New LeCroy scope - WaveRunner 8000

[ez24]

Welcome back

Hope it stays open.  I think by not using offensive insults against each other but towards the scopes ?

Buy anyway fun

[Wuerstchenhund]

Welcome back

Hope it stays open.  I think by not using offensive insults against each other but towards the scopes ?

Buy anyway fun

Fun, well, I don't know. There are probably a hundred threads about Rigol scopes and a lot about Keysight scopes, but dare you mention LeCroy it does bring out the (always the same two) trolls.

But as I said, pretty much everything has been said, there's no point repeating.

[Simon]

Fun, well, I don't know. There are probably a hundred threads about Rigol scopes and a lot about Keysight scopes, but dare you mention LeCroy it does bring out the (always the same two) trolls.

But as I said, pretty much everything has been said, there's no point repeating.

Well then say nothing! I am getting fed up with people calling each other trolls, it gives no one the moral high ground and if your calling people trolls while not reporting them it kind of makes you a troll yourself!

[tautech]

Welcome back

Hope it stays open.  I think by not using offensive insults against each other but towards the scopes ?

Buy anyway fun

Fun, well, I don't know. There are probably a hundred threads about Rigol scopes and a lot about Keysight scopes, but dare you mention LeCroy it does bring out the (always the same two) trolls.

But as I said, pretty much everything has been said, there's no point repeating.

Look the discussion was healthy, there are many that can learn from it despite it being at some times heated when it doesn't need to be at all.

Wuerstchenhund, you're an opinionated guy, that's not bad it's just you, but when somebody ( I was gunna type Someone  ) whom you call trolls questions you there no need to be aggressive, we're here to learn and for you to share your knowledge is appreciated. 

Please carry on.

[Wuerstchenhund]

Wuerstchenhund, you're an opinionated guy, that's not bad it's just you, but when somebody ( I was gunna type Someone  ) whom you call trolls questions you there no need to be aggressive, we're here to learn and for you to share your knowledge is appreciated. 

I have no problem being questioned, in fact I appreciate it as it might be an opportunity to learn. What I expect however is a logical, conclusive and well supported argument. Something that should be no problem for any engineer.

What I have a problem with it being attacked as "fanboi" and other things by two certain individuals because I dared to make a reasoned comparison between two scopes. "We're call you out" and other crap isn't what can reasonably be called a logical, conclusive and well supported argument. When one of the same two individual s then shows himself of being unable to do at least some basic research via Google and to make some really silly mistakes (like using a competitor's marketing spreadsheet as source) while continuing his attack, all while avoiding directly addressing any response so the discussion revolves in circles, then you know this isn't a person who knows much about the topic or who doesn't know but wants to learn, hell it's not even a person who wants to have a grown-up discussion.

If the whole purpose is to stirr up dissent then you know it's a troll.

But yes, I should have just reported them. Mea culpa.

Please carry on.

I'll do, but I'm not going to respond to any other troll attempts other than reporting them, and I certainly won't waste more time responding to posts made by two certain individuals.

Anyways, I think this thread is dead anyways, and any technical side-topic should probably be discussed in a separate thread.

[Someone]

I have no problem being questioned, in fact I appreciate it as it might be an opportunity to learn.

So far you've inaccurately compared Realtime waveform capture rate with segmented capture rate (several times). Your response:

You really think I'd use some primitive tool like mask testing for searching for a glitch when on a newer high-end scope I have a wide range of tools available to detect, identify and quantify any type of irregularity in a repetitive and non-repetitive signal?

Dismiss realtime capture rate (over and over) without providing examples of alternatives.

Then you gave us all a "lesson" on how persistence and intensity weren't different (they are completely separate controls on most scopes):

The other point, one that is often ignored, is that due the high frequency and the resulting ultra-short presence a single or very rare glitch, even on a perfect scope with an indefinitely fast sample rate and a perfect real-time display, is still unlikely to be visible long enough to be perceivable by the human eye or to show up bright enough on a persistence display. Staring at waveforms and looking out for glitches and runts may work at frequencies in the kHz or lower MHz range, but at frequencies in the GHz range it's a different story.

