Which oscilloscope for hobbyist? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pm
content: Hello!I know I'm not the first to ask "which oscilloscope"... but here's my story:I’ve been researching a good oscilloscope to buy. My last one was a hand-me-down Tektronix, so massive that it had two handles. (and you really needed to grab with both hands!)I have plenty of experience with "real" oscilloscopes, although none with what would be considered modern technology, and certainly no experience with a USB device.My background is in electronic engineering – at one time industrial process controls and monitoring systems, although professionally these days I’m purely a software engineer. In my spare time I enjoy learning and experimenting with Raspberry Pi, Arduino, MSP430, Bus Pirate and various other electronic gizmos.I’m looking for a good hobby-grade oscilloscope, and perhaps even a logic analyzer included or separate. I know that many online comments seem to indicate that USB oscilloscopes should be avoided. But I wonder how many of the authors of those comments are serious professionals with requirements well beyond what I would need?So here’s what I am looking at (in no particular order):Link Instruments MSO-19http://shop1.usbdso.com/MSO-19-MSO-19.htmAnalog Arts SL917http://www.analogarts.com/selection-guid/oscilloscope-with-arbitrary-waveform-generator-and-logic-analyzer/sl917-100-mhz-oscilloscope-10-mhz-awg-100-mhz-logic-analyzerQuantAsylum QA101https://www.quantasylum.com/content/Products/QA101.aspxBitScopehttp://www.bitscope.com/product/BS10/Saleae Logic 8https://www.saleae.com/and of course:Rigol DS1054Z (DS1074Z Plus?)http://www.rigol.com/prodserv/250/For a “real” oscilloscope, it seems the Rigol is the hands down winner. Also the most expensive of the above list; Also the most portable.I'm wiling to pay for a good solution, but I'm fairly certain I don't need a $1000+ setup to use occasionally at home. It also doesn't need to be portable.For the specifics listed above:I only recently stumbled upon the Analog Arts; looks cool, but not a lot of other comments found online.The QuantAsylum I have been looking at for quite some time, but the QA101 still seems to be not yet ready for actual sale.BitScope. People seem to either love it or hate it.Saleae. Seems cool. American made.Any feedback, comments or suggestions would be appreciated.Thanks in advancegojimmypi

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 11:16:04 pm
content: Of all of those, the DS1054Z in its altered state has to be the overall winner in my book.The Bitscope is a bitshite mostly down to the software. Hardware's well built though.The Saleae is over ratd in my opinion, there is very limited triggering capability, and you need the much more expensive pro models for reasonable sample rate.I don't know about the other models other than a quick glance, but I'd be confident in saying that if you had a DS1054Z and any of the others, the only one that would be sitting on your bench after a week would be the Rigol.

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 16, 2015, 11:43:53 pm
content: thanks for your comments."bitshite" - that's funny; I learned a new term.is it the annoyance of having to fire up a PC that makes USB 'scopes so unappealing?could you clarify "altered state" with regards to the DS1054Z ?

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 01:53:54 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmThe root problem with USB devices is that a general purpose desktop environment is very cumbersome with a complex instrument like an oscilloscope. It's awkward and time consuming when compared to simple knobs and buttons. It becomes very tedious to click on hundreds of different things to control your instrument, imagine what it would be like to point, click, select from drop down box, re-point, click, select from drop down box, re-point, click, select from drop down box, etc. hundreds of times and you can begin to get a feel for the problem. The second problem is the lag, on my Analog Discovery it feels like it takes over 100ms from the time I click on something for that action to take effect, it also lags at updating the screen. I love myAnalog Discovery, but I wouldn't use it as my main instrument.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmStrong no. It is limited to a single shot sample rate of 200 MSa/s. This will limit you to a usable bandwidth of about 40 MHz (200 MS / 5 = 40 MHz). If you choose to go with a USB instrument make sure it uses USB 3.0 at a minimum.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmStrong no, limited to a single shot sample rate of 100 MSa/s. Disregard bandwidth, single shot sample rate is king when it comes to digital oscilloscopes. For every MHz bandwidth you need preferably a minimum of five times the sample rate to faithfully reproduce a waveform. i.e. 100 MHz bandwidth requires 500 MSa/s. The more samples you have the better, for instance, I bought a 4 GSa/s (4000 MSa/s) scope. You need extra sampling to prevent aliasing.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmStrong no. Again, the problem is it's limited to 200 MSa/s. You would need a USB 3.0 interface to get higher sampling rates.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmStrong no. Yet again, the problem is it's limited to 100 MSa/s. Without the sample rate to support it, the 100 MHz bandwidth rating they claim is essentially a lie. Nyquist requires an absolute minimum of 200 MSa/s with a sin(x)/x interpolation algorithm to reproduce a 100 MHz signal, anything less and you will be aliasing. I can not over stress how important it is that you have a high single shot sample rate. sub-sampling/equivalent time sampling are NOT the same thing as single shot/continuous sampling.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmIt would make a mediocre logic analyzer, but as an oscilloscope it's pure crap. The analog side is limited to 10 MSa/s! Hell no. As an LA, you would need the Pro version to get good results.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmThis is the only product you've listed that has an acceptable sample rate. If these are your only choices the Rigol is the clear winner.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmAbout a month ago I was in the same boat you are in, and yesterday I ended up plopping down $2594 for a Rigol MSO4014. This was the minimum that I felt was necessary to do this hobby justice. I evaluated the Rigol MSO/DS1000Z and honestly I thought it felt like a toy, but it may work for your needs. I also evaluated the Rigol MSO/DS2000 and this would have been perfect, if only it had 4 channels. I don't think you want to spend what I did, so what I would recommend for you is the Rigol MSO2072A, right now this scope is selling for $929.25 over atwww.tequipment.netwith a special 25% off code. PM me and I can send you the code. If you don't have a signal generator the MSO2072A-S might be a better option for you. I highly recommend the Rigol's because that is what the community knows, everyone flocked around them because nearly all of them are hackable to higher bandwidths. For instance, the MSO4014 that I bought can be hacked to 500 MHz, on a western made Keysight 500 MHz would cost you $14k, so the Rigols offer extremely good value for the money... exactly what a hobbyist wants.The following Rigol models are all 25% off right now at tequitment:DS1074Z-SDS1102DDS2072A-SDS2102A-SDS2202ADS2202A-SDS2302A-SDS4012DS4034DS4054DS6062MSO2072AMSO2072A-SMSO2101AMSO2102AMSO2302AMSO2302A-SMSO4014

author: FlyingHacker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 05:42:56 am
content: Stick with a CRT and get a Tek 2232 Dso. Wonderful scope.If need bells and whistles, and scopes that wipe your a$$ then maybe the Rigol. Otherwise I would stick with an old school scope.

