A newbie needs some help with my first DSO

[2N3055]

I need to take you a step back here.

First of all: When you measure something, you want to be able to make a relation between cause and effect so you can draw a conclusion from the measurement result. This may sound obvious but for many it requires training to measure / collect data in a way so it is possible to establish a singular cause & effect relationship.

Secondly: I'm not looking at something which can only occur after the moment of acquisition. I just want 1 acquisition with as much data as possible so I can see what happened before AND after an event. I might not always need the data but with shorter memory DSOs I have often wished to have more data in order to have more information about what happened before and after an error condition. That can show the problem so it can be fixed right away or can give valueable glues on what to set triggers for and thus save a lot of time (and money) instead of poking around in the dark. Keep in mind that my typical measurements are for DUTs which are highly sequential through hardware and/or software.

Back to the history buffer: When I'm debugging / testing embedded firmware / FPGA / hardware, each single shot measurement represents a new version with a fix or change. Which means that whatever is in the history buffer is no longer relevant information as I won't be able to match a specific acquisition with a specific change somewhere. There is no way to draw a meaningfull conclusion from the data in the history buffer. So I rather have no history buffer at all if that means getting more memory for the current acquisition.

A history buffer is only usefull if you can record all relevant information in/by the oscilloscope itself (input versus output) without making changes to the DUT. That way you can draw a meaningfull conclusion from the acquisitions in the history buffer. Keep in mind though that a history buffer and segmented recording are functionally equal it is just that an automatic history buffer is easier to use / setup.

I respectfully remain unconvinced.  I think you have convinced yourself of an advantage that is not there.

You are allowed to have your own opinion. I'm sorry I can't explain the advantages of zooming out better (they are definitely real!) and you feel the need to go down the ridiculing path instead of just respecting other people's idea even if you don't fully understand them.

We understand what are you doing.

We don't understand why do you insist it is universally better than the other way around that achieves same results.

And no, I cannot respect other people opinion (or have any other opinion about it) if I don't understand it.
I do respect that you have right to think whatever you want.
And you have to respect I have the same right. Including thinking you are wrong.

But this is philosophical/legal/freedom of expression-speech  argument.

We are talking here about technical solutions. There is no place for opinions here.
Just facts. Is something faster/more accurate/can do something you cannot otherwise/cheaper.....
Stuff like that.

And please stop calling it "zooming out". It is simple practice to take very long capture in Single/normal  mode and analyze it when stopped by inspecting details in that long capture. Most of the scopes with deep memory can do that.
We all do that already.

[BillyO]

You are allowed to have your own opinion. I'm sorry I can't explain the advantages of zooming out better (they are definitely real!) and you feel the need to go down the ridiculing path instead of just respecting other people's idea even if you don't fully understand them.

I'm not ridiculing you at all.     you must have missed this:

I respectfully remain unconvinced.

Since there is already a way to do exactly what you want (and that way offers complete control of the capture) then the zoom "feature" is just a gimmick.  A perfect analogy would be the "green mode" on a camera verses setting the exposure yourself.  In both the case of the camera's "green mode" and the oscilloscopes "zoom feature" you are letting the device choose how your data is collected.

[nctnico]

You are allowed to have your own opinion. I'm sorry I can't explain the advantages of zooming out better (they are definitely real!) and you feel the need to go down the ridiculing path instead of just respecting other people's idea even if you don't fully understand them.

I'm not ridiculing you at all.     you must have missed this:

I respectfully remain unconvinced.

Since there is already a way to do exactly what you want (and that way offers complete control of the capture) then the zoom "feature" is just a gimmick.  A perfect analogy would be the "green mode" on a camera verses setting the exposure yourself.  In both the case of the camera's "green mode" and the oscilloscopes "zoom feature" you are letting the device choose how your data is collected.

Ofcourse there are always multiple ways to achieve the same goal. Equally, there are less and more effective ways to achieve a goal. For me being able to have information beyond the screen allows me to not having to think about how to setup the scope precisely to capture what I need. No matter what, the data I need is there and thus I can concentrate more on the problem I'm trying to solve rather than messing with the tools. To some this sounds outright insane but it saves me a lot of time.

I know the zoom window can be used for even finer control but that comes at the price of needing to mess with 2 timebases and giving up what is most dearest to me on an oscilloscope: vertical space. Along a similar line you can argue that the history buffer is a useless feature / gimmick because the same can be accomplished using segmented recording which also allows finer control over the precise number of segments.

[tautech]

I know the zoom window can be used for even finer control but that comes at the price of needing to mess with 2 timebases and giving up what is most dearest to me on an oscilloscope: vertical space.

Here is where you are not fully conversant with Siglent DSO development, much different to how Zoom mode and memory management was implemented in the past.

Now when your fingers are on the timebase encoder Zoom mode is engaged with just a press, < not new, but toggling between windows in Zoom mode is just another press of the timebase encoder and in those models that offer memory management the main timbase can be zoomed out an order of magnitude more than most DSO's available.....while in Stop mode.

12bit SDS2000X HD, 8bit SDS5000X and all higher BW models have this capability which can negate the need for Zoom mode yet in Zoom mode the trigger point is always visible so to have a reference point when panning through a capture.

[awakephd]

...But learning how to trigger on characters emitted by a UART is a useful way of understanding your scope's capabilities. Doubly so when comparing it with a logic or protocol analyser.

First I want to thank OP for starting such an interesting thread, but, I get here and the story just stops?

Dan, as the OP, I am sorry that I haven't posted the past couple of days - I've been out of town and away from the scope, so haven't been able to follow up. The story will continue ... unfortunately with frequent interruptions occasioned by my real job getting in the way of my hobbies.

[awakephd]

Hello,

It would be good if awakephd would say what signal sources he has available, so that you could suggest better experiments.

Best regards
egonotto

A very primitive signal generator (basic sine, square, triangle waves), plus whatever I can generate from an Atmel ATTiny84 or Arduino Nano, i.e, I2C, SPI, UART, plus PWM at various frequencies. And for a "real" test, I am planning to test and experiment with the effectiveness of basic R/C de-bounce filters on various switches.

[Fungus]

Why do you think you cannot move around captured buffer on Siglent? You can. Exactly the same as on any other scope.

But normally there's nothing there.

(unless you previously zoomed out, re-captured, then zoomed in again trying to remember the horizontal scale you were at before you did all that, yes, we got that...)

[awakephd]

All, I am very sorry to have kicked over what is apparently an old and hotly debated ant hill regarding memory and zoom and such.

I will repeat that as a newbie, I have no dog in this fight, other than seeking to understand how to use the scope I actually have (as opposed to the ones that I don't have which happen to handle things differently). From where I sit (in a sea of ignorance!), I honestly don't see why this argument is so consuming. Despite many suggestions to the contrary, it is not clear to me - perhaps because of my ignorance - that one approach is superior to the other; they are simply different. Maybe each approach offers some advantages over the other ... but in the end it seems like arguing over a preference for apples vs. oranges.

One more time, I plead my ignorance - perhaps I just don't know enough to appreciate the finer nuances of the argument. From what I can see, you are all experienced users who are getting really good use out of your preferred scopes ... in which case, why give a fig if someone else prefers and is getting really good use out of a scope that does things differently??

[KungFuJosh]

One more time, I plead my ignorance - perhaps I just don't know enough to appreciate the finer nuances of the argument. From what I can see, you are all experienced users who are getting really good use out of your preferred scopes ... in which case, why give a fig if someone else prefers and is getting really good use out of a scope that does things differently??

It's not you, none of their conversation belongs in this thread. I mentioned previously that the only thing that matters is as you said, learning to use the scope you have. Them debating different brand philosophies is completely useless, and counterproductive here.

[bdunham7]

author=nctnico link=topic=430231.msg5527699#msg5527699 date=1717337486]
allows me to not having to think about how to setup the scope precisely to capture what I need...

Yes, you're a fast-thinking knob twiddler.  That's not meant as an insult, just a humorous description of how I see a certain set of people whose brains appear to operate very differently than mine.  I can't operate a scope without knowing where the settings are at.  And yes, bad encoders enrage me just as much as anyone else.

No matter what, the data I need is there

Unless it isn't.  It will be there if the record length at the scopes fastest undecimated sampling rate is long enough.  Otherwise it won't.  And on something like a 1M Megazoom scope at 2GSa/s, that's a half a millisecond.  Deliberately setting the timebase  (no zoom needed if you don't like it for some reason, such as the zoom window taking half the screen) to what you need will cause the scope to slow down the sample rate appropriately.  Possibly this isn't commonly an issue with your scopes as you use them, but it will come up in common uses using your technique.

Along a similar line you can argue that the history buffer is a useless feature / gimmick because the same can be accomplished using segmented recording which also allows finer control over the precise number of segments.

I would actually agree with that and don't find much utility in having the history buffer as a default.  I'm especially annoyed that the SINGLE mode on my SDS2354X+ wipes appears to wipe out the history so you always only have one capture.  It might be occasionally useful to take repeated single captures and save them all.  In fact you can easily do this using the EXT TRIG and a pushbutton.  So while I don't find the SINGLE memory management to be as appalling as you do, Siglent and it's proxies and proponents here have to reckon with the fact that they've not implemented a useful alternative system. 

[bdunham7]

All, I am very sorry to have kicked over what is apparently an old and hotly debated ant hill regarding memory and zoom and such.

It's actually worth discussing and if you can tolerate the squabbling and understand the issue, you'll probably gain something.  You appear to already have figured out what it is about in the general sense.  It's not like we're having fistfights here.

[tggzzz]

All, I am very sorry to have kicked over what is apparently an old and hotly debated ant hill regarding memory and zoom and such.

I will repeat that as a newbie, I have no dog in this fight, other than seeking to understand how to use the scope I actually have (as opposed to the ones that I don't have which happen to handle things differently).

That's a very sane attitude Learn to use whatever tool you have to its best advantage.

Learning any complex tool takes time and energy; being simpler is an advantage of analogue scopes.

The number of people that have detailed experience of more than one similar tool is very limited. Various people have allegedly noted something to the effect that "academic fights are so vicious because the stakes are so small".

A very primitive signal generator (basic sine, square, triangle waves), plus whatever I can generate from an Atmel ATTiny84 or Arduino Nano, i.e, I2C, SPI, UART, plus PWM at various frequencies. And for a "real" test, I am planning to test and experiment with the effectiveness of basic R/C de-bounce filters on various switches.

That's an excellent cross-section

The debouncing should show an advantage of digitising scopes over analogue scopes. While it is possible to use an analogue scope, it is useful to be able to push the button many times and use infinite persistence to overlay multiple traces.

I'd regard I2C/SPI/UART as being more or less equivalent, and just use whatever's most convenient.

What you haven't explicitly mentioned is correlating two or more signals, e.g. time delays between signals, or triggering on the combination of several signals.

You might also like to explore signal integrity issues. Classic examples are poorly constructed (TTL) digital counters, or octal buffers driving a heavily loaded bus.

Have fun, whenever you can

[nctnico]

author=nctnico link=topic=430231.msg5527699#msg5527699 date=1717337486]
Along a similar line you can argue that the history buffer is a useless feature / gimmick because the same can be accomplished using segmented recording which also allows finer control over the precise number of segments.

I would actually agree with that and don't find much utility in having the history buffer as a default.  I'm especially annoyed that the SINGLE mode on my SDS2354X+ wipes appears to wipe out the history so you always only have one capture.  It might be occasionally useful to take repeated single captures and save them all.  In fact you can easily do this using the EXT TRIG and a pushbutton.  So while I don't find the SINGLE memory management to be as appalling as you do, Siglent and it's proxies and proponents here have to reckon with the fact that they've not implemented a useful alternative system.

On the R&S RTM3004 it is implemented the same. Each press on the single button wipes the history. I don't quite see the logic in doing this either but maybe it is done to make sure each capture is made using the exact same configuration. However, on the R&S scope there is a setting to tell how many captures need to be taken in single mode before the entire acquisition 'session' is completely over.

[Electro Fan]

Why do you think you cannot move around captured buffer on Siglent? You can. Exactly the same as on any other scope.

But normally there's nothing there.

(unless you previously zoomed out, re-captured, then zoomed in again trying to remember the horizontal scale you were at before you did all that, yes, we got that...)

Not trying to debate, but I think Fungus’ comment is correct - yes?

[Electro Fan]

I know the zoom window can be used for even finer control but that comes at the price of needing to mess with 2 timebases and giving up what is most dearest to me on an oscilloscope: vertical space.

Here is where you are not fully conversant with Siglent DSO development, much different to how Zoom mode and memory management was implemented in the past.

Now when your fingers are on the timebase encoder Zoom mode is engaged with just a press, < not new, but toggling between windows in Zoom mode is just another press of the timebase encoder and in those models that offer memory management the main timbase can be zoomed out an order of magnitude more than most DSO's available.....while in Stop mode.

12bit SDS2000X HD, 8bit SDS5000X and all higher BW models have this capability which can negate the need for Zoom mode yet in Zoom mode the trigger point is always visible so to have a reference point when panning through a capture.

- is there a link to a video showing this? Thx

[2N3055]

Why do you think you cannot move around captured buffer on Siglent? You can. Exactly the same as on any other scope.

But normally there's nothing there.

(unless you previously zoomed out, re-captured, then zoomed in again trying to remember the horizontal scale you were at before you did all that, yes, we got that...)

Not trying to debate, but I think Fungus’ comment is correct - yes?

No it is not..

If you deliberately misuse equipment contrary to how it is supposed to be used you get bad results.

[Fungus]

I am planning to test and experiment with the effectiveness of basic R/C de-bounce filters on various switches.

Sounds like a perfect example of where the Siglent way is going to be a pain in the ass. You'll be forever zooming in to look at detail then forgetting to zoom out again to prepare the 'scope for the next capture.

[Someone]

Why do you think you cannot move around captured buffer on Siglent? You can. Exactly the same as on any other scope.

But normally there's nothing there.

(unless you previously zoomed out, re-captured, then zoomed in again trying to remember the horizontal scale you were at before you did all that, yes, we got that...)

Not trying to debate, but I think Fungus’ comment is correct - yes?

Its more of the same omissions of conditions and imaginary problems.

There is no need to take another capture. 2N3055 explicitly says within the captured buffer. It's right there in the quote. Set the capture buffer to collect what you want it to, which is done by either method. The only difference is illustrated above by the large image I quote, whether or not there is a split in the display for the long and short views at the same time, or if the user has to manually switch between them.

Yet fungus somehow twists that around to the method already showing all the content and requiring fewer adjustments of the controls... apparently needing more work and additional steps (in their imagination). Which is not true in practice. Remember this is the poster who started out confidently wrong in "helping" the beginner with factually false information.... noise and post count ahead of truth and assistance.

Perhaps you can explain how the comment is correct? Or Fungus could explain how it is correct? Rather than these endless: nah you're wrong!

[Someone]

I am planning to test and experiment with the effectiveness of basic R/C de-bounce filters on various switches.

Sounds like a perfect example of where the Siglent way is going to be a pain in the ass. You'll be forever zooming in to look at detail then forgetting to zoom out again to prepare the 'scope for the next capture.

How many times do you want to post this crap? You're factually incorrect.

The scope in question can plainly capture a long time segment, its deep memory allows the sample rate to be maintained to longer horizontal timebases then other competitive examples.

This achieves the same capture depth as setting the memory depth to force capture around the window as other brands/models do. There is nothing requiring additional captures.

The ZOOM function does not change the horizontal timebase. Your lazy method of using the horizontal time base to zoom in and out would be the problem. But that is not required, or a logical way to use the scope. Not zooming out does nothing to change the capture depth, it's always set by the horizontal time base independent of the zoom position and scale.

So why keep pushing a beginner, who asked for some clarity on the best way to use their scope, away from the way that scope is designed to be used?

[KungFuJosh]

So why keep pushing a beginner, who asked for some clarity on the best way to use their scope, away from the way that scope is designed to be used?

100%. It's frustrating for those of us with some experience to see the nonsense, it can't be fun for beginners that are actually trying to learn.

[nctnico]

I am planning to test and experiment with the effectiveness of basic R/C de-bounce filters on various switches.

Sounds like a perfect example of where the Siglent way is going to be a pain in the ass. You'll be forever zooming in to look at detail then forgetting to zoom out again to prepare the 'scope for the next capture.

How many times do you want to post this crap? You're factually incorrect.

So why keep pushing a beginner, who asked for some clarity on the best way to use their scope, away from the way that scope is designed to be used?

Actually the question was:

The link to Dave's video was actually very helpful for me in making sense of what memory depth is. I confess that i was assuming it would work more like the Keysight, which is part of why I was having trouble understanding - I hit "stop," but there was no data past the end of the screen. I think I am now understanding that, for the Siglent and a few others, what is captured is only what fits on the screen at a given moment - thus, one must zoom out, capture, then zoom in to see detail. Right? Maybe?

So there you have the proof you are so friggin' wrong in your thinking it isn't even funny, right in your face: people expect a DSO to capture beyond the screen because they find it useful. It is simple as that, like it or not. And yet you keep on going trying to push your limited view onto everyone. FFS 

The best way is what gets people to results in a way which suits them best. Imagine somebody coming along insisting you stand behind your desk while you prefer to sit on a chair behind your desk.

[tautech]

I know the zoom window can be used for even finer control but that comes at the price of needing to mess with 2 timebases and giving up what is most dearest to me on an oscilloscope: vertical space.

Here is where you are not fully conversant with Siglent DSO development, much different to how Zoom mode and memory management was implemented in the past.

Now when your fingers are on the timebase encoder Zoom mode is engaged with just a press, < not new, but toggling between windows in Zoom mode is just another press of the timebase encoder and in those models that offer memory management the main timbase can be zoomed out an order of magnitude more than most DSO's available.....while in Stop mode.

12bit SDS2000X HD, 8bit SDS5000X and all higher BW models have this capability which can negate the need for Zoom mode yet in Zoom mode the trigger point is always visible so to have a reference point when panning through a capture.

- is there a link to a video showing this? Thx

Not that I'm aware of.

Which particular features interest you ?
Will a series of detailed screenshots suffice ?

I have SDS6204A that has the memory management features which can also be used like SDS800X HD with Auto memory management. Zoom mode for both of these works the in same way.

[Martin72]

people expect a DSO to capture beyond the screen because they find it useful. It is simple as that, like it or not.

Some people expect that...
It is not without reason that the default setting for all scopes that I know across brands is “auto” as far as memory management is concerned.
And in this setting you can't look “behind” the screen and I bet 99% of the time you don't need to, otherwise it wouldn't be a default setting.

[Electro Fan]

I know the zoom window can be used for even finer control but that comes at the price of needing to mess with 2 timebases and giving up what is most dearest to me on an oscilloscope: vertical space.

Here is where you are not fully conversant with Siglent DSO development, much different to how Zoom mode and memory management was implemented in the past.

Now when your fingers are on the timebase encoder Zoom mode is engaged with just a press, < not new, but toggling between windows in Zoom mode is just another press of the timebase encoder and in those models that offer memory management the main timbase can be zoomed out an order of magnitude more than most DSO's available.....while in Stop mode.

12bit SDS2000X HD, 8bit SDS5000X and all higher BW models have this capability which can negate the need for Zoom mode yet in Zoom mode the trigger point is always visible so to have a reference point when panning through a capture.

- is there a link to a video showing this? Thx

Which particular features interest you ?

The features you mentioned/indicated that are “much different to how Zoom mode and memory management was implemented in the past.”


“…Siglent DSO development, much different to how Zoom mode and memory management was implemented in the past.

Now when your fingers are on the timebase encoder Zoom mode is engaged with just a press, < not new, but toggling between windows in Zoom mode is just another press of the timebase encoder and in those models that offer memory management the main timbase can be zoomed out an order of magnitude more than most DSO's available.....while in Stop mode.

12bit SDS2000X HD, 8bit SDS5000X and all higher BW models have this capability which can negate the need for Zoom mode yet in Zoom mode the trigger point is always visible so to have a reference point when panning through a capture.”

[nctnico]

people expect a DSO to capture beyond the screen because they find it useful. It is simple as that, like it or not.

Some people expect that...
It is not without reason that the default setting for all scopes that I know across brands is “auto” as far as memory management is concerned.
And in this setting you can't look “behind” the screen and I bet 99% of the time you don't need to, otherwise it wouldn't be a default setting.

I think the reason the default is auto is because that will ensure the highest waveform update rate as this is something many people find very important. Otherwise the support department will be swamped with questions. OTOH, there is no such setting on Keysight DSOs. You always get full memory for the last acquisition.

Edit: also think about why all (except for 1 or 2) major manufacturers of DSOs have been implementing capturing more than what is necessary to fill the screen for 40 years already (since the dawn of the DSO in the 1980's). If it where such an outlandisch or bad idea as some pretend it to be, then why are all the manufacturers still implementing it? Even the early Siglent scopes had capturing beyond the screen (the first firmware versions for the SDS2000 for example). It makes no sense for the oscilloscope manufacturers to implement/retain a feature without any significant demand for it.