Help me choosing new Oscilloscope

[bigfede]

Hello everybody,

I have no decided yet, but I'm looking around to see which is suitable for my application. I had in the past the DS1054Z unlocked. Recently I've sell it on eBay trying to upgrade my bench.
In general I do not use scope for "fast" signals (I have never measured signals faster than 10MHz) but just for power supplies ripples, data bus, and so on. Never used for any kind of HF application. So my question is, can you help me choosing ?
My budget: 1000-1500€ and I have seen the MSO5074 and the HDO1074. I know they are pretty different from each other, but thinking about the future I don't know which is the "best" choice. I know that MSO5000 have huge sample rate with respect to HDO1000.. but is it really important?

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

[tggzzz]

In general I do not use scope for "fast" signals (I have never measured signals faster than 10MHz) but just for power supplies ripples, data bus, and so on. Never used for any kind of HF application.

"Data bus" implies a digital waveform implies you are measuring fast signals. Hint: the clock rate is irrelevant: all that matters is the transition time.

FFI, with a little theory and some demonstrations: https://entertaininghacks.wordpress.com/2018/05/08/digital-signal-integrity-and-bandwidth-signals-risetime-is-important-period-is-irrelevant/

[Fungus]

In general I do not use scope for "fast" signals (I have never measured signals faster than 10MHz) but just for power supplies ripples, data bus, and so on. Never used for any kind of HF application. So my question is, can you help me choosing ?
My budget: 1000-1500€ and I have seen the MSO5074 and the HDO1074. I know they are pretty different from each other, but thinking about the future I don't know which is the "best" choice.

We know even less about your future than you do. 

HDO1074 is best for power supply ripple.

MSO5074 is best for data buses.

What sort of power supply ripple do you need to see? Are you worried by 50mV, by 5mV or by 0.5mV?

[bigfede]

In general I do not use scope for "fast" signals (I have never measured signals faster than 10MHz) but just for power supplies ripples, data bus, and so on. Never used for any kind of HF application.

"Data bus" implies a digital waveform implies you are measuring fast signals. Hint: the clock rate is irrelevant: all that matters is the transition time.

FFI, with a little theory and some demonstrations: https://entertaininghacks.wordpress.com/2018/05/08/digital-signal-integrity-and-bandwidth-signals-risetime-is-important-period-is-irrelevant/

That's pretty interesting article! Thanks a lot.

[bigfede]

In general I do not use scope for "fast" signals (I have never measured signals faster than 10MHz) but just for power supplies ripples, data bus, and so on. Never used for any kind of HF application. So my question is, can you help me choosing ?
My budget: 1000-1500€ and I have seen the MSO5074 and the HDO1074. I know they are pretty different from each other, but thinking about the future I don't know which is the "best" choice.

We know even less about your future than you do. 

HDO1074 is best for power supply ripple.

MSO5074 is best for data buses.

What sort of power supply ripple do you need to see? Are you worried by 50mV, by 5mV or by 0.5mV?

Good point. The answer is that I don't know 
Basically I'm looking for a valid upgrade. Usually 5mV is sufficient on most of my application.

[Fungus]

Even with its noisier front end the MSO5000 should show if ripple is >=5mV, no problem.

[bigfede]

Ok, but any competitor? I mean I've always used Rigol or Lecroy, but is there any good competitor to this model?

[wasedadoc]

Not clear why you sold the hacked Rigol DS1054Z as it seems to be perfectly adequate for the tasks you list.

[bigfede]

I was able to sell it to a well good price!

[JeremyC]

Ok, but any competitor? I mean I've always used Rigol or Lecroy, but is there any good competitor to this model?

You should check the Siglent SDS2104X Plus, it can be easily hacked to 500MHz and has very low noise front end.

In the EU you can get the SDS2104X+ for ~1199 Euro from “Batter Fly”, link below
https://www.batterfly.com/shop/en/siglent-sds2104x-plus

Check the SDS2104 and MSO5074 side by side review:

[TomKatt]

I had in the past the DS1054Z unlocked. Recently I've sell it on eBay trying to upgrade my bench.
In general I do not use scope for "fast" signals (I have never measured signals faster than 10MHz) but just for power supplies ripples, data bus, and so on. Never used for any kind of HF application. So my question is, can you help me choosing ?

Just curious - from your description, it would almost seem as though the DS1054Z would have met most of your requirements...  In what ways did you find it lacking enough to sell it and consider upgrading?

Your requirements seem relatively modest, yet your budget and considerations far exceed them?

Edit - of course, you may be like myself and simply always want 'better'...  However, the wife tends to view priorities somewhat differently lol 

[nctnico]

There are many recent threads about oscilloscopes so there really isn't a good reason to start another one. The  DS1054Z firmware has slowly matured but the newer Rigols seem like a bug-fest needing a couple of years to get fixed.

With the OP's budget I'd take a good look at one of the new, big screen MicSig tablet oscilloscopes.

[bigfede]

I point out that the screen was pretty small when working with four channels, also the FFT was not readable at all. Also I thought to upgrade in order to be able to do "more". For example: I have a logic analyser that directly connect to my Mac, It's from DreamSourceLab and it works pretty good, I can record and then do some kind of post processing. It happened sometime that I need to have a look at signals in real time, and it was not possible at all! So maybe with the MSO5000 the integrates digital inputs I can finally do that.

[bigfede]

Ok, but any competitor? I mean I've always used Rigol or Lecroy, but is there any good competitor to this model?

You should check the Siglent SDS2104X Plus, it can be easily hacked to 500MHz and has very low noise front end.

In the EU you can get the SDS2104X+ for ~1199 Euro from “Batter Fly”, link below
https://www.batterfly.com/shop/en/siglent-sds2104x-plus

Check the SDS2104 and MSO5074 side by side review:

I've seen this video surfing around on YT and I was not sure on my choice. I mean: the Ripon have 8Gsa/S ( :Pthat for the prize is amazing) but Siglent "only" 2..

[tautech]

I've seen this video surfing around on YT and I was not sure on my choice. I mean: the Ripon have 8Gsa/S ( :Pthat for the prize is amazing) but Siglent "only" 2..

Yes two 2GSa/s ADC's each serving 2 channels and each ADC with 200 Mpts memory depth.
With 4 channels driven SDS2000X Plus provides 1 GSa/s and 100 Mpts max per channel.

Lesson is the big numbers need be broken down to see the full picture.
SDS2000X Plus is a 350 MHz 4ch or 500 MHz 2 channel design depending on how you need to use it.

However, you said the DS1054Z screen was too small for your liking but with a DSO with a webserver you can port the display to a PC display where you won't have any issues with waveforms or FFT being to small.
But this always comes back to needs and available budget.   

[bigfede]

I've seen this video surfing around on YT and I was not sure on my choice. I mean: the Ripon have 8Gsa/S ( :Pthat for the prize is amazing) but Siglent "only" 2..

Yes two 2GSa/s ADC's each serving 2 channels and each ADC with 200 Mpts memory depth.
With 4 channels driven SDS2000X Plus provides 1 GSa/s and 100 Mpts max per channel.

Lesson is the big numbers need be broken down to see the full picture.
SDS2000X Plus is a 350 MHz 4ch or 500 MHz 2 channel design depending on how you need to use it.

However, you said the DS1054Z screen was too small for your liking but with a DSO with a webserver you can port the display to a PC display where you won't have any issues with waveforms or FFT being to small.
But this always comes back to needs and available budget.   

Thanks for your suggestion. My point here is to understand if 8Gsa/s VS 2Gsa/s can make really the difference. I was aware that the front end (Rigol) is pretty noisy.

[tautech]

My point here is to understand if 8Gsa/s VS 2Gsa/s can make really the difference.

You missed the point as each have their pluses and minuses. Max sample rate is governed by the # of active channels.
Siglent X Plus and many of their other models use 2x ADC's so when all channels are active the resultant sampling rate determines the system BW for it not to break Nyquist.
Typically its 2.5x BW which for 350 MHz requires 1 GSa/s where for the SDS2000X Plus this is met with all channels active.
But by using 2 ADC's BW can be pushed to 500 MHz and still meet Nyquist on the condition just one channel is used on each 2 GSa/s ADC.
This is managed automatically with BW limiters on the X Plus with Full BW when just 2 channels are used or a 350 MHz BW limit is engaged when a 3rd channel or subsequent is activated.

In reality SDS2104X Plus has a 4ch BW of ~185 MHz and SDS2504X Plus nearly 600 MHz with 2 channels active but 350 MHz when a 3rd or 4th is activated.

[BillyO]

Your original post says "I do not use scope for "fast" signals (I have never measured signals faster than 10MHz) ".  Now it seem you are hung up on 8Gsa/S vs 2Gsa/S.  Have your requirements changed?

First, teh Rigol is 8Gsa/S only for a single channel, by the time you activate all 4 you are down to 2Gsa/S.

The higher sample rate is only really important for the display more complex HF signals.  The analog BW of the Rigol will ensure those signals are pretty much filtered to a sine wave by the time the 8Gsa/S becomes an important factor.  So I'm really not sure why it is emphasized so much in their marketing.  It's really there because they use a single ADC and they want to have 2Gsa/S with all 4 channels enabled.  That is a minor advantage over the Siglent.  You will, if you need to look at 250MHz +, get a little better signal representation with the Rigol.  However, there a far more advantages in favor of the Siglent over the Rigol in other areas.

You need to decide what is important to you and make your decision on which scope best delivers what you need.  But the 8Gsa/S is not something you can fully realize on the Rigol so it's probably best you don't get too hung up on it.

[bigfede]

Your original post says "I do not use scope for "fast" signals (I have never measured signals faster than 10MHz) ".  Now it seem you are hung up on 8Gsa/S vs 2Gsa/S.  Have your requirements changed?

First, teh Rigol is 8Gsa/S only for a single channel, by the time you activate all 4 you are down to 2Gsa/S.

The higher sample rate is only really important for the display more complex HF signals.  The analog BW of the Rigol will ensure those signals are pretty much filtered to a sine wave by the time the 8Gsa/S becomes an important factor.  So I'm really not sure why it is emphasized so much in their marketing.  It's really there because they use a single ADC and they want to have 2Gsa/S with all 4 channels enabled.  That is a minor advantage over the Siglent.  You will, if you need to look at 250MHz +, get a little better signal representation with the Rigol.  However, there a far more advantages in favor of the Siglent over the Rigol in other areas.

You need to decide what is important to you and make your decision on which scope best delivers what you need.  But the 8Gsa/S is not something you can fully realize on the Rigol so it's probably best you don't get too hung up on it.

Thanks, this is the kind of discussion I need to decide.
But now, why Siglent is so much better? Apart that it cost 300€ more.

[Fungus]

First, teh Rigol is 8Gsa/S only for a single channel, by the time you activate all 4 you are down to 2Gsa/S.

Sure, but that's not obligatory. You can have 8Gsa/S when you really need it.

[bigfede]

First, teh Rigol is 8Gsa/S only for a single channel, by the time you activate all 4 you are down to 2Gsa/S.

Sure, but that's not obligatory. You can have 8Gsa/S when you really need it.

That's my point, if needed the Rigol can satisfy 8Gsa/s! Others costs more and with less feature (eg Rigol have also Function Generator built in)

[bdunham7]

That's my point, if needed the Rigol can satisfy 8Gsa/s! Others costs more and with less feature (eg Rigol have also Function Generator built in)

8GSa/s on a scope without 50R inputs seems somewhat pointless, but the minimum 2GSa/s (4 channels active) with 350MHz BW does mean that it will be much less likely to have aliasing effects.  I doubt that is a serious issue for you, but that's the only real selling point.  I'm all for more samples, but not at the expense of some of the other things the Rigol does not do as well.

[bigfede]

That's my point, if needed the Rigol can satisfy 8Gsa/s! Others costs more and with less feature (eg Rigol have also Function Generator built in)

8GSa/s on a scope without 50R inputs seems somewhat pointless, but the minimum 2GSa/s (4 channels active) with 350MHz BW does mean that it will be much less likely to have aliasing effects.  I doubt that is a serious issue for you, but that's the only real selling point.  I'm all for more samples, but not at the expense of some of the other things the Rigol does not do as well.

How about HDO1000?

[TomKatt]

I'm all for more samples, but not at the expense of some of the other things the Rigol does not do as well.

Speaking of which - if the way my Siglent SDS1104X-E operates is representative of how modern DSO's work, the scope cuts back on sampling frequency at lower timebases...  So if the you don't really work with high frequencies much, wouldn't you be paying for sampling rates you couldn't use?

[2N3055]

I'm with Nico here..

This is same again for thousand time same question that was answered so many times before.
To OP:
what do you expect new to hear?  It has been discussed to death..

In that approximate range of MSO scopes there are two scopes Rigol MSO5000 and Siglent SDS2000XPlus.

Rigol is a bit cheaper and Siglent is a bit more expensive. MSO5000 will do the job if you don't need absolutely best analog performance and has few more things: one AWG output  more, more math channels and more decode channels. AWG is limited on both (separate AWG is really the way to go) and math and decode usefulness depends on what you do.
Siglent has better sensitivity and much lower noise, propper FFT implementation, excellent Bode plot implementation, it has only 2 math channels but those you can type arbitrary formula... etc. Each has specific set of strengths and weakneses.

Siglent is generally more refined. To many people MSO5000 will be sufficient. And so will be DS1054Z or Siglent SDS1000X-E..

My advice is to find one of previous endless discussion on this and do your homework. Nobody here actually know what you want, expect, or will do in a future. And it is boring to repeat all the same stuff again and again. Most of the people that could be helpful don't even bother to answer anymore...
Good luck in your quest..