author: CustomEngineerer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 08:37:44 am
content: Quote from: FlyingHacker on October 17, 2015, 05:42:56 amI've got a Rigol and I've never been able to get it to wipe my ass, though the probe hooks are wonderful for picking dingleberries. Any idea how much Rigol sells the wiper upgrade for? If the Rigol rep would have mentioned that I would have definitely preferred to have that option over the AWG.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmIt really depends what you are wanting to do with it. I think a little more details about what exactly you are wanting it to do would help people make a suggestion. In addition to asking I would also suggest looking through a couple of other threads on this subject to really get as much info as you can before you decide to spend your money.I know at least a couple of the usb scope manufacturers (for sure picoscope) have demo's of the software that comes with their instrument that you can download for free to get a feel of what using it would be like. The quality of the software has always been one of the biggest complaints I've heard about the usb scopes/LAs. After trying a couple software demos is when I decided that I really wasn't interested in a usb scope.Also, if you do end up deciding to get a USB scope, getting one with USB3 is a good idea, but when I was researching them around a year ago most of the ones that had 3 charged a premium for it and some didn't even take advantage of it.edit: The usb logic analyzers seem to get recommended more than the usb scopes. I've very rarely seen someone actually recommend getting a usb scope on this forum.

author: TheSteve
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 08:57:57 am
content: I'm not a big Rigol fan but several friends who wanted a scope for hobby purposes have bought the Rigol DS1054z, done the free 30 second mod to up the bandwidth to 100 MHz and add the advanced features and all are very happy. I have one as well and an very impressed for the price. You'll even get a discount for being an eevblog member if you buy from tequipment.netThere are many choices but for the price point it's going to be very tough to beat the 1054

author: nowlan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 09:21:33 am
content: Stay safe with the herd. The rigol is best bang for buck.4 channels lets you deal with SPI bus, since you seem to be into digital/microcontrollers.The problem with USB devices is driver support if you upgrade your OS etc.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 09:25:14 am
content: Quote from: Howardlong on October 16, 2015, 11:16:04 pmYep, I'd bet that way too.

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 17, 2015, 11:34:32 pm
content: First, thanks for all the great responses, particularly since I'm not the first to ask the "which oscilloscope" question.Quote from: FlyingHacker on October 17, 2015, 05:42:56 amyes, the scope I used at work a bunch of years ago was a Tek and the 2232 looks like a similarly priced one as compared to the Rigol (but used?), and wow... 15 years old. surely things have evolved since then, and the Rigol has twice the number of inputs. Still, hard to go wrong with a Tek, eh?http://www.tek.com/datasheet/2232-digital-and-analog-oscillscopeQuote from: nbritton on October 17, 2015, 01:53:54 amyes, that's exactly the explanation I was looking for. Dave's video clearly demonstrates the cumbersome interface. That's the kind of thing one never really understands until experiencing it first hand (or seeing someone else). Thanks for the comment.Quote from: nbritton on October 17, 2015, 01:53:54 amI am so glad you mentioned this! I was looking at the Analog Discovery device some time ago, and had forgotten about it. Dave has an awesome video on this:https://youtu.be/Aymumu3mYl8I thought it was cool when reading online, but after watching Dave's video, I think I'm sold on this!Quote from: nbritton on October 17, 2015, 01:53:54 amThanks for this suggestion. After your comment, I looked very seriously at one of the higher-end Rigols. I'm not sure I want to spend that much, not to mention Dave has a compelling argument to not get the MSO:https://youtu.be/MC9_4mpqVgUQuote from: nbritton on October 17, 2015, 01:53:54 amThis was another great suggestion. The signal generator I have (one-of-a-kind, that I custom built years ago and packed away in the garage), is probably not a great piece of equipment in today's world. So I looked really hard at the Rigol's with the built in signal generator and/or the MSO feature.Dave made a really good point about how 16 channel logic analyzers today are not needed as much as a couple of decades ago (like when I was getting my degree; the only place I've ever used a logic analyzer was in school); As Dave pointed out: Not a lot of equipment designed these days is full of separate, discrete chips... do I really need that many channels? so I'm thinking the 3 or 4 channels on the Rigol should do for most occasions, and the Analog Discovery for occasional tinkering with more channels.So in the end, I'm thinking the awesome-price Rigol DS1054Z as my go-to scope, plus the Analog Discovery device for the occasional signal generation and logic analyzer. What do you think?

author: usagi
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 01:51:53 am
content: i've done the cheapy scope thing before, they are all too compromised and usability blows.finally got a rigol DS1054Z and never looked back.

author: Muxr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 02:03:41 am
content: Yeah it's not even close really. Rigol's DS1054z changes the game at that price point. 1Gs/s 4ch scope at less than $400 is a steal.

author: mtdoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 02:10:40 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 17, 2015, 11:34:32 pmThat's a great combination for a budget hobbyist lab.

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 04:55:19 am
content: The Analog Discovery is a steal if you can get it at the academic pricing. For students they throw in a $65 Analog Parts Kit for free, and for $10 they will also bundle a copy of MultiSim Student Edition. That's $384 worth of gear for $169.You don't need to be enrolled in a class to get the academic pricing, all you need is an academic email address... what Digilent told me verbatim is: "If there is no specific class requiring this purchase, you can just put "none" in the academic verification field that asks for it."

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 06:48:48 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on October 18, 2015, 03:56:06 amThe truth is you might be able to get by with 100 MHz, but the problem is your measurements won't be accurate. You have to remember that a bandwidth specification is measured to -3dB, so by the time you get to 100 MHz your signal amplitude is already 30% off. Another thing you need to remember is that a square wave is the infinite fourier series summation of the fundamental frequency and all of its odd harmonics, so this means to accurately display a square wave on your screen, from a pragmatic standpoint, you need to capture at least the 3rd, 5th, and 7th harmonics. Furthermore, you'll be aliasing harmonics above the sampling rate, which could possibly give you a false impression. Thus in theory a 100 MHz scope is only accurate up to about 10 MHz on square waves.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 07:07:09 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmThey are correct.Main reasons:a) A mouse is the wrong interface for an oscilloscope (how many musicians play on-screen instruments with a mouse?)b) Requiring a PC always on your workbench is a pain in the assc) The supplied softwarewillbe awful. Good software costs a lot of money to write, cost-cutting 'scopes don't have it.Youcanget them with good softwareandthat don't cut corners with the electronics, but... they cost more than a DS1054Z and you're still stuck with point (a).Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmAnd ... useless as an oscilloscope. It doesn't even have a real time view mode to see what you're looking at.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmWinner!PS: Ignore the "A scope isuselesswithout at least 1GHz bandwith!" and "analogue scopes were good enough for my father, they're good enough for you!" crowd.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 16, 2015, 11:03:52 pmAnalog Discovery is a great gadget for experimenting and learning stuff.

author: CustomEngineerer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 07:11:29 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 17, 2015, 11:34:32 pmThe general consensus seems to be avoiding the higher end Rigol gear (specifically DS4000 & DS6000). I don't have experience with them so can't say for sure, but they seem to be consider a buggy toy for the money you have to spend on them. The DS1000Z & DS2000A series scopes seem to be so popular is because they are decent hardware (for the price), easily hackable, and cheap. While the DS1000Z & DS2000A are just as buggy as the DS4000 ($2300 - $6500) & DS6000 ($5900 - $9600) because don't cost near as much, $300 - $1000 the bugs don't seem to be as big of a deal.I also wouldn't recommend getting the Rigol builtin signal generator unless you don't have the space for a standalone unit. I bought the DS2072A-S with the builtin signal generator and have regretted not putting the extra $300 it cost towards a decent standalone AWG. The interface is clunky to use while also trying use the oscilloscope to measure a signal. The specs aren't that great, it doesn't do sweeps and its annoying to have to plug into the generator connectors on the back of the scope. While it is probably better than an older home built generator, considering what you can get for around the same price it just isn't worth it except for very specific use cases (no bench space, need all-in-one portable unit, probably a few others). Don't get me wrong, I really do enjoy the DS2072A scope, just not the builtin signal generator.Edited to remove link to Dave's MSO video

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 07:16:31 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on October 18, 2015, 07:00:42 amRight, because most of the time digital is only concerned with the signal being high or low, any low bandwidth scope can do that. However, to really see exactly what your circuit is doing you need a higher bandwidth scope.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 07:23:31 am
content: Quote from: CustomEngineerer on October 18, 2015, 07:11:29 amWould you have a different view if the AWG BNC was on the front panel?

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 07:40:48 am
content: Quote from: CustomEngineerer on October 18, 2015, 07:11:29 amI agree with that. It's not that the higher end Rigols are worse, it's just that people pay more for them so they expect more from them. I myself am worried that my new DS4000 won't meet my expectations, because for me $2594 is a lot of money. The annuitization for this scope is $22 a month for the next ten years, so for that price it better deliver.Quote from: CustomEngineerer on October 18, 2015, 07:11:29 amI totally agree with this, the built-in signal generator is mediocre at best when compared to stand alone AWGs. You would be better off taking the money you would spend for a -S model and putting that, plus a little extra money, towards a Siglent SDG2042X. It pains me to say that because I don't like Siglent gear on a matter of principle because they produce really shitty software, but in terms of price/performance I think the SDG2000X is going to be the new benchmark to beat.

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 07:47:47 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on October 18, 2015, 07:34:08 amThe Analog Discovery is not a 5 MHz scope, the reality is its frond end is capable of upwards of 50 MHz @ -3dB. In practice though its 125 MSa/s sampling rate limits it's usable bandwidth to 25 MHz. It basically says this in page 16 of its technical reference manual:Quotehttps://www.digilentinc.com/Data/Products/ANALOG-DISCOVERY/Discovery_TRM_RevB_1.pdf

author: CustomEngineerer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 07:52:25 am
content: Quote from: tautech on October 18, 2015, 07:23:31 amNo, its an annoyance having the connectors on the back but I have worked around it. My biggest problem with the builtin is that for around the same price I could have gotten a decent bench AWG, followed closely by how annoying it is to try and adjust the generated signal while also trying to capture the signal. I also have needed a sweep function a couple of times recently that pretty much all the bench units around that price seem to have. I have been looking at standalone AWG's recently mainly because of this and have come pretty close to pulling the trigger on one a couple of times. Honestly if Rigol just added a sweep signal (linear and logarithmic) I probably wouldn't be looking for a standalone for now (still wouldn't crazy about the builtin, but would probably be good enough for what I need). Though not even sure if thats something that could be done in a firmware upgrade anyways, so not like I am expecting it.

author: CustomEngineerer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 08:04:34 am
content: Quote from: nbritton on October 18, 2015, 07:40:48 amAgreed. When I was looking at the DS2072A, I really tried my best to justify the cost of the DS4000 because I really wanted the 4 channels. Kind of funny, the main thing that kept me from doing it was the extra $300 for the extra 2 channels. Then I go and end up spending the extra $300 for the sig gen in the DS2072A-S. This was a little before the DS1000Z's came out or I probably would have gone that route, but I am glad that I got the 2072.Quote from: nbritton on October 18, 2015, 07:40:48 amI feel the same way as long as Siglent doesn't totally screw up the firmware (which seems to be a fairly good possibility that they will).

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 09:21:21 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on October 18, 2015, 08:11:55 amThat square wave looks piss poor in my opinion. The edges are all rounded because at 20 MHz the OWON, or the Analog Discovery, isn't able to fully display/capture the 7th harmonic. Do a 3 MHz signal from the Analog Discovery and measure it on you best scope.

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 09:28:52 am
content: Quote from: mtdoc on October 18, 2015, 02:10:40 amTotally agreed. While the AD has its limitations, it is a sound piece of test gear in its own right and will cover off your AWG requirement and most LA requirements you might have. The limitation of the LA is mostly down to limited memory and to a lesser extent it only has basic triggering options and the sample rate is limited to 100MSa/s, which may or may not be a problem depending on what you're doing. For the vast majority of hobby stuff, I'd say it's not going to be a problem. The software's pretty good too, nice and responsive and reasonably intuitive.If you're unable to make the academic pricing, for some reason Microchip Direct has had it priced less than most other outlets in the past, currently $219 vs $279.Regarding the AWG on the DS1000Z-S, as an AWG for my purposes it ain't half bad, but having the connectors on the back as well as having to battle through the scope menus to get at it isn't perfect. If I used an AWG every day it would drive my nuts. You can do sweeping of sorts setting a channel on FM while modulating it with a triangle but it's not a perfect solution. I ran pigtails from the back to avoid having to access the rear of the scope all the time. I found that it's a compromise at the end of the day, but mostly about usability than functionality.

author: CustomEngineerer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 10:03:06 am
content: Quote from: Howardlong on October 18, 2015, 09:28:52 amWould you mind giving a little more detail on how you fake the sweeping? Sounds like it could be useful in a pinch.I also did something similar for the generator connectors to avoid having to reach back behind the scope to hook up. I've got the scope a couple of shelves up on my work desk and mounted some bnc chassis mount feed through adaptors at project level on my desk. I keep the 2 generator connectors hooked to those so when I need the generator I can just connect to the ones on the desk. At first I was a little worried that the extra cable length and going through an extra terminal might affect the signal but I have tested it and haven't noticed any problems.

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 10:09:15 am
content: I don't know if the DS2000 is the same as the DS1000Z, but try this...o 1MHz sineo set the modulation to FMo modulating frequency 1kHzo modulate with triangleo deviation 1MHz

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 12:19:30 pm
content: Quote from: blueskull on October 18, 2015, 07:00:42 amI'm sorry but that's nonsense, BW is as much as important as sample rate.Here's are some screenshots for a quick test done with a 15MHz pulse (50% DC, generated by an Agilent 33522B) probed by a 3GHz 20GSa/s scope (LeCroy WavePro 7300A):Sampled at full bandwidth with 20GSa/s:Sampled at 200MHz bandwidth with 20GSa/s:Sampled at 20MHz bandwidth with 20GSa/s:It's pretty obvious that the 20MHz shot doesn't resemble the original signal, which is understandable since important frequency components of the original signal are left out, and that even a very high sample rate can't overcome the limitations imposed by a too low analog bandwidth.Now, just for fun, let's see what impact the sample rate has:Sampled at 200GS/s (RIS, something like ETS):Sampled at 20GS/s:Sampled at 10GS/s:Sampled at 5GS/s:Sampled at 2.5GS/s:Sampled at 1GS/s:Sampled at 500MS/s:Sampled at 250MS/s:Sampled at 100MS/s:Sampled at 50MS/s:We can see that the waveform remains valid all the way down to 250MS/s, which considering that the bandwidth necessary for capturing all relevent components of a 15MHz square wave is 120-150MHz, is logical:So in short, yes, BW does matter, and no, high sample rates are no substitute for bandwidth.QuoteYou've seen something which may or may not resemble what the original signal looks like, and it may even have worked for you, who knows, but that doesn't mean a 100MHz scope will show you all relevant components of a 20MHz pulse.QuoteI agree with nbritton, that's a really piss-poor waveform, and unless your signal generator actually produces such crap signals then what you see on the scope is completely useless to assess any of the relevant signal parameters. You can get similarly valid results by reading from fish guts.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 12:56:23 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on October 18, 2015, 12:19:30 pmThe two should match. If there's a serious mismatch then that's a red flag. You have to wonder who designed the device.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 12:58:57 pm
content: QuoteIs the the first ever sighting of a manufacturerunderselling the bandwidth?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 01:20:03 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on October 18, 2015, 12:56:23 pmExactly. A chain is only as good as its weakest link.

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 04:56:47 pm
content: Attached are some screenshots from my Analog Discovery measuring a 5V 1 MHz, 3 MHz, and 10 MHz square waves.

author: mtdoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 05:07:37 pm
content: Quote from: nbritton on October 18, 2015, 04:56:47 pmAre you using the AD's AWG to produce the square wave?. If so, try a different signal source.

author: Rupunzell
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 05:08:27 pm
content: 20 Mhz @ 10mV square wave from a Tek 2102 pulse generator (circa late 1960's). Display using a Tek 7104, 7A29, 7B10 = 1Ghz real time.Note the signal fidelity, low noise and wave form fidelity and image quality.Gaussian response, no input filter worries, no worries about sampling rate issues, No fiddling with touch screens and menus, concerns about issues directly related to analog to digital conversion are gone as there is no analog to digital conversion. Just direct, accurate real time response and display of the input signal.While DSO-MSO have their place in the test and measurement world, there is also a place for high quality CRT based time domain instruments.Bernice

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 05:20:54 pm
content: Quote from: Rupunzell on October 18, 2015, 05:08:27 pmIt's an illusion...

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 05:24:25 pm
content: Quote from: nbritton on October 18, 2015, 04:56:47 pmI don't own an AD but I would have expected slightly better than that...The thing that makes it look really ugly is that it's not using sin(x)/x interpolation in the display. Is there any way to turn that on in the software?

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 05:34:51 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on October 18, 2015, 05:24:25 pmWell three things to realize, first the AD is an educational tool, second running both the AD's AWG and DSO eats up double? the sample rate, and thirdly I ran the test wrong, the default square wave on my AD's AWG is from +5V to -5V... I should have changed the DC offset.

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 05:56:35 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on October 18, 2015, 12:19:30 pmThanks for spending the time to post that information & screen snips!

