Moving on to better multimeter for electronics  - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: rookie
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 03:49:27 pm
content: I'm planning to get some multimeters for use in my projects. My projects are mostly low power wireless electronics, sensors etc.I had some cheap ones (klein tools) that died on me. I got a spare AN8009 to get me through the meantime. I think it's a decent meter for the price.But I also want to get a super accurate dmm. Going through the forum, I kind of narrowed down on the Brymen brand. Looks like they provide reallygood value without breaking the bank. So I have BM867S, BM869S, BM525 in mind. I think I should get BM867S and BM525.Looking at the feature comparison between 867 and 869, the only one that seemed to matter to me was the dc accuracy (0.02 vs 0.03). 0.03 on the 867 already seems too good to me.867 also doesn't have :- 100kHz AC+DC bandwitdh- VFD-Hz VFD-V measurement- T1-T2 temperature readings.I don't know if I'd ever need these features for my work. Any thoughts on this?I also plan to get BM525 as it has the logging feature which I think might be super useful.So, any thoughts on these choices before I decide to drop money on them? It's either 2 867S or 1 867S and 1 525.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 04:15:07 pm
content: Quote from: rookie on June 05, 2019, 03:49:27 pmYep.Quote from: rookie on June 05, 2019, 03:49:27 pmDon't obsess over those numbers. I bought a "0.03%" BM857s last month and as far as I can tell iteasilyexceeds that spec.Quote from: rookie on June 05, 2019, 03:49:27 pmOnly you can answer that: What will you do with the extra 60 bucks? Will you look back in six months and think "60 bucks is nothing, I should have..."?Quote from: rookie on June 05, 2019, 03:49:27 pmAll of the meters on your list have data logging options. Maybe you could spend the 60 bucks on that.PS: There's also the 859S which is cheaper than the 869S and has almost identical features.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 05:01:37 pm
content: Totally agree with Fungus but you save money on the BM525 by buying the data logging adaptor for the BM867s and capture the data on your PC?

author: CDaniel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 05:20:20 pm
content: A good AC true rms bandwidth is a "must have"in the lab , even if you don't use it right now . This are meters that probably will last many , many years , so a little extra more money is worth spending .

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 06:19:03 pm
content: I have 869S and 525. They use same PC interface. 869S is to me worth a bit more that 867 because:- AC bandwidth over 100kHz . in reality -3 dB point is around 300kHz.- Slightly better accuracy.- two temp measurement. That is useful because many times you measure temp difference. For instance temp of transistor and temp of heatsink or ambient. Temp of refrigerator and ambient..- for audio , in addition to good AC bandwidth, it has dB scale. You can check VU meters (signal levels) on audio equipment.525 is very good meter. Logging works well, but if you plan to use it, you will need PC adapter. Viewing data on meter is not really easy. Usual workflow is to log, bring it to PC, dump data to PC and massage it there. Same USB adapter works for 867/869 though, so it has more than one use.

author: MikeP
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 07:38:17 pm
content: I had 867, but then changed to 869. Do not repeat my mistake. It is a good device, but slow. For quick measurements, you should have one more with fewer digits.

author: rookie
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 08:34:22 pm
content: @MikeP : Are you saying getting 867 was the bad decision or the 869?

author: rookie
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 08:40:50 pm
content: Thanks for the inputs @Fungus, @Specmaster, @CDaniel, @2N3055 !The price difference been 867 and 869 is actually not too much. I could either spend the difference on the PC adapter or just bite the bullet on 869S.I was planning on getting the PC adapter anyways so I can connect the 869/7, 525 for logging. I agree with @2N3055, viewing all the data on the meter is not feasible.I understand that all these meters have logging capability.But it looks like the 525 has higher memory for logging compared to 869/867. That is one of the reason I was considering it.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 08:54:10 pm
content: Quote from: rookie on June 05, 2019, 08:40:50 pm869/7 doesn't have standalone logging like 525. You can log to PC while connected, and then both 869 and 525 don't have limitations..

author: rookie
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 10:53:16 pm
content: Oh. I was under the impression from the specs that 525 has a higher logging frequency on the PC. May be that is just what is available onboard the meter(i.e without connecting to a computer). Thanks for the clarification.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2019, 11:53:13 pm
content: Wait... What?!!!!I have seen on this site many times how the Fluke 87V IS the Gold Standard!!! Isn't anyone going to recommend it??

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 12:17:10 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 05, 2019, 11:53:13 pmI've never personally known someone who had and used an 87V.

author: JxR
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 12:44:20 am
content: Quote from: maginnovision on June 06, 2019, 12:17:10 amI think I have one in a box somewhere, covered in dust. For a small fee you can experience...well something! I really should put that thing up on eBay, but then I wouldn't have a portable meter, and the very next day I would inevitably need one for some reason.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 12:47:57 am
content: Challenge accepted..it's a dirty job but someone has to do it87V is the Gold Standard here,after the 189, 289 and it's MMA brother 28-11 have walked off with their trophiesI've given the Brymens and others a go, but the top end Fluke club are hard to beat in consistency, buzzer/continuity speed, killa MIN-MAX-PEAK, wide AC bandwith, blah blahand basically handle what Fluke rates them for, I'm assuming AIO general purpose multimeter use.If some punters are nutters/rich enough and or one beer too many, to test suss fly zappers and BBQ starters without a resistive attenuator of sorts,hey what do they expect when any fried meter no longer has the potential to indicate potentialFlukes are easy to get into and service/clean,and new buyers don't have to cross their fingers 'if' they score a dud or a failed unit at some point in time.BTW: just how well do Brymens handle serious physical drops on floors and concrete?and what international repair and parts network exists, since a lot seem to be OS purchases?Or is it a'..you takes your chances, Bub'thing?FWIW OP and others at similar posts are perhaps better off with two or three multimeters (Fluke and or non Fluke),which between them, should sport all the features and or reasonable/good enough accuracy specs required,and MANY other benefits.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 02:50:33 am
content: Think Fluke has parts for the old antique meters, think again. At best you may find some old junk meter on ebay to salvage used parts for your 189.Of course you could buy a new 289 and wait while it boots up and squint at the screen after it eventually does. Plus you get the added advantage that you can prepare and eat your supper while you wait for it to plot your data.Can't see anyone using these for basic electrical work which may be why Fluke really doesn't off much for electronics use. Well, except the 87V gold standard. That meter I hear does everything, for everyone, forever. If you were not aware of that, I guess you just don't work in the industry is all.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 03:25:47 am
content: I would not buy a Fluke 97 and I especially would not buy one of their current higher performance handheld DMMs.I still use a Tektronix DMM916 as my best portable DMM. It was a competitor to the Fluke 97 20 years ago and is roughly comparable. Despite its own collection of design flaws, it has proven to be reliable.If I was looking for a better portable DMM, especially an equally accurate one, my first requirement would be consistent input resistance as this has been a recurring issue for me when making accurate measurements. Right now I have to drag a bench meter around sometimes. Finding such a portable DMM is not an easy task however because often manufacturer's specifications are incomplete.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 03:51:22 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on June 06, 2019, 03:25:47 amI think you have a wrong part number in the mix. I have a couple of Fluke 97s and like them. It's nothing like the DMM916. For one thing, the 97 is a 50MHz scope.I think the key here is if you do plan to buy any used Fluke, be careful if it comes from Australia. There seems to be a cult that practice spitting in their meters as a way to heal them, much like a dog licks it's wounds. There is another sect who believes in the healing properties of WD40. :https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/lube-dmm-selector-switch/25/

