Rigol MSO4000 and Rigol MSO's in general - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2014, 12:12:15 am
content: Hello all,This is my first post here so please go easy.I am looking at getting a Rigol MSO4014, I have a couple of questions and concerns that I am trying to address before I Invest that kind of money. I have a couple projects for school, work, and best of all keeping myself sane and challenged with interesting projects. All are very mixed signal and some are "High Frequency"(i.e. 300 to 500MHz) for range of most reasonably priced scopes. I could make do with 2 channels and 16 digital channels, but 4 analog channels and 16 digital would make some things much much easier.Does anyone have anything to say about the Rigol MSO's? Do the hacks for the other Rigols work? Any big bugs or big problems?Thanks,thewyliestcoyote

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2014, 12:35:03 am
content: This pretty much sums up my thoughts:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-mso4000-and-ds4000-tests-bugs-firmware-questions-etc/The latest firmware did help some.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2014, 06:43:15 am
content: Thanks for the link!How slow is the LXI/LAN interface? one of the projects that I have in mind is a test bench and this requires a couple of instruments to be control by a computer.I have bunch of experience with Agilent Field foxes, PNA's, spectrum analyzers, and older VNA's. I have to say the Field foxes are possibly the most network limited device I have ever worked with. Or should I say anything having to do with saving or transferring data of any kind.How does the logic analyzer affect the sample length? I am guessing they are separate memory devices in the scope. I really like the deep sample memory of the 4000 vs other scopes.Is the logic analyzer worth the $1140? or would it just be better to by a logic analyzer and figure out the time delay between the trigger condition in to the trigger out signal?

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2014, 11:19:42 am
content: I'm not gonna be able to help you too much, but here goes:- LX/LAN, as a 100% Linux user I can't run their software, but I do use the LAN interface to pull screenshots, which works fine usingPeter's Linux software. This works fine and is reliable, also works for the DSA815 SA.- My personal belief, it's really hard to beat a proper logic analyzer, MSOs are just kinda a toy, or used for light duty work, specific triggering etc. Is it worth the $1140? Guess it depends on your budget, I bought into it cause of convenience, there are times when a married Scope and LA are quicker and easier.Over all, the MSO4000 series is the absolute cheapest path to 500Mhz with full protocol decoding (compared to the Agilent, the Rigol decoding is a joke), but that value comes with noticeable caveats.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2014, 07:35:48 pm
content: For all of the stuff that I have done with all the Agilent instruments that I have worked with I have written the software 100% from scratch. Using just telnet or TCP on ports 5024 or 5025, using C/C++ or python if my boss was feeling nice and wanted it done sooner. I am not really interested in just screen shots. I want to be able to able to pull a trace and do what ever processing on the PC side looking at timing, distortion, intermittent faults and such. I am 99% Linux user so I am not sure Rigol's software would do me much good, but good to know its out there.I would need to the trigger the scope on digital signals, so maybe it is worth it, but sounds like a should also just invest in a good logic analyzer. One of the reasons that I would like a logic analyzer is I am working on a hardware in the loop test bench for a project. I would like to be able to see more then 4 channels of data at a time.What Probes did your MSO4000 come with? looking at the Rigol North America website the DS4000's come with a probe for ever channel and the DSO's only come with the logic analyzer probe not the analog probes. Are they the 300MHz or the 500MHz ones?

author: electronic_eel
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 21, 2014, 09:11:48 pm
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 21, 2014, 07:35:48 pmYou might have mixed that up a bit. The DS4000 models come with 2 or 4 (depending on channel no) analog probes, model RP3500A. The MSO4000 models come with the same 2 or 4 analog probes and the logic probes.You can pull the data gathered with the logic analyzer off the scope and analyze it on the pc. Sigrok has support for the Rigol scopes.The integrated logic analyzer easily beats simple logic analyzers like saleae. The sample memory dwarfs a lot of big professional LAs and with 1 GS/s it is fast too. But it only has 16 channels, that is not enough for parallel busses, ram interconnects and the like. And the trigger possibilities and decoding are much more advanced on a dedicated LA. But in a lot of cases you can trigger on a high level fault, sample and then analyze it externally.You won't find a dedicated LA with that speed and memory for the price difference between the DS4000 and MSO4000 series.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 06:38:22 am
content: Thanks for the advice about the logic analyzer. I think the saleae 16 pro is 500MSPS so not bad. I have a desktop I am planing on using has 32GB of RAM, so I thing that will for me. I have a open logic sniffer and the limited sample memory is basically worthless for what I am trying to do now.I wounder why more scopes do not have the super large sample depth where memory is so cheap these days. Maybe one of the scope manufactures with release a scope that uses like DDR3 memory cards. 32GPts would be kind of cool, thought I am not of a use off the top of my head that can use that much memory, but someone should build it so we can find out a good use.

author: electronic_eel
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 07:42:25 am
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 22, 2014, 06:38:22 amThats just marketing. Do the math: 500 MS/s * 16 channels = 8 GBit/s. That is even larger than the theoretical limit of USB 3, much more the practical one.Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 22, 2014, 06:38:22 amWith these speeds you can't just "plug in" DDR3 ics. You have to carefully select the FPGA doing the addressing of the mem and then connect all the ram ics in parallel to the fpga.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 09:06:43 am
content: QuoteYou are 100% correct, I am just copied the info from the saleae site. I think that is not 500 MS/s for all 16 channels, but maximum sample rate of a channel. The practical limit of USB 3 is a pain, I have 4 Ettus B210 SDR's. I am working on a 4x4 MIMO system for work and it is driving me crazy how picky USB 3 is.QuoteI am not saying using just IC's to a existing scope, but if some manufacture would make a scope using DDR Dimms like you would have in a desktop PC. The data transfer speeds for a single card exceed the 4GBPS for 4GSPS. DDR3-800 is 6400MBPS. I am not sure I understand what you are getting at, yes there would need to be some board layout world for that(done in ever modern motherboard), some sort of configuration of the interface on the FPGA, and yes the buffer size on the FPGA would have to be bigger for the increase in latency from the memory and physical length of the traces. There are a couple of DDR3 controllers out there for FPGA in just about every flavor, some even have hardware controllers build in. It was just a open end question/statement of what I think would be interesting to be tried for a scope.

author: electronic_eel
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 11:14:30 am
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 22, 2014, 09:06:43 amYou have 4 channels sampling analog data, that is 8 bit per sample, at 2 GS/s (half the speed if all channels active). That is 64 GBit/s. You need to constantly store that amount of data reliably into the ram, so you have to add all the wait times, setup times, refreshes and whatever that DDR3 or soon DDR4 needs. That isn't all that easy or all scope manufacturers would have done that years ago.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 03:46:15 pm
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 21, 2014, 07:35:48 pmSorry for the late reply, factory probes are the RP3500A, 500Mhz passive.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 08:20:06 pm
content: QuoteNo problem and good to hear, I thought I would have to buy 4 500MHz probes. It is kind of confusing that they are not listed under the standard accessories for the MSO4000's but are for the DS4000's. Have you tried to unlock "hack" your scope for the 500MHz bandwidth and decode options?QuoteNever thought it was easy, but I am not sure why it hasn't been done other than added complexity and cost. As for data rate what a CPU in a modern PC is way greater than what is needed for a oscilloscope in this range. The DS2000 only uses 2 DDR2 IC's. This is much lower data rate than just one DDR3 Dimm with 4 or 8 in parallel depending on the controller. Now maybe use 2 or 4 Dimms., even if "they" use laptop So-Dimm for physical size.https://www.flickr.com/photos/eevblog/8022112817/in/set-72157631618295437/lightbox/https://www.skhynix.com/products/consumer/view.jsp?info.ramKind=03&info.serialNo=H5PS5162GFR

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 08:28:32 pm
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 22, 2014, 08:20:06 pmYes, all decode and 500Mhz, easy as Sunday morning.I don't know that anyone has tried the hacks on the 2.0.2 firmware, but upgrading from 2.0.1 all hacks carry through and are there.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 11:15:11 pm
content: Very good to hear, thanks!QuoteIf firmware version 2.0.2 cant be hacked, firmware downgrade is possible right?

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 11:17:28 pm
content: Very good to hear, thanks!QuoteIf firmware version 2.0.2 cant be hacked, firmware downgrade is possible right?

