Siglent SDS800X HD 12 bit DSO's

[skander36]

How could i have missed that? Yes its there, but i cant get a connection to it.

I wonder if the password is set up correct. It does not seem to be set? A empty password does not work either. Edit: "reset" is "setting the password" after you entered it. 

Any IT specialist here (see picture)? 

In the manual for 800X-HD there is described only Client option, this why I'm not sure.
On me it was work from first try with empty password and also with a password that I set later.
From the Wireshark capture I see the error: "STATUS_BAD_NETWORK_NAME". The means usually a that there's a typo in SMB sharename or servername that your're trying to access.
I suggest to first try to access the root directory with just the IP address : \\192.168.43.180\  and then "Share".
 

[eTobey]

I suggest to first try to access the root directory with just the IP address : \\192.168.43.180\  and then "Share".

Thats the solution!

To bad i already spend hours to find out myself, and not to wait that maybe other posted that information.

But i can give another information:
Since i use a Wifi bridge, if i use the scope as client, the files that get savde, will be save with the right date/time stamp!

[gburdzin]

Not 100% sure but that's what the guy on the phone said, but RCC do not charge for shipping and Electro-Meters do.  So it ends up being a wash on the cost.

So, Electro-Meters owner got in touch and we emailed back and forth a bit.  This afternoon he had his sales guy send me a "deal I can't refuse".  Delivery won't be until the 2nd week in May though, but that's okay as no one in Canada can do any better.

That sounds great    I ordered the SDS2104X HD along with the logic analyzer bundle for what I think is a good price, but I never got offered any additional discount.  I'm curious how much of a "deal" you got?

[BillyO]

PM Sent.

[tautech]

As long as I am actively working with a menu on the touch screen or with the mouse, closing it manually is fine: I just tap in some empty area of the screen.

Click/tap the menu header to close any menu.

[electronics hobbyist]

As long as I am actively working with a menu on the touch screen or with the mouse, closing it manually is fine: I just tap in some empty area of the screen.

Click/tap the menu header to close any menu.

Yes, that also works. Smaller target area, but it's always in the same place. Maybe I should get used to tapping there when I am working with the touch-screen menu.

But it does not change things when I am using the physical buttons as described: I still need to reach over to the touch screen to get rid of the menu again. It seems there is no physical button mapped to the "hide menu" function?

I think it would be neat if pressing the cursor/math/decode/measure button a third time would close the menu. So upon consecutive presses of the respective button, the menu would cycle through
(1) open the menu, function is ON;
(2) menu stays open, function is OFF;
(3) hide the menu, function stays OFF.

This will change user usage habits and should be avoided.
It seems that there are no physical buttons like this. A requirement can be made to have the Quick Button execute the show/hide menu or hide menu. 

[eTobey]

Not a big fan of adding yet another function to the Quick button. I already have a hard time deciding for one of mutiple useful options that can be assigned to it...

I would be cool to have 6 quick buttons! And a little area, where you can put stickers on. I dont mind to replace some existing buttons, because they can be assigned to those quick buttons. I need a force button!

[BillyO]

Hey folks just trying to get an idea how to interpret the specs for this scope.  In particular for this scope we have:

Vertical Resolution: 12 bits

and

Effective Number of Bits ENOB: 8.4 bit

What does this mean?  Does it mean we effectively only get 8.4 bits?

[BillyO]

Hey folks just trying to get an idea how to interpret the specs for this scope.  In particular for this scope we have:

Vertical Resolution: 12 bits

and

Effective Number of Bits ENOB: 8.4 bit

What does this mean?  Does it mean we effectively only get 8.4 bits?

Never mind.  I found this:https://docs.keysight.com/kkbopen/why-oscilloscope-enob-is-an-important-specification-to-always-consider-584427916.html

So, what's the ENOB of the SDS2104X-P?  That specification is not listed for that scope or my SDS1104X-E 

[pdenisowski]

Hey folks just trying to get an idea how to interpret the specs for this scope.  In particular for this scope we have:

Vertical Resolution: 12 bits

and

Effective Number of Bits ENOB: 8.4 bit

What does this mean?  Does it mean we effectively only get 8.4 bits?

I would strongly recommend this video

[radiohomebrewer2000]

Can the confirmation for Auto Setup be turned off (disabled)?

My old HP scope does not do this.

It really does hold me up having to go back and press Continue.

[tautech]

As long as I am actively working with a menu on the touch screen or with the mouse, closing it manually is fine: I just tap in some empty area of the screen.

Click/tap the menu header to close any menu.

Yes, that also works. Smaller target area, but it's always in the same place. Maybe I should get used to tapping there when I am working with the touch-screen menu.

