Ask Electronics

4086 readers

21 users here now

For questions about component-level electronic circuits, tools and equipment.

Rules

1: Be nice.

2: Be on-topic (eg: Electronic, not electrical).

3: No commercial stuff, buying, selling or valuations.

4: Be safe.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

DavideAndrea@discuss.tchncs.de

linker3000@discuss.tchncs.de

4 channel scopes, budget. Siglent or Rigol? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 day ago by ikidd@lemmy.world to c/askelectronics@discuss.tchncs.de

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I don't need much more than 100Mhz but I'd like to have serial/CAN decoding. I could probably get away with a 2 channel, but it seems like a lot of the extra features like wifi control and digital channels only come on the 4 channels like the 1204X-E, plus it has some waveform generation (though maybe that's an addon?).

Anyone have a budget model they'd recommend? The DS1504 seems like it's getting a bit long in the tooth and the price point doesn't really seem competitive with better scopes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

If you need a plain scope, the Rigol entry-level ones are all decent. But if specifically looking at serial/CAN, may want to take a look at a Saleae-8. The device is headless and comes with probes. Connects to a computer via USB. The software runs on the computer and is what sets them apart.

If too expensive, suggest finding a used 8 and not succumb to cheapo knockoffs on EBay. The software gets regularly updated and runs only on their devices. That alone is worth the investment. You can even extend it by writing your own analyzer code to handle event sequences.

No relation. Just a happy long-time owner of a Saleae-16. Has saved my bacon a few times. Also have an old DS1054, but haven't had to use it for eons.

[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

I am leaning towards just getting the scope without logic analyzer and getting that afterwards, for use with Sigrok or the like. I'll keep this in mind.