EEVblog #703 - Rigol DS1054Z Oscilloscope Review Summary

[EEVblog]

Dave reviews the new Rigol DS1054Z Oscilloscope.
Is this US$399 marvel really the best value budget oscilloscope on the market?
This is a summary video, be sure to watch all the other videos on this scope:
Full features review: http://youtu.be/W2qdtQkBKhc
Teardown: http://youtu.be/kb9P1Am9aFU
Jitter Problem: http://youtu.be/kcOdzFaIYNE
Jitter Problem Fix: http://youtu.be/K1IJH9aJvgE
Reverse Engineering: http://youtu.be/lJVrTV_BeGg

[kjn4685]

Dave I what to tell you thank you very much for your teardown and reviews. I am going to try to talk my wife into getting this scope for me. I hope!

[Dinsdale]

I was in the middle of getting an SPI bus up (PIC to M95512) using my Tek 465 when the vertical finally gave it up. So I got this scope. Found my problem straight off the bat with SPI decoding. Outstanding.
I bought my 465 in 1997. It's been a great workhorse. That was entry level for me. It was $1000.00. The 1054 was $413 delivered. That's $283 in 1997 money. This is entry level today? No one has any room to complain about anything on this scope. It's just amazing.
Enjoyed the review, Dave, super job and very useful.

[iankellogg]

So this scope seems really really amazing for $400 so I would love to know, what makes the $800 DS2000 better, or say the $3000 agilent X3000? When does those scopes become worth it?

[ivan747]

Woooow Dave! Two simultaneous episodes!  Thank you! 

[DIPLover]

So this scope seems really really amazing for $400 so I would love to know, what makes the $800 DS2000 better, or say the $3000 agilent X3000? When does those scopes become worth it?

I will consider the case of hacked DS2000A vs hacked DS1054Z as this is "what's inside the box" you buy.

1. Bandwidth : DS2000A has 300MHz bandwidth vs 100MHz
2. Sampling : DS2000A has 2GS/s vs 1GS/s
3. Channels : DS2000A has 2 channels plus a dedicated EXT Trig input, that can be used for the hardware counter and some other stuff. DS1054Z has 4 full channels and no EXT Trig input, that will cost you a channel. 1054Z wins hands-down here.
4. Probes : DS2000A includes 2x RP3300 300MHz passive probes. DS1054Z includes 4x RP2200 150MHz probes. 300MHz probes are usually quite expensive.
5. Display : DS2000A has 8-inch screen with 800x480 resolution and 116dpi. DS1000Z has 7in screen with 800x480 resolution it is sharper at 133dpi but everything (fonts mainly) is a bit smaller. Still a HUGE screen for an entry scope.
6. Decoding : Serial options are the same. Protocols using more than 2 wires (some SPI mainly) are obviously only possible on DS1000Z so it wins here if you use them.
7. Triggers : DS2000 has USB, CAN and Video trigger on top of the very complete set present on the DS1000z.
8. Memory : DS2000 has 56Mpts vs 24 (both are HUGE, I have no use case where 56M would make a difference vs 24 for a single channel but more is more I guess)
9. Hardware : From the teardowns, the DS2000 has 2 FPGAs whereas the DS1000Z has only one.
10. Update : The DS2000 has a faster maximum update rate (50k waveforms per second peak vs 30k).
11. Performance : DS2000 maintains a faster update rate under heavier use
12. Small signal : DS2000 has a working 500uV per div vertical setting
13. DS2000 can show 14 divisions horizontal on the screen (the menus hide) vs 12 divisions. 10 divs was standard for 30 years.
14. DS2000A has a switchable 50ohm input mode
15. DS2000 has 256 levels "digital phosphor" intensity graded display vs 64 levels (still awesome!)

More/better physical controls on the DS2000
  -segmented memory controls
  -separate vertical controls
  -large knob for fast navigation
  -7 soft buttons on each side of screen vs 6 on DS1000Z

DS2000A is a better scope generally, but DS1000Z is AMAZING for its PRICE POINT.

That is the important thing.

[KNA]

The software comedy at the end of the (Full features review) vid haha! 

[coppice]

I was in the middle of getting an SPI bus up (PIC to M95512) using my Tek 465 when the vertical finally gave it up. So I got this scope. Found my problem straight off the bat with SPI decoding. Outstanding.
I bought my 465 in 1997. It's been a great workhorse. That was entry level for me. It was $1000.00. The 1054 was $413 delivered. That's $283 in 1997 money. This is entry level today? No one has any room to complain about anything on this scope. It's just amazing.
Enjoyed the review, Dave, super job and very useful.

How old was your 465 when you bought it in 1997?

[nixfu]

In the detail review video @14:35  s/DS1074z/DS2000, that can make menus disappear off screen.

[Dinsdale]

How old was your 465 when you bought it in 1997?

Must have been around 15yrs old. I remember that the price quoted was somewhat lower. When I got to the shop, they asked me a if I wanted calibration, so I got that. Had to leave it and come back later. It didn't have a mark on it. It also had 2 probes, 2 50ohm coax, 2 50ohm terminators, camera hood, and the manual. The main thing that made it useful for digital was the delayed timebase. I'll use the Rigol to bring it back to life (I hope).
But now with the Rigol, I will not have to write software loops or trigger pulses on an unused port pin, etc. Storage is fantastic - jitter can sometimes be intolerable towards the end of a delayed timebase trace. And 4 channels almost feels like I have a logic analyzer!

[han]

Did i heard Rigol 2000/3000 series in 15:10 (EEVBlog #704 - Rigol DS1054Z Oscilloscope Features Review) , with Keysight/Agilent Oscilloscope?

[Solder_Junkie]

Great videos and very informative.

I have concerns over the accuracy of the on-screen measurements with my 1064Z, sometimes they match with what I expect and other times they don't. Not having a second scope for comparison, it's hard to say.

The frequency readout seems OK, but the amplitude doesn't always seem correct at times.

The specification shown in the manual doesn't include amplitude accuracy... A fail?

Looking forward to Dave's video covering measurements and calibration accuracy.

[Cnoob]

This is my first scope I have owned and I still have an analogue scope mind set.
 Dave's full review has been invaluable in helping me to get to know and understand this scope.
I don't mind the menus on the screen or the fan noise it's all the functionality of the scope that I find confusing.

I purchased this scope as a late xmas present to myself base on Dave's previous scope blogs as well as his and other forum members comments.
Many thanks guys.

[Fungus]

My review is much shorter:

"The 'Z' in the name? It's short for 'zilla'...."

[Dave Turner]

Dave thank you for the review and summary - you've again helped me by pointing out even more abilities that I had not noticed. (Hardly surprising of course).

I purchased the DS1074Z-S in 2013 after discussion on this forum and, in general, am very satisfied with it.
 
I was interested to note the subtle differences and additions in the the menu system between the DS1074Z-S software version 00.02.00 SP1 and the DS1054Z software version 00.04.01.SP2. The expanded help system amongst others.

I can see from Dave's review that he has board version 0.1.1 whereas I've no idea what my board version is.

From other threads on this forum I'm aware that the jitter and AC trigger issues have been solved and that an updated software version is available.

My question for those who have implemented the updated software is whether or not it includes the menu changes/additions as well.

[Krakonos]

Awesome. I've had DS2072 for some time now and although it's differenet in hardware, when I was watching this, I turned on my scope few times too many to check if it's included in mine. It was and I learned a LOT. Thanks you very much, sir!

[SteveyG]

So is the MSO worth around double the price of this one? How many find they need analogue and logic to be captured together?

[nixfu]

So is the MSO worth around double the price of this one? How many find they need analogue and logic to be captured together?

If you don't have some extreme portability issues, it usually is better to have a separate specialized device rather than an all-in-one.  This is true for lots of classes of devices. Anytime you cram two devices together you usually have to make a whole bunch of compromizes and leave out a ton of capability.   
I
This is usually true for scopes with built in signal generators, logic analyzers, and often spectrum analyzers included in scopes as well.   

[EEVblog]

So is the MSO worth around double the price of this one? How many find they need analogue and logic to be captured together?

