Siglent SSA3000X and SSA3000X-Plus Spectrum Analyzers

[Performa01]

A few tweaks later in manual mode revealed what I was looking for.
108 Hz out. 

But from the SDS2kX datasheet:
SDS2000X series AWG Frequency Accuracy ±50 ppm

Isn't it funny how all SDS2k(X) seem to run a little high in terms of internal reference frequency?

My measurements with 25MHz out of the WaveGen:
SDS2k: +440Hz (+17.6ppm)
SDS2kX: +333Hz (+13.3ppm)

My standalone Function Genrator is specified to +/-100ppm for 1 year over the temperature range of 18°C ~ 28°C, and right now it's +29.2°C here in my home lab and the instrument is several years old without recalibration. And guess what? It is just 38Hz high at 25MHz, which is only +1.5ppm. This is what I'm used to with all my equipment and I have always wondered why Siglent seems to struggle to do the same...

The winner amongst the SDS2k(X) instruments so far is your SDS2kX with just +108Hz (+4.3ppm). 

Not sure how accurate the measurement with the SSA3kX is though. Yes, according to the data sheet, internal reference of the SA should be within 1ppm, but the marker peak search might also be a little off.

Unless the SA has a built-in true frequency counter (some have), it isn't the instrument of choice for me when it comes to highly accurate frequency measurements. Of course it should be fine as long as we're talking about a couple of ppm, but you really cannot trust it whenever you want accuracies better than that...

[rf-loop]

A few tweaks later in manual mode revealed what I was looking for.
108 Hz out. 

But from the SDS2kX datasheet:
SDS2000X series AWG Frequency Accuracy ±50 ppm

Isn't it funny how all SDS2k(X) seem to run a little high in terms of internal reference frequency?

My measurements with 25MHz out of the WaveGen:
SDS2k: +440Hz (+17.6ppm)
SDS2kX: +333Hz (+13.3ppm)

My standalone Function Genrator is specified to +/-100ppm for 1 year over the temperature range of 18°C ~ 28°C, and right now it's +29.2°C here in my home lab and the instrument is several years old without recalibration. And guess what? It is just 38Hz high at 25MHz, which is only +1.5ppm. This is what I'm used to with all my equipment and I have always wondered why Siglent seems to struggle to do the same...

The winner amongst the SDS2k(X) instruments so far is your SDS2kX with just +108Hz (+4.3ppm). 

Not sure how accurate the measurement with the SSA3kX is though. Yes, according to the data sheet, internal reference of the SA should be within 1ppm, but the marker peak search might also be a little off.

Unless the SA has a built-in true frequency counter (some have), it isn't the instrument of choice for me when it comes to highly accurate frequency measurements. Of course it should be fine as long as we're talking about a couple of ppm, but you really cannot trust it whenever you want accuracies better than that...

Marker peak tracking is quite accurate. Much better than 1Hz resolution what it show. When follow it, it discipline very accurately to peak and follow it.  When I take this image it some times move ine pixel left or right and some times it also show 10MHz but mostly 1Hz less.

Signal is coming from Rb (Rb error sure less than +/- 5mHz but I do not promise more because there is time when I have adjusted it)
Same signal is also reference for HP83131A for measure SSA3000X 10MHz Ref Out.
It is bit high, (so,  SA readings bit low). When I take this image SSA Ref Out freq is around 10 000 000.430 Hz after over half hour stabilizing time (some first minutes it really sweep lot, nearly like ocxo)

But If turn (in marker functions) freq counter on (yes there is), there is some (perhaps systematic) small error. This counter resolution is 1Hz also with GHz range.
But, in this image it is not used. This is just with normal marker and tracking on.
Also if set scale to 10dB/div this peak top is wide but still it discipline marker very accurate to top middle, even when  part of trace peak  top looks straight horizontal line (due to TFT resolution) still marker is well adjusted to center

[tautech]

A few tweaks later in manual mode revealed what I was looking for.
108 Hz out. 

