Santa brought me the exact DSO and I myself am just learning the basics. I have built tube amps and guitar effects for over 10 years now and feel I should understand more of whats going on. I was just given a triplet 630 series 4 that needs some tuning and resistor work and Ill use my fluke meter for that. I loved the vtvm video you did and it was recommended to look into one for the amp building I do. Analog Oscilloscope and signal generator next, I understand there are oscilloscopes with the signal gen in them but not sure which ones. Thanks for the builds
I use both, too. My work is mostly analog, with a bit of Arduino stuff mixed in. I have my trusty Tek 2215A I use for a lot of my analog stuff, but I do use my Owon XDS3102A when I want to measure frequency and RMS voltage at the same time, like when I am adjusting the crossover frequency on a bi-amped system.
I lean towards the analogue when I don't need the digital, because i'm used to it. When I need the digital I have no apprehension about using it however which is quite often.
I don't see any triggering on either of these 'scopes! (4:43) Both appear to be set to 'AUTO'. Should be send to 'NORM' and the trigger-level carefully adjusted.
Just new into electronics and found your take on what scope to use for what job very informative. At the start of the video I had very little clue on the subject but know just about enough to make sense of your take on things once explained in laymans terms. You explain things very well. I have both a digital and an analogue scope but still finding my way around these instruments. I do need a better analogue scope though, mine is very very (1st scope!) basic. An educated opinion is worth 10,000 hrs of me bumbling around, that's for sure! Thanks very much for sharing your knowledge!
Im glad you enjoyed the video and found it informative. Its worth noting though not mentioned that when purchasing an analoge scope, you might be in for a restoration, repair or calibration.
This reminds me of why I use both digital and analog multimeters - sometimes one will show you something the other just can't catch. Like why so many audiophiles still prefer tubes and vinyl.
@@muppetpaster Measurement of anything is never an exact proposition, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle will see to that, there will always be noise and some uncertainty. Analog and digital processing presents this margin of error in different ways, trying to show the reality as truthfully as possible. In the end, all that counts is whether our human brain gets the information it needs and can process in it's own way.
Your video will only change one thing that each oscilloscope is suitable for something different, but most of the work will be done similarly by both. It's like plowing a field with a car. It will also probably work, but it won't be the same as with a tractor.
Ah, finally someone who gets it right. But it's more modern, so it must be better. No, it must not. Trust your own eyes, and don't just see what you have been expecting to see, what you have been programmed to see. But why spend 50 dollars, if you can also spend 5'000 dollars for the same image quality? It's more expensive, so it must be better. No, it must not. Gold is much older than paper dollars, and yet it's much better. And old movies are much better than the newer ones, as far as wisdom and true insight are concerned.
There are clear shortcomings regarding an analogue scope. Maybe also some advantages. It all depends for what purpose are they used. What I would add on the beginning of the manual would be the intended use (as all medical device mandatory have) 🙂 If you for example want to troubleshoot some spurious glitches it is probably almost impossible with a pure analogue scope. Horses for courses as they say.
Maybe a $10,000 DSO would do a little better with a higher sample rate. Both have their advantages. A company I worked for had fancy logic analyzers and scopes that you almost had to have a masters degree to operate! Good subject to address, Jordan.
You about right as had both but decide to get a keysight 3000 series and does great in RF, but also cost 8k when it was new. Yes tried even the 3k Rigol which returned as was completely unusable and finally found a deal on a DSO x 3000 for around 4k and scope is about as good as my Tektronix analog scope when looking at modulated signals. Do understand why people prefer analog scopes as not everyone can afford a expensive DSO especially for hobby use. Old DSO even one that cost 15k back in the day are pretty much worthless for looking at a modulated signal. So a good analog Tektronix 2200, or 2400 series scope is best way to go for most. A refurbish good condition Tektronix 2400 series analog scope can be had for $400 to $600 bucks, vs the 4k you have to send on a good newer model DSO, if you want one that 300mhz and higher.
If i did that then I would not be able to illustrate the price comparison point of the video, which was a main basis of the argument. Judging by your 3 responses, you seem triggered by this video, so ill just leave this here.
I am working on a new oscilloscope that uses none of the old technology. That is a Holographic DSO, still in prototyping, will cost around 5000 to 7000 USD, display size would be 21" to 42", and projected in the air, no screen, no LCD; pure holograms. Just wanted to leave a comment here; this is from one of the biggest US Research Institute; for military, and top notch applications. UHD Resolution, with a bandwidth of 1 GHz. Good day.