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 11:17:54 pm
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 22, 2014, 11:15:11 pmAccording to the link in reply #1 yes, downgrade is possible, but I've not personally tried it.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 11:25:29 pm
content: Rigol hardware seems to be decent for the money. I have noticed quite a few bugs in my DS2102A.....and the fact that math opperators aren't done on dedicate hardware, might be a serious detraction for your applications. Rigol support is absolutely dreadful. I would still buy the various Rigol products I have, given the choice again.I had a couple newer Agilent scopes on demo, and they were vastly superior, in terms of stability and math functions, but I didn't like the UI as much and the resolution/noise floor weren't as good as the DS2000A series. I do a lot of DC work, so the lower sensitivity is a plus for me.I would buy again, but looking at the MSO range I would bypass Rigol and go with Agilent. For MSO, I had much much better experience with Agilent triggering and math operations.If I was looking to spend Agilent money though, I might go with Hameg. Their on screen statistics and math are really a cut above. Both Agilent and Rigol don't seem to understand how important it is to show statistics, in relation to signal waveforms. Especially in such ways that don't clutter up the screen.Again for MSO I would look to Agilent over Rigol.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2014, 11:42:39 pm
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 22, 2014, 11:25:29 pmNot to hijack the thread, but I absolutely love my HM8118 and HMC8012. Of all my T&M experience, I've never used a Hameg Scope, sure would like to....Aside from the much slower wf/sec and expensive decode addons, I bet they are excellent machines.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 12:16:35 am
content: No problem I am very open to idea's and thanks for the recommendation.QuoteResolutions and noise floor are both very big plusses for me! I have used a couple of high end Agilent scopes and have had very good experience with them(support is great, from what I here Rigol could learn something). I am still a college student and not sure if I could afford Agilent prices.QuoteIts amazing to me that manufactures to not put more effort to improve the math functions, statics, decodes. It is something that should be handled on the scope and not on the controlling PC. I would thing(Big time conjecture) there is some room in the front end FPGA, or I would pay more for a bigger FPGA. I think this is one of the reasons that Agilent when to a ASIC for there scopes. It would be interesting to get a DS1000Z to have a play with custom firmware on the FPGA and processor to see if hardware functions for rigols are possible.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 05:05:55 am
content: Agilent math operations are first rate....they are done on a dedicated co-processor (I believe). There is absolutely no lag in the response.The Rigol DS2000 series has a resolution/noise floor above and beyond just about anything out there, for sane money. However that is only on DS2x series. The MSO4k is roughly the same as Agilent X series, minus the hardware math operations.The Hameg stuff is a class above both IMO. For statistics and operators, it's the best I have ever put my hands on.The best solution might be Agilent MSO, and a Rigol DS2x series for the low noise and higher resolution Y axis. If I had to buy and MSO it would certainly not be Rigol's MSO....the unit I demo'd was quite "laggy" on decoding and math function.Yes I 100% agree.....more scope manufacturers need to take some cues from Hameg and put better math and statistical functions into their GUI. The fact that Rigols statistics cover the waveform seems a bit ridiculous.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 05:12:54 am
content: Oh one more thing to mention....if you really do want to use the DS2x series noise floor and resolution, you really do need to invest in a decent differential probe setup, and decent pre-amplifier....you most certainly aren't going to make use of that enhanced noise-floor with the bundled probes (10x).On the issue of money, the MSO from Rigol and MSO from Agilent are really going to be pretty close dollar-wise.....especially once you add up all the bits and bobs you need to get them cracking properly.I would still, personally go for Hameg. They will most certainly be getting my money for my next scope purchase.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 05:37:15 am
content: QuoteIts just a shame that there is no 4 channel DS/MSO2K version.QuoteFor the Rigol why would they not just to the serial, I2C, or SPI decode in the FPGA. All of those cores to do the functions do not take much space. Maybe some point in the future there will be open source firmware for the cheap Rigol scopes(Rigol supported or not) that will incorporate these things. I know I am asking for a lot out of a scope and should most likely be done by 3 or 4 instruments, oscilloscope, logic analyzer, PCIe DAQ and maybe a direct sampling software defined radio. But on the hardware level there is not much difference between for the expensive stuff.MANUFACTURES TAKE NOTE! list of things for next generation oscilloscopes, LOLLarge expandable sample memoryHardware math and decode functionsFast networking interfaces for moving large amounts or streaming data, maybe PCIe or Thunder BoltLower noise floorBetter resolution 10 or 12 bitsEnough of how things ought to be and back to how they are. Yes I know, for now most of my real sensitive measurements will be done on custom test fixtures build for the purpose. So this should defer some of the cost for now, maybe?.

author: H.O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 12:04:57 pm
content: Hi,QuoteWith the latest firmware version as of this date, which is (short) 00.02.02, released a couple of weeks back, everyhing* works fine on my DS4k.* In the context of entering keys to unlock the features lurking inside that is.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 12:15:43 pm
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 23, 2014, 12:16:35 amSo I guess you've never used a LeCroy scope then?If you want advanced maths and powerful signal analysis then there's nothing coming close to a LeCroy scope.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 12:18:03 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on October 23, 2014, 12:15:43 pmWhich also offers:Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 23, 2014, 05:37:15 am

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 12:24:13 pm
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on October 23, 2014, 12:18:03 pmLeCroy HDO4000:http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopeseries.aspx?mseries=419HDO6000:http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopeseries.aspx?mseries=422HDO8000:http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopeseries.aspx?mseries=422WaveRunner HRO:http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopeseries.aspx?mseries=388Note that these are all true 12bit scopes, not the silly oversampling stuffAgilentKeysight offers.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 09:22:53 pm
content: Yeah I have seen that LeCroy has 12 bit scopes, I also love the deep sample memory's and from what people say the math and decode functions are great. I am still a college student and will be in some form for the next 2 to 6 years so cost so a big factor for something I am not sure if I will be directly making money from, or resell and recover some money. To hold me over I am going to buy a MSO2072A. The first couple projects I can get away with the smaller sample memory, lower bandwidth, and 2 channels not 4. I have a couple projects that need 4 channels but that can be put off. Its a shame that Rigol does not make a 4 channel version of the DS2000 scopes.Design of a scopes maybe should be discussed in another thread but we are here. It would be interesting to think of affordable scope with 10 or 12 bit resolution, better memory and math functions. I am not a FPGA guy but I do not that the Xilinx Zynq 7020 have comparable or larger FPGA fabric to a spartan 6 25 LX like in the DS2000's and the CPU part of the chip is more powerful than the Blackfin in the DS2000's. A oscilloscope could just use the Zynq 7020 with maybe embedded ram or better yet Dimm DDR3, flash chip, and ADC for the major IC's on the board. The faster bus between the FPGA and CPU parts of the chip then what's in all the Rigol scopes and the lower cost of software because of the Linux ecosystem. Also the possibility of user writable programs for custom decoding. Why has this not been done? Maybe it should be.

author: electronic_eel
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 23, 2014, 09:50:42 pm
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 23, 2014, 09:22:53 pmLeCroy makes some really neat equipment. But they are pricey, if you add some basic options you are quickly in a range of 30.000 to 50.000 USD for one scope. That is even above the limit for smaller companies or contractors if you don't absolutely need a special feature only they offer.And I'm not sure how long the current models will last: internally they have an analog & sampler board and a nearly standard pc board. The pc runs windows and does all the user interface, display functions and so on. Current pcs often die after 7 to 10 years, often because of bad caps, but also from contact corrosion and other diseases. So I fear their current scopes won't last that much longer. So unlike other expensive investments like a car, I'm not sure if you'll be able to sell it again for a good price in 10 years.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 12:11:14 am
content: QuoteVery true, I am sure that is a problem, but I have a VNA at work from the 90's running Windows 98(I think, I am not in charge of it) and its still running like a champ. I do not spend much money on cars ether. My second job is working for a company that is trying to wireless internet delivery and I will be doing a bunch of PCIe work, maybe I can talk them into buying a high end LeCroy scope for that work.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 12:19:11 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 23, 2014, 05:05:55 amSo you say that DS2000 series is better than DS4000 series in terms of resolution/noise floor?How are they comparing against each other? Is their quantitative measure for this?I heard that in general DS2000 series software is more stable than DS4000 series software, as the user base on DS2000 series is much higher, and Rigol support focuses more on the DS2000 bugs.If we combine the better support, together with better resolution/noise floor, than the decision is made easily. Or is there still a specific need for DS4000 series although all the known bugs? Some examples?

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 12:32:02 am
content: Other some features like sample memory depth, sample rate, and some math and decode functions, I am not sure why Rigol would just combine the 2 into a newer series. DS2000 with 140 MPts, better noise floor, and 4 channels. My needs for the MSO4000 can basically be summed up in sample rate, memory depth, 500 MHz bandwidth, and 4 channels.

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 05:00:58 am
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 24, 2014, 12:32:02 amThe 140MPt usefullness is in question in my opinion. I tried a 4000 series and found two major issues that made 140M memory much less enticing.- zoom painfully slow, took minutes to zoom & reboot required to exit laggy mode-I2C decode only available on 100ms/div or slower even though sample rate was almost 10x required. Should have been able to decode a much longer capture at lower sample rate.Hopefully 2000 fixed those issues, but really surprising that after ~3yrs 4000 still can't so decode on segmented memory (!) That's a different topic I guess but good to know for any discussions about mso usefulness . my testing was on DS, not mso - but believe the same.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 05:25:36 am
content: Quote from: electronic_eel on October 23, 2014, 09:50:42 pmYes, these scopes can be pricey if you have to buy new (and even then they're generally cheaper than Agilent or Tek). But you don't need to spend $30k to get a decent scope, they also offer a lot in the below $10k price bracket. For example, if you can live with 8bit, the WaveSurfer 3000 starts at roughly $3000, and already comes with lots of advanced features.And then there is the used market. For example, for the price of a Rigol DS4012 (100MHz 2Ch) you can occasionally get something like this:http://www.ebay.com/itm/161431504754?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fsch%2Fi.html%3F_from%3DR40%26_sacat%3D0%26_nkw%3D161431504754%26_rdc%3D1This is a 600Mhz 4Ch 10GSa/s scope w. 25Mpts sample memory and up to 1,250,000 wfms/s.Or if you need more bandwidth and capabilities, the price of a Rigol DS4032 (300MHz 2Ch) can get you something like that:http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/LECROY-WAVEPRO-7300A-3GHz-QUAD-20GS-s-DIGITAL-STORAGE-OSCILLOSCOPE-/231333585982?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item35dc8e643e&nma=true&si=T8PVOxP4hsdfbxTQRQKwYh88G%252FI%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557(This is a 3Ghz 4Ch high end scope with 20GSa/s and 48Mpts, serial decode for dozens of standards aside from coming with most of the other available analysis options, and up to 150,000 wfms/s)These are just two examples. There are lots of deals out there which can give you advanced maths and analysis for less than a Rigol DS4000 or any of the other low end scopes.QuoteOnly if you buy crap kit. Were I work we have lots of HP and Dell machines (business PCs, workstations and servers) which run special applications and which run fine even after 10+ years. The only issues are hard disks but they should be considered consumables anyways and are generally cheap to replace.There was a "bad cap" period between 2002 and 2004 due to defect caps from some large manufacturers but this affected not only PCs but many other electronics products as well, and by now most of the affected components have already been replaced or repaired. Most manufacturers had purged their product lines by 2004.QuoteYour fear has no bounds to reality. For example, LeCroy has introduced their first Windows scopes (WaveMaster 8000, WavePro 7000) in 2002, and aside from a few initial software issues (which have been fixed in subsequent updates) they survived just as well as non-Windows scopes. The same is true for other LeCroy Windows scopes (i.e. WaveRunner 6000) of which some are now in their 10th year. In fact, if you look at other manufacturers (Agilent, Tek) who came out with Windows scopes much earlier (IIRC Tek around 2000, HP/Agilent around 1998), and although some weren't particularly great scopes (i.e. the first generation of Windows9x based Infiniium scopes sucked donkey balls), they more or less survived as well as non-Wndows scopes.It's also not clear to me why there should be a connection between electronics lifetime and what it is used for (Windows PC, Embedded Controller). If it's designed properly and the components are good then it will very likely last a very long time. As far as LeCroy is concerned, the only difference between their Windows scopes and the previous non-Windows models was the architecture (PowerPC vs x86) and the OS (VxWorks vs Windows). It's beyond me why the change to x86 and Windows should affect the reliability and endurance of their scopes.All this aside, LeCroy scopes come with 3 years warranty, and after that LeCroy guarantees support for a further 7 years after a series has gone out of production, so for those that use a scope to earn their living there is very good long-term support available.

author: H.O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 05:46:52 am
content: Hi,QuoteThat was true until a couple of weeks ago. The latest firmware (00.02.02) provided a fix for that (at last).QuoteIt would be interesting to see a list of all those know bugs you mention which are present in the DS4k but not in the DS2k. Don't get me wrong, there are bugs and issues for sure but really, what bugs are you refering to exactly that you'd get in the DS4k but not in the DS2k - today.And, regarding the examples you're requesting (some of which has already been pointed out):* Higher bandwidth* Higher sample rate* Deeper sample memory* Faster update rate* 4 channels.*Internal 50ohm termination* Larger screen (same resolution)Only you know if any of these are valid reasons for YOU to select the the DS4k over the DS2k and then the DS2k over the DS1k and then the DS1k over something else - or the other way around....EDIT: Looks like the DS2kAdoes have internal 50 termination.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 07:14:41 am
content: pascal....the DS2000 series offers 500uV/div resolution.....and the noise floor to actually use it. HOWEVER.....the included probes are 10x and will NOT allow such resolution. The only real use of such resolution is with a decent differential probe set and pre-amplifier. Which obviously costs as much, if not more than the scope itself. I chose that option though, because I do a lot of DC work, where noise floor is critical to my set of metrics.Agilent doesn't offer anything useful, for that kind of work....for anywhere near the same total price point. If you need 500uV/div to characterize your designs, then the DS2000 and a decent differential probe-set/pre-amplifier is about the only option.....besides our old Tek analog favorite =)I personally need the statistics and data-logging that the analog scope doesn't offer.....and part of my product specifications are a set of test metrics per device shipped.LeCroy certainly has an excellent Ui and set of math functions, IMO. The price of their scopes, that offer such functionality, is too high (IMO) in relation to the lack of other functions.I think the nice compromise is a DS2000 + differential probes + pre-amplifier, and a Hameg MSO for it's excellent metrics and statistical capabilities.The price of that complete setup, is less than most higher end scopes....and you get the best of all worlds.Granted the Rigol products can't hold a candle to Agilent or Tek or LeCroy support......if I was spending someone elses money I would have Tek and Agilent on my bench. If I am spending my money it's the two scopes I mentioned above =)

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 07:39:46 am
content: QuoteThere are 2 projects that I am working on that I will need that kind of memory for. First is spectral resolution, yes I know this can be done in lower resolution with smaller memory, but more memory makes this easier. If you say the decode is a problem that is a big deal as the other project is high speed real time control system. I wish to use the scope to measure performance and verify function.QuoteGood to hear. I thought DS2K had 50 ohm termination?QuoteGood tip on the scope. I will really consider it! the USB decoding is interesting, that would be useful.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 07:49:12 am
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 24, 2014, 07:39:46 amNot really. As long as the sample memory can capture the amount of points that are used for FFT calculation then it doesn't matter much anymore. What's worse is that the Rigol DS4000 merely uses 700 points for calculating FFT which is very bad:http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-00f2/0/-/-/-/-/file.pdfEven the expensive DS6000 uses only 700 points which is a joke. Just as a comparison, even my oldLeCroy WaveRunner LT264M(300MHz 4Ch scope from 2003) offers 50kpts for FFT as standard and up to 1Mpts with the installed EMM software option.The other thing that is important is processing power as FFT puts a lot of strain on that, and I've seen entry level scopes like the DS4000 struggling in coming up with sensible update rates due to their slow processing, even when they only capture a small number of data points.QuoteWell, the above auction has ended, but it seems the seller has now listed a smaller scope (WaveRunner 6100A):http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/LECROY-WAVERUNNER-6100A-1GHz-QUAD-10GS-s-DIGITAL-STORAGE-OSCILLOSCOPE-/231367252526?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item35de901a2e#ht_6135wt_959It's a smaller scope with less bandwidth (WaveRunner is LeCroy's upper mid-range series, this one has 1GHz bandwidth, 10GSa/s and up to 125,000 wfms/s) but it seems to come with full decoding suite. And it takes up less space than the big WavePro so this could be a better option.BTW, FFT on this scope goes up to the full 12Mpts (4 channel mode)/24Mpts (1 and 2 channel mode).These scopes are a completely different world than anything Rigol makes.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 08:03:27 am
content: wow that is a phenomenal deal.....if you don't grab this I might. Those options alone are worth the price

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 08:05:05 am
content: OOPS, just noticed this"Note: Auction is for oscilloscope only - probes not included."

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 08:19:21 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 24, 2014, 08:05:05 amEven without probes these are great deals. A set of good passive probes (i.e. Testec) is less than $300, and for higher frequencies one should go for active probes anyways which are more expensive (but even there the LeCroy probes are ususally much cheaper than comparable Agilent or Tek probes).

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 08:31:57 am
content: Agreed....some decent probes would sweeten the deal, but when you stack some decent actives/differential amps on this.....I think we are looking in the $6k range. I think the scope will sell for around $3k USD (give or take).It's still a phenomenal deal.On the note of scope obsolescence....scopes never really go into a category of "obsolete". They will always do what they were designed to do. Granted they may lose value, but equipment shouldn't be looked at as an investment. It's a tool. So as long as your needs don't outpace the scopes ability, you are able to use the tool until it simply fails to provide accurate data.With the amount of options loaded into this scope, I don't see how you would ever outgrow it. Hell it even has FC decode. This scope is a data logistics engineers dream. I will def keep an eye on that price. The options list alone could never be afforded by an independent engineer. Someones corporate credit account put some serious money into that tool.Even include PMA2 package....damn you for linking this.....

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 09:13:28 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 24, 2014, 08:31:57 amIf you have some patience then you can find active probes for pretty reasonable prices. For example, I recently bought a HFP1000 1GHz probe for less than $100. I also got some AP033 Differential Probes for similar amounts.The beauty with LeCroy probes is that they all use the same probe interface since roughly 1994 when the 9300 Series came out, so the probes are not specific to a certain model.QuoteIt certainly is. And it comes with what is probably the best touch screen interface one could find on a scope.QuoteWell, yes and no. Yes, they will continue to do what they're supposed to do, but they can become obsolete when new standards or features are developed that are no longer supported by the scope (i.e. PCIe 3.0 decoding which is only supported by newer LeCroy scopes, the older scopes only support older PCIe standards). LeCroy does update the software on their older scopes, though, and makes some new features available to older scopes through these updates.But yeah, as long as your needs don't require some new feature that isn't available the scope won't be obsolete.QuoteThis particular seller seems to sell fully loaded LeCroy scopes every now and then. Apparently most are Ex-Demo models that got most/all of the goodies.QuoteI know. Mea culpa.

author: H.O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 09:24:38 am
content: QuoteHmmm..... Honestly, I wasn't sure and I'm more than happy to stand corrected but the front panel is lacking the 50ohm LED present on the DS4000 and theDS2000 User's guideprovides no evidence of it being present when searching for terms like "50", and/or "impedence" both of which pops up with valid hits in the DS4000 Users guide.Again, it might be that it's there and I just don't see it. If you have "evidence" please show me and I'll correct my previous post ASAP.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 09:28:09 am
content: Quote from: H.O on October 24, 2014, 09:24:38 amIf I remember right then the DS2000 lacks 50 ohms termination while the DS2000-A has it.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 09:28:43 am
content: To really make use of the feature set on this scope you sort of do "need" a da1855a (or similar) and a AP015 (or similar). Those items hold their value pretty well on the used market (min $1500 for the differential amp), but again $6k into the scope and those accessories, still represent a lot of functional and relevant diagnostics for well under the cost of even a base model Agilent X series, with MSO capability.I know a lot of people aren't so fond of LeCroy, but I have personally never had anything but good experiences with their scopes (especially the split screen windowing for discreet channels).Even though new standards may emerge in the market, it still doesn't render the older scope "obsolete" (technically). It will still function for those purposes. Granted my field of expertise makes that statement a bit biased (I don't see DC regulation changing much in the near future). It is always nice to have an extra, functional (albeit older) scope on hand for the core protocols. In some ways I feel a bit sorry for the engineers stuck in endless PCi spec changes and endless modern serial bus changes. We can still send a lot of data, blindingly quickly, using "older" simpler interfaces. Such is the consumerist driven market thoughThanks again for blowing my bacon fat and hamburger budget for the month

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 09:33:24 am
content: My DS2000A most certainly has 50 ohm termination....which makes sense, since the A series has built in sig gen.....but if I do recall correctly the non A series had it as well. 10meg and 50ohm as standard.With the lower noise floor and resolution it's a bit of a must.....however if you have a good differential amp it shouldn't cause much issue, either way. Which is honestly the only way that resolution is "usable".I still can't say much bad about the DS2102A. For the money you simply can't get that noise floor in another product. In the higher bandwidths, that might not be relevant though.....so if you need above 200mHZ I am not sure I see the point of the DS2000 series.....not enough channels, and too much money, in comparison to Agilent X series.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 10:04:49 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 24, 2014, 09:28:43 amThe main reason for the very high prices of DA1855A amplifiers is that it is useable with any oscilloscope and any probe, not just LeCroy scopes and probes. That's essentially what keeps prices up. The DA1855A is also limited to 100MHz bandwidth. Unless you need the flexibility (re scope and probes that can be used) and the high input voltage (i.e. power electronics) there's little point in getting one, especially when it's pretty useless for most faster busses due to its low bandwidth. For everything else there are much cheaper options, i.e. the mentioned AP-033 probes.I've also seen AP-015 current probes going for less than $350 which isn't bad, although finding these deals requires some patience.QuoteI guess most complaints come from people that are used to other scopes and only have used a LeCroy scope on a short occasion, and then are overwhelmed by its capabilities and some of the differences (i.e. the swapped horizontal and vertical controls) compared to other scopes. Most long-term users seem to love them, though.QuoteIn principle I agree. And not all standards change that quickly anyways.QuoteWell, on the other side this change also usually means that there is money available to get the right kit. If not then in many cases the old standards would probably do equally fine.

author: H.O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 10:16:19 am
content: QuoteDuh, it even says "•50 Ohm Impedance included" on the Rigolproduct page.Indeed, it looks like the original (now obsolete) DS2000 doesn't have it while the DS2000A does. There's no mention of in theDS2000 Manualwhile theDS2000A manualclearly specifies it.I've edited my previous message. Thanks for correcting me!

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 10:35:11 am
content: The need of the differential amp, is to get good impedance matching with a variety of inputs....it just makes things a lot easier, and gives you a lot of different options, to engineer the "proper" test. Admittedly I am a bit lazy and would prefer to tweak the differential amp, rather than go through endless scope sub menus to get where I want to be. The biggest benefit of the external amplifier is to simply set one input param on the scope, and do the rest outside the "box".So this was kind of my point about Rigol scopes above 100 mHZ. To really utilize the resolution and noise floor, you do NEED this setup + appropriate probes (usually something very specific).So in essence there is really no point in stepping above the 100mHZ bandwidth DS2000 series.....because if you need that resolution and noise floor, you aren't going to be measuring out past those ranges anyhow.I would still want the differential amp for the LeCroy scope you linked....for reference signal purposes, and the versatility the amplifier offers. It's far easier to employ one of those units and one or two general probes, than a small army of application specific probes (for general purposes). At least that is the way I have always liked to work.I also find myself building a lot of my test leads and "probes" (for very specific tests) and the versatility of i/o the differential amp offers really suits those needs well. Especially where you are trying to quantify very very specific inductive and capacitive properties....and you don't want your test setup to taint those results.Again this is really focusing on DC conversion, at an extreme level of precision. Which is why I so desperately want that PMA2 package. It would save a lot of time in calculating dead time losses in switchers, and in reading harmonic content of critical DC rails.I know this is a bit far off OPs original question, but he did mention the desire for the 500uV resolution, and low noise front end.....I am not sure how/why....if his needs are for higher bandwidth serial decodes, but he did mention it.I still think the Hameg MSO fit those needs (for OP) better than just about anything else out there.....for his budget.I am, however, lusting over the PMA2 package, in that level of scope....with accessories needed (for me specifically) for under $6k. That is astounding value and would save me massive effort and resources on the design bench. Those metrics, displayed in an accurate way are like gold, to someone who does what i specifically do.Obviously the bandwidth on the RF input is useless to me, but you just can't get the tools in the PMA2....inside a scope with that screen real estate and function set....for anywhere near that price....Being able to calculate phase angle offsets, in real-time, between 4 discreet channels is beyond appealing....especially when you can simultaneously data log harmonic content and dead time loss....I need to shut up before I place a bid on that thing

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 11:06:00 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 24, 2014, 10:35:11 amUnderstandable. The downside for that however is that you have to pay for it in form of the DA1855A.QuoteFully agree.QuoteIf you're only interested in Power Analysis have you considered going for one of the older scopes with PMA1? There often are some WaveRunner 2 LTs and WavePro 900 scopes which come with PMA1 (and if the scope doesn't already have it then you should be able to get the option through the LeCroy Yahoo group since as far as I know they're working on getting these options out for older scopes for free as they did for the 9300 and LC Series).The WR2 LT and WP900 of course lack serial decode, the touch screen and Windows OS, and some other features, but they're still very advanced and reliable scopes. I have PMA1 in my WR2 LT264M but so far never used it. However if you want me to try something or want screen shots then let me know.I also have a WavePro with PMA2 so I could do the same there as well.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 12:13:57 pm
content: That is a very generous offer.What I am most curious about is the difference in log-able metrics between the PMA packages.....as well as the speed of the functions. I.E. what is the polling rate and capture rate, and output rate.What is appealing to me about the 6100A, is the versatility and speed of functions (especially with this units processor upgrades). The windows environment is also a HUGE plus, for networking function.The screen real estate is also a big plus, although I am not the biggest fan of touch screens.....but a mouse isn't much of a bother to me (or hot key functions).The packages in the listed scope really are extensive, and cover a lot of ground. My DC designs are currently employing PMbus, and having the fast decode metrics, coupled to phase angle, and power analysis is HUGE. I currently have to employ 5 discreet pieces of hardware to do the same pass/fail tests and design work. Tying all of those into a development environment, just to get a time correlated result, is a very frustrating and on going effort.Obviously the DS2102A is still going to be in the loop, for that noise floor and resolution (still not sure what the real 6100A noise floor is).I am also very curious about the power consumption, radiated EMF and acoustic noise/vibration of the 6100A is in this trim.The processing power, windows OS, and screen real estate make this device VERY appealing....sometimes I do have to do remotes into the hardware, when the test needs to be isolated.Have you ever had the chance to hook a proper current probe and differential pair into the PMA1 package and capture a full overview of power analysis? I.E. input current in relation to current at load....and dead time losses? Those are the real metrics we need in our current projects. Getting a real-time overview of i/o losses, in relation to physical environment would cut development times, by orders of magnitude.We are designing high precision power converters, using some very proprietary methodology. Obviously gaining insight across discreet components is hugely cost beneficial, when it comes time to spin our own packages.Part of our problem is designing the test equipment protocols and systems to validate the research. Most scopes, simply lack the power to grab all of the metrics we need, in a time correlated fashion. Stitching together discreet pieces of hardware, and then validating the offsets (latencies) is one hell of a bear, and leads to substantial waste of resources (and obviously leaves us second guessing some of the data).The duality of the situation, is they are products for niche consumer markets. So amortizing high dollar test systems into the equation is simply impossible. It would decimate the MSRP and kill innovation. Being able to acquire such high dollar equipment, at these prices is a step in the right direction.4 channels at this level of processing power is perfect for bi-polar pair, phase analysis.....and associated metrics.An interesting test would be to gauge the phase offset/correlation and total power i/o losses from a MCU based oscillator, driving those quad FET's. Our biggest hurdle is interrupts and how they add to those latencies, and in turn swing phase at the load. Building an ASIC to avoid those latencies, is not an option...because of that amortized cost (again). Sadly the parallax propeller MCU is just not a mature or developed enough product to employ. It does away with those pesky interrupts...and 8 cores is enough to drive the FET's, but it's a bit of a "hobbyist" chip.Obviously the solution here is simply measuring and taking into account those latencies, and programming the correct offsets.....hence the need for this kind of statistical processing power.If that ain't a mouthful.....sorry you asked yet?P.S. the CMNR in the 1855A and voltage isolation is a strong consideration for anyone looking for a proper differential amplifier. Obviously an army of application specific active probes is much preferred, but having to deal with those in an ongoing qualification (pass fail) system is nightmarish. Especially if the $15/hour operator has little to no respect for those expensive pieces of wire =)

author: awallin
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 10:07:53 pm
content: Just noticed Keysight has a MSOX2024A + APPBNDL promotion where the scope + most software upgrades is sold for lower than the standard price of the scope itself!?2 636 eur + VAT. Is Keysight going to release something new soon and want to get rid of old stock? Or are these 'promo's running all the time?similar(ish) Rigol MSO4024 would be 3259 eur + VATor perhaps the Rigol 4000-series should be compared to the Keysight 3000-series?

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 24, 2014, 11:35:27 pm
content: Why does DS2000 series have better noise floor than DS4000 series?Is this because of some architectural limitation in the DS4000 design?I thought that DS4000 is better than DS2000 on all levels.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2014, 03:32:10 am
content: money....

author: H.O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2014, 04:27:33 am
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on October 24, 2014, 11:35:27 pmWho said that and did you really?QuoteHonestly, from where I'm sitting it looks like you don't know what it is you're looking for. You don't know if you need 2 or 4 channels, you don't know if you need the extra samplerate the DS4k provides over the DS2k or even what the DS2k provides over the DS1k. You don't know what bandwidth you need and now you're starting to talk about the need for the good noisefloor and 500uV/div range on the DS2k - while you yesterday made it pretty clear you didn't even know that inputs on a normal scope are mains earth referenced and not isolated from each other.Don't get me wrong, we're all beginners at some point and it'snothingwrong with that but instead of mulling over which scope to buy for months just get one and start using it. At this rate, by the time you actually decide (if ever) something else has come on to the market and it all starts over.Since you don't seem to know what you're going to use it for just get one for crying out loud ;-)BTW: I'd still like you to answer the question regarding "all the known bugs" in the DS4k that aren't present in the DS2k because I'd like to verify that on my DS4k.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2014, 06:03:07 am
content: QuoteThere are a couple factors that make the Keysight scopes less value for the money for me. The higher cost of software options would bleed me dry to get to the bandwidth I need for some projects that I have. The 8 channel logic analyzer is kind of low, I am sure I could make it work. This is probably a sign that I should get a good stand along logic analyzer. The build in function generator is kind of stupid as there is no arbitrary waveform support. I know I don't have the spend the money to unlock it, its just the idea that they are not trying there hardest to make the best product they can. I have had good luck with the math, decode functions, and segmented memory after having a play with a DSOX2002A the other day. The total memory depth is smaller then I would like. I hope the do update the scope.QuoteThe only things that made me look at the DS4000's was the 4 channels, higher bandwidth, deeper memory, and hoping the math and decode functions would be better. I think I could be just fine with a DS2000 if there was a 4 channel version for 80-90% of what I do. There is some stuff that I have to do that is +500MHz stuff with very small signals, so a LeCroy 12 bit scope may be right for the job.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2014, 07:44:19 am
content: buy 2 DS2000A's. On a serious note though.....I don't understand....you say you want low noise floor, but 500mHZ or more bandwidth.....the two don't go hand in hand. There isn't one scope that is going to do it all. Buy a DS2000A for measuring and qualifying analog components.....and buy the Hameg MSO for your digital work.I don't see any continuity in what you want....it's kind of all over the place. I mean no offense by that, but it's true.Why would you buy a scope with 500uV resolution and a low enough noise floor to use it, above 100mHZ? You are going to need to use a 1855A or similar differential amplifier to employ that low noise "usefullness" and that is going to limit you to 100mHZ.....and frankly so is ANY probe setup that can make use of the low noise front end.....low noise front ends, and high bandwidth DO NOT go together....that isn't because a lack of technology....it's physics.Low noise measurements are going to get a low pass filter (active or passive) no matter what you do.....otherwise you will just be buried in RF noise....and there is no longer a point*confused*P.S> don't buy test equipment just to buy test equipment....buy it for a specific purpose....there is no one box does it all solution. The more specific you get, the more you will find something that measures the task at hand.....if you need to measure with an extremely low noise floor and high resolution, you are dealing with DC....so why buy bandwidth? If you need to measure RF you are dealing with AC, and 500uV/div is going to be relatively useless....

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2014, 11:51:32 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 24, 2014, 12:13:57 pmNo problem. I have a bit of time on my hands this weekend anyways.QuoteIt definitely is. And there's also the advantage in handling general storage, i.e. USB drives. With Windows you're no longer limited to a small flash drive with FAT32 file system.Don't put too much into the processor upgrade, you can get suitable processors and RAM for these scopes for a few bucks these days. Which is good as in the past LeCroy did skimp a bit in terms of CPUs, i.e. the WavePro 7000 Series came with a 1.7GHz Celeron and the WaveRunner 6000 with a 1.4GHz Celeron. The thing with Celerons is that they have small caches (512k for the ones in the WP7k and WR6k), and as LeCroy's XStream does all calculations in the CPU cache this has an impact on performance. You can upgrade the scopes with fast Pentium4 processors with 1MB cache (just don't switch on Hyperthreading), which does speed up processing a lot. If you use a CPU with faster FSB then this will help, too. My WavePro has now 3GB RAM and a 3.2GHz 800MHz FSB P4, and it's a lot quicker now in demanding processing tasks.QuoteI was sceptical of the touch functionality at first (and I don't particularly like Agilent's implementation) but the LeCroy MAUI user interface is really good. They put a lot of effort into making it ergonomical. It also works well with a mouse.The WaveRunner screen is 8.4" which is ok but sometimes feels slightly cramped compared to the larger 10.2" screen of the WavePro 7k. But you can connect an external screen if you want to (and unlike the old Agilent Infiniiums it can be used in dual head mode, with the scope application running on any screen and at any resolution).QuoteI don't know about the WaveRunner 6100A but I just checked my WavePro 7300A and it is 3.157mVpp/385.4uVrms (full 3Ghz BW) and 1.764mVpp/354.4uVrms (200Mhz BW).My WaveRunner2 LT264M shows 1.11mVpp/164uVrms at full bandwidth (350Mhz).I guess that the noise floor on the WR6100A is quite a bit lower than the WP7300A, probably closer to the LT264M.QuoteThe WR6kA Series is specified with 425W. I haven't found the other figures.QuoteYes, it's definitely a bargain for such a scope. Which I think shows that the 2nd hand market is still worth considering.QuoteNo, unfortunately not. I don't do much power electronics.QuoteIndeed. I guess of the advantages of LeCroy is that most people probably only search for Tek and HP/Agilent when looking for scopes which keeps interest in LeCroy lower, thus generally resulting in lower prices.QuoteNo, not yetThe only problem I have is that my home lab is still sparsely populated, so all that's available as a signal source at the moment is a DG1026z 2Ch 60MHz AWG. But if it helps I could simulate two correlated input signals and have it run through PMA1 on the WaveRunner2 and PMA2 on the WavePro.I could also post some screenshots of the options in PMA1 and PMA2 if that's something you'd be interested in (I'd do that in a separate thread, though), and maybe some short videos showing the update rate.I'm sorry that I can't be of more help.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2014, 10:01:08 pm
content: Quote from: H.O on October 25, 2014, 04:27:33 amI am considering all options as I will get funding from the government for an innovation project.Basically the budget is very big, and I need to spend it, and therefore I could buy an MSO4014 instead of an MSO2072A, if it would provide value to the project.I have a Master degree in Electrical Engineering, but this is many years ago, and I worked the past 14 years with Project Management and Technical Presales. So I am not into this anymore. If you are doing technical work for many years, then of course you know all these terminology and parameters by heart, but I simply don't.Yes, I was surprised that MSO4000 is not better in all levels than MSO2000. But maybe it is, just not the noise floor, as they don't go hand in hand with bandwidth. But I would actually expect that you can enable a low pass filter for low noise measurements on the MSO4000 series, to make it act like a lower bandwidth scope for that specific measurement case. There should be the one and only scope out there, but apparently that is not possible. For me it is new that you can not just spend certain amount of $$$ to get a scope that fits all test measurement cases, irrespective of what field you are working in.

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 25, 2014, 11:30:45 pm
content: QuoteI am working on designing a software defined radio with +300 MHz of bandwidth, hoping to get into the 600 MHz range with 16 bits of resolution. This is where the 4 channels comes from, I and Q for 2 channels for Tx and Rx. If there was a 8 Channel scope that is even better. The logic analyzer is to look at the input of the DAC and output of the ADC's. maybe 4 DS2000A's LOL.No one makes oscilloscopes for the kind of frequency ranges in my day job, starts with X-band and goes all the way up to the optical range. So what can be expected performance range of oscilloscopes are not something I think about every day. Its taking me a bit of time to get used to the idea of "low frequency" LOL.I have a couple of other projects that don't need that kind of of bandwidth or memory depth. I am looking into making a production test fixed for something that i am hoping I can make into a product in the next 4 to 8 months that can be done with a MSO1000Z-S for just about everything. But that project's highest frequency in that project is 50 MHz on a digital bus, 200MHz for the internal clock of the micro controller, and 1 to 5 MHz for the analog with voltage resolution of 1 mV should be just fine.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2014, 02:36:44 am
content: The windows OS, is a must....it would be fantastic to have one unit act as a general acquisition hub for any future metrics (specific). The networking and file management being centralized is HUGE. Especially being able to mount external volumes via iSCSI, straight on to the acquisition device. Maybe I can finally get back to day to day life, with this kind of time saving functionality.An interesting test would be to feed two DC signals, with an offset greater than 4 volts (but under 8V), and introduce slight phase discrepancies (not sure if your sig gen can piggyback some AC into the DC signal). Another option would be an AC signal set, with a freq, below 60hZ, with positive offset ONLY.What we want to measure is the loss in power across two bi-polar sets when their phase angles cross. I.E. what is the total loss when phase offset is coincidental (time correlated).Or even simpler, what happens when one switching cycles dead time is overlapped by another bi-polar pair.....if the integration isn't precise we have a derivative "dead time" across the opposite phase crossings....my guess is this switching cycle is somewhere in the 600kHZ range, but that is what we need to tune.Being able to see line harmonics is a very appealing metric, as we can see not only the relative losses, but at which frequencies those losses occur, and employ filter sets to minimize LF phase cancellations.....again our crutch is that we can't time things from an ASCI, and have to rely on some band-aid solutions to raise efficiency, when using a less expensive MCU....which relys on interrupts between switching (logic) cycles....425W is a bit on the "nutty" side. I imagine that with a processor and RAM upgrade that total TDP will climb into the 500+ watt range? Have you had a chance to see what your upgraded scopes total draw is?Thanks again for all of your help. It's an avenue we simply did not consider....the used LeCroy unit with PMA2 saves us about 12k in spectral analysis gear, and the development time and tools to get time correlated metrics from 5-7 discreet devices. The bandwidth is totally unnecessary for us, but I can't see another piece of hardware, that has these tools, for that low of a cost basis.I am going to hunt around for a lower bandwidth, windows based unit....with the PMA2 package....but time being critical, it might makes sense to just buy the unit you linked and get on with it. I am not the type of person to get bogged down in test equipment ideals, specs or "investment quality". That stuff seemed much more important in my 20's, but these days they are just fancy screwdrivers.....use them when needed and move on

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2014, 03:32:47 am
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 25, 2014, 11:30:45 pmwhat you really need is a modular front end (card cage) and run LABview behind it.......you need a very specific thing. Most scopes are designed for general purpose work. Just grab a modular card cage, and the full NI package. What functionality isn't included in the general test and measurement set can easily be written using VB/C+. Grab 8 input cards.....use an external ref clock and grab some logic analysis cards.....

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2014, 07:56:18 am
content: QuoteI have had the suspicion that is the direction I would have to go. I must say I am not a fan of labview tho. I have looked into using PCIe DAQ cards but the cost to performance just about killed me. Its a shame that it is not a more common tool. I have even used the Keysignt PXI box at work for a project. It was basically a 16 port 26.5 GHz VNA with room for a couple more if needed. I didnt want to know the price.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2014, 09:12:54 am
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 26, 2014, 07:56:18 amFar less than a 16 channel 26.5 GHz, general purpose (self contained) oscilloscopeWhat is it you don't like about LABview? If it's UI you can skin and script away to your hearts content....you can even integrate external knobs, buttons, sliders etc.....and map their functions....

author: thewyliestcoyote
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2014, 10:18:12 am
content: QuoteI am a C/C++ python sort of guy, not really a graphical programming kind of guy, expect gnuradio companion. It's always been kind of a pain for me. I know there is NI CVI I have used it a lot and would not like to use it any more. The 16 channel box and VNA's where on the order of quarter to half a million dollars.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2014, 05:38:17 pm
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 26, 2014, 02:36:44 amYes, Windows does have its advantages over the embedded OSes used in other scopes.QuoteMy Rigol DG1062z can create DC with AC on top of it as well as correlated signal.I did hack together some quick tests and a few screenshots of PMA1 and PMA2 and put them intoa new thread. Have a look if that helps. If you want some other specific tests then let me know.Quote425W is the rating of the PSU. I haven't found any figures about the power draw of a WaveRunner 6100A.I haven't measured yet the power consumption of my WP7300A but I'd guess the power consumption is probably in the 350-400W range. Which is not that much considering it supplies a 3.2Ghz Windows PC with hard disk and optical drive as well as a 4Ch 3Ghz 20GSa/s SiGe front end plus a set of huge fans.My guess for the WP6100A would be somewhere in the 280W to 320W range. This is pretty much in line with most advanced Windows-based scopes from other manufacturers. Of course it's no power saver like a Rigol DS4000 or Agilent DSO-X which relies on a low power chipset and an embedded OS.QuoteYou're welcome.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2014, 06:53:09 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on October 25, 2014, 11:51:32 amThanks for those tidbits! I have to admit that the noise-floor on my 9300 and 9400 LeCroys was low enough that I never characterized it.QuoteThat's a winter-time advantage I hadn't considered... a space-heater for 'free'.Not quite so comfy though during summer heat-waves.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 26, 2014, 09:32:02 pm
content: Quote from: Mark_O on October 26, 2014, 06:53:09 pmWhat noise floor do you get on these scopes?QuoteI don't think it's that much of a problem. For example, my WavePro 7300A is rated at 650W max power consumption, but in terms of heating up the room it's nowhere near as bad as my WaveRunner 64Xi which is rated at 340W and which in the summer can make a room quite uncomfortable.But then I'm located in England where the weather is never really good, just different shades of bad

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 27, 2014, 12:33:23 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on October 26, 2014, 09:32:02 pmMy 9300 is still packed from a move (not yet completed), but I can easily check one of my 9400's in the next day or two. As I recall, it was ~1.5mVpp with 400 MHz BW. I.e., not as good as your WR2. RMS I have no clue.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 27, 2014, 02:10:15 am
content: Quote from: thewyliestcoyote on October 26, 2014, 10:18:12 amYou can buy used PXI cages and cards, for pennies on the dollar.You can write in C or python and translate down the road....I never was bothered by NI interfacing....you can map external hardware using MAX or simple MIDI commands....so much knobs, so little time

