Author Topic: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E  (Read 12345 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 17518
  • Country: 00
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #25 on: August 14, 2023, 07:07:09 pm »
thanks I'll look at the rigol too but they say they still have many bugs

ALL oscilloscopes have bugs. They're very complex devices.

The question is will it do what you need? Even Dave's early release model seems to be able to measure noise.

 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7019
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #26 on: August 14, 2023, 08:56:38 pm »
thanks I'll look at the rigol too but they say they still have many bugs

As Fungus wrote, every DSO has bugs.
But it depends on the type and amount... ;)
If the scope hangs regularly, that's not a nice little bug (it may have been fixed, I had "my" rigol in february).
In addition, only rudimentary functions such as in FFT mode, a bodeplot is completely missing.
This can still change, if they are clever, this must also change.
Only if and when is always such a thing with rigol and the reason why I had once turned my back on the brand.

Quote from: coppice
The MSO5074 is currently 810 pounds + VAT in the UK. The SDS2104X+ is 1050 pounds + VAT. If you can afford the higher price you get a better instrument. The market seems to be functioning properly.
The rigol DS/MSO 7000 series has the same noisy front end as the MSO5000 (I had myself confirmed by rigol) and cost 2600/3300€ each for the 100Mhz/4ch variant, so much for the topic more expensive is better.

« Last Edit: August 14, 2023, 09:55:22 pm by Martin72 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline uargoTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Country: es
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #27 on: August 14, 2023, 10:07:09 pm »
thanks I'll look at the rigol too but they say they still have many bugs

ALL oscilloscopes have bugs. They're very complex devices.

The question is will it do what you need? Even Dave's early release model seems to be able to measure noise.

I already know it. but people comment that the firmware is still unpolished, that it is logical that all oscilloscopes have many bugs at the beginning and over time they are fixed
 

Offline uargoTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Country: es
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #28 on: August 14, 2023, 10:12:40 pm »
thanks I'll look at the rigol too but they say they still have many bugs

As Fungus wrote, every DSO has bugs.
But it depends on the type and amount... ;)
If the scope hangs regularly, that's not a nice little bug (it may have been fixed, I had "my" rigol in february).
In addition, only rudimentary functions such as in FFT mode, a bodeplot is completely missing.
This can still change, if they are clever, this must also change.
Only if and when is always such a thing with rigol and the reason why I had once turned my back on the brand.

Quote from: coppice
The MSO5074 is currently 810 pounds + VAT in the UK. The SDS2104X+ is 1050 pounds + VAT. If you can afford the higher price you get a better instrument. The market seems to be functioning properly.
The rigol DS/MSO 7000 series has the same noisy front end as the MSO5000 (I had myself confirmed by rigol) and cost 2600/3300€ each for the 100Mhz/4ch variant, so much for the topic more expensive is better.

I hope the rigol or the Siglent 1000 HD are very good, but it is still too early to confirm it, they look good, but it is necessary to wait a while, I think.
The Siglent SDS2104X PLUS convinces me more and more, the firmware is more established, if the 10-bit mode works for me to see the noise, it is an oscilloscope that I like
 

Offline KungFuJosh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3163
  • Country: us
  • TEAS is real.
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #29 on: August 15, 2023, 01:20:10 am »
I have the SDM3045X and the SDS2504XP, and they're both great. My SDM3045X was upgraded to the SDM3055X-E, which you can also do to get 5.5 digits.
"Right now I’m having amnesia and déjà vu at the same time. I think I’ve forgotten this before." - Steven Wright
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 17518
  • Country: 00
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #30 on: August 15, 2023, 05:51:45 am »
I already know it. but people comment that the firmware is still unpolished, that it is logical that all oscilloscopes have many bugs at the beginning and over time they are fixed

Even so: If it does then things I need very well then I can overlook a few bugs in the CAN bus decoder, or whatever.

eg. The way the stats work and the overall user interface on these new Rigols could save hours per day if that's what you spend your time using.

I expect a big push from Rigol in the next few months when their new 800 series hits the market. I'm already saving up for mine.
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7465
  • Country: hr
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #31 on: August 15, 2023, 08:26:50 am »
I already know it. but people comment that the firmware is still unpolished, that it is logical that all oscilloscopes have many bugs at the beginning and over time they are fixed

Even so: If it does then things I need very well then I can overlook a few bugs in the CAN bus decoder, or whatever.

eg. The way the stats work and the overall user interface on these new Rigols could save hours per day if that's what you spend your time using.

