MSO5000 Bode Plot Capability: Is it Good Enough? [Many tips about a 1st scope]

[balnazzar]

At moments you sound like a spoiled child...
Pardon my being direct.

No problem. In turn, I hope you'll be so kind to pardon me for the same reason.
You sound like a person who has to patronize other people in order to feel happy. Not a big deal, it doesn't automatically makes you a bad person, but you should work upon it.

Listen. It is simple. You obviously didn't ever try RTB2000, SDS2000X HD or any of other scopes you mention.

Please don't put things I didn't say into my mouth. Indeed, I did NOT mention the SDS2000X HD. I just linked a review who had the 2000X+ (and not the HD) in it.
That I didn't (even ) try them went without saying, otherwise, having had 1st person experience, it would have been useless to listen to that review.

And SDS2000X HD makes RTB2000 look cheap.. It is so high quality in look and feel. That is just a fact, but you wouldn't know but your prejudices allow you to say I'm lying and am a fanboy...

That's the second time you are putting your own words into my mouth. More specifically, I did not say you were lying. On the very contrary, I stated that such utterances were not for me to contradict.

What I do know from my direct experience is that this scope is too noisy to be used. 
Also, I specified in bold text that the scope in itself was better that I expected (at least up to the functionalities I used) and particularly the responsiveness exceeded my expectations.
But once more you seem to ignore the praise, while at the same time you take any criticism personally.

I also tell you from experience that most people have more than one device with fan in it and not so quiet environment and they don't even notice these sounds anymore.

So all these people on that thread that are trying to swap the fan inside their 1104x-e are all maniacs of absolute silence. Not to mention those who are actually bothered by the noise, but don't want the hassle and the risks of tinkering with the internals..

I also have a great deal of devices with fans in my study. The are just not so noisy. Not even close.

And your point about manufacturer stupidity and customer stupidity is just your hubris that you know better than anybody and that everything is simple. And you are wrong.

No, it's my opinion. Your is that it's just hubris and I'm wrong. That's fine. People are entitled to have their own different opinions. Just try not to take everything personally.

Most customers are price conscious and manufacturers mass produce products for majority. . Simple as that.
So no fancy seats are being installed because most of the people don't need them.

You didn't get the point.
The point in telling that story was to atriculate the fact that people often need a thing, but still don't care about it. That's sloppy by any possible evaluation criterion.
Another point was highlighting that manufacturers often avoid to make a product considerably better just to save a few bucks.
Proof: two posts above you'll find a person who installed a 7$ fan inside his scope while regretting not having done it sooner.
You didn't get that also.

If you read here and there on forums, A LOT of people tries to swap the fans inside their scopes. Not 65$ fans, just ~10$ fans. 10$ for the end user. For a manufacturer that orders tons of them is one third of that price.

End note: No bad feelings, but if you try again to steer this discussion towards personal, I'll abstain from replying.

[tautech]

I swapped the fan in my old Rigol. A $7 fan made a huge difference.

As I suspected.. This confirms my conjecture about the manufacturer not bothering about quality just to scrape a few dollars more.

Fungus speaks through his arse as he knows jack shit about Siglent !

Maybe you ignore my previous report about the same spec Noctua fan is no quieter than what Siglent use = fact #1

2ch SDS1202X-E and SDS11/1204X-E are the same form factor yet run quite different fans, SDS1202X-E being much quieter as it hasn't got the horsepower to cool that SDS11/1204X-E has = fact #2

Half the HW in SDS1202X-E of the 4ch version and less features requires much less cooling = fact#3

Same form factor and very similar case design yet inside they are very different, the 2ch mainboard is horizontal whereas the 4ch model mainboard is vertical. Both use a metal chassis so channel BNC's can be securely fixed to minimize the microphonics that plague cheaper designs = fact #4

Of course you could best match a replacement fan to your ambient temperatures but a manufacturer can't, they must design for all conditions in a worldwide marketplace so the fan can be thought unnecessarily noisy in a cooler climate = fact #5


Stop being a twat and accept that horsepower needs cooling just as it does in a PC where the cheapest methods are certainly not the quietest. You could of course water cool a scope but then it would not be portable.


Then if I had my choice based on $ spend for fan noise and features SDS2104X Plus would be first choice, then SDS5kX or 6kA if budget was no issue or maybe SDS2104X HD but not yet had one on my bench however the 350 MHz version will be here soon for a customer but he has needed to wait for it so only a FW install and our normal probe compensate/checks before it must go to them. 

[balnazzar]

It is not easy to find silent (or nearly-silent) test equipment.  When I was shopping for a scope this year I found that there were few options that were 'guaranteed' to be quiet-enough for me - at least without hearing them in-person.  Compared to the great bang-per-buck units like the sds1104x-e, I found the options were either much more expensive (the R&S already discussed), or had fewer features (eg the fanless Owon sds1000-series which also have inferior performance), or both (eg the fanless Tek 1000C series).   

The main fanless options I found that had deep memory and lots of features were the nicer Picoscopes, but they are not cheap and most people strongly prefer benchtop equipment.   The most 'affordable' deep-memory 4-channel option is the 2406B at $700 US (50 MHz, 1 GS/s, 32 MSample memory, 1 MHz AWG w/ Bode plots) but has been out of stock and backordered everywhere for months as far as I can tell; the least-expensive 4-channel deep-memory models actually in-stock in stores cost about $1000 US (2407B, 3403D).   

I was starting to write a reply about the Picos. Take a Pico with good specs. Say 100 MHz, 4chs, 1 GS/s, 128 Mpts.
It sells for ~1100 eur.
It's more than a chinese scope with the same specs, but less, say, than a DSOX1204G.

But the point upon which I'd invite you to reflect upon is that it's a fanless brick completely enclosed by unvented plastic, which is a terrific thermal insulator.
It lacks knobs and a screen but has all the stuff that outputs heat: a beefy processor, the ADC, the memory, etc..

So with a little care it's possible to produce good stuff with a an even better thermal envelope.

[balnazzar]

There are no silent chain saws either ;-)

The second is that the way one uses instruments usually is different from the way you use your computer. I realize that there are probably professionals that use this stuff all day long like I do when at work with my computer. But for most at the hobby level you will not be taking measurements 8 hours a day, 5 days a week.

Well, there are no silent chainsaws, but there are silent, good scopes. See my reply about the picos, for example. Or, as benchtop go, the R&S RTB2K.

True, one doesn't use a scope 8 hrs a day, but even if you have it turned on for half a hour, you should be able to concentrate upon the work.

In the end, I realize that I cannot justify buying a 3000 eur R&S, even if I save enough money. Not with my current level of experience and competence.
I think that I'll buy a 70 MHz or 100 MHz 4chs Pico within a few months.
I'll miss the buttons & knobs, but I can't really stand the noise.

[balnazzar]

Fungus speaks through his arse as he knows jack shit about Siglent !

There is no need to turn the conversation into unpleasant.

Maybe you ignore my previous report about the same spec Noctua fan is no quieter than what Siglent use = fact #1

I did not ignore it. On the contrary, I stated that that was even more worrying. But consider that Noctua makes a shitload of fans, some of them very high rpm-rated. If someone has put a high-rpm Noctua inside the scope without a resistor, and the scope drives it full steam, of course it will be noisy. But that's just my conjecture..

As for Fungus, if he tells that putting a 7$ fan into his Rigol and that solved the noise, that's a fact as well. Maybe he selected the right fan.

Of course you could best match a replacement fan to your ambient temperatures but a manufacturer can't, they must design for all conditions in a worldwide marketplace so the fan can be thought unnecessarily noisy in a cooler climate = fact #5

That's why they should have put a temperature sensor (2$) in it along with a PWM controller.

Stop being a twat and accept that horsepower needs cooling

What about the picos (fanless) or the RTB2K (quiet)?
I mean, "if you want silence, you have to open your wallet, cheap stuff is noisy" sounds more convincing.

Then if I had my choice based on $ spend for fan noise and features SDS2104X Plus would be first choice

For features maybe. But the review highlighted that it's damn noisy.
The 2K HD is allegedly silent. Allegedly. But it's a 4000$ scope. Out of question.

I'm upset because I'm using the 1104xe and it's indeed a good, nice little scope, like you said days ago. Very good for the price. And yet I have to return it.

Why they had to spoil it with a shitty fan, that really escapes me.

[jasonRF]

It is not easy to find silent (or nearly-silent) test equipment.  When I was shopping for a scope this year I found that there were few options that were 'guaranteed' to be quiet-enough for me - at least without hearing them in-person.  Compared to the great bang-per-buck units like the sds1104x-e, I found the options were either much more expensive (the R&S already discussed), or had fewer features (eg the fanless Owon sds1000-series which also have inferior performance), or both (eg the fanless Tek 1000C series).   

The main fanless options I found that had deep memory and lots of features were the nicer Picoscopes, but they are not cheap and most people strongly prefer benchtop equipment.   The most 'affordable' deep-memory 4-channel option is the 2406B at $700 US (50 MHz, 1 GS/s, 32 MSample memory, 1 MHz AWG w/ Bode plots) but has been out of stock and backordered everywhere for months as far as I can tell; the least-expensive 4-channel deep-memory models actually in-stock in stores cost about $1000 US (2407B, 3403D).   

I was starting to write a reply about the Picos. Take a Pico with good specs. Say 100 MHz, 4chs, 1 GS/s, 128 Mpts.
It sells for ~1100 eur.
It's more than a chinese scope with the same specs, but less, say, than a DSOX1204G.

But the point upon which I'd invite you to reflect upon is that it's a fanless brick completely enclosed by unvented plastic, which is a terrific thermal insulator.
It lacks knobs and a screen but has all the stuff that outputs heat: a beefy processor, the ADC, the memory, etc..

So with a little care it's possible to produce good stuff with a an even better thermal envelope.

I don’t know enough about the internals to know whether the Picoscopes can be compared so directly to the Siglent.  Certainly there are differences. For example, the sds1104x-e has dual 1 GS/s ADCs while the Picoscopes have a single ADC.   But even when comparing to single-ADC bench scopes, much of the processing (for example the FFTs, all of the fancy math channels, and the serial decoding) for the Picoscopes is done in the Picoscope software running on the computer, so less processing is required in the box.  Full disclosure: both of my scopes are Picoscopes (2204a, 5244b) and I love them, but I completely understand why many folks would much prefer a bench scope.  My work area is virtually silent, but that is also because I do not need high-performance power supplies, external signal generators, multimeters, spectrum analyzers, signal analyzers, etc (I only have low-performance gear besides the fancy picoscope).  If you need all of that gear with modern capability, as others have stated, there will be noise.   

Jason

[JeremyC]

balnazzar, I’m guessing you’re trying to get best what you can get in your budged,
but as of now you aren’t sure what you really need.
I would suggest to stay with the AD2, work with your projects, if you hit a limitation make a comment in your work log.
Review the log after some period of time  (3 months?) and you will find what you really need. Otherwise you may end with wasting money.

[Fungus]

Stop being a twat and accept ...

Seriously?

[2N3055]

It is not easy to find silent (or nearly-silent) test equipment.  When I was shopping for a scope this year I found that there were few options that were 'guaranteed' to be quiet-enough for me - at least without hearing them in-person.  Compared to the great bang-per-buck units like the sds1104x-e, I found the options were either much more expensive (the R&S already discussed), or had fewer features (eg the fanless Owon sds1000-series which also have inferior performance), or both (eg the fanless Tek 1000C series).   

The main fanless options I found that had deep memory and lots of features were the nicer Picoscopes, but they are not cheap and most people strongly prefer benchtop equipment.   The most 'affordable' deep-memory 4-channel option is the 2406B at $700 US (50 MHz, 1 GS/s, 32 MSample memory, 1 MHz AWG w/ Bode plots) but has been out of stock and backordered everywhere for months as far as I can tell; the least-expensive 4-channel deep-memory models actually in-stock in stores cost about $1000 US (2407B, 3403D).   

I was starting to write a reply about the Picos. Take a Pico with good specs. Say 100 MHz, 4chs, 1 GS/s, 128 Mpts.
It sells for ~1100 eur.
It's more than a chinese scope with the same specs, but less, say, than a DSOX1204G.

But the point upon which I'd invite you to reflect upon is that it's a fanless brick completely enclosed by unvented plastic, which is a terrific thermal insulator.
It lacks knobs and a screen but has all the stuff that outputs heat: a beefy processor, the ADC, the memory, etc..

So with a little care it's possible to produce good stuff with a an even better thermal envelope.

An observation.
Let me start with a fact I think Picoscopes are brilliant. I have 3.

But you forget that Picoscope contains only acquisition engine. No general purpose CPU for U/I, no screen no PSU. It is not good comparison. And they do have fan and make noise. Some do, higher specced ones. And you have to add in whatever noise your PC has. Which in your case will be rather quiet and maybe already on so there is a win.

Taking all in account I would say maybe that is best choice for you, but this all started with a budget and some requirement that steered away from it..

[2N3055]

Fungus speaks through his arse as he knows jack shit about Siglent !

There is no need to turn the conversation into unpleasant.

Maybe you ignore my previous report about the same spec Noctua fan is no quieter than what Siglent use = fact #1

I did not ignore it. On the contrary, I stated that that was even more worrying. But consider that Noctua makes a shitload of fans, some of them very high rpm-rated. If someone has put a high-rpm Noctua inside the scope without a resistor, and the scope drives it full steam, of course it will be noisy. But that's just my conjecture..

As for Fungus, if he tells that putting a 7$ fan into his Rigol and that solved the noise, that's a fact as well. Maybe he selected the right fan.

Of course you could best match a replacement fan to your ambient temperatures but a manufacturer can't, they must design for all conditions in a worldwide marketplace so the fan can be thought unnecessarily noisy in a cooler climate = fact #5

That's why they should have put a temperature sensor (2$) in it along with a PWM controller.

Stop being a twat and accept that horsepower needs cooling

What about the picos (fanless) or the RTB2K (quiet)?
I mean, "if you want silence, you have to open your wallet, cheap stuff is noisy" sounds more convincing.

Then if I had my choice based on $ spend for fan noise and features SDS2104X Plus would be first choice

For features maybe. But the review highlighted that it's damn noisy.
The 2K HD is allegedly silent. Allegedly. But it's a 4000$ scope. Out of question.

I'm upset because I'm using the 1104xe and it's indeed a good, nice little scope, like you said days ago. Very good for the price. And yet I have to return it.

Why they had to spoil it with a shitty fan, that really escapes me.

Purpose of a fan is to move air. Fact that some people put in fans that don't move enough air to make it silent will compromise thermal integrity of device. Or not, depending whether you're in tropics or Syberia. Manufacturer has to GUARANTEE it will work in full range promised in datasheet.
If you take effort to look at the numbers, very few people bother and think fan needs exchanging. Those that do are in a minority. Nobody is going to make product more expensive for less than 1% of users, compromising sales to 99% users that are quite happy with both device and price. I'm not saying you're stupid for wishing better, but it simply doesn't work that way.

And please will you refrain from statements like "The 2K HD is allegedly silent. Allegedly. ..". That is an example you making a statement that implies I'm lying... I know for fact it is true, not alleged fact. Only statement that is correct from you is that you haven't heard it yourself and you cannot say if would be silent enough for your needs.
And my statements might seem to you like patronizing, but they are simple fact that I know what I am saying and trying to point out facts that are wrong... I don't have to help you, i don't get paid by anybody, nor you, nor any manufacturer or dealer. I don't sell any of this stuff, just a user like you, with a distinction that I have been in this quite long, since the days of CRT scopes. And currently own 7 scopes from different classes, owned more during years, and worked with God know how many...
I also design and manufacture electronics and can tell you it all seems simple until you try it in real life...

I do recognize that you also can, and in fact, do give credit where credit is due. And as I said, I do recognize that you need specific acoustic requirements.
But it is not general case to all users (and this in not my opinion but a fact, from sales channel) and there is no need to call manufacturer or other users names for not having same requirements as you. That is all. You take it as you will.

BUt we get back to beginning.  You must define your priorities correctly. And accept that you might not get what you want (need) for a budget you are willing to pay. In which case either budget or expectations must revised. Simple as that. Complaining at length how manufacturers are stupid for not making devices exactly how it suits you and customers are stupid too because not everyone has same needs as you is, firstly pointless.  It leads to no solution for you. And it also leads to some people getting bothered by being called names...

And this is my last detour from topic here. As far as I'm concerned all scope advice was already dispensed and we are into endless tangential discussions about meaning of the Universe.
I wish you to find a good solution for your needs, without breaking a bank...
All the best to you.

Summary:

By taking into account revised requirements that heavily emphasize on near silent device, I recommend to OP to make a research into fanless devices (some Picoscopes, I believe R&S had entry level scope that was fanless) or a device that has very quiet acoustic envelope (like R&S RTB2000 or SDS2000X HD), off course all by taking into account budget available. I think enough data was given for OP to make good decision. It would be nice for OP to share his final decision and rationale behind it here in a conclusion, so other users with similar budget and requirements (with emphasis on very acoustically quiet scopes) could benefit from all the effort OP and contributors invested in this.

[balnazzar]

Certainly there are differences. For example, the sds1104x-e has dual 1 GS/s ADCs while the Picoscopes have a single ADC.   
[...]
both of my scopes are Picoscopes (2204a, 5244b)

But any 5000-series pico has 8 independent ADCs (I think that's why they can get to 16 bit resolution.. By stacking ADCs..)

[balnazzar]

balnazzar, I’m guessing you’re trying to get best what you can get in your budged,
but as of now you aren’t sure what you really need.
I would suggest to stay with the AD2, work with your projects, if you hit a limitation make a comment in your work log.
Review the log after some period of time  (3 months?) and you will find what you really need. Otherwise you may end with wasting money.

That's a good advice. I will do so. If not out of wisdom, certainly out of necessity.

The 4-chs Picos are not currently manufactured (probably as a consequence of silicon supply chain shortages..), and are due to be delivered again to distributors not before the next summer (Farnell told me they expect them to be delivered june 2023).

I just hope I won't need >2chs too often, and the same goes for 30 MHz (which is like saying I'll be alble to oberve signals up to 5 MHz accurately...).

[Fungus]

Nobody is going to make product more expensive for less than 1% of users, compromising sales to 99% users that are quite happy with both device and price. I'm not saying you're stupid for wishing better, but it simply doesn't work that way.

Now who's inventing numbers?

There are lots of threads on EEVBLOG with people trying to silence their oscilloscopes. Some of them are about Siglents.

Any mod may involve voiding the warranty though, it's up to the individual to make that decision.

Given that a "silent" oscilloscope is going to be much more expensive it might make sense to take the warrant-voiding leap and mod a cheap one. I'd use it a bit first to make sure it doesn't die an early death though. Maybe switch it on when you're not around to hear it.

And please will you refrain from statements like "The 2K HD is allegedly silent. Allegedly. ..". That is an example you making a statement that implies I'm lying... I know for fact it is true, not alleged fact.

Nothing with a fan will ever be truly silent.

[balnazzar]

An observation.
Let me start with a fact I think Picoscopes are brilliant. I have 3.

But you forget that Picoscope contains only acquisition engine. No general purpose CPU for U/I, no screen no PSU. It is not good comparison. And they do have fan and make noise. Some do, higher specced ones. And you have to add in whatever noise your PC has. Which in your case will be rather quiet and maybe already on so there is a win.

Taking all in account I would say maybe that is best choice for you, but this all started with a budget and some requirement that steered away from it..

That's a good point. Although as for general purpose CPUs, consider that for example Apple managed to tuck the M1, one of the most powerful laptop processors in existence, inside a few millimetres thick case, along with a very power-hungry 11" display with very high resolution (displays do draw power as function of their resolution). It's all passively cooled, and it does not overheat.
Now imagine a pico 5000 with its 8 ADCs "stacked" upon an iPad pro.
That would be quite a scope. 11" retina display, blazing fast UI, 8 ADC, 16 bit and whatnot. And *passive*.

[balnazzar]

Purpose of a fan is to move air. Fact that some people put in fans that don't move enough air to make it silent will compromise thermal integrity of device. Or not, depending whether you're in tropics or Syberia. Manufacturer has to GUARANTEE it will work in full range promised in datasheet.
If you take effort to look at the numbers, very few people bother and think fan needs exchanging. Those that do are in a minority. Nobody is going to make product more expensive for less than 1% of users, compromising sales to 99% users that are quite happy with both device and price. I'm not saying you're stupid for wishing better, but it simply doesn't work that way.

I get your point, and there is truth in it. But I still have to read about just 1 person who swapped the fan and then reported that the scope has died due to overheating.

And please will you refrain from statements like "The 2K HD is allegedly silent. Allegedly. ..". That is an example you making a statement that implies I'm lying... I know for fact it is true, not alleged fact.

NO. I'm not implying you are lying. I'm implying that this has been reported by just one person, who happens to be quite insensitive to acoustical noise by his own admission. If you automatically assume nasty intentions by your counterpart in a conversation, such a conversation would necessarily steer toward unpleasant.

It would be nice for OP to share his final decision and rationale behind it here in a conclusion, so other users with similar budget and requirements (with emphasis on very acoustically quiet scopes) could benefit from all the effort OP and contributors invested in this.

Here is what I'll do:

I'll try and use just the AD2 for now. It's very good, apart from its limitations (2chs only, low frequency, etc..).

Then I'll buy a Pico (2000 series, 4ch, probably 70 MHz), hoping that they'll be available soon. If not, I'll go for a Pico 3000 as soon as I have the money.

I would recommend the 1104X-E to anyone who is *very* insensitive to acoustical disturbance, but want a good, cheap scope, with a very good price-quality ratio!

[2N3055]

Purpose of a fan is to move air. Fact that some people put in fans that don't move enough air to make it silent will compromise thermal integrity of device. Or not, depending whether you're in tropics or Syberia. Manufacturer has to GUARANTEE it will work in full range promised in datasheet.
If you take effort to look at the numbers, very few people bother and think fan needs exchanging. Those that do are in a minority. Nobody is going to make product more expensive for less than 1% of users, compromising sales to 99% users that are quite happy with both device and price. I'm not saying you're stupid for wishing better, but it simply doesn't work that way.

I get your point, and there is truth in it. But I still have to read about just 1 person who swapped the fan and then reported that the scope has died due to overheating.

And please will you refrain from statements like "The 2K HD is allegedly silent. Allegedly. ..". That is an example you making a statement that implies I'm lying... I know for fact it is true, not alleged fact.

NO. I'm not implying you are lying. I'm implying that this has been reported by just one person, who happens to be quite insensitive to acoustical noise by his own admission. If you automatically assume nasty intentions by your counterpart in a conversation, such a conversation would necessarily steer toward unpleasant.

It would be nice for OP to share his final decision and rationale behind it here in a conclusion, so other users with similar budget and requirements (with emphasis on very acoustically quiet scopes) could benefit from all the effort OP and contributors invested in this.

Here is what I'll do:

I'll try and use just the AD2 for now. It's very good, apart from its limitations (2chs only, low frequency, etc..).

Then I'll buy a Pico (2000 series, 4ch, probably 70 MHz), hoping that they'll be available soon. If not, I'll go for a Pico 3000 as soon as I have the money.

I would recommend the 1104X-E to anyone who is *very* insensitive to acoustical disturbance, but want a good, cheap scope, with a very good price-quality ratio!

Thank you for your nice post. I just wanted to add that we might be having a problem communicating in language that is foreign to both of us. My meaning of allegedly is "something that is claimed without proof" and usually used in legal proceedings or by journalist when wanting to cast doubt to someone's claims without taking responsibility if journalist or lawyer falsely accused someone.. So it has meaning you are casting doubts my statement is true and unproven, a speculation.. That combined with my adamant statement my claim is fact and a true, means casting doubt as to veracity of me and my statement.. But water under the bridge, I'm just explaining rationale behind on my side..

You are correct there are not many reports of scopes dying after putting in lesser fan. First reason is people don't like to brag about failures. Other reason is because it is not about dying same day, but about decreased reliability. In fact you could go in and disable fan completely, it might work like that for months, especially in nice cold office. But you would probably see weird bugs, freeze ups and that would progress as downward spiral until it would repeatably fail. Or you could see problem only when you enable FFT because then CPU goes up and there is more heat. Anyways thermal engineering is engineering and there is method to the madness. If you want to improve on factory design, you absolutely can, but it has to be done in rational and proper way with testing and measurements. Not just swapping fans and hoping for the best. Or you can, but all bets are off. You might get lucky or not. That is my point.

There are more than one SDS2000X HD users, and my statement is a proven, fact with all of them.
Let's put it this way. SDS2000X HD is so silent that after initial fan test on power up,  I had to switch off all the devices in a lab, close the door and window, and then I had to put an ear 10cm from it to hear a slight whoosh...

Fact that I'm not "sensitive" to fan sound doesn't imply I'm deaf or have trouble hearing. It simply means that I can mentally ignore (I simply don't pay attention to it) slight hum of individual device, especially when more than one device is on. Sort of like those pink noise meditation sounds on Youtube. In fact I had to learn to do so, because I have no luxury to chose- As soon as you go a bit up the chain, there are no more silent devices. And some are more annoying if there are resonances that show up as slight tones.. Sort of tinnitus like noise.. But as I say, you have no choice sometimes.

Actually I have quite keen ear (it is getting worse with age though), but I'm more annoyed and bothered when I start hearing higher frequency noises from switchers or whatnot. I used to get crazy from old CRT TV horizontal frequency that I clearly felt in my ears as an unpleasant pressure..


And now for useful advice about Pico.  I have 4262 (16bit model), a 8Ch 4824A (12 bit) and 3406D MSO. 2000 and 3000 series are 8bit. Higher end 2000 series and entry level 3000 seem to overlap a bit but there are differences.
Make sure to check input ranges, input offset ranges and 20MHz BW filter. I believe 2000 series does not have hardware 20MHz BW filter.
There is also 5000 series that has variable resolution. Most of them support Hexamers FRA application, but not lowest 2000 models. Not all models are available now.

Best,

[balnazzar]

@2N3055

Thanks for the clarification  Yes, we non-native speakers tend to simplify and not to articulate properly. That stands true for myself in the 1st place.

Coming to the scopes, thanks also for the useful info about the Picos. You have quite an assortment, but I think the money spent is justified by the fact you earn a living with them.
Of particular interest is the fact that Hexamer's FRA application is not supported by the 2000-series. That's very bad news! 

EDIT: May I ask what you think about the Pico's software suite? Is it bug-free? Complete? And so no..

[2N3055]

@2N3055

Thanks for the clarification  Yes, we non-native speakers tend to simplify and not to articulate properly. That stands true for myself in the 1st place.

Coming to the scopes, thanks also for the useful info about the Picos. You have quite an assortment, but I think the money spent is justified by the fact you earn a living with them.
Of particular interest is the fact that Hexamer's FRA application is not supported by the 2000-series. That's very bad news! 

EDIT: May I ask what you think about the Pico's software suite? Is it bug-free? Complete? And so no..

FRA supports 2000 ones with larger memory.
And yes they all paid for themselves. In fact I would buy them for the project.. With time they start grow numbers..

Pico 6 SW is very stable and fully featured. It has a bit older windows app concept.
There is V7 beta that is getting to be feature complete, with much more modern GUI . I actually use it all the time, and check with V6 when in doubt.
V7 felt unusual in beginning but with time I like it better than old one. I run it on 23" touchscreen on PC and it works the treat..
Pico is is quite conservative and tend to debug quite well.

[balnazzar]

Most of them support Hexamers FRA application, but not lowest 2000 models. Not all models are available now.

I'm trying to get more info about that. In particular, which ones are 'lowest enough' not to support the FRA app.

It seems the absolute lowest model (10 MHz) is not supported [source: pico forums, Hexamer's posts]
It is unclear if for example, the 25,50,70,100 MHz models support it.

The wiki says:
The current design of the application requires a PicoScope device that has at least 2 channels and a function generator. [...]
Some devices are not compatible due to other unique impediments. For example, the PS3204 function generator currently does not output a pure sine.

It also seems that the FRA won't work with an external function generator.

[jasonRF]

Certainly there are differences. For example, the sds1104x-e has dual 1 GS/s ADCs while the Picoscopes have a single ADC.   
[...]
both of my scopes are Picoscopes (2204a, 5244b)

But any 5000-series pico has 8 independent ADCs (I think that's why they can get to 16 bit resolution.. By stacking ADCs..)

Dave did a teardown of a 5000B scope a bunch of years ago (I think it was a 5443B), so I know that it has a single ADC chip that draws something like 1/2 Watt.  It is a very specialized chip, and they basically designed their scopes around it.  I suspect they use that same chip in the current 5000D series, unless it is obsolete.     

Regarding FRA4Picoscope, it works fine with my 2204a, the cheapest Picoscope in the current lineup.  For years that was my only scope and I used that app many times.  There are examples from at least two different 2000-series (including my 2204a) in the thread
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/picoscope-2000/

jason

[2N3055]

Most of them support Hexamers FRA application, but not lowest 2000 models. Not all models are available now.

I'm trying to get more info about that. In particular, which ones are 'lowest enough' not to support the FRA app.

It seems the absolute lowest model (10 MHz) is not supported [source: pico forums, Hexamer's posts]
It is unclear if for example, the 25,50,70,100 MHz models support it.

The wiki says:
The current design of the application requires a PicoScope device that has at least 2 channels and a function generator. [...]
Some devices are not compatible due to other unique impediments. For example, the PS3204 function generator currently does not output a pure sine.

It also seems that the FRA won't work with an external function generator.

2000 series with small memory does not work. Because it has to capture large burst at a time.
Actually it works but not all the time and with all settings.. I don't remember the details.
2207B up to 2408B have 64 MB memory and they work fine for sure.
Which puts it in a almost same price bracket as smaller of 3000 series, that are better devices.

PS3204 is old discontinued device...

Interesting thing about Hexamer's FRA fro Picoscope is that full source is available. And if you look into source, signal generating part is separated in module and can be replaced with code that drives some other generator... In  fact there are preparations in code for it..

[jasonRF]

Most of them support Hexamers FRA application, but not lowest 2000 models. Not all models are available now.

I'm trying to get more info about that. In particular, which ones are 'lowest enough' not to support the FRA app.

It seems the absolute lowest model (10 MHz) is not supported [source: pico forums, Hexamer's posts]
It is unclear if for example, the 25,50,70,100 MHz models support it.

The wiki says:
The current design of the application requires a PicoScope device that has at least 2 channels and a function generator. [...]
Some devices are not compatible due to other unique impediments. For example, the PS3204 function generator currently does not output a pure sine.

It also seems that the FRA won't work with an external function generator.

The 3204 is a very old model that is out of production (EDIT: I see 2n3055 beat me to it!).  My understanding is that it works fine with most of the more modern Picoscopes.   Again, I have never had any problems using it with my 2204a.  Works every time.

And yes, only Hexamer  has written a plugin to interface with another function generator.  But the hooks are there, as 2N3055 points out.

If you want to use an external function generator to do Bode plots outside of FRA4Picoscope there are several options. 

1. Just like you can with any scope, do it the old-fashioned way and manually do the measurements frequency by frequency, then plot in your software of choice.  This is complicated by the fact that the Picoscope software does not have automated time-delay or phase-difference measurements, which is a little irritating.  You can use math channels to program your own, or you can use cursors and do it the slow way... 

2. Use the PicoSDK (software developement kit) and write you own code.  If you are using c or c++ it might take some time depending on your programming skills, but if you are happy with a simple Python script there are Python wrappers for the PicoSDK functions.   The key will be learning how to control your function generator from Python.  I have started playing with this recently, and it doesn't look bad at all to control a Picoscope and read the data, although it will probably take another couple of hours to get a simple end-to-end script to make basic plots (mostly hampered by the fact that I don't really know Python).  The only computer-controllable signal sources I have are a nanoVNA, tinySA, and an Arduino-controlled AD9833-based generator still on a solderless breadboard.  While I can control all of them just fine from Python, all just use simple commands over a COM port.  Commercial function generators may take more work to interface. 

3. Semi-automated.  For each frequency: setup the function generator and scope settings, then save the waveforms in an output file.  One file per frequency.  Then you can suck the data into your favorite software (I have done this with Octave), looping over the files to compute the gain and phase for each frequency and then generate the plot.   I have done this a number of times with my 2204a using an old 12-MHz BK Precision DDS function generator (an ebay special) that has no provisions for software control.  This approach takes some time - using keyboard shortcuts I can do about three frequencies per minute (mostly dominated by the wonky function gen interface).  I estimate the frequency as part of processing each file, so don't need to keep track of that info separately or do the frequencies in any particular order.

jason

[balnazzar]

But any 5000-series pico has 8 independent ADCs (I think that's why they can get to 16 bit resolution.. By stacking ADCs..)

Dave did a teardown of a 5000B scope a bunch of years ago (I think it was a 5443B), so I know that it has a single ADC chip that draws something like 1/2 Watt.  It is a very specialized chip, and they basically designed their scopes around it.  I suspect they use that same chip in the current 5000D series, unless it is obsolete.     

Regarding FRA4Picoscope, it works fine with my 2204a, the cheapest Picoscope in the current lineup.  For years that was my only scope and I used that app many times.  There are examples from at least two different 2000-series (including my 2204a) in the thread
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/picoscope-2000/

jason

Thanks for the information!

I was making reference to this forum post: https://www.picotech.com/support/topic14311.html
Particularly, the third post from above. Says that the 2204A has something that hinders the FRA app. Maybe it was solved in the successive software releases?

About the 5000 series, they advertise them as having eight (!) ADCs. Maybe it's just for the lastest 5000 series models?

One question about that little 10 MHz scope. How often did you hit the bandwidth limit in your work? For example, you were able to accurately observe transients up to which frequency?

Thanks!

[balnazzar]

Interesting thing about Hexamer's FRA fro Picoscope is that full source is available. And if you look into source, signal generating part is separated in module and can be replaced with code that drives some other generator... In  fact there are preparations in code for it..

That's very good news. If it's witten in Python, I have some programming experience with it.
Thanks!

[balnazzar]

If you want to use an external function generator to do Bode plots outside of FRA4Picoscope there are several options. 

[...]

Thanks a lot, very detailed reply!