--ARE YOU HAPPY WITH RIGOL PRODUCTS?--

[alsetalokin4017]

I have only had my DS1054Z for a couple of weeks and I have done the usual stuff like look at counter outputs from an FPGA and decoding of a UART stream.  Nothing that challenges the scope.  Considering what I do in the sandbox, I may never challenge the scope.

If the scope is annoying, get rid of it.  If the UI is slow, get something else.  Life is too short to work with tools you don't like!

I didn't buy my scope to win a beauty contest and the UI works about as fast as I can manipulate the knobs so I think I'll hold on to it for a while.

I just did a sample of Math A+B using 2 bits of a binary counter on Ch1 and Ch2.  The sum of A+B is exactly what I would expect and the trace aligns perfectly.

Did you try that test at 500 ns/div, Average acquire mode, and with a third channel turned on?

A couple of days ago, someone said that none of the trigger modes other than Edge worked on the DS1054Z.  Specifically, they said I couldn't trigger on a character in a UART string.  Well, they had me going!  So I rigged up an Arduino to send character strings and, voila', the trigger is perfect.

Be somewhat doubting about what you read on the Rigol bashing threads.  Much of the information is wrong!

Perhaps _some_ of the information is wrong, like the statement about the triggering problem (which did not come from me; I've even demonstrated several very useful trigger modes other than Edge on my YT channel) ... and/or perhaps you are just not setting your scope appropriately in your sandbox to see the problems.

Take a look at the two scopeshots I've posted up above. Is this some "obscure" setting or usage of the scope? How many people will simply accept what the hardware frequency counter says without checking it against the actual graticule and sec/div settings? Why does the scope trigger on a falling edge when it's supposed to be triggering on a rising edge? Why does _only_ changing the trigger level between two very reasonable settings on a perfectly ordinary signal cause this set of errors?   

Trust... but verify. 

[rstofer]

Trust... but verify.

In my case, with the FPGA outputs, I already knew the frequency and the DS1054Z counter was exactly correct.  But, you're right, it's good to verify.

I had two goals for the scope:  Check SPI with 4 channels, triggering on CS' and looking at acceleration, velocity and displacement simultaneously on my analog computer.  The Digilent Analog Discovery does a terrific job for both of these uses.

I haven't modeled the damped harmonic system but I did just model a circle and displayed it in the X-Y mode.  First, it works!  And Measure-All gets what is an entirely reasonable answer for Vp-p and so on.  There are a couple of things I need to play with:  First, I don't seem to be able to increase the persistence in X-Y mode and to accommodate this, I need to speed up time on the computer.  My base time is 1 second and 10x is 0.1 second.  Next evolution, I will incorporate 100x.  Good stuff to know!  Second, the X-Y display is under the YT display and it's in a little box.  I need to study up on that.  But, heck, X-Y is simply a diversion.  Time to read the book, I suppose!  But first the adventures...

There is indeed some variation in triggering, even on edge, as a function of the trigger level.  Nothing I haven't been able to work around (change the level to get what I want) but, yes, it is apparent.  I particularly noticed it when decoding RS232.  Not just triggering RS232, actually decoding it.  Unless the phase of the moon is just right, there is every possibility that the decode is wrong.  Twist the trigger level knob and things clear right up.  I'm not sure I understand all I know about this issue.

Coming from an analog scope, the part I find the most confusing is the fact that the trigger point is in the middle of the screen by default.  Yes, I know I can move it but, still, I'm used to traces starting over on the left.  It'll take a while.

As it stands today, the scope is doing everything I had hoped for.  I really have no issues.  Even if I had issues, I wouldn't be willing to spend a great deal more money to buy something else.  I read a thread where somebody wants to skip over the Rigol and move to an R&S scope.  It has three times the bandwidth (great!), half the channels (sigh...) and five times the cost!  I'll pass!  This is just a hobby...

There are probably only two people on the planet interested in analog computing but I find it gives me much more insight into the differential equations I was barely able to handle back in college.  Things would have been a lot easier if we had had analog computers in the lab.

[rstofer]

I love my Rigol DS1054Z!

It makes me laugh every single day.       

While I tried to recreate your error I found that it doesn't trigger at a point at which IMHO it should be perfectly able.
It won't trigger a 2.5 V_pp 1 kHz square with 2.5 V offset until the trigger level reaches 440 mV... 
Edit: the same thing happens if you trigger on the falling edge and move the trigger level above 2.16 V...

It's a little worse than that!  It appears that the minimum value is some percentage of the full waveform.  As the V/div increases, the trigger level increases as well.  When I decreased the V/div, I was able to trigger at 120 mV.

Does it matter?  Not to me!  I'm sure even my Tek 485 requires some voltage above the noise floor.

Here's my criteria:  Is the image what I expect?  Can I trigger on it?  If so, we are GTG!

[RoGeorge]

This post is just to easily follow the subject.

[Monkeh]

This post is just to easily follow the subject.

There's a little button down the bottom which says 'notify'. Yeah, it's so you don't notify all of us.

[Legionary]

I have had my DS2072 for a few years now and it has been rock solid for me.

It doesn't really hold a candle to the Agilent that I used in my college days, but for common hobbyist stuff it should be more than sufficient.
Yes, the interface layout is poorly thought out, and the UI lags a little, but I have learned to compensate and don't even really notice these little niggles anymore.
Considering what I paid for the scope and how much an equivalent scope from a more reputable brand costs, I find the drawbacks acceptable.

Besides, that is extra money for more equipment!