Greetings,

I have a ('77 ?) Tektronix 485 scope (serial starts with a 'B' or an
'8', number is 167020) that I received 4 years ago. At the time it
worked, although I was (still am somewhat) pretty "green" regarding
electronics as I am more of a hobbyist than a professional as I love
to learn and "tinker". In the past, I have serviced tube amplifiers
for friends. Right now I have a 3M (Mincom) M56 professional
multitrack tape recorder I am currently in the process of aligning. I
guess you could say I am an "analog dinosaur" of sorts... LOL.

When I initially got the 485, the unit powered up and I could do some
basic sweeps, but I have not really used it since I initially got it
(mainly due to getting married, having kids and buying a new house -
funny how those things take up gobs of your life ;-). When I went to
turn it on about a year ago, I noticed a clicking or chirping with no
beam. Apparently as I understand it based on some quick research on
the 'net, this is not an uncommon symptom on these 'scopes having a
power supply trying to start but failing due to current overload of
some sort (capacitors?).

So, I did a search on Tektronix repair and came up with a person that
thinks they will be able to fix it.

However, for the price of the repair (and maybe a little more), I am
wondering if I wouldn't be better served with something like a 2465/A/
B?

Here's some reasons why maybe I think I should go with the 2465:

1) Compared to the 485, it's a newer 'scope with perhaps less hours
than my 485 (don't know how much use my 485 has had; it appears to be
in average or slightly better condition)
2) Less "mechanical" parts in the 2465 (e.g., pots, etc. from my
understanding) to fail
3) Lots think this is the epitome of the analog oscilloscope

Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I thought
this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking

wrote in message
...
Greetings,

I have a ('77 ?) Tektronix 485 scope (serial starts with a 'B' or an
'8', number is 167020) that I received 4 years ago. At the time it
worked, although I was (still am somewhat) pretty "green" regarding
electronics as I am more of a hobbyist than a professional as I love
to learn and "tinker". In the past, I have serviced tube amplifiers
for friends. Right now I have a 3M (Mincom) M56 professional
multitrack tape recorder I am currently in the process of aligning. I
guess you could say I am an "analog dinosaur" of sorts... LOL.

When I initially got the 485, the unit powered up and I could do some
basic sweeps, but I have not really used it since I initially got it
(mainly due to getting married, having kids and buying a new house -
funny how those things take up gobs of your life ;-). When I went to
turn it on about a year ago, I noticed a clicking or chirping with no
beam. Apparently as I understand it based on some quick research on
the 'net, this is not an uncommon symptom on these 'scopes having a
power supply trying to start but failing due to current overload of
some sort (capacitors?).

So, I did a search on Tektronix repair and came up with a person that
thinks they will be able to fix it.

However, for the price of the repair (and maybe a little more), I am
wondering if I wouldn't be better served with something like a 2465/A/
B?

Here's some reasons why maybe I think I should go with the 2465:

1) Compared to the 485, it's a newer 'scope with perhaps less hours
than my 485 (don't know how much use my 485 has had; it appears to be
in average or slightly better condition)
2) Less "mechanical" parts in the 2465 (e.g., pots, etc. from my
understanding) to fail
3) Lots think this is the epitome of the analog oscilloscope

Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I thought
this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking


The 485 is a really excellent scope, and the problem you describe should be
fairly easy to repair. There's no sense in upgrading, as a beginner you
probably won't use a large portion of the features the 485 provides even.

wrote:
Greetings,

I have a ('77 ?) Tektronix 485 scope (serial starts with a 'B' or an
'8', number is 167020) that I received 4 years ago. At the time it
worked, although I was (still am somewhat) pretty "green" regarding
electronics as I am more of a hobbyist than a professional as I love
to learn and "tinker". In the past, I have serviced tube amplifiers
for friends. Right now I have a 3M (Mincom) M56 professional
multitrack tape recorder I am currently in the process of aligning. I
guess you could say I am an "analog dinosaur" of sorts... LOL.

When I initially got the 485, the unit powered up and I could do some
basic sweeps, but I have not really used it since I initially got it
(mainly due to getting married, having kids and buying a new house -
funny how those things take up gobs of your life ;-). When I went to
turn it on about a year ago, I noticed a clicking or chirping with no
beam. Apparently as I understand it based on some quick research on
the 'net, this is not an uncommon symptom on these 'scopes having a
power supply trying to start but failing due to current overload of
some sort (capacitors?).

So, I did a search on Tektronix repair and came up with a person that
thinks they will be able to fix it.

However, for the price of the repair (and maybe a little more), I am
wondering if I wouldn't be better served with something like a 2465/A/
B?

Here's some reasons why maybe I think I should go with the 2465:

1) Compared to the 485, it's a newer 'scope with perhaps less hours
than my 485 (don't know how much use my 485 has had; it appears to be
in average or slightly better condition)
2) Less "mechanical" parts in the 2465 (e.g., pots, etc. from my
understanding) to fail
3) Lots think this is the epitome of the analog oscilloscope

Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I thought
this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking

I had the same problem with my 485. Took me a few hours to isolate (due
to the disassmebly required) but it was caused by a shorted tantalum
cap. I used to fix T & M equipment for a living, so I may be more
adventurous than you. The 485 is a classic, probably the best portable
scope ever made. I bet if you got your head and hands in the 485 you
could find and fix the problem.

Good luck

--
Mike McGinn
"more kidneys than eyes"
Registered Linux User 377849

wrote in news:8617845e-5625-4187-a7df-
:

Greetings,

I have a ('77 ?) Tektronix 485 scope (serial starts with a 'B' or an
'8', number is 167020) that I received 4 years ago. At the time it
worked, although I was (still am somewhat) pretty "green" regarding
electronics as I am more of a hobbyist than a professional as I love
to learn and "tinker". In the past, I have serviced tube amplifiers
for friends. Right now I have a 3M (Mincom) M56 professional
multitrack tape recorder I am currently in the process of aligning. I
guess you could say I am an "analog dinosaur" of sorts... LOL.

