So are you guys saying I should pass on this scope? I know Dave has said multiple times in different videos to get an analog scope so that's why I was considering this one.
Dave has also repeatedly said that people should stop taking this old advice from 2009(?) literally, as it's no longer accurate because the entry level scope market has changed a lot from the time he made the recommendation.
Could you point to his opinion? Please, I'm a newbie!
Well to summarise, the mostly now 20+ year old CRO's are reaching the end of reliability. This statement I know WILL incite all sorts of responses, but bear with me.
For a NEWBIE, the possibility of maintaining and repairing a CRO, while fascinating, will be a substantial diversion to the projects they are working on. Been there done that myself.
Many may have the skills and equipment to do so, and good on them.
But if you are starting out and budget is not a great concern, DSO is the way to go.
The features they now offer are amazing.
Yes the Wuerstchenhund is correct, Dave has lately made several posts in various threads very similar to this one, recommending a recently introduced DSO. Can't bring myself to state the brand.
What if there's limited budget? Is better an old analog or a cheap digital?
IMO, regardless of budget is ones ability to keep an old CRO working.
Circuitry in CRO's, especially the HV supply for the CRT is often problematic, irrespective of component quality used, it is the nature of the beast.
Even the signal path, sweep and low voltage circuitry needs another scope to diagnose faults.
Consider that if you invest in an CRO, it is not without risk.
If one has the skills and tools but not the budget, it is indeed an option.
Always ensure a Service manual is available too.
Even the very low cost DSO's offer SO many more usefull features that a CRO doesn't.
Reliability is almost unquestionable.
But consider this very old wise saying: First cost= last cost.
If you don't want any hassles get a DSO.