There have been a few threads very recently in https://groups.io/g/HP-Agilent-Keysight-equipment which you would probably find interesting. There is a lot of enthusiasm over the 1670 and 16700 machines - I wouldn't say you've missed the sweet spot since these are now often much cheaper than the later 168x and 169x machines but still very well liked : not least because the 167x are based on HPUX rather than Windows.
On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 8:43 PM Glen Slick via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 20, 2023, 12:05 PM John H. Reinhardt via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > Hello all. I looking around for a Logic Analyzer for doing (mostly) DEC > > QBus/UniBus stuff. Being the way I am I want something with enough lines > > to handle the most of the signals so I'm guessing something with roughly > > 80-ish channels. I think that lets out all/most of the USB based LA. > I've > > looked around and it seems the the HP/Agilent 16700 series > (16700B/16702B) > > are probably what I want. I've also seen the 1670G which also seems > quite > > doable. I've seen a lot of posts at the EEVblog and it seems I missed > > possibly the golden age of 16700 LA by a few years price-wise. > > > > What I'm wondering is if there is something specific I should be looking > > for, or opinions on which LA is more suitable. Or even if there is a > > different make of LA to look for. > > > > Thanks in advance for your help > > > > John H. Reinhardt > > > > Where are you located? That can have a large impact on the cost of > acquiring a large 16700-series logic analyzer. For example, I have more of > those than I need in the Seattle area. A local deal might work out well, > but if shipping is involved that can quickly get too expensive. > > If bench space is limited, a 1670G takes up a lot less, and is completely > self contained and easier to move around and set up. On the other hand, a > 16700-series is more flexible, and if you have space to set up an external > monitor you can see a lot more data on the screen at the same time without > scrolling around. >
