UNI-T MSO3054HD Oscilloscope - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: egonotto
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2024, 09:43:12 pm
content: Hello,in the new video from Shahriar about the Microwave Symposium, Washington 2024, a new 12-bit oscilloscope MSO3054HD from UNI-T can also be seen briefly. I can't find anything at UNI-T yet. The link in the image does not provide any information, but you can already see some data in the image.Best regardsegonotto

author: shabaz
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 01, 2024, 10:57:27 pm
content: Managed to screenshot a little bit, and this was the info on theirwebpage(had to disable JavaScript to see it).Bandwidth: 500MHz Also available MSO3034HD 350MHz▪ Vertical Resolution: 12-bit HD, 16-bit ERES▪ 4 Analog Ch/16 Digital Ch, Logic Analyzer SW included (probes optional)▪ Max Sample Rate:5GSa/s[EDIT: as mentioned by @thm_w below, this looks definitely like a typo, should be 2.5GSa/s]2.5GSa/s per channel▪ Memory Depth: 500Mpts per channel▪ Max Capture Rate: 1,500,000 wfms/s per channel▪ Arb Waveform Generator: Dual Channel 50MHz option▪ 10.1-Inch UltraPhosphor3 Touchscreen Display▪ 5-Year WarrantyPower Analyzer: (option) power quality, harmonics, switching loss, ripple wave, loop analysis, safety operation areaSpectrum Analyzer: up to 1GHz. Up to 4Mpts enhanced FFT, functions such as frequency setting, waterfall plot, detection setting, and marker are includedBode Plot Analyzer: Option (also requires AWG option)Bus Decode: Included: RS232/422/485/UART, I2C, SPIOption: CAN, CAN-FD, FlexRay, LIN, SENT, MIL-STD-1553, ARINC429, Manchester, I2S/LJ/RJ/TDM (audio)DVM/Frequency Counter: 7-bitMeasures up 54 measurement parametersMask limit testingWeb server (SCPI control, remote access wired and Wi-Fi)

author: Anthocyanina
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2024, 07:22:45 pm
content: it seems to be available for purchase on their chinese website:https://instruments.uni-trend.com.cn/list_221/2862.html

author: thm_w
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2024, 09:19:14 pm
content: So 12-bit 2.5Gs/s for $2,200 USD.I'm not sure who would buy it over the Siglent SDS2204X HD at $2,400. Or a DHO1074 for $900.BUT, they are definitely driving down the price of scopes with probe sensing on them, it seems (siglent doesn't have it). And 5 year warranty is always great.Quote from: shabaz on July 01, 2024, 10:57:27 pmI think this has to be a typo, everywhere else says 2.5Gs/s max. Not even per channel.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2024, 09:26:42 pm
content: Quote from: thm_w on July 02, 2024, 09:19:14 pmYou confuse active probe support with probe sense, they are 2 different things.SDS5000X and SDS3000X HD are where Siglent models start providing active probe support.Probe sense OTOH is provided with SDS1000X HD, SDS2000X Plus and all higher models, 8 or 12bit.

author: egonotto
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2024, 09:49:29 pm
content: Hello,If the MSO3000HD really had 2 x 5 GSa/s and at least 2 x 500 MSa, I would find it interesting.However, if it had 2 times 2.5 GSa/s and only 1 time 500 MSa, I would no longer find it interesting.Best regardsegonotto

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2024, 09:56:54 pm
content: Active probe interface only makes sense if you have corresponding probes on offer - is that the case?Otherwise, there are strong visual references to Rigol, and the advertised maximum 1,500,000 Wfms/s is also "suspicious".

author: Anthocyanina
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2024, 10:49:41 pm
content: it seems this scope also has 50 ohm termination, i missed the label stating that in the pictures! i'm liking the design of this scope too, it looks like the front panel has a bunch of light pipes behind the encoders, and from the few images that appear to be real pictures, it doesn't look bad. Not sure about the cyan strip at the top, but i don't mind it either. This design looks much nicer than rigol's latest offerings. They've put this one in their 3000 class, so maybe 2k and 1k class 12 bit scopes coming from them too?

