R&S SML01 1.1Ghz Generator - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2023, 11:04:50 pm
content: EDIT: Title changed.Hi,I would like to buy a 1Ghz generator, but currently only to determine bandwidths of oscilloscopes, nothing else.So I don't want to buy a new one, that would be too expensive for this one application.So I looked for used generators and I found one:https://www.aimtti.com/product-category/legacy-products/aim-tgr1040I could get exactly this model used for under 400€, because it is supposed to be technically flawless, but the display has a small quirk and the transformer hums.Neither is a problem for me, from the side everything is clear.What I want to know is if this generator is good enough for what I want to do.I do not trust the whole even cheaper China stuff over the way - Or is that a misjudgement ?What do you think, buy this generator or is it cheaper ?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2023, 11:33:14 pm
content: 2dB level accuracy is nothing to write home about. You can find an R&S SMIQ which has much better performance for about the same amount of money with some patience.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2023, 11:37:52 pm
content: 1050€ minimum currently and huge dimensions..It should be space saving I forgot to say.QuoteHm, OK...For determining the -3dB frequency this is worse.

author: TurboTom
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2023, 11:39:01 pm
content: The price for a discuntinued RF signal generator of these specs is borderline acceptable, but I doubt that the money is well spent for the application that you have got in mind. Amplitude accuracy over the span is specified to be +-2dB. In order to properly characterize oscilloscopes even half of that accuracy appears to be too much.A plain adjustable sine wave oscillator in combination with an RF level meter may be a more accurate approach, though it may be more troublesome to put to use.Okay, @nctnico beat me on that one. But I may add that some Spectrum analyzer tracking generators may not be much worse suitable for that application. So if you have got an SSA3000 (Plus) or DSA800TG series device, these may provide a suitable test signal as well.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2023, 11:39:09 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on July 21, 2023, 11:04:50 pmNo analyzer to set a zero span and use its TG ?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2023, 11:47:52 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on July 21, 2023, 11:37:52 pmLowballing has served me pretty good every now and then.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 21, 2023, 11:48:54 pm
content: @tautech:A R&S at work...SA is on my list for my home equipment.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 12:06:40 am
content: Quote from: tautech on July 21, 2023, 11:39:09 pmWon't do much good as tracking generators typically aren't levelled.Something like this could be interesting:https://aaronia.com/en/shop/signal-generator/battery-powered-signal-generator

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 12:35:55 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on July 22, 2023, 12:06:40 amOf course, that's why analyzers have a Normalize function.However the analyzer typically has far better accuracy than TG where if we are to worry about TG flatness for zero span tasks a marker dropped on the frequency of interest will display the amount of level correction one needs to make.There are ways around many inconveniences.Quote from: Martin72 on July 21, 2023, 11:48:54 pmConsider the above.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 12:44:40 am
content: And now use the TG output to measure the amplitude flatness of an oscilloscope which is the intend of the OP. How is normalisation going to help there? Not to mention the harmonics a TG output may have that will show up on an oscilloscope.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 01:02:20 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on July 22, 2023, 12:44:40 amIt's late there so maybe you need some rest to think clearly about this.You can't use Normalization on TG for use other than with the analyzerbutwe can measure TG unflatness with the analyzer and account for these errors/inaccuracies for other use needs.TG can be used as a fixed (zero span) or sweeping frequency for other than analyzer needs and at levels within TG amplitude capabilities.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 01:04:25 am
content: That is rather cumbersome and still doesn't deal with harmonics. For all you know the TG output looks like a square wave. That doesn't matter so much for a spectrum analyser itself as this is basically sweeping a narrow filter over the input signal to determine amplitude versus frequency, but if you want to look at the bandwidth on an oscilloscope you will want to have a signal that looks like a single tone.Getting some form of a real RF generator is the easiest and most straightforward path.

