Tek Tak Toe

[analoger]

what do you think of this oscilloscope TDS2024C?

Any better alternative within the same price range < $3000?

[mikeselectricstuff]

TDS2024 Is a creaking old dinosaur - only 2.5k memory - a complete joke and extremely poor value for money.
Look at the newer Agilent DSOX/MSOX range, and also used Agilent 5000/6000/7000 in Agilent's Ebay store. You will get way, way more scope for your money. Also look at the Rigol 2000/4000 range.

Tek have pretty much stagnated these days, and are desperately trying to cling onto their former reputation, but with no new product developments.

[analoger]

Yup I was looking at Agilent stuff, and Rigol, but from what I've heard Tek wins.

This is a decent one and I don't need the RF analyzer...

http://www.tek.com/oscilloscope/mso4000-dpo4000

[mikeselectricstuff]

This is a decent one and I don't need the RF analyzer...

It may be a decent scope, but ridiculously overpriced

Unless you can get a very, very serious discount from those Tek prices (like >50%), they are extremely poor value - $7K for a 100MHz scope - are you kidding?

There are probably a few Tek fans out there trying to cling on to Tek's former glory and ignoring anything coming from anywhere else, but at the lower end of the market at least, they are a sinking ship.
Just look at their recent TBS products - a minor rehash of an ancient product, which looks utterly ridiculous against what you can get for the same price elsewhere.

[analoger]

Indeed. I've noticed they are more expensive than others, but maybe Agilent is something I should seriously consider. Do you know if they offer discounts and on what basis I get the discount?

Thanks.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Agilent do periodically have offers, e.g. incuding licenses for extra features. I believe they also have good deals for education users.
If you look at the feedback on their ebay store, you'll see that they do take offers
They accepted an offer of 10% off recently when I bought from them.

[analoger]

I'm considering something within this price range, not more...but is this adequate for learning, hobbyist projects, maybe experimenting and designing new circuits? Any better alternative?

http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-19466 ... =CA&lc=eng

Thanks.

[mikeselectricstuff]

If you're buying new, that's about the most scope you'll get for the money, and way better than you _need_ for hobbyist use, however if you're the sort of person that like using nice tools you will love using it.

You may get a bit more for your money used. e.g. 500MHz 4 channel :
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Agilent-DSO50 ... 2a2a2c20b9

If buying new it would be worth spending a little time talking to dealers to see if there are any deals to be had.

[modeller]

If you're buying new, that's about the most scope you'll get for the money, and way better than you _need_ for hobbyist use, however if you're the sort of person that like using nice tools you will love using it.

I was gonna say - wow. I could afford something like that but man, that is a really, really nice instrument for a hobbyist. I'm thinking of the Rigol DS1102 @ $400, and that's getting into the luxury domain for me.

Hey are you the "mikeselectricstuff" on You Tube? I love that channel I just subscribed to it the other day!

[mikeselectricstuff]

Something else to consider - if you don't reallly know whether you need a scope in that price range, start off with something cheap like a Riglol 1052 and see if you find it limiting/annoying - test gear has reasonable resale value so it's not a big gamble.

However if you;re happy to spend the money on something that will last a long time, by all means go for it.
Here's a review of the 3000X :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdbuSZVYewg

[analoger]

Rigol sounds a very good choice to invest on a first oscilloscope.

When it's MSO with 16 digital channels, it makes a difference in price, but do I need this feature? What kind of applications I need the digital channels for? My guess here is 16 channels work for 16 bit digital circuits but what if I'm working on 32 or even 64 bit stuff, are they of any help in this case?

Thanks.

[mikeselectricstuff]

You will rarely if ever wanting to be probing a data bus, so the CPU bus size isn't really a factor in how many scope channels are useful.
2 channels is often the first limitation that people hit with lower end scopes - even simple protocols like SPI need 3 or 4 channels to debug, so either 4 analogue channels, or 2 analogue + 8 or 16 digital MSO channels can be very useful.
Although there are various cheap PC add-on devices for looking at digital channels, having them on the scope alongside analogue channels is a lot more useful and productive.
However if you're not really sure what you need, probably better to start at the lower end, and see how you go, or choose a scope that has an upgrade path.
Everyone's needs are different, and any limitations will quickly become apparent once you start using it.
The only reason not go for something higher end is cost - a higher end scope is not going to be any harder to use.

[adafruit_support_mike]

Rigol sounds a very good choice to invest on a first oscilloscope.

It is. The lower end Rigol scopes offer unusually good bang for the buck these days. I think they're trying to capture the hobbyist market, or at least build a market of people who know their gear when it's time to advance to the next 'scope.

[analoger]

Just curious what is this beast used for?

http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-21088 ... =CA&lc=eng

Is it real-time sampling? I mean do Agilent make uP's that are 10x faster than Intel and AMD?

[adafruit_support_mike]

Just curious what is this beast used for?

Anything really fast, but the most obvious application would be testing high-bandwidth connections between chips. It's probably aimed at the cell phone market, since the radios there operate in the 4-5GHz range.

Is it real-time sampling?

Yep.. 160 gigasamples per second in two-channel mode.

I mean do Agilent make uP's that are 10x faster than Intel and AMD?

Heck yeah.. how else would Intel and AMD test their chips?

Any test equipment you use has to be faster and more precise than the thing you're trying to measure. If it isn't, you can't know whether you're seeing errors in the circuit or errors in the toolchain you're using to measure the circuit.

This doesn't really have a full microprocessor though, at least not in the measurement section.. more of an insanely fast ADC. The signal path is much shorter than what you'd find in a CPU, and this device makes a different set of tradeoffs among price, power, and speed. It probably burns power at an impressive rate, costs more than the building around it, and uses tricks that would make most physicists say, "WTF?"