Siglent - 11/20 - New SDS1104X-U, 4 channel 100MHz, 1Gsa/s economy oscilloscope - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 07:01:01 pm
content: Edit: Now with comparison pics, thanks Dave!SDS1104X-U$399.00100 MHz bandwidthReal-time sampling rate up to 1 GSa/sRecord length up to 14 MptsSerial bus triggering and decoder supports protocols I2C, SPI, UART, CAN, LINAdvanced measurements on full memory (14 Mpts)Large 7-inch TFT-LCD display with 800 * 480 resolutionSIGLENT’s SDS1000X-U Series Super Phosphor Oscilloscopes is available in one bandwidth, 100 MHz. It has a maximum sample rate of 1 GSa/s and a maximum record length of 14 Mpts. For ease of use, the most commonly used functions can be accessed with its user-friendly front panel design.The SDS1000X-U series employs a new generation of SPO (Super Phosphor Oscilloscope) technology that provides excellent signal fidelity and performance. It comes with an innovative digital trigger system with high sensitivity and low jitter, and a waveform capture rate of 400,000 frames/sec (sequence mode). The SDS1000X U also employs a 256 level intensity grading display function and a color temperature display mode not found in other models in this class.Link to new scopehttps://siglentna.com/product/sds1104x-u/Discuss!Rather interesting offering... not sure what to think of it vs the E yet

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 07:11:09 pm
content: After looking it over it seems more or less 100 bucks less for losing the accessory port.. which frankly the ones for it never excited me anywayI suspect this very well could be enabled to 200 MHz but as its a board spin maybe not... wont be till someone gets one and gives it go that we will knowEdit.. on second thought they could have just depopd it and its just a bom rev

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 07:31:56 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 28, 2020, 07:11:09 pmThey cut a lot of other features, too. Reduced FFT size, reduced sample memory, less ADCs... and who knows what else?Quote from: Elasia on November 28, 2020, 07:11:09 pma) That's just a guess.b) You really don't want want 200Mhz bandwidth on a 4-channel scope with 1Ghz sample rate. It breaks Nyquist.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 07:50:57 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 28, 2020, 07:11:09 pmNo, it needs be a new PCB as the signal path has changed to allow a single ADC to process all 4 channels.

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 08:05:38 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on November 28, 2020, 07:50:57 pmIts a single now? Ouch..... market fishing for higher profit margins? This seems like a lot of effort for a lot less product for not a lot less money..... no idea who would buy this and just throw their dollars away as far as single user or small groups go... this thing is a flop for the hobbyist with the E version around and not much more

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 08:31:09 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 28, 2020, 08:05:38 pmThere are several omissions in capability with X-U now that were clearly outlined in rf-loops SDS1104X-U thread.IIRCNo MSO, only 1 USB-A port, zero options, web server removed, lesser Pts FFT, no 500uV/div, No Bode plot.It's obvious to me SDS1104X-U has been built down to a price point for the hobbyists first 4ch DSO where based on it's other specifications still competes strongly with anything else in this new price point.The devil is in the details and one need study any DSO datasheet carefully.....which is no problem, we're engineers aren't we ?I see the X-E at a higher level of capability albeit more expensive however it's already a well proven platform in the sub $500 bracket.SDS1104X-U is sub $400 bracket like SDS1202X-E but the 200 MHz 2ch can do some things X-U cannot do.Interesting times.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 09:14:12 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 28, 2020, 08:05:38 pmWell, that didn't take very long....

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 09:35:04 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on November 28, 2020, 08:31:09 pmIf they sell it at 250 on sale that would make a nice pickup.. half the cost and an entire different bracket on the cheap end

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 09:38:39 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 28, 2020, 09:35:04 pmFor a 4ch DSO....I wish.....what are you smoking ?Can I have some ?

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 09:47:30 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on November 28, 2020, 09:38:39 pmI smoke only the finestReally though its not to far off from seeing one show up sooner or laterhttps://www.tequipment.net/Instek/GDS-1054B/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?v=7401Instek 4 channels are only 310

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 10:03:52 pm
content: Just so we don't forget the real specs of this new 4ch X-U...actually not so new as been available from web shops in China for a little while:100 MHz bandwidth1 GSa/s14 Mpts << see table by rf-loop:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-1120-new-sds1104x-u-4-channel-100mhz-1gsas-economy-oscilloscope/msg3356644/#msg3356644Waveform capture rates up to 100,000 wfm/s (normal mode) and 400,000 wfm/s (sequence mode)Decodes: IIC, SPI, UART, CAN, LINHistory and Sequence modes (max 80,000 frames)Search, NavigateGated measurementsStatistics128 k pts FFT, supports Peaks and Markers1 mV/div sensitivityNo glare 7" displayFull channel tab info: input attenuation, input coupling, BW limit, Vertical position and V/div.Of course some cannot open their eyes and plainly see all these things staring at you in website imagery and in datasheets.

author: Lowkus
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 10:24:47 pm
content: If I purchase an SDS1204X-E ($760) or an SDS2104X Plus ($1400), over the course of several years would I save myself more than a week of wasted time compared to using an SDS1104X-U? Are the capabilities of the more expensive scopes going to have a significant impact on how long it takes me to debug problems in my circuits?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 11:07:48 pm
content: Quote from: Lowkus on November 28, 2020, 10:24:47 pmIt depends what you do. There is no much difference between 1000X-E and X-U for, let's say service work.And there is lot of difference to 2000X+ if you do some development and want to be able to analyse and capture more.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 28, 2020, 11:34:26 pm
content: 1000X, 1000X+, 1000X-E, 1000X-U....Why don´t giving different models more clearer "names" ?Same with 2000X, 2000X-E, 2000X+...

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 06:56:32 am
content: Quote from: Lowkus on November 28, 2020, 10:24:47 pmWe really need know more.Each of the 3 have their place but the 1204X-E and 2104X Plus are 200 MHz class DSO's whereas X-U is just 100 MHz.X-U doesn't have 500uV/div sensitivity and while one normally replies I don't need that, consider what probes you might use with it. Eg with a 100x probe 100mV/div becomes max sensitivity for a X-U. Same applies for differential probes where 200x and 500x are common attenuations.Do you already have an AWG and if not the SDS2104X Plus has a 50 MHz inbuilt as an option however for a promotional period this is free. Likewise the SDS1204X-E has AWG capability albeit in the form of an additional USB powered box that's controlled within the DSO UI. X-U has none of this.Are you comfortable with touch displays ? They are faster and especially when partnered with a mouse. Of the 3 DSO's only SDS2104X Plus offers this.Learning a new UI or any UI for that matter is a cost in time but IMO time is not the only consideration, it is the whole experience including total capabilities that you may not need right now but they're there for you to grow into of use when that need comes along.I might say get the cheaper X-U or X-E and see how they fit with you with the view to upgrading when the need arises but the SDS2104X Plus has a quite different UI albeit with some similarities to other Siglent DSO's.However, your budget so your decision as we cannot see your needs through your eyes.

author: ballen
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 07:06:50 am
content: It's clear to me. This scope is designed to compete apples to apples with the Rigol 1054Z. It has effectively the same price and feature set. The Rigol has one ADC, this has one. The Rigol does not have 500uV/division, neither does this. The Rigol has no integrated web server, neither does this. And so on.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 07:13:20 am
content: Quote from: ballen on November 29, 2020, 07:06:50 amNearly right.SDS1104X-E was detuned to make the X-U that doesn't require hacking to provide 100 MHz BW.OTOH SDS1104/1204X-E is a 200 MHz platform.All do Dot mode correctly.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 08:36:24 am
content: Quote from: Lowkus on November 28, 2020, 10:24:47 pmThat depends on how complex your circuits are, obviously.If you can afford it and you feel this is an important decision then go straight for 2000-series. They can do more analysis of the signal, they have better FFTs, etc. The manufacturers deliberately leave things out of the lower models.Things like the touch screen of the 2000 will also save you loads of time in general use.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 08:41:27 am
content: Quote from: ballen on November 29, 2020, 07:06:50 amIt's still more expensive than the Rigol.If anything, this will take away sales from the Siglent SDS1104X-E.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 10:47:05 am
content: Quote from: ballen on November 29, 2020, 07:06:50 amLets just ask few questions about new SDS1104X-U to Siglent experts. I don't have the scope so cannot test myself.1. What can you do with segment/history frames. (Rigol cannot do any of this)-Can you play them back with persistence to get envelope of all captured frames ?-Can you decode from them ?-Can you enable measurements on history frames ?2. Does it have Measurement trend (Rigol has that)3. Does it have CAN/LIN (Rigol doesn't)4. Does it measure over full captured data (Rigol doesn't)5. Does it has better/faster msk test. Those are very useful sometimes.6. Does it have detected peaks table in FFT? Is it sortable? (Rigol doesn't have it)7. Does it have search function? What can it do? (Rigol has none)8. Is 1mV/div real analog range. (Rigol has 1mV/div by zooming in software from 5mV/div)9. Does it have color grading display? (It seems to does, Rigol doesn't)Potentially there is quite some difference. Also, for those who care, Siglent is more responsive to user input.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 12:20:14 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on November 29, 2020, 10:47:05 amYes and no. It can automatic playback backward and forward direction with selected speed and when speed is enough fast it also produce intensity gradation.During playback it works like DPO. But it is not just as fast even if turn playback as fast as possible.There can use intensity or color gradation and select what interpolation use or not at all.It do not have settable overlay stack for sequential acqusitions so that it can overlay (stack) all segments in history to one screen. (This feature what have some user settable parameters is wished from Siglent. Looks like it is not in highest priority level in to do list)As far as I know in fast sequence mode when sequence is ready it leave all segments stacked (overlay) on screen until user do his next selection or if it is in continuous mode it start new sequence. Least in X-E models and afaik this works mostly like X-E.QuoteIndependent of if they are from normal acquisition history or after fast segment acquisition in history buffer these can decode.It means that you can trig separate messages and even if period is slow these can capture to history buffer just as they exist and then afterwards individual acquisitions can decode. All what are in history buffer have full data just as in normal acquisition memory. (Added with relative time stamp. There is not RTC).QuoteOf course, fully and with full resolution. Including also FFT and math.QuoteNo. Only normal statistics.QuoteYes it have, just all what also X-E model have including 2 separate decoder (fullduplex).QuoteYes and with full resolution including also waveform history buffer.In this place I will also add that all interpolations are fully post processed and can always change afterwards including history or stopped scope. All is based to full raw ADC data in memory, in runtime and afterwards in acquistion normal memory and in history memory.QuoteIt have hardware based full speed mask test and test result do not affect speed. What is current normal wfm/s speed is also mask test speed and it do not affect wfm/s speed. Also mask test signal output (pass/fail) is full speed.QuoteYes. 10 automatic peak markers. Is it sortable? I do not know what parameters user can give for search peaks or arrange order in table.QuoteYes, some search. I think it is best to read from User Manual. Not easy told by ten words.But can not example search decode result data.QuoteYes, afaik.QuoteYes of course.Most normal things are just same as in X-E models. Even User manual is same.Dropped things are all Optionals. 500uV/div. Web server. BodePlot. 1ns/div time scale. Now minimum is 2ns/div. Other USB port dropped from back side.Reduced things are Double ADC Double memory is now single ADC single memory. Now it is 1/2/3+4Ch in use 1GSa/500MSa/250Msa/s and memory goes 14/7/3,5M.FFT memory length reduced. It is 1/8 from E-X model. Max is now 131072pts (128k). Other ways FFT works same.History, fast sequence, measurements, decode, intensity and color grade all same. Also wfm speed same and so on.