On such a small and already a bit fiddly screen, no, I generally would not pay double for MSO unless you wanted the analog/digital time correlation, which granted can be handy. With 4 channels, deep memory, and serial decoding, you probably aren't going to often need a LA anyway. YMMV.
With 4 channels you can still do SPI decoding and have an analog channel left for time correlation.

[BillyD]

And the most heavily used phrase in the video is.... "399 dollars" !!
Damn right too, it's a game changer, they could have easily charged another 100.
Great review.

[dentaku]

This must be the most thoroughly covered product in EEVBlog history.
I'm glad I didn't already buy a 1074Z because the 1054Z has everything I need for a lower price.

[Howardlong]

I went for the MSO1074Z-S as it's primary use is as a field scope, so when I have external technical meetings etc, I have a fair bit of test equipment already at my disposal. If you've ever been to some of the large(and not so large) R&D facilities, it's not uncommon to have to wait a day just to get a piece of equipment out of stores, so typically I take as much of my own kit as I can, within reason of course.

Worst place on earth to be without the right equipment for me was working in Svalbard trying to fix a broken coaxial power splitter on a satellite uplink antenna array. It was not the job I expected to be doing when I went there, all I'd brought was a crappy little 25W soldering iron and an Anritsu Sitemaster VNA to try to restrict baggage. Finding a soldering iron there was not easy... I learned, always be prepared.

[bitblt]

Now that is what I consider a thorough product review (#703 + #704).  You should sell DSOs and other test equipment on HSN or something.  You would make millions!  Anyway thanks for providing an outstanding review of the Rigol DS1054Z.  I think I want to buy two of them now.   

[Yago]

If Victor Kiam was still around he'd "Buy the company"!

Still awaiting delivery, I'll be camping out behind the front door for 6 weeks, argg!

[leppie]

On such a small and already a bit fiddly screen, no, I generally would not pay double for MSO unless you wanted the analog/digital time correlation, which granted can be handy. With 4 channels, deep memory, and serial decoding, you probably aren't going to often need a LA anyway. YMMV.
With 4 channels you can still do SPI decoding and have an analog channel left for time correlation.

When is the performance review video coming?

I found SPI decoding working well at 8MHz clock. Havent gone higher.

Will you test the performance of the probes too? I found them quite shitty vs my 250MHz Texas probes when I looked at a 125MHz crystal. They had about 6db loss compared to the Texas ones at that speed.

[Ericho]

  Great review. Thank you Dave 
Mine is been on order for a while. I'm even more confident now that I didn't waste my €300 Euro (ex VAT)

[Lightages]

Will you test the performance of the probes too? I found them quite shitty vs my 250MHz Texas probes when I looked at a 125MHz crystal. They had about 6db loss compared to the Texas ones at that speed.

I see the same issue with the RP2200 probes. They do seem to not match their rating but I have no way to really test them yet. All I know is when I compare a square wave with them against an RP3300 probe there is a big difference in the waveform on the screen. If the RP2200 probes are 150MHz then I would not expect to see such a difference. I will try to post images later.

[ivan747]

If I get a job I applied for the other day, I think I'll be upgrading the DS1052E to one of the Z models. It's just too tempting, and I want the lab to be good for the following 10 years without huge multihundred spendings if possible, for personal finance reasons 

[eV1Te]

I have owned the DS1074Z-s since it came out, it truly is amazing how much you get for your money!

Though here is a few complaints, which might help anyone looking for this scope and want to know what the limitations are.

The responsiveness, or lack thereof. Turning any knob to change a setting or value has enormous delay and the "knob-acceleration" is highly non-linear so if you turn the horizontal knob to fast the waveform can jump a few screen-widths away in just a quarter of a turn.

This makes the built in signal generator difficult to use, since you can not reliably turn any knobs in order to change frequency or amplitude, it is way to slow and sketchy. It is faster to enter the value manually, which still requires you to use the same unresponsive knob to scroll through a table of numbers.

The serial decoder can be close to useless for transmissions with large packages. It only decodes the points available on the screen, not what is in the memory. Hence you can not decode anything longer than a few bytes since the number of points in the screen buffer is very small (you can see this in one of Daves videos, all decoded values becomes FF FF or somethin random when he increases the horizontal to see more data). And scrolling through the data horizontally does not work either since the start of the transmission then goes of screen and the decoder loses sync.

However with a lot patients and time on your hands (as an armature hobbyist) this is an excellent instrument! I would however recommend an Agilent... sorry... Keysight scope for more serious work, since it has true hardware accelerated maths functions and a much more responsive user interface that would save you much time in the long run.

[max_torque]

I've also noticed on my 74Z, that it only updates the screen buffer in "stop" mode when you touch one of the control knobs (usually you hit stop, then use the horizontal offset knob to scroll sideways through the memory buff).  If you've had a waveform that has been hetrodyneing on screen, then as soon as you touch the knobs, the second false trace disappears off the screen!

I've also found something weird with the triggering, where simply turning on another channel (which reduces the sample rate) causes a previously locked trigger to unlock and loose the signal completely.  It seems quite difficult to recreate this bug however.

[Lightages]

Yes, the on only screen logic decoding is a bit of a disappointment. I purchased this scope with the logic decoding function in mind and it appeared that it did it from memory from what I read. To find it does not means I am on the search for a logic analyzer again. It is a good thing that I did not pay for the logic decoding functions. I certainly can't complain about the over package for the price.

[Fungus]

The only complaints I have are in the user interface. The stupid do-everything knob in particular. It's very easy to move the knob in a menu selection and select the wrong item.

IMHO the right-side menu buttons should work like this:

Press button to open menu.
Use blue arrows to go up/down in that menu.
Press the menu button a second time to close the menu.

That would leave the multi-function knob almost redundant, yes, but I don't think I'd miss it.

[Lightages]

Here is a screen shot with an RP3300 on channel one (yellow) and an RP2200 on channel two (blue). Yes both probes were adjusted for compensation at the same time, yes I have tried swapping what channels the probes are connected too, and yes I have verified this on my DS1052E modified to 100MHz. I have also verified that all my 4 RP2200 probes exhibit the same response as well as my 2 RP3300 probes have the same response.

So you can see that within the capabilities of the DS1054Z, hacked to 100MHz, that the RP2200 probes do have a visible and real performance limitation. Does this affect the performance of the whole system so that it is below 100MHz, ie. lower than 3db at 100MHz? I cannot say because I do not have anything with fast enough rise time nor anything with high enough frequency output with a flat response to actually measure the bandwidth of the input system.

Dave made the assertion in the full features review that the RP2200 probes will not limit the performance of the scope. Well I would really like to know if this is true or not. And if they do limit the performance, which it is apparent they do, is it enough of a limit that lowers the bandwidth below the rated bandwidth of the scope?

Perhaps these probes were included to actually provide more roll off and help with the under sampling problem when using 3 or 4 channels.

[leppie]

Here is a screen shot with an RP3300 on channel one (yellow) and an RP2200 on channel two (blue). Yes both probes were adjusted for compensation at the same time, yes I have tried swapping what channels the probes are connected too, and yes I have verified this on my DS1052E modified to 100MHz. I have also verified that all my 4 RP2200 probes exhibit the same response as well as my 2 RP3300 probes have the same response.

So you can see that within the capabilities of the DS1054Z, hacked to 100MHz, that the RP2200 probes do have a visible and real performance limitation. Does this affect the performance of the whole system so that it is below 100MHz, ie. lower than 3db at 100MHz? I cannot say because I do not have anything with fast enough rise time nor anything with high enough frequency output with a flat response to actually measure the bandwidth of the input system.

Dave made the assertion in the full features review that the RP2200 probes will not limit the performance of the scope. Well I would really like to know if this is true or not. And if they do limit the performance, which it is apparent they do, is it enough of a limit that lowers the bandwidth below the rated bandwidth of the scope?

Perhaps these probes were included to actually provide more roll off and help with the under sampling problem when using 3 or 4 channels.

A 2MHz signal is not going to tell you much. Test them on a fast scope with a 150MHz signal.

[Lightages]

I think I just said that I have no way to test any better right now. 

The 2MHz signal is a square wave so it has much higher frequency content that 2MHz. So it does demonstrate a real difference in the response of the two different models of probes. I didn't write the whole message with all the qualifiers for nothing.

