • Country: at
  • Pobody’s Nerfect ;-)
    • KEM InfoPage
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #85 on: September 07, 2021, 10:48:33 am »
There was probably not enough demand for such a high resolution handheld meter.

I don't think the last digit would be really stable between 1 min after turn on and fully warmed up (1 hour). So the resolution is of limited value.
The benchtop 6 digit meters nearly all use a ovenized reference. This is not really practical in the cramped space.
With the compact form the temperature rise is also larger than with a more spread out bench meter.

6 digits are mainly a thing if the result is not read by eye, but directly send to a computer / memory.
The important parts are often more the ability to resolve small voltages, not the number of digits.  With modern SD ADCs the number of digits as pure resolution is not a good measure of the quality.

I think this is most probably the case why it has been discontinued.

A question to all: Are the high end (high priced approx 850€ and more) Gossen Multimeters worth the money?

Would say they have a good reputation but there is also this annoying magnetic and static field issue, described in this


by Joe smith - dunno if there are any newer revision of this Gossen Series were those issues already have been fixed?

So in other words: what speaks out for Gossen their pros and cons, or Fluke or other brands, besides their brand names?
« Last Edit: September 07, 2021, 10:57:30 am by Markus2801A »
Teacher for electrical Engineering @ HTL and Werkmeisterschule :-)
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #86 on: September 07, 2021, 12:57:39 pm »
The benchtop 6 digit meters nearly all use a ovenized reference. This is not really practical in the cramped space.
With the compact form the temperature rise is also larger than with a more spread out bench meter.

This raises the question of why multimeters can't have an internal temperature sensor and be calibrated across a range of different temperatures.

The calibration would take a few hours but I'm sure it could be automated so it's no big deal on a production line.
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #87 on: September 07, 2021, 01:08:16 pm »
A question to all: Are the high end (high priced approx 850€ and more) Gossen Multimeters worth the money?

With Brymen around? No.

So in other words: what speaks out for Gossen their pros and cons, or Fluke or other brands, besides their brand names?

Flukes work, people are used to buying Flukes, people know what they're getting for their money when they buy one. At a professional level people aren't interested in shopping around or taking a chance on a different brand just to save $200 on something that's going to last for many years (hopefully!)

Gossen aren't massive outside Germany but I imagine the same reasoning applies there.
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Online mawyatt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3192
  • Country: us
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #88 on: September 07, 2021, 03:07:06 pm »

Flukes work, people are used to buying Flukes, people know what they're getting for their money when they buy one. At a professional level people aren't interested in shopping around or taking a chance on a different brand just to save $200 on something that's going to last for many years (hopefully!)

Agree, we've got a Fluke 87 that's probably 30~35 years old. It's still working and has never been calibrated and still compares well to our KS34465A!

It's my goto handheld DMM, and has been as long as I can remember :-+

Best,
Curiosity killed the cat, also depleted my wallet!
~Wyatt Labs by Mike~
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #89 on: September 07, 2021, 04:01:02 pm »
Flukes work, people are used to buying Flukes, people know what they're getting for their money when they buy one. At a professional level people aren't interested in shopping around or taking a chance on a different brand just to save $200 on something that's going to last for many years (hopefully!)
Agree, we've got a Fluke 87...

The downside of this is that Fluke can never innovate or make another new meter. They'll still be making the 87V a thousand years from now.

(and it will still default to AC in current mode)
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline Bassman59

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2501
  • Country: us
  • Yes, I do this for a living
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #90 on: September 07, 2021, 04:09:37 pm »
Flukes work, people are used to buying Flukes, people know what they're getting for their money when they buy one. At a professional level people aren't interested in shopping around or taking a chance on a different brand just to save $200 on something that's going to last for many years (hopefully!)
Agree, we've got a Fluke 87...

The downside of this is that Fluke can never innovate or make another new meter. They'll still be making the 87V a thousand years from now.

(and it will still default to AC in current mode)

Seems like Fluke does offer many other meters.

And the 233 with detachable display looks like a really cool thing.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2021, 04:12:58 pm by Bassman59 »
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #91 on: September 07, 2021, 04:48:11 pm »
Seems like Fluke does offer many other meters.

Oh, sure, they make lots of meters... but nothing that's cheaper than the 87V would work on an EE workbench. They're all missing some essential feature or other (usually uA or TRMS).
« Last Edit: September 07, 2021, 04:49:58 pm by Fungus »
 

Offline Markus2801A

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 107
  • Country: at
  • Pobody’s Nerfect ;-)
    • KEM InfoPage
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #92 on: September 07, 2021, 08:15:18 pm »

Seems like Fluke does offer many other meters.

And the 233 with detachable display looks like a really cool thing.

Seems gossen has the same "problem", they seem to only renamed their series. But nothing new has evolved since many years, isn't this strange?
Nothing new since almost a decade no innovation no new design better operating/usability/display etc.? Am I wrong or do these companies hold on too hard on their success resulting in maybe getting overruled by the good and cheaper "asian" alternatives (like Brymen)?
Look at whts happened to Nokia, could something also happen tho them?
Teacher for electrical Engineering @ HTL and Werkmeisterschule :-)
 

Offline bdunham7

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7727
  • Country: us
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #93 on: September 07, 2021, 09:14:08 pm »
Nothing new since almost a decade no innovation no new design better operating/usability/display etc.? Am I wrong or do these companies hold on too hard on their success resulting in maybe getting overruled by the good and cheaper "asian" alternatives (like Brymen)?

