Author Topic: Advice about oscilloscope to buy. (Read 34972 times)

Blisk · « **on:** October 16, 2016, 07:36:22 pm »

rstofer · « **Reply #1 on:** October 16, 2016, 09:47:52 pm »

That's quite a shopping list. I suggest you make a spreadsheet with rows for features and columns for scopes. Rank the rows by importance to you so that important features get more weight. Price needs to be considered as well.

As none of those scopes interest me, I'm no help in the selection. I bought a Rigol DS1054Z and it does more than I will ever need. OTOH, Your needs appear to exceed mine so it is right that you should look at more expensive scopes.

I wouldn't consider anything with less than 4 channels or less than 100 MHz plus serial decoding. More memory is a good thing too. So, for me, the hacked DS1054Z fills the needs without breaking the bank. I'll hold onto my 350 MHz Tek 485 just in case!

nctnico · « **Reply #2 on:** October 16, 2016, 10:14:18 pm »

I'd take the Owon, Hantek, Uni-t, Subay(?), Protek and Siglent scopes off the list to begin with because they are probably too buggy anyway. I see a TDS220 from Tektronix as well but that model is crap ($600 in 'for parts' condition?? utter nutter!!).
I'd go for at least 4 channels. If you don't care about protocol decoding there are many second hand scopes from Agilent, Lecroy and Tektronix on Ebay which have decent specifications while being affordable. What is the budget?

tautech · « **Reply #3 on:** October 17, 2016, 12:58:04 am »

Quote from: Blisk on October 16, 2016, 07:36:22 pm

Hi
I see here are alot of experts with alot of experiences about osciloscopes.
I use now some small osciloscope for 200$ and I will like to buy new one more powerfull.
So I am looking something like below.
But don't know which brand to buy and which have new technology and it is fast enough.
I hope I can give some advice here which one to buy.
Thank you.
Sorry for messy post.

Welcome to the forum.

Nothing wrong with your post at all, in fact it's refreshing to see somebody come aboard that's done some research as to what's available.
Better still you've wisely set your sights on a DSO with 100 MHz BW.

If you've been watching threads like these you'll have seen all sorts of opinions on what's best and what to keep clear of by some that are not up to date with the latest models. This field of entry level DSO's are forever advancing, new models and ongoing upgrades to performance so don't take anybody's word based on historical experiences.

The Siglent SDS1102X-S is no longer produced, the S denotes inbuilt AWG and this and MSO have been incorporated into a newer version, the Siglent SDS1102X+.

The Subay Technologies SDS1102X is a Siglent, the baby brother of above but without AWG and MSO and you can see the all the specs, manuals and pricing in the link below.
And as you're in Europe, Siglent are running a promotion on these with the Decoding option free.
http://www.siglenteu.com/pdxx.aspx?id=2373&T=2&tid=1
Your local distributor is listed here:
http://www.siglenteu.com/howtobuy.aspx

2N3055 · « **Reply #4 on:** October 17, 2016, 07:41:44 am »

Siglent, Rigol and others have presence in EU..
And prices are OK , EU warranty, no import procedure...

tggzzz · « **Reply #5 on:** October 17, 2016, 08:03:06 am »

Congratulations on doing some research before asking a question. That makes a pleasant change, and will help you get relevant helpful responses.

Quote from: Blisk on October 16, 2016, 07:36:22 pm

I use now some small osciloscope for 200$ and I will like to buy new one more powerfull.
But don't know which brand to buy and which have new technology and it is fast enough.

What is inadequate about your existing scope?

Examples: number of channels, analogue/digital post-processing, transient capture, connectivity, ...

"Fast enough" for what purpose?

For example, if you are interested in digital signal integrity then 100MHz is barely adequate for 1980s logic families, and is insufficient for modern logic families. A 300/400MHz scope would be far more useful.

Don't forget to include the cost of probes with suitable probe tip accessories; with a 6"/150mm ground lead, most simple *10 probes will ring at ~90MHz i.e. inside the measurement system bandwidth.

BravoV · « **Reply #6 on:** October 17, 2016, 08:19:27 am »

Quote from: Blisk on October 16, 2016, 07:36:22 pm

I use now some small osciloscope for 200$ and I will like to buy new one more powerfull.

Same lack of crucial information that always happened to a thread like this asking for new scope recommendation.

Give us the max budget, once given, I believe nice people around here will quick to come out with optimal suggestions based on the money that you're willing to spend.

Money 1st, then talk features, capabilities, score and etc.

Blisk · « **Reply #7 on:** October 17, 2016, 08:26:27 am »

Yes I see now.
My budged is about 900$.
My current oscilloscope can't be used on frequencies over 10Mhz I used now frequency divider.
I have measured now some modulated signal and get some strange results than I measured that on friends profi oscilloscope he payed for that 2500€
and was differend result of signal more stable and more readable.

tggzzz · « **Reply #8 on:** October 17, 2016, 08:59:40 am »

If you are "measuring a modulated signal", are you sure an oscilloscope is the best tool? A lot will depend on the frequencies and what aspect of the signal you are measuring. If you previously used a "frequency divider", are you just measuring the mean frequency? If so, why not just use a frequency counter?

Check scopes' linearity specifications, and consider using "RF tools" such as spectrum analysers, modulation domain analysers, etc. Note the aphorism in my .sig!

sergioag · « **Reply #9 on:** October 18, 2016, 12:09:02 am »

Not on your list, but let me suggest a Rigol DS1054Z or a Rigol DS2072A. Both are kinda in your price range (specially the first one) and I'm sure both fit your needs. And you probably can hack them to get more bandwidth (up to 300MHz for the DS2072A) and options (i.e. decode).

Disclaimer: I own a Rigol DS2102A and I'm totally happy with it.

tautech · « **Reply #10 on:** October 18, 2016, 07:00:26 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on October 17, 2016, 08:26:27 am

Yes I see now.
My budged is about 900$.
My current oscilloscope can't be used on frequencies over 10Mhz I used now frequency divider.
I have measured now some modulated signal and get some strange results than I measured that on friends profi oscilloscope he payed for that 2500€
and was differend result of signal more stable and more readable.

Another look at this thread and your list we see you've included an ATTEN ADS1102CML , again the OEM is Siglent but this model has been upgraded with a higher resolution display and had LAN capability added.
http://www.siglenteu.com/pdxx.aspx?id=2346&T=2&tid=1

They're good entry level DSO's, I've sold many dozens of them and they are very reliable. Like all Siglent DSO's they have 400V rated channel inputs.....not all other brands do and as a result they require careful considered use when higher voltages are encountered.

How does your shortlist look now Blisk ?

pascal_sweden · « **Reply #11 on:** October 18, 2016, 07:16:23 pm »

What would be the advantage of buying an OEM version of Siglent, instead of Siglent itself?

The only reason I can think of is local availability in an exotic country, where only the OEM version is available and not Siglent itself, but both in US and in Europe there is an official Siglent dealer.

So in US and Europe, buying the OEM version would only have disadvantages.
Siglent software updates might not work. Most likely they do, but you never know.

Maybe the OEM version is slightly cheaper, but probably it will not be a big difference.
And most of the time these OEM versions are very ugly. The labels on the scope have a background color that is too dark or too flashy. The color scheme in the UI looks awful. And many more disadvantages.

If you go for Siglent, then go for the original Siglent, and not for an OEM.
Better support, better looking, etc.

tautech · « **Reply #12 on:** October 18, 2016, 07:25:33 pm »

Quote from: pascal_sweden on October 18, 2016, 07:16:23 pm

What would be the advantage of buying an OEM version of Siglent, instead of Siglent itself?

The only reason I can think of is local availability in an exotic country, where only the OEM version is available and not Siglent itself, but both in US and in Europe there is an official Siglent dealer.

So in US and Europe, buying the OEM version would only have disadvantages.
Siglent software updates might not work. Most likely they do, but you never know.

Maybe the OEM version is slightly cheaper, but probably it will not be a big difference.
And most of the time these OEM versions are very ugly. The labels on the scope have a background color that is too dark or too flashy. The color scheme in the UI looks awful. And many more disadvantages.

If you go for Siglent, then go for the original Siglent, and not for an OEM.
Better support, better looking, etc.

Pascal.
OEM = Original Equipment Manufacturer.
Anything that is/looks similar is a rebrand.

Yes you are correct to say the original provides better support and as for FW updates, there are many examples of owners getting into serious trouble, even bricking their scope by not using the correct FW.
In general, OEM = better support.

pascal_sweden · « **Reply #13 on:** October 18, 2016, 08:44:47 pm »

Thanks for pointing out about OEM.
I know about the meaning, but must anyhow have misused that formulation for a longer time.

But you know, some companies make OEM products that are never sold under their own brand.
So in that case talking about a rebrand isn't a correct formulation either

Philips and Panasonic used to have camcorders in the eighties, which neither of them produced themselves. But the company that produced them, didn't sell these cameras themselves.
So in that case it was difficult to talk about these video cameras as OEM, or as rebrand

And what about the Windows CD's that come with Laptops. They call it OEM version, while the CD is labeled with Dell or HP

From a hardware perspective OEM is correct, but from a software perspective OEM is wrong, as Microsoft is the OEM for software and not Dell or HP =)
The original Microsoft Windows comes in a nice big box. The OEM Microsoft Windows comes in a paper sleeve.

H.O · « **Reply #14 on:** October 19, 2016, 05:33:14 am »

Quote

Philips and Panasonic used to have camcorders in the eighties, which neither of them produced themselves. But the company that produced them, didn't sell these cameras themselves.
So in that case it was difficult to talk about these video cameras as OEM, or as rebrand

The cameras are not OEM, the company who manufactured the cameras is the OEM - the Original Equipment Manufacturer. I don't think it matters whether or not it's being sold under the OEMs own name or not, Philips still bought it from someone else and put their sticker on it. Philips is not the OEM, someone else is.

If that OEM is selling the same equipment (camera in this case) to several companies or exclusively to Philips doesn't really matter. The OEM is still the OEM while Philips is not.

And as for the Windows example, the "OEM version" is a version (by Microsoft) for OEMs (ie Dell, Lenovo, ASUS).

zapta · « **Reply #15 on:** October 19, 2016, 02:37:20 pm »

Quote from: tautech on October 18, 2016, 07:00:26 pm

They're good entry level DSO's, I've sold many dozens of them and they are very reliable. Like all Siglent DSO's they have 400V rated channel inputs.....not all other brands do and as a result they require careful considered use when higher voltages are encountered.

Hi Blisk, since you are new here, a word of caution. Tautech does it often here, cherry picking features to push the brand he represents and discredit the competition. If I would you, I would pay more attention to opinions of independent users.

Good luck.

nctnico · « **Reply #16 on:** October 19, 2016, 03:24:09 pm »

Indeed also look at maximum voltage RMS versus maximum voltage peak. All in all (most) 1M Ohm input scopes are designed to survive an encounter with 230V mains so Siglent isn't an exception or special.

tautech · « **Reply #17 on:** October 19, 2016, 05:01:22 pm »

Quote from: zapta on October 19, 2016, 02:37:20 pm

Quote from: tautech on October 18, 2016, 07:00:26 pm
They're good entry level DSO's, I've sold many dozens of them and they are very reliable. Like all Siglent DSO's they have 400V rated channel inputs.....not all other brands do and as a result they require careful considered use when higher voltages are encountered.

Hi Blisk, since you are new here, a word of caution. Tautech does it often here, cherry picking features to push the brand he represents and discredit the competition. If I would you, I would pay more attention to opinions of independent users.

Good luck.

And where in this thread have I done that ?
This thread started civil with a defined list of the OP's preferences....but with errors and misunderstandings as to current models and specs, shouldn't they be corrected ?

Knowledge to help the OP for his requirements is paramount, or should I withhold that ?

zapta · « **Reply #18 on:** October 19, 2016, 08:42:17 pm »

Quote from: tautech on October 19, 2016, 05:01:22 pm

Quote from: zapta on October 19, 2016, 02:37:20 pm
Quote from: tautech on October 18, 2016, 07:00:26 pm
They're good entry level DSO's, I've sold many dozens of them and they are very reliable. Like all Siglent DSO's they have 400V rated channel inputs.....not all other brands do and as a result they require careful considered use when higher voltages are encountered.

Hi Blisk, since you are new here, a word of caution. Tautech does it often here, cherry picking features to push the brand he represents and discredit the competition. If I would you, I would pay more attention to opinions of independent users.

Good luck.

And where in this thread have I done that ?

Check above. I quoted it in my post.

tautech · « **Reply #19 on:** October 20, 2016, 05:34:32 am »

Quote from: zapta on October 19, 2016, 08:42:17 pm

Quote from: tautech on October 19, 2016, 05:01:22 pm
Quote from: zapta on October 19, 2016, 02:37:20 pm
Quote from: tautech on October 18, 2016, 07:00:26 pm
They're good entry level DSO's, I've sold many dozens of them and they are very reliable. Like all Siglent DSO's they have 400V rated channel inputs.....not all other brands do and as a result they require careful considered use when higher voltages are encountered.

