Rigol MSO5074 vs DHO914s

[ebastler]

@simone.pignati stated the possibility of carrying out comparative tests.
I post message #23, presenting some suggestions.
@simone.pignati, if you don't understand the questions, or don't have all the instruments to carry out the comparative tests, or don't have an agenda, or something else, let us know.
If you have any difficulty performing the tests, let us know your questions so we can help you.
If you decide not to carry out the tests, please also let us know.

Since Simone has not been on the forum for a few days, maybe I can chime in.

Simone had stated that he would have the DSO900 around for testing for two weeks, starting on September 11th. You proposed your list of tests on September 27th. So I'm afraid he will not be able to do these tests for you. If you have any difficulty understanding the problem, let us know.

[BRZ.tech]

Hi,
@ebastler.
I understood the problem, you're right, I sent the question outside the available period so @simone.pignatti could have the HDO900 on hand for testing.
I understand she hasn't been on the forum for a few days.
This way, she is free to not do the rehearsals.
And someone else, if they want, can do the rehearsals.
And then, @simone.pignati can do it too, if she wants.
I use Google Translate for all translations into English. I'm sorry if any words weren't translated well.
All the best.

[Geotekds]

I have an MSO5104, MSO5074, and a DHO914s.  I bought the DHO914s to see how good the 12 bit resolution was, especially for audio FFT.  It is a bit better, but the MSO is still far superior from the operator's standpoint.  The large screen on the 5000 will spoil you.  Also the MSO5000 supports VNC, which allows rapid control from though the net.  With the VNC, you can put the display on a giant screen and zoom it to fill the screen.  The DHO914s does have better response on a browser connection.  The biggest problem with the DHO914s is the necessity of switching channels to control a channel.  Many times you might be thinking you are controlling channel 1 when in fact channel 2 was still selected. I do like the VESA mount which allows the dho914s to be mounted on a bracket.

[Tarloth]

Sorry, any news from the users that have both oscilloscopes? I want to replace an old four-channel agilent with something that has a logic analyzer included, LIN/CAN decoding and an AWG is appreciated to test some analog sensor circuit, but essentially I am going to use it in digital applications. Is the usability of the DHO914s reasonable? I would greatly appreciate personal experience from those who have used both models. Thank you

[Fungus]

Sorry, any news from the users that have both oscilloscopes?

I'd want a big screen for looking at all those logic channels.

You don't need 12 bits if you're using it in digital applications.

[Tarloth]

I agree with you, what gives me doubts is that the MSO5000 has already been around for 5 years and I suspect that they will stop supporting it soon. In that sense, the DHO surely has more bugs but it has a more modern design, it will age more slowly. I am very attracted to the 8GSa/s that allows me to detect glitches 3 times faster than those detected by the DHO, half of my use of the oscilloscope is that, detecting glitches (although to be honest they last longer than those detected even by the DHO ). The screen and independent controls per channel for the vertical one are a very strong advantage, but on the other hand those who have the MSO say that the interface is much slower and clunkier than that of the DHO.

The possible battery use of the DHO is also a very strong point in its favor since many times I have to monitor CAN lines far from the AC line but with 24 volts easily available. 12 bits don't really interest me, they are not a decisive factor but it scares me a little that everyone says that the analog front end of the MSO is really very noisy (how much?), but sometimes people exaggerate in order to favor the brand that has been bought versus the one that the neighbor bought.

I'm really in doubt, clearly there are features that I find very attractive about both but I don't have the budget to buy both. That's why I'm "desperately" asking for opinions from those who have them.

Thank you very much for any opinion you can give me.

[Fungus]

I agree with you, what gives me doubts is that the MSO5000 has already been around for 5 years and I suspect that they will stop supporting it soon. In that sense, the DHO surely has more bugs but it has a more modern design, it will age more slowly.

The MSO5000 isn't going to stop working. They're not going to add more features to the DHO900.

What you see today is pretty much what you'll see five years from now.

I am very attracted to the 8GSa/s

Yep.

it scares me a little that everyone says that the analog front end of the MSO is really very noisy (how much?)

