NEW 100MHz Keysight Scope Release on 1st March 2017

[TK]

About 1Mpts. of memory ? Not even as paid option ?

There is the resistor option to get 1Mpts of memory and all the DSOX1000 features

[skander36]

About 1Mpts. of memory ? Not even as paid option ?

There is the resistor option to get 1Mpts of memory and all the DSOX1000 features

I know about , I've read all your post about the subject , but is not displaying anywhere that you have 1 Mpts . There is a method to calculate how much memory you have for sampling ?
Thanks !

[rf-loop]

Yes, this is a memory thing. Any scope will do this if you zoom out far enough, but the point at which it happens is a function of sample rate and memory depth.

Thanks !
I was not sure , because on Siglent I reduced the memory to 14K (7 times smaller than 100k on EDUX) and waveforms seems still  recognizable . But maybe at deeper zoom levels it doesn't take account about my settings , something like Keysight do with automatic memory allocation .
About 1Mpts. of memory ? Not even as paid option ?

A key difference between Keysight and Siglent scopes is that Keysight always uses the maximum amount of memory available and Siglent (by default) only uses enough memory to fill the screen. On the Keysight you can zoom out and see more of the signal when using short time/div settings. On the Siglent OTOH you'd need to recapture the signal and then zoom in which is kinda clunky.

Tis is true about Siglent but bit loosy to say that it uses just enough memory to fill the screen.
With example 1ms/div it use default 14M memory. Is it just enough for fill the screen? Or is it bit more...  This all is mapped to display width.  This all memory lenght is also with full data used for measurements. Screen show always full captured length. No visual blind time. With Siglent hardware based zoom you can zoom from 1ms/div down to 1ns/div without loosing trigger stability. Still less than 100ps trigger jitter. If no need fast update rate, just keep scope 1ms/s and use zoomed window with timebase needed. All can do in zoomed window or upper window. Even measurements used data resolution is same. Even when 14M is mapped to 700 pixel wide display.

But if display vertical dimension is more then I like it more.
Siglent is bit different compared to many other scopes what use long memory  and time base is just nearly as full window zoom.
handling Siglent need bit different adjustment/handling practice than this other style. It takes quite short time to adapt this method. If can not adapt and learn other handling-adjustment practice - then it may feel difficult.
 
I remember old golden times when I have adaped to use Tektronix scopes. Oh well...one day I need use HP scope.  First feel was that with this can not do anything...total crap...let me throw this out from window.. Until I have experience with it and adapted to use just bit different, perhaps some things (UI) was even better than in Tek.    After then later when I use again Tek. It did not anymore feel so good - not anymore like "leader".   (but this time was analog scopes time)

I do not say that other method is universally better than other (Sig vs many others). But they are different and need different handling practice in muscle memory.

Why Siglent need copycat others? If one duck turn his head is it so that all other ducks need also turn heads. Markets are free and open. Everyone can buy what he like or need or want with his budget.

[nctnico]

A key difference between Keysight and Siglent scopes is that Keysight always uses the maximum amount of memory available and Siglent (by default) only uses enough memory to fill the screen. On the Keysight you can zoom out and see more of the signal when using short time/div settings. On the Siglent OTOH you'd need to recapture the signal and then zoom in which is kinda clunky.

Tis is true about Siglent but bit loosy to say that it uses just enough memory to fill the screen.

Siglent is bit different compared to many other scopes what use long memory  and time base is just nearly as full window zoom.
handling Siglent need bit different adjustment/handling practice than this other style. It takes quite short time to adapt this method. If can not adapt and learn other handling-adjustment practice - then it may feel difficult.

The Siglent method means pushing more buttons and recapturing a signal to see more so it IS more difficult and (worse) counter productive. Besides that it is better to do things the way everything else does it if you are a new kid on the block. That way you can leverage decades of customer feedback on useability into your product. Doing things your way results in re-inventing a square wheel which obviously is not going to get you extra points. Learn to walk before trying to run and so on.

[rf-loop]

A key difference between Keysight and Siglent scopes is that Keysight always uses the maximum amount of memory available and Siglent (by default) only uses enough memory to fill the screen. On the Keysight you can zoom out and see more of the signal when using short time/div settings. On the Siglent OTOH you'd need to recapture the signal and then zoom in which is kinda clunky.

Tis is true about Siglent but bit loosy to say that it uses just enough memory to fill the screen.

Siglent is bit different compared to many other scopes what use long memory  and time base is just nearly as full window zoom.
handling Siglent need bit different adjustment/handling practice than this other style. It takes quite short time to adapt this method. If can not adapt and learn other handling-adjustment practice - then it may feel difficult.

The Siglent method means pushing more buttons and recapturing a signal to see more so it IS more difficult and (worse) counter productive. Besides that it is better to do things the way everything else does it if you are a new kid on the block. That way you can leverage decades of customer feedback on useability into your product. Doing things your way results in re-inventing a square wheel which obviously is not going to get you extra points. Learn to walk before trying to run and so on.