@@retrotechandelectronics I no longer work in electronics but got a DSO for around the house. It serves that purpose well and It seems like that's what it was intended for. It's nice to have it doing calculations and to have something more than a multi-meter to work with. Your advice will be handy if I ever get into more advanced projects. It seems like having both is a cost effective way to go in that case.
I have returned to your video because one told me a trick that only can be done on a CRT. He told me that if you have very rare glitches that are extremely short, you can take a long exposure photo of the screen and by that way capture these glitches over hours or days. You'll end up with a clear photo of the precise location and appearance. Does that sound plausible?
There is a persistence setting on the modern DSO's that does this, and as it stands much easier than the Fstop settings with film cameras back in the day, setting persistence to indefinite accomplishes this.
Thanks for answering. Hope that I may use a bit more of your time. It looks like you are using a 100% analog but would a digital scope with CRT screen not be equally good if you let it show live info?
Your test is not fair. You are not comparing analog to digital. You are comparing an expensive analog to a cheap ass digital. Get an expensive digital and your tests might look different.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
Santa brought me the exact DSO and I myself am just learning the basics. I have built tube amps and guitar effects for over 10 years now and feel I should understand more of whats going on. I was just given a triplet 630 series 4 that needs some tuning and resistor work and Ill use my fluke meter for that. I loved the vtvm video you did and it was recommended to look into one for the amp building I do. Analog Oscilloscope and signal generator next, I understand there are oscilloscopes with the signal gen in them but not sure which ones. Thanks for the builds
I use both, too. My work is mostly analog, with a bit of Arduino stuff mixed in. I have my trusty Tek 2215A I use for a lot of my analog stuff, but I do use my Owon XDS3102A when I want to measure frequency and RMS voltage at the same time, like when I am adjusting the crossover frequency on a bi-amped system.
I lean towards the analogue when I don't need the digital, because i'm used to it. When I need the digital I have no apprehension about using it however which is quite often.
I don't see any triggering on either of these 'scopes! (4:43) Both appear to be set to 'AUTO'. Should be send to 'NORM' and the trigger-level carefully adjusted.
Just new into electronics and found your take on what scope to use for what job very informative. At the start of the video I had very little clue on the subject but know just about enough to make sense of your take on things once explained in laymans terms. You explain things very well. I have both a digital and an analogue scope but still finding my way around these instruments. I do need a better analogue scope though, mine is very very (1st scope!) basic.
An educated opinion is worth 10,000 hrs of me bumbling around, that's for sure!
Thanks very much for sharing your knowledge!
Im glad you enjoyed the video and found it informative. Its worth noting though not mentioned that when purchasing an analoge scope, you might be in for a restoration, repair or calibration.
This reminds me of why I use both digital and analog multimeters - sometimes one will show you something the other just can't catch. Like why so many audiophiles still prefer tubes and vinyl.
But audio (tubes/vinyl) is a question of taste and feeling.....Measurement equipment is an exact question.
Same reason I use my Heathkit VTVM for Analogue measurements and POT sweeps
@@muppetpaster Measurement of anything is never an exact proposition, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle will see to that, there will always be noise and some uncertainty. Analog and digital processing presents this margin of error in different ways, trying to show the reality as truthfully as possible. In the end, all that counts is whether our human brain gets the information it needs and can process in it's own way.
In AM modulation Tektronix only looks more like there is a fuzzy (lens)filter on it. Both do the job.
Your video will only change one thing that each oscilloscope is suitable for something different, but most of the work will be done similarly by both. It's like plowing a field with a car. It will also probably work, but it won't be the same as with a tractor.
I notice the same thing When the two devices were connected in parallel i used the rigol 1054z and the crotech 3810
Ah, finally someone who gets it right.
But it's more modern, so it must be better.
No, it must not.
Trust your own eyes, and don't just see what you have been expecting to see, what you have been programmed to see.
But why spend 50 dollars, if you can also spend 5'000 dollars for the same image quality?
It's more expensive, so it must be better.
No, it must not.
Gold is much older than paper dollars, and yet it's much better.
And old movies are much better than the newer ones, as far as wisdom and true insight are concerned.
Aaaahh ,I wondered where he was, the conspirasist...........Don not believe what you are programmed to see.
There are clear shortcomings regarding an analogue scope. Maybe also some advantages. It all depends for what purpose are they used. What I would add on the beginning of the manual would be the intended use (as all medical device mandatory have) 🙂 If you for example want to troubleshoot some spurious glitches it is probably almost impossible with a pure analogue scope. Horses for courses as they say.
