20 Feb
2016
20 Feb
'16
4:31 p.m.
Which is your favourite ? Why you like it and would recommend it ? and .... How often
you use it ?
20 Feb
20 Feb
5:42 p.m.
On 02/20/2016 03:31 PM, GerardCJAT wrote:
Which is your favourite ? Why you like it and would
recommend it ? and .... How often you use it ?
I had a Tek 1240. Not bad, kind of short record length, but
you could put a bunch of channels on it. But, it was REALLY
SLOWWWW to format up the display, and every couple pages
when scanning back and forth in time it would have to go
through the reformat again. It did have a Z-80
disassembler, which was real nice at the time.
I then moved up to a Tek 9200 DAS. I got it off eBay for
$700 when it went out of support from Tek. Mine has 288
channels (3 each 92A96D cards) and cost $128,000 new. These
cards have 96 channels at 100 MHz and 128K record length.
Supposedly, there's a way to link channels and get 200 MHz,
but I haven't figured out how to do it. It is still a
little laggy when scrolling, but quite tolerable. There is
a crazy way to add the Tek LA font to your X server so you
can run it from any X windows server. I have this working
at work, with a TLA520. At home I have the 9200
with their X-terminal, so I haven't bothered to set up the X
server to display from the LA. (The TLA520 is almost
identical to the 9200, but in a smaller box.)
I've never used an HP LA, so I really can't compare. I did
have one case at work where we had a really rare failure,
where a particular data word in a stream of words was
wrong. I was able to set up a sequence of conditionals on
the TLA520 to step through to the specific word of the
packet and then if a certain range of bits was all zeros,
trigger the analyzer. This was really great, as the failure
would only happen every 3-5 minutes. I suppose the HP
analyzers have a similar capability.
Jon
6:17 p.m.
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 1:31 PM, GerardCJAT <gerardcjat at free.fr> wrote:
Which is your favourite ? Why you like it and would
recommend it ? and .... How often you use it ?
If you are primarily asking about traditional big box with large
number of parallel channel logic analyzers (as opposed to 8/16 channel
USB based analyzers) I don't think you could go wrong with an HP /
Agilent 16700 series if you have the room to set one up.
At least in the US you should be able to pick up a bare mainframe
somewhere around $100, which shouldn't be much more than any older
generation HP / Agilent logic analyzers. Plug in logic analyzer
modules shouldn't cost too much and are readily available, along with
the necessary breakout lead sets and grabbers. With a 16700 series you
can hook up an external monitor at up to 1280x1024 or optionally
1600x1200 and you can see a lot of information simultaneously. Much
more so than on the older series with built in CRT displays.
For vintage micro work there were lots of CPU interfaces available,
although they are not always easy to find.
I have the following set of CPU preprocessor modules which mate with a
10269C interface for use with HP / Agilent logic analyzers:
10300B (64683A) Z80
10304B (64655A) 8085
10305B (64653A) 8086/8088
10307B (64672B) 6800/6802
10308B (64671A) 6809/6809E
10311B (64670A) 68000/68010
10312B (64657A) 80286
10314B (64659A) 80386
10342B RS-232C/V.24, RS-499, HP-IB bus preprocessor interface.
Also an E2423A SCSI bus preprocessor interface.
I have HP / Agilent 1660C, 16500A/B/C, 16600A, 16700A/B, 16702B, and
16900A analyzers. Most often (which isn't really all that often) I
would likely use a 16700B. I should get a 16700B set up with the
E2423A SCSI probe to take a look at what is going on when I try to use
an Emulex UC07 SCSI controller with some hard drives that it doesn't
seem to like.
I also have Tek TLA714/720/721 and TLA7016 logic analyzers. They don't
quite seem as natural to use to me as the HP / Agilent analyzers. Also
the cables and breakout lead sets seem to typically be more expensive
than the HP / Agilent ones.
-Glen
21 Feb
21 Feb
3:46 a.m.
