How often do you use an oscilloscope? Analog? Or digital? Or both?

[Newmarket]

I understand your method, but it probably wouldn't tell you if the circuit is hooting at 200Khz, which a scope would.

Was just going to say something similar.
"Horses for Courses" - if you're concern is getting a kit working okay then that's one thing. But if you are doing something more 'ground up' and need/want to check that it isn't singing away out of audio band (and 'using up amplifier gain' then that is something else. ( It will likely show up as a dc offset but that requires some interpretation and won't give detail).
A scope won't, of course, easily convey subtle (or not so subtle) distortions etc.
But that is why there is specialist audio kit - Audio Precision / Prism / Lindos etc...
Or solutions using less expensive audio interfaces and software. There's a role for all solutions.

On a practical note - analogue 'scopes are imo great but they do tend to have a large 'footprint' compared to cf a basic Tektronix 'scope. So if you're poking around the back of a patchbay - that's rather different from working 'On the Bench'.

 

[Newmarket]

. There's no way I would buy an analog scope. Ever. I don't care how much you're trying to save. I'm not sure I would take one even if it were given to me for free and I had an unlimited about of bench space.

Bit of an extreme view there tbh.
On a daily (work) basis I have access to pretty much state of the art DSOs. Yes - they are great and I can average values and export the waveform data for documentation and further analysis (typically via Excel) etc etc...
But for some applications my (personal) old Tektronix 'scope is still a better solution.

 

[mobyd]

I use all sorts. Principal is a Tek 2465 which I love but it is slowly dying of old age. Backup is a Rigol 1054 which is wonderful for taking pictures but a bit crap for "right here, right now" jobs. On the burn in/soaktest bench is an HP54600B which is an odd combination of digital and CRT screen and in the GO bag is a Tek THS720 (small and light).

 

[user 37518]

I'm not so sure about that. First of all, I have the DS1052E and it's a POS compared to the digital scopes you can get today. The analog scopes are just so limited. And I would not be surprised at all if one of the little USB ones are pretty good these days (that video is 12 years old). I've never had one but I have a pretty good idea about what parts are required to make a decent scope and I don't see why one couldn't be made pretty small. The real value is actually in the software. So it makes a lot of sense to just have the software running on a computer (along side your audio spectrum analyzer software). If I were to buy a new scope, I would definitely look at the little USB ones. I would just look very carefully at the sort of rates, resolution, software and so on. If they just don't compare on paper, I would get a newer DS scope (preferrably 10 bit or maybe even 12 bit if I'm feeling flush). There's no way I would buy an analog scope. Ever. I don't care how much you're trying to save. I'm not sure I would take one even if it were given to me for free and I had an unlimited about of bench space.

I will take a Tektronix 2465b over any of the prosumer digital scopes in the market, I don't care how advanced they are, although, to be fair, it is not 100% analog. However, I do like having PC connectivity and all that Jazz. In my opinion, an analog scope is best for troubleshooting and quick stuff and when you don't want to be messing around with menus, a digital scope is best when you need the extras that analog scopes don't have. I wouldn't commit to only one: digital or analog.

 

[gyraf]

I use an analogue scope at a daily basis - simply couldn't do my daytime job without it, it's a natural extension of my senses now. The digital does not get nearly as much use unless needed to solve a problem of digital nature (like serial data monitoring etc). There's something (dynamic?) that does not translate "right" to digital scopes yet imo.

My main tools are an almost-50years-old tektronix 465 for HF, a relatively sensitive Kenwood CS4025 for LF

/Jakob E.

 

[moamps]

My opinion is that the type (and quantity) of an oscilloscope depends on the work to be done. If someone is a guitar player and needs to fix a cable or a simple pedal from time to time, then he doesn’t need an oscilloscope. If someone is assembling a DIY device (and selling it) then sooner or later they will need an oscilloscope. If someone is a device designer, then the oscilloscope is an "must have" part of the instrumentation. If someone is a device serviceman, then they must have an oscilloscope and must fully check the functionality of the device they are repairing. The use only of the "signal tracer" mentioned here is insufficient in modern times.

Also, from my experience (and the experience of learning others), young engineers better understand the operation of digital oscilloscopes if they have previously learned how the analog type works.

I use some type of oscilloscope almost every day. I recently fixed the DBX286 preamp and Behr ADA8000 with a user remark that the devices work but there is something strange in the sound. A typical problem with such devices are dried electrolytic capacitors in the power supply (too close to hot regs), which are the fastest and easiest to detect using the analog scope (and digital will be slower by 5-10 sec). It is quite inadequate to fix this using DMM alone.

I’m pretty old so I like analog oscilloscopes. I have been using two TEK 2246s for over 30 years. A good feature they have is digital readout so some values can be measured more easily. When I need to take some measurements and document it (for a lecture or an article), I use TEK 2024 digital oscilloscopes and recently an R&S.

For people who are just entering this area, and intend to stay, I would recommend purchasing a slightly better and more expensive digital oscilloscope like the Keysight EDUX1052G that also has a good signal generator.

I apologize for the long post.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

I prefer the immediacy of real knobs and switches to hidden functions buried in layers of inscrutable menus. My first scope was a Tek 2235 and it still sits on my bench where it is the most frequently used.

I also have a Tek 7834 storage frame and plug-ins for four vertical channels and two horizontal. This beast gets fired up if i need more than two channels or more than 100MHz BW. If I could have only one scope it would be a 7000 series.

I recently acquired an early digital storage scope, a Tek 2440, which has more features than my others, some menu stuff, and several CPUs inside, but also the familiar Tek control layout. Haven't even fired it up.

When I've had to use a digital scope I've found the user interface frustrating. Many seem to have been designed by people who don't use oscilloscopes at all. Not a fan.

 

[user 37518]

I use an analogue scope at a daily basis - simply couldn't do my daytime job without it, it's a natural extension of my senses now. The digital does not get nearly as much use unless needed to solve a problem of digital nature (like serial data monitoring etc). There's something (dynamic?) that does not translate "right" to digital scopes yet imo.

My main tools are an almost-50years-old tektronix 465 for HF, a relatively sensitive Kenwood CS4025 for LF

/Jakob E.

I get what you say, but to be honest, the high-end digital scopes like Keysights pro line, those are at a whole different level, I would definitely take one of those over any analog scope, but we are talking about tens of thousands of dollars

 

[Newmarket]

I get what you say, but to be honest, the high-end digital scopes like Keysights pro line, those are at a whole different level, I would definitely take one of those over any analog scope, but we are talking about tens of thousands of dollars

Yes - that's a fair point but realistically the OP question isn't really going there.
fwiw on s daily work basis I use 'scopes that cost from a few thousand £ to (at a guess) £16K+. eg HP or LeCroy. Then add on the fancy probe stuff cost.
But for some of my own audio stuff I'll still reach for my old Tek scope.
But it has a loose control pot' . Service may be uneconomical or unavailable so time may be limited.

 

[user 37518]

Yes - that's a fair point but realistically the OP question isn't really going there.
fwiw on s daily work basis I use 'scopes that cost from a few thousand £ to (at a guess) £16K+. eg HP or LeCroy. Then add on the fancy probe stuff cost.
But for some of my own audio stuff I'll still reach for my old Tek scope.
But it has a loose control pot' . Service may be uneconomical or unavailable so time may be limited.

Completely agree

 

[Whoops]

How often do you yourself use one? What for? Mics, pres, comps, eqs? Tuning circuits, capsules, fets? How do you know when to use one? Only troubleshooting?

In 14 years of building a lot of DIY audio gear successfully, repairing all kinds of audio gear, repairing tube amps, I only had to use the Oscilloscope 1 time, so 1 time only in 14 years.
I used it to set the Bias point in some BA283 cards belonging to some Neve 1272 modules used as mic preamps.

I never used an Oscilloscope for troubleshooting, I use the multimeter and an audio probe, I inject music at the input and audio probe the circuit, that always works very well for me.
I guess everyone has their own methods.

I have a nice Rigol scope at the workshop, but for most basic uses a simple cheap pocket osciloscope would be more than enough, like for example setting the bias in BA283 cards.

If you really want to buy one I advise you to buy only a Digital Scope, and my recommendation is the Rigol 1054

 

[Rob Flinn]

In 14 years of building a lot of DIY audio gear successfully, repairing all kinds of audio gear, repairing tube amps, I only had to use the Oscilloscope 1 time, so 1 time only in 14 years.
I used it to set the Bias point in some BA283 cards belonging to some Neve 1272 modules used as mic preamps.

I never used an Oscilloscope for troubleshooting, I use the multimeter and an audio probe, I inject music at the input and audio probe the circuit, that always works very well for me.
I guess everyone has their own methods.

I have a nice Rigol scope at the workshop, but for most basic uses a simple cheap pocket osciloscope would be more than enough, like for example setting the bias in BA283 cards.

If you really want to buy one I advise you to buy only a Digital Scope, and my recommendation is the Rigol 1054

As I said before a very legitimate method of working, but it won't necessarily tell you if the unit is hooting at 400KHz.

 

[Whoops]

Hi Rob, was is "Hooting"?
sorry I don't know that word

 

[Khron]

It's the onomatopoeia for the sound owls make. In this context, i'm quite sure it meant "oscillating".

 

[JohnRoberts]

Often while troubleshooting (without a scope) we can detect above audio band oscillation by hearing some extra noise added by the slower circuitry rectifying the unstable HF, not unlike the mechanism for radio station interference.

[edit- that noise is sometimes characterized as a "frying" sound. No doubt caused because the HF oscillation is not a clean stable frequency. /edit]

JR

 

[Rob Flinn]

Hi Rob, was is "Hooting"?
sorry I don't know that word

oscillating.

 

[Newmarket]

Often while troubleshooting (without a scope) we can detect above audio band oscillation by hearing some extra noise added by the slower circuitry rectifying the unstable HF, not unlike the mechanism for radio station interference.

Yes. And with a voltage meter it may cause an increase in DC offset as the oscillation is likely asymmetrical. But what you read depends very much on the meter itself.
Nothing quite like seeing it visually on a display.
And I think the AES should now adopt "Hooting" as the official term

 

[FIX]

I have purchased many scope in my day. Couple of notes. The older analog ones are slower (not in the spectrum that they are used for) so the display is pretty smooth and easy to read. A lot of the cheaper digital scopes are so fast that they display noise no matter how clean the signal is, throwing you off. I have had cheap ones, and have 2) Tektronix scopes, but the one I'm happiest with is the Siglent Scope. I also have their volt meter. Very nice stuff at a fair price.

https://siglentna.com
They can get expensive, but Amazon carries the cheaper ones.

 

[Artefact Studio Services]

My everyday quick test of analog audio equipment (pro studio stuff) is a 1kHz square wave through the DUT and observe the output on a Tek analog or digital scope. Frequency response is easy to observe with the Slope on the Scope!

 

[Newmarket]

My everyday quick test of analog audio equipment (pro studio stuff) is a 1kHz square wave through the DUT and observe the output on a Tek analog or digital scope. Frequency response is easy to observe with the Slope on the Scope!

Excellent reminder of that point that may not be obvious to all. You don't have to use a swept sine to take a look at frequency response in the first instance at least.
On an associated note I just bought a DMM at Lidl for £10. It has a 1kHz output function although I haven't tested it yet.