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.?? *
*