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 12:47:45 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on November 29, 2020, 10:47:05 amConsidering what they did to strip the board to make this, its harder to guess at how well it will preform vs its mother without open reviews posted but does have a good bit the rigol doesnt. That said i dont think this was made directly at rigol either... they have been in that segment for ages now. It's both a platform round out and also like tau said to put a 100M marker at 4ch/400 without being hacked. That said i'd think rigol would be coming out with something new sooner or later that would smoke it because its not rigol but gwinstek who actually has the better offering than rigol and this new siglent if hacked and dont forget both the rigol and gwinstek platforms are over FIVE years old now.... all they need to do is refresh their bargain scopes and it will push this one out. Both of them have not had much reason to release something till now so siglent pushing this item is a good thing to give them a kick in the pants as the 100M mark will eat into their higher cost 100s.. gw's is some 600+I'd be more interested in a comparison against gwinstek GDS-1000B that has a lot of what the siglent doeshttps://www.gwinstek.com/en-global/products/downloadSeriesDownNew/1738/130

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 12:59:28 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 29, 2020, 12:47:45 pmAs I said earlier: Rigol will definitely have to respond to this, even if it's only a price cut.(although I still think it will eat at least as many sales of Siglent SDS1000X-E as it will of Rigol's DS1054Z)In the end though,we all win.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 01:07:12 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 29, 2020, 12:47:45 pmThis Siglent U scope runs the same platform as the GW Instek GDS-1054B and if you open them up you'll likely find exactly the same parts. The Siglent U is just a stripped down version of an existing design. The difference is that GW Instek did this earlier on.When hacked the GDS-1054B gives you a scope which (compared to the Siglent U) has lower waveform rate but more memory per channel (10Mpts / 20Mpts in segmented mode), free form math, input signal filtering, better memory management (if you tell it to use 1Mpts it will use 1Mpts), 1Mpts FFT (with search and markers) and last but not least individual channel controls. And there are other neat things GW Instek has like being able to mount a Windows file share to dump data onto a computer directly over the network.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 01:37:51 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 29, 2020, 12:47:45 pmImho, it is NOT made for competite with Rigol DS1000Z. There is no single reason today for compete with it. There is markets for both and also it need remember 1kZ is today least partially obsolete so why compete with already obsolete instrument.There is markets for this Siglent (and many others, just as many company do shoes and trousers and one like this and other like that and all sell) and it is made for answer this demand... not vice versa direction. It need carefully understand that markets in some western countries is not all markets. There is lot of crowing areas in world and there is growing demand. They do not all anymore all drool after Ks or Tek when more can get with less. Example RCEP is not nonsense and it also affect. Asia-Pacific countries form world's largest trading bloc. And just now.Bit biased but... CGTN: China-ASEAN Expo in Nanning - A new center for the world's economy.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 02:16:15 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on November 29, 2020, 01:37:51 pmman you keep throwing troll like that. the other "was" thread, you trolled (maybe unintentionally) that 1kZ has (sounds like) crap FFT. here again i archived it in my reply in that other thread...Quote from: rf-loop on November 26, 2020, 10:10:01 amif you sounds like a fanboy/troll, you'll invite fanboys/troll in as well... if they are really no competition, you should just stop at..Quote from: rf-loop on November 29, 2020, 01:37:51 pmnow to be clear, i dont care if you like Siglent or Rigol. but when i smell competite Rigol fanboyism thing, i will tease them with my VisaDSO SW capture (long FFT display), there are other diy SWs as well out there in Linux etc, the point is, people made it for Rigol. what i wonder after this long, why nobody come up with diy SW for Siglent? i did see programming manual for the other older series, but since nobody proved it afaik, i conclude it as broken, and i dont own one to try. if someone can come up with even a simplest SW that merely can download all DSO data points to PC with source code example as our guideline, i will give Siglent a thumbs up. but until then, dont call other competites as obsolete DSO. "modern" is about "connectivity", IoT is modern because it can connect to something else, like 5G and smartphones, similar to if DSO can connect to PC for programming and analysis etc not available built-in scope. if something cannot connect, lets call it obsolete. i'm not into brand bashing here, but if its really worth it, prove it. here, another screen captures for your Siglent's pet hates, someone can call it lie, but can we make such as "lie" in Siglent scope? its just for an aesthetics show off, more like an "art" not really can help anything technicallycheers friend.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 02:27:34 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on November 29, 2020, 02:16:15 pmHere's one of the very last pictures ever taken of my DS1054Z, it was doing an FFT at the time. Seems to me like there's some useful information visible there.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 02:29:51 pm
content: just to be clear, if you want this FFT buzz, just buy a proper Spectrum Analyzer, those 1Mpts DSPed scope will become obsolete quick.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 02:38:01 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on November 29, 2020, 02:29:51 pmNo. Because a spectrum analyser doesn't go to near DC frequencies. Also the frequency resolution of 1Mpts FFT will beat a spectrum analyser hands down at low frequencies.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 02:52:09 pm
content: Removed because I'm reading the wrong Siglent manual.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 03:04:22 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on November 29, 2020, 02:38:01 pmwhats the point if it can have leakage in 500Hz bin? anyway, 1Mpts FFT is not something unsolvable in 1kZ+PC. whats no working solution so far (afaik) is 10Mpts FFT Siglent DSO (even +PC). ps: those who are not aware the deeper details of FFT yet, we cant just use all 17Mpts and expect to get 8.5Mpts FFT, it will take ages to compute O(N^2) of simple "any size" FFT algorithm, we'll need O(N.log(N)) such as DIT or KISS FFT, but that need only of size N=2^y (y must be integer) so your 17Mpts must be downgraded to maybe like 10Mpts data in time domain, hence you'll only get 5Mpts FFT. with 24Mpts data, it will downgraded to 20Mpts, hence we can have 10Mpts FFT (50Hz bin instead of 100Hz bin in 5Mpts FFT). fwiw.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 03:08:16 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on November 29, 2020, 02:52:09 pmWhat, like this?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 03:17:53 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on November 29, 2020, 02:52:09 pmActually the GWI GDS-1054B is able to show a table with peaks with the search function combined with FFT. I don't know if the MDO mode can also be activated on it though.

author: switchabl
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 03:28:01 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on November 29, 2020, 03:04:22 pmFortunately this is not the case. The "normal" Cooley-Tukey FFT algorithm can also be used very efficiently for lengths that can be written as a product of small prime numbers (not just power of 2, but 3, 5, 7 etc as well). Even for large prime lengths, you can use something like Bluestein's algorithm, which is not quite as fast but still O(N log(N)).Often you don't really need to compute a X Mpts FFT anyway. If you only want to see a small frequency span at this kind of resolution, then you can just do DDC (digital down conversion) first and then do a smaller FFT.Now, this is not usually available on low-end scopes, but as we are talking about off-line analysis on a PC, this is not a problem. You don't have to code it yourself either, there are many,manyefficient FFT codes for all kind of lengths available.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 03:37:13 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on November 29, 2020, 03:13:48 pmThis is from 1000X-E/X-U manual. Just tiny sample.Of course there is markers and table and so on.But if you read 1000X series manual... its your problem.ETA: and as can see there is err... ( 8 )

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 03:39:57 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on November 29, 2020, 03:04:22 pmAnd if you just paste plots from LTSpice, you don't need scope at all...Stop trolling about what analysis you can do on PC in a topic about oscilloscopes.Did you know Rigol DS1054Z can alsofly?You just have to put on an airplane...Let see if other manufacturer's scopes can do that!!As Nico nicely says, there is a point of diminishing returns for everything.FFT on scope needs lot of points if you want high frequency resolution AND high maximum frequency at the same time. If you're looking at the frequencies of up to, let's say 100kHz, 64kpoints is a lots of resolution: at 200 KSPS/s, with 64kpoints you get 32kbins, that gives you resolution of 3 Hz per bin.Problem is with higher frequencies: with 16 MHz bandwidth (32MSps/s) same 64k points will get 476,8 Khz per bin. So if you want better RBW to look at 10.7 MHz filter, you need to bump u FFT points to more: 2 MPoints will give 1 Mbins, and you get 14.9 Hz per bin.. 1 MPoints will give 512 kbins, and you get 30 Hz per bin..Point is, SA shines with MHz frequencies and up, because of constant RBW, because it uses downconversion.At lower frequencies, FFT will get better results and will have instantaneous full real time bandwidth for whole measured frequency interval.At audio frequencies, even 128k Points will achieve impressive resolution, more than enough to tune and verify any audio filter made with real life components.1MPoint extends that to little bit higher frequencies, so it is quite useful to some 10s of MHz.For serious work in MHZ and up region, you need SA, like Mechatrommer says. 8 bit scopes might have RBW good enough to look at the things, but they won't have dynamic range of a SA.For low frequencies, you need high res scope or audio or some kind of specialized analyser...

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 04:01:09 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on November 29, 2020, 03:37:13 pmFair enough, posts removed.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 04:25:36 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on November 29, 2020, 03:39:57 pmthinking about it... you are right! the decision to put ethernet connectivity (and errr, USB port too) in Siglent tools is just nonsensical. lets just use it as is, can i suggest built-in DMM? and Quake too?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 04:41:12 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on November 29, 2020, 04:19:07 pmWTF is wrong with you? Stop trolling.It is sad thing that you have nothing better to do, when I, for sure, know you have lot of knowledge and could actually make very intelligent and useful comments?What do you figure, I'm Rigol or Siglent fanboy? Or Keysight, or Micsig, or Metrix, or Brymen, or TTi, or Picoscope, or Signal Hound, or Maynuo, or AOIP, or what...I have all of those and all that equipment is both awesome at some things and suck at others ...I had DS1074Z before, and loved it for what it was, well worth of money in 2016 when I bought it. It paid of in few weeks, and was very useful little thing. I also never really felt it was slow like some other people were complaining. 4 years passed, and things have changed. There are better options today, and if you absolutely have to chose based on price alone, still solid choice. I would not say to somebody that buys it today that they made a mistake. Still worth the money.But at this moment, with GDS1054B you get better scope, with SDS1104X-U you get better scope, with Micsig you get highly portable scope that is also very nice and also have some things and miss some other. With SDS1104X-E much better scope that has 2 A/D converters and lot of other stuff that you need to upgrade to GW Instek GDS2000E series to get. In my opinion GDS2000E series is much better scope than SDS1000X-E series, but GDS2000E is starting to get into price range of SDS2000X+ which wins with bigger screen.... Never ending story... Your mileage may vary.Sorry if that insults your precious and tender feelings you have for your DS1054Z connected to PC. But you'll have to sort that out with your therapist. Leave me out of your struggle with that...Please.EDIT: REMOVED P.S.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 04:50:41 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on November 29, 2020, 04:25:36 pmBut the fact still remains that it is easier if a device can perform the functions by itself. That you don't need to bring / install software on a PC before you can do something. On a PC the update rate will always be slower due to data transfer and the integration of on-screen measurements the oscilloscope brings is gone. It is like driving one car with two steering wheels. Doable for sure but not ideal. If your goal is to use a PC for analysis then a Picoscope is a much better choice anyway

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 04:52:16 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on November 29, 2020, 02:16:15 pmI hacked my own into the sds2104x plus by putting samba on it to get files as well as ssh so i didnt have to bother over serial / scpi / ext usb only... its annoying linux scopes being released now still dont have such basic functions on the low end when it doesnt take much to run them.. i mean use it as simply as collecting triggered data most of the time in an automated manner via scripts and not invoking the webserver either but its a hell of a lot easier to do some stuff over the full shell so why not use bash to begin with... maybe that will change in another decade.. till then they are open just enough to go do whatever you want to customize

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 05:03:54 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 29, 2020, 04:52:16 pmNot being able to map network drive is my favorite pet peeve on all of those embedded scopes. I'm looking at you Keysight !! Especially that with 3000T they went trough pains to print to network printer... Who uses that anymore... Sheesh... Please, make it connect to windows shares, please.Did you document and share what you did (what steps are needed to install Samba on it) somewhere? For non Linux gurus..?

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 05:10:21 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on November 29, 2020, 05:03:54 pmIf Elasia creates the script I can pack it in an .ADS.

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 05:13:27 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on November 29, 2020, 05:03:54 pmNo, never got around to it. But if you look in its main and hacked threads you will find tv84's compiled firmware files that will easily get you into the shell and from there you can run as rootBut the gist is if someone else wanted to do something you just need to find the correct compiler for the proc and put it on the fs then pull the sources and compile them and run as normal and back it all upIt's also possible to rewrite the ads firmware upload to deliver a full patch containing those contents with the help of tv84

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 05:14:20 pm
content: Quote from: tv84 on November 29, 2020, 05:10:21 pmI swear you were standing behind me creeping...

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 29, 2020, 05:41:51 pm
content: Quote from: Elasia on November 29, 2020, 05:14:20 pm

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 04:20:53 am
content: Apparently one is on the way to me. Wioll be interesting to see how stripped down the design is compared to the existing model.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 04:25:54 am
content: Comparison (from Siglent)

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 05:02:06 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 04, 2020, 04:20:53 amUnless there's some quality issues somewhere as the result of the downgrade, I suspect most users won't even notice 99% of the time. As in, if you had both, for most tasks you'd reach for the closest one and not bother taking 3 extra steps to get the 1104X-E. But then again, they're only shaving $100 off a mid-design-cycle model that would be due for a price cut anyway at the first sign of serious competition.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 08:01:44 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 04, 2020, 04:25:54 amThey have done bit sloppy work in compare tables. Also this kind of tables are not very useful because it do not expain any thing any deeper than just name, number and v or x.Rigol FFT is totally wrong. Even when it may be still stated in some data sheets but - this kind of errors tell that they do not know competitors or comparable at all. In markets this kind of company need do they "homeworks" better for know others.I do not know if this is absolute truth but I have seen notes that Rigol 1kZ have 64k FFT instead of 2k. So 64k and 128k not very big difference, just in same ballpark with 1:2. 1M and 2M they are in different world.Then V/div. Of course if they tell Display scale 1mV/div and after then tell both, X-U and 1kZ have 1mV/div it is somehow ok.Imho more important is what real full resolution V/div. Good example is Keysight what may have 4mV/div lowest full resolution and after then 2 an 1mV/div are just digital zoom somewhere or even more just only display image vertical zoom.Without any single this kind of detail these tables are nearly like nonsense. Also need know truth instead of some obsolete data sheet values. I can still somewhere find fun numbers about Keysight BodePlot.But Siglent X-U FFT is 128k (131072pts) and Rigol 1000Z2k64k(65536pts) afaik.Only trump can live with lies.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 08:20:32 am
content: Quote from: rf-loop on December 04, 2020, 08:01:44 amYep.All data points are cherry picked, there's inaccuracies and missing competitors (where's the cheap Keysights/Insteks?)Quote from: rf-loop on December 04, 2020, 08:01:44 amYep. They tell you nothing about the usability, the amount of useful information shown on screen, how that information is shown, how many button clicks and knob twists is takes to turn on a simple measurement, if they can zoom out after a data capture, etc., etc.But still... par for the course in the marketing world.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 09:09:44 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on December 04, 2020, 08:20:32 amCherry picked or not. This is marketing and normal and every single manufacturer use it. Keysight perhaps one of leader in this area of things. If you have read enough HP-Agilent-Keysight sales brochures but not only these, even and more clever can find in many application notes. They have done it tens of years, they are very experienced in this.But, If do Chery picking, cherry need be true not lie cherry.. It is still not extremely fair but without direct lies.Btw, Rigol manual still tell FFT length is 16k or somehow from diplay area 1200ptsAnd what is Rigol Frame Record... they tell it is fast, hardware based and max 60000 frames. If look afterwards one saved frame... is it possible look it with FFT or decode it or make some new measurements based to ADC data there. Or change interpolation.Time when I have Rigol 1kZ I did not use it at all because it was for one project where it totally fails, I do not even remember if this feature was there in this time (just after 1kZ born).

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 10:31:02 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 04, 2020, 04:20:53 amwill be interested to see your review. the table in your next post shows comparison with Keysight DSO, but majority of us own DS1054Z so we hope to see comparison with that too. we would love to see some bashing and cursing and how crappy our DS1054Z vs this brand spanking budget scope. so maybe we can consider (based on your acedemical review) if its worth another buy.Quote from: EEVblog on December 04, 2020, 04:25:54 amedit: just checking it.... there are small lies... there are big lies.. (attached) if they based on that and just add 2Mpts to competite, they were highly deluded.. enough for me... there is no possible way to get 10MPts (bins) FFT out of this thing...http://scopechart.com/rigol/rigol-ds1054z-ds1054z-1

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 06:10:41 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on December 04, 2020, 10:31:02 amNit picking.SW engineers have made some wonderful enhancements to DSO memory in the past from the initial release of a product yet the datasheets are nearly never updated to reflect the changes.So which datasheet do we compare from ?A case in point was the original first SDS2000 with 35 Mpts memory that later with FW was enlarged to 70 Mpts yet no datasheet ever reflected this.What is right to do ?Update datasheets and cause confusion in the marketplace or keep datasheets to match initial product release ?Or later release a new tweaked model of much the same instrument like SDS2000X, now with 140 Mpts memory.Best is a apples vs apples comparison.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 07:15:26 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on December 04, 2020, 06:10:41 pmi'm not sure if i understand. you mean siglent scope can be hacked to 35/70/140Mpts? can you point me to the hack thread? or are you saying, the scopes come out of factory at 35/70/140Mpts capacity? its just that not updated in datasheet? and what price? $500 budget? if spec/datasheet is not what it actually is, whats the point discussing here? btw, in earlier post i was referring to the stated (outdated) 12Mpts DS1054Z memory (actually now 24Mpts out of factory) when Siglent made the comparison chart and claimed their scope has 14Mpts (if actually bigger?) thats their problem, but when they stated (under rated) the competitor's spec, thats trouble! can we allow laziness in updating datasheet/chart?

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 07:36:38 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on December 04, 2020, 06:10:41 pmThe one that is current when you make the comparison. I get your point, but everybody with any current knowledge of budget scopes knows that the 1054Z comes with 24M for a while now. My honesty expectations for marketing types are pretty low, on the order of politicians, but this does seem to fall below even that standard.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 07:42:59 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on December 04, 2020, 07:15:26 pmSDS2000-level, so $1500 entry point. Not the cheapies.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 07:46:48 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on December 04, 2020, 07:36:38 pmNot just that but technically the hackability should be taken into account as well...In the end these comparison charts are utterly useless. And some stuff in the datasheet too. Calling a 7" screen large

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 04, 2020, 08:20:16 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on December 04, 2020, 07:46:48 pmI remember certain Siglent fanboys endlessly posting a Siglent vs. Rigol chart here.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 05, 2020, 05:27:54 am
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on December 04, 2020, 07:15:26 pmOriginally old SDS2000 (yeswithoutX) come with single or dual* 35M memory length. And there was no any hack but some peoples have made BW modification in hardware.Later one Siglent FW update rise memory length to single or dual* 70M. (Perhaps due to more wise memory mapping.) It was already there in hardware.Next model, SDS2000X have single or dual* 140M max acq. memory length just from this model start.And now SDS2000XPlus single or dual* 200M.*) In 4 channel models where construction is 2x(1ADC+1MEM)In 2 channel models construction is 1x(1ADC+1MEM)SDS1104X-E (4 channel) construction is 2x(1ADC+1MEM)SDS1104X-U (4 channel) construction is 1x(1ADC+1MEM)--------------------------------Other question, not releted to this quoted msg at all.What is real truth about Rigol DS1000Z FFTManual tell it is 1200pts and then some kind of memory mode 16kpts.Now I have heard it is 64kpts.I have not seen any example or test image where can see this exactly. I have not seen after some search where can see amount of bins or df. Why it so difficult.Also this compare tables do not tell anything about true V/div things... yes I know it is display scale but imho more important is, what is full resolution V/div and what are then just magnified. As example in some Keysight model 1mV/div is digitally magnified from 4mV/d.If one have true 1mV/dif and other have this magnified 1mV/div is there apple vs apple. My opinion is - not. Even if we do not talk sensitivity but we change it to siplay scale. Next time some make 100uV/div display scale and advertise in data sheet and sales brochures they have 100uV/div...Of when we put rigol frame redorder to same row where other are segmented memory acquisition or sequence. Apple vs apple... oh well I have seen many kind of apples.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 05, 2020, 05:30:29 am
content: Siglent have officially corrected this FFT 2kpts mistake what is in DS1000Z, afaik.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 05, 2020, 05:50:45 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on December 04, 2020, 08:20:16 pmAs far as I can see it was Dave who post these tables - due to unknown reason. Perhaps media business need.And then next I try tell error there.Also there is many other errors or other way not directly comparable things compared. One example V/div things.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 05, 2020, 06:10:40 am
content: Quote from: rf-loop on December 05, 2020, 05:50:45 amAnd why KS 1k series, it's a 2 GSa/s DSO FFS and in another market sector and price.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 05, 2020, 07:39:29 am
content: then i guess he got a chart made by some clown who claimed to know the SDS1104X-U spec and doesnt know well the DS1054Z spec.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 01:26:34 am
content: Here a direct comparison from welectron, official siglent distributor.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 05:25:54 am
content: And here other oneProbes 100MHz = Probes included with 100MHz modelProbes 200MHz = Probes included with 200MHz modelBut other thing.I have asked this also before without answer or least I have not hit this answer.Rigol manual and data sheet tell FFT 1200pts and FFT in "memory mode" (what ever this is) 16kpts.But somewhere I have seen claim about 64kpts.Where is documented or directly displayed it is 64kpts. Who can show it or where I can find this excatly, it is changed and when, after what Firmware version.I like facts not rumors.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------ERROR corrected: Table is corrected. Available memory was previously wrong14M 1Ch/7M 2 channels/3.5M 3 or 4 channels.After I have tested it this is clear.This is correct:1Ch ON, max acquisition length 14Mpts (1x14M) max 1GSa/s2Ch's simultaneously ON, max acquisition length for both channel 7Mpts (2x7M) max 500MSa/s3-4Ch's simultaneously ON, max acquisition length for every channel 7Mpts (4x7M) max 250MSa/sAlso tested it with saving .CSV to USB. 2ms/div, all channels on, 7M max memory. 250MSa/s.It produce huge 490 000 488 bytes file. All 4 channels 7Msamples + header where is setttings.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 11:09:41 am
content: I also need to make a not here about discussions on FFT:Many are confusing number of sample points and number of FFT bins.You need 2048 points to have 1024 bins..If you sample at 1 MS/s, divided by 2048 will give you 488 Hz frequency between bins, in 1024 bins from 0Hz to 500 kHz (1/2 sampling rate).So if a scope claims 64 KPoints of FFT, it will as a result have 32 Kbins.It will also have 15,26 Hz resolution per bin at same 1 MS/s sampling rate.Or 1,526 kHz per bin at 100MS/s with 50 MHz bandwidthor 15.26kHz at 1GS/s and 500 MHz bandwidth.That is how you determine how much bins/points Rigol has, by figuring out best RBW at specific sampling rate/bandwidth.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 12:04:17 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on December 06, 2020, 05:25:54 amok here is confesion from 1kZ owner for not the first time... the built-in 1kZ's FFT is crap! whatever it is, 64K? 16K? 2K? let call it 200 points, bottom line its crap... happy now? ps: now dont ever confuse yourself with its memory size 12M or 24M? dont bother! dont ever ask Siglent to put it in their comparison chart ok?

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 12:25:19 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on December 06, 2020, 11:09:41 amYes, naturally.And in this thing, example Siglent, and many others do not leave anything what need guess.This is SDS1104X-U128kpts. 131072points aka samples and 65536 bins. In this image sampling frequency is 50MHz and this give FFT range 0 - 25MHz. (as can see it is zoomed in lot from full scale)50MHz/2/65536 is 381.47Hz and this information it tell always on the screen. If user have selected less length then it show it.Then these different windows have different response. Here example "flat-top" used in example. (not very good highest freq resolution but better for level.)Picked up just from wikipedia.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 12:48:06 pm
content: Quote from: Mechatrommer on December 06, 2020, 12:04:17 pmAll we know this, but question was what it is in scope itself. I wonder what makes it so difficult.If I have DS1kZ on my table I know it after 2 minute if not sooner and I have answer for this kind of simple question.Also I have not get answer if Rigol "record" frames can afterwardd use for automatic measurements, for FFT, for decode etc. They advertise it like it is seqmented acquisition...About Siglent we have lot of data and details what it is and what not... but about Rigol... nearly like "guess what is this - play".Do peoples buy these just for decorating some hobby corner or just playing some fun.So, without further data/knowledge, there is user manual and data sheet what tell it is 16kpts in "memory mode" - what ever it is. I keep this as fact, until some data what overrides this information.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 02:02:16 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on December 06, 2020, 12:48:06 pmfor what? why bother with rigol if you already have siglent? its like you buy a DSO just because of its FFT? man you already have your SA? you make "rf" to loop now you want to see FFT in DSOQuote from: rf-loop on December 06, 2020, 12:48:06 pmfor building circuit, for download data to PC so we can do serious FFT, not toyish 1Mpts FFT also possible upload to MATLAB for anyone interested. we are returning customer from 1kE to 1kZ. downloading data to PC from Siglent is "guess what is this - play" since forever, but someone hit a kill switch by saying they dont need data to PC, fine! Rigol already have name in people's heart for a decade for budget $400-500 scope, it gathered people into this forum when Dave make the first review 1kE. there was no $400 Siglent so it was no brainer. now Siglent just want to start the race, i wish them good luck! Rigol already has in-house 10GSa/s 2GHz for $10K, Siglent has half that and half that for not half that price. we will wait until Dave make review and compare both, he has both scopes. cheers.

author: switchabl
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 03:45:54 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on December 06, 2020, 12:48:06 pmI can only speak for myself, but: I already know the built-in FFT is horrible in the Rigol, so if I know I need it, I use something else.People "playing some fun" probably don't use it either, because it is no fun at all.But I was curious because of all the different numbers mentioned, so I turned it on FFT for the first time in years:I think the width of the side-lobes for a rectangular window should be (sampling frequency / number of points), so that suggests roughly 4k points, probably zero-padded to 16k?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 04:59:10 pm
content: Quote from: switchabl on December 06, 2020, 03:45:54 pmWhy would they zero-pad it?When it was initially launched it used "on-screen" data like all the other measurements, ie. 1200 points."Memory mode" does some extra work to fetch more sample data than what's on screen. I'm guessing they build a composite buffer by fetching many batches of 1200 points, then do the FFT on that.

author: jemangedeslolos
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 05:23:36 pm
content: I don't understand the positioning of this scope ?it is perhaps intended for large institutions which will order large quantities and therefore save a lot of money compared to the X-E.But the price difference is too small compared to the loss of specification for a one shot purshase for hobby or small business.300€ or $ net and they will have a hard time manufacture enough I think.In my opinion they missed the opportunity to destroy the ds1054z and all the unfinished chinese Aliexpress scopes.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 07:08:27 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on December 06, 2020, 12:25:19 pmAhh, so you have one.Being stuck in China due to CV does have its advantages.

author: switchabl
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 06, 2020, 07:16:08 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on December 06, 2020, 04:59:10 pmI don't know, and I don't think they should (rather than just having 16k actual data points). But it sure looks like it no? If they didn't, you wouldn't see the that much detail on the side-lobes.It doesn't look like that FFT uses much more than 4k of data in any case. If there is a way to use more, I didn't find it. This is with a current firmware and using "Memory*" as the source (whatever the * means).

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 10, 2020, 05:16:23 am
content: Teardown photos:https://www.flickr.com/photos/eevblog/albums/72157717234695506Yep, much simpler front end.

author: merser
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 17, 2020, 08:17:58 pm
content: Definately looks a good alternative to the DS1054Z but for Oz buyers its more like $630 not $399. Price point is similar with the rigol.

author: TurboTom
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2020, 08:06:45 pm
content: Just for comparison: Here's a shot of both the FFTs of a DS1000Z and a MSO2000A with a signal as per @rf-loop's example (dual-tone sine 300&350kHz). For every of those screenshots, I've optimized the settings to the best results. Actually, I wouldn't call this "utterly useless", especially DS1000Z with the updated firmware (already dating a few years back) made a lot of difference. But still, the new Siglent (and other's as well) scopes' FFT wins hands down, especially usability-wise. The peak search / table function appears to be a very nice add-on, usually only to be found in SAs.Edit: Added another FFT of the DS1000Z with the same sampling rate as @rf-loop selected on his SDS1000U. Here, the deficiencies of Rigol's FFT implementation get clearly obvious. Calculations point into the direction that Rigol's sampling-memory based FFT processes at least 50kbytes of memory, assuming that each column on the screen represents one bin of resolution at minimum available kHz/div setting.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2020, 03:00:29 am
content: @TTOh you just take this ultra simple example out from context where only purpose was tell that Siglent do not hide things like FFT data length and also user do not need calculate bin resolution because it is also displayed. It was only purpose about this image, and also show there is markers and peak search etc . This was also not my test at all but from Siglent marketing material where just display that hey there is also peak search.Also here is markers, now for Delta. And instead of dual tone here is used "triple tone"In this image split window display. Carrier is over display range but not worry, of course level is there just right. Only adjusted so for get more noise level to bottom. 1MHz, AM modulate 1kHz 20%. (As can see (as can see sidebands levels are -20dBc.)Here full window display, 1MHz, AM, 1kHz, 100% (as can see LSB and USB levels -6dBc.)It is not SDS1x04X-E what have 8 times better resolution with 1048576 points FFT data length when X-U model have 131072 points what give here with 5MSa/s (5MHz)5000000Hz/2/(131072/2)= 38.15Hz when X-E model have in same place 4.77Hz.As can see in images this signal is very easy to SDS1104X-U. This is resolution for 0 - 2.5MHz band. Of course if take 0 - 500kHz FFT like in @TT image then Siglent X-U FFT bin is 7.63Hz.This table can also show more, also freq etc but I turn these off and only show delta with just only 3 markers for more clear visibility.In this image tiny bit more challenging case but still without any problem with SDS1104X-U.Signal 325kHz sine, carrier level-40dBm. AM modulation with100Hz. Modulation depth0.2% using -40dBm carrier sides need be -100dBm level (-60dBc). Just like checkbox - done.Also it tell that input channel noise level is not very bad. Using full BW in same setup rise base noise level bit. If you think rise this persistence yellow noise top to -110dBm line it is just there. (note averaging)This is what you can try...ETA: Table in Reply #65 corrected. There was error in amount of available memory.Right is: 1 channel alone on, max 14M. When 2, 3 or 4 channels simultaneously on, all channels have max 7M !

author: TurboTom
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2020, 03:49:16 am
content: Thanks @rf-loop for demonstrating this kind of performance. It's not even worth to try to match that with any of the FFT implementations of the "mature" Rigol scopes. I don't know about their more recent designs or other manufacturer's products. But it seems that noise- and FFT-wise, the engineers at Siglent really did their homework! It's quite interesting to watch how the products evolve, especially since hardware-wise, the DS1000Z and the SDS1000U aren't too far apart, except for the main SOC silicon... I guess, the software approach makes most of the difference, of course in combination with the more powerful Zync SOC/FPGA combination in Siglent's product. I'ld actually love to see a very compact scope (like the DS1000Z), equipped with the grunt of an SDS2000X Plus or (probably more realistic) of a DS5000.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 22, 2020, 10:29:59 am
content: It is not one or two time when someone ask how to get AM signal trig'd to modulating frequency. Of course old traditional answer is, adjust Trigger Hold Off time. Yes it works. But, it is also very poor method. When modulating frequency change bit more adjust again.. adjust again.. some times very frustrating. Also I have seen many times peopled give advice to use trigger holdoff. All modern digital scopes have lot of more clever things that these traditional things what come from analog oscilloscope era.With this method here trigger can be rock solid without any adjustment over whole normal audio range (90us in image is too long time except if need trig to very low, well under 10Hz, mod frequencies what are not normally used).This modulating freq change speed is not constant. This is not at all because scope trigger. This is how I adjust generator what is not very handsome for this purpose.Signal is 21.2MHz and modulation stepped 10Hz - 4kHz.Of course this is not just Siglent SDS1104X-U feature. Most modern scopes have this or other suitable trig functions for this.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 10:08:47 am
content: SDS1104X-U have also timing inaccuracies as all oscilloscopes have more or less.It is good to know least roughly how much is scope own time jitter when we try measure some signal jitter what we do not know. Of course if you have oscilloscope in your hand you can check it quite easy, if you have tools. But all do not have. Data sheet tell only roughly how big error there can be in frequency but it do not tell anything about how much it have jitter. Also just this time I do not have signal source what jitter I know sure but with other scope I can compare. If other scope is much better with it I can enough sure that test signal have same or less jitter but it can not be more.So here is test. Same one signal come from signal source and it is split to both scopes and test is made simultaneously just in same time.Other scope is SDS2104XPlus what have quite good reference. How ever I try SDS2104X+ can not show more total jitter over 10ms than up to 0.5ns peak to peak over more than 15minute period.After then I start both scopes with around same settings and infinite persistence.In image there can see SDS1104X-U result and for compare in same image is SDS2104X+ result.Is it much or not. It depends what user is doing. It is ≤ 0.6ppm peak to peak. So, 1ms something like 0.6ns.SDS1104X-U most fast time scale is 2ns/div.Of course this is just one individual scope so do not take this result as "data sheet".Btw in SDS2kX+ image can also see corners "wobbling" because what is not of course from scope in this case.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 26, 2020, 01:44:57 pm
content: Images tell.Only one wonder. In sequence mode it is bit faster than SDS1104X-E if look top speed.Note, history buffer wfm amount is same as sequence mode maximum amount.Really this wfm/s thing is not most important thing. Also there may exist more fast burst speeds but I do not note these. Some manufactures may also use these peak speed. These are not peak speed but continuous average wfm/s speed least over 1s. (sequence speed is different thing)

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2020, 08:21:06 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 04, 2020, 04:20:53 am3 weeks pass and only crickets.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2020, 09:53:06 am
content: Here is other "fact sheet".t/div, max mem limit, (only two selections noted, most low and most high) then background history buffer max wfms count (fifo length) and then max amount of segments in fast sequence mode. Also there is calculated max amount of captured data memory in different cases. Max up to 56M.I hope I have corrected my mistake in every place where is exist.I also repeat it here.Right information is:If only one Ch is in use: it have max 14MIf two, three or four channels are on simultaneously: Every channel have max 7M.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 27, 2020, 10:05:41 am
content: Quote from: tautech on December 27, 2020, 08:21:06 amHe did a teardown:

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2020, 09:43:17 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on December 27, 2020, 10:05:41 amMaybe that's all we'll get from Dave for the X-U.Therefore I'll have to get a unit to Defpom for a deeper look when some I have coming arrive next week.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2021, 10:56:34 am
content: Here freq response.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 15, 2021, 09:07:25 am
content: Got my hands on some.Dunno why but immediately noticed a little addition in the Save/Recall menu where in the X-U the Bin2CSV convertor application has been added whereas for X-E it's currently only available with a virtual key from the instrument control feature within the webserver.Maybe Siglent will add this to X-E in a future update.X-UX-E

author: LiftedTrace
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 02:05:15 am
content: I just recently purchased a Rigol DS1054Z (just before the Siglen seems to have been released.) I dont use anywhere near all the features, but I am a bit on the child hood greedy side though and have to wonder....should I return this Rigol and get the Siglent SDS1104X-U instead?The Siglent being fairly new and the Rigol being quite dated. Would it be worth my time to do a swap them out? Reading thru this posts it seems the Siglent is better, but its also about $50 more.Anyone have thoughts on this?

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 07:53:51 am
content: Quote from: LiftedTrace on January 26, 2021, 02:05:15 ama) These aren't smartphones, life doesn't move fast in the oscilloscope world. The difference between the two isn't really much.b) The "new" Siglent is just a cut down version of a previous model Siglent which is nearly as old as the Rigol.Quote from: LiftedTrace on January 26, 2021, 02:05:15 amIt's about $50 better. Whether you send it back and cost the seller money on a whim is between you and your greed.If you want something thatreallyfeels new and "next generation" then get a Micsig.(that's what I did - I went from Rigol to Micsig and I'm loving it)

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 08:24:52 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 26, 2021, 07:53:51 amWell, you keep repeating that, implying it's a better instrument than both DS1054Z and SDS1104X-U..It is not, it's just different, has some things better, some worse...It depends what you do. For instance, STO1000C doesn't have statistics on measurements, and not even AC RMS measurement. It doesn't have table mode for decode, but it has dedicated decode in full screen text mode, that doesn't work with zoom or signal view in general, and doesn't allow you to switch between views. If you do switch modes, you lose captures. You cannot tap on packet and make it show it to you in waveform view..It has no segments, not even basic ones DS1000Z has..OTOH, it is really portable, front end is low noise, and what it has, works pretty well with very few bugs.But it is very basic scope, with some eclectic mix of features. It has filtering and quite good math, but no statistics on basic measurements..It has no segments, but has segments button..To me it almost seems like it was released unfinished...Text mode decode looks like an afterthought that is not integrated into scope but works as a separate acquisition mode. That gives it some pretty powerful capabilities, but also takes away many, so it is very limited, instead of better...And it is quite a more expensive than those two.I have it, and I'm not regretting buying it. It paid off very quickly, because it is a very useful handheld scope. But it would be very awkward to have it as single scope to own. And I'm not talking about user interface. I only have touch screen scopes, and will never go back to non touch screen ones.It is the awkward mix of some very advanced features combined with missing some basic features and some conceptual choices that makes it questionable choice for first and only scope.But as I said, it depends what you do.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 09:13:20 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 08:24:52 amYou can't deny itfeelsnew and "next generation" though.Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 08:24:52 amThey're currently working on statistics, at my request.(or so they tell me)Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 08:24:52 amTwisty knobs are bad! At least we agree on that.Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 08:24:52 amThe entry-level Rigols/Siglents being discussed here can't do everything, either.Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 08:24:52 amSerial decoding is way better than on Rigol/Siglent.(nb. The silly sound effects can be turned off)Yes, you go to a separate screen to record/view the incoming data but I don't see a problem there because:a) It does the live/on-screen decoding too, just like the others.b) You can let it sit in text mode and record all the incoming data, it's not limited to just whatever's in the sample memory at any given time.Saving to USB stick is also easy in text mode - the "Quick Save" button at the bottom of the screen is modal so when you're in text mode it dumps the recorded serial data to a .csv file when you press it.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 10:15:36 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 26, 2021, 09:13:20 amYes, it is a good little thing. I really like it or what it is but it has it's cons too.Twisty knobs are not bad, best U/I is knobs for basic, obvious stuff, supplemented with touch screen for stuff that is better used that way.Glad to hear about statistics.. If you're communicating with them, remind them on AC RMS measurements.Text mode works great, in text mode it uses special acquisition mode, that allows it to decode huge number of packets, basically replacing need for segmented mode for long decoding.But you loose completely the whole idea of scope with decoding: correlation of decoded packet to an analog event on other channel.You cannot select that packet and switch to waveform mode to see what was happening then...It converts a scope into 4 ch 10 USD logic analyser....The advantage comes from the fact that it has enough capability to get you out of trouble out in the field...And it makes great second scope, for usual scope work...

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 12:57:42 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 10:15:36 amThey're bad for menu navigation.Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 10:15:36 amYou mean standard deviation? I'll mention it.Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 10:15:36 amIt obviously can't store the analog history of the other channelsgoing back in time. The serial data in the buffer might have arrivesagesago.I don't see how you can say it's worse than the others though, it also has their "traditional" decode mode where it just decodes the current sample memory.It also has very good serial triggering, two serial decoders on screen at once, and setting the parameters is sooooo much easier/faster than with a twisty knob.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 02:16:04 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 26, 2021, 12:57:42 pmYeah, but knobs are gorgeous for actual scope work...Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 10:15:36 amQuote from: Fungus on January 26, 2021, 12:57:42 pmYep. Standard deviation (aka AC RMS in Keysight parlance). Thanks!Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 10:15:36 amQuote from: Fungus on January 26, 2021, 12:57:42 pmThat is the thing, proper table decode and segmented memory, does exactly that, it gives you 10s of thousands of packets and analog history in vicinity of packet. STO1000C is not worse than Rigol DS1000Z in that regard, but it is worse than other scopes that have segmented/history mode and proper decode table mode...In general, I find STO1104C to be very useful instrument. But as I said, I get this feeling it still is not feature complete. It's saving grace is the fact that, what it is there, works quite well and is very good contender in inexpensiveportablescope area.But it's not quite complete and missing few things to be real replacement for desktop scopes that you can get for same amount of money, provided you don't needportable...BTW, I suggest you open new topic "How MICSIG tablet scope compares to entry level desktop scopes" where you can elaborate in detail your experience.As a former DS1000Z user, you probably have good amount of data on that. It would be interesting to read... I also had DS1000Z before and now have Micsig STO1104C, I would likely gladly contribute there... Maybe some users that have both Micsig and other entry level scopes from other manufacturers could also say few words..Let's leave this topic go back to what it is: a place to discuss details of new SDS1104X-U series from Siglent..

author: drussell
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 05:08:55 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on January 26, 2021, 02:16:04 pmActually, I am finding this whole discussion enlightening and very helpful.I'm currently in the market for a couple of entry-level scopes and am looking for some first hand knowledge of these various units, especially people who have used more than one for direct comparison. I've been looking for a good youtube comparison series or something but haven't really found much in the way of good resources yet. I'd really love to see Dave do an updated entry-level scope showdown, for example.Currently my personal DSO capabilities consist of the grand total of an old K7103 Velleman kit that I built in the early 90s, so a whole whopping 32 MS/sec, 4k per channel memory depth, 100 V peak input capability and a parallel port interface, so any of these recent models are going to be a huge improvement.If this were a year ago, I would say for sure I would just grab a couple Rigol DS1054Zs and be done with it. They're a mature, well known and understood quantity with a proven track record. They've made a gazillion of them so even far-future servicing should be possible since partially dead "parts units" with salvageable bits will likely be available far into the future.It looks like I can buy a couple of DS1054Zs for under $420 CAD each after tequipment's free shipping, "we'll pay your sales tax" promo and the EEVblog discount if they'll let me stack all those together. That seems like a bargain as far as scope-for-the-money goes. I would be hacking them to 100 Mhz and full options, of course. One will be for me personally at home and the other for general purpose use at my own small business and I don't really foresee any medium-term requirements for anything significantly higher than what is currently done with the K7103 and newer decent PC software and the aging, worn out old Tek 40 MHz dual channel with the ailing, fading CRT, etc.I have also been considering the Siglent SDS1104X-E, since it does seem overall to be a more capable scope, dual ADCs, hackable to 200 MHz, better FFT, faster processor in general, runs Linux directly so potentially has the ability to add some utilities and customizations, etc. but they are quite a bit more money. At $630 CAD each, that is pretty much exactly 1.5 times as much as the DS1054Z and I'm simply not sure they're really worth the extra money for my typical use cases. I could buy three DS1054Zs for the price of two SDS1104X-Es.I would probably never use the ability to add the digital inputs or signal gen options, wifi or anything like that. I would rather just use a separate inexpensive logic analyzer, for example. As for the fancier FFT, I'm already used to just capturing data using the K7103 and pulling it into the computer where I can do whatever I want to it despite the limitations of the FFT in the "normal" software, although I can see times where something closer to realtime could potentially be useful, I guess. Things like having 256 shades on the intensity grading instead of 64isbetter, but I don't see anything like that being a "killer feature" either. The internal web server interface looks convenient but again, I don't see that becoming in any way critical for my typical workflows and use cases. CAN decoding might be useful I suppose, but again a dedicated solution is easy enough and cheap if I need it.The SDS1104X-U adds a new dimension to the mix, yet it seems like its only real advantage over the DS1054Z would be speedier UI and a few random bells and whistles for the most part, and I don't expect it to be as inexpensive as the Rigol. (Tequipment does list it but no pricing is shown so I assume they don't even stock it yet to compare?) I have personally never used a 1054Z or any of the Siglents so I have absolutely no first hand knowledge of either series in any way, but the Rigol front panel even looks like options and UI menus, etc. might be easier to work with in general with twice the number of screen buttons for a non-touchscreen scope, etc.This leads me to suspect that the good ol' 1054Z isprobablystill the way to go, mostly really just for its ubiquity more than anything else, but I am looking to following any related discussions or especially, like I said, any kind of in-depth comparison or shootout or whatnot. The one comparison video that I found to be helpful so far really didn't bode well for the SDS1104X-E. For example, while it did still show waveforms above the -3 dB point, up to 150 MHz, the Rigol still showed usable waveforms up to 430 MHz. While the amplitude obviously wouldn't be correct, the fact that they can even display something at all on a single channel way up at that far above the rated bandwidth is the kind of thing that makes me still think I'd like them...Any pointers to suggested comparison resources are highly appreciated!If I'm convinced that spending the extra dough on something that really is "fancier," I'm always in the "buy once, cry once" camp when it comes to buying tools, but I also can't spend a fortune on scopes right now either.Thank you all for your informative discussions. Please carry on!

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 06:18:03 pm
content: Quote from: drussell on January 26, 2021, 05:08:55 pmBatronix doesn't have it either so I'm guessing it doesn't exist yet in the real world.Quote from: drussell on January 26, 2021, 05:08:55 pmYep. Things like enabling measurements are much easier/faster on a Rigol thanks to the buttons down the left edge.Rigol also has some features that the Siglent doesn't, eg, plot a rolling graph of measurements over time.Quote from: drussell on January 26, 2021, 05:08:55 pmIf you can buy from Tequipment then the GW-Instek GDS1054B is under $300 with the EEVBLOG discount:https://www.tequipment.net/Instek/GDS-1054B/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?search=trueThat's a sweet little 'scope and they've added a lot of new features lately via firmware updates, eg. Serial decoding.Ask about current state of hackablilty here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/possible-gw-instek-gds-1000b-hack/

author: drussell
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 06:49:08 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 26, 2021, 06:18:03 pmWhat? There's no "roll mode" or whatever they call it?Hmm, that's important if it doesn't exist on some of these potential choices. I use the "transient recorder" feature on the K7103 all the time! I guess I need to read through the manuals of a couple of these possible models to try to spot things like that.QuoteI haven't really eliminated any possible brands at this point, I'm open to all suggestions but I don't want to totally hijack this thread either, perhaps I should start another comparison thread? It just always seems like "what is the best scope" is a done to death thread topic.That being said, the little bits and pieces I have heard about general quality on GW-Instek gear did not exactly inspire confidence and give me that warm fuzzy feeling and the price in CAD would only be $20 less than than the Rigol since there is no "pay your sales tax" promo on them like on the DS1054Z. I would rather get the ubiquitous Rigol if all other things are equal, even simply due to track record and number sold alone, so any contender needs to be way better bang for the buck by somehow either being far less expensive or way more capable in some ways that would make it more useful to me, hence my interest in the SDS1104X-U vs DS1054Z specifically, as I think I already basically understand where the SDS1104X-E vs DS1054Z divide ends up.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 06:50:04 pm
content: Quote from: drussell on January 26, 2021, 06:47:04 pmThere's a standard "roll mode" for the channel waveforms but the Rigol can overlay a rolling graph of the measurements (eg. RMS, VPP, etc). I believe Siglents can't do that.(and I'm sure I'll be quickly slapped down by the Siglent police if I'm wrong).

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 07:03:58 pm
content: Quote from: drussell on January 26, 2021, 06:49:08 pmYep. There's nothing wrong with the Rigol. It works, it shows wiggly lines on screen, it's very reliable and solidly built.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 08:18:33 pm
content: Quote from: drussell on January 26, 2021, 06:49:08 pmSDS****X-* models all have 2 roll modes, an automatic one when the timebase is slowed beyond 50ms/div and a dedicated roll mode.Auto waits for the memory buffer to be completely filled before displaying anything while the dedicated roll mode displays the waveform in RT.The Roll button lets you enter and exit the dedicated roll mode.Saelig has the SDS1104X-U as do I in NZ and as an EEVblog member you can ask for their EEVblog discount in their discount thread:http://www.saelig.com/sds1000x-u-series/sds1104x-u.htm

author: drussell
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 08:39:10 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on January 26, 2021, 08:18:33 pmWhat is the maximum time limit on the rolling mode, how does it handle that or how slow of a timebase can you set? Do you happen know if it is internally running all the time in roll mode or does it always try to sample after a trigger threshold is crossed. I suppose I really need to read up on how the various trigger options even normally works on these modern DSOs...I haven't downloaded any of the Siglent manuals yet, still working my way through the DS1054Z book. I wish there were online emulators for the UI on these things, it is rather tricky to understand the various nuances without having the actual instrument in front of you, but especially in these days of extra virus annoyance doing any of the usually easy, proper in-person evaluations is likely to be a particularly arduous to downright impossible task.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2021, 08:45:32 pm
content: Quote from: drussell on January 26, 2021, 08:39:10 pmTimebase range is listed in datasheets. X-U = 2 ns/div-100 s/divSort of running continually and it's called History mode.Everything about the modern DSO is trigger related.https://siglentna.com/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2020/11/SDS1000X-U_DataSheet_DS010AH-E01A.pdf

author: LiftedTrace
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2021, 04:12:17 pm
content: QuoteWhere is this thread located?

author: drussell
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2021, 04:49:33 pm
content: Quote from: LiftedTrace on January 27, 2021, 04:12:17 pmJust ask in the thread below and they will send you a PM:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/equipment-discounts-from-saelig/msg3434708/#new

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2021, 06:02:31 pm
content: Quote from: drussell on January 26, 2021, 06:49:08 pmIt is not like GW Instek is making scopes to not sell them and they have been in the test equipment business for a long time (probably longer than Rigol and Siglent). Also keep in mind that the GDS1054B is the only one in this price bracket with individual channel controls. Discarding it based on 'a feeling' is a mistake. In my experience the service department from GW Instek is responsive and their quality is just fine (lots of GW Instek gear is sold as rebadges by several A brands).The best thing for you to do is make a list with pros/cons for each model where it comes to functionality and decide on what is important to you. Quality wise they are all the same.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 28, 2021, 02:17:08 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on January 27, 2021, 06:02:31 pmThe reason they weren't historically very popular is in part because they lacked things like serial decoders, but these have been added as standard now. They also cost a lot more than the Rigol.(Serial decoderscouldbe added by hacking in the serial decoder plugin from a higher-up model but there was no official option)I haven't owned one myself but I've seen a lot of people say good things about them. For under $300 they seem like a total bargain.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 02, 2021, 07:26:31 pm
content: Defpom has a look at the new SDS1104X-U

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 03, 2021, 12:07:31 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 02, 2021, 07:26:31 pmThank you. Nice video.One small marginal note.Is it finally time to forget this old Trigger Holdoff time method for trig AM modulation. It was important in history with analog scopes and older digital scopes with very limited trigger functions. Today we have lot of better things in modern oscilloscope trigger engine.Today modern digital oscilloscopes have lot of more powerful trigger functions. Even the old brown fox can learn new jumps over the lazy dog...Problem with trigger holdoff time using is: when modulating frequency change lot as it many times do in real life it loose trig easy and if it change lot and fast never can not follow it with adjusting HoldOff time.Here is (imho) better method.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-1120-new-sds1104x-u-4-channel-100mhz-1gsas-economy-oscilloscope/msg3381016/#msg3381016

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 03, 2021, 07:29:38 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on February 03, 2021, 12:07:31 pmYes I thought of you when I watched Defpom attempting to get solid triggering on AM modulation.He certainly shows some better familiarity now he has an X-E of his own but he still has a few more tricks to learn about its standard features and I made comments on the YouTube page that he has pinned at the top so to help others.Quite pleased he covered all he did in just 30 mins.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 03, 2021, 08:22:29 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on January 27, 2021, 06:02:31 pmIf you're in the U.S., the GDS1054B comes in under $300 with the EEVblog discount. The SDS1000X-U is $100 more than that. Unless one of the limitations of the 1054B mentioned below is a showstopper, the Instek is the clear winner due to price alone.The Instek has per-channel controls, while the Siglent does not. But this comes at a cost: the Instek is substantially larger in its width. If space is at a premium for you, the Siglent is a better choice, all other things being equal (which, of course, they're not).The UI on the SDS1000X-U, if it's anything like the 1204X-E that I have, is good, and reasonably responsive. But the UI on the GDS1054B isblazing fast, smooth as butter. Save for a couple of times when I managed to make the UI crawl (I haven't been able to figure out how to reliably repeat it), it's been stable in that respect. The Instek shows exactly what a UI implemented on top of the Zynq architecture is capable of when done properly. The Instek also separates out the select button from the multifunction knob, while the Siglent uses a press of the multifunction knob for selection. The latter results in errors while selecting items. It would have been better for Siglent to use a detented knob for the multifunction knob, as that would eliminate the problem. Instek's solution is superior even to a detented knob, since it allows for fast scrolling through values while also eliminating the problem of the knob moving on you when you select something.Both units give you excellent serial decoding capability. The 1054B gives you i2c, SPI, CAN, LIN, UART, and parallel bus decoding (tough to see how useful parallel would be with only 4 channels, though).The 1054B has a frontend that limits the bandwidth to below 100 MHz, so even though it can be hacked to claim that it's a 100 MHz scope, it isn't really. Seehttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/possible-gw-instek-gds-1000b-hack/msg3306636/#msg3306636.The -3 dB point seems to be at around 80 MHz. What I don't know is whether or not the hack results in any changes to the bandwidth characteristics of the scope. I suspect not, but I don't have a proper signal source that I can use to test that.When hacked, the 1054B has segment capability. It also has event search capability that ties into the FFT and makes it possible to display a table of peaks. But Instek seems to have implemented segmented memory as an afterthought. With the Siglent, it is a first-class property, baked into the design, and is always active. Why do I say that Instek has implemented it as an afterthought? Simple: because you can't have it active while search is active at the same time. Similarly, you can't enable search (and thus see FFT peaks) if segmented memory is active. This means you can't see the frame-by-frame peaks in the FFT. This is a limitation that has no rational justification that I can think of.Worse, if you are using segments on the Instek, the FFT mechanism willnotshow the FFT as it varies by segment. This means that you cannot examine how the spectral content of the waveform changes over time. The Siglent does this correctly, precisely because it implements segments as a first-class always-on mechanism.Additionally, while the Instek will allow you to see the FFT peaks in a table, the Siglent implements this better: it allows you to see the table overlaid on the waveform and/or the FFT. The Instek's table covers up the entire screen and thus makes it impossible to see the peaks in the FFT graph as you move through the table.The Siglent implements a "what you see is all you get" approach to acquisition. In particular, the unzoomed screen boundaries define the limits of the capture. This has advantages and disadvantages. It has the advantage of clarity, in that it makes it clear exactly what you're getting for any given capture, and it then is on you to set your timebase appropriately to capture what you need. It has the disadvantage that if your screen size (in terms of time) isn't big enough to show the data you want, you can't just zoom out in order to see the data that you missed. The Instek implements a more traditional capture mechanism whereby the amount that is captured is defined by the memory size relative to the sample rate, and the scope will wait until it fills the buffer before enabling another trigger event. If you want a fast trigger rate, you have to manually downsize the capture buffer to accomplish that. There's an indicator at the top of the display that shows the size of the waveform on the screen relative to the size of the capture, so you can always tell whether you're viewing a subset of an entire capture or the whole thing. Perhaps the easiest way to illustrate the difference is to perform a digital protocol capture where you're decoding the results. With the Siglent, you have to set up your timebase so that the entire capture is on the screen. If the amount of necessary data per capture event is high enough, you won't be able to examine relevant subsets of the decoded data without using zoom mode (which works well enough). With the Instek, you can just set your timebase to directly see what you're interested in and the scope will still capture everything that will fit into memory. But the downside of the latter is that you would have to Just Know that the part of the waveform that represents the start of the digital message is within the buffer range, which may or may not be the case. But: nothing prevents you from setting your timebase in exactly the same way you would the Siglent and using zoom mode on the Instek, either, at least when the amount of data you need to capture is much larger than what you need to display. Finally, the pass/fail mask mechanism works only on the screen, and this gives the Instek's approach a massive advantage, because it means you can define a specific portion of the full capture as what should be tested, while the Siglent utterly lacks that capability (the 2000X+ fixes this by making mask testing in zoom mode possible, but that capability is not present in the 1000X-E and, I presume, the 1000X-U).Now, the Siglent's approach heredoeshave an advantage in theory. Suppose that you're capturing a large series of bursts of communications traffic, such that the amount of time per burst is, say, 40 microseconds of time. At 1GS/s, that's 40000 sample points. The Instek will force you to acquire 100000 points in order to capture this at the full sample rate. If the amount of time between bursts is more than 20 microseconds and less than 60 microseconds plus the Instek's trigger re-arm time,the Instek will miss the subsequent event. But with the Siglent, you can just set your timebase to 5 us/div, so that the screen covers 70 microseconds (the Siglent has 14 horizontal divisions), and as long as the delay between bursts is longer than 30 microseconds plus whatever the Siglent's re-arm time is, it'll capture the entirety of all the bursts. And because segmented memory is always on, it will always store the captures for later review. The Instek has segments, but you'd be limited to segments of 100000 points in this case, and that may cause you to miss the trailing portion of some 50% of the bursts. If you intentionally drop the capture size to 10000 points, the sample rate drops to 200MS/s, and thatdoestake care of this hypothetical problem, but you take a sample rate hit in order to achieve that. Both scopes have some limitations here. They're just different limitations.All in all, I'd say the Instek gets the win. But not by as much as you might think. Its main advantage is price and that fast UI. At the current price, the value of the Instek is off the charts.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 03, 2021, 08:52:03 pm
content: Quote from: kcbrown on February 03, 2021, 08:22:29 pmI'm afraid I don't really understand the reasoning here, especially bold parts.Every scope will directly couple trigger event rate to trigger events. And if scope has to capture 100 ms of data per trigger, it will have max 10 triggers per second. It's no matter if that time length was defined by sample memory size settings & sample rate settings or by time/div & sample rate settings. Two scopes capturing same sample size at same sample rate will take same time to do it. If there is difference in trigger rate between them, it will be inrettriger (rearm) time, that has to be added to sample time to define trigger rate.....Regards,Sinisa

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 03, 2021, 11:07:06 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on February 03, 2021, 08:52:03 pmThis might be a case of bad use of terminology on my part. I've since corrected it. Please review it again and let me know if I got other things wrong.Your description is correct: the screen determines how much time after the trigger fires the scope will delay before re-arming the trigger. This is true of both the Instek and the Siglent for their normal operating mode (see below for a caveat with respect to the Instek).The point I was attempting to make is that because the Siglentalwaysuses the amount of time represented by the screen to determine the amount of time to be represented by a capture,andthe trigger re-arm time is the amount of time between the trigger indicator and the right edge of the screen, the end result is that the Siglent forces you to trade trigger firing rate for capture length. The Instek doesn't force that upon you. The trigger firing rate is, as usual, limited by the time distance between the trigger indicator and the right edge of the screen, butthe capture size is not limited to the time represented by the screen. This means the trigger can fire oftenandthe amount that is captured will be determined solely by the memory depth (the amount of time that represents depends on the sampling rate, and the sampling rate is adjusted so that it either is enough to always fill a screen's width worth of time or is at the sampling rate limit, whichever is lower).This means you can use the Instek to see changes to the waveform in rapid succession while still capturing a much larger amount of time when you stop the scope. Obviously, though, the large capture itself only happens when the scope is stopped. When the Instek is in segmented memory mode, it sets the trigger rearm time to be long enough to ensure that the specified amount of memory is filled before the trigger re-arms.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 03, 2021, 11:09:42 pm
content: Quote from: kcbrown on February 03, 2021, 11:07:06 pmNo. Try triggering in normal mode on a single event and you'll see there will be a full capture. AFAIK only the newer Keysight scopes have this weird behaviour where you have to stop first (much like pressing the 'single' button) before getting a full acquisition.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 03, 2021, 11:34:35 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 03, 2021, 11:09:42 pmI should have been more precise. The large capture that contains multiple events that would fire the trigger, where the events are separated by more time than that represented by the distance between the trigger location and the edge of the screen only happens when the scope is stopped. The trigger re-arm time is defined by the time distance between the trigger location on the screen and the edge of the screen, no? If so, then that would mean the trigger can fire any time after the previous event fired plus (at most) the amount of time represented by the screen.If the trigger re-arm time is defined by the amount of time represented by the capture buffer then that would make the trigger re-arm time independent of the timebase whenever the time represented by the screen is smaller than the time represented by the capture. Is that actually how it works? If so, then I stand corrected, and that would actually reduce the practical difference between the Siglent and the Instek in this regard.I think I'm going to have to come up with an experiment that shows what the scope does here.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 03, 2021, 11:53:25 pm
content: Quote from: kcbrown on February 03, 2021, 11:34:35 pmI think you are confusing a couple of things. For clarity:- trigger re-arm time is the time needed between finishing a capture and making the acquisition hardware ready for the next capture. This is also called dead time.- the time needed for the acquisition is number of samples * 1/samplerate. So 10Mpts at 1Gs/s takes 10M * 1n= 10msThe total time for an acquisition cycle is the time needed for the acquisition + the trigger re-arm time + time it takes for an event to appearWhat is different between Siglent and other oscilloscopes is that Siglent dynamically alters the number of samples to sample only enough to fill the screen regardless of the memory depth selected by the user.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 12:07:52 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 03, 2021, 11:53:25 pmOK, so I apparently did misunderstand how the acquisition of the Instek works. This means the Siglent actually gives you an advantage here, because it gives you fine-grained control over the acquisition rate, whilst the Instek only gives you coarse control by way of specifying the acquisition buffer size.I'll modify my original message to reflect the consequences of this, because they're not insignificant.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 12:17:11 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on February 04, 2021, 12:07:52 amIs it not blatantly obvious there are 2 different capture philosophies used by the wfps datasheet spec ?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 12:23:42 am
content: Nico is right.Only Keysight does this juggling.Keysight in Normal mode keeps triggering and grabbingonly screen full of data. Sometimes only 50 points. You can check that by sending single bursts from siggen manually.Take a capture in RUN mode and try moving waveform horizontally or change timebase... And if you press STOP, it will do nothing with existing capture. Still no additional data.It will actuallywait for next triggerand that one will be taken same as if it were in SINGLE mode. So, on Keysight (3000T series) I confirm that going from RUN to STOP is similar to pressing SINGLE while in RUN mode. Thatone last capturewill be full length.Fun fact, if that last trigger it's waiting for, isdelayedmore than 100ms it willabort. SounlikeSINGLE, itwon'twait forever.Keysight took a lot of time with all kinds of tricks like this to create an illusion that it takes long captures AND is fast at the same time. It isn't. It's justtrickinguser to think so..On fast signals you would never know. Recently they added special capture mode to fix memory, because people wanted a mode where scope behaves deterministically....So truth is, that with Keysight 3000T, youcannotnotice something interesting on the screen while in RUN between triggers, press STOP and then look at the more data, like Dave and others think it works. That last long capture will be next trigger....Or none if it times out. The one you wanted to zoom out, will be either lost, or will be screen size, nothing before or after...Every other capture while in RUN mode is just what will fit on screen at current timebase.Same as Siglent, except Siglent has much more memory and Siglent won't do that trick with switching to SINGLE going from RUN to STOP.On scopes that have fixed memory length, they will always capture full requested length. Rigols have a setting if you want memory to be Auto (Siglent style) or fixed length all the time..So if you set Instek for 10 MS and you have it on any timebase that will keep 1 GS/sec, you will always get 10 ms of data, even if you set scope to 5ns/DIV. And have max 100 triggers per sec..Regards,Sinisa

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 12:30:23 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 03, 2021, 11:53:25 pmKeysight does it too, also Rigol and Micsig when set to Auto memory mode. It is normal mode, nothing unusual, or bad.With Rigol and Micsig you do have a choice of strategy though, if that is important for user. Keysight sampler mode is too awkward to be used in normal work.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 12:49:04 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on February 04, 2021, 12:07:52 amAnd now you understood exactly my point in lengthy discussion about scopes that "are better because they can set sample buffer size manually"..It is easier and deterministic and requires no constant mental math (and less human errors because of it) to simply set time span you want to look at, capture the lot and then drill into detail.The Siglent, LeCroy, Pico way. And Rigol ,Micsig R&S and many more support that memory management mode. With Siglent, Lecroy, R&S, Pico also supporting history mode, that lets you review previous captures..If you really need to look at just a part of that big buffer, you open zoom window and dial in that exact time to look at.... Simple.Nicos method does achieve same dataset, and saves screen space (zoom does take screen real estate, true), but is (to me) more convoluted to setup... But both work.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 01:39:12 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on February 04, 2021, 12:49:04 amYep. I recognized that early on: "It has the advantage of clarity, in that it makes it clear exactly what you're getting for any given capture, and it then is on you to set your timebase appropriately to capture what you need."QuoteThis is one of the reasons the SDS2000X+ series is so nice. The screen is large enough that you still have a decent amount of waveform real-estate even in zoom mode. On that scope, zoom mode is suddenly way more usable. And it's clear they've done a lot to make it that way. Even mask testing works in zoom mode now, something I viewed as perhaps the most significant shortcoming to Siglent's implementation.Honestly, it wouldn't take much at this point for Siglent to change zoom mode so that it can, at the user's option, use the entire waveform display area of the screen for the zoomed section, and have the unzoomed section represented in iconic form in exactly the same way that most other scopes represent the capture buffer versus the viewed portion, namely:All they would then need is some way to clearly indicate that zoom mode is active, since changing the horizontal scale would no longer change the acquisition timebase.I'd love to see the same sort of thing on the SDS2000X+ as well, though it has enough screen real estate that they could use perhaps 1 vertical division's worth of real estate to represent the unzoomed view.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 10:08:08 am
content: Quote from: tautech on February 04, 2021, 12:17:11 amThe philosophies aren't as different as I thought, frankly. Both fill the defined buffer. The difference is in how the buffer is defined.I'm frankly surprised that the Instek doesn't reenable the trigger immediately after it has gotten enough data to display. Which is to say, I'm surprised the Instek's capture sequence isn't something like this (the below presumes a system with a circular memory buffer of size 2*N, where N is the number of sample points configured for the capture):1. Scope sets the start of the capture (call this S) to a predefined point in the buffer (probably just the absolute beginning address of the buffer), nulls the last trigger location (call this T), erases the display processor's list of frames, and begins acquisition. Acquisition continues until the scope is stopped.2. While acquisition is going, it would take the following conditional actions:a. If N points have been acquired and no trigger events have occurred since S, reset the acquisition location to S.b. If N points have been acquired, and at least N/2 points have been acquired since T, then set S to the current acquisition location.c. If the trigger conditions are met, set T to the current acquisition location and disarm the trigger.d. If the current location corresponds to the rightmost acquisition point that would be shown on the screen after T, add the decimated data for the points from the beginning of the screen to the end of the screen to the display processor's list of frames, and re-arm the trigger.e. If 1/60th of a second has passed since the last display update, the display processor combines all of the frames in its list (if any) into a single display frame and ships it to the screen, and clears its list. If its frame list was empty then it does nothing.3. The scope is commanded to stop. At this point:a. If a trigger event has occurred within the last N points, then (if necessary) continue to acquire until either N/2 points past the last trigger point or until N points since S, whichever is later, then stop capture, and then make it possible to see the captured data from S to the current point (i.e., would make it possible to see N points, with at most N/2 before the last trigger point and at least N/2 after it).b. If a trigger event has not occurred within the last N points, but the other half of the total buffer contains a trigger event (i.e., 2b happened), then make that other half available for display.c. Otherwise, no trigger events occurred since the scope was started, so there's nothing to display.With the above setup, the trigger would be re-armed when acquisition hits the rightmost edge of the screen relative to the trigger. This would cause trigger events to be processed, and the display updated, not based on the length of the acquisition buffer but rather based on the width of the screen. But once the scope is stopped, you'd have an entire capture buffer's worth of data at your disposal.The above is approximate, of course. I'm sure there are conditions that I haven't accounted for. But hopefully you get the idea here. In essence, the scope would always maintain a current circular acquisition buffer of N points, within a total memory buffer of 2*N points worth. It's double buffering, in essence, but the double buffering is conditional upon the trigger having fired at least once within the last N points, and making the buffer continuous in this manner means that you don't have to play with bank switching or anything like that which might complicate processing. But as a hardware matter, for it to work, the memory would need enough bandwidth to be written to at the sampling rate in one region while being read in a different region. And, of course, decimation for screen display purposes would certainly have to happen in hardware (FPGA).I'm not any kind of genius or anything. That much should be obvious.The above seems straightforward in my naive estimation, so surely it has been thought of long before. What is it about it that makes it unworkable in practice, such that there doesn't seem to be an inexpensive scope that does it (that I know of)? It has the advantage of a trigger refresh rate that's as fast as the scope can manage combined with a traditional "the configured buffer always gets filled" end result that people expect.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 12:04:02 pm
content: Scope timebases on Keysight 3000T range from 5E-10 to 50 seconds per div.. It is hard doing tricks like that with 11 orders of magnitude of time span.Also, you forget about measurements, those have to be optimized for speed and for that you want streamlined data formats and flow.Also you cannot retrigger while capturing unless you have datapath that will change where it writes data all the time..Capturing goes into circular buffer of certain size, all the time. Trigger engine only leaves the marker where trigger happened, and then you rollover and keep capturing until you reach trigger point from the other side. Than you start dumping data on other memory location, leaving last data buffer for display/measurement engine to process it. That is also your history buffers.Or you can do what Keysight does, always getting absolute minimum of data points and reconfigure to single on STOP. And you shuffle and do tricks inside Megazoom chipset. That are possible only because very small memory. If you were to make 10-MEgazoom or 100-Megazoom chip, it would have to work differently. It's literally 100 times more processing than what 1-Megazoom chip has to do. Not to mention fixed low res display window compared to higher resolution displays...

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 07:09:40 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on February 04, 2021, 12:04:02 pmWhy? The timebase, combined with the memory depth, ultimately determines the sampling rate. The sampling rate is set so as to ensure that the time covered by the buffer is never less than the time represented by the screen. The algorithm I described is independent of the sample rate.QuoteSure, and that would place some additional demands on at least some of the data. I fully expect that the sampled data would have to be decimated and processed in real time by the FPGA. But these are separate processing paths.I admit that if you're using DRAM, then a memory controller that makes possible the kinds of parallel processing of data needed here might be quite a challenge to design. Decimation into a separate buffer (likely internal to the FPGA) would have to be able to keep up with the fastest sampling rate the scope is capable of. Fast SRAM is more expensive but might be needed for something like this if the sample rate is high enough. You might even incorporate SRAM into your DRAM memory controller design and use that as a write-through cache to satisfy reads when possible.QuoteWhy is that? As you note, a trigger event merely sets a marker. That happens while capturing. The implementation I described requires only a single trigger event location pointer, which always points at where the last trigger event occurred.QuoteThat's exactly what I was describing above. The primary difference is that what I described would re-arm the trigger after the acquisition had passed the location boundary of the display, rather than the end of the buffer, and whether or not the buffer location for the next acquisition would be reset to the start of the current buffer section of N points would depend on whether a trigger event occurred within the last N points (if no event occurred within the next N points then it would reset the acquisition location to the start of the existing buffer area because the rest of the buffer area might contain a trigger event and that would need to be preserved).Think of the implementation I described as a conditional circular buffer implemented within another circular buffer that's twice the size. The point of it is to ensure that you always preserve a memory region of N points that contains the last seen trigger event within it, as long as at least one trigger event was seen at all, as well as to ensure that the trigger fires, and the resulting processing happens, as often as possible.My question is: how is what I described so different from what scopes currently do that what I described isnot possibleto implement with the hardware used by low-end scopes? Whatmandatesthat the trigger must fire at most once per amount of time represented by the memory depth and sample rate combination?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 08:26:03 pm
content: Quote from: kcbrown on February 04, 2021, 07:09:40 pmSimplicity and low return on investment. See how much discussion already is sparked by relatively basic acquisition schemes. Besides that the search function found on many oscilloscopes nowadays can look for trigger events in the acquired data (either in a single record or segments). This is similar to what you are proposing.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2021, 08:47:58 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 04, 2021, 08:26:03 pmI guess so. That's especially true if it requires designing a custom DRAM controller.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 07, 2021, 08:47:34 am
content: Talk about cutting it fine.....finally got around to checking the SDS1104X-U BW after spotting Defpom reporting is as only a little over its rated 100 MHz BW and indeed it just barely makes spec.Source SDG6022XSweep 0-200 MHz-3dB point ~103 MHz

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2021, 05:17:51 am
content: New firmware for SDS1104X-U.Version： V1.1.5R68.3MBhttps://int.siglent.com/upload_file/zip/firmware/Oscilloscope/SDS1104X-U_1.1.5R6_EN.zipRelease notesSupport EasyScopeX

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2021, 11:38:42 am
content: Quote from: tautech on March 07, 2021, 08:47:34 amBecause oscilloscopes are individuals and also test setups. Here other same kind of test. Note that BW shape looks bit better.-3dB >110MHz But -1dB point clearly higher.Used short RG316 and 50ohm feed thru and signal source also some SDG6kXIt is very good BW is rejected to just over 100MHz because fNyq. 125MHz and oscilloscope type of Sinc interpolation need some "free air" before Nyquist wall. Less aliasing = better trusted measurements with unknown signals. Even -6dB point is far over fNyquist leading strong aliasing. But, this is entry level cheap scope and this happen only if 3 or 4 channels simultneously in use. With 2 channels in use fNyq. is 250MHz and 0.8fNyq is 200MHz where attennuation is ok in this class. But still user need know FFT may display quite strong aliases. If need avoid these, then need use external LPF. (and for digital filters fanboys, digital filter do not know if signal after ADC is alias or not, they do not have any label "hey I am alias"... only good (and expensive) place for filter is before ADC. )(you see small unsymmetry so -3dB is not just as cursor 11.52 (115MHz) reading is. True is bit below.Sidenote. Why I use this trigger mode and settings. Because it trigs rock solid even when I attenuate signal down to -12dB from sweep start reference level. So I do not need adjust trigger when I change level in wide range.If this scope BW -3dB point is even bit higher I recommend modify its front end for more narrow BW or Siglent implement to FW some warning message about possible aliasing when 3-4 channels is in use, because its analog BW violates Nyquist-Shannon.

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 12, 2021, 01:37:49 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on May 12, 2021, 11:38:42 amThis is conventional thinking, requiring an analog antialiasing filter before ADC which can get quite involved depending on how close to Nyquist and what post ADC signal degradation is acceptable. A good example of these analog filters was in the original Sony CD players before oversampling was later introduced. This analog filter had to suppress almost 100dB at 1.1 band transition (22KHz/20KHz) which later oversampling relaxed considerably. Recall analyzing this Sony analog anti-aliasing filter, which used polystyrene precision caps, bobbin wound air-core inductors, and complex active circuitry to keep the aliasing and distortion over 100dB down!! Our interest wasn't for audio, but we were dealing with signals that needed to be preserved with over 100dB fidelity, and aliasing and distortion posed a similar issues. The Sony filter was indeed a work of engineering artOver a decade ago advanced research work at USC produced a completely new and different type ADC where the waveform being observed creates it's own Nyquist limit. This ADC was called Non-Uniform Sampling (NUS) ADC and had the unique feature of sampling the input waveform in both amplitude and time, which produced a result that was in fact post processed with antialiasing filters in the digital domain, so the waveform did sort of say"hey I am alias"...This was all part of an advanced research project that involved break-thrus in multiple disciplines, and back in ~2012 seeing a 1GHz signal sampled by the NUS ADC with stunningly good results and thinking, "this would make a superb ADC for a RTSA or DSO". Keysight was very interested in this NUS ADC, so maybe we may see these trickle down to our instrumentation world soonBest,

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2021, 08:26:47 am
content: Quote from: tautech on May 12, 2021, 05:17:51 amThis is PRODUCT_ID 17001.

author: QuitButton
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 18, 2021, 01:54:51 pm
content: Have I got this right or am I missing something here? Timebase of 2ns, I only get 28 samples. (or 14 or 7 with other channels on)Is that the limit or anyway of increasing the number?

author: tttonyyy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 18, 2021, 02:28:27 pm
content: Quote from: QuitButton on June 18, 2021, 01:54:51 pm14 horizontal squares of 2ns = 28ns across the screen width. So you have one sample per ns which is 1GSa/s, which is right.The number is only increased by opening the wallet wider

author: QuitButton
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 18, 2021, 03:38:59 pm
content: I'm probably not wording things right. My old Hantek somehow manages todisplay800 dots from the 40 samples it takes at 2ns timebase. I guess its averaging even though it shouldn't be, or there's some basic difference in the operation between these models that I'm not understanding yet.It also has an Equivalent-Time capture that the Siglent seems to be missing, which allows the creation of relatively useless captures like this one:Edit: No, the 800 display dots is not just the width of the display...

author: QuitButton
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2021, 04:57:29 pm
content: Can someone confirm what I'm seeing here isn't me going bonkers and its just "how things are"?On my Hantek, at 2ns in Dots display I get this:That's obviously a lot more than the ~28 samples it should be at 1GS/s so I'm guessing that either a) Hantek fill in the gaps (its not really "dots" is it?), or b) Hantek do more than one sample per single shot, or c) Something is happening that I don't understand.Siglent give me this sort of display tt the same timebase:I can though, get something close the Hantek's display by using Sequence capture on the Siglent, thus:Is that what Hantek do?

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2021, 05:31:48 pm
content: If you have more dots than mathematically possible during a single capture, the scope is overlaying multiple captures.

author: tttonyyy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2021, 06:27:29 pm
content: That's the answer. This only works with repetitive signals. If you single trigger the scope you'll see the true reflection of number of sample points on screen.Edit: there's a great explaination here:https://uk.tek.com/document/application-note/real-time-versus-equivalent-time-samplingWhich is why one of your captures shows apparent noisey edges.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2021, 08:29:18 pm
content: Quote from: QuitButton on June 19, 2021, 04:57:29 pmQuote from: bdunham7 on June 19, 2021, 05:31:48 pmQuote from: tttonyyy on June 19, 2021, 06:27:29 pmBoth these ^^However it's evident QuitButton's capture was manually instigated whereas if it was done with a Single trigger one sample point will be aligned with both the horizontal and vertical trigger points.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2021, 09:19:09 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on June 19, 2021, 08:29:18 pmI believe that is not true--and with an interpolated trigger where the trigger does not in any way control the sampling clock, how could it be true? I'm not sure what you mean by 'manually instigated', but you can see that there are two dots that when interpolated by sin(x)/x would plausibly be right at the trigger point, but there's no sample there.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2021, 09:25:45 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on June 19, 2021, 09:19:09 pmRun/Stop vs Single.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2021, 09:38:01 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on June 19, 2021, 09:25:45 pmThe only difference I see between Run/Stop and Single is that the segmented mode only works in Single. Either way, at 1ns/div I get 1 sample per division (except with segmented mode I get multiples at random locations relative to each other) and the samples can be anywhere.

author: tttonyyy
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2021, 10:08:56 pm
content: I'd not really thought about this before. I would guess that the scope firmware just sees that two successive samples cross the trigger threshold, and linearly (or sin(X)/X) interpolates where that crossing point would be in time and shifts the display of all sample positions appropriately to make the zero point line up like we see above.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 19, 2021, 10:28:25 pm
content: Quote from: tttonyyy on June 19, 2021, 10:08:56 pmGood, so some more for you to ponder on.These scopes (all DSO's) covert the input analog signal to an entirely digital stream (data points) where in modern Siglents an entirely digital trigger awaits a data point that meets its thresholdbeforeinterpolation is applied to reconstruct the waveform into something we all understand and expect to see.For the most part you can use these entirely in Dot mode although for screenshot captures and Single shot it's better to be in Vector mode so to have interpolation applied.

author: QuitButton
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 20, 2021, 03:45:41 pm
content: Quote from: tttonyyy on June 19, 2021, 06:27:29 pmThat's just it, this IS (supposed to be) a single shot capture. Which doesn't make sense why Hantek shows the result it does.

author: StillTrying
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 20, 2021, 06:17:49 pm
content: Quote from: tttonyyy on June 19, 2021, 10:08:56 pmI've looked at loads of scope shots where there's only 2 or 3 full ADC speed samples per division trying to determine ifthe triggerinterpolation is linear or sinx, most of the time the X timing looks too good for the trigger interpolation to be just a linear line between the 2 samples.It's difficult to tell much when the trigger is in the middle of a fast edge where any interpolation is going to be very nearly a straight line between the 2 nearest samples anyway.We need someone to experiment with dots + persistence ~2 samples division and the trigger nearer the false pre and over shoot that sinx creates when there's not enough samples on the edge. If the middle of the fast edge now wobbles we'll know the trigger interpolation is exactly the same as used for the displayed trace, - I think.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2021, 12:47:05 pm
content: Here is 100MHz sine in CH4. Also other channels are on for reduce samplerate to 250MSa/s. (Ch 1-3 trace display hidden)Attached image 1.First one shot with Sinc interpolation. Persistence infinite.Attached image 2.Then same acquistion but turned display for dots only. (note that Siglent do not produce fake dots as many other scopes do in this case)Now it still keep this persistence but its intensity is now reduced and real ADC sample dots are visible.If trig is based to linear interpolation there can see where trigger position is in this case. And if this interpolated trig position is now placed to trigger position we can see really high horizontal positioning jitter because samples are randomly in different positions in every sequential acquisitions. But as next image show trigger is rock solid.Attached image 3.All same but now just running with infinite persistence and trigger position is rock solid and as can see in image 2 samples can be where ever.--------This last example (SARI) is old, made with SDS1104X-E , (it works also in X-U but with bit reduced performance due to different trigger system, due to single ADC system)Also when I read this thread... one tiny tip. In Siglent there is two different acquisition modes. Fast and slow.Slow mode works like conventional DSO. one acquisition and display... one acquisition and display...Fast mode... working as DPO (Siglent name SPO) depending timebase and signal, trigger etc... it acquire as many acquistion as it can before need display. Display interval is normally 40ms. In some cases it can acquire up to thousands acquisition in one display interval and they are displayed overlaid in this one display frame.Note in image what is sampling speed and what is signal. This is NOT Equal Time. This is Siglent SARI (Sequential Acquistion Random Inteleaving) what is also not LeCroy RIS mode but somehow tiny tiny bit its cousin. Siglent have not advertised it in any place, and also no need advertise. But experienced user of course can use it because he also then understand its all limits without ranting this and that. But this is useful in some special cases when Sinc may produce Gibbs ears when working with samplerates.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2021, 07:11:42 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on June 21, 2021, 12:47:05 pmYou can get the same result with slow mode and persistence, but either case the usefulness seems quite limited. Your sample rate still has to be pretty close to the desired bandwidth otherwise this too falls apart.I take it that this example demonstrates that when reducing the sample rate to fit in a smaller memory space, the scope does the sinc trigger interpolationbeforedecimation?Your statement that Siglent doesn'tintentionallylie about dots seems true as far as I can tell--but the reason the scope can't do something like this example on aliased signals is because it can't properly place the dots in the correct horizontal position because it is relying on a sinc interpolation of an aliased signal. So it is precise but incorrect about the horizontal position, resulting in a very clean but wrong aliased signal, dots or vectors don't matter. In this example, it can place the dots correctly even though they are over Nyquist for the decimated sample rate--and when overlaid, the represent the signal correctly.

author: Bathyscaphe
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 29, 2021, 08:30:19 pm
content: I am considering to buy either SDS1104X-U or SDS1202X-E as my first oscilloscope. I am asking your opinion which scope I should purchase.Currently, I have no intentions to operate the scope at high frequencies of over 100MHz+, or using more than two channels, so the decision is tough. SDS1202X-E has somewhat better and less noisy frontend than Siglent's budget 4 channel scope, and it has also better FFT resolution, but I do not know if they are worth of 2 extra channels.I definitely need I2C and UART decoders and preferably triggers as well (my interest is to debug noisy and long I2C transmission lines and various simple frequency-output sensors), so these Siglent scopes are the ones I consider the best for me. Have you regretted of buying a 2 channel scope over a 4 channel one? Or vice versa, do you think a 200 MHz scope with good noise and FFT features is better than a worse 4 channel scope?

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2021, 08:46:38 pm
content: Quote from: Bathyscaphe on June 29, 2021, 08:30:19 pmWelcome to the forum.If you are to do much in the way of decoding a X-U is simpler to use as there is no need to set a Clk Timeout when you have additional channels available.However if you are confident you can work with just 2 channels a SDS1202X-E does have individual vertical controls which are initially more intuitive to use although it takes little time to get acquainted with multiplexed controls.I would say your call.

author: Bathyscaphe
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 30, 2021, 05:56:38 am
content: Thanks for your kind reply. I wonder if there are any differences between firmware matureness or PCB/components quality?Finally, if I am going to play with signals having frequency over 100 MHz (for instance to measure attenuation of a RF filter at 130 MHz), would a scope bandwidth of 100 MHz be fine if I just measure the scope's attenuation beforehand and take it into account? Am I correct?

author: Andrew_Debbie
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 30, 2021, 06:23:52 am
content: QuoteHave you watched the tear down videos on YouTube?https://youtu.be/Y6gzYbuMjOAhttps://youtu.be/slBXLf4YKtA

author: Bathyscaphe
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 30, 2021, 06:36:40 am
content: Quote from: Andrew_Debbie on June 30, 2021, 06:23:52 amYes, I have. There is indeed a small difference between the ADC implementations that affect the noise levels, but I did not understand if the components such as the capacitors are more durable and better in general.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 30, 2021, 07:38:58 am
content: Quote from: Bathyscaphe on June 30, 2021, 05:56:38 amCertainly there are some maturity differences and one in particular is addressed with a recent firmware addition that provides for EasyScopeX support in X-U models. I am not aware of any other issues.All our new stock has to be updated with this version before sale.I don't believe Siglent have made changes to any component quality.QuoteYou could and results would be indicative of performance but amplitude would of course not be correct.SDS1202X-E could be the better choice for you at this price point.

author: Bathyscaphe
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 30, 2021, 11:43:10 am
content: Thanks for your help, I decided to purchase a SDS1202X-E. If I ever needed a four channel scope some day for decoding multiple digital transmissions, I could buy a logic analyser. Otherwise I have no need for 4 channels. I would be even happy to just see whether the transmission is OK or not.

author: tzok
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 24, 2022, 03:03:43 pm
content: After some time, it is worth to mention, that SDS1104X-U is still the only X-U series model, and for all that time it received 1 firmware update, while SDS1104X-E had 4 FW updates and 2 OS updates since last (and only) FW update of X-U