Sorry early morning rant, There are counters out there already that can do 14/15 digits: tsc5125A and the Miles box for example. Very difficult to get a reference into that counter that can match and provide that type of stability.
I am sure Agilent would love to hear our feedback probably as long as we don't accuse them of leaving out features purely as a profit motive. Heck Apple sells $160 production cost iPads for $800 and doesn't even include a calculator app for free. People don't care and they end up with $100+ billion cash in the bank. I'd rather have Agilent charge a bit more and have them still around 10 years from now. Bye, Said Sent From iPhone On Feb 19, 2014, at 10:08, Tom Knox <[email protected]> wrote: > > I hope I have not come off sounding like that Said, I simply would like to > see a great product better, I am hoping/committed to work with Agilent > toward a better product if they are interested. And in the past I have found > they are interested in our feedback. The 53132A was revolutionary in it's > day, but with advances in time and freq there is now a market for a 14 or 15 > digit counter. > I am still attempting to individually characterize each item in my time and > freq system and understand their strengths and weaknesses. And hope to learn > more about the 53230A in the coming weeks. But TVB's comments in particular > seemed consistent with my impressions so far. > I would welcome your thoughts on the 53230A. > Thanks;l > Thomas Knox > > > >> CC: [email protected] >> From: [email protected] >> Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 08:25:28 -0800 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] strange behavior of 53230A or is the light on, >> but nobody in? >> >> Mike, >> >> They are already giving you another way to calibrate the unit, different >> from how you think they should have done it and you are pulling out the >> statist card and accusing them of being greedy capitalists? >> >> Come on, thats backseat driving. Be happy they invested millions of their >> own money and put out a more or less affordable new counter in a market >> flooded with good low-cost used counters. >> >> Bye, >> Said >> >> Sent From iPhone >> >> On Feb 19, 2014, at 0:33, mike cook <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> Le 19 févr. 2014 à 01:05, Tom Knox a écrit : >>> >>>> Thanks Tom and Bob, I have been thinking of contacting Agilent for some >>>> time. I think they are a great company with some good products, but there >>>> are a few real blind spots in some current products. I also have seen in >>>> the past a genuine interest in listening. I would be willing to approach >>>> them if I could enlist your help in addressing potential changes to >>>> improve the product. >>>> Thanks; >>>> Thomas Knox >>> >>> If they are steering the VCXXO,OCXO from the Ext. Ref. , then they are in >>> effect calibrating it. Why not remember the applied EFC when they get phase >>> lock? That can be applied when the internal timebase is selected. >>> It couldn't be that they might lose the chance to sell a signal generator >>> ;-), as calibration needs a square wave input, and the Ext. Ref In is >>> ignored. >>> >>>> >>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 18:00:17 -0500 >>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] strange behavior of 53230A or is the light on, >>>>> but nobody in? >>>>> >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> Well at least this got me digging a little. >>>>> >>>>> If you grab a copy of the 53230A spec sheet and look under the external >>>>> reference input, it’s pretty well described. It will accept 1, 5,10 MHz >>>>> as an external reference. It will lock over a 1 ppm range with the XO >>>>> option and 0.1 ppm with the OCXO option. Based on that I’d guess they are >>>>> still using the same basic PLL approach as on the older counters (5335 >>>>> era). >>>>> >>>>> The “Microsoft Windows inside” sticker on the back of the counter was a >>>>> bit of a surprise …. >>> >>> No sticker on mine. >>> >>>>> >>>>> Bob >>>>> >>>>> On Feb 18, 2014, at 11:51 AM, Tom Van Baak (lab) <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> TomK, >>>>>> >>>>>> If anyone has technical contacts deep within Agilent, let's see if this >>>>>> issue can be resolved. I would have bought a 53230A when it came out a >>>>>> few years ago but my eval units showed this clock noise problem. That >>>>>> plus the poor quality of the ref out made me think the designers were >>>>>> cutting corners, or had little experience in metrology, or maybe they >>>>>> thought this was "ok" for a bench instrument. >>>>>> >>>>>> Otherwise it's a really nice counter; the first one from Agilent than >>>>>> can actually do ADEV properly (since it is a time stamping counter). >>>>>> >>>>>> I should dig out my old data and send it to you. Maybe as group we can >>>>>> help them fix the problem. >>>>>> >>>>>> /tvb >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 18, 2014, at 12:10 AM, Tom Knox <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have asked Agilent >>>>>>> if stock versions of the 53230A and 53132A switched the internal >>>>>>> oscillator out of circuit with an Ext Ref signal >>>>>>> applied. I thought >>>>>>> Agilent's engineer was intentionally vague but said the oscillators were >>>>>>> indeed switched out of circuit on the counter with Ext Ref signal >>>>>>> applied. These questions were related to several 53132A's I have seen >>>>>>> configured with a small board back near the Ext Ref input (OPT H01 I >>>>>>> think) that appeared to Switch the internal reference out of circuit. >>>>>>> Agilent would not share information on the option. My question to >>>>>>> Agilent is why sell an option and be unwilling to say what it does or >>>>>>> how your stock unit functions? >>>>>>> Thomas Knox >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: [email protected] >>>>>>>> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 09:38:28 -1000 >>>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] strange behavior of 53230A or is the light >>>>>>>> on, but nobody in? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Bob, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm wondering if you (or any else) has measured the PLL performance of >>>>>>>> the 53230-series? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I agree it will "clean up the crud" but this assumes the ext ref is >>>>>>>> dirtier than the internal osc. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What I found instead was that if you use a good external ref the PLL >>>>>>>> actually makes it worse. This was very disappointing. The XO version >>>>>>>> of the counter performed worse than the OCXO version even with a maser >>>>>>>> as the ext reference. Did your reading of the schematic show a way to >>>>>>>> directly use the ext ref, bypassing the noisy PLL? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The other thing I found was that the ref out signal was a very >>>>>>>> polluted copy of the ref in. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> /tvb (i5s) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 17, 2014, at 7:04 AM, Bob Camp <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If you dig into the schematics (when they supplied them … ): >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The external reference goes into a phase detector. It’s one of those >>>>>>>>> digital ones that can lock up to many inputs. You could feed >>>>>>>>> 3.33333333 MHz in as a standard input as well as 0.5, 1, 2.5, 5, and >>>>>>>>> 10 MHz. The internal oscillator (or an internal oscillator) is phase >>>>>>>>> locked to the external input through a fairly narrow analog loop. The >>>>>>>>> idea is to clean up the crud on the standard line. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> With no external reference, the PLL drops out and you go back to what >>>>>>>>> ever the local reference is. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes there’s a little more to it than that and no the circuit is not >>>>>>>>> exactly the same on every counter HP ever made. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Bob >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Feb 17, 2014, at 7:55 AM, wb6bnq <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Mike, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The most likely answer is when you select external time base for an >>>>>>>>>> input, it disables the connection for the internal oscillator. The >>>>>>>>>> external input signal is probably also routed straight to the >>>>>>>>>> reference output jack. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> However, it would be good to read the manual, as they usually cover >>>>>>>>>> how those connections work. Otherwise, perhaps someone that owns >>>>>>>>>> one could provide further insight. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Bill....WB6BNQ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> mike cook wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Something that must be simple to explain, but that I can't get my >>>>>>>>>>> head round. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I got a new 53230A. >>>>>>>>>>> When first using it, I measured my T-Bolt 10MHz using the internal >>>>>>>>>>> 10MHz timebase and it came up short of 10MHz, 9.999 998 5xx. I >>>>>>>>>>> wasn't worried about it as the counter only has a TCXO internal >>>>>>>>>>> oscillator. So I fired up my PRS10 and after leaving that on for >>>>>>>>>>> some time, connected it to Ext Ref. , changed to the ext time base >>>>>>>>>>> and measured again. This time 10.000.000.00x. Then I switched the >>>>>>>>>>> two references, measuring the PRS10 against the T-Bolt. Again I got >>>>>>>>>>> 10MHz down to the 11th digit. >>>>>>>>>>> All that looked good so I have been using it with either the PRS10 >>>>>>>>>>> locked to GPS, or the T-Bolt as the external time base. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> After leaving it on (but not inactive) for a month, I did an >>>>>>>>>>> Autocal. No problem. >>>>>>>>>>> I was wondering if that would have changed the internal time base >>>>>>>>>>> frequency, but no, using that still gave similar figures to the >>>>>>>>>>> above. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> So at that point I decided to measure the Internal TB against my >>>>>>>>>>> reference. So I connected the Int. Ref. Out to channel 1, connected >>>>>>>>>>> my PRS10 ref to Ext. Ref In, selected the EXT time base and found >>>>>>>>>>> that the count was 10MHz dead on????? I don't get that at all. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> in summary: >>>>>>>>>>> DUT against internal TB counts < 10MHz. To me that means that >>>>>>>>>>> the internal timebase is a bit fast. Is that assumption correct? >>>>>>>>>>> DUT against Ext.Ref counts 10MHz >>>>>>>>>>> Internal TB against Ext.Ref counts 10MHz. If my assumption >>>>>>>>>>> above is correct, the count should be greater than 10MHz, no? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Can anyone shed any light on that? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to >>>>>>>>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >>>>>>>>>>> and follow the instructions there. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to >>>>>>>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >>>>>>>>>> and follow the instructions there. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to >>>>>>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >>>>>>>>> and follow the instructions there. >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to >>>>>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >>>>>>>> and follow the instructions there. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to >>>>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >>>>>>> and follow the instructions there. >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>>> To unsubscribe, go to >>>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >>>>>> and follow the instructions there. >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >>>>> To unsubscribe, go to >>>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >>>>> and follow the instructions there. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >>>> To unsubscribe, go to >>>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >>>> and follow the instructions there. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe, go to >>> https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >>> and follow the instructions there. >> _______________________________________________ >> time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] >> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >> and follow the instructions there. > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
