Choosing Lab equipment for our new electronics lab.

[Wuerstchenhund]

However, if you are going to be taking your work beyond some research/fiddling and onto some formal acceptance testing then I'd suggest you choose equipment with a decent and reliable ATE capability. Usually this means Agilent/KS is the safe ((least buggy) option so maybe go for a 4 channel scope from the low end of the 3000 series. A good engineer will make do with any of the scopes mentioned so far but even a good engineer will struggle with poor ATE support.

Any modern scope from the big names can be safely used inside an ATE, Agilent/Keysight is not any better in this regard than the other big brands (and from experience they're not necessarily the least buggy option either), so that's pretty much a no-brainer.

The other thing is that for ATEs you don't really use the scope that is sitting on the circuit designer's bench but a separate one which is dedicated to ATE operation and doesn't necessarily have to have a screen (i.e. PXI digitizers). Often enough the ATE scope can be much simpler than a bench scope as many calculations are done in the test software and not in the scope.

This aside, the OP clearly wants a bench scope, not an ATE scope, so the focus should be on bench properties and not how good it is for any hypothetical ATE operation where it's very unlikely to end up anyways. Aside from the simple fact that formal acceptance testing doesn't necessarily require an ATE. Especially for smaller project an ATE is overkill, and any testing can be done manually following an approved Acceptance Test Procedure. And for this is the case, Agilent/Keysight scopes in the class the OP is considering offer exactly nothing to support test documentation. Only the LeCroy WaveSurfer comes with proper documentation tools (LabNotebook) as standard.

[CM800]

However, if you are going to be taking your work beyond some research/fiddling and onto some formal acceptance testing then I'd suggest you choose equipment with a decent and reliable ATE capability. Usually this means Agilent/KS is the safe ((least buggy) option so maybe go for a 4 channel scope from the low end of the 3000 series. A good engineer will make do with any of the scopes mentioned so far but even a good engineer will struggle with poor ATE support.

Any modern scope from the big names can be safely used inside an ATE, Agilent/Keysight is not any better in this regard than the other big brands (and from experience they're not necessarily the least buggy option either), so that's pretty much a no-brainer.

The other thing is that for ATEs you don't really use the scope that is sitting on the circuit designer's bench but a separate one which is dedicated to ATE operation and doesn't necessarily have to have a screen (i.e. PXI digitizers). Often enough the ATE scope can be much simpler than a bench scope as many calculations are done in the test software and not in the scope.

This aside, the OP clearly wants a bench scope, not an ATE scope, so the focus should be on bench properties and not how good it is for any hypothetical ATE operation where it's very unlikely to end up anyways. Aside from the simple fact that formal acceptance testing doesn't necessarily require an ATE. Especially for smaller project an ATE is overkill, and any testing can be done manually following an approved Acceptance Test Procedure. And for this is the case, Agilent/Keysight scopes in the class the OP is considering offer exactly nothing to support test documentation. Only the LeCroy WaveSurfer comes with proper documentation tools (LabNotebook) as standard.

I don't really care much for these proper documentation tools, I can just as easily take screenshots of the Agilent scope's waveforms using their built in software, It could be an advantage, but It isn't worth silly money extra. You keep saying the WaveSurfer is cheaper and all that. Not sure really? Could you give me some prices against the similar set up with Keysight?

[G0HZU]

Aside from the simple fact that formal acceptance testing doesn't necessarily require an ATE.

But it often requires overnight or unattended testing with the ability to monitor and log any non compliance events.

I would expect that power and motor control would require quite lengthy soak test routines across temperature, voltage and load. Not a lot of fun if someone has to sit there all the time looking at test gear.

But maybe the OP doesn't 'need' to do any ATE or soak testing. I suggested Agilent only if ATE was needed because their products are a fairly safe choice for ATE with minimal bugs and good technical support. Also ATE doesn't always mean huge and heavy racks of test gear and lots of NRE costs. It can be as simple as a lashup on an engineers bench with a few bits of test gear connected via GPIB or some other interface and all controlled by a simple control program written by the engineer in VB or something similar.