But from the SDS2kX datasheet:
SDS2000X series AWG Frequency Accuracy ±50 ppm

Isn't it funny how all SDS2k(X) seem to run a little high in terms of internal reference frequency?

My measurements with 25MHz out of the WaveGen:
SDS2k: +440Hz (+17.6ppm)
SDS2kX: +333Hz (+13.3ppm)

My standalone Function Genrator is specified to +/-100ppm for 1 year over the temperature range of 18°C ~ 28°C, and right now it's +29.2°C here in my home lab and the instrument is several years old without recalibration. And guess what? It is just 38Hz high at 25MHz, which is only +1.5ppm. This is what I'm used to with all my equipment and I have always wondered why Siglent seems to struggle to do the same...

The winner amongst the SDS2k(X) instruments so far is your SDS2kX with just +108Hz (+4.3ppm). 

Not sure how accurate the measurement with the SSA3kX is though. Yes, according to the data sheet, internal reference of the SA should be within 1ppm, but the marker peak search might also be a little off.

Unless the SA has a built-in true frequency counter (some have), it isn't the instrument of choice for me when it comes to highly accurate frequency measurements. Of course it should be fine as long as we're talking about a couple of ppm, but you really cannot trust it whenever you want accuracies better than that...

Ha, funny how all these inbuilt AWG's so far have been a little high in frequency.
My nearly 3 yr old SDS2304 (HW 3.3)



476 Hz low. 

[Performa01]

476 Hz low. 

Oh, great news – thanks for checking that!

I already wondered if there is some systematic problem, but you have now proven that it’s not.

[nctnico]

Be carefull which reference point to choose. Basically you can't measure more accurately than the accuracy specs of the clock source in the SA or generator.

[tautech]

Be carefull which reference point to choose. Basically you can't measure more accurately than the accuracy specs of the clock source in the SA or generator.

And you never took the moment to read rf-loops reply above. 

[rf-loop]

Be carefull which reference point to choose. Basically you can't measure more accurately than the accuracy specs of the clock source in the SA or generator.

If my 10MHz reference x accuracy is specified so that error is under 1ppm then it is as long as do not know more about it.
I have measured my individual  10MHz reference x so that I know, its error is less than 0.1ppm.
I can use it with this knowledge and I do not care anything about what manufacturer specifications are as long as I know better my individual unit specs what I can write.  But, this do not claim anything how it is in other single individual same equipment with same manufacturer specs. It can be better or worse than my individual and if really do not know, only known thing is manufacturer specifications and its calibration certificate.

So, if one do not really know more then can claim only as specifications as long as cal certificate is valid.

So, if look something what show 25MHz then can tell it is 25MHz +/- 25Hz if there is not more available aabout accuracy than manufacturer this specification.

My measurements are based to one selected Trimble Tb and Z3801A GPS (or based to these some times readjusted Rb's). With accuracy what I need they are enough, but still not true NIST traceable. Real accuracy is not so simple thing, depending of course if we are satisfied with max 1ppm or  <0.1ppb error.

[nctnico]

Be carefull which reference point to choose. Basically you can't measure more accurately than the accuracy specs of the clock source in the SA or generator.

And you never took the moment to read rf-loops reply above. 

I just see a lot of comparing between various generators going on without mentioning what frequency reference is being used.

[rf-loop]

Be carefull which reference point to choose. Basically you can't measure more accurately than the accuracy specs of the clock source in the SA or generator.

And you never took the moment to read rf-loops reply above. 

I just see a lot of comparing between various generators going on without mentioning what frequency reference is being used.

It looks like name Siglent generate some biased blind point in your eyes.

Years I have told in many places, including also in this thread what kind of references I use.
Btw, if you do not see in SSA3000X display left top reading Ext Reference it use its internal reference. Is it difficult to know then.
If there read Ext Ref then it can not know if not explained. Difficult?

