EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
Electronics => Beginners => Topic started by: Tech77997 on March 17, 2020, 09:06:12 pm
-
In 2015, Dave recommended the Rigol DS1054Z as the best oscilloscope for the beginner.
I am a beginner and would like to buy the best oscilloscope for the lowest price possible.
Consider the oscilloscope at the link below: it has 2 channels instead of 4, and probably lacks in other features that the DS1054Z has. But, again, I am a beginner and would like to ask you, the expert: could it be that now in 2020 this oscilloscope is better for the beginner than the DS1054Z, especially because of its much more affordable price?
https://www.amazon.com/Hantek-DSO5072P-Digital-Oscilloscope-Bandwidth/dp/B00RJPXB6Y/ref=sxbs_sxwds-stvp?crid=3J4T4OQKZIIJD&cv_ct_cx=siglent+oscilloscope&keywords=siglent+oscilloscope&pd_rd_i=B00RJPXB6Y&pd_rd_r=d03a597f-9697-49f2-bac8-ab3388111999&pd_rd_w=TgRlI&pd_rd_wg=gZ8yc&pf_rd_p=a6d018ad-f20b-46c9-8920-433972c7d9b7&pf_rd_r=XQZ53CCBQFX73HP5DMHV&psc=1&qid=1584476763&sprefix=siglent+%2Caps%2C196#customerReviews (https://www.amazon.com/Hantek-DSO5072P-Digital-Oscilloscope-Bandwidth/dp/B00RJPXB6Y/ref=sxbs_sxwds-stvp?crid=3J4T4OQKZIIJD&cv_ct_cx=siglent+oscilloscope&keywords=siglent+oscilloscope&pd_rd_i=B00RJPXB6Y&pd_rd_r=d03a597f-9697-49f2-bac8-ab3388111999&pd_rd_w=TgRlI&pd_rd_wg=gZ8yc&pf_rd_p=a6d018ad-f20b-46c9-8920-433972c7d9b7&pf_rd_r=XQZ53CCBQFX73HP5DMHV&psc=1&qid=1584476763&sprefix=siglent+%2Caps%2C196#customerReviews)
-
40 kpts memory size is a huge deal breaker. Seriously, save up a bit of money and get 1054z. It is a much better scope.
-
I'm a beginner as well and have been doing a lot of research on oscilloscopes. There's a ton of things to look out for and since I haven't used one yet it's really hard to know what the most important features are. Starting out I would say these are the most important bandwidth, number of channels, sampling rate, memory depth. Trigger types really depend on the level of scope but most entry level ones don't have a lot of options in this department.
Rigol has some videos that talk about what some of the characteristics are here: https://www.rigolcanada.com/scopebasics/ (https://www.rigolcanada.com/scopebasics/) Make sure to watch the one on bandwidth and memory depth.
Also read these two PDFs.
https://www.newark.com/wcsstore/ExtendedSitesCatalogAssetStore/cms/asset/images/americas/common/storefront/tektronix/7136_Oscilloscope-Basics-Guide.pdf (https://www.newark.com/wcsstore/ExtendedSitesCatalogAssetStore/cms/asset/images/americas/common/storefront/tektronix/7136_Oscilloscope-Basics-Guide.pdf)
https://www.mouser.com/pdfdocs/Tektronix12_things_to_consider1.pdf (https://www.mouser.com/pdfdocs/Tektronix12_things_to_consider1.pdf)
I've read some reviews of Hantek DSO and none of them were really impressive. I think you can get a better scope for just about the same money if you buy one locally. That way more of your money goes toward the actual scope instead of shipping.
Looking at the specs the two things that stand out are the very low memory depth, which is only 40Kpts. The rise time is 5ns.
I've been looking at a Siglent SDS1000CML+. The price is little higher than the Hantek but you get 100Mhz bandwidth, 2Mpts memory depth and rise time of 3.5ns. There is apparently a hack to get this scope's bandwidth bumped up to 150Mhz.
Check out this review by Jack Ganssle of the Siglent SDS1000CML+. It's from 2014 so this scope has been out for some time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9AOEa2k0Uc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9AOEa2k0Uc)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5H69SssvLA&t=72s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5H69SssvLA&t=72s)
Rigol offers the DS1102E which has similar specs as the SDS1000CML+ but the memory depth drops to 1Mpts and it has a smaller screen. I found this little demo useful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4oUdqm-nZw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4oUdqm-nZw)
Good luck.
-
If you want the lowest price possible without getting a piece of junk, the Hantek is a reasonable choice. If you can afford the Rigol DS1054Z it does offer quite a bit more useful functionality.
-
Many thanks for your detailed response and for your time. I will be sure to carefully study the resources you have provided.
-
Many thanks to all of your input.
-
You might want to consider the Siglent range for value for money. I was in the same position as you now seem to be a year last November and, after some serious youtube viewing, settled on the SDS1202X-E as a first DSO purchase. I figured that a two channel 'scope would be a sensible starting point for my initial needs since if I ever started hankering for something better, the experience gained would leave me much better informed in any future buying decision.
I've tracked down a few youtube review videos which might prove useful.
https://youtu.be/64kxGDOg7es
https://youtu.be/laK1v2Zas4o
https://youtu.be/slBXLf4YKtA
Oh, and BTW (I almost forgot), I've been very happy with this DSO which is still serving my needs (the hankering for something better hasn't happened yet :) ).
JBG
-
Thank you Johnny. I will be sure to watch these videos.
-
Thank you Johnny. I will be sure to watch these videos.
The first 2 are of a scope I supplied to Defpom. :)
SDS1202X-E have been a best seller here in NZ but that's currently challenged by the 4ch SDS1104X-E which while being very similar is a more capable scope.
Do you homework and take your time and ask lots of questions. ;)
-
Interesting question! Maybe 2020 is a good time for Dave to update the best beginners O'scope suggestion. (Mr. EEVBLOG are you hearing this).
In 2015, Dave recommended the Rigol DS1054Z as the best oscilloscope for the beginner.
I am a beginner and would like to buy the best oscilloscope for the lowest price possible.
It is often a good idea to consider the used market as that can lead to much more scope for a given price.
Consider the oscilloscope at the link below: it has 2 channels instead of 4, and probably lacks in other features that the DS1054Z has. But, again, I am a beginner and would like to ask you, the expert: could it be that now in 2020 this oscilloscope is better for the beginner than the DS1054Z, especially because of its much more affordable price?
https://www.amazon.com/Hantek-DSO5072P-Digital-Oscilloscope-Bandwidth/dp/B00RJPXB6Y/ref=sxbs_sxwds-stvp?crid=3J4T4OQKZIIJD&cv_ct_cx=siglent+oscilloscope&keywords=siglent+oscilloscope&pd_rd_i=B00RJPXB6Y&pd_rd_r=d03a597f-9697-49f2-bac8-ab3388111999&pd_rd_w=TgRlI&pd_rd_wg=gZ8yc&pf_rd_p=a6d018ad-f20b-46c9-8920-433972c7d9b7&pf_rd_r=XQZ53CCBQFX73HP5DMHV&psc=1&qid=1584476763&sprefix=siglent+%2Caps%2C196#customerReviews (https://www.amazon.com/Hantek-DSO5072P-Digital-Oscilloscope-Bandwidth/dp/B00RJPXB6Y/ref=sxbs_sxwds-stvp?crid=3J4T4OQKZIIJD&cv_ct_cx=siglent+oscilloscope&keywords=siglent+oscilloscope&pd_rd_i=B00RJPXB6Y&pd_rd_r=d03a597f-9697-49f2-bac8-ab3388111999&pd_rd_w=TgRlI&pd_rd_wg=gZ8yc&pf_rd_p=a6d018ad-f20b-46c9-8920-433972c7d9b7&pf_rd_r=XQZ53CCBQFX73HP5DMHV&psc=1&qid=1584476763&sprefix=siglent+%2Caps%2C196#customerReviews)
The problem with many of these no name products is that the spec sheets alone don't mean much. If the manufacture and the quality of the design don't back up the machines then they are basically junk. Since the name Hantek doesn't ring a bell at the moment I have no idea if the scope is worth the money. The reviews on Amazon are bit of a joke as one guy gave it 5 stars but said they need capacitor replacement. Many other postings give it 5 stars but seem to never consider technical merit (sort of like a beauty contest).
This is why technical reviews like Dave does are so important as they always cover device performance but also usability. On modern O'scopes that i much the onscreen menus as it is the knobs. So yeah maybe we need a a 2020 update from Dave.
-
Thanks again! All very helpful.
-
The problem with many of these no name products is that the spec sheets alone don't mean much. If the manufacture and the quality of the design don't back up the machines then they are basically junk. Since the name Hantek doesn't ring a bell at the moment I have no idea if the scope is worth the money. The reviews on Amazon are bit of a joke as one guy gave it 5 stars but said they need capacitor replacement. Many other postings give it 5 stars but seem to never consider technical merit (sort of like a beauty contest).
Hantek is a well established name, with a fairly long history. All Amazon reviews are a joke. A huge number of them were clearly written for an entirely different product. Having used a Hantek a few times I'd give it 5 stars at $215.
-
I have the Siglent SDS1102CML. It was less expensive than the Rigol at the time, and it was Jack Ganssle's review and a few others that pushed me to the Siglent.
Caveats, I don't really do much analog, and every time I've actually had a use for a scope, this one has done the business as Dave likes to say. Someone more involved in analog electronics may find a different need. I did luck out and got my on eBay, new in box, with a last minute bid, so that's a good part of how I got it for well under the MSRP.
I wouldn't hesitate to get another Siglent if I needed a scope with more features though.
-
The problem with many of these no name products is that the spec sheets alone don't mean much. If the manufacture and the quality of the design don't back up the machines then they are basically junk. Since the name Hantek doesn't ring a bell at the moment I have no idea if the scope is worth the money. The reviews on Amazon are bit of a joke as one guy gave it 5 stars but said they need capacitor replacement. Many other postings give it 5 stars but seem to never consider technical merit (sort of like a beauty contest).
Hantek is a well established name, with a fairly long history. All Amazon reviews are a joke. A huge number of them were clearly written for an entirely different product. Having used a Hantek a few times I'd give it 5 stars at $215.
Well it is good that somebody has heard of them, I'm not sure why it didn't ring a bell here.
-
I'm also in thee market of a starter scope and started this topic a couple of days, ago. Not trying to take away from your form, but make sure to read through this topic.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/starter-scope/msg2969952/#msg2969952 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/starter-scope/msg2969952/#msg2969952)
I ended up going with digilent analog discovery 2, for now and will get a real scope in the feature, if you are a student they have great deals atm.