Hi Blisk, since you are new here, a word of caution. Tautech does it often here, cherry picking features to push the brand he represents and discredit the competition. If I would you, I would pay more attention to opinions of independent users.

Good luck.

And where in this thread have I done that ?

Check above. I quoted it in my post.

You are indeed a nit picker zapta.

Quote

They're good entry level DSO's, I've sold many dozens of them and they are very reliable.

Fact.

Quote

Like all Siglent DSO's they have 400V rated channel inputs....

Fact

Quote

not all other brands do and as a result they require careful considered use when higher voltages are encountered.

Fact

You may know all these things ^^^ just as I and many other members do, but does the OP ?
And why shouldn't he/she get the "heads up" ?

Yes, I do sell and use scopes as well as other "test equipment" and that doesn't qualify me to offer advice based on personal experience ?
You're joking right ?

pascal_sweden · « **Reply #20 on:** October 20, 2016, 09:38:00 am »

Tautech is just helping the OP with advice, that's all.

I highly appreciate his input on this forum, and I don't see it as pushing Siglent.

There is nothing wrong with being proud on a brand that you support and highlight its strengths.
We have plenty of people here that do this for A-brands all the time.

We should not just divide the world in Rigollers, Siglenters and Keigsighters.
Some people have both Rigol gear and Siglent gear, and maybe even some second hand Keysight gear.
There is no vendor that is best in all fields, in terms of feature set, price level.
The best lab setup, is the one that combines the best equipment from different vendors.

zapta · « **Reply #21 on:** October 20, 2016, 09:43:29 am »

Quote from: tautech on October 20, 2016, 05:34:32 am

Quote
not all other brands do and as a result they require careful considered use when higher voltages are encountered.
Fact

tautech, what part of cherry picking you don't understand?

Quote from: tautech on October 20, 2016, 05:34:32 am

Yes, I do sell and use scopes as well as other "test equipment" and that doesn't qualify me to offer advice based on personal experience ?
You're joking right ?

Coincidentally the unbiased opinion that you keep pushing aggressively in the T&M threads have a very high correlation with your financial interests.

Please take example from the more respective brands here such as the keysight guy. He is more respectful to the discussions here and doesn't paddle his pro-my-brand 'personal experience'. You and your brand are closer to pcbway spamming territory.

tautech, you are a vendor, not a regular opinionated user, so please act accordingly.

tggzzz · « **Reply #22 on:** October 20, 2016, 10:41:27 am »

Quote from: zapta on October 20, 2016, 09:43:29 am

Coincidentally the unbiased opinion that you keep pushing aggressively in the T&M threads have a very high correlation with your financial interests.

Please take example from the more respective brands here such as the keysight guy. He is more respectful to the discussions here and doesn't paddle his pro-my-brand 'personal experience'. You and your brand are closer to pcbway spamming territory.

tautech, you are a vendor, not a regular opinionated user, so please act accordingly.

This could be avoided if tautech made a statement on each relevant posting to the effect that "Ob disclosure: I am a user and distributor of X; that means I sell products that I use and trust".

ProBang2 · « **Reply #23 on:** October 20, 2016, 01:49:58 pm »

I don´t understand the reason for the fuss...
A siglent distibutor clearly recommends OWON oscilloscopes. So what?

And now? Back to topic (if there is any further interest)?

pascal_sweden · « **Reply #24 on:** October 20, 2016, 01:59:26 pm »

OP is looking for most Bang for Buck scope. Maybe ProBang2 can help out!

ProBang2ForBuck =)

Karel · « **Reply #25 on:** October 20, 2016, 02:04:10 pm »

Quote from: pascal_sweden on October 20, 2016, 09:38:00 am

Tautech is just helping the OP with advice, that's all.

My impression is that tautech wants to sell siglent stuff.

Stuff that, if you want to sell it later on ebay, put you (or ebay) at risk to receive a wrongfull trademark claim...

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-they-filed-a-'wrongful-trademark-claim'/

Blisk · « **Reply #26 on:** October 20, 2016, 05:40:51 pm »

OK
few things popu what I may considere.
First high voltage
Second if scope can be hacked and get more out of it.
And third some have lan, or maybe USB to connect it to computer.
Three which have poppedup most are sigilent and rigol and owon

Lightages · « **Reply #27 on:** October 20, 2016, 06:15:14 pm »

It seems to me that Tautech is merely showing information and clarifying some things. He stated an advantage to Siglent scopes. He then tells the OP to buy from someone else. How is he selling things and making money on this? It is good to be skeptical, but it is also nice to not accuse people of being entirely selfishly motivated and basically calling them liars and/or thieves just because they sell things. Anybody want to accuse Dave of being dishonest here for selling his products and commenting on them here? C'mon people.........

tautech · « **Reply #28 on:** October 20, 2016, 06:25:44 pm »

Quote from: zapta on October 20, 2016, 09:43:29 am

Quote from: tautech on October 20, 2016, 05:34:32 am
Yes, I do sell and use scopes as well as other "test equipment" and that doesn't qualify me to offer advice based on personal experience ?
You're joking right ?

Coincidentally the unbiased opinion that you keep pushing aggressively in the T&M threads have a very high correlation with your financial interests.

Yes, it might seem that way to you.

Quote

tautech, you are a vendor, not a regular opinionated user, so please act accordingly.

Correction: I am a vendor and a regular opinionated user.

I do a small # of repairs in which I get to use the demo models I have and gain further experience and familiarity with models I stock. I don't and won't stock all Siglent models as some don't have a place in the NZ market. I endeavour to be aware of the technical strengths and failings of the products I represent and based on that try to make the best recommendations I can.
That's a privileged position that only a few members here can say that and some are much more knowledgeable than I.

My presence on this forum has little effect on any NZ sales I might gain and NZ is the only country I wish to sell in.
Fact is ,experience over the past decades of use, repair and investigation of several brand of scopes has ended up with me distributing Siglent, I openly display this in my signature and website link in my profile.
Before I became a distributor my pastime was repairing CRO's and a few DSO's, so gained quite some knowledge of the basic workings of a scope.

Quote from: Blisk on October 20, 2016, 05:40:51 pm

OK
few things popu what I may considere.
First high voltage
Second if scope can be hacked and get more out of it.
And third some have lan, or maybe USB to connect it to computer.
Three which have poppedup most are sigilent and rigol and owon

No order:

HV, how high? 100:1 probes are a good idea to have for anything over 150V. Err on the side of safety.

Nearly all modern DSO's have USB and LAN, datasheets will list the I/O's.

zapta · « **Reply #29 on:** October 20, 2016, 06:29:37 pm »

Quote from: Lightages on October 20, 2016, 06:15:14 pm

... it is also nice to not accuse people of being entirely selfishly motivated and basically calling them liars and/or thieves

'liar'? 'thief'? You are making things up now.

Fungus · « **Reply #30 on:** October 20, 2016, 09:06:49 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on October 20, 2016, 05:40:51 pm

OK
few things popu what I may considere.
First high voltage
Second if scope can be hacked and get more out of it.
And third some have lan, or maybe USB to connect it to computer.
Three which have poppedup most are sigilent and rigol and owon

Rigol DS1054Z stands head and shoulders above everything else in the sub-$1200(ish) group simply because you can hack it and enable a ton of features. It's not an amazing device in itself, if you have a specific need like FFT there are better 'scopes. But ... it's a good all-rounder, it's well built and all those features for $400 is hard to resist.

Lightages · « **Reply #31 on:** October 20, 2016, 09:38:28 pm »

Quote from: zapta on October 20, 2016, 06:29:37 pm

Quote from: Lightages on October 20, 2016, 06:15:14 pm
... it is also nice to not accuse people of being entirely selfishly motivated and basically calling them liars and/or thieves

'liar'? 'thief'? You are making things up now.

Quote from: zapta on October 20, 2016, 09:43:29 am

Coincidentally the unbiased opinion that you keep pushing aggressively in the T&M threads have a very high correlation with your financial interests.

Please take example from the more respective brands here such as the keysight guy. He is more respectful to the discussions here and doesn't paddle his pro-my-brand 'personal experience'. You and your brand are closer to pcbway spamming territory.

tautech, you are a vendor, not a regular opinionated user, so please act accordingly.

I don't need to say more.

videobruce · « **Reply #32 on:** October 21, 2016, 02:16:29 pm »

Since the suggestion came up early on, two vs four channels. Where/when do the extra two channels come in handy?
My other question; scopes under 100MHz, where/when/what aren't they suited for?

Regarding 'bugs', anyone else feel Siglent scopes are "buggy" per a comment eariler??

nctnico · « **Reply #33 on:** October 21, 2016, 02:29:13 pm »

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 02:16:29 pm

Since the suggestion came up early on, two vs four channels. Where/when do the extra two channels come in handy?

I would never buy a scope with less than 4 channels. Having 4 channels makes life a lot easier because most circuits will have more than 2 signals of interest. Just think about an SPI bus which has 3 signals as a minimum but there are many more situations. When working on a project I easely find myself using 3 or 4 channels.

videobruce · « **Reply #34 on:** October 21, 2016, 02:43:36 pm »

But, do they always have to be measured at the same time?

zapta · « **Reply #35 on:** October 21, 2016, 02:46:23 pm »

My old faithful TDS210 had only two channels and worked just great for me (hobby use). When I had to replaced it recently I picked a 2ch R&S over a 4ch Rigol and never looked back. 'You must have X' statements should be taken with a grain of salt IMO. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

nctnico · « **Reply #36 on:** October 21, 2016, 02:54:31 pm »

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 02:43:36 pm

But, do they always have to be measured at the same time?

If you want to relate them in time, yes. Having 4 channels makes life a lot easier in many situations. The number of scopes out there with 4 channels is enormous so the choice really is a no-brainer.

Fungus · « **Reply #37 on:** October 21, 2016, 03:24:22 pm »

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 02:16:29 pm

Since the suggestion came up early on, two vs four channels. Where/when do the extra two channels come in handy?

I'd say "all the time". If you've got them you will use them.

IMHO your question should really be the other way around, ie. Why do some people think four channels is too many, what sort of electronics work do they do that two channels is enough?

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 02:16:29 pm

My other question; scopes under 100MHz, where/when/what aren't they suited for?

The answer to that could get quite complicated.

Short answer: If you can't imagine a signal where you need more than 100MHz you probably don't need more than 100MHz.

Giving advice on bandwidth is pointless without discussing a specific measurement task. If you don't have a specific task then it's better to buy something cheap so you wasted less money when the specific task comes along.

100MHz is a good bandwidth for general non-professional, home-electronics work. 50Mhz is probably enough in practice but a certain manufacturer give you a free upgrade to 100MHz so you might as well take it.

Fungus · « **Reply #38 on:** October 21, 2016, 03:27:02 pm »

Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 02:46:23 pm

My old faithful TDS210 had only two channels and worked just great for me (hobby use). When I had to replaced it recently I picked a 2ch R&S over a 4ch Rigol and never looked back. 'You must have X' statements should be taken with a grain of salt IMO. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

You managed to tell somebody what to spend their money on without actually defining the term "hobby use". Well done, you should look for a job in politics.

"Hobby use" for me involves a lot of Arduinos and stuff. Two channels certainly isn't enough for that.

videobruce · « **Reply #39 on:** October 21, 2016, 03:48:04 pm »

I realize you can't ever have enough bandwidth, but cost is a factor. I figured 100megs was a compromise. I wouldn't even consider 50megs, not in todays world.
The next jump up (200MHz) gets pricey, especially if it is a 4 channel scope. I wanted to stay under $1000 US (maybe $1200). I also wanted 2 GaS sampling, above that really gets pricey.

Yes, I should of qualified my needs & use. My bad. I would say a couple of steps above 'hobby'.

Simon · « **Reply #40 on:** October 21, 2016, 03:51:15 pm »

can we cool please.

zapta · « **Reply #41 on:** October 21, 2016, 03:56:05 pm »

Quote from: Fungus on October 21, 2016, 03:27:02 pm

Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 02:46:23 pm
My old faithful TDS210 had only two channels and worked just great for me (hobby use). When I had to replaced it recently I picked a 2ch R&S over a 4ch Rigol and never looked back. 'You must have X' statements should be taken with a grain of salt IMO. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

You managed to tell somebody what to spend their money on without actually defining the term "hobby use". Well done, you should look for a job in politics.

"Hobby use" for me involves a lot of Arduinos and stuff. Two channels certainly isn't enough for that.

Yes, Arduino, ARM, etc, my own PCB designs. You can find some of my recent projects here https://github.com/zapta .

I qualified it as 'hobby use' recognizing that a professional setting may have different needs and priorities.

Once I designed and built from scratch a fully functional personal computer using only an analog multimeter and logic probe so am very skeptical of 'you must have X' statements. Focus should be on what you build and learn, not what equipment you have. YMMV.

rstofer · « **Reply #42 on:** October 21, 2016, 04:00:16 pm »

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 02:16:29 pm

Since the suggestion came up early on, two vs four channels. Where/when do the extra two channels come in handy?
My other question; scopes under 100MHz, where/when/what aren't they suited for?

