SIGLENT SDS1102CM and EasyScope - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 31, 2011, 09:14:10 pm
content: Well, I went for the SIGLENT SDS1102CM in the end.Suits my pocket and 2Mpts of memory to boot.I haven't had long to play with it but it seems fine as far as I can tell using an old synth resonant filter as a sine source and the probe square wave o/p.The replacement for my old blown signal generator still hasn't arrived yet.The only annoying thing with it so far is the EasyScope 3.0 software.The bundled CD version is in Chinese, it links OK but I can't read the buttons.I downloaded English versions from SIGLENT, ATTEN and LeCroy but none of them will link properly with the scopeI get one Green light only when I test the connection and then the Link Fails when I hit the connect button.Looks like communication is only going one way.I've emailed SIGLENT but in the meantime I think I'll try installing the English version to a memory stick and then copy files over to the main install on my HD one by one and see if I can get it to work AND speak English.Any constructive ideas about how to fool EasyScope into speaking English and working at the same time will be most welcome.

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2011, 02:10:32 am
content: You'll be relieved to learn I'm sure that I've sorted it.The Chinese version of EasyScope 3.0 Ver 3.01.03.01.09 can indeed be fooled into operating in English.The installer won't proceed when another version is installed so I first installed an older English language version Ver 3.01.03.01.02 onto a USB stick, then removed the stick and uninstalled what was left through Vista Control Panel.I then installed the Chinese 09 but replaced the set.ini (that carries the language command) from the stick along with some likely looking .dll files which probably hold the English characters.Second or third time of bodging and she sprang into life in full English AND talking to the scope.Result!!Not an elegant solution but hey ... brute force and ignorance has it's uses

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2011, 12:56:13 pm
content: Happy for you. Give us a review of its performance when you can.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2011, 05:24:38 pm
content: I'm be interested to hear a review too. It does look tempting, perhaps a little too good to be true.

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2011, 07:17:43 pm
content: Aarrgh! A review? No pressure then ...I guess I could take a few pics, I'm not rigged for video but I think I could squeeze 640 x 480 20fps out of my Canon A470 still camera.Bottom line will be that it works.I'll give it some thought.Here's the spec page to be going on with:http://www.siglent.com/en/product_show.asp?articleid=159ORhttp://aprilatsiglent.en.ecplaza.net/2.aspI would say that Siglent replied promptly to my email enquiry about the EasyScope software.That's a good sign in my book.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2011, 07:45:20 pm
content: Yes, if you can, if you do I think you'll be the first and only Siglent review on eevblog, if not many forums or review sites too.Quote from: Kozmyk on September 01, 2011, 07:17:43 pm

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2011, 09:16:58 pm
content: Going from the website, there are three models: 60MHz, 100Mhz and 150MHz. I wonder how hackable they are?I couldn't find the 150MHz model on ebay. The lowest prices I could find for the 60MHz and 100MHz are $350 and $420 respectively. If I bought one, I'd probably just get the 100MHz rather than hack because it seems more trouble than it's worth.

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 02, 2011, 02:01:27 am
content: I think I may have found the catch in the bucks vs features vs quality on this scope.The waveforms displayed are unstable, jittery.Even low frequency signals move around a bit.I've recorded a bit of it compared to my Kikusui 5020 20MHz analogue scope.Apologies for the video quality. I needed to get in closer and use less zoom but it was too late at night to go shifting furniture.I don't know what to do about the scope now.I'll try some other sources but I think it's the scope that's at fault not the signal source.Am I being too fussy?Maybe it's a shortcoming common to all these budget DSOs?

author: johnnyk126
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: September 02, 2011, 04:21:01 am
content: I think that this jumping on digital scope comes from the difference in display technology.On cheap digital scope without extra features enabled pixels are only on or off. Waveform is redrawn few times per second and there is no fadeout (unless persistence is enabled). There is only one waveform drawn at a single time, and that causes this jumping, because consecutive redraws are in different places and previous waveform is instantly removed. Sharp pixel image enhances this jumping badly.On analog scope because of persistence of phosphor jittery waveforms produce blurry lines or double images. They seem to be stable because they are not turned on and off instantly.Try to enable persistence and play with intensity/brightness settings, this should it bring more to analog behavior.

