Oscilloscope for Audio Service - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Raziel92
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2022, 02:17:34 pm
content: Hello, im replacing my old Rigol DS1054Z with new scope, mosty will be used in audio service, one of the major function which i need from new scope is the FRA, so im chosing between Rigol MSO5074 and GW-INSTEK MDO-2104AGOn which scope the FRA feature will work better?Last 2 days i spend on reading forums / watching video but still im not decided.Im familiar with both manufacturers, used DS1054Z for last 4 years, also I have some instruments like bench LCR meter or bench multimeters from GW.Rigol has advantage in bigger screen and HDMI if needed, also it has better spec on the paper at least.GW seems to have more options to be set related to FRA measurments and the plots are displaye on whole screen since on Rigol they appear on small window (dont know maybe the window can be adjusted)

author: Grandchuck
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2022, 08:48:55 pm
content: This is another approach to measuring frequency response:https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=frequency+response+testing+with+room+equalizer+wizard&docid=607987770968000766&mid=94B17D17A4E50AD945C894B17D17A4E50AD945C8&view=detail&FORM=VIREI don't have any experience with either oscilloscope.Happy New Year and welcome to the forum

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2022, 09:33:13 pm
content: Rigol MSO5000 series is useless for audio due to excessive noise. I suggest to also look at Siglent or R&S (RTB2004) for frequency analysis. In the end it also comes down to what you prefer as a user interface. The GW Instek is the only one offering individual channel controls, Siglent offers higher frequency resolution for FRA and the RTB2004 has a really nice display and well working touch screen interface.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 01, 2022, 10:40:34 pm
content: There is no GW-INSTEK MDO-2104AG AFAIK.There is MDO-2104EG though..I agree with Nico, there are R&S (more expensive) RTB2004 and Siglent 2104X+ (medium price, good FRA) that would be my choice before scopes you mentioned.But for general work around audio frequencies even DS1054Z is quite competent little scope. Aside from FRA.What do you think by audio work?Would you be better of with audio analyzer or with a PC soundcard /audio software combination?They have orders of magnitude better distortion and noise figures and can perform frequency response analysis.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 12:49:42 am
content: Don't discard the GW Instek MDO though. It is not extremely expensive (can be hacked to higher bandwidths and other goodies), it has snappy controls and a no-nonsense user interface.

author: pope
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 11:38:47 am
content: I'm on the same boat really. I do only audio work and I since I can't afford the the siglent 2000 series I'm leaning towards the Siglent SDS1104X-E. Any idea how the FRA is on this scope for audio?I do have an audio interface and software for more detailed measurements. However, the main limitations of audio interfaces is the limited bandwidth. So a scope with bode plot comes handy if you want to check if there's any ringing/ oscillations/ etc.. on higher frequencies.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 12:04:32 pm
content: Quote from: pope on January 02, 2022, 11:38:47 amShortly, it will have limited dynamic range because of 8 bit converter. But within that dynamic range it will work really well. And for testing bandwidth of amplifiers, tone controls etc it will work really well.I understand limited funds.. But if you go SDS1104X-E you 'll need Siglent AWG for FRA. 2000X+ has AWG built in so it is self contained instrument for FRA...

author: pope
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 12:21:26 pm
content: I realise the 8-bit limitation but I don't really care about the FFT part of the scope. I can get much better results with my audio interface+software combo. I only care about testing the bandwidth of amps and do troubleshooting. Also, I don't do any digital work, only analog audio work so maybe the 2000x+ is an overkill for my needs.I'm thinking of pairing the 1104x-e with the SDG1032X. Even this combo is cheaper than the 2000x+ and I want to believe that it'll be sufficient for my needs.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 12:22:39 pm
content: Dynamic range depends on how FRA is implemented. On the R&S scopes the input sensitivity is changed so that the input signal is always maximal. That gives you much more dynamic range than an 8 bit converter can provide.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 02:02:41 pm
content: Quote from: pope on January 02, 2022, 12:21:26 pmWell that was kind of what I aimed for...SDS2000X+ is convenient package and better scope.If you don't need that, in that case SDS1104X-E + SDG1032X would do good job for you. And while SDS2000X+ has FFT with more points SDS1104X-E allready have very good one..

author: mawyatt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 02:21:27 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on January 02, 2022, 12:22:39 pmThe SDS2000X+ also does this.Best,

author: pope
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 04:02:53 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on January 02, 2022, 02:02:41 pmCan you convince me buying the SDS2000X+ ?I mean, what do you find so useful for analog audio work that justifies almost twice the price of the1104x-e + SDG1032Xcombo?Edit: The SDS2000X+ is also 8-bit right?

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 04:31:52 pm
content: Quote from: pope on January 02, 2022, 04:02:53 pmI have no motive to do so.I try, in my limited way, help people make right decision for them.I also share my experience, professional, personal, life experience and what it thought me.That is all.My experience is that giving more money for better tools usually proves to be good decision.Provided you DO have the money, and that tools ARE better for your use and DID provide you additional benefits.If it isn't really useful to you, that it is a waste of money.On several occasions I recommended people to make spreadsheet table with all the things they would need (or like) an instrument would do. Then you make several columns for few instruments of interest and grade them how good they are at doing each one. You make sure to write down everything important to you: screen size, touch or not, number of channels, FRA, FFT... The lot. All that is important to you. And price.Then you sum up points and you will have more impartial and analytic overview of situation. Where it usually becomes quite obvious what is best choice...I can tell you what would be my reasons if that would help you:1. Large screen. My eyes are not what they used to be. I have to bring my 8.5" screen Keysight close to see.2. Touch screen. That is such a improvement I don't own any scopes anymore that aren't touch screen, and never will.3. Larger memory and larger BW. This might not be important to you but those are things that you cannot replace when you do need them4. It supports more decode protocols, including audio I2S family.5. More measurements and math functions.6. New U/I for touch that makes it easier to operate scope.7. Good proper mixed signal implementation. There is even decent free design of MSO pod if you don't want to buy original one.8. Built in sig gen. Great for FRA. OTOH, it is very basic SG, and no replacement to real fully featured sig gen.None of these points have to apply to you.OTOH, 1104x-e + SDG1032X combo would give you lesser (but still excellent scope for your purpose) and a better 2ch fully featured AWG with larger amplitude, same quality FRA etc...Depending on your priorities, that could easily be better choice for you than SDS2000X+...

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 04:38:33 pm
content: Quote from: mawyatt on January 02, 2022, 02:21:27 pmYes Mike, absolutely correct.Siglent and Keysight and even a FRA for Picoscope can do adaptive drive and adaptive input attenuation. All that can gain much larger apparent dynamic range, together with averaging and clever software algorithms..But even without that, for instance, if tone control has +-15dB range, those 30dB comfortably fits into 8 bit range of 45-50db. Also with filters, we want to see first 40 dB of slope. Even with limited range you can see roll off slope angle, -3dB points and all of that.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 05:01:57 pm
content: Quote from: pope on January 02, 2022, 04:02:53 pmI also do some repairing and refurbishing of audio equipment, including tuners, receivers and radios. I also have both scopes. The SDS 1104X-E is completely adequate--excellent IMO--for the uses you describe, including working on the RF sections. Having the signal generator as a separate instrument with two channels is vastly superior to any built-in AWG unless you have absolutely no bench space. So I'd say that the SDS1104X-E + SDS1032X combo is actually a better choice than a lone SDS2104X, not even considering the cost. I have the 2042X which allows me to do FM RF work after hacking, so perhaps consider that instead?QuoteYes, but it has a 100MHz BW-limited 10-bit mode that does work as advertised. The two scopes are also significantly different in how they operate. The 1104X-E has ERES and averaging in the acquisition menu, so it alters the displayed channel trace. The 2000X+ displays them as a math trace, leaving the original unfiltered or unaveraged trace on the display. This actually works well once you get used to it, so I'm not knocking the 2000X+. However, comparing the two really underscores the tremendous bang-for-buck of the smaller one. If the cost difference is significant to you, the 1104X-E + AWG combo would be the way to go.HTH

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 07:05:12 pm
content: Quote from: bdunham7 on January 02, 2022, 05:01:57 pmDon't overlook the $159 25 MHz isolated output SAG1021I AWG USB module for the SDS10*4X-E for FRA especially if you have limited bench space.https://siglentna.com/product/external-arbitrary-waveform-generator-2/While the stimulus levels it provides are small compared to a standalone AWG it still can be quite useful for basic tasks.

author: Raziel92
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 07:05:44 pm
content: Thank you guys for replies, i was thinking of R&S, as I can Pay for the unit itself, that additional buying options for generator and fra will cost me about 2600 euros.For detailed THD, IMD and etc i have dedicated audio analyzer Panasonic VP-7722AAlso I wasnt thinking about Siglent, years ago i had some scope from them and i remember i didnt like it much.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 07:14:09 pm
content: Quote from: Raziel92 on January 02, 2022, 07:05:44 pmYes it wasn't long ago their basic offerings were very plain however recent models are in another league.The Xilinx processor opened up another level of capabilities and performance where we no longer even bother to stock any of the old models.Good luck with your selection.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 07:46:03 pm
content: Quote from: Raziel92 on January 02, 2022, 07:05:44 pmIf so, really take a look at Siglent SDS2000X+... It will cost you fraction of money of R&S and give similar capability.

author: Andreas
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 10:16:22 pm
content: Hmm,why not use a dedicated low noise (8.5uV RMS) high resolution (16 bits) oscilloscope like the PicoScope 4262 ?with best regardsAndreas

author: Raziel92
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2022, 10:26:33 pm
content: Because i need independent unitEdit: Siglent would be nice alternative but it needs AWG license for 300 euros...While GW Instek is for 1000 euro with AWG included, Rigol is for 1000 euro with free options, and Siglent is for 1080 euro + additional 300 euro for AWGI know there are hack options but...I dont have time to search for the info how to do that + what about warranty.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2022, 01:38:50 am
content: Quote from: pope on January 02, 2022, 04:02:53 pmIf you're going to do any digital at all, the SDS2000X+ is easily worth the price of admission. The larger screen makes the display of digital traces much more usable, especially if you're doing digital bus work.The user interface (and, especially, zoom mode) works so much better on the SDS2000X+ that I would probably spring for it just on that basis alone. I have both the SDS2104X+ and the SDS1204X-E, and can tell you from experience that the SDS2000X+ series is far and away a better experience overall. That is has a built-in AWG is icing on the cake.It's not without its shortcomings. It's not terribly responsive to the front panel controls (though this depends a lot on what the scope is doing), which is really odd because it's very responsive to the touchscreen in almost all situations. You don't have to touch the screen in order to use the touchscreen interface, either. It'll work with a mouse, and that's my preferred approach because I can use the mouse anywhere on the bench, and thus use the scope, even when the scope is not within reach.If you can't afford the SDS2000X+, then that's pretty much that. But if you can, it iseasilyworth the stretch. Given its flexibility (especially if you're a hobbyist and are willing to use the keygen to unlock all of its capabilities), it's likely the last scope you'll ever need. It'sthatgood. But see below.QuoteEverything depends on your currentand futureuse cases. If all you're using it for is audio work, and that's all you'll ever use it for, then the SDS1104X-E + SDG1032X will be quite sufficient (more than sufficient, actually. The SDS1104X-E is a very capable scope). And there are certainly advantages to having a separate AWG, particularly when it has two outputs instead of just the one that the 2000X+ has (it's for this reason that you might want to pick up an external AWG, which might be something as simple and inexpensive as the UNI-T one, even if you get a 2000X+). The 2000X+ gets you 10 bits worth of vertical resolution below 100 MHz (thus easily covering audio frequencies) and a lower noise floor, but that might not wind up being of any importance to you).What the 2000X+ gets you most of all is increased flexibility and usability. The capture buffer is an order of magnitude larger. The display is larger and more usable. The touchscreen interface is excellent. Save for better responsiveness to the front panel, the 2000X+ is likely to leave you wanting for nothing.One thing that would help us a bit here is to know exactly what "audio work" includes. For instance, does it include radio work? If so, then you'll need a much wider frequency range capability than you would just for audio amplifiers. But if it's really only audio frequencies that you need then you'll be far better served with a PC-based oscilloscope that has a significantly greater resolution than you would any of the scopes we've been talking about here. For instance, theAnalog Discovery Pro 3000, which gets you 14 bits resolution (16 bits with oversampling), two AWG outputs, and the sheer processing speed of a real computer (since the user interface software runs on your computer).

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2022, 08:50:27 am
content: Quote from: Raziel92 on January 02, 2022, 10:26:33 pmMDO-2104EG is NOT 1000 €.For SDS2000X+ currently for 300€+ you get AWG and digital MSO pod and cables and grabbers (that alone cost more than that). For FRA AWG license is not even needed.SDS2104X+ is a class above MDO-2104EG. MDO-2104EG is a good scope and we can argue it is slightly better than SDS1104X-E. But it cost 1400-1500€ everywhere I looked. For that kind of money, it cannot compete with fully loaded SDS2104X+.As for Picoscope 4262, there is no scope in the world with that kind of specifications. If all you do is under 5 MHz and you need absolutely best specifications there is no comparison. But I agree that it is best to combine it with another more general purpose scope.

author: pope
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2022, 10:28:42 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on January 03, 2022, 01:38:50 amThanks for your reply.I don't do any radio work. Just plain analog audio work so the only reason I need a bit higher bandwidth is to check for any oscillations from the power supplies or the amplifiers themselves.At this point I should mention that I already own an analog 60MHZ tektronix scope as well as a couple of analog 2MHz function generators.The 2000X+ is very tempting indeed but I was thinking that I might get a better value for money if I buy aDSO for basic tasks + an AWG + something like an quantasylum QA403. This would probably cost similar to buying just the 2000X+On the other hand, I really need my digital scope to be able to do reasonably well FRA so I can test the amplifiers bandwidth limits and oscillations/ ringings etc...I understand the usefulness of operating the 2000X+ with a mouse from a distance but can't I do the same with the 1104X-E connected to my PC?FWI, I have plenty of bench space so this is not an issue. In fact, I might have more space than I need

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2022, 02:08:41 am
content: Quote from: pope on January 03, 2022, 10:28:42 amOK, I think it's worth asking at this point: what frequency range are you looking to cover here? And how many channels do you need?The Digilent I linked to is good to about 50 MHz, which should be plenty for your purposes. It has a network analyzer capability that will get you amplitude and phase response information of a device under test. Seehttps://digilent.com/reference/test-and-measurement/analog-discovery-pro-3x50/reference-manualThe two channel version is $850. That's about the same as the SDS1104X-E plus SDG1032X. The major advantage the Digilent has is its resolution: 14 bits to 16 bits. But for frequency response analysis, I can't see how that would make a difference unless you need an incredibly low noise floor (the Digilent page doesn't specify the internal noise floor of its analog inputs). My SDS1204X-E shows a -115 dBV RMS noise floor when configured with 3 bits of ERES and a 20 MHz bandwidth limit:The above is with an open 50 ohm terminator on the input, in case that matters.QuoteYou would certainly get better value for the money that way.As good as the 2000X+ is, for your use case it may not be the best use of the money. I like mine so much that I rarely use anything else, but I'm just a relatively inexperienced hobbyist, and I use mine primarily for various types of troubleshooting, both analog and digital. I hardly scratch the surface of what this scope is capable of.QuoteThe SDS1104X-E should do a reasonable job of that, as long as its noise floor is sufficiently low for you.QuoteYou can, but in my experience it isn't anything like using the instrument itself. And I've seen some strange problems with it. Maybe your experience will wind up being better. I use Linux as my operating system and it may be that there are some assumptions that Siglent makes with respect to the browser being used, such that a browser under Windows would work a lot better. No idea.QuoteWell, we'll clearly have to fix that!

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2022, 02:11:25 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on January 04, 2022, 02:08:41 amOr even the SDS1202X-E for a lot less money.(and isn't the noise floor about the same as the SDS2000X...?)

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2022, 02:13:08 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 04, 2022, 02:11:25 amI would have suggested that, but it doesn't support the automatic Bode plot option.QuoteI was under the impression that the 2000X+ noise floor was lower, but perhaps not by enough to matter for this.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2022, 02:24:46 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on January 04, 2022, 02:13:08 am

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2022, 02:57:38 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on January 04, 2022, 02:13:08 amCorrect, the only compact 2ch models that support FRA are the 2 GSa/s SDS2000X-E range although these require a SAG1021I or one of the standalone Siglent ARBs.SDS2000X-E have most of the fruits the 4ch X-E's have and these are a 350 MHz design.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2022, 07:03:04 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 04, 2022, 02:24:46 amWell, it shouldn't be much of a surprise that most manufacturers won't put all of the nifty toys into their lowest end models. Otherwise, why would anyone bother buying models above the lowest end ones, save perhaps for better hardware limitations?It's a carefully considered approach, of course. They need to put enough toys into the lowest end models to attract buyers, but not so many that they shift customers away from their models above the lowest end. In a competitive market, the low end is a constantly changing thing with ever more features being added as companies attempt to one-up each other. So while Siglent's lowest end modelright nowlacks Bode plot capability, their next generation lowest end model might well include it.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2022, 12:09:46 pm
content: Quote from: kcbrown on January 04, 2022, 07:03:04 pmSeems petty to me.The difference between 2 channels and 4 channels isn't enough? There's notthatmuch difference in price. The 1104X is still very much "low end" in that respect.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2022, 01:55:18 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 05, 2022, 12:09:46 pmYou're just being rude again..Despite name similarity, 2ch versions predate slightly current 4ch 1104X-E versions, and are not exactly the same platform.It is what it is..Why don't you go complain to Keysight how petty they are for all the shortcomings and deliberate crippling they are doing for their 1000 series..Well, they could put same functions as 3000T has, right ... Same chipset after all.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2022, 02:25:55 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on January 05, 2022, 01:55:18 pmAt least I've never called anybody any names on here.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2022, 04:29:02 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 05, 2022, 02:25:55 pmNo, you just passive-aggressive waste everybody's time... For fun..Worst part is that you have many very intelligent and to the point postings...When you want to... When you're not in a mood to have fun by just provoking and riling up people for kicks...There is a difference between being a person that doesn't conform to establishment, prefers to think with it's own head and question everything, in a quest of pursuing real truth, and a contrarian and anarchist.I think you have enough rebellion inside you to be both, and intelligence to be the first one.Choice is yours..

author: Raziel92
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2022, 05:10:12 pm
content: After reading over 100 pages about sds200x+ looks like i will order 2102x+Hope i wont be dissapointed by UI and overall made-quality

author: points2
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2022, 06:04:55 pm
content: hi Raziel92,nearly good choice ! ;-)Good choice this X-Plus because it's a dawn good product, easy to use etc... and thanks to Martin72 in the related thread on this dawn good forum, you'll be able to boost its features (basic & simple hack).As the 2102X-plus has only 2 CH, I don't know if you could get the 500MHz BW out of it...Nearly good choice because with such a machine, from time to time you get ideas of measurements here & there and 4CH are usefull (you'll get these ideas because the machine is really great & enable more than you can expect.Moreover, if one day you want to change it, and sell it : the rebate (in %) with a 2CH will be bigger than with a 4CH.Rgds

author: Raziel92
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2022, 06:37:33 pm
content: Bought it, hope it wont dissapoint me, once i get it i will try to unlock AWG, actually i dont need anything more to my low frequency work

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2022, 06:52:09 pm
content: Quote from: Raziel92 on January 05, 2022, 06:37:33 pmI personally wouldn't go for a 2ch but you know best what you need and how much you're prepared to pay.It is a good scope and I hope you have lots of fun using it doing your stuff.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2022, 11:40:41 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 05, 2022, 12:09:46 pmIt's a 2 channel scopewith twice the guaranteed bandwidth. That's why the price difference isn't that much: the increased bandwidth somewhat offsets the absence of another 2 channels (but note that it has a separate external trigger input, while the 4 channel models do not). And even then, while the dollar price difference isn't terribly much, the 1104X-E costs 25% more than the 1202X-E. That's not insignificant.If you expect manufacturers to put all their toys into their lowest-end models then explain why Keysight doesn't put eye diagramming into their 1000X series scopes. Or power analysis. Or USB decoding. Or any of the other protocol decoders that are available for some of their more advanced models (e.g., ARINC 429, SENT, FlexRay).Alloscilloscope manufacturers (that I know of, at any rate) restrict some of their toys from their lowest end models. If you know of any that don't, do tell. Otherwise, you haven't a leg to stand on here.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2022, 01:43:16 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on January 05, 2022, 11:40:41 pmI get that Siglent's SDS2000X series will have more features than their SDS1000X series but in this case they'reboth1000X-series. There's no reason to leave out a whole list of firmware features other than being petty. Within a series the difference should be bandwidth+channels. If they want to mess around they can have options/upgrades, not disabilities/cripples.Just an opinion, obviously. Siglent can do whatever they like, just don't expect me to love them for stunts like this.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2022, 02:50:05 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 06, 2022, 01:43:16 amWhy does thehardwareplatform make any difference whatsoever for asoftwarefeature as long as the hardware itself can support it? Your argument is internally contradictory.In any case, now you get to explain why it is that Keysight limits the mask test, segmented memory, SPI, CAN, and LIN decoding to the DSOX 1000 models and doesn't include them with the EDUX, seeing how the difference between them isonlythe software.QuoteWait, so you'd be fine with it if Siglent made the Bode plot feature a paid add-on in the 1202X-E but included it standard with the 1104X-E?I do sympathize somewhat with your argument. I do find it a little odd that Siglent doesn't even offer the Bode plot feature as a paid add-on for the 1202X-E or 1104X-U. But it's not like this is something unique to Siglent, and honestly, given the whole keygen thing, I can see why they do it.In fact, you know perfectly well that many software features (e.g., decoding) will work perfectly well across series, so why should such software features be available in one series but unavailable in another, when that feature will work on both?QuoteWell, then you must have the same view of Keysight. I haven't looked to see if the other manufacturers are consistent about offering all software features within a given series for all models in that series at least as a paid option. But Keysight certainly isn't.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2022, 03:11:03 am
content: Quote from: kcbrown on January 06, 2022, 02:50:05 amThe EDUX is a different product line, even if the hardware is very similar to the 1000X.Quote from: kcbrown on January 06, 2022, 02:50:05 amI'm not sure I'd be ecstatic but at least I wouldn't facepalm.Quote from: kcbrown on January 05, 2022, 11:40:41 pmBut you get 2 more channels, logic analyzer, etc., ie. the money went in extra hardware.PS: The 1204X-E costs50%than the 1104X-E and there's no hardware difference.

author: bdunham7
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2022, 04:06:31 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 06, 2022, 03:11:03 amThat's why we hack them. The 1204X-E costs exactly double the 1202X-E, so pricing seems bit weird. But I think the hardware is significantly different between the 2-channel and 4-channel models. The 2-channel version was released a year earlier, runs different firmware and hasn't been updated in a few years now. The only oddity is that they use model numbers that make it appear to be part of the same series when maybe they should differentiate them a bit. Perhaps SDS1202X-U would be more appropriate.

author: Fungus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2022, 04:56:32 am
content: Bottom line: You'd have to bean idiotmisinformed to try and save 25% by buying a 1202X. The difference between the 1202X and a hacked 1104X iswaymore than 25%.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2022, 07:45:59 am
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 06, 2022, 04:56:32 amOr even more misinformed by using model numbers from another series.

author: kcbrown
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2022, 07:01:16 pm
content: Quote from: Fungus on January 06, 2022, 03:11:03 amThey're both listed in the same brochure. Keysight certainly seems to treat them as if they're in the same product line.And in any case, if you get to claim that the EDUX is a different product line, then I get to claim that the 1202X-E is also a different product "line".QuoteSo theydohave different hardware, by your own admission. Why, then, are you proclaiming that they should have the same available feature set?QuoteThere's no hardware difference right now (that we know of. Has anyone pulled apart a recent 1104X-E and compared its front-end with the 1204X-E?), and I expect there's no real difference at all except for the software-enabled bandwidth increase in the 1204X-E, but the 1204X-E isguaranteedto be capable of 200 MHz bandwidth, and the 1104X-E isn't. This means Siglent can, at their option, change the front-end hardware in the 1104X-E as a cost saving measure (or as a measure to deal with parts shortages) at any time if they so choose, even if doing so reduces the bandwidth (as long as it doesn't fall below 100 MHz). They can't do so in the 1204X-E in such a way as to reduce the bandwidth.Under the silicon shortage conditions we have, such a change might easily be something Siglent would make in order to keep production going.And again, you must level the same charge at other manufacturers if you insist on excoriating Siglent on this. Keysight, for instance, charges $750 to take a DSOX1204A from 70 MHz to 200 MHz, for a price increase of67%, with no hardware difference.

author: pope
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2022, 01:00:42 am
content: Quote from: Raziel92 on January 05, 2022, 06:37:33 pmLet us know what you think!

author: Raziel92
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2022, 11:18:03 am
content: My 1st impressions are position at all except the probes quality

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2022, 02:39:30 pm
content: Quote from: Raziel92 on January 13, 2022, 11:18:03 amProbes that come with scopes usually aren't the best (even on very expensive models). I always keep going back to Testec probes.

author: Raziel92
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2022, 06:52:34 pm
content: Bought NOS Telequipment 70Mhz probe for 55 $, for sure it will be far better then stock Siglent probe.

author: 1audio
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2022, 05:16:34 pm
content: What are the aspects you expect to be better? Mechanical durability? Frequency response? waveform distortion? Ihave always liked the miniature HP probes for general work and the vintage Tek probes for working on high voltage- the larger size keeps the operator further from the dangerous voltages and they are pretty sturdy.

author: AnalogEngineer
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 19, 2022, 05:37:48 pm
content: HowdyI also mostly use my scope for analog audio.As others have pointed out the Siglent SDS1000X-E series has an crazy low noise floor compared to other brands. This makes it a better choice. When doing audio work this comes in handy often. My old Rigol can't pull a power supply audio leakage problem out of a 5mV / diV noise floor. My Siglent can see down to 500uV no problem. Not even my Tektronix 2465B can do that.For audio the lack of resolution, only 8 bits, is often a problem when calibrating things. But that is why I have a Fluke 289.A 10 or 12 bit scope would mean reading RMS not so jumpy but I don't see any good options with that so I use other tools.I have yet to find a scope that is usable for audio range frequency response. The Bode plot is too slow.I suggest you look at a decent ($200 or better) 192KHz USB audio interface and use ARTA software (about $100 but there is a free limited feature version) instead. I don't use my scope for this anymore once I found ARTA.

author: pope
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2022, 01:18:23 pm
content: Quote from: AnalogEngineer on January 19, 2022, 05:37:48 pmWhen you say "too slow" what do you mean? How slow is slow? And for what bandwidth?The problem with the audio interfaces is that even the 192kHz ones have limited bandwidth. Theoretically the should go all the way up to 96kHz but I'm not aware of any interface capable of such bandwidth. Most 192kHz have their Fc well below 96kHz.

author: AnalogEngineer
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 20, 2022, 01:51:56 pm
content: Quote from: pope on January 20, 2022, 01:18:23 pmTo slow meaning it takes 2-3 minutes to do a sweep at low resolution and low sample rate. If you are tweaking or tuning this just doesn't cut it and gets infuriating fast. ARTA can do 131072 sample 192KHZ sweep at well over 10Hz so I can see real time results. ARTA is absolutely fantastic for REAL time tweaks while looking at frequency response, distortion, noise floor, RMS level etc. It's only limited by the quality and bandwidth of your interface.Yes it only goes up to about 40KHz with 192KHz sample due to the ADC/DAC filters but the OT said audio where I really never have to look at over about 25KHz. This is a great tool for audio. If you need to get over 40KHz there are other tools to use.If you need better than this consider a QuantAsulum interface (a lower cost alternative to the Audio Precision).https://quantasylum.com/products/qa402-audio-analyzer

author: pope
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2022, 02:01:47 pm
content: Quote from: AnalogEngineer on January 20, 2022, 01:51:56 pmI've been considering the qa403 for quite a while (since the qa401 actually) but I'm not totally convinced yet. I might wait for the Cosmos DAC and get both AD and DA converters. We shall see.I've never used arta. I'm currently using REW, Electroacoustic toolbox and Fuzzmeasure. I might give arta a go.I also can't fckin decide whether I should buy the 1104x-e or the sds2000X Plus. And now the HD would be coming out....