Ehh, too bad. Looks like every DSO under ~$400 is a piece of shit (except for the Rigol of course). Isn't there really anything useful on the market in that price range except for a 5 year old Rigol with a small screen (both size and resolution)?A pc oscilloscope maybe. I tried it. I's pretty annoying compared to a bench oscilloscope.... Anyway, if you want something good at least $500 you have to spend... If you are lucky you may found something refurbished and calibrated for interesting price.....
Ehh, too bad. Looks like every DSO under ~$400 is a piece of shit (except for the Rigol of course). Isn't there really anything useful on the market in that price range except for a 5 year old Rigol with a small screen (both size and resolution)?
For what it's worth, the Uni-T UTD1102CM I spent a couple of hours with was MUCH MUCH more responsive!
I was actually surprised Dave sounded rather happy and diplomatic at the beginning of this video and and it took him almost 20 minutes to really started entering his usual ranting mode :-DD
Ehh, too bad. Looks like every DSO under ~$400 is a piece of shit
Ehh, too bad. Looks like every DSO under ~$400 is a piece of shit (except for the Rigol of course). Isn't there really anything useful on the market in that price range except for a 5 year old Rigol with a small screen (both size and resolution)?
I was actually surprised Dave sounded rather happy and diplomatic at the beginning of this video and and it took him almost 20 minutes to really started entering his usual ranting mode :-DD
Yeah, assuming the front-end problem not a botched hardware design, both serious issues could be fixed via firmware, might change his rating.
For Rigol it was bit easier anyway, their firmware is in principle taken from their former models, and they already 10 yrs old today. In the golden time period Rigol made lot of money, the DS1000E has been paid out by far before they started with the production (as lot of things in E models are coming directly from other models, so only bit of modifications they made). Today with all the good contracts they managed to earned lot of money, and a lot of knwledge from e.g. Agilent. This is a complettly different player today.
I know their resources are limited but I'd assume a few of the manufactures watch these videos
Hmmmmm, been looking at the cheap scopes, I have made my decision , despite the Rigol DS1052E may be old , that is the one I'm going for, I think as a hobbyist, who does a few repairs, I think will be a really good Oscilloscope, and I would say it will really useful in my Amateur radio station too.
Paul M0BSW
Third Issue: "Overshoot":Tested my DSO-1062D with HP 33120A @1MHZ Square wave. Any overshoot/undeshoot.
Sorry, but it looks like Rigol paid you to give negative feedback
As a guess with respect to the pulse fidelity ... since the Tekway is hackable for 200 MHz, this suggests a switchable input filter under firmware control. If the filter is not a Gaussian type, it can introduce pulse ringing when enabled.
One way to determine the input filter characteristics in the frequency domain would be to plot the frequency response and look for dips or peaks and also look at the roll off rate. Gaussian should not have peaks and dips and should give a smooth roll off.
Sorry, but it looks like Rigol paid you to give negative feedback to their compatitors on low end market, like :"all those new scopes sucks, keep buying our outdated Rigol 1052e or pay more for our newer models...;)"I thought Dave's review was excellent. An unbiased independent review from somebody well qualified and respected for his opinion.
Why is it that they can't seem to get the UI and the functionality all the way at times?
They get like 90% of the way there then fall on their face.
ugh... it's ugly. jebus. I mean, the DS1000 series aren't the most attractive things in the world, but damn... the fonts just look terrible and nobs, etc. ugh.
However, my first impressions conclusions stand.
The scope had poor pulse response,
poor trigger jitter/stability,
it's slow
it's slow
and the firmware locked up.
If it turns out that my unit was faulty for some reason, then so be be it. But I can only review and comment on the facts I saw and presented in the video for the unit I had.
Dave, why did the distributor send you a faulty scope? That's strange.
Probably this scope is faulty!
But I have a concern about how the scopes demonstrate the square pulse. And the test done with the same signal generatoror and the same 50 Ohm resistor.
