DSOX1204G 200Mhz vs Used MSO3014A (Calibrated in 2018)

[tv84]

Responsiveness doesn't do you any good if you need to press 5 buttons versus 3 buttons on a non-Keysight scope.

  Booting a PC requires only one key and people usually complain a lot... Translation: UI and responsiveness are different things and you know it perfectly well.

[kcbrown]

Responsiveness doesn't do you any good if you need to press 5 buttons versus 3 buttons on a non-Keysight scope.

There will always be some differences in how quickly one can get to any given piece of functionality, because different manufacturers prioritize different functionality with respect to that.

That doesn't make one better than the other unconditionally, which is your claim here, but rather it makes one better than the other only with respect to certain functionality.

It could well be that a non-Keysight scope is most optimal for your specific use.  That's very different from the claim, which you make here, that a non-Keysight scope is the "best choice" for a non-touchscreen scope, a statement you made without any elaboration whatsoever.

[erwets]

Thanks all for the information and discussion. Since the thread began, I've been offered a deal on both the DSOX1204G (fully unlocked) and RTB2004 (with the R2K-COM4 bundle) at $1700 USD and $3400 USD, respectively. I've never used the R&S before, but it seems like a great scope, although $3400 USD is a _hefty_ price tag.

I've opted not to get the used MSO3014A after inspecting it and finding some internal signs of abuse and improper care.

I will likely try and borrow a friend's R&S for a few days to check it out before ordering the Keysight. If the R&S really blows me away, then I'll buy that. Does anyone have any recent experience with the RTB2004 they'd like to share?

The 2104X seems nice on paper, but the last time I used it, I ran into like 3 issues alone which screwed up my workflow. This was about ~1.5 years ago, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. I may consider it again since it seems to have such a pull on a number of hobbyists.

[kcbrown]

The 2104X seems nice on paper, but the last time I used it, I ran into like 3 issues alone which screwed up my workflow. This was about ~1.5 years ago, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. I may consider it again since it seems to have such a pull on a number of hobbyists.

Note that the scope we're talking about is the 2104X+: https://siglentna.com/digital-oscilloscopes/sds2000xp/

It has a touch screen and the UI for that works pretty well.  With respect to the UI, its main problem is lack of responsiveness to the front panel.  I've supplied a detailed (well, as much as I can reasonably manage) bug report on it here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-bugs-missing-features-feature-requests/msg3774821/#msg3774821

That doesn't mean it's unusable.  It just means that it's not as usable under some circumstances as it should be.  And the touch screen UI makes up for a lot of that, because while it might miss events from the front panel, I've never seen it miss events from the touch screen.

Where the 2104X+ shines is in its capabilities.  Solid capabilities can make up for a lot of sins.

[2N3055]

The 2104X seems nice on paper, but the last time I used it, I ran into like 3 issues alone which screwed up my workflow. This was about ~1.5 years ago, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. I may consider it again since it seems to have such a pull on a number of hobbyists.

Wrong scope, not SDS2104X  but new 10" touchscreen SDS2104X+ (X Plus), very different animal.

[Someone]

Memory is not the problem.
Problem is that you have 4GS/s that is not 4GS anymore as soon as you use any timebase longer than 50us/div. And then drops rapidly. If you set timebase for 2ms/div (to look at somethin 20 ms long) it takes nosedive to 40MS/s..  At that timebase, if you have anything higher than 20 MHz in signal it will alias and show weird artefacts in signal that aren't there.

Well, seeing how the actual sample rate ultimately determines the maximum frequency you can reconstruct anyway, wouldn't they use a low-pass filter with a variable upper frequency on the input in order to eliminate the aliasing you're talking about?  I mean, this is an issue you'd have even on the SDS2000X series.  Once you make the timebase long enough you can't maintain the native sample rate.  The additional memory helps, of course, but doesn't eliminate the issue.

Some users who are more familiar with other brands of scopes fear aliasing as its pretty easy to produce. But... its very hard to get the Keysight/Agilent meagzoom scopes to show aliasing artefacts as their front end filtering and decimation "just work" (invisibly and without any controls, prioritising maximum sample rate possible at all times).

You are correct, Keysight uses all kinds of neat tricks, and it kinda deals with some aliasing artefacts. For instance it will silently use Peak detect to extract outside envelope of AM modulated signal that should alias. But that will be only screen display, if you press zoom, zoom will show nonsense. But, still, better than others.

Depends which acquisition mode the scope is set in, as whats on the screen and whats in the waveform acquisition memory are often completely different!

Acquisition Mode	Plotter (screen)	Memory (decimated)
Normal	Full Bandwidth	Random
Peak Detect	Full Bandwidth	Min/Max
High Resolution	Anti-aliased	Anti-aliased

None of those modes "alias", you're probably recalling zooming in on a signal outside the memory sample rate bandwidth in normal mode where the random decimation makes it look like noise. But the realtime/screen display always shows an accurate picture. The point of the phosphor emulation is to show the full path of the incoming waveform, so of course that includes the min/max points, but its not throwing away all the other points and showing solid blocks (as in the peak detect memory acquisition), it shows the relative likelihood of the waveform in the much desirable (and expensive to produce) 2D histogram.

You're simplifying it down way too much, and trying to minimise the effects with sideways statements like "kinda deals with some aliasing artefacts", perhaps some examples? I've never(!) seen aliasing on those scopes, ever, even when trying to provoke it, so more like "always eliminates aliasing".

Whats important to remember is that the acquisition waveform and screen display are decoupled and not produced from each other.

And if you want to have the screen and/or acquisition antialiased, turn on the high resolution. Nothing silent or hidden or sneaky, all the users choice.