"A" brand instruments vs "B" brand

[Fungus]

Oh you are tiresome and fucking lazy Fungus:
15B+ is $77 and took me 2 minutes to find one, they might even be available cheaper and although that's 50% more than a 101 it's worth it.
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004275532822.html

(link trimmed, it's not difficult...)

Oh, my bad. I forgot we were in the November sales so they might be cheaper this week.

$77 isn't the price I get when I click that link though, I get this:


(Plus I'll have to pay 20% VAT, but we'll ignore that for the sake of argument).

The Brymen you're trying hard to ignore is the BM805s, which I can get all year round for 58 Euros.

[e0ne199]

what would you do when your "A" brand oscilloscope got broken and it could not have service support from keysight anymore?

[Fungus]

So, same answer provided as months previous, a junior was let loose without supervision.
Since when has Dave interviewed any other TE CEO's ? 

We know the excuses they gave, but two wrongs still don't make a right.

[Black Phoenix]

Oh you are tiresome and fucking lazy Fungus:
15B+ is $77 and took me 2 minutes to find one, they might even be available cheaper and although that's 50% more than a 101 it's worth it.
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004275532822.html

(link trimmed, it's not difficult...)

Oh, my bad. I forgot we were in the November sales so they might be cheaper this week.

It's not the price I get when I click that link though, I get this:


(Plus I'll have to pay 20% VAT, but I'll ignore that for the sake of argument).

The Brymen you're trying hard to ignore is the BM805s, which I can get all year round for 58 Euros.

Expensive even in sale for that model. I can get the 17B+ directly in the Huaqiangbei Electronics Market by talking with the owner of the shop that fill my electric and electronic needs here when I need something urgent and can't wait for 2 day delivery.

570RMB the last time I check, last week.

I've been thinking of buying one to offer to a neighbour kid here who is into Arduino (my fault, he saw me some time ago fixing some gaming consoles and got curious, pick up his Chinese new year money and bought a kit for himself) and I want to make him start to do small projects in a breadboard. I already got him some boards and discrete components so just missing the DMM.

Could give him a Uni-T but I'm more knowledge in Fluke than the Uni-T offerings. Just a small Christmas present for a kid who study like hell every single day because of their family (culture related, not going to force my own believes - school then extra classes and after arriving home is study until midnight/one every single week day) and the only small time he have free spends playing with Arduinos and playing football (soccer for the ones on the other side of the Atlantic) with my kid.

[balnazzar]

I hope nobody is looking at the back of the Tektronix then. Likely it says 'made in China'.

Yeah, but the company itself is American.

Tek makes the majority of its scopes in the US. The 2 series is made in China, but Tek *owns* those factories, and controls all the steps in the manufacturing process.

As for the general discussion, Billy is comparing products that belong to different market segments (2K+, 2K HD, RTB2K). The true-12bit scope should be left out of the comparison because it belongs to another tier with respect to the other two, and it has been made with the Lecroy brand in mind. Even the knobs/buttons are different from the other Siglents, and as some report, it's extremely silent.

[joeqsmith]

I'm just trying to figure out why you think the Fluke 101 is bad value for money.

I just feel it's an extremely limited and simple instrument.  For the price you can source a good old Fluke slide switch model like a 8022 or the bench equivalent like the 8012 (or both if you're patient) that will run circles around the 101.  It does have the advantage of being tiny, I'll give it that, but a modern DMM without at least a mA range? 

It's only redeeming feature is it can survive Joe's tests. $50 is a lot for some for a meter with such limited capability and for not a whole lot more you can get a Fluke DMM with uA capability.....and Joe has beat one of them up too.

Must be referring to the 17B+. 

Close, 15B, before they did the + thing. Same as 17B but different external case and button overlay.
No backlight.
Good sound basic DMM with most of the basic features you want in a DMM for electronics, the rest you can do with instruments better suited to the more advanced measurement types.
AC and DC current modes into uA and a few other bits and bobs the 101 don't have. IIRC I paid $63 for mine which is not a lot more for a lot more DMM than a 101.

Ok, I thought you were referring to my testing. 

[BillyO]

The truth is the Siglent out performs the Keysight.  The $200 compact camera does not come close to an SLR system with a full range of lenses.

And I'm telling you the latter is also largely true for the former. Largely where is comes to useability but the RTB2004 is even better.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/functional-comparison-of-rs-rtb2000-siglent-sds2000x-and-keysight-dsox1000/msg3922118/#msg3922118

After many hours of videos..  I have to say that the RTB2004 is a nice scope.  However ..  to get the R&S with the options that came with the Siglent I'd have to spend $5725.  That is $4725 more than what I paid.  The little extra niceties that the RTB2004 offers are not worth that for me.   Not by a long shot.

Then there are the things the Siglent has that R&S doesn't like deeper memory, more accurate time base, faster WFCR, and a few other things that are probably not that important like higher frequency internal generator (I have an external generator that is far more useful).

Then there is also the hackability of the Siglent which can get me a scope that even $8500 spent on the R&S would not get me.

So, thanks for pointing me to that series.  It was very informative and has assure me I made the right purchase for my needs.

[thikone]

Indeed. And the DSOX2000 series from Keysight is one of the least interesting choices from the A brands. R&S RTB2004 is well worth considering.

The RTB2004 is nicer than the DSOX2000 but still not much competition for that Siglent SDS2000 HD.  It can't even compare to the much lower spec'd SDS2000X Plus.

So, spec is better for Siglent SDS2000X HD than for RTB2004. But Rigol MSO5000 is even better, is it not? Yet I see that most people suggest Siglent over Rigol.

I want to buy a decent oscilloscope and did some research. Rigol seems to be cheaper spec wise almost every time. But then I started noticing other aspects, like responsivness, ease of use and UI in general. And Rigol is not so great in this area. And for me this is a very important area. Good user interface means less frustration, more joy to use and ultimately I would use it more often, spend more time and do more project. At least it is so with my other hobby - woodworking.

It is very tempting to get SDS2000X+ that has 20% discount till end of this year. On the other hand, UI of RTB2004 is so nice and I must admit beautiful internals (for example, trigger implementation is such that it can trigger even on not active channel because there is a separate path from front-end to triggers logic), but not yet hacked. Hack, I even considering to get a loan from bank and buy MXO44 that has even better UI and bigger screen...

While I don't need many other qualities of A-brand scopes (long production life, certificates and such), B-brands just don't cut it in this respect.

Am I crazy or is there others who think this way? Not that I'm big fan of Apple, but what is equivalent of iPad in oscilloscope world?

[rsjsouza]

Am I crazy or is there others who think this way? Not that I'm big fan of Apple, but what is equivalent of iPad in oscilloscope world?

UI and niceties are very alluring. At work I have been using a larger number of oscilloscopes and the higher end models tend to have much faster processors to handle the UI. Due to the sheer cost of such equipment, however, the purchase decisions will forcefully require compromise. That is what an iPad or iPhone used to give you a few years ago: polish but at the expense of the latest features.

At home I drive an advanced Rigol (DS4014, hackable) and its UI is not as polished as the R&S RTA or as smooth as the KS DSOX3014A at work. However, I am convinced everyday of my decision at the time whenever I look at the bang per buck ratio of these two advanced models Hackability is what placed Rigol on the map and I would never be able to afford an equipment at such advanced level for my home.

[nightfire]

But a Fluke 101 is worth every penny if your hobby requires a "safe" meter. 

That thing can't even measure current.  I guess that way they don't even have to put a fuse in it.

This is very probably done intentional.
Two reasons to do so:
a) Manufacturer saves money on parts that are will not be used like input jacks and precision shunt resistors
b) As there is no low-impedance input, there is no possibility for the classic cause of accidents in leaving the test leads on amps and then attempt to probe voltages...
Some manufacturers like Hioki actively promote some versions of their multimeters with non-available Amps inputs as a measurement to increase work safety in critical environments.

[balnazzar]

So, spec is better for Siglent SDS2000X HD than for RTB2004. But Rigol MSO5000 is even better, is it not? Yet I see that most people suggest Siglent over Rigol.

Time to start a thread about the MSO5000's noise floor 

Am I crazy or is there others who think this way? Not that I'm big fan of Apple, but what is equivalent of iPad in oscilloscope world?

There is no equivalent of an iPad in the oscilloscope universe. In the tablet universe you pay some 500 bucks for a decent android tablet, and *less* than twice such price for an iPad.
When it comes to oscilloscopes, you still pay some 500 bucks for a decent (or almost) scope, but 10X that price for the iPad-ish equivalent (say, the KS 3000T).

[Hydrawerk]

Any thoughts on GW Instek? It should be probably OK.

[BillyO]

So, spec is better for Siglent SDS2000X HD than for RTB2004. But Rigol MSO5000 is even better, is it not? Yet I see that most people suggest Siglent over Rigol

No.  The SDS2000X HD is a much higher spec'd scope than the Rigol MSO5000.  Even the SDS2000X Plus is a better scope, all considered, than the Rigol and is now almost a low cost.

[BillyO]

Any thoughts on GW Instek? It should be probably OK.

They make some real nice stuff.  Generally speaking right in there with Siglent and Rigol.

[BillyO]

This is very probably done intentional.
Two reasons to do so:
a) Manufacturer saves money on parts that are will not be used like input jacks and precision shunt resistors
b) As there is no low-impedance input, there is no possibility for the classic cause of accidents in leaving the test leads on amps and then attempt to probe voltages...
Some manufacturers like Hioki actively promote some versions of their multimeters with non-available Amps inputs as a measurement to increase work safety in critical environments.

a) For sure.
b) Maybe, but it really limits the use of the device.  I find I need to take current readings all the time so a DMM like the Fluke 101 would just not work out for me as my only meter.  The only reason I can see having it as a 2nd meter is because of it's small size.  However, there are a lot of compact meters to be had for $50US that have a lot more going for them in terms of functionality than the little Fluke that for me woudl be better choices as a 2nd compact DMM.  The UT61 series comes to mind.

[nctnico]

Any thoughts on GW Instek? It should be probably OK.

They make some real nice stuff.  Generally speaking right in there with Siglent and Rigol.

Not quite. GW Instek has been around much longer and has a much bigger revenue. They certainly have carved out a place in the professional market for a long time already. Their gear typically works as it should (or it gets fixed quickly) and they offer a much wider range of instruments.

[BillyO]

Not quite. GW Instek has been around much longer and has a much bigger revenue. They certainly have carved out a place in the professional market for a long time already. Their gear typically works as it should (or it gets fixed quickly) and they offer a much wider range of instruments.

So you'd put them in the A group?  I'll go with your estimate here as I don't have hands on experience with GW Instek.  I was just gong by what I've read or seen on YT.

BTW, I have 4 products from Siglent - none are not working as they should.  One had some tiny issues, but Like I said, Siglent got back to me in less than 2 hours to resolve the problem.  Maybe I'm just lucky, but I'm not sure that is the case.  I think you will see Siglent make serious inroads into the professional market over the next decade.

[Fungus]

Not quite. GW Instek has been around much longer and has a much bigger revenue. They certainly have carved out a place in the professional market for a long time already. Their gear typically works as it should (or it gets fixed quickly) and they offer a much wider range of instruments.

So you'd put them in the A group?

As noted many times: "A group" has very little to do with the quality or abilities of the instruments (they can often be worse!). It's all about the support contracts, traceability, name recognition, etc.

(eg. "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM")

[balnazzar]

Any thoughts on GW Instek? It should be probably OK.

They make some real nice stuff.  Generally speaking right in there with Siglent and Rigol.

VERY different kind of product. Made to feel very responsive and analog-like (a-la Keysight), but with less features w.r.t. Sig and Rigol (e.g. FRA, etc...) for the same price tag.

[nctnico]

Not quite. GW Instek has been around much longer and has a much bigger revenue. They certainly have carved out a place in the professional market for a long time already. Their gear typically works as it should (or it gets fixed quickly) and they offer a much wider range of instruments.

So you'd put them in the A group?  I'll go with your estimate here as I don't have hands on experience with GW Instek.  I was just gong by what I've read or seen on YT.

I'd put GW Instek in the Sub-A bracket. From what I see GW Instek optimises to deliver good equipment at a lower price that doesn't have so much advanced features so it takes less engineering & testing time to develop. Also they seem to be better at re-using software from earlier models so features implemented in earlier models get pushed forward to newer models.

I think you will see Siglent make serious inroads into the professional market over the next decade.

They may try but for as long as Siglent doesn't get firmware functionality & regression testing in order, they won't succeed. The professional market is all about being able to trust your test equipment. And by the time they succeed, Siglent gear will be just as expensive as buying from established A brands.

[Domitronic]

Or spareparts...Knob is lost ? no problem, here you have a new one.

Thats not valid for Tektronix. Asked them how much a repair of a knob on a 10 year old scope is. The encoder seems to be broken. Answer was that they don't even know if they have the part. I have to send the scope to Tektronix, and then they will check. This check costs already 700 Euros. And if they find they can't repair it because they don't have the part anymore the 700 Euro are gone.


Edit: The scope was already 13 years old at the time of the request for a quote.

[Fungus]

I have to send the scope to Tektronix, and then they will check. This check costs already 700 Euros. And if they find they can't repair it because they don't have the part anymore the 700 Euro are gone.

That's as an individual. You'll never see that if you're a corporate user because it'll be covered under your service contract.

And we're back to "the difference between 'A' and 'B' is the customer, not the product"

[Domitronic]

They may try but for as long as Siglent doesn't get firmware functionality & regression testing in order, they won't succeed. The professional market is all about being able to trust your test equipment. And by the time they succeed, Siglent gear will be just as expensive as buying from established A brands.

Tektronix has problems with regression testing as well. With a firmware update of 4 and 5 series earlier this year the ruined the roll mode which is really a basic thing. And with the new progress bar during boot they introduced "feature" that the scope freezes during boot as well. So you can pay much more and still get bad quality.

[Domitronic]

That's as an individual. You'll never see that if you're a corporate user because it'll be covered under your service contract.

Thats wrong, i don't use Tektronix at home. Asked for the company i work for. The reason they told me is that there is no long term support for this model anymore.

[Fungus]

Thats wrong, i don't use Tektronix at home.

OK, bad assumption.

The reason they told me is that there is no long term support for this model anymore.

Time to go dumpster diving in the bins of the big corporations that used to used that model ... get some spare parts.