|
HP 3582A ?
Arny Krueger wrote:
snip You can find an audio interface that will outperform say a HP 334 for $30. For $200 you're in the same league as some of the older, but not all that old AP stuff. Trying to use a PC as a general purpose bench instrument is like the old race car guys that I used to hang out with. They would build a new big block Chevy and a Turbo 400 behind it every couple of seasons. They put in a dually one ton truck and pulled a trailer that would have been just about right for an old single axle B Mack around for the season. They got about five miles to the gallon under load too. When I got older, I'd ask them why they didn't buy a real truck, you know, air brakes, Fuller Roadranger, like a used Yellow or Roadway day truck. Well, license and insurance cost too much and you needed a "chauffeurs license" to drive it. (Those pre-CDL days!) Well okay, at least put a diesel and an Allison in the pickup, why don't you? Because we don't know how to work on them and you can't get them in the junkyard for a hundred bucks. Eventually they got tired of building "motors" (sic) for the tow truck and not the race car and put a 3208 Cat or a turbo 4-53 and an Allison or a Clark five speed in there. They then got like ten miles to the galllon and the truck rusted out twenty years later and the engine and trans still ran. The PC does okay as a controller or as a dedicated production test box with a buffered, isolated interface. But it is not like a scope or gen or analyzer that sits on the bench. |
HP 3582A ?
"Bret Ludwig" said:
The PC does okay as a controller or as a dedicated production test box with a buffered, isolated interface. But it is not like a scope or gen or analyzer that sits on the bench. Then let me scare you: the LeCroy Wavesurfer we have at work, runs on Windows XP and has an USB connector....... ;-) -- - Ever seen someone with 5.1 ears? So, what does that tell you? - |
HP 3582A ?
Sander deWaal wrote: "Bret Ludwig" said: The PC does okay as a controller or as a dedicated production test box with a buffered, isolated interface. But it is not like a scope or gen or analyzer that sits on the bench. Then let me scare you: the LeCroy Wavesurfer we have at work, runs on Windows XP and has an USB connector....... ;-) As does the HP /Agilent Infiniium. As long as you use no other software at all it works pretty well, but QNX would have been a very much better choice. Is this a former Yokogawa or Iwatsu product? |
HP 3582A ?
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message oups.com... Arny Krueger wrote: snip You can find an audio interface that will outperform say a HP 334 for $30. For $200 you're in the same league as some of the older, but not all that old AP stuff. Trying to use a PC as a general purpose bench instrument is like the old race car guys that I used to hang out with. They would build a new big block Chevy and a Turbo 400 behind it every couple of seasons. They put in a dually one ton truck and pulled a trailer that would have been just about right for an old single axle B Mack around for the season. They got about five miles to the gallon under load too. When I got older, I'd ask them why they didn't buy a real truck, you know, air brakes, Fuller Roadranger, like a used Yellow or Roadway day truck. Well, license and insurance cost too much and you needed a "chauffeurs license" to drive it. (Those pre-CDL days!) Well okay, at least put a diesel and an Allison in the pickup, why don't you? Because we don't know how to work on them and you can't get them in the junkyard for a hundred bucks. Letsee Bret. If I want to have audio test equipment that will measure spurious responses 100 dB down,, I either buy a M-Audio AP 24192 for $179 and 2 watt 5k pot to use as an attenuator for testing power amps and the like for about $10 more, or I pony up $4,500 - $10,000 for a used Audio Precision rig that is a whole lot better and easier to use, but in the end also measures spurious responses 100 dB down. How about renting one? Well one source offers new AP equipment for rent at 1/10 of new price *per month*, and another offers a legacy AP System One for $650 a month. You pays your money and you makes your choice... |
HP 3582A ?
Arny Krueger wrote: or I pony up $4,500 - $10,000 for a used Audio Precision rig that is a whole lot better and easier to use, but in the end also measures spurious responses 100 dB down. I've seen them on ebay for under $2000 ( it may have been Euros ). Graham |
HP 3582A ?
