Author Topic: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread  (Read 35469 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« on: January 23, 2024, 08:33:24 am »
A revised summary of this thread together with some new content in a PDF can be found here:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5422823/#msg5422823
----------

I have decided to evaluate the SDS824X HD and will post the results here.

Why the 800 and not the 1000X HD?

Well, I suppose the SDS800X HD to be the most popular offer for hobbyists and small businesses in Siglent’s lineup, eventually replacing the successful SDS1000X-E series.
Even though there are some differences, most of that are comfort features (except for the 50 ohm inputs), hence the SDS800X HD test results should be largely valid for the SDS1000X HD as well.

I’ve once listed the obvious differences between SDS800X HD and SDS1000X HD here (reply #45):

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-just-drop-its-mic-new-sds800hd-12bit-scope-crazy-price-leaked/msg5212773/#msg5212773

In the meantime I have a confirmed list of differences:

-SDS800X HD has no external trigger input.
-Only the 200 MHz SDS800X HD have 100 Mpts memory, the lower models have only 50 Mpts.
-SDS800X HD has no 50 ohm inputs.
-SDS800X HD doesn’t have the higher quality encoders with indents
-SDS800X HD has less serial protocols: CAN-FD and FlexRay are missing.
-SDS800X HD has only 2 USB host ports.
-SDS800X HD has only 7” capacitive touch screen, but at the same resolution 1024 x 600.
-SDS800X HD doesn’t support probe factor detection.
-SDS800X HD doesn’t support Tektronix Mode.
-SDS800X HD doesn’t support Advanced Measurements Display Mode M2.
-SDS800X HD doesn’t support Measurement Histograms Secondary Zoom.
-SDS800X HD has no RTC.

+SDS800X HD supports NTP.

The first impression was very positive. The instrument feels solid, the display appears a bit small, especially for someone used to the 10.1” screens of the 2000 series, yet the resolution is the same and it’s bright and crisp.

Operation feels snappy, it appears to be (at least) on par with the SDS2000X Plus/HD series in this regard.

The fan noise is about the same as in the SDS1104X-E, thus it can be slightly annoying and users will have something to optimize 😉

Boot time is less than 40 seconds.

And sorry, no, I haven’t tried to install a web browser or PDF reader or play doom on it, even though I know that these might be the most important features for some 😉

Now that these trivialities are out of the way, let’s have a look at the performance – and I have to state in advance that there is a lot of progress when compared to the trusty 1000X-E series – it’s almost a completely different world.


Table of Content

This posting
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/

1.   Bandwidth
2.   Pulse Response

Reply #1
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293744/#msg5293744

1.   Noise & Spurs
2.   Vertical Zoom Demo

Reply #2
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293747/#msg5293747

1.   History & Sequence Mode
2.   Counting Pulses
3.   Trigger Jitter

Reply #3
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293750/#msg5293750

1.   Measurements
2.   Measurement Histograms
3.   Vertical Axis Labels
4.   DC Check
5.   Counter

Reply #4
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293753/#msg5293753

1.   AC Trigger Coupling
2.   Triggering noisy signals

Reply #5
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293756/#msg5293756

1.   Deep Measurements
2.   Probe Bandwidth

Reply #6
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293759/#msg5293759

1.   Poor Men’s Differential Probing
2.   Distortion measurements

Reply #7
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293762/#msg5293762

1.   Digital Channels

Reply #8
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293765/#msg5293765

1.   Measurements 2 (Trend/Track)
2.   FFT Dynamic range

Reply #9
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293771/#msg5293771

1.   True Vertical Sensitivity
2.   Peak Detect
3.   Bode Plot at a glance

Reply #58
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5332358/#msg5332358

1.   Bode Plot Example

Reply #63
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5335604/#msg5335604

1.   SPI Speed Test

Reply #65
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5335802/#msg5335802

1.   The 200 Mbps SPI challenge

Reply #67
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5338655/#msg5338655

1.   Mask Test

Reply #68
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5341157/#msg5341157

1.   Zoom Expectations

Reply #72
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5343827/#msg5343827

1.   Serial Decoders

Reply #73
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5346977/#msg5346977

1.   Cursors

Reply #74
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5351024/#msg5351024

1.   System Performance with SP5050A Probe

Reply #80
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5354024/#msg5354024

1.   Custom Probe Factors

Reply #82
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5357321/#msg5357321

1.   Dots Mode

Reply #90
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5360858/#msg5360858

1.   X-Y

Reply #150
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5373095/#msg5373095

1.   Identity

Reply #155
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5373974/#msg5373974

1.   Noise Density

Reply #160
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5377403/#msg5377403

1.   Noise density 2

Reply #167
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5380811/#msg5380811

1.   Granular Noise

Reply #180
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5384846/#msg5384846

1.   HAM Test

Reply #199
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5389646/#msg5389646

1.   Fun with Square Waves

Reply #214
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5392730/#msg5392730

1.   Zoom Challenge

Reply #234
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5396741/#msg5396741

1.   FFT-Setup
2.   FFT Window Functions


Bandwidth

Let’s start with the bandwidth. We would like to get the specified bandwidth even with all channels active, yet we do not want to deal with excessive aliasing. 

At first, one single channel at 2 GSa/s:


SDS824X_HD_FR_2GSa_log

Amplitude drop at 200 MHz is less than 2 dB and actual -3 dB bandwidth is 244 MHz. Frequency response is even a tad better when two channels are in use at 1 GSa/s:


SDS824X_HD_FR_1GSa_log

Amplitude drop at 200 MHz is <1.8 dB and actual -3 dB bandwidth is 245 MHz. Finally we look at all four channels in use at only 500 MSa/s:


SDS824X_HD_FR_500MSa_log

Now the bandwidth is actually limited to the advertised 200 MHz.


Pulse Response

For all these tests, a 10 MHz square wave with 1 ns rise time has been fed into cannel 4.

Lets start with single channel mode and 2 GSa/s:


SDS824X_HD_PR_2GSa_Zoom_Stop

In stop mode, we get a clear picture of the imperfections of the pulse top even when zoomed in 20x (main window: 100 mV/div, zoom: 5 mV/div). The rise time measurements yield the expected result of ~1.8 ns, which corresponds to 1.5 ns rise time for the SDS824X HD. This is well below the specified 1.8 ns for the 200 MHz model.

In Run mode we can see some modulation because of noise, yet nothing that could not be cured by averaging using a math trace:


SDS824X_HD_PR_2GSa_Zoom_Avg16

In case you wonder why the imperfections of the pulse top are so pronounced in the previous screenshot, this is simply the price we pay for less than perfect impedance matching when using a scope that lacks 50 ohm inputs. External termination is always a compromise working reasonably well up to 70 MHz at best. Fast edges like the 1 ns rise time in this example occupy 600 MHz bandwidth. The output impedance of the pulse generator isn’t perfect 50 ohms either, and both phenomena combined lead to reflections showing up in the first ~16 ns of the pulse.

Of course it can be demonstrated, how better impedance matching improves things. For this I’ve used a quality 18 GHz cable with two 10 dB 18 GHz Narda in-line attenuators (one at each end) to ensure sufficient attenuation for any reflections between generator and DSO. Because of the 20 dB attenuation in total, I had to increase the generator output level by 20 dB as well. This would have been 6 V amplitude, but at that level, it’s rise time is limited to min. 1.2 ns, hence I made do with just 3 V and increased the DSO sensitivity to 50 mV/div, in order to still get the 1 ns rise time:


SDS824X_HD_PR_2GSa_Zoom_Avg16_Match

With two active channels, the sample rate drops to 1 GSa/s:


SDS824X_HD_PR_1GSa

The overshoot is more pronounced now (probably because of additional AA-filtering), yet rise time measurements haven’t changed.

With four active channels, the sample rate drops to only 500 MSa/s:


SDS824X_HD_PR_500MSa

We can see hints on slight reconstruction errors together with rather pronounced Gibbs ears. Rise time measurement is off by hefty 27%, so we can safely state that this configuration is not fit for characterizing pulses with <2 ns rise time.

With a signal rise time of 2ns we can measure 2.6 ns: assuming 1.5 ns rise time for the SDS824X HD, this measurement now is only ~5% off and should be acceptable already. Furthermore, we can use Dots mode to get rid of any reconstruction errors:


SDS824X_HD_PR_500MSa_2ns_Dots

« Last Edit: April 01, 2024, 10:10:24 am by Performa01 »
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #1 on: January 23, 2024, 08:34:33 am »
Noise & Spurs

This is a demonstration of the noise with all channels active, where the bandwidth is limited to true 200 MHz.

The noise is shown for various conditions:

Ch.1: input open, 200 MHz bandwidth;
Ch.2: input open, 20 MHz bandwidth;
Ch.3: input 50 ohm terminated, 200 MHz bandwidth;
Ch.4: input 50 ohm terminated, 20 MHz bandwidth;

Because of the pronounced 1/f characteristic of the frontend noise below about 300 kHz, the results strongly depend on the lower bandwidth limit. Let’s start with 100 kHz:


SDS824X_HD_Noise_100kHz-200MHz_4Ch

Compare this with 10 kHz lower bandwidth limit:


SDS824X_HD_Noise_10kHz-200MHz_4Ch

1 kHz lower bandwidth limit:


SDS824X_HD_Noise_1kHz-200MHz_4Ch

Finally 200 Hz lower bandwidth limit:


SDS824X_HD_Noise_200Hz-200MHz_4Ch

Here you can see the noise characteristic up to 25 MHz at a RBW of ~90 Hz. In order to prevent aliasing taking effect, the noise measurement has been done of a 20 MHz bandwidth limited input channel. Since this bandwidth limiter is only first order, a digital 30 MHz lowpass filter has been added.


SDS824X_HD_Noise_20Hz-25MHz_4Ch_F30M

The Noise characteristic is a combination of the 1/f noise of the MOSFET input buffer in the HF path and the FET OpAmp in the LF path, which is fed with a heavily attenuated signal that has to be amplified again before the recombination of both paths.

We can clearly see this in the previous screenshot:
At 300 kHz, the measured noise level is -150.894 dBV, this corresponds to a noise density of just 3 nV/√Hz at a RBW of 89 Hz. The following table shows the complete measurements:

300 kHz:   -150.894 dBV    3.0 nV/√Hz
100 kHz:   -144.227 dBV    6.5 nV/√Hz
 30 kHz:   -135.927 dBV   16.9 nV/√Hz
 10 kHz:   -125.303 dBV   57.5 nV/√Hz
  3 kHz:   -116.034 dBV  167.2 nV/√Hz
  1 kHz:   -111.083 dBV  295.6 nV/√Hz
300 Hz:    -111.665 dBV  276.5 nV/√Hz
100 Hz:    -108.281 dBV  408.2 nV/√Hz

At 10 MHz, the noise density has dropped to about 2.4 nV/√Hz.

Finally let’s have a look at the spurious signals (CH.4, 50 ohm termination, 20 MHz bandwidth limit):


SDS824X_HD_Spurs_200Hz-200MHz_4Ch

The Peaks List shows the 10 strongest spurious signals, where all are at or below 1 µVrms, except for a single spur at 1.14155 MHz, which is 3.85 µVrms. This is exceptionally good, especially in this class.


Vertical Zoom Demo

Vertical zoom can suffer from noise, if high zoom factors are used. Some demonstrations use bandwidth limits to reduce noise when zooming in. It is in the responsibility of the user then to make sure that no relevant high frequency detail gets lost by this.

In general, the question remains: what if we need to look at higher frequencies? A 200 MHz 12-bit DSO should be able to demonstrate a resolution advantage with 200 MHz bandwidth signals just as well…

Here is the signal mix: a 1 MHz 600 mVpp sine with a 200 MHz 10 mVpp sine riding on it:


SDS824X_HD_VZ10x_Run

I’ve chosen straight 10 mV/div for the zoom window, i.e. a ten times magnification. The superimposed waveform is a little noisy, yet clearly visible.

This is run mode. In stop mode, we can see that all the noise is just modulation and lowering the bandwidth wouldn’t help anyway:


SDS824X_HD_VZ10x_Stop

In stop mode we basically get a clean waveform with some distortion. Yet this is just 12 bits without any additional tricks.

We can use the average math function to get rid of the modulation:


SDS824X_HD_VZ10x_Avg16

16 times average (Math trace F1) is enough to get the waveform pretty clean even in run mode. The implicit resolution enhancement of this measure is 4 bits, so that the DSO is effectively working with 16 bit data now.

« Last Edit: January 25, 2024, 06:37:56 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, hansibull, ZigmundRat, 2N3055, Mortymore, ch_scr, Martin72, orzel, Serg65536, LuisBe, chillidog

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #2 on: January 23, 2024, 08:35:34 am »
History & Sequence Mode

Inspired by the complaint here:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-hdo1000-and-hdo4000-12bit-oscilloscopes-launched-in-china/msg5269170/#msg5269170

I’ve tried to replicate the test scenario described by forum member Egonotto, which is a fairly moderate one. For this, the SDS800X HD doesn’t need any special mode; the always active background history can handle that:


SDS824X_HD_5ms_Hist

The test signal is a burst packet, 20 µs long, consisting of 100 pulses. The repetition interval (burst period) was 5 ms for this test.

At 5 µs/div, the SDS824X HD takes an average of 650 µs/frame and a maximum of <2 ms/frame. The screenshot shows the History List displaying the time delta between the packets. It is 5 ms throughout, with the occasional 4.999 ms because of the not so accurate timebase of the SDS800 (25 ppm vs. 1 ppm in the SDS2000X Plus/HD series).

For event recording, we’d rather use the dedicated Sequence mode. This provides a constant 52 µs/trigger @ 5 µs/div, hence can capture a burst period of 100 µs without a single missing frame:


SDS824X_HD_100us_Seq

The screenshot shows the History List displaying the time delta between the packets. It is 100 µs throughout, with the occasional 99 µs because of the not so accurate timebase of the SDS800.

For complete information, here are my measurements for the trigger rates during normal use with vector and dots display mode as well as sequence recording from the fastest timebase of 1 ns/div up to 100 µs/div.


SDS824X HD Trigger rate


Counting Pulses

This is a demonstration of the pulse count function. As further refinement, gated measurements can be used in order to ignore unwanted portions of the record.

First the basic pulse measurement without any bells and whistles; a 100 MHz pulse packet with 1 ns rise time and 1000000 pulses is fed into Ch.4


SDS824X_HD_Pulsecount

The scope registers the correct number of one million positive pulses. The negative pulse count naturally delivers the same number minus one. Together with the peak to peak deviation of zero over >100 acquisitions it is obvious that the pulse count is spot on.

Let’s add a measurement gate. We define it to start 1.0 ms after the trigger point and to be 5 ms wide:


SDS824X_HD_Pulsecnt_Gate

We now get a count of ~500k (100 MHz x 0.005 sec.) as expected. The count is a little higher because of the limited accuracy of the timebase in the SDS800.

We can engage the zoom view for a closer inspection of the waveform:


SDS824X_HD_Pulsecnt_Gate_Zoom

We can still see the gating cursors in the main window, but the detailed view with time data is in the zoom window now. Since the “B” cursor exceeds the size of the zoom window, it is drawn at the right border and the time specification of 6.00 ms is another hint that it is outside the zoom window, which is only 100 ns wide.

The gating cursors are fully independent, consequently we can still add regular cursors (manual/tracking/measurement):


SDS824X_HD_Pulsecnt_Gate_Zoom_Cursors

With all these information, screen gets a bit busy, but we could also use the traditional info block for the regular cursors and place it at the least disturbing spot:


SDS824X_HD_Pulsecnt_Gate_Zoom_Cursors2


Trigger Jitter

The datasheet specifies the trigger jitter as <100 ps. This doesn’t sound great, considering the SDS2000X HD, where the specification is <10 ps RMS (and it has been measured as 2.02 ps actually).

Now let’s measure this using a 200 MHz sine signal from an OCXO-driven AWG (SDG7102A), fed into channels 2 and 4 of the SDS824X HD via a 12.4 GHz resistive power splitter. This way we can observe the jitter in the trigger channel as well as a not triggered channel.

The high quality 200 MHz sine signal has been chosen for its fast edges and low inherent jitter – after all we want to characterize the DSO and not the signal source.

We need to utilize a measurement gate, because for some unknown reason the T@M measurement considers all rising edges in the record, whereas we only want to measure the first one.


SDS824X_HD_Trigger Jitter

At a timebase of 1 ns/div, we cannot see any jitter in the triggered as well as the non-triggered channel after more than 10 minutes at infinite persistence.

The jitter measurements are as follows:
Triggered channel: 28.6 ps pk-pk, 4.852 ps rms;
Un-triggered channel: 28.9 ps pk-pk, 4.652 ps rms;
Skew Ch.2-Ch.4: 20.9 ps pk-pk, 3.39 ps rms;

While this is about twice as much as the SDS2000X HD, it is still very respectable and miles ahead of older designs with analog trigger system (none of Siglent’s X and A series).

« Last Edit: January 24, 2024, 06:19:14 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, ZigmundRat, 2N3055, Mortymore, ch_scr, Martin72, orzel, Serg65536, LuisBe, chillidog

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #3 on: January 23, 2024, 08:36:11 am »
Measurements

There are the simple measurements, where we can define an arbitrary set of up to all 52 measurements that are related to a single channel. This set can subsequently be applied to any Input-, Zoom-, Math- or Reference-Channel. That’s also one disadvantage of the simple measurements – it’s restricted to a single channel. The other drawback is the total lack of statistics in this mode.


SDS824X_HD_Measure_Simple_Embedded

A high number of measurements might be desirable at times, yet it takes up a lot of screen space. Siglent has now introduced a new display option for measurements; “Floating”:


SDS824X_HD_Measure_Simple_Floating

This is a transparent overlay which might help to better utilize the screen space in certain situations.

We also got the Advanced Measurements., but unfortunately only mode A; mode B is available only in its bigger (and more expensive) siblings:


SDS824X_HD_Measure_Advanced_Embedded

We can have statistics and also enable the little Histicons (History Icons) as in the screenshot above, we can also mix various channels, yet we are restricted to only 5 measurements at a time.

We can have floating measurements in this mode as well, yet it might be a good idea to turn the axis labels off to avoid text collisions:


SDS824X_HD_Measure_Advanced_Floating


Measurement Histograms

The small Histicons in the advanced measurements statistics can be enlarged by simply clicking or tapping on them. This opens a separate window with a more detailed version of the histogram. The last measurement result is marked by a small red dot in the histogram, so one can watch the build up of the histogram even when there is already a lot of data collected and histogram bars don’t visibly change anymore.


SDS824X_HD_Measure_Advanced_Histogram


Vertical axis labels

The new kids in town like the SDS800X HD also bring new features: apart from the logarithmic frequency axis for the FFT, as demonstrated in the noise measurements, we also got a selectable vertical label position.


SDS824X_HD_VLabel_left


SDS824X_HD_VLabel_right


SDS824X_HD_VLabel_center


DC Check

One of the advantages of a 12 bit DSO should be not only high resolution, but also good accuracy. The SDS800X HD has a typical error of 0.5% at vertical gain settings from 5 mV/div up to 10 V/div, thus entering 3.5 digit DMM territory.

Here is a quick check with a 300 mV DC “signal”:


SDS824X_HD_DC_300mV

The error in this measurement is <0.13%. Mean and RMS measurements show pretty much the same result, as expected.


Counter

The SDS800X HD does not provide a DMM, but it has at least the Counter application. It can be used as a frequency counter or totalizer. I don’t see much use in the frequency counting function, chiefly because the automatic measurements can do exactly the same – and even on more than one channel at a time – and then we have the always visible 7 digit trigger frequency counter on top of that (I wouldn’t ever want a scope without that feature!).

But the Counter is still not totally useless, as it can also be configured as gated totalizer:


SDS824X_HD_Totalizer_Gated

Channel 3 is fed with a 1 ms wide pulse as a gating signal, channel 4 is connected to a 10 MHz sine source. Consequently, a single shot acquisition results in 10000 hits = 10 khits. This is deadly accurate because both signals come from the same AWG, hence both signals are derived from the same OCXO (whose accuracy is irrelevant in this application, yet is specified <100 ppb)

Other than the pulse counts in the measurements, the counting process can be controlled by an external signal.

EDIT: Section "Measurement Histograms" added.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2024, 10:42:45 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: tautech, Mortymore, ch_scr, Martin72, LuisBe, chillidog

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #4 on: January 23, 2024, 08:36:51 am »
AC Trigger Coupling

Most of us use DC coupling for the trigger almost all the time, and there is not much to talk about it, other than that it works just as it should. We rather want to examine AC trigger coupling now.

Why and when would we need AC coupling for the trigger at all? Usually, we make that choice for the channel input and if we select AC coupling there, the trigger will inevitably be AC coupled as well. So there we already have the answer – we have the opportunity to force the trigger into AC coupling, even when the corresponding input channel is DC coupled. This can be useful for AC signals that have a DC offset that we want to watch on the screen. The offset might change with time and we still don’t want to lose triggering.

AC trigger coupling does not display a trigger level indicator, simply because it would need to closely follow even a fast-changing signal offset, thus might be rather distracting instead of beneficial.

The following test uses a 200 mVpp 100 ns wide pulse at 1 MHz repetition frequency that is superimposed on a 600mVpp sine wave at 100mHz, which acts as a variable DC offset here. As if this weren’t enough, this signal has a fixed DC offset of -6V on top of that, which needs to be removed by means of the vertical position control and the trigger level adjusted accordingly. Infinite persistence is used to give a hint what is going on.


With DC trigger coupling, triggering would only occur about 1/3 of the total time in this scenario and even then, the horizontal position would only be reasonably stable because of the short 1 ns rise time of the pulse edges. A signal with slower edges would move horizontally as well, because of the permanently changing trigger level (relative to the AC portion of the input signal). 


SDS824X_HD_Trigger_DC_VarOffset

It’s totally different if we use AC trigger coupling. When using Auto-Set by pushing the trigger level control, the trigger level is set to 50% of the signal amplitude. With this, triggering occurs always at the same point on the X-axis, no matter what the DC offset or low frequency instantaneous signal level is. The waveform constantly changes its vertical position on the screen, but remains stable on the time axis – and even more important, the signal is triggered continuously.


SDS824X_HD_Trigger_AC_VarOffset

We’ve heard complaints about DSOs that prove unable to maintain an AC- or LFRJ-trigger without some additional jitter. So here’s a test with AC trigger coupling and a 6 ns wide pulse with 1 MHz repetition frequency. The screenshot has been taken after several minutes with infinite persistence.


SDS824X_HD_Trigger_AC_Jitter

Jitter can be measured as 36.0 ps peak to peak and 6.84 ps RMS; not quite as good as the former test with the 200 MHz sine signal, yet certainly not bad either – and also reveals that my pulse generator (SDG7102A) produces quite stable signals, even when fast edges are involved.


Triggering noisy signals

Of course, for serious measurements our goal should be to find a reliable, stable and noise-free trigger source with sufficient amplitude. Sometimes this is not available and we need to try the next best thing by getting a stable triggering also from less ideal sources.

Let’s assume a low frequency signal with high frequency spikes (maybe from fast logic cicuits nearby) superimposed. To simulate this, a 600 mVpp 1 kHz sine wave has a 10 mVpp 3.254 MHz pulse train (10 ns wide pulses) riding on it. Standard DC trigger doesn’t work with such a signal, but HF-reject coupling does:


SDS824X_HD_Trig_Spikes_HFRJ

Just for fun, we can do the opposite thing and use LF-reject trigger coupling. This triggers stably on the pulses, yet because of the high waveform update rate the screen is full of traces from the 1 kHz sine.


SDS824X_HD_Trig_Spikes_LFRJ

After stopping the acquisition, we can closely inspect the last record. Even better, we can look up all the previous acquisitions in the history:


SDS824X_HD_Trig_Spikes_LFRJ_Hist1


SDS824X_HD_Trig_Spikes_LFRJ_Hist2

Another common situation is just a noisy signal like this:


SDS824X_HD_Trig_Noise_DC

Infinite persistence has been used to visualize the unstable signal phase.

We can still trigger on such a signal by simply lowering the trigger bandwidth, i.e. using HFRJ:


SDS824X_HD_Trig_Noise_HFRJ

Alternatively, the Noise Reject switch in the trigger settings will increase the trigger hysteresis, thus making it immune to noise (within reason).


SDS824X_HD_Trig_Noise_DC_NRJ
 
« Last Edit: February 17, 2024, 08:38:33 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: tautech, ebastler, Mortymore, ch_scr, Martin72

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2024, 08:37:25 am »
Deep Measurements

Here's some demonstration of a common exercise which cannot be solved without deep measurements.

Imagine a 16 bit PWM based on 20 MHz clock frequency. This results in a rather slow 304 Hz PWM signal that can resolve 65536 different levels of duty cycle. To analyze this, we should be able to have accurate time measurements with at least 0.001525878 % (15 ppm) resolution

A very similar demonstration has been published for the 8-bit SDS2354X Plus a while ago already (reply #4336):

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-coming/msg5183499/#msg5183499

Let’s see how the SDS800X HD fares.

Timebase is set to 500 µs/div, so that we can capture at least one full PWM period.

At 2 GSa/s, this results in 10 Mpts record length.

The PWM signal for this test has 1 ns rise time and 0.001% resolution for the duty cycle.

First the lowest at 0.001 %:


SDS824X_HD_Duty_0.001

Near full scale at 99.999 %:


SDS824X_HD_Duty_99.999

Half scale at 50.000 %:


SDS824X_HD_Duty_50.000

Finally, one step higher at 50.001 %:


SDS824X_HD_Duty_50.001

The duty cycle measurement is spot on and stable, even though not quite as impressive as the SDS2000X Plus (look at the peak-peak and standard deviation).

The period measurement is fairly stable too, with a standard deviation of only 9.2 ps. Peak deviation can only be measured in 100 ps steps, which is ten times more than the SDS2000X Plus. Quite obviously the peak deviation was well below 100 ps, hence gets reported as 0 s.

The Cycle Mean measurements gives an approximation of the resulting voltage level. It is far less precise than the duty cycle measurement though. No wonder – an even 12 bit DSO is still no precision bench DMM, hence measurement resolutions of ~15 µV are not going to be stable – this also shows in the standard deviation of ~324 µV – which is about ten times as much as with the SDS2000X Plus, but that’s only because the amplitude was ten times lower for the test back then (and the required resolution there would have been ~1.5 µV).

Finally, the rise and fall times are about as (in)accurate as can be realistically expected at 2 GSa/s. The rather high peak deviation of ~1.4 ns already hints on the averaging of many individual measurements to get the final result. Once again, we see an advantage of the SDS2000X Plus, even though the sample rate is the same. Yet this is not only about the physical sample rate, but also interpolation strategies, which require massive HW support and might be a bit simpler in the SDS800X HD. The higher bandwidth of the SDS2000X plus is helpful in this case as well.

Of course we can always get full accuracy for one local detail like the rise time by using zoom trace measurements:


SDS824X_HD_Duty_50.001_Rise

Now the rise time measurement result is much closer to the truth. The key for this is to use a timebase faster than 50 ns/div in the zoom window. Now the Sinc reconstruction generates additional data points, thus increasing time resolution and reducing the standard deviation of the measurement to just ~6 ps, which is in turn even better than the SDS2000X Plus.


Probe Bandwidth

The frequency response plots in the “Bandwidth” section have been made with a properly terminated coax connection. A proper review should also test the associated probes – unfortunately, I don’t have one, as my test unit didn’t include any accessories. I suspect that the standard probes delivered with the SDS824X HD will be the well known PP215. Even though I do have some very old PP215 (which probably aren’t quite the same as the current ones), I don’t have access to them right at the moment, hence make do with the only slightly younger 100 MHz PP510, just to give you an idea.

First the frequency response up to 500 MHz:


SDS824X_HD_Probe_PP510_FR

It can be seen, that even Siglent’s cheapest 100 MHz probe extends the system bandwidth to ~274 MHz (244 MHz with direct coax connection). So much for the practical relevance of probe ratings and textbook formulas, which are way to simplistic as to actually model the real world.

Of course, the probe has been properly LF-compensated prior to the measurements:


SDS824X_HD_Probe_PP510_PR_1kHz

The transition times are about 2 ns, which is slightly slower than with the direct coax connection. This is another occasion, where we can see the (ir)relevance of textbook formulas when it comes to real-world performance. The bandwidth was wider, yet the rise time is slower – how can that be?

Of course it’s in the frequency response, which is a far cry from the first order low pass, that is assumed in a textbook. The sudden drop of ~1.5 dB at about 120 MHz is most likely responsible for the slower rise time.

The ultimate test for proper HF-compensation is done with a fast (1 ns) risetime 1 MHz square wave.


SDS824X_HD_Probe_PP510_PR_1MHz_Zoom

It can be seen, that the PP510 isn’t an ideal match for this scope because of an overdamped edge. In other words, the HF-compensation, which is not user adjustable, is not perfect for this probe-scope combination.

The screenshot above is also another demonstration how such details can be observed on a 12 bit DSO with proper zoom implementation, without the need to take a chance by overdriving the inputs.

« Last Edit: January 29, 2024, 08:58:18 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler, Mortymore, ch_scr, Martin72

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2024, 08:38:00 am »
Poor Men’s Differential Probing

With analog scopes, we were able to combine two regular (single ended, ground referenced) channels into one differential channel. This was done by adding both channels with the 2nd channel inverted, whose gain had to be fine-tuned in order to get the maximum common mode rejection. Of course, this solution was far from ideal and sensitivity as well as common mode rejection were rather limited, especially at higher frequencies, which made it hard to get meaningful results when common mode voltages were high compared to the differential signal.

We can’t do the same on a modern DSO, for a number of reasons:

•   The fine adjust of the vertical gain has only ~2% resolution, so it is not suitable to balance the channels for a CMMR >34 dB.
•   The difference has to be computed by a math channel, which always takes the vertical gain setting into account and scales to the true value, thus ignoring any gain adjustments.
•   Finally, with only 8 bits the math result doesn’t have enough resolution to properly analyze the differential signal. It is the same problem as with having vertical zoom on an strict 8-bit DSO.

The screenshot below demonstrates the result of two identical 10 MHz signals fed into channels 3 and 4 at 100 mV/div and a difference math channel is set to a 100 times higher gain at 1 mV/div:


SDS824X_HD_PMDiff_10MHz

Common mode rejection can be estimated from the amplitude measurements and would be 606.7/2.44 = 248.6 ~ 47.9dB, which is not bad at all – but we can do even better...

Of course, the balance is not perfect out of the box. Input channels and probes will both have gain tolerances, which compromise the common mode rejection. With a fairly precise instrument like the SDS800X HD we can just measure that:


SDS824X_HD_PMDiff_10MHz_corr1

As expected, there are slight differences. In this particular case, we get 516.955 mVpp for Ch.3 and 519.555 mVpp for Ch.4, so we can calculate the correction factor as 516.955/519.555 = 0.995. Consequenty, we just replace C4 in the formula by the expression C4*0.995.

The common mode rejection can be estimated from the amplitude measurements and would be 519.555/1.613 = 322.1 ~ 50.16 dB, just 2.25 dB better than before. But the correction would certainly make a much more significant difference when the initial imbalance is more pronounced.

For best accuracy, (especially external) 50 ohms termination cannot be used at the scope input, as their tolerances could be up to 2%. Without termination, a direct coax connection of 1 meter length can work reasonably well up to a couple MHz, but at higher frequencies, amplitude accuracy and common mode rejection degrade considerably. Even at only 10 MHz, the 600 mVpp signal was measured ~14 % low. The next screenshot demonstrates the same test at 100 MHz:


SDS824X_HD_PMDiff_100MHz_corr1

Peak amplitude is totally off now and common mode rejection is degraded to 173.2/3.82 = 45.34 = 33.13dB, which could still be acceptable for some tasks, yet is clearly degraded compared with the 10 MHz test. Even more importantly, the amplitude ratio has significantly changed now. This means, that the correction factor is not valid over the entire DSO bandwidth.

Just for fun, we could try to alter the correction factor; now we get 173.236 mVpp for Ch.3 and 170.833 mVpp for Ch.4, so we can calculate the correction factor as 173.236/170.833 = 1.014.


SDS824X_HD_PMDiff_100MHz_corr2

Common mode rejection would now be respectable 173.25/1.288 =134.5 ~ 42.5 dB.

In most practical scenarios, we’ll use probes; this is problematic because of their complex impedance and transmission characteristics, so that the tolerances cannot be eliminated by applying a simple correction factor. I’ll demonstrate the use of probes for a low frequency like 1 MHz. I only have a set of SP5050A probes here, yet I’m pretty confident my test results are still representative for any suitable 10x probe:


SDS824X_HD_PMDiff_SP5050A_1MHz_corr

We get 3.0097 Vpp for Ch.3 and 3.0633 Vpp for Ch.4, so we can calculate the correction factor as 3.0097/3.0633 = 0.9825.

With this, common mode rejection is 3.0633/0.02541 = 120.55 ~ 41.6 dB. This degrades quickly at higher frequencies.


As a conclusion, thanks to 12 bit resolution, 16 bit data processing and high accuracy of 0.5%, poor men’s differential probing can be an option at low frequencies with this scope, whereas it didn’t work at all with the older 8-bit SDS1000X-E series.


Distortion measurements

General purpose oscilloscopes cannot have ultra low distortion frontends, especially nowadays, where even entry level instruments start at 70 or 100 MHz bandwidth. And even a low end device like the SDS800 goes up to 200 MHz for the top model within the line, and I’d bet the integrated PGA (Programmable Gain Amplifier) in these devices has more than 0.5 GHz bandwidth.

To cut a long story short: the usual techniques to keep distortions down in audio devices, particularly global feedback, cannot be applied to wideband amplifiers. Taking this into account, it’s still amazing what can be achieved with modern integrated circuits, yet it’s the main reason why 12-bit DSOs fail to come even close to 12 bit ENOB.

Let’s start with the harmonic spectrum of a low distortion 10 MHz sine wave:


SDS824X_HD_FFT_THD_10MHz

Strongest harmonic is the 2nd at -66 dBc. Since all other harmonics have considerably lower amplitude, we can safely state that THD is about 0.05%, which isn’t bad at all.

Yet such results cannot be guaranteed; the individual gain stages within the PGA can have differences in linearity, so we need to know our instrument and take note of the weak as well as sweet spots within the vertical gain range. My particular sample of the SDS824X HD has a weak spot at exactly 100 mV/div, whereas all the settings >100 mV/div up to (at least) 110 mV/div yield results like the one shown above.

Whenever we do distortion measurements of the DSO frontend, we need to be confident that the distortion products actually come from the DSO and not the signal source. It can be tricky to verify this, hence a different approach might be more precise: the dual tone intermodulation test.


SDS824X_HD_FFT_IMD_10MHz_95FS

Two independent +6 dBm signals at 9.5 and 10.5 MHz are fed into a resistive wideband power combiner. To ensure proper isolation between the two signal sources and avoid intermodulation distortion at their output stages, a 10 dB inline attenuator has been added to each generator output. Together with the 6 dB attenuation of the splitter, we’d expect two -10 dBm input signals.

Quite obviously, the external termination of the DSO input, which cannot compensate for the ~17 pF input capacitance, is responsible for the higher-than-expected losses, hence inaccurate input level. Since we use relative measurements anyway (delta amplitude in the markers list), this doesn’t matter though.

A vertical gain of 50 mV/div doesn’t appear to be a weak spot in this instrument, so we get respectable -69 dBc for the third order intermodulation products.


SDS824X_HD_FFT_IMD_140MHz_95FS

Two independent signals at 140 and 141 MHz are fed into the power splitter. At these higher frequencies, the problems with the external termination get even more obvious and instead of the nominal level of -10 dBm we get up to 2.2 dB less. Once again we don’t care because we’re only interested in relative levels.

The vertical gain of 50 mV/div from the last test is used again and we get respectable -67 dBc for the third order intermodulation products. Other than an OpAmp with global feedback, distortion performance does not necessarily get much worse at higher frequencies.

« Last Edit: February 01, 2024, 03:29:05 pm by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore, ch_scr, Martin72

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2024, 08:38:36 am »
Digital Channels

All contemporary Siglent DSOs can be upgraded to MSOs. The cheaper low end devices like the SDS800/1000X HD don’t have the required hardware built in, but communicate with a completely autonomous subsystem: it’s the SLA1016, which has already been introduced back in early 2018 to add MSO capabilities to the SDS1004X-E and later 2000X-E series.

Reply #64 in my review from that time shows the hardware, which is nowhere near as sexy as the fully integrated SPL2016 solution:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1104x-e-in-depth-review/msg1449168/#msg1449168

In order to work with the SDS800/1000X HD, the firmware in the SLA1016 needs to be upgraded. Unfortunately, the current beta version 8.2.3 provides no backward compatibility; once upgraded, the SLA1016 no longer works with SDS1004/2000X-E. If a single SLA1016 shall be shared between older SDS1004/2000X-E and new SDS800/1000X HD, the FW would have to be up- and downgraded accordingly.

The external subsystem approach has a few disadvantages:

•   Since it incorporates a complete SOC and local memory, it cannot be cheap even though the probe head and the grabbers leave a cheap impression.
•   Mixed analog / digital pattern trigger is not possible.
•   Zoom mode cannot be used as soon as digital channels are enabled.
•   History doesn’t work either when digital channels are activated.

If you wonder where these limitations come from, it’s simply because this is a separate subsystem connected via a (probably only moderately fast) serial interface. Because of the long memory, the DSO cannot have instant access to the full sample data through the SBUS interface (about 200 Mbit/s transfer speed needed for even only a single frame per second). Consequently, the SLA1016 only transfers the decimated screen data during normal operation.

I’ve already demonstrated its performance here in Reply #1068:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1204x-e-released-for-domestic-markets-in-china/msg2007983/#msg2007983

Now let’s add some more content. First, it might be important to know that the SDS800X HD doesn’t collapse when its advertised capabilities are actually called up.


SDS824X_HD_Digital_4Ch_P16_Deskew

In the above screenshot we can see 16 digital channels at 1 GSa/s sample rate together with 4 active analog channels at 500 MSa/s each.

We can further see one digital parallel bus decoder placed right under the digital traces, showing hexadecimal values.

The Deskew parameter is there to compensate for runtime differences between analog and digital probes; it can be adjusted in 10 ps steps.

There is a digital Edge trigger set on channel D0.

We can enable just 8 bits if we want to show e.g. the activity of a 7-bit counter:


SDS824X_HD_Digital_4Ch_P8_Counter


Now let’s check a fast clock signal (on 7 channels):


SDS824X_HD_Digital_4Ch_P8_200MHz_1ms

In order to see the details. We need to stop the acquisition and then zoom in using a faster time base:


SDS824X_HD_Digital_4Ch_P8_200MHz_Stop_Zoom_5ns

Who said we cannot have a perfect 200 MHz square wave on a 200 MHz bandwidth oscilloscope 😉

Here’s another challenge: a 2 ns wide pulse with 500 ps rise time, captured analog and digital at the same time:


SDS824X_HD_Digital_1Ch_p4_Pulse_2ns

A digital Deskew value of 6.52 ns was required to get both domains reasonably aligned; as expected, the digital channel shows a simplified representation of the pulse, which can be characterized by the measurements of the analog channel. Of course, 200 (or even 245) MHz bandwidth is not nearly enough to even remotely reproduce such a pulse; for this, at least 1 GHz bandwidth would be required. Yet it looks clean and good within the capabilities of a low bandwidth DSO and the transition time measurement results of 1.4 and 1.25 ns suggest an unexpected good oscilloscope risetime.


Probably the most popular use case nowadays would be serial decoding. I’ll just demonstrate I2C, even though this protocol only requires two channels.


SDS824X_HD_Digital_1Ch_I2C_Run

We can see some I2C messages in the decoder table at the bottom and two digital channels together with an analog trace in the upper half of the screen. Right in the middle, there is still the parallel bus decoder line, which is of course unreadable at this time base. The I2C decoder line right under the digital channels is readable, yet messages are truncated, as indicated by the red dots.

In stop mode, we can choose a faster time base and show the complete I2C messages in the decoder line.


SDS824X_HD_Digital_1Ch_I2C_Stop_Zoom_200us

There’s finally the question: what if we want some advanced measurements (with statistics and Histicons) on top of that all?


SDS824X_HD_Digital_1Ch_FullHouse

Well, this looks a bit cramped, yet still not so bad if only we’d disable that useless parallel bus decoder line. Maybe we could make do with simple measurements, then we’d get a bigger signal display again.

« Last Edit: February 05, 2024, 11:58:21 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore, ch_scr

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2024, 08:39:11 am »
Measurements 2 (Trend/Track)

Even the entry level DSOs like the SDS800X HD provide advanced features like Trend and Track Plots for measurements. They can be a bit fiddly at times, but the results are definitely worth it.


Trend Plots

Let’s start with the more familiar (to most) Trend charts. As the name suggests, they plot a measurement value over time. For this, the record length of the raw acquisition can be short – a single full signal period would already be enough. Shorter records have the advantage of faster processing and less memory consumption.


SDS824X_HD_Measure_Trend_AM_Interval

Of course, even a 12-bit DSO is not a metrology-grade instrument, hence we cannot use Trend Plot to observe the stability of a voltage standard; yet there are still plenty of applications where 0.5% accuracy is sufficient.

For the example above, we have used a 1 s time interval Trend Plot, measuring the peak to peak amplitude of a 10 MHz sine wave, 100% amplitude modulated by a 10 mHz ramp signal. The minimum time interval for Trend Plot would be 0.5 s.


SDS824X_HD_Measure_Trend_AM_enlarged

It can be seen that the Trend Plot has a separate statistic, as it is significantly slower than the regular measurements, hence works on a decimated subset of the original measurement data. Consequentially, since the time interval of the Trend Plot is one second, the measurement rate of the PK-Pk measurement can be calculated as ~19.4 per second, while at the same time we get 174 frequency measurements per second.

Instead of a fixed time interval, we can alternatively use sequence record mode. Now the trend plot window behaves like a scope in roll mode, i.e. the update rate is faster, but the time axis shows measurement samples instead of time units now.


SDS824X_HD_Measure_Trend_AM_Sequence


Track Plots

Track plots also show the developing of a measurement value, but not over time but within a single record. As opposed to trend plots, this works best with long record lengths and only with certain measurements – the ones that are computed for the entire record, i.e. all the time related measurements.

Consider a 10 MHz carrier frequency modulated with a 20 kHz sine wave and a frequency deviation of +/-1 MHz. Other than e.g. AM, we cannot really see this in the regular y-t display. This is where the Track Plots come in handy; they let us “demodulate” frequency and phase modulated signals – and such modulations could also come from noise, drift and jitter.


SDS824X_HD_Measure_Track_FM

Take a closer look at the above screenshot: the record length is 5 Mpts and there are 1000 times more frequency measurement samples than Pk-Pk amplitude measurement samples. Experienced people could tell from the histogram that the modulation signal would very likely be a sine wave, but they would not be able to determine the deviation and modulation frequency.

From the Track Plot we can see that the modulation signal is a sine wave with exactly 50 µs period (=20 kHz) and it alters the carrier frequency between 9 and 11 MHz.


FFT Dynamic range

Since the introduction of the SDS1004X-E in early 2018, FFT has always been a strong point of Siglent DSOs. The SDS800X HD is no exception and numerous examples have been published already in this review, as the FFT is an incredibly universal tool to demonstrate fundamental features like frequency response, noise distribution and signal spectra in general, as well as measure distortion products, spurious signals and weak signals, deeply buried under the noise floor.

One of the concerns with the FFT in DSOs is the dynamic range. For 8-bit acquisition systems, this is only about 49 dB according to the textbook, as it is some 73 dB for 12 bits. And indeed we need to be careful when acting outside these “guaranteed” dynamic ranges. Yet the wonders of process gain in an FFT and other resolution enhancement techniques can extend the usable dynamic range quite a bit, and this shall be demonstrated for the SDS800X HD in some best case scenario.

What is the “best case” scenario? It is a frequency at or above 1 MHz in order to escape the 1/f noise, but at the same time the frequency should be low enough so we can get rid of all the high frequency noise by using the 20 MHz bandwidth limiter plus an additional steep 20 MHz lowpass filter. Consequently, we practice math on math (the SDS800X HD could also have combined it in one formula instead) and calculate the FFT on the filter output instead directly on the Ch.4 data.

Two signals from an AWG at 9.9 and 10.1 MHz are fed into a wideband signal combiner, where the second signal goes through a fixed 20 dB attenuator together with a 1 GHz step attenuator before it hits the combiner, whose output is connected to the SDS824X HD Channel 4 input via another 10 dB inline attenuator and a 50 ohm through terminator. Of course, the tolerances of these various components sum up, so I have calibrated the whole setup for a 0 dB setting of the step attenuator first by means of the AWG output levels, but left them untouched for all subsequent measurements. As a consequence, any tolerances of the step attenuator settings will affect the results. The step attenuator is a Wavetek 5080.1 with a specified tolerance of +/-1 dB up to 400 MHz. After using it many decades, I can tell from experience that it thankfully is clearly more accurate than that.

In order to get a low RBW (Resolution Bandwidth), hence also a low noise floor, we don’t want an excessively high sample rate; 100 MSa/s and a Nyquist frequency of 50 MHz is plenty to deal with a 10 MHz signal and also a 20 MHz FIR filter.

Here's the calibration result:


SDS824X_HD_FFT_DR_500kpts_10MHz_40dB

The error is <0.05 dB. Going from there, here’s the measurement for 80 dB level difference:


SDS824X_HD_FFT_DR_500kpts_10MHz_80dB

The error is < 0.25 dB, which could well be attributed to the step attenuator.

Now let’s try 100 dB with the same setting:


SDS824X_HD_FFT_DR_500kpts_10MHz_100dB

The measurement error is still <0.7 dB, yet the 2nd signal is almost down in the noise.

Up to now, we’ve only computed a 512 kpts FFT, so let’s try 1 Mpts now, thus cutting the RBW in half.


SDS824X_HD_FFT_DR_1Mpts_10MHz_100dB

Now the 2nd signal is clearly above the noise floor and the total error is less than 0.15 dB!

Even if we assume the step attenuator would have no tolerances at all, this still is a remarkable result.

« Last Edit: February 17, 2024, 01:14:17 pm by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Muxr, 2N3055, Mortymore

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2024, 08:39:43 am »
True Vertical Sensitivity

The SDS800X HD has a specified vertical gain range from 500 µs/div up to 10 V/div. Many contemporary DSOs have similar specs, yet only a small minority of them can provide true 500 µV/div as the real highest sensitivity at full resolution. The real sensitivity of many instruments is lower, sometimes significantly so (up to 5 mV/div). As a consequence, anything above the true highest sensitivity is just software zoom and won’t provide full resolution anymore. This might be not that much of a problem for a 12 bit DSO, but 8 bit instruments degraded to 6 bits at 1 mV/div could get problematic. On the other hand, most of those instruments also exhibit high noise levels, so the ENOB (Effective Number of Bits) drops below 6 bits at these higher sensitivities anyway.

For the SDS800X HD, I stumbled across the unexpected property of nearly equal noise levels for all vertical sensitivities from 500 µV/div to 5 mV/div:


SDS824X HD_ND

These numbers are not totally accurate because it proves very difficult to place the markers close to the intended frequency without hitting a minor spur. Consequently, I would think that the noise level is fairly uniform across all the higher sensitivities from 500 µV/div to 5 mV/div and the minima across all measurements would be the best representation of the truth:

Noise 500 µV/div – 5 mV/div :
  1 kHz : 232.9 nV/√Hz
  3 kHz : 174.2 nV/√Hz
 10 kHz :  62.5 nV/√Hz
 30 kHz :  16.0 nV/√Hz
100 kHz :   5.7 nV/√Hz
300 kHz :   2.7 nV/√Hz
  1 MHz :   2.4 nV/√Hz
 10 MHz :   2.5 nV/√Hz

This made me suspicious: does Siglent cheat after all? Are all vertical gain settings below 5 mV/div just fake? First, I’ve checked the raw acquisition data for 500 µV/div vertical gain and found the lowest voltage step to be 1.042 µV.

Time [sec]                Value [V]              Delta [V]
-4.0000000000E-08   -4,166667E-05   5,208E-6
-3.9500000000E-08   -4,166667E-05   000,000E+0
-3.9000000000E-08   -4,270833E-05   1,042E-6

The SDS800X HD has 480 LSB per vertical division (just like the SDS2000X HD), thus 3840 LSB on the visible part of the screen. Since a 12 bit acquisition system provides a total 0f 4096 LSB, there is very little headroom outside the visible screen area.

The interesting part is when we multiply the 1.042 µV resolution with the 480 LSB of one division: 1.042 * 480 ~ 500 µV/div; -> Bingo!

A less accurate, but quicker and simpler method to verify the resolution of the SDS800X HD is using vertical zoom; we can zoom into the noise in dots display mode, thus getting horizontal lines vertically spaced according to the true resolution of the instrument.

At a vertical gain of 500 µV/div and a vertical zoom window at 2 µV/div, we get the following picture:


SDS824X_HD_Resolution_Demo

Since we still have 8 vertical divisions also in the zoom window, the total visible screen height covers 16 µV at 2 µV/div. We can count 15 horizontal lines, hence 16 steps and can conclude that each step has to be close to one microvolt.

Verdict: Siglent don’t cheat. The uniform noise level at and below 5 mV/div is just a property of the integrated PGA (Programmable Gain Amplifier) used in this instrument.


Peak Detect

The peak detection capability of the SDS800X HD is specified as 2 ns. Let’s have a closer look at that.

First a 2 ns wide pulse with 300 mV amplitude and 500 ps rise time in normal acquisition mode at sufficient sample rate (2 GSa/s):


SDS824X_HD_Pulse_W2ns_RT500ps_2GSa_Norm_Zoom

It can be seen that such a narrow pulse is already a bit too much for a 200 (244) MHz oscilloscope; the amplitude has already dropped a bit and pulse width measurement isn’t quite accurate either. As expected, the rise time measurement approaches the scope’s own rise time.

With all these shortcomings, we still get a fairly stable picture – look at the main window and the peak and standard deviations in the measurements statistics.

In the screenshot above, the time base was at 5 ms/div and the sample memory was already at its maximum of 100 Mpts; slowing down the time base any further will inevitably lower the sample rate:


SDS824X_HD_Pulse_W2ns_RT500ps_100MSa_Norm_Zoom

At 100 ms/div and 100 Mpts record length the sample rate has to be decimated to just 100 MSa/s – far too slow for capturing a 2 ns wide pulse. As a consequence, many pulses get lost. In the main window we would expect to see about 1000 pulses at a pulse repetition rate of 1 kHz, but there are actually much less and the amplitudes vary wildly.

This isn’t a very realistic scenario; not many engineers would try to watch 2 ns wide pulses at a time base of 100 ms/div and have to use 2 million times zoom to watch the pulse details. Yet this is where Peak Detect acquisition mode comes into play:


SDS824X_HD_Pulse_W2ns_RT500ps_100MSa_Peak_Zoom

The main window now shows all the pulses; the amplitudes still vary a bit, but at least we don’t miss any pulses anymore. Pulse shape has nothing to do with reality anymore and measurements yield just house numbers. This should be a clear warning to not use Peak Detect for anything serious, as any math and measurements on such waveforms are of artistical value at best.

All that Peak Detect really can do is to hint on any pulses within the record.

Of course peak detection works for even narrower pulses just as well. This is not because the specification is not correct, but the simple fact that a 244 MHz DSO like the SDS824X HD simply cannot process even faster pulses:


SDS824X_HD_Pulse_W1ns_RT500ps_2GSa_Norm_Zoom

This is now a 1 ns wide pulse at maximum sample rate of 2 GSa/s. The amplitude is still 300 mV, yet the SDS824X HD cannot cope with it anymore and the amplitude measurement result has dropped to just 173 mV. The pulse width is still measured as 1.8 ns, so the relative slowness of the frontend widens shorter pulses at the expense of amplitude, hence makes an even faster peak detection unnecessary.


Bode Plot at a glance

Instead of showing an inexpressive first order RC-lowpass filter demonstrating less than 40 dB dynamic in the audio range, I’d rather check the most important characteristics of a Bode Plot: frequency- & dynamic range and accuracy.

For this, I’ve refrained from using inline terminators at the scope inputs but fed them from 50 ohms sources directly via ~25 cm long coaxial cables. The source resistance of 50 ohms, together with the cable and scope input capacitances, forms a first order lowpass filter at ~10 MHz. This can also serve as a warning how even very short cables can introduce significant amplitude errors at relatively low frequencies, as long as a transmission line is not properly terminated.

We can see this characteristic when using the “Vout” mode of the Bode Plot, where we get the absolute amplitude of the DUT output (where the DSO itself represents the DUT).


SDS824X HD_Bode_1M_Vout

The amplitude drops quite significantly above 10 MHz. It is not the 20 dB/decade like a classic first order lowpass – and this is for a number of reasons that I won’t discuss in this article. Bottom line is, that even with very short cables, accuracy of the absolute signal level is gone already at moderate frequencies of a couple MHz.

The phase plot does not resemble this, as it stays within +/-1° up to 120 MHz quite easily. It almost looks like this would not be a minimal phase system, yet it’s just the nature of a multi-channel oscilloscope, where the input signals are always phase aligned.

When using the relative (Vout/Vin) mode (as we usually do), things look completely different:


SDS824X HD_Bode_1M_S21

Bode Plot now shows the difference between reference channel 1 and the other channels. It is indicative of the quality of the SDS800X HD that the differences between channels are really negligible: less than 0.3 dB amplitude error as well as less than 1° phase error up to 120 MHz, and almost no differences between channels 2-4, speaks for itself.

Let’s check the accuracy and dynamic range now. Two signals are used to visualize a 60 dB amplitude difference. This time, 50 ohm inline termination has been used.


SDS824X HD_Bode_50_S21_60dB

There is a significant phase difference, and this comes from the additional 3-stage step attenuator + Inline attenuator + some 50 cm additional coaxial cable for channel 4.

As a final experiment, here is a 100 dB amplitude difference (phase has been adjusted by means of the channel skew parameter):


SDS824X HD_Bode_50_S21_100dB

Noise is getting a major problem, yet amplitude measurements can still yield useable results in the range 100 kHz to ~20 MHz.

The reference level is low (~570 mVrms), hence channel 4 input sees only 5.7 µVrms!

I’ve not nearly exploited the dynamic range of the SDS800X HD, which could handle up to 28 Vrms (but then with beefy external >16 W terminators) if the need should be.

« Last Edit: February 13, 2024, 10:09:45 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore, Martin72, Bad_Driver

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #10 on: January 23, 2024, 09:23:12 am »
Quote
it’s almost a completely different world.

Absolutely, no contest.

Offline Wintel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 52
  • Country: us
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #11 on: January 23, 2024, 02:32:02 pm »
Is this a real or a "hack" SDS824X HD?

 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #12 on: January 23, 2024, 02:35:17 pm »
Is this a real or a "hack" SDS824X HD?
I presume real one...
What would be the difference anyways?
 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, Performa01

Offline chillidog

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 8
  • Country: es
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #13 on: January 23, 2024, 02:36:08 pm »
Thanks for the elaborate testing! Looks like a very capable scope indeed. Is this still a pre-release/China version or the real deal?
Chaos is the natural state of the universe. Order a mere illusion of man.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #14 on: January 23, 2024, 03:14:11 pm »
This is a genuine SDS824X HD, an early production unit ment for the international market. I've got this unit for beta tests and now that the official introduction comes nearer, I had asked Siglent product management for permission to publish the most relevant details, so you can know what you might be waiting for ;)

I most definitely don't know it, but from the datasheet I would not rule out that the SDS822/4X HD might have slightly different hardware compared to the SDS802/4 and 812/4X HD, because SDS822/4X HD provide slightly higher waveform update rates.

 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, egonotto, ebastler, 2N3055, ch_scr, Martin72, core, orzel, PELL, Spacerat

Offline Wintel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 52
  • Country: us
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #15 on: January 23, 2024, 06:44:54 pm »
This is a genuine SDS824X HD, an early production unit ment for the international market. I've got this unit for beta tests and now that the official introduction comes nearer, I had asked Siglent product management for permission to publish the most relevant details, so you can know what you might be waiting for ;)

I most definitely don't know it, but from the datasheet I would not rule out that the SDS822/4X HD might have slightly different hardware compared to the SDS802/4 and 812/4X HD, because SDS822/4X HD provide slightly higher waveform update rates.
Hi,

Could you please do 2 tests?

1. Set the coupling of channel 1 to GND, Timebase to 1ms and 500uV/div to test the noise floor.

2. Set the coupling of channel 1 to GND, Timebase to 20ms and 1mV/div to test the noise floor.

 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #16 on: January 24, 2024, 05:10:57 am »
This is a genuine SDS824X HD, an early production unit ment for the international market. I've got this unit for beta tests and now that the official introduction comes nearer, I had asked Siglent product management for permission to publish the most relevant details, so you can know what you might be waiting for ;)

I most definitely don't know it, but from the datasheet I would not rule out that the SDS822/4X HD might have slightly different hardware compared to the SDS802/4 and 812/4X HD, because SDS822/4X HD provide slightly higher waveform update rates.
Hi,

Could you please do 2 tests?

1. Set the coupling of channel 1 to GND, Timebase to 1ms and 500uV/div to test the noise floor.

2. Set the coupling of channel 1 to GND, Timebase to 20ms and 1mV/div to test the noise floor.

Here with input coupling GND as you ask

Zoom window: Zoomed in vertically to max and horizontally so that every single real ADC sample dots are visible. Without interpolations.
In this oscilloscope, GND coupling is not done in start of analog input pathway. But it is also not after ADC zero binary data.
But it nicely tell what are ADC real steps...




coupling of channel 1 to GND, Timebase to 1ms and 500uV/div (and Zoom window (Z1) 10ns/div and 2uV/div)



coupling of channel 1 to GND, Timebase to 20ms and 1mV/div (and  Zoom window (Z1) 50ns/div and 2uV/div)

With 1mV/div ADC F.S. is ~8.5mV  and display full scale is 8mV
« Last Edit: January 24, 2024, 07:31:12 am by rf-loop »
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, core, Spacerat, chillidog

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #17 on: January 25, 2024, 01:08:12 pm »
Subscribing, and giving this thread a little bump -- updates to the reserved posts don't move it up the "recent posts" list, I think. Many thanks for the in-depth review, Performa01, I am looking forward to the sequel!
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Veteran68

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 727
  • Country: us
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #18 on: January 25, 2024, 01:50:44 pm »
I'd love to see someone do a side-by-side with the Rigol DHO1000 line (not the DHO800 line). I know I could do a datasheet comparison but that doesn't tell the whole UX and real-world performance story.

I have the DHO1074 (upgraded to 200Mhz + 50Mpts memory) since the BF deal was too good to pass up, but I'd been holding out for Siglent's new HD scopes to arrive. I have a suspicion that the SDS1000 isn't going to be nearly as affordable as the DHO1000 series -- especially considering the BF discount -- but I'm wondering if the SDS800 series might be close enough and have some compelling improvements over even the "next-tier" DHO1000.

I realize it's not really fair to try and compare scopes from different tiers, but I wouldn't be surprised if Siglent's bottom-tier 800HD offering was as good or better in some ways than Rigol's next-tier 1000HD line.

Obviously the screen will be the major downgrade going from the DHO1000, and I do love the big, sharp Rigol screen. To give that up for the smaller Siglent would require some substantial improvements in other features.

Now if the SDS1000 comes to NA within the ballpark of Rigol's DHO1000 pricing, that's where I'll be looking, but I'm still curious where this 800 series fits in the comparison.
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #19 on: January 25, 2024, 02:19:39 pm »
I'd love to see someone do a side-by-side with the Rigol DHO1000 line (not the DHO800 line). I know I could do a datasheet comparison but that doesn't tell the whole UX and real-world performance story.

I have the DHO1074 (upgraded to 200Mhz + 50Mpts memory) since the BF deal was too good to pass up, but I'd been holding out for Siglent's new HD scopes to arrive. I have a suspicion that the SDS1000 isn't going to be nearly as affordable as the DHO1000 series -- especially considering the BF discount -- but I'm wondering if the SDS800 series might be close enough and have some compelling improvements over even the "next-tier" DHO1000.

I realize it's not really fair to try and compare scopes from different tiers, but I wouldn't be surprised if Siglent's bottom-tier 800HD offering was as good or better in some ways than Rigol's next-tier 1000HD line.

Obviously the screen will be the major downgrade going from the DHO1000, and I do love the big, sharp Rigol screen. To give that up for the smaller Siglent would require some substantial improvements in other features.

Now if the SDS1000 comes to NA within the ballpark of Rigol's DHO1000 pricing, that's where I'll be looking, but I'm still curious where this 800 series fits in the comparison.

Maybe SDS1000 will have better pricing ?  ^-^
I guess we will see soon...

Biggest differences  between 1000XHD and 800XHD are:
 
Screen size (same resolution though, so same screen content)
No 50Ω inputs. Only 1MΩ
Decodes: 1000XHD (I2C, SPI, UART, CAN, LIN, CAN FD, FlexRay) vs 800XHD(2C, SPI, UART, CAN, LIN)
Simpler I/O: one less USB port and no External Trigger IN
Some differences in measurement display options.

As for comparisons, truth is, SDS800XHD as a scope compares very favourably to DHO1000. I do understand the screen size is important (I'm nearsighted) though.

But, mind you, class numbers are not arbitrary. I expect for Siglent 1000XHD to be in a ballpark price wise compared to Rigol DHO1000 (list prices, not fire sale prices) and more capable. And 800XHD should be less than that, in it's class.. They might not try to undercut Rigol in prices, but should be in the same class, maybe bit more.
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #20 on: January 25, 2024, 05:02:43 pm »
I have updated the opening posting with a confirmed list of differences between SDS800X HD and SDS1000X HD and have added a contents overview.

The following content has been added:

Reply #3: Measurements, Vertical Axis Labels, DC Check, Counter

Reply #4: AC Trigger Coupling, Triggering noisy signals
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, ebastler

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #21 on: January 25, 2024, 05:09:38 pm »
In the meantime I have a confirmed list of differences:

-SDS800X HD has no external trigger input.
-Only the 200 MHz SDS800X HD have 100 Mpts memory, the lower models have only 50 Mpts.
-SDS800X HD has no 50 ohm inputs.
-SDS800X HD has less serial protocols: CAN-FD and FlexRay are missing.
-SDS800X HD has only 2 USB host ports.
-SDS800X HD has only 7” capacitive touch screen, but at the same resolution 1024 x 600.
-SDS800X HD doesn’t support probe factor detection.
-SDS800X HD doesn’t support Tektronix Mode.
-SDS800X HD doesn’t support Advanced Measurements Display Mode M2.
-SDS800X HD doesn’t support Measurement Histograms Secondary Zoom.

+SDS800X HD supports NTP.

Thank you, that's a helpful summary.

Regarding bandwidth and memory depth, is it fair to assume that the basic model will be upgradable? Also, as the SDS1000X HD does not support NTP, I assume it has an on-board real-time clock with battery backup (while the 800X HD does not)?
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #22 on: January 25, 2024, 05:27:46 pm »
Regarding bandwidth and memory depth, is it fair to assume that the basic model will be upgradable? Also, as the SDS1000X HD does not support NTP, I assume it has an on-board real-time clock with battery backup (while the 800X HD does not)?
I honestly don't know, but the ugrade from 70 to 100 MHz goes without saying. Hackers will also find a way to upgrade to 200 MHz, even though there is a small chance that the memory depth and waveform update rate might not be upgradable. Who knows, maybe Siglent management holds the view that this product is such a great price/performance ratio that they actually want to optimize the BOM for the lower bandwidth models. Time (and the Hackers) will tell.

I think that this scope will become popular among amateurs on a budget, even if the memory depth would stay at 50 Mpts and the max. waveform update rate is 20% slower.

I don't have an SDS1000X HD, but rf-loop owns the previous version of it, so he should be able to answer that question. Yet it's a safe bet that it has a RTC - the missing NTP support is a dead giveaway.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, ebastler, 2N3055

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #23 on: January 25, 2024, 06:35:04 pm »
Regarding bandwidth and memory depth, is it fair to assume that the basic model will be upgradable? Also, as the SDS1000X HD does not support NTP, I assume it has an on-board real-time clock with battery backup (while the 800X HD does not)?
I honestly don't know, but the ugrade from 70 to 100 MHz goes without saying. Hackers will also find a way to upgrade to 200 MHz, even though there is a small chance that the memory depth and waveform update rate might not be upgradable. Who knows, maybe Siglent management holds the view that this product is such a great price/performance ratio that they actually want to optimize the BOM for the lower bandwidth models. Time (and the Hackers) will tell.

I think that this scope will become popular among amateurs on a budget, even if the memory depth would stay at 50 Mpts and the max. waveform update rate is 20% slower.

I don't have an SDS1000X HD, but rf-loop owns the previous version of it, so he should be able to answer that question. Yet it's a safe bet that it has a RTC - the missing NTP support is a dead giveaway.
I do, the early white version and indeed it has a RTC.
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #24 on: January 25, 2024, 09:25:59 pm »
Regarding bandwidth and memory depth, is it fair to assume that the basic model will be upgradable? Also, as the SDS1000X HD does not support NTP, I assume it has an on-board real-time clock with battery backup (while the 800X HD does not)?
I honestly don't know, but the ugrade from 70 to 100 MHz goes without saying. Hackers will also find a way to upgrade to 200 MHz, even though there is a small chance that the memory depth and waveform update rate might not be upgradable. Who knows, maybe Siglent management holds the view that this product is such a great price/performance ratio that they actually want to optimize the BOM for the lower bandwidth models. Time (and the Hackers) will tell.

I think that this scope will become popular among amateurs on a budget, even if the memory depth would stay at 50 Mpts and the max. waveform update rate is 20% slower.

I don't have an SDS1000X HD, but rf-loop owns the previous version of it, so he should be able to answer that question. Yet it's a safe bet that it has a RTC - the missing NTP support is a dead giveaway.
I do, the early white version and indeed it has a RTC.

Yes I can also confirm, SDS1000X HD (1G version) sure have internal HW RTC with battery backup (and I "believe" that 2G version also have hardware RTC). 

SDS800X HD do not have.
Of course it have date/time of day clock function where user can set date and time manually or configure it for get real time from NTP when it is connectd to network where NTP is available. Naturally if one have own NTP server it do not need connect to internet.
It keep time as long as it is ON. After shut down it loose time and it need get time manually or from NTP again after booted up. If user do not need real time at all. Time display can also shut off so that it do not start display date and time from year 1970

Also in my previous image can see there is clock displayed and all times when I turn it on (if cable is connected), it get right time from network NTP server (when configure it, user need know suitable NTP server IP, instead of name)
« Last Edit: January 25, 2024, 09:29:22 pm by rf-loop »
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, ebastler

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #25 on: January 25, 2024, 09:48:20 pm »
Hi,

Quote
Yes I can also confirm, SDS1000X HD (1G version) sure have internal HW RTC with battery backup (and I "believe" that 2G version also have hardware RTC).


It seems so (pic taken from the 1000X HD(2ndG) unboxing thread)...

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #26 on: January 25, 2024, 09:50:25 pm »
Duh, right, thank you! I had not remembered that post. Alright, so the lack of NTP is a non-issue for the larger model, as expected.

Maybe the RTC could be added to the list of SDS800X HD vs 1000 differences in the top post?
 

Offline orzel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 82
  • Country: fr
    • Sylphide Consulting
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #27 on: January 25, 2024, 10:31:36 pm »
...it get right time from network NTP server (when configure it, user need know suitable NTP server IP, instead of name)

That seems scary. Most of the time, the dhcp server will provide a NTP server as well... Can the scope use this ?
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #28 on: January 25, 2024, 10:41:09 pm »
...it get right time from network NTP server (when configure it, user need know suitable NTP server IP, instead of name)

That seems scary. Most of the time, the dhcp server will provide a NTP server as well... Can the scope use this ?
NTP server URL's can be found in seconds, here's yours for France:
https://www.ntppool.org/en/zone/fr

For large countries with multiple time zones you also need specify your location in the scopes NTP menu.
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 

Offline orzel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 82
  • Country: fr
    • Sylphide Consulting
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #29 on: January 25, 2024, 11:01:21 pm »
For large countries with multiple time zones you also need specify your location in the scopes NTP menu.

That's not what i meant. I know where to find a ntp server. I even have one here.

The question was : do you really need to manually enter an IP ?

Most networks use DHCP for hosts to get an IP. And this same DHCP server that answers, can also provides some more information. And typically, it can provide a NTP server.

Here at least, this is the way almost all networks do.
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #30 on: January 25, 2024, 11:15:46 pm »
For large countries with multiple time zones you also need specify your location in the scopes NTP menu.

That's not what i meant. I know where to find a ntp server. I even have one here.

The question was : do you really need to manually enter an IP ?
For the older SDS1*04X-E, yes.
800X HD is a continuation of this NTP functionality but with a different and updated touch UI where entering a URL via the virtual or an external keyboard is quicker and simpler.

For X-E, we setup the NTP for NZ in every unit we sell and we will be doing the same when 800X HD arrives.

Edit to add
Performa01 might like to show us use of the virtual keyboard.
« Last Edit: January 25, 2024, 11:25:49 pm by tautech »
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #31 on: January 26, 2024, 05:17:59 am »
Currently, for now, System Settings/Time is like this. The IP address of the NTP server is entered there. What could be easier. One could get by with even less if you could enter it in hex but it accept it only decimal form.

Personally I would have left out those time zone name lists entirely. Instead, one parameter field where one can enter time difference +/- hh.mm relative to UTC. Every engineer or who have attended elementary school know how many hours the clocks in their area are in relation to UTC. If one don't know - back to school. However, now there is that list and we live with it :) ... How can someone, who doesn't know the offset to UTC, find the right one if their own city or state is not found there... (...censored... :D ).

In images below can see menu for configure System / Time



« Last Edit: January 26, 2024, 11:01:26 am by rf-loop »
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline chillidog

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 8
  • Country: es
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #32 on: January 26, 2024, 10:53:03 am »
The IP address of the NTP server is entered there. What could be easier.
Well... even easier would be not having to enter it at all, i.e., relying on DHCP. Of course, when no NTP option is presented, manual entry should still be possible. I suppose it's the same way with the IP address? If there's no DHCP on the network, one could still manually enter an IP address, right?
Chaos is the natural state of the universe. Order a mere illusion of man.
 
The following users thanked this post: orzel

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #33 on: January 26, 2024, 11:25:55 am »
If there's no DHCP on the network, one could still manually enter an IP address, right?

Yes.
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 

Offline orzel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 82
  • Country: fr
    • Sylphide Consulting
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #34 on: January 26, 2024, 05:29:24 pm »
Well... even easier would be not having to enter it at all, i.e., relying on DHCP.

That's even very easy. Those scope use linux, and very probably a common package for dhcpd, all of them defaulting to handle ntp... At worse, it's a one liner in some config file. I can do some "pro bono" consulting to help Siglent if they can't manage that !
« Last Edit: January 29, 2024, 12:19:51 pm by orzel »
 

Offline empeka

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 18
  • Country: pl
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #35 on: January 26, 2024, 05:58:57 pm »
I'm not an android expert, but I think that dhcpcd in android was deprecated many years ago in favor of... more android native java library, that does not seem to handle option 42.
 

Offline baldurn

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 189
  • Country: dk
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #36 on: January 26, 2024, 06:32:35 pm »
Personally I would have left out those time zone name lists entirely. Instead, one parameter field where one can enter time difference +/- hh.mm relative to UTC. Every engineer or who have attended elementary school know how many hours the clocks in their area are in relation to UTC. If one don't know - back to school. However, now there is that list and we live with it :) ... How can someone, who doesn't know the offset to UTC, find the right one if their own city or state is not found there... (...censored... :D ).

It is for automatic daylight saving. The rules for that varies all of the world. So you need to know the country or state.

Of course it happens that the politicians change the rules and your software gets outdated.
 

Offline orzel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 82
  • Country: fr
    • Sylphide Consulting
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #37 on: January 26, 2024, 07:19:17 pm »
I'm not an android expert, but I think that dhcpcd in android was deprecated many years ago in favor of... more android native

Hopefully those new siglent scopes wont be android, but linux as usual. That's not Rigol !  :palm: :box:
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #38 on: January 26, 2024, 07:29:20 pm »
I'm not an android expert, but I think that dhcpcd in android was deprecated many years ago in favor of... more android native

Hopefully those new siglent scopes wont be android, but linux as usual.
Yep, Linux all the way to even the PC based SDS7000A.
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 
The following users thanked this post: orzel

Offline empeka

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 18
  • Country: pl
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #39 on: January 26, 2024, 07:49:25 pm »
Oh... I've sunk in hacking dho800 so deep in the last few days, that I almost forgot that there are other OSes :palm:
Well, it's good to be wrong sometimes;)
 
The following users thanked this post: orzel

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #40 on: January 29, 2024, 09:04:04 am »
The following content has been added:

Reply #5

1.   Deep Measurements
2.   Probe Bandwidth

The opening posting has been updated accordingly.

 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, 2N3055, Mortymore, myf, Martin72, chillidog

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #41 on: January 29, 2024, 09:10:38 am »
Thank you for the enormous effort you are putting in here - THIS is a review...
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, 2N3055, Jacon, Mortymore, myf, BRZ.tech

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #42 on: February 01, 2024, 03:40:01 pm »
The following content has been added:

Reply #3
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293750/#msg5293750

2.   Measurement Histograms

Reply #6
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293759/#msg5293759

1.   Poor Men’s Differential Probing
2.   Distortion measurements

The opening posting has been updated accordingly.

 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055, Martin72

Offline Orange

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 348
  • Country: nl
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #43 on: February 01, 2024, 06:25:08 pm »
Performa01
I'm not impressed by the HF response step size the first 15ns; there is much undefined over and undershoot. The same behavior can also be seen on the SDS1000HD. Almost as if they use the same front-end design.

Can you also make a test on a 100Hz square wave input signal ? Some recent Siglent scopes also have problems with this (not showing a real square)

Thank you
 

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #44 on: February 01, 2024, 11:08:15 pm »
Quote
I'm not impressed by the HF response step size the first 15ns

Which screenshot are you referring to?

 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #45 on: February 02, 2024, 07:33:18 am »
Performa01
I'm not impressed by the HF response step size the first 15ns; there is much undefined over and undershoot. The same behavior can also be seen on the SDS1000HD. Almost as if they use the same front-end design.

Can you also make a test on a 100Hz square wave input signal ? Some recent Siglent scopes also have problems with this (not showing a real square)

Thank you

SDS824X HD, 100Hz sqr from SDG1032X with normal 10x probe.
average for better see top and bottom line shape
« Last Edit: February 02, 2024, 07:36:41 am by rf-loop »
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, Orange

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #46 on: February 02, 2024, 07:58:04 am »
Performa01
I'm not impressed by the HF response step size the first 15ns; there is much undefined over and undershoot. The same behavior can also be seen on the SDS1000HD. Almost as if they use the same front-end design.

Can you also make a test on a 100Hz square wave input signal ? Some recent Siglent scopes also have problems with this (not showing a real square)

Thank you

Why would they not share input design, when their specifications for inputs are pretty much the same...? Of course, they would only share 1MΩ input path design.

Are you referring to images with top part of signal zoomed in 20X ?
(Which by the way is something not many scopes can do, not to mention in this class.)

Your definition  of recent is very different from mine.  Problems with compensation were in scopes from 2017..  that is going on to 7 years now... there were 3 generations of new products released. Just saying...
 

Offline Orange

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 348
  • Country: nl
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #47 on: February 02, 2024, 08:18:59 am »
Performa01
I'm not impressed by the HF response step size the first 15ns; there is much undefined over and undershoot. The same behavior can also be seen on the SDS1000HD. Almost as if they use the same front-end design.

Can you also make a test on a 100Hz square wave input signal ? Some recent Siglent scopes also have problems with this (not showing a real square)

Thank you

Why would they not share input design, when their specifications for inputs are pretty much the same...? Of course, they would only share 1MΩ input path design.


Are you referring to images with top part of signal zoomed in 20X ?
(Which by the way is something not many scopes can do, not to mention in this class.)

Your definition  of recent is very different from mine.  Problems with compensation were in scopes from 2017..  that is going on to 7 years now... there were 3 generations of new products released. Just saying...
Picture SDS824X_HD_PR_1GSa is NOT zoomed in, and clearly shows strange strange aberrations, almost there is a reflected wave interfering with one of the internals...
A TDR or VNA  would shed some light on this to see what is going on. (at least on a SDS1000X HD this is possible, but outside the scope of this thread)

There is nothing wrong with sharing a good design, I did not imply this is a bad thing, just an observation, so no defense from your side is needed here.

As for the LF compensation in the front-end, Siglent does not have a good track record for this, specially on the low end scopes. I consider the SDS800 as a low end scope give the fact it has only a 7''  screen hence my curiosity for the LF distortion on this model.

Thanks Performa01 and RF-loop for the tests
 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #48 on: February 02, 2024, 08:57:36 am »
I'm not impressed by the HF response step size the first 15ns; there is much undefined over and undershoot. The same behavior can also be seen on the SDS1000HD. Almost as if they use the same front-end design.
I’ve demonstrated how the details of a pulse flat can be closely inspected without overloading the scope input by means of a proper zoom implementation and additional math to deal with noise. Yes, neither pulse generators nor oscilloscope frontends are 100% ideal, especially in terms of impedance matching. Because what we see in my screenshots are clearly reflections stemming from less than perfect impedance matching. On the other hand, small aberrations in the realm of 2.5 % (as in this case) are usually well accepted in the industry.

I’ve added a paragraph and a screenshot to the “Pulse Response” section in the opening posting to demonstrate a modified test setup for the occasions where we really need highest possible signal fidelity up to the fine details.

Can you also make a test on a 100Hz square wave input signal ? Some recent Siglent scopes also have problems with this (not showing a real square)
Absolutely no problem with a 100 Hz square when using the SDS800X HD (or any other contemporary Siglent DSO):


SDS824X_HD_PR_100Hz_Zoom

Also the claims about serious problems with the SDS1000X-E (at 10 Hz this time) could not be confirmed:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1104x-e-in-depth-review/msg5278090/#msg5278090
« Last Edit: February 02, 2024, 08:59:28 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Orange

Offline Orange

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 348
  • Country: nl
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #49 on: February 02, 2024, 09:16:01 am »
 Much better  HF pulse response now in the added test  :-+
LF distortion is also absent ;GOOD !

Thanks Performa01
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, 2N3055

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #50 on: February 02, 2024, 11:07:29 am »
Performa01
I'm not impressed by the HF response step size the first 15ns; there is much undefined over and undershoot. The same behavior can also be seen on the SDS1000HD. Almost as if they use the same front-end design.

Can you also make a test on a 100Hz square wave input signal ? Some recent Siglent scopes also have problems with this (not showing a real square)

Thank you

Why would they not share input design, when their specifications for inputs are pretty much the same...? Of course, they would only share 1MΩ input path design.


Are you referring to images with top part of signal zoomed in 20X ?
(Which by the way is something not many scopes can do, not to mention in this class.)

Your definition  of recent is very different from mine.  Problems with compensation were in scopes from 2017..  that is going on to 7 years now... there were 3 generations of new products released. Just saying...
Picture SDS824X_HD_PR_1GSa is NOT zoomed in, and clearly shows strange strange aberrations, almost there is a reflected wave interfering with one of the internals...
A TDR or VNA  would shed some light on this to see what is going on. (at least on a SDS1000X HD this is possible, but outside the scope of this thread)

There is nothing wrong with sharing a good design, I did not imply this is a bad thing, just an observation, so no defense from your side is needed here.

As for the LF compensation in the front-end, Siglent does not have a good track record for this, specially on the low end scopes. I consider the SDS800 as a low end scope give the fact it has only a 7''  screen hence my curiosity for the LF distortion on this model.

Thanks Performa01 and RF-loop for the tests

Thank you for explaining.  I wasn't defending, just wanted to know what exactly you mean.

But I think "As for the LF compensation in the front-end, Siglent does not have a good track record for this, specially on the low end scopes" is a bit over the top.
There were 2 entry level scopes, 7 years ago, then new, sharing input design that had error in manufacturing on one batch.

Shall I start with all the major problems Keysight, Tek, R&S had in their equipment over the years.
From outright bad designs to major manufacturing problems. Does that makes them "they don't have good reputation making T&M equipment"
Of course not.

He who works makes mistakes... that is just a fact.
In a perfect world there would be none.

In real world, as long as problem is recognized and taken care off, it is all we can ask for.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #51 on: February 02, 2024, 11:51:33 am »
There were 2 entry level scopes, 7 years ago, then new, sharing input design that had error in manufacturing on one batch.
Even that statement is not correct.

The SDS1202X-E, introduced to the public in Autumn 2016, had missing compensation capacitors in the frontend in the very first production batch.

Somewhere I've read claims that the SDS1104/1204X-E, introduced in early 2018, also was affected - but this is Chinese Whispers at best. I got my SDS1104X-E several months before its market start and it did not have any issues. You'll also not be able to find any complaints from users about such issues.

 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #52 on: February 02, 2024, 12:39:34 pm »
There were 2 entry level scopes, 7 years ago, then new, sharing input design that had error in manufacturing on one batch.
Even that statement is not correct.

The SDS1202X-E, introduced to the public in Autumn 2016, had missing compensation capacitors in the frontend in the very first production batch.

Somewhere I've read claims that the SDS1104/1204X-E, introduced in early 2018, also was affected - but this is Chinese Whispers at best. I got my SDS1104X-E several months before its market start and it did not have any issues. You'll also not be able to find any complaints from users about such issues.

I stand corrected then. Thank you for clarification.
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #53 on: February 04, 2024, 05:01:32 pm »
The following content has been added:

Reply #7
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293762/#msg5293762

1.   Digital Channels

The opening posting has been updated accordingly.
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler, Martin72

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #54 on: February 04, 2024, 05:19:37 pm »
Many thanks for being very clear on the capabilities as well as limitations! I also appreciate the older photos of the probes (in the 1104X-E thread, had not come across these yet) -- they give a good impression what to expect.

I am pleasantly surprised that in your screenshot, the digital channels hardly ever show the +- 1 ns skew stated in the datasheet. The DHO900 logic analyser is specified for +- 5 ns skew between digital channels, typical (!). Although I don't know whether it actually exhibits these rather large deviations.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #55 on: February 09, 2024, 12:32:07 pm »
The following content has been added:

Reply #7
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293762/#msg5293762

1.   Digital Channels: fast pulse measurement added

Reply #8
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293765/#msg5293765

1.   Measurements 2 (Trend/Track)
2.   FFT Dynamic range

The opening posting has been updated accordingly.
 
The following users thanked this post: TheDefpom, 2N3055, KungFuJosh, Martin72, Bad_Driver, chillidog

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #56 on: February 13, 2024, 09:58:44 am »
The following content has been added:

Reply #9
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293771/#msg5293771

1.   True Vertical Sensitivity
2.   Peak Detect
3.   Bode Plot at a glance

The opening posting has been updated accordingly.
 
The following users thanked this post: TheDefpom, 2N3055, Mortymore, KungFuJosh, Martin72, orzel

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #57 on: February 13, 2024, 11:08:01 am »
Thank you for your incredible efforts.... :scared:   :-+
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, 2N3055

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #58 on: February 13, 2024, 05:50:44 pm »
Bode Plot Example

Here is my standard test for Bode Plot: a simple 455kHz IF filter, consisting of a Kyocera KBF-455R-20A ceramic 6 element filter with two resonant 2nd order L-matching networks for the 50/1500 ohm impedance transformation at both the input and output.


SDS824X HD_Bode_50_S21_IF455kHz

A complex structure like this has a somewhat chaotic phase response, especially in the passband and the transitions into the stopband. The amplitude shows nice steep transitions into the stopband, yet there are some unwanted resonances as is typical for this type of filters. The important fact is that we need high frequency resolution to capture all the fine details. Furthermore, this test demonstrates at least 90 dB dynamic range.

The data table has been adjusted to the nominal center frequency of the filter, which should be 455 kHz. A vertical cursor marks the selected frequency in the plot and from the table we can see that insertion loss of this filter is some 3.66 dB. The frequency with the lowest attenuation of 3.57 dB is 458 kHz though. This “data cursor” is independent of the manual cursors that are available in the Display menu.

I’ve set up some specific measurements: UF (Upper Frequency), LF (Lower Frequency) and BW (Band Width) to characterize the most important properties of the filter. We can see at a glance that the bandwidth is precisely 21.4 kHz.