Regarding 'bugs', anyone else feel Siglent scopes are "buggy" per a comment eariler??

I bought the DS1054Z for two specific reasons: I wanted 4 channels (more in a moment) and I thought decoding would be helpful.

I do a lot of uC and FPGA projects and the SPI protocol is a way of life. Four channels makes this protocol easy! CS' frames a transaction, MISO and MOSI carry the data and SCK clocks it. Being able to see all 4 signals simultaneously is a great feature. Having the bytes decoded on screen is just icing on the cake.

Frankly 100 MHz isn't a lot. Most of my projects involve uCs clocked at 50 or 60 MHz. External signals don't generally run anywhere near that fast. My FPGA projects just might run up to 100 MHz but if they do, the 1054 isn't going to get the job done. You need to be able to display at least the 5th harmonic to display anything that even resembles a square wave so don't count on being able to jam a 100 MHz square wave into a 100 MHz scope and see anything other than a sine wave at the fundamental. A 100 MHz scope won't even display a 50 MHz square wave very well because it can't display even the 3rd harmonic. Realistically, a 100 MHz scope might do a fine job of displaying 20 MHz square waves. That's fine with me! Almost every thing I do will be in that range.

In my view, scopes under 100 MHz are pretty useless because of the need to display at least the 5th harmonic. A 10 MHz scope would be suitable for something in the 2 MHz range of square waves and, these days, that's pretty slow. Two channel scopes are boring. I have had 2 channel scopes for decades so I thought I would treat myself to something more capable. I had a 10 MHz scope for quite a while and I used it for some interesting projects (like a floppy controller for my Altair 8800B) but in those days 6 MHz was smokin' and the Altair only ran at 2 MHz.

I'm not going to get rid of my Tek 485 350 MHz scope any time soon. It doesn't have any features but it does have bandwidth.

Regarding 'bugs': Make sure the comments are current with the latest firmware. Manufacturers are working hard to improve firmware. Try to separate the valid complaints from the nonsense given by detractors. I did read the epic DS1054Z threads before I purchased one but I discounted most of the comments for 4 reasons: The comment predates the latest firmware, the bug is in an area that I don't care about, the writer was on my list of detractors or the fact that some of the complainers aren't very good at using a scope. Be certain to separate 'user error' from 'bug'.

videobruce · « **Reply #43 on:** October 21, 2016, 04:11:24 pm »

And the importance of sampling rate? Is 2GaS/S enough for most low to mid end work?

Simon · « **Reply #44 on:** October 21, 2016, 04:17:54 pm »

Two giga samples is plenty again it always comes down to what frequency you want to examine

Fungus · « **Reply #45 on:** October 21, 2016, 04:20:31 pm »

Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 03:56:05 pm

I qualified it as 'hobby use' recognizing that a professional setting may have different needs and priorities.

It's not about level, it's about what you do. "Electronics" is a very broad subject. Building radios isn't the same as designing microcontrollers which isn't the same as repairing audio amplifiers.

Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 03:56:05 pm

Once I designed and built from scratch a fully functional personal computer using only an analog multimeter and logic probe so am very skeptical of 'you must have X' statements. Focus should be on what you build and learn, not what equipment you have. YMMV.

True, but you can make life a lot easier...

tggzzz · « **Reply #46 on:** October 21, 2016, 04:24:36 pm »

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 04:11:24 pm

And the importance of sampling rate?

It is only of marginal importance and is principally used as a sales headline; the front end's analogue bandwidth is the key measure.

To ram home the point, many high-end scopes sample at a rate much lower than the highest frequency they can measure. That works - and is valuable - with repetitive and pseudo-repetitive signals. (Pseudo-repetitive: e.g. a digital datastream where you are looking at the eye diagram to assess the signal integrity).

Too many years ago, I used a 25MS/s HP boat anchor to measure sub-nanosecond risetimes.

Lightages · « **Reply #47 on:** October 21, 2016, 04:28:57 pm »

Many questions about "what is the best" or "what do I need" are only really answerable two ways. What can you afford? If you need it you will know.

People looking for equipment don't want to buy the wrong thing of course and feedback on making a purchase is a good thing to avoid buying junk or something useless. Some types of electronics work needs very specific capabilities in equipment but the vast majority of equipment needs really comes down to what you can spend and what you want to work on. Buying a 2Msps scope to work on audio might work, but buying a 500MHz bandwidth MSO with 20Gsps is going to work better. The former is almost useless and the latter total overkill.

If you are going to work on voltages higher than 100V then a scope that has 400V capability is good. It is not the most important criteria. If you are only going to look at audio signals then probably you don't need 4 channels. If you are going to try and troubleshoot USB then 100MHz is not enough.

These kind of considerations and what most people want to spend are the reasons that the Rigol DS1054Z gets mentioned so much. It is capable enough to do what many people want to do with a scope and at the price is a good starting point to learn about scopes and also learn if you need more capability or not. Even if it is not good enough in some aspect after you learn what you really need, it is still a good auxiliary scope for looking at things and also can be sold at not too much of a loss.

From what I have seen and read I would not buy an Owon, but the Siglents do have some things to recommend them too.

Disclaimer: I have only used my Rigol DS1052E (hacked) and my DS1054Z (hacked) and have no experience with the other scopes asked about by the OP.

zapta · « **Reply #48 on:** October 21, 2016, 04:40:32 pm »

Quote from: rstofer on October 21, 2016, 04:00:16 pm

In my view, scopes under 100 MHz are pretty useless...

That's an extreme statement. Basically you imply that having a 70Mhz DSO is about the same as not having a DSO at all. My 60Mhz TDS210 served me very well and I would keep using if I could.

Too much focus on equipment and feature list IMO rather what we design build and learn.

Fungus · « **Reply #49 on:** October 21, 2016, 04:50:10 pm »

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 03:48:04 pm

I realize you can't ever have enough bandwidth, but cost is a factor. I figured 100megs was a compromise. I wouldn't even consider 50megs, not in todays world.

Of course.

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 03:48:04 pm

The next jump up (200MHz) gets pricey

Yep. It's a tough call. What's the real, on-screen difference between 100MHz and 200MHz in practice?

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 03:48:04 pm

Yes, I should of qualified my needs & use. My bad. I would say a couple of steps above 'hobby'.

It's not about 'level', it's about what you want to do. People went to the moon with less than a DS1054Z but if you're looking at the signal integrity of a simple (today) 50Mhz SPI bus then you need a lot more MHz.

A Rigol DS2000 can (I believe) be unlocked to 300MHz for about $840. That's about as much bandwidth as you can get for your budget but it's only 2 channels.

(Pair it with a DS1054Z and you're still in budget and will have enough channel/bandwidth combinations for just about anything.

)

rf-loop · « **Reply #50 on:** October 21, 2016, 04:50:53 pm »

I have used many different oscilloscopes over 45 years. In hobby (or better say hobbies) and in work in industry, with power electronics and for many kind of electronic systems for adjust systems, for repair systems and for test some own designed electronics in industry and also bit in military. There have been industrial analog and digital control systems, including also old analog computer systems (example EIA, long time ago) what some times need calibrate and so on. In hobby also radio communication systems and some tiny old "computer" systems based with 6800 and 6809 and later some others. Today all is more like playing like kids and some times more seriously.

There have nearly always been availabe 2 and 4 etc channel scopes for use if need. Analogs and later also digitals.

Rough estimate if I think all hours what I ever have used oscilloscope(s) it is not much wrong if I estimate that >>99.5% 1 or 2 channel. <>0.5% 3 - 4 channels and very tiny part from this time even over 4 channels (really rare). Perhaps so that very old times need was more rare than today.

Nearly all times 100MHz have been minimum. But never needed over 1GHz oscilloscope in my own use.

But also it is perhaps true that if my active time start today with today's electronics, it is possible that 3-4 channel needs have rised. But, I can still think that there is lot of use and users who never really need 3- 4 channels Then there is users who need quite often 3-4 channels.

What is nice to play is not always what we really need.

Finally, equipment do not rise your skills.
I can make lot of miracles with quite simple equipmnets what noob can not do even if he have thousends features scope what price is one expensive car.

We take one failed some old equipment and I take old Tek 2465 and then some noob take expensive digital scope.
I have analyzed signal, made diagnose and repaired this machine before this noob have find adjustments what he need for display signals for anaylze it. Then, there is things what I can not do with this Tek2465 or HP1741 (due to too slow speed for draw CRT memory and other known limits common with analog scope...) but I can do even with Rigol DS1000E or Siglent SDS1000CML or with Owon SDS7102 or even with HP54200

No one can know what is best for some buyer until needs are specified.

This way here - it can not do.

I can think or quess what is perhaps good to OP but I do not say it because I do not know enough about OP's needs etc.

VW is one of most popular car here. But it is not for me even when lot of peoples like it. I do not select just because "all like".
Also I do not have swiss knife even if it is handy but it is not very good in anything.

2N3055 · « **Reply #51 on:** October 21, 2016, 05:11:11 pm »

rf-loop

I don't think anybody could have said it better!!

I agree 100 %..

nctnico · « **Reply #52 on:** October 21, 2016, 05:21:08 pm »

Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 03:56:05 pm

Once I designed and built from scratch a fully functional personal computer using only an analog multimeter and logic probe so am very skeptical of 'you must have X' statements.

These kind of statements always make me wonder about how much time would have been saved by having the right equipment. Also being able to make the right measurements helps to verify a design. All in all having good tools makes building something easier and quicker. I don't understand why someone should buy a limited piece of equipment because a couple of grey beards didn't had much equipment either because back then it wasn't affordable. Making-do comes at a price: time. So in the end it comes down to how much is your time worth?

rstofer · « **Reply #53 on:** October 21, 2016, 05:23:01 pm »

Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 04:40:32 pm

Quote from: rstofer on October 21, 2016, 04:00:16 pm
In my view, scopes under 100 MHz are pretty useless...

That's an extreme statement. Basically you imply that having a 70Mhz DSO is about the same as not having a DSO at all. My 60Mhz TDS210 served me very well and I would keep using if I could.

Too much focus on equipment and feature list IMO rather what we design build and learn.

Well, I did say 'In my view...'. MY projects are all digital or very low frequency analog, VERY LOW frequency. Watch it on a V-O-M meter slow. All of my digital projects run over 50 MHz even though the external signals seldom get over 20 MHz. So, yes, anything less than 100 MHz is pretty useless if I want to be able to display something that looks somewhat like a square wave. In some cases, I really do care about setup and hold time relative to the clock and that's a lot easier to do when square edges look square. I have no interest in RF and even less in audio. Again, "In my view...". Other opinions willl vary.

Features are the entire reason for buying a DSO. DSOs will never be the same as analog scopes so there had better be some reason for all the interest. In fact, it's the features! Single shot, infinite persistence is one. Measurements is another. It's all about the features...

There are plenty of fine analog scopes on the used market. I bought my 485 via eBay about 12 years ago. It still works well. But it has no features and, again, for my purposes, it isn't overly helpful with only two channels. It's fast but it doesn't have features.

In the end it gets down to price. Sure, I'd love to have a 500 MHz Keysight MSO but that's not realistic for my level of interest in this hobby. What is realistic is a low end scope with decent bandwidth and features. Plus 4 channels. If I wasn't gaining channels and features, why bother?

Of course I can get by with less. I've been doing it the hard way for decades. But the capabilities of the modern DSO, even an entry level version like the DS1054Z, make buying a DSO very attractive. Attractive at $400, maybe not for $1200... It's just a hobby, one of several.

Sure, the 60 MHz TDS 210 is a good scope. Nothing wrong with it! But, realistically, if I couldn't buy one for $100, I wouldn't bother. Even then, I would want to compare the feature list against the DS1054Z and see how they stack up. Prices on eBay are all over the map but tend toward a number where I would just go for a more modern scope. The 210 doesn't do anywhere near as many measurements as the 1054Z. Nowhere close! So, maybe $200 for a used 210 or $400 for a new 1054Z - that's the fundamental question. OTOH, if I had the TDS210, I might not be looking for an upgrade just yet. It does have some features. Record length isn't one of them...

At this point, I'm pretty down on recommending used scopes. Some of our members have had less than stellar results. I'm happy with my $200 Tek 485 but I think I just got lucky! Others have had different results.

It's pretty easy to recommend 100 MHz as a lower end because it comes in such an inexpensive package along with a ton of features and 4 channels. Of course I'm going to recommend the DS1054Z or something similar. And, at this point, I'm not going to be recommending used scopes at all.

zapta · « **Reply #54 on:** October 21, 2016, 05:42:46 pm »

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 05:21:08 pm

...Making-do comes at a price: time. So in the end it comes down to how much is your time worth?

My hobby time is very cheap. It's about satisfaction, not productivity. That's why mentioned that my use case is hobby.

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 05:21:08 pm

I don't understand why someone should buy a limited piece of equipment because a couple of grey beards didn't had much equipment either because back then it wasn't affordable.

1. I don't have beard, gray or any other color.
2. I am using an oscilloscope, it's a nice R&S 100Mhz two channel that I preferred over a 4 channel Rigol.
3. All equipment is limited.
4. My point was that I am skeptical of blanket 'you must have feature X' statements. People's needs, goals, priorities, and preferences are much more diverse than that.
5. I appreciate more what people design, build and learn rather than what equipment they have. Having fancy equipment or a collection expensive 7 digits bench DMMs will not get you any points here. Building something cool and innovative will.

YMMV.

rstofer · « **Reply #55 on:** October 21, 2016, 05:52:28 pm »

More often than not. when new users ask for recommendations, they don't include any details about their applications and it's true, the applications matter. The problem is, they probably don't know their application for today and they certainly don't know their applications for several years down the line. We tend to recommend what we have because, hopefully, our equipment meets our needs.

The next idea is to 'future proog' the decision. Good luck with that! Many years ago I was warned to 'never bet against technology'. Boy, was that right!

There's really no way around the issue of application. The user doesn't know and neither do we.

tggzzz · « **Reply #56 on:** October 21, 2016, 06:57:12 pm »

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 05:21:08 pm

Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 03:56:05 pm
Once I designed and built from scratch a fully functional personal computer using only an analog multimeter and logic probe so am very skeptical of 'you must have X' statements.
These kind of statements always make me wonder about how much time would have been saved by having the right equipment. Also being able to make the right measurements helps to verify a design. All in all having good tools makes building something easier and quicker. I don't understand why someone should buy a limited piece of equipment because a couple of grey beards didn't had much equipment either because back then it wasn't affordable. Making-do comes at a price: time. So in the end it comes down to how much is your time worth?

Logic probe? Luxury; they were a high-end HP product. I had to make do with LEDs when I designed and built my 6800 system with 128 bytes of RAM.

But more seriously, you are missing the indirect benefits that arise from doing more with less:

more complex, capable tools have a steeper learning curve; that's a serious issue for a beginner
it is better to put your money into your project than into tools for your project; the project is the objective
having to think and deeply what is going on is a good discipline, and is very rewarding
if you are going to be a professional engineer (cf hobbyist or technician), there will come a point where you can't just buy a tool and use it, because physics will get in the way. It is better to start thinking deeply at the outset
sooner or later someone has to make the next generation tool using only this generation of tools (how do you make a 5 digit multimeter if the best multimeters are only 4 digits?)
being able to explain what you did, how, and why is very very advantageous in job interviews
an engineer is someone who can do for $1 what any fool can do for $2

rstofer · « **Reply #57 on:** October 21, 2016, 07:13:18 pm »

Quote from: tggzzz on October 21, 2016, 06:57:12 pm

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 05:21:08 pm
Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 03:56:05 pm
Once I designed and built from scratch a fully functional personal computer using only an analog multimeter and logic probe so am very skeptical of 'you must have X' statements.
These kind of statements always make me wonder about how much time would have been saved by having the right equipment. Also being able to make the right measurements helps to verify a design. All in all having good tools makes building something easier and quicker. I don't understand why someone should buy a limited piece of equipment because a couple of grey beards didn't had much equipment either because back then it wasn't affordable. Making-do comes at a price: time. So in the end it comes down to how much is your time worth?

Logic probe? Luxury; they were a high-end HP product. I had to make do with LEDs when I designed and built my 6800 system with 128 bytes of RAM.

But more seriously, you are missing the indirect benefits that arise from doing more with less:
more complex, capable tools have a steeper learning curve; that's a serious issue for a beginner

True enough but those features don't have to be used. I clearly don't have any idea how to use all, or even many, of the features of a modern DSO. It's a work in progress1 In the meantime, I benefit from the features I do understand.

Quote

it is better to put your money into your project than into tools for your project; the project is the objective

This is seldom true for me. I am only interested in projects up to the 90% level. I want to learn about the techniques and have very little interest in the completed project. True, that's just me but I suspect there are others out there.

Quote

having to think and deeply what is going on is a good discipline, and is very rewarding

Taking away an important sense like sight is a definite handicap. Sure, you can do electronics without a scope but as the projects get more complex, the handicap is more profound.

Quote

if you are going to be a professional engineer (cf hobbyist or technician), there will come a point where you can't just buy a tool and use it, because physics will get in the way. It is better to start thinking deeply at the outset

Thinking IS important but so is seeing. If you can't see it, it doesn't exist. How in the world can you discover glitches without a scope. A logic probe these days is only useful for static systems. The LED will tell you that something changed but it won't tell you when.

Quote

sooner or later someone has to make the next generation tool using only this generation of tools (how do you make a 5 digit multimeter if the best multimeters are only 4 digits?)
being able to explain what you did, how, and why is very very advantageous in job interviews
an engineer is someone who can do for $1 what any fool can do for $2

And spends $100 on the tools to do it and $1000 on the labor. My hobby time does have value. As I get older, my labor rate goes up.[/list]

tggzzz · « **Reply #58 on:** October 21, 2016, 07:51:37 pm »

Quote from: rstofer on October 21, 2016, 07:13:18 pm

Quote from: tggzzz on October 21, 2016, 06:57:12 pm
Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 05:21:08 pm
Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 03:56:05 pm
Once I designed and built from scratch a fully functional personal computer using only an analog multimeter and logic probe so am very skeptical of 'you must have X' statements.
These kind of statements always make me wonder about how much time would have been saved by having the right equipment. Also being able to make the right measurements helps to verify a design. All in all having good tools makes building something easier and quicker. I don't understand why someone should buy a limited piece of equipment because a couple of grey beards didn't had much equipment either because back then it wasn't affordable. Making-do comes at a price: time. So in the end it comes down to how much is your time worth?

Logic probe? Luxury; they were a high-end HP product. I had to make do with LEDs when I designed and built my 6800 system with 128 bytes of RAM.

But more seriously, you are missing the indirect benefits that arise from doing more with less:
more complex, capable tools have a steeper learning curve; that's a serious issue for a beginner
True enough but those features don't have to be used. I clearly don't have any idea how to use all, or even many, of the features of a modern DSO. It's a work in progress1 In the meantime, I benefit from the features I do understand.

I occasionally show beginners how to use scopes. I observe that they don't know what it is "safe" to ignore at this stage vs what they actually need to know. Too many options completely confuses them, to the point they can't "see the wood for the trees" and do simple tasks.

Quote

Quote
it is better to put your money into your project than into tools for your project; the project is the objective
This is seldom true for me. I am only interested in projects up to the 90% level. I want to learn about the techniques and have very little interest in the completed project. True, that's just me but I suspect there are others out there.
Quote
having to think and deeply what is going on is a good discipline, and is very rewarding
Taking away an important sense like sight is a definite handicap. Sure, you can do electronics without a scope but as the projects get more complex, the handicap is more profound.
Quote
if you are going to be a professional engineer (cf hobbyist or technician), there will come a point where you can't just buy a tool and use it, because physics will get in the way. It is better to start thinking deeply at the outset
Thinking IS important but so is seeing. If you can't see it, it doesn't exist.

There are many many things that exist that I can't observe directly. Start by considering electromagnetic fields in enclosures and filters, and all the tricks of the trade associated with microwave design (and that includes digital systems, of course).

Quote

How in the world can you discover glitches without a scope.

You think about what the root causes of glitches are and how to avoid them.
You implement the design in small steps, one gate at a time, and test each step before moving the next step.
That's standard engineering practice; softies have triumphantly reinvented that wheel and think TDD is novel. Sigh.

Anybody that throws the whole design together and tries to debug the totality is likely to be disappointed.

Quote

A logic probe these days is only useful for static systems. The LED will tell you that something changed but it won't tell you when.

I have a logic probe; I don't recall using it. To me they are only a conveniently packaged LED. HP did have "signature analysers", but they were a production testing, not design.

Quote

Quote
sooner or later someone has to make the next generation tool using only this generation of tools (how do you make a 5 digit multimeter if the best multimeters are only 4 digits?)
being able to explain what you did, how, and why is very very advantageous in job interviews
an engineer is someone who can do for $1 what any fool can do for $2
And spends $100 on the tools to do it and $1000 on the labor. My hobby time does have value. As I get older, my labor rate goes up.

That is, of course, an interesting valid personal consideration - and I have some sympathy with it! But for many people the advantages I've mentioned are important in the long term.[/list]

tautech · « **Reply #59 on:** October 21, 2016, 08:02:16 pm »

Good discussion guys.

Yep, when we select a scope there is no doubt we will grow beyond it's capabilities.....from LV digital circuitry to HV power electronics maybe.
From analog circuitry to digital and decoding maybe.

Here, NZ we are better to have a scope that can safely withstand rectified mains (325V) and for the common protocols 2 channels plus a Trig input at least for the protocol clock.
Not high end requirements.....just the basic ones.

nctnico · « **Reply #60 on:** October 21, 2016, 08:37:29 pm »

Quote from: tggzzz on October 21, 2016, 06:57:12 pm

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 05:21:08 pm
Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 03:56:05 pm
Once I designed and built from scratch a fully functional personal computer using only an analog multimeter and logic probe so am very skeptical of 'you must have X' statements.
These kind of statements always make me wonder about how much time would have been saved by having the right equipment. Also being able to make the right measurements helps to verify a design. All in all having good tools makes building something easier and quicker. I don't understand why someone should buy a limited piece of equipment because a couple of grey beards didn't had much equipment either because back then it wasn't affordable. Making-do comes at a price: time. So in the end it comes down to how much is your time worth?
But more seriously, you are missing the indirect benefits that arise from doing more with less:
more complex, capable tools have a steeper learning curve; that's a serious issue for a beginner
it is better to put your money into your project than into tools for your project; the project is the objective
having to think and deeply what is going on is a good discipline, and is very rewarding
if you are going to be a professional engineer (cf hobbyist or technician), there will come a point where you can't just buy a tool and use it, because physics will get in the way. It is better to start thinking deeply at the outset
sooner or later someone has to make the next generation tool using only this generation of tools (how do you make a 5 digit multimeter if the best multimeters are only 4 digits?)
being able to explain what you did, how, and why is very very advantageous in job interviews
an engineer is someone who can do for $1 what any fool can do for $2

Doing more with less is like trying to tie your shoe lace with one hand. A nice trick but it won't land you a job. There are more than enough engineering challenges left in a typical project that require ingenuity. Better concentrate on those than wasting time on trivial things due to lack of good tools (if you have the money to spend on tools ofcourse).

rstofer · « **Reply #61 on:** October 21, 2016, 09:05:47 pm »

By the time a new user decides to buy a scope, I would have to assume they have come up against something where having a scope would be a benefit. After all, they're about to part with serious money!

There is no question that the modern DSO has a ton of features! It will be months, if not years, before I find my way around the DS1054Z and that's just an entry level scope. OTOH, I can do the things I need to do and only rarely stumble on finding the proper menu.

All the newcomer needs to know is to connect the signal and press Auto - everything else will work out fine. Once the trace is on the screen, they can diddle with time/div or volts/div. No, I'm not entirely serious but it is true. I use Auto all the time. Primarily because I will have left the scope in some obscure more with a lot of settings having been messed with.

So, wander around Google, or even this forum, and find tutorials and videos. That's how everybody learns anything these days. Google has more than 13 million hits on "how to use a DSO". Toss out half as nonsense and there are still a few millions hits.

I certainly wouldn't recommend backing up to a dual channel CRO just to get rid of features.

As it turns out, the Rigol DS1000Z manual is pretty well written. RTFM comes to mind!

tggzzz · « **Reply #62 on:** October 21, 2016, 09:10:25 pm »

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 08:37:29 pm

Quote from: tggzzz on October 21, 2016, 06:57:12 pm
Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 05:21:08 pm
Quote from: zapta on October 21, 2016, 03:56:05 pm
Once I designed and built from scratch a fully functional personal computer using only an analog multimeter and logic probe so am very skeptical of 'you must have X' statements.
These kind of statements always make me wonder about how much time would have been saved by having the right equipment. Also being able to make the right measurements helps to verify a design. All in all having good tools makes building something easier and quicker. I don't understand why someone should buy a limited piece of equipment because a couple of grey beards didn't had much equipment either because back then it wasn't affordable. Making-do comes at a price: time. So in the end it comes down to how much is your time worth?
But more seriously, you are missing the indirect benefits that arise from doing more with less:
more complex, capable tools have a steeper learning curve; that's a serious issue for a beginner
it is better to put your money into your project than into tools for your project; the project is the objective
having to think and deeply what is going on is a good discipline, and is very rewarding
if you are going to be a professional engineer (cf hobbyist or technician), there will come a point where you can't just buy a tool and use it, because physics will get in the way. It is better to start thinking deeply at the outset
sooner or later someone has to make the next generation tool using only this generation of tools (how do you make a 5 digit multimeter if the best multimeters are only 4 digits?)
being able to explain what you did, how, and why is very very advantageous in job interviews
an engineer is someone who can do for $1 what any fool can do for $2
Doing more with less is like trying to tie your shoe lace with one hand. A nice trick but it won't land you a job.

There you're wrong. Of the 7 jobs I've had the indirect benefits were directly instrumental in landing me the the three most interesting: my first, at Cambridge Consultants, and at Hewlett-Packard Laboratories.

And at the latter the disadvantages of having "too much" equipment was noted by many denizens. A slightly unusual situation, I'll agree, but so was my doing all the paperwork to import munitions

Quote

There are more than enough engineering challenges left in a typical project that require ingenuity. Better concentrate on those than wasting time on trivial things due to lack of good tools (if you have the money to spend on tools ofcourse).

Choosing the "right" tools is a key engineering skill.

All too often "right" means "what is available instantly" - and then you often have to find inventive way to solve the task with whatever tools happen to be at hand.

rstofer · « **Reply #63 on:** October 21, 2016, 09:12:02 pm »

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 08:37:29 pm

Doing more with less is like trying to tie your shoe lace with one hand. A nice trick but it won't land you a job. There are more than enough engineering challenges left in a typical project that require ingenuity. Better concentrate on those than wasting time on trivial things due to lack of good tools (if you have the money to spend on tools ofcourse).

Tools at any level are cheaper than wages. I'm long retired but if I were an engineering manager, I would be buying better tools. Two reasons: Tools reduce the cost of engineering and, more important, tools are capital equipment and don't come out of Wages & Salary. All my department has to pay is the depreciation. I can buy a $100,000 scope for the 10 year depreciation or about $10,000 out of my budget. I can't get more than a month of wages for that kind of money and all I need to do is save one month's (and benefits) each year for 10 years!

Can the scope save a month's wages per year? Probably...

But the equation for the hobbyist is vastly different...

tggzzz · « **Reply #64 on:** October 21, 2016, 09:18:49 pm »

Quote from: rstofer on October 21, 2016, 09:05:47 pm

By the time a new user decides to buy a scope, I would have to assume they have come up against something where having a scope would be a benefit. After all, they're about to part with serious money!

Often people have a burst of enthusiasm and are prepared to spend significant money on a wetsuit/windsurfer, a camera, gym membership, RC aircraft, etc. All too often these shiny new toys are left to gather dust in the cupboard. "Too complicated" increases the chances that dust will be gathered.

Quote

There is no question that the modern DSO has a ton of features! It will be months, if not years, before I find my way around the DS1054Z and that's just an entry level scope. OTOH, I can do the things I need to do and only rarely stumble on finding the proper menu.

With a well-designed tool, I would hope that would be the case. But the pre-requisite is that you know what you don't need to know and so know what you can safely ignore.

Beginners don't have that knowledge.

Quote

All the newcomer needs to know is to connect the signal and press Auto - everything else will work out fine. Once the trace is on the screen, they can diddle with time/div or volts/div. No, I'm not entirely serious but it is true. I use Auto all the time. Primarily because I will have left the scope in some obscure more with a lot of settings having been messed with.

The latter "rescue me using reset" is valid.

The "auto" will show something, but whether it is what the user needs to see is a separate issue.

tggzzz · « **Reply #65 on:** October 21, 2016, 09:26:14 pm »

Quote from: rstofer on October 21, 2016, 09:12:02 pm

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 08:37:29 pm

Doing more with less is like trying to tie your shoe lace with one hand. A nice trick but it won't land you a job. There are more than enough engineering challenges left in a typical project that require ingenuity. Better concentrate on those than wasting time on trivial things due to lack of good tools (if you have the money to spend on tools ofcourse).
Tools at any level are cheaper than wages. I'm long retired but if I were an engineering manager, I would be buying better tools. Two reasons: Tools reduce the cost of engineering and, more important, tools are capital equipment and don't come out of Wages & Salary. All my department has to pay is the depreciation. I can buy a $100,000 scope for the 10 year depreciation or about $10,000 out of my budget. I can't get more than a month of wages for that kind of money and all I need to do is save one month's (and benefits) each year for 10 years!

That's a very important calculation, particularly if spending more money means hitting the market sooner and capturing more of the market.

But with any new tool you have to factor in the learning curve and how that affect the time-to-market etc. In a professional setting often there is probably existing experience on similar tools, so the learning curve can be minimal. But for some tools, especially CAD, learning which sequence of buttons to press varies radically from one tool to the next. In such cases it can be better to stick with imperfect existing tools.

Quote

Can the scope save a month's wages per year? Probably...

Yes, repeat no. Depends on the tool and the circumstances. A scope, probably yes

rstofer · « **Reply #66 on:** October 21, 2016, 10:01:09 pm »

Quote from: tggzzz on October 21, 2016, 09:26:14 pm

Quote
Can the scope save a month's wages per year? Probably...

Yes, repeat no. Depends on the tool and the circumstances. A scope, probably yes

Where I worked, we never did post-mortems on business decisions or project payback. We moved on... In other words, if I, as the engineering manager, said that the scope had saved money, that was the end of the discussion. On to more important topics. True, I didn't work in electronics but the management style was just as I said. Win, lose, draw but by all means, move on!

nctnico · « **Reply #67 on:** October 21, 2016, 10:15:40 pm »

As a side note: the most succesful employers I worked for spend money on getting good equipment. I do the same: if I foresee a project needs special equipment I make sure I have it.

zapta · « **Reply #68 on:** October 21, 2016, 11:06:26 pm »

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 10:15:40 pm

As a side note: the most succesful employers I worked for spend money on getting good equipment. I do the same: if I foresee a project needs special equipment I make sure I have it.

1. 'need' is not always a binary function. Often there are many options, variables and possibilities.

2. Naturally successful companies have money for fancy equipment.

3. Don't mix hobby and professional scenarios.

4. Nobody here opposes to or suggests to ban 4ch scopes.

The world is not black and white, many shades of gray and possibilities in between.

David Hess · « **Reply #69 on:** October 22, 2016, 01:39:20 am »

Quote from: rstofer on October 21, 2016, 05:23:01 pm

Well, I did say 'In my view...'. MY projects are all digital or very low frequency analog, VERY LOW frequency. Watch it on a V-O-M meter slow. All of my digital projects run over 50 MHz even though the external signals seldom get over 20 MHz. So, yes, anything less than 100 MHz is pretty useless if I want to be able to display something that looks somewhat like a square wave. In some cases, I really do care about setup and hold time relative to the clock and that's a lot easier to do when square edges look square. I have no interest in RF and even less in audio. Again, "In my view...". Other opinions willl vary.

...

There are plenty of fine analog scopes on the used market. I bought my 485 via eBay about 12 years ago. It still works well. But it has no features and, again, for my purposes, it isn't overly helpful with only two channels. It's fast but it doesn't have features.

High bandwidth *is* a feature as you point out.

My analog sampling oscilloscope is in no way a replacement for a modern budget DSO or any of my analog and digital storage oscilloscopes but when high bandwidth, clean response, or perfect overload recovery are needed, then nothing can match it.

Quote

At this point, I'm pretty down on recommending used scopes. Some of our members have had less than stellar results. I'm happy with my $200 Tek 485 but I think I just got lucky! Others have had different results.

It's pretty easy to recommend 100 MHz as a lower end because it comes in such an inexpensive package along with a ton of features and 4 channels. Of course I'm going to recommend the DS1054Z or something similar. And, at this point, I'm not going to be recommending used scopes at all.

The only reasons I would not recommend a used analog oscilloscope are maintenance which a new user is unlikely to be prepared for and reliability unless the user is in a position to refurbish it. In most cases a good budget Chinese DSO will be better.

Wuerstchenhund · « **Reply #70 on:** October 22, 2016, 04:00:16 am »

Quote from: tggzzz on October 21, 2016, 04:24:36 pm

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 04:11:24 pm
And the importance of sampling rate?

It is only of marginal importance

No, it isn't. It's *one* parameter that determines the max useable real-time BW of your scope.

Quote

and is principally used as a sales headline; the front end's analogue bandwidth is the key measure.

Nope, it's not. The Front End's BW is *one* parameter

Quote

To ram home the point, many high-end scopes sample at a rate much lower than the highest frequency they can measure.

Yes, 20 years ago

Today, scopes have BWs of up to 100GHz with sample rates of up to 240GSa/s. Sampling scopes have long died out except for some very specific niches (i.e. optical high speed communication signals), and even there they have been/are subsequently replaced by real-time DSOs.

Quote

Too many years ago, I used a 25MS/s HP boat anchor to measure sub-nanosecond risetimes.

Good for you, but that is pretty much irrelevant today, unless you want to suggest people here invest in obsolete niche technology as a general purpose scope.

Nozzer · « **Reply #71 on:** October 22, 2016, 06:04:36 am »

Quote from: nctnico on October 21, 2016, 02:54:31 pm

Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 02:43:36 pm
But, do they always have to be measured at the same time?
If you want to relate them in time, yes. Having 4 channels makes life a lot easier in many situations. The number of scopes out there with 4 channels is enormous so the choice really is a no-brainer.

To be fair

with a modern MSO like the R&S 12** series, which only have 2 analogue channels,you can probe up to 8 digital channels with the Pod and use both analogue channels and the auxiliary output channel as an additional digital imput channel, so whilst you only have 2 analogue channels, you have 11 digital channels available - of course you need the software and digital probe for this. The scope's bandwidth is also software upgradable to a maximum of 300 MHz and offers 1Gs/s max on both (interleaved) analogue channels and all digital channels.

Fungus · « **Reply #72 on:** October 22, 2016, 06:58:16 am »

Quote from: Nozzer on October 22, 2016, 06:04:36 am

To be fair with a modern MSO like the R&S 12** series, which only have 2 analogue channels,you can probe up to 8 digital channels with the Pod and use both analogue channels and the auxiliary output channel as an additional digital imput channel, so whilst you only have 2 analogue channels, you have 11 digital channels available - of course you need the software and digital probe for this. The scope's bandwidth is also software upgradable to a maximum of 300 MHz and offers 1Gs/s max on both (interleaved) analogue channels and all digital channels.

A fully pimped out R&S is a nice device. Not cheap for a hobbyist though.

tggzzz · « **Reply #73 on:** October 22, 2016, 09:01:06 am »

Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on October 22, 2016, 04:00:16 am

Quote from: tggzzz on October 21, 2016, 04:24:36 pm
Quote from: videobruce on October 21, 2016, 04:11:24 pm
And the importance of sampling rate?

It is only of marginal importance

No, it isn't. It's *one* parameter that determines the max useable real-time BW of your scope.

Quote
and is principally used as a sales headline; the front end's analogue bandwidth is the key measure.

Nope, it's not. The Front End's BW is *one* parameter

Of course; but in practice for a beginner my statement is useful. It allows them to concentrate on whether 1Gs/s or 50MHz specification will determine what they can see.

Quote

Quote
To ram home the point, many high-end scopes sample at a rate much lower than the highest frequency they can measure.

Yes, 20 years ago Today, scopes have BWs of up to 100GHz with sample rates of up to 240GSa/s. Sampling scopes have long died out except for some very specific niches (i.e. optical high speed communication signals), and even there they have been/are subsequently replaced by real-time DSOs.

What are you talking about? They are all sampling scopes. Old ones used diode bridges to sample, new ones like the HP boat anchor use ADCs.

And yes, I was referring to things like high speed comms signals.

Quote

Quote
Too many years ago, I used a 25MS/s HP boat anchor to measure sub-nanosecond risetimes.

Good for you, but that is pretty much irrelevant today, unless you want to suggest people here invest in obsolete niche technology as a general purpose scope.

Thats a strawman argument, based on a reflex reaction to speed reading what I wrote and falsely interpolating things I didn't write.

David Hess · « **Reply #74 on:** October 22, 2016, 07:22:02 pm »

Quote from: tggzzz on October 22, 2016, 09:01:06 am

Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on October 22, 2016, 04:00:16 am
Yes, 20 years ago Today, scopes have BWs of up to 100GHz with sample rates of up to 240GSa/s. Sampling scopes have long died out except for some very specific niches (i.e. optical high speed communication signals), and even there they have been/are subsequently replaced by real-time DSOs.

What are you talking about? They are all sampling scopes. Old ones used diode bridges to sample, new ones like the HP boat anchor use ADCs.

And yes, I was referring to things like high speed comms signals.

It is unfortunate that DSO could mean either digital sampling oscilloscope or digital storage oscilloscope. In the past, "sampling" oscilloscopes referred to a very specific design where sampling occurred before attenuation and amplification so bandwidth was limited only by the sampling strobe width or transition time producing a non-linear but very predictable sin(x)/x frequency response. They also have clean transient response and immunity to non-destructive overload.

As Wuerstchenhund points out, these oscilloscopes have been replaced by real time designs except in applications where their higher bandwidth for a given price makes up for their limitations. The cheapest 12 GHz oscilloscope Tektronix sells is about $100k while you can buy a 12 GHz "sampling" oscilloscope from Picotech for $10k. If used instruments are considered, then a 12 GHz sampling oscilloscope can be had for less than $1000; I bought mine for $400.

I keep hoping one of the budget DSO makers will add a sampling input to one of their instruments but I guess there is no market for 4 GHz of bandwidth at a budget price.

