a beginner question - scopes

[Toby Paddock]

Buck Buchanan wrote:

>As a general rule for analog synth stuff I believe the following 
>(and I believe others will believe this general rule): 
>If you can only have one scope, you must have an analog.  
I believe that I believe this.

>A cheap PC based scope is ganna be neat for a couple 
>of things (capturing one-shots, saving screen shots, etc)
>but it's ganna have all kinds of weird effects due to it's 
>budget AND digital nature.  It's ganna alias, it's ganna 
>miss glitches that your not specifically looking for, it's 
>not ganna show you good amplitude envelope information 
>(high freq. in w/low time base setting).
Digital scopes are cool and do cool stuff, especially the 
cooler ones.  BUT THEY LIE.  Don't turn your back on one.
You need to know what you are looking for and then set it
up to see it.  Don't trust them farther than you can 
comfortably spit a rat.

>I use a fully loaded TDS640 here at work ... 
I use a TDS540 at work for capturing mechanical shock 
waveforms.  Wonderful digital machine, calculates peak 
of the shock, and it runs a printer.  But in this case you 
know fairly close what the waveform will be.  Works great.

>Even a VERY CHEAP analog scope in working order 
>will be a better overall tool for analog synth work.  
Sounds like my scope.

I think it depends how much you are going to use it.  For me,
a cheap scope is fine for occasional light-duty work.
Your waveform may vary.

Hoping this finds you,
Toby Paddock
- -- -  - -- -  - -- -  - -- -  - -- -
http://www.seanet.com/~tpaddock
Pronteon Approved, 
Cult of the Mighty Radio Shack Reverb