[nctnico]

Be carefull which reference point to choose. Basically you can't measure more accurately than the accuracy specs of the clock source in the SA or generator.

And you never took the moment to read rf-loops reply above. 

I just see a lot of comparing between various generators going on without mentioning what frequency reference is being used.

It looks like name Siglent generate some biased blind point in your eyes.

I guess my name has the same effect on you  So no, I was just making a comment about Tautech's screendumps and the good habit of questioning the meaning of measurement results in general. He compares his generators with eachother and makes comments on their frequency being off based on -appearantly- the clock in his spectrum analyser. Statiscally it is odd that all generators he tested deviate in the same direction. It could happen but it requires some more investigation to determine whether his spectrum analyser is a bit off or the generators all are slightly high. When measuring 10MHz the 1ppm reference in the spectrum analyser has an error of +/-10Hz. At >50ppm accuracy the SDG1010 may be off by +/-500Hz at 10MHz.

[tautech]

Be carefull which reference point to choose. Basically you can't measure more accurately than the accuracy specs of the clock source in the SA or generator.

And you never took the moment to read rf-loops reply above. 

I just see a lot of comparing between various generators going on without mentioning what frequency reference is being used.

It looks like name Siglent generate some biased blind point in your eyes.

I guess my name has the same effect on you  So no, I was just making a comment about Tautech's screendumps and the good habit of questioning the meaning of measurement results in general. He compares his generators with eachother and makes comments on their frequency being off based on -appearantly- the clock in his spectrum analyser. Statiscally it is odd that all generators he tested deviate in the same direction. It could happen but it requires some more investigation to determine whether his spectrum analyser is a bit off or the generators all are slightly high. When measuring 10MHz the 1ppm reference in the spectrum analyser has an error of +/-10Hz. At >50ppm accuracy the SDG1010 may be off by +/-500Hz at 10MHz.

My turn.
Do your eyes not work?

A few tweaks later in manual mode revealed what I was looking for.
108 Hz out. 

But from the SDS2kX datasheet:
SDS2000X series AWG Frequency Accuracy ±50 ppm

Isn't it funny how all SDS2k(X) seem to run a little high in terms of internal reference frequency?

My measurements with 25MHz out of the WaveGen:
SDS2k: +440Hz (+17.6ppm)
SDS2kX: +333Hz (+13.3ppm)

My standalone Function Genrator is specified to +/-100ppm for 1 year over the temperature range of 18°C ~ 28°C, and right now it's +29.2°C here in my home lab and the instrument is several years old without recalibration. And guess what? It is just 38Hz high at 25MHz, which is only +1.5ppm. This is what I'm used to with all my equipment and I have always wondered why Siglent seems to struggle to do the same...

The winner amongst the SDS2k(X) instruments so far is your SDS2kX with just +108Hz (+4.3ppm). 

Not sure how accurate the measurement with the SSA3kX is though. Yes, according to the data sheet, internal reference of the SA should be within 1ppm, but the marker peak search might also be a little off.

Unless the SA has a built-in true frequency counter (some have), it isn't the instrument of choice for me when it comes to highly accurate frequency measurements. Of course it should be fine as long as we're talking about a couple of ppm, but you really cannot trust it whenever you want accuracies better than that...

Marker peak tracking is quite accurate. Much better than 1Hz resolution what it show. When follow it, it discipline very accurately to peak and follow it.  When I take this image it some times move ine pixel left or right and some times it also show 10MHz but mostly 1Hz less.

Signal is coming from Rb (Rb error sure less than +/- 5mHz but I do not promise more because there is time when I have adjusted it)
Same signal is also reference for HP83131A for measure SSA3000X 10MHz Ref Out.
It is bit high, (so,  SA readings bit low). When I take this image SSA Ref Out freq is around 10 000 000.430 Hz after over half hour stabilizing time (some first minutes it really sweep lot, nearly like ocxo)

But If turn (in marker functions) freq counter on (yes there is), there is some (perhaps systematic) small error. This counter resolution is 1Hz also with GHz range.
But, in this image it is not used. This is just with normal marker and tracking on.
Also if set scale to 10dB/div this peak top is wide but still it discipline marker very accurate to top middle, even when  part of trace peak  top looks straight horizontal line (due to TFT resolution) still marker is well adjusted to center

[nctnico]

Resolution is something different than accuracy. With an internal reference accuracy of 1ppm in the SSA3000 measuring a 1GHz signal has an accuracy of +/-1000Hz so when the marker says it is at 1 000 000 000 Hz in reality the frequency can be anywhere between 999 999 000 Hz and 1 000 001 000 Hz.

[tautech]

Resolution is something different than accuracy. With an internal reference accuracy of 1ppm in the SSA3000 measuring a 1GHz signal has an accuracy of +/-1000Hz so when the marker says it is at 1 000 000 000 Hz in reality the frequency can be anywhere between 999 999 000 Hz and 1 000 001 000 Hz.

Oh for heavens sake.
rf-loop has made that statement based on fact.....by verification of the frequency counters accuracy.

Do you doubt he has the equipment to do that?

If you're an persistent doubter, grow some balls and go and get one to check it out for yourself.
You may have had a disappointing experience with Siglent equipment before but surely you've lived long enough to know and have seen companies improve their product, or are you so blind you cannot see?

[nctnico]

Resolution is something different than accuracy. With an internal reference accuracy of 1ppm in the SSA3000 measuring a 1GHz signal has an accuracy of +/-1000Hz so when the marker says it is at 1 000 000 000 Hz in reality the frequency can be anywhere between 999 999 000 Hz and 1 000 001 000 Hz.

Oh for heavens sake.
rf-loop has made that statement based on fact.....by verification of the frequency counters accuracy.

Do you doubt he has the equipment to do that?

I don't doubt rf-loop has the equipment to do that but the thing is that when it comes to drawing conclusions from measurements you have to go by the accuracy specification for the instrument. If rf-loop's SSA3000X happends to be accurate within 0.05ppm (for example) that doesn't mean the SSA3000X you have or which I could get has the same (initial) accuracy. Siglent specifies it will be accurate within 1ppm over a certain time and temperature range so that is as sure as you can get without using an external (more accurate) frequency reference.

For example: earlier this year I bought a Keysight 6.5 digit DMM for a project. It's calibration sheet shows the readings during factory calibration are well within it's accuracy specification but still I can't say it will always perform better than specified based because it worked so well during it's factory calibration. It has been transported, went through temperature cycles, was switched on/off several times, humidity changes, etc which could have changed it's reference a little bit. Keysight's specs guarantees it will meet a certain level of accuracy but there is no way for me to tell how much it has actually drifted.

[tautech]

Resolution is something different than accuracy. With an internal reference accuracy of 1ppm in the SSA3000 measuring a 1GHz signal has an accuracy of +/-1000Hz so when the marker says it is at 1 000 000 000 Hz in reality the frequency can be anywhere between 999 999 000 Hz and 1 000 001 000 Hz.

Oh for heavens sake.
rf-loop has made that statement based on fact.....by verification of the frequency counters accuracy.

Do you doubt he has the equipment to do that?

I don't doubt rf-loop has the equipment to do that but the thing is that when it comes to drawing conclusions from measurements you have to go by the accuracy specification for the instrument. If rf-loop's SSA3000X happends to be accurate within 0.05ppm (for example) that doesn't mean the SSA3000X you have or which I could get has the same (initial) accuracy. Siglent specifies it will be accurate within 1ppm over a certain time and temperature range so that is as sure as you can get without using an external (more accurate) frequency reference.

For example: earlier this year I bought a Keysight 6.5 digit DMM for a project. It's calibration sheet shows the readings during factory calibration are well within it's accuracy specification but still I can't say it will always perform better than specified based because it worked so well during it's factory calibration. It has been transported, went through temperature cycles, was switched on/off several times, humidity changes, etc which could have changed it's reference a little bit. Keysight's specs guarantees it will meet a certain level of accuracy but there is no way for me to tell how much it has actually drifted.

   
I'm calling you out as a troll.

You made this post:

Be carefull which reference point to choose. Basically you can't measure more accurately than the accuracy specs of the clock source in the SA or generator.

And you never took the moment to read rf-loops reply above. 

I just see a lot of comparing between various generators going on without mentioning what frequency reference is being used.

It looks like name Siglent generate some biased blind point in your eyes.

I guess my name has the same effect on you  So no, I was just making a comment about Tautech's screendumps and the good habit of questioning the meaning of measurement results in general. He compares his generators with eachother and makes comments on their frequency being off based on -appearantly- the clock in his spectrum analyser. Statiscally it is odd that all generators he tested deviate in the same direction. It could happen but it requires some more investigation to determine whether his spectrum analyser is a bit off or the generators all are slightly high. When measuring 10MHz the 1ppm reference in the spectrum analyser has an error of +/-10Hz. At >50ppm accuracy the SDG1010 may be off by +/-500Hz at 10MHz.

Again you fail to read a post for the info contained within and are blatantly trolling.

A few tweaks later in manual mode revealed what I was looking for.
108 Hz out. 

But from the SDS2kX datasheet:
SDS2000X series AWG Frequency Accuracy ±50 ppm

Isn't it funny how all SDS2k(X) seem to run a little high in terms of internal reference frequency?

My measurements with 25MHz out of the WaveGen:
SDS2k: +440Hz (+17.6ppm)
SDS2kX: +333Hz (+13.3ppm)

My standalone Function Genrator is specified to +/-100ppm for 1 year over the temperature range of 18°C ~ 28°C, and right now it's +29.2°C here in my home lab and the instrument is several years old without recalibration. And guess what? It is just 38Hz high at 25MHz, which is only +1.5ppm. This is what I'm used to with all my equipment and I have always wondered why Siglent seems to struggle to do the same...

The winner amongst the SDS2k(X) instruments so far is your SDS2kX with just +108Hz (+4.3ppm). 

Not sure how accurate the measurement with the SSA3kX is though. Yes, according to the data sheet, internal reference of the SA should be within 1ppm, but the marker peak search might also be a little off.

Unless the SA has a built-in true frequency counter (some have), it isn't the instrument of choice for me when it comes to highly accurate frequency measurements. Of course it should be fine as long as we're talking about a couple of ppm, but you really cannot trust it whenever you want accuracies better than that...

Ha, funny how all these inbuilt AWG's so far have been a little high in frequency.
My nearly 3 yr old SDS2304 (HW 3.3)



476 Hz low. 

[rf-loop]

Resolution is something different than accuracy. With an internal reference accuracy of 1ppm in the SSA3000 measuring a 1GHz signal has an accuracy of +/-1000Hz so when the marker says it is at 1 000 000 000 Hz in reality the frequency can be anywhere between 999 999 000 Hz and 1 000 001 000 Hz.

I've always said that when you try and have enough hard-working, everything can be learned. Even this kind of complex things.
 

[nctnico]

So +/-1ppm of 1GHz is not +/-1000Hz?

[Performa01]

Gentlemen, please don’t get into a fight for nothing, despite a few misunderstandings.

May I sum it all up:

Nobody here has claimed that the SSA3kX generally could do frequency measurements with better than 1ppm accuracy (without individual verification of the calibration, that is).

We were derailing this thread by briefly discussing the frequency deviations of instruments that have 25ppm accuracy specs. To do this, an instrument with 1ppm guaranteed accuracy is certainly up to the task.

