First oscilloscope for third-year EE student

[bdunham7]

Just curious--if you already had the other scopes, why were you looking for a new, lower end one?  (this from someone with more scopes in total than you...and another on the way)

and how did you get the 300MHz option for the DS1054Z?   

[Gandalf_Sr]

Just curious--if you already had the other scopes, why were you looking for a new, lower end one?  (this from someone with more scopes in total than you...and another on the way)

and how did you get the 300MHz option for the DS1054Z?   

I wanted a 'beater' scope that I could take out to client sites without worrying if it would be damaged or stolen.  Now I have buyers remorse; remorse that I bought the expensive Keysights

Option DSCA on Riglol - it doesn't really do 300 MHz but it tries.

[EDIT] I'm getting confused, of course that 300 MHz option is for the DS2072A.  The 1054Z has the 100 MHz option and does about 135 MHz in real world tests.

[Old Printer]

I am a rank beginner hobbyist so take this for what it is worth. I went with the 1104E-X because of slightly better specs (2 ADC's) and the fact that Siglent is still actively fixing/improving the software. Some will say a scope should not be released until the bugs are worked out, but this is the low end scope market has changed and it is what it is. To ME the $150 ish extra cost of the Siglent over the Rigol was not enough to sway me. I may well buy another scope in the next 5-10 years, but over that time span the cost difference is minimal, to ME. There were just not enough of the GW Instek's visibly in use for me to really consider them.
I love my Analog Discovery's, I bought the new model 2 years ago when I could not decide on a scope, the picked up one of the original versions on eBay for $50 because it was too cheap to pass up. The AD1 is 95% as good as the AD2, they only made a small power supply change to the hardware between versions, and the spiffy case

[Fungus]

In your first budget scope there should be no real "deal breaker" in the regards to UI and usability. You will get used to any scope and it'll do the job.

This.

I don't really get the rejection of the Rigol DS1054Z. Yes the vertical controls are slow but almost nothing else is. I don't believe it's a deal breaker, not if the alternative is to spend $150 more, which would get you a very nice multimeter or soldering iron instead.

It seems to me that I spend more time turning measurements on/off and the DS1054Z has a handy set of buttons down the left side for that. The Siglent needs you to go through a whole series of knob twiddling operations to turn on measurements.

[Fungus]

[EDIT]The 1054Z has the 100 MHz option and does about 135 MHz in real world tests.

In better tests it does close to 200Mhz.

[Gandalf_Sr]

[EDIT]The 1054Z has the 100 MHz option and does about 135 MHz in real world tests.

In better tests it does close to 200Mhz.

What's a 'better' test, is it one that gives you the results you wanted?

[Fungus]

In better tests it does close to 200Mhz.

What's a 'better' test, is it one that gives you the results you wanted?

A test's a test. Numbers don't lie.

[rsjsouza]

It seems to me that I spend more time turning measurements on/off and the DS1054Z has a handy set of buttons down the left side for that.

I like that on the Rigols as well. The buttons at the left of the screen are quite handy for me (I have a DS4014).

[bdunham7]

[EDIT]The 1054Z has the 100 MHz option and does about 135 MHz in real world tests.

In better tests it does close to 200Mhz.

I only have one to test (mine) but I get rise times of 2.6 to 3.4ns and -3db points of 110-130MHz depending on vertical gain.  200MHz shows up and triggers (as does 400MHz!) but with way, way more than -3db attenuation.  What test shows a -3db point anywhere near 200MHz?

[Fungus]

[EDIT]The 1054Z has the 100 MHz option and does about 135 MHz in real world tests.

In better tests it does close to 200Mhz.

I only have one to test (mine) but I get rise times of 2.6 to 3.4ns and -3db points of 110-130MHz depending on vertical gain.  200MHz shows up and triggers (as does 400MHz!) but with way, way more than -3db attenuation.  What test shows a -3db point anywhere near 200MHz?

This one:



https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1818215/#msg1818215

[Dubbie]

One thing I’d like to add, personally, I wouldn’t worry about a built in AWG. I have owned two scopes with them built in. And I think I have used them the grand total of once. I way prefer my standalone AWG. Usually when I am injecting a signal somewhere, my scope is busy with other measurements and I don’t want to be flicking through menus etc adjusting things back and forth. Usually the amount you pay to add on an internal AWG would buy you a nice external one. This I think is vastly preferable.

[2N3055]

[EDIT]The 1054Z has the 100 MHz option and does about 135 MHz in real world tests.

In better tests it does close to 200Mhz.

I only have one to test (mine) but I get rise times of 2.6 to 3.4ns and -3db points of 110-130MHz depending on vertical gain.  200MHz shows up and triggers (as does 400MHz!) but with way, way more than -3db attenuation.  What test shows a -3db point anywhere near 200MHz?

That perfectly agrees with my measurements.

Pulse test is not relevant. Only real test is frequency sweep with siggen...
DS1000Z has funny input filters that have slow rolloff, and super fast edge will inject enough high frequency content into that edge and  make it look faster.  Truth is, if Rigol made sharper filter with better rolloff closer to ideal, it would have better pulse response. And would have less aliasing artefacts...

[nctnico]

Pulse test is not relevant. Only real test is frequency sweep with siggen...

Indeed. Bandwidth based on the risetime is just an approximation under the assumption the filters have a certain roll-off.

[RedFantom]

It definitely is possible, as I have just successfully demonstrated a 1M 32bit hardware FFT on a Zynq 7010. The bottleneck is DRAM bandwidth and in my case I can get up to 70 FFTs per second. I think up to 16M points should be easily doable on a Zynq 7010 which most of these scopes use.

Yes, I saw your thread and I am tempted to try it on my Pynq board . The list of cool projects is getting longer and longer...

PS. Anyone who wants to buy any of my scopes is welcome to make me an offer

Well, if you can wait for me to finish my study and get a job first...

I am a rank beginner hobbyist so take this for what it is worth. I went with the 1104E-X because of slightly better specs (2 ADC's) and the fact that Siglent is still actively fixing/improving the software. To ME the $150 ish extra cost of the Siglent over the Rigol was not enough to sway me. I may well buy another scope in the next 5-10 years, but over that time span the cost difference is minimal, to ME. There were just not enough of the GW Instek's visibly in use for me to really consider them.

Thank you for voicing pretty much what I am thinking! Yes, there is a €150 difference between the two Siglent/GW Instek and the Rigol, but if one is a device I know I will regret spending my money on every time I use it and the other is one that also does the job just fine with a few quirks, then I'd really rather spend the additional money.

I love my Analog Discovery's, I bought the new model 2 years ago when I could not decide on a scope, the picked up one of the original versions on eBay for $50 because it was too cheap to pass up. The AD1 is 95% as good as the AD2, they only made a small power supply change to the hardware between versions, and the spiffy case

But if you had to choose between getting an Analog Discovery 2 now (plus maybe a hot air soldering station or something) and an oscilloscope in a couple of years, or getting an oscilloscope now, which would you choose? Of course we might have different requirements of it, but just in your situation?

This.

If it were just the controls, maybe. I'd really rather buy everything sequentially and get what I actually want to use than get multiple things at once and then not buy what I want.
If I had had the opportunity to try out the Rigol before ordering it, I wouldn't have ordered it. Looking around on the internet, it seems to be a personal thing whether the speed of the Rigol is something to get used to or something to get frustrated by. I tried. When it was here, I really, really wanted to not be so annoyed by it. But that only made the disappointment worse, so I returned it.

[Someone]

Which scope are you looking at that has 1M point FFT? I did some searching around and even the keysight DSOX3000T series only has up to 64k points...

Both the Siglent and the Instek discussed here claim 1Mpoint FFT.

Update speeds fall through the floor at longer FFT depths:

Like most of these discussions is really depends what specific application the scope is being used for, some times an interactive display is desirable, other times maximum data regardless of processing time. Doing the FFT on a computer can end up faster in some cases.

[tautech]

You seem to be pretty demanding here for your first scope, to the point where you don't really have an option that suits all your stated needs?

And why not, RedFantom has used better scopes than what he's considering here at Uni however like so many he's budget constrained and looking for bang for buck.
Maybe you didn't have time to read the whole thread. 

Which scope are you looking at that has 1M point FFT? I did some searching around and even the keysight DSOX3000T series only has up to 64k points...

Both the Siglent and the Instek discussed here claim 1Mpoint FFT.

Update speeds fall through the floor at longer FFT depths:

Like most of these discussions is really depends what specific application the scope is being used for, some times an interactive display is desirable, other times maximum data regardless of processing time. Doing the FFT on a computer can end up faster in some cases.

What's the point of offering a well out of date video that's nearly 18 months old ? 
Much has changed !

[Someone]

What's the point of offering a well out of date video that's nearly 18 months old ? 
Much has changed !

Much may have changed, has the FFT calculation rate changed? Do suggest a more appropriate video if you know of one.

[tautech]

What's the point of offering a well out of date video that's nearly 18 months old ? 
Much has changed !

Much may have changed, has the FFT calculation rate changed? Do suggest a more appropriate video if you know of one.

Sorry I don't.
The latest FW for the the 4ch X-E's has just been out for a few weeks so most likely no one has put one up yet.

[EEVblog]

Just buy the cheapest scope you can get. Anything will show you a waveform and open your world into electronics.
Spend the rest on other stuff you need.

Mr. EEVblog, thank you for replying. I had not expected that. Consider me humbled.

There are no real proper videos of the Rigol 2000 series, so I have no idea how responsive it is. From your comment, I am deducing that I should avoid it like the plague. I will.
When I got the DS1054Z, I considered whether I could get used to its slowness (not so much its quirks, those I could live with), but I don't think I can. If it cost €250, then maybe. But a device costing €379 should at least not annoy me, no matter how cheap it is when compared to more expensive oscilloscopes. It's too much money for that, at least to me. If it is just fast enough not to be annoying, that is enough.

I very much disagree with Dave here. It is better to buy the best tool you can afford because it will offer a much better experience and ease of use. Sure you can 'make do' with lesser tools too but at some point that just holds you back from getting actual work done. In the end you want to complete a project and enjoy the path to completion as much as you can.

The 1054Z (and it's predecessor the 1052E) has worked just fine for countless people, it is a cheap 4CH scope that does a LOT for the money.
If you want a better "experience" pay double for the Keysight, sure, knock yourself out, it's my preferred daily driver.
The Siglent or others can't match the Keysight if nice usability is your desire, so kinda a half-way house.

[Old Printer]

I am a rank beginner hobbyist so take this for what it is worth. I went with the 1104E-X because of slightly better specs (2 ADC's) and the fact that Siglent is still actively fixing/improving the software. To ME the $150 ish extra cost of the Siglent over the Rigol was not enough to sway me. I may well buy another scope in the next 5-10 years, but over that time span the cost difference is minimal, to ME. There were just not enough of the GW Instek's visibly in use for me to really consider them.

Thank you for voicing pretty much what I am thinking! Yes, there is a €150 difference between the two Siglent/GW Instek and the Rigol, but if one is a device I know I will regret spending my money on every time I use it and the other is one that also does the job just fine with a few quirks, then I'd really rather spend the additional money.

I love my Analog Discovery's, I bought the new model 2 years ago when I could not decide on a scope, the picked up one of the original versions on eBay for $50 because it was too cheap to pass up. The AD1 is 95% as good as the AD2, they only made a small power supply change to the hardware between versions, and the spiffy case

But if you had to choose between getting an Analog Discovery 2 now (plus maybe a hot air soldering station or something) and an oscilloscope in a couple of years, or getting an oscilloscope now, which would you choose? Of course we might have different requirements of it, but just in your situation?

The 1104E-X was not quite  out when I bought my AD2 and I really wanted something right then. Now that the Siglent is out and doing well I would definitely grab that scope, and I just did. I think it is worth $150 more than the 1054Z, Rigol's attention has gone elsewhere like to the MSO5000, but for $1000 and a lot of work to be done.. Troll ebay and eventually you will find a good deal on an AD1. Digilent sold them by the thousand for $99 to EE students and they must be just sitting in drawers waiting to be sold. The GW Instek just does not sell many units that show up where we can watch and talk to their owners

[Gandalf_Sr]

When I was younger, I made the mistake several times over of being talked into buying something I didn't need, like a warranty for a TV or an underseal treatment for a car.  Perhaps this is a lesson everyone needs to learn the hard way but a few are able to  leverage the experience of those who have trodden the same path before them.  I wish I'd know when I was young that there's nothing as valuable as the benefit of experience.

Save your money and buy the DS1054Z.

Beware of brand xxx fanboys or salespeople telling you that brand xxx is best.

If you still want to future-proof your first oscilloscope purchase; why not buy this baby from Keysight on eBay, you'll 'save' $167,356,000 /s

[JxR]

Save your money and buy the DS1054Z.

Beware of brand xxx fanboys or salespeople telling you that brand xxx is best.

Why would he want to repurchase the same scope he already bought, didn't like, and returned?  No reason to not respect a choice the OP has already made. 

For the OP, I have no recommendations to make for the models you mentioned since I haven't used them. Although, I would certainly recommend not to buy the same model again that you already know you don't want.  My only recommendation would be to keep an eye on Keysight's official refurbished store on eBay, just in-case. Maybe something will pop up there that is close to your budget (since you already know you like their interface).

[Gandalf_Sr]

Hmm, it's like he test drove a Fusion hybrid but didn't like it because performance wasn't like his friend's Focus RS.  Now he's shopping for a car and all he actually needs is to get from A to B as economically as possible; He wants to be able to afford a Focus RS but can't.

You're saying,

Why would he want to repurchase the same [car] he already [test drove], didn't like, and returned?  No reason to not respect a choice the OP has already made.

What is wrong with suggesting that the solution was what he started with and that his idea that, by spending 50% more would make him 100% happy is false; it's a law of diminishing returns and all cheap scopes have limitations, even my $7,000 scopes have less memory than I think they should.

It appears that a chap called Dave Jones agrees with me to a great extent.

I actually own the DS1054Z and I use it a lot and I have ZERO buyer remorse now even though I did have (subjective) concerns pre-purchase.

I have no association with any equipment manufacturer or their sales force.

[nctnico]

Save your money and buy the DS1054Z.

Beware of brand xxx fanboys or salespeople telling you that brand xxx is best.

Why would he want to repurchase the same scope he already bought, didn't like, and returned?  No reason to not respect a choice the OP has already made. 

Indeed. Talking about fanboys... 
Most of the other options have already been provided in this thread.

[Gandalf_Sr]

Scanning the thread reveals the comment (not by me)...

member nctnico is a bit of a GW-Instek fan.