Hello all!
Please forgive the intrusion. I apologize for my ignorance. I can see there is a very knowledgeable group of people here. I need a few questions answered about DSOs.
I have in my possession a 25 year old Agilent 54111D DSO. This is a beast! I see the new scopes available seem to surpass this scopes capabilities at a small price. There are a couple things I do not understand. There are 2 GS/s scopes with a bandwidth of 200 Mhz. This is a ratio of 10:1. Does this make sense? Isn't this overkill? I think anything beyond 4:1, like my scope, would have negligible value. So does greater that 4:1 oversampling make up for hardware that has inadequate performance?
Also my scope has 6-bit (8-bit effective at 50 Mhz) vertical resolution. There are scopes nowadays that provide 8-bit resolution and an effective resolution of up to 12-bits. Is my scope still adequate? I will be using it for embedded software development and audio amplifier implementations.
I notice there are (Rigol) scopes that on paper appear to exceed the performance of my scope and come with many additional features. What would the difference be between that (Rogil) scope, lets say the DS1202CA, and my scope aside from the differences in bandwidth? The accuracy? The S/N for instance? Just the feature set?
Did I make a bad purchasing decision by not going with something inexpensive scope (like the Rigol)? Perhaps I need to save up for a good *Agilent* scope with the same features? This sounds attractive to me. But what would the differences be in what you would consider essential performance parameters?
BTW my boat does need a new anchor. ;-)
Thanks!
Bob Graham
Edited by: tucson on Apr 1, 2014 12:59 AM
Please forgive the intrusion. I apologize for my ignorance. I can see there is a very knowledgeable group of people here. I need a few questions answered about DSOs.
I have in my possession a 25 year old Agilent 54111D DSO. This is a beast! I see the new scopes available seem to surpass this scopes capabilities at a small price. There are a couple things I do not understand. There are 2 GS/s scopes with a bandwidth of 200 Mhz. This is a ratio of 10:1. Does this make sense? Isn't this overkill? I think anything beyond 4:1, like my scope, would have negligible value. So does greater that 4:1 oversampling make up for hardware that has inadequate performance?
Also my scope has 6-bit (8-bit effective at 50 Mhz) vertical resolution. There are scopes nowadays that provide 8-bit resolution and an effective resolution of up to 12-bits. Is my scope still adequate? I will be using it for embedded software development and audio amplifier implementations.
I notice there are (Rigol) scopes that on paper appear to exceed the performance of my scope and come with many additional features. What would the difference be between that (Rogil) scope, lets say the DS1202CA, and my scope aside from the differences in bandwidth? The accuracy? The S/N for instance? Just the feature set?
Did I make a bad purchasing decision by not going with something inexpensive scope (like the Rigol)? Perhaps I need to save up for a good *Agilent* scope with the same features? This sounds attractive to me. But what would the differences be in what you would consider essential performance parameters?
BTW my boat does need a new anchor. ;-)
Thanks!
Bob Graham
Edited by: tucson on Apr 1, 2014 12:59 AM
While I am not familiar with the Rigol scopes in particular, the Agilent 2000X series offers significant benefits over similarly priced scopes available. Www.agilent.com/find/2000X-Series
Specifically:
Up to 50,000 waveforms/s. why does this matter? http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-7885EN.pdf & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utTzCDUUjPc&list=PL5298621BABA862A1&feature=share&index=1
Upgradable to 8 channel MSO
Upgradable bandwidth
Built in function generator to 20 MHz (option)
I2C/SPI, UART/RS232, CAN/LIN decode/trigger (analog channels only)
Up to 1MPt / channel
Segmented memory
Mask testing
And a lot of other nifty features.
And all the software options can be had for one low price currently: http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5991-4162EN.pdf
And here’s how it stacks up against the Rigol scopes in question:
Agilent 2000X-Series vs. Rigol DS1000CA/B Oscilloscopes
http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5990-6738EN.pdf
anyway, these are sold through our distribution partners. And they’d be happy to drop ship you one to try, gratis. You can find a list of authorized distributors here: www.agilent.com/find/distributor
as for memory depth… 1MPts may not seem like hat much nowadays… but too much memory is not always a good thing as it can kill the waveform update rate: http://www.tmworld.com/design/manufacturing/4389565/Oscilloscope-memory-depth-when-bigger-is-not-always-better
On the other hand:
Three Compelling Reasons for Deep Acquisition Memory
http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5991-1822EN.pdf
see also:
Ten Things to Consider When Selecting Your Next Oscilloscope AN 1490
http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-0552EN.pdf