When you run scope you really do not see anything what is outside screen borders. So what is this more what you see (or less if you think Sig). Perhaps you have a periscope that you can see across the edge.  Only waste of time to capture outside screen. This all time signal is out from screen is your blind time. You have there signal but you can not see what is going on there. If it feels better there is something - wll then it feels better. I do not feel better if I know there is data what I can not see.   But yes, I know, this is endless... day after day we hear that Siglent example decode only what is on the screen - without thinking anything but repeat this infinitely for "fooling" because mostly when peoples hear or read it,  it feels first like crap - until carefully thing what is really on the screen. There is whole used acquisition length. I do not know any oscilloscope what can show or decode more than acquisition length. This is more like that one like blonde and one like redhead.

[nctnico]

A key difference between Keysight and Siglent scopes is that Keysight always uses the maximum amount of memory available and Siglent (by default) only uses enough memory to fill the screen. On the Keysight you can zoom out and see more of the signal when using short time/div settings. On the Siglent OTOH you'd need to recapture the signal and then zoom in which is kinda clunky.

Tis is true about Siglent but bit loosy to say that it uses just enough memory to fill the screen.

Siglent is bit different compared to many other scopes what use long memory  and time base is just nearly as full window zoom.
handling Siglent need bit different adjustment/handling practice than this other style. It takes quite short time to adapt this method. If can not adapt and learn other handling-adjustment practice - then it may feel difficult.

The Siglent method means pushing more buttons and recapturing a signal to see more so it IS more difficult and (worse) counter productive. Besides that it is better to do things the way everything else does it if you are a new kid on the block. That way you can leverage decades of customer feedback on useability into your product. Doing things your way results in re-inventing a square wheel which obviously is not going to get you extra points. Learn to walk before trying to run and so on.

When you run scope you really do not see anything what is outside screen borders. So what is this more what you see (or less if you think Sig). Perhaps you have a periscope that you can see across the edge.  Only waste of time to capture outside screen.

No it is not. In many cases I look for a problem in a signal. If the problem appears I like to zoom/move to a different part of the signal (which was off screen) to see what happened before or after the problem. On a scope which doesn't use full record length this is a pain in the ass because you'd have to zoom out first to force full record length and then zoom in on every trigger. This means a lot of extra work especially if the problem doesn't always happen and there is no clear trigger condition to set. I clearly recall this was a major nuisance in the SDS2204 I used to own.

[rsjsouza]

A key difference between Keysight and Siglent scopes is that Keysight always uses the maximum amount of memory available and Siglent (by default) only uses enough memory to fill the screen. On the Keysight you can zoom out and see more of the signal when using short time/div settings. On the Siglent OTOH you'd need to recapture the signal and then zoom in which is kinda clunky.

Tis is true about Siglent but bit loosy to say that it uses just enough memory to fill the screen.

Siglent is bit different compared to many other scopes what use long memory  and time base is just nearly as full window zoom.
handling Siglent need bit different adjustment/handling practice than this other style. It takes quite short time to adapt this method. If can not adapt and learn other handling-adjustment practice - then it may feel difficult.

The Siglent method means pushing more buttons and recapturing a signal to see more so it IS more difficult and (worse) counter productive. Besides that it is better to do things the way everything else does it if you are a new kid on the block. That way you can leverage decades of customer feedback on useability into your product. Doing things your way results in re-inventing a square wheel which obviously is not going to get you extra points. Learn to walk before trying to run and so on.

When you run scope you really do not see anything what is outside screen borders. So what is this more what you see (or less if you think Sig). Perhaps you have a periscope that you can see across the edge.  Only waste of time to capture outside screen.

No it is not. In many cases I look for a problem in a signal. If the problem appears I like to zoom/move to a different part of the signal (which was off screen) to see what happened before or after the problem. On a scope which doesn't use full record length this is a pain in the ass because you'd have to zoom out first to force full record length and then zoom in on every trigger. This means a lot of extra work especially if the problem doesn't always happen and there is no clear trigger condition to set. I clearly recall this was a major nuisance in the SDS2204 I used to own.

Nico, what other oscilloscopes have the same behaviour as Keysight's? Is this perhaps a feature exclusive of Keysight? IIRC my Rigol DS4014 (is at home at the moment) and the Tektronix TDS3054 and TDS7104 (the ones I used to use at work) behave the same as the Siglent in question. I have never used a mid/high end oscilloscope, thus it may be a feature common on that area of the market.

[JPortici]

Rigol 1000 behaves this way, GW instek 1000 and 2000 should too, from what i saw.
Lecroy, i don't know.. the one i own has can't do much more than analyzing waveforms and math so i don't use it for glitch hunting

but i think that any scope that lets you decide the actual record lenght will behave as nico wants.
me personally, i want both: fewer long records i can zoom out without having to capture them having already zoomed out (because context is important) and many captures with history mode (which may or may not differ from segmented capture) the latter i like to use when studying relationships between serial messages and other signals, or analyzing errors in serial busses

which is a perfect excuse for not having too much equipment

[nctnico]

Nico, what other oscilloscopes have the same behaviour as Keysight's? Is this perhaps a feature exclusive of Keysight? IIRC my Rigol DS4014 (is at home at the moment) and the Tektronix TDS3054 and TDS7104 (the ones I used to use at work) behave the same as the Siglent in question. I have never used a mid/high end oscilloscope, thus it may be a feature common on that area of the market.

AFAIK Keysight scopes (at least the ones for daily use) all use the maximum memory length. Every other scope I have used (except for the Siglent SDS2204) allowed to force a certain memory length and kept that setting. Some oscilloscopes do have an automatic setting which limits the record size to the screen size but is can be overridden. IIRC the TDS3054 and TDS7104 don't have very long record lengths anyway by today's standards.

[rsjsouza]

Nico, what other oscilloscopes have the same behaviour as Keysight's? Is this perhaps a feature exclusive of Keysight? IIRC my Rigol DS4014 (is at home at the moment) and the Tektronix TDS3054 and TDS7104 (the ones I used to use at work) behave the same as the Siglent in question. I have never used a mid/high end oscilloscope, thus it may be a feature common on that area of the market.

AFAIK Keysight scopes (at least the ones for daily use) all use the maximum memory length. Every other scope I have used (except for the Siglent SDS2204) allowed to force a certain memory length and kept that setting. Some oscilloscopes do have an automatic setting which limits the record size to the screen size but is can be overridden. IIRC the TDS3054 and TDS7104 don't have very long record lengths anyway by today's standards.

Thanks, I will try this on my DS4014 when I get home today.

[Keysight DanielBogdanoff]

Nico, what other oscilloscopes have the same behaviour as Keysight's? Is this perhaps a feature exclusive of Keysight? IIRC my Rigol DS4014 (is at home at the moment) and the Tektronix TDS3054 and TDS7104 (the ones I used to use at work) behave the same as the Siglent in question. I have never used a mid/high end oscilloscope, thus it may be a feature common on that area of the market.

AFAIK Keysight scopes (at least the ones for daily use) all use the maximum memory length. Every other scope I have used (except for the Siglent SDS2204) allowed to force a certain memory length and kept that setting. Some oscilloscopes do have an automatic setting which limits the record size to the screen size but is can be overridden. IIRC the TDS3054 and TDS7104 don't have very long record lengths anyway by today's standards.

Our InfiniiVision oscilloscopes below the 6000 X-Series always use max memory. The 6000 X-Series and up (and all Infiniium) can be configured.

The reason some oscilloscopes don't default to max memory is due to the processor architecture. The ASICs we use for processing on the InfiniiVision scopes are designed to handle the full memory depth load, where as scopes with more traditional processors can get bogged down under long memory depth + deep analysis/decode/measurement loads. And, a scope vendor will never want to have their scope act laggy under default settings.

[rsjsouza]

Nico, what other oscilloscopes have the same behaviour as Keysight's? Is this perhaps a feature exclusive of Keysight? IIRC my Rigol DS4014 (is at home at the moment) and the Tektronix TDS3054 and TDS7104 (the ones I used to use at work) behave the same as the Siglent in question. I have never used a mid/high end oscilloscope, thus it may be a feature common on that area of the market.

AFAIK Keysight scopes (at least the ones for daily use) all use the maximum memory length. Every other scope I have used (except for the Siglent SDS2204) allowed to force a certain memory length and kept that setting. Some oscilloscopes do have an automatic setting which limits the record size to the screen size but is can be overridden. IIRC the TDS3054 and TDS7104 don't have very long record lengths anyway by today's standards.

Thanks, I will try this on my DS4014 when I get home today.

I must be getting terribly old... I use this feature quite often on the DS4014 (my mechanical memory simply went straight to the specific menu) but somehow I had forgotten. 

[martinot]

 

The last dozen or more posts have been with Siglent as the topic of discussion in a KS thread. 

Rename the thread March Scopemonth? 

Certainly seems that way, interesting times. 

Butting out now, we've got some new stuff coming soon too. 

Makes me dislike siglent even more.

Old thread, but just reading up on scopes to consider buying. Looking at KS and R&S, but also offerings from Siglent. Besides that the new Siglents looks too garish and toy like (pastel colours and fake silver rings on knobs looks really awful IMO), they seems to have a lot going form them (deep memory, and and a little bit original thinking in how scopes can work).

But reading this thread and other parts of the forum; what really sets them apart are their sales mens and sales representatives.

Siglent sales people: many who often is very abrasive and confrontational.

Keysight sales people: always good manners and very professional on-topic fact based response/answers.

Just this difference alone gives me a big concern and negative feeling about buying a Siglent product, and a clear plus in feeling for possibly going with Keysight!

(I hope KS value their sales/marketing people, as their doing a really good job in my book).