Should I buy a Lecroy Wave Ace? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Hammer
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 08:42:12 am
content: I'm aware of the general opinion of them, and of their origins. I know someone who purchased a Lecroy Wave Ace 2024 (he says he paid $2000, but I have my doubts). He never used it, it's still new in the box. He has been trying to sell it for months and is down to asking $600, I told him maybe $400 and he said he would take it.I'm currently an EE major and this would be my first scope. It would be nice to have one at home but I have access to well-equipped labs 24/7 so it's not critical. He also has a Lecroy function generator and a logic analyzer. These aren't included in the price and I don't have the model yet, but I would imagine they match this unit.unit can be seen here:http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopemodel.aspx?modelid=6886So would you buy this for $400?

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 08:50:56 am
content: I dont know anything about that particular brand/model but just looking at the specs it seems very good for $400 (200mhz and 4 channel)I'm a bit confused about the memory depth, some places it says 1M/2M long memory and other places it says 24k memory.

author: Hammer
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 09:01:48 am
content: Apparently Lecroy is whoring out their name for their entry models. There was talk about it on this forum a few months back, which can be read here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/chinese-junk-a-provocative-challenge-give-your-best-shot!/msg510598/#msg510598To quote Wuerstchenhund:"It's a well known secret that the LeCroy WaveAce Series are Siglent scopes. The original WaveAce 100 Series were Siglent SDS1000CM scopes, and the current the WaveAce 1000 and 2000 Series are Siglent SDS1000CML and SDS1000CFL scopes. All made by Siglent for LeCroy, as confirmed by various sources (incl. LeCroy themselves). In fact, even the firmware is made by Siglent, LeCroy merely provides the name. You can even flash the LeCroy firmware on the equivalent Siglent device.LeCroy does the same with the WaveStation waveform generators which are rebadged Siglent SDG1000 and SDG5000 devices."

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 09:29:59 am
content: Quote from: Psi on February 07, 2015, 08:50:56 amThere is only one place where memory is specified and place is equipment model datasheet.Can it be more clear:QuoteIt is Siglent higher grade models in SDS1000 series. These are SDS1000CFL models where acquisition (front end - ADC's ) is made very different (and far better) comparing SDS1000DL/CML/CNL models.Also this 4 channel model have two acquisition groups.CH1+CH2 and CH3+CH4Both groups have 2GSa/s for one channel and 1GSa/s for two channel.Selecting one CH from other group an done from other it have 2 channel with simultaneous 2GSa/s and both have 24k memory.Memory is not high but it need also know that deep memory is of course nice and very important in some cases but also many times we do not need deep memory at all. Many times even under 50 data points is enough or even less. It depends just what we are doing.Do not compare SDS1000CFLmodels with SDS1000 series other modelsand even more wrong you go if you look these several totally obsolete/junk "reviews" with some very old HW and FW versions or just reviews what are made by entry level noob who do not have any experience and knowledge when he take his first oscilloscope out from box and start ranting. These old junk are circulated agen and agen after months and years and named as some kind of truth. Value of truth do not rise how many times junk is repeated. There have been also more or less severe FW bugs of course and later these bugs are fixed more or less.I have looked many video rewievs where some total noob is playing with knobs and buttons like lively kid without any knowledge what he is really doing but just wondering what "amazing" things there happend on the screen and then ranting this and that depending his feelings and mood.Sometimes it looks that only and alone one motive is get video and flush (upload) it to internet as toilet drain.Real good value reviews are very extremely rare - there is but they are rare. Some older well experienced peoples have done these but mostly they handle older equipments and they have done lot of work for made good video for teaching or review. There need be documented signals, all scope settings, FW versions, HW versions and equipment handled as well educated experienced peoples do in normal workshop/lab. They do not play equipments as sugar-drunk over spirited kid with some thousend feature toybox.LeCroy price is terrible. (Amazon USD 2804.-)But this model is not cheap even from original manufacturer Siglent.SDS1204CFL list price is (in Europe) still EUR 760.00 (VAT 0).It have its pros and cons but it depends user individual needs.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 10:04:44 am
content: The WaveAce 1000 Series are standard re-badged Siglent SDS1000CNL. The WaveAce 2000 however is a customized (by Siglent) version of the Siglent SDS1000CFL:http://www.siglent.com/ENs/pdxx.aspx?id=58&T=2&tid=1Unlike the SDS1000CML/CNL (aka WaveAce 1000) the CFL was pretty expensive for a scope with such low sample memory and not very popular because of that. For the WaveAce 2000 LeCroy ordered a customized version with larger sample memory (1M). However, from what I was told the firmware for the LeCroy and the Siglent are not interchangeable because of that. In addition, the firmware for the CFL (which is also the base for the WaveAce 2000 firmware) hasn't seen many of the bug fixes that went into the Siglent CML/CNL and therefore also into the WaveAce 1000, which would make this an even buggier scope than the WaveAce 1000/Siglent CML/CNL.I normally would recommend to stay the hell away from these scopes, but on the other side at $400 it *could* be a decent deal for a 4Ch 200MHz scope, provided you know what you're getting into and that you can live with these scopes' problems. On the other side, the Rigol DS1054z costs the same new, and although it offers lower bandwidth and sample rate I'd say that Rigol's firmware (although still buggy) is a bit more mature than the one for these Siglent scopes.Personally I wouldn't buy it, and would rather save a bit longer so that I could get a good second hand scope (i.e. a LeCroy WaveRunner2) which is much closer to a proper tool and which will serve for many years to come. I also believe that I'd rather buy decent kit in the first place than wasting time with what essentially is closer to a toy, just to replace it later after anyways.I guess it depends on what you want. If EE is just a hobby then a scope like the WaveAce 2024 is probably good enough at $400. If it's to become a profession then I'd say investing a bit more money for a proper (2nd hand) scope is the better option long-term.But that's just me being weird.

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 10:33:07 am
content: Quote from: Hammer on February 07, 2015, 08:42:12 amQuote from: Hammer on February 07, 2015, 09:01:48 amWelcome to the forum.Well it seems you've been keeping a bit of an eye on us.But how much notice have you really been taking?Again to quote Wuerstchenhund:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-lecroy-1ghz-midrange-scope-(wavesurfer-10)/msg519480/#msg519480And like you need more proof:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent's-new-products-sds3000-series-oscilloscopes/msg451211/#msg451211I'd ask, are these entry level?If you'd taken the time to study Siglent's site, you just might have also read their claim to fame:the leading Chinese manufacturer of Oscilloscopes by VolumeThere are many re-branded Siglent's, heaven only knows how many, I wouldn't have a clue.I'll ignore your Whoring comment for now, and add Siglent and LeCroy have an on-going long standing relationship....this is nothing new.rf-loop's post is very accurate, the 1000CFL series are lacking substantial memory, but the have enough to be adequately useful. A few years ago this was the norm in DSO's.But, if you wanted to buy the same DSO as a Siglent, you'd pay a lot more than $400.There are FEW DSO's in this class with 2GS/s sampling.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 12:03:57 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 07, 2015, 10:33:07 amThe WaveSurfer 10 is*not*a Siglent made scope.QuoteYou're comparing apples vs oranges here. The SDS3000 (aka WaveSurfer 3000) is not the same as the Siglent rebadges sold by LeCroy. In fact, LeCroy had a major part in the design of that scope (and teached Siglent a few things along the line), and the software is also provided by LeCroy (which is a godsend, really, considering how crap Siglent is with software). Siglent's largest part is acting as a manufacturer for that scope.This however is pretty much irrelevant regarding the WaveAce 2024 in question which aside from the logo is 100% Siglent and 0% LeCroy.QuoteWell, for most part this "long standing relationship" (which only started around 2009 btw) merely consisted in Siglent selling their scopes in black cases to LeCroy who in return signed checks for Siglent. This was only because LeCroy wanted some presence in the entry level market (especially after Agilent came out with their Rigol rebadges) but couldn't be arsed to invest in their own solution (which is understandable, really) while their previous entry level scope (WaveJet 300A, an Iwatsu rebadge) was too expensive.The WaveAce hasn't exactly had a stellar track record and has really pissed off a number of customers with its bugs of which many Siglent was simply incapable of fixing.When it came to the WaveSurfer 3000 LeCroy knew that Siglent was a decent hardware manufacturer but that they're pretty poor in terms of design, and for their new entry level WaveSurfer they certainly didn't want to risk pissing off customers again with some half-baked Siglent design, which is why they kept their finger on the hardware and didn't let Siglent even touch the software. The WaveSurfer Series is very important to LeCroy, unlike the entry level WaveAce.QuoteI'm not sure what "a few years" are for you but 24kpts was considered very poor 15 years ago already, and for more than 5 years even somewhat decent entry level scopes have 1M or more.QuoteThat is true, and aside from the laughably small memory the reason why no-one bought these scopes except LeCroy and some other re-badger, and the fact that even LeCroy only bought them after Siglent upgraded the sample memory shows what a poor offer the CFL was.QuoteMaybe, but thanks to the small sample memory the 2GSa/s isn't very useful.What's even worse for the CFL is that even Siglent's own SDS2000 is now in roughly the same price range as the CFL, while offering 2GSa/s and 28M(?) sample memory.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 01:04:12 pm
content: This is not SDS1000CFLThis is not for topic.But 24k memory.We do not always need lot of memory.Here is 4 channel and every channel use0.07k memory. (70 sample points)How this go better if it now use 100k or 1M or 100M.This image other way is nothing but just playing like kid. Only turned all channels on and pseudorandom in and turned measurements and cursors on. Of course this is still image. In live it looks better due to human eye clever filtering.But always do not need even tektronix some model 2.5k memory, not Siglent CFL 24 or 12k memory.Memory depth in image just 70 points. It depends what we do how much memory is needes. It is not at all universal only truth that always need looooot of memory. Just opposite, many times need as small memory as possible. Some times even 15 points is enough (and because points time position travels fast around of signal and update rate is enough it draw still nice picture.OP: do not think lecroy 2024 can do this. It can not. But 24k memory is still well enough for lot of different use. Of course small memory force scope to drop samplerate when use lower horizontal speed. It depends... what you are doing if need more or less memory. If look 100MHz signal using example 5ns/div horizontal speed on the scope display in real time how much memory there is needed. If there is 20 horizontal division and 1GSa/s and 5ns/div there need exactly 100points memory for use it as analog scope screen watching detecting with eyes what are going on with signal. Independent of scope brand. It can be Tek, R&S, Keyshit-Agilent-HP, LeCroy, or what ever Rigol, Siglent, Tonghui, GW...

author: Dave
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 01:41:06 pm
content: Quote from: Hammer on February 07, 2015, 09:01:48 amIf it's any consolation to you, LeCroy's expensive models are pretty awful, too. I have yet to use a LeCry scope that does not make me want to chuck it out the window.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 02:06:41 pm
content: Quote from: Dave on February 07, 2015, 01:41:06 pmCare to elaborate in what ways they're in your opinion "pretty awful"? I'm really curious as in my experience LeCroy's scopes are among the best you can find.

author: rf-loop
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 02:22:30 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 10:04:44 amReally?LeCroy Made by Siglent and available also with Siglent name.WaveAce 2002 12/24kWaveAce 2012 12/24kWaveAce 2022 12/24kWaveAce 2032 12/24kWaveAce 2004 12/24k+12/24kWaveAce 2014 12/24k+12/24kWaveAce 2024 12/24k+12/24kWaveAce 2034 12/24k+12/24k

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 02:35:11 pm
content: Quote from: rf-loop on February 07, 2015, 02:22:30 pmNo, actually they didn't, my bad. Just checked again and you're right, the WaveAce 2000 is just another re-badge job (it seems it was the WaveAce*200*where LeCroy ordered a customized variant, but it seems this wasn't about the memory either).Sorry for the confusion. I never spent much time with WaveAce scopes, tough, so for those models I can't speak from first hand experience.

author: Dave
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 03:35:49 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 02:06:41 pmCertainly.User interfaces are their biggest problems.Dicky knobs: I've used one of the WaveAces in the past and scrolling through serial data would be a nightmare. The horizontal scroll knob was tiny, it was incredibly slow and it had zero acceleration if you spun it fast. It took half a minute of knob spinning to get to the desired location.Cursors: Don't remember which model it was, but I remember it not being able to turn on both horizontal and vertical cursors at the same time. If you are trying to compare two points on a trace, having both pairs of cursors is crucial. Nope, not this one.Counter-intuitive settings: Instead of having nice and simple settings, for example three buttons to set up triggering, you have to go into overly complex menus and fiddle with the settings to get anything to show up on the screen.Retarded memory: This was one of the WaveSurfer MXs models. I probed a signal coming from an FPGA only to have it display an almost flat trace. It took me a couple of minutes to figure out that the sample memory was too shallow to allow any kind of decent measurement. I then finally managed to figure out where to set a larger sample memory and just as I was thinking how stupid it was that the sample memory wasn't at its maximum setting by default, I realized why that was not the case. The scope became abysmally slow and only after a moment or two did the real waveform appear on the screen. Is this what one should expect from a $15k scope?It's not that they don't work well when you eventually manage to set them up right, it just takes a whole lot of time and frustration to set up something incredibly simple. It just kills productivity and irritates you without a good reason. I have had the chance to play with many scopes over the years, but only LeCroys managed to piss me offevery single time.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 05:01:47 pm
content: Quote from: Dave on February 07, 2015, 03:35:49 pmWaveAce? I though you wanted to tell me about probllems with the more expensive LeCroy scopes? The WaveAce isn't exactly a high end scope, and the hardware and software including the UI is 100% Siglent.But yes, I vagely remember that the knobs were amongst the compaints with the WaveAce (especially the 100/200 models).QuoteYes, standard cursors means either horizontal or vertical, but if I remember right (never needed both cursors at the same time so I'd need to check) that is the same with Agilent/Keysight scopes.I'm struggling however to see an application for this. What did you try to achieve?QuoteCome on, setting up standard triggering on a LeCroy is child's play, really. LeCroy scopes also have (and had at least since the 9300 Series from the early 90's) hardware knobs/buttons for trigger level and operating mode, as well as a setup button which directly opens up the on-screen menu, and for standard settings it's just another press on the softkey (pre-X-Stream scopes) or the touchscreen (X-Stream scopes). It's not rocket science.Of course it's getting more complicated for more advanced trigger (SMART Triggers) setups but that's in the nature of these things and equally involving on other scopes, if they even offer such triggers, that is.As to getting to show something on the screen, there's the Auto Setup button which does exactly that - setting up the scope to get something on the screen which quickly gives you a starting point from where to go where you want.QuoteThe WaveSurfer (M)Xs has automatic sample memory management which is enabled by default and which always uses enough memory to run the acquisition at the highest possible sample rate, so no, the low sample memory setting is certainly not the default for these scopes. It requires manual user action to change the memory settings, which suggests that either you or someone else fiddled with the memory management settings, and I guess you probably also didn't bother to set the scope back to defaults before starting your measurements (or someone has overwritten the default settings with their own). That is user error, not a scope problem.And I can tell you that these things not only happen with LeCroy scopes. I stopped counting the number of times someone's measurements failed because the previous user has made some changes to the settings and the next user didn't reset it, and the labs I'm working in are predominantly Agilent/Keysight. It also happens because, while EE's generally know very well how to operate a standard scope, many EE's simply fail to recognize that operating a modern high end scope and its advanced capabilities requires that some time is spent learning how to operate the scope properly, but many EE's simply fail to do that. Your story above re. the memory settings illustrates that very well.Again, why didn't you use Auto Setup? It would have corrected the issue immediately.QuoteI'm sorry but so far I haven't heard anything that really justifies a statement like this:Quote from: Dave on February 07, 2015, 01:41:06 pmWhat you've described looks very much about user error, i.e. you don't really know how to operate the scope properly. That's not meant as offense, and I've seen many EE's struggling with operating advanced high end scopes especially when they normally use simpler scopes only. But that applies to other scopes as well and is certainly not the fault of the scope.As I said before, any advanced scope requires that the user gets acustomed with how it is operated before working with it. These are no standard scopes with a few buttons that all do more or less the same, they are pretty much advanced signal analyzers that expect the user knows what he does and how the thing operates.You won't get very far with try & error on these scopes.

author: Hammer
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 05:47:20 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 07, 2015, 10:33:07 amThanks for all the replies. As this opportunity presented itself yesterday, I was doing research last night into this particular scope and was unable to find much. Eventually I found this forum and did a search for Wave Ace. I found discussions dating back several years, and I read them all. So yes, I have been spying on you for years... but only since yesterday (lol).Quote from: WuerstchenhundIt' certainly to become a profession. I have very little doubt that this scope would meet my immediate needs. I am also aware that $400 is chump change when we are talking about buying a scope. As I have no income outside of grants / scholarships, it's more than I would like to part with at the moment. A high end scope is quite a few years away for me and the draw of immediate gratification is strong. I would love to have my own scope, but cost is a concern and likely will be for some time. (I start my Senior year in the fall and intend to stay for a masters)Quote from: rf-loopI wasn't able to find pricing on that specific model, so thank you. I suppose that ultimately I am trying to determine if this is a great deal or not. I would like a scope, but currently it would serve as a (significant) convenience rather than fulfilling a necessity. If this is a $1,000 scope I can grab for $400, I would take advantage of the opportunity. If this is a pretty good deal on a $500 scope, I would pass. At this point, I don't have enough knowledge to make that determination, so I'm hoping you guys can point me in the right direction.Thanks again

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 08:07:55 pm
content: Hammer, despite it's shortcomings, you won't get a 4 Ch 200 MHz DSO with 2 GSa/sanywherefor that money.In your position grab it, gain more experience and go on to better things.

author: Maxlor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 08:28:37 pm
content: Quote from: tautech on February 07, 2015, 08:07:55 pmTrue. But high bandwidth isn't the only thing that's relevant. For the things I do, I find that memory is more important to me by far than bandwidth. So with a $400 budget, I'd go for the 1054Z, nobrainer. But the rub is, it's the thingsIdo. Whatyoudo will be different, and so will your requirements. Maybe figuring out your requirements (or, well, preferences) would be a good start, and aligning that with the pro/cons of your options. If you don't know yet because you're unsure what you'll be doing in the next years, just pick a hobby project that seems interesting to you, and use that as a basis, maybe?

author: tautech
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 08:37:43 pm
content: Quote from: Maxlor on February 07, 2015, 08:28:37 pmTrue, BUT the 1054z is hamstrung by having only 1 GSa/s to share over 4 channels.At best only 1/2 the sampling of the LeCroy.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 08:52:17 pm
content: Quote from: Dave on February 07, 2015, 03:35:49 pmI tried to use a newer low end LeCroy at work a few months back. I agree with Dave. That UI was one of the worst. I was just trying to do a real simple quick measurement and ended up grabbing an old Tek. If the UI interferes is so bad I can't get simple work done without finding the manual for it, this equipment is worthless to me.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 05:01:47 pmAgree with above as well. I personally like both my 8500A and my antique 7200s UIs. Both have a lot of features but they are easy to figure out and get setup (and need to be because their manuals are not always the best!).Personally, OP, I would buy it if I were looking for a first DSO as long as it all checks out.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 09:09:42 pm
content: If I step into an unknown car I have trouble finding out where the knobs for certain functions are. Does that mean the car is bad or useless?IMHO bitching about an oscilloscope while not willing to read the manual says more about the person than the oscilloscope.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 09:11:33 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 07, 2015, 08:52:17 pmBut Dave was talking about the higher end models. There's no doubt that LeCroy's low end sucks.QuoteRemember what scope this was? The WaveAce is typical Siglent but since these scopes are primitive they are pretty easy to operate. The Iwatsu-regadge WaveJet however has a pretty old-fashioned UI which I personally found pretty unintuitive. It therefore wouldn't surprise me if it was a WaveJet.QuoteWell, modern LeCroy scopes (WaveSurfer and up) have exactly the same UI as your WM8500A, just with a different color scheme (charcoal instead of the blue-ish of older scopes), and as you say it's pretty easy to operate if you spend a bit of time to familiarize yourself with it.

author: Dave
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 10:15:17 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 05:01:47 pmNope, had those mixed up. It certainly wasn't a cheapie.I've tried searching for the model, it believe it was WaveSurfer 424 (by the looks of the images I found online). It's not exactly a new model, though.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 05:01:47 pmChange of voltage over defined period of time, for example.Another example would be finding the time constant of an exponential signal. Find the 63% point with vertical cursors and then move the horizontal ones to intersect that and measure the time interval.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 05:01:47 pmI only became somewhat familiar with the menus once I took the time to fiddle with them a bit and explore the possibilities. On many other scopes it would just work, no fuss, straight to taking measurements. That's what intuitive user interfaces are all about.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 05:01:47 pmYep, wasn't my scope, I just borrowed it for a couple of measurements. Still doesn't explain why it slowed down when I set a large sample memory.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 05:01:47 pmHere's the thing: The first time I used an Agilent DSO7000 series scope (I realize it's not quite the same caliber of scope as an MXs, but it still is no joke), I felt right at home. The commands were exactly where I expected them to be and I had the desired image on the screen in no time. That is what I consider an intuitive user interface. Having to fiddle with the commands for 20 minutes to get something useful on the screen is not my idea of a decent instrument.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 05:01:47 pmI stand by my statement, I truly believe that they are atrocious.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 10:46:50 pm
content: Another vote for LeCroys (not Wave Ace). I threw out all my HPs / Teks etc years ago and never looked back. Looking for my next one.Easy to setup, excellent triggering etc etc . Maybe hints of sour grapes surfacing :-) . 2nd hand LeCroys are an absolute bargain !

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 07, 2015, 10:49:44 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 07, 2015, 09:09:42 pmImagine buying a new car, and before going for a test drive asking for the manual? Who does this?Sure I may not know how to set the clock or clear the oil change timer but I expect to be able to drive it. Of course, if you need the manual, we may not want you or your car on the roads!Back to DSOs....Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 07, 2015, 09:11:33 pmIf their new WavePro, WaveMaster, LabMaster etc run like the X-Stream, that was a smart move on their part. IMO, that's not a bad UI at all as complex as it is. I'll be 100 years old before I can afford the WaveExpert for home use.Looking at eBay, it may have been a WaveJet. Next time I see it, I'll check it out.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 08:01:09 am
content: NOI was given one of these as a demo and I thought it might be a nice small /portable "beater" scope. After two hours of fiddling with it I wanted to slash my wrists. The amount of time it took to do simple things was infuriating.However my experience with my WS MXi has been noting but beyond expectation. It is simply the best scope I have used for my needs. Amazingly fast and accurate triggering setup. Awesome cursor set up (dedicated cursor control section) and analysis function far beyond the Agilent it replaced. My specific unit is also very accurate and easily meets manufacturer specs, even though its over 5 years old....Avoid the wave ace like the plague and try and save a few more dollars for a "better" model...or grab a uses DS2000 from Rigol. That scope is far from perfect but light years better than the wave ace.The wave ace is a terrible "beginners scope" because it will frustrate you to the point of not being able to learn anything. You will just want to give up on your project and get plastered to take your mind away from all the negative vibes the wave ace created. Its THAT bad

author: Smith
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 08:55:04 am
content: We have one LeCrap scope at work. I cant remember the type but it's a midrange model. Nobody wants to use it. The interface is frustrating and everytime you want to make a measurement the damn thing starts self calibrating itself.But in all it's not expensive. For basic debugging it will probably do fine. On the other hand, you could spend a little more for a scope that will fit your needs for now and upcomming years (without the frustration)