When I initially got the 485, the unit powered up and I could do some
basic sweeps, but I have not really used it since I initially got it
(mainly due to getting married, having kids and buying a new house -
funny how those things take up gobs of your life ;-). When I went to
turn it on about a year ago, I noticed a clicking or chirping with no
beam. Apparently as I understand it based on some quick research on
the 'net, this is not an uncommon symptom on these 'scopes having a
power supply trying to start but failing due to current overload of
some sort (capacitors?).

So, I did a search on Tektronix repair and came up with a person that
thinks they will be able to fix it.

However, for the price of the repair (and maybe a little more), I am
wondering if I wouldn't be better served with something like a 2465/A/
B?

Here's some reasons why maybe I think I should go with the 2465:

1) Compared to the 485, it's a newer 'scope with perhaps less hours
than my 485 (don't know how much use my 485 has had; it appears to be
in average or slightly better condition)
2) Less "mechanical" parts in the 2465 (e.g., pots, etc. from my
understanding) to fail

at least with pots,you can always sub something in.

3) Lots think this is the epitome of the analog oscilloscope

the 2445/65 series was the best portable scope TEK ever made.
BUT,because TEK stopped making their custom ICs/hybrids,they had to stop
making the scopes.There's also a problem with failing horizontal output amp
ICs(A TEK-made IC).

Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I thought
this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465

Not if you can get the parts for the 2465,and have a service manual. ;-)

3) More robust for the beginner

"robust"?? the 2445/65 was better built,IMO.

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking

*IF* you got a fully working 2465 for what the 485 cost to repair,I'd go
with the 2465. then look for a 2nd for parts support.


the one thing that worries me about your 485 is the attenuator HF switch
contacts;they lose tension,and the white plastic cam follower that holds
the gold contact to the spring arm degrades over time,to the point the
contact falls off. you can't get them anywhere except from salvaging a dead
scope. Intermittent attenuators were a very frequent problem with the 485.

One note;the 2445/65 sometimes came with Options that have separate op and
service manuals;there will be a sticker on the rear denoting what options
were installed,if any.Stuff like counter/timer,TV trigger,DMM,and a RARE
word recognizer option.I never saw one of those.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"James Sweet" writes:

wrote in message
...
Greetings,

I have a ('77 ?) Tektronix 485 scope (serial starts with a 'B' or an
'8', number is 167020) that I received 4 years ago. At the time it
worked, although I was (still am somewhat) pretty "green" regarding
electronics as I am more of a hobbyist than a professional as I love
to learn and "tinker". In the past, I have serviced tube amplifiers
for friends. Right now I have a 3M (Mincom) M56 professional
multitrack tape recorder I am currently in the process of aligning. I
guess you could say I am an "analog dinosaur" of sorts... LOL.

When I initially got the 485, the unit powered up and I could do some
basic sweeps, but I have not really used it since I initially got it
(mainly due to getting married, having kids and buying a new house -
funny how those things take up gobs of your life ;-). When I went to
turn it on about a year ago, I noticed a clicking or chirping with no
beam. Apparently as I understand it based on some quick research on
the 'net, this is not an uncommon symptom on these 'scopes having a
power supply trying to start but failing due to current overload of
some sort (capacitors?).

So, I did a search on Tektronix repair and came up with a person that
thinks they will be able to fix it.

However, for the price of the repair (and maybe a little more), I am
wondering if I wouldn't be better served with something like a 2465/A/
B?

Here's some reasons why maybe I think I should go with the 2465:

1) Compared to the 485, it's a newer 'scope with perhaps less hours
than my 485 (don't know how much use my 485 has had; it appears to be
in average or slightly better condition)
2) Less "mechanical" parts in the 2465 (e.g., pots, etc. from my
understanding) to fail
3) Lots think this is the epitome of the analog oscilloscope

Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I thought
this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking

The 485 is a really excellent scope, and the problem you describe should be
fairly easy to repair. There's no sense in upgrading, as a beginner you
probably won't use a large portion of the features the 485 provides even.

I agree 100 percent.

My first guess would be one or more of those imfamous tantalum gumdrop
caps have decided to turn into short circuits. These are on the power
supply PCB on the bottom. Save yoursefl some grief and replace them all
(maybe 2 dozen). I have just been putting in aluminum electrolytics.
Not sure how much difference it makes.

--- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/
Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Sites: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/F_mirror.html

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is
ignored unless my full name AND either lasers or electronics is included in the
subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.

On Nov 27, 1:59 pm, Sam Goldwasser wrote:

I agree 100 percent.

My first guess would be one or more of those imfamous tantalum gumdrop
caps have decided to turn into short circuits. These are on the power
supply PCB on the bottom. Save yoursefl some grief and replace them all
(maybe 2 dozen). I have just been putting in aluminum electrolytics.
Not sure how much difference it makes.

Or can I just stick with tantalum replacements? Mouser shows some,
though I have no idea values.

http://www.mouser.com/search/Refine....user_Wildcards

I assume radial termination style?

You say you've been putting in AL 'lytics. Do tants come polarized?

Say I go with Nichicon AL 'lytic radials. Is there a preferred series?
They have all kinds...

http://www.nichicon.co.jp/english/pr...ini/daia_f.htm

James Sweet wrote:

The 485 is a really excellent scope, and the problem you describe should be
fairly easy to repair. There's no sense in upgrading, as a beginner you
probably won't use a large portion of the features the 485 provides even.

Agreed, and I bet a nickel the issue is that there is too much dust and
dirt providing leakage paths in the high voltage section. Have the tech
give it a good cleaning and you will probably be fine.