I expect a big push from Rigol in the next few months when their new 800 series hits the market. I'm already saving up for mine.

Well, other people are different.
For instance I will take simpler device, that is reliable and works well, over a device that was developed by marketing department and has impressive list of "features" in datasheet but none of it works as it should...

And praise how "new Rigols" have "good interface" is fact that they finally made touch screen interface. In fact the were late to the party, it was long due  on their part. And state of software is still what other manufacturers would call beta.. They will eventually get there, but their track record is that they do it slow.
"Just hard work is not enough - it must be applied sensibly."
Dr. Richard W. Hamming
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Performa01

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1729
  • Country: at
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #32 on: August 15, 2023, 10:01:03 am »
The Siglent SDS2104X PLUS convinces me more and more, the firmware is more established, if the 10-bit mode works for me to see the noise, it is an oscilloscope that I like
That's it. Do not believe everything posted here, like claims a DSO being the wrong tool for noise characterization. This might be true for some scopes with noisy frontends and/or lousy FFT implementation, but not for e.g. an SDS2000X Plus. Of course, an SDS2000X HD would be even better.

When analyzing noise, we don't want a single absolute number like from a DMM with its very limited bandwidth; we want to see the entire spectrum with accurate levels for every single frequency component. Such information also helps us to identify the source of the noise (so we might be able to do something about it).

Once again, instead of just claims and speculations, here is a practical demonstration (older measurement, not the latest firmware), where I happened to measure a weak 10 MHz signal and wanted to find out if the 10 bit mode can improve such measurements even though the FFT in itself provides a resolution enhancement already.

I've found a measurement of the -70 dBm level particularly, which is 71 µVrms or 200 µVpp respectively - far below 600 µV (whatever it should be, peak, p-p or rms).

First the measurement in 8 bit mode.

SDS2354X Plus_LVL_10MHz_1mV_-70dBm_8bit

Of course the signal is not visible in the time domain, because at about 600 MHz bandwidth, the oscilloscope's own noise is 76 µVrms or 685 µVpp. Yet the FFT shows the overall noise floor as well as the single signal quite well.

The frequency step is 119,2 Hz and with Flattop window the resulting RBW (Resolution Bandwidth) is ~450 Hz. I did not measure the noise floor back then, but from the graph we can estimate it to be about -124 dBm = 141 nVrms or 399 nVpp for a 450 Hz wide bin. From this, we can calculate the noise density to 141 nVrms / √450 Hz = 6.65 nV/√Hz. From this, we can calculate the total noise for any desired bandwidth.

Hint: The signal source for this particular test did not include noise deliberately, so this measurement shows the limits of the instrument in this particular configuration and setup. It means that external noise has to be stronger than about 10 nV/√Hz in order to be detectable. Still not too bad.

But even more important than the wideband noise floor is the identification and proper measurement of spurious signals, which can give a strong hint on the noise source.

In this example, with just 8 bits, we measured the 10 MHz signal as -69.8 dBm (72 µVrms, 205 µVpp), which results in an error of +0.2 dB or +2.33 % - not too bad for a microvolts signal level at 10 MHz - try that with any DMM!


Now the same measurement in 10 bit mode.

SDS2354X Plus_LVL_10MHz_1mV_-70dBm_10bit

The signal is still not visible in the time domain, even though the input bandwidth is now limited to 100 MHz because of the 10 bit acquisition mode.

The noise floor is now at about -130 dBm = 71 nVrms or 200 nVpp for a 450 Hz wide bin. From this, we can calculate the noise density to 71 nVrms / √450 Hz = 3.34 nV/√Hz. That means, the noise floor has dropped dramatically by 6 dB – we have gained one bit of dynamic range, or in other words: the ENOB has been increased by one bit, just as expected – and up to 100 MHz there should hardly be any noise sources we could not accurately characterize with this.

Again, we can calculate the total noise for any desired bandwidth.

The measurement of the 10 MHz signal is now spot on as well. We can measure it as -70.015 dBm – an error of just -120 nVrms or -350 nVpp, equivalent to -0.015 dB or -0.17 % - no further comment necessary.
 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055, Martin72, Atomillo

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #33 on: August 15, 2023, 11:09:45 am »
The Siglent SDS2104X PLUS convinces me more and more, the firmware is more established, if the 10-bit mode works for me to see the noise, it is an oscilloscope that I like
That's it. Do not believe everything posted here, like claims a DSO being the wrong tool for noise characterization. This might be true for some scopes with noisy frontends and/or lousy FFT implementation, but not for e.g. an SDS2000X Plus. Of course, an SDS2000X HD would be even better.

