We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Rohde & Schwarz Oscilloscopes OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

What is Rohde & Schwarz Oscilloscopes?

Oscilloscope innovation that delivers measurement confidence. Excellent signal fidelity, high acquisition rate, an innovative trigger system and a clever user interface - that’s what you get with Rohde & Schwarz, a leading manufacturer of oscilloscopes. Match your needs with the right oscilloscope platform, probing options and software applications. From general purpose test to solutions for specific industry standards, we have you covered.

Rohde & Schwarz Oscilloscopes was previously known as RT Series.

Rohde & Schwarz Oscilloscopes Video

Archived Rohde & Schwarz Oscilloscopes Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Brandon Jiao
Staff Transceiver Engineer at Xilinx, Inc.
MSP
With this machine, it's easier for us to debug or clarify where the noise source could be because of its accuracy
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable features are its wide bandwidth and 8 ports."
  • "The depth the the user GUI could be improved. It is a bit deep for new users. During the first two weeks we spent a lot of time finding the tabs."

What is our primary use case?

We are using their VNA for our RFSoC PCB design guideline and EVBs.

The application targets on 5G and high speed transceiver applications. We care much about the noise floor and crosstalk. With this machine, it's easier for us to debug or clarify where the noise source could be because of its accuracy. 

How has it helped my organization?

For the RF application, we care much about the crosstalk on our device and PCBs. Generally, what we can do with the other vendor's product is four-port measurement. It's a bit complicated for us and time consuming to combine all the crosstalk measurement together in a  unified model. However, with this VNA, it is much easier because of its eight ports configuration. 

It's very stable because everything is done at the same time. This means within the test condition environment, everything is the same. This has increased accuracy and dramatically saved a lot of our time.

We can do more experiments with this product than using other VNAs which have less ports.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are its wide bandwidth and 8 ports. These are very important for us to do the crosstalk evaluation, and they came in at very good price.

It is easy to use.

What needs improvement?

The GUI could be improved since the hierarchy is a little complicated for the new users. It would be good if the frequently used configurations in the calibration setup such as the signal power, phsical bandwidth etc. could be moved to one editable table. And users can access to the table by clicking a quick link button in the desk top of the GUI.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

For transceiver applications, the bandwidth is a bit narrower. The bandwidth of the VNA is around 20 GHZ, and for the 58G and 112G applicaitons,the measurements require much higher bandwidth. However, for our main product, the scope still works fine.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is really good. In the very beginning, we had some problem with their Ecal because of the connector type is different. So, their expert in the factory gave us a very prompt support, explaining everything, and I enjoyed that they told the truth. They told us the flaws in the accounts and the limit of the whole machine, so we understood what we were doing. This gave us a bottom line in terms of the accuracy and reliability.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We did do a demo before purchasing.

When we chose this, the price was really reasonable, and it is a high-end product. It had a high price, but we understood that because it had 8 port, the same noise floor (as the competition) with double the measurement capabilities and a cheaper price.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Yes. We compared a lot based on cost and support. We chose Rohde & Schwartz based on their long history in the RF application. Also, there is high correlation between different products, and our customers are using Rohde & Schwartz's products (which is good because we want to use the same platforms to do the same tests).

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Power Integrity Lead at Elton Designs
Real User
The ability to have both the time domain and frequency domain, where the frequency domain is a very broad spectral plot, is extremely valuable
Pros and Cons
  • "The ability to have both the time domain and frequency domain, where the frequency domain is a very broad spectral plot, is extremely valuable."
  • "The Rohde & Schwarz user interface is very oriented towards drop and drag functions on the screen. Some of those are just not obvious how to use. You have to have somebody get you over the hump."

What is our primary use case?

I'm very much in the power integrity field. I spend a lot of time working for a major semi-conductor manufacturer doing silicon validation.

Our end product has to pass all the various FCC compliance tests, which is sort of the field of expertise that I have. For a customer to build a product with a switching mode power supply in it and be able to provide some degree of certification or comfort, they have to pass the compliance test which permits them to sell into the marketplace. That has always been an emphasis of mine, when I'm doing application engineering for a semiconductor company. They're selling to a company which integrates a switching mode device into their product. For them to sell that product, they have to jump through hoops, meeting a bunch of compliance tests that the FCC or European agencies establish. Once they pass, they are certified in their lab to sell. Then, I try and provide a lot of leading advice on how they can incorporate that noise generating device into a product with a high degree of likelihood that they will pass those tests.

We are doing an investigation of the interface between audio power amplifiers and loudspeakers, including the speaker wiring that provides the interconnect.

How has it helped my organization?

The Rohde & Schwarz gear that I use is because it's so sensitive. I'm always looking for things way down into the noise floor as part of the electromagnetic compliance work that I do.

What is most valuable?

In the case of Rohde & Schwarz, I have a power-oriented frequency display option which allows me to do spectral plots of the residual noise that I'm looking at and have that on a logarithmic frequency axis since I'm not using this in conventional communication applications. I'm looking for broadband noise and things that will stick up out of the spectrum. To be able to have both the time domain and frequency domain, where the frequency domain is a very broad spectral plot, it is extremely valuable. There are things which happen in the frequency domain, or you can see in the frequency domain, that you'd never see from a normal oscilloscope plot. You can try and get correlation between an oscilloscope and a spectrum analyzer as a separate instrument, but it is difficult. Only Rohde & Schwarz, at the time I was selecting this, had the logarithmic frequency axis to allow that plot.

What needs improvement?

There is certainly a learning curve. Finally, watching YouTube videos on using the instrument got me over the hump, as well as a sit down session with one of the oscilloscope experts. 

The Rohde & Schwarz user interface is very oriented towards drop and drag functions on the screen. Some of those are just not obvious how to use. You have to have somebody get you over the hump. My understanding is they have a newer user interface, but I haven't gotten around to upgrading the firmware on my scope in some time, so I'm not familiar with it yet. In comparison, I love the LeCroy interface.

Recently, I've learned that there are ways to adapt these instruments to become a Vector Network Analyzer (VNA), which is of interest to me. If I can use probes that are not in the 50 ohm domain, which is what you would have with a normal Vector Network Analyzer, then doing power applications for me, this would be a lot safer. Using a traditional communications type Vector Network Analyzer in the 50 ohm domain and having these high DC potentials (adding the DC blocks is adding air to the test method), then having an oscilloscope type front-end which is lot more tolerant of overload, it is a lot safer. The vector network analysis that I need to do is well under a gigahertz, and the other instruments that I have sort of stop at 40 megahertz. Trying to get past 40 megahertz into the mid-hundreds of megahertz and have high impedance probes that will tolerate DC, that is really of interest to me.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I have a 4 GHz scope, and the stuff that I am doing probably stops at around 500 MHz.

While there are options that they don't have, it's all field upgradable. With the hardware upgrades, they have little accessory bays in the back of the scope which I have been making inquiries about.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is very good. It is just a phone call, and I always get a prompt response.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

The two LeCroy scopes that I owned were their 12-bit scopes. I had both a 4-channel and an 8-channel gigahertz scope, which ae a lot easier to run. However, they're lower in performance only from the standpoint that I ended up buying the highest performance Rohde & Schwarz unit, which I tend to use in automated setups under a LabVIEW Control.

This product would have been overkill for the previous project that I worked on, which is why I used LeCroy.

Where in reading Steve Sandler's book on power integrity, and in discussions with him, he pointed out how superior the the Rohde & Schwarz RTO's are

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

In all cases, I have gotten demos of the products prior to purchase.

The pricing is expensive, but very fair when you look at the technology that you are getting. These are higher-end pieces which have a ton of engineering in them that is not evident on the package. However, you could imagine the amount of time that the vendor has spent on the firmware, optimizing the internal layout, developing custom ICs, etc. They're releasing a mass produced product, but these things are built to last.

Buying Rohde & Schwarz gear is like buying a Mercedes. It raises eyebrows when you're asking for that level of performance.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

In the case of the Rohde & Schwarz scope, if you set it up side-by-side against the LeCroy 12-bit scopes, it has about a six time lower noise floor, even though it is an 8-bit scope. This allows me to dig deeper down into the noise floor and chase down some particular parasitic that might cause a compliance test failure. It has better sensitivity, aside from the better feature set, which is really important to me.

LeCroy tends to have some kind of either reliability issues or delays from their national service depot.

I haven't done anything lately with Keysight or Tektronix.

Anritsu also makes good gear too.

What other advice do I have?

It is a remarkable scope. It is hard to get used to compared to other oscilloscopes because of the cryptic user interface. However, once you get over that, it's got a lot of power.

We are not using this product to support connected devices, e.g., IoT development, nor are we planning to going forward.

Trial the models. Use them and see what the limits are that you can get away with using the highest-end gear, and also if you will need to step back to a lower-end product, like RIGOL.

In the case of the Rohde & Schwarz, with the number of equivalent screen updates that it does per second,you can find some really illusive glitch or failure to trigger. If you have another machine that runs substantially slower, you'll probably never find that little event, unless you're willing to wait a few weeks for the scope to finally trigger on a missed event. If you're trying to certify something to be rock solid, then you will to have to go with a scope which has much faster acquisitions, not just the sample rate, and has the ability to distill information looking for something that's out of the ordinary.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Hardware Engineer at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
We use it to measure high-speed and low-speed signals
Pros and Cons
  • "The product is quite reliable and straightforward to use. Typically, there are no households that we have to set up."
  • "I'm against the Windows-based tools. Now everybody is running scopes, VNAs, and all their tools based on Windows. I don't want to see that in the future."

What is our primary use case?

I'm using the VNA for basic measurements, debugging, and troubleshooting in the automotive industry.

The application space that we are using the solution to target is all types applications: high-speed digital, high-speed serial, channel evaluation, cables, measuring cables, and measuring connectors.

I am measuring high-speed and low-speed signals.

What is most valuable?

The product is quite reliable and straightforward to use. Typically, there are no households that we have to set up.

What needs improvement?

User interface is okay. I would probably rate it a seven out of ten. The software is sometimes not intuitive, even though we want it to be. It could be a bit better.

I'm against the Windows-based tools. Now everybody is running scopes, VNAs, and all their tools based on Windows. I don't want to see that in the future.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We are utilizing the full bandwidth of the product.

Typically, if we need to upgrade, we just buy another tool.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

If we are looking to purchase a product, we ask for a loaner for a month or so to test it out. Then, we will make a decision.

When considering a solution for purchase, it's a combination of user interface, abilities, and price. If something is way better, then costs is less of a factor.

What other advice do I have?

Shop around. Get a loaner from all of the options. Purchase the one which fits best for you.

It doesn't take that long to get acclimated to the solution, unless you have something difficult. Everything is mostly available online. I don't think I even contacted support.

We have use it mostly with supported calibration tools (for support devices).

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Signal Integrity Engineer at Starkey Hearing Technologies
Real User
It has a very low noise floor. It will take time to learn because of the user interface.
Pros and Cons
  • "It has a very low noise floor."
  • "Sometimes, it's difficult to find menus on the user interface."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is audio measurements, as well as current measurements.

We use the UPV Audio Analyzer mostly, not the scope. We use Bluetooth in our product. We are measuring currents for enabling Bluetooth.

How has it helped my organization?

We can't measure our dynamic current with oscilloscopes. We can only use an Audio Analyzer, because of the low noise floor. Thus, it provides information that we couldn't get otherwise.

What is most valuable?

Its very low noise floor.

What needs improvement?

There is a small learning curve. It probably took a month or two to get used to the instrument because of the user interface, which could be cleaned up more. Sometimes, it's difficult to find menus.

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.

How are customer service and technical support?

I haven't used their technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We are utilizing the full bandwidth of the product. 

I believe the product is upgradable to provide more functionality to the user.

What other advice do I have?

It provides all the functionality we need. It will take time to learn due to the user interface.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
CEO at a manufacturing company with 1-10 employees
Real User
It is easy to connect with, accurate, reliable, and hardly fails
Pros and Cons
  • "It is easy to connect with, accurate, reliable, and hardly fails."
  • "They could use an RDA interface."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is telecom. I use a couple of their models.

The application space that we are using the solution to target is 5G and another proprietary connectivity solution for digital health and autonomous driving.

Essentially, we measure the signal to noise issue, various EVM, and other wireless performance.

How has it helped my organization?

  • It is easy to connect with.
  • It's accurate.
  • It's reliable.
  • It hardly fails.

What is most valuable?

  • User interface
  • Accuracy
  • Performance
  • Reliability

What needs improvement?

They could use an RDA interface.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We are utilizing the full bandwidth of the product, more or less.

I haven't personally thought about upgrading it. For this particular application, somebody else owns the instrument. We just use it.

How are customer service and technical support?

If we need technical support, we just call them.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing is very expensive.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We also evaluated HPE and Anritsu.

What other advice do I have?

It has good performance, reliability, and support, but it is too expensive. Compare to other business models.

As time passes, the learning curve gets shorter. They're becoming better.

The technology requirements are increasing because of evolving standards. While they're coming along, I expect them to be there, as they have always been there.

We are not using this product to connect with support connected devices, but it will be going forward for devices, like IoT development.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
HW Eng. at a tech company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Accurate, very easy to operate, and user-friendly, it enabled my EMC/EMI testing
Pros and Cons
  • "The characterization of RF channels was helpful... The user interface was very simple to operate and there were a lot of tutorials."

    What is our primary use case?

    I used it for board design, EMC/EMI measurements, EMC/EMI testing, and for RF measurements. I used it to test some parameters in phased array antennas, to do testing of far fields. I was measuring signals up to 15 gigahertz, and for EMI testing according to the FCC.

    I used it to support connected devices for IoT development.

    I used the full bandwidth of the product.

    How has it helped my organization?

    I used it almost every day as a lab testing and measurement unit. It was a mandatory instrument for doing my job.

    What is most valuable?

    It was a spectrum analyzer of Rohde & Schwarz so the characterization of RF channels was helpful and it enabled me to see the measurements that I wanted to see.

    The user interface was very simple to operate and there were a lot of tutorials.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    There was technical support, there was no problem with that. There were tutorials. We also had people in Israel who provided any assistance that we needed.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I didn't choose Rohde & Schwarz. It was bought in the past, so it was there.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    One of the things I liked less, not only me but also my company, was that Rohde & Schwarz are very expensive. The prices are too high. There are solutions that are almost the same that sell at better prices. It's a problem for Rohde & Schwarz, but their instruments are very good, that's for sure.

    What other advice do I have?

    If your company has enough money and you are not a small startup or a medium startup, purchase Rohde & Schwarz. But, of course, a small company or small startups that are just at the start, this is not a good solution for you.

    There wasn't really a learning curve, because the principles are basic things that other engineers could explain to us very quickly. But if we had to do out-of-the-ordinary things, we always had references on the internet or contact with Rohde & Schwarz people in Israel.

    I would rate the product at nine out of ten, because it's very accurate, very easy to operate, very user-friendly, and there is a lot of support. The nine, instead of ten, is because of the price.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Firmware Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    The user interface is more than what we expected. It's easy and fast to use.
    Pros and Cons
    • "The user interface is pretty good. Right now, it is more than what we expected. It's easy and fast to use."
    • "We would like to have autotracking and auto error tracking for regression testing. We would like to know what error happened, when it happened, and during what scenario (such as setup), because right now we have to manually look at when it happened."

    What is our primary use case?

    The primary use case is debugging, prototyping, and validating the check site and design, e.g., the circuitry and hosts. We have several testing stages to go through before production.

    We have a lot of different models that we are using in the lab. We work with the highest view scopes and protocol analyzers, like PCIe, SAS, and SATA. We use them a lot. The PCIe analyzers, like PAM, have full size testing equipment in our labs.

    We are the server producers. We touch every corner: high-tech. electronic, electrical, down to the mechanical, materials, and performance. We provide the backbone to support the words - Internet connection.

    What is most valuable?

    • Accuracy
    • Console/GUI
    • Zoomable things
    • Remote access

    What needs improvement?

    We would like to have autotracking and auto error tracking for regression testing. We would like to know what error happened, when it happened, and during what scenario (such as setup), because right now we have to manually look at when it happened. Sometimes, this takes a long time. We want when something happens, to capture it, then have it give out the full timestamp. We also want it user-friendly and sent to the cellphone, so that's the Internet of Things.

    The test equipment has configured the capability to ease the tester's routine job. Going forward, the product should be able to forward the tester's debugging and test information to the their cellphone and enable them to check the results on-time. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    More than five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We update everything in our systems everyday.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We are using the full bandwidth.

    We have a series of specific testing instruments to generate a protocol for generating signals and RF down to the digital protocol analyzer. We have high-speed serial, a base-band processor, network processors, network chips, network controllers, and CPUs.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Their support is strong and timely.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    The previous solution was out-of-date and too old, but we did not switch. We kept the legacy systems in the lab to support legacy customers because not all our customers kept pace. We're the most advanced industry, and we have to support them.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We did a demo with all the vendors that we evaluated. We learned their roadmaps and features. We also exchanged ideas of what they are designing in the future.

    What other advice do I have?

    They are a top tier product. We use it to guarantee our top tier product. That is why we purchased it.

    The user interface is pretty good. Right now, it is more what we had expected. It's easy and fast to use.

    There is no learning curve. We have an evolution that is following the process, such as following companies producing in test equipment. We followed their seminar rapidly. We know their roadmap and they know our roadmap, so we have very synchronized very well, which is good.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    George Brown
    Sr Electrical Engineer at TVH Americas
    Real User
    Leaderboard
    Repeatable results help me know what to fix, how much to fix, and when to stop
    Pros and Cons
    • "The most valuable features are the accuracy and repeatability."
    • "In the next release, I would like to see report generation. It would make it a lot easier to refer back to and, when doing final testing, seeing what went on during the pre-test would help."

    What is our primary use case?

    I'm using the EMC Receiver for compliance testing, EMC. For us, the product is targeting embedded systems, predominantly, and I have multiple antennas on the same board: Cell mode, GPS, Bluetooth. Keeping all those separate and identifying them is a major part of it.

    We are also using this product to support connected devices for IoT development.

    We utilize the full bandwidth.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Repeatability is the main thing: Being able to go back to the lab and test get the same results. I know what to fix and how much to fix and when to stop.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable features are the accuracy and repeatability.

    What needs improvement?

    In terms of the user interface, the program is great but the front panel is a little bit tough to get through.

    In the next release, I would like to see report generation. It would make it a lot easier to refer back to and, when doing final testing, seeing what went on during the pre-test would help.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    More than five years.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Technical support is fair because I use front panel more than I use programming. Most of tech support doesn't use front panel.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    The previous solution dropped by the wayside. It was HP, and then it went to Agilent. Rohde & Schwarz has always been top-end. That's what influenced it.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The pricing is too high.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    Tektronix was definitely on the shortlist but I still like Rohde & Schwarz displays and accuracy. We didn't do a trial before purchasing.

    What other advice do I have?

    Save up your money and get one. It's worth it.

    There was most definitely a learning curve. On any instrument there's a learning curve. It took me a good two weeks.

    Our solution is field-upgradable but I'm not sure yet how we'll take advantage of that.

    I'd give it an eight out of ten. Again, the display, the presentation of the data, as well as repeatability and accuracy, are what count.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    User at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    Serial data analyzers and jitter measurements are free, but unit should be smaller, portable
    Pros and Cons
    • "Most of the features offered are free, like serial data analyzers or jitter measurements."
    • "The size of the unit is too big, too heavy. It has to be made more portable and smaller."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use it for monitoring and measuring signals in telecom systems. We are measuring anything from low-speed to high-speed and we are usually using the whole bandwidth of the product.

    What is most valuable?

    Most of the features offered are free, like serial data analyzers or jitter measurements.

    What needs improvement?

    The user interface of this solution is not that intuitive. When you're used to a different product, there's a learning curve.

    Also, the size of the unit is too big, too heavy. It has to be made more portable and smaller.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    Less than one year.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We haven't really contacted support, but if we did we would go through the rep or the distributor.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    If we are going to switch, usually it's speed related and bandwidth related.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We looked at Tektronix and Keysight. We did a trial or a demo of the products on our shortlist before purchasing them. What we learned was that the price varies from model to model but usually they're in the same ballpark.

    What other advice do I have?

    When you're used to a product, go with the same product or vendor, unless the price of another is really cheap.

    There's a definite learning curve. I'm used to Tek or Agilent.

    I would rate this product at seven out of ten because there's a learning curve that's involved in using the product.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Hardware Engineer at a tech company with 51-200 employees
    Real User
    It has a low noise floor, but the user interface could be improved
    Pros and Cons
    • "The noise floor for reference clocks is pretty low, so this instrument is able to measure it where others cannot."
    • "The noise sensitivity: It has a low noise floor."
    • "The user interface could be improved, e.g., the documentation on the menus. I have to open a separate document to figure out the functionality sometimes."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use it for phase noise analysis.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The noise floor for reference clocks is pretty low, so this instrument is able to measure it where others cannot.

    What is most valuable?

    The noise sensitivity: It has a low noise floor.

    What needs improvement?

    The user interface could be improved, e.g., the documentation on the menus. I have to open a separate document to figure out the functionality sometimes. Some primaries are unclear and the limitations are sometimes unclear, then you have to go ask customer support. So, it would be better if the documentation was more easily accessible (not lacking).

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We are not utilizing the full bandwidth of the product. We will utilize the full bandwidth eventually, but not in the near future, probably in a few years.

    It is not field upgradable. Usually, you just have to buy a new instrument.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The technical support is good. They are pretty responsive. We usually contact them by e-mail and they respond quite quickly.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    This product was advertised by them. They demoed it for us. That is how we evaluated, bought, and purchased it. 

    During the demo, we learned the limitations on what it can measure. We demoed for both units for approximately two weeks.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The pricing is way too expensive.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    The noise sensitivity was better with Rohde & Schwarz, and the only competitor that we know of is KeySight and their PXA product.

    What other advice do I have?

    Understand the features that it has. It is very unclear if you first use the product, like what exactly every button is doing.

    It was not that big of a learning curve. It took maybe a week. It was pretty easy.

    The application space that this solution targets is high-speed serials.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Padamanabh Deshmukh
    Hardware Engineer at Cisco Systems, Inc.
    Real User
    The product is good and efficient in terms of the measurements, but it is pretty repetitive to use
    Pros and Cons
    • "It is a more efficient, easier way to do measurements."
    • "The instrument has a wide bandwidth. You can sweep across a wide range of frequencies."
    • "It would be good if they would try to automate most things because it has more pressing buttons and repetitive work. If there were automation scripts that they could provide, that would improve things."

    What is our primary use case?

    We are using it for spectrum analysis, most frequency domain stuff, and phase noise measurements.

    How has it helped my organization?

    It is a more efficient, easier way to do measurements.

    What is most valuable?

    • The instrument has a wide bandwidth. You can sweep across a wide range of frequencies. 
    • The resolution is good.
    • The accuracy is pretty good.

    What needs improvement?

    It would be good if they would try to automate most things because it has more pressing buttons and repetitive work. If there were automation scripts that they could provide, that would improve things.

    It would be good if they could go up to higher gigahertz bandwidths. Right now, the analyzer that we have is able to go to 10 GHz, and there's a lot of stuff going on at higher frequencies. I'm not sure if they have this product available in the market.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    Less than one year.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We are probably not using the full bandwidth of the product. 

    If it is upgradable, definitely we want to upgrade. We want to go to the higher bandwidths and are limited by the bandwidth of the product. Also, we want to go onto the higher frequencies.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I haven't been in contact with the technical support or vendor.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We did a comparison with the Keysight product, and the resolution of Keysight was more efficient and better compared against Rohde & Schwarz.

    What other advice do I have?

    The product is good and efficient in terms of the measurements, but it is pretty repetitive to use.

    The application base that the solution is targeting is a high-speed serial technology. We measure phase noise. The spectrum analyzer that we're using is an important criteria to characterize the things that we want.

    There is definitely a learning curve. To get used to the system, it will probably be two or three days. It's not much time. It's pretty easy, but most of the time, you have to repeat everything.

    The user interface is pretty good. The menu functions are available right on the screen. For the analyzer that we are using, it has most of the button things and there is no touch screen to it. You pretty much figure out what's going on and you just have to press the buttons.

    We are not using it for IoT development.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Design Engineer at Xilinx, Inc.
    MSP
    This product makes my life easier, results better, and speeds up my work
    Pros and Cons
    • "I have been able to do quality measurements that I have been unable to achieve with the equipment from some other vendors."
    • "There was a learning curve. Their use interface and the way that their products work are not intuitive to somebody who switches from other vendors."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use it to measure power supply noise.

    We are using a couple of types of oscilloscopes from the RTO®2000 product line. We use the spectrum analyzer and signal source analyzer.

    How has it helped my organization?

    I have been able to do quality measurements that I have been unable to achieve with the equipment from some other vendors. Since I spend quite some time in the lab, this product makes my life easier, results better, and speeds up my work.

    What is most valuable?

    For real-time oscilloscopes, Rohde & Schwarz has a pretty robust solution. 

    • It's compact. 
    • It has low channel noise. 
    • I appreciate their customer support.
    • It specifically targets voluntary applications, which is what I'm doing. E.g., I have to do a lot of wattage noise measurements for supply and distress.

    So, it is a good match for the sort of things that I need to do. 

    What needs improvement?

    There was a learning curve. Their use interface and the way that their products work are not intuitive to somebody who switches from other vendors, like Keysight or LeCroy. At first, I had to be walked through every step because every time I guessed where to find a function, I would guess wrong.

    Once you learn the user interface, it's very nice. However, when you face it for the first time, it's tricky. You have to spend time with the product before you feel comfortable with it.

    I would like to increase the range of our signal processing functions in our real-time oscilloscopes. Since they have been marketing their oscilloscope as universal or as a multi-purpose scope, it does very well for the supplying those measurements, but it is lacking in jitter measurements.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    Three to five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    I might take advantage of the memory upgrade, because that is something that you can always use more of in a real-time scope.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I have been very satisfied with their customer support. I know quite a few application engineers from Rohde & Schwarz and all of them are very helpful, knowledgeable, and easy to deal with.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    A good friend of mine suggested Rohde & Schwarz. Previously, I was using Keysight LeCroy, so I didn't really know about Rohde & Schwarz. I trust the person who suggested Rohde & Schwarz would be better than the competition. I tried it for myself (through a demo) and am now convinced that my friend's opinion of the product is true.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The pricing is very competitive.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We tried Tektronix or Keysight LeCroy. I have nothing against LeCroy, as the company still uses it with some applications, specifically for voluntary measurements, our debugging tool, and multipurpose tool.

    What other advice do I have?

    I would advise someone to seriously consider using Rhode & Schwarz's equipment, especially if they have similar needs to mine.

    Most of the time, I'm not measuring signals, I'm measuring noise. I'm measuring noise on the power supply. This is important because they are multiple components squeezing through a single chip, so the power supply is always stressed. They can interact and talk to each other, so you want to make sure that doesn't happen.

    I use the full bandwidth of this solution.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.