New Tek scopes?

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Brian Roth

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 20, 2005
Messages
3,185
Location
Salina Kansas
I didn't search/dig all that much here, but recently (6 months ago?) there was a thread regarding some inexpensive Chinese-made portable scopes.  I have totally forgotten the brand name(s).

Regardless, this "flew in over the transom" today:

http://info.tek.com/www-tbs1000boscilloscope-more-scope-more-value.html

IIRC, the Chinese scopes had a pretty low rez screen.  The Tek's spec is 800  x 480.  Without seeing it, I dunno if that is close to what I'm used to seeing when I "squint at" the green lines on my beloved Tek 2215,  which I paid Full Price for back in 1982.....

But it is SO much smaller and has a bazillion features, and is  a Tek without a four or five figure price tag.  Comments?


Bri  (perhaps Gear Lusting....)


 
Brian Roth said:
Comments?

50 MHz analog bandwidth isn't enough.

Two channels aren't enough.

2.5k-point record length isn't enough.

Of course, your needs are likely different from mine, and having said that, I've had a TDS2024 for years. While it's a toy compared with the DPO3054 I have at work, having a 200 MHz 'scope for digital debug is fine if you're looking at I2S signals and such.

But I suppose $500 for a brand-new 50 MHz 'scope with a warranty beats the pants off of anything you'll find with equivalent specs on eBay.

-a
 
The TBS1000B seems to be a successor to the TBS1000 which is what most of the Chinese devices seem to have copied. The B version has a bigger and higher resolution display. I am not sure it it is worth the extra resolution because it still only takes 8 bit samples so the FFT functions are not going to be much use for audio.

The price is VERY good and with a 5 year warranty and the Tek name it is sure to sell well. £343 from Farnell in the UK.

Cheers

Ian
 
I have a several years old TDS 1002  (60Mhz 1GS/s) and no complaints...

For your kind of work I would consider one of the hand held battery operated scopes, but that modern Tek form factor is small and light enough to use in the field.

Presumably any studio you have to work in has an outlet.

JR

PS: That looks like a hipper display than mine, but like I said I have no complaints.

 
Brian Roth said:
Ohhhh...I forgot to check the sampling depth spec.  I don't know if 8 bits is sufficient for closely examining analog waveforms.

Bri

I wouldn't trust my eyes or analog scope linearity for distortion measurement. You will be able to see obvious distortion.

If the display is 480 high that is closer to 9 bits display resolution (512 pts). If the signal being read is slower than the max Ghz sample rate it could collect multiple samples per pixel. So internal signal resolution can be greater for lower frequency. Actually the amount of oversampling will depend on how you set your timebase and how fast of a signal you are looking at. (Caveat I have no idea how they actually crunch data inside a D-scope, I just know how I would do it).

While 50 MHz may seem pedestrian to Andy, for relatively slow audio and basic digital troubleshooting it should be adequate (IMO).

That price sounds less than I paid for my old heath-kit scope, and I had to assemble that.  :eek:

JR
 
For a low budget 2ch 50MHz scope I love my Rigol DS1052E.  We actually use two of those at my previous job in audio electronics, as well as an old analog trace Hameg.  I could never figure out how to use the darn Hameg, so I used the cheap Rigol more often when I had to do something.

Tektronix is definitely more of a name than Rigol, but at $500 price point you're not paying for a lab-grade instrument that they have a reputation for, so I'd be wary about paying for the name as well.  Some cheapie things are just low quality and not worth it, but that Rigol seems to have proved itself as a solid value, so at that point I'm not sure that a couple hundred more buys me anything I'd be willing to pay for.  As I said, you're not paying for lab-grade instrumentation, so the only things you might be paying for in that range that would be worth it when comparing are more reliability or more compatibility with some other systems you may want to use.  At least that's how I See it  :p
 
The all digital scopes seem great to me , especially the easy means of collecting data, except for their 8 bit sample size. Unless there is some really smart stuff going on inside I cannot see how the built in FFT is going to see eanything less that 1% distortion. I would love to be proven wrong.