For those bothered by the complex phase plot, there is always the option to disable any trace we like:


SDS824X HD_Bode_50_S21_IF455kHz_NP

« Last Edit: February 13, 2024, 05:57:10 pm by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore, Martin72, orzel

Online tszaboo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7392
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX product design
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #59 on: February 13, 2024, 09:58:36 pm »
Few questions: Is that 500 steps to measure the Bode plot? What did you use to make the signal, USB to a desktop AWG or the S-BUS AWG?
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #60 on: February 14, 2024, 09:25:59 am »
Few questions: Is that 500 steps to measure the Bode plot? What did you use to make the signal, USB to a desktop AWG or the S-BUS AWG?
It is 501 points Bode Plot with an external SDG6052X connected via USB.

For better dynamic I've used the SDG6052X in Tracking mode, so I could connct the reference channel and the DUT directly to the AWG and didn't need a power splitter, which would have caused 6 dB signal loss.
 
The following users thanked this post: tszaboo, mawyatt

Offline mawyatt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: us
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #61 on: February 14, 2024, 06:08:35 pm »
Few questions: Is that 500 steps to measure the Bode plot? What did you use to make the signal, USB to a desktop AWG or the S-BUS AWG?
It is 501 points Bode Plot with an external SDG6052X connected via USB.

For better dynamic I've used the SDG6052X in Tracking mode, so I could connct the reference channel and the DUT directly to the AWG and didn't need a power splitter, which would have caused 6 dB signal loss.

Good idea using the AWG tracking mode instead of a splitter when you have a 50 ohm system :-+

Best,
« Last Edit: February 14, 2024, 06:10:53 pm by mawyatt »
Curiosity killed the cat, also depleted my wallet!
~Wyatt Labs by Mike~
 

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #62 on: February 15, 2024, 04:56:10 am »
BodePlot. It is also good to look for performance limits. So what can't be done with it. Here are a couple of examples of where performance becomes a limiting factor. In one, the dynamics of the measurement is limiting, and in the other, the frequency resolution.

First, an IF filter built using the "Bob Peace" style. (there is cascaded 2 very cheap Murata filters and some "this and that" for reduce cross over etc.)
In addition to the form factor of the filter, the stopband is extremely important. This doesn't even come close to see it. Here it is necessary to reach at least somewhere -120----130dB below the passband and this can not at all.
The steepness of the edge is also such that it would be good to have more frequency resolution. Of course, the edges could be run separately with a narrower Span if need go more deep.


455kHz IF filter wide sweep
Green trace is BP noise level. (just empty channel) There can see jump in noise level perhaps due to overlapping between two different RBW when RBW change, just there is one point where BodePlot "receiver" bandwidth (RBW) is changing.


Same filter, BP Span now 50kHz

It is here clear that this BodePlot can not at all see this filter stop band charasteristics. For this, there need be lot of more dynamic range down from 0dBm level.

Steep edges can analyze separately if need more frequency resolution. (50kHz Span minimun step is 100Hz what is not enough for very steep and narrow filters, but this filter is not so steep)



Then two xtal resonators. The frequency resolution ends in both. That approximately 84kHz resonator should be driven with perhaps a 0.1Hz step sweep. Because the minimum Span is 500Hz and the maximum number of samples 501 limit in this case limit is 1Hz.


Here bit over 84kHz resonator.
Now Span is 500Hz and 1Hz steps. (501 pts). It is clear that this 1Hz step is far too big for this if need carefully look series and parrel resonances.
It need least 10 times more resolution.

Notice that the phase information in the table is just random noise. It's a pity that in scalar measurements that part cannot be closed. So user have to ignore them only in his own head. (In this case there is not reference signal at all.)



And same here in next.

Cheap around 2.4MHz resonator. Sweep resolution is not well enough but here (if any reason) if need look series and/or parallel resonances mode more detailed, here can do it running these separately using more narrow span. Limit is 500Hz Span and 501pts what give 1Hz resolution.




In the ad, of course, a real careless salesman could write that the resolution is up to 275204396 pts/decade, which is not false if we are precise. On the other hand, it is in all cases at least 70/decade when full sweep 10Hz - 120MHz.







Finally, a picture of what it can do quite easily.


This is very simple cascaded HiPass CRCR (green trace) and LoPass RCRC filter for get BandPass (yellow trace). Traces are BandPass, HighPass and one trace (pink) is after first CR in HiPass.
As can see there is visible also this capacitor resonace.
Green trace signal use 1x probe. (this is reason for higher freq attenuating)

But overall it still amazing how much this can do.

It's good to know what can do. It's also good to know what can not.
« Last Edit: February 15, 2024, 08:21:20 am by rf-loop »
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, Mortymore, Martin72, orzel, mawyatt

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #63 on: February 15, 2024, 09:21:00 am »
SPI Speed Test

We could ask the question: how fast an SPI data stream can we decode with a 200 MHz DSO? Huch much oversampling do we need?

For some DSOs it is said that they need a fair bit of oversampling for proper decoding. Yet the answer is, a proper implementation doesn’t require much in this regard, hence it should be perfectly adequate to have a bandwidth three times the SPI clock frequency. The sample rate on the other hand should be irrelevant, as long as the Nyquist criterion for the required bandwidth is fulfilled. That makes for more than 6 times the SPI clock frequency.

The SDS824X HD true bandwidth is limited to 200 MHz in full channel mode and its sample rate is 500 MSa/s. According to the hypothesis stated above, this bandwidth would allow a max. SPI clock of 66 MHz and the sample rate is sufficient for that. The only way to know how good this works is to try it out…

I felt adventurous, hence didn’t bother with 66 MHz, but tried 100 MHz right away:


SDS824X_HD_SPI_100Mbps

The above screenshot shows a bidirectional (full duplex) 100 Mbps SPI data stream with a message length of 11 bytes. No special trigger has been used, just falling edge trigger on the /CS line.

The decoding works without issues, but how can we prove that the results are correct? Here’s a simple test: I’ve replaced the MOSI signal with a phase synchronized copy of the 100 MHz clock signal, phase shifted 90° such that it is always sampled at its low state and then shifted by another 180° so that it is always sampled at its high state. This way we’re putting the maximum stress on the acquisition chain, whereas it would be an easy task if we had just static signals for MISO/MOSI.


SDS824X_HD_SPI_100Mbps_0


SDS824X_HD_SPI_100Mbps_1

The expected results of all 0x00 for the first test and all 0xFF for the second one has been achieved, proving that there is a good chance to decode a 100 Mbps SPI data stream correctly with only twice the bandwidth and five times the sample rate.

If we trigger on the rising edge of the clock, we can produce an eye diagram which clearly shows that there is plenty of margin for correct decoding. Even the MISO signal, while slightly delayed, causes no problem in this scenario.


SDS824X_HD_SPI_100Mbps_Eye

The fast pulses look very soft on the 200 MHz scope and the clock signal is a pure sine now, since we can only capture the 2nd harmonic, but not the 3rd.

Compare this to the same clock and MOSI signals displayed at ten times the bandwidth of the SDS6204X HD:


SDS6204_Pro_H12_SPI_100Mbps_Eye

So, could we go up to even 200 Mbps maybe?


SDS824X_HD_SPI_200Mbps_Eye

This is quite revealing. There might be a small chance to get it working with a fair share of luck, yet this certainly isn’t a robust solution. The transitions are way too slow to give any reasonable error margin for the decoder.

« Last Edit: February 15, 2024, 09:37:15 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, egonotto, ebastler, newbrain, Mortymore, gf, Martin72, mawyatt

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #64 on: February 15, 2024, 10:25:37 am »
SDS824X_HD_SPI_200Mbps_Eye

This is quite revealing. There might be a small chance to get it working with a fair share of luck, yet this certainly isn’t a robust solution. The transitions are way too slow to give any reasonable error margin for the decoder.

The eye diagram is still very nice and has fully open eyes. If MISO/MOSI are sampled at the zero-crossing of the clock, there is still plenty of error margin, although there is a small time offset between the 4 signals. I think the potential problem is rather that the decoder is possibly working directly with the original (asynchronous) 500MSa/s samples. With prior interpolation/upsampling, I think decoding should still work fine. Can the decoder run on an interpolated math trace?
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #65 on: February 15, 2024, 11:59:01 am »
The eye diagram is still very nice and has fully open eyes. If MISO/MOSI are sampled at the zero-crossing of the clock, there is still plenty of error margin, although there is a small time offset between the 4 signals. I think the potential problem is rather that the decoder is possibly working directly with the original (asynchronous) 500MSa/s samples. With prior interpolation/upsampling, I think decoding should still work fine. Can the decoder run on an interpolated math trace?
Yes, the eye is wide open, but timing is extremely critical. The slightest phase shift throws off the decoder and during my tests, I could never get it completely stable.

I do not know whether the decoders work on the raw sample data, but I guess not on the other hand I do know that there is no reconstruction/interpolation for slower time bases, where the record length approaches or exceeds the screen width. It might rather also have to do with the digital 200 MHz bandwidth limiter, that is activated whenever more than two channels are active and helps to suppress aliasing artifacts in the region from 250 to ~290 MHz.

Decoders cannot work on anything other than true input channels. Depending on the operation, Math traces might get too slow to act as reliable source for the decoders, and even more importantly they are not suitable as a trigger source. The serial triggers are implemented in hardware and operate on a separate trigger data stream, which is never decimated but always either sin(x)/x reconstructed or linearly interpolated, according to the user settings.


The 200 Mbps SPI challenge

While we cannot decode a SPI data stream in 4-channel mode, it appears to be no problem if we stick to just two channels (I’ve switched to 32 bit words by now):


SDS824X_HD_SPI_200Mbps_2Ch

Here’s the obligate 0 and 1 test:


SDS824X_HD_SPI_200Mbps_2Ch_0


SDS824X_HD_SPI_200Mbps_2Ch_1

… and the eye diagram:


SDS824X_HD_SPI_200Mbps_2Ch_Eye

The eye-diagram looks way better now, as the bandwidth is 245 MHz in this configuration and there is no digital filter. The sample rate is twice as high, so your guess is as good as mine as to which of these factors actually makes all the difference.

EDIT: my guess now is that it's actually the sample rate.


« Last Edit: February 15, 2024, 03:56:51 pm by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler, Mortymore, gf, Martin72, orzel

Offline mawyatt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #66 on: February 15, 2024, 06:22:02 pm »
BodePlot. It is also good to look for performance limits. So what can't be done with it. Here are a couple of examples of where performance becomes a limiting factor. In one, the dynamics of the measurement is limiting, and in the other, the frequency resolution.

First, an IF filter built using the "Bob Peace" style. (there is cascaded 2 very cheap Murata filters and some "this and that" for reduce cross over etc.)
In addition to the form factor of the filter, the stopband is extremely important. This doesn't even come close to see it. Here it is necessary to reach at least somewhere -120----130dB below the passband and this can not at all.
The steepness of the edge is also such that it would be good to have more frequency resolution. Of course, the edges could be run separately with a narrower Span if need go more deep.


455kHz IF filter wide sweep
Green trace is BP noise level. (just empty channel) There can see jump in noise level perhaps due to overlapping between two different RBW when RBW change, just there is one point where BodePlot "receiver" bandwidth (RBW) is changing.


Same filter, BP Span now 50kHz

It is here clear that this BodePlot can not at all see this filter stop band charasteristics. For this, there need be lot of more dynamic range down from 0dBm level.

Steep edges can analyze separately if need more frequency resolution. (50kHz Span minimun step is 100Hz what is not enough for very steep and narrow filters, but this filter is not so steep)



Then two xtal resonators. The frequency resolution ends in both. That approximately 84kHz resonator should be driven with perhaps a 0.1Hz step sweep. Because the minimum Span is 500Hz and the maximum number of samples 501 limit in this case limit is 1Hz.


Here bit over 84kHz resonator.
Now Span is 500Hz and 1Hz steps. (501 pts). It is clear that this 1Hz step is far too big for this if need carefully look series and parrel resonances.
It need least 10 times more resolution.

Notice that the phase information in the table is just random noise. It's a pity that in scalar measurements that part cannot be closed. So user have to ignore them only in his own head. (In this case there is not reference signal at all.)



And same here in next.

Cheap around 2.4MHz resonator. Sweep resolution is not well enough but here (if any reason) if need look series and/or parallel resonances mode more detailed, here can do it running these separately using more narrow span. Limit is 500Hz Span and 501pts what give 1Hz resolution.




In the ad, of course, a real careless salesman could write that the resolution is up to 275204396 pts/decade, which is not false if we are precise. On the other hand, it is in all cases at least 70/decade when full sweep 10Hz - 120MHz.







Finally, a picture of what it can do quite easily.


This is very simple cascaded HiPass CRCR (green trace) and LoPass RCRC filter for get BandPass (yellow trace). Traces are BandPass, HighPass and one trace (pink) is after first CR in HiPass.
As can see there is visible also this capacitor resonace.
Green trace signal use 1x probe. (this is reason for higher freq attenuating)

But overall it still amazing how much this can do.

It's good to know what can do. It's also good to know what can not.

My god man, it's just a DSO after all :palm:

Evidently (we don't have one.....yet!!), a pretty damn good one at that :-+

Best,
Curiosity killed the cat, also depleted my wallet!
~Wyatt Labs by Mike~
 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055, Mortymore

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #67 on: February 16, 2024, 09:26:03 pm »
Mask Test

Consistent with the previous SPI speed test, I want to demonstrate the usefulness of the full speed mask test, as it’s a perfect tool for automatic eye diagram monitoring.

Let’s get back to the 100 Mbps eye diagram of the previous test and set up a mask for it. For this, there is an integrated mask editor; we cannot just use the automatic mask creation here, because we don’t want to define a particular waveform with certain tolerances, but rather some forbidden area, so that the “eye” stays wide open.


SDS824X HD_Mask_Editor

I didn’t spend much time creating a perfect mask; this one has just been cobbled together quite quickly. Furthermore, the eye most likely doesn’t need to be that wide open in practical applications, yet this is just for demonstration’s sake.

Now we let the mask test run. With the clean signals produced in a near ideal lab environment, we could have run that test for days without any failure, so I’ve added 224 mVrms noise with 500 MHz bandwidth to the data signal, hoping that I’ll get a mask violation eventually:


SDS824X HD_Mask_Test_run

The mask test is implemented in hardware, so we are getting a high number of passes within a short time. The screenshot has been taken a few seconds after the test started and up to this point, no mask violation has occurred. Yet it only takes a little while longer and a total of 411262 test runs until the first violation occurs.


SDS824X HD_Mask_Test_fail

As can be seen, the mask test was set up in a way that it would beep and stop on the first violation. Alternatively, we can also get an automatic screenshot every time the violation occurs.

This is another small difference to the SDS2000X HD: there we can also have the option “Failure to History”, which means that all mask violations (and only these) are stored in the history, so we can have the mask test run overnight and then analyze all the mask violations in peace later.

The info block in the display tells us that the failure rate in this test scenario was less than 0.001%. Of course, it can be seen quite clearly that this violation wouldn’t have prevented the SPI decoder to deliver correct results. It’s all a matter of setting up the mask appropriately…
« Last Edit: February 16, 2024, 09:29:18 pm by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, 2N3055, Mortymore, Martin72, orzel

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #68 on: February 18, 2024, 11:18:18 am »
Zoom Expectations

When using a 12-bit DSO, some people tend to get enthusiastic and expect miracles. Maybe we all should come back to earth and ask ourselves what we can realistically expect.

There’s the zoom, where the SDS1000X HD has been shown to exhibit some Sinc artefacts at extreme zoom settings. But shouldn’t we first of all get a feeling what a realistic zoom factor is?

Consider a signal that has to be viewed at a vertical gain of 1 V/div in order to fit on the screen:


SDS824X HD_PR_H50ns_Stop

Now we want to zoom in, e.g. 5x:


SDS824X HD_PR_H50ns_Stop_Zoom5

We already see a bit of noise creeping in. Apart from that, we should determine how much zoom is feasible, before we try to zoom in any further:

Just like the SDS800X HD, an SDS1000X HD will have 480 LSB (aka codes) per division. Consequently, 20x zoom is about the sensible limit, because then we get 24 LSB per division – and with this, there would still be a chance to see something meaningful. 20x zoom means 1 V / 20 = 50 mV/div:


SDS824X HD_PR_H50ns_Stop_Zoom20

Now the noise is stronger and it already gets hard to spot any details. Yet we can take it to the extreme and try 100x zoom:


SDS824X HD_PR_H50ns_Stop_Zoom100

We are now at 4.8 codes per division and what we see is just (mostly granular) noise – all this has nothing to do with the real signal anymore. Most obvious when viewing it in Dots mode.


SDS824X HD_PR_H50ns_Stop_Zoom100_Dots

We can take it one step further and zoom in horizontally as well (while still in Vectors mode), so that it becomes less obvious that we’re actually looking at pure noise:


SDS824X HD_PR_H2ns_Stop_Zoom100

As can be seen, the SDS800X HD doesn’t show any Sinc artifacts, yet the much more important insight should be that it is completely irrelevant what a DSO shows at such extreme zoom levels, where we see nothing but noise anyway.

Of course, we could also do it the correct way. Whenever we need to use some extreme zoom, then we also need a means to

a)   Increase the vertical resolution
b)   Reduce the noise

The tool of choice for repetitive signals is Averaging, because it increases the vertical resolution, suppresses any modulation (hence also noise) and doesn’t affect the bandwidth.

Even at the extreme 100x zoom setting we can get the following:


SDS824X HD_PR_H50ns_Stop_Zoom100_AVg1024

We leave the input channel at its original gain of 1 V/div, but set the final time base while still in Run mode and set up a math trace with averaging, which can be displayed at any vertical scale, i.e. also 10 mV/div for a 100x zoom. When the desired number of averages has been processed, we can stop the acquisition, yet this is not required, as the input channel is left unchanged anyway. In this example it is 1024 averages shown at 10 mV/div, hence a 100x zoom again.

Now compare this with the previous screenshots. This one now has much less curves and kinks than even the pointless capture at 2 ns/div before, proving that it’s just nonsense (=noise) what we get at such zoom levels without proper averaging.

Of course, 1024 averages are quite a lot. In theory, it would enhance the resolution by 10 bits, making for a total of 22 bits. The current platform doesn’t support sample data and digital signal processing results at a higher resolution than 16 bits, so this is what we get as soon as we use 16x or higher averaging. The ENOB on the other hand benefits a lot more from this, even though it’s limited to 16 bits as well. But it starts at just 8.4 bit according to the data sheet, and 1024x averaging will increase this by 5 bits for a total of ~13.4 bits.

« Last Edit: February 18, 2024, 11:22:06 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: orzel

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #69 on: February 18, 2024, 11:34:07 am »
There’s the zoom, where the SDS1000X HD has been shown to exhibit some Sinc artefacts at extreme zoom settings. But shouldn’t we first of all get a feeling what a realistic zoom factor is?

Thank you for following up on the discussion in the SDS1000/3000X HD thread. But I think you missed a key point of that discussion.

Even without any zoom (in your first screenshot), the effective vertical resolution of the trace display is cut in half! There are always pairs of identical pixels in the vertical direction, resulting in a trace that is fatter than necessary and has lower resolution -- despite the fact that there must be plenty of vertical resolution to spare in the actual sample data. See the magnified view below.

Why does the scope do that? The Math trace in your final screenshot shows proper resolution of individual pixels.

 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #70 on: February 18, 2024, 12:22:26 pm »
Thank you for following up on the discussion in the SDS1000/3000X HD thread. But I think you missed a key point of that discussion.

Even without any zoom (in your first screenshot), the effective vertical resolution of the trace display is cut in half! There are always pairs of identical pixels in the vertical direction, resulting in a trace that is fatter than necessary and has lower resolution -- despite the fact that there must be plenty of vertical resolution to spare in the actual sample data.
Just because I didn't address that point yet, it doesn't mean that I "missed the point".

Regarding the pixel rendering, I've already looked into this and prepared a posting, until it occured to me that this product is not even released yet and I should rather report any issues, rather than publishing them. Because that's my personal approach for public reviews prior to a product release: I publish the content as I've planned it and minor bugs that I notice along the way will be reported, but not explicitely published. In case of severe bugs that prevent me from doing what I have planned, I would refuse to publish anything at all and just say the product is not yet ready for review.

To cut a long story short, the "point that I missed" has long been reported when I posted the "Zoom Expectations" article.

Of course the Sinc artifacts in the SDS1000X HD are a bug, and this has been reported quite a while ago (not by me, as I don't have an SDS1000X HD), but there has been Chinese New Year silence in the past two weeks and then again, just like the SDS800X HD, the SDS1000X HD is not even released outside of China yet.

 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, ebastler, 2N3055, Mortymore

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #71 on: February 18, 2024, 12:33:08 pm »
Just because I didn't address that point yet, it doesn't mean that I "missed the point". [...] To cut a long story short, the "point that I missed" has long been reported when I posted the "Zoom Expectations" article.

Apologies if I caused offense, I did not mean to. It just appeared to me that you had posted this in direct response to the current discussion in the SDS1000/3000X HD thread, and I wanted to point out that the vertical screen resolution issue discussed there is in fact not related to the Zoom function.

I think Siglent would be doing themselves a big favor if they can change the trace rendering to make use of the full vertical screen resolution. In the SDS1000/3000X HD thread, this started as a complaint about the "poor screen" used in the Siglents, in comparison with the Rigol DHOs -- but it turns out that the slightly lower physical resolution only plays a very minor role in this.

Edit: Thanks for the explanation in the other thread. So this is not going to be improved, due to hardware (FPGA block RAM) constraints in the budget HD scopes. Which is not a big deal for the SDS800X HD with its smaller screen, but a pity for the SDS1000X HD, in my opinion.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2024, 12:58:03 pm by ebastler »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, Mortymore, artur0089

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #72 on: February 19, 2024, 04:52:56 pm »
Serial Decoders

This is just a quick test to demonstrate some serial decoders. For convenience sake (simple connections to the test board without having to bother with probes), I’ve used the digital channels of the SLA1016.

The I2C decoder has already been used in the course of the Digital Channels test in Reply #7, so I’ll not show it again here:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293762/#msg5293762

Here’s some SPI data stream with simple edge trigger on /CS:


SDS824X HD_Digital_SPI

This is some UART data stream in 8N1 format with serial UART trigger on the start condition of a byte:


SDS824X HD_Digital_UART

Finally, a CAN telegram with serial CAN trigger on the start condition.


SDS824X HD_Digital_CAN

« Last Edit: February 19, 2024, 04:55:34 pm by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore, Martin72, orzel

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #73 on: February 21, 2024, 09:18:29 am »
Cursors
Cursors

Not everyone might be familiar with the various concepts of cursor measurements, so here comes a brief explanation together with some examples.

There are three kinds of cursors: Manual, Tracking and Measure.

In Manual mode, the x and y cursor pairs can be moved freely and used like calipers to measure distances in both axes, even at the same time if so desired.


SDS824X HD_Cursors_Manual

In Track mode, the x-cursor pair can be moved freely, whereas the y-cursor pair will always track the selected signal trace. Of course, this makes most kind of cursor measurements much easier and also more precise.


SDS824X HD_Cursors_Track

Finally, in Measure mode the cursors are fully automatic and just visualize the points of the signal trace that are used by a certain automatic measurement. Here are some examples:

Rise Time


SDS824X HD_Cursors_Measure_Rise

For the 10-90% rise time measurement, the measure cursors show the corresponding positions for the 10% and 90% threshold on the time axis.

Rising Edge Overshoot


SDS824X HD_Cursors_Measure_ROV

For the rising edge overshoot, the measure cursors show the amplitude difference between top and positive peak.

Positive Pulse Width


SDS824X HD_Cursors_Measure_Width

For the pulse width (according to the thresholds configured in the Measurement Config, default is 50-50%), the measure cursors show the corresponding positions on the time axis.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2024, 09:20:53 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, egonotto, Mortymore, Martin72, orzel, mawyatt, Bad_Driver

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #74 on: February 23, 2024, 08:59:01 am »
System Performance with SP5050A Probe

Many folks worry about the adequacy of the supplied probes.

There are few situations where it would be appropriate to use passive 10x high impedance probes at a test node within a circuit carrying >100 MHz signals. With a tip capacitance of 10 pF the impedance at 100 MHz is just 160 ohms and forms a low-pass filter together with all not extremely low source resistances. This might still be okay for low impedance nodes like the outputs of line drivers, but certainly not anywhere else.

Apart from the fact, that at higher frequencies alternative probing solutions are required, the previous test of the good old 100 MHz PP510 has shown that they do not limit the system bandwidth, but even extend it to ~274 MHz and the rise time is quite adequate at 2 ns, see section “Probe Bandwidth” in Reply #5:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293756/#msg5293756

If you wonder what you could gain with a much better (and much more expensive) probe – here’s a test with Siglent’s top model, the 500 MHz SP5050A.

Just to give you an idea, I’ve once tested the quite similar SP3050A, which is also rated 500 MHz, as always using the industry standard test with 25 ohm source impedance (2nd screenshot in Reply #90):

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/at-last-siglent_s-sds5054x-touchscreen/msg2165488/#msg2165488

On a 1 GHz SDS5104X, the system bandwidth was 1.096 GHz with this “500 MHz” probe. Of course, this is useless in practice as it would only work on a terminated 50 ohm port with the supplied coax-adapter – and in that case we could dispend with the probe and just use a direct coax connection instead.

Now here’s the system frequency response with SP5050A up to 500 MHz:


SDS824X_HD_Probe_PP5050A_FR

It can be seen, that this 500 MHz probe extends the system bandwidth to ~291 MHz (274 MHz with PP510 and 244 MHz with direct coax connection).

Of course, the probe has been properly LF-compensated prior to the measurements:


SDS824X_HD_Probe_PP5050A_PR_1kHz

The transition times are now in the 1.7-1.8 ns ballpark, hence very similar to the direct coax connection.

The ultimate test for proper HF-compensation is done with a fast (1 ns) risetime 1 MHz square wave.


SDS824X_HD_Probe_PP5050A_PR_1MHz_Zoom

It can be seen, that the SP5050A is a pretty good match for this scope because the initial overshoot is about the same level as the top of the pulse.

Verdict: yes, the SP5050A outperforms a PP510 in just about every regard. It’s a very nice probe overall and it sure demonstrates the bounds of possibilities with the SDS824X HD. There still isn’t a huge difference after all.

« Last Edit: February 23, 2024, 09:00:49 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, Mortymore, KungFuJosh, Martin72, orzel

Online Mortymore

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 444
  • Country: pt
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #75 on: February 24, 2024, 01:04:44 pm »
Hi!

I have a couple of questions that address the probe settings, namely, about "custom" in the "Probe attenuation" setting, and if it's possible to set the probe for current.

The datasheet for the SDS800X-HD (pg.10) and for the SDS1000X-HD (pg.9), states for Probe attenuation the options: 1X, 10X, 100X and custom. The flexibility of this last option is very important to me to set proper values on the oscilloscope, when monitoring IV from an SDL1000. The IV output ranges up to 10v, independently of the voltage or current scale set in the SDL.

So, for a current scale of 5A, the scope should be set for an attenuation of 0.5X, that is, when measuring 5A, the SLD is outputting through I.monitor 10V. If one can set a multiplier of 0.5X and Current instead of voltage, the scope will "translate" de correct interpretation of what's being measured.

My IDS2000E, can do this partially. I can set the channel to display Amps, instead of Volts, but the probe attenuation is only available in multiple steps of 1X, 2X and 5X.
Since the SDL has a scale of 36V;150V, to display the correct voltage the scope would need an attenuation factor of 3.6X;15X, and for Amps 30A;5A a factor of 3X;0.5X. I only have available the latest on my scope.



Hope I manage to transmit the idea.
I would appreciate if someone could clarify about the options available to the probe settings for the SDS800X-HD/SDS1000X-HD.
Sorry if there's a picture were that was already shown, or talked about, that I have missed.

I'll take the opportunity to thank Performa01 for is initiative and gigantic work on this thread.
Thanks
« Last Edit: February 24, 2024, 01:18:53 pm by Mortymore »
 

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #76 on: February 24, 2024, 02:15:14 pm »
Quote
I'll take the opportunity to thank Performa01 for is initiative and gigantic work on this thread.

Me too, and I suggest you move this question to the other, more general SDS800 thread. :-+

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds800x-hd-12-bit-dsos-coming/

Online Mortymore

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 444
  • Country: pt
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #77 on: February 24, 2024, 02:58:28 pm »
Quote
I'll take the opportunity to thank Performa01 for is initiative and gigantic work on this thread.

Me too, and I suggest you move this question to the other, more general SDS800 thread. :-+

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds800x-hd-12-bit-dsos-coming/

Thanks for the suggestion but I'd prefer to get the answer here, were the 800-HD functionality is being address, than mix it up with the colour opinions chat  ;)
If that's OK for the OP and moderators, naturally.

If my questions were answered, it will serve us all I expect. Besides the intention is to know if it will be able to match the Siglent scopes functionality with the Siglent Loads potential.
If not, I hope it will be considered by Siglent in the future the ability to set the inputs of the scope as a current probe, and get to show Amps, not only Volts, since I expect the ratio option thing is doable with the existing "custom" option.

Regards

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #78 on: February 24, 2024, 03:40:04 pm »
Hi,
Usermanual, chapter 11.2, channel setup...

https://www.batronix.com/files/Siglent/Oszilloskope/SDS2000X-HD/Datasheets/SDS2000X_HD_UserManual_EN01A.pdf

It´s from the 2k HD, but should be the same.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #79 on: February 24, 2024, 04:15:31 pm »
Quote
I'll take the opportunity to thank Performa01 for is initiative and gigantic work on this thread.

Me too, and I suggest you move this question to the other, more general SDS800 thread. :-+

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds800x-hd-12-bit-dsos-coming/

Thanks for the suggestion but I'd prefer to get the answer here, were the 800-HD functionality is being address, than mix it up with the colour opinions chat  ;)
If that's OK for the OP and moderators, naturally.

If my questions were answered, it will serve us all I expect. Besides the intention is to know if it will be able to match the Siglent scopes functionality with the Siglent Loads potential.
If not, I hope it will be considered by Siglent in the future the ability to set the inputs of the scope as a current probe, and get to show Amps, not only Volts, since I expect the ratio option thing is doable with the existing "custom" option.

Regards

I don't think Siglent even has any scope they are making now that does not support choice if channel shows V or A...
And then you have custom probe scaling factor, fractional... 2 of them per channel.
And not only that, but if you make one channel V and other A and in math multiply them it show in watts..

 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #80 on: February 24, 2024, 06:23:58 pm »
Custom Probe Factors

This is a demonstration how to use custom probe factors for current measurement.

Consider we want to measure current using channel 4 and this should be set up for a rather weird conversion factor of 0.1234567 amperes per volt. First thing to do would be changing the Channel units from Volts to Amperes:


SDS824X HD_Ch_Current_1V_A

Now we have set channel 4 to measure current at a conversion factor of 1 V/A (one volt per ampere), as it is displayed in the channel tab now. But in our example, we need a different conversion factor. Consequently, we enter the Probe menu:


SDS824X HD_Ch_Current_Probes

There is currently 1.0 V/A selected, and we can also get some more predefined probe factors, but not the one we want to use. Thankfully, there are also two permanent user settings. We can preset them to our most used custom probes and can use them just like the predefined ones from now on. Tapping on the user setting, we get the input keypad for the custom V/A setting:


SDS824X HD_Ch_Current_Probe_Input

Here we can enter any desired conversion factor from 1 µA/V up to 1 MA/V with at least 6 digits resolution. For example, here is 0.1234567 V/A:


SDS824X HD_Ch_Current_Probe_0.1234567

Here’s a measurement example: channel 1 is set to 1x voltage probe at 500 mV/div, whereas channel 4 is set to a custom probe at 4.05 A/div.


SDS824X HD_Ch_0.1234567_Power

During normal use, channel 4 would be set to 500 mV/div with a 1x voltage probe. The custom probe factor of 0.1234567 V/A is equivalent to 8.1000059 A/V. This multiplied by 500 mV/div results in 4.050003 A/div, just as it is displayed in the corresponding channel tab

Just for fun, I’ve set up a math operation, simply multiplying the two channels to get the power. Trace F1 shows a scaling of 8.1 W/div and a vertical offset of 0.0 W.

The measurements show the standard deviation (=AC-RMS) for channels 1 in volts and for channel 4 in amperes. Formula trace F1 shows the AC-RMS power in watts.


« Last Edit: February 24, 2024, 06:47:19 pm by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, Mortymore, Martin72, mwb1100, orzel

Online Mortymore

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 444
  • Country: pt
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #81 on: February 24, 2024, 08:08:29 pm »
Thank you Martin72 and 2N3055 for your replies, and a special appreciation to Performa01 for taking the time to make such a detailed exposition of the probe settings.  :-+

Best regards
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, 2N3055

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #82 on: February 26, 2024, 10:08:45 am »
Dots Mode

Not every DSO has it, but Dots display mode is essential whenever the DSO gets near the limits of the sample theorem, hence signal reconstruction – or even acquisition itself – appears flawed.

As an example, consider a 12 MHz square wave with quite moderate 3 ns rise time, hence a perfectly adequate signal to a 200 MHz oscilloscope like the SDS824X HD.


SDS824X HD_Square_12MHz_3ns_1GSa_Vect

The screenshot above shows the standard use case: Auto memory with at least 10 Mpts max. record length, Sin(x)/x reconstruction, Vector display mode, no Color grading, Persistence off.

In 2 channel mode, where we get a sample rate of 1 GSa/s without aggressive AA-filter, the waveform looks pretty good. With these settings, it would be pretty hard to provoke major reconstruction errors or even aliasing on a deep memory DSO like the SDS824X HD. Yet there might still be situations where we can’t get a sufficient real time sample rate. To demonstrate this, we can use the Constant Sample Rate setting instead of Auto Memory.

As a first step, let’s reduce the sample rate to 250 MSa/s, which many would consider still adequate for a 12 MHz signal:


SDS824X HD_Square_12MHz_3ns_250MSa_Vect

Even though the fundamental frequency of the signal is just 12 MHz and the Nyquist frequency (125 MHz) is more than ten times higher, we still get to see massive reconstruction artefacts and aliasing already. So much for the sometimes mentioned “rule of thumb” which suggests that a bandwidth five times the repetition frequency of a square wave would be adequate…

Let’s take this one step further and set the sample rate to 100 MSa/s:


SDS824X HD_Square_12MHz_3ns_100MSa_Vect

With the previous settings, we still got something remotely similar to a square wave. We go one step further and reduce the sample rate to 50 MSa/s:


SDS824X HD_Square_12MHz_3ns_50MSa_Vect

Now we finally got a pure sine wave with lots of amplitude modulation and jitter – certainly not a very good representation of the original waveform anymore. We still want to take it to the extreme and reduce the sample rate even further to 20 MSa/s, thus violating Nyquist even for the fundamental frequency:


SDS824X HD_Square_12MHz_3ns_20MSa_Vect

This last screenshot needs not be commented, as it speaks for itself – except for the fact, that the SDS824X HD won’t let us use the original time base of 20 ns/div with such a low sample rate anymore. As a consequence, the DSO has automatically switched to 50 ns/div.

Anyway, this is not the end – after all we’ve got the Dots display mode up our sleeves:


SDS824X HD_Square_12MHz_3ns_20MSa_Dots

Yes, with only 1 point per division (10 points for the whole record!), there is no contiguous trace and the rendering is a bit dim. Yet nothing that could not be improved by a little Persistence time:


SDS824X HD_Square_12MHz_3ns_20MSa_Dots_P1

What we get now is a perfect visual representation of the original signal – within the bounds of the 244 MHz bandwidth, that is – despite the effective sample rate of only 20 MSa/s.

« Last Edit: February 26, 2024, 10:12:31 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, ebastler, matus, Mortymore, Martin72, orzel, Bad_Driver

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #83 on: February 26, 2024, 10:16:53 am »
Thank you, Performa01 -- that was an impressive demonstration case for dot mode!

But I am intrigued: How can triggering work so well in the under-sampled acquisition modes, to allow the scope to precisely overlay the multiple captures?
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #84 on: February 26, 2024, 10:34:06 am »
Thank you, Performa01 -- that was an impressive demonstration case for dot mode!

But I am intrigued: How can triggering work so well in the under-sampled acquisition modes, to allow the scope to precisely overlay the multiple captures?

The ADC and the trigger engine still run at the full sample rate. The down-sampling to the acquisition sample rate happens thereafter.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, ebastler

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #85 on: February 26, 2024, 10:38:06 am »
Ah, ok -- so dot mode can't work any magic if one really pushes the scope to the limits of its sampling rate. That makes sense, thank you!
 

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #86 on: February 26, 2024, 10:46:15 am »
Ah, ok -- so dot mode can't work any magic if one really pushes the scope to the limits of its sampling rate. That makes sense, thank you!

The trigger engine also interpolates, i.e. it can determine the trigger point with sub-nanosecond resolution @1Gsa/s ADC sample rate.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2024, 11:18:22 am by gf »
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #87 on: February 26, 2024, 12:17:50 pm »
The trigger engine also interpolates, i.e. it can determine the trigger point with sub-nanosecond resolution @1Gsa/s ADC sample rate.

But that would be the same interpolation algorithm which is used for sin(x)/x interpolation of the traces in line mode, right? Hence would suffer from the same aliasing problems if the scope is pushed beyond its sampling rate limits?
 

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #88 on: February 26, 2024, 01:24:28 pm »
The trigger engine also interpolates, i.e. it can determine the trigger point with sub-nanosecond resolution @1Gsa/s ADC sample rate.

But that would be the same interpolation algorithm which is used for sin(x)/x interpolation of the traces in line mode, right? Hence would suffer from the same aliasing problems if the scope is pushed beyond its sampling rate limits?

Good question what kind of interpolation it uses.

Sure, as long as the front-end provides sufficient alias rejection for the ADC sample rate (i.e. for frequencies >= fs/2), it is not surprising that a sinc trigger interpolation works well.

Some time ago I was indeed curios what happens if this is not granted, and did a simulation. For the attached plots I'm assuming a "maximally flat" 4th order Butterworth frequency response with -3dB cut-off at 250MHz. This gives sufficient alias rejection for 1Gsa/s, but clearly not for 500MSa/s. As expected, with sinc interpolation, the 1GSa/s traces line up cleanly in figure1, but the sinc-interpolated 500MSa/s traces in figure2 suffer from aliasing and and don't line up. The simulated dots plot with trigger interpolation in figure 3 is still nice at 500MSa/s, despite violation of the sampling theorem, but the shape is no longer perfectly correct. All three plots use sinc interpolation for the simulated trigger (i.e. for the horizontal alignment of the overlaid traces or dots). The trigger level is 0.9, trailing edge.

So interestingly, trigger interpolation + dots mode still seems works to some extent (not in general, of course) if the sampling theorem is violated.

[ Btw, ignore the horizontal line at y=0 in figure3. ]
« Last Edit: February 26, 2024, 01:38:02 pm by gf »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #89 on: February 26, 2024, 04:00:08 pm »
Good question what kind of interpolation it uses.

A while ago, Siglent have changed that strategy and the trigger interpolation seems now to be the same as for the waveform display/processing.

I other words, even in Dots display mode where there should be no difference for the display waveform, the choice of linear (x) interpolation vs. Sin(x)/x reconstruction still matters for the trigger. Yet I don't think this will make a huge difference as soon as Nyquist is violated in the trigger path.
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #90 on: February 28, 2024, 08:22:14 am »
X-Y

As usual, X-Y mode is hardware accelerated with high waveform update rates and intensity or color grading.

An important property is the waveform update rate in X-Y acquisition mode and it shows that at faster time bases (≤2 µs/div) the trigger rate is even higher in X-Y mode than the corresponding 2-channel Y-t mode. The table below shows the trigger rates for various time base settings from 100 ns/div up to 1 ms/div and compares the trigger rates in regular dual channel Y-t mode to the X-Y mode:


SDS824X HD_XY_UpdateRate

The maximum speed at 100 ns/div was more than 63000 updates per second and X-Y mode limits the time base so that it cannot get any faster than that. Up to 1 µs/div, the update speed is always greater than 10000 per second and from there it scales as expected, i.e. the trigger speed is proportional to the record length.

The figures stated above are valid for the full sample rate of 1 GSa/s, which also means record lengths of e.g. 10 Mpts at 1 ms/div. In other words, these numbers represent the worst case and X-Y operation could be accelerated by limiting the record length (thus also reducing the sample rate).

I want to show some examples, which also demonstrate the intensity and color grading. First a familiar Lissajous figure, and then some I/Q waveform patterns at 1 Mbps, which can serve as a speed demonstration because of their complexity.


SDS824X HD_Sine_1MHz_5MHz_45deg_IG


SDS824X HD_QPSK_1Mbps_CG


SDS824X HD_8PSK_1Mbps


SDS824X HD_D8PSK_1Mbps_CG


SDS824X HD_16QAM_1Mbps_CG

« Last Edit: February 28, 2024, 08:25:16 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: tautech, ebastler, Mortymore, Martin72, orzel

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #91 on: February 28, 2024, 08:29:53 am »
Thank you for demonstrating XY mode. The waveform update rates are quite impressive for this scope class, and the color grading is a nice touch!

I guess it was to be expected that the limited trace resolution (grouping 2 pixels together) now applies to the X axis as well, due to the limitations of the block RAM capacity in the FPGA.

But why did Siglent choose to render this differently in the X direction?  On the Y axis, pairs of pixels showing the same brightness are displayed. On the X axis, every other line is simply left black, resulting in rather pronounced scan lines and a dim display overall. Are there technical reasons for this, or was it a UI design choice? Or is it a user-changeable setting maybe?
« Last Edit: February 28, 2024, 08:55:26 am by ebastler »
 

Online Anthocyanina

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 340
  • Country: 00
  • The Sara
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #92 on: February 28, 2024, 08:57:45 am »
do these scopes have fine timebase adjustment? i've been wondering about this feature in modern scopes for a while. so far the only one i know for sure has this is the keysight 1000 series.

Thank you!
 

Offline mwb1100

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 529
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #93 on: February 28, 2024, 09:48:52 am »
do these scopes have fine timebase adjustment? i've been wondering about this feature in modern scopes for a while. so far the only one i know for sure has this is the keysight 1000 series.

The SDS800X-HD manual doesn't mention it (it does for the vertical adjustment), so it looks like not.  As far as other modern scopes that have it, the Rigol MSO5000 does.
 
The following users thanked this post: Anthocyanina

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #94 on: February 28, 2024, 09:59:07 am »
do these scopes have fine timebase adjustment? i've been wondering about this feature in modern scopes for a while. so far the only one i know for sure has this is the keysight 1000 series.

The SDS800X-HD manual doesn't mention it (it does for the vertical adjustment), so it looks like not.  As far as other modern scopes that have it, the Rigol MSO5000 does.

