Let’s Talk About LeCroy Scopes, AKA… the “Wuerstchenhund Holds Court” Thread - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2015, 08:47:11 pm
content: This thread is intended to stimulate a discussion of LeCroy scopes. Since LeCroy offers a fairly good size product family the WaveSurfer 3024 is proposed as an initial reference model to help people get oriented to the overall LeCroy product family. Other models might be more or less capable, older, newer, etc. – but the 3024 (and the 3000 series) looks to be a good starting point in understanding LeCroy scopes.http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopemodel.aspx?modelid=8556http://cdn.teledynelecroy.com/files/pdf/wavesurfer-3000-datasheet.pdfA few basic introductory things about the 3024:4 analog channels seems to be generally preferred but for 2 channel requirements there is the 3022Touch screen, mouse capable, and conventional UI (see “Maui” UI)MSO capability – seems to offer not only mixed use (including 16 digital channels) but also pretty good review functions; the toolset and history mode also look interestinghttp://teledynelecroy.com/newwave/videos/As with other products from other manufacturers the documentation and videos, etc. can be compelling but until you actually use a product it’s hard to know what is really what. So questions from potential new users and feedback from existing users would be great.Net, net: Given all the Rigol, Agilent/Keysight, Tektronix, etc. discussions around it would be interesting and useful to better understand the MSOs and DSOs from LeCroy.Without further ado, here is the “Let’s Talk About LeCroy Scopes”, AKA… the “Wuerstchenhund Holds Court” thread.All info, comments, questions, etc. regarding LeCroy scopes welcome.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2015, 08:51:34 pm
content: I looked at the Wavesurfer 3000 but what put me off is that the MSO + decoding options made the 4 channel 200MHz model almost twice as expensiveThe price difference will be worse with lower bandwidth and less channels. Getting a second hand Agilent DSO7000 series made more sense to me in the end.

author: marshallh
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 07, 2015, 09:02:30 pm
content: Can't beat 1ghz ABW for $500.

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 07, 2015, 09:08:53 pm
content: How much of an afterthought is the MSO capability? In some 2nd hand scopes I looked at it seemed to be a USB peripheral.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2015, 09:33:39 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on November 07, 2015, 08:47:11 pm*hammering gavel to the block*Silence! The court is in session!(sorry, I just couldn't resist, plus I always wanted to try that Shadow font!)QuoteThe WS3k is a good scope, even though the hardware is actually made by Siglent (the software comes from LeCroy). This isn't necessarily a bad thing, as Siglent makes really good hardware (they just really suck at software), but it shows in some areas, i.e. the front panel layout.It's aimed mostly against the Keysight DSOX3000T, which is a good scope, however there are a few points that speak for the WS3000 (taken from anearlier positing:The Wavesurfer comes with a larger screen with higher resolution (10.1" 1024x600 vs 8.4" 800x480 with the DSOX3kT)For scopes with bandwidths up to 1GHz I'd say in practical terms 4GSa/s and 10Mpts is probably much more useful than 5GSa/s and only 4Mpts memoryFFT with the WaveSurfer is up to 1Mpts while the DSOX3kT uses only 64kpts which is pretty poorThe WaveSurfer allows automatic and manual sample memory/sample rate management while the DSOX3kT is automatic onlyUnlike the DSOX3kT, which feature-wise is not that much better than the DSOX2k, the WaveSurfer 3000 has many features that can be found in LeCroy's high-end scopes, i.e. WaveScan and LabNotebook.The DSOX3kT has nothing comparable to WaveScan, which is a very versatile tool to find rare glitches and other issues and which works 'live' as well as on sampled data.The DSOX3kT also doesn't offer anything comparable to LabNotebook, which is a documentation tool and pretty neat if you have to document your measurements in some standardized format.The WaveSurfer 3000 uses the same probe interface (ProBus) all midrange and high-end scope from LeCroy use since the mid '90s, which means there's a wide range of suitable active probes out there, including a lot of second-hand ones which often sell for reasonable prices because they don't carry the "Tektronix" or "Agilent" labelIntegrated AWG: 25MHz 125MSa/s 14bit with 16kpts on the WaveSurfer, 20MHz 100MSa/s 10bit with 8kpts on the DSOX3kT (both not great, but still)LAN is standard on the WaveSurfer 3000 while it's a $400 option on the already expensive DSO3kTNot that important, but the WaveSurfer has four (2x front, 2x rear) USB host ports (Keysight two, one front one rear)Plus the WaveSurfer 3000 is noticably cheaper than the DSOX3kTQuoteThat is true, which is why for anyone considering spending that much money on a scope I strongly recommend to contact the scope manufacturers and ask for a loaner (and there often is the chance to get a fully loaded demo scope at a large discount), or failing that, buy the scope where it can be returned without problems within a certain period (i.e. a week).QuoteWell, it definitelyispretty Rigol and Keysight centric in this forum, which is a shame as it creates the impression that nothing else is out there or worth considering. Leaving out LeCroy from low end scope discussions is understandable, though, because their low end scopes either suck (WaveAce, Siglent rebadges) or come with outdated specs (WaveJet), however there's also R&S which offers what was formerly Hameg under the Value Instruments moniker (and which has some nice entry-level scopes), and they're regularly ignored as well.I'm well aware that I'm pretty much the only one who mentions LeCroy in some threads (which has earned me a few funny and not so funny titles), but I'm still surprised that they are rarely even mentioned, aside from the occasional "my colleague doesn't like them because they are complicated" or "LeCrap" BS stories.At the end of the day, more choice is good, and more choice means we're more likely to find the right scope, plus it keeps prices in check.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2015, 09:57:28 am
content: Quote from: Howardlong on November 07, 2015, 09:08:53 pmOn the WS3000 it's pretty much an integral part of the scope, not an afterthought, and that is also the case for other LeCroy X-Stream (Windows) scopes.However, there is an exception:after LeCroy came out with the WavePro 7000 and WaveRunner 6000 scopes they also wanted to offer MSO capabilities. For that they bought in some MSO adapter called MS-32 which connects to the scope's BNC input and to its USB port. MS-32 performed badly (and with 'bad' I mean really bad!), and even worse its problems were inherent in its design and therefore couldn't be fixed through software updates. MS-32 was exactly that, MSO as an afterthought. Prospective buyers of used WavePro 7000(A) and WaveRunner 6000(A) scopes should really stay away from a scope equipped with MS-32 at all costs, because not only does the MSO option perform badly, the scope will refuse to boot if the MS-32 adapter isn't connected if the MSO option is installed.For its successor scopes LeCroy then developed new MSO options (MS-250 and MS-500) which connect through a proprietary high speed bus (L-Bus) and which perform great, and which are fully integral parts of the scope software. The first scopes with the new MSO option were the WaveSurfer Xs and the WaveRunner Xi, and later it also came to the WavePro 7000A successor WavePro 7zi.TL;DR: the MSO options are great except for MS-32 which should be avoided.

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2015, 10:18:05 am
content: I think it must've been the MS-32 that I'd seen. I had my suspicions about how it would perform, you've confirmed them. Thanks for the other details too.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2015, 05:28:39 pm
content: If anyone is interested, here is a old document talking about the technology that went into the LeCroy WaveMaster 8000 and which came out in 2001. The WavePro 7000 is pretty much identical except for the lower bandwidth (1-3GHz for the WP, 3-6GHz for the WM) and the inputs (WP: BNC 50ohms/1M switchable; WM: 50ohms BMA).

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2015, 05:32:51 pm
content: Here is a table showing the Parameter Measurement, Analysis, and Math Capabilities of the older WaveRunner2 LT (VxWorks) and the WaveRunner 6000/WavePro 7000/WaveMaster 8000 (Windows).It shows for example that the WaveRunner2 LT (a scope which came out in 2000) could already do up to 1Mpts FFT, and the WavePro/WaveMaster up to 50Mpts when most other scopes were still limited to 64kpts or 128kpts (or even less).

author: free_electron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2015, 06:11:21 pm
content: LeCrap.i still don't like em.-Plastic rotary knobs that split and then fall off (all of em, the plastic becomes hard and brittle over time),-Removable frontpanels gimmicks that become a bad contact nightmare (7ZI series)-Slow as molasses to respond to their UI (7000 series, 7Zi)-Become more noisy than a hoover vacuum as soon as you do anything with em ( 7Zi series )-Crappy probes where the pogo-tips break off in the grabber hooks.-Endless "calibrating" messages and "triggering" messages .. with 4 to 10 seconds blind times. ( come on, make an ADc that doesn't drift will ya ! No other scope manufacturer needs that crap)- buggy user interfaces. one The 7000 and 7300 DSA's : spin the timebase knob too fast and the scope bluescreens... whoopdedoo. STILL not fixed after 10 years of complaining !- bass ackwards functionality. Like store traces in memory , perform an acquisition , scroll and you lose time lock between memory and acquisition... duh !Nope. Not for me. Thank you.The problem with LeCroy machinery is that these products started as very fast, deep memory samplers to be used in the physics department. They still have that mindset. They don't behave like what you'd normally expect from a scope. They have their strange quirks that make sense if you treat em as deep memory fast samplers. Not so much as you'd expect from a scope. LeCroy also fails miserably when trying to integrate stuff. Their foray into mixed signal ( the want to have 16 or 32 digital channels) was a disaster. They used a third party to design that block and the integration was a disaster. The damn thing was so buggy on its UI that a selected block to zoom in on would show a completely different block. The same goes for their current probes. Overpriced rebadged Hioki's to make em compatible with their crappy 6 pin pinheader scope connector.

author: HighVoltage
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2015, 06:33:32 pm
content: I had bought aLecroy Wavejet 354 500 MHzand was full of anticipation to use it.It was small and cute and that is where the fun stopped.- It was soooooo loud from the air ventilation, it was impossible to work next to it- As soon as any math function was turned on, the scope became not responsive anymore.- Slow response in general on the GUI- A huge area of the screen is wasted for menu options, even if they are not used- Getting data of the scope was possible but not easy.- and so much more, I am happy I forgot!Guess what,I returned it after a few weeks!And I will probably never have a LeCroy again!

author: XFDDesign
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2015, 07:07:12 pm
content: I actually picked up a WaveSurver 3054 earlier this year to replace a Tek scope that went into the recycling bin.I find the probes to be well made, especially compared to the new Tektronix probes which I have a hard time getting repeatable contacts with. The unit on whole is actually pretty silent. I don't much care for the touch screen, if only for the fact it doesn't seem to be as responsive as I would like.The math operations are quite nice, and LeCroy has done some very clever work with managing the display when you do different tasks (i.e. you can have an FFT get its own part of the window, without being on top of your traces).I'm very impressed with the fact that the scope still operates as a scope, while the FFT engine crunches numbers. I'll keep getting waveforms while it's computing. My old junked TDS5k couldn't do that. The built in, low freq, arb is actually quite nice as well, having a damn good SFDR compared to most off-the-shelf ARBs.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2015, 07:35:51 pm
content: Quote from: free_electron on November 10, 2015, 06:11:21 pmYes, that was pretty common on the 9300 Series (mid ''90s) and the WaveRunner LT (late '90s), falling off knobs was pretty much their trademark. With the WR2LT and WavePro 900 the knobs were changed, and much more durable, and aside from early production runs of the WR(M)Xi (2006) and falling off "Superknobs" on early production runs of the WaveRunner 6zi (2009) that wasn't much of a problem. Plus LeCroy often just sent you a batch of replacement knobs (usually the improved variant).QuoteYes, the removable frontpanel (the whole panel can be removed and connected to the scope via USB cable so that you can have the controls close to your workspace, which I find pretty neat) on early WP7zi units had contact problems with the USB sockets when they were plugged in the unit. That was fixed pretty quickly out in the field and in production.QuoteNot really. I worked on 7zi and 7zi-A, and there's nothing slow on these scopes. I also have a WavePro 7000A in my private lab, and again, no slowness here. Some of the earlier WavePro 7000 (non-A) which were sold with Windows 2000 were somewhat laggy when operating the front panel, this was improved in later software updates, and these days these scopes should be upgraded to XP anyways as otherwise they're stuck on an antique firmware.I vaguely remember that last time you listed your "dislikes" you mentioned that they were still on Windows 2000 running an older software. If so then maybe you should try XP and the current firmware, and your problem should be gone.QuoteYes, they are nosiy. So are pretty much all multi-GHz high end scopes (the DSO90k will blow your brains out). That is mostly because these scopes develop an extensive amount of heat that needs to be removed somehow.QuoteNever happened to me. And I have not exactly the most sensitive hands.QuoteIf you get endless "calibrating" and "triggering" messages then your scope is either defective or you're doing something wrong (actually, endless "calibration" was one of the bugs on earlier WavePro 7000 and 8000 scopes).And if you think that other manufacturer's ADCs don't drift then you're wrong, they pretty much drift exactly the same, just the scope doesn't bother to compensate for it.BTW, you know that you can disable the auto calibration? You should, as I'm pretty sure I told you beforeQuoteOf course the problem has been fixed, pretty much in one of the earlier Windows 2000 software releases.QuoteNever noticed that, but considering that the other software issues you mentioned have been fixed long ago this could well be another case of outdated software.BTW, these problems are not limited to LeCroy, I've seen more than my fair share of annoying and aggravating bugs on Agilent scopes as well. That's why the software can be updated.QuoteI work almost exclusively with high end scopes, mostly with Agilent/Keysight, and aside from UI and functional differences (i.e. some stuff that's available on one scope or but not another) a LeCroy scope pretty much behaves like any other scope. The only "strange" quirk is the swapped horizontal and vertical controls, the rest is pretty straight forward.QuoteThat would be the MS-32 MSO option that I mentioned earlier, and yes, it was buggy like hell and pretty useless. However, that thing came out around 2003, and in the last 12 years things have changed a bit. The later MS-250 and MS-500 MSO options for WaveRunner MXi and WaveSurfer MXs are actually pretty good, and aside from the fact that the MSO boxes are a bit large and cumbersome the MSO performance is pretty much on a similar level as what you can get from Keysight.QuoteI can't complain over Hioki, their probes are actually pretty good. I also don't know what is "crappy" on the 6pin header that is part of ProBus, the probe interface they now use pretty much unchanged for over 20 years and which has proven to be pretty solid, but if that's your opinion then fine.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2015, 07:47:28 pm
content: Quote from: HighVoltage on November 10, 2015, 06:33:32 pmGood for you, why keep it if it doesn't satisfy your expectations. That's why one should always ask for loaners of all scopes one considers for purchase.I guess this must have been a while ago, probably ten years or more. The WaveJet 300 came out in 2004, and in 2007 was replaced by the WaveJet 300A (which was replaced by the WaveJet 300T Dave reviewed recently).The WaveJets are rebadged Iwatsu scopes (the 300 is a DS-5000 if I remember right), the only part that comes from LeCroy is the brand name. They are not bad scopes but as you said the original WaveJet was noisy, and the UI was reminescent on the old Tek UIs of the '90s. In 2004 the WaveJet was a very good offer, but these days its specs are pretty unimpressive.QuoteWell, never say never, each brand has come up with lemons, and while LeCroy's low end scopes are pretty poor, their scopes like the WaveSurfer 3000 and up are really good.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2015, 01:15:04 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 10, 2015, 07:35:51 pmThe sent me all new knobs for the old Waverunner and these have not been a problem. Very tight fit. I have not hand any problems with my old 7200/As or my WM.Said it before but the case on the Waverunner is not the highest quality and don't get me started on those connector failures. I do like the scope now that I have had it for a while and I will say that LeCroy has really pulled through and helped me out with it.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 10, 2015, 07:35:51 pmEven my old 7200s are fairly responsive when you consider their age. I was not impressed with that Waverunner when I first got it but again, adding the RAM and putting the SSD in it really woke it up. You know it's been in there almost a year now? Not bad for something that was not going to work.BTW Wuerstchenhund, did you end up installing that SSD in yours? If so, any problems?Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 10, 2015, 07:35:51 pmI would guess my i7 laptop makes less noise than my first IBM PC. Really, I think my WM is about as loud as my old 7200A and throws out near the same heat for 10X higher BW and 20X higher sample rate and ....... I don't see this trend changing.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 10, 2015, 07:35:51 pmI have no complaints about their standard 10X probes I have used. I have had to repair some of their GHz differential probes that had the tips broke off (not by me).Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 10, 2015, 07:35:51 pmStupid auto cal anyway.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 10, 2015, 07:35:51 pmI have never seen this and use the 7300. I have not had a bluescreen on both my WR and WM. Even with the added Ethernet board in the WM with it's SSD, it is rock solid.... After all the negative comments about the Ethernet I just figured I would throw that one in there.Well. I guess that's not 100% true. I did have to change the CMOS battery in the WM this summer.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 10, 2015, 07:35:51 pmWe have some LeCroy somewhere at work that has some crazy UI. I have never figured out where or what that thing was. We bought a brand new one not too long ago. What I would call a low end unit, not sure the model. Looks nice and drove just fine.I have ran into problems with their software being buggy but these newer releases I must admit have been very nice. Wish it was this stable when we bought the WP7300.One last thing I would like to mention is that Teledyne/LeCroy really has stepped up and helped me out.

author: marshallh
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 11, 2015, 01:46:48 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on November 10, 2015, 06:11:21 pmThought I was the only one. At least it was only a $90 used probe.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2015, 06:31:22 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on November 11, 2015, 01:15:04 amYes, the Malaysian vendor who built the first WR(M)Xi did a pretty poor job with the chassis and the quality of the plastics parts, but the later production runs (made in USA) were much better.I doubt your replacement knobs will fall off anytime soon.QuoteWell, I did get a Transcend PSD330 IDE SSD (the same one you used), and it's sitting here and waiting to be installed for a few months nowI'm pretty sure it will work, though, as Transcend fixed the UDMA issues that occurred with the older PSD320 in these scopes.QuoteThe hand piece housings of older AP-033 and AP-034 Differential probes are often broken (the underside tends to crack), however a new replacement housing is $17 or so (and its the newer, improved and more modern looking design which won't crack). Probes without housing or with parts of the housing missing can often be found on ebay and are a good way to get a very good probe for cheap.QuoteYes, it would be better if it was opt-in (i.e. off by default until enabled).BTW, the Siglent-made WaveSurfer 3000 doesn't do auto-cal any more (I guess they figured these days its no longer a benefit for a 4GSa/s ADC)

author: XFDDesign
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2015, 11:47:50 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 11, 2015, 06:31:22 amAt least as far asmyWaveSurfer 3054 goes, it does actually do auto-cal. Once. Around 30m of being on, it does one very quick self-cal cycle and then comes back. I think their method is to simply do it once the instrument is to temp.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2015, 02:01:57 am
content: Quote from: XFDDesign on November 11, 2015, 11:47:50 pmIs the Auto-Cal feature able to be disabled as the Siglent SDS2000 series allows?If it's in anyway a similar UI, this feature is within one of the Utilities pages.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2015, 09:55:46 am
content: Quote from: XFDDesign on November 11, 2015, 11:47:50 pmInteresting. It wasn't the case on the one I had for a day (it calibrated after power-up and that was it), but then this has been shortly after they came out so I guess it might have been introduced with one of the several firmware updates this model got.I think that's a good change, calibrating after a 30min warm-up is a much better than calibrating when the scope is cold and then seing drift the parameters when its warmed up.Quote from: tautech on November 12, 2015, 02:01:57 amThank god it isn't

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2015, 04:50:47 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 11, 2015, 06:31:22 am

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 09, 2015, 08:57:03 pm
content: W-Man, maybe you could use your good will with LeCroy to convince them they should consider adding the $1500 MSO probe harness for the digital channels to their bundle deal. I know the incremental cost of software is close to zero but this accessory doesn't look like it's a super long way from zero. If they had more people using their scopes and reporting how happy they are with their scopes you could get a rally going. Seriously, there is an opportunity for MSOs in the market between Rigol and 5k.

author: pascal_sweden
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 09, 2015, 09:55:21 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 09, 2015, 09:33:39 amSo funny! Cool to have people like you guys on this forum!It's really learnful, and discussions are nice!

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2015, 06:34:08 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on December 09, 2015, 08:57:03 pmI doubt I can. But then, getting the MSO probe kit for free should be achievable, especially if you buy one of the larger WS3k scopes. Just because it's not part of the official bundle doesn't mean LeCroy can't be convinced to include it.Don't forget, how much you pay for big brand T&M gear is pretty much down to your negotiation skills (and how often you mention Keysight, especially when they have a promo!)Another alternative might be to import the harness from the Siglent SDS3000 (which is the same scope) that is only sold in China. I haven't seen any prices or availability but I guess that this isn't impossible.QuoteI see what you mean, and you're right, it doesn't look like a very complex or expensive item.QuoteTrue, but it's not that there isn't anything else besides Rigol. On the cheaper end there's theHamegR&S HMO Series MSO scopes, and there's also the R&S RTM (although with MSO option the 200MHz 2ch variant is very close to $5k).

author: Howardlong
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 12, 2015, 08:30:15 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on December 10, 2015, 06:34:08 amWhile I agree that there'll certainly be some gouge on such an option, if it's a passive unit some of the "cost" will be in the cable itself: if it's anything like the Tek MSO LA cables, the multi-way coaxial cable and the final probe wires themselves have damped distributed resistance of one or two hundred ohms. For smallish volumes and runs, the tooling to make such cables is going to be a very significant factor.As a comparison, the Rigol MSO1000 cables (RPL1116) take a different approach, they use active pods with comparators and simple ribbon cable to avoid the need for special cable and counter intuitively these are almost certainly much cheaper to make than a passive cable with distributed resistances.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2015, 10:14:42 am
content: Quote from: Howardlong on December 12, 2015, 08:30:15 amI haven't seen the WS3k LA cables (which like the scope itself are made by Siglent) in real life yet but I'd bet they are not coax cables but plain standard ribbon cables on active probe pods, similar to Rigol, or my Siglent SDS2204.

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 31, 2016, 12:32:42 am
content: Thanks for all the good info WH. After getting a chance to do a test drive I decided I really like the WS3K UI and controls better and ended up jumping on a WS3054 refurbed and a used but working AP020 FET active probe (for $200!!!). If the probe works well I'll get a second one. The refurb won't include the FG or WS3K-EMB decoder, but even buying the decoder at the ridiculous MSRP ($950) it's still a bargain and I can get it if (when) I find I need it, or hang back and see if LeCroy will push an app bundle at some point. The FG... meh. Pass for my uses although I can see it being convenient for location work or assembly testing. For my uses the button is a waste of panel real estate. I also see the MSO pod available used now (one on eBay for $1k) so apparently the family has been around long enough now to start making its way onto the used market.I liked so many things about it - the use of the full screen width, automatic scaling, measurement histograms, the fast math, the FFT, the glitch finder, and above all just the nice, quick, accurate touch response. I thought I'd find the touchiness a bit gimmicky, but I really like it. It's just really well done. Now I just want my own sitting on the bench ASAP.Anyway, without your... endorsement... I probably would never have considered LeCroy.

author: chromex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 31, 2016, 04:35:59 pm
content: Can we software upgrade the bandwith to 750 Mhz?After some search i now consider a Lecroy Wavesurfer3024...would be nice to see a review and teardown of it made by Dave!

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 31, 2016, 04:47:24 pm
content: Quote from: bson on January 31, 2016, 12:32:42 amNo problem, glad I could help.QuoteYes, the internal FG (actually, it's now an AWG after firmware update not too long ago) isn't great, like the the generators that come with most scopes these days. Unless you get it enabled for free it's probably better to just buy a separate generator instead if you need one.The AP020 is an older probe (came out around 1997 I think but has been produced for quite a long time) but it's still a very good one. But I'm not sure it's supported on the WS3000 (although the AP020 works with all newer and current'full size' X-Stream scopes i.e. those running a full copy of desktop Windows), but I would be surprised if LeCroy had stripped support from the software of their embedded scopes. So please, when you get it let us know if the WS3000 works with the AP020.QuoteWell, the WS3000 came to market I think around April 2014, and has sold pretty well, so I'm sure we'll see an increasing number of them appearing as refurbs and used. Considering that the RRP for these scopes was already very low it will be interesting to see how 2nd hand pricing will develop.QuoteI thought the same (touch being a gimmick) before I tried it, but as you said MAUI works pretty well, and that it is a really good UI is shown by the fact that it does so not only on a smaller scope like the WS3000 but also on high end scopes like WavePro or LabMaster which are full with options of which every one has a ton of settings.The WS3000 is a really nice scope, and because it's still a X-Stream scope it's also pretty fast. It also shows that Siglent can produce really good hardware, an that the end product works well if they are not left anywhere near to softwareQuoteThat's why I mentioned them, to show some potential alternatives to the trodden path of Agilent/KeysightOnce you get your scope and you have used it for a bit it would be great if you would consider doing a review. I'd guess there's some interest for it.

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 31, 2016, 09:40:26 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on January 31, 2016, 04:47:24 pmI'll start a separate thread for it, just to collect info in one place.I wasn't able to find any hard info on the AP020, but I'm also looking at the AP034 which is a differential1.5GHz1GHz FET probe of roughly the same vintage as far as I can tell. For that one I found a data sheet/overview, which states it's a ProBus device, so I'm kind of leaping to the conclusion the AP020 is as well and might just work unless they made significant changes to ProBus. But I can't imagine they would have rerouted the power, so maybe it'll at least work in a "dumb" mode (i.e. not adjustable from the scope). But yeah, it's a bit of a leap. I figured it probably uses I2C for configuration so cutting SCL and SDA might make it appear and work as a "dumb" powered probe. Or if they dropped support for it make it work in a dumb mode with a warning popup to the effect that reconfiguration is not supported by this scope model. It can also be converted to a dumb BNC probe with the ADPPS power supply; same with the AP034. I'd get one of those with the differential probe anyway so I can use it with my VNA.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 31, 2016, 10:21:53 pm
content: Quote from: chromex on January 31, 2016, 04:35:59 pmI guess it depends what your starting point is (i.e. I doubt the 200MHz variant can be upgraded to 750MHz just by software, but the 500MHz probably can).QuoteI wouldn't hold my breath. LeCroy is a bit picky which reviewers they support so I guess unless Dave gets one from somewhere else...

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 31, 2016, 10:33:45 pm
content: Quote from: bson on January 31, 2016, 09:40:26 pmThat's a good idea.QuoteI have some AP034 and AP033 (the 500MHz variant) as well, again great probes and they work with all scopes from the old 9300 Series to the current WaveRunner 6zi or HDO Series.The ProBus interface hasn't been changed since its introduction in the 9300 Series back in the '90s, so from the electrical side you should be fine. I just wonder if the firmware on the WS3000 "knows" these probes, but I'd say it would be pretty silly if they didn't.

author: chromex
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 01, 2016, 04:20:35 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on January 31, 2016, 10:21:53 pm

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 01, 2016, 04:46:15 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on January 31, 2016, 10:33:45 pmAha!http://teledynelecroy.com/support/knowledgebase.aspx?docid=201&typeid=1&capid=106&mid=530&smid=WaveSurfer is ProBus compatible. You can use active probes with the WaveSurfer, including HFP1000,AP034, AP033,AP020, AP031, ADP300, ADP305, CP500, CP150, CP015, and AP015.Lookin' good for the home team!!!

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 01, 2016, 05:04:11 am
content: I'd definitely be interested in (or add to) a Lecroy comparison / cross compatibility thread.I'm looking for my next one now, so having a(nother) reference point would be of great value, so NO bidding against me on ebay :-)

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 01, 2016, 06:19:58 am
content: Quote from: bson on February 01, 2016, 04:46:15 amBe careful, it doesn't say WS3000. Before the WS3000 came out the WaveSurfer Series pretty much only consisted of 'full' Windows scopes running the full X-Stream stack on a x86 platform. The WS3000 is an Embedded scope running a 'light' version of X-Stream on an embedded platform.The article probably predates the WS3000. But as I said I can't imagine why it shouldn't support all ProBus probes.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 01, 2016, 06:36:53 am
content: Quote from: digsys on February 01, 2016, 05:04:11 amFrankly, there's not much that to discuss re. probe compatibility. It's actually pretty simple:LeCroy's entry level scopes (i.e. LiteRunner LP, WaveJet, WaveAce, all pretty much bought in an rebadged) have a standard BNC input only. There's no control for active probes, and if you want to use active probes with these scopes then the probe needs to be powered externally.LeCroy's mid-range (WaveSurfer) and high-end (9300, LC, all WaveRunner, all WavePro, all HDO) scopes have ProBus, which is BNC with a I2C interface to power and control active probes. Once a probe is supported the support for it pretty much stays in later firmware versions. That means for example an old AP033 probe still works on a modern HDO4000 Series scope, however a new probe like the ZS1000 will not be supported by say the 9300 Series because the scope's firmware doesn't know it. It will however work on say a WavePro 7000 from 2001 because the scope is still supported by X-Stream software updates.LeCroy's upper and ultra high end scopes (i.e. WaveMaster, LabMaster) use ProBus, which is basically ProLink but with a high frequency RF connector. Pro link is 50ohms and low voltage (5V max) only, but ProBus probes can be used on ProLink scopes through an adapter. Newer ProLink scopes like the WaveMaster 8zi can also have a second set of ProBus inputs as an option.That's pretty much it.

author: XFDDesign
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 01, 2016, 01:53:10 pm
content: Quote from: chromex on January 31, 2016, 04:35:59 pmSoftware upgrades only go up to 500MHz. After that, you have to sent it into LeCroy where they replace the front-end business with different front-ends.

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 09, 2016, 04:40:14 am
content: The AP020 is fully recognized and works beautifully! My probe came with a few accessories (ground pin, ground clip dongle, grabber) and storage case. Not bad for $200... might buy one more. The generic adapter kit for it is probe kit PK005; ordered one from Tequipment but I'm not confident they'll be able to source it. Worth a try though. The AP020 is shorter than the passive 500MHz probes and a little fatter so can't use the same accessories. The ground pin is a little different too, and not just a spring.Bought an AP034 differential probe for $150 that's not here yet. Let's how it works."Won" the WS3K-MSO pod on Best Offer from the same dealer (Avalon Test Equipment) as I got the scope from.So starting to put a nice little kit together here. Will do a little mini review at some point but right now I've unblocked so many projects I'm going to be busy for a while!

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 09, 2016, 06:02:46 am
content: Quote from: bson on February 09, 2016, 04:40:14 amThanks for reporting back! Good to hear that the AP020 works with the WS3000. I'm pretty sure the AP034 will work, too.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 09, 2016, 06:08:28 am
content: Quote from: free_electron on November 10, 2015, 06:11:21 pmI'll be sure to bring that one up next time somebody says the DS1000Z is "bugridden" (and more expensive scopesaren't...)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 09, 2016, 11:50:43 am
content: Quote from: bson on February 09, 2016, 04:40:14 amI hope you can make some time free to do a review on the WS3k; I'd like to see and read more about it.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 09, 2016, 12:11:50 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on February 09, 2016, 06:08:28 amIf you don't mind to look stupid, just go ahead!The claim above is not just silly but also completely wrong, and this particular user (who has been posting his list pretty much in any LeCroy related thread for a while) already admitted he didn't even bother to upgrade the firmware in all the 14yrs(!) since that bug was fixed (it pretty much only affected very early WP7k/WM8k and DSA scopes running Windows 2000 and was fixed pretty fast back then in 2002, and while software support for W2k scopes has stopped a while ago these scopes can be upgraded to XP and run the latest X-Stream software which is fully supported on those old instruments).And just to be clear: no-one said more expensive scopes are bug free. But the number of bugs is generally very small, and even non-critical bugs get fixed very quickly. Plus contrary to your favorite Chinese B-brand, with these scopes you know how long you will get support, which with LeCroy is at least 7 years after a scope has stopped being produced.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 09, 2016, 12:18:28 pm
content: Quote from: WuerstchenhundPLUS, once your model has been EOS'd, you can d/load ALL the maths and FFT options FREE !! and some of these are quite extensive !I've updated 3 LeCroys so far, over the last 2 yrs, with options that would have cost me $10's of 1,000s had I bought them with the scope.

author: awallin
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2016, 08:29:43 pm
content: So I went and got a WS 62MXs-b from the LeCroy factory refurb-shop at ebay. Where do I sign up for the fanboy club? We need a T-shirt or something!They took my price offer (about -10% from what they asked) so I paid about 1/4th of the list-price(62MXs-b still listed at digikey, although this model is being EOSed real soon I think?)4-channel scopes seems to be the fashion now so the 2-channel ones are sold away since nobody wants them?The black box arrived today and I had time to play a bit. Everything ok so far but a few observations:- appears brand new. maybe I can check hardware dates etc. (MFG 2013-JUN on the back) but at least it looks and feels like new-from-factory. manuals, cal-certs etc included.- it runs quite hot, with loud fans, I guess there's an old CPU in there that runs XP? (or is it the scope ADCs and ASICS that run hot?). Has anyone compared noise and heat to the newer 3000-series?- it clickety-cliks relays quite a lot and says "Calibrating.." quite a lot. I hope this is just during warmup?- came with a USB-GPIB dongle which might actually find use in controlling other instruments via software on the scope.- passive probes PP024 are only 500MHz while scope is listed as 600MHz... oh well.- stupid Q but what's the BNC-connector on the back-side top right? no text on that... and too lazy to pickup manual now..- also came with EU power-cord which was a nice touch (US or UK cord would have just been a throw-away..)If anyone has ideas for DIY active probes and/or DIY LA (needs software license also?) I could be interested. I will probably do a BW test and/or rise-time test at work sometime soon... stay tuned.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2016, 09:15:18 pm
content: Quote from: awallin on February 16, 2016, 08:29:43 pmNah, that's for the Keysight crowdQuoteIt's due to be EOS'd pretty soon. The WaveSurfer (M)Xs-B held the spot that is now covered by the WaveSurfer 3000 on the lower end and the WaveSurfer 10 at the upper end.QuoteWell, these scopes are usually bought as debugging scopes for complex tasks, and that very often requires more than 2 channels. Hence the majority of scopes are sold in 4ch variant, and the 2ch versions attract a lot less interest.Which, if you can live with two channels, pretty much allows you to get one at a bargain price (if you can find a 2ch one)QuoteIt might well be new, or a demo scope. Usually scopes that young don't come back from the customer so it very likely never really left LeCroy before you bought it.QuoteThe heat comes from the two 5Ghz ADC hybrids (LeCroy doesn't use ASICs do do their waveform processing as scopes from other brands do). The CPU is a Core 2 Duo but it's heat is negligible compared to the ADC hybrids.The WS3000 runs a lot cooler and more silent, but then it uses COTS 2GSa/s ADCs and a low power embedded platform (IIRC ARM or MIPS), which put out a lot less heat.QuoteYes and no. The calibration runs everytime after you change the vertical setting over a certain amount, it also runs from time to time to temperature-compensate the ADCs (although these calibrations appear less often if the scope is warmed up and the environmental temperature is stable). Most scopes from other manufacturers don't do that, which means they deviate if the scope is used in a different environment than the standard one that was used for the spec sheet. Your scope will maintain its performance specs pretty much throughout the whole operating envelope.There's a setting to disable auto-calibration so that it does not interrupt a critical measurement.QuoteNice! That's actually a not that cheap option. My guess would be that the scope was indeed a demo scope.QuoteThat's normal. 500MHz for a passive high Z probe is pretty much stressing it, as they aren't really useful at such high frequencies. You ideally want an active probe (i.e. AP034, can often be found for not much money) or a low-z passive probe.QuoteThat's a multi-purpose BNC that can act as a trigger out, a ref clock input and probably more (not sure for the WaveSurfer, though).QuoteAs to the LA probes I'd say forget it. These scopes have a L-Bus interface that connects to a brick-size box (MS-250, MS-500) which contains the LA electronics, and the LA probes connect to that brick. It's pretty complex and I doubt it can easily be re-implemented through a DIY solution. Yes, the LA also needs a software license.I guess you might have more luck hacking options, as they are just software keys. And there are quite a few interesting options available for the WS(M)Xs-B.You could certainly build your own probes, but frankly when a 1GHz AP34 can often be found below $200 then I'm not sure it's really worth it.QuoteWell, considering that the 600Mhz WRXis (which use a similar front end) usually exceed 870MHz (3dB point) I wouldn't be surprised if your scope shows a similar real-life bandwidth.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 16, 2016, 10:22:27 pm
content: Quote from: awallinWow great news ! I'm still looking for another LeCroy. Can you post details of the site and approx price you paid ? Maybe I'll hire you to get one for me as well :-)

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2016, 10:39:54 pm
content: Quote from: digsys on February 16, 2016, 10:22:27 pmI am pretty sure it was this one:http://www.ebay.com/itm/Teledyne-LeCroy-WaveSurfer-62MXs-B-600MHz-5GS-s-2Ch-Oscilloscope-WS-GPIB-/321980705342?(just a guess, but it matches the timespan)

author: awallin
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2016, 05:25:40 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on February 16, 2016, 10:39:54 pmYep that's the one. I think there was a WS 3024 listed yesterday for a similar price.. but can't find it now (only a -40% off MSRP bargain though)LeCroy has feedback from just 40 buyers - so it must be quite new compared to e.g. Keysight's similar operation? When will Tek join in too?I wouldn't want to be a sales-rep trying to push new test-gear to customers at MSRP these days..

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2016, 06:16:45 am
content: Quote from: awallin on February 17, 2016, 05:25:40 amYes, the ebay outlet is pretty new.QuoteTek already has 'Tektronixused', plus they were selling through another outfit before then. But seriously, who would buy Tek these days anyways unless those that are forced to? They pretty much have the most unattractive offerings of all big brands.QuoteMSRP was always only something that only the lazy ones paid. Even the worst negotiator is usually able to get immediately some percentage off just by asking. The T&M business has always been about haggling

author: bson
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 17, 2016, 08:33:20 am
content: Quote from: awallin on February 16, 2016, 08:29:43 pmActive probes can be found at low, low prices. I got an AP020 for $150, bought an AP022 factory tested from LeCroy for $145 (still waiting for it to arrive - there's one left athttp://www.ebay.com/itm/Teledyne-LeCroy-AP022-Active-Probe-Kit-with-Performance-Report-/161686695014?hash=item25a5472c66:g:2dAAAOSwstxVPkIl), and an AP034 differential probe. The AP034 didn't come with any accessories and only handles +/-400mV at 1X, so I ended up locating a 10X attenuator (tip adapter) for it (which gives it a +/-8V range) that isn't here yet. These ranges are top of the DC offset (up to 40V if memory serves). The AP020 is a 1GHz 1.6pF single-ended probe, the AP022 is 2GHz 0.8pF. The AP034 is nice in that it takes standard 2.54mm spaced square pins for tips, or they can be added to a board for TP's and the probe just "plugged in". The single-ended probes are the more typical "pointed instrument" type.The 500MHz 1:10 passive probes work great with my 53131A (opt 003, opt 010) frequency counter set to 10X attenuation.

author: awallin
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 05:18:59 pm
content: any ideas on where to find list-prices on lecroy WaveRunner 8000-series scopes?just got an e-mail they are selling ex-demo units at reduced prices...

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 07:37:53 pm
content: Quote from: awallin on September 12, 2016, 05:18:59 pmI think RRP for the 500MHz variant starts at $14k up to $29k for the 4GHz variant. They don't show list prices for most of their gear but there's a quick quote function on the LeCroy website.It seems they are selling ex-demo units for some 47% off which isn't bad for a scope that came out 5 months ago.

author: AutomationGuy
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 13, 2016, 04:56:30 pm
content: Hello LeCroy Experts,I have a WaveSurfer 3024 and I like the scope becorse of its large functionality. There are some issues like the cursor control on a FFT. Its hard to zoom to a spike on the FFT. The general software stability increased latley. The current version 7.9.1.3 is the first stable version.Now I found a Version 8.0.4.4 on LeCroys website and I downloaded it. Next day the version disappered. I am not so sure if I should install that version on my scope. Which version do you run on your Wavesurfer 3000 scopes?RegardsAutomationGuy

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 13, 2016, 06:22:47 pm
content: Quote from: AutomationGuy on September 13, 2016, 04:56:30 pmYes, cursors can be a bit fiddly. Some LeCroy scopes have a setting which allows you to change the acceleration profile for the encoders, but I can't remember if the WS3000 has it, too.Rumors say that the WS3000 may get something like the SPECTRUM option on the larger scopes which would make FFT a bit easier to use, but that's not confirmedQuoteCan't confirm that, we have now over 100 of these scopes out there in the field and they all have been pretty stable, aside from a few ones that catched a problem where it would sit in an indefinite boot cycle (but that was fixed a while ago).If your scope has stability issues then it might well be a problem with your specific unit. I'd keep an eye on that.QuotePretty much a wide mix of versions including two scopes with some very early firmware (its users tend to spend no time on firmware updates).As to the version 8.0.4.4 you mention, I doubt that was for the WaveSurfer 3000, for which X-Stream Lite 8 is due to come out later this year, as far as I know.The current version is 7.9.1.3.

author: Keysight DanielBogdanoff
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 13, 2016, 09:11:40 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on November 09, 2015, 09:33:39 amI don't want to derail the thread with a comparison shootout, but I feel obligated to chip in on a couple points for the Keysight scopes (bear with me)Keysight's capacitive touch screen vs WS3k resistive touch screen. Ask for a demo/loaner, you won't want a scope without itSerial decoding is done in hardware, so it's stinkin fast (also we have more supported protocols)Keysight FFT is hardware accelerated, can be signal gated, and has a peak search in the lister3 year cal cycle vs 1 year cal cycleKeysight acquisition modes (normal, peak detect, average, high resolution) vs WS3k with "normal" mode only & "ERES" as a math channelKeysight DVM and hardware frequency counter & totalizer vs N/AKeysight 1 knob set per channel vs multiplexed channel knobsand of course waveform update rate and zone trigger...That's all, carry on.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 13, 2016, 10:16:29 pm
content: Hmm, how could I have missed the Wavesurfer 3000 has no peak detect

author: TAMHAN
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 13, 2016, 11:45:55 pm
content: This is very odd now. LeCroy already had Peak Detect in the 9354AM - see the video below:

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 12:44:19 am
content: I too find it very odd that a WS3000 does not have Peak Detect.One can only imagine that it's been left out of the incorporated features on purpose, if indeed it is missing.As a WS3000 is Siglent HW but apparently LeCroy couldn't trust Siglent to write the FW there only seems 2 explanations: Daniel's wrong or indeed LeCroy has left this basic feature out.Both the Siglents that have evolved from about the same time as the WS3000 (Siglent SDS3000) do indeed have Peak Detect as do many of the Siglent range;SDS2304X:

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 01:31:30 am
content: The oldest DSO I am aware of with peak detection is the Tektronix 2230 which was first available in 1986 and implemented it with TTL using 74ALS574s octal D flip-flops for registers and 74LS684s 8-bit magnitude comparators.Implementation of peak detection is not trivial since it has to occur at the full digitizer sample rate. The 2232 which replaced the 2230 just 4 years later had 5 times the sample rate at 100 MS/s and implement peak detection in a custom ASIC which interfaced the digitizer to memory. In theory discrete logic could still have been used but complex MSI functions like the 74LS684 were never made available in faster logic processes. I hate to imagine how much power an ECL implementation would take but I am sure someone did it.Peak detection became free or at least very inexpensive with programmable logic which was already used to either store the acquisition record in embedded SRAM or interface the digitizer to discrete memory but even so, low cost DSOs even now often lack this feature like many Rigol DSOs before the 1000Z series. Of course if you are Tektronix, HP/Agilent/Keysight, LeCroy, or any other major OEM, you have been implementing this inside of an ASIC for a long time.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 06:54:59 am
content: haven't had to play with either of them but my two cents..Keysight's capacitive touch screen vs WS3k resistive touch screen. Ask for a demo/loaner, you won't want a scope without itthis actually depends on the quality/sensitivity of the touch screen. i'm sure we all remember older android phones and non-android samsungs (brr)Serial decoding is done in hardware, so it's stinkin fast (also we have more supported protocols)that is why i always find myself leaning toward keysight. i'd gladly have that couple more protocols.. but 4 Mpts memory.. just no.i'd rather use a picoscope for the serial protocols other scopes lack, which is exactly what we do at work. no fancy scopes but a pico for our serial needs.Keysight acquisition modes (normal, peak detect, average, high resolution) vs WS3k with "normal" mode only & "ERES" as a math channeli am sure that there is something simillar to peak detect, wavescan? not really the same thing but if you want to find aberration in a signal..now. i judged on my experience and having no experience with the specific hardware on trial i'd like to ask to the judge, his honour, and defence lawyer: what's the deal with the loaner? can i small guy ask for a loaner to test for my home lab or is it only reserved for businesses? as i doubt we'll ever need new scopes unless our glorious tek breaks down (but i noticed a channel is probably in need of calibration. fingers crossed) and even then unless we don't start doing more challenging hardware both of these will be overkill in bandwidth/sample rate.but one of these will be in my lab. not today or tomorrow but soon.oh, mr k: why did you go black a little while ago? is it because you want to have thecoolestscopes in the market?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 07:43:35 am
content: Quote from: Keysight_DanielBogdanoff on September 13, 2016, 09:11:40 pmSo that's the commercials break then I guess?No seriously, you're welcome Daniel.QuoteSureQuoteI fully agree to try it on a loaner, because the difference is negligible. A capacitive touch screen is a big advantage on a tablet or a smartphone where modern operating systems use multitouch operations and gestures, however that isn't true for a scope where touch operation mostly consist of pointing at stuff and drawing a box.At the moment, there's only one big brand scope which uses multi-touch and gestures, and that is the new LeCroy WaveRunner 8000. And this does have a capacitive touch screen.Also, resistive touch screens have the advantage that they work well with gloves, which is a big advantage in environments where you're not supposed to touch the UUT with bare hands. There DSOX3kT's capacitive display is useless in these environments because it's capacitive screen doesn't work with gloves.QuoteYou are right that the DSOX3k supports a larger number of protocols (the WS3000 does support the most widespread ones like UART/RS232, SPI, I2C, CAN, FlexRay while the DSOX3kT also supports I2S, MIL-1553, ARINC-429, LIN and SENT). Of course if you need one of these additional protocols and can't live with a cheap USB gizmo then the DSOX3000T is the only sensible option - and Keysight really charges a premium for that.QuoteFirst of all, the DSOX3000T's FFT only does a measly 64kpts while the WaveSurfer 3000 can process up to 1Mpts, that's 16 times the amount of data!Also, you say "hardware accelerated", which usually means it's done through a dedicated ASIC. That isn't necessarily an advantage, though, because as we've seen especially in high-end scopes which through their high speed ADCs produce much more data than scopes like the DSOX3kT and WS3k, LeCroy's software-based X-Stream architecture handles large amounts of data a lot better than the "hardware accelerated" architectures from other manufacturers including Keysight.QuoteI agree, it's an advantage if you need it. There's no technical reason why any modern scopes couldn't work on a 3yr cal cycle (they are all pretty stable these days) so I'd assume others including LeCroy will update to 3yrs as well, which means the days this is an advantage will very likely be numbered.QuoteAs you say, on the DSOX (like pretty much any other scope) these are indeed acquisition modes while on LeCroy scopes they are math traces, but having them as acquisition mode is not an advantage, because it means that in any other mode than "normal" you lose all the actual acquisition data (they are destructive). On a LeCroy scope, where waveform-altering functionality is available as math trace, the original sampling data is retained. This has always been LeCroy's core design principle, and is the reason why LeCroy has been and still is the to-go brand for scientists when it comes to scope.Also, the DSOX3kT, like pretty much any non-LeCroy scope (aside from some newer Siglents apparently, but god knows how good their implementation is), only offers the standard simple boxcar filter for its high resolution mode. ERES is a bit more sophisticated as it uses a linear phase FIR filter which avoids the various disadvantages of boxcar filtering (i.e. appearance of ringing) or the complete lack of controls over the filtering process.Of course, things like ERES or using waveform-altering functionality as math traces while retaining the original sample data is much more processing and memory intensive, but the WS3000 seems to perform very well against simpler scopes like the DSOX3kT, despite having to process more data.BTW, Averaging is available on the WS3k as well of course, again as a math trace so the original sample data is always retained.Regarding Peak Detect (PD), you're right. The WS3k, like most LeCroy scopes, doesn't have Peak Detect acquisition mode.Quote from: TAMHAN on September 13, 2016, 11:45:55 pmThey pretty much dropped PD in 1998 (the 9384C was one of the few scopes which had PD, and also the last one).Quote from: tautech on September 14, 2016, 12:44:19 amIt is on purpose. PD was a crutch to overcome the very small sample memories of older digital scopes, allowing to sample at full sample rate for an extended amount of time by storing only the minima and maxima of a sampled group and thereby extending the time length that can be acquired. As it is an acquisition mode, it is destructive (i.e. you lose the original sample data). You also lose timing information (you know in which sample period the data points were acquired, but you don't know where in that period, i.e. at the beginning or the end).These days, scopes come with reasonably large sample memories, which means even in normal mode you can run the scope at full sample rate for longer timbases. Also, modern scopes tend to come with a much larger sample rate to BW ratio (the 750Mhz WS3074 samples at 4GSa/s, the 1Ghz DSOX3104T at 5GSa/s), which means there is lots of room for the sample rate to drop without losing any details. With its 10Mpts memory, even the 750MHz WS3 can aquire a 5ms period at sufficient sample rate (2GSa/s). And the lower the analog bandwidth the further the sample rate can be dropped without losing detail.Modern mid-range and higher scopes also have sophisticated trigger and analysis tools so that the scope can capture the important event at high sample rate instead of having to capture a longer sequence via PD. Of course most entry-level scopes lack such functionality, and PD can then help there.Bottom line is that PD is not offered because it's destructive and because LeCroy scopes like the WS3000 have suitable alternative ways (i.e. WaveScan) of capturing events at high time resolution.I know that some people will probably disagree (I remember some discussions with nctnico about PD), but despite using mostly Keysight scopes at work which all have PD, I can't remember when the last time was when I used it (I vaguely remember one time in the early 2000's with some Tek scope). That of course doesn't mean much, and I'd be interested to hear about specific scenarios where people believe PD is still required - bearing in mind we're talking about a mid-range scope here, not some simple $400 Rigol box.Quote from: Keysight_DanielBogdanoff on September 13, 2016, 09:11:40 pmThat's incorrect. The WS3000 does have hardware frequency counter, and it has the DVM (which was a free addition a few months after release, and a free upgrade for all existing scopes)QuoteYes. If that's really an advantage it's up to your individual preference. My WavePro 7300A has individual controls, and I'd wish it was multiplexed because it allowed me to change channel settings without having to move my hand.I'd rather have the space spent on a larger and higher resolution screenQuoteYou're right with the waveform update rate of course (which is amazingly high for an entry-level scope). It's a nice marketing feature, but it's advantage in real-life is pretty limited, especially when compared to other scopes with decent trigger/analysis tools. Plus it comes at the price of very limited sample memory, which is a pretty big disadvantage.But zone trigger, really? The WS3000 comes with WaveScan which can do zonal triggering and a lot more. The DSOX3kT doesn't even have anything similar, because that is only available for the Infiniium Series (InfiniiScan). And off course like pretty much everything at Keysight, it's a paid-for option. And having InfiniiScan on my work DSO91304A and WaveScan on my WavePro 7300A at home, I have to say that InfiniiScan can't even do half of what WaveScan can do. Plus WaveScan is free (comes with all LeCroy mid-range and high-end scopes, and when it came out it was a free upgrade for existing scopes). Go figure.Since we're talking features, how about LabNotebook? It's a tool to create test reports and document testing directly on the scope. As with WaveScan, it comes standard with every LeCroy mid-range and high-end scope, and that includes the WS3000. What does the DSOX offer to make documenting test series easier? Exactly, pretty much nothing.Lastly, lets have a quick look at pricingThe 100MHz 2ch DSOX3012T starts at $3500 while the 200Mhz 2ch WS3022 starts at $3.300 (it's price went up, actually, it used to start at $3k) - LeCroy gives you 2x the BW and 2.5x the memory for $300 less (or comparing similar BW, the 200MHz DSOX3022T is already at $4170 - that's $870 more which could be spent on probes and other tools instead)Let's have a look at the 500MHz variants:WS3054: $7500 vs Keysight DSOX3054T: $11704 - that's $4200 difference! You could even buy the 750Mhz WS3074 ($9200) and save $2500 which can buy you probes and other stuff.Actually, the 500Mhz DSXO3054T is even more expensive than the 1Ghz WaveSurfer 10 which is $10k - double the BW, up to 16Mpts/Ch, and even more serial decode options than the DSOX3kT has for $1700 less.Just for completeness, Keysight wants a whooping $14525 for the 1GHz DSOX3104TWhich puts it quite close to the WaveRunner 8000 - a sophisticated high end scope with 20/40GSa/s, up to 128Mpts/Ch, multi-touch, and large-capacitative touch display (the 500Mhz 4ch variant starts at $14k, the 1Ghz variant is probably around $16k).I'm not sure that the separate vertical controls, PD, the excessive update rate and a few more serial decode options are worth the large price premium, even less so when it comes at the cost of tiny sample memory, smaller screen, and lack of other functionality.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 08:05:26 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on September 14, 2016, 06:54:59 amWell, if you look at the prices, at least if you're in for a higher BW scope (500Mhz and up) then same/less money gives you more protocols, more BW and more features from other brands.Keysight is really squeezing it.QuoteIn general it's available to anyone. If you're spending several grands on a scope then doing a test drive is not just adviseable, it's crucial IMHO. Of course some sales droids can get a bit iffy when a consumer calls, not a business, but if they are uncooperative just hang up and try again until you get a sales droid that is more flexible. At the end of the day, they have incentives to sell, and most don't care if it's for business or hobby if it's an easy sale.Also, never forget to negotiate. No-one pays list price except the lazy. You can usually get options and probes thrown in as well.QuoteWho's Mr K?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 09:44:36 am
content: Even with long memory I use peak detect often at low sweep rates to make sure I don't miss a narrow pulse c.q. see a trace which has all the expected elements and nothing missing or malformed due to aliasing. It is true that timing information is lost but when looking at (for example) video signals it is nice to see the hsync and vsync pulses are all there. To me having no peak detect is a show stopper.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 10:13:21 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 14, 2016, 09:44:36 amI understand. Well, on a LeCroy scope I would rather use WaveScan for that.Your scenario is actually not too unsimilar to a pet project of mine, where one element relies on a set of (unevenly spaced) sync pulses. To find out if pulses are missing or out of spec I just throw WaveScan at it and let it run for a while, it then tells me any pulses were missing/out of spec, and if so presents me with a nice histogram showing when exactly that happened. If I wanted I could even set it up to do specific measurements on malformed pulses, or just let it do some screen shots everytime a deviation occurs, or do a range of other stuff.It's pretty handy, and helped me to identify a problem where the sync generating unit producted malformed pulses in varying periods. It also helped me finding the source of a problem where the sync providing element occasionally threw out malformed pulses. With WaveScan and the statistics function I found out that the timing depended on the operating mode of that unit, i.e. power load, and that it was a flaw in the PSU which caused it.Granted, on a entry-level scope which doesn't have any advanced functionality, PD is probably the best (only?) way to do that.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 10:32:14 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 14, 2016, 08:05:26 amdaniel, keysight.a couple of months ago or so i saw new test equipment with black enclosures on keysight homepage, i remember it was mentioned even here at that time as a joke on them trying to look like lecroyhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/opinion-keysight-new-design-theme/msg938112/#msg938112don't need to take me seriously on that oneyes, what you say about loaner is true and what i fear is that they wouldn't care about loaning to privates, which is understandable to some degree.it is also very stupid, on some degree. I already said i was a salesperson once and the worst thing you can do is to refuse the hint of a sale

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 10:56:40 am
content: Quote from: JPortici on September 14, 2016, 10:32:14 amAh, I seeQuoteYes, I remember. KS's new signal analyzers are in black, which is somewhat interesting.It seems however scope will stay beige/whiteQuoteAs I said it's only the occasional sales drone, most of them are happy to sell you a scope, or giving you a loaner.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 12:15:12 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 14, 2016, 07:43:35 amThe connection between record length and peak detection reminds me of a recent post on the forum about the Rigol 1000Z linking record length and delayed sweep/acquisition.The user in question was operating at a slow time/div but needed to magnify waveform details to such an extent at a point after the trigger point that the limited sample rate even with the Rigol's relatively long record length became a problem. The question was whether the delay function could be used to acquire a full sample rate acquisition at the point of interest and I guess the answer was no; the Rigol's delay function *only* affects what is shown on the display and has nothing to do with the acquisition process despite what Rigol's documentation implies. I managed to resist my inclination to respond that a gimpy Tektronix DSO with a 4K record length would have had no problem with this.So both peak detection and delayed sweep/acquisition are crutches to overcome the limitations of a short record length. I would also add DPO functionality to this list of crutches and I would rather have all three than a long record length if it means a faster update rate with lower blind time.QuoteI am not sure if this is what you meant to say. That modern DSOs typically come with a large maximum sample rate to bandwidth ratios makes no difference when the sample rate is limited by record length unless they have peak detection, delayed sweep/acquisition, or something similar going on between the digitizer and acquisition record.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 02:13:24 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on September 14, 2016, 12:15:12 pmWell, that is not surprising, considering that the Rigol DS1000z is a $400 scope with very limited functionality. I already said that for low end scopes PD is sometimes the only option. But we're not talking low-end scopes here.QuoteIn essence, yes. PD may have some place in a low end scopes with limited trigger/analysis capabilities but again, this isn't what we're talking here.QuoteYes, it's a crutch, because Tektronix was simply unable to produce an architecture that delivers fast update rates in normal mode. DPO mode has several disadvantages, like no measurements, because like other acquisition modes its destructive (i.e. the original sampling data is gone).DPO is one of many reason why pretty much no-one in its right mind buys Tektronix scopes these days, aside maybe from teh edu sector which now seems to be Teks main customers and which is full of people that live in their own world.QuoteGreat. But this tells me that you somehow missed the whole point I was making, which is that the lack of PD on the WS3000 is made up by other tools. Don't take this the wrong way but you sound like the type of person that if sat in front of a modern high end scope and asked to find and measure a glitch would resent to persistence mode and cursor readouts.There's a reason why a modern mid-range or high-end scope has advanced toolsets, which is that you don't have to rely on crutches that pretty much only exist because of limitations in test gear 20 years ago.QuoteThe point is that back then in 1996 a standard 100Mhz DSO like the HP 54622A came with 200MSa/s sample rate, while a modern day equivalent samples at 2Ghz or more. The large oversample ratio on modern scopes means it doesn't necessarily have to run at full sample rate to get all the details, meaning on a scope that lets you manually select the sample rate you can simply drop the sample rate to extend the acquisition period even more.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 02:31:08 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 14, 2016, 10:13:21 amYou are missing my point slightly. For a first cursory look at a signal I'd like to see it's extremes at all timebase settings (even the slowest ones and roll mode) and for that peak detect is the only option. Sometimes I have to look at signals from systems which are slow but can have glitches. Even worse: I have no idea what to expect. So I set the scope to roll mode with peak detect on to get a feel for what a signal does (amplitude and if there are pulses at all) over a period of seconds to minutes. From there I can switch to triggering on glitches etc.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 05:25:53 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 14, 2016, 02:31:08 pmI'm sorry and maybe I still miss your point but that sounds like a perfect scenario for WaveScan (which is *not* a trigger btw, it's more like a search tool/glitch finder, and it finds stuff that triggers won't). Instead of going through various time base settings I'd just enable WaveScan and let it search for deviations, and then just let it run for a while (5 seconds, 30s, a few minutes, ten days, whatever is appropriate). WaveScan will tell me exactly what went wrong at which point in time.The problem with PD is that, while it can show small glitches on scopes that don't have enough memory to sustain a longer acquisition cycles at sufficient sample rates, it will show a somewhat malformed signal because of the loss of timing resolution. It also adds non-existing noise to the waveform, and overemphasizes infrequent amplitude deviations. It's OK for identifying glitches but pretty worthless to make a qualitative assessment of a signal. And PD won't show me anything that WaveScan can't find, without having me to stare at the screen to whole time waiting for an event to appear.And while you used PD to find out that there are in fact glitches or dropouts in your signal and start to setup your triggers to catch them, WaveScan can already have done the work and provided me with screenshots of the glitches, or measurements.One caveat though: WaveScan on the WaveSurfer Series is a simpler version of WaveScan on the high end scopes (WaveRunner, WavePro, WaveMaster, LabMaster) and lacks some of its capabilities. Not having a WS3000 myself (I only had one for a day) I can't exactly say what WaveScan on the WS3000 can and can't do. But I'm pretty sure, for your given scenario, it would easily find all dropouts and other problems with your signals.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 06:07:09 pm
content: Wavescan sounds like a perfect tool for letting the scope find 'errors' in a signal. However every now and then I find myself in a situation where I hook up a scope to a system and I have no idea what to expect so the first thing I want is a slow recording (seconds per divisions) of some signals which may be interesting. Roll-mode or long time/div with peak detect are really crucial because that way I have both an overview of what happens on a long timescale and an indication if there is or isn't something happening on shorter timespans. From your description I don't see how wavescan can do the same but then again I have never seen Wavescan in action.

author: AutomationGuy
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 07:18:25 pm
content: In WaveScan you can assign limits to any math function like rise time, peak width, duty cycle, RMS and so on ... on a trace and when the limits are -touched the trace will be stored. I am sure you can find any peak with WaveScan.That way you can leave your scope running for days and review the stored anomalies next day. The high end scopes probably have much more math functions.Actualy I could find signals using LeCroy scopes in some cases where I couldn't find them using other scopes.Here are some feature requests in case someone from LeCroy is reading this:I would like to have WaveScan on FFT which would include math functions on a FFT trace.Another nice feature on the WS3000 would be a SENT decoder.A Hex number comparison trigger on the MSO would be nice as well. (Could be availble already. I was missing it in an earlier SW version)One thing about the WS3000 which annoys me is the autosetup which probbaly breaks sampling for a few seconds each time its triggered. I could not yet find out when the autosetup is triggered. There is a button for autosetup on the scope but it has no use for me since the scope starts it automaticly.The autosetup is realy helpfull and gives real good results but it interrupts sampling.Direct replay from a trace to the build in function generator would be nice.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 07:24:54 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 14, 2016, 05:25:53 pmWhat features does Wavescan offer over a Mask test?Sounds from what you describe it's much the same thing.Can it be used over non-repetitive waveforms or a continuous data stream?

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 07:27:46 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 14, 2016, 02:13:24 pmIt was surprising to me but only because I had studied the user manual which implied something very different. Marketing triumphs over engineering.There really is no alternative to evaluating an oscilloscope in person with a collection of problems to solve.QuoteI did *exactly* that while evaluating a Tektronix MSO5204 and its "advanced toolset" was not able to make the kind of glitch measurement I was interested in which would have been trivial on a oscilloscope with delta delay capability. I could not get it to work and the Tektronix sales engineers could not get it to work although together we managed to crash the DSOs user interface a couple of times. Or does the MSO5000 series qualify as a budget low end DSO?This experience among others with modern mid-range DSOs has led me to distrust the advertised capabilities of all of them.QuoteI think that may have been Tektronix's theory when they released the TDS700 series without peak detection.With delayed sweep/acquisition capability, the record length is of less importance for making the maximum sample rate available.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 07:35:41 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 14, 2016, 02:31:08 pmI use peak detection in the same way and if I had a DSO with DPO mode, I would probably use that instead as required. I have been told a couple of times now that DPO mode is intended for quantifying signal irregularities so that advanced triggers can then be setup to capture them.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 11:43:44 pm
content: Quote from: AutomationGuy on September 14, 2016, 07:18:25 pmExcept you won't find the peak/error/glitch with certainty. The scope is hunting through the captures offline to look for anomalies, which relies on the speed you are able to search. This will never be as fast as realtime capture and accumulation, which although it still has a dead/blind time is much smaller than offline analysis.Quote from: tautech on September 14, 2016, 07:24:54 pmWavescan is the offline analysis built into most Lecroy scopes it takes the capture and then searches through it, if it finds events you can tell it what to do with them. Mask testing can be done offline like this, or it can be done much faster in hardware, but mask testing cannot do all the advanced analysis of wavescan so they can miss or capture different characteristics. Keysight offer similar tools under their InfiniiScan name.Quote from: David Hess on September 14, 2016, 07:35:41 pmMr W is for some reason opposed to this method of working. The rest of us get on with life and use realtime modes to get a quick look at the signal before deciding what to do. Accumulating a large amount of captures in an eye diagram or even just free running you can gain some understanding of what needs a more detailed investigation.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 05:31:50 am
content: Quote from: tautech on September 14, 2016, 07:24:54 pmYes it can.WaveScan is pretty much an automated anomaly finder. It can learn how the signal works and then identify pretty much any kind of anomaly, even those that are difficult to trigger on. That includes data streams for a wide range of standards (provided you have the serial decode and analysis option for that standard of course). Other than Mr S. claimed, WaveScan*does*work in real-time (although it can also be used post-acquisition). It's a pretty unique tool, and none of the other manufacturers offer anything similar. Keysight has InfiniiScan on the Infiniium Series, it can't do even half of what WaveScan does, it's slow, and of course it's a paid-for option.As stated above, the WaveSurfer mid-range scopes have a slightly cut-down version of WaveScan (not all functions as the high-end scopes), and I'm not sure where exactly the differences are (documentation isn't exactly a strong point of LeCroy, they could learn a thing or a hundred from Keysight here), but I'm pretty sure for the stated case where people use PD, WaveScan on the WS3k would have no problem finding the anomalies.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 05:42:39 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on September 14, 2016, 07:27:46 pmWell, it's Rigol, what should I say. That's the company that wants $9k for a 1GHz DS9104 where basic functions like ETS still don't work 7 years after the scope came to marketQuoteNo, there never is. Which is why I'd always recommend to get some loanders and take the scopes for a spin around the block before committing several grand for what should be a tool that works for you.QuoteI'm sorry to have to say this but Tektronix is shit. I have a MSO3054 (or had, until a week ago), and I've seen the MSO4k and MSO5k Series, and they are pretty much the same. These scopes are slow, they still can't produce decent waveform rates in normal mode, and their toolset is pretty basic. The few times we had a Tek representative inhouse, we saw pretty much the same as you. I felt sorry for them because they have to go out and sell that crap.QuoteWell, the lesson here is just don't buy Tek. They were great 30yrs ago when analog scopes were a thing but their DSOs are nothing to write home about. When I got my MSO3054 I really wanted to like it, but seriously it's so bad using it you lose the will to live. The UI is dreadful and must have been designed by someone who genuinely hates humans. It's really that poor. No wonder why Keysight pretty much owns most of the T&M market.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 07:40:23 am
content: Quote from: Someone on September 14, 2016, 11:43:44 pmNo, WaveScan is *not* just an off-line tool (although it can be used post-acquisition), like mask testing it works real-time as well.QuoteNo, they don'tInfiniiScan is a far cry from what WaveScan does. It's pretty much a flexible trigger which you have to setup to look for specific issues (which means you already have to know what you're looking for). It's a lot more flexible than a conventional trigger, but it's nothing like WaveScan.Of course, If you had ever *used* InfiniiScan and WaveScan yourself you'd know that, and maybe then you wouldn't feel the need to come to these threads and spew the always same nonsense about things you don't understand and you've clearly even barely read about. I have InfiniiScan on my work DSO91304A (it's pretty much on all our Infiniiums), and while it adds some really useful functionality (like the zone triggers) it's in no way a full substitute for or in any way equivalent to WaveScan.QuoteThat condescending statement just shows that you really have no idea what WaveScan is (aside from I guess you could find with a quick google search). Since you seem to be made of Teflon (nothing sticks), I'm not going to repeat all the info that is given here and in the old WaveRunner 8000 thread again, as clearly you come to these threads not to contribute but because you have some hidden agenda.Just let me say this, that one sign of a good engineer is eagerness to learn, and that includes functions and capabilities that new tools can bring to the table and which could make life easier (and then make an informed choice wether it helps for his own tasks or not). The average engineer sticks to what he learnt in his youth and avoids change or spending time on learning new stuff wherever possible. Both categories are easily recognizable.Of course, there's nothing wrong with wanting to stick with what you know. Just buy tools that support your way of working and live on happily. But don't come here and try to BS others that show more interest in what is available in modern tools and who want to see if they can use it for their benefit.So If you want to contribute positively you're welcome. But if you continue with your obvious 'agenda' then don't get surprised if some of the Mods will have a serious talk with you.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 08:12:13 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 15, 2016, 07:40:23 amIts not running in the acquisition memory at sample rate, its run on the general purpose processor, offline, as you say it can be run on acquired data exactly the same way. It can be used in realtime at a diminished capture rate which is addressing the questions posed by other users although not your narrative.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 15, 2016, 07:40:23 amYou could certainly reference that thread where you consistently claimed realtime use was stupid yet failed to suggest alternatives, and didnt come up with any examples at all, sure. Everyone would love to see some new tools and ways to use them but you wont share.

author: JPortici
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 08:44:55 am
content: Quote from: AutomationGuy on September 14, 2016, 07:18:25 pmAgreed. only option i'd really "miss" over a MSO3000T (that i already have on a 200€ picoscope + whatever price pc though)Quote+1 on that too, much faster than capture, download, load on another AWG

