Is the Tektronix TBS1152 old crap compared to other entry level scopes - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Ecklar
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 12, 2014, 04:27:43 am
content: How does the Tektronix TBS1152 stack up to the likes of similar Rigol or Siglent oscilloscopes? I'be seen a couple references suggesting they aren't nearly as good as the current Chinese crop. Can anyone shed some like on this Tek scope? Any good? Really good? Or is it indeed crap?Thnx. Eck

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 12, 2014, 04:45:24 am
content: It's too expensive for an entry level scope.Not enough memory 2.5k points.Small screen.Not enough features compared to other entry point scopes like intensity grading.Then again maybe is more accurate and the 150MHz gives it a little edge but you can get three 4 channel rigols "upgradable" to 100MHz for the cost of one of those.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 12, 2014, 06:16:02 am
content: It's crap. Only a fool would buy one.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 12, 2014, 03:06:42 pm
content: They would appear to be Tek designs, derivatives of the TDS series. They are essentially reduced versions of the TDS series. (Or, another way: The TDS are more expensive versions of the TBS)I really don't know who would buy, e.g. a TBS1052 for so much when the DS1054Z offers much more for the price... unless they *really* need the Tek name.

author: edavid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 12, 2014, 11:46:50 pm
content: Quote from: tom66 on December 12, 2014, 03:06:42 pmA college outfitting an undergraduate lab, that gets a huge discount and a service deal.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 13, 2014, 09:22:07 pm
content: Quote from: mojo-chan on December 12, 2014, 03:00:35 pmNo, they are Tek scopes, based on the 20 year old TDS200 series design. Hence why they still have a pathetic 2.5K memory.They are still flopping that dead horse after 20 years, but that's the Danaher Way.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2014, 09:42:43 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 13, 2014, 09:22:07 pmWell, people still buy them. TBS1000 series is good for basic tasks at school or for very basic use in industry. Sometimes you just need to check if there is 80MHz 5Vpp or so...But not good for hobby use where you need more memory. Not a good value for money.BTW have you seen this?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2014, 09:48:22 pm
content: There is a bit upgraded version available. But it still has 2500 points per channelhttp://www.tek.com/oscilloscope/tbs1000b-digital-storage-oscilloscopehttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/tektronix-tbs1000b/BTW there are some obsolete products, that are still produced...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAZ-452http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAZ-469http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lada_Niva

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2014, 02:57:48 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 13, 2014, 09:22:07 pmI thought that 20 years was bolleaux until I looked, they were introduced in about mid 1996 as far as I can tell.Listen Dave, I was (fairly) happily plodding along with my lonely TDS2024 that I bought about ten years ago for about $3k until I started viewing your bloody Vblog about four months ago. Now I have three CROs, and another three DSOs, an AWG, another spec an (had two already), and another power supply to add to the three I had already. Am I more productive? NO! Because I spend my life now fannying around with test gear and not actually making anything.

author: Warhawk
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2014, 03:15:24 pm
content: Quote from: Howardlong on December 14, 2014, 02:57:48 pmsame thing has happened to me

author: Lunasix
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2014, 03:52:22 pm
content: I bought a TDS2024 2 years ago for 200$ and I've used it for professionnal project, when other guys (client but almost colleague) had Tek MSO3k or MSO4k. Of course, I was looking at theses scopes. But knowing how to use holdoff, 2nd time base, and other triggering functions, I was more efficient. Others were always looking and searching among very long recording.I'm not saying to buy a new TDS2000 or equivalent. For that price (or lower), go with Rigol. But I don't agree with the unique word "crap". If the price isn't too high, it's far more usable as an old analog scope. And these scopes are silent ! I have now a MSO2024 (another crap if I read the blog, but second hand, much lower price), and I keep the TDS for some work, I can leave it powered on all the day whithout hearing noisy fan.A good scope is better. But it's a common error (and not only for electronic) to think high end equipment will make you a genius.

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2014, 03:56:29 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on December 13, 2014, 09:42:43 pmI 'love' how everything that's shitty is always declared "perfect for education", even when the same price can buy you things thataren'tshitty. Because why buy the good equipment when you can pay the same amount to make students miserable?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2014, 09:37:49 pm
content: Back in 2011, the Agilent DSOX2000 series was sold for similar price as TDS2000 series.DSOX2000 is good for education, too.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2014, 06:53:04 am
content: Quote from: c4757p on December 14, 2014, 03:56:29 pmI couldn't agree more. I mean, what are they supposed to learn from that? How crap entry level scopes were in 1996?Students should learn with something that is relevant for today, not the yesteryears, or otherwise we will continue to get EEs who don't really know how to use a somewhat modern scope.

author: edavid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2014, 04:17:03 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on December 15, 2014, 06:53:04 amHave you ever TA-ed an undergraduate lab? For the average student, it is really better if the equipment is as simple as possible. This is especially true for non-EE students taking an introductory EE course.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2014, 06:07:02 pm
content: Quote from: edavid on December 15, 2014, 04:17:03 pmOk, so what exactly can these students learn better with one of those shitty TBS scopes that they can't with a better modern-day alternative?Aside of course from the fact that the UI on those TBS scopes is horrendous, which already seems to conflict with your "as simple as possible" mantra.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2014, 06:19:08 pm
content: At my university, there are many 10+ years old instruments. TDS2000 series and Agilent 54600 and 54620 series.Well, once I used a DSO7000B in a lab exercise.I visited a military radar factory and there was an old HP 54800 series scope. I think that you still find much old (but expensive) equipment in professional labs.

author: c4757p
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2014, 06:35:20 pm
content: Quote from: edavid on December 15, 2014, 04:17:03 pmYup, actually I have! They get to use some of the rather nice Agilent DSOX2000-series (can't remember the exact model number, one of the four-channel variants) in the main labs and I hear very few complaints about them. Students, instructors and TAs all find them quite easy to use. We've got some of these god-awful Tek scopes in one of the other minor labs andeverybodyhates the damned things.A proper UI doesn't just toss everything in your face. The students I work with don't need to worry about all the extra features because they don'tseethe extra features unless they're going to use them (in which case they get brief instructions in the lab text). What theydoget is an oscilloscope that wasn't designed by and for muppets.

author: Wim_L
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2014, 10:34:58 pm
content: They're perfectly useful scopes, but you can get better for similar prices. There's no reason not to use them, but there isn't much reason to buy any either, unless you have a lot of training manuals that depend on some specific model of scope being used.One disadvantage of using these in an educational setting might be the short sample memory. Unless it's set to peak detect, beginning students might encounter aliasing before they've learned what it is. I'm not sure if that is a bad thing or an educational opportunity, but it's something to be aware of. An old analog scope might be better if single-shot capture is not needed.

author: edavid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2014, 01:03:53 am
content: Quote from: c4757p on December 15, 2014, 06:35:20 pmAren't those Agilents quite a bit more expensive than the TBS1152?QuoteI guess I was thinking of Rigols, which I think would be confusing to students.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2014, 01:18:47 am
content: At Tektronix there is not a big problem with aliasing.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2014, 08:21:05 am
content: Quote from: Howardlong on December 14, 2014, 02:57:48 pmThe CCD based digitizer design goes back to the Tektronix 2430 introduced in 1986 so it is more like 28 years. There are some earlier examples but that was the first one as far as I know with a CCD designed from the start to operate as an oscilloscope digitizer.I think people misidentify the largest problem with these; it is not short record lengths or low waveform acquisition rates but terrible overload performance although all or most DSOs suffer from this to one extent or another.The only reason I would buy an oscilloscope like this is if I could get it used so I could have high bandwidth at given price but that does not apply to this model.

author: MadTux
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2014, 03:43:03 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on December 20, 2014, 08:21:05 am7D20 with 40MS/s introduced in 1982. So 32 years old. Who beats me with an older one?

author: edavid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2014, 04:18:43 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on December 20, 2014, 08:21:05 amThe TBS1152 being discussed here doesn't use CCDsI've never heard of it having any particular overload problems either.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2014, 03:52:43 am
content: Quote from: MadTux on December 20, 2014, 03:43:03 pmI considered mentioning the 7D20 as an even earlier example but the CCDs it uses were designed for video applications.Quote from: edavid on December 20, 2014, 04:18:43 pmDoesn't it? That 2.5k record length is the same as the TDS200 series oscilloscopes which use a CCD based digitizer and both series have a lower bandwidth when peak detection is used. CCD based digitizers do peak detection as part of the sampling process where it may affect bandwidth. If peak detection is done during decimation when a fast ADC is used, it has no effect on bandwidth.The overload problem I mentioned is specific to CCD digitizers. They can "boom" like optical CCDs when overloaded.

author: edavid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2014, 04:46:10 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on December 23, 2014, 03:52:43 amOf course not. There is no IC logic process available that supports CCDs.QuoteTDS200 doesn't use CCDs either.