Doesn't matter for digital. Digital is all about timing and squareness of edges. Sample rate and bandwidth is king.

[NE666]

those who have the MSO say that the interface is much slower and clunkier than that of the DHO.

I have both the MSO5k and the DHO1000.  Sure, the 5k UI now looks a little dated as compared to that of the DHOs but I find it perfectly useable in absolute terms.  I don't perceive any lack of response, not to any significant degree.  And as it has already been said, the physical vertical controls I actually prefer, at least in my workflows.  It could be increased familiarity (I've had the 5k longer) but I actually find the 5k faster to use sometimes. YMMV.  The DHO screen is noticeably brighter, which is welcome but it's also significantly more reflective, so it's a mixed bag.

I initially bought the 5k rather than DHO, since I also am working predominantly in the digital/microcontroller domain.  My rationale being that the best bang for the buck comes from buying features you will benefit from e.g. significantly increased sample rate rather than those you won't e.g. 12-bit resolution.  Unless you're planning to work with small signal levels, the front-end noise argument is moot imho.

Also, you're likely younger than I am and may hence have better eyesight but - I'm glad I went with 9" and 10" screens respectively.  MSO operations with any significant number of channels on a 7" screen would be pushing it I think, at least for me.  You can, of course, always make use of the HDMI output on any of these machines but only if you want a monitor on your workbench too.

I'll add too that the reason I subsequently purchased the DHO was "because I can" and "it was cheap" (40% discount during Black Friday week) rather than needing to make up for any deficiency in the 5k.  It could still find it's way onto an auction site yet.

[UK]

Sorry for being off topic, but when we talk about only digital signals, bigger screens and dreaming about working from battery power... why not just grab a logic analyzer + tablet/laptop with the desired screen size, instead of this big heavy guy MSO5000?!

For example something like DSLogic U3Pro32 for half of the price of MSO5104.

[Tarloth]

Sorry for being off topic, but when we talk about only digital signals, bigger screens and dreaming about working from battery power... why not just grab a logic analyzer + tablet/laptop with the desired screen size, instead of this big heavy guy MSO5000?!

For example something like DSLogic U3Pro32 for half of the price of MSO5104.

UK, now I have a LA connected to a laptop. Decoding signals from the PC has many disadvantages for me, it is perfectly usable but not ideal. Among the disadvantages is that whenever I need to decode it is because I have to see signal degradation at the same time the error occurs, so then I have to use the external LA, the laptop and the oscilloscope and on top of that I see the analog signal on a screen and the digital decoded in another. I prefer to see all in the same screen in real time to see jitters for example.

Another issue is that essentially the laptop plus the LA costs more than the oscilloscope, it's not as compact, and I don't have all the other features of the oscilloscope on hand or its robustness. Laptops can be fragile in field conditions and those that aren't cost much more than an oscilloscope in this price range.

[Tarloth]

I have both the MSO5k and the DHO1000.  Sure, the 5k UI now looks a little dated as compared to that of the DHOs but I find it perfectly useable in absolute terms.  I don't perceive any lack of response, not to any significant degree.  And as it has already been said, the physical vertical controls I actually prefer, at least in my workflows.  It could be increased familiarity (I've had the 5k longer) but I actually find the 5k faster to use sometimes. YMMV.  The DHO screen is noticeably brighter, which is welcome but it's also significantly more reflective, so it's a mixed bag.

I initially bought the 5k rather than DHO, since I also am working predominantly in the digital/microcontroller domain.  My rationale being that the best bang for the buck comes from buying features you will benefit from e.g. significantly increased sample rate rather than those you won't e.g. 12-bit resolution.  Unless you're planning to work with small signal levels, the front-end noise argument is moot imho.

Also, you're likely younger than I am and may hence have better eyesight but - I'm glad I went with 9" and 10" screens respectively.  MSO operations with any significant number of channels on a 7" screen would be pushing it I think, at least for me.  You can, of course, always make use of the HDMI output on any of these machines but only if you want a monitor on your workbench too.