"Bret Ludwig" said:
LeCroy ........... Is this a former Yokogawa or Iwatsu product? Dunno, and don't care, either. It works, which is as much as one might expect from a Windows XP-based thingy ;-) I still prefer the sturdy old AP1, though. I'm getting too old to get used to all new thingies they buy in order to lower our profit taxes............. -- - Ever seen someone with 5.1 ears? So, what does that tell you? - |
HP 3582A ?
"Eeyore" wrote in
message Arny Krueger wrote: or I pony up $4,500 - $10,000 for a used Audio Precision rig that is a whole lot better and easier to use, but in the end also measures spurious responses 100 dB down. I've seen them on ebay for under $2000 ( it may have been Euros ). I looked at recent US eBay closings before I made my previouis post. |
HP 3582A ?
The Krooborg tries out its rusty old fact-by-assertion module. I looked at recent US eBay closings before I made my previouis post. An obvious lie. Come back when you have something truthful to post. -- Krooscience: The antidote to education, experience, and excellence. |
HP 3582A ?
Bret Ludwig wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote: snip You can find an audio interface that will outperform say a HP 334 for $30. For $200 you're in the same league as some of the older, but not all that old AP stuff. Trying to use a PC as a general purpose bench instrument is like the old race car guys that I used to hang out with. They would build a new big block Chevy and a Turbo 400 behind it every couple of seasons. They put in a dually one ton truck and pulled a trailer that would have been just about right for an old single axle B Mack around for the season. They got about five miles to the gallon under load too. When I got older, I'd ask them why they didn't buy a real truck, you know, air brakes, Fuller Roadranger, like a used Yellow or Roadway day truck. Well, license and insurance cost too much and you needed a "chauffeurs license" to drive it. (Those pre-CDL days!) Well okay, at least put a diesel and an Allison in the pickup, why don't you? Because we don't know how to work on them and you can't get them in the junkyard for a hundred bucks. Eventually they got tired of building "motors" (sic) for the tow truck and not the race car and put a 3208 Cat or a turbo 4-53 and an Allison or a Clark five speed in there. They then got like ten miles to the galllon and the truck rusted out twenty years later and the engine and trans still ran. The PC does okay as a controller or as a dedicated production test box with a buffered, isolated interface. But it is not like a scope or gen or analyzer that sits on the bench. *If* the thing under test is amenable to it, there's little or no hope of improving on a PC soundcard and Matlab as a combo. Might need a breadboard to adapt the signals, but if it's in range, it'll outrun just about anything for the money. You're assuming you can trust the test equipment. Sometimes, you can't.... -- Les Cargill |
HP 3582A ?