Despite examples showing this to be false you've continued on your claim that we have no idea what we're talking about but you won't show us.

And to continue the misdirection you've lumped together a group of radically different tools:

Since then TriggerScan has been part of every WaveRunner/WavePro/WaveMaster/LabMaster scope under the "WaveScan" umbrella (WaveSurfers don't have the "TriggerScan" part, and the WS400 doesn't even have WaveScan). And later it has become much more powerful than the old version described in this document.

BTW, Keysight has something roughly similar called "InfiniiScan" which pretty much copies what WaveScan can do (and yes, LeCroy had it first), and which is really really slow even on a upper high-end scope like the DSO90k.

WaveScan and InfiniiScan hunt through captures in memory, while TriggerScan rapidly changes the trigger conditions to quickly find abnormal events in repetitive signals.

[rf-loop]

I want hear more about Trigger Scan technology. It is innovative and interesting - technically.

[Wuerstchenhund]

I want hear more about Trigger Scan technology. It is innovative and interesting - technically.

Unfortunately one thing LeCroy really sucks in is documentation (which is often poor and rarely updated), so I'm not sure there is a lot of info out there about it other than taking a scope that has it and playing around with it.

The same is true for many of their videos. 

The only thing I can say is that it's pretty old, WaveScan/TriggerScan came out I think in early 2004 as a free feature upgrade for all LeCroy X-Stream (Windows) scopes including older scopes (WR6k/WP7k/WM8k which came out around 2001) through the normal X-Stream software update process.

Another new feature that came in at around the same time was LabNotebook, which is useful if you need to document the measurements you take:
http://teledynelecroy.com/features/featureoverview.aspx?modelid=2109&capid=102&mid=556

The X-Stream only scope that didn't get WaveScan/TriggerScan and (if I remember right) LabNotebook is the WaveSurfer 400 (the very first WaveSurfer scope), which wasn't powerful enough and in general was a very basic scope.

[EEVblog]

Fun, well, I don't know. There are probably a hundred threads about Rigol scopes and a lot about Keysight scopes, but dare you mention LeCroy it does bring out the (always the same two) trolls.

Calling people trolls is the kind of attitude that got this thread locked in the first place.
If you can't play nice then you won't be welcome here.
I was kind enough to re-open this thread and your first post back is to call people trolls?
People say the exact same thing about you BTW.
Give me a good reason why I shouldn't lock it again?

[Wuerstchenhund]

Fun, well, I don't know. There are probably a hundred threads about Rigol scopes and a lot about Keysight scopes, but dare you mention LeCroy it does bring out the (always the same two) trolls.

Calling people trolls is the kind of attitude that got this thread locked in the first place.
If you can't play nice then you won't be welcome here.

You may want to have a closer look at the sequence of posts to recognize who started the fight.

I was kind enough to re-open this thread and your first post back is to call people trolls?

Yes, I called a certain two people trolls, one of which had his post cancelled because of - trolling.

So 'troll' is now a forbidden word then?

People say the exact same thing about you BTW.

Fine, and if I'm found to be trolling then you should block me, which would be the right thing to do with trolls.

Anyways, if you don't want me here just say the word, if you believe my contribution isn't of value then that's OK and I'll spend this part of my free time elsewhere. Your turf, your call.

I'd still recommend you think about how you deal with such issues. Of course you provide the platform and that is appreciated, however it's knowledgeable people here who provide the real value, and leaving trolls a pretty much free reign certainly doesn't encourage productive participation.

Give me a good reason why I shouldn't lock it again?

As I said, your turf, your call. Do what you have to do.

[EEVblog]

You may want to have a closer look at the sequence of posts to recognize who started the fight.