OK, this Tekway unit has a lot of ringing and over or undershooting.
Rigol's scope has a identical pattern without any over or under-shooting.
Agilent and Owon has a almost identical patterns that differs than Rigols.
Wich pattern is true, Agillent/Owon or Rigol. For me the pattern of Rigols it seems to have a lot of smoothness.
What is your opinion for this differences?
The distributor is weird. :--
The distributor is weird. :--
...
(I have always made "pre-ageing" and tests for every single scope I have sell.
What ever model or brand it is. Also other new equipments. All go to burn in tests before accepted for sell. failed units stop to my barrier and did not go to end users. This is one reason why I do not so much admire these re-shipper sellers who only receive parcels, get orders and send parcels to end users. But cheapest price win - of course, or is it so...
In this time average was around 50% failed after arrive from factory.
Here one fun sample image.
Signal is around 16MHz quite clean sinewave from medium grade generator HP8657B.
David, have you all this scope, or you have returned the Owon and Tekway?
OK, I undertand that the scopes with high BW has a lot of frequency content. The Agilent is 500MHz, the Owon is 300MHz the Rigol 1052 is hacked 100MHz (50MHz) but the other Rigol with 200MHz why seems like other Rigol and not to 300MHz Owon.
nah, i dont want to take my Voltcraft apart, it still has warranty i think.Does it have a date of manufacture on it somewhere?
At the "Hantek-Tekway-DSO cack - get 200M..." there is a reference (#1807) of member "rf-loop" about faulty Chinese products.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hantek-tekway-dso-hack-get-200mhz-bw-for-free/1800/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hantek-tekway-dso-hack-get-200mhz-bw-for-free/1800/)
He said:...
(I have always made "pre-ageing" and tests for every single scope I have sell.
What ever model or brand it is. Also other new equipments. All go to burn in tests before accepted for sell. failed units stop to my barrier and did not go to end users. This is one reason why I do not so much admire these re-shipper sellers who only receive parcels, get orders and send parcels to end users. But cheapest price win - of course, or is it so...
In this time average was around 50% failed after arrive from factory.
Here one fun sample image.
Signal is around 16MHz quite clean sinewave from medium grade generator HP8657B.(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hantek-tekway-dso-hack-get-200mhz-bw-for-free/?action=dlattach;attach=52194;image)
Probably this happens to all Chinesse scopes (Rigol, Owon, Siglent, e.t.c).
David, have you all this scope, or you have returned the Owon and Tekway?
OK, I undertand that the scopes with high BW has a lot of frequency content. The Agilent is 500MHz, the Owon is 300MHz the Rigol 1052 is hacked 100MHz (50MHz) but the other Rigol with 200MHz why seems like other Rigol and not to 300MHz Owon.
Please, if you don't have the Owon and Tekway can you examine the Agilent and Rigol the same frequency with a limited BW?
At the "Hantek-Tekway-DSO cack - get 200M..." there is a reference (#1807) of member "rf-loop" about faulty Chinese products.NO, this was in 2011, affecetd was hw1005, we now at hw1007
The Agilent is 500MHz, the Owon is 300MHz the Rigol 1052 is hacked 100MHz (50MHz) but the other Rigol
with 200MHz why seems like other Rigol and not to 300MHz Owon.
OK, I undertand that the scopes with high BW has a lot of frequency content.
Probably this scope is faulty!
But I have a concern about how the scopes demonstrate the square pulse. And the test done with the same signal generatoror and the same 50 Ohm resistor.
OK, this Tekway unit has a lot of ringing and over or undershooting.
Rigol's scope has a identical pattern without any over or under-shooting.
Agilent and Owon has a almost identical patterns that differs than Rigols.
Wich pattern is true, Agillent/Owon or Rigol. For me the pattern of Rigols it seems to have a lot of smoothness.
What is your opinion for this differences?