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 04:13:04 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 06, 2019, 03:51:22 amYea, I meant Fluke 87.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 07:26:40 am
content: I think Fluke87V had not been mentioned before because the OP had already indicated that the Brymens was the sort of price point. He was after a better meter and not the Rolls Royce of meters, although I have my doubts on that being the Rolls Royce, expensive yes.Fact is that there is no problem with Brymens so why pay more?Sent from my POT-LX1 using Tapatalk

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 07:38:10 am
content: Fluke 87 is basic meter for power electronics. It is a good robust thing, and expensive.You can get both BM525S and BM869S for the price of F87V.F87V doesn't have "wide AC bandwidth", it goes to 20kHz.-BM525S to 20kHz.-BM869S goes to 100 kHz (300kHz -3dB).F87V accuracy is slightly better than BM525S but slightly worse than BM869SF87V can measure 1 temp sensor- Both BM525/869 mentioned can measure 2 temp sensors and show difference.F87V has fast peak detect mode. It is faster than Brymen. I don't use that mode because it is useless because that's a work for a scope if you searching for weird spikes. Probably useful for some startup peak measurement or something in power electronics.F87V doesn't have dB mode. BM869S does and it works well.F87V will have longer battery life than BM869, and similar to BM525SF87V doesn't have data logging. It does have IR USB cable option.-BM525 has data logging, up to some 40000 dual and 80000 single measurements.F87V is safe and protected from high energy transients up to 600V CAT IV. That is excellent.BM869S and BM525S are even better with up to 1000V CAT IV. Best in class.F87V has nice continuity mode (buzzer). So does have BM869/525. It is fast and works well. There is heated discussion every few weeks where people spend ridiculous amount of time discussing musicality of buzzers and such. Next thing someone will start measuring THD and S/N ratio to prove some buzzers "are just so much better". That is just funny. If it works, has good threshold, it reacts fast and it buzzes it is GOOD. It will do the job, it's a buzzer, damn it.F87 is only single display, BM525/869 are dual display, showing two measurements at once..etc ...etc..F87V is most revered meter because it used to be king of the hill. It is not anymore, it is just very good, but nothing special compared to others at the same (or lesser) price range.So yeah, I'm adamant when I say that it is definitely better to buy both BM525S and BM869S for the price of single F87V that will, feature wise, be basically less featured that BM525And no, I'm not discussing used crap Ebay lottery.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 09:16:16 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 06, 2019, 02:50:33 amWell for starters, do you believe Brymen will have parts available for their vintage meters in the future? We both know that answer up front = same deal as FlukePersonal POV: I don't mind the 289 boot up time (a few seconds?!) whilst hooking up leads, attaching crocs or clamp attachment, or setting up an inline current thing etc.There's no squinting after playing with the contrast control outdoors and indoors the one time,till you get a good result under most lighting conditions,and there's always the 2 speed backlight if things ever get squintyThe on board logger gets the job done for any real world electronic or sparky work out in the field,it's quick enough for what it is and reliable, and saves on stuffing about with laptops that have L O N G boot times and quirksand other raved about meters that have software BUGS fanboys conveniently 'forget' to mention.A clear plastic zip bag in dusty, sandy or wet conditions ensures the meter won't get trashed.Come on, how many clued 289 owners can biatch about Fluke's very fair attempt at producing a real 'All In One meter with the lot' that works fine, and is no slouch on specs.If people don't want to read manuals on a rainy Sunday afternoon, or run through the menus during a work break to understand where the meter's designers heads were at,and take down some hard notes for future reference,hey, don't buy this expensive Made In The USA (?) meter.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 10:34:57 am
content: Fluke 289 is great instrument. Screen could be better (contrast) and screen refresh could be better, but none of that is showstopper.Problem is that it cost so much, that you can buy BM869S (except graphing, similar specs to F289) and a Micsig tablet oscilloscope.No kidding.And those two combined will be much more useful than F289.I'm certain of that.I'm not arguing Fluke meters are bad. I'm saying they are not worth the money they are asking, when you compare what else is there.

author: coromonadalix
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 10:44:14 am
content: The 87 series are way over priced, managed to find flukes 187 and 189, they are way better, the 287 289 series naaah tired and hated it immediately. Too bulky.Tried Brymen 857s, i was surprised, made a mistake to sold it, needed cash for the 189but it was good and fast.Never tried Keysight 30,000 counts and up dmm's, i simply find them ugly (sorry)And many Oled screens problem naaaaaaaaaaaanh too.Wish my Gossen 28-29 where faster, 2 reads a sec"they are the best ones never had" but now unobtanium in parts and cost $$$ to calibrate.I wish the eevblog meter gw121 was prime for use, relatively compact bluetooth etc .... have to wait. Im keeping an eye on occasion on the related threads, gets better and better with time.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 11:21:57 am
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on June 06, 2019, 09:16:16 amGood point. I could buy a brand new car today and worry about parts in 20 years, or I could buy a 20 year old are and worry about parts today. Of course, I could spit on the20 year old car and it would be good as new.Of course, read the first few pages of this thread and we can understand why Fluke and specifically the 87V is the gold standard by which all other are judged. If the thread ran again today, I wonder what would be posted.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/if-brymen-bm869s-is-cheaper-and-as-good-why-people-would-still-buy-fluke/Dave has made a point to bring up the feel of the rotary switches. I'm a bit of a rotary switch connoisseur myself.https://youtu.be/dQPcAs0EEqY?t=955How can you even begin to compare the BM869s?? Oh wait, I can.https://youtu.be/bs5n3a__Yq0?t=586

