Choosing Lab equipment for our new electronics lab. - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 06:06:07 pm
content: Hey guys.I'm looking around for test equipment to get going on a product development lab (power electronics and servo drives / motion control)I am trying to pick out and choose the equipment to use.Does anyone have a good suggestion for:- Oscilloscope ( 4 channel is a must ) Rigol or Agilent.- Function generator- Precision power supply- Precision multi-meter. (How many digits would I probably need? 5.5?)I'm going to be developing 3 phase and stepper motor drives for industrial applications, may branch into PLC / Automation control design.Does anyone have any suggestions in relevance to the equipment?We are not too worried about budget however It all has to be justified (don't really need a 1GHz scope where a 200MHz would do etc.)Thanks,Thomas Williamson

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 06:23:16 pm
content: The two most common things people leave out of their post asking for help:Where do you liveWhat is your budgetWithout this information you get unhelpful replies.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 06:34:49 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on February 13, 2015, 06:23:16 pmI've already said about the budget, as for location, UK.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 06:56:03 pm
content: OK, for a minimum budget you want to consider:Rigol DS1054Z and hack it to all options and 100MHzSiglent SGD1025Powers supply? Keysight to match your needs2 multimeters at least and I would suggest Brymen BM869s and also get the PC cable, or with internal logging you want to look at Brymen BM525s. Get the PC cables for whatever you buy.Logic analyzer, I am waiting for an Ikalogic ScanaPLUS V2I would also suggest a clamp meter or two, Brymen BM079 for three phase voltage and single phase current, and/or a Uni-T UT211BIt also sounds like you could benefit from a handheld oscilloscope for troubleshooting on site. Make sure you get one with isolated inputs.This is for a minimum budget. Should come in at less than $4000USD

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 07:47:28 pm
content: I am definitely interested in that Logic analyzer.I have that oscilloscope at home, It's great. Do you think it would be good enough for developing these kinds of products?(Wasn't sure if I would need to go with an Agilent / Keysight 3000 series or a Rigol DS4000.)What do you think of the Rigol bench-top power supply? This one maybe?http://www.rigolna.com/products/dc-power-supplies/dp800/dp831a/It looks fairly accurate too.I shall definitely look into those meters too!I don't think I shall need to worry about a hand held scope as anything that is borked or seems broken we would take back to base.Thanks for your thoughts though! Does anyone else have any?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 07:57:49 pm
content: IMHO the Keysight 3000 is a bit short on memory. AFAIK the memory gets smeared over the channels so the more analog and digital channels you turn on, the less memory you get per channel.I'd get an MSO instead of a (low end) logic analyser anyway. The value for money is much better than any of the low end USB logic analysers due to the memory depth an MSO typically offers.If you can stretch the budget a Lecroy Wavesurfer 3000 series could be nice. If I had to buy a mid range oscilloscope now that would be my first choice to take a closer look at.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 08:05:35 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 13, 2015, 07:57:49 pmThat is a beautiful oscilloscope. (http://uk.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3024/?qs=%2fha2pyFaduiQhABdVLXR5hFK1PR7V9lGeC2Qep8eBWfVcKhA%2f8LXAA%3d%3d)I might chat to my boss and see if we can get one to demo for a period of time (LeCroy is quite good like that)At nearly £3k that is quite a huge investment, gonna be hard to persuade him for that.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 08:09:21 pm
content: Add another 1000 pounds for the MSO option and some more for serial decodeOr wait a couple of months and see if Siglent finally gets their SDS2000 firmware together.

author: BloodyCactus
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 08:11:46 pm
content: if this is for business, the scanaplus is a toy and can you trust the readings on a uni-t at all? are the rigol DS1054Z and siglent SGD1025 even on a business level of trustworthyness? business dont go out and buy the bottom shelf cheapest everything, thats what hobbyists do.you want someone who can give you vendor support in your country, good warranty etc. Remember siglent are the people who had a usb socket on the front of their device and not connected to anything internally. bogus.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 08:19:47 pm
content: Quote from: BloodyCactus on February 13, 2015, 08:11:46 pmI agree with you there. It is for business. But budget is fair but rather limited. I don't have the biggest experience however I will for the most part be driving the product development forward with help from a couple of more experienced people (in other countries)I would have thought the DS1054Z fairly trustworthy but again, I'm not an expert and I haven't been in for long enough to notice all the 'new player traps' so this is very much a learning experience for me. I am of course dealing with being fairly new (first job) and most of my experience is from a hobbyist perspective. I also of course have to deal with the fact that being new they may not always think I am right on the choices of equipment (As I am young and may be 'seeing shiny') so I do have to back up everything I say.The company I am working for does not have a huge budget but if the price can be justified (by data) then they can understand and will agree.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 08:20:46 pm
content: When I asked for a budget, I was told it wasn't important. I suspected differently so I suggested bottom range equipment that could do the job. When an expensive scope was mentioned, the budget became important. Again, no budget range leads to pointless answers.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 08:25:43 pm
content: Quote from: Lightages on February 13, 2015, 08:20:46 pmI understand what you mean. As I said, budget isn't a HUGE problem if I can PROPERLY justify it. I get questions like 'Are you sure you need this feature' and 'Couldn't we go with this cheaper one'Being that this is primarily a sales company I am working for, looking to create their own product range, they don't have as good knowledge as most of us do. And even then, I don't have that much. I am to mostly learn on the job, grow my experience as I experiment and come up with designs and such that can go towards production (while doing tech support for some of their product range)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 08:33:49 pm
content: If you don't have a big budget start with cheap equipment and buy specialistic/more accurate equipment if a project requires it. The Siglent SDG1000 series function generator is a decent piece of equipment.BTW: A 70V 20A PSU will probably take a big chunk of change to buy. Maybe get two lesser PSUs which can be connected parallel or in series to get higher current or higher voltage.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 08:49:06 pm
content: ditch the function generator. you;re never going to use it.if you going to do motor drive : get multiple power supplies

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 08:56:41 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on February 13, 2015, 08:49:06 pmReally? I intended to use it for PWM control along with testing inputs / outputs against noise and various such things.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 09:16:20 pm
content: Same here. Recently I did a wireless power project. I used my Siglent SDG1010 as a PWM generator for the initial testing.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 12:39:48 am
content: It does worry me about how 'reliable' the equipment is... I mean people say it is hobbiest.. but then again if it works, and it makes measurements that are similar to the 'professional' ones... whats the difference? If it does the job... it's good. I am going to discuss with the Director / Owner of the company on Monday to choose a direction on where to go (cheap and then upgrade or expensive and few upgrades needed)I would really appreciate it if someone could write something I could forward to my boss about the better decision to go with or any tips / such about the equipment? ( To backup what I say compared to experts / people who know their field.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 01:38:09 am
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 14, 2015, 12:39:48 amWhatever equipment you buy nowadays get repaired at the board or module level. So either way expect to pay a lot when it is broken. If you buy a low end Tektronix, Keysight or Lecroy: it is all made in China. The choice is more like: do you buy directly from the source or from a trading company which runs the price up by 3 times or more. BTW I'm pretty sure there are Rigol and Siglent distributors out there which care for their clients.

author: Noise Floor
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 02:11:06 am
content: What are you analysis and documentation needs? Any need for software in the lab?

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 03:09:38 am
content: Get a 3000 series Agilent. You really do need more than 200 MHz for anything but the slowest of clocks now. Shoot for 500Mhz and you'll get to use cheap, passive probes, but keep the option to go to 1GHz should you need to. If you're going to be doing automation, you'll want the MSO option sooner or later and it will keep your oscope channels free. The 2000 series will only serial trigger off the scope channels. You will want this ability for monitoring Canbus/MODBUS etc.Get the function generator option. Occasionally you'll need it.Don't get a Rigol. By the time you add the serial decode packages and get the bandwidth you really need, it is not inexpensive any more. And the serial decoding is done in software, which is sloooow.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 09:04:02 am
content: I'd suggest a "one stop shop":http://www.siglent.com/ENs/index.aspxSDS2000 series 4 Ch DSO with ALL options. AWG, Decode, MSO and Power Analysis (special promotion untill end of FEB)SPD3303 series PSUSDM3055 Bench DMMAll with supporting and compatable software.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 10:05:30 am
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 14, 2015, 12:39:48 amThere's quite a difference. For example, Siglent and Rigol both produce good hardware but both suck at developing the firmware for their kit. For example, Siglent came out with a nice entry level scope (SDS2000) but after all that time it is still plagued by firmware bugs that may or may not be fixed eventually. Just read the SDS2000 threads in this forum. To make matters worse it looks like Siglent is now working on new scope models so no-one knows if the SDS2000 will ever get the necessary attention.Rigol is slightly better in this regard but they focus their attention on the products that sell most (i.e. DS2000 and DS1000z scopes, the DS2000 has seen many updates and is now in a decent state regarding its firmware) which comes at the cost of neglecting the DS4000 and DS6000 which both suffer from problems that have long been fixed in the DS2000. That means while the DS2000 is a good and reliable scope in its price class, the DS4000 is still a buggy like hell and unlikely to ever get its problems fixed.The other thing is that support is very variable with Siglent and Rigol, while the big names have established support centers around the world with short turn-around times and the chance to talk to engineers with product knowledge and not just some script jokey.As a hobbyist, such things may well be acceptable if the price is low, as the kit usually only sees occasional use. But in a professional setting the last thing you want is a buggy piece of equipment that wastes time or prevents you from doing what you need. Don't forget that even for a lowly paid EE time wasted time can quickly translate into costs that exceed the price of the equipment in question or the price difference between kit from a cheap Chinese brand and something from a big name brand. And it's not a good position to be in if that happens because you saved a few hundred bucks by buying or recommending cheap kit.Quote from: LabSpokane on February 14, 2015, 03:09:38 amPlease don't. I have to second the recommendation for the LeCroy WaveSurfer 3000. It's a great scope, and while the Keysight DSO-X3000T is a good scope it's still just a rehash of the now approx 5yr old DSOX3k, and it's no match for the LeCroy (i.e. the DSOX3kT's FFT is limited to 64kpts, the WS3k to 1M; 2 math functions of which only one can be displayed with FFT on the DSOX3kT against six on the LeCroy which can be displayed at the same time even with FFT). The DSO-X3kT also only offers only 4Mpts of sample memory which is quite poor for a scope that came out in 2014 while the WaveSurfer 3000 comes with 10M. In addition, the LeCroy offers additional goodies like LabNotebook for documenting measurements (not available on the Keysight) and a user interface (MAUI) that was designed for touch from the ground up while Keysight just adds touch to a non-touch UI. If you have doubts then contact LeCroy and ask for a free loaner which you can take for a spin around the block.QuoteI agree, 200MHz is really too low. Bandwidth is one of the most underestimated things when choosing a scope.QuoteThat's true.BTW, as to pricing, never compare the list prices for Agilent/Keysight or LeCroy kit with the prices for Rigol or similar kit. The big brands are usually pretty flexible in their pricing, and as a business you can usually haggle like on a Turkish bazar. For example, you might be able to get the LeCroy WS3000 for below list price with all the options you want for cheap or even free. Of course the more expensive the scope is the bigger is the room for negotiations but you should still be able to save a few bucks for 500MHz WaveSurfer 3000.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 11:16:46 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 14, 2015, 10:05:30 amI hate to ask, but how would I actually haggle down the pricing of a 500MHz WaveSurfer 3000 (over £7K) and how far could I haggle it down by? Not quite sure how I would approach it and what kind of bargaining power / promises I can make to get the price significantly down.I am also admittedly a bit confused why I would need 500MHz when I am only probably going up to a max of 100KHz in terms of the frequencies I am using on the output of drives, not to mention I doubt I will ever need or want to probe the clock of my microcontrollers (Again, doubt it would go over 120MHz. I'm not arguing nor disagreeing, I just need to be able to explain the prices to my boss. Especially considering I am 18 and they may not take me as seriously when I say I 'need it' compared to a 40 year old electronics guru. (Not to mention my valve era electronics tutor who seems to think it can all be done with a 60MHz Siglent 2 channel scope)

