[sdiy] What test gear do you use?

Mon May 7 00:40:26 CEST 2018

I got a whole studio with just test equipment.

https://www.facebook.com/Waveform-Research-Centre-1157781711025359/?_rdr

Cheers,

Dennis
On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 00:38, <sleepy_dog at gmx.de> wrote:

>
>  >> I have found the Rigol products to be completely unusable compared
> to quality ‘scopes. The encoders are useless, for all intents and
> purposes. There’s a reason these ‘scopes are cheap, and hacking one to a
> higher base model does not make up for the poor overall design quality.
> <<
>
> Do you have anything concrete about that "poor overall design quality"?
> I have seen teardowns and extensive tests done by several EEs, and they
> were quite impressed with the quality, even though there have initially
> been some firmware bugs.
>
> Apparently many people finding them quite usable, some of them smaller
> companies, not just hobbyists.
> When I bought my Rigol of the newer generation when it had just come
> out, its specs - and they are real specs - completely dwarfed the back
> then basic Tek DSO model, especially its laughable point memory size
> (and the "1 elephant tooth per kpoints" they were asking for extra). For
> what was it, 1/3 the price or less? I don't remember exactly.
>
> Now take it with as many tablespoons of salt as you like as I'm no EE,
> but there are not just a few EEs who do approve of that product line :-)
>
> I'm not sure what exactly is your beef with the encoders. That they're a
> bit slow?
> At least they have push function (for instant, accurate
> re-centering/zeroing and other things you'd contextually expect a push
> to do),
> which Tek hadn't discovered when I bought my Rigol, kinda annoying /
> silly, b/c so damn obvious (even the crappy Hantek of 2011 I once had
> had that).
>
> Compared to a USD 350,- scope that has better specs than the average Tek
> DSO say from 2014,
> some used "bargain" that will cost you $100 servicing to make it usable
> again (if there isn't some other nasty flaw the seller did not tell and
> that you discover too late - too bad, no warranty), doesn't seem such a
> bargain after all. It is a bit of a bet, not everyone likes to play.
>
> Are the current models (of below motorcycle price) of big name brands
> still made for this longevity you referred to? It's not my impression,
> but I haven't looked at it in depth.
> And I for one would not get some scope so old that it's "digital and
> analog hybrid", as their memory size must be so ridiculously small that
> there's hardly any point to it even pretending to be a DSO at all.
>
> I do get your point in your next message (which I just saw),
> about the importance of quality equipment, as bad tools cost time and pain.
>
> But from all  I read about people dissecting Rigol scopes - even if it's
> not top notch in all regards, they seem to be far from being toys anymore.
>
> - Steve
>
>
> > I have found the Rigol products to be completely unusable compared to
> quality ‘scopes. The encoders are useless, for all intents and purposes.
> There’s a reason these ‘scopes are cheap, and hacking one to a higher base
> model does not make up for the poor overall design quality.
> >
> > Before you say you can’t afford a higher quality ‘scope, don’t forget
> about the used market.
> >
> > I have a Tektronix 2213A 60 MHz analog ‘scope and a Tektronix 2230 100
> MHz DSO that’s actually an analog and digital hybrid. These were $100 to
> $300 each on the used market. That’s less than a Rigol, and you’ll actually
> be able to use it. Not only that, but the parts are made to be serviceable
> for decades to come, and that’s an advantage that Tektronix has over many
> ‘scope manufacturers. I recently paid a mere $100 to have one of them
> repaired, and I didn’t even have to mess around with high voltages myself.
> >
> > I also have cheaper tools like Gadget Factory's Open Logic Sniffer, a
> 16-channel digital analyzer, and the Bus Pirate. Of course, these cheaper
> tools are digital, not analog.
> >
> > I built my own bench power supply with adjustable bipolar outputs from
> Craig Anderton’s Electronic Projects for Musicians in the early eighties,
> and it still works today. I use it to power Euro modules. It doesn’t have a
> fancy digital display, so I just connect a nice Fluke 87 meter, adjust the
> desired voltages, and then screw the cover on the unit and it is reliable.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> > On May 6, 2018, at 1:12 PM, sleepy_dog at gmx.de wrote:
> >> Yes, you can hack the Rigol not only to a higher base model, but also
> unlock protocol analyzers, extra trigger modes etc, probably nothing an
> analog synth kit builder desperately needs, though.
> >>
> >> - Steve
> >>
> >> On 5/6/18, Jimmy Moore <jamoore84 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I didn't mean to clutter up Quincas' thread with the scope
> conversation,
> >>> but I'd love to hear more about what test gear people use.
> >>>
> >>> I've recently gotten back into kit building, and Quincas' video on the
> kit
> >>> scope looked fun and useful -- Do people have other equipment that
> >>> similarly fills a similar purpose that is worth its while? Space is at
> a
> >>> premium in my apartment, which is why I'm interested in hearing about
> these
> >>> small kit things.  I don't have much room for a dedicated test bench!
> >>>
> >>> Steve's comment about the DSO112
> >>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGU9LoEpQFw> brought me further down
> the
> >>> rabbit hole.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>   What's everyone use?
> >>>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Synth-diy mailing list
> > Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
> > http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Synth-diy mailing list
> Synth-diy at synth-diy.org
> http://synth-diy.org/mailman/listinfo/synth-diy
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://synth-diy.org/pipermail/synth-diy/attachments/20180506/25755270/attachment.htm>