Unless the input signal is perfectly terminated etc the bandwidth of the scope bandwith will determine what high frequency content (overshoot/undershoot is an example) is shown.
That is why the 500MHz Agilent differs and shows that higher frequency content.
Of course, that assumes that all scopes have the same rolloff response, which they should ordinarily do to a reasonable order.
In theory the 100MHz Rigol 1052E and Tekway should have had the same "rounded" response that lacked that high frequency content. The Rigol 1052E is the response you would expect, with the DS2000 showing a bit more content, and the Agilent and OWON the most.
From this it is clear that the Tekway has a major problem. What that problem is unclear.
Could this mean that Tekway has found that the fan is not really needed in the first place or have they used larger heatsinks for passive cooling? Is so, that would be great as we'd all prefer silent test equipment.
David, have you all this scope, or you have returned the Owon and Tekway?
The OWON and Tekway have gone back, I only had them for a day or two.
David, have you all this scope, or you have returned the Owon and Tekway?
The OWON and Tekway have gone back, I only had them for a day or two.
Note to self: If you want Dave to post his review ASAP set a return date on your stuff. :D
The distributor is weird. :--
That distributor is honest. You can tell he doesn't cheat the "Dave test". After all he will get a lot of customers when he finally scores the big one and gets Daves thumbs up on some product :) Rigol got huge bump in sales thanks to Dave, and that was before eevBlog channel got popular.
I worked for PC parts distributor over 10 years ago (third in sales in my country, sole distributor of some big brands at the time etc) and it was common for sales/PR people to come down to the service area basement and tell us to find a "perfect unit" because some IT Paper had a hardware shootout. All of a sudden shitty brand CRT monitor/CDrom was scoring perfect marks.
As said above, I think we saw Dave's impressions from a hurried perspective. I don't disagree with the pulse response issue, it certainly could be better, but on-balance (and that's what was missing) one area of weakness is certainly overcome by the positives when this sub-$500 scope is positioned properly in the marketplace.
And if you want the best of everything especially signal fidelity then move up the price bracket and buy Agilent. Dave know's and loves the X-series and spent a lot more time reviewing it!
To set the record straight here's the history of this instrument.Never give Dave a potentially faulty scope. Always give him a new unit, if you want a positive review.
It was not a new unit.
It had been sold previously and had developed a problem while the customer had it.
The company that bought it needed it for their business and they were unable to work without it.
We did not wait for a spare mainboard to repair it.
We gave the customer a new scope from our stock to get him back to work immediately.
When we got the replacement board from Tekway we fitted it in this unit.
That is the reason the serial numbers on the screen and on the back are different.
sorry Dave, but that bullshit what you said.
Never give Dave a potentially faulty scope. Always give him a new unit, if you want a pisitive review.
sorry Dave, but that bullshit what you said.
I can only base my opinion on the scope I tested, anything else would be 2nd hand opinion.
That's what this forum is for, if you have experience with the scope add your own opinions.
Then based on that info, people can make up their own minds.
I have facts and video evidence of why I said what I said about the Tekway, it was not bullshit.
maybe Rigol is soldered by chinese virgins giving the DSO some magic ?That's it. Her name is Anna Ohura.
maybe Rigol is soldered by chinese virgins giving the DSO some magic ?That's it. Her name is Anna Ohura.
Of course I don't have the information tinhead has, but in the light of the review that seemed very plausible.
So I'm a little confused.
Someone else claims that the reviewed scope is just faulty and that the scopes have no issues....even though this particular scope originally had issues, and the new board that was sent out to fix them also has issues.
What have I missed?
Someone else claims that the reviewed scope is just faulty and that the scopes have no issues....even though this particular scope originally had issues, and the new board that was sent out to fix them also has issues.
What have I missed?
That "someone" is tinhead, no need to use the common backstabbing tactics of referring to "someone" and THEM.