When analyzing noise, we don't want a single absolute number like from a DMM with its very limited bandwidth; we want to see the entire spectrum with accurate levels for every single
If you look at OP's specific problem then you'll see it is about finding power supply noise in an analog circuit. Unless the OP has totally messed up the power supply decoupling, that means the problem is in the DC to several tens of kHz frequency range. You'd need a filter to make FFT usefull on an oscilloscope to prevent aliasing due to large sub-sampling factor. There are better tools out there compared to a general purpose oscilloscope. As I wrote before, probing also becomes an important factor so a device with floating or differential inputs will help to keep ground induced noise out.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2023, 12:42:13 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline uargoTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Country: es
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #34 on: August 15, 2023, 01:31:37 pm »
I have the SDM3045X and the SDS2504XP, and they're both great. My SDM3045X was upgraded to the SDM3055X-E, which you can also do to get 5.5 digits.

Thanks, can you give me a link on how to convert the sdm3045x to sdm3055x-e?
 

Offline uargoTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Country: es
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #35 on: August 15, 2023, 01:33:58 pm »
I already know it. but people comment that the firmware is still unpolished, that it is logical that all oscilloscopes have many bugs at the beginning and over time they are fixed

Even so: If it does then things I need very well then I can overlook a few bugs in the CAN bus decoder, or whatever.

eg. The way the stats work and the overall user interface on these new Rigols could save hours per day if that's what you spend your time using.

I expect a big push from Rigol in the next few months when their new 800 series hits the market. I'm already saving up for mine.

I also hope to see a review of the new rigol and siglent 1000hd, I'm impatient
 

Offline uargoTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Country: es
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #36 on: August 15, 2023, 01:36:48 pm »
I already know it. but people comment that the firmware is still unpolished, that it is logical that all oscilloscopes have many bugs at the beginning and over time they are fixed

Even so: If it does then things I need very well then I can overlook a few bugs in the CAN bus decoder, or whatever.

eg. The way the stats work and the overall user interface on these new Rigols could save hours per day if that's what you spend your time using.

I expect a big push from Rigol in the next few months when their new 800 series hits the market. I'm already saving up for mine.

Well, other people are different.
For instance I will take simpler device, that is reliable and works well, over a device that was developed by marketing department and has impressive list of "features" in datasheet but none of it works as it should...

And praise how "new Rigols" have "good interface" is fact that they finally made touch screen interface. In fact the were late to the party, it was long due  on their part. And state of software is still what other manufacturers would call beta.. They will eventually get there, but their track record is that they do it slow.

+1 I think like you, even so they are interesting devices to keep track of them
 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055

Offline uargoTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Country: es
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #37 on: August 15, 2023, 01:46:31 pm »
The Siglent SDS2104X PLUS convinces me more and more, the firmware is more established, if the 10-bit mode works for me to see the noise, it is an oscilloscope that I like
That's it. Do not believe everything posted here, like claims a DSO being the wrong tool for noise characterization. This might be true for some scopes with noisy frontends and/or lousy FFT implementation, but not for e.g. an SDS2000X Plus. Of course, an SDS2000X HD would be even better.

When analyzing noise, we don't want a single absolute number like from a DMM with its very limited bandwidth; we want to see the entire spectrum with accurate levels for every single frequency component. Such information also helps us to identify the source of the noise (so we might be able to do something about it).

Once again, instead of just claims and speculations, here is a practical demonstration (older measurement, not the latest firmware), where I happened to measure a weak 10 MHz signal and wanted to find out if the 10 bit mode can improve such measurements even though the FFT in itself provides a resolution enhancement already.

I've found a measurement of the -70 dBm level particularly, which is 71 µVrms or 200 µVpp respectively - far below 600 µV (whatever it should be, peak, p-p or rms).

First the measurement in 8 bit mode.

SDS2354X Plus_LVL_10MHz_1mV_-70dBm_8bit

Of course the signal is not visible in the time domain, because at about 600 MHz bandwidth, the oscilloscope's own noise is 76 µVrms or 685 µVpp. Yet the FFT shows the overall noise floor as well as the single signal quite well.