Thank you,
Joe
-
I'm also in thee market of a starter scope and started this topic a couple of days, ago. Not trying to take away from your form, but make sure to read through this topic.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/starter-scope/msg2969952/#msg2969952 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/starter-scope/msg2969952/#msg2969952)
I ended up going with digilent analog discovery 2, for now and will get a real scope in the feature, if you are a student they have great deals atm.
Thank you,
Joe
Thank you for that link. I rather doubt the OP would be interested in the Discovery 2 though. I read the whole topic thread but what really caught my attention was mention of the impossibility of being able to purchase analogue CRT based 'scopes other than for ancient 2nd hand examples. My first thought was "At last! A chance to express my :wtf: reaction (when I'd been browsing Banggood's oscilloscopes and accessories section a few months back) in an EEVblog posting! >:D" . The following links will save me any further explanation, I'm sure. :)
https://uk.banggood.com/110V220V-V-212A-MCH-Dual-Channel-20MHz-Analog-Oscilloscope-with-Imported-CTR-and-6-Digit-Frequency-Meter-p-1550405.html?rmmds=search (https://uk.banggood.com/110V220V-V-212A-MCH-Dual-Channel-20MHz-Analog-Oscilloscope-with-Imported-CTR-and-6-Digit-Frequency-Meter-p-1550405.html?rmmds=search)
https://uk.banggood.com/V-5030-Portable-Oscilloscope-30Mhz-Analog-Oscilloscope-with-6-CRT-Dual-Channel-Oscilloscope-p-1552088.html?rmmds=search (https://uk.banggood.com/V-5030-Portable-Oscilloscope-30Mhz-Analog-Oscilloscope-with-6-CRT-Dual-Channel-Oscilloscope-p-1552088.html?rmmds=search)
https://uk.banggood.com/V-5040-Handheld-Oscilloscope-40Mhz-Analog-Oscilloscope-with-6-CRT-2-Channels-2-Tracing-Dual-Channel-Analogue-Oscilloscope-p-1550407.html?rmmds=search (https://uk.banggood.com/V-5040-Handheld-Oscilloscope-40Mhz-Analog-Oscilloscope-with-6-CRT-2-Channels-2-Tracing-Dual-Channel-Analogue-Oscilloscope-p-1550407.html?rmmds=search)
I'm also grateful for that link to your topic thread which had led me to revisit the 'scopes section of BG's site since it revealed a cheaper alternative to those horrible (and over-priced) Cleqee black plastic shrouded 50 ohm in line terminators I'd disregarded as suitable alternatives to the BNC T adapters with 50 ohm terminators I'm currently using.
Searching for specific items on BG's web pages all too often fails to show all (or even any of) the qualifying items no matter how you phrase your search term and this was yet another example of this deficiency of e-marketing by BG (and Ebay and Amazon - I'm sure this must be a deliberate policy to force the hapless consumer into spending as much time browsing their sites as possible in fruitless search efforts in the hopes of wringing another impulse purchase out of them). It's this aspect of on-line shopping that annoys me the most (often to the point of screaming my curses at BG, Ebay, Amazon and their spawn from the 'comfort' of my desktop computer).
Until I'd revisited the 'scopes section to find the relevant links to those analogue 'scopes, I never knew that BG were selling cheaper and better (FVSVO 'better') thru-line 50 ohm BNC terminator alternatives to those cheap 'n' nasty Cleqee examples of crappiness. I doubt these in-line terminators are any better than the BNC terminators I'm already using in regard of their construction but they do offer a less cluttered solution than the BNC T adapter with terminator kludge I'm currently obliged to use for the want of anything better.
I'm off now to more thoroughly browse the 'scopes section to make sure I haven't overlooked any other useful accessories even though I doubt there's any more 'gems' than those in line terminators to be had (leave no stone unturned... twice over! ;) ).
That was it, there weren't any more 'gems' to find (other than to spot the 'missing' 30MHz analogue 'scope and add to the links above).
JBG
-
https://uk.banggood.com/V-5040-Handheld-Oscilloscope-40Mhz-Analog-Oscilloscope-with-6-CRT-2-Channels-2-Tracing-Dual-Channel-Analogue-Oscilloscope-p-1550407.html?rmmds=search (https://uk.banggood.com/V-5040-Handheld-Oscilloscope-40Mhz-Analog-Oscilloscope-with-6-CRT-2-Channels-2-Tracing-Dual-Channel-Analogue-Oscilloscope-p-1550407.html?rmmds=search)
Its good to see some inclusivity, with provision of handheld products for the giant market. ;)
-
A word of caution to the OP...
One thing that is absolutely guaranteed in internet discussions like these (eg, "what's the best XXXX?") is that you will get 1,264 different suggestions from people who only are aware of their own needs, not yours. You'll hear of awesome features on one scope, and other awesome features on another, but in the end you may not need any of them. Or maybe you'll need all of them plus more.
A bit like asking "what vehicle should i buy?". Well, if you're hauling freight....
If you want some relevant info, I suggest you consider the following:
1. What's your budget, realizing that the scope is usually just one component of a whole set of test gear you might need?
2. What kind of stuff do you envision yourself using the scope for? This is real important to think about.
3. Do you need a good computer interface and associated PC software?
4. How serious is this scope thing? A hobby you might drop in a few years, or is this a lifetime thing?
And so on...
-
Check out this review by Jack Ganssle of the Siglent SDS1000CML+. It's from 2014 so this scope has been out for some time.
His review is the non + version. The CML+ versions were launched 30th May 2016, there's never been a proper review of them AFAIK.
Main difference from the non + is the higher 800x480 screen resolution.
-
Check out this review by Jack Ganssle of the Siglent SDS1000CML+. It's from 2014 so this scope has been out for some time.
His review is the non + version. The CML+ versions were launched 30th May 2016, there's never been a proper review of them AFAIK.
Main difference from the non + is the higher 800x480 screen resolution.
And the addition of LAN connectivity.
-
I sometimes giggle at the suggestion that newomers to the scope world enumerate their use cases before deciding on a scope. In many cases, they have never used a scope and other than x(t), they have no idea what it can do. Any thoughts they have will be just a small subset of their ultimate uses.
That means the best source for selecting a scope is to ask opinions of other users and this works both ways. Some of the suggestions come from very experienced users and others come from somebody who started last week. Amazon reviews are a lot like that: Who is doing the review and what's their experience?
OK, I giggle, but I don't have a better suggestion. There are a lot of very knowledgeable folks hanging around here and there still isn't a consensus. That's because "for a few dollars more, you can get...".
When I bought my Rigol DS1054Z a couple of years ago, there was a lot of discussion about the scope, not all good, but it was definitely a frequently mentioned product. I didn't have any experience with DSOs but decades of using an analog scope (even then, I only used the most obvious functionality). So, I bought it and have never regretted it. There are quite a few users here on EEVblog. That scope owned the entry level market until Siglent came out with the SDS1104X-E and may still just because it is a very well known product.
Today, I would be looking at the Siglent line because they are a newer design and have at least one model at 4 channels, 200 MHz. Bandwidth is the most important specification right after channels. If you want to use your scope as some kind of mini logic analyzer, 4 channels is far better than 2. I would think the SDS1104X-E unlocked to 200 MHz would be the hot setup or maybe pay the premium and have it unlocked at the factory as the much more costly SDS1204X-E.
Still, on the positive side for the Rigol, there have been several firmware upgrades and all of the known bugs have been killed. There are still design related complaints but it isn't a bug if it was never designed to have some requested feature. There have been some issues with the Siglents but I haven't followed along. I have no idea whether there are open issues but it is worth researching.
On the matter of 'bugs': Sometimes these failings are at the margins of usage. If you are never going to do something that is reported as a problem, what difference does it make? Very experienced users are always playing at the margins, not necessarily true for hobbyists.
I guess my only suggestion is to research the main players in the entry level market and that cuts it down to Siglent and Rigol (in my opinion only). After weeks of agonizing over details, reading reviews, watching videos, I would still buy the SDS1104X-E simply because the GUI is faster than the Rigol's. And it's newer and I like shiny things!
-
My only point is that there are clearly a handful of important criteria when choosing a scope, and we should at least know some of the basic needs.
Money is usually #1. How many times I've seen people advise to spend $12,000 on something, and the requestor says, "umm, I was looking more towards, like, $200".
Also, is the requestor in school to become an engineer, with a particular interest in a certain area? Power? Digital? Audio? Computers? How many times I've seen people say "Oh, you absolutely MUST have 4 channels and 2GHz of bandwidth and an MSO and spend $6,000". Usually that's nonsense. Certain areas of learning/interest don't require high bandwidth. Or digital. Or big expense. Heck, maybe a crap USB or handheld scope is fine. Or maybe they want some excellent integration with computer software. Maybe they want to integrate with Matlab. Or maybe they want to learn about basic electricity.
Anyway, you get the point. What I need may be irrelevant to anyone else.
-
My only point is that there are clearly a handful of important criteria when choosing a scope, and we should at least know some of the basic needs.
Money is usually #1. How many times I've seen people advise to spend $12,000 on something, and the requestor says, "umm, I was looking more towards, like, $200".
Also, is the requestor in school to become an engineer, with a particular interest in a certain area? Power? Digital? Audio? Computers? How many times I've seen people say "Oh, you absolutely MUST have 4 channels and 2GHz of bandwidth and an MSO and spend $6,000". Usually that's nonsense. Certain areas of learning/interest don't require high bandwidth. Or digital. Or big expense. Heck, maybe a crap USB or handheld scope is fine. Or maybe they want some excellent integration with computer software. Maybe they want to integrate with Matlab. Or maybe they want to learn about basic electricity.
Anyway, you get the point. What I need may be irrelevant to anyone else.
Nope. What you think you need could well be a limitation that holds you back from further/future development.
-
My only point is that there are clearly a handful of important criteria when choosing a scope, and we should at least know some of the basic needs.
Money is usually #1. How many times I've seen people advise to spend $12,000 on something, and the requestor says, "umm, I was looking more towards, like, $200".
Also, is the requestor in school to become an engineer, with a particular interest in a certain area? Power? Digital? Audio? Computers? How many times I've seen people say "Oh, you absolutely MUST have 4 channels and 2GHz of bandwidth and an MSO and spend $6,000". Usually that's nonsense. Certain areas of learning/interest don't require high bandwidth. Or digital. Or big expense. Heck, maybe a crap USB or handheld scope is fine. Or maybe they want some excellent integration with computer software. Maybe they want to integrate with Matlab. Or maybe they want to learn about basic electricity.
Anyway, you get the point. What I need may be irrelevant to anyone else.
Nope. What you think you need could well be a limitation that holds you back from further/future development.
Thats the case with absolutely EVERYTHING you buy. EVERYTHING.
Why buy a quart of milk when you might need more cuz your car might break down and you can't go the supermarket next week?
Why buy a $1,500 low end computer when you might decide in 3 years to run software that requires 64 GB and high speed drives and 4 high end GPU's and a 1,200 watt power supply that'll cost $8,000?
Why not buy a $28,000 scope? Heck, you may start up a high tech research firm as soon as you get out of school.
Anyone can wave their hands and come up with an infinite number of hypotheticals to justify something they like.
On the other hand, if you can't describe what you want the scope for in the first place, maybe you don't really need it.
-
I guess by the time a user needs a high end scope, they'll know it! They won't be asking "which entry level scope" on EEVblog.
Even if their interests evolve beyond the entry level scope, the resale value should be at least 50% of cost and they can write the other half off to education. Now they know what they really need. Sell the entry level scope and buy the higher level scope. Or not... There's always a use for more test equipment.
Education has never been free!
The important thing is to get started. I'm going to point out the Siglents but my Rigol does a terrific job. For bandwidth, I have a well used Tek 485 rated at 350 MHz. It cost about $200 and provided about 12 years of great service before I bought the Rigol. As nice as it is, it can't do any of the advanced features of the Rigol. All it can do is display squiggly lines. A long time ago, back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, that was sufficient. No longer!
-
I guess by the time a user needs a high end scope, they'll know it!
For sure but never underestimate what the capable EE can do with just a basic DSO......never !
I've seen world leading industry development done with just a 60 MHz Tek DSO and an old shitter at that !
The point is the current market offerings will let you go a loooong way once experience is gained as more and more functionality gets crammed into these truly capable little boxes. They are not just scopes anymore but a toolbox of capability that the newbie can grow into.
Maybe just 15 yrs ago I got my first scope when both digital and power electronics was my greatest interest and in very short time I yearned for a DSO with good input voltage ratings should I make a mistake when working with mains and of course the requirement to capture events so to analyse them.
Now some years later I well know how capable the modern DSO is and with past experience gained would never hesitate to recommend a 2 or 4ch 100 MHz DSO for the vast majority of needs to most anyone.
Many I fear sell themselves short when selecting their first scope. :(
-
Also keep in mind for those who don't have hundreds of $$ sitting around (y'know, like the undergraduates trying to pay off their iPhone XI's and hoping Mom & Dad will give them a good allowance :D ), there are options out there if you're just trying to learn some basics. There's a whole market of $50 handheld scopes (with like 200kHz bandwidth, 50V pk, single channel, etc.) that get some great reviews and seem to be a reasonable alternative for those just starting out. Probably great for stuff like Arduino or RPi projects, learning about electronic components and putting together simple circuits, etc.
Now I know we males/engineers have this "WHAT?? Real men only buy stuff with all these cool features. Anyone else is a complete wimp..." attitude, but if you ignore all that I'm sure these low priced devices serve a very big market. And they seem especially popular in the auto and audio industries.
Remember, not everyone needs 0.0001 femtosecond rise times :D
Seems to me a nice option is to try out something like that, and use it as a way to figure out your next steps (if any). And no matter what, you will always have a low priced, portable scope at hand that's probably fine for a bunch of quick uses.
Does anyone have any experience with any of those. I may even pick one up just to try it out.
-
Also keep in mind for those who don't have hundreds of $$ sitting around (y'know, like the undergraduates trying to pay off their iPhone XI's and hoping Mom & Dad will give them a good allowance :D )
How odd you should bring that up. My wife and I are financing the grandson's education and it's fairly pricey. He is taking a Circuits class (even though his major is ME) and the lab class uses Analog Discovery 2s. I'm a huge fan of this device. No, it isn't $50 but it has a ton of capability.
Does anyone have any experience with any of those. I may even pick one up just to try it out.
Starting at message 52, I present 3 "Circuits" experiments (not contiguous, scroll down) that are easily done with the AD2 and considerably more difficult without. Somehow, things like the Bode' Plot, Forced Response and Impedance seem important to me.
One of the students in that thread bought the device at a substantial Student Discount plus an additional 10% discount. Still nowhere near $50... Alas, I had to pay street price and I still think it is the best bang for the buck I have ever bought.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/starter-scope/50/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/starter-scope/50/)
The allowable voltage range is limited as is the bandwidth but the bundle of software defined tools is lengthy. For the curious, the Waveforms software is free to download and works in a kind of "Demo" mode. At least look at the list of tools, it is extensive!
-
Hi Everyone,
All this discussion about entry level 'scopes led me to wonder about where the latest technological developments in this field have extended the specifications at the exit level end of this spectrum. I did a search for "the most expensive 'scope teardown" and, not surprisingly, rediscovered this review and teardown of a 1.3 million dollar 4 channel 110GHz B/W 256GSa/s per channel Keysight monster.
https://youtu.be/DXYje2B04xE
For the few in this topic thread who haven't already seen this, I highly recommend the 54 minute investment of time (that you'll never get back - isn't it always thus?) to view this video in full. For those who can't afford to spend even 54 minutes of their precious time, there's a description that succinctly describes the key points beneath the video which will only consume some two (or three - allowing extra time to wipe away the drool) minutes of your life.
Either way, this should help re-calibrate your expectations, if not provide a brief respite from any obsessing over the best bang for your buck entry level 'scope choices.
If you're anything like me, you'll be nodding your head by the time you reach the end of the video, with the thought, "I think Keysight must be marketing this as a 'Loss Leader'(tm) - that's one seriously under-priced piece of kit, all things considered." ::)
BTW, if a minimum of microphonic disturbance from the input coupling capacitors is deemed desirable in your "starter 'scope", the Siglent models are to be recommended over their competitors in this budget end of the DSO market. Modern DSOs all suffer this effect to a greater or lesser degree (just avoid treating your 'scope like a piñata) due to the universal use of ceramic caps.
I'm sure I'd come across a youtube review that had favourably compared the Siglent against Hantek and Rigol (possibly even a low end Tektronix model) about a year back but, try as I might, I can't track it down. I ran an 'Impulse Test' on my own Siglent SDS1202X-E at the time, which needed very high levels of mechanical abuse to get anywhere near the voltage levels demonstrated by the other brands used in video reviews that had included such 'Impulse' testing.
I have to admit that I was feeling a little smug after this test. For all I know, Siglent may even have specifically chosen low piezoelectric effect types for the more critical signal path areas to minimise susceptibility to this piñata effect. ;D
Of course, it could just simply be down to 'dumb luck' that the component placement/circuit layout happened to be less susceptible to this microphonic effect than that of their competitors' products. Either way, I'm a "happy bunny". ;D
JBG
-
I'm sure I'd come across a youtube review that had favourably compared the Siglent against Hantek and Rigol (possibly even a low end Tektronix model) about a year back but, try as I might, I can't track it down. I ran an 'Impulse Test' on my own Siglent SDS1202X-E at the time, which needed very high levels of mechanical abuse to get anywhere near the voltage levels demonstrated by the other brands used in video reviews that had included such 'Impulse' testing.
I have to admit that I was feeling a little smug after this test. For all I know, Siglent may even have specifically chosen low piezoelectric effect types for the more critical signal path areas to minimise susceptibility to this piñata effect. ;D
Of course, it could just simply be down to 'dumb luck' that the component placement/circuit layout happened to be less susceptible to this microphonic effect than that of their competitors' products. Either way, I'm a "happy bunny". ;D
JBG
All Siglent models use BNC's of a bulkhead style so when fastened to the chassis any PCB any microphonic susceptibility is greatly reduced. This also eliminates the chance of BNC's breaking free from the PCB like was common in Tek TDS210/220's.
-
It sucked as I have all the patience of a tiger looking at a bloody steak but I saved and got a Siglent SDS1104X-E which I later hacked into a 1204X-E. 200MHz scope with PLENTY of room to grow into. I'm not sure if I'll ever need to upgrade. You'll be kicking yourself for buying a "Bottom of the bargain bin" scope when a year or so down the road you find yourself needing ANOTHER new scope because you didn't want to wait a little while longer to get the scope you really needed.
-
For an entry level individual, especially somebody still in school, I see spending good money on a brand new O'scope as foolish. Far better to look for a cheap or even free unit until your collection of bench tools is fleshed out. There are a couple of reasons for this, one is that buying a good bench DVM should be pretty high on a persons list in this situation and frankly a decent portable meter too. The second reality is that you may end up out in industry working with old equipment anyways, it is better to develop some skills with not so state of the art equipment. There isn't a huge difference in the capability of today bench multimeters and what you might have seen on a bench 30 years ago (as far as the functionality delivered). Contrast this with an O'scope that will have drastically different functionality compared to even a 10 year old model. This difference in built in capabilities is also why old scopes are so cheap these days.
As others have stated a developing engineer or technician should at some point understand when they will need the capability of a modern scope. That is really the best time to buy as you should be able to determine for oneself what features you need. Also the longer one puts off a purchase the more goodies you get in a scope for your buck.
Also keep in mind for those who don't have hundreds of $$ sitting around (y'know, like the undergraduates trying to pay off their iPhone XI's and hoping Mom & Dad will give them a good allowance :D ), there are options out there if you're just trying to learn some basics. There's a whole market of $50 handheld scopes (with like 200kHz bandwidth, 50V pk, single channel, etc.) that get some great reviews and seem to be a reasonable alternative for those just starting out. Probably great for stuff like Arduino or RPi projects, learning about electronic components and putting together simple circuits, etc.
I'm not sure about some of those cheapies, but honestly at that level of performance investing in a scopemeter would be a better use of ones money. Again looking at this from the standpoint of a complete newbie to the field of electronics, there are many quality and safe, 'scopemeters' out there with as wide or wider bandwidths. Since a good portable meter should be in everybody's bag of tools it is something to consider. The real problem here is that these sorts of scopes quickly loose suitability past AC systems
Now I know we males/engineers have this "WHAT?? Real men only buy stuff with all these cool features. Anyone else is a complete wimp..." attitude, but if you ignore all that I'm sure these low priced devices serve a very big market. And they seem especially popular in the auto and audio industries.
Remember, not everyone needs 0.0001 femtosecond rise times :D
No they don't but on the other hand such a scope might not be useful for long. I do a lot of work on industrial systems and a scope with under a 5Mhz bandwidth can in fact be very useful. At the same time though it can be very limiting. So you need to have the experience to say when the image on screen makes sense.
Seems to me a nice option is to try out something like that, and use it as a way to figure out your next steps (if any). And no matter what, you will always have a low priced, portable scope at hand that's probably fine for a bunch of quick uses.
Does anyone have any experience with any of those. I may even pick one up just to try it out.
No experience with anything you mentioned. However a bit of experience with "scopemeters" and frankly it is like anything else if you work within the units limitations it can be a tool. If not it will become a hammer (not its intended use case). It really comes down to the user and their ability to leverage the tool and its fit with their interests.
-
Far better to look for a cheap or even free unit until your collection of bench tools is fleshed out.
::)
Define cheap.
And learn on some old clunker that mightn't even be reliable ? :scared:
That's where I started and sure don't miss needing to fix a scope before you can do anything with it. Been there done that and got the award for it. Never again.
My mentor, a Dr of EE once said of all the tools available to him, if he had to only have one it would be a scope and for a good while I've pondered on this and now know how right he was such has been the advancements in DSO's in the last few years.
-
What he said.. :-+
My first scope was an affordable GW 10mhz single channel, as the Dick Smith Electronics alternative had too small a screen etc.
I bought it new as I had no intentions as a newb to stuff around with a used abused cro,
when all I needed was to learn to use the thing, and monitor signals etc not learn to repair cros (yet!)
I then bought a used dual channel 15mhz Trio-Kenwood, and after confirming everything worked and wth Alt and Chop did :-// (Mr. Wannabee Expert..)
sold the GW to another newbie and showed him how to get started safely with audio signals as I did, and progress from there.
Then came the novelty necessity for an analogue storage scope.
After that.. well, some may know the money pit deal and predict the rest of this comment :D
-
What he said.. :-+
My first scope was an affordable GW 10mhz single channel, as the Dick Smith Electronics alternative had too small a screen etc.
I bought it new as I had no intentions as a newb to stuff around with a used abused cro,
when all I needed was to learn to use the thing, and monitor signals etc not learn to repair cros (yet!)
I then bought a used dual channel 15mhz Trio-Kenwood, and after confirming everything worked and wth Alt and Chop did :-// (Mr. Wannabee Expert..)
sold the GW to another newbie and showed him how to get started safely with audio signals as I did, and progress from there.
Then came the novelty necessity for an analogue storage scope.
After that.. well, some may know the money pit deal and predict the rest of this comment :D
:-DD :-+
What Dave may have advised just a year or two back has certainly sent many up the wrong path and led to the frustration of having a busted old clunker CRO on ones hands which is fine for some with the knowledge and the tools to fix it and keep it going.
That day is gone IMHO and why launch the next generation into electronics with substandard tools, hell it's not like what we do takes no time to learn let alone needing to fix your tools just to follow your hobby or chosen path.
-
At one time, I was really good with a slide rule. Today I use a calculator and an overpowered one at that; the HP48GX. And I have a dozen other high end calculators. I still have a couple of slide rules but they haven't gotten a lot of use in the last 40+ years. I feel the same way about scopes.
I built my first scope back in the very late '50s (?) from plans in the ARRL Handbook. If was a fascinating project for a kid but it didn't have a lot of features. Then I bought a Dumont scope (50 kHz) which I used for several years before I built a 10 MHz Heathkit scope around '80. This scope got me through the 8080 years. I used that scope up until the early 2000's when I bought a Tek 485 which works fine and still has a ton of bandwidth.
As nice as the 485 is, it can't compare at all with the capabilities of even a very low end DSO in any feature except bandwidth. It won't decode, it doesn't have single shot mode, it doesn't make measurements, it's a complete bust when compared to even a Rigol DS1054Z. There is simply no rational comparison.
The idea that a newcomer should learn to use a CRO doesn't hold water either because there aren't that many differences in operating a DSO. In fact, the DSO has more control options. But at a fundamental level, all you do is twiddle knobs for V/div, t/div, trace position, trigger mode and trigger level and the DSO has a LOT more trigger options.
Other than bandwidth, I can't come up with a single reason for having a CRO. Old school is cool, no doubt, but never confuse a CRO with a modern DSO.
Note: There may be some edge cases where the very old 'mainframe' scopes with plug-ins make some particular kind of measurement that simply can't be done by an entry level DSO. If you need to make that kind of measurement, you probably aren't an entry level user.
If I were a student, I wouldn't buy a DSO either. The Digilent AD2 has too many advantages in terms of devices/dollar. But I've told that story elsewhere.
The only issue I see in the entry level market is the competition between the somewhat older Rigol and the somewhat newer Siglents. The unlocked SDS1104X-E would probably be my choice today.
-
I'm sure I'd come across a youtube review that had favourably compared the Siglent against Hantek and Rigol (possibly even a low end Tektronix model) about a year back but, try as I might, I can't track it down. I ran an 'Impulse Test' on my own Siglent SDS1202X-E at the time, which needed very high levels of mechanical abuse to get anywhere near the voltage levels demonstrated by the other brands used in video reviews that had included such 'Impulse' testing.
I have to admit that I was feeling a little smug after this test. For all I know, Siglent may even have specifically chosen low piezoelectric effect types for the more critical signal path areas to minimise susceptibility to this piñata effect. ;D
Of course, it could just simply be down to 'dumb luck' that the component placement/circuit layout happened to be less susceptible to this microphonic effect than that of their competitors' products. Either way, I'm a "happy bunny". ;D
JBG
All Siglent models use BNC's of a bulkhead style so when fastened to the chassis any PCB any microphonic susceptibility is greatly reduced. This also eliminates the chance of BNC's breaking free from the PCB like was common in Tek TDS210/220's.
Thank you for that insight. It rather suggests that Siglent have a tighter control over their bean counters than their competitors, limiting the damage they can inflict on a company's reputation just for the sake of a fraction of a percent boost in profit margins. It seems I have every justification to declare my smugness at making such a wise choice. :)
I've also just recently discovered yet another reason for being so smug. In the "eevblog.com/forum/buysellwanted/re-feelelec-new-arrival-fy-6900-signal-generator" thread, the issue of trying to interpret the noise and ripple from waveform traces alone when testing the original smpsu against home brewed analogue PSU concoctions intended to "improve" this dirt cheap function/signal generator (as with its predecessors, the FY6600 and FY6800 models) had come up.
The point had been made that, whilst waveform traces can reveal clues as to the nature and size of the problem, the only sane option is to use a half decent (or better if your pocket is deep enough) Spectrum Analyser for this task. If you don't have such a device, then 'scope traces are the next best thing, being better than nothing at all.
This got me to wondering whether the built in FFT function in the Siglent models could stand in as a "Poor Mans' half decent Spectrum Analyser". I had already seen very favourable reviews of the FFT feature in the recent Siglent SDS1000 series of DSOs were the FFT performance rating had been placed well above that of its competitors so I was curious to know whether I could get any useful noise spectra with this built in FFT function.
My initial tests had concentrated on the PSU noise and ripple aspect so I'd set my FY6600 sig genny to output a 0.3V "DC Waveform" to restrict my observations to only the noise and ripple effects, sans any possibly confusing test waveform (the 0.3 DC voltage is readily ignored (the 'scope, indeed all 'scopes, have a switch dedicated to the blocking of such DC voltage interference already built in ;D ) ).
The 0.3V output setting wasn't a random choice. The FY6xxx series (so far) switches a 20dB ish attenuator into the output for dc voltage output settings below the 250mV mark (corresponding to the 500mV p-p threshold applied to all other waveforms) which would attenuate the very noise I was looking for. I posted a couple of these FFT graphs to the FY6900 topic thread for other cash strapped hobbyists to peruse and compare to the noise and ripple components of their own PSU upgrades.
Since the efficacy of budget entry level DSO's FFT features had been questioned, it occured to me to post a more familiar looking spectrum of a carrier wave tone (10MHz 1Vrms - 0dBV in my case) for those members with an interest in applying such modifications to their bargain basement function generators. The results looked quite impressive compared to my earlier attempts at using this feature.
Quite frankly, my earlier failures to get a usable plot had simply been down to my unfamiliarity with what can be a complex setting up process compared to the basic function of getting squiggly lines to appear on the screen. Having finally worked out how to optimise the FFT settings, I thought I'd post my own plots to not only demonstrate the FFT feature but also offer clues to the required settings for the benefit of any who may have (like I had) dismissed the FFT feature as a useful tool in assessing PSU noise and ripple (and signal quality in general) simply due to being unimpressed by their initial experience with this feature on a freshly acquired "Entry Level DSO".
I've attached these FFT plots so you can see what I'm blathering about ("A picture is worth..." and so on - you get the picture, assuming I manage to successfully attach them, that is!). Oh, and one more point (I'd almost forgotten to mention - actually did, this is an edit), Please note that the 10MHz peak is 20dB off the top of the plot since I had to set the reference level to -20dBV in order to display the noise floor.
JBG
-
Just one more datapoint. Rigol sent me an e-mail talking about a US$299 offer for the DS1202Z-E. It is quite a reasonable price for a 200MHz 2 channel entry level scope.
-
Hehe, my beginners lab I recently set up has a Hantek DSO5102P.
So far I’ve not used it at all (apart from playing around). Yet after reading this thread, I really wish I had spent a bit more and bought the Rigol DS1054Z.
I’m sure really mine will be totally fine, maybe I need to join the TEA thread :)
-
Hehe, my beginners lab I recently set up has a Hantek DSO5102P.
So far I’ve not used it at all (apart from playing around). Yet after reading this thread, I really wish I had spent a bit more and bought the Rigol DS1054Z.
I’m sure really mine will be totally fine, maybe I need to join the TEA thread :)
If you are sad you didn't double the price of the Hantek and get a DS1054Z, are you also sad you didn't double it again and get an MSO5072? Where does this end?
-
@JBG
Nice FFT plots, yes FFT use does take some getting your head around as the result is also related to the timebase setting used. Dedicated spectrum analysers can be more straightforward to use in that respect as just Span, CF and dB/div need be set to get a meaningful result.
WRT BNC input connectors, several designs were common over the years and most old scopes had substantial chassis and flying coax leads whereas today with scopes being so compact and lightweight the need for decent metal to mount BNC's was overlooked and even the BNC style used to mount on the BNC was cheapened further with only 2 mounting pins that further compromised rigidity and robustness as Tek rudely found with TDS200 DSO's.
Still today there are differences in design where the PCB might be mounted horizontal or vertical using mostly 4 pin bulkhead BNC's. Also to maintain the high input ratings some scopes have 1206 500V caps which by virtue of their size can be more subject to negative effects from vibration than a smaller part.
This all adds up to quite a challenge for designers. ;)
-
Hehe, my beginners lab I recently set up has a Hantek DSO5102P.
So far I’ve not used it at all (apart from playing around). Yet after reading this thread, I really wish I had spent a bit more and bought the Rigol DS1054Z.
I’m sure really mine will be totally fine, maybe I need to join the TEA thread :)
If you sad you didn't double the price of the Hantek and get a DS1054Z, are you also sad you didn't double it again and get an MSO5072? Where does this end?
Most likely with that 1.3 million dollar Keysight UXR monster I mentioned upthread? >:D
The question over what you're prepared to spend on an "Entry Level(tm) 'starter' DSO" is a good one. Unless you know for sure that you'll be needing those extra two channels almost right away, the two channel budget offerings are almost by definition, a "Starter 'scope" for the purposes of most hobbyist users looking to acquire their very first modern DSO.
Even though you might be considering the cheapest specification of DSO to keep the cost of entry level to a bare minimum, this isn't going to prevent you considering moderately more expensive, 'Best Bang for your Buck' alternatives, where, one way or another, you'll have to find an answer that very question.
I found myself dealing with this cost/benefit ratio question some eighteen months ago when I'd suddenly acquired an urge to own one of these modern marvels of DSO technology that had come within the budgetary reach of most hobbyists, myself included. I spent several weeks, if not a month or more, just watching youtube review videos before deciding that the Siglent 1202X-E was easily the best value for money in its class (IMO and at that time).
The situation has probably altered by now so you'll need to verify any recommendations you receive and invest some of your own precious time in watching the latest youtube review videos. However, I suspect that Siglent are still offering the best value for money. If Siglent have been knocked off this BVFM pedestal by their competitors' latest offerings, it might be worth hanging back a little if you can, to see Siglent's response before making any commitment.
Eventually, you have to make a purchasing commitment (assuming you've not decided to postpone your testbench upgrade indefinitely) and splash the cash. When that moment arrived for me, I had it clear in my head that I was getting the best possible 200MHz B/W 1GSa/s dual channel DSO around the 350 quid price point (£365 in actual fact) from the official Siglent UK agent and if it turned out that I'd underestimated my need for a 4 channel 'scope, then so be it.
I could easily enough upgrade to a 4 channel 'scope should the need arise and my 'scope ownership experience would put me in a better position to make the best choice possible. I only ever saw the purchase of the two channel Siglent as a "Win-win" result. In the subsequent 17 months or so since I purchased it, I've never ever pined for a 4 channel version.
I may eventually hanker after a better 'scope if I ever start tackling more ambitious projects than the DIY GPSDO I built and a long list of upgrade modifications I've applied during the past 16 months to my cheap as chips Feeltech signal/function generator. It'll probably last me a few more years yet before I look to replacing it with a brand spanking new higher spec model for, most likely (in real terms at least), very little more money than I'd paid for this one.
JBG
-
Hello everyone,
Many thanks to all of your input. I am amazed at the amount of replies and at how detailed and helpful they are. Thank you! The EEVBlog is truly a great place!
I will carefully look into the resources mentioned and think about the considerations mentioned as I figure the 'scope I will buy.
Thank you again!
-
Hello everyone,
Many thanks to all of your input. I am amazed at the amount of replies and at how detailed and helpful they are. Thank you! The EEVBlog is truly a great place!
I will carefully look into the resources mentioned and think about the considerations mentioned as I figure the 'scope I will buy.
Thank you again!
It's great you got some satisfaction from the experienced members replies :-+ within a record? 2 page thread :clap:
sometimes it can side track into a 100+ page sword and sandal epic :scared:
;D
-
Hehe, my beginners lab I recently set up has a Hantek DSO5102P.
So far I’ve not used it at all (apart from playing around). Yet after reading this thread, I really wish I had spent a bit more and bought the Rigol DS1054Z.
I’m sure really mine will be totally fine, maybe I need to join the TEA thread :)
If you are sad you didn't double the price of the Hantek and get a DS1054Z, are you also sad you didn't double it again and get an MSO5072? Where does this end?
You can check out any time you want but you can never leave. >:D
-
I believe restofer’s advice to be spot on, on this and many other occasions. As a rank beginner I have gone through the scope dilemma, though being well into my 60’s my disposable income is probably a bit better than a struggling student. A few years ago looking for my first digital scope the 1054z was too new for me so I went with the Analog Discovery for $300. It is a great tool and I still use it regularly, particularly when I travel. After a few years I still wanted a bench scope and went with the SDS1104XE because I thought it to be a bit more advanced than the 1054z when I was buying. Very happy with that purchase as well. While I had my AD2, I still watched the eBay ads for them and eventually found a used AD1 for $50 and grabbed it just because it was cheap and I have a grandson coming along, actually 2. It is 95% as good as the AD2 and I would grab another if I saw one, but you don’t see that sort of deal when you really need one, but they do come along regularly at $125 or so in the US, still a good deal. Right now if $ were tight I would get a 1054z as it is about the same price as the AD2 at full price, but if a bit more money could be dug up I still think the SDS1104XE is the better scope for the money. I hate to buy older technology when just starting out in anything I expect to stick with, but that’s just me.
-
@JBG
Nice FFT plots, yes FFT use does take some getting your head around as the result is also related to the timebase setting used. Dedicated spectrum analysers can be more straightforward to use in that respect as just Span, CF and dB/div need be set to get a meaningful result.
Just for fun, I plotted the FFT of a 1MHz square wave using the AD2 and its internal AWG. The rounding of the square wave is probably due to the fact that I just used the flyleads and a breadboard for making the interconnections.
-
@JBG
Nice FFT plots, yes FFT use does take some getting your head around as the result is also related to the timebase setting used. Dedicated spectrum analysers can be more straightforward to use in that respect as just Span, CF and dB/div need be set to get a meaningful result.
Just for fun, I plotted the FFT of a 1MHz square wave using the AD2 and its internal AWG. The rounding of the square wave is probably due to the fact that I just used the flyleads and a breadboard for making the interconnections.
For fun back at ya !
SDS1104X-E 50 ohm termination on input and 1Vp-p 1MHz square wave ex SDG6022X
FFT Peak hold with markers.
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/is-this-oscilloscope-perhaps-the-best-for-the-beginner/?action=dlattach;attach=957182)
-
I have got to get that SDS1104X-E - that’s really nice.
-
I have got to get that SDS1104X-E - that’s really nice.
Yes it's the Peak Hold that cleans up all the rubbish down on the noise floor when it's generally of zero interest compared to the fundamental and all its harmonics.
If there's other FFT's you wanna see please ask.
-
I have got to get that SDS1104X-E - that’s really nice.
Yes it's the Peak Hold that cleans up all the rubbish down on the noise floor when it's generally of zero interest compared to the fundamental and all its harmonics.
If there's other FFT's you wanna see please ask.
That snippet of info (Peak Hold) was the major clue as to how you'd managed to 'cleanse' the spectrum of all signs of the sideband pedestals: just submerge them in a sea of raised noise floor artefacts - nice trick! ;)
I had to have another read of the user guide before I could usefully experiment further with the suggested acquisition modes and FFT settings listed in the math section of the guide before I was able to approximate your results.
Initially, I'd thought that perhaps the differences had been due to my use of a cheap 'n' cheerful Feeltech FY6600 signal generator compared to the more expensive Siglent unit you'd employed. Now that I've managed to closely approximate your FFT result, you can hardly see the difference other than for the even harmonics present in the cheap generator's output versus the lack of same in your spectral plots for the Siglent generator which probably just means they're at a much lower level, hidden within that raised up noise floor along with all the sideband noise pedestals.
I've attached screen captures to show my own version of this test using the aforementioned FY6600 as the test source. The rise and fall times for square edged waveforms is limited to 8ns but there is a little work around to reduce them to just 4ns if the 8ns isn't quite fast enough for the task in hand. AFAICR, for a square wave output on CH1 configure a duplicate square wave on CH2 and use it to 100% amplitude modulate CH1. [Edit] I tried that but couldn't get it to work - there had been a trick to speed up the rise and fall times, I've just simply forgotten the details. :(
You might find all of these now tucked out of sight sideband noise pedestals distracting but I don't. Indeed, I found their absence from the plot rather disconcerting to the point where I then had to figure out exactly what settings you'd used (and therefore which ones to avoid) to get such a distorted plot.
Since you so kindly offered, could you post another FFT plot using more normal settings to capture the more interesting portions such as the actual noise floor and sideband pedestals generated by the Siglent generator? I'd like to compare them to the plots I'm getting from this dirt cheap Feeltech signal generator of mine.
Also, could you forego the display of the signal waveform being shared in split screen mode? At the 50μs per division timebase setting you're obliged to use with the FFT display, a 1MHz square wave trace provides rather limited information to the point where subtracts rather more from the display than it adds. It's far better to run the FFT function in exclusive mode when capturing screenshots.
If you feel the need to offer a picture of the waveform being analysed, I think you may as well set the timebase appropriately and capture it as a separate wave trace before readjusting the timebase and switching back to the FFT screen for further examination and analysis.
JBG
-
If we are to compare AWG signal purity this needs a different approach and it matters how many bit they each might be. A slow triangle or ramp should distinguish the steps just with a clean sharp trace however if we are to compare sinewaves the setup matters as we are not only looking for harmonics but sidebands and phase noise too.
To do all this with affordable equipment will only get you so far as we are down near the noise floor and as these instruments are digital the clock stability of each also matters unless they have a common reference clock.
As FFT results are dependant on timebase settings and memory depth we always have a tradeoff between these two and the frequency of the sampled signal so to keep as many data points on the display to get the best trace that results from interpolation reconstruction. Further as we examine signals closely with lower Span and dBm/ settings the noise floor also drops so we must keep chasing it with lower and lower Reference settings.
Anyways, some screenshots for study, again from SDG6022X 1MHz sine @ 0dBm into 50 ohm external termination.
-
Is this one better than the SDS1104X-E?
https://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1202Z-E/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?b=y&v=7906 (https://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1202Z-E/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?b=y&v=7906)
-
If you can afford the Rigol DS1054Z it does offer quite a bit more useful functionality.
... especially once you update it with hacked firmware. :D (check the usual northern BOLTR channel for details)
-
Is this one better than the SDS1104X-E?
https://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1202Z-E/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?b=y&v=7906 (https://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1202Z-E/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?b=y&v=7906)
Welcome to the forum.
It's a 2 channel DSO and introduced as competition to SDS1202X-E.
-
The question of what is cheap is an interesting one. I'm looking at this from the perspective of somebody entering engineering school, and for many in that situation spending $50 on a scope might be a poor diversion of money. It is easy to spend a $1000 a year just on books and a laptop is a modern day requirement. So this is most defiantly dependent on ones financial condition going into school. In the end after some experience with a cheap scope and with the schools lab equipment, experience will guide the buyer in the right direction.
As for funky used scopes that can be a problem but on the other hand it is also an opportunity to learn how to repair and work with such equipment. It also prepares you for industry because you don't often have access to the newest and best devices once you leave school. This is often the biggest issue with graduates, that is their inflexibility when it comes to tools of the trade.