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 05:59:59 pm
content: Can I play too?Scope: Rigol DS1054Z "unlocked" to 100MHz bwSignal source: DataPulse (Systron Donner) DP-101Connection: 2 lousy 50-ohm BNC patchcords spliced together with double-female, with Rigol 50-ohm thru-terminator at scope end

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 06:05:53 pm
content: Ok, I've spent hours on this (Dave has some really awesome video reviews!)... and I plan to order from amazon today (really can't beat the prime shipping, return poliucy, and 3% cash back on amazon/chase card)So for others still researching and reading, I'm including some additional information:First the Rigol page:http://www.rigolcanada.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/ds1000Z/ds1054z/And Dave's feature list video:Dave really expresses his opinion of the DS1054z at Time Index 31:30https://youtu.be/W2qdtQkBKhc?t=1898I had considered the other scopes below, however each had drawbacks: all are only 2 channel with limited storage depth. Hard to beat the Rigol 4 channels at 24meg max (6 meg when using all 4 channels)Siglent SDS1102CML Digital Storage Oscilloscope, 100MHz, 7" TFT-LCD Displayhttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GQNNL1UB&K Precision 2190D Digital Storage Oscilloscope, 1 GSa/s, 100 MHz Bandwidthhttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00SS0A0JUOwon SDS7102 Deep Memory Digital Storage Oscilloscope 2-channel with VGA and LAN interfacehttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006G54K3GTektronix TBS1052B-EDU 50 MHz, 2 Digital Channel Oscilloscope, 1 GS/s Samplinghttp://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00KAKI58Y(I admit it was hard not to go with the usual gold-standard in oscilloscopes: Tektronix)The 2232 mentioned in a prior post, although old, does have impressive specs: Sample Rate - 100 MS/s per channel. Effective sample rates up to 2 GS/s in repetitive storage mode (0.5 µs/div and faster in single-channel mode, 0.2 µs/div and faster dual-channel).(it must have been expensive in its day). But not a lot of storage: Record Length - 4K or 1K selectable. 2K or 512 per channel in dual channel mode.http://www.tek.com/datasheet/2232-digital-and-analog-oscillscopeThere's also apparently some interesting software available (Thanks Dave, for including this in the video!), that can talk to the DS1054z via Ethernet LXIhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/free-ds1052eds1102e-software-for-linux/msg690621/#msg690621In particular the stuff posted by marmad looks potentially very useful, if it works with the new DS1054z:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/software-tips-and-tricks-for-rigol-ds200040006000-ultravision-dsos/Quote from: Karel on June 30, 2015, 08:44:42 amHere's a link to the DSRemote open source linux software:https://github.com/Teuniz/DSRemote(I'm ever more excited to order my DS1054z now!)From Dave's video, it seems the Rigol software is really dreadful. Not a showstopper, but could have made this an even more awesome product.If I were to add a killer feature: an HDMI screen output would make the Rigol a ridilously cool scope.Thanks everyone for the really great input!

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 06:06:14 pm
content: Quote from: nbritton on October 18, 2015, 05:34:51 pmYes, I'm not expecting greatness...Quote from: nbritton on October 18, 2015, 05:34:51 pmYep. That's more like I'd expect to see for that bandwidth and no sin(x)/(x) display.

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 06:06:25 pm
content: @Bernice...Gotta love the 7104!"A one GHz _analog_ scope was good enough for my daddy..... "

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 06:11:40 pm
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 18, 2015, 06:05:53 pmRigol's remote control software? Yes, it's pretty bad. I guess you can't have everything for $400.I don't have any real reason to use it though. If I need a screenshot I just put a USB stick in the front connector and press the 'print' button.Quote from: gojimmypi on October 18, 2015, 06:05:53 pmAlso: 8 inputs, 1GHz bandwidth and a signal generator(!)

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 06:12:48 pm
content: @gojimmypi:Please allow me to recommend TEquipment as your USA vendor for the DS1054z. You really _can_ beat Amazon, I think. (Someone will send you the EEVblog TEquipment discount code if you ask for it....)ETA: Two things: I had to return my original DS1054z under the TEquipment warranty (bad glitch on one channel) and had a replacement in hand in less than a week. And I just took delivery of an Extech LT300 light meter that someone else ordered for me from Amazon... and it arrived with a previously-opened and resealed box, a completely dead battery, and a clumsily reattached screenprotector film..... but it was sold as new.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 06:27:27 pm
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 18, 2015, 06:05:53 pmFYIThe B&K is a re-branded Siglent.

author: Mosaic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 07:10:38 pm
content: Regarding the issue of SPI requiring additional inputs to decode on a DS2000 series scope.Technically true but practically not essential it seems as often one of the channels is occupied by dummy bytes:http://www.bitwizard.nl/wiki/index.php/SPI_versus_I2C_protocols

author: mtdoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 07:14:35 pm
content: Quote from: nbritton on October 18, 2015, 05:34:51 pmWell, you peaked my curiosity - so here is my AD generating and simultaneously recording a 10 MHz square wave (I had forgotten the AWG could do that high of frequency!) and for reference, the same signal fed into my 200 MHz bandwidth Rigol.I'd say the AD does pretty darn well all things considered.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 09:37:04 pm
content: Quote from: mtdoc on October 18, 2015, 07:14:35 pmYep.

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 11:08:06 pm
content: another somewhat related question: is there any reason to have the 50 ohm adapter for a scope being used on relatively low frequencies (<100MHz) ? what specific circumstances require a 50 ohm adapter?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 11:25:04 pm
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 18, 2015, 11:08:06 pm99MHz is not "relaively low frequency". A 15pF scope probe with a 6 inch ground lead will resonate and ring at ~100MHz.If you have a "low impedance Z0 probe" (which has ahigherimpedance than a so-called "high impeadance probe", the you will need a 50ohm termination.FFI, seehttps://entertaininghacks.wordpress.com/library-2/scope-probe-reference-material/

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 11:36:14 pm
content: Quote from: blueskull on October 18, 2015, 11:31:06 pmYes and no. The real problem in this case is the input capacitance of high-Z (standard) probes and 1M Ohm oscilloscope inputs. As a rule of thumb: that input capacitance kills any chance of measuring signals (containing harmonics) over 100MHz correctly.Even when using a 50 Ohm terminator parallel to tens of pf isn't going to work right so using a (feed-through) terminator isn't going to help at very high frequencies. This is why you'll find 50 Ohm inputs on any decent oscilloscope having a bandwidth over 150MHz.