Rigol's DHO series supports it too. Although a bit inconvenient on the small DHO800/900, since they have a single shared button for Zoom or Vernier; the user needs to configure what it does and can reach the other function only via touch menus. The larger DHO1000/4000 have two separate buttons.
 
The following users thanked this post: Anthocyanina

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #95 on: February 28, 2024, 10:49:14 am »
But why did Siglent choose to render this differently in the X direction?  On the Y axis, pairs of pixels showing the same brightness are displayed. On the X axis, every other line is simply left black, resulting in rather pronounced scan lines and a dim display overall. Are there technical reasons for this, or was it a UI design choice? Or is it a user-changeable setting maybe?
I don’t know – in any case there are no user settings about this. Quite honestly, for me this is pure cosmetics, hence clearly one of the less important things. All the more so as the X-Y mode is rarely used nowadays. Eventually I might inquire about any possible improvements.

A high-resolution scope is not meant for inspecting traces with a magnifier glass, but getting suitable data for vertical zoom and precise measurements.

do these scopes have fine timebase adjustment? i've been wondering about this feature in modern scopes for a while. so far the only one i know for sure has this is the keysight 1000 series.
No. What would be the use case for this?

All contemporary Siglent DSOs have huge secondary buffers for measurements and math, and support gated measurements with separate gating cursors.

 
The following users thanked this post: Anthocyanina

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #96 on: February 28, 2024, 11:06:35 am »
[I don’t know – in any case there are no user settings about this. Quite honestly, for me this is pure cosmetics, hence clearly one of the less important things. All the more so as the X-Y mode is rarely used nowadays. Eventually I might inquire about any possible improvements.

A high-resolution scope is not meant for inspecting traces with a magnifier glass, but getting suitable data for vertical zoom and precise measurements.

I certainly agree that X-Y mode is a somewhat exotic use case, and not a forte of any digital scope. I'm keeping a CRT scope around for those rare occasions anyway... So certainly not a critical limitation.

I don't really agree on the "it's not meant for looking at traces" argument. It's an oscilloscope, after all.  If the user were not meant to look at the trace in detail, why bother with intensity or color grading? ;)

Maybe Siglent can improve the visual quality of the display with limited effort -- actually not only in X-Y mode, but also for the Y dimension in regular Y-T mode. If the doubled-up pixels were not simply rendered black or at the same intensity as the respective "real" pixel from block RAM, but could be shown as an intensity average of the two neighboring "real" pixels, that should produce much smoother traces.
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #97 on: February 28, 2024, 11:38:51 am »
SDS800xHD and vertical pixels......

Can those claiming this scope always renders waveform with double vertical pixels  please explain attached images:

On this capture it is clearly visible that portions of the waveform are rendered with exactly ONE vertical pixels....

Download images to your PC and zoom in....

 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #98 on: February 28, 2024, 11:57:26 am »
SDS800xHD and vertical pixels......

Can those claiming this scope always renders waveform with double vertical pixels  please explain attached images:
On this capture it is clearly visible that portions of the waveform are rendered with exactly ONE vertical pixels....

That would be great news! This might convince me to get an SDS1000X HD with the larger screen after all.  :)

What exact scope type did you use, and what did you do differently? I have zoomed into many of Performa01's screenshots in this thread, and they all show the doubled-up pixels. And Performa01 has also explained why this limitation exists (see below). So what is different now?

Unfortunately, the budget instruments have to make do with the block RAM in the Zynq SOC, so there are no ressources for pixel mapping at that level. This affects the SDS800X HD, SDS1000X HD and even the good old SDS2000X Plus.
 

Offline baldurn

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 189
  • Country: dk
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #99 on: February 28, 2024, 11:57:52 am »
SDS800xHD and vertical pixels......

Can those claiming this scope always renders waveform with double vertical pixels  please explain attached images:

On this capture it is clearly visible that portions of the waveform are rendered with exactly ONE vertical pixels....

Download images to your PC and zoom in....

Looks to me like there are certain lines that are 1 pixel and the rest are two? Like it is reducing from a resolution that is not a whole fraction of the screen resolution.
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #100 on: February 28, 2024, 11:58:21 am »
A high-resolution scope is not meant for inspecting traces with a magnifier glass, but getting suitable data for vertical zoom and precise measurements.

I don't really agree on the "it's not meant for looking at traces" argument. It's an oscilloscope, after all.  If the user were not meant to look at the trace in detail, why bother with intensity or color grading? ;)
Did you leave out the bold part of my message on purpose?

We do not need to look at traces at a pixel level, just to take advantage on intensity or color grading.

If ~0.5% resolution is not enough to inspect some tiny (and usually insignificant) signal details, then vertical zoom is the right tool for it.

 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #101 on: February 28, 2024, 12:00:49 pm »
Sorry, I did not mean to mis-quote you. But I find that the slightly jagged traces in Y-T mode are quite visible on a 10" screen without magnification, and even more so the black "scan lines" in X-Y mode.
 

Offline DaneLaw

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 450
  • Country: dk
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #102 on: February 28, 2024, 12:14:20 pm »
Sorry, I did not mean to mis-quote you. But I find that the slightly jagged traces in Y-T mode are quite visible on a 10" screen without magnification, and even more so the black "scan lines" in X-Y mode.

Was unsure what you meant, but I reckon it's this stepping in the vertical axis. (pic from #90 zoomed on two graticules)
« Last Edit: February 28, 2024, 12:22:53 pm by DaneLaw »
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #103 on: February 28, 2024, 12:18:39 pm »
Was unsure what you meant, but I reckon it's this stepping in the vertical axis. (pic from #90)

Yes, it's alway double-pixels at the same intensity in the vertical direction, both in X-Y and Y-T mode. (Unless under some conditions, as shown by 2N3055 -- hope he can shed some more light onto that.) And in X-Y mode, the fact that every other column remains black.
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #104 on: February 28, 2024, 12:22:20 pm »
SDS800xHD and vertical pixels......

Can those claiming this scope always renders waveform with double vertical pixels  please explain attached images:

On this capture it is clearly visible that portions of the waveform are rendered with exactly ONE vertical pixels....

Download images to your PC and zoom in....

Looks to me like there are certain lines that are 1 pixel and the rest are two? Like it is reducing from a resolution that is not a whole fraction of the screen resolution.

That is direct dump of screen from a scope with Web control.
1024x600 pixel for pixel.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2024, 12:23:51 pm by 2N3055 »
 

Offline baldurn

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 189
  • Country: dk
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #105 on: February 28, 2024, 12:47:01 pm »
SDS800xHD and vertical pixels......

Can those claiming this scope always renders waveform with double vertical pixels  please explain attached images:

On this capture it is clearly visible that portions of the waveform are rendered with exactly ONE vertical pixels....

Download images to your PC and zoom in....

Looks to me like there are certain lines that are 1 pixel and the rest are two? Like it is reducing from a resolution that is not a whole fraction of the screen resolution.

That is direct dump of screen from a scope with Web control.
1024x600 pixel for pixel.

Yes what I am saying is that appears like it is upscaling from a lower resolution in a primitive way. Say the original data is 200 pixels and the screen is 300 pixels. You could do that by mapping even source pixels to two screen pixels and odd source pixels to just one screen pixel. That way 2 pixels becomes 3 on the screen. Looks to me something like that is going on. You have some horizontal lines one pixel and other horizontal lines are two pixels.
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #106 on: February 28, 2024, 01:55:40 pm »
SDS800xHD and vertical pixels......

Can those claiming this scope always renders waveform with double vertical pixels  please explain attached images:

On this capture it is clearly visible that portions of the waveform are rendered with exactly ONE vertical pixels....

Download images to your PC and zoom in....

Looks to me like there are certain lines that are 1 pixel and the rest are two? Like it is reducing from a resolution that is not a whole fraction of the screen resolution.

That is direct dump of screen from a scope with Web control.
1024x600 pixel for pixel.

Yes what I am saying is that appears like it is upscaling from a lower resolution in a primitive way. Say the original data is 200 pixels and the screen is 300 pixels. You could do that by mapping even source pixels to two screen pixels and odd source pixels to just one screen pixel. That way 2 pixels becomes 3 on the screen. Looks to me something like that is going on. You have some horizontal lines one pixel and other horizontal lines are two pixels.

You mean inside the scope?
Why would they do that?

You do realize that problem with the scope is that they have TOO MANY data points/values to map to one pixel.
Vertical res of ADC is 4000 points.
Even worse, internal representation is 16 bit, so 65536 vertical values.
So unless you have that much EXACTLY on the screen, you have to map..
How do you plot it when you have 600 vertical pixels?
You need to map 6.6 data values vertically to one pixel for one ADC data point.
And cca 109 from internal 16 bit value.

And then you have fact that one pixel horizontally must map hundreds of thousand of data points to one pixel.
When your buffer has 10 Mpts and screen is 1024 pixels wide, that is 10000 sample points to single pixel, horizontally. And they will all have different values...

How do you map that to screen?
You create data cloud.
As I said, those "double" pixels are simply accurate representation of in-between values. It is nor pixel above nor pixel below, but somewhere in the middle or both...

I you were to upsample by pixel doubling (or tripling) , you would never have any combination of pixels different form integer multiplier of upsampling: for x2  it would be always 2, 4 ,6 8.. or for 3x 3, 6, 9 ...
You couldn't have 1, 2 and 3 at the same time on the screen. Ever.

« Last Edit: February 28, 2024, 01:57:57 pm by 2N3055 »
 
The following users thanked this post: tautech, KungFuJosh

Offline baldurn

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 189
  • Country: dk
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #107 on: February 28, 2024, 02:07:19 pm »
You mean inside the scope?
Why would they do that?

This is just speculation, but it appears they downsample the 12 bit raw data to 8 bits before processing it in the UI chain. It would halve the amount of data they need to work assuming the CPU would otherwise have to work with 12 bit stored in a 16 bit data structure. Then the final step to display the data is to upscale from 256 values to maybe 400 lines on the screen.

We may find the reason if we compare the SDS2000X HD. Does it have a slower CPU or maybe the memory bandwidth is worse? So they had to do something to make the UI quicker on the cheaper platform.
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #108 on: February 28, 2024, 02:08:15 pm »
As I said, those "double" pixels are simply accurate representation of in-between values. It is nor pixel above nor pixel below, but somewhere in the middle or both...

I am still puzzled by your screenshots. I have scrutinized quite a few other screenshots published here, copying them to a bitmap editor and zooming in. I always strictly saw doubled pixels in the Y dimension. It's even more striking in Performa01's recent X-Y screenshots, with the alternating black columns along the X dimension.

And Performa01's explanation made sense to me: When there is limited fast memory to create the "digital phosphor" overlay of traces in the FPGA, lumping two screen pixels together seems like a technically efficient way of getting by.

Hence I am wondering what you did differently. Is it maybe that a single capture gets rendered differently -- plotted directly from the full-resolution data buffer? Did you capture these traces in the screenshot in Single mode; or did you stop the acquisition and then shifted the displayed time window so the screen got redrawn from the buffer?

(Edit: Typos)
« Last Edit: February 28, 2024, 02:15:19 pm by ebastler »
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #109 on: February 28, 2024, 02:16:00 pm »
As I said, those "double" pixels are simply accurate representation of in-between values. It is nor pixel above nor pixel below, but somewhere in the middle or both...

I am still puzzled by your screenshots. I have scrutinized quite a few other screenshots published here, copying them to a bitmap editor and zooming in. I always strictly saw doubled pixels in the Y dimension. It's even more striking in Performa01's recent X-Y screenshots, with the alternating black columns along the X dimension.

And Performa01's explanation made sense to me: When there is limited fast memory to create the "digital phosphor" overlay of traces in the FPGA, lumping two screen pixels together seems like a technically efficient way of getting by.

Hence I am wondering what you did differently. Is it maybe that a single capture gets rendered differently -- plotted directly from the full-resolution data buffer? Did you capture these traces in the screenshot in Single mode; or did you stop the acquisition and the shift the displayed time window so the screen got redrawn from the buffer?

Read my post above.
You all ignore that if you have 10000 horizontal data point to squeeze into one pixel, there are hard decisions to be made...

I made a capture with 1000 data points. So data is not crowded horizontally.
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #110 on: February 28, 2024, 02:24:03 pm »
You all ignore that if you have 10000 horizontal data point to squeeze into one pixel, there are hard decisions to be made...
I made a capture with 1000 data points. So data is not crowded horizontally.

I don't see how "horizontal crowding" explains the strict double-pixel patterns seen in all those other screenshots. There should be some single pixels, and many double-pixels which are vertically shifted vs. the others by 1 pixel.

I still like my hypothesis about the screen being redrawn from the full-resolution data buffer under certain cirumstances, resulting in a full-resolution display. (While it is always half-resolution when drawn from the "digital phosphor" buffer in the FPGA.) Could you comment on the questions I asked? Thanks!

Is it maybe that a single capture gets rendered differently -- plotted directly from the full-resolution data buffer? Did you capture these traces in the screenshot in Single mode; or did you stop the acquisition and then shift the displayed time window so the screen got redrawn from the buffer?
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #111 on: February 28, 2024, 02:35:31 pm »
You all ignore that if you have 10000 horizontal data point to squeeze into one pixel, there are hard decisions to be made...
I made a capture with 1000 data points. So data is not crowded horizontally.

I don't see how "horizontal crowding" explains the strict double-pixel patterns seen in all those other screenshots. There should be some single pixels, and many double-pixels which are vertically shifted vs. the others by 1 pixel.

I still like my hypothesis about the screen being redrawn from the full-resolution data buffer under certain cirumstances, resulting in a full-resolution display. (While it is always half-resolution when drawn from the "digital phosphor" buffer in the FPGA.) Could you comment on the questions I asked? Thanks!

Is it maybe that a single capture gets rendered differently -- plotted directly from the full-resolution data buffer? Did you capture these traces in the screenshot in Single mode; or did you stop the acquisition and then shift the displayed time window so the screen got redrawn from the buffer?

No, sorry.

I cannot comment to all wild speculations here. I have no internal knowledge of exact algorithm used, and if I had, nobody in their right mind would tell me something like that without signing NDA, in which case I would not be able to share it....
I'm afraid that all that like to speculate here will have to be happy with that status quo.

What I can, and am saying is how I think it could have been done.
All I know that Occams razor is king, and it is probably simply done in simplest way it could be, for reasons of speed and resource size.....
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #112 on: February 28, 2024, 02:47:26 pm »
No, sorry.

I cannot comment to all wild speculations here. I have no internal knowledge of exact algorithm used, and if I had, nobody in their right mind would tell me something like that without signing NDA, in which case I would not be able to share it....
I'm afraid that all that like to speculate here will have to be happy with that status quo.

What I can, and am saying is how I think it could have been done.
All I know that Occams razor is king, and it is probably simply done in simplest way it could be, for reasons of speed and resource size.....

I am baffled. Why don't you want to answer two simple questions on how you acquired those two screenshots?  :-//

Look -- I am not criticizing either you or Siglent with these questions. I just want to understand what's going on, out of technical curiosity. It's my favorite type of puzzle, where you have to deduce the internal mechanism based on observations of the external behaviour.

I have tried to explain why I don't think your assumption (horizontal crowding) explains the observed pattern. I have proposed another assumption, and those two data points on how you acquired the screenshots would help to support or falsify that. Please indulge me and tell me how you acquired them.  ;)
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #113 on: February 28, 2024, 03:03:50 pm »
No, sorry.

I cannot comment to all wild speculations here. I have no internal knowledge of exact algorithm used, and if I had, nobody in their right mind would tell me something like that without signing NDA, in which case I would not be able to share it....
I'm afraid that all that like to speculate here will have to be happy with that status quo.

What I can, and am saying is how I think it could have been done.
All I know that Occams razor is king, and it is probably simply done in simplest way it could be, for reasons of speed and resource size.....

I am baffled. Why don't you want to answer two simple questions on how you acquired those two screenshots?  :-//

Look -- I am not criticizing either you or Siglent with these questions. I just want to understand what's going on, out of technical curiosity. It's my favorite type of puzzle, where you have to deduce the internal mechanism based on observations of the external behaviour.

I have tried to explain why I don't think your assumption (horizontal crowding) explains the observed pattern. I have proposed another assumption, and those two data points on how you acquired the screenshots would help to support or falsify that. Please indulge me and tell me how you acquired them.  ;)


What do you mean how I acquired them? What do you mean I don't want to answer?

They are acquired with a scope. By using settings in plain view on the screen (which is one of great things on this scopes, it is all there on the scope screen).
They are directly from the scope by using screenshot button in Web view.
It is as plain as it can be...

What are you implying? Some tricks or manipulations on my side? Are you questioning my integrity?

As I said, there is not only horizontal crowding (nice term for this by the way) but also vertical. If you use 2 pixels and pixel brightness you can achieve more visual states that single pixels. Think of it as using dithering instead of AA...
Combine all of that and you get this...

In the end, apart from intellectual curiosity it does not matter.
It works quite well the way it is.
 

Offline baldurn

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 189
  • Country: dk
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #114 on: February 28, 2024, 03:13:18 pm »
I have marked some lines in this cutout of a screen shot:



The numbers corresponds to the "y" line number. The line y=2 is a single line and no other lines are partial into the screen line occupied by y=2. In my opinion this fact rules out the theory that we are seeing 4096 values (12 bit) being mapped to approximately 400 screen lines. In that case it is very unlikely that we will see this set of steps where no value gets partially mapped to the line with y=2. We should see some double pixels a half step up from y=1 and we should see some double pixels a half step down from y=3. But we are not seeing that.

My theory is that we are seeing 8 bit data (256 values) mapped to 400 screen lines. Some of the values do indeed end up being in between and are rendered as two pixels. A few values do end up being close to exact and are rendered as one pixel.

I know this is supposed to be a 12 bit scope and we want to see 12 bit data. But I think we are seeing evidence that the 12 bits are downsampled to 8 bit before being processed by the UI. They can still use the full 12 bits raw data in other contexts. I assume the FPGA is working with 12 bit data but the CPU might be working with 8 bit to speed things up.
 

Offline Veteran68

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 727
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #115 on: February 28, 2024, 03:15:29 pm »
You do realize that problem with the scope is that they have TOO MANY data points/values to map to one pixel.
Vertical res of ADC is 4000 points.
Even worse, internal representation is 16 bit, so 65536 vertical values.
So unless you have that much EXACTLY on the screen, you have to map..
How do you plot it when you have 600 vertical pixels?
You need to map 6.6 data values vertically to one pixel for one ADC data point.
And cca 109 from internal 16 bit value.

I think (hope?) everyone here understands that with any scope you're going to have more data than pixels. Nobody argues that point. What does matter to those of us who care more than others about the visualization, is how that mapping is done. Saying "it does not matter" is simply dismissive of those to whom it DOES matter.

It shouldn't be necessary to point out that the criticisms/disappointments with Siglent here compared to Rigol's approach with the DHO line is the physical resolution of the display. Rigol supports MORE data at 1280x800 than the more limited 1024x600 resolution in the Siglent scope. You have 67% more pixels on the screen to work with. That's not a trivial difference. While I'd say the 1024x600 resolution is more tolerable, if not ideal, in the smaller 800 series, with the 1000 series and their 10.1" screens it's more of an egregious design decision. That's a very limited resolution which just makes display quality noticeably worse, especially on the bigger screen which just magnifies scaling artifacts.

I get that some people care more about the data than the visualization of it, but to ebastler's earlier points, at the end of the day an oscilloscope is all about displaying a waveform. Expecting it to be displayed as cleanly and accurately as possible is not a baseless "nitpick," it's a legitimate concern. Especially given the relatively low cost of a higher resolution LCD panel (or else Rigol wouldn't have done it at their lower pricepoint). While it may not sway everyone away from the other clear benefits of the Siglent design, dismissing these concerns out of hand is not productive to the discussion either. Those of us on the fence due to the downgrade in visual quality want to be convinced of the reasons to buy something that -- in this specific technical case -- is inferior to what we have. So please, indulge our concerns and help us understand what Siglent was thinking, and what might be done to improve things that we may not be aware of.

I really want another Siglent scope as I prefer the brand, but I'm not yet to the point of giving up my DHO for one, even if it is inferior in other ways.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #116 on: February 28, 2024, 03:19:40 pm »
What are you implying? Some tricks or manipulations on my side? Are you questioning my integrity?

No second thoughts, and no cause to get defensive -- just the two questions mentioned earlier. Please take them at face value.

As I tried to explain before, it would make sense to me that the scope can draw traces on the screen at full resolution (only) if it gets the data to be plotted directly from the 12-bit capture buffer, under the circumstances described in my questions. So I would like to understand whether that is the reason for the different appearance of your screenshots vs. others I have seen.

I can obviously try this myself once I have an SDS HD scope. But the thing is that my decision whether to get an 800 or 1000 series scope will depend on what I can expect to see on the screen. So I would much prefer to understand this upfront, rather than create extra hassle for myself and Batronix by buying one model, then potentially having to exchange it.

I don't think the answer to those questions can be gleaned from the screenshots themselves. And unless I overlooked something, I don't think you have answered them yet. Pretty please?

Is it maybe that a single capture gets rendered differently -- plotted directly from the full-resolution data buffer? Did you capture these traces in the screenshot in Single mode; or did you stop the acquisition and then shift the displayed time window so the screen got redrawn from the buffer?
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #117 on: February 28, 2024, 03:31:25 pm »
You do realize that problem with the scope is that they have TOO MANY data points/values to map to one pixel.
Vertical res of ADC is 4000 points.
Even worse, internal representation is 16 bit, so 65536 vertical values.
So unless you have that much EXACTLY on the screen, you have to map..
How do you plot it when you have 600 vertical pixels?
You need to map 6.6 data values vertically to one pixel for one ADC data point.
And cca 109 from internal 16 bit value.

I think (hope?) everyone here understands that with any scope you're going to have more data than pixels. Nobody argues that point. What does matter to those of us who care more than others about the visualization, is how that mapping is done. Saying "it does not matter" is simply dismissive of those to whom it DOES matter.

It shouldn't be necessary to point out that the criticisms/disappointments with Siglent here compared to Rigol's approach with the DHO line is the physical resolution of the display. Rigol supports MORE data at 1280x800 than the more limited 1024x600 resolution in the Siglent scope. You have 67% more pixels on the screen to work with. That's not a trivial difference. While I'd say the 1024x600 resolution is more tolerable, if not ideal, in the smaller 800 series, with the 1000 series and their 10.1" screens it's more of an egregious design decision. That's a very limited resolution which just makes display quality noticeably worse, especially on the bigger screen which just magnifies scaling artifacts.

I get that some people care more about the data than the visualization of it, but to ebastler's earlier points, at the end of the day an oscilloscope is all about displaying a waveform. Expecting it to be displayed as cleanly and accurately as possible is not a baseless "nitpick," it's a legitimate concern. Especially given the relatively low cost of a higher resolution LCD panel (or else Rigol wouldn't have done it at their lower pricepoint). While it may not sway everyone away from the other clear benefits of the Siglent design, dismissing these concerns out of hand is not productive to the discussion either. Those of us on the fence due to the downgrade in visual quality want to be convinced of the reasons to buy something that -- in this specific technical case -- is inferior to what we have. So please, indulge our concerns and help us understand what Siglent was thinking, and what might be done to improve things that we may not be aware of.

I really want another Siglent scope as I prefer the brand, but I'm not yet to the point of giving up my DHO for one, even if it is inferior in other ways.

I'm not being dismissive of anybody. If such a detail is important to you that is your prerogative.
You do realize that in image Baldurn is showing up here pixels are being artificially magnified almost 10 times from their physical size on the screen?
That nobody even noticed that and did even understand what are they talking about until they started (they, few people that complained about it) showing these highly magnified images?

In real life I literally had to pick up a magnifying glass to be able to see it.
This is how big deal it is in real life.

If you object to it on principle, that is fine with me.
I don't deny effect is there.
I simply state it is pretty much invisible  for all practical purposes.

You alone decide what are your priorities.

Take care.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2024, 03:53:38 pm by 2N3055 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Bad_Driver

Online KungFuJosh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
  • Country: us
  • TEAS is real.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #118 on: February 28, 2024, 03:35:06 pm »
Here's an idea. Grab a CSV file from the scope and plot it out in Excel and see how it looks.
"I installed a skylight in my apartment yesterday... The people who live above me are furious." - Steven Wright
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #119 on: February 28, 2024, 03:52:43 pm »
What are you implying? Some tricks or manipulations on my side? Are you questioning my integrity?

No second thoughts, and no cause to get defensive -- just the two questions mentioned earlier. Please take them at face value.

As I tried to explain before, it would make sense to me that the scope can draw traces on the screen at full resolution (only) if it gets the data to be plotted directly from the 12-bit capture buffer, under the circumstances described in my questions. So I would like to understand whether that is the reason for the different appearance of your screenshots vs. others I have seen.

I can obviously try this myself once I have an SDS HD scope. But the thing is that my decision whether to get an 800 or 1000 series scope will depend on what I can expect to see on the screen. So I would much prefer to understand this upfront, rather than create extra hassle for myself and Batronix by buying one model, then potentially having to exchange it.

I don't think the answer to those questions can be gleaned from the screenshots themselves. And unless I overlooked something, I don't think you have answered them yet. Pretty please?

Is it maybe that a single capture gets rendered differently -- plotted directly from the full-resolution data buffer? Did you capture these traces in the screenshot in Single mode; or did you stop the acquisition and then shift the displayed time window so the screen got redrawn from the buffer?

I'm not being defensive but wanted a clarification. We are both conversing in what is, to us, a second language. Better verify than presume...

All I did was start the scope, attached 1MHz squarewave into it, chose that timebase at random and you see results.
Plain as that.
I tried in both Stopped and Single. Made no difference.

I do not know why their images are different. Maybe they (them) cherry picked images to illustrate point they wanted to prove?
Or maybe simply, as I did, chose some random settings that resulted in those images. I don't know what they did.
You will have to ask them. I didn't answer that question , because it is not addressed to me.
I told you what I did, which is all I can answer. Sorry.

I'm not disputing their images.
I simply wanted to investigate statement that kept being repeated that 1000xHD draws 2 vertical pixels ALWAYS, and that 800xHD will probably too.
Well, now we know 800xHD for sure does not draw 2 vertical pixels ALWAYS.
That is all.

That is my data point. I leave further speculations about rendering implementations to others.

I personally didn't notice it until this discussion broke out. I had to use loupe to actually see it. That is how "big" problem this is in real life (pun intended).
I find implementation fine in normal work and will prefer not to waste more time on it.
There are many more interesting things (for me..) on the scope to investigate.

You guys have fun with this, if you like.

Best,

« Last Edit: February 28, 2024, 03:55:21 pm by 2N3055 »
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #120 on: February 28, 2024, 04:51:47 pm »
I do not know why their images are different. Maybe they (them) cherry picked images to illustrate point they wanted to prove?
Or maybe simply, as I did, chose some random settings that resulted in those images. I don't know what they did.

You can look at any of Performa01's screenshots in this thread, typically captured in "Run" mode. I don't think he hand-picked them to make the scope look bad. ;)  It's all consistent with the assumption that traces rendered from the FPGA "digital phosphor" buffer show the coarser pixilation, due to size constraints of that buffer.

Quote
I personally didn't notice it until this discussion broke out. I had to use loupe to actually see it. That is how "big" problem this is in real life (pun intended).

I agree that it is not obvious at all on the smaller SDS800X HD screen, which is why I am leaning towards an 824. I have said several times, in this and other threads, that I find it a disappointing design choice in the SDS1000X HD in particular, given its larger screen and the markup you pay for that.

As stated and shown in the other thread, I do find that traces look noticeably more jagged on the SDS1000X HD than on the DHO1000; no magnifying glass required. But -- as witnessed by the fact that I have returned my DHO1074 -- I fully agree that there are more important aspects to a DSO.

 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, 2N3055, Mortymore

Online Anthocyanina

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 340
  • Country: 00
  • The Sara
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #121 on: February 29, 2024, 01:52:42 am »
do these scopes have fine timebase adjustment? i've been wondering about this feature in modern scopes for a while. so far the only one i know for sure has this is the keysight 1000 series.
No. What would be the use case for this?

All contemporary Siglent DSOs have huge secondary buffers for measurements and math, and support gated measurements with separate gating cursors.

I find this feature to be useful all the time. Sometimes a waveform of interest won't fit nicely on the screen with the 1-2-5 steps, it either fits more than one period, or less, or the portion of interest either is too visually narrow on the horizontal axis, or goes beyond the screen at the next step.

For example, look at these waveforms of the switching node of a flyback converter:

using a timebase between 200 and 500ns/ let me fill more of the screen with the relevant portion of the waveform. using 500ns/ would have scrunched the high frequency ringing enough that you wouldn't distinguish it well enough, and using 200ns/ would have cut out the moment when the MOSFET turns on again.

 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Online KungFuJosh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
  • Country: us
  • TEAS is real.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #122 on: February 29, 2024, 02:21:08 am »
It's a little weird that we can't do it since there's the manual entry option. It automatically rounds to either 200 or 500 in that space. I would think this feature could be implemented at any point if enough people want it.
"I installed a skylight in my apartment yesterday... The people who live above me are furious." - Steven Wright
 
The following users thanked this post: Anthocyanina

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #123 on: February 29, 2024, 10:32:21 am »
It's a little weird that we can't do it since there's the manual entry option. It automatically rounds to either 200 or 500 in that space. I would think this feature could be implemented at any point if enough people want it.

How does the scope handle "pinch and zoom" gestures on the touch screen? Does the horizontal scale also snap to the 10-20-50 grid, or is a continouos vernier control available in that way?
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #124 on: February 29, 2024, 10:50:56 am »
Oh, one more question: Has anyone explored the maximum waveform update rates, for the 824 and/or its smaller siblings? There are some data in the recent post on X-Y mode; but I think Performa01 did not aim to hit the maximum rates there, but rather looked for a good balance of speed and data points per frame.

The datasheet specifies a higher update rate in normal mode for the 824. So this would also be a good check to see whether an "upgraded" 804 or 814 performs at the full 824 spec, or whether there is different hardware in the 824 which enables the higher waveform rate. I'm asking for a friend... ;)
« Last Edit: February 29, 2024, 10:54:39 am by ebastler »
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #125 on: February 29, 2024, 12:26:18 pm »
It's a little weird that we can't do it since there's the manual entry option. It automatically rounds to either 200 or 500 in that space. I would think this feature could be implemented at any point if enough people want it.

How does the scope handle "pinch and zoom" gestures on the touch screen? Does the horizontal scale also snap to the 10-20-50 grid, or is a continouos vernier control available in that way?
Horizontal scale  "pinch and zoom" 1-2-5 steps. No vernier.
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler, Anthocyanina

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #126 on: February 29, 2024, 12:35:55 pm »
Oh, one more question: Has anyone explored the maximum waveform update rates, for the 824 and/or its smaller siblings? There are some data in the recent post on X-Y mode; but I think Performa01 did not aim to hit the maximum rates there, but rather looked for a good balance of speed and data points per frame.

The datasheet specifies a higher update rate in normal mode for the 824. So this would also be a good check to see whether an "upgraded" 804 or 814 performs at the full 824 spec, or whether there is different hardware in the 824 which enables the higher waveform rate. I'm asking for a friend... ;)

Due to very busy times I have not made yet detailed speed tables with different settings etc.
But naturally I have inspected that said value in data sheet is true. SDS824X HD, measured ETA: tiny bit over 120kwfm/s. average around 118.5kwfm/s and peak around 127kwfm/s. (FW 1.1.3.2: 1Ch on, display Dots, 50ns/div, input 10MHz)
« Last Edit: February 29, 2024, 03:12:48 pm by rf-loop »
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #127 on: February 29, 2024, 12:42:18 pm »
Due to very busy times I have not made yet detailed speed tables with different settings etc.
But naturally I have inspected that said value in data sheet is true. SDS824X HD, measured tiny bit over 120kwfm/s.

Thanks! If you still have it in your notes, could you indicate the settings where the maximum rate is achieved? (Time base, memory points, presumably dot mode?) Then others could easily compare with the 804/814 in off-the-shelf and "upgraded" condition.
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #128 on: February 29, 2024, 02:18:54 pm »
Thanks! If you still have it in your notes, could you indicate the settings where the maximum rate is achieved? (Time base, memory points, presumably dot mode?) Then others could easily compare with the 804/814 in off-the-shelf and "upgraded" condition.
We are right there in the review thread, aren't we?

Why not look up the regular content? The table in the third picture of the linked posting shows everything relevant. I did not optimize the input signal for best performance though, hence I could only attest 118690 waveforms per second in dots display mode at 50 ns/div.

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293747/#msg5293747

There is even a table of contents in the opening posting, so it all can be found quite easily.
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler, 2N3055, orzel

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #129 on: February 29, 2024, 03:37:10 pm »
We are right there in the review thread, aren't we?

Why not look up the regular content? The table in the third picture of the linked posting shows everything relevant. I did not optimize the input signal for best performance though, hence I could only attest 118690 waveforms per second in dots display mode at 50 ns/div.

There is even a table of contents in the opening posting, so it all can be found quite easily.

Perfect information (what else?  :)), thank you!

I thought I had seen these data in the thread, then could not find them, and concluded that I must have mixed things up with your work on some earlier scope. In my defense, I did check the table of contents carefully before posting the question -- but it lists the relevant post as "History & Sequence Mode, Counting Pulses, Trigger Jitter", which did not click.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline capslock

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 17
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #130 on: March 04, 2024, 11:02:30 am »
For the Bode plot, which function generator did you use and did you need special software modules for it?

The 800x series seems to be compatible with the SAG1021I, which ist just a glorified USB dongle for € 139 + tax. The much more expensive scopes need a costly software
(In addition the function generator software option (SDS1000X-E-FG) or (SDS-5000X-AWG) or (SDS6000Pro-FG) is required.) So do we need this with the SDS800X, too?
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #131 on: March 04, 2024, 11:35:11 am »
For the Bode plot, which function generator did you use and did you need special software modules for it?

The 800x series seems to be compatible with the SAG1021I, which ist just a glorified USB dongle for € 139 + tax. The much more expensive scopes need a costly software
(In addition the function generator software option (SDS1000X-E-FG) or (SDS-5000X-AWG) or (SDS6000Pro-FG) is required.) So do we need this with the SDS800X, too?

You can use any of Siglent AWGs, including SAG1021I you mentioned. For bode plot there is no need for any special license. Just AWG.

But if you want to use AWG as AWG then you need AWG license. But for Bode plot no. Just AWG hardware.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline capslock

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 17
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #132 on: March 04, 2024, 12:26:24 pm »
Thanks. I found the software option for the 800 series, it's another 95 € + tax.

Sounds like the SDG810 for € 169 is a better deal then, since it is standalone and includes the AWG functionally. Any downsides, i.e. is there a need to control the AWG functionally from the scope or can the scope even talk to the SDG?

Or for that matter, do I need a Siglent function generator at all to do Bode plots, i.e. could I set my Owon generator to do a sweep and let the Siglent trigger on the start of the sweep?

Bonus question: is there any good reason to by a 4-channel scope when all I do is analog (including Class D) audio? So far, I have never felt the need for more than two channels.
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #133 on: March 04, 2024, 12:30:48 pm »
Thanks. I found the software option for the 800 series, it's another 95 € + tax.

Sounds like the SDG810 for € 169 is a better deal then, since it is standalone and includes the AWG functionally. Any downsides, i.e. is there a need to control the AWG functionally from the scope or can the scope even talk to the SDG?

Or for that matter, do I need a Siglent function generator at all to do Bode plots, i.e. could I set my Owon generator to do a sweep and let the Siglent trigger on the start of the sweep?

Bonus question: is there any good reason to by a 4-channel scope when all I do is analog (including Class D) audio? So far, I have never felt the need for more than two channels.


4 channels is something you have to decide. I would not buy 2ch anymore. It is something you find ways to use when you have it. For instance, you can do Bode with 3 channels and one reference.
Usage?  A 3 way xover that you can plot at the same time. You can make plot with overlapping all 3 bands...
If you have only 2 ch, you will have to do it 3 times, and merge data manually.
I personally like external AWG better because you can operate it independent to the scope. No need to do it from the scope.

You cannot use external AWG that way. It has to be controlled by scope, step by step... I know there was an effort to make piece of software that would act as a gateway to other AWGs. I don't know how far that went and what is supported...
« Last Edit: March 04, 2024, 12:35:06 pm by 2N3055 »
 

Offline capslock

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 17
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #134 on: March 04, 2024, 12:34:31 pm »
Thanks. So the SDG810 is controlled by the scope and can do all the things the SAG + software does at a lower price?
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #135 on: March 04, 2024, 12:42:02 pm »
Thanks. So the SDG810 is controlled by the scope and can do all the things the SAG + software does at a lower price?

Heeeh, kinda mixed bag.

SDS810 will have lower max frequency. Signal quality will be mostly the same. AWG core is the same basically.
It will have modulation.

Honestly, SDS810 is older generation.
My recomendation is to get SDG1032x if you can afford it..

It is new generation, very good signal quality, especially pulse and squarewave and it is 2 independent channels.
 

Offline capslock

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 17
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #136 on: March 04, 2024, 12:48:18 pm »
Thanks. First of all: in order to do Bode plots, I need SAG or any of the SDG, i.e. the scope will talk to the external device?

Secondly, what do you mean by modulation? That the older SDG is spec'ed only at 10 MHz bandwidth (which I suspect is the highes frequency it can output, not the analog bandwith)?
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #137 on: March 04, 2024, 01:10:28 pm »
Thanks. First of all: in order to do Bode plots, I need SAG or any of the SDG, i.e. the scope will talk to the external device?

Secondly, what do you mean by modulation? That the older SDG is spec'ed only at 10 MHz bandwidth (which I suspect is the highes frequency it can output, not the analog bandwith)?

You really need to download datasheets for SAG1021I, SDG810 and SD1032x and set the side by side..

SAG is simplest in capabilites, 1ch, but goes to 25MHz
SDG810 is also 1 channel, only up to 10MHz sine but more functions: modulation etc.
SDG1032X is new generation, 2 independent channels, up to 30MHz (60 actually for platform), and very good pulse capability.

« Last Edit: March 04, 2024, 01:23:03 pm by 2N3055 »
 

Offline capslock

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 17
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #138 on: March 04, 2024, 01:22:54 pm »
Yes, thank, I understand the differences. I am just not sure I need better signal quality that I cannot use without using 50 Ohms T-pieces on the inputs.

Sorry for asking again: the SDS will talk to any of the SAG, SDG, SD to generate a Bode plot?
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #139 on: March 04, 2024, 01:24:39 pm »
Sorry for asking again: the SDS will talk to any of the SAG, SDG, SD to generate a Bode plot?

Yes. I thought I was clear. Sorry.

 
The following users thanked this post: capslock

Online KungFuJosh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
  • Country: us
  • TEAS is real.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #140 on: March 04, 2024, 01:33:18 pm »
That depends on how you want to communicate. The newer AWGs with an X at the end generally have ethernet ports. The SDG810 does not have an ethernet port, so if it does work with BODE plots, you're limited on how you can set it up.
"I installed a skylight in my apartment yesterday... The people who live above me are furious." - Steven Wright
 
The following users thanked this post: capslock

Offline capslock

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 17
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #141 on: March 04, 2024, 03:33:45 pm »
Yet the SAG also only has a USB port and this is how the SDS800x talks to it.
 

Offline adam4521

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 82
  • Country: gb
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #142 on: March 04, 2024, 05:00:59 pm »
The difference in price between a SAG1021I with signal generator license and SDG1032X in the uk is just £21+VAT. With the latter you get 2 channels that can work separately or synchronised, modulation, more amplitude range, plus the convenience and flexibility of a dedicated instrument with its own screen. I get that the ‘I’ means that the signal output is isolated, but overall the SAG1021I feels poor value compared to the rest of the offer within the brand.
 

Online KungFuJosh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
  • Country: us
  • TEAS is real.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #143 on: March 04, 2024, 05:02:40 pm »
Yet the SAG also only has a USB port and this is how the SDS800x talks to it.

Sure, but that's not a standalone unit. I use ethernet for communication between my Siglent devices. The point is to be aware of what the options and limitations are.
"I installed a skylight in my apartment yesterday... The people who live above me are furious." - Steven Wright
 

Offline orzel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 82
  • Country: fr
    • Sylphide Consulting
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #144 on: March 04, 2024, 05:04:14 pm »
Thanks. First of all: in order to do Bode plots, I need SAG or any of the SDG, i.e. the scope will talk to the external device?

Yes, the scope will drive the SDG. It's very simple: connect them using usb (typically), or ethernet (if available on both), then a simple setting on the scope establishes the communication and confirms it's ok. Then you can do bode plot. It only works with signal generator and scope of the same brand, there doesn't seem to be any established standard on how to do that.
 

Offline capslock

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 17
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #145 on: March 04, 2024, 07:05:16 pm »
The difference in price between a SAG1021I with signal generator license and SDG1032X in the uk is just £21+VAT. With the latter you get 2 channels that can work separately or synchronised, modulation, more amplitude range, plus the convenience and flexibility of a dedicated instrument with its own screen. I get that the ‘I’ means that the signal output is isolated, but overall the SAG1021I feels poor value compared to the rest of the offer within the brand.

Here it is € 67 including tax. The software is € 113 (with tax), i.e. about as much as my standalone Owon was. I am still toying with the idea of buying the SAG without the software if that is all that is needed for Bode plots.

How useful is this feature anyway for testing discrete audio amps? I'd have to run them open loop and feed them a much attenuated signal from the generator. Wonder if this means noise or phase issues?
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #146 on: March 04, 2024, 07:57:55 pm »
The difference in price between a SAG1021I with signal generator license and SDG1032X in the uk is just £21+VAT. With the latter you get 2 channels that can work separately or synchronised, modulation, more amplitude range, plus the convenience and flexibility of a dedicated instrument with its own screen. I get that the ‘I’ means that the signal output is isolated, but overall the SAG1021I feels poor value compared to the rest of the offer within the brand.

My personal recommendation is SDG1032X because for very little more money you get the device that is superior in every respect.
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #147 on: March 04, 2024, 08:02:10 pm »
The difference in price between a SAG1021I with signal generator license and SDG1032X in the uk is just £21+VAT. With the latter you get 2 channels that can work separately or synchronised, modulation, more amplitude range, plus the convenience and flexibility of a dedicated instrument with its own screen. I get that the ‘I’ means that the signal output is isolated, but overall the SAG1021I feels poor value compared to the rest of the offer within the brand.