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 11:37:59 am
content: Some comments from someone who dumped an 867 for a Fluke 87V and then got an original 87:So I got an 867 and I can't recommend it now. Mine has gone. I paid £130 for it.1. The 867 interface I found to be problematic. It's difficult to infer which of the submodes it is in and it remembers them unhelpfully. This is touted as a feature but I think it's really a misfeature. You know with the Fluke that it's going to be turn to here, press this twice, always. Considerably less likely to do something stupid then and cost yourself a new set of fuses.2. The AC+DC mode in the 867 is damn slow. I mean really slow.3. the 867 is huge and heavy and takes up a hell of a lot of space.4. Hold on the 867 is completely useless unless you have an extra hand growing out of your butt. Auto hold on Flukes is waaay better.5. If you want data logging it's a significant chunk of cash more (I don't need it if I'm honest).6. Display viewing angle is never quite right and the plastic over the display is terrible and the backlight is terrible.7. The recommended 869s is literally only around £40 cheaper than a new in box 87V of which there are tens of them going around on ebay almost constantly at least here in the UK.8. I had an RFI issue with mine which I couldn't recreate. It went batshit crazy when I was measuring current in the supply line of an RF PA.9. If a signal is close to a range boundary it sometimes never settles and just switches range constantly resulting in you having to dump the probes and poke it into manual range. Fluke is better here by a mile.So 87V, new in box (I paid £150 for mine which had a brand new 3rd party UKAS cal on it because I'm a sneaky ebay sniper)1. Bargraph on it is basically useless. It is literally never in a range where it's useful. Literally not once.2. amps defaults to AC amps which is mostly useless for me as I mostly am interested in DC amps so this is an extra mode switch literally every time I want to measure current.3. AC bandwidth is actually about 80KHz on mine although that's not guaranteed.4. Display angle is not great if it's lying on the bench but otherwise it is really good as is the backlight.5. Really really really nice to use. Nothing unexpected.So 87 I bought duff and resurrected it (I paid total £90 including new terminal post assembly)1. Loses official CAT ratings (I'll get shot for this but "meh")2. All other issues fixed.3. Lose the nice backlight but the viewing angle is fine for the bench.4. The thing was 25 years old when I got it and it is a 1:1 match on all readings against my 87V which is in cal.5. Flat 100KHz bandwidth easily.6. I got a new terminal assembly, an official Fluke part from a mainstream supplier (TME) for a 25 year old meter!!! That's support.I keep the 87 for basic work and the 87V for anything else which is high voltage, high current or dangerous.

author: rookie
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 03:54:35 pm
content: The inputs here are great, thanks for chiming in everyone! The discussion definitely makes choosing harder for meBut yes, one of the reasons I considered Brymen was it's price to feature balance.Flukes are great but are definitely priceyyy!I will think about this for a bit before pulling the trigger

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 04:53:00 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on June 06, 2019, 11:37:59 amI see what you did there, you fixed the slow AC+DC mode by getting rid of it all together.Good job Fluke!!!Someone had pointed out BD139's RF problem. I attempted to replicate their findings using a BM869s, except not looking at some power supply current but putting the meter right in line with the load. Then tuning to the same frequency. Then if that wasn't bad enough, I increased the power levels a fair amount. Not suggesting anyone attempt to repeat this test. I run them so you don't have to.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hear-kitty-kitty-kitty-nope-not-that-kind-of-cat/msg1906376/#msg1906376

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 05:23:59 pm
content: I replaced the AC+DC mode with two Fluke 87sMore seriously I think the 287 does that.Yeah I couldn’t repo that one again either. May have been bogons.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 06:00:05 pm
content: I forgot that the 87 has networking. As I understand it, one meter acts as a master, the other slave. The master requests the AC component from the slave then performs that square root of the sum of the squares. The networking is really a nice feature, otherwise I would need two meters, plus a calculator.The 289/287 I thought were the only two they offer today with it. One more reason the 87V is the gold standard, none of this useless math to waste space on the function switch and confuse the user.On the RF, I would guess that there was a bit of distortion. Maybe the meter is susceptible at the 2nd or 3rd harmonic. Still, I did sweep the BM869s well past that at 10V/m.I suspect this would cause the 87's RF network to go down and you would be stuck calculating AC+DC by hand.https://youtu.be/wYuzFtoHMqg?list=PLZSS2ajxhiQBTCU8Mq_i9jidT024A0dV6&t=842

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 06:03:02 pm
content: I like my calculator

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 06:42:16 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on June 06, 2019, 06:03:02 pmAnd the discussion goes in direction: is RPN better....

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 07:03:38 pm
content: I think every thread has turned into that recently. And of course it is(HP35S here)

author: CDaniel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 07:23:36 pm
content: Computing AC+DC is very simple and fast for the microcontroller ... the slowness is because it has to switch all the time from DC to AC and back , both autoranging . Thats the compromise in a cheap meter where AC and DC share the same path . But you don't use AC+DC every day ...

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 07:45:51 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on June 06, 2019, 07:03:38 pmNah, Casio fx-61F rules...I don't know what I'm gonna do when it dies.. Probably will need therapy..Anyway AC+DC on BM867 might be slower than single measurement but is faster and easier than switching and calculating manually.On the same token, I never used Autohold on F87 because it was slowing me down... To each his own..

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 08:52:01 pm
content: Quote from: CDaniel on June 06, 2019, 07:23:36 pmMy DMM916 is the same way; AC+DC mode is really slow for the reason you identify. Not only does it have to alternately measure average DC and then AC through the AC converter, but it has to wait for the settling time between each switch. There are alternative designs which do not suffer from this problem but they draw a lot more power making them unsuitable for battery operation.On the other hand, I have never had a use for AC+DC.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 09:13:24 pm
content: My old GW Instek did that as well. Clackity clack of relays as it did it as well. Very irritating.As David says, it's the same for me. I have never had a use for AC+DC either. I usually measure DC to work out the DC operating point with no signal on something and use a scope or power meter for the AC stuff.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2019, 11:37:29 pm
content: @ bd139, re one of your your earlier comments above, same deal here with 87 and 87Vbut FYI you won't pull 80 or 100khz AC bandwidth out of an original series 87 or 87-1, or 87V any time soon mate.They are spec'd to 20khz and I can vouch them to be quite linear at various voltages/ranges up to about 14khz (poor mans pen/paper dot plotting with clean sine wave) before they rollI think I got similar performance from the current ranges too, but forgot to take note of that () so please don't quote me, as they may either be same or much lowerEDIT:good luck hitting 2khz AC Current Bandwidth with both 87-1 and 87V, but hey, it's better than a kick in the headI did the comparison thing a while back to verify if an 87 and 87V could cut it for audio work and or amp tests in a pinch, and yes they can.A flat 14khz is good enough for a lot of audio related tasks, but if it has to be straight line 20khz to 30khz then it's has to be a 100khz meter >189, 89IV, 289, 8060Ahey, maybe the bells n whistles Brymen can stretch its AC jeans to(crossed fingers).. 99.9khz ?fwiw both the old school 87 and 87V sport the same AC bandwidth, and I'm fine using either meterI bought the crusty unloved 87V with the money I saved over the years on 87 batteries

author: CDaniel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 05:51:57 am
content: Fluke 87 uses an AD737 true-rms converter which is a cheaper version of the AD637 used in many 100KHz bandwidth multimeters , so even if the front end could have the banwidth it is limited by the true-rms chip .

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 06:17:13 am
content: Quote from: CDaniel on June 07, 2019, 05:51:57 amIt is probably AD636, with 200 mV range... As far as I can remember it was a metal case so that would be AD636JH or AD636KH depending on grade used..AD636 goes to 1MHz -3dBBM869S goes over 300KHz easy.. Bandwidth will be also highly dependent on front end design and protection circuits...

author: CDaniel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 06:27:40 am
content: Yes , it is AD636 .AD637 is even better , I looked at it recently thats why it was in my mind .AD737 is used in allmost every crappy true-rms 1K-5K bandwitdh multimeter .Good bandwidth requires capacitors in parallel with the input divider for compensation , which cheap multimeters don't use .

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 07:03:50 am
content: Just measured mine again. I was wrongFluke 87: flat to 22Khz. 3dB at 105KHzFluke 87V: flat to 35KHz. 3dB at 224Khz.This is 5V RMS into 50 ohms terminated at the meter.I actually use my HP 400E for AC measurements mostly as that’s flat to 17Mhz after I frigged with the compensation and has a 1mV range. Only average responding though.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 08:13:33 am
content: While I have zero knowledge of either F87 or 87V but I do have a few F25s F27s, the later has the auto hold feature that bd139 speaks of which is useful if you really need it. That said of course, what is the matter with using the Max/Min setting on the B867 to achieve the same thing?He says the AC+DC is really slow, I find find that's the case on my 867 which purchased within days of him and from same supplier. I have nothing but praise for mine, alright, the backlight isn't even over the screen, but it's still useful if you need it. I have other much cheaper meters with very good backlights, this is I believe bd139 looking for perfection in everything, which I doubt exists. I don't do the kind of RF work he does so I have not seen any misbehaving in that area, neither has Joe as his video shows, other meters can be affected. I have about 10 handheld DMMs and can say that for me that the Brymens 867 is my best meter and pride and joy. The fact that the various options of the dual displays remaining selected by default can be an advantage so you can customise your meter to the ranges you use. I'm unaware of any setting in the dual display modes that would cause you to blow fuses unless you was in the current modes, but they don't have dual display modes AFAIK and the input Jack's have audio alerts if the Jack's being used are incompatible with the mode selected.I believe that the problem bd139 had with his one was because he had a faulty one I'd have sent it back under warranty if it happened to me. There is however 1 known problem with both the Brymens 867 and 869 and is the Crest function cannot be used on DC Amps, they are aware of it but that's not a feature or a problem that matters to me.Would I recommend the Brymens, hell that is a Huge yes, I'd be happy with either 867 or 869 and expect many others here are of the opinion. And of course the fact that they are Cat 4 rated @ 1000v shouldn't be ignored, that might be a factor in your safety.Sent from my POT-LX1 using Tapatalk

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 09:08:39 am
content: The max on the BM867 only captures extreme values and you have to return to the meter to reset/read. Autohold will read several values sequentially with two hands on the DUT without having to return to the meter to reset it. This turned out to be a massive efficiency boost for me poking around DC bias conditions in things I have built which require me to be careful and have eyes on so I don't blow them up. I did a semi-tongue in cheek example / comparison of Fluke and Keysight's implementation of autohold here which demonstrates it pretty well:Now I'm not saying the BM867 is a horrible meter here. It's not. That title is reserved for the ass end Uni-T meters. But I find the thing difficult to live with compared to the 87 series once you've used one. But honestly the 87V is waaaay too expensive for what it is if you buy new from a mainstream distributor. I got lucky on a NIB one for a ridiculously good price. I would probably own the 867S still if I didn't have one but I have an 87V now so I'd rather keep that.Also I still own two Brymens, albeit BM22s which are excellent little meters. One lives in my bag most of the time.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 10:09:14 am
content: Quote from: bd139 on June 07, 2019, 07:03:50 amAre we talking genuine AC Voltage Bandwidth or the Frequency counter ?There is NO WAY any stock unhacked 87-1 or 87V is going to be linear past 14khzand good luck hitting 2khz in AC current modePlace your bets gentlemen

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 10:17:33 am
content: That's AC volts. Flat is within 1dB of expected. After the flat range it usually dips very slightly to about 2dB then rises to flat again then down to 3dB where it falls off a cliff rapidly. I'll plot it later if I get some time.The frequency counter is utterly crap.To note it is range dependent as well based on the converter amplitude and this is terminated at the meter properly. If you do this at 50mV for example it'll be shit.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 11:05:53 am
content: Quote from: bd139 on June 07, 2019, 09:08:39 amYes I remember that clip wellI agree that the autohold as you demonstrate is a very useful feature but is not insurmountable because what I do with situations as you describe is, I tend to use grabbers so the connections of interest can made and then you have 2 hands free to use the normal hold system, admittedly only one at a time can be measure and it will take a little longer to complete a series of checks but that surely is desirable if circuits are that unstable / unsafe to work on if you have concentrate 100% on the connections if it keeps your fingers free from any riskOn the car front, just limped to the garage today and they said that they were looking at the 14th before they could do itThey eventually said that if I left it with them they would have a go and see what they can do for Monday. So they dropped me back home and I await news on Monday, fingers crossed. If not, I'll have to consider getting it picked up and taken to quick fit or similar, god knows what that will cost

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 12:13:49 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on June 07, 2019, 07:03:50 am"Flat" is an ambiguous term. To be clear you are defining it within +/-1dB of the reference? How are you measuring your reference?I have that 87V I bought brand new (no spit or WD40 added). I could compare against the BM869s and your data.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 12:21:32 pm
content: Reference is a calibrated AWG output which indicates 5.002V RMS on the calibrated 87V at 1KHz. 1dB of reference is what I'm measuring.I'll run a sweep through it over the weekend if I get a few minutes and post the data. Probably one for another thread - will link it here when done. Will do the 87 as well.

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 01:09:20 pm
content: For a bench meter I still like the old fluke 8840a models. They were built to last and the displays are better than LCD for the bench. I really don't like handheld meters for the bench because they seem to always be in the way.Look on ebay and you can get fully working models for around $75.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 01:18:22 pm
content: Quote from: ptricks on June 07, 2019, 01:09:20 pmPut the handheld where your bench meter is, I'm sure there'll be a net gain in space.

author: ptricks
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 01:24:58 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on June 07, 2019, 01:18:22 pmAnd then I have to use two hands, one to hold the meter the other to turn the dial to change the setting, or push the buttons or change leads. Remote readings require another cable and that means the meter that is already going to fall over is even more likely to. The viewing angle on lcd is generally meant for above the meter so on a bench it doesn't face me, it angles up. I can read my bench display from across the room. There is a reason bench meters are sold .

