New Tektronix TBS2000 oscilloscopes - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: ADT123
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 06:16:13 pm
content: Apologies if posted elsewhere but looks like Tek have launched a new range of low(ish) cost scopes. TBS2000 series. Not much on the web yet but found this:http://www.top-oscilloscopes.com/fr/produits/oscilloscopes/oscilloscopes-num%C3%A9riques/tektronix-tbs2072-oscilloscope-num%C3%A9rique-70-mhz-%C3%A0-2-voies-detail

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 06:24:48 pm
content: http://www.top-oscilloscopes.com/download/PDF/Tektronix%20TBS2000.PDFThe pdf file was created on 24. 6. 2016.Looks nice, but waveform update rate is unspecified. It looks like an original design, not similar to any Siglent, Rigol or GW Instek. I do not see any visual persistence feature like that on Rigol DS2000 or DS1000Z.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 06:33:23 pm
content: No information here yet.http://news.tektronix.com/http://www.foldertrade.hu/kategoria/196_Tektronix-TBS2000This is strange.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 06:45:08 pm
content: I think the specs are preliminary. The 20MPts memory depth on all channels is interesting (Keysight doesn't even come close to that) and Tek finally put a display with a decent resolution in a low-end scope but what is missing are detailed specs like FFT length and decoding options. Without decoding this scope is just too expensive and also not very suitable for modern education.

author: LA7SJA
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 06:47:31 pm
content: According tohttp://www.newark.com/tektronix-tbs2000-oscilloscopeis the waveform update rate 10 000.Datasheethttp://www.newark.com/wcsstore/ExtendedSitesCatalogAssetStore/cms/asset/pdf/common/tektronix/Tektronix-TBS2000.pdfJohan-Fredrik

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 06:54:19 pm
content: They should do an upgrade to this old DPO2000/MSO2000 scope with that funny low resolution LCD.http://www.tek.com/oscilloscope/mso2000-dpo2000

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 06:55:44 pm
content: The TBS2000 oscilloscope series looks very ugly IMO.Did you see the multi-color handle? And the panda screen is definitely not looking nice.The feet look like a horse that is about to leave its stable =)

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 06:58:52 pm
content: Quote from: LA7SJA on August 01, 2016, 06:47:31 pmNothing in the official datasheet.http://www.newark.com/wcsstore/ExtendedSitesCatalogAssetStore/cms/asset/pdf/common/tektronix/Tektronix-TBS2000.pdfIs therenovideo trigger and no serial decoding?It is 5 years from 2011 when Keysight DSOX2000 was launched and there is still no competitor from Tektronix in the same price range.

author: LA7SJA
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 07:46:07 pm
content: I have not used video trigger in thiscenturymillennium, have you? The serial decoding is probably just a "insert coin" option. The big question is how usable are the decoding options, the Keysight is very fast and usable on decoding.Johan-Fredrik

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 07:48:21 pm
content: A specific button for "courseware" - what a waste of space.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 07:50:37 pm
content: Quote from: LA7SJA on August 01, 2016, 07:46:07 pmAnother really useful thing on the KS ( not sure which models can do it) is that it can do two serial decodes simultaneously - same or different types.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 07:52:01 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 01, 2016, 06:45:08 pmI think education is what this thing was actually designed for. There seems to be a huge emphasis on the built-in "courseware" (which seems to be much more explanatory than the usual built-in help) and integration into Tek's classroom system.This would also explain why it comes with Tek's TekVPI probe connector system, which doesn't make much sense for a conventional entry-level scope (too expensive).I do like the LXI control screen.I hope it works without JavaThe overall scope properties remind me a lot of OWON. Tek already rebadges one of OWON's AWG series, and while this scope doesn't seem to have a direct OWON equivalent I wouldn't be surprised if this is in fact produced by OWON as a (heavily altered) OEM variant.I doubt Tek sees this scope as a competitor to Rigol's DS1000z/DS2000/DS4000 Series, or the GW Instek GDS-2000E or the Keysight DSO-X2000, scopes which attract hobbyists and small businesses. The new TBS2000 seems to be designed particularly for that one market where Tek still makes a lot of sales - education.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 08:37:24 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 01, 2016, 07:52:01 pmMaybe but if it has some options like decoding the long memory sure makes it an interesting competitor for Keysight's offerings. This price for the 100MHz 4 channel model is around 2000 euro. So far the low end Tektronix scopes where plagued by short memory and small, low resolutions screens but it seems they finally addressed those issues.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 08:38:09 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 01, 2016, 07:52:01 pmI thought Hantek.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 09:15:52 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on August 01, 2016, 08:38:09 pmPlace your bets folks.....

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 09:18:51 pm
content: No matter what market this scope is designed for, it just looks ridiculous and is under-powered.

author: robert_
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2016, 10:42:16 pm
content: Quite impressive Tek finally does something cheap that has long enough memory.So, it sure has to be an adaption (with these very "nice" TekVPI connectors) of some chinese design, as Tek surely would find yet another use for their "great" 1k/2.5k/10k CCD storage chips they seem to have a few freight train loads too many around.I wonder if it can actually power active/current probes without an external PSU this time, and how many. It is quite a shame a DPO2k cant power anything, and a DPO3k can just power 2 current probes.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 12:03:48 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 01, 2016, 06:24:48 pmI don't see any indication from that datasheet that it has intensity graded display. If it hasn't, it's just a sad joke.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 12:13:31 am
content: Quote from: LA7SJA on August 01, 2016, 06:47:31 pmI think that may be an error - it isn't mentioned at all in the datasheet. Neither are decodes.So it looks like for over 1Keuro you get no intensity grading, no decodes.But you do get 15 horizontal divs an wifi dongle compatibility - woop deedoo!

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 02:00:08 am
content: Quote from: LA7SJA on August 01, 2016, 07:46:07 pmThe only time I have used video triggering was on my 2440 while playing with it. Surprisingly it handled high definition 1200+ line displays just fine even though it was designed when NTSC and PAL was it. Of course any analog oscilloscope with video triggering and trigger on delay can do the same thing.I do not see anything about logic inputs which suggests to me that it will not have serial decoding capability.The 5 year warranty will be nice but I think this model is intended as a replacement for their TBS1000 models although it has a lower bandwidth. It is interesting that it uses the TekVPI probe interface though.On a side note, the Tektronix web site is so fucking useless now.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 02:04:22 am
content: Not much detail yet but no examples of intensity grading in the documents so far, and a shame to not have an integrated signal generator even if it has toy specifications for teaching labs.But its carrying the TBS model name and has a CMRR specification for the inputs, along with the active probe interface. A mistake, should have been crosstalk?

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 04:29:02 am
content: Quote from: Someone on August 02, 2016, 02:04:22 amI did not see any examples of intensity grading either so while I am sure it supports variable persistence, it probably only displays one acquisition at a time and has a low waveform acquisition rate like their CCD based digitizers.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 05:07:18 am
content: Linked in sleuthing...From the dates there may have been some changes in the hardware since then, but its something to go on for now.

author: Towger
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:23:01 am
content: Sound like a scope designed by committee, with marketing taking a leading role and insuring it does not eat into their existing model's sales.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:38:34 am
content: 1400 Euros for 70Mhz, 2-channel 'scope with very basic features... and people are salivating?Just because it says "Tektronix" on it?I don't get it.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 07:47:49 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on August 02, 2016, 06:38:34 amIt's all in the name - maybe if Keysight were still called Hewlett Packard, more people would realise that Tek haven't been "the scope guys" for many years.

author: Jay_Diddy_B
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 08:38:42 am
content: Hi group,Information include the comparisons with other scopes and the service manual is now on the Tektronix website.Link:http://www.tek.com/search/apachesolr_search/tbs2000It seems the big thing that they are pushing in the comparisons are:1) 20M point of record length2) Wireless connectivity, through a dongle stuck in the back3) The educational aspects.4) Faster time base 2ns with 500 MS/s5) Bigger screen6) The VXI probe interface. I don't know why you need active probes on an entry level 'scope.Regards,Jay_Diddy_B

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 08:48:53 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on August 02, 2016, 06:38:34 amYep, and the RMS measurements can probably be trusted too.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 08:54:31 am
content: Quote from: Jay_Diddy_B on August 02, 2016, 08:38:42 amI love how the comparisons turnlack of measurementsinto a feature:Tek: Automatic measurements can be categorized and laid out in one page for straight-forward selection (win!)Other: Automatic measurements are selected from a long list. You arenotable to see them all at once(lose!)

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:00:54 am
content: So definitely no intensity display then - pathetic, just pathetic. 20M record length is pretty pointless without it.If that's the best Tek can do years after what KS and Rigol have been doing, it looks like they've pretty much given up trying. I'd be highly surprised if this wasn't a re-badge job from one of the Chinese companies.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:01:13 am
content: Quote from: tautech on August 02, 2016, 08:48:53 amThe question is: Does it evenhaveRMS...?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:14:47 am
content: Quote from: Jay_Diddy_B on August 02, 2016, 08:38:42 amIt is interesting to see Tektronix made comparison sheets for scopes from Hameg, Rigol, GW Instek, Lecroy and Keysight but no Siglent.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:21:26 am
content: Quote from: Jay_Diddy_B on August 02, 2016, 08:38:42 amThis compare what they show is really weird.They compare new TBS2000 to WaveAce 2000 (Siglent SDS1000CFL) - congratulations, well done. This is one sign what show how Tektronix is drifting...Siglent have launched this WaveAce 2000 aka Siglent SDS1000CFL year 2010. Originally launched 2009 as SDS1000CF (small TFT) and soon later, 2010 model SDS1000CFL (7" TFT). Very relevant compare.But, it must be in same ballpark and comparable because big name Tektronix compare they new oscilloscope to this. Or how this need understand.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:32:32 am
content: Quote from: Scope-Angel on August 02, 2016, 09:02:02 amSpot the Tek Troll.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:34:41 am
content: So the 4-channel version is three times the cost of the Rigol 1074Z and no intensity display. What planet are these people on?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:35:55 am
content: Quote from: Scope-Angel on August 02, 2016, 09:02:02 amScope-Angel's first ever post on the forum is a Tek advert?Sniff, sniff. I smell something...

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:42:43 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 02, 2016, 09:34:41 amImo 10x4Z Rigol do not have all channel on 1GSa/s and not all channel on 20M for every channel. Or are there agen some new hack?But other ways TBS2000 looks more like students class room version.But still I believe Tektronix is capable of design scope so that even so simple thing as Sin(x)/x is not joke what Rigol have now exercised nearly 10 year but still it looks like they do not even know what it is.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:48:29 am
content: Main features as far as I can tell:* Courseware – Lab exercises may be downloaded for free and may be loaded and viewed on the oscilloscope* Has an extra USB port on the back for a WiFi dongle (presumably for downloading the Courseware...)* Accepts very expensive probes.Conclusion: They've got their sights set on people who don't spend their own personal money on test gear.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 11:00:39 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on August 02, 2016, 09:48:29 amExactly.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 11:53:54 am
content: The older Tektronix DSO's looked nicer and more expensive.The new TBS2000 series looks ugly IMO and it also looks a bit cheap.The new Tektronix logo is a joke! It's so ugly! I wonder how many millions they paid a design agency for this.If Tektronix compares their new scope with the Siglent SDS1000CFL, that means that their product manager not only has a weird taste in terms of design, it also means that he has no clue whatsoever about Rigol DS1054Z and Siglent SDS1000X.The new TBS2000 series is certainly not the ducks guts!Note that there are several universities in Belgium which use Rigol DS1052 and Rigol DS1000Z in their labs. And the last thing which they need is this TBS2000 rubbish.Why is none of these big companies doing real innovation anymore?If they want to take the lead, they should come up with a cheap and affordable 4-channel 100 MHz scope with a deep memory and where ALL 4 channels would be isolated. Many universities would buy these scopes for their Power Electronics labs. None of these big companies has real guts to pull of an affordable 4-channel isolated scope!

author: robert_
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 12:35:01 pm
content: A good 4-ch isolated scope doesnt even need to be affordable, we would pay a whole lot for that kind of instrument, if it were to exist. Copy the user interface and frontend from Lecroy (since they do the least crappy ones at the moment), large benchtop form factor is perfectly good as it fits a large display, we dont care for portability.The R&S RTH did look good on paper but did disappoint me pretty hard, lacking even basic features (and having surprisingly crappy CMRR).

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 12:47:17 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 02, 2016, 11:53:54 amThere is no enough money available in low end segment(s). Nearly nothing. There is no other than the only remaining desperate price competition where no one wins. Some famous compoanies may survive as long as some well known country goverment help some export companies which has been able to pull the right string.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 12:50:16 pm
content: Isolated inputs are a niche requirment, and would actually be a PITA for routine use, as you'd need to always connect the ground wires on every probe.I doubt there is any significant market for a low-end scope with isolated inputs.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 01:22:51 pm
content: Quote from: robert_ on August 02, 2016, 12:35:01 pmKeysight has some hand-held-ish scopes with isolated inputs. They are not cheap and not really portable but would be useful as a bench scope.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 01:40:16 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 02, 2016, 09:00:54 amIt would surprise me if it doesn't have intensity display; maybe Tektronix deems that so standard they don't even mention it. After all they already had some form of persistence on the monochrome TDS500 series (early 90's).

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 03:02:29 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 02, 2016, 01:40:16 pmNo mention of it, or update rate and no sign of it in any of the images. One of the dealer pages does use the DPO acronym, another shows an update rate but not seen it in any of the Tek documents.Text search for "intensity" in teh user manual only refers to backlightAnd no mention anywhere of ANY decodes, option or otherwiseConsidering how lame it looks you'd expect them to be pushing every possible feature.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 05:01:27 pm
content: The update rate is 10000 times per second. The controls look lively in the demo. It DOES have variable persistence. See the spec sheet. VP is a DISPLAY mode, not an acquisition mode. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder but the handle is normally flipped down when the scope is in use. Then it matches the case. But seriously do we choose a scope by how it looks?Guys why do we beat equipment up before we know the facts? The website seems to be barely working I know but give it a chance.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 05:07:52 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 02, 2016, 03:02:29 pmI wouldn't call the scope itself lame. The way it looks is a result of the current test equipment design style (the Panda look). Let's just wait until the datasheet gets completed. Does Tektronix send scopes to Dave for a review?IMHO the comparison charts Tektronix made are outright pathetic though. As if customers are stupid and can't compare those for themselves

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 05:17:34 pm
content: The Tektronix TPS2024B looks so much better! Moreover that one comes with 4 isolated channels!

author: robert_
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 05:30:48 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 02, 2016, 05:17:34 pmYes, what a revolution in the scope industry with its enormous 2500 points of memory!

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 05:34:12 pm
content: If they would make an update to this model, and give it a deep memory such as 56MPts, then it could be a strong contender. And please Tektronix, don't mess with the design, as the old design was so much better than the new Cheapish look design.

author: TinkerFan
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:18:19 pm
content: I think the scope looks ok and I like the transparent overlays (waveform measurements etc.). But other than that...The isolated inputs are probably to protect the scope, which is obviously for the education market, and the circuitry around it from blowing up when someone who has never heard of 'floating groun' before plays with it...

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:25:52 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 02, 2016, 05:07:52 pmI didn't mean the physical look, I meant the whole product - piss-poor value and lacking features that have become industry standard

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:30:54 pm
content: GOOD isolated inputs are quite expensive. TEK/ FLUKE ( they have the same parent company) do make several isolated input scopes.Big high resolution screens are very handy for 4 channels and poor eyesight.The scope supports a snapshot which shows all measurements at the same time, albeit wth less detail and control.Mike what features are you talking about?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:34:54 pm
content: You can buy a DSOX2002A for 1300USD probably.http://www.newark.com/keysight-technologies/dsox2002a/oscilloscope-2-analog-70mhz-1gsps/dp/21T9315At the basic configutation it has 100k points per channel. Still a nice basic scope for school use.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:36:27 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 02, 2016, 05:01:27 pmanother one shill? (one post)i have the TPS2014 with the wooping fucking doo 2.5k memory, one whole screen per acquisitions. with lower timebases i have to look out for aliasing, the fft is a joke...... still better than the 1054z.Very low noise floor. Math is accurate. faster responding controls (hah) and the isolated channels have become a mustthat's what i expect from a scope that costs three times and looks like it offers a tenthbut enough flaming.i completely agree with the "tek is for people who spend someone else's money" it costs too much

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:36:35 pm
content: There is10,000 waveforms/second capture ratein the user manual.http://www.tek.com/oscilloscope/tbs2000-digital-storage-oscilloscope-manual/tbs2000-series

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:41:37 pm
content: manual:QuoteAccording to the manual, there is novideotrigger. This is crap.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:50:00 pm
content: QuoteOK, I like that there is aTrig Out.QuoteWhat the hell is this supposed to be??

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 06:59:21 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 02, 2016, 06:41:37 pmYou can use the external trigger out of a DS154Z for video trigger.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 07:02:24 pm
content: Well, why not, there was something similar at DSOX2002A till 2012 or so.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 07:05:45 pm
content: Not a shill and I make no effort to hide the fact that I was a TEK employee from 1980 until 2011. I simply forgot my user name and had to reregister to log in.I do not sell or represent in any wayanytest equipment nor am I compensated for my opinions.I retired years ago. I do have some bias towards TEK but can say most of that went away when I retired. I had contact wth about 30000 customers during that period and so I know a fair amount about both TEK bias and false assumptions. I also know that many users have limited knowledge about how test equipment works or does not.Now I own lots of old TEK equipment I have restored and also a Rigol 10xxZ model. I can say it has lots of features for the buck and works nice. It is a very good hobbiest scope. But it is does have compromises for a professional user.I get it that everyone wants long record length, though I can tell you that you should never use more than what is necessary. Explanation is available for the asking...This new model is a definite improvement in many areas but I understand why a hobbiest can not afford it. That is why I have the Rigol!It does appear to be equal to or better than the "professional" competition.In 31 years I sold fewer than 50 video triggers. In the last ten years 0!But if you need video trigger, then just chose annother scope.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 07:10:46 pm
content: QuoteWell, this is nice. I think that Rigol, Siglent or Owon do not have this feature. At DSOX2002A you have to buy an expensive plug-in LAN module.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 07:14:47 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 02, 2016, 07:05:45 pmTBS2000 is probably the first scope without a video trigger in last 25 years or so. Even that basic TDS210 has a video trigger.On the other hand, TBS2000 can be nice for basic school use.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 07:22:30 pm
content: Some big pictures.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 07:26:57 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 02, 2016, 07:10:46 pmIs this how Tek normally do LAN remote scope control ?Siglent's use the EasyScope interface and NIVISA software to provide the LAN and USB connection drivers.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 07:27:57 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 02, 2016, 07:05:45 pmsorry for thatbut you know.. the timing.. the content..

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 07:57:36 pm
content: I don't know why people get so wound up about the TBS2000. At the end of the day, it looks like a decent scope when considering that this was obviously developed for the education market. Not surprising when the education market is one of Tek's largest markets, so they have to come up with something that their customers in the edu space (which won't necessarily be up to date with what's available on the T&M market) will like.It's clearly not aimed at the average hobbyist.And seriously, considering that Tek never really had a good hand at designing digital scopes (unlike their analog scopes, Tek's DSOs were almost all average at best and in general a pain to use), this is probably as good as it gets.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 08:04:18 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on August 02, 2016, 07:26:57 pmThis is how pretty much all big brands do LAN remote scope control.QuoteOf course they do, because to provide a local webserver and interactive controls requires more processing resources than are available in the typical bottom-of-the-barrel scope. Which at the end of the day are made for a low price point.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 08:08:59 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 02, 2016, 07:14:47 pmWhy would you want video trigger? Who even uses analogue video signals nowadays? Besides I think you can still do video triggering if the trigger system supports triggering on events.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 08:16:55 pm
content: The TBS200O was clearly developed developed for the education market. It is not a large market though, very small indeed in terms of number of dollars. I think the reason that people show interest is that many people seek the better build quality and support you get from a big company. Arguably even the products that TEK does that are ODM typically have numerous safety and performance mods that are unique to them.If you would like this scope to be better tailored to the things that you value then I suggest you either call or email them or talk to your local REP and make your wishes known.It can be seriously argued that TEK never made good digital scopes. The last independent number I saw indicate that TEK had about 50% of the worldwide digital scope market. If that still holds true they sell as many scopes asall other manufacturers put together.While this does not prove they make the best scopes it does mean that Majority of people who believe they do!

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 08:59:37 pm
content: TBS2000 is probably the first scope without a video trigger in last 25 years or so. Even that basic TDS210 has a video trigger.On the other hand, TBS2000 can be nice for basic school use.While many scopes did offer that features in a VERY basic form few had real video trigger where you could select a specific line and field. Even then none were are good as dedicated video analyzers.For a simple video trigger you should be able to trigger on the negative going sync pulse using pulse width trigger. I forget how wide that is, maybe 3.5uS or so. Then just store that as set up and you are good to go.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:26:32 pm
content: This comparison is crap.In fact Rigol DS2000A has many trigger types, like Edge Trigger, Pulse Trigger, Runt Trigger, Windows Trigger (Option), Nth Edge Trigger (Option), Slope Trigger, Video Trigger (HDTV Option), Pattern Trigger, Delay Trigger (Option), TimeOut Trigger (Option), Duration Trigger (Option), Setup/Hold Trigger, RS232/UART Trigger, I2C Trigger, SPI Trigger, CAN Trigger (Option) and USB Trigger (Option).

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:33:30 pm
content: It is good that TBS2000 has that improved help and teaching stuff, but none of them were needed at my university.At the basic courses there were scopes like HP 54600 series, some TDS1000 or TDS2000. Nowadays some Keysight DSOX2000A and Tek TBS1000B are slowly being bought and introduced to lessons.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:35:21 pm
content: If someone can name one new feature in the new TBS2000 oscilloscope which wasn't already present in all entry-level DSO scopes for the past 3-5 years?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:35:37 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 02, 2016, 09:31:11 pmThat 20Mpoints memory with search and mark capability (in future firmware release) is not common. Active probe support is very uncommon among low-cost scopes.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:40:01 pm
content: It is funny how all other scopes in comparison sheets have 1GS per channel (at least stated by Tektronix guys) and only TBS2000 has 500MS per channel. The ADCs are apparently expensive even in 2016. Come on, even TDS210 has 1GS per channel.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:52:47 pm
content: Strange, but well, why not.At least there is fine vertical setting. Not like GW Instek with no such feature.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:55:24 pm
content: Deep memory has been in Rigol and Siglent for several years now. Not considered as a new feature.Search and mark are only two buttons for now. Any scope manufacturer can put these 2 buttons on their front panel. Even Rigol and Siglent can support this feature eventually. Not considered as a new feature.Active probe is more like a luxury thing. It is not needed for education purpose. In fact it would be better to have a passive probe, so that the students can learn about the probe settings. Not considered as a new feature, as it is a well known feature on high-end scopes. It is a nice to have, but not a must have, especially compared with the other things that would be more useful in this scope (higher bandwidth, higher sampling rate, intensity grading, decoder options, isolated front-end).When I was talking about a new feature, I meant a real innovation. Basically I am looking for a reason of existence for this new scope, and without any groundbreaking new feature, there simply is no reason!

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 09:58:10 pm
content: That teaching capabilities with WiFi are quite new, but not needed IMHO. For school I want real scopes that are used in industry, like HP 54600, Tek TDS2000, DSOX2000 or DSOX3000.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:01:45 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 02, 2016, 09:58:10 pmSo do the instructors but they don't get the budgets and have tomake dowith what's affordable.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:06:31 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 02, 2016, 09:40:01 pmI'm beginning to sound like a bigot here:May be so but in fact faster A to D's little other than add noise and loss of accuracy in a 100 MHz scope. Reasons are:1. This scope uses good sinx/x interpolation that requires 2.5 sample per cycle to reproduce a sine wave with no more than a 5% envelope error. This means the the DIGITAL STORAGE BANDWIDTH is 500/2.5 or 200 MHZ.2. The scope on the other hand has only a 100MHz (analog ) bandwidth so it has plenty of samples to accurately reconstruct the waveform. In fact this sample rate would support 200MHz analog BW.3. In fact the four channel version of the scope can do 1GS/s on 2 channels. but this is irrelevant with 100 MHz analog bandwidth.4. At any given price point faster A to D's are noisier, have poorer dynamic accuracy (less effective bits) and generate more heat which often times means adding a noisy fan.Lessons:Engineering is a trade off. In the case of a scope a series of complicated and none obvious trade offs.Comparison sheets by ANY manufacturer are generally crap and obviously biased. Make your own. compare only those specs that are important to you.Ask the manufacturer of the scope why you should buy his scope. Filter this input based on your experience with the individual you are talking to. Do they know what they are talking about? Have they ever lied or misrepresented a product? Many reps simply just echo what they are told by the manufacturer.The devil is in the details. If you can not or do not want to compare ever spec in a spec sheet (and even then only a couple of manufacturers guarantee their specs) then you will have difficultly making real comparisons between various scopes. This is not intended to belittle anyone. I know of only a few customers who ever did this in a valid way.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:08:47 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 02, 2016, 05:01:27 pmVP is not necessarily the same as intensity grading. I see no reference to any intensity control in the UMAFAICS the 10kwfm/sec is ONLY used to do peak-detect and high-res acquisition modes ( the manual states the latter is not actually implemented yet, p.42).I see no evidence anywhere of a proper analogue-like intensity-graded display.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:10:44 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 02, 2016, 09:35:21 pmer, wifi.... because everyone needs wifi on a piece of kit that lives on a bench, obviously....

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:11:48 pm
content: In fact, those overpriced oscilloscopes targeted for education are neither used in the industry, and are neither used by hobbyists. So you learn to work with a scope that is not used by anybody else except instructors. Not very good IMO!They should use oscilloscopes in the labs, which are used in the industry, or at least which are used by many people. In that case, putting a Rigol DS2000A or a Siglent SDS2000X in the university lab wouldn't be such a bad idea at all. Hardware wise it outperforms the Tektronix education line with several miles, and it is used by many people.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:15:35 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on August 02, 2016, 08:48:53 amAnd its sampling jitter, AC trigger coupling, and ground signal coupling can probably be trusted.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:18:00 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 02, 2016, 10:11:48 pmDo you know what students attempt to do to scopes?No this Tek and similar spec'ed scopes are quite appropriate for the scope teaching lab and I quite see the benefit in today's electronics learning environment of the increased memory depth in these Teks.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:19:53 pm
content: Not sure if Rigol DS2000A or a Siglent SDS2000X survive a 8 hour use per day. I have never seen an erratic knob on a Tek at my university. There were some cracked knobs on few 54600 scopes, well, after some 15-20 years after manufacture.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:22:32 pm
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on August 02, 2016, 09:00:54 amDesigning an oscilloscope with a long acquisition memory may now be cheaper do to increasing integration than designing one with dual timebases and triggers to support dual timebase delayed acquisitions. Except for FFTs and special applications, that makes a long acquisition memory the budget option.My preference would be to have both but budget oscilloscopes do not.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:25:08 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 02, 2016, 10:19:53 pmUntil you try one you will never know.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:26:29 pm
content: MIkeselectricstuff- You are correct they are different. However, every TEK scope that I know of sincethey invented Digital Phosphorhas had intensity grading. I have no reason to assume this one will differ. However, only a handful of non TEK scopes have a hardware implementation of color grading. Even that is only available on the high end models. Most do grading in software which is far inferior in performance. The intensity knob merely an adjustment of how the various colors get mapped to the screen. This can automatic or user adjustable via a knob or a soft menu. The panel is already quite crowded.Remember this scope was just introduced today. Much of the material on the web was prematurely released by anxious distributors. I have already found many links that are broken or that lead to the wrong documents. More importantly TEK has a history of rolling out software upgrades that add features for the first couple of years of a product's life.If history holds, what you see today is not what you ultimately will get, it is significantly less.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:29:31 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 02, 2016, 10:24:45 pmAnd why? think back to the discussion in the thread "What is missing in the marketplace".In order to get the analog data across the isolation barrier there are speed bottlenecks.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:38:09 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on August 02, 2016, 10:29:31 pmIf it needs to survive students, it better has an isolated front-end!That's why I was saying that they have to make a 4 channel oscilloscope with 1) an isolated front-end and 2) with a deep memory! For some reason, no manufacturer can realize that configuration!Speed bottlenecks are no argument, as the Tektronix TPS2024B can go up to 200 MHz.It would be the perfect scope, if it only had deep memory!Instead of reinventing an underdimensioned ugly looking oscilloscope, Tektronix should have improved the TPS2024B oscilloscope, and give it a deeper memory. End of story!I think that we can compare Tektronix with Nokia and Motorola. First they were innovators, then they started to become second followers, then they became "we suck the least", and now they are surpassed by many others. It's because of their "we think, we are the best" and their "refusal to face the facts" ostrich policy.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:42:30 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 02, 2016, 10:38:09 pmYou don't get it do you?It takes time to fill memory depth, the more memory the more time so this affects the max sampling rate that can effectively be used deep memory and isolated front ends.Tradeoffs, always tradeoffs.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:43:03 pm
content: That might be the worst introduction video I've ever seen as well.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 10:54:57 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 02, 2016, 09:40:01 pmAnd they deliberately compare it with the older GW-Instek GDS2000A, instead of the newer GW-Instek GDS2000E.

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 11:14:50 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on August 02, 2016, 10:29:31 pmYou seem awfully sure of this. Is that because you are familiar with the fiber optic options and their price points? Or because you aren't? I haven't spent enough time shopping to have an opinion of my own, but even if I were sure that there was nothing on the market at an appropriate price point, I wouldn't make bets on 6 months from now.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 11:19:37 pm
content: Quote from: jjoonathan on August 02, 2016, 11:14:50 pmI'm only familiar with the current use of opto isolation for isolated front ends and a fibre optic solution may offer a better solution.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 11:30:21 pm
content: There is definitely gear out there which is isolated but those are more geared towards data acquisition and not so much bench top oscilloscopes. One of the projects I'm working on is a data acquisition unit for use in high power HV labs. Even when sitting on the (mains powered) wireless charging station it has a (IIRC) 30kV isolation to ground.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2016, 11:35:12 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 02, 2016, 11:53:54 amQuote from: pascal_sweden on August 02, 2016, 09:35:21 pmYou sure are making a lot of noise without actually checking the details. They specify a CMRR for the channels, separately to crosstalk, and the manual has:Quote from: TekBut these specifications are missing from the available documents at the moment. Its entirely possible the scope has floating inputs and discusses using a probe across a resistor to measure currents (with probe settings to read directly in amperes).Other interesting features (promised for the future) are the 16 bit high-res mode when most competitors only go to 12 bit (or less).

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 12:11:00 am
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on August 02, 2016, 10:43:03 pmNot sure why. The video was OK for me.There is a real video of the scope, not a CAD simulation:

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 01:27:03 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 03, 2016, 12:11:00 amLooks like they're making good use of the higher resolution screen, the cursors are very tidy and informative.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 01:54:45 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 03, 2016, 12:11:00 amLittle to do with the vid, I've already flagged diesel as a stalker.Check the sig.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 02:08:49 am
content: I agree after seeing the video, I'm impressed.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 02:20:05 am
content: Damn that looks goodI'll draw a parallelism with cheap android phones and mid-top of the line models"but the camera 16 MPixel here too""but the processor is the same speed"and that sort of bullcrapLook at those cursors, the gui and how it is laid out. that's the attentions to details one expects from tek, this is where a noticeable part of your money went.*** I have never used anything newer than the TPS2000C from tek and i say this is a gigantic improvement. ***

author: jjoonathan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 02:21:32 am
content: Tek isn't the only one fond of low production-value videos with bass-boosted whooshing noises:https://youtu.be/f2R7zi7psbw?t=12

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 05:13:19 am
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 02, 2016, 08:16:55 pmThat's nonsense, at no point had Tek anywhere near 50% of global the DSO market. Tek had a leading position in the market for analog scopes (where if I remember right they managed to reach some 62% at some point) but that changed quickly when digital scopes became increasingly widespread, a market that was (and still is) dominated by HP (then Agilent, then Keysight) and LeCroy.QuoteYeah, like people who believe smoking is good for them.And it's a shame that the belief of all these people doesn't help Tek to increase its dwindling sales, while for some reason despite all this people believing Tek is the best they still rather spend their money scopes made by someone else.Be careful with that stuff you're smoking, dude!

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 05:33:08 am
content: Quote from: Someone on August 03, 2016, 01:27:03 amI agree, at least from the video the UI looks quite well done.Overall I'd say it's a nice entry-level scope with interesting features for the edu market. The only real point criticize I saw is the WiFi dongle, which for an edu scope shouldn't be so easy removable (i.e. it should be secured mechanically, or behind a cover, or better yet internally) as it will inevitably disappear.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 07:16:59 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 03, 2016, 05:13:19 amNo not smoking anything here- too old for that. Judging by your comments you appear to be something of an industry expert. I didn't represent that TEK currently has 50% DSO market share. I could not possibly know that. What I said was the last time I saw a market share report, and I only saw 1 independent report, that was the number I saw. I do know there was essentially NO DSOs made at that time except those made by HP, TEK, a few Lecroy some by Gould and some by Nicolet. That tells me this was before Lecroy seriously entered the scope market. I don't recall when that was but maybe the mid 80's. Now the market is loaded with cheap Chinese imports and I would expect that they would dominate the unit volume but probably not the dollar volume. Since TEK became a part of Danaher in 2007 sales are no longer reported externally so no one outside of TEK/ Danaher really knows what their sales are. Indeed even employees below top management were not provided with sales information except in a general sense. I did hear some numbers from time to time that were " leaked". They seemed lower that what I though they should be. I can tell you that in my territory though I did annual market share analysis. I do not claim absolute precision but I had been in the territory for 31 years so I pretty much knew what everyone had. In my last year (2011) with TEK I estimated scope market share at around 40%. At that time I do not have responsibility for low end scopes- those below about $15K and so my numbers did not include them. My Agilent counterpart agreed with this analysis. He admitted that we were kicking his ass. I did not even know who the Lecroy guy was... Your stated market share in analog agrees with numbers I have heard, but did not see. I do not know how other territories or other parts of the world fared. If you have current market share estimates those would be interesting.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 07:28:17 am
content: The FFT demonstration in the video showed 2K points at the bottom. So would it really be only 2K points for FFT? That's a joke! =)

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 07:39:27 am
content: I think you can select record lengths for FFT. But I doubt seriously if you can choose 20M. That would take a while to run. Then again these are not intended to be used for serious characterization. Assuming 20 K point FFT even with a 100Mhz full span your bins would be 5KHz apart. Good enough for the kinds of applications this would be used for.You seem to be violently opposed to this scope. Did you have some kind of bad experience in the past?