By the way I'm not trying to dismiss the value of a good scope, what I'm trying to point out is that every situation is different. Even out in industry a scope might not be the first thing you reach for depending upon what your job is. For the first few years I did a lot of calibration work on process controls and frankly a good DVM was a requirement. For a student I would certainly recommend a good, high end, handheld DVM that is book bag compatible; if they have money to throw at instrumentation. In the end almost any electronics related form of employment will make use of a good DVM, that might not be a case for a scope. I'm just not convinced that getting a scope is the first thing I would suggest for somebody entering engineering/technical school. Yes they will eventually want one, but I'd flesh out that work bench with other things before the scope. Frankly I can't see a scope being hugely important in the first year anyways.
Far better to look for a cheap or even free unit until your collection of bench tools is fleshed out.
::)
Define cheap.
And learn on some old clunker that mightn't even be reliable ? :scared:
That's where I started and sure don't miss needing to fix a scope before you can do anything with it. Been there done that and got the award for it. Never again.
My mentor, a Dr of EE once said of all the tools available to him, if he had to only have one it would be a scope and for a good while I've pondered on this and now know how right he was such has been the advancements in DSO's in the last few years.
-
I've recently acquired a Siglent SDS1202X-E too. I've only used it for one major project to date, but so far I'm very happy with it. 200MHz, 1GS/s, 2 channels, 14Mpts.
I could also have got 100MHz 4 channels for about the same price, but I decided I'd rather have more bandwidth than more channels. Also I got dedicated knobs for each channel, which I also like.
At NZ$700 it wasn't the cheapest thing I could have got, but it seems very good value for that price and should last me a long while.
-
@tautech
Thanks for those screenshots. They were rather interesting (in the sense that I had a little difficulty trying to emulate them :) ). Anyway, I did my best and here are my four best plots. One problem I hit straight away was the -24dB ref limit on the 1dB per division setting. I had to use the 5dB setting (2dB was still too limiting) in order to show the noise floor (the interesting bit ;) ).
It's quite obvious that the FFT function built into the SDS1104X-E is an upgrade over the SDS1202X-E's FFT function. I suppose it's only fair seeing as how they reduced its per channel control knobs ration to a quarter of the 1202's allocation of two per channel :( (and still they charge double for the privilege of having four channels on tap >:().
Considering the front panel real estate that dedicated control knobs would consume, I suppose it's more or less inevitable (at least at the 'affordable price' end of the 'scope market). However, when such multiplexing of control knobs is applied to a two channel DSO such as that Rigol DS1202Z-E that got mentioned earlier, it just cheapens it (and, imo, that Rigol was butt ugly cheap enough to begin with).
With a four channel 'scope, it's a case of "Needs Must" but with a two channel 'scope, it just looks like a case of "Bean Counteritus" having its wicked way with the UI and design aesthetic. Still, in view of the likelihood that a beginner's next 'scope will likely be a four channel offering cursed with this shortage of control knobs, that cheap Rigol may be not such a bad way to start after all (saves the prospective purchaser becoming spoilt by the luxury of dedicated control knobs ::) ).
JBG
-
@tautech
Thanks for those screenshots. They were rather interesting (in the sense that I had a little difficulty trying to emulate them :) ). Anyway, I did my best and here are my four best plots. One problem I hit straight away was the -24dB ref limit on the 1dB per division setting. I had to use the 5dB setting (2dB was still too limiting) in order to show the noise floor (the interesting bit ;) ).
Good work and glad to see you're getting to grips with using FFT. :-+
It's quite obvious that the FFT function built into the SDS1104X-E is an upgrade over the SDS1202X-E's FFT function. I suppose it's only fair seeing as how they reduced its per channel control knobs ration to a quarter of the 1202's allocation of two per channel :( (and still they charge double for the privilege of having four channels on tap >:().
Yes and no !
While X and X-E models share a similar UI that originated from a major FW upgrade in SDS2000 and was implemented in the later SDS1002X models it has continued to evolve as X-E models have substantially more processing power so can comfortably support 1Mpts FFT. Markers of different types and table displays also have been added, none of which would've been possible in the lesser processing power in earlier X models.
Considering the front panel real estate that dedicated control knobs would consume, I suppose it's more or less inevitable (at least at the 'affordable price' end of the 'scope market). However, when such multiplexing of control knobs is applied to a two channel DSO such as that Rigol DS1202Z-E that got mentioned earlier, it just cheapens it (and, imo, that Rigol was butt ugly cheap enough to begin with).
Multiplexed controls you either love or hate it appears and once I was never a fan of them either however once forced to get used to them you do quite quickly as I discovered when lucky enough to beta test SDS1104X-E.
With a four channel 'scope, it's a case of "Needs Must" but with a two channel 'scope, it just looks like a case of "Bean Counteritus" having its wicked way with the UI and design aesthetic. Still, in view of the likelihood that a beginner's next 'scope will likely be a four channel offering cursed with this shortage of control knobs, that cheap Rigol may be not such a bad way to start after all (saves the prospective purchaser becoming spoilt by the luxury of dedicated control knobs ::) ).
It's only market RRP and BOM cost driven. ;)
-
It depends what you want to use the scope for.
If its high speed digital stuff or RF then you are going to have to speed some decent money on a scope.
If its just audio frequencies then even a cheap £20 ebay USB PC scope would do the job.
-
I've recently acquired a Siglent SDS1202X-E too. I've only used it for one major project to date, but so far I'm very happy with it. 200MHz, 1GS/s, 2 channels, 14Mpts.
I could also have got 100MHz 4 channels for about the same price, but I decided I'd rather have more bandwidth than more channels. Also I got dedicated knobs for each channel, which I also like.
At NZ$700 it wasn't the cheapest thing I could have got, but it seems very good value for that price and should last me a long while.
Often the bandwidth initially offered, can be hacked upwards, depending on the sampling rates available to all four channels in simultaneous use. A sampling rate of 512MSa/s can comfortably support a 200MHz bandwidth. If that 100MHz 4 channels DSO you'd been considering had a dual 1GSa/s per DAC on its acquisition board like the Siglent 1104X-E, the only impediment to doubling the bandwidth up would be the unavailability of a hacking software package for that model of DSO and the possible need to make a minor hardware modification.
Hacking your DSO to a wider bandwidth can range from an 'easy peasy' firmware only upgrade to 'a little bit tricky' firmware plus some soldering depending on the make and model involved. If you already have any experience of hacking devices, this may offer a way to get a bigger bang for your buck if you choose your initial purchase with this in mind. In this case, you've chosen so wisely, Siglent have already pre-hacked it for you. :)
If you researched this purchase as carefully as I had some eighteen months back, I'm sure you'll be aware of the missing caps issue in the channel acquisition boards that had afflicted the early production run. By the time I ordered mine nearly eighteen months ago, this problem had been fixed in the later versions that were being sold so I've never had to take mine apart.
Like yourself, I've been extremely pleased with what my £365 (delivered from a UK agent) had bought me. Going on currency exchange rates, you got yours for about the equivalent of £330. The UK agent has only dropped the price by just a fiver which is reassuring - it implies the 2nd hand market isn't awash with used 1202X-E's suggesting that most of their wise owners haven't felt any need to replace it with something better. :)
Anyway, I'm about to inflict yet another set of FFT plots upon this thread which I think may be of some interest, if not to your good self, then at least to the OP and any others who may be monitoring the activity here for helpful hints in purchasing a DSO (perhaps like me, only their 2nd 'scope in 40 plus years ::) ).
These are power rail noise spectra of the 5.18v output from the 1.3A rated 7805 sized buck converter (a cheap mini 360, iirc, from Banggood) that I'd elected to use over the more prosaic 7805 analogue regulator choice. I discovered that its switching frequency is just over 1.2MHz when the output current is above the threshold that takes it out of 'Hiccup' economy standby mode which is guaranteed to be true in this case (300mA or so once the OCXO is up to temperature).
I'd wanted to solder an SMA-F socket to the board to properly examine the ripple and noise before completely assembling it but lacked suitable cables and adapters so, after making do with the 'scope probe tip and spring clip ground contact to get a more accurate picture, I boxed it all up to "Suck it and see" how well it would work.
Earlier this week, the required kit arrived so I pulled it apart to fit an SMA-F socket with 1000nF ceramic cap in series (shunted with a 1K resistor to allow me to measure the DC voltage with a DMM with an error of just -0.01%) with a short co-ax run to the Vcc test point, allowing me to reassemble it and monitor voltage, noise and ripple any time I wanted.
The FFT is set to show dBV rms meaning -20dB corresponds to 100mV rms, -40dB to 10mV and so on. The half meter of SMA-M to BNC male connecting cable is terminated with a 50 ohm thru-line terminator at the scope. Since the test point impedance is close to zero ohms and directly driving the noise and ripple into the cable, there's no need to apply any 6dB correction factor when interpreting the voltage levels.
The first six images show ever wider frequency spans starting with a 1MHz close up view of the noise floor. The second encompasses a 2MHz span to reveal the 1.2MHz switching component just poking up above the background noise (the 1MHz spike is part of the noise coming from the logic ICs as is virtually all of the rest of the spikes visible in the remaining images). Hopefully, the additional filtered feed from that point to the OCXO and GPS module (and cmos RRO opamp) will keep most of that digital hash suppressed in this more critical area - I may shift the co-ax connection to the OCXO's +5v pin later on to check this out.
The final two images demonstrate the effect of applying the 20MHz bandwidth limit as per the now out of date standard, previously used for such noise and ripple traces on equipment now long since past its BBD. With the almost universal use of dc-dc converters in modern equipment which can put out high levels of switching noise transients that can extend into the low hundreds of MHz in the case of dc-dc converters with poor component layout and design, the use of the 20MHz B/W limit is no longer appropriate.
JBG
-
I just want something to troubleshoot arcade boards, logic, gates, memory, cpu. Mostly 5v stuff...I'm nowhere near you guys on this stuff and I'm not sure if I should get a logic probe or use that money towards a cheap scope? Thx
-
I just want something to troubleshoot arcade boards, logic, gates, memory, cpu. Mostly 5v stuff...I'm nowhere near you guys on this stuff and I'm not sure if I should get a logic probe or use that money towards a cheap scope? Thx
It looks like you're describing vintage kit (5v logic gates etc) which suggests you may be better served with a logic analyser rather than (just) a DSO alone. Although it seems unlikely that '80s and '90s arcade games will be using anything other than the ubiquitous 7805 voltage regulators to provide the 5v Vcc rail voltages, who's to say that such kit couldn't have been repaired or revamped with drop in dc-dc converter replacements (same footprint but no need to bolt them onto a heatsink)?
Ceramic caps can fail, causing excess noise and ripple which could introduce inexplicable faults in the logic processes you're trying to probe (and even analogue voltage regulators can become oscillators if their decoupling caps go open circuit or high resistance). That cheap Rigol and a separate (also cheap) logic analyser might be a more cost effective investment than a relatively pricey 'all in one' MSO solution.