Like most others, the favorite is the one I use! So we are all biased by definition, and I
have an HP 1670G. In general I?d go straight to Tek for vintage scopes and HP for vintage
LAs, and be very somewhat leery about doing the opposite... I chose it because it is
small and portable, has a boatload of channels, the pattern generator, LCD color screen,
integrated keyboard, and mine had the 2M deep memory option (important). And I collect HP
instruments, so it fits right in. Rarer, more recent and expensive (but still very
affordable) than the dirt cheap CRT based 16xx series - has a hard disk and the memory
humph. I don?t use it often, but when I do it?s critical. It saved me on two projects so
far, developing my HP 7970 tape HP?IB driver and repairing my Documation card reader (all
documented on my YouTube videos if you want to get a feel for it). The one downside is the
lack of a touchscreen, you need a mouse and a lot of clicking around. The 15000/16000
series is better for that but a much larger unit, it would be a step up though. If you
want to save $ go in the other direction for the B&W 16xx series. At their current
price points, any of them is an absolute steal compared to what they can do for you, and
they are all perfectly usable. Good time to buy one.
Marc
From: cctech <cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org> on behalf of GerardCJAT
<gerardcjat at free.fr>
Reply-To: GerardCJAT <gerardcjat at free.fr>, "cctech at classiccmp.org"
<cctech at classiccmp.org>
Date: Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 1:31 PM
To: "cctech at classiccmp.org" <cctech at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Logic Analyser Polling ....
Which is your favourite ? Why you like it and would recommend it ? and .... How often
you use it ?
6:19 a.m.
There is another option to all this. You could use a modern 16 or 24 channel logic
analyzer. I have in my "bag" a Saleae logic16. They have a new version called
the pro that even does some scope like signal analysis.
Anyway, it was invaluable working on my Scelbi when troubleshooting because it hooks right
up to my MacBook and allows me to store entire runs of the system with gigabytes of
capture. I was tracking down a wonky step process where the CPU seemed to auto advance
when jamming instructions in if I waited more than a few seconds between steps. Having a
long running capture with something quick to setup really helps. It's also really
cool to watch the entire Sol-20 boot up process into Solos.
The other really useful thing about the Saleae logic stuff is size. It has come in useful
when I have to go somewhere other than my workbench to fix something because it's very
portable. It is very impractical for me to bring more than some hand tools, a hand held
DSO, my Saleae, a hakko desoldering gun and a portable temp controlled soldering iron to
some of the places I have had to do repairs on vintage tech.
Cheers,
Corey
corey cohen
u??o? ???o?
On Feb 21, 2016, at 3:46 AM, Curious Marc
<curiousmarc3 at gmail.com> wrote:
Like most others, the favorite is the one I use! So we are all biased by definition, and
I have an HP 1670G. In general I?d go straight to Tek for vintage scopes and HP for
vintage LAs, and be very somewhat leery about doing the opposite... I chose it because it
is small and portable, has a boatload of channels, the pattern generator, LCD color
screen, integrated keyboard, and mine had the 2M deep memory option (important). And I
collect HP instruments, so it fits right in. Rarer, more recent and expensive (but still
very affordable) than the dirt cheap CRT based 16xx series - has a hard disk and the
memory humph. I don?t use it often, but when I do it?s critical. It saved me on two
projects so far, developing my HP 7970 tape HP?IB driver and repairing my Documation card
reader (all documented on my YouTube videos if you want to get a feel for it). The one
downside is the lack of a touchscreen, you need a mouse and a lot of clicking around. The
15000/16000 series is better for that but a much larger unit, it would be a step up
though. If you want to save $ go in the other direction for the B&W 16xx series. At
their current price points, any of them is an absolute steal compared to what they can do
for you, and they are all perfectly usable. Good time to buy one.
Marc
From: cctech <cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org> on behalf of GerardCJAT
<gerardcjat at free.fr>
Reply-To: GerardCJAT <gerardcjat at free.fr>, "cctech at classiccmp.org"
<cctech at classiccmp.org>
Date: Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 1:31 PM
To: "cctech at classiccmp.org" <cctech at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Logic Analyser Polling ....
Which is your favourite ? Why you like it and would recommend it ? and .... How often
you use it ?
11:57 a.m.
On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 12:46 AM, Curious Marc <curiousmarc3 at gmail.com> wrote:
Like most others, the favorite is the one I use! So we
are all biased by definition, and I have an HP 1670G. In general I?d go straight to Tek
for vintage scopes and HP for vintage LAs, and be very somewhat leery about doing the
opposite... I chose it because it is small and portable, has a boatload of channels, the
pattern generator, LCD color screen, integrated keyboard, and mine had the 2M deep memory
option (important). And I collect HP instruments, so it fits right in. Rarer, more recent
and expensive (but still very affordable) than the dirt cheap CRT based 16xx series - has
a hard disk and the memory humph. I don?t use it often, but when I do it?s critical. It
saved me on two projects so far, developing my HP 7970 tape HP?IB driver and repairing my
Documation card reader (all documented on my YouTube videos if you want to get a feel for
it). The one downside is the lack of a touchscreen, you need a mouse and a lot of clicking
around. The 15000/16000 series is better for that but a much larger unit, it would be a
step up though. If you want to save $ go in the other direction for the B&W 16xx
series. At their current price points, any of them is an absolute steal compared to what
they can do for you, and they are all perfectly usable. Good time to buy one.
Marc
If I was looking at traditional HP / Agilent / Tektronix logic
analyzers and wanted a small self-contained portable systems an HP /
Agilent 1670G with Option 2 (2M sample depth) would be the most
interesting to me. Of the 1660/1670 self-contained portable series the
1670G is the most recent, has the highest speed and sample depth
capabilities, and a nice color LCD display.
The 1660A Mono CRT. 4K sample depth. Floppy only. No LAN.
The 1660C Mono CRT. 4K sample depth. Hard drive. LAN optional.
The 1660E Color LCD. 4K sample depth. Hard drive. LAN.
The 1670A Mono CRT. 64K (optional 500K) sample depth. Hard drive. LAN.
The 1670D Mono CRT. 64K (optional 1M) sample depth. Hard drive. LAN.
The 1670E Color LCD. 1M sample depth. Hard drive. LAN.
The 1670G Color LCD. 64K (optional 256K or 2M) sample depth. Hard drive. LAN.
There are also built-in scope and pattern generator options available
on some of those.
Unfortunately the 1670G series usually seem to come at a price premium
compared to other choices, at least on eBay. The asking prices I
normally see are at least $200 and usually significantly more, and
often without Option 2 and/or the lower channel count 1671/1672/1673G
versions. I haven't seen one go by cheap enough to grab one for
myself. For the same price you could get a much more capable and
expandable 16700B system, but then it is larger and no longer
self-contained and easily portable.
The best deal I see today on eBay for 1660/1670 series is a 1670D
Option 030 for $150 + $30 shipping. (
http://www.ebay.com/itm/321867912004 )
-Glen
9:08 a.m.
Which is your favourite ? Why you like it and would recommend it ? and
.... How often you use it ?
Does the HP LogicDart count? (it is a 3 channel logic analyser)
If so, then it's my favourite, its so convenient (not much more work than a simple
logic probe, but it tells me so much more), it is small enough to use on just
about any machine (I don;'t worry about putting it on top of a PCB or whatever.
I use it just about every time I repair a classic computer.
If not then the HP1630. OK, it's old and there are better specced instruments
available, but this was the last HP to have schematics available, and it does
all I need for repairing classic computers.
-tony
23 Feb
23 Feb
3:02 a.m.
http://www.dreamsourcelab.com/dslogic.html [1]
.. by a mile.
Use it all the time. Works great.
-Alan
On 2016-02-20 16:31, GerardCJAT wrote:
Which is your favourite ? Why you like it and would
recommend it ? and .... How often you use it ?
Links:
------
[1] http://www.dreamsourcelab.com/dslogic.html
3021
days inactive
3024
days old
7 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
alan＠alanlee.org -
applecorey＠optonline.net -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
curiousmarc3＠gmail.com -
elson＠pico-systems.com -
gerardcjat＠free.fr -
glen.slick＠gmail.com