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 07:48:02 am
content: I am sorry to read that you have that impression. If that is the case, then I want to apologize for my negative tone.The reason that I am a bit negative about this low-end scope, is that I am a man of facts, and I believe that any manufacturer can make a decent revenue even with fair pricing of the equipment.Currently Tektronix does not live up to fair pricing for the low-end scopes.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 08:30:22 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on August 03, 2016, 02:20:05 amHave you looked at the R&S HMO series of 'scopes? They do all that sort of stuff even better and have far more capabilities (eg. Serial decoding).Looking at that video this Tek seems aimed squarely at education. What University teacher isn't going to be asking for more budget after watching that?(...and will the next generation of students go straight into their first jobs not knowing that "ground-clip is bad"?)

author: ADT123
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 09:19:58 am
content: Interesting that the 2 & 4 channel models look so different. Different sized enclosures, layout of the controls etc. I guess they must have decided its cheaper to make 2 different models rather than just design a 4 channel one and leave off 2 channels.

author: Jay_Diddy_B
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 09:47:59 am
content: Hi,It would be interesting to know if Tektronix offers educational discounts on these scopes, if you are equipping a lab or two.I survived my University education using a Telequipment D1016. We didn't have any automated measurements, we used the graticule.It wasn't DPO, it had a real phosphor.It was 15 MHz bandwidth. I don't think my education suffered.Telequipment was acquired by Tektronix.Regards,Jay_Diddy_B

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 10:10:10 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on August 03, 2016, 08:30:22 amI think that lecroy does that too (though i never even laid eyes on one in the real world so i might be wrong)the point of my post was why would someone spend two, three times the money for an instrument that, from a first glance at the spec sheet, is the same as another one

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 10:23:23 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on August 03, 2016, 10:10:10 amI can see instructors using the UI features to upload a course wirelessly for students to access in the GUI later then grab all the WiFi dongles and lock them in his/her desk. Often lab scopes are Kensington locked to benches with only a mains supply with no LAN and I find this WiFi feature quite unique.Tutor prepares course, uploads to DSO's, done.....no paper and no printing.Institutions will be quite enamoured with these new Teks.

author: nfmax
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 10:57:38 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on August 03, 2016, 10:10:10 amFrom what little I know it would be a poorly-run educational establishment that paid even half the listed price, for a multi-unit buy.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 11:15:10 am
content: If they managed to get the basics right first, then they could add the bells and whistles like this educational stuff and Wifi.But they haven't managed to get the basics right, and they only focused on the bells and whistles, which in practice nobody uses and cares about anyhow.A good book with illustrations about the basics of a digital storage oscilloscope would serve so much better.The students can keep that book as a reference, and don't lock themselves into a scope with built-in tutorials.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 11:31:54 am
content: Quote from: nfmax on August 03, 2016, 10:57:38 amTheir ridiculous list price clearly has a lot of headroom to discount. Their build cost isn't going to be far off similar Chinese models.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 12:38:49 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 03, 2016, 07:16:59 amLet's just say I got around a bit. Based on your comments I guess you've been in sales for Tek? If so then I'm the type of person that sits opposite you (customer). Aside other things, I specify and buy test equipment (lots of it, really) for a larger number of technology labs spread around Europe and the US.We also maintain very good contacts to other labs, facilities and to some extend Universities and technical training schools which are used to gather and process independent market figures for our own use, far away from manufacturers' Kool-Aid. What we don't capture (and don't care for, honestly) are sales to individuals like one-man shops or hobbyists.I'm not involved in data gathering/processing, though.QuoteWhich LeCroy did in 1981 and back then there wasn't really a large market for DSOs anyways. My data doesn't go so far back but irrespective of Teks marketshare being 50% or not it's a lot easier to become dominant in an emerging market than in an established one, which is what the DSO market is today.QuoteI doubt that they dominate the unit volume, at least not for units sold under their own brands. The hobbyist market seems to love them but in the commercial field they are still pretty much non-existent.QuoteThat's pretty much the opposite from what I have seen and also what our data shows. Tek sales have been dwindling since at least 2004, and in 2011 I very much doubt their market share was even close to 40%, much less so for the mid-range and high-end segments, both areas where Tek hasn't really been competitive for ages. Things were a bit better in the low-end, predominantly thanks to the edu segment, which Tek courts in the hope that it hooks more people to their brand.And frankly, that's not surprising. Unlike their analog scopes, Tek DSOs were rarely anything to write home about. Entry-level scopes with ridiculously low memory, mid-range and high-end scopes that were limited in performance and capabilities compared to its competitors while in general being painfully slow ("like wading through molasses" is a term often associated with TDS5000/6000/7000/70000 scopes, and rightfully so). Then there are some annoying limitations (like the DPO "high-speed" mode where measurements are disabled, or the mentioned memory sizes), and some really daft ideas (like the LCD shutter on early TDS scopes). To make matters worse, instead of coming up with some innovative new products Tek pretty much continued to push their stale products in a warmed-up form.Tek may have had some interesting scopes like the 11000 Series back in the mid-'80s, and later introduced the lunchbox format and came up with intensity grading (on which HP and LeCroy worked as well), but that was back in the '90s. Technical advances of DSO technologies since then happened elsewhere (which isn't surprising because Tek has long lost most of its talent, not just thanks to the mind-numbing DBS).Today Tek is widely considered the bottom-of-the-barrel of the big brand scope manufacturers. The only ones buying Tek (aside from the edu market thanks to strong incentives) are people that don't know what else is out there, often with fond memories from back in the analog scope days (or they just spend someoneone else's money and thus don't care). And even then the preferrence only lasts until they have tried a modern Tek scope and scopes from other manufacturers.Of all the labs we support, only one still buys Tek scopes, and this only for contractual reasons (limited to specific pieces of kit). We occasionally invite Tek for evaluations we do before making a procurement decision, but they regularly don't get the sale simply because their products weren't good enough and the pricing too unflexible.Mind you that this is limited to scopes, not other categories of test instruments. And not all current Tek products are as poor as their scopes. And in regards to scopes, at least that new TBS2000 looks like a decent and well thought out unit, at least based on the data that is available so far. I'm sure the edu market will love it.QuoteSure it would be interesting, we're often asked by manufacturers to provide access to our data. But that's not gonna happen.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 12:41:05 pm
content: Quote from: JPortici on August 03, 2016, 10:10:10 amNot in this price class, in which LeCroy merely sells rebadged Siglent SDS1000CML/CFL scopes (LeCroy WaveAce).They do on their mid-range and high-end scppes, though.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 01:24:54 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 03, 2016, 12:38:49 pmFor one man shops the Tektronix scopes are totally uninteresting so far. I did buy a Tektronix scope for a customer a couple of years ago but that was just for political reasons and purely based on brand recognition and me being able to 'drive' it without needing to learn a new user interface. I have owned&used Tektronix scopes (DSOs) for nearly 2 decades but there is nothing in Tektronix' line-up I would buy nowadays. Still if the TBS2000 gets decent protocol decoding for a sane price it will be a very interesting scope compared to what the competition is currently offering.edit: better wording

author: nowlan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 01:39:45 pm
content: The back shot shows it has ethernet socket. I think the wifi dongle is liable to go missing in a classroom. Hopefully generic chinese ones can replace it.https://youtu.be/rL1t-ZbG3pA?t=267---tbs2072 via tek.com70mhz us$1200100mhz us$1460I forget how much a discount schools can get, but I know mine will call the local office, rather than resellers.---R&S look to be catering to education with their low end scopes.HMO1072 Digital Oscilloscope (70 MHz bandwidth, 2 channels)$1095---Having said that, I have seen siglent & hantek at school when budget just wasnt there.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 01:44:31 pm
content: Quote from: nowlan on August 03, 2016, 01:39:45 pmAt this price you'd think WiFi would be built in - they're really pushing it as a selling point and it's only $1 in extra hardware. Adding the extra USB port at the back probably costs them nearly that much.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 02:47:14 pm
content: Quote from: Someone on August 02, 2016, 11:35:12 pmR&S offers 16bit (software) HiRes modes for RTE/RTO as option, but even on these scopes with fast ADCs the benefit over 11bit or 12bit modes is miniscule.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 04:55:51 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 03, 2016, 02:47:14 pmI would be surprised if the s/n ratio ratio ever would approach 16 bits also. High res as implement in TEK scopes is really a type of boxcar integrator. It uses the extra samples that the A to D can produce beyond what is necessary for a given sweep speed and record length to compute a sort of a horizontal or spacial average. Thus the degree of improvement over non high res is most at lower (requested) sample rates and decreases to nothing when the sample rates approaches the max the scope can do.For example if the sweep speed and record length you are using calls for 100MS/s and the scope can do 1 GS/s then you have ten times more samples than you need. What do you do with those samples?In sample mode-nothing you simply display the 1st pointIn high res mode-you add the the samples together calculate an average and put the average into the bin for displayIn peak detect you keep the highest and lowest values and throw away the rest.Thus at slow sweep speeds you have lots of extra samples and this increases both resolution and s/n a large amount. At fast sweep speeds where 1 GS/s is called for their is no improvement when using hi res.This is greatly oversimplified but should illustrate the point.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 05:02:12 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 03, 2016, 12:38:49 pmI agree with some of your points and disagree with others. This is interesting to me. If you you would like to continue the discussion I am up for it but we should probably take it off line as we are getting off topic.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 05:12:04 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 03, 2016, 04:55:51 pmI'd be wary of putting too must trust into high-res modes other than doing unspecified filtering on the signal. For getting more bits from an A/D converter a lot depends on the linearity of them (and they are probably barely linear enough to support 8 bit resolution) and the amount of noise available to do oversampling. Think about feeding the scope with a very accurate and low noise DC signal. I doubt it can resolve beyond 8 bit. On the Tektronix TDS744A I used to own I could get the weirdest interpolation results in high-res mode with the bandwidth limiting on.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 06:10:02 pm
content: I would be surprised if the s/n ratio ratio ever would approach 16 bits also. High res as implement in TEK scopes is really a type of boxcar integrator. It uses the extra samples that the A to D can produce beyond what is necessary for a given sweep speed and record length to compute a sort of a horizontal or spacial average.Thus at slow sweep speeds you have lots of extra samples and this increases both resolution and s/n a large amount. At fast sweep speeds where 1 GS/s is called for their is no improvement when using hi res.I'd be wary of putting too must trust into high-res modes other than doing unspecified filtering on the signal. For getting more bits from an A/D converter a lot depends on the linearity of them (and they are probably barely linear enough to support 8 bit resolution) and the amount of noise available to do oversampling. Think about feeding the scope with a very accurate and low noise DC signal. I doubt it can resolve beyond 8 bit. On the Tektronix TDS744A I used to own I could get the weirdest interpolation results in high-res mode with the bandwidth limiting on.The user is always in charge off his results.Hires in my experience works great. You can think of it as low pass filter. Theapproximatecut off frequency is sample rate divided by 2. But the response has a sinx/x characteristic. So if you use a 20MHz BW limit the sample rate would have to be around 50Ms/s to produces the best signal to noise ratio. If you signal had frequency components above 20MHz that were really strong this could cause the scope to alias at this low of a sample rate and that could cause the problems you describe. This is because BW limit filters on scopes are NOT brick wall. Once again, most scopes have a manual transmission. You have to shift the gears at the right time or bad things can happen. Judging by your tag line you, like many of us, have had that problem.I am more than happy to explain ways to avoid this that might help you. With experience DSO's can be largely prevented from deceiving you!One last point, there is always enough noise to dither the signal and make the Hires mode work. Tek does do dynamic characterization of the scope as a system in all modes, including hi res.The 12 bit spec that you see so often is the result of ENOB testing that calculates the effective number of bits using well defined waveforms. You are right though about the " unspecified filtering" . This could be calculated by the scope but I know of no manufacturer that actually does this. So you are left with the rule of thumb mentioned above. This rule of thumb may not apply to other manufacturers as I don't know how they implement hires. In that case it is better to ask them what rules to use.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 06:46:07 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on August 03, 2016, 01:44:31 pmOr they wanted the capability to unambiguously disable wireless access for security reasons or wanted easy upgradability since WiFi standards progress so quickly. I would worry about someone walking off with the WiFi dongle though.In a classroom environment, I would hope that the wired ethernet is used instead.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 03, 2016, 02:47:14 pmHow do they handle the INL of the 8 bit digitizer though? I would expect the measurement accuracy to be at best 8 bits and significantly less at higher frequencies where the ENOB drops no matter how the samples are processed into each bin without heroic self calibration. Delta-Sigma ADCs avoid multibit quantization for a good reason if INL is important.I see that nctnico is asking the same question.Quote from: linearphase on August 03, 2016, 06:10:02 pmThe signal to noise ratio is improved tremendously but the nonlinearity of the 8-bit digitizer trashes the SFDR and high resolution measurement accuracy which nctnico observed with his TDS744A.Boxcar averaging is the worst common FIR filter but it does have the virtue of only using 0 and 1 coefficients making it easy to implement in hardware for maximum performance.High resolution mode is a great simple feature for lowering noise to produce a clearer display at the cost of bandwidth though. Just do not be fooled into thinking that DC measurements are improved as well.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 07:38:49 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 03, 2016, 06:10:02 pmI'm very well aware of aliasing problems! It is just that you can't create extra bits from an AD converter in a meaningfull way in an uncontrolled environment like an oscilloscope.BTW my tag line is more about the effects of limited bandwidth + probes which by definition make what you see on your screen an interpretation of the reality within the limits of your test setup.

author: linearphase
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 07:55:43 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 03, 2016, 06:46:07 pmAgreed. Isn't the high res filter implemented in hardware so it is essentially processing samples as fast as they come in?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 08:24:41 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 03, 2016, 04:55:51 pmYes, as on pretty much every other scope that offers such mode, aside from LeCroy (it's ERES function is actually a bellcurve FIR filter, not just a simple boxcar filter).Quote from: nctnico on August 03, 2016, 05:12:04 pmIndeed, plus it's prone to ringing. It's also an destructive mode, i.e. you lose the original sample data. At least with ERES I can do other stuff with the original waveform alongside the ERES trace.But the processing requirements for ERES are way to high for an entry-level scope.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 08:29:53 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 03, 2016, 05:02:12 pmAny time but then probably in a separate thread.QuoteAgree.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 09:41:06 pm
content: Tektronix should do an upgrade of DPO2000 / MSO2000 with that 480×240 WQVGA LCD.http://www.tektronixoverachiever.com/

author: timb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 10:06:10 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 03, 2016, 09:41:06 pmYes, despite their age they are nice little basic scopes. I have an MSO2024B as my daily driver. A bigger screen *would* be nice!

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2016, 11:14:37 pm
content: Quote from: linearphase on August 03, 2016, 07:55:43 pmThat is exactly how this type of high resolution mode is done although it sounds like some R&S DSOs are more sophisticed. Peak detection and DPO histograms operate in the same way; samples are processed in real time before being stored in the acquisition record or acquisition histogram in the case of DPO operation.This requires custom logic to get enough performance but some early DSOs with low sample rates used discrete SSI logic to accomplish it so if you want an example with full documentation of peak detection done this way, check out the Tektronix 2230 service manual. The faster 2232 with 5 times the sample rate moved this function to a custom ASIC which also operates as multiplexer between the digitizers and memory.It has been a long time but I do not remember a set of FIR coefficients which would produce acceptable results compared to boxcar averaging using only shifts. Fixed point processing performance is probably good enough to make a real FIR filter but I doubt the improvement would be worthwhile considering the extra complexity and power requirements.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2016, 12:47:16 am
content: I like that bigMultipurposeknob of TBS2000. It is much better than Keysight, Rigol or Siglent.

author: Muxr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2016, 01:06:24 am
content: Looks nice. I always liked that Tek color. Would love to see Dave take it apart in a video, the price doesn't seem bad either.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2016, 02:07:04 am
content: For schools I prefer DSOX2000 / DSOX3000 series. These scopes are used in industry, too.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2016, 05:07:05 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 09, 2016, 02:07:04 amWhy? Both are very expensive (especially the DSOX3k Series), the DSOX2k comes with a silly 1Mpts memory, and both don't even come with something so basic as a LAN port (and forget about WiFi).Quote*Any*big brand scope is used in industry. Simply because that is where they customers are.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2016, 04:36:28 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 07, 2016, 12:47:16 amJust one nice button does not justify that you have to break the bank to buy this scope.Worst case, just add yourself a bigger button on your Rigol or Siglent oscilloscope.Probably that big button is about the only good thing about that scope. The dual color handle looks ugly. The feet make it look like a horse that is about to leave the stable. The button placement is completely different on the 4 channel series than on the 2 channel series, so if they have both scopes in the university, students will have to learn two separate layouts, in case for some labs they have to use the 2 channel scope and for other labs they have to use the 4 channel scope. Very smart move Tektronix!

