Upgrading to the Siglent SDS1104X-E versus my OWON SDS7102V - thoughts?

[MartyMacGyver]

I understand the SDS1104X-E can be upgraded to 200MHz in firmware, which is an attractive feature.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds1104x-e-hack-to-200mhz-and-full-options/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-ads-firmware-file-format/

Hopefully that's still possible for recently-purchased models.

That said, I'd be upgrading from my old OWON SDS7102V scope. While I'd obviously have 2 more channels and what appears to be a better display, I wonder what are the drawbacks, if any? The lack of an EXT trigger input seems to be the most obvious thing, and I don't think this scope takes a battery (but that was the WORST thing about the OWON - the battery was terrible from day one).

[MartyMacGyver]

I'll add that OWON's XDS3104AE is a consideration, but I'm not sure how well it compares.

[SMB784]

The lack of an external trigger on the SDS1104X-E is a non-issue, considering the fact that you can trigger on any of the four channels - thereby giving you four possible trigger source options - while the 2 channel + EXT trigger of the OWON only gives you three trigger source options.

Also there are ways of upgrading the bandwidth and all options for the SDS1104X-E for free that are firmware/hardware agnostic

[MartyMacGyver]

Yeah, I'm not that concerned about the EXT. And as long as the firmware hacks aren't blocked now it will be nice to have that extra functionality.

As long as it's a solid upgrade from my current scope, I'll be happy.

[SMB784]

You can now obtain the bandwidth and option upgrades without hacking the firmware.

[MartyMacGyver]

You can now obtain the bandwidth and option upgrades for free without hacking the firmware.

Really? How so?? Link?

[tautech]

You can now obtain the bandwidth and option upgrades for free without hacking the firmware.

Really? How so?? Link?

In a thread you missed:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/unlocking-siglent-sds1104x-e-step-by-step/

[MartyMacGyver]

In a thread you missed:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/unlocking-siglent-sds1104x-e-step-by-step/

Well, then - it looks like I'll be upgrading!

[daveyk]

I understand the SDS1104X-E can be upgraded to 200MHz in firmware, which is an attractive feature.

I just paid the extra and bought the SDS1204x-E.

It has a few quarks, but I have been able to work around the nicely. Operational learning curve isn’t too bad. Email tech support is excellent and they seem to take software suggestions and pass then on to their engineering team.

I measure and image Ultrasonic pulser images. I found that this 200MHz s one compares very favorably to a $8k Tektronix TDS-3034 scope. These pulses range from -90volts to -500volts with ~8ns fall times and 80ns - 230ns pulse width (measured at -10% down from 0%, not at 50%.

You can not change the pulse width measurement reference levels from 50% to what you need (-10% in my case), so you have to use the vertical cursors to properly measure pulse width. I have been told my need is in the software engineering hand now. Using a 100:1 probe the only difference in meAsurement compared to the expensive Tektronix is about 1ns higher fall time reading. The Siglent will report 9ns where the Tek reports 8ns. The specification To compare to is typically “<15ns”, so that is not an issue.

Except for my need for variable pulse width measurement reference points, I find it works damn close to Tek TDS3000 series scopes costing a lot, lot more.

It’s display is really nice and it is very lite in weight, perhaps too lite - lol. If I really wanted to spend $8000 to $11000 for a new scope, I would get a Tek TDS3034 or aTDS3054, but being cheap, I’ll take the $700 Siglent.

Oh and using VB and VBA programming environment, I find the Siglent network communications much, much faster than GPIB!

Dave


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MrW0lf]

You can not change the pulse width measurement reference levels from 50% to what you need (-10% in my case), so you have to use the vertical cursors to properly measure pulse width.

Use math channel to create virtual offset or apply physical DC offset to move zero level? Or it will "AC couple" anyway to pulse (in which case more complex modding of pulse on math channel might still help)?

[tautech]

You can not change the pulse width measurement reference levels from 50% to what you need (-10% in my case), so you have to use the vertical cursors to properly measure pulse width.

Use math channel to create virtual offset or apply physical DC offset to move zero level? Or it will "AC couple" anyway to pulse (in which case more complex modding of pulse on math channel might still help)?

For some background on what Dave is looking for see this thread.....a few posts in:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/tektronix-tds3032-forgets-its-gpib-address-setting/

The T@L measurement for the Siglents is Trigger level to 50% level across a pulse.....a measurement that I don't see a use for, whereas a measurement at the same level definable by the user.......

[Performa01]

You can not change the pulse width measurement reference levels from 50% to what you need (-10% in my case), so you have to use the vertical cursors to properly measure pulse width.

Use math channel to create virtual offset or apply physical DC offset to move zero level? Or it will "AC couple" anyway to pulse (in which case more complex modding of pulse on math channel might still help)?

Automatic pulse width measurements use (Vtop + Vbase) / 2 as the 50% reference level, so any DC offset will just be ignored.

It is similar for pretty much all time measurements, where a certain reference level is used.


I support the request for user-definable reference levels, but this means a significant change in the UI, as up to now automatic measurements don't need/have any parameters.

Apart from pulse width, there are also duty, rise and fall and maybe even channel delay measurements which would be candidates for custom reference levels.

[2N3055]

Some other scopes define lower, middle and upper threshold.  By default at 10%, 50%, and 90%. Some measurements use 10  lower and upper (rise time for instance) and some use middle point (like pulse width.) All 3 threshold are user settable. 

[MrW0lf]

Automatic pulse width measurements use (Vtop + Vbase) / 2 as the 50% reference level, so any DC offset will just be ignored.

Not if fiddle with signal a little...

[MartyMacGyver]

My new scope (and new SDG2042X signal generator) arrived today! now to begin tweaking them...

The scope should be straightforward... the firmware for the SDG2042X, though, seems to be MIA:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/the-siglent-sdg2042x-thread/msg2066593/#msg2066593

Fingers crossed on that one...

Edit: SDG2042X is now an SDG2122X! It was a little more complicated but it's all good now as best I can tell. A nice holiday upgrade overall!