Rigol DS1054Z or not?

[Fungus]

A very expensive logic analyzer, with limited memory and horrible controls (compared to something PC based).

Siglent with option is not separate LA + separate scope, it is MSO. If you know diffrerence.

Yes.

How about Rigol MSO. Is it expensive and horrible with controls and memory. Or do you use double standards. And if you look Rigol MSO it share Analog channels memory with digital channels. Even more horrible than Siglent.

If you can use cheap 10$ LA with Rigol Ds1kZ why also Siglent user can not do same, if saeparate LA with scope is enough. In this case Siglent owner can buy separate cheap LA just as Riglol owner. But if he then think he want MSO... now this Rigol owner buy Rigol MSO scope... Siglent user only buy this option.  If we compare Siglent MSO then somehow fair is compare it with Rigol MSO. Consumer price in Germany for Rigol MSO1074Z is around 930 euro and MSO1104Z 950 euro.
Siglent MSOSDS1104X-E price is 966 euro
Btw, if in Rigol want use 16 digital channels only 2 analog channels can use. Siglent can do simultaneusly all 4 analog channels and all 16 digital channels.

Yes, Rigol is worse.

PS: I never mentioned Rigol, I'm not sure why you brought it up.

Other things just as with DS1000Z vs SDS1004X-E

Which one is expensive?

Siglent is more money but both are expensive compared to a USB/PC option (which can by synched to your 'scope via trigger-out).

[nctnico]

the main difference IMHO is that you can buy later a logic analyzer module for the siglent

A very expensive logic analyzer, with limited memory and horrible controls (compared to something PC based).

You are forgetting that a logic analyser can't show digital signals in realtime. This the added value of having digital channels on an oscilloscope. An MSO is not a logic analyser and vice versa. Don't make the mistake thinking they are equal.

[Fungus]

You are forgetting that a logic analyser can't show digital signals in realtime. This the added value of having digital channels on an oscilloscope. An MSO is not a logic analyser and vice versa. Don't make the mistake thinking they are equal.

That's not a hardware limitation:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/looking-for-low-cost-usb-logic-analyzer-with-real-time-view/msg870162/#msg870162

[Johnboy]

I ended up purchasing both a digital and analog scope, more because I wanted to better understand 'scopes in general and how they function than from a pressing and imminent need to study signals (although the Extra certainly was a big push). Therefore price was a significant consideration, and this isn't really a vote for Rigol or Siglent (Or GW Instek, or Tektronix, or Keysight). My guess is that stand-alone oscilloscopes will sooner than later go the way of the dodo. The grudging admiration that keeps popping up for the does-everything-but-not-everything-particularly-well Analog Discovery units suggests to me that this sort of PC integration is where the technology is really headed. This is coming from someone who "rides a horse while there is a perfectly good car in the driveway". I'm aware of some irony there.

For the OP, I found the following article of interest to me in considering some of the entry level scope limitations and how some people are finding workarounds for them. This one would likely be of interest to a ham, considering that the 'scope in question has been slammed repeatedly for its FFT performance. https://hackaday.com/2015/09/22/a-better-spectrum-analyzer-for-your-rigol-scope/
There are also quite a few others floating around this forum as well (often in between epic arguments over the validity of claimed specs for low-end test equipment). I've learned quite a few things from watching these guys lace up their gloves every week or so, or whenever this topic returns in the form of a new thread.

[nctnico]

My guess is that stand-alone oscilloscopes will sooner than later go the way of the dodo. The grudging admiration that keeps popping up for the does-everything-but-not-everything-particularly-well Analog Discovery units suggests to me that this sort of PC integration is where the technology is really headed.

No. The problem is that a PC is not well suited as a back-end for an oscilloscope. If you want to build a PC oscilloscope then you end up doing a lot of signal processing in the hardware anyway because you can't get the data fast enough into the PC and have it processed. Using an FPGA and a box with buttons is just easier. Besides that you don't have to deal with all kinds of OS specific problems and different OSses (for starters Linux and Windows but Mac is also necessary).

[rf-loop]

PS: I never mentioned Rigol, I'm not sure why you brought it up.

Because you. You tell that Siglent MSO is expensive and some other adjective...  in same message you then talk LA and how cheap and nice it is...  yes, it IS true but it have nothing to with MSO.

Now if you talk that Siglent scope MSO option is expensive... yes it is if you compare Riglol DS1kZz + cheap LA box. Or if you compare Siglent MSO option to simple el cheapo usb LA box.
But do you think it is comparable...they are different things... even if noth have same amount of digital channels...   then it is bit more fair to compare it with Rigol MSO in around same entry level group specially because they have nearly same price.  This is why I rise Rigol MSO to same table with Siglent MSO.   

Problem. How to explain milk color to born blind. This just start feel same... .

[Johnboy]

My guess is that stand-alone oscilloscopes will sooner than later go the way of the dodo. The grudging admiration that keeps popping up for the does-everything-but-not-everything-particularly-well Analog Discovery units suggests to me that this sort of PC integration is where the technology is really headed.

If you want to build a PC oscilloscope then you end up doing a lot of signal processing in the hardware anyway because you can't get the data fast enough into the PC and have it processed. Using an FPGA and a box with buttons is just easier. Besides that you don't have to deal with all kinds of OS specific problems and different OSses (for starters Linux and Windows but Mac is also necessary).

While I hardly feel qualified to argue that point with you, I suspect that there are likely any number of people currently working on solving this problem as I type, largely because whoever can overcome these obstacles stand to amass a fortune by so doing. The philanthropic quest to make quality test equipment available to almost anyone has intrinsic value even beyond currency, current manufacturing costs notwithstanding for dedicated boxes. How long have manufacturers been integrating USB interfaces into oscilloscopes?

I understand that easier/cheaper is currently a barrier to complete integration with PC's, but do you really feel that it will always be so?

[ultrarunner2018]

One problem I would have with any PC-based scope is that I don't own a laptop or tablet PC (or Mac), so I would be limited to doing all my test/troubleshooting work where my PC is. That's OK most of the time, but there could come a day when I want to do some work in the field.
In addition, I must agree that the OS could present problems. Even my SDRPlay sometimes will not run after a Windows update, due to drivers being wiped out during the upgrade.
I like the fact that I can do my hamming without my PC (on my Yaesu FT-450D or one of my HT's), and there are never any issues with drivers, other software, or OS upgrades breaking a working setup.

Next thing I wanted to mention is aliasing. I wasn't exactly sure what you guys were talking about there. I am familiar with aliasing with images on the screen; especially with games, but not so much with the scope. So I Googled, and found a good YouTube vid on the subject. It was explained very well, and I can understand how a newbie in the field could misinterpret what he is seeing on the scope due to aliasing, but once one has enough experience to understand these things, I don't really see it as a problem.

I still like the concept of the Analog Discovery. I could learn a lot from it. The only issue is whether or not I actually have good use for a real oscilloscope. I think that a little time will determine that for me.
I wish that I could afford both the scope and the Analog Discovery!

[Fungus]

One problem I would have with any PC-based scope is that I don't own a laptop or tablet PC (or Mac), so I would be limited to doing all my test/troubleshooting work where my PC is.

A perfectly valid concern.

Next thing I wanted to mention is aliasing. I wasn't exactly sure what you guys were talking about there. I am familiar with aliasing with images on the screen; especially with games, but not so much with the scope. So I Googled, and found a good YouTube vid on the subject. It was explained very well, and I can understand how a newbie in the field could misinterpret what he is seeing on the scope due to aliasing, but once one has enough experience to understand these things, I don't really see it as a problem.

This is the best explanation I've ever seen:

[ultrarunner2018]

This is the best explanation I've ever seen:

I agree 100%!
I wish I had teachers like Monty. I would have gotten a lot more out of my education than I did.
That video makes me want to buy the Analog Discovery and play around.

[ultrarunner2018]

I just had a thought:
I have been sitting on the fence a while over this o-scope thing, and today had the thought about Trump's new tariffs on Chinese imports.
Could these new taxes increase the cost of test equipment from China over the coming months? If so, then I think I'd better make my decision sooner than later to avoid the price increase.

[SkyMaster]

... and today had the thought about Trump's new tariffs on Chinese imports.
Could these new taxes increase the cost of test equipment from China over the coming months?

You could ask your President by calling him, at the White House, at 202-456-1414.

 

[ultrarunner2018]

... and today had the thought about Trump's new tariffs on Chinese imports.
Could these new taxes increase the cost of test equipment from China over the coming months?

You could ask your President by calling him, at the White House, at 202-456-1414.

 

I seriously wish that he was not 'my' president. But that's not a subject to engage in here...
I nearly moved to Canada when I was a child. Almost bought a house on Washburn Island, near Toronto. I have always had a warm spot in my heart for Canada. I have only been there twice; once to Toronto, and once to Montreal and Quebec... oh, and then there was the one time I was 'unofficially' in Canada, when I got lost on a trip to Jay Peak Vt, took a wrong turn, and ended up at the border. I turned around before getting to Canadian customs, but when I stopped at US customs, the official in the booth told me I was actually in Canada.

[ultrarunner2018]

I have made my decision.
I am going to buy the Siglent SDS1104X-E. The biggest reason I have chosen it over the Rigol DS1054Z is the dual ADC's. There are other technical aspects that I feel are better in the Siglent than the Rigol too, but the dual ADC's with 2x the sample rate on multiple channels is what sold me.

I did consider the Analog Discovery 2, but it's relatively high price and limited bandwidth - despite all of the other things it can do, and I would have needed the BNC board and two probes, that would have brought its price up to or higher than the Rigol DS1054Z anyway. In addition, I decided that my main interest in owning a scope is not so much to experiment; after all I said about the Rpi, but it is more the need to investigate real-world scenarios. Finally, having a stand-alone scope is more suitable, since I do not own a tablet or laptop computer, and everything I would be doing with something like the Analog Discovery would have to be based on my desktop (tower) PC.

Now, my only decision is whether to buy the scope now, or wait until December, when I have a birthday, and probably some extra cash coming my way.
That said, I am not earning any interest in my checking account, so it's really a push. I'm leaning towards buying it now, as it would give me a head-start on my projects.

[ultrarunner2018]

I've got one more question:
Why doesn't TEquipment sell the SDS1104X-E? They have the 1102X, and 1102B (whatever the difference is).
I was hoping I could buy the 1104X-E from them, since I have read that they offer a discount to members of this forum...

[wpwrak]

Why doesn't TEquipment sell the SDS1104X-E? They have the 1102X, and 1102B (whatever the difference is).

Are you sure ? When I search for "Siglent" in their shop, I get the Instek (!) 1102B and the Rigol (!!) 1102E. The Instek is somewhat similar to the Siglent. That Rigol - "BEST SELLER", no less - is some two generations older Also note that both have only two channels.

I was hoping I could buy the 1104X-E from them, since I have read that they offer a discount to members of this forum...

You may want to send a message to tautech. He always seems to have some discount coupons from Siglent dealers.

[MT]

Many distributors meanwhile offer a 30 days no-questions-asked return policy.

So what they actually do is recycling the A stock scope to the next dude who thinks he gets a NEW
unboxed from the factory. If i buy a new unit it has to be new not B stock else it should be sold as B stock, C stock etc

[ultrarunner2018]

Many distributors meanwhile offer a 30 days no-questions-asked return policy.

So what they actually do is recycling the A stock scope to the next dude who thinks he gets a NEW
unboxed from the factory. If i buy a new unit it has to be new not B stock else it should be sold as B stock, C stock etc

In some states in the U.S. it is illegal to sell anything like that as new. I would Google the subject and find what the telltale signs of 'B' stock are. I am sure that they are easy to spot once you know what you are looking for.
Also, buying direct from the factory (Siglent apparently has its own store) should guarantee that this doesn't happen.
I wouldn't trust Amazon - especially if it's "sold by <name_of_seller> and fulfilled by Amazon"

[Fungus]

Many distributors meanwhile offer a 30 days no-questions-asked return policy.

So what they actually do is recycling the A stock scope to the next dude who thinks he gets a NEW
unboxed from the factory. If i buy a new unit it has to be new not B stock else it should be sold as B stock, C stock etc

And yet you don't think twice about RMAing it if you don't like it.

That's a double standard.

You want the 30-day no-questions-asked return policy? You should accept returned goods (unless there's something obviously wrong with them, but the dealer should check that).

[MT]

Many distributors meanwhile offer a 30 days no-questions-asked return policy.

So what they actually do is recycling the A stock scope to the next dude who thinks he gets a NEW
unboxed from the factory. If i buy a new unit it has to be new not B stock else it should be sold as B stock, C stock etc

And yet you don't think twice about RMAing it if you don't like it.

I didnt think about RMA at all, because i want a NEW thing not yours RMA'ed device you have fiddled with then
sold as A stock to me, however as i said if its sold as B stock, many distributors do that in other areas.

That's a double standard.

You always sees the worst and seeks for the worst and that is your straw-man argument projected onto others Fungus! Redo your behavior!

You want the 30-day no-questions-asked return policy? You should accept returned goods (unless there's something obviously wrong with them, but the dealer should check that).

What utter bullshit!

No one has to accept B stock gods at A stock price!

No i dont want 30 day no-questions-asked return policy, why even distributor include that shit. I want a NEW unboxed from factory that i keep, i havent returned a single unit in my entire life unless i was broke at delivery or under warranty, can you even understand that approach? I doubt!

If i buy a NEW car i dont want to have the demo car everybody else have been out and test crashed!
If i buy a news paper(fake news ) i want a fresh new that nobody else have read before me!

Here for your enlightenment europés largest Mi distributor who have used  B stock practices for ages!
https://www.thomann.de/gb/search_dir.html?ref=intl&shp=eyJjb3VudHJ5IjoiZ2IiLCJjdXJyZW5jeSI6IjIiLCJsYW5ndWFnZSI6ImVuIn0%3D&sw=b+stock&smcs=2e1baa_1881

[Fungus]

No i dont want 30 day no-questions-asked return policy, why even distributor include that shit.

Well, there's the problem. They don't offer the choice.

[MT]

No i dont want 30 day no-questions-asked return policy, why even distributor include that shit.

Well, there's the problem. They don't offer the choice.

Selling B stock pretending it's A stock at A stock price are illegal in many countries!

[Old Printer]

Many distributors meanwhile offer a 30 days no-questions-asked return policy.

So what they actually do is recycling the A stock scope to the next dude who thinks he gets a NEW
unboxed from the factory. If i buy a new unit it has to be new not B stock else it should be sold as B stock, C stock etc

And yet you don't think twice about RMAing it if you don't like it.

That's a double standard.

You want the 30-day no-questions-asked return policy? You should accept returned goods (unless there's something obviously wrong with them, but the dealer should check that).

I disagree. Returning a product because you are not happy with it after you get to hold it is a part of the "buying online" process. If it were a brick & mortar seller the buyer may have decided it was not the product for them before purchase. Even B&M stores offer return policies, yet when you purchase a product you have every right to expect a sealed box, unless you opened it yourself. That is just part of doing business and the dealer/manufacture standing behind their product. The cost of selling returned merchandise as B stock is just part of the cost of doing business.

[bugi]

... The cost of selling returned merchandise as B stock is just part of the cost of doing business.

Which cost is of course paid by the customers, in the A stock's prices... Except, it seems, most customers are not ready, not even remotely ready, to pay that extra, considering how many look for the absolutely cheapest price, avoiding taxes and customs when possible, etc.  That A stock vs. B stock cost isn't necessarily cheap, as, in theory, the device should take a visit to nearest official repair facility or similar (in some rare cases it could be that same shop, especially for official sellers), for an official statement of its new state after the visit at the previous customer. Without proper official statement of the item's status, it is basically a random guess, and the item may be need to be sold at huge discount (which would need to be amortized into the A stock prices).

Thus, customers end up buying from the cheapest shop, which hasn't included such "cost of doing business" in the A stock prices, and thus the shop can not afford to not put the returns back into A stock circulation, and sells returns after a cursory check...  Yet customers expect to get the top stuff for those bottom prices

I think in EU the laws were changed so that sellers can now ask some cost from customers for returns, but it is up to the sellers to choose whether they do so or not, affected by competition, market pressure etc. (and they have to tell about such costs beforehand). That change allows sellers to move the return related costs towards those that return items, instead of spreading such costs to all customers. But, it is hard to put that into use, when the bottom price competitor might also advertise that returns have no extra cost (and customers do not stop to think why or how that competitor can do so)...

Of course, that is where the laws should come in to even the playfield, to make sure all the players play by the same rules, but my experience has been that the laws, more correctly, the law enforcement isn't working that well. Some shops happily do the nasty things without getting caught, or if they get caught, they just explain it was a rare mistake and may get an insignificant penalty.  Leading to the situation where those shops that do things right will end up just dying away sooner or later because all the customers flock to that cheap shop, even if its reputation took a small hit (which most didn't notice, many others forgot, and the rest don't care because they can save a bit).


Personally, I don't typically mind getting preopened packages as long as the thing contains everything that was supposed to be in there, and the item is of such a type that can not be "abused" or used in unintended ways. Say, a set of screw drivers or a simple calculator, easy to see if they are still ok. But, for example PC components are often "tested" for overclocking potential (and then returned when they don't meet the higher expectations), and cheap scopes hacked for options, yet normal user can not see what sort of state they are in, so for those I would not accept returned items as new.

[Old Printer]

Accepting returns without penalty is a selling feature of a particular vendor, and the buyer needs to weigh that when deciding where to buy. At least in this country. How is the average user able to tell if something like a scope has been hooked up to a signal/voltage that might damage it? And why should I have to deal with returning a product that has been damaged like that so the dealer can save some money on returns.