On a forum that has approx 800 posts a day, moderators are not going to look into "who started what".
Nor does it matter, you perpetuated it instead doing the right thing and ignoring it and/or reporting it. You are just as much to blame if not more.

Yes, I called a certain two people trolls, one of which had his post cancelled because of - trolling.

How about you stop that please?
Especially after a thread has gotten heated, reported, locked and then unlocked.
You are being deliberately antagonistic.

So 'troll' is now a forbidden word then?

Not on it's own, but people who are continually antagonistic toward other users and start throwing troll around all the time  and taking everything personally will ultimately not last on this forum.
IIRC there have been many reports about your posts over the years, it does not look good. Try not to let that continue please, don't give people reason to report you.

Fine, and if I'm found to be trolling then you should block me. If you don't want me here just say the word, if my contribution isn't appreciated then that's OK. Your turf, your call.
I'd still recommend you think about how you deal with such issues. Of course you provide the platform and that is appreciated, however it's knowledgeable people here who provide the real value, and leaving tolls a pretty much free reign certainly doesn't encourage productive participation.

Knowledgeable technical contributors here are given a lot of slack.

[nctnico]

Fun, well, I don't know. There are probably a hundred threads about Rigol scopes and a lot about Keysight scopes, but dare you mention LeCroy it does bring out the (always the same two) trolls.

Calling people trolls is the kind of attitude that got this thread locked in the first place.
If you can't play nice then you won't be welcome here.
I was kind enough to re-open this thread and your first post back is to call people trolls?
People say the exact same thing about you BTW.
Give me a good reason why I shouldn't lock it again?

This topic was about to touch some interesting topics when it comes to advanced triggering. What I wanted to post a few days ago is this:

What I see in this thread is that there is a focus on seeing things on an oscilloscope and let the operator decide what is right or wrong. But the thing is that in some cases that just can't be done because of dead time, re-arm time, update rate limitations, etc. So what is needed are better tools which look at the waveform and only show a signal which doesn't conform the set parameters. That is not so far fetched and even low end scopes offer things like triggering on pulse widths, runts, protocols, etc but you can take that several steps further by describing a signal as a set of rules which are evaluated by a programmable statemachine. High end logic analysers have similar features. In these you can literally program the trigger engine using input patterns, timers, counters in several different states in order to capture a very specific event based on very specific condition. And it doesn't slow down or have blind time. It is like a sliding mask test which goes over a signal without blind time. The only difference is that you won't see something if the anomalie doesn't occur. The machine does the work for you.

[Wuerstchenhund]

You may want to have a closer look at the sequence of posts to recognize who started the fight.

On a forum that has approx 800 posts a day, moderators are not going to look into "who started what"

Understandable, but in some instances you have to, even if just to make sure you tell off the right target. That's part of moderation.

Yes, I called a certain two people trolls, one of which had his post cancelled because of - trolling.

How about you stop that please?
Especially after a thread has gotten heated, reported, locked and then unlocked.
You are being deliberately antagonistic.

I'm not. However it shows why I said you should look at the actual sequence of events, not just at the last few posts. One specific individual has actually quite a track record of following and attacking me.

IIRC there have been many reports about your posts over the years, it does not look good. Try not to let that continue please, don't give people reason to report you.

As I said, if someone reports me as "troll" and, after looking at the facts, you find this report is justified then you should tell me or block me. It's the only right thing to do.

However, I'd expect you to, after looking at the facts, if you believe the report wasn't justified that you tell off the reporter and don't count this against me.

It should really work both ways.

I'm direct and open, which might not be to everyone's taste, and I on occasion I fight my place, but most certainly I don't attack anyone for no reason or participate in a discussion just to stir up dissent (i.e. the definition of 'trolling'). That much I can say. There are cases where I disagree with other members, but except for two who shall not be named that disagreement stays on a technical level and is based on discussing technical arguments, and I still get along well with the discussion partners after the discussion ended (and often even agree with them on other issues).

