Great timing, I glanced at one of these as I wondered what the FFT function would be like and you just answered my question...Poo...if the configuration of this is anything to go by !....cheers :)
I think this is a "clone" of the 6022E bur don;'t have one to compare it to. I do have a Hantek 6074BC that I'll do a video on soon. It's an example of a much better USB scope. It actually delivers more than the specs promise. However, the UI leaves a lot to be desired. The Instrustar UI is much better, simpler and more intuitive. Perfect for the noob.
@@uni-byte the hantek software is why i ended up buying the lowest spec pico scope. it's good enough for the audio frequency range and their new software is quite good and runs on linux.
It might, but you'd be better served by buying a ZEEWEII DSO3D12. Zeeweii are selling them for about $89 + free shipping on ALiExpress right now and they are a 10x better scope plus a DMM and a function generator all in a rechargeable, portable and standalone form factor.
I wholly agree that it is not worth buying. But, I wonder for the one that you have in hand... 1) Might it have done better when it was new and the caps were not dried out? 2) I would not trash it... I would give it to a noob to learn with. Functions, setup, etc. If they destroy it, nothing lost. Just a suggestion...
According to the original owner it was like that from the start. It could just be a bad example though. Yeah, I'll keep it around for someone looking to use it for low frequency stuff. It'd be fine for audio or RF up to 1-4MHz.
Looking to upgrade my old scope. I'm looking for a 100MHz 4 channel scope in the $500 range. What's your thoughts on the Rigol DS1104Z Plus or the Siglent SDS1104X-E scopes? Or is there a better scope for the money? There are plenty reviews of both. Both have pros and cons, just wondering your thoughts.
I had this same decision back a while. For that price range they are your best bets. For me the Siglent won out . In my opinion, for my use it's an all-round better performer with the exception of memory depth and 14MPts is sufficient for what I use that scope for. I also like the UI a bit better than on the Rigol. The real kicker though, was the web interface. I use that ALL the time and would not like to give it up.
I bought the Owon HDS2202s (25 mhz signal generator) for 250 dollars including tax to Norway. The scope is 200mhz one channel, but comes with one 100mhz probe. Pretty happy with it. I had this industrar scope for several years, not happy with it, I simply gave it away.
Thanks for the feedback. Rigol seems to have more buttons, whereas the Siglent seems to be more menu driven. The Siglent does seem to have a better noise floor. Rigol does have the port for a logic analyzer, but I don't see myself paying $300 for the dongle and the SW license. Watched a review where the Rigol was able to monitor up to 300MHz and the Siglent stopped triggering just above 100MHz, both scopes are rated at 100MHz at the 3dB roll off. The Rigol must have a better frontend, maybe used it their higher bandwidth units. I'm just a hobbyist, trying to get the best bang for the buck. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
@@RonDogInTheHouse My Siglent will trigger well beyond 250MHz. I was also able to ""improve" the BW on mine to 200 MHz and it's actually good out to 240MHz @ -3dB. I'll do a test on the triggering and maybe publish a shorts video on it. Edit Update: Just ran a quick test on teh SDS1104X-E and it was able to trigger reliably to 425MHz. Did a short video on it: th-cam.com/users/shortshJrkqFlcAiU
@@sveinjohansen6271 The Owon scopes are far better than these. So are the Hantek USB scopes. Yeah, how could you sell something like this? Even if I only got $20 for it I'd fell guilty.
Great timing, I glanced at one of these as I wondered what the FFT function would be like and you just answered my question...Poo...if the configuration of this is anything to go by !....cheers :)
I was going to look at the FFT, but since it generally performed so poorly I didn't bother.
Don't blame you :)@@uni-byte
Hantek have made these for ages, for instance 6022BE. And I think companies have been selling various re-brandings of them for a similarly long time.
I think this is a "clone" of the 6022E bur don;'t have one to compare it to. I do have a Hantek 6074BC that I'll do a video on soon. It's an example of a much better USB scope. It actually delivers more than the specs promise. However, the UI leaves a lot to be desired. The Instrustar UI is much better, simpler and more intuitive. Perfect for the noob.
@@uni-byte the hantek software is why i ended up buying the lowest spec pico scope. it's good enough for the audio frequency range and their new software is quite good and runs on linux.
Would this scope be useful for instance just giving indication of communication on a Can-bus.
Apologies if this is a silly question
It might, but you'd be better served by buying a ZEEWEII DSO3D12. Zeeweii are selling them for about $89 + free shipping on ALiExpress right now and they are a 10x better scope plus a DMM and a function generator all in a rechargeable, portable and standalone form factor.
Thank you very much for replying I really appreciate it.
Just ordered one as they were on sale for £69!
Thanks again
I wholly agree that it is not worth buying. But, I wonder for the one that you have in hand... 1) Might it have done better when it was new and the caps were not dried out? 2) I would not trash it... I would give it to a noob to learn with. Functions, setup, etc. If they destroy it, nothing lost. Just a suggestion...
According to the original owner it was like that from the start. It could just be a bad example though. Yeah, I'll keep it around for someone looking to use it for low frequency stuff. It'd be fine for audio or RF up to 1-4MHz.
Looking to upgrade my old scope. I'm looking for a 100MHz 4 channel scope in the $500 range. What's your thoughts on the Rigol DS1104Z Plus or the Siglent SDS1104X-E scopes? Or is there a better scope for the money? There are plenty reviews of both. Both have pros and cons, just wondering your thoughts.
I had this same decision back a while. For that price range they are your best bets. For me the Siglent won out . In my opinion, for my use it's an all-round better performer with the exception of memory depth and 14MPts is sufficient for what I use that scope for. I also like the UI a bit better than on the Rigol. The real kicker though, was the web interface. I use that ALL the time and would not like to give it up.
I bought the Owon HDS2202s (25 mhz signal generator) for 250 dollars including tax to Norway. The scope is 200mhz one channel, but comes with one 100mhz probe. Pretty happy with it. I had this industrar scope for several years, not happy with it, I simply gave it away.
Thanks for the feedback. Rigol seems to have more buttons, whereas the Siglent seems to be more menu driven. The Siglent does seem to have a better noise floor. Rigol does have the port for a logic analyzer, but I don't see myself paying $300 for the dongle and the SW license. Watched a review where the Rigol was able to monitor up to 300MHz and the Siglent stopped triggering just above 100MHz, both scopes are rated at 100MHz at the 3dB roll off. The Rigol must have a better frontend, maybe used it their higher bandwidth units. I'm just a hobbyist, trying to get the best bang for the buck. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
@@RonDogInTheHouse My Siglent will trigger well beyond 250MHz. I was also able to ""improve" the BW on mine to 200 MHz and it's actually good out to 240MHz @ -3dB. I'll do a test on the triggering and maybe publish a shorts video on it.
Edit Update: Just ran a quick test on teh SDS1104X-E and it was able to trigger reliably to 425MHz. Did a short video on it: th-cam.com/users/shortshJrkqFlcAiU
@@sveinjohansen6271 The Owon scopes are far better than these. So are the Hantek USB scopes. Yeah, how could you sell something like this? Even if I only got $20 for it I'd fell guilty.
Russian scope would have been built with chips made of potato.
Made with draniki chips? I think it is!
I had the Hantek version of this. It was just as bad.
Thanks for the info!