I'll add too that the reason I subsequently purchased the DHO was "because I can" and "it was cheap" (40% discount during Black Friday week) rather than needing to make up for any deficiency in the 5k.  It could still find it's way onto an auction site yet.

The same on this side, microcontrollers essentially and although lately I never monitor more than 4 or 5 lines at the same time, I perfectly understand what you indicate about the screen and it is one of the strong points of the MSO along with its much better bandwidth.

Now, a very important question, where did you get a 40% discount on DHO??? THANKS

[ebastler]

Now, a very important question, where did you get a 40% discount on DHO??? THANKS

Rigol Europe, Rigol North America and their local distributors are offering 40% on the DHO1000 series -- until tomorrow in Europe, apparently until December 4th in North America. Not sure whether you can get the same deal locally; Rigol NA's website says "US and Canada only".

[Tarloth]

Doesn't matter for digital. Digital is all about timing and squareness of edges. Sample rate and bandwidth is king.

Thanks Fungus!, I understand that digital noise surely does not influence signals of at least 0.7 volts in digital, but how much noise does your unit have on analog the front end? Less than 10mv? Many times I evaluate sensors and when the signal varies slowly I use a very good multimeter and that's it, but sometimes the signal that I need to it process cannot be followed by the multimeter obviously and I need to see it in the oscilloscope, which is why I am concerned about noise. I don't need 12 bits (they are very appreciated of course) and I don't need the noise to be in the microvolts range either, but I would be worried if it is greater than 10mv. In the forums I have read atrocities about the noise in the MSO, I don't know if it is due to malicious people, poor measurement or defective units.

Thanks in advance

[Tarloth]

Rigol Europe, Rigol North America and their local distributors are offering 40% on the DHO1000 series -- until tomorrow in Europe, apparently until December 4th in North America. Not sure whether you can get the same deal locally; Rigol NA's website says "US and Canada only".

I will buy in USA today! I'll check that discount right now, thanks!

EDIT: I just saw it, great price, but the DHO1000 series does not have a logic analyzer and I would prefer to integrate it. While it has more bandwidth than the 900 and a larger screen, it lacks a built-in signal generator too. The AWG of the MSO5000 or the DHO900 are not wonderful, especially when compared to higher budget instruments, but they are sufficient for me to evaluate signal adaptation circuits for sensors. It seems to me that the alternative is still the DHO900 or the MSO5074 (hacked of course). Thank you!

[Fungus]

Thanks Fungus!, I understand that digital noise surely does not influence signals of at least 0.7 volts in digital, but how much noise does your unit have on analog the front end? Less than 10mv?

It's not an absolute number, it's more like a percentage. Think of it as thick traces on screen.

How much noise that represents depends on your vertical scale.



There's features to mitigate it but they usually come with conditions, like needing a repeating signal and averaging several copies of it together ("waveform averaging" mode).

As noted earlier though, it's moot for digital work.

[tszaboo]

Rigol Europe, Rigol North America and their local distributors are offering 40% on the DHO1000 series -- until tomorrow in Europe, apparently until December 4th in North America. Not sure whether you can get the same deal locally; Rigol NA's website says "US and Canada only".

I will buy in USA today! I'll check that discount right now, thanks!

EDIT: I just saw it, great price, but the DHO1000 series does not have a logic analyzer and I would prefer to integrate it. While it has more bandwidth than the 900 and a larger screen, it lacks a built-in signal generator too. The AWG of the MSO5000 or the DHO900 are not wonderful, especially when compared to higher budget instruments, but they are sufficient for me to evaluate signal adaptation circuits for sensors. It seems to me that the alternative is still the DHO900 or the MSO5074 (hacked of course). Thank you!

Yep, the lack of AWG and LA really hurts those two families. Like what are you even supposed to do with a 2 channel scope alone? Cannot decode any serial protocol and see the results the same time. Siglent has this nice feature that you can connect an AWG to a scope with an USB cable and the scope will do Bode plot with it, Rigol, this is missing. It's only software. I don't see why would you buy that 12 bit scope, unless it's your 3rd scope or something.

[Tarloth]

Yep, the lack of AWG and LA really hurts those two families. Like what are you even supposed to do with a 2 channel scope alone? Cannot decode any serial protocol and see the results the same time. Siglent has this nice feature that you can connect an AWG to a scope with an USB cable and the scope will do Bode plot with it, Rigol, this is missing. It's only software. I don't see why would you buy that 12 bit scope, unless it's your 3rd scope or something.

I don't understand you tszaboo, sorry, my English is not good and I'm probably missing your point. The two oscilloscopes we are talking about have 4 channels and both have at least one AWG integrated (included in the cost, the MSO actually has two but both enabled by a hack). AWG in rigols have the same functionality of siglent that is external via USB and a added cost. I consider a disadvantage and external device that could be integrated inside the same device. Both have BODE analysis (with limitations in the DHO900 and apparently some bug) but from what I observe with the same functionalities as the siglent. It is true that the siglent has, according to the reviews, less noise than the MSO, but no less than the DHO900.

What would be your real point in favor of Siglent?

[Tarloth]

It's not an absolute number, it's more like a percentage. Think of it as thick traces on screen.

I see it, I have more noise in my old Agilent (rigol?), it's not relevant in digital signals.

There's features to mitigate it but they usually come with conditions, like needing a repeating signal and averaging several copies of it together ("waveform averaging" mode).

Yes, abussing from the 8GSa/s I can average 6 points and still has the same bandwidth of the DHO900

As noted earlier though, it's moot for digital work.

Agree, THANKS for help me

[tszaboo]

Yep, the lack of AWG and LA really hurts those two families. Like what are you even supposed to do with a 2 channel scope alone? Cannot decode any serial protocol and see the results the same time. Siglent has this nice feature that you can connect an AWG to a scope with an USB cable and the scope will do Bode plot with it, Rigol, this is missing. It's only software. I don't see why would you buy that 12 bit scope, unless it's your 3rd scope or something.

I don't understand you tszaboo, sorry, my English is not good and I'm probably missing your point. The two oscilloscopes we are talking about have 4 channels and both have at least one AWG integrated (included in the cost, the MSO actually has two but both enabled by a hack). AWG in rigols have the same functionality of siglent that is external via USB and a added cost. I consider a disadvantage and external device that could be integrated inside the same device. Both have BODE analysis (with limitations in the DHO900 and apparently some bug) but from what I observe with the same functionalities as the siglent. It is true that the siglent has, according to the reviews, less noise than the MSO, but no less than the DHO900.

What would be your real point in favor of Siglent?

I was talking about the DHO1072 and DHO1074.

[Tarloth]

I was talking about the DHO1072 and DHO1074.

Ahhhh, ok, yes, I don't dispute that the DHO1000 model has better analog characteristics than the 900, but I need the logic analyzer and to a lesser extent the signal generator, but I need both.

[Fungus]

Yes, abussing from the 8GSa/s I can average 6 points and still has the same bandwidth of the DHO900

The BIG weakness of the DHO900 is the sample rate when everything is turned on simultaneously. It's not enough.

This is the decider for me.

[Tarloth]

Yes, the bandwidth of the DHO900 is really disappointing, 2Gsa/s would calm my concern. 

I really think that the MSO5000 is a better oscilloscope, I have to decide in the next few hours so that a friend can buy it in the USA and bring it here to Argentina. I am saddened by the fact that at first what interested me most about the DHO914s is the possibility of using it on battery power to decode signals in the field.

Thanks to your information I was able to eliminate the ghosts read in the forums regarding the MSO5000, now unfortunately I have to choose between better bandwidth and portability.

Thank you all

[TELCO]

I'll think that the hobbyists will buy both an MSO5000 for the benchwork an d a relatively tested functionality and a DHO8/900 for its newness,12-bit and portability. Both scopes use the same LA-probe so that investment is shared.

That is exactly what I am going to do since I already own the MSO5K and I like the DHO900.