My personal recommendation is SDG1032X because for very little more money you get the device that is superior in nearly every respect.
FTFY.
The usefulness of an isolated AWG should never be overlooked.
YMMV.

Otherwise I agree, SDG1032X is the superior choice for the functionality it offers.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2024, 08:23:08 pm by tautech »
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, 2N3055, skander36

Online KungFuJosh

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1567
  • Country: us
  • TEAS is real.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #148 on: March 04, 2024, 08:09:27 pm »
How useful is this feature anyway for testing discrete audio amps? I'd have to run them open loop and feed them a much attenuated signal from the generator. Wonder if this means noise or phase issues?

I haven't tried it yet, but I recently built this project for testing DOAs: https://www.fivefishstudios.com/diy/opamptestjig/
"I installed a skylight in my apartment yesterday... The people who live above me are furious." - Steven Wright
 

Offline orzel

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 82
  • Country: fr
    • Sylphide Consulting
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #149 on: March 04, 2024, 11:37:02 pm »
My personal recommendation is SDG1032X because for very little more money you get the device that is superior in every respect.

Yeps. I got one and i'm very happy with it. Never cared for 'options' or 'integrated' awg in scopes.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #150 on: March 05, 2024, 07:32:31 am »
Identity

Since the SDS800X HD is an extremely affordable package, some corners had to be cut, one of them being the signal samples rendered as clusters of two vertical pixels (because of the limited amount of block RAM in the Xilinx Zynq FPGA).

While this hardly poses constraints to our everyday tasks, there might still be situations where we want to get the maximum visual resolution for certain measurements. This is where the math channels come into play.

The Identity function returns the original acquisition data, whereas the Average function is the preferred choice for repetitive signals, because it reduces (also) the 1/f-noise and increases the resolution, hence enables us to produce clean traces even from very noisy signals.


SDS824X HD_Math_Zoom_Identity_Avg16

The screenshot shows a 12 MHz square wave with 1 ns rise time. Zoom mode has been engaged to take a closer look at the rising edge overshot details.

The channel 4 trace is always 2 pixels high, so it appears thicker than the math traces.

Math trace F2 plots the Identity function, which is basically the same as channel 4, but uses the full screen resolution, hence looks nicer.

Math trace F3 plots the a 16x Average of the signal in channel 4. It reduces the noise and increases the vertical resolution to 16 bits.

If we want to show the math trace(s) exclusively, e.g. for documentation purposes, we can hide the original signal trace in the corresponding channel menu.

EDIT: added the reason for this restriction to the 1st paragraph.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2024, 10:11:45 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler, Mortymore, Martin72, core, orzel, Bad_Driver, Anthocyanina

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #151 on: March 05, 2024, 08:15:19 am »
 :)
Played with something similar today while testing some current probes of which one when set to highest sensitivity was very noisy.
Averaging ( Math) had to be engaged to get readings close to actual.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2024, 10:02:38 am by tautech »
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #152 on: March 05, 2024, 09:23:36 am »
Thank you for demonstrating the full-resolution display via Math function, Performa01!

I think Siglent could make the Math traces look even smoother if they rendered a change in value not via a "stair step", but via a proper diagonal step. See the lazy ASCII "illustration" below -- stair step on the left, diagonal on the right.

The hardware channels are actually rendered (by the FPGA?) with diagonal steps. The Math traces are rendered (by the CPU?) with full vertical resolution, but with the stair steps -- which emphasizes the discrete steps, makes them appear a bit brighter, and makes the curves look more jagged than necessary in my opinion. Assuming the rendering is done on the CPU side, this should be easily changed -- maybe worth a try to make the screen look its best?

Code: [Select]
       XXXXXX        XXXXXX
    XXXX          XXX
 XXXX          XXX

Edit: Hmm, that ASCII art looks less than convincing. Here's a more realistic example: In Performa01's screenshot, I removed the "stair steps" from the red Math trace. It does look smoother than the blue one, and certainly better than the original red trace a few posts above -- not a huge effect, but worthwhile in my opinion.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2024, 09:44:55 am by ebastler »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline capslock

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 17
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #153 on: March 05, 2024, 09:48:10 am »
Is there any idea why they implemented it this way? It is hard to imagine this is dictated my hardware, and hence necessary from a cost saving point of view. It sound more like an oversight in programming to me.
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #154 on: March 05, 2024, 10:12:33 am »
Is there any idea why they implemented it this way? It is hard to imagine this is dictated my hardware, and hence necessary from a cost saving point of view. It sound more like an oversight in programming to me.

The double-pixels in the traces for physical channels are due to a hardware limitation, as mentioned by Performa01 above and explained in a bit more detail here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds3000x-hd-and-upgraded-sds1000x-hd/msg5341286/#msg5341286

For the stair-step rendering of the math traces, I can't imagine a hard constraint which would force Siglent to do it that way. It might just have been the "first draft" implementation of the curve rendering, and then never got questioned?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, capslock

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #155 on: March 05, 2024, 05:57:41 pm »
Noise Density

In my previous test

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5293744/#msg5293744

I used a constant sample rate of 100 MSa/s, which allowed a 2 Mpts FFT with an effective FFT-sample rate of 50 MSa/s and Δf = 23.84 Hz. This was required, since the FFT in the SDS800X HD is limited to 2 Mpts max. and I wanted to measure the 1/f noise down to at least 100 Hz. As a consequence, I had to set up the FFT in a way that I get a frequency step (Δf) well below that.

Of course, if we want any accuracy in the spectrum plot, the Flattop window has to be used, and the RBW is Δf * 3.73 in case of Siglent’s version of the Flattop Window.

Because of the low sample rate of just 100 MSa/s for the acquisition, there will inevitably be aliasing, folding back all the noise above 50 MHz to the first Nyquist zone. Then there will be even more aliasing because the FFT introduces one more decimation step, from 100 to 50 MSa/s. The latter could be countered by a digital filter, but it doesn't make that much of a difference anymore.

All this does not matter much as long as we are mainly interested in the 1/f noise below about 300 kHz, because it is much stronger than the high frequency noise anyway.

Now we want to see the real noise density up to 10 MHz without any aliasing spoiling our measurements. For this we can activate all channels, thus reducing the input bandwidth to a well defined 200 MHz and engage the 20 MHz bandwidth limiter on top of that, so that we can be absolutely sure that there will be no aliasing products of any significance affecting the measurement at 10 MHz.


SDS824X HD_ND_1mV_20MHz_500MSa

Calculation for 10 MHz: -144.58 dBV = 59 nVrms.
The noise density at this point is 59 nV / √889.3 Hz = 59 nV / 29.8 = 1.98 nV/√Hz;

Here is the complete table:
 10 MHz:   -144.58 dBV    2.0 nV/√Hz
  3 MHz:   -142.48 dBV    2.5 nV/√Hz
  1 MHz:   -141.88 dBV    2.7 nV/√Hz
300 kHz:   -141.55 dBV    2.8 nV/√Hz
100 kHz:   -131.63 dBV    8.8 nV/√Hz
 30 kHz:   -125.49 dBV   17.8 nV/√Hz
 10 kHz:   -113.34 dBV   72.2 nV/√Hz
  1 kHz:   -101.97 dBV  267.2 nV/√Hz

With a noise density below 2 nV/√Hz, the Siglent SDS824 X HD beats most of the competition at higher frequencies, whereas the 1/f noise is nothing to write home about, but that has to do with the special split path input buffer design with its enormous offset compensation capability (±8 V starting at only 10.2 mV/div!).


Attached is the binary data file for this measurement.

SDS824X_HD_Binary_C4_2.7z
Channel 4, 1 mV/div, 50 ohms terminated;
500 µs/div, 2.5 Mpts, 500 MSa/s;
Bandwidth limit = ~20 MHz to get rid of any remaining aliasing from >250 MHz;


EDIT: Of course, the above measurement was flawed, because the 20 MHz bandwidth limiter affects the 10 MHz measurement. The actual noise density, measured without bandwidth limit at 10 MHz is 2.4 nV/√Hz, just as it was stated in the first test.


SDS824X HD_ND_1mV_200MHz_500MSa

Here is the updated noise density table:
 10 MHz:   -144.58 dBV    2.4 nV/√Hz
  3 MHz:   -142.48 dBV    2.5 nV/√Hz
  1 MHz:   -141.88 dBV    2.6 nV/√Hz
300 kHz:   -141.55 dBV    2.9 nV/√Hz
100 kHz:   -131.63 dBV    6.0 nV/√Hz
 30 kHz:   -125.49 dBV   16.0 nV/√Hz
 10 kHz:   -113.34 dBV   68.8 nV/√Hz
  1 kHz:   -101.97 dBV  247.0 nV/√Hz

A noise density of <2.4 nV/√Hz is still one of the best in the industry.

Attached is the binary data file for this measurement.

SDS824X_HD_Binary_C4_3.7z
Channel 4, 1 mV/div, 50 ohms terminated;
500 µs/div, 2.5 Mpts, 500 MSa/s;
Full Bandwidth;

« Last Edit: March 06, 2024, 05:45:38 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler, Mortymore, gf, Martin72, core, orzel, Bad_Driver

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #156 on: March 06, 2024, 09:46:25 pm »
Of course, if we want any accuracy in the spectrum plot, the Flattop window has to be used, and the RBW is Δf * 3.73 in case of Siglent’s version of the Flattop Window.
...
Calculation for 10 MHz: -144.58 dBV = 59 nVrms.
The noise density at this point is 59 nV / √889.3 Hz = 59 nV / 29.8 = 1.98 nV/√Hz;

Actually it is not the RBW (-3dB bandwidth), but the ENBW, which matters for noise denity. For Octave's flattop window, RBW=3.73*Δf, and ENBW=3.77*Δf. The Matlab variant it is almost the same. Don't know the factors for the Siglent variant of the window. The Siglent window must be different, though, since the SDS800X handbook specifies a main lobe width of 23*PI/N (-> 11.5*Δf), while it is 10*Δf for the Matlab/Octave variant. The exact coeffients are unfortunately not documented.

[ Fortunately, for a flattop window, the difference between RBW and ENBW happens to be small, so it does not make a big difference if the wrong one is used. ]

Quote
Now we want to see the real noise density up to 10 MHz without any aliasing spoiling our measurements. For this we can activate all channels, thus reducing the input bandwidth to a well defined 200 MHz and engage the 20 MHz bandwidth limiter on top of that, so that we can be absolutely sure that there will be no aliasing products of any significance affecting the measurement at 10 MHz.

Is the 200 MHz limiter an analog or a digital filter?

[ If it is digital, then it cannot remove noise that has already been folded by the sampling process from 490-500 Mhz, 500-510 MHz and from 990-1000 MHz down to 0-10 MHz (at 500MSa/s). Then it might be better to use 2GSa/s in order to avoid this folding. ]
« Last Edit: March 06, 2024, 09:53:04 pm by gf »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline pdenisowski

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 641
  • Country: us
  • Product Management Engineer, Rohde & Schwarz
    • Test and Measurement Fundamentals Playlist on the R&S YouTube channel
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #157 on: March 06, 2024, 10:07:38 pm »
First, thank you for doing all this - really excellent analysis. 

One small question:  is it possible to configure the FFT parameters independently of the time domain settings?  Or does changing the parameters in one domain change the settings in the other domain?
Test and Measurement Fundamentals video series on the Rohde & Schwarz YouTube channel:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKxVoO5jUTlvsVtDcqrVn0ybqBVlLj2z8

Free online test and measurement fundamentals courses from Rohde & Schwarz:  https://tinyurl.com/mv7a4vb6
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #158 on: March 06, 2024, 11:49:18 pm »
One small question:  is it possible to configure the FFT parameters independently of the time domain settings?  Or does changing the parameters in one domain change the settings in the other domain?
No - there is no dedicated SA-application. The FFT is just a math operation.

We can select the FFT length (as long as it does not exceed the total record length).

We have vertical and horizontal settigs, but these define the view parameters and do not affect the signal acquisition. Consequently, they are primarily used for zooming and navigating within the total FFT result.

We always need to set the correct acquisition mode (normal in most cases, ERES only in special situations, no Average and certainly no Peak Detect at all), input coupling, vertical gain & offset and time base to ensure sufficient record length.

 
The following users thanked this post: pdenisowski

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #159 on: March 07, 2024, 12:12:22 am »
Fortunately, for a flattop window, the difference between RBW and ENBW happens to be small, so it does not make a big difference if the wrong one is used.
That’s what I am relying on. The “RBW-filter” defined by the flattop window has steep transitions into the stop band, hence the noise bandwidth is assumed to be approximately the same as the resolution bandwidth.

Furthermore, if the actual noise bandwidth is a little wider than the RBW, what would the result be? The resulting noise density would be even ~0.5% lower, so it’s totally safe to specify the noise density by using the RBW of the Flattop window.


Is the 200 MHz limiter an analog or a digital filter?
It is a combination of both. Yes, at 500 MSa/s we cannot guarantee there will be no high frequency noise components folded back to the first Nyquist zone, this is why I used the 20 MHz (analog) bandwidth limiter at first. Unfortunately, this already affects the noise floor at 10 MHz a little. But you can see that there is no significant difference between 20 MHz and 200 MHz at 3 MHz (2.5 nV/√Hz), which I take as prove that the aliasing components can be neglected in the 200 MHz test scenario.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, gf, Martin72, core, orzel

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #160 on: March 07, 2024, 11:07:41 am »
Noise Density 2

This time I’ve decided to put not so much weight on the 1/f noise at really low frequencies, but do a flawless measurement where we can rule out any aliasing artefacts affecting the numbers.

I used only a single channel (Ch. 4), hence a sample rate of 2 GSa/s, which permits a 2 Mpts FFT with an effective FFT-sample rate of 2 GSa/s and Δf = 953.67 Hz, resulting in 3.56 kHz RBW with the Flattop window. This allows us to measure the 1/f noise down to at least 10 kHz and guarantees full accuracy up to 1 GHz.

Now we want to measure the real noise density up to 100 MHz without any aliasing spoiling our results.


SDS824X_HD_ND_2GSa_1mV

Calculation for 10 MHz (I’ve used 9.9 MHz to escape a micro-spur): -137.35 dBV = 135.68 nVrms.

The noise density at this point is 135.68 nV / √3560 Hz = 135.68 nV / 59.66 = 2.27 nV/√Hz;

Here is the complete table:
100 MHz:   -137.73 dBV    2.18 nV/√Hz
 10 MHz:   -137.35 dBV    2.27 nV/√Hz
  3 MHz:   -136.64 dBV    2.47 nV/√Hz
  1 MHz:   -136.54 dBV    2.50 nV/√Hz
300 kHz:   -135.01 dBV    2.98 nV/√Hz
100 kHz:   -128.72 dBV    6.14 nV/√Hz
 30 kHz:   -120.57 dBV   15.70 nV/√Hz
 10 kHz:   -104.51 dBV   99.67 nV/√Hz

We are getting pretty close to 2 nV/√Hz at frequencies of 10 MHz and higher.

 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, maxwell3e10, Mortymore, gf, Martin72, core, orzel, Bad_Driver

Offline hpw

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 366
  • Country: 00
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #161 on: March 08, 2024, 07:28:37 am »

@Noise Density 2: Any chance to save 100x AVG by 2M as one 200M BIN file size to save?
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #162 on: March 08, 2024, 09:04:43 am »
@Noise Density 2: Any chance to save 100x AVG by 2M as one 200M BIN file size to save?
That’s not easy:

The record length is 4 Mpts with these settings, which means there are 400 Mpts in total used with 100x averaging – and the settings are as they are for a reason. At slower time bases, it would not be possible to retain the 2 GSa/s FFT-sample rate. A faster time base setting (e.g. one that leads to 2 Mpts) would not be sufficient for a 2097152-point FFT.

Of course, I could just capture a long record so that you can play with it – but that I’ve done already and since the total sample memory in the SDS824X HD is just 100 Mpts, I can’t provide anything longer than that.

A different approach would be to save the complete history, but this feature is not implemented yet and then the entire history is limited by the max. 100 Mpts sample memory just as well.

Only way would be to save 100 individual records, each 4 Mpts = 8 MB long. But that’s a bit too much asked 😉

 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, RAPo

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #163 on: March 08, 2024, 09:19:43 am »
EDIT: Moved my answer to hpw's "A call for Bin-Files as for new Siglent HD-Models" thread - I think it fits better there.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/a-call-for-bin-files-as-for-new-siglent-hd-models/msg5379377/#msg5379377
« Last Edit: March 08, 2024, 02:15:41 pm by gf »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline hpw

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 366
  • Country: 00
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #164 on: March 08, 2024, 03:39:38 pm »
@Noise Density 2: Any chance to save 100x AVG by 2M as one 200M BIN file size to save?
That’s not easy:

The record length is 4 Mpts with these settings, which means there are 400 Mpts in total used with 100x averaging – and the settings are as they are for a reason. At slower time bases, it would not be possible to retain the 2 GSa/s FFT-sample rate. A faster time base setting (e.g. one that leads to 2 Mpts) would not be sufficient for a 2097152-point FFT.

Of course, I could just capture a long record so that you can play with it – but that I’ve done already and since the total sample memory in the SDS824X HD is just 100 Mpts, I can’t provide anything longer than that.

A different approach would be to save the complete history, but this feature is not implemented yet and then the entire history is limited by the max. 100 Mpts sample memory just as well.

Only way would be to save 100 individual records, each 4 Mpts = 8 MB long. But that’s a bit too much asked 😉

Look, I like(d) simple getting the equal results as you using equal samples.  :-+

The given BIN files shows on the first 5..10 FFT's anyway a higher noise as the flowing once. Even on SDS3000 HD.

This is may a thermal or stability issue, as the gear to heat up (1h or more) before any 1/f & noise to measure.

The calculations of the dBrtHz could be easier done, as the ENBW value in dB to subtract of the dBV. But works only with equal used FFT Window for dBV to dBVrtHz graphs.





 

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #165 on: March 08, 2024, 11:18:32 pm »
Look, I like(d) simple getting the equal results as you using equal samples.  :-+

If you lower your expectations and are also satisfied with a very similar result, you can obtain it from the .bin file posted by Performa01.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline maxwell3e10

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 869
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #166 on: March 09, 2024, 06:17:35 am »
Thanks for these measurements, 2 nV/sqrt(Hz) at 1mV/div is indeed quite impressive, among the very best noise for front end amplifier. https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/oscilloscope-input-noise-comparison/
The 1/f noise is not as good, a bit worse than Rigol HDO.

Did you make measurements at 1V/div scale? That would be a test of the ADC and a direct measure of HD performance.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #167 on: March 09, 2024, 07:58:00 am »
Granular Noise

This time we shall have a look at the granular noise of the 12-bit SDS800X HD. At high sensitivities like 1 mV/div, we cannot expect much of an advantage from the 12 bits, but at low sensitivities like 50 mV/div and higher, the 12 bits should clearly give us a benefit.

I used only a single channel (Ch. 4), hence a sample rate of 2 GSa/s, which permits a 2 Mpts FFT with an effective FFT-sample rate of 2 GSa/s and Δf = 953.67 Hz, resulting in 3.56 kHz RBW with the Flattop window. This allows us to measure the noise down to at least 10 kHz and guarantees full accuracy up to 1 GHz.


SDS824X_HD_ND_2GSa_1V

There’s little point in calculating a noise density (which would have to be specified in hundreds of nanovolts or even single digit microvolts per square-root Hertz), but we should consider the full-scale value of +9 dBV in this test scenario.

We get a SNR of >110 dB at 100 MHz with a RBW of 3.56 kHz.

You can download a 100 Mpts binary file for this test scenario:

SDS824X HD
Channel 4, 1V/div, 50 ohms terminated;
5 ms/div, 100 Mpts, 2 GSa/s;
Full bandwidth = 254 MHz;

https://mega.nz/file/XD5UVL7a#KQhhly2Zo7U2D5wumdrSVm2psvrTVdZtO8pwSQV34wA
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, maxwell3e10, gf, Martin72, RAPo

Offline Bad_Driver

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 364
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #168 on: March 09, 2024, 11:03:38 am »
Performa01, a dumb question.

Is there a special reason for always using channel 4 for your tests? 
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, Martin72

Offline RAPo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 622
  • Country: nl
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #169 on: March 09, 2024, 11:19:17 am »
Maybe the green color trace, it looks more like an analog scope and the rigol (sadly) doesn't have it? 🤔
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, Martin72

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #170 on: March 09, 2024, 11:56:49 am »
Performa01, a dumb question.

Is there a special reason for always using channel 4 for your tests?

I usually use the first channel - because the short cables don't get any further and my measuring equipment is to the left of the scope. ;)

Edit:
Quote
You can download a 100 Mpts binary file for this test scenario:
Is canceled for me with the reference to a (possible) virus (Win10,Edge)

« Last Edit: March 09, 2024, 11:58:43 am by Martin72 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #171 on: March 09, 2024, 11:58:39 am »
Is there a special reason for always using channel 4 for your tests? 
It's actually the green color trace that I prefer, also because of fond memories of analog CROs, so I decided to use Ch.4 as the default choice back when I got my first Siglent MSO (SDS2304) about 10 years ago.

Back then I've even found a bug that was specific to not using channel 1 - so one more reason to stick to Ch.4 ever since ;)
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, 2N3055, Martin72, Bad_Driver, RAPo

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #172 on: March 09, 2024, 01:54:13 pm »
There’s little point in calculating a noise density (which would have to be specified in hundreds of nanovolts or even single digit microvolts per square-root Hertz), but we should consider the full-scale value of +9 dBV in this test scenario.

We get a SNR of >110 dB at 100 MHz with a RBW of 3.56 kHz.

If you relate it to a specific bandwidth, then it is still a density.
Maybe dBFS/Hz would be an appropriate (bandwidth-independent) metric?
Then it would be about -145 dBFS/Hz at 100MHz.

However, the full bandwidth noise floor is ~4.3 mVRMS, which corresponds to a total SNR (or better say SINAD?) of ~56 dBFS, or ~9.1 ENOB (not yet including harmonic spurs and mixing products of the measured signal, since no signal is present).

What I also noticed, by the way, is that roughly 1/3 of the noise floor's total power is contributed by the two (interleaving?) spurs at 500MHz and 1GHz! I wonder if it would not be possible to calibrate them out? Or is it already the best possible calibration?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #173 on: March 09, 2024, 02:05:52 pm »
Here some example where are bottom and top of voltage band I and II
Now here is also other individual SDS824X HD
And as can see very close with @Performa01

Below images, all inputs terminated with 50 ohm  terminator (HP11593A).


Voltage band II
F1 1V/div
F2 102mV/div

Voltage band I
F3 100mV/div
F4 1mV/div



FFT window FlatTop



btw, I do not know this Siglent used FlatTop window real ENBW (Equivalent Noise Band Width) so here below is same using Rectangle aka "Boxcar" window.




FFT window Rectangle, Input 1mV/div, Full BW
Calculation for 9,85 MHz  -142.8 dBV = 72.1nVrms
Noise density in this point 72.1nVrms / √953.7 Hz = 2.33 nV/√Hz;


« Last Edit: March 09, 2024, 02:16:40 pm by rf-loop »
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, Martin72, core

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #174 on: March 09, 2024, 03:50:41 pm »
There’s little point in calculating a noise density (which would have to be specified in hundreds of nanovolts or even single digit microvolts per square-root Hertz), but we should consider the full-scale value of +9 dBV in this test scenario.

We get a SNR of >110 dB at 100 MHz with a RBW of 3.56 kHz.

If you relate it to a specific bandwidth, then it is still a density.
Maybe dBFS/Hz would be an appropriate (bandwidth-independent) metric?
Then it would be about -145 dBFS/Hz at 100MHz.
Right. I should have said: “there’s not much point in calculating the classic noise density expressed in nV/√Hz.

Since the vertical axis is dBV (and not dBm) in this example, I guess dBFS/√Hz would be more appropriate.

Since the SDS800X HD lacks 50 ohm inputs, it feels more natural to work with voltages instead of power levels.


However, the full bandwidth noise floor is ~4.3 mVRMS, which corresponds to a total SNR (or better say SINAD?) of ~56 dBFS, or ~9.1 ENOB (not yet including harmonic spurs and mixing products of the measured signal, since no signal is present).
Since there is no distortion component, SNR would be the better term in my book. Static spurs can be looked at as some sort of noise, and dynamic ones (that depend on input signal) could rather be classified as some complex form of non-harmonic distortion.

Since distortion products can easily be lower than -54 dBc, actually up to -70 dBc as also demonstrated in this thread, the 9.1 ENOB should be actually achievable in many practical scenarios.


What I also noticed, by the way, is that roughly 1/3 of the noise floor's total power is contributed by the two (interleaving?) spurs at 500MHz and 1GHz! I wonder if it would not be possible to calibrate them out? Or is it already the best possible calibration?
The self-calibration takes quite a long time, so it’s actually been a while since I’ve last performed one.

Now I’ve tried again, even though I didn’t expect much from it – in my experience the calibration in this instrument seems pretty stable anyway. Yet there is a little difference indeed:


SDS824X_HD_ND_2GSa_1V_cal


 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, Mortymore, Martin72, core, BRZ.tech

Offline BRZ.tech

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 45
  • Country: br
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #175 on: March 10, 2024, 01:15:00 pm »
Dear @Performa01
Regarding this topic, I consider it like Star Trek episodes, in terms of content and depth. I can't imagine the next episode...
The SDS800X HD really put SIGLENT at the forefront and in the minds of hobbyists compared to other manufacturers. Soon we will have 1,000,000 views on the set of related topics.
Competing manufacturers will have to greatly improve their hardware and free firmware to compete with the SDS800X HD in entry-level DSO/MSO. For beginners and hobbyists, it can deliver much more quantity and quality of information, for an affordable price, compared to competitor models, in addition to 12 bits of vertical resolution.

As for the 8-digit frequency meter, it is spectacular, achieving displays with single-digit resolution, frequencies up to 99.999999 MHz. Competitive models provide a maximum of 6 digits, with single-digit resolution of 999.999 KHz.

I am currently a user of a RIGOL MSO5000, which serves my hobby. But I intend to soon buy one the SDS800X HD, perhaps the SDS804X HD, even for the challenge of reproducing your tests, and learning many things. Very soon, with regular deliveries from SIGLENT, as here for me the best value for money is to buy on Aliexpress.

As for my doubts and questions, let me know @Performa01 if you have a YouTube channel that shows step by step how to carry out these brilliant tests. And if you accept it here on the list, let “beginners” ask you “obvious things” questions.


In the HAM – Amateur Radio universe, in which I am, which is a potential client for the SDS800X HD, we measure many very low amplitude signals, below 1mVrms, in the time domain, and in the FFT, it can be in dBm or dBV . It looks like the SDS800X HD can present both possibilities.

Any colleague on the topic can also answer my questions, they will be welcome.

Maybe it's already on your rehearsal schedule:
I suggest you do a test to measure a signal, which we use in HAM, a VHF sinusoidal signal f=146MHz, without modulation, Amplitude = 1mVrms, at 50 Ohm, to start, and Decreasing the Amplitude up to 10uVrms, and if possible even lower, up to the sensitivity limit of the SDS800X HD. And present the images in the Time domain, and also in the Frequency domain, using the FFT with the Table, it can be in dBm or dBV.
And present your conclusions to the HAM universe.

Afterwards, perform FM Modulation, with a sinusoidal signal of f=1KHz, with a 5KHz deviation. Present the same images, in the Time and FFT domains.
And present your conclusions to the HAM universe.

Afterwards, perform AM Modulation, with a sinusoidal signal of f=1KHz, with Modulation Index = 80%. Present the same images, in the Time and FFT domains.
And present your conclusions to the HAM universe.

Translation with Google translator.
TKS.
73.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2024, 06:16:36 pm by BRZ.tech »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, RAPo

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #176 on: March 10, 2024, 05:21:03 pm »
You ask from @Performa01
But here is some quick demo from me.

carrier bit over 145MHz, AM 1kHz 80% ( sidebands are ~-8dBc )
Yes when I did it I forget you ask 146... my head "best berore" day was far away in previous millenium...

For 2m band there need use 500MSa/s so even with 2M FFT we can not get more resolution - this is simple direct FFT.
( and I have not tested if internal down conversion (Nyquist "trick") can use so that result give any even somehow acceptable result)

(note, I have used Hamming window so levels accuracy is poor. (FlatTop is better but around 890Hz RBW with this setup is so borderline for detect sidebands so I use here Hamming...  when carrier and sidebands freq do not match with FFT bins there is some amounf scallop error in amplitude. With -107dBm it can clearly see also that noise start affect lot (it can see when look carrier and sidebands persistence traces... I have usede 30 sec persistence)
There is Tektronix 50ohm feedthru termination in scope input.
image a: -87dBm carrier is ~10uVrms
image b: -107dBm carrier is ~1uVrms


Signal come from HP 8642B "boat anchor"

Very limited time so only these examples.


« Last Edit: March 11, 2024, 04:33:33 am by rf-loop »
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, orzel, trackersoft, BRZ.tech

Offline BRZ.tech

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 45
  • Country: br
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #177 on: March 10, 2024, 06:53:00 pm »
You ask from @Performa01
But here is some quick demo from me.

carrier bit over 145MHz, AM 1kHz 80% ( sidebands are ~-8dBc )
Yes when I did it I forget you ask 146... my head "best berore" day was far away in previous millenium...

Dear @rf-loop,
I am very grateful for providing your input.

I modified my previous post to add:
"Any colleague on the topic can also answer my questions, they will be welcome."

As for the wavelength frequency in 2m, f=145MHz, there is no problem. I indicated f=146MHz because it is the center of the 2m band here in my country. But calculating at 145MHz will not change the practical effect of the test. TKS.

In image "a", at the Carrier frequency, with 10uVrms of input Amplitude, in the AM signal, it was great to see the exact Amplitudes and Frequencies, and clearly, of the Carrier and LSB and USB lanes.

In image "b", it was even better to see the same information, and well defined, with an AM signal input amplitude of 1uVrms...

In my opinion, the SDS824X HD passed the AM test...

As for the CW and FM Modulation test, it is not possible to know yet.

@rf-loop, a question, because I don't know how to use SIGLENT's UI: in your table you present "MARKER: 1, 2 and 4", but you did not present "Marker: 3". Can you explain why?

TKS
73.

« Last Edit: March 10, 2024, 06:58:20 pm by BRZ.tech »
 

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #178 on: March 10, 2024, 07:07:06 pm »
Hi,

Quote
in your table you present "MARKER: 1, 2 and 4", but you did not present "Marker: 3". Can you explain why?

You can set and activate/deactivate the markers individually.
Example:
In my bandwidth measurement yesterday, I first measured the 70Mhz variant and distributed markers 1-5 accordingly.
With the 200Mhz variant, for example, markers 2 (which I had set to 25Mhz) and 3 (set to 50Mhz) no longer made sense, so I no longer activated them.

 
The following users thanked this post: BRZ.tech

Offline BRZ.tech

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 45
  • Country: br
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #179 on: March 10, 2024, 07:17:19 pm »
Hi,
Martin72.
Thank you for your response.
Understood, regarding disabling the marker individually. This is very practical when you have many weak signals around a signal of measurement interest.
I will see your Bandwidth measurement in the other topic.
I inform you that I always watch the videos on your YouTube channel...

TKS
73.
 
The following users thanked this post: Martin72

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #180 on: March 11, 2024, 08:37:24 am »
Ham Test

Here come some tests that could be of interest for HAM operators.

First, I should ensure that expectations don’t get unrealistic. A general-purpose oscilloscope like the SDS800X HD is neither a spectrum analyzer nor a test receiver, even when its noise figure drops below 10 dB at frequencies above 300 kHz. Yet it just works on the full input signal bandwidth, there is no pre-selector, no mixer to shift small portions of the upper spectrum down to a lower intermediate frequency and no filter that could isolate the IF signal.

In the time domain, 400 µVrms is pretty much the limit for reliable triggering, indicated by a correct trigger frequency counter display; for even lower levels, triggering gets increasingly sporadic and at 100 µVrms, the trigger frequency counter drops below 1 MHz. Only if we have a strong copy of the signal of interest, such as measuring the stop band of a filter, we could trigger on the input signal and use the Average math function to make even very weak output signals visible and measurable, even those way below the noisefloor, as has been demonstrated already in this thread.

For all the following tests, a Siglent SDG7102A AWG with OCXO option has been directly connected with coaxial Hyperflex 5 cables, a step-attenuator Wavetek 5080.1 and an inline terminator “hp10100C” at the scope input.


CW Test

For the 1 mVrms demo I had to bring quite a lot of information onto a single screen:


SDS824X HD_SA_CW_146MHz_1mV

The main window at the top is showing the 146 MHz signal at a timebase of 500 µs/div. We need that slower timebase to get sufficient data for a 2 Mpts FFT. Of course we can’t see any details there, hence there is the zoom window below, where the signal is displayed at a timebase of 10 ns/div. We can see that the vertical position is not constant across the screen width, which hints on the noise that gets very noticeable at such low signal levels.

The zoom window also contains the FFT which reveals some weak modulation due to noise and we can see the corresponding sidebands indicated by markers 1, 2, 4 and 5, whereas marker 3 corresponds to the main signal.

Below we have two windows nested: the advanced measurements together with the Peaks List, for which I’ve freed up some space by removing measurements 2 and 3. We can see that the amplitude measurements in the time domain still work reasonably well, at least Stdev (= AC-RMS), whereas the peak-to-peak amplitude cannot be accurate – once again because of the noise.

The signal frequency measurement is not accurate as well and all automatic measurements have a high variance, as can be seen in the measurement statistics and histograms, yet the 7-digit trigger frequency counter is still rock stable and pretty accurate. Of course, it is 2 kHz off, which is equivalent to 13.7 ppm, but that’s because the time base of the SDS800X HD has 25 ppm tolerance, which is pretty much standard, while Siglent’s higher end DSOs starting at the SDS2000X plus provide class leading 1 ppm timebase accuracy.

The peak table shows the various signal amplitudes, but we are mainly interested in Peak #3, which is indicated as -47.146 dBm at 146.00205 MHz. Surprisingly, the frequency is exactly the same as the trigger frequency counter, hence absolutely correct relative to the SDS800X HD timebase, also the amplitude is pretty much spot on (should ideally be -47.0 dBm).

At this point I should mention that the Peak table is automatic and we only set the search parameters, i.e. threshold and excursion. This is in contrast to the Markers, which can be preset on peaks or harmonics, yet each marker can be set individually to any desired frequency by the user. For the measurements here, Peak tables have been used exclusively.

There is no point to further look at the time domain for weaker signals, because they will get heavily distorted and eventually buried in the noise anyway. Yet I don’t change the arrangement and only move the zoom trace out of view.

Next, we try 100 µVrms:


SDS824X HD_SA_CW_146MHz_100uV

The main window at the top shows mainly noise for the 100 µVrms signal at 245 MHz bandwidth. The zoom window with the FFT displays a clean spectral line, hence we only get a single peak marker.

The advanced measurements below just try to measure the noise, even though the Stdev measurement still isn’t too far off – just a coincidence?

Since such a weak signal cannot be properly triggered anymore anyway, I’ve used AC-line trigger instead and the trigger frequency counter just shows a constant 50 Hz now. FFT doesn’t need a triggered signal.

The peak table shows the signal amplitude as -67.316 dBm at 146.00205 MHz. The amplitude is still pretty accurate (should ideally be -67.0 dBm).

Now let’s try 10 µVrms:


SDS824X HD_SA_CW_146MHz_10uV

Once again, we get a clean spectral line with a single peak marker.

The advanced measurements below are totally meaningless, but the peak table shows the signal amplitude extremely accurate as -87.073 dBm at 146.00205 MHz.

Another attempt with 1 µVrms:


SDS824X HD_SA_CW_146MHz_1uV

One more time, we get a clean spectral line with a single peak marker.

The advanced measurements below are totally meaningless, but the peak table shows the signal amplitude pretty accurately as -107.291 dBm at 146.00205 MHz.

A final attempt with 100 nVrms:


SDS824X HD_SA_CW_146MHz_100nV

We even get a tiny spectral line, but have to tweak the search parameters to get the peak marker. Its amplitude is now way off: -123.737 dBm at 146.00182 MHz (should be -127.0 dBm). The signal is just too close to the noise floor now.

This test is quite revealing. Even a 100 nVrms signal could be detected, and even though the signal amplitude was off by 3.26 dB, the frequency could still be measured with just ~200 Hz error (relative to the DSO’s timebase that is)!


FM Test

For the modulation tests, I did not feel like trying many different levels again, so 1 mV and 10 µV RMS shall be sufficient for FM.

First I need to repeat what I’ve already stated initially: An oscilloscope is a baseband instrument, not a spectrum analyzer. There is only so much frequency resolution we can get from a 2 Mpts FFT. As a consequence, the expectations shouldn’t be very high when looking at one kilohertz frequency spacing in signals from the 2 meter band.

Modulation: 1 kHz modulation frequency and 5 kHz frequency deviation.

1 mVrms at 146 MHz first:


SDS824X HD_SA_FM_146MHz_1mV

Well, that’s not very convincing. I was forced to use the Blackman window, which is still usable for spectrum analysis with a max. amplitude error of 1 dB. Its resolution bandwidth is not that much better than Flattop hence the picture isn’t very useful and we only get a vague idea of the FM spectrum.

It should be clear that a general-purpose oscilloscope isn’t a test receiver. If we look at bandwidth limited signals, like filtered IF, where we need not worry about aliasing from unrelated signals in the neighborhood, we could just use the “frequency conversion by undersampling” method.

Any ADC acts as a mixer, thus producing a spectrum of ±n * fi ± m * fs, where fi is the input frequency and fs is the sample clock, while n and m are just integers running from 0 to (theoretically) infinity. During normal operation, we don’t want to see any mixer products, which is perfectly possible as long as the input signal and all its harmonics don’t exceed fs/2 and the output of the ADC has a brick-wall filter (then in the digital domain of course, aka Sinc filter or sin(x)/x reconstruction) that removes everything above fs/2.

Yet in some circumstances, we can make use of a certain high-order mixer product, just as in this example, where the effective FFT sample rate is only 5 MSa/s, which is quite obviously way too low for a 146 MHz input signal.

According to the formula given above, we are aiming at the mixer product for 1 * fi - 29 * fs, which is

1 * 146 MHz – 29 x 5 MHz = 146 MHz – 145 MHz = 1 MHz;

Now if we set the center frequency to 1 MHz, we get the carrier at 146 MHz and a resolution bandwidth of only 35.57 Hz, even with just 512 kpts FFT, hence can also clearly see the sidebands and their 1 kHz spacing. 16x averaging has been used in order to get a clean and stable display:


SDS824X HD_SA_FM_146MHz_1mV_5MSa

Be aware that the true center frequency is Peak #6 at 1.00197 MHz because of the SDS824X HD timebase tolerance of 25 ppm.

The following table compares the measured sidebands with the expected ones in dBm:

Ord.   Meas.   Expected
  0   -62.052   -62.083
  1   -56.750   -56.763
  2   -73.700   -73.713
  3   -55.823   -55.833
  4   -55.200   -55.223


Now for the 10 µVrms test:


SDS824X HD_SA_FM_146MHz_10uV_5MSa

There is a spurious signal at marker 5 exceeding the signal spectrum – we just have to ignore it.

The following table compares the measured sidebands with the expected ones in dBm:

Ord.   Meas.   Expected
  0   -102.07   -102.083
  1   -96.700   -96.763
  2   -113.70   -113.713
  3   -95.700   -95.833
  4   -95.100   -95.223
  5   -98.500   -98.733


All in all the down-mixing via the ADC can save our day as long as we have an isolated signal and the signal levels don’t get too low.

There are several caveats though:

•   We need to make sure that n is always positive, otherwise we’d get the result in reverse frequency position, i.e. the upper sideband appears below the carrier and vice versa.
•   Mixing with the 29th harmonic of the sample clock introduces also 29 times more phase noise and jitter and this might get visible the FFT plot.
•   Amplitude accuracy might suffer, as a harmonic mixing process is not guaranteed to be as efficient as the fundamental one, hence we might see some attenuation.


AM Test

Modulation: 1 kHz modulation frequency and 80% modulation depth.


SDS824X HD_SA_AM_146MHz_1mV

Well, that looks familiar. Once again, the picture isn’t great and we only get a vague idea of the AM spectrum. The sidebands should be -8 dBc = -61.6 dBm. The deviations come from the insufficient resolution bandwidth and the amplitude error of the Blackman window.

We are looking at the mixer product for 1 * fi - 29 * fs again, which is

1 * 146 MHz – 29 x 5 MHz = 146 MHz – 145 MHz = 1 MHz;

Now if we set the center frequency to 1 MHz, we get the carrier at 146 MHz and a resolution bandwidth of only 35.57 Hz, hence can also clearly see the sidebands and their 1 kHz spacing. 16x averaging has been used in order to get a clean and stable display:


SDS824X HD_SA_FM_146MHz_1mV_5MSa

Be aware that the true center frequency is Peak #3 at 1.00197 MHz because of the SDS824X HD timebase tolerance.

The sidebands should be -8 dBc = -55 dBm. The accuracy is very high despite the harmonic mixing process.


General Remark: I don’t maintain a YouTube channel and my time is limited. Since I’ve already published most of the intended content, and I made sure the relevant information can easily be found by means of the table of contents in the opening posting, I don’t mind people asking questions here, even newbie questions 😉


EDIT: Corrected the statement for the 10 µV FM-test and added a comparison of measured vs. expected results.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2024, 11:16:10 am by Performa01 »
 

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #181 on: March 11, 2024, 08:47:57 am »
So much useful and worth knowing information and basics in a single thread - that's why I will keep the link to it "forever" in my signature.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, matus, Mortymore, Grandchuck, KungFuJosh, BRZ.tech

Offline hpw

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 366
  • Country: 00
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #182 on: March 11, 2024, 08:58:54 am »

@CW Test: could be enhanced as 1/f PN and Jitter test. Using a -3dB signal at fs/xxx, where xxx is exact 2^n and then ZOOM-In or use simple a 10MHz OXCO sine signal.

This is mostly done on Audio as using fs/4 as looking for 1/f & symmetric jitter or modulation spurs.

I did similar tests already on a Siglent SSA and the internal reference synthesizer is as  :palm:
 

Offline Muttley Snickers

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2341
  • Country: au
  • Cursed: 679 times
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #183 on: March 11, 2024, 09:58:47 am »
(snip...) 
General Remark: I don’t maintain a YouTube channel and my time is limited. Since I’ve already published most of the intended content, and I made sure the relevant information can easily be found by means of the table of contents in the opening posting, I don’t mind people asking questions here, even newbie questions 😉

You sir are to be thoroughly commended, an inspirational piece of work if ever there was.   :clap:

So much useful and worth knowing information and basics in a single thread - that's why I will keep the link to it "forever" in my signature.