Knowledgeable technical contributors here are given a lot of slack.

Maybe, but this is true for some people who do engage in trolling as well unfortunately.

[tautech]

Maybe, but this is true for some people who do engage in trolling as well unfortunately.

Shit man, you've used that word again^^^^^

I used to think you were doing that to me, I just sucked it up, you should too.

[Wuerstchenhund]

This topic was about to touch some interesting topics when it comes to advanced triggering. What I wanted to post a few days ago is this:

What I see in this thread is that there is a focus on seeing things on an oscilloscope and let the operator decide what is right or wrong. But the thing is that in some cases that just can't be done because of dead time, re-arm time, update rate limitations, etc. So what is needed are better tools which look at the waveform and only show a signal which doesn't conform the set parameters. That is not so far fetched and even low end scopes offer things like triggering on pulse widths, runts, protocols, etc but you can take that several steps further by describing a signal as a set of rules which are evaluated by a programmable statemachine. High end logic analysers have similar features. In these you can literally program the trigger engine using input patterns, timers, counters in several different states in order to capture a very specific event based on very specific condition. And it doesn't slow down or have blind time. It is like a sliding mask test which goes over a signal without blind time. The only difference is that you won't see something if the anomalie doesn't occur. The machine does the work for you.

That's probably best discussed in a separate thread, even if this thread hadn't derailed.

In my experience a lot of the capabilities of modern scopes are often wasted because people pretty much treat it like an analog scope, i.e. a device to *look* at something (a waveform, a glitch). Not just here, I see that often even with otherwise experienced engineers. Of course it's difficult keeping track of advances in test equipment if T&M isn't your field of work, and making use of all the advanced capabilities becomes difficult if you have to change between various scope models and manufacturers often.

The machine should really do the work for you.

[Simon]

If you susepct someone is trolling just report them. We can then keep an eye on things as they unfold, it stops the rot sooner and is easier to follow. If you get to the point of calling someone a troll then maybe it's time to report them. A report does not mean we take immediate action but wmay jusy monitor things. It's easier than trying to patch things up.

Coming out looking to be right all the time never works, agree to dissagree. Some people are not worth arguing with. It takes 2 to tango - or should that be troll. Our most famous scrap with a member will only be remembered for the banning of that member who was continually antagonized by the same other member and responded every time like clock work, but the provoking member also got banned as well, but then who remembers who that even was.

[Wuerstchenhund]

If you susepct someone is trolling just report them. We can then keep an eye on things as they unfold, it stops the rot sooner and is easier to follow. If you get to the point of calling someone a troll then maybe it's time to report them. A report does not mean we take immediate action but wmay jusy monitor things. It's easier than trying to patch things up.

You're absolutely right, and in hindsight I can see that it was a mistake not just report it immediately.

Coming out looking to be right all the time never works, agree to dissagree. Some people are not worth arguing with.

That is certainly true.

[EEVblog]

Coming out looking to be right all the time never works, agree to dissagree. Some people are not worth arguing with.

That is certainly true.

Although a good technical argument is fine, go at it, so long as you can keep it strictly technical.
It's fine to take it personally of course (mumble to self "I'm going to prove this SOB wrong!"), that's what drives half the good technical debates on forums, but the moment you show publicly that you are taking it personally and start attacking the other person, that is the instant everyone loses.

[Performa01]

... mumble to self "I'm going to prove this SOB wrong!" ...

As a non native speaker, I wonder what this might stand for...

[Wuerstchenhund]

... mumble to self "I'm going to prove this SOB wrong!" ...

As a non native speaker, I wonder what this might stand for...

SOB = short form for male descendant of a female dog 

[Performa01]

... mumble to self "I'm going to prove this SOB wrong!" ...

As a non native speaker, I wonder what this might stand for...

SOB = short form for male descendant of a female dog 

Got it! Thanks for clarification!

Now that's what I call a technical debate where I could learn something useful!