Update: Quotes fixed, I think.

tggzzz · « **Reply #75 on:** October 22, 2016, 08:20:26 pm »

Quote from: David Hess on October 22, 2016, 07:22:02 pm

Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on October 22, 2016, 04:00:16 am
Quote from: tggzzz on October 21, 2016, 04:24:36 pm
Yes, 20 years ago Today, scopes have BWs of up to 100GHz with sample rates of up to 240GSa/s. Sampling scopes have long died out except for some very specific niches (i.e. optical high speed communication signals), and even there they have been/are subsequently replaced by real-time DSOs.

What are you talking about? They are all sampling scopes. Old ones used diode bridges to sample, new ones like the HP boat anchor use ADCs.

And yes, I was referring to things like high speed comms signals.

It is unfortunate that DSO could mean either digital sampling oscilloscope or digital storage oscilloscope. In the past, "sampling" oscilloscopes referred to a very specific design where sampling occurred before attenuation and amplification so bandwidth was limited only by the sampling strobe width or transition time producing a non-linear but very predictable sin(x)/x frequency response. They also have clean transient response and immunity to non-destructive overload.

As tggzzz points out, these oscilloscopes have been replaced by real time designs except in applications where their higher bandwidth for a given price makes up for their limitations. The cheapest 12 GHz oscilloscope Tektronix sells is about $100k while you can buy a 12 GHz "sampling" oscilloscope from Picotech for $10k. If used instruments are considered, then a 12 GHz sampling oscilloscope can be had for less than $1000; I bought mine for $400.

I keep hoping one of the budget DSO makers will add a sampling input to one of their instruments but I guess there is no market for 4 GHz of bandwidth at a budget price.

For the record, you've swapped attributions in the quotes. Otherwise, I agree.

And my 50ps risetime "scope" cost £20: a Tek1502 TDR. With some imaginative perversion of the calibration routines, it can measure the transition time of other outputs

Blisk · « **Reply #76 on:** October 22, 2016, 10:35:05 pm »

Thank you guys for good debate I have learned quite something from what you write.
I need a scope which will be on my desk and if needed ocasionally connected to PC to record some signals for discuss it with others.
I have learned that some scopes can be hacked to higer frequency and some other things so I will buy one which gives me that possibillity.
Also think I will not need more than 2 channels, rather higher frequnecy than more channels.
So can we more talk about which models have more benefits than philosophical questions will I need that or this.
I work with digital and analog electronics, depends of what my project is.
Currently frequencies about 3.3Ghz to 60 Ghz.
Yes automatic is good for most simple measurments.

Blisk · « **Reply #77 on:** October 22, 2016, 10:39:25 pm »

Quote from: Fungus on October 20, 2016, 09:06:49 pm

Quote from: Blisk on October 20, 2016, 05:40:51 pm
OK
few things popu what I may considere.
First high voltage
Second if scope can be hacked and get more out of it.
And third some have lan, or maybe USB to connect it to computer.
Three which have poppedup most are sigilent and rigol and owon

Rigol DS1054Z stands head and shoulders above everything else in the sub-$1200(ish) group simply because you can hack it and enable a ton of features. It's not an amazing device in itself, if you have a specific need like FFT there are better 'scopes. But ... it's a good all-rounder, it's well built and all those features for $400 is hard to resist.

That scope is only 50Mhz

What about this one?
can it be hacked to get 200Mhz or more?

Rigol DS1104Z 100 MHz Digital Oscilloscope with 4 channels

price is verry afordable, about 600€

rstofer · « **Reply #78 on:** October 22, 2016, 11:13:10 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on October 22, 2016, 10:39:25 pm

Quote from: Fungus on October 20, 2016, 09:06:49 pm
Quote from: Blisk on October 20, 2016, 05:40:51 pm
OK
few things popu what I may considere.
First high voltage
Second if scope can be hacked and get more out of it.
And third some have lan, or maybe USB to connect it to computer.
Three which have poppedup most are sigilent and rigol and owon

Rigol DS1054Z stands head and shoulders above everything else in the sub-$1200(ish) group simply because you can hack it and enable a ton of features. It's not an amazing device in itself, if you have a specific need like FFT there are better 'scopes. But ... it's a good all-rounder, it's well built and all those features for $400 is hard to resist.

That scope is only 50Mhz

What about this one?
can it be hacked to get 200Mhz or more?

Rigol DS1104Z 100 MHz Digital Oscilloscope with 4 channels

price is verry afordable, about 600€

The DS1054Z can be extended to a 100 MHz version, identical to the 1104Z by just entering a secret squirrel pass code.
Do a Google search for 'riglol' - yes, misspelled.

You will get, and keep, 100 MHz bandwidth, serial decoding, extended memory, etc. All the stuff that comes free during the trial period and expires all too soon.

tggzzz · « **Reply #79 on:** October 22, 2016, 11:27:52 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on October 22, 2016, 10:35:05 pm

I work with digital and analog electronics, depends of what my project is.
Currently frequencies about 3.3Ghz to 60 Ghz.

You can afford a 60GHz scope?! I couldn't afford a 60GHz spectrum analyser

tautech · « **Reply #80 on:** October 23, 2016, 05:49:35 am »

Quote from: Blisk on October 22, 2016, 10:35:05 pm

Thank you guys for good debate I have learned quite something from what you write.
I need a scope which will be on my desk and if needed ocasionally connected to PC to record some signals for discuss it with others.
I have learned that some scopes can be hacked to higer frequency and some other things so I will buy one which gives me that possibillity.
Also think I will not need more than 2 channels, rather higher frequnecy than more channels.
So can we more talk about which models have more benefits than philosophical questions will I need that or this.
I work with digital and analog electronics, depends of what my project is.
Currently frequencies about 3.3Ghz to 60 Ghz.
Yes automatic is good for most simple measurments.

Don't you mean 3-60 MHz ?

OK so your interest is in the 100-200 MHz range.
There's a bit of choice within that range but if you settle on 200 MHz as requirement expect to have to pay a good bit more.
As I've mentioned before PC connectivity is not an issue with the modern DSO, they all have either LAN or USB or both.
From the Siglent stable there's 3 series to choose from that have 200 MHz models.
Once we get to these frequencies you might consider a higher sampling rate than 1 GSa/s and go for 2 GSa/s.
BUT it's a trade off with memory depth too in some models. All very well having a large sample rate but those samples need be stored to memory to then make all the features a DSO has truly useful.

2 or 4 channels....your call, many say they'd never have another 2 channel scope after getting a 4 channel one and yes I've got both BUT Siglent DSO's have a Ext Trigger input that can be used as a defacto 3rd channel or 5th in the case of a 4 channel DSO. Check any others you are interested in have this too. A use case of the Ext Trigger input might be to trigger on the clock of a serial protocol data stream.

For a truly basic 4 channel 200 MHz DSO, SDS1204CFL or the 2 channel version SDS1202CFL.
2 GSa/s sampling, only 24 Kpts memory though and no decoding etc.
http://www.siglenteu.com/pdxx.aspx?id=58&T=2&tid=1

The 2nd from the Siglent stable, I've linked before the SDS1000X series, available up to 200 MHz and with better memory than above but only 1 GSa/s sampling and 2 channel only.
http://www.siglenteu.com/pdxx.aspx?id=2373&T=2&tid=1

Currently top of our line is the SDS2000X series, 2 GSa/s, 70-300 MHz, 140 Mpts memory, 2 or 4 channel.
Edit
MSO capable as standard. (Option)
http://www.siglenteu.com/pdxx.aspx?id=1195&T=2&tid=1
There's a promotion running on these at the moment where the buyer gets a free BW upgrade, so you'd pay for a 100 MHz model and get the 200 MHz model free.

Keep throwing us questions Blisk and we'll do our best to fill in any questions you have.

Edit added

Blisk · « **Reply #81 on:** October 23, 2016, 07:10:12 am »

Quote from: tggzzz on October 22, 2016, 11:27:52 pm

Quote from: Blisk on October 22, 2016, 10:35:05 pm
I work with digital and analog electronics, depends of what my project is.
Currently frequencies about 3.3Ghz to 60 Ghz.

You can afford a 60GHz scope?! I couldn't afford a 60GHz spectrum analyser

you don't have 100$?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Portable-RF-spectrum-analyzer-Arinst-SSA-25-6000-MHz-Very-fast-measurements-/232119936171?hash=item360b6d24ab:g:TnsAAOSwaB5XtrEB

Blisk · « **Reply #82 on:** October 23, 2016, 07:18:18 am »

Quote from: tautech on October 23, 2016, 05:49:35 am

Currently top of our line is the SDS2000X series, 2 GSa/s, 70-300 MHz, 140 Mpts memory, 2 or 4 channel.
http://www.siglenteu.com/pdxx.aspx?id=1195&T=2&tid=1
There's a promotion running on these at the moment where the buyer gets a free BW upgrade, so you'd pay for a 100 MHz model and get the 200 MHz model free.

Keep throwing us questions Blisk and we'll do our best to fill in any questions you have.

Ok you promote Siglent is it hackable, like some others to get more from less?

Fungus · « **Reply #83 on:** October 23, 2016, 07:37:25 am »

Quote from: Blisk on October 22, 2016, 10:39:25 pm

Quote from: Fungus on October 20, 2016, 09:06:49 pm
Rigol DS1054Z
That scope is only 50Mhz

50Mhz before unlocking, 100MHz after.

Quote from: Blisk on October 22, 2016, 10:39:25 pm

What about this one?

Rigol DS1104Z 100 MHz Digital Oscilloscope with 4 channels

Nope. That's exactly the same as an unlocked DS1054Z (but costs 200€ more).

To get more bandwidth you need to unlock a Rigol DS2000 series. The cheapest DS2000E is about 840€, 2 channels, and can be unlocked to 300MHz. That's a pretty good price for a 300Mhz 'scope.

tautech · « **Reply #84 on:** October 23, 2016, 07:49:01 am »

Quote from: Blisk on October 23, 2016, 07:18:18 am

Quote from: tautech on October 23, 2016, 05:49:35 am

Currently top of our line is the SDS2000X series, 2 GSa/s, 70-300 MHz, 140 Mpts memory, 2 or 4 channel.
http://www.siglenteu.com/pdxx.aspx?id=1195&T=2&tid=1
There's a promotion running on these at the moment where the buyer gets a free BW upgrade, so you'd pay for a 100 MHz model and get the 200 MHz model free.

Keep throwing us questions Blisk and we'll do our best to fill in any questions you have.
Ok you promote Siglent is it hackable, like some others to get more from less?

It probably is hackable, there are some Siglent products being hacked and the only the 2 that I'm aware of are SSA3000X spectrum analyser and the SDG2000X AWG.
But really there's little incentive to hack when Siglent offers these free bandwidth upgrades.
Sometimes there's cheap option packages too, buy 1 get all, that sort of promotion.

If you in any way need traceability of an instrument you'd be wise to not hack an instrument but get an official model from a manufacturer along with the calibration certificate they provide.

Performa01 · « **Reply #85 on:** October 23, 2016, 08:16:50 am »

Quote from: Blisk on October 23, 2016, 07:10:12 am

Quote from: tggzzz on October 22, 2016, 11:27:52 pm
Quote from: Blisk on October 22, 2016, 10:35:05 pm
I work with digital and analog electronics, depends of what my project is.
Currently frequencies about 3.3Ghz to 60 Ghz.

You can afford a 60GHz scope?! I couldn't afford a 60GHz spectrum analyser
you don't have 100$?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Portable-RF-spectrum-analyzer-Arinst-SSA-25-6000-MHz-Very-fast-measurements-/232119936171?hash=item360b6d24ab:g:TnsAAOSwaB5XtrEB

That’s not a spectrum analyser and it’s only 6GHz.
You could call that thing a spectrum monitor at best, in actual fact it’s just a toy.

BravoV · « **Reply #86 on:** October 23, 2016, 08:46:45 am »

Quote from: Performa01 on October 23, 2016, 08:16:50 am

Quote from: Blisk on October 23, 2016, 07:10:12 am
Quote from: tggzzz on October 22, 2016, 11:27:52 pm
Quote from: Blisk on October 22, 2016, 10:35:05 pm
I work with digital and analog electronics, depends of what my project is.
Currently frequencies about 3.3Ghz to 60 Ghz.

You can afford a 60GHz scope?! I couldn't afford a 60GHz spectrum analyser
you don't have 100$?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Portable-RF-spectrum-analyzer-Arinst-SSA-25-6000-MHz-Very-fast-measurements-/232119936171?hash=item360b6d24ab:g:TnsAAOSwaB5XtrEB

That’s not a spectrum analyser and it’s only 6GHz.
You could call that thing a spectrum monitor at best, in actual fact it’s just a toy.

+1

No offence Blisk, my suggestion is to hang around here for a while, read and search the forum. Tons of good resources here.

CMIIW, it looks like you don't know what you want, also don't have deep enough knowledge on T&M equipment, just listen n read to enrich your knowledge, rather than randomly quoting google searches.

There are already many good advises posted here by resident "experienced" members that looks like you keep ignoring.

Blisk · « **Reply #87 on:** October 23, 2016, 02:13:24 pm »

Quote from: Performa01 on October 23, 2016, 08:16:50 am

Quote from: Blisk on October 23, 2016, 07:10:12 am
Quote from: tggzzz on October 22, 2016, 11:27:52 pm
Quote from: Blisk on October 22, 2016, 10:35:05 pm
I work with digital and analog electronics, depends of what my project is.
Currently frequencies about 3.3Ghz to 60 Ghz.

You can afford a 60GHz scope?! I couldn't afford a 60GHz spectrum analyser
you don't have 100$?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Portable-RF-spectrum-analyzer-Arinst-SSA-25-6000-MHz-Very-fast-measurements-/232119936171?hash=item360b6d24ab:g:TnsAAOSwaB5XtrEB

That’s not a spectrum analyser and it’s only 6GHz.
You could call that thing a spectrum monitor at best, in actual fact it’s just a toy.

I know that it is not it was just what first came out.
Spectrum analyser is quite expencive device arround 2000$

I am reading now, learning and collecting money to buy oscilloscope.
I will do that in late november when collect all money I need.

Blisk · « **Reply #88 on:** November 01, 2016, 08:29:58 pm »

Is there a list of scopes which can be hacked or software unlocked to get more out of it?

Blisk · « **Reply #89 on:** November 03, 2016, 04:15:12 pm »

I thought tthis debate will continue with some more advices, what you can do with some of the oscilloscopes.
This one have 16 channels logic analyser. Don't know what exactly that mean???

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Rigol-Oscilloscope-50MHz-DS1052D-1G-SR-16-channels-logic-Analyzer-/321120739175?hash=item4ac4499f67:g:jLYAAOxyB0VRtdz2

rstofer · « **Reply #90 on:** November 03, 2016, 06:29:30 pm »

As you can see from the photo, the scope can display 16 digital channels along with 2 analog channels all on a little bitty screen (compared to a PC based logic analyzer).
This digital capability can be quite handy when working on mixed signal systems (analog and digital simultaneously) but many folks use a separate logic analyzer because, among other things, triggering can be much more complex (and useful) on a logic analyzer.
Dave did a video on mixed signal scopes

It's just a choice...

rstofer · « **Reply #91 on:** November 03, 2016, 06:32:49 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on November 03, 2016, 04:15:12 pm

I thought tthis debate will continue with some more advices, what you can do with some of the oscilloscopes.

Why? We're 91 replies in and I don't see where there is more to add.

Blisk · « **Reply #92 on:** November 03, 2016, 06:48:34 pm »

Quote from: rstofer on November 03, 2016, 06:32:49 pm

Quote from: Blisk on November 03, 2016, 04:15:12 pm
I thought tthis debate will continue with some more advices, what you can do with some of the oscilloscopes.

Why? We're 91 replies in and I don't see where there is more to add.

For me it is quite alot more to learn, that's why. For you maybe not.

tautech · « **Reply #93 on:** November 03, 2016, 10:31:57 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on November 03, 2016, 06:48:34 pm

Quote from: rstofer on November 03, 2016, 06:32:49 pm
Quote from: Blisk on November 03, 2016, 04:15:12 pm
I thought tthis debate will continue with some more advices, what you can do with some of the oscilloscopes.

Why? We're 91 replies in and I don't see where there is more to add.

For me it is quite alot more to learn, that's why. For you maybe not.

Read the thread again and again and again, there is much advice to research for you to make the choice that suits you best.
At the end of the day it is your money to spend, not ours.
At this level of equipment there will always be compromises in features that can be had.....even in much more expensive equipment too.

When it comes down to a particular model and you're unsure of any problems you may have read about....ask here again as many have been fixed in latest FW editions and this alone makes many reviews obsolete.

rf-loop · « **Reply #94 on:** November 04, 2016, 06:52:35 am »

Quote from: tautech on November 03, 2016, 10:31:57 pm

When it comes down to a particular model and you're unsure of any problems you may have read about....ask here again as many have been fixed in latest FW editions and this alone makes many reviews obsolete.

Most of reviews are:

1. Mostly obsolete because FW changes.

2. More or less obsolete Because HW changed.

3. Because reviewer have more or less lack of knowledge, experience and skills about just this equipment and how to use it.

4. Because reviewer may have more or less lack of knowledge, experience and skills how to make reliable lab testings.

5. Because bias. Bias do not come only from money relationship. Just one brand owner may be very biased. Just like peoples are when they fall in love and see only nice things and blind for every error. Or people may have some bad feel with some brand - in history - and after then he do not see nothing but errors and good things he close eyes and ears and brain. Some seller may be very biased and some seller less. Some sellers may be much much less biased than some people who have fall in love with some brand. Also some peoples are more honest than other.

6. Reviews what are designed to push down some brand - perhaps more common than peoples often think. This is because if you promote some equipment and tell how good it is in this and that and do some tricks every people suspect bias - even if it is true.
But, do it opposite way, support negative opinions about competitors without easy detectable relationship. Drama theater is not very difficult sport.

Perhaps it is very fun result if we arrange blind tests or even double blind tests.
But simply, think what hapend if we remove all things what tell brand. Change all GUI so that no names and same colors and overall edit display so that direct recognize brand is difficult. All scopes to box what are same, including knobs and buttons so that recognize is difficult or even impossible.
After then give these Keysight, Tektronix, LeCroy, Rigol, Siglent, Goodwill, etc (some comparable level models) etc to test group what are asked to do some designed measurements and tests. Then randomly selected test groups and randomized also equipments and so that other test groups can not get any info from other group. After all groups have made tests collect data and opinions...

Some reviews are just some kind of ranting and playing like kid with his first game boy. Most bad are these "out from box" noob's made "reviews" where they do not understand even most basic fundamentals and then "wondering" things what they see and suspect that scope is bad more than think that they do not understand what they see and why. You can see these user errors and lack of knowledge even from popular reviewers what noobs admire and think they are popular because they know so much. It is easy to know much and stay front of "class room" if classroom is full of noobs who are just starting hobby and perhaps just play with his first oscilloscope.

Mostly these, sometimes even very popular reviewers, very rare do and show any carefully designed and done lab grade test measurements. After look what kind of user mistakes they do even with simplest basic things some times, it is easy to understand why they do not show reliable tests with true professional grade measurements with well designed and documented test settings and after then well documented data.
Some times they use equipment with fast fingers what are 10 times more fast than thinking behind fingers.
Some times there is available real professionals made reviews but they are rare. Many times peoples think they are boring. Because they do not play scope just like game boy where fastest finger win.

Blisk · « **Reply #95 on:** November 07, 2016, 09:33:10 pm »

As far as I read and google it is mostly RIGOL upgraded and can be upgraded to 300MHz.

Can I upgrade this Siglent to 100Mhz or more - Siglent 8" SDS2072?

rstofer · « **Reply #96 on:** November 07, 2016, 11:04:13 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on November 07, 2016, 09:33:10 pm

As far as I read and google it is mostly RIGOL upgraded and can be upgraded to 300MHz.

Can I upgrade this Siglent to 100Mhz or more - Siglent 8" SDS2072?

You need to read very carefully when considering upgrades. The 50 MHz DS1054X can only be upgraded to 100 MHz, no higher. Some 200 MHz scopes might be upgraded to 300 MHz but I know nothing about that.

According to this thread, you aren't going to hack the SDS2072 but last year Siglent did offer a free bandwidth upgrade. That promotion may not be available this year.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/which-model-of-scope/

tautech · « **Reply #97 on:** November 08, 2016, 05:09:36 am »

Quote from: rstofer on November 07, 2016, 11:04:13 pm

Quote from: Blisk on November 07, 2016, 09:33:10 pm
As far as I read and google it is mostly RIGOL upgraded and can be upgraded to 300MHz.

Can I upgrade this Siglent to 100Mhz or more - Siglent 8" SDS2072?

You need to read very carefully when considering upgrades. The 50 MHz DS1054X can only be upgraded to 100 MHz, no higher. Some 200 MHz scopes might be upgraded to 300 MHz but I know nothing about that.

According to this thread, you aren't going to hack the SDS2072 but last year Siglent did offer a free bandwidth upgrade. That promotion may not be available this year.

It is and if you follow the link in Reply #80 to the Siglent European website you'll see it's still active:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/advice-about-oscilloscope-to-buy/msg1054445/#msg1054445

But it's only a 1 BW step for free promotion.
70-100 MHz, 100-200 MHz or 200-300 MHz. At the higher BW's it represents a good $ saving.

Blisk · « **Reply #98 on:** November 08, 2016, 08:11:26 am »

As I read here 70Mhz can be unlocked to 300Mhz
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/unlockinghacking-the-rigol-ds2000a-series-scope-the-short-post/

Does Siglent SD2072 have the same hardware 100Mhz and 300Mhz or not?

Fungus · « **Reply #99 on:** November 08, 2016, 09:21:08 am »

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 08:11:26 am

As I read here 70Mhz can be unlocked to 300Mhz
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/unlockinghacking-the-rigol-ds2000a-series-scope-the-short-post/

The Rigol DS2000 series can do that, yes.

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 08:11:26 am

Does Siglent SD2072 have the same hardware 100Mhz and 300Mhz or not?

No.

rf-loop · « **Reply #100 on:** November 08, 2016, 10:31:57 am »

Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 09:21:08 am

.

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 08:11:26 am
Does Siglent SD2072 have the same hardware 100Mhz and 300Mhz or not?

No.

Would you put evidence on the table.

Fungus · « **Reply #101 on:** November 08, 2016, 10:38:49 am »

Quote from: rf-loop on November 08, 2016, 10:31:57 am

Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 09:21:08 am
.

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 08:11:26 am
Does Siglent SD2072 have the same hardware 100Mhz and 300Mhz or not?

No.

Would you put evidence on the table.

No. It might be, it might not be. Who knows?

On The Other Hand: The OP seems to be asking if he can hack his Siglent the same way that happy Rigol owners are busy hacking theirs. A quick google search will tell you that the answer to that question is "no".

Blisk · « **Reply #102 on:** November 08, 2016, 10:43:31 am »

So Rigol 2000 series is best choice for that money?

rf-loop · « **Reply #103 on:** November 08, 2016, 10:47:18 am »

Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 10:38:49 am

Quote from: rf-loop on November 08, 2016, 10:31:57 am
Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 09:21:08 am
.

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 08:11:26 am
Does Siglent SD2072 have the same hardware 100Mhz and 300Mhz or not?

No.

Would you put evidence on the table.

No. It might be, it might not be. Who knows?

So why you answer No if you do not know anything about it.
Right answer what you can use is (if you really want answer without knowledge): "I do not know", as long as you do not know.

Fungus · « **Reply #104 on:** November 08, 2016, 11:10:18 am »

Quote from: rf-loop on November 08, 2016, 10:47:18 am

So why you answer No if you do not know anything about it.

I know perfectly - the clue is in the fact that you can buy upgrades.

Buuuut:
a) That isn't what the OP is really asking
b) The answer to the real question is "no".

rf-loop · « **Reply #105 on:** November 08, 2016, 11:22:59 am »

Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 11:10:18 am

Quote from: rf-loop on November 08, 2016, 10:47:18 am
So why you answer No if you do not know anything about it.

I know perfectly - the clue is in the fact that you can buy upgrades.

Buuuut:
a) That isn't what the OP is really asking
b) The answer to the real question is "no".

Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 09:21:08 am

.

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 08:11:26 am
Does Siglent SD2072 have the same hardware 100Mhz and 300Mhz or not?

No.

This was question and there is your answer - if you forget it. Exatly.

Fungus · « **Reply #106 on:** November 08, 2016, 11:37:02 am »

Quote from: rf-loop on November 08, 2016, 11:22:59 am

This was question and there is your answer - if you forget it. Exatly.

Nice trim.

He said:

Quote

As I read here 70Mhz can be unlocked to 300Mhz
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/unlockinghacking-the-rigol-ds2000a-series-scope-the-short-post/

Does Siglent SD2072 have the same hardware 100Mhz and 300Mhz or not?

What was he really after?

You're right though, the answer was pedantically incorrect.

Next time I'll use more than one word. Maybe something like "Yes, but this line of reasoning is futile and will only end in disappointment".

rf-loop · « **Reply #107 on:** November 08, 2016, 12:51:57 pm »

Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 10:38:49 am

On The Other Hand: The OP seems to be asking if he can hack his Siglent the same way that happy Rigol owners are busy hacking theirs. A quick google search will tell you that the answer to that question is "no".

This is true. I have not (yet) seen any evidence for Siglent SDS1000X/X+ or SDS2000X this kind of hack what is at this time available for Rigol 1000Z and 2000 models. No one also know how long Rigol continue this marketing trick.

Only what Siglent offer at this time is limited time offer for SDS2000X series so that when pay 70MHz model price then get 100MHz model, when pay 100MHz model price, get 200MHz model etc. And other offer is for options.