The frequency step is 119,2 Hz and with Flattop window the resulting RBW (Resolution Bandwidth) is ~450 Hz. I did not measure the noise floor back then, but from the graph we can estimate it to be about -124 dBm = 141 nVrms or 399 nVpp for a 450 Hz wide bin. From this, we can calculate the noise density to 141 nVrms / √450 Hz = 6.65 nV/√Hz. From this, we can calculate the total noise for any desired bandwidth.

Hint: The signal source for this particular test did not include noise deliberately, so this measurement shows the limits of the instrument in this particular configuration and setup. It means that external noise has to be stronger than about 10 nV/√Hz in order to be detectable. Still not too bad.

But even more important than the wideband noise floor is the identification and proper measurement of spurious signals, which can give a strong hint on the noise source.

In this example, with just 8 bits, we measured the 10 MHz signal as -69.8 dBm (72 µVrms, 205 µVpp), which results in an error of +0.2 dB or +2.33 % - not too bad for a microvolts signal level at 10 MHz - try that with any DMM!


Now the same measurement in 10 bit mode.

SDS2354X Plus_LVL_10MHz_1mV_-70dBm_10bit

The signal is still not visible in the time domain, even though the input bandwidth is now limited to 100 MHz because of the 10 bit acquisition mode.

The noise floor is now at about -130 dBm = 71 nVrms or 200 nVpp for a 450 Hz wide bin. From this, we can calculate the noise density to 71 nVrms / √450 Hz = 3.34 nV/√Hz. That means, the noise floor has dropped dramatically by 6 dB – we have gained one bit of dynamic range, or in other words: the ENOB has been increased by one bit, just as expected – and up to 100 MHz there should hardly be any noise sources we could not accurately characterize with this.

Again, we can calculate the total noise for any desired bandwidth.

The measurement of the 10 MHz signal is now spot on as well. We can measure it as -70.015 dBm – an error of just -120 nVrms or -350 nVpp, equivalent to -0.015 dB or -0.17 % - no further comment necessary.

Thank you very much and great collaboration, summarizing an SDS2104X PLUS works, although an SDS2104HD would be better, and the 1000HD would need to see a review to see what background noise they have
 

Offline uargoTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Country: es
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #38 on: August 15, 2023, 01:50:39 pm »
The Siglent SDS2104X PLUS convinces me more and more, the firmware is more established, if the 10-bit mode works for me to see the noise, it is an oscilloscope that I like
That's it. Do not believe everything posted here, like claims a DSO being the wrong tool for noise characterization. This might be true for some scopes with noisy frontends and/or lousy FFT implementation, but not for e.g. an SDS2000X Plus. Of course, an SDS2000X HD would be even better.

When analyzing noise, we don't want a single absolute number like from a DMM with its very limited bandwidth; we want to see the entire spectrum with accurate levels for every single
If you look at OP's specific problem then you'll see it is about finding power supply noise in an analog circuit. Unless the OP has totally messed up the power supply decoupling, that means the problem is in the DC to several tens of kHz frequency range. You'd need a filter to make FFT usefull on an oscilloscope to prevent aliasing due to large sub-sampling factor. There are better tools out there compared to a general purpose oscilloscope. As I wrote before, probing also becomes an important factor so a device with floating or differential inputs will help to keep ground induced noise out.

Thanks, for that, apart from buying the SDM3045X, I wanted to see what oscilloscope could help me with this, and the answer seems to be the SDS2104X PLUS, the SDS2104 HD (out of my budget), and the 1000 HD series from Rigol and Siglent
 

Offline Performa01

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1729
  • Country: at
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #39 on: August 15, 2023, 04:17:14 pm »
I also hope to see a review of the new rigol and siglent 1000hd, I'm impatient
Instead of being impatient, what about contributing to the community and do a thorough review yourself ;)

Seriously though, there are plenty "reviews" out there. They will show you how to unpack the Rigol and some fanboys will praise it to no end, even though they've never touched one, just because it finally has an acceptable noise level and a user interface that doesnt look like a slot machine.
-----

Just to provide complete information on the SDS2000X Plus: aliasing isn't a problem even at low frequencies on a decent DSO with long FFT. For instance, we can analyze down to 100 Hz and still have 250 MSa/s for the FFT. Together with the 20 MHz bandwidth limiter and the 10 bit mode, which additionally limits the bandwidth at 100 MHz rather steeply, we don't have a problem with aliasing due to subsampling at all.

It is true though that general purpose oscilloscopes have a rather strong rise in noise below some 100 kHz, hence measuring very low noise will not be possible at low frequencies.

600 µVpp would be equivalent to 212 µVrms or -60,46 dBm (I use dBm even though we are talking about voltages here, just because my measurements happen to be in dBm). Consequently, we can analyze noise as long as the FFT plot does not exceed that level. As we can see from the attached graph, even at just 1 kHz, the measured level is still -96 dBm for 450 Hz bandwidth – way below the -60.46 dBm calculated before. Only down at 200 Hz we reach a noise level of 900 µVrms.

But then again: if you need to look just for mains hum and its harmonics – and 600 µV would be a problem for your circuit alrady, then you actually need a dynamic signal analyzer (expensive) or a PicoScope 4262.

SDS2354X Plus_Noise_1M_BW20M_10bit
 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7019
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #40 on: August 15, 2023, 05:04:51 pm »
Quote
...and a user interface that doesnt look like a slot machine.

 :-DD

Made my day.
And it´s true. 8)
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, 2N3055

Offline KungFuJosh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3163
  • Country: us
  • TEAS is real.
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #41 on: August 15, 2023, 05:44:50 pm »
I have the SDM3045X and the SDS2504XP, and they're both great. My SDM3045X was upgraded to the SDM3055X-E, which you can also do to get 5.5 digits.

Thanks, can you give me a link on how to convert the sdm3045x to sdm3055x-e?

Check here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sdm3045x-enough-is-enough/msg3909188/#msg3909188

review that thread for other details. It's pretty easy.
"Right now I’m having amnesia and déjà vu at the same time. I think I’ve forgotten this before." - Steven Wright
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 17518
  • Country: 00
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #42 on: August 15, 2023, 06:01:42 pm »
And praise how "new Rigols" have "good interface" is fact that they finally made touch screen interface. In fact the were late to the party, it was long due  on their part.

Look again, it's much more than "touch screen bolted onto legacy interface".

eg. Channel configuration:


Multi windowing:


Watch this video (on large touch screen via HDMI output):

« Last Edit: August 15, 2023, 06:05:54 pm by Fungus »
 
The following users thanked this post: KungFuJosh

Offline uargoTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Country: es
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #43 on: August 15, 2023, 06:19:19 pm »
I also hope to see a review of the new rigol and siglent 1000hd, I'm impatient
Instead of being impatient, what about contributing to the community and do a thorough review yourself ;)

Seriously though, there are plenty "reviews" out there. They will show you how to unpack the Rigol and some fanboys will praise it to no end, even though they've never touched one, just because it finally has an acceptable noise level and a user interface that doesnt look like a slot machine.
-----

Just to provide complete information on the SDS2000X Plus: aliasing isn't a problem even at low frequencies on a decent DSO with long FFT. For instance, we can analyze down to 100 Hz and still have 250 MSa/s for the FFT. Together with the 20 MHz bandwidth limiter and the 10 bit mode, which additionally limits the bandwidth at 100 MHz rather steeply, we don't have a problem with aliasing due to subsampling at all.

It is true though that general purpose oscilloscopes have a rather strong rise in noise below some 100 kHz, hence measuring very low noise will not be possible at low frequencies.

600 µVpp would be equivalent to 212 µVrms or -60,46 dBm (I use dBm even though we are talking about voltages here, just because my measurements happen to be in dBm). Consequently, we can analyze noise as long as the FFT plot does not exceed that level. As we can see from the attached graph, even at just 1 kHz, the measured level is still -96 dBm for 450 Hz bandwidth – way below the -60.46 dBm calculated before. Only down at 200 Hz we reach a noise level of 900 µVrms.

But then again: if you need to look just for mains hum and its harmonics – and 600 µV would be a problem for your circuit alrady, then you actually need a dynamic signal analyzer (expensive) or a PicoScope 4262.

SDS2354X Plus_Noise_1M_BW20M_10bit

thanks
 

Offline uargoTopic starter

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 102
  • Country: es
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #44 on: August 15, 2023, 06:20:34 pm »
I have the SDM3045X and the SDS2504XP, and they're both great. My SDM3045X was upgraded to the SDM3055X-E, which you can also do to get 5.5 digits.

Thanks, can you give me a link on how to convert the sdm3045x to sdm3055x-e?

Check here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sdm3045x-enough-is-enough/msg3909188/#msg3909188

review that thread for other details. It's pretty easy.

thanks
 

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7019
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #45 on: August 15, 2023, 09:25:57 pm »
Quote
Look again, it's much more than "touch screen bolted onto legacy interface".

