new Oscilloscope choice

[kcbrown]

Internal slots ? 

Yeah.  On the 2104X+, when you save settings, you can choose internal or external.  External requires a USB stick be present.  Internal lets you select from 10 possible "slots" to save to.  I couldn't think of a better term for it.

By "user default" I presume you mean what you get when you save the settings to the default button?

Yes.
Wisest method is to use Factory default first then set the scope exactly as you want then in the Save menu apply the settings to User Default. At anytime later you can change default behaviour or return to Factory default settings.

Makes sense.  I tend to leave the default button alone because it's set up to restore to factory default settings by, er, default, and this way I have something I can use as an emergency measure to restore the scope back to sanity, e.g. if the UI isn't responding properly or something.  If there's a separate procedure for doing that at power on then I obviously could just use that.  I don't see any such procedure documented in the user manual, though.

[tautech]

Internal slots ? 

Yeah.  On the 2104X+, when you save settings, you can choose internal or external.  External requires a USB stick be present.  Internal lets you select from 10 possible "slots" to save to.  I couldn't think of a better term for it.

OK instrument Setups is what these are and yes 10 are possible however you need go into Save/Recall to load them which is a little more hassle than hitting Default once you have set the one you like.

By "user default" I presume you mean what you get when you save the settings to the default button?

Yes.
Wisest method is to use Factory default first then set the scope exactly as you want then in the Save menu apply the settings to User Default. At anytime later you can change default behaviour or return to Factory default settings.

Makes sense.  I tend to leave the default button alone because it's set up to restore to factory default settings by, er, default, and this way I have something I can use as an emergency measure to restore the scope back to sanity, e.g. if the UI isn't responding properly or something.  If there's a separate procedure for doing that at power on then I obviously could just use that.  I don't see any such procedure documented in the user manual, though.

I don't know of one either but that's not to say there isn't some hidden method.
In these you expressly have 2 types of default in the factory one if you chose to leave it unchanged or the User Default which is a feature that was first released in the little X-E you have.
With the X Plus and its greater feature set such as the ability to change trace colors some might to set the Default so to have those rather than the factory setup and you may have noticed rf-loop prefers an orange trace that I guess takes him back decades to some early CRO's with orange phosphors.

Anyways you need play with the User Default in the Save/Recall menu to really see now useful and powerful it is but as I mentioned before Factory Default the scope first to get rid of any underlying settings before you set a User Default and while you're in there having a play learn how to return the factory Default setting.

[2N3055]

And now you reached where I was a year ago.

There is no issue with zoom. Except he simply doesn't like to use it.

Well, this isn't, or at least wasn't, strictly true.  It used to be that zoom mode had some serious limitations.  For instance, on the SDS1000X-E series, you can't use the mask test function in zoom mode, so you can't use it to test some specific portion of the waveform that is a consistent distance from the trigger point, and then have much more in the way of capture to examine when a fault is detected.  And on that same scope, zoom mode uses a significant portion of the screen for the unzoomed section, and the zoomed section as a result isn't using as much screen real estate as you'd want if that was where your primary focus was (which it generally will be when you're using zoom mode).

But the 2000X+ series fixes all of this.  If there's something you can't do with zoom mode on that scope, I don't know what it is.

It's really a shame it's taken Siglent this long to get to this point, though.  It suggests that Siglent didn't really understand the various ways that people will want to use the scope.

And Instek is guilty of the same thing.  Their segmented memory implementation is quite clearly an afterthought, and not a first-class characteristic of the scope.


So there just doesn't seem to be a perfect scope out there.  They all have seem to have flaws of one kind or another, at least until you get into the $10K+ range, at which point the instruments seem to become more special-purpose.

Guess that describes pretty much any kind of product offering you can think of, doesn't it?   

I was discussing only new touch screen Siglent platform.  Smaller and older scopes have also smaller screens and that makes it all more critical, I agree...
And I wouldn't say "it took them long to understand". By that same token, Keysight doesn't understand Infiniivision scopes have very little memory and they think it is not a problem. Believe me, they do.

But you cannot simply change platform.  Once you commit to certain architecture, you have limited manoeuvring space, unless something was planned from the beginning, or is simple by happenstance..

You are so correct about "perfect scope", or any kind  of product, really. There is no perfect general purpose scope, regardless of the price. And as you go up the food chain, things get more specialized, true.

But If you have scope that has low noise front end, big screen, sufficient bandwidth for general purpose work (200-500MHz does 90% of all work, or more depending on what you do), enough channels and MSO, enough memory, some advanced measurements and analysis options, you get pretty close to machine that will do the job for you pretty much for everything.

Keysight MSOX2024A is 4500€ with VAT in EU. With NO serial decode/trigger and siggen options enabled. You need to buy those separately. And that is non touch, small screen scope with 1 MPts per ch (max) and limited math and 8ch MSO option with limitations..

That kind of money buys you SDS5000X with 500 MHz bandwidth, all options. And LeCroy like memory architecture, and many advanced analysis options.
I know which one I would choose...

[Caliaxy]

Do you have a 50 ohm termination?

I don't have.
The manufacturer of active load said just connect the bundled BNC-BNC cables to my oscilloscope and that's all.

Really? I'm far from being an expert, but a BNC-BNC cable is a 50 ohm transmission line, which has to be terminated properly - either at the oscilloscope end (with a 50 Ohm resistor to the ground) or (better) at the source end (with a 50 ohm resistor in series). Failing to do so will result in reflections not being attenuated and erroneous readings. Unless the provided BNC-BNC cable includes termination (which should be clearly marked on the cable), or the electronic load has a source 50 ohm terminated BNC output for oscilloscope (which might very well be the case), you need to add one.

Sorry if I'm telling you things you already know.

[Caliaxy]

Keysight MSOX2024A is 4500€ with VAT in EU. With NO serial decode/trigger and siggen options enabled. You need to buy those separately.

In the spirit of fairness let's add that Keysight MSOX2K (as well as 3K and 4K) can be "liberated", too, to full specs for free (for personal educational purposes, of course  ). There is a whole thread on this forum about this.

[rf-loop]

With the X Plus and its greater feature set such as the ability to change trace colors some might to set the Default so to have those rather than the factory setup and you may have noticed rf-loop prefers an orange trace that I guess takes him back decades to some early CRO's with orange phosphors.

Absolutely wrong. 
I do not remember I have used more any oscilloscope in my history what have amber/orange trace color. Perhaps some short random case. But this is not reason at all. In some old computer monitor it have been far before anybody have even heard linux or windows. Btw it was Windows 1.0 what was my first touch with Windows. And this time I remember there was also some amber screen portable computers and also tabletops, perhaps still more green.   If I hardly try think it is possible there was some Yokogava scope what perhaps have amber screen, digital scope, but really I am not sure about my memory.



--------
Amber/ Orange IS good instrument display color if backround is dark. There is many reasons. With older eyes there may be also more advantages. Bit... 

There is two things what I ... sorry... totally hate in instruments... PINK color is one and other is blue LED. In my house here is not any blue Led aand never come. If they want enter to my home I have some good defense equipment and armaments for to defend, repel or completely destroy this kind of intruding enemies.

Everyone know  Tektronix, HP, Solartron etc  old analog oscilloscopes trace colors and also old HP digital monochrome CRT scopes colors. Old times are really not reason.  But eyes fatigue etc things are if you look 8/24/7 just scope screen. So reason is not nostalgic things but just eyes and some part also color taste what match or least is not color conflict with my environment.

This time was nice... amber screen and no eyes fatigue even if work 12h every day. 

[2N3055]

Keysight MSOX2024A is 4500€ with VAT in EU. With NO serial decode/trigger and siggen options enabled. You need to buy those separately.

In the spirit of fairness let's add that Keysight MSOX2K (as well as 3K and 4K) can be "liberated", too, to full specs for free (for personal educational purposes, of course  ). There is a whole thread on this forum about this.

I wasn't comparing it to "liberated" one, but to a full legally unlocked device that is 2 classes up the food chain...

If you want a hacked one, 1400€ (with tax) SDS2104X+ will have up to 500 MHz bandwidth (200MHz max on 4ch Keysight MSOX2204A).

[nctnico]

Keysight MSOX2024A is 4500€ with VAT in EU. With NO serial decode/trigger and siggen options enabled. You need to buy those separately. And that is non touch, small screen scope with 1 MPts per ch (max) and limited math and 8ch MSO option with limitations..

That kind of money buys you SDS5000X with 500 MHz bandwidth, all options. And LeCroy like memory architecture, and many advanced analysis options.
I know which one I would choose...

Now you make it sound that a Siglent scope is just as good as an A-brand scope 3 times the price. It just isn't in real life. Read the latest addition to the SDS200X+ thread ( https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-bugs-missing-features-feature-requests/msg3564889/#msg3564889 ) for another example of 'rough edges'. If Siglent gets full memory acquisiton implemented in time, I'm contemplating to evaluate it to see if it makes sense to propose it as a candidate oscilloscope to buy for a customer. But these rough edges make me wonder how many other issues my rigorous oscilloscope test plan is going to turn up and whether it is actually worth my time. Sending an engineer on a wild goose chase due to an issue in a piece of relatively cheap test equipment quickly diminishes the money saved. In a commercial setting it is the ROI that counts and not the initial investment.

[2N3055]

Keysight MSOX2024A is 4500€ with VAT in EU. With NO serial decode/trigger and siggen options enabled. You need to buy those separately. And that is non touch, small screen scope with 1 MPts per ch (max) and limited math and 8ch MSO option with limitations..

That kind of money buys you SDS5000X with 500 MHz bandwidth, all options. And LeCroy like memory architecture, and many advanced analysis options.
I know which one I would choose...

Now you make it sound that a Siglent scope is just as good as an A-brand scope 3 times the price. It just isn't in real life. Read the latest addition to the SDS200X+ thread ( https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-bugs-missing-features-feature-requests/msg3564889/#msg3564889 ) for another example of 'rough edges'. If Siglent gets full memory acquisiton implemented in time, I'm contemplating to evaluate it to see if it makes sense to propose it as a candidate oscilloscope to buy for a customer. But these rough edges make me wonder how many other issues my rigorous oscilloscope test plan is going to turn up and whether it is actually worth my time. Sending an engineer on a wild goose chase due to an issue in a piece of relatively cheap test equipment quickly diminishes the money saved. In a commercial setting it is the ROI that counts and not the initial investment.

Do your homework. That A brand scope 3x the price doesn't even decode from his 8 bit MSO options. And decodes are not even there for that price, you need to pay for fourth SDS2104X+ just get decodes. When there are bugs, they will get fixed. But scope deliberately made to be limited won't...

ROI exists only if device can do the job in the first place..

[nctnico]

Keysight MSOX2024A is 4500€ with VAT in EU. With NO serial decode/trigger and siggen options enabled. You need to buy those separately. And that is non touch, small screen scope with 1 MPts per ch (max) and limited math and 8ch MSO option with limitations..

That kind of money buys you SDS5000X with 500 MHz bandwidth, all options. And LeCroy like memory architecture, and many advanced analysis options.
I know which one I would choose...

Now you make it sound that a Siglent scope is just as good as an A-brand scope 3 times the price. It just isn't in real life. Read the latest addition to the SDS200X+ thread ( https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-bugs-missing-features-feature-requests/msg3564889/#msg3564889 ) for another example of 'rough edges'. If Siglent gets full memory acquisiton implemented in time, I'm contemplating to evaluate it to see if it makes sense to propose it as a candidate oscilloscope to buy for a customer. But these rough edges make me wonder how many other issues my rigorous oscilloscope test plan is going to turn up and whether it is actually worth my time. Sending an engineer on a wild goose chase due to an issue in a piece of relatively cheap test equipment quickly diminishes the money saved. In a commercial setting it is the ROI that counts and not the initial investment.

Do your homework. That A brand scope 3x the price doesn't even decode from his 8 bit MSO options. And decodes are not even there for that price, you need to pay for fourth SDS2104X+ just get decodes. When there are bugs, they will get fixed. But scope deliberately made to be limited won't...

But that is something you know upfront from the spec sheet so no surprises. And the choice isn't limited to Keysight. R&S decodes just fine from the digital channels for example and then are Tektronix & Yokogawa as well.

[kcbrown]

Now you make it sound that a Siglent scope is just as good as an A-brand scope 3 times the price. It just isn't in real life. Read the latest addition to the SDS200X+ thread ( https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds2000x-plus-bugs-missing-features-feature-requests/msg3564889/#msg3564889 ) for another example of 'rough edges'.

Rough edges aren't the same as functional bugs.

And the decoding issue that post talks about isn't a bug, but is a configuration error on the user's part.  It's something that bit me as well, until I understood what "include R/W bit" in the protocol decode config meant.

[technogeeky]

The comments in this thread combined with the comments on the zoom thread makes me think two things.

First, there are two races going on in the oscilloscope industry:

* a race to the straight up to the top, with the highest-end and most sophisticated features locked up behind paid options codes (Keysight, R&S, etc)
* an oscillating race to up and down from the bottom, with a few manufacturers more or less banking on the fact that the word-of-mouth and cottage industry around options hacking will drive sales


The former category of oscilloscope will always be driven by business, education, and industry: a collection of customers who will pay the price for the options because there is a budget for it; they will work with the manufacturer for support to get any *real* bugs; and people put up with rough edges and annoyances because they have to, it's for work.
 
The latter category, however, is driven by the hobbyists and self-selectors; the people who might not be participating at all if it weren't for the huge value presented by the hacks (and the hacks, we have to admit, at this point are a marketing strategy and not a technical oversight...). The hacks were first on the cheapest entry item (the Rigol 1054z), then some Siglent scopes, then more expensive Siglent scopes; then back to the newer, cheaper Rigol scopes...

Second, this race will be won by whichever manufacturer has the courage to just embrace open-source and stop pretending.

The hivemind of people in this community would have easily answered if there is a system limitation about the zoom; if there is a real limitation (e.g. the Keysight ASIC really does things in a superior way) they could easily have hacked in a workaround that would manage memory settings and depths and present a similar picture -- if only to shut other people up about it. The vaunted Micsig formula entry options would be ported over. People would implement the parts of RTB scopes they like... and on and on and on.

I know it's not quite this easy, and they do depend on people paying for the options and buying the higher entry scopes; but come on. If one scope manufacturer just took the last step and really opened up the firmware/software they would dominate the future of that market segment. And I suspect it's also the fastest growing market segment (the Rigol 1054z is surely the most sold scope of all time...). Seems like such a no brainer.

 

[2N3055]

...........................................

 

 

In your world there are only Boing, Lockheed Martin and looser hobby users, and nothing in between.

Education buyers who buy overpriced scopes for education are asses, because they buy 2 scopes instead of 20 with budged they have. 
Same with companies. Not every company is  military contractor, with unlimited budget (coming from taxpayers pocket and nobody can ask why, because you know ...). 
And that is super rich USA. Now enter rest of the 6,5e9 people on the world.

Siglent and Rigol scopes are good value even at retail prices, with no hacks, especially when they run specials that give you thousands of USD worth of options for free.

And open source works backward of what you said. I know open something agenda tells you different but it isn't so.
It took Linux 20 years and 10s of thousands of patches and additions to basic OS kernel and API by likes of IBM, Novell, Microsoft (yes Microsoft) etc, to make it a good, usable, operating system it is today. Open sourcing it didn't do a thing. It was free (no money) that did it.

You cannot open source scope of any significance that easy. Hardware manufacturing margins are so low that all the profit comes from analysis software sitting on top of it. Why would a company do that for practically free so somebody else can make money on it. Or not, for free..

It's funny how you leap from "capitalism good" A companies "deserve" to charge huge amounts of money for their scopes, to "other" companies should give it for practically free..
Write a letter to Keysight and ask them why they don't release opens source scope... If feel a bit of double standards there..

Hive mind did answer it. We have one user that insists on specific thing, one that trolls every discussion on everything, many who think all is fine as it is, and many that don't care, because the simply use any device the way it says in a book, do the job and move on to another project. After Dave made video on it, where he mudded situation even more by talking about similar but slightly different issue, even then, nobody cared enough to make a poll. Nobody cares, it's just few loud ones that make this visible... LeCroy users like it well enough, and even on those scopes that have optional manual control, people use it in AUTO all the time...
So yeah, potential users need to know different scopes have some idiosyncrasies in a way they work, and that is it.

[hobbyelectronics]

Hello,

I am still unsure as to what scope to purchase, after following all the replies, both the R&S RTB2004 and the Siglent SDS2104X+ both seem to be fantastic pieces of test equipment for the money.
I fully understand that with the SDS, the value for money is so much more because of the added features that are included and the possible extra features that can be 'upgraded' if needed.

Putting features to one side, I feel that the R&S is possibly a higher quality piece of kit, but that does not mean its better for the intended purpose. I have always purchased anything based on the fact I buy the best I can afford, but in this case both of these scopes are good and both have advantages over the other. I just don't want to buy one and later think I should have bought the other, which may be the case no matter what way I decide!

If the R&S was as 'upgradable' like the Siglent, I think that would be my choice, but at the moment I think the Siglent will give me more usable features once its been doctored. Although I do like the fact that the R&S has a 10 ADC and a higher res screen (I know that that's not the only or most important consideration but its part of the decision making process along with the annoying shiny screen!), but then its also nice to have the full decoding etc and other benefits of the Siglent when it actually comes to using it in real life.

Although I have a Saleae logic analyser, it would also be really nice to have features where I can trigger on a particular digital signal and actually see data side by side with analogue traces to see what's actually going on when developing MCU based designs with a few analogue sensors and signal conditioning circuits thrown in and maybe a few active filters etc.

I think now its just a case seeing what way I decide when its comes to ordering one. I suppose the opinions of which is better suited could be discussed forever and perhaps a lot of this is just based on personal choices.

Anyway, thanks again for everyone's inputs and opinions, it has been a great help, but as also thrown up more things for me to consider which I had not even thought about before, which is really good and what forums are all about.

If I have any more specific questions I will post them here, but will also continue to read any further posts as they have all been valuable.

Have a good weekend.

Thanks

John

[tv84]

Putting features to one side, I feel that the R&S is possibly a higher quality piece of kit, but that does not mean its better for the intended purpose. I have always purchased anything based on the fact I buy the best I can afford, but in this case both of these scopes are good and both have advantages over the other. I just don't want to buy one and later think I should have bought the other, which may be the case no matter what way I decide!

John, to make things (un)clearer for you: the RTB is as "doctorable" as the SDS.

If you can get away with the RS capabilities and its price you wont loose with any of them (RTB or SDS).

In last resort, toss a coin. You can always blame luck afterwards. If you think you might not get the best deal with tossing a coin then it's because you already have a preference for one of them. In that case, go for it.

Nobody in this forum will be able to make that decision for you. Only YOU can do it. You seem to have all the input you need. Ask the wife to choose by the looks...

[Fungus]

I am still unsure as to what scope to purchase, after following all the replies, both the R&S RTB2004 and the Siglent SDS2104X+ both seem to be fantastic pieces of test equipment for the money.
I fully understand that with the SDS, the value for money is so much more because of the added features that are included and the possible extra features that can be 'upgraded' if needed.

Putting features to one side, I feel that the R&S is possibly a higher quality piece of kit, but that does not mean its better for the intended purpose.

Correct^

It's not all about paper specs or lists of features. The R&S software is full of little details and on-screen thingys that make them a pleasure to use. See internet videos for details.

Normally I'd say "go for it!", but ... that shiny screen. 

Some people love those screens, some people hate them. Me? I couldn't live with it.

Nobody in this forum will be able to make that decision for you. Only YOU can do it. You seem to have all the input you need. Ask the wife to choose by the looks...

Yep.

[tv84]

The latter category, however, is driven by the hobbyists and self-selectors; the people who might not be participating at all if it weren't for the huge value presented by the hacks (and the hacks, we have to admit, at this point are a marketing strategy and not a technical oversight...). The hacks were first on the cheapest entry item (the Rigol 1054z), then some Siglent scopes, then more expensive Siglent scopes; then back to the newer, cheaper Rigol scopes...

The "hacks" are not a marketing strategy on theirselves. Most of the time, what people here call "hacks", are no more no less than taking advantage of the licensing mechanism that the manufacturer developed for adding features after sale.

Once the mechanism becomes known, the manufacturer could try to change the mechanism and we've seen it done many times. That decision to change or not the licensing mechanism is the decision that could be called in the "marketing strategy". Although, changing a licensing mechanism can present HUGE costs and technical difficulties that are hard to deal (as backward/forward compatibilities, etc.)

Bear in mind that practically ALL scopes that have licenseable options can be (or is it "have been"...  ) upgraded by others besides the vendor. The fact that only the more common and lower-priced (B and C) scopes have their methods in the public's eye doesn't mean that all A-brands haven't had their methods known under the counter in more private forums.

So, is that a "marketing strategy"? I call it a "feature" of the licenseable options world.

[hobbyelectronics]

Ah, that's the one thig that niggles me. The shiny screen. I think that's the only thing that's stopping me ordering today.
Its really would bug me so much if every time I worked with it I could see myself staring back!

I think the Siglent has many other benefits but I think I would bite the bullet on the R&S if the shiny screen wasn't an issue, which it may not be in real life (Like some have suggested), but I cannot tell unless I have one in front of me.
Maybe I will ring R&S and ask if I can return it if its an issue I can't live with....

I have about another week or so before I really need to buy one, so I am sure I will go round it circles and just see what takes my fancy on the day.....

All seems so silly really, not being able to make a decision. All the data / specs are there in front of me with many reviews, videos, opinions etc. Think I am cracking up. Blame it on the lockdown. 

thanks

[Fungus]

Ah, that's the one thig that niggles me. The shiny screen. I think that's the only thing that's stopping me ordering today.
Its really would bug me so much if every time I worked with it I could see myself staring back!

I think the Siglent has many other benefits but I think I would bite the bullet on the R&S if the shiny screen wasn't an issue, which it may not be in real life (Like some have suggested), but I cannot tell unless I have one in front of me.
Maybe I will ring R&S and ask if I can return it if its an issue I can't live with....

Anti-glare filters exist (and they work!).

When you're on the phone you could ask R&S why they don't include one in the box, like Micsig does.   

[Zlotnik]

Ah, that's the one thig that niggles me. The shiny screen. I think that's the only thing that's stopping me ordering today.
Its really would bug me so much if every time I worked with it I could see myself staring back!

If it really boils down to this, the decision is easy!
Place an iPad where the scope would go. Is it annoying?
No: order the RTB
Yes: order the RTB and a matte screen protector.

Seriously, it might not be an issue at all. And if it is, google around! Back when I was researching the exact same trade-off, I did not find a single report of a user that was annoyed by the glossy screen, tried a matte screen protector, and was still unhappy with the screen.

If you're still unhappy, you're a consumer, you can still just send it back!

[Fungus]

The "hacks" are not a marketing strategy on theirselves.

I'm pretty sure they are, there's no other explanation why it's so easy or why manufacturers do nothing about it

It helps hobbyists buy the 'scopes while keeping the prices high for business/education who are afraid of their warranties.

[Zlotnik]

Putting features to one side, I feel that the R&S is possibly a higher quality piece of kit, but that does not mean its better for the intended purpose.

Correct^

It's not all about paper specs or lists of features. The R&S 'scopes software is full of little details and on-screen thingys that make them a pleasure to use. See internet videos for details.

This.

Specs and headline features aren't everything. Once the tool does the job, it's about ROI for professional use or enjoyment for hobby use. How much that is worth and what works well is so specific to the user, that actual recommendations quickly become useless.

Try for yourself if you can, otherwise look out for gripes and raves, and imagine you were in the reporter's shoes.

[Zlotnik]

John, to make things (un)clearer for you: the RTB is as "doctorable" as the SDS.

Really?
I thought some had started and dumped the firmware, but no real progress had been made, as most RTB users got a full-spec bundle at one of the sales.

I've got the COM4 bundle too so it's "too late" for me, but could you link to the thread where they've cracked that nut?

[tv84]

The glossy screen looks always nicer.

BUT when our brain gets "in the zone" and our eyes only see our reflex... there's little we can do to distract from it...

As Fungus says, plenty of screen filters.  Don't know about their "touch" feeling.

BTW all my monitors are matte.

[goaty]

I cut down a cheap screen protector for laptop to fit the RTB2k screen. Rather difficult to apply without dust particles behind. Touch works fine, little bit rougher, so a bit more gliding resistance.
But image looks less vivid and crisp. Ok for me. Doesn't reflect anymore.
Film can be removed anytime without residue.