author: TurboTom
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 07:15:06 am
content: @nctnico - that's actually not true. Admitted, especially at low frequencies (sub-10MHz range), there are very strong harmonics present in most TG output signals, but same is true for many RF signal generators. This is the result of the output amplifier not really being designed for these low frequencies. Since the signal is synthesized by mixing two pretty decent sine wave signals, the difference of those shouldn't (and doesn't) contain that much harmonics, hence I'ld consider a TG signal (harmonics-wise) suitable for bandwidth testing of an oscilloscope, at least much better so than one of these ADF4351 based "el-cheapo" sources. But if it's comfortable to use a TG for such an application, is written on another page...A hint for the OP: Once in a while, an R&S SM300 can be found inexpensively (though usually with a broken PA which is quite fixable). These generators perform much better than the initially mentioned AimTTi instrument and are very well suited for other test jobs as well. Yet, you've got to be patient and put some work into the device...

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 07:37:33 am
content: I'll just leave these here for discussion.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 02:10:25 pm
content: For cost reasons at the lab we usually don't calibrate or rely on a signal generator amplitude accuracy - instead, we have calibrated SAs to verify and eventually normalize the output of any signal generator. Although a bit more cumbersome as it involves an additional verification step, it tends to work well. And this is true even for the SMIQs we have around.Good luck in your decision!

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 02:35:42 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on July 22, 2023, 02:10:25 pmThat is also a good way. You can load calibration tables into the SMIQ for this purpose (and automate the process if you want) but my guess is that this is more to compensate for dampening from cables rather than improving output accuracy. The SMIQ is specified for 0.5dB output level accuracy up to 2 GHz which is pretty good.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 02:53:44 pm
content: Hi,OK, the Aim tti is "dead", then I´ve looked for some else cheap and spacesaving generators, but no way...First this cought my attention because of the claimed 0.5dB precision:https://eleshop.de/rf-explorer-signal-generator.htmlBut in the specs it will be relative :https://static.eleshop.nl/mage/media/downloads/RFExplorer-6G_Signal_Generator_datasheet.pdfThis one here(german language):https://scdn.rohde-schwarz.com/ur/pws/dl_downloads/dl_common_library/dl_news_from_rs/165/165_sml_de.pdfSounds promising, it´s not too big and you can get it used for under 1000 bucks.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 03:54:22 pm
content: To do this properly, you have to minimise all contributors to uncertainty. The classic way to do this would be to use a self levelling system as drawn below. The level accuracy of the sig gen is improved to be similar to the accuracy of the power meter and as long as the splitter is connected directly at the input of the scope, there are no cable losses to worry about.The other major contributor to uncertainty is due to mismatch from the sig gen mating to the device under test. With the system below, the source VSWR is defined 'only' by the quality of the 50 ohm resistor in the splitter that feeds the device under test. So as long as a precision splitter is used, you can get ultra low source VSWR at 1GHz for very little cost. The splitter can be homebrew. This reduces mismatch uncertainty to negligible levels.The sig gen either has to have the option for external ALC or it must have external AM that is DC coupled and this allows an external leveller amp to be used.I'm not suggesting you go out and buy a 83752A sweeper or an expensive power meter or HP 11667 splitter, but this system represents the ideal way to do this test.You can make the splitter for a very low cost using a pair of 50 ohm resistors (Hint: use two 100R SMD resistors in parallel for each 50R resistor), and any mid range 1GHz sig gen that supports EXT AM with DC coupling can be used. The power meter could be replaced with a decent diode detector as long as the sig gen has low harmonic content. This would save even more cost. It's still going to be way better than anything else suggested so far.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 05:45:33 pm
content: Have you considered using a pulse gen and derive the DUT scope bandwidth from rise time?

