How Thick is Your Baselne on Your Digital Oscilloscope?

[Carrington]

Please can someone do the same test but now connecting both terminals of the probe together (ie live/central and ground wire) to the ground lug of the Probe Comp. terminals.

Thanks. 

[alm]

That would make a decent magnetic loop probe. Are you trying to detect stray fields or trying to measure front-end/ADC performance? In the latter cause you should use a proper low-inductance RF short (eg. BNC shorting cap, or tinfoil across the probe as Dave did in one of his early 'unusual oscilloscope phenomenon' videos). Preferably one without a few feet of coax with shielding of dubious quality. I find a 50 ohm terminator useful in a pinch, it's well shielded and fairly close to a short compared to the scope input at low to moderate frequencies.

[marmad]

Thanks, I think the memory depth is not adj able  on the DS4024 with most time base settings...

No offense, but if you believe this comment you wrote, you seriously need to figure out how to use a DSO properly. Not only does this affect the sample rate, but it will affect (usable) bandwidth and visible noise as well.

[marmad]

The 1mV and 500uV range on the Rigol is also a 'real' full ADC range, no up-scaling used on this model. In fact I have not seen this anymore since decades. The last scope if seen that used up-scaling on low ranges was a Tek 468, one of the first digital scopes I used.... (1983 i think....)

- Orange

The Agilent X-Series use scaling - their real resolution is to 4mv/div (1mv/div and 2mv/div are 'magnified').

[Carrington]

That would make a decent magnetic loop probe. Are you trying to detect stray fields or trying to measure front-end/ADC performance? In the latter cause you should use a proper low-inductance RF short (eg. BNC shorting cap, or tinfoil across the probe as Dave did in one of his early 'unusual oscilloscope phenomenon' videos). Preferably one without a few feed of coax with shielding of dubious quality. I find a 50 ohm terminator useful in a pinch, it's well shielded and fairly close to a short compared to the scope input at low to moderate frequencies.

Hi alm!

I just want to make a comparison between the SDS7102 (unshielded case) and DS2072 (shielded case).
And to do this under similar conditions:

1) Take all probes and LAN or USB cables off of the scope and do a self calibration.
2) Preferably the scope should be away from other noise sources such as fluorescent lights, computers, switching power supplies, etc.
3) Connect a probe to the CH1 BNC and make sure it is properly compensated. Make sure the probe switch is set to x10.
4) Connect both the probe and the 6.5" ground wire to the ground lug of the Probe Comp terminals.
5) Set up the scope as follows:

CH1:
  Coupling = AC
  Probe: Attenu = X10
  Limit = Full Band
  Volts/Div = 50.0mV
  Vert Pos = 0.00div

Horizontal:
  Horiz = Main
  Horiz Pos = 0.00ns
  Sec/Div = 500µs or 1ms

Trigger:
  Type = Single
  TrigMode=  Edge
  Source = CH1
  Coupling = AC
  Slope = /
  Mode&Hold = Auto, Holdoff = 100ns
  Level = 0.00mV

Acquire:
  Mode = Similar to Peak Detect
  Memory Length = Max

Thank you very much. 

[rf-loop]

Here picture with Owon
(inside pictures also Rigol (from Galaxyrise pictures) and level adjusted for same size div's)
Owon input open. Capture mode peak. (so it use 1GSa/s data)
(owon screen size is 800x600, image resized)

[Galaxyrise]

Here picture with Owon
(inside pictures also Rigol (from Galaxyrise pictures) and level adjusted for same size div's)
Owon input open. Capture mode peak. (so it use 1GSa/s data)
(owon screen size is 800x600, image resized)

Very similar! Did you have persistence enabled on the Owon?  I'm guessing you did not, and that's why the Rigol line is more "blurry"

[rf-loop]

Here picture with Owon
(inside pictures also Rigol (from Galaxyrise pictures) and level adjusted for same size div's)
Owon input open. Capture mode peak. (so it use 1GSa/s data)
(owon screen size is 800x600, image resized)

Very similar! Did you have persistence enabled on the Owon?  I'm guessing you did not, and that's why the Rigol line is more "blurry"

Very similar? Nearly 50% more is very similar?

No persistence on in Owon.

But persistence do not add detected peak values. Rigol images did not have mesurement on display so it can not see with numbers but still brightest part of Rigol trace is more fat than Owon.
It is not competition and difference is nearly marginal and I do not mean proof anything.... but I'm wondering Rigol advertisements where is "...to deliver an extremely low noise floor to help you capture smaller signals." 

Can we now advertise Owon that it have very extremely low noise floor.

but Rigol advertised claims about special low noise is just ad without  nothing more but just empty words. And this is "fun".
(we also know that Rigol front end is nearly copy from Owon, but perhaps from earlier Owon.. ) How can advertise low noise if there is 500uV/div what have around 1000uV noise. But building  of the imagination is advertising professionals work. And it looks like Rigol is very good in this.

I have heard example total bullshits that Rigol DS1000E series signal capturing quality is better than Owon SDS. Of course these kind of opinions without facts are too easy to shoot down with raw data. Totally other question is who is listening becouse religions make it difficult. Very easy it happends that  mind manipulating falses start live they own life.   It is so easy to tell just like this cup is half of empty, but this cup is half of full, I take this last one.


It just so simple case that Owon have some marginal amount less noise. It is natural also technically becouse SDS7102 have some amount less ADC noise. Rigol  (DS2000)  is with 2GSa/s (2x1G) ADC and Owon use 1GSa/s (2x500M) ADC  but also it looks like Rigol use RuiFeng ADC (what also Owon have used previously). (not big difference but part of decibel here and part there etc.. it makes finally some amount less noise. But also it is good to note that Owon BW -3dB point is over 170MHz. Also Owon discrete fet front end (previously dropped out one noisy and hot amplifier) have less noise than old precessor.

[marmad]

Very similar? Nearly 50% more is very similar?

No persistence on in Owon.

But persistence do not add detected peak values. Rigol images did not have mesurement on display so it can not see with numbers but still brightest part of Rigol trace is more fat than Owon.
It is not competition and difference is nearly marginal and I do not mean proof anything.... but I'm wondering Rigol advertisements where is "...to deliver an extremely low noise floor to help you capture smaller signals." 

Can we now advertise Owon that it have very extremely low noise floor.

but Rigol advertised claims about special low noise is just ad without  nothing more but just empty words. And this is "fun".
(we also know that Rigol front end is nearly copy from Owon, but perhaps from earlier Owon.. ) How can advertise low noise if there is 500uV/div what have around 1000uV noise. But building  of the imagination is advertising professionals work. And it looks like Rigol is very good in this.

I have heard example total bullshits that Rigol DS1000E series signal capturing quality is better than Owon SDS. Of course these kind of opinions without facts are too easy to shoot down with raw data. Totally other question is who is listening becouse religions make it difficult. Very easy it happends that  mind manipulating falses start live they own life.   It is so easy to tell just like this cup is half of empty, but this cup is half of full, I take this last one.


It just so simple case that Owon have some marginal amount less noise. It is natural also technically becouse SDS7102 have some amount less ADC noise. Rigol  (DS2000)  is with 2GSa/s (2x1G) ADC and Owon use 1GSa/s (2x500M) ADC  but also it looks like Rigol use RuiFeng ADC (what also Owon have used previously). (not big difference but part of decibel here and part there etc.. it makes finally some amount less noise. But also it is good to note that Owon BW -3dB point is over 170MHz. Also Owon discrete fet front end (previously dropped out one noisy and hot amplifier) have less noise than old precessor.

Really, rf-loop - this is all rather silly. There is no point in comparing these two scopes because the DS2000 is so vastly superior (and more expensive, of course). Whether the base line noise of one is slightly larger than the other - when you don't use any special features which have been added specifically to reduce noise - is like comparing a really fast car to a slow car and saying. 'Let's compare the speed if you don't press the accelerator of the fast car all the way down.'

Instead, let's compare the noise level of the two scopes while using High-Res mode. Oh wait, the Owon doesn't do High-Res - or almost any of the dozens of features, speed, intensity grading, etc. of the Rigol. When it DOES do those things, then let's do a comparison.

In the meanwhile, if you want to say that the Owon has slightly less base line noise while doing 35 wfrm/s and no other processing - fine. Unfortunately, I can't make my Rigol capture so few wfrm/s.

And, of course, this doesn't even cover ALL of the bad posts/complaints here over problems with noise in certain versions of the SDS7102. Where are the similar complaints of design/manufacturing defects in the Rigol?

But also it is good to note that Owon BW -3dB point is over 170MHz. Also Owon discrete fet front end (previously dropped out one noisy and hot amplifier) have less noise than old precessor.

Rigol BW -3dB point is over 175MHz in images posted by GalaxyRise.