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2016, 07:52:40 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 09, 2016, 05:07:05 amThis might often be no problem. I did not see any scope with LAN being used at my university.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2016, 08:01:01 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 09, 2016, 07:52:40 pmTrue, but you're still paying a premium for a scope with miniscule memory.QuoteMaybe a missed opportunity? But then it well be because Keysight wants extra $$$ for that interface.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2016, 09:05:02 pm
content: Yes, if you want alow-costmiddle range scope with a long memory (at least 5MPoints), you should stay away from Keysight.Infinii Vision 6000X has 4Mpoints, butQuotehttp://literature.cdn.keysight.com/litweb/pdf/5991-4087EN.pdf?id=2456396http://www.keysight.com/en/pcx-x205214/infiniivision-6000-x-series-oscilloscopes?nid=-55355.0&cc=CZ&lc=engThis is a 15000USD scope.OK, for a long memory you have to buy this 21000USD beast.http://www.keysight.com/en/pcx-x205213/infiniium-s-series-oscilloscopes?nid=-55369.0&cc=CZ&lc=enghttp://www.testmart.com/estore/unit.cfm/DIGOSC/KEYSIG/DSOS104A/390339015/8.htmlKeysight has no scope like Tek MDO3000. It is not expensive as fuck, but has 10Mpoints per channel.http://www.tek.com/oscilloscope/mdo3000-mixed-domain-oscilloscope

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2016, 09:26:38 pm
content: It's only normal that an A-brand scope costs more than a Chinese scope.But it would be more acceptable if the cost factor is 2x, and not 4x or 5x.

author: Lukas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2016, 10:47:40 pm
content: It's teardown time! Since none of has the hardware at the moment, let's take a look at the firmware. As to be expected, this scope runs linux as well as Tek's other non-windows scopes. Looking at the firmware update, things are a bit different than they used to be. Instead of some ext2 image, you now get a "TBS2KB.TEK" file.Binwalk tells us that there's a Cramfs at offset 340 in there, looks interesting. Unfortunately, mounting the cramfs image doesn't work as does using fsck.cramfs for unpacking. After staring at the blob and the cramfs documentation I figured out that tek for some reason decided to hack cramfs in interesting ways. Instead of the standard 12 byte inodes, this one's got 16 byte inodes, 4 bytes more! I couldn't patch fsck.cramfs to understand tek's crazy format, so I came up with thishttp://pastebin.com/BW7nYDWiminimum-brains python script that doesn't understand paths and simply extracts every file it finds in one directory.Some notable things on the extracted files:- There are two monster executables, ULPP and tekapp, totalling over 40MB. Fore some reason, they left the map file for the ULPP binary in the image.- It really seems to be based on the AM33xx, there's a programm called gpmcdma- There are many libraries referring to other tek instruments,- There's a 16MB big Opentype font, seems a bit like an overkillI don't have the time to take a closer look at the extracted files right now, maybe someone of you is interested...There's no indication whatsoever on the tek website of them integrating GPL'ed software in there productsI had hoped that tek would do better than some random chinese CCTV camera manufacturer...

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2016, 08:33:44 pm
content: How many points are used in the FFT? In the video from Tektronix it says 2000 points.In that respect the FFT functionality isn't better than the one you can find in Siglent or Rigol.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2016, 09:44:29 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 10, 2016, 08:33:44 pmNot for long.

author: testmode
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2016, 06:59:39 pm
content: Quote from: Lukas on August 09, 2016, 10:47:40 pmFound this tidbit on the profile from that business-oriented social networking website of apparently the System Engr/HW Lead of the TBS2000 scope:Main board?10 layer?, main component:TI CPU (AM3352)+ Xilinx FPGA (Kintex7)+ADI ADC (AD9434)+ Power supply(Buck,Cuk ,buck-boost)Analog front end( TEK ASIC + differential Amplifier, DAC, comparator ),IO board(Ethernet, USB, UART, external trigger)

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2016, 12:08:11 am
content: Quote from: testmode on August 14, 2016, 06:59:39 pmI caught that on page 1 of the thread.

author: urill
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 05:20:06 am
content: My school just got these scopes (probably the first batch from the production line). I made a review video.Please forgive my lack of coverage when playing with the features. This is my first time doing a review video, and I did not have much time. Now I truly appreciate Dave's presenting skill.https://youtu.be/dhMTu-k17mwScreen resolution: 800x480Waveform update rate: 3000 wfm/sIntensity grading: no intensity adjustment. does have some sort of grayscale.

author: nowlan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 07:31:13 am
content: 1. I wonder if he realises that it is sampling at 500 megasamples in his vid2. no detents on the multiknob ??

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 07:38:50 am
content: let's see if tekcanactually fix things in their updates, it is very lacking at the moment.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 01:10:50 pm
content: It looks like the Rigol DS1054Z performs better than the Tektronix TBS2000.The Americans are beaten by the ChineseMake America great again!

author: urill
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 03:18:14 pm
content: Quote from: nowlan on August 27, 2016, 07:31:13 am1. the scope only does 1 GSa/s at its lowest timescale. If you turn on both channels, you get 500 MSa/s max.2. no detents

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 04:10:30 pm
content: Quote from: JPortici on August 27, 2016, 07:38:50 amBlasphemy!Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 27, 2016, 01:10:50 pmHeretic!

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 05:29:30 pm
content: Quote from: JPortici on August 27, 2016, 07:38:50 amWhat a disappointment.Seeing the video I get the impression that Tek has now solidly arrived in the bottom bin, not just compared to big brands but even to Chinese B-brands. The latter have bugs but at least they don't charge Tek prices for it.I had really hoped that this would be a sign of a new beginning for Tek (especially since they are apparently no longer owned by Danaher), abandoning the mediocrity in their previous products. But it rather seems its still the same old Tek, selling overpriced junk.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 05:48:28 pm
content: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TektronixQuotehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FortiveQuoteI am not sure if anything important changed...

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 06:23:26 pm
content: Some big companies just loose it.From innovators, they become second followers.From second followers, they finally land below Chinese manufacturers.We have seen this happen at many American companies.It might be related to overpaid product managers who have no engineering degrees,and just focus on process and change management. They have no clue about the products they are making. In fact, they might not even care, as long as their pay check keeps rolling in at the end of the month. Probably they remove all the mirrors from their house, as they don't want to see their true identity with their own eyes.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 06:30:23 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 27, 2016, 05:29:30 pmexactly the same. i'd love to own a modern tek if it wasn't a complete laugh of an instrument (price/quality/feature ratio)

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 06:37:47 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 27, 2016, 05:48:28 pmYou're probably right.I don't get it, really. They must know by now that the people that buy Tek because of brand loyality are literally dying out, and confronting students with sub-par instruments is not going to help them sell more to the industry.On the other side, Keysight and its predecessors, while not always offering the best products, sell good every-day instruments customers want, with great service on top. Which made them #1.Is Fortive really confident with scraping at the bottom and hoping to make a quick sale to univerity departments with Profs that have lost touch with the industry over 20 years ago already?Mind-numbing

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 06:44:28 pm
content: Over the past 20 years I have owned several Tektronix scopes but it is impossible to bring myself to love their current offerings. Tektronix even seems to sell Itech rebadged power supplies under the Keithley brand!

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 06:48:31 pm
content: Quote from: pascal_sweden on August 27, 2016, 06:23:26 pmTek had lost it a long time ago, long before when the Chinese started to invade the western T&M markets. Tek pretty much stopped innovating when the DSO replaced the analog scope as general purpose scope. It's like they made DSOs only because they were forced to, and would have happily made analog scopes instead. HP on the other hand, while not being overly successful with analog scopes, embraced DSOs and made the best of it (and LeCroy was pretty much with DSOs right from the start).QuoteMaybe, but it could very well be their engineers clinging so much to analog technology that they pretty much missed when the world became digital. And frankly, that is exactly what it looks like. Not always it's the MBAs to blame, although they certainly didn't stop the decline.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 06:53:01 pm
content: I just watched the video.Oh, dear...It's not just worse than a DS1054Z (unlocked), it actually looks worse than the $299 Siglent SDS1102 (which I'm not saying is a bad scope for $299)All that fuss about being able to connect Tek active probes, etc., .... why would anybody even want to?PS: I'm not sure I believe it has no AC coupling mode. It simplyhasto have that somewhere.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 10:16:36 pm
content: There is probably noTrigger AC Coupling.Not sure if it is a big disadvantage.

author: urill
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 10:19:30 pm
content: It has AC coupling. It does not have AC coupled trigger.Quote from: Fungus on August 27, 2016, 06:53:01 pm

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 10:20:11 pm
content: urillYou can use theMenu On/Offbutton instead of abackorescapebutton

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 10:29:43 pm
content: urillAccording to the manual it seems that thefinebutton works only with theVertical Positionknob andnotwith theVertical scaleknob.This is very GW Instek & Owon - like!

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 10:59:15 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 27, 2016, 10:20:11 pmThat's a big design fail.They should have added a separate BACK button. Even Hantek has that!

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 27, 2016, 11:11:04 pm
content: Quote from: urill on August 27, 2016, 10:19:30 pmMaybe you missed it from the linked page of the manual but low frequency rejectisAC coupling; low frequencies include DC.Some Tektronix oscilloscopes have both AC and low frequency reject coupling and some just have one or the other.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 04:24:15 am
content: Quote from: Lukas on August 09, 2016, 10:47:40 pm16MB isn't especially big for an opentype font. If they are trying to get reasonable coverage they probably have upwards of 10k characters in the font.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 04:27:20 am
content: Element 14 seems to be doing a big promotion of these scopes. They describe them as basic, and everything looks fine for a basic scope..... until you reach the prices.It looks like they have taken an Owon scope, added some courseware features, the Tek logo and a higher price tag, and will now market it to those Western universities with adequate budgets.

author: nowlan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 07:23:31 am
content: uk=855 squid.au=1696Tek offering loaner for a week.http://info.tek.com/as-tbs2000-try-before-buy-my-sg.htmlhttp://info.tek.com/as-tbs2000-try-before-buy-thailand.htmlBonus: By participating in the program, you automatically qualify to be a lucky winner for a TBS2104, which will be announced on 31-December-2016 by Tektronix. Check out sg.tek.com/promotions for details.http://info.tek.com/as-tbs2000-try-before-buy-australia.htmlAussie trial doesnt include any prizes.Terms and Conditions:Program is valid from 1-September-2016 to 16-December-2016.Duration of the trial period: 1-WeekTo qualify for the program you need to:Be employed.Sign the Loan Agreement form while you are trying the TBS2000 out.Return the TBS2000 within 7-days after its arrival.Participants of the program will enjoy a 10% discount on order(s) placed prior to 16-December-2016.

author: Faith
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 01, 2016, 08:04:57 am
content: Quote from: coppice on September 01, 2016, 04:27:20 amYep. And one very big issue I have with Tektronix is how they are not very transparent with pricing on their website.My local Tektronix website doesn't show prices for the TBS2000 at all, for example. I need to go to the US website for that. And even in the US website you cannot see the prices of options without creating an account. Really?Times like this just make me go back towww.keysight.comwhere I can see the price of each scope with each option along with a list of all on-going promotions.I may not always agree with Keysight pricing but at least they're upfront about it.More manufacturers should learn from this.

author: bg8up
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 01:22:15 am
content: Board details...

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 08:42:10 pm
content: Any hints on the boards about who is the OEM? The large Xilinx Kintex FPGA seems odd because Tektronix likes to use ASICs in their scopes.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 11:36:46 pm
content: Quote from: bg8up on September 18, 2016, 01:22:15 amAny photos of the power supply PCB?

author: snoopy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 07:42:33 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 27, 2016, 06:48:31 pmI have recently acquired a Tek TDS784A and nothing could be further from the truth. In its day(1995) it was way ahead of the competition and today is still way ahead of the low-end scope market in some of its performance metrics. I bought it because I needed a 4ch scope with at least 1GHz bandwidth and 4Gs/s plus 400,000 waveforms/s acquisition rate for runt pulse detection where my low-end 200MHz Hantek just didn't cut it. It appears that once you go above the 500MHz bandwidth this is still dominated by the big names and most of the low end scopes fall by the way side probably because they don't have the expertise and experience to design ultra high sample rate acquisition hardware . Rigol may have a 1GHz scope but checkout the pricing. No longer the sub $1000 mark is itcheers

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 07:52:25 am
content: Quote from: snoopy on September 20, 2016, 07:42:33 amYou mean like a WS3000, the HW of which is made by Siglent.QuoteAnd nor should it be.

author: snoopy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 08:11:08 am
content: Quote from: tautech on September 20, 2016, 07:52:25 amSo siglent should have a scope like this ?? I only see entry level scopes on their website.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 08:40:25 am
content: Quote from: snoopy on September 20, 2016, 08:11:08 amI wouldn't call the SDS2000X series entry level, some might.I'd also be quite confident it'd find your problem with it's 160k wfps, 2Gsa/s sampling and 140 Mpts memory depth.That's the best they have to offer the western markets at this time.........unless you count the Siglent made LeCroy.

author: snoopy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 08:52:48 am
content: Quote from: tautech on September 20, 2016, 08:40:25 amIt's still a lightweight in terms of bandwidth. Not much better than my Hantek. No good for looking at SDRAM signals. Like I said once you go above 500MHz or 1GHz forget about the low end scopes and be prepared to pay bucks. There is currently no free lunch when it comes to raw scope performance. If I was tektronix I probably wouldn't waste a lot of time in the low-end scope market. This has been flogged to death and there is probably very little profit in it. Having said that these TBS scopes look like they have some serious hardware so tek is probably limiting the feature-set on purpose.cheers

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 10:31:08 am
content: Quote from: snoopy on September 20, 2016, 07:42:33 amNo, it wasn't. It certainly was one of the better scopes back then but with only 500kpts per ch (in single ch mode), only basic triggers, simple maths and 10kpts FFT (and a floppy as only local storage medium) it was far from "way ahead of the competition". Other manufacturers already offered 1Ghz 4GSa/s with up to 8Mpts (4Mpts/Ch), advanced FFT (up to 6Mpts), maths and analysis tools, advanced triggers and local storage on a hard disk.The thing is that in the subsequent years Tek's products haven't really progressed a lot, while other scope manufacturers' products have. The result was that Tek was being left behind even further, until today where pretty much no-one buys Tek unless forced or having a mind being stuck in the analog days.QuoteOnly in some areas (BW and sample rate), but not in others (memory, FFT, maths performance).QuoteWell, it's not difficult for any scope to be better than a HantekQuoteNot surprising because B-brands tend to use generic components for their designs, which for most part have to be cheap. Because 'cheap' is the main sales argument people buy B-brands. If they weren't cheaper than a big brand then no-one would buy them.Also, price is a major factor in the entry-level segment, however further up the ladder other properties like performance, features and reliability & support become more important, so these markets are unlikely to be as receptive to B-brands as the entry-level/hobbyist market.QuoteBut it still performs like a scope in the sub-$1000 mark, plus even roughly 5 years it still suffers from major bugs (like ETS not working). Even without the bugs, considering that the $9k DS6104 is still as basic as a DS2000 or DS4000 in terms of functionality, it's pretty much a sad joke.Quote from: tautech on September 20, 2016, 08:40:25 amThe SDS2000X *is* an entry-level scope, simple as that. It's BW, performance, features and price clearly position it in the middle of the entry-level segment.Siglent has only one scope that isn't entry-level, and that is the SDS3000 (which is lower mid-range)

author: snoopy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 10:49:25 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 20, 2016, 10:31:08 amBasic triggers ?? Are you kidding me.It's got "InstaVu" which at the time put it way ahead of the competition in catching infrequent events such as runt pulses, glitches setup and hold time violations. Way ahead of its time which saw Agilent and Lecroy desperately trying to play catch-up. Sure it doesn't have lots of the bells and whistles you get in modern scopes that most will probably never use but then this was a scope of the time and still is relevant in many ways. My Hantek has got lots of these bells and whistles and I find that I just don't use most of them in my day to day work. Your siglent and rigol scopes won't be-able to be used to diagnose problems with high speed memory timing issues because they just aint got the bandwidth no matter how many bells and whistles they offer which all boils down to the firmware running on the thing. When you need the horsepower to diagnose fast signals looking for value for money in entry level scopes is just a moot point IMO.cheers

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 11:47:49 am
content: Quote from: snoopy on September 20, 2016, 10:49:25 amNo, I'm not. You got:- Edge- Logic- Pulse (includes glitch, runt, width, slew rate)- Video (PAL/SECAM/NTSC, FlexFormat) if you've got Option 05That's it.Even back then that wasn't exactly earth shattering. Other scopes also gave you exclusion trigger, droput triggers, interval trigger and so on.QuoteI'm sorry but that is nonsense. When your TDS came out HP already had its own high waveform rate architecture (MegaZoom) on the market - faster, fully automatic, and without the drawbacks of Tek's InstaVu mode (like the lack of measurements). What's really sad is that the same limitations are even found on modern Tek scopes like the MDO3k Series, which just shows how stale their technology is.LeCroy back then already had the 9300 Series, which was vastly more powerful than any DSO Tek came up with. Like any high end scope it lacked the high waveform rates but its advanced SmartTriggers made more than up for that. Plus you got more memory (like, a lot), and what were back then the most advanced maths and analysis tools on the market. End of 1996 they then came up with the LC Series, up to 1.5Ghz and 8GSa/s plus an even more powerful architecture, plus an extension of the already very long list of available options.There wasn't anything in the TDS Series which HP or LeCroy were "desperate to catch up" to - that's really jutst wishful thinking on your part.QuoteWell, it also lacked many of the features you got in scopes from other brands at the time. Which pretty much contradicts your "far ahead of the competition" statement.QuoteActually, it doesn't. Hantek's scopes are as basic as it can get, really. Just have a look at the current crop of entry-level scopes, like the GW Instek GDS-2000E, or even the Rigol scopes.QuoteNot sure what you're talking about as I don't own any Siglent scopes.Anyways, as someone who has used the TDS Series as well as the various HP scopes extensively back then when they were current I can assure you that the TDS784A was in no way "ahead of the competition". It was a good scope, aimed at engineers converting from analog scopes, but nothing extraordinary.Look, I know that coming from a Hantek a TDS700 must look like a tool from another planet, but if you think that back then it was extraordinary you're deluding yourself.Tek's problem was and still is that they saw the DSO as another form of the analog scope, while HP and especially LeCroy understood that the benefit of the digital scopes lies in its analysis capabilities. Tek never made that switch, and this, reflected in their portfolio of lacklustre products, is the reason why they are trailing the big brands and increasingly also the B-brands.

