SDS2000x plus has AWG integrated, not a good one, but it is there and can do bode plot... no need for the DG811IMHO the AWG is the biggest let-down of the SDS2000X+, which is otherwise a great scope for the price. The hardware seems pretty good with 14bit, 125MS/s and 50MHz BW, but the software implementation is just too basic and only really good for simple fixed (e.g. sine/square) waveforms. No modulation, no pulse train generator, no random noise generator, no noise-on-sine....
The AWG in the SDS2000X+ in its current form is not a replacement for a good signal generator and not up to the implementation in e.g. the R&S RTB2000. However, if Siglent makes a proper signal generator in a future firmware update, this scope is going to be really competitive!
The Bode analyzer functionality is good though (albeit a bit slow).
So much for me to unpack!!! So many responses! What a wonderful community!
So after reading up on MSO it does not look like I will go that route...
However, a combo Scope and AFG sounds like a good combination. What is the typical use case you have where the combo does not give you good enough amplitude?
What is you suggestion for a Combo Scope/AFG?
Thanks!
--Tim
So much for me to unpack!!! So many responses! What a wonderful community!
So after reading up on MSO it does not look like I will go that route...
However, a combo Scope and AFG sounds like a good combination. What is the typical use case you have where the combo does not give you good enough amplitude?
What is you suggestion for a Combo Scope/AFG?
Thanks!
--Tim
Test conditions are two posts before in post #1743.
OK, thanks.
Without even going into the chosen setup it's obvious that:
a) Higher bandwidth scope = more noise.
However, a combo Scope and AFG sounds like a good combination. What is the typical use case you have where the combo does not give you good enough amplitude?
What is you suggestion for a Combo Scope/AFG?
--Tim
However, a combo Scope and AFG sounds like a good combination. What is the typical use case you have where the combo does not give you good enough amplitude?
What is you suggestion for a Combo Scope/AFG?
--Tim
Mostly for me it’s microcontroller ADCs with Vref over 2.5V, so, for example, a 2.5V AWG maximum often won’t test through the ADC’s full range.
The Rigols seems to be the best in terms of having 2 channels, and modulation and even AWG capabilities, but are limited to +/-2.5V. I’m not aware of any other scope AFG offering modulation capabilities, and very few offer dual channel.
Siglents top out at +/-3V and is single channel, and offers no AWG capability or modulation.
Keysights top out at +/-5V and are single channel on the 3000 series, dual channel on the 4000 and 6000, and do offer AWG capability but no modulation.
Tek MDOs are +/-5V and offer no AWG or modulati9n capability.
However, a combo Scope and AFG sounds like a good combination. What is the typical use case you have where the combo does not give you good enough amplitude?
What is you suggestion for a Combo Scope/AFG?
--Tim
Mostly for me it’s microcontroller ADCs with Vref over 2.5V, so, for example, a 2.5V AWG maximum often won’t test through the ADC’s full range.
The Rigols seems to be the best in terms of having 2 channels, and modulation and even AWG capabilities, but are limited to +/-2.5V. I’m not aware of any other scope AFG offering modulation capabilities, and very few offer dual channel.
Siglents top out at +/-3V and is single channel, and offers no AWG capability or modulation.
Keysights top out at +/-5V and are single channel on the 3000 series, dual channel on the 4000 and 6000, and do offer AWG capability but no modulation.
Tek MDOs are +/-5V and offer no AWG or modulati9n capability.For completeness: the R&S RTM3000 offers modulation, arbitrary (32kpts) and noise. All in all it is a pretty complete generator. I do use it every now and then. Unfortunately there is no way to trigger on the internal generator though.
You’ll see I had the 20MHz bandwidth limit apploed in all cases.
You’ll see I had the 20MHz bandwidth limit apploed in all cases.
Yes, I saw that, but the statement still applies.
The dangerous part is extrapolating your result to when 20MHz limiter isn't enabled*. You're assuming the Rigol noise will increase in exactly the same way as the Siglent noise.
(*) ie. the Way the 'scope is generally used.
You’ll see I had the 20MHz bandwidth limit apploed in all cases.
Yes, I saw that, but the statement still applies.
The dangerous part is extrapolating your result to when 20MHz limiter isn't enabled*. You're assuming the Rigol noise will increase in exactly the same way as the Siglent noise.
(*) ie. the Way the 'scope is generally used.
But if I hadn't used the BW limiter, everyone would have complained that I wasn't comparing like for like.
I didn't put the BW limit on to make the Rigol look bad, I just wanted a level playing field.
Maybe some of the Rigol noise appears a bit further down the circuit path, after the 20Mhz limiting capacitor.
What noise levels do you see with the limiter off? That the figure would be interesting, too. Also: How much effect does the 20Mhz limiter have on each 'scope? Some of them might have a better limiter (ie. more than capacitor).
It seems that Rigol's own chipset has been a bridge too far and it is not the leap ahead they promise it to be.
I think these are the alternatives in Rigol:
Rigol DG1032Z 30MHz Arbitrary Waveform Function Generator
Rigol DP832 195W Power Supply
Rigol DS1054Z 50MHz 4-Ch Digital Oscilloscope
I think these are the alternatives in Rigol:
Rigol DG1032Z 30MHz Arbitrary Waveform Function Generator
Rigol DP832 195W Power Supply
Rigol DS1054Z 50MHz 4-Ch Digital Oscilloscope
For the power supply, if I were buying one today, I would probably go with a GW Instek GPP model with the LAN option.
This is the 4-channel one. You can find the 3-channel model a bit cheaper.
https://www.tequipment.net/Instek/GPP-4323/DC-Power-Supplies-/-Lab-Power-Supplies/
There's a good discussion about it here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/seeking-psu-advice-rohde-schwarz-nge103b-com3-or-keysight-e36313a/msg3230970/#msg3230970
It seems that Rigol's own chipset has been a bridge too far and it is not the leap ahead they promise it to be.
Well, that's life, you get what you pay for. The MSO5000 is for me remarkable scope but i'd still prefer to own the SDS2000x+ because it seems more polished to me and frankly, I see no reason to have a 8gsa/s converter for a 350MHz signal, thats almost 23x (also, whats the point of having such high frequency and no 50ohm input, nahhh).
Somehow after reading every post's suggestion I have arrived at the same list of Siglent pieces.
Siglent Technologies SPD3303X-E Triple Output Power Supply
Siglent SDS1104X-E 100Mhz digital oscilloscope 4 channels standard decoder
Siglent Technologies SDG1032X Arbitrary Waveform - Function Generator
What are the same comparable items with Rigol? My head is swimming with too many model numbers and features!
Thanks!
Tim
...
Test conditions are two posts before in post #1743.
Effective bits:
My comparison of MSO5000 to SDS2000X+
...
Test conditions are two posts before in post #1743.
Effective bits:
My comparison of MSO5000 to SDS2000X+
I'm sorry but I dare to question @Howardlong's findings on the MSO5000 rms noise and thus the calculated equivalent resolution.
Just compare the peak-to-peak with rms noise figures at 500mV/div setting:
Vpp - 44.5mV
Vrms - 44.2mV
These two numbers are more or less identical which is mathematically impossible in case of an observation of AC signals. Vrms cannot be higher than Vp = 1/2 Vpp, which is the case if the signal has true square shape. And noise doesn't look that much like a square wave... On average, the crest factor for white noise can be assumed to be in the ballpark of 4, thus Vrms should be closse to 1/8 Vpp which matches the figures of the "big" Keysight and the TEK surprisingly well.
To explain the measured figures, I state that all those numbers that deviated considerably from the 1/8 relation had some amount of DC offset superimposed. This is easily overlooked since the zero marker is such a tiny pip at the left border of the screen... The better method of evaluating the AC component of Vrms using internal measurements is just taking the standard deviation of Vpp. This eliminates the average (DC offset) by summing up geometrically the difference of the individual measurements minus the average, e voila -- AC RMS .
The resulting equivalent resolution figures for some of the scopes will turn out much better if this calculation is done properly, but this wouldn't change the impression the reader now already memorized that the MSO5000 has got a front-end that's noisy like the Niagara falls... The apparent noise definitely differs, and Rigol for sure is among the noisier "party", but it's definitely not as bad as Howard evaluated in his table. Much of the apparent noise is also contributed to the way the traces are visualized, and Rigol's display engine traditionally emphasizes the extremal values and thus makes their scopes appear more noisy.
I'm not a Rigol or Siglent fanboy - I own gear of both companies and also had some "buyer's remorse" with both, but I think when publishing a comparison like this, we should at least make sure that the figures make sense from a mathematical point of view...