Questions on purchase of new test equipment - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: n0nuf2
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: July 01, 2013, 04:15:52 pm
content: Hello.I haven't used an o-scope since electronics school 25 years ago. A lot has changed. I would like to buy a good o-scope. After looking at your videos, I am down to either the Rigol 4024 or Agilent 3024A. I do not know if I will have a use for 200MHz, but with the Rigol, need to buy it up front, correct? Are these scopes comparable / relatively on the same playing field? Are there many good reasons for the Agilent over the Rigol outside of the name? While the built-in SG and meter are nice, they are not a necessity and externals are just fine.I do not want a cheap, slow, POS, of course. ;-)I realize that the Rigol will not be upgradable like the Agilent.I will not be using this scope in a pro environment. It will be used for Amateur radio electronics projects like AVR/PIC, RF receivers/transmitters, oscillators, power supplies, audio, modulation, distortion, noise, harmonics, amplifiers, circuit design and experimentation, tuners, etc.Are there any other options/probes that I would want to buy up front?I do have a fetish for RS232 communications and would like the ability to work with these types of interfaces and protocols. Will the RS232 options also work with USB? What about Ethernet and 802.11x wireless?What about a great Fluke meter? Model?Thanks in advance.Scott

author: retiredcaps
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 12:24:13 am
content: Quote from: n0nuf2 on July 01, 2013, 04:15:52 pmI know nothing about scopes, but can give some choices with the above. What are your requirements and what is your budget?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 02:22:08 am
content: A Rigol 4000 or Agilent 3000 is a heck of a scope to pay for just for hobby use.One could argue that the money is better spent elsewhere and to chose a more affordable scope.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 02:39:34 am
content: If you want to do RS232, be sure to get a scope with a logic analyzer, or a separate logic analyzer.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 04:43:43 am
content: Quote from: n0nuf2 on July 01, 2013, 04:15:52 pmBIG DISCLAIMER: So far when it comes to digital scopes and logic analyzers, I'm a shopper, not a user - but I'm a diligent shopperI've been doing my best to study scopes (and LAs) and learn from all the good info here. Disclaimers aside, the two scopes you are considering would likely be my two favorites so far. If $s were no object I'd go with the Agilent 3024A but I'm confident that the Rigol 4024 would also be great.One of the key reasons to go with the Agilent product line would be if you want a built-in logic analyzer. Currently, on the Rigol 4000 there is no such option, although there are rumors that Rigol might be introducing LAs on some models some time this year.Another reason I like the Agilent is that it is very expandable. You could start with the DSO and add the MSO capability later. Likewise, you could upgrade the bandwidth. The uplift for adding these features later rather than buying them on day 1 would make it more attractive to buy the full configuration on day 1 if you were certain you were going to ultimately purchase the options, but the premium for adding them later doesn't seem too bad. So, for example, you could start with a 100MHz DSO without the LA and maybe be happy. If you need more bandwidth and/or the LA later you wouldn't be too far behind $ wise vs. having bought the higher bandwidth and the LA on day 1.The option prices can add up pretty quickly though on the Agilent 3000 series and you could quickly configure a scope that would make the Rigol base unit look very attractive.You asked about RS232. Here is a link to that option on the Agilent 3000:http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-1951451-pn-DSOX3COMP/computer-serial-triggering-and-analysis-rs232-uart-for-infiniivision-3000-x-seriesHere is a link to some info on the RS232 option for the Rigol:http://www.tequipment.net/RigolSD-RS232-DS4.htmlHere is the Agilent upgrade from the DSO to the MSO:http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-1954187-pn-DSOX3MSO/infiniivision-3000-x-series-oscilloscope-mso-upgrades-100-500-mhz-models?nid=-33563.970735.00&cc=US&lc=engYou can say the Agilent LA/MSO capability is pricey, or you could say compared to the Rigol at least the option is available.Another alternative would be to go with the Rigol and use an external LA. Some people would say you could get a better external LA for the same price as the Agilent built-in LA. For some applications/uses that might be true but in my (admittedly barey informed) opinion the ability to synchronize the analog and digital signals is more likely to be superior on an integrated MSO than a DSO + separate LA.My sense is that among the nicest features on the two models you are considering (compared to most of the other models in this general price and performance range) are their search features. I can't compare the Rigol 4024 to the Agilent 3024A search, but I'm pretty sure the Agilent 3000 series search is superior to the Agilent 2000 series.(I think rather than trying to defend their pricing on the DSOX/MSOX3000, Agilent would tell you that their model most equivalent to the Rigol DS4024 is the DSOX2024A. This would make the pricing considerably closer between Agilent and Rigol but it would probably also make Rigol still more competitive in terms of specs and most (but not all) features; but hey - if you have the $s the Agilent DSOX3024A with it's performance and base feaures plus it's upgrade and exansion path is sweet.)Net, net: you could start with the Agilent DSOX3014A and work your way up on bandwidth and other features as you need/want them but any way you cut it, the cost of the Agilent 3024A is going to be notably more on than on the Rigol 4024. So a big part of the equation is whether you need/want the built-in logic analyzer. If not, you could save some $s with the Rigol. When comparing the base Agilent DSOX3024A vs the Rigol DS4024 there are probably various people here who could help you with that if you can frame the questions.And of course there is the level of support. Rigol seems to come through reasonably well but it might be hard to beat Agilent. I think the general consensus is that Rigol's support might be good enough but I bet it would be hard to find a lot of users who would claim that Rigol's support consistently beats Agilent's support. YMMVLet us know what you decide.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 05:02:27 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 02, 2013, 02:22:08 amAmateur radio can be a very expensive hobby if you go the other route with all new store-bought stuff.The prices of top of the line HF Transceivers would make your eyes water!It seems that the OP is going to make his own gear,so that frees up the money for more expensive test gear.That said,I would go for a cheaper DSO,plus a Tek 100Mhz analog & a Rigol or similar,Spectrum Analyser.Uses up a lot of bench space,but gives you a lot more versatility.

author: n0nuf2
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 05:40:24 am
content: Ok Guys, I guess I didn't say it right. 4024 vs 3024A.Be easy now, it's been a long time. :-) And I'm just trying to get this straight. Buy once and forget it.I read somewhere that there's 30% error 1:1, but if youdivide the f by 3 it drops to 5% and divide by 5 will drop error to 3%.Meaning, a 500MHz scope analyzing a 100MHz sig would roughly have 3% error?I assume a 2GHz sample rate is adequate or would I want 4 or 5 GHz samples?I read that I want a scope that can do at least the 5th harmonic.That means that a 200MHz scope will accurately test a 40MHz signal, at 3%My old Tek back in electronics was I believe 100MHz analog 4ch.1. Why is the Agilent better? Or Not? From the price, they sure think it is better.2. The Rygol has most of the same options for a lot less $3. The Rygol won't have a new 4K series out till this fall that fills their void of MSO (+digital)4. Silly, I want hi def graphics with quality shading. Not Cheezy. Want that ultra fine resolution. Be fun to see the video of the WAV file making graphics on this unit.5. I want a fast, stable, accurate scope6. I want good decoders for I2C for AVR/PIC, SIC think this one is for Morotolla?, RS232, etc. Don't know what you use the audio decode for.7. I want the memory depth and the acquisition speed.8. I want the VGA and LAN options9. I want the case and front cover10. Do I want to buy the advanced math functions? What will those do for me?11. I want the option to add digital channels to the unit for some crazy UART or other logic project.12. Also want to do some USB work13. Also want to analyze some etherrnet streams and determine is the data dirty? Do I have a cable problem? etc...14 Would be handy to see and tune/fix some tuned circuits in old rf transceivers15. What memory depth is good enough?16. Is segmented memory a requirement?I would rather spend $5K on Rigol if its that good over 8K on Agilent. I remember from one of Dave's blogs that he was raving on the Agilent being better than the DS2000 series. But you actually get more screen real estate on the Rigol as the Agilent menus don't go away. I am not crazy about the pastel color choice including Pink on the Rigol.If it's the Rigol, I have to get the MHz and many options up front.Why do I want a scope like this? Quality? Because we were limed with the ones I started out with utter crap and don't want to get sinking feeling again as I made the wrong decision. And the 4024 does NOT have a logic plug, DSO only. That Rigol MSO scope isn't planned till this fall.What am I going to use it for? A/D circuits, timers, oscillators, power supplies, measurements, home brew design and experimentation. visual interaction with w/e I am attempting to burn up at the moment. RF amplifiers, receivers, transmitters, PLL VFO's, TDR measurements. power computations, watching how what my code from the computer is controlling this device I have created, bit bumping, visualization data/signals between different modules. Will this be pulses? Will this be protocols? I don't know yet because I haven't finished buying all of this stuff again. Heck, even my SWR meter is a Rig Expert AA-1000. Want to be working on something and not come to that point where if only I had bought X or Y, than I could measure this. I am focusing on the big ticket items to get my bench going so I can start re-learning, experimenting, and building. Then I'm walking into Electronics Supply and buying stock in multiples of the most used components I used to have on the shelf. I have the hako 926 and some other solder equipment. I want to build that next DTE/DCE gadget and test it till it works. I want to design my circuits with Proteus or the like and not only test them on screen, but be able to test them on the bench as well. I also hear you can do quite a lot with micro controllers now. Going to put some time in on that as well.Going to couple this with a DVOM, signal generator, and spectrum analyzer... These with a few meters, a few more tools, and some component stock along with several electronics books and library items and a great selection of components should get started.Anyway, overkill. N00bie? Definitely. Use it or lose it, and in the last 25+ years, I'm drawing a blank. Oh, and get this set up before I move to yet the next job. You don't get the luxury of hanging out in one area for may years in the DOD environment.Did I leave out anything? Dave & others, please assist with the best scope in the $5-6K range so I don't have to upgrade this thing every couple of years and lose a bunch of $$$...All comments, criticisms, and good ole objective information is greatly appreciated.Thanks,Scott - n0nuf

