Jeremy (G0HZU)
Thanks for your comments. I've seen that you're interested in the topic via discussions in several other forums and I've found your contributions to be useful and interesting. You mentioned the HP11848A and I've been in the process of comparing it with an HP11729B, of which several examples have recently appeared on eBay. To cut a long story short the 11848A is the preferred model performance-wise, although both have a lower out-of-the-box signal input limit of 5 MHz, with some level of complication when testing below 20 MHz. I suspect that one could optimize both for HF use and, with a bit of re-working, I may even be able to coax some MF operation from the equipment. However, looking at the price of the used HP11729B and the likely effort involved, the resources may well be better directed to a new system.
I suspect the Measurement Computing DAQ boxes would be a viable path. Looking a bit more closely at the MC site, I see that they have Data Translation DAQ systems which are actually called "dynamic signal analysers" and offer some complementary (but not complimentary) proprietary Fourier analysis software. One 2 or 3-channel system is described at
https://www.mccdaq.com/Products/Sound-Vibration-DAQ/DT9847. It's not a bargain basement price by ham standards (USD 4500 for hardware + advanced Fourier analysis + basic general purpose analysis) but, compared with the original price of the HP3561A mentioned by HH75, it'd certainly be viable for the serious user. I mention this largely because it's about the closest contemporary substitute I've found for the HP series instruments. With a maximum baseband analysis bandwidth of 100 kHz the combination of the baseband system and an RF spectrum analyser would complete the measurement suite, as in the HP system.
Exactly how the MC lower cost options would compare withe the Dynamic Signal Analyser hardware is an open question and perhaps some advice from one of their application engineers would be worthwhile. I note that if one adds up the desirable features in the lower cost DAQs, the difference between those units and the Data Translation DSA is not as great as it first appears. Desirable features include true simultaneous sampling of channels and a couple of DACs, just to make the box more useful in general DSP applications.
Another open question is whether SIGVIEW works with the Data Translation DSA hardware (as opposed to the MC DAQs). If so, I suspect that's a lower cost software environment in which to establish oneself. Still, the software will make or break the integrated system so some careful testing would be in order. SIGVIEW (at least) offers a trial version, which would certainly be handy.
73, Peter.