[Milsurplus] Sig gens

[Bill Cromwell]

Hi,

I have "toys" too. The biggest problem with the toys is lack of 
shielding/isolation. Your nicest scope is useless when measuring the 
output of the "toy" signal generator at low levels because of all the 
leakage your receiver - the device under test- can hear right through 
the air and coupled by your hand capacitance, etc. Look in one of those 
"real" signal generators and note all of the shielding, bypassing, etc. 
I have a V/UHF signal generator and the circuitry is behind *three* 
layers of metal cabinet and there are other metal boxes hiding the 
individual stages inside.

Those of us with the "toys" will do the best we can. We should always 
know the limitations of our gear. Meanwhile, do not let this woeful, 
gloomy news stop you from enjoying the hobby:)

73,

Bill  KU8H

On 3/20/20 3:28 PM, hwhall at compuserve.com wrote:
> Sounds like a practical viewpoint.  When we're restoring old warhorses, 
> are we really shooting for right-out-of-the-factory performance or is it 
> sufficient to get them operating reasonably well?  And wouldn't 
> monitoring the sig gen input with a scope give good enough numbers for 
> sensitivity measurements, anyway? (Asks the guy with only "toys" on the 
> workbench.)
> 
> Wayne
> WB4OGM
> 


-- 
bark less - wag more