| Products > Test Equipment |
| Siglent SDS1104X-E In-Depth Review |
| << < (16/48) > >> |
| tautech:
--- Quote from: rf-loop on March 12, 2018, 04:31:48 am --- --- Quote from: Performa01 on March 11, 2018, 10:14:20 pm --- I've never had a SDS1000X+, so I cannot comment on it. However I happen to have a picture of the SLA1016 connectors: --- End quote --- Physically connector looks same as SPL1016 used with SDS1102X+. At this point I´m quite sure SPL1016 including cables is same. --- End quote --- It is, I am very sure. I still have SDS1002X+ option SPL1016 in stock. I compare the MSO head I have with this photo from Performa01 and they are identical AFAICT. BUT then I look at the grabbers offered with/for X+ or X-E MSO HW and wonder why Siglent must squeeze last $ from X-E MSO option and then supply grabbers better suited to DIP use rather than SOIC. :-// :( Those I have for SDS1kX+ MSO option are black and Siglent branded but appear the same as the grey EZ-HOOK USA made, and have dual side entry connections too. :) If these are Chinese copy of some better brand then they look much better suited to be included with X-E MSO HW than what Perfoma01 has that might better be described as from a Aliexpesss bargain bin. |
| pascal_sweden:
Where are the pictures in the above posting? |
| Performa01:
--- Quote from: tautech on March 11, 2018, 10:33:33 pm ---Do you happen to have a SCSI drive cable and can maybe check if it's the same 68 pin/plug format ? A cable such as this could then offer a better solution to the gawd awful ribbon cable: https://www.ebay.com/itm/SCSI-3-Ultra-Cable-68-pin-HD68-Male-to-68-pin-HD68-Male-HP-166298-038-AF-0-60m/391907302964?hash=item5b3f7ede34:g:6GkAAOSwNsRZ41iJ --- End quote --- It's been nearly two decades that I've last used SCSI and it has been SCSI II back then. I think this has smaller (50 pin?) connectors. SCSI III might be worth a try, but I most definitely don't have such a cable. |
| tautech:
--- Quote from: pascal_sweden on March 12, 2018, 03:17:55 pm ---Where are the pictures in the above posting? --- End quote --- Is that better ? Added ;image flags for some browsers to see. |
| Performa01:
There has been a discussion about unexpected inaccuracies when using AC-coupling in another thread: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/differences-in-measurements-50hz-keysight-1000x-scope/ This made me think that my performance verification for the split path input buffer in the Siglent SDS1104X-E might have been incomplete and I should look into this once again more deeply. My initial concern was that I might have overlooked something, because I’ve only checked the frequency response above 10Hz and only with DC-coupling. I did not check Ac-coupling and thought there might be a hidden issue, maybe even below 10Hz, especially since the corner frequency for AC-coupling is rather low at ~1.2Hz on the SDS1104X-E. I’ve used the FFT with peak hold and an external AWG to perform a 500 second sweep for the frequency range of 1Hz to 100Hz in order to get a high resolution frequency response graph. I did this twice, first for DC-coupling, storing the result as the blue reference trace REFA and a 2nd time for AC-coupling, which is the white math trace in the screenshot below. SDS1104X-E_1-100Hz_DC_AC As can be seen, there is actually a difference between the DC trace (blue) and the AC trace (white) and despite the low corner frequency the maximum deviation of the rms voltage is some 2.7% around 70Hz. Knowing this, I’ve checked the difference at 70Hz in the time domain, see screenshot below. SDS1104X-E_70Hz_DC_AC Once again, the DC-coupled signal has been stored as a reference trace REFA and the AC-coupled signal is the green CH.4 trace. The automatic measurements indicate 600mVpp for DC-coupling (REFA) and 612mVpp for AC-coupling (Ch.4). This would be a difference of 2% or 3LSB. As a conclusion, while there is a difference, it is hard to spot in the time domain without automatic measurements and 3LSB is certainly bearable. Since I’ve played with a split path buffer design a little while, I know that it is not easy to get a result as good as this, so my hat goes off to Siglent R&D for that. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |