Help choosing DSO :) MSO5000 ? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 07:02:58 am
content: The last time I used an oscilloscope was when I was in college which was a long time ago. I have always wanted an oscilloscope and I think its time...I have already decided on an entry level scope (based on what I feel is needed at the moment) : the Siglent SDS1104X-E.Now, as usual, the confusion is this : This would be a scope I am gonna use for another decade (hopefully!). So, can I get something better ? Who knows what I might be using it for in 3-5 years time... I am keeping a spend limit of 2X of the SDS1104X-E, which gives me a Rigol MSO5074 which looks awesome on paper! (I think I prefer the SDS2104X Plus, but I am keeping a strict spending limit).Here is where I need help from you folks.1) Are these scopes still "hackable" in 2022 ? Can they also be returned to "factory state" in case I want to claim warranty ?2) Most of the videos/articles on the MSO5000 series talked about a lot of issues : sluggish UI, effective 5bit resolution, front-end noise etc. What is the state now ?3) Is the MSO5000 series still bug ridden ? Would I rather enjoy the lower specd SDS1104X-E (and save some money as well) ?Ideal scenario : Use the SDS1104X-E for some time and if/when the need arises move to a better scope. Maybe at this point in time, there are better options available as well! The problem is, I doubt I'd be able to sell a DSO at a decent price here in India.(I'll be spending around 650 USD on the SDS1104X-E! Now way around that!).

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 08:50:55 am
content: I have the Rigol DS1054Z which I bought before the SDS1104X-E was introduced. Buying today, I would definitely go for the Siglent. Since you are already comfortable with that decision, go for it!AFAIK, the process for gaining 200 MHz bandwidth is well understood. Use the Search feature and see what turns up. There is a massive thread.You can start here for a recent thread:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/can-sds1104x-e-be-unlocked-to-200mhz/msg3992438/#msg3992438BTW, user 'tautech' is a Siglent distributor in NZ so pay attention to what he says.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 09:18:48 am
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 27, 2022, 07:02:58 amYes.It's done deliberately as a marketing thing so that will never change. There is no "war".Quote from: nubinstanley on March 27, 2022, 07:02:58 amYes.Quote from: nubinstanley on March 27, 2022, 07:02:58 amAll 'scopes have problems. Don't be fooled into thinking theSiglent worldis perfect.The MSO5000 has been much improved by firmware updates. Always look at the dates onanythingyou read about it and disregard the old stuff. If you want a beast of an oscilloscope? The MSO5000 is the one.Most of MSO5000's front-end noise is still there though. There's more features to reduce it but it's a hardware thing so they con only do so much. Whether it's a problem depends on you and what you intend to use it for. If you work all day with signals in the mV range the MSO5000 probably isn't the 'scope for you. If you're working with mostly digital things then you'll appreciate the massive memory, bandwidth and ASIC processing power.The SDS1104X-E is probably all you need for now though.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 10:28:24 am
content: BTW: Don't expect to sell used test equipment without a big loss (unless it is a collector's item or the price is at scrap value). Test equipment devaluates faster than a car.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 11:08:01 am
content: Quote from: rstofer on March 27, 2022, 08:50:55 am

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 11:09:37 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 27, 2022, 10:28:24 am

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 11:21:30 am
content: Good suggestions all around. If I were on the market for an entry level scope, the Siglent would be my choice as well, although the Rigol DS1054Z is aging quite well and is still a respectable scope.One additional aspect is that the higher noise of the MSO5000 might impact your work significantly if you are interested in working with very low level signals (audio/instrumentation signal chain or power supply ripple measurements, for example).Good luck in your choice!

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 11:25:18 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 27, 2022, 09:18:48 amThen I guess, if I go the MSO5000 route, I could just get the MSO5072 ?Quote from: Fungus on March 27, 2022, 09:18:48 amI don't think I'll be working all day with signals in the mV range. Is there any "external" DIY work-around though ?Let me read a little bit more about the MSO5000 - user feedback after firmware upgrades...

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 11:28:19 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on March 27, 2022, 11:21:30 amThe nearest Siglent alternative to the MSO5000 would the Siglent SDS2104X Plus right ? Is there any from Siglent with comparable sample rates ?

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 12:01:25 pm
content: Although sample rate is not everything, the Rigol has exceedingly high sample rates which are not matched by any of the products in Siglent's line. A cursory view on their product line shows that, in terms of overall specifications of memory depth and waveform update rate, the SDS5000 seems to be the closest, although at a much higher price tag. Even still, the SDS2104X Plus has very decent specifications but it costs more than the MSP5072 (at least in the webpages I looked).Again, such decision is always dependent on the budget and application: if you are interested in the MSO5072 and feel that two channels are enough for you, then you can save some money by considering even the entry level SDS1202X-E but you at the expense of having impaired serial protocol decoding capabilities, for example (some require more than two channels). On the other hand, the MSO5074 is listed as an even lower cost when compared to the SDS2104X Plus, so you might take that into consideration as well.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 12:14:43 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on March 27, 2022, 12:01:25 pmI brought the MSO5072 into the mix because it is cheaper and because the MSO5000 series is "hackable".So, as I said in my initial post, if I want to stick to my spending limit, the MS05072/MSO5074 is the "best" at the price point.I am worried about the noise floor though. As I understand, even if I am not working at very low voltages, any signal would appear "thicker" on the scope ? I am reading through a few threads on this topic now. It would have been good if I could see the same signals (say 10mV/50mV/100mV sinusoid @ 20Mhz) on the the MSO5072/MSO5074 and the SDS2104X Plus/SDS1104X-E.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 12:25:46 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 27, 2022, 11:25:18 amYes.You only get two cheap probes though instead of four good ones with the MSO5074 so it's not much of a saving at the end of the day.In a pinch there's all sorts of tricks you can do to get around the noise. It depends a lot on the frequency and type of signal though.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 12:31:04 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 27, 2022, 12:14:43 pmYes... but fixating on that is missing what oscilloscopes are for. Oscilloscopes are there to see thetiming, shapeof a waveform. eg. Is it going up and down? When? How much? At what frequency? Thick lines don't change any of that.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 12:32:08 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 27, 2022, 12:25:46 pmYeah, forgot about the probes!If there are reliable DIY (and low cost) workarounds for the low noise floor problem, and if the number of times I actually work with such low voltages is low, I guess there is no scope to beat the MSO5000 at that price point....But, like I mentioned in my previous post, I can't exactly comprehend how much the "thicker" reproduction of all signals might affect its usage.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 12:33:01 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 27, 2022, 12:31:04 pm

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 02:24:15 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 27, 2022, 12:32:08 pmIt will rarely prevent you from getting the job done but if you're an OCD sort of person who'll obsess over every time you look at the screen instead of remembering how much bandwidth/memory you've got then don't buy one.You'll also be gaining separate channel controls a touchscreen and signal generator. All worth having.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 03:48:27 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 27, 2022, 12:14:43 pmDespite some dubious things being said here, MSO5000 has much more noise than SDS2104X Plus/SDS1104X-E andthat is importantif you need to see low level signals.No amount of wishful thinking and pushing a head in a sand will change that fact. Thick lines will hide the fact that in that noise there are other signals riding on large one...You cannot replace low noise equipment with a high noise equipment. Higher noise equipment, by definition, hides more things from you.You cannot replace bandwidth. If you need 1 GHz bandwidth, 200Mhz scope won't do. Period.If you need to sample long periods with high sample rate, you need long memory. Scope with large memory can sample what a small memory scope can, but not vice versa.If you need decoding, you need to have it.All that being said, I personally like the scope to have lowest noise and best analog performance first. On top of that all other.MSO5074, SDS2104X Plus and SDS1104X-E are really 3 different types of scopes.I would say that MSO5074 (if equipped with MSO probes) is a decent mixed signal scope for looking at logic level signals. It has noisy front end, but it has lots of memory and MSO and decoding. I personally don't like their implementation, but is is a useful scope for amateur robotics, microcontroller arduino type stuff etc.. It has 2Ch of basic AWG. It has Bode plot but is not very good.SDS2104X Plus is much better scope for analog stuff etc. It is more designed for that. Since I do that, I prefer it to MSO5000. I also, personally, like their software concept better. It is more logical to me. It has 1CH of basic AWG. It's Bode plot implementation is top notch.But, If I were you, I would just go and get SDS1104X-E. It is a lot of scope for the money. Possibly all the scope you need for a long time. And for the rest of the money you can buy few other instruments....And these class of scopes actually hold their value. You will easily sell it later and upgrade if you have a need for it.

author: Chernobyl
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 04:18:32 pm
content: I purchased a Siglent SDS1104X-E about 6 months ago and love it. For a hobbyist it is great value for money and I don't think you'll regret your choice.Full disclosure: I have a tiny amount of regret around not springing for the SDS2104X Plus (more bandwidth and nice large touchscreen), but I just couldn't justify the over 2x cost at this time.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 04:57:11 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 27, 2022, 02:24:15 pm

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 04:58:34 pm
content: Quote from: Chernobyl on March 27, 2022, 04:18:32 pm

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 12:36:44 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 27, 2022, 03:48:27 pm...ifyou need to see low level signals then obviously it's important, nobody's denying that. What if you don't particularly need to see them?Quote from: 2N3055 on March 27, 2022, 03:48:27 pmThat's just FUD though. Maybe you can give a concrete example of when it would be a disaster instead of just invoking the bogeyman.If a signal is repetitive then things like averaging mode can clean it up. Here's a screenshot taken from a MSO5000 with averaging mode on:No thick traces there.There's also hires mode and heatmap mode. They can bring out more detail especially when you've got 8Gsamples/sec to burn.Yes, Iknowthey're not perfect solutionsandthe Siglent is better. All I'm saying is that the MSO5000 isn't a complete disaster like all the oooo-look-at-the-Rigol-noise-isn't-it-awful! screenshots that get posted here seem to imply. If low level signals aren't a big thing for you then the Rigol is a lot of bang:buck.nubinstanley: You say the SDS1104X-E will cost you 650 USD where you live. How much is the Rigol?The SDS1104X-E is probably still the best bet unless you're working with (eg.) digital stuff in the 50-100MHz range and absolutelyneedthe Rigol's bandwidth.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 05:07:51 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 27, 2022, 03:48:27 pmI do understand what you are saying.But my question is as follows :I work a lot with microcontrollers and so I know that I want 4 channels, good protocol decoding and LA capabilities (cheap DIY probe possible with the MSO5000 ?). It's also unlikely that I'll get an acceptable resale value for a scope in my location - So, the one I buy now, will most likely be the one I'll be using 10 years from now!Coming to analog part - Right now, I don't even know a use-case where I would need to look at very low voltages.I am planning on learning more as I go and so I don't know for a fact that I'll not know such a use-case in future.So no, I cannot say with absolute certainty that the low noise floor will not be an issue for me. And as I mentioned earlier, I am not exactly able to comprehend how the front-end noise would effect the reproduction of higher voltage signals (1V+ ?) - the thicker traces - will it be too off-putting ?So..1) Assuming that for the next 3 years I'll mostly be in the digital domain with a little bit of analog stuff, is the MSO5000 a bad buy ?2) The thicker traces - will it be too off-putting ? Will it be too difficult to work with analog signals - even if not very low voltages ?3) How is the protocol decoding/LA capabilities of the SDS1104X-E/SDS2104X Plus (compared to the MSO5000)? Also, DIY LA probes are difficult to make ?4) For the occasions where I do have to work with low voltages, can I use some work-arounds ? Pre-amps ?As I did mention, I shortlisted 3 scopes : SDS1104X-E, MSO5104, SDS2104X Plus. The last one is off the list as I don't want to spend that much. Right now, after all the reading, I am a bit scared to go the MSO5000 way.But, to be frank, I don't know if that feeling is justified.Maybe if I get answers to the above questions, I can make a more informed decision.I sure do hope if a few of the MSO5000 owners chime in. Anyhow, looks like I'll be saving some money (by buying the SDS1104X-E)

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 05:14:53 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 28, 2022, 12:36:44 amThe listed price is close to1310 USD.Quote from: Fungus on March 28, 2022, 12:36:44 amTo be frank, we are not talking about "what I absolutely need".It's about "I can buy only one - what's the best I can get at a price point so that some features are there IF/WHEN I need it".Anyhow, looks like getting the SDS1104X-E would be the safe bet. And HOPE that if/when I need to upgrade, I get a decent resale price for it.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 05:24:04 am
content: The SDS2104X Plus would come to around1855 USD(haven't done any negotiations)...

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 07:25:03 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 28, 2022, 12:36:44 amYou keep repeating, what at first was uninformed statements and now is something else. Deliberate misinformation?If someone can post a screenshot that shows a trace that is twice as thick as some other scope's, than it is REAL.Of course something is not a problem if you CHOOSE to ignore it. Until it hits you on the head even if you're not looking, that is...If you shut it off and don't use it at all you can't see any noise.. See, I fixed it for you...No noise I tell y'a.Image you posted is not a representation of how MSO5000 shows trace and how much noise it has. It is a single capture of only 1 kpts. Noise is manifested by overlapping thousands of traces on top of each other. Low noise scope with good trigger will perfectly retrace all pixels on top of each other. You will have what visibly looks like one trace, but is a combination of thousands of triggers on top of each other. Scope with high noise will have signal wiggle around and will show thick trace. How thick? Depends on the noise and chosen range.Averaging is not replacement for low noise front piece of equipment in a first place. It works only on a repetitive signal and will filter out noise that is a part of a signal too. Noise in a signal is something we want to see if there is some. That is why we bought the scope in a first place. Hires is lowpass filtering and converts your scope to a bad audio card if you filter too far.. Will also filter out anything in that range from a signal too.And none of that is FUD. You keep screaming FUD and repeating how it is not important. It isimportant figure of merit separating different equipment. Ask any radio person how unimportant is dynamic range, noise figures and such. And why they spend so much time to get a 1 or 2 dB less noise.It might not be a deal breaker to some that only work on digital signals but is genuine part of the characteristics of MSO5000. Problem with scopes is that they are universal instruments. They allow us to see stuff you can't otherwise. And their use is very creative sometimes. And we cannot predict how are we going to use them and on what kind of the problem.There are still people that claim old analog scopes are superior because they have lower noise and thin traces on which you can see more details compared to digital scopes. And in the case of MSO5000 they would be right. But there are other digital scopes (some really inexpensive for the specs you get) that are at the level of good analog ones in regards of noise.Does it make MSO5000 unusable and useless? Not by any chance. It is a scope that has many features and if you're not looking into low level signals and use it for digital it is a tool that will let knowledgeable person do many things. It is not a bad scope, it's just not very good at certain, important figures of merit.Andthis is all I already SAID in my post. For many people not doing precision stuff analog performance will be GOOD ENOUGH.But we cannot spread misinformation that it is EQUALLY GOOD as scopes that have SUPERIOR performance noise figures...We cannot spread misinformation noise is not important because you filter and average and it magically goes away. It doesn't. That is simply not true. We sometimes use some techniques to squeeze signal a little bit to try and isolate some specific detail from the signal when we are working on a edge or deliberately want to ignore some part of the signal. But that is only if we have no other choice or we don't care about detail at that time. But if signal is not there to be seen in a first place, you can't do much.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 07:39:28 am
content: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-coming/Watch the Howardlong video in the first post.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 09:16:22 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 28, 2022, 07:25:03 amDo take a look at my reply (with a list of queries) to your earlier post.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 09:23:48 am
content: Quote from: tautech on March 28, 2022, 07:39:28 amI am assuming that you are talking about this video :If yes, I had seen that. There is also a pinned post under the video (An update from 4 months ago), the last sentence reads :Code:The TL;DR: For a daily driver, I have changed my mind, and I now find I'm slightly more likely to go for the Rigol despite its several shortcomings, and this is mostly because I'm more comfortable with the workflow. The slightly smaller form factor of the Rigol means fits better on my bench, underneath the monitor without obscuring it. YMMV of course!Which was why I kept the MSO5000 in contention even after going through the front-end noise thread.If this guy can use it as a daily driver, I definitely can - I'll most likely have 1/10th the use/knowledge starting off.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 09:40:25 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 28, 2022, 07:25:03 amThe text I wrote above that image was: "If a signal is repetitive then things like averaging mode can clean it up. Here's a screenshot taken from a MSO5000 with averaging mode on:"Quote from: 2N3055 on March 28, 2022, 07:25:03 amThe text I wrote below it was: "I know they're not perfect solutions and the Siglent is better."