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 02, 2011, 12:38:05 pm
content: Do you think that it's Just aliasing type noise?At the trigger point, which on the DSO is shown in the middle of the screen, the display is rock steady.The jitter appears to get worse as you get further away from the centre.Altering persistence does cover some of the digitisation noise but not the jittering of a whole vertical line on a square waveI'll certainly play around with it some more before I decide if I like it or not

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 02, 2011, 04:19:58 pm
content: Quote from: johnnyk126 on September 02, 2011, 04:21:01 amThat makes sense to me too and is exactly what I'd expect to see from a digital 'scope hooked up to an unstable waveform.Quote from: Kozmyk on September 02, 2011, 12:38:05 pmBy the looks of it you used an uncompensated probe. Try using a compensated probe and it should be better.What signal generator are you using? By the sounds of it, it only goes up to 5MHz so it can't be that good. Try using a crystal oscillator and you should get a perfectly stable waveform, if the 'scope is any good.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 02, 2011, 05:30:16 pm
content: Alas, this doesn't look good at all. If its tends to do this because it was designed this way, or its designed better and has a fault, either way I would return it.Those waveforms should be as stable as the analog scope. It could waver and jerk for many reasons: subsampling, the clock is unstable, DAC are faulty, and many other things ... none of which should exist in a well made low end DSO at the low frequency used for the test, IIRC the video shows ~ 1 MHz or so.Here is a copy of a video we did on the Hantek 3x25 arb generator as mechatrommer hacked the software; it shows clearly the effect of 7 MHz vs 100 MHz; you can see how stable the waveforms are.At 100 MHz the Rigol starts to 'wobble' a bit, this is the effect of subsampling as the ratio is 1:5, below the recommended Nyquist 1:10 for most stable images ... [at 2 channels the sampling rate it 500Ms/s.]Quote from: Kozmyk on September 02, 2011, 12:38:05 pm

author: johnnyk126
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: September 02, 2011, 05:42:03 pm
content: Quote from: Kozmyk on September 02, 2011, 12:38:05 pmLCD display doesn't have any intermediate areas between pixels. In addition resolution is relatively small and pixels large. This probably causes you to see this as very large problem and difference seems dramatic.Also on analog scope every sweep goes on the screen, so you have smoother transitions. On digital it is not possible due to display speed, so this makes this jumping even worse, because consecutive sweeps are further apart.Try checking the scope on stable frequency source, such as crystal mentioned above.What I'm trying to say is that analog scopes are masking a lot of the jumping you can see. The same way needle in analog meter seems smooth and stable when digital meter LCD display is full of jumping numbers.

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 02, 2011, 07:25:31 pm
content: Thanks for the input guys.Connection used in the video was direct 50 Ohm BNC cable, no probe.Terminated or unterminated made no discernible difference.Changing to compensated probes on x10 still displays jitter above 100kHz on the DSO not on the CRO.For sure it's a cheap sig gen but not so bad that the CRO can't get a stable display from it.I understand the principles of sampling and aliasing errors/artefacts but I'm not convinced that is the issue here. I could be wrong of course.I'll have to break into something around the house and look for a crystal output from something.One of my RC Txs should have something suitable.I'm beginning to suspect that it's not fit for purpose.I'm not looking forward to all the hassle involved in sending it back.The HF crystal osc test shall be the decider.I'mma go eat and worry about it laterDo some more video editing ...

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2011, 12:25:10 am
content: Well, this thread has achieved one thing at least.I've broken my YouTube duck.I found a 16MHz Xtal lurking in one of my RC Txs and here's the vid.I had a mess about with persistence and intensity but it's only overlaying the variations and ending up with a Thick trace.Maybe I'm expecting too much from this type of scope, I dunno.It's OK for freezing a burst of PWM and examining in detail but realtime waveforms get the thumbs down from me.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2011, 06:22:15 pm
content: I assume this is using a compensated probe? I know adding too much capacitance can pull crystals off. Still either way that doesn't look good.The frequency appears to be fine, it's more noise added to waveform. What do you see if you short the probes together and choose the lowest voltage/division setting?

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 03, 2011, 06:37:47 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on September 03, 2011, 06:22:15 pmThe frequency does not appear to me to be fine at all. There is shifting left and right that seems to be a timebase or triggering problem. Kozmyk, sorry you took one for the team, but I agree that there are probably better options out there.

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 04, 2011, 01:36:23 am
content: x10 probes shorted gives a 4mV p-p 106.3MHz ripple.50Ohm terminators straight over the inputs give same freq @0.25mV p-pTime base seems a likely culprit to me as the trigger appears to hold steady at centre screen but he trace expands and contracts either side of it.Could be video timebase has the problem while the front end is steady.Just guessing.Arguing this as a fault worthy of RMA is going to be fun.