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 03:15:39 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on June 07, 2019, 12:21:32 pmFor audio I doubt they are working with 50ohms. To do some sort of A-B comparison, we should run them the same way. We could drive the generator into the 50ohm, then come off of that with a 600ohm series, then into your meter. It may be interesting to try it at 50 and 600 just to see if there is a difference. We could also make up a -20dB 50-600 ohm pad. I'm not much of an audio buff so your call. Document how you decide to run it and I will attempt to replicate your results.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 03:24:27 pm
content: Quote from: ptricks on June 07, 2019, 01:24:58 pmI like you, also like the Fluke 8840A and 8842A and the thing with Flukes is that they rarely need calibration unless you are after accuracy down to the last uVIt has been my experience with the Flukes I own that they hold their calibration well over the years. I'm not 100% sure if these can be calibrated against suitable references using the front buttons alone or not. However I also own some HP and Solartron bench meters where is indeed possible and thus means that given suitable reference signals, you can keep these calibrated yourself very easily. I don't believe this is possible with hand helds however so that's a point to bear in mind. Another is that most handhelds also far more functions then bench meters do.Fact is that meters are jusy another tool in your kit and it is up to us to decide which one best fits our purposes at the time, I don't consider my kit to be adequate without having both types at my disposal

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 05:57:05 pm
content: " linear past 14khz ", "flat", "straight line"Using the signal generator to a 6dB splitter, one leg going to a 50 ohm thru, the other to the scope terminated at 50 ohms for a sanity check. Set the output to achieve 1.000VAC at 100Hz on the BM869s. Swept the freq to -0.1, -1.0 and -3dB.I only checked the one meter and full disclosure, this is the newer of the two that was dropped, 50,000 life cycles and transient tested to failure. No spit was used during the repairs, however, to be VERY clear, the meter does not have the same part numbers for the clamp. I had tried modified the clamp stage to see if I could make it more robust. If BD139 comes up with a better way to test their meters, I will use the stock meter. While I damaged that meter as well during my testing, I used the same parts during the repairs.

author: CDaniel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 06:26:24 pm
content: The weak link for HF in this portable meters are the probes , obviously unshielded and not designed for this , so the results can be influenced by the testing techniques in many ways .

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 06:40:07 pm
content: Quote from: CDaniel on June 07, 2019, 06:26:24 pmYou are absolutely 100% accurate with this statement. At these frequencies it IS VERY important to use proper cabling. I was going to buy a new car but instead, picked up some decent cables to make these measurements.https://www.thecableco.com/emperor-double-crown-speaker-cable-pair.html

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 08:12:39 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 07, 2019, 05:57:05 pmIf I remember correctly, this is similar to what I got on my BM869S..My Picoscopes have 600 Ohm output, maybe a quick run on that?

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 08:35:54 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on June 07, 2019, 08:12:39 pmI did go ahead and make a 20dB pad attenuator to go from 50 to 600 ohms but have not tried it. Give it a try with your Picoscope. Maybe try it with 50 ohms as well. I doubt my selection of transistors made much of a difference but it wouldn't hurt to have a sanity check.The whole meter audio thing is beyond me anyway. I don't get the whole, I need a perfectly flat handheld meter to look at a non-linear amplifier. Oh well. Let's roll with it.

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 08:37:02 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 07, 2019, 06:40:07 pmClearly those guys know what they're doing, but they forgot the shields earth connector. Think they used fuel line for the outer insulation?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 08:42:21 pm
content: Quote from: maginnovision on June 07, 2019, 08:37:02 pm...once heard they think you’ll agree, that’s a small price to pay given the performance on offer.

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 08:50:37 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on June 07, 2019, 08:42:21 pmIndeed. The description got me hooked, now I've gotta find out for myself.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 09:00:38 pm
content: Quote from: maginnovision on June 07, 2019, 08:50:37 pmThey'll be a good investment once they're fully burned in.

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 09:06:27 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on June 07, 2019, 09:00:38 pmI'll probably have to pay someone for that, I don't have the equipment for it. I hope the effects of burn in won't be countered by shipping. I'll have to specify ground shipping, right? I'll email the experts.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 09:10:50 pm
content: Using a 1/4 wavelength rule of thumb for a transmission line, at 500KHz that's about 150 meters. Those are some VERY long DMM leads we are talking about.I ordered mine custom and should have them today. The McLaren F1 will need to wait.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 10:48:55 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 07, 2019, 08:35:54 pmI got a bit of time, made few measurements. 1V P-P from 600 OHm siggen on Picoscope 3406D.Sweep, from 100Hz to 500KHz BM869S (5V range) and MTX3293 (1V range, and 10V range)And yes, it's just a curiosity, you don't really need perfectly flat AC bandwidth to repair amplifiers.But when amplifiers distort, it is nice to measure full energy going into speakers, and that can easily go to 100s of kHz range..For bandwidth linearity of amplifiers measurement you will need something more specialized than handheld anyways...

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2019, 11:24:39 pm
content: It's a bit too hard to tell from the graphs.I tried my original BM869s, with probemaster leads and 50 600 ohm 20dB pad. Again, setting meter to 1.0VACRMS as a reference.limit, freq, measured voltage0.1 dB, 149KHz, 1.0108V Fell out high1.0 dB, 373.1KHz, 0.8925V3.0 dB, 456KHz, 0.709VI then went back to the 50ohm termination using the original BM869s0.1dB, 127KHz, 1.0116V1.0dB, 385KHz, 0.8933V3.0dB, 486KHz, 0.7078VStaying with the 50ohm, I repeated the test using the new 87V that again, has 50,000 cycles on the switch.0.1dB, 26KHz, 0.988V1.0dB, 72KHz, 0.892V3.0dB, 135KHz, 0.707V**** Added Fluke 189 #1 from an old friend of mine *****0.1dB, 98KHz, 0.9883V1.0dB, 160KHz, 0.8908V3.0dB, 223KHz, 0.7089VFluke 189 #20.1dB, 70KHz, 0.9886V Not as good as the worse of the two BM869s1.0dB, 147KHz, 0.8928V3.0dB, 213KHz, 0.7098Fluke 189 #40.1dB, 98KHz, 0.9883V1.0dB, 148KHz, 0.8910V3.0dB, 202KHz, 0.7083VQuote from: Electro Detective on June 06, 2019, 11:37:29 pmBased on the above, we know the Fluke 189 is the definition a straight line, and we can see the BM869s has a flatter response. I guess we have to conclude that the BM869s is in fact straight line as well.Quote from: 2N3055 on June 07, 2019, 10:48:55 pmI assumed the repair techs would use a scope or network analyzer for this, not a meter. Then again, I've just been schooled on the definition of a straight line. Not to be pedantic, well, maybe a little, I always thought a line by definition would be straight.How does it get any straighter than a line?? Once again, I'm lost in the world of audio...