I’ve made a silly objection that the peak search might introduce additional errors on the marker frequency, but that quite obviously cannot be true for verifying a 25MHz signal on an instrument that offers RBW down to 1Hz, like the SSA3kX does.

Still I’m old school, so whenever I publish any frequency measurements, they will be from my frequency counter that’s accurate within a couple of ppb thanks to a well aged, military grade ovenized frequency standard (and calibration is checked from time to time). But that’s certainly not necessary as long we’re talking about deviations in the ppm range.

[rf-loop]

So +/-1ppm of 1GHz is not +/-1000Hz?

Why such question? Has someone said something like that?
Do you like the strawman?

[nctnico]

So +/-1ppm of 1GHz is not +/-1000Hz?

Why such question? Has someone said something like that?
Do you like the strawman?

Just answer the question yes or no.
If I use a frequency counter with a 1ppm reference what is the possible error when it shows 1GHz?

[joeqsmith]

My measurements are based to one selected Trimble Tb and Z3801A GPS (or based to these some times readjusted Rb's). With accuracy what I need they are enough, but still not true NIST traceable. Real accuracy is not so simple thing, depending of course if we are satisfied with max 1ppm or  <0.1ppb error.

I too use the Z3801A.  It's tied to a UPS and looks like it been on for almost 13 years now.   Even back then I don't remember them selling for a whole lot.   I have an antenna located in the attic of the house for it.  Modified mine to use an internal supply and enabled the RS-232.  I thought the 10MHz reference was was 10-9, so 1hz/GHz.   Also thought this was not very good compared to what they had at the time.   

Looking in the manual, "Frequency Accuracy: < 1 x 10-9, one day average"   Certainly good enough for 1ppm.   

[rf-loop]

I too use the Z3801A.  It's tied to a UPS and looks like it been on for almost 13 years now.   Even back then I don't remember them selling for a whole lot.   I have an antenna located in the attic of the house for it.  Modified mine to use an internal supply and enabled the RS-232.  I thought the 10MHz reference was was 10-9, so 1hz/GHz.   Also thought this was not very good compared to what they had at the time.   

Looking in the manual, "Frequency Accuracy: < 1 x 10-9, one day average"   Certainly good enough for 1ppm.

Looking in the manual, "Frequency Accuracy: < 1 x 10-9, one day average"

We have smiled with this specification many times. But, they do not lie.
It is better.

Need also remember there was time  when they change SA status in GPS system for civil use.

But some 3801 is much better than some other. Also depending if OWEN is drifted out from optimal temperature discipline or perhaps in manufacturing phase they have not done it perfectly for every individual XTALS)

It fun that some (old) Trimble (not Tb but model what looks like just as Z3801A
specify:
Frequency accuracy - <2E-12 one day average  and  <2E-10 any interval.
Perhaps Trimble NTPX26  what  have also used years ago parallel with Z3801
(At this time I have 2x Z3801A and this Trimble NTPX26 and also Trimble Tb (with good OCXO)
And I need say I get best with Z3801A's
But Trimble Tb can be very good if environment temp do not change so much and parameters are carefully set for accurate frequency (default is more like fast find accurate time and this leads to more wide freq changes when it discipline. Discipline Parameters (and also receiver parameters depending local  things) need find optimum for individual Trimble)

[Bicurico]

Hello.
Can someone please tell me if it is possible to downgrade the firmware? If I buy a new one and get it with FW0707, can I still install FW0705?
Thanks!

[tautech]

Hello.
Can someone please tell me if it is possible to downgrade the firmware? If I buy a new one and get it with FW0707, can I still install FW0705?
Thanks!

Yes.

From 7.07 to 7.05



And back again, no problem.

One of the improvements in 7.07 was to enable the saving of jpeg file types, not only bmp as was in 7.05 so I had to convert the image to jpeg from bmp to meet the forum file size limits.



I do like the file/folder management UI, it's quite easy to browse into all levels of sub-folders and out again. 

[Bicurico]

Thanks!