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2011, 01:44:01 pm
content: The makersI've found SIGLENT, their International Sales Dept in particular, to be very helpful, although a fix is not yet forthcoming.I had hoped that they might have a firmware update to cover this already.It's an older model by their standards.They may yet come up with something.I must say that apart from the Jitter problem, I really like this scope and it's features.The split/alternate triggering in particular.The ability to view two unsynchronised waveforms at the same time is a delight.I really would like to be able to keep this scope.The sellersThis is an interesting and encouraging response from the seller.Encouraging because they appear open to the idea of no-quibble returns.Interesting because the makers and distributors have encountered jitter problems before with this model.The jitter they discuss is however at a different frequency, assuming the units to have translated correctly. microseconds often becom milliseconds in translation, I've found.Here's a section of the seller's comms:QuoteThat a pretty positive seller attitude I reckon.Fingers still crossed for a firmware upgrade.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2011, 03:08:53 pm
content: This is good to know they are aware, are trying to fix it, and responded well to you.But they already have your money, you still have a defective product so unless you can wait and have no immediate need to use it that's fine but you can also return it until the repair is made then buy it then with the working firmware/fix; with the way products are, chances are it will be cheaper or there is something new that will come out better for the same price. Why keep a defective item?Many scopes have split unsync triggering of 2 channels, at the least the Rigol 1052e has it, it works well and you know it been that way since 2009.Quote from: Kozmyk on September 05, 2011, 01:44:01 pm

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2011, 04:18:28 pm
content: You're right of course.It's just that a company or seller treating you right and doing what they're supposed to do is cause for celebration, these days.Guess who's kicking himself right now that he didn't follow the crowd and get a DS1052E ?Comms with Siglent have been good.We were chatting via MSN this morning, very helpful.First time I'd received an attachment via MSN as well.(new English version of EasyScope Ver3.01.03.01.11)It's worth giving it a day or two to see if Siglent can come up with a fix; give their Sales Dept time to get the query through to the relevant engineers.Failing that it'll be RMA time.

author: dfnr2
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2011, 10:56:26 pm
content: Hi Kozmyk,This phenomenon is totally normal. You are looking at the difference between a DSO and an analog scope. When you acquire any piece of test equipment, including a DSO or analog scope, you do have to learn it's limitations. That's why HP and Tek used to publish detailed theory of operation and schematics for all their equipment. Looking at your videos, the "unstable" DSO waveforms exactly match up with entirely comparable artifacts on the analog scope. Depending on which scope you are used to, your brain will tend to integrate out the artifacts in one, and fixate on the artifacts in the other. Also, it's why it's sometimes nice to have both scopes in the lab. But if I had to choose, I'd pick the DSO.You are looking at a combination of several factors:1) System noise, including at the generator output, cabling, input stage, and ADC noise sources2) Noise from random sample jitter.3) Signal distortion from asymmetric sample interleaving.You can see and measure the effects of all these sources in all DSO's. High-end scopes (meaning $$$$+) use all sorts of black magic to minimize these various sources. Careful attention to input stage design, low-noise circuits, careful shielding, etc. help minimize noise. Careful clock management, high-speed ADC's, careful timing, routing, and high-speed design help with the second two factors in high-end scopes.I've attached some images of a 16 MHz sine wave (to match your example), taken with a LeCroy Wavepro scope. The first shows sampling at 500 Ms/s, probably what the siglent is using. Here, because there are fewer samples per cycle, noise on the waveform causes more gross distortions in the perceived sinusoidal shape.The second is sampled at 1 Ms/s. You can see distortions of similar magnitude, but half the width. The energy of each deviation is smaller. The eye perceives the underlying waveforms better.The third is sampled at 20 Gs/s. The noise is the same amplitude, but the underlying waveform is even more apparent, partly due to the display routine, and partly due to the integrative abilities of our retinas and optic cortex.The fourth and fifth pictures show the result of turning on persistence for the 20Gs/s waveform, and (last) the 500 Ms/s waveform.You can see that the appearance of the high end lab-grade scope is similar to your siglent when using similar sample rates. I have tried another similar rebadged Atten scope (the 150 MHz version), and a Hantek 200 MHz scope. I found the atten/siglent to have overall much less distortion due to jitter and sample-interleave asymmetry than the Hantek. This has been discussed in several other forum threads, including the long Hantek thread, and a rigol sinc(x) thread.So take heart. You have a great deal on an inexpensive decent quality scope, about equivalent to the low-end Tek, LeCroy, and HP scopes. Actually, identical to the LeCroy WaveAce scopes, since these are simply rebranded Atten scopes based on the same design.Best regards,Dave(EDIT:) BTW, the measurements at the bottom of the screen are not meaningful, because I had them set to channel 1, and the input for this experiment was channel 2. I didn't think to switch over the measurements, and just noticed it now. Measurements would be irrelevant to the point of this exercise, however.

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2011, 01:13:43 pm
content: Thank you for your efforts to further explain the effects of waveform digitisation on their resultant display.The graphs illustrate your point but not the temporal stability or lack thereof that a video might show, but I can't go demanding videos, can I.I've now seen better stability and display clarity from comparable units so this one is going back, I'm afraid.I went back and played some more with Persistence but the results did not satisfy.I appreciate that Expectation vs Perception may be playing a part here.Altering my perception filter however only succeeded in leaving me with the conviction that I was fooling myself.On all other aspects I found the Siglent a pleasure to use.Siglent themselves have been most helpful in trying to find a solution.Comms with them have been a pleasure.

author: dfnr2
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2011, 06:47:23 pm
content: Quote from: Kozmyk on September 07, 2011, 01:13:43 pmWhat's in your video could be perfectly normal. However, if the "jumping" is worse than other comparable scopes (on your same setup), then it is possible that the distortions you are seeing may be due to asymmetric DAC timings. This is what I was seeing on the my Hantek, which had a similar effect much worse than the otherwise comparable Atten. In the case of the Hantek, this was most likely due to imperfectly spaced sampling due to difficulty timing 5 DACs rather than 4 on the atten.I imagine it would be possible for two siglent scopes to perform differently. You may want to borrow a comparable scope to compare the magnitude of the effect. It's good to know the dealer is being responsive. I certainly hope they do the right thing and let you return or exchange the scope if it's not behaving as expected. Let us know how it turns out.Dave

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2011, 07:03:58 pm
content: I agree fully, plus there are other causes either by design or by production defect. But a good DSO shouldn't jitter in the horizontal timebase; also the amount of sampling artifact on low frequencies needn't be tolerated as there are other scopes that do better. As example, the Rigol 1052e videos are far stabler even with sampling artifact on default settings for sampling speeds, without persistence, averaging, or sinx on.Quote from: dfnr2 on September 07, 2011, 06:47:23 pm

