New Oscilloscope - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: VK3DRB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 05:01:13 am
content: Hi.Last night my trusty HP54600B failed at power-on, just when I needed it. The SMPS is crowbar-ing, making a loud repetitive clicking sound. Part of me says "Don't be a loser. Fix it." but part of me says "You don't have time. It is false economy". I will probably fix it in my spare time sometime in the future as a backup but am interested getting new oscilloscope with more features now.DESIRED FEATURESA 4 channel CRO - occasionally I need more than 2 channelsSerial decoding would be convenient. Not sure how good this feature is compared to a common logic analyser like the Salae Logic.Decent FFTs.Higher bandwidth is better of course, but I have a good mate who will let me borrow his Tekronix 500MHz bandwidth oscilloscope whenever I want.Reliable and trusted - no some crappy software full of bugs with bling, no crappy soldering or dodgy board layout.Logically laid out user interface.Am prepared to hack the new oscilloscope.OPTIONS1. Rigol DS1054ZThis looks like a good deal from a trusted local supplier for the 4 channel DS1054Z for about $440 USD including four optionshttps://emona.com.au/products/electronic-test-measure/oscilloscopes/ds1054z.html. The only hack required then would be to increase bandwidth. The only issue is 100MHz is pretty slow for some of my needs, but it will get me out of trouble the majority of the time. The FFT's are pretty poor on the DS1054Z apparently, but there is a workaround to get decent FFTs...https://hackaday.com/2015/09/22/a-better-spectrum-analyzer-for-your-rigol-scope/With these free options, can I still hack the oscilloscope from 50MHz to 100MHz by changing its model whilst keeping the free legitimate add-ons?2. Hantek DSO4104CI am tempted to get a Hantek DSO4104C for $66 USD more from a Hong Kong eBay vendor with a decent rating. According to an excellent hacking post on EEVBLOG, this model might still be hackable (I hope) to get at least 250MHz bandwidth and has an AWG built in.3. Siglent sds1104x-eGet a Siglent sds1104x-e and hack it for 200MHz.4. Old model high-end oscilloscope like the TDS754DUp to 1GHz bandwidth, but $2K. Very high bandwidth, but a bit expensive, big and bulky, risky second hand and they sport a diskette drive.5. Keysight or Rhode and Schwartz (and don't tell the wife).Better made with less issues - the oscilloscope, that is. Could get a Keysight and hack it for greater bandwidth, but at the risk of losing features as per Dave's hacking video on the Keysight. I an not sure whether the extra money for a Keysight worth it over one of the Chinese oscilloscopes.I have read the many posts around, opinions and reviews and am confused as ever. I am a bit of a tight-arse, but am prepared to spend a little more if I get a lot more bang per buck. Any comment on which oscilloscope you would suggest? I want to end up being biased to one solution; and I believe many other readers would be interested in the results too. Cheers!

author: VK5RC
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 06:26:41 am
content: I have not played with the Rigol scope, had a play with their Spec An. Really good value for money.I had one of the very early lcd digital Rigol scopes and it didn't work for me. I put the money down for the Keysight (was then Agilent) MSOX3024 — I find the user interface really intuitive - it has survived my stupidity (voltage across the 'grounds') - in essence I have been very happy with it. I also get a degree of confidence in the measurements using it. Not great value for money - but a quality product.Rob

author: bob91343
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 06:29:34 am
content: I am very happy with my ancient HP 54542A (I think it is). It has 500 MHz BW on all four channels, FFT, lots more.I think it was ahead of its time. I got it for a nice price on ebay a while back.

author: e0ne199
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 06:32:01 am
content: buy Hantek DSO4104C if you want to hack it to its full potential

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 07:22:10 am
content: You say you don't want firmware bugs. Sorry, it won't be a hantek, rigol or Siglent.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 07:29:25 am
content: Quote from: Helix70 on February 22, 2020, 07:22:10 amOr a KS or R&S.C'mon man get real. Every manufacturer has bugs. The perfect scope is get to be made.

author: Ed.Kloonk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 08:32:07 am
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 22, 2020, 05:01:13 amWhist I swore I would never need a DSO and that my CRO from Jaycar in the very early '90's would be all that I ever need. I went for the emona 1054z. Every fibre in my body wanted to resist the time-based trial-ware features included in the model. And going from a dual-trace CRO to a DSO with, frankly, too many buttons, I wish it had a feature like computer BIOSes now. You know, basic and advanced. Sometimes I wish the 1054z would pretend it is a old fashioned scope. Maybe I'm just an old bastard.Once I gave the firmware a good old fashioned 'talking to', the scope was nag-free and certainly worth the price I paid and would highly recommend.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 08:48:43 am
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 22, 2020, 05:01:13 amIn the lost cost hackable DSO's from Siglent that meet your requirements are:SDS1104X-E. Dual ADC's with 14 Mpts of memory each. $499SDS2014X Plus. TrioTest doesn't list these yet but should have them soon I imagine. Hackable to 350 MHz and 2 channels can operate at 500 MHz (one on each ADC). Latest challenger to the A brands @ $1400And the SDS2202X-E, only 2 channels with a single ADC and 28 Mpts memory but also hackable to 350 MHz. $620These lowest BW models in each range come with lower spec probes so there may be some signal attenuation when hacked to max BW.

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 09:47:02 am
content: Quote from: tautech on February 22, 2020, 08:48:43 amThis one is yet to be seen...But you can change a SDS2104X+ to a 70 MHz model, if you want to go lower.

author: tv84
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 09:54:28 am
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 22, 2020, 05:01:13 amYou should also consider the trendy:Rigol MSO5074 (Sooner or later bugs will get ironed out. Or else, it's game over for Rigol...)Siglent SDS2104X+ (as tautech suggested)

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 10:27:21 am
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 22, 2020, 05:01:13 amAdd the GW Instek GDS-1054B, GDS-2074E or MSO-2074 to your list. Hackable using a key generator to get more bandwidth (300MHz on the latter two) and unlock other features (like spectrum analyser mode). Good (productive) UI, individual channel controls and really solid firmware.If you want high bandwidth then I suggest to look at more recent Lecroy (Wavepro 7000 series) or Agilent. The Tektronix TDS500/700 are getting very old and they are hard to calibrate because you need special equipment and software.

author: VK3DRB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 10:57:06 am
content: Thanks to all.A friend called in the last hour and offered me a as new (hardly used) DSO5102B for $290 AUD ($200 USD), delivered to my door. He has only used it only a few times in the last few years and it is as new. 100MHz, yet to be hacked. I assume I can hack it. Bad thing is it is only 2CH, but I do have a Bitscope BS42200 spare I can get working to do the odd 4ch 100MHz measurements. I don't like the bitscope model as it is a bit old and the Ethernet connectivity is a P.I.T.A., besides not having a screen.I have used a low end cheapo GW-INTEK before and found it to be horrible. Maybe the GDS-2074E or the MSO-2074 are worth investigating. If they can also work as a spectrum analyser in the one instrument that might be a bit of a bonus; although I do have a PC based one that goes to 4GHz.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 11:02:24 am
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 22, 2020, 05:01:13 amPure bang-per-buck, no.But if you want a nicer and more responsive and easier to use everyday scope, the Keysight wins. It's the scope I reach for if I just want to look at something.

author: VK3DRB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 11:32:33 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 22, 2020, 11:02:24 amhttps://www.ebay.com/itm/Keysight-Used-DSOX2014A-Oscilloscope-4-channel-100MHz-/174162556528?It says used, for around 50% off, but sold by Keysight, so it could be OK. Maybe I can hack the resistors to get 200MHz out of it.I once bought a high end laptop "refurbished" from Dell Factory Outlet (search on Google). It was about 30% off retail and I can guarantee it has never been unpacked of switched on. It was brand new. Been a very good laptop - no problems. Maybe this Keysight is the same? "Used" might mean demo maybe.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 11:42:38 am
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 22, 2020, 11:32:33 amThe Keysight ebay store are known for bundling in some extra's if you just ask them, so for this scope it's the DSOX2BW24 option

author: shakalnokturn
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 11:46:23 am
content: 5. Keysight or Rhode and Schwartz (and don't tell the wife).Better made with less issues - the oscilloscope, that is. Could get a Keysight and hack it for greater bandwidth, but at the risk of losing features as per Dave's hacking video on the Keysight. I an not sure whether the extra money for a Keysight worth it over one of the Chinese oscilloscopes.I have read the many posts around, opinions and reviews and am confused as ever. I am a bit of a tight-arse, but am prepared to spend a little more if I get a lot more bang per buck. Any comment on which oscilloscope you would suggest? I want to end up being biased to one solution; and I believe many other readers would be interested in the results too. Cheers!Pay extra get something closer to a finished product.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 12:04:35 pm
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 22, 2020, 11:32:33 amGive the GW Instek scopes a look first. 10 times more (actual) memory depth and much easier to operate. I used to own an Agilent MSO7104A and I found it very cumbersome to use because you have to dive deep into the menu structure to set it up if you need things like math or decoding. The GW Instek scopes OTOH have two rows of buttons (vertical and horizontal) so the menu structure is very shallow and you can see what you are doing better. Unlike many other scopes GW Instek scopes have a seperate select button. When combined into one it is very easy to rotate the button when you press it. On the MSO7104A this was a major cause of irritation; I still have the GW Instek scope but I sold the MSO7104A a couple of years ago.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 12:39:26 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 22, 2020, 07:29:25 amYeah, but if we "get real", then it's also absolutely true that the big name ones have FAR better firmware than the cheapies. They clearly invest a lot more into testing and bug fixing than the cheapies.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 12:57:53 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on February 22, 2020, 12:39:26 pmNot necessarily. It depends on how you defines cheapies. If you mean brands like Owon, Hantek or Rigol (and to a lesser extend Siglent) then you are right. If you define it as 'Asian brands' then you are wrong. GW Instek and MicSig have solid firmware (where GW Instek responds quickly -a couple of weeks at most- with an update if you find a bug; I have not managed to find a bug in MicSig firmware so far so can't comment on how quick they fix things).

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 12:59:53 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 22, 2020, 12:57:53 pmThe cheap brands the OP mentioned were Hantek, Rigol, and Siglent. I didn't say anything about origin.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 08:28:38 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on February 22, 2020, 12:39:26 pmGo and tell it Lecroy please, maybe then our wavesurfer would be getting bug-free at last..And by the way, the term "buggy" is far too negative in my opinion.It suggests that you can't work with the device, and in most cases this is completely wrong.I´ve owned 3 different rigol models (DS1000Z, DS2000Z, MSO5000), 2 different Siglent (SDS1104X-E and my actual one, the SDS2354X+), a Uni-T ( my first cheap DSO in 2009, after some older lecroys) and another one, I´ve forgotten it´s name.And they all have bugs, more or less.But you could work with them, none of them was so "buggy" that you would throw it out of the window.In my case it was always a matter of technical limitation I´ve explored while using them, which made me swop to another model.Bugs are everywhere, if you spend 400 oder 4000 or even 12000 bucks for a scope.The above mentioned wavesurfer for example, we know it´s bugs and trying to avoid them ( e.g. the bug that the scope freezes when you press "find trigger level" on lower timebases - just don´t do it.).Untill it´s debugged.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 11:00:57 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 22, 2020, 07:29:25 amYes, this is true.But.Hand on heart, which scopes have fewer bugs? Which have more refined HMIs? Which have more money spent on the interface and user experience? Let’s be honest.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 11:16:34 pm
content: Quote from: Helix70 on February 22, 2020, 11:00:57 pmI hope you realise that these are extremely difficult questions with no clear cut answer. There are very cheap scopes which are easy to operate and there are very expensive oscilloscopes which are difficult to operate. Allow me to provide an extreme example: signal filtering. I have a Lecroy Wavepro 7300A (list price $28000) and a MicSig TO1104 (list price around $500). Both offer signal filtering. On the MicSig it is simple to setup. Works out of the box in seconds. On the Lecroy Wavepro however I have not managed to get signal filtering working even though spending quite a bit of time on it. It seems I'm even allowed to make settings which result in no signal on the Wavepro 7300A. So in the end which oscilloscope has the more refined UI? I'd vote for the MicSig one in this case.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 11:43:27 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 22, 2020, 11:16:34 pmWe can all pluck out specific examples of the exception instead of the rule, but I would expect the LeCroy to offer many other examples where it wins over MicSig.In General, the more time, effort and money a company spends on a product, the better it will be. Sometimes there are flukes, sometimes an exception, but I am generalising my experiences. Another good indicator of attention to detail, "care factor" if you will, is the documentation for a device. Jump on the KS website and check out the manuals, then compare. It isn't hard to see where at least some of the extra money is going.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 22, 2020, 11:58:48 pm
content: Quote from: Helix70 on February 22, 2020, 11:43:27 pmBugs IS a very generalised word.For basic operation few scopes have show stopping bugs now, even at release.Add into the mix a wider feature set that some A brands don't even offer and the chance of bugs are increased until a feature gets polished as a result of customer feedback.Today can you say KS's initial poor implementation of FRA/Bode plot has even changed at all ?Or does their 'care factor' = zero ?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:02:44 am
content: Quote from: Helix70 on February 22, 2020, 11:43:27 pmIt is not a specific example. It just goes to show that spending a lot of money doesn't guarantee a polished UI. In the case I outlined above it is preventing the user from inputting impossible values / lack of guidance to what would be acceptable values. I'm sure I can find more similar cases if I compare more deeply but that is besides the point because it is not a feature-by-feature comparison. There is much to complain about the overall build quality of the Lecroy too.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:04:13 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 12:02:44 amIt is the very definition of a specific example.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:04:57 am
content: Again: you are not getting the big-picture point. Don't get distracted by going into the nitty gritty of just an example.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:10:41 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 12:04:57 amQuote from: tautech on February 22, 2020, 11:58:48 pmI used the FRA feature on my 3014T just the other day. I didn't notice any bugs. Maybe I am lucky. As a matter of fact, I have not found any real issues with my 3014T at all. Perhaps it is because I am too busy, perhaps I work around them without thinking about them.At home, on the other hand, my DS1054 is a pig to use. But it is mine, and I paid bugger all for it, so I forgive it.Now, back to the relevant comments from the OP. He/She wants a scope without bugs. Very specific comment. Starting the discussion with brands that are aiming at the cheap end of the market is contradictary to that desire, far more so that the established industry standards.Keep obfuscating if you like, you will win the internet, but I am sure deep down we agree on that.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:12:53 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 12:04:57 amI get it fine. Overall, the companies with larger R&D budgets like KS, R&S, LeCroy, Tek, etc etc are going to get closer to bug free than Rigol, Siglent, Hantek, Owon, etc.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:27:29 am
content: Quote from: Helix70 on February 23, 2020, 12:12:53 amNo. That isn't true at all. For starters it greatly depends on where the R&D budget is spend. In some cases you might get 10 times more engineering time for the same money. In my experience there is no difference between the A brands where it comes to the number of bugs compared to more serious Asian brands like GW Instek and MicSig (and I'm tempted to including Siglent in this list too).However there is a difference in the service level. The A-brands will do a recall if something isn't right. The Asian brands typically don't have the infrastructure for such an operation in place.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:31:07 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 12:27:29 amThen we shall agree to disagree.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:32:42 am
content: Not sure but it seems to me you are looking for an aknowledgement of an idea you have in your mind. Maybe you should try to back your claim the A-brands are always the best of all based on facts. Count number of bugs and time it took to fix them. What I wrote is based on such a comparison.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:42:19 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 12:32:42 amThere is no need to back a claim that if a company spends more on R&D, they will achieve I higher standard than one that spends less. It is simply a reality.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:44:51 am
content: Quote from: Helix70 on February 23, 2020, 12:42:19 amBut this assumption is demonstrably false just by looking at the difference of what the engineering time costs in different parts of the world.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 12:53:19 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 12:44:51 amOk, fair enough. Let me refine my comment.There is no need to back a claim that if a company spends moretimeon R&D, they will achieve I higher standard than one that spends less. It is simply a reality.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 01:49:47 am
content: Quote from: Helix70 on February 23, 2020, 12:53:19 amYes, and when a product has been on the market for some years then naturally more $ will have been spent on it.Does that make it substantially better and that they might still be rorting buyers for options when more recent market offerings might offer those same options for free.Sure if you are happy to spend x times more for the same functionality it's only natural there's a bigger R&D ROI anyways.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 05:00:42 am
content: Quote from: Martin72 on February 22, 2020, 08:28:38 pmWell, LeCroy wasn't one of the brands in question, so I wasn't talking about them either way.Quote from: Martin72 on February 22, 2020, 08:28:38 pmAs a native English speaker with a background in technical writing, I don't think the word connotes that. The word for something you can't use is "unusable". "Buggy" just means it has bugs, without really explaining the extent of the bugginess. While we know that NO software is truly bug-free, "buggy" usually just means having at least enough bugs to be noticeable.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 05:03:53 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 12:04:57 amWhat? But you're the one who was avoiding the big picture and instead delving into a specific counterexample. Literally 180˚ opposite of what you're preaching.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 10:49:39 am
content: Quote from: tooki on February 23, 2020, 05:03:53 amAgain, the example was just to show that 'big brands' deliver unpolished user interfaces too. Don't get hung up on the details!

author: BravoV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 11:01:33 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 10:49:39 amSo what are you saying is, that details don't apply to GW-Instek, but only to Rigol ?

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 11:10:29 am
content: Quote from: BravoV on February 23, 2020, 11:01:33 amStop trolling.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 01:03:29 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 10:49:39 amAnd that doesn’t change the general rule that the big brands invest more time into their firmware.What’s incredible is you admonishing people to look at the big picture, while you yourself brought in a specific example, and then claim it’s not one. It is.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 02:07:16 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on February 23, 2020, 01:03:29 pmI doubt that but also why would that even matter??? If you look at the entire spectrum you'll see quickly that spending more or less time & money on R&D doesn't mean a product is bug free or the UI is polished better. IOW: you can't make such broad statements because they don't apply to all cases. It is like saying all red haired people eat a lot of carrots. Or like saying that everything from China is crap.You really need to seperate manufacturer by manufacturer and product by product because each manufacturer has a different opinion on what is worthy to release, what the ROI should be, what kind of service level to provide and whether they aim for lots of features with the chance of missing features at the release date versus getting fewer features but deliver a mature product at the release date versus releasing a basic version and let it depend on sales whether to do further development or not.

author: Martin72
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 08:56:10 pm
content: Every buying advice thread ends up in a general discussion….Not very helpful for the thread starter.

author: Helix70
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 10:12:00 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 02:07:16 pmCompanies that spend more time (and money) on R&D deliver better products than those who spend less time (and money), period. You sound foolish to argue anything else.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2020, 10:56:56 pm
content: But that is the thing... just spending time and money means nothing if you don't define the project goals and quality of the engineers. True example: I've witnessed developing a very similar product at two different companies. Company A needed over 2 work years to get to the point what company B accomplished in 6 work months. Needless to say company B spend less time and money to get to the same result. In your reasoning this would mean that the product from company B is lesser compared to that of company A. That makes no sense at all. In fact the engineers at company B made better architectural choices and where better compared to the engineers at company A. Even worse... a company can spend oodles of time and money and still come up with a crappy product.Trying to judge products and manufacturers by how much time they may (or may not) spend on product development is useless. Especially if it is just a blanket statement based on a gut feeling. To known for sure you'd need to do an in-depth analysis of their annual reports (if they even provide that level of detail). Maybe Rigol spend more time & money on their new MSO5000/7000 series than Tektronix has on their new MSO4000/5000 series. And perhaps Tektronix is spending more time & money on marketing compared to Rigol. I don't know.IOW: you are trying to come up with a metric to compare manufacturers / instruments which has no basis in reality.In the end it is the result and price point which counts. How a manufacturer gets there is not our problem.

author: VK3DRB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 12:32:24 am
content: Hi All.I finally did it.Bought a Siglent SDS1104X-E.Best price was from Triotest in Sydney, in stock (there is now only one left). Price was cheaper than anything on eBay incl delivery, possibly because Triotest bought them in prior to the $A falling badly. Plus I would rather buy from a reputable Australian vendor than from China for two main reasons:1. Corona virus delaying delivery.... a very real possiblity.2. Three year warranty (not if I hack it to 200MHz), but if it is DOA there are far less hassles and cheaper to return.Thanks for all your comments. They have provided interesting bedtime reading.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 01:40:18 am
content: I wish you happiness with your purchase; I personally believe this is the best bang for buck oscilloscope in the lower end of the marketplace, as it has quite a modern architecture and great features.(I wrote a long reply addressing many of your points but couldn't post before your last reply.)The only thing I can say about the ongoing discussion is that neither time nor money are the sole answer to a better product. Thecollective experienceof management and development teams in a broad area (usability, technical, mechanical, ergonomics, etc.) can make or break a product. Undeniably the A brands have been on the road for much longer and, through partnerships, lent a hand to the B brands and gave them a great leg ("Copy and paste" of existing products only take you so far), which they are wisely using to improve at every iteration.

author: VK3DRB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 02:27:36 am
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on February 24, 2020, 01:40:18 amThanks and you are so right. Also, standardisation is an important aspect of an instrument, or software for that matter. I use Altium a lot but when I use LTspice or Fusion 360 much less frequently, my mind's keyboard/mouse control is in Altium mode for a few hours.I did see a Lecroy 4ch = 500MHz 5Ga/s scope on eBay for $USD 1000 that has only been tested on one channel at 1KHz. Who knows if the scope was any good after 20 odd years. It was tempting, but what really turned me off was it runs Windows 2000! Ugh. I remember using one of these LeCroys 15 years ago and boot-up was a pain in the proverbial. But it came with Microsoft's Solitaire game. Maybe LeCroy thought us engineers with poor people skills and no friends can get our rocks off playing Solitaire on an incredibly expensive oscilloscope during lunch time. I remember the LeCroy's timebase and volts per division UI panel location were the reverse of Tektronix and HP - that drove me nuts because I was using three or four different CRO's in a few labs at the time. But the LeCroy scope's front end capabilities were outstanding.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 04:21:57 am
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 24, 2020, 02:27:36 amOk, I will scribble part of my long previous reply.I was in a similar predicament a few years ago when I was trying to decide on a US$1~2k oscilloscope: should I get a modern new B-brand model or an older A-brand off eBay? Many factors were at play at the time (size, convenience, features, bandwidth, persistence, decoding) and the LeCroys available at that price range were very tempting but lost in convenience, decoding and sheer size - not to mention the neverending fear of buying an equipment at the brink of failure. Windows oscilloscopes were too expensive at the time, but they wouldn't fit the bill to me either - at work I was using a Windows 2000 oscilloscope (Tektronix TDS7104) and was very upset by the exact same reason: boot lag. However, the responsiveness was alright if you used the very well designed physical buttons - the mouse operation was not really great for my taste. I ended up getting a Rigol DS4014 from their clearance site and it was the best compromise - besides, I was already used to their interface from my previous DS1102E.For a few months we have been having visits from several manufacturers at work, and I got to get a feel for the modern interface implementations of some A brands. I got to play with Tek MDO3 and MDO4, Keysight 1000, 3000 and 4000 series, as well as LeCroy Wavepro 4000 and HDO6000. The Keysights are the front runners being very intuitive and responsive and the buttons accessed pretty much all the functions and options - however, the screen and memory are a far cry from the other models. The LeCroys where very responsive as well, but they depended too much on the mouse for my taste, having the physical buttons accessing the major applications/functions (Wavescan, etc.) but from there the mouse and touchscreen were the only ways to navigate the options and settings - the screen was by far the best of all three brands. The Teks had a very comprehensive coverage of functions and options on the buttons, but the responsiveness and overall performance was abysmal - the screen was quite nice alright.This is obviously my impression about the fact that different manufacturers will prioritize different aspects of the interface (apart from Tek, which seems to be quite lost for quite some time).

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 12:16:39 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 02:07:16 pmAs a general rule, it's true. Just because exceptions exist doesn't mean the general rule is untrue.It's so weird, you keep arguingfor and againstgeneral rules in this thread. Telling people they need to look at the big picture, but then telling them they're wrong when they do.

author: frogg
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 01:08:26 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 23, 2020, 12:27:29 amDude, you're impossible.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 01:08:39 pm
content: @Tooki: better come up with numbers showing big brands invest more time & money in their products compared to others before making such bold statements. IMHO you should think again about how you are trying to contort some weird metric onto test equipment manufacturers. A metric which has no merit at all in the real world because it doesn't matter to consumers anyway. See my previous reply to Helix70.Quote from: frogg on February 24, 2020, 01:08:26 pmNo. I'm being precise because it basically is another 'everything from China is crap' discussion (although cleverly disguised). While in reality the big brands also put equipment on the market with less polished features and bugs which may take long to fix.I hope I have made the point clear now.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 01:13:47 pm
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 24, 2020, 02:27:36 amThis was probably a WaveRunner 6054(A) and these scopes are still very good. But they are analysis scopes.QuoteSo it was a non-A model which all came with Windows 2000 and which can easily be upgraded to WindowsXP (where they can run newer firmware).QuoteWell, these are high-end scopes which pretty much all were and still are Windows-based, across al big brands. Nobody really cares about boot times with these scopes as they are generally left on over the day anyways. Again, these are analysis scopes so not exactly the type used to just quickly glance at a signal.Quote from: rsjsouza on February 24, 2020, 04:21:57 amMouse? Really?The UI on these LeCroy has been designed for touch operation right from the start when it became first available around 2002. The only time I saw someone using a mouse with these scopes was when we had a scope with a defective touch panel.It should also not be surprising that most of the options need the touch screen, considering that putting it onto the front panel would probably quadruple the number of controls. But most functions are easy to reach with only a few pokes on the screen.You should have seen the early HP/Agilent Infinium scopes, which had an UI which was designed for mouse control and which has later been combined with touch input. While the UI of modern Keysight Infiniium scopes has gone a long way since you can still see that they were derived from that old mouse-control UI.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 05:38:26 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 24, 2020, 01:08:39 pmYou're just arguing to hear yourself talk.There is nothing controversial or bold about saying that larger, established companies with reputations to maintain can, and will, invest more in R&D than a low-end, small company (regardless of geographic provenance).

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 06:05:13 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on February 24, 2020, 05:38:26 pmYou are right, that's not controversial. It's a fact of life.There's a reason we still give >$1M almost every year to big brands like Keysight, R&S and LeCroy, and not to Rigol, Siglent, GWI, Hantek or any other of the lesser brands. Oh, and also not to Tek (but that's a different story).That's not necessarily a question of quality, but only the big brands have the technology to provide us with high end lab-grade test equipment we need. Most of the stuff the smaller brands make is not even close to what we need on the bottom end, although some more recent instruments (i.e. Siglent SDS5kX, Rigol DS8k and RTSA) are getting close. But when it comes to state-of-the-art technology, only the big brands offer the real deal.Then there is support. Especially Keysight offers top-notch support for when it's needed, also R&S and (at least in the US) LeCroy. We have seen cases where we stumbled up on a rare bug and got a fix in a matter of days. If something breaks we know it will be supported, and we will also know exactly when this support will end. Try to get something of a product life cycle map from any of the lesser brandsI'm not saying that big brand kit is bug free - it certainly isn't. Aside from the misery we have seen with Tektronix, pretty much every new piece of kit from R&S has suffered from various (sometimes really idiotic) bugs. But they all were fixed in a very short time (sometimes days), at least for the SAs and VNAs we use (40+GHz). Granted, this isn't always the case for the big brand offerings at the bottom of the portfolio where updates can often take longer, but at the end of the day the big brand will support its kit within the active product life cycle.There still is a difference between the lesser brands and the big names, although some of the former are improving (Siglent and Rigol have repair centers in the EU and the US, and perform paid-for repairs; Siglent seems to also sell spares as well). But turnaround times vary as does the support experience, there is no managed support cycle for their products, there is no offer of additional support options like repair agreement, no loaner availability and so on. GWI doesn't offer this either, and emails I sent asking for details about their PSUs remained unanswered.So yes, the big brands do put more into R&D, into their products and into their services as the lesser brands. Actually, a lot more. And they use it to squeeze every dollar out from you until you squeek

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 06:13:28 pm
content: Sure but a large differentiator for the 'big brands' is support which adds to the price (and user convenience too). However I wouldn't be surprised that manufacturers like Rigol and Siglent are putting more resources into R&D in order to catch up. The big brands can kind of coast on existing technology by providing incremental upgrades (Keysight's Megazoom ASIC for example). R&S is a bit of an outsider because they seem to have done a massive rewrite of their user interface (at the expense of releasing firmware which isn't as finished as you'd like).But the initial statement was: 'more R&D money = better product' and that isn't necessarily true. Ofcourse you can define better product as having more features, more bandwidth, etc but then you are comparing apples with oranges in the end. If you define better as 'less bugs, better user interface' then things look completely different.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 08:23:32 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 24, 2020, 01:13:47 pmDespite I mentioned mouse, perhaps I should have emphasized that I only played with it using the touchscreen (the mouse was something the sales person told me it was possible). Obviously that, since I only had tens of minutes in front of the oscilloscope, I surely wasn't proficient in any capacity - it is just that I am really accustomed to select some function and then navigate its options/values/etc. with a multifunction knob of sorts (I couldn't locate one and the sales person was not knowledgeable as well).Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 24, 2020, 01:13:47 pmI am pretty sure there are pretty good reasons to do that and, during the time I operated it, I felt the UI is incredibly well done. However, I somehow really like to have the mechanical feedback/feel of buttons. Fetish? Maybe, but that is how I roll nowadays... If our group gets to buy one (or I get one for free from LeCroy) I will do my best to get used to it.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 24, 2020, 01:13:47 pmI have seen enough with mouse interfaces. I have used the TDS7104 and I currently own a TWD120 digitizer that get a "fair" grade in my assessment. Surprisingly enough, I got used to the Owon VDS1022I interface quite quickly.

author: angrybird
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 10:04:28 pm
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 22, 2020, 05:01:13 amJust a note - Consider the following regarding the TDS series:1) You can convert the floppy to USB interface quite easily.2) You can convert the CRT to LCD for a cost around $350USD if you pay for the kit, or about half this if you do it yourself.3) You can upgrade the lower models to the TDSx84x (1GHz) with only the soldering of a few SMD resistors.I checked eBay just now and there are several candidates for these modifications in the range of $500USD.I really love the probes that are available on the secondhand market for the tektronix scopes, and for very affordable prices. Hard to beat.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 10:41:18 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 24, 2020, 06:13:28 pmOh my god, stop being so obtuse! That something isn'tnecessarilytrue (translation: that exceptions exist) is not being disputed. The point is thatexceptions do not disprove that something is generally true. NOBODY here has claimed that there are no exceptions, on the contrary, we've expressly stated this factrepeatedly, but you seem to be ignoring it, no matter how many times we say it (or how many times YOU say it!!! o_O).Quote from: nctnico on February 24, 2020, 06:13:28 pmThis discussion has always been about less bugs, better UI. Attentive and non-combative pupils will notice in the original post:Quote from: VK3DRB on February 22, 2020, 05:01:13 amWe haveonlybeen discussing firmware and UI quality here.(Nobody addressed soldering or layout because there aren't any major deficiencies in this regard.)

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 24, 2020, 11:02:40 pm
content: The topic of bugs is beautifully summed up here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/keysight-msox3104t-minor-niggles/msg2934904/#msg2934904

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2020, 12:58:21 am
content: Quote from: tautech on February 24, 2020, 11:02:40 pmOh, yes... Just like Brymen vs. Fluke, the newcomers always have to climb a steeper ramp to get the credit and reputation of old timers. The difference is that Brymen seems to be already there w.r.t. quality and service, while Siglol/Riglent are still walking this path, albeit evolving in a very quick ascending route.To regain confidence after failures such as the early SDS2000 version, the DS4000 or the Yaigol may take some more time.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2020, 07:58:34 am
content: Quote from: angrybird on February 24, 2020, 10:04:28 pmWell, just the scope plus the LCD upgrade will set it around $800, and you still end up with a slow scope with limited capabilities (FFT, one of the requirements of the OP, just sucks on the TDS). A lot of TDS variants also suffer from the capacitor plague and re-capping one isn't a lot of fun (and means another investment).Also, it's great that TDS some models can be up-hacked to 1GHz, but at $800+ there is an increasing number of other options available which offer similar BWs and better functionality, and which have proven more reliable than many of the older TDS Series.Some Tek probes sure are great but most of them can be used with other scopes as well. There's no need to chain oneself to a TDS scope just to use them.I'd also really think twice about getting a higher BW scope, not only because at 1GHz+ the probe solutions become a lot more expensive. If all you do is measure low frequency signals then larger scope BW will only serve to increase the noise level.For someone who was satisfied with a 100MHz 54600B (which is one of the early models without MegaZoom) I'm sure one of the common entry level scopes (i.e. DS1054z, SDS1202X-E or Keysight DSO-X1102A) would make a great replacement while offering extended capabilities the 54600B didn't offer.

author: VK3DRB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2020, 09:40:10 am
content: WOW! I got the Siglent SDS-1104X-E today. Its a ripper for the price. Actually it looks and works a lot better than I first thought. Showing this machine off would definitely attract the chicks.This Sydney company Triotest are excellent. Ordered it yesterday from Sydney and arrived here today in Melbourne (900km away) for only $US 13 delivery. They respond to emails quickly and are friendly. That's service!https://www.triotest.com.au/Only issue is by design the top few pixels are hidden by the bezel if you look down on it on your workbench. Some people place the scope on a platform to overcome this. I have a better idea. As I am typing this, I am 3D printing some front foot extensions that slip over the feet like socks. These tilt the angle of the CRO so that the screen is perpendicular to my line of sight.I will publish the foot extensions on Thingiverse if anyone wants to 3D print their own and post a photo and send you the link.As I was designing these foot extensions, a thought crossed my mind about 3D filament on-going supply with the corona virus fiasco. I use eSun filament which is high quality and at a good price. Guess where their factory is... Hubei Province. I will order a few reels in to keep me supplied in case the factory goes out of business for a long time.

author: vinlove
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2020, 09:53:19 am
content: DESIRED FEATURESA 4 channel CRO - occasionally I need more than 2 channelsSerial decoding would be convenient. Not sure how good this feature is compared to a common logic analyser like the Salae Logic.Decent FFTs.Higher bandwidth is better of course, but I have a good mate who will let me borrow his Tekronix 500MHz bandwidth oscilloscope whenever I want.Reliable and trusted - no some crappy software full of bugs with bling, no crappy soldering or dodgy board layout.Logically laid out user interface.Am prepared to hack the new oscilloscope.OPTIONS1. Rigol DS1054ZThis looks like a good deal from a trusted local supplier for the 4 channel DS1054Z for about $440 USD including four optionshttps://emona.com.au/products/electronic-test-measure/oscilloscopes/ds1054z.html. The only hack required then would be to increase bandwidth. The only issue is 100MHz is pretty slow for some of my needs, but it will get me out of trouble the majority of the time. The FFT's are pretty poor on the DS1054Z apparently, but there is a workaround to get decent FFTs...https://hackaday.com/2015/09/22/a-better-spectrum-analyzer-for-your-rigol-scope/With these free options, can I still hack the oscilloscope from 50MHz to 100MHz by changing its model whilst keeping the free legitimate add-ons?Well, I have had my Rigol DS-1052E for about a year now, and it has been a great scope.It is super fast, and rock solid accurate.If you can hack from 50Mhz to 100Mhz, and if you need 100Mhz scope, then it would be a great bargain scope for you which also gives super fast operations.

author: frogg
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 25, 2020, 05:53:37 pm
content: Quote from: VK3DRB on February 25, 2020, 09:40:10 amCheers mate - I also have the SDS-1104X-E and I love it.It works great.