author: Dave
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 10:03:43 am
content: Quote from: Smith on February 08, 2015, 08:55:04 amI don't even know how I managed to forgetthose. You are just about ready to take a measurement and it starts self-calibrating. EVERY. DAMN. TIME.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 12:42:42 pm
content: Quote from: Dave on February 07, 2015, 10:15:17 pmIf it was a WaveSurfer 400 Series then this explains some of your complaints. It was LeCroy's first "compact" size X-Stream scope (came out around early 2004) and was built by Iwatsu. The hardware quality was great (well, Iwatsu) but the scope itself was really really basic. Only very simple maths and measurements, basic triggering, no serial decode, no WaveStream or any other goodies. There were only three software options for it (advanced triggers, advanced maths and Mask Testing) and two hardware options (sample memory upgrade from 500k/Ch to 2M/Ch in interleaved mode, USB-to-GPIB adapter) for it. The scope ran XP Embedded (a variant of Windows XP Pro with reduced functionality) on a Pentium3 866MHz platform. The software was a stripped down variant of leCroy's X-Stream package which required some modifications due to the WS400's properties. This is also the reason why this scope didn't see as many software upgrades as other LeCroy scopes.The WS400 missed a lot of features and settings that went into successor models (WS Xs, Xs-A, Xs-B) and which were available even in older X-Stream scopes (WavePro 7k, WaveMaster 8k). It wasn't overly successful (production ended in 2005 if I remember right) and was quickly replaced with the much more capable WSXs.QuoteI see. Well, that's how I'd done it on an analog scope with cursor readouts back in the old days. On a modern scope like a LeCroy, I'd do this via the measurement functionality, not by fiddling with dual cursors. Set the level to 63% and drag the measurement markers to set the section you want to look at. Simples.And you can have multiple measurement cursors, not just one. No matter if horizontal, vertical or mixed.It's not surprising that you get sub-standard results when you operate an advanced scope like an analog boat anchor. You really need to know how to operate your tools to get the best out of them.QuoteOk, for illustration I attached images of the Trigger section of a typical LeCroy front panel (Picture 1) and the Trigger on-screen menu (Picture 2).To setup a basic trigger like say Edge Trigger, on a LeCroy I just press the "Setup" button on the front panel which opens the Trigger screen. On this screen, I just tap "Edge". That's it. Two button presses. Two more if I want to select a different trigger source.That's how all LeCroy X-Stream scopes operate. Even the old WS400 worked that way, just with a lot less options to choose from.So you're saying that this is unintuitive and complicated? Really? I'd say it can't get much simpler than that.QuoteOf course I don't know the circumstances but scopes generally slow down if you try to fill large sample memories at low sample rates. Which is understandable as the sample rate decides the speed with which the sample memory is filled. A WSXs can have 10M sample memory if it has the hardware option, and since you seem to have issues with the memory setup it may very well be that this was due to sub-optimal settings.QuoteSo lets look at the DSO7k then. Picture 3 shows the Trigger section of the front panel, which doesn't offer much control other than a button which offers the on-screen trigger menu (which can be seen in Picture 4). As the DSO7k isn't touch operated you have to go through softkeys. In my example, to setup Edge triggering I would have to the front panel button, then the 'Mode' softkey, and then cycle through the modes until 'Edge'.And you say this is more intuitive and less complicated than on a LeCroy? Heck, even Auto Trigger requires going into the menu while on the LeCroy it's a hardware button on the front panel.QuoteNo problem, everyone is entitles to his opinion. But I'd say based on what you have shown is that your problems are mostly due to a lack of understanding of how to operate the scope properly. I already said it and will say it again, any EE should familiarize himself with the tools he is using, and this is even more true if the tool happens to be a modern advanced high end scope.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 12:50:24 pm
content: Quote from: Dave on February 08, 2015, 10:03:43 amIndeed, if only there was a switch to disable it. But wait, there is!I guess this is just another example of I-don't-know-my-scope

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 01:02:06 pm
content: counter intuitive triggering system? with a lack of Ui? HUHcounter intuitive cursor system with lack of Ui? HUHI won't even get into the fact that you have a touch screen and stylus to play with......I picked up this scope a while back and was up and running within a few minutes....I don't get how anyone would struggle with something so logical and well thought out

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 01:14:01 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 07, 2015, 10:49:44 pmProbably not many. But quite frankly they should. In many countries it is a implicit or direct legal requirement that the driver has familiarized himself with the operation of his vehicle. Part of that is reading the manual which, amongst nice-to-know-stuff, usually happens to include a lot of safety relevant advice. You may not know it (or live in a country where this doesn't matter much) but depending where you live if bad things happen there can be legal consequences if you ignored that advice.QuoteYes, you will be able to drive it, but you may already struggle to setup the seat, or refuelling the car at the gas station, or setting up the aircon properly. And I'm not even taking things like Mercedes's Command system or similar in-car control and navigation systems which have so many functions that they fill two instruction books.QuoteFrankly, I'd rather have someone on the road who is aware that he doesn't know everything and tries to close that gap (i.e. by reading the manuals) than someone who grossly overestimates his own knowledge and capabilities and who believes he's above reading a manual. Especially since it's usually the latter group that causes all kinds of mishaps and accidents on the road.Not that this has anything to do with DSOs anyways as DSOs have no legally mandated set of controls, their users don't need to get a permit which involves passing a test before they can use it, and failing to operate it properly is a lot less likely to have fatal consequences, especially to 3rd parties.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 01:32:05 pm
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on February 08, 2015, 01:02:06 pmI really can't understand it either. I mean, if someone struggles with LeCroy's MAUI then any advanced Agilent/Keysight scope must be inoperable for them as their 'touch' UI is really awful (clearly designed with mouse control in mind, with touch being merely an afterthought).On the other side somehow my colleagues and I managed to work with these Agilent scopes, but then we did read the manuals and spend half an hour or so each to familiarize before using them for actual work.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 01:38:20 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 08, 2015, 01:32:05 pmI personally HATE touch screens, with a passion...and thought I would be tied to a mouse and keyboard on the MXi....after a couple hours I just unplugged both....as long as you calibrate the zones, when you change the tilt angle etc, I have had no issues with navigation either....I tap and it does what it's supposed to 99% of the time....and that other 1% is because of me fumbling with too many things at once....I mean everyone is entitled to like what they like, but to try and bash a respected manufacturer, wholesale...based on limited experience with ONE of their products?? c'monI have had some Agilent hardware I thought was utter crap....and yet I still buy the Agilent products that aren't....you can't throw an entire company under the bus because of some lack of experience or bad experience with ONE of their products.....that is like buying a rotten apple and then saying all apples are rotten and should be avoided....P.S. to reiterate what i said earlier in this thread....the WaveAce in question is complete and total crap.....it has maybe ONE redeeming quality, which is split windowing on traces, in a scope of that "class"....but even that is useless, because the screen is too damn small to make sense of what you are seeing when trace windowing is enabled....and easily it's WORST attribute are the pathetic small knobs that have NO sensing algo....click by painful click they are just awful.....please OP, avoid this scope...it's not even a good scope to "learn the ropes" on.....it will just frustrate you and make you less productive.....if you just need to learn what a scope is and what it does grab a cheap analog beast.....learn how to calibrate it...learn what does what...learn how to manually read the trace etc.....that is worth far more for someone who has never touched a scope...than a poorly implemented DSO Ui and design

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 01:53:09 pm
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on February 08, 2015, 01:38:20 pmFunny, that could have come from me! I also hate touch screens, I hate them on phones (and I hate that the options without touch for higher end ones are somewhat non-existent, so I have to live with a touch cell), I hate them in cars, and I'm not fond on them on laptops (my laptop has touch, which I'ven't used much at all). I thought I'll hate them on scopes, too, especially when the old non-Windows LeCroys already had such a good menu system.Then I got a WaveSurfer 422, and while the scope was way to primitive for my needs I really found myself liking the touch interface. LeCroy has really done an excellent job implementing touch, especially considering that their first touchscreen scopes (WM8k) came out in 2001, long before the current touch craze.QuoteFully agree, and I think it's even worse when most of the problems experienced are down to the user not knowing how to operate the scopes and not because of a problem with the scope itself (other than that it doesn't work like a 1980's analog scope).QuoteEvery manufacturer, even the best ones, have produced crap in at least one occasion. All of them.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 03:36:13 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 08, 2015, 01:14:01 pmIt would be hard to prove if people who read the manuals cause less accidents. Percentage, I bet it's a wash. Based on absolute numbers, I bet you are right. Because we only use the manual as a reference.If they move all the foot controls to the steering wheel, or even remove the steering wheel, we will have a problem with the UI.Image a different keyboard layout for every MFG. Once a standard is adopted by the majority, it's best to stay with it.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 03:43:05 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 08, 2015, 03:36:13 pmright....which is why every scope has horizontal and vertical controls.....triggers etc.....but, just like in a motor vehicles knobs and levers....they don't all happen to be located in the same place....also in a motor vehicle the steering wheel and pedals and seats are not in EXACTLY the same place.....variations due to chassis and cabin constraints.....they are approximately where they need to be to use it, just as with a scope of any type, the horizontal and vertical controls are not in EXACTLY the same place, but where they need to be to use them, based on design decisions and other criteria....generally they are to the right of the screen, in some type of panel, that is easy to reach, in relation to other controls.....just like a "standardized" layout in a motor vehiclefor example....go try and drive an 18 wheeler, bus, tractor or garbage truck.....never having driven anything other than a simple 4 wheeled consumer automobile....you won't get very far.....and then even after you learn how to shift an 18 wheeler, you still won't know how to operate the loading system in a garbage truck....so not only do you have to read manual to operate those things....you also need to get physical "hands" on training and then pass a closed course examination, to even become certified to drive one on public road wayssame way with a scope...your boss buys something and sets it on your bench and says here is your scope....learn how to use it, to do the tasks I set forth, or you are fired....long story short, LeCroy hasn't stayed in business by producing some totally Alien device and calling it a "scope"....it's a scope, like any other....spend time with it and you learn how to use it properly and more efficiently.....just like that garbage truck you will have to learn to operate, if you don't learn the scope....

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 03:44:35 pm
content: @joeqsmith:You obviously don't realise that the position of the various knobs for things like fog lights, rear-view mirrors, alarm lights, heater, aircon, etc is entirely different between the various car manufacturers. There isn't even a standard on how something basic like the wipers should be controlled!

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 04:51:19 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on February 08, 2015, 03:44:35 pmMany features are not always needed. I don't always need to use the HVAC and may only need the wipers when it's dry or the windows are dirty. I certainly do not need a radio, period. I have yet to need to look at a manual to figure out how to use these features, or set the mirrors or the seats for that matter.Some DSOs are very feature rich. Do I need all of these features to get every job done, no. Are there features I may never use, yes. When I do need to do something more complex that I have to turn to the manual, I expect to be able to find it quickly and not have to contact the mfg to figure it out.Do I expect to be able to do some simple measurements without a manual or contacting the mfg, yes. This is where that one LeCroy we have at work falls way short. Even if I took the time to learn all the ins and outs, the next time I go to use it, I may waste a bunch of time having to relearn it again.

author: Dave
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 08:28:23 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 08, 2015, 12:50:24 pmI don't own a LeCroy, nor would I want to.On other scopes, I never had to go digging around various settings menus, to explicitly instruct a scope not to piss me off every two minutes. If only I dedicated 2 hours of my time to study the manual...

author: Smith
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 08:37:36 pm
content: The scope should be intuitive. I use my old hp scope, and its the most user friendly scope i ever had. My Philips is simpel to use too. My work scope (expensive tek) is quite simple too. I would never buy a scope thats not intuitive. Nor would I buy any other device that require me to use manual where others dont.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 11:00:51 pm
content: Quote from: Dave on February 08, 2015, 08:28:23 pmWell, other scopes won't gurantee their specifications if they're operated outside the declared standard environment because they don't even offer temperature compensation. It might look that way to you but they didn't put this in just to annoy you.QuoteFor an EE, that's a pretty sad attitude. Not that rare unfortunately, but still sad.

author: Dave
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 08, 2015, 11:45:11 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 08, 2015, 11:00:51 pmNot wanting to study a manual of a device that I'm going to useonce? Seriously?

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 09, 2015, 12:03:20 am
content: Quote from: WuerstchenhundGive it up mate :-) , the people have made up their mind. It's a pointless discussion from here on in.The Lecroy doesn'r have the power swith in the upper right hand corner, 5mmx10mm from the edge, so it's cr@p :-)There's NO point delving into the specs or it's capture / processing ability after that revelation .. that power swith SUCKS !I'm glad I don't employ them. SMH

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 09, 2015, 12:23:34 am
content: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-scopes/msg180500/#msg180500https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1052e-vs-lecroy-waveace-101/msg289175/#msg289175https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/equipment-running-windoze/msg211085/#msg211085https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-metrix-dox2000-scopes-by-chauvin-arnoux/Siglent scopes are rebranded as LeCroy, BK Precision, Atten, Metrix and maybe something else.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 09, 2015, 12:37:18 am
content: Imagine, something happens on the line and it's a crisis (not that it ever happens) and you are the lucky one who has to deal with it.Cost of shutting down is what?Hummmm You grab the first DSO you see and start to work on the problem but find you are wasting a lot of time hunting through the menus and not finding what you need.Do you attempt to find the manual and if your lucky it may even explain what you need to do to get it setup? Or, grab something that you know will get the job done and get you out of the crisis and back to your normal job.Agree with Dave. Been there, done that. No need to waste a bunch of time reading a manual for a DSO I doubt I would ever touch again (other than to see what that POS was). If that was the first LeCroy I ever used in my life, it would very well have been the last. It's hard to win back a customer after you just gave them the worst product they have ever seen.Maybe Dave will get a chance to play with a high end LeCroy sometime and change his tune. In the mean time, no way I am going to call him or anyone else out on how they get their jobs done.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 09, 2015, 01:54:50 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on February 09, 2015, 12:23:34 amAnd some Rigols scopes were re-branded Agilent.....you can't make blanket statements and expect to be taken seriously.....Agilent, and LeCroy, and Tek have made many hundreds of products over the years.....and evaluations should be made on a product by product basis.....with a big black piece of tape over the "badge" the specific product wears....I am not saying YOU are making wholesale, blanket statements.....but a LOT of folks here are.....

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 09, 2015, 06:44:01 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 09, 2015, 12:37:18 amNot saying this never happens but you'd hardly get any laurels if you have to do complex measurements under time pressure and you get stuck because you're using a tool that has been there for some time and you didn't bother to get to know it.However, what using a scope for basic stuff concerns, I yet have to see a scope that is so unusable that you can't get it to work without reading the manual. I worked with the Siglent SDS1000CML (which is a WaveAce 1000 with smaller memory), crap firmware but still dead easy. Same with the WaveJet 300 (ugly and convoluted menus but using basic functionality was easy).But that doesn't change a fact that for using an advanced scope's full capacity trial & error is a rather stupid way to find out how it works. And some things like measurement and analysis setups can be very complicated by nature and work differently between scopes, which is why manufacturer invest money to produce a set of manuals. Better take 20mins or half an hour and read the relevant sections in the manual than wasting an hour with trial & search.QuoteI don't. Dave made a brushing statement that all LeCroy's more expensive scopes (so not WaveAce and WaveJet) were awful and difficult to operate, but when digging down it's pretty obvious that it's simply user error. He obviously treated these scopes like analog scopes, which won't get you very far these days, but that is hardly the fault of the scope. As shown on the example it's pretty dead simple and intuitive setting up basic stuff like triggers (and certainly more so than with the DSO7k he claimed was so much easier to use). I'd guess he was also taught that pressing the Auto Setup button is verboten, as one button press would very likely have solved many of his problems getting a sensible waveform on the screen.As to reading manuals or getting to know one's tools, I can tell you that in every lab I worked in the last almost 30 years one would have been looked rather foolish if he didn't get to know his scope. At least in the sector I work it is expected from every respectable engineer to spend time to familiarize with new tools, and that is specifically true for modern advanced scopes (and most people seem to enjoy doing this). This is simply part of being a professional.

author: don
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 09, 2015, 03:51:45 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 09, 2015, 06:44:01 amIt's a tough sell that LeCroy's X-stream UI is dead simple and intuitive, especially to people that have struggled with it. I work in a cross-functional company where it is common to work on multiple benches with different people from hour to hour or day to day. "come look at this" for example. If you are not familar with LeCroy this can be tough. Getting out a manual to not going to happen for these quick sessions. What will happen is hard to use equipment will sit unused as enough people struggle, and that's generally what happens with LeCroy where I work for quick debug sessions. LeCroy makes nice scopes, but the xstream interface is very polarizing. I'm fine with it, but it's not my favorite UI. And yes, the autoset button is one to stay away from. Unless you like it when someone changes all the settings when you walk away for coffee. You can undo, but then what's the point?

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 10, 2015, 12:35:10 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 09, 2015, 06:44:01 amSound like you have worked for very small companies and may in just one department. Places I have worked are much larger. There is no, "his scope". Normally there is more equipment than you would even want to inventory. There isn't even one building. Funny that you would judge a case you know absolutely nothing about.Quote from: don on February 09, 2015, 03:51:45 pmSounds about the same dynamics. We have long term projects that run for several years but there is a lot of multiprocessing.I see the same thing. We bought a company some time ago that had a Tek logic analyzer in their inventory. Different people tried to to use it but it was so different it became a dust collector.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 10, 2015, 06:43:57 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 10, 2015, 12:35:10 amActually, no, I've only worked in a small place once. At the moment I spend most of my time in the labs of one of Europe's largest technology companies.QuoteFrankly, you know jack shit about what I do and where I have worked, so maybe you should stop making assumptions about stuff you have no clue.

author: TunerSandwich
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 10, 2015, 06:54:27 am
content: I hope everyone here can at least agree that the WaveAce series of scope from LeCroy were pretty awful....(thanks to the OEM)I don't suppose everyone has to love this or that, but I personally love my MXi.....I have found nothing convoluted or cryptic about it. I have never once had to read the "manual" to do something simple.....or frankly quite complex. The device is self explanatory and intuitive to me....but maybe I have some type of brain malfunction, where LeCroys "nonsense Ui" only makes sense to me....Either way my MXi has served me well so far.....and the WaveAce was rejected on day one of the "demo"

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 10, 2015, 08:47:52 am
content: Quote from: TunerSandwich on February 10, 2015, 06:54:27 amI really can't understand why LeCroy is still selling the WaveAce. I mean, all they got from it was negative publicity because these scopes were so shit, and, unlike in showbiz, in the T&M sector not any publicity is good publicity. It seems they suffer from a similar problem as Tek in that they don't really understand the entry level market and believe some 'me too' products will cut it. I guess someone at LeCroy saw that Siglent was selling lots of SDS1000 scopes at $400 and thought LeCroy could do the same by putting its name on it and multiplying Siglent's asking price by 5 or more, all while ignoring that bugs are tolerated in a Siglent scope at less than $400 but not in a LeCroy scope for $2k+.The WaveJet on the other side isn't a bad scope, it's actually quite good. It's only problems are that it's way too expensive (it's asking price is around the same level as for the WaveSurfer 3000, which is a much more advanced scope) and that it's UI is more akin to an early 90's scope.QuoteYeah, you're weird, manBut seriously, I still fail to understand how someone can be struggling doing basic tasks like setting the trigger on a MAUI based scope.On the other side I noticed that those that complain about LeCroy's UI are usually occasional users of these scopes, and most of the time use either a low end DSO or some analog scope which is what they're familiar with. I can see that some LeCroy-specifics like the swapped horizontal and vertical controls can be annoying to them, but still I would reasonably expect any EE to be able to do some basic measurements on a LeCroy highend scope without using the manual.

author: Hugoneus
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 10, 2015, 11:18:19 am
content: Sometimes using an instrument becomes like muscle memory and when you are frustrated trying to solve a technical problem, you just want something familiar.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 10, 2015, 11:57:39 am
content: Quote from: Hugoneus on February 10, 2015, 11:18:19 amThat's true.

author: Nerull
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 11, 2015, 04:39:50 am
content: I'm curious if there is a single person out there who would recommend one of these scopes who isn't financially invested in people buying them. It's not very often you see every single positive post on a product come from a dealer.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 11, 2015, 06:00:54 am
content: Quote from: Nerull on February 11, 2015, 04:39:50 amI guess you haven't followed any discussions about Siglent scopes then

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 01:44:32 am
content: Finally took a look at that Lecroy I mentioned earlier. It's a Waverunner. Very small and light weight. Not bad looking.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2015, 04:06:50 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 11, 2015, 03:28:14 amI see. I guess you have to be American to find that witty.QuoteThat covers a span of 18 years and 7 different Series. It's like saying "I drive a Ford".QuoteSmall and lightweight sounds like a WaveRunner(2) LT, although they weren't particular beautiful and not that light.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 11:39:27 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 14, 2015, 02:03:40 amSo that's the scope you made the following statement about?Quote from: joeqsmith on February 07, 2015, 08:52:17 pmAside from that a WaveRunner isn't really a low end scope, I also have a WR64Xi, and it's essentially the same (minus the MSO option) scope that TunerSandwhich has (and which is shown in various images not only in this thread), and which uses the*exact same UI*(MAUI) as your WaveMaster 8kA. It's one of the features of LeCroy, that all these scopes operate the same, aside from some minor differences because of differences in functionality.In the same post you also said the following about your WaveMaster 8kA:Quote from: joeqsmith on February 07, 2015, 08:52:17 pmSo you're saying that you can operate a WM8kA but struggle with a 64Xi which both use the same user interface?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 11:46:24 am
content: Quote from: tautech on February 07, 2015, 08:37:43 pmSo what? It's good enough for the job, and most times you are not using 4 channels.And the Rigol can't be beat for all it's other functionality, making the sample rate limitation a minor point.If you really, really, need sample rate and full 100MHz bandwidth and the utmost signal fidelity on all 4 channels, you shouldn't be buying a sub $400 scope.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 11:56:37 am
content: Quote from: Hammer on February 07, 2015, 08:42:12 amNope.Not unless youabsolutelyneeded 200MHz bandwidth at a rock bottom price.The Rigol DS1054Z at sub $400 is a much better buy.A massive amount of more memory, one of the best intensity graded displays on the market, faster updating(?), and a lot more measurement capability and serial decoding.

author: WackyGerman
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: February 15, 2015, 12:05:12 pm
content: Well I am still using this superduper cro you see on the picture below . It has two inputs and gigantic 15 MHz bandwith . I saved it from the dumpster at a household clearance . Nobody wanted it and the mains lead was cutted off . I only needed to replace it and this old cro is working well after cleaning the pots with contact cleaner an turning round and round . I think my next oscilloscope will be a Rigol 1000z Series . This is more than good enough for me and it has the most value for the money .

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 12:35:39 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 15, 2015, 05:25:25 pmYes, I believe so. I am not sure on the cost of this particular system. WaveRunner isn't entry level, it's actually upper mid-range/lower highend. The current ones (WR6zi-A) start at around $12k for theIf I remember right the WaveRunner Xi started at around $10k with the 400Mhz 2Ch model (42Xi), and the 64Xi was closer to $14k with no options.QuoteIt's definitely the same, aside from minor differences caused by different functions and changes over the various versions.And I would expect any EE to be able to at least make a very basic measurement with that scope, even if he has never seen one of them or read the manual.QuoteSafety. If a company throws out electric/electronic kit that has a mains lead it often cuts it off, in case someone does dumpster diving, plugs the thing in, it fails and he dies of an electric shock, in which case the company might(!) be liable. By cutting off the mains connector they basically prevent the device from being operated, which can make a difference in case something happens.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 16, 2015, 12:52:52 pm
content: I agree. If I deem a device to be dangerous when powered I cut the power cord before bringing it to 'the dump'.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2015, 02:51:14 am
content: QuoteI expected to be able to as well but I couldn't pull it off in the time it took to grab a better scope. Sure, you can chalk it up to my lack of skills if you like.It would be interesting to see some sort of study on the UIs. I wonder if the major T&M suppliers do this. Last time we had LeCroy bring in their DSOs, we had a few different ones for a couple of weeks. I don't think I heard one person say they liked how the scopes drove. I think we have bought one Teledyne LeCroy after that, the rest have all been Agilent.

author: Paul Moir
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: February 17, 2015, 03:15:03 am
content: It's also a pretty popular minor fraud. Cut the power cord off something that is going to auction you may want, and it'll go for next to nothing.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 01:59:28 am
content: A few pictures of it

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 06:31:58 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 27, 2015, 01:47:19 amOk, and it's a 'POS' because...?QuoteNo, it doesn't.The WaveRunner Xi Series had a problem with the connectors between Front End and Acquisition Board where due to thermal stress they did lose contact. Sometimes re-seating the FE module helps, but if not the connectors need to be re-soldered or replaced. Early scopes (i.e. 2005) were much more affected because they had insufficient fans, LeCroy later upgraded the fans with faster ones (also retro-actively on the 2005 models).I seriously doubt LeCroy really quoted $5k for repair, if that quote is genuine then this must have been from a third party who probably saw a chance for pulling a fast one. LeCroy charges standard rates for repairs, and for the 64Xi in the UK that is around £2600 (roughly $4k), and I know for a fact that the prices they charge in the US are even lower. This fee is a maximum amount, i.e. no matter what's broken on your scope they will fix it and it won't cost you more. However, if they find that the repair is simpler (like the connector issue) then the actual cost will be much lower (probably closer to $600 for replacing the connectors).The price also includes a full calibration. And after it passes calibration (which after repair it's guaranteed to do!) you can even buy some 1, 2 or 3 years of manufacturer warranty for that scope. Yes, even for a 64Xi which came out in 2005!So it's not exactly the conspiracy as you seem to think, and compared with what I have experienced with Agilent (try to get warranty on a 10 year old scope from them!) it's actually a pretty good support system.Oh, and I wouldn't exactly consider a 600MHz 4Ch 10GSa/s 1.25M wfms/s WaveRunner 64Xi a low end scope. It's still one of the best debug scopes out there. The trigger system is even better than the already very good one in the older Series (WRLT, WM8k, WP7k, WR6k and so on). Some of the options that are available are very powerful and more advanced than on the older scopes. And the optional L-Bus connector makes it into a very good MSO. Even Keysight's latest offerings in that class (DSO-X4k) can't really compete with it. The only drawback is that it sometimes feels a bit slow if equipped with the standard 1.3GHz Celeron but that can be upgraded to a 1.8GHz or 2GHz Pentium-M with 2MB cache which makes the scope fly.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 10:18:58 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 27, 2015, 06:31:58 amThis Wavehumper has a date of 29-Oct-06. Repair ticket is dated 8-13-13.So they sell them with a known bad interconnect design, then charge to have them repaired. Notice in the attached picture that this channel's connector appears to have been changed out. While it was apart, I had looked at the solder joints on the outside edge of it. They were fine. I can believe reinstalling the board may have corrected the problem temporarily.It has a whole 480MB of RAM and the 1.3GHz Celeron. Hard drive cycles a lot.The ticket does not have the price. Let me see if I can locate the original quote. I'll also see if it had been sent in for repairs prior. Seems strange they would have swapped out the connector with a different plating as part of the build process. If they did, I wonder why they switched plating during the build. If not, this thing had an even shorter life.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 10:54:39 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 27, 2015, 10:18:58 amIt's not the connector design that is bad (these are Hirose connectors which in other applications have shown to be very durable), it's how the FE and the ACQ board were bolted together which resulted in thermal stress in the connectors. During production several steps were introduced to alleviate the problem. Units made in 2007 or later will be very unlikely to ever suffer from the problem, and even for earlier units only a small part of them was actually failing because of that.And it's understandable that after almost 9 years they won't fix the problem for free anymore (as they did when the scopes were younger).QuoteIn case you manage to fix it, try to give the joint between FE and ACQ board some room for movement, i.e. by using nylon washers for the bolts and by not tightening them too much.QuoteThat's actually 512MB (single DDR333 512MB memory stick). All standard parts so easy to replace with a 1GB DDR400 stick, a Pentium-M 1.8GHz or 2GHz (must be a FSB400 variant) with 2MB cache, and a modern 2.5" SATA hard drive with SATA-to-EIDE bridge. Makes a lot of difference.QuoteThe WR(M)Xi was produced from 2005 to 2009 where it was replaced by the WR(M)Xi-A (the biggest change was the move from PCI to PCIe aka X-Stream II which brought a noticable jump in performance), and despite the connector issue (and another problem where the protective sheet on the display came loose on some scopes) the WR(M)Xi was overall pretty reliable.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 12:20:55 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 10, 2015, 12:35:10 amIts very common in large organisations for the users to have no access to the manuals for their test equipment. If the place is big enough to have its own calibration department the manuals will most often be there. If you know someone in calibration you might be able to get access to the manuals occasionally. Otherwise any nonintuitive features just don't get used, and you often have to guess at the performance you are supposed to expect from the stuff. The rationale seems to be that manuals are generally lost in the labs, but its unclear how not having them available from day one is supposed to be an improvement.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 03:32:57 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on February 27, 2015, 12:20:55 pmNone of the cal labs in larger organisations I've worked with would have been willing to store the user manuals, and why should they? Cal labs only need the Service (Calibration) manuals, not the user guides, and (aside from a few rare cases) the service manuals detail all necessary steps they need for calibration and (where required) adjustment. User guides are supposed to be out there in the field with the user.And I've yet to see a place where the user manuals weren't available in paper or electronics form to employees. Worst case is you just download it from the mfgr website, which all major vendors offer these days. In most places manuals were seen like accessories (i.e. probes) as part of the set and therefore are inventorized as separate items. And portable kit is always checked to have manuals in the carring bags as it's much cheaper than having the engineer wasting time in the field or worst case having to come back because he struggles with the kit.Big name manufacturers usually spend a lot of money with the manuals, and I'm pretty sure they would love to save the costs. But user manuals are still made because there's still demand for them.QuoteAnd what prevents the engineers working at that (awful sounding) place to just use the pdf version?

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 04:16:01 pm
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 27, 2015, 03:32:57 pmYour tag indicates you are in the UK. I haven't lived there for 23 years, but not having access to manuals was normal back then. In those days PDF manuals were not an option. Obviously the availability of PDFs from the makers web sites have changed things for a lot for some equipment. However, there are still no downloadable manuals for many instruments, especially if they were introduced a few years ago.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 04:42:21 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on February 27, 2015, 04:16:01 pmI'm in the UK but my work regularly brings me to mainland Europe and even more often the US for extended periods of time.QuoteObviously this was a problem in the old days (where in many labs you had to sign out a manual and sign it back in when you returned it) but since the 2000's pdf manuals are pretty widely available.And back in the old days most test gear was pretty simple compared to modern kit which often has tons of very advanced functionality built-in. 23 years ago most scopes were still analog.QuoteI'd say its rare to not find a download for manuals, even for devices introduced recently. Having user manuals available for download is pretty much expected these days.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 05:53:00 pm
content: I assumed people would know that the 480MB was the Windows reported value and not the physical amount.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 27, 2015, 10:54:39 am"bad interconnect design" meaning at the system level not specifically a connector. I do believe your comment :Quoteis dead on. If you want a DSO you can debug every few years, this is the best scope out there!!I never contacted LeCroy to have it repaired. The last contact was the one on the ticket from 2013, 7 years after DSO was built. I could care less if they charge to fix it but $5K, to fix a problem that they know they have and have already attempted to repair when the unit is only 7 years old....Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 27, 2015, 10:54:39 amGood info. It did not appear to be in any sort of bind when I reassembled it. The case is made very poorly and can believe there could be some stress in it. Think of the cheapest China made PC case and you have the Waveblunder. I actually spent some time trying to take out some of the bends in the case. Maybe it is designed so cheap so it will flex and not stress the parts.I put about 6 hours on it after it was assembled and it ran fine. I wouldn't really call it fixed because I didn't address any of the root problems.Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on February 27, 2015, 10:54:39 amMaybe they are and this one is a lemon. If LeCroy replaced the connector after it was purchased and the same channel failed again, that's two failures in 7 years for the same problem. Not a sign of any sort of quality. Still wonder why I say its a POS?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 27, 2015, 06:45:09 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 27, 2015, 05:53:00 pmThat's where I can agree on, the mechanical build quality is definitely much lower than of the previous WaveRunners (WRLT, WR2LT, WR6k(A)) which were built like tanks. The design of the internal aluminium chassis is pretty poor, and in many areas it looks like it has been hand-made by some apprentice. The plastics outer shell isn't very robust, and many WR(M)Xis suffered from broken off handles.Having said that, it's certainly good enough for a bench scope. But I certainly wouldn't carry one around (I'd rather take my WavePro 7300A with me than my WR64Xi).QuoteCase flex isn't an issue with these scopes, it's mechanical stress caused by the PCBs getting pretty hot and expanding (which is prevented by the bolt that bind the ACQ board to the Front End). Actually a small problem, but obviously neglected. It seems that the Malaysian manufacturer who made the scope for LeCroy didn't do a very good job.QuoteIt may well be that there's actually not much wrong with it and that thermal stress was enough to disconnect the FE from the ACQ board temporarily, and if so a set of Nylon washers and reduced fixing torque on the bolts (maybe with a bit of Loctite to prevent them from falling off) might rectifiy the problem for good.QuoteNo, it's not. But I can understand that any free repairs have to have a limitation regarding how long they are available. And I say this as a WR64Xi owner with a scope that came from the 2005 batch and still suffers from two failed connectors (Ch1 and 4). But if the problem is rectified properly once it's unlikely to come back, and despite the somewhat lower build quality it's still one of the better scopes in that class.And it's not that other manufacturers never had similar problems, just that the free fixes usually stopped the moment the warranty ran out, and in some cases the product support was discontinued not too long after so there wasn't even a paid repair by the manufacturer.QuoteI actually never did, but probably for different reasons than you imagine.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 28, 2015, 02:18:50 am
content: QuoteQuoteI suspect this DSO was repaired once for the the same channel and now you are saying that you have the same Wavecrapper DSO with two dead channels. Yea, it's a low end DSO.QuoteQuoteDid you try to get them to repair yours for free or something and they would not? They are a business. Of course, quoting $5K (or even $2K) to repair what you are calling a known design flaw does seem to be a poor business model. To me it says they are unwilling to stand behind their products and could care less about their customer base (which was already small).QuoteIt just keeps getting better. It's so bad you would rather try and lug around a huge WP7300A than take what is designed as a portable unit?WAVE RUNNER ® Xi SERIESPerformance ReimaginedYes, they got that part right! But then the first line is:WaveRunner Xi Series gives you everything with no compromises —Boy did they ever miss the mark there!!

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 28, 2015, 10:15:44 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on February 28, 2015, 02:18:50 amNo, I didn't (the scope is sitting in the corner collecting dust at the moment), but I probably should ask them to. Thinking about it (and after seeing two other XIs with the same problem yesterday), I guess you're right in that they should really fix the problem for free, at least as long as the scope is within the prime support period (which is 7yrs after end of production). After that charging for it is fair game I guess.QuoteThen ask them if they fix it for free, and if not put up a stink, i.e. complain on Twitter (which seems to be quite effective for such stuff). Often enough some pressure is needed to get some resolution.QuoteYes, because the WP7300A has become my every-day scope, and it's actually not that much more inconvenient to carry than the WRXi. And since my WRXi has none of the software options while my WP7kA has all of them, I'd rather take the WavePro.But at the end of the day both scopes are made as bench scopes, not luggables, and honestly, if I needed a portable scope I'd get something like a WaveSurfer 3000, or an Agilent DSOX3kT or something in that weight class.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 01, 2015, 06:25:27 am
content: The places I have worked for will normally scrap equipment if the repair cost exceeds the value. If the company has no interest in supporting their customers, we just stop buying their products.On the plus side, I did attempt to see if the Waveblunder would show spurs over the BW and it rolls off as expected.Was not expecting otherwise. Must be a problem with the newer products.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 01, 2015, 10:03:16 am
content: Quote from: joeqsmith on March 01, 2015, 06:25:27 amUnderstandable (although businesses usually use the book value of their equipment, not the market value), but since you have the scope now you might get somewhere in having it fixed for free. After all these scopes still sell for several grands.Another alternative (if you want to fix it yourself) might be to replace the connectors with a more permanent replacement (i.e. flat ribbon cable) which would get rid of the thermal problem for good.

author: joeqsmith
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 01, 2015, 11:27:14 am
content: Quote from: Wuerstchenhund on March 01, 2015, 10:03:16 amI am not 100% sure but would guess that capital equipment like DSOs would be fully depreciated after seven years. $5K to fix a DSO worth nothing on the books makes for poor business.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 01, 2015, 12:18:56 pm
content: Quote from: joeqsmithI'd be very surprised that tax rules would be SO different between our countries, but here in OZ (having run / been a director for 35+yrs) it works like this -I chose how many years to depreciate "aid to manufacture / R+D" equipment, usually 3-5+ yrs (I chose 3 due to constant changing nature of the game).After that - IF I sell the equipment, I pay tax on any balance - so I'd normally sell it off for $1. IF I keep it and service it, I write off ALL costs in that year !I do NOT need to depreciate service costs. So would I pay $7K, or $35K+ and start again ?... NOPE. Every year that I keep the old equipment running,it's "free". And I can use the other $28K saving to buy other shlt .. err equipment.

author: guenthert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 17, 2019, 05:49:51 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on February 15, 2015, 11:56:37 amSorry for the thread necromancy, but I did just that, i.e. bought a Wave Ace 2032 for $400. Since they are by now well aged (although my units was hardly used -- power up count was about 50) good deals (potentially better than mine) should be around. Since I do already own a DS1054Z, I think I can perhaps contribute here in case someone else needs to make up their mind about such a purchase.Fortunately, I did look up this thread before buying one, so I kind of knew what I was getting into. And I understand some dismissive comments about this unit -- if I had paid a lot of money expecting a "LeCroy", then I'd be disappointed. But once you hold it in your hand, there's no mistaken it for anything other than an entry level oscilloscope for hobbyist, very well in the same league as a DS1054Z. In fact, it looks and feels (tactile as well as operating with alignment of menus and buttons) very much the same. It is perhaps slightly easier to operate, which might be due to it offering less functionality or because I used the Rigol first (and briefly analogue ones *long* time before that).Dave is quite right above, the Rigol offers more functionality and much more memory (the Siglent/LeCroy one is showing its age there) and twice as many inputs (not counting the trigger-in on the 2032) and due to that will be the better deal for most people. It's also prettier (higher resolution screen) and at first sight seems to be less 'noisy' (does the 1054Z default to the "hi-res" mode? I forgot. The Wave Ace does offer an averaging mode which considerably reduces noise, albeit does default to sampling mode). Both units thankfully remember the most recent settings after boot-up.So why buy it then? Well, my 1054Z happens to be in a storage facility on the other side of the world. The Wave Ace complements my Digilent Analog Discovery nicely (better than the Rigol) for higher frequency signals. It's also more honest about what it measures (allows one to en/disable sinc at all times, not to speak of the buggy implementation of sinc in the Rigol), albeit there's still a bug in the firmware where the Wave Ace falls back to vector display, when the time base is set to the lowest setting, regardless of the vector/points selection. I plan to use it chiefly to verify that no high frequency noise is present (and 200 or so MHz is the current limit of my wallet ;-} -- yeah, someday I'll get me a proper signal analyzer ...The Wave Ace conveniently allows to set the input resistance to 50Ohm, but sadly offers no way of powering active probes. Fwiw, it offers equivalent time sampling, making the best of the 300MHz input bandwidth (or 1.2ns rise time), at least for strictly periodic signals.It came with a (no two) sets of fairly nice passive probes with some accessoires (including an adaptor to BNC). They're rated for 250MHz bandwidth and include a manual with impedance over frequency diagram. Nice touch.It's fan is a bit quieter than I remember the Rigol's one, but sadly there is a faint high pitch whine (sounds more like coil whine than fan noise to me). Not too annoying, but noticeable. That might be only my (well aged) unit though.So there's arguably not much going for the Wave Ace, but where do you get an oscilloscope with 200+ MHz bandwidth for $400? There are plenty of Tektronix 485 around, but they're heavy, much older (and not that easy to repair) and don't offer all those niceties of digital storage oscilloscopes (single shot -- 'nuf said). So far, I'm quite content with my purchase.