Just to add to Martin72's post.
As the thread is currently 8 pages and still under 20 people have the ability to select "All" at the top of the page to open all of the existing pages and then print as a hard copy or save as a pdf for reference, don't forget the images though. You won't find this level of information in any user manual that's for damn sure.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, Martin72, BRZ.tech

Online Mortymore

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 444
  • Country: pt
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #184 on: March 11, 2024, 10:18:20 am »
So much useful and worth knowing information and basics in a single thread - that's why I will keep the link to it "forever" in my signature.

Great idea! I've added a signature with the link to this thread also.

..
Just to add to Martin72's post.
As the thread is currently 8 pages and still under 20 people have the ability to select "All" at the top of the page to open all of the existing pages and then print as a hard copy or save as a pdf for reference, don't forget the images though. You won't find this level of information in any user manual that's for damn sure.

I've been compiling in a doc the posts from Performa1, according to the list of links provided in the 1st.
It's not in a PDF format because I suspect that Performa1's work is not done yet  ;) since he keeps open to suggestions and extremely supportive answering them.  :clap:

PS: By the way... This weekend I made the same "mistake" as Martin72 and bought an SDS804X-HD. It was shipped 10 minutes ago, wile I was reading this thread updates  8)
« Last Edit: March 11, 2024, 10:25:58 am by Mortymore »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, 2N3055, Martin72, core, BRZ.tech

Offline pdenisowski

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 641
  • Country: us
  • Product Management Engineer, Rohde & Schwarz
    • Test and Measurement Fundamentals Playlist on the R&S YouTube channel
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #185 on: March 11, 2024, 10:24:36 am »
I was forced to use the Blackman window, which is still usable for spectrum analysis with a max. amplitude error of 1 dB. Its resolution bandwidth is not that much better than Flattop hence the picture isn’t very useful and we only get a vague idea of the FM spectrum.

Again, many thanks for the detailed analysis - if you don't already work for a T&M manufacturer, you really ought to consider it :)

Quick question: which window types does the Siglent support?   

I'm not sure I would have used a Blackman(-Harris) window here, although I presume this is the default (at least it's the default on a lot of scopes).  Since you're going to have to trade between frequency selectivity and amplitude accuracy, a window type with better selectivity might be better for generic spectrum analysis (i.e. what's where in spectrum).

Test and Measurement Fundamentals video series on the Rohde & Schwarz YouTube channel:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKxVoO5jUTlvsVtDcqrVn0ybqBVlLj2z8

Free online test and measurement fundamentals courses from Rohde & Schwarz:  https://tinyurl.com/mv7a4vb6
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, BRZ.tech

Offline RAPo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 622
  • Country: nl
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #186 on: March 11, 2024, 12:01:02 pm »
Ham Test


General Remark: I don’t maintain a YouTube channel and my time is limited. Since I’ve already published most of the intended content, and I made sure the relevant information can easily be found by means of the table of contents in the opening posting, I don’t mind people asking questions here, even newbie questions 😉

Thanks for your knowledge and insights. They're really appreciated. This thread convinced a Rigol-fan boy to order a Siglent!
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, 2N3055, BRZ.tech

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #187 on: March 11, 2024, 12:13:10 pm »
SDS824X HD_SA_CW_146MHz_1mV

We can see that the vertical position is not constant across the screen width, which hints on the noise that gets very noticeable at such low signal levels.

Theoretically, a bandpass filter could help to reduce noise in the time domain display. The handbook sais that 200 FIR taps are supported. With 200 taps @2Gsa/s you can design filters with ENBW down to 10 MHz (see attachment). For the provided 500µV/div noise floor data, this would improve the 0..1GHz SNR by ~16dB. Is it actually possible to specify/upload arbitrary custom filter taps, or are only the predefined filters supported? The latter seem to be a bit limited (e.g. bandpass passband >= 0.02 * sample_rate).
« Last Edit: March 11, 2024, 12:17:14 pm by gf »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, Mortymore, BRZ.tech

Offline mawyatt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #188 on: March 11, 2024, 02:26:03 pm »
@Performa01

Superb work, well done :clap:

You nicely show the inherent built-in capability of this new highly affordable Analytical Instrument we disrespectfully call a "Scope"!!

Also like the use of the "Trick", reminiscent of our 80s multi-tier DTCA CCD based RTSA, this technique seemed lost in time!!

We thought/hoped Siglent might "answer" Rigol's excellent DHO800 introduction, they've certainly answered that "call"  ;)

Edit: Added in

Best,
« Last Edit: March 11, 2024, 03:50:40 pm by mawyatt »
Curiosity killed the cat, also depleted my wallet!
~Wyatt Labs by Mike~
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, 2N3055, BRZ.tech

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #189 on: March 11, 2024, 02:32:03 pm »
I was forced to use the Blackman window, which is still usable for spectrum analysis with a max. amplitude error of 1 dB. Its resolution bandwidth is not that much better than Flattop hence the picture isn’t very useful and we only get a vague idea of the FM spectrum.

Again, many thanks for the detailed analysis - if you don't already work for a T&M manufacturer, you really ought to consider it :)

Quick question: which window types does the Siglent support?   

I'm not sure I would have used a Blackman(-Harris) window here, although I presume this is the default (at least it's the default on a lot of scopes).  Since you're going to have to trade between frequency selectivity and amplitude accuracy, a window type with better selectivity might be better for generic spectrum analysis (i.e. what's where in spectrum).

No, Blackman is not default, I think it's Hanning (correctly: "von Hann"), and unfortunately so, because many folks not really understanding how to properly setup a FFT stick to the default and - quite frankly - everything but Flattop is pretty useless for spectrum analysis. I thought I made it clear that I have used Blackman because it is the only other acceptable window with max. 1 dB amplitude error, which has at least a little bit narrower bandwidth.

The reason for this hard assessment together with the answers to your questions can be found here:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-coming/msg4318822/#msg4318822
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, core, BRZ.tech

Offline pdenisowski

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 641
  • Country: us
  • Product Management Engineer, Rohde & Schwarz
    • Test and Measurement Fundamentals Playlist on the R&S YouTube channel
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #190 on: March 11, 2024, 02:49:28 pm »
No, Blackman is not default, I think it's Hanning (correctly: "von Hann"), and unfortunately so, because many folks not really understanding how to properly setup a FFT stick to the default and - quite frankly - everything but Flattop is pretty useless for spectrum analysis. I thought I made it clear that I have used Blackman because it is the only other acceptable window with max. 1 dB amplitude error, which has at least a little bit narrower bandwidth.

The reason for this hard assessment together with the answers to your questions can be found here:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-coming/msg4318822/#msg4318822

Thanks for the link.  Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you (or you're speaking tongue-in-cheek), but I would however rather strongly disagree that "everything but Flattop is pretty useless for spectrum analysis"  It very much depends on the application (i.e. what kinds of signals you're looking at).  Even if amplitude accuracy is your primary concern, there are still multiple window types that provide "acceptable" amplitude accuracy in many applications.

The fact that various window types exist (and all modern T&M FFT implementations support multiple window types) speaks to the need for different windows :)

I'm working on my own presentation / video covering this, but in the meantime there is an excellent (and accessible) coverage of FFT windowing in this paper

https://www.egr.msu.edu/classes/me451/me451_labs/Fall_2013/Understanding_FFT_Windows.pdf   (see page 4)

Or a little more technical:

https://www.ti.com/content/dam/videos/external-videos/2/3816841626001/5834902778001.mp4/subassets/adcs-fast-fourier-transforms-and-windowing-presentation-quiz.pdf  (see slide 10)
« Last Edit: March 11, 2024, 02:52:44 pm by pdenisowski »
Test and Measurement Fundamentals video series on the Rohde & Schwarz YouTube channel:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKxVoO5jUTlvsVtDcqrVn0ybqBVlLj2z8

Free online test and measurement fundamentals courses from Rohde & Schwarz:  https://tinyurl.com/mv7a4vb6
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, Mortymore, core, orzel, mawyatt, RAPo, BRZ.tech

Offline mawyatt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #191 on: March 11, 2024, 04:03:43 pm »
Good elementary FFT Windowing references  :-+

A priori signal type and post measurement intent certainly helps with proper Window selection, sort of a "Matched Filter" type representation!!

Best,
« Last Edit: March 11, 2024, 04:12:10 pm by mawyatt »
Curiosity killed the cat, also depleted my wallet!
~Wyatt Labs by Mike~
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, pdenisowski

Offline pdenisowski

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 641
  • Country: us
  • Product Management Engineer, Rohde & Schwarz
    • Test and Measurement Fundamentals Playlist on the R&S YouTube channel
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #192 on: March 11, 2024, 04:44:48 pm »
A priori signal type and post measurement intent certainly helps with proper Window selection, sort of a "Matched Filter" type representation!!

That's a great way of putting it.  In my experience, customers often don't (necessarily) know the frequency domain characteristics of their signal in advance, so choosing an FFT window is still sometimes a trial-and-error process.

I'm guessing (because I haven't read it ... mea culpa) that the Siglent documentation is much like most other documentation in that it lists the FFT window types but provides very little practical guidance about when to use one window type instead of another (and/or guidance about how to recognize when you're using the wrong window type for the signal you are measuring).
Test and Measurement Fundamentals video series on the Rohde & Schwarz YouTube channel:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKxVoO5jUTlvsVtDcqrVn0ybqBVlLj2z8

Free online test and measurement fundamentals courses from Rohde & Schwarz:  https://tinyurl.com/mv7a4vb6
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, BRZ.tech

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #193 on: March 11, 2024, 04:53:15 pm »
It's actually a tad better than that, and describes the frequency resolution vs. amplitude "resolution" properties of the various window functions. See the relevant table from the SDS800X HD manual attached.

 
The following users thanked this post: Electro Fan, 2N3055, pdenisowski, orzel, mawyatt, BRZ.tech, radiohomebrewer2000

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #194 on: March 12, 2024, 11:59:40 am »
Filter Demo

There was the suggestion for cleaning up high frequency narrowband signals by means of a bandpass filter. In this case we are talking about the 146 MHz signal from the HAM Test demo.

The narrowest bandwidth achievable at 146 MHz is 40 MHz (126-166 MHz). This appears very wide, but is pretty effective nevertheless. Just look at the noise floor:


SDS824X HD_Math_FFT_BP_126-166MHz_Noise

The screenshot above shows two math channels with FFT plots; F4 is the original signal (which is just the frontend noise for now), whereas F1 shows the result of the filter operation performed in math channel F2. It should be immediately obvious that getting rid of the strong 1/f-noise below 300 kHz alone would help a lot. With the BP-filter, only at 1 kHz the 1/f-noise approaches the level of the original HF-noise (~-120 dBm).

We cannot expect a major improvement for FFT measurements, because the resolution bandwidth there is much narrower than our bandpass-filter anyway. Here is the FFT with the 1 mVrms signal at 146 MHz applied:


SDS824X HD_Math_FFT_BP_126-166MHz_1mV

Yes, there actually is a difference. The original signal is measured ~0.43 dB too high because of the noise, resulting in -46.57 dBm, see F4 Markers List. On the other hand, the filtered version of that signal measures -47 dBm almost spot-on, as can be seen from F1 Markers List. So yes, even the FFT measurements can benefit from a cleanly filtered signal.

Now let’s have a look at the time-domain, where the improvement because of the filter should be even more obvious:


SDS824X HD_Math_BP_126-166MHz_1mV

Advanced automatic measurements have been set up for the amplitudes of both the original signal and its filtered version. The visual difference is quite striking already, and the measurements confirm the improvement: just like with the FFT, automatic measurements are more accurate with filter than without.

We already know that reliable triggering is only possible down to about 400 µVrms, yet it still works with 100 µVrms signals, if we can accept a high failure-rate (look at the trigger frequency counter):


SDS824X HD_Math_BP_126-166MHz_100uV

Once again, the visual difference is quite striking, and even though the automatic measurements for both signal variants aren’t entirely accurate, there is still a major improvement with the filtered version.

« Last Edit: March 12, 2024, 12:01:46 pm by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Electro Fan, egonotto, Mortymore, gf, Martin72, core, orzel, trackersoft, BRZ.tech, radiohomebrewer2000

Offline Veteran68

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 727
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #195 on: March 12, 2024, 03:35:42 pm »
As the thread is currently 8 pages and still under 20 people have the ability to select "All" at the top of the page to open all of the existing pages and then print as a hard copy or save as a pdf for reference, don't forget the images though. You won't find this level of information in any user manual that's for damn sure.

I agree this is a level and quality of documentation that deserves to be immortalized in a document format like PDF. To that end, I spent some time this morning using a browser extension I'm fond of that lets you "clean" a web page to make it more suitable to printing and/or saving as PDF. I stripped out all of the forum decorations/controls and as much of the back and forth dialog, Q&A, and other noise as I could to keep it limited to the documentation type posts and screenshots provided by Performa01, rf-loop, and others. Of course where a question resulted in further exposition and educational presentation, I kept that. I may have scrubbed (inadvertently or intentionally) some useful details or interactions here and there, as it turned out to be a larger chore than I expected and had to drop and come back to it multiple times in between work stuff (yes, I did this while at work, lol).

If/when more such content is added to the thread, it won't be hard to edit the PDF to append the new info. It's not perfect, and it's not paginated, but it is searchable and it's cleaner than a raw forum dump.

I was going to host it somewhere, then realized that if I zipped it, it came to just under the 8000KB attachment limit for the forum. So I've attached it here ZIP'ed for now. If it grows much larger, we can find a host for it later. I have Google Drive, OneDrive, Box, Dropbox, as well as some personal web hosting space that I could use. Not to mention the free file hosting services.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, Grandchuck, Martin72, core, RAPo, BRZ.tech, bte, Wictorsson

Offline BRZ.tech

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 45
  • Country: br
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #196 on: March 12, 2024, 09:45:56 pm »
Ham Test

Here come some tests that could be of interest for HAM operators.


Hi,
@Performa01
I am very grateful about your amazing analysis of CW-AM-FM for the HAM universe. TKS.

I have another question that I consider relevant to the HAM universe, which is the Frequency Response of the SDS800X HD for Square Wave Excitation.
It is very interesting for HAMs when it comes to making RX-TX in Digital Modes, in various RF bands, where HAMs DIY artisanal new low power RF radios, called QRP, for the frequencies authorized by legislation, on each country or region.
And the analysis of Digital Signals in the time regime and frequency regime is very welcome for HAM users. And I'm sure the SDS800X HD will literally be able to supply the most important measurements.
In this topic, I looked in the index, in the first post, and I didn't find the Frequency Response for Square Wave Excitation.

"Any colleague on the topic can also answer my questions, they will be welcome."

I suggest you do a test to measure a signal, which we can use in HAM, a SQUARE WAVE signal f=50.000MHz, without modulation, Amplitude = 0 to 1Vpp, at 50 Ohm, to start, and increase the frequency, to have the minimum number of tracks that you think are necessary in the FFT of the SDS800X HD, for the cutoff frequency that you consider sufficient for the BW.

On the FFT screen where you found BW, in the “FFT Table”, locate the Frequencies and Amplitudes of the Fundamental and Harmonics, and set up an equation in time of f(t), with the coefficients and sines and cosines, of the sum Fourier Series: A0, An, Bn. (I put them in UPPERCASE characters for emphasis, but they are lowercase characters).

I have read many “Theoretical Articles” and I have seen many “Videos” on Youtube, which theoretically calculate the “Fourier Series Coefficients”, but without the practical part, of collecting the coefficients from the FFT Table, and inserting them into f(t).
Next, a video that I thought was excellent, about the calculation of the “Fourier Series Coefficients” presented by “Professor Michel van Biezen”:


At the end of the video, he presented the conclusion, with f(t) with (DC Value = A0), the Fundamental and the Third and Fifth Harmonics.
At the end of the test, the “Fourier Series Coefficients” collected from the “FFT Table” of the SDS800X should be very close to those presented by “Professor Michel van Biezen”.
There is the question that how the “Fourier Series Coefficients” in their Amplitude values should be presented in the f(t) equation: Vpp, Vrms, Vp, or other??
You can present the images in the Time domain, and also in the Frequency domain, using the FFT with the Table, it can be in dBm.
And present your conclusions to the HAM universe.
TKS.
73.
 

Offline maxwell3e10

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 869
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #197 on: March 12, 2024, 10:58:29 pm »
Thank you for providing so many detailed measurements. I am wondering if you can test the averaging and ERES math features, which are not described in detail in the manual. Basic questions are what is the maximum number of averages, does it allow finite and running average, how much does averaging or ERES slow down update rate?
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #198 on: March 12, 2024, 11:54:25 pm »
Some screenshots from SDS814X HD via PC for your study.
Probe comp output.
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, core

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #199 on: March 13, 2024, 06:30:14 pm »
Fun with Square Waves

I have another question that I consider relevant to the HAM universe, which is the Frequency Response of the SDS800X HD for Square Wave Excitation.

And the analysis of Digital Signals in the time regime and frequency regime is very welcome for HAM users. And I'm sure the SDS800X HD will literally be able to supply the most important measurements.
In this topic, I looked in the index, in the first post, and I didn't find the Frequency Response for Square Wave Excitation.
The frequency as well as pulse response of the SDS800X HD have been presented in some detail in the opening posting (sections “Bandwidth” and “Pulse Response”). Why do you think you need a special frequency response for square waves?

You’re talking about Fourier and point to a video showing how to derive the well-known Fourier coefficients for a square wave. Maybe these all too theoretical approaches still don’t convey the fundamental insight that the fidelity of a square wave reproduction on the oscilloscope screen depends on the rise time of the square wave and the bandwidth of the scope. The scope bandwidth is known, whereas our task now is to find the rise time a 200 MHz DSO can handle smoothly.

Okay, let’s recap some fundamentals.

Even with moderate 3.5 ns rise time, the pulse spectrum extends up to >800 MHz – look at the spectrum in the screenshot below (for this I pulled out a heavier gun with 2 GHz bandwidth):


Ref-Spec_Square_3.5ns_10MHz

Of course, a fast scope like this reproduces a comparatively slow rise-time like this flawlessly. We can see that with 210 MHz bandwidth we could expect a decent reproduction of this signal with no more than ~1% aberrations, because all harmonics down to -40 dBc would be included. With 250 MHz bandwidth (which the SDS824X HD nearly has with up to 2 channels in use), the expected aberrations would be even lower at about 0.3%, as all the harmonics down to -50 dBc would be included.


I suggest you do a test to measure a signal, which we can use in HAM, a SQUARE WAVE signal f=50.000MHz, without modulation, Amplitude = 0 to 1Vpp, at 50 Ohm, to start, and increase the frequency, to have the minimum number of tracks that you think are necessary in the FFT of the SDS800X HD, for the cutoff frequency that you consider sufficient for the BW.
Well, let’s see what a 50 MHz square wave would look like if we stick to a rise-time of 3.5 ns, which would be adequate for the SDS824X HD:


SDS824X HD_Square_3.5ns_50MHz

Yes, this is a perfectly flawless rendering of the square wave with 3.5 ns rise time, as also quite accurately measured by the SDS824X HD. A Look at that picture enables us to predict how an even faster square wave would look; here’s an example for 80 MHz:


SDS824X HD_Square_3.5ns_80MHz

Right, there’s almost a pure sine left. With just 3.5 ns rise time, we cannot expect anything better.

Of course, we can use a faster rise time, like 1 ns, which clearly is a bit fast for a 200 MHz DSO:


SDS824X HD_Square_1ns_80MHz

Overall, the result doesn’t look bad – it just can’t properly characterize the original signal as the rise time measurement is totally off and approaches that of the DSO itself. The signal shape is just what to expect from a bandwidth limited square wave signal. The amplitude measurement is still pretty accurate though.

I hope it is now clear that it’s not the frequency of a square wave, but its rise time, which makes all the difference.


At the end of the test, the “Fourier Series Coefficients” collected from the “FFT Table” of the SDS800X should be very close to those presented by “Professor Michel van Biezen”.
There is the question that how the “Fourier Series Coefficients” in their Amplitude values should be presented in the f(t) equation: Vpp, Vrms, Vp, or other??
You can present the images in the Time domain, and also in the Frequency domain, using the FFT with the Table, it can be in dBm.
I did not watch that video to the end, sorry. The Fourier series for standard waveforms are well-known, so we need no educational video for that.

Well, let’s start with the reference again. What does the 80 MHz square wave with 1 ns rise time look on a DSO that is actually fast enough to handle it?


Ref-Spec_Square_1ns_80MHz

Of course, it all starts with the fact that the square wave itself is far from textbook-perfect. The spectrum contains also even harmonics with a constant level of about -55 dBc, even though there shouldn’t be any at all. We can also see aberrations in the time domain, most obviously a little overshoot, hence we cannot expect a good conformity with the theoretical values.

The Fourier series for a rectangular wave is like 2 * A / Pi * (h1 + h3 / 3 + h5 / 5 + h7 / 7 …);

In the example above, the amplitude is 0.6 V, so the term in front of the parenthesis is 2 * 0.6 / Pi = 0.38197 Vp;

We should now be able to calculate the individual harmonics:
h1 = 0.38197 Vp = -11.37 dBV;
h3 = 0.38197 Vp / 3 = 0.127 Vp = -20.91 dBV;
h5 = 0.38197 Vp / 5 = 0.0764 Vp = -25.35 dBV;
h7 = 0.38197 Vp / 7 = 0.0546 Vp = -28.27 dBV;
h9 = 0.38197 Vp / 9 = 0.0424 Vp = -30.45 dBV;

If we compare this to the Peak Table in the above screenshot, we get the following list:

Freq.   Calculated   Measured   Deviation
[MHz]   [dBV]    [dBV]      [dB]
80   -11.37   -11.535   -0.165
240   -20.91   -21.786   -0.876
400   -25.35   -28.153   -2.803
560   -28.27   -34.581   -6.311
720   -30.45   -42.963   -12.513

The fundamental at 80 MHz is pretty close to the theory, also the third harmonic at 240 MHz is not too far off. Yet all the higher harmonics are increasingly attenuated. Well, no wonder – the textbook calculates the Fourier coefficients for ideal square waves with zero rise time!

What we want to do now, is not comparing a less than perfect square wave, captured with the SDS824X HD, to some textbook theory, but rather with the reference. The outcome is only all too predictable: at 80 MHz the measurement result will be similar, at 240 MHz almost 3 dB too low and drop off pretty quickly at even higher frequencies.


SDS824X HD_Square_3.5ns_80MHz

Yes, the prediction comes true.

Freq.   Calculated   Measured   Deviation
[MHz]   [dBV]    [dBV]      [dB]
80   -11.37   -11.827   -0.457
240   -20.91   -24.514   -3.6
400   -25.35   -40.954   -15.6

Unexpectedly, the level for the even order harmonics is a little bit higher too, with -44 dBc for the 2nd harmonic.

Verdict: this is a nominal 200 MHz instrument. The true 3 dB bandwidth is somewhere at 245 MHz, as long as we don’t activate more than two channels at the same time. The specified rise time is 1.8 ns, actually it is better than 1.5 ns. It has been shown that the SDS824X HD can handle pulses with 1 ns rise time, even though it cannot fully characterize them. The comparison of the Fourier series from the textbook with the real measurements was nothing more than a little fun, because in the real world a perfect square wave doesn’t exist.

And the most important part: the frequency of a square wave is only important because it also dictates the maximum rise time of the signal. For instance, we cannot have a 200 MHz square wave with just 3.5 ns rise time. Other than that, especially for digital communications, we don’t need excessive bandwidth – just enough to capture the relevant part of the modulation spectrum, which has to be bandwidth limited at the transmitter side anyway. Sections “SPI Speed Test” and “The 200 Mbps SPI challenge” deal with fast digital signals, and as the title already reveals, it is possible to handle 200 Mbps communication with the SDS824X HD – just 245 MHz bandwidth are enough for that.

« Last Edit: March 14, 2024, 05:50:42 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, newbrain, 2N3055, Mortymore, Martin72, core, orzel, BRZ.tech, gitm

Offline mawyatt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #200 on: March 13, 2024, 07:46:45 pm »


The Fourier series for a rectangular wave is like 2 * A / π * (h1 + h3 / 3 + h5 / 5 + h7 / 7 …);

In the example above, the amplitude is 0.6 V, so the term in front of the parenthesis is 2 * 0.6 / π = 0.38197 Vp;

We should now be able to calculate the individual harmonics:
h1 = 0.38197 Vp = -11.37 dBV;
h3 = 0.38197 Vp / 3 = 0.127 Vp = -20.91 dBV;
h5 = 0.38197 Vp / 5 = 0.0764 Vp = -25.35 dBV;
h7 = 0.38197 Vp / 7 = 0.0546 Vp = -28.27 dBV;
h9 = 0.38197 Vp / 9 = 0.0424 Vp = -30.45 dBV;

If we compare this to the Peak Table in the above screenshot, we get the following list:

Freq.   Calculated   Measured   Deviation
[MHz]   [dBV]    [dBV]      [dB]
80   -11.37   -11.535   -0.165
240   -20.91   -21.786   -0.876
400   -25.35   -28.153   -2.803
560   -28.27   -34.581   -6.311
720   -30.45   -42.963   -12.513

The fundamental at 80 MHz is pretty close to the theory, also the third harmonic at 240 MHz is not too far off. Yet all the higher harmonics are increasingly attenuated. Well, no wonder – the textbook calculates the Fourier coefficients for ideal square waves with zero rise time!

What we want to do now, is not comparing an imperfect square wave, captured with the SDS824X HD to some textbook theory, but rather with the reference. The outcome is only all too predictable: at 80 MHz the measurement result will be similar, at 240 MHz almost 3 dB too low and drop off pretty quickly at even higher frequencies.


SDS824X HD_Square_3.5ns_80MHz

Yes, the prediction comes true.

Freq.   Calculated   Measured   Deviation
[MHz]   [dBV]    [dBV]      [dB]
80   -11.37   -11.827   -0.457
240   -20.91   -24.514   -3.6
400   -25.35   -40.954   -15.6

Unexpectedly, the level for the even order harmonics is a little bit higher too, with -44 dBc for the 2nd harmonic.

Verdict: this is a nominal 200 MHz instrument. The true 3 dB bandwidth is somewhere at 245 MHz, as long as we don’t activate more than two channels at the same time. The specified rise time is 1.8 ns, actually it is better than 1.5 ns. It has been shown that the SDS824X HD can handle pulses with 1 ns rise time, even though it cannot fully characterize them. The comparison of the Fourier series from the textbook with the real measurements was nothing more than a little fun, because in the real world a perfect square wave doesn’t exist.

And the most important part: the frequency of a square wave is only important because it also dictates the maximum rise time of the signal. For instance, we cannot have a 200 MHz square wave with just 3.5 ns rise time. Other than that, especially for digital communications, we don’t need excessive bandwidth – just enough to capture the relevant part of the modulation spectrum, which has to be bandwidth limited at the transmitter side anyway. Sections “SPI Speed Test” and “The 200 Mbps SPI challenge” deal with fast digital signals, and as the title already reveals, it is possible to handle 200 Mbps communication with the SDS824X HD – just 245 MHz bandwidth are enough for that.

Not sure about your results above??

A unity +-1 volt square wave has 4/pi as the 1st component and each odd harmonic drops as 1/n.

So if the squarewave is 0.3V peak (0.6VPP) then the 1st component h1 is 0.38197V (as stated) and 20Log(0.38197) is -8.359dBV, not -11.37dBV as stated??

Edit:
And,
h3 should be -17.90dBV
h5 should be -22.34dBV
h7 should be -25.26dBv
and so on.

Also, think your "n" above should be pi.

Am I missing something?

Best,
« Last Edit: March 13, 2024, 07:54:14 pm by mawyatt »
Curiosity killed the cat, also depleted my wallet!
~Wyatt Labs by Mike~
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #201 on: March 13, 2024, 08:42:55 pm »
A unity +-1 volt square wave has 4/pi as the 1st component
...
So if the squarewave is 0.3V peak (0.6VPP) then the 1st component h1 is 0.38197V (as stated) and 20Log(0.38197) is -8.359dBV, not -11.37dBV as stated??

4/pi is the peak amplitude. FFT shows RMS amplitude, which is 2*sqrt(2)/pi. I.e. 3dB lower.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, 2N3055, mawyatt

Offline mawyatt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #202 on: March 13, 2024, 11:21:06 pm »
Thanks gf, my bad  |O

Best,
Curiosity killed the cat, also depleted my wallet!
~Wyatt Labs by Mike~
 
The following users thanked this post: 2N3055

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #203 on: March 14, 2024, 06:36:37 am »
Thank you for providing so many detailed measurements. I am wondering if you can test the averaging and ERES math features, which are not described in detail in the manual. Basic questions are what is the maximum number of averages, does it allow finite and running average, how much does averaging or ERES slow down update rate?
Other than the higher end devices (starting with SDS2000X HD), the SDS800X HD does not provide hardware-accelerated acquisition modes for ERES and Average. Math functions are processed way slower in software. The RAW acquisition rate is not affected by this though.

Both ERES and Average preserve the sample rate. While not really surprising in case of Average, it means that ERES is implemented in a sliding, non-decimating form.

The maximum number of 1024 Averages can be performed in 54 seconds, which is close to 19 averages per second.

I don’t know for sure, but assume that it has to be finite time average, because it works with long records as well (I have tried 10 Mpts, where it slows down considerably) and the SDS800X HD doesn’t have 10 Gpts of memory.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, maxwell3e10

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #204 on: March 14, 2024, 08:45:33 am »
I don’t know for sure, but assume that it has to be finite time average, because it works with long records as well (I have tried 10 Mpts, where it slows down considerably) and the SDS800X HD doesn’t have 10 Gpts of memory.

I guess you rather mean infinte? Like e.g. an exponential moving average?

It is still unclear to me how it averages traces with different trigger point positions (i.e. at different fractional sample time)?
Quantizing the trigger points to the nearest sample would introduce jitter in the amount of +-1/2 sample.
And time shifting the samples of the traces to align them horizontally would imply the need for interpolation.

[ If a large number of traces are averaged, then it may be an option to quantize, since statisitcally, the trigger point quantization + averaging effectively results in a convolution with the probability distribution of the fractional trigger positions, which is a lowpass filter. ]

Quote
Both ERES and Average preserve the sample rate. While not really surprising in case of Average, it means that ERES is implemented in a sliding, non-decimating form.

ERES is just a lowpass filter then. If it happens to be simple boxcar averaging (i.e. sinc frequency response), then it is certainly not a proper anti-aliasing filter for decimation anyway. So it can even make sense to keep the sample rate and not decimate. Can you check the frequency response with ERES? Does it have typical sinc (or sincN) side lobes? Or is it a proprietary filter? If the latter, then ENBW would be interesting too to predict the expected noise reduction.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline RoGeorge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6203
  • Country: ro
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #205 on: March 14, 2024, 09:43:07 am »
select "All" at the top of the page to open all of the existing pages and then print as a hard copy or save as a pdf for reference

There is a plugin/extension for browsers (for Firefox-like browsers the addon is called 'SingleFile' https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/single-file/ ).

'SingleFile' can save the entire webpage as a single html offline file, with pics, and it also retains the original links, to click later for the live content of the page.  The saved filename can distinguish between forum pages, so it can save distinct pages (the "All" might be too much to continuously scroll, distinct pages are easier to navigate than jumping back and forth in a very long single scroll).  Can make highlights or annotations on top of saved pages, cutouts, etc.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, core

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #206 on: March 14, 2024, 11:18:34 am »
I don’t know for sure, but assume that it has to be finite time average, because it works with long records as well (I have tried 10 Mpts, where it slows down considerably) and the SDS800X HD doesn’t have 10 Gpts of memory.

I guess you rather mean infinte? Like e.g. an exponential moving average?
No, how should I? I’m following a simple logic here by asking myself: how can we compute a moving average if we don’t have a buffer big enough to store all the past records (plus the current one), which would have to be 1024 records in case of 1024x averaging, hence 10.24 Gpts = 20.48 GB of sample memory in case of 10 Mpts records?

If on the other hand it is done piecewise, one block of 1024 records after the other, we just need a single counter and accumulators for each sample within a record – 22 bit would be sufficient for 1024x averages of 12 bit samples. Since math channels are limited to 10 Mpts, this requires the equivalent of 20 Mpts (=40 MB) memory, even if 32-bit accumulators are used. That’s just manageable. Consider all four math channels performing averaging at the same time – then 80 Mpts of the 100 Mpts total memory would already be used up.


It is still unclear to me how it averages traces with different trigger point positions (i.e. at different fractional sample time)?
Quantizing the trigger points to the nearest sample would introduce jitter in the amount of +-1/2 sample.
And time shifting the samples of the traces to align them horizontally would imply the need for interpolation.
Of course the records have to be fine-adjusted to get their trigger points perfectly aligned. I think in current software generation the user setting of linear or sin(x)/x for the display rendering is used for trigger alignment as well (prior to that it has always been sin(x)/x).

That happens all the time anyway, and any acquired record is processed that way, whether it is used to calculate an average or not.

It’s also worth noticing that we cannot have a History when the Average acquisition mode is selected in one of the higher end DSOs that support this. The same restriction does not apply for ERES. Yes, of course, we can’t have the History as we know it, when we need almost all the memory for accumulators and counters…


[ If a large number of traces are averaged, then it may be an option to quantize, since statisitcally, the trigger point quantization + averaging effectively results in a convolution with the probability distribution of the fractional trigger positions, which is a lowpass filter. ]
Sorry, I’m not sure if I can follow you here – I’m neither a mathematician nor a DSP-expert.

What do you want to quantize? And the probability distribution of the trigger position correction values can be seen whenever we use Dots display mode. I would expect the probability distribution to be just a straight horizontal line.


Quote
Both ERES and Average preserve the sample rate. While not really surprising in case of Average, it means that ERES is implemented in a sliding, non-decimating form.

ERES is just a lowpass filter then. If it happens to be simple boxcar averaging (i.e. sinc frequency response), then it is certainly not a proper anti-aliasing filter for decimation anyway. So it can even make sense to keep the sample rate and not decimate. Can you check the frequency response with ERES? Does it have typical sinc (or sincN) side lobes? Or is it a proprietary filter? If the latter, then ENBW would be interesting too to predict the expected noise reduction.
Of course, ERES is (just?) a LP-Filter, no one has ever claimed otherwise. And yes, it might be just a boxcar filter, see screenshot below with ERES 2.0:


SDS824X HD_FR_ERES2.0_2GSa
« Last Edit: March 14, 2024, 11:20:14 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, maxwell3e10, gf

Offline RoGeorge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6203
  • Country: ro
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #207 on: March 14, 2024, 01:33:13 pm »
how can we compute a moving average if we don’t have a buffer big enough to store all the past records

My conclusion (based on how Rigol DS1054Z was behaving, so don't know if this applies to Siglent, too) was that the moving average in Rigol was calculated by averaging the pixels of the screen only, not the raw data, so the buffer size was dictated by the number of pixels on the width of the display.

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #208 on: March 14, 2024, 02:11:20 pm »
My conclusion (based on how Rigol DS1054Z was behaving, so don't know if this applies to Siglent, too) was that the moving average in Rigol was calculated by averaging the pixels of the screen only, not the raw data, so the buffer size was dictated by the number of pixels on the width of the display.
Well, that's a whole different world. As alread stated in my previous post, math is limited to 10 Mpts per channel - that's about 10000 screen widths ;)
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #209 on: March 14, 2024, 03:00:39 pm »
how can we compute a moving average if we don’t have a buffer big enough to store all the past records

My conclusion (based on how Rigol DS1054Z was behaving, so don't know if this applies to Siglent, too) was that the moving average in Rigol was calculated by averaging the pixels of the screen only, not the raw data, so the buffer size was dictated by the number of pixels on the width of the display.

Don't confuse how DS1000Z was doing things.

Has nothing to do with that.

This is about averaging of data as acquisition mode.
It works on full buffer size, from repetitive triggers.
If it says 10MPts, it is 10MPts.

I presume it is something similar to Continuous averaging as defined by LeCroy..

Continuous Averaging

Continuous Averaging, the default setting, is the repeated addition, with unequal weight, of successive
source waveforms. It is particularly useful for reducing noise on signals that drift very slowly in time or
amplitude. The most recently acquired waveform has more weight than all the previously acquired ones:
the continuous average is dominated by the statistical fluctuations of the most recently acquired
waveform. The weight of ‘old' waveforms in the continuous average tends to zero (following an
exponential rule) at a rate that decreases as the weight increases.
You determine the importance of new data vs. old data by assigning a weighting factor. The formula for
continuous averaging is:

new average = (new data + weight * old average)/(weight + 1)

By setting a Sweeps value, you establish a fixed weight that is assigned to the old average once the
number of sweeps is reached. For example, for a sweeps (weight) value of 4:

Sweep no.    ----                               New Average

1 (no old average yet) (new data +0 * old average)/(0 + 1) = new data only
2                               (new data + 1*old average)/(1 + 1) = 1/2 new data +1/2 old average
3                               (new data + 2 * old average)/(2 + 1) = 1/3 new data + 2/3 old average
4                               (new data + 3 * old average)/(3 + 1) = 1/4 new data + 3/4 old average
5                               (new data + 4 * old average)/(4 + 1) = 1/5 new data + 4/5 old average
6                               (new data + 4 * old average)/(4 + 1) = 1/5 new data + 4/5 old average
7                               (new data + 4 * old average)/(4 + 1) = 1/5 new data + 4/5 old average

etc...

That way you only need one buffer for averages accumulation and you grab new capture, recalculate in place and move on to next trigger.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, gf, core, mawyatt, RAPo

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #210 on: March 14, 2024, 03:52:37 pm »
I presume it is something similar to Continuous averaging as defined by LeCroy..

Continuous Averaging
...

What you describe is an exponential moving average (EMA), which is an IIR filter (i.e. infinte).

Performa01's guess was that SDS800X averaging is still finite (FIR). But a true SMA is not possible w/o keeping the complete tail. All you can do with limited memory is to deliver a SMA at a (significantly) lower frame rate than the trigger rate, or to do some approximations which may again involve recursions that make them IIR at the end.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, newbrain, 2N3055

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #211 on: March 14, 2024, 04:06:33 pm »
I presume it is something similar to Continuous averaging as defined by LeCroy..

...

That way you only need one buffer for averages accumulation and you grab new capture, recalculate in place and move on to next trigger.
Thanks for pointing out LeCroy's method of processing a continuous Average.

Siglent don't have a weighting factor but a "number of averages" instead. Of course, this could be used to derive the weighting factor for continuous averaging.

The memory requirement is still high, it still means a maximum of 80 Mpts of memory for 4 channels, assuming that the current record has to be buffered somewhere, for the continuous calculation of the new average.

Btw, LeCroy don't offer this as acquisition mode, it's always been a math function.

Another pointer might be Siglent's reluctance to provide high numbers of Averages. We have to make do with 1024 (even though this really should be enough for all practical purposes, SDS6000 has 8k), whreas the competition offer up to 64k.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, 2N3055, core

Offline maxwell3e10

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 869
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #212 on: March 14, 2024, 04:26:58 pm »
Some scopes offer simple finite average where the trigger stops after required number of averages, this does not require storing all the data in memory. Other scopes offer history average, which would be equivalent to a simple moving average and limited by total memory. If there are no additional options and the update does not stop after reaching the number of averages, then it must be exponential moving average.

The trigger rate must be reduced while it's doing the averaging (or any math operation) or it just skips frames to be included in the average.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #213 on: March 14, 2024, 06:58:07 pm »
Of course, ERES is (just?) a LP-Filter, no one has ever claimed otherwise. And yes, it might be just a boxcar filter, see screenshot below with ERES 2.0:

SDS824X HD_FR_ERES2.0_2GSa

Thanks for the screenshot.
Yes, looks like a 16 tap boxcar filter. The spacing of the zeros is N*125 MHz, is it? (Hard to see exactly on the log scale.)
The sidelobes decay too fast for a boxcar filter, but that's certainly caused by the frontend frequency response.

So ERES 2.0 obviously means +2 ENOB, while the resolution enhancement is even +4 bits.
[ Not exactly +2 ENOB, of course, since the noise floor is not white. ]
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, newbrain, 2N3055, core

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #214 on: March 15, 2024, 08:01:52 am »
Zoom Challenge

Some folks have the need for a high dynamic range, i.e. the ability to inspect small details in a signal. To accomplish this, they usually increase the vertical gain of the DSO and use the position control to center the region of interest on the screen. This way, even 8-bit oscilloscopes can display some detail – as long as the signal distortions, caused by overdriving the oscilloscope frontend, don’t affect the displayed portion of the signal too much. The distortions are especially bad with general purpose oscilloscopes, as they use the well-known split path input buffer with its problematic overload recovery behavior.

Now let’s examine our options with the Siglent SDS800X HD.

First, we could try to use the traditional technique in overloading the scope. Without too much thinking, we can just connect a strong signal and then “zoom in” by increasing the vertical gain of the oscilloscope.

In the following example we have a 2 Mbps PRBS-signal with 3 V amplitude connected directly, hence a 1x probe factor applies.


SDS824X HD_PRBS-4_A3V_V1V_P1

Now we try to take a closer look at the pulse tops and increase the sensitivity. This works reasonably well down to 200 mV/div, but at 100 mV/div we hear a relay clicking and the signal gets distorted:


SDS824X HD_PRBS-4_A3V_V100mV_P1

With a distorted signal like this, it makes no sense to try to look at any details in the signal. So, this obviously is the wrong approach.

For most applications, it is not the overload recovery of the semiconductor devices, like clamping diodes and transistors, which cause the problem. The overload recovery time of these devices is usually in the low (or even sub-) nanoseconds and is only really of concern in multi-GHz instruments.

Our problem is the clamping in the split-path input buffer, which causes clean clipping in the LF-path, but a differentiation of the waveform in the HF-path. When the clipped LF-path is recombined again with the both offset- and phase-shifted HF-path, the result is heavily distorted and has little similarity with the original signal.

Knowing all this, we are able to find a solution: just don’t drive the input buffer so hard that the clamps get activated. Keep the input signal well below 1 Vpp by using 100x probes if necessary. This also has the advantage of a much lower capacitive load at the probe tip and the low noise of the SDS824X HD makes the use of x100 probes unproblematic.

The next screenshot demonstrates a 1 MHz square wave with 5V amplitude and a 10 mVpp 40 MHz sine riding on it, using a ten times probe.