author: rodpp
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 11:52:08 am
content: Do you already have some equipments to start the project?If yes, maybe it's better start with it and buy new ones only when the necessity comes. In that moment you'll know exactly what you will need.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 11:57:18 am
content: Quote from: rodpp on February 14, 2015, 11:52:08 amWe have a Siglent 60MHz 2 channel scope and some cheap bench power supplies ( the kind colleges use for their classes ) Not really much other then that. We do have a decent soldering iron now however (Weller)

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 12:04:06 pm
content: So when the frequency that is being sent to the drive is incorrect, how do you plan to check the microcontroller driving it all with a 50 MHz scope? If you can't probe the system end to end in order validate and troubleshoot it, why bother looking at all? Ignorance may be bliss, but not in electrical engineering.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 12:50:51 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on February 14, 2015, 03:09:38 am200MHz is more than enough for general purpose work. You'll need special probes to be able to actually use high bandwidths and those probes together can cost just as much as the oscilloscope. Typically I have a 200MHz scope for everyday use and an older oscilloscope with a much higher bandwidth for special occasions.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 01:16:13 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 14, 2015, 11:16:46 amThe WS3054 isn't over £7k, it's actually less than £5k:http://www.tme.eu/en/details/lc-surfer3054/digital-oscilloscopes/teledyne-lecroy/wavesurfer-3054/QuoteIt's not that difficult, really. Just contact LeCroy sales directly (not any distributor) and tell them your company is procuring a scope, that you normally buy Agilent/Keysight but that the WaveSurfer 3024/3054 looks interesting, and ask for the price for the config you want. Once they give it to you tell them that the stated price exceeds your budget and what you can get from Agilent and Tek, but if the price were to be closer to X that you could convince your management that the LeCroy was the better proposition.In my experience large T&M manufacturers are pretty easy to deal with, aside from Tek who doesn't seem to be very flexible in their pricing (which is even more surprising when considering that they're no longer a top contender in terms of scopes).QuoteA 200MHz scope only good enough for a 120MHz signal if it's a pure and perfect sine wave (which in reality often won't be the case). And other signal components may easily exceed the fundamental frequency. For example, ff it's closer to a square then your 200MHz scope is only good for capturing the fundamental frequency but not the harmonics, and the waveform you see won't have much to do with what's actually happening. Also, you seem to fall into the trap of only considering the bandwidth of the signals you expect to find, but not what else might be there that's screwing up your design and which you simply won't see because your test equipment lacks the necessary bandwidth. In the worst case you're chasing phantoms because you're essentially flying blind (which again comes back to money lost through hours wasted which depending on the situation can quickly exceed the price difference for better equipment).I think 500MHz is pretty reasonable recommendation, but if that's outside your budget then I'd go with the 300MHz model instead of only 200MHz.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 01:33:58 pm
content: QuoteI was mostly referring to the cost of all the probes + the digital channels etc.QuoteI shall take your advice there and have a chat with them.QuoteI was not aware of this, huge thanks for letting me know this kind of stuff as It's something I wouldn't have thought of at all. It's also a good point I can put forward to management.Is it worth getting a multimeter or could I just use my Oscilliscope for the more precise measurements that are below 200V?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 01:57:20 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 14, 2015, 01:33:58 pmDigital channels are a software option (as is the enablement for the integrated Arbitrary Waveform Generator) which is one of the things that probably could be negotiated in.QuoteGet a multimeter. Even a simple handheld multimeter is better than the scope multimeter (and with better resolution), and even a decent one doesn't have to cost much money.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 02:09:26 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 14, 2015, 01:57:20 pmAlright then, It seems that buying the Digital channels is not only the actual software but the cables for it too. I have a couple of hand held multi-meters, I may look into getting a proper 4 wire multi-meter from somewhere too.Would it be a good idea to invite them to our building and into a meeting room to discuss or do it through email or phone. They usually bring some samples too...

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 02:29:59 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 14, 2015, 02:09:26 pmThey're part of the WS3K-MSO package, and certainly would be thrown in.QuoteJust ask them to give you a demo on-site, which they should be happy to do. You might even be able to get a fully loaded demo scope for a verry low price.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 03:25:26 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 14, 2015, 02:29:59 pmWhy don't they just include it if it gets thrown in anyway? I recently asked for a quotation for a Wavesurfer3000 but didn't pull the trigger on it due to the options being so darn expensive.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 04:17:10 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 14, 2015, 03:25:26 pmBecause it would be a waste to throw in logic cables which will then end up collecting dust in the box or going to the bin because they're not needed. A lot of these scopes will not be used for logic work.QuoteTry to approach LeCroy directly. If you buy from shops like Mouser or Digikey then of course they'll charge you full price.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 04:21:33 pm
content: BTW: I've asked a local Lecroy dealer for a price.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 04:27:53 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 14, 2015, 04:21:33 pmI wouldn't go through dealers if you can avoid that (i.e. if there's a LeCroy subsidiary in your country), as they usually have some limitations re. pricing and obviously want to have a piece of the cake for themselves.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 05:21:32 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 14, 2015, 04:27:53 pmYeh, I agree there!

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 06:20:49 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 14, 2015, 04:27:53 pmI didn't look into that. Maybe later this year once I figured out what I'm going to do with my oscilloscope situation.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 06:41:53 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 14, 2015, 10:05:30 amAs usual the hound is doing his best with some "over the top" marketing claims.Siglent are more engaged with this community than other manufacturers striving to get their products better.There were a dozen FW issues addressed in the last release at Xmas.(SDS2000)Major bugs discovered in equipment are normally sorted in a week of two.Rigol has some problems with 1000 & 2000 series that have owners waiting for a year for a fix.These subtle facts have been conveniently overlooked in his reply.Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 14, 2015, 01:33:58 pmA quality DMM will be more useful than a DSO for your needs along with its additional functionality.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 06:47:25 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 14, 2015, 06:41:53 pmBeing that you ARE a Siglent distributor I find it hard to take you tooo seriously in terms of their products, especially as the ones I have tried I haven't found them to be very good. I'm going to try have a good chat with my boss about the oscilloscopes and so on.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 06:55:55 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 14, 2015, 06:41:53 pmSays the person with a vested interest in Siglent.QuoteYeah, well maybe Siglent should have spend more time actually addressing the issues in a timely manner.QuoteGreat, and still the scope is suffering from major bugs after a year of release which is pretty much an embarassment (and as far as I know the main reason why LeCroy has adopted an Iwatsu scope for their entry level (WaveJet) instead of the SDS2000, and why Siglent isn't allowed even near the software for the SDS3000 aka WS3000).Siglent has demonstrated that their hardware is solid but in terms of firmware they are absolutely useless.TCWilliams, don't believe me (or a Siglent seller), just read the SDS2000 threads in this forum to see how bad it really is. You'll find that even some people that originally defended the scope in the beginning have pretty much given up on it and wouldn't recommend it any more. As someone else pointed out in another thread, it's remarkable that it's only the people with a vested interest who are defending Siglent no matter what. Read the threads and then decide if that is acceptable for you in a commercial setting.QuoteIndeed, and I think I already highlighted that Rigol has similar problems. And just because other cheap Chinese brands suffer from the same problem doesn't make Siglent's failure to sort out their many firmware problems.But I understand that negative feedback about the products you sell is a concern for you.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 07:02:23 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 14, 2015, 06:41:53 pmI agree. An oscilloscope usually has a DC accuracy specification of 1% at best. Even a cheap Chinese bench DMM like the VC8145 is around 0.05% DC accuracy. I'd get several basic DMMs both bench model and hand held.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 07:07:02 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 14, 2015, 06:47:25 pmYes and openly so.What can't you take seriously?Which models have you tried?You stated you had a 60 MHz unit.....you'll find the SDS2000 range are significantly more advanced.You may not be aware LeCroy are working with Siglent and LeCroy rebrand some Siglent products for their entry level range.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 14, 2015, 06:55:55 pmOf course, why wouldn't I be?However of greater concern is Siglent's response to issues in the fastest possible time as everybody likes to publicize a competing brands shortcomings.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 07:18:45 pm
content: We have to admit that Siglent has several of their employees active on this forum. AFAIK they are the only major equipment vendor to do so. Also it seems the Lecroy Wavesurfer 3000 hardware is build by Siglent.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 08:53:31 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 14, 2015, 07:18:45 pmThat's true, however it hasn't really lead to a better product, has it? They have received tons of good feedback early on, but only addressed some of the issues, and often replaced one issue with a new one.Showing presence on a forum is all nice and dandy from a marketing perspective, but for an end user it's pretty much worthless if major product flaws remain unfixed for long periods of time.QuoteAside from that I think it's very much debatable if Siglent can be considered a 'major vendor', the simple truth is that most big brands that are not active here manage to bring out more mature products.Also don't forget that some companies like Keysight have their own forum, and that this is not the only EE forum.QuoteYes, the hardware, which was designed with LeCroy keeping their finger on it, and with Siglent being prevented from even touching the software (all they get are encrypted binary blobs to put on the scopes). For the WaveSurfer 3000, LeCroy is using Siglent for what they're good at - producing quality hardware(!) at reasonable costs. Also the WaveSurfer 3000 will be supported by LeCroy and not Siglent, so it's backed up by a pretty solid and proven support structure.I said it before and say it again, Siglent can produce good quality hardware, but they definitely have shown to be utter useless when it comes to software. That's a fact, and while as a hobbyist the quirks of Siglent's firmware might be tolerable in some cases, I can't honestly recommend to invest money in such buggy kit if it's meant to be for a professional setup.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 11:12:56 pm
content: Having sat down with a family friend (Phd. Head of Research at an ultrasound company) who do a large amount with oscilloscopes, RF and various other things.We went though some maths along with a deep discussion and decided that I wouldn't ever need to go above (or near) 200MHz, taking into account fundamental frequencies. Along with that he said that he has used both LeCroy and Agilent extensively and finds Agilent much better in terms of cost-benefit.He has highly suggested the MSOX3024A and I do believe that I shall very likely go with that (He is a crazy brainbox, knows huge amounts)All I have to figure out is the rest of the equipment. !