Maybe a $10,000 DSO would do a little better with a higher sample rate. Both have their advantages. A company I worked for had fancy logic analyzers and scopes that you almost had to have a masters degree to operate! Good subject to address, Jordan.
Yeah true, Even 5K, but to what end. Goes towards the argument of 50$ to get in the game with infinite sample rate.
You about right as had both but decide to get a keysight 3000 series and does great in RF, but also cost 8k when it was new. Yes tried even the 3k Rigol which returned as was completely unusable and finally found a deal on a DSO x 3000 for around 4k and scope is about as good as my Tektronix analog scope when looking at modulated signals. Do understand why people prefer analog scopes as not everyone can afford a expensive DSO especially for hobby use. Old DSO even one that cost 15k back in the day are pretty much worthless for looking at a modulated signal. So a good analog Tektronix 2200, or 2400 series scope is best way to go for most. A refurbish good condition Tektronix 2400 series analog scope can be had for $400 to $600 bucks, vs the 4k you have to send on a good newer model DSO, if you want one that 300mhz and higher.
Maybe it is not really fair to compare a 200$ DSO to a Tektronix oscilloscope?!!! I'd like to see you do this with a keysight DSO.
If i did that then I would not be able to illustrate the price comparison point of the video, which was a main basis of the argument. Judging by your 3 responses, you seem triggered by this video, so ill just leave this here.
Nice video thanks for posting
I am working on a new oscilloscope that uses none of the old technology. That is a Holographic DSO, still in prototyping, will cost around 5000 to 7000 USD, display size would be 21" to 42", and projected in the air, no screen, no LCD; pure holograms. Just wanted to leave a comment here; this is from one of the biggest US Research Institute; for military, and top notch applications. UHD Resolution, with a bandwidth of 1 GHz. Good day.
Does it run on plutonium?
It seems like the DSO's in this price range are a bit buggy for certain processes.
It’s true, you can’t compare it against a 1000$ dso in function and quality.
@@retrotechandelectronics I no longer work in electronics but got a DSO for around the house. It serves that purpose well and It seems like that's what it was intended for. It's nice to have it doing calculations and to have something more than a multi-meter to work with.
Your advice will be handy if I ever get into more advanced projects. It seems like having both is a cost effective way to go in that case.
would the component trace on the hantek improve is you play around with the persistance?
?
Not possible to exactly calculate frequance and voltage in analoge one?
Its possible.... but not automatic.
Thanks.
What about accuracy of mesurment of voltage & frequancy.
Acceptible by analog or not?
I have returned to your video because one told me a trick that only can be done on a CRT.
He told me that if you have very rare glitches that are extremely short, you can take a long exposure photo of the screen and by that way capture these glitches over hours or days. You'll end up with a clear photo of the precise location and appearance.
Does that sound plausible?
There is a persistence setting on the modern DSO's that does this, and as it stands much easier than the Fstop settings with film cameras back in the day, setting persistence to indefinite accomplishes this.
Was that AM signal direct from a function generator?
It was.....
Just discovered your channel. Great content. Sign me up. (Audio is a bit low/lo-fi. Maybe consider this as an upcoming content challenge).
I have some directional mics ive added since then
@@retrotechandelectronics Also consider lapel/wireless. I see the guy at EEVblog uses one. Great channel, rock on.
Quick summary: DSO's don't do X-Y mode well. :-)
Lissajous curves don't look good in my DSO but look gorgeous in my CRO. Same with my transistor curve tracer.
Wary interesting video!
I try to keep things interesting , thanx!
Thanks for answering.
Hope that I may use a bit more of your time.
It looks like you are using a 100% analog but would a digital scope with CRT screen not be equally good if you let it show live info?
And deleting responses that do not suit you?????? OK. Good practice! I'm done here.
?
Deleting what responses? I just work up to read this, but feel free, there's the door......
thanks Sir, ...
Most welcome
Cool
Your not triggering ..
With all due respect you are using an entry level DSO.
Correct , but, the cost of which was accounted for in the analysis.
go to here
I was there, the video proves it
Why the hell you use digital oscilloscopes like DSO 5072P in 2019? Use anything with 'digital phosphor' and you will never come back to analog scope.
ok
Your test is not fair. You are not comparing analog to digital. You are comparing an expensive analog to a cheap ass digital. Get an expensive digital and your tests might look different.