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 27, 2014, 02:26:28 am
content: Thanks again for running the PMA tests. The results are very insightful and helpful.As far as power consumption, I did find a LeCroy "official" spec on 6100A. It's claimed MAX is 400 W.I wonder if removing the optical drive, replacing the magnetic with an SSD and doing some other optimization (PSU) would help. I assume most of the TDP is going to the older generation of CPU and supporting hardware. I can't imagine the front end draws all that much. I suppose the cathode/back-light is also a bit of a culprit.In our shop power consumption is a very critical factor. We are in California, in a district that charges power premiums. There is also the consideration of extra heat that needs to be removed (all lab spaces are calibrated 20 deg C). I know it might seem trivial, but I recently did a full rework of all computing and support systems, to achieve the least possible consumption.....the savings was well over 30% total use and better than 50% in bottom dollar (we have a tiered power billing structure here). The hardware is amortized over 1 year and net's 3 years service life savings after that initial payback period. It nets 12k in savings over the equipment service life. I digress...There is, of course, the factor of being a good citizen and not being wasteful.....which has it's own moral rewards.Your noise floor tests exceed LeCroy official specs. That is always a plus. 1.7mV p-p is quite respectable. It's at least good enough to measure significant losses.Do you know if the scope software package is "married" to the specific hardware in the system? I.E. is it possible to gut the computing engine and peripherals and set the license and package to run on another set of hardware? MOBO, CPU, mem etc...?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 27, 2014, 12:30:44 pm
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 27, 2014, 02:26:28 amThat could well be. These figures seem to differ slightly between the brochures and catalogues. But yeah, it's the maximum value, the real-world consumption should be noticeably lower.QuoteFrankly, I doubt it. Replacing the 3.5" hard disk with a laptop hard drive could bring a few Watts (and a new drive is always a good idea as hard disks are essentially consumables and old drives may be unreliable). A SSD doesn't necessarily use less power (in many cases it uses even a bit more, especially when the system doesn't support SATA link power management), and Windows XP has no support for TRIM so I'd probably stay away from a SSD (however, one of the hard disks with SSD cache could be an option as they don't rely on TRIM for garbage collection).Replacing the very complex PSU is out of the question unless you want to design your own (which certainly isn't straight forward). It's not just a PC PSU.Replacing the mobo is difficult as these scopes use a DVO ADD AGP card which relies on the i865 chipset graphics and which is unlikely to work with other mainboards. The software for these scopes is also timing critical and doesn't suppport multi-core or Hyperthreading, so going multi-core isn't a good idea.QuoteThe Front End and Aquisition system draws the most amount of current and produces the majority of the heat. The CPU is a Pentium4, not the most efficient but with a TDP in line with many modern CPUs (and it the newer ones do support Speedstep). Same with the chipset.QuoteFrankly, if power consumption and heat is that important then I'd really consider going for PMA1 on a WaveRunner2 which is rated somewhere between 150VA and 230VA max. There's also very little heat coming out from the scope's back, and it's also more silent than the WP7k or WR6k Series.PMA2 is of course nicer and has a better graphical representation but you pay for it by the much higher processing requirements (which means more heat and power consumption). But don't discount PMA1 or the older non-Windows scopes, especially if you don't rely on serial decode, as these scopes are still very powerful tools.I can see if I can measure the power consumption of my WP7kA and WR2 LT264M.QuoteLeCroy has always been very conservative in their specs, unlike Agilent which occasionally tend to bend the truth quite a bit.QuoteYes, it is. The software license is specific to the scope, secured via an involved license managing system.QuoteNo, it isn't. And quite frankly, even if it were then doing that would make it a big project in its own which is hardly worth the end result (wasted man hours and a system that may or may not work reliably).However, you can fully remote-control the scope via Ethernet. LeCroy offers some free software for that (WaveStudio).

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 27, 2014, 01:21:00 pm
content: We did some testing recently on the new Samsung 850 pro SSD's and found their power consumption to be far far less than the segate constellation hybrid drives. It's a pretty significant step up, compared to even the 840 series. On the issue of TRIM support, samsung magician or Ccleaner have a nice garbage collection function set and do offer some other tweaks (also we can always disable indexing, superfetch etc in win). Not so worried about that....more worried about the MOBO actually booting the drive and any licensing issues that might arise from a cloned volume?Very surprised to hear that the front end draws so much. i suppose my lack of experience with higher bandwidth front ends, is to blame for that. I never really play with anything outside 1MHz. Still stuck in the stone age =)If the computing engine isn't traditional (OTS) parts, then yes I can totally see your point about being a waste of time. Maybe it's best to just accept the TCO of the 6100A and then weigh that against "needs". I suppose by the time it's used and serves it's function, the current WIN7 based LeCroy scopes will be down to under $5k and maybe lighter power consumption, with expanded functionality.I imagine the Ethernet link into wave-studio is far from "real-time"?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2014, 03:35:55 pm
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 27, 2014, 01:21:00 pmThat may well be, but I guess the tests have been done on a somewhat recent platform (i.e. SATA2 or SATA3)? Newer SATA standard support various power save modes which SATA1 (which is what these LeCroy scopes have) doesn't.Was this a 2.5" or a 3.5" Constellation?QuoteSure, but running some other program in the background could very well impact the scope processes (which are very timing sensitive).QuoteYou don't even need to clone the volume, just save the calibration data on the D: drive from the original disk (important!), then take a new disk, create at least two partitions, install XP plus all updates (plus gfx and network drivers from the intel website) on the first partition, copy the calibration data into the second, and download and install the latest LeCroy XStream software for your scope. Done!The licenses are stored inside the front end and managed through the LeCroy software.QuoteIt's not really the bandwidth. The thing is that the samplers in the typical low end scopes like the Rigols or Siglents are relative slow (1GS/s, often only 500MSa/s), and often are made of cascaded standard parts from Analog Devices or someone else. These ADCs are simple, cheap, and low power (which means low heat dissipation). The sample memory is usually external which is fine because the sample rate (and therefore the data rate) is low.But if you need higher sample rates (i.e. 5GSa/s or higher) then timing becomes much more critical, so scope manufacturers place the ADCs and the sample memory in a purpose-designed hybrid chip to keep distances low. The tight packaging, together with the very high clock rates however mean that these hybrids suck a lot of power and dissipate a lot of heat.QuoteWell, I guess someone still has to design and develop those pesky low frequency power electronics thingiesQuoteHonestly, aside from hard disk, CPU and RAM I wouldn't do anything to these scopes. These are very complicated (hardware and software) designs, and if you start replacing mainboards and power supplies then the chance is high that you'll end up with a very expensive door stop.QuoteWell, this will certainly take a while, and I wouldn't count on the Windows 7 scopes using less power. The WaveRunner 6zi is rated at 400W, and the current WavePro 7zi is rated at 800W. The PC part plays little into the overall power consumption.QuoteIt's really very close to real-time (screen capture works almost instantly). I use my WavePro over a crappy 11g (54Mbps) USB WiFi adapter as I don't have yet any network connection in my home lab, and it works surprisingly well.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2014, 06:30:41 pm
content: Guys, I just wanted to mention I'm enjoying the discussion. Thanks, Wuerstchenhund, for sharing all the insights into the LeCroys.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 28, 2014, 07:03:58 pm
content: Quote from: Mark_O on October 28, 2014, 06:30:41 pmYou're welcome, I'm glad you enjoy it.I'm by no means a specialist regarding these scopes, I actually only really discovered LeCroy a bit over a year ago when I bought an old WaveRunner LT224 on ebay. Of course I knew the name before, but in the past for me they were just a niche scope manufacturer with a french sounding name which makes scurile devices that many engineers say are cryptic to use. Of course I always wanted to have one out of curiosity but I never really considered their scopes when looking for "every day" scopes as they were simply unknown to me.But then last year I sold my trusty old HP 54510A (and for the record: I*loved*the single knob interface!), and my other scope (HP 54542A) had a faulty PSU, so when I saw this little white LeCroy scope with its LCD monitor on ebay I couldn't resist and bought it.I always felt that most digital scopes were a bit lacking in terms of what to do with the data they collected. For example, FFT on most scopes was and still is pretty primitive (see also the 700 pts limit on the Rigol DS4000, just to stay somewhat on-topic), as were the maths capabilities. At work we got more and more advanced midrange and highend scopes from Tek and Agilent over the years, often with their "advanced" math and analysis software offerings. Don't get me wrong, these were great scopes, but I always felt they were lacking in the signal analysis department. When I then got the old WaveRunner scope I bought I immediately felt at home with this thing. Lucky for me it came with almost all of the software options, and although the low sample rate (200MSa/s) and the small memory (150kpts) did limit it's usefulness, the features and capabilities that were available on this old scope were unbelievable. In this scope I found what I was missing in every single other scope before. That's how I became so hooked up to LeCroy.The old WR LT224 is now gone (a colleague who borrowed it killed it with his ignorance, brr!), so I bought a WaveRunner2 LT254M, a WaveRunner 64Xi and (for work) a WavePro 7300A. Chances are slim that I'll ever buy anything else unless I need a low end scope (the LeCroy offerings in the low end are very poor unfortunately) or I need a MSO (Agilent is makes the better MSOs).If you're interested, I did a review (no video, just text and pictures) of myWaveRunner LT224last year, and one of myWaveRunner2 LT264Mmore recently, although both only cover the basics.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 29, 2014, 09:57:28 pm
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 27, 2014, 01:21:00 pmWell, it seems the WR6100A has now sold for $3384. But the seller has listed a new scope (WaveRunner 64Xi), again with most of the options including PMA2:http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/231372226193?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&fromMakeTrack=trueI have the same (without the options, though). It's the successor of the WaveRunner 6000A Series and a really great scope. 10GSa/s (in single and dual channel mode, 5GSa/s in triple and quad channel mode), 25Mpts memory, up to 1,250,000 wfms/s trigger rate. The PC part uses Pentium-M processors (mobile CPUs which are much more energy efficient than the Pentium4 in the WR6kA and WP7kA). The screen is larger as well (10.2" vs 8.4" on the WR6kA), and it takes less space on the desk.Power consumption is listed with 340W max (I guess this is for the 2Ghz variant) and 290W max for the 62Xi (2Ch 600MHz), so I guess the 64Xi is probably somewhere between these two (probably closer to the 62Xi figure). Don't forget that the max power rating also includes the optional MS-250 logic adapter which turns the WaveRunner Xi into a MSO (WaveRunner MXi), so I'd say the real-life consumption should be closer to 250W.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 30, 2014, 09:58:16 pm
content: I bid on the 6100A, but it went over my cap. I didn't want to pay more than $3k for it. I already have the 64Xi on watch list. I would have actually preferred the 6100A, but the Xi also has advanced FFT and "spectrum analysis". That coupled with the line harmonics measurement on PMA is def an interesting and welcome tool-set.NOT a fan of the single set of vertical controls, or the reduced 8 bit scale....but 2mv/dev is good enough for what we need to do and I can always fall back to the DS2102A if I need that extremely low noise front end (very useful in debugging something that fails masks on the Xi).Strongly considering it.....it's a very nice scope, for our needs.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2014, 10:52:20 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on October 30, 2014, 09:58:16 pmFor $3k you'll probably only get a VxWorks-based scope (WR LT, WR2 LT, WP900) with PMA1. You'd really need *a lot* of luck to snap one of the X-Stream Windows scopes with PMA2 for that money.QuoteThe WR6kA Series are great scopes but the Xi is so much better in any way. Larger screen, much better triggering (even when the WR6kA is already very good at that), comes with WaveStream (which the WR6kA and WP7kA don't have), up to 1.25M waverforms per second (compared to the WR6kA's 125k wfms/s), more compact size, faster processing, more responsive UI, more energy efficient, and more options. The MXi variant does come with the LeCroy Bus (L-Bus) interface for the logic adapter (i.e. MS-250) which makes it a debugging powerhouse, especially with all the options. I guess the scope as offered had an original price tag north of $35k.I do have my doubts that the scope will sell for $3k only, though.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2014, 12:21:03 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 02, 2014, 10:52:20 amYeah, no kidding. The MS-250 adapter alone typically goes for ~$3k.I'd guess the 64MXi will break $5k pretty easily.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2014, 04:05:08 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on November 02, 2014, 12:21:03 pmhave seen the ms250 + 64MXi + active differential probes + OG boxes manuals software etc....sell for under $4500the LeCroy used marketplace is scary, to say the least....at least Tek and Agilent markets have some pricing stability.....Standalone ms250 are going for under $900 and sometimes under $500 on historical records.....$3k is obviously not going to happen, but $7-$9k seems way high.....$5k-$6k seems more stable and logical....It's a shame that we have to spend so much time speculating on and discussing test equipment specifications.....it only takes away form "real engineering efforts"....I feel if the industry spent less time worry about faster bigger better more more more, we could use much more logical, established methodology to solve engineering problems in more efficient ways.It seems it's all a numbers game these days. Especially in these times where you need a scope to compute overly engineered mathematics problems. Frustrating to spend more time debugging and discussing the gear used to do it, than actually paying homage to the great thinkers that came before us.There is something quite magical and rewarding about NOT having to use a half million dollar test rig to do something relatively simple.*STROKES GREYING BEARD AND MUTTERS TO SELF*

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2014, 04:55:43 am
content: http://www.ebay.com/itm/WaveRunner-600MHz-4-Channel-with-XMATH-JTA2-XDEV-4-probes-MS-250-add-on-/161419552759?pt=BI_Oscilloscopes&hash=item25955ae7f7&nma=true&si=G7BICuy3RaHcsZ1xk1Nw819FvL8%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2014, 04:58:42 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on November 03, 2014, 04:05:08 amThanks, TS. I appreciate your sharing your observations. While those are still safely out of my price range, it's always good to know.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2014, 05:38:30 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on November 03, 2014, 04:58:42 amI am, by no means, any expert on oscilloscope economics...but it seems the LeCroy used pricing is all over the place....hard to find a "real" price. I suppose the value is whatever someone is willing to pay (as usual). Seems you can bank a bit more on used Agilent and Tek prices though. Even Keysight direct used sales has some reasonable prices on "fancy" scopes. I suspect where they rape you is in options (as usual).Tough call to make. That 6100A was a fantastic bargain though. Someone made out like a bandit ....

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2014, 06:43:21 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on November 03, 2014, 04:05:08 am[...]Quote from: TunerSandwich on November 03, 2014, 04:55:43 amIndeed, with some luck there sometimes are bargains to be found. But don't forget that the scope in that link only came with XMATH, XDEV and JTA2 and serial decode for I2C, SPI and UART only. All the interesting stuff is missing, and this does affect the price.QuoteI don't think that's the case. In my experience the 2nd hand prices for LeCroy kit are as stable as for Agilent and Tek. Ebay however isn't a good reflection of the overall market for used gear, as it's predominantly hobbyists and small businesses that don't need the services T&M brokers offer which buy there. And the simple fact that most people think "Tek" and "Agilent" only when looking for oscilloscopes means that quite often the sales price of LeCroy kit auctioned on ebay is much lower than it would be for comparable Tek or Agilent kit.QuoteBased on where it is now my guess would be that $5k to $6k is about right, maybe even lower.QuoteWell, these are complex tools, and like with other complex tools looking at the details is important to make sure that the tool is right for the job at hand. This aside, I'm sure whoever designed these scopes does consider his work to be "real engineering". And of course I don't know what exactly you do design but I wouldn't be surprised at all if amongst your customers there are other engineers discussing the properties of your products and the alternative from competitors.QuoteWell, for many engineers the "established" way using oscilloscopes is limited to looking at waveforms and maybe taking some readouts with cursors, or finding glitches with a scope in persistence mode and waiting to *see* the glitch on the screen. Methodology which has been transferred from analog scopes (and which still work on DSOs) but which isn't necessarily the best way of doing things.A modern advanced scope can do so many things which can make life so much easier but which are simply ignored by many engineers because they are stuck in methodology established decades ago.QuoteWell, the thing is that electronics *is* maths. The waveform displayed on a scope is not just some changes in voltage levels, it's a math function. And one you treat is as that you can easily extract any parameter you need from it, which you can't do by merely looking at stuff. I guess that's also the reason why you're interested in a scope with power analysis package.QuoteTrue, but without the advanced capabilities in modern scopes a lot of things wouldn't even be possible.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2014, 07:29:14 am
content: If we look at traditional equipment brokers, we can find more stability, but it's at typically delusional values. I do understand they have overhead to accommodate, and offer some levels of warranty (usually). However if we look at the more traditional, independent marketplaces, the range in pricing is a bit astounding. Like I had said in the past, if I was opening up XYZ corps checkbook, there would be no hesitation to use a broker or buy new.If that item stays under $6k it would be fair (IMO). If it climbs past $7k I think it's possibly overvalued. Granted it is a very nice tool-set.The problems I am talking about, in regards to complexity...is mostly complexity for complexities sake. The products I design are almost always an attempt to employ complexity, ONLY when it leads to a necessary reduction of complexity in the end users hands. Or when it is necessary to do something very very specific. I do however, see a lot of the complexity for complexity sake approaches.What I mean by "real engineering", is that I see a general trend towards using non discreet packages and "do it all" SoC. I know the ideals behind this are to simplify and diversify, but that kills all the cleverness involved (IMO). It delegates us to being nothing more than OTS component selectors and assemblers.For example with a modern PoL controller, I have a vast array of functions that I can control and quantify, that do nothing more than mirror traditional passive component applications.Yes the size is spared, but at the expense of over complexity, and un-necessary or redundant functions. Which obviously leads to some power and resource wastage, and dramatically increased the need for overly complex analysis chains.Of course electronics is math....but when it exceeds the math one can do in their lifetime, to solve what was traditionally solved in a simple way, would you agree there might be a problem?It seems to be the same scenario with code structures.....so much modern code is object based and bloated/redundant....it instils a bit of laziness and "bucks" the more traditional systems of efficiency, which spurred so much innovationI'm not sure any of this stuff makes life easier, as you spend as much time debating and analyzing and maintaining the systems that were supposed to make that reality. I know the majority of my engineering time is spent analyzing the systems and pace of development....than actually worrying about innovation. Such is the hyper-consumerist marketplace. The time is not spent to make things mature. the time is spent on designing systems to take less time to design systemsStrange that I would pick a test equipment forum to drop such bombshells ?

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2014, 07:36:09 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 03, 2014, 06:43:21 amNow that scenario is TRULY scaryI tend to stay as far away from those people as possible....leave them for the marketing machine