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2015, 11:52:20 pm
content: thanks for the replies!Say I had a hi-z scope (the DS1054)... and a 50 ohm coax cable signal that I wanted to measure....Would I be able to plug the high-z probe into a coax "T" with one side terminated with a 50 ohm terminator, and the other receiving the 50 ohm signal - and get a proper measurement?

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 12:08:03 am
content: for anyone looking for a hobbyist scope, I found this pdf file while googling for "50 ohm" stuff... lab notes from a 2007 UC Berkeley Class:Function Generator and Oscilloscope - In this lab you learn how to use the oscilloscope and function generatorhttps://inst.eecs.berkeley.edu/~ee100/su07/lab/lab2-FunctionGeneratorOscilloscope/eecs100_eecs43_lab2-fncn_generator_scope.pdfperhaps someone might find it useful

author: TheSteve
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 12:30:54 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 18, 2015, 11:52:20 pmDepends on the frequency - if it isn't too high this may be fine depending on what you want to do.Can you give us a more detailed example?

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 12:56:00 am
content: Quote from: TheSteve on October 19, 2015, 12:30:54 amSay a 50 ohm terminator like this:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00G10MKCOand a "T" like this:http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000510YX/plug the male end of the T into the scope, put the terminator on one of the female connectors of the T, and use a Hi-Z scope on the other female connector of the T.as I talk through this, I think this is actually a silly idea, no? The scope will be an unterminated part of the transmission line causing problems. (it has been a long time since my EE classes. did I mention I work as asoftwareengineer these days?)

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 01:44:38 am
content: Quote from: blueskull on October 19, 2015, 12:10:33 amAnother Dave video! Awesome. thanksI also came across this National Instruments white paper "Select the Correct Oscilloscope Probe for Your Application":http://www.ni.com/white-paper/14825/en/edit: as internet links sometimes change, I've attached the NI Whitepaper

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 02:23:27 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 18, 2015, 11:08:06 pmI see you've gotten all kinds of theoretical answers to your question. Here is an actual test case. I already posted the scopeshot _with_ the 50 ohm thru-terminator up above, but I'll put another one here. The specific circumstance in this case is when you are scoping something with an output impedance of 50 ohms -- like most signal/function generators --, and with a cable connection of 50 ohm impedance.Scope: Rigol DS1054z, unlocked to 100 MHz bw.Signal source: DataPulse (Systron Donner) DP-101, output impedance 50 ohms, set to produce a 5 V (by knob markings) positive going square pulse train at 10 MHz.Connection: 50 ohm coax BNC patchcords RG-58/U, two pieces "spliced" with a double-female BNC, total length about 6 feet.Terminator: Rigol 50-ohm thru-terminator (aka impedance adapter), 18 dollars from TEquipment:http://assets.tequipment.net/assets/1/26/DimRegular/Adaptor2.JPGFirst shot below iswithterminator at the scope channel input. Second shot iswithoutthe terminator, using the _exact same_ settings on the pulse generator.Moral: You pays your money, and you takes your chances.

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 02:33:41 am
content: And just for the sake of completeness, here's a shot using a BNC T connector and a 50 ohm end-terminator at the scope, as suggested above.(ETA: But _not_ using a high-z probe (which would indeed be silly) , rather using the same BNC patch cable connection as my above shots.)

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 02:47:20 am
content: Quote from: alsetalokin4017 on October 19, 2015, 02:23:27 amThat's great info, thanks for taking the time to post it.In this case, you knew your signal source was 50 ohms. When poking around in a random circuit board, I assume the high impedance setting is preferred? Do you have an example of a circuit-analysis situation where there's not an obvious 50 ohm BNC connector.... where one would need an impedance adapter?thanks again for your responses.cheers

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 02:55:41 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 19, 2015, 02:47:20 amYou are welcome. Yes, in most cases with low frequency signals -- defined by me as being 10 MHz and under -- one would normally use the standard 10x attenuated passive probe and the 1Megohm scope input impedance, as this setup will load the circuit under test the least. In most cases. This is probably why the Rigol designers didn't put a selectable 50ohm-1Megohm input impedance on their low-bandwidth scopes.I'm not an EE (although I sometimes pretend to be one on YouTube, hah) but I'm sure that there are more qualified people here who can answer your question better when higher frequencies, active probes, and better scopes are concerned.I will caution you with another quote from my favorite physicist, though..."It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."--Richard FeynmanBottom line: Get the Rigol 1054z, unlock it to 100 MHz bandwidth, and also order the 50 ohm adapter-terminator of your choice, and use it when you are patching directly to your FG, or whenever you think it may be appropriate.

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 03:16:45 am
content: And even more completeness:First shot below is the PG's output, scoped with the stock Rigol probe, 10x setting, connected to the PG's BNC output jack, no other termination.Second shot is the "silly" connection: the probe connected to the PG as above and connected to the scope with a "T" and 50 ohm end-terminator. Blecch fooey.Of course the PG's settings have not changed in this whole test series.

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 06:30:06 am
content: You'll also find the response will change depending on the length of 50 ohm coax from your AWG to the 10X 10M ohm probe point due to the reflections incurred.Another test you could do is to run an arbitrary length of 50 ohm coax from the AWG, use a 50 ohm thru terminator (or T piece plus terminator) at the other end of the coax from the AWG, and probe with the 10X 10M ohm probe at the thru terminator. The result should be pretty similar to probing with the 10X probe directly at the AWG with the thru terminator.

author: TheSteve
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 06:32:05 am
content: Hah - I thought he meant to use the T connector so he could have the load terminated properly and have a port to connect the tip end of the probe in to. Which is totally fine until the frequency gets too high. Obviously connecting the BNC end of the probe into the T is just a bad idea all around.

author: CustomEngineerer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 07:21:20 am
content: Quote from: Howardlong on October 18, 2015, 10:09:15 amAhh, I see what you mean. That does work on the DS2000, thank you for sharing.

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 08:09:05 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 19, 2015, 01:44:38 am

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 08:57:34 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on October 18, 2015, 12:56:23 pmWell, 25 years ago I knew the people that designed HP's front ends, and theycertainlyweren't fools. A 1GHz 40ns-25MS/s (or was it 25ns-40MS/s?) scope was very useful when observing the signal integrity of sub-nanosecond edges.If you want to consider the maths of sampling real-time signals, don't forget that if you have an AM audio signal on a 100MHz carrier, you only have to digitise it at ~40kS/s to completely reconstruct the signal. Of course the sampler has to have bandwidth >100MHz.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 10:08:50 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on October 19, 2015, 08:57:34 amNo, they certainly weren't fools, but they had to work with limitations of the technology that was available back then (although 25yrs ago HP already made 1GSa/s scopes), and which no longer exist in 2015.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 01:05:53 pm
content: QuoteAgreed. AFAIK HP had (low sample rate) sampling scopes with 1GHz bandwidth back in 1960.My old HP vector voltmeter uses similar front end technology and offers 1GHz BW and it dates back to the mid 1960s.

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 04:29:06 pm
content: Quote from: alsetalokin4017 on October 18, 2015, 06:12:48 pmI appreciate the recommendation. I still ended up ordering the DS1054z on amazon, but TEquipment was the seller. I added the scope to the cart from the eevblog page, as it appears Dave gets a percentage of the sale. I recently learned folks can donate to him as well, which I plan to do (this information is usually hidden in the "show more" section on youtube):Support the EEVblog through Patreon!http://www.patreon.com/eevblogDave is really awesome! I really like the videos and hope he continues to create content.I did send an email to TEquipment asking about warranty repairs. Here's their response:QuoteAnd so with amazon, I get the same 30 day deal - but return shipping is free. It is a ridiculously cool system that I've used on occasion. Amazon let's you print a return label online, then just take the box to a UPS store for free returns. (plus there's a UPS store walking distance from my home).So TEquipment still received my business, just via amazon. I got a 3% cashback from amazon, Dave gets a cut, and I have piece of mind that I don't have to pay expensive shipping costs if I need to return it. Oh, and did I mention it will arrive on Wednesday? 2-day Prime shipping is awesome. Add to this I cut the cable a few years back and amazon Fire TV is the only thing on my screen. But I regress, this is sounding more like an amazon commercial.This has been really crazy. I spent more time shopping for a $400 oscilloscope than I think anything else I've bought in recent memory. lol. If it had been a Tek, I don't think I would have hesitated so much. My only concern is the tiny size. Again, an HDMI cable on the back would be just fantastic.I'm really excited to play with my toy! I haven't been this excited since my Heathkit Multimeter package arrived in the mail when I was 14.(and yes, I still have it!)Thanks again everyone for their input, particularly since I certainly was not the first one to ask the "which oscilloscope" question.

author: Rupunzell
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 04:59:36 pm
content: History of Sampling technology:http://w140.com/kurt/50_years_sampling.pdfhp used Ghz sampling technology in more than just the 8405A Vector Volt Meter, hp 3406A sampling RF voltmeter, hp 4851A Vector Impedance meter (study the 4815A probe) and others, circa early 1960's technology.The video folks were pushing slightly past Nyquist using pulse discriminator and got useable information recovered.Sampling information systems are not new, GHz sampling systems have been around in instrumentation and systems for over 50 years now. What has changed is the data centric technology world of today putting real world analog conversion to bits of data central to many information systems today.-Yet most tend to forget the ways of Nature remains analog.BerniceQuote from: G0HZU on October 19, 2015, 01:05:53 pm

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 05:13:50 pm
content: I came across this article & thought I'd share for any future readers of this thread regarding the high impedance vs 50 ohm oscilloscope input topic:"What's Wrong with my Function Generator? (hint: nothing)"http://www.effectivebits.net/2011/12/whats-wrong-with-my-function-generator.html

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 05:15:44 pm
content: Quote from: Rupunzell on October 19, 2015, 04:59:36 pmAs soon as Shannon formalised the sampling theorem in a way that engineers took notice of (as opposed to the various formulations of the same theorem by various people in maths and statistics many years before) people were busy making the narrowest aperture samplers they could for various jobs. Oscilloscopes were an obvious use.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 05:20:41 pm
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 19, 2015, 05:13:50 pmOn a similar topic there is a thread here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/show-us-your-square-wave/

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2015, 06:34:32 pm
content: Quote from: blueskull on October 19, 2015, 05:30:43 pmYes but these are essentially niche products which come with tons of limitations (plus the general annoyance of being USB scopes), however as you said they are also relatively cheap.QuoteNo, but then, low cost isn't always a top-most priority, and the benefit of having a capable real-time scope often outweighs the price difference.At the end of the day it comes down what you want to do and how big your budget is.

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 08:15:51 am
content: Now that my DS1054z is in transit, I realized I forgot to ask as important question: what sort of transient response should I expect from adigitaloscilloscope? Will I be able to see switch bounce noise? or if some spike occurs between samples, I'll never know, right? I think I have only ever used an analog scope. But a 100MHz scope should seemosttransient stuff, right?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 08:43:22 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 20, 2015, 08:15:51 amYes.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 10:50:57 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 20, 2015, 08:15:51 amUnless you have exotic applications (e.g. photon counting), everything is analogue. Digital circuits merely interpret analogue signals in a quantised fashion - usually but not always binary.The principal measure of a scope's performance is the bandwidth of its analogue front end measured in Hz, which includes amplifiers, filters and (where appropriate) sampler. The number of samples per second is, to a large extent, a marketing tool.Yes, I do realise that one of the fundamental limitations on shrinking transistors is that they get too small to contain "enough" electrons at any instant - and so their operation becomes probabilistic.

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 08:42:51 pm
content: thanks for the replies on transient response. although the timestamps don't show it, I woke up at 2:00am (!) with a sudden thought of not just reconstructing waveforms, but what happens with the unexpected glitch and how adigitaloscilloscope might handle those noise spikes. I ended up finding and reading this article:Sin(x)/x interpolation: an important aspect of proper oscilloscope measurementshttp://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1272526Well, the new scope should arrive tomorrow... I'm anxiously awaiting a chance to take it for a test drive! I'm interested in any suggestions on tests for proper operation. thanks!