And what you missed is that tinhead doesn't say these oscilloscopes have no issues. For a year or two he is raising hell with Hantek/Tekway to get stuff fixed. What he is saying is that, based on his experience with multiple hardware and multiple firmware versions, that particular oscilloscope did not behave like what is considered "normal" for these oscilloscopes.
- same FPGA
i actually said everything what new to be said, it is not that hard to get one or two pages back and read my technical explanation of that what Dave saw on the test unit.
ok, i will shot a short video, it seems that some ppl need visual things and not just few lines of "technical crap" text.
- same FPGA
That one's a bit of a stretch, the only thing you can get on that is theoretical maximum gate speed, but they have to be programmed.
And once again, there was nothing wrong with Dave's review, he didn't cheated (on purpose'), so yes his statement based on his result is ok. But on the other side i (and other as well) do have working models and i/we know what one can achieve on these DSOs. So there is difference between "Dave's DSO" and "all these DSOs" and all i'm trying to do is to stop people from seeing only "back and white" when there is a rainbow on the sky^^.
I understand all that you're writing - but the question remains - when you buy a $400 - 500 product (or get one for review), should you have to search and install the perfect combination of FW for your hardware in order to prevent hangs and crashes - and make it 'achieve' the performance you expect it should have out of the box?
The whole game will change a bit when Rigol DS1000Z will be available, but still, you will not get any other DSO with big screen, fast update and 200MHz for 250EUR.Maybe we won't have to wait for too long: Franky is just showing off his new toy here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1104z/) :)
The whole game will change a bit when Rigol DS1000Z will be available, but still, you will not get any other DSO with big screen, fast update and 200MHz for 250EUR.Maybe we won't have to wait for too long: Franky is just showing off his new toy here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1104z/) :)
A few questions:
"Long memory is just crap slow"
Could this eventually be corrected in firmware?
Is jitter the main problem with this FPGA design version? Could this eventually be corrected or compensated for in firmware? I understand that the FPGA version in a particular 'scope can be determined by looking at the "hardware version" in the "system information" screen?
Could this eventually be corrected or compensated for in firmware? I understand that the FPGA version in a particular
scope can be determined by looking at the "hardware version" in the "system information" screen?
"the frontend story :P"
Is there a manufacturing date range or something on the 'scope's "system information" screen which could be used to determine if a given 'scope has the front end resistor values that cause this problem?
ahh cool! when you do teardown? :)Ahhh, I can only wish to have one of these beauties with me for a teardown... With twin babies such oscilloscope is worth a good load of diapers, formula, wipes... :-/O
I do want something that can be switched on and be trusted to be correct.
"Long memory is just crap slow"
Could this eventually be corrected in firmware?
sure, others (Rigol) is doing this properly with 2 times slower DSP (from a pure bus speed), the FPGA/SRAM/CPLD are not an issue here.
Option A: Nothing is done and the review stands.
Option B: If Trio is close enough to where Dave is, maybe he could drop by with his camera and repeat the same test on another unit (if available)
Option D: Someone else repeats the full test on video and Dave provides a link to it in his video.
Backstabbing? I just didn't see any reason to really call him out because it's not anything personal about him. I read where he's fighting Tekway to get the issues fixed, but I also read where he calls "bullshit" and basically says Dave should base his opinion on some schematic, not the actual scope. :-// Geez...just get him non-broken scope to test.
Option D: Someone else repeats the full test on video and Dave provides a link to it in his video.
Option D: Someone else repeats the full test on video and Dave provides a link to it in his video.
I might take you up on that ;) I have one the 70MHz Hantek jobs. I can only compare it to my analogue scope but it's been really good so far.
Also, as I mentioned in the video, Tinhead knew I had the scope and sent me a whole host of info before I finished shooting about how he's been helping/fighting Tekway to fix issues for years etc, and gave a big list (no less than 11 items) of "bad things" about the scope and stuff that didn't work etc.
Now he calls my opinion of thing Bullshit? I don't get it :-//