SDS824X HD_OVD_5V_10mV_P10

Yes, the trace is noisy. It would be much better if we could use the 20 MHz bandwidth limiter – but unfortunately, this would also affect the 40 MHz signal we are interested in. Averaging would help a lot, but we want to be able to watch dynamic signals, hence it is not an option either.

We can still see the 40 MHz sine clear enough to know it is there – and that for a signal amplitude ratio of 1:500! That’s what a low noise high resolution DSO can do for you…


There might be situations, when we just cannot get that low – maybe because the signal levels are so high that the output of even x100 probes would still exceed ~500 mVpp. Then a combination of (moderately!) overdriving the scope and vertical zoom could be the best solution.

Consider a 1 MHz Square wave with 5 V amplitude – maybe as output of a x100 probe, so the original signal would be 500V - unbelievable, isn’t it? It could be some 625 watt transmitter – but these wouldn’t output a square wave and hopefully there wouldn’t be any subtle signal details to observe, which would not be better analyzed by using the FFT, but I digress…

Here is that familiar 40 MHz sine wave again, riding on the square wave:


SDS824X HD_Ref_5V_10mVpp

First step is to increase the vertical gain, i.e. dial in lower numbers, just before the relay would click. We could use the fine adjust to get 102 mV/div (because this is the highest gain we can get without changing the attenuator setting), but this shouldn’t be necessary for now. So we finally end up with 200 mV/div:


SDS824X HD_OVD_limit_5V_10mVpp

We can already see the little wiggles on the top of the square, it is much smaller than the overshoot and ringing at the rising edge. Yet now we engage the Zoom mode to take a closer look:


SDS824X HD_OVD_limit_5V_10mVpp_Z20mV_ERES2.0

The above screenshot demonstrates two things: first is the ERES2.0 math trace in the main window, that lets us look at the 40 MHz sine at 10 mV/div. It is ugly, because ERES cannot get rid of the 1/f noise, so there’s no use displaying it in more detail in the zoom window. But secondly, we have the regular trace in the zoom window at 20 mV/div, which is at least as clear as the overdrive zoom before.

One more time it should be remembered that we have a signal ratio of 500:1 here.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2024, 08:05:06 am by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, hansibull, maxwell3e10, matus, Mortymore, ch_scr, gf, Martin72, core, orzel

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #215 on: March 15, 2024, 03:03:13 pm »
The above screenshot demonstrates two things: first is the ERES2.0 math trace in the main window, that lets us look at the 40 MHz sine at 10 mV/div. It is ugly, because ERES cannot get rid of the 1/f noise, so there’s no use displaying it in more detail in the zoom window. But secondly, we have the regular trace in the zoom window at 20 mV/div, which is at least as clear as the overdrive zoom before.

It looks like the ERES trace was displayed without persistance.
Is that generally not supported for math traces? Or did you just turn it off?
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #216 on: March 15, 2024, 04:10:57 pm »
It looks like the ERES trace was displayed without persistance.
Is that generally not supported for math traces? Or did you just turn it off?
I never use persistence display mode (other than the inherent 1/framerate of the display), except when I explicitely mention it.

What you probably see is the vast difference in waveform update rate; the signal traces are updated 6590 times per second in this very scenario, whereas the math trace is much slower, even though it looks fast on the screen. I cannot think of a method to measure the waveform update rate of a math trace - it's probably just a few dozen updates per second at best.

I have re-created this test-scenario and enabled 5 seconds persistence this time:


SDS824X HD_OVD_limit_5V_10mVpp_Z20mV_ERES2.0_Pers5

 
The following users thanked this post: Electro Fan, egonotto, ebastler, gf, orzel, RAPo

Offline RAPo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 622
  • Country: nl
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #217 on: March 15, 2024, 05:04:19 pm »
A bit off topic, but do you know the refresh rate in the x-y plot window (or even better a way to measure it on non-siglent oscilloscope)?

What you probably see is the vast difference in waveform update rate; the signal traces are updated 6590 times per second in this very scenario, whereas the math trace is much slower, even though it looks fast on the screen. I cannot think of a method to measure the waveform update rate of a math trace - it's probably just a few dozen updates per second at best.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #218 on: March 15, 2024, 08:56:13 pm »
A bit off topic, but do you know the refresh rate in the x-y plot window (or even better a way to measure it on non-siglent oscilloscope)?
As you quoted me, I don't know a way to measure it if it is done in software. If it is integrated into the HW, like in the SDS800X HD, we can measure it just like the waveform update rates in regular y-t mode, see the result table in Reply #90 here:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread/msg5360858/#msg5360858
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline maxwell3e10

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 869
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #219 on: March 15, 2024, 09:13:40 pm »
For measuring how fast the average is calculated one can use this method:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/scope-with-fast-waveform-averaging/msg4340002/#msg4340002

For X-Y plot, I would use two sine waves with 90 degree phase shift at low frequency (say 1 Hz) and set the scope to a fast time scale (say 10 nsec/div). If the display is in dot mode, you would expect a series of dot blotches appearing around the circle. The number of blotches tells you the number of updates in 1 second. Depending on persistence, one could also set a finite number of triggers, so the blotches don't run around the circle and start to overlap.

Edit: should still be visible in line mode if the number of blotches around the circle is small, so frequency of sine wave can be increased.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2024, 09:36:55 pm by maxwell3e10 »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #220 on: March 15, 2024, 09:22:18 pm »
For measuring how fast the average is calculated one can use this method:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/scope-with-fast-waveform-averaging/msg4340002/#msg4340002

For X-Y plot, I would use two sine waves with 90 degree phase shift at low frequency (say 1 Hz) and set the scope to a fast time scale (say 10 nsec/div). If the display is in dot mode, you would expect a series of dot blotches appearing around the circle. The number of blotches tells you the number of updates in 1 second. Depending on persistence, one could also set a finite number of triggers, so the blotches don't run around the circle and start to overlap.
Not available in XY mode.
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto

Offline BRZ.tech

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 45
  • Country: br
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #221 on: March 16, 2024, 12:35:08 am »
Fun with Square Waves

[…
And the analysis of Digital Signals in the time regime and frequency regime is very welcome for HAM users. And I'm sure the SDS800X HD will literally be able to supply the most important measurements.
In this topic, I looked in the index, in the first post, and I didn't find the Frequency Response for Square Wave Excitation.
The frequency as well as pulse response of the SDS800X HD have been presented in some detail in the opening posting (sections “Bandwidth” and “Pulse Response”). Why do you think you need a special frequency response for square waves?
...
[/quote]

Dear @Performa01,
1. You asked me, and you deserve an Answer:
In message #175 I asked if you accept “beginners” asking you questions about “obvious things”.
In your message #180 you replied: “don’t mind people asking questions here, even newbie questions 😉”
On YouTube, on the R&S channel and on the Teledyne LeCroy channel, there are “theoretical videos” on the subject of “square wave excitation frequency response”, in a different way from your presentation. They just don't have the practical part. In summary, they state that the BW of the DSO must be greater than 5x the frequency of the fundamental wave signal.

2. In my opinion as a “beginner”, for a non-SIGLENT user (not yet), the fact that it presents the “Bandwidth” of a sinusoidal signal, and “Pulse Response” does not allow us to conclude that the frequency is tolerable with deformations, for the square wave SDS800X, is f=80MHz (photo: SDS824X HD_Square_3.5ns_80MHz).
Based on the “Bandwidth” of sine signal, and “Pulse Response”, how did you reach the conclusion of BW for square wave?
 
3. As you demonstrated that for the SDS800X, BW = 245MHz for sinusoidal signal, I just divided it by 5, and asked you to start the test at f=50MHz, and increase the frequency, and you arrived at f=80MHz with a “square wave” (“photo: Ref-Spec_Square _1ns_80MHz”), which 80 x 3 = 240MHz…
The SDS824X HD managed to faithfully display the “1 fundamental”, the “3 harmonic” and the “5 harmonic”.
The richness and detail of your analysis is impressive... Maybe someday I will be able to repeat your essays, to learn many things. Unfortunately, not everything is as obvious to me, as it is to you and other colleagues working on the topic.
 
4. As for the video by “Professor Michel van Biezen”, for experts, the issue comes down to just the photo at the beginning of the video… the equation and the Fourier Series Coefficients.
In my “beginner” analysis, it doesn’t matter much if the theoretical equation doesn’t support a square wave signal of 1ns risetime…
Note that the objective is didactic, and may contain an error, for example of 20%, in practical measurements in relation to theoretical calculations… In HAM, we are not so orthodox in relation to the perfection of comparing measurements…
I think it's better to start with 20% error, and aim to reduce this number a lot. But I really appreciate your orthodoxy, and your method of analysis. Maybe someday I will be able to understand almost everything you taught, and teach some beginners in the HAM universe, and I will cite you as a source.

5. As for the Fourier Series, you learned another formula that I had never seen. This Fourier Series formula has many ways to learn it.
TKS.
Having observed your comments, it is still not possible to understand whether the “Fourier Series Coefficients” should be placed in Vp, Vpp, Vrm, or something else.
Request: Even if it contains errors greater than 20%, as there is no perfect square wave, if you can assemble and present an equation of the Fourier Series, with f=80MHz, of the square wave, I will be very grateful. As in the formula presented in the video by “Professor Michel van Biezen”.

6. In the photo: “Ref-Spec_Square _1ns_80MHz”, in the “Peak Search Table”, in “Marker 6” it has f=880.00000MHz. I said here that it has “8 digits”, but you repeatedly state that the SDS800X has “7 digits” in the Counter. Do you count from “0 to 7”, or from “1 to 8”?

7. After your “class”, I agree with you that the “Risetime” is the starting point for buying an AWG, and “the good one is the 1ns”, but it is the top of the line, and is far above of my hobby budget.
TKS.
73.

« Last Edit: March 16, 2024, 12:40:32 am by BRZ.tech »
 
The following users thanked this post: Electro Fan

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #222 on: March 16, 2024, 09:42:35 am »
2. In my opinion as a “beginner”, for a non-SIGLENT user (not yet), the fact that it presents the “Bandwidth” of a sinusoidal signal, and “Pulse Response” does not allow us to conclude that the frequency is tolerable with deformations, for the square wave SDS800X, is f=80MHz (photo: SDS824X HD_Square_3.5ns_80MHz).
Based on the “Bandwidth” of sine signal, and “Pulse Response”, how did you reach the conclusion of BW for square wave?

The bandwidth, wich is just a single number, is indeed insufficient (unless you make some additional assumtions), but the impulse response defines a LTI system completely1). Particularly for a square wave signal, the impulse response (or the step response2)) gives you a good idea what defomations of the square wave edges you have to expect. The top and the bottom of a low-frequency square wave are flat anyway, so the key is the deformation of the edges. Only at high frequencies, the deformation of the rising and falling edges begin to overlap and add up. Then it is no longer so obvious what the exaxt shape will be. Still you can calculate it from the impulse response. The old question what bandwidth is enough for displaying a square wave cannot be answered in general. It is up to you what YOU consider "good enough" (or good enough for a particular use case). You just need to be aware that what you see is never the reality. This applies whenever you measure anything.

EDIT:
1) If you know the impulse response of a linear system, then you can calculate the response to any input signal.
2) Note that the step response is just the integral of the impulse response, so each one can be derived from the other.

Quote
it is still not possible to understand whether the “Fourier Series Coefficients” should be placed in Vp, Vpp, Vrm, or something else.

It is just a matter of scaling/normalization. You can re-write the Fourier series equation in terms of peak, peak-to-peak or RMS values for the coefficients.

FFT on the scope is usually normalized to display RMS values, and it does not display positive and negative frequencies of the raw DFT spectrum separately, but displays only the combined power of positive and negative frequencies.

Also note that FFT on the scope displays only the magnitude, but not the phase. However, the amplitude of the peaks in the displayed FFT output is not sufficient to derive the sin() and cos() coefficients of the Fourier series for an arbitrary periodic signal. In order to separate sin() and cos() coefficients for the same frequency you need phase information as well.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2024, 12:22:24 pm by gf »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, Electro Fan, mawyatt, Bad_Driver, BRZ.tech

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #223 on: March 16, 2024, 10:52:16 am »
@Performa01, please let me ask two more questions regarding averaging:

1) I wonder what happens if an averaged trace is displayed in dots mode? Are the averaged dots now evenly spaced with 1/sample_rate interval, or do they still retain fractional horizontal positions? [Particularly when a large number of traces are averaged.]

2) I think to rememer that you (or was it somebody else?) did demonstrate in a different thread that FFT(average(Cx)) resulted in a higher FFT sample rate than the original sample rate of Cx, on either the SDS2000 or SDS6000 (don't remember which one). Obviously the signal was implicitly up-sampled/interpolated to a higher rate. I wonder if the same applies to the SDS800X?
« Last Edit: March 16, 2024, 11:07:57 am by gf »
 

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
 
The following users thanked this post: gf

Offline RAPo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 622
  • Country: nl
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #225 on: March 16, 2024, 02:19:56 pm »
Thanks, that is a clever method (if and when there is a dot mode on the xy-plot window).

For measuring how fast the average is calculated one can use this method:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/scope-with-fast-waveform-averaging/msg4340002/#msg4340002

For X-Y plot, I would use two sine waves with 90 degree phase shift at low frequency (say 1 Hz) and set the scope to a fast time scale (say 10 nsec/div). If the display is in dot mode, you would expect a series of dot blotches appearing around the circle. The number of blotches tells you the number of updates in 1 second. Depending on persistence, one could also set a finite number of triggers, so the blotches don't run around the circle and start to overlap.

Edit: should still be visible in line mode if the number of blotches around the circle is small, so frequency of sine wave can be increased.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #226 on: March 16, 2024, 03:20:27 pm »


1) I wonder what happens if an averaged trace is displayed in dots mode? Are the averaged dots now evenly spaced with 1/sample_rate interval, or do they still retain fractional horizontal positions? [Particularly when a large number of traces are averaged.]

Here, Dots, Persistence and Average 256 so there can see that samples have been in all possible fractional positions (here sample interval 2ns)
Ch3 and Ch4 on only for drop samplerate (traces out of screen)math

Note that math trace in wfm/s is slower than channel direct wfm/s


« Last Edit: March 16, 2024, 04:02:05 pm by rf-loop »
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, gf, core

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #227 on: March 16, 2024, 04:56:41 pm »
Obviously the signal was implicitly up-sampled/interpolated to a higher rate. I wonder if the same applies to the SDS800X?

Unlike the SDS2000xplus (at that time, this may have been fixed), the 800X HD "sticks" to the entered interpolation coefficient, in this example 20 (40GSa/s).
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #228 on: March 16, 2024, 05:01:58 pm »
Obviously the signal was implicitly up-sampled/interpolated to a higher rate. I wonder if the same applies to the SDS800X?

Unlike the SDS2000xplus (at that time, this may have been fixed), the 800X HD "sticks" to the entered interpolation coefficient, in this example 20 (40GSa/s).

Thanks! Good that it honores the requested upsampling factor :-+

EDIT:
But I wonder how it can do a 16k point FFT @40GSa/s if the captured record length is only 200 points? 20x interpolation gives only 4000 point, which is less than 16k.
[ Theoreticaly it would be possible to window the 4000 points and then zero-pad to 16k before  invoking the FFT. This would result in an interpolation in the frequency domain. But that's just speculation :-// ]

But I actually meant FFT(Average(Cx)), without d/dx or explicit interpolate in the formula.
IIRC, it did interpolate, too, although not explicitly asked to do it.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2024, 09:12:44 pm by gf »
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #229 on: March 16, 2024, 09:40:01 pm »
In message #175 I asked if you accept “beginners” asking you questions about “obvious things”.
In your message #180 you replied: “don’t mind people asking questions here, even newbie questions 😉”
Yes, you are right. I might have just been a bit surprised. Since this is a “Review & Demonstration” thread for a specific digital oscilloscope, I expected a newbie-question in this context to be from someone unfamiliar with Siglent scopes – or even digital scopes in general, so I was prepared to deal with DSO specifics, but not with basics of signal theory and Fourier series for imaginary signals that can never exist in the real world.


On YouTube, on the R&S channel and on the Teledyne LeCroy channel, there are “theoretical videos” on the subject of “square wave excitation frequency response”, in a different way from your presentation. They just don't have the practical part. In summary, they state that the BW of the DSO must be greater than 5x the frequency of the fundamental wave signal.
Well, I don’t think much of such videos. Firstly, we need not tell serious users of an oscilloscope what bandwidth they require for displaying a square wave, and even more importantly, there’s no use in telling some street number like “5 times the square wave frequency”. Because it is simply not correct.


2. In my opinion as a “beginner”, for a non-SIGLENT user (not yet), the fact that it presents the “Bandwidth” of a sinusoidal signal, and “Pulse Response” does not allow us to conclude that the frequency is tolerable with deformations, for the square wave SDS800X, is f=80MHz (photo: SDS824X HD_Square_3.5ns_80MHz).
Based on the “Bandwidth” of sine signal, and “Pulse Response”, how did you reach the conclusion of BW for square wave?
Rise time is the key and I’ve demonstrated it. Here is how I would deal with it on a theoretical basis:

We were talking about the SDS824X HD, an oscilloscope whose bandwidth has been measured to be about 245 MHz. There is the well-known formula to estimate rise time from bandwidth:

tr = 0.35 / 245 MHz = 1.43 ns.

The SDS824X HD is specified for 1.8 ns (which it probably has if more than two channels are active), yet with just a single channel, I had estimated its rise time from my measurements as ~1.5 ns and the formula tells us that it might actually be even a tad lower than that. For the ease of use and the sake of this exercise, let’s just continue working with the initial assumption of 1.5 ns.

We can calculate the total rise time tr from the signal rise time trs and the scope frontend rise time trf:

tr = √(trs² + trf²);

The error would then be: err = (tr / trs - 1) * 100 [%];

Rewriting this formula to get the permissible signal rise time for a given error margin leaves us with:

trs = √(trf² / ((err / 100 + 1)² - 1));

How big an error are we willing to accept?

1%? Then the signal rise time should not be faster than 10.6 ns.
2%? Then the signal rise time should not be faster than 7.5 ns.
5%? Then the signal rise time should not be faster than 4.7 ns.
10%? Then the signal rise time should not be faster than 3.3 ns.
15%? Then the signal rise time should not be faster than 2.65 ns.
20%? Then the signal rise time should not be faster than 2.26 ns.

Or we don’t care? Then everything is fine, as long as at least the fundamental frequency does not exceed the bandwidth of the DSO.

I’ve always used the spectrum of a signal to decide how much bandwidth is needed to get a faithful reproduction on the DSO, just as I’ve demonstrated it in my earlier post with the 3.5 ns rise time square wave. Once again, it’s up to the user to decide what level of harmonics needs to be within the acquisition bandwidth. And of course we cannot accurately determine the expected error from this, but with some imagination and experience, we can know what we really need, also depending on the task on hand.

I have already pointed out that in digital communications we never had any bandwidth to waste, so all the digital modulations always really transported more or less distorted sine waves, which only get converted back into square waves within the receiver.


3. As you demonstrated that for the SDS800X, BW = 245MHz for sinusoidal signal, I just divided it by 5, and asked you to start the test at f=50MHz, and increase the frequency, and you arrived at f=80MHz with a “square wave” (“photo: Ref-Spec_Square _1ns_80MHz”), which 80 x 3 = 240MHz…
I’ve shown the two extremes. First, the benign and still fairly accurate 3.5 ns, where we can expect an error of max. 8.8%. Second, aggressive 1 ns rise time with up to 80% error. The actual errors were lower, partly because the rise time of the SDS824X HD is a little faster than the 1.5 ns that we’ve assumed here. Anyway, we could define a “square-wave-bandwidth” only if we have a clear error margin in mind. The 80 MHz square wave with 3.5 ns rise time was rendered perfectly okay by the SDS824X HD, even though it looked pretty much like a sine. Yes, there are irritations, because some folks probably expect to get a trapezoid waveform instead of a sine, and that is actually where the bandwidth limited square wave collides with our imagination. But how do you define aberrations in the expected shape of a signal edge? As a consequence, I would say the signal rise time is the more readily available and less complicated metric.


4. As for the video by “Professor Michel van Biezen”, for experts, the issue comes down to just the photo at the beginning of the video… the equation and the Fourier Series Coefficients.
In my “beginner” analysis, it doesn’t matter much if the theoretical equation doesn’t support a square wave signal of 1ns risetime…
I have to admit that I have difficulties understanding what you actually want. In a previous post you wanted me to show how the Fourier coefficients of the DSO measurements match the theory shown in that video, now you claim that accuracy doesn’t matter for you.


5. As for the Fourier Series, you learned another formula that I had never seen. This Fourier Series formula has many ways to learn it.
Well, in practice me at least do not deal with instantaneous time-domain values like cos(ω * t), but with harmonic signal levels from the frequency domain.


Having observed your comments, it is still not possible to understand whether the “Fourier Series Coefficients” should be placed in Vp, Vpp, Vrm, or something else.
In my example it has quite obviously been a mixture of all. The formula, which originally includes 4 times the peak value (which is actually half the amplitude) as first term, has been simplified by me by using double the amplitude instead. It goes without saying that the amplitude of an ideal square wave is identical with its peak-to-peak value, hence Vpp. The Fourier coefficients are still related to half the signal amplitude; hence they are peak values, which I have clearly stated in my article (Vp). Finally, I have converted the peak values to dBVrms. Yes, I’ve just written dBV, because dBVrms happens to be the only dBV unit available in Siglent DSOs (and many others).


Request: Even if it contains errors greater than 20%, as there is no perfect square wave, if you can assemble and present an equation of the Fourier Series, with f=80MHz, of the square wave, I will be very grateful. As in the formula presented in the video by “Professor Michel van Biezen”.
Sorry, I honestly don’t know what you want. The equation for a Fourier series looks always the same, no matter if it is for 1 kHz or 80 MHz.

Maybe someone else can chime in, because I personally am at my wit’s end. All I can do now is strongly recommend that you stop fixating on that video.


6. In the photo: “Ref-Spec_Square _1ns_80MHz”, in the “Peak Search Table”, in “Marker 6” it has f=880.00000MHz. I said here that it has “8 digits”, but you repeatedly state that the SDS800X has “7 digits” in the Counter. Do you count from “0 to 7”, or from “1 to 8”?
Yes, the math might show more digits in order to provide more resolution for detailed analysis, but that is not necessarily accurate in absolute terms.

What I am referring to is the always visible trigger frequency counter in the top right corner of the screen. This is the closest thing to a real frequency counter and it has class-leading 7-digits resolution, albeit only pretty average 25 ppm absolute accuracy.


7. After your “class”, I agree with you that the “Risetime” is the starting point for buying an AWG, and “the good one is the 1ns”, but it is the top of the line, and is far above of my hobby budget.
Once again, I’m not sure to understand you. While it is obvious that it’s quite nice to have a professional grade AWG that can deliver fast rise time signals, this is a completely different topic. I was always trying to get the message through, that a square wave should be primarily judged by its rise time and not frequency, even though – and this once again is something I’ve already stated – the two are somewhat related. A square wave at 240 MHz just cannot have a rise time significantly slower than 1 ns.

The actual message is: on a SDS824X HD you can faithfully reproduce a 50 MHz square wave with 3.5 ns rise time, while you are not able to do the same with a 1 kHz square wave that has 1 ns rise time - even though the scope-bandwidth is 245000 times the square wave frequency!
 
The following users thanked this post: Electro Fan, egonotto, tautech, Bad_Driver, BRZ.tech

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #230 on: March 16, 2024, 09:51:38 pm »
7. After your “class”, I agree with you that the “Risetime” is the starting point for buying an AWG, and “the good one is the 1ns”, but it is the top of the line, and is far above of my hobby budget.
Once again, I’m not sure to understand you. While it is obvious that it’s quite nice to have a professional grade AWG that can deliver fast rise time signals, this is a completely different topic. I was always trying to get the message through, that a square wave should be primarily judged by its rise time and not frequency, even though – and this once again is something I’ve already stated – the two are somewhat related. A square wave at 240 MHz just cannot have a rise time significantly slower than 1 ns.

The actual message is: on a SDS824X HD you can faithfully reproduce a 50 MHz square wave with 3.5 ns rise time, while you are not able to do the same with a 1 kHz square wave that has 1 ns rise time - even though the scope-bandwidth is 245000 times the square wave frequency!

I think I know where the misunderstanding lies. Let me try to paraphrase:

Performa01's message is: When considering how well you can observe a given square wave, it's the risetime which counts, i.e. which is the critical parameter (and not so much the frequency). Whereas BRZ might have misunderstood it as: When considering how to best generate a square wave, aim for the generator with the fastest risetime.

The latter is a misinterpretation. In fact, I would say one should avoid faster-than-necessary risetimes in many cases, due to the problems in signal propagation and detection which the high-frequency components bring. (As discussed by Performa01 in the context of the challenges they bring when observing square waves on an oscilloscope.)
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, BRZ.tech

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #231 on: March 16, 2024, 10:03:09 pm »
1) I wonder what happens if an averaged trace is displayed in dots mode? Are the averaged dots now evenly spaced with 1/sample_rate interval, or do they still retain fractional horizontal positions? [Particularly when a large number of traces are averaged.]
Yes, they retain fractonal positions, as rf-loop has nicely demonstrated. Yet as we already know, Average as a math function is not so fast and we have to make do with about 19 averages per second, whereas the original signal trace is orders of magnitude faster.


2) I think to rememer that you (or was it somebody else?) did demonstrate in a different thread that FFT(average(Cx)) resulted in a higher FFT sample rate than the original sample rate of Cx, on either the SDS2000 or SDS6000 (don't remember which one). Obviously the signal was implicitly up-sampled/interpolated to a higher rate. I wonder if the same applies to the SDS800X?
I personally have never used FFT(Average(Cx)), because it doesn't make sense to me. Tests have shown that it makes matters much worse in case of weak signals, because removing all the noise also prevents all the implicite or explicite resolution enhancement techniques from working. Not to mention the fact that we could only watch static signals with that anyway.

I've just tried it now and quite unsurprisingly, it does not change any sample rate and I'm pretty sure it never did.

Also Interpolate() always worked correctly. It was the Derivative() in conjunction with Interpolate(), which resulted in too high numbers as sample rate in the FFT - but that was only observed in the SDS2000X Plus, not in any other Sglent SDS model.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline BRZ.tech

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 45
  • Country: br
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #232 on: March 17, 2024, 01:07:20 am »
...
Once again, I’m not sure to understand you. While it is obvious that it’s quite nice to have a professional grade AWG that can deliver fast rise time signals, this is a completely different topic. I was always trying to get the message through, that a square wave should be primarily judged by its rise time and not frequency, even though – and this once again is something I’ve already stated – the two are somewhat related. A square wave at 240 MHz just cannot have a rise time significantly slower than 1 ns.

The actual message is: on a SDS824X HD you can faithfully reproduce a 50 MHz square wave with 3.5 ns rise time, while you are not able to do the same with a 1 kHz square wave that has 1 ns rise time - even though the scope-bandwidth is 245000 times the square wave frequency!

Dear @Performa01,
I am very grateful for your explanations. And I apologize for taking up your precious time.
I realized from your comments and the performance of the SDS800X HD, and other SIGLENT instruments, that they are much better and more reliable than they appear to be, and seek perfection in providing their customers with the possibilities of carrying out Measurements and Tests in general Extremely Reliable.

In fact, when it comes to DSO/MSO I have not reached the stage of stating what is extremely correct, in relation to what is not correct. Perhaps debugging will occur with time and the practice of making correct measurements and having the fundamental concepts well founded.

Really, for an expert, my questions and doubts of “newbie” can cause confusion in understanding what I asked. But I see that you and the other colleagues treated it with great respect, and tried to explain things in the best possible way.

As for "these videos", I still don't have to make a value judgment, what I have done is watch and follow educational material from sources that appear to be safe. But it seems that they are not that so reliable and safe.
TKS.
73
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Offline Bad_Driver

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 364
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #233 on: March 17, 2024, 08:39:51 am »
Dear Performer01

thank you very much for the many very insightful explanations and tips on using the SDS800.
I have to admit to my shame that I am also doing many things for the first time and understood that I have never found or used on my SDS2000X+, which has been on my desk for 4 years.  |O
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, 2N3055

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #234 on: March 17, 2024, 10:58:06 am »
FFT-Setup

Like all Siglent DOSs, starting with the venerable SDS1202X-E, the SDS800X HD have a very useful FFT implementation. To get the most out of it, we should be able to set it up correctly.

The FFT-length in the SDS800X HD can be up to 2 Mpts. This enables low resolution bandwidths and low noise, but it's still “only” a 12-bit DSO, hence results below -73 dBFS shouldn’t be trusted blindingly. In many cases, the usable dynamic range with decent accuracy can be up to 100 dB though.

Some hints for proper setup of the FFT on Siglent DSOs in general and the SDS800X HD in particular:


FFT-Bandwidth and RBW

This is quite different to a traditional SA (spectrum analyzer). There is no menu for the resolution bandwidth and also no direct setting for the FFT-bandwidth, even though we have a menu item for the horizontal display parameters, i.e. start/stop frequencies for wideband measurements and center frequency/span for narrowband applications. But this is just for zooming into a longer FFT result; for best speed and lowest RBW (resolution bandwidth) we need to make sure that no high zoom factor is required to get the desired display. The following rules apply:

•   The analysis bandwidth (FFT-BW) is always half the FFT sample rate (FFT-SR).
•   The frequency step Δf is the sample rate divided by the number of FFT points.
•   In the Acquire menu, a constant sample rate can be set in order to also limit the FFT-sample rate.
•   The resolution bandwidth (RBW) is the frequency step multiplied by a factor specific for the window function in use.

The maximum number of FFT points can be up to 2 Mpts, but it also depends on the record length, which increases with slower time base settings, which in turn might be limited by the maximum memory as defined in the Acquire menu. Apart from that, the number of FFT points can be further limited by the corresponding setting in the FFT-Config menu.

RBW = Δf * k, where k is the 3 dB bandwidth factor in bins, depending on the window function:

k: Rectangle 0.99, Blackman 1.74, Hanning 1.62, Hamming 1.64, Flattop 3.73.

Blackman and especially Flattop are the most universal and useful window functions in practice. You definitely should stick to these two as long as you cannot prove that some other window would actually work better in your specific application.

Thus: Δf = RBW / 4 (rounded) in case of the flattop window or RBW / 2 for Blackman.

To get the proper settings for any given FFT-BW and RBW pair, proceed as follows:

Determine the FFT sample rate: SR = FFT-BW * 2 [Sa/s];
Determine the number of FFT points: FFT-pts >= SR / Δf [pts];
Determine the time base: TB >= FFT-pts / SR / 10 [s/div];

As mentioned earlier, you can lower the FFT-sample rate by setting a constant acquisition sample rate; this can be useful when you want really low FFT-sample rates but do not want to use very slow time base settings, which would slow down the acquisition considerably.


Setting up the FFT

Even from the best FFT implementation, we can only expect good results as long as the scope has been set up properly for that specific task. How many so called “reviews” have we seen where FFT has been engaged and some scope settings randomly altered just to get a halfway plausible but actually not very meaningful FFT graph, which was then either praised or criticized?

Of course we can get away with some quick & dirty setup if the requirements are low, but even then we should never ignore the most important parameters like FFT bandwidth, which should always cover the full signal spectrum, otherwise aliasing artefacts could easily spoil our measurement results.

For optimal speed, frequency resolution and dynamic range, we need to put a little more effort into a proper setup, which has quite different requirements compared to the usual Y-t view (aka time domain). Below there is a complete checklist how to properly set up the DSO for analysis in the frequency domain (most of these topics should be obvious, but still listed for completeness):

1.   Set acquisition mode to normal. Use ERES only for a good reason and stay away from average. Avoid Peak Detect under all circumstances and without any exception!
2.   Use edge trigger in auto mode to make sure signal acquisition doesn’t stop even when the signal amplitude drops below the trigger sensitivity. FFT doesn’t require a stable trigger, so you can also use AC-line trigger for that.
3.   Determine the lower bandwidth limit for the FFT analysis. If it is >10 Hz, use AC-coupling for the input channel to ensure maximum dynamic range even with large DC offsets and/or high input sensitivities. If DC-coupling has to be used, use the vertical position control to compensate for any DC offset, so you can optimize sensitivity, hence get the highest dynamic range.
4.   Determine the upper bandwidth limit for the FFT analysis. In order to avoid aliasing artifacts, this should not only cover the desired analysis bandwidth, but include the highest expected input frequency. In general, it’s best to start with a higher upper bandwidth limit and reduce it only after it has been confirmed that there is no significant signal content above the desired final limit.
5.   Choose the frequency step size according to the explanations given earlier in this article, which would be about one quarter of the required resolution bandwidth when using the Flattop window.
6.   Find an appropriate set of horizontal time base setting and the number of FFT points; refer to the explanations given earlier in this article. You should watch the displayed FFT parameters while altering the time base and double check that they match your expectations. Be aware that the desired resolution bandwidth might not be achievable due to the limited choice of sample rates and FFT lengths and/or the maximum specified FFT length of 2 Mpts.
7.   Engage FFT mode, select the correct source channel and start with Split Screen mode.
8.   Set the vertical gain so that the peak amplitude of the input signal is between ±2 to ±4 divisions.
9.   Set the horizontal FFT display parameters according to the bandwidth you want to display and select linear/decade mode for the frequency axis. Decade is advantageous for wideband measurements, whereas linear is best for narrowband applications.
10.   Set the vertical FFT display parameters, i.e. the desired level units (dBV or dBm, forget volts!) and make sure the external load impedance matches reality whenever working with power levels, i.e. dBm. Set the reference level and vertical scale so that the FFT amplitude range of interest makes best use of the available screen space.
11.   Setup (at least) automatic peak-peak measurement for the input channel. During frequency domain analysis, especially in Exclusive mode, keep an eye on the Vpp measurement for the input channel to make sure no overload occurs.
12.   Make sure the desired window function is selected.

Hint: stay in Split Screen mode until the amplitude setup is finished and the levels are reasonably stable, then switch to Exclusive mode. By keeping an eye on the peak-to-peak measurement of the input signal, you can still detect an overload condition instantly; the scope indicates that by displaying > instead of = in front of the measurement value.

Example: Pk-Pk >851.875mV instead of Pk-Pk  755.000mV.



FFT Window Functions

For the ones who try to understand the consequences of certain settings in the FFT analysis – this is about the window functions.

Why are there so many different windows (only few of them available on the SDS oscilloscope)? What is the best window to use?

There have been times when processor systems haven’t been nearly as powerful as today. Non-RISC architectures with just 1 MHz clock frequency and less than 1 kB RAM were not uncommon during the seventies of last century. Instruments that could compute a FFT at all have been rather exotic, and FFT-lengths like 64 points were quite common. In the light of this, there is no wonder that less than ideal FFT-window functions optimized for certain tasks were popular.

Sometimes there are descriptions about the benefits and drawbacks of the various window functions, yet most folks would rather not care and want a universal setting that works for them every time. Just like with a traditional SA (spectrum analyzer) with analog RBW (resolution bandwidth) filters in the final IF (intermediate frequency) path. And fortunately, there is one…

There are several features of a window function, and two of them are amplitude accuracy and resolution bandwidth. If we look at just these two properties, then the rectangle window would have the narrowest resolution bandwidth but the worst amplitude error, whereas it’s just the opposite for the Flattop window.

So, whenever we need the best frequency resolution, we just sacrifice a bit of accuracy and use the Rectangle window?

It’s not that simple. An FFT divides the entire analysis bandwidth into frequency bins. If, for instance, we have an FFT-length of 32768 points, then we get 16384 such frequency bins and at an effective sample rate of 2 MSa/s, each of them will be 61.04 Hz wide. In this case, 61.04 Hz is the bin width and the bin spacing at the same time. The center of a bin will always be an integer multiple of the bin width.

Now FFT-windows behave differently, depending on the offset of the input signal frequency from the bin center. I did a selectivity test for the various window functions available on an SDS800X HD and used the before mentioned parameters:

FFT-sample rate = 2 MSa/s
FFT-Length = 32768 pts
Bin-width = 61.03515625… Hz

The test will be for amplitude accuracy and the -20 dB, -40 dB and -60 dB selectivity. I define the latter at the frequency distance for a -20, -40 or -60 dBc signal to still produce a visible 3 dB peak in the spectrum (and not drowned out by the leakage of the neighboring o dBc reference signal).
 
The -3 dB bandwidth might be most important for characterizing the passband of any two-port network, but for a filter, where the selectivity is the main concern, the bandwidth at a useful attenuation is even more important.

The metric of a filter shape factor exists, which is usually defined as the ratio of the filter bandwidth at -60 dB and -6 dB. The shape-factor might even be the most important property of any RBW filter at all, because it ultimately defines selectivity. Consider what a proper BP (Band-Pass) filter, as it might be found in any traditional SA, looks like:


Ref-BP_Cheby9_0.2dB

This is a 9th order Chebyshev BP filter with 0.2 dB passband ripple. It has a -3 dB bandwidth of about 10 kHz and less than 16 kHz bandwidth at -60 dBc. The 3/60 shape factor is thus ~1.57. The lower the shape factor, the higher the selectivity.

What does it mean in practice? We can distinguish a strong signal at 0 dBc together with a weak signal at -60 dBc next to it, as long as the distance is at least ~13 KHz, i.e. 1.3 times the RBW. That is excellent and makes for a useful analysis in the frequency domain.

An FFT is quite different to a classic continuously swept spectrum analyzer. If we feed a stable sine wave into a swept analyzer, we’ll get the frequency response plot of the RBW-filter.

The FFT doesn’t plot a continuous filter response, but simply shows the outputs of the individual frequency bins, and ideally only the one bin covering the input frequency responds with the correct amplitude (and phase, but that’s not displayed). It is like a huge filter bank with a bunch (16384 in our next example) of filters, all working in parallel. What we see is different from the RBW-filter response; we rather see the “leakage”, i.e. signal outputs from neighboring “filters” (bins), sometimes even far away from the signal frequency - and there are amplitude errors for the main bin.

A 0 dBm test signal of 499.99342 kHz has been used for the first test, which is equivalent to precisely 500 kHz if the time base of the SDS800X HD were accurate. this is precisely 8192 times the bin width, hence the exact center of a bin.

What do we get?

Window     Ampl.  Selectivity [Hz]
            [dBm]   -20 dB   -40 dB    -60 dB
Blackman     0.0     236.58   236.58    236.58
Flattop      0.0     366.58   416.58    416.58
Hamming      0.0     168.58   168.58    168.58
Hann         0.0     171.58   171.58    171.58
Rectangle    0.0      98.58    98.58     98.58

Look at the rectangle window, with two signals, the 0 dBm reference signal (carrier) and the 2nd signal at -40 dBc (with an enormous amplitude error of 2.8 dB), which creates just a 3 dB peak at a distance of 98.58 Hz, as an example:


SDS824X HD_FFT_Rectangle_0.0_S40dB_500092Hz

With a distance of just 1.615 bin widths, selectivity is quite good.  Yet real-world signals will usually not be an exact integer multiple of the bin-width, so we need more tests.

In any practical application where the FFT of a general-purpose oscilloscope is to be used, we cannot freely define the signal frequencies, hence they will be more or less off center. Even if we could select a frequency, most related signals like intermodulation (mixer) products and spurs can still have any frequency offset with regard to the bin spacing. Consequently, we need to take the worst case into consideration, that is a frequency offset of half the bin-width.

A 0 dBm test signal of 500.02394 kHz has been used for the following test, this is precisely 8192,5 times the bin width, hence the exact bin-border for my individual sample of the SDS824X HD.

Window     Ampl.  Selectivity [Hz]
            [dBm]   -20 dB   -40 dB    -60 dB
Blackman     -1.0    206.06   266.06    426.06
Flattop       0.0    386.06   386.06    451.06
Hamming      -1.8    196.06   196.06    -
Hann         -1.3    203.06   326.06    586.06
Rectangle    -3.8    381.06  2780.06    -                   

This looks very different, doesn’t it? All of a sudden, the rectangle window has 3.8 dB amplitude error and its selectivity isn’t all that good anymore. In fact it is unbelievable >45 bin-widths for the -40 dBc selectivity! By contrast, the Flattop window hasn’t changed at all: the amplitude error is effectively zero as it was before and also the selectivity has only marginally changed. That means more than -60 dBc attenuation at 300 Hz (less than 5 bins) distance from the center.

Hamming does not have a 60 dB attenuation within a reasonable bandwidth – in fact it is so wide that I could not be bothered to measure it. The same applies to the Rectangle window, where the -40 dBc selectivity test didn’t reveal anything useful:


SDS824X HD_FFT_Rectangle_0.5_S40dB_502800Hz

What do we want for a proper RBW filter for spectrum analysis, in order to get serious and accurate measurements?

1.   High dynamic range. We have no use for a RBW filter that has no proper stopband attenuation, hence picks up all the garbage from the neighborhood.
2.   Fast transitions into the stopband, which is equivalent to a low shape factor.
3.   A reasonably flat passband without massive amplitude errors, as soon as the signal frequency gets off center a bit.
4.   And most importantly, all these parameters shall be constant and independent of the exact input frequency.

The only window that appears to be perfect in almost all regards is the Flattop window. It has a very high dynamic range, low shape factor, a totally flat passband, and even more important, its properties remain constant and do not depend on the signal frequency. Only downside: it has the widest bandwidth of all candidates. Yet in modern equipment, where at least 1 Mpts FFT have become standard, we need not desperately look for a windows function that sacrifices a lot of good properties just for a little narrower RBW.

Blackman is the only alternative that I can recommend from the selection in the Siglent SDS800X HD. It has less than half the RBW of the Flattop window and the shape factor is still reasonable. It works down to -60 dBc even with the worst-case frequency offset of half a bin width, and the passband flatness, hence also the amplitude error, is not too high. This is generally true for all window functions of the Blackman-family, especially Blackman-Harris. Siglent only implements the original Blackman window though.

You can take a look at all the remaining window functions in the attachment, albeit only for worst case frequency offset, indicated by “0.5” in the file name.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2024, 03:01:37 pm by Performa01 »
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #235 on: March 17, 2024, 11:28:30 am »
Brilliant, thank you Performa01!

You should really think about converting this material into a (PDF?) booklet -- an "Application Guide to Digital Oscilloscopes" or such. Maybe something Siglent could fund, and distribute as either a separate document or merge into the user manuals?

