Siglent SDS1104X-E vs. Rigol DS1054Z Advice?

[KungFuJosh]

Translation for simple people like me:

Hi Res: Scope lowers bandwidth and averages some crap to pretend to be better quality.

Average: Scope removes data and averages some other crap to pretend to be better quality.

Despite how you translate it at some time each of these tools will be found to be indispensable ! 

Maybe, but you gotta admit it's a pretty good translation.

[bugi]

Those explanation are not wrong, therefore they are accurate.

This is where I disagree. IMHO, leaving some important information away makes a description inaccurate (while not wrong, per se). A crude example: "3" is not accurate description of the result of 10/3, but it is not wrong in the sense that it is the correct result... when given the extra explanation that it is the result rounded to just 1 digit.  And the "is a more precise"-part was (also IMHO) a clear example how the description can be even wrong (and not just inaccurate), i.e. whether it is correct or wrong depends on the input signal and settings, and since that latter part is not told, the (less than experienced) reader can incorrectly assume it applies at all times and situations.  Simply changing the "... is a more precise ..." to "... can give a better precision ...", adding a mention that moving average also affects frequency response, and perhaps even give a keyword or two ("moving average") would have been better; the reader is left with unknown conditional and a unknown effect on frequency response, for which he can look for more info elsewhere, if interested, and at least is aware that the better precision is not necessarily always applicable and the shown waveform may differ from the input waveform.

While this case is certainly not a thing in court of justice, but still, leaving some important information out can make an explanation inaccurate or at least badly misleading, even if the part that is told is not wrong/lie/incorrect in itself.

[KungFuJosh]

While this case is certainly not a thing in court of justice, but still, leaving some important information out can make an explanation inaccurate or at least badly misleading, even if the part that is told is not wrong/lie/incorrect in itself.

What some may call a "lie by omission."

[Fungus]

Despite how you translate it at some time each of these tools will be found to be indispensable ! 

They wouldn't put them in if they weren't. 

[KungFuJosh]

First Impressions.

I like the screen and GUI better than the Rigol. It looks nicer.

I hate the placement of the front USB port. My 32GB USB3.1 stick (which works perfectly fine, including firmware updates), has a lip that pokes up. I had to tie a string to it so I can remove it. It's very small (which I like, I don't want a huge thing sticking out of the scope), and it is pretty annoying to limit the space to grab memory sticks from the front of the unit.

Firmware updating was a much simpler process on the Rigol. It's not difficult on the Siglent, but as I expected, it's more work. Even if the firmware file is in the root of the memory stick, you still need to select the file, and click a stupid button to run it. Then it decompresses the file, and asks you to manually "restart the scope and wait" (shut off and power back on, since there's no actual restart button). Eventually it comes back to life, and you need to go to the menu to confirm that the firmware update was actually successful. Assuming it was successful, now you need to wait 30 minutes for the scope to regulate itself before you do a self calibration.

By comparison, on the Rigol you put the firmware update file on the memory stick and put it in the hole. It automatically detects the firmware file and asks you if you want to update. It does the rest. The end.

Firmware Updates

My scope came with Software 7.6.1.20R3 and FPGA 2018-01-03 installed.

The instructions say there should be a 1 or 0 after the 7 to tell you if the V1 OS was installed or not. It was, but I didn't know that until later, thanks to weirdness from the info screen.

For the hell of it, I decided to install 6.1.12 firmware to see what would happen. It worked fine. There was no warning about installing an older firmware, it went ahead and installed as you would expect. After installing, there was more visible noise on screen, and it showed: Software 7.6.1.12 and FPGA 2017-11-07.

Finally I installed what I assume is the latest available firmware. Now my scope shows Software 7.1.6.1.25R2 and FPGA 2018-03-06.

The firmware documentation is certainly sloppy. The US site listing the firmware versions has a revisions link that is outdated, so it's totally useless. They should include release dates next to their links.

Anyway, another 15 minutes of waiting before the self-calibration can be done and then I can hopefully use this thing.

[KungFuJosh]

Self-calibration took about 7 or 8 minutes, which isn't too bad. I don't remember how long the Rigol took.

I know I'm impatient, but the speed of the screenshots was worth the price of admission alone. On the Siglent, you press print, and it tells you it was saved. Done. On the Rigol, it tells you it's saving it, shows a progress bar, saves it, and after about 3 to 5 seconds you can use the scope again. Siglent wins screenshot speed for sure.

When using the Auto Setup, a simple "back/undo" type arrow poops up on the bottom soft menu. You can quickly undo the auto settings, or click default to reset all. I dig it.

I plugged my Pico TA131 that was calibrated in the Rigol, and it was still spot-on with the Siglent.

I calibrated the new x100 probe I got, the BK PR2000B. It has a tiny hump at the start of the square waves. I read somewhere that's supposed to be a good thing, but I dunno. Is that true, or does this probe suck? 1 out of 4 of my TA131 probes I bought does the same thing:



Oh yeah, and I love the simplicity of using that zoom feature as above.




On a side note, it looks like they're paying attention. People were comparing the math functions in the forums here, and mentioned Rigol's cute pictures, and Siglent added some cute pictures:

[tautech]

I calibrated the new x100 probe I got, the BK PR2000B. It has a tiny hump at the start of the square waves. I read somewhere that's supposed to be a good thing, but I dunno. Is that true, or does this probe suck? 1 out of 4 of my TA131 probes I bought does the same thing:



Oh yeah, and I love the simplicity of using that zoom feature as above.

Does the 100x probe compensation adjustment range spec adequately cover the SDS1104X-E input spec of 15 pF ±2 pF ?

[KungFuJosh]

Does the 100x probe compensation adjustment range spec adequately cover the SDS1104X-E input spec of 15 pF ±2 pF ?

The manual says 10 - 30 pF, so it certainly should. I attached the specs.

[Fungus]

When using the Auto Setup, a simple "back/undo" type arrow poops up on the bottom soft menu. You can quickly undo the auto settings, or click default to reset all. I dig it.

Um, so does the Rigol.

[KungFuJosh]

More Observations:

I like that both the front and rear USB ports work for both memory sticks and for powering devices such as differential probes.

I also like that the frequency counter is always on. I didn't like having to search for and enable that on the Rigol (and I didn't like when I forgot to).

I'm also able to see things I couldn't see before with the Rigol. I have a prototype tube amp with a modified reverb circuit in it, which is the cause of a parasitic oscillation. Watching the sine waves, probe connected to the output jack: if I turn up the reverb knob I get the assumed reverb shakiness at first, but then parasitic craziness. With the Rigol, it looks random and crazyish. With the Siglent connected using the same Pico probe, it's a lot clearer, and I can see the parasitic's timing that wasn't at all apparent before. I don't know if that's helpful yet, but it's interesting.


Oh yeah. Two Three things I don't really like:

1. I don't like having only a "soft" power button. I would prefer that there was also a real power button on the back.

2. Not sure about the IEC socket. It's probably fine, but something about it feels cheap. I use similar fused IEC sockets on my amps, and they feel a lot more sturdy.

Edit: 3. I don't like where the probe calibration terminals are. It's better on the Rigol out of the way on the side, instead of the middle like on the Siglent. My opinion.

[KungFuJosh]

When using the Auto Setup, a simple "back/undo" type arrow poops up on the bottom soft menu. You can quickly undo the auto settings, or click default to reset all. I dig it.

Um, so does the Rigol.

The Siglent has a permanent physical Default button, the Rigol did not.

On the Rigol you had to press STORAGE to bring up a menu on the screen, and then you could press DEFAULT. Those are extra steps. I'm not saying it was hard on the Rigol. But two button presses is more than one. That's a slower work flow.

On the Siglent, the default soft button poops up automatically. That's less work.

[tautech]

Does the 100x probe compensation adjustment range spec adequately cover the SDS1104X-E input spec of 15 pF ±2 pF ?

The manual says 10 - 30 pF, so it certainly should. I attached the specs.

Good. 
Probe compensation adjustment can be influenced by the pressure placed onto the trimmer with the adjustment tool.
Check this is not the case with your issue. Sometimes to get compensation 'perfect' it requires more than a single attempt. 

[KungFuJosh]

Good. 
Probe compensation adjustment can be influenced by the pressure placed onto the trimmer with the adjustment tool.
Check this is not the case with your issue. Sometimes to get compensation 'perfect' it requires more than a single attempt. 

lol, obviously I tried more than once before posting about it.

That screenshot is without me touching the probe. I'll mess around with it more later and see if it changes at all.

Edit: I tweaked it around more, it doesn't look as noisy as that screenshot, but it still has that little spike. Not sure why that screenshot makes it look so noisy anyway, I was probably messing around.

[JS]

Hey! The Rigol has an overshoot measurement, pretty handy while calibrating probes! I got it under 1%, don't remember the exact number, but that suggests about 1 LSB, which seems good enough for me.

I calibrated the probes when it arrived, each probe for each channel with the corresponding color and I just check every once in a while, haven't need to tweak it any further than that.

JS

[bitseeker]

Josh, thanks for the comparisons thus far. Interesting stuff.

[KungFuJosh]

Josh, thanks for the comparisons thus far. Interesting stuff.

No problem! It certainly has been interesting. I'd say, for me, from a user-experience standpoint, the Siglent wins hands-down.

I felt dumb for a second because it was so simple to use I couldn't figure something out. I was looking for the probe compensation button in the menus, and I couldn't find it. Then I realized the only button I didn't hit was for the channel. Duh! There it is. Everything on the Siglent is that straight-forward; if the settings are relevant, the menu pops up when you press the button. It's actually very well organized.

Between the overall faster performance, and the better user-experience I'm already enjoying this scope more. The workflow is faster, and the screen definitely looks better to me. I'm happy with this purchase.

Now, I'm going to do more testing/work on a tube amp and see if I can sort out this stupid parasitic.

At the same time, I'm trying to justify the purchase of some of these probes. Hopefully I find them all useful. 

The x10 on the TA131s are rated 600V, which is plenty for most of my circuits, but I also got the x100 which are rated at 2000V.

I also need to figure out how useful the differential probe I got is. At x50 it goes to 130V, and x500 it goes to 1300V. I feel like this guy is going to collect some dust. I guess it's a good thing it comes in fancy case, right?

[KungFuJosh]

Hey! The Rigol has an overshoot measurement, pretty handy while calibrating probes! I got it under 1%, don't remember the exact number, but that suggests about 1 LSB, which seems good enough for me.

I calibrated the probes when it arrived, each probe for each channel with the corresponding color and I just check every once in a while, haven't need to tweak it any further than that.

JS

When I had the Rigol, I calibrated the first probe, and retested it on each channel. It didn't need any tweaking at all once calibrated. Even switching one of my TA131 probes from the Rigol to the Siglent surprisingly didn't need any adjusting.

[JS]

Hey! The Rigol has an overshoot measurement, pretty handy while calibrating probes! I got it under 1%, don't remember the exact number, but that suggests about 1 LSB, which seems good enough for me.

I calibrated the probes when it arrived, each probe for each channel with the corresponding color and I just check every once in a while, haven't need to tweak it any further than that.

JS

When I had the Rigol, I calibrated the first probe, and retested it on each channel. It didn't need any tweaking at all once calibrated. Even switching one of my TA131 probes from the Rigol to the Siglent surprisingly didn't need any adjusting.

Yes, I also did that test, and had the same results, but better to be safe, and even better have the color on your probe tip matching the display (leave aside the two blue channels)

JS

[tautech]

Hey! The Rigol has an overshoot measurement, pretty handy while calibrating probes! I got it under 1%, don't remember the exact number, but that suggests about 1 LSB, which seems good enough for me.

I calibrated the probes when it arrived, each probe for each channel with the corresponding color and I just check every once in a while, haven't need to tweak it any further than that.

JS

When I had the Rigol, I calibrated the first probe, and retested it on each channel. It didn't need any tweaking at all once calibrated. Even switching one of my TA131 probes from the Rigol to the Siglent surprisingly didn't need any adjusting.

Another thing about 'accurately' compensating probes, set the timebase to say 200us or faster so to stretch the peak of the square wave and also use plenty of amplitude so to magnify the uncompensated portion for finer adjustments.
You might have to shift the Hor and 0V positions but the result is worth it. Also DO assign the correct colored rings to the probes so that they go back onto the same inputs.
What a lot of ferking about I hear you say, well I do this for every DSO I sell !

[KungFuJosh]

Yes, I also did that test, and had the same results, but better to be safe, and even better have the color on your probe tip matching the display (leave aside the two blue channels)

JS

Hahahaha, I was gonna make a joke about missing having two blue channels, and I totally forgot.

Another thing about 'accurately' compensating probes, set the timebase to say 200us or faster so to stretch the peak of the square wave and also use plenty of amplitude so to magnify the uncompensated portion for finer adjustments.
You might have to shift the Hor and 0V positions but the result is worth it. Also DO assign the correct colored rings to the probes so that they go back onto the same inputs.
What a lot of ferking about I hear you say, well I do this for every DSO I sell !

Yeah, I play with them knobs plenty. I stretch out the wHor until it's too bent to adjust, and then tweak it back to a usable shape. I've tried doing that both by itself, and with the zoom function to see how it affects compensation. For whatever reason, with the square looking flat, the tip always looks over-compensated on the x100 probe. Just the tip.

[KungFuJosh]

Here's another example of the speed (by mistake). This is the 1 Pico probe that does the same thing as the BK probe. I shoved in the memory stick and hit the print button. It worked fast enough that it captured the screen with the USB message still on, and I didn't even realize it captured anything yet, so I hit the button again and captured two images. Oops.

[bitseeker]

I also need to figure out how useful the differential probe I got is. At x50 it goes to 130V, and x500 it goes to 1300V. I feel like this guy is going to collect some dust. I guess it's a good thing it comes in fancy case, right?

Well, it sounded like you had already determined that you didn't need to make differential measurements, just relative to ground.

[tautech]

Here's another example of the speed (by mistake). This is the 1 Pico probe that does the same thing as the BK probe. I shoved in the memory stick and hit the print button. It worked fast enough that it captured the screen with the USB message still on, and I didn't even realize it captured anything yet, so I hit the button again and captured two images. Oops.

Yeah you get that if you're in too much of a hurry capturing screenshots. A USB stick with an LED can let you know when the Save has finished.

BTW, the channel tab for the screenshot of the 100x probe earlier shows input attenuation set to 1x as you hadn't set that up before saving however it won't make any difference to the displayed overshoot.

[KungFuJosh]

Well, it sounded like you had already determined that you didn't need to make differential measurements, just relative to ground.

Well, yeah. 99% of what I'm doing will be to ground. Of course I might learn something that increases my need for the differential probe, but I dunno.

[Fungus]

Oh yeah, and I love the simplicity of using that zoom feature as above.

The Rigol does the exact same thing. 

(push the horizontal timebase knob and you toggle zoom mode)



(except the Rigol shows an extra inset at the top showing you where you are in the entire memory buffer).