In sampling theory the BW is determined by the half of the sampling rate. But in a scope things seems to be different if I'm not mistaken.

But for example if you look at the front panel of the oscilloscope model TDS1002B, among other things two things are written. It is written 1GS/s and it is also written 60MHz.

So the BW is explicitly given here as 60MHz. On the other hand if we apply Nyquist law we could have also conclude the BW is half the sampling freq. so 1GHz/2 = 500MHz. So where am I thinking wrong here?

  • \$\begingroup\$ Possible duplicate of Oscilloscope Bandwidth, what's it all about? or Oscilloscope: How are Bandwidth specification and Sampling Rate related? \$\endgroup\$
    – Oldfart
    Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 12:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ The maximum bandwidth given perfect brick wall filtering (infinite time delay) is when sampling is twice the BW. As engineers we degrade these requirements to something more practical. \$\endgroup\$
    – Andy aka
    Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 12:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ If you close questions like these soon or later all questions will be duplicate and the site will be closed. Asking a similar question lets OP to interact with the fresh answers. Imho this policy will change soon. No offense just wanted to express my opinion.. \$\endgroup\$
    – pnatk
    Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 12:56
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Explain how we need "fresh" answers when a proper answer to your question already exists? If you have an additional question then it is perfectly fine to link to the existing answer and question and ask: "Related to <question> and <answer> it is unclear to me why.... \$\endgroup\$ Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 12:58
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ My suggestion was to make a new question and just link to the old one to make it explicit that you have found and read that answer. Then make sure whatever you ask isn't already discussed in the old answer. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Dec 12, 2019 at 13:06


Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.