Scope upgrade for ~1500€

[nctnico]

Just this year Dave became aware of the memory management of deep memory scopes and struggled to get his head around the real power of a DSO, zooming in

No.. wrong: Zooming out! But that doesn't fit your narrative because Siglent is the only oscilloscope out there which can't zoom out despite having deep memory  And that again proves the point I made before: cheap gear but important features which improve productivity are missing.

Not heard of LeCroy ? Pico ?
Both leaders in their field.

Niche markets you mean.

[MaxZ]

Thanks again for all the input.

@2N3055
Considering Dave and the GW Insteks. I do recognize that his opinion and ways of using the scope aren't equal with mines. However, that doesn't imply that I have to disagree with him on every single point. I wasn't talking about the part where the menu is not at the place he's used to. I was talking about things like "strange lines and overshoots", "dots not being dots anymore", "strange bumps on the signal at certain display settings", ... Those things have nothing to do with his preference for Keysight. And I don't think that "it's not their newest scope" is a justification for any of those things either. However I do want to know if GW Instek fixed those issues or if Dave did anything wrong (without me noticing it) that caused them.

Other things: "hit a button to open another menu with only a single button", where I totally agree with Dave that that button does not require a whole extra menu. Consistency in UI design is a good thing except for the cases where it only makes life harder. This is one of them IMO. I also agree with Dave that a dark grey/black font on a dark blue background is shitty to read (and completely unecessary). Even in your video about the newer scopes they still do it for some texts. This means that even after 7 more years they still don't know about things like minimum contrast in UI design. Also, monospaced, serifed fonts? Really...? Maybe they fix bugs within weeks as @nctnico says, which would be great. But apparently they stopped fixing anything UI related 30 years ago. They may have added stuff, like buttons with Sans Serif fonts but instead bringing the rest up to date, too, they still have the same monospaced 1990 looking menus, the same 1990 color set that doesn't even work everywhere (dark on dark).
I guess when I continue to watch the video the list will grow further. Again, if this is completely pointless for you, that's okay. It's not for me. IMO a UI should help the user, making its work as easy and comfortable as possible. It shouldn't be a necessary evil.

To sum up: as long as their scopes look like this I won't like their look for sure. But I do want to check out what they are capable of in practice (thx for the video) and maybe that compensates for the UI. I shall see.
Btw: I dont think I have to decide between "good features/hardware" and "ergonomics". I don't think that GW Instek can't change a font or a font color without making the scope worse, etc. You can have both. At least the scopes I originally considered archieved this.

@tautech, @nctnico:
I've read that discussion in the Siglent thread. For me, both concepts have their pros and cons. Siglents/LeCroys/Picos/... concept certainly is interesting and not per se a bad idea. But I also understand that users that had any other scope brand won't like it because it's not what they're used or simply not what helps them doing their job. And that's legit, too. Especially @tautech: "Yeah but he stabbed me, too" "Other companies (don't) listen to their customers, too" - that kind of argument is no justification for anything. Especially since I highly doubt that it's the zoom convention that made LeCroy a "leader" as you say. Every position in a discussion will for sure find examples of other people, companies, minorities and majorities that had the same good or bad idea.
To me it seems like there are cases where either concept shines, and cases where either concept is unpractical. Additionally it's become clear that forcing everyone to do it in the Siglent way pisses off quite a few people. For both reasons I genuinely think Siglent should give them the choice. Put a switch somewhere in a menu to let the user decide what zoom concept fits him best and make everyone happy. Siglent seems to listen to their customers in quite a few points, so why not in this one.

@Martin72:
I dont know what defines an A or B brand and I think it doesn't help at making a reasonable choice. To me it sounds rather like "pay for the name, not for the functionality" etc.
Considering bugfixes: I don't want a scope that requires quick bugfixes or even worse, bugfixes on a regular base. Nonetheless I do appreciate if the manufacturer fixes "important" bugs quickly.

@Fungus:
Yes I could get the entry level Keysight scope. But what benefit would it offer me compared to any other scope on the list (and in particular: compared to a used MSOX3000)?


Kind regards,
Max

[nctnico]

Thanks again for all the input.