author: lewis
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 08:18:34 am
content: I would strongly suggest you get an Agilent and Rigol on demo and test them out for yourself. I've never used a Rigol scope, but I do own an MSOX3054 and MSO7104 and I would literally trust my life to them. They are a pleasure to use, much better than Tektronix (and I always used to be a Tek man before I tried the Agilents) and have a reliability, accuracy and repeatability you can depend on. And yes, you pay for it. I wouldn't trust any Rigol scope in quite the same way.If you want to USB and Ethernet packet analysis, you might want to consider the Agilent MSOX4000 series, MSO9000 series, or even a Tektronix MSO4000 series (although you'll throw it out of the window after a few minutes of use). Rigol probably have some much cheaper offerings with these options available.I could go on, but the best thing for you to do is to get a couple of Agilents, Teks and Rigols on demo for a week or so and try them out for yourself. If your local distributor won't give you one to try, don't buy. I had an Agilent MSOX3054, MSO7104B and Tek MSO4104, MSO5104 on demo all at the same time and it was very interesting to compare them!

author: AndyC_772
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 03:18:02 pm
content: If you want to use serial decodes, and especially if you think you might need FFT, don't bother with the Rigol - get the Agilent. The update rate and overall responsiveness of the scope is in a whole new league entirely. FFT is especially painful, but there are display and other bugs in the Rigol's serial decode feature which seriously limit its usefulness IMHO. I reported them months ago and they're not fixed.On the other hand, the segmented memory and sheer storage capacity of the Rigol 4000 series is a brilliant feature, superbly implemented and very useful indeed if you think you might need to capture long serial data streams or multiple triggers that you may want to review afterwards. The Agilent just doesn't have anything like the capacity (though to be fair, nor do any other scopes in the same market segment).The Agilent 3000X is certainly the nicer scope to use, but the Rigol is near enough half the price and almost as capable - and in terms of memory depth, miles ahead. Try out both if you can, though neither would be the 'wrong' choice IMHO.

author: KTP
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 07:38:59 pm
content: I bought a MSOX3024 and love it. I haven't even powered up my 100mhz Rigol or any of my analog Tek scopes in over 7 months but use the Agilent at least once a week.

author: G0HZU
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 02, 2013, 08:02:01 pm
content: Please don't flame me for this but can't you just do the serial decoding with a £2 AVR/PIC powered from USB and display the info on a laptop running a simple app in VB?I spent a few years meddling with car ECUs and wrote stuff like this for a PDA and I had good results plus I could 'decode' the data to a further level because I could display it either as memory address pointers or as text or as numerical data (eg a bargraph).In this sense the cheap AVR+ PDA or laptop would totally outperform anything from Agilent or Tektronix.QuoteAgreed. For ham radio stuff I think this combo would be excellent.