Cheers

Ian
 
For what it's worth, I kicked in for this. Maybe they'll get their shit together and actually ship them. (FWIW I have no more interest in backing anything on Kickstarter any more.)

-a
 
I'd like to go for one of those DAQ which work on android or other OS, really small and flexible, I like this one, I hope I can get one, looking how to bring it here... http://redpitaya.com

125MS/s 14bit 50MHz 2ch in +2ch out, plus other 4 analog I/O 12 bit 100KS/s

Is not a scope but it has a pretty good use I guess, for portable workbench...

JS
 
If you are thinking about a new scope, I've been really happy with the Agilent (now Keysight)
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-1945063-pn-DSOX2014A/oscilloscope-100-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng

The update rate is very nice.  I've used some much slower more expensive scopes.  These traces look really good in comparison. 
 
ruffrecords said:
The all digital scopes seem great to me , especially the easy means of collecting data, except for their 8 bit sample size. Unless there is some really smart stuff going on inside I cannot see how the built in FFT is going to see eanything less that 1% distortion. I would love to be proven wrong.

Cheers

Ian


Ian, you rock :)
groupdiy turning in to grsltz... we need more of you...



 
ruffrecords said:
The all digital scopes seem great to me , especially the easy means of collecting data, except for their 8 bit sample size. Unless there is some really smart stuff going on inside I cannot see how the built in FFT is going to see anything less that 1% distortion. I would love to be proven wrong.

Cheers

Ian

This bugged me for a long time. After some recent hum chasing using the QA400 spectrum analyser I have a better grasp of the strengths and weaknesses of FFTS. Bottom line is that the FFT noise can be a good way below  the resolution of the AtoD. How far depends on the number of samples taken - 10log (n/2) where n is the number of samples. So 1024 samples will drop the noise floor by 27dB - not spectacular, but some DSOs have 1024 thousand points which drops it by 57dB. Most DSOs are 8 bit so their basic resolution is about 48dB but add 57dB to it and you should be able to see artefacts nearly 100dB down.

Cheers

Ian
 
Some of the Rigol Scopes can use the large aquisition memory to get very deep FFt, not on the scope, but in software on a connected PC.  opens new possibilities in post processing but adds complexity of course.

http://rheslip.blogspot.ch/2015/09/software-spectrum-analyzer-for-rigol.html

- Michael
 
I am looking for a nice DSO for home.  I don't want to buy used I would like a nice new one.

Keysights are nice.  Would like a nice 3000 or higher number series but the starting price for the 4 channel 200mhz is kind of high for home use.

Looking around the web I found this https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/us/product/hmo1002-productstartpage_63493-61541.html
with the I2C and CAN options for around 1K
Any one know anything about this scope?

I have been reading the eev blog forum and watching YT videos about scopes and doing web searchs and it seems there are issues with some scopes.  I want LAN, I2C, good low noise preamps, software that does not lock up the scope, good HM interface, 100mhz min bandwidth
From watching youtube videos the software and user interface seem to lacking in some scopes

I have found some under $2K, 4 channel, scopes but looking at web reviews makes me wonder if they are worth buying(I don't trust web reviews but they sometimes are good)
 
ruffrecords said:
ruffrecords said:
The all digital scopes seem great to me , especially the easy means of collecting data, except for their 8 bit sample size. Unless there is some really smart stuff going on inside I cannot see how the built in FFT is going to see anything less that 1% distortion. I would love to be proven wrong.

Cheers

Ian

This bugged me for a long time. After some recent hum chasing using the QA400 spectrum analyser I have a better grasp of the strengths and weaknesses of FFTS. Bottom line is that the FFT noise can be a good way below  the resolution of the AtoD. How far depends on the number of samples taken - 10log (n/2) where n is the number of samples. So 1024 samples will drop the noise floor by 27dB - not spectacular, but some DSOs have 1024 thousand points which drops it by 57dB. Most DSOs are 8 bit so their basic resolution is about 48dB but add 57dB to it and you should be able to see artefacts nearly 100dB down.

Cheers

Ian
Yes a form of over sampling.

JR
 

Latest posts

Back
Top