author: snoopy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 12:14:36 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 20, 2016, 11:47:49 amyou forgot Pattern, State and Setup/Hold time violation triggers so that was not allIn 97 I worked for a company that bought a whole lot of agilent scopes. Can't remember the models but with CRT green screens. Should have seen the single shot triggerJust a pile of incoherent dots on the screen. No sinx/x interpolation etc. It was woeful but it wasn't a cheap scope either. Perhaps I missed a setting or something but unless it was a repetitive waveform it was pretty much useless on high sample rates. Must have been an entry level scopeHantek does have a whole pile of measurement functionality but I only use a handful of them. These days scopes seem to be a lot about one-upmanship on who can have more measurements modes than the other even when you'll only use a handful of them.I need raw scope performance and these entry level scopes won't deliver it no matter how many measurements you've got on it. Let me know when your cheap scopes can sample at 4Gs/s with 1Ghz bandwidth and I'll be ready to order one because that is what I need right nowcheers

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 01:01:16 pm
content: Quote from: snoopy on September 20, 2016, 12:14:36 pmThose are part of the Logic triggers (and were available in competitor scopes, too), so yes that really was all.QuoteWho knows. In 1997 just came out with the first Infiniium scope (54800A Series, Windows95 based) which had LCD, as had the 5452xC and 5454xC upper entry-level scopes.The HP 54600 Series had green CRTs, and was still sold back then. They were indeed entry-level scopes (replacements for analog scopes), and the series also contained some sampling scopes which indeed were useless for non-repetitive waveforms. However, the real-time scopes were actually pretty good, and it's standard set of triggers worked generally very well.QuoteIt depends on what you do, but if you don't even use the functionality in your Hantek then it doesn't matter much which big brand scope you got as they all should perform notably better.QuoteI can't comment much on the performance of modern-day entry-level scopes as my experience with them is negligible (and my main scopes at work and at home are high-end scopes), but surely that depends on your definition of "cheap", really.The cheapest new 1Ghz scope is probably the Rigol DS6104 at $9k, but as I said that scope sucks because it's pretty much a buggy entry-level scope with larger BW. The cheapest new 1Ghz big brand scope I'm aware off at the moment is the LeCroy WaveSurfer 10, and this is already $10k.There's also the Siglent SDS3104 but that is only sold in China and is probably even more expensive.None of these price figures are anywhere near "entry level", though. In any case the 2nd hand market offers far more attractive choices.

author: snoopy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 20, 2016, 10:49:28 pm
content: Like I said once you go above 500MHz bandwidth the price jumps up dramatically. The front end acquisition is what adds to the overall cost.I watched this video on a comparison between the Siglent and Rigol scopes and it appears that the siglent firmware is very buggy whilst the rigol maybe slower in some modes it seems to operate much more reliably. Both scopes achieve update rates from a few hundred to nearly 50,000 at different time-base settings and that seems to be the upper ceiling in terms of performance. If most of these scope features are just firmware then perhaps Tek can step up to the plate with its new low-end scope platforms

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 12:22:08 am
content: Quote from: snoopy on September 20, 2016, 10:49:28 pmThat's the problem with OLD videos, they'rewellout of date.You use the brand names as generalizations of buginess and/or performance but do be aware that this is an ever changing situation and if you were to do some homework you'll find in the Siglent FW changelogs most identified bugs have been addressed.There's much more up to date info in various threads of this forum including links to #'s of FW updates that have any bugs at much very lower levels than when these models were initially released.The Siglent SDS2k has been superseded by the SDS2kXand even the vid is showing the SDS2000 with an old version of FW but the new V2 FW has been out for nearly 12 months:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000-new-v2-firmware/Most notable change was an increase of memory depth from 35 to 70 Mpts.SDS2000 waveform update rates:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000-new-v2-firmware/msg810575/#msg810575SDS2kX thread:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent's-new-product-sds2000x-series/SDS2kX teardownhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-864-siglent-sds2000x-series-oscilloscope-teardown/We've hijacked this thread enough, feel free to jump into any of the other threads linked to continue this discussion.

author: bg8up
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 01:16:52 am
content: Power distribution PCB is comming

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 05:43:13 am
content: Quote from: snoopy on September 20, 2016, 10:49:28 pmI actually had a Siglent SDS2204 once (bought it for a simple task), and yes it was a bug-ridden misery because Siglent was unable to fix the firmware in the almost 2 years the scope had been on the market back thenRumors go the later firmware got better but I didn't stick around to wait for it. Siglent makes good hardware but they seem to be inept when it comes to software.The Rigol DS2000 has less bugs in the video but only because it came out much sooner than the SDS2000 and the majority of bugs had been fixed since then. But as with the Siglent, apparently it wasn't all joy and laughter when the Rigol came out, because Rigol also tends to release gear in an immature state.Which made me decide to rather buy 2nd hand big brand gear (except Tek) than anything from the Chinese B-brands.QuoteThey could, and I really wish they would (we could really use another successful big brand in the market to keep Keysight from squeezing it), but I don't think they will. Tek was part of Danaher, which employed their 'Danaher Business System' (DBS) of excessive cost cutting to maximize shareholder value, which has driven out most of Tek's old talent long ago already. And not too long ago the sad rest of Tek was split off into a Danaher spin-off (Fortive), and they seem to stick to the same methodology as Danaher. As the new TBS2000 shows, sadly.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 06:18:14 am
content: Quoteas this tek wasn'tin the video from the user who got them at his uni you see that there are knobs that don't do anything yet because functions are yet to be implemented, menus grayed out for the same reason.i get it, they wanted to have tehe product on the benches for the beginning of school year.still a big fat

author: snoopy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 06:37:28 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 21, 2016, 05:43:13 amThat's really quite ashame that Tek has been taken over by bean counters and MBA morons. They may have bitten off more than they can chew by becoming complacentHowever I believe this latest scope has some decent hardware for the price and they just need to focus on developing the firmware which a lot of these modern scopes are built on. They should get rid of the obsolete gear from their product lime such as the TDS2000 series scopes with their minuscule 2.5k record lengthsand focus on getting this one rightcheers

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 06:59:43 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on September 21, 2016, 06:18:14 amIndeed that seems to be the case.QuoteProbably. But you have to see it from Tek's side. Pretty much their only customer base that hasn't run away yet are government contracts and the education market, and these days the former is also very likely to drop Tek in favor of Keysight or LeCroy. The education market is easier to work because most tutors have been out of the industry for a long time (if they even have been in the industry, that is), and their knowledge of the T&M market is often way outdated (if they know Tek then usually from when they still made analog scopes), which means Tek can still benefit from a positive image from the golden haydays there.Also, the edu market predominantly buys simple scopes, which removes the need for Tek to compete on technology, something they have to do in the industrial market and something they clearly struggle with.QuoteYes, but as long as it's good enough to follow the curricula then the customer is unlikely to care.

author: snoopy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 12:42:50 pm
content: So Dave are you going to get one to have a peak inside ?cheers

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 12:46:38 pm
content: Quote from: snoopy on September 21, 2016, 12:42:50 pmNobody offered me one.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 01:03:22 pm
content: Well, that answers that. It is horribly slow and slower than my DSOs which are old enough to drink.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2017, 10:44:25 pm
content: I saw this TBS2000 at a trade fair one month ago and I was not impressed. This scope just looks weird and crap. No video trigger. A strange way to choose channels for cursor measurements.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2017, 10:48:55 pm
content: Why would you need video trigger nowadays? Analog video has been obsolete for a while now.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2017, 10:50:59 pm
content: The scope has quite good connectivity, but there is probablyno finevertical or horizontal setting. No cursors in XY mode.The waveform gets obscured by automatic measurements, well, I can forgive this.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2017, 10:53:30 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on April 14, 2017, 10:48:55 pmYes, but I think that almost all other scopes have a video trigger. And TBS2000 is a school scope. There should be a video trigger.And these buttons still have no functions. Maybe they will be supported in a new firmware in future.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2017, 10:58:01 pm
content: Well, Keysight DSOX2000 was designed as a school scope back in 2011 and it stays competitive till nowadays. Yes, it has a small 1Mpoints memory, but at school it is OK.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2017, 11:37:53 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on April 14, 2017, 10:48:55 pmVideo triggers also work with analog RGB like from VGA but I agree, it seems odd that oscilloscopes still include them.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2017, 12:42:07 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on April 14, 2017, 11:37:53 pmi was surprised to see dedicated video-trigger hardware in the DSOX1000 -an LM1881 sync seperator.

author: serggio
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2017, 06:18:57 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 14, 2017, 10:58:01 pmU really need more acquisition memory? U really use more memory day from day in measurement? For what?As for Tek TBS2000, I not understand Tek marketing, I not understand targeting this device.. price starting from 1200 USD, 1 GS/s Sample Rate and TekVPI™ probe interfaceProbe from Tek with this interface type cost more that couple of this scopes... For what this interface was added in this scope?

author: ErnestoFB
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: July 30, 2017, 06:42:40 am
content: Folks,I simply loved every detail of my TBS2104! And you can adjust the brightness for sure!

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2017, 10:53:45 pm
content: Well, as a basic entry level scope it is quite OK.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 03:59:55 am
content: Quote from: serggio on April 17, 2017, 06:18:57 pmLarge acquisition memory is a modern low end DSO's version of marketing's Blue Crystals with some economic justification in that a large acquisition memory is *cheaper* than implementing the alternatives.QuoteThe probe interface is basically free compared to the cost of the probe which uses it and even a full set of stock passive probes are not inexpensive.The alternatives were to leave the probe interface off or implement *another* custom incompatible probe interface which ends up costing just as much.

author: ErnestoFB
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 04:57:46 am
content: For me it will be very useful because I will be able to use active probes not needing to buy a more expensive oscilloscope and having the same results up to the frequency of 100MHz, which perfectly covers the signals of 99% of my projects.

author: ErnestoFB
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 05:17:07 am
content: Quote from: serggio on April 17, 2017, 06:18:57 pmCompared with my old oscilloscope, a Tektronix TDS1012C-EDU with only 2.5k points of record length, it only accelerated a thousand times my debug work in I2C and SPI buses because I can capture all the communication in the bus, turn off the circuit and analyze calmly if the obtained signals correspond what should happen.My main motivation for buying the TBS2104 was its affordable price, the 20M of record length, the four analog channels and the superb 9" display.

author: blacksheeplogic
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 06:04:24 am
content: Quote from: serggio on April 17, 2017, 06:18:57 pmEven on much more expensive scopes, an active probe can cost the same or more than the scope. I fail therefore to see why the inclusion of the TekVPI probe interface detracts in anyway from this scope. Also for the target market it makes sense, a teaching facility may well have access to these probes and it may make these scopes more flexibility as teaching tools across courses.With Keysight, active probe support requires stepping up to a 3T and even then they only permit 2 on the 3T. How is this a good thing?

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 07:14:31 am
content: Quote from: ErnestoFB on August 06, 2017, 05:17:07 am... if you can only buy tektronix. i'll give you that. i heard that buying these things is a bit tricky in brazil

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 08:10:40 am
content: Quote from: ErnestoFB on August 06, 2017, 05:17:07 amBTW this is on all channels, but not shared. So total 80M. Just to clarify so people do not think it has less than budget scopes

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 12:26:37 pm
content: Quote from: ErnestoFB on August 06, 2017, 05:17:07 amI think that TBS2104 has no I2C or SPI decoding... :-(

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 03:01:07 pm
content: Quote from: ErnestoFB on August 06, 2017, 05:17:07 amThere are certainly applications where a long record length is required but they are in the minority. In the past, this would have been done with a logic analyser or protocol decoder and those are still better instruments for this.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 04:06:00 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 06, 2017, 03:01:07 pmNot if you want to look at both signal waveform and decoding. From my own experience having an oscilloscope with deep memory AND decoding is definitely better (=more productive). Think about situations where a signal gets distorted every now and then. Deep memory (segmented mode) allows to capture many messages without knowing exactly what is wrong with the signal and when the message with the problem is found you can also check the waveform.

author: ErnestoFB
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 05:29:17 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 06, 2017, 12:26:37 pmYes, it doesn't have data decoder. But I see this image and quickly understand the content of every data packet and any data or signal errors or unwanted noises, simultaneously. In this image, I have in channel four the slave select signal, which was used as trigger source too. In channel three, the serial clock and in channel one, MOSI (microcontroller output slave input) signal with data 0x20, 0x0F, 0x26, 0x26, 0x24, that I can interpret in seconds.The data decoder really increases the analysis speed, but I have no money to buy a better scope here in Brazil and the TBS2104 worked great until now.

