We had Y400s at work.?? They were in for repair a lot.?? I could have had one.?? I didn't want one.??? The Y400 reminded me of a Marconi 2955. ? It had a lot of clicking relays.?? I cannot speak on the Cell Master.?
I don't consider my equipment entry level, although some might.?? On a budget, if I had to choose, a COM-120B or a 1600, since I am familiar with them, and a return loss bridge,?? A HP 8920, or 8921 would also be a good choice.?
Not that you asked, I use a S113B for antennas, a IFR COM-120B, 1200s, and 1600s for real radio work.?? When you get old like me, a 1200 is a lot easier to take to sites, but it certainly has its limitations.??
A HP 8753ES for combiners and duplexers, and a ARRA 3428 line stretcher for determining cable lengths for the above.?? For portable use, a HP FieldFox would be nice, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
In my opinion, you are always better off with test equipment designed for what you are doing, if you really care about the end result, instead using a Jack of All Trades.?
There is an old saying, Tektronix makes good scopes, and HP makes good RF equipment.? Don't cross that line.
I'm sure someone will disagree with me.? Oh well...
John?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 2025-03-12 23:33, Pro4XComm via groups.io wrote:
They both cover the frequency range I would be interested in. I guess the part I'm unsure of is that the Anritsu specifically says in the functions that it has a signal generator whereas the Tektronix says it can be used as a "sine wave or continuous wave source" under "CW mode". I'm unsure whether this mode on the Tektronix would be suitable for tuning duplexers or whether the Anritsu would be the one I need. The Tektronix advertises it can test insertion loss/gain and return loss so would this be a good option for using it as an SA and also a VNA for tuning duplexers?
