How durable are the knobs on these things? Seems like some of them take quite a pounding (eg. the menu button). Do they last...?The DS1054Z is exactly the same as the other 1000Z(-S) DSO/MSOs and so far, it is pretty much all praise-praise-praise for its older and bigger brothers so I would expect the DS1054Z to be no different.
How durable are the knobs on these things? Seems like some of them take quite a pounding (eg. the menu button). Do they last...?
So you are saying that you have 100MHz bandwidth and can verify it? Sorry for the doubt but I haven't read everything on this scope but I believed the extra features could be added but not bandwidth. I hope I am wrong.
This thing runs on linux right? How come It doesent need "soft" shut down?
I feel really bad by pressing the button which just cuts power to the scope...
But would would be different about this particular UltraVision scope? Rigol doesn't sell bandwidth upgrades for ANY of their DSOs - the fact that you could enable higher BW via keys was only because Rigol put the code in their UltraVision FW with the intention of offering upgrades - but they've never implemented it.Do we know if the DS1000Z line uses the LMH6518 PGA, like the DS2000 line? If so, what would be different is that it doesn't seem like they could reduce the bandwidth from 70MHz to 50MHz using LMH6518 settings, so there would have to be some other LPF or software limit added.
So you are saying that you have 100MHz bandwidth and can verify it? Sorry for the doubt but I haven't read everything on this scope but I believed the extra features could be added but not bandwidth. I hope I am wrong.
a) Somebody posted some waveforms in the "DS1074Z" thread, they seemed to show an improvement.He seems to have deleted that post.
Ordered my on Tequipment a week ago and it just shipped, a steal for only $356! (edu pricing + eeveblog discount)
uh, it was?? I have an edu email, and I applied the eevblog discount and the website accepted it??Ordered my on Tequipment a week ago and it just shipped, a steal for only $356! (edu pricing + eeveblog discount)
How did you do this? I was told that the edu pricing and the EEVblog discount were mutually exclusive.
a) Somebody posted some waveforms in the "DS1074Z" thread, they seemed to show an improvement.He seems to have deleted that post.
I think the measureable difference will be tiny in practice.
So it is still not clear whether the bandwidth is upgradeable. I will might buy one if it ever gets confirmed.
so every scope's bandwidth is a moot point?
Almost every scope doesn't keep their maximum sample rate with more than one channel, so every scope's bandwidth is a moot point?
Scope | P-P | Bandwidth |
Rigol DS1054Z | 2.40 V | 100 MHz |
Tektronix 465B | 2.4 V | 100 MHz |
Hantek DSO5062B | 2.46 V | ~200 MHz |
You'll overlook a decent 4-channel DSO for $400 just because you can't hack the bandwith to get a tiny, hard to measure improvement?
:palm:
But yes, at even 50MHz, this is a good buy.
Which process did you use to get the options ?The riglol keygen, as documented in various threads.
Did you need to connect to the JTAG interface first though ?Nope
uh, it was?? I have an edu email, and I applied the eevblog discount and the website accepted it??
But yes, at even 50MHz, this is a good buy.For someone who really needs waveform accuracy though, the DS1000Z platform starts coming apart at the seams if you need quad-channel capability beyond 25MHz.
I already have a scope and spending money to replace it requires that certain threshold of improvement is achieved. There are many benefits to the DS1054Z but going backwards in bandwidth goes against the grain a bit. Personal bias? YES! It is my money and I have my criteria for making an upgrade.This is a bit like a mechanics' toolbox where you may find 10 slightly different versions of a 12mm wrench (angled, straight, knuckle-length, standard length, box, open, pipe, etc.) or socket (wobble, short, medium, long, thin-wall, impact, 1/4", 5/8", 1/2", 3/4" drive, etc.) They are all fundamentally the same tool but mechanics hoard multiple variants because in some circumstances, having the tool that fits exactly right can spare them tons of trouble.
Any chance someone would be willing to give me the EEVblog discount code for TEquipment?PM sent.
I already have a scope and spending money to replace it requires that certain threshold of improvement is achieved. There are many benefits to the DS1054Z but going backwards in bandwidth goes against the grain a bit. Personal bias? YES! It is my money and I have my criteria for making an upgrade.Seems reasonable actually (any market), but especially with what things tend to cost in Brazil. Shipping alone can ruin a good value otherwise. :(
Any chance someone would be willing to give me the EEVblog discount code for TEquipment?I simply open chat on TEquipment site, and tell them "I'm a member of a eevblog, can I get a discount?". And I've got this discount in 5min. I used that method twice.
For someone who really needs waveform accuracy though, the DS1000Z platform starts coming apart at the seams if you need quad-channel capability beyond 25MHz.
In theory you only need about 2.4 times the sample rate if you have sin x/x interpolation
Is that why they don't let you turn it on when you're only using one or two channels? ;)
For someone who really needs waveform accuracy though, the DS1000Z platform starts coming apart at the seams if you need quad-channel capability beyond 25MHz.
Oh course it does, it's one of the cheapest scopes on the market!
Is that why they don't let you turn it on when you're only using one or two channels? ;)
They do that?
Of course, if you want to get pedantic, at 250MSs with all 4 channels on, that gives you 5 times the max 50MHz bandwidth. In theory you only need about 2.4 times the sample rate if you have sin x/x interpolation...
Why does the DS1000Z have a switch to turn on and off sin(x)/x? Because it should be switched off when running 3 or 4 channels
Weird. Mine only lets me switch it on when running 3 or 4 channels.
That is either a bug - or working the opposite of what it's actually displaying. It makes no sense that way.
Sin(x)/x
Press Sin(x)/x to enable or disable the dynamic sine interpolation function which can acquire better restoration of the original waveform.
Note: If the number of channels currently turned on is less than three, Sin(x)/x is grayed out and disabled.
From the user manual:QuoteSin(x)/x
Press Sin(x)/x to enable or disable the dynamic sine interpolation function which can acquire better restoration of the original waveform.
Note: If the number of channels currently turned on is less than three, Sin(x)/x is grayed out and disabled.
To me that sounds like it's by design, not a bug.
That is either a bug - or working the opposite of what it's actually displaying. It makes no sense that way.
From the user manual:QuoteSin(x)/x
Press Sin(x)/x to enable or disable the dynamic sine interpolation function which can acquire better restoration of the original waveform.
Note: If the number of channels currently turned on is less than three, Sin(x)/x is grayed out and disabled.
To me that sounds like it's by design, not a bug.
As I mentioned above in my EDIT, it may be that automatic selection of sin(x)/linear works the same as the DS2000 when running 1 or 2 channels - giving you manual selection ONLY when you have 3 or 4 channels enabled.
On my scope, the Sin(x)/x key is indeed greyed out if less than three channels are turned on, but the text reads "ON". It can only be turned off when three or four channels are in use.
On my scope, the Sin(x)/x key is indeed greyed out if less than three channels are turned on, but the text reads "ON". It can only be turned off when three or four channels are in use.
On my scope, the Sin(x)/x key is indeed greyed out if less than three channels are turned on, but the text reads "ON". It can only be turned off when three or four channels are in use.
Can you check what it reads when you have just 1 or 2 channels enabled with a slower sample rate (e.g. something <=250MSa/s)?
I just went down to 25Msa/s. It never enables the setting.
(And that agrees with what the manual says...)
I don't want to know if it enables the setting - I already know it doesn't. I want to know if it says ON or OFF at sample rates <= 250MSa/s. My theory is that the DSO functions like the DS2000 when running 1 or 2 channels - automatically switching OFF sin(x)/x when the sampling rate is 1/4 or less than the maximum.
It never says "OFF", always "ON".
The menu name should ACTUALLY be something like "AUTO sin(x)/x".
It never says "OFF", always "ON".
Weird. Mine only lets me switch it on when running 3 or 4 channels.
That is either a bug - or working the opposite of what it's actually displaying. It makes no sense that way.
Weird. Mine only lets me switch it on when running 3 or 4 channels.
That is either a bug - or working the opposite of what it's actually displaying. It makes no sense that way.
If the digitizer suffers from excessive amplitude or phase jitter when interleaving is used which happens when only 1 or 2 channels are active, then Rigol might force (x)/x interpolation off because it makes aliasing generated in the digitizer through intermodulation more apparent. This occurs whether the input signal has components above the Nyquist frequency or not and no anti-aliasing filter can improve the situation.
Weird. Mine only lets me switch it on when running 3 or 4 channels.
That is either a bug - or working the opposite of what it's actually displaying. It makes no sense that way.
If the digitizer suffers from excessive amplitude or phase jitter when interleaving is used which happens when only 1 or 2 channels are active, then Rigol might force (x)/x interpolation off because it makes aliasing generated in the digitizer through intermodulation more apparent. This occurs whether the input signal has components above the Nyquist frequency or not and no anti-aliasing filter can improve the situation.
As already indicated by subsequent posts, this is not the case - and in fact, Fungus had it backwards, just as I wrote - the DSO only allows you to turn it OFF when 3 or 4 channels are enabled. Besides, IMO, your theory presumes a bad design to begin with - and I doubt there's a modern DSO, inexpensive or otherwise - that does what you propose.
Well, the above discussion about what the Rigol is doing is clear as mud. :)
Some pretty expensive modern oscilloscopes which use interleaving visibly suffer from this problem to one extent or another. I have yet to see anybody test for it on Rigol's oscilloscopes or any other inexpensive DSO.
Well, the above discussion about what the Rigol is doing is clear as mud. :)
I think rolycat's post makes it crystal clear that sin(x)/x is either ON all the time with 1/2 channels *or* (more likely) is automatically switched ON/OFF based on sample rate (as it's bigger brother, the DS2000 does).
QuoteSome pretty expensive modern oscilloscopes which use interleaving visibly suffer from this problem to one extent or another. I have yet to see anybody test for it on Rigol's oscilloscopes or any other inexpensive DSO.
I understand the problem with interleaving - but to propose that the interleaving happening inside a single chip - which has been designed specifically to have it's multiple ADC's interleaved - is bad enough to warrant switching off sin(x)/x seems a stretch to me. :)
In any case - as I showed with my posted images - it's quite simple for any DS1000Z owner to find out when and where the DSO is using sin(x)/x interpolation.
Well, the above discussion about what the Rigol is doing is clear as mud. :)
This is why I wish someone would test this. From what I remember, the ADC does some type of internal self-calibration to minimize distortion caused by interleaving but it is still at the mercy of its external clock source.
Why does the DS1000Z have a switch to turn on and off sin(x)/x? Because it should be switched off when running 3 or 4 channels
Weird. Mine only lets me switch it on when running 3 or 4 channels.
This question has already been resolved - see my subsequent post.Why does the DS1000Z have a switch to turn on and off sin(x)/x? Because it should be switched off when running 3 or 4 channels
Weird. Mine only lets me switch it on when running 3 or 4 channels.
I'm just going to hazard a guess, since I don't have a 1000z, but sinx/x may default On (or always be on) for 1 or 2 channels. And defaults Off with 3 or 4 enabled (with the option to turn it back on, as Fungus noted, IF you know the input signal characteristics would allow it).
Bandwidth aside, is there anything you're lacking with your existing scope that a newer budget DSO could provide (i.e. existing scope is analog, so some DSO features might be nice to have)?
Makes sense. :)Bandwidth aside, is there anything you're lacking with your existing scope that a newer budget DSO could provide (i.e. existing scope is analog, so some DSO features might be nice to have)?
I have a modified DS1052E. What is missing is the update speed, the much bigger memory, and protocol decoding. These could all be helpful to me. I probably will get one. I don't need much more than what this scope offers so a DS2072A is much more money for not much more of what I could use.
This is why I wish someone would test this. From what I remember, the ADC does some type of internal self-calibration to minimize distortion caused by interleaving but it is still at the mercy of its external clock source.
You're saying Rigol don't know how to make a stable clock source?
Hi all.
This morning a friend came in my lab with a new little toy (hacked DS1054z) and asked me to have some measurement done; since I was busy I made just a couple of test of it.
Measured bandwidth -3db @ 116MHZ with my old (and trusty) Agilent 8657B.
Also attached you will find the best rise and fall time measured.
Still I can't believe that this thing costs only 299€.
I am suggesting that Rigol is playing games with the sin(x)/x reconstruction filter because it makes their digitizer linearity or sampling jitter look bad but maybe Occam's Razor or Hanlon's Razor applies.
Still I can't believe that this thing costs only 299€.
I am suggesting that Rigol is playing games with the sin(x)/x reconstruction filter because it makes their digitizer linearity or sampling jitter look bad but maybe Occam's Razor or Hanlon's Razor applies.
Honestly, your "suggestion" is based on pure speculation - and, IMO, contradictory to both posted information from users and common sense. To me it seems as if you're just spreading misinformation.
It's already been reported that sin(x)/x is displayed as being automatically ON with 1 or 2 channels enabled - and having manual selection available ONLY when the highest sampling rate is 250MSa/s makes perfect sense - both from the point of view of avoiding aliasing, plus that of porting code from the other UltraVision models.
Instead of continually expounding this theory, perhaps you can post a link to one single document from ANY scope manufacturer that describes turning OFF sin(x)/x at the FASTEST real-time sampling rates to avoid the problem you're imagining.
I do not expect common sense from a company that repeatedly confused peak detection with envelope detection in an apparent attempt to mislead customers into thinking their DSOs had the former when they actually only had the later. I ran across this years ago when I was evaluating DSOs (before the Rigol Z series was even announced) and it led me to disqualify Rigol. Ever since then, I have been suspicious of their motives. Of course this may have been common sense for them from a marketing point of view.
It does NOT make sense for it to be disabled (or enabled) to avoid aliasing because sin(x)/x reconstruction neither causes nor increase aliasing. It merely makes it more apparent.
I would love to link to a set of screen shots or videos showing if the aliasing problem exists or not in a Rigol DSO but I do not have one to test. I can show it on other (old) DSOs and in Agilent's application notes but that is not very helpful except to show that the problem exists in a general sense. Agilent pointed the problem out to distinguish themselves from Tektronix.
No company in their right mind is going to include as a reason for turning off sin(x)/x interpolation that it is to conceal aliasing made worse by interleaving done to increase the real-time sample rate.
A sample 1054Z is on it's way to me end of next week.
And I should have my own unit some time after that.
Your problems with them from the past are meaningless to this discussion, IMO - virtually every single company has made mistakes with some product at some point or another. The point is rather that you started this theory of yours in response to a MISTAKE that was posted in this thread by an owner (Fungus) about the way the DSO dealt with with sin(x)/x.
QuoteIt does NOT make sense for it to be disabled (or enabled) to avoid aliasing because sin(x)/x reconstruction neither causes nor increase aliasing. It merely makes it more apparent.
As has been mentioned before: for sin(x)/x interpolation to be accurate, you have to have an analog input signal that has no frequency content above the Nyquist frequency - which, when 3 or 4 channels are on, is 125MHz. The normal frequency response of the DS1000Z does not roll-off fast enough to minimize aliasing for sin(x)/x interpolation ...
... - i.e. LINEAR interpolation should be used - or- to put it another way, there exists a good reason for being able to manually keep sin(x)/x turned OFF when 3 or 4 channels are on, if you need to. ...
... On the other hand, if you enable the 20MHz bandwidth limiter for each channel that's turned on, you can use sin(x)/x interpolation without problems on the higher sample rates
QuoteI would love to link to a set of screen shots or videos showing if the aliasing problem exists or not in a Rigol DSO but I do not have one to test. I can show it on other (old) DSOs and in Agilent's application notes but that is not very helpful except to show that the problem exists in a general sense. Agilent pointed the problem out to distinguish themselves from Tektronix.
Again, where are these application notes? I want to see a document describing turning off sin(x)/x interpolation because of interleaving problems at the fastest real-time sampling rates. I can link to reams of literature about the problem of aliases in sin(x)/x interpolation, if you like.
QuoteNo company in their right mind is going to include as a reason for turning off sin(x)/x interpolation that it is to conceal aliasing made worse by interleaving done to increase the real-time sample rate.
Do you mean that no company will have published literature about this made-up theory of yours? ;)
They are meaningful in questioning the credibility of Rigol and especially so since they have continuously made the same mistake for years and have not corrected it yet. Perhaps I am too strident at times.
The aliasing produced in the digitizer between an input signal which is completely below the Nyquist frequency and the sample clock occurs whether sin(x)/x reconstruction is used or not.
This LeCroy application note mentions the sin(x)/x reconstruction problem in connection with interleaving on page 15 with a Tektronix DSO. Agilent likes to pick on Tektronix about this as well:
The second is about the trigger out jitter time (3nS) measured from the rear output.
What would a trigger output with that much jitter be used for? Qualifying a logic analyser or word recognizer?IMHO 3nS jitter on a 100MHZ cheap scope is a decent time and it is difficult to have better results with digital triggers feeded by 1G samples per second. It's just three sample uncertainty.
The second is about the trigger out jitter time (3nS) measured from the rear output.Are you sure your tests are completely accurate? In your image, I don't see a separate input channel being used to generate the Trigger Outs (unless the output is from a different DS1000Z).
QuoteWhat would a trigger output with that much jitter be used for? Qualifying a logic analyser or word recognizer?
IMHO 3nS jitter on a 100MHZ cheap scope is a decent time and it is difficult to have better results with digital triggers feeded by 1G samples per second. It's just three sample uncertainty.
Personally I don't use measuring tape when I look for millimeters.
In fact I didn't use two channels.
I just let the scope autooscillate on a single channel after an external stimulus and set the scope to trigger both negative and poitive edges.
Just the other day I was using the gate out on my 7904 like this to measure jitter at specific trigger levels because analog delayed sweep was not up to the task. My much slower 7603 at 100 MHz would have worked just as well but the sweep gate output is on the back and difficult to reach.I still am a proud tek 7854 owner and I know what are you saying. ^-^
I wonder what would be the best way to eliminate it in this type of design short of implementing an external analog trigger which would be unlikely to provide any additionally useful function. I guess a programmable delay should be all that is needed although that would do nothing to lower the delay.There are several ways but are all expensive if compared to the street price of this scope.
But neither did the other two people that measured the jitter (if you follow the links I posted above) - they used a second DSO (DS2000) to measure the jitter.I'm at home now. On monday I'll go to the lab and give that a shot.
A small update:
with the same method and AC coupling for the triggering I can't see the jitter at all. ;D
And is not affected by the number of turned ON channels.
So what exactly is being measured here?Since the DS1000z series haven't an external trigger input I have simply connected the trigger out to channel 1 input with a BNC cable.
The interesting thing would be internal trigger or external trigger in to external trigger out delay and jitter.
PPS: Is Dave brazen enough to post a video telling people to hack the DS1054Z? I know it's not exactly a secret and Rigol is fully aware of the practice (they're probably reading this thread right now), but...There is not much of a video to make about this: you take your serial number, put it in the code generator, take the code the generator spits out and enter it on the scope.
PPS: Is Dave brazen enough to post a video telling people to hack the DS1054Z? I know it's not exactly a secret and Rigol is fully aware of the practice (they're probably reading this thread right now), but...There is not much of a video to make about this: you take your serial number, put it in the code generator, take the code the generator spits out and enter it on the scope.
PS: Is there any way to "remove" a key? Some sort of factory reset?Just go to the UltraSigma Utility, send SCPI command
If Dave starts making videos /promote hacks, its over with the free stuff he gets from Agilent,Fluke and Rigol.PPS: Is Dave brazen enough to post a video telling people to hack the DS1054Z? I know it's not exactly a secret and Rigol is fully aware of the practice (they're probably reading this thread right now), but...There is not much of a video to make about this: you take your serial number, put it in the code generator, take the code the generator spits out and enter it on the scope.
(Maybe you need to look up "brazen" in the dictionary)
Obviously I don't mean the physical process of doing it, more the morality of posting videos about it (and saying "beauty!" at the end).
Would you do it if it was your blog?
If Dave starts making videos /promote hacks, its over with the free stuff he gets from Agilent,Fluke and Rigol.
as somebody just mentioned 100mhz hack for DS1054Z.... if true, it suggests they think hackability works for them, and if you think about it for a moment, it's quite possible that they sell more scopes in this way... (consumer just thinks he got something for nothing, and consumer likes that! heh...but he did pay for the scope...)
PPS: Is Dave brazen enough to post a video telling people to hack the DS1054Z? I know it's not exactly a secret and Rigol is fully aware of the practice (they're probably reading this thread right now), but...
video should be made, because people started to search the yt instead of google.
(video of 30sec length, just the hack... )
(i mean the hacking just got even easier with z series...that doesn't suggest rigol hates it, does it?)
Why would Dave feel compelled to do a video blog about it now?
have you tried searching this forum or the web for "DS1054Z"? do you see this thread in those results? or do you see some obvious hints on how to hack it?PPS: Is Dave brazen enough to post a video telling people to hack the DS1054Z? I know it's not exactly a secret and Rigol is fully aware of the practice (they're probably reading this thread right now), but...video should be made, because people started to search the yt instead of google.
(video of 30sec length, just the hack... )
It seems you guys are rather late to the party. We've been discussing, posting, rehashing, etc. about the UltraVision (and other new Rigol products) hacks on this blog for about a year and a half. Why would Dave feel compelled to do a video blog about it now?
have you tried searching this forum or the web for "DS1054Z"? do you see this thread in those results? or do you see some obvious hints on how to hack it?
don't be shy, input "DS1054Z hacking" in google....
also, why did dave post a video about hacking 1052?
it's all about search and how easy or tough is it to find info. also 1054z is fairly new. even though his "brothers" (ie series) are not.
and i have less intention to read 2xx pages of "Sniffing the Rigol's internal I2C bus" thread just to find hacking info and what could go wrong and when.... (rig)lol. ;)
That was 4 and 1/2 years - and a much smaller EEVblog - ago.you seem to be saying that rigol wants this as a dirty lil secret that everybody and nobody knows about?
It's easy to find the information.no. you're biased because you're talking about it for a year and a half.
While I appreciate your desire to not have to do any work whatsoever for free stuff, that hardly seems like a great reason for Dave to have to make a video about it.i did my work, didn't i mention the right thread? and key making web-page.
That would imply I don't how to properly use a search engine.know how. know-how. ;)
It adds up perfectly.QuoteThat was 4 and 1/2 years - and a much smaller EEVblog - ago.you seem to be saying that rigol wants this as a dirty lil secret that everybody and nobody knows about?
while you're discussing about it for long time now? and people started to talk about hacking (not just here) as soon as it appeared.
doesn't add up.
PPS: Is Dave brazen enough to post a video telling people to hack the DS1054Z? I know it's not exactly a secret and Rigol is fully aware of the practice (they're probably reading this thread right now), but...
They may turn a blind eye to discussions in forums such as this, but if promotion of the potential for unlocking capabilities which have not been paid for becomes too blatant they are likely to take action.They have already taken action against the hacks on many of the different models - with varying degrees of success. And it's obvious that they would: there's always going to be some voices in Rigol's management saying that they're losing money because of them. And of course, that leads to less time and energy spent on FW development, new features, debugging, etc.
as for forum search, did you try it? inform us do you get results from this page. or would you like me to make a screenshot?I think you need to improve your search skills ;)
sure
see attachment....
They have already taken action against the hacks on many of the different models - with varying degrees of success. And it's obvious that they would: there's always going to be some voices in Rigol's management saying that they're losing money because of them.
They didn't let it open on purpose
No accident, just cheaper to use a single design for both high and low end offerings.
They tried to prevent it but they didn't use the algorithm properly and the private key kind of leaked, don't recall the details, they are buried in the monster thread somewhere.
We're talking about the 100MHz upgrade. It's not purchaseable. Why would they allow this change via buttons on the front panel if they didn't want to?Only one hardware/software combination to test and they decided to set it up so they can unlock it via their options route because it was already implemented.
There's no way they couldn't have blocked this when releasing the new 50MHz model (which needed some firmware tweaks and supply chain changes anyway - to make it 50MHz).Then they will have to test them separately, more cost on production and testing.
PS: Why can't they change the private key if it leaked? Yes, it would be hacked again eventually but it would disrupt the hackers for a while.Because there are products in the wild already so it's too late.
We're talking about the 100MHz upgrade. It's not purchaseable. Why would they allow this change via buttons on the front panel if they didn't want to?
Rigol wanted to be able to build one scope and then decide which model it was just before shipping it.
No, that was a side effect of being able to do it at the factory.
if (currentModel==0x0000) {
setTheModel(); // nb. This can only be done once
}
else {
log("Somebody is trying to hack me!");
}
Generally speaking if it involves a license keys in any way, then I believe that case law shows that this can be illegal,Does it? I cannot see how it can possibly be illegal to buy a device and then type a key into the front panel. If, however, the hack involves downloading or modifying firmware, then there is clearly a copyright issue.
I cannot see how it can possibly be illegal to buy a device and then type a key into the front panel. If, however, the hack involves downloading or modifying firmware, then there is clearly a copyright issue.Politicians make stupid laws, they have to do nothing with common sense.
I cannot see how it can possibly be illegal to buy a device and then type a key into the front panel. If, however, the hack involves downloading or modifying firmware, then there is clearly a copyright issue.And, on the same hand, with your argumentation all software keys would be free to share, you don't have to buy it. I'd say, with the riglol key you activate a part of the software you don't have a valid license for.
Yes, that way if they have the programmed scopes in inventory, but they get orders for a different model, they can pull them out of the boxes, reprogram them, and put on new stickers.
Anyway, as far as I can see the DS1054Z does not need hacking to be super value.
I am seriously considering ordering one even before you review it, because I think it might go out of stock immediately afterwards.
The place I got mine from is already posting ">21 days" delivery time on their front page.
http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html (http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html)
So why did "Rigol's management" allow a 100MHz upgrade via keygen? It's not a purchaseable option, why is it even in there?
Answer: It's marketing in its purest form. It's the attention grabber - you can get yourself an expensive scope for the price of a cheap one!
None of the UltraVision models (DS2000, DS4000, DS6000) had the working code for an upgradeable bandwidth option until it was included in the third (or fourth?) FW version released for the DS2000 models - with Rigol's intention to begin selling BW upgrades along with the other options. But the timing was bad for Rigol (or good - depending on your point of view) because that release happened just before/as the option key system was being hacked here - allowing people to start enabling the extra bandwidth with keys.
Right, so the question is: Why wasn't that option removed in the fifth (or later) versions of the firmware?
my point was to refute your proposition that the entire thing was a marketing ploy by Rigol from the beginning
Right, so the question is: Why wasn't that option removed in the fifth (or later) versions of the firmware?
The only answer that makes sense is...
The place I got mine from is already posting ">21 days" delivery time on their front page.
http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html (http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html)
Meilhaus has them on stock: http://www.meilhaus.de/en/rigol+ds1054z.htm (http://www.meilhaus.de/en/rigol+ds1054z.htm)
Some folks have commented on noisy fans on Rigol scopes. Anyone care to share an opinion on the DS1054Z fan noise?I had a 1054z for few days and personally I don't think it's noisy. Or maybe I'm getting older and I need hearing aid.
Some folks have commented on noisy fans on Rigol scopes. Anyone care to share an opinion on the DS1054Z fan noise?
Thanks.
Timebase (ns) | wfrm/s | data points |
5 | 24 000 | 60 |
10 | 32 000 | 120 |
20 | 30 000 | 240 |
50 | 63 000 | 600 |
100 | 23 000 | 1 200 |
200 | 13 000 | 2 400 |
500 | 5 700 | 6 000 |
1000 | 2 900 | 12 000 |
Yes, that way if they have the programmed scopes in inventory, but they get orders for a different model, they can pull them out of the boxes, reprogram them, and put on new stickers.
Never going to happen.
Edit: But let's assume it did ... they're perfectly capable of flashing a temporary internal-use-only firmware that allows key changes, let it run, then re-flash the latest consumer firmware.
Some folks have commented on noisy fans on Rigol scopes. Anyone care to share an opinion on the DS1054Z fan noise?
Dave, is your sample coming from Emona? and do they still (I think they used to) do deals for EEVBlog members? I'd like to support local if the pricing isn't too extreme.
Well, it is time for me to get a 'modern' DSO to go along side my 30yo BWD analog and Kikusui DSO CROs.
Just hobbyist work, and the 1054 looks like the way to go at the moment.
Dave, is your sample coming from Emona? and do they still (I think they used to) do deals for EEVBlog members? I'd like to support local if the pricing isn't too extreme.
- Rob.
Some folks have commented on noisy fans on Rigol scopes. Anyone care to share an opinion on the DS1054Z fan noise?
Thanks.
You seem to be strangely intent on proving your point, regardless of the cost. And willing to extend this discussion, ad infinitum. You've gotten some good background information and explanations from Marmad, yet you're still not satisfied.
Some folks have commented on noisy fans on Rigol scopes. Anyone care to share an opinion on the DS1054Z fan noise?
Thanks.
Noisy enough to be audible in a quiet lab on my DS1074Z. Much noisier than my laptop or computer.Does the internal temperature warrant this?
Noisy enough to be audible in a quiet lab on my DS1074Z. Much noisier than my laptop or computer.Does the internal temperature warrant this?
Like this?
Noisy enough to be audible in a quiet lab on my DS1074Z. Much noisier than my laptop or computer.Does the internal temperature warrant this?
Hard to say. The fan is speed-controlled, likely from some internal temperature.
The usual issue with noise on these fans is that, just like on PCs:
* Fans don't do anything for specs, so they use fans that are reliable but cheap, so they the losing part of the trade-off is noise.
* The fan is smaller (cost), so much noisier (speed) than a larger fan with no easy option to replace it by something larger/slower.
In the case of the DS1000Z, the fan is 50mm and runs pretty fast. It's an uncommon size (for a PC fan), and with the high CFM spec, it's hard to find a good replacement that moves enough air and is quiet. I ended up picking up a Gelid Silent 5, which is substantially quieter, but still clearly audible. It's the only "quiet" 50mm fan I found that moves close to the right amount of air.
Laurent
What specification does the original fan have? 13CFM?
The usual issue with noise on these fans is that, just like on PCs:They could add to the specs an extra bullet: "silent operation". :) The price difference between a 5cm and an 8cm isn't much, and it might result in better cooling at 1/4 the speed.
* Fans don't do anything for specs, so they use fans that are reliable but cheap, so they the losing part of the trade-off is noise.
* The fan is smaller (cost), so much noisier (speed) than a larger fan with no easy option to replace it by something larger/slower.
In the case of the DS1000Z, the fan is 50mm and runs pretty fast.
For such a high-RPM fan, the Gelid is pretty quiet. Not silent, but quiet.
Is there enough room in there for an 8cm fan?
I should have taken a picture. The fan is stuck between two sheets of metal with no extra room. I don't think you can even fit a 60mm there. You'd need to rework the sheet metal to change the fan size.
I should have taken a picture. The fan is stuck between two sheets of metal with no extra room. I don't think you can even fit a 60mm there. You'd need to rework the sheet metal to change the fan size.
I have a simpler, no-cost, and no-labor method for blocking fan noise: play music ;D
Noisy enough to be audible in a quiet lab on my DS1074Z. Much noisier than my laptop or computer.Does the internal temperature warrant this?
I just received my new DS1054Z an hour ago. :)
Three of the four probe clip hoods were defective (just empty plastic shells). >:(
I chatted with TEquipment, who called Rigol during the chat, and was told that Rigol will ship me replacements. :|
Not a great start, but I am still hoping everything else is fine.
Three of the four probe clip hoods were defective (just empty plastic shells). >:(
I chatted with TEquipment, who called Rigol during the chat, and was told that Rigol will ship me replacements. :|
I just received my new DS1054Z an hour ago. :)
Three of the four probe clip hoods were defective (just empty plastic shells). >:(
I chatted with TEquipment, who called Rigol during the chat, and was told that Rigol will ship me replacements. :|
Three of the four probe clip hoods were defective (just empty plastic shells). >:(
Bummer, all 4 of mine were good.
I just received my new DS1054Z an hour ago. :)
Three of the four probe clip hoods were defective (just empty plastic shells). >:(
I chatted with TEquipment, who called Rigol during the chat, and was told that Rigol will ship me replacements. :|
Not a great start, but I am still hoping everything else is fine.
also the rings come with spares but I'm missing one color
also the rings come with spares but I'm missing one color
With both sets of 2, you should have gotten 4 of each color but only need 2 of each color...
by the way, I noticed on the startup display that the 'installed features' have a trial duration that expires after around 35 hours.....if I do not 'hack' the scope, will all these features go away?
Just to confirm that my upgraded DS1054 has a measured bandwidth of ~130 MHz, confirmed both by using a leveled signal generator (looking for the -3 dB point), and a pulse generator with a 70 ps risetime.
Just to confirm that my upgraded DS1054Z has a measured bandwidth of ~130 MHz, confirmed both by using a leveled signal generator (looking for the -3 dB point), and a pulse generator with a 70 ps risetime. On the system info screen the system software is 00.04.01.SP2, the board version is 0.1.1, and the model is shown as a DS1104Z.
The actual -3 dB point is about 133 MHz using a leveled signal generator. The scope measures the rise time of the pulse generator as 3.3 ns, so I guess the final answer for the bandwidth depends on whether you use the "traditional" 0.35/(rise time) formula, or if you use the 0.4 to 0.5/(rise time) formula for digital scopes shown in Agilent's (oops, I mean Keysight's) Application Note 1420 "Understanding Oscilloscope Frequency Response and Its Effect on Rise-Time Accuracy." Either way, the bandwidth is plenty high for my needs!
It seems that you both have access to good signal generators and know how to use them. I would be interested in the response of an unhacked DS1054Z. As Fungus asked, it would also be interesting to know the measured effect on bandwidth of having 2 or 4 channels configured.
Has anybody seen / heard anything regarding when TEquipment will have these back in stock?
Just to confirm that my upgraded DS1054Z has a measured bandwidth of ~130 MHz, confirmed both by using a leveled signal generator (looking for the -3 dB point), and a pulse generator with a 70 ps risetime. On the system info screen the system software is 00.04.01.SP2, the board version is 0.1.1, and the model is shown as a DS1104Z.
What did it have before?
What does if have with different numbers of channels enabled?
Before the "upgrade" I measured the bandwidth as almost exactly 50 MHz with a sharp rolloff above 50 MHz, consistent with bandwidth limiting in software.
There is no real difference in the bandwidth with multiple channels enabled (see the next paragraph), however, the sample rate drops to 500 MSa/s with two channels enabled, and to 250 MSa/s with three or four channels enabled. The memory depth drops from 24 MSa with one channel to 12 MSa/channel with two channels, and down to 6 MSa/channel with three or four channels enabled.
Because of the slower maximum sample rate with multiple channels enabled, there will be some waveform distortion due to undersampling at the highest sweep speeds. For example, at 5 ns/div a 250 MSa/s sample rate gives only slightly more than one sample per division, so fast waveforms can become very distorted. Changing the acquisition mode to Hi Res or Peak has no particular effect, nor would I expect any, since the samplers are already at their maximum speed. Averaging definitely smooths the waveform, but then there's no way to tell just by looking at it that there's an undersampling problem.
BTW, the risetime of a 70 ps risetime pulse generator as measured by the DS1054Z actually appeared to improve by going from one channel to two channels enabled. That was just an artifact, because the slower sample rate missed some roundoff in the leading edge so the reconstruction by the sin(x)/x interpolator made the edge look faster. Enabling three or four channels slowed the risetime measurement due distortion of the leading edge caused by undersampling.
Has anybody seen / heard anything regarding when TEquipment will have these back in stock?
Start a quick chat with them, it is easy and they'll let you know!
I'm wondering if the waveform generator from the DS1000Z-S versions can be added by adding the two bnc connectors.
Here's a teardown video of a DS1000Z -> http://youtu.be/xMPPuAOoD8c?t=1m15s (http://youtu.be/xMPPuAOoD8c?t=1m15s)
[/quote
What about the Source button on the front panel?
I'm wondering if the waveform generator from the DS1000Z-S versions can be added by adding the two bnc connectors.
Here's a teardown video of a DS1000Z -> http://youtu.be/xMPPuAOoD8c?t=1m15s (http://youtu.be/xMPPuAOoD8c?t=1m15s)
The actual -3 dB point is about 133 MHz using a leveled signal generator.
Before the "upgrade" I measured the bandwidth as almost exactly 50 MHz with a sharp rolloff above 50 MHz, consistent with bandwidth limiting in software.
I'm wondering if the waveform generator from the DS1000Z-S versions can be added by adding the two bnc connectors.
Here's a teardown video of a DS1000Z -> http://youtu.be/xMPPuAOoD8c?t=1m15s (http://youtu.be/xMPPuAOoD8c?t=1m15s)
Unlikely. Fitting DACs to all units would not be very cost efficient. Also, there is a cutout on the board in place where gen BNCs would normally go so they are either on separate board in ds1000z-s or the main board is different.
However, this isn't unexpected, since the chip they're using has no 50 MHz LPF setting. I'd guess they're using the programmed 70 MHz setting in hardware, which in practice should be fine. But for those paying attention to small details, the 70 MHz models are only down 3dB at ~90 MHz. And therefore the more "conservative" 50 MHz BW (with respect to a 4-channel 250 MHz sample rate), doesn't buy you any more immunity from aliasing, because it's imposed in software.
Does the 1000Z series use an amplifier chip like the 2000 series? I was watching the teardown on youtube, but I didn't see anything like that mentioned....
I'm wondering if the waveform generator from the DS1000Z-S versions can be added by adding the two bnc connectors.
Here's a teardown video of a DS1000Z -> http://youtu.be/xMPPuAOoD8c?t=1m15s (http://youtu.be/xMPPuAOoD8c?t=1m15s)
Unlikely. Fitting DACs to all units would not be very cost efficient. Also, there is a cutout on the board in place where gen BNCs would normally go so they are either on separate board in ds1000z-s or the main board is different.
Are you sure, that the board woudl need additonal DACs. What I've seen on the video only the chip for the "not yet available" Logic-Analyzer option and the connectors for the waveform generator are missing. I could imagine that a replacement of the firmware would add the waveform generator.
What did it have before?
What does if have with different numbers of channels enabled?
Before the "upgrade" I measured the bandwidth as almost exactly 50 MHz with a sharp rolloff above 50 MHz, consistent with bandwidth limiting in software.
There is no real difference in the bandwidth with multiple channels enabled
The simplest way to avoid that would be to apply the programmable filter at the full 200+MSPS regardless of time base and then down-sample to whatever output sample rate from there. You need little more than an FIR filter for that, which takes a trivial amount of space in modern FPGAs.Before the "upgrade" I measured the bandwidth as almost exactly 50 MHz with a sharp rolloff above 50 MHz, consistent with bandwidth limiting in software.
Potentially, that could be a concern. I.e., software BWL does nothing to eliminate aliasing, because the damage has already been done by then. (Higher frequency components have already folded back into the pass-band.) That's why there is a programmable LPF in the gain-stage of the front end, in the first place.
1000Z teardown:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMPPuAOoD8c (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMPPuAOoD8c)
Potentially, that could be a concern. I.e., software BWL does nothing to eliminate aliasing, because the damage has already been done by then. (Higher frequency components have already folded back into the pass-band.) That's why there is a programmable LPF in the gain-stage of the front end, in the first place.
The simplest way to avoid that would be to apply the programmable filter at the full 200+MSPS regardless of time base and then down-sample to whatever output sample rate from there. You need little more than an FIR filter for that, which takes a trivial amount of space in modern FPGAs.
Some DSOs work this way but it has drawbacks and less expensive oscilloscopes usually have different maximum sample rates depending on how many channels are active.That's why I used 200+MSPS in my hypothetical scenario instead of 1GSPS: the DS1000z has 250MSPS with all four channels enabled.
The actual -3 dB point is about 133 MHz using a leveled signal generator.
Thanks for that.
Did you happen to notice how far out the -10dB or -20db points were? I'm curious about how fast the falloff is, since in 4-channel mode, the extended BW makes things pretty dicey (aka, probable aliasing). That would not be an issue, with it's original bandwidth.
In other words, if I had one, I think I'd be more likely to bump it to a 1074z model, instead of 1104z.
ADDED: that's assuming I was going to be using it in 4-channel mode a lot. Which I probably would be.
I think I hate the multifunction knob.Yes, selecting things with the multifunction knobs on Rigols (and some Siglents also) can be a pain in the ass.
It works pretty well most of the time.
"Most"?
I wonder if we can get Dave to rant about it in his video. Maybe they'll do something....It just seems unnecessary to have to push that fiddly little knob with all those other buttons lying around.
Acceleration would be great for trying to get those large value changes though.
Re Multifunction knob, could this be improved with a different unit ie. with a much softer "push to select"?Acceleration would be great for trying to get those large value changes though.
That's one of the reasons I think the DS2000 is so nice = acceleration via the navigation knob. When I was reviewing the Siglent SDS2000 recently, it was driving me crazy every time I had to get through a large selection of numbers via the multifunction knob.... sooo slow... but on the DS2000, just zip right to the end ^-^
Acceleration would be great for trying to get those large value changes though.
Re Multifunction knob, could this be improved with a different unit ie. with a much softer "push to select"?
It seems many DSO's suffer this problem, maybe it is a symptom of just what hardware is available?
When I open up a menu with a lot of selections, scroll down to the one I want... it quite often jumps the the next selection when I press the knob to select it. So annoying.If I remember correctly, Connor Wolf mentioned exactly that issue in one of his youtube videos about the 1000Z series.
I think I hate the multifunction knob.
When I open up a menu with a lot of selections, scroll down to the one I want... it quite often jumps the the next selection when I press the knob to select it. So annoying.
It would be so much nicer if there was a separate "Enter" button, or even if I could just press the same button that opened the menu to close the menu again (selecting the new value, obviously).
Pressing a menu button multiple times should just repeatedly open/close the menu without changing the value.
If you want to go up/down to a new value in the menu by pressing buttons instead of using the multifunction knob you could use the blue up/down arrows, not the button that opened the menu.
I just remeasured my "upgraded" DS1054Z bandwidth points. I used the amplitude of a 10 MHz sinewave input as my reference level, as I've observed that the amplitude drops by about 1.5 dB at 100 MHz as compared to the level at 10 MHz. I set my Agilent E4436B to deliver a signal that measured 0 dBm at the 50 ohm terminated scope input. I had only Channel 1 active so the scope would sample at 1 GSa/s to ensure the best waveform fidelity. Here are my results:
Frequency Amplitude
10 MHz 0.0 dBm
100 MHz -1.5 dBm
150 MHz -3.0 dBm
393 MHz -10.0 dBm
447 MHz -20.0 dBm
Yes, selecting things with the multifunction knobs on Rigols (and some Siglents also) can be a pain in the ass.
...it helps if you can develop a specific way of holding and turning it when selecting things...
Frequency Amplitude
10 MHz 0.0 dBm
100 MHz -1.5 dBm
150 MHz -3.0 dBm
393 MHz -10.0 dBm
447 MHz -20.0 dBm
As would be expected, the waveform above 400 MHz became quite distorted (it looked like an amplitude modulated carrier) because of undersampling, but surprisingly, the triggering was rock-solid all the way up. The frequency measurement by the scope was reasonably accurate as well, except that at frequencies above 400 MHz the displayed value jumped around quite a bit.
More seriously, this is a serious usability problem, that scope manufacturers could solve easily in their firmware.
More seriously, this is a serious usability problem, that scope manufacturers could solve easily in their firmware.
I don't agree that it can be 'easily' solved in firmware - or at least, not easily solved for all users all of the time. Every single device I own that is a complex combination of hardware/software buttons has UI mistakes that crop up from time to time (the iPhone jumps selections and misses presses, etc.) - although, granted, perhaps not as often as this; I certainly would agree that it could be better than it is.
But we're on the same page as far as potential for radical improvements, that would not be all that hard to achieve.
Personally, I think the idea of pushing a rotating knob to select something which has been highlighted by the rotation is a bad idea to begin with - in a number of different ways. It's both non-intuitive, more physically wearing on the encoder, and harder to code correctly. I'd much rather have a selection button right next to the knob, but it's simply done as a cost/real estate-saving measure.
Is the issue that it moves when pressing the button, or that it has a delay before reaching its final location.
If I wait for it to stop on a selection, then carefully press the button straight on with no rotation, it usually works fine.
Personally, I think the idea of pushing a rotating knob to select something which has been highlighted by the rotation is a bad idea to begin with - in a number of different ways. It's both non-intuitive, more physically wearing on the encoder, and harder to code correctly.
I'd much rather have a selection button right next to the knob, but it's simply done as a cost/real estate-saving measure.
The most intuitive choice (to me) is to push the same button that opened the menu.
Thus they chose pressing the menu button to change the setting and pressing the up/down buttons to select it permanently. It's back to front, but at least it works and avoids using the knob.
Sounds like a detented encoder like in the Siglent SDS2000 is needed.Is the issue that it moves when pressing the button, or that it has a delay before reaching its final location.
It moves when you press the knob.If I wait for it to stop on a selection, then carefully press the button straight on with no rotation, it usually works fine.
"Usually" is not "always". It should be "always".
I'm guessing the problem is that sometimes you stop turning it very close to a threshold point and the tiniest movement can make it jump to the next option.
This is because it's not a knob with indents, yes, but putting in a clicky knob wouldn't totally 'fix' it, it's a broken paradigm (IMHO). It needs a separate button. The most intuitive choice (to me) is to push the same button that opened the menu.
PS: Some people have shaky hands...it must be almost unusable for them.
Fungus: ". but how about that great big "Clear" button right above the multifunction knob? It would make a great "Enter" button with no extra hardware cost (just a firmware change - make it act as "Enter" whenever a menu is open)."
YES! THIS PLEASE.
It must be simple to change the firmware to permit this function to be enabled/disabled via some system setting
in a future firmware update.
Please Rigol, can you do this?
The place I got mine from is already posting ">21 days" delivery time on their front page.
http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html (http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html)
Meilhaus has them on stock: http://www.meilhaus.de/en/rigol+ds1054z.htm (http://www.meilhaus.de/en/rigol+ds1054z.htm)
Sounds like a detented encoder like in the Siglent SDS2000 is needed.It is not really needed: you simply need to code a dead-zone in the software to ignore movement below a certain speed or require a minimum amount of movement after the last stop before accepting movement again.
Sounds like a detented encoder like in the Siglent SDS2000 is needed.It is not really needed: you simply need to code a dead-zone in the software to ignore movement below a certain speed or require a minimum amount of movement after the last stop before accepting movement again.
Sounds like a detented encoder like in the Siglent SDS2000 is needed.It is not really needed: you simply need to code a dead-zone in the software to ignore movement below a certain speed or require a minimum amount of movement after the last stop before accepting movement again.
Sounds like a detented encoder like in the Siglent SDS2000 is needed.
It is not really needed: you simply need to code a dead-zone in the software to ignore movement below a certain speed or require a minimum amount of movement after the last stop before accepting movement again.
The ancient Tektronix 2232 has a momentary push rotary control and uses variable programmed hysteresis in the rotation which is both very simple and very effective. If I try, I cannot even make it glitch.
Dave hasn't got his scope yet?No,
All the Rigol scopes meant for Australia have been sent to Europe ;D
Nevertheless, from a UI point of view, having to push something which rotates (except for the simplest toggling - e.g. coarse/fine) is a stupid idea on many levels and should be dropped completely from design.
All the Rigol scopes meant for Australia have been sent to Europe ;D
There's none left in Europe either. Looks like I did the right thing by grabbing mine the very first day. 8)Nevertheless, from a UI point of view, having to push something which rotates (except for the simplest toggling - e.g. coarse/fine) is a stupid idea on many levels and should be dropped completely from design.
Yep.
Actually, I quite like pushing the horizontal scale knob to go into zoom mode. That one works for me. :-)
(Weirdly enough, it's the only push-function which isn't marked on the front panel...you have to find that one by accident)
For frequent menu selections though? Nope.
Actually, I quite like pushing the horizontal scale knob to go into zoom mode. That one works for me. :-)
Be aware that the Meilhaus availability status is not correct!
Meilhaus contacted me this morning to let me know that they are on backorder and i will receive my Oszilloscope at begin of November. I checked on their homepage and they are still showing the status as green icon.
Be aware that the Meilhaus availability status is not correct!
Meilhaus contacted me this morning to let me know that they are on backorder and i will receive my Oszilloscope at begin of November. I checked on their homepage and they are still showing the status as green icon.
The place I got mine from is already posting ">21 days" delivery time on their front page.
http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html (http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1054Z.html)
Meilhaus has them on stock: http://www.meilhaus.de/en/rigol+ds1054z.htm (http://www.meilhaus.de/en/rigol+ds1054z.htm)
The ancient Tektronix 2232 has a momentary push rotary control and uses variable programmed hysteresis in the rotation which is both very simple and very effective. If I try, I cannot even make it glitch.
Well, we'll just have to accept your claim that the Tek knob is impossible to glitch, with smooth movement over all speeds it can possibly be turned at. Nevertheless, from a UI point of view, having to push something which rotates (except for the simplest toggling - e.g. coarse/fine) is a stupid idea on many levels and should be dropped completely from design.
I wonder how old the patent is on control acceleration.
two potentiometers locked together and rotated 180 degrees are encoded separately to remove the dead zone of a single potentiometer in lieu of an optical or mechanical rotary encoder.
On a completely different note: Does anybody know what kind of encoders Rigol uses for their knobs? Optical? Mechanical? Magnetic? Plain old potentiometer?
I'm just wondering how long they're going to last...
Would someone mind sending me the tequipment.net EEVBlog discount code :-+
Thinking about picking up this scope.
Wow, I thought self-cal was slow, but try saving a big waveform.... Had to leave it overnight, output size was only 11.4MB (4 x 3mb), but it took at least 3 hours to save... :wtf:
Just got my DS1054Z after UPS screwed up and lost two of the trucks it was on and all four of the probes were missing the contacts on the hooks. I was told from TEquipment that this is common, and I've already seen it mentioned on this thread, but supposedly Rigol is doing something about it? I have three exams this week so I won't be able to play with it much until the weekend...TEquipment has different warehouses, so your full order may be packed and shipped in different boxes from multiple locations. Can be confusing the first time you experience this.
Interestingly, my free AC voltage detector arrived on Friday while my scope didn't arrive until today (Tuesday) even though they were shipped from the same place within half an hour of each other. I can't even guess how this would have happened logistically.
Just got my DS1054Z after UPS screwed up and lost two of the trucks it was on and all four of the probes were missing the contacts on the hooks. I was told from TEquipment that this is common, and I've already seen it mentioned on this thread, but supposedly Rigol is doing something about it? I have three exams this week so I won't be able to play with it much until the weekend...
Interestingly, my free AC voltage detector arrived on Friday while my scope didn't arrive until today (Tuesday) even though they were shipped from the same place within half an hour of each other. I can't even guess how this would have happened logistically.
For some reason they prefer to put the free ac detector in its own box instead of opening the Rigol box and throwing it in. It is odd though that they never seem to arrive at the same time! That has happened to me twice in a row!
but I suspect that many people would not be happy if they found the manufacturer's seal had been broken.
but I suspect that many people would not be happy if they found the manufacturer's seal had been broken.
I agree this is likely the reason.
I've just unpacked my DS1054Z and hooked up a probe (with the x1 setting) to the Compensation Signal Output Terminal and hit Auto and seen a measurement of 30V (vertical scale = 5.00V. Is that correct ?
Spot on thanks Alan. Appreciate the fast response :)
..I guess it's a popular device, but why? :-// :-DDNo idea. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that it is probably the best bang for buck scope ever built (expecially if we take into account the hacking options) :-DD
Looks like Adafruit has 6 of these in stock, although there is a $50 premium over what seems to be the typical price.
http://www.adafruit.com/products/2145 (http://www.adafruit.com/products/2145)
Looks like Adafruit has 6 of these in stock, although there is a $50 premium over what seems to be the typical price.Adafruit need to be a bit more careful with their advertising. The first item in their bullet point list of features for the DS1054Z on that page reads:
http://www.adafruit.com/products/2145 (http://www.adafruit.com/products/2145)
In contrast with Germany, the distributor in the Netherlands had at least one DS1054Z in stock yesterday for a friend of mine. He should receive it tomorrow. :)Yes, they did, not sure if they still can offer it from stock. Just write them an e-mail and ask, you get a reply very quickly.
QuoteIn contrast with Germany, the distributor in the Netherlands had at least one DS1054Z in stock yesterday for a friend of mine. He should receive it tomorrow.
Ik ben Belg van origine, dus kan het laten leveren naar omgeving Leuven =)
Ja Eindelijk van dat gezeur af ;)Ik ben Belg van origine, dus kan het laten leveren naar omgeving Leuven =)
Ik denk dat als je uiteindelijk koopt een DSO, velen van ons hier zal een hartaanval hebben. ;)
If you are in Europe, you can get a unit from batterfly. Most of the rigol equipment I have was sourced from them and they have very reasonble prices and delivery times. The scope shipped in 24h and I had had it with me in 5 working days. And they put some swag in the box for you too.FWIW, TEquipment would put that bundle at ~$461 shipped after applying the 6% discount (according to xe.com, 374EUR ~= 474USD), so near US prices before VAT.
http://www.batterfly.com/shop/oscilloscopi/70MHz/rigol-ds1054z (http://www.batterfly.com/shop/oscilloscopi/70MHz/rigol-ds1054z)
They also have a nice bundle of the DS1054Z with a hakko FX888D for 374€ which is a good bargain.
http://www.batterfly.com/shop/oscilloscopi/70MHz/bundle-ds1054z-fx888d (http://www.batterfly.com/shop/oscilloscopi/70MHz/bundle-ds1054z-fx888d)
The nice thing is that they have units in stock and they keep the information updated on their web site.
These folks are from Italy.
They also have a nice bundle of the DS1054Z with a hakko FX888D for 374€ which is a good bargain.
http://www.batterfly.com/shop/oscilloscopi/70MHz/bundle-ds1054z-fx888d (http://www.batterfly.com/shop/oscilloscopi/70MHz/bundle-ds1054z-fx888d)
I’m considering buying DS1054Z but because I’m “young player” in electronics I would like to ask you guys about something.
That scope has 50 MHz BW and 250 MSa/s on four channels. That gives exactly 5 times more sample rate than BW which is enough with sin(x)/x interpolation. But if we increase BW using that hack you’ve mentioned up to 100 MHz the situation changes and we get only 2.5 times the max BW. Can you tell me how that influences the readings
Does it make sense at all to have scope with 100MHz and only 250 MSa/s?
That scope has 50 MHz BW and 250 MSa/s on four channels. That gives exactly 5 times more sample rate than BW which is enough with sin(x)/x interpolation. But if we increase BW using that hack you’ve mentioned up to 100 MHz the situation changes and we get only 2.5 times the max BW. Can you tell me how that influences the readings and if that can cause aliasing? What is the theoretical limitation to avoid aliasing? How that issue is solved in 1104Z model if it has 100MHz and 250 MSa/s (4ch) as default?
Does it make sense at all to have scope with 100MHz and only 250 MSa/s?
Simple: It means you don't actually get 100MHz bandwidth.
If you know the input signal is bandlimited (for example, it came out of a lowpass filter), you can use the full bandwidth.
So to sum up (if I understood correctly):
1) 1104Z IS a real 100MHz scope even while using 4 channels
So to sum up (if I understood correctly):
1) 1104Z IS a real 100MHz scope even while using 4 channels
Can anyone make some tests or show some examples what is the difference while measuring some 100MHz signals on one and four channels using upgraded 1045 model?
For a 100 MHz BW, 250 MS/s is enough to represent the original signal as it complies with the Nyquist theorem.
Maybe if you were looking at the input and output of a radio transmitter. (But even without an example, I think it's important to understand what the real limitation is.)If you know the input signal is bandlimited (for example, it came out of a lowpass filter), you can use the full bandwidth.Aside from decoding in the digital realm, when exactly would you be looking at 3 or 4 independent signals which you knew were all band-limited to 100MHz?
IMO, unless decoding/examining digital signals of a known speed, the analog BW of the DS1000Z when running 3/4 channels should be considered ~25MHz (unless the DS1054Z/DS1074Z have filtering in the gain-stage).It's misleading to describe it that way, because people will think that you can't see signals > ~25MHz, which is not true. If you said alias-free bandwidth, that would be clearer.
Has anyone applied a 150MHz signal in 4 channel mode and looked for aliasing?Can anyone make some tests or show some examples what is the difference while measuring some 100MHz signals on one and four channels using upgraded 1045 model?There's some in the middle of this thread somewhere. The tests have been done. The results have been published (see the first part of this reply).
Maybe if you were looking at the input and output of a radio transmitter.
It's misleading to describe it that way, because people will think that you can't see signals > ~25MHz, which is not true.
For a 100 MHz BW, 250 MS/s is enough to represent the original signal as it complies with the Nyquist theorem.
Technically true, but it's only useful to musicians, not electrical engineers.
The transmitter in my example has IQ inputs, and I also need to look at the LO :)Maybe if you were looking at the input and output of a radio transmitter.
That's 2 channels - not a limitation, in terms of the sampling rate - and so not applicable.
What's the name of the logic fallacy that marmad is employing here?It's misleading to describe it that way, because people will think that you can't see signals > ~25MHz, which is not true.Only people that don't understand what we're talking about. OTOH, using your logic, I could describe my Rigol DS2302 as being a 450MHz DSO, since I can clearly see those signals.
EDIT: BTW, every time I've written about this, I've used terms like "a truly usable BW" or "a practical BW", etc. to indicate that it's not the actual BW of the DSO - but the 'workable' BW in many circumstances.Above you called it "analog BW" :-//
What's the name of the logic fallacy that marmad is employing here?It's misleading to describe it that way, because people will think that you can't see signals > ~25MHz, which is not true.Only people that don't understand what we're talking about. OTOH, using your logic, I could describe my Rigol DS2302 as being a 450MHz DSO, since I can clearly see those signals.
Above you called it "analog BW" :-//
and that it can sample at it's highest rate (without fear of aliasing) that XX MHz with all N channels ON. The DS1104Z can not - period.
Has anyone here actually proof that the DS1104Z can not do 100 MHz on all 4 channels at same time?The DS1104Z can do 100 MHz on all 4 channels at same time, however if the signal contains frequencies beyond 125 MHz you get aliasing when all 4 channels are enabled. 125 MHz is dangerously close to 100 MHz which means that if you really need 100MHz with all 4 channels enabled you might want to look further.
100 MHz scope == proper filter in the analog frontend to limit max. frequency to 100 MHz, period.100 MHz scope means that you can expect that the -3dB point of the analog front-end is at least 100 Mhz, it does not say anything about the attenuation of higher frequencies. It is not possible to create an analog filter that passes all signals below 100 MHz with little or no attenuation and at the same time completely blocks any signal with frequency higher than 100 MHz. Even with a very steep filter (which tend to have undesirable side effects) it is still possible that frequency components above the Nyquist frequency make it to the ADC resulting in aliasing artifacts.
Analog channel: 1 GSa/s (single-channel),
500 MSa/s (dual-channel), 250 MSa/s (three/four-channel)
and simillar goes for memory depth. more channels=less bandw. and memory depth.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=112665
in img tags)Has anyone here actually proof that the DS1104Z can not do 100 MHz on all 4 channels at same time?
For me the analog frontend should just limit the max. frequency to make sure that there is no conflict with the corresponding ADC specs
and that it can sample at it's highest rate (without fear of aliasing) that XX MHz with all N channels ON. The DS1104Z can not - period.
But with all 4 channels on, 250MSa/s, Nyquist is still 125 MHz, right? Am I missing something?
Has anyone here actually proof that the DS1104Z can not do 100 MHz on all 4 channels at same time?
Or are the speculations just that it can not, because it is supposed to have no fancy anti-aliasing filter or whatever it might be called?
For me the analog frontend should just limit the max. frequency to make sure that there is no conflict with the corresponding ADC specs (sample rate) in the path beyond,
and my understanding is that a 100 MHz scope has proper filtering by default to take care of this requirement in combination with > 200 MS/s ADC.
100 MHz scope == proper filter in the analog frontend to limit max. frequency to 100 MHz, period.
Isn't the anti-aliasing filter just a band pass filter?
How complex can that be?
Mark_O: can't one just turn off the other channels to check how the signal looks in one channel mode if you get a feeling something might be off? Then if you have confirmed it, you can safely turn on the rest of the channels knowing that what you see is the accual signal. Of course, this assmums that one is triggering off the channel in question.
Would there be any accual problems going about it this way?
P.S. I know that that would be a hassel and I'm not saying it's convenient. Nor am I saying I understand this stuff all that well, it's just an idea I got while reading the previous comments.
What about the other Rigol series, and their reliable bandwidth?
For the Rigol DS1104Z: ALL 4 channels, 25 MHz is reliable bandwidth.
For the Rigol DS2302A: ALL 2 channels, what is the reliable bandwidth?
But even when you are only debugging 25 MHz designs with this scope, you will still have the risk of higher frequencies right? I mean, even if you use it as a 25 MHz scope, there could be higher frequencies that give false readings? Or do I miss understand here?No, you are correct - but in general, you shouldn't be attempting to measure signals that contain such high frequncy components (just as, for example, you wouldn't want to be measuring the same signals with only 1 channel on, but a sampling rate of 250MSa/s due to your time base/memory depth settings).
For the Rigol DS2302A: ALL 2 channels, what is the reliable bandwidth?200MHz (2GSa/s) is perfectly fine on the DS2000A. 300MHz starts to push the filtering boundaries a bit - and as many of us have mentioned in other threads, the DS2302A starts to run into the same possible problem (although much less severely) when you run it with both channels on (1GSa/s - 500MHz Nyquist).
But even when you are only debugging 25 MHz designs with this scope, you will still have the risk of higher frequencies right? I mean, even if you use it as a 25 MHz scope, there could be higher frequencies that give false readings? Or do I miss understand here?No, you are correct - but in general, you shouldn't be attempting to measure signals that contain such high frequncy components (just as, for example, you wouldn't want to be measuring the same signals with only 1 channel on, but a sampling rate of 250MSa/s due to your time base/memory depth settings).
Another option would be to enable the 20MHz bandwidth limiter of each channel when using 3 or 4 channels. The DS1000Z appears to be using AD5207 (http://www.analog.com/static/imported-files/data_sheets/AD5207.pdf)s for gain adjustment of the amplifiers in the front end - and I'm assuming that they apply the bandwidth limiting there.
sorry .. I just had to chuckle. I own several Tektronix 2465B's that will do 4-channel and 400 Mhz acquisitions in their sleep!
With four channels on the DS1054Z might be a better scope than the DS1104Z because it has a much harder cutoff filter (above 50MHz).
as far as the screen size, it's amazing how much great engineering was accomplished with the eye-strain and mental anguish caused by staring at a small CRT.
rehashing the analog versus digital oscilloscope comparison is ... sophomoric at best.
I was reacting to what $400 can buy if you need high-bandwidth and multiple channels, and relaxed triggering requirements.
perhaps I simply felt that after 23 pages, this thread could use an injection of analog humor.
as far as the screen size, it's amazing how much great engineering was accomplished with the eye-strain and mental anguish caused by staring at a small CRT.
I seem to remember having no problems at all staring at my Tek 465 all day and night.
W7NGA, can you do a single shot 400MHz on 4 channels with your Tektronix 2465B? The answer is no.
This is comparing apples and pears.
As my aim was to free it from its chains 8) i thought I should test it's performance before and after applying the upgrade. The result surprised me!
To me it seems that at least my sample of the DS1054Z was not bandwidth limited to 50 MHZ out of the box.
...that implies that it's BW frequency response is at least XX at -3db - and that it can sample at it's highest rate (without fear of aliasing) that XX MHz with all N channels ON. The DS1104Z can not - period. Since it does not adhere to these normal expectations, this would be no different than breaking one of the other implied specifications: e.g. that a 300MHz DSO has a 450MHz BW (even though that BW is at -9db).
Does anybody know if the DS1104Z supports ETS (Equivalent Time Sampling)?
Does anybody know if the DS1104Z supports ETS (Equivalent Time Sampling)?
No, none of the Rigol UltraVision DSOs do.
I disagree with the simplicity of this answer.What a surprise! :)
They have something functionally equivalent.This is yet another new theory of yours. ;D
On a DPO style oscilloscope using only digital triggering...But who said the Rigol UltraVision scopes are only using digital triggering? It's not specified in any Rigol datasheets.
...the reconstruction happens before triggering which yields a comparable trigger to clock delay measurement. If this did not happen, then timing measurements would be limited to the base sample rate which even at 1 GS/s would only be 1 nanosecond which is pretty poor.Why don't you look at a DPO that is actually advertised as using a digital trigger? Such as the Siglent SDS2000 (http://www.siglent.com/DataSheet/EN/SDS2000_DataSheet_EN.pdf) - a 2GSa/s DSO (just like the Rigol DS2000) - that, according to it's datasheet, has a trigger timing and resolution of precisely 1ns.
On a DPO style oscilloscope using only digital triggering...But who said the Rigol UltraVision scopes are only using digital triggering? It's not specified in any Rigol datasheets.
Quote...the reconstruction happens before triggering which yields a comparable trigger to clock delay measurement. If this did not happen, then timing measurements would be limited to the base sample rate which even at 1 GS/s would only be 1 nanosecond which is pretty poor.Why don't you look at a DPO that is actually advertised as using a digital trigger? Such as the Siglent SDS2000 (http://www.siglent.com/DataSheet/EN/SDS2000_DataSheet_EN.pdf) - a 2GSa/s DSO (just like the Rigol DS2000) - that, according to it's datasheet, has a trigger timing and resolution of precisely 1ns.
Normally, when people talk about ETS, they're talking about the ability to sample at higher than RT rates. Even if what you're describing is functionally equivalent inside the DSO, it's operationally completely different - and thus irrelevant - to the end user of the DSO.
Mark_O: can't one just turn off the other channels to check how the signal looks in one channel mode if you get a feeling something might be off? Then if you have confirmed it, you can safely turn on the rest of the channels knowing that what you see is the accual signal. Of course, this assmums that one is triggering off the channel in question.
Would there be any accual problems going about it this way?
P.S. I know that that would be a hassel and I'm not saying it's convenient. Nor am I saying I understand this stuff all that well, it's just an idea I got while reading the previous comments.
...the reconstruction happens before triggering which yields a comparable trigger to clock delay measurement. If this did not happen, then timing measurements would be limited to the base sample rate which even at 1 GS/s would only be 1 nanosecond which is pretty poor.
And then I will look at the early LeCroy DSOs which were advertised as having digital triggers and find that they had timing resolution significantly higher than their real time sample rate would suggest.
It is relevant to an end user who expects ETS like performance out of his DSO which says nothing about ETS in its documentation or marketing.
Are you suggesting these Rigol oscilloscopes are crippled compared to the obsolete ETS oscilloscopes they replaced?
Capture a pair of synchronous high frequency sine waves in single shot mode and measure the resolution of the delay between them. Or do the same with one or more fast transition edges which displays pattern sensitive jitter or controlled delay. Can these oscilloscopes make these measurements?
...the reconstruction happens before triggering which yields a comparable trigger to clock delay measurement. If this did not happen, then timing measurements would be limited to the base sample rate which even at 1 GS/s would only be 1 nanosecond which is pretty poor.
In depends on context whether a 1 ns timing measurement is poor or not.
QuoteAnd then I will look at the early LeCroy DSOs which were advertised as having digital triggers and find that they had timing resolution significantly higher than their real time sample rate would suggest.
That's true, but so what? I have a 9300-series LeCroy, and two 9400-series. And you are correct about their timing resolution/capabilities. But they all had ETS (well, RIS), so they got that for "free", because they had a clock (or facsimile thereof) that ran 40x-50x faster. I see interpolation capabilities in the ps range. Back about 50 years ago, when I was using LeCroy scopes in the Physics labs at the Uni, picosecond events were extremely important. But the current "affordable" scopes we're talking about were never intended for that purpose.
QuoteIt is relevant to an end user who expects ETS like performance out of his DSO which says nothing about ETS in its documentation or marketing.
Why would anyone expect that? :-// If it says nothing about some aspect of its performance, I have no expectations.
QuoteAre you suggesting these Rigol oscilloscopes are crippled compared to the obsolete ETS oscilloscopes they replaced?
Marmad may not, but I would. Though I wouldn't use the word crippled. They're simply more limited, in some ways. And I also don't understand why it would surprise you that scopes designed to sell for 50x less, would be less capable in some regards?
QuoteCapture a pair of synchronous high frequency sine waves in single shot mode and measure the resolution of the delay between them. Or do the same with one or more fast transition edges which displays pattern sensitive jitter or controlled delay. Can these oscilloscopes make these measurements?
No. Not really. Not effectively. The 1000z series doesn't specify, but the higher-performance 2000-series can have up to 2 ns of skew (nominally 1 ns) between the two channels. That's up to 4 clock periods at it's max sample rate. And there's enough jitter in their trigger systems (somewhere between 4-8 ns, IIRC) to make that look small by comparison.
The smallest resolution on any trigger-related setting in the 1000z specs is 8 ns, and for the 2000 series is 2 ns. Step increments are 4 ns* and 1 ns, respectively. What does that tell you?
*AFAIK. I hope Marmad (or anyone with those Rigols) will correct me, if that is incorrect about the step-size. The setting may be less, even if it can't really honor it. But the 1000z may have a 1 GHz clock, even when it's not using it to drive sampling directly.
Nowadays, SPI busses aren't just 2 MHz, or 5, or 8 MHz. I've got one here that's running at 60 MHz, and I wouldn't be surprised to hear about faster. So let's say he's looking at that signal on his embedded system. He's perplexed, because he can't get the darn thing to decode properly. It should work (a la, pascal), because it's "only" 60 MHz. But there are numerous problems that prevent it.
The Rigol user manual is explicit about supporting a timebase scale of 5 ns/div.
Without interpolation or reconstruction at 250 MS/s, that would produce a pretty awful looking display of a 3.5 nanosecond transition time signal (single-shot or not)
I wish someone would do the basic simple tests which would reveal how exactly these DSOs perform and then compile a wiki with the results. I would do it myself but lack the necessary hardware, namely the DSO.
The Rigol user manual is explicit about supporting a timebase scale of 5 ns/div.
Yes, given it's maximum sample rate of 1GSa/s.
QuoteWithout interpolation or reconstruction at 250 MS/s, that would produce a pretty awful looking display of a 3.5 nanosecond transition time signal (single-shot or not)
Who would think that the DSO could produce a decent looking 3.5ns rise time without interpolation when it's only sampling every 4ns? When looking at 5ns/div @ 250MSa/s (unless you're just examining the paltry 15 acquired sample points), the entire displayed waveform is nothing but interpolation. Expecting 'detail' at that time base and sample rate is fairly silly.
QuoteI wish someone would do the basic simple tests which would reveal how exactly these DSOs perform and then compile a wiki with the results. I would do it myself but lack the necessary hardware, namely the DSO.
Virtually ANYTHING can be bought and returned within 30 days if you're willing to absorb the shipping costs. Instead of posting new speculation every few days (a couple of weeks ago it was that the Rigol secretly turned off sin(x)/x interpolation at higher sample rates to hide interleaving errors), perhaps you should get one of the scopes, run the tests you want and post your results - returning the DSO afterwards. I would be curious to see your results, and no offense, but judging by your posting frequency here, you have the requisite free time. :)
Nowadays, SPI busses aren't just 2 MHz, or 5, or 8 MHz. I've got one here that's running at 60 MHz, and I wouldn't be surprised to hear about faster. So let's say he's looking at that signal on his embedded system. He's perplexed, because he can't get the darn thing to decode properly. It should work (a la, pascal), because it's "only" 60 MHz. But there are numerous problems that prevent it.
Yep. This is why discussing Nyquist limits is a mistake in relation to DSOs. The "ten to one" rule for sample rate vs. bandwidth isn't predicted by theory, it comes from experience working with real signals.
nb. Theory can justify the rule (hindsight vision is 20:20...)
As far as buying and then returning an item I never intended to keep, I consider that rather dishonest.
Great! So where in the manual does it say that the fastest timebase scale is slower when more channels are used? I must have missed that or maybe Rigol left it out.
I obviously do not expect any detail faster than the analog bandwidth or between sample points but I do expect sin(x)/x reconstruction to produce something closely resembling a 3.5 nanosecond transition. All of the necessary information baring aliasing is there.
I still suspect they took steps to hide interleaving and aliasing errors. Run the above test and find out.
As far as buying and then returning an item I never intended to keep, I consider that rather dishonest.
...a sample rate to-bandwidth ratio of 4:1 is sufficient to produce reliable digital measurements.
So while we would all love to have a 10:1 ratio or even better, I think it is going a bit far to say we must have 10:1. No doubt that the sample rate when using 4 channels on the 1000Z scopes are there downside, but the price is incredible.
One could argue that if you planned to return it from the get go that that might not be so ethical.
I'd certainly argue that. The seller will have a hard time selling it as "new" if it's had 30 days use (especially since the DS1054Z has trial features that tick away as you use it).
So while we would all love to have a 10:1 ratio or even better, I think it is going a bit far to say we must have 10:1. No doubt that the sample rate when using 4 channels on the 1000Z scopes are there downside, but the price is incredible.
Does anybody know if the DS1104Z supports ETS (Equivalent Time Sampling)?
No, none of the Rigol UltraVision DSOs do.
Thanks marmad. That's interesting and, to a certain extent, somewhat disappointing.
Yep. People are arguing over this as if it were a $4000 oscilloscope, not $400.
For $400 the only question you should be asking is, "Where can I get one???"
Yep. People are arguing over this as if it were a $4000 oscilloscope, not $400.
For $400 the only question you should be asking is, "Where can I get one???"
Agreed. That's why it is such a shame that the main thread dedicated to what is probably the best oscilloscope buy in quite a few years has been polluted with irrelevant and unhelpful noise. Perhaps the thread could be tidied up so it can add value long into the future ?
Yep. People are arguing over this as if it were a $4000 oscilloscope, not $400.
For $400 the only question you should be asking is, "Where can I get one???"
Agreed. That's why it is such a shame that the main thread dedicated to what is probably the best oscilloscope buy in quite a few years has been polluted with irrelevant and unhelpful noise. Perhaps the thread could be tidied up so it can add value long into the future ?
+1
Yeah, but where is my logic analyzer????
Yeah, but where is my logic analyzer????
It has options for serial decoding, trigger on serial events/serial data, etc.
Agreed. That's why it is such a shame that the main thread dedicated to what is probably the best oscilloscope buy in quite a few years has been polluted with irrelevant and unhelpful noise. Perhaps the thread could be tidied up so it can add value long into the future ?
Agreed. That's why it is such a shame that the main thread dedicated to what is probably the best oscilloscope buy in quite a few years has been polluted with irrelevant and unhelpful noise. Perhaps the thread could be tidied up so it can add value long into the future ?
One could argue that if you planned to return it from the get go that that might not be so ethical.
I'd certainly argue that. The seller will have a hard time selling it as "new" if it's had 30 days use (especially since the DS1054Z has trial features that tick away as you use it).
...but the basic dishonesty of doing this would haunt me.
...but the basic dishonesty of doing this would haunt me.
I see your point, David - OTOH, I'm not sure why you think making continual speculations in this thread (without any proof) that Rigol is deliberately taking steps to hide errors in this DSO is much better.
I would be the first to admit that companies (and, unfortunately, often Chinese companies) are sometimes misleading - or not forthcoming - about problems/faults in their products (and Rigol is certainly no exception). And I have definitely questioned the veracity of posted specifications myself in this forum - but I've tried to do it based on conflicting or contrary (or, admittedly :-[, sometimes misunderstood) information/evidence related to the product itself - rather than history.
So unless/until you have some corroboration that supports your speculations, perhaps you might give them the benefit of the doubt? When I originally suggested you buy one and test it, I was fairly sure you would find yourself impressed by the value for money (even given it's shortcomings) - and end up keeping it in the end. :)
I have pointed to evidence others have published (even Rigol) which you have not addressed so I hardly believe at this point that you would consider direct evidence produced by me.
..but neither of the Rigol DSOs I might consider will do anything significant for me that I cannot already do with my existing analog and digital oscilloscopes
Apparently their waveform reconstruction and triggering is defective
Getting back to more practical information: it would be good if an owner with the necessary test gear charted the frequency response of the DSO before implementing the 100MHz BW option (or after removing it).
Before the "upgrade" I measured the bandwidth as almost exactly 50 MHz with a sharp rolloff above 50 MHz, consistent with bandwidth limiting in software.
Stan Perkins did that:QuoteBefore the "upgrade" I measured the bandwidth as almost exactly 50 MHz with a sharp rolloff above 50 MHz, consistent with bandwidth limiting in software.
Quote..but neither of the Rigol DSOs I might consider will do anything significant for me that I cannot already do with my existing analog and digital oscilloscopes
So I'm curious: what DSO do you own that can capture up to 65000 separate waveforms for decoding or analysis, over a span of time from microseconds to days? :)
QuoteApparently their waveform reconstruction and triggering is defective
No, I think you're confused about the meaning of "apparently" (as with "evidence" above :)). Their waveform reconstruction and triggering in the UltraVision DSOs appears to be fine - unless someone proves otherwise with tests.
Stan Perkins did that:QuoteBefore the "upgrade" I measured the bandwidth as almost exactly 50 MHz with a sharp rolloff above 50 MHz, consistent with bandwidth limiting in software.
I saw that post, but it's a bit vague. He doesn't specify the slope of the roll-off (specifically, the attenuation at 125MHz), and he mentions that he believes it's being done in software - although this would be a different method than Rigol has used in the past (at least, it's different than the DS2000 - perhaps the DS1052E/DS1102E also uses software limiting?).
EDIT: Also, there has been at least one conflicting report to Stan's posted here. (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg528697/#msg528697)
I have a Tektronix 7834 analog storage oscilloscope for making 4 channel 300 MHz captures at 250,000+ sweeps per second (but not at the same time) over a span of seconds to minutes. Technically it can go for hours but it is already difficult enough to use and bistable storage mode is painful on the eyes. I have a pair of 2230s for making 4 channel captures over hours to days if necessary.
I saw that post, but it's a bit vague. He doesn't specify the slope of the roll-off
and he mentions that he believes it's being done in software - although this would be a different method than Rigol has used in the past (at least, it's different than the DS2000 - perhaps the DS1052E/DS1102E also uses software limiting?).
"Sharp"
He doesn't specify the slope of the roll-off (specifically, the attenuation at 125MHz)
Software makes sense. I assume they made no hardware modifications to the existing DS1074Z/DS1104Z 'scope.
I have a Tektronix 7834 analog storage oscilloscope for making 4 channel 300 MHz captures at 250,000+ sweeps per second (but not at the same time) over a span of seconds to minutes. Technically it can go for hours but it is already difficult enough to use and bistable storage mode is painful on the eyes. I have a pair of 2230s for making 4 channel captures over hours to days if necessary.
Neither of these have anything close to the storage capabilities of the DS1000Z or DS2000. The 7834 is limited (according to it's datasheet) to 30 minutes of time,
and the 2230's can save a maximum of 3 waveforms (each @ 1k compressed). There is simply no way you can, for example, capture and store a 14k waveform once per second for 18 hours.
I don't have the equipment to produce a clean sine wave close to 1GHz/500MHz (my DS2000's 1/2 channel Nyquist frequencies) - but even if I did, I'm not sure why I would spend time running tests to satisfy your (and your's alone, as far as I've read) suspicions.
That is a very short list even if you include various ways a 7834 may be used to crush invaders. :)
...but there are many things the Rigols cannot do that these can and they are the things I require.
Hmm well I can generate sigs up to 1.5 GHz with my DSA815 so I did some tests with my "upgraded" 1074Z with 4 channels on, so 250 MSa/s:
100 to 200 MHz.
Nice aliassing! notable the 200 MHz in, resulting in a 50 MHz displayed sine... (250-200 = 50, so the math checks out :P)
Hmm well I can generate sigs up to 1.5 GHz with my DSA815 so I did some tests with my "upgraded" 1074Z with 4 channels on, so 250 MSa/s:
100 to 200 MHz.
Nice aliassing! notable the 200 MHz in, resulting in a 50 MHz displayed sine... (250-200 = 50, so the math checks out :P)
The HW counter loses it above 100 MHz, until it folds back to < 100 MHz...
I think the 100 MHz example is displaying aliasing in the digitizer like I described but the variable persistence is concealing it as a thicker trace. The 120 MHz example definitely shows a problem but it is so extreme that I am not sure if something else is going on. The 160 MHz example shows what I expected the 100 MHz example to look like.
Thanks for these! Any chance you could do them one more time with sin(x)/x OFF (linear interpolation ON) just for a comparison? Perhaps it doesn't make much difference with a simple sine wave at 5 pts/div; you might try a set at the smallest timebase as well.See attachments.
Yup, correct. An oversight here. A single capture @ 100 MHz shows a "thin" trace like the others.I think the 100 MHz example is displaying aliasing in the digitizer like I described but the variable persistence is concealing it as a thicker trace. The 120 MHz example definitely shows a problem but it is so extreme that I am not sure if something else is going on. The 160 MHz example shows what I expected the 100 MHz example to look like.
The 100MHz example is the only one captured while the DSO is running - meaning a snapshot from the intensity buffer while capturing >10,000 waveforms per second. When the DSO is stopped, it's just the last captured waveform - as seen in the other 3 images.
That is a very short list even if you include various ways a 7834 may be used to crush invaders. :)
;D
Quote...but there are many things the Rigols cannot do that these can and they are the things I require.
No argument there - I was just trying to specify at least one way in which these new, cheap, deep-memory DSOs can outperform some of the great, older gear. I still keep and use my 35-year old Tek 212 - even though it only has a BW of 500kHz - because manufacturers still don't make inexpensive, lightweight, battery-operated, double-insulated (floating to 600V) DSOs - although they're getting closer.
I think the 100 MHz example is displaying aliasing in the digitizer like I described but the variable persistence is concealing it as a thicker trace. The 120 MHz example definitely shows a problem but it is so extreme that I am not sure if something else is going on. The 160 MHz example shows what I expected the 100 MHz example to look like.
The 100MHz example is the only one captured while the DSO is running - meaning a snapshot from the intensity buffer while capturing >10,000 waveforms per second. When the DSO is stopped, it's just the last captured waveform - as seen in the other 3 images.
Yup, correct. An oversight here. A single capture @ 100 MHz shows a "thin" trace like the others.
So, if I am understanding the traces:
100 MHz - ok
120 MHz - showing signs of a problem, getting bigger and smaller amplitude
160 MHz - aliasing to 80 MHz
200 MHz - aliasing to 50 MHz
Just out of curiosity, what would this test look like with a square wave?
Only the 120 MHz results looks weird to me but I think I know what causes it in this case. I have seen something similar which appeared to be related to the aperture time of the digitizer implying a non-linear frequency response but I do not think that is it.
As mentioned before, it's fairly easy to turn ON/OFF the 100MHz BW option with SCPI commands, and if the 50MHz BW device had a sharp enough roll-off implemented in the front-end (i.e. attenuating >= 125MHz >= -12db), it would be an alternative way to BW limit the device when using primarily 3/4 channels (while keeping the working BW around the stated 50MHz maximum).
So, if I am understanding the traces:
100 MHz - ok
120 MHz - showing signs of a problem, getting bigger and smaller amplitude
160 MHz - aliasing to80 MHz90 MHz
200 MHz - aliasing to 50 MHz
Just out of curiosity, what would this test look like with a square wave?
for us inexperienced scope users, are you saying that if you set up the scope to be a 100MHz device, it is still only as good as the 50MHz scope that it was sold as
and only good for signals up to 25MHz
They show exactly what you would expect given that the source has a high level of distortion; tracking generators do not have to be clean. The test in this case is not significant except on a gross scale and does not say anything useful about the DSO.I beg to differ. These screenshots show exactly what I expected given that the roll off of the analog front-end above 100+ MHz is not very steep.
And yes, the DS1104Z with all 4 channels turned on isn't much different than the stock DS1054Z with all 4 channels turned on.
for us inexperienced scope users, are you saying that if you set up the scope to be a 100MHz device, it is still only as good as the 50MHz scope that it was sold as
No. We're discussing the limits of *all* 100Mhz, 1Gsa/s oscilloscopes (and finding that the DS1054Z/DS1104Z is matching the theory perfectly, maybe even beating it a little...the analog input part seems to be better then 100MHz).and only good for signals up to 25MHz
And yes, the DS1104Z with all 4 channels turned on isn't much different than the stock DS1054Z with all 4 channels turned on.
Part of the difficulty here is using an oscilloscope in place of a logic analyser which would at least have the option of operating synchronously on a clocked data stream from SPI.
It is worth mentioning that accurately capturing a 60 MHz SPI signal may also present probing difficulties and active probes are not cheap and low-z probes are not ubiquitous (but they are easy to make). Just having a high bandwidth DSO with a fast sampling rate is not enough if probes with long ground connections are used or if the circuit cannot handle the capacitive loading of a high impedance passive probe or the low input resistance of a low-z probe.
I once designed in a pair of emitter followers to drive 50 ohm transmission lines in place of probes from something that was essentially a very fast SPI. This worked much better than the active probe I did not have.
But we have no side by side comparison with proper test equipment between a upgraded DS1054Z and a factory DS1104Z. There is still every possibility that Rigol is batching them at different speeds after factory testing. Just as with many CPUs the 'slower' ones may operate perfectly well (or good enough) at the higher speeds and faster chips may be badged as slower versions as they sell faster etc.
But to borrow and scale a phrase, a 100 MHz oscilloscope cannot track a 2.5 nanosecond edge but it should be able to measure a delay of 1.0 nanoseconds between two such edges.
QuoteQuoteAnd then I will look at the early LeCroy DSOs which were advertised as having digital triggers and find that they had timing resolution significantly higher than their real time sample rate would suggest.
That's true, but so what? I have a 9300-series LeCroy, and two 9400-series. And you are correct about their timing resolution/capabilities. But they all had ETS (well, RIS), so they got that for "free", because they had a clock (or facsimile thereof) that ran 40x-50x faster. I see interpolation capabilities in the ps range. Back about 50 years ago, when I was using LeCroy scopes in the Physics labs at the Uni, picosecond events were extremely important. But the current "affordable" scopes we're talking about were never intended for that purpose.
So what was the facsimile of the clock which allowed high resolution delay measurements? RIS as they describe it sure sounds like what I described where transition midpoint timing (*) is derived after reconstruction.
The Rigol user manual is explicit about supporting a timebase scale of 5 ns/div. Without interpolation or reconstruction at 250 MS/s, that would produce a pretty awful looking display of a 3.5 nanosecond transition time signal (single-shot or not)
...when the display resolution indicates that about a difference of 100 picoseconds should be visible; 800 points / 12 divisions = 66 points per division in the display record but some of that is used by the UI so 50 points per division is more realistic.
That then comes out to 100 picoseconds at 5 ns/div. Coincidentally, the delay calibration is *specified* in the user manual to be 100 picoseconds at 5 ns/div.
If it is not possible to see 100 picoseconds of delay difference using this oscilloscope, then it is odd that the delay compensation would support that resolution. Why support it if it cannot be seen anyway?
That is also insignificantly worse than the oldest 100 MHz ETS DSOs that I know of can do.
Now maybe the DS1104Z cannot do the above with a single shot acquisition, but it sure should be able to because it is not difficult and the hardware is capable of supporting it.
The online reference I like to give for various TDC designs is currently down do to hosting issues but the relevant part of the description for a transition midpoint timing TDC is "A resolution of around 10ps or so is possible when using a 16 bit pipeline ADC clocked at 80MHz or more." As I recall, these were popular in particle collision experiments because of their adequate resolution and accuracy and their very high measurement rate.
Binning based on analog front end of oscilloscopes? (ie. some BNC connectors leading to the ADC) Seems unlikely to me. If it fails at 100MHz it's almost certainly going to fail at 50MHz as well.
Distortion of the TG _is_ visible, but nothing spectacular, see attachments.
But we have no side by side comparison with proper test equipment between a upgraded DS1054Z and a factory DS1104Z. There is still every possibility that Rigol is batching them at different speeds after factory testing. Just as with many CPUs the 'slower' ones may operate perfectly well (or good enough) at the higher speeds and faster chips may be badged as slower versions as they sell faster etc.
Only a very tiny percentage of chips fail at high speeds but magically work at slower speeds.
Most binning is done where chips are designed to keep on working with some parts completely disabled. eg. A CPU could work with half the cache RAM if there's a failure in the other half, a GPU can disable a bank of SIMD processors if there's a defect there, etc.
Binning based on analog front end of oscilloscopes? (ie. some BNC connectors leading to the ADC) Seems unlikely to me. If it fails at 100MHz it's almost certainly going to fail at 50MHz as well.
So, if I am understanding the traces:
100 MHz - ok
120 MHz - showing signs of a problem, getting bigger and smaller amplitude
160 MHz - aliasing to80 MHz90 MHz
200 MHz - aliasing to 50 MHz
One small correction, above.
@pa3bca: As I've mentioned, since the DS1000Z series doesn't use the LMH6518 in the front-end, it would be nice to know how (and how well) it's handling BW limiting (both for the 20MHz per channel, as well as 50MHz/70MHz for model differentiation). On my DS2000, when I input a 20MHz signal and turn on the 20MHz channel limiter, the signal drops by almost a perfect -3dB. If I input a 100MHz signal, it will be down by approx. -13dB. What are your results given those same parameters?Ok.
Most binning is done where chips are designed to keep on working with some parts completely disabled.DRAM chips get binned based on their maximum achievable clock speed for given timings, supply voltages, power, etc. CPUs also get speed-binned based on their maximum achievable clock and the amount of power they draw to reach a given clock speed, same goes for CPLDs, FPGAs and just about all other forms of digital ICs.
They show exactly what you would expect given that the source has a high level of distortion; tracking generators do not have to be clean. The test in this case is not significant except on a gross scale and does not say anything useful about the DSO.
I beg to differ. These screenshots show exactly what I expected given that the roll off of the analog front-end above 100+ MHz is not very steep.
The distortion level of the 815 TG has _very_ limited impact on this. It is probably what causes the somewhat imperfect sine @ 100 MHz but I think the influence on the other measurements is irrelevant.
I did some measurements of the 815 TG with my "upgraded" 2072 at 50 and 100 MHz. It looks like the 2nd harmonics are down by approx. 20 dB, so 1/10 of the amplitude of the fundamental. Unlikely that this type of distortion renders the measurements not useful like you suggest.
The amplitude is down by (only) 50% at 200 MHz, so this shows clearly that you need to be very careful if the measured signal has components above say 100 MHz. they _will_ bleed through as aliases.
Distortion of the TG _is_ visible, but nothing spectacular, see attachments.
At 100 MHz:
100 MHz without BW limiting: 212 mV (-1.5 dB @ 100 MHz, this is an "upgraded" 1072Z :-))
100 MHz with 20 MHz BW limiting: 62.3 mV
20 log (62.3/212) = -10.6 dB
Thanks again! It doesn't seem quite as sharp a roll-off as on the DS2000. Could you please check 125MHz (the 3/4 channel Nyquist frequency) with the 20MHz BW limit on? Perhaps both with just 1 channel ON (1GSa/s), and then with all channels ON (250MSa/s)?125 MHz - 250 MSa/s and 1 GSa/s with and without 20 MHz BW filter. See attachments.
What I meant when I refereed to this is that the distortion from the TG is going to conceal the distortion in the DSO unlike that other test with the video I linked to where an RF synthesizer intended for receiver testing was used. The DSO will show aliasing from the TG distortion products.Ah yes I now see what you mean. Unfortunately I have nothing here (readily available) that can produce a 100MHz-ish signal where spurious is down more than 50 dB. Could build it (say a 5 pole low-pass after a 100 MHz generator) but not now.
125 MHz - 250 MSa/s and 1 GSa/s with and without 20 MHz BW filter. See attachments.Thanks once again for your time and efforts! Not long after I asked you to run the tests, I found a BW chart posted in another thread specifying the 20MHz BW :-[ (part of the problem with spread-out information on this blog) - so sorry for asking for the duplicated effort.
This time the shots are taken with the scope in running mode and not n one shot mode. Note the "interesting" amplitude modulation on the first two screenshots, with freq = Nyquist. 125 MHz.
The frequency counter lost it though, even with 1 GSa/s.
But to borrow and scale a phrase, a 100 MHz oscilloscope cannot track a 2.5 nanosecond edge but it should be able to measure a delay of 1.0 nanoseconds between two such edges.
Perhaps it 'should', but if the spec says the interchannel delays can be as much as 1-2 ns, using it for such measurements isn't something I'd care to rely on.
QuoteAnd then I will look at the early LeCroy DSOs which were advertised as having digital triggers and find that they had timing resolution significantly higher than their real time sample rate would suggest.
That's true, but so what? I have a 9300-series LeCroy, and two 9400-series. And you are correct about their timing resolution/capabilities. But they all had ETS (well, RIS), so they got that for "free", because they had a clock (or facsimile thereof) that ran 40x-50x faster. I see interpolation capabilities in the ps range. Back about 50 years ago, when I was using LeCroy scopes in the Physics labs at the Uni, picosecond events were extremely important. But the current "affordable" scopes we're talking about were never intended for that purpose.
QuoteSo what was the facsimile of the clock which allowed high resolution delay measurements? RIS as they describe it sure sounds like what I described where transition midpoint timing (*) is derived after reconstruction.
I haven't researched the mechanism they used to implement it, but the 9400 (surprisingly the older generation of the two) has an absolute time-base accuracy spec of +/-10ps, and can do relative interpolation as you're describing, down to 5ps. My 9300 may be better yet, but the manual is still packed away.
QuoteThat then comes out to 100 picoseconds at 5 ns/div. Coincidentally, the delay calibration is *specified* in the user manual to be 100 picoseconds at 5 ns/div.
It's not a coincidence at all. But it would be an easy trap to fall into (as I suspect you are) to then assume this implies something about the timebase capabilities of the hardware. When instead it simply reflects a display-mapping capability.
QuoteThat is also insignificantly worse than the oldest 100 MHz ETS DSOs that I know of can do.
Probably true, and reflective of the fact that these are not ETS DSOs. Which is kind of what Marmad and I have been trying to tell you. >:D
QuoteNow maybe the DS1104Z cannot do the above with a single shot acquisition, but it sure should be able to because it is not difficult and the hardware is capable of supporting it.
;D ;D ;D ::) "should"? "it is not difficult"? "the hardware is capable"? That's a lot of assertions for one sentence. Sadly there are many things that are not difficult, yet many DSO manufacturers leave them out. And while there are many technique that could be used to improve the temporal resolution of a scope, that doesn't mean that Rigol incorporated any of them... perhaps due to cost, or difficulty trying to merge them with intensity grading, which they felt was more important/valuable.
QuoteThe online reference I like to give for various TDC designs is currently down do to hosting issues but the relevant part of the description for a transition midpoint timing TDC is "A resolution of around 10ps or so is possible when using a 16 bit pipeline ADC clocked at 80MHz or more." As I recall, these were popular in particle collision experiments because of their adequate resolution and accuracy and their very high measurement rate.
Yes, it was the nuclear physics lab that I was doing particle collision experiments with the LeCroys, back in the olden days. Not really the 50 years I mentioned, but close enough that my recollections of details are extremely vague. But I've spent a lot of time working with my own (antique) LeCroys, so I know them pretty well. And I do rather like the 4000x4000 vector graphics displays (though the burn-in not so much).
Do we know what ADC the DS1054Z uses?
Only the 120 MHz results looks weird to me but I think I know what causes it in this case. I have seen something similar which appeared to be related to the aperture time of the digitizer implying a non-linear frequency response but I do not think that is it.
The 120MHz result is what I would expect as the sine wave frequency starts to approach the border of the Nyquist frequency (125MHz) - the appearance of amplitude modulation due to 'leakage' (perfectly reproducing a frequency exactly half that of the sampling rate only works in theory). As the frequency reaches Nyquist, the AM will become more extreme. At some point past Nyquist, there is the reappearance of an alias that looks like a normally amplified sine wave again.
Only the 120 MHz results looks weird to me but I think I know what causes it in this case. I have seen something similar which appeared to be related to the aperture time of the digitizer implying a non-linear frequency response but I do not think that is it.
The 120MHz result is what I would expect as the sine wave frequency starts to approach the border of the Nyquist frequency (125MHz) - the appearance of amplitude modulation due to 'leakage' (perfectly reproducing a frequency exactly half that of the sampling rate only works in theory). As the frequency reaches Nyquist, the AM will become more extreme. At some point past Nyquist, there is the reappearance of an alias that looks like a normally amplified sine wave again.
I agree in principle although I would not call it leakage. I took another look at that test and did some tests of my own to replicate it. What I see does look like an alias folded back below the Nyquist frequency and relatively close to the fundamental. What I was saying in my later post is that we cannot know if this was produced in the DSO or if it originated from the test signal because the later has much higher distortion than the DSO has.
It is tedious to do but looking at the 120 MHz example carefully, it looks like a 120 MHz fundamental which is expected with a large spur at 95 MHz and offhand I do not see a way to produce that with aliasing in this case so I think it is just distortion in the source.
Using seronday's chart (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-inside-picture/msg337710/#msg337710), I've revamped my earlier figure showing the (even bigger) risk of aliasing if not limiting the BW to 20MHz when running with 3/4 channels on. The roll-off of the DS1000Z is so slow, that frequency content above Nyquist could be aliasing as high as almost -2db when using 3/4 channels @ 250MSa/s.
Analog ICs may get binned based on linearity, noise, bandwidth, offsets, current draw, etc.
The binning if they did this would be for distortion produced anywhere from the BNC to digitizer.
Based on what we know about the amplifiers and ADCs used, it could vary by about 12 dB or so.
The reference dB was 0.98, so 125Mhz should be at around -3.2dB (given the -2.2 reading), no?Thanks for pointing out the error. I screwed-up in a few different ways when I edited together the charts: I didn't move from log scale to linear for dB; I didn't fix seronday's odd BW scaling; and most importantly - I forgot that his chart was made on an unaltered DS1074Z - so it reflects a "70MHz" BW limit.
Did a quick re-test with FTT on. TG at 120 MHz. THis is the best (resolution) I can get at these settings.Well better resolution is possible. See attached for FFT's with the TG at 120, 110 and 100 MHz.
The 120 MHz component can be clearly seen, and it looks like at 130 MHz there is another one (confabulated by the scope :( ). Exactly mirrored around the 125 MHz nyquist.
hmmm..
that is probably price without vat...on batronix....and that's not the best price in europe it seems to me (marmad already mentioned another option
Me? I'm gonna relax and enjoy my 4-channel, top-build-quality, sub-100Mhz-with-four-channels-enabled, 300 Euro oscilloscope... :-+ (thanks, Rigol!)
They tried to prevent it but they didn't use the algorithm properly and the private key kind of leaked, don't recall the details, they are buried in the monster thread somewhere.
(part of the problem with spread-out information on this blog)
Definitely a DSO artifact, and not caused by spurious/harmonics of the TG..When the upper and lower sidebands created by sampling start overlapping (when approaching Nyquist), first you can get false AM (taught as "leakage" by an old EE teacher of mine) and then aliases.
The AM you saw in the earlier screenshot of the 120 MHz signal is definitely caused by mixing this 120 MHz and the confabulated 130 MHz by the DSO.
It is tedious to do but looking at the 120 MHz example carefully, it looks like a 120 MHz fundamental which is expected with a large spur at 95 MHz and offhand I do not see a way to produce that with aliasing in this case so I think it is just distortion in the source.No, it's a byproduct of sampling a frequency very close to Nyquist: a false appearance of amplitude modulation. The "modulating signal" is caused by leakage of the fundamental frequency. Here's an image I altered demonstrating the process in action (the red dots are the sample points connected via linear interpolation):
Quote from: David HessThe binning if they did this would be for distortion produced anywhere from the BNC to digitizer.
Based on what we know about the amplifiers and ADCs used, it could vary by about 12 dB or so.
As much as that? That's surprising.
I assume this is what the self calibration is for.
Does that affect bandwidth or just voltage measurements?
Do we know what ADC the DS1054Z uses?
Just posted the datasheet (Hittite website: HMCAD1511 (https://www.hittite.com/products/view.html/view/HMCAD1511)) right above your comment two minutes before you posted this. ;D
What I meant when I refereed to this is that the distortion from the TG is going to conceal the distortion in the DSO unlike that other test with the video I linked to where an RF synthesizer intended for receiver testing was used. The DSO will show aliasing from the TG distortion products.
Ah yes I now see what you mean. Unfortunately I have nothing here (readily available) that can produce a 100MHz-ish signal where spurious is down more than 50 dB. Could build it (say a 5 pole low-pass after a 100 MHz generator) but not now.
But then again: are we going to see -50dB spurious signals back into the "passband" and into the display? with 8 bit A/D? what am I missing here...
Me? I'm gonna relax and enjoy my 4-channel, top-build-quality, sub-100Mhz-with-four-channels-enabled, 300 Euro oscilloscope... :-+ (thanks, Rigol!)that is probably price without vat...on batronix....
Check out the explanations for Gibbs phenomenon and how reconstruction of a perfect edge works toward the end.
D/A and A/D | Digital Show and Tell (Monty Montgomery @ xiph.org) - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM)
I will trade you links though. A friend forwarded this link to me. His daughter has to study this video for some class she is doing. Check out the explanations for Gibbs phenomenon and how reconstruction of a perfect edge works toward the end.I have found that video, and a couple of related ones by the same guy, to be the best things to refer someone to when they start some brain dead discourse about a sampled signal being a staircase or triangles or other bizarre notion.
D/A and A/D | Digital Show and Tell (Monty Montgomery @ xiph.org) - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIQ9IXSUzuM)
I have found that video, and a couple of related ones by the same guy, to be the best things to refer someone to when they start some brain dead discourse about a sampled signal being a staircase or triangles or other bizarre notion.
Are the samples taken at an instant in time (or in a narrow window) as the theories seem to suggest? In that case, what happens if you sample a sine wave at exactly twice the frequency (eg. 1kHz sine wave, 2kHz sampler)?
a) If I sample at the peaks/troughs, everything is OK.
b) If I sample at the zero-crossing points then the wave will completely disappear (all my samples will be zero).
c) I can also sample at any point between (a) and (b), getting a 1KHz wave with different amplitudes.
They could sort the scopes per brand, and by advertised bandwidth, and add a confirmed bandwidth next to it.
There is a guy on Ebay who rebuilds 150 MHz Tektronix 2445 oscilloscopes by removing the hardware bandwidth filter, setting a jumper to make the firmware think it is a 2465, and changing the faceplate to that of a 300 MHz 2465 oscilloscope. These faux 2465s do indeed have 300 MHz bandwidth or higher but because the original 2445 lacks the rather ingenious frequency and phase compensation network included in a true 2465, the transient response is severely compromised. Nobody noticed this on these Ebay specials for a long time because they just checked the bandwidth.
Can these calibration coefficients be read-out?
This way it would be possible to verify if they differ a lot between e.g. an original MDO2302A and an MSO2072A.
Or can the errors be measured with more extensive measurements besides BW measurement?
Is there a systematic way to do this, according to a unified, standardized test framework, where different test users could contribute to complement the database on the Internet?
I have found that video, and a couple of related ones by the same guy, to be the best things to refer someone to when they start some brain dead discourse about a sampled signal being a staircase or triangles or other bizarre notion.
One thing I don't understand about sampling.... how are the samples actually taken?
Are the samples taken at an instant in time (or in a narrow window) as the theories seem to suggest? In that case, what happens if you sample a sine wave at exactly twice the frequency (eg. 1kHz sine wave, 2kHz sampler)?
a) If I sample at the peaks/troughs, everything is OK.
b) If I sample at the zero-crossing points then the wave will completely disappear (all my samples will be zero).
c) I can also sample at any point between (a) and (b), getting a 1KHz wave with different amplitudes.
If the sampler is very slightly out of sync with the incoming waveform (eg. if I sample at 2.0001 kHz) then I ought to see a 1kHz sine wave with pulsating amplitude, right?
Widening the sample window and taking an average doesn't seem to help, so... how do samplers work?
This image shows what I mean: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampling_theorem#mediaviewer/File:CriticalFrequencyAliasing.svg
At the "critical frequency" (I just found out it has a name) the original wave could have any amplitude at all...even infinite amplitude!
Can these calibration coefficients be read-out?
This way it would be possible to verify if they differ a lot between e.g. an original MDO2302A and an MSO2072A.
Or can the errors be measured with more extensive measurements besides BW measurement?
Is there a systematic way to do this, according to a unified, standardized test framework, where different test users could contribute to complement the database on the Internet?
Can these calibration coefficients be read-out?
This way it would be possible to verify if they differ a lot between e.g. an original MDO2302A and an MSO2072A.
Or can the errors be measured with more extensive measurements besides BW measurement?
Is there a systematic way to do this, according to a unified, standardized test framework, where different test users could contribute to complement the database on the Internet?
To what end? By using unauthorized codes to unlock options, you are getting some extra bandwidth (whether it's perfectly compensated or not) for free. If your livelihood depends on that extra bandwidth, you really should be paying for it - rather than risking some hack.
Absolutely not. As already shown in both my earlier posted drawing and pa3bca's 120MHz image, both the amplitude and frequency are shifted by leakage when close to Nyquist. This is not much of an issue in the time domain, since no one normally attempts to sample and reconstruct signals close to fs/2 - but in the frequency domain it's a different story because of the nature of the FFT process, and has led to various adaptive sampling-frequency algorithms.If the sampler is very slightly out of sync with the incoming waveform (eg. if I sample at 2.0001 kHz) then I ought to see a 1kHz sine wave with pulsating amplitude, right?If everything is perfect then yes...
...and this is where I disagree with some here.Sorry David, you may disagree - but you're just plain wrong. :) This has nothing to do with digitizers - it's just math. I dug around online and found the following info for you from a computational physics course:
The Rigol R&D department consists of many highly skilled electrical engineers, with master degrees, and probably many with PhD degree as well. They know all these mathematics and physics very well.The first sentence: yes, obviously. "You canna break the laws of physics captain"
So from that perspective their equipment should be designed to meet all the constraints imposed by physical laws and sampling theorems.
Therefore I believe that their low-pass filter, ADC specs, and software algorithms are most likely well engineered and configured in an optimal way.
Absolutely not. As already shown in both my earlier posted drawing and pa3bca's 120MHz image, both the amplitude and frequency are shifted by leakage when close to Nyquist. This is not much of an issue in the time domain, since no one normally attempts to sample and reconstruct signals close to fs/2 - but in the frequency domain it's a different story because of the nature of the FFT process, and has led to various adaptive sampling-frequency algorithms.Agree with Marmad.Quote...and this is where I disagree with some here.Sorry David, you may disagree - but you're plain wrong. :) This has nothing to do with digitizers - it's just math. I dug around online and found the following info for you from a computational physics course:
And the quandary you bring up about sampling a frequency at fs/2, or even frequencies very close to the Nyquist frequency (like pa3bca's 120MHz - which was fs/2.08) - i.e. that the frequency locations are unknown - is one of the reasons that, although sampling theory states that a sample-rate of 2*BW or larger is sufficient to reproduce frequencies < BW, most papers on DSO sampling and interpolation speak about a fs/2.5 ratio as the absolute minimum for reconstruction.
So no, at $399 this is not the best that is technically possible given physics laws.. But for the money it comes d*mned close and it is certainly well engineered..
So no, at $399 this is not the best that is technically possible given physics laws.. But for the money it comes d*mned close and it is certainly well engineered..
The price is pretty astounding. The ADC alone is listed at ~$62 in quantities of 500 from Digikey.
The price is pretty astounding. The ADC alone is listed at ~$62 in quantities of 500 from Digikey.Pricing up the BOM of a product from Digikey prices is like pricing up the BOM of a car from the cost of spares at your local dealer.
Pricing up the BOM of a product from Digikey prices is like pricing up the BOM of a car from the cost of spares at your local dealer.
I suspect Rigol buy at least 501 of these devices and get a somewhat better price. :)
But this is an oscilloscope, not an iPhone - Rigol's not selling 12 million (or even 12 thousand) a month. I never suspected they paid close to that amount, but that (and the $73 single-unit price) gives me a ballpark idea of what they might be paying for it. :)Oscilloscope volumes can be surprisingly high, and Rigol is one of the more successful players. I wouldn't be surprised if they made 12k a month of this entry level model. I would be very surprised if they paid even $10 for that ADC chip.
Oscilloscope volumes can be surprisingly high, and Rigol is one of the more successful players. I wouldn't be surprised if they made 12k a month of this entry level model. I would be very surprised if they paid even $10 for that ADC chip.
I was amazed to find a very obscure maker of simple scopes was making a couple of thousand a month some years ago, so 12k a month for a world class producer doesn't sound odd to me.Oscilloscope volumes can be surprisingly high, and Rigol is one of the more successful players. I wouldn't be surprised if they made 12k a month of this entry level model. I would be very surprised if they paid even $10 for that ADC chip.
Would like to post some actual data to support any of this?
"To see the problem of frequency leakage, one can simply look at a plot of the function f(t)=cos(3t) and the sampled data points with a sampling rate of one per second ( red circle)."
"In this case, the sampling rate is one per second and its corresponding Nyquist frequency is 0.5 Hz. The actual frequency of the function is 0.477 Hz (3/2pi) and under-sampling is not a problem. However, the mismatch of the the fundamental frequency and the sampling frequency introduces spurious low frequency components in the sampled data. Note the slow oscillation in the sampled data. The result of this mismatch is that the power of the fundamental frequency leaks into other frequencies. This can be seen from the following power spectra."
"The peaks at the fundamental frequency are broadened by this effect. As the total length of the data increases, the resolution in frequencies increases and the peak at the fundamental frequency gets sharper."
I was amazed to find a very obscure maker of simple scopes was making a couple of thousand a month some years ago, so 12k a month for a world class producer doesn't sound odd to me.
As for the IC price, just look at the pricing of most stuff on Digikey, compared to what real negotiated prices look like. Some of them are 50 times a reasonable price. You go to Digikey to get a few bits quickly to make experimental setups and prototypes. Its not where you go for serious production. I'm not knocking Digikey. Convenience is expensive to provide. The die for this chip isn't going to be huge, although the test costs might be significant - high speed mixed signal testing costs.
I love your enthusiasm and righteousness, but once again - I posted a fact: HMCAD5211 at $62 for 500 units - you've posted stories and speculation, but no actual data. Most people know good (and even not so good) ADCs are expensive - even in quantities of 10k.Get real. You quoted a Digikey price. For a quantity of 500 the vendor won't talk to you, but their main distributors will. If you'd quoted a price from them you'd have more credibility.
I love your enthusiasm and righteousness, but once again - I posted a fact: HMCAD5211 at $62 for 500 units - you've posted stories and speculation, but no actual data. Most people know good (and even not so good) ADCs are expensive - even in quantities of 10k.
Get real. You quoted a Digikey price.
I would hope Rigol is buying directly from Hittite with their volume.
I love your enthusiasm and righteousness, but once again - I posted a fact: HMCAD5211 at $62 for 500 units - you've posted stories and speculation, but no actual data. Most people know good (and even not so good) ADCs are expensive - even in quantities of 10k.
I found the same price and did not think much of it other than what an amazing deal even though Digi-Key and similar distributors will be at the high end of the price scale. I would hope Rigol is buying directly from Hittite with their volume.
I remember similar parts in the past costing at least an order of magnitude more for less performance and functionality.
The sampled points shown alone display exactly what is described but the examples I am familiar with include sin(x)/x reconstruction after sampling which reproduces the original waveform including the peaks correctly.
On DSOs that I have used under the proper conditions (I would not normally be measuring pure sine waves close to Nyquist) I can generate exactly what is shown and described with reconstruction disabled and then restore the original waveform, which is close to Nyquist but not exceeding it, with reconstruction turned on.
Yes and what we have seen has nothing to do with the impurities of the applied signal. Yes impurities above Nyquist will fold back and show up, but even with my DSA815's 'crappy' TG this would be far down in the noise (i.e invisible).The sampled points shown alone display exactly what is described but the examples I am familiar with include sin(x)/x reconstruction after sampling which reproduces the original waveform including the peaks correctly.
I'm not sure I understand you. It's obvious that sin(x)/x being run on the displayed sampled points will not reproduce the original waveform correctly. In fact, not only does sin(x)/x interpolation reproduce just what we saw in pa3bca's 120MHz image, but I can reproduce the exact same results by setting my DSO at any sampling rate and sending it a sine wave with the frequency of ~fs/2.08 (and other frequencies close to - but less than - the Nyquist frequency).QuoteOn DSOs that I have used under the proper conditions (I would not normally be measuring pure sine waves close to Nyquist) I can generate exactly what is shown and described with reconstruction disabled and then restore the original waveform, which is close to Nyquist but not exceeding it, with reconstruction turned on.
I don't know what you mean by 'the proper conditions', but the math above says that it would be extremely difficult to do that over much time. The Nyquist theorem simply states that if a signal contains no frequencies higher than B, it is mathematically possible to reproduce it by a series of points spaced 1/(2B). It says nothing about the length of the sampling. Leakage occurs over time; it's window dependent - e.g. if you just sample a cycle or two of a 120MHz sine wave at 250MSa/s, you can get a reproduction of the frequency of the waveform - thus satisfying the Nyquist theorem. But if you begin to sample more cycles than that, leakage WILL occur.
As further proof: 24 MHz generated by my DG1032Z, DS2072A at 50 MSa/s.
Spurious of the DG1032 is at -60dB(2nd harmonic) to -70dB for others. Not stellar but quite sufficient thank you. So now we might all agree that spurious signals cannot have any visible influence on the displayed signals.
And as expected the scope shows an 'Amplitude modulated" signal. Modulation frequency of (25-24) - (25-26) = 2 MHz, 26 MHz being the "mirror" of the 24 MHz signal wrt to Fnyquist/2. All as explained by Marmad.
And (but maybe I misunderstood David) reconstruction will not restore the original 24 MHz waveform.
pa3bca, what Rigol product or user interface is shown in the image below?Rigol DSA815 TG Spectrum Analyzer.
Very nice - please explain the setup you used with the SA, DG1032Z, and scope. How do you like the DG1032Z?Oh I used the DG1032Z to output a 24 MHz sine at 0dBm. Into the spectrum analyzer to check the output/spurious. (as shown above).
I remember similar parts in the past costing at least an order of magnitude more for less performance and functionality.
Its not that long ago you couldn't buy such functionality as a chip, even at exotic niche product prices. Times change, and devices like this do have volume applications now. Hittite describes (or is it described now they are part of ADI) itself as a microwave company. That tells you what their core market is.
Tektronix was making their own custom high speed ADCs when they sold their silicon fab to Maxim and then they bought from Maxim and others got access to those high speed ADCs as well.That was 20 years ago. Back then Maxim would not have been able to sell a high performance converter to a Chinese company. Even now Chinese companies wanting state of the art converters end up sending delegations to Washington to plead for them.
Yes and what we have seen has nothing to do with the impurities of the applied signal. Yes impurities above Nyquist will fold back and show up, but even with my DSA815's 'crappy' TG this would be far down in the noise (i.e invisible).
And (but maybe I misunderstood David) reconstruction will not restore the original 24 MHz waveform.
Tektronix was making their own custom high speed ADCs when they sold their silicon fab to Maxim and then they bought from Maxim and others got access to those high speed ADCs as well.
That was 20 years ago. Back then Maxim would not have been able to sell a high performance converter to a Chinese company. Even now Chinese companies wanting state of the art converters end up sending delegations to Washington to plead for them.
I had not considered that but I am sure it was the case because of export restrictions. They continued to make custom ICs for Tektronix as well for at least some time. I have one Maxim marked part with Tektronix part number with a date code of the 50th week of 1994 which fits with the other Maxim parts showing up in the late 24xx series oscilloscopes which were made between 1989 and 1996. Wikipedia says the date was 1994.I thought all the 24xx scopes used CCDs for sampling, and had very mediocre ADCs. I think Tek made those CCDs, and they were pretty neat technology for the time.
This fits with the earlier post marmad made about leakage. I know I have run across that before but did not recognize it because the terminology was different. A sharper reconstruction filter would allow one to get closer to the Nyquist frequency.No, this wouldn't help. Reconstruction filters are, of course, low pass filters designed to remove spurious high-frequency content (above Nyquist) in the sampled data. As stated in the physics post I made (and visible in the examples), leakage "...introduces spurious low frequency components in the sampled data." A look at the power spectra graph from that post confirms that the "power of the fundamental frequency" leaks into other lower frequencies.
I had not considered that but I am sure it was the case because of export restrictions. They continued to make custom ICs for Tektronix as well for at least some time. I have one Maxim marked part with Tektronix part number with a date code of the 50th week of 1994 which fits with the other Maxim parts showing up in the late 24xx series oscilloscopes which were made between 1989 and 1996. Wikipedia says the date was 1994.
I thought all the 24xx scopes used CCDs for sampling, and had very mediocre ADCs. I think Tek made those CCDs, and they were pretty neat technology for the time.
No, this wouldn't help. Reconstruction filters are, of course, low pass filters designed to remove spurious high-frequency content (above Nyquist) in the sampled data. As stated in the physics post I made (and visible in the examples), leakage "...introduces spurious low frequency components in the sampled data." A look at the power spectra graph from that post confirms that the "power of the fundamental frequency" leaks into other lower frequencies.
interested.
As I noted before, there has been a continual development of adaptive sampling-frequency algorithms (to minimize the mismatch between input frequency and sampling rate) over the last few years to combat leakage (specifically for use with FFTs). There are a number of various papers on it if you're interested.
Now I am confused. Are you referring to the analog antialiasing filter before the digitizer or the reconstruction filter after the digitizer? If aliasing occurs then the later cannot do anything about it.
Yes, and we established that in the screenshots I made there were no frequency components above Nyquist, so aliasing was not occurring.Now I am confused. Are you referring to the analog antialiasing filter before the digitizer or the reconstruction filter after the digitizer? If aliasing occurs then the later cannot do anything about it.
Both are low-pass filters. Leakage is a phenomenon that is not associated with aliasing (since it happens below Nyquist) and is not preventable by antialiasing or reconstruction filters.
If the source in my electronic design has a max. frequency of 100 MHz, then where can I expect to get the higher frequencies from? Interference, noise, higher harmonics?But how would you know / be sure that there are no higher (i.e. >= Fnyquist) in your signal? You certainly cannot check that with your scope.
Everybody is discussing here that the low-pass filter in the analog front-end of the Rigol scope is no good, as it is not a higher order filter and does not have a steep slope behind the cut-off frequency.
But who cares if the signals in the electronic design are below or at max. 100 MHz?
I have a hard time to understand where the higher frequencies can come from, and if there are any, that their impact is noticeable.
Would like to have a better understanding on unexpected higher frequencies that can show up, their origin (interference, noise, harmonics) and their impact?
Aren't the higher harmonics far enough away, even if the analog filter isn't perfect?
Or is that where the problem originates, that the higher harmonics are relatively close to the original signal, and are not cut-out by the simple filter in analog front-end of the Rigol DS1054Z?
I like the paper but I am surprised someone wrote one about this and I do not understand how it applies in this case.
Everybody is discussing here that the low-pass filter in the analog front-end of the Rigol scope is no good...
Higher harmonics: Let's say we have a 100 MHz square wave. With a square wave at 100 MHz, the fundamental frequency is at 100 MHz, the 3rd harmonic is at 300 MHz, the 5th harmonic is at 500 Mhz. Doesn't the low-pass filter cut-out frequencies above 300 MHz? I believe it does!
As you approach the Nyquist frequency there's this thing called "aliasing" which you willfully seem to be ignoring.I think the point he was trying to make is that the first harmonic of a 100MHz square wave (300MHz) would be a fair bit beyond the DS1054Z's front-end roll-off and not cause much aliasing.
As you approach the Nyquist frequency there's this thing called "aliasing" which you willfully seem to be ignoring.I think the point he was trying to make is that the first harmonic of a 100MHz square wave (300MHz) would be a fair bit beyond the DS1054Z's front-end roll-off and not cause much aliasing.
But I agree that in the grand scheme of things, such a specific case is of rather limited use.
I want to come back to my question: if none of the signals in the electronic design, either the source, the intermediate signals in the signal path or the output signal has a frequency above the limit...
Interference: Can this really go up to 100 MHz with a noticeable impact? Don't believe so.
Noise: Can this really go up to 100 MHz with a noticeable impact? Don't believe so.
If not, it is a design failure I would say, if a 100 MHz scope does not even handle a 100 MHz square wave (DS1104Z with 100 MHz BW, 250 MS/s per channel).
If not, it is a design failure I would say, if a 100 MHz scope does not even handle a 100 MHz square wave (DS1104Z with 100 MHz BW, 250 MS/s per channel).
And you'd be wrong. Again. (https://s.yimg.com/ok/u/assets/img/emoticons/emo11.gif)
According to all your "uncertainties" about not knowing for sure if there is a higher frequency or not, that suggestion about buying a 200 MHz scope should not hold either to be consistent with your "uncertainty". Because your "uncertainty" can not guaranty either that there is not a higher frequency than 200 MHz in the signal path either, although you are measuring 100 MHz signals.
But the "uncertain" guys here want to have a whopping margin of 10x.
And when Nyquist says that the sampling frequency should be two times, I believe that 2,5 is already an extra margin. But the "uncertain" guys here want to have a whopping margin of 10x.You seem to be unwilling (or unable) to grasp the very basics of sampling - even though they have been laid out here time and time again. The Nyquist theorem is just that: a mathematical theorem. It is not real world usage - such as trying to get an accurate image of a waveform you're trying to look at. It doesn't take much imagination to see what kind of image a waveform sampled at fs/2 is going to deliver with linear interpolation:
No wonder that you need to reach out in your pocket for a scope which is way over dimensioned for the kind of electronic toys which you are designing :)
Hi,
Probably I'm OT but I wonder if it would be possible to group buy this oscilliscope to have a bigger discount for large quantities.
I think a lot of people here would like to buy one of these...
Any ideas?
Thanks!
Is 10x margin enough for sure
Is 10x margin enough for sure, or only expected to be enough? Does that 10x margin still depend on having an acceptable higher order low-pass filter in the analog front-end of the scope?
So although the Rigol DS2000 series goes up to Rigol DS2302A, in reality the best configuration which can be used and meets 10x margin when using 2 channels at the same time, is the Rigol DS2101A. Is that correct?
You seem to be unwilling (or unable) to grasp the very basics of sampling - even though they have been laid out here time and time again. The Nyquist theorem is just that: a mathematical theorem. It is not real world usage - such as trying to get an accurate image of a waveform you're trying to look at. It doesn't take much imagination to see what kind of image a waveform sampled at fs/2 is going to deliver with linear interpolation:I think its you who are unable to grasp the basics of sampling. Your simplistic join the dots scheme massively expands the bandwidth of the signal. If you put those triangles through a bandpass filter, so remove all the out of band crud you just created, you'll get back to something similar to the original signal.
Your simplistic join the dots scheme...
If you put those triangles through a bandpass filter, so remove all the out of band crud you just created, you'll get back to something similar to the original signal.
...2.5 - 4x oversampling can be enough.
...2.5 - 4x oversampling can be enough.
This only applies to signal reconstruction (ie. display), not to the actual sampling process.
There are plenty of idiotic pictures on the web. You chose to quote this one to illustrate something. Maybe you didn't adequately explain what that something was.Your simplistic join the dots scheme...
Mine? It's just a stock Nyquist image lifted from the internet showing a sine wave sampled at 2f.
They don't faithfully display right up to Shannon, for reasons many people have explained. However the practical limitations of not being able to impose a brick wall filter without nasty phase effects don't make linear interpolation, with its consequent massive increase in bandwidth, any more meaningful. After digitising a signal you don't get back to the original signal just by feeding it through a DAC. You have to filter back to the Shannon bandwidth. If your DAC is a ZOH type, you also need to compensate for its funky frequency response. If you are to display the digitised signal in any meaningful form, you need to do the same kind of filtering digitally.QuoteIf you put those triangles through a bandpass filter, so remove all the out of band crud you just created, you'll get back to something similar to the original signal.
Oh please.. do go on! School me on how DSOs are faithfully reproducing waveforms right up to the Nyquist frequency. :-DD
There are plenty of idiotic pictures on the web. You chose to quote this one to illustrate something. Maybe you didn't adequately explain what that something was.
They don't faithfully display right up to Shannon, for reasons many people have explained.
However the practical limitations of not being able to impose a brick wall filter without nasty phase effects don't make linear interpolation, with its consequent massive increase in bandwidth, any more meaningful.
Does this mean we stop talking about it, and start using our scope ? :)
Wow, I really don't have the energy to go through this again. Congratulations, you win!
Wow, I really don't have the energy to go through this again. Congratulations, you win!Does this mean we stop talking about it, and start using our scope ? :)
Does this mean we stop talking about it, and start using our scope ? :)
This argument over sampling rates and bandwidth is really quite silly....
You volt-nuts may say the scope only has real 25MHz bandwidth on four channels. If that really bothers you, don't buy it. Or turn on the 20MHz filter. (It'd be really nice if Rigol let users enable the 50 and 70MHz filters too, for the 100MHz scopes. I can hope.)
Apologies if this has been pointed out before...That number does not necessarily mean anything: many months have gone by since the DS1104Z launched so it is highly probable that Rigol has tweaked the PCB or BoM since then and DS1104Z manufactured more recently might be revision 01 as well.
The resistor jumper configuration for "Hardware Version" is different on DS1054Z compared to DS1104Z.
Oh and Pascal, when do you buy an Rigol scope ?????
For sure he keeps us busy ;)Oh and Pascal, when do you buy an Rigol scope ?????
Now there's an interesting question! Let's look back at the last year...
January 01, 2014, 02:40:30 PM »
I am going to buy a digital oscilloscope, but am doubting between the DS1074Z (4 channels) or the DS2072 (2 channels).
January 01, 2014, 05:38:35 PM »
I am interested in DS2072A but want to wait until the hack is confirmed with new FW and all options enabled, including 300MHz and CAN decoding.
January 02, 2014, 04:20:22 PM »
is the DS2072A hackable to 300 MHz with all options or not?
How long does it typically take to come up with a new hack? =) I need to buy my scope latest next week :)
January 21, 2014, 09:49:04 AM »
Are there any rumours or confirmations about upcoming DS2000 series with built-in LA?
Will the LA have 8 channels or 16 channels? When is it expected? Details on launch date and model numbers? Pictures?
~~ Purchase decisions got deferred, more questions were asked, the LA option awaited. Then he focused on the MSO1074z (after flirting for a bit with the Siglent SDS2000).
June 30, 2014, 03:56:18 AM »
I am considering to buy a new scope now, and am thinking about MSO1074Z, as it seems to have everything I need. 4 Channels is very handy.
July 11, 2014, 07:57:32 AM »
Anybody with more feedback about the MSO2072A or the MSO1074Z?
If you are doing digital design 2 analog channels are more than enough given that you have 16 digital channels.
So that makes me conclude to go for the MSO2072A. Now just need more feedback on it
August 04, 2014, 09:21:00 AM »
Myself am going to order very soon an MSO1074Z, or an MSO2072A. Still doubting about which one is the best, but most likely it will be the MSO1074Z, as 100 MHz (after possible upgrade) would be enough for my current applications. But I really want confirmation that feature wise both scopes are as good.
August 07, 2014, 12:33:46 PM »
From that perspective I think I have finally made up my mind. It is simply going to be a MSO2072A :)
~~ Finally! :phew: But not so fast...
August 09, 2014, 04:49:16 PM »
It actually seems that intensity grading is better on 1074Z series than on 2000A series.
Also the screen contrast is better on the cheaper 1074Z series.
Now I am really confused. Although the screen is smaller on the 1074Z series, the screen quality is better than the 2000A series.
Honestly I am clueless again, and still can not decide then on MSO1074Z or MSO2072A, after seeing this video =)
~~ Marmad finally inquired, 2 months ago: "seriously, man, you've been posting these same questions for over 7 months now... perhaps it's time to bite the bullet and buy a DSO?"
August 13, 2014, 05:43:40 AM »
Yes, I agree. I will buy the scope in September =) [MSO2000, after debating viewing angles vs. 1000z]
~~ But hold on a minute...
September 10, 2014, 05:21:47 AM »
Considering to buy MSO1074Z or MSO2072A. Most likely I will go for MSO2072A.
October 09, 2014, 10:51:54 AM »
I haven't bought the scope yet, as I was waiting on some videos for the LA functionality in the MSO series. But scope will be ordered soon (other priorities now).
~~
My personal suspicion is he won't ever order any DSO. Because: a) he wants it to be perfect, and the "best" in every possible way, b) he wants it to be trivially easy to hack, c) he wants guarantees that it will have no limitations that he might some day run into, and the major #1 reason... (drum roll please)
d) he really has no need for a DSO! >:D
Good summary! Yes, keeps everybody busy!Pascal,
I will come with the big announcement at the right time :)
Now I am confused. Are you referring to the analog antialiasing filter before the digitizer or the reconstruction filter after the digitizer? If aliasing occurs then the later cannot do anything about it.
Both are low-pass filters. Leakage is a phenomenon that is not associated with aliasing (since it happens below Nyquist) and is not preventable by antialiasing or reconstruction filters.
Yes, and we established that in the screenshots I made there were no frequency components above Nyquist, so aliasing was not occurring.
note: what results is not really an AM signal, but a DSB signal (or AM with suppressed carrier, the sine does not ride the wave) -equivalent to the summation of the original "real" 120 MHz and the leaked "mirror" at 130 MHz. In the FFT's a few pages ago and attached here you can see that the amplitude of the mirror grows as the sampled frequency approaches Fnyquist. The result is shown as a double-sideband signal, not really an AM signal as there is no power in the central frequency of 125 MHz.
All this is after the digitizer and no aliasing occurring.
So as Marmad noticed this leakage is no issue till say Fsample/2.5 (my 100 MHz). There the leakage is so small is does not show any more.
As I understand it (now) up until Fnyquist you can reconstruct the frequency, but the amplitude information gets lost above Fsample/2.5. Just too few samples, and these samples "shift" along the wave resulting in the AM like waveform
Looking at the samples near Fnyquist themselves I am not even sure that a reliable reconstruction of the amplitude is even possible, and that it has nothing to do with errors in the reconstruction algorithms used by Rigol? At least that is what the documentation Marmad supplied is suggesting.
Interesting learning experience. This goes to show that one should be really really careful when interpreting displayed waveforms even long before FNyquist. So the DS1000Z's are 100 MHz scopes? Yes, but beware..
This post covers the same problem and mentions the Agilent MSO6034 manual which includes a statement about their reconstruction filter having a bandwidth of half the Nyquist frequency:
The leakage is still there. If you look really carefully at the lower frequency examples, you can see the amplitude still varying but it happens at a higher frequency because the signal and image are further apart.
If the filter was long enough, then the 130 MHz image would have been removed. The filter however is shorter than this because of both performance reasons and because the filter length subtracts from the usable record length at the ends where a full set of samples is not available to calculate it.
This post covers the same problem and mentions the Agilent MSO6034 manual which includes a statement about their reconstruction filter having a bandwidth of half the Nyquist frequency:
No, this doesn't cover the same problem; this is you attempting to connect this with a problem the DS1000E had - just as you tried to do before earlier in this thread. Rf-loop and jahonen were discussing the problem of the sin(x)/x interpolation on the DS1000E not matching the actual sample points. That is not the issue at all here - the interpolation matches the sample points just fine (see images).
QuoteThe leakage is still there. If you look really carefully at the lower frequency examples, you can see the amplitude still varying but it happens at a higher frequency because the signal and image are further apart.
Huh? No it doesn't. I just examined his 100MHz image in Photoshop and the amplitude only varies +/- 1 pixel - certainly within the DSO's margin of error, especially since the display memory is 2x scaled from the intensity buffer .
QuoteIf the filter was long enough, then the 130 MHz image would have been removed. The filter however is shorter than this because of both performance reasons and because the filter length subtracts from the usable record length at the ends where a full set of samples is not available to calculate it.
By long enough, do you mean infinitely or impossibly longer? If not, please produce a SINGLE real-world example of a DSO sampling a frequency between fs/2.1 and fs/2.05 and reconstructing the waveform correctly. I would love to see it. :)
At a lower frequency yet it will become indistinguishable from noise. Pick the right higher frequency and it will be +/- 2 pixels. Pick a higher one yet and it will be +/- 3 pixels.
I cannot give an example of a DSO doing this for the reasons discussed above but textbooks give graphic examples of ideal sin(x)/x reconstruction all the time when they discuss representing all input frequencies up to but not including the Nyquist frequency. How else could a sampled data stream represent all frequencies up to but not included the Nyquist frequency accurately otherwise?
This is the same screenshot of the 120 MHz signal where I counted wrong and you made the same counting mistake:Oops. My bad. The 10 MHz is indeed your blue line riding the wavecrests, not my (5 MHz) red line. Was not paying attention (and counting) as I was trying to reconcile the two signals (120 and 130) into a DSB waveform.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg532229/#msg532229 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg532229/#msg532229)
The signal is a 120 MHz sine wave. The image above the 125 MHz Nyquist frequency is at 130 MHz. After reconstruction with a low pass filter, any remaining part of the 130 MHz image should result in constructive and destructive interference with a beat frequency of 10 MHz which is what the blue line I have added shows.
The amount of leakage is continuous with the input frequency. At some frequency it will be low enough not to be seen visually but it will still be present which an FFT will show. At a lower frequency yet it will become indistinguishable from noise. Pick the right higher frequency and it will be +/- 2 pixels. Pick a higher one yet and it will be +/- 3 pixels.Yes, the closer the frequency gets to Fnyquist the larger the mirror becomes. (as leakage increases)
If the filter was long enough, then the 130 MHz image would have been removed. The filter however is shorter than this because of both performance reasons and because the filter length subtracts from the usable record length at the ends where a full set of samples is not available to calculate it.Hm I think I can see how with (much) longer sampling you might get rid of the mirror (leaked) frequency, as the sampling points "move" over the fundamental. but, but... wouldn't that be ETS?? sounds like cheating?
I want to come back to my question: if none of the signals in the electronic design, either the source, the intermediate signals in the signal path or the output signal has a frequency above the limit, then the higher frequencies can only come from interference, noise or higher harmonics.You really don't have a clue, do you? Or are you deliberately trolling this forum?
Interference: Can this really go up to 100 MHz with a noticeable impact? Don't believe so.
Noise: Can this really go up to 100 MHz with a noticeable impact? Don't believe so.
Higher harmonics: Let's say we have a 100 MHz square wave. With a square wave at 100 MHz, the fundamental frequency is at 100 MHz, the 3rd harmonic is at 300 MHz, the 5th harmonic is at 500 Mhz. Doesn't the low-pass filter cut-out frequencies above 300 MHz? I believe it does!
If not, it is a design failure I would say, if a 100 MHz scope does not even handle a 100 MHz square wave (DS1104Z with 100 MHz BW, 250 MS/s per channel).
I want to come back to my question: if none of the signals in the electronic design, either the source, the intermediate signals in the signal path or the output signal has a frequency above the limit, then the higher frequencies can only come from interference, noise or higher harmonics.You really don't have a clue, do you? Or are you deliberately trolling this forum?
Interference: Can this really go up to 100 MHz with a noticeable impact? Don't believe so.
Noise: Can this really go up to 100 MHz with a noticeable impact? Don't believe so.
Higher harmonics: Let's say we have a 100 MHz square wave. With a square wave at 100 MHz, the fundamental frequency is at 100 MHz, the 3rd harmonic is at 300 MHz, the 5th harmonic is at 500 Mhz. Doesn't the low-pass filter cut-out frequencies above 300 MHz? I believe it does!
If not, it is a design failure I would say, if a 100 MHz scope does not even handle a 100 MHz square wave (DS1104Z with 100 MHz BW, 250 MS/s per channel).
The resistor jumper configuration for "Hardware Version" is different on DS1054Z compared to DS1104Z.
That number does not necessarily mean anything: many months have gone by since the DS1104Z launched so it is highly probable that Rigol has tweaked the PCB or BoM since then and DS1104Z manufactured more recently might be revision 01 as well.
Good summary! Yes, keeps everybody busy!
I will come with the big announcement at the right time :)
LOLGood summary! Yes, keeps everybody busy!
I will come with the big announcement at the right time :)
And when you do, I expect you'll really start asking questions in earnest! ;) And keep us even busier.
One good outcome of your deferring a decision was the arrival of the MSO2000 (not available when you started your quest for the Holy Grail), which pretty nicely balances out the 2-channel loss from the 1000Z to the 2000. For someone who (may) want to do embedded systems work at some point, it's a very nice combination.
And if you wait long enough, Siglent may improve the firmware implementation on the SDS2000 to the point where you could get 4 analog channels AND 8 digital channels... for a price in the same ballpark as the MSO2000. Though the hackability of the Rigols does give them a decided advantage.
EDIT: besides, when I prepared that retrospective, I thought we needed a break from the Hess/Marmad bout, that was in the 14th round. :box:
Is the DS1000U series something Rigol only sell in China? I don't see reference to these models on other country's web sites.Like the DG1022U variant of Rigol's DG1022 function generator it seems to be primarily intended for domestic markets, although it (there appears to be only one model, the DS1072U) is available in Western countries from various Chinese shippers, such as this one (http://www.rigoloscilloscope.co.uk/wholesale/RIGOL-DS1072U-70Mhz-Oscilloscope-FFT-500MSa-s-3-yrs-warranty-air-shipping-track-656.html), and there is an English manual (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fus.rigol.com%2Fdownload%2FOversea%2FDS%2FUser_guide%2FDS1000U_UserGuide_EN.pdf&ei=_btFVNi1EoHSaJD7gIAP&usg=AFQjCNHgAKPL6MzBuo4D6bDUvHUPrXwkfg&bvm=bv.77880786,d.ZWU) on Rigol's US website.
The DS1102U is 100MHz, 1Gs/s, 16k samples of storage and its list price is CNY1580 (US$257). It looks like the ADC is a lower spec (or maybe there's a lower timing control spec) than the E series, as its repeat capture effective sampling rate is 10Gs/s, while the E series claims 25Gs/s. Most things about the U series seem essentially the same as the E series. I suspect, from some promotional stuff they are doing, that this might be their entry model going forward.Is the DS1000U series something Rigol only sell in China? I don't see reference to these models on other country's web sites.Like the DG1022U variant of Rigol's DG1022 function generator it seems to be primarily intended for domestic markets, although it (there appears to be only one model, the DS1072U) is available in Western countries from various Chinese shippers, such as this one (http://www.rigoloscilloscope.co.uk/wholesale/RIGOL-DS1072U-70Mhz-Oscilloscope-FFT-500MSa-s-3-yrs-warranty-air-shipping-track-656.html), and there is an English manual (http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fus.rigol.com%2Fdownload%2FOversea%2FDS%2FUser_guide%2FDS1000U_UserGuide_EN.pdf&ei=_btFVNi1EoHSaJD7gIAP&usg=AFQjCNHgAKPL6MzBuo4D6bDUvHUPrXwkfg&bvm=bv.77880786,d.ZWU) on Rigol's US website.
It's hard to imagine why anyone would want one, though - it only has half the sample rate and half the memory of the now rather obsolete DS1000E series scopes, and costs about the same.
Thats great but where do you get ?
Thats great but where do you get ?
Thats great but where do you get ?
You could try www.batronix.com (http://www.batronix.com), The shipping costs to Israel would be €54.45 without VAT.
Thats great but where do you get ?
Hi,
I bought mine from Silcon Electroincs (www.silicon.cz (http://www.silicon.cz)). 294€ ex. VAT with free shipping within EU.
Excellent service, and very fast shipping - highly recommended.
BR Jonas
I also ordered the DS1054Z from Batronix a week ago. Unfortunately they were not in stock so I will have to wait at least another three weeks (according to their website). Bummer
Thats great but where do you get ?
Hi,
I bought mine from Silcon Electroincs (www.silicon.cz (http://www.silicon.cz)). 294€ ex. VAT with free shipping within EU.
Excellent service, and very fast shipping - highly recommended.
BR Jonas
The link is broken..
Yes i know about them but like you said they are out of stock
EDIT: besides, when I prepared that retrospective, I thought we needed a break from the Hess/Marmad bout, that was in the 14th round. :box:
Most boring bout ever :rant:At least one of the two (of the worst offenders) finally realizes it...
Two guys typing furiously:
Off hand I can't think of another scope that even comes close in bang-per-buck for the same price?
...people don't feel comfortable with this mathematical concept though.
I also ordered the DS1054Z from Batronix a week ago. Unfortunately they were not in stock so I will have to wait at least another three weeks (according to their website). BummerYou should have tried arBenelux, they had one in stock last week.
At least one of the two (of the worst offenders) finally realizes it...
Unfortunately, this thread has already been thoroughly hosed, making it difficult for the typical person looking to buy one of these scopes to navigate through the muck. :palm:
Too bad we can't roll the clock back on this one to message #37 and start over, where Dave says the following....people don't feel comfortable with this mathematical concept though.
(although no one has yet tested and posted a chart of the 50MHz roll-off).
Meltronics in Tel Aviv is the Rigol distributor for Israel.
http://www.meltronics.co.il/ (http://www.meltronics.co.il/)
QuoteToo bad we can't roll the clock back on this one to message #37 and start over, where Dave says the following....people don't feel comfortable with this mathematical concept though.
As much as I enjoy Dave's posts, it's already been shown that he's incorrect in what he stated about the 100MHz bandwidth (although no one has yet tested and posted a chart of the 50MHz roll-off).
You deleted the part I was referring to... The mathematical concept of value for the buck.
I refuse to comment any further on this subject, as I'm not up to starting another unnecessary boxing match in this thread. :palm:
At least one of the two (of the worst offenders) finally realizes it...
Oh, I've realized it all along. The question is: would it better to just not respond when someone makes unsupported allegations about problems the DSO has?
Yes, I have no affiliation with them, but if you live in the Netherlands and need a Rigol device do buy from them. I bought several Rigol devices there and their service is excellent.I also ordered the DS1054Z from Batronix a week ago. Unfortunately they were not in stock so I will have to wait at least another three weeks (according to their website). BummerYou should have tried arBenelux, they had one in stock last week.
YES
As the Talking Heads put it, Say something once, why say it again? Of course it's always easier to apply this rule to someone else.
Hmm I know it it's always the ones with the outspoken / strong opinions your hear of. I am curious how the silent minority in this forum feels about this issue.At least one of the two (of the worst offenders) finally realizes it...
Oh, I've realized it all along. The question is: would it better to just not respond when someone makes unsupported allegations about problems the DSO has?
YES
As the Talking Heads put it, Say something once, why say it again? Of course it's always easier to apply this rule to someone else.
As much as I realize there has been some off-topic (or close to off-topic) stuff, there has also been a serious discussion about the capabilities/limitations of the DSO.And I for one am grateful for it. As Harry Callahan (almost) said, a man's got to know his scope's limitations.
Oops. My bad. The 10 MHz is indeed your blue line riding the wavecrests, not my (5 MHz) red line. Was not paying attention (and counting) as I was trying to reconcile the two signals (120 and 130) into a DSB waveform.
Two guys typing furiously:
"That is caused by non-linearity and sampling jitter in Rigol's digitizer."
"Uhh... no it isn't."
"Ok, THAT is caused by non-linearity and sampling jitter in Rigol's digitizer."
"No proof of that."
"Well, THAT is caused by non-linearity and sampling jitter in Rigol's digitizer."
"No, that's something else."
....
....
Rinse and repeat. :D
If the filter was long enough, then the 130 MHz image would have been removed. The filter however is shorter than this because of both performance reasons and because the filter length subtracts from the usable record length at the ends where a full set of samples is not available to calculate it.
Hm I think I can see how with (much) longer sampling you might get rid of the mirror (leaked) frequency, as the sampling points "move" over the fundamental. but, but... wouldn't that be ETS?? sounds like cheating?
DSOs with longer and sharper reconstruction filters will display more accurate results up to their Nyquist frequency.
Oh, I've realized it all along. The question is: would it better to just not respond when someone makes unsupported allegations about problems the DSO has?
YES
As the Talking Heads put it, Say something once, why say it again? Of course it's always easier to apply this rule to someone else.
Quote from: people link=topic=36920 date=allthetimeBLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH ....What if somebody drops in here and only reads the last few posts? If the only person still posting is the idiot/moron then they might get completely the wrong idea.
FFS US$399!!!!
:palm:
On my 2440 I can recover the original waveform at the wrong amplitude, which is then rectified if I enable ETS.
Yep, I can't believe anybody is nitrpicking over a $400 oscilloscope that can do as much as this one can.While it is incredible for the price, apparent oversights and rounded corners are still apparent oversights and rounded corners though.
What kind of results do you get when averaging is used?Averaging has (as I expected) no effect on the displayed waveform. That is, if triggering is on the top of the highest wave so the display is stable in normal mode. See attachments.
On my 2440 I can recover the original waveform at the wrong amplitude which is then rectified if I enable ETS.
What kind of results do you get when averaging is used?
On my 2440 I can recover the original waveform at the wrong amplitude which is then rectified if I enable ETS.
Averaging has (as I expected) no effect on the displayed waveform. That is, if triggering is on the top of the highest wave so the display is stable in normal mode. See attachments.
If I have the trigger level on 0 volt the display is of course not stable, and in that case averaging shows a somewhat constant amplitude that is, indeed, the average of the amplitude(s)
The frequency counter is totally lost here :) The counter is not a HW counter as in the DS2000 series.
Marmad is your scope still original 70 MHz? if so this might explain the 2 dB difference
O yes. Well this 1 dB can be easily explained by the more limited BW of your scope so the amplitude is already a bit more down at 100 MHz than with my scope.Marmad is your scope still original 70 MHz? if so this might explain the 2 dB difference
Yes, it's a loaner so it's unmodified. But the difference between our measurements was just slightly over 1dB.
1) Is there any kind of information about these options? I have found nothing beyond a brief sentence summary.There's quite a bit of info in the user manual (http://www.adafruit.com/datasheets/DS1000z_Manual.pdf).
2) Are these options field-installable after the fact? Or must they be ordered with the unit?They can be bought at any time (it's just a software key). There are also hacks available on this blog.
3) Does the "Serial Bus Analysis Option" possibly include Lan-C ? (The Sony/Canon camera control protocol, see: EEVblog #297)No - and no.
Or could I write a macro or something to add that to the protocols?
4) There is also an option: AT-DS1000Z - Advanced Triggering Option: RS232/UART,I2C,SPI,Runt,Windows,Nth Edge,I don't think it's absolutely necessary (although I've never tried) - the Decode section has it's own definable parameters that are used irrespective of the trigger. But it makes life easier since you can get the Trigger working on the bus first, then just copy the Trigger settings to the Decode section.
Do I need that ALSO in order to use the Serial Bus Analysis Option?
O yes. Well this 1 dB can be easily explained by the more limited BW of your scope so the amplitude is already a bit more down at 100 MHz than with my scope.
TEquipment is apparently out of stock, I guess that should be no great surprise
And I don't see any hint of when they think they might be in stock, probably not a big surprise, either.
I am very conflicted about when to order. I am going to be out of town the first week of November,
and I don't want to order it now and possibly have them send it to be delivered while I am gone.
And I don't know how long the $399 price will remain?
Quote3) Does the "Serial Bus Analysis Option" possibly include Lan-C ? (The Sony/Canon camera control protocol, see: EEVblog #297)No - and no.
Or could I write a macro or something to add that to the protocols?
In seronday's graph, he shows 100MHz as being attenuated to about -11.3dB when the 20MHz BW limit is turned on. My test shows a 100MHz 400mV sine being attenuated to ~-7.8dB.Marmad,
Quote3) Does the "Serial Bus Analysis Option" possibly include Lan-C ? (The Sony/Canon camera control protocol, see: EEVblog #297)No - and no.
Or could I write a macro or something to add that to the protocols?
Not really an absolute No, he could take the recorded waveform and convert it to digital levels respecting the timing and feed that to his own decoder.
Marmad,
The reference frequency for all levels on the Graph in question is 1Mhz.
You appear to be measuring the difference in levels at 100Mhz which is in fact approx. 8dB.
Test with a Williams pulse generator. 3 meters of coax on the collector to ensure a long enough pulse.
With no BWL the risetime is 3.1 ns. If we use 0.35 the Bandwidth would be 0.35/3.1e-9 = 113 MHz. Sounds plausible
With 20 MHz BWL the risetime is 14.7 ns, i.e. 0.35 / 14.7e-9 = 23.8 MHz.
Hmm looks ok'ish?
Marmad,
The reference frequency for all levels on the Graph in question is 1Mhz.
You appear to be measuring the difference in levels at 100Mhz which is in fact approx. 8dB.
Ok. But I didn't see that mentioned in your original post (although I now see the graph begins at 1MHz) - and why 1MHz for a 100MHz DSO?
Marmad.
When measuring the frequency response of an instrument such as an oscilloscope you would normally start at DC and work upwards in frequency from there, to find and record any variations in level.
You may have received an automated message stating your ship date was changed to 11/20/2014. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience, as your order is firm and your ship date is ~11/3/2014.
False alarmQuoteYou may have received an automated message stating your ship date was changed to 11/20/2014. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience, as your order is firm and your ship date is ~11/3/2014.
It came from Christine Hoh from Tequipment 35 minutes ago.
Got this email from batronix:
"On 24th October you have ordered a Rigol DS1054Z.
[...]
Just to update everyone. We have 85 units coming in on this shipment. This shipment is sold though. If you are part of the 85 that are inbound, you got an email about the error in pushing the date back.
We have a special air shipment of 100 units coming Nov 20th and then we have a bunch more arriving in early December. We have some units on the November shipment that are not sold yet. We have the only stock in the USA at this point until December because of our big pre orders.
Thanks for the business!
Evan Cirelli
TEquipment.NET
I have one on order from Emona here in Australia, has anyone else? If so have you received it? It should be close.
(http://i.imgur.com/uAhCdgNs.jpg) (http://imgur.com/uAhCdgN)
Got mine from Batronix today, best spot on the desk assigned (:
But that fan really is too audible for me, must find replacement for that ...
[..]
I placed in my DS1000z the GELID Silent 5 fan. (gelidsolutions.com)
Its working very quiet!
[..]
The question is, are there any special considerations with this new digital scope that would make things any different from the old analog scope when making floating measurements like this?
I have a question for the experts here .... In my field sometimes I have to take some pretty dangerous measurements. By that I mean looking at a waveform across a device that might be 600 volts DC off ground (yikes). Since isolated probes are extremely expensive, it is (unofficially) routine to break the rules by 'floating' the case of the scope on an insulated surface and using an isolation transformer to power the scope (and not touching the case when the power is on). The question is, are there any special considerations with this new digital scope that would make things any different from the old analog scope when making floating measurements like this? (Obligatory note: I work with dangerous equipment that has dangerous voltages and this practice is not recommended. You're supposed to buy an isolated/insulated scope and/or an isolated probe. Don't try this at home or at work. I already know this.)
--Wyatt--
Not an expert, but there is a safer alternative, but you are still dealing with high voltages so the only safe way will be not to do things you don't fully understand that are dangerous.
You can use 2 channels with A+B and inverting B, like people been doing it on analog scopes when you need to measure voltages that are not ground referenced to your equipment after removing the ground clips on your probes.
Still you need good quality probes for the task and your scope should be able to handle that voltage. In the case of the DS1054Z is only rated up to 300V RMS, not sure on DC you will have to look up the specs.
Also the probes that come with it are probably no good for 600V.
And finally, Math function on digital scopes (at least at this price level) required to do the A + Inverse B, is not particularly fast, but should be fine for low frequencies or when real time is not that important.
I wouldn't use this scope for measuring anything higher than mains, and I wouldn't use it to measure mains because there is rarely a reason to do that when you can use a DMM instead for most tasks.
I use a 100x probe for this, one of the things that gets looked at is the DV/DT of the spike across an SCR at up to 1200 volts. (Yikes!) I hope I am not mistaken in thinking that the 100x probe allows measuring higher voltage?
A 10x probe allows a higher test voltage by a factor of 10, and yes 100x a factor of 100...... BUT!
Remember that the probe ground IS AT EARTH GROUND and you cannot connect that anywhere except for a confirmed earth potential on the device under test unless the device under test is connected using an isolation transformer. The probe also need to be rated for the higher voltage your are probing and preferably with a proper CAT rating and with a 3rd party certification.
I have a question for the experts here .... In my field sometimes I have to take some pretty dangerous measurements. By that I mean looking at a waveform across a device that might be 600 volts DC off ground (yikes). Since isolated probes are extremely expensive, it is (unofficially) routine to break the rules by 'floating' the case of the scope on an insulated surface and using an isolation transformer to power the scope (and not touching the case when the power is on). The question is, are there any special considerations with this new digital scope that would make things any different from the old analog scope when making floating measurements like this? (Obligatory note: I work with dangerous equipment that has dangerous voltages and this practice is not recommended. You're supposed to buy an isolated/insulated scope and/or an isolated probe. Don't try this at home or at work. I already know this.)
(http://i.imgur.com/uAhCdgNs.jpg) (http://imgur.com/uAhCdgN)
Got mine from Batronix today, best spot on the desk assigned (:
But that fan really is too audible for me, must find replacement for that ...
Hi!
I placed in my DS1000z the GELID Silent 5 fan. (gelidsolutions.com)
Its working very quiet!
Mathieu
The question is, are there any special considerations with this new digital scope that would make things any different from the old analog scope when making floating measurements like this? (Obligatory note: I work with dangerous equipment that has dangerous voltages and this practice is not recommended. You're supposed to buy an isolated/insulated scope and/or an isolated probe. Don't try this at home or at work. I already know this.)If you need to make differential measurements on medium/high-voltage circuits on a semi-regular basis, you really should follow your own advice and get a proper high-voltage differential probe.
Depending on how much accuracy and bandwidth you require, you might be able to build your own for a fraction of the cost: a basic non-isolated probe is simply a pair of 100:1 attenuators feeding a differential amplifier's inputs. The parts cost including PCB would likely be under $40. I am planning to build a handful of those for myself once I get my 1054Z since I expect to poke around 1-5kV stuff fairly regularly and only need about 5MHz of bandwidth.
(http://i.imgur.com/uAhCdgNs.jpg) (http://imgur.com/uAhCdgN)
Got mine from Batronix today, best spot on the desk assigned (:
But that fan really is too audible for me, must find replacement for that ...
Hi!
I placed in my DS1000z the GELID Silent 5 fan. (gelidsolutions.com)
Its working very quiet!
Mathieu
I'm assuming doing this broke the warranty?
Just a comment about the bandwidth / aliasing discussion ... whenever you're working with power inverters, choppers, etc., about the only place you ever see anything that resembles a sine wave is at the output, and that's when everything is working right. :) Often what needs to be caught is the amplitude of a steep spike, as across an SCR in a commutating circuit, and often when there are problems to troubleshoot, transients are involved that can destroy devices. There's no way I can be sure there won't be high frequency components on a waveform, generally. That's one of the reasons why I appreciated that discussion. That said, we generally get by on mediocre equipment, helped by a knowledge of its limitations. So thanks!I am no expert on power converters, but I understand that they mostly operate in the tens of Kilohertz range to a few 100's Kilohertz. Only very high-end stuff into a few Megahertz. I know that internally rise-times can and will be very short and that they generate all kinds of nasty harmonics into the tens of Megahertz (after all I can hear those nasty signals on my HF transceivers) but I think you can safely assume that frequency components > 100 MHz in these devices are way lower than the signals you are analyzing, so if these alias back the amplitude is probably way below the threshold of what is visible (the ADC is only 8 bits). And if in doubt use only one channel and Fnyquist moves up to 500 MHz. If you see no change in the signal then aliasing is no problem.
I am no expert on power converters, but I understand that they mostly operate in the tens of Kilohertz range to a few 100's Kilohertz. Only very high-end stuff into a few Megahertz. I know that internally rise-times can and will be very short and that they generate all kinds of nasty harmonics into the tens of Megahertz (after all I can hear those nasty signals on my HF transceivers) but I think you can safely assume that frequency components > 100 MHz in these devices are way lower than the signals you are analyzing, so if these alias back the amplitude is probably way below the threshold of what is visible (the ADC is only 8 bits). And if in doubt use only one channel and Fnyquist moves up to 500 MHz. If you see no change in the signal then aliasing is no problem.
And if you see ristimes of individual pulse in the order of 3.5 ns (for a 100 MHz scope this as abt the minimum rise time you can see) than you know you have to be careful how to interpret these....
Depending on how much accuracy and bandwidth you require, you might be able to build your own for a fraction of the cost: a basic non-isolated probe is simply a pair of 100:1 attenuators feeding a differential amplifier's inputs. The parts cost including PCB would likely be under $40. I am planning to build a handful of those for myself once I get my 1054Z since I expect to poke around 1-5kV stuff fairly regularly and only need about 5MHz of bandwidth.
Jim Williams designed and built a more demanding differential probe which is documented started at page 72 of Linear Technology application note 65. The custom differential input amplifier he designed fits within your $40 budget but would need some changes for DC operation.
Depending on how much accuracy and bandwidth you require, you might be able to build your own for a fraction of the cost: a basic non-isolated probe is simply a pair of 100:1 attenuators feeding a differential amplifier's inputs. The parts cost including PCB would likely be under $40. I am planning to build a handful of those for myself once I get my 1054Z since I expect to poke around 1-5kV stuff fairly regularly and only need about 5MHz of bandwidth.
Jim Williams designed and built a more demanding differential probe which is documented started at page 72 of Linear Technology application note 65. The custom differential input amplifier he designed fits within your $40 budget but would need some changes for DC operation.
"Measuring voltage of floating lamp circuits requires a nearly heroic effort."
I'll say it does! Good thing the things I play with are steam-powered by comparison.
I play with everything from servo and AC motor drives, to phase-shift SCR controllers to SCR type inverters of various designs to IGBT type inverters, generally very high power from 20 KW up to 1 MW with frequencies up to 100 KHz or so. Oh, and some tube type oscillators up to 150 KW, 450 KHz (you don't measure anything directly in that circuit if you know what's good for you). My new toy will be a very nice upgrade for me. Thanks.Hmm it looks like aliasing should be way down on your list of worries :o If you must play with your life at least use tools that provide a minimum amount of safety.
I am going to buy from tequipment and take advantage of the eevblog discount but also I've heard of them having a student discount, and luckily I am still a student. Using my .edu email doesn't seem to change anything for this scope, but it does for a few others (siglent for example). Anyone know if the student discount applies only for certain brands/scopes? From what I understand 14 were unsold from their batch they are getting today or tomorrow with the next batch being a few weeks from now, so I am eager to order this ASAP.
I am going to buy from tequipment and take advantage of the eevblog discount but also I've heard of them having a student discount, and luckily I am still a student. Using my .edu email doesn't seem to change anything for this scope
Per my discussions with TEquipment support, the EEVBLOG discount > student discount, mainly due to the free shipping.
Forgive me if this is a foolish question, but how can I actually apply the code? I only see the ability to request a quote, so I assume I would get a price with the discount by monday which would likely mean I get put into the next batch. Is there any way for that code to be applied without waiting till Monday? If not, what are y'all thoughts on ordering now and then calling them on monday asking if they can apply the discount after purchase?When you get to the payment section, there's a spot where you can enter codes (enter in the shipping and billing addresses, hit continue in green, and it's on the next page).
So I just ordered today and had 0$ tax, 0$ shipping, the AC high voltage sensor, and of course the scope, for $375.
I have one on order from Emona here in Australia, has anyone else? If so have you received it? It should be close.
Ordered in September, told 4 weeks, rang when I didn't hear anything, told another 4 weeks which means around the end of november. Not getting my hopes up that it will be here by then.
we have another 95 units arriving in the next week or so therefore your order should be included with that batch of shipments to go out.so there ya go.
I just got an e-mail from TEquipment, my 1054z is shipping today instead of next week. WoooHooo :clap:Got the same email, but mine won't actually ship until Friday the 14th due to the single shipment to keep the free shipping.
Picked up my Rigol at lunchtime. A$482.90 inc GST from Emona Brisbane.Sounds assuring if you buy from him ;)
Bang for buck is quite amazing. Fired it up and checked the channels so far.
For anyone visiting Emona in Brissy... They have a single office in the back corner of a Honda motorbike dealership at 1019 Ipswich Road, Moorooka. No street signage, nothing.
A more unlikely place I have never picked up a new piece of test gear from!
OMG how bad is Rigol's software for the DS1054Z (and others)? |O
UltraVision driver is buggy and bloated.
UltraScope doesn't even come on the CD included!, and when I install it I can't even find it :-BROKE
:rant:
Got an email from Tequipment that my DS1054Z is shipping yesterday, Oct 12!
If that's the case, they could ship me something really great from the future like a 100 channel scope with brain link-up.Got an email from Tequipment that my DS1054Z is shipping yesterday, Oct 12!
Are they shipping it via TARDIS?
From: orderstatus@Tequipment.NET
Subject: Tequipment.NET OrderStatus Update - Order# xxxxx
Date: 13 Nov 2014 15:50:31 -0500
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qty Product Name Status
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 RIGOLDS1054Z
50 MHz Digital Oscilloscope wi 1 To Be Shipped On 11/12/2014*
1 SANTRONICSAC-EZ
AC Voltage Sensor - 50-1000 VA 1 To Be Shipped On 11/14/2014* (Old Estimate: 11/11/2014)
* Your order is marked "Ship Complete Only"
Partial shipments available upon request for an additional fee per shipment.
Got an email from Tequipment that my DS1054Z is shipping yesterday, Oct 12!Same here.
But wait, in the same email, the free gift AC detector isn't shipping until tomorrow, Oct 14. And the order is by default marked as "ship complete". So that's holding up the shipment.
Doh! Thanks for the free gift!
What is the latest firmware for the 1000z? And where can you get it?According to the Firmware Upgrade Request (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/form/1579/0012:d-0002/1/1579:p-000d/-/%7B%7BEnv.SrcId%7D%7D/%7B%7BEnv.RecId%7D%7D/index.htm/) page on their US website, the latest firmware for the DS/MSO1000Z/-S family is 00.04.01 as of the 25th of August, 2014.
I hate the way they are so dogey with getting the latest updates.
The scope is very noisy to my taste. Anyone knows a quieter replacement fan or at least dimensions of the mounting holes?
OMG how bad is Rigol's software for the DS1054Z (and others)? |O
UltraVision driver is buggy and bloated.
UltraScope doesn't even come on the CD included!, and when I install it I can't even find it :-BROKE
:rant:
Quality - I have been impressed with the way the Rigol comes as a package here in Australia. For those not aware -
The unit was double boxed, 2ply cardboard on the outside, 3ply on the inside box with foam inserts at either end.
A quickstart guide in paper - not the "Here is the CD manual, go find a PC to read it on".
Four probes - they could have skimped here and given two probes and go find the other two yourself.
A real Australian IEC power lead, with finger guards on the pins.
USB Cable.
CD with software Dave has had a run-in with this, I haven't tried it yet.
The little note on the outside about the NI drivers that Oaliey pointed out above (Nice support Emona :-+)
Very nice Emona and Rigol!
I have checked my MSO1104Z: Problems with DC Coupling and heavy problems witch AC Coupling.
Fortunately I'm still within the 30 days money back guarantee. So I'll send this thing back.
I don't trust that I'll get a fix by a chinese company. If they solve the problem I can buy a new one.
Hello! Like everyone I saw the video today that Dave posted on the scopes. Rigol is looking into the issue right now and will have an update as soon as they investigate. This issue will get attention. Rigol is an excellent company to work with and will post an update shortly.
Thanks
Evan
TEquipment.NET
The AC coupling jitter seems to be quite the serious issue.I rarely use AC coupling but I had in the past using my DS2072
I really wonder, how nobody noticed this scince the scopes release, considering how friggin popular the scope accually is. Expecially considering that the DS2000 series shows the same issues.
Rigol is an excellent company to work with and will post an update shortly.
The AC coupling jitter seems to be quite the serious issue.
I really wonder, how nobody noticed this scince the scopes release, considering how friggin popular the scope accually is. Expecially considering that the DS2000 series shows the same issues.
I rarely use AC coupling but I had in the past using my DS2072
I wonder if the problem was introduced later or I was just lucky to never have found the jitter since I have my scope (about 10 months I believe)
Does anyone know how I would go about obtaining a DS1054Z in Germany? Is it available anywhere right now?
All I checked have really weird delivery times specified. Some say a week, then on request say 3. Others say more than 3 weeks...
>I'll try to run some tests later on at home. But I didn't find any jitter on either AC or DC coupling.You raise a VERY valid point. Watching the icons on the display I see it is indeed the AC Trigger mode selected from the triggering menu. I was testing mine from selecting AC coupling from the input menu. Hence no issue on my DS2702. The menus are different on the 1000z so didn't notice this at first.
NOTE: This jitter issue has to do with the AC TRIGGERING, and NOT regular AC Input COUPLING.
I use AC Coupling all the time when working with audio or rf signals, but I have never used the AC Triggering function.
I think lots of people are thinking this jitter issue has to do with the very common function of switching your input to the AC coupling mode that is very common to use, and that is incorrect. This happens only if you use the AC Triggering feature, which personally I am not totally sure when you would even need to use.
I just wanted to make sure everyone understood the difference. It appears that lots of people are getting the impression about this jitter that Dave was talking about, was an issue with just using AC input coupling and it is not.
Does anyone know how I would go about obtaining a DS1054Z in Germany? Is it available anywhere right now?Batronix would be the obvious place for you to go to, but as you said they won't be able to deliver it anytime soon. I doubt you find any shop in Germany or the EU for that matter that has these units in stock.
All I checked have really weird delivery times specified. Some say a week, then on request say 3. Others say more than 3 weeks...
Batronix will have some scopes on December ~8-10.Does anyone know how I would go about obtaining a DS1054Z in Germany? Is it available anywhere right now?Batronix would be the obvious place for you to go to, but as you said they won't be able to deliver it anytime soon. I doubt you find any shop in Germany or the EU for that matter that has these units in stock.
All I checked have really weird delivery times specified. Some say a week, then on request say 3. Others say more than 3 weeks...
Batronix will have some scopes on December ~8-10.Does anyone know how I would go about obtaining a DS1054Z in Germany? Is it available anywhere right now?Batronix would be the obvious place for you to go to, but as you said they won't be able to deliver it anytime soon. I doubt you find any shop in Germany or the EU for that matter that has these units in stock.
All I checked have really weird delivery times specified. Some say a week, then on request say 3. Others say more than 3 weeks...
"Now just where did I see that option to set the probe divide by ratio???" I've seen it twice. :-//Press the active channel button to get that channel's menus on screen.
Okay, one more. Using the measurements settings I can have it measure peak and rms values plus a number of other things. They line up along the bottom edge of the screen. How do you turn them off. Say I have RMS selected but want to turn it of????? Pushing the button again just tells you it's already enabled???Not conversent with Rigols, but there should be a "Clear" or similar in the Measure menus
Okay, one more. Using the measurements settings I can have it measure peak and rms values plus a number of other things. They line up along the bottom edge of the screen. How do you turn them off. Say I have RMS selected but want to turn it of????? Pushing the button again just tells you it's already enabled???
Now I have to start looking for a printed manual, it comes with a quick start guide which is basically useless since what it covers is all intuitive if you've ever used a scope.There's a User Manual.pdf available (PM sent).
Okay, one more. Using the measurements settings I can have it measure peak and rms values plus a number of other things. They line up along the bottom edge of the screen. How do you turn them off. Say I have RMS selected but want to turn it of????? Pushing the button again just tells you it's already enabled???
You.. basically can't. You can push them off the screen, or remove all of them (sort of), but not individually remove them. At least not via any obvious method I've found.
Okay, one more. Using the measurements settings I can have it measure peak and rms values plus a number of other things. They line up along the bottom edge of the screen. How do you turn them off. Say I have RMS selected but want to turn it of????? Pushing the button again just tells you it's already enabled???
You.. basically can't. You can push them off the screen, or remove all of them (sort of), but not individually remove them. At least not via any obvious method I've found.
It's not obvious and I think it's a bug but here's how:
1) Measure --> Clear --> All Items
This will take them all off the display but if you turn any one back on the old ones will appear grayed out.
So, don't do that, instead:
2) Turn off the 'scope and turn it back on again.
Now add a measurement item and it will appear all by itself left-justified on the bottom line.
-Katie
Because power cycling is obviously the right way to do things..NO
Because power cycling is obviously the right way to do things..NO
If you Clear them they should be gone. Full Stop.
If power cycling is needed it is indeed a BUG
Fixed now thanks....but not the bug.Because power cycling is obviously the right way to do things..NO
If you Clear them they should be gone. Full Stop.
If power cycling is needed it is indeed a BUG
Sorry, is your sarcasmometer broken?
I'm guessing the 1054Z is the recommended device to get for a first scope? I could spend more $ if it would be better in the long run for a computer engineering student, as long as it's not some ridiculous Agilent that costs more than 2k.The 1054Z currently offers the best 'bang per buck' by a wide margin - although you may want to wait for Dave's review, which is in the pipeline.
Dave's AC trigger coupling and how to measure voltage rails with AC input coupling were mind blowing
Dave's AC trigger coupling and how to measure voltage rails with AC input coupling were mind blowing.
You clearly did not use the analog enough ;p
Okay, one more. Using the measurements settings I can have it measure peak and rms values plus a number of other things. They line up along the bottom edge of the screen. How do you turn them off. Say I have RMS selected but want to turn it of????? Pushing the button again just tells you it's already enabled???
You.. basically can't. You can push them off the screen, or remove all of them (sort of), but not individually remove them. At least not via any obvious method I've found.
It's not obvious and I think it's a bug but here's how:
1) Measure --> Clear --> All Items
This will take them all off the display but if you turn any one back on the old ones will appear grayed out. So, don't do that, instead:
2) Turn off the 'scope and turn it back on again.
Now add a measurement item and it will appear all by itself left-justified on the bottom line.
-Katie
Okay, one more. Using the measurements settings I can have it measure peak and rms values plus a number of other things. They line up along the bottom edge of the screen. How do you turn them off. Say I have RMS selected but want to turn it of????? Pushing the button again just tells you it's already enabled???
You.. basically can't. You can push them off the screen, or remove all of them (sort of), but not individually remove them. At least not via any obvious method I've found.
It's not obvious and I think it's a bug but here's how:
1) Measure --> Clear --> All Items
This will take them all off the display but if you turn any one back on the old ones will appear grayed out. So, don't do that, instead:
2) Turn off the 'scope and turn it back on again.
Now add a measurement item and it will appear all by itself left-justified on the bottom line.
-Katie
There is no bug. Whether you like it or not, it's just a feature Rigol has implemented to try to offer easier access to often-used measurements without having to, for example, page through 4 menus while trying to locate a specific Vertical or Horizontal measurement for a second time in a session.
You delete individual measurements by using Measure -> Clear -> ItemX -> Delete
It will then grey-out that measurement, and you can use Measure -> Clear -> ItemX -> Recover to restore it if you want. If you add new measurements, the greyed-out ones will slowly be pushed off screen.
This system means that you can get back quickly to a measurement you previously used during the current session, if you've cleared the screen of the bottom measurements for awhile.
Sorry, but that's stupid.
If I wanted to hide the measurements, I'd pick an option called 'hide measurements'. Not 'clear' which for some reason actually means 'leave all the text there just change the colour and don't display a value'.
It's an utterly crap bit of 'UI', not a feature.
Sorry, but that's stupid.
If I wanted to hide the measurements, I'd pick an option called 'hide measurements'. Not 'clear' which for some reason actually means 'leave all the text there just change the colour and don't display a value'.
It's an utterly crap bit of 'UI', not a feature.
Again, regardless of your well-articulated opinion, it's not a bug.
In your opinion.
If not a bug in the scope, a bug in the UI designer's head.
Why not just suggest they do it the most logical way to me. One push turns on a measurement. Next push turns it off. Push once read the RMS Value, push again to turn it off. How hard can that be to do? Spoken from the viewpoint of a non-software writer.
Pretty sure there are a lot of cases when you just want to see a measurment value of a signal and afterwards you don't need it. In that case one would just push to turn it on, and push it again after a second to turn it back off. So yeah, that would be kinda nice.
On 21st October you have ordered a Rigol DS1054Z.
Herewith, we would like to inform you that your requested device is not available yet.
At the moment, we are waiting on two deliveries from Rigol for this device. The estimated time of arrival for the first delivery lies between December 8th - 12th. The second delivery approximately at the end of January.
Due to your position in our waiting list, you will receive a device from the first delivery.
We are apologising for this delay. The demand for this devise is unexpectedly high. Rigol itself can currently not manufacture as many devises as needed at the moment.
If the time of waiting is too long for you, you are welcome to choose a similar product from this series. We grant you a 8% discount because of the special circumstances.
Best regards,
Thorsten Schliszio
There is no bug. Whether you like it or not, it's just a feature Rigol has implemented to try to offer easier access to often-used measurements without having to, for example, page through 4 menus while trying to locate a specific Vertical or Horizontal measurement for a second time in a session.
If you're correct and Rigol intended it to work this way than surely power cycling once cleared should not remove all measurements from the display so that they lose their greyed-out status. I'd say it's a bug one way or another.
We are apologising for this delay. The demand for this devise is unexpectedly high.Are they seriously suggesting they didn't see this comming? It's probably the best bang-for-buck scope ever made... Can't see any other reason to release the scope at such a price without the intention of turing the whole market upside down.
Quote from: BatronixWe are apologising for this delay. The demand for this devise is unexpectedly high.Are they seriously suggesting they didn't see this comming? It's probably the best bang-for-buck scope ever made... Can't see any other reason to release the scope at such a price without the intention of turing the whole market upside down.
How does the DS1000Z series measure up in bugs-for-buck? :)Probably a lot better than most other budget scopes (I'm looking at siglent, hantek, owon etc.). And if your talking about the AC triggering issue: people have been using the DS2000 series scopes for two or three years now (don't remember exact year of it's release) without issues and whining about it. So I'm pretty sure the importance of the bug is severely exaggerated. Sure it's a bit of a nuisance but it sure as hell isn't the worst bug scopes have had.
So your tolerance to bugs is price related?How does the DS1000Z series measure up in bugs-for-buck? :)Probably a lot better than most other budget scopes (I'm looking at siglent, hantek, owon etc.). And if your talking about the AC triggering issue: people have been using the DS2000 series scopes for two or three years now (don't remember exact year of it's release) without issues and whining about it. So I'm pretty sure the importance of the bug is severely exaggerated. Sure it's a bit of a nuisance but it sure as hell isn't the worst bug scopes have had.
Comparing the scope to an Agilent or a Tektronix counterpart would be a bit unfair considering the vast price difference, not even taking into account the fact that even they have their own issues.
Rigol itself can currently not manufacture as many devises as needed at the moment.happen last time in the world of dsos?
People rightly expect these things to be accurate, their designs and projects rely on it.i don't expect perfection in any human or any machine humans make.
NZ Siglent Distributor......>:(
NZ Siglent DistributorI have never hidden this fact, when I registered here I posted my website link for all to see but it seems that was not enough to keep everybody happy.
Fact is that development and manufacturing costs have come down on things like oscilloscopes so everyone wants one but still cheap R&D gets you errors and mistakes. On the whole you get about what you pay for.Very true, but some don't understand that compromises in design like a 1 Gsa/s ADC shared by 4 channels will result in substandard performance.
Seriously this is a worrying trend, one I'm sure manufacturers have great delight in exploiting.
If one cares to look at my contribution you will see the majority has been general electronics related as is my passion for electronics.
If one only knew how many manufacturers/suppliers were members you'd all be shocked.
Substandard compared with what? A 1 Gsa/s ADC is the standard and four channels is twice the standard at this price point and some way above it. Building any piece of test gear involves compromises, and knowing the limitations of your equipment is essential at any level.Fact is that development and manufacturing costs have come down on things like oscilloscopes so everyone wants one but still cheap R&D gets you errors and mistakes. On the whole you get about what you pay for.Very true, but some don't understand that compromises in design like a 1 Gsa/s ADC shared by 4 channels will result in substandard performance.
In the Siglent range for example ONLY the budget/entry level models have less tha 1 Gsa/a ADC's.Substandard compared with what? A 1 Gsa/s ADC is the standard and four channels is twice the standard at this price point and some way above it. Building any piece of test gear involves compromises, and knowing the limitations of your equipment is essential at any level.Fact is that development and manufacturing costs have come down on things like oscilloscopes so everyone wants one but still cheap R&D gets you errors and mistakes. On the whole you get about what you pay for.Very true, but some don't understand that compromises in design like a 1 Gsa/s ADC shared by 4 channels will result in substandard performance.
but still cheap R&D gets you errors and mistakes.Bugs can occur in all R&D regardless of how much money you spend on it and I would expect Rigol to reuse a fair amount of C/VHDL/Verilog between their product lines' FPGAs and SoCs since most features are fundamentally the same regardless of the GUI and PCB layout.
So, hypothetically - say Rigol can fix the problem with the DZ1054Z by re flashing the firmware but after which you will lose the ability to hack the firmware
So your tolerance to bugs is price related?
Looks like one releases "supposedly" completed gear on the market hopeing that many won't or can't recognise its shortcomings....seems like the modern marketing way. :palm:
Siglent's SDS2000 series was ALWAYS identified as "a work in progress"....it still is.
But it suffers NO jitter at any timebase, any delay settings, and whether DC or AC .
Siglent have always been proactive and transparent to improve their products and their regular EEVblog participation is proof of this.
So, hypothetically - say Rigol can fix the problem with the DZ1054Z by re flashing the firmware but after which you will lose the ability to hack the firmware
If they wanted to make it unhackable, they would have done so already. I'm pretty sure they make it hackable on purpose.
Careful, the DSA815 Spectrum Analyzer has been made un-hackable from reports on here.
When twisting the knobs to move cursors, or the trigger level or menu navigation, the older 1102E response is instantaneous and at a high frame rate (I'm using wrong terminology all over the place but I hope you get the idea). The new 1054Z is so slow that it becomes VERY frequent to enter wrong commands because you fell short on the selection or went too far. Also, aiming the correct trigger level or a cursor is a pain on this scope only because of the slow response. You can tell from Dave's video when he dials the trigger level.
Can you be a bit more specific? Do you mean with a single channel on at any timebase? Or multiple channels? My own subjective opinion is that it's fine with 1 channel on, but gets a bit more sluggish with each new channel (or function) added.
Also, the frame rate is a bit irrelevant. At faster timebases, the DS1054Z is capturing MANY more waveforms per second than your DS1102E, which captures a maximum of something like 80 - 200 wfrm/s - while the DS1054Z is capturing like 1000 - 30000 wfrm/s. This means that even if, for example, the DS1102E is refreshing the screen 50 times a second, each refresh contains 1 or 2 new waveforms - while if the DS1054Z is updating the screen 30 times a second, each update contains 30 - 1000 new waveforms.
It feels like overall the interface desperately needs either a faster processor or a better firmware.
Siglent's SDS2000 series was ALWAYS identified as "a work in progress"....it still is.
Hi, I have been lurking this forum for a while. Finally decided to buy DS1054Z.
I would very much appreciate if somebody could please send me the Tequipment eevblog discount code!
Thanks, Seavan
Would you please pm me as well? It would be much appreciated.Hi, I have been lurking this forum for a while. Finally decided to buy DS1054Z.
I would very much appreciate if somebody could please send me the Tequipment eevblog discount code!
Thanks, Seavan
pm sent
pm sentWould you please pm me as well? It would be much appreciated.Hi, I have been lurking this forum for a while. Finally decided to buy DS1054Z.
I would very much appreciate if somebody could please send me the Tequipment eevblog discount code!
Thanks, Seavan
pm sent
Was about to pull the trigger on a used Tek 475 when I saw this! Can someone please send me the code? Thanks so much! I'm a long-time EEVBlog lurker on Youtube, new forum member....looks great so far...I'm sure I'll be coming here regularly from now on!pm sent
Hi, I have been lurking this forum for a while. Finally decided to buy DS1054Z.
I would very much appreciate if somebody could please send me the Tequipment eevblog discount code!
Thanks, Seavan
When I bought mine I asked about the EEV BLOG discount and they gave it to me, no secret code needed.It's needed for web orders.
It's needed for web orders.Click here and Ask (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/pm/?sa=send;u=690)
When I bought mine I asked about the EEV BLOG discount and they gave it to me, no secret code needed.It's needed for web orders.
You're assuming the order is placed during normal business hours when there are humans to man chat windows and generate quotes (phones and email too). :o :PWhen I bought mine I asked about the EEV BLOG discount and they gave it to me, no secret code needed.It's needed for web orders.
Naw, chat line, get a quote, convert to order. No phone needed...
Just wondering if anyone ordered the DS1054Z from Tequipment recently? If so, what delivery date were you given? I've been waiting (impatiently!) since mid October. First I was told after January 1st but recieved a recent e-mail stating December 12th. I'm dying to get this in my grubby little paws! Anyone.....?
@pa3bca - perhaps you can make another image using that 120MHz sine wave input you used before and "Sin(x)/x OFF"?Will do that as soon as I am home tonight (at the office now)
Thanks - but there's actually no need; I asked you to do it once before. Looking back through the previous posts, I found it here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg529751/#msg529751). The funny thing is that we were so focused on explaining the AM caused by the leakage, we didn't even notice that the sin(x)/x interpolation is absolutely NOT turned off ;D@pa3bca - perhaps you can make another image using that 120MHz sine wave input you used before and "Sin(x)/x OFF"?Will do that as soon as I am home tonight (at the office now)
Thanks - but there's actually no need; I asked you to do it once before. Looking back through the previous posts, I found it here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg529751/#msg529751). The funny thing is that we were so focused on explaining the AM caused by the leakage, we didn't even notice that the sin(x)/x interpolation is absolutely NOT turned off ;DToo late :)
Here they are together on your screen: 250MS/s, 120 MHz, Sin(x)/x on and off. Only the amplitude changes, the waveform does not... (And notice that the scope thinks the frequency is 125 MHz or 119 MHz)
Just wondering if anyone ordered the DS1054Z from Tequipment recently? If so, what delivery date were you given? I've been waiting (impatiently!) since mid October. First I was told after January 1st but recieved a recent e-mail stating December 12th. I'm dying to get this in my grubby little paws! Anyone.....?
Same deal here, although I just got an email changing the delivery date BACK to 12/31.As Rigol has announced new FW is coming out, is it better to hold shipments and install the better FW or just ship the back orders???
Just wondering if anyone ordered the DS1054Z from Tequipment recently? If so, what delivery date were you given? I've been waiting (impatiently!) since mid October. First I was told after January 1st but recieved a recent e-mail stating December 12th. I'm dying to get this in my grubby little paws! Anyone.....?
i have placed an order on November 26 and order status is "Estimated to Ship: 12/12/2014" =)
Plus shipments that are in transit.Same deal here, although I just got an email changing the delivery date BACK to 12/31.As Rigol has announced new FW is coming out, is it better to hold shipments and install the better FW or just ship the back orders???
As Rigol has announced new FW is coming out, is it better to hold shipments and install the better FW or just ship the back orders???Personally, I'd say just ship, and let the customer update the firmware (Rigol should make it easy to download by getting rid of the request form nonsense though, which is easy to do).
The DS1054Z was released a few months back -- has it had a FW update yet?Not exactly - they have released beta firmware in response to issues identified by several users and highlighted by Dave. This seems to have serious bugs which will hopefully be resolved prior to an official firmware update.
The DS1054Z was released a few months back -- has it had a FW update yet?The DS1054Z may have been released only two or three months ago but it is the same hardware as the DS1074Z/DS1104Z released nearly two years ago. The biggest differences are the software bandwidth limit and model number stickers.
It was announced in September 2013 (see Dave's video, It was made available around oct/dec 2013, So that is ONE year.The DS1054Z was released a few months back -- has it had a FW update yet?The DS1054Z may have been released only two or three months ago but it is the same hardware as the DS1074Z/DS1104Z released nearly two years ago. The biggest differences are the software bandwidth limit and model number stickers.
Since the hack sites seem to be disappearing, probably due to Rigol, they may holding off shipment until the hack sites are down. I guess we'll find out when they finally start shipping again. Or they have a defeat for the hack and want it installed as rapidly as possible and in as many systems.
From what I have read no-one has found a major enough flaw to halt shipment.
My 2cents worth. :-//
I bought a DS-1054Z last week and it seems fairly easy to use even though I've never owned a DSO before.The biggest challenge to using a multimeter, oscilloscope, spectrum analyzer, logic analyzer and most other basic instruments is knowing what you are looking for. The instruments' fundamental functions usually become largely self-explanatory once you know why you need to use a given instrument for a given task since the two are directly related by physics and maths.
I'd bet on the firmware issue.I'm not so sure.
I'd bet on the firmware issue.I'm not so sure.
Members Bud & MarkL's investigations in the jitter thread https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/) indicate the PLL might not be engineered precisely or incorrectly implemeted.
Firmware can only suppress any issue here, not eradicate it.
Thats why not all units are affected to the same degree.
Maybe IF any scope was being used in an advanced manner, certainly not for simple measurements.
That's true of course, but firmware is often used to hide the limitations of hardware. While we may not like it, certain settings are often "locked out" to prevent hardware be used to it's full capacity or because of cost.
I could see a situation where the software detects this (jitter) issue and simply displays a message on the bottom of the screen "Unable to lock", is that sufficient?
Bud has even gone so far as to put his nuts on the line in this post:
Buy a DS1054Z or not?
Information is paramount for this decision.
So....... we have members with significant expertise joining here everyday.
That's a bit of an overstatement (rather like the one he makes in his post): he's an anonymous poster who has been a member here since April of this year .....
So....... we have members with significant expertise joining here everyday.
That's a bit of an overstatement (rather like the one he makes in his post): he's an anonymous poster who has been a member here since April of this year .....
I haven't seen others give this the same investigation that it rightfully deserves.
If what has been claimed in his posts is indeed correct, IMO it displays a trend in the ongoing reduction in the quality of test quipment in general. Does this not worry us...it does me.
Are not oscilloscopes precision equipment?
Sure we have seen many products hurried to market, only to be exposed as unfinished/incomplete.
Time will tell if this is the case with DS1000 series of there is indeed a design error.
So....... we have members with significant expertise joining here everyday.
I haven't seen others give this the same investigation that it rightfully deserves.
If what has been claimed in his posts is indeed correct, IMO it displays a trend in the ongoing reduction in the quality of test quipment in general. Does this not worry us...it does me.
Are not oscilloscopes precision equipment?
Since the hack sites seem to be disappearing, probably due to Rigol, they may holding off shipment until the hack sites are down. I guess we'll find out when they finally start shipping again. Or they have a defeat for the hack and want it installed as rapidly as possible and in as many systems.
OTOH, people have been managing to use the DS1000Z for their intended purposes for about a year now. Why? Because most people aren't using large trigger offsets or AC-coupled triggers most of the time.
Are not oscilloscopes precision equipment?The bulk of DSOs out there only have 8bits ADCs. You are not going to get much precision out of those unless you have a repetitive signal and crank averaging up all the way.
You say most people don't need a decent trigger offset performance.
This jitter problem is not going to disappear just because you may think most people do not need to see a delayed signal.
OTOH, people have been managing to use the DS1000Z for their intended purposes for about a year now. Why? Because most people aren't using large trigger offsets or AC-coupled triggers most of the time.
My Ds1054Z, running the beta firmware and no installed license codes has a horizontal timebase jitter
of approximately 75-80ns at 15 us offset.
You say most people don't need a decent trigger offset performance.
Have you looked at any decoded serial bus data without browsing forward and backwards from the trigger point along the captured (and decoded) signal? I know I do and I suspect most others do as well.
This jitter problem is not going to disappear just because you may think most people do not need to see a delayed signal. A scenario could be where an event occurs and 15 us later a 1 Mhz clocked spi data stream starts.
my DS1054Z will blur the signal to 8% of the 1 Mhz clock.
I see this as unusable.
A scenario could be where an event occurs and 15 us later a 1 Mhz clocked spi data stream starts.
my DS1054Z will blur the signal to 8% of the 1 Mhz clock.
I see this as unusable.
What I did write was that I thought the reason the problem hadn't been reported in the last year was that it wasn't a capability many owners were often using. The other possibilities are that the 5us jitter is something limited to the more recent HW revision(s) of the main board - or - that it is only severe in a limited number of cases...which is certainly possible. My 1074Z (spring 2014) does NOT exhibit the n*5 us trigger issue. And I have used the trigger offset extensively when decoding (and especially troubleshooting SW implementations of) SPI and I2C signals...
..which is certainly possible. My 1074Z (spring 2014) does NOT exhibit the n*5 us trigger issue. And I have used the trigger offset extensively when decoding (and especially troubleshooting SW implementations of) SPI and I2C signals...Some people have noticed jitter worse than 200ns, others around 100ns, yet more under 50ns and the lucky ones report none. There clearly is a wild variance and luck-of-the-draw component behind it; maybe an issue with the ADC clock generator PLL's drift and jitter combined with the reference crystal's own and the tolerances of all the other components around the PLL/VCO.
Are not oscilloscopes precision equipment?The bulk of DSOs out there only have 8bits ADCs. You are not going to get much precision out of those unless you have a repetitive signal and crank averaging up all the way.
I would be more worried about accuracy: making sure what I am seeing is actually representative of what is really there.
Mine peaks around 16-17us as well with the beta FW.
Can you check if it becomes good in multiples of ~33us?A scenario could be where an event occurs and 15 us later a 1 Mhz clocked spi data stream starts.
my DS1054Z will blur the signal to 8% of the 1 Mhz clock.
I see this as unusable.
That is a piss poor use case ;p Unless of course you are not analysing any of the data and just watching continuous signals, but who does that with SPI? :-// :-X (you wont really have issues with decoding and using a non-auto trigger)
My unit peaks around 28us. See
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/msg558628/#msg558628 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/msg558628/#msg558628)
for screen captures.
Maybe it's time to feed yours and my DS1054Z with an SPI data stream clocked around 1 and up to 8 MHz (why 8? Arduino max SPI clock speed. remember this DSO is targeted at hobbyists)
and see if it can decode at a few delay positions. It might be fine even with the large jitter.
Are not oscilloscopes precision equipment?
The bulk of DSOs out there only have 8bits ADCs. You are not going to get much precision out of those unless you have a repetitive signal and crank averaging up all the way.
Ideally, I would need this oscilloscope within 8-15 days. Thanks for reading ! :)I ordered one a month ago. The lead time I got back then was 10-12 weeks.
I'm from France and can't find the DS1054Z in stock anywhere in Europe, all sellers seem to be out of stock. Batter Fly are out of stock too since a few days ago, I'm waiting for an answer from arBenelux but I don't think they ship to France. Zeitech seem to have it in stock but with a 4 weeks delay (do you know if it's usually faster?).See reply to DanielS.
Ideally, I would need this oscilloscope within 8-15 days. Thanks for reading ! :)
I ordered one a month ago. The lead time I got back then was 10-12 weeks.It's simply supply and demand. Right now the demand is greater than the supply, so sellers run out between shipments (Rigol can't keep up ATM).
I'm guessing Rigol is keeping supplies of the 1054Z tight so it won't nuke demand for the 1074Z/1104Z.
which can take 2 weeks or so just to reach port
Just sea time, or does that include port time (load/unload & clearing customs) and land transport?which can take 2 weeks or so just to reach port
At the very least 2 weeks. Anything from 4-12 weeks is normal for non-air freight.
I finally got my DS1054Z. I of course want to unlock the extras but I can't find any site with the code generator that is still alive or has a working generator.
rigol.3owl.com is down, so is another site, and goroot.ca does not produce a working code.
I have tried to find links and references here on the forums, but it is an ocean to swim. Any help please?
BTW, my software version is 00.04.02 SP3, Board version 0.1.1
#1. I have to agree with some others here; The control response is so slow for some things. Not a deal breaker but I did not expect such slow response.Ad.1
#2. The menu system and options are a bit intrusive when all you want to do is see the signal.
#3. Measurements displays always display even if the are deleted or cleared. I remember reading about this here but I don't remember any option to just see the measurement display that is actually active without having to shut down the scope and restarting it.
#4. No adjustable filters? The DS1052E has this. Why not the DS1054Z?
Sure. How about this model being defective having a major issue with ADC clock - see the Jitter thread in Blog Specific section of the Forum.
Sure. How about this model being defective having a major issue with ADC clock - see the Jitter thread in Blog Specific section of the Forum.
Indeed, a problem so major that it's taken over a year to draw any significant attention.
Sure. How about this model being defective having a major issue with ADC clock - see the Jitter thread in Blog Specific section of the Forum.
Indeed, a problem so major that it's taken over a year to draw any significant attention.
That may mean that many/majority of them are more shelf decoration for wannabe EE's like myself than tools that are actually being used in somewhat obscure scenarios that would highlight a shortcoming.
Still waiting to see how all of this shakes out of course, but I suspect they're being used almost exclusively for common tasks, and do just fine at them (based on current information being reported). Still making it quite useful as a general purpose, entry level DSO at a hobby friendly price IMHO. ;DSure. How about this model being defective having a major issue with ADC clock - see the Jitter thread in Blog Specific section of the Forum.
Indeed, a problem so major that it's taken over a year to draw any significant attention.
That may mean that many/majority of them are more shelf decoration for wannabe EE's like myself than tools that are actually being used in somewhat obscure scenarios that would highlight a shortcoming.
Guys.. just an update. If you got an email from us about your ds1054z shipping 12/31... they will be shipping tomorrow instead. ( monday if we dont get them all out but most will go tomorrow ) I dont want to send a bunch of new emails out for yet another change of date but we will ship them tomorrow for anyone who got a 12/31 confirmation. Anyone else we will be getting 400 in the 2nd week of Jan.
Thanks everyone.
Evan
TEquipment.NET
I received an email (in the UK) yesterday and was told mine was arriving today, they had a batch flown in directly from China and were sending them out straight away.
All these units will have new firmware in them I was told on the phone when I called to check about the knows bugs and that the scopes are now fixed regarding the AC coupled trigger mode and the jitter issues.
I finally got my DS1054Z. I of course want to unlock the extras but I can't find any site with the code generator that is still alive or has a working generator.
rigol.3owl.com is down, so is another site, and goroot.ca does not produce a working code.
I have tried to find links and references here on the forums, but it is an ocean to swim. Any help please?
BTW, my software version is 00.04.02 SP3, Board version 0.1.1
I finally got my DS1054Z. I of course want to unlock the extras but I can't find any site with the code generator that is still alive or has a working generator.riglol.3owl.com is down but you can still find the archived version here: https://web.archive.org/web/20131215225141/http://riglol.3owl.com/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20131215225141/http://riglol.3owl.com/)
rigol.3owl.com is down, so is another site, and goroot.ca does not produce a working code.
I have tried to find links and references here on the forums, but it is an ocean to swim. Any help please?
riglol.3owl.com is down but you can still find the archived version here: https://web.archive.org/web/20131215225141/http://riglol.3owl.com/ (https://web.archive.org/web/20131215225141/http://riglol.3owl.com/)The http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol-103d/ (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol-103d/) mirror site is also still up and running.
I can confirm that. Mine arrived yesterday. The code generator does not work for 00.04.02 SP3. The jitter problem seems to be solved by this firmware version.
I can confirm that. Mine arrived yesterday. The code generator does not work for 00.04.02 SP3. The jitter problem seems to be solved by this firmware version.
That's the same board and firmware version in the DS1054Z I had, and it had the jitter problem.
I can confirm that. Mine arrived yesterday. The code generator does not work for 00.04.02 SP3. The jitter problem seems to be solved by this firmware version.
That's the same board and firmware version in the DS1054Z I had, and it had the jitter problem.
Did you ever apply the beta FW? If so, did you bad results like poida_pie and me?
ok, I did now some more tests on frequencies > 5 MHz.The problem I was referring to is the 5us jitter. The AC coupling jitter has more consistent behavior scope to scope, and should be correctable with new firmware. Take a read through the jitter thread in blog #683, and if it's not clear what the difference might be between the two, watch Dave's blog #685 on AC trigger coupling.
In general it seems that the jitter problem is not gone, but it isn't quite as substantial as what was reported earlier in this thread by other users. On my DS1054z which arrived last friday I did not notice the jitter issue when tested on frequencies up to 1MHz.
Today I hooked up my poor man's frequency generator, a AD9850 board which can generate frequencies up to (a noisy) 40MHz.
First some pictures of the rigol with/without AC trigger coupling + signal on my analog scope @10MHz and then the same with a (noisy) signal of 40MHz.
As you can see @10MHz I have jitter with both DC/AC trigger coupling. Maybe the first is just noise generated by my AD9850 board but it is not visible on my analog scope supplied with the same signal.
At 40MHz I saw almost no difference between both settings on the Rigol. On the analog scope the signal did also show up quite noisy.
@MarkL are these results consistent with your findings about the source of the jitter problem? Let me know if there are some other tests I can do to help.
ok, I did now some more tests on frequencies > 5 MHz.It is not clear that your analog scope is showing the waveform after 6uSec Delay.
First some pictures of the rigol with/without AC trigger coupling + signal on my analog scope @10MHz and then the same with a (noisy) signal of 40MHz.
There appears to be no spec listed for the hardware counter.I would not be surprised if the DS1xxxZ's "hardware" counter was done by FPGA based on the ADC's output instead of dedicated edge detection and counting hardware.
Can anyone confirm the highest frequency the hardware counter can read? It appears on my DS1054Z hacked to 100MHz reads to 112.999MHz and then starts aliasing any higher. My DS1052E will read at least to 480MHz with the tests I can perform.Seems to be related to the amplitude of the signal rather than a sampling problem. If you adjust the vertical so it is clipping/off the screen, it will go higher before skipping counts.
The software counter reads correctly.
There appears to be no spec listed for the hardware counter.
Seems to be related to the amplitude of the signal rather than a sampling problem. If you adjust the vertical so it is clipping/off the screen, it will go higher before skipping counts.
Does anyone know how to set the realtime clock of the unit? The reason I ask is that all files that I saved so far with this scope are dated 1/01/1980 and I couldn't find a way to adjust the date in the settings. Did I miss something?There is no real time clock on the DS1000Z series scopes.
:o Really? Can others confirm this?Does anyone know how to set the realtime clock of the unit? The reason I ask is that all files that I saved so far with this scope are dated 1/01/1980 and I couldn't find a way to adjust the date in the settings. Did I miss something?There is no real time clock on the DS1000Z series scopes.
Yes I can confirm the DS100Z series does not have an RTC. It is one of the reasons I mostly use Ultra Sigma to capture the screen.There is no real time clock on the DS1000Z series scopes.:o Really? Can others confirm this?
QuoteThere is no real time clock on the DS1000Z series scopes.:o Really? Can others confirm this?
Software version is 00.04.04.SP300.04.04.SP3 or 00.04.02.SP3? If 00.04.04.SP3, then RIGOL is updating scopes pretty quickly.
Does have the jitter issue
Board 0.1.1
Software version is 00.04.04.SP3
Does have the jitter issue
Board 0.1.1
People are still buying this despite the jitter issue?
Are they confident it is software fixable or do they think it won't affect them?
I cannot find an active website that give valid unlock codes for hacking this from 50MHz to 100Mhz.
Are people still doing this?
Software version is 00.04.04.SP300.04.04.SP3 or 00.04.02.SP3? If 00.04.04.SP3, then RIGOL is updating scopes pretty quickly.
Does have the jitter issue
Board 0.1.1
Sorry in advance if I am posting in the wrong thread.
Yesterday I received a new DS1074Z. I also did the activation code DSER and it worked no problem. My question is, can I upgrade to the latest firmware? Currently the scope is version 00.04.01.SP2 and Board 0.1.1. Thanks for your help!
Software version is 00.04.04.SP3
Does have the jitter issue
Board 0.1.1
People are still buying this despite the jitter issue?
Are they confident it is software fixable or do they think it won't affect them?
When you buy gear you do so with your needs in mind (like anything). I am well aware of the jitter issue and the scopes other feature outweigh that fault.
When you buy gear you do so with your needs in mind (like anything). I am well aware of the jitter issue and the scopes other feature outweigh that fault.
I am also in BC, Canada.
Where did you buy it and what was the final cost ($CDN) shipped to your door?
Thanks.
When you buy gear you do so with your needs in mind (like anything). I am well aware of the jitter issue and the scopes other feature outweigh that fault.
I am also in BC, Canada.
Where did you buy it and what was the final cost ($CDN) shipped to your door?
Thanks.
People are still buying this despite the jitter issue?How often do you need to use a 5µs delayed and perfectly timed sweep in your everyday measurements? I can go for weeks without needing delayed sweep.
Are they confident it is software fixable or do they think it won't affect them?
Software version is 00.04.04.SP300.04.04.SP3 or 00.04.02.SP3? If 00.04.04.SP3, then RIGOL is updating scopes pretty quickly.
Does have the jitter issue
Board 0.1.1
Sorry that was a mistake 00.04.02.SP3 is correct
How often do you need to use a 5µs delayed and perfectly timed sweep in your everyday measurements? I can go for weeks without needing delayed sweep.
Sorry in advance if I am posting in the wrong thread.
Yesterday I received a new DS1074Z. I also did the activation code DSER and it worked no problem. My question is, can I upgrade to the latest firmware? Currently the scope is version 00.04.01.SP2 and Board 0.1.1. Thanks for your help!
There is no point in updating the firmware unless you are having an issue that requires it. At this point there have been no major fixes.
When it does happen (major fixes) check the forum and ask if key upgrades will be killed. If they are then you will need to decide what is more critical. At this point there is no indication that they will but you never know.
How often do you need to use a 5µs delayed and perfectly timed sweep in your everyday measurements? I can go for weeks without needing delayed sweep.
Forget about jitter, this is not the jitter that is the problem, it is the ADC clock which is the problem. Jitter is just a way this defective ADC clock manifests itself. There may be other problems caused by the bad clock that are not that apparent. Unless ADC clock is fixed, people will never know that the measurements they do with the scope are good or incorrect.
People reading this and related topics, whenever they see written "5uS jitter problem" should replace it in their head with "ADC clock problem", then see if that makes them less comfortable then it is now.
Does the new firmware kill the upgrades?
A bit hard to estimate without understanding the horizontal and vertical scales used in these plots. Can you tell what it was in Mhz and dB ?
Can you post the same graph but with 6MHz span and 500kHz span?
I guess Bud's never gonna let this one go then. :-DDNor should he, the proper design and component implementation in test equipment is in ALL of our interests, is it not?
I guess Bud's never gonna let this one go then. :-DDNor should he, the proper design and component implementation in test equipment is in ALL of our interests, is it not?
As I wrote in another thread, I did the update on my 1074Z and it fixed the trigger jitter for me. However, the scope seems to be booting a lot slower now - is that a normal behavior or something fishy going on?I (still) haven't received my 1054Z so I cannot say anything about the pre/post-update boot time but depending on the nature of Rigol's PLL fix, maybe the firmware does some form of clock quality analysis during boot and goes through PLL parameter ranges to find the best parameters for individual PLLs. If that's the case, they should be saving those settings as a starting point for the next boot so the POST/BIST/Cal will not need to spend as much time searching afterwards, much like how cable modems store their last known-good configuration channel to avoid the blind 54-1000MHz scan to find it on subsequent power-ups assuming it has not changed.
Hello,
As I wrote in another thread, I did the update on my 1074Z and it fixed the trigger jitter for me. However, the scope seems to be booting a lot slower now - is that a normal behavior or something fishy going on?
- I ran the cal routine after the update. I don't know if that's a recommended procedure but as a general rule I do after a firmware update. Make sure the scope is up to temp so the cal is correct.
- I ran the cal routine after the update. I don't know if that's a recommended procedure but as a general rule I do after a firmware update. Make sure the scope is up to temp so the cal is correct.
Speaking of which... Is it just my scope, or do others see the same, uh, error in offset adjustment after a cal routine? It seems that the offset calculation takes the lowest value found in the noise and sets that to be the 0V, the result being that the trace sits "on top" of the center line. Unless i'm mistaken, i would expect the slightly noisy trace (when nothing is connected to the input) to be centered to the center line.
When manually selecting a smaller V/div setting it becomes more clear. While at the most sensitive setting(s) the noise goes well below the center line, it still is shifted upwards somewhat.
Greetings,
Chris
It looks to me like they are doing something to make the traces more visible when overlapped. If that's the case it would be nice to disable it.
I haven't noticed any boot delay. I'm getting 19 seconds.
As I wrote in another thread, I did the update on my 1074Z and it fixed the trigger jitter for me. However, the scope seems to be booting a lot slower now - is that a normal behavior or something fishy going on?I (still) haven't received my 1054Z so I cannot say anything about the pre/post-update boot time but depending on the nature of Rigol's PLL fix, maybe the firmware does some form of clock quality analysis during boot and goes through PLL parameter ranges to find the best parameters for individual PLLs. If that's the case, they should be saving those settings as a starting point for the next boot so the POST/BIST/Cal will not need to spend as much time searching afterwards, much like how cable modems store their last known-good configuration channel to avoid the blind 54-1000MHz scan to find it on subsequent power-ups assuming it has not changed.
I haven't noticed any boot delay. I'm getting 19 seconds.
I have just measured the boot time on mine from pushing the power button to trace on screen it takes 34 seconds here ...
The 19 seconds you have sounds more like what I had before. The scope seems to be functional otherwise, but the long startup time had me worried that the thing was hanging on boot!
Am i wrong in thinking that it should be indeed centered? I'd say it should be centered, since i would expect the noise to be distributed equally above and below 0V.I would definitely expect calibrated grounded or unconnected input to follow the channel's vertical position reference marker - centered on the noise's DC value, if any.
Am i wrong in thinking that it should be indeed centered? I'd say it should be centered, since i would expect the noise to be distributed equally above and below 0V.I would definitely expect calibrated grounded or unconnected input to follow the channel's vertical position reference marker - centered on the noise's DC value, if any.
I would not consider it a deal-breaking issue since it is easily subtracted out but it would certainly nag me a little - like any known defect in any product.
Very different, is it constant? Was the firmware update time excessive? Mine firmware install was under 2 minutes.
It looks to me like they are doing something to make the traces more visible when overlapped. If that's the case it would be nice to disable it.
I don't mean the sometimes strange display if all channels are enabled and nothing is connected. Just the offset from a single channel relative to the 0V center line.
Attached are three (lousy, since i don't have it connected to the computer) images of what i mean. The amount of offset changes slightly depending on what V/div setting is used, but generally the offset is never so that the trace, when no input is applied, is centered around the 0V center line.
Am i wrong in thinking that it should be indeed centered? I'd say it should be centered, since i would expect the noise to be distributed equally above and below 0V.
Greetings,
Chris
Very different, is it constant? Was the firmware update time excessive? Mine firmware install was under 2 minutes.
Yes, it is constant, same thing on every boot. The firmware update was fairly smooth and quick, no problems.
I am going to try to reset all the options and re-install them, perhaps the new firmware doesn't like something there.
Did you use DSER?
On mine channels 1 and 4 are similar sitting slightly above center (but still on) the zero graticule. Channels 2 and 3 are the same but slightly below center. I've run the cal 3 times and each time it varies slightly but the pairings are the same. Coupling does not matter nor does a grounded bnc or probe.
But even after removing all the options using the :SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall command, rebooting, reflashing the firmware again the scope still boots in the same ~35 seconds, with just the default trial versions of the options.Just a guess that long time is for PLL to lock?
Just a guess that long time is for PLL to lock?
Also ,set to 500s/div and watch the zero drift at power on. my DS2000 takes 30 minutes to be stable
And use averaging.
But even after removing all the options using the :SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall command, rebooting, reflashing the firmware again the scope still boots in the same ~35 seconds, with just the default trial versions of the options.
Ah well, as mentioned, not a deal breaker by a long shot. Just strange...Since Rigol uses an analog switch instead of a reed switch or relay, one possibility is that the ground offset comes from the analog switch having slightly different offset voltages on its ground and signal inputs. In that case, Rigol would need to provide a manual ground calibration option - either let people manually tell the scope how far out it is to set the offset or let the user initiate a manual auto-cal using the open/shorted inputs instead of the internally analog-switched ground.
Ah well, as mentioned, not a deal breaker by a long shot. Just strange...Since Rigol uses an analog switch instead of a reed switch or relay, one possibility is that the ground offset comes from the analog switch having slightly different offset voltages on its ground and signal inputs. In that case, Rigol would need to provide a manual ground calibration option - either let people manually tell the scope how far out it is to set the offset or let the user initiate a manual auto-cal using the open/shorted inputs instead of the internally analog-switched ground.
Upgrade worked fine for me and did NOT kill the upgrades.
LOVE the new EXTRA LARGE measurement font O0
However, the timescale doesn't go below 5.00 ns.
So, my only (stupid?) question remains, has the unlock made my scope a 100MHz?
I could also use the scope to more than 200 MHz without the waveform distorting. However if I enabled all four channels and viewed a sine wave, the waveform mysteriously dropped to 50 MHz for a 200 MHz input. The displayed frequency and the period of the waveform both equated to a 50 MHz signal!Nothing mysterious going on there.. With all 4 channels on the sampling rate is only 250 MSa/s. So your 200 MHz input is way above Nyquist. What you see is aliasing: 250 MSa/s - 200 MHz = ... 50 MHz!
OK, so I am pushing the scope beyond its limit, but interesting to see what happens.
Stand Alone Logging/ Recording.
I understand that this series has no onboard RTC or Date Generator,
so I would assume that for stand alone logging it simply allocate's a
sequential record number to the triggered event, or wait's for a file
name to be manually entered, I have no clue as to what take's place.
I expect that these unit's are a whole different monster when connected
to the PC Software and PC Clock, but my question relates to offline use.
Stand Alone Logging/ Recording.
I understand that this series has no onboard RTC or Date Generator,
so I would assume that for stand alone logging it simply allocate's a
sequential record number to the triggered event, or wait's for a file
name to be manually entered, I have no clue as to what take's place.
I expect that these unit's are a whole different monster when connected
to the PC Software and PC Clock, but my question relates to offline use.
Sequential file saving of waveforms is the norm. As for time stamping the file date on mine is 11-1-2014 1:00PM for all files. Time stamping is normally done on a PC by the OS so that should not be a problem there.
One feature I really like is the quickprint button, you set up the file format and type ahead of time and then just his the one button to save the file. It works really well and is very handy for documentation.
As for buy it now or later, I purchased before the jitter issue was solved. In fact after the first failed revision (beta) release. Even with the jitter issue it was well worth the money. The triggering variations on the unit work really well and for me that has turned out to be the best feature so far. Seriously it's amazing what you get for the money.
Stand Alone Logging/ Recording.
I understand that this series has no onboard RTC or Date Generator,so I would assume that for stand alone logging it simply allocate's a sequential record number to the triggered event, or wait's for a file name to be manually entered, I have no clue as to what take's place.
I expect that these unit's are a whole different monster when connected to the PC Software and PC Clock, but my question relates to offline use.
Sequential file saving of waveforms is the norm. As for time stamping the file date on mine is 11-1-2014 1:00PM for all files. Time stamping is normally done on a PC by the OS so that should not be a problem there.
Sequential file saving of waveforms is the norm. As for time stamping the file date on mine is 11-1-2014 1:00PM for all files. Time stamping is normally done on a PC by the OS so that should not be a problem there.
Thanks to pickle9000,
Was that date stamp you refered to a folder that you created and then addressed with
your own label, and if so would that folder then contain the sequential waveform events
that can be called up localy on the scope without PC connection.
The manual get's a bit confusing for me at this point
in referance to recall of waveforms and setup's.
Thanks to rf-loop
The image that you provided for the Siglent was ideal, date, time stamp and
events within those time stamps, I dont know how the DS-1054z display's
the event log although I did see it in a video.
I cant remember if it was Dave's, Connor Wolfe's, Echen's, the list goes on and on.
Again Many Thanks
Muttley
As far as I know (with my DS1074Z) it do not have segment (frame) time stamps. Segment number is sequential number but afterward do not know if there is 100us or 100s between two acquired segment.
When Siglent DS2000 acquire max 400000 segment in second every segment have real time stamp with us resolution.
Lastly, the 4-channel SDS2000 unit costs 3x as much as the Rigol you're comparing it against, so the fact that the 1000z has more limitations is only to be expected. Thus it's harder to criticize on that basis.There's also 4 times the sampling available with 2 or 4 channels used with the SDS2000. ;)
As far as I know (with my DS1074Z) it do not have segment (frame) time stamps. Segment number is sequential number but afterward do not know if there is 100us or 100s between two acquired segment.
Yes, that is correct. (and disappointing, but understandable)QuoteWhen Siglent DS2000 acquire max 400000 segment in second every segment have real time stamp with us resolution.
The uSec timestamps on the SDS2000 are excellent. Not only that it has them, at good resolution, but also in how they're displayed and navigated.
However, the SDS2000 does not capture 400,000 segments. It's maximum is 80,000 segments (frames).
Lastly, the 4-channel SDS2000 unit costs 3x as much as the Rigol you're comparing it against, so the fact that the 1000z has more limitations is only to be expected. Thus it's harder to criticize on that basis.
There is a later f/w version to cure the trigger jitter, it will become SP4 after the update
BTW: its on firmware 4.02.SP3 and board version jumps between 0.1.1 and 0.2.1 :D
Hi everyone :)
Just got my new DS1054z today, did a quick test to see if everything is working and of course it has ;)
Then i was trying to do a little "upgrade" via the DSER key and the known website and it dosent work, all it says is "Invalid Licens" :-\
It already has the Newest Firmware 4.02.SP4 factory installed and the Board Version jumps from 0.2.2 to 0.1.1 :-\
as you can see on the Screenshot
Does anyone have the same Problem "Upgrading" his new Scope ?
Thx for all the Replys ;)
It already has the Newest Firmware 4.02.SP4 factory installed and the Board Version jumps from 0.2.2 to 0.1.1 :-\
as you can see on the Screenshot
Anyone know if the 100 MHz hack is reversible? From what I recall, it changes the model type and doesn't uninstall using the uninstall all command.
Yes there are some commands you can execute from the ultravision software command interface that will delete the key.Any clue as to which command will remove it? There had been earlier comments that "uninstall all" didn't remove it, as it changed the model to 1104.
Any clue as to which command will remove it?
Except it has been previously reported that the 100 MHz mod changed the model number and wasn't reversible by "uninstall". Do you know if that is the case, or not?
For God's sake ::)
Search -> scpi command uninstall
Or download the pdf manual and use the search funktion there, please.
Argh- Tequipment just re-updated the ship date on my 1054Z from the 20th to the 26th.
I wish there was a 4 channel scope in the DS2XXX series for < $1k. The low price on the 1054Z is making it hard for Rigol to keep up with demand.
Argh- Tequipment just re-updated the ship date on my 1054Z from the 20th to the 26th.
I wish there was a 4 channel scope in the DS2XXX series for < $1k. The low price on the 1054Z is making it hard for Rigol to keep up with demand.
Yeah I got the same email today, sucks. I actually got excited at first, thought they might have shipped it out today.
Its probably only a slight delay as I am sure the scopes have been in transit now for some time.
Good News for me :D
i used the Tool and the first Code Successfully worked :-+
Thanks for all the Tips and Hints and of Course for the Amazing work :-+ :-+
Argh- Tequipment just re-updated the ship date on my 1054Z from the 20th to the 26th.
I wish there was a 4 channel scope in the DS2XXX series for < $1k. The low price on the 1054Z is making it hard for Rigol to keep up with demand.
I am on that list too, delayed till 26th. Are the Rigols purchased from TEquipment shipped from Rigol in Beaverton, OR or NJ?
But you may have to request tracking # once you see complete order status at TE, 7 days NJ to WAAre the Rigols purchased from TEquipment shipped from Rigol in Beaverton, OR or NJ?My DS2072 was shipped from NJ.
Hello, I am wondering if anyone tested 500uV after SP4.
Maybe Rigol fixed this problem.
Could anyone test it if it is possible?
Well it looks like I was very lucky to get the last one from Batronix, their website is now showing "end of March / beginning of April". Ordered on Sunday and received on Thursday, excellent service!Same here. Ordered Sunday (22:53) and received it on Thursday in The Netherlands :-+
Argh- Tequipment just re-updated the ship date on my 1054Z from the 20th to the 26th.
I wish there was a 4 channel scope in the DS2XXX series for < $1k. The low price on the 1054Z is making it hard for Rigol to keep up with demand.
Yeah I got the same email today, sucks. I actually got excited at first, thought they might have shipped it out today.
Its probably only a slight delay as I am sure the scopes have been in transit now for some time.
We got 383 units in yesterday. They started shipping today but most will ship monday. We will have 110 left for stock after everything ships! This is the 1st time we have had stock since it was launched.
Best Regards,
Evan
TEquipment.NET
http://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/ (http://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/)
Wonder if the code generators to unlock all features still work...They still work with the latest firmware.
A bit annoying that I ordered from Rigol UK and yet the wait is still said to be at another month!
Just shot them an Email to see, might just order elsewhere and pay a bit extra for shipping.
A bit annoying that I ordered from Rigol UK and yet the wait is still said to be at another month!
Just shot them an Email to see, might just order elsewhere and pay a bit extra for shipping.
In case anyone is misled by the name, Rigol do not have a UK operation - their European branch office is in Germany.
Rigol UK is just a trading name for Telonic Instruments Ltd, who are a UK-based Rigol distributor.
Except it has been previously reported that the 100 MHz mod changed the model number and wasn't reversible by "uninstall". Do you know if that is the case, or not?
For God's sake ::)
Search -> scpi command uninstall
Or download the pdf manual and use the search funktion there, please.
I can confirm all options, 100MHz included :-+ are reversible on sp3. Model number is 1054z after uninstall.
Like hammy statet, use the scpi command ":SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall" in the SCPI control panel of ultra sigma.
I can switch them on and off no probs no power cycle needed.
Yago - I bought my DS1074Z-S & DP832 from Telonic in November '13 during the DP832 issues highlighted by Dave J. I have no connection with them other than that transaction. I have rarely received better service than I did from them.
My experience with them is noted in this forum.
However, what those trial hours in installed options means? ???They're software options available for the scope that have a limited time of activation. Once they expire, they're no longer usable until you purchase the license key.
Those features will expire and we have to pay extra or some kind of license was not installed in this review demo? ::)
That said, it can be hacked (here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/ds1000z-serie-unlocking/msg491026/#msg491026)).Thank you for explaining this hack issue.
Is it possible to connect DS1054Z oscilloscope to Linux box somehow, because of Windows USB support looked very bad in this review?
I'm not holding too many hopes for USB, but LXI should work. Applications - that's another matter!I've forgot about LXI (LAN eXtensions for Instruments) and it looks like it should be quite easy and cool to automate some tasks with a few lines of code :-+
$ telnet 192.168.1.126 5555
Trying 192.168.1.126...
Connected to 192.168.1.126.
Escape character is '^]'.
*IDN?
Rigol Technologies,DSA815,DSA8A154402661,00.01.07.00.01
So the only concern is for the moment Programming Guide from Rigol for this DS1054Z scope? :-BROKE
Of course no need to use bloody telnet for this connection while a few lines of code in C/C++ can setup such TCP connection and send whatever we want and as many times as we want and do what we want and write in our software >:D
Of course, it's trivial to implement an LXI client from a command point of view so I'd probably not bother with the aforementioned lib.When made a quick view into this manual above it looks like that LXI and USB (usbtc) uses the same SCPI comands, but also other control methods are mentioned:
You can control the oscilloscope remotely by sending SCPI commands via the PC software (Ultra Sigma)LXI looks like system independent while TCP is used.
provided by RIGOL. Besides, you can also control the instrument using the “Measurement &
Automation Explorer” of NI (National Instruments Corporation) or the “Agilent IO Libraries Suite” of
Agilent (Agilent Technologies, Inc.).
Of course, it's trivial to implement an LXI client from a command point of view so I'd probably not bother with the aforementioned lib.When made a quick view into this manual above it looks like that LXI and USB (usbtc) uses the same SCPI comands, but also other control methods are mentioned:QuoteYou can control the oscilloscope remotely by sending SCPI commands via the PC software (Ultra Sigma)LXI looks like system independent while TCP is used.
provided by RIGOL. Besides, you can also control the instrument using the “Measurement &
Automation Explorer” of NI (National Instruments Corporation) or the “Agilent IO Libraries Suite” of
Agilent (Agilent Technologies, Inc.).
It is interesting from performance point of view which one can be faster LXI or USB ? ::)
This is some kind of standard ethernet card port from hardware point of view inside this DS1054Z oscilloscope (fast ethernet or maybe even gigabit) or something different?
Does anyone know how to dump the entire recorded data into CSV file(s)?One of the options in the Storage menu once you choose CVS format is Source: [Display|Memory], you need to select "Memory."
Heh. Just for fun I used telnet and :SYSTem:OPTion:INSTall [key] to turn on all the options on mine.This screen looks much better now >:D
Does anyone know how to dump the entire recorded data into CSV file(s)?One of the options in the Storage menu once you choose CVS format is Source: [Display|Memory], you need to select "Memory."
Saving a 6Mpts record to USB memory stick this way takes forever since you are looking at a 100+MB file and a USB stick write speed of about 150KB/s.
I tried exporting waveform data to CSV so I could import it in OpenOffice:Calc and do a DFT on it for power factor measurement. My first attempt was with 6Mpts but after the horrendously slow export and seeing how slow Calc is at dealing with 1M cells per channel, I decided to drop to 60k - sampling at over 1000xFs is already plenty overkill.
External trigger is commonly omitted on four-channel scopes. Even the four-channel Tek scopes I've had don't have it. I guess it's seen as something of a hack to get a bit more performance out of an otherwise limited two-channel instrument...
External trigger is commonly omitted on four-channel scopes. Even the four-channel Tek scopes I've had don't have it. I guess it's seen as something of a hack to get a bit more performance out of an otherwise limited two-channel instrument...
External trigger is commonly omitted on four-channel scopes. Even the four-channel Tek scopes I've had don't have it. I guess it's seen as something of a hack to get a bit more performance out of an otherwise limited two-channel instrument...
Does anyone know how to dump the entire recorded data into CSV file(s)?One of the options in the Storage menu once you choose CVS format is Source: [Display|Memory], you need to select "Memory."
External trigger is commonly omitted on four-channel scopes. Even the four-channel Tek scopes I've had don't have it. I guess it's seen as something of a hack to get a bit more performance out of an otherwise limited two-channel instrument...The Siglent SDS2000 series 2 & 4 Ch versions have an Ext trigger rear BNC as standard and it is available in menus for various uses. ;)
When I do that, I just get one frame. For example, I set my memory depth to 12K, and when I record the waveform, I get some 5000 frames, of 12K points. When I save to a CVS file and select memory, I get 1 CSV file with 12,000 points in it, not a csv file with 12K * 5000 points, or 5000 CSV files of 12K points.I haven't tried messing with segmented memory yet. With the number of little things Rigol seems to have gotten wrong in the DS1000z, I would not be surprised if omitting to enable dumping segmented capture memory (at least without writing an SCPI/VISA app to walk through them and download them individually to a PC) was one of them.
Surprisingly Rigol's 1000B low-end, older, 4-channel series scopes have an external trigger input.
External trigger is commonly omitted on four-channel scopes. Even the four-channel Tek scopes I've had don't have it. I guess it's seen as something of a hack to get a bit more performance out of an otherwise limited two-channel instrument...
When I do that, I just get one frame. For example, I set my memory depth to 12K, and when I record the waveform, I get some 5000 frames, of 12K points. When I save to a CVS file and select memory, I get 1 CSV file with 12,000 points in it, not a csv file with 12K * 5000 points, or 5000 CSV files of 12K points.
I am not sure where did you get the idea about the 5000 * 12k points. It simply dumps either whatever is on the screen, if you select "Screen" as the source or the entire memory of the scope, if you select "Memory". There is no concept of "frames" there - what are you referring to?I'm pretty much certain he was thinking about segmented memory recording. At 12k points per frame / segment / trigger event, that would be 500 waveforms to fill the 6Mpts memory per channel though.
I'm finally saying goodbye to my Tek boat anchor - does anyone know if the tequipment discount is still live and how to get one?PM sent.
I'm pretty much certain he was thinking about segmented memory recording. At 12k points per frame / segment / trigger event, that would be 500 waveforms to fill the 6Mpts memory per channel though.
I have not tried segmented memory yet but I'm guessing the memory dump function only dumps the currently selected segment.
So....after a bit of back-and-forth it seems clear that the DS1054Z indeed has something like 100MHz bandwidth after inputting the codes.
What we really need is somebody who can do a test before/after, preferably with two scopes side by side.
I don't mean to change the subject, but how does the cutoff point for those specs typically work anyhow? ...
Is it normal for scopes to go that far past their frequency spec, or is 50 just the point where they should begin to lose something?
So....after a bit of back-and-forth it seems clear that the DS1054Z indeed has something like 100MHz bandwidth after inputting the codes.I have a DS1054Z and a commercial grade Marconi RF signal generator that is flat within a dB or so to 512 MHz. Using a through 50 Ohm terminator on an "unhacked" 1054 and 50 Ohm coax, shows a -3dB bandwidth of between 95 and 98 MHz. Opening up the scope to mimic an 1104Z, with "100 MHz" bandwidth, gives a measured -3dB bandwidth in excess of 130 MHz. Individual scopes may vary, but my scope has well over it's specified bandwidth out of the box without hacking.
What we really need is somebody who can do a test before/after, preferably with two scopes side by side.
Search function is very useful or just reading few posts before :)PM sent.
A few posts per page on this thread are about discount code....
Looking to get one of these Rigol DS1054Z scopes. Can someone pass along the discount code please?PM sent
Thanks!
Search function is very useful or just reading few posts before :)
A few posts per page on this thread are about discount code....
Hello, I am wondering if anyone tested 500uV after SP4.
Maybe Rigol fixed this problem.
Could anyone test it if it is possible?
500uV is for another Rigol scope, the 1054z does not have that capability.
Hello, I am wondering if anyone tested 500uV after SP4.
Maybe Rigol fixed this problem.
Could anyone test it if it is possible?
500uV is for another Rigol scope, the 1054z does not have that capability.
Well the 1054Z(hacked) I have has it or had it. I just upgraded the firmware to SP4 and while it is listed in the installed options it no longer works at all.
As far as I know, the hacked 500µV range on the DS1000Z has never worked in the first place. If it "worked" for you at some point, it likely was a fluke. For most people, all they see is the channel going railed. Even if it had a usable 500µV range, the front-ends are already noisy enough at 1mV that 500µV would be mostly useless.500uV is for another Rigol scope, the 1054z does not have that capability.
Well the 1054Z(hacked) I have has it or had it. I just upgraded the firmware to SP4 and while it is listed in the installed options it no longer works at all.
If I set the scale to 1-second per segment, I must wait 6 seconds before I see anything, then I get real-time data plotting for the next 6 seconds.Yes Display starts after trigger event
If I move the horizontal marker to the edge of the furthest-left segment, I get plotting in realtime across all 12-segments. I figured this was some setting I accidentally enabled somewhere, but I can't find such a feature.
Does anyone have any ideas? Is this just the way that this oscope works?
As far as I know, the hacked 500µV range on the DS1000Z has never worked in the first place. If it "worked" for you at some point, it likely was a fluke. For most people, all they see is the channel going railed. Even if it had a usable 500µV range, the front-ends are already noisy enough at 1mV that 500µV would be mostly useless.500uV is for another Rigol scope, the 1054z does not have that capability.
Well the 1054Z(hacked) I have has it or had it. I just upgraded the firmware to SP4 and while it is listed in the installed options it no longer works at all.
Yes Display starts after trigger event
use Horizontal position(next to Scale) to move to the left , even off the display.
Masejoer, behaviour you have described is consistent with slow time base and a trigger - there will be no trace until trigger happens which can take 6-60s or more. To show real time trace in slow time base:
- enable "roll mode"
- move trigger point to the left of the screen - it will show trace immediately after trigger
- force single trigger manually
It doesn't help when every request shows PM sent instead of how to get it.True. I was able to get it quickly by opening a chat session at the site. I'm guessing there's a rule about posting it in the forum (maybe to encourage registration), but it's certainly not a closely guarded secret.
The point is that you need to be a member of the EEVBlog forums to get the discount.
Anyone have problems with the generated codes on the latest batch of DS1000z scopes? I had no problem, but a buddy of mine with a serial # only 80 higher (same batch of scopes) is getting invalid license. Wondering if the private key changed?
Anyone have problems with the generated codes on the latest batch of DS1000z scopes? I had no problem, but a buddy of mine with a serial # only 80 higher (same batch of scopes) is getting invalid license. Wondering if the private key changed?
Does he use the Website or the Programm itself ?
I had also Problems with the Website, that never gives me a Working key... :(
But then i tried the Windows Programm and everything worked Perfect on the First try ;D
Strange...
What Option did he tried ? The Full Option "DSER" ?
I first just tried the Recording Option and that workd great for me...
Maybe he can try that if not already had....
Anyone have problems with the generated codes on the latest batch of DS1000z scopes? I had no problem, but a buddy of mine with a serial # only 80 higher (same batch of scopes) is getting invalid license. Wondering if the private key changed?
Did he try a few times, the web version doesnt necessarily spit out a working key 1st time, but it definetely works. it may take a few attempts, and use DSER.
Most have applied the key then installed SP4. Has anyone else tried putting the DSER key in at SP4?
Does he use the Website or the Programm itself ?
I had also Problems with the Website, that never gives me a Working key... :(
But then i tried the Windows Programm and everything worked Perfect on the First try ;D
At first when I installed the new firmware, the board version was shown as 0.2.3. Then I successfully unlocked the recommended options, and the board version changed to 0.2.2. Now, the board version is shown as 0.1.1 even though nothing has changed. Any idea why the scope can't seem to make up its mind?Mine jumped around board revision numbers a few times before settling for 0.1.1 too, which is odd considering how the board version number is set by resistors on the PCB and should not change on their own.
Hi guys,Emona comes up a lot from other members in Australia. Worst case, you might compare both to TEquipment as well (they do ship internationally).
I'm considering buying this scope in AUS. Where can I get the best price? I guess none of these "discount codes" would apply/be worth it for anyone in aus? Looking at eyou.com.au at the moment...
Hi guys,Emona comes up a lot from other members in Australia. Worst case, you might compare both to TEquipment as well (they do ship internationally).
I'm considering buying this scope in AUS. Where can I get the best price? I guess none of these "discount codes" would apply/be worth it for anyone in aus? Looking at eyou.com.au at the moment...
PM sent.
GDay
Thank's for your comment, It was only a few week's ago that I confirmed
with Emona both price and expected arrival, at that time they were
$439 + 10% = $483, now they are $479 + 10% = $527.
Also, from what I understand eyou get them from Emona anyhow.
Emona support Dave, so I will support Emona, no middle man.
Muttley
GDay
Thank's for your comment, It was only a few week's ago that I confirmed
with Emona both price and expected arrival, at that time they were
$439 + 10% = $483, now they are $479 + 10% = $527.
Also, from what I understand eyou get them from Emona anyhow.
Emona support Dave, so I will support Emona, no middle man.
Muttley
Here's the code for Australia " Ripped Off "
Although to be fair the Aussie dollar is down at the moment.
Muttley
1. I used ds1052e a couple of times before and it had 'alternate trigger' mode. How can I achieve the same functionality with this scope?
3. Is there any PC software that would allow using this scope as a logic analyzer? I'm particularly interested in CAN, USB and simple binary decoding.
For CAN , Add decoding option with KeyI don't think DS1054z supports CAN decoding.
USB , is just PC with USB monitoring programI am not sure what you meant. ??? Please explain. :)
SeeThanks, I think delayed trigger is what I need.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-and-multiple-triggering-individual-triggering-on-each-channel/msg538623/#msg538623 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-and-multiple-triggering-individual-triggering-on-each-channel/msg538623/#msg538623)
Just to clarify - does this happen on other scopes?2. When I switch from 2V/div to 5V/div (10x attenuation) on AC coupling the waveform shifts down after the relay clicks and then rises up again. Does this happen because the input coupling capacitor charges up or something? Not a big deal, but it's slightly annoying.Not sure
I use only Linux, so I was really hoping sigrok would work. Unfortunately, there appears to be a bug in the scope firmware that prevents more than 500 bytes transfer over USB. I will take a stab at it some time in the future, but for now it doesn't work.I didn't know there is support for linux, thanks for the info. Although I'm not really concerned about the OS. You mentioned a bug with USB, but what about LXI?
If the 1054Z has CAN decoding, it's news to me. I've been using a new Saleae Logic 8. But if the scope can do it, that would be excellent. I suspect that it cannot, however. Do the higher end Rigols have CAN decoding?
You mentioned a bug with USB, but what about LXI?I haven't verified the USB bug yet for lack of time. I'll check LXI too once I get the time. Hopefully, it won't take too long! :)
It doesn't help when every request shows PM sent instead of how to get it.True. I was able to get it quickly by opening a chat session at the site. I'm guessing there's a rule about posting it in the forum (maybe to encourage registration), but it's certainly not a closely guarded secret.
Is the DS1054Z in stock at TEquipment?
What is the best place to buy one in Canada?
Does anyone know why I might be getting out of phase glitches that appear on the screen when measuring say a 10 KHz sine wave from an audio source?
The problem sometimes goes away if I use the small metal spring instead of the aligator clip for grounding. Can it be a problem with the amplifier or is it a loose connection? I'm confused. |O
Does anyone know why I might be getting out of phase glitches that appear on the screen when measuring say a 10 KHz sine wave from an audio source?This may not be related to your phase glitches, but I noticed an issue with one of the probes.
Does anyone know why I might be getting out of phase glitches that appear on the screen when measuring say a 10 KHz sine wave from an audio source?This may not be related to your phase glitches, but I noticed an issue with one of the probes.
Most of the time I set the probes to x1 attenuation, since I don't need the bandwidth. I noticed that sometimes the amplitude suddenly starts to drop/bounce. When I switch to x10 the problem goes away. I think the attenuation switch is a bit dicky. I made a couple of tests to make sure it's not a bad connection and I'm pretty confident that the switch is to blame.
It doesn't help when every request shows PM sent instead of how to get it.True. I was able to get it quickly by opening a chat session at the site. I'm guessing there's a rule about posting it in the forum (maybe to encourage registration), but it's certainly not a closely guarded secret.
Can you please PM me the Rigol code? Thanks!
May I please also have the discount code?PM sent.
Hi, could I have the discount code for tequipment.com as well? Does it apply to the DS2000 series? And is it only valid outside the US? Thanks!Yes, it will apply to the DS2000 series. PM sent.
I didn't find the dedicated thread. Could you post a nudge and/or PM discount code? Thanks!Searching "Tequipment code" or "Tequipment thread", would have gotten what you wanted, including the thread Special Price FOR EEVblog Members (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/special-price-for-eevblog-members/). :)
Is the DS1054Z in stock at TEquipment?
What is the best place to buy one in Canada?
rigolcanada.com or http://www.electro-meters.com (http://www.electro-meters.com)
Is the DS1054Z in stock at TEquipment?
What is the best place to buy one in Canada?
rigolcanada.com or http://www.electro-meters.com (http://www.electro-meters.com)
Prices from electro-meter seem fair. Has anybody ordered from them before?
Thanks, on the West Coast. Will give them a call. Assume they are the authorized dealers for Rigol if any issues.
Do the 4 channels share a same ground?
Or are the 4 channel working as independent differential inputs that float in respect to each other?
-Didix
Do the 4 channels share a same ground?
Or are the 4 channel working as independent differential inputs that float in respect to each other?
-Didix
same ground for all 4 channels - same as the majority of the scopes ;) to get a floating input you need a differential probe.
Do the 4 channels share a same ground?
Or are the 4 channel working as independent differential inputs that float in respect to each other?
-Didix
same ground for all 4 channels - same as the majority of the scopes ;) to get a floating input you need a differential probe.
Or detach the ground clips in two probes and use the probes and math function CH1-CH2 (A-B) for example, as a differential probe, but the math function in the ds2000 is a bit slow, so it's probably as slow in the DS1054Z.
By slow I don't mean that you will loose the signals, but the display will lag displaying the output if trying to look at the signal "live"
Do the 4 channels share a same ground?
Or are the 4 channel working as independent differential inputs that float in respect to each other?
same ground for all 4 channels - same as the majority of the scopes ;)
Do the 4 channels share a same ground?
Or are the 4 channel working as independent differential inputs that float in respect to each other?
same ground for all 4 channels - same as the majority of the scopes ;)
And also connected to mains ground - watch out where you connect the ground clip of your probes!
Do the 4 channels share a same ground?
Or are the 4 channel working as independent differential inputs that float in respect to each other?
-Didix
same ground for all 4 channels - same as the majority of the scopes ;) to get a floating input you need a differential probe.
Or detach the ground clips in two probes and use the probes and math function CH1-CH2 (A-B) for example, as a differential probe, but the math function in the ds2000 is a bit slow, so it's probably as slow in the DS1054Z.