author: ErnestoFB
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 06, 2017, 05:36:16 pm
content: Quote from: JPortici on August 06, 2017, 07:14:31 amThe Brazil is a hell for who like Science or Electronics. I hate this country and I will left from here as soon as possible.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2017, 11:16:06 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 06, 2017, 03:01:07 pmNot really. For example, just watch how quickly the sample rate (and thereby the useable BW) drops on scopes with small sample memories when you extend the timebase. A scope with deep memory can sustain a high sample rate even at long timebase settings.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2017, 03:18:43 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 07, 2017, 11:16:06 amBut not long delay settings as we discovered with the Rigol DS1000Z. (1) In that case, long record lengths are great as long as what you want to see what lies within them and if it does not, the sample rate has to be decreases anyway. Oscilloscopes with short acquisition memories use features like peak detection and delayed acquisition (sweep) to apply their maximum sample rate exactly where the user wants.More processing power was also required to allow deep acquisition memories but both were the result of increases integration and processing power has fallen behind making very deep acquisition memories *less* useful in a general sense. Maybe high end DSOs avoid this problem but my experience with the DSO/MDSO5000 series is that they do not; using high record lengths results in waiting for processing of each record which is fine for single shot applications where long record lengths are especially useful but it is aggravatingly slow otherwise.This processing power problem with long record lengths is not new. The ancient Tektronix 2230/2232 DSOs support 1k and 4k record lengths which seems laughably short by today's standards but why did they support a 1k record length at all? Why wasn't more acquisition memory included? It would have been trivial to do and only moderately expensive. I suspect it was because the limited processing power available at the time could handle 1k records significantly faster so for a *better user experience*, a selectable 1k record length was made available.(1) The Rigol DS1000Z series brings up another question. Exactly what is the record length of a DS1000Z? Measurements are only made upon the display record which is 600 or 1200 points long yet the specifications say 3 Mpoints/channel. Shouldn't they say something like 600 or 1200 points operating in real time and 3 Mpoints/channel when stopped? How many other DSOs which make measurements on the display record are like this?If only 600 or 1200 points are displayed, what happened to the others? What exactly is the sample rate of a Rigol DS1000Z when all of the samples do not fit into the display record? Do they all contribute something to the display or are they thrown out? This may explain some odd looking displays on modern DSOs.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2017, 03:27:40 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 03:18:43 pmThis is kind of a typical Tektronix problem which cannot be extrapolated to oscilloscopes in general. Besides that there are several affordable scopes on the market which have enough processing power to deal with tens of Mpts quickly.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2017, 03:31:35 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 07, 2017, 03:27:40 pmI have played with other DSOs and I have yet to fine *one* where "quickly" was quick enough. See above about display record length.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2017, 03:35:30 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 03:18:43 pmWell, I have no idea if the DS1000z, a bottom-of-the-barrel scope which it's biggest feature being cheap, does something different here but on a decent scope with "deep memory" the sample rate drops a lot later than on a scope with just a few thousand kpts of memory.QuoteGreat. Peak Detect may detect glitches but it loses all timing correlation and the waveform on the screen doesn't necessarily look like the original signal. In addition, it's absolutely useless for measurements. Delayed acquisition also requires the user to know where to look at.Both methods are crutches to overcome the lack of sample memory.QuoteActually, no, longer memory doesn't require more processing.QuoteYes, but that is simply only because Tek doesn't seem to know how to design a proper DSO and pretty much all their scopes lock up when the scope is busy doing something. And I do know how aggravating this can be as I had a MDO3000 once.Other scopes will not lock up the UI until the acquisition is complete but enable any user changes instantly.QuoteAgain, this has nothing to do with processing power, it's just idiotic software design by Tek. They must employ engineers that really hate humanity for them to come up with such products.QuoteAgain, I have no idea how the DS1000z works but on most decent scopes the memory used is the memory the scope was setup with, which is usually displayed somewhere on the screen. The only exception are the Agilent/Keysight DSO-X InfiniVision scopes which don't allow user control of the sample memory and which don't show how many memory is actually used.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2017, 03:45:27 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 03:31:35 pmWhich ones (list some make/models)?QuotePretty much any decent DSO interrupts the acquisition process to apply anu user settings that have been made. It may not be as quick as say changing the timebase on an analog scope but it's not far off.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2017, 04:19:05 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 07, 2017, 03:45:27 pmI do not keep an itemized list (and do not get enough opportunities to test DSOs) and the DPO/MSO5000 series were the only memorable ones and no LeCroys. Often you can tell from a review video that something weird and unspecified is going on.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 07, 2017, 03:35:30 pmWeren't we talking about affordable DSOs?After finding about the display record thing in the DS1000Z and other people saying that most modern DSOs make display record measurements, I am not sanguine that the statement "the sample rate drops a lot later than on a scope with just a few thousand kpts of memory" has much meaning. It is true though when single shot acquisitions are made and I agree that long record lengths are very handy in that case.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2017, 07:38:54 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 04:19:05 pmI was asking because I remember you always pretty much only list some Tek scopes and the Rigol DS1000z, but as nctnico and myself said repeatedly this is a Tek specific problem and should not be generalized as being common amongst DSOs - it is not!QuoteI wouldn't rely on a video review to assess the performance of a scope, no matter who does it. There's so much stuff even experienced reviewers can (and often do) miss, and then there are the ones where the presenter doesn't handle the scope correctly.QuoteYes, but in my opinion that covers quite a bit more than just what pretty much is one of the cheapest scopes on the market. It includes scopes like the Keysight DSO-X1000A/G and DSO-X2000A, the GW Instek GDS-1000B and GDS-2000E, and maybe even the R&S RTB2004.QuoteBut it does. Because with the sample rate your useable BW also drops, and when your sampling BW drops below the (true) analog BW then any frequency component sitting in between will cause aliasing. Let me quote froma posting I made 2 years ago where I compared a low memory Tek TDS694C (3Ghz 10GSa/s, 30k standard, 120k max) with a long memory scope (LeCroy WavePro 960, 2Ghz 16GSa/s with 250k standard and 16M max)and which shows how quickly the BW advantage of the Tek melts away because of it's small memory1:Quote1In the posting the usable BW was defined as fmax=0.5*fsto keep it simple, however the real useable BW after Nyquist-Shannon would be fmax<0.5*fs.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2017, 09:28:14 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 07, 2017, 07:38:54 pmMy point was that the display record processing makes these DSOs operate more like they are limited by the display record length than the record length given in the specifications which in only available for saved acquisitions. This is a deliberate tradeoff because they cannot process their full record length in an acceptable time.The TDS694C (and all of the TDS600 models) is more specialized than the typical DSO of that time and has more in common with transient digitizers than oscilloscopes. It uses CCD sampling to achieve 10GS/s on every channel simultaneously.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2017, 08:33:59 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 09:28:14 pmThey can, as could even scopes back then (the same M68k that Tek used it its low memory TDS scopes was used by deep memory scopes like the HP 54645A/D with 1Mpts or the LeCroy 9300 Series with up to 8Mpts, and even the latter had no problems processing the full record length in acceptable time).QuoteProbably (well, the short memory makes the TDS694C useless for pretty much anything else than short transients), but for this discussion that's completely irrelevant as the same is true for pretty much any low memory scope vs a deep memory scope.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2017, 04:19:01 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 08, 2017, 08:33:59 amHP had their Megazoom ASIC doing the heavy processing in the HP 54645A and I assume LeCroy was doing something similar. If only the 68000 processor had been available, then the performance with long record lengths would have been unacceptable except for a minority of long record length applications.That is why I gave examples of old DSOs which did not support longer record lengths simply because of processing limitations. They could not even support their longest record length without reducing their display update rate noticeably so they allowed shortening the record length even further.Just having more fast acquisition memory is not sufficient.QuoteThat series of oscilloscopes was intended for applications where bandwidth and real time sample rate were the only considerations. They had a specific market which in earlier time would have been using oscilloscopes like the 519, 7104, and scan converter based instruments.I get your point that record length limits sampling rate and I have never disagreed. I just think long record lengths which have been enabled by increasing integration have been seized upon by marketing departments in a quest for specsmanship leading to deceptive practices like the Rigol example I gave.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2017, 07:16:03 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 08, 2017, 04:19:01 pmYes but it shows that handling 1M of memory wasn't outside the scope of technology in 1995.QuoteNo, LeCroy never settled on ASICs for waveform processing, and the 9300 Series only relies on the CPU for pretty much everything, as do later LeCroy scopes.QuoteWhich wasn't a processing limitation at all.QuotePlease explain how a scope should maintain the same update rate in small memory (say 4k) as in large memory (say 4M) when by the laws of physics and math at a given sample rate it takes 1000x as long to fill the large memory than to fill the small memory? Of course the update rate will drop when using large memory, unless your scope uses HPAK's trick of using only small memory and only making the last acquisition a long one?QuoteMaybe, and it shows that Tek didn't really 'get' digital scopes and was too fixated on their analog past, but as I said the TDS694C was only an example, and Tek has produced many more low memory scopes and not all of them have the excuse of being made for niche purposes.QuoteSample memory sizes haven't really been the prime marketing argument for the best part of a decade, and even before then were rarely so. Sufficient memory is pretty much standard for any scope since the early 2000s, and rightfully so, similar to other features like color displays. As to Rigol, they simply put in the large memory in their scopes because A) it's cheap and B) especially on a budget scope like the DS1000z long memory prevents the measly sample rate in 4ch mode to drop further on longer timebase which would make the 4ch mode useless. Just do the math and see how far you'd get with the few K you believe are sufficient for a DSO these days.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:15:37 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 08, 2017, 07:16:03 pmI explained it right here:This processing power problem with long record lengths is not new. The ancient Tektronix 2230/2232 DSOs support 1k and 4k record lengths which seems laughably short by today's standards but why did they support a 1k record length at all?See where it says 4M? Hmm, I don't. See where it says anything close to 4M? Hmm, it does not say that either.Of course the acquisition rate is impacted by long record lengths. But back then, processing limitations impacted it even on short but not the shortest record lengths and it still does even now with exceptions for things like being able to process the digitizer output in real time to produce histograms.Why do you think so many DSOs are making measurements on the display record? It is faster and requires less processing power because it limits the record length. It also sometimes produces deceptive results.QuoteFor something that is so unimportant for marketing, they sure go out of their way to advertise their long record lengths while avoiding the subject of how those long record lengths do not apply except in specific operating modes.QuoteIt shows Tektronix made those oscilloscopes for a specific market where the limit in record length was irrelevant and other considerations like sample rate and bandwidth were more important.I'm not very familiar with LeCroy's products other than those from companies that they bought. How did the LeCroy DSOs which were contemporaries to the Tektornix TDS600 series compare? Wasn't LeCroy selling a lot of DSOs for high energy physics applications at the time? Maybe there wasn't much overlap with the market Tektronix was catering to.QuoteI do it all the time. The only applications where it regularly comes up are the same applications where I would use a logic or protocol analyser or a strip chart recorder.When I have used modern DSOs which support long record lengths, I set them low enough for maximum performance unless a long record length is needed just like I do with my 20+ year old DSOs.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2017, 03:30:09 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 09, 2017, 03:15:37 pmSo many? I know one brand who truly does that. Then theres some others who use more complex approach, lets say "optimized dataset", but (much) larger than display.Out of approx 10 scopes tested inauto-measurements threadthere was only 1 using display record. Also processing power deficit as of today is complete myth, as latest entry level scope tests show.Its up to user if stick to CRO-like practices or soak in new possibilities, concentrate on task at hand and let scope processor do the dirty work.Interesting that this has created situation where more conservative top-dollar tech may get beatings from low-end DSOs in low-freq applications.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 10:19:48 am
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on August 09, 2017, 03:30:09 pmWhich one is that? We know Rigol is doing it and the Keysight guy at the end says their InfiniiVision DSOs do it which is not the first time I have heard that about them although I did not believe it the first time.QuoteThe transition time test is good and I have used it myself but it is not very relevant to practical applications. Someone would naturally zoom in when making this measurement.The test I have started to use is RMS which *should* work fine on a decimated acquisition record but often does not because of processing. RMS has the advantage that it is more likely to be used as part of a windowed measurement at slow time/div settings to measure noise on part of a signal.QuoteI do not see where that was measured at all.QuoteIf the new possibilities include producing the wrong result, then it is hardly an alternative.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 10, 2017, 11:43:29 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 10, 2017, 10:19:48 amActually we have new member in "screen sampler" family:Owon XDS3102A, according to tor-loop test here.Folds in specific test at 200ns, just like DS1000Z. In comparison SDS1202X-E folds at 5ms.About Keysight - have little interest what they say. I observe and calculate. According to observations *SOX3000T delivers end-result that implies about 20k record as base, at least in rise time department. This is way up from "screen sampler".Quote from: David Hess on August 10, 2017, 10:19:48 amTransition time test is just an indication, along with pulse period test, which is also included. Those indicators expand toallhorizontal measurements. Can be tens of those in modern scope.Overall, with "screen sampler" you are limited to primitive single screen activities, while full or at least larger-than-screen-record scopes can be used almost like multi-timebase scopes because can "go high and low" at the same time.For example here scope is doing 2Mpts FFT at same time on 24MHz and 32768Hz signal. It could be any other activity involving substantially different frequencies. One cannot miss functionality like that if its utterly impossible with tech at hand. Just like one probably mostly does not miss that DMM cannot graph and displays only single number.Quote from: David Hess on August 10, 2017, 10:19:48 amThings that spoil RMS can be probably concluded from simpler tests. Original idea to base tests on risetime, period did occur because even Arduino can be used as signal source, so more people can investigate what they actually have sitting on desk.Quote from: David Hess on August 10, 2017, 10:19:48 amNon-deficit of processing power is again direct implication of scope doing full-record calculus on slow timebases. Low-end SDS1202X-E folds accurate calculus on timebase 5 orders of magnitude larger than DS1000Z. GDS1054B 3 orders of magnitude.Quote from: David Hess on August 10, 2017, 10:19:48 amWhats wrong with my 2xFFT showcase? Or just go over auto-measurements thread test reports, can see that "Screen samplers" are not just wrong, when not in exactly right timebase they areexponentiallywrong:32768Hz square test signal:SDS1202X-E, 500MSa/s, 2ms/: rise ~9ns, period 30.52usDS1000Z, 250MSa/s, 2ms/: rise 80000ns, period 120usNow if take calculator and analyze Rigol performance:2ms/ * 12/ = 24ms = 24000us24000us / 120us = 20024000us / 80000ns = 300So this is why effective dataset for Rigol can be considered as ~300 points.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 11, 2017, 03:55:54 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 09, 2017, 03:15:37 pmI'm sorry but you didn't explain. While you think that it's processing which makes deep memory scopes slow, you seem to ignore the basic fact that at a given sample rate it simply takes more time to fill the larger memory. Processing has nothing to do with it.QuoteThese were just examples.QuoteI think MrW0lf has already covered this but fact is that at least as big brands' mid-range and high-end scopes are concerned measurements are done from the sampled data and not from the display record. The only exceptions I'm aware of are the LeCroy WaveAce 100/200 and 1000/2000, which are all rebadged Siglent low end scopes (SDS1000CL/CML,CFL), use screen data for measurements, as well as the Rigol-made Agilent scopes (DSO1000?).QuoteWell, it's part of a scope's specs, so it should be obvious why manufacturer list it. The same is true for having color screens, or the physical dimensions.Pretty much all decent modern scopes, aside from maybe the Keysight DSOX and some ancient Teks, have more than enough sample memory for pretty much any task you can throw at them. It's hardly a decisive factor when buying a scope, again similar to having a color screen.QuoteYes, and no. Tek wanted to produce digital scopes that as much as possible behave like analog scopes. They never understood that the power in DSOs is not in being able to come up with better/cheaper 'analog-like' scopes but in the incountable number of ways to squeeze even more information out of a captured signal, way beyond what the squiggly line on the screen tells the user.QuoteYou're right, LeCroy started with making digitizers and later scopes aimed at high energy physics, which was their core market until the mid- '80s, and later also started making inroads into electronics engineering. The 9300 Series which came out I think somewhere around 1993 was pretty much designed for the EE market, with up to 4GSa/s and 8M memory. LeCroy also offered not only advanced math and analysis tools (for example, these scopes could already do 1M FFTs), but also specialist applications for storage companies (hard disks and optical storage).QuoteThe point is that on a 20+ year old Tek with 4k or so you can't because long memory (in a modern sense) doesn't exist on these old scopes.I've no problem believing that small memory works for you, I guess you're probably used to it (and it seems you didn't really had much contact with any decent modern deep memory scope), and that's fine. It however doesn't invalidate my arguments.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 12, 2017, 12:27:25 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 11, 2017, 03:55:54 pmYes, there is a fundamental limit to how fast the display can be drawn at slower timebases, but even there many scopes fall far below the theoretical maximum rates. But thats ignoring the faster timebases where there are significant limits to how fast waveforms can be captured and displayed in real time, where there is a wide diversity of scopes optimised for different purposes as was shown here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-mso4000-and-ds4000-tests-bugs-firmware-questions-etc/msg973064/#msg973064Increasing the memory depth of those rigol scopes further reduces their acquisition rates, same with the Tektronix examples David is talking about, its like this with most scopes and well known. The entire "argument" about needing memory depth controls is that the user needs it for some reason, in the Agilent/Keysight X series thats not needed because there isneverso rarely a reason for the user to capture a smaller memory depth (even though it could be nice for some applications where the data is being offloaded).Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 11, 2017, 03:55:54 pmYou really need to stop going out of your way to tell everyone that scopes with deep memory and advanced post capture analysis are so far superior for all possible uses than scopes with fast realtime analysis or displays. They're both useful for different purposes which the other cannot do, and while they have a lot of overlap where either could solve the same problem not everyone has the budget for multiple scopes or a scope with useful deep memory analysis.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 10:10:38 am
content: Quote from: Someone on August 12, 2017, 12:27:25 amThanks Captain Obvious, but the point was not if scopes get slower with larger sample memory (they do) but the why. David seems to believe it's because of processing, but in reality this is simply down to basic math.QuoteThe DSO-X, like any HPAK InfiniVision scope, is cheating as the only time it acquires a long memory segment in normal acquisition is at the last acquisition made after pressing STOP, otherwise it uses just enough memory to fill the display record. Plus it doesn't even tell you how much memory it uses.That is fine for some tasks but not for others, i.e. sometimes you might want to capture a specific lenght only. After all, there's a reason why pretty much any other newer scope allows for manual setup of sample memory, and that includes even Keysight's own scopes (Infiniium), which indicates that there's some use for this feature.QuoteAnd you really need to start paying attention to and try to understand what has actually been written because this was mostly about sample memory sizes, not analysis capabilities, and I've already demonstrated how a small memory scope easily gets caught out by it's small memory.Not that this is really a problem these days, as, aside from some ancient Tek offerings and some early HP Infiniiums, pretty much most somewhat modern scope (i.e. made since 2000), even those from the Chinese B-brands, offer more than enough sample memory to avoid the pitfalls. And that even includes the Keysight DSO-X Series.They're both useful for different purposes which the other cannot do, and while they have a lot of overlap where either could solve the same problem not everyone has the budget for multiple scopes or a scope with useful deep memory analysis.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 04:09:14 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 14, 2017, 10:10:38 amThat isn't entirely true because what happens if you press stop and there is nothing more to trigger on? You can still use zoom to zoom into the signal. I'm pretty sure HPAK is using a dual acquisition technique which uses a short buffer to draw an intensity graded trace and switches to a deep memory mode when you change the timebase to zoom in. The giveaway is that the intensity graded trace dissapears once you change the timebase to zoom in/out.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 05:42:49 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 14, 2017, 04:09:14 pmWhat happens if there's no trigger after pressing STOP is an interesting question. I honestly don't know, and I'll have no access to a DSOX for a while so somebody else would need to test that out.However, even if HPAK uses some dual acquisition mode as you suggest, the high waveform rate it reaches would make it physically impossible to use all the memory at the given max sample rate of these scopes. Which means if you press STOP and there's no trigger you'd end up with a record of unknown length which very likely is less than the full sample memory.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 06:36:19 pm
content: Ofcourse there is more to it but I think an acquisition is terminated if a trigger arrives before it is finished. That way it always has a full record after the last trigger event but it can also achieve a very high update rate. There is no need to record data which isn't going to be used.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2017, 11:48:39 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 14, 2017, 10:10:38 amThere is no basic maths you can apply to determine how fast a particular scope will update in realtime, none reach the theoretical ideal and all have some limitations which are not disclosed/revealed by the manufacturer. Lets go back to your point where this started:Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 08, 2017, 07:16:03 pmIdeally you wouldn't have to compromise on memory depth, it would always be as deep as possible for the horizontal window. You are limited by sample rate for short captures, and memory depth for long captures, but in the in-between where neither is limiting people still choose to have a shorter memory depth than they could capture because it slows down aspects of the scope such as the waveform display rate. You can measure this so I took a rigol 1054 and did the comparison setting both scopes to 50us per division:Waveformswfms/sRigolMemoryVectorDotsSample Rate1054Z12k36362410MS/s120k217298125MS/s600k1781921GS/s1200k1601701GS/s12M60611GS/s24M35361GS/sKeysight1000/2000X500k18001GS/s3000X500k17461GS/s3000X2M7804GS/sThe theoretical zero blind time rate is 2000 wfms/s for the Keysight, and 1667 wfms/s for the Rigol (extra 2 divisions horizontal display). They're all able to run at 1GS/s for this test but the Keysight gives you no direct options to change to other memory depths, while the Rigol with all its choices fails to match the realtime performance. It even lets you choose longer depths that are captured outside the display but not shown until you stop and zoom around the capture, at the shorter memory depths the Rigol is dropping its sample rate and not putting 1GS/s data onto the screen which is why comparisons need to be made carefully. Processing (and/or memory bandwidth) is limiting the ability to draw more information to the screen and the reason why many scopes offer the choice of shorter memory depths.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 14, 2017, 10:10:38 amIf you want to capture a specific length ofdatasure, its nice to have the controls available and I did mention that is one corner case. But in general what people want to capture is a length oftimeand they would like to have as much memory and sample rate as possible, but for most scopes thats balancing against realtime waveform update rate. Or the user needs to capture elements with a particular frequency so they are constrained in their lowest possible sample rate, again the tradeoff appears. Or we can take the Keysight X series scopes where they provide no choice, but there are so few cases where you would want to have shorter memory depths on them that that it seems reasonable they left the option out.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 14, 2017, 10:10:38 amThey don't cheat, it tells you the sample rate for the current mode clearly and plainly on the UI as do many other scopes:I find this is much easier to work with than memory depth as I'm generally concerned about the frequencies being captured, not the specific length of memory being used to do this. Again, when you always get as much memory as possible used in the captures you can forget about that parameter and focus on the ones that matter to your specific situation. Yes, going to a single capture doubles the memory depth in many situations (but not all) but when looking at the signal I can quickly asses if the sample rate is sufficient for the information I want to see and adjust the controls accordingly.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 12:05:54 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 14, 2017, 05:42:49 pmDaniel from Keysight engaged on this and linked to a video:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-keysight-scope-1st-march-2017/msg1125192/#msg1125192Its not confusing or magic, while in run mode the memory is halved from maximum (generally) and when pressing stop the memory is held and when you press single it uses as much memory as possible for the next trigger. Its not using the minimum possible to fill the display buffer, the data is aggregated into a 2d histogram (with vectors) at the running sample rate and there is a larger memory available when stopped to navigate/zoom through.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 01:34:45 pm
content: Quote from: Someone on August 14, 2017, 11:48:39 pmThere's basic math which tells you how long it takes to capture a specific segment, a time that no scope no matter how fast is able to beat, which isTcapture = sizememory / fsampling[Samples per second]Knowing this, it should really be no surprise why a long memory scope will take more time to complete an acquisition cycle than a short memory scope.QuoteCorrect, which again should be no surprise to anyone who knows about the mathematical relationship between time per acquisition, sample memory size and sample rate, as demonstrated above.QuoteThat is all great, but again you miss the point. This was about long memory being useful or, as David Hess claimed, just being a marketing gimmick. No-one argued that a scope must always be run at max memory settings, if you believe this then this is just your interpretation. The discussion was if long memory on a scope is a needed feature, for which I argue that in this day and age, yes it is.Besides, the point about processing David and I have been discussing earlier was pretty much about what processing was available in comparable scopes back then. Comparing the performance of one of the cheapest bottom-of-the-barrel scopes on the market with a not exactly cheap upper entry-level/lower mid-range DSOX3k with dedicated waveform ASIC (MegaZoom) and then concluding that the Rigol is limited by processing power (what a surprise!) has nothing to do with what David and I were discussing, and is also a bit silly, really.QuoteConsidering that memory controls are standard on the majority of scopes I doubt it's just a "corner case". I use it regularly in a wide range of situations, as do my colleagues.QuoteProbably right (at least for standard measurement situations), but most newer scopes that offer sample memory controls also offer an automatic mode which only uses enough memory as required to maintain a high waveform rate, so at least with these scopes this isn't really an issue.Not all do, like the Tek MDO3000, and it can add to this scope's already overall very high frustration factor, but scopes like that are thankfully in the minority.QuoteYou're right, but in cases where the auto selection isn't good enough usually you'd wantmorememory, not less. I guess the reason the DSO-X, like any InfiniVision scope right back to the old HP 54542A/D from 1995, lacks memory controls is probably down to their MegaZoom ASIC, which (like the comparatively small memory) wasn't considered a problem for a scope that was optimized for very high update rates at the cost of pretty much everything else. After all, any other HPAK scope back then and today does have sample memory settings, and newer ones also have an automatic mode.QuoteFair enough, and I can see why not having to care is practical in most standard measurement situations. But again, that is true for most somewhat newer scopes that offer user-controllable memory, as they also have an automatic mode. This isn't an either-or decision, these days you can have both, automatic memory management for everyday and manual controls when it's needed.Anyways, this discussion wasn't about the DSO-X, which in the context of sample memory still counts as a deep memory scope, it was about if long memory is a worthwhile feature to have or not.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 02:55:36 pm
content: Quote from: Someone on August 15, 2017, 12:05:54 amI remember the thread, haven't seen the video (and where I am I can't see it) but I'll do so when I get the chance.QuoteYes, for the double buffering.QuoteSo when you press STOP you end up with a record half the size of the max sample memory (at best).QuoteOK, so your only way to capture a complete max memory segment is SINGLE.QuoteOK, so on a DSO-X3kT with 4Mpts and 5GSa/s, that would mean a best case (single channel) 2Mpts in normal acquisition mode, which at 5GSa/s takes 400us to fill. Even on a perfect scope with zero blind time, 400us per acquisition translate into only 2,500 acquisitions per second. Which means to reach the very high waveforms the DSO-X3kT can achieve it would have to dramatically reduce the amount of memory used, i.e. at 500k acquisitions per second that just leaves 2us for acquisition + blind time, so even that perfect scope with no blind time would have to reduce the sample memory size to 10k.I'll check out the video if it actually explains what happens if you press STOP and no new trigger appears, but I'd guess that there won't be a large sample size left to zoom around widely.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 03:02:10 pm
content: Quote from: Someone on August 14, 2017, 11:48:39 pmFine, but if you read what you quoted again you might notice (I did even highlight it) that I was talking aboutsample memory, *not*sample rate.Can you point me where the sample memory in used is shown on your screenshot?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 03:07:50 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 15, 2017, 02:55:36 pmAs I wrote before your math is too simplified. You don't have to fill the entire acquisition memory if you know the data is not going to be used. This is the case when a new trigger arrives before the acquisition memory is completely filled. After all at short time/div settings you'll be looking at a fraction of the acquisition memory anyway. The rest is outside the screen.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 05:09:54 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 15, 2017, 03:07:50 pmNo, it's not. It's simply one of the critical limitations in linear sampling systems.QuoteYes, you don't have to fill the entire memory, that is clear. But if the scope doesn't then where should it get its data to zoom out from?You can't have it both ways. Either the scope uses little memory and is then able to achieve a high update rate, or it uses more memory which means the update rate goes down.Now as the DSO-X3kT is concerned that means it either uses a big part of the available memory or it doesn't to achieve fast update rates.We know that the DSO-X uses all memory (4Mpts) in SINGLE mode.We know that the DSO-X uses half memory (2Mpts) in NORMAL/AUTO mode on the *last* acquisition made after pressing STOP.We know that the DSO-X uses a lot less than the available memory (which would be 2Mpts best case) for all acquisitions in NRM/AUTO except for the last one to maintain its very high update rates (again, it uses the full available memory on the last acquisition after pressing STOP).So what about when the scope is in NRM and you press STOP and no further trigger appears? The scope will not have made a longer 'last' acquisition as it hasn't been triggered anymore. And the acquisitions made before STOP was pressed would only have used a small part of the available memory as otherwise the update rates would have dropped like a rock (see the formula I stated, for which there is no way around). And with the last acquisition only using a small part of the memory, there simply is no data to zoom out.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 05:20:31 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 15, 2017, 05:09:54 pmNo new trigger means the memory is filled completely and then the data required to show the signal outside the screen will be there. Don't think in terms of fixed memory lengths. It is like starting with a new task and abandoning the old task. new trigger = reset acquisition memory addres counter.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 15, 2017, 10:38:33 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 15, 2017, 05:09:54 pmYou're once again saying things are fact which you dont understand, every capture in run mode is filling a sample buffer of the same size (the halved memory). It is rendered out to the screen at a smaller resolution without dropping any of the points from every single one of those buffers. As soon as you press stop the last of those complete buffers is available to navigate/zoom through. The case of waiting for the next trigger is when you request that functionality by pressing not stop, but the single button to rearm acquisition.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 15, 2017, 01:34:45 pmI did mention the theoretical maximum capture rates, very few scopes approach those limits, and their peak performance is typically found by drastically reducing the memory depth and/or sample rate as shown in the example I presented. You cannot come up with "simple maths" to determine how fast any particular scope model will update.David was pretty clear in his articulation about the long memory being counterproductive to update rates.Quote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 03:18:43 pmQuote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 09:28:14 pm

author: urill
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 01:13:44 am
content: It has been a year since they released this scope. The search/marker buttons still do nothing.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 10:09:38 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 15, 2017, 05:20:31 pmThat would make sense but is this really what happens? Has anyone tried?Quote from: Someone on August 15, 2017, 10:38:33 pmWell physical facts are physical facts and remain so no matter if you believe in them or not.But actually you're right, there's something I don't understand:QuoteI get the rest, but the highlighted part is impossible (i.e. the scope filling the complete 2M/1M/500k in every acqusition in NORM/AUTO mode).http://literature.cdn.keysight.com/litweb/pdf/5989-7885EN.pdfpage 08 lists the update rates for the Keysight DSO-X 3000 (considering the document is dated 2017 I assume it's the 3000T not 3000A), i.e.- 1,030,000 updates/s at 10ns/div timebase- 960k updates/s at 20ns/div- 170k updates/s at 200ns/divLet's see (and for simplicity I'll assume the scope has zero blind time):1,030,000 updates/s at 10ns/div10ns/div at 10 divisions => 100ns displayed segment; 100ns @ 5GSa/s => 500pts memory required to capture the displayed segment.Now let's see how much is really captured at each acquisition:1,030,000 updates/s means each update can't take longer than 9.7E-07s or 970ns; 970ns @ 5GSa/s results in 4850pts, i.e. each acquisition can only fill 4,850pts or less.960k updates/s at 20ns/div20ns/div => 200ns displayed segment; 200ns @ 5GSa/s => 1k memory required for the displayed segment.960,000 updates/s => 1.04E-06s or 1.04us per update; 1.04us @ 5GSa/s => 5,200 points memory, i.e. each acquisition can only fill 5,200pts or less.170k updates/s at 200ns/div200ns/div => 2us displayed segment; 2us @ 5GSa/s => 10kpts memory req'd for the displayed segment.170,000 updates/s => 5.88E-06s or 5.88us; 5.88us @ 5GSa/s => 29,400pts memory, i.e. each acquisition can fill no more than 29,400pts of sample memory.Tl;dr: The scope can impossibly fill 2Mpts at each acquisition while maintaining its excessive update rates in NORM/AUTO mode. So yes, the DSO-X is 'cheating' as normal acquisitions only use a small amount of sample memory and the max available memory (2M) is only used in the last acquisition.You still think I'm wrong? Fine, prove it.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 10:42:49 am
content: Quote from: Someone on August 15, 2017, 10:38:33 pmAnd while we agreed on the last part, his argumentation is still wrong.Quote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 03:18:43 pmQuote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 09:28:14 pmAnd that's where he's just wrong. The fact that acquiring a longer memory sample takes more time has *nothing* to do with processing power, simply because deep memory scopes don't process the whole memory content in normal acquisition mode (they only process enough data to build the display record and perform measurements, with sample sizes comparable to short memory scopes).The simple fact is that at a given sample rate it takes a fixed amount of time to acquire and fill a certain size of sample rate. This is one of the most fundamental laws for linear samplers, and shouldn't take much to understand.Processing power comes into play when the memory content is analyzed, i.e. through FFT.And because the time to fill sample memory at a given sample rate is fixed, pretty much any deep memory scope (aside from the HPAK 54600/InfiniVision) allows to manually reduce the used memory size to reduce the time needed for the acquisition to complete, thus increasing the update rate (and on scopes that lock up like Tektronix scopes do) responsiveness.So going back to David's original argument, no, there's no advantage of having a scope with small sample memory.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 10:47:55 am
content: Quote from: urill on August 16, 2017, 01:13:44 amAnd they'll probably still do nothing when this scope series is retired.Seems not much has changed with Tek

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 11:20:31 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 16, 2017, 10:09:38 amIf the Keysight scopes achieve higher waveforms/s than they should given the amount of memory versus samplerate then this is what they must be doing.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 11:40:40 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 16, 2017, 10:09:38 amI have so carefully framed the discussion yet you take it off in directions that make no sense, if you wanted to talk about fast sweep times then why not say that originally instead of writing several pages of off topic thread derailment?Quote from: Someone on August 14, 2017, 11:48:39 pmIts stands as a representative example of two different scopes both of which increase their realtime update rate when showing fewer points despite it being the same acquisition time window.To pull out the careful framing of this:Quote from: Someone on August 14, 2017, 11:48:39 pmThere are limits but they are entirely constant with the displayed sample rate. Which leads onto this:Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 16, 2017, 10:09:38 amThe Keysight X series always use as much memory as possible to fill the acquisition time window, at the fastest sample rate possible. Yes when its running at fast sweep speeds then the sample rate limits the amount of memory that can be shown on the screen, and when pressing stop in such a situation you either get no more than that memory depth available or when hit with a repetitive signal the entire 1/2M buffer so there is some mystery around how its managing the acquisition memory and what might be available when you press stop. Contrast this to the rigol example above which you can ask it to sample a buffer much larger than is on the display and it will dutifully do so, continuing to show only whats on the display but capturing a large window to either side into the memory while the auto memory depth mode picked a memory depth to fit the acquisition window and no more.But if you want to have the full memory outside the visible window to navigate through after stopping why run it realtime in such a narrow sweep window to begin with? Just set the sweep time to capture whats needed and use zoom to look at a small window if its that interesting.Back in the real world people choose to run their scopes at less than the maximum memory depth because the processing power/memory bandwidth limitations mean it will operate faster and/or update the screen faster with more waveforms. I even managed to pull this same behaviour out in the Keysight 3000X.Quote from: nctnico on August 16, 2017, 11:20:31 amThere is something not obvious happening when you press stop, but its not ever giving less memory depth than the sample rate * acquisition width, sometimes more but never less.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 11:55:02 am
content: Quote from: Someone on August 16, 2017, 11:40:40 amWhen you press 'stop' triggers which start a new acquisition are blocked so the memory can be filled. Nothing non-obvious happens. BTW I used to own a DSO7104A so I'm quite familiar with how Megazoom based Agilent/Keysight scopes work.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 12:11:22 pm
content: Quote from: Someone on August 16, 2017, 11:40:40 amIf this thread derailed then it's because you replied to some postings you didn't even read and argued points that everyone else was in agreement.But I guess the main trigger was that I said the DSO-X is 'cheating' during normal acquisitions, which as shown it does.Anyways,...Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 16, 2017, 10:09:38 amThe Keysight X series always use as much memory as possible to fill the acquisition time window, at the fastest sample rate possible.Thank you! So now with your now re-worded statement it looks like we're finally in agreementQuoteThere shouldn't be a mystery how the acquisition memory is managed. While I'm not a friend of the auto-only memory management in the DSO-X I can see that it's adequate for most common measurement situations entry-level scopes are normally facing, however I still think the scope should at least show how much memory is A) available and B) actually in use.QuoteObviously, as otherwise it wouldn't be able to draw a complete waveform on the screen.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 12:44:31 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 16, 2017, 12:11:22 pmKeysight will never ever do that because the actual memory depth the scope has available can be over 8 times less than it says on the badge (all analog + digital + reference channels enabled). How to explain that?

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 09:51:26 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 16, 2017, 12:11:22 pmYou frame "cheating" in a very curious position, cheating is where something is doing an underhanded trick but the scope is showing all the information clearly:The horizontal sweep timeThe sample rate which it is captured atYes, its not capturing the data outside the window, but it never claims to be doing that. There are some occasions where it will capture the data around the screen when stopping acquisition of a repetitive signal but its not something which is documented. If you want that data outside the screen on other scopes you would set the memory depth to instruct it to capture that area, on the X series scopes you would make the acquisition window wide enough to capture that same time period.Its different ways of working that achieve the same end result, and some of us prefer not having to manually adjust memory depths and would rather use the single horizontal control to do the same. If you don't like working that way its fine but you make out like its some huge deficiency with the product which it simply isn't.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 07, 2017, 03:35:30 pmBut essentially every scope on the market is limited in its realtime update/throughput rate because none of them hit the theoretical maximums attainable. There is something limiting it, its processing/computing/memory bandwidth.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 14, 2017, 10:10:38 amYou try and connect display record with the acquisition buffer, which are different lengths and shapes. In the non sample rate limited examples I showed the display record (of note when measurements are derived from it) is much shorter in horizontal samples than the acquisition record, which is maximised under all conditions to the speed of the sweep.Note that on Auto, some scopes will not utilise the full sample rate and memory depth available because that would degrade the realtime/interactive performance/rate of the scope, because they have limited processing to keep up with the longer memory depths. Yet you spend several pages trying to disguise this simple point with discussion about the way that the Keysight X series which always maximise the memory depth (even where that is reducing the update/throughput rate) is somehow less ideal.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2017, 09:56:33 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 16, 2017, 11:55:02 amWhen zooming out on these long captures there is both pre and post trigger expansion of the memory, it could just be a side effect of the pointers but that would block the pingpong memory allocation which increases memory throughput. So given its related to the frequency of the repetitive signal I think there might be a short timer after pressing stop where it will accept a new trigger and fill out the memory (8Hz and up measured quickly here).