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 08:51:49 pm
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 20, 2015, 08:42:51 pmIt is and it isn't.With a fast enough sampling rate Dot mode is more accurate.QuoteLet's hope you made the right decision.See if you can add to this list:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-(ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models)-bugswish-list/

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 08:58:51 pm
content: One feature of the 1054z that I really like is the "Pass-Fail" mask function. You can display a waveform, and generate a mask and squeeze it down so that it narrowly bounds the waveform, then "stop on fail" and any glitch that causes the waveform to exceed the boundary of the mask will stop the scope and save the glitch on screen.For example:

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 09:10:44 pm
content: Quote from: alsetalokin4017 on October 20, 2015, 08:58:51 pmThe DS1000 series mask performance is quite poor as rf-loop states here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/evaluating-oscilloscopes-for-best-waveform-update-rates/msg737860/#msg737860BTW, he has one and has tested it.

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 09:19:46 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on October 20, 2015, 09:10:44 pmWell.... since I _want_ the scope to stop when it sees a glitch, I don't see the problem that rf-loop is complaining about. As I show in the video above, it works as I want it to work. YMMV of course. It's a 400 dollar, low bandwidth scope. What does rf-loop expect for that price and performance level? The Siglent SDS2000 that he compares it to costs more than twice as much and its display doesn't look nearly as nice.

author: gojimmypi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2015, 11:30:52 pm
content: Quote from: alsetalokin4017 on October 20, 2015, 08:58:51 pmThat's cool; How did you get such a crisp video of your 1054z screen?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2015, 05:05:38 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 20, 2015, 08:42:51 pmThe article is 6 years old and from a time where cheap entry-level scopes didn't necessarily have sin(x)/x interpolation, but these days I doubt you'll find many that don't have it. Of course the basics discussed are still correct, but it fails to show the limitations of sin(x)/x, as certain conditions need to be met for it to produce a valid waveform.Here's an (also older but still valid) paper discussing the limitations of interpolation:http://cdn.teledynelecroy.com/files/whitepapers/wp_interpolation_102203.pdf

author: alsetalokin4017
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2015, 07:24:08 am
content: Quote from: gojimmypi on October 20, 2015, 11:30:52 pmYou're kidding, right? My old Panasonic video camera and the various transcoding and compressions used give me a pretty fuzzy video picture, not at all as nice as Dave's videos or others from more modern kit.Oh... maybe you mean the screenshots toward the end of the video. Those are made by sticking a USB stick in the scope's hole and pressing the "print" button (under the Help button) which saves the screen as a .png (or .jpg) file to the stick. Then I insert the saved images into the video using the OpenShot nonlinear video editor on my Linux computer.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2015, 09:46:00 am
content: Quote from: alsetalokin4017 on October 20, 2015, 09:19:46 pmIt works ok IF you use it as you told. But, if example want counter for pass and fail you can not trust at all this pass/fail ratio.This is just as "know your equipment limits" for avoid mistakes.

author: nbritton
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 09:00:23 am
content: I just got my MSO2072A in the mail and the one thing that stands out the most is the 8 inch screen is too small. I have the scope stilling at the back of my desk and the fonts on the screen are so small that you can barely read the words. I have to squint and move in just to decipher what's on the screen. Very annoying, I'd hate to see what it looked like on the DS1054Z because that one only has a 7 inch screen.Also within just a few hours of use I'm already frustrate that it doesn't have 4 channels.

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 03:09:29 pm
content: I can sympathise: as a comparison, the 7" on the 1054Z is indeed small: I generally like high density, but this is a little extreme for daily use for me, but an acceptable compromise for portability in the field. The 9" on the MDO3000 I have I find just about perfect for bench use (same resolution as the 1000Z & DS/MSO2000 series at 800x480). At the other end of the scale, the Agilent 7000 I have is a 12" beast at 1024x768 and it's a bit like Duplo in comparison.As a comparison, for quite some time for my main day to day scope I used up until quite recently an Agilent 54642D 2+16 MSO, even though I had a selection of other 4 channel scopes about, because the UI on those scopes is just so easy to use and responsive. For almost all I did it was fine, but when messing with things like SMPS, I found I missed the extra analogue channels, and I had a 54622D hooked up to the trigger permanently in case I needed it. By the way, the wavefrom display on those scopes is 1000x255 inside a 7" 4:3 CRT, it is always super clear, but there's a lot less unnecessary chrome and other clutter on the screen than the Rigols, but that's what people expect these days.

author: Gixy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2015, 04:09:55 pm
content: Quote from: nbritton on October 22, 2015, 09:00:23 amHi,As mentionned elsewhere in this forum, cases where you really need more than 2 analog channels are very rare. Don't forget that you have with your MSO2072A 16 digital channels with which you can observe the digital buses and discrete signals of your circuit.Having also an MSO2072A (now MSO2302A...), I find only the measurement texts below the traces too small; furthermore, the character font used for those texts is less readable (Times New Roman or equivalent), and looks bad compared to others texts on the screen.Don't worry, you have made a good choice and will have a lot of fun with this scope!Denis

author: khtwo2002
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2016, 04:59:23 am
content: Quote from: nbritton on October 22, 2015, 09:00:23 amDont know if this reading lens could help:http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pocket-3X-A4-Full-Page-Magnifier-Sheet-Fresnel-Lens-Reading-Map-Magnifying-Loupe-/351293110162?hash=item51cab37792:g:71sAAOSw1vlUwK0e

author: khtwo2002
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2016, 05:15:55 am
content: Quote from: nbritton on October 22, 2015, 09:00:23 amProbably this one shows clearer about the magnifying effecthttp://www.ebay.com/itm/XL-Full-Page-Magnifying-Sheet-Fresnel-Lens-3X-Magnification-Magnifier-UF-/161859864168?hash=item25af998668:g:RGkAAOSwl9BWINJO

author: ornobian
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: October 13, 2018, 07:54:24 pm
content: In my opinion, Rigol DS1054Z will be the winner of the hobbyist. You will like it.

author: Gandalf_Sr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 14, 2018, 01:46:49 am
content: Yup, you're gonna dig the 1054Z, best $300 I ever spent.