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 12:08:54 am
content: Not sure what leaked cleaning solutions are being inhaledbut the AC bandwidth specs in the Fluke user and calibration manuals for 87-1, 87V and 28-11 -specifically- state20khzmax,depending on the range/s.If it's typo error and should be200khz, then we all have dud meters randomly performing from 14 to 101 khzand better jump on that Fluke Warranty asap before they get pushed out of businessby Brymen and Uni-Tor flog the used ones back to the unwary pawn dealers and Negative Feedback fearing Ebay sellers.---------------------My verifications were simple as simple can be:A linear/straight line performance (or whatever correct term floats boats) audio signal generator 10hz to 30khz hooked up directly to the 87 meter,with similar results using either general purpose hook up leads/spaghetti or shielded audio cable.Then the sig gen hooked up to to a brand new out of the box customers power amp (Crown 2400? heavy mofo) and amp outputs to 87 meterAnd yes an oscilloscope was in on the action too to ensure the sig gen and amp were doing their thingand a Tabor 8020 function generator with sine and all the other wave/pulse goodies, HP distortion meter,as well as variable 0 to 32 ohm dummy load and halogen lamps for thrashing real audio gear to their limitsCome on gents, these are kiddie tests, the Fluke 87X will perform as specified by Fluke from 0 to 40 volts AC +-2.0%with high frequency response rolling off a lot sooner once you hit on 400 to 1000 volts ACFor the fastidious: All contact points cleaned beforehand with isopropyl alcohol,then after the tests lubed with WD40(as recommended by Fluke)and some mule spitto protect from tarnishing and crustiness during storagei.e. I have a frozen pack of humble pie in the fridge, and state there is no way anyone will pull anything past 20khz on their stock 87xat any level above 400mV AC, in actual real world average user conditions that Fluke caters for.I rest my case Your Honor

author: The Soulman
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 12:42:23 am
content: #stoppolutingtheforumwithsecondrankhalvearsedcomedy#AD536AKHrulez (yes rules with a z, because # uknow.)

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:03:55 am
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on June 08, 2019, 12:08:54 amLet me just hook of this DMM to verify what we are seeing with the scope... Did you spit on the meter while testing for good measure too?

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:18:36 am
content: No, and I won't loan the meter out to people testing suspect TVs, barbeque starters, bug zappers...I've got a 101 loaner for thatAnyways, have fun with it, and looking forward to a'JQS audio adventures testing frequency response of worthy multimeters'Youtube video perhaps?

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:21:00 am
content: Keysight 1252B:312kHz for 1dB605kHz for 3dB1282A:223.1kHz for 1dB269.4kHz for 3dBBluepoint DMSC683A(I don't think this is even RMS):2.701kHz for 1dB6.393kHz for 3dBFluke 98II(Technically it's all math but it does call the function a multimeter):2.86MHz for 1dB5.963MHz for 3dBKeysight U1620A(dedicated meter inputs, I think this is similar to 1242C?):150kHz for 1dB193kHz for 3dBFor comparison these were with no attenuation, just fed by a sig gen High-Z output. 1V RMS signal output. Signal generator is close enough for this test. Also just used some probemaster leads. Good enough for me.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:32:51 am
content: The scope should be able to read below a 1/10 of a dB, should have more than one channel, should be flatter than a meter. Why put a meter across the amp? Were you trying to impress someone with jotting down some numbers for the brand new amps response and felt the meter was giving you better answers than the scope? I would have been laughing my ass off.Sorry, I have no plans to enter the world of the audio buffs.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:39:10 am
content: Quote from: maginnovision on June 08, 2019, 01:21:00 amThat's impressive. Looks like I had made a graph showing the UT61E's frequency response before and after mods. That thing really peaks up before rolling off. After mods, it just rolls off.

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:43:42 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 08, 2019, 01:39:10 amI think the 1252B was closest to flat and the 1620A had the worst response. I didn't actually log it all though, just watched as I went through.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:55:46 am
content: Looking at the manual for your Fluke 98II now. It's a bit different than my 97 that has separate banana connectors. It looks like a nice setup for automotive. The 97 is more a scope, marketed for automotive. It's missing a lot of features you have with the 98II. I doubt the 97 is anywhere near that response (using the meter mode).

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:58:42 am
content: Yea, I was at work and found myself in need of a scope one day. That's what they had on the truck at the time but it came complete so I took it. It's been very reliable and has so many built-in tests I never got rid of it. The bandwidth is severely limited compared to... Any other fluke handheld(scope).

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 02:06:46 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 08, 2019, 01:32:51 amAudio is not your forte it seems, so I'll spare you the details of 100 years? of testing etiquette from manufacturers, AES members, field techs etc etcI think you'd be good at it, as long as you don't get reeled in by audiophoolsFWIW: it's not always practical to lug a scope around to check a bank of dusty crusty operating amplifiers in a harsh environement just to confirm if there's life or sneaky DC being pumped out,or rogue frequency emitted due to a fault.Then there's crossover frequency adjustment verify work, cable related votage drops and dB stuff I won't audio buff you with.The scope would have to be an isolated inputs one anyway, to avoid dramas = big ripoff price dollars, no thanksAnyone involved in audio and the electrics powering it, can do most tasks with aneasy to use consistent quality87x series meter.But it won't happen unless the user reads the manual and understands all the limitations of the meter, not just what it does.And for practical audio purposes a meter that kicks straight from LF up to 10 or 12 khz AC, and dies off at 18 to 20khz, is all you need,as anything higher than that may pick up HF or SMPS drivel, unrelated to the current test/diagnostic.That's why a lot of oscilloscopes have that bandwidth limit switches for lower frequency work,on an 87x multimeter it's an automatic bandwidth limit---------------------Are people claiming unbelievable multimeter frequency responses testing their AC Bandwidth voltage and or current specs,or the AC volts/current HZ/frequency function ?I do believe there is a... slight difference ?

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 02:11:41 am
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on June 08, 2019, 02:06:46 amI was just doing the meters I had handy. They weren't measuring frequency, just ACV, although most of the ones I checked can do both at the same time.Also, the fluke and bluepoint were thrown in for fun. The fluke is obviously going to be very high, it's an oscilloscope, and the bluepoint was going to be bad because it's an old automotive meter. For the 1252B I am attaching some pictures just in case you are doubting that one.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 03:12:47 am
content: I just checked the U1252B owners manual PDF Table 7-4 for "U1252B accuracy specifications ± (% of reading + number of LSD) for true RMS AC voltage"and it clearly specifies that from 500mv to 50v, it's 20hz to 100khz,and from 500v to 1000v it's up to 5khzU1251B owners manual PDF for "..accuracy specifications ± (% of reading + number of LSD) for true RMS AC voltage"specifies that from 500mv to 50v, it's 30hz to 30khz,and from 500v to 1000v it's up to 5khzFake user manual ?