But for exaple, in standard you get with SDS2000X
max 140000wfm/s
max 140M memory (in 4 channel models 2 x 140M) (+ some extra memory for History buffer and Sequence acquisition.)
! max 80000 waveform history buffer (always working backside with current speed (exept if Sequence acquisition is in use). "Stop and look history" feature)
max 80000 waveform (segment) in Sequence mode
! max 500000 wfm/s speed in Sequence mode inside one Sequence.
! Full speed hardware based mask test (up to 140000wfm/s independdent of test result)
Hardware ready for MSO with 16 channel digital inputs (MSO functions activation need license and using need also 16 channel LA probe)
Hardware ready 1Ch 25MHz AWG (activation need license)

What is best for individual user depends individual needs and what things/features user give more or less weight.

nctnico · « **Reply #108 on:** November 08, 2016, 01:03:08 pm »

Blisk is asking for value for money. A 2 channel 70MHz Rigol DS2072 costs $836 at Tequipment. $161 extra buys him a 4 channel 200MHz GW Instek GDS2204E ($1000 from Tequipment). A 4 channel 100MHz Siglent SDS2104X + decoding option costs $1473 from Saelig (I don't see the free bandwidth upgrade). For that $437 extra you can buy a very nice seperate waveform generator or USB based logic analyser not to mention the SDS2000X still has short & slow FFT, hires limited to 14kpts (what is the use of having deep memory?), decoding only what is on screen and various annoying bugs in the firmware.

Fungus · « **Reply #109 on:** November 08, 2016, 01:23:31 pm »

Quote from: nctnico on November 08, 2016, 01:03:08 pm

Blisk is asking for value for money. A 2 channel 70MHz Rigol DS2072 costs $836 at Tequipment.

That's the best value for money if you can live with 2 channels (You can easily unlock 300MHz + a lot of extra features)

Quote from: nctnico on November 08, 2016, 01:03:08 pm

$161 extra buys him a 4 channel 200MHz GW Instek GDS2204E ($1000 from Tequipment).

Oooh! They've really dropped the price on that one. It's a very good deal for $1000.

http://www.tequipment.net/Instek/GDS-2204E/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?b=y&v=7781

rf-loop · « **Reply #110 on:** November 08, 2016, 02:03:09 pm »

Quote from: nctnico on November 08, 2016, 01:03:08 pm

decoding only what is on screen and various annoying bugs in the firmware.

What bug you really know?

Is it so that only experience you have is with early FW from old SDS2000 what was predecessor for SDS2000X series.

Decoding what is in memory.

Sorry but it still looks like you do not understand this working principle in scope where all captured memory length is on the screen. If there is even 140Mpts captured length, it is all on the screen, visible, without hidden part of trace.

What decoding is needed for part of signal what is not captured. Please explain why need decode something what do not exist in memory? I repeat it agen here: Of course Siglent do NOT DECODE things what are not in display! Outside of display there is NOTHING to decode. With this principle user see all what captured length, there is not hidden part. Less real blind time.

Goodwill 2000E scope have some kind of "segmented memory acquisition" but I have not seen any real data about its speed. Fast segmented acquisition is important basic feature in oscilloscope. Also not waveform history buffer at all. Can you show tested guaranteed speed of segmented memory acquisition in Goodwill.

Goodwill 2000E max samplerate is 1GSa/s. Max Memory 10M.
(what is samplerate and memory for all channels when all is in use)

But how ever Siglent serial decoding is, it still looks like (based to information in this forum) in this area perhaps Goodwill do better work. Same with advanced FFT in Goodwill (based to information in this forum).

nctnico · « **Reply #111 on:** November 08, 2016, 02:33:28 pm »

Quote from: rf-loop on November 08, 2016, 02:03:09 pm

Quote from: nctnico on November 08, 2016, 01:03:08 pm
decoding only what is on screen and various annoying bugs in the firmware.

What bug you really know?

Is it so that only experience you have is with early FW from old SDS2000 what was predecessor for SDS2000X series.

Just read the thread about the SDS2000/SDS2000X firmware. Still bugs out there and a lot has not been covered in that thread so there may be many more lingering (triggering on message content in protocols for example). Siglent's biggest problem is their mediocre firmware engineering department and their lack of knowledge about how an oscilloscope should work. The SDS2000 got introduced about 3 years ago but today the firmware still has several issues and it turns out they can't even deliver some of the promised features like FFT, decoding and hires without incurring serious limitations. That is not something they can fix without a major overhaul of the hardware platform. The sad part is that if Siglent got it right of the bat they could have made a killing with the SDS2000. In today's market however it is obsolete.

And yes, decoding only what is on screen is bad because the decoding will dissapear as soon as you scroll the beginning of the message off-screen which makes it impossible to correlate bit timing problems to parts inside a decoded messages (like ACK bit in I2C and CAN, reversal of a half-duplex RS485 bus, SPI bus enable, etc).

Blisk · « **Reply #112 on:** November 08, 2016, 02:57:16 pm »

Quote from: nctnico on November 08, 2016, 01:03:08 pm

Blisk is asking for value for money. A 2 channel 70MHz Rigol DS2072 costs $836 at Tequipment. $161 extra buys him a 4 channel 200MHz GW Instek GDS2204E ($1000 from Tequipment). A 4 channel 100MHz Siglent SDS2104X + decoding option costs $1473 from Saelig (I don't see the free bandwidth upgrade). For that $437 extra you can buy a very nice seperate waveform generator or USB based logic analyser not to mention the SDS2000X still has short & slow FFT, hires limited to 14kpts (what is the use of having deep memory?), decoding only what is on screen and various annoying bugs in the firmware.

Exactly! I am looking something about 800-1000$, best for that money.
I will check Instek I am not familiar with it, how good is hardware and stable firmware?

Fungus · « **Reply #113 on:** November 08, 2016, 03:41:19 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 02:57:16 pm

I will check Instek I am not familiar with it, how good is hardware and stable firmware?

According to Dave's teardowns: The hardware is OK (not outstanding but no obvious problems). Has decent processing power for the job.

According to forum members: Firmware is above average. Good features, very few bugs.

Overall: I don't think you can do better for a general purpose 'scope for $1000 right now (that's a hefty discount ... only 2 left at that price!)

Edit: On the other hand, it looks like you're not in the USA. You probably have to pay a lot of shipping and taxes.

Fungus · « **Reply #114 on:** November 08, 2016, 03:54:08 pm »

If you can't get the Instek for $1000 then weirdly enough you might have to get a Rigol DS1054Z.

To get a better 'scope than an unlocked DS1054Z you really need to pay over $1000.

There's really nothing between $400 and $1000 that's better than a DS1054Z unless you have a very specific need, eg. good FFTs. There are 'scopes with better FFT than the DS1054Z but you lose badly on bandwidth, number of channels, etc.

On the bright side: You'll have $400-$600 left over from your budget to buy something else.

nctnico · « **Reply #115 on:** November 08, 2016, 04:07:19 pm »

Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 03:54:08 pm

If you can't get the Instek for $1000 then weirdly enough you might have to get a Rigol DS1054Z.

Weirdly enough I have to agree.

Blisk · « **Reply #116 on:** November 08, 2016, 04:22:31 pm »

Quote from: nctnico on November 08, 2016, 04:07:19 pm

Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 03:54:08 pm
If you can't get the Instek for $1000 then weirdly enough you might have to get a Rigol DS1054Z.
Weirdly enough I have to agree.

yes I am not from US but from Europe, so I need to buy scope from seller in europe, if not I need to pay about 27% more for cutom fees and taxes.

tautech · « **Reply #117 on:** November 08, 2016, 04:52:04 pm »

Recent discussion overlooks that a SDS2kX has MSO as standard.
If Blisk thinks he might need it and buys a DS2k, thinking he'll hack it to higher BW, he'll be disappointed. Nobodys done that yet AFAIK.

The previously mentioned free BW upgrade for SDS2kX is currently only available in European and Asia pacific regions.

nctnico · « **Reply #118 on:** November 08, 2016, 05:27:41 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 04:22:31 pm

Quote from: nctnico on November 08, 2016, 04:07:19 pm
Quote from: Fungus on November 08, 2016, 03:54:08 pm
If you can't get the Instek for $1000 then weirdly enough you might have to get a Rigol DS1054Z.
Weirdly enough I have to agree.
yes I am not from US but from Europe, so I need to buy scope from seller in europe, if not I need to pay about 27% more for cutom fees and taxes.

So Slovenia is also pretty bad when it comes to VAT. Still with the Tequipment Eevblog discount their price may not be bad compared to European sellers. You can try to contact GW Instek in Europe ( sales@gw-instek.eu ) to find a more local reseller.

Blisk · « **Reply #119 on:** November 08, 2016, 05:59:24 pm »

quick look for Instek version 2000 is far more expencive than other oscilloscopes.
it is from 1500-2000$

nctnico · « **Reply #120 on:** November 08, 2016, 06:08:59 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 05:59:24 pm

quick look for Instek version 2000 is far more expencive than other oscilloscopes.
it is from 1500-2000$

Test equipment in Europe is more expensive than in the US. If you take the Tequipment deal for the GW Instek 2204E (note GW instek has a different 2000A series so be carefull what you compare) you'll pay 910 euro for the scope and another 245 euro for the VAT. Add 50 euro(?) for shipping and you end up at 1205 euro all in which probably is a very good price.

Nozzer · « **Reply #121 on:** November 08, 2016, 06:31:20 pm »

The Rigol DS2000 series are two channels and only go up to a maximum BW of 200MHz.

jemangedeslolos · « **Reply #122 on:** November 08, 2016, 06:46:42 pm »

300Mhz

Blisk · « **Reply #123 on:** November 08, 2016, 10:55:16 pm »

Quote from: Nozzer on November 08, 2016, 06:31:20 pm

The Rigol DS2000 series are two channels and only go up to a maximum BW of 200MHz.

For me I think 2 channels is enough.

is there a list what unlocked Rigol DS2000 can do, except higher frequency - 300Mhz

Fungus · « **Reply #124 on:** November 09, 2016, 06:36:29 am »

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 10:55:16 pm

is there a list what unlocked Rigol DS2000 can do, except higher frequency - 300Mhz

http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 10:55:16 pm

For me I think 2 channels is enough.

If 2 channels is enough then Rhode&Schwartz have some interesting models for $1000. You won't get 300MHz bandwidth but they're very nice 'scopes.

Fungus · « **Reply #125 on:** November 09, 2016, 06:51:37 am »

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 05:59:24 pm

quick look for Instek version 2000 is far more expencive than other oscilloscopes.
it is from 1500-2000$

That's a normal price for those.

The $1000 is a very special offer from Tequipment.

Blisk · « **Reply #126 on:** November 09, 2016, 08:23:37 am »

Thanks I will check that.

I thought if there is a list of oscilloscopes which can be hacked or upgraded for all brands not just rigol.

Blisk · « **Reply #127 on:** November 09, 2016, 08:25:08 am »

Quote from: Fungus on November 09, 2016, 06:51:37 am

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 05:59:24 pm
quick look for Instek version 2000 is far more expencive than other oscilloscopes.
it is from 1500-2000$

That's a normal price for those.

The $1000 is a very special offer from Tequipment.

yes but they are in USA and need to pay 27% extra for taxes.

nctnico · « **Reply #128 on:** November 09, 2016, 10:01:46 am »

Even with the 27% taxes it is a much better deal than you'll probably find in Europe! Don't let the idea of having to pay taxes get in your way.

Blisk · « **Reply #129 on:** November 09, 2016, 10:43:51 am »

Quote from: nctnico on November 09, 2016, 10:01:46 am

Even with the 27% taxes it is a much better deal than you'll probably find in Europe! Don't let the idea of having to pay taxes get in your way.

I am aware of that, summary counts.

Blisk · « **Reply #130 on:** November 24, 2016, 09:26:02 am »

Dollar raise and that means no scope for me for a while $:-\$

Blisk · « **Reply #131 on:** April 23, 2017, 07:52:52 pm »

Did anything changed in this field???
or it is all the same on the market of osclloscopes?

tautech · « **Reply #132 on:** April 23, 2017, 08:06:03 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on April 23, 2017, 07:52:52 pm

Did anything changed in this field???
or it is all the same on the market of osclloscopes?

Big changes for you to study if 200 MHz and 2 channels are enough.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-985-siglent-sds1202x-e-oscilloscope-teardown/
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-siglent-sds1000x-e-oscilloscope-based-on-xilinx-zynq-7000-soc-architecture/

I should have the first units of these in NZ today.

TK · « **Reply #133 on:** April 23, 2017, 08:32:03 pm »

Quote from: Blisk on November 08, 2016, 10:55:16 pm

Quote from: Nozzer on November 08, 2016, 06:31:20 pm
The Rigol DS2000 series are two channels and only go up to a maximum BW of 200MHz.

For me I think 2 channels is enough.

is there a list what unlocked Rigol DS2000 can do, except higher frequency - 300Mhz

The Rigol DS2000 can do 200MHz, the DS2000A can go up to 300MHz


EEVblog Main Site	EEVblog on Youtube	EEVblog on Twitter	EEVblog on Facebook	EEVblog on Odysee