[Wuerstchenhund]

I don't really care much for these proper documentation tools, I can just as easily take screenshots of the Agilent scope's waveforms using their built in software, It could be an advantage, but It isn't worth silly money extra.

Maybe, but it's standard with all LeCroy X-Stream scopes (and has so for over a decade) so there's no additional money involved. I use it quite often for documenting certain tests, and does more than just taking screenshots.

But at the end of the day you have to decide if that is important for you. I just wanted to mention it as these features are often overlooked.

You keep saying the WaveSurfer is cheaper and all that. Not sure really? Could you give me some prices against the similar set up with Keysight?

Sure (although, really, you could have done that easily yourself).

Let's have a look at the WaveSurfer 3054 (500MHz 4Ch) which has a street price of between $6949 and $7850:
http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?x=0&y=0&lang=en&site=us&keywords=Wavesurfer+3054
http://www2.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3054/?qs=%2fha2pyFadujJWeX%2fwfDD9iHh9Y6%2ffJ%252b%252bMSlDa5Bfu%2fC9ohyHVYEg2Q%3d%3d
http://www.tme.eu/en/details/lc-surfer3054/digital-oscilloscopes/teledyne-lecroy/wavesurfer-3054/
http://www.tequipment.net/LeCroy/WaveSurfer-3054/Digital-Oscilloscopes/DSO/

One suggestion was the Keysight DSOX3000 Series. Unfortunately I couldn't find street prices for the DSOX3000T but Keysight wants $11,200 for it:
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2486131-pn-DSOX3054T/oscilloscope-500-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng (Keysight uses geolocation and might switch to your country's website which might not show any pricing)

The older Keysight DSOX3054 isn't much cheaper:
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-1948448-pn-DSOX3054A/oscilloscope-500-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng
http://www.tequipment.net/AgilentDSOX3054A.asp?v=7401

This shows that the WaveSurfer 3054 is roughly $4k cheaper than the Keysight DSOX3054(T). I don't know you but $4k is a lot of money in my book.


The other suggestion was a 200MHz scope. The WaveSurfer 3024 is roughly $3800 to $3900:
http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?x=0&y=0&lang=en&site=us&keywords=Wavesurfer+3024
http://www2.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3024/?qs=%2fha2pyFadujJWeX%2fwfDD9r1Ni8eBeO6prxYfayRwY%2fOihHBwlCzV8g%3d%3d

Let's look at the Keysight DSOX3024 (T and non-T):
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2483850-pn-DSOX3024T/oscilloscope-200-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-1946679-pn-DSOX3024A/oscilloscope-200-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng
http://www.tequipment.net/AgilentDSOX3024A.asp?v=7401

The Keysight is rougly around $4400 which means it's still around $600 more expensive than the WaveSurfer.

I'm not going into the DSOX4000 as this scope is even more expensive, and as already mentioned in another posting for what Keysight is asking for it you can already get a LeCroy high end scope which is vastly superior.

That LeCroy is cheaper than Keysight isn't new, in fact it has often been the case in the last 20 years or so.

[Wuerstchenhund]

Aside from the simple fact that formal acceptance testing doesn't necessarily require an ATE.

But it often requires overnight or unattended testing with the ability to monitor and log any non compliance events.

Sure, but you don't need a full size purpose-built ATE for that. Remote-controllable test equipment (which is pretty standard nowadays) and a computer with the software is all you need. Depending on the scope you don't even need the computer.

But maybe the OP doesn't 'need' to do any ATE or soak testing. I suggested Agilent only if ATE was needed because their products are a fairly safe choice for ATE with minimal bugs and good technical support.

As I said before, Agilent/Keysight isn't necessarily better in this regard than the other big names (I'm not talking about Rigol and Siglent of course). As long as you stick to a reputable vendor your're pretty safe. And it would be pretty foolish to give up functionality that might be essential for a bench scope just because of a perceived 'superiority' for ATE operation.

Automated testing is a no-brainer for any of the big brand gear today, and you can easily setup an automated tester with any Tek, Keysight, LeCroy, R&S or whatever device that is remote controllable.

Then there's also the option to simply give certain tests to an external provider who has the necessary equipment to automatize. Especially when it comes to environmental testing (temperature, shock/vibration) this usually gets pretty involving, with very expensive test equipment.

[nctnico]

Still I wonder whether you want to leave something running overnight.
Usually I build dedicated test rigs because that is cheaper than tying up expensive test gear for a long period.

[Wuerstchenhund]

Still I wonder whether you want to leave something running overnight.

Certainly not unsupervised, no matter if it's bench kit or a proper racked ATE.

Usually I build dedicated test rigs because that is cheaper than tying up expensive test gear for a long period.

Me, too, and also because test kit for ATEs often has different requirements than bench kit anyways.

[G0HZU]

Still I wonder whether you want to leave something running overnight.

Certainly not unsupervised, no matter if it's bench kit or a proper racked ATE.

I assumed the OP was involved in professional design of power and motor control systems and therefore they may be long term testing involved. I've tested stuff overnight loads of times at work and so have my colleagues. Also we sometimes have our designs soak tested for days at a time at places like Cape (now Trac) Engineering (UK). They can do harsh environmental testing that we can't do in our labs beyond our various (but basic) Thermotron chambers.

[CM800]

Still I wonder whether you want to leave something running overnight.
Usually I build dedicated test rigs because that is cheaper than tying up expensive test gear for a long period.

I would be expecting to do that indeed, week long runs and so on, but yeh, I would make a test rig for something like that!

[CM800]

I don't really care much for these proper documentation tools, I can just as easily take screenshots of the Agilent scope's waveforms using their built in software, It could be an advantage, but It isn't worth silly money extra.

Maybe, but it's standard with all LeCroy X-Stream scopes (and has so for over a decade) so there's no additional money involved. I use it quite often for documenting certain tests, and does more than just taking screenshots.

But at the end of the day you have to decide if that is important for you. I just wanted to mention it as these features are often overlooked.

You keep saying the WaveSurfer is cheaper and all that. Not sure really? Could you give me some prices against the similar set up with Keysight?

Sure (although, really, you could have done that easily yourself).

Let's have a look at the WaveSurfer 3054 (500MHz 4Ch) which has a street price of between $6949 and $7850:
http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?x=0&y=0&lang=en&site=us&keywords=Wavesurfer+3054
http://www2.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3054/?qs=%2fha2pyFadujJWeX%2fwfDD9iHh9Y6%2ffJ%252b%252bMSlDa5Bfu%2fC9ohyHVYEg2Q%3d%3d
http://www.tme.eu/en/details/lc-surfer3054/digital-oscilloscopes/teledyne-lecroy/wavesurfer-3054/
http://www.tequipment.net/LeCroy/WaveSurfer-3054/Digital-Oscilloscopes/DSO/

One suggestion was the Keysight DSOX3000 Series. Unfortunately I couldn't find street prices for the DSOX3000T but Keysight wants $11,200 for it:
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2486131-pn-DSOX3054T/oscilloscope-500-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng (Keysight uses geolocation and might switch to your country's website which might not show any pricing)

The older Keysight DSOX3054 isn't much cheaper:
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-1948448-pn-DSOX3054A/oscilloscope-500-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng
http://www.tequipment.net/AgilentDSOX3054A.asp?v=7401

This shows that the WaveSurfer 3054 is roughly $4k cheaper than the Keysight DSOX3054(T). I don't know you but $4k is a lot of money in my book.


The other suggestion was a 200MHz scope. The WaveSurfer 3024 is roughly $3800 to $3900:
http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?x=0&y=0&lang=en&site=us&keywords=Wavesurfer+3024
http://www2.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3024/?qs=%2fha2pyFadujJWeX%2fwfDD9r1Ni8eBeO6prxYfayRwY%2fOihHBwlCzV8g%3d%3d

Let's look at the Keysight DSOX3024 (T and non-T):
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-2483850-pn-DSOX3024T/oscilloscope-200-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng
http://www.keysight.com/en/pd-1946679-pn-DSOX3024A/oscilloscope-200-mhz-4-channels?cc=US&lc=eng
http://www.tequipment.net/AgilentDSOX3024A.asp?v=7401

The Keysight is rougly around $4400 which means it's still around $600 more expensive than the WaveSurfer.

I'm not going into the DSOX4000 as this scope is even more expensive, and as already mentioned in another posting for what Keysight is asking for it you can already get a LeCroy high end scope which is vastly superior.

That LeCroy is cheaper than Keysight isn't new, in fact it has often been the case in the last 20 years or so.

I was quite supprised by some of those figures, everywhere I was looking, Lecroy was much more expensive then Agilent. Thanks for finding those prices. I think I shall request a demo unit from them to have a play around... Thing is I need to set up and get stuff in to actually test first (the electronics lab has -nothing- to test as we are just planning to get into product design. haven't even started yet.

[nctnico]

Still I wonder whether you want to leave something running overnight.
Usually I build dedicated test rigs because that is cheaper than tying up expensive test gear for a long period.

I would be expecting to do that indeed, week long runs and so on, but yeh, I would make a test rig for something like that!

Another good idea is to make a device self-monitoring. For example by counting the number of interrupts, overcurrent events, maximum / minimum temperature, etc ,etc you can eliminate most of the ATE equipment required for testing AND you can get some diagnostic information from units installed in the field.

[Wuerstchenhund]

I was quite supprised by some of those figures, everywhere I was looking, Lecroy was much more expensive then Agilent.

I don't know where you looked of course but I haven't seen the WS3k anywhere as to what Agilent/Keysight asks for their DSOX3k. Funny enough LeCroy seems to be associated with expensive in some people's minds, which I guess comes from the fact that they mostly make high end scopes which tend to be very pricey, and only in 2008/2009 came out with their entry level scopes (WaveAce, don't ask, it's crap).

Thanks for finding those prices. I think I shall request a demo unit from them to have a play around... Thing is I need to set up and get stuff in to actually test first (the electronics lab has -nothing- to test as we are just planning to get into product design. haven't even started yet.

If I remember right then what you will be working on is similar to what TunerSandwich does for a living (power electronics). He hasn't replied to this thread yet but maybe give him a shout, he might give you better advice for your particular circumstances.

[nctnico]

I'd be careful with just comparing base prices. I have a strong feeling everyone tries to make the price of the base model low but charge a lot for the options. IMHO you should determine which options you want and then compare prices.

[CM800]

I was quite supprised by some of those figures, everywhere I was looking, Lecroy was much more expensive then Agilent.

I don't know where you looked of course but I haven't seen the WS3k anywhere as to what Agilent/Keysight asks for their DSOX3k. Funny enough LeCroy seems to be associated with expensive in some people's minds, which I guess comes from the fact that they mostly make high end scopes which tend to be very pricey, and only in 2008/2009 came out with their entry level scopes (WaveAce, don't ask, it's crap).

Thanks for finding those prices. I think I shall request a demo unit from them to have a play around... Thing is I need to set up and get stuff in to actually test first (the electronics lab has -nothing- to test as we are just planning to get into product design. haven't even started yet.

If I remember right then what you will be working on is similar to what TunerSandwich does for a living (power electronics). He hasn't replied to this thread yet but maybe give him a shout, he might give you better advice for your particular circumstances.

I've popped him a message, thanks for that suggestion.

Yeh, that is indeed what I was thinking. I think I may be being drawn towards just how sexy the Lecroy scopes are (they look so much better then the Rigol ones that look like they were designed for kids.)

[nfmax]

Keep an eye open for bargains. Last year, I bought an ex-demo MSO-X 2024A, in 'certiprime' condition with full calibration certificate and three years warranty, with every available optional  firmware feature, for £1970. The supplier was Aspen Electronics, who are an official Keysight UK dealer. They will come and demo equipment for you (which is why they regularly have ex-demo equipment available). There are few things showing on their website now - unfortunately not quite such a steal as I made, as the special offer on the options is now over.

The 2000 series would not suit you, as it lacks the probe interface, and you will need to use differential and current probes in your work. But as a hobby scope it's the bees knees!

[CM800]

Keep an eye open for bargains. Last year, I bought an ex-demo MSO-X 2024A, in 'certiprime' condition with full calibration certificate and three years warranty, with every available optional  firmware feature, for £1970. The supplier was Aspen Electronics, who are an official Keysight UK dealer. They will come and demo equipment for you (which is why they regularly have ex-demo equipment available). There are few things showing on their website now - unfortunately not quite such a steal as I made, as the special offer on the options is now over.

The 2000 series would not suit you, as it lacks the probe interface, and you will need to use differential and current probes in your work. But as a hobby scope it's the bees knees!

Ah yes, I was recommended that exact same thing by my friend, the same company too infact! haha.

[G0HZU]

The other suggestion was a 200MHz scope. The WaveSurfer 3024 is roughly $3800 to $3900:

If I wanted a 4 channel scope I'd want dedicated vertical controls for each channel. But that scope only has one set of (shared) vertical controls and an oddly arranged set of channel select buttons.

Maybe some people prefer that type of interface but I would instantly hate it because I've always used scopes with dedicated controls for each channel. The fact that the channel select buttons appear to be arranged vertically make me think that the scope designer (Siglent?) is either deliberately trying to be 'different' when it comes to the user interface or is trying to make 'cheap' look elegant. Either way I'd be regularly cursing that scope if I had to do any intensive interface tweaking across all 4 channels.

The vertical channel selector buttons and single vertical controls would be a dealbreaker for me...

[CM800]

The other suggestion was a 200MHz scope. The WaveSurfer 3024 is roughly $3800 to $3900:

If I wanted a 4 channel scope I'd want dedicated vertical controls for each channel. But that scope only has one set of (shared) vertical controls and an oddly arranged set of channel select buttons.

Maybe some people prefer that type of interface but I would instantly hate it because I've always used scopes with dedicated controls for each channel. The fact that the channel select buttons appear to be arranged vertically make me think that the scope designer (Siglent?) is either deliberately trying to be 'different' when it comes to the user interface or is trying to make 'cheap' look elegant. Either way I'd be regularly cursing that scope if I had to do any intensive interface tweaking across all 4 channels.

The vertical channel selector buttons and single vertical controls would be a dealbreaker for me...

I understand some people may have problems with that but since my first scope was a DS1104Z I am more used to it so it isn't really a problem for me.

[G0HZU]

I understand some people may have problems with that but since my first scope was a DS1104Z I am more used to it so it isn't really a problem for me.

In that case you might prefer the LeCroy. Because your requirements are fairly basic I think a lot boils down to personal preference. Although from a business point of view you may also have to consider overall running costs YoY and the attractiveness of any warranty/support/cal contracts that may be on offer across all the test gear you buy.

[nctnico]

The other suggestion was a 200MHz scope. The WaveSurfer 3024 is roughly $3800 to $3900:

If I wanted a 4 channel scope I'd want dedicated vertical controls for each channel. But that scope only has one set of (shared) vertical controls and an oddly arranged set of channel select buttons.

Maybe some people prefer that type of interface but I would instantly hate it because I've always used scopes with dedicated controls for each channel.

You'll get used to that quickly enough. I can use both types of scopes without problems. Individual controls are nicer but giving up some buttons for a bigger screen or only have a few (bigger) buttons to deal with makes sense.

[G0HZU]

You'll get used to that quickly enough.

Maybe... I noticed that even the expensive LeCroy scopes are the same. But every scope I've used since my student days has had dedicated vertical controls so it could be a case of old dog and new tricks. I could live with it but I don't think I'd ever warm to it 

The other thing that is important (to me at least) is the usability and quality of the FFT mode.  How does this compare between various models in this price bracket? I don't know how important this is for motor/power stuff though. 

[Wuerstchenhund]

You'll get used to that quickly enough.

Maybe... I noticed that even the expensive LeCroy scopes are the same. But every scope I've used since my student days has had dedicated vertical controls so it could be a case of old dog and new tricks. I could live with it but I don't think I'd ever warm to it 

Yes, all 'true' LeCroy scopes (i.e. not the rebadges) have a single vertical control. The only exception was the WaveMaster 8000(A), WavePro 7000(A) and WaveRunner 6000(A) Series which had individual controls.

It's usually not a big issue. What most people coming from other scopes struggle more is that LeCroy has horiziontal and vertical controls swapped over other scopes, which can take a while to get acustomed to when you're used to the standard setup, but even this is a minor invonvenience (especially since many scopes from other manufacturers like Keysight now no longer have horizontal controls on the right hand side but i.e. on the top area of the front panel). I regularly swap between the Agilents at work, my WavePro (individual controls) and my WaveRunner 64Xi (single vertical control), and I rarely use the wrong knob.

And if you think the single vertical control is bad then have a look at the old HP 54500 Series of which most models had a single knob for *all* functions (only the later scopes had individual knobs). God I loved these scopes 

The other thing that is important (to me at least) is the usability and quality of the FFT mode.  How does this compare between various models in this price bracket? I don't know how important this is for motor/power stuff though.

FFT on the Agilent is pretty basic and only goes to 64k points which is still better than the Rigols but overall not much. The WaveSurfer 3000 goes to 1M. Maths on the WaveSurfer is also more flexible.

For power electronics stuff the optional Power Analysis options that are available for some scopes might be useful. It's not (yet?) available for the WS3000 but the WaveSurfer 10 has it available (option WS10-PWR):
http://cdn.teledynelecroy.com/files/pdf/wavesurfer10-datasheet.pdf

the WS10 is a 1GHz scope with 10GSa/s and 20Mpts but at $9980 it's still noticeably cheaper than the Agilent DSOX3054 with 500MHz bandwidth only:
http://www2.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-10/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMs4AFwHyzhTm3RqmtTN9JCXtuq0OnV0CmI%3d
http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/WAVESURFER%2010/WAVESURFER%2010-ND/4990945

And it's even more advanced than the WS3000, and supports more serial decode options. There's also a Spectrum Analyzer option (WS10-SPECTRUM) available for it.

I think TunerSandwich uses the Power Analysis option for his work, and might be better suited to say if it could be useful in this case.

[CM800]

Not really interested in anything over 200MHz for now. It seems like huge overkill for what I am doing.

I will get either this one:

Lecroy 200MHz 4 channel:  £2,925.56
http://uk.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3024/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMt57hNjmO%252b8mw6TsCgrgmj5iXBy4qoSgs0%3d

Agilent 200MHz 4 channel: £3012.00
http://uk.farnell.com/keysight-technologies/dsox3024t/oscilloscope-4-ch-200mhz-5gsps/dp/2449635



Lecroy 200MHz 4 channel with Digital Inputs: £2,925.56 + £1,171.52 = £4,097.08
http://uk.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WAVESURFER-3024/?qs=sGAEpiMZZMt57hNjmO%252b8mw6TsCgrgmj5iXBy4qoSgs0%3d
+
http://uk.mouser.com/ProductDetail/Teledyne-LeCroy/WS3K-MSO/?qs=%2fha2pyFadujetpotou2vdZwVIQpiCLhoPsRcDCCFSXw%3d


Agilent 200MHz 4 channel with Digital Inputs: £4,028.00
http://uk.farnell.com/keysight-technologies/msox3024t/oscilloscope-20-ch-200mhz-5gsps/dp/2449645

[nctnico]

About power analyses: for that you'll also need a current probe. Those are rather expensive and for anything serious I'd prefer to have two 

[don]

That was my point. If Lecroy can't intervene and get Siglent to fix these things, then that does not bode well for any sort of relationship between Siglent and Lecroy.

Not really. The WaveAce were bought as finished product, designed by Siglent, built by Siglent, maintained by Siglent. LeCroy got exactly what they ordered, which is a low end scope that gets the same firmware updates as the Siglent original. In hindsight it certainly wasn't a good decision on LeCroy's part to buy in some bottom-of-the-barrel scope, but at the end of the day they got what they ordered and paid for.

What if the WS3000 for example starts to ship with hardware faults (because it's Siglent hardware), the same debacle could ensue.

No, it can't. The difference is that for the WS3000, LeCroy has had it's finger on the hardware design (and also showed Siglent a few things along the lines of how to do scope design properly), something they hadn't done on the WaveAce. The WS3000 design has followed the same quality and reliability criteria as for other LeCroy scopes. Outsourcing production doesn't change that.

There's really no need to worry because the WS3000 is produced by Siglent. Outsourcing has always been part of LeCroy's business strategy, and is one of the rare cases where it actually made sense. The WaveRunner LT/WavePro 900 (both LeCroy developed) were made by Iwatsu. Some of the WaveRunner (M)Xi/(M)Xi-A and WaveSurfer Xs/Xs-B were made by another electronics manufacturer in Malaysia, and so on. Nothing new here. LeCroy could have produced the WS3000 themselves in the US, but then the scope would have cost probably at least 30% more, which is a difficult sell in this price class.

The WaveAce is shit, no doubt about that. But the WaveSurfer 3000 is as much LeCroy as any of their other midrange and highend scopes. I had a chance to play with one for a day, and it's really an outstanding scope in this price segment.

It's short-sighted to say "There's really no need to worry because the WS3000 is produced by Siglent."    And LeCroy's "finger on the HW design" ?   It takes a lot more than a finger to get a solid design.    Siglent is the HW designer, not just manufacturer.  That's an incredibly huge difference.  LeCroy should have done it themselves if they want people to trust it's as good as 100% LeCroy after the recent siglent/lecroy products.   And past products made by Iwatsu does not apply here anyway because history does not guarantee anything about future products with other partners.   The most applicable recent history is the Siglent Waveace and Siglent SDS2000 . Especially given that SDS2000 and SDS3000/WS3000 were developed at the same time. 

More importantly is LeCroy's poor quality control team that gave their seal of approval to Waveace.  That's just wrong.  If waveaces was supposed to be a bad scope with no planned fixes and  LeCroy planned that then it's hard to blindly trust the SDS/WS3000.   Smart buyers should question these products.  Just like any other spec.   I like LeCroy, but can't give them an automatic pass because it says LeCroy and has LeCroy firmware.  Some reviews would be nice, but for whatever reason there is very little out there.  I hope it's a good scope,  but it's disingenuous for you to dismiss other scopes as much as you do and sell LeCroy scopes as hard as you do without acknowledging the risk associated with a design by siglent / lecroy.   

If you owned one or used one at work and were answering technical questions I might give much more credence to your sales pitch, at least if you stuck with facts.  For example, you incorrectly stated it has 6 math functions instead of 2 so you do not appear to know THAT much about the scope .  You stated that when comparing it's math functions as an advantage over Agilent 5yr "rehashed" scope.  Not a big deal on it's own, but combined with you dismissing other brands as much as you do I expected more knowledge of the product you are pushing.   And what new technology is so amazing in SDS/WS3000 anyway compared to agilent and tek?  Yes, looks like a decent scope, but nothing special compared to agilent 3000 and tek's MDO3000 offerings.  One can argue the SDS/WS3000 is a "rehash" of existing technology as well.   Perhaps a rehashed siglent design on the HW side.   Windows embedded? Resistive touch? No new scope technology their for the end user.   Maui interface?  It's fine, but not amazing enough to make me ignore agilent/tek.   I just don't see the justification for the strong selling you do and bashing of other scopes as much as you do.  They all have advantages and disadvantages and winner should be judged by what the tool can do for the purchaser compared to other tools.

Do you perhaps work for LeCroy in some capacity or own their stock?