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 09:43:52 am
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 28, 2022, 09:23:48 amThere have been firmware updates since that video.Don't forget: There's a lot of happy MSO5000 users on EEVBLOG. Just go to any of the MSO5000 threads and see.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2022, 10:01:22 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 28, 2022, 09:43:52 amOne more things I found : It seems to be easier to make DIY logic probes from the Siglent ?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2022, 10:27:05 am
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 28, 2022, 05:07:51 amI'm sorry but I thought that enough was said in meantime that direct answer to this was not necessary.What does the digital domain mean to you?Scope use with digital signal is two fold: signal integrity and decoding protocols. With MSO scope you can also cross trigger between analog/digital with many channels. If you only do serial protocols no need for digital channels that much. 4ch scope will do.Signal integrity on digital signals is analog work. Decoding is software works. Being able to do both on same scope without switching cables and such is convenient.If you do a lot of decoding and not much analog, and cross triggering is no important, a small USB protocol analyser and simpler scope will do better job. Just because decoding is better on PC.So maybe you'l be better of with SDS1104X-E and a small logic analyser.How are you going to look at digital signal? With passive 10x probe? That means that when you are at 1 V/div for 3.3V logic, you are actually using scope at 100 mV/div. What is noise then?I'm not going to make a decision for you. I cannot.As I said, if you want to just buy something because you want to give yourself a present of something nice, then buy whatever makes you happy. If you need something to do the job, just get simplest and cheapest thing that will do the job.I think you have enough info. Now it is up to you to decide what you want/need.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2022, 01:34:33 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 29, 2022, 10:27:05 am

author: jacekowski
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 02:44:36 am
content: I would strongly advise against MSO5000 (i've had 2 that both had serious issues with (presumably) ADC interleaving).In all screenshots below it was fed with nice clean sine wave, artefacts were generated in the scope.The issue is less obvious when scope is limited to 100MHz, but if you know where to look it is quite easy to find.

author: normi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 04:25:13 am
content: The MSO5000 does have more noise than the Siglent, but so does the mso7000 and mso8000 which are way more expensive than the Siglent, so it is clear that it is not all about noise. But to be objective, I have found that there are more Youtube videos from MSO5000 owners than I have found for the Siglent SDS2104X Plus, so there are numerous active use cases that can be viewed online to get an independent review. Both are nice scopes and offer a lot of features but the US$500 savings gained by buying the MSO5000 could go a long way in buying other much needed equipment. If you want to work with low level signals you can buy cheap amplifiers or build one which will pickup signals even lower than what the Siglent can. If you doneedto work with low level analog signals then get the cheaper Siglent scope that has low noise floor.There are others on the forum who have both scopes and are pleased with the MSO5000 because it does have a number of capabilities that theSDS2104X Plus does not offer.On another note, it is far easier to dispose of a scope for a good price if you live in wealthy country, expensive scopes are harder to sell in countries with lower income and so you will have to give bigger discounts. If I were selling a scope I would have to ship it to the US to get a better price.Youtuber tomtektest does an extensive series on the scope, and his reviews are based on purchases he made and are not sponsored.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 06:06:11 am
content: Quote from: normi on March 30, 2022, 04:25:13 amFun argument. This can do also with Siglent. And circle close... back to starting line.Btw, dc coupled low noise, 1Mohm impedance, 200 - 500MHz linear amplifier is not simplest case. Been there, not want replay.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 08:25:21 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 29, 2022, 10:27:05 amYep. 4 channels can do a lot of "digital" work. I wouldn't get the logic breakout on day one, I'd wait and see how it goes.Quote from: 2N3055 on March 29, 2022, 10:27:05 amIt doesn't need massively low noise though. An MSO5000 is perfectly capable of finding runt pulses and telling you if the pullups on your I2C bus are working.Quote from: 2N3055 on March 29, 2022, 10:27:05 amThose logic analyzers are OK for examining large data exchanges but they aren't real time. You can't just look at the signal and fiddle with the controls. You have to press "record" on the PC, wait a while, press "stop", then go in and see what you got.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 09:50:55 am
content: Quote from: jacekowski on March 30, 2022, 02:44:36 amThis is scary...Where you able to find other folks facing the same problem ? Did you end up getting a different scope (if yes, which one ?) ?Has the issue been resolved in the latest firmware ?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 10:00:08 am
content: Quote from: jacekowski on March 30, 2022, 02:44:36 amHas anybody else had this issue? You'd think something so blindingly obvious would have been all over the forums since day one.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 10:17:40 am
content: Quote from: normi on March 30, 2022, 04:25:13 amI am not an expert and I just want to buy a scope (at a particular price point) that can last quite a while. If I am being honest, the SDS1104X-E would probably be more than enough for me right now. But, I am not buying this scope just for "right now" - I am hoping to learn. I am from India, and I can confidently say that I'll not get a decent resale value for the scope. I am already buying at a higher price compared to someone from the US (MSO5074 : ~1300; SDS2104X Plus : ~1850 USD) So, whatever I buy now is the one I'll be using for a loooong time.If the issues plaguing the MSO5074 can be "worked around", I'll of course prefer to get that compared to the Siglent.After going through a lot of threads on the forum, the primary issue seems to be the front-end noise in the MSO5000. I understand that working with low level signals can be difficult because of this. But I am not experienced enough to comprehend the effect it is going to have for other use-cases.1) During the (possibly rare) occasions when I need to work on low level signals, are there work-arounds available ? (Seems like I can possibly use cheap/DIY pre-amps ?)2) The thicker traces - will it be too off-putting ? Will it be too difficult to work with analog signals - even if not very low voltages ? Using an example that @2N3055 pointed out :QuoteWhat is the answer here ?With the front-end noise that the MSO5000 has, is it too difficult to work with 3.3V logic with a 10X probe at 100mV/div ?Any idea about the issue @jacekowski mentioned in the previous post ?Quote from: normi on March 30, 2022, 04:25:13 amYes, found the list yesterday. Going through those videos now.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 10:28:03 am
content: Quote from: rf-loop on March 30, 2022, 06:06:11 amHey, if I didn't have to spend ~570 USD extra, I would have already bought the SDS2104X Plus.Quote from: rf-loop on March 30, 2022, 06:06:11 amForgive my ignorance...Could you give me a situation where this is applicable ? Maybe then, I'll be able to make a judgement - whether or not such a use-cases would ever be one that I'll need to consider. (I do agree that I cannot say with absolute certainty that I'll never be in such a situation.)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 10:35:03 am
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 30, 2022, 10:17:40 amThis. Even with digital signals you will want to check whether they are within the threshold limits so having the thinnest trace possible helps to make a quick assessment without guessing what the signal level actually. Sure you can enable averaging or hi-res but those are just crutches if your actual problem is a noisy oscilloscope frontend.And don't get fooled by 'low level signals'. An oscilloscope scales (amplifies / attenuates) the input voltage to match the ADC's input range so whatever noise is in the frontend, it will affect every V/div setting. So even a 50Vpp signal is affected.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 10:53:04 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 30, 2022, 10:35:03 amSay I use averaging/hi-res mode while working with 3.3V digital logic as mentioned in the example. Can there be something that gets hidden due to it ?Quote from: nctnico on March 30, 2022, 10:35:03 amMmmm.Let's keep aside the low level signals. Let's say I am working on stuff in the 1Vpp - 50Vpp range. How thick a trace are we talking about ? Is it bad enough to justify me spending around 570 USD more ? (Not saying that this is the only thing that differentiates an SDS2104X+ from an MSO5000 - Display size, a "bit" sluggish UI etc are things I am willing to overlook for the money... Am I overlooking something else that is important ?)

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 11:16:29 am
content: Quote from: nubinstanleySorry this my comment was not at all for you.Based on what I have read from this chain, I still believe that you will never find yourself in such a situation. This not to absolutely exclude that it still couldn’t be possible.If I am in a situation as you have explained and from which I have formed an imaginary reality of yours, then my choice would be SDS1104X-E. If my image of your reality were the same as your real reality.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 11:34:17 am
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 30, 2022, 10:17:40 amYes.From DC up to about 1Mhz you can use a $2 opamp to preamplify the signal.Above that there'sall sorts of amplifiersavailable.A single box that does all frequencies would be awfully expensive but if you have a specific need then it can be quite cheap.Realistically though, you probably won't need it. The MSO5000 will probably be OK without them.Quote from: nubinstanley on March 30, 2022, 10:17:40 amNo.a) Nobody's forcing you to use 1V/div. Feel free to fill the screen when/if you're interested in "noise".2) Noise will be what it is - a percentage of the on-screen divisions. Here's a typical screenshot:You'd think people who post questions like the above would show what happens instead of just invoking FUD/bogeymen, but... noooo.If the signal is repetitive like in that screenshot then you can turn on averaging mode or hires mode and get much thinner traces. Most of the time though, you'll be interested in the frequency, amplitude, rise times and squareness of the corners. Noisedoes not hide any of those things, see image above.(images taken from noise discussionhere)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 11:50:17 am
content: Now show the same signal with 2 or 3 divisions like you would normally do to fit more traces on the screen and you'll see that the amount of noise versus amount of signal gets quite large.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 11:53:08 am
content: Quote from: rf-loop on March 30, 2022, 11:16:29 amEven so, just out of curiosity, could you give me an example use-case ?Also, maybe I'll ask a question from a different perspective : In your experience, what are a few use-cases where you think the SDS1104X-E can't cut it ?

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 11:59:17 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 30, 2022, 11:34:17 amOk....

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 12:02:38 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 30, 2022, 11:50:17 amI can understand (I think). But (an excerpt from an earlier post),"Is it bad enough to justify me spending around 570 USD more ? (Not saying that this is the only thing that differentiates an SDS2104X+ from an MSO5000 - Display size, a "bit" sluggish UI etc are things I am willing to overlook for the money... Am I overlooking something else that is important ?)"

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 12:08:43 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 30, 2022, 11:50:17 amWhen you have multiple traces on screen you're usually more interested in the timing and positions of the signals relative to each other.Noise doesn't hide that either. eg. can you see if the data signal changes only when clock is low?

author: normi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 03:02:39 pm
content: I had the same issue when I was looking for a new scope, I saw the SDS2104X+ and was considering buying it, then I heard about the MSO5000 and compared all the pros and cons and found that spending the extra money was not worth it for my personal use. For your case I think the choice is between the MSO5000 and the cheaper Siglent, if this is a new hobby then there are huge amounts of projects that can be done with very basic scopes, and its hard to find a high percentage of cases that you will need the MSO5000 or the SDS2104X+, and if you do need the features then there is even far less cases for low signal measurements.The other thing to consider is that there are advantages that the MSO5000 has:1. Much better AWG, you get 2 channels plus the options for modulation2. It does not do Sinx interpolation to guess the shape of a wave, the high sample rate provides real picture of the signal since the sample points are close.3. individual controls for each channel, for some persons this is an absolute necessity4. Has HDMI output5. does not have the Zoom issue which all Siglent scopes appear to have, read further on forum or EEVBLOG Dave's video6. There are others which I have not listed, but the question I faced was after adding and subtracting the features the pros that remained for the Siglent did not justify the extra cost for me.Here is another Youtuber who does mostly RF and analog work, he sold his old scope and bought a MSO5000, he appears very proud of his scope and therefore this dismisses the idea that it is primarily for digital work. Also remember he would have hacked the scope so he would be a member of this forum and would have come across all the competing views.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 04:21:22 pm
content: Quote from: normi on March 30, 2022, 03:02:39 pmThank you for taking the time to share all this information! My confusions is also between the MSO5000 and the SDS2104X+.I can justify a jump from the SDS1104X-E to the MS5000 but was confused about a jump to the SDS2104X+.From a usability perspective, how is the scope ? UI, protocol decoding... ?Will checkout the video...

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 05:03:57 pm
content: In the end neither are 'perfect' allround. AFAIK both Rigol and Siglent only decode what is on screen. If you want to get something more polished then look at the R&S RTB2004 for example. Maybe it makes more sense to buy something cheap right now, see where the roads leads you to and upgrade later.

author: phs
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 05:06:56 pm
content: As I recall, the issues jacekowski was having most likely come down to incorrect termination of the signal going into the scope. In the pictures jacekowski posted above, there is no information provided about how the signal was terminated. However, if I recall correctly, the signal was split from a single sig gen output and terminated into two (2) 50 ohm bnc through termination connectors at two of the input channels to the scope. I suspect this can cause transmission line problems. You have a 50 ohm transmission line, split, being terminated with two 50 ohm through terminations, and my guess is this explains the effects shown in the photos -- the affects of the signal reflections seem pretty clear to see in the photos. I was able to reproduce exactly this effect with an RTB2004, using a similar setup.The other thing that I believe occurs with this setup is that as you dial through various frequencies from the sig gen, the amplitude of the signal will become significantly dependent on frequency, and will change as the frequencies change.It was shown in a photo I provided that the RTB2004 demonstrated exactly the same artifacts -- again -- in all likelihood due to transmission line effects.However, when terminated properly, these issues almost completely disappear -- with each scope (RTB/MSO).With proper termination, when a single-shot sweep is performed, the amplitude variations/reflection artifacts pretty much go away and the only remaining artifacts are slight variations in how the sample points are laid down within the instrument's noise envelope that surrounds the signal. Both the RTB and MSO demonstrate this issue, as does any scope out there. In fact, I was surprised at how well the Rigol compared to the R&S in this case. It's clear that the "noise envelope" around the signal on the MSO is "thicker" than the RTB, but for most use cases (in my experience) this just doesn't make that much difference. Having to choose, I'd rather have a much higher waveform refresh rate rather than the tighter noise specs. It just feels like the Rigol reveals more information about the signal, for most general use cases. Don't have a Siglent scope lying around to add to the comparison, so the RTB example is just for limited comparison purposes.As far as I can tell, I have seen no evidence whatsoever that there was anything wrong, at all, with the second scope jacekowski showed pictures from.Something else I've observed is that low signal levels, in most combinations of settings, if not all, the RTB runs at a much slower waveform update rate when compared to the MSO, which I find annoying when trying to see what low-level signals actually look like. Though I haven't actually done extensive testing, it just feels like the MSO, in many cases, provides significantly more information about the dynamic nature of the signal at low levels, largely because of the much higher waveform refresh rate. Additionally, the way the Rigol displays the waveforms and handles persistence, just looks really good.In actual daily use, the MSO scopes here tend to get more use than the RTB scopes, primarily due to the larger number of relevant features they have in comparison to the RTB. Also, the controls feel more intuitive and they seem quicker to operate than the lovely looking, but often annoying UI of the RTB. (Talking about the front panel controls and using a mouse, not the touch screen, which I rarely use).Anyone complaining about the noise on the MSO who hasn't actually used one day in and day out might want to reconsider being so vocal about how dire the MSO noise issues are, as I believe they may be doing quite a disservice to potential users for whom the MSO could be an extremely useful tool. The feature set on the MSO is still quite extraordinary for the price, and allows a wide array of signal analysis techniques to be applied. It really is a high-quality "Swiss-Army-Knife" that is unbeatable for the price (if "enhanced", that is).For the wide variety of work done here, the MSO can do more than the RTB (faster decoding, multiple FFTs, 2 AWGs, area triggering options, higher waveform update rate, more sophisticated and varied triggering options, and more I'm not thinking of right now. In fact after being disappointed at the limited bps UART decoding rates and, at the time, limit of 4 simultaneous measurements of the RTB, it was decided to try out the MSO scopes and they have proved to be more capable for the wide variety of work done here.Yes, the noise can be annoying in some relatively rare use cases, but there are the various "noise reduction" functions available (although they aren't all that satisfying for my use much of the time), but also the "color grade" function can help to display more detail about the signal. And, anyone thinking an 8-bit scope is going to be the most useful tool for 16/24/32 bit audio signal analysis is likely to be disappointed. There are probably better tools for that sort of work.Also, if someone spends the majority of their time in the 1 mV/div and below range, there are likely better tools for that as well, but don't forget to consider the waveform update rate in those cases, too.As for the Siglent scopes, those still are not under consideration here because of their choice of implementation of the zoom function, but also, comparable models were not available at the time the MSO scopes were purchased. There is a lot to like with the Siglents it appears, but I would have to make sure they have the same rich array of functionality as the Rigols, higher waveform update rates, as well as zoom capabilities more in line with the RTB and MSO.Though the Rigol is far from perfect (UI can get sluggish, but not much worse than the RTB, the web UI isn't nearly as nice as the RTB, and the screen is smaller than the RTB, and yes, there is a noticeable difference in low level signal noise levels), but for the daily tasks here, the Rigol just can't be beat for $$/function. It's a high performance workhorse with a surprising range of capabilities, and has been a great investment, as have all the Rigol scopes purchased here over the years. Yep, I'm a happy user, but looking forward to seeing what Siglent is up to in the future as well...

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 05:07:55 pm
content: First image some signal. It looks pretty much very noisy. MSO5000 user will say: "you see, I see same noise.."Then you zoom in and realize all of that is a signal:There are no noise reduction techniques that preserve full bandwidth AND decrease noise on a signal that is not strictly repetitive. You either give up bandwidth (i.e you get a 1Mhz scope) or noise is there.A side note: this is with a scope on 1mv/div natively (10mv with 10x probe) riding on top of 11,5V signal. DC coupled...Ruminate on that. That is what a low noise scope front end can do...With a 500MHz+ full bandwidth...

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2022, 05:26:43 pm
content: Quote from: phs on March 30, 2022, 05:06:56 pmHI!You are correct, touchscreen Rigols have fast trigger rate.Could I bother to ask you what is it with zoom that is not right with Siglent? They even implement vertical zoom.They also implement full set of advanced triggering, arbitrary math, 2 zone triggers etc...They do measurements on full buffer, have gated measurements, numerous measurements functions.Also Histograms and histicons, Trend and Track plots etc etc..They have many advanced functions of mid range scopes really...

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 01:01:19 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 30, 2022, 05:03:57 pmNico, the Rigol DS1054Z (and perhaps the DS2000) is the one that decodes on screen. Several other models don't.Quote from: 2N3055 on March 30, 2022, 05:26:43 pmSinisa, you don't want to open that can of worms again... It is that discussion from the scope wars of 2020 that talked about capture a large buffer then "zoom in" to look at details, or capture a detail and "zoom out" to see the stream (or something about that).

author: jacekowski
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 03:30:20 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 30, 2022, 10:00:08 amI've found some previous reports (it seems like it is not always this bad)https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/review-rigol-mso5000-tests-bugs-questions/msg3187486/#msg3187486Considering that you have to set up triggering level very near top or bottom limit (so it triggers only from the glitch) for the issue to be obvious (otherwise it looks like fatter trace and the really big glitches are infrequent enough to disappear if you are triggering it near 0V) it is also almost impossible to spot with lower bandwidth models.

author: jacekowski
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 03:33:14 am
content: Quote from: phs on March 30, 2022, 05:06:56 pmSignal was correctly terminated, and local distributor confirmed that the issue existed and took the scope back. Also, screenshots attached to my post in this thread shows traces when i "upgraded" the scope to full bandwidth (something i didn't want to share on a public forum before i got my refund).

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 04:53:05 am
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 30, 2022, 04:21:22 pmYes, it can be confusing and everyone has their perspective. The scope discussion comes up regularly, the usual suspects reply (including me) and no conclusions are reached. All as it should be!I have the SDS1104X-E and SDS2104X+, I don't have any MSO5000 but I did have the earlier DS1054Z. You mentioned not having used an oscilloscope in a while. The entry-level-and-just-above scope space is an extremely competitive area right now and significant advances have happened recently and continue. The result is that you can get a lot of bang-per-buck now, but perhaps with some occasional rough edges. You mentioned you will work with microcontrollers and want decoding and such. If that is all or the vast majority of what you intend to do with it, then I'm probably not the best person to help you pick a scope. Otherwise, I'd tell you that the less-expensive SDS1104X-E is probably a pretty clear choice--it is much cheaper, it works very well and the bugs are mostly worked out and it really has a quite nice feature set when hacked. What it doesnothave is any sort of signal generator, a large screen (it's OK, just not huge) or a good LA option. It does have an LA option and you can hack the license, but the hardware is a bit expensive and can't easily be DIY-ed. The price point allows you to upgrade later with fewer regrets once you spend some time with a modern DSO and figure out all the things that it can do. And in today's rapidly advancing market, I don't think it makes sense to buy capability today that you might not be able to use for 3-5 years--or never. And you might miss out on something you didn't know you needed until you try and do it and it isn't there.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 06:24:49 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on March 31, 2022, 01:01:19 amOhhh,that...He said zoom mode problems, that ain't zoom mode problem, but acquisition memory strategy differences..Didn't connect it..But anyway I appreciate you for warning me about that minefield. No, I don't want to relive that..Thanks Rafael!

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 06:50:37 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 30, 2022, 05:26:43 pmOh, come on! You're seriously going to pretend you don't remember what Siglent's "Zoom problem" is?Dave did a video on it:Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 06:24:49 amQuite.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 07:04:35 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 31, 2022, 06:50:37 amYou HAD to be that idiot, right ?After peoplespecifically asked not toopen that can of worms?Do I have to repeat, ad nauseam, again, fact that that video is mostly WRONG and full of inaccuracies?Fact that you well knowbut are left with no other arguments than that controversy...

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 07:11:45 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 30, 2022, 05:07:55 pmI'm not sure what that's supposed to prove. If you stop a Rigol MS)5000 and zoom in then it's going to be a single pixel trace, too!The "thick traces" on 'scopes are only there when you're zoomed out - they're a result of the 'scopes "digital phosphor" technology (the traces at the top of that screenshot look thick, too!)The difference is where the noise comes from, not in the display algorithm.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 07:13:46 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 31, 2022, 07:11:45 amYes.... Now you get it....

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 08:11:47 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 07:04:35 amI like how you reposted it.Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 07:04:35 amLOL!Maybe you meant after a single Siglent fan with his head in the sand asked not to repost it?Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 07:04:35 amFeel free to point out a single thing in that video that doesn't actually happen on Siglents.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 08:57:46 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 31, 2022, 08:11:47 amIquotedit in full. Which you don't do because always twisting meanings and taking things out of context.How the FU**K is Rafael Siglent fan? He owns Rigol scope. He wanted to avoid this exact thing you are doing right now.Taking things out of context. The whole video is about "Siglent is no good because it doesn't do this.." and then uses Keysight to demonstrate it. Which also can't do things claimed it can. So whole video, it's tone, note implications and conclusion is false.Siglent (currently) uses same acquisition strategy as : Keysight, R&S, LeCroy etc. when working in Auto memory management mode. Some of these also support manual memory control that works by disabling normal timebase behaviour and timing and acquiring fixed record length all the time, regardless timebase. That is really a special acquisition mode same as roll mode is. It is useful to some and provides nothing that cannot be done other way. I had (and still have) scopes with manual memory control and never use that. I just keep them in auto mode and use it LeCroy/Siglent way, with zoom on, including your beloved Micsig. It is more logical way to me. Others can do what they want. But they can't claim something is wrong if they are not capable of using something the way it is explained manual.This is my last reply to you on this here. I refuse to fuel your perpetual provocations. If you want to argue, open your own topic and let's argue there. So people who enjoy your jabs and pricks and provocations. There are some many the enjoy reality TV. Don't hijack other topics with your vitriol... Call it "Fungus calls bullshit!" or something flashy and cater to your audience there. And leave people here alone.Please. Pretty please?

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 09:53:48 am
content: Just another day at the office...@nubinstanley,Buy the X-E. That's all you ever need in the near future and these things aren't cheap in your region.If you find that you would need the MSO5000 for something, it will be a good exercise to find a way to overcome its inexistence.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 09:57:53 am
content: Quote from: tv84 on March 31, 2022, 09:53:48 amYeah sorry...I agree and said that before. X-E is plenty of scope for most uses..Quote from: tv84 on March 31, 2022, 09:53:48 amLOL!

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 12:03:31 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 07:13:46 amI've always had it. I'm not the one pretending otherwise.Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 08:57:46 amYep. Bury your head in the sand.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 12:47:54 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 06:24:49 amCome on, you can't be that thickIt is you who asked about more details so you opened the door for the can of worms to be put on the table againMaybe you should start to accept that not everyone sees it the same way as you do where it comes to memory management / zooming out. Respect other people's workflow / agree to disagree so to say.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 02:03:16 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 31, 2022, 12:47:54 pmWell I WAS that thick... Arrogant much ??A man spoke about "zoom anomaly". How TF those words have to do anything with that can of worms.And you though I won't reply to you too, and it is a good time to insult me with your insinuations, without repercussions......Not Fungus, not you didn't notice that everybody else on this topic suddenly went away.With "...Ooh noo... not these 3 idiots again" gasped under their breaths..Also, my last response to you here. If you have something to discuss on a technical merit fine.Otherwise, stay well.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 02:09:21 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 02:03:16 pmWhat else could it possibly be?It absolutely belongs in a discussion where people are asking questions about UI, workflow, etc. The only people wishing it wasn't here are the Siglent fanboys.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 04:06:04 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 30, 2022, 05:03:57 pmThe RTB2004.. Isn't that a 2500 USD scope ? Or did I find the wrong model ?If yes... Let me remind you that I am trying to justify a jump from 1300 USD to 1850 USD (or avoid the jump)Quote from: nctnico on March 30, 2022, 05:03:57 pmAt the lower end, I would want to get at least and SDS1104X-E, which would come to around 670 USD. I doubt I'll be able to make half of that back if I try to sell it here in India.So no, that's not an option for me. I have to get something that I can (want to) hold on for quite a while.So the question is this : "Is the Rigol's thick traces (assuming that I'd be working on low level voltages only rarely) bad enough to justify me spending around 570 USD more ? (Not saying that this is the only thing that differentiates an SDS2104X+ from an MSO5000 - Display size, a "bit" sluggish UI etc are things I am willing to overlook for the money... Am I overlooking something else that is important ?)"