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Les Cargill wrote: Bret Ludwig wrote: Arny Krueger wrote: snip You can find an audio interface that will outperform say a HP 334 for $30. For $200 you're in the same league as some of the older, but not all that old AP stuff. Trying to use a PC as a general purpose bench instrument is like the old race car guys that I used to hang out with. They would build a new big block Chevy and a Turbo 400 behind it every couple of seasons. They put in a dually one ton truck and pulled a trailer that would have been just about right for an old single axle B Mack around for the season. They got about five miles to the gallon under load too. When I got older, I'd ask them why they didn't buy a real truck, you know, air brakes, Fuller Roadranger, like a used Yellow or Roadway day truck. Well, license and insurance cost too much and you needed a "chauffeurs license" to drive it. (Those pre-CDL days!) Well okay, at least put a diesel and an Allison in the pickup, why don't you? Because we don't know how to work on them and you can't get them in the junkyard for a hundred bucks. Eventually they got tired of building "motors" (sic) for the tow truck and not the race car and put a 3208 Cat or a turbo 4-53 and an Allison or a Clark five speed in there. They then got like ten miles to the galllon and the truck rusted out twenty years later and the engine and trans still ran. The PC does okay as a controller or as a dedicated production test box with a buffered, isolated interface. But it is not like a scope or gen or analyzer that sits on the bench. *If* the thing under test is amenable to it, there's little or no hope of improving on a PC soundcard Are you talking about any PC _sound_card? and Matlab as a combo. Might need a breadboard to adapt the signals, but if it's in range, it'll outrun just about anything for the money. A PC _sound_card? Meant for _audio_ frequency ranges? Like single diget Hz to 20-30 kHz? You think I'd rather have that than a decent DC to RF (X mHz) oscilloscope 10 v/div down to 1-10 mv/div sensitivity? Time base seconds/div to microseconds/div or less? And, can measure DC. Maybe if you want to do some FFT or other DSP on an audio signal you can have the soundcard. I'll pick the dedicated gear with specs that fit the ap. You're assuming you can trust the test equipment. Sometimes, you can't.... You mean you don't need to _assume_ the soundcard is working or you don't need to worry about sw bugs or invalid process or tollerances or other spec-dependent limitations? So, if the computer says "X" then it is absolutely true, valid, straight from the horses mouth? No ands, ifs, or buts? Do you know what the term "parasitic" means as it applies to chips? -- Les Cargill |
HP 3582A ?
"Straydog" wrote in message... Do you know what the term "parasitic" means as it applies to chips? And I thought it was all about microbes, barnacles, and other blood suckers. |
HP 3582A ?
"Straydog" wrote in message .com... Are you talking about any PC _sound_card? The fact that you even ask that shows how little you know about them. However some like the Lynx compare pretty well to an AP test set within their designed range, for a LOT less money. A PC _sound_card? Meant for _audio_ frequency ranges? Yes, amazing isn't it that is exactly what audio people want to measure, but try 1Hz to 90kHz for some sound cards, with 0.001% N+D. You think I'd rather have that than a decent DC to RF (X mHz) oscilloscope 10 v/div down to 1-10 mv/div sensitivity? **** just about any sound card can do that voltage range with a 20 cent resistive divider. Shame you didn't mention the real problem, if you want a high input impedance you need a high quality buffer amp. Of course those simply measuring audio gear don't need it. Time base seconds/div to microseconds/div or less? And, can measure DC. Maybe if you want to do some FFT or other DSP on an audio signal you can have the soundcard. I'll pick the dedicated gear with specs that fit the ap. Good for you, especially if your application is not audio. Funny though how most dedicated test gear is connected to a PC data aquisition system these days, at least in most metrology labs. The ability to make repeated measurements unattended, with data manipulation, analysis and presentation is something not many labs would be without anymore. You mean you don't need to _assume_ the soundcard is working or you don't need to worry about sw bugs or invalid process or tollerances or other spec-dependent limitations? So, if the computer says "X" then it is absolutely true, valid, straight from the horses mouth? No ands, ifs, or buts? Do you know what the term "parasitic" means as it applies to chips? Calibration standards apply to ANY test gear, analog or digital, PC based or stand alone. Anybody with knowledge of metrology understands how to make proper measurements, those who don't believe their test gear's badge is all the calibration that's necessary :-( MrT. |
HP 3582A ?
