Is this oscilloscope perhaps the best for the beginner?

[tautech]

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. 

[engrguy42]

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    ), 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 

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. 

[rstofer]

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    )

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/

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!

[Johnny B Good]

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.

 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".

JBG

[tautech]

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.

 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".

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.

[ArcticPhoenix0]

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.

[wizard69]

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    ), 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 

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.

[tautech]

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 ? 

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.

[Electro Detective]

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 

[tautech]

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 

 

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.

[rstofer]

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.

[Johnny B Good]

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.

 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".

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  ) ).

 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

[rsjsouza]

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.

[HobGoblyn]

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

[coppice]

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?

[tautech]

@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. 

[Johnny B Good]

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? 

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

[Tech77997]

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!

[Electro Detective]

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   

sometimes it can side track into a 100+ page sword and sandal epic   


 


 

[GreyWoolfe]

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.

[Old Printer]

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.

[rstofer]

@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.

[tautech]

@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.

[rstofer]

I have got to get that SDS1104X-E - that’s really nice.

[tautech]

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.