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 04:08:06 pm
content: Quote from: phs on March 30, 2022, 05:06:56 pmThank you!... For the detailed reply.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 04:15:58 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 31, 2022, 04:06:04 pmI know. I just wanted to point out that there are other choices around. Car analogy: You are now looking at Hyundai and KIA but they aren't at the luxury and comfort levels BMW and Mercedes offer.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 04:16:19 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 30, 2022, 05:07:55 pmAgain, forgive my ignorance..I do understand the advantages of having a low noise scope.But, could you give an example situation where I might come across such a signal ? Maybe then I'll be able to make a judgement - whether or not such a use-cases would ever be one that I'll need to consider.Also, are you implying that such a measurement would have been impossible on the Rigol ?

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 04:23:26 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on March 31, 2022, 04:53:05 am

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 04:28:22 pm
content: Quote from: tv84 on March 31, 2022, 09:53:48 amYeah... maybe its more of a "want" than a "need".Anyhow, thanks for the advice.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 04:32:46 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 31, 2022, 04:15:58 pm

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 04:41:06 pm
content: Anyhow, first of all, let me apologize for triggering another "noise war".I am happy to have received varying perspectives and now I think that the ball is in my court. Thank you all, for all the inputs/advice. Maybe I'll drop a message here after I finally buy a scope (only if I buy something that I actually need and not what I want)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 05:16:02 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 31, 2022, 04:41:06 pmIn the end it is up to you. A good way is to try before you buy. If you have the chance to try the oscilloscopes you are interested in, then go that route. Make some kind of test plan & prepare some circuits you want to do measurements on (analog signals, protocol decoding, some math, etc) otherwise you'll be just twiddling some knobs. Maybe this threadhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/functional-comparison-of-rs-rtb2000-siglent-sds2000x-and-keysight-dsox1000/made by forum member RBBVNL9 can serve as input for what kind of tests to do.Short of that you can try to find videos with people actually using the oscilloscope to make measurements. Not so much reviews, but actual use. From there you can try to imagine how a particular oscilloscope would work for you. But still, some things are very much depending on what kind of circuits you are working on an what kind of workflow you like.edit: typo

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 05:19:18 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 31, 2022, 04:16:19 pmThat is a ripple on a power supply.I don't have a MSO5000 here to try. Someone who has it can try to recreate scenario.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 05:20:47 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 31, 2022, 05:16:02 pmThis is good advice!

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 08:38:37 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 31, 2022, 02:09:21 pmWhat it boils down to is a slightly different way of doing things that happens to annoy certain people. I see the point, but have no real issues adapting to using zoom if I want to scroll horizontally. Really the only thing that Siglent gets unforgivably wrong here is not allowing you to condense the whole-record display into a bar indicator (showing only what part of the record is being displayed in the zoom window) at the top like you see on Tek scopes. This would put the matter to bed entirely as far as I'm concerned. Instead we get jokes about curtains.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 09:03:05 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 31, 2022, 04:06:04 pmFrom what you've stated as your use case? I vote no. "Thick traces" don't have any affectat allon the type of measurements you'll be making (ie. signal timing, signal rise times, signal shape+amplitude, timing between multiple channels, serial decoding...etc).What you need is bandwidth, sample rate, lots of memory. The Rigol wins out there.There's also workaround for measuring low level voltages.Really though: Nobody can possibly answer that question for you. It's your money, it's your decision. The information has been posted.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 09:59:03 pm
content: A paralel topic:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-electricalcomputer-engineer-student-test-bench-equipment-recommendations/msg4093312/#msg4093312Quote from: Fungus on March 31, 2022, 09:03:05 pmTrace noise DO have (smaller or larger) effect on signal rise times, signal shape+amplitude. Some measurements will average out data in statistics.. Some won't. Decoding won't care, or anything that you do on a scope that is just checking if signal is there.SDS2000X+ has MORE bandwidth (both in "non hacked" basic version and in full blown "unlocked" version). It has sufficent sample rate (but MSO5000 does have faster sample rate). Siglent has lots more of memory (4x100 or 2x200 MPoints). Even more in segmented mode. Actuall, on your own merits Siglent wins here.And again there is no workaround for measuring low level voltages that is equivalent to proper front end sensitivity.There are some specialized preamps that could be used to measure in some cases but they are not workarounds that can replace native scope sensitivity.It is a different question if OP will ever need to measure down to microvolts. OP might not need that and in that case it is not important.I agree with your last sentence completely.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2022, 10:10:35 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 09:59:03 pmI think you have to rephrase this: there is no workaround for getting rid of noise at all signal levels. After all, a relatively large amount of noise is affecting all signal levels.Having owned a rather noisy DSO myself where the noise got in the way of using it, I'm wary of dismissing the downsides of a noisy DSO so easely. But this argument is running in circles now. The fact is that at this price level there will be compromises.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 08:19:28 am
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on March 31, 2022, 04:16:19 pmAs mentioned, power supply ripple. Whether it'll be visible on the Rigol or not depends on the intensity of the ripple. I'm sure there are many other things that might qualify, but suspect that most of them will be of interest only to people who are doing analog work.Ifallyou're going to do is digital work, and youknowthis, then a scope with a relatively noisy frontend isn't going to give you problems, and other things are going to matter a lot more.Honestly, as a general purpose tool, something like the Rigol is probably going to be just fine. The problem is that you won't necessarily know in advance when you'll need to see signals from your DUT that fall within the noise range of the frontend. Sometimes you're trying to figure out why your circuit is failing and it's only after you see the full characteristics of the signal that you realize what's really going on. If the signal includes swings that fall below the noise floor, you won't see them. Maybe that will matter and maybe it won't, but it may be that you won't realize it until you see it. As a general rule, the quietness of your frontend is like horsepower in a car. Chances are you're not going to need a lot of it but there are some situations in which there just isn't a substitute.One question I have to ask is: in your region, what are the prices of:The Rigol MSO5000 (probably the 5074)The Siglent SDS-2104X+The Siglent SDS-1104X-EThe Siglent SDS-1104X-UThe Instek GDS-1054BPrices tend to vary a lot across regions, and I think it would be interesting to see what the various options would actually cost you.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 08:23:52 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 30, 2022, 05:03:57 pmYep.I don't know how good zoom mode is on the Rigol. On the Siglent, you can use that to simultaneously get full memory decoding and display of decoding of any particular section of the signal.Note that the Siglent's acquisition method is to acquire only to the time boundaries of the screen anyway, so the main situation you'll run into limitations with respect to on-screen decoding are when you zoom into a section of the acquired signal without using zoom mode. As with any tool, you'll be fine once you learn how to use it properly, and in this case, using zoom mode is the proper way to deal with the situation.QuoteI'd generally agree with this, though that will depend on why the OP is looking for what amounts to a long-term purchase and what his minimum requirements are, as well as the likely amount of time before he outgrows his initial purchase.Depending on price and availability in his region, and depending on his needs, the OP should probably take a hard look at the Instek GDS-1054B.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 10:57:21 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 31, 2022, 05:16:02 pmI am trying to get a demo of the MSO5000. Will go through the thread.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 10:58:13 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 05:19:18 pm

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 11:00:24 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on March 31, 2022, 09:03:05 pmYes! Decision time.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 11:11:56 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on April 01, 2022, 08:19:28 amPrices converted to USD below :The Rigol MSO5000 (probably the 5074) :1280 USDThe Siglent SDS-2104X+ :1862 USDThe Siglent SDS-1104X-E :670 USDThe Siglent SDS-1104X-U :525 USDThe Instek GDS-1054B :592 USD(from Amazon -> not confirmed from an authorized reseller)At the lower end, I did some research and finalized on the SDS1104X-E. I could justify spending double that amount (to my wife and myself) and so I continued with my research. I landed on the MSO5000, which seemed like the perfect one for me and then I came across the front-end noise discussion. This in turn lead me to the SDS2104X Plus and the question I had was -> Should I spend the extra ~580 USD for it.Anyhow, I think I have received all the information I can possible understand.Need to take a decision....

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 11:23:34 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on March 31, 2022, 09:59:03 pmI forgot to ask one question : If I go with the SDS2104X+, in your opinion, what is something from the MSO5000 that I would absolutely miss ?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 12:11:27 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on April 01, 2022, 11:23:34 amThere was enough details said about what is different.What would you miss I cannot say.It highly depends on what you use it for.At my desk I have 7 scopes now. Each one of them is better in something than others and worse at something than others.

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 02:03:10 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on April 01, 2022, 11:23:34 amNothing! Only the 500 bucks in the wallet.So, if you can afford the SDS2kX+ go with it!