I'm still using a Tek tube scope at work and it's always been flawless
although the calibration guys hate me.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:no13j.19418$XT.16175@trnddc01...

wrote in message
...
Greetings,

I have a ('77 ?) Tektronix 485 scope (serial starts with a 'B' or an
'8', number is 167020) that I received 4 years ago. At the time it
worked, although I was (still am somewhat) pretty "green" regarding
electronics as I am more of a hobbyist than a professional as I love
to learn and "tinker". In the past, I have serviced tube amplifiers
for friends. Right now I have a 3M (Mincom) M56 professional
multitrack tape recorder I am currently in the process of aligning. I
guess you could say I am an "analog dinosaur" of sorts... LOL.

When I initially got the 485, the unit powered up and I could do some
basic sweeps, but I have not really used it since I initially got it
(mainly due to getting married, having kids and buying a new house -
funny how those things take up gobs of your life ;-). When I went to
turn it on about a year ago, I noticed a clicking or chirping with no
beam. Apparently as I understand it based on some quick research on
the 'net, this is not an uncommon symptom on these 'scopes having a
power supply trying to start but failing due to current overload of
some sort (capacitors?).

So, I did a search on Tektronix repair and came up with a person that
thinks they will be able to fix it.

However, for the price of the repair (and maybe a little more), I am
wondering if I wouldn't be better served with something like a 2465/A/
B?

Here's some reasons why maybe I think I should go with the 2465:

1) Compared to the 485, it's a newer 'scope with perhaps less hours
than my 485 (don't know how much use my 485 has had; it appears to be
in average or slightly better condition)
2) Less "mechanical" parts in the 2465 (e.g., pots, etc. from my
understanding) to fail
3) Lots think this is the epitome of the analog oscilloscope

Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I thought
this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking


The 485 is a really excellent scope, and the problem you describe should
be
fairly easy to repair. There's no sense in upgrading, as a beginner you
probably won't use a large portion of the features the 485 provides even.

Hi James. I had a 485 many years ago to use for field work ( not that easy
schlepping it around the country). I think it had a 250 MHz bandwidth. It's
really packed so be careful when attempting repairs. Starting with checking
the low voltage power supplies is a good idea. Also be careful if sending it
out prepaid for service. Check the service place thoroughly for references
and for viable guarantees. The 485 is a professional scope that way exceeds
the hobbyists requirements. So if you can repair it reasonably, you will own
a classic gem.

Cordially,
west

"West" wrote in news:OQ53j.37950$Xg.23109@trnddc06:


"James Sweet" wrote in message
news:no13j.19418$XT.16175@trnddc01...

wrote in message

...
Greetings,

I have a ('77 ?) Tektronix 485 scope (serial starts with a 'B' or
an '8', number is 167020) that I received 4 years ago. At the time
it worked, although I was (still am somewhat) pretty "green"
regarding electronics as I am more of a hobbyist than a
professional as I love to learn and "tinker". In the past, I have
serviced tube amplifiers for friends. Right now I have a 3M
(Mincom) M56 professional multitrack tape recorder I am currently
in the process of aligning. I guess you could say I am an "analog
dinosaur" of sorts... LOL.

When I initially got the 485, the unit powered up and I could do
some basic sweeps, but I have not really used it since I initially
got it (mainly due to getting married, having kids and buying a new
house - funny how those things take up gobs of your life ;-). When
I went to turn it on about a year ago, I noticed a clicking or
chirping with no beam. Apparently as I understand it based on some
quick research on the 'net, this is not an uncommon symptom on
these 'scopes having a power supply trying to start but failing due
to current overload of some sort (capacitors?).

So, I did a search on Tektronix repair and came up with a person
that thinks they will be able to fix it.

However, for the price of the repair (and maybe a little more), I
am wondering if I wouldn't be better served with something like a
2465/A/ B?

Here's some reasons why maybe I think I should go with the 2465:

1) Compared to the 485, it's a newer 'scope with perhaps less hours
than my 485 (don't know how much use my 485 has had; it appears to
be in average or slightly better condition)
2) Less "mechanical" parts in the 2465 (e.g., pots, etc. from my
understanding) to fail
3) Lots think this is the epitome of the analog oscilloscope

Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I
thought this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking


The 485 is a really excellent scope, and the problem you describe
should
be
fairly easy to repair. There's no sense in upgrading, as a beginner
you probably won't use a large portion of the features the 485
provides even.

Hi James. I had a 485 many years ago to use for field work ( not that
easy schlepping it around the country). I think it had a 250 MHz
bandwidth. It's really packed so be careful when attempting repairs.
Starting with checking the low voltage power supplies is a good idea.
Also be careful if sending it out prepaid for service. Check the
service place thoroughly for references and for viable guarantees. The
485 is a professional scope that way exceeds the hobbyists
requirements. So if you can repair it reasonably, you will own a
classic gem.

Cordially,
west





if you ship it anywhere,**pack it very well**,with at least 3-4 inches of
padding on EVERY side,top,and bottom.

Using loose peanuts is a great way to have your scope smashed up.
Better to pack the peanuts in plastic bags,making "pillows" and place those
around the scope.

I've seen plenty of poorly packed instruments,and UPS/FedEx/DHL/USPS is not
liable for poorly packed items.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Sam Goldwasser wrote:


Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I thought
this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking


I'm an expert on these things. The 485 is the best portable
analog scope ever made. It is arguably the best analog scope ever made,
though the 7904 series competes well on the bench. Do anything you
can to keep one working. There is no substitute for a 485/7904,
and I've used them all, including $50,000 digital ones. For repairing
analog electronic oddities, digital frequently simply
doesn't work.

A 485 is 350 MHz scope.

The 2465 is a very poor substitute, though a good scope.

Doug McDonald

On Nov 28, 1:31 pm, Doug McDonald
wrote:

I'm an expert on these things. The 485 is the best portable
analog scope ever made. It is arguably the best analog scope ever made,
though the 7904 series competes well on the bench. Do anything you
can to keep one working. There is no substitute for a 485/7904,
and I've used them all, including $50,000 digital ones. For repairing
analog electronic oddities, digital frequently simply
doesn't work.

A 485 is 350 MHz scope.

The 2465 is a very poor substitute, though a good scope.