If you only watch videos and pictures, you might not get the right impression.
In reality, the creation and positioning of the windows was a difficult, annoying and not always as functional as intended matter.
I had also described this in the Rigol thread.
Nevertheless, it is the "best" user interface rigol has ever had, no question.
But as almost always, it is very well thought, but half-heartedly done.
This ultimately drove me into the arms of siglent.
What they offer is not super fancy, but it works as intended.
In practice, that makes all the difference.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7465
  • Country: hr
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #46 on: August 15, 2023, 10:19:47 pm »
And praise how "new Rigols" have "good interface" is fact that they finally made touch screen interface. In fact the were late to the party, it was long due  on their part.

Look again, it's much more than "touch screen bolted onto legacy interface".

That is exactly what I said. Previous MSO5000/7000 was an awkward hybrid. But as Martin says, even the new one is far from being that good. Not because concept is wrong ( concept is kind of right this time) but you can literally see it is brand new and kind of thrown together in a  hurry. Bunch of stuff is missing etc.. You can see they were rushing it to the market.
But they are on the right track and if they finish it they might have good product.

I really wish they take it seriously and make good products. It is good for us to have choice..

Or maybe they will finish it 80% and then move to the new products in the future...
Only Rigol knows what are real plans and only time will tell.
"Just hard work is not enough - it must be applied sensibly."
Dr. Richard W. Hamming
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #47 on: August 15, 2023, 10:26:44 pm »
And praise how "new Rigols" have "good interface" is fact that they finally made touch screen interface. In fact the were late to the party, it was long due  on their part.

Look again, it's much more than "touch screen bolted onto legacy interface".

That is exactly what I said. Previous MSO5000/7000 was an awkward hybrid. But as Martin says, even the new one is far from being that good. Not because concept is wrong ( concept is kind of right this time) but you can literally see it is brand new and kind of thrown together in a  hurry. Bunch of stuff is missing etc.. You can see they were rushing it to the market.
But they are on the right track and if they finish it they might have good product.

I really wish they take it seriously and make good products. It is good for us to have choice..
Yes. Even if that means the price being on par with Keysight, R&S, Tektronix, Yokogawa, etc. Engineers cost serious money in China nowadays so realistically the Chinese can't make test equipment that really is on par with the A-brands cheaper than the A-brands can. And a lot of the problem is lack of knowledge as well. China is handing out large financial incentives for companies to bring leading edge technology into China (just to be clear: this is first hand information!).
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7019
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #48 on: August 15, 2023, 11:00:55 pm »
Quote
Even if that means the price being on par with Keysight, R&S, Tektronix, Yokogawa, etc.

Based on daily work and comparison with an "A" brand, I have to say that the Siglent scope performs very well.
If you want to include "more" than just the performance, you have to make sacrifices, that's clear.
There's the quality of the device's workmanship, the variety of functions and the comfort of the user interface, and above all the after-sales service.
If that would be on the same level as the other providers, there would be no significant price difference (and therefore no reason to buy them).
Privately, I have no problem with that, so I can disregard that and buy a "cheaper" scope.
At work, in the test field, I have nevertheless introduced the Siglent scopes, due to a simple consideration.
For the money, they perform exceedingly well and if there is something wrong with them, we just buy a new one instead of having it repaired.
What I don't like or find irritating, however, is the "general mood" here in the forum regarding scopes and their prices.
A scope for say 3000€/$ is still a cheap device today.
You should not fool yourself.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Veteran68

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 727
  • Country: us
Re: buy a better oscilloscope than the Siglent SDS1104X-E
« Reply #49 on: August 15, 2023, 11:21:16 pm »
What I don't like or find irritating, however, is the "general mood" here in the forum regarding scopes and their prices.
A scope for say 3000€/$ is still a cheap device today.
You should not fool yourself.

What mood is that, exactly?

You have to remember this forum is made up of both hobbyists and those who do this for a living. I don't know what the mix is, but I suspect it leans more towards hobbyists than working professionals. In a professional lab, scopes and logic analyzers commonly run into the many tens of thousands of dollars. But outside of a job like that, or cheap(er) kits, back 30 years ago hobbyists had no ready access to that kind of equipment.

Thanks to sub-$500 oscilloscopes, now any semi-serious hobbyist or maker can afford a scope. Since those people are likely a majority of this forum, I'd say $3000 for a scope (while certainly cheap for commercial use) is still WAY out of reach of most of them. I certainly won't pay that for my personal use.
 
The following users thanked this post: Warhawk


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf