Turn your Rigol DS1052E Oscilloscope into a 100MHz DS1102E

...

attempt to

the

called=20

ant=20

the=20

You are too damn scattershot to follow. A proper direct answer was = required,=20 you gave many other things instead. Go away until you can give a = straight answer.

message=20

of=20

(s.e.d).

scopes,=20

reasonably=20

John, i am talking about brand _new_ analog 'scopes. Probably with=20 microchannel faceplates as well. All the old groovy Tektronix patents=20 have expired.

message=20

two-bedroom house=20

one day you=20

home.=20

Your=20

of his=20

thinking... having=20

couch in=20

that door?

did=20

Postprocessing is not the same as input channel bandwidth limiting. =20 Check out the schematics of Tek analog 'scopes with input channel=20 bandwidth limiting.

liberal

that he=20

until age

No, Gov't handouts, i have met them face to face. Mummy and Doody could=20 support them but won't. So they go "on the dole".

and

this

any

exposed

couple

and

and=20

manufacture.

and

and

different

you=20

that!

one=20

for.=20

actually=20

scope

advertised,

stupid,

Ferrari=20

are=20

more=20

my

His nym was well chosen from a s*it-com character many years ago. It was= =20 either the one with the junk yard or the dry cleaning business.

Yes I did. Once again, it wasn't new information exposed by me, and it wasn't a negative blog. It was an informational blog clarifying an interesting design/build aspect of this scope, and actually had a positive spin. I used words like "great value for money", "excellent quality", "smart", "clever", and "professional" etc. FYI, I actually approached the GM of Rigol USA about it before I did the blog, asking them to clarify and present their side of it. They did not respond. But you'd know all that if you actually watched the video. I know the GM reads this forum, and has even contributed in the past, and I have had previous correspondance with him about my postive review of the scope which they liked.

That's laughable. I have been one the biggest supporters of their scopes, and am almost certainly directly responsible for more sales of them than any other individual. Your viewpoint is so myopic it's truly amazing. Keep digging that hole by all means, but be careful, because as Phil said, you might pop up in China.

Good for you, so do I. And so do the probably thousands who have bought one based on my promotion and recommendation of it over the last year and a bit.

Dave.

At first I thought it was another of Nymbecile's. It fits.

Dry cleaning. He is sorta wheezy.

The only new analog scopes I know of are minor brands, B&K/Instek/Kenwood sort of stuff. All the name-brand scopes are digital now. LeCroy used to sell the 470 MHz Iwatsu scope, but I think they gave that up. The Iwatsu SS-7840H is around $10K. And not even color. It looks to me like digital scopes are less expensive at pretty much every performance point.

Microchannel plates are insanely expensive, especially ones big enough to be an oscilloscope screen.

John

house

you

his

having

in

door?

Well, they hardly had the option to do digital filtering.

John

message

house

you

Your

his

having

couch in

door?

But I wonder what various digital scopes do at slower sweep speeds. Clock the ADC slower? Throw away samples? Interpolate? Filter?

John

Yup, economy of scale and other factors.

Iwatsu still do a 1GHz analog storage scope at $28K:

The 400MHz analog is $7500:

Hameg do a 200MHz analog at $2500:

Dave.

That's quasi-digital, with a CRT-based scan converter tube.

My friend Bernard still makes this:

which uses the older kind of scan converter, two electron gun/deflection systems facing one another in one tube with some sort of charge storage film between them. This is the one Tek used to market. Goodness knows where he gets the tubes... probably old stock.

I don't miss tubes, or meter needles, or analog scopes at all.

John

message

house

day you

Your

his

having

couch in

door?

The only way to find out is to input a signal that causes aliasing. With high samplerates, short memories and limited hardware the only way is to simply discard samples.

They are a lot cheaper second hand because no-one wants an analog scope anymore. $500 should be enough.

I had a couple pairs of the Tektronix version of this I bought in the late '70s and early '80s. They had two 7000 series plug-in bays and went for ~$20K each (don't remember if that included the 7B92 and 7A19, or not).

If it's the Tek tube, it's a 512x512 diode array inbetween the two guns.

Nope, though I do still like analog scopes, at times. Don't have one, but that's a different matter.

Me neither. Although the low end digitals like the Rigols are no match for an analog scope for some jobs. So unless you've got a high end digital, it's still useful to have that analog scope around.

Dave.

think

pretty

John, it writes to a miniature phosphor screen at up to 10 divisions/ns. = =20 That is analog. Then phosphor trace is amplified in intensity, and image= =20 size is scaled up with a fiber optic lens and a camera like sensor. Then= it=20 is digitized, rasterized and colorized. They have to make these tubes=20 themselves, and i bet there are new patents involved. In terms of=20 repeatable triggering and single shot capture it goes toe to toe with=20 any previous technology, notably including your 7104 and DVST scopes.

The old Tek scopes were DVSTs. Two guns, one write gun and one projector= =20 gun both on the same side of the storage grating. The scan converters = are=20 a different technology.

There is still a few us who want one. I am still on the lookout for=20 a Tek 2465 or very similar. There are cases where even my TDS 544A=20 won't get me the same results.

When might an analogue scope be better than a low end digital?

Regards,

Ross..