As a college student, I worked with various pieces of lab equipment depending upon the facet of engineering being studied. The one thing I remember was that most of the equipment was antiquated and outdated. Thus, faulty and poor readings or output signals were produced. In one particular lab, we used the HP 54600B 100 MHz along with the Wavetek 100 MHz synthesized arbitrary waveform generator model 395 and the Agilent 33120A 16 Mhz function/arbitrary waveform generator.  Since I had never seen or used most of the equipment prior to college, I really could not form a judgment as to which, or what, equipment was better than what I was using.  I just did like the geniuses, got to class early so that I could get the working equipment.

As of this year, my college’s lab equipment has been updated to newly purchased Agilent DMSO-x 2012A, along with the EMONA telecoms-trainer analog/digital biskit. I was elated to see the modern technology, for it was badly needed. The telecom trainer was especially nice, because many of the components and the block functions (adders, multipliers, etc…) used on a breadboard are already embedded into the biskit.

Courteously, Tektronix has kindly donated a MSO2024B oscilloscope for my use. As I took the device out of the box, I noticed features that were not on my college oscilloscope. I examined the device; ooh-ed and aah-ed over the ease-of-use functions and a thought came to mind.  What and which lab equipment is needed and is best in an engineer’s facility?

For the last month, I have asked our audience, in different venues, what is the best oscilloscope manufactured in the last twenty years. Most readers could not see the other reader’s answer. Of course, an onslaught of PR reps promoted its product. However, I had some very interesting answers along with new-found knowledge of oscilloscope manufacturers.

Reader one used their wit stating, “For most engineers, the answer is simple. The one I have access to on my bench right now!” I knew that this statement was mostly not true, because of my equipment experience in college.

Reader two took me back into a time where I have no knowledge of­­—the 1960’s. Reader two stated, “Personally, I thought late-60s vintage Tektronix oscilloscopes were great. Devices of engineering beauty.” I didn’t reply to ask what made these devices so great; yet, I needed to know why. So after a little research, I discovered a website and museum devoted to vintage Tektronix oscilloscopes. After reading the information, I was able to understand this reader’s philosophy. Here is the link: http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/scopes/tek.html

Reader three was more definitive in their answer; yet, their answer was similar with reader two. “The answer is the one you can afford locally. The basic technology is so well shared that most 20 MHz ‘scopes are the same. If you need higher frequencies or storage abilities, things change. The problem with “new” digital technology is that it only represents the average signal whilst the old style analogue ‘scopes can show occasional ‘blips’ or funny oscillations that only occur spuriously. They have a lot of “bells and whistles” but often give you answers you do not require. It depends on your application, if you need information from a single signal or comparing more than one signal. I am from the old school and Tektronix is beyond my budget but remain leaders in the professional market.”

Reader four gave an answer that just made common sense. They stated, “ You asked an excellent question, but consider that since oscilloscopes get better all the time, it is nearly impossible to say the “best” one in the past 20 years. It would be like asking, which cell phone was the best for the past 20 years. Certainly a Palm Pre is better than a Motorola Star-Tac. But I’d say for the time the Star-Tac was iconic and the Palm Pre was fast forgotten. In that sense, the Star-Tac was a “better” phone.”

Reader four continues to state, “On the subject of oscilloscopes you can make similar statements. Not only are some scopes better for the time, but also it depends on the spot in the market. While I work for Tektronix, I do truly believe that the Tektronix MDO4000 is the “best” general-purpose scope available today. But it is certainly not best for a home hobbyist. Also, I do think “best” should consider the scope’s popularity in the market. Certainly the modern Tektronix DPO3000 is better by all specifications and measures than the Tektronix TDS3000 that it replaced. Yet, the DPO3000 has many similar competitors today, where as it would be hard to match the TDS3000 when it comes to its total market penetration and popularity at the time of its peak. For a similar reason, I’d say the Tektronix 2465 analog oscilloscope was also iconic and would occupy a similar spot for many hobbyists. I have customers who still love their TDS3000 and 2465 oscilloscopes even though newer scopes are, in theory, “better” products. Also, consider products like the HP54645D, which I believe was the first modern era mixed-signal oscilloscope. Certainly, the current market heirs to those products are the Tektronix MSO2014B and Agilent DSOX2014. Both these products far outperform the HP54645D, but will either ever be as noted?”

I did mention that I used a HP54600B (mixed-signal oscilloscope) in my learning years.

A different, yet intriguing answer from reader five stated, “I was a big fan of Agilent’s Infinium oscilloscope series. With the multiple channels and a large bandwidth, we were always able to use it for any application in the Radar field I was working in. It worked with analog and digital signals, and could store waveforms. I really could go on for quite awhile about why I liked that scope.” 

Reader six is an engineer true and true. Not only did they go around the question, they had me pondering more questions. Reader six stated, “The top 2 players in that market are Agilent and Tektronix. There are a number of smaller players from Asia and Europe. As for the best, I’m not sure one could answer that unless there were more criteria as part of the selection: bandwidth, sample rate, # channels, RAM storage size, resolution, size, cost, multi-function capability, various connectivity options (IEEE, USB, etc.) and so on. Depending on what your actual use is one might be better than another, which might be better in a different application. Bench techs don’t need portable but they do need lots of extras whereas a field tech considers size first so long as it meets minimum needs for their typical signal acquisition (resolution, sample rate, bandwidth). There is no one unit “best” unless one defines the application.”

Informative answers, without detailed information, named Infiniium 90000 X-Series, Rohde & Schwarz RTO oscilloscopes, and FLUKE as best.

I would like to thank everyone who participated in the questionnaire. So, my next question is, “What components and its schematic makes an adequate (preferably best) control system design?” Tell me what you think.