But it does not change things when I am using the physical buttons as described: I still need to reach over to the touch screen to get rid of the menu again. It seems there is no physical button mapped to the "hide menu" function?

I think it would be neat if pressing the cursor/math/decode/measure button a third time would close the menu. So upon consecutive presses of the respective button, the menu would cycle through
(1) open the menu, function is ON;
(2) menu stays open, function is OFF;
(3) hide the menu, function stays OFF.

Honestly, how many ways are required to do exactly the same thing ?

While you are questioning physical operation of the DSO also consider remote/webserver use where there are no physical buttons.
Is Menu header toggling ON/OFF really inadequate ? 

[tautech]

Honestly, how many ways are required to do exactly the same thing ?

While you are questioning physical operation of the DSO also consider remote/webserver use where there are no physical buttons.
Is Menu header toggling ON/OFF really inadequate ? 

I gave my motivation, namely not wanting to reach over from the physical buttons (which are very convenient for switching off cursors etc., as explained) to the screen. I explicitly said that everything is fine when I use the touch screen anyway, and the same applies for mouse operation -- be it in front of the scope or via the remote interface.

You personally may not care since your usage patterns are different and you don't use the physical buttons in this situation anyway. But please do try to understand what I am asking and why, and don't try to tell me that I must not want this.

Take a step back to consider, of all the DSO's that use this almost identical UI....all the way to $20k DSO's, SDS800X HD has the smallest display and physical form factor yet operates in the same way as its bigger brothers.

Why should SDS800X HD need to operate in a different way when some buyers try out the low cost models before investing in upmarket models therefore consistency of UI becomes very important.

Yes, the Menu header is smaller in a 7" display DSO but not so small it cannot be used without issue.
We need reach for the front panel to press a button so touching the RH top corner is not more difficult than pressing a button, is it not ?

[mawyatt]

Take a step back to consider, of all the DSO's that use this almost identical UI....all the way to $20k DSO's, SDS800X HD has the smallest display and physical form factor yet operates in the same way as its bigger brothers.

Why should SDS800X HD need to operate in a different way when some buyers try out the low cost models before investing in upmarket models therefore consistency of UI becomes very important.

Very important point about consistent UI that younger folks and hobbiest often miss. Way back when HP was HP, and Tek was Tek, we wouldn't even consider anything that wasn't HP, Tek, or Fluke for the very reason of a consistent UI.

We almost never needed to "RTFM" even with a new instrument as things just worked a certain way that HP, Tek and Fluke had created for their instruments, and we had learned over time. Reps for "other" OEM brands would often get really mad when we would ask if "they" would pay for our learning time to get familiar with their equipment 

A consistent UI is very valuable IMO, and shouldn't be overlooked when deciding on a specific instruments or brand.

Best,

[pdenisowski]

Way back when HP was HP, and Tek was Tek, we wouldn't even consider anything that wasn't HP, Tek, or Fluke for the very reason of a consistent UI.

We almost never needed to "RTFM" even with a new instrument as things just worked a certain way that HP, Tek and Fluke had created for their instruments, and we had learned over time. Reps for "other" OEM brands would often get really mad when we would ask if "they" would pay for our learning time to get familiar with their equipment 

A consistent UI is very valuable IMO, and shouldn't be overlooked when deciding on a specific instruments or brand.

I agree with your sentiment entirely - there is a lot to be said for a consistent UI and manufacturers ignore this at their own peril.

But having worked for HP as an apps engineer for test and measurement instruments, I had plenty of customers complain about the HP user interfaces as well

[mawyatt]

But having worked for HP as an apps engineer for test and measurement instruments, I had plenty of customers complain about the HP user interfaces as well

HP even had a few "Lemons" back then. Recall a new function generator that the HP rep said was really great, we wanted another HP3325, but he persuaded us to get the new model, as the HP3325 weren't available and back ordered. We didn't need it right away so it sat in the equipment stock room for almost a year, when we did bring it out the output spectrum was horrible!!  Wanted to return it but were told to send it to HP repair. Repair got back with us and said it was OK, better than most, and sent it back

We contacted the rep to return it but were told it's too late for a return/refund. In the meantime we had a $1/2M order being processed for a high end VNA, SA, MW Generator & some other stuff. After a couple months the HP rep called and asked how the order was doing, we told him it was on "hold" and we were evaluating some R&S equipment instead!! Couple days later a new HP3325 magically appeared at "no charge"

That was the only really bad piece of HP we can recall back then, same rep kept trying to get us to use their scopes, but we didn't like them compared to Tek.

Best,

[tautech]

A consistent UI is very valuable IMO, and shouldn't be overlooked when deciding on a specific instruments or brand.

Indeed, now all the latest models share the same UI which certainly makes my life somewhat easier when setting up probes, installing new FW and configuring equipment before dispatch.

Like what you might ask, setting NTP IP, system time and location, install any options, H Pos behaviour, probes to 10x and compensated, V/div and timebase to 500us/div so when new owners that should know their stuff get a NIB product they can quickly discover it's ready for use !

Takes but a few minutes and then the company sticker gets attached then back into the box with a product catalogue for our clients further study ....just in case there's any other equipment they need. 

[mawyatt]

A consistent UI is very valuable IMO, and shouldn't be overlooked when deciding on a specific instruments or brand.

Indeed, now all the latest models share the same UI which certainly makes my life somewhat easier when setting up probes, installing new FW and configuring equipment before dispatch.

Like what you might ask, setting NTP IP, system time and location, install any options, H Pos behaviour, probes to 10x and compensated, V/div and timebase to 500us/div so when new owners that should know their stuff get a NIB product they can quickly discover it's ready for use !

Takes but a few minutes and then the company sticker gets attached then back into the box with a product catalogue for our clients further study ....just in case there's any other equipment they need. 

Valued added distributor

Best,

[electronics hobbyist]

Can the confirmation for Auto Setup be turned off (disabled)?

My old HP scope does not do this.

It really does hold me up having to go back and press Continue.

At present, you can execute it by pressing the "Auto Setup" physical button twice.
The Wanted Features list have added whether a second confirmation is required.

[Performa01]

At present, you can execute it by pressing the "Auto Setup" physical button twice.
The Wanted Features list have added whether a second confirmation is required.

I would say the confirmation is not needed on the higher class instruments like SDS1000X HD and up, since the potentially dangerous "Default" and "Auto Setup" buttons are nicely recessed and cannot easily be pushed by accident. But on the SDS800X HD these buttons are very prominent and a careful setup of the instrument could be ruined by a single sloppy button-press.

As always in such cases, it might be a good idea to place a switch in the Utility -> System Settings, where we can select whether we want a confirmation or not. Maybe even an option to disable Auto-Setup for the educational market, where students should learn to setup their instruments optimally and not relying on an uninspired auto-setup. In this case re-enabling over the menu has to be locked via password. This would be sensible especially for the low cost instruments like the SDS800X HD, as they're likely to become popular in the educational market.

[electronics hobbyist]

I would say the confirmation is not needed on the higher class instruments like SDS1000X HD and up, since the potentially dangerous "Default" and "Auto Setup" buttons are nicely recessed and cannot easily be pushed by accident. But on the SDS800X HD these buttons are very prominent and a careful setup of the instrument could be ruined by a single sloppy button-press.

As always in such cases, it might be a good idea to place a switch in the Utility -> System Settings, where we can select whether we want a confirmation or not. Maybe even an option to disable Auto-Setup for the educational market, where students should learn to setup their instruments optimally and not relying on an uninspired auto-setup. In this case re-enabling over the menu has to be locked via password. This would be sensible especially for the low cost instruments like the SDS800X HD, as they're likely to become popular in the educational market.

Completely agree, I have also noticed this. If it is an recessed button, this confirmation is not necessary. Currently, adding an optional setting is the best solution.
The X-E has an educational mode that can disable autoset、measure..., and other products are believed to support it as well.

[2N3055]

Can the confirmation for Auto Setup be turned off (disabled)?

My old HP scope does not do this.

It really does hold me up having to go back and press Continue.

At present, you can execute it by pressing the "Auto Setup" physical button twice.
The Wanted Features list have added whether a second confirmation is required.

Removing confirmations on functions that reconfigure many settings on a scope you just took 10 minutes to setup is bad idea in my opinion.

"This operation will format your drive C:. Do you want to continue?" Definitely good to have confirmation sometimes.  Auto and Default button should have confirmation, if you ask me...


If I may give advice to people posting here:

To add some new feature or change some way of doing things on whole platform of scopes takes resources(because if they change how windowing works, for instance, it is now like 10 scopes to be changed, regression tested etc..) .
Sometimes significant changes, which might not be obvious from user perspective.

Feature requests that expect features of 3x higher class of scopes are unrealistic. Let's be real here.
Changes in UI, behavior etc. that are based on personal preferences and/or simply wanting for a device to work in different way just because are also not realistic.
If you want a scope that works exactly like "that other brand" it means you should buy "that other brand". One manufacturer will never exactly copy other one for various reasons.
Every new product will have it's own idiosyncrasies. That is just fact of life.

What needs to be reported are bugs : if you enable Video triggering and it doesn't work, spend some time figuring out what happens so you can report it in a way that will be reproducible.
Any bug that is reproducible, immediately goes into Siglent's pipeline. No kidding. Sometimes takes time to make fix and for fix to reach FW update, but bug report goes into pipeline in a matter of hours.
They fix bugs, because that is what is their responsibility and they wish to have good reputation of well working products.
That is something that is in their interest.
But bug must be a bug to be fixed. A malfunctioning function. Fact that you think something should work differently is not a bug, per se. It might be, but also you might just be a picky eater... Just saying.

As for feature suggestions, let me be blunt: these are not feature requests. Those are suggestions and wishes.
If you don't have separate paid contract in addition to your bought device, where you a paying for the service of developing custom instrument, manufacturer is not obliged to listen to all the whimsical musing of all of the 7 billion people on the planet.
Go to Keysight or R&S and demand features... We have Paul here from R&S and he can explain how it works. If manufacturer can make some changes they will gladly do it, if possible (technically) and if it is appropriate to the device class and if it fits in their long term strategy.

As for suggestions and wishes, it is wise not to get lost in trivial.
Ask for things that from experience it was proven that this and that would make your life easier. If a function that is 3 levels deep in menu is something that you use all the time and it is waste of time, and if 100 users in the world ask for it, it might be considered.
If one person doesn't like it, and 10000 other users don't care, there is large chance it will not be considered. Just being realistic here.
Also, explaining use case and providing a good rationale behind the feature request is necessary to make a case for the feature.
To put it simply, explain why it is USEFULL to have a feature. Fact that you simply like something or not is not necessarily relevant.

Otherwise we get to story of the boy who cried wolf all the time...

[pdenisowski]

Maybe even an option to disable Auto-Setup for the educational market, where students should learn to setup their instruments optimally and not relying on an uninspired auto-setup. In this case re-enabling over the menu has to be locked via password.

The RTB2000 has had this feature for many, many years already:

https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/webhelp/RTB_HTML_UserManual_en/Content/622eab43fb1040a9.htm#d803048e19117

But to be honest, I'm not sure how widely it is used. 

I work in test equipment for a living and use autoset constantly as a starting point when configuring a scope.  I'm not sure I entirely understand all the people who think autoset somehow makes people lazy or prevents them from learning how to configure scope settings properly.  Autoset is the beginning, not the end

This would be sensible especially for the low cost instruments like the SDS800X HD, as they're likely to become popular in the educational market.

I'm curious to see whether these "low cost" instruments start penetrating the academic market in the United States.  Most universities seem to either still buy instruments from the "major" manufacturers, or they have their students buy their own "personal" all-in-one instruments such as the Digilent Analog Discovery.  Are any universities in the United States buying Siglents, etc. instruments in bulk for their labs? 

[eTobey]

I would say the confirmation is not needed on the higher class instruments like SDS1000X HD and up, since the potentially dangerous "Default" and "Auto Setup" buttons are nicely recessed and cannot easily be pushed by accident.

I would totally disagree! 

I am not using those buttons really much, so a confirmation dialog would not be annoying at all. Also, there might be the case where i hit the button intentionally, but the confirmation dialog would give me the chance to ask myself "am i really finished with that part of measurement?".

But wait: wasnt there someone that said, this dialog confirmation could be changed?

[pdenisowski]

Auto and Default button should have confirmation, if you ask me...

Or at least not be right next to each other - can't count the number of times I accidently hit "Preset" when I meant to hit "Autoset" 

Go to Keysight or R&S and demand features... We have Paul here from R&S and he can explain how it works. If manufacturer can make some changes they will gladly do it, if possible (technically) and if it is appropriate to the device class and if it fits in their long term strategy.

There is a lot that goes into deciding what features we add to our instruments.  Some planned features may not be available at launch but are added early on in the product life cycle.  Some features are added at customer request or to address a competitive situation.  Some features are added but at additional cost (license), especially for newer technologies that didn't exist when the product was launched or for technologies that represent a significant engineering expense. 

One thing that we don't typically do is (radically) change the GUI or user interface unless absolutely necessary.  For every customer who wants you to change something, there is another customer who likes things just the way they are.

There is also the issue of test automation - changing the way things are done in a GUI sometimes also necessitates changing the underlying SCPI commands, and that is a big no-no for customers who make heavy use of automation.

So yeah, it's a complex situation.  That said, we always welcome comments, feedback, suggestions, etc. from all of our customers, including hobbyists.  Yes, the feedback from large customers tends to carry more weight, but some of our best feature enhancements have come from "average" customers.  I have had the "every-single-customer-I-meet-with-wants-this-feature" conversation more times than I can remember

Edit:  sorry, forgot to address the "device class" part.  Yes, like all manufacturers we have different "classes" of many instruments such as scopes and some features are only implemented on certain classes of instruments, although this is also somewhat flexible.  As others have said, you can't (or at least shouldn't) expect high-end features on an entry level scope.  There are often significant technical / architectural reasons for this - it's not a marketing / sales strategy