@2N3055
Considering Dave and the GW Insteks. I do recognize that his opinion and ways of using the scope aren't equal with mines. However, that doesn't imply that I have to disagree with him on every single point. I wasn't talking about the part where the menu is not at the place he's used to. I was talking about things like "strange lines and overshoots", "dots not being dots anymore", "strange bumps on the signal at certain display settings", ... Those things have nothing to do with his preference for Keysight. And I don't think that "it's not their newest scope" is a justification for any of those things either. However I do want to know if GW Instek fixed those issues or if Dave did anything wrong (without me noticing it) that caused them.

GW Instek has fixed those issues.

[Fungus]

@Fungus:
Yes I could get the entry level Keysight scope. But what benefit would it offer me compared to any other scope on the list (and in particular: compared to a used MSOX3000)?

It obviously has benefits for Dave. 

Dave likes it because it's the 'scope that never slows down no matter how much you throw at it, it's the 'scope for engineers who know the math, it speaks his language and does things the way he expects. Some might say it doesn't have much memory, and that's true, but it has a few tricks up its sleeve and seems to get the job done anyway.

(Some might say that "Deep memory" is a FUD term thrown around by salesmen, there's some truth in that, too, and I can remember those exact same salesmen saying so when the Rigol DS1054Z appeared with a lot more memory than their models had at the time)

Me? I'd probably get the GW-Instek because:
* I know it's technically good (electronically and mathematically)
* I'm sure all the features will work properly and there won't be much it can't do
* It has a separate button for menu selections (no pushing of the twisty knob)
* Separate vertical controls for each channel (no messing about with multiplexed buttons).
* Fast and responsive

That's a personal choice though.


Now excuse me, my new oscilloscope just arrived. I've an unboxing to do... 

[Fungus]

Just this year Dave became aware of the memory management of deep memory scopes and struggled to get his head around the real power of a DSO, zooming in

No.. wrong: Zooming out!

Yep. It's not normal to work on zoomed-out data, you certainly don't set up triggering when you're zoomed out and can barely see the individual waves.

The main benefit of deep memory is searching for infrequent events and not being able to zoom out when you find something really disrupts the workflow.

But that doesn't fit your narrative because Siglent is the only oscilloscope out there which can't zoom out despite having deep memory  And that again proves the point I made before: cheap gear but important features which improve productivity are missing.

Word.

[tautech]

Especially @tautech: "Yeah but he stabbed me, too" "Other companies (don't) listen to their customers, too" - that kind of argument is no justification for anything. Especially since I highly doubt that it's the zoom convention that made LeCroy a "leader" as you say. Every position in a discussion will for sure find examples of other people, companies, minorities and majorities that had the same good or bad idea.
To me it seems like there are cases where either concept shines, and cases where either concept is unpractical. Additionally it's become clear that forcing everyone to do it in the Siglent way pisses off quite a few people. For both reasons I genuinely think Siglent should give them the choice. Put a switch somewhere in a menu to let the user decide what zoom concept fits him best and make everyone happy. Siglent seems to listen to their customers in quite a few points, so why not in this one.

Pleased to see you have really been doing some study yet not everyone understands there are different memory management philosophies in different brands. For some this is HW choice driven and others the emphasis is on analysis where the larger the capture the better.
With just 1500 Euro available the SDS2104X Plus is leader in this class for mem depth and to utilise this memory fully just the understanding of how best to do it and minor changes to workflow are needed.

However only the buyer can decide what specs are required and make a feature choice that best suits their needs yet do so with the knowledge scope usage may not be what they are accustomed to.
Since scopes were invented none have ever worked the same yet all can produce the same result in an apples vs apples test.
Proposals have been put to Siglent to change their long standing 'LeCroy/Pico capture philosophy' however last I heard it was not considered high priority but that was some months ago and with new SDS2000X Plus firmware not far away we might have a surprise coming or not. IDK.

LeCroy and Pico are leaders in their specialty fields and if LeCroy can build a 100+ GHz DSO that topped HPAK's efforts until recently they are worthy of great respect.

[Fungus]

@Fungus:
Yes I could get the entry level Keysight scope. But what benefit would it offer me compared to any other scope on the list (and in particular: compared to a used MSOX3000)?

It obviously has benefits for Dave. 

Let's do a car analogy... 

There's no "correct" car to buy. Some people want pickup trucks, some people want a two-seater sports car, some people want something cheap and small to go around town and do the shopping ... and a whole bunch of stuff in between.

We can all agree on which models are stinkers but nobody has an answer as to what's "best". There's happy car owners in every category.

Your problems are that:
a) You don't know what category you're in because you don't know the world of oscilloscopes. The only answer would be to have them all and try them, but that's not possible.
b) You're asking in a place which is full of bias and conflicting interests (ie. fanboys and sales reps for particular brands).

[Fungus]

Pleased to see you have really been doing some study yet not everyone understands there are different memory management philosophies in different brands. For some this is HW choice driven and others the emphasis is on analysis where the larger the capture the better.

There is no reason not to capture the full memory when you press "stop" or when you do a single-shot trigger. None.

Only a few posts ago you were going on about the benefits of "deep memory", yet ... here's a Siglent that isn't using it all.

[tautech]

Pleased to see you have really been doing some study yet not everyone understands there are different memory management philosophies in different brands. For some this is HW choice driven and others the emphasis is on analysis where the larger the capture the better.

There is no reason not to capture the full memory when you press "stop" or when you do a single-shot trigger. None.

Only a few posts ago you were going on about the benefits of "deep memory", yet ... here's a Siglent that isn't using it all.

Oh FFS Fungus, go play with your new scope instead of rambling on about nothing or something you think you see.

[Fungus]

Oh FFS Fungus, go play with your new scope instead of rambling on about nothing or something you think you see.

The emperor goes naked by choice. 

[2N3055]

I think forum would be 50 % smaller if 3 of you didn't do this all time.....

[Mr. Scram]

I think forum would be 50 % smaller if 3 of you didn't do this all time.....

"A Siglent shill, a GW-Instek fanboy and a Rigol adept log in" sounds like the start of a joke. I guess it is a joke, except no one's laughing.

[Mr. Scram]

Yep, with that budget you could get a Keysight DSOX1204G.

https://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Keysight-DSOX1204G.html

It's EEVBLOG Dave's favorite oscilloscope.

A good used 2000X is within reach. Aiming for a 3000X is optimistic, but becomes more likely with a budget increase.

[Martin72]

Yep, with that budget you could get a Keysight DSOX1204G.
https://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Keysight-DSOX1204G.html

What are the benefits against the scopes mentioned before ?
Smaller screen, smaller memory ?
Comparing to the MSO5000 (bigger screen (9" instead 7",higher resolution, touchable), 2-ch AWG, max 200M memory, max 350Mhz (etc, etc), it losts in every way and is more expensive.

[jemangedeslolos]

I think forum would be 50 % smaller if 3 of you didn't do this all time.....

"A Siglent shill, a GW-Instek fanboy and a Rigol adept log in" sounds like the start of a joke. I guess it is a joke, except no one's laughing.

I have one Siglent, one Rigol and one Gw Instek ( an old one )
In which category am I classified? 

[jemangedeslolos]

However, while reading you, I think my scopes are faulty because they don't crash, I get to work with them and create high-end products and make money.
Do I have to return my devices for replacement? That worries me 

[Mr. Scram]

What are the benefits against the scopes mentioned before ?
Smaller screen, smaller memory ?
Comparing to the MSO5000 (bigger screen (9" instead 7",higher resolution, touchable), 2-ch AWG, max 200M memory, max 350Mhz (etc, etc), it losts in every way and is more expensive.

It's a more basic but a mature oscilloscope. The features are solid and it's a pleasure to use due to the ASIC. Both line up with MaxZ's preference for well executed features and convenience. The Chinese options tend to come with more features and options but are also typically more hit and miss. The interface lag on the Rigol is fairly atrocious which is fine for many, but means a no go for others. It really depends on what you value, need and can afford. I'd probably recommend looking at one of its bigger brothers instead of the 1000X though.

[Mr. Scram]

I have one Siglent, one Rigol and one Gw Instek ( an old one )
In which category am I classified? 