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 11:29:53 pm
content: I don't think he is right about the Agilent. The 3000 series is based on obsolete technology. That technology was great... 10 years ago.Put together a wish list and call Lecroy and tell them what price and options they have to match to make you buy a Wavesurfer 3000.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2015, 11:46:14 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 14, 2015, 11:29:53 pmIn what way is Agilent's oscilloscopes 'obsolete technology'?The family friend I was talking about used to use LeCroy oscilloscopes in their products for quite a while until they decided and worked out that Agilent 3000A series were actually much better. ( At one point he could literally phone up LeCroy and they could recognize his voice from how often he called them / did business)I think I shall do that anyway and give them both a test run.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 12:24:02 am
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 14, 2015, 11:46:14 pmHe must have used either a WaveAce or a WaveJet then. In case you didn't know, LeCroy never bothered to develop cheap low end scopes so they rebadged some cheap Siglent scopes (with Siglent firmware!) and sold them as 'WaveAce', and also some Iwatsu scopes as 'WaveJet'. The WaveAce is plain crap, and while the WaveJet is not a bad scope it's outdated and overpriced. But then no-one buys LeCroy for their botom-of-the-barrel scopes.But that has little to do with the WaveSurfer 3000, and which easily gives the old DSOX3000A and even the "new" DSOX3000T a run for its money. I have used the DSOX3000, and spent some time with the WS3000, and the latter is simply the much more capable scope, and at a pretty decent price, simple as that.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 03:09:02 am
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 14, 2015, 11:12:56 pmIf all you ever need to test is the stepper / driver side of the motor, he is correct. If you need to go upstream very far, you'll hit the wall in a hurry. If renting a scope is as easy in the UK as the US, it's less of an issue.

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 03:29:01 am
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 13, 2015, 08:56:41 pmIf you want a generator that can do that you will need to look at a multichannel one that has ARB capability and you will for sure require a buffer amplifier to be able to inject signals.most Signal generators can not generate PWM signals (unless they have ARB capability) If you want to go all the way up to EMC you will need a machine that can do several hundred MHz , a serious amplifier and you will need current coils as well. but you may be better off generating PWM signals with a small microcontroller board as you hive finer grain control.For a scope i would not look at the 3000 series from Agilent (keysigh.. Agilent name will stick for a long time. There's even people still calling it HP) but bump it up to the 4000 series. The advantage is that those machines are software upgradeable. If, in the future you find you need more bandwidth or memory that can be 'unlocked' by buying the key. Beats having to buy a whole new scope. So you pay for what you need right now and you pay the difference to get a better machine in the future as opposed to a totally new machine.i would look into getting some good , used, power supplies that are stable under harsh load conditions if you will be playing with drive technology.Be carfull with beack-emf coming from your system that could ruin the power supplies , or pumpt the output above what you have set it to. Most supplies cannot handle current being forced in to them , you may want to get a supply that has a so called down programmer or even a two or four quadrant supply. ( sink and source both in voltage and current mode )added bonus if you get one of those : you can use em as amplifier for a signal generator if you want to inject 'garbage' into a system under test. Most four quadrant supplies have an analog control input in the back. simply drive the signal in there and the basically become a power amplifier.

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 06:35:10 am
content: @TCWilliamson - do yourself a favor and think about the work you are doing and what you need the tools to do. Then go to all the different manufacturer websites and see what they offer in your price range, just below and just above budget. Compare specs. Focus on the differences and see what is important to you. Read datasheets, check out the manuals. Then search Google on those scopes. Watch YouTube videos, ask questions about how they operate on the forum. Get a demo if you can.But asking "what scope should I buy" is not going to get you far. Why? Because lecroy, tek, agilent all make excellent scopes. Regardless of what anyone tells you. And when you ask a general purchasing question, many people will reply with brand loyalty or brand hatred. And that has nothing to do with the capability of a scope serving your needs on your bench.If that sounds to daunting then you probably need to spend more time on your design and developing your test plan so you know what tool needs to do. Then you can ask specific tool questions and get some good responses. Until then you might as well name three sports teams and ask which is the best. If you need to learn about scopes features then throw out some questions along those lines. Anyway, just a suggestion - its hard to filter through a lot of responses implying fact when they are extremely subjective.Edit - I reread this thread after posting and see you are getting some good research here and there. I get concerned when people say buy A, don't buy B without ones feature needs in mind. But looks like you are filtering through that. My response probably more against that than suggesting you are not doing your homework - good luck.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 07:55:03 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 12:24:02 amThe 3000X series uses a now 4 year old ASIC. The New 3000T uses the same ASIC.The Waveserfer 3000 was release 12 months ago, so it sure had better give the Agilent a "run for it's money", in fact it had better do a lot more than that considerign how new it is.I don't know what nctnico is on about it being 10 y/o technology, it was ground breaking and state-of-the-art 4 years ago. So much so that no one could touch Agilent for several years.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 07:57:33 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on February 15, 2015, 03:29:01 amThe 3000X is also software upgradable in the same way.The 4000X has the exact same performance, just with a bigger screen and some more decode options etc. But as far as everyday use scopes goes the 4000X is identical to the 3000X

