When Jim Ford replies from his Samsung phone, he wipes out
all of the formatting. When he replies from his Windows box,
(em client) formatting is preserved.
His reply was the first to have destroyed the formatting.
-Chuck Harris
Sergey Kubushyn wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sat, 29 Feb 2020, Jim Ford wrote:
Thanks, Sergey.? I have updated my "wishlist" HP 8340 entry to add "best with no
options".
BTW, do you see your own text below?? When I reply, I see the previous text on my
screen, and when I receive my own reply as posted to the group, it contains the
other text as well.? Therefore, I haven't made any effort to copy text from
previous posts.? But I've often wondered if others see the previous text.? It bugs
the crap out of me to see somebody else's "Yeah, I agree" post, for example, with
no context.
Those people who post a single "Me too!" letters are mentally ill and it is
a sin to insult them. Thou shalt forgive them; for they know not what they
do...
Your quoting is fine; it is somebody else that screwed up earlier message
text making it all one long line without breaks.
Jim
------ Original Message ------
From: "Sergey Kubushyn" <ksi@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: 2/28/2020 10:13:42 PM
Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B
On Fri, 28 Feb 2020, Jim Ford wrote:
I don't know who had all that message thread screwed up (guys, _PLEASE_
setup proper quoting -- it is impossible to read) but as of 8340B I can tell
that the best one is instrument without _ANY_ options.
Unlike 99.9999% of other measurement equipment _EVERY_ option in 8340B is
"Remove something" or "Make it worse" (moving connectors to the rear falls
in the latter category.)
There is no options in 8340B that would've added something or made it better
than basic instrument without options.
Option 007 is relaxed phase noise, page 1-10.? I guess James Bond wasn't
concerned about phase noise!? 3 dB worse across the board except is the same at
100 kHz offset (not surprising as that's probably the PN floor), and 30 Hz offset
not specified. Thanks, Bruce. JimSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: Bruce <bruce@...> Date: 2/28/20?
4:43 PM? (GMT-08:00) To: [email protected] Subject: Re:
[HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B vs 83631B Some of the 8340 series
that were used with the 8510C have more phase? noise than the "normal" unit - I
think this is the Opt 5 version - be? careful and try to avoid Opt 5 if you can -
check the documentation to? be sure my mmemory is correct.Quoting Jim Ford
<james.ford@...>:> Interesting, Vladan, that the 8340/8341 synths share
circuitry with? > the 8566 spec an.? I figured the bottom part of the 8566 was
pretty? > much just a synthesized sweeper anyway.? I don't have an 8340 or? >
8341 (yet), but there are a few of the lower frequency versions in? > one of the
labs at work, and they do look like the bottom of the? > 8566.? The sloped bottom
part of the front panel gives them away.? I? > believe the standalone synths are
5 rack units, though, vs. 3 or 4? > for the bottom of the 8566.>> Jim>> ------
Original Message ------> From: "pianovt via Groups.Io"
<pianovt@...>> To: [email protected]> Sent:
2/28/2020 1:20:20 PM> Subject: Re: [HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment] 8510C: 8340B
vs 83631B>>> Here is a brief history. The 8340A was designed in parallel with? >>
the 8510A and was intended for use with it. There was no 8360? >> series back
then. With time, the 8510 A became the 8510B and at? >> some point the 8340A?
become a "B" too. The biggest difference? >> between the A and B versions of the
two instruments was the change? >> from a HP proprietary processor to the 68000.
Eventually, the 8510B? >> was reworked into the 8510C. While this was going on, a
new? >> sweeping syntehsizerseries? was released, the 8360.>>>> The 8360 series
had some models which were stripped down,? >> specifically for use with the 8510.
Stripped down means they didn't? >> have a standard front panel user interface.
They were meant to? >> interact with the 8510 via the system bus only. That kept
the cost? >> down for customers who didn't need a stand-alone sweeper or? >>
synthesizer.>>>> In the meantime, a lower cost version of the 8340 was
introduced,? >> the 8341. It was a 20 GHz synthesizer. However, if you are
willing? >> to study the differences and do some work late at night, you can? >>
probably make the 8341 do much of what the 8340 does and get it to >> work to
26.5 GHz. The 8341 will work with the 8510 system, but I am? >> not sure which
firmware works with what.>>>> The 8340/41 is very heavy, and it has a jet engine
style cooling? >> fan. Inside, the frequency synthesis circuits are pretty much
the? >> same as what was used in the 8566 spectrum analyzer, but there is? >>
also an output section with a multiplier, leveling circuits,? >> modulation etc.,
in other words all the stuff that's needed to get? >> the signal out. The upside
is, many 8566 LO parts can be had for? >> next to nothing, so spare parts are
largely available for the? >> synthesizer portion. Documentation is also
available. Not so much? >> for the 8360. As far as I know, the alignment and
calibration? >> software for the 8360 has not been released to the general
public? >> either.>>>> Vladan>>>>
---
*
*? KSI@home??? KOI8 Net? < >? The impossible we do immediately.? *
*? Las Vegas?? NV, USA?? < >? Miracles require 24-hour notice.?? *
*
---
*
*? KSI@home??? KOI8 Net? < >? The impossible we do immediately.? *
*? Las Vegas?? NV, USA?? < >? Miracles require 24-hour notice.?? *
*
