Ok I'll have a look that. I was more wondering if there's a hardware/path difference, so maybe slightly different performance. But yeah maybe it says in the video on most DSO's, it's the same signal, just analyzed differently.
Of course it is the same signal. All modern Siglent DSOs have a fully digital trigger saystem. That means that the trigger signal path splits off the signal path only in the digital domain, i.e. after the ADC. The frontend doesn't even know about the trigger, except for the external one, which is still oldschool analog.
As a consequence, AC-coupling is just an operation in the signal processing, just like the LFRJ and HFRJ filters, that are implemented numerically in hardware, i.e. some FPGA. The same goes for hold-off, where Siglent offers the rather unique "holdoff by event" (greetings from LeCroy!) in addition to the usual "holdoff time".
I should look up trigger jitter too, if it's called that. Some signals are just annoying to look at. IDK when it's the signal, or noise or the scopes I'm using, and then I guess the screen update speed on a DSO most be some of it too. Sometimes hold-off helps, or LP/HP filters.
There is a scope characteristic called "trigger jitter", but that is
very low on contemporary Siglent DSOs - we measure it in picoseconds. You won't notice it at all.
What you mean is "unstable triggering", caused by ambigous trigger levels. As long as the chosen trigger level occurs only at the intended trigger event - and only there and then - you have a stable triggering. Once you get this level associated with other (maybe spurious) events, your trigger isn't unique hence not stable anymore.
The first measure is to find an appropriate trigger level, which is unique and provides stable triggering. If this cannot be found, then we choose the next best thing, i.e. the least ambigous trigger level.
If the spurious trigger is somehow synchronous to the signal you want to trigger on, then holdoff can (and will) help - if setup correctly. In such cases the zone trigger can also solve most ambigous situations.
If there are asynchonous events disturbing your trigger, then filters might help, e.g. HFRJ when you want to trigger on a slow signal with HF interference on it and vice versa for the LFRJ trigger.
Sometimes simply chosing the appropriate trigger solves the problem best. If simple edge trigger does not do the job in certain cases, then more advanced triggers like slope, pulse, window or pattern might work like a charm.
Maybe you should study the trigger section of my review, where I've demonstrated a lot of tricky situations, where edge trigger and even holdoff won't cut it anymore - and how to get a stable trigger in those situations. It is for the SDS1104X-E, but is universally true, since this is a subset of the higher class scopes. SDS1000X-E lacks a few advanced triggers and doesn't support zone trigger. Reply #2, first document:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1104x-e-in-depth-review/msg1371778/#msg1371778
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