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 02:36:45 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on April 01, 2022, 11:23:34 amThat is the sort of question that results in "paralysis by analysis". I can't say what you would miss, but one feature I'd like to have that the SDS2104X+ doesn't is the HDMI output to directly connect a monitor. 16 LA channels and 4 analog channels on the screen at once is very crowded, especially when you're stuck losing 25% of your screen in the zoom mode.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 02:47:08 pm
content: Think about what else you could have on your bench with $500 to spend.Maybe a nice bench multimeter?A good power supply and soldering iron?Either would be a much better way to spend that money IMHO.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 02:50:35 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on April 01, 2022, 02:36:45 pmIs working with half a screen the latest Siglent owner's workaround to not being able to zoom out?It still doesn't address the problem of zooming out on a one-off event that you just managed to capture.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 02:58:29 pm
content: Quote from: tv84 on April 01, 2022, 02:03:10 pm

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 02:59:07 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on April 01, 2022, 02:50:35 pmIt always has been, but it is 3/4 screen on the SDS2104X+. You know what they say--3/4 of a loaf is better than half.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 02:59:38 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on April 01, 2022, 02:36:45 pmQuote from: bdunham7 on April 01, 2022, 02:36:45 pm

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 03:00:39 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on April 01, 2022, 02:47:08 pm

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 06:51:39 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on April 01, 2022, 11:11:56 amIf digital is all you're doing and you don't intend to get the digital pod for the 1104X-E, then you should reconsider the 1104X-U. It has the same decoding capabilities, number of channels, bandwidth (plenty for the kind of digital work scopes in this range are capable of), operating characteristics, etc., as the 1104X-E, but you're saving $100 in the process. If you could elaborate on why you're interested in the 1104X-E over the 1104X-U, that would be helpful.But see below. Because digital is what you're primarily interested in, the 1104X-U or 1104X-E isn't likely to be as good an answer.QuoteIf you compare the 1104X-U (or the Instek GDS-1054B) against the 2104X+, you're looking at over afactor of threeprice difference. That's a lot to swallow. You can get quite a lot of additional equipment for the difference. As nice as the 2104X+ is (I have one, and believe me, it's very nice indeed, my go-to scope for pretty much anything), it's hard to justify that kind of price difference unless the price of the 2104X+ (or the MSO5000, for that matter) wouldn't strain your finances.The deal is this: if finances aren't really an issue, then get the best thing you can lay your hands on (within reason) and you're guaranteed to be happy with it. If finances really are an issue, then go for the best bang for the buck you can get your hands on which will do the job adequately.The way I see it, the Rigol doesn't really hit that bang for the buck sweet spot in terms ofdigitalfunctionality.And because the 1104X-E and 1104X-U do decoding of whatever's on the screen (even if the non-visible portion of the capture itself contains crucial sections needed for that),andthe screen is relatively small,neitherare good candidates for digital work where you'll have multiple decoded traces on the screen at the same time. This is so because in order to properly see the decoded contents, you'll need to use zoom mode. The SDS-2104X+ will require this, and even the Rigol will require this (seehttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/new-rigol-scope/msg2021533/#msg2021533).There is only one scope in the list that decodes theentire captureirrespective of what's on the screen, and that's the Instek.This means, for digital work, the two best candidates in the list are the SDS-2104X+, and the GDS-1054B. The Siglent because its zoom mode is excellent (which takes care of the on-screen decoding issue), you can build your own digital pod for it if you need additional digital channels, and its screen is higher resolution than the Rigol's, thus making zoom mode that much more effective. The Instek decodes the entirety of the capture, so you can zoom in and out and move around to your heart's content and the decoded values will show up properly. The Instek is alsoveryfast, making for a pleasant experience.So the way I see it is this: if finances aren't really a major concern, then get the SDS-2104X+ and call it a day. If finances are a major concern, then get the Instek.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2022, 08:59:46 pm
content: 1104X-E has 2 ADC and twice the memory and web control and 1 MPts FFT (U has 128k max). And no Bode plot.I personally think it is worth the price difference.U is made to directly compete (and be better than) Rigol DS1054Z.Instek GDS-1054B is sweet little scope that I like better than DS1054Z but it also have only one ADC converter like Z and U.

author: normi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 12:12:02 am
content: Quote from: tv84 on April 01, 2022, 02:03:10 pmThat's misleading, there are numerous features that persons could miss, that statement is specific to you. I saw one post where the an OP requested same advise and the SDS2kX+ was suggested and he said absolutely no way was he going to buy a scope that did not have individual channel controls like the MSO5000. That thread the go for long as he eliminated all the SDS2kX+ fans.At the end of the day, the choice is based on the needs but you are tempted to spend more in the hopes that it will cover every possible future unknown situation. But this does not work, as the scopes each have their strong points and if you have no idea why you need a scope then you won't be able say which features are valuable to you.I am very pleased with my MSO5000, but I have stayed away from my own views and posted links to online users who are not doing reviews but are actually using the scope, so its unbiased use can be observed.My advice to the OP is to buy a much cheaper scope wait a number of years if you are still into the hobby then at that time there will be even more advanced scopes out there at even lower prices. All reasonable persons here would agree that it would have been unheard of for a scope that has 8G sample rate to be available for $900-1000 but Rigol has proven it is possible with the MSO5000. The Siglents and Owons may one day get to this level so we could have greater choices with less compromise in the years to come.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 03:27:58 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on April 01, 2022, 08:59:46 pmFor someone who's going to do mostly digital work?I agree it would be worth the difference if the features were going to be used. But it's unclear how much, if any, real analog he's going to be doing, and whether the nature of that analog work will require frequency domain analysis.QuoteWhich for the bandwidth of the scope and the use case (mostly digital at relatively low frequencies), is perfectly fine. And it has a killer FFT. No Bode plot, though.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 08:41:51 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on April 01, 2022, 06:51:39 pmThis decision was made quite some time back.I had compared all the ones in the lower end and decided on the 1104X-E.Quote from: kcbrown on April 01, 2022, 06:51:39 pmSo far, the advice I have been getting was that for digital work, get the MSO5000 and for more of analog work (and if I have the money to spend), get the SDS2104X+. Why do you recommend the SDS2104X+ over the MSO5000 ? (Apart from : "screen is higher resolution than the Rigol's, thus making zoom mode that much more effective")Also : "The Siglent because its zoom mode is excellent (which takes care of the on-screen decoding issue)" --> Isn't this applicable for the SDS1104X-E as well when doing protocol decoding ?Quote from: kcbrown on April 01, 2022, 06:51:39 pmI can afford the SDS2104X+.The fact that I'll be paying around 460 USD more, say, when compared to someone from the US, does hurt.I think that I'll be primarily using digital in the near future because I mostly work on micro-controllers and sensors right now. At the same time, another reason to get a scope is also that I have started getting back into electronics in general. I am doing some self study and hopefully would get better along the way.The ideal scenario for me is to get an SDS-1104X-E (I felt that this was the best fit to handle digital and analog at the price point). Then sell it IF/WHEN I need to upgrade and then find the best scope at that point in time. The problem is that, I am certain that I'll not be able to sell it at a decent price. Which was why I was considering spending extra to get one that is decent enough to last quite a while. One with a basic inbuilt AWG preferably so that I don't have to invest in a stand-alone AWG right away. And here we are : MSO5000 vs the SDS2104X+.Anyhow, thanks for spending all this time to explain this!

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 08:44:55 am
content: Quote from: normi on April 02, 2022, 12:12:02 amSeriously considering this advice now. Worst case I'll end up with 2 scopes!

