Is a Rigol MSO5000 overkill for a hobbyist?

[2N3055]

And if you take long memory slow acquistion and stop, you can zoom in into detail... And it is much easier to set scope that way instead of mentally calculating how long will certain memory depth be at certain sample rate...

People should stop repeating this nonsense statement. It is not a defect... It is a design decision. Scope captures amount of time that fits on  screen and  as set with timebase, same as analog scope would.
Many other scopes work this way (including LeCroys and Picoscope) and most of the scopes by default work like this also in AUTO memory mode. They have to be put into manual memory mode for this to happen. Some scopes, like Keysight Megazoom, don't do it either, but make a trick that if you stop the scope it takes additional longer capture. So people wrongly think it captured things outside the screen. It didn't, it took separate full memory single capture after you pressed stop...
Even on scopes that can manually control memory, most of the people don't use it and use Auto memory mode because setting memory back and forth all the time is time consuming and annoying and if you just set to longest memory all the time, than it slows down scope to a halt...
It can be useful in some specific scenarios but same captured data can be achieved by simply setting a scope timebase to long setting, capture and then change timebase to faster..

Good points but.. I still prefer a scope that zooms out. In absence of this, I'd like at least to have some workaround a-la-Keysight.

Anyway, a detailed review about this aspect among various brands has been done:

My point is  that you don't understand how it works then. That video is absolutely opposite of detailed review and proven wrong on many points stated in video. But people still watch it but don't read the discussion explaining all the things wrong with it..

There is no free lunch. There is no data being captured outside set time. It is only that you can set time by obscure mental calculation (flying blind and calculating sample rate/ manual memory length ratio) or by simply setting proper time base in a first place...

[Fungus]

Fast forward to 2022 and 2 new model series and the existing SDS5000X series now all have a new memory management mode when combined with deep memory makes for DSO's with market leading zoom out capability.

So they admit that was the wrong way to do it...

[Fungus]

Not when you don´t need to observe very low voltage signals.

And even when you do, it can be made to work (hires mode, heatmap mode, etc).

If you're looking at low level signals all day long then it would make life difficult but many (most?) people simply aren't in that category.

(and if you are, the new Rigol HD will probably kick Siglent ass)

[balnazzar]

Mh, the SDS5000s at the university cannot zoom out, much to the scorn of my professor, who curses all the time for that. Outdated firmware?

[2N3055]

Fast forward to 2022 and 2 new model series and the existing SDS5000X series now all have a new memory management mode when combined with deep memory makes for DSO's with market leading zoom out capability.

So they admit that was the wrong way to do it...

That is a false conclusion.. A non sequitur.. But you know that, oh so well.. Your motive is to provoke people while you enjoy the commotion.

No, they added it to scopes where it was easily possible so we don't have to listen to these incessant trolling from people who don't even own a darn Siglent scope... 
How about that unsubstantiated statement, that is pure figment of my imagination...

[2N3055]

Not when you don´t need to observe very low voltage signals.

And even when you do, it can be made to work (hires mode, heatmap mode, etc).

If you're looking at low level signals all day long then it would make life difficult but many (most?) people simply aren't in that category.

(and if you are, the new Rigol HD will probably kick Siglent ass)

No you can't, and you should stop proving your ignorance..

And from what can be seen so far, new HDO Rigol 4000 is finally with a potential to have decent signal path. 1000 not so much it seems. Better than older Rigols, but nothing special. At the moment it seems there is production delays for 1000 series anyways.
But both are limited in functions, and even HDO4000 is not better noise wise than SDS2000X HD, at best comparable at some parameters.

It still remains to be seen how well Rigol will actually develop the platform..

[balnazzar]

My point is  that you don't understand how it works then. That video is absolutely opposite of detailed review and proven wrong on many points stated in video. But people still watch it but don't read the discussion explaining all the things wrong with it..

There is no free lunch. There is no data being captured outside set time. It is only that you can set time by obscure mental calculation (flying blind and calculating sample rate/ manual memory length ratio) or by simply setting proper time base in a first place...

- Detailed in the sense that the reviews looks at many brands. Not in the technical sense.

- The scope could and should capture much more data with respect to the screen's window. It has the memory and should have the computational/sampling power to do that without slowing down. Otherwise, even the workaround by Keysight is better than nothing. And according to tautech even Siglent is changing its "design choices" about that.

[balnazzar]

I don't damn know why any discussion on this forum has to get inflamed...

[balnazzar]

No, they added it to scopes where it was easily possible so we don't have to listen to these incessant trolling from people who don't even own a darn Siglent scope... 

Mh, now you are making dubious assumptions.

It's much more reasonable to think that they added it because they actually want to *improve* their products, and also they got feedback, and recognized that people consider that feature a nice thing to have.

[balnazzar]

Rigol HDO1000. I wouldn't consider it. It's just a bare scope without all the stuff that comes with a MSO5K.

Basically you pay 1399 just for the high res front end (999 for the 70 MHz is more reasonable).

I know the mantra, "it depends upon what you have to do with it". I'm saying from the point of view of a hobbyst or student who wants a general purpose instrument to grow into.

[2N3055]

My point is  that you don't understand how it works then. That video is absolutely opposite of detailed review and proven wrong on many points stated in video. But people still watch it but don't read the discussion explaining all the things wrong with it..

There is no free lunch. There is no data being captured outside set time. It is only that you can set time by obscure mental calculation (flying blind and calculating sample rate/ manual memory length ratio) or by simply setting proper time base in a first place...

- Detailed in the sense that the reviews looks at many brands. Not in the technical sense.

- The scope could and should capture much more data with respect to the screen windows. It has the memory and should have the computational/sampling power to do that without slowing down. Otherwise, even the workaround by Keysight is better than nothing. And according to tautech even Siglent is changing its "design choices" about that.

Workaround from Keysight is dangerous trick. If you set Normal trigger mode, wait for a sparse  trigger, you get several, you see on the screen something interesting and press stop two things might happen: if there is a trigger within few hundreds milliseconds it will destroy capture from the screen, and get another long capture. Different from the one because of which you stopped the scope. Second option is that if you don't get a new triggerable event in that period, then it will stop and show you your screen. It will not have anything but on the screen in memory. So see, that Keysight trick doesn't work at all, and it's only purpose is to pretend it does... Because of that, and when some of us started to write about it openly, Keysight added manual memory mode to the scopes, so for few years now they have manual memory control. But their trick in normal auto mode does not work and never did.

Siglent didn't change design choices, they added additional fixed sample rate/memory acquisition model  to some scopes (where it was possible) to simply have that function too. And that, mostly, because being able to fix sample rate is useful for many purposes. Fixed memory mode was sort of free ride with that..  If that was to benefit of some users even better.

[2N3055]

No, they added it to scopes where it was easily possible so we don't have to listen to these incessant trolling from people who don't even own a darn Siglent scope... 

Mh, now you are making dubious assumptions.

It's much more reasonable to think that they added it because they actually want to *improve* their products, and also they got feedback, and recognized that people consider that feature a nice thing to have.

I was sarcastic and made a clear statement of that. See my other post..

[2N3055]

Rigol HDO1000. I wouldn't consider it. It's just a bare scope without all the stuff that comes with a MSO5K.

Basically you pay 1399 just for the high res front end (999 for the 70 MHz is more reasonable).

I know the mantra, "it depends upon what you have to do with it". I'm saying from the point of view of a hobbyst or student who wants a general purpose instrument to grow into.

I agree with you. HDO 1000 is basically a DS1000Z with 12bit ADC and big touch screen. MSO5000 is better "all round" scope despite not having best front end, for half a price...

[balnazzar]

Well, not exactly half the price. The same price for the 70 MHz version, but they give you a bonanza of things with the MSO5K.

About the sarcasm, I see  But I think Fungus was being sarcastic as well...

[Someone]

My point is  that you don't understand how it works then. That video is absolutely opposite of detailed review and proven wrong on many points stated in video. But people still watch it but don't read the discussion explaining all the things wrong with it..

There is no free lunch. There is no data being captured outside set time. It is only that you can set time by obscure mental calculation (flying blind and calculating sample rate/ manual memory length ratio) or by simply setting proper time base in a first place...

...
- The scope could and should capture much more data with respect to the screen's window. It has the memory and should have the computational/sampling power to do that without slowing down. Otherwise, even the workaround by Keysight is better than nothing. And according to tautech even Siglent is changing its "design choices" about that.

The "zoom out" trick is by definition slowing down a scope, all that data around the screen is captured and not seen on the window but is blocking another trigger from happening.

Yes, there is use for that, but its an extreme corner case and not the normal/typical use. It requires the user to know what trigger rate they want, accept not seeing any of the "zoom out" data during operation, and for some odd reason refuse to use a zoom window.

Want no slowing down? use a little memory as possible.
Want more information on the screen? Up the trigger rate for overlaid waveforms, or have the full capture length on the screen.
Want to see some fine detail in a capture? use the damn zoom window!

[balnazzar]

Mh, let me reflect upon that... I'll do a few experiments.

[nctnico]

There is no free lunch. There is no data being captured outside set time. It is only that you can set time by obscure mental calculation (flying blind and calculating sample rate/ manual memory length ratio) or by simply setting proper time base in a first place...

You keep on repeating this but it isn't true. In fact for many of the measurements I do, I don't even care about time/div setting. And in some cases (like verifying protocol bitrates which can be off by a factor 100) I don't even know which time/div setting I'd need to use to get the signal on screen. The deep memory simply makes sure there is always enough data. I make a measurement and twist the time/div knob until there is a visible signal. Then I use a measurement and / or cursors to tell me what I want to know. There is zero mental calculation and zero preparation. But we have been around this before. It is like the eternal discussion about automatic / stick shift in cars. The thing is a good DSO offers both so everyone can be happy.

Again: suggesting to use the zoom window is just stupid. Especially on the lower end scopes, the zoom window takes away a significant portation of the already small screen. It doesn't help improve the useability especially if you have a bunch of traces and protocol decoding enabled.

[2N3055]

There is no free lunch. There is no data being captured outside set time. It is only that you can set time by obscure mental calculation (flying blind and calculating sample rate/ manual memory length ratio) or by simply setting proper time base in a first place...

You keep on repeating this but it isn't true. In fact for many of the measurements I do, I don't even care about time/div setting. And in some cases (like verifying protocol bitrates which can be off by a factor 100) I don't even know which time/div setting I'd need to use to get the signal on screen. The deep memory simply makes sure there is always enough data. I make a measurement and twist the time/div knob until there is a visible signal. Then I use a measurement and / or cursors to tell me what I want to know. There is zero mental calculation and zero preparation. But we have been around this before. It is like the eternal discussion about automatic / stick shift in cars. The thing is a good DSO offers both so everyone can be happy.

Again: suggesting to use the zoom window is just stupid. Especially on the lower end scopes, the zoom window takes away a significant portation of the already small screen. It doesn't help improve the useability especially if you have a bunch of traces and protocol decoding enabled.

Seriously, you don't even care about timebase on a scope but you are going to tell me I'm wrong.. okkkkeyyy....that IS funny....
What kind statement is that..
And that kind of grab full memory of something and then sift through it works only for your use case like details of long sequences and decoding.
How the f**k do you use the scope like that?
You just grab some random signals and then look around? Just stabbing in a dark until you find something by chance? Do you even need trigger function?

Do you even use scope as a normal scope?

It is not about manual/auto debate. It is more like you insist all cars have to have winch because you like using it to pull wood from the forest. Which makes perfect sense for someone living in forest that does pull wood.. For the rest that is something that will just sit there unused for years...

And also zoom debate is also getting old. Rest of the world disagrees with you. Zoom is great function, learn to use it.

[nctnico]

You are not wrong with how you use a scope. I am not wrong with how I use a scope. You are just stuck thinking that your way is the only way AND keep forcing your way onto other people by ridicule without even considering that the use cases may be completely different. Your post above just proves that. On top of that you keep ignoring people stating that they prefer to have the zoom-out feature as if they are idiots. How ignorant can you be? I'm done...

[tautech]

There is no free lunch. There is no data being captured outside set time. It is only that you can set time by obscure mental calculation (flying blind and calculating sample rate/ manual memory length ratio) or by simply setting proper time base in a first place...

You keep on repeating this but it isn't true. In fact for many of the measurements I do, I don't even care about time/div setting. And in some cases (like verifying protocol bitrates which can be off by a factor 100) I don't even know which time/div setting I'd need to use to get the signal on screen. The deep memory simply makes sure there is always enough data. I make a measurement and twist the time/div knob until there is a visible signal. Then I use a measurement and / or cursors to tell me what I want to know. There is zero mental calculation and zero preparation. But we have been around this before. It is like the eternal discussion about automatic / stick shift in cars. The thing is a good DSO offers both so everyone can be happy.

Again: suggesting to use the zoom window is just stupid. Especially on the lower end scopes, the zoom window takes away a significant portation of the already small screen. It doesn't help improve the useability especially if you have a bunch of traces and protocol decoding enabled.

Seriously, you don't even care about timebase on a scope but you are going to tell me I'm wrong.. okkkkeyyy....that IS funny....
What kind statement is that..
And that kind of grab full memory of something and then sift through it works only for your use case like details of long sequences and decoding.
How the f**k do you use the scope like that?
You just grab some random signals and then look around? Just stabbing in a dark until you find something by chance? Do you even need trigger function?

Do you even use scope as a normal scope?

It is not about manual/auto debate. It is more like you insist all cars have to have winch because you like using it to pull wood from the forest. Which makes perfect sense for someone living in forest that does pull wood.. For the rest that is something that will just sit there unused for years...

And also zoom debate is also getting old. Rest of the world disagrees with you. Zoom is great function, learn to use it.

This MO is normal when complex use of the trigger suite is required. Hit STOP than do the measurements, zoom in or out on a captured waveform. Why be challenged by the proper use of a scope ? 

[2N3055]

You are not wrong with how you use a scope. I am not wrong with how I use a scope. You are just stuck thinking that your way is the only way AND keep forcing your way onto other people by ridicule without even considering that the use cases may be completely different. Your post above just proves that. On top of that you keep ignoring people stating that they prefer to have the zoom-out feature as if they are idiots. How ignorant can you be? I'm done...

No, I'm not forcing anything. I agree with you something works for you but you refuse to accept it is not common practice, and that most of the people don't care for your use case... That is all.

THere is no zoom out feature.. It is old, outdated practice of using fixed manual control of memory on scope. That you have some use for. Rest of the people hate it and use Auto mode... While I do not mind if scope has manual memory management, I find it completely unnecessary feature in this day and age...
That is what I think.

[Someone]

Again: suggesting to use the zoom window is just stupid. Especially on the lower end scopes, the zoom window takes away a significant portation of the already small screen. It doesn't help improve the useability especially if you have a bunch of traces and protocol decoding enabled.

"stupid" as your obscure use case only wants to look at the data outside the window after pressing stop.

Pretty much everyone else, wants to see both the data at the same time.

Screen/UI too small? that's a characteristic to consider far more important to most people/use cases than "zoom out".

But do continue trying to justify your personal corner case as some parameter that must be considered as by every one else as some new essential function. We'll just have to keep pointing out how dumb your "argument" is, the OP didn't understand any of the nuance or reasoning, and you still won't back it up or explain it, just keep pushing your nonsense condensed "argument".

 ... more 

[Someone]

This MO is normal when complex use of the trigger suite is required. Hit STOP than do the measurements, zoom in or out on a captured waveform. Why be challenged by the proper use of a scope ? 

Normal (from my experience of having seen many many many different people use scopes) is that users do not expect to collect any data outside the visible window. Trigger on what you want and then inspect as needed.

Its this ridiculous leap to a small number of people now saying capturing outside the window is a must have feature, so they can see a slowly triggering characteristic, then stop (before another trigger), and see some other correlated data.

A zoom window is pretty much the obvious solution to that, see both, and have fast/direct control of memory size and position.

There is NO scope (that I'm aware of) that lets you set the trigger position within the overall capture and the screen location independently, trigger position is relative to screen (and all that outside the screen is invisible). Which is why the zoom window is so important to explain/discuss, it adds those controls so the user can set every parameter (reducing the size of the view, but now including a view of the entire capture).

But I'm sure nctnico will continue shouting over any reasonable discussion of the pros and cons of different methods:

Zoom out; pros: bigger picture of part of the signal, cons: limited control of positioning
Zoom window; pros: see everything and control all positions, cons: smaller waveform size

The user can choose what is most appropriate to them, from my perspective it is very hard to imagine common or routine use cases for zoom out, the benefits just aren't there.

[Fungus]

I agree with you. HDO 1000 is basically a DS1000Z with 12bit ADC and big touch screen.

As if that's nothing... 

We haven't seen the firmware capabilities yet but just as some people won't be affected by the noise on the MSO5000, other people will probably kill for the low noise and detail of an HD1000.

[WaveyDipole]

Rigol HDO1000. I wouldn't consider it. It's just a bare scope without all the stuff that comes with a MSO5K.

Basically you pay 1399 just for the high res front end (999 for the 70 MHz is more reasonable).

I know the mantra, "it depends upon what you have to do with it". I'm saying from the point of view of a hobbyst or student who wants a general purpose instrument to grow into.

I agree with you. HDO 1000 is basically a DS1000Z with 12bit ADC and big touch screen. MSO5000 is better "all round" scope despite not having best front end, for half a price...

Thank you both for that bit of information. So the HDO1000 has a lower noise floor because of using more bits in its ADC but is a more basic instrument, whereas the MSO5000 has a higher noise floor but is something of an all-rounder more suited to a hobbyist.  That is actually helpful to know.

I did sort of assume that the HDO1000 would have the same features as the MSO5000 although Dave's video makes it clear there is no sig gen and there are no MSO features. He also says the MSO1000 is "software crippled" and is limited to 1mv, whereas the higher end of the range goes all the way down to 100uV. Finally he also found some bugs.

My use is likely to be more general purpose, although I accept that when performing specific and sensitive metrics, then that lower noise floor might make a huge difference. I am not sure of how much benefit a HDO1000 would actually be to me. I don't need a built-in sig gen, but I would view the MSO features as useful.