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2017, 06:00:15 am
content: Try a signal with a much longer interval and you'll see it won't wait for a new signal after pressing stop.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2017, 07:34:52 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 17, 2017, 06:00:15 amYes, there appears to be some maximum time between pressing stop and the next trigger after which it wont make the extra (and sometimes longer) capture.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2017, 08:25:06 am
content: Quote from: Someone on August 16, 2017, 09:51:26 pmThe used memory size- Oops, it doesn't show that.QuoteGreatThe point is that on every other decent scope I know what is going on in any situation, and not just how fast it samples but also how much sample memory is used (even Keysight's other scopes show this).QuoteSo essentially if you want to capture a longer segment in NORM/AUTO mode you have to make sure the whole period fits on the screen, i.e. you have to treat a deep memory scope like a small memory scope (i.e. fit the whole period into the few thousand points it uses during repetitive acquisitions), and potentially suffer from the drawbacks (i.e. a drop of sample rate because of the extension of the time base). While on every other decent scope you just set the scope to use more memory, and be done with it, without a drop in sample rate.Yes, I can clearly see the advantage of not having any control about the memory use in the DSO-XQuoteWell, having no control and not even indications about the memory use is an issue (your mentioned workaround is just a crutch and as stated has its own problems), and while you might not have come across it doesn't mean it's not a problem. Most of our engineers like the DSO-X (we don't have any of the smaller ones just a bunch of DSO/MSO-X4104A and DSO/MSO-X4154As, plus I think one or two DSO-X6004As), but still for the more complex tasks they're pretty much sitting on the shelf and a different scope on the bench, because you have no control over the sample memory. So yes, it's an issue for us.You're also ignoring the fact that the DSO-X is pretty much the only decent scope without memory controls. Every other scope, even those that do offer automatic memory management, allow the user to setup memory manually (and keep the user informed about how much memory is in use). If having no control over the sample memory wasn't a problem as you seem to believe then there must really be a lot of stupid product developers out there who could have easily saved the cost of implementing manual controls. But then, the fact that even Keysight's non-InfiniVision scopes do allow manual memory control should already have told you something.QuoteYes, but that is pretty much by choice. Excessively waveform update rates have been achievable before (>1M waveforms/s isn't really new), but there's obviously a cost due to the higher memory BW and processing requirement, which means a more expensive product, or if you go HPAK's way (using an special purpose ASIC architecture of which principal development has concluded 20 years ago and where the initial development costs have been recouped by now) you save on monetary costs but end up with a scope that is pretty much optimized for excessive waveform update rates at the cost of features and flexibility.Taking the Rigol DS1054z that seems to be a preferred example, it's obviously limited in both memory BW and processing power, but that was a conscious choice by Rigol to reach the very low price point the DS1054z is sold at.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 14, 2017, 10:10:38 amThanks again, Captain obvious. It's not like I already showed that in my calculations above, is it?You really need to start paying attention.QuoteThat's wrong (if you disagree, name these scopes!). Pretty much every decent scope will of course utilize the full sample rate and the setup memory depth in AUTO mode. And as stated already, scopes don't process the whole memory content during normal acquisitions, just a smaller part required for display content generation and measurements, so there is no processing penalty from longer memory in normal acquisition mode.Or are you talking about automatic memory management on other scopes? If so, then you're still wrong, as scopes will always maintain the sample rate which is possible at the given timebase setting (based on what the physically available sample memory allows for) and only adjust the used record length to capture enough for screen generation and measurements.Also, aside from Tek scopes, the UI performance is independent on the record length, i.e. they don't lock up the UI until the acquisition is finished but will rather abort the current acquisition alltogether if the user input demands so. So long memory acquisitions have no impact on the interactive performance, just on the update rate.QuoteOKFirst, it was you who started a discussion about the DSO-X, as before then it was simply about old short memory scopes and newer deep memory scopes, and if the deep memory really is a benefit or just a marketing gimmick. Second, you came in addressing points that weren't even debated, and without even understanding the scope you feel the need to defend 'til death (i.e. like your comment about the DSO-X fully using the available free sample memory in every acquisition, which was nonsense). And third, while I appreciate that you found your own way around the limitations, you ignore that not everyone has the same requirements, as well as the fact that pretty much every other decent scope does offer memory controls and tells its user about the memory in use, which is for a reason.If your DSO-X3000A (if I remember right) works fine for you, great, more power to you. But don't fall into the trap to extrapolate your own use case on the rest of the EE world.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 17, 2017, 09:36:20 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 17, 2017, 08:25:06 amAgain you run in as many different claims as possible into a simple point.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 17, 2017, 08:25:06 amYes, what would be the value in having information off the screen but still captured? Reading the Lecroy WS3000 manual is says that the maximum memory setting is overridden and shorter memory depths are used at fast sweep speeds, not capturing the extra samples around the sweep window just like the Keysight X series does. But even if you want that its possible to do something similar so its not a lacking feature...Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 17, 2017, 08:25:06 amNo, you again jump to the conclusion that there will be some small memory depth used when I'm explaining how to access the full memory depth. Its right there in plain sight if you want to capture the full memory depth available, just keep winding out the horizontal sweep until you've got it all in the acquisition window (or go one step further, watch the sample rate drop and return back to the maximum depth). Its then acquiring that entire memory depth, not "thousands of points".Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 17, 2017, 08:25:06 amThe limitations of memory depth and sample rate tradeoff are the same on all scopes, this isn't something particular here. You can access the full memory depth if you wish to, or not. The major limitation is not being able to request a lower memory depth and drop the sample rate for a given time acquisition window, but as discussed above thats a narrow use case where you might want to increase the waveform rate (which you say is already "excessive") or then offload a particular number of samples for processing.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 17, 2017, 08:25:06 amLengthening the memory depth of the record either a) increases sample rate, or when limited by sample rate b) increases the acquisition window both of these are available on the X series, there is no drop in sample rate. Or are you moving the goal posts once again and trying to make comparisons of unmentioned specific conditions where the shorter maximum memory depth of the X series scopes could be compared to some other scope? More memory is also a nice thing to have for some situations, but thats getting wildly off track again.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 17, 2017, 08:25:06 amThe rigol example above (a low end scope being compared in a thread about another competitors low end scope) doesnt use the full memory depth when set to Auto.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 17, 2017, 08:25:06 amYou're looping back around and not qualifying this, are you still trying to talk about the fast sweep speeds where most of the acquisition record is off the screen? Because I was clearly talking about auto memory mode where the scope has latitude to pick a memory depth to fill the entire sweep window, where they do need to process all the acquisition memory depth and draw it to the screen, and its well known that increasing the memory depth (increasing sample rate at the same time as the window is a constant width) greatly reduces the update rate of most scopes.I'll pull up some figures for a tek DPO4000 at different memory depths to illustrate later (a scope with no Auto setting for memory depth). There are some scopes that you can set into modes where the acquisition recordsaren'tall being drawn to the screen, and they can have extremely low blind time but only for the n number of acquisitions that are held in memory, unlike accumulating acquisitions into a graduated display/eye diagram/etc which is processing intensive.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2017, 03:03:32 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 07, 2017, 03:18:43 pmI had some free time to record and chart some of this behaviour, in a Rigol 1104Z and a much older Tek DPO4000. As always the results are interesting.Each scope has the same behaviour of capturing the memory depth selected by extending the acquisition buffer each side of the trigger outside the window on the screen, this region of operation is shown with dotted lines toward the right. At the other extreme aliasing did occur in both scopes and captures that were unrecognisable from aliasing are shown dotted to the left. Turning on zoom on the Tek drops the capture rate, as it does if maths/FFT is enabled but more on that later. The trigger was set to the middle of the screen and then peak capture rates were measured at each horizontal setting against the benchmark 1MHz square wave. This has the Rigol running in vector mode as that is where most people would be using it, I'm well aware the capture rates jump up if you turn on dots mode but this is about comparing scopes doing the same thing (as near as possible).The Tek DPO hugs the theoretical maximum update rate closely until 10us/div and bizarrely gets lower update speeds at the 1k record length throughout much of the operating range which is likely related to memory packing and bandwidth (in-)efficiencies in the DDR2 ram:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/repairing-tektronix-dpo4000mso4000-series-scopes/Then there is the other odd drop off as the short memories zoom in on the middle of their acquisition. As memory depth is increased no surprises the update rate drops off quickly suggesting a limit in the rendering system.Turning instead to the Rigol it has less change in the rates between the different memory depths, but doesnt extend to the same high extremes as other scopes do. Its doing a much better job of keeping up with the 10M/12M deep memory but there is some path in getting the rendering to the display limiting all the modes to less than the Tek (not just explained by the difference of 10/12 divisions). Going back to processing when turning on the FFT (in its normal mode) the Rigol doesnt slow down the acquisition rate as its taking the data from the display, this limits its length in points but keeps it running with a respectable and useful speed as discussed previously.Quote from: Someone on July 25, 2017, 11:52:25 pmBut the Tek DPO4000 did drop its capture rates when processing its FFTs or maths, and putting its FFT update rates in context:DPO4000 1M point FFT, 0.08 update/second (greater than 13 seconds between FFT completions!)DPO4000 100k point FFT, 1 update/secondDSOX1000 64k point FFT, 3 updates/secondDS1054Z 64k point FFT, 1 update/secondDPO4000 10k point FFT, 10 updates/secondDSOX1000 1k point FFT, 60 updates/secondDS1054Z 1k point FFT, 3 updates/secondDS4000 1k point FFT, 8 updates/secondDPO4000 1k point FFT, 24 updates/secondIf we can collect enough data this too could make an interesting plot, but it needs a relatively high speed camera to accurately measure.So the ageing Tektronix is still "better" than the low end Rigol in most respects, but they're limited in subtly different ways. The surprise is that the processing for the "deep" memory has in fact improved in the Rigol despite its low cost.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2017, 10:03:53 am
content: Quote from: Someone on August 17, 2017, 09:36:20 amSeems you're a very slow learner, so I'll quickly summarize the relevant points for you:1.) David and I were discussing if deep memory is actually useful or just a marketing gimmick (David thought it's more of a gimmick, I think it's very useful, as demonstrated on an example used in an older posting of mine).2.) We both are well aware that at a given sample rate more sample memory means lower waveform rates, the point of discussion was about the 'why' (David believed this was due to increased processing, which was wrong as the additional data in a long memory scope is not processed during normal acquisitions; the lower wavform rate comes simply from the fact that more memory needs longer to be filled).3.) When David and I were talking about long memory and it's relation to a scope's processing, we were referring to what was technically feasible back in the mid-'90s.4.) Yes, the Keysight DSO-X, like all InfiniVision scopes back to the HP 54600 Series, is 'cheating' in normal acquisition mode as it only uses a small record size to maintain high waveforms, makes only use of the available free sample memory (half, quarter or 1/4th of 4M on the DSOX3k) in the last acquisition after pressing STOP, and only uses the full sample memory in a SINGLE acquisition, all while giving the user zero indication about the actual memory used.I guess the last point made you jump in (as for some reason you seem to always do as soon as someone criticizes the DSO-X Series) as you clearly (according to your own statements) believed somehow the DSOX uses the full available sample memory (half, quarter or 1/4th of 4M on the DSOX3k) in every acquisition in normal acquisition mode, which as I've shown is physically impossible.Even worse than you not knowing how your own scope works though is that you constantly jump in arguing about stuff no-one else was arguing about, which is the only reason this thread has derailed so much. For example, when David and I were debating the usefulness (or not) of deep memory, I cited an earlier post of mine showing the sample rate drop in a Tek TDS694 small memory scope vs a LeCroy WavePro 900 deep memory scope on longer time bases, on which for some reason beyond me you jumped in saying I shouldn't hamper on scopes with advanced analysis functions, even though such functionality wasn't even part of the discussionAnd this wasn't the only time you argued stuff no-one else was debating.It appears you have a serious problem reading and actually comprehending written English, it seems you just skim over the text, jump to some conclusion about what it probably was about, and then rush out arguing whatever you think is worth doing so. It would be more productive if you'd just read carefully, maybe twice, then think about what the text really says before posting. I've seen some good posts from you but your tendency to argue points that weren't even an issue is seriously letting you down.Quote from: Someone on August 17, 2017, 09:36:20 amYes, but like most what you have said in this thread it's also completely irrelevant to both what has been discussed and the topic of this thread (which is Tek's TBS2000). It really seems you've lost the plot completely now (FFT rates of a $300 and a $15k scope? WTF?).Anyways, I'm no longer sure what points you're really arguing about, so that's the point I think I should leave you to yourself

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2017, 10:29:52 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 18, 2017, 10:03:53 amInterestingly enough Pico has just come up with feature called "DeepMeasure" that will chew up to 1M wfms (100M pts) and format as Excel-style table:https://www.picotech.com/library/oscilloscopes/deepmeasure?hpc3However I am indeep sadnessas auto-measurement aficionado because this feature seems to be limited to USB 3.0 scopes and my 2408B is USB 2.0

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2017, 11:09:26 am
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on August 18, 2017, 10:29:52 amHm...Limitations- DeepMeasure works with up to 100 million samples in each acquisition.- Maximum number of cycles that can be processed in each acquisition is one million. (So not a very severe limitation!)- While running, the number of cycles updated live is limited to 50,000. Additional cycles are processed and displayed when the acquisition is stopped, or with single shot acquisition.- Multiple buffers in PicoScope can be set to trigger and capture successive waveforms; - DeepMeasure will process each buffer, up to the 100 million samples total limit.- DeepMeasure works with PicoScope 3000, 4000, 5000 and 6000 Series instruments.I assume 'cycle' refers to the waveform's cycle, or do they mean something else (i.e. screen cycle)?Anyways, it's an interesting approach but without knowing more or having seen it in use I can't see any big advantages over say the histogram function on a good bench scope, which also works for a lot more measurements.But then I don't have any noteworthy experience with PicoScopes (a few colleagues use them in automated test environments, we don't use them on the bench) so I could be missing something.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2017, 02:32:33 pm
content: ...well at last they clearly state limitations so one can do informed decision, not buy a pig in designer bag like it might happen with certain other brandsOtherwise Im quite convinced that they refer to actual waveform cycle, since "screen" has little meaning in Pico software.The point here seems to beevent correlation, just like with regular vs time-correlated FFT. Probably you click line-of-interest in table and get navigated to specific place in record, where can inspect wfm in detail + events on other channels (digital or analog).Further from this can only guess.Seems no demo feature for this.Some glitch in the matrix, actually it shows up in new beta demo mode.

author: egonotto
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2017, 08:32:17 pm
content: Hi,inhttps://www.picotech.com/library/picoscope/picoscope-release-6.13.1-betayou read:"DeepMeasure is compatible with PicoScope 3000, 4000, 5000 and 6000 Series deep memory instruments"DeepMeasure seems only in PicoScope 6.13.1 Beta from Aug 17 2017 available.Perhaps I try it.It is very new.Best regardsegonotto

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 18, 2017, 11:19:37 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 18, 2017, 10:03:53 amYet you keep only considering the case where adding more memory depth increases the acquisition depthandnot the number of those points making it to the screen, and never framed that even when I was explicitly discussing the much more typical operation of an oscilloscope increasing the memory depth where there is sample rate available to keep the entire acquisition on the screen.But even if you look at the cases where there is a tiny portion of the memory depth displayed on the screen as in the plots above, the Tektronix DPO in its 10M memory depth fails to get close to its theoretical acquisition rate of 250 acquisitions/second, a similar ratio between theoretical maximum and the peak in operation is seen in its 1M mode. Its limited by its ability to process the data, in the case you frame, in the typical use cases, in all cases...Not all scopes follow that pattern of operation, and adding more memory around the visible portion is some narrow use case very rarely needed (which you have not even attempted to describe its practical applications) but you focus intently on that (without explaining it) and not the more realistic cases.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on August 17, 2017, 08:25:06 amIts this sort of unqualified statement you keep making that is so obnoxious, during normal acquisitions scopes do process the entire memory depth to the display....when that acquisition length is the length of the display, which is the most common operation of scopes, such as when set to automatic memory depth.In this (most common case) then reducing the memory depth will generally increase acquisition rates, which are limited by the processing of the scope.There are examples from Lecroy and Keysight that wont let you set a memory depth larger than this and always reduce the memory depth to whats on the screen. To say the conditionneverexists with such certainty is plainly ridiculous.

author: blanchae
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 29, 2018, 07:35:10 pm
content: We purchased this model scope (18 scopes) for our electronic labs and had high expectations. But we have run into a few issues with it:1. Random lockups and misconfigurations that require hitting the "default setup" to clear and restart the scope.2. The menu configuration process is just plain awkward, almost to the point of frustrating3. These are noisy scopes - the noise floor is excessive as far as I'm concerned4. The timebase trigger is "weak", difficult to trigger on low amplitude signalsI don't trust the on screen measurements that the scope displays (Vpp, min, max, etc..) The values depend on what your amplitude setting is set to. I've used oscilloscopes since the early 70s and when you start to question your measurement instrument's reading then that is a problem.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2018, 11:02:38 pm
content: Tek TBS2000 is just strange. There is even no video trigger.https://www.tek.com/oscilloscope/tbs2000-basic-oscilloscope

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2018, 11:26:34 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 29, 2018, 11:02:38 pmWhy would you need video trigger? Analog video has been dead and buried for over 10 years already.I'm using a TBS2000 every now and then at a customer and I can't say it is really bad. If you experience issues then it might be a good idea to check if the scope is running the latest firmware and update if there is a new firmware release.