I think the handheld DMM is what you would call a 'mature technology'.  A lot of what passes for 'innovation' is just very incremental and sometimes dubious 'improvements'.  I think that there are 10X as many actual Fluke customers that would want to bring back a discontinued model (like the 187/189) over coming out with a new one.  Often companies with products like these will build them unchanged as long as they can because that is what their customers want--and when they do discontinue them, it is because some part of their supply chain has simply become unavailable.
A 3.5 digit 4.5 digit 5 digit 5.5 digit 6.5 digit 7.5 digit DMM is good enough for most people.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki, james_s, Markus2801A

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #94 on: September 08, 2021, 03:55:45 am »
The downside of this is that Fluke can never innovate or make another new meter. They'll still be making the 87V a thousand years from now.

(and it will still default to AC in current mode)

It hasn't always, the 87-III defaults to DC, they ruined the 87 with the V by switching the default to AC. It's absolutely obnoxious and the main reason I would not ever buy a 87V. I almost never measure AC current by inserting the meter in the circuit, I use my current clamp. They could make a 87-VI easily enough that offers the classic 87 features and form factor with a selectable default or last setting memory. If they did it's the meter I'd recommend everyone looking for a meter take a look at. My 87-III is the best meter I've ever owned.
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21611
  • Country: us
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #95 on: September 08, 2021, 04:00:35 am »
Oh, sure, they make lots of meters... but nothing that's cheaper than the 87V would work on an EE workbench. They're all missing some essential feature or other (usually uA or TRMS).

There's no reason for them to make anything cheaper, various Asian brands already own the market for cheap meters, Fluke is known for high quality professional products and by chasing the cheap market they would only degrade their name. Besides, it's not like the 87 costs thousands of dollars, it isn't cheap, but it isn't outlandishly expensive. People regularly spend significantly more on the latest smartphone every year or two.
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #96 on: September 08, 2021, 08:48:52 am »
There's no reason for them to make anything cheaper, various Asian brands already own the market for cheap meters, Fluke is known for high quality professional products and by chasing the cheap market they would only degrade their name.

The point is that Fluke is clearly in the market to maximize profits, not to provide anybody with the best possible multimeter.

This is where everybody says "Well, duh! They're a business!" but that's not the point being made. The point is that the 87V isn't perfect, It could easily be improved in a few places.

Fluke could also offer two or three alternative models to choose from while keeping the 87V as-is for all the corporate customers and die-hard 87V fans.

They never will though. Innovation is dead at the Fluke multimeter division. It died with the 87IV.

I think that there are 10X as many actual Fluke customers that would want to bring back a discontinued model (like the 187/189)

Yep.

they ruined the 87 with the V by switching the default to AC. It's absolutely obnoxious and the main reason I would not ever buy a 87V.

Me, too.

(Also: I've heard of Brymen and I can get two or three BM857s for the price of an 87V)
« Last Edit: September 08, 2021, 09:04:11 am by Fungus »
 
The following users thanked this post: Markus2801A

Offline bdunham7

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7727
  • Country: us
A 3.5 digit 4.5 digit 5 digit 5.5 digit 6.5 digit 7.5 digit DMM is good enough for most people.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki, james_s

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11332
  • Country: ch
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #98 on: September 08, 2021, 03:10:13 pm »
From everything people say, Brymen makes solid products. But they won’t be able to command Fluke prices until they’ve been on the market for 20-30 years: part of what you’re paying for in a Fluke is the knowledge that a Fluke meter will still be accurate after decades. (No need to bring up the handful of Fluke products that have conked out too young. They exist but are not representative.)

It is so silly that the same people keep making the same tired arguments against Fluke pricing. If you’re price sensitive, then don’t buy one. You’re not their target market. (Heck, as electronics people, we are not their target market to begin with.) Fluke’s target markets are electricians (especially industrial), where safety is more important than cost. Fluke isn’t cheap (but neither are they that expensive in absolute numbers), but they have the reputation that safety-sensitive customers care about a lot.
 
The following users thanked this post: james_s, AaronLee

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16560
  • Country: 00
Re: Why is a decent benchtop DMM more expensive than a scope?
« Reply #99 on: September 08, 2021, 03:37:49 pm »
The point is that the 87V isn't perfect, It could easily be improved in a few places.

So you want to be the product manager that messes with a successful formula?

The "V" in the name indicates that they've done it before.  :-//

Would (eg.) Bluetooth viewing+data logging affect their formula or sales?

https://www.fluke.com/en-us/product/electrical-testing/digital-multimeters/fluke-233

OK, it might affect sales of that meter. It would probably a gain for Fluke though as it simplifies production and distribution logistics to have one less model in the lineup.

« Last Edit: September 08, 2021, 03:44:23 pm by Fungus »
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf