Need help selecting oscilloscope - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Jayy
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 30, 2014, 02:03:59 pm
content: Hi,I am in to embedded systems work mostly.Frequency of work: up to 80MhzNeed help is selecting the best scope between the 2. They both are the same rate.Rigolhttp://www.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/mso2000a/mso2302a-s/300Mhz bandwidth2GSa/s110,000 wfsHameghttp://shop.rohde-schwarz.com/uk/hameghmo3054.html500 Mhz Bandwidth4GSa/s5000 wfsAny help would be appreciated.Thanks,Jayy.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 30, 2014, 02:29:21 pm
content: If someone put to table exactly these named two oscilloscopes and tell me I can free (this delete any effect of money) select which one I want to take. (related by my own needs and what are important for me and I also know what is difference between "up to" 50000wfm/s and 4800wfm/s and what difference between intensity grading and what is difference between memory and so on... and many other dingle dongles. )I do not need think even 1 second: Rohde@Schwarz (Hameg).If need select between Rigol MSO4000 series 4ch model and this Hameg... then need think and think...

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 30, 2014, 05:39:40 pm
content: Quote from: gazelle on December 30, 2014, 04:37:40 pmOh, it really come also with many options. In this price and quality class it looks really hardcore offer.Btw, I have understood that this HOO14 is segmented memory and there (up to) 200000 wfm/s (for compare, Siglent SDS2000 segmented memory speed is up to over 400000 waveforms/s (segments) but of course it can not show this speed real time on the screen))or do you mean it rise also realtime displayed waveform update rate on the screen to 200kwfm/s.In updated data sheet: "Waveform update rate up to 5000 Wfm/s" and older datasheet 4800.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 30, 2014, 08:15:37 pm
content: In that pricerange I'd also consider the Lecroy Wavesurfer 3000 series. One of the downsides of the Hameg is the 640x480 screen where 800x480 is standard nowadays.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2014, 05:42:41 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on December 30, 2014, 08:15:37 pmIn general, I'd agree. However, I don't know that a WS3000 actually IS in that price range, once you've bundled in all the options in the R&S promo.The base on the WS3054 is about 7-grand,beforethe pricey MSO and decoder options are added on. And that doesn't include CAN decode, which still isn't available at any price (which I find very surprising).[and if a 2-analog channel version would be adequate for your needs, in conjunction with the 16-logic channels; a 3052 configuration isn't even an option with LeCroy.]

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2014, 08:44:45 am
content: Still: Wavesurfer 3000 versus HMO3000 means a 1040x600 screen versus 640x480. IMHO it is worth to spend some extra cash on twice the amount of screen real estate.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2014, 09:16:42 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on December 31, 2014, 05:42:41 amIt looks like you're in the US so you could always contact a LeCroy salesdroid and show them the pricing for the Hameg, and ask them to match that price. They often even include the software options (i.e. CAN) you want.There's quite a bit of haggle room with the more expensive LeCroy scopes.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 31, 2014, 01:34:23 pm
content: Quote from: gazelle on December 31, 2014, 01:15:48 pmNot sure if there's much point in going through that thread. Fact is that the low end LeCroy scopes (WaveAce Series) are rebadged Siglent SDS1000CML/CFL scopes whith shoddy Siglent firmware and a ridiculous price tag. This was certainly a mistake as people (rightfully) expect LeCroy quality when buying these scopes, just to be later disappointed when the Siglent developed firmware is full of bugs. It also certainly affected LeCroy's reputation.However the WaveSurfer 3000 is not a low end scope, and it is *not* a Siglent rebadge. LeCroy has developed the scope together with Siglent, and all of the Software comes from LeCroy. It's essentially the same kind of partnership LeCroy once closed with Iwatsu, who at the time didn't really know how to design a proper DSO, and which resulted in what were probebly the most reliable LeCroy scopes ever (WaveRunner LT, WaveRunner2 LT, WavePro 900).So the short lesson to learn is that stay away from the LeCroy WaveAce, but there's no need to worry regarding the WaveSurfer 3000.

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2015, 04:59:55 am
content: Ironically it may not be a "rebadge" in the sense of 100% turnkey solution like waveace, but you can buy the same scope with the LeCroy badge or Siglent badge and it makes quality-conscious people wary. Regardless of who's SW is in it, how partnerships are supposed to work, or how past partnerships have worked.New partnerships are often perceived as a new company with a mix of the two companies strengths, weaknesses and the unknown wildcard of how well it all worked in the end. They just need substantial service time behind the product with a favorable outcome. LeCroy obviously could have avoided this by designing in- house or at least disallowing siglent from selling the identical siglent sds3000 given how easy it is to do a google search. But they saved cost with co-design and apparently do not get a free pass that all is well because of the lecroy name.The logistics of a co-design are not great for engineering. Communication between company a and company b is dictated by nda's that limit IP transfer. NDA's are designed to share just enough info. Never more than needed if lawyers are doing their job. The reason is if you share to much then the company with the more valuable IP (presumably lecroy) may teach the other company trade secrets which will hurt them down the road in the form of competition. If you share to little the product may have issues. So design targets can fall through the cracks or just are not communicated or tested. The concern is real and not unique to these two companies. Time will tell how successful the partnership was. Its the risk you take when you save development costs with co-designs and sell the same scope under different brands.The good news is LeCroy saved cost and the ws3000 might be a very good scope. It does have lecroy SW in it, albeit with less features than some may expect from higher end lecroy's (ie very limited math capability). But in general it seems to check all the major features a scope of this class should have so is one of several to consider in this price class depending on your needs and likes ( agilent, tek, hameg, etc as well obviously ). The bad news is they might have a hard time getting traction with sales until there are more first-hand reviews for day-to-day usage to convince people to take the plunge. I only saw one on youtube, may be others. The really really bad news would be the hypothetical worst case scenario where siglent did not hold up their end of the deal and hw design is not where it should be.

author: devanno
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2015, 06:12:12 am
content: If you follow the rule of 5's, the only one of the two that meets your needs is the 500MHz 'scope. The rule of 5's says that you want a -system- (o'scope and probes) that are rated at least 5X the highest bandwidth you're measuring. Of course, many 'scopes will measure higher, but they'll have greater attenuation once you pass their rating.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2015, 11:45:09 am
content: Quote from: don on January 03, 2015, 04:59:55 amFortunately designing the hardware for a DSO is extremely easy compared to the software. Judging the teardowns of various pieces of Siglent equipment they seem to be capable of designing good hardware.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2015, 01:26:01 pm
content: Quote from: don on January 03, 2015, 04:59:55 amThen I guess you will never buy a car because all cars are more or less designed that way. Or travelling by train or airplane.QuoteNot really. It's not that Siglent and LeCroy have founded a new company (SigCroy?) they both operate together. All they do is sharing product responsibilities and dividing certain design aspects amongst them. Happens all the time in many industries, probably much more than you're aware off.At the end of the day the entity that sticks its name on the finished product is the one who has product responsibility towards the customer.QuoteSiglent is only allowed to sell the SDS3000 in China (and maybe some other parts of Asia) while LeCroy 'owns' the rest of the global market. It's great that you can find the SDS3000 on Google but you won't get one over legitimate channels outside China, and even if you managed to get one you'd end up with a scope with no warranty which would have cost you around the same as the LeCroy variant which comes with full warranty and long-term support (and a nicer color).Both parties benefit from this deal. Siglent because they can get their name out in their home market as a vendor offering serious test equipment (which they struggle to do with their own kit), and the "Powered by Teledyne LeCroy" in the lower left corner on the screen signals that they are using technology from one of the leading manufacturers of highend scopes, which raises Siglent's stake. For LeCroy, they have someone who has shown to be capable of designing and producing good hardware, which allows them to offer the WS3k for very low prices in their traditional markets.QuoteNot really. For example, the whole automotive industry is proof that this isn't true, because this industry lives and breathes co-design. Or do you think all parts of your car is made by the company that has their name on the hood?The same is true for Aerospace as well.QuoteYou're overcomplicating things. There aren't really much secrets in the hardware design of a 4GSa/s scope. Everyone can do that. LeCroy may be able to offer some improvements due to their experience but there isn't much "IP" in these designs. The secret sauce is in the software which Siglent gets as an encrypted binary blob to flash into their scopes.Agilent had a similar deal with Rigol which they apparently later regreted as it made Rigol stronger as a competitor, but there isn't much risk in it for LeCroy. First, LeCroy has no interest in designing 4GSa/s scopes. Even 15 years ago they already showed Iwatsu how to make 4GSa/s scopes, and at that time these scopes were highend scopes. It didn't hurt them at all, in fact, it reduced their cost base so that LeCroy scopes were often cheaper than comparable scopes from Agilent or Tek.QuoteAgain, you're overcomplicating things. There's nothing wrong with Siglent's hardware designs, even the shitty LeCroy WaveAce scopes are shit because of the software (and the price tag for these scopes). LeCroy always kept their fingers on the companies they partnered with, and I have full trust that the hardware of the SDS3000 aka WS3000 is just fine. The part where LeCroy got caught out was the incapability of Siglent to design proper software. However, this has been addressed with the SDS3000 aka WS3000 because the software is pure LeCroy.

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2015, 12:14:11 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on January 03, 2015, 01:26:01 pm