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:02:16 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 15, 2015, 07:55:03 amIt's not just the ASIC. The 3000T is essentially a 3000 just with touch functionality added and a slightly higher sample rate.QuoteI'd say it does, it offers a lot more functionality than the DSOX3000(T), while being noticably less expensive.The WS3k even does quite well against the DSOX4000, which costs a lot more (roughly the same as the WaveRunner 6zi, which again is a much more advanced scope than the DSOX4k) while suffering from the same problem of a tiny sampling memory.The area where the WS3000 does lack, though, is in the number of supported decode formats (the DSOX3k supports more), although LeCroy is working on expanding them. But unless you need to decode one of the formats that's not available on the WS3000 I'd say the WaveSurfer is the much better scope these days.QuoteIt was (at least for the low end sector, as there already were >1M wfms/s scopes before then) but it also shows that Agilent/Keysight have drawn themselves into a corner with their focus on the waveform update rate, and it won't get better.Quote from: EEVblog on February 15, 2015, 07:57:33 amIt is, as is the WaveSurfer 3000, but bandwidth upgrades are pretty much a gimmick in my opinion. If you do the upgrade quite soon after buying the scope then you end up paying much more than just going for the higher bandwidth model in the first place. And if you upgrade the scope years later then you're usually better of by just selling the scope and getting a new one, which will usually come with better performance and more features.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:11:44 am
content: Quote from: don on February 15, 2015, 06:35:10 amBe careful with Youtube videos, though, because a lot of them are made by someone who is still in the "buyer's euphoria" phase, and quite often doesn't have enough experience with competing products to draw a reasonable conclusion how the particular scope stacks up against the competition. And then there are "thank you for the free scope" type of reviews (which seem to have increased for scopes from a certain manufacturer that was once at the top but is now closer to the bottom of the barrel).If you spend several grand on a scope then you really should get a demo, period. Not just a demonstration, get a loaner scope for a few days so that you can evaluate it in your environment and useage scenarios. If a manufacturer refuses then they obviously don't want your business, and in this case simply move on.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:19:54 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 10:02:16 amI don't know why people think the 4000X is special, it's not. Exactly the same ASIC as the 3000X, the same screen resolution, the same memory, the same sample rate, the same touch zone triggering, etc. It just has an extra 0.5GHz bandwidth, physically bigger screen, two AWG's, and a few bells and whistles.But essentially the same scope.QuoteQuoteOf course they have.They are working on it, bet your bottom dollar.They had the market to themselves for a sold 3 years, now they'll cop a few years of slower sales until their Megazoom 5 comes out.Then it's likely the other brands will be on the backfoot again unless they can preempt that.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:33:41 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 12:24:02 amDo you mean May 2014 launched Siglent SDS3000 what also sold as WaveSurfer 3000?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:47:35 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on February 15, 2015, 03:29:01 amReally? The DSOX4000 is a bumped up DSOX3000 (which as Dave already stated can also be bandwidth upgraded) and probably the most unattractive scope in the whole Keysight lineup.A DSOX4054 brings you the same 5GSa/s and the same tiny 4M sample memory the DSOX3k(T) suffers from, at a price of a whooping $14,255. That's the same price bracket you can already get the 600MHz version of these instead:http://cdn.teledynelecroy.com/files/pdf/waverunner_6_zi_datasheet.pdfKeysight makes good scopes but the DSOX 2k/3k/4k are somewhat simple scopes based on their old MegaZoomIV ASIC, which in turn was designed for Agilent's intended waveform update 'race'. But the ASIC is holding the scopes back in terms of sample memory, and the whole design is pretty limited in terms of processing and functionality, which now shows more than ever.The WR6zi in the sheet above is also an older design (and soon to be replaced by a successor) but it still offers 20GSa/s and 16Mpts (software upgradeable to 40GSa/s and 128M), and functionality-wise is in a completely different league than the DSOX4k (I've worked with both scopes Series and the DSOX4k really is no match for the 6zi). And that at a similar price (I've even seen the 600MHz WR606zi on sale from LeCroy for less than $12k, including several software options).And it's just one example of what else is out there.I can't see why these days anyone would want buy a DSOX4k.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:57:55 am
content: Quote from: rf-loop on February 15, 2015, 10:33:41 amYes, the May 2014 launched WaveSurfer 3000, of which the hardware has been designed in a cooperation between LeCroy and Siglent, and where the software is provided by LeCroy, and which Siglent will sell as SDS3000 in the Chinese market only.It's a completely different thing than just buying SDS1000 scopes and rebadge them for resale.The WS3k/SDS3k thing is actually quite clever. LeCroy is using Siglent's strenghts (which is producing good hardware at low costs), while they keep their finger on the hardware design and keeping Siglent away from the software. The result is a very nice scope at a really decent price that even Keysight can't match. And since LeCroy is offering the WS3000 at a decent price there's little incentive for grey imports of the SDS3000, which will not be supported outside China by Siglent anyways.And even though Siglent is the manufacturer of the WS3000 the scope has the same support as any other LeCroy scope (of which many are made by various 3rd parties), i.e. 3yrs warranty as standard and full support for 7 years after ending of production of that Series.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 11:32:42 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 10:57:55 amYou mean that same support (or lack of) that made the WaveAce such a debacle?How do you know that the WS3000 firmware is 100% Lecroy?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 11:34:22 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on February 15, 2015, 03:29:01 amNonsense. Just use the variable duty cycle. No need to go wild for some prototype testing.

author: Ice-Tea
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 11:48:15 am
content: Allow me to add something to this topic aside from the scope pissing contest.You might wanna look into a power meter, I myself have some decent experiences with Yokogawa, example:Especially if you will be doing non-isolated designs, get differential probes, such as these:Get current probes, either of the clamp type or the TTI meter Dave reviewed some time ago. Within the limitations of the thing, it's awesome.I personally feel a thermal imager (FLIR has obviously good stuff) is a great adition, especially with power electronics.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 12:04:11 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 15, 2015, 07:55:03 amI guess I misread that somewhere but still the memory is short. To make matters worse: when in run mode the memory per channel is divided in half. One half is used for display and one half is used for acquisition. This is the same on the much older models. They probably upgraded the ASIC for faster/different memory but the basic functionality is very old.I played quite a bit with a different Keysight oscilloscope and one thing I didn't like was that at low s/div settings (for looking at high frequency signals) the intensity grading stops and you end up with an acquisition spanning many screen. But that could be me not knowing how to change this behaviour.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 12:06:31 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 15, 2015, 11:32:42 amThe WaveAce is a debacle because it's essentially a $300 Siglent scope with a different label sold at closer to $1900. It's pure Siglent, 100%, including the buggy firmware. I had a Siglent SDS1102CML (essentially a WaveAce 1012 with smaller sample memory) myself, it's an OK scope from a cheap Chinese brand that was dirt cheap, and because of that I think the bugs were acceptable (the low price has to come from somewhere). It's not OK however if that's what you get from a big brand for the price equivalent of a Agilent DSOX2k.Support couldn't help because the firmware is Siglent, and as with the SDS2000 they are pretty slow in fixing the issues (and often introduce new problems along the line, which doesn't help).I know a few (large) customers that were pretty pissed with these scopes, which mostly ended up being taken back by LeCroy because Siglent couldn't sort out the problems.Why it's still on sale is quite frankly beyond me. From what I've seen all the WaveAce has achieved so far is to damage LeCroy's reputation. It's a 'me-too' product to be present in the low end probably because they feel they have to, similar to Tek's TBS1000 scopes. I can't see them selling many of them, and whenever it comes to low end scopes their sales staff seems to deflect interest to the WaveJet 300T instead (probably because they know that the WaveAce is crap).QuoteFrom discussions with a few peple in LeCroy. The WS3000 is a X-Stream scope. X-Stream is one of LeCroy's important technologies (it's in all their midrange and highend scopes up to the 100GHz LabMaster), and there's a lot of IP in this software. The WS3k is an embedded scope (it runs W7 Embedded) with limited processing so it runs a cut-down version of X-Stream, but there's still a lot in it that could be beneficial to a competitor. There's no way they will open this to any 3rd parties.Siglent is licensed to use and resell it in their SDS3000 (which is marked as "Powered by Teledyne LeCroy"), but they don't have any access to the source or the internals of the software (and I frankly doubt that Siglent even has the expertise to work with the source). One of the advantages of this is that (unlike with WaveAce) most of the few bugs that were there after the scope has been launched have been fixed in a very short time, as it happens with the other X-Stream scopes.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 12:39:06 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 15, 2015, 11:32:42 amDave,What would you suggest? After all you have tried and used a huge load of scopes over many years.From what I have worked out, the highest frequency I will likely come across (other then the pure-sine clock coming into the micro controller) is the quadrature encoded output of a high speed, high resolution encoder. Going at the highest, crazy specifications we would ever look at:4000RPM motor (67 turns per second)10000 line encoder quad encoded (40,000 pulse per rev)67*40000 = 2.68MHzFor a square wave like that... what kind of bandwidth on the scope should I really look for.EDIT:Did some more math using wolfram and I worked out that the 41st Harmonic is a fairly good waveform shape, 41*2.68x10^6 = 109MHz, I would go with 200MHz, giving me some buffer.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 12:59:49 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 12:06:31 pmThat was my point. If Lecroy can't intervene and get Siglent to fix these things, then that does not bode well for any sort of relationship between Siglent and Lecroy. What if the WS3000 for example starts to ship with hardware faults (because it's Siglent hardware), the same debacle could ensue.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 01:14:47 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 15, 2015, 12:39:06 pmYou said budget isn't that important, so I'd go for better than the entry level stuff like the D1054Z.Maybe a Rigol DS4014. 4CH, 4GS/s, very deep memory, nice intensity graded display, for under $2500But there are many choices at those levels, Keysight, Tek, Lecroy, Hameg. So that would be a minimum, just because it's not your money

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 01:16:56 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 15, 2015, 12:59:49 pmI think Lecroy builds the Wavesurfer3000 themselves and sells the hardware to Siglent. Look closely at this picture from Siglent's website:Yes it says 'Assembled in USA' on the back.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 01:22:51 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 15, 2015, 12:59:49 pmNot really. The WaveAce were bought as finished product, designed by Siglent, built by Siglent, maintained by Siglent. LeCroy got exactly what they ordered, which is a low end scope that gets the same firmware updates as the Siglent original. In hindsight it certainly wasn't a good decision on LeCroy's part to buy in some bottom-of-the-barrel scope, but at the end of the day they got what they ordered and paid for.QuoteNo, it can't. The difference is that for the WS3000, LeCroy has had it's finger on the hardware design (and also showed Siglent a few things along the lines of how to do scope design properly), something they hadn't done on the WaveAce. The WS3000 design has followed the same quality and reliability criteria as for other LeCroy scopes. Outsourcing production doesn't change that.There's really no need to worry because the WS3000 is produced by Siglent. Outsourcing has always been part of LeCroy's business strategy, and is one of the rare cases where it actually made sense. The WaveRunner LT/WavePro 900 (both LeCroy developed) were made by Iwatsu. Some of the WaveRunner (M)Xi/(M)Xi-A and WaveSurfer Xs/Xs-B were made by another electronics manufacturer in Malaysia, and so on. Nothing new here. LeCroy could have produced the WS3000 themselves in the US, but then the scope would have cost probably at least 30% more, which is a difficult sell in this price class.The WaveAce is shit, no doubt about that. But the WaveSurfer 3000 is as much LeCroy as any of their other midrange and highend scopes. I had a chance to play with one for a day, and it's really an outstanding scope in this price segment.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 01:25:48 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 15, 2015, 01:16:56 pm"Assembled" is not the same as "Manufactured". It's enough to put the rear cover on and put an English manual and a US mains lead in the box to call something "Assembled in USA".I guess the "Assembled" refers to the skin (plastic outer shell) being put on in the US. They probably ship the naked chassis, and the Siglent calibration sticker seems to support that.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 01:53:26 pm
content: For the stuff you are looking at I'd say you could be happy with any modern/mainstream standalone DSO.However, if you are going to be taking your work beyond some research/fiddling and onto some formal acceptance testing then I'd suggest you choose equipment with a decent and reliable ATE capability. Usually this means Agilent/KS is the safe ((least buggy) option so maybe go for a 4 channel scope from the low end of the 3000 series. A good engineer will make do with any of the scopes mentioned so far but even a good engineer will struggle with poor ATE support.I'd echo what free_electron said about PSU choice and I'd be tempted to look at used HP/Agilent PSUs for best value vs performance vs ruggedness vs ATE capability. Also some of them can be used as a programmable active load.Also, Ice-Tea made some very valid suggestions about the probes and the thermal camera.In your case, I think the scope choice really does just boil down to personal preference and (possibly) decent ATE performance/reliability. Maybe try and get a demo/trial organised and ask the rep about ATE interface options if you feel you may need to do any automated testing.I'd also suggest some form of multi channel logger system that can log various things during trials or soak tests. At work we make our own and often this stuffis designed into the gear itself but in your case you'd be using an external system. You can buy ATE gear like this but it's usually quite expensive. The cheap option is a self built USB powered MCU with a decent external ADC with maybe 16 channels for logging stuff like temperature sensors, various voltages, currents and maybe even vibration or movement.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 02:55:10 pm
content: Ideally, I would love a 3kW power supply for up to 200V @ 15A with current / voltage limiting.Sadly I think that would cost as much as a new car and It would be cheaper to just make one myself at work.I have no clue where I could buy a 4 quadrant powersupply.. it sounds like godsend but I have a feeling it costs as much as a small house for 3kW...