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2011, 08:31:47 pm
content: Quote from: dfnr2 on September 07, 2011, 06:47:23 pmactually it is vice versa - Hantek does use 4 or 8 ADCs and ATTEN/Rigol/Siglent 5 or 10, but the problem is everywhere the same:- ADCs clocked from FPGA (jitter)- FPGA not using dedicated clock outputs (jitter)- all VREF (ADCs) connected together and to internal VREF instead of external and stable VREF- bad PSUs/signal path supply filteringAll these factors above have big influence, most of them (PSU and VREF can be changed, clock change need drastical redesign - cost factor!!!) can not be fixed or only when you spend a lot of $$$ (which didn't make sense because then you can buybetter scope and hope the manufacturer did good job .. which is unfortunately not always the case, you can buy 20k $ scopeand will still see distortion created by not properly aligned interlevaed ADCs).Additionaly by design all these low budget DSOs does not have clocks aligned properly in phase - why ? wellbecause they can't, the FPGA i/o jitter is already that high that you can't align them. All these DSOs are usingsimple trick - sample every ADC sperate -> calculate cross zero timepoint -> align the sampled data.This works of course good on paper - but in real world already a small jitter in test signal during factory calibrationis creating distortion in the table (and again, look the factors above, they have later still influence),sometimes (when you have good FG) you can recalibrate DSO to work a better as with original factory calibration,the cross zero calculation is very depandant on jitter, edge rise time and timebase settigns during calibration.I was for example to calibrate my DSO light years better than Hantek did it originaly - a extrem low jitter FG very fast rise time,patched firmware (to run calibration in 1ns/div - yes ONE).The best case scenario is with non-interleaved ADCs, however it costs money - actually only Rigol CA/ATTEN CAL isusing ONE dual-channel ADC (which of course is still in interleave mode when only one channel enabled, but the distortionis a bit better because the ADC is taking care of clock phase and not FPGA) - but they have only small sample memory.Another option is Owon SDS - same as Rigol CA/ATTEN CAL but it does have 10Mpoint memory - unfortunatley waveform updaterate is slow as hell. The next possible DSO is then already Agilent DSOX, Instek DSO3000 and so on.Now back to low range DSOs - depends on firmware you might get fooled, a non "wobbling" waveform on screen didn't meansthat the DSO is really properly working (ADCs phase aligned) - when you switch Hantek to slower screen update youwill get waveform exact such stable as on Rigol - on Rigol you can't just switch to faster update to see all these distortionscreated by jitter and aliasing. So what is better ? Non of them, one setup is lying by doing avg, another is wobbling arounddue all these factor aboveAnd finally QC - when you have no luck you bought "broken" scope, maybe not 100% broken but probably somecomponents issue (drift, cold solder, transport issues) or lazy ppl at manufacturer side (moved cable during calibration, whatever).All you can do is to compare with EXACT same model and EXACT the same test setup, just a quartz oscillator and piece of unknowncable/terminator is not enough.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2011, 10:04:10 pm
content: Quote from: Kozmyk on September 05, 2011, 04:18:28 pmThe DS1052E is only 50MHz unless you hack it, has much less memory. The 100MHz Rigol is much more expensive and there's still the short memory issue.Quote from: tinhead on September 07, 2011, 08:31:47 pmSo the ADS1102CAL seems like the better 'scope if having loads of memory is unimportant.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 08, 2011, 09:40:55 pm
content: tinhead, always a pleasure to read your very thoughtful, analytical and extensively technical commentary!I agree fully with your comments but regardless on how the ADC are configured, the designs should take the jitter into account so it isn't noticeable, if not invisible, until >= the scopes rated maximum bandwidth.The 2 items of concern shown by the OP in videos are horizontal drifting and sampling waveform distortion at very low frequencies. Unless this model Siglent has user adjustable sampling rate apart from the horizontal timebase adjustment, the drift and waveform distortion occurs at << 1 MHz.As for the Rigol 1052e, as one of the most tested scopes on eevblog, Dave has shown in his reviews how it compares at transients against the superfast Agilent InfiniiVision series, but in this exercise it clearly need not do more to demonstrate it does not have the same issues this Siglent shows at << 1 MHz.The only cause for some doubt about the Siglent's flaws is the signal source could be more stable to rule out its instability as throwing the Siglent off; but the simultaneously analog scope measurement at low frequencies suggests the Siglent more likely has issues.Here is a much better test, in this case its a Tek vs a UniT scope, and the quality of the signal source is much clearer so the differences in waveform distortion is more apparent.By comparison, the newer Atten scopes appear to be better than this Siglent and the UniT:Quote from: tinhead on September 07, 2011, 08:31:47 pm

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 08, 2011, 10:18:51 pm
content: My Siglent is parcelled up ready for return and I'm ordering a Rigol.My concern now is that after all the niceties of my comms with the seller; when I asked to confirm the return address they sent me a different one from their sending address and they're asking me to mark it as a GBP10 GIFT.Doing that would lose me all protection if the parcel were lost or damaged.I need it to go Insured and Signed for just in case I have to claim through PayPal if it all goes tits up.I've voiced my concerns to them and I'm awaiting a reply.Their business day won't start for another hour or two.I don't mind helping them avoid a few charges but not at the risk of it disappearing and me getting shafted.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 08, 2011, 10:58:53 pm
content: Good luck, Kozmyk. Yes, the biggest problem with mail order is returning it, it can eat into the savings of buying it in the first place. Please keep us posted with your adventures with Siglent. Note the Rigol is not without its faults recently, since 2011 Hellene received a unit with much high baseline noise than prior models and several users report firmware 2.5 caused some usability bugs like flickering screen and buttons not working, sometimes [ there are videos on youtube]. However, if you follow the Rigol thread on hacking it, other users are not reporting such issues. Lastly, this week a new firmware was released 2.6, and the last known good one, 2.4 is downloadable from the Rigol website. All the Rigol faults have discussions on eevblog.Quote from: Kozmyk on September 08, 2011, 10:18:51 pmYes, the Rigol is basically 50 MHz but I think its still bang for buck; but there are other scopes reviewed and championed by tinhead, marmad and others ... with superb reviews of function and usability, but they generally cost more money. But worth looking into it if the costs difference is very small in your country balanced against their specs and bandwidth; these folks are showing the scopes are not just feature laded but well made, including the newer Atten wide screen models. For me, the Rigol cost $360 delivered by an authorized local dealer, so even the very competitive Instek 1062A, with ~ similar bandwidth, its was $60+ through tequipment.net over 1 year ago. So in the end, what you end up with may take into account more than just the specs, but what deals fit you best. To ease the problem with defects and warranty, I prefer vendors be local to make service easier.The extra long memory is always appreciated but the scope, IMHO, had first work best in providing stable clean waveforms before anything else.Quote from: Hero999 on September 07, 2011, 10:04:10 pm

