Author Topic: Osciloscope recommendation  (Read 24079 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RoGeorge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2259
  • Country: ro
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #25 on: October 13, 2016, 05:16:59 am »
Yes, last year, when I was looking for a scope. At that moment, nothing can beat the Rigol DS1054Z, so I bought one. I liked it so much that afterwards I also bought a Rigol DP832 Power Source, then a DG 4102 Arbitrary Waveform Generator. So far, no complains.

This year I didn't looked, but I bet it's the same. Still, I would like to hear if anyone has different news for 2016.

Offline videobruce

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 376
  • Country: us
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #26 on: October 13, 2016, 05:21:38 am »
I kinda was leaning towards Rigol, but from what I have read recently, Siglent seems to have passed them overall. At least for lower cost spectrum analyzers.
Interestingly, one of the engineers that worked for Rigol now works for Siglent.  ;)

Two things I don't like about Rigol;
The fan is way too noisy, it only cools the PS which doesn't get that warm in the 1st place,
Their scopes do not have separate vertical & horizontal controls for each channel.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2016, 05:25:18 am by videobruce »
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 18061
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. NZ Siglent Distributor
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2016, 05:27:07 am »
Interestingly, one of the engineers that worked for Rigol now works for Siglent.  ;)
More than just one.  :P
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
 

Offline Wuerstchenhund

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2961
  • Country: gb
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #28 on: October 13, 2016, 05:27:26 am »
Anyone ever do a Rigol vs Siglent pros & cons??

Is there even a notable difference? Both offer cheap bargain basement gear with OK (Rigol) to good (Siglent) hardware quality which will be riddled with firmware bugs when it comes to market, and these bugs may or may not be fixed in subsequent years.
 

Offline setq

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 444
  • Country: gb
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #29 on: October 13, 2016, 05:31:24 am »
Isn't that the same as Keysight but without the expensive? ;)
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 18061
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. NZ Siglent Distributor
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #30 on: October 13, 2016, 06:10:44 am »
Isn't that the same as Keysight but without the expensive? ;)
And some LeCroy's.  :P
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
 

Online Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10650
  • Country: 00
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #31 on: October 13, 2016, 09:50:48 am »
Is there even a notable difference? Both offer cheap bargain basement gear with OK (Rigol) to good (Siglent) hardware quality which will be riddled with firmware bugs when it comes to market, and these bugs may or may not be fixed in subsequent years.

You say that like the scopes are barely able to show wiggly lines on screen when they arrive. This is a long way from the truth.

 

Offline Wuerstchenhund

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2961
  • Country: gb
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #32 on: October 13, 2016, 10:00:07 am »
Is there even a notable difference? Both offer cheap bargain basement gear with OK (Rigol) to good (Siglent) hardware quality which will be riddled with firmware bugs when it comes to market, and these bugs may or may not be fixed in subsequent years.

You say that like the scopes are barely able to show wiggly lines on screen when they arrive. This is a long way from the truth.

 :wtf:

Really, stop that childish hyperbole, I said nothing of the sort :palm:  And it doesn't exactly help your credibility here if you make stuff up as you go along.

The reality is that both Siglent and Rigol give you roughly the same, which is a basic scope for little money. It will very likely be riddled with bugs when it comes to market, and luck (and the number of buyers complaining) will decide if and which bugs get fixed or not.
 

Online Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10650
  • Country: 00
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #33 on: October 13, 2016, 10:37:46 am »
Really, stop that childish hyperbole, I said nothing of the sort :palm:  And it doesn't exactly help your credibility here if you make stuff up as you go along.

..."riddled with bugs"

Funny how many people never even notice them.  :-//
 

Offline videobruce

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 376
  • Country: us
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #34 on: October 13, 2016, 11:21:16 am »
Quote
Funny how many people never even notice them.
They must be e-bay and/or Amazon buyers and/or sellers, they never seem to notice anything based on their reviews and the poorly composed ads themselves. If they own it, it usually automatically gets a five star review unless it arrived broken or shortly after.  :--
 

Offline videobruce

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 376
  • Country: us
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #35 on: October 13, 2016, 11:25:14 am »
The problem with all of them is getting thru Chinese managements thick skull (mostly their culture) to make product changes, starting with simple firmware fixes to fix poor menu structure which is all too common.