Since you will be initially testing the voltage rails for noise and ripple caused by faulty components to avoid going on a wild goose chase with your logic analyser, the effects you're looking for are unlikely to be as subtle as the effects of the dc-dc converter noise and ripple submerged in a sea of logic gate power rail noise as displayed in my own FFT plots. Indeed, they'll likely be apparent enough in the waveform traces without resorting to the FFT function and that being the case, you could buy yourself a 2nd hand worn and battered 100 or 200 MHz B/W DSO with only one working channel to cover such initial examination of the voltage rails, leaving more money in the budget for a decent LA. ;)
I have a memory of 'decent' 2nd hand LAs costing upwards of a thousand dollars being discussed in the FY6600 thread last year so did a quick search for "cheap logic analysers" and found this short lived thread from just over 4 years ago:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/budget-logic-analyzer-which-one-do-you-recommend/msg854725/#msg854725 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/budget-logic-analyzer-which-one-do-you-recommend/msg854725/#msg854725)
Here's a less older thread discussion (from only two years ago):
https://hackaday.com/2018/01/03/spite-thrift-and-the-virtues-of-an-affordable-logic-analyzer/ (https://hackaday.com/2018/01/03/spite-thrift-and-the-virtues-of-an-affordable-logic-analyzer/)
And, here's an example of just how cheap you can go! ::)
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hobby-Components-24MHz-Analyser-1-1-16/dp/B00DAYAREW (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hobby-Components-24MHz-Analyser-1-1-16/dp/B00DAYAREW)
If it is vintage arcade kit from the '80s and '90s, that last item might even prove sufficient (at least for your initial requirements). However, only you know your needs so, if you haven't already come across any of those examples above in your own researches, take another long hard look at what's out there. I'm not in the market for a LA so that's as far as I'm going (at least right now ;) ).
All things considered, a decent MSO could prove to be your best option after all - it depends on your requirements (would just looking at the traffic on an eight bit data bus suffice or will you need to capture 16 bit addresses as well?).
JBG
-
IN a case like this I strongly suggest holding off on your buy until you get a better understanding of the hardware you are working on. You will want to understand the clock rates of various components so that you can better spec a scope. Also the mix of analog to digital is important. Also I wouldn't be surprised at all if some vintage hardware comes in 3.3 volt variants.
As for a logic probe, that might not be a bad investment and frankly is something you can build yourself. Logic probes can be low cost and remain useful over time. I wouldn't however suggest their purchase over a good DVM or some other pieces of primary test equipment. Most people would consider a scope a primary piece of test equipment so there is some conflict there
If this is a long term investment it might pay to take what ever bandwidth you decide is about right and double it. The other issue that you will have to consider is what sort of serial port debugging that a potential new scope supports. While I'm not really involved in arcade systems I have to think that the use of serial ports of various types would be common even in some vintage equipment.
In a nut shell this highlights the problem of suggesting hardware to somebody when you are not highly familiar with the equipment they will be working on. It isn't easy to say to somebody that XYZ model is all you need when it might not even come close. In the case here; I could see SPI (or other serial tech) being used to interconnect boards in an arcade system, I just have no idea if I'm right.
I just want something to troubleshoot arcade boards, logic, gates, memory, cpu. Mostly 5v stuff...I'm nowhere near you guys on this stuff and I'm not sure if I should get a logic probe or use that money towards a cheap scope? Thx
-
I load the promode file into the scoop,and the scoop give me the number 1204x-e on the screen.
i like to disable this mode to normal ,but i not understand it.
Sorry for englisch ,iam a beginner.
-
I would suggest getting a used scope, maybe and old analog scope, then later get a better one, can't hurt to have 2 scopes.
-
I respectfully disagree with wizard69, even though what he says makes a lot of sense, but I say buy an old used scope today! That's right today! It dos not have to be great as long as it works, you will learn something from the experience, in 6 months if it's not what you want then sell it on ebay and buy another one, or keep both.
-
If this is your first scope , I would go after a used analog . You can get then really cheap for a decent scope to learn on. And if something does go south for some reason that warranty won't cover , they are much easier to fix and your not out a lot of money .
-
If this is your first scope , I would go after a used analog . You can get then really cheap for a decent scope to learn on. And if something does go south for some reason that warranty won't cover , they are much easier to fix and your not out a lot of money .
This I don't believe is good advice and let me tell you why.
Since 2012 I have sold a lot of scopes and not one to my knowledge has been broken by the user. The odd and rare warranty claims yes (fans, probes etc) but IME far less than failures in a comparable time of old scopes which BTW I've had my fair share of before becoming a new equipment distributor.
-
300 Canadian bucks will get an entry level dso with knobs. For uni that's a better choice. For the hobbyist I'd say the same. 20 years ago price. Rigol changed things at this point a DSO has more to teach.
-
There is simply no comparison in the capabilities of a DSO and an old analog scope. I have used analog scopes for a very long time but, these days, my Rigol DS 1054Z does all the work. I still have a Tek 485 for its 350 MHz bandwidth but I seldom use it.
If I could get an analog scope for very little money and money was tight, maybe I would buy it. More likely, I would buy the DSO on my credit card and worry about the cost later.
In my view, there are 4 candidate scopes:
Siglent SDS 1204X-E -> 200 MHz 4 Channels $759 https://siglentna.com/product/sds1204x-e-200-mhz/ (https://siglentna.com/product/sds1204x-e-200-mhz/)
Siglent SDS 1202X-E -> 200 MHz 2 Channels $379 https://siglentna.com/product/sds1202x-e/ (https://siglentna.com/product/sds1202x-e/)
Siglent SDS 1104X-E -> 100 MHz 4 Channels $499 https://siglentna.com/product/sds1104x-e-100-mhz/ (https://siglentna.com/product/sds1104x-e-100-mhz/)
Rigol DS 1054Z -> 100 MHz 4 Channels $349 https://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/ (https://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/)
The Rigol must be 'unlocked' to move from 50 MHz to 100 MHz. No big deal!
The Rigol is the least expensive of the options and there is a question about the need for 4 channels versus 2 channels as well as a question about 200 MHz vs 100 MHz. Clearly, the more expensive option provides more capability.
Since I'm not especially price sensitive, I would probably be reading everything I could get my hands on that was related to the SDS 1204X-E. I want 4 channels (for SPI decoding) and more bandwidth is always a good idea.
OTOH, there is nothing wrong with my Rigol DS 1054Z. It meets all of my scope needs,
I see tequipment has a special where they will pay my sales tax. That's about a 10% savings. BTW, none of the prices above include tax or shipping. In terms of shipping, I would probably buy through Amazon and get free Prime shipping.
-
rstofer
You missed the latest model in the entry level price bracket:
https://siglentna.com/digital-oscilloscopes/sds1000x-u/
The 100 MHz 4ch SDS1104X-U is a feature trimmed version of X-E with a nicer $ 399 price tag.
Dave's done a teardown of it already.
Defpom has one for a review that should be released on YT in a few days.
-
That $100 savings between the X-E and X-U comes with a major loss of features. The buyer will have to decide whether it is worth it. Unfortunately, new users have no idea what they gave up.
I want that SDS 1204X-E!
-
Maybe I didn't say it well in my last post, but the point I was trying to get across was the idea that you really can't specifiy a scope until you know what you will be using it for. More importantly understanding how the stuff you are interested in impact the scopes specs.
A lot of people never really move beyond audio electronics hobby wise so that defines one end of the performance spectrum. Somebody interested in digital systems is another point and frankly robotics / automation another. So I just don't see jumping into a big scope purchase as the smart thing to do.
On the flip side scopes are extremely useful for learning and understanding electronics. However I'm more inclined to suggest going the used scope route (if one can be found cheap) to learn with. Such a scope would better help you define what you need with respect to a more capable scope. A new scope, even with the "cheap" import options is not a trivial investment and buying capability really makes a lot of sense. So unless you have a lot of money to throw away, I wouldn't go out and buy a new scope until you can better answer the question yourself is this right.
-
A lot of people never really move beyond audio electronics hobby wise so that defines one end of the performance spectrum. Somebody interested in digital systems is another point and frankly robotics / automation another. So I just don't see jumping into a big scope purchase as the smart thing to do.
Which goes to the question of whether a scope is needed at all. It's just assumed by those with experience that a scope is fundamental to electronics at any level, probably because the level will change with time. But who knows? A newcomer may get an LED to blink with an Arduino and never work on electronics again. They may put it on back burner for 20 or 30 years, it may never be their primary hobby.
All we can do is assume the requestor knows why they want a scope and it would be helpful if they stated the reason, but we would still assume that their range of interest will grow with time and recommend something decent right out of the gate.
The case can be made for buying an analog 'beater' scope to save money but it likely wastes some amount of money on a scope that doesn't have a future. If the scope is worth $50, it is likely not worth even shipping to a new owner. It will probably go to electronic recycling as selling it is more effort than the money is worth. Or, like my Tek 485, it sits under the table waiting on a project that requires higher bandwidth and less features.
All we can do is provide a range of options, the decision rests with the user. But the DS1054Z is a lot of scope for the money. I'm still going to recommend it along with the Siglents. I wouldn't even pay the freight for an analog scope now that DSOs are so inexpensive.
-
I'm just not convinced that getting a scope is the first thing I would suggest for somebody entering engineering/technical school. Yes they will eventually want one, but I'd flesh out that work bench with other things before the scope. Frankly I can't see a scope being hugely important in the first year anyways.
Scopes aren't generally backpack portable. Although they may not be available, I would still recommend every EE student have an Analog Discovery 2 and a laptop computer in their backpack. Just about anything that needs doing can be done with the AD2. It is particularly useful for students.
Unfortunately, with distance learning, the backorder situation is ridiculous and I'm pretty sure Digilent has increased the price. I thought it used to be about $279 and now it's $399. Then again, Digilent was sold to NI so we have to expect things to change and not for the better. Maybe just opportunistic pricing...
And, yes, a decent DMM would be at the top of the list. However, the AD2 has 2 voltmeter channels (actually, the scope channels interpreted as voltage). Good enough...
-
Hi everyone,
I want to chime in on this discussion by asking how much of a difference is it to beginners that the two of these oscilloscopes have to offer? Rigol DS1054Z & SDS1104X-U
I learned a few things about oscilloscopes about 20 years ago in school but I had nothing to do with them afterwards until now.
One or two years ago I started to tinker around again with microcontrollers and I build guitar pedals as a hobby. A dream would be a diy synth. That's what I could use an oscilloscope for.
I got some money in the drawer and want to spend it on something usefull for my bench.
Given the fact that I am a hobbyist and don't need it for a living I want to buy something that is not too expensive but no crap. My grandfather used to say that we are to poor to buy cheap.
But my limit would be 400€.
I know that the Siglent-SDS1204X-E has more to offer for than a Siglent SDS1104X-U but 100€ are still 100€.
Is a Rigol DS1054Z still the best bang for the buck? (hacked or not hacked)
Right now there is a discount on the DS1054Z with a few "options".
Rigol DS1054Z
https://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html (https://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html)
With following options included SD-DS1000Z Serial Decoder, AT-DS1000Z Advanced Trigger, MEM-DS1000Z Memory Option, REC-DS1000Z Record-Module
€ 374.85
Siglent SDS1104X-U
https://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Siglent-SDS1104X-U.html (https://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Siglent-SDS1104X-U.html)
€ 427.21
I don't know if I realy need it but I love to learn new stuff and I don't want to buy another guitar :D
-
Hi everyone,
I want to chime in on this discussion by asking how much of a difference is it to beginners that the two of these oscilloscopes have to offer? Rigol DS1054Z & SDS1104X-U
I believe the SDS1104X-U will have a better user interface than the Rigol. You can check over in Test Equipment for any reviews on the -U model.
But my limit would be 400€.
I know that the Siglent-SDS1204X-E has more to offer for than a Siglent SDS1104X-U but 100€ are still 100€.
Based on Amazon and currency exchange, you are $15 short of the SDS1104X-E which has more features than the SDS1104X-U - notably the Bode' plot which you may never use. I believe it requires a Siglent waveform generator.
The hot setup right now is to buy the SDS1104X-E and unlock it to get the 200 MHz option like the SDS1204X-E.
Is a Rigol DS1054Z still the best bang for the buck? (hacked or not hacked)
It was a couple of years ago but today I believe the SDS1104X-E is the way to go. It costs an additional $150 but it can be unlocked to 200 MHz and that's a nice feature for digital systems. It is meaningless for audio.
If audio and low speed uC peripherals (SPI, I2C, UART) is the application arena, either of the DS1054Z or SDS1104X-E will serve just fine. Of course, the DS1054Z would have to be unlocked to 100 MHz.
Right now there is a discount on the DS1054Z with a few "options".
Rigol DS1054Z
https://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html (https://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html)
Doesn't matter! When you unlock using DSER, you get all the options and the 100 MHz bandwidth. Search Google for riglol
http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/ (http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/)
DSER isn't listed for the DS1000Z but it is the proper one to use.
I keep linking to this mega-thread. Charlotte buys the 2 channel SDS1202X-E (200 MHz 2 Channel) at message 150. I would highly recommend you read the entire mega-thread. We do some very interesting experiments using features that practically nobody ever discusses. It was a lot of fun learning about all the features of the Siglent.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/what-an-oscilloscope-recommended-for-a-woman-passionate-about-electronics/msg3100087/#msg3100087 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/what-an-oscilloscope-recommended-for-a-woman-passionate-about-electronics/msg3100087/#msg3100087)
There are two other threads in the Beginner forum dealing with this exact subject. There's no reason to repeat all the information. Search for 'SDS1104X-E'
I own the DS1054Z unlocked to 100 MHz with all the options enabled and it's a fine scope for my purposes. I wanted 4 channels, Charlotte figured she could get along with 2. Her applications are likely different than mine.
Were I going out to spend money on a scope, it would be the SDS1104X-E and I would unlock 200 MHz as soon as I opened the box. Then I would sit back and be happy.
-
I'm just not convinced that getting a scope is the first thing I would suggest for somebody entering engineering/technical school. Yes they will eventually want one, but I'd flesh out that work bench with other things before the scope. Frankly I can't see a scope being hugely important in the first year anyways.
Scopes aren't generally backpack portable. Although they may not be available, I would still recommend every EE student have an Analog Discovery 2 and a laptop computer in their backpack. Just about anything that needs doing can be done with the AD2. It is particularly useful for students.
Unfortunately, with distance learning, the backorder situation is ridiculous and I'm pretty sure Digilent has increased the price. I thought it used to be about $279 and now it's $399. Then again, Digilent was sold to NI so we have to expect things to change and not for the better. Maybe just opportunistic pricing...
For a student something like the Digilent would be a good idea.
As for the sale to NI, that is reason enough in my mind not to do business with them. This is the first I've heard of them being National Instruments property.
And, yes, a decent DMM would be at the top of the list. However, the AD2 has 2 voltmeter channels (actually, the scope channels interpreted as voltage). Good enough...
With the price bumped to $399 there are likely other USB connected "scopes" or similar devices competing. That high price just opens up the field to many competing devices. I'm not really up on what is available in this niche so maybe the competition isn't there yet.
-
the SDS1104X-E which has more features than the SDS1104X-U - notably the Bode' plot which you may never use. I believe it requires a Siglent waveform generator.
Off topic, sorry, but is this true of all Siglent scopes including X-E and X Plus? Bode plots only works with Siglent sig gens?
-
the SDS1104X-E which has more features than the SDS1104X-U - notably the Bode' plot which you may never use. I believe it requires a Siglent waveform generator.
Off topic, sorry, but is this true of all Siglent scopes including X-E and X Plus? Bode plots only works with Siglent sig gens?
X Plus, no as they have an inbuilt 50 MHz AWG.
All X-E models and SDS5000X models require an external stimulus source for Bode plot that can be a standalone AWG or the 25 MHz SAG1021I AWG USB module that's controlled entirely from the scopes UI.
For Bode plot use with a standalone AWG it's automatically controlled via USB or LAN irrespective of the model of scope.
-
With the price bumped to $399 there are likely other USB connected "scopes" or similar devices competing. That high price just opens up the field to many competing devices. I'm not really up on what is available in this niche so maybe the competition isn't there yet.
The Analog Devices ADALM2000 competes and costs just $249
https://www.analog.com/en/design-center/evaluation-hardware-and-software/evaluation-boards-kits/adalm2000.html#eb-overview (https://www.analog.com/en/design-center/evaluation-hardware-and-software/evaluation-boards-kits/adalm2000.html#eb-overview)
The software isn't even close. I didn't spend enough time to actually use it for something because it didn't appear to have a 'demo' device. One thing about Digilent Waveforms, you can run through the software with no external hardware.
Since I already have an AD2, there was no reason for me to actually compare specs.
It's unfortunate that the AD2 has increased in price. It's a fantastic learning tool and competes well with a bench full of equipment. At $400, I wouldn't have even had the experience.
-
Siglent Technologies SDS1052DL u$s259.0 in amazon :scared:
-
Siglent Technologies SDS1052DL u$s259.0 in amazon :scared:
Don't even bother as the feature set is minimal and memory depth pitiful. :--
Never ever been tempted to import those here.
-
With the price bumped to $399 there are likely other USB connected "scopes" or similar devices competing. That high price just opens up the field to many competing devices. I'm not really up on what is available in this niche so maybe the competition isn't there yet.
Wow, I just saw this and $399 + whatever taxes and shipping comes along, it is really expensive. That not accounting for some of the most useful accessories such as the BNC adapter.
Sure, it has a ton of features but, for the individual user, it seriously clashes with other products - for starters a Owon VDS1022 at $100 ($60~70 in a promotion) is a very competent starter. Link this to a Kingst or a cheaper Saleae clone and you start to have the components to a serious beginner's lab for much less money.
The Analog Devices ADALM2000 competes and costs just $249
https://www.analog.com/en/design-center/evaluation-hardware-and-software/evaluation-boards-kits/adalm2000.html#eb-overview (https://www.analog.com/en/design-center/evaluation-hardware-and-software/evaluation-boards-kits/adalm2000.html#eb-overview)
The software isn't even close. I didn't spend enough time to actually use it for something because it didn't appear to have a 'demo' device. One thing about Digilent Waveforms, you can run through the software with no external hardware.
This is probably the reason why the ADALM is cheaper. Maintain software is an expensive business, especially in these days of ever changing OSes and Browsers which seem to break compatibility quite often. Besides, in my experience the risk is higher as this educational platform is not really the core business of the company - it is not uncommon for a full discontinuation to be one reorg away, unfortunately.
-
As a beginner, I've been looking at (if I can convince myself to spend this kind of money):
- Rigol DS1102Z-E from https://shop.electro-meters.com/collections/digital-oscilloscopes/products/rigol-ds1102z-e-8560281 (https://shop.electro-meters.com/collections/digital-oscilloscopes/products/rigol-ds1102z-e-8560281)
- Siglent SDS1102CML+ from https://www.transcat.ca/brand/siglent-store/oscilloscope/siglent-sds1102cml-100-mhz-oscilloscope-2-channel (https://www.transcat.ca/brand/siglent-store/oscilloscope/siglent-sds1102cml-100-mhz-oscilloscope-2-channel)
They're both around C$400.
-
Rigol DS1102Z-E
Siglent SDS1102CML+
Between those 2, I doubt the SDS1102CML+ is worth it these days, others can draw better traces and there's no control over the memory. In the UK the DS1102Z-E is usually a bit cheaper.
-
Rigol DS1102Z-E
Siglent SDS1102CML+
Between those 2, I doubt the SDS1102CML+ is worth it these days, others can draw better traces and there's no control over the memory. In the UK the DS1102Z-E is usually a bit cheaper.
Yes, no contest as the 1102Z-E is far better spec'ed.
A comparable model from Siglent is SDS1202X-E or for a similar but little dearer price point SDS1104X-U.
-
What about a GW Instek GDS-1202B for a beginner? Or even the GDS-1102A, which is cheaper.
-
What about a GW Instek GDS-1202B for a beginner? Or even the GDS-1102A, which is cheaper.
The GW Instek GDS-1202B seems to be a nice scope. Rumor has it that the FFT part of these scopes is quite nice and one of the better out there. My local prices here show that it's around 433 USD for the 1202B while the 1102A is actually a few dollars more expensive at 460 USD. These prices are from element14 (Farnell) and I guess there are cheaper places out there. Point is that the Siglent SDS1202X-E cost 359 USD at Amazon delivered, which is a bit cheaper. I recently got myself a SDS1104X-E and I am very happy with it so far.
-
The scopes in my price range appear to be (according to Amazon Canada pricing):
- Rigol DS1102Z-E
- Hantek DSO5102P
- Rigol DS1102E
-
The Rigol DS1102E is now outdated, no?
-
The Rigol DS1102E is now outdated, no?
Possibly; one thing I haven't done is determine when these models were introduced.
-
I forgot to include the HANMATEK DOS1102, but I think it might be a re-branded clone.
Oh and the Owon SDS1102. I need to read these forums for comments on this one.
-
The Rigol DS1102E is now outdated
5.7″ QVGA (320 x 240) display
= Yes. :)
-
The DS1052E/1102E is still a great scooe if you have nothing and find one in the used market for cheap. But paying the full price of a new unit, you are better served by other offers.