Straydog wrote:
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Les Cargill wrote: Bret Ludwig wrote: Arny Krueger wrote: snip You can find an audio interface that will outperform say a HP 334 for $30. For $200 you're in the same league as some of the older, but not all that old AP stuff. Trying to use a PC as a general purpose bench instrument is like the old race car guys that I used to hang out with. They would build a new big block Chevy and a Turbo 400 behind it every couple of seasons. They put in a dually one ton truck and pulled a trailer that would have been just about right for an old single axle B Mack around for the season. They got about five miles to the gallon under load too. When I got older, I'd ask them why they didn't buy a real truck, you know, air brakes, Fuller Roadranger, like a used Yellow or Roadway day truck. Well, license and insurance cost too much and you needed a "chauffeurs license" to drive it. (Those pre-CDL days!) Well okay, at least put a diesel and an Allison in the pickup, why don't you? Because we don't know how to work on them and you can't get them in the junkyard for a hundred bucks. Eventually they got tired of building "motors" (sic) for the tow truck and not the race car and put a 3208 Cat or a turbo 4-53 and an Allison or a Clark five speed in there. They then got like ten miles to the galllon and the truck rusted out twenty years later and the engine and trans still ran. The PC does okay as a controller or as a dedicated production test box with a buffered, isolated interface. But it is not like a scope or gen or analyzer that sits on the bench. *If* the thing under test is amenable to it, there's little or no hope of improving on a PC soundcard Are you talking about any PC _sound_card? Yes. and Matlab as a combo. Might need a breadboard to adapt the signals, but if it's in range, it'll outrun just about anything for the money. A PC _sound_card? Meant for _audio_ frequency ranges? Like single diget Hz to 20-30 kHz? You think I'd rather have that than a decent DC to RF (X mHz) oscilloscope 10 v/div down to 1-10 mv/div sensitivity? Time base seconds/div to microseconds/div or less? And, can measure DC. Maybe if you want to do some FFT or other DSP on an audio signal you can have the soundcard. I'll pick the dedicated gear with specs that fit the ap. You're assuming you can trust the test equipment. Sometimes, you can't.... You mean you don't need to _assume_ the soundcard is working or you don't need to worry about sw bugs or invalid process or tollerances or other spec-dependent limitations? So, if the computer says "X" then it is absolutely true, valid, straight from the horses mouth? No ands, ifs, or buts? Do you know what the term "parasitic" means as it applies to chips? Absolutely. *In this case*, the rig beat out some rather expensive specialized test gear. We also needed several hours of captured data. We had eight or nine scopes and three logic analyzers; the PC complemented 'em nicely. What works depends on the test. -- Les Cargill -- Les Cargill |
HP 3582A ?
"Straydog" wrote in message
.com *If* the thing under test is amenable to it, there's little or no hope of improving on a PC soundcard Are you talking about any PC _sound_card? Let's put it this way. A lot of good audio development and test was done with equipment such as the HP 333/334. Conventional wisdom is that if you can't measure it with a 333, you can't hear it either. A 333 pretty well ran out of gas around 0.02% THD. IOW if you hooked a perfect signal source up to a 333 and nulled it carefully, that would be a good residual. The residual THD of a typical Realtek audio interface on a modern motherboard is less than that. and Matlab as a combo. Might need a breadboard to adapt the signals, but if it's in range, it'll outrun just about anything for the money. All you need is a a modern PC and a freeware audio testing program - RMA55. A PC _sound_card? Meant for _audio_ frequency ranges? Unh huh. Like single diget Hz to 20-30 kHz? Well up to 20 KHz or so. You think I'd rather have that than a decent DC to RF (X mHz) oscilloscope 10 v/div down to 1-10 mv/div sensitivity? Try verifying the specs of a $39.95 DVD players audio outputs with a scope. In the real world of general purpose troubleshooting and development you would ideally have both. And, can measure DC. That's what voltmeters are for, chum. Maybe if you want to do some FFT or other DSP on an audio signal you can have the soundcard. You seem to be seeing the light. I'll pick the dedicated gear with specs that fit the ap. Of course. You're assuming you can trust the test equipment. Sometimes, you can't.... You mean you don't need to _assume_ the soundcard is working or you don't need to worry about sw bugs or invalid process or tollerances or other spec-dependent limitations? So, if the computer says "X" then it is absolutely true, valid, straight from the horses mouth? Measurements are what they are. Their utility is always in the interpretation. No ands, ifs, or buts? Do you know what the term "parasitic" means as it applies to chips? It means, "Where is my dual-trace scope?" |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:05 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com