Digital Oscilloscope Chart

[miguelvp]

TL;DR the Rigol DS2000 series capture rate is 50,000 wfms/s not 65,000, that's the max number of waveforms it can record. Also on the DS1000Z there is no 60,000 wfms/s option that is for recording as well.

Not sure how Rigol got their 65,000 wfms/s, I've never seen anything higher than 48,000 and I thought they did claim just 50,000 but not sure.

Actually I did look at the specs and it's 50,000 wfms/s for the whole DS2000 series:

http://www.tequipment.net/assets/1/26/DS2000A_DataSheet_EN.pdf

DS1000z series capture rate is 30,000 wfms/s no option available to do more:

http://www.tequipment.net/assets/1/26/MSO__DS1000Z_Datasheet-EN.pdf

Still it's a useless figure because that's at 700 points Mem depth, at 1.4Kpoints it halves and at 14.0Kpoints it's 1/10th (~5,000 wfms/s), Edit: and the capture rate changes with the vertical settings as well, maybe it will reach the 50,000 at the 500uV per division at X1.

At 500ns time division feeding it a 600 KHz 9Vpp sawtooth signal with the vertical set at 2 V per division I get a whooping 35.5 Hz No K in there. Edit: my bad, I still had the mem depth set to 56M oops, at 14kpts it's triggering at 5,000 wfms/s.

So that waveform capture data spec is useless, If you want to find something you better set the trigger right, even at the full 50,000 wfms/s you will be missing quite a bit so you can't rely on the capture rate anyways.

Also there are a lot of things missing in your charts.
For example Analysis of recorded data with pass/fail masks.
Decoding and what can it decode.
LXI communication

Just to name a few.

Last but not least, I only looked at the DS2000 and not in detail so it seems the document is lacking due diligence IMHO.

[tautech]

rs20;
Problem with that is it takes away from this forum as in a benefit for the members. IOW's it's just another reason to visit here. 
For that monstrous multimeter chart. That is grossly overwhelming.  Too much info. I can't even imagine who long it took to compose all of that. 

Really, just how did you think it would be used?
Select a DMM, based on local availability, price and the features you need and see how it compares against similar. 
We are very lucky to have this "living" document, there's nothing that can compare. 

[rs20]

rs20;
Problem with that is it takes away from this forum as in a benefit for the members. IOW's it's just another reason to visit here. 
For that monstrous multimeter chart. That is grossly overwhelming.  Too much info. I can't even imagine who long it took to compose all of that. 

Er... so you're advocating a centithread of people badgering a single person to continuously edit and re-upload an XLS on the basis that that "solution" acts as an advertisement/benefit for EEVBlog? Ridiculous.

Let's focus on what is the best solution for oscilloscope selection for everyone, rather than trying to achieve some bizarre marketing goal or to deprive non-members.

Finally, if you're overwhelmed by the spreadsheet, just hide columns and rows you aren't interested in. Simple.

[videobruce]

rs20;
The only thing that is ridiculous is being labeled as a "supporter" when you label my suggestion of this being a benefit to this forum "ridiculous"

[rs20]

rs20;
The only thing that is ridiculous is being labeled as a "supporter" when you label my suggestion of this being a benefit to this forum "ridiculous"

Cheers, I enjoy ad hominem attacks. I'm labelled as a supporter because I am a supporter.

If you could explain how making one person collate a whole bunch of suggestions from a centithread and re-upload XLSs on a regular basis is a not a far worse solution than mine for the members (let alone anyone else on the planet), then I might change my mind. I didn't label your concept as ridiculous because I don't care about the community, I did so because it's ridiculous to think that your concept will help the community.

[fanOfeeDIY]

Hi all,

I just sorted by prices, fixed RIGOL's waveform updates, moving discontinued models, and uploaded to google drive.
It took me a while to get used to on uploading Google drive and editing on the web, but it was ok

Adding more models will take more times, maybe some other days, today is Sunday and have things to do

[fanOfeeDIY]

One of the reason I felt like writing on the forum is that, the eevblog is on Australia.

I stayed in Australia mostly in Sydney using Working Holiday visa when I was a student long time ago.
It was not every thing perfect, but I enjoyed it, learning Australian English, garbage -> rubbish, gasoline -> petrol, Theater -> Cinema and etc.
Tomato is pronounced as tomato and not tomeito

I do not see much (actually any) Japanese posting here, so I guess the Australia government issued me the visa was effective for the objective.

[Wuerstchenhund]

Compiling a chart as this is not just time consuming, it's a nightmare as it's very easy to mix specs up or enter incorrect numbers. I know because I have complied charts for spectrum analyzers and consumer DVR's. It sure as hell isn't easy.

I never said it's easy.

Instead of being "harsh", why not correct some of the errors that you see?? 

What for? I mean, seriously, what's the purpose of this table?

You know how many scopes are out there? Even if we stay with DSOs and forego all the analog scopes this still leaves us with several hundreds of different scopes from the big brands alone. You want to stick all of them into the table? If not, which one do you want to omit, and why?

And what about updating the pricing on a regular basis? And what reference location (Japan, US, Europe, Antarctica) should be used for pricing? And what sources (reseller, ebay)?

I appreciate the work the OP has done but sorry I can't see what use such a table has. It lists a few very basic specs plus some subjective guesswork like "Build Quality", plus some arbitrary prices (from where? My guess is Japan but pricing there is usually pretty high and of little relevance to the rest of the world). You really want to point to this list next time a beginner asks for advice on getting a scope? There's hardly enough information to for anyone to decide for the right scope, simply because there are many more factors involved than what are listed as categories on this table. It won't even help a beginner because he'll probably know even less of what the scopes in particular can do and what not as the more experienced members, and in the end will just create confusion and frustration. Talk about providing a dis-service here.

There's a reason why the current system (people come here, list their individual requirements, and get advice based on that) works very well. I really can't remember a single time when someone said "oh, I wished we had a list with the most basic specs of all oscilloscopes". Such a table may have some use for simpler instruments like handheld DMMs, but DSOs are much more complex.

Again, I appreciate that creating the tables took a lot of work, but in my opinion this is a 'solution' in search of a problem. And useful participation in communities is like these doesn't mean just doing 'something', it means addressing an actual problem. And I'm sorry but I can't see the absence of such a table as a problem.

[videobruce]

What for? I mean, seriously, what's the purpose of this table?

A starting and/or reference point.
.

You know how many scopes are out there?

Too many.
Both of those comments apply to that multimeter table, if not more so. Then why do we need a 'sticky' on multmeters? 

If you narrow it down to the most current, name brands available In Australia, Europe, the UK, the US & Canada in a middle price range, say $500 to $1500 (give or take), I'm sure the list would be substantially less than those multimeters. beside, just because you don't feel a need, I'm sure others do.

[nctnico]

There's a reason why the current system (people come here, list their individual requirements, and get advice based on that) works very well. I really can't remember a single time when someone said "oh, I wished we had a list with the most basic specs of all oscilloscopes".

IMHO such a list is nice to have because it offers an overview of what is out there. I'm sure it will point people to brands or types they didn't know about.

[pickle9000]

One thing that would be nice to include would be the rebranded model names and numbers, Rigol and Siglent both do this. Lecroy does Siglent, B&K, Atten (mostly Siglent I think), Agilent is Rigol.

I'm sure there are variances, Siglent makes a 2 part firmware to allow manufacturers to keep logo's and such in place. Power supplies may have better caps and so on, but that would actually have to be verified.

[videobruce]

I really can't remember a single time when someone said "oh, I wished we had a list with the most basic specs of all oscilloscopes". Such a table may have some use for simpler instruments like handheld DMMs, but DSOs are much more complex.

There is always a first time and judging by the response were, it already happened.
More complex instruments are more of a reason for a chart, not less. 

[rs20]

I really can't remember a single time when someone said "oh, I wished we had a list with the most basic specs of all oscilloscopes". Such a table may have some use for simpler instruments like handheld DMMs, but DSOs are much more complex.

There is always a first time and judging by the response were, it already happened.
More complex instruments are more of a reason for a chart, not less. 

Agreed, for all the complexity of oscilloscopes, you can really summarize the basic things you can achieve with that oscilloscope by stating bandwidth, sample rate, record length, waveforms/second.

So having a place to go where you can say (e.g.) "I don't want to spend more than $1.5k, need 500 MHz, 4 channels, what's my shortlist of models" is obviously very handy.

[Hydrawerk]

I think that most Tektronix scopes do not have a segmented memory.

[pickle9000]

I really can't remember a single time when someone said "oh, I wished we had a list with the most basic specs of all oscilloscopes". Such a table may have some use for simpler instruments like handheld DMMs, but DSOs are much more complex.

There is always a first time and judging by the response were, it already happened.
More complex instruments are more of a reason for a chart, not less. 

Agreed, for all the complexity of oscilloscopes, you can really summarize the basic things you can achieve with that oscilloscope by stating bandwidth, sample rate, record length, waveforms/second.

So having a place to go where you can say (e.g.) "I don't want to spend more than $1.5k, need 500 MHz, 4 channels, what's my shortlist of models" is obviously very handy.

I would add serial decoding and intensity graded display to that basic features list.

[videobruce]

I enjoy ad hominem attacks.

Oh, like you did to me by throwing the first stone? Then, it looks like you do along with your sophisticated terminology.

[rs20]

I enjoy ad hominem attacks.

Oh, like you did to me by throwing the first stone? Then, it looks like you do along with your sophisticated terminology.

I criticized your idea, not you. You still haven't defended your idea.

[videobruce]

No need to, a number of others already have.

[rs20]

videobruce, Taking this off-thread because clearly there's been a miscommunication where you don't realize I'm advocating Google Drive vs XLS centithread -- this distinction has not been mentioned in this thread since my message, except for the OP saying he's done it.

[rf-loop]

I think that most Tektronix scopes do not have a segmented memory.

Even my  20years old TDS520A have FastFrame (aka segmented memory) acquisition. It can do it max 50k frames/s.

Of course it is very limited if compare to today Siglent SDS2000 what can do up to 400k segment/s (400k waveforms/s) including also every segment time stamps. Without time stamps segmented memory acquisition is very limited. (also Rigol DS2000 do not have time stamp what makes its useability very limited.)

[fanOfeeDIY]

Hi all,

Thank you for the all comments.

Today is my weekday, so I have limited time to work on this, but I learned a lot since I posted my initial chart on Friday night.
(*)Correcting incorrect value on segmented memory and waveforme update rates on RIGOLs.
(*)Initially I had features on the left and models on the top but changing the horizontal and vertical of the cart makes significantly better chart.
(*)Learned how to use segmented memory on RIGOL.
(*)Uploading image with png reduces mosquito noise than jpg.
(*)I was able to add SIGLENT in the chart.
(*)Owen, Hantek, GW-instek and Iwatsu are others to add in the chart.
(*)Learned how to use excel, Google drive, and edit on the Google drive.
(*)Sorting the chart by price is much better, since the price is probably the most interest in the chart.
(*)Japanese member "mojo-chan" is posting a lot on eevblog.

Pretty good experience to learn for me in a few days.
I am happy that I posted my chart.

Also, I added to the first post, this is the link to the Google drive, which I am expecting for people to add comments.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rtPqMAkNw2bSkqocuc7zcYkl57fsdPVlxzyqcJmbKIc/edit?usp=sharing

[fanOfeeDIY]

Hi rf-loop,

Do you mind teaching me all the Tektronix models in the chart has FastFrame (segmented memory) or not?
I would like to update the chat.
The word FastFrame is another word I learned today.

[fanOfeeDIY]

Just added models by Hantek, GW-instek and IWATSU. 

[videobruce]

fanOfeeDIY;
I would limit the chart to stand along bench scopes. No PC or handheld. There are just too many models with just those others.
Those other categories should have there own list.
Eliminate those 5" cheapo's and put a ceiling around $1500. Some of those names have way to many just by themselves. 

[fanOfeeDIY]

Hi,

I added a column for whether has separated individual vertical knobs for each channels or sharing among channels, based on the feedback.
Having separated knobs for each channels seem to be interested for some people which improve usability.

I updated the first post with changes.

I tried to add OWEN and GRATTEN but not today.