Hi Doug,

Thanks for your thoughts.

Do you do repairs on these scopes? Or does anyone in the group know
some noteworthy techs I can send my scope to for repair?

It seems most here think I should just stick with the 485. I have no
problem with that. However, it's good that I brought this thread up as
now I've learned that there may be issues with the 485 to be concerned
about, namely the attenuator problem Mr. Yanik has brought up (that is
somewhat disconcerting).

BTW, how long do the CRTs last on these scopes?

Doug McDonald wrote in
:

Sam Goldwasser wrote:


Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I thought
this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking


I'm an expert on these things.

Oh?

The 485 is the best portable
analog scope ever made. It is arguably the best analog scope ever made,
though the 7904 series competes well on the bench. Do anything you
can to keep one working. There is no substitute for a 485/7904,
and I've used them all, including $50,000 digital ones. For repairing
analog electronic oddities, digital frequently simply
doesn't work.

A 485 is 350 MHz scope.

The 2465 is a very poor substitute, though a good scope.

Doug McDonald






IMO,the 485 is much worse than a 2465,having lots of flaky attenuator
problems,a bitch of a power supply repair-wise,and less accuracy than the
2465 series.And you get a better CRT display with the 2465.
The 2465 was the best portable scope TEK ever made.What killed it was TEK
selling off the ICO/Hybrid plant to Maxim,and Maxim cutting TEK's throat
by forcing a last-time buy on TEK-made ICs.
The 485s are getting really old,the HF switch contacts are degrading and
unavailable.
The 2465 is more serviceable -if you can get the parts.
the 485 has the same problem.

I worked for TEK for 21.5 years in their Field Service centers repairing
and calibrating these scopes.I'd much rather work on a 2465 than a 485.
485s were a PITA even when TEK was still issuing the mod summaries on
fiche.There were SO many ECO changes,you couldn't keep up with them all.

I agree about the 7904 lab scopes being great.Had one on my bench.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

wrote in news:fc628060-369a-4006-8372-
:




BTW, how long do the CRTs last on these scopes?


Too many variables. How long does a light bulb last?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

I no longer recommend owning or using Tektronix analog scopes,
period. Yes, they were very well built, but none of them are 100%
supported and they all lose the same parts. The hybrid issue is a big
one, but CRTs, attenuators, and high voltage parts on all solid state
Teks are getting unavailable even through the back channels.

If some company decided to FULLY SUPPORT certain Tek models,
guaranteeing availability of every part from new production-or at
least every part that is getting scarce-I'd say yes.

Ironically you can still get every possible part for many tube Teks,
but the size, weight, power draw and heat make them nonstarters. That
is why the parts are available.

Buy a new scope.

"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message
...
I no longer recommend owning or using Tektronix analog scopes,
period. Yes, they were very well built, but none of them are 100%
supported and they all lose the same parts. The hybrid issue is a big
one, but CRTs, attenuators, and high voltage parts on all solid state
Teks are getting unavailable even through the back channels.

If some company decided to FULLY SUPPORT certain Tek models,
guaranteeing availability of every part from new production-or at
least every part that is getting scarce-I'd say yes.

Ironically you can still get every possible part for many tube Teks,
but the size, weight, power draw and heat make them nonstarters. That
is why the parts are available.

Buy a new scope.

New scopes are expensive, used Teks in good working order are relatively
cheap and still offer excellent performance. There's millions of them out
there and parts units can still be found. If you're a business with budget
to burn then yes, buy a fancy new scope, but if you're a hobbyist on a
budget, you can't beat an old Tek.

James Sweet wrote:


New scopes are expensive, used Teks in good working order are relatively
cheap and still offer excellent performance. There's millions of them out
there and parts units can still be found. If you're a business with budget
to burn then yes, buy a fancy new scope, but if you're a hobbyist on a
budget, you can't beat an old Tek.



There is only one problem: there are no "new scopes" that will
substitute for a 485/7904 for some purposes of work on analog signals.
Period. They don't exist.

We don't know what the use of the original poster is supposed to
be. The "have to have analog" ones generally involve visual
detection of rare events in analog signals. The dead time of
fast digital scopes can cause hopelessly great "down time fraction"
for this.

For most purposes digital scopes are fine.

Doug McDonald

Bret Ludwig wrote:

I no longer recommend owning or using Tektronix analog scopes,
period. Yes, they were very well built, but none of them are 100%
supported and they all lose the same parts. The hybrid issue is a big
one, but CRTs, attenuators, and high voltage parts on all solid state
Teks are getting unavailable even through the back channels.

If some company decided to FULLY SUPPORT certain Tek models,
guaranteeing availability of every part from new production-or at
least every part that is getting scarce-I'd say yes.

Ironically you can still get every possible part for many tube Teks,
but the size, weight, power draw and heat make them nonstarters. That
is why the parts are available.

Buy a new scope.


I agree 100%!!!!!!!! Buy a brand new chinese scope with no support,
and throw it away when it dies. Repeat till you're tired of using crap,
then buy a used US made scope.


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

On Nov 29, 6:40 am, Doug McDonald
wrote:

We don't know what the use of the original poster is supposed to
be.

See my original post:

"In the past, I have serviced tube amplifiers for friends. Right now I
have a 3M (Mincom) M56 professional
multitrack tape recorder I am currently in the process of aligning."

Probably going forward, much of the same.

Jim Yanik a écrit :
Doug McDonald wrote in
:

Sam Goldwasser wrote:

Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I thought
this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I should
ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking
I'm an expert on these things.

Oh?

The 485 is the best portable
analog scope ever made. It is arguably the best analog scope ever made,
though the 7904 series competes well on the bench. Do anything you
can to keep one working. There is no substitute for a 485/7904,
and I've used them all, including $50,000 digital ones. For repairing
analog electronic oddities, digital frequently simply
doesn't work.

A 485 is 350 MHz scope.

The 2465 is a very poor substitute, though a good scope.

Doug McDonald






IMO,the 485 is much worse than a 2465,having lots of flaky attenuator
problems,a bitch of a power supply repair-wise,and less accuracy than the
2465 series.And you get a better CRT display with the 2465.
The 2465 was the best portable scope TEK ever made.What killed it was TEK
selling off the ICO/Hybrid plant to Maxim,and Maxim cutting TEK's throat
by forcing a last-time buy on TEK-made ICs.
The 485s are getting really old,the HF switch contacts are degrading and
unavailable.
The 2465 is more serviceable -if you can get the parts.
the 485 has the same problem.

I worked for TEK for 21.5 years in their Field Service centers repairing
and calibrating these scopes.I'd much rather work on a 2465 than a 485.
485s were a PITA even when TEK was still issuing the mod summaries on
fiche.There were SO many ECO changes,you couldn't keep up with them all.

I agree about the 7904 lab scopes being great.Had one on my bench.


Totally agree on the 2465.

As for the DSOs, the OP clearly don't know what good ones can do. See
the DSA/11k plugins series. That's simply the best scope I've seen. Period.

I currently have a setup with a DSA and one 11A34 and one 11A33 diff
plug-in from which I *measure* signals at the 10uV level with excellent
accuracy (has been checked against some calibration tooling). But the
truely amazing parts are the plug-ins (11A33 & 11A34 checked) recovery
from deep saturation.
Right now after a 200mV step down to 0V (on a 1mV/div scale), both
plug-ins show not more than 40uV thermal tail and recovers from
saturation in under 50ns. All this being very well behaved and hence can
be well compensated for, pushing the performances one step further.

We're trying to find a 'modern' DSO doing that: nada, nothing.
The last we've tested (DPO7054 @ euro 15K) showed near 2mV thermal
tailing after a 200mV step.

What I wonder is what did make Tek losing the art of those exceptional
input stages...

Now, try to do this with a 485 or a 2465. And no, a 7K series with a
7A22 PI can't do that either (too much drift and not enough BW).


--
Thanks,
Fred.

In article ,
Doug McDonald wrote:
There is only one problem: there are no "new scopes" that will
substitute for a 485/7904 for some purposes of work on analog signals.
Period. They don't exist.

Iwatsu still makes high performance analog scopes. They used to be resold
by LeCroy, but now I think you have to get them from Japan.

(David DiGiacomo) wrote in
:

In article ,
Doug McDonald wrote:
There is only one problem: there are no "new scopes" that will
substitute for a 485/7904 for some purposes of work on analog signals.
Period. They don't exist.

Iwatsu still makes high performance analog scopes. They used to be
resold by LeCroy, but now I think you have to get them from Japan.


how much "high performance" do you need for audio,tube amps?
250Mhz is overkill.
A T922 (15Mhz)would suffice,and be far more reliable than a 485.
No OOP TEK-made ICs,either.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Fred Bartoli " " wrote in :

Jim Yanik a écrit :
Doug McDonald wrote in
:

Sam Goldwasser wrote:

Reasons why I should maybe stay with my 485:

1) Better proprietary IC availability (?, don't beat me up; I
thought this was what I read...)
2) Easier to service/repair than the 2465
3) More robust for the beginner

Obviously if I am thinking like this, I have no idea what I
should ultimately do. What does everyone think? ducking
I'm an expert on these things.

Oh?

The 485 is the best portable
analog scope ever made. It is arguably the best analog scope ever
made, though the 7904 series competes well on the bench. Do anything
you can to keep one working. There is no substitute for a 485/7904,
and I've used them all, including $50,000 digital ones. For
repairing analog electronic oddities, digital frequently simply
doesn't work.

A 485 is 350 MHz scope.

The 2465 is a very poor substitute, though a good scope.

Doug McDonald






IMO,the 485 is much worse than a 2465,having lots of flaky attenuator
problems,a bitch of a power supply repair-wise,and less accuracy than
the 2465 series.And you get a better CRT display with the 2465.
The 2465 was the best portable scope TEK ever made.What killed it was
TEK selling off the ICO/Hybrid plant to Maxim,and Maxim cutting TEK's
throat by forcing a last-time buy on TEK-made ICs.
The 485s are getting really old,the HF switch contacts are degrading
and unavailable.
The 2465 is more serviceable -if you can get the parts.
the 485 has the same problem.

I worked for TEK for 21.5 years in their Field Service centers
repairing and calibrating these scopes.I'd much rather work on a 2465
than a 485. 485s were a PITA even when TEK was still issuing the mod
summaries on fiche.There were SO many ECO changes,you couldn't keep
up with them all.

I agree about the 7904 lab scopes being great.Had one on my bench.


Totally agree on the 2465.

As for the DSOs, the OP clearly don't know what good ones can do. See
the DSA/11k plugins series. That's simply the best scope I've seen.
Period.

I currently have a setup with a DSA and one 11A34 and one 11A33 diff
plug-in from which I *measure* signals at the 10uV level with
excellent accuracy (has been checked against some calibration
tooling). But the truely amazing parts are the plug-ins (11A33 & 11A34
checked) recovery from deep saturation.
Right now after a 200mV step down to 0V (on a 1mV/div scale), both
plug-ins show not more than 40uV thermal tail and recovers from
saturation in under 50ns. All this being very well behaved and hence
can
be well compensated for, pushing the performances one step further.

We're trying to find a 'modern' DSO doing that: nada, nothing.
The last we've tested (DPO7054 @ euro 15K) showed near 2mV thermal
tailing after a 200mV step.

What I wonder is what did make Tek losing the art of those exceptional
input stages...

Ignorant beancounters and overpaid upper management.
They thought they could sell off the ICO/hybrid division,and then buy the
same parts from the new owner,but Maxim decided TEK was not buying in
enough volume to make Maxim happy,and forced a last-time buy before
shutting down the production of TEK ICs/hybrids.

They didn't "lose" the technology,they sold it off.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Nov 29, 12:50 pm, Jim Yanik wrote:
how much "high performance" do you need for audio,tube amps?
250Mhz is overkill.
A T922 (15Mhz)would suffice,and be far more reliable than a 485.
No OOP TEK-made ICs,either.

Well, point being I already have the 485. BTW, I got this 485 gratis
from a friend who was hoping to use it but couldn't find the time over
the years. But then it died shortly after I received it from him.

My original query was based more around the thought "Should I put
money into this 485?". Or if it's too much hassle/cost to fix it would
I be better served (on the repair person's advice) to sell/trade it in
for a 2465 or another 485 he has (with the possible notion that I may
"grow" into whatever I end up with)...

My apologies for apparently having caused more excitement than I had
planned on.

writes:

On Nov 29, 12:50 pm, Jim Yanik wrote:
how much "high performance" do you need for audio,tube amps?
250Mhz is overkill.
A T922 (15Mhz)would suffice,and be far more reliable than a 485.
No OOP TEK-made ICs,either.

Well, point being I already have the 485. BTW, I got this 485 gratis
from a friend who was hoping to use it but couldn't find the time over
the years. But then it died shortly after I received it from him.

My original query was based more around the thought "Should I put
money into this 485?". Or if it's too much hassle/cost to fix it would
I be better served (on the repair person's advice) to sell/trade it in
for a 2465 or another 485 he has (with the possible notion that I may
"grow" into whatever I end up with)...

My apologies for apparently having caused more excitement than I had
planned on.

There's no excitement.

It won't be cost effective to have it professionally repaired.

You have nothing to lose and all to gain by finding the shorted cap(s)
and replacing them, or all of them. A decent DMM is all you need.

--- sam | Sci.Electronics.Repair FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/
Repair | Main Table of Contents: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/
+Lasers | Sam's Laser FAQ: http://www.repairfaq.org/sam/lasersam.htm
| Mirror Sites: http://www.repairfaq.org/REPAIR/F_mirror.html

Important: Anything sent to the email address in the message header above is
ignored unless my full name AND either lasers or electronics is included in the
subject line. Or, you can contact me via the Feedback Form in the FAQs.

wrote in message
...
On Nov 29, 6:40 am, Doug McDonald
wrote:

We don't know what the use of the original poster is supposed to
be.

See my original post:

"In the past, I have serviced tube amplifiers for friends. Right now I
have a 3M (Mincom) M56 professional
multitrack tape recorder I am currently in the process of aligning."

Probably going forward, much of the same.

Well using a 485 for that sort of work is sort of like using a McLaren F1 to
go buy groceries. It'll do the job just fine, but there remains a huge
amount of untapped capabilities.

That said, it'll do as fine a job as as anything else you can find, and as
old as it is, the price should be reasonable.

"Sam Goldwasser" wrote in message
...
writes:

On Nov 29, 12:50 pm, Jim Yanik wrote:
how much "high performance" do you need for audio,tube amps?
250Mhz is overkill.
A T922 (15Mhz)would suffice,and be far more reliable than a 485.
No OOP TEK-made ICs,either.

Well, point being I already have the 485. BTW, I got this 485 gratis
from a friend who was hoping to use it but couldn't find the time over
the years. But then it died shortly after I received it from him.

My original query was based more around the thought "Should I put
money into this 485?". Or if it's too much hassle/cost to fix it would
I be better served (on the repair person's advice) to sell/trade it in
for a 2465 or another 485 he has (with the possible notion that I may
"grow" into whatever I end up with)...

My apologies for apparently having caused more excitement than I had
planned on.

There's no excitement.

It won't be cost effective to have it professionally repaired.

You have nothing to lose and all to gain by finding the shorted cap(s)
and replacing them, or all of them. A decent DMM is all you need.



Or someone may well be willing to trade him a good working lower end scope
for the as-is 485. I would if I had one, but my 465 meets my needs.

On Nov 29, 4:39 pm, "James Sweet" wrote:

Well using a 485 for that sort of work is sort of like using a McLaren F1 to
go buy groceries. It'll do the job just fine, but there remains a huge
amount of untapped capabilities.

That said, it'll do as fine a job as as anything else you can find, and as
old as it is, the price should be reasonable.


Well, point being I already have the 485 which I got free from a
friend who was hoping to use it but couldn't find the time over the
years. But then it died shortly after I received it from him.

My original query was based more around the thought "Should I put
money into this 485?". Or if it's too much hassle/cost to fix it would
I be better served (on the repair person's advice) to sell/trade it in
for a 2465 or another 485 he has (with the possible notion that I may
"grow" into whatever I end up with)...

To which another poster in a cross-post has replied that it wouldn't
be cost effective to repair the 485 implying that I could do the work
myself...

wrote in
:

On Nov 29, 4:39 pm, "James Sweet" wrote:

Well using a 485 for that sort of work is sort of like using a
McLaren F1 to go buy groceries. It'll do the job just fine, but there
remains a huge amount of untapped capabilities.

That said, it'll do as fine a job as as anything else you can find,
and as old as it is, the price should be reasonable.


Well, point being I already have the 485 which I got free from a
friend who was hoping to use it but couldn't find the time over the
years. But then it died shortly after I received it from him.

My original query was based more around the thought "Should I put
money into this 485?". Or if it's too much hassle/cost to fix it would
I be better served (on the repair person's advice) to sell/trade it in
for a 2465 or another 485 he has (with the possible notion that I may
"grow" into whatever I end up with)...

To which another poster in a cross-post has replied that it wouldn't
be cost effective to repair the 485 implying that I could do the work
myself...




the 485 power supply is a very tricky one;it's a series-resonant switcher
with several control loops.it's very easy to make the PS -worse- than it
was before you tried to fix it.
It's also complicated by the terrible access to parts of the PS,and the
inability to isolate scope circuit sections from the PS.

You definitely need a service manual before starting in on it.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

OK, I have a question for the group. Gonna deviate a little here from
the original post...

What is a "Storage Oscilloscope"? Is there anything it can't do that a
normal oscilloscope can (for mostly audio purposes)?

I have a chance to get a Tek 434 locally. Anything I should know about
it? Any big problems with it?

Also, would the probes be compatible between the 485 and the 434?

Thanks,
Chris

OK, I have a question for the group. Gonna deviate a little here from
the original post...

What is a "Storage Oscilloscope"? Is there anything it can't do that
a
normal oscilloscope can (for mostly audio purposes)?

I have a chance to get a Tek 434 locally. Anything I should know
about
it? Any big problems with it?

Also, would the probes be compatible between the 485 and the 434?

Thanks,
Chris

On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 11:02:59 -0800 (PST), wrote:

OK, I have a question for the group. Gonna deviate a little here from
the original post...

What is a "Storage Oscilloscope"? Is there anything it can't do that a
normal oscilloscope can (for mostly audio purposes)?

I have a chance to get a Tek 434 locally. Anything I should know about
it? Any big problems with it?

Also, would the probes be compatible between the 485 and the 434?

Thanks,
Chris

Usually a 'storage' scope will allow you to save a trace that is one
time and keep it displayed for a long(er) period of time. That is it
won't fade out.

There are some downsides, but generally a storage scope will do all
that a regular scope will do, and then some.

Most scope general purpose probes are compatible. Speciality probes
are a different issue however. When I say compatible, we're talking an
industry standard and often probles from other makes of scopes will
work just fine with whatever you have. You will have to adjust the
comphensation for a 10x probe, and sometimes they don't comphensate
properly for a diffent scope, but generally you are OK.

(I use a storage scope for my general purpose work...)

OK, I have a question for the group. Gonna deviate a little here from
the original post...

What is a "Storage Oscilloscope"? Is there anything it can't do that
a
normal oscilloscope can (for mostly audio purposes)?

I have a chance to get a Tek 434 locally. Anything I should know
about
it? Any big problems with it?

Also, would the probes be compatible between the 485 and the 434?

Thanks,
Chris

wrote in news:cdb4bcb6-0826-4a3f-a41b-
:

OK, I have a question for the group. Gonna deviate a little here from
the original post...

What is a "Storage Oscilloscope"? Is there anything it can't do that a
normal oscilloscope can (for mostly audio purposes)?

I have a chance to get a Tek 434 locally. Anything I should know about
it? Any big problems with it?

Also, would the probes be compatible between the 485 and the 434?

Thanks,
Chris

the TEK 434 is a 25 Mhz bistable storage scope;the CRT phosphor can store a
captured waveform for a short time;the CRT has flood guns that keep the
stored trace illuminated.

First Q would be price? how much for the 434? They are not worth more than
a few 100 USD.

2nd worry is the CRT condition; the storage flood guns wear out and no
longer maintain writing speed,and the 434s are old enough to worry about
the non-storage trace too.

3rd;the 434 has a very wierd power supply,and the HV is prone to arcing and
zapping the Z-axis board.the 434 HV is not something you can rebuild.
4th;434 has several TEK-made ICs,all out of production(OOP).

IMO,a 434 would not be a very wise buy.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

wrote in news:2fda6ec1-272c-4e89-b6b2-
:

OK, I have a question for the group. Gonna deviate a little here from
the original post...

What is a "Storage Oscilloscope"? Is there anything it can't do that
a
normal oscilloscope can (for mostly audio purposes)?

I have a chance to get a Tek 434 locally. Anything I should know
about
it? Any big problems with it?

oh,yeah!


Also, would the probes be compatible between the 485 and the 434?

Thanks,
Chris


IMO,skip the 434.

I suggest you buy a 2213,2215,"A" versions of those
scopes,2235,2236(100Mhz),or a working T922(15Mhz) or T932/935(35Mhz).
The T900 series are very inexpensive,simple scopes.
I have a 2213 myself.(2 Ch,60Mhz BW)

422,453,454 are all OLD scopes and a crapshoot WRT the CRT and switch life.
People really like them,though.

465's are a great scope,LOTS made,plenty of "parts scopes" available,but
still getting old.

AVOID 2300 series scopes. Avoid 200 series scopes.
Avoid 5000 series scopes.
Avoid 7300,7400,7500 series scopes.

7600 scopes are good,7704A,and 7904 are great.
A 7603 with 7A26 and 7B53A plugins is a good combo.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Nov 29, 1:04 am, "James Sweet" wrote:
"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message

...

I no longer recommend owning or using Tektronix analog scopes,
period. Yes, they were very well built, but none of them are 100%
supported and they all lose the same parts. The hybrid issue is a big
one, but CRTs, attenuators, and high voltage parts on all solid state
Teks are getting unavailable even through the back channels.

If some company decided to FULLY SUPPORT certain Tek models,
guaranteeing availability of every part from new production-or at
least every part that is getting scarce-I'd say yes.

Ironically you can still get every possible part for many tube Teks,
but the size, weight, power draw and heat make them nonstarters. That
is why the parts are available.

Buy a new scope.

New scopes are expensive, used Teks in good working order are relatively
cheap and still offer excellent performance. There's millions of them out
there and parts units can still be found. If you're a business with budget
to burn then yes, buy a fancy new scope, but if you're a hobbyist on a
budget, you can't beat an old Tek.

Ante up and buy a brand new scope. Or a used refurbed late model in
support one from a real supply house with a cal cert.

The old Teks are a bargain until the first unobtainable part fails.
The problem is the same parts fail and therefore the supplies are
exhausted. You wind up swapping out parts from a scope junkpile of
carcasses you can't bear to chuck out since they are mostly good but
one tiny weensy thing-okay, the jug isn't so tiny-and there are no
more.

From a USER standpoint the best scopes ever made were the last analog
Teks-22xx and 24xx B models with cursors, soft knobs, and "all mod
cons" and a real electrostatically deflected CRT. From a repair
standpoint they are a disaster. (There were also the aborted fetus TAS
models which are dog**** even when working.)

The best analog scope tech TODAY, is far and away Iwatsu with their
converter tube which is a small CRT with a CCD sensor in the end
instead of phosphor screen. Their scopes are well made but the user
interface is not as good as classic Teks.

New analog scope choices today come down to Iwatsu, Hameg, maybe
Hitachi. Sencore still makes their overpriced ****box and cheapo third
tier models are available too.

On Nov 29, 10:40 am, Doug McDonald
wrote:
James Sweet wrote:

New scopes are expensive, used Teks in good working order are relatively
cheap and still offer excellent performance. There's millions of them out
there and parts units can still be found. If you're a business with budget
to burn then yes, buy a fancy new scope, but if you're a hobbyist on a
budget, you can't beat an old Tek.

There is only one problem: there are no "new scopes" that will
substitute for a 485/7904 for some purposes of work on analog signals.
Period. They don't exist.

The Lecroy people proved this false when they were selling Iwatsus
here. The converter tube Iwatsu does everything a 485 does, but
backwards and in high heels, plus gives you VGA and digital image
storage.

On Nov 29, 9:24 pm, wrote:
On Nov 29, 4:39 pm, "James Sweet" wrote:



Well using a 485 for that sort of work is sort of like using a McLaren F1 to
go buy groceries. It'll do the job just fine, but there remains a huge
amount of untapped capabilities.

That said, it'll do as fine a job as as anything else you can find, and as
old as it is, the price should be reasonable.

Well, point being I already have the 485 which I got free from a
friend who was hoping to use it but couldn't find the time over the
years. But then it died shortly after I received it from him.

My original query was based more around the thought "Should I put
money into this 485?". Or if it's too much hassle/cost to fix it would
I be better served (on the repair person's advice) to sell/trade it in
for a 2465 or another 485 he has (with the possible notion that I may
"grow" into whatever I end up with)...


If it can be fixed cheaply fine, but understand it's an asset that
has a fixed and not well known finite life ahead of it. If the tube or
any of half a dozen other things goes it's like, well, it's worse
than an antique car with a shattered engine block-you can't swap in an
incorrect but close looking engine. Tek made a cornucopia of CRTs
each unique to one or two models.

On Nov 30, 4:07 pm, Jim Yanik wrote:
wrote in news:2fda6ec1-272c-4e89-b6b2-
:

OK, I have a question for the group. Gonna deviate a little here from
the original post...

What is a "Storage Oscilloscope"? Is there anything it can't do that
a
normal oscilloscope can (for mostly audio purposes)?

I have a chance to get a Tek 434 locally. Anything I should know
about
it? Any big problems with it?

oh,yeah!



Also, would the probes be compatible between the 485 and the 434?

Thanks,
Chris

IMO,skip the 434.

I suggest you buy a 2213,2215,"A" versions of those
scopes,2235,2236(100Mhz),or a working T922(15Mhz) or T932/935(35Mhz).
The T900 series are very inexpensive,simple scopes.
I have a 2213 myself.(2 Ch,60Mhz BW)

422,453,454 are all OLD scopes and a crapshoot WRT the CRT and switch life.
People really like them,though.

465's are a great scope,LOTS made,plenty of "parts scopes" available,but
still getting old.

AVOID 2300 series scopes. Avoid 200 series scopes.
Avoid 5000 series scopes.
Avoid 7300,7400,7500 series scopes.

7600 scopes are good,7704A,and 7904 are great.
A 7603 with 7A26 and 7B53A plugins is a good combo.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Hi Jim,

Another reason why I should avoid is due to lack of a feature. In my
research, I see no ability to check for phase shift ("X-Y") between
two signals. My 485 has this abillity with the "X-Y" button, which I
don't see on the 434. Right?

wrote in
:

On Nov 30, 4:07 pm, Jim Yanik wrote:
wrote in news:2fda6ec1-272c-4e89-b6b2-
:

OK, I have a question for the group. Gonna deviate a little here
from the original post...

What is a "Storage Oscilloscope"? Is there anything it can't do
that a
normal oscilloscope can (for mostly audio purposes)?

I have a chance to get a Tek 434 locally. Anything I should know
about
it? Any big problems with it?

oh,yeah!



Also, would the probes be compatible between the 485 and the 434?

Thanks,
Chris

IMO,skip the 434.

I suggest you buy a 2213,2215,"A" versions of those
scopes,2235,2236(100Mhz),or a working T922(15Mhz) or T932/935(35Mhz).
The T900 series are very inexpensive,simple scopes.
I have a 2213 myself.(2 Ch,60Mhz BW)

422,453,454 are all OLD scopes and a crapshoot WRT the CRT and switch
life. People really like them,though.

465's are a great scope,LOTS made,plenty of "parts scopes"
available,but still getting old.

AVOID 2300 series scopes. Avoid 200 series scopes.
Avoid 5000 series scopes.
Avoid 7300,7400,7500 series scopes.

7600 scopes are good,7704A,and 7904 are great.
A 7603 with 7A26 and 7B53A plugins is a good combo.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Hi Jim,

Another reason why I should avoid is due to lack of a feature. In my
research, I see no ability to check for phase shift ("X-Y") between
two signals. My 485 has this abillity with the "X-Y" button, which I
don't see on the 434. Right?


well,I can't recall specifically if it does,but I believe it does.
I think you have to put the time/div switch into X position,then use Ch2
for it's input.I'd have to see a front panel pic to be sure.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Dec 1, 8:50 am, Jim Yanik wrote:
well,I can't recall specifically if it does,but I believe it does.
I think you have to put the time/div switch into X position,then use Ch2
for it's input.I'd have to see a front panel pic to be sure.

I don't see any indication for X position on the time/div switch...?

http://a763.g.akamai.net/7/763/1644/...2/VPID/4462013

http://a763.g.akamai.net/7/763/1644/.../VPID/4462013/