Timeline for To see an encoded AM radio wave, what kind of Oscilloscope do I need?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 2018 at 14:30 | comment | added | johnny | @pjc50 Thanks. That is exactly what I wanted to see. You should add an answer. | |
| Sep 28, 2018 at 10:16 | comment | added | pjc50 | Here's a video youtube.com/watch?v=2f2nQ9yDAIA of someone doing this with a crystal set and a Tektronix 2235 scope, which seem to be <$200 on ebay. | |
| Sep 28, 2018 at 10:08 | comment | added | pjc50 | I think @user1234's point is that the analog scope has very low latency regardless of timebase, which isn't true for all digital scopes. USB scopes in particular will have high latency. | |
| Sep 27, 2018 at 19:27 | comment | added | Dmitry Grigoryev | @user1234 Observing 10 seconds of waveform cannot take less than 10 seconds. | |
| Sep 27, 2018 at 14:56 | comment | added | johnny | @Bimpelrekkie Thanks for the new keyword to search. I didn't know about those. | |
| Sep 27, 2018 at 14:40 | comment | added | floppy380 | Digital scope is slower comparing to the analog one for example in this case: If you want to observe 10 seconds of 1Hz wave signal on scope screen analog is much faster almost immediate. When you want to adjust time scale in such application the digital one will stuck all the time. | |
| Sep 27, 2018 at 14:19 | answer | added | Dmitry Grigoryev | timeline score: 2 | |
| Sep 27, 2018 at 14:10 | comment | added | Bimpelrekkie | On nearly any scope with sufficient bandwidth you can observe an AM radio signal. But really, there's not that much to see. For real RF you would need a spectrum analyzer (they're quite expensive). A scope is more for low frequency stuff, focusing your choice on viewing the AM signal is pointless if you ask me. Either get a good used analog scope to learn what you need or get one of the popular cheap digital scopes if you have the cash. A USB scope could be OK but the good ones cost nearly the same as a standalone model so not worth it in my opinion. | |
| Sep 27, 2018 at 14:08 | answer | added | Olin Lathrop | timeline score: 2 | |
| Sep 27, 2018 at 14:04 | comment | added | Bimpelrekkie | I have seen videos of digital, but they appear to be "slow," on the older Analog scopes, it is faster and seems more responsive. I think that that is a generalization and at least for any modern scope simply untrue. My guess: the person showing the digital scope didn't (know how to) use it properly. The main advantage of a digital scope is that it can "freeze" a signal. That's useful for continuously changing signals like audio (and therefore also an AM radio signal). On an Analog scope you would be unable to look at details. But what do you want to see in the AM signal? | |
| Sep 27, 2018 at 13:56 | history | asked | johnny | CC BY-SA 4.0 |