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 05:59:31 pm
content: Hi,Yes....https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/math-problems-on-sds2k-(trying-to-display-bandwith)/msg4972270/#msg4972270

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 07:23:11 pm
content: If it helps, I can list a few things that can add to the overall uncertainty if you simply buy a decent 1GHz sig gen that has had a recent calibration and use it to test the 1GHz scope.The first one is level uncertainty. This might be as good as +/-0.1dB (typical) up to 1GHz but it could be +/-0.2dB. It could be as bad as +/- 1.5dB for an older mid range sig gen that has an upper limit of 1GHz. This is because the manufacturer will opt for a more basic (cheaper) ALC system that will work well up to about 700MHz but then degrade a bit towards 1GHz.Therefore, it's best to buy a sig gen that has optional versions that can go to several GHz as they will probably all share the same ALC (levelling) system that will be good to several GHz. The Agilent ESG series has very good flatness for example and these seem to start at about £600 on ebay.Then there is mismatch uncertainty between the source and the load. The source VSWR of your sig gen at 1GHz at (say) +6dBm might be 1.3:1. The input VSWR of your 1GHz scope might be 1.5:1 at 1GHz. This contributes another +/- 0.23dB uncertainty to the overall system.Then there is the loss in the connection cable and this could easily be 0.5dB at 1GHz for a decent RF cable with low VSWR.This stuff soon adds up and a lot depends on what you consider to be acceptable.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 22, 2023, 08:21:24 pm
content: Quote from: Bud on July 22, 2023, 05:45:33 pmThat won't work because it assumes a certain roll-off factor that isn't fixed on oscilloscopes. The only way to determine the bandwidth of an oscilloscope is to use a levelled RF generator.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2023, 12:31:41 am
content: Quote from: G0HZU on July 22, 2023, 07:23:11 pmI haven't tested the bandwidth of an osciloscope, but on the VNA the choice of adapters and connectors can add a few fractions of a dB here and there - especially if you happen to grab a random cable and/or adapter from the lab's shared drawer and waste quite some time trying to figure out why the darn response seems off...That and curves and kinks on the cable, whose influence is much more severe on a sensitive equipment such as a VNA.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2023, 01:44:36 am
content: At frequencies over 1GHz you need to check the specs of the cable and use really short cables as well. I have a few short Huber+Suhner RG223 cables I use for measurements where cable loss must be low.

author: Performa01
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2023, 10:55:22 am
content: I don't have a specific recommendation, but a few general hints:Testing the bandwidth of a scope is not a precision task in my book. Even an error up to 1 dB would not really matter that much. Take for example my measurement of the SDS2504X Plus, where a 1 dB error caused by the cabling accounts just for the difference of 570 to 605 MHz. Are we really that desperate to brag about the bandwidth of our darling scopes that such a small difference matters?As others have already hinted on, you want a sine, not a square as its output by some cheap toys. Dead giveaway: if there are no specifications for the harmonic distortion, then don't touch it!Get some 10 dB inline attenuators so you can optimize the port impedances. A quality signal generator will have a good VSWR as long as its attenuator is active (i.e. you don't demand the full signal amplitude), but the scope input VSWR might be as bad as 1.5:1 at the bandwidth limit and far worse beyond that. The resulting error is not huge, but the measurement trace looks prettier if it has no wobble in itA quality signal generator is "levelled", i.e. its output amplitude is measured and controlled in a way to make it as constant as possible. Tracking generators are not. You can build your own precision levelling circuit as pictured by G0HZU, but this requires quite some gear and you'll probably lose the ability to sweep the signal generator - and therefore the simple way to let the scope plot its own frequency response. Real automation might be no fun with ancient gear that only provides GPIB (or nothing at all), and it most definitelyisa pain if you have to do it by hand...

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2023, 12:31:15 pm
content: Like I said, a lot depends on what you consider to be acceptable. I think about +/- 0.7dB levelling is typically possible (at the end of a short RF cable) with a fairly modern mid range 1GHz sig gen. So if this is acceptable then this should be fine. If you have a decent RF attenuator you can improve the source match of the sig gen but you would ideally have to know the attenuator was healthy in terms of VSWR and flatness to 1GHz.For a bit of fun, I powered up an old Marconi 2019A sig gen. This operates up to just over 1GHz. This sig gen cost me about £120 over 25 years ago and I rarely use it. However, it does support external AM modulation with DC coupling.I also powered up an old Anritsu power meter I bought in the early days of ebay. This cost £200 complete with a thermocouple sensor.I also used my homebrew levelling amp to level the output of the 2019A sig gen via the external AM mod input. The levelling amp is just a cheap opamp in a box with a potentiometer that sets the output level. This was made from scrap parts and effectively cost me nothing.The sensor cal shows about +/- 0.05dB for the correction factor all the way to 16GHz.I also used my homemade version of the 11667 splitter. The resistors cost less than £0.50 to make this. It also needs three RF connectors but these can be purchased for about £5 each.I then set the output level target to -12.00dBm using the levelling amp. I could have set it to anywhere from about +10dBm down to about -20dBm.The levelling amp was able to level from a few MHz through to the 1GHz limit of the sig gen. The power meter displayed -12.00dBm at the output of the splitter on every test frequency. But then it should do this because it is in an ALC loop. In reality, the accuracy will be limited by the quality of the splitter and the accuracy of the thermocouple power meter even though the display shows -12.00dBm at every frequency.The total budget for the above is less than £400. If I had used a 4GHz sig gen then it could have been used to measure 4GHz scopes with low overall uncertainty.The risk with doing this with 'just' a sig gen is that unless you have a way of verifying that the output is within specification you have to hope that the sig gen levelling is OK.The Marconi 2019 has fairly good levelling up to 1GHz but I'm unsure of the source VSWR. An external attenuator can improve this, but again, you ideally have to have something to try and prove the level is flat. If this means buying a power meter then you might as well use the same levelling system as me.A decent homebrew diode detector could just about work to 1GHz if you wanted to (quick and cheaply) prove the sig gen was flat to 1GHz +/- 1dB but this would require a sig gen with low harmonics.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 23, 2023, 02:24:51 pm
content: The plot below shows the 'typical' flatness of the Agilent ESGD4000A (AKA E4433A) sig gen and this plot is shown in the 'typical' section of the datasheet. The plot shows multiple traces and this shows the flatness of several sig gens on the same plot.This is very impressive. I've got one of these sig gens here and these E443xAsig gens tend to sell much cheaper than the later E4433B version which looks almost identical.Note that this plot will be taken using a very expensive Agilent/Keysight power sensor head that will have ultra low VSWR. This effectively removes any mismatch uncertainty due to the source VSWR of the sig gen. A typical scope input will not have a low VSWR up at UHF so some extra uncertainty will creep in when using this sig gen into test devices (like a 50R scope) that don't have an ultra low VSWR across the frequency range of the test device.My E4433A has the electronic attenuator fitted and there is also a version of these ESGD sig gens with a mechanical attenuator. I've also got the E4433B version here and it has the mechanical attenuator.Over time the levelling performance will degrade as the sig gen ages but I think it should remain within about +/- 0.2dB. The last time I formally checked my ESGD (a few years ago) it was within +/- 0.1dB on my power meter. The harmonic levels from these sig gens are usually quite low. Harmonics are usually better than -40dBc. I think the spec is -30dBc but it's usually much better than this.The ESGA analogue versions of these sig gens are even cheaper as they don't have vector modulation. I assume that the flatness performance is similar to the D versions.It's easy to get in a muddle with the model numbers. ESGD series are the ones with vector modulation. The ESGA don't have vector modulation.The E4433A is actually an ESGD4000A and this does have vector modulation. I'm not certain but I think all the E443x models are ESGD vector sig gens and all the E442x ESGA series are analogue with no vector modulation.Prices tend to vary a lot for these sig gens so patience is the key. There are other makes/models with similar performance but they may cost a bit more.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2023, 08:23:38 pm
content: Hi,What about this one here:R&S SML01

author: Performa01
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 07:34:03 am
content: Quote from: Martin72 on September 05, 2023, 08:23:38 pmA strong yes!Amplitude accuracy of typical 0.3 dB is plenty for all the usual tasks. Phase noise is good and even excellent in "extended divider mode". For characteriszing receivers and spectrum analyzers it's a big bonus to have a low phase noise source like this, even when it's limited to a few dozens of MHz.It does have sweep mode with up to 1 s per frequency step, hence perfectly usable for letting the scope plot its own frequency response by means of the FFT in peak hold mode.Only downside is the limited frequency range of just 1.1 GHz. That means, an SDS2504X is about the fastest scope one can effectively characterize with this.

author: djsb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 08:58:22 am
content: G0HZU,Have you got any details of the levelling amp you mentioned (schematic)? Thanks.David.

author: alm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 09:12:48 am
content: Quote from: G0HZU on July 23, 2023, 02:24:51 pmA common solution is to crank the output of the generator to the highest possible level, and then add as much attenuation as possible at the scope input to mitigate this mismatch.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2023, 07:05:40 pm
content: QuoteShort question:Why ?

author: Performa01
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2023, 06:38:58 am
content: Quote from: Martin72 on September 06, 2023, 07:05:40 pmShort answer: whenever I want to characterize a DUT with lowpass characteristic, then I want to lookat leastone octave beyond the corner frequency, so that I can see the transition into the stop band.If you use a 1 GHz generator to characterize a 1 GHz scope, then its quite obvious that you can confirm that is within spec up to 1 GHz, but you will never know its actual bandwidth.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 13, 2023, 07:36:50 pm
content: Hi,Update:I´ve bought the R&S SML01, should arrive soon..I'm quite curious about the device, I've never had anything like it.My siglent HD and I are already "looking forward" to the first tests.Will continue this thread with first impressions and more, accordingly the title is now changed.Martin

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2023, 06:58:32 pm
content: Arrived...At the weekend I have to look in there....

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2023, 02:17:39 pm
content: Hi,Which connector type is the RF-output ?Thought it is PL259 and ordered an adapter to BNC - But it´s too big.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2023, 02:19:56 pm
content: It's a female N connector (50 ohm)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N_connector

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2023, 02:28:27 pm
content: Thankyou, now I´ve ordered the right one..

author: Performa01
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2023, 03:54:14 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on September 15, 2023, 02:17:39 pmYou will never find PL259 in any serious RF gear that covers frequencies above about 50 MHz. This standard isn't suitable for high frequencies, one reason being that it has an ill-defined characteristic impedance.RF signal generators traditionally have N-connectors.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2023, 04:16:15 pm
content: Yes, now I know that too.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2023, 04:18:49 pm
content: Test it very short - But it works...It is also interesting how the scope can still "bravely" measure the frequency, up to 800Mhz it is no problem, at 1Ghz it no longer works properly but that is also completely OK.Next thing is to open it up, I want to see what´s inside...

author: Performa01
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2023, 04:32:31 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on September 16, 2023, 04:18:49 pmSure. You cannot expect any DSO with full digital trigger system to trigger (hence also display the correct trigger frequency) at the Nyquist frequency and above

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2023, 04:43:04 pm
content: Therefore the " its OK "...And you can nicely see that the "protection for seeing artefacts" of the scope works when adding the second channel of one ADC.Having such a "high frequency" source is a good thing to understand how some things work.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2023, 07:10:56 pm
content: Hi,opened it up, not much too see there...Superb building quality.I wonder how that was done with the bandwidth, the 1.1, 2.2 and 3.3 Ghz....If I should ever get really bored, I'll unscrew more.For now, I prefer to leave it as it is.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2023, 07:13:06 pm
content: Rest of the pics..

author: mwb1100
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2023, 07:36:10 pm
content: If you still have the MSO5000 could you run some similar quick test whenever convenient to see where and how badly it falls off?

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2023, 07:50:32 pm
content: Hi,Unfortunately, this is the only model from my "ownership list" that I no longer have access to.I have access to the following Scope models:-Siglent SDS2504X HD (Home)-Siglent SDS1104X-E (Home)-Siglent SDS2104X Plus (loan from work)-Rigol DS1054Z (loan from work)-Rigol DHO804 (Home, soon..)-Lecroy WS3024Z (Loan from work)

author: KeBeNe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2023, 04:03:14 am
content: Quote from: Martin72 on September 17, 2023, 07:10:56 pmfrequency extension is done by module, which is placed near the attenuator

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2023, 06:39:53 pm
content: Hi,Want to make some cables....Question:You can get BNC/N Type connectors for crimping or soldering - Last would be good because I don´t have a crimping tool.But are there any advantages/disadvantages between the two types ?

author: KungFuJosh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2023, 07:15:42 pm
content: Crimping tools are cheap, and usually returnable if you only need them once. 😉

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2023, 07:20:17 pm
content: Is crimping better than soldering ?That was my question...

author: switchabl
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2023, 08:47:30 pm
content: At 1 GHz both will work just fine. Crimping is usually faster/cheaper if you need to do more than just a handful. High-end test cables are often soldered. Some types of coax cables can't be soldered.It's more important to use quality connectors (ideally brand-name connectors like Suhner, Radiall, Rosenberger etc) and cables. And to follow the assembly instructions carefully. Make sure the connector is actually suitable for the cable. Cut to the correct lengths. Don't damage the braid. Make a fixture to hold everything in the right place for repeatable soldering. If possible, measure a few samples on a VNA to make sure your process is ok.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2023, 09:18:08 pm
content: QuoteI do not have a VNA.Not yet...Cable :https://kabel-kusch.de/Koaxkabel/HyperFlex-10/HyperFlex-5.htmConnectors:https://kabel-kusch.de/Steckverbinder/steckverbinder.htm

author: switchabl
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2023, 09:26:21 am
content: I haven't used their connectors but I have bought a couple of coax adapters from them. Definitely a step above your usual Ali special. Not exactly precision adapters but quality seems consistent enough, unlikely to be completely off or damage your test port. Good price/performance for general purpose, low-ish frequency applications.(I did try to use one of their BNC-SMA for a DC resistance measurement once and that was a bit all over the place. 60$ Amphenol RF adapter was repeatable to a couple of mOhms.)

author: Performa01
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2023, 11:22:28 am
content: Quote from: Martin72 on October 07, 2023, 07:20:17 pmWell, if you ask me, the answer is this: if done professionally, a crimped connector can be just as good as a soldered one. The worst thing you can do is buying the cheapest junk connectors in the crimp version. I have once made a bunch of lab cables, using standard RG58 and cheap noname crimp connectors. Most of them have developped contact problems sooner or later. By contrast, all my soldered ones have worked well even after 10+ years.Last time I needed a bunch of new cables in various lengths and with different connectors - yes, it was when I introduced the Hyperflex 5 in my lab, I didn't take a chance and ordered the cables custom built from Koaxshop 24 - but they don't seem to carry the Hyperflex anymore, which is a pity, because it has the best electrical characteristics overall amongst all those "low loss" cables which are still usable in a lab (you don't want anything thicker than 5 mm and you also don't want anything more rigid than the Hyperflex 5 for sure).

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2023, 08:49:28 pm
content: I have now ordered the Hyperflex 5 cable and some BNC58-155 and N-153TA connectors, for soldering.Either I solder them myself or take them to work, because we also assemble cables there....

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 12, 2023, 06:32:11 pm
content: Kusch is quick...

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 19, 2023, 07:48:25 pm
content: I wasn´t so quick, finished today..It was a bit fiddly, but I don't think the quality is the worst.I have now ordered more BNC plugs and will make BNC cables to replace my cheap ones.And then it's time to get to grips with the generator, e.g. with the sweep mode.Because I wanted to do something with it.