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 04:06:30 am
content: I wouldn't say that, it's just what they guarantee. Obviously at 600kHz if I'm 3dB down that's WAY outside the accuracy limits, even 1dB is outside specs. They obviously just don't care to specify when it's outside the converters official bandwidth. If I have time tomorrow maybe I'll give 500V-1000V 20-85K or so Hz a shot.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 04:19:53 am
content: I have used Techron amps over the years for testing (not audio). These were DC coupled. The last one I used was a small one like that Crown you show. KWish. I just use them, like a scope or meter....I picked up the Fluke 97s to drag around in the garage and such. I've had my old analog scope in the car, trailer, garage and it's no fun. The 97 gets me 50MHz BW which is more than enough. Battery like is only about 8 hours but it uses standard C cells. So I just swap in a new set.With a scope, I can normally tell what the noise is coming from if I am familiar with the circuit. It's just a lot more information and still fits in your hand.If the meter has too high of BW, it's easy enough to limit. You brought up using an external attenuator. No reason it couldn't be a filter as well set to what ever BW you needed.As for higher voltages vs small signal response, I have no way to really test it. The best I can do is use one of my HV supplies to drive it and use a scope to trim the supply. There is a tradeoff of the frequency I can achieve and the amplitude. The was taken using my original BM869s using AC+DC, with 100 volts applied. Using my Fluke 97 to trim the supply. All a gross measurement at best but should provide you with some sort of idea. Maybe someone else is setup for higher voltage low frequency work.100Hz, 99.86V200, 99.75400, 99.81800, 99.821K, 99.812K, 99.814K, 100.418K, 100.2810K, 100.2720K, 100.0140K, 99.4450K, 99.1660K, 100.7270K, 100.4480K (can no longer achieve 100V with the supply)

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 04:20:09 am
content: Quote from: CDaniel on June 07, 2019, 06:26:24 pm100 kHz is not that high and the capacitance and shielding is not an issue with low source impedance.The multimeter's input divider however is typically not compensated and that has a big effect. You may have noticed that many 10 megohm meters have a 1 megohm input resistance in AC mode. 100 kHz and 100 kilohms (1 megohm x10 divider) come out to 16 picofarads which is in the right range for the input capacitance of the high impedance buffer.The higher bandwidth common RMS converters also draw significantly more power:AD637 8 MHz 2.2 MilliampsAD636 1.5 MHz 800 MicroampsAD736/AD737 0.5 MHz 165 MicroampsOther differences include accuracy and crest factor so it is not all about bandwidth.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 11:13:28 am
content: Quote from: rookie on June 06, 2019, 03:54:35 pmI have a Brymen BM857 and it is well within its specified accuracy after many years (mfg date circa 2000). A few of my impressions arehereBrymens in the US are re-branded as Greenlee and Extech. Although I would never buy an Extech DMM (quality control issues reported in several threads around here), Greenlee seems to be quite a reasonable brand. If you don't mind buying used and having 10k counts instead, thiseBay auction: #123795261491has a good one for a good starting price. Buy it now you can have thiseBay auction: #153229645548(equivalent to BM815 or BM817).

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 11:22:11 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on June 08, 2019, 11:13:28 amMine arrived recently (see that thread) and it seems to be accurate down to the last digit on all the ranges I can test with my limited equipment.eg. Here it is measuring my 10k reference resistor (0.01% tolerance) using Brymen's gold-plated probes:nb. The meter specification is 'only' 0.1% accuracy for resistance measurements so itcouldbe ten counts out and still be in spec.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 01:17:31 pm
content: At the risk of being called a Brymen fanboy, I really think that you can't go far wrong with one of their professional models from the 800 series, best bang per buck I've come across on a new product.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 07:44:42 pm
content: Quote from: Specmaster on June 08, 2019, 01:17:31 pmMy problem with Brymen and the reason they are not on my short list is that they make no meter comparable to my old Beckman RMS225 which has the superior radial terminal arrangement. B&K, Amprobe, and Uni-Tred do while any Brymen meter would be step back for me.This is not to say that there is anything wrong with Brymen in general. But if I consider them, then I have lots of other choices as well.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 08:13:27 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on June 08, 2019, 07:44:42 pmPlease can you explain what you mean a bit more? I have googled for that meter you refer to and to me it looks like a Fluke 25 with slightly odd jack positioning, nothing else special about it. I understand about personal preferences, it took me a long time to even think about buying a meter with a red bumper, to me it was so wrong. Then I started to think about it rationally, does the colour mean that the meter is rubbish, less safe to use, hell no the specs on it where among the best I've seen and I have several Flukes already. this meter is now my favorite and go to first meter every time I need a handheld one. So I'm curious to understand what it is that you find so compelling about the terminal arrangement that you would not consider a Brymen.Isn't it a bit refusing to upgrade anything, a car, TV whatever because you have become so used to the layout of something that is old and maybe not the safest product around

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 08:36:53 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on June 07, 2019, 11:50:01 pmNope, no cheating, just mV Metrix graph wasn't on same vertical scale.You said graphs are not doing it for you, I had bit more time, so here you are.Hope that's better.. BM869 is REALLY flat in 100 kHz bandwidth, and better than specs

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 08:45:38 pm
content: Quote from: Specmaster on June 08, 2019, 08:13:27 pmThe slightly odd jack positioning is the feature. It allows the use of standard 3/4" dual banana plugs for all measurements especially including high current measurements. Many old power supplies had the same arrangement of banana jacks for the same reason.This superior arrangement became a liability when safety standards mandated shrouded banana connectors although shrouded 3/4 dual banana plugs do exist. Of course everybody uses incompatible shrouds.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 09:12:25 pm
content: I'm sorry, I don't know if I'm being thick here or what it is, but are you seriously suggesting that makers like Bryman, Fluke, Keithly etc are using illegal and dangerous shrouded banana sockets on the meters and plugs on their leads or what, I'm just not quite understanding you here?

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 09:14:23 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on June 08, 2019, 08:45:38 pmSorry, I don't understand. I use 3rd party leads from Probe Master, along with all of my standard adapters.

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 09:24:17 pm
content: Or the following (and don't touch it)(I have three of these)

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 09:26:02 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on June 08, 2019, 08:45:38 pmIf your meaning that it is possible for a user to plug in inferior leads / plugs that only push into the jacks 3/4 of the way because the actual plug is too short for the socket tube and therefore may restrict the amount of power in terms of current that it is possible to carry , then I would say to you, how does your Beckman meter prevent these 3/4 plugs from used on it? I think you might find that they will fit the same, there is a standard that all good makes adhere to and yes it is also possible to take a normal non-shrouded 4mm banana plug and plug into any banana socket regardless of it being designed to accept shrouded plugs or not.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 11:11:10 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on June 08, 2019, 08:45:38 pmMy UT136C has this and it is quite handy - I don't recall many other meters currently having this 120° arrangement.However, this meter stays away from anything high energy due to how easy it is to confuse the inputs (I do this all the time) - this makes the arrangement an inferior option (or perhaps niche) in my opinion.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2019, 11:35:05 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on June 08, 2019, 11:11:10 pmWell yes that would be my assessment of it as well because it certainly is not the universal standard that almost other meter adopts. But even having those sockets in that arrangement does not prevent the user from using 3/4 length banana plugs be they shrouded or not does it and this I believe is what David Hess is claiming that his meter seems to do and that other meters don't match up to his meter in preventing it? I maybe wrong on that point but I'm waiting get further clarification on that from David and I think that Joe is equally baffled and awaiting some answers.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 08:46:01 am
content: Quote from: Specmaster on June 08, 2019, 09:26:02 pmAnybody measuring that amount of power with a multimeter is probably Doing It Wrong. Get a clamp.

author: windsmurf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 09:36:43 am
content: Quote from: Specmaster on June 08, 2019, 09:12:25 pmI think what David means is that manufacturers moving on to safer shrouded banana sockets led to designers moving away from making the the COM input equidistant from the other jacks.So we see less of this input arrangement:

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 10:07:06 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on June 08, 2019, 07:44:42 pmTrue, but not many with the same bang/buck.Quote from: windsmurf on June 09, 2019, 09:36:43 amSeems like a weird restriction to place on yourself, but each to his own.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 10:26:14 am
content: Quote from: windsmurf on June 09, 2019, 09:36:43 amI fail to see how this arrangement of terminals is an advantage, even if you need to use dual plugs to BNC adaptors there are adaptors around, from highly regarded makers as per example by bd139 and the 3/4 plug and unshrouded plugs that David mentions is STILL able to be used with ANY meter of any age, even going back to AVO and Simpson meters and any other meter uses the industry standard of 4mm banana jacks which has been proven to a safe a reliable connection as it deemed that a person using a multimeter should be a suitable skilled and competent person to be able to use such meters / plugs and leads safely. The operator has to shoulder some responsibility for what they are doing, the manufacturers cannot make these meters 100% safe in every situation. I know which meter I would rather put my faith into in critical situations.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 10:52:51 am
content: Quote from: Specmaster on June 09, 2019, 10:26:14 amThe advantage of the 120° configuration is that it can be used with more variants of the dual banana plugs, either BNC or not.Due to the length of the wires the adapter showed by BD139 is a bit more susceptible to environmental noise than the more compact forms attached, although it does not matter in most cases.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 11:25:40 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on June 09, 2019, 10:52:51 amI can't imagine it makes any difference at all on the 10A range(...which is the only "incompatible" socket on most meters).

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 12:19:55 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on June 09, 2019, 11:25:40 amThats a good point, the most extreme / unusual meter I own is this one and it just has the normal standard layout for the jacks but in reverse so even with this one, the dual plugs would fit everything but the 10A range. I like this meter because it has a special bargraph function that puts it in to a centre zero mode and heightens the sensitivity of it thus making an ideal digital meter for radio alignment use.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 12:41:35 pm
content: Quote from: Specmaster on June 09, 2019, 12:19:55 pmThere's a few meters that can do that.(...including the Fluke 87V, I found out the other day, although it's a hidden feature :-) )

author: bd139
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 01:37:53 pm
content: It's not hidden - just no one has read the manual that comes with it

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 04:09:38 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on June 08, 2019, 08:36:53 pmVery nice work!! Thanks for putting this together.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 04:32:01 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on June 08, 2019, 08:45:38 pmAfter re-reading your post and others, I understand what you are after. You want to use these standard connectors with EVERY combo. Many years ago, I was wanting a 1.5" spaced banana to BNC to use with my power supply that I was floating. I wasn't able to locate one.The BM869s would be a problem as it's not flat.

author: Specmaster
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 05:01:04 pm
content: @ David Hess, Now I understand where you where coming from with the 3/4I took it you meant 3/4 length banana plug as that is a gripe with me as well that many cheaper plugs skimp on the length of the pins and because of the extra depth of the shrouded sockets and the thickness of the plastics used in the cases, means that only a fraction of the pins make contact with the socket.That being said though, even with the curve of the front plate on the 867/9 I see no reason why you couldn't still use those dual plugs in the V and ma ranges, I doubt that you'd be able to touch any exposed pin, surely you wouldn't want to use them on the 10A range?

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 05:08:50 pm
content: Every meter I have would support those adapters for everything but the high amp range so I assume he does use or want to use them for that.

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 06:01:07 pm
content: Well they couldn't on my meters because they don't fit, haha. I just started up the 5200A and the 1252B battery is dead so I have to charge it. Hopefully it doesn't take too long so I can test at higher voltages. I'll also try to do 10/100V 1dB, 3dB.

author: maginnovision
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 09:36:29 pm
content: Well unfortunately I couldn't successfully do what I wanted as I hit the overload limit.I did test what I could though. I double checked both the frequency and voltage with a scope in parallel to the meter so if you doubt my numbers... Try yourself because I don't know either. I was already pushing the 5200A passed its limits at 50V(Should be max freq of about 500kHz). Although once I started to break past that frequency the Crest factor started breaking the 1.44 or so that it typically runs at. By time I hit 1MHz it was 1.71 which is pretty much a triangle wave. The readings also weren't terribly flat but I don't know what else I'd expect at 3-10x the rated frequency and high crest factors. For 100V it went into overload at the listed frequency which isn't surprising since it's only rated for 100kHz but the crest factor never changed. I was going to check more meters but it's the first hot day this year and power already died once. Hope anyone finds this interesting.1252B10V-1dB 419.04kHz-3dB 1.159Mhz50V-1dB > 950kHz - 1MHz100V-1dB > 367kHz500V-1dB > 33.621kHz

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 09, 2019, 11:58:05 pm
content: Quote from: bd139 on June 09, 2019, 01:37:53 pm189 has the same mode. Quite handy. The Keysights do not have that, unfortunately.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 10, 2019, 04:26:55 am
content: Quote from: Specmaster on June 08, 2019, 09:12:25 pmTheir only danger is their inconvenience. Is it an improvement in safety if dongles and adapters have to be added to use them?Plus now I need different shrouded plugs for different meters because they are not all interchangeable. Are they safe when the wrong shrouded plug is used?My solution to that is to cut the leads close to the shrouded plugs and add Powerpole connectors. Is that safer?Using Powerpoles like that is actually kind of nice though since catching the leads will now detach them at the Powerpole connector instead of damaging the meter or leads. And the Powerpole connectors keep the lead pairs together.Quote from: joeqsmith on June 09, 2019, 04:32:01 pmI have actually seen double wide banana plugs before and assume they were intended for that very problem.Some power supplies or at least some old ones have the triangular 60 degree arrangement of binding posts so 3/4" banana plugs can be used with every output configuration. Heathkit had one like this as shown below; this allows the shorting bar to ground to be installed on either output. A dual supply would need a W instead of V arrangement but I do not remember ever seeing it done.Another thing I like about the old banana terminals is that they can be wired directly into the circuit without plugs at all but you would not want them on a portable meter because they stick up so far. On a bench meter they are great and I have a few like that which I much prefer to my bench meters which have shrouded banana sockets.Quote from: Specmaster on June 09, 2019, 05:01:04 pmI would especially want to use them with the high current range because the standard dual 3/4 inch banana jack accepts thicker wire. I just make custom cables with no adapters as needed and the dual banana plugs are reusable. Semi-permanent connections means no test leads detaching and the dual plug keeps the leads together as one unit. If I need to make another connection to the same terminals, they stack.