Well, which one do you post compulsively obsessively about in every single oscilloscope thread to the point of people loathing the sight of your nickname? That category.

[Martin72]

However, while reading you, I think my scopes are faulty because they don't crash, I get to work with them and create high-end products and make money.
Do I have to return my devices for replacement? That worries me 

Yeah, reading here how terrible all it was and then returning to the bench and wonder, you could turn your scope on...

[nctnico]

I think forum would be 50 % smaller if 3 of you didn't do this all time.....

"A Siglent shill, a GW-Instek fanboy and a Rigol adept log in" sounds like the start of a joke. I guess it is a joke, except no one's laughing.

That is because the Keysight lover entered the room. Nothing to be happy about that because these guys have  such a short memory that they incapable of remembering jokes 

[Fungus]

I think forum would be 50 % smaller if 3 of you didn't do this all time.....

"A Siglent shill, a GW-Instek fanboy and a Rigol adept log in" sounds like the start of a joke. I guess it is a joke, except no one's laughing.

I have one Siglent, one Rigol and one Gw Instek ( an old one )
In which category am I classified? 

My new oscilloscope isn't a Rigol. Which one is me?

[nctnico]

I think forum would be 50 % smaller if 3 of you didn't do this all time.....

"A Siglent shill, a GW-Instek fanboy and a Rigol adept log in" sounds like the start of a joke. I guess it is a joke, except no one's laughing.

I have one Siglent, one Rigol and one Gw Instek ( an old one )
In which category am I classified? 

My new oscilloscope isn't a Rigol. Which one is me?

Same here. There are very few (maybe 1 or 2) digital oscilloscope brands I have not owned or used but somehow I'm always drawn to Tektronix. Maybe Tautech is the secret Rigol admirer?

[Martin72]

My new oscilloscope isn't a Rigol. Which one is me?

An A or B Brand ? 

[Mr. Scram]

That is because the Keysight lover entered the room. Nothing to be happy about that because these guys have  such a short memory that they incapable of remembering jokes 

That's the thing, isn't it? There are a few people here who can't distinguish between normal conversation and endlessly obsessive disfunctional behaviour. They think anyone else is how they are and what they're doing somehow normal. I don't think you understand how fed up most people here are with thread after thread being barfed full of the same inane drivel. Any sensible discussion is long gone because the sensible people quickly move on. There's a wealth of knowledge which won't partake in these conversations because of the bad behaviour of a few. What's left is the same hot garbage we see in every thread. Newcomers in turn are missing out both because a lot of knowledge is absent and because they're actively fed FUD. Not to mention their first Eevblog experience is by far the worst one to be had. It's like a toxic moat keeping people out.

I don't know why Dave puts up with it, but maybe he's decided his time is more valuable. If it were up to me the two or three usual suspects would've been booted long ago. Any useful posts are swamped by an avalanche of disappointment and bile.

[jemangedeslolos]

That is because the Keysight lover entered the room. Nothing to be happy about that because these guys have  such a short memory that they incapable of remembering jokes 

That's the thing, isn't it? There are a few people here who can't distinguish between normal conversation and endlessly obsessive disfunctional behaviour. They think anyone else is how they are and what they're doing somehow normal. I don't think you understand how fed up most people here are with thread after thread being barfed full of the same inane drivel. Any sensible discussion is long gone because the sensible people quickly move on. There's a wealth of knowledge which won't partake in these conversations because of the bad behaviour of a few. What's left is the same hot garbage we see in every thread. Newcomers in turn are missing out both because a lot of knowledge is absent and because they're actively fed FUD. Not to mention their first Eevblog experience is by far the worst one to be had. It's like a toxic moat keeping people out.

I don't know why Dave puts up with it, but maybe he's decided his time is more valuable. If it were up to me the two or three usual suspects would've been booted long ago. Any useful posts are swamped by an avalanche of disappointment and bile.

You will find the same behavior in all forums, in all areas.

There has been for years a war between Microchip VS Atmel ( It's very funny now by the way ).
Intel VS AMD
ATI VS NVIDIA
Windows VS Linux
gasoline VS diesel
Android VS IOS
[...]