Why do we need Chinese characters in the menu for North American & European models??  :-//
 

Offline zapta

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6004
  • Country: us
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #36 on: October 13, 2016, 02:37:22 pm »
There's no way you can recommend replacement of a Agilent InfiniiVision with a MSO1000Z series IF you've read this:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/

Vendors coming here to trash their competitors is a disgusting practice. tautech, please stop it.
Drain the swamp.
 

Online rstofer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7188
  • Country: us
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #37 on: October 13, 2016, 03:25:17 pm »
Yes, last year, when I was looking for a scope. At that moment, nothing can beat the Rigol DS1054Z, so I bought one. I liked it so much that afterwards I also bought a Rigol DP832 Power Source, then a DG 4102 Arbitrary Waveform Generator. So far, no complains.

This year I didn't looked, but I bet it's the same. Still, I would like to hear if anyone has different news for 2016.

How odd that you copied my shopping list!  I'm thinking DG4162 but I already have the scope and the DP832 is up next.
 

Online rstofer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7188
  • Country: us
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #38 on: October 13, 2016, 03:41:33 pm »
I kinda was leaning towards Rigol, but from what I have read recently, Siglent seems to have passed them overall. At least for lower cost spectrum analyzers.
Interestingly, one of the engineers that worked for Rigol now works for Siglent.  ;)

Two things I don't like about Rigol;
The fan is way too noisy, it only cools the PS which doesn't get that warm in the 1st place,
Their scopes do not have separate vertical & horizontal controls for each channel.

I used to work in Silicon Gulch and engineers changed jobs by simply turning into the wrong driveway one morning.  What's your point?  Everybody works somewhere, until they work somewhere else.  Engineers who design scopes probably migrate between companies that make scopes.  Doesn't mean a thing!

Gee, somewhere up above somebody was gushing over the R&S HMO 1524 and, horrors, it too DOESN'T have a pair of knobs per channel.  It costs 6 times as much as the Rigol DS1054Z and it has the same UI (more or less).  R&S with no per-channel knobs!  To be fair, it looks like a very nice scope.

http://www.tequipment.net/Rohde-&-Schwarz/HMO1524/Mixed-Signal-Oscilloscopes-(MSO)/

The 1054 fan is pretty much a non issue if you have a high end desktop running (something with a 1000W PS) but it's pretty easy to change.  Replacing the encoder with a detent style is also pretty straighforward.  Neither mod is necessary.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2016, 05:56:49 pm by rstofer »
 

Offline RoGeorge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2259
  • Country: ro
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #39 on: October 13, 2016, 04:35:47 pm »
I'm thinking DG4162

For the generator, Siglent has something in the same price range, but it was advertised as a 16 bits resolution instead of only 14 for Rigol. Also, the maximum sample speed is different, 300 Ms/s Siglent vs 500 Ms/s Rigol. Siglent has also an interpolation mode advertised as 1.2 Gs/s with 4 x interpolation, but I didn't get into details, so I'm not sure which one is better.

If you choose a Rigol from DG4000 series, I heard that the current firmware was not yet hacked.

Offline Wuerstchenhund

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2961
  • Country: gb
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #40 on: October 13, 2016, 04:42:41 pm »
Really, stop that childish hyperbole, I said nothing of the sort :palm:  And it doesn't exactly help your credibility here if you make stuff up as you go along.

..."riddled with bugs"

Funny how many people never even notice them.  :-//

Yeah, that's why we have all these endless bug-related Rigol threads plus a very long thread showing how to *not* design a DSO, because hardly anyone noticed the shitloads of issues  :palm:

You couldn't make this shit up....
« Last Edit: October 13, 2016, 04:46:24 pm by Wuerstchenhund »
 

Online Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10650
  • Country: 00
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #41 on: October 13, 2016, 05:05:47 pm »
Yeah, that's why we have all these endless bug-related Rigol threads

No, we have endless bug-related Rigol threads because two or three people here can't see the bigger picture and when anybody discovers a minor problem they'll repeat it endlessly.

The big picture is that most of these problems weren't noticed or reported here until many months after the product launch. After the initial report they became "OMG the sky is falling!!!!!" to two or three forum members. Everybody else could see the 'scope totally kicked ass for $400.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2016, 05:09:38 pm by Fungus »
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19413
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #42 on: October 13, 2016, 05:17:55 pm »
Put this on your wall:
"The shittyness of a crap tool often only reveals itself after having used a good tool."
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 
The following users thanked this post: Wuerstchenhund

Online Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10650
  • Country: 00
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #43 on: October 13, 2016, 05:21:12 pm »
Put this on your wall:

So... your car is a Rolls Royce and you live in a 20 bedroom mansion, right? Nothing less than the absolute best is worth owning.

 

Online rstofer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7188
  • Country: us
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #44 on: October 13, 2016, 06:20:07 pm »

Yeah, that's why we have all these endless bug-related Rigol threads plus a very long thread showing how to *not* design a DSO, because hardly anyone noticed the shitloads of issues  :palm:

You couldn't make this shit up....

Except that, in the case of the DS1054Z, every single known bug, other than the spelling error, has been corrected.  Every single one!  And you know it!

Is there a single thread discussing CURRENT 1054 problems?  If there are still problems, they are very well hidden because there is a cadre of people looking for them.  Just waiting to pounce...

The other annoyances are not bugs, there are design decisions.  Yes, the fan could be quieter.  Yes, the encoder should have detents.  But knobs/channel is a design decision and not particularly important.  If these are critical, shop elsewhere.

When people talk about hardware quality, what are they talking about?  Do they even know?  Is there a checklist?  The fact is, I have had my 1054Z apart a couple of times and it all seems rather fine to me.  The screws hold things together, they don't seem to strip out and even the PCB looks like every other PCB I have ever seen.  It's kind of green with black things all over the place.  Somebody do a teardown and show off the differences in quality.  Go on, do it!  I dare you!  I double dare you!  I doubt there is a nickle's worth of difference between ANY of the brands, including Keysight.  There will be a green PCB with black things all over it.  Oh, and prove that any perceived difference results in measurement errors.

 

Offline blueskull

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 13553
  • Country: cn
  • Power Electronics Guy
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #45 on: October 13, 2016, 06:35:48 pm »

Yeah, that's why we have all these endless bug-related Rigol threads plus a very long thread showing how to *not* design a DSO, because hardly anyone noticed the shitloads of issues  :palm:

You couldn't make this shit up....

Except that, in the case of the DS1054Z, every single known bug, other than the spelling error, has been corrected.  Every single one!  And you know it!

Is there a single thread discussing CURRENT 1054 problems?  If there are still problems, they are very well hidden because there is a cadre of people looking for them.  Just waiting to pounce...

The other annoyances are not bugs, there are design decisions.  Yes, the fan could be quieter.  Yes, the encoder should have detents.  But knobs/channel is a design decision and not particularly important.  If these are critical, shop elsewhere.

When people talk about hardware quality, what are they talking about?  Do they even know?  Is there a checklist?  The fact is, I have had my 1054Z apart a couple of times and it all seems rather fine to me.  The screws hold things together, they don't seem to strip out and even the PCB looks like every other PCB I have ever seen.  It's kind of green with black things all over the place.  Somebody do a teardown and show off the differences in quality.  Go on, do it!  I dare you!  I double dare you!  I doubt there is a nickle's worth of difference between ANY of the brands, including Keysight.  There will be a green PCB with black things all over it.  Oh, and prove that any perceived difference results in measurement errors.

This discussion is completely meaningless and will never end.
Some people like W prefer things to be done correct at the first time with tons of pre-engineering and research, while some others prefer things to be done barely usable, then refine over time, to save initial launching cost.
Both have reasons for their own choice, and are both correct, depending on at which angle you view it.
I like the latter one because I see it is the trend. Nowadays the TE market is highly competitive and you can be sure that any new technology will be cloned very quickly, so launch and refine model makes more sense than refine and launch model as anyway your refining before launching will be learned by your competitor and hence will not buy you much competing advantage. Getting revenue as soon as possible makes more sense in terms of marketing.
 

Online PA0PBZ

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4278
  • Country: nl
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #46 on: October 13, 2016, 06:50:13 pm »
so launch and refine model makes more sense than refine and launch model as anyway your refining before launching will be learned by your competitor and hence will not buy you much competing advantage. Getting revenue as soon as possible makes more sense in terms of marketing.

Hmm, Samsung Note 7 anyone?
Keyboard error: Press F1 to continue.
 

Offline 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2456
  • Country: hr
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #47 on: October 13, 2016, 06:55:09 pm »

This discussion is completely meaningless and will never end.
Some people like W prefer things to be done correct at the first time with tons of pre-engineering and research, while some others prefer things to be done barely usable, then refine over time, to save initial launching cost.
Both have reasons for their own choice, and are both correct, depending on at which angle you view it.
I like the latter one because I see it is the trend. Nowadays the TE market is highly competitive and you can be sure that any new technology will be cloned very quickly, so launch and refine model makes more sense than refine and launch model as anyway your refining before launching will be learned by your competitor and hence will not buy you much competing advantage. Getting revenue as soon as possible makes more sense in terms of marketing.

I also like to buy perfect products that work right out of the box first time.. But I can't afford to pay 5000€ for just that.. On the other hand, ALL manufacturers, even "premium ones" are releasing "half baked" products nowadays..  They might be better at fixing problems, have better customer relations, have more experience and know how so their products have more space to grow ... But they are also releasing product with very aggressive timeline....
In my experience with software, I never buy "screaming new" products... I buy them after they are on the market for some time.. Early adopters pay premium, both in price and in the enjoyment of early bugs, with both premium brands and second tier manufacturers....



 

Online rstofer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7188
  • Country: us
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #48 on: October 13, 2016, 07:04:53 pm »

This discussion is completely meaningless and will never end.
Some people like W prefer things to be done correct at the first time with tons of pre-engineering and research, while some others prefer things to be done barely usable, then refine over time, to save initial launching cost.
Both have reasons for their own choice, and are both correct, depending on at which angle you view it.
I like the latter one because I see it is the trend. Nowadays the TE market is highly competitive and you can be sure that any new technology will be cloned very quickly, so launch and refine model makes more sense than refine and launch model as anyway your refining before launching will be learned by your competitor and hence will not buy you much competing advantage. Getting revenue as soon as possible makes more sense in terms of marketing.

True enough but in the launch-refine scenario, the company would be wise not to irreparably damage their brand.  The bugs have to be subtle and eliminated quickly.  Rigol has done this pretty well with the 1054Z.  The thing about trying to achieve perfection before release is that nothing is ever perfect.  There's always 'one more thing' and by the time the product is released, the marketing window has closed.  There have been some classic blunders in the cell phone industry.  Apple, Samsung,...

You would think, after all this time, there wouldn't be a spelling error in the 1054 menu.  Of all the easy things to fix...
 

Offline blueskull

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 13553
  • Country: cn
  • Power Electronics Guy
Re: Osciloscope recommendation
« Reply #49 on: October 13, 2016, 07:14:33 pm »
so launch and refine model makes more sense than refine and launch model as anyway your refining before launching will be learned by your competitor and hence will not buy you much competing advantage. Getting revenue as soon as possible makes more sense in terms of marketing.

Hmm, Samsung Note 7 anyone?

Not ethical, but it makes money. Think of it, they were selling phones for decades and this is their only massive safety issue. Though it created huge brand name impact, this strategy also led them to world's top phone manufacturer and billions and billions of money.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf