NEW Keysight HD3

[2N3055]

There's totally a plan for something there. J302 looks to be an unpopulated footprint for exactly the same connector used for the other two modules. And there are similarly located mounting holes.

The way I see it there are mounting holes but not even close to layout of input channels. It does look like a place for another module, but different kind.

[nctnico]

There's totally a plan for something there. J302 looks to be an unpopulated footprint for exactly the same connector used for the other two modules. And there are similarly located mounting holes.

The way I see it there are mounting holes but not even close to layout of input channels. It does look like a place for another module, but different kind.

At least is explains the open space on the right at the inputs.

[HighVoltage]

Thanks for the pictures, Dave!

The power supply looks much better than in previous Keysight scopes. 

[MarkL]

There's totally a plan for something there. J302 looks to be an unpopulated footprint for exactly the same connector used for the other two modules. And there are similarly located mounting holes.

The way I see it there are mounting holes but not even close to layout of input channels. It does look like a place for another module, but different kind.

Wild guess: A dedicated, >1GHz real-time spectrum analyzer module?

Besides the R&S MXO4/MXO5, why not also target Tek's MDO3/MDO4?  Tek is steering people away from the MDO, so there's going to be a market hole there.

[pdenisowski]

Tek is steering people away from the MDO, so there's going to be a market hole there.

"Market hole" implies that there is a market for something - I'm not sure that's the case

[nctnico]

Tek is steering people away from the MDO, so there's going to be a market hole there.

"Market hole" implies that there is a market for something - I'm not sure that's the case

I'm not 100% sure what you are implying but if it is about FFT having similar dynamic range compared to a dedicated spectrum analyser module when using >=12 bit ADCs, then I think you have a good point.

[MarkL]

Tek is steering people away from the MDO, so there's going to be a market hole there.

"Market hole" implies that there is a market for something - I'm not sure that's the case

Well, such a feature isn't in my space; I certainly don't need it.  It could have failed because of poor implementation, but I suppose you would know...

[Anthocyanina]

There's totally a plan for something there. J302 looks to be an unpopulated footprint for exactly the same connector used for the other two modules. And there are similarly located mounting holes.

this, the MSO in the name, and that space next to channel 4 just screams HD304MDO 🤔🤔🤔

[Zucca]

Legendary MSOX3104T on my desk is capable of 1.1 M triggers per second at 500ps/div. Sounds impressive.

That means it triggers every cca 910 ns. Triggers, take 5ns of data, waits for 905ns, triggers... Meaning scope is blind 99,5% of time....

What also they don't tell you that every 1/60th of the second (probably screen refresh) it makes 250µs pause when it does not trigger.
In 500ps/div timebase full screen of data is 5ns wide. That means that, 60 times a second, scope is blind for what is equivalent of 50000 screens wide period of time, in addition to baseline 99.5% blind time.

So yeah unless someone does make a zero blind time scope it is all just marketing and statistical games.

Still I do not see the point for MSOX3104T users to upgrade to a HD3, unless they are working in unicorn applications.
I mean, how important are 14bits for the EE today?

Less noise (50% less?) scope: hopefully your EMI in the lab are not spitting into the soup... otherwise your high $ scope performance will not make any difference.
Kind like having $ speakers in a noisy city environment. Just saying if you see too much noise on the scope maybe first check where the noise is coming from.

That said I know for sure I am saying obvious things to everybody here, but this is what my mind thinks about low noise scopes.

[MarkL]

Tek is steering people away from the MDO, so there's going to be a market hole there.

"Market hole" implies that there is a market for something - I'm not sure that's the case

I'm not 100% sure what you are implying but if it is about FFT having similar dynamic range compared to a dedicated spectrum analyser module when using >=12 bit ADCs, then I think you have a good point.

I think the difference on the Tek MDO is that the SA port has higher BW than the analog channels (6GHz vs. 1GHz), and it's also real-time so it could trigger on infrequent spectral events.  So, it's not the same as running FFT on the regular channels.  But I think Paul is implying the functionality was a flop anyway.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Tek is steering people away from the MDO, so there's going to be a market hole there.

"Market hole" implies that there is a market for something - I'm not sure that's the case

True analogue spectrum analyser input?
RF output for VNA?
Wavegen here would have been nice, but clearly they have other plans

[pdenisowski]

I think the difference on the Tek MDO is that the SA port has higher BW than the analog channels (6GHz vs. 1GHz), and it's also real-time so it could trigger on infrequent spectral events.  So, it's not the same as running FFT on the regular channels.  But I think Paul is implying the functionality was a flop anyway.

Not the functionality so much as the business case - I can't recall a single customer of mine saying "You know, this would be a great scope if only you had a dedicated hardware, real-time spectrum analyzer in it.  And I'd be willing to pay X USD for that function" (where X is a non-trivial percentage of the overall scope price)

(Please feel free to chime in if you are, in fact, such a potential customer )

There are plenty of customers who want a VNA with spectrum analyzer capability, or a spec an that can make (scalar) network measurements (combined with an internal or external generator).  In fact, I just recorded a video this morning showing how to do this with our FSW spectrum analyzer - should be on our YouTube channel next week.

But I just haven't seen a lot of demand for a "scope plus RTSA" combo.  And I think as scope spectrum / FFT performance keeps increasing, there will be even less demand for that combo.

(Of course, it's possible that this is all just misinformation designed to keep our competitors from releasing a scope + RTSA combo before ours is done .... )

[Jay_Diddy_B]

I have used a Tektronix MDO4104 with the SA function for several years. The SA function was useful for doing conducted EMC pre-scans without requiring a separate SA.

I don't think Tek has abandoned the MDO concept. My MSO 4 series has 'spectrum view' on all the channels. This makes the dedicated SA input redundant.
Similarly, the 'flexchannel' architecture allows you to convert any of the analog channels into 8 digital channels.

The main power of the MDO is the ability to cross-trigger between the scope, the logic inputs or the SA.


Jay_Diddy_B

[Zucca]

Thanks Jay_Diddy_B, 110% right on the money.

[AndyC_772]

Still I do not see the point for MSOX3104T users to upgrade to a HD3, unless they are working in unicorn applications.
I mean, how important are 14bits for the EE today?

I work in sensor applications; being able to see very small signals, or very small perturbations on top of a larger signal, is useful.

EMI isn't too much of an issue because of the frequencies involved. As sad as some may find it, I use the 20 MHz bandwidth limit on my MSO-X3104A much of the time, so a lot of RFI just gets filtered out.

I do, of course, use the higher bandwidth at other times, or on other projects.

The higher resolution on HD3 is a welcome and obvious addition, of course, but perhaps not the ground breaking feature it's made out to be. I've managed very well just by using averaging and the hi-res acquisition modes on my 3000X.

[maxwell3e10]

The higher resolution on HD3 is a welcome and obvious addition, of course, but perhaps not the ground breaking feature it's made out to be. I've managed very well just by using averaging and the hi-res acquisition modes on my 3000X.

Averaging is underappreciated and is often an after-thought in scopes. But if well-implemented that 1M wfrms/sec can increase your SNR not by 2 but a factor of 1000 in 1 second. Of course it requires fast hardware averaging to take advantage of every waveform and data depth greater than 16 bits.

[_Wim_]

Averaging is underappreciated and is often an after-thought in scopes. But if well-implemented that 1M wfrms/sec can increase your SNR not by 2 but a factor of 1000 in 1 second. Of course it requires fast hardware averaging to take advantage of every waveform and data depth greater than 16 bits.

I agree that averaging is underappreciated, but that noise reduction is only for uncorrelated (random) noise, as I am sure you know. If you look at a picoscope 5000 series (12 bit scope), it can go up to 16-bit with averaging, but it is nowhere near the picoscope 4262 (16 bit scope) if you look for example at distortion figures. So I do think that a real 14-bit scope is a very nice improvement, lets hope this also comes to lower end models in the future.

[Martin72]

Thanks for the pictures, very solid build.
And then it seems to be “only” two ADCs, not four.

[nctnico]

There can be two ADCs in each chip. Or even more.

[Martin72]

Good point.

[electr_peter]

Front end cans are soldered 

Only at the corners....

Shields should be removable with little effort. There seem to shields on the other side of input modules as well.

[Wolfgang]

There can be two ADCs in each chip. Or even more.

Yeah, of course. Crosstalk say hello, please If you really need high precision you do it with 1 ADC per channel.

[nctnico]

There can be two ADCs in each chip. Or even more.

Yeah, of course. Crosstalk say hello, please If you really need high precision you do it with 1 ADC per channel.

According to the datasheet, the channel to channel seperation is >40dB which isn't stellar. To compare: R&S RTM3004 has >50dB, R&S MXO4 has >60dB (the latter being 10 times better compared to the HD3). Edit: Batronix' Magnova also claims >60dB (and >70dB up to 200MHz).

[Wolfgang]

There can be two ADCs in each chip. Or even more.

Yeah, of course. Crosstalk say hello, please If you really need high precision you do it with 1 ADC per channel.

According to the datasheet, the channel to channel seperation is >40dB which isn't stellar. To compare: R&S RTM3004 has >50dB, R&S MXO4 has >60dB (the latter being 10 times better compared to the HD3). Edit: Batronix' Magnova also claims >60dB (and >70dB up to 200MHz).

... and now do a little handwaving and calculate what would happen to your ENOB if an "adjacent" channel is processing a strong signal ... Does not really make sense to have 14Bits and a channel separation of only 40dB, does it ?

[tautech]

There can be two ADCs in each chip. Or even more.

Yeah, of course. Crosstalk say hello, please If you really need high precision you do it with 1 ADC per channel.

According to the datasheet, the channel to channel seperation is >40dB which isn't stellar. To compare: R&S RTM3004 has >50dB, R&S MXO4 has >60dB (the latter being 10 times better compared to the HD3). Edit: Batronix' Magnova also claims >60dB (and >70dB up to 200MHz).

As does SDS6000A......