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 12:34:59 pm
content: Quote from: Someone on September 15, 2016, 08:12:13 am*Nothing* runs in the acquisition memory in a scope, it's a store for sampled dataQuoteOn a LeCroy X-Stream scope (which the WS3000 is, X-Stream lite) *everything* runs on the main processor. Which is the main reason why these scopes are so fast.Which you should know by know as this has been excessively discussed in the past already.QuoteWTF are you talking about? WaveScan directly uses life acquisition data, there's nothing inherently "offline" to it as you claim. The update rate goes down (naturally because of the processing required), by how much depends on the circumstances (i.e. what WaveScan settings, scope generation and CPU cache size and speed). Nevertheless it scans all acquired data.As to my "narrative", all I said was that the tool you clearly know jack shit about should be a sufficient replacement for situations where people tend to use Peak Detect.QuoteI have no idea what you're talking about. But in any case, if you feel that something that has been discussed in another thread needs further discussion then this will happen there and not here, which seems to be your modus operandi to stir up trouble.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 12:48:21 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 15, 2016, 12:34:59 pmThe thing is that peak-detect combined with roll mode will show all peaks. If Wavescan is an acquire-process-acquire-process- system then it will have a considerable blind time. IMHO you are too much focussed on finding glitches in known signals but you have to take a few steps back to a signal you know nothing about and want to get a feel for. Without peak detect this is nearly impossible and it sounds to me Wavescan isn't solving that. Compared to the Lecroy Wavesurfer 3000 it seems the R&S RTM2000 series is in the same price range and it does have peak detect.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 12:52:43 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 14, 2016, 06:07:09 pmI still believe WaveScan could help here, as it can find errors you don't know are in the signal.Obviously you have adapted your way of working to your tools, but if you ever have the chance just give it a try.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 01:08:41 pm
content: Quote from: AutomationGuy on September 14, 2016, 07:18:25 pmWaveScan on FFT is unlikely as FFT is processed data (and WaveScan works with the original sampled data).I haven't tried on the WS3000 but as to math on FFT, you should be able to use the FFT trace (which is just a math trace like any other math function) as an input to another math function.QuoteLeCroy has stated they'll expand the options for the WS3k depending on customer feedback (they already implemented CAN and FlexRay which were both missing when the scope came out) so they might as well implement SENT if enough people show interest.Quotethe scope should not start auto setup by itself, only if you press the button (if it does then there's something wrong with your unit).The WS3000 does a self-cal cycle after a certain amount of time running but that is once only.QuoteAs with SENT, ask LeCroy, they might just implement it in a next software release.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 01:43:47 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 15, 2016, 12:48:21 pmI do, and that's what WaveScan can be used for. It can find problems you didn't know where in the signal. You seem to think that you have to know the problem for it to work, but you don't.Yes, the blind time will be higher than with PD in roll mode. But then all roll mode tell you if there are any drop-outs or if there aren't (and that only if you didn't miss anything), you still haven't analyzed the problem.QuoteIt's difficult to do remotely (and I don't have a WS3000 at hand anyways) but I'm still confident I could find with WaveScan anything you find with PD.Just out of interest, what frequencies/pulse widths/PRFs are we talking here? You mentioned H-Sync/V-Sync which suggests some kind of video signal?QuoteThe RTM2000 is a very nice scope (and yes, it does have PD), however it has a max update rate of some 11k wfms/s, a much smaller screen, and you only get 128k FFT, plus options and probes are pretty expensive (and probe selection is very limited). However it does have some nice features (like dimmable LED indicators), it's really very silent, and even comes with a Z input (brightness modulation for true X/Y/Z mode) which is a rarity on DSOs. It also has a memory search tool that helps to find certain glitches and runts post-acquisition.Some time ago I bought a RTM1054 (500MHz 4ch) 2nd hand which for the price (<$2k) was an absolute bargain. The RTM2000 is pretty much the same plus a few improvements (128k instead 64k FFT, 10M instead of 8M, MSO option, more serial decode standards) but the platform is the same (BlackFin based). The scope is now with someone else who talked me into selling it to him and he's quite happy. I'm not sure I'd have paid the $6k or so R&S wanted for it when new.I know we talked about this and you had some problems finding representation in your country but if you have the chance then I'd recommend to get loaners and spend some time exploring the various tools like WaveScan in your test environment. I might well be that I'm wrong and WaveScan can't help in your situation (although I doubt that), but I'd really recommend to give it a try.The worst thing with WaveScan is that it is so poorly documented by LeCroy (like a lot of things, unfortunately).

author: AutomationGuy
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 06:45:49 pm
content: I don't know the insightes of the WaveSurfer3K but technicaly it should be possible to implement WaveScan at least partly in FPGA and process all data in real time. How many math functions are implemented in VHDL could depend on the scope price. There might still be some functions implemented on an "offline" CPU. That would make WaveScan run "offline" in just some configurations. Many might run in real time.I know there is a limit on high speed signals but in many usecases WaveScan could run in real time. Especialy on video or audio signals.LeCroy will not publish its scope insights. Especialy not for marketing reasons.I just need occasionaly peak position and peak width in numbers on an FFT to quickly read out without fiddling with cursors. A math function could implement that. If FFT could be implemented in VHDL plus math that could even run in real time in WaveScan.WaveScan might not be fast enough to always catch all anomalies but its so quickly configuered and can run for days which saves so much time for me to find problems.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 11:41:51 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on September 15, 2016, 12:48:21 pmThis is the important point for everyone to understand, searching the acquired data after the fact looking for anomalies has a much higher blind time than looking at realtime or your extreme example of peak detect in roll mode which theoretically has no blind time if you check the screen at least once per horizontal period. Different ways to look for different characteristics, and all useful techniques.Quote from: AutomationGuy on September 15, 2016, 06:45:49 pmYes, this is the approach taken by some other manufacturers with hardware mask testing or advanced triggers. Lecroy goes further and offers a very unique triggerScan mode where it will step through a list of triggers to test against but sadly doesn't apply them in parallel so the blind time becomes proportional to the number of features you are looking for exceptions on (similar scaling for wavescan). So its about evaluating the possibility for different tools to a) see the anomaly, and b) the rate at which it can check for that specific anomaly amongst all the other possible anomalies it is looking for.More advanced searches can be conduced offline, so they increase the ability to detect anomalies, but they capture slower and with higher blind times than simpler tools such as mask testing or visual assessment of an eye diagram. None of the tools are better for all situations no matter how much Mr W says so.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2016, 09:14:48 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 15, 2016, 12:34:59 pmWhile literally true, this statement is misleading; operations like digital triggering, peak detection, timebase decimation, and DPO functions work on the non-trivial real time subset of samples in parallel with or between the digitizer and acquisition memory limited only by logic resources. While I expect designers attempt to make this subset of samples as small as possible because logic costs more than memory (memory is incredibly cheap in all respects), it always exists unless none of these operations are present like on very early or very cheap DSOs. What gets stored in the acquisition record has been processed except in trivial cases or apparently if you are LeCroy.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 15, 2016, 12:34:59 pmI am not interesting in "sufficient" replacements; I am interested in superior replacements which if they do not cover all previous applications, at least do not preclude them using the older method. DPO is usually but not always a superior replacement for peak detection so the later is still needed. I am not sanguine that WaveScan is a superior replacement for either.Marketing said the same thing about large acquisition memories replacing the need for delayed acquisition and peak detect yet the result has been lower performance or outright uselessness in a minority of applications which older DSOs without large acquisition memories have no trouble with; if a DSO misses the long tail of applications, then that is not an improvement no matter how much marketing tries to convince otherwise. For instance if a current DSO cannot capture the jitter on a GPS pulse per second output at a sampling rate commensurate with its bandwidth, then I am not interested in it no matter how good its automatic measurement capability, touch screen, "one true knob" user interface (HP), and dual aspect ratio display (LeCroy) is.Dig up Bob Colwell's Stanford lecture where he mentions "Blue Crystals" for an example of marketing driving development to its detriment. If you cannot find it, I can provide it as a bittorrent link. Marketing reminds me of the law aphorism about pounding the table but suitably modified:If you have the record length on your side, pound the record length. If you have the WaveScan on your side, pound the WaveScan. If you have neither on your side, pound the table.Your comment about LeCroy designs originating with physics applications where all original data is preserved and then analyzed fits with how WaveScan is described as working however I do not think that model is necessary or even suitable for design, development, and troubleshooting.It would be interesting to consider how a modern DSO could work to provide superior performance to older designs. Processing after acquisition strikes me as insufficient by itself unless either deadtime is acceptable or processing occurs in real time in which case why is there an acquisition record at all?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2016, 02:34:03 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on September 16, 2016, 09:14:48 amThat is right, because other scopes use 'destructive' acquisition modes (destructive as in the original sample data is destroyed) when not in normal mode.It's still only data thoughQuoteThat is fine, but if you follow the discussion then you should realize that it was meant as a "replacement" at a functional sense, not literally, i.e. if you were given the WS3000 you could get the same results as when given a scope with Peak Detect.It certainly didn't mean people like nctnico should rush out and buy one, besides that I've regularly pointing out that no scope should be bought without a test drive. If you had say a DSOX3000T and it fits your needs then it would be silly to sell it and buy a WS3000 instead. But if you're in the market for a scope in that class then the WS3000 is certainly worth consideration, and while it lacks some features it brings others that, while perhaps using a different approach most EE's would take, can replace many of them plus bring further benefits (you may or may not use, but that's up to you).QuoteIt isn't, because WaveScan is not meant to replace DPO, a mode Tek had to implement because their scopes architectures suck so badly that they can't get decent update rates in normal mode without using some tricks. Other scopes have had persistence mode for years, and so does the WS3000.QuoteWell, PD is in pretty much any big brand scope aside from LeCroy, so I must have missed when a manufacturer claimed it's no longer needed because of memory lengths. What has happened though is that the need for PD has reduced a lot, simply because of ever increasing sample meory sizes.QuoteThat may be your opinion, but in reality there are many areas where having the original sample data retained so you can run various analysis modes in parallel is a big advantage. You'll find LeCroy scopes in pretty much every segment of high tech, often simply because no other scope including Keysight can offer the same performance or capabilities. And that has been the case pretty throughout their existence.If that architecture wouldn't work for their customers then I'm sure LeCroy would have already given up on it because implementing a design as on other scopes where sampling modes can be destructive would make it a lot easier for them.

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 05:43:40 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 16, 2016, 02:34:03 pm*All* DSO architectures suck badly if they cannot process the data from the digitizer in real time. That does not make them useless but it prevents them from replacing an analog oscilloscope like the Tektronix 7834 fast storage oscilloscope.Persistence has nothing to do with DPO operation. The earliest non-vector DSOs Tektronix made included it but without DPO operation, it was no faster than non-persistence operation which is to be expected.If I were designing a DPO mode, I would halve the acquisition memory by dividing it into two banks, fill one bank with the real time histogram, and swap banks allowing the histogram to be processed for display while filling the other bank. To take maximum advantage of this, the acquisition record length *must* be limited to provide the maximum trigger rate because otherwise multiple triggers will be present in each histogram. That is not fatal but it effectively creates blind time for data which is not going to be displayed anyway. It also shows why a short record length may be used in DPO mode without any drawbacks except of course for not being able to see the original data which will be required in specific applications.If I care about the original data, record it in parallel for display as needed like when a secondary trigger condition is satisfied. With increasing integration, memory for an extended record is the cheapest thing to add.QuoteMany areas like physics?Apparently then LeCroy oscilloscopes are found in every segment of high tech except those I have worked in. When evaluating equipment, LeCroy has always been close to the bottom for me. These days based on historic reputation which may or may not be deserved, I would group them with the likes of Rigol. Pointing out other manufacturer's flaws does not make them better; just because I am not a fan of current Tektronix designs does not lead me to default to LeCroy.QuoteI do not believe this at all. LeCroy has specialized in a specific DSO design to the exclusion of markets where their reputation is poor anyway. It is easier for them to accept the status quo than to pursue those markets. I am sure they also had patent conflicts with other manufacturers which made certain designs more attractive than others and marketing is going to push what you have.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 06:38:50 pm
content: Quote from: David Hess on September 17, 2016, 05:43:40 pmThat was where they started decades ago. It's hardly their main market.Today this are areas like storage technologies (LeCroy scopes were and still are standard in the labs of most hard disk and other storage manufacturers), and high speed communications/networking (guess what one of the target market for the 100Ghz scope is) or aerospace/defense (for example, LeCroy is the *only* scope manufacturer that even offers procotol support for standards like SpaceWire or EFABus/STANAG3910). They have "scopes" with up to 80 channels, sampling rates of 240GSa/s and inter-channel jitter of less than 130fs. You think this is for physics when the majority of options are for communications, Vector Signal Analysis and other EE related stuff?QuoteWell, then I guess that was either in different fields which didn't require as cutting edge in a scope. Or maybe it wasn't as high tech as you think it was.Quote"Historic reputation"? Which was what exactly?QuoteReally? Rigol which really has nohing that isn't bottom-of-the-barrel? You compare the company that makes the fastest, most advanced scopes you can find, and which supports their scope longer than any other manufacturer with a CHinese B-brand that required Agilent to teach them so that they come up with the bug-ridden products they offer today?If that isn't a stupid statement then I don't know what is.QuoteAnd still that's the vendor you seem to go to for new scopes, which i guess is because you trust them based on the great analog scopes they had.It's no secret that Tektronix scopes are crap. That's why pretty much no-one who knows a bit about the T&M market buys them unless they have no choice.QuoteSo what, I never expected it did, nor do I care. Why should I, it's your business what you buy and what not, not mine. I obviously don't even know what you work on so I couldn't even recommend something even if you asked (although my gut feeling is that whatever it is it should be as close to an analog scope as possible).Juts to be clear, I don't want to "convert" anyone, and as stated nor do I suggest that if you have a decent scope already to dump that and buy a LeCroy. All I do is show some alternative about scopes not too many people here know much about, so people know there are alternatives to the trotten path of pretty much only Keysight. You're completely free to ignore that of course and consider only those manufacturers that you trust personally, even if it's what today is pretty much the bottom scrape of all the big brands.QuoteWhich are? You already stated something about "poor reputation" so it would be helpful if you could provide some details.It's clearly not digital storage, communications and aerospace/defense, so what are these markets where they have a poor reputation?QuoteAgain, what are these markets?QuoteWhat "patent conflicts" are these? Can you provide some links please?

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 10:26:36 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 17, 2016, 06:38:50 pmThen how about instead of using one sided feature comparisons you show some of these unique features and how they're used. Telling everyone you have a secret technique/feature that makes all other scopes pointless while failing to tell anyone else either how it solves problems better or even what that feature or technique is just makes you look like a you're here to be intentionally obtuse and blustery.Even when presented with well described examples of how people use peak detect to learn about signals, you immediately dismiss them without capturing all the requirements:Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on September 14, 2016, 10:13:21 amPeak detect runs at the acquisition sample rate, and as discussed can have zero blind time. This can be very important to quickly assess the signal especially in something as complex as video. But without any examples or evidence you claim that a technique with substantial blind time (still unquantified) would be a much better way to do it, and then continue to argue on and on about it. The simple answer is to provide some figures of the blind time and the capabilities of the wavescan triggers then we can see what applications it might be superior for. But until then you're just broadcasting your unsubstantiated view and we're all sceptical.Analog (even some digital) video signals are good candidates for visual assessment or mask testing due to their structuredframeswhich are complex enough to only be decoded by specialist signal analysers (from Tek). We know of two tools which work for this, a fast realtime scope, or the video analysers.

author: heavenfish
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 10:21:09 am
content: There're two primary usecases for oscilloscopes. First it's a validation tool that people use it to view the waveform or make measurements to see whether your circuits work as expected; second it's a troubleshooting tool that people use it to find bugs by looking for a abnormal signal or incorrect cmd being sent through serial buses. Though the later seems need more advanced features sets in oscilloscopes, an oscilloscope still needs some basic things to do what it was invented for: waveform visualization.Wavescan can help to debug and find any glitches from video waveforms or any other waveforms. But if a student or technician wants to show an entire frame of video signal on the screen, just show, there's no better way than simply using peak detect mode.This doesn't mean Lecroy did anything wrong. In the end, no product can meet everybody's need and make them all happy. It's about the choice of the company and the product manager. Which features are more important for the applications and customers they focus, or easier to implement with their technology.

author: mjames
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 06, 2021, 06:00:48 pm
content: What are the general differences between the different types of Lecroy scopes, i.e., WavePro vs WaveRunner vs WaveSurfer, etc.?Thanks,m-- Mark

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2021, 06:12:26 am
content: Quote from: mjames on June 06, 2021, 06:00:48 pmOn LeCroy web site, they have all the info you need, including comparison tables for exactly that.. Shortly, they range differ in capabilities and frequency ranges while keeping similar look and feel...

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2021, 11:28:45 am
content: Quote from: mjames on June 06, 2021, 06:00:48 pmWaveSurfer are upper midrange scopes with BWs of up to 1GHz, which are usually built on some kind of embedded platform (SOC or x86), and with a more limited set of functionality. These are intended to be flexible general purpose scopes for tasks which don't require extended analysis capabilities.WaveRunner are lower high-end scopes with BWs up to 4GHz, built on Windows (x86), and with notably expanded capabilities over the WaveSurfer. The WRs are intended as debugging and analysis scopes. There also is an 8 channel variant, which is also sold together with advanced power analysis software as Motor Drive Analyzer (MDA).WavePros are mid-high-end scopes with BWs up to 8GHz, also built on Windows (x86), with some additional features over the WaveRunner. These scopes are often used for serial data analysis and compliance testing. There also are special application variants for hard disk manufacturing (DDA, Disk Drive Analyzer).WaveMasters are upper high-end scopes with BWs up to 30GHz, other than that they are similar in functionality to the WavePro. There also are special application variants for comm systems testing (SDA, Signal Data Analyzer).LabMasters are modular ultra-high-end scope systems with BWs up to 100GHz and up to 80 channels. The functionality is similar to WavePro/WaveMaster.HDOs are high definition scope models (although other LeCroy scopes are now HD as well) which are positioned between WaveSurfer and WaveRunner.Everything else below WaveSurfer is just re-badged kit from other brands (Iwatsu in the past, Siglent today).

author: Sighound36
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2021, 06:10:29 pm
content: If there is anything in particular you would like to know happy to help, we own few Lecroy scopes including a Wavepro HD, 8000MDA and a couple of Waveunner runner HD's plus some 6000's

author: maxwell3e10
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2022, 04:42:11 am
content: I am trying to find an inexpensive scope with at least 1 GHz bandwidth and ability to do fast waveform averaging. It seems like Wavepro 7000 series would work, but I don't know how fast is its math averaging function. Would someone be able to test it?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2022, 10:36:08 am
content: Don't expect fast update rates. Everything is done in software on the Wavepro 7k series and the software isn't pushing the processor what it is capable off. Count on 1000 waveform updates/s tops in the best case scenario.

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2022, 11:23:53 am
content: Someone with a Lecroy 12 bit scope (HDO*** ? ) can please tell me how the noise reduction with the enhanced resolution works on practice? ie does one need to setup another math channel with the enhanced res on it, or does it apply directly to the channel being mesasured like the High-res in Tek scopes?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2022, 03:43:12 pm
content: Quote from: PartialDischarge on August 03, 2022, 11:23:53 amEres is a math function on these.This is something Siglent SDS2000X HD does more versatile, because you can have ERES as acquisition mode and math channel...Best...Not enough homework... They have a Filter function in channels (that seems to to be ERes) and math ERes.Thanks Martin!

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2022, 08:24:37 pm
content: We got a HDO6034A at work, you can do enhanced resolution via math, but also directly in the channel menu.Can make a pic from it tomorrow.

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 04, 2022, 07:00:24 am
content: Quote from: Martin72 on August 03, 2022, 08:24:37 pmYes please, take a pic of both ways and see if the noise reduction works and is the same.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 04, 2022, 07:46:37 am
content: Quote from: PartialDischarge on August 04, 2022, 07:00:24 amOf course it works...Question is: what are your expectations and criteria for it?

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 04, 2022, 09:13:04 am
content: I just want to see how it is activated and that it works, even just for the usec division which is not much for these scopes, I don’t have access to one of these. I have had already 2 customers who have these scopes but seem to have no idea on how to setup this mode or that it exists. There is serious lack of basic knowledge on how to measure with a scope in young engineers today, people measuring noise in pkpk instead of rms etc...

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 04, 2022, 09:32:46 am
content: Quote from: PartialDischarge on August 04, 2022, 09:13:04 amI agree there is widespread lack of detailed knowledge.. In part because scopes have never been more powerful (complicated).And also by nobody reading manuals anymore apparently..ERes is quite well documented actually... See attachment.. There are several white papers on LeCroy site that go into even more details.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 04, 2022, 09:59:35 am
content: Quote from: PartialDischarge on August 04, 2022, 09:13:04 amIf those scopes have some options, it is very likely that these include signal filtering. From my experience with Lecroy scopes these are even harder to setup but have the potential to create much steeper high pass, band pass and low pass filters which could be a better solution to isolate signals which live in a certain frequency band.@2N3055: I'd don't think the Eres principle is the problem but the user interface. From what I have seen from my Lecroy Wavepro 7k is that it is very powerfull but getting math & functions going, is far from trivial. You really need to know what you are doing and what you are after.If the goal is to have a scope that can do high resolution and simple averaging functions, then other brands which simply have 'high res' and average modes are far easier to drive.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 04, 2022, 06:10:30 pm
content: Eres in the channelmenu..Signal was stopped(because I had to give the DUT away...), you can see some small disturbances on it.With eres, the signal is clear.But you can also use eres as a mathfunction ( 8....EIGHT mathchannels..LOL).

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 04, 2022, 07:39:53 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on August 04, 2022, 09:59:35 amI agree ease of use is important.. But saying "as simple as possible but no simpler" comes to mind.My problem with these "other scopes" is that they have something easy but no control or explanation what is happening to your signal..So for real control you need to embrace complexity.. You can optimize UI but in the end you will still have more parameters to set than with a scope that simply does "something" to the signal with one click...ERes should be quite simple: enable it and choose how many bits you want.. I attached excerpt from manual. And, quite frankly, people who cannot be bothered to read that much and understand it will have problems with basic electronics... Yes, I know, that sounds abrasive and insulting, but it is truth.If I had Wavepro 7000, I would buy a small Rigol, Siglent, Micsig etc.. in addition to it for noncritical daily type of work..Not because Wavepro is too complicated, but it takes more time to setup. Like you say. I agree with that. Saving time is important. But sometimes it takes hours to setup experiment. Scope setup time becomes miniscule part of that time.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 04, 2022, 10:01:16 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on August 04, 2022, 06:10:30 pmThe "same" +3 bits of enhancement produced different results and frequency cutoff ? Even when the timebase/samplerate seems to be the same?

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 04, 2022, 10:10:15 pm
content: I didn´t change anything when swapped to the math functions.

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2022, 03:18:23 am
content: C1 has a 20MHz low pass filter applied to it, but It seems the math function is taking the raw data from C1, which in part makes sense

author: Performa01
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2022, 06:51:39 am
content: Quote from: Someone on August 04, 2022, 10:01:16 pmMartin used the 20 MHz bandwidth limiter for the input channel. So it's only consequent that the reported bandwidth in the channel menu cannot exceed 20 MHz.By contrast, the math function does not care about the bandwidth limited source and reports the full ERES bandwidth.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2022, 07:37:44 am
content: One thing I can see is that ESR (enhanced sample rate) ison.One thing to note is that cutoff frequencies are consistent with 2.5 GS/s and 10 GS/s respectively (1.25 and 5GHz theoretical BW before ERES).Whichmightmean that ERes in a channel is made from data before ESR, and in math after ESR (naturally).I would disable ESR and try if then it is the same.20 MHz BW limitshouldbe physical, analog filter in channel input.BW shown are for ERes alone, based on (Nyquist x 0,016) for 3 bit ... Or at least itshouldbe like that..Maybescope "saw" use of BW20 limiter and "decided" to use 4x decimated data to save on filter taps..But I doubt.I would try disabling ESR first and try again.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2022, 07:16:21 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on August 04, 2022, 09:32:46 amSeems the HDO6000A do have some more feature in it´s software- although it´s basically the same ( before buying the 6000 we got a 4000 on loan).Because in the manual of the HDO6000/Waverunner 9000 there is the same part about Eres function like you attached in your post.And one additional more, the possibility to choose Eres in the channelbox, see my pic below (It´s just this one sentence).By the way, turning the channel to full bandwith changes nothing on the bandwith when Eres is +3bit on the channelmenu.

author: HighVoltage
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2022, 03:54:00 pm
content: I have always looked at LeCroy scopes as a niche market filler.Over the years I only owed two LeCroy scopes and both were extremely bad in responding, when any kind of math or extra functionality was turned on.I never had these problems with any of the Agilent / Keysight scopes.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2022, 04:17:59 pm
content: I tend to agree with that assessment. Although: are the Agilent / Keysight scopes you are referring to using decimated data or acquired data for math? One of the (few) good things about Lecroy scopes is that they use acquired data for math (not sure about the various rebadges they sell) .

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2022, 06:03:11 pm
content: Quote from: HighVoltage on August 06, 2022, 03:54:00 pmThat is a sleazy comercial, not something I would expect from a great company..(i don't like comparisons from LeCroy or Tek either, they all go too far in this kind of material)Comparing 1 GHz/2.5 GS/s with a 8 GHz 40GS/s and noting the lather one is more accurate near 1 GHz...And showing ENOB for only one amplitude that incidentally sits in Keysight sweet spot...As for Keysight scopes being more "responsive" to user input that is what they optimize for. There are people that do lots of simple, fast operations with a scope and demand "instantaneous" response to user commands.Even if that means that scope is slow calculating. I see that with my MSOX3104T compared to SDS6104H12.Simple waveform view, edge trigger and it feels like analog scope.. up to 1 Meg trigs per sec.... Amazing.I switch on math, and FFT updates every 2 seconds, and that is on puny 64 Kpoints.At the same time SDS6104H12 will update 8 MEGpoint FFT several times a second...I see your statement more as a testament you are doing specific type of work and use scopes in a way that Keysight concept suits you. And I have a feeling you mostly prefer Infiniivision series (3000/4000/6000).Because S series in that video has same concept as LeCroys (just cruder), and is even slower to drive for everyday work.LeCroy is niche, or not. They are great for R&D, science folks, test... They are "scopes with analysis lab built in". If you need that, they are first choice, if you don't, than you don't...I find them logical to setup, but I never was a button twiddler, more of a make plan first before doing something...We are all different and have different needs..

author: HighVoltage
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2022, 10:22:36 am
content: Yes, you are correct, my comparison is with the Keysight Infiniivision Series 3000X, 4000X, and 6000X, which I use every day in my work. And for some reasons they are just perfect for my applications.I don't have a S-Series nor have I used a Keysight S-Series scope. (Maybe one day!) The video compares two scopes in the same price range and the LeCroy does show some basic limitations. I also think they set the S-Series to 1 GHz bandwidth. One could probably also find limitations in Keysight scopes, no question!My personal experience with LeCroy scopes have just been terrible. And yes, I know that LeCroy makes some amazing high end scopes for research but they are in a range of not affordable to normal businesses.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2022, 01:32:32 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on August 06, 2022, 06:03:11 pmActually, the effect shown in the video is sin x/x reconstruction going wrong on the Lecroy for some reason. With 2.5Gs/s there shouldn't be any problem showing a 1GHz sine wave. I'm not going point fingers as to where the problem is due to the nature of the video.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2022, 02:17:32 pm
content: Quote from: HighVoltage on August 07, 2022, 10:22:36 amIf you have found an instrument that is perfect for your use that is great!As I said, I do own MSOX3104T and use it. Among my scopes, that is the one that replaces "old school" CRT scopes... It has many good sides, and many limitations, depending of what you ...I know they limited input filter to 1GHz, but if you look at the FFT, it is brickwall response, sampled at 40 GS/s and with full 8 GHz bandwidth and then software discards anything above 1 GHz.. Keysight can even use ERES here, because of massive oversampling, which would explain very optimistic ENOB figures...But , biggest point here is that they took two completely differently targeted instruments and compare them at uneven metrics.. That particular LeCroy is, for instance, used a lot in power electronics industry because of 12 Bit and comprehensive analysis packages available... Super high bandwidth would even be undesirable here...

author: David Hess
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2022, 04:35:04 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on August 06, 2022, 06:03:11 pmQuote from: HighVoltage on August 07, 2022, 10:22:36 amMy understanding is that LeCroy oscilloscopes were originally descendant from high speed digitizers intended for the scientific research and nuclear weapon testing. These applications require high speed, long record length, and unattended operation. I think this is reflected in LeCroy preferring long record lengths while relying on post processing rather than real time processing during aquision.I have noticed that modern oscilloscopes intended for use as automated test equipment also usually lack a responsive and easy to use front panel interface, as opposed to oscilloscopes intended for service work where the operator does not necessarily know what they are looking for, so a good interface is more important.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2022, 07:53:35 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on August 05, 2022, 07:16:21 pmAsked lecroy support for this.He wasn´t sure but he think it´s because of the avaible 20Mhz BW limit why eres in the channel menu is also limited to 20Mhz.Then a nice explaination followed about the eres filter function, I think I post it here tomorrow, maybe it´s interesting.

author: Verticon
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2022, 08:54:58 pm
content: This wiggling (up and down, left and right) trace of the sinusoid signal on the display of the LeCroy scope is exactly the same artefact what I see on my DDA120(LC574-series). The scope has a bandwith of 1 GHz but the wiggling starts already at a few hundred MHz where the signal on another scope with much less bandwidth is absolutely stable. I was wondering about the reason for that and thought that it is probably a defect in the trigger section. But when I see it on an actual LeCroy model one could assume that this is LeCroy specific. It's hard to believe because in general the DDA120 is a very powerful scope.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 08, 2022, 09:40:50 pm
content: If you mean my posts, it´s a 20khz sinewave feeding into a little transformer, scope is on one of it´s secondary outputs.Scope was a 12 bit lecroy with 350Mhz bandwith.It´s a very small transformer so I must use micro testleads on his pins and then connect the probe on this leads - probably the reason for the disturbances on the sinewave signal.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2022, 01:28:18 am
content: Quote from: David Hess on August 07, 2022, 04:35:04 pmOld thread. I still own four vintage LeCroy DSOs (7200, 7200A, 64xi & WM8500) and no other scopes. The SSDs I was told were never going to hold up for more than a few weeks have now been active for 8 years. Also, the 1G Ethernet card that was added to the WM has never given me any troubles. I'm still not a fan of the Waveblunder but after 8 years, its starting to grow on me. Since installing all new knobs, I only had one fall off once. The plastic case continued to crumble to the point where the front of the unit was starting to fall apart. My bench it seems is a harsh environment. I ended up finding some gray plastic that I melted into the original along with a bit of silver paint, that doesn't match, to cover it up. The electronic design was never a problem but the mechanics looks like it was done by people selling to Harbor Freight.The attached were taken from the 1990 catalog which provides some of the history.

author: hpw
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2022, 07:54:34 am
content: @Joe: I still own four vintage LeCroy DSOs (7200, 7200A, 64xi & WM8500) and no other scopes.I am at the same point, as looking for service manual WM8000A & and maintenance to made (cap's to replace, rotary encoders to replace, dust to remove inside, front bezel to replaced, calibration locally ...) and in addition may adding additional SW options. Even possible to transfer the options them from dead to working DSO or even purchase them??As they are from good parents so maintenance is as on an old FerrariBTW: Just a warning to purchase them on ebay (and not only) as claimed warranty given but never able to provide, working what is not fully trough and even not cleaned sold at all. As it goes with LeCroy probes as required TIP's missing at all!!

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 09, 2022, 12:19:31 pm
content: To be clear: Lecroy has re-used the 7200A model number for a 2GHz / 20Gs/s WavePro model.

author: moerm
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2024, 03:23:37 pm
content: Allow me as a still almost outsider to talk about what I saw here, in particular in this thread, but also to some degree generally.I personally have an almost brutally pragmatic approach. Example: I don't ask or even care which instrument, let alone which brand, is "the best". I rather try to find out what the "best" for me and within a certain budget, "best" meaning some numbers (like WUR, Samplerate, etc), sure, but at least as importantly, (ideally all) the features I need.LeCroy fell out of my scope (as in "what I looked at") for one simple reason: no MSO, at least not with a reasonable budget. Side note: I have a certain lab structure, mainly based on recognizing that there simply is no "perfect scope" and that I need to define a few kinds of tasks and then find the scope for those tasks, e.g. a "versatile bread and butter everyday scope" vs a higher end analysis scope.One factor that I felt making it particularly difficult, also here, and well visible in this very thread here, is the "mine is superior to yours" also appearing in the form of "Brand X isthetrue/best instrument, period" but also in the form of "a scope without feature xyz is basically worthless".But I also, not learned, but found again what I take to be human kinks out of control, e.g. a 10000+ post "heavyweight" in all seriousness putting some Rigolcrap, uhm, stuff right next to professional quality gear.And I also found (and disclose right away that I'm a fan) Wuerstchenhund who, the way I see it, isnottrying to "sell" LeCroy scopes but likes them and seems to be on a (laudable) mission to remind the community that there is A-brand life outside of Tektronix and Agilent (pardon me, but I refuse to play their "use the most current name" game). And he seems to be a very knowledgeable man with plenty experience in the TME world - but, of bloody course, some seem to be incapable to let a brand they don't care about or simply dislike for whatever reason enjoying a bit light. It seems almost as if some reflex forced them to hit on any attempt by Wuerstechenhund.I myself developed kind of a somewhat weak spot for LeCroy scopes but got seriously pi__ed off by their, so it seems, "we don't give a flying f_ck aboutsmallcustomers!" attitude. So, all in all, I'm certainly not a warrior for LeCroy. But one should be able to recognize and accept that they did some things damn right and/or well (e.g. their probe interface continuity).Somewhat similarly I hear people over and over again say that Tektronix digital scopes are slow as snails - while a certain gentleman from down under seemed to almost have an orgasm when he introduced the new 2000 thingy.Would it maybe be possible to (possibly in another and/or new thread) getreasonableand moderate, concrete experience based info on the Tek TDS7000 series, preferably without some Rigol fan taking a dump?I'm asking because I wonder how the Wavepro 7300 and the Tek TDS7254 compare.Sidenote: yes I've heard it, Tek digital scopes are snails - but is that really also true for kind of (former) high-end scopes? And, if so, how bad is it? I'm asking because such a scope, for me, wouldnotbe my everyday, go to scope but my north of 500 MHz (i.e. only occasionally used) and analysis scope, so while snail speed would not be OK, "cow with a lame leg" slowwouldbe OK and with a max budget of about 4k or 5k for such a beast I'd not be a beggar but neither can I expect too much.And no, I don't feel bad about possibly derailing this thread because a) it's pretty much dead anyway, and b) my point is not off-topic (WP 7300 is within topic I guess).Thanks and have a nice sunday

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2024, 04:06:24 pm
content: As for the MSO, my old scopes supported the MS-32. This was made by NCI GoLogic, GLUSB-36-1M-575. You can find various flavors of this for cheap (<600 USD) but not the exact same one. I've often wondered if they have anything proprietary in the one sold to LeCroy.Wuerstchenhund had tried to give me advice on the SSDs and the 1Gb interface claiming both would be problematic. History has proven otherwise. Good source but would rather if you don't know or unsure, don't present your claims as fact. He is also the person who had suggested swapping the CPU in the WaveBlunder and claimed performance increase. I don't think he ever presented any data and I never made the switch.Shame he left, but he was banned for some reason or another prior. Guessing people were reporting him for some reason or another. Doubt it was for bad advice as that would take out 100% of us. They reactivated his account but seemed to mark the end of his posting. Again, too bad IMO.

author: moerm
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2024, 04:19:40 pm
content: @joeqsmithThank you."MS-32" I know but I seem to remember that only somewhat newer LeCroy scopes seem to have supported that device plus its price tag looked prohibitively high (but maybe I remember something wrong).And yes, I know your story with Wuerstchenhund's advice, at least the basic line, and I agree; it seems his knowledge in that area was a bit off. But still, from what I looked at and found out (checking what he said generally about LeCroy scopes), modulo some details, I got a much clearer picture of LeCroy and their scopes.Say, did you possibly happen to ever have had your fingers on (or, even better, played or worked with) a TDS7000? I'd really value your feedback. What wouldyouconsider to be a at least halfway reasonable alternative to a WP7300 within 4k to 5k$?

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2024, 05:27:34 pm
content: My WaveBluner was made in 2006 and supports the MS-32. I know my old WaveMaster supports it as well. I have never seen one, let alone tried one. Doing a search there is a used on listed on eBay now for 2k. Several similar ones listed for $500. With them LeCroy rebranding Siglent, you may be able to get something much better and lower cost. I have zero experience with Siglent scopes.I had called him out about a comment he made about their first PC based scopes as my old 7200A used a standard PC 486DX motherboard which I believe was their actual first step into using a common PC platform. Guessing he just didn't know the history. It used PSOS, and maybe PC to him meant MS Windows. Again just small misinformation which wasn't a problem. Adds some color to the discussion. But it seems he got into a few large battles with members. I don't remember them ever posting anything political, religious.... that would have potentially led to their being banned.I have not used the Tektronix you mention and really have no idea about their support, if it could it be serviced, parts availability, manuals.... IMO, buying vintage high end equipment is a crap shoot. Your 4-5k may not cover the repairs and service when you buy your "working" scope used. And you may not be able to work a deal to have it shipped to the OEM for inspection as they may longer support it. Even if it works when received, can you afford to buy a second one for parts to keep it running? Lots of custom parts.... This is why I was wondering in the lower speeds, does it now make more sense to get something new.You could add a couple of zeros onto that and get a new WaveMaster with options. I was looking at one for work. They do seem nice.https://www.teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/wavemaster-hd

author: moerm
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2024, 06:51:49 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on April 21, 2024, 05:27:34 pmI never saw an explanation either. But that may be due to lurking but not carefully reading any and all threads.Whatever, it seems that at some later point in time he was allowed back, but seems to be much less active since. A bit sad, I always enjoyed reading his posts.Quote from: joeqsmith on April 21, 2024, 05:27:34 pmYep, that's my view too, that buying vintage high end equipment is a bit like lottery.That said, nope, I still prefer to go that route (forsomeinstruments). One major reason being that older equipment usually was of significantly higher quality and mainly driven by engineers rather than "managers", or worse, by marketing and sales people (I want to stay polite ...).Yes, some materials used back then, in particular plastics, it seems were lower quality, but still, all in all, one got a quality that seems hard to get nowadays with all the "a computer plus some slapped on analog stuff" equipment, profit optimized, of course.And I have a (small) advantage: I don't care for anything north of 2.5 GHz (with scopes), nor do I run a show room (cracked front plate? So what, as long as that device works fine).My major worry with Tektronix is their tendency to use proprietary chips etc. which nowadays are either ridiculously expensive or unobtainium plus they seem to have multiple waves of "bad luck" that is, crapacitors, whole board sections with bad soldering, etc.Thank you again!

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2024, 08:24:17 pm
content: Wuerstchenhund initiated robust discussion based on his wide experience in the TE field as an advisor to professional purchase. There is little equipment he has not come in contact with or used.Some could never look past his valuable input which brought complaints and eventually banning.Later a group of supporters requested his reinstatement here which brings us to where things stand today.Last I heard he had some talk of relocating which as we all know would be a considerable draw on any of his spare time hence little contribution here for a while.Would be good to see him check in again......

author: alm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 21, 2024, 09:46:03 pm
content: Quote from: moerm on April 21, 2024, 03:23:37 pmI wonder how many people who use(d) a Tek TDS7000 scope you'll find in this topic. I'm pretty sure Wuerstchenhund wrote about the TDS7000 (though probably not in this topic). He was not a fan, if I remember correctly, and thought much higher of the Wavepro 7000 series. I have never used the TDS7000 series, so I can't comment.I believe the TDS7000 series does not use standard BNC inputs, so be sure to budget for whatever adapters you might need (to 50 Ohm SMA/BNC/N or 1 MOhm BNC at reduced bandwidth) if you don't have four TekConnect probes.

author: moerm
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2024, 12:35:27 pm
content: Quote from: alm on April 21, 2024, 09:46:03 pmA link would be helpful and welcome.Quote from: alm on April 21, 2024, 09:46:03 pmYep that's my impression as well and highly likely the case; but maybe, just maybe only for the >= 4 GHz models.Well, anyway it also has some desirable (to me anyway) advantages over the WP7000 (incl. a service manual, possibly even with schematics).Thank you

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2024, 12:46:57 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on April 21, 2024, 08:24:17 pmNot really. In the end he had to admit not having any hands-on experience / knowledge where it comes to the wide range of problems electronics and embedded firmware engineers need to deal with on a daily basis. Basically he just recommended Lecroy regardless based on his experience in a rather narrow field which just happened to fit Lecroy well (or people he bought equipment for just didn't care / know to look further to see if there is equipment which fits their use case better).

author: alm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2024, 03:32:41 pm
content: Quote from: moerm on April 22, 2024, 12:35:27 pmIs Google blocked in your country?Here's some comments by Wuerstchenhund:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/recommendations-for-a-fast-(ghz)-scope/https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-tektronix-3-series-mdo/100/And here some more discussion about the TDS7000 series (not involving Wuerstchenhund):https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/tek-7404-4ghz-scope-on-ebay/