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 03:21:10 pm
content: It depends on what kind of car you buy. I'd get several power supplies you can connect in parallel or series. That way you can use several power supplies for various projects or connect them together for one big project. You can look at power supplies from Chroma. Farnell also carries some reasonably priced brands. When dealing with motor drives reverse EMF can be an issue though.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 03:24:23 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 15, 2015, 03:21:10 pmThe drives I intend to make will have a circuit to protect themselves from EMF using a dump resistor and a mosfet.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 05:51:47 pm
content: Quote from: G0HZU on February 15, 2015, 01:53:26 pmAny modern scope from the big names can be safely used inside an ATE, Agilent/Keysight is not any better in this regard than the other big brands (and from experience they're not necessarily the least buggy option either), so that's pretty much a no-brainer.The other thing is that for ATEs you don't really use the scope that is sitting on the circuit designer's bench but a separate one which is dedicated to ATE operation and doesn't necessarily have to have a screen (i.e. PXI digitizers). Often enough the ATE scope can be much simpler than a bench scope as many calculations are done in the test software and not in the scope.This aside, the OP clearly wants a bench scope, not an ATE scope, so the focus should be on bench properties and not how good it is for any hypothetical ATE operation where it's very unlikely to end up anyways. Aside from the simple fact that formal acceptance testing doesn't necessarily require an ATE. Especially for smaller project an ATE is overkill, and any testing can be done manually following an approved Acceptance Test Procedure. And for this is the case, Agilent/Keysight scopes in the class the OP is considering offer exactly nothing to support test documentation. Only the LeCroy WaveSurfer comes with proper documentation tools (LabNotebook) as standard.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 06:10:23 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 05:51:47 pmI don't really care much for these proper documentation tools, I can just as easily take screenshots of the Agilent scope's waveforms using their built in software, It could be an advantage, but It isn't worth silly money extra. You keep saying the WaveSurfer is cheaper and all that. Not sure really? Could you give me some prices against the similar set up with Keysight?

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 06:43:38 pm
content: QuoteBut it often requires overnight or unattended testing with the ability to monitor and log any non compliance events.I would expect that power and motor control would require quite lengthy soak test routines across temperature, voltage and load. Not a lot of fun if someone has to sit there all the time looking at test gear.But maybe the OP doesn't 'need' to do any ATE or soak testing. I suggested Agilent only if ATE was needed because their products are a fairly safe choice for ATE with minimal bugs and good technical support. Also ATE doesn't always mean huge and heavy racks of test gear and lots of NRE costs. It can be as simple as a lashup on an engineers bench with a few bits of test gear connected via GPIB or some other interface and all controlled by a simple control program written by the engineer in VB or something similar.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 06:53:41 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 15, 2015, 06:10:23 pmMaybe, but it's standard with all LeCroy X-Stream scopes (and has so for over a decade) so there's no additional money involved. I use it quite often for documenting certain tests, and does more than just taking screenshots.But at the end of the day you have to decide if that is important for you. I just wanted to mention it as these features are often overlooked.QuoteSure (although, really, you could have done that easily yourself).Let's have a look at the WaveSurfer 3054 (500MHz 4Ch) which has a street price of between $6949 and $7850:http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?x=0&y=0&lang=en&site=us&keywords=Wavesurfer+3054http://www2.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3054/?qs=%2fha2pyFadujJWeX%2fwfDD9iHh9Y6%2ffJ%252b%252bMSlDa5Bfu%2fC9ohyHVYEg2Q%3d%3dhttp://www.tme.eu/en/details/lc-surfer3054/digital-oscilloscopes/teledyne-lecroy/wavesurfer-3054/http://www.tequipment.net/LeCroy/WaveSurfer-3054/Digital-Oscilloscopes/DSO/One suggestion was the Keysight DSOX3000 Series. Unfortunately I couldn't find street prices for the DSOX3000T but Keysight wants $11,200 for it:http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2486131-pn-DSOX3054T/oscilloscope-500-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng(Keysight uses geolocation and might switch to your country's website which might not show any pricing)The older Keysight DSOX3054 isn't much cheaper:http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-1948448-pn-DSOX3054A/oscilloscope-500-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=enghttp://www.tequipment.net/AgilentDSOX3054A.asp?v=7401This shows that the WaveSurfer 3054 is roughly $4k cheaper than the Keysight DSOX3054(T). I don't know you but $4k is a lot of money in my book.The other suggestion was a 200MHz scope. The WaveSurfer 3024 is roughly $3800 to $3900:http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?x=0&y=0&lang=en&site=us&keywords=Wavesurfer+3024http://www2.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3024/?qs=%2fha2pyFadujJWeX%2fwfDD9r1Ni8eBeO6prxYfayRwY%2fOihHBwlCzV8g%3d%3dLet's look at the Keysight DSOX3024 (T and non-T):http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2483850-pn-DSOX3024T/oscilloscope-200-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=enghttp://www.keysight.com/en/pd-1946679-pn-DSOX3024A/oscilloscope-200-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=enghttp://www.tequipment.net/AgilentDSOX3024A.asp?v=7401The Keysight is rougly around $4400 which means it's still around $600 more expensive than the WaveSurfer.I'm not going into the DSOX4000 as this scope is even more expensive, and as already mentioned in another posting for what Keysight is asking for it you can already get a LeCroy high end scope which is vastly superior.That LeCroy is cheaper than Keysight isn't new, in fact it has often been the case in the last 20 years or so.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 06:58:17 pm
content: Quote from: G0HZU on February 15, 2015, 06:43:38 pmSure, but you don't need a full size purpose-built ATE for that. Remote-controllable test equipment (which is pretty standard nowadays) and a computer with the software is all you need. Depending on the scope you don't even need the computer.QuoteAs I said before, Agilent/Keysight isn't necessarily better in this regard than the other big names (I'm not talking about Rigol and Siglent of course). As long as you stick to a reputable vendor your're pretty safe. And it would be pretty foolish to give up functionality that might be essential for a bench scope just because of a perceived 'superiority' for ATE operation.Automated testing is a no-brainer for any of the big brand gear today, and you can easily setup an automated tester with any Tek, Keysight, LeCroy, R&S or whatever device that is remote controllable.Then there's also the option to simply give certain tests to an external provider who has the necessary equipment to automatize. Especially when it comes to environmental testing (temperature, shock/vibration) this usually gets pretty involving, with very expensive test equipment.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 07:08:26 pm
content: Still I wonder whether you want to leave something running overnight.Usually I build dedicated test rigs because that is cheaper than tying up expensive test gear for a long period.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 07:12:20 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 15, 2015, 07:08:26 pmCertainly not unsupervised, no matter if it's bench kit or a proper racked ATE.QuoteMe, too, and also because test kit for ATEs often has different requirements than bench kit anyways.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 07:20:52 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 07:12:20 pmI assumed the OP was involved in professional design of power and motor control systems and therefore they may be long term testing involved. I've tested stuff overnight loads of times at work and so have my colleagues. Also we sometimes have our designs soak tested for days at a time at places like Cape (now Trac) Engineering (UK). They can do harsh environmental testing that we can't do in our labs beyond our various (but basic) Thermotron chambers.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 07:34:49 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 15, 2015, 07:08:26 pmI would be expecting to do that indeed, week long runs and so on, but yeh, I would make a test rig for something like that!

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 07:40:44 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 06:53:41 pmI was quite supprised by some of those figures, everywhere I was looking, Lecroy was much more expensive then Agilent. Thanks for finding those prices. I think I shall request a demo unit from them to have a play around... Thing is I need to set up and get stuff in to actually test first (the electronics lab has -nothing- to test as we are just planning to get into product design. haven't even started yet.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 07:49:02 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 15, 2015, 07:34:49 pmAnother good idea is to make a device self-monitoring. For example by counting the number of interrupts, overcurrent events, maximum / minimum temperature, etc ,etc you can eliminate most of the ATE equipment required for testing AND you can get some diagnostic information from units installed in the field.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 07:50:18 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 15, 2015, 07:40:44 pmI don't know where you looked of course but I haven't seen the WS3k anywhere as to what Agilent/Keysight asks for their DSOX3k. Funny enough LeCroy seems to be associated with expensive in some people's minds, which I guess comes from the fact that they mostly make high end scopes which tend to be very pricey, and only in 2008/2009 came out with their entry level scopes (WaveAce, don't ask, it's crap).QuoteIf I remember right then what you will be working on is similar to what TunerSandwich does for a living (power electronics). He hasn't replied to this thread yet but maybe give him a shout, he might give you better advice for your particular circumstances.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 08:07:18 pm
content: I'd be careful with just comparing base prices. I have a strong feeling everyone tries to make the price of the base model low but charge a lot for the options. IMHO you should determine which options you want and then compare prices.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 08:08:15 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 07:50:18 pmI've popped him a message, thanks for that suggestion.Yeh, that is indeed what I was thinking. I think I may be being drawn towards just how sexy the Lecroy scopes are (they look so much better then the Rigol ones that look like they were designed for kids.)

author: nfmax
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 08:13:44 pm
content: Keep an eye open for bargains. Last year, I bought an ex-demo MSO-X 2024A, in 'certiprime' condition with full calibration certificate and three years warranty, with every available optional firmware feature, for £1970. The supplier was Aspen Electronics, who are an official Keysight UK dealer. They will come and demo equipment for you (which is why they regularly have ex-demo equipment available). There are few things showing on their website now - unfortunately not quite such a steal as I made, as the special offer on the options is now over.The 2000 series would not suit you, as it lacks the probe interface, and youwillneed to use differential and current probes in your work. But as a hobby scope it's the bees knees!

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 08:15:05 pm
content: Quote from: nfmax on February 15, 2015, 08:13:44 pmAh yes, I was recommended that exact same thing by my friend, the same company too infact! haha.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 08:53:39 pm
content: QuoteIf I wanted a 4 channel scope I'd want dedicated vertical controls for each channel. But that scope only has one set of (shared) vertical controls and an oddly arranged set of channel select buttons.Maybe some people prefer that type of interface but I would instantly hate it because I've always used scopes with dedicated controls for each channel. The fact that the channel select buttons appear to be arranged vertically make me think that the scope designer (Siglent?) is either deliberately trying to be 'different' when it comes to the user interface or is trying to make 'cheap' look elegant. Either way I'd be regularly cursing that scope if I had to do any intensive interface tweaking across all 4 channels.The vertical channel selector buttons and single vertical controls would be a dealbreaker for me...

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 09:10:00 pm
content: Quote from: G0HZU on February 15, 2015, 08:53:39 pmI understand some people may have problems with that but since my first scope was a DS1104Z I am more used to it so it isn't really a problem for me.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 09:22:45 pm
content: QuoteIn that case you might prefer the LeCroy. Because your requirements are fairly basic I think a lot boils down to personal preference. Although from a business point of view you may also have to consider overall running costs YoY and the attractiveness of any warranty/support/cal contracts that may be on offer across all the test gear you buy.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 09:27:42 pm
content: Quote from: G0HZU on February 15, 2015, 08:53:39 pmYou'll get used to that quickly enough. I can use both types of scopes without problems. Individual controls are nicer but giving up some buttons for a bigger screen or only have a few (bigger) buttons to deal with makes sense.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:03:58 pm
content: QuoteMaybe... I noticed that even the expensive LeCroy scopes are the same. But every scope I've used since my student days has had dedicated vertical controls so it could be a case of old dog and new tricks. I could live with it but I don't think I'd ever warm to itThe other thing that is important (to me at least) is the usability and quality of the FFT mode. How does this compare between various models in this price bracket? I don't know how important this is for motor/power stuff though.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:23:53 pm
content: Quote from: G0HZU on February 15, 2015, 10:03:58 pmYes, all 'true' LeCroy scopes (i.e. not the rebadges) have a single vertical control. The only exception was the WaveMaster 8000(A), WavePro 7000(A) and WaveRunner 6000(A) Series which had individual controls.It's usually not a big issue. What most people coming from other scopes struggle more is that LeCroy has horiziontal and vertical controls swapped over other scopes, which can take a while to get acustomed to when you're used to the standard setup, but even this is a minor invonvenience (especially since many scopes from other manufacturers like Keysight now no longer have horizontal controls on the right hand side but i.e. on the top area of the front panel). I regularly swap between the Agilents at work, my WavePro (individual controls) and my WaveRunner 64Xi (single vertical control), and I rarely use the wrong knob.And if you think the single vertical control is bad then have a look at the old HP 54500 Series of which most models had a single knob for *all* functions (only the later scopes had individual knobs). God I loved these scopesQuoteFFT on the Agilent is pretty basic and only goes to 64k points which is still better than the Rigols but overall not much. The WaveSurfer 3000 goes to 1M. Maths on the WaveSurfer is also more flexible.For power electronics stuff the optional Power Analysis options that are available for some scopes might be useful. It's not (yet?) available for the WS3000 but the WaveSurfer 10 has it available (option WS10-PWR):http://cdn.teledynelecroy.com/files/pdf/wavesurfer10-datasheet.pdfthe WS10 is a 1GHz scope with 10GSa/s and 20Mpts but at $9980 it's still noticeably cheaper than the Agilent DSOX3054 with 500MHz bandwidth only:http://www2.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-10/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMs4AFwHyzhTm3RqmtTN9JCXtuq0OnV0CmI%3dhttp://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/WAVESURFER%2010/WAVESURFER%2010-ND/4990945And it's even more advanced than the WS3000, and supports more serial decode options. There's also a Spectrum Analyzer option (WS10-SPECTRUM) available for it.I think TunerSandwich uses the Power Analysis option for his work, and might be better suited to say if it could be useful in this case.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:33:26 pm
content: Not really interested in anything over 200MHz for now. It seems like huge overkill for what I am doing.I will get either this one:Lecroy 200MHz 4 channel: £2,925.56http://uk.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3024/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMt57hNjmO%252b8mw6TsCgrgmj5iXBy4qoSgs0%3dAgilent 200MHz 4 channel: £3012.00http://uk.farnell.com/keysight-technologies/dsox3024t/oscilloscope-4-ch-200mhz-5gsps/dp/2449635Lecroy 200MHz 4 channel with Digital Inputs: £2,925.56 + £1,171.52 = £4,097.08http://uk.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3024/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMt57hNjmO%252b8mw6TsCgrgmj5iXBy4qoSgs0%3d+http://uk.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WS3K-MSO/?qs=%2fha2pyFadujetpotou2vdZwVIQpiCLhoPsRcDCCFSXw%3dAgilent 200MHz 4 channel with Digital Inputs: £4,028.00http://uk.farnell.com/keysight-technologies/msox3024t/oscilloscope-20-ch-200mhz-5gsps/dp/2449645

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 10:34:16 pm
content: About power analyses: for that you'll also need a current probe. Those are rather expensive and for anything serious I'd prefer to have two

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 11:20:48 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 15, 2015, 01:22:51 pmIt's short-sighted to say "There's really no need to worry because the WS3000 is produced by Siglent." And LeCroy's "finger on the HW design" ? It takes a lot more than a finger to get a solid design. Siglent is the HW designer, not just manufacturer. That's an incredibly huge difference. LeCroy should have done it themselves if they want people to trust it's as good as 100% LeCroy after the recent siglent/lecroy products. And past products made by Iwatsu does not apply here anyway because history does not guarantee anything about future products with other partners. The most applicable recent history is the Siglent Waveace and Siglent SDS2000 . Especially given that SDS2000 and SDS3000/WS3000 were developed at the same time.More importantly is LeCroy's poor quality control team that gave their seal of approval to Waveace. That's just wrong. If waveaces was supposed to be a bad scope with no planned fixes and LeCroy planned that then it's hard to blindly trust the SDS/WS3000. Smart buyers should question these products. Just like any other spec. I like LeCroy, but can't give them an automatic pass because it says LeCroy and has LeCroy firmware. Some reviews would be nice, but for whatever reason there is very little out there. I hope it's a good scope, but it's disingenuous for you to dismiss other scopes as much as you do and sell LeCroy scopes as hard as you do without acknowledging the risk associated with a design by siglent / lecroy.If you owned one or used one at work and were answering technical questions I might give much more credence to your sales pitch, at least if you stuck with facts. For example, you incorrectly stated it has 6 math functions instead of 2 so you do not appear to know THAT much about the scope . You stated that when comparing it's math functions as an advantage over Agilent 5yr "rehashed" scope. Not a big deal on it's own, but combined with you dismissing other brands as much as you do I expected more knowledge of the product you are pushing. And what new technology is so amazing in SDS/WS3000 anyway compared to agilent and tek? Yes, looks like a decent scope, but nothing special compared to agilent 3000 and tek's MDO3000 offerings. One can argue the SDS/WS3000 is a "rehash" of existing technology as well. Perhaps a rehashed siglent design on the HW side. Windows embedded? Resistive touch? No new scope technology their for the end user. Maui interface? It's fine, but not amazing enough to make me ignore agilent/tek. I just don't see the justification for the strong selling you do and bashing of other scopes as much as you do. They all have advantages and disadvantages and winner should be judged by what the tool can do for the purchaser compared to other tools.Do you perhaps work for LeCroy in some capacity or own their stock?

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 11:28:56 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 15, 2015, 10:34:16 pmYep, you will use current probes extensively if looking at power. You can pick up a differential preamp that works well depending on bandwidth needs and get by with a relatively small sense resistor (ie a gain of 100). I use both current probes and diff pre-amps. Unfortunately they cost more than the scope if new so see if you can buy second hand as there are good deals out there. If you buy current probe second hand make sure you can return it. The ferrite is very fragile and can easily break if lightly dropped the wrong way. Consider the total system (probes + scope) for your needs before you pull the trigger on a scope.

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 11:33:54 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 15, 2015, 10:33:26 pmAt this price point have you looked at tektronix MDO3000 series (ie MDO3014 or MDO3024)? I have one, like it and it's another option to consider if spending this much on a scope. If you have any questions about how the MDO3000 operates let me know.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 08:53:45 am
content: Quote from: don on February 15, 2015, 11:20:48 pmSo what? The SDS2000 hardware is just fine, there is absolutely *nothing* wrong with it. The problem in that scope is the software.The same is true for the WaveAce. The hardware is just fine (albeit a bit too low performance for that price class). It's the software that makes it suck.For the WS3k/SDS3k, Siglent is as much hardware designer as back in the days Iwatsu was for the WaveRUnner(2) LT. As manufacturer they have some input but primary design decisions are made by LeCroy. For the WS3k/SDS3k, things like front panel are Siglent designs while the logic board is LeCroy.I know that in your mind you have this idea from hardware issues in the SDS2000, ignoring that all its ills lie in its firmware. If you know about a hardware problem then provide some evidence that supports your speculation, otherwise shut up. Seriously.QuoteAs I already said before (and more than once!), the WaveAce scopes are bought in. They don't go through LeCroy's QC because they are bought in products, not components. QC for them lies with Siglent, and again the hardware is absolutely fine.The WaveAce also got (and still gets) fixes, but again as this is Siglent's responsibility1it doesn't happen fast enough, and often new issues are introduced. Like with the SDS2000.It certainly was a mistake by LeCroy to buy in bottom-of-the-barrel scope, and believe me they got enough flak for the WaveAce from their customers. But this isn't unique to LeCroy. The first Rigol scopes that Agilent rebadged had awful firmware, and it took quite a while for them to fix the worst problems.A "smart buyer" knows that every T&M manufacturer came up with crap once in a while, and that includes HP/Agilent/Keysight and Tek (who still have some shit products in their portfolio). That's almost unavoidable. A "Smart Buyer" therefore judges its product by its own merits and a manufacturer by the overall performance of its products and not by a single exemption. Because if he doesn't then the "smart buyer" will not be able to buy anything from anyone.QuoteYes, there isn't much, but LeCroy has been pretty cautious in terms of giving kits out for review, and it's just now that they begin to open up a little bit, at least to reviewers like Shariar and Mike who have earned themselves a solid reputation.QuoteThere isn't any risk, aside your highly irrational fears stuck in your head. The WaveSurfer 3k is out with customers for almost a year now and they seem to love it enough that for a while LeCroy couldn't come up with enough scopes.Look, it's obvious you have a grudge against Siglent because you felt let down by the SDS2000, and to a certain extend I can understand that. But it's really getting silly with your attempts to talk by some hardware issues where there are none. The SDS2000 scope is a pretty fine piece of hardware. It's problem lies in its software, and that is also the problem of the WaveAce. If you have evidence that shows there are hardware issues then present them, otherwise you should really stop spreading your irrational fears.QuoteI never said I knew everything about the scope, and I'm pretty sure I already stated that I had one for one day only (these smaller scopes are not the ones I usually use for work). I also have worked with the Agilent DSOX3k on a few occasions. And I stand by my opinion that the WS3k is a great scope in this price bracket, more capable than the DSOX3k, and (as proven!) also less expensive. Considering the amount of functionality in the WS3k, it's difficult to get to know it inside out after a day. However, it certainly has me more impressed than the Tek MDO3k we got for a demo, but that has already been discussed elsewhere so I'm not going there any more.And quite frankly, even using one for only a day is still a lot more than you have learnt about a scope you're so dismissive of.Also, I'm not trying to sell anything, I'm merely stating my opinion and my experience as I guess many other people here do. And so far my experience with LeCroy has been very positive. You can discount that as "sales pitch" if you want, I really don't care. It's not about you, it's about the OP who came here for advice. How about you respect that?BTW, I also stated several times that the OP should get all scopes he considers in and try it himself, but I guess this is just another thing you didn't pay attention to.QuoteAnd quite frankly, from someone who knows neither the DSOX3k nor the WS3k I would have expected a bit less negativity.QuoteIf saving of several hundred to over $4k is nothing special to you, while at the same time offering more sample memory, better FFT and much more functionality then I'd say you don't really know what you're talking about. But then, this just reinforces the impage you're presenting here, which is the one of a very irrational guy looking to push his agenda.I of course I also get that the real problem of the WS3k is that it's not a Tek MDO3k. What would be a posting from Don without at least one mandatory mention of the Tek MDO3000 even when it wasn't even part of the argument. Talk about a well placed sales pitch thereBut then, these days Tek certainly needs every help they can to sell their scopes.Really Don, I understand that you feel screwed by Siglent, but man, get over it. Your erratic and irrational blabering doesn't really add anything that helps the OP. Again, if you know from a hardware problem in the WS3000 (or even the SDS2000!), come up with evidence (or at least a reference) that supports your speculation or shut up. At the moment your ramblings only make you look stupid, seriously.The Op already got the recommendation to test the scopes of choice in his own environment so he can see firsthand how good or bad they are for what he wants to do. Also no reason why this should not include the scope you seem to be so attached to that you feel the need to defend it wherever criticism is expressed, the Tek MDO3000. I just hope the OP gets a better unit from Tek than we did when we tried that thing, or they're in for another embarrassment.1- This refers to internal obligations between LeCroy and Siglent; of course for the WaveAce LeCroy carries overall responsibility towards the end users

author: Ice-Tea
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 09:57:46 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 16, 2015, 08:53:45 amThat is bollocks. If you slap on your badge, you damn better make sure it meets your standards before sending it out.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 11:11:36 am
content: Quote from: Ice-Tea on February 16, 2015, 09:57:46 amIt's not bollocks. Siglent started selling the SDS2000 way before the firmware was ready. Although I wouldn't call the current firmware version buggy or unstable it is severely lacking. OTOH it's not a useless oscilloscope if you can do without protocol decoding, high resolution, averaging, remote control over LAN and FFT.Then again I agree it is weird Lecroy didn't test the Waveace properly before shipping. Perhaps the sales department pushed it ahead. Either way Lecroy appearantly didn't take that chance with the SDS2000 while it would have filled the gap between the low end and high end oscilloscopes.

author: Ice-Tea
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 11:22:28 am
content: If you rebadge something and sell it for a hefty premium, your customers expect some form of QA, not just on hardware but also on FW/SW. You're basically saying "yeah, we we charge you $$$$ for the badge but at least you know someone who knows what a decent scope should be has taken a look at it".Without that, it's just highway robbery.As soon as you put your badge on it, it becomes your responsability.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 12:02:22 pm
content: Quote from: Ice-Tea on February 16, 2015, 11:22:28 amYes, towards the customer.But I was talking about internal obligations, i.e. between the supplier (Siglent) and the customer (LeCroy). The WaveAce are to be delivered ready to sell by Siglent. QC and stuff is Siglent's task.That of course doesn't abolish LeCroy from it's responsibility towards its customers, and yes, it was a stupid thing to just buy them in blindly without looking closer on the product's issues. I guess someone noticed that Agilent did the same with Rigol kit and thought it will be alright.But as little as Agilent's Rigol rebadges are representative of the whole Agilent/Keysight product range, this is the same for the WaveAce and LeCroy's other scopes.

author: rodpp
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 02:30:31 pm
content: Hi Wuerstchenhund, do you have any link with Lecroy?

author: nanofrog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 03:11:33 pm
content: FWIW, I'd recommend contacting distributors of the scopes you're interested in, and inquire about setting up a "test drive" (major manufacturers offer such programs). Makes it far easier to avoid ending up with a "lipstick on a pig" model at any rate.

author: JuKu
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 04:03:30 pm
content: If you are going to assemble your own desings, a reflow oven is great time-saver. Manual paste dispensing with a stencil is easy, but if you do that regularly, you might want a paste printing machine. I don't, but I do a new board maybe one in two months, tops. (Self-promotion: If your boards are complex, you might want a prototype builders' pick and place machine.)

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 04:52:55 pm
content: Quote from: nanofrog on February 16, 2015, 03:11:33 pmIndeed, get some loaners of all scopes that are worth considering and test them for a few days (but I already suggested that).I personally wouldn't go through distributors but directly through the manufacturers. They might then forward your request to a distributor but it helps if the distributor knows that the manufacturer is involved, which tends to keep them more grounded.Quote from: rodpp on February 16, 2015, 02:30:31 pmI know a few people working there (as I do with Keysight and a few other manufacturers) but other than that, no, just a satisfied user of their high end scopes who only really discovered them about 2 years ago (I knew LeCroy existed before then, but strangely never considered them when shopping for scopes).

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 05:46:10 pm
content: I tried to persuade my boss to part with £40,000 for a HDO8000 from Lecroy.... He said no. (He thinks £4,000 is crazy money for a scope.) Not sure what to do now. haha!

author: rodpp
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 05:53:35 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 16, 2015, 04:52:55 pmThanks for answer, sometimes when someone is avid defending a specific brand there are some interests involved. Good to know that is not your case, so it means a very happy customer!It's important to note that members of this forum in bussiness with a brand have a disclaimer in the signature, a very good approach in my opinion. There is no problem in a salersperson defending their products, they know a lot about these products, since this relation is clear to everyone.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 07:02:22 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 16, 2015, 05:46:10 pmReally....he's a bit out of touch.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 07:03:48 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 16, 2015, 05:46:10 pmIt might be time to work backward from the budget, or budget target. With the budget target in mind you can find as much functionality, performance, and reliability as the budget target will afford. Sometimes, after that, at the end you can dial the budget up or down to get what make sense all the way around.

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 09:19:51 pm
content: Quote from: rodpp on February 16, 2015, 05:53:35 pmIts nice to have representation from sales community. It should help them identify what customer needs are and hopefully make better products for everyone. Actually I don't think Wuerstchenhund acts as an someone in sales, perhaps a stock holder. People in sales generally act professional and discuss specifications when comparing scopes. And make consessions in some weak areas on their products, basically be objective. But stockholders are not a face of the company so do not need to act professional. They benefit from both positive praise of their company and dismissing competitive products. Its this pattern of praise of LeCroy ws3000 and up & negative comments of other brands independent of others usages that is odd. Everyone knows there is no single best tool for everyone. Especially when there is so little talk about what the user will do with the tools in question.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 10:43:23 pm
content: To add my 2 cents: I have been looking for a scope in the $5000 range (before the euro took a nose dive) and the Wavesurfer3000 came out on top compared to the Tektronix MDO3000 and Keysight3000 series. Mostly due to the long memory, high display resolution (1000x600 IIRC), touch screen and competitive pricing.