As a short-term step, would it make sense to reorganize the "table of contents" in the initial post? It is currently organized chronologically. But since you have re-visited some topics over time, and the total amount of material is becoming too much to grasp even the whole TOC at a glance -- could the links to the individual posts be grouped into a few larger topic areas? I am not sure what that meta-structure would best look like. Maybe start with basic horizontal and vertical settings and performance, move on to measurements/cursors/math, then specific application areas?

In any case -- thank you again for the huge effort you have and continue to put into this thread. I have not seen anything like it, anywhere and on any scope!
« Last Edit: March 17, 2024, 11:40:54 am by ebastler »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, hansibull, Jacon, myf, pdenisowski, mwb1100, core, radiohomebrewer2000

Offline iMo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4790
  • Country: pm
  • It's important to try new things..
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #236 on: March 17, 2024, 11:52:05 am »
I wonder why that hints above cannot be somehow suggested to the user by the o'scope itself. It cannot be such a rocket science to implement those into the o'scope's system. Simply navigate the user with short messages with above hints when he/she messes up with the settings in a suboptimal or even wrong way..
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline Grandchuck

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 649
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #237 on: March 17, 2024, 11:59:12 am »
Many thanks to professor Performa01 for bringing us oscilloscope university.
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #238 on: March 17, 2024, 01:58:46 pm »
As we can see, the rectangle window is fantastic. It has no amplitude error at all and an ultra-narrow -3 dB bandwidth of just 6.4 Hz. First doubts should arise though, when we look at the shape factor, which is a rather catastrophic 18.44! Let’s take a look at that:

SDS824X HD_FFT_Rectangle_0.0_3dB

Well, the -3dB bandwidth of a rectangular window is always about 0.884*Δf, which is about 54 Hz for the given parameters.

The root cause why you measure a horribly wrong value of 6.4 Hz is the linear interpolation between adjacent frequency points, which is not appropriate here. With a proper sinc interpolation you would see the true shape of the window function's frequency response and measure the correct bandwidth. In the time domain, you would not sample a sine wave signal with (say) 2.3 points/period either, interpolate the samples linearly and expect that you can still recognize it as sine wave. But the same happens here in the frequency domain. The scope fools you by connecting the frequency points (which are correct) with straight lines. It is important to be aware and not to trust these straight lines blindly.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2024, 02:07:26 pm by gf »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, 2N3055, Martin72, mawyatt

Offline mawyatt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #239 on: March 17, 2024, 04:37:50 pm »
As we can see, the rectangle window is fantastic. It has no amplitude error at all and an ultra-narrow -3 dB bandwidth of just 6.4 Hz. First doubts should arise though, when we look at the shape factor, which is a rather catastrophic 18.44! Let’s take a look at that:

SDS824X HD_FFT_Rectangle_0.0_3dB

Well, the -3dB bandwidth of a rectangular window is always about 0.884*Δf, which is about 54 Hz for the given parameters.

The root cause why you measure a horribly wrong value of 6.4 Hz is the linear interpolation between adjacent frequency points, which is not appropriate here. With a proper sinc interpolation you would see the true shape of the window function's frequency response and measure the correct bandwidth. In the time domain, you would not sample a sine wave signal with (say) 2.3 points/period either, interpolate the samples linearly and expect that you can still recognize it as sine wave. But the same happens here in the frequency domain. The scope fools you by connecting the frequency points (which are correct) with straight lines. It is important to be aware and not to trust these straight lines blindly.

Good catch, it "looks" like 64Hz as we didn't spot the decimal point!!

Linear interpolation of sparse data, one should expect errors, some cases significant with interpolated results. This was the limiting dynamic range in SPICE like Time Domain simulations even tho SPICE utilized quadradic interpolation, and why in 80s we developed a version that "forced" the simulation at exactly the proper times with a-priori knowledge of the expected post FFT implementation. Doing 2-Tone IMD of ultra-linear systems reveled the SPICE limitations, later Cadence picked up on this.

However, this certainly doesn't take away from the superb efforts of Performa01 which really shows the incredible versatility of these Fine Instruments when in the hands of a Master  :clap:

And we "discredit" these as just DSOs :palm:

Best,
Curiosity killed the cat, also depleted my wallet!
~Wyatt Labs by Mike~
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, gf

Offline radiohomebrewer2000

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 35
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #240 on: March 17, 2024, 04:56:15 pm »
If someone comes up with a guide for the SDS800X HD scopes like the material that Performa1 has been provided with explanations on how to do them as well, I would buy this book.  Seriously. 

I have looked at the documentation for the SDS800X HD series ahead before it is delivered so I can some idea of what to expect.  But, the documentation is very terse.  Maybe I am just used to the manuals (spoiled) for my commercial ham radios from companies like Kenwood, ICOM, Yaesu that provide very good manuals with their ham radios.

Again, I am willing to buy a book for US$50 for more.

 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto

Offline mawyatt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3273
  • Country: us
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #241 on: March 17, 2024, 05:02:27 pm »
Didn't you already "Buy the Book", and the SDS814 was just the "Special Promotion" ;D

That's how we "Explained" it to our "CFO/CEO"  ;)

Best,
Curiosity killed the cat, also depleted my wallet!
~Wyatt Labs by Mike~
 
The following users thanked this post: radiohomebrewer2000

Online tszaboo

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7392
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX product design
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #242 on: March 17, 2024, 05:25:25 pm »
OK, so I had a go at the Bode plot module. This is a SDS800HD together with a SDG1000X measuring a current transformer-opamp module called ZMCT103C. I was interested in it's transfer function (the current transformer is 1:1000 turns )
The setup only requires a BNC-BNC cable and a BNC-Crocodile cable and a resistor, everything else comes with the instruments. CH2 on the AWG is set to tracking mode, no other settings are necessary on the AWG. The scope is connected to the AWG with a USB cable, it recognized it automatically, CH2 of the AWG is connected to the scope. Other than that, I just had to enter the frequency range, and the number of points, set up the channels.
One thing I noticed that the Bode plot will measure 3 outputs if set up, that's a nice touch that doesn't really cost anything. It would be nice if the save button would work in the bode plot menu, but now it does nothing and the save location has to be entered manually. Overall I'm very satisfied with this setup, and the capabilities of both the scope and the AWG so far.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2024, 05:48:58 pm by tszaboo »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, 2N3055, KungFuJosh, Martin72

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #243 on: March 17, 2024, 05:57:09 pm »
Well, the -3dB bandwidth of a rectangular window is always about 0.884*Δf, which is about 54 Hz for the given parameters.

The root cause why you measure a horribly wrong value of 6.4 Hz is the linear interpolation between adjacent frequency points, which is not appropriate here. With a proper sinc interpolation you would see the true shape of the window function's frequency response and measure the correct bandwidth. In the time domain, you would not sample a sine wave signal with (say) 2.3 points/period either, interpolate the samples linearly and expect that you can still recognize it as sine wave. But the same happens here in the frequency domain. The scope fools you by connecting the frequency points (which are correct) with straight lines. It is important to be aware and not to trust these straight lines blindly.
Thank you for pointing this out. Something isn’t quite correct and I will definitely look into this and try to come up with a test that documents the practical usefulness of the various window functions and also passes under the strict eyes of our Guru “gf” at the same time 😉
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, 2N3055, Mortymore, pdenisowski, KungFuJosh, Martin72, core

Offline electronics hobbyist

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 147
  • Country: cn
    • sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #244 on: March 19, 2024, 08:57:42 am »
Thanks a million to professor Performa01.

This review book is so great, so I translated it into Chinese and published it on Zhihu (similar to Quora), and I have only completed 20% so far.
The main purpose is to learn for oneself, and it would be even better if other people could also learn about these oscilloscope knowledge.
If you feel it's not suitable, I will hide it.   ^-^
Thank you again.

The following English image is translated from Chinese to English through Google.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2024, 09:03:23 am by electronics hobbyist »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, Mortymore

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #245 on: March 19, 2024, 11:52:24 am »
I have revised the FFT-Window article, which should now convey my points without major inaccuracies.

You should really think about converting this material into a (PDF?) booklet -- an "Application Guide to Digital Oscilloscopes" or such. Maybe something Siglent could fund, and distribute as either a separate document or merge into the user manuals?

As a short-term step, would it make sense to reorganize the "table of contents" in the initial post? It is currently organized chronologically. But since you have re-visited some topics over time, and the total amount of material is becoming too much to grasp even the whole TOC at a glance -- could the links to the individual posts be grouped into a few larger topic areas? I am not sure what that meta-structure would best look like. Maybe start with basic horizontal and vertical settings and performance, move on to measurements/cursors/math, then specific application areas?
Thank you very much! I have planned to make this available as a PDF document sooner or later. In fact, I’m already working on it and this will of course be better organized. Since I don’t want to create updates all the time, I’ll wait until I’ve got the feeling that I’ve reached a consistency point, the inspiration for new articles fades a little, and this thread has settled a bit.


EDIT: forgot to answer the 2nd part of your suggestion:

Regarding the reorganization of the current TOC, this makes not much sense, because I’ve initially reserved a number of posts where I cramped as much content as possible into every single posting, and these cannot be grouped in a different way anymore. The idea was to have all the information all in one place so that it can be found easily.

When I ran out of reserved postings, I realized that it doesn’t matter much where the postings are within the thread, as long as we have an overview with that table of content in the OP.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2024, 02:43:31 pm by Performa01 »
 

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #246 on: March 19, 2024, 01:34:05 pm »
An FFT is quite different to a classic continuously swept spectrum analyzer. If we feed a stable sine wave into a swept analyzer, we’ll get the frequency response plot of the RBW-filter.

The FFT doesn’t plot a filter response, but simply gives an output, which of course should ideally look like an isolated square, one frequency bin wide and the height depending of the amplitude.

Sorry if I disagree again, with this statement. There is not really a difference. Like the SA, the FFT also shows the filter resonse, centered at the frequency of the sine wave stimulus frequency. But the FFT does not plot the continuous filter resonse, but it samples the filter resonse at discrete frequency points (-N/2...N/2-1)/N*sample_rate. And the result of the FFT are only the frequency domain samples. And that's where all the confusion comes from. Mentally we are not able to reconstruct the  continuous filter response from the samples (although the reconstruction can be done mathematically), and connecting the samples with straight lines gives a wrong impression either.

The blue curve in the attachments is the continuous frequency response of a rectangular window function. And the three plots also show the resulting samples, when the continuous curve is sampled at three different frequency offsets. Note that the samples look quite different, although the shape of the continuous curve is the same. As said, from each set of samples, the continuous (blue) curve can be reconstructed - but not "mentally" :scared:

EDIT: The samples at the bottom of figure1.png are actually located at -Inf dB, since they hit the zeros of the frequency response. For clarity, I just wanted to keep them inside the plot. In practice they would be at the noise floor.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2024, 04:21:52 pm by gf »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, newbrain, Mortymore, pdenisowski, core, orzel

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #247 on: March 19, 2024, 03:11:44 pm »
An FFT is quite different to a classic continuously swept spectrum analyzer. If we feed a stable sine wave into a swept analyzer, we’ll get the frequency response plot of the RBW-filter.

The FFT doesn’t plot a filter response, but simply gives an output, which of course should ideally look like an isolated square, one frequency bin wide and the height depending of the amplitude.

Sorry if I disagree again, with this statement. There is not really a difference. Like the SA, the FFT also shows the filter resonse, centered at the frequency of the sine wave stimulus frequency. But the FFT does not plot the continuous filter resonse, but it samples the filter resonse at discrete frequency points (-N/2...N/2-1)/N*sample_rate. And the result of the FFT are only the frequency domain samples. And that's where all the confusion comes from. Mentally we are not able to reconstruct the  continuous filter response from the samples (although the reconstruction can be done mathematically), and connecting the samples with straight lines gives a wrong impression either.
Thanks again for being alert – I’ve rephrased this paragraph one more time and now tried to describe the reality properly instead of just making a sloppy statement…
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, 2N3055, Mortymore

Offline rf-loop

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4106
  • Country: fi
  • Born in Finland with DLL21 in hand
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #248 on: March 20, 2024, 12:28:55 pm »
Here measured Rectangular window  -3dB BW.

Based to Keysight,  Uniform window -3dB width is 0.8844 x Δf


Input 125kHz (128xΔf), dBm (external 50 ohm).    (f input matched with oscilloscope reference)


Input freq rised up 0.8844 x Δf/2
Result as expected -3dB drop. (lack of enough level measurement resolution)

As can see oscilloscope FFT display also RBW. But what kind of "RBW" it is? Least it is not main lobe -3dB BW. 

(Mostly least I think RBW as normal spectrum analyzer RBW)

There is  Δf 976.56Hz and then RBW 966.80Hz. This looks like based to 0.99
But perhaps  863.7 Hz is more right value for RBW(3dB)?

Rectangular (aka Uniform, aka Boxcar) window is nice for noise measurements because its noise BW is just Δf.
I drive a LEC (low el. consumption) BEV car. Smoke exhaust pipes - go to museum. In Finland quite all electric power is made using nuclear, wind, solar and water.

Wises must compel the mad barbarians to stop their crimes against humanity. Where have the wises gone?
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, RAPo

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #249 on: March 31, 2024, 10:30:32 am »
I have promised to provide a condensed PDF version of my Review & Demonstration articles, and today I present a revised document which also includes additional content and a complete list of bookmarks for easy navigation.

Due to space restrictions for forum attachments, I had to split this into two parts. Here comes the first part, including the following main topics:

Document History
Introduction
Basic Information

Acquisition
Display
Trigger
Measure
Cursors
Math
Analysis
Probes
« Last Edit: March 31, 2024, 10:35:33 am by Performa01 »
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #250 on: March 31, 2024, 10:31:25 am »
Here is the second part, including the following main topics:

MSO
HAM Test
User Comments

Figures
Tables
« Last Edit: March 31, 2024, 10:34:20 am by Performa01 »
 

Offline eTobey

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 558
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #251 on: April 04, 2024, 04:48:58 am »
...

On page 23 you wrote: "At 5 μs/div, the SDS824X HD takes an average of 650 μs/frame and a maximum of <2 ms/frame." I dont get what these 650us/frame mean. I would think it would be a constant 50us as you can see on the screen?
"Sometimes, after talking with a person, you want to pet a dog, wave at a monkey, and take off your hat to an elephant." (Maxim Gorki)
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #252 on: April 04, 2024, 05:48:48 am »
...

On page 23 you wrote: "At 5 μs/div, the SDS824X HD takes an average of 650 μs/frame and a maximum of <2 ms/frame." I dont get what these 650us/frame mean. I would think it would be a constant 50us as you can see on the screen?

At 5µs/div  50µs is interval shown on the screen.
To do that scope has to trigger, capture, process signal, display and all measurements, and reconfigure to get ready to get another trigger.
That is called retrigger time.
Retrigger time hence consist of time when actual capture is happening and so called "blind" time, while scope processes data and going back to Ready status.

So that sentence means that that when scope is in 5µs/div retrigger time is 650µs/MAX 2ms
Full table of retrigger times(triggers/s) is on pg. 24.

Make note that with same settings, in sequence mode retrigger time is 52us, meaning "blind time" is 2µs.

That is why it is recommended to use sequence mode if you need to capture fast bursts of signal.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, ebastler, newbrain, Jacon, Mortymore, Grandchuck, BRZ.tech

Offline BRZ.tech

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 45
  • Country: br
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #253 on: April 14, 2024, 06:00:08 pm »
Hi,
Dear @Performa01
I return with the “Newbie” questions.
I am studying how to measure the Slew Rate of an Operational Amplifier in a DSO/MSO.
In this case, I thought this video from Texas Instruments was really good:
https://www.ti.com/video/4078676441001#:~:text=Slew%20rate%20is%20defined%20as,of%20the%20output%20signal's%20amplitude

In order not to waste time, TI defined what the Slew Rate is (time 0min:28sec), and that the “Unit” of measurement is (V/us), photo attached.
TI presented the Slew Rate of different Operational Amplifiers (time 04min:05sec), photo attached.

In the SDS800X HD datasheet, on page 16, in “Horizontal Paramenters” and “Miscellaneous Parameters”, it does not state that it automatically measures Slew Rate.
But it states in “Miscellaneous Parameters” that it automatically measures Positive Slope and Negative Slope.
In the SDS800X HD datasheet, on page 17, it states in “Power Analysis” (optional): “Measure”, which automatically measures the Slew Rate.

In the SDS800X HD datasheet, on page 06, “Parameter Statistics Function”, photo attached, that shows the measurement of a Square Wave Signal of Amplitude = 5Vpp, and f = 10MHz.
In the “PSlope(C1)” column, it presents the “average value”, with: (Mean = 1.0282K V/us), which is extremely fast for an Operational Amplifier, considering data from the best TI OA, according to the attached table.

“Newbie” Questions:
1. Carry out a test with the SDS800X HD, with Square Wave excitation, with Amplitude = 5Vpp and f = 10MHz, repeating the test of: “Parameter Statistics Function”.
Perform the measurement in “Unit”: (V/us), “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope”.
If there are, explain what are the differences between the “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope” measurements?

2. Regarding the “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope” measurements, the performance measurement of the Operational Amplifier, is or is not, the same thing as performing the “Power Analysis” (optional) of the SMPS, for the automatic measurement of Slew Rate?
If they are different, I suggest SIGLENT add the Slew Rate measurement to the SDS800X HD menu, “Horizontal Parameters”.

Anyone on the topic can comment on my questions.
Translation with Google Translate.
Grateful for the attention.
 
The following users thanked this post: Mortymore

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #254 on: April 14, 2024, 06:09:57 pm »
Hi,
Dear @Performa01
I return with the “Newbie” questions.
I am studying how to measure the Slew Rate of an Operational Amplifier in a DSO/MSO.
In this case, I thought this video from Texas Instruments was really good:
https://www.ti.com/video/4078676441001#:~:text=Slew%20rate%20is%20defined%20as,of%20the%20output%20signal's%20amplitude

In order not to waste time, TI defined what the Slew Rate is (time 0min:28sec), and that the “Unit” of measurement is (V/us), photo attached.
TI presented the Slew Rate of different Operational Amplifiers (time 04min:05sec), photo attached.

In the SDS800X HD datasheet, on page 16, in “Horizontal Paramenters” and “Miscellaneous Parameters”, it does not state that it automatically measures Slew Rate.
But it states in “Miscellaneous Parameters” that it automatically measures Positive Slope and Negative Slope.
In the SDS800X HD datasheet, on page 17, it states in “Power Analysis” (optional): “Measure”, which automatically measures the Slew Rate.

In the SDS800X HD datasheet, on page 06, “Parameter Statistics Function”, photo attached, that shows the measurement of a Square Wave Signal of Amplitude = 5Vpp, and f = 10MHz.
In the “PSlope(C1)” column, it presents the “average value”, with: (Mean = 1.0282K V/us), which is extremely fast for an Operational Amplifier, considering data from the best TI OA, according to the attached table.

“Newbie” Questions:
1. Carry out a test with the SDS800X HD, with Square Wave excitation, with Amplitude = 5Vpp and f = 10MHz, repeating the test of: “Parameter Statistics Function”.
Perform the measurement in “Unit”: (V/us), “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope”.
If there are, explain what are the differences between the “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope” measurements?

2. Regarding the “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope” measurements, the performance measurement of the Operational Amplifier, is or is not, the same thing as performing the “Power Analysis” (optional) of the SMPS, for the automatic measurement of Slew Rate?
If they are different, I suggest SIGLENT add the Slew Rate measurement to the SDS800X HD menu, “Horizontal Parameters”.

Anyone on the topic can comment on my questions.
Translation with Google Translate.
Grateful for the attention.

Short answer, yes, [Positive slope] is slew rate measurement of positive going signal and [Negative slope] is respectively is slew rate measurement of negative going signal.
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #255 on: April 14, 2024, 06:55:47 pm »
Slew Rate Measurement

In the SDS800X HD datasheet, on page 06, “Parameter Statistics Function”, photo attached, that shows the measurement of a Square Wave Signal of Amplitude = 5Vpp, and f = 10MHz.
In the “PSlope(C1)” column, it presents the “average value”, with: (Mean = 1.0282K V/us), which is extremely fast for an Operational Amplifier, considering data from the best TI OA, according to the attached table.
I’ve had a look at Texas Instruments and have found no less than 57 operational amplifiers capable of a Slew Rate of 2 kV/µs or faster. There are still 13 OpAmps with a Slew Rate faster than 5 kV/µs, the fastest being the THS3491, which manages 8000 V/µs.

In the light of this, 1000 V/µs would have required a fast hybrid amp in the Seventies of last century, but isn’t particularly fast for a monolithic integrated OpAmp today.


1. Carry out a test with the SDS800X HD, with Square Wave excitation, with Amplitude = 5Vpp and f = 10MHz, repeating the test of: “Parameter Statistics Function”.
Perform the measurement in “Unit”: (V/us), “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope”.
If there are, explain what are the differences between the “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope” measurements?
It needs not be complicated. Here’s a 10 ns wide pulse with 2 ns rise-time, which is at the edge of accurate measurements with an SDS824X HD:


SDS824X HD_Slew_Pulse_W10ns_RT2ns

As can be seen, the rise-and fall-times are accurately measured as ~2 ns. The slew rate should be 80% * 5 V / 0.002 µs = 4 V / 0.002 µs = 2 kV/µs. The actual measurement is off by some 2.76% for the positive slope.

It should be kept in mind that the universal definition of the thresholds to be at 10% and 90% might not be valid in every industry, hence these thresholds are user-definable – see the measurement config submenu displayed in the above screenshot.


2. Regarding the “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope” measurements, the performance measurement of the Operational Amplifier, is or is not, the same thing as performing the “Power Analysis” (optional) of the SMPS, for the automatic measurement of Slew Rate?
If they are different, I suggest SIGLENT add the Slew Rate measurement to the SDS800X HD menu, “Horizontal Parameters”.
It is all the same thing – Slew Rate is Slew Rate, universally defined in volts per second, no matter what package uses this measurement. Positive and negative slope measurements just measure the Slew Rate on positive and negative transitions.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, 2N3055, Martin72, BRZ.tech

Offline pdenisowski

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 641
  • Country: us
  • Product Management Engineer, Rohde & Schwarz
    • Test and Measurement Fundamentals Playlist on the R&S YouTube channel
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #256 on: April 14, 2024, 11:29:47 pm »


“Newbie” Questions:
1. Carry out a test with the SDS800X HD, with Square Wave excitation, with Amplitude = 5Vpp and f = 10MHz, repeating the test of: “Parameter Statistics Function”.
Perform the measurement in “Unit”: (V/us), “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope”.
If there are, explain what are the differences between the “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope” measurements?

2. Regarding the “Slew Rate” and “Positive Slope” measurements, the performance measurement of the Operational Amplifier, is or is not, the same thing as performing the “Power Analysis” (optional) of the SMPS, for the automatic measurement of Slew Rate?

Anyone on the topic can comment on my questions.

I recently made a short (< 6 min) video on slew rate measurements using an oscilloscope (primarily in the context of switch mode power supplies).  It's the same measurement (delta_V/t) regardless of whether you're measuring an op amp or SMPS, although the way you acquire the voltage waveform may be different depending on the application.

Slew rate is often included in "power analysis" option packages, but in my experience, most people just measure it "by hand" and don't really require a special option to do it.

Test and Measurement Fundamentals video series on the Rohde & Schwarz YouTube channel:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKxVoO5jUTlvsVtDcqrVn0ybqBVlLj2z8

Free online test and measurement fundamentals courses from Rohde & Schwarz:  https://tinyurl.com/mv7a4vb6
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, BRZ.tech

Offline Vitold

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 7
  • Country: sk
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #257 on: April 20, 2024, 05:04:16 pm »

Sorry if this is the wrong place to post, but I have a question about SDS800X trigger terminologie.

For dropout trigger type, trigger is configured with "State" for "Over Time Type" But menu says "Slope Rising | Falling"  I think it should be "Time High" and "Time Low" when "Over Time Type" = "State" (and "Rising" or "Falling" when Over Time Time = "Edge") This is confusing for me.

Do other users have the same idea?

Trigger works perfectly, only configuration parameter name is confusing  ;D
 

Offline Vitold

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 7
  • Country: sk
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #258 on: April 20, 2024, 05:19:35 pm »
It is all the same thing – Slew Rate is Slew Rate, universally defined in volts per second, no matter what package uses this measurement. Positive and negative slope measurements just measure the Slew Rate on positive and negative transitions.

I have a question about "slope" trigger on SDS800X. This is the same as "slew rate" trigger on other scopes, correct?

When I try to configure a "Slope" trigger, GUI says "Trigger when edge crosses two thresholds is inside or outside a selected time range". I can configure time range, but where can I configure upper and lower voltage thresholds? Or is this not really a slew rate trigger (like on other scopes)?
 

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #259 on: April 20, 2024, 06:12:22 pm »
For dropout trigger type, trigger is configured with "State" for "Over Time Type" But menu says "Slope Rising | Falling"  I think it should be "Time High" and "Time Low" when "Over Time Type" = "State" (and "Rising" or "Falling" when Over Time Time = "Edge") This is confusing for me.
The terminology is correct. The Dropout Trigger watches for a transition within the specified Dropout time period. A transition can either be rising or falling. The trigger fires whenever the specified transition does not occur within the Dropout period.


I have a question about "slope" trigger on SDS800X. This is the same as "slew rate" trigger on other scopes, correct?

When I try to configure a "Slope" trigger, GUI says "Trigger when edge crosses two thresholds is inside or outside a selected time range". I can configure time range, but where can I configure upper and lower voltage thresholds? Or is this not really a slew rate trigger (like on other scopes)?
It would be effectively the same as a slew rate trigger, but maybe specified differently.

As always, the thresholds are set by the trigger knob. Since there are now two of them, you can push the trigger knob in order to toggle between the two thresholds.

In the attached screenshot, I’ve used Slope Trigger to trigger on the end of the sweep of a 1 Vpp sine wave. Sweep time is 100 ms and frequency range is 100 kHz to 1 MHz. Trigger condition is for a positive signal slope (rising) of less than or equal to 132 ns between -200 mV and +200 mV thresholds. This way, only the 1 MHz sine has a fast enough edge to trigger.


SDS824X HD_Trigger_Slope_1MHz
« Last Edit: April 20, 2024, 06:14:08 pm by Performa01 »
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto, Vitold

Offline Vitold

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 7
  • Country: sk
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #260 on: April 20, 2024, 06:29:37 pm »
As always, the thresholds are set by the trigger knob. Since there are now two of them, you can push the trigger knob in order to toggle between the two thresholds.

That is the thing I was missing - thank you!
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Offline Vitold

  • Newbie
  • Posts: 7
  • Country: sk
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #261 on: April 20, 2024, 07:13:10 pm »
I am sorry for all the questions, but I have my new SDS800X and I am experimenting with it - fun!

Why does it have "GPIB" in I/O Setting? I don't see a GPIB interface on the back of the scope.
 
The following users thanked this post: egonotto

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #262 on: April 20, 2024, 07:26:58 pm »
This question is better placed in the general thread:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds800x-hd-12-bit-dsos-coming/

 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, KungFuJosh, Vitold

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #263 on: April 20, 2024, 09:02:21 pm »
I am sorry for all the questions, but I have my new SDS800X and I am experimenting with it - fun!

Why does it have "GPIB" in I/O Setting? I don't see a GPIB interface on the back of the scope.
To support Siglents USB to GPIB adapter:

Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01, egonotto, Jacon, Mortymore, pdenisowski, Vitold

Offline pdenisowski

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 641
  • Country: us
  • Product Management Engineer, Rohde & Schwarz
    • Test and Measurement Fundamentals Playlist on the R&S YouTube channel
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #264 on: April 22, 2024, 06:32:50 am »
For dropout trigger type, trigger is configured with "State" for "Over Time Type" But menu says "Slope Rising | Falling"  I think it should be "Time High" and "Time Low" when "Over Time Type" = "State" (and "Rising" or "Falling" when Over Time Time = "Edge") This is confusing for me.
The terminology is correct. The Dropout Trigger watches for a transition within the specified Dropout time period. A transition can either be rising or falling. The trigger fires whenever the specified transition does not occur within the Dropout period.

I wonder if some of the confusion might be from the word "dropout" - some vendors (including R&S and also Tek, I believe) have a "timeout" trigger that triggers when the waveform stays above or below a given level for X amount of time.  There doesn't need to be a transition (i.e. a "slope") for the trigger to occur.  For example, I might want the scope to trigger if a line stays low for more than N seconds.

I presume the Siglent trigger works the same way (and the poster says it does work), just different terminology.

Out of all the T&M instruments I work with, scopes seem to be the least consistent in terminology between vendors. :)


Test and Measurement Fundamentals video series on the Rohde & Schwarz YouTube channel:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKxVoO5jUTlvsVtDcqrVn0ybqBVlLj2z8

Free online test and measurement fundamentals courses from Rohde & Schwarz:  https://tinyurl.com/mv7a4vb6
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #265 on: April 22, 2024, 08:00:37 am »
For dropout trigger type, trigger is configured with "State" for "Over Time Type" But menu says "Slope Rising | Falling"  I think it should be "Time High" and "Time Low" when "Over Time Type" = "State" (and "Rising" or "Falling" when Over Time Time = "Edge") This is confusing for me.
The terminology is correct. The Dropout Trigger watches for a transition within the specified Dropout time period. A transition can either be rising or falling. The trigger fires whenever the specified transition does not occur within the Dropout period.


I wonder if some of the confusion might be from the word "dropout" - some vendors (including R&S and also Tek, I believe) have a "timeout" trigger that triggers when the waveform stays above or below a given level for X amount of time.  There doesn't need to be a transition (i.e. a "slope") for the trigger to occur.  For example, I might want the scope to trigger if a line stays low for more than N seconds.

I presume the Siglent trigger works the same way (and the poster says it does work), just different terminology.

Out of all the T&M instruments I work with, scopes seem to be the least consistent in terminology between vendors. :)

I agree about terminology not having industry wide consensus...
And that can be confusing sometimes...

As for word dropout it is a valid signal condition and used a lot.  In communications, power electronics...
 
The following users thanked this post: pdenisowski

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #266 on: April 22, 2024, 08:15:44 am »
As for word dropout it is a valid signal condition and used a lot.  In communications, power electronics...

"Dropout" is obviously a valid and established term. But it covers only part of the scenarios well where this trigger type might be used. E.g. when monitoring a communication protocol, one may be interested in situations where it takes one station a certain (longer than usual) time to respond. There is nothing missing in the signal, no "dropout" in this case.

So I think "timeout" is the better designation here since it is more general.
 
The following users thanked this post: pdenisowski

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #267 on: April 22, 2024, 09:09:38 am »
For dropout trigger type, trigger is configured with "State" for "Over Time Type" But menu says "Slope Rising | Falling"  I think it should be "Time High" and "Time Low" when "Over Time Type" = "State" (and "Rising" or "Falling" when Over Time Time = "Edge") This is confusing for me.
The terminology is correct. The Dropout Trigger watches for a transition within the specified Dropout time period. A transition can either be rising or falling. The trigger fires whenever the specified transition does not occur within the Dropout period.

I wonder if some of the confusion might be from the word "dropout" - some vendors (including R&S and also Tek, I believe) have a "timeout" trigger that triggers when the waveform stays above or below a given level for X amount of time.  There doesn't need to be a transition (i.e. a "slope") for the trigger to occur.  For example, I might want the scope to trigger if a line stays low for more than N seconds.

I presume the Siglent trigger works the same way (and the poster says it does work), just different terminology.
Just think of it: in order to leave the low state in your example, there has to be a transition, right? And if that transition does NOT occur within the specified amount of time, then the trigger will fire.

However the Siglent dropout trigger has two modes of operation: State and Edge.

Yes, in case of Edge the Slope switch (Rising/Falling) is not quite right and should change to State (High/Low). The difference is that with State we actually trigger if there is no transition at all within the specified timeout period, whereas with Edge there might be still one additional transition that is the opposite to the trigger condition and consequently the final signal state might be high or low, but the relevant part is that the specified state change or transition does not occur within time.

EDIT: I've just requested an UI-change to get an adapted switch in State mode.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2024, 09:16:30 am by Performa01 »
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #268 on: April 22, 2024, 10:05:56 am »
As for word dropout it is a valid signal condition and used a lot.  In communications, power electronics...

"Dropout" is obviously a valid and established term. But it covers only part of the scenarios well where this trigger type might be used. E.g. when monitoring a communication protocol, one may be interested in situations where it takes one station a certain (longer than usual) time to respond. There is nothing missing in the signal, no "dropout" in this case.

So I think "timeout" is the better designation here since it is more general.

Timeout is "giving up on waiting for something we consider valid to come". It is maybe too general.

Dropout mostly implies completely missing signal or signal that drops out below defined threshold...

For your example,  there is no signaling (voltage transitions) most of the time, unless a side transmits something. What is idle voltage doesn't matter, because we know what idle voltage is considered inactive. In that case you can use Edge, Pulse, Interval or Dropout trigger.....



 

Offline eTobey

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 558
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #269 on: April 22, 2024, 10:22:06 am »
I found this interesting information:

For complete information, here are my measurements for the trigger rates during normal use with vector and dots display mode as well as sequence recording from the fastest timebase of 1 ns/div up to 100 µs/div.


SDS824X HD Trigger rate
Can someone please explain, why is there a discontinuity in the rate?
« Last Edit: April 22, 2024, 10:35:40 am by eTobey »
"Sometimes, after talking with a person, you want to pet a dog, wave at a monkey, and take off your hat to an elephant." (Maxim Gorki)
 

Online tautech

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28383
  • Country: nz
  • Taupaki Technologies Ltd. Siglent Distributor NZ.
    • Taupaki Technologies Ltd.
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #270 on: April 22, 2024, 10:42:36 am »

Dropout mostly implies completely missing signal or signal that drops out below defined threshold...
No, this is defined as a Runt.
Avid Rabid Hobbyist
Siglent Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@SiglentVideo/videos
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #271 on: April 22, 2024, 10:43:28 am »
Can someone please explain, why is there a discontinuity in the rate?

Could you please be more specific? What do you find unexpected? At which timebase setting(s)?

Edit: What I personally find unexpected is that the waveforms/s do not keep increasing monotonously as we go to faster time bases, i.e. reading the table bottom-to-top. I would expect them to do that, maybe saturating at some point, when the frame time becomes dominated by the post-processing and trigger re-arming time.

Instead the waveform rates keep increasing as we go from slow time bases to 50 ns/div, then start to drop again. Not a "discontinuity", but a non-monotonous behavious which is not obvious.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2024, 11:04:05 am by ebastler »
 

Online gf

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #272 on: April 22, 2024, 11:12:13 am »
Instead the waveform rates keep increasing as we go from slow time bases to 50 ns/div, then start to drop again. Not a "discontinuity", but a non-monotonous behavious which is not obvious.

Isn't that the point where interpolation joins in in order to display the trace?
 

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6510
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #273 on: April 22, 2024, 11:17:53 am »
Instead the waveform rates keep increasing as we go from slow time bases to 50 ns/div, then start to drop again. Not a "discontinuity", but a non-monotonous behavious which is not obvious.

Isn't that the point where interpolation joins in in order to display the trace?

But the non-monotonous change applies in dot mode as well. Interpolation should not be relevant there? And for the digital triggering I assume interpolation is used at any time base?
 

Offline eTobey

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 558
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #274 on: April 22, 2024, 11:26:44 am »
Edit: What I personally find unexpected is that the waveforms/s do not keep increasing monotonously as we go to faster time bases, i.e. reading the table bottom-to-top. I would expect them to do that, maybe saturating at some point, when the frame time becomes dominated by the post-processing and trigger re-arming time.

Not a "discontinuity", but a non-monotonous behavious which is not obvious.

Figured it out memory limit is reached and as you described the "overhead".

Yes, "discontiuity" was the wrong word.  ::)
"Sometimes, after talking with a person, you want to pet a dog, wave at a monkey, and take off your hat to an elephant." (Maxim Gorki)
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #275 on: April 22, 2024, 11:30:52 am »

Dropout mostly implies completely missing signal or signal that drops out below defined threshold...
No, this is defined as a Runt.

Different potato ..  >:D
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #276 on: April 22, 2024, 11:34:02 am »
Please suspend all talk about Wfm/s rates from that table based on early FW.
It will need to be re-tested again...
When currently tested FW is released...
 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #277 on: April 22, 2024, 12:19:36 pm »
Please suspend all talk about Wfm/s rates from that table based on early FW.
It will need to be re-tested again...
When currently tested FW is released...
Is it a bug then?

Where did I said that.

I said that discussing a speed of FW that had changes in meantime is waste of time.
It is equally relevant like discussing how tall was I when I was 18 while buying a coat today.
Irrelevant.

It needs to remeasured and then yap away all you like...

 

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #278 on: April 22, 2024, 12:43:29 pm »
Please suspend all talk about Wfm/s rates from that table based on early FW.
It will need to be re-tested again...
When currently tested FW is released...
Is it a bug then?

Where did I said that.

I said that discussing a speed of FW that had changes in meantime is waste of time.
It is equally relevant like discussing how tall was I when I was 18 while buying a coat today.
Irrelevant.

It needs to remeasured and then yap away all you like...

It is a simple question, that could have been answered with a word, no longer than two letters. And you did not answer it at all.   :o

You are provocateur, deliberately making inflamed pompous discussions..... Clickbait type of conversation.
I do not intent to participate.

I have a bad news for you.
In a short time there will be new FW.

That you will have to test all over again. Every. Single. Detail.
All of the stuff you did and said will mostly matter no more.

Have fun.
 
The following users thanked this post: tautech, RAPo

Offline pdenisowski

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 641
  • Country: us
  • Product Management Engineer, Rohde & Schwarz
    • Test and Measurement Fundamentals Playlist on the R&S YouTube channel
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #279 on: April 22, 2024, 02:11:12 pm »

Dropout mostly implies completely missing signal or signal that drops out below defined threshold...
No, this is defined as a Runt.

I've usually seen "runt" defined as a signal whose amplitude crosses a lower threshold twice in a row without crossing an upper threshold.  That is, a runt trigger requires defining a lower and an upper threshold (and optionally some other things, depending on the scope).

Again, maybe another terminology mismatch between manufacturers :)

Edit: very sorry (@ebastler) if this is in the wrong thread - so many SDS800X threads.  I promise to be better if it is :)
« Last Edit: April 22, 2024, 02:13:15 pm by pdenisowski »
Test and Measurement Fundamentals video series on the Rohde & Schwarz YouTube channel:  https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLKxVoO5jUTlvsVtDcqrVn0ybqBVlLj2z8

Free online test and measurement fundamentals courses from Rohde & Schwarz:  https://tinyurl.com/mv7a4vb6
 
The following users thanked this post: newbrain, 2N3055, BRZ.tech

Online 2N3055

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6663
  • Country: hr
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #280 on: April 22, 2024, 02:58:34 pm »
All you just could have done would be say "no", even if it wasnt true. Instead you are deceived by a wrong bias, still reading rudeness in almost every sentence i write. It seems that you did not really accepted my apology.

I'm not going to say "no" or "yes" just placate your ego's need to control my narative.
Even less I'm going to lie. Never, ever, even suggest that. Ever again.
I'm not going to lie even if I could materially gain from it.
It is called principles.

I answered "it doesn't matter, it is rendered irrelevant" because that is the answer.
Since modern digital scopes are based on FPGA cores, the Field Programmable Gate Arrays, it is possible for manufacturers to literally changed how hardware works. Significantly and fundamentally even.

To the point that it practically becomes a new revision of hardware, on logical level.

And since there was work done on hold-off in trigger, there were changes done on the very triggering.
Making previous measurement mere historic curiosity.

Until triggering is remeasured it is Tabula rasa to us. Complete mystery.
We.Simply.Don't.Know.
It might be slower than it was for all I know. Or faster. Or same. Or any other combination in-between.
If we knew exactly what was done, we could extrapolate educated guess.
But we don't know any details. So we don't know.

 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, KungFuJosh

Online Martin72

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5842
  • Country: de
  • Testfield Technician
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #281 on: April 22, 2024, 04:22:47 pm »
Can we move further discussion to the general SDS800X HD thread please? Let's try to keep the S/N ratio high here. Thanks!
+1
(Please)
 
The following users thanked this post: rf-loop, Performa01, newbrain, 2N3055, Bad_Driver

Offline Performa01Topic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: at
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #282 on: April 22, 2024, 04:27:50 pm »
Well, I don't want to unveil too many details about a still unreleased beta firmware, yet a decent hint shall be allowed...

You might have noticed that according to my review, the waveform update rate doesn't quite reach 120 kWfm/s, even though it is specified that way in the datasheet. People knowing me would not be surprised that this fact was in Siglents bug base the very next day.

This is just one of many bugs that have been addressed.
 
The following users thanked this post: newbrain, 2N3055, pdenisowski, KungFuJosh, Martin72

Offline eTobey

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 558
  • Country: de
Re: Siglent SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #283 on: April 23, 2024, 07:11:52 am »
I just had a occasion, where the measurement could not keep up with a trigger rate of less than 166 times per second. Of 10 possible measurements, only 3 were measured/counted.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sds800x-hd-bug-reports-firmware/msg5463370/#msg5463370

Is there any information about where the limit exactly lies?

It would be an idea to add this to the table in future measurement tests.
"Sometimes, after talking with a person, you want to pet a dog, wave at a monkey, and take off your hat to an elephant." (Maxim Gorki)
 

Offline eTobey

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 558
  • Country: de
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #284 on: April 23, 2024, 07:29:34 am »

SDS824X HD Trigger rate
What do the values in the third column mean? I just dont get it. Even after the next day. I only see a proportinal relation to the record length.


I have deleted my off-topic posts in here, and i suggest others to do the same.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2024, 07:37:29 am by eTobey »
"Sometimes, after talking with a person, you want to pet a dog, wave at a monkey, and take off your hat to an elephant." (Maxim Gorki)
 
The following users thanked this post: ebastler, BRZ.tech

Offline electronics hobbyist

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 147
  • Country: cn
    • sds800x-hd-review-demonstration-thread
Re: SDS800X HD Review & Demonstration Thread
« Reply #285 on: April 23, 2024, 08:22:44 am »
What do the values in the third column mean? I just dont get it. Even after the next day. I only see a proportinal relation to the record length.
What I see is the theoretical total number of points, which is the second column multiplied by the fourth column.
In fact, a frame of data is not just points on the screen, but also needs to search for trigger points, so the actual frame of data is more than the screen points.

Quote
I have deleted my off-topic posts in here, and i suggest others to do the same.
:-+

« Last Edit: April 23, 2024, 09:09:06 am by electronics hobbyist »
 
The following users thanked this post: Performa01


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf