Best Oscilloscope for $3k

Dear Group,

I can finally afford a new oscilloscope to supplement my trusty TEK 465M. My budget is around $3k. I like the newer Agilent scopes, which I have used when someone else was paying. I do mostly low frequency high-precision instruments (analog signals less than about 1 MHz).

The pretty lower-end Agilent scopes are in reach, but I'm tempted to use one of these:

formatting link

which is driven internally with an FPGA and one of these ADCs:

formatting link

I make out the ENOB to be 11.6 bits at 125 MSPS with 14 bit samples using 4 channels, and 13.2 bits with 16 bit samples at 62.5 MSPS using one channel. It will also go out to 1 GSPS with 8 bit samples. Analog BW is 200 MHz.

I like the serial decoding for free and the ability to stream data to an external application for creating custom processing. I'm thinking this would be good for prototyping AFEs with signal processing via the PC.

So my thinking is that using this rather obscure configurable ADC that these guys improve performance over the big manufacturers ASICs for my particular applications niche.

What do you think?

ChesterW

Reply to
ChesterW
Loading thread data ...

Looks like Hittite acquired Arctic and Keragis, then ADI acquired Hittite.

Personally, I like scopes with knobs and screens and such. It is an interesting idea, a scope with a fast 8-bit ADC and a slower, true 12 to 16 bit ADC.

Reply to
John Larkin

Short term, if the PC you are using it with craps out, you need to come up with another PC. This is usually not too hard to do, either at work or at home; it might be a good idea to keep your n-1 PC around a little longer as a backup.

Long term, you have to be prepared to keep a PC running, probably on XP or 7, for however long you own the scope. (Or a virtual machine of XP or 7, as long as the VM's USB support is fast enough for the scope.)

The fact that they claim to support XP through 8 is a good sign. You can probably count on getting updated drivers/software for 9 in a few years. After that, you may or may not get further software support.

If they give you source code for the drivers, that is also a good sign for long-term support. However, even their Cadillac model at US$2800 is only about a week or two, plus or minus, of one programmer's time. If it won't work with Windows 10, you may end up ahead to just buy another scope, rather than paying someone to port the drivers for you.

The newer "regular" scopes have kind of the same problem, since many of them are just PCs in a funny case with a nice A/D board. On the other hand, you would hope Agilent or Tek would pick a better "motherboard" and other components, so they would last longer.

By the way, if you do have a newer Tek that runs Windows, and you haven't made the backup CDs/DVDs for it, do so. If you get a replacement hard drive from Tek, it comes blank - no software. At a previous employer, the nice Tek scopes (and spectrum analyzers, and other stuff) lived in sort of an IT limbo - they were on an isolated network, which was good, but they didn't get any backup or antivirus support, which was not so good.

Matt Roberds

Reply to
mroberds

I have been wanting to switch to Linux for some time now but never made the jump. I may be mistaken but I believe a Linux compatible device is much less likely to be broken by new versions of the OS, no? I won't buy a LogicPort from Intronix because they don't support Linux or Android.

--

Rick
Reply to
rickman

Well, it depends on which OS features/support libraries the device depends. If it is handled entirely in userland -- and only uses the OS for the hardware interface(s) to the device -- then it is most readily continuously supported. E.g., (backward) compatibility libraries can provide all the hooks for the OS's API that *may* change, over time (this is how NetBSD/FreeBSD handle "old binaries" without requiring re-compilation).

If, OTOH, support is tightly integrated into the kernel, then all bets are off. E.g., I have never ported my 9-track tape driver "forward" as the NetBSD kernel evolved -- simply because it was easier to just keep an old kernel running for those times when I needed to read/write half inch tape!

Similarly, FreeBSD at one time (perhaps still!) had some low level hacks to support a special purpose LORAN-C receiver. Expecting these things to be supported moving forward assumes someone will have a "vested interest" in making that happen.

Reply to
Don Y

Den onsdag den 27. august 2014 00.06.44 UTC+2 skrev Don Y:

I think a big thing is that you'll be able to reinstall on any hardware you find that is compatible without having to mess around with getting permission from a Microsoft server

-Lasse

Reply to
Lasse Langwadt Christensen

It depends on the nature of the interface. If it requires a special driver, you really need the source code so you can compile for new kernel versions. If it's just a USB or TCP/IP or other standard interface, it's relatively robust to version changes. Not perfectly immune, just relatively.

We got bit on a special PLC controller with a linux driver for a CNC machine - the supplying company wouldn't give us the source, just the binary driver that was locked to a particular (now antiquated) version of Linux. We took it off the network given the risk, which is a nuisance.

Reply to
Frank Miles

If you're looking at lower level Agilents, might as well go directly to Rigol -- they're the same things, Agilent just rebrands them. Tek does the same thing but with a different Chinese brand (but who would want a Tek interface in this day and age, anyway?). The ones around $1-2k are comparable, and you get more features per buck that way.

Tim

--
Seven Transistor Labs 
Electrical Engineering Consultation 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Tim Williams

The only scope I ever spent anything like that amount on is my fave Tektronix TDS 694C--four channels, 3 GHz, 10 Gs/s on all four simultaneously, 128k sample memory per channel, $2700 on eBay. Patience is a virtue. ;)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs 
Principal Consultant 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Phil Hobbs

K

W
n

At the $3K level he will be (or should be) looking at an Agilent DSO2000-X or DSO3000-X series, or one of the lower-end DSO6000A series, not one of th e rebadged Rigols. He should buy a gently used one on eBay if necessary to meet the budget. It is worth it. Agilent has beaten everybody else's DSO s to a bloody pulp over the last few years.

Re: NeonJohn's comment, he's spot on. A USB oscilloscope is like a USB han dgun. (And I say this as a designer of USB test gear. Headless instrument ation can be great, but not for something as fundamental as an oscilloscope or DMM.)

Re: Phil's comment, I like my 694C immensely, but every time I turn it on I have to wonder if this is the last day on the job for its trigger chip. A lso, the probes can be stupidly expensive. I don't think the 694C (or any

50-ohm only scope) is a good choice for a general purpose bench tool. It's better as a pinch hitter for a newer, slower DSO.

-- john, KE5FX

Reply to
John Miles, KE5FX

I'm confused. Tim is saying Agilent and Rigol scopes are the same thing. Why do you say the OP should be looking at an Agilent scope?

I can't agree with this. I have held off buying a new scope for some time now while I continue to look for a good inexpensive mixed signal USB headless scope. There are a couple of Hantek units I am considering.

--

Rick
Reply to
rickman

Only the very lowest-end Agilent scopes were made by Rigol, and I'm not sure they even still sell those. The rest are designed in-house.

Better than nothing, obviously. But when you're looking to spend multiple thousands of dollars, the mainstream brands have some appeal over whatever Harbor Freight is importing this week.

At $3K you could probably pick up an MSO6014A or even a 6034A on eBay. Still a production model, and it's the last generation that runs VxWorks instead of Windows. Even better, if you buy one now it will say "Agilent" and not "Keysight." :-P

-- john, KE5FX

Reply to
John Miles, KE5FX

I'd go with the Agilent scope. I don't think you'd be happy with the USB stuff. For a little over 3K you can get a 200mhz dsox2024 with all the software options turned on ( minus the I/O pod for the digital section).

Cheers

Reply to
Martin Riddle

The price cutoff may be different than I remember, in which case you'll be looking at better name-brand value. Still not nearly proportionate to the sticker price, but if you're hard set on buying a certain set of features in one machine, maybe that's what you have to pay.

For the features you'll likely need... do you really need more than a Rigol? It's not like they give up using the InfiniVision ASICs in the bottom barrel models... even the $400 one is quite attractive on a general basis.

They've come a long way since their crusty early days. Even the menus are downright navigable, which is something Tektronix never once figured out in their digital line!

Stay away from the true bottom-barrel no-names like HanTech or whatever, and you should be pretty happy.

Tim

--
Seven Transistor Labs 
Electrical Engineering Consultation 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Tim Williams

Why would anyone be "looking" to spend some thousands of dollars? I am looking for a set of features and specs and want the lowest price I can find for them.

I've actually never understood why oscilloscopes are so expensive actually. I get that there is a lot of R&D that goes into them, but once you have a solid design I would think that could be used for a lot of scopes and that NRE could be amortized.

--

Rick
Reply to
rickman

o
s
a
e
0-X or DSO3000-X series, or one of the lower-end DSO6000A series, not one o f the rebadged Rigols. He should buy a gently used one on eBay if necessar y to meet the budget. It is worth it. Agilent has beaten everybody else's DSOs to a bloody pulp over the last few years.

handgun. (And I say this as a designer of USB test gear. Headless instru mentation can be great, but not for something as fundamental as an oscillos cope or DMM.)

I have a Picoscope for close to 10 years now, works flawlessly

Cheers

Klaus

Reply to
Klaus Kragelund

Yeah, I've heard a lot of good things about the Picoscopes, but they are very pricey. I also don't recall them making a mixed signal scope, am I wrong?

--

Rick
Reply to
rickman

if the drivers are open srouce then yes, else probably no.

contrast 10 year old ATI and NVIDIA graphics cards.

--
umop apisdn 


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
Reply to
Jasen Betts

to

oes

t a

are

000-X or DSO3000-X series, or one of the lower-end DSO6000A series, not one of the rebadged Rigols. He should buy a gently used one on eBay if necess ary to meet the budget. It is worth it. Agilent has beaten everybody else 's DSOs to a bloody pulp over the last few years.

SB handgun. (And I say this as a designer of USB test gear. Headless inst rumentation can be great, but not for something as fundamental as an oscill oscope or DMM.)

ng.

Go to

formatting link

They have 2 mixed signal scopes.

You can download the software and run it without a scope. It will run a sam ple waveform, so you can get the feeling for the controls and the features

Cheers

Klaus

Reply to
Klaus Kragelund

Hi John,

Now that it has an LCD, you could always keep it running 24/7 if you suspect it happens on a power up, . :) I suspect that many of these scopes spent most of their lives turned on which is why there's so many of them with dim CRTs and loaded with dust inside.

Were you ever able to fix or diagnose the other 694C you bought?

Jay (Who sold you your working one...)

Reply to
JW

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.