EEVblog #451 - Rigol DS1052E vs DS2072 Oscilloscope

[EEVblog]

How much has oscilloscope technology developed in the last 5 years?
Dave compares the baseline $800 entry level scope from 5 years ago, the Rigol DS1052E, to the current $800 benchmark, the DS2072.
Demos of intensity graduated display, waveform update speed, LXI Ethernet interface control and waterfall plots, segmented memory waveform replay mode, and more.
Includes bonus gratuitous analog oscilloscope comparison.

[ivan747]

Awwww yeah! Thanks Dave. I think we all had a great discussion on the thread that started this. I expect this video to get a lot of views.

[EEVblog]

I expect this video to get a lot of views.

I hope so, took a while to shoot this one!
It was going to be a quick 5 min vid where I just mentioned each feature, but I thought it was kinda lame if I didn't demo each one.

[Astroplio]

Yep, what you say in the video pretty much sums it up for me also.
I bought the DS2072 for the same reasons as an entry level scope. And actually, I don't think I will need to get an other scope, as a hobbyist. Maybe, IF one day I will advance my knowledge level enough I will need a Mixed Signal Oscilloscope but for the next 10-15 years I am well covered.

My only complain against Rigol is their support (after sale service, firmware updates).
The competition from the other major companies demands a far better customer service, they should invest more effort and fast into this matter.

George

[ivan747]

Dave wants Staze to go broke 
I would still get the DS1102E for myself (and I did). You won't convince me this time Dave. 
It's just that $800 is a lot of money for a hobby you can abandon in 2 or 4 years.
I can't abandon the hobby myself because I am making it my career but still, I don't spare $800.

Original thread here:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/first-scope-lost-in-the-reviews/

P.S. now the poll made in the original thread will go frenetically towards the DS2072. Lucky Dave.

[ivan747]

Dave, is there any way you can request some low end <$1000 oscilloscopes and make an Oscilloscope shootout video in the future? Maybe for the 500th video? 

That really would get a lot of views.

[nitro2k01]

It's just that $800 is a lot of money for a hobby you can abandon in 2 or 4 years.

You could also flip the argument and claim that you'll abandon the hobby earlier if you just pay the $400. 

[IanB]

But what about the fan noise?

The DS1052 got noted for having a distinctly audible fan. Is the DS2072 louder, quieter, or about the same?

One advantage of the DS1052 if you don't have a dedicated lab is the small size. You can easily tuck it away on a shelf when you are not using it.

[nitro2k01]

One advantage of the DS1052 if you don't have a dedicated lab is the small size. You can easily tuck it away on a shelf when you are not using it.

Speaking of which, I don't I recall that Dave gave them a good side/top view so you can judge the depth better.

[Hydrawerk]

DS2072 does not have the alternate trigger, that DS1052E has. But this might not be a problem.

[sbehnke]

Bummer, I literally just received my ds1052e this week, but oh well. I'm still an electronics newbie and I think I can learn a lot from my scope.  I've got plenty of people who would gladly take it off my hands should I decide to upgrade later as well.

[IanB]

Bummer, I literally just received my ds1052e this week, but oh well. I'm still an electronics newbie and I think I can learn a lot from my scope.  I've got plenty of people who would gladly take it off my hands should I decide to upgrade later as well.

That is a bit of a bummer as the DS1052E is essentially discontinued and the DS1102E is available at more or less the same price (unless you got a close-out deal on the 1052).

But don't worry about it, the 1052 is still the nice scope it was when it was first introduced, and the 2072 costs way more as well as being much bigger and more complicated to operate.

[Pilot3514]

I have seen you analyze serial communications (I2C, SPI, RS232) in different videos.  This is the first time I notice USB.

What is necessary to do USB traffic analysis? 
Do you need an $800 scope or can it be done with a Saleae logic analyzer or BusPirate?

[ivan747]

I have seen you analyze serial communications (I2C, SPI, RS232) in different videos.  This is the first time I notice USB.

What is necessary to do USB traffic analysis? 
Do you need an $800 scope or can it be done with a Saleae logic analyzer or BusPirate?

Something tells me you can't debug something that works at the same speed your (memory-less) debugger communicates with its host.

[nitro2k01]

Something tells me you can't debug something that works at the same speed your (memory-less) debugger communicates with its host.

It should be within reason to sniff USB 1 with Saleae. Saleae continuously reads the bus at 24 MHz, which exactly twice the USB 1 (full bandwidth) signal rate. On the other hand, sniffing USB 1 may not be all that useful in this day and age, unless maybe you're developing another USB bitbang implementation from scratch.

[c4757p]

Damn you Dave, now I've got one more item to drool over while clutching my empty wallet. 

[EEVblog]

Dave, is there any way you can request some low end <$1000 oscilloscopes and make an Oscilloscope shootout video in the future? Maybe for the 500th video?  :-

Sure, but then people would complain I'm not comparing $400 scopes, or $600 scope, or $800 scopes 

[EEVblog]

One advantage of the DS1052 if you don't have a dedicated lab is the small size. You can easily tuck it away on a shelf when you are not using it.

Speaking of which, I don't I recall that Dave gave them a good side/top view so you can judge the depth better.

I forgot to mention that. They are essentially the same depth.

[ivan747]

Something very important for me is the screen brightness. The room where my lab is has a huge 3mx1.2m window pointing to the west. From 4 to 6 I think you could sunbathe if you leave the windows open. Screens look all dim except for LCDs.

[EEVblog]

Something very important for me is the screen brightness. The room where my lab is has a huge 3mx1.2m window pointing to the west. From 4 to 6 I think you could sunbathe if you leave the windows open. Screens look all dim except for LCDs.

I find the DS2000 screen a little annoyingly dim.

[IanB]

Something very important for me is the screen brightness. The room where my lab is has a huge 3mx1.2m window pointing to the west. From 4 to 6 I think you could sunbathe if you leave the windows open. Screens look all dim except for LCDs.

When recently faced with a similar problem I found a very effective solution in window blinds. They can block as much light as you need.

[sbehnke]

That is a bit of a bummer as the DS1052E is essentially discontinued and the DS1102E is available at more or less the same price (unless you got a close-out deal on the 1052).

But don't worry about it, the 1052 is still the nice scope it was when it was first introduced, and the 2072 costs way more as well as being much bigger and more complicated to operate.

Eh, I got a bonus at work and ended up buying the scope for $314 shipped directly from Rigol NA.  I thought that was a great price.  It is working great for poking around my circuits and learning what I'm doing. 

[BiOzZ]

Wonderful! i have an old 25mhz DSO owon i have been meaning to upgrade!

also no one i know has even heard of owon XP

[BiOzZ]

Eh, I got a bonus at work and ended up buying the scope for $314 shipped directly from Rigol NA.  I thought that was a great price.  It is working great for poking around my circuits and learning what I'm doing.

true but a better price would have been 314.15

[Chipguy]

When you compare the Rigol ones to the Tektronix ones, then i wonder how Tektronix can survive like this.
Compare the Rigol DS2072 with the Tek TDS2002C, the Tek is $1080 while the Rigol is $839.
The Tek only has a little display and 2.5K memory while the 14M of the Rigol sound much more serious.

Comparing  the 4000 series Rigol scopes with the Tek ones gets even worse. There you have a difference from $3800 for the Rigol and about $7000 for the Tek ones.

Its pretty scary how this development is going....

[casper.bang]

Interesting comparison.  I would totally get the 2072 if it were only x2 the price of the 1052... unfortunately for me, it's not. So pardon me, I'll still have to consider this an illustration of technolical progress in 4-5 years rather than a "first scope" shootout.

[marmad]

How much has oscilloscope technology developed in the last 5 years?
Dave compares the baseline $800 entry level scope from 5 years ago, the Rigol DS1052E, to the current $800 benchmark, the DS2072.

Nice video, Dave - thanks for the kind words about the software 

One minor mistake while you showed the DS2000's features - in frame (segment) analysis mode, you can work with masks (Pass/Fail) or templates (Trace). You can't chose a frame to use as the mask, as you tried to do in the video (you just create the mask in the traditional way of X/Y div/distance) - but you can do it if you use templates. Working in Trace mode is more powerful than Pass/Fail since it analyzes and displays both error frames and the percentage of difference (deviation) from the template - whereas with masks the difference is always just 0% (pass) or 100% (fail). This makes the Trace mode a nice tool for analyzing things like jitter.

In any case, great job 

[marmad]

But what about the fan noise?

The DS1052 got noted for having a distinctly audible fan. Is the DS2072 louder, quieter, or about the same?

I have/had both scopes - the DS2072 is much less audible. It's not completely silent, but it's a rather low, smooth rumbling -  and it's not disturbing to me in the way that the DS1052's was. A definite improvement.

[marmad]

Interesting comparison.  I would totally get the 2072 if it were only x2 the price of the 1052... unfortunately for me, it's not. So pardon me, I'll still have to consider this an illustration of technolical progress in 4-5 years rather than a "first scope" shootout.

But the quality/features of the DS2072 are, as Dave put it, an order of magnitude higher - more like x10 as opposed to x2. But of course, many other factors have to be considered: How quickly do you need a scope? How often will you use it? What are your long term plans? Etc.

Need the cheapest scope as quickly as possible?
A used analog scope or one of the low cost DSOs is probably the answer.
Saving money for a scope that you don't need immediately but want to use for years?
Don't bother with one of the < $400 DSOs anymore - they're outdated. Save your money a bit longer and get something vastly better.

One other point that I don't think Dave mentioned in this video: the quality of the build (inside and out). Much much better on the new Rigols - it feels much closer to professional measurement equipment.

[ivan747]

Something very important for me is the screen brightness. The room where my lab is has a huge 3mx1.2m window pointing to the west. From 4 to 6 I think you could sunbathe if you leave the windows open. Screens look all dim except for LCDs.

When recently faced with a similar problem I found a very effective solution in window blinds. They can block as much light as you need.

She who must be obeyed has been delaying the installation of blinds for months now 

[marmad]

Something very important for me is the screen brightness. The room where my lab is has a huge 3mx1.2m window pointing to the west. From 4 to 6 I think you could sunbathe if you leave the windows open. Screens look all dim except for LCDs.

My lab is in a room with five 2.25m x 1.2m windows and the screen brightness, although on the dim side, is enough during the day.

[casper.bang]

But the quality/features of the DS2072 are, as Dave put it, an order of magnitude higher - more like x10 as opposed to x2. But of course, many other factors have to be considered: How quickly do you need a scope? How often will you use it? What are your long term plans? Etc.

Absolutely. If you're passionate about this hobby, know that you are in it for the long run and have the cash, I can totally see the benefits!

However, if you're like me; primarily a software engineer with a neglected but curious electronics past, occasionally tinkering with breadboards and can see the advantage of a basic scope over an advanced multimeter, there is a mighty big step from a 1052 to a 2072. I am in the marked for an beginner/hobby scope that improves on the 1052 for around $US500/€400. By several definitions, the 2000 series is not that.

[Hydrawerk]

I find the DS2000 screen a little annoyingly dim.

Does the Agilent DSOX2000 have a better screen? It is CCFL on the Agilent, but it might be OK.

[Hydrawerk]

When you compare the Rigol ones to the Tektronix ones, then i wonder how Tektronix can survive like this.
Compare the Rigol DS2072 with the Tek TDS2002C, the Tek is $1080 while the Rigol is $839.
The Tek only has a little display and 2.5K memory while the 14M of the Rigol sound much more serious.

Comparing  the 4000 series Rigol scopes with the Tek ones gets even worse. There you have a difference from $3800 for the Rigol and about $7000 for the Tek ones.

Its pretty scary how this development is going....

Tek is IMHO better for schools or some companies, where they don't want any advanced features but the scope is turned on 12 hours a day. Tek is not suitable for hobby use, it is not a good bang per buck.

[marmad]

However, if you're like me; primarily a software engineer with a neglected but curious electronics past, occasionally tinkering with breadboards and can see the advantage of a basic scope over an advanced multimeter, there is a mighty big step from a 1052 to a 2072. I am in the marked for an beginner/hobby scope that improves on the 1052 for around $US500/€400.

Understood. Well, if you don't need to do much/any digital circuit debugging - and the current noise issues have been resolved - the Owon SDS7102V is a good deal (large screen, 10M per channel, battery-operated, VGA out, etc.) in that price range.

[marmad]

Tek is IMHO better for schools or some companies, where they don't want any advanced features but the scope is turned on 12 hours a day.

I know of one deal currently happening that's putting the Rigol DS2000s into some schools in an EU country.

[casper.bang]

Understood. Well, if you don't need to do much/any digital circuit debugging - and the current noise issues have been resolved - the Owon SDS7102V is a good deal (large screen, 10M per channel, battery-operated, VGA out, etc.) in that price range.

Interesting, what makes the DS2000 that much superior when it comes to digital circuit debugging... the 40% larger sample memory? The sample memory compression feature? The trigger options? I have the Owon SDS7102 as a candidate, but some of the similar Siglent models looks better build and with better UX.

[Hydrawerk]

Those Siglents have unspecified waveform update rate and low resolution screen up to 480×240 pixels or so.

[casper.bang]

Those Siglents have unspecified waveform update rate and low resolution screen up to 480×240 pixels or so.

Sure, they are no match for the DS2000. But compared to the 1052E?

[marmad]

Interesting, what makes the DS2000 that much superior when it comes to digital circuit debugging... the 40% larger sample memory? The sample memory compression feature? The trigger options? I have the Owon SDS7102 as a candidate, but some of the similar Siglent models looks better build and with better UX.

Well, I was making the case for the Owon vs. other sub-$500 scopes - and referring to the very slow waveform update rate on the Owon (as a hindrance to digital debugging). But yes, with the DS2000, there is the update speed, the segmented memory capture and analysis, the vast array of triggers (including protocols), and the optional protocol decoders - all of those are nice aids to have in digital design and debugging.

I don't really know much about the Siglents, but I'm sure there is tons of info scattered about this forum 

[marmad]

Sure, they are no match for the DS2000. But compared to the 1052E?

Again, I can't speak to the Siglents, but one other thing that the Rigols have - and which, as far as I know, no other Chinese manufacturer is doing yet (and which was very important to me as a programmer) - is providing a firmware-based set of SCPI (Standard Commands for Programmable Instruments) commands for external control - which makes it easy to create third party software - or use MatLAB, LabView, etc. - to grab data from the scope for external processing - or to control it remotely.

[Pentium100]

The new scope is nice, but since I already have the 1052E, I'll wait, maybe someday I'll be able to buy it for $400

Some of the new features look useful...

[cheepokleebo]

However, if you're like me; primarily a software engineer with a neglected but curious electronics past, occasionally tinkering with breadboards and can see the advantage of a basic scope over an advanced multimeter, there is a mighty big step from a 1052 to a 2072. I am in the marked for an beginner/hobby scope that improves on the 1052 for around $US500/€400. By several definitions, the 2000 series is not that.

I have bought both of these scopes for our school (and, actually both are the low BW model with a SW upgrade - it's a bit cheaper that way - I think Dave might be wrong about the SW upgradeability of the 2000 series). The DS2000 series is sexy and definitely pornographic. Looking at the DS1052 screen is like watching an old time peep-show with a scratchy B/W photos on a Rollodex type projector.  That said, I am not sure I will be able to justify an additional DS 2000 series scope when a DS1000 series with a nice LA (we use the DV3100) costs the same amount. Most of the time the scopes are used to see if we have a reasonably clean waveforms without too much  undershoot/overshoot, or if the edges are monotonic and somewhere down the line there is no double triggering of F/Fs. In this respect both scopes perform similarly. I swapped around the probes that came with the scopes and I really can't tell the difference.  And all the options (the bus decoders, the fancy triggers and the 56M memory)  on the DS2000 series are not that cheap. So if you are doing digital design, I would be tempted to spend the $400 on a nice LA (the DV3100 with 512K memory on all 16 channels and compression on top of does the trick for us).

[marmad]

I swapped around the probes that came with the scopes and I really can't tell the difference.

I can't really remember the probes all that well from when I owned the DS1052E - but it seems to me they had a less-solid feel than the DS2000s - but I could be wrong. One thing though (and I think Dave got this wrong in the video), I'm pretty sure all of the DS2000s come with the 350MHz probes - regardless of the BW of the scope - but I don't remember the probe BW of the DS1052s.

And all the options (the bus decoders, the fancy triggers and the 56M memory)  on the DS2000 series are not that cheap.

Are you aware that's it reasonably easy to just keep restarting the trial period for the options in the current firmware?

[EEVblog]

I am in the marked for an beginner/hobby scope that improves on the 1052 for around $US500/€400. By several definitions, the 2000 series is not that.

And by several other definitions, it is.
You could argue that intensity graduated display is the new entry level standard, and is an essential feature for beginners, so they don't miss as much detail on the waveform. Combine that with anti-aliasing and a scope with these feature is more fool proof, and should be the new beginner standard feature set.
You could argue that the 1052 has more traps for beginners in that respect.
It's not always all about price.

[EEVblog]

One thing though (and I think Dave got this wrong in the video), I'm pretty sure all of the DS2000s come with the 350MHz probes - regardless of the BW of the scope - but I don't remember the probe BW of the DS1052s.

I am of the understanding that the 70MHz model comes with the RP2200 probes instead of the RP3300 probes, but I could be wrong.
Can anyone confirm?

[DL5TOR]

One thing though (and I think Dave got this wrong in the video), I'm pretty sure all of the DS2000s come with the 350MHz probes - regardless of the BW of the scope - but I don't remember the probe BW of the DS1052s.

I am of the understanding that the 70MHz model comes with the RP2200 probes instead of the RP3300 probes, but I could be wrong.
Can anyone confirm?

just to confirm this is out of the rigol ds2000 datasheet

[marmad]

just to confirm this is out of the rigol ds2000 datasheet

It's a nice gesture from Rigol: wanting to make sure you're probe-ready when you hack it up to 200MHz 

[EEVblog]

just to confirm this is out of the rigol ds2000 datasheet

It's a nice gesture from Rigol: wanting to make sure you're probe-ready when you hack it up to 200MHz 

Cool, I stand corrected.
That's really nice.
Say you bought a cheap old high bandwidth analog for example, you'll have suitable probes.
Shame you can't software upgrade the bandwidth, but maybe that's a future thing?

[DL5TOR]

I just cheched my probs as i have a ds1102

thy are RP-2200

73 de DL5TOR
Torsten

[marmad]

Shame you can't software upgrade the bandwidth, but maybe that's a future thing?

I think they've been holding back on that option for now (as Agilent had done with the 1M and bus decoding for the X2000) - especially since they've had that price point to themselves for the last 9 months or so. It will interesting to see what happens now that the GW-Instek GDS-2000A has entered the fray. The 2 channel versions are priced almost exactly the same as the Rigol DS2000s - but the 4 channel versions seriously undercut Rigol's DS4000 prices - and actually create a whole new price point for a modern 4 channel scope with intensity grading, expandability, etc.

[Hydrawerk]

Thanks for the video, Dave. How many automatic measurements can DS2000 do at the same time? The Agilent DSOX2000 can do four measurements and GW Instek GDS-2000A can do eight measurements at the same time.

[marmad]

How many automatic measurements can DS2000 do at the same time?

Five (if not using Measure All).

[Hydrawerk]

Just a minor thing.
http://youtu.be/_TSr9nFN1GU?t=5m
Don't be confused with the fact that you will not find "segmented memory" in the user manual. It is called Waveform record.

[Hydrawerk]

Marmad
OK, It is enough for a two channel scope... On the other hand, the four channel Agilent DSOX2000 can do only four measurements.  Not so good. And even no simultaneous use of cursors and auto measure together. 

[Teneyes]

Hi All,   My search for a new scope , lead me to many reviews.  and I learnt , what was important,
Digital, deep memory, bandwidth, sample rates, screen size, quality and costs.
I first looked at Rigol 1052E , then was thinking of Owon, almost ordered. Then  update rate after watching Agilent's video on need for fast update to catch rare events. I learnt that Rigol was source of low end DSO for Agilent and I almost bought the low end Agilent on special. but then came the DS2000.  It had what I was looking for , and I think Rigol learnt from Agilent.
I compared the cost of Rigol to the Agilent and said ok!   Maybe I jumped at it early, but bought the DS2072 back it Aug/2012.
Definitely NO Regrets!!!!!
I was just helping a friend debug data stream and It was easy to show 24 bits on the wide screen, He commented his company using Tek had such small screens. I still have lots to learn with all the Options

And I thank Marmad for the Great software to connect to my DS2072, for quick captures to forward on to people with such easy.

Below are some pics of my playing with the DSO and Marmad's software (already posted on other thread)

[majki]

I belive the DS1000 series is also capable  a very basic waveform recording and playback.
It is limited by the memory depth and the not so handy interface, but it exists.

[marmad]

I belive the DS1000 series is also capable  a very basic waveform recording and playback.
It is limited by the memory depth and the not so handy interface, but it exists.

It's true - but it's limited in another important way as well. Sometimes you want to use segments to quickly capture multiple occurrences of a signal (e.g. an edge or a pulse) and then run an analysis on the segments to see if there's any minor deviation. Well, the waveform update rate also affects how quickly you can record segments - the minimum rearm time. So the Agilent X3000 has a minimum rearm time of 1us for segments (1/1000000) and the X2000 and DS2000 have one of ~20us (although the DS2000 can be as short as  ~17.5 us when you use the Auto sample setting). But the DS1000 would have a much longer rearm time - something in the millisecond range - making it much less useful as an analysis tool. Also, I don't remember if the DS1000 time-tagged it's recorded frames or not - which is rather critical if trying to use it for debugging.

[Deckert]

Again, I can't speak to the Siglents, but one other thing that the Rigols have - and which, as far as I know, no other Chinese manufacturer is doing yet (and which was very important to me as a programmer) - is providing a firmware-based set of SCPI (Standard Commands for Programmable Instruments) commands for external control

The new v5 of the Siglent firmware supports SCPI. They also released EasyScopeX with a dramatically improved user interface (also available on all the siglent compatibles, eg. Atten, Xytron, etc). I was rather surprised to see that they did this and did so retroactively.

--deckert

[DL5TOR]

I belive the DS1000 series is also capable  a very basic waveform recording and playback.
It is limited by the memory depth and the not so handy interface, but it exists.

It's true - but it's limited in another important way as well. Sometimes you want to use segments to quickly capture multiple occurrences of a signal (e.g. an edge or a pulse) and then run an analysis on the segments to see if there's any minor deviation. Well, the waveform update rate also affects how quickly you can record segments - the minimum rearm time. So the Agilent X3000 has a minimum rearm time of 1us for segments (1/1000000) and the X2000 and DS2000 have one of ~20us (although the DS2000 can be as short as  ~17.5 us when you use the Auto sample setting). But the DS1000 would have a much longer rearm time - something in the millisecond range - making it much less useful as an analysis tool. Also, I don't remember if the DS1000 time-tagged it's recorded frames or not - which is rather critical if trying to use it for debugging.

I just checked my DS1102

It can do a recording

with a minimum of 1ms and up to 1000 frames

all based on what the menu gave me and with out verification (no gear to test it right now)

so I hope this helps

73 de DL5TOR

[marmad]

The new v5 of the Siglent firmware supports SCPI.

That's good to hear - I think it should be standard on all test and measurement gear.

[marmad]

I just checked my DS1102

It can do a recording

with a minimum of 1ms and up to 1000 frames

That 1ms will be a delay in addition to the rearm time plus the acquire time, I'm fairly certain. You can test it easily to find out. The DS2000 lets you set that added delay down to 100ns - but that doesn't mean it can capture segments that fast.

The general formula for figuring out the minimum time between segments is: rearm time + (timebase * divisions) + delay setting.

[seb1982]

That is exactly the video I've been waiting for - thank you so much, Dave!

My mind is now made up - DS2072 it is! Particularly if it is possible to keep re-setting the additional trigger options.  Who knew Rigol's painfully slow firmware fixing would have an up-side?! 

[DL5TOR]

so did a basic test
Feq sweep 1000-20000 hz duration 2s/sweep (soundcard from PC)
 capured 1000 frames at 1ms delay 20us/div 12devisions
it needed  5 complet passes and the end freq is 17500Hz
that equates to a total time of 9.75s (aprox)-> 9.75ms/frame

9.75ms-1ms(delay)-(20ms/div*12)=8.5ms(aprox)

so that schuld do it. I know this was not a exact mesurment but it did the trick


73 de DL5TOR

[Salas]

Hello Dave

You said you don't think there is something in the 1000 series that's not in the 2000. I remember the digital filter menu for that. It came handy to me many times when I had the hacked 1052E. Don't know if some spec or feature like the hi-res mode covers and renders it not worth including in the 2K series?
Anyway, selling the previous and upgrading to the new was a good move I don't regret. A quality jump.

[poundy]

So a quick look at the Emona website for current AU pricing (yes, ex GST)

DS1052 $329
DS1102 $399
DS2072 $839
DS2102 $1143
DS2202 $1626

So comparing 50MHz to 70MHz, the 2000 series features (better memory depth, screen, features etc) is worth $510 (155% of the DS1052E price).

Comparing 100MHz to 100MHz is $744 more (186% of DS1102E).

If you were still going to buy the 1000 series, to me it seems the DS1102E is the price point to choose now?  Yes, hacked option and all that, or get it legit for the same price as the 1052E was a few months back. 

What's the collective thoughts on benefit of the 70MHz versus 100MHz or 200MHz - not everyone has Dave's budget (certainly not as an enthusiast) or contacts to get great deals (but if you do, share them  O0 )

[EEVblog]

If you were still going to buy the 1000 series, to me it seems the DS1102E is the price point to choose now?  Yes, hacked option and all that, or get it legit for the same price as the 1052E was a few months back. 

Yes, you'd be a bit silly not too.
I think Emona offer a 3 year warranty too. No warranty if you hack it of course.
So the hack has been almost made redundant now.

What's the collective thoughts on benefit of the 70MHz versus 100MHz or 200MHz - not everyone has Dave's budget (certainly not as an enthusiast)

Try being an enthusiast 4 years or so back, the $400 price point scope market didn't exist!  (you lucky young whipper snappers!)
100MHz vs 70MHz is almost pointless. I'd go either 70MHz or 200MHz.
You could take a chance with the 70MHz that a hack might eventually be made available, or a software license upgrade option.

[marmad]

9.75ms-1ms(delay)-(20ms/div*12)=8.5ms(aprox)

so that schuld do it. I know this was not a exact mesurment but it did the trick

Thanks for the test, DL5TOR. It seems to show that the rearm time is included in the delay time - I haven't experimented enough with the DS2000 to see if that's the case with it as well. But I think your timing experiment has too many unknown variables to get a truly precise idea of the rearm time. For example, the difference between the 1ms setting and your calculated 1.25ms per segment is 200 waveforms per second. That might not seem very much, but at the lower end of the update rate spectrum, it makes quite a difference (average test time to see a glitch occurring 10 times per second [with 99% prob.] doubles: i.e. increases by ~2 hours). You might try the experiment again - at 200ns/div and at 2ns/div to see if they substantially alter the final result.

The problem is, as mentioned before, since 'recording' takes place at trigger events (except in P/F mode), without accurate time-tagging of captured segments - or good analysis software to use on the segments - the usefulness of the feature is quite limited. That is likely the reason you don't see much mention of the feature in the DS1000s.

Edit: As an example, here are two plots of segments from the DS2000 - that show a sine wave glitching into a square wave. The top one is done without using time-tags - and the bottom one with. It's clear that in the bottom image you get an idea of when the glitch actually occurred in the given period of time.

[cengland0]

Awesome comparison.  I like it when people only show the differences because it simplifies things to show me what I'll gain with the extra expense and makes the video shorter.  Thanks Dave, I had this same question and you had an awesome answer.

[M0BSW]

 $800, that's to much for me to spend on a hobby, however the DS1052, would fill my needs, I'll have to see what they go for here in the UK, Uni T , sell scopes over here a lot, I'm also most to scared to ask what you think of them.

[Hydrawerk]

Hi, Dave, please do a video about the zoom (aka delayed sweep) mode and XY mode of DS2000.

[JackOfVA]

Here's an image saved from my Agilent MSO7034B, 1 MHz sine wave, 100% AM modulated with a 100Hz tone (generated from a Rigol DG4102 function generator) with the intensity turned down to about 30%.

When I looked at the 'scope display, it shows the expected analog-type image with a light interior and bright edges, but the print conversion function has distorted the colors and to an unfortunate degree the trace color density. (The 'scope display has a black background and a yellow trace, but the saved image inverts the background to white and makes the yellow trace more of a brownish color.)

And, by the way, Dave's waveform shows well over 100% modulation -- quite recognizable through the little "blips" instead of a narrow region of 0 voltage. The attached image is about 98% modulation depth.

[EEVblog]

I belive the DS1000 series is also capable  a very basic waveform recording and playback.
It is limited by the memory depth and the not so handy interface, but it exists.

Yes, I stand corrected.
I had completely forgotten about that feature, as it's is buried away in the 2nd page of the utility menu!

[EEVblog]

And, by the way, Dave's waveform shows well over 100% modulation -- quite recognizable through the little "blips" instead of a narrow region of 0 voltage. The attached image is about 98% modulation depth.

Yes, I used 120% modulation.

[Salas]

...Me I had originally met Dave's blog when I was Googling info on the 1052E DSO. Remember the first 1052E EEVblog video? That was 4 yrs ago. Now compare his 1080 res 2013 presentation style, lab, and info galore. Well that is some sure progress! Its worth mentioning. Congrats Dave.

[EEVblog]

...Me I had originally met Dave's blog when I was Googling info on the 1052E DSO. Remember the first 1052E EEVblog video? That was 4 yrs ago. Now compare his 1080 res 2013 presentation style, lab, and info galore. Well that is some sure progress!

Yup, sure it!
That was shot on a 320x240 webcam that was maybe 8 years old, propped up on a bottle of Jack Daniels (no, I don't drink it, supplier gift).
I hated that video, I really did, but I uploaded it anyway. Here is the original aus.electronics newsgroup post announcing it:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/aus.electronics/FvwX2e93FiY/qRhoPiwzENcJ

[PhilNY]

Thank you Dave for a very informative blog. I mostly still run older equipment for my repair shop and the students where I work are still using HP54603B's which are getting a bit outdated, just how much outdated I was unaware of till watching the Rigol and the price is great. My only concern is how they might hold up to the abuse of college students so we were leaning towards the Agilent DSOX2002A since our HP-Agilent scopes have had a pretty good track record. It remains to be seen if anything new will hold up to these kids. I get lots of good ideas from your test equipment blogs that help keep me current.

Great job
Cheers
Phil

[notsob]

Talk to your the scope manufacturers rep, be it agilent, tek, rigol or whoever, they tend to do special deals for educational institutions.

[NickS]

What is necessary to do USB traffic analysis? 
Do you need an $800 scope or can it be done with a Saleae logic analyzer or BusPirate?

Decoding USB on a scope would be stupid unless you are looking for a specific issue like noise or debugging a bit banging usb interface.

Your computer will very happily spew out all the raw USB protocol goodness with the right software.
As long as your computer's USB controller can understand the signal you don't need any hardware to probe it.

[PhilNY]

notsob   

The Mfrs reps here in NY are not all that willing to spend much time on small institutions any more, but often I can get a piece of equipment on loan for a bit.
As far as educational deals I am a bit jaded after 23 years of being offered demos and closeouts, the most discount I have ever seen is about 10% and they only often apply that to approved educational items.

It is nice to see Daves video because it is not a sales guy pushing something.

Phil

[marmad]

The Mfrs reps here in NY are not all that willing to spend much time on small institutions any more, but often I can get a piece of equipment on loan for a bit.
As far as educational deals I am a bit jaded after 23 years of being offered demos and closeouts, the most discount I have ever seen is about 10% and they only often apply that to approved educational items.

A number of members here seem to have gotten their Rigol DS2000s - at a discounted price - from Tequipment.net, which is located near you. If you have any interest in the DSO - and you haven't spoken to them already - you might give them a call.

[lgbeno]

Get video, would love to see more things like this.  Tear downs are good but ill be honest, I don't walk away with nearly as much learning.

I've had this debate in my mind about scopes, I have this massive tds544a at home it's a real top spec scope for its time 500mhz, 4 channels, lots of good stuff.  Most of it I don't use and would rather have something small and portable.  Was looking at Agilent dso2000x, Rigol and Hameg.  After seeing the video I think my mind is made that rigol is a awesome scope dollar for Dollie.  Agilent is good too but probably pay more for the name.  Tek IMO is really just a name at this point...

[kfitch42]

The software looked interesting, but I was shocked by how long it took to transfer from the scope to the PC. It was attempting to transfer the contents of the 14Mpt sample memory(before being cancelled), right? Eight bits per sample, right? That's 14MB of data. At 100BaseT you get around 10MB/s of throughput ... so it should have been able to transfer everything in under 2 seconds.

So, is the speed a limitation of: the bloatedness of the LXI protocol? the scope? the software?

[marmad]

The software looked interesting, but I was shocked by how long it took to transfer from the scope to the PC. It was attempting to transfer the contents of the 14Mpt sample memory(before being cancelled), right? Eight bits per sample, right? That's 14MB of data. At 100BaseT you get around 10MB/s of throughput ... so it should have been able to transfer everything in under 2 seconds.

So, is the speed a limitation of: the bloatedness of the LXI protocol? the scope? the software?

Two things:
1) Your memory estimate is way low. Dave was working with segments - and together with the full 56MB of normal sample memory, the DSO has something in the neighborhood of 128MB of memory for segments.
2) The DSO treats each segment as if it's a single-shot sample, so when external software asks for the current contents of memory, it gets ONLY the current segment. The software then has to ask the DSO to 'play' the next segment (and wait) - and that's what takes most of the time - not the actual transferring of data.

After Rigol's experience with the DS1000 series - where you could cause major refresh glitches in the DSO by asking for data from it too quickly - they have (rightly so) made it impossible to cause any kind of glitch or slowdown to the scope's operation remotely, so external software always has low priority. Otherwise I could easily get more than 20 fps from the DSO for real-time waveform display.

[kripton2035]

Dave, I would LOVE a comparative review of hameg HMO2024 and Agilent MSOX2024 mixed signal scopes.
along with their signal decoding facilities ...
prices are almost the same (if you get a refurbished agilent ...)
are the functionnalities better in one or the other ?
I'm sure I'm not the only one that would like such a review ...
thanks.

[kfitch42]

The software looked interesting, but I was shocked by how long it took to transfer from the scope to the PC. It was attempting to transfer the contents of the 14Mpt sample memory(before being cancelled), right? Eight bits per sample, right? That's 14MB of data. At 100BaseT you get around 10MB/s of throughput ... so it should have been able to transfer everything in under 2 seconds.

So, is the speed a limitation of: the bloatedness of the LXI protocol? the scope? the software?

Two things:
1) Your memory estimate is way low. Dave was working with segments - and together with the full 56MB of normal sample memory, the DSO has something in the neighborhood of 91MB of memory for segments (it can do a maximum of 65000 segments at 1.4kB per segment).
2) The DSO treats each segment as if it's a single-shot sample, so when external software asks for the current contents of memory, it gets ONLY the current segment. The software then has to ask the DSO to 'play' the next segment (and wait) - and that's what takes most of the time - not the actual transferring of data.

After Rigol's experience with the DS1000 series - where you could cause major refresh glitches in the DSO by asking for data from it too quickly - they have (rightly so) made it impossible to cause any kind of glitch or slowdown to the scope's operation remotely, so external software always has low priority. Otherwise I could easily get more than 20 fps from the DSO for real-time waveform display.

Ahhh, I guess I didn't understand segmenting. I assumed there was a single pool of sample memory that got segmented.

In the video he captured 8128 frames of 14Ks each. That works out to about 113MB (I was only off by less than an order of magnitude .  So, it seems that the combination of the protocol and the scope (I agree the scope should put external requests at low priority) is the limiting factor. I guess that isn't anyway to 'pipeline' those requests ala HTTP/1.1

[casper.bang]

Does the 2072 use compression as well as segmentation? As a software guy working with smart-meters and the analysis/storage of massive amounts data, I would say that timeseries data on a small scale (i.e. in an oscilloscope) is no different and thus subject to some of the same efficient integer compression techniques.

[kfitch42]

Does the 2072 use compression as well as segmentation? As a software guy working with smart-meters and the analysis/storage of massive amounts data, I would say that timeseries data on a small scale (i.e. in an oscilloscope) is no different and thus subject to some of the same efficient integer compression techniques.

I don't know the answer, but I am guessing no. The great thing about compression is that you get to store more data that fits the expectations of the compressor. The bad thing about compression is that it is less predictable. On a bit of test equipment like this you should expect your expectations to be violated. With compression you would never know how many sample/frames you could store ahead of time. Is some white noise sneaking into that signal you are debugging? Suddenly you don't get as many frames (or perhaps your update rate goes down ... something will have to give).

Perhaps compression could help when transferring data to the PC, but, as has already been noted, the performance there is not limited by the data throughput.

[marmad]

So, it seems that the combination of the protocol and the scope (I agree the scope should put external requests at low priority) is the limiting factor. I guess that isn't anyway to 'pipeline' those requests ala HTTP/1.1

Yes, it's a pity that the DSO can't just transfer large blocks of memory with markers signifying segment start and stop points - having to display each segment on the DSO screen really slows down the process. The fastest speed I can extract segments from the Rigol is, on my desktop machine, about 1400 per minute for single channel / 1100pm for two channels. But currently my software is the only way to get segments out of the DSO (which is why I started writing it in the first place) - that is one feature that is lacking in the current firmware: the ability to save and load captured segments.  It would be nice if Rigol adds it at some point.

Does the 2072 use compression as well as segmentation? As a software guy working with smart-meters and the analysis/storage of massive amounts data, I would say that timeseries data on a small scale (i.e. in an oscilloscope) is no different and thus subject to some of the same efficient integer compression techniques.

I don't know the answer, but I am guessing no. The great thing about compression is that you get to store more data that fits the expectations of the compressor. The bad thing about compression is that it is less predictable. On a bit of test equipment like this you should expect your expectations to be violated. With compression you would never know how many sample/frames you could store ahead of time. Is some white noise sneaking into that signal you are debugging? Suddenly you don't get as many frames (or perhaps your update rate goes down ... something will have to give).

Perhaps compression could help when transferring data to the PC, but, as has already been noted, the performance there is not limited by the data throughput.

Also I'm just not sure it's possible to do real-time given the tight limitations of maintaining the waveform update rate (and blind times). Each segment is exactly like a single-shot capture - and at the 20ns timebase setting - which is where the Rigol captures ~50k wfrm/s - it can capture segments at almost exactly that rate. But I don't know for sure how it stores and accesses them inside the scope - but I sure would like to 

[casper.bang]

I don't know the answer, but I am guessing no. The great thing about compression is that you get to store more data that fits the expectations of the compressor. The bad thing about compression is that it is less predictable. On a bit of test equipment like this you should expect your expectations to be violated. With compression you would never know how many sample/frames you could store ahead of time. Is some white noise sneaking into that signal you are debugging? Suddenly you don't get as many frames (or perhaps your update rate goes down ... something will have to give).

On the DS7072 as I understand it, capture/analysis, storage and presentation are after all very different things though (unlike the cheaper scopes). In loss-less software algorithms (image analogy: PNG/GIF/RLE) we deal with worst case performance (big-O) and I would think it's easy to guarantee some minimum, or worst case, simply fall back to non-compressed (image analogy: BMP/RAW).

From the demonstration video by Dave, it looks like compression could potentially store several order of magnitudes more frames. That could come in handy in a scenario where you favor longer memory over higher frame capture.

[marmad]

From the demonstration video by Dave, it looks like compression could potentially store several order of magnitudes more frames. That could come in handy in a scenario where you favor longer memory over higher frame capture.

True, but considering that the DSO has 192MB of DDR2 acquire memory - and the current maximum amount of memory that appears to be used (based on sample size * segments) is around 114MB - would make it seem as if they're not (at least at this time) using compression.

[jboard146]

Great video Dave.

This was a really good comparison of the DS1000 and the DS2000 series. I'd personally go with the DS2102 version.

I'l still up in the air on getting the Agilent DSOX2012 or the Rigol DS2102. I keep thinking if i go with the Agilent I might as well get the 4 channel version which is like almost doubling the cost. With Agilent you start adding options the price starts to go way up and quick.

I also keep thinking (pure speculation) that Rigol is going to come out with the mixed signal version of the DS2000 series. Anyone have inside info about this?

[xrunner]

Great video Dave.

This was a really good comparison of the DS1000 and the DS2000 series. I'd personally go with the DS2102 version.

I was about 2 weeks shy of ordering a DS1052 but that video changed my mind. The place I would have ordered the DS2072 from says a 6 month waiting period. Oh well, I have lived without it for this long a few months more won't matter.

[marmad]

I also keep thinking (pure speculation) that Rigol is going to come out with the mixed signal version of the DS2000 series. Anyone have inside info about this?

From what I've heard, they are apparently working on an LA module and a waveform generator module for the DS2000 series, which will (please take the following with a huge amount of salt) be ready for sale in about 5-6 months.

[EEVblog]

I was about 2 weeks shy of ordering a DS1052 but that video changed my mind. The place I would have ordered the DS2072 from says a 6 month waiting period.

Woah, 6 months?!
Who's that?

[EEVblog]

From what I've heard, they are apparently working on an LA module and a waveform generator module for the DS2000 series, which will (please take the following with a huge amount of salt) be ready for sale in about 5-6 months.

If that happened, then 6 months after that you'd probably have Agilent squeezing more goodness out of the 2000X.
It's an interesting battle, and it's funny (or sad) to note that there pretty much isn't anyone else in the game that matters as much.

[EV]

From what I've heard, they are apparently working on an LA module and a waveform generator module for the DS2000 series, which will (please take the following with a huge amount of salt) be ready for sale in about 5-6 months.

Are those only for new scopes??

[marmad]

Are they only for new scopes??

I don't know. The current DS4000 mainboards seem to have a built-in connector that might be available for add-on modules - but I don't remember seeing anything like that in Dave's teardown of the DS2000 - was there? I think we'll just have to wait and see.

[xrunner]

I was about 2 weeks shy of ordering a DS1052 but that video changed my mind. The place I would have ordered the DS2072 from says a 6 month waiting period.

Woah, 6 months?!
Who's that?

Sorry I misread it. I says 6 weeks. Glad you brought it up.

Test Equipment.net. They are who I was going to buy the DS1052 from.

    **PLEASE NOTE: Due to Overwhelming Demand, lead time is currently 6 weeks** 70 MHz Digital Oscilloscope with 2 channels

http://www.tequipment.net/RigolPricelist.html

[EEVblog]

Rigol NA claim to have it in stock
http://www.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/ds2000/

[Selectech]

My Rigol DS2102 arrived today. Busy day today so didn't get too much time with it - but what I've looked at so far I like.

[Blaww99]

I haven't seen anyone mention this, so perhaps it's irrelevant. But the scope reviewed in the video is a DS2202, which is roughly twice the cost of the DS2072. Do the advantages listed in the video apply to the 2072 as well?

[marmad]

I haven't seen anyone mention this, so perhaps it's irrelevant. But the scope reviewed in the video is a DS2202, which is roughly twice the cost of the DS2072. Do the advantages listed in the video apply to the 2072 as well?

Yes.