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 10:54:18 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 16, 2015, 08:53:45 amUmmmm....multiple people questioned the risk of Siglent / LeCroy partnership (Dave brought it up?). Your dismissal of it looks stupid on your part. The concern of a siglent / lecroy partnership is a valid consideration given how poor LeCroy handled the waveace.The fact is, Agilent/Tek/LeCroy all make nice scopes in that price range and it blows my mind how people talk like there is only one clear choice. I would happily use any of the scopes depending on the work I'm doing. And I have seen all three in use but have only extensively used the MDO3000 with my own work. My opinions of all the scopes are similar enough, I just have a lot more experience with the MDO3000.

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 11:08:55 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 16, 2015, 10:43:23 pmYeah, the agilent is out if you need more memory. LeCroy / Tek both have 10M all the time and on all channels which is decent. I'm a roll mode user at 10M which is why I prefer MDO3000. It's rolls at 40ms/div and sample rate is limited by memory (comes out to 25MS/s on MDO3000) . LeCroy rolls at 100ms/div and 5MS/s max. For me that's significant but seems not many roll mode users out there.Display size / resolution is tough to compare because the LeCroy GUI takes up a large portion of the screen so the graticule undergoes a lot of rescaling as you navigate UI. But you can shut down menus and get a bigger graticule in the end. Keysight's cap touch is a welcome addtion on touch based scopes though.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2015, 06:42:25 pm
content: We've decided that we will probably get the WS3024 along with a current and differential probe.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2015, 12:56:57 pm
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on February 17, 2015, 06:42:25 pmIf you get this scope I think it would be nice if you could let us know how you're getting on with it.

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2015, 05:54:59 pm
content: I sure will!

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2015, 10:10:33 pm
content: Interestingly enough we have ended up buying a LeCroy WaveSurfer 44MXs-B 4 channel 400MHz, 5GS/S (Thanks TopLoser for the amazing deal)http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopemodel.aspx?modelid=4681&capid=102&mid=504

author: mzzj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2015, 11:26:33 pm
content: Current probes? Differential probes? High voltage probes? I would wouch för these Rather than gigaherz scopes given the intented use.Will Cost you arm and leg and you probably need better than cheapest chinese scope to use these.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 11:30:36 am
content: Quote from: TCWilliamson on March 20, 2015, 10:10:33 pmNice scope! It's even better than a WS3k, and should give you good service. If the blue LeCroy seal on the back is still in place you can even buy some LeCroy warranty for it if you send it in for calibration.Just make sure you make a backup of the calibration folder on the D:\ drive in case the built-in laptop hard disk dies (which it might eventually, as hard disk are essentially consumables). This folder contains the scope specific factory calibration data and is needed for it to work correctly, and if you lose it then a full factry calibration is required ($$$). The other stuff on the drive (XP, software) can easily be replaced if lost.Quote from: don on February 16, 2015, 09:19:51 pmI'm neither a seller of LeCroy scopes (or T&M kit in general, nor am I even a salesman), nor a stockholder of LeCroy or any other Teledyne company (too little to gain to be worth my investment).The simple reason I'm suggesting LeCroy when I feel it's appropriate is that they are often simply overlooked. When talking about (proper) scopes, most people think "Tektronix" and "HP/Agilent/Keysight", and hobbyists probably also "Rigol". "Hameg" might just come up as well, but usually that's about it.The second thing is that you can post specific questions about the capabailities of any Tek/Keysight/Rigol scope, and you will very likely drown in replies because there are lots of people who know these scopes. Now do the same for a LeCroy midrange or high end scope, and you will probably only get very few, simply because fewer people actually know these scopes (and even less know them well enough to be able to answer more specific questions). And if you ask about a newer LeCroy there's a very good chance you won't get any reply, aside from the occasional "we have them at work but I haven't really used them" or (worse) the typical "LeCrap" talk from people who have no clue how to operate one properly or who just make up some stories they pulled from their backsides.In short, this means that for someone who is looking for a scope for a particular task, there often isn't as much public information out there regarding LeCroy scopes as there is for scopes from other brands, and that someone might very well miss out on a great tool just because he didn't know it existed, which would be a shame.I also regularly chastize LeCroy for their shortcommings (i.e. the WaveAce), so it certainly can't be said that I think that all they do is great. Far from that.As I've already written otherwise, I only became really familiar with LeCroy scopes a couple of years ago. Of course I did know they existed, but for some reason I never considered them, partially because of them being perceived as very expensive, and because I heard they were awkward. But then I came across a very cheap LeCroy WaveRunner LT224, and I started looking deeper into LeCroy scopes, and found that they are neither awkward (or difficult to operate) nor particular expensive (in fact, their scopes are regularly cheaper than comparable Agilent/Keysight ones), and that these scopes offer a vast range of analysis tools one simply can't get from anyone else. LeCroy really is for DSOs what Tek was for analog scopes (there's some truth to the "Mercedes amongst scopes" moniker), just without people raving about it. These days the gap has narrowed a bit, especially Keysight has come some way in analysis, and now R&S offers some very attractive midrange scopes as well (Tek is a different story, though), and LeCroy really shot themselves in the foot with the crappy WaveAce Series of entry level scopes, but there are still many things you can only get from LeCroy, simple as that.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 11:51:45 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on March 21, 2015, 11:30:36 amThe problem with Lecroy scopes (traditionally) has been the world renowned horribly unusable user interface. I've worked at companies that have had top of the line Lecroy scopes and they always sat on the shelf gathering dust because no one wanted to use them unless they absolutely had no other choice.This seemed almost on universal at every company.When someone came around hunting for a scope to use, you'd tell them the lecroy on the shelf is available, and they often say "no thanks, I'll wait until you are finished with the Agilent/Tek."Their brand took a lot of damage from this I suspect which is likely why they never became mainstream and were always know as the company that made those really high end top performance obscure scopes for obscure uses.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 01:03:23 pm
content: Bummer. I was hoping for a review of the Wavesurfer 3000.@Dave: are you going to review one anytime soon?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 01:06:58 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 21, 2015, 01:03:23 pmLecroy have only ever approached me once a few years back, all keen, and then balked once they heard my terms and conditionsi.e. I can say whatever I want, and they don't get to vet the footage before I post.Never heard from them again.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 01:13:28 pm
content: That is a pity. No chance to get one on loan from a local equipment dealer if you promise not to open it?I'm still very interested in getting a Lecroy WS 3k but I'd like to see a decent review first.

author: aveekbh
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 01:33:24 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 21, 2015, 11:51:45 amYes, that's been my experience. I've used a WaveRunner 6zi at work, and the kind of analysis you can do on it is absolutely great - which would otherwise require exporting the data and analysing on a PC. But I struggle with the knobs every time - the velocity sensing is too touchy. Several operations require you to dig into the menu system using the touch screen (or mouse and keyboard). I much prefer the Agilent for quick measurements.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 01:43:40 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on March 21, 2015, 11:51:45 amI've heard these stories, but quite frankly it's beyond me how anyone who calls himself an engineer could struggle to do at least basic stuff with a LeCroy scope, no matter if it's a modern X-Stream scope or an older (pre-Windows) one. The front panel layout is really dead simple, as is the menu structure. And they all operate the same. It really can't get any more straightforward than this, seriously.I'm not arguing when it comes to doing advanced stuff, which in any case requires that someone is a bit more familiar with a scope (no matter what brand), but doing the most standard and even many advanced measurements shouldn't really cause some struggle on a LeCroy. If you can't figure out how to measure i.e. the time difference between two pulses with a LeCroy scope then you shouldn't really be near a scope.I bet the people from these stories never really tried one or are just afraid because all they know are simple (analog?) scopes, or simply because someone told them these scopes were difficult to operate. And it raises the question why companies are apparently buying these scopes when obviously no-one wants to use them.QuoteI'm not sure it did hurt them at all. LeCroy originally served the science corner (high power phyiscs), not EEs, so they probably didn't care much about what EEs perceive as "obscure". And it didn't prevent them from being present in nearly any high tech lab where people work on pushing the boundaries of technology. Probably because, as I said before, there is a point were Tek or Agilent or whatever isn't good enough, in the ultra high end there's simply just LeCroy and nothing else.

author: Noise Floor
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 02:13:54 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on March 21, 2015, 01:43:40 pmWhat applications can LeCroy cover that Tek and Agilent do not?

author: aveekbh
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 02:53:05 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on March 21, 2015, 01:43:40 pmIn my case, it's not that I really struggle with the controls. It's just that I'd rather use the more familiar Agilent MSO7k scope for something that takes maybe only 30 minutes. For something that takes hours of investigation, I use the Lecroy. Of course, the 6Zi is a big, heavy beast, so sometimes I don't feel like moving it to another bench - and that's also a factor.Once you get used to the Lecroy menu system, things are straightforward and well-organised. And the on-screen keyboard is actually quite usable - quite different from the Windows-based Agilent gear.That said, I have used the older Agilent Infiniium scopes (XP based) - and they are an even bigger hassle!

author: JackP
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 03:12:15 pm
content: Quote from: Noise Floor on March 21, 2015, 02:13:54 pmOff the top of my head I'd say a 100GHz scope (see the Signal Path Blog)

author: CM800
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2015, 03:32:48 pm
content: The price I got it for was actually cheaper then any of the Agilent 4 channel / 100MHz scopes so it seemed a no-brainer to me.Thanks for the tips about the hard-drive by the way, I will sort that out...Interestingly enough, a few days ago a friend popped over and gave me a lecroy scope with a broken screen (Fixed it by wiggling the internal connector to it) It's a Waverunner LT264!I was pretty pleased with that (And couldn't stop thanking him enough to breath)We haven't got any probes yet but the 4x 500MHz Passive probes that come as a standard, I intend to look into getting the current probes etc when I can / when I need them (Let the company's creditcard cool off for a bit)