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 09:13:16 am
content: Quote from: normi on April 02, 2022, 12:12:02 amThe OP has been evolving throughout the thread (for better or for worse, only him will be able to see it in the end). That was his goal when he made the initial post.I don't consider myself a Siglent fanboy.I own a MSO5000.(ATM, if you want to call me a LeCroy fanboy, then I'll accept.)My first msg in this thread advised him to buy the X-E and get on with life. It's the only thing he will need in the foreseeable future. If the "individual channel controls" were a must have then there would be no point for him in continuing or, as a matter of fact, even considering the X-E.The X+ is overall a better scope that the MSO5000. It is, and it costs 50% more! Plenty of threads in this forum have discussed this to exhaustion.And to add to the misleading posts: the Rigol hasn't seen a FW update worth it of that name since it came out, leaving all the buyers drooling for it. Siglent has been much more consistent in hearing the users, in reading this forum and providing corrections and enhancements when it comes to the X+ (and extra reason is the fact that the X+ is in the same line of development as Siglent's current bigger brothers).If buying the 5000, in 3 years time, the OP will have an exceptional high-samplerate (even for that time) with individual controls, etc but with 7-year bugs, features yet to be solved or improved!So, in the end, maybe it's better to buy the X-E and, in 3 years, reevaluate the situation and see if there exists a MSO6000 that covers all these aspects.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 10:19:35 am
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on April 02, 2022, 08:41:51 amWell, my thinking was that you could build your own digital pod and thus get 16 additional digital channels. But the price difference between the Siglent and the Rigol would probably pay for a digital pod for the Rigol, so I guess that's not much of a difference after all.Now, zoom mode on the Rigol might be as effective as it is on the Siglent, but I can't say one way or the other on that. Icansay that it's highly effective on the Siglent. It is very well implemented, and is essentially a first class citizen on the scope.QuoteNo. The much more limited screen real estate of the 1104X-E means that zoom mode isn't anything like as effective there as it is on the 2104X+. Believe me, I know this because I own both. Zoom mode just isn't implemented as well on the 1104X-E. Just as one example of the difference, you can't use the mask test in zoom mode on the 1104X-E. You can on the 2104X+. If you've got a repeating digital signal that is occasionally malfunctioning, the mask test will make it possible to stop the scope when the malfunctioning signal shows itself. If the size of the capture needed to properly get everything you need (e.g., if you need to decode some other part of the problematic signal) is too large to reasonably build a mask, then the 1104X-E just won't be usable in that situation. But the 2104X+ will, because you can enter zoom mode, move to the part of the capture you want to build your mask against, start the mask test, and when the scope automatically stops due to the mask test being violated, you can then view other portions of the capture to see what preceded the problem.That's just an example, but it illustrates the limits of zoom mode as implemented on the 1104X-E that aren't there on the 2104X+. Screen real estate is also a major advantage on the 2104X+ over the 1104X-E. Put simply, you have as much real estate in the 2104X+ zoom mode section as you have on theentire screenof the 1104X-E. It appears the same is true of the MSO5000 compared with the 1104X-E.Now, I did err in one regard. The Rigol MSO5000 and the Siglent SDS2104X+ both have screens of the same resolution. So you get the same resolution advantage either way. And in looking at zoom mode photos for the MSO5000, it appears its zoom mode is dimensionally about the same as the 2104X+.If the zoom mode is implemented in the MSO5000 as well as it is in the SDS2104X+, then I can't think of any real advantage the Siglent would have over the Rigol for digital work. I don't know what decoding options are available, but I think both scopes provide plenty for the kind of digital work you're likely to do.QuoteWell, in the end it's actually a tough choice.If it's between the 1104X-E and the Instek, I'd go for the Instek in a heartbeat. I happen to own one of those as well, so I know from experience how they compare, and for digital work, the Instek clearly wins.If it's between the MSO5000 and the SDS2104X+, honestly, it's too close to call. I just don't have any experience with the MSO5000 so I can't reasonably opine as to how well it works for doing digital work. Icansay that the SDS2104X+ works quite well for digital work. I suspect the Rigol will as well.Frankly, I think you'll wind up being quite happy with any of these. About the only thing I can recommend is going over the MSO5000 thread and the SDS-2000X+ threadscarefully. Look over the complaints about each. If the complaints about the MSO5000 aren't enough to dissuade you then that's probably what I'd wind up going for. Unless you're planning on getting into low-noise measurements or something like that, I expect the noisy frontend of the Rigol won't be enough to prevent you from making good use of it in the analog domain.Oh, and if you see a comment from me complaining about the unresponsiveness of the SDS-2104X+ front panel, it turns out that I had a hardware problem with the scope's timebase encoder, and that basically invalidates my prior experience in terms of the responsiveness of the UI. I'll have to gain more experience with the scope before I can definitively say anything about that.

author: normi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2022, 01:27:36 pm
content: Quote from: tv84 on April 02, 2022, 09:13:16 amI am aware that you own a MSO5000, I was not saying the OP would miss the individual controls since he does not have much experience. I used that case to show one example of one feature that could be missed, he does not have an AWG the MSO5000 has a better version he would miss that. The issue most users have is whether spending $500 more is worth it, had the MSO5000 not been there I would have bought the SDS2kX+ as there are no other similar scopes in that price range.This situation is not unique to oscilloscopes, he will go through this same analysis for soldering stations, signal generators, power supplies and the list goes on. There is more to experience with having lots of equipment that can do a good job, vs spending a whole lot on a few pieces with finer tuned functions that you may not need.Another advise I would give OP is don't look to buy everything off the shelf building things yourself gives a great sense of accomplishment and provide a tremendous learning experience. There are DIY projects posted on this forum and elsewhere which can enhance your test equipment at a fraction of the cost of the vendor supplied version. These may not be perfect but they often get the job done and the experience gained would be worth a whole lot more. Example: Build a probe for oscilloscope logic analyzer for $50 vs $400 from the vendor.

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 02:52:55 am
content: Quote from: tv84 on April 02, 2022, 09:13:16 am

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 03, 2022, 04:10:19 pm
content: Quote from: kcbrown on April 02, 2022, 10:19:35 am

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2022, 01:57:11 pm
content: After a lot of deliberation, I decided to get the SDS1104X-E + SDG1032X (need to decide on a power supply). Hopefully that should be more than enough for a few years.But, the only little "itch" I have is : the MSO5000 comes to about the same price as the above combo.Should I just get that and rely on the built-in AWG.Anyhow, thanks you all, for all the inputs. I do have a question on an Owon power supply (https://www.owon.com.hk/products_owon_spe_series_%7C_spe-u_series_1_ch_dc_power_supply) without any reviews on this forum. I guess I'll start a separate thread for that.

author: Markus2801A
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2022, 06:24:25 pm
content: Quote from: nubinstanley on April 05, 2022, 01:57:11 pmIMHO this is a very good combo! Go for it! I think it will offer much more value for the money than buying the MSO5000! A dedicated AWG should surpass the built in one in the MSO5000.Regarding the Power Supply Owon should be very okay, may also consider GW-Instek!

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 06, 2022, 09:22:51 am
content: Quote from: Markus2801A on April 05, 2022, 06:24:25 pmAny experience with OWON SPE3102/OWON SPE6103/OWON P4305 (I can't find any review on the first two...) ? I am also considering getting the Korad KA3005D...

author: Markus2801A
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2022, 04:33:21 pm
content: The OWON P4305 seems to be rock solid units with toroid transformer!I have one at home, very good!But I wanted a laboratory power Supply with 4 Channels so I also went for the GW Instek GPP-4323 power supply incl. LAN modulehttps://eleshop.eu/gw-instek-gpp-4323-programmable-power-supply-lan.html

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2022, 10:46:16 pm
content: Discussion about the Owon PS...https://eevblog.com/forum/testgear/inside-the-owon-p4603p4305-linear-psu/

author: nubinstanley
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 10, 2022, 02:01:29 pm
content: Quote from: Markus2801A on April 08, 2022, 04:33:21 pmI had seen the thread that "rsjsouza" posted. So,1) Does the P4305 has that power on spike ? Could it damage the DUT ?2) The OCP/OVP seems to kick in after a delay ? Also, settings are also stored after a delay ?

author: Markus2801A
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 10, 2022, 03:49:26 pm
content: I have not measured this on my unit. Sometime I think those "spike" measurements on Laboratory PowerSupplies are some kind of "Benchmark" some people like to evaluate those Units. But in reality most of the units are okay and will not damage the DUT unless you have to deal with very sensitive DUT`s but in this case you will know and be aware of it!

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 10, 2022, 04:17:14 pm
content: Quote from: Markus2801A on April 10, 2022, 03:49:26 pmI disagree. There are a lot of parts out there that have a very limited supply voltage range. Think about 5V opamps for example. Many will break when subjected to supply voltages over 6V; their maximum voltage is often 5.5V. But these aren't really sensitive components, they just have a limited power supply range. In the end you will want a PSU that doesn't overshoot -period-.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2022, 01:34:18 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on April 10, 2022, 04:17:14 pmCertainly it's best to have a PSU that won't overshoot.But damage is the result ofdelivered energy, not merely overvoltage. Overvoltage just causes a barrier threshold to be crossed. My (perhaps limited) understanding is that it's not sufficient to merely cross the barrier, that some minimum amount of energy has to be delivered in the process for damage to take place.That minimum amount of energy could indeed be very tiny. But how tiny? Would a microjoule be enough to damage the device? If the voltage is exceeded for a microsecond, would that be enough to cause damage? I can imagine it would for some devices, but at the same time, the implication is that even normal anti-static procedures would be insufficient to protect such devices.So I think the person you were responding to has something of a point. If the device is so sensitive that it would be damaged by voltage overages that deliver minimal energy, you're already going to know in advance that you've got such a device on your hands, because you'll have needed to take extraordinary precautions to avoid damaging it through ESD.You really need to understand the characteristics of your power supply to know whether or not it has the potential to damage any given device through overvoltage.