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 08, 2011, 11:59:08 pm
content: I probably will have a go at doing the Rigol hack eventually.But not before I've satisfied myself that it's working properly.After all the fuss and bother it appears that I've only saved £30/$48 by buying the RIGOL from eBay rather than from the German distributor Batronix.I was too fixated on eBay deals to realise there was a good deal much nearer home.My mistake.I had looked at UK prices but the ones I could find here were all much higher than Germany.As long as this Rigol from the seller in China is Ok then I'm clear but that's the risk we take trying to save money isn't it.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 09, 2011, 12:04:03 am
content: Quote from: saturation on September 08, 2011, 09:40:55 pmwhen you open both Rigol E and Siglent aka ATTEN you will find identical hardware (actually ATTEN/Siglentadded only some extras for 50R termination and changed TFT controller to drive larger screen), so whatever theydid wrong is inside firmware (as Rigol was able to use exact same pice of hardware much better).This is actually the price you have to pay for cloned clones of clonesNormally i would say "who cares, they will fix that in next fw revision", but unfortunately these products are fromthe "buy and die" category, support is not existing at all. I noticed it already as i played with the older ATTEN DSO(and was thinking about to test Siglent). This is a really unfortunate, a better firmware would made these scopesbetter than the original (Rigol E) just because of the larger display.Anyway, good luck Kozmyk, in my case was easy to return due my friends in China.

author: Kozmyk
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 09, 2011, 12:14:28 am
content: Thanks for the wishes of good luck.The sellers comms have been good so far, allowing for the time zone difference.I'm just uncomfortable about this request to send Gift and low value.I don't understand why, it's not like the seller is Importing the unit, it's a return.Maybe they get a tax break for an export sale but have to pay it back if the unit is returned.I don't know how it import/export rules work for Chinese sellers.At the end of the day I'm going to go with whatever eBay/PayPal advise.They're the ones I'd be claiming from if anything went wrong with the return.

author: cseb
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 03, 2012, 10:13:57 am
content: Hi,This is how I see the SDS1102CM after 2 weeks:http://cseb.hu/siglentRegards,Csaba

author: dmderev
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 06, 2012, 06:52:38 am
content: I have Atten ADS1102CAL - and my impression is that it uses the same 5x AD9288 ADCs in interleaved mode. I was mostly satisfied with the features for 1 week, until I discovered few problems on fast timebases (25ns/div, 10ns/div, 5ns/div). First, the trigger point (the crossing of the waveform and trigger level and location where the scope shows the trigger arrow) is shifted by 3-4ns. Not a big deal, but something to pay attention to.The more serious problem is that sometimes, the scope shows the waveform shifted by 10ns right from the trigger point. This happens randomly, and looks like an overlay of two unstable waveforms. The shifted waveform is exactly the same, but simply shifted. Very annoying. This makes me think that it is a synchronization problem in FPGA - the trigger signal simply ends in the earlier memory location. This also makes me think that the fundamental sampling rate is 100MHz (10ns) and the ADCs are time-interleaved. Or at least the words stored in RAM are combined of 10 samples.Interestingly, this behavior happens not all the time. It is possible to turn the scope on and off, and sometimes it does not show the defect. This makes me think that some logic in the acquisition section is not properly reset or initialized - otherwise all power-on cycles would have shown same result.Did anyone see such strange behavior? Did anyone open Rigol 1102 or Atten 1102 or Siglent 1102 scopes (they should be exact clones)?Is there any schematics available?

author: techhie
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 01, 2012, 07:10:20 pm
content: It looks like I am not the only one who has had a problem getting Easyscope 3 to talk to the ATTEN ADS1102CAL. I found the English version on the included CD as well as USB drivers, which only load on a Windows XP machine. Will not work on a Windows 7. Everything goes according to plan when plugging in the scope and starting the software then, press "connect", and it fails! Very frustrating. No reply so far from ATTEN. Maybe they are unable to diagnose and fix?Any and all suggestions here would be much appreciated.

author: Erwin Ried
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 27, 2013, 08:09:30 am
content: Quote from: techhie on June 01, 2012, 07:10:20 pmDid you ever find a solution? I can't connect either (sorry for replying to this very old thread, but it seems the issues still continue in this area, now with easyscope X...)