The X-series analyzers have evolved quite a bit since their introduction, as the early versions ran XP, and the newer ones are probably on Win10, maybe 11. That gets into licensing negotiations with uSoft. Even with XP, the EXA, MXA, and PXA were faster and more capable than the PSA.

?

The PSA was faster than the 8566/8568, and had a better display, as well as better dynamic range and speed. Log mag display linearity was no longer an issue as the log amps in the IF were replaced with software log functions. Dynamic range was at least 20 dB better. Amplitude accuracy improved from =/- 1.5 dB or worse to less than .5 dB, almost into power meter territory. ?The limitation of the PSA was that it could not support USB devices very well. Writing thee drivers to accommodate every possible peripheral in the wild, wild west that was USB back then was a lot of work. uS was doing all of that work, so why re-invent the wheel.

?

The EXA/MXA/PXA took a lot of the hardware tech from the PSA and added the speed, memory, peripheral support, and processing horsepower of a modern PC, integral to the machine. Could it have used Linux instead of Windows? Yes, but at the time, Linux did not have the horsepower and peripheral support, among other things. ?

?

Some features that ship standard with every box:

?

More displayed data points, at least 64,000 last I knew were available. No, the LCD won’t show them all but they are all available via GPIB, USB, or LAN ports.

?

Sweep speeds are substantially faster than the 8566/8568.

?

Amplitude accuracy and frequency are much better because of the large amounts of memory, both RAM and disk, which allows calibrating at more points across the range of the box, and applying the corrections immediately.

?

Measurements like channel power and adjacent channel power are available.

?

There are at least 4, traces available, in color, that can use any of 4 or 5 different detectors, so you can compare traces taken simultaneously with different detectors ( Rosenfell, Peak, Neg Peak, Average, and Sample). There are more trace math tricks available than the earlier models.

?

There are, I think, 10 markers available, on each trace. Any marker can be a reference marker and any other marker can be a delta marker to that. Multiple reference and delta markers can exist on the same trace.

?

On board storage of setups, traces, etc. is limited only by the size of the hard disk, which of course have grown larger over time. With the USB and LAN ports, off-board storage is just like you would do on a Win PC.

?

There are several other cool things the X-series can do, but I think I’ve hit a few of the more useful ones.

?

I have used the 8566/8568 family since they came out in the late 70’s, the PSA for several years, and also the X-series since they were introduced. I still own a 66, a 68, and a 3.6 GHz EXA. I don’t use the 68 much. I use the 66 for microwave needs, but the EXA for most everything else on my test bench. Yeah, I hate the slow boot up time, but it does everything else so well and so much faster, and I very seldom need to post-process any sweeps, which saves me a lot more time than the slow boot up costs.

?

My EXA has the noise figure option, and it does have some quirks compared the using the 8970 system that I used to have, but it is just as capable. It doesn’t have quite as many tricks as the 8970 could pull off with its Special Functions menu, but I haven’t missed those.

?

I have had the EXA for going on 15 years and have not had any problems with it. (OK, now I’m slightly apprehensive about going into the lab and turning it on, having said that!)

?

Just like PCs in general, the hardware needed to support newer versions of Windows has changed, and obsoletes the older stuff. An upgrade is pretty simple, though not hobbyist cheap. The computer part ?is a plug in module that has a standard interface, so that , last I heard, an original X-series can be upgraded to the lates Wintel version just by replacing that module. The RF hardware doesn’t need to change at all. Certainly, I would expect that more recently built units will have better RF stuff as that evolves over time.

?

Blame the suits for going to a Windows OS? Nope, blame the engineers who finally got the freedom to build a machine that could do everything that the evolving technology of RF hardware, signal processing, and computing horsepower made possible.

?

Tom, N8ZM

?

Hi

Just an extra note

The preamp are inbuilt all MXA`s

One of the very nice features are a package named EDP..enhanced display package— its also an ?software option and works wonders-it simply lets you make normal sweeps at your own choise…and have a split screen with a spectrogram….

If one buy from the seller I earlier have linked to,you simply ask Hong for the options you want..and the analyzer can use!!

?

?

Hi Jeremy et all

The MXA have both a preamp and electronically attenuator as option.All MXA have inbuilt 28v dc for noise sources.

The phase noise and noise figure options works even better than the one used in the old PSA.

Regarding vsa 89600 software….all MXA` used to come with ?version 12.02 and version 14 preinstalled.works great in my MXA`s -and of course one can use this software from a pc as well.

There exist ?cracks for version 12.02 and version 22.21.

Only two of the sellers at ebay can offer the units with-a lot- of options…have made a link.

I have collected most info about these nice systems.If interested I can share!!

The only caveat are the bandwidth at 3.6 Ghz,but many of us ?still have the ?old HP/Agilent 856x/859x series analyzers going to multi Ghz.Combinedwith the 3.6 Ghz MXA it’s a great combo as the vsa 89600 sofware have an inbuilt up/down converter mode.The MXA come standard with a digital bandwidth of 25 Mhz!!!

Hardy

?

?

?

Here's the datasheet for the N9020A? MXA analyser


It may be the case that the 28V hardware for driving an external noise source is standard equipment. It might therefore be possible to measure noise figure by adding a suitable licence code. Maybe Hardy can advise about this.

The analyser would also need a preamp to cover up to 3.6GHz or an external (homebrew or HP) preamp could be fitted. The noise figure of the internal preamp isn't that great, so I'd recommend making an external preamp, especially for use below about 1GHz.

A noise source would also be needed and this could be homebrew or something like an HP 346A/B. A homebrew noise source would be a lot cheaper but it won't be as stable or as accurate.

The noise figure GUI will probably be similar to that used in other Agilent/Keysight analysers. It's a really nice feature to have on a modern spectrum analyser.?

Hi Jeremy et all

The MXA have both a preamp and electronically attenuator as option.All MXA have inbuilt 28v dc for noise sources.

The phase noise and noise figure options works even better than the one used in the old PSA.

Regarding vsa 89600 software….all MXA` used to come with ?version 12.02 and version 14 preinstalled.works great in my MXA`s -and of course one can use this software from a pc as well.

There exist ?cracks for version 12.02 and version 22.21.

Only two of the sellers at ebay can offer the units with-a lot- of options…have made a link.

I have collected most info about these nice systems.If interested I can share!!

The only caveat are the bandwidth at 3.6 Ghz,but many of us ?still have the ?old HP/Agilent 856x/859x series analyzers going to multi Ghz.Combinedwith the 3.6 Ghz MXA it’s a great combo as the vsa 89600 sofware have an inbuilt up/down converter mode.The MXA come standard with a digital bandwidth of 25 Mhz!!!

Hardy

?

?

?

Here's the datasheet for the N9020A? MXA analyser


It may be the case that the 28V hardware for driving an external noise source is standard equipment. It might therefore be possible to measure noise figure by adding a suitable licence code. Maybe Hardy can advise about this.

The analyser would also need a preamp to cover up to 3.6GHz or an external (homebrew or HP) preamp could be fitted. The noise figure of the internal preamp isn't that great, so I'd recommend making an external preamp, especially for use below about 1GHz.

A noise source would also be needed and this could be homebrew or something like an HP 346A/B. A homebrew noise source would be a lot cheaper but it won't be as stable or as accurate.

The noise figure GUI will probably be similar to that used in other Agilent/Keysight analysers. It's a really nice feature to have on a modern spectrum analyser.?