New MicSig/EEVblog DP10007 HV Differential Probe - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 02:24:34 am
content: I've got a potential new prototype high voltage differential probe to replace the Sapphire HVP70 probe which is very nice probe, but it's very expensive. New one is significantly cheaper.It's almost exactly the same specs.100MHz, x10/x1003.5ns70V/700V max CATT II 600V CAT1 1000VInput referred noise <15mVrms 10X, <60mVrms 100X8Mohms/1.25pF diff4M/2.5pF to groundUSB powered.Will post comparison tests with the HVP70 as the reference.If you want anything specific tested let me know.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 02:47:15 am
content: HV probe or a HV Differential probe ?That's not entirely clear for anyone stumbling into here.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 02:56:54 am
content: Quote from: tautech on December 14, 2020, 02:47:15 amDifferential.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 03:01:02 am
content: Just realised it's actually been released, so I'll now provide details.http://www.micsig.com/html/41.html#It's the DP10007, and Micsig designed this one at my request to match the Sapphire HVP70 specs and x10/x100 ranges which I think are more useful for mains and lower voltage use.

author: tonyh88
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 04:43:39 am
content: Certainly looks promising and very good price. Looking forward to the showdown

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 05:16:23 am
content: I'd like to see tests of noise, CMRR and gain accuracy at high voltages.Can it be CAT II/1000V if it only works up to 700Vpk?

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 05:45:28 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 14, 2020, 03:01:02 amYESSS

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 01:52:12 pm
content: No kidding? I actually got mine in the mail the other day.. thought it was a nice addition when i saw it a few weeks agoWorks pretty nice

author: Hydron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 02:45:35 pm
content: Would be interested to see a frequency response measurement of this new model - my DP10013s had some pretty bad peaking at around 70MHz due to the input lead L & C (varies a bit based on how twisted the leads are). In the end I shortened mine to move the peaking frequency a bit higher where it gets rolled-off a bit by the probe's inherent bandwidth limit. This actually caused real issues when measuring stuff - I saw extreme ringing on an edge that was mostly an artefact (there was some moderate ringing in reality, but being smack bang in the middle of the probe's response peak made it look much worse).Am also keen to see inside one to see if they have improved the design or just changed the ratio - it certainly had some opportunities for improvements, especially around the gain switching section, though it was hard to argue about the value proposition.

author: Keith956
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2020, 08:01:06 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 14, 2020, 03:01:02 amI've got a DP10013 and the biggest issue I have is the red/black input leads which are hardwired to the probe body. It would be much nicer to have 4mm sockets on the probe so you can connect whatever you like rather than use the supplied accessories which are large and clunky and make the 100MHz spec a joke.For 1kV the test leads might be ok but for low voltages like the DP10007 targets they are way too clunky.

author: S. Petrukhin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2020, 12:05:38 am
content: Sorry for the distraction.I needed to investigate the phase voltage in 3 phases and I made a very cheap high-voltage isolated 3-channel differential probe.

author: cowasaki
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 22, 2020, 09:35:41 pm
content: When will it be available? When will it be available from the supplier that covers the UK....... Sorry forgotten his name at the moment

author: Elasia
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 22, 2020, 10:24:21 pm
content: Quote from: cowasaki on December 22, 2020, 09:35:41 pmLooks like backorder of a week from this UK shop.. not surprising, most stock has seemed to have been sucked up alreadyhttps://www.rigol-uk.co.uk/product/micsig-dp10007-high-voltage-differential-probe/Ebay has somehttps://www.ebay.com/itm/Micsig-Oscilloscope-High-Voltage-Differential-Probe-Kit-DP10007-700V-100MHz-New/254774021198

author: rernexy
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 07:41:31 am
content: an Australian micsig distributor appvision added them (today?) for AUD 295 ex GST, so AUD 324.50 retail.But they state a 2 week lead time.https://appvision.com.au/index.php?id_product=536&id_product_attribute=0&rewrite=high-voltage-differential-probe-100mhz-1300v&controller=product

author: cowasaki
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 09:10:55 am
content: Quote from: Elasia on December 22, 2020, 10:24:21 pmThanks. I found them late last night. I'll order some in January.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 11:43:57 am
content: Quote from: rernexy on December 23, 2020, 07:41:31 amThat's pricey. I should be able to sell it for AU$250 or under.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 11:57:24 am
content: Dave, do you have the flexibility to influence the design ? Please, make them do the "banana style" for the input, instead attached fixed probe wires.Like this example ... and please ask them to make it using standard banana plug spacing.This leave user with flexibility to use different probe/wiring styles, for example using these below and/or other many possibilities.

author: CDN_Torsten
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 12:00:15 pm
content: BravoV - fully agree. The fixed leads are terrible. Way too bulky for certain applications and frequently requires some sort of extension or adapter...ends up looking like a dog's breakfast.

author: wolfy007
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 12:02:24 pm
content: Damn, was just looking at that one yesterday and emailed the local Micsig dealer about it and pricing.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 12:16:28 pm
content: Quote from: CDN_Torsten on December 23, 2020, 12:00:15 pmWorst, as the HV probe usually was used in HV environment that are harsh, rough and tough places like generator set, big motor or big thru hole components that may be hot, not the type of probing condition that you're going to use like in low voltage SMD board that usually done at bench top.And at the rough places, usually after a while. the cables are doomed either get crushed, bent like hell, chipped, touched hot part like heatsink and etc, and ended with ugly and probably unsafe probe cables to work with.With banana style input, we just throw away the cables and buy a new one, instead of the head-ache have to open the probe body, find a suitable cables, de-solder and solder the replacement cables and etc, totally a ship wreck.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 12:35:20 pm
content: Quote from: BravoV on December 23, 2020, 11:57:24 amThat would require all new tooling and maybe new PCB, and that's not cheap.They would likely do it for a big enough MOQ, so might be talking a 6 figure order here.I doubt they'll do on their own dime. The existing units are and selling, and selling well it seems. There is nothing in it for them to redo the design at this point.If you are that keen, chop the leads off and fit your own plugs maybe?

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2020, 12:56:25 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 23, 2020, 12:35:20 pmAs expected, still doesn't address my pet peeve about this.Its like these HV probe designers never worked in truly rough environment on probing HV, its like their limit of imagination when using this kind of probe is just for probing mains voltage at USB charger circuit only, cozily on bench table.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 26, 2020, 09:27:05 am
content: Quote from: BravoV on December 23, 2020, 12:56:25 pmTechnically this x10/x100 model is designed to do just that. It's not designed for high energy hgih voltage industrial applications.

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 26, 2020, 11:16:16 am
content: Its my wish, that should someday, if .. you managed to sit down with manufacturer to role out a new HV diff. probe, you are aware of this idea, or at least send it MigSig team, "hopefully" they will consider this design for their next iteration if any.Yeah, wishful thinking.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 26, 2020, 11:52:46 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 26, 2020, 09:27:05 amIf that is the case then it makes even more sense to leave the leads off. On my Pintek differential probes I use a BNC to banana adapter so I can connect a BNC cable or a standard 1:1 probe to the input every now and then to make a floating measurement. Much more convenient compared to using the thick leads.

author: nikifena
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2021, 04:45:24 pm
content: I've got DP10013 but actually I prefer 10x/100x probe.Just wondering about a simple hack with the input resistor dividers modifying the existing 50x/500x to 10x/100x diff probe.

author: Hydron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2021, 05:10:10 pm
content: DP10013 input divider is 500:1, followed by a buffer, then a 1x/10x gain output amp (gain switching done with a relay in a pretty janky way that doesn't give the most confidence in a good CMRR match between ranges, as there is only one trimmer for both).To increase the gain the input divider low-leg R and C would need changing. There will be side effects to doing this, not the least of which would be a proportional reduction in the common mode input range (needs to stay within the bounds of the input buffer, which is the limiting factor).Screws are also under the bloody sticker, asshole move there

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 02, 2021, 09:52:21 am
content: Has anyone measured the CMRR of the DP10007?I measured well outside the spec at 10MHz, really obvious when directly compared with the HVP70 which has identical specs. Can anyone else confirm?Micsig are investigating.

author: Hydron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 02, 2021, 11:58:00 am
content: One of my DP10013s was well out of spec all the way from DC in one range (forget which but could check). Sent it in for an exchange.Is yours out just at higher frequencies, or all the way from DC as well? I think I checked mine at DC by using a megger to apply ~500V of CM voltage (referenced to the BNC shield, plugged into a multimeter). Alternatively apply mains.There is a single DC CMRR adjust pot and a trimmer cap for each divider leg in the DP10013 - if yours is OK at DC but not higher then it could be the latter being out.Would certainly be interested in pics of the inside - wondering if it is different to the DP10013 or if they have just tweaked the divider/amplifier. Especially curious as to how they are doing the range switching (this is one of the weak points of the other one, and is how it was possible for one range to be out but the other OK). Would also be interested in a frequency response sweep.Might be able to find my plots of DP10013 CMRR vs frequency if that helps.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 02, 2021, 01:31:39 pm
content: Quote from: Hydron on February 02, 2021, 11:58:00 amWasn't able to test with the simple setup I used. Problem at 10MHz, so I just informed them and left it at that for now.

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 11, 2021, 08:24:19 pm
content: I have the DP10013 and also the DP10007 probe. I can do some measurements if someone want. Let's discuss what an how I should measure. So we can compare both probes.

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 12, 2021, 03:59:29 pm
content: I have tested my Micsig DP1007 probe. In the first test, I have shorten the inputs and looked for the noise (reason why I bought the Probe). Then I had a look with my scope in both settings. The 10:1 works fine, but hte 100:1 has an interference influence. It's from the inside of this device. My other probe Micsig DP10013 works in both settings fine with the same boundary conditions.Has anybody the same problem?

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2021, 11:48:33 am
content: Probably, the DP10007 uses a different HW approach regarding its internal power supplies (with respect te previous models).In this new model, the positive supply (5Vdc) must be raised up to about 10Vdc and this additional step-up circuit could cause the interference you observe.The different philosophy of the internal supply voltages would also seem confirmed by the higher power consumption declared by the manufacturer for this new version.

author: beanflying
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2021, 12:17:04 pm
content: Subbing in. I got a DP10013 a while ago and can run it up against Valhalla AC Calibrator (I have been meaning to for a while) over a range in the next few days. Also interested in the guts of the 10007 for a comparison.

author: Kibabalu
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2021, 05:47:47 pm
content: Quote from: mrprecision on February 12, 2021, 03:59:29 pmdon't see this issue with my DP10007.How do you supply your probe?

author: beanflying
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2021, 01:20:55 am
content: Rule of adapters you will never have enoughThe 4mm posts on my Calibrator are to short to take the points on the multimeter type probe/jacks (suits most others I have with a quick check). I could have made a MF set but went with spade lugs instead for a variation in the box.

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2021, 11:57:35 am
content: I have done some Measurements with the DP10013 and DP10007 for comparison:Channel 1: GeneratorChannel 2: DP10013Channel 2: DP10007Frequency Response Divider x10 x50Comment: Usefull up to 10MHzFrequency Response Divider x100 x500Comment: Usefull up to 10MHzNoise Divider x10 x50 (Standard Deviation = RMS Noise)Comment: 33mV (DP10013) vs 13mV (DP10007)Noise Divider x100 x500 (Standard Deviation = RMS Noise)Comment: 107mV (DP10013) vs 26mV (DP10007)Common Mode Rejection x10 x50Common Mode Rejection x100 x500Step Response x10 x50Step Response x100 x500

author: BreakingOhmsLaw
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2021, 01:33:31 pm
content: I have a DP10007 as well.CMRR measured and (vs spec value) on 10x50Hz -70dB (-80)20kHz -55dB (-60)1MHz -52dB (-50)10MHz -33,2dB (-40)No information how Micsig measures the CMRR though.Can we agree on a common setup? Input leads twisted x-times, input signal etc.?

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2021, 06:12:21 pm
content: Here you can see the setup for my common mode measurement:A question is how save is the device. What happen if the BNC connector is not grounded via the scope (as in the manual recommended). The impedance between the measuring cable and the BNC shield is not high enough to pass the electronic device test (devices of class II).

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2021, 07:46:20 pm
content: I did some further measurements regarding safety. For the measurement I followed up the IEC 61010-1 (Safety requirements for electrical equipment for measurement, control, and laboratory use).In part 6.3 "limit values for accessible parts" "level in normal condition", there is a current level of 0.5mArms for measuring circuit of figure A2 (2k ohm load) for sinussoidal a.c. with frequencies up to 100Hz.I put my maximum measuring voltage of arround 250Vrms @ 50Hz at the inputs. Then I measured the current flow from the BNC shield to one of the input pins. The measuring result was 0.143mArms. This value is lower than 0.5mArms and therefore not be hazardous for llife. So the probe should be save.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 29, 2021, 10:03:47 pm
content: Quote from: BreakingOhmsLaw on March 29, 2021, 01:33:31 pmI'll shoot a video on this in a few day when I have time. MicSig are still looking into it.My setup is a 50ohm terminator on the scope, 10MHz sine from the function gen as large as possible, measured and confirmed on one scope channel.Leads of both inputs twisted reasonably tightly and both inputs shorted and connected across the 50 ohm load. Then using 20*Log (output p-p / Vgen p-p)I use a HVP70 for comparison which is supposed to have indentical CMRR specs and the Micsig is way higher.They say they are still working on it, but have not confirmed mt setup is correct or what setup they are using.

author: BreakingOhmsLaw
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2021, 08:49:07 am
content: Okay, repeated the measurement with what I think Dave meant:Some remarks:- Scope is set to 20MHz Bandwith limit- V/div fine adjustment used to maximize amplitude in order to optimize ADC quantization.- Lead of DP10007 twisted 8x.- Measurements below 1MHz are difficult because the common mode signal is swamped in the noise. I used persistence and color grading and estimated the amplitude of the "cloud".- The BNC splitters will introduce an error, ignoring that for now.x10 x100 Spec50 Hz -70 -56 -8020 kHz -50 -54 -601 MHz -49.5 -37.6 -5010 MHz -32.2 -20 -40A final note: My DP10007 has a slight positive DC offset. Does anyone else see this?

author: mr.os
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2021, 10:10:53 am
content: I also made a measurement with my DP10007. I measured it with a HP 89410A and have so some graphs:The green trace is the CMRR of the x10 range and the blue trace is the CMRR of the x100 range (the analyzer has done the math that the graphs are the direct CMRR). Some points (measured partially in another mode where I can't generate such a nice plot):x10x10050Hz-82dB-79dB20kHz-59dB-57dB100kHz-56dB-57dB1MHz-50dB-42dB10MHz-37dB-22dBSo at least the x10 spec are in my measurements not so far away from the manufacturers spec. My probe is also relative new, maybe they have changed something.My measurement setup:Also checkd for DC offset and with shorted inputs the x10 range has around 360µV and the x100 range around 280µV. So this is fine.

author: mf_ibfeew
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 30, 2021, 05:19:47 pm
content: >A final note: My DP10007 has a slight positive DC offset. Does anyone else see this?I had a similar problem with my DP20003, more than 12V ofset (with the 200:1 range)After complaint I got no new shiny probe, instead I got an email with the following instructions:procedure for Micsig Auto-offset-calibration:- connect probe to power (USB), switch on, short both input leads- push down both range buttons simultaneous, after some time you will hear some relays clicking inside. The offset-error should be zero now- switch off, switch on, test offset, be happy- if my english is to bad: look atMaik

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 31, 2021, 02:57:49 pm
content: Could anyone review my noisemeasurement?

author: BreakingOhmsLaw
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 01, 2021, 08:00:25 am
content: Quote from: mrprecision on March 31, 2021, 02:57:49 pmHere you go:

author: SimpleOne
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2021, 11:58:58 pm
content: Is anyone aware if any changes have been made to the DP10007 since the testing reported above?I'm hunting around for some relatively low priced diff probes for 3Ph motor tests. I currently have one HVP70 from Dave's store when he had them in stock. Would people suggest hunting down additional sapphire probes, or are the DP10007's now a better alternative for the money?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2021, 07:50:32 am
content: Quote from: SimpleOne on June 25, 2021, 11:58:58 pmThey should be way better bang-per-buck. I have not heard back from Micsig, will need to give them a poke as I'm now a long time without either probe.Sapphire increased their FOB prices by like 20% or something, so I dropped them. They are nice probes, but the price was already high enough, and the margins low. I made less on those probes than my meters at half the price.

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2021, 08:54:14 pm
content: For me the DP10007 HV Probe is ok after I got a replacement.

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 27, 2021, 09:49:53 am
content: Quote from: mrprecision on June 29, 2021, 08:54:14 pmWhat was the exact problem with your old probe for asking for a replacement?Thanks a lot

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 27, 2021, 09:21:04 pm
content: I have shorten the inputs of the probe for the setting 10:1. I see some coupling from there DC/DC converter inside the diffprobe. I bought the probe at Bartonix, they could measure the same effect with my probe and with other probes of this type. They got some newer ones and there it is much better. I have two probes which are find now. I use this mostly for lower signals as a diffprobe, not mainly for higher voltages.The noise of the 10:1 probe is lower than on the other Micsig probes. If you don't zoom in too much in the x-axis, you would think that the probe has higher noise...

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 27, 2021, 11:15:52 pm
content: Quote from: mrprecision on July 27, 2021, 09:21:04 pmOk, now I remember the inconvenience you encountered ... Just for comparison, can you post the noise acquisition for the new probe (i.e. the replacement...) you received?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 28, 2021, 12:13:11 am
content: Quote from: mrprecision on July 27, 2021, 09:21:04 pmI don't recall seeing that on mine.Unusual that you'd see that as a fault on one unit.

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 28, 2021, 08:35:26 pm
content: Noise measurement of two different DP10007 Probes (x10)I measured the noise around 12.7mVrms of both probes (inputs shorten, attenuation x10, standard deviation). The datasheet shows a value of (max) 15mVrms. So the noise is within the specs. The noise of the DP10007 is much lower than on the other the two MicSig probes. The good thing on the DP10007 is the low attenuation (x10) which is the same like for the standard scope probes. For low voltage and regular power line voltages the DP10007 is out of my point of view the best choice.

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 28, 2021, 09:11:58 pm
content: Ok, but my question was related to the 90KHz noise effect you had with the old DP10007 probe for which you have requested replacement.The new one you received as a replacement does it have a similar behavior? In other words, setting the timebase to 2uS are you able to trigger and to see the same 90KHz noise in the new one too?If yes, can you post a screenshot of this 90KHz noise?

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 30, 2021, 04:59:51 pm
content: Yesterday i got my new probe (DP10007).Input referred noise compliant with the manufacturer specifications (and with data measured by mrprecision):13.7mV rms (x10) and 29.1mV rms (x100)The "anomaly" a with frequency of about 90 khz observed by some people is not present...Next steps, evaluation of accuracy, bandwidth and CMRR.The BNC connector of the probe appears quite hard to fit into the scope socket. May be it is a bit out of specification. Probably I'll replace it to avoid unnecessary stress to the oscilloscope connectors.To the guy who asked for the manufacturing date (and now he seems to have removed the related post):my probe is dated 16-03-2021. The rms noise you measured in your probe seems a bit out of specification. To avoid the effects of any dc component I suggest to redo the acquisitions using the "Stdev" instead of the "rms". If still out of specification, measure the noise of your oscilloscope and try to subtract it from the acquisition made ("probe noise"^2 = "measured noise"^2 - "oscilloscope noise"^2)

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2021, 08:50:24 pm
content: Some further measurements I've done on my probeStatic gain accuracy:x10 -0.53% (spec. +/- 2%)x100 -1.12% (spec. +/- 2%)Input referred offset:x10 + 9.8mVx100 + 47.2mVCMRR:Freq. x10 x100 Micsig Spec.DC (50Hz) -89 -79 -8020KHz -75 -74 -60100KHz -72 -63 n.a.1MHz -57 -42 -5010MHz -39 -22 -40Rise Time (Step response):Rise Time Fall Time Bandwidth Estimation (from step response) (*)x10 3.71 ns 3.71 ns 94 MHzx100 3.37 ns 3.60 ns 100 MHz(*) Single pole low pass filter modelMeasured Bandwidth (-3dB):x10 128 MHzx100 118 MhzBandwidth Flatness:+/- 1dB +/- 3dBx10 DC - 33MHz 33MHz - 100MHzx100 DC - 33MHz 33MHz - 88MHzConcluding:Pros:- good overall performances considering the price- very nice and compact package designCons:- CMRR below specification- too long (and oversized) input cables can cause high frequency artifacts. I would have preferred them shorter (20-25cm) with a possible extension supplied (e.g. Tektronix approach...)- BNC connector out of specification (it hardly enters the oscilloscope connectors, risking damaging them)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 04, 2021, 02:42:18 am
content: I've been informed by Micsig that a new version of the DP10007 is coming shortly, presumably to fix the CMRR issue I raised.

author: voltsandjolts
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 04, 2021, 07:22:12 pm
content: Thanks for the heads-up on that Dave.Unfortunately I need to push-the-button on a DP10007 soon-ish, so I will probably get old stock.Here's hoping the improvement will be retrofittable to older units

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 05, 2021, 05:48:48 am
content: Quote from: voltsandjolts on August 04, 2021, 07:22:12 pmYeah, it's not a big deal. It's just that they matched the specs of the Sapphire HVP70 because that's what I asked them to try and do and they said they were able to do that, but turns out it fell short on CMRR.

author: RafaPolit
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 05, 2021, 05:58:52 pm
content: This is a very useful thread, thank you!I just bought a Keysight DSOX1204G, which should arrive in about a month or so (don't ask, living where I live has some serious disadvantages!).After researching a bit, I would probably really want/need a differential probe. Keysight's cheapest one goes for about $700+ (compatible with the 1024). So, this really looks like a promising option without breaking the bank. Should I just pull the trigger (Amazon US claims only 2 left in stock), or is the new version coming so soon that it would be better to wait?Thanks again for any feedback, and since it's my first post... just can't praise EEVblog and Dave high enough, you are really an essential tool for us amateur / newcomers to the field. Thanks a bunch!Rafa.EDIT: Amazon's seller is SainSmart Official, not sure if that is important info and if they are a trusted seller, price is really much lower than on MicSig's own site, so wondering if there is some weird issue going on?

author: Ferrer
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 14, 2021, 09:13:52 pm
content: Hi friends. First of all, I want to express my respect and gratitude for all the topics and comments that I have seen developed in this forum, of great value for those of us who enjoy electronics.In relation to the Micsig DP10007, there is a question that confuses me and that I have not seen dealt with in this thread: What is really the maximum voltage that it admits as input: 700 V (DC + AC Peak), or 700 V (DC + AC Peak to Peak) ?.- The specifications found on the Micsig website indicate 700 V (DC + AC Peak)http://www.micsig.com/html/41.html#- In the Product Review of Bob Kalpon's channel it seems that the limit is 700 V (DC + AC Peak to Peak)- In some stores on the web it also seems that the limit indicated in the Micsig specifications is not correct, and they state that said limit is 700 V (DC + AC Peak to Peak)https://www.sainsmart.com/products/micsig-dp10007-high-voltage-differential-probe-kitI no longer know what to believe. Could someone tell me what is your opinion on this?I think it is an important question if we are going to use the differential probes on the hot side of a switching power supply if the mains voltage is 240V (It could mean a Peak to Peak voltage of around 680V, and a small Variation of the mains voltage could cause the device to explode and, as a consequence, destroy the oscilloscope).

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2021, 09:34:41 pm
content: If they matched the specs of the ubiquitous Sapphire-OEM model (widely sold under various brand names like BK Precision, Probemaster, Tektronix, Cal-Test, etc) then it works like this:That probe (the Sapphire) can withstand an input of 1400 volts peak +/- relative to the other lead, which if it was sinusoidal AC, would be about 1000VRMSor 2800Vp-p. It can read (produce a scaled output) of up to 700 volts peak +/- because it has a 100X scale factor and a 7 volt peak maximum output. The original (or at least the ones I remember) Sapphire models had 20X/200X scaling, so they had the same 7 volt peak output, but could measure the full 1400 volts peak. They later released a 10X/100X version like the MicSig, apparently because many scopes don't have 20X/200X attenuation settings and people don't like doing math in their heads.The Micsig DP10007 may be based on the DP10013, in which case the peak number (for safety, not readings) may change to 1300 volts. Or perhaps it is only the 700 volts that it is rated for. In any case, it should be good for 1400Vp-por 500VRMS. Note that they don't have a frequency derating curve for it. I rather doubt it can take 500VRMS@ 70MHz.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2021, 06:25:30 am
content: Quote from: Ferrer on August 14, 2021, 09:13:52 pmI believe that is it's operational range. i.e. the range for which it is guaranteed to give an output to within specification (subject to derating). It will not suddenly blow up above that.It handles my 245V mains voltage waveforms no problem at all. I think I even took it to 270V RMS or so no problem, but I'll have to recheck this. I have a high voltage AC generator reference standard (up to a few KHz only) so I can take it up until the output waveform clips. I will have to do a short video demoing this sometime this week.

author: Kean
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2021, 07:59:36 am
content: FWIW, on my DP10013 set to 50X (130V max differential voltage) the over-range indicator comes on at about 95VRMS, i.e. about 270VP-PSo I'm pretty sure it is referring to DC + AC Peak, not DC + AC P-P

author: voltsandjolts
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 15, 2021, 08:43:16 am
content: The maximum measurement range: 700 V (DC + AC Peak)The maximum rated safe range is more than that.Note the input differential will never see the peak-peak voltage, so that doesn't apply.

author: Ferrer
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 15, 2021, 11:42:36 am
content: Thank you very much for your kindness dear friends. Your verifications shed light on this very confusing issue considering the diversity of positions held on the matter. I will wait and watch carefully the video that will be published on the EEVblog channel to end any doubts.And again, thank you very much for your extraordinary kindness.

author: RafaPolit
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 19, 2021, 06:17:35 pm
content: Quote from: Ferrer on August 14, 2021, 09:13:52 pmI looked at that video, seems like a good product! I purchased one and am waiting on the oscilloscope to arrive.Regarding the video, there is a moment when he claims there is a slight phase shift at higher frequencies, and then, at even higher ones, that the wave is "ahead" of the original. I was wondering if that is even possible or if he misreads it and it is so forward-phased that it almost reaches the next period and is delayed almost an entire period minus a small percentage? Or can it really be presented "before" with a negative phase?Thanks for any insight,Rafa.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 24, 2021, 06:37:13 am
content: Teardown photos:Micsig DP10007 High Volatge Differential Probe TeardownbyDave Jones, on FlickrMicsig DP10007 High Volatge Differential Probe TeardownbyDave Jones, on Flickr

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 24, 2021, 07:12:04 am
content: Video test of clipping. Decided to make it a main channel video with teardown.TLDR; clips at 580Vrms, flashes overrange alert at 470Vrms, survives 1100Vrms just fine, output goes to +/-8VDoesn't mean it'll meet the performance specs at those limits, but that's what they are

author: Ferrer
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: August 24, 2021, 07:27:59 pm
content: Superb verification of how far this differential probe can go. Clear, precise explanation and also fun and entertaining, like all your videos. I am amazed that the probe can withstand rms voltage above 1KV without exploding. I have enjoyed watching you dissect the probe like a CSI forensic surgeon. By the way, you are a magnificent detective at looking for bastard screws. Thank you so much Dave !!A hug from Mallorca, Balearic Islands

author: Kibabalu
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2021, 08:37:18 am
content: Quote from: RafaPolit on August 19, 2021, 06:17:35 pmDear Rafa,your assumption is correct.Due to the input voltage divider, with four parallel resistor-capacitor combinations in series, you get this high phase shifts.

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 25, 2021, 10:33:23 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 24, 2021, 07:12:04 amA bit strange that the nodes of the four capacitors of the input HV divider are not connected with the related node of the symmetrical resistor network.This approach does not seem to guarantee a balanced distribution of the input voltage between the various capacitors... I'm wrong?

author: Hydron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 26, 2021, 07:43:25 am
content: Immediately from Dave's teardown pics I can see a significant design improvement from the DP10013 - this new one has an extra trimmer to allow CMMR to be tweaked between ranges.The older DP10013 only had a single trimmer but 2 gain ranges - it relied on resistor matching to maintain CMRR between ranges, and the single trimmer had to be adjusted to the best compromise between high/low range CMRR. When I opened mine up to shorten the leads (another story - it had some _nasty_ peaking at about 70MHz) I ended up tweaking one of the gain resistors (where VR2 is in the new design) to get it bang on in both ranges.

author: mrprecision
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2021, 07:07:24 pm
content: I have two MicSig DP10007 probes and did for both probes and for both measuring ranges some measurements. The CMRR is quite ok, only for the higher frequencies and for the 100x range the CMRR is quite out of the datasheet. What do you think?Probe A, Bodeplot 10xProbe B, Bodeplot 10xProbe A, Bodeplot 100xProbe B, Bodeplot 100xProbe A, CMRR 10xProbe B, CMRR 10xProbe A, CMRR 100xProbe B, CMRR 100x

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 31, 2021, 11:48:57 pm
content: The CMRR is the heart of a differential probe.It is much more important than bandwidth and this heavy limitation (CMRR close to -20dB @ 10MHz) of the probe is absolutely not negligible!I think (but I'm not sure) that I have identified the cause of this problem. I will try to fix it soon.I hope micsig is kind enough to let me have a new front label to replace the one I had to remove

author: hatte
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2021, 06:56:43 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 04, 2021, 02:42:18 amAny information available on this "new and improved" version of the DP10007 probe?E.g. is the updated version currently being shipped Micsig?Any information of serial number cut-over, or other way to identify new variant?

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2021, 07:07:50 pm
content: The CMRR at HF of a differential probes is going to be bad no matter what you do, it may be a bit better than bad, but still bad. For line frequency work they are fine but for measuring low voltage floating signals in power electronics only fiber isolated probes make sense.

author: BH3XON
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2021, 06:55:07 am
content: I bought a differential probe, $1150，but I haven't received it yet.The manufacturer describes it to use “RF isolation”，so it has a good HF CMRR。But the differential input voltage is low, I used to test the LLC Half-bridge GaN drive signal should be ok.Regarding "RF isolation", I guess it may be magnetic coupling isolation。Bandwidth：50 MHzAttenuation：2x, 20xTotal range (DC+ACpp)：3 V (2X)，30 V (20X)Max input voltage (compared to ground)：±1500 VNoise：5mV（2X），50mV（20X）CMRR（2X）：-140 dB (100 Hz)-120 dB (1 MHz)-85 dB (10 MHz)-60 dB (50 MHz)

author: BH3XON
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 25, 2021, 04:04:31 am
content: I received the differential probe mentioned above.The following figure shows the key waveforms used to test the LLC resonant half-bridge,CH1: Half-bridge voltage, CH2: LS_GATE, CH3: HS_GATE, CH4: resonant currentHF CMMR is not bad，But the differential input voltage is only ±30V ！ I am worried that it will be damaged！

author: TheBay
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 25, 2021, 05:34:29 pm
content: I've been meaning to get a set of Differential Probes for ages, my use case for these is repairing equipment where a differential probe is needed due to voltage levels and mains references. Not for low voltage use (I have other equipment for that)With that in mind I'd settled on getting a set of the EEVblog HVP70 different probes which just about fit in the voltage range I need for the moment and figured I'd get a higher voltage set later on. I couldn't find these for sale anywhere currently (Certainly no where in the UK)I saw a few videos on the McSig DP10007's and DP10013's and Dave's video and figured I'd get one of these and was torn between the two models, also noticed that the DP10007/DP1013 are on sale with McSig branding or no branding. I did wonder if they were the same thing or clones. Has anyone else seen these, Amazon and eBay are flooded with them?While I was looking I found a new set of Tektronix P5200A's for not much more than the McSig DP10007's so I bought them.Now I'm in a quandary about what to do, I can find very little information on the Tek P5200A's on here and how they compare to the McSig's offering.I was a bit put off with what I've read about the current batch of DP10007's and was going to hang on till the issue is sorted or hopefully Dave does a EEVblog rebrand of one with any issues addressed.The P5200A's have arrived with me today and I looked at them and wondering what to do, shall I use them and enjoy them, or sell them and get something else. I had no idea what the RRP was on them till I started looking for reviews after I'd bought them, are they just overpriced or will they be any better than the offerings from McSig or similar. I must say the detachable leads appeal and the Fluke clips etc they came with look really nice.Really interested to know what's in the pipeline for any EEVblog branded differential probes.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 25, 2021, 11:22:55 pm
content: Quote from: TheBay on November 25, 2021, 05:34:29 pmJust sold out the other day. New stock not due until early January.Micsig have not gotten back to me on the issue, so I'm continuing to order and stock the trusted HVP70.

author: TheBay
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 25, 2021, 11:52:59 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 25, 2021, 11:22:55 pmI get the impression MicSig are not the OEM from what I've seen. Not good they haven't got back to you about the issue, even something out of courtesy to say they are looking in to it would have been good considering the amount of exposure MicSig are getting on here.That's good news you are continuing with the Sapphire based probes and I'll pick the HVP70 up when it comes back in stock.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 26, 2021, 04:13:14 am
content: Quote from: TheBay on November 25, 2021, 11:52:59 pmWhat gives you that idea? My spidey sense hasn't indicated that.QuoteI'll post on here once back in stock. I was surprised by the popularity of my last batch, sales were much higher than previously.They are having component shortage issues and I had to commit to a higher than desired minimum order to get it happening. They had another dealer who would only pony up 20% of the MOQ required (under their own brand, not mine), so I had to agree to cover the other 80%. So it seems like I'm currenlty 80% of the world market for this probe

author: TheBay
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 26, 2021, 09:27:27 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 26, 2021, 04:13:14 amThe market is flooded with DP10013 and DP1007 differential probes, but with what appears to be no branding. And look identical to the MicSig differential probes. And that the DP10013 is available for £88 delivered inc tax, they were even cheaper the other day as there is often a discount voucher on the item as well.These all mainly seem to be sold by sellers from the far east on Amazon and eBay with made random names and these don't really fit with the other items they are selling.Whether these are clones of MicSig, possible but I doubt. Or are just made by another OEM and they will put a brand on the front.It's the same story with the DP10007s. I haven't searched for the other models.I was sorely tempted to order the cheapest of the DP10013's and see what branding they turn up with and if they are the same.QuoteThat's absolutely crazy, just goes to show how many the other companies are selling. And I can see why they have been so popular for quality and price they cannot be touched.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 26, 2021, 10:41:59 am
content: Quote from: TheBay on November 26, 2021, 09:27:27 amThe funny thing is that I was the one that requested they design the DP10007 and helped them test it, and yet here I am not selling it and everyone else isI asked for custom branding on the Micsig current probes but they said my volume wasn't high enough.QuoteWould be interesting to find out.QuoteYeah, these aren't something that sell in big volume, and margins are not great, they are expensive to buy wholesale.I think I'm also one of the biggest Brymen dealers in the world for the 235.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 27, 2021, 08:48:25 am
content: FYI, I've asked Micsig about the possibility of counterfeits and the OEM thing.

author: TheBay
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 27, 2021, 10:32:19 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 27, 2021, 08:48:25 amIt will be interesting to know their response.Attached a screenshot of the current price in the UK.

author: Micsig_support
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 30, 2021, 09:47:23 am
content: HiFrom the picture, they even do not put the brand. It is said that they just put low price to cheat..please take care of the wallet.

author: Micsig_support
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 30, 2021, 09:51:37 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 27, 2021, 08:48:25 amThey are not our OEM customers. And we even do not know who they are.From the picture, they just remove the brand and put a lower price in the internet. and they are not even a copy..There are too many online shop sellers who make the same thing....

author: Micsig_support
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 30, 2021, 09:53:10 am
content: Quote from: TheBay on November 27, 2021, 10:32:19 amThey are fake. do not believe them. we do not know who they are.

author: TheBay
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 30, 2021, 06:15:02 pm
content: Quote from: Micsig_support on November 30, 2021, 09:47:23 amI don't quite understand what you mean about the low price to cheat?Quote from: Micsig_support on November 30, 2021, 09:53:10 amHow do you know they are fake, have you actually seen them? Maybe they are selling your brand or could they be made by the same OEM that you use?I may order a set and do a teardown to see what is inside.

author: dreamcat4
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 30, 2021, 06:36:05 pm
content: well those ones seem to have gone out of stock for the time being (at least from that particular amazon UK seller here in uk)but i do agree that doing a teardown would be helpful to clear up any such ambiguities - either way!

author: TheBay
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 30, 2021, 08:15:22 pm
content: Quote from: dreamcat4 on November 30, 2021, 06:36:05 pmThey were £77 a day or two ago, I went to grab them earlier and they have sold out.As soon as they are back in stock fulfilled by Amazon I'll get some and have a look inside.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 30, 2021, 08:24:00 pm
content: This saga reminds me of the Pintek/Pintech fiasco where the venerable Pintek DP-25 was copied some years back by Pintech.http://www.pintek.com.tw/product_detail/landersound/index.php?Product_SN=19265&Company_SN=6002&Product_Site_Classify_SN=17072https://en.pintech.com.cn/bls_html/ifferentialprobeseriesblsarticlelist/pplowvoltagedifferentialprobeblsarticlearticle37.html

author: ceut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2022, 08:45:21 pm
content: Hello everyone,I have found (and read) all this MicSig topic, because I'm interested in buying the DP10007.Since last posts, is there anyone who had some news about the fixed CMRR model of DP10007 ?Also, I have actually (since some times now) a Rigol DS1052E crossflashed to DS1102E which works well, but I also check scope for changing it.I have downloaded the full chart on the other topic to see which model I could buy, and I hesitate between the SiglentSDS2202X-ESDS1202X-E and the Rigol DS1202Z-E.Both seems similar..So if anyone could give me any advices about these 2 models ...?Thanks!Edit: My badconfusing the SDS1202X-E and the SDS2202X-E

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2022, 09:00:14 pm
content: Quote from: ceut on March 11, 2022, 08:45:21 pmThey not.SDS2202X-E is a 2 GSa/s DSO, 28 Mpts memory depth, Webserver, Bode plot etc.

author: ceut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2022, 09:35:48 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on March 11, 2022, 09:00:14 pmThank you for the reply !Just saw that I mixed the name when I write them down from the chart...So I have edited my post, the Siglent is the SDS1202X-E

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2022, 09:40:10 pm
content: Quote from: ceut on March 11, 2022, 09:35:48 pmYes then quite similar but dig deep in their datasheets to see what they might have in common.SDS1202X-E was released a few years earlier and still is a popular seller for us.

author: ceut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2022, 10:17:38 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on March 11, 2022, 09:40:10 pmYes I saw that it was release somewhere in 2017.I have bought last year the SPD3303X-E, it was my first Siglent product and I'm quite happy with itAnd my actual (and old) Rigol works well too.The SDS1202X-E and the DS1202Z-E are at exactly the same price here (in France).But very few information/review on this Rigol model, whereas I saw everywhere this Siglent...Even on the place where I have bought my power supply, the SDS1202X-E is marked as "best seller"...So, as you say, I have to dig more to find which one will be the best for me

author: SkullKill
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 12, 2022, 02:00:09 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on November 26, 2021, 10:41:59 am@EEVblog any update on the fixed version yet? any ETA on selling it on your website by any chance?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 27, 2022, 10:24:25 pm
content: Quote from: SkullKill on March 12, 2022, 02:00:09 pmStill haven't heard from them. I've kinda given up and gone back to selling the HVP70.

author: todorp
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 03:59:59 pm
content: Hi, Is there an official distributer/reseller in europe for the HVP70?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 28, 2022, 10:37:06 pm
content: Quote from: todorp on March 28, 2022, 03:59:59 pmSimons Electronics in the Uk used to carry them, but he hasn't stocked them for a while.

author: implor
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 09, 2022, 06:25:07 am
content: I'm looking at the Micsig DP10007 at batronix and it say:"Only connect to a grounded oscilloscope!"I can't see why that should be a requirement for safety. Am I missing something obvious?https://www.batronix.com/shop/measurement/probes/Micsig-DP10007.html?gclid=CjwKCAjwur-SBhB6EiwA5sKtjny_NfIukZL1Pew1adK9JoLbAL2tpdluQwJF-S0ch1v9mzUYXXGzPBoCabUQAvD_BwE

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 09, 2022, 06:39:03 am
content: Quote from: implor on April 09, 2022, 06:25:07 amDifferential probes are not isolated probes, the ground serves as a sink for currents in the attenuator inputs. If you float the ground of a differential probe it sits a voltage in between the voltage of the inputs

author: implor
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 09, 2022, 07:03:51 am
content: Quote from: PartialDischarge on April 09, 2022, 06:39:03 amI Get it. You can do it with a battery oscilloscope but your BNC will be half the value of what ever you are probing.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2022, 11:52:01 am
content: See here:and

author: Trader
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2022, 08:59:25 pm
content: Quote from: hatte on October 05, 2021, 06:56:43 pmAny updates about that?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 17, 2022, 10:30:05 am
content: Quote from: Trader on May 14, 2022, 08:59:25 pmHaven't bothered to ask, they haven't bothered to tell me.I'm back to selling the HVP70Any updates about that?

author: ojete
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 18, 2022, 06:16:46 pm
content: You can ask batronix, they are selling a new batch and maybe the problem is now fixed.

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 18, 2022, 07:57:13 pm
content: Quote from: ojete on May 18, 2022, 06:16:46 pmIt is not a design problem, it is a production problem where the CMRR needs to be adjusted by careful compensation of the capacitances in the input divider legs, ergo it is a question of time and cost. Ergo I don’t think they are solving it lol

author: dreamcat4
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 18, 2022, 08:35:15 pm
content: maybe we can modify our own probes then to fix it?

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 18, 2022, 08:44:40 pm
content: Quote from: dreamcat4 on May 18, 2022, 08:35:15 pmI don’t know what is your intended use, but your better off spending the money in a good diff probe if you need a good CMRR , or even a fiber isolated probe.Right now Lecroy and RS make the best diff probes

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 19, 2022, 12:09:19 am
content: Quote from: PartialDischarge on May 18, 2022, 08:44:40 pmLecroy rebadge Sapphire probes, which is who makes my HVP70.

author: ojete
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2022, 04:31:01 am
content: It seems there is a new probe from Micsig which looks very good.https://www.batronix.com/files/Micsig/DP750-Files/Micsig-DP750-Catalog.pdf

author: Trader
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2022, 08:04:59 am
content: Output Voltage ≤1.5V, maybe not a low noise.

author: TwistedTransistor
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2022, 06:41:58 pm
content: I've been looking at buying a new diff probe recently.It strikes me that this DP10007 is not much good for off-line SMPS work as it is limited by its maximum differential and common-mode voltage specs. A typical modern off-line switcher with PFC is going to be switching about 400V and depending on the circuit topology it is fairly common to see twice that across the switch, i.e. 800V.On the other hand, the 1300V spec of the DP10013 is possibly higher than it ideally would be, giving poor SNR.It seems to me that the optimal is somewhere between the two. If I was Micsig I'd probably have aimed at about 850-900V.It does lead one to wonder what the target market of the DP10007 is? Maybe they want you to buy both DP10007 and DP10013 to cover all scenarios. Sneaky.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 29, 2022, 09:04:27 pm
content: Last saturday my DP10007 arrived, didn´t test it so far.Looks good so far, if it´s usable the price is insane cheap, so I wouldn´t worry to buy another one to cover higher voltages.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2022, 12:15:36 am
content: Quote from: TwistedTransistor on August 29, 2022, 06:41:58 pmThe best configuration IMO is a 1400Vpk20X design with the 7 volt output. Sapphire makes one, but apparently people are put off by the 'odd' 20X attenuation. The DP10007 is safe to 1400Vpkjust like the DP10013, it just saturates the output. I have the DP10007, it works and is handy at times, but I don't regard it as quite a pro-quality instrument and am glad I got it cheaply. I would gleefully trade it for a Probemaster 4231 if I could.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 30, 2022, 03:18:32 am
content: Quote from: TwistedTransistor on August 29, 2022, 06:41:58 pmThe DP1007 was created at my request to match my HVP70 that I sell. The plan was for me to sell a lower cost x10/x100 varient with similar specs.So they created it based on the HVP70 spec I gave them (and they matched it spec for spec IIRC), I tested it and it had problems that they never got back to me to resolved. They released it anyway.I'm still selling the HVP70.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2022, 08:28:40 pm
content: QuoteWhat problems ?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 30, 2022, 10:25:04 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on August 30, 2022, 08:28:40 pmIt would not meet the CMRR spec.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2022, 08:33:08 pm
content: Now I got one, how can I test it to see if it´s still a problem ?

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2022, 08:52:38 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on September 06, 2022, 08:33:08 pmNone ?

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2022, 10:07:31 pm
content: Found one.https://blog.teledynelecroy.com/2021/04/how-to-test-cmrr-of-differential-probes.html

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 22, 2022, 08:37:57 am
content: Quote from: Martin72 on September 06, 2022, 08:33:08 pmFunction gen into a 50 ohm load into a scope, largest voltage you can generate.Connect both diff probes to the positive side of the 50ohm load, make sure they are twisted.Measure the diff probe output amplitude in ratio to the input with 20*log(Vout/Vin)10MHz spec is -40dB IIRC.

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 22, 2022, 09:05:40 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on December 22, 2022, 08:37:57 amOne trick here is that the attenuation ratio of the diff probe has to be taken into account, ie if the input is 1Vrms and the output at 1:1 scope setting is 1mV, then the CMRR is not 60dB but 60dB-probe att.I never know if manufacturers are playing with this, and for example in the Lecroy image the CMRR for the x50 and x500 look suspiciously similar, for x500 the CMRR should be at least 20 dB worst, although this can depend on the actual behaviour of the probe... best to test

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 22, 2022, 09:33:49 am
content: Quote from: PartialDischarge on December 22, 2022, 09:05:40 amAh, yes, of course. You set that as the probe ratio on the scope.The manufacturer could very well diddle this. It should be specifically mentioned in the datasheet if it's output referred, but it never is.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 26, 2022, 11:52:11 pm
content: @Dave:

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 28, 2022, 05:47:33 am
content: Response for the DP10007 vs the HVP70Just like I told Micsig right back at the start, it didn't meet the -40dB spec at 10MHz, and they said they'd look into it and they never got back to me.Phase and gain response is not smooth like the HVP70. But as expected, bets are are off over 10MHz with such probes which is why the spec stops there.

author: ojete
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2022, 02:00:21 pm
content: Thanks Dave, I was interested in the DP10007 but this measurements don´t look very good.This problem was "supposedly" fixed in a later revision of the probe but I don't know if this is true, maybe if someone has a recent unit can´t test it and tell us if something has changed.This cmrr loss and abrupt phase shift at 6 khz, maybe can be because of a resonance? and maybe because of the ceramic capacitors and the piezo effect?

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 28, 2022, 02:03:07 pm
content: Hi,Got one bought a few months before, will test it in the next days.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 29, 2022, 02:39:21 am
content: Quote from: ojete on December 28, 2022, 02:00:21 pmInteresting, they didn't convey that to me, and they knew I waiting for their response before I ordered them.Mine is certainly an original unit.Video of the testing:

author: dreamcat4
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2022, 03:11:45 am
content: ok so if this transpires that there was a product revision that improves the cmrr. then it would be great to see a teardown comparison. to know if there were any internal changes if its possible, maybe to figure out how to mod older units. or if not possible for example without breaking the calibration etc?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 29, 2022, 05:04:22 am
content: Quote from: dreamcat4 on December 29, 2022, 03:11:45 amMy teardown photos are here:https://flickr.com/photos/eevblog/albums/72157719721698708

author: trp806mo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2022, 06:44:08 pm
content: My DP1007 from 2 years is in spec : (raw file, 10/20dB must be added) <-40dB@10MHz

author: ojete
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2023, 05:14:21 am
content: Dave, you could ask the guys of MicSig to send you a new unit of the DP10007. If they have fixed the resonance problem I'm sure they would do it so you can test it and sell it in your store if you want.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2023, 09:35:37 pm
content: Preparing...

author: ojete
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2023, 10:50:07 pm
content: Thank you so much. I'm really interested in this probe and I hope they have fixed the resonance problem.The Sapphire probe Dave sells it's very tempting but with shipping and the customs here in Europe the price goes up very quickly.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2023, 06:34:52 pm
content: Hi,Quickshots of today, tomorrow afternoon carrying on for further playings.Raw values without adding something.Probe is setting to 10x.Setup:-Siglent SDS2504X HD-Siglent SDG2122X-Huber&Suhner 50 ohm termination.Bode plot amplitude setting to max.CMRR Plots 20Mhz and 120Mhz (thanks to the SDG2122X)CMRR Value rms Ch1 and Ch2 at 10MhzRemarkable:Calculated value meets the value in the bode plot. ( 20*log10(Ch2/Ch1) ) edit : phase also !As mentioned before, further play arounds tomorrow - If you want to see something else with this setup, any comments on what I did today, feel free...Martin

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 11:30:16 am
content: Another play before visiting relatives...Using the formular editor of the scope, F is displaying 20*log(C2/C1).In retrospect, I don't even know if I need to declare log10 additionally in the editor than just log.I'll test it later.

author: PartialDischarge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 12:19:04 pm
content: The phase of the CMRR is meaningless, what matters is the amplitude. Also the phase response in differential mode is also not very interesting, the pulse response in time axis is however more indicative"Using the formular editor of the scope, F is displaying 20*log(C2/C1)"It has to be the ratio of the rms value of the signals, not the ratio of instantaneous voltages.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 04:53:52 pm
content: Nevertheless, I like the way it fits together, both in Bode and measured in this way.QuoteYes, that also occurred to me when I was on the road.But at the moment I don't know how to include this in the formula editor.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 08:00:13 pm
content: I got a second diff.-probe, a testec si-9002, 25Mhz.Pics:CMRR plot and "normal" bode plot up to 30Mhz.Looks good and was expected.To avoid "picture shuffling" I´ll post the bandwith results of the Micsig in a second post.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 08:31:57 pm
content: Here the bandwith of the micsig, first up to 30Mhz, then 120Mhz.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 22, 2023, 09:55:36 pm
content: Again the bandwith of the micsig probe, but in "higher resolution"...The linearity between 20Mhz and 100Mhz is...not given.At work we got some probes from testec, also with 100Mhz, will take one of them at home in the next days.

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 13, 2023, 10:33:31 pm
content: Relatively recently Micsig changed its specification regarding the CMRR of the DP10007 probe from the old 50db@1MHz to 45dB. Furthermore, the CMRR @10MHz that in the past was 40dB is no longer specified!!It can be deduced that although they are aware of the problem, they have no intention of solving it...I therefore decided to proceed on my own by making slight modifications to the probe which gave me rather good results (see the below graph) both on the x10 range, where at 10MHz I brought the CMMR from 39dB to 51dB (+12dB) and on the x100 range where the CMRR went from 22dB to 50dB (+28dB).For your information, my probe has the same PCB version as the one presented in detail by Dave in his various posts (i.e. DP700V_V1X 2020.09.22).Therefore, if your probe has this PCB version (or a similar version that includes the same schematic...) and you are interested in converting your poor CMMR DP10007 into a "Super Probe", I will provide with all the information necessary to do so (naturally not taking any responsibility and not being able to give you any guarantee regarding the results...).Stay tuned!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 16, 2023, 05:30:57 am
content: Quote from: ExaLab on September 13, 2023, 10:33:31 pmThat's why I never stocked it and went back to the more expensive Saphire probe.

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2023, 12:21:56 pm
content: Before starting with the discussion, I would like to make some considerations about the probe bandwidth.As noted by many users of this thread, the probe bandwidth is far from the declared 100MHz!To verify this avoiding the artifacts of the input resonances it is sufficient to remove the input leads and test the transfer function (TF) of the device in this status.The bandwidth of the "pure" probe more or less will be near 40-50Mhz.As shown in the below graph, the TF of the full device (i.e. provided of the input leads) is due to the sum of the "pure" probe TF with the input LC TF.The resonance frequency of this LC network is about 110MHz but, twisting the leads, other "modes" will overlap to the main resonance complicating the situation...My feeling is that this resonance was intentionally used to attribute the nominal 100MHZ bandwidth to the probe although, in practice, the behavior above 40MHz is highly variable and conditioned by the geometry and mutual position of the input leads.A further fundamental aspect that few people know is that the resonance associated with the capacitance of the input stage can also substantially influence the CMRR measurement at high frequencies.Therefore, always give due weight to the resonant frequency originating from the common mode capacitance of the two inputs (in this device is approximately 5pF) and the cumulative series inductance of the reference path (that usually coincides with the ground path of the measuring bench).If this resonance frequency is close to the CMRR frequency you are investigating, the effect is that you'll measure a CMRR worse than the actual value.As example, if the measurement bench is organized as in the below drawing, the resonance frequency can be estimated at around 25MHz and can strongly affect the 10MHz CMRR measurement.To limit this error it is usually sufficient to reduce the inductance of the reference loop by making a direct ground connection between the oscilloscope and the signal generator lead and making this auxiliary connection close to the input and output leads of the probe.This will move the resonant frequency further to the right, away from the frequency under investigation.In practice, this operation can be easily accomplished by simply connecting a probe between the oscilloscope and the output lead of the signal generator (generally this connection is unconsciously present since the amplitude of the input signal is measured...)Remark / Important Note: in case of significant high frequency common mode components, the above precautions must also be adopted during the usual differential measurements (this to avoid to degrade the expected high frequency CMRR of the probe).OK, enough with the premises!Next time I will explain how to improve the CMRR above 100KHz.Do not miss!!

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2023, 06:43:55 pm
content: I would like to begin the discussion with some reassurances.All the actions I will propose will not modify the frequency response or the calibration of the probe in any way.In any case, for those interested, at the end of the discussion I will illustrate step by step the complete calibration procedure of the device, also explaining in detail the reason (not exactly intuitive...) of the presence of two capacitive compensation trimmers for each channel...As you know, the CMRR of a differential amplifier depends both on the performance of the operational amplifier in use and on the accuracy and symmetry of the polarization network external to it.To simplify the analysis, let's assume we use an ideal op amp. Well, in this case the CMRR will depend only on the network external to it!Using the classic differential structure schematized in fig. 1, as you know, two are the conditions/constraints to obtain an infinite cmrr:Zi+ = Zi- and Zp+ = Zp- (1)if these conditions are both satisfied the cmrr will be infinite, at any frequency.If we reduce the biasing network to simple resistors (and this probe uses only simple resistors...), the basic conditions to be respected will become:Ri+ = Ri- and Rp+ = Rp- (2)where once again, Rp+ and Rp- represent the parallel of the resistors that relate to the non-inverting and inverting input respectively.In other words, the above conditions summarize the "secret" to obtaining an infinite cmrr using a linear polarization network: to have total and absolute equality between the non-inverting and inverting amplification factors respectively. Just to fix the ideas with simple numbers, a 1% of asymmetry between the two channels degrades the CMRR to -40dB. To obtain a CMRR of -100dB the unbalance must be less than 10ppm!​What it happens in the real world?In this case the CMRR will depend on the performance of the op-amp and on the frequency behavior of the polarization network which, even if made up of simple resistors, as the frequency increases will be affected by the effects of some parasitic parameters (e.g. traces and components inductance, mutual inductive and capacitive coupling between components, traces and components coupling with the pcb reference layers and so on...).On many differential probes that make use of this technology (DP10007 included), the above balancing (2) is generally achieved with two complementary measures:1) The use of precision resistors2) The insertion of a calibration resistive trimmer whose purpose is to finely adjust the amplification factor of one of the two channels(note that this last adjustment can be either internal to the circuit under examination or external to it!).As it is easy to imagine, since there is no high frequency compensation (as we will see, for DP10007 this statement is not entirely true...), these two measures will guarantee optimal CMRR at low frequencies only (note that the amplification factor of the balancing channel is usually calibrated at 50Hz...)But then, what happens to CMRR at high frequencies?As already mentioned, at high frequencies this parameter is substantially governed by the multitude of parasitic parameters affecting the entire circuit.Having said this, you will surely have understood how I intend to proceed!​We are very close to the conclusion of the whole story!Soon I will propose two solutions: the first very simple and immediate, intended for those who want to improve just a little the disastrous high freq CMRR of the x100 range (which, as you will see, is fundamentally due to a design error by Micsig... ), the second, more complete, performing and flexible, aimed at global performance optimization.

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2023, 04:13:20 pm
content: Question: considering that no one intervenes, is there anyone interested in the topic I’m covering regarding the CMRR ugrade?If yes, please let me know and I continue, otherwise I leave...I would hate to proceed just to favor Micsig

author: dreamcat4
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2023, 04:22:34 pm
content: Quote from: ExaLab on September 29, 2023, 04:13:20 pmAbsolutely! (however if you prefer not to inform Micsig without them 1st providing a due commission, I absolutely understand, and am very much happy to wait).

author: manupthehills
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2023, 04:43:45 pm
content: Very interested, please go ahead. Grazie

author: Hydron
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2023, 08:18:47 pm
content: Am interested as well - had a play around with my own micsig probes, there are certainly some issues with the design. I ended up reducing the lead length to tame the worst of the resonance in mine.

author: Centmo
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2023, 11:25:19 pm
content: I just bought two of these probes and am following your posts intently

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2023, 10:28:33 pm
content: Thanks for your kind feedback!Getting straight to the point I can confirm that for frequencies lower than approximately 50MHz the anomalous degradation of the cmrr of this probe is mainly linked to the stray capacitances.Let's analyze the CMRR behaviour in the case of an hypothetical imbalance between the two equivalent stray capacitances at the op-amp inputs (capacitances referred to the reference plane).It can easily be demonstrated that for an ideal op-amp configured as in fig. 2, for C values of the order of a few pF and frequencies lower than 100MHz, the CMRR is very close to:CMRR = 20 Log (ω Rp ΔC) (3)Where: ω = 2 π fRp is the parallel of the resistors that relate to the nodeΔC is the capacitance misalignment between the two input nodesNote that in our device (DP10007), Rp is equal to:83 ohm (x10 range)333 ohm (x100 range)From the above relationship (3), it can be noted that:1) In an ideal op-amp the CMRR degrades with a slope of 20db/decade2) In our probe, for a given ΔC, the CMRR of the x100 range is 12dB worste than the x10 rangeSome of you may have noticed that at 10MHz the CMRR difference between the two ranges is greater than 12dB (e.g. in my specific case it is: 39dB – 22dB = 17dB ).The reason for this is very simple: the x100 range has a cap imbalance higher than that the x10 range!In fact, by solving equation (3) with respect ΔC and substituting the respective CMRR values at 10MHz for both ranges it will be possible to have a preliminary estimate of the C misalignment:In my specific case (CMRR = -39dB @ x10 range and -22dB @ x100 range), ΔC will be:2.15 pF x10 range3.80 pF x100 rangeConsidering that in the real world we are dealing with a non-ideal op-amp, the pair of values just found will represent a slight overestimation of the actual ΔC values.In practice, in our scenario, we will have that:ΔC < 2.15 pF for the x10 rangeΔC < 3.80 pF for the x100 rangeThe ΔC difference between the two ranges (about 1.65 pF), as already mentioned, is due to a colossal design error that I leave to you the pleasure to identify!!!Without this error, the cmrr of the x100 range, between 1 and 10 MHz would have benefited by approximately 10dB!Of course we will go further…Instead of correcting the error we will proceed directly to the full compensation of both ranges, obtaining even better results!!Happy WE and see u soon

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2023, 01:24:00 pm
content: As explained, the anomalous CMRR degradation is mainly due to the cap. imbalance between the two op-amp inputs.Going into more detail, the positive input has a basic excess of capacitance most likely due to the intrinsic input impedance misalignment of the used op-amp (data sheet highlights a ΔC of about 1pF)When the x100 range is selected, a furter contribution (of the same sign…) is added to this basic misalignment. This additional capacitance is due to the incorrect circuit positioning of the relevant calibration trimmer (Fig. 1a). As it is easy to see, this trimmer represents a clear element of asymmetry between the two input branches (positive and negative).The mistake made by Micsig (one of many mistakes...) was to place this trimmer downstream of the 1Kohm input resistor instead of directly at the buffer output. By doing so, they accentuated the capacitance present on the positive input of the differential stage, increasing the unbalance and therefore drastically worsening the CMRR of the x100 range.Never seen such serious errors!!!The x100 range is therefore doubly penalized: a greater capacity imbalance on the one hand, a higher Rp value on the other.As mentioned, we will not directly fix this error… We'll balance it (more effective choice!)Two are the solutions that I propose (alternatives to each other):Basic UpgradeA simple and ready-to-use solution that can satisfy most of you. This version, in principle, does not even require recalibration of the probe (which however I highly recommend...)Required components:1.2 pF 1206 NPO Capacitor (x1)1.5 pF 1206 NPO Capacitor (x1)0 ohm 1206 Resistor (x1)Advanced UpgradeThis is the solution that guarantees the best results. Its hardware implementation is as simple as the basic version.What makes it a little more complex are two aspects:1) To obtain the best results it requires a fairly complex calibration procedure2) The capacitive ceramic trimmers used may not be easily availableRequired components:Miniature SMD Ceramic Trimmer CapacitorMin. cap range 0.9 pF – 2.5 pF (x2)6.8 pF 0805 NPO Capacitor (x1)Notes:- For the Advanced Upgrade, as trimmer capacitors I used the Murata TZC3 Series 1.4 – 3 pF (PN: TZC3Z030AA01).The minimum guaranteed C is 1.4 pF. Measuring the component, all my samples exhibited a minimum capacitance of less than 0.90 pF- The Advanced Upgrade requires an additional hole in the metal screen, aligned with the position of VC6- The proposed solutions use two auxiliary balancing capacitors: Ca5 (VC5) acts on both ranges (x10 and x100), Ca6 (VC6) affects only the x100 range- To open the probe, gently lift both front labels (the main and the top one). By operating delicately they will not be damaged.If part of the adhesive layer is damaged, remove it completely. You can easily replace it with double-sided tapeNext time I will describe the simplified and the full calibration procedure.Stay tuned!

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2023, 03:01:02 pm
content: Excellent work so far, very great.

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 20, 2023, 05:38:38 pm
content: Preliminary considerations regarding calibration:1) This probe does not provide either offset adjustments (carried out via SW) or gain adjustments (the accuracy of which depends only on the precision of the resistors used)2) As anticipated, each of the two branches (pos and neg) of the input attenuator stage is equipped with an high frequency compensation that acts near 15MHz allowing small gain adjustments (+/- 0.1dB max).This is done splitting the low side RC in the parallel of two distinct RC bipoles with asymmetric capacitances. The zero of the full TF that would be obtained with the single bipole solution is thus converted into a pole at the same frequency plus two zeros, one to the right and one to the left of this one. Increasing or reducing the cap. difference between the two RC bipoles is possible to increase or reduce the HF gain (note that, in order to maintain the LF Compensation, the sum of these two capacitances must remain constant!)As I’ll explain later, this HF compensation has several drawbacks.3) Although the calibration should be carried out with the probe in its case (by removing the central label on the back of the case), for reasons of practicality and better access to all the adjustment trimmers we will do it removing the back cover.Once successfully carried out calibration in these conditions, it will always be possible to refine the three main adjustments (LF Compensation, DC CMRR and AC CMRR) with the device in its case.4) The procedure must be carried out with the metal shield rigorously fixed with the two screws provided. Pay attention to the fact that for frequencies higher than a few kHz, given the low capacities in use on the HV divider, the behavior of the input front-end is heavily influenced by the position of this shield and by any minimal variation in pressure on it. So, during the entire procedure, avoid to touch it!Later I will propose how to fix it in a stable and definitive way.5) DC CMRR adjustment requires the use of a high input voltage. If you do not have a generator with these characteristics (i.e. >100Vac), it is common practice to use the Live terminal of the mains voltage. I assume that whoever carries out this operation is adequately informed about the possible risks involved. All safety rules and guidelines for elevated voltage measurement should be followed!Personally, to avoid damages to the equipment in the event of a fault or accidental short circuit I connect to the “Live” of the mains voltage using a 100KΩ 1W decoupling resistor, placed inside a common power plug.6) AC/HF CMRR should be adjusted (or evaluated) using a sinusoidal source of at least 100Vpp. Not having amplitudes of this magnitude, all available resources on the oscilloscope must be used to remove all forms of noise extraneous to the stimulus signal. I recommend to trigger the scope on a dedicated channel connected to the signal generator and then use the most suitable method to remove the noise (averaging, BW limit, hires filters and so on...).For the less experienced, I remind you that the CMRR of the probe can be easily calculated starting from the output/input measured ratio (in dBs) by adding 20dB for the x10 range or 40dB for the x100 range (e.g. if the probe range is x100 and the output/input measured ratio is -80dB, the CMRR will be: -80dB +40dB = -40dB).7) Before to start with the procedure, connect the device to the supply and wait at least 15 minutesSimplified Calibration Procedurea) LF Compensation1- Connect the DP10007 output to the oscilloscope2- Select the x10 range3- Connect the DP10007 inputs to a 10KHz / 20Vpp square-wave source.Red lead to the signal and black lead to the ground4- Adjust the oscilloscope to properly display the waveform5- Adjust VC4 in order to optimize the the square-wave response (act as if you were calibrating a common x10 passive oscilloscope probe)6- Connect Red lead to the ground and black lead to the signal7- Adjust VC2 for the best square-wave responseb) DC CMRR Adjustment1- Connect the DP10007 output to the oscilloscope (make sure that the oscilloscope is regularly connected to ground)2- Select the x10 range3- Connect both the probe input leads (red and black) to a ground referred 50/60Hz / 200 – 240 Vrms sinusoidal source. To do this you can use the live terminal of the mains voltage(Warning: use all the necessary safety precautions above mentioned)4- Adjust the oscilloscope to properly display the waveform5- Adjust VR1 to minimize the amplitude of the displayed waveform6- Select the x100 range7- Adjust VR2 to minimize the amplitude of the displayed waveformc) AC CMRR Adjustment (LF Channel Alignment)1- Connect the DP10007 output to the oscilloscope2- Select the x10 range3- Twist the probe input leads and connect both (red and black) to a 20KHz, sine wave signal source (minumum amplitude: 20 Vpp / 200 – 300 Vpp recommended).Make a direct ground connection between the signal source and the oscilloscope (this can simply be done with the probe used to monitor the signal of the source)4- Adjust the oscilloscope to properly display the waveform5- Adjust VC4 to minimize the amplitude of the displayed waveformd) HF CMRR Adjustment (for Advanced Upgrade Only)1- Connect the DP10007 output to the oscilloscope2- Select the x10 range3- Twist the probe input leads and connect both (red and black) to a 10MHz, sine wave signal source (minumum amplitude: 10 Vpp / 20 Vpp or more recommended).Make a direct ground connection between the signal source and the oscilloscope4- Adjust the oscilloscope to properly display the waveform5- Adjust VC5 to minimize the amplitude of the displayed waveform6- Select the x100 range7- Adjust the oscilloscope to properly display the waveform8- Adjust VC6 to minimize the amplitude of the displayed waveformClarifications / notes:1) All the changes proposed so far have the fundamental aim of improving (even substantially) the CMRR for frequencies above 100 kHz.With reference to this parameter, my probe is now able to compete with products of the best manufacturers (-60dB @ 1MHz, -55dB @ 10MHz and -35dB @ 50MHz)2) All the modifications proposed so far do not solve the serious problem of resonance that you may encounter at low frequencies (see the graph below)This anomaly, if present, involves the abrupt degradation of the CMRR for frequencies around 6700 Hz and is due to a completely different cause3) Given the numerous necessary premises, I must postpone the Complete Calibration Procedure to my next post

author: Swake
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2023, 03:12:26 pm
content: Thank you for this elaborate explanation that I still have to read in detail.At the moment I can't make out if this upgrade is something I 'need' or just 'want because I can'. Anyhow it would certainly make a small interesting winter-time project.Would this apply to the DP10013 probes too? I guess these aren't all too different, but couldn't find a picture of the internals to compare.

author: dreamcat4
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 06, 2023, 08:22:31 am
content: So is there also a thread yet for the new Micsig MDP series diff probes too? Since those are also supposed to have lower CMRR (and other things).But critically those new Micsig MDP series are now cheaper than the other more expensive older diff probe that Dave has kept on selling on his eevblog store. And perhaps it sits at a price somewhere in between?Unless this is the MDP thread?https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hv-differential-probe-versus-isolation-transformer/

author: ExaLab
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2023, 06:20:01 pm
content: The procedure I am going to illustrate aims to harmonize the high frequency gain (from MHz upwards) of the two input channels. This will allow us to further optimize the CMRR compared to the results obtained from the Simplified Calibration (the improvement @10MHz could be over 10dB!!)As already mentioned, this is achieved by altering the imbalance of the pair of zeros (referred to the TF of the input stage) of one channel relative to the other.This step should be an integral part of the "Low Frequency Compensation" (generally called "Short Term" and "Long Term" Compensation) of each channel as it aims to align the zero of the Input Front End with the dominant pole of the following stage. For various reasons related to design shortcomings (which I will not address for the sake of brevity...), for our unit this is not possible.However, this does not prevent us from using a "Preset and Evaluate" approach (simple, effective even if it is a little time consuming…). The aim is to acquire the trend of the CMRR as a function of the position of VC4 and then choose the best compromise. We will test a few different configurations for the HF frequency response of the positive channel and then choose the one that offers the best results in terms of HF CMRR.In practice, we will recalibrate the probe for various positions of the VC4 trimmer while tabulating the CMRR at the frequencies of greatest interest (100KHz, 1MHz and 10MHz) (see picture below).The procedure proposed involves angular steps of approximately 20 degrees counterclockwise. Naturally, if at the first step (+20 degrees) the average CMRR were to significantly worsen compared to the starting configuration (0 degrees), instead of continuing with positive angles (+40, +60 etc.) it will be necessary to switch to negative angles (-20, -40 etc.).Before starting with the procedure, I remind you again that the angles I am referring to are relative to the initial position of VC4 and that this reference position changes from one unit to another.I also remind you that the absolute zero of all the four capacitive trimmers coincides with the notch arranged horizontally and that the absolute rotation limits are worth +/- 90 degrees. Therefore, if during the Full Calibration Procedure VC4 (or VC3) reaches these absolute limits (i.e vertical notch of the trimmer) the evaluation angle of VC4 must stop here.If the CMRR trend is positive but you have reached the above limit it will always be possible to continue with the analysis by unbalancing (with angles opposite to those adopted for VC4) the VC2 trimmer. This remote event requires a new LF compensation and we will analyze it separately (if necessary...).The picture below ghraphs a typical behaviour of the CMRRs as function of the VC4 relative angle.Full Calibration Procedurea) Simplified Calibration ProcedurePerform the “Simplified Calibration Procedure”b) Annotation of the VC4 PositionAnnotate the exact VC4 position and give it a ID name (e.g. 0˚)Even if we will only act on VC3 and VC4, to be safe, take a photo of the initial position of all the four capacitive trimmersc) CMRR Evaluation1- Make sure that the x10 range is selected2- Measure the CMRR @ 100kHz, 1MHz and 10MHz3- Note these three values next to the actual position of VC44- If the actual position of VC4 is 80˚skip to point h)d) Changing the position of VC41- Rotate VC4 counterclockwise approximately 20 degrees2- Give a ID name to this new VC4 position (e.g. 20˚, 40˚ etc)e) AC CMRR Adjustment1- Maintain the x10 range2- Twist the probe input leads and connect both (red and black) to a 20KHz, sine wave signal source (minumum amplitude: 20 Vpp / 200 – 300 Vpp recommended).Make a direct ground connection between the signal source and the oscilloscope (this can simply be done with the probe used to monitor the signal of the source).3- Adjust the oscilloscope to properly display the waveform (note that due to the strong channel decompensation, the signal amplitude in this step will be quite high)4- Rotate VC3 until the amplitude of the displayed waveform is minimized (adjust the oscilloscope gain accordingly). Note that the direction of rotation of VC3 is alwaysopposite to that of VC4 at step d)!f) HF CMRR Adjustment (for Advanced Upgrade Only)1- Perform the HF CMRR Adjustment limited to the x10 range (VC5 adjustment only)For details please refer to the step d) of the “Simplified Calibration Procedure”g) Resume the procedure from point c)h) Choice and setting of the optimal position of VC41- Choose the optimal angle of VC4 based on the following criteria: aim for the best CMRR @ 1MHz and 10MHz values that do not excessively penalize the CMRR @ 100KHz.As can be seen from the graph below (for which the optimal angle is about 40˚…), in this position the three acquired CMRR values are equally spaced by 8 -10 dB.Note that the optimal angle chosen could also be an intermediate value between those tested (e.g. 30˚) and as already anticipated, if the trend of the CMRR for positiveangles is not favorable, the procedure will also have to be extended to the negative angles of VC4.2- Set the optimal and final position of VC4i) AC and HF CMRR adjustmentPerform the above step e) (AC CMRR adj) and step f) (HF CMRR adj) for the final position of VC4l) x100 Range HF CMRR Adjustment (for Advanced Upgrade Only)Perform the HF CMRR Adjustment limited to the x100 range (VC6 adjustment only)For details please refer to the step d) of the “Simplified Calibration Procedure”OK, my discussion ends here!! I hope it has been useful to you in improving the CMRR of this differential probe. If yes, with reference to HF CMRR only, you will now have a performant differential probe!Let me know!Of course, there remain many other outstanding problems that for reasons of time (and professional ethics..) I cannot address.Among these I remember only a few:1) The actual bandwidth of the “pure probe” limited to approximately 45MHz2) The obvious discrepancy between the advertised bandwidth (100MHz) and a pair of non-removable input cables over 45cm long3) The abrupt degradation of CMRR (worse than -40dB) at frequencies close to 6700Hz4) The presence of traces ( ̴ 0.20mVpp) of residual noise at 24KHz at the output5) The absence in the user manual of any reference related to the derating curve for the input voltage (this lack speaks for itself!!)For these and many other reasons, not least the terrible HF CMRR (in the absence of the changes I proposed…), at the moment, if you are interested in purchasing a differential probe I strongly suggest evaluating other manufacturers. Naturally, if in the near future Micsig were to propose some new product and after in-depth testing I should verify its effectiveness, I’ll have no problem enhancing its characteristics…Don't be attracted by the low price of a product if it is not able to meet your expectations and above all, be wary of all those reviews characterized by superficiality and evident lack of professionalism of the reviewer.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 15, 2023, 09:28:30 am
content: Thanks ExaLab, beyond awesome effort!

author: dreamcat4
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2023, 10:00:32 am
content: I think it's awesome too!!And not wanting to take away 0 from that but, I really think we need to compare the mod'ed 007 to an out-of-the-box newer MDP series lineup right? (ofc for more $$ expense, but less efforts).Because that is like a cost-reduced optical probe (but as a much more conventional cheaper diff probe, and without the optical bit). However maybe people here are not so excited about the MDP? But they seem pretty affordable really.

author: marcoe87
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: November 17, 2023, 08:07:39 am
content: Thanks ExaLab for the great work.I am an owner of a DP10007 probe and I would be interested in fixing also the CMRR degradation effect around 7 kHz.Could you share at least some hint on how to address it? Is it related to input wires?

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 20, 2023, 07:39:59 pm
content: Quote from: ExaLab on October 08, 2023, 01:24:00 pmThanks for the information on improving this flawed DP10007. We used the simpler approach and used 0805 COG capacitors, as we had these available.Noted that the cover has flanges on the mounting posts that apparently are to hold the PCB in place when tighten down, these flanges might hit the added components if these are located near the PCB edge by the mounting post cut out. By positioning the added components (like the 1.2pF cap) between the main XY axis of the case, say ~45 degrees, then the post flanges are avoided. One could also cut the post flange for clearance.Anyway, thanks for the info on improving these DP10007s, we noted an improvement as you've shown.Edit: BTW if your scope has an FFT, this is a good way to set minimum values in the presence of large noise signals. Also, a old Tek 577 can serve as the high voltage low frequency source, just tap off the Collector Test Terminal.Best,

author: ceut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2024, 10:51:59 am
content: Hello,Sorry to dig up this topic, I have posted into it in 2022, then I have gave up the idea to buy this DP10007 (and other diff. probes).For 2024: again I'm looking forward to buying a Differential probe, and I don't know if they have fixed the CMRR problem since ?Maybe someone has bought a new one recently ?I saw that a new model has come up (MDP700) but I don't like the big BNC part, to use on a portable DSO.The output cable are really short.And also, I think the "UI" is not as good as the DP series (leds seem to be very small to see them, and the button seem not to be as great).So, thanks for any information/advice someone can give me (even on other brands)

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 13, 2024, 11:10:09 pm
content: Quote from: ceut on May 10, 2024, 10:51:59 amMicsig just sent me an MDP series probe. Haven't tried it yet. I think they just gave up on the DP series.

author: ceut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2024, 09:07:54 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 13, 2024, 11:10:09 pmHello DaveGreat to read that !Do you think you could make a review on it, with a comparison with the DP10007 ?Also a teardown would be greatI have checked the Micsig slow-website (https://www.micsig.com/MDP), and you have totally right

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2024, 02:13:04 pm
content: Quote+1

author: ceut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2024, 03:28:14 pm
content: So I ended up with buying the new MDP700 I have just received yesterday.A little review of things that was not told anywhere.I have made about the same mod/add with 850mAh battery powered and the MH-CD42 module, like my Micsig CP2100B current probe (here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/micsig-current-probe-cp2100b-tests-and-comparing/msg5470294/#msg5470294)The MDP700 draw about 125mA (tested with the great UM34 from RD-Tech)My unit is from the 05/24 so 15 days old probeIt is a great probe, but as I was thinking previously: I find too big the BNC module, and the button are not super easy to manipulateAlso, the packaging isnotthe one you could see onallYoutube review:=>It is a fully plastic case ! Exactly the same as for my CP2100BAnd Micsig has added 2x 30cm wire extensionIt seems to be the final version, whereas the youtubers have received a "beta" package.All cables are silicon, the "grip" tweezer(sorry don't know if it is the good word?) is very high quality, seems better than my genuine Hirschmann one.And the flexible part is also silicon.Only the alligator clips seem not to be super great quality: even the plastic seems cheapI have also added in the case the 2 best quality extensions I have found on Aliexpress (J20009 Pro) to use banana plug or anything else on the probe.PSU included 5V/1A, I will not use it so I have not checked its stability with my UM34+LD35 (RD-Tech).Some photos as always:Hope it will be usefull for some of youEdit: I have added a screenshot of the 230V voltage line of my little apartment, it is the first time I see its real waveform

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 11, 2024, 11:17:40 pm
content: Quote from: ceut on May 15, 2024, 09:07:54 amAh, so that's confirmed, discontinued.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 11, 2024, 11:18:05 pm
content: Quote from: Martin72 on May 15, 2024, 02:13:04 pmYep, just haven't gotten around to it yet.

author: ceut
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 14, 2024, 04:34:43 pm
content: I have finished my own package with some accessories , and cut some of the foam inside the box to fit themAgain, here are photos, if my ideas would be usefull for some of you

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 12, 2024, 06:27:56 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 13, 2024, 11:10:09 pmI'm a little confused - the Micsig website identifies the DP series as the 'new' products, and has the MDP series listed under their 'History (old)' product section... But the 'new' DP series looks nothing like DP1007 probe I have - the new ones look like the MDP series.I hate it when vendors swap products around but leave the model number the same.

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 15, 2024, 03:06:57 pm
content: I also just noticed that the new MDP series output signal is 1/2 of the prior DP series (7V -> 3V), which equates to the DP10007 10X/100X probe now equivalent to the MDP701 20X/200X probe - both have 70V / 700V ranges. The change in attenuation from 100X to 200X for the same voltage rating is a bit confusing to me. I would have originally guessed that a larger output signal would provide better S/N measurements - ie 0-3V (seems like it should be 3.5V ?) now represents 0-700V at the 200X setting. That means that every 1V at the scope equates to 200V measured...I'd really be interested in a review video on these new models - especially how they compare to the old models and also how they compare to the Sapphire probe.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 16, 2024, 04:19:02 am
content: Quote from: TomKatt on July 15, 2024, 03:06:57 pmFYI, the DP10007 with x10/x100 was made at my request to match the specs of the Sapphire HVP70 I sell. Seems they did't bother doing that again for the new MDP range.

author: TomKatt
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2024, 08:06:04 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 16, 2024, 04:19:02 amI recall you mentioning they produced the original at your request... Odd that they apparently decided to continue offering a model with the 70V/700V ranges but changed the output scale from 10X/100X to 20X/200X by cutting the output signal in half. Either they had trouble meeting your original specs or perhaps they standardized on their new amplifier platform that seems to be an offshoot of their "SigOFIT" isolated fiber optic probes - I note all their other models for higher voltage ranges also output a ~3V signal (I still think 3.5V must be the actual output level). Given the lower output headroom, I wonder if this is an area where new 12bit scopes might provide some advantage?

author: AndreyS
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2024, 01:57:31 pm
content: What is it about new types of DP10007 appearing on amazon ? while micsig claims dp10007 are discontinued ? What the..?New ones differs from old ones by crocodile clips by the looks of it.I've got dp10013 version and it didn't had those regular multimeter probes.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 23, 2024, 01:34:45 am
content: Quote from: TomKatt on July 16, 2024, 08:06:04 pmBoth of those things could be true.

author: dorkshoei
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2024, 09:44:35 pm
content: Quote from: AndreyS on August 22, 2024, 01:57:31 pmThe modelI currently see on Amazon (USA)-- see attached -- looks nothing like your two images and more like the two part MDP700 which on the Migsig website is now marked "High Voltage Differential Probe MDP series（Old)".The Amazon product is clearly marked DP10007 but if I look at theMicsig webpage [products -> High Voltage Differential Probe DP series (new)]I see it states "The previous model DP10007 has been upgraded to DP700".I'm confused, clearlyI was in the market for my first differential probe (for use with Siglent SDS1104X-E). I see the Amazon seller is offering a $30 promo bringing the price down to $159.99

author: MF-jockey
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 31, 2024, 10:39:41 pm
content: At the end of May I ordered a DP10007 from Banggood. Theofferinitially showed the new version but further back the old one was shown. The delivery arrived in mid-June and it was the old beige version. I also wanted the divider factors 10X and 100X because you can set these on my OWON DS7102.I first installed the"Basic Upgrade"(Thanks toExaLab) with capacitors 1.2 pF and 1.5 pF. Later I carried out the CMRR measurements, once before and then after calibration. The CMRR values ​​from the data sheet were only achieved after the "Simplified Calibration Procedure".(Table see Appendix 5)After watching a video by David, I think the conventional DP10007 is the best choice for me.I think the new version will only be available as DP700 or MDP700, Micsig writes: "The previous model DP10007 has been upgraded to DP700" and also "The previous model DP10007 has been upgraded to MDP700". Marketing is probably still in the clarification phase.

author: RogerG
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2024, 03:28:44 pm
content: Hi,2 days ago I ordered a DP10007 from Banggood. Tony Albus gave a hint via Youtube that if you orderwith delivery from CZthey will send the latest version in DP700 design instead of DP10007. Today was delivery time.... and tataaa ...I really got the new one!Interesting that on the front of both of the device cases there is no DP700 text. Just Micsig. On the back of the part with the BNC there's a sticker with "DP10007". But every piece of hardware is exactly as what you see on a normal DP700. It comes with the black plastic carrying case and the normal hooks, alligators, banana extension cables and USB PS and a nice long USB A to C cable. Attenuation is 20x/200x, too.The datasheet is clearly showing the values of the new DP700:Attenuation, CAT rating, noise, CMRR, output voltage, power and power supply are all the values from the new device.Nice bang for the buck, with some coupons I just paid 128€.I just hope that the rubbery coating of the probe case is no ordinary soft coating which becomes sticky after some years...

author: dorkshoei
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2024, 03:32:56 pm
content: I ordered from Amazon US on Sept 23rd and got the new style. US$140It's also marked DP10007. The marketing confusion re: model versions on micsig's site is unfortunate.

author: rs38
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2025, 11:24:56 pm
content: https://www.micsig.com/notice/511High Voltage Differential Probe DP Series Upgrade NoticeUpdated：2025-01-09

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 24, 2025, 11:57:01 pm
content: Quote from: rs38 on February 24, 2025, 11:24:56 pm"Both old and new units will be shipped randomly"

author: rs38
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2025, 07:04:55 am
content: I try to ask their pre-sales how to handle that with resellers to get the "new" one, I will let you know.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2025, 11:21:32 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 24, 2025, 11:57:01 pmI suspect they might have very soft sales until the full promised rollout in April 25th...What we used to do is a discount on older units to offload old stock quickly and replace with new stock. But that is something not always welcomed by upper management...

author: Veketti
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 14, 2025, 11:56:43 am
content: MeToo, ordered one from Gangbang with delivery from CZ and got the new one.

author: rs38
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: March 18, 2025, 05:50:03 pm
content: >I try to ask their pre-sales how to handle that with resellers to get the "new" one, I will let you know.not too easy, but I got this from Migsic:Quotewhich they did, but they (german distri) had no clue about the new version and wrote End of Febr:Quote@VekettiQuote from: Veketti on March 14, 2025, 11:56:43 amis it the new new 10x/100x or the semi-new black one?at least you got an euro power plug

author: Veketti
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2025, 07:57:30 am
content: Quote from: rs38 on March 18, 2025, 05:50:03 pmIt's the semi-new with 20x/200x..

author: rs38
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 09, 2025, 07:33:46 pm
content: what Vpeak for 20/200x does it state in it's case?

author: Proxy64
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 03, 2025, 01:41:09 pm
content: Got mine todayWith attenuation 10x/100x