Good scope?

Hey guys,

I am finding the choice in scope modules is small.

I am working with these most of time:

and in short I’d like to know whether I can find oscillosopes with more display options.

For example, I noticed I always struggle to display complex signals according to their periodicity, so I’d like a scope that can calculate it and display it immobilized, as does the vcv scope’s trigger or count modula’s freeze.

I don’t think this is what you are looking for but when I was debugging very small clicks in my module I used VCV Library - Submarine HS-101 and then hooked it up to a clock or trigger so that it would only capture one sample. When I didn’t have a clock or trigger I would route the signal through a delay then press capture once I heard the click, and the delay would be long enough that I could capture the issue on the scope.

1 Like

I’ve considered making a trigger module just to go along with Submarine. To get the features I’m used to from “real” scopes in the the 70’s… Trigger delay (which you mention) also AC coupled

1 Like

I really miss Omri’s scope from V1 - it had different quality (sampling frequency) settings and at highest quality it would capture pretty much everything.

1 Like

There may be a new one coming with some nice options:

15 Likes

Any updates on this?

It has been part of Cardinal for a while, unlikely to ever come to VCV due to library restrictions.

What restrictions are you referring to?

1 Like

I’m curious too. Nice scope.

the one saying opensource modules are not allowed to be commercial, even though nothing on the GPLv3 terms forbids this.

was mentioned a few times already on these forums, with good points for why it would be a good idea. for one it is a nice way to get compensation for work done on Rack modules, without having to keep it closed-source/proprietary :face_vomiting:

waiting for the day when that rule changes…

3 Likes

That seems like a strange self-imposed restriction. Has they ever said why they want to punish open source devs that way?

because a few people complain very loudly that what they are paying for is available “for free” elsewhere. which is not exactly 100% true anyway since the payment would be for the service and convenience of integration and automatic updates too.

you know the “I had to pay for it, so you must too” entitled shitty attitude.

I dont think we should cater to these kinds of people, but what do I know… maybe they are more common in certain parts of the world?

1 Like

That’s wild. The original dev guy seemed very well versed in the different software licenses, you’d think he’d understand that “Open Source” has nothing to do with whether you pay money for the software. RedHat for example is Open Source and my company pays them more yearly than I paid for my house.

Someone needs to attend an RMS lecture or two.

1 Like

Someone needs to attend an RMS lecture or two.

RMS is a sexist creep. Open Source is bigger than him, thank God.

4 Likes

It is their platform, so their rules. Just unfortunate that this hurts opensource developers.

The main counter-response to this request for commercial foss modules has been “just ask for donations”, which is quite ridiculous to me.

1 Like

LOL, what do you mean?

it is somewhat of a thing I am noticing when dealing with customer support for my company, certain regions of the world seem to have a more likelyhood of people complaining very loudly and on a regular basis where other regions are more understanding of a company’s internal struggles.

3 Likes

Indeed, it is even worse than that, thanks for mentioning it, I had no idea and it is realy bad…

Not really what quantuum was looking for, but this is a nifty scope:

The trace on T’s Sight slows down as it squishes to the left, so you get to see short-term features as well as long-term features at the same time.

Submarine EO-102 Envelope scope is a good scope. I find the cursors (Indices) very useful.

2 Likes