RTB2004 still worth it in 2021 (vs SDS2104X+)?  - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: flimtim
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 04:50:59 pm
content: I am a longtime lurker first time poster on EEVBlog, so thank you for the great content up until now.I am an EE PhD looking for a new scope to carry me through my dissertation as well as hobby projects. I have settled on the following two scopes as contenders: RTB2004 and SDS2104X+.I am able to purchase the RTB2004 as a full package (COM4) for ~2400€ and I would purchase the SDS2104X+ at it's base price and then hack it to unlock all features @ 500MHz.As for the requirements I am looking for in the scope:- 4 channels- large display- Advanced math functions- Low noise floor for audio applications- Protocol decoding (UART/SPI/I2C)- MSO functionality (while I have a separate Salea, I find it critical to view the analog signal against the protocol for certain applications)- Intuitive UI- Capable FFT. Although I have access to an analyzer, I do not have a great analyzer at my workbench.While I have the money for either scope, the price/capabilities ratio seems fantastic on the SDS2104X+.My primary questions are:EEVBlog seems to love the SDS2104X+, and there is a great deal of praise for the scope throughout the site. I guess my questions is, "What's the catch?"Simultaneously, is the RTB2004 still worth purchasing in 2021, or is it starting to show it's age? I would buy the RTM3004 if I could, but it's way outside my budget.Thank you,Roger

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 05:04:54 pm
content: Roger,We're doing some very advanced development work and using the SDS2000X+ "augmented", very capable DSO. Since you are working towards a PhD you are likely into the more theoretical aspects of EE, and will find the FFT and Bode plot capability and other math functions enlightening for a DSO in this price range.Also, the low noise floor and ERES function are quite nice. We have two of these one is a 2 channel and the other is 4 channel, the 8 bit ADC Siglent is utilizing in these are very good for an 8 bit ADC, and produces accurate results.Good luck on your dissertation, care to share?Best,

author: exe
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 05:07:45 pm
content: I found RTB2004's UI to be very slow. I'm surprised that so many people like it.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 07:02:26 pm
content: Quote from: flimtim on November 01, 2021, 04:50:59 pmBoth are good devices. RTB2000 is slightly different concept, although they are both designed for touchscreen GUI .They both have segmented memory and history mode (saving previous captures in a background).They both have well integrated MSO option.They both have similar, quite advanced triggering.Both have AWG, R&S one has slightly better options, and it has small pattern generator.Both have FRA (Bode plot)RTB2000 has 5 simple math channels that can be nested for more complicated math.SDS2000X+ has 2 math channels but the have arbitrary expressions and nesting of two channels.RTB2000 has 2 simplex decodes so for UART Rx/Tx you can decode only one protocol.SDS2000X+ has 2 duplex decoders so 2 full protocols at the same time.RTB2000 has 10 bit converter, but noise is not as good as 10bits would suggest. In datasheet there is no noise spec.SDS2000x+ has up to 2Mpts FFT, and low noise floor, and 500uV/div. There is noise spec in datasheet. 80uV RMS over 500 MHz bandwidth. Very good...SDS2000X+ has more sample memory, RTB2000 has control of memory differently implemented.SDS2000X+ has 2 zone triggers.SDS2000X+ has hystograming and hysticons for measurements.SDS2000x+ decodes more protocols..SDS2000X+ has 50 Ohm inputs.SDS2000X+ has power analysisSDS2000X+ has LAN disk share mapping for saving.RTB2000 is very fancy and good, but not a better scope than SDS2000X+.It is currently supported by R&S, it is active model.SDS2000X+ is still in active development, so even new features are being added occasionally.It is really not easy to compare scopes like this, they are complicated devices. Ideally, you should try to use both to see for yourself.I personally wouldn't give more money to gain less functionality.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 07:05:23 pm
content: Quote from: exe on November 01, 2021, 05:07:45 pmThat is what I have been saying for few years now, when I tried, side by side, RT2000/RTM3000 and Rigol MSO5000/7000, R&S scopes were not faster than Rigols, and some operations felt even slower than on Rigols. That was few years ago, so maybe some optimizations were made, but I wasn't impressed.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 07:15:30 pm
content: Quote from: exe on November 01, 2021, 05:07:45 pmMaybe they've only used Tek before

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 07:52:25 pm
content: Quote from: flimtim on November 01, 2021, 04:50:59 pmWelcome to the forum.QuoteThese come with sup par probes, no autosense and switchable.Doing my best to have this changed so all models in this range come with 350MHz 10x autosense probes at least.Otherwise a vey popular model that we have trouble keeping in stock due to buyer demand.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 09:13:45 pm
content: Quote from: flimtim on November 01, 2021, 04:50:59 pmWith the RTB2004 you get a scope with a well polished user interface and it has been around long enough to have the firmware issues sorted out. It is full of nifty features. For example: display of decoded data is suberb; if you make the trace higher then the contents will be rotated by 90 degrees in case the rectangle that contains the data is too narrow so you can have a huge amount of decoded data on screen.

author: flimtim
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 10:58:05 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on November 01, 2021, 07:02:26 pmThis is fantastic. Thank you for the succinct rundown.

author: flimtim
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 11:00:38 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 01, 2021, 09:13:45 pmThanks. I'm personally wondering whether the polish and professionalism of R&S is worth it. If I wasn't a student and I had some disposable income, I would certainly dispose of it much too quickly... Obviously, this is only a question I can answer for myself, but the R&S quality is tempting.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 11:30:23 pm
content: QuoteBefore the siglent sds2k+ comes up, I would say yes, but after the siglent launch...After working over a year with the sds2k+ there are only 3 advantages the R&S got, in my opinion.Higher resolution screen, native 10 bit ADC, and it´s a R&S gear..Is this worth to pay double the price ? (100Mhz vs 100Mhz)For me, not...

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 11:35:36 pm
content: Quote from: flimtim on November 01, 2021, 04:50:59 pmWhat does that Siglent cost you locally?I see 1398€ with LA and AWGhttps://www.siglent.eu/product/1182111/siglent-sds2104x-plus-4ch-100mhz-2gsa-s-oscilloscopeIn that case I suspect it's hard to justify the extra 1k, especially as a student.Remember that a lot of people on the forum got the R&S when they had that crazy half price introduction special.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 01, 2021, 11:43:03 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on November 01, 2021, 07:52:25 pmYes, that's just dumb at this end of town, very amateur. The user can buy a set of cheap $10 switchables if they need that.

author: flimtim
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 12:04:25 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 01, 2021, 11:35:36 pmI am able to purchase the 2104X+ Promo package, which includes the 100MHz scope and the SPL2016 logic probe, for... €1400. It also includes some unlocked options (awg && mso), but I would hack that anyway. If I were to purchase only the base scope, I would spend €1150. (NOTE: Both these prices include a student discount).Obviously this is the more financially sensible decision, and I am under no illusion that I'm "paying for the lights" with R&S. And I know this sounds so stupid, but...the couple times I've had the chance to use the RTM3004, it was felt soooo cool to play with! I feel like a kid who has the chance to buy his toy and now I have to exercise self-restraint because I'm not actually a kid...maybe I don'treallyneed to eat?I guess I was hoping someone was going to say, "No wait! The R&S is so much better because A,B,C,...", but alas, it is not so.Quote from: EEVblog on November 01, 2021, 11:35:36 pmYes, that's a good point. Thanks.

author: Domitronic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 12:13:03 am
content: Hello,i have had the RTB2004 and returned it. Mainly because the FFT is unusable for low frequency stuff in my opinion. The comment from R&S to that topic was that you can not expect more in that price range. Also one of the knobs was not working correctly and the scope had to be sent for repair anyway. I can also not confirm that firmware issued have been sorted out. At least i encoutered two bugs in the first few hours of using it.I still liked the user interface and that it has pretty low fan noise. I even ordered it with an additional set of x100 probes because i measure mains voltage from time to time. And since the RTB2000 can only go up 5V/div the x10 probes are not sufficient for european mains voltage. But in the end it had to go and i'm now happy with the SDS2k for half of the price.BR

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 12:17:27 am
content: Quote from: flimtim on November 01, 2021, 11:00:38 pm¸Well, with R&S it is mostly visual polish (Apple style attention to visual detail and uniformity of graphical presentation) and some nicely laid out stuff.There are some nice features in RTM3000 but those are not available in RTB2000.Construction for the both scopes is the same. Plastic case, single PCB motherboard, touch screen (that is polished shiny glass on R&S), some metal shielding, PSU and that's it. It is same as Keysight 3000T series and any modern embedded scope, really.Quality and reliability vise, SDS2000X+ is top notch product. It is at the same level as A brands.To me it looks both professionally made and done with care. I don't care much for visual eye candy.. I mean , i have sense of aesthetics, I just don't want to pay twice so my scope would have custom fonts that "better communicate corporate legacy"... or whatnot...There are some complaints about fan noise (acoustic), nothing special. Some don't mind, some are screaming bloody murder.. Mostly people that expect sound level of fanless equipment. R&S RTB2000 does that a bit better, it's fan is apparently very quiet. Although some people complained about it too.. Go figure..

author: flimtim
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 12:23:33 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on November 02, 2021, 12:17:27 amI've seen this in a couple places, but I figured if it was a huge issue I could just replace the fan with a nice high quality silent fan. I assume people are complaining that the fan itself is too loud and not that the software incorrectly triggers the fan so that it spins more than is necessary?Afayk, is that a faulty assumption (i.e. that I can replace the fan if it becomes a huge issue)?

author: flimtim
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 12:24:56 am
content: Quote from: Domitronic on November 02, 2021, 12:13:03 amWow, that's pretty bad. Thanks for sharing.Quote from: Domitronic on November 02, 2021, 12:13:03 amAppreciate the input.

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 12:36:13 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 01, 2021, 09:13:45 pmApart from the issue of the annoyingly slow UI (compared to Keysight) that is...

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 12:41:50 am
content: Quote from: flimtim on November 02, 2021, 12:04:25 amMSO Promo package includes the inbuilt 50 MHz FG license:https://www.siglenteu.com/news-article/save-up-to-e496-with-a-new-sds2000x-plus-oscilloscope-and-option-bundle/

author: flimtim
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 12:44:44 am
content: Quote from: tautech on November 02, 2021, 12:41:50 amAh yes, thanks. I mean FG but wrote AWG.Great deal, btw.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 01:00:49 am
content: Quote from: flimtim on November 02, 2021, 12:44:44 amNo not a great deal but onehell of a deal !SPL2016 MSO probe set is normally $369 plus $169 licensing so it's over 50% saving just on MSO and a further saving of $219 for FG !Unfortunately it's come, gone and back again for some markets however Oceania has had this since 1 August.But only when optioned with a new scope.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 01:24:03 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 01, 2021, 11:43:03 pmExactly.For some reason Siglent thinks their SP3035A probes for $179ea are something special when a better probe we source and supply healthy markups to can Siglent retail for just $79 !That obviously could diminish the cost of SDS2354X Plus by $400.Poking them a bit ATM on this one.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 01:38:40 am
content: The main problem with the SDS2K+ UI is the lack of responsiveness to the front panel under some circumstances. Fortunately, the touch screen remains responsive even under those conditions. If you tend to like to twist knobs, then you might be put off a bit by this. But if you're comfortable using the touch screen for most operations, then it almost certainly won't be an issue to you.And in any case, I'm hopeful that Siglent actually pays attention and fixes it, because it's about the only significant issue I have with the scope.That's just me, of course. Who knows how many others have been bothered by it ...

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 06:11:35 am
content: Quote from: tautech on November 02, 2021, 01:24:03 am$179ea? Yikes.So you just order wholesale without probes and supply your own?

author: hj
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 07:01:59 am
content: Hi folks, 2104x+ owner here...With all euphoria towards this scope there are some voices raising short comings and critics.As I have already stated, I am a DSO new-by with no first tier DSO experience so I can't really judge and assess it but here are two german YT videos that reveal some stuff:This guy compares the 2204x+ to his LeCroy well aware that the two devices are in a different league to show- wave form going wild beyond a certain vertical threshold (~10:20)- over/undershooting square wave edges due to over compensation of the analog inputs (~11:40)He puts it into perspective "if you know that the scope does this, you can live with it at this price point". Go figure...- some other stuffThis one is about the effective DAC resolution available on screen. Remember he is reporting this for the 1102x but I can reproduce it on the 2104x+ and already asked if this is DSO standard behaviour or Siglent specific in the main thread (maybe some of you experts can answer this question for me:)There are other things this guy complains especially the massive oversampling on decoding signals reducing the effective recording time down to 0.28secs (for the 14MS buffer)BTW: He ended up getting a RTB2002YMMV, Jo

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 07:14:41 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 02, 2021, 06:11:35 amOnly the 350 MHz model comes with SP3035A probes Dave and it's a model we rarely sell whereas the 100 MHz rated SDS2104X Plus (really a 185 MHz model) has been a good seller for us despite it's equipped with switchable probes and just looked up what we pay for them which is outrageous when we can buy 100 MHz 10x autosense probes for $8.80 less than our cost for Siglent's 200 MHz switchable probes.I really need to properly characterize them as suitable replacements although I do expect them to roll off well before 200 MHz probes.Anyway if you think $179 is steep try $229 for SP3050A 10x 500 MHz autosense probes for which we can source a 600 MHz equivalent for 20% of that cost.....and of course they're even cheaper by the thousand !

author: RBBVNL9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 08:30:15 am
content: I do not own an SDS2104X+, so will not comment on that. But as an RTB2004 user, I’d like to share my experiences with that instrument. In fact, I consider myself to be a rather satisfied user; the RTB is probably my preferred kit on my bench. Let me in the below comment a couple of reasons why.Firstly, it’s responsiveness. I was surprised to see several critical comments about this; perhaps there have been significant firmware upgrades in this regard before my purchase 1.5 years ago? Using the current firmware version (2.30) I see:- a really fast power-on. It takes a mere 10 seconds before you can do your measurements. This is heaven compared to my Keysight DSOX1204G oscilloscope which takes a frustrating 45 seconds to start up. Most other instruments on my bench also take at least twice as long to power up. (*)- A very fast and responsive user interface. Snappy and consistent, regardless of the mode or menu you’re in.- Very stable, no crashes or glitches. (**)Second, it's GUI. It’s well thought and consistently implemented. No Christmas tree of presentation modes, fonts, entry methods, etc. Items are exactly in the places /menus where you expect to find them, from day 1. No cryptic messages, no functions that depend on some other setting hidden in a different menu, etc. The ‘life’ UI via the webserver is 100% identical to the front panel (buttons and screen) has no delays on controls or screen update whatsoever. It’s great for screen video capture (for future reference or sharing with others).Third, the firmware updates. Even if this device has been on the market for some years, R&S have been constantly addressing things and also has been issuing meaningful additions even recently (like a variable low pass filter in its mathematics section).Fourth, the overall look and feel. Clever and clean layout, good looking, quality buttons, and rotary dials (much more pleasant than my Keysight DSOX and many more instruments I have). To me, some devices just feel ‘good’ when using them, others less so.Although I only touched upon some (user) aspects in the above; they make that if I go to my lab, the RTB is my instrument of choice that makes me happy when I use it.Like any device, the RTB is not perfect and there are always things left to be desired – some of them reasonable desires given the price and category, others less so ;-). If I’d need to buy an instrument in this range today, I’d surely look at all the options. But would not be surprised if I end up buying an RTB again.(*) A quick selection: Siglent SDG2042X: 22 seconds, Siglent SDG1032X: 23 seconds, Siglent SDM3045X: 17 seconds, Keithley DMM6500: 18 seconds.(**) I experienced some predictable crashes in the past, for example when loading certain files. This was fixed in firmware updates.

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 09:12:53 am
content: Quote from: flimtim on November 01, 2021, 04:50:59 pmMaybe there is no catch, have you think about that? The pure fact that you are comparing a "B-brand chinese product" with an "A-brand german product" means the SDS2000X+ is a heavy contender.The RTM3000 is not the RTB2000. They are R&S but not the same league. So don't hang on to your RTM feeling...@2N3055 has laid it out for you very explicitly. And you have added the tipping point (if any doubts remained): the price that you can get on the SDS deal!Many threads have been argued for best bang-for-buck with a SDS costing 1500€. If you can get it for 1100+€, then it's a no-brainer. For sure the display won't be as glossy but is your PhD in digital photography?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 09:38:22 am
content: Quote from: hj on November 02, 2021, 07:01:59 amFirst of all, I don't know German language more than ordering a beer. So if I understood wrongly I apologize.First video seems to talk about comparison of 1GHz 10GS/s per channel Lecroy with SDS2204X+. Here we have two problems: signal overdrive recovery (that is a problem many people have problem grasping and that has been discussed many times before). In short, R&S RTB2000 has worse recovery than that and also Keysight MSOX3000T and many modern scopes including LeCroys. Generally, you can push signal "off screen" about one screen up and down before things go crazy.He overloaded front end 10x times and then made wrong conclusion it was "digital calculation problem". Problem is that LeCroy also show signal distortion (rounded leading edge) but he doesn't notice that. While Siglent signal looks really ugly,bothsignals aredistortedandnot to be trusted.Other problem is with the fact that LeCroy uses linear interpolation by default. So square waves look perfect. If you set SDS2000X+ in dot mode it will show perfect waveform, despite having 5 times less sampling rate..I presume both scopes were properly 50 Ohm terminated. Man is an engineer and seems to be very competent .. He had driven both scopes from individual channels and then swapped them. Good practice.Other person with SDS1000X-E might have had that one batch with problems with front end, but that would create problems only with probe compensation and he is not using probes.Also I couldn't understand how cables were connected in detail or if they were terminated at all. If you connect 50 OHm coax cable from siggen to one scope though T and then to other scope without 50 Ohm termination at the end, scopes will literally be fed different signals and standing waves will distort the signal. Also, AC coupling has high pass characteristics, so will distort low frequency square waves...Some links about overdrive recovery:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-vertical-distortion-problem/https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-mso1074plus-vertical-issue/https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/strange-behaviour-of-siglent-sds1104x-e/https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rohde-schwarz-rtm3000-review/So none of stuff shown is some "Siglent problem"

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 09:38:36 am
content: Quote from: mikeselectricstuff on November 02, 2021, 12:36:13 amNothing beats the Keysight, and it's using a now decade old ASIC.Theyhaveto have something new in the works by now...

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 10:43:47 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 02, 2021, 09:38:36 amThat depends on what you are doing. Compare setting up decoding on the R&S RTB2004 / RTM3004 with the way it is implemented on a Keysight or Siglent scope. R&S has all the settings in one screen that gives a good overview of what you are doing (including a nifty auto-level button). OTOH on the Keysight and Siglent scopes you have to go through a whole bunch of menus which makes the process of setting up decoding very tedious; these are not user interfaces that make optimal use of a touchscreen interface. The RTB2004 / RTM3004 user interface seems to have been designed to be a touch screen interface from the ground up so it leverages the touch screen much better. I used to own an Agilent DSO7104A but I was rather dissapointed by how tedious it is to use for more complicated tasks like decoding.

author: Performa01
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 10:51:34 am
content: Quote from: hj on November 02, 2021, 07:01:59 amHere are my comments on the first video:All in all this is a perfect example how some people clearly show their ignorance and lack of experience, despite claiming to be professionals and talking about the matter with the air of an expert – which they clearly aren’t. And no expensive 1 GHz LeCroy Wavesurfer 104MXS-B on their workbench alters that fact. For those who don’t understand German – you haven’t missed anything in this particular caseThe complaint about the probes sounds like the oscilloscope would not support autosense. But of course it is only the PP215 probe that doesn’t support it. Funny enough that the reviewer never came up with the idea to try his LeCroy probe on the siglent – just to see autosense working for once.Oh dear. You actually need an USB stick to store a screenshot on the Siglent?! This makes the instrument completely useless. It is so f*g hard to carry an USB stick around all the time…On a more serious note, with the most recent firmware, storing screenshots on internal memory is supported, just like the LeCroy does it.The fact that the Siglent shows a 100 Mpts record length whereas the LeCroy only uses 5 Mpts has very little to do with the “current memory management” but with the limited memory of just 25 Mpts per channel pair on his LeCroy Wavesurfer 104MXS-B. In fact, the record length is perfectly predictable.Now for the “signal analysis”:Let’s start with the first obvious major mistake: the inputs are operated in high-Z mode. It should be common knowledge that ill-terminated direct coax connections can be very problematic. I do not know what the rise time of that squarewave from the Agilent AWG is, but in any case it will cause overshoot and ringing when the line is not terminated properly.Anyone should have learnt by now, that massive overdriving of the oscilloscope input might lead to ugly distortions – and this actually depends on the configuration, i.e. signal frequency and what PGA gain within an attenuator range is currently used. And no, it is not a pure “digital-mathematical problem”, but a well known recovery issue of the HF-Path coupling in modern split path input buffers.I’ve tried to replicate the situation in the video and I had to set both generator and DSO to high-Z in order to be able to use 2 V/div vertical gain at all. The overdriven signal still did not look too bad down to 200 mV/div (of course, this was not a faithful reproduction anymore). At 100 mV/div (where the attenuation changes and the PGA is near minimum gain), it went crazy though. And of course, since my square wave has a rise time of 2 ns, the overshoot into the ill-terminated input was quite bad.By the way, the overload distortion gets much more benign if we avoid the most critical zone of the crossover frequency in the split-path input buffer, i.e. have a signal frequency >10 kHz, the higher the better.So why did the LeCroy apparently handle this better?As mentioned before, it is a matter of PGA gain. If 2V/div happens to be a setting with the PGA gain close to its maximum, then the input level in HF input path is not clamped and no shift between DC offset and HF content will occur.The suspiciously round corners of the “square” on the LeCroy already hint on a waveform reproduction that has little to no similarity with the true signal – because the inevitable overshoot because of the ill-terminated line should be visible there as well. But the overshoot does not show on the LeCroy even when not overdriven – so this must have something to do with the bandwidth limiter. The guy claims to use a 200 MHz bandwidth limit on the LeCroy to make it equal to the Siglent. But to me this all looks much more like he has confused it with 20 MHz, because only when I limit the SDS2000X+ to 20 MHz, I get similarly round corners on the squarewave as we see it on the LeCroy.This is a perfect example how lack of knowledge and excessive self-confidence can have bad consequences. I do not even want to imagine how this “professional” has checked the flats of pulses and square waves the way he demonstrated it in the video – and promptly got all kinds of garbage results because of improper probing, thoughtlessly overdriving the inputs and maybe inadvertent bandwidth limiting. Only the inexperienced can believe that the fancy LeCroy shows a faithful representation of the input signal in this particular setup.All the clueless speculations about “digital-mathematical problems” and “overdriving the ADC”, which “doesn’t have overdrive headroom” or “does not recognize that it’s been overdriven” and then “just does anything” do not lead any further. The ADC can handle overloads just fine – and it will never see a major overload anyway because of the corresponding measures in the signal path in front of it.And now the clueless waffle goes on again. The guy seems to know for sure that Siglent has “overcompensated” the scope input, because he sees a tiny overshoot – his AWG must be really slow that it all looks so benign. “You do this if you only have a low bandwidth and you want to increase it, or the rise time …” Our friend has not noticed that this is a 500 MHz oscilloscope (570 MHz actually) only limited to 200 MHz by the usual first order RC-lowpass filter located within the PGA. So there’s certainly no “overcompensation” required for a bandwidth of just 200 MHz.The guy doesn’t know his gear – he suspects that the SDS2000X+ doesn’t have an external trigger input – surprise, surprise: it does!I won’t comment on the unboxing video from 2017 about the long obsolete SDS1102X. This is not only a whole different class but also different generation. And of course: a cheap Siglent cannot be good, whereas an expensive R&S has to be – just as a mandatory principle.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 12:35:31 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 02, 2021, 10:43:47 amI'm talking about UI and scope response in general everyday use.If I just want to look at a signal I'm going to pick the Keysight every time. It is the most responsive scope on the market.

author: H.O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 02:57:58 pm
content: QuoteI'm sure it'll be available any day now, as a cloud tethered subscription based OAAS (Oscilloscope as a service) - forprofessionaluse only obviously.

author: flimtim
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 04:10:05 pm
content: Quote from: tv84 on November 02, 2021, 09:12:53 amThis thought goes against every fiber of my beingQuote from: tv84 on November 02, 2021, 09:12:53 amAlas, if I had been wiser and listened to my elders maybe it would have been…

author: flimtim
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 04:11:18 pm
content: Thanks everyone. Really appreciate your insights.I have ordered the SDS2104X+ Promo Package, and I’m looking forward to getting to work!

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 04:18:56 pm
content: Quote from: H.O on November 02, 2021, 02:57:58 pmI'm thinking in creating a VATAAS (VAT as a service) to fill in the gap for anyone that needs it.

author: RBBVNL9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 04:20:02 pm
content: Have fun exploring it, flimtim!

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 05:32:08 pm
content: The first guy I sort of understood what was going on. The second not so much. To your questions:Quote from: hj on November 02, 2021, 07:01:59 amI'm one of the people that has pointed out this 'issue' in the past. So lets be clear--input amplifier overdrive recovery time is an issue in certain unusual situations and it usually is not specified or guaranteed. A scope with fast overdrive recovery can be used in a particular way that is handy in certain rare situations. Most of my older Tek scopes are very good at this, the Siglents have a noticeably (wildly, actually) longer recover time in comparison. I have not done an extensive study of modern scopes, but it has been claimed that many modern scopes have similar issues.This is a characteristic, not a defect!I have pointed the issue out only in the context of questions like"is there anything at all that your old scope can do better"and"why would someone who is not price sensitive still prefer an A-brand scope". IMO, overdrive recovery is one of those marginal issues that might, in some cases, separate 'Pro' from 'almost-Pro'. That said, it must also be pointed out that the Siglents in question have excellent low-noise front ends, better than many of the old models that I was comparing them to, especially the older DSOs. IMO the fact that anyone has to dig this deep to make a criticism of the scope is a pretty good indication that it is actually pretty good. I think the issue is worth knowing about but not worrying about.QuoteWithout trying to hash out all the details, I'm completely unconvinced that this is an actual issue. Siglents typically have a particular front end and digital bandwidth filter setup that is a little less resistant to aliasing but has an exemplary step response. I didn't spend any time trying to figure out what he has showing on his screen.QuoteYes, under certain conditions the range of the ADC may extend beyond the screen, but I can't imagine why anyone would have an issue with that. It's not a Siglent-only thing and does not cause any issues that I'm aware of.

author: Markus2801A
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 06:46:51 pm
content: It's a little bit off topic:in the past few weeks we were looking for a new car. Considering the "German" A-Brands like BMW, VW and Co, IMHO we came to the conclusion: they are well built, good quality with an extra high price you probable only pay for the brand name!Looking at other brands like Hyundai, Citroen, Subaru etc. you get more innovation more technology in your car without paying for the brand name.and this reminded me on my decision which DSO to buy:A few month ago I also tested and comparedKeysightandR&S Scopes. In the end I bought theSIGLENT SDS 2104X Plus- why: almost the same thing as above mentioned with the cars: you get a very tech savvy device, and you don't pay for the Brand Name!Yes the RTB GUI is really very nice, If I had the money to throw it out the window i probably would have bought the RTB. But thats not the case.IMHO the Chinese and other Brands are making huge steps in providing innovative testing equipment, like in the cars and e-cars business.

author: Performa01
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 08:13:18 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on November 02, 2021, 05:32:08 pmSince this topic pops up over and over again, I’ll try to summarize the issue.In the good old times, oscilloscope frontends were constructed as cascaded differential amplifiers, with offset trims and lots of compensation networks to get the desired frequency response. The DC offset was not particularly low or temperature-stable because of the input FETs (that sometimes were not even dual), but adjusting the beam was such a common task on the analog scopes that nobody really cared. Making high bandwidth frontends using the discrete semiconductors of that time (like BFY90) was a demanding task, yet frontends up to 375 MHz following this design principle haven’t been unheard of. Yet high impedance, high DC precision and high bandwidth are contradicting requirements…At some point, clever guys invented the “two way speaker system” for oscilloscopes, i.e. the split path input buffer. This is simple in principle, but not simple at all to implement with satisfactory results. You have a DC/LF-path with a FET-OpAmp (which also handles the offset) and an HF buffer with discrete dual gate MOS-FETs and/or microwave transistors. The signal is split in the input:1.) to the OpAmp with bidirectional input clamp via an RC lowpass.2.) to the HF buffer with bidirectional input clamp via a small capacitor (ballpark figure: 1 nF).Both signals are combined eventually, but that’s not trivial and includes two nested feedback loops that need to be matched carefully, just as the time constants in the input/output coupling and the inner feedback loop. I won’t talk about these details, but all this needs to be tailored towards a certain crossover frequency, where we want to ensure a smooth transition between the two paths.Now consider a severe input overload condition.The DC/LF-Path has the resistor (divider) working on a clamp, this will give a clean, symmetrical clipping with negligible recovery time. Absolutely no issues here. Btw, the resistive divider is up to the hundreds of kiloohms, and attenuates the input signal on top of that, so that the OpAmp needs to amplify it back up to the original level again. The offset compensation range on the other hand increases proportional to the divider ratio. So there you finally also learn about the reason why the DSO input gets so noisy at low frequencies and that there is a trade-off between a good offset range and low LF-noise.The HF-path on the other hand is now just a small capacitor working into a clamp. Can you imagine how the output signal looks? During normal operation, this coupling capacitor remains at 0V DC – or at least the DC voltage across it remains constant. Consider the signal exceeding the positive limit, the clamp chimes in, the capacitor begins to charge up to the point where the input signal reaches its positive peak value. Now the signal voltage starts going negative, but the capacitor remains charged, hence the voltage at the clamp goes down immediately. It hits the negative clamp while the input signal might still be positive, and the capacitor now discharges and then charges in the opposite direction. What we get, is some sort of sawtooth signal with the full amplitude as permitted by the HF clamp. Now imagine what it looks like, if the cleanly clipped LF-Signal is combined with the freshly created, out of phase sawtooth … no need to say that it looks very(!) ugly.Now why are there still differences between different brands and models?There is at least one freedom of choice in the split path input buffer design – it’s the crossover frequency. If we place this too low, then the coupling capacitor to the HF-path needs to be a high value, like 22 nF, not best suited for very high frequencies anymore and putting a lot of stress on the clamp in case of a severe overload (remember that specified 400 Vpk are not uncommon). So we want to place the crossover frequency higher, but that increases the zone where the noisy LF-path is used and it might go into a territory where the OpAmp exhibits a considerable phase shift already. This has to be avoided at all costs, otherwise we won’t be able to cleanly combine the two signals again. We usually end up somewhere between 100 Hz and a couple of kHz.In any case, the recovery behavior quite obviously gets faster when the HF coupling capacitor is smaller, which in turn means that the design has a higher crossover frequency.Apart from that, the effect will diminish as the signal frequency goes up. As a consequence, in some scenarios yet a lower crossover frequency might work better, because of the increased distance to the signal frequency.As a verdict, this matter is hard to predict and rest assured, if you show me a scenario where scope A recovers better than scope B, then it is very likely that I can come up with a different scenario, where scope B beats scope A in this regard. Of course, in practice such phenomena will be usually discovered at our darling frequency, 1 kHz, or maybe the mains frequency. So if a manufacturer is smart, they should optimize the frontend for 1 kHz and forget about all the other design aspects

author: RBBVNL9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 10:07:54 pm
content: QuoteIn other regions, the prices might be different, but in my country (Netherlands) the RTB2k-com4 retails for €4100 (including VAT). That's the 4ch 300MHz model with all available software licenses, wavegen, plus the 16 channel digital probes. For the closest equivalent model and options in the Siglent SDS2000X Plus series, you would pay €3145 (the SDS2354X Plus, being the 4 channel 350MHz model) plus €240 (the current 'summer sale' special offer for SPL2014 16 channel digital probe plus its license plus wavegen), totaling €3385.(And yes I know some people hack the Siglent but I do not find that fair in terms of a price comparison, just as I think illegal software does not allow for a fair price comparison with legal software…)So, over here, the Siglent costs 18% less than the R&S. Somewhat cheaper but not dramatically so. Personally, when there is 18% difference, I let the decision depend on what I really prefer, not on the price.Note: RTB price based on the currentFarnell price.Note: SDS price based on theSiglent Europe website.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 10:36:55 pm
content: Quote from: Markus2801A on November 02, 2021, 06:46:51 pmWhile siglent is going to be the A-brand under the chinese brands, they benefit a lot of the partnership with lecroy and vice versa.The touchscreen scopes sds2k+, sds5k and now the new 6kA are the latest results.Especially the sds2k+, which is for me the legacy of the former "true game changer" scope we all know its name.I remember the "desaster" well, as lecroy presented a low-cost scope named WaveAce...The regional sales-engineer from lecroy was so upset about this, we never will try again to offer a low cost scope he told us once on a visit.And now...Relabeled siglent scopes in their portfolio, up to the sds5k, the Wavesurfer 3000Z come from siglent, the Wavesurfer 4000HD come from siglent....It is an accolade for siglent.And an advantage for us, culminating in the sds 2k+/sds5k actually.QuoteNone of us would pay this for some reasons..

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 02, 2021, 11:21:20 pm
content: Quote from: RBBVNL9 on November 02, 2021, 10:07:54 pmEconomist play with other people money and say "only 18%".People that buy things with their own money don't think in percentages. To them it is not "only" 720 € difference....Also thereasare some advantages to Siglent despite the price being lower ... There are some good sides to RTB2000 too.I would call it a draw.. And depending what you need.If they were exactly the same price ( or thereabout) I would agree that then you play preferences.This way, it is only "promise of a premium EU brand". True or not..

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 12:38:57 am
content: Quote from: RBBVNL9 on November 02, 2021, 10:07:54 pmWithout going into BYOL ("bring your own licenses") world (although it's done in both brands) I'll add this: you were not totally fair choosing the highest BW model fully optioned for the comparison.You should do a comparison between the lower model of the SDS2000X+ with a educational pricetag of 1.100€ (as offered to OP) and an equivalent RTB (with EDU discount). You'll see that it easily passes the 50% discount mark. That is the fair comparison to make and if the technical qualities weren't sufficient then this should be also a major factor.

author: hj
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 06:44:27 am
content: Oh wow, didn't expect such a deep resonance to my questions and yt links. I appreciate your in depth answers especially 2n3055, performa01, tv84 and bdunham

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 07:30:13 am
content: Quote from: RBBVNL9 on November 02, 2021, 10:07:54 pmJust a quick reminder, THAT is NOT Siglent Europe site. That is a authorized dealer, like any other that sells Siglent, there are quite few in EU....Batronix, Welectron, Batterfly etc etc... Some of these even give EEVBLOG discounts..Siglent Europe site ishttps://www.siglenteu.com/

author: RBBVNL9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 07:42:07 am
content: QuoteAh, you are right, thanks for pointing that out. I was putten on the wrong track because they use the URL and namehttps://www.siglent.eubut indeed the official Siglent European website ishttps://www.siglenteu.com.I do think their prices are similar to those of the other Siglent resellers in Europe, including the price of the SDS2354X Plus, as well as the 'special offer' of the digital probes and wavegen option.

author: exe
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 07:51:22 am
content: Looking at OPs dilemma, I think it's not really important which scope he'll get. It's more like buying a first car (or a guitar). I'd buy the one that feels better, not necessary the best bang per buck. Motivation: 1) both scopes are pretty capable 2) even 10+MHz measurements are not that easy to do and it takes skills, not say some hundreds of MHz.So, my guts feeling is both scopes are much more than OP actually needs (because he never mentioned his requirements).

author: edigi
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 07:53:33 am
content: Quote from: tv84 on November 03, 2021, 12:38:57 amYou've made my day. (These days people need this.)

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 07:56:19 am
content: Quote from: RBBVNL9 on November 03, 2021, 07:42:07 amIt is the standard worldwide MSO promotion:https://int.siglent.com/info/detail-52.htmlUS and EU websites also show this and other active promotions in the Promotions link at the foot of every Siglent webpage.

author: RBBVNL9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 12:29:08 pm
content: QuoteThe term ‘Bring your own licenses’ (BYOL) is normally used for clients bringing in previously acquired appropriate license entitlements. It is used this way by the likes of IBM and Amazon AWS. Not sure it is appropriate to use this term for hacking...

author: RBBVNL9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 12:34:48 pm
content: QuoteInteresting. Is it the SDOX1 series you refer to here?I just took a DSOX1204G into use as a temporary replacement for my RTB2004. Curious to see how I feel about it after some time. But the 40+ second startup time doesn't give me the feeling I want to pick this scope when I quickly want to look at a signal (compared to the 10 seconds of the RTB). But maybe I will find that other aspects offset that startup time thing.

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 05:17:52 pm
content: Quote from: RBBVNL9 on November 03, 2021, 12:29:08 pmI think this is your own definition, the generic term may accommodate my intended goal. If not, I missed another patent possibility!

author: RBBVNL9
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 06:14:26 pm
content: QuoteMy description did not come from my own definition, but the meaningsprovided by Law Insider.But regardless of where the BOYD definition came from, I think it cannot be seriously argued that when someone hacks a device, that person has “brought its own license”? The essence of the concept license, in the context of intellectual property, is that one has the permission from a rightsholder to be allowed to do something.Holding the chair of Intellectual Property at my university, this is at least what I explain to my students. In the end, it is the law (and more specifically, the authority of national courts) to determine whether a license was obtained or not.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 03, 2021, 06:23:20 pm
content: Quote from: RBBVNL9 on November 03, 2021, 06:14:26 pmActually, it is up to the firmware of the device to decide whether the license is valid or not!IMO, it is not helpful to extend the theoretical reach of the law to situations where it is not likely to be applied. National courts are unlikely to weigh in on the validity of a scope upgrade unless further issues arise, such as someone selling hacked license keys on eBay.

author: metebalci
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2022, 10:26:56 am
content: I dont know about SDS2104X at all, and I am not using scopes very often, but I have a RTB2004 (fully loaded) and also an (Agilent) MSOX6004 (2.5GHz). I think for its feature set, RTB is a great scope, being a new device, some simple features are very handy. For me, bandwidth and no 50 ohm inputs were first issues. I would get a higher model R&S instead of Agilent also, but it was easier and cheaper to get an Agilent compared to a similar spec R&S.