[leppie]

I think I just said that I have no way to test any better right now. 

The 2MHz signal is a square wave so it has much higher frequency content that 2MHz. So it does demonstrate a real difference in the response of the two different models of probes. I didn't write the whole message with all the qualifiers for nothing.

Picking out the high frequency content to make a comparison is IMO way harder than comparing the amplitude.

I did not mean you had to do it, but Dave and many others should be able to test.

[phenol]

Do the ground leads have the same length?
The system BW (scope and probe) is different from the BW of the scope alone. it goes like this:
1/BWsys=sqrt[(1/BWscope)^2+(1/BWprobe)^2]

[leppie]

I tested again. Making sure the Texas probe was correctly 'compensated' (I accidentally changed the high frequency pots previously  ).

There indeed not much difference in amplitude (on my TDS360), maybe 5-10% less on the Rigol probe.

So I guess they are 150MHz as claimed.

[Lightages]

Do the ground leads have the same length?
The system BW (scope and probe) is different from the BW of the scope alone. it goes like this:
1/BWsys=sqrt[(1/BWscope)^2+(1/BWprobe)^2]

The outward appearance of the two different models is the same. The ground leads are the same length. And I did say system bandwidth.

[ultranalog]

Well, you've gone and done it now. The largest distributor in Europe (batronix) has completely sold out its stock of 1054z's in two days 

Luckily mine's already on the way 

[pickle9000]

I wonder how many are coming off the production line every month?

[MacAttak]

Thanks Dave for reviewing this new model. Upgrading from my DS1052E is a no-brainer.

[EEVblog]

Well, you've gone and done it now. The largest distributor in Europe (batronix) has completely sold out its stock of 1054z's in two days 

Why the hell aren't I making money from this? 

[teslafan]

Rigol should give u a piece of the action, a commission, a cut at least! 

[pickle9000]

Rigol should give u a piece of the action, a commission, a cut at least! 

We could certainly stuff five bucks in an envelope (write ds1054z on it) and mail it to Dave directly. Not much of a commission but couldn't hurt. 

[leppie]

I am so glad I pre-ordered from TEquipment when they 'accidentally' put up the product page initially. 

[ultranalog]

We could certainly stuff five bucks in an envelope (write ds1054z on it) and mail it to Dave directly. Not much of a commission but couldn't hurt.

Excellent suggestion - Done! (if you can call paypal an envelope)

[EEVblog]

Dave made the assertion in the full features review that the RP2200 probes will not limit the performance of the scope. Well I would really like to know if this is true or not. And if they do limit the performance, which it is apparent they do, is it enough of a limit that lowers the bandwidth below the rated bandwidth of the scope?

Just shot a video on this. The result is practically identical between the two probes. Not only on the rigol, but 3 other scopes as well.

[EEVblog]

You can have the money or the trust and confidence of the viewing audience. Not both. You chose wisely.

I did get a scope for free, a whopping $399 worth, so confidence in me is already shot 

[EEVblog]

Actually, I wasn't going to get the scope for free, but they eventually said don't bother sending back, as it's not worth it to them to have it shipped back 

[Fungus]

Shall we make a list of all the buttons you never push on the front panel?

I'll start with the 'MODE' button in the trigger area and the big 'Clear' button at the top. Does anybody ever push those?

I'm sure they could have been used for something useful.

[EEVblog]

Shall we make a list of all the buttons you never push on the front panel?
I'll start with the 'MODE' button in the trigger area and the big 'Clear' button at the top. Does anybody ever push those?

I thought I showed the CLEAR button in my extended review? I think it's useful.

[Fungus]

Shall we make a list of all the buttons you never push on the front panel?
I'll start with the 'MODE' button in the trigger area and the big 'Clear' button at the top. Does anybody ever push those?

I thought I showed the CLEAR button in my extended review? I think it's useful.

I'm just watching that video now. It wasn't published here so I missed it.

Ok....I see where you use it. You'd think that the "huge-button-at-top-left" would do a really common function though.

eg. Use it to confirm a menu selection instead of pushing the stupid multi-function knob (swap the functions - use the multi-function knob to clear the display).

[aveekbh]

Incidentally, the 9.9E37 you saw on the software actually represents +infinity. I see this quite often with all sorts of instruments at work.

 9.9E+37 = INFinity (Infinity)
-9.9E+37 = NINF (Negative Infinity)
9.91E+37 = NAN (Not A Number)
Source: http://rfmw.em.keysight.com/rfcomms/refdocs/wcdma/wcdma_prog_invalid_results.html

But, yeah, that software is simply unusable.

[MarkL]

Here are some tests on the RP2200.

Below is a screen shot of an RP2200 looking at the swept output of a spectrum analyzer tracking generator from 1MHz to 201MHz.

I don't have an external power sensor, but plugging the TG back into the spectrum analyzer and also looking at it with an Agilent N2894A (passive 700MHz probe) both show that it's reasonably flat through the test sweep range.    The scope is an Agilent MSO3104A which has a brick wall BW of 1GHz.

The RP2200 is in yellow and the N2894A is included as a reference in blue.  Ground is even with the bottom, so you're seeing half the waveform.  The full horizontal sweep is shown, so each division is 20MHz.  Both probes were compensated before testing.

Also included is a shot of the both probes looking at a 50ohm terminated output of a ADCMP580 eval board.  This chip has a fall/rise time of 37ps typ. (20% to 80%), so it's effectively zero as far as the probes and scope are concerned.  There's also a shot of the pulse going directly into the scope.  There's a little bit of mismatch somewhere.

The RP2200 has more variation over frequency than I'd want to see, and some long overshoot on the pulse input.  But to be fair probes are part of the end-to-end acquisition path and it's only a true test when used with the intended scope.

EDIT: I should also point out that the amplitude on these sweeps is *linear*.  Most probe response curves you normally see are in dB.

[phenol]

the 'brickwall' bw rolloff of that keysight scope could explain the ringing on the pulse edges. Other competitive brands, such as R&S RTO scopes, have a gentle roll-off and, provided there are no transmission line mismatches, the intrinsic ringing is rather low...

[Lightages]

Well.... with Dave's response and this latest round of tests on the probes, I am doubting my results. I will retest and see if I screwed up somewhere, but I never screw up!

[MarkL]

the 'brickwall' bw rolloff of that keysight scope could explain the ringing on the pulse edges. Other competitive brands, such as R&S RTO scopes, have a gentle roll-off and, provided there are no transmission line mismatches, the intrinsic ringing is rather low...

Yes, I forgot about that.  You could be right.  It does have that look.

I double checked on a 500MHz TDS3054 which I believe has a gaussian roll off.   The ringing is the same (940ps), but a little less in magnitude as would be expected.

Because of the close agreement I'm not exactly sure in this case.  A different high speed edge source would settle it.

[Lightages]

I just retested all of my four RP2200s and my 2 RP3300s. I tested on my DS1054Z upgraded to 100MHz and on my DS1052E upgraded to 100MHz and on all channels. The results are the same. The RP3300 probes show the same as the yellow trace in image I posted, and the RP2200 probes all show the same as the blue trace. There are some very small differences between the probes but the RP3300 probes always show higher frequency content. This is the way that I am interpreting it.

Am I interpreting this incorrectly?

If not what are the chances that all of my four RP2200s are below spec and both of my RP3300s are in spec.?

Unfortunately I have no convenient test signal that I can use to actually quantify the difference. Any ideas what signal I might have one hand I can use to test this?

[Dave Turner]

Fungus made a point about the 'Mode' button in the trigger menu.

Would someone please  care to explain the the difference between the dedicated buttons - 'Auto', 'Run/Stop' & 'Single' and the Mode button which cycles between 'Auto', 'Normal' & 'Single'.

Ok I know it should be obvious - let's just say I have brain fade.

[MarkL]

I just retested all of my four RP2200s and my 2 RP3300s. I tested on my DS1054Z upgraded to 100MHz and on my DS1052E upgraded to 100MHz and on all channels. The results are the same. The RP3300 probes show the same as the yellow trace in image I posted, and the RP2200 probes all show the same as the blue trace. There are some very small differences between the probes but the RP3300 probes always show higher frequency content. This is the way that I am interpreting it.

Am I interpreting this incorrectly?

If not what are the chances that all of my four RP2200s are below spec and both of my RP3300s are in spec.?

Unfortunately I have no convenient test signal that I can use to actually quantify the difference. Any ideas what signal I might have one hand I can use to test this?

Are you using the alligator clip or the ground spring?  I assume you're referring to your post #32.

The tests I did were with the ground spring on both probes.  You need to make the ground as short as possible to reduce parasitic inductance.  The longer the ground, the more ringing you're going to see.

Some probes come with BNC adapters and those are even better, but there was no BNC adapter in the RP2200 package that I tested.

[Lightages]

Hmm yes. Actually now that I remember the question about the ground leads, the ground leads on the RP3300 are a bit longer. I will try again with the ground leads exchanged and with the short ground sprung points. I should have paid more attention to the ground lead lengths but I can be a bit of a stubborn ahole sometimes.

[Howardlong]

Fungus made a point about the 'Mode' button in the trigger menu.

Would someone please  care to explain the the difference between the dedicated buttons - 'Auto', 'Run/Stop' & 'Single' and the Mode button which cycles between 'Auto', 'Normal' & 'Single'.

Ok I know it should be obvious - let's just say I have brain fade.

The Run/Stop does exactly that, if it's either armed or triggering, it stops and displays the current acquisition, if there is one. Press again, and it restarts.

The only way to re-arm a Single shot is to press the Single button. Either that or you go to Auto or Normal, then Single, but that's not quite the same as the scope may well have already triggered as a result of going to Auto or Normal.

Force is not the same as Single.

If you press Run/Stop in Single mode, it goes to Auto.

However there is not a way to select Normal with these buttons. That must be done either from the Mode button or within the Trigger Menu.

So yes, all the Mode button functionality is also in the Trigger menu, but it's a more direct way of getting there.

I use the Run/stop all the time, and the Single button too. Hardly ever the Auto button, that has nothing directly to do with triggering, it's the auto setup button. Occasionally Clear, usually to clear the nag screen about expiring options on switch on. Or not, as the case may be.

[Lightages]

I just returned from doing the retest with the spring clips for the ground and also with the ground leads switched. With the ground leads switched there is no discernible difference in the appearance of the waveform. With the ground clips attached and probing the end of the BNC instead, both models of probes show the ringing on the signal even more, but they still show basically the same difference between appearance as before.

So that you know my setup for the waveform generation: I am using an analog function generator and using the TTL/CMOS output. The output is connected to a T with one side connected to a 50 ohm terminator and the other end a coax with alligator clips on the end. This is used for the probes with the probe grabber tips installed and the ground lead. For the spring clip test the alligator cable was switched to a normal BNC bale and the end measured with the bare probe tip and spring clip ground. The setup was chosen because it provides the fastest rise time on the aquare wave of any other method I have right now. The ringing is in the source cables used, not the probes.

[Howardlong]

You need to terminate the other end of the coax too.

The TTL/CMOS output probably won't be 50 ohms either, but it should be low impedance.

[Lightages]

I understand how the termination changes the waveform. That is not the point. I am observing the ringing wave form on purpose. Are you saying that the different probes are loading the source  differently and causing the waveform to change and I am seeing this change rather than the response of the probes? Therefore I need to terminate the source so that the change in the probe's loading will be negligible in comparison to the termination load?

Sorry we are getting so far off topic here......
Time to move to move to a separate thread. Hopefully we can determine the value of the probes that are supplied.

[phenol]

why don't you probe (using the ground spring) the T output directly and then remove the termination and probe the unloaded cmos gen output...

[Lightages]

I don't want to hijack this thread anymore than it has been sorry. Refer to this thread:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/scope-probes-as-supplied-by-rigol-for-the-low-end-scopes-a-discussion/

[max_torque]

Dave, can you try some tests with the scope triggering?

On my 74Z, with two channels selected, the system triggers well on signals that are short and relatively infrequent, say a 100uS 5v pulse once every 100ms, but as soon as i turn on a 3rd or 4th channel, the triggering is lost completely (even without any input to those extra channels)?

  Now, it's quite possible i'm doing something stupid here ( ) but it would be nice to see if other people find the same thing?

[Dave Turner]

HowardL - thanks for your explanation. I do use the scope in the way you describe but I'd missed the subtle differences between the run/stop and single buttons and the mode control options.

[MarkL]

Thought I'd share a quick followup on some previous tests I posted on the RP2200:

  https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-703-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope-review-summary/msg591033/#msg591033

I said:

But to be fair probes are part of the end-to-end acquisition path and it's only a true test when used with the intended scope.

So here's the same test with the spectrum analyzer tracking generator, but this time with a DS1054Z I was able to borrow for a day.  This unit has had the DSER hack installed.

Below are shots of the tracking generator output again, with and without the RP2200.  The sweep was 1MHz to 201MHz as it was before, and was made to span 10 divisions.  Direct input to the scope has a BW of almost 150MHz (3dB point, 70.7%).  With the RP2200 it's about 130MHz.  (Sorry about the small vertical size - I couldn't figure out how to get the cursor display out of my way to see where I needed on the trace.)  The blue trace is the trigger output from the tracking generator (high when sweeping).

You can see that the unevenness in the curve with the RP2200 is the same type of response as was seen with the RP2200 on a different scope.  It's definitely the probe.  Not great, but I've seen worse.

The displayed direct pulse input from the ADCMP580 eval board has a rise/fall of about 2.8ns, and with the RP2200 maybe a tiny bit less.  If you want to assume a gaussian filter (I don't know what's in there but it looks like it) this test puts the BW at around 125MHz direct and 130MHz with RP2200.

I've also also included a couple of shots of what the pulse looks like using the supplied 5.5" ground alligator clip.  The first is with the same pulse as the other tests, and the second with a lower frequency where you can see the ringing more clearly.

From what I'm measuring, the scope and scope+probe do significantly better than the expected 100MHz.

EDIT: Fixed link ref.

[Lightages]

Thank you very much MarkL.

[TerminalJack505]

Looks like a nice scope for the money.  Unfortunately you can't actually buy it for $399 now thanks to the eevblog effect.   

Ebay sellers are charging $550.  The seller on Amazon (TEquipment) is charging $459.  Although, if you go to their site they still have it listed for $399 but none in stock.

Probably just as well since that saves me from compulsively buying one.

[CrashO]

Unfortunately you can't actually buy it for $399 now thanks to the eevblog effect.   

Nah.
The scope has been hard to get (from stock) since it was released back in September.  Altough the waiting period has been steadily increasing since then.

I spotted one in stock last Sunday and immediately ordered one for €365 ( about $412 ) including VAT and received it on Thursday. 

[coppice]

The Tao Bao page of one of Rigol's resellers in China says Rigol has sold 20k of the DS1000Z series worldwide. I wonder how accurate that is, and how old this claim is?

http://detail.tmall.com/item.htm?spm=a230r.1.14.35.f3cxEj&id=39640772399&abbucket=19#

[pickle9000]

The Tao Bao page of one of Rigol's resellers in China says Rigol has sold 20k of the DS1000Z series worldwide. I wonder how accurate that is, and how old this claim is?

http://detail.tmall.com/item.htm?spm=a230r.1.14.35.f3cxEj&id=39640772399&abbucket=19#

I'm not sure how long it has been on the market but I think Teq could see numbers like that in a 12 month period if they could maintain the stock.

[tequipment]

We have over 100 in Stock at Tequipment.  You are right about the price.   Eevblog members pay less than 399.  Message me for the code.  It's more on Amazon because Amazon charges a fee.   
Thanks
Evan
tequipment.net

[TerminalJack505]

We have over 100 in Stock at Tequipment.  You are right about the price.   Eevblog members pay less than 399.  Message me for the code.  It's more on Amazon because Amazon charges a fee.   
Thanks
Evan
tequipment.net

PM sent.

Thanks for the heads-up about your stock.  And thanks for the discount!

[pickle9000]

We have over 100 in Stock at Tequipment.  You are right about the price.   Eevblog members pay less than 399.  Message me for the code.  It's more on Amazon because Amazon charges a fee.   
Thanks
Evan
tequipment.net

PM sent.

Thanks for the heads-up about your stock.  And thanks for the discount!

99