author: shabaz
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2024, 10:50:43 pm
content: Quote from: thm_w on July 02, 2024, 09:19:14 pmThanks; you're right. I've updated the comment to stop getting people's hopes up!

author: shabaz
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2024, 11:01:28 pm
content: The large memory depth is nice to see. In terms of usability, perhaps not to everyone's taste, but I really like the dual multipurpose controls that are on Tek instruments, and this Uni-T 'scope has them too.

author: Antonio90
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2024, 09:31:27 am
content: Looks interesting on paper. The style is a bit in line with Rigol's gaudy "gaming" visuals. I don't like it, but I don't care too much. It's a pity the dark coloured scheme has won, no biggie though.In any case, I don't know what's there to entice customers to buy. Everything is a paid option (including FRA, which actually needs two options), and the price advantage doesn't seem enough to chose it over already proven brands like Siglent and Rigol.At €1500 it would be an enticing option, at €2200, not so much.EDIT: 135Vrms max. rating. A bit lower than usual bench scopes. No limit on Vpeak though

author: Rod888
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 25, 2025, 03:48:31 am
content: This uni-t scope has numerous advantages over rigol/siglent-much higher processing power, the unit has double or more the analog bandwidth as the other vendors at every eres bit addition 13.5bit w/ eres has full 500Mhz bandwidth and sig has only220Mhz-faster waveform rate-lower deadtime-cheaper options,more included features that don't even need options like logic doesnt even need an option , just have to buy the probe-500Mhz unit is cheaper base price than the sds3000xhd or dho4000 800/1000meg series- -3bd bw actually greater the 600mhz and can see attenuated waveforms past 1 gig, not sure how far rigol/siglent stretch past, might be similar-has external 10Mhz reference input unlike siglent, who makes a scope with no ref in? dumb considering most reasonable labs sync every instrument to 10Mhz master oscillator. Siglent/rigol dont even publish or provide to cal labs any cal procedures to tweak the internal clock back to spec when it drifts off, you have to send it back to them , truly sad.-uses excellent ti and other american chips not some custom made Chinese chippersonally i think the mso3054hd is the better option over the rigol dho4000 or siglent sds3000xhd series scopes, my 2 cents for all the siglent blow hards here to chew on

author: egonotto
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 25, 2025, 05:52:14 am
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 25, 2025, 03:48:31 amHello,how is that supposed to work with a maximum of 2.5 GSa/s?Do you have an MSO3000HD?Best regardsegonotto

author: Rod888
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 26, 2025, 03:48:50 am
content: The ERES filter processes 'n' samples at a time from the acquired input and weights them to produce a finite impulse response (FIR) filter with a Gaussian low pass frequency response. This is what gives the extra bits beyond the 12bit a to d converter. This post processing with dsp algorithms is much more powerful with the uni-t which is why if you look at the eres specs for bandwidth vs bit depth the siglent and rigols take much bigger loss of bandwidth penalties at the higher bit resolutions. They have weaker hardware is what it really means.

author: egonotto
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2025, 05:10:59 am
content: Hello,do you work at UNI-T? Do you know the algorithm used in the MSO3000HD?Best regardsegonotto

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2025, 10:29:25 am
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 26, 2025, 03:48:50 amNo it does not work that way.ERES filter works by being low pass filter. More higher frequencies you filter out, more "virtual bits" you gain."Weak " or "strong" hardware has nothing to do with it.Faster or slower processing can only influence time to process the buffer, i.e. speed od processing. That translates in faster or slower triggering rate (less or more blind time) but has nothing to do with frequency response. It is mathematically impossible.If you are filtering for certain number of bits, you loose same amount of high frequency response every time.Only way to have same ERES and more BW is to use faster sampling.So with 20GS/s you might have 1GHZ BW, while with 5GS/s you will have 250MHz with same ERES settings.Rest of your post looks like an Aliexpress comercial.All fluff and not a single proper specification.All on a mythical device none of us saw ever...We would be very happy to see a nice review. With measurements and numbers...Until then...

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2025, 01:15:09 pm
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 25, 2025, 03:48:31 amUni-T chinese User Manual:QuoteSiglent SDS3000X-HD manual:QuoteThe above raises the question of whether these two instruments ERES functions are the same thing at all. Do we compare apples and shirts. Bandwidth is based mainly to math and not computing power.

author: newbrain
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 26, 2025, 02:11:44 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop, abridged by me on January 26, 2025, 01:15:09 pmSomething is seriously strange: we get one extra bit, and break the Nyquist barrier?The Siglent spec look approximately what one would expect: 1 bit gain -> 4 samples needed, hence 0.25×sample_rateWhat am I missing?Edit: mixed up the bit gain. Should have been:1 bit gain -> 4 samples needed, hence 0.125×sample_rate

author: Rod888
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 12:01:54 am
content: QuotemathIScomputing power as it is performed by the cpu/dsp whose power is directly related to eres bandwidth penalty, less processor = less bandwidth due to slower eres processingQuoteyes it does work that way, filtering is done via processing NOT analog filers with op amps etc in the same way the spectrum analyzer function doesn't using sweeping and filters/detectors like a traditional spectrum analyzer but likewise uses processing using fft and math (calculus) to covert time to frequency domain. This is common knowledge and practice and is all about processing after/during data capturemathIScomputing power as it is performed by the cpu/dsp whose power is directly related to eres bandwidth penalty, less processor = less bandwidth due to slower eres processingQuotelf the sample rate doesnt break nyquist (2.5Gs/s ~ 1.25Ghz bw so a 500Mhz bw rating = 5 samples per cycle bettering the nyquist minimum ) then a bw of .6* samplerate is even further under.the uni-t at a 500mhz bw rating on 2.5gs/s gives 5 samples per cyclethe siglent 1ghz bandwidth rating at 4gs/s gives 4 samples per cyclehere again the uni-t has better specand no i dont own a unit-t or work for them but i am in the market for a new 12bit scope and was comparing chinese ones including gw instek (but 8bit) and going by specs, published teardowns and sleuthing the web so far i see the uni-t model as the best option of the bunch

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 12:36:38 am
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 26, 2025, 03:48:50 amA Gaussian Low Pass Filter is anInfinite Impulse Response Filternot aFinite Impulse Response Filteras stated!! How many filter taps/samples do you think it takes to closely mimic a true Gaussian Response??Best

author: Rod888
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 06:51:48 am
content: from the web:Quotethe point isnt how big the array they use is or how many iterations, what matters is its all math and calculations via software running on processors in the digital realm not analog, the faster the hardware the less time to resolve and lower bandwidth penalty due to longer deadtime due to processing, thats the point im making .The uni-t has as they state over 250gs/s processing speed exceeding the abilities of the other chinese vendors which is why their eres bandwidth penalty is 1/2 of the others because eres is entirely a calculation process not a to d sampling rate . Don't understand dsp concepts ? Even in audio gear everyone is now using dsp, graphic/parametric equalizers, bandpass, bandstop, notch, compression, effects are all done using math and digital realm processing not analog op amps capacitors and inductors etc which is exactly the same way the scopes are doing eres and spectrum analysis via fft math. If people dont get it i cant help, they need to do some research on modern digital signal processing. Heck even analog radio communications is now going the way of the dodo , ever hear of sdr :software defined radio? its all sampling with a to d like a scope then every function: IF chain, bandwidth filtering, demodulation, auto-notch, tcs, agc, noise blanking, bandscope, EVERYTHING is done in the digital realm just like how oscilloscopes are these days, and digital realm processing is more about backend processing power over front end sample rate, naturally both play a role but having a more pumped back end certainly is way more beneficial than a few gs more over the nyquist rate. Nobody uses raster beam analog scopes now, its all processing speed and the king of dsp/processing speed has the more capable product, which in this case is uni-t. Having an 80gs/s a to d converter is useless if its being driven by a 6502 processor and from my research the uni-t has superior processing giving it the leg up @ 500mhz which is what is important to me, if others prefer having a scope with 10gs/s but weaker processing that gives a 10k w/s refresh well good for them, different stokes..I'm out, cheers

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 06:52:31 am
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 27, 2025, 12:01:54 amI don't know if you are using some translation software or AI to help you write, but we are not understanding each other.Before getting into argument, you must know facts better.You are the one making extraordinary claims, but have no relevant data.You deliberately took SDS3000XHD for comparison and then claim things that are not accurate.Firstly, nobody said ERES is analog filter. Why are you even mentioning it?Second, SDS3000xHD does not even use CPU for ERES but direct hardware.Third, ERES is digital filter that is well known how it works. If this new UNI-T scope has more BW when you set it at same settings as other scopes, than it is NOT doing same resolution enhancement as it should. I.E. they lie in specifications.Fourth, 1 GHz scope has better specifications than 500Mhz scope. Also, SDS3000xHD has maximum sample rate of 4GS/s and minimum of 2 GS/s. That is more and better than max 2.5GS/s and min 1.25GS/sQuote from: Rod888 on January 27, 2025, 12:01:54 amNo, no and no. Speed of how fast you can calculate ERES results has nothing to do with how much BW of the signal is reduced in comparison to original.And since UNI-T samples at max 2.5 GS/s compared to 4 GS/s with SDS3000xHD, at same ERES bit depth it will have LESS BW than Siglent.1.6 times less...So all of your points that claim it is better are actually exactly the opposite.SDS3000xHD is much higher class scope to begin with, in many parameters.And if you want to compare, this UNI-T scope class is more to be compared to the SDS2000xHD from Siglent.Which, by the way is excellent scope. UNI-T should be lucky if they made scope that good to be able to compare to it.UNI-T is NOT manufacturer known to make good scopes, by the way. All their scope offerings so far were simple and rather awkward made devices. I would put Owon and Hantek higher on the scales than them...Knowing a bit about the industry and knowing how hard is to make these type of products, chances to suddenly, out of the blue, they would make extraordinary good product that can actually compete with the likes of Siglent and Rigol is not very high. It does not work that way.Even Rigol, that is a much more established manufacturer for scopes, struggles with development of completely new platform. Because it is hard.Putting together a team overnight and just magically spitting out world class product with no prior experience simply does not happen for products of this complexity.And then there is question of long term support, FW updates, etc etc.For which UNI-T is famous in the EU as having none to really speak of.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 07:16:01 am
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 27, 2025, 06:51:48 amYou seem not to have no in depth understanding of the topic, or we have large language barrier here..Nobody speaks about analog filters.Also you are confusing speed of calculations with results.Faster processing will allow that scope could trigger faster. Which is different topic. Retrigger rate is not BW.But as it has to perform same mathematical equation to get same result, result will be the same.So you cannot have larger signal BW with everything else (sample rate and filter) being the same.And resultant BW of the signal will be defined by sample rate divided by filter length. So scope with same filter and half the sample rate will have half the BW.Your comments on Nyquist and sample rate with ERES are also not accurate. Since ERES is digital filter applied after AD conversion is already done, if there is some aliasing to begin with, ERES will not help with it...DSP is not some magical hand waving. It is math.To summarize. results of your research are not very accurate. I suggest to investigate more.As a side note, I would rather have a scope with 4GHz and 20GS/s and 10k triggers per second than scope with 500 MHz BW, 2.5GS/s and 100k triggers per second.But I am weird that way..

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 02:14:56 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on January 27, 2025, 06:52:31 amDon't forget that Rigol and Siglent have learned a lot from their respective past relationships with a couple of the masters of modern digital scopes Keysight and LeCroy, believe Siglent is still working with LeCroy!!Best

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 02:41:09 pm
content: QuoteYepp,In the “lower” price range up to about€15,000, almost everything is from Siglent, including the two Wavesurfer models.Edit: The T3DSO4000L-HD (Siglent 6000pro H12) starts with 16000€, 2Ghz model cost 45000€....

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 02:45:37 pm
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 27, 2025, 06:51:48 amEver design a Gaussian LowPasPass Filter? Do you understand the math involved and it's properties? If you did you would soon realize that it takes an infinite number of components to do such, so only an approximation can be realized with a finite number of components.So how many "taps" does your Finite Sampling DSO require to "properly" represent the Gaussian Function while Enhancing the ADC Resolution to a given improvement in equivalent "bits"??Suggest some serious time with Zverev's Handbook of Filter Synthesis book, the bible of Filter Synthesis and Design. Starting at page 60 for a understanding of what a Gaussian Filter actually is/are (there are 3 types accepted as "Gaussian" approximations) and how these are physically implemented in actual hardware.Great reference for anyone involved with signal processing, which a DSO is one example, as are SDRs.....all under General Data Acquisition Systems.Best

author: Rod888
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 05:02:49 pm
content: Quoteis it impossible?it certainly does affect deadtime which btw the unit-t states is under 1us, not sure what or if the other chinese vendors rate their units at but it would be a good indicator on who has the biggest processing hatfromhttps://www.teledynelecroy.com/doc/making-more-accurate-measurements-using-digital-oscilloscopesQuotein another paper by teledyne its described how interpolation can increase eres bandwidth but i wont bother posting all that is said you can get enough out of the posted link.suffice to say its not mathematically impossible you just need more processing and who's to say uni-t isn't doing something else other than, or in addition to, upsampling to increase eres bandwidth?Here again to my point the ability to do these things is all dependant on digital processing power.To say that something is impossible mathematically is a little short sighted don't you think? I'm sure there were folks saying time to frequency domain conversion is mathematically impossible before fourier published his transforms so dont be so quick to say something is impossibleQuotewhat comment would that be? nyquist has nothing to do with eres, where did i say it did or even mention aliasing? must be that language barrier you are referring to, no? I do assume as you said that you were looking in the mirror, right? I didn't come here to get trolled by smacktards commenting on language skills so put a sock in the yap of your derogatory commentsQuoteto each his own, the application will dictate the preference, personally i want to catch fast transients or glitches so faster triggering is more important to me, guess i'm not weird that way because i know many in the same boaT

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 05:21:06 pm
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 27, 2025, 05:02:49 pmYes, I was referring to my capability to understand your posts. Only derogatory comments so far are by you...By "having more power" you cannot filter out more signal and still keep more signal. That is the point of filtering.Literally it is mathematically impossible. It is called entropy.How fast you can filter has nothing to do with it.Only way to catch fast glitches reliably is by trigger.If you want to catch them blindly, fast triggering helps, but only to the point.You can be rude as much as you want, it don't change you are saying wrong things.

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 06:29:32 pm
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 27, 2025, 12:01:54 amWhile studying up on Gaussian filters and functions, also suggest a study of elementary DSP techniques as you obviously don't understand how post processing signals relates to the signal captured bandwidth.Your direct statement above, highlighted, is absolutely WRONG!!! However, you seem to want to argue and degrade the very folks that understand this and are trying to help you understand why this is so. ERES is a Post ADC signal capture process and performed in the Digital Domain, not in Real Time. Thus the input referenced Bandwidth in question is dictated by the ADC sample rate and the input channel analog Pre-filtering (anti-aliasing) not the Post processing. The Digital Domain Post processing is what reduces the effective bandwidth and enhances the effective signal capture resolution as "seen" from the display. Higher processing speed/power just makes these post acquisition computational enhancements update quicker, but not change the acquisition bandwidth.Lighten up a little and listen to those folks that truly understand what they are discussing (many decades of analog & digital scope experience), you'll likely learn a lot in short orderBTW why don't you acquire this UNI-T DSO and write/video a review, then you could enlighten all of us hereBest

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 06:47:15 pm
content: Here's a good analogy to the directly above discussion.Would you expect the higher speed/power of a DSP processor or FPGA to improve the FFT bandwidth on a DSO??Best

author: Rod888
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 09:23:14 pm
content: no processing a fft bandwidth is not modified by processing speed wyatt but it will make a huge difference in update speed and usability , thats why a ton of scopes shouldnt even bother with fft, the refresh is so slow you cant see any transients because the scope is wasting so much time processing rather than capturing, so in fft case IF all you are doing is transforms then it wont change bandwidth but processing will certainly enhance performance in other tangible waysi dont mean to be rude 3055, sorry, just having trouble with your argument and frustrated you arent picking up what im laying downlet me try and put it this way why processing can effect eres bandwidthYou have to assume there is more than guassian filtering being applied like sinx interpolation or who knows what else digital manipulation of the data is going on, lets take sinx interpolation as its already done by lecroy,etc the more processing the higher the oversample, consequently the higher the eres bandwidth because the effective sample rate has been increased due to the oversample processing, which in the case of lecroy is a x10 multiplier. You want to process the oversample interpolation fast enough and as many iterations as you can to bump the oversample as high as you can without adversely effecting the deadtime/refresh/trigger speed how ever you want to term that. So more processing power = higher over sample resulting in more eres bandwidth because the gaussian function is now truncating bandwidth on the oversampled signal not the initial sampling speed, i dont know how else to put it. This will only be more true if they are doing more processing in addition to interpolation to push the eres bandwidth up, not all tricks are revealed and published, if your company comes across a technique that allows you to double eres bandwitch compared to the competition would you tell everyone how you're doing it? Because the cats out of the bag on interpolation enhancements to eres bandwitch lecroy (and others) have let it be known. If eres was only about gaussian filters then everybody's eres bandwidth modifiers would be identical, but they are not and i doubt everyone is lying about there specs, there is just more going on than what people are aware of.does my argument make no sense?

author: Rod888
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 09:52:46 pm
content: here is a snippet from teledyn lecroy application note an006Quotenotice how bandwidth gains are mentioned from 10:1 to 50:1, this is all about processing power for oversample rate and a balance between bandwidth gains and increases in deadtime, so eres bandwidth ISdirectly affected by processing power for sin(x) interpolation modifiers. Add more digital tricks and gflops makes an even bigger difference.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 11:01:29 pm
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 27, 2025, 09:23:14 pmI don't aim to belittle you or insult you in any way. We are discussing technical topic and we will find a way to understand each other. We will solve this problem.Your explanation how ERES work is not accurate. It is actually very simple. ADC samples, and samples are fed into data pipeline. There is an algorythim that takes last 10, 20, 30 ,40 last samples and makes an weighted average of them by applying filter on them. There is no upsampling, sin(x)/x interpolation, nothing else before the process that would change data.It is done very fast in hardware (on 3000xHD).Amount of bits you gain by averaging will be proportional to loss of BW. That is how it works. Filter will filter out higher frequencies and have less noise because of that.As for speed of processing you are correct that fast scope will be able to process more screens per second than the slow one.And if ERES is calculated slowly in software then scope will have to wait for next trigger longer, making scopethroughputslower. Meaning scope will trigger 1000 times a second in ERES and one with fast processing will be able to trigger 100K times per second.But waveform will look the same and they will have same signal BW after the filter because they are doing exactly the same calculation, just one is faster while doing it.To put it bluntly, it is same pizza delivered by faster or slower car. There is improvement in how fast pizza comes, but it is exactly the same dish.All scopes do it this way, there are differences in filter implementation but no magic, or anything that can brute forced.And in many scopes this is done very fast in hardware (FPGA) and even in software this is very fast. Today processors have all kinds of DSP blocks or even dedicated DSP processors for this.If you take a look at this article, you will see that Lecroy ERES is already very clever...... It is not decimating but performing running average.https://www.teledynelecroy.com/doc/differences-between-eres-and-hiresLook, a scope with fast processor and fast hardware capable of fast processing is good. But that is only part of equation. And not a solution to all problems, but merely a good start.How well is scope made is something that goes on top of it.And then we still have a question of how well analog front end is made, etc etc..UNI-T is not a scope company. Previous scopes they made were not very good.I am not saying this new scope is bad. If I were to venture a guess they hired someone to make this for them.That team might have conceptualized good design. Potentially it might be good scope. Or not.We just don't know. And based on previous experience at this moment I am sceptical.Once someone actually tries it and uses it, we will see.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 27, 2025, 11:11:06 pm
content: Quote from: Rod888 on January 27, 2025, 09:52:46 pmAN006 is very weird one.If you upsample and then downsample by ERES filter you get original data. It is simple as that. Actually you will get signal distortion because upsample and downsample proces will not be ideal reverse function pair.But there will be no noise reduction.I have a scope that can do that. Upsample by interpolation and then can do ERES on it and will show you.Siglents have LeCroy type of math.But tomorrow.

author: egonotto
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 28, 2025, 12:01:44 am
content: Hello,I am interested in how the:”If the waveform is not repetitive, the user can apply interpolation to upsample a single shot acquisition of the waveform by up to a factor of 50 and then apply ERES to the interpolated waveform”stated in the document:“Making More Accurate Measurements Using DigitalOscilloscopesNovember 30, 2011"works in practice.I would be surprised if this works without any problems.Best regardsegonotto

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 28, 2025, 08:00:44 am
content: Sorta amusing new member Rod888 presents LeCroy papers when Siglent have a working relationship with LeCroy for 10+ years.Some Siglent DSO's were only available to the west in LeCroy colours as western marketing rights were surrendered to LeCroy in exchange for their product development collaboration.SDS3000 used a LeCroy GUI and later when it was upgraded to an X version LeCroy retained western marketing rights.

author: egonotto
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 28, 2025, 06:31:09 pm
content: Hello,the UNI-T MSO3054HD therefore has 13.5 bits at ERES with a bandwidth reduction of 1.5 GHz. So without bandwidth reduction. This means that the noise is not reduced by ERES, the additional resolution of 1.5 bits drowns in the noise. Consequently, the ERES of 1.5 bits is completely useless.Best regardsegonotto

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 28, 2025, 07:13:34 pm
content: Quote from: egonotto on January 28, 2025, 12:01:44 amThis does seem odd, where do these "Extra Samples" come from since this is a single shot??Best

author: egonotto
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 28, 2025, 07:19:45 pm
content: Hello,they using Sin(x) /x interpolation to upsample the waveform.Best regardsegonotto

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 28, 2025, 09:15:05 pm
content: Quote from: egonotto on January 28, 2025, 06:31:09 pmThat is pretty much in line of what I said..I have a theory for that LeCroy AN006.This was on 8 bit scope. Upsampling probably mapped 8 bit samples into 16 bit data space.Then ERES was used to reduce to original data. But now data is stored in 16 bit and that would enable better measurement of some parameters like risetime.... Or something like that.But upsampling and then downsampling back gains no noise reduction, exactly because there is no reduction in BW. THere is no free lunch.And there would be some distortion, but for measurement of digital signals, where you would want timing measurements and such, that would not be important. But that was 8 bit scope. I see no point on 12 bit scope. I see only data loss because of double conversion.one image: original signal (yellow) AND classic ERES3 AND upsample+ERES3 down - visible distortions on signal, some filtering.one image: original signal (yellow) AND upsample+ERES3 down - visible distortions on signal, some filteringone image original signal (yellow) AND upsampled - no visible difference

author: CosteC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2025, 04:53:08 pm
content: I found this today:I am rather disgusted. Comparison of UNI-T MSO3045HD to Rigol DHO900, while DHO4000 would be more fair. Number of factual errors... MSO4000 has number of strange limitations, like MSO4804 has 800 MHz and 4 GSa/s but only in one channel mode, but 400 MHz at poor 1 GSa/s per channel when all 4 are enabled.What suprises me is that UNI-T software looks very similar to Rigol's. Or is it only me?

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2025, 05:52:38 pm
content: 38 minutes of chatter without saying or showing anything...This thing looks a lot like the Rigol, not just the UI.Oh yeah, there's the DHO4000 and MHO5000, but no MSO4000 from Rigol.

author: CosteC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2025, 05:59:32 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on June 01, 2025, 05:52:38 pmThanks, corrected.I am under strong impression, this UNI-T is purchased technology, repacked to some extend however. Not rebrand only. Interesting as usually UNI-T is OEMThis review was noting like even approaching objectivity :'(

author: Sorama
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2025, 06:15:17 pm
content: None of his reviews are.

author: CosteC
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2025, 06:49:26 pm
content: Quote from: Sorama on June 01, 2025, 06:15:17 pmNobody is perfectly objective, yet this one was particularly bad. Seems I am pretty lucky on daily browsing.I mean rarely I see something which is wrong on facts. Very biased opinions are other story.