By slow I don't mean that you will loose the signals, but the display will lag displaying the output if trying to look at the signal "live"
Now I noticed some noise on the track. It's go there also with the inputs set to GND... If I have to return it I have to reset options! How can I do it? Do you have some hints?Use the SCPI command :SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall, then reboot the oscilloscope.
Now I noticed some noise on the track. It's still there also with the inputs set to GND... Sometimes I can see little rectangular waves, other times sawtooth, sometimes I see 3mm of noise also in 1V/div. If I do something, then I come back, sometimes track become thin, with only a little, acceptable noise.
Do anyone have a similar problem on his DSO?
Is that math function included in the basic package of the DS1054Z?As far as i know it's included, press the math button and check.
-Didix
However, the track is noisy also with the input coupling selector set to GND: if the problem is due to RF interference, it is a shielding problem near the AD converter, because RF can't enter from the BNC.Does this happen on any other oscilloscope you have?
Is that math function included in the basic package of the DS1054Z?As far as i know it's included, press the math button and check.
-Didix
Even old scopes have an add with inverted signal on the 2nd channel, and old analog scopes are actually faster to do this than modern ones because they do it real time in the analog space.Is that math function included in the basic package of the DS1054Z?As far as i know it's included, press the math button and check.
-Didix
I sure would do so if I had one ::)
I am thinking about buying one - that would be an addtl feature that my 40 yrs old Siemens is not supporting.
-Didix
No, I haven't any other oscilloscope. I was thinking to buy one in 1986, but my uncle gave me an oscilloscope for some time, then I bought a portable DAT recorder ;)However, the track is noisy also with the input coupling selector set to GND: if the problem is due to RF interference, it is a shielding problem near the AD converter, because RF can't enter from the BNC.Does this happen on any other oscilloscope you have?
And/or do you have any metal screen to fully cover the DS1054Z (thinking DIY Faraday screen)?
Here are some pictures.I would agree that most likely something gets into the signal path well behind the inputs, near the A/D converter. The fact that you can get the same amplitude of the noise/interference signal at either 5mV/div or 1V/div is consistent with that assumption. It probably also makes no difference at all whether you switch the 20 MHz bandwidth limit on or off? The 125 MHz frequency you see seems not directly related to the FM frequency. It might be a subharmonic of the 1 GHz or 500 MHz sampling frequency?
In the evening I was thinking that near home (300~500m) there is a FM transmitting antenna on 105MHz and 93.3MHz. It's very powerful: with some FM radios I can't receive some other stations, because signals take input stages into saturation.
However, the track is noisy also with the input coupling selector set to GND: if the problem is due to RF interference, it is a shielding problem near the AD converter, because RF can't enter from the BNC.
Even old scopes have an add with inverted signal on the 2nd channel, and old analog scopes are actually faster to do this than modern ones because they do it real time in the analog space.Is that math function included in the basic package of the DS1054Z?As far as i know it's included, press the math button and check.
-Didix
I sure would do so if I had one ::)
I am thinking about buying one - that would be an addtl feature that my 40 yrs old Siemens is not supporting.
-Didix
So if you have an A+B and you can set B to be the inverse its the same thing as A-B
In the evening I could make a test in the cellar or with an aluminum foil.Metal window screen would be better, as you'd be able to see through it while the scope is on (quick & easy way to determine if it's RF). ;) No leakage issues at any rate this way vs. aluminum foil (due to access for viewing & operation during test).
But what I finally need is to measure two signals at different positions in my circuit, where (at least) one of the signals needs to be measured floating.From using the scope and reading manual I would say you can do only one pair (A-B or C-D), but not both because only one math channel is available. Maybe you can capture signals on 4 channels, stop scope, calculate math, add reference traces for both combinations and go from there.
As much as I understand I cannot do this with my only two channels that are referenced to common ground.
So I guess the best would be to have an 4 channel scope and measuring differential A-B and C-D.
Well, so the question is still open:
Is that math function where I can do (differential A-B and C-D) included in the basic package of the DS1054Z?
But what I finally need is to measure two signals at different positions in my circuit, where (at least) one of the signals needs to be measured floating.From using the scope and reading manual I would say you can do only one pair (A-B or C-D), but not both because only one math channel is available. Maybe you can capture signals on 4 channels, stop scope, calculate math, add reference traces for both combinations and go from there.
As much as I understand I cannot do this with my only two channels that are referenced to common ground.
So I guess the best would be to have an 4 channel scope and measuring differential A-B and C-D.
Well, so the question is still open:
Is that math function where I can do (differential A-B and C-D) included in the basic package of the DS1054Z?
Anyway, depending on what you do with differential measurements, real differential probes (either high V or high BW) are the way to go.
For my current application it would be ok to measure one signal differential (A-B) and the second signal referenced to ground (C only).Yes, I have measured differential signals. Add math channel of 2 signals and see combined result. Scope runs slower with math on though.
As I understand you have done differential measurements?
To get back to my original but yet unanswered question ::) :Yes, basic scope has a math features. Only advanced triggering and decoding are an option.
Is that math function included in the basic package of the DS1054Z?
For my current application it would be ok to measure one signal differential (A-B) and the second signal referenced to ground (C only).Yes, I have measured differential signals. Add math channel of 2 signals and see combined result. Scope runs slower with math on though.
As I understand you have done differential measurements?QuoteTo get back to my original but yet unanswered question ::) :Yes, basic scope has a math features. Only advanced triggering and decoding are an option.
Is that math function included in the basic package of the DS1054Z?
Those who got a new DS1054Z in the last couple of weeks, what firmware and hardware versions did you receive?
Were you still able to "upgrade" to all options? I read that 00.04.02.04.07 the "upgrade doesn't work https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/is-ds1054z-with-firmware-00-04-02-04-07-hackable/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/is-ds1054z-with-firmware-00-04-02-04-07-hackable/)
Cheers!
Were you still able to "upgrade" to all options? I read that 00.04.02.04.07 the "upgrade doesn't work https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/is-ds1054z-with-firmware-00-04-02-04-07-hackable/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/is-ds1054z-with-firmware-00-04-02-04-07-hackable/)
Were you still able to "upgrade" to all options? I read that 00.04.02.04.07 the "upgrade doesn't work https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/is-ds1054z-with-firmware-00-04-02-04-07-hackable/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/is-ds1054z-with-firmware-00-04-02-04-07-hackable/)
Some "failed" upgrade attempts have been reported which were traceable to mis-typed serial numbers, or to the online keygen not always refreshing properly. It seems advisable to poll the keygen a couple of times and check whether you get consistent output.
Cheers,
Jürgen
Were you still able to "upgrade" to all options? I read that 00.04.02.04.07 the "upgrade doesn't work https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/is-ds1054z-with-firmware-00-04-02-04-07-hackable/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/is-ds1054z-with-firmware-00-04-02-04-07-hackable/)
Not sure why there is so much confusion around this. The firmware version you mentioned is the latest one (which the scope indicates as "00.04.02 SP4" in the system information). The key generator for upgrades still works fine with that version.
Can you post some noise pictures?Hi Datman,
Thanks!
Also, the switches of the 4 (!) probes are defective in position x1, then i have 2 reasons for shipping. How are your probes? Do they work without any problem at 1x? Please test series resistance, because problems do not appear on the scope until resistance is under several kohms.
How are your probes? Do they work without any problem at 1x?Out of my two DS1054Z, I have one probe with an effectively broken 1X switch (almost never works), two with somewhat flaky 1X (wiggling the switch may cause them to break contact and go 10X) and another probe where the needle tip "nub" the hook attachment clips onto sometimes gets stuck inside the attachment.
Where did you order your scope -- Batronix, by any chance? I had concluded that I would use my 30-year-old 20 MHz probes if I need 1x sensitivity at low bandwidth, but come to think of it, maybe I should ask them to swap the probes for a set that works as advertised...I've bought my scope from ALLDATA here, in Italy.
... I was wondering if there is a way of setting the date and time on the DS1054Z?
There is no real time clock on the unit. I'm not sure why they left it out.Adding it in would cost a battery, an RTC chip, a crystal and a few other support components. No budget for that on a $400 scope!
Adding it in would cost a battery, an RTC chip, a crystal and a few other support components. No budget for that on a $400 scope!How much would that cost in volume - $5-10, perhaps? Additional design effort would be small, because they could just reuse the design from another series. I suppose they wanted to keep the BOM cost below some threshold, otherwise they could have just increased the price by $10.
Adding it in would cost a battery, an RTC chip, a crystal and a few other support components. No budget for that on a $400 scope!How much would that cost in volume - $5-10, perhaps? Additional design effort would be small, because they could just reuse the design from another series. I suppose they wanted to keep the BOM cost below some threshold, otherwise they could have just increased the price by $10.
Adding it in would cost a battery, an RTC chip, a crystal and a few other support components. No budget for that on a $400 scope!How much would that cost in volume - $5-10, perhaps? Additional design effort would be small, because they could just reuse the design from another series. I suppose they wanted to keep the BOM cost below some threshold, otherwise they could have just increased the price by $10.
RTC modules are less than $1 from AliExpress, so I doubt the BOM cost would be more than that, but they would have had to design in a battery holder and door.
My humble apologies if I have missed this, but I was wondering if there is a way of setting the date and time on the DS1054Z?
When I save a wave pic to USB drive the date is 1/1/1980.
Adding it in would cost a battery, an RTC chip, a crystal and a few other support components. No budget for that on a $400 scope!How much would that cost in volume - $5-10, perhaps? Additional design effort would be small, because they could just reuse the design from another series. I suppose they wanted to keep the BOM cost below some threshold, otherwise they could have just increased the price by $10.
RTC modules are less than $1 from AliExpress, so I doubt the BOM cost would be more than that, but they would have had to design in a battery holder and door.
Adding it in would cost a battery, an RTC chip, a crystal and a few other support components. No budget for that on a $400 scope!How much would that cost in volume - $5-10, perhaps? Additional design effort would be small, because they could just reuse the design from another series. I suppose they wanted to keep the BOM cost below some threshold, otherwise they could have just increased the price by $10.
RTC modules are less than $1 from AliExpress, so I doubt the BOM cost would be more than that, but they would have had to design in a battery holder and door.
Why would it need a door? A properly designed RTC should run for many years on a single cell. Long past warranty, at which point, who cares?
Perhaps. What did they do on the DS2000?
There is no real time clock on the unit. I'm not sure why they left it out.
Could someone have a look on this short movie I recorded and tell me if my Rigol has an issue or is it only my lack of knowledge?Seems like you have not set a proper trigger (trigger is far too low) and scope just happens by luck to refresh it's memory in required frequency. Having more channels changes refresh speed slightly. Or the trigger is just set on the very edge and adding new channel shifts waveform a bit and trigger fails.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVqZiExSqUQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVqZiExSqUQ)
Hi there
Could someone have a look on this short movie I recorded and tell me if my Rigol has an issue or is it only my lack of knowledge?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVqZiExSqUQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVqZiExSqUQ)
My trigger source is set to CH2 somewhere around middle point and this is simple PWM from Arduino. CH1 is mosfet output. Everything is good until I enable CH3 (connected to square test output) or CH4 (not connected). Triggering get lost until I shift its level higher (even above actual source signal).
This looks for me like an issue but correct me if I'm wrong.
Thanks
Seems like you have not set a proper trigger (trigger is far too low)You can see on the video that trigger is more or less in the middle (2,70V for logic 5V signal)
Not sure what I'm doing different. I tried a similar thing [...] I couldn't reproduce your problem.Unfortunately, I had already different settings on my bench but I've recreated it and I think I have all the same (board and dso settings) and.. huh, I'm no longer able to recreate the issue. That is quite strange and pity I didn't debug it more when I had a chance.
I've had my scope for a while now. What I need now is a 'scope "cozy". Does someone have a grandmother who wants to do a kickstarter? You know, a nice embroidered, quilted cover with the RIGOL name on it. And a flap over the probe connectors so you can leave your probes connected if you want. Maybe a great-grandmother is required to find the necessary talent.
Hi there
Could someone have a look on this short movie I recorded and tell me if my Rigol has an issue or is it only my lack of knowledge?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVqZiExSqUQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVqZiExSqUQ)
My trigger source is set to CH2 somewhere around middle point and this is simple PWM from Arduino. CH1 is mosfet output. Everything is good until I enable CH3 (connected to square test output) or CH4 (not connected). Triggering get lost until I shift its level higher (even above actual source signal).
This looks for me like an issue but correct me if I'm wrong.
Thanks
Trigger in AUTO mode (From the User's guide:
Ex.: I'm watching a 200us signal on 50us timescale. I tried to compensate by setting hold-off to a large value, e.g. 1s. However, this only results in the waveform standing still for one second while the 200us signal that triggered it is already off-screen. Is this the intended behavior? At work I use AUTO mode all the time, yet on DS1054Z it kind of becomes useless for random probing, because it's easy to miss a trigger event when nothing on-
I've had my scope for a while now. What I need now is a 'scope "cozy". Does someone have a grandmother who wants to do a kickstarter? You know, a nice embroidered, quilted cover with the RIGOL name on it. And a flap over the probe connectors so you can leave your probes connected if you want. Maybe a great-grandmother is required to find the necessary talent.
Can you tell us something about the noise on the trace?
Can you tell us something about the noise on the trace?
Can you tell us something about the noise on the trace?
You mean this: ?
You can understand what I'm talking about seeing the screenshots I posted in this topic a few days ago
Hi, Blackbirdhttp://www.eevblog.com/2014/04/10/eevblog-601-why-digital-oscilloscopes-appear-noisy/ (http://www.eevblog.com/2014/04/10/eevblog-601-why-digital-oscilloscopes-appear-noisy/)
Can you tell us something about the noise on the trace?
The problem is that I see the noise every time I use the scope, also measuring a 10Vpp signal!Hi Datman,
Please note that a 1/5 division noise is 1/50 scale: 1/50 of 256 (8bit) is about 5/256. 1 LSB (Least Significant Bit) is 1/256; the 2nd LSB is 2/256; the 3rd is 4/256, then noise affects fully the first 2 of 8 bits and sometimes the 3rd!
If the peak level is 1/5 of a square, it is 1/50 (10 squares) of 256 (8 bit vertical A/D converter resolution)Sure, but which of your screenshots shows the noise filling 1/5 of a square? With the exception of the ones captured at 2mv/div or 5mV/div (where you start to see the actual noise of the input stage), I see only traces with two line-widths (4 pixels), which seems to correspond to 1 digit of noise. That's also supported by your image number 4, which shows a single-shot trace alternating between just two discrete states. The light-blue channel is an exception, with an extra digit of noise, in your scope.
If the peak level is 1/5 of a square, it is 1/50 (10 squares) of 256 (8 bit vertical A/D converter resolution)The easiest way to check that and be certain beyond reasonable doubt would be to export data to CVS and see how many different readings you get. Put that on a spreadsheet and you can do a histogram and do other statistical analysis on the reading distribution.
Maybe the ADC only counts to 200?? I will try to capture a ramp signal in pixel-mode and count the discrete states...Do a one-shot capture, export it to CVS, then do a histogram with 256 bins to see if you have any missing bins. Missing bins would indicate missing counts.
Do a one-shot capture, export it to CVS, then do a histogram with 256 bins to see if you have any missing bins. Missing bins would indicate missing counts.OK, here we go. I connected a ramp signal to channel 1 of my DS1054Z and captured a single shot in normal acquisition mode, sin(x)/x off, dot display. Screenshot and CSV data are attached. The CSV data has 1500 points, as expected from the sample rate (I had all 4 channels on to get a sparse dot display, enabling me to see the individual dots on screen better). But it only has 200 different vertical values, all spaced equidistantly without extra gaps.
So it seems that the DS1054Z limits its data acquisition and display to a sub-range of 200 counts out of the full 256, only. This of course maps nicely onto the 400 pixel net vertical range of the display. Cheating just a little bit; we've got ourselves a 7.6 bit ADC here...Hi Folks ,
So do the 200 levels in the CSV actually correspond to a larger vertical range, which even goes beyond what's on the screen in the screenshot below? But that would not make sense; what about the nice "200 counts = 400 pixels" correspondence?? Confused; need to look more closely...
So do the 200 levels in the CSV actually correspond to a larger vertical range, which even goes beyond what's on the screen in the screenshot below? But that would not make sense; what about the nice "200 counts = 400 pixels" correspondence?? Confused; need to look more closely...I actually see 201 bins with one or more counts in them by making my bins in 0.04V increments from -5.1V to +5.1V, so it looks like the ramp has 55 missing counts in it.
I recently purchased the Rigol ds1054z and makes me think things but not sure since it's my first oscilloscope is normal this happen ?.@ cryptos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pdf268c_QPI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pdf268c_QPI)
Ex.: I'm watching a 200us signal on 50us timescale. I tried to compensate by setting hold-off to a large value, e.g. 1s. However, this only results in the waveform standing still for one second while the 200us signal that triggered it is already off-screen. Is this the intended behavior? At work I use AUTO mode all the time, yet on DS1054Z it kind of becomes useless for random probing, because it's easy to miss a trigger event when nothing on-From the User's guide:
"Note: When the horizontal time base is set to 50 ms/div or greater, this Auto trigger mode allows the absence of trigger signal."
Maybe try Normal trigger mode for intermittent pulses
is normal this happen ?.
Hi Folks,
I have just recently received my DS1054Z, which I am most pleased with, and the dealer, Telonic, were excellent.
I have been experimenting with the Riglol 'keygen' codes. My unit has the following fitted:-
Software Version 00.04.02 SP4
Board Version 0.1.1
The 'keygen' code DSFR did not work, it came up with an invalid code message!
However, the 'keygen' code DSER worked first time. The only difference between these codes, as far as I can discover, is that DSFR is supposed to activate all options including 500uV/div. The DSER code enables all that DSFR is supposed to do except for the 500u/div option.
Maybe Rigol have removed the 'buggy' 500uV/div option from the latest software/board issue!
Hope that this information is useful to EEVBLOG Forum readers.
73 Dick
It is not illegal.
If you are not comfortable doing it, then don't. Dave's stand on this is clear too, if you own it, it is your to do as you wish. Rigol even put Dave's video on how to hack the DS1052E on their website!
It's a gray area. On one side you should be able to hack and mod anything you own. Who cares if you move bits jail break whatever. You paid for it, you should be able to play with it, you're voiding the warranty perhaps.It is not illegal.
I find that very hard to believe.
It is the same procedure as a keygen to unlock software. Is that legal?QuoteIf you are not comfortable doing it, then don't. Dave's stand on this is clear too, if you own it, it is your to do as you wish. Rigol even put Dave's video on how to hack the DS1052E on their website!
Then why then sell it?
Or is the world divided into smart asses that can hack stuff, and losers who pay for it?
Here you go:
http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/ (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/)
Use option code DSEF. Do not use DSFR or DSBA - 500uV Vertical as this does not work and causes problems with the scope.
Some people actually think this is a marketing tactic by Rigol now.
Second question is how does this affect the warranty? And if it affects it negatively is it possible to revert back to the original firmware/remove the feature keys?
But the scarcity of the 'scopes for actual purchase ... what's the deal with that?
... and don't want to circumvent the warranty sticker more than once if I have to.
But the scarcity of the 'scopes for actual purchase ... what's the deal with that?Artificial scarcity to make people who cannot afford to be back-ordered for weeks pony up for the DS1074Z, DS2072A or other models in the $600-1000 range.
It could genuinely be the difficulty of ramping up productionThe DS1054Z is exactly the same scope as all the other DS1xxxZ, so the production should be fairly well sorted out by now. Well, exactly the same except for the stickers with the model number on it.
OK, that's up to you.I think he meant the waxed paper trick to remove warranty seals without breaking them. If I did that, I would simply leave the sticker on the waxed paper and only re-apply it if I need to send the scope back for warranty. Once the seal is broken, it is broken and usually quite obvious.
Does the warranty sticker have some indication that shows how often it has been breached ?
Or: who's going to know (or care) how many times it has been opened if once is already too much ?
I think he meant the waxed paper trick to remove warranty seals without breaking them. If I did that, I would simply leave the sticker on the waxed paper and only re-apply it if I need to send the scope back for warranty. Once the seal is broken, it is broken and usually quite obvious.
You mean the hairdryer trick? Does that work on Rigols? I've been wondering how to get at the noisy fan without voiding the warranty.
On the same subject: Where do I get a good, quiet fan...?
Second question is how does this affect the warranty? And if it affects it negatively is it possible to revert back to the original firmware/remove the feature keys?
As others have stated, the laws on warranties vary depending upon where you live. But since Rigol seems to be aware of the prevalence of (and arguably even aquiescing in) installing the options without paying the fairly exorbitant price, they would have a hard time rejecting a warranty claim for a problem that was unrelated to the installed options.
I replaced the fan in my 1054z with this one:What is required voltage? 12V?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835352002&nm_mc=TEMC-RMA-Approvel&cm_mmc=TEMC-RMA-Approvel-_-Content-_-text-_- (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835352002&nm_mc=TEMC-RMA-Approvel&cm_mmc=TEMC-RMA-Approvel-_-Content-_-text-_-)
You'll need to modify the connector to a 2-pin one. It has somewhat less air flow -- still more than enough for this scope -- but it's incredibly quiet.
I am under impression that the noise comes partly from the amount of air rushing through the case holes. Or does the noise come solely from fan?
The two things aren't unrelated ... slower fans are quieter and move less air.
What is required voltage? 12V?
The two things aren't unrelated ... slower fans are quieter and move less air.Assuming both are of comparable design and build quality. It does not matter how fast the fan is spinning when the fundamental design is hopeless.
Second question is how does this affect the warranty? And if it affects it negatively is it possible to revert back to the original firmware/remove the feature keys?
a) Don't know
b) Yes
Has anyone a hint where i can find informations about how to remove the installed options? Thanks!search here for option:uninstall
Yes it does. I used a heat gun from several inches away and the sticker came off without me even having to touch it.How did you stick it back on?
Has anyone a hint where i can find informations about how to remove the installed options? Thanks!search here for option:uninstall
Yes it does. I used a heat gun from several inches away and the sticker came off without me even having to touch it.How did you stick it back on?
Yes it does. I used a heat gun from several inches away and the sticker came off without me even having to touch it.How did you stick it back on?
The little yellow plastic tings that come on the end of the probes, what purpose do they serve?See this thread:
Also are they supposed to stay on the end of the probe?
Mine keep falling off :-//
(1st scope, so this is all a bit new, apologies if it's a silly question)
The little yellow plastic tings that come on the end of the probes, what purpose do they serve?See this thread:
Also are they supposed to stay on the end of the probe?
Mine keep falling off :-//
(1st scope, so this is all a bit new, apologies if it's a silly question)
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/retractable-hook-tip-on-rigol-ds1054z-scope-doesn't-stay-on-its-probe-!/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/retractable-hook-tip-on-rigol-ds1054z-scope-doesn't-stay-on-its-probe-!/)
Read it all. ;)
That seems piss poor manufacturing, never come across that before. :palm:The little yellow plastic tings that come on the end of the probes, what purpose do they serve?See this thread:
Also are they supposed to stay on the end of the probe?
Mine keep falling off :-//
(1st scope, so this is all a bit new, apologies if it's a silly question)
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/retractable-hook-tip-on-rigol-ds1054z-scope-doesn't-stay-on-its-probe-!/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/retractable-hook-tip-on-rigol-ds1054z-scope-doesn't-stay-on-its-probe-!/)
Read it all. ;)
Read through it and watched the video too, all good stuff.
There was a suggestion that the yellow part was to help with the measuring of pins on IC's.
But i never found an answer as to why it won't stay attached.
The hooks attach nicely, no problem there, but the yellow pieces will not stay on regardless of how hard i push them on.
Still looking for an answer.
If i missed it would you point me directly to what i'm looking for?
The ... yellow pieces will not stay on regardless of how hard i push them on.FWIW, they're hit & miss IME (I've 2 that will stay on, and the other 2 that won't without help).
:palm:The ... yellow pieces will not stay on regardless of how hard i push them on.FWIW, they're hit & miss IME (I've 2 that will stay on, and the other 2 that won't without help).
Perhaps try a bit of tape on the inside of the yellow pieces, and see if that helps. :)
Not an instance where you'd want to be using the cheapest possible probes though (especially when you know the covers slip off super easy). ;):palm:The ... yellow pieces will not stay on regardless of how hard i push them on.FWIW, they're hit & miss IME (I've 2 that will stay on, and the other 2 that won't without help).
Perhaps try a bit of tape on the inside of the yellow pieces, and see if that helps. :)
You would be real happy if they fell off when probing a densly populated high powered circuit and allowed the GND ring to contact a component lead. BANG shit pants, :-BROKE DUT, :-BROKE scope and probe. :wtf: :palm:
Do not use DSFR or DSBA - 500uV Vertical as this does not work and causes problems with the scope.
That's great plazma!!! :-+ Mines suppose to ship tomorrow from Tequipment, crossing my fingers ;D Thanks for sharing the results on the unlock, looking foreword to doing the same!!
Do not use DSFR or DSBA - 500uV Vertical as this does not work and causes problems with the scope.
Just to clarify - enabling itself causes problems? Or only using 500uV doesn't work.
Found the following on TEquipment's DS1054Z page (http://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?search=true)...That's great plazma!!! :-+ Mines suppose to ship tomorrow from Tequipment, crossing my fingers ;D Thanks for sharing the results on the unlock, looking foreword to doing the same!!
Mine also. Here's to hoping it's not an April Fool's joke.
Do not use DSFR or DSBA - 500uV Vertical as this does not work and causes problems with the scope.
Just to clarify - enabling itself causes problems? Or only using 500uV doesn't work.
As far as I know, as I have not tried it myself, it does not work AND causes other problems too. I could be wrong.
The probes are quite low quality. None of them kept the yellow cap in place. The 1x position is loose and sometimes causes noise.
Luckily I have Agilent 500MHz probes coming.
The probes are quite low quality. None of them kept the yellow cap in place. The 1x position is loose and sometimes causes noise.
Luckily I have Agilent 500MHz probes coming.
You really can't expect Agilent quality in a $400 4-ch oscilloscope.
And 500MHz Agilent probes are close to $100ea used on ebay anyway.
Dave did a video on the RP2200 probes and found them adequate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHbooMWS0bU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHbooMWS0bU)
If you remember please do a comparison between the RP2200 and the Agilent probes.
I am curious as to how much noise is normal. There is a thread here that looks into this issue.
Is there a simple way to disable already enabled 500uV mode? Or the only way is to uninstall all and then put new code again?Uninstall & reinstall a new code that skips the 500uV option is the only way I know it works.
HiNo, do not enable it, it doesn't work.
I had no clear, install with DSER in DS1074Z, without enabling 500uV Vertical , then I can install the DSBA option to enable or must be disabled?
HiNo, do not enable it, it doesn't work.
I had no clear, install with DSER in DS1074Z, without enabling 500uV Vertical , then I can install the DSBA option to enable or must be disabled?
What are your experince with "Multi-level intensity grading display"? Should it show less frequent signal paths with lower intensity like an analogue scope? I tested with pseudo-random signal but I think only two intensity levels are shown: normal and a darker. Not a big deal but I expected more.64 intensity levels are present which is more than enough in most cases. With very simple signals all you get is few grades if you think about it.
Hello,Take a look at Dave's summary review (EEVBlog #703) where he demonstrates the feature, describing it as one of the best on the market.
I received my DS1054Z some weeks ago. I has to wait more than two months. Great device, I really like it.
What are your experince with "Multi-level intensity grading display"? Should it show less frequent signal paths with lower intensity like an analogue scope?
What are your experince with "Multi-level intensity grading display"? Should it show less frequent signal paths with lower intensity like an analogue scope? I tested with pseudo-random signal but I think only two intensity levels are shown: normal and a darker. Not a big deal but I expected more.
Hmmm. Made some tests. It seems that the behaviour depends on the horizontal time base and the memory depth settings. The higher refresh rate of the signal the more grades of intensity levels.What are your experince with "Multi-level intensity grading display"? Should it show less frequent signal paths with lower intensity like an analogue scope? I tested with pseudo-random signal but I think only two intensity levels are shown: normal and a darker. Not a big deal but I expected more.
Yes, intensity grading mimics the intensity control of an analogue scope. See Dave's review on it - https://youtu.be/W2qdtQkBKhc?t=1921 (EEVBlog #704).
[Edit - added the time (32:01) and episode title to the URL.]
It seems that the behaviour depends on the horizontal time base and the memory depth settings. The higher refresh rate of the signal the more grades of intensity levels.
On low frequency signals (like audio) I can differentiate only two levels. The display persistency time settings has no effect on it except 0.
I sent you a pm with ithi, can I get "eevblog discount code" for ds1054z on tequpment.com? Thanks
hi, can I get "eevblog discount code" for ds1054z on tequpment.com? Thanks
Thank you! One more question--how can I apply that code on tequipment.com?hi, can I get "eevblog discount code" for ds1054z on tequpment.com? Thanks
I sent you a PM with the code. :)
Get through the checkout process, and on the second-to last step, there is a box for a coupon code. If you're having to enter your payment information, you've gone too far.Thank you!
hi, can I get "eevblog discount code" for ds1054z on tequpment.com? Thanks
I sent you a PM with the code. :)
Any suggestions for "must have" accessories to a DS1054Z scope? A better probe?The probes are good enough for me. Some of them have issues with the 1x/10x switch in the 1x position, which are measurable with a resistance meter, but don't seem to affect scope measurements under normal circumstances. Of course, if you have special requirements (differential probes, HV, current measurement or whatever), those might imply the need for additional probes.
... After testing it I unlocked the options. ...Who is the owner of this website?
I used the code generator at http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/ (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/) with...
How to be sure that your scopes don't start playing sponsored promo videos as from 2016 ?:-DD
How to be sure that your scopes don't start playing sponsored promo videos as from 2016 ?I am super confident this won't happen as the DS1xxxz scopes don't even have an RTC. Maybe on the DS2xxx series :-D
I just got an email with a link to a pdf with new and old prices:So the DS1054Z is going up by from 299 to 339 euros. Given that US dollars and euros are almost at parity at the moment it will be interesting to see if this will affect the rather higher $399 list price in the States.
http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Priceadjustment_Rigol.pdf (http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Priceadjustment_Rigol.pdf)
So the DS1054Z is going up by from 299 to 339 euros. Given that US dollars and euros are almost at parity at the moment it will be interesting to see if this will affect the rather higher $399 list price in the States.Remember that those Euro prices are without VAT.
This has taken me out of lurker land. Would it possible for me to get a code too? About to pull the trigger and pick one of these up!
Imagine my chagrin when I checked the UPS tracking site and saw "Delivered".... when there's nothing delivered! On a hunch I went out to the street and looked around... and saw the boxes on the porch of the vacant house next door. Facepalm!! We filed a complaint with UPS Customer Disservice but what are you gonna do?Pick up you box secretly and unobserved, and claim that the package has not been delivered. UPS has nothing to confirm that they delivered the package to you or your neighbors (unless they go criminal and copy your signature you made for a previous delivery). Let the sender and UPS sort out the mess. If they do these shitty things, feel free to exploit it...
Fan noise is not nearly as bad as you lot made me expect! I even bought a replacement Fractal Design fan for it, anticipating some kind of vacuum-cleaner whine from the stock fan.. but it's not even as loud as my computer!
feel free to exploit it.
This has taken me out of lurker land. Would it possible for me to get a code too? About to pull the trigger and pick one of these up!
PM Sent. Enjoy. :)
Quotefeel free to exploit it.
Wow!
Just how low can some people go?
While I'm sure it's a bug/unimplemented feature, I am not sure how many people actually spend time setting up their scopes to this level. I may be wrong, but certainly I've never been bothered to do this on any scope I've had, my scope setups tend to be very dynamic in nature, having to spend time configuring the channel annotations every time I moved a probe would be painful.
I do sometimes set up PC-based logic analysers with annotated channels, but it is much easier as you have a keyboard.
Maybe in a static demonstration I could see this being useful on a scope, but for day to day probing I wouldn't bother.
It's not a "bug" when an instrument reports "A" for Amps when it should be saying "W" for Watts... it's an _error_. Perhaps you don't see it that way, and that's your privilege, I suppose. What if the numerical value was off by, say, 10 percent? Would that be a "bug"?The fine points of the English language may escape me here -- in a piece of software, "bug" and "error" are the same to me...
It's not a "bug" when an instrument reports "A" for Amps when it should be saying "W" for Watts... it's an _error_. Perhaps you don't see it that way, and that's your privilege, I suppose. What if the numerical value was off by, say, 10 percent? Would that be a "bug"?The fine points of the English language may escape me here -- in a piece of software, "bug" and "error" are the same to me...
There is a thread on bugs (errors?) and suggestions for the DS1000Z series: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-%28ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models%29-bugswish-list/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-%28ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models%29-bugswish-list/), which should be a good place to post your issues. Personally, I share Howard's feeling that this is of limited significance, because I never use the unit settings anyway.
I've just ordered one from Batronix , hope to get it at end of April.
When i get it, and i want to "enhance it" ;) , is that best done with the original fw ?
Or should i upgrade (if possible) to the latest fw first.
/Bingo
Pick up you box secretly and unobserved, and claim that the package has not been delivered. UPS has nothing to confirm that they delivered the package to you or your neighbors (unless they go criminal and copy your signature you made for a previous delivery). Let the sender and UPS sort out the mess. If they do these shitty things, feel free to exploit it...
Heh... I like the way you think! Unfortunately my evil plans always backfire... with my luck I'd be observed by the little old lady down the street peering through her curtains, and get arrested for stealing my own oscilloscope!
My problem now seems to be intermittent. The CH4 offset issue comes and goes, with some dramatic screen glitches on the CH4 trace.Check your probe for an intermittent X1/X10 switch - out of my two DS1054Z, I have three probes with chronic switch issues on the X1 position and two or three more I wouldn't trust either.
Can someone send me the discount code for tequipment? Thanks
Either use the tequipment chat on Monday, or ask in the proper thread, don't clutter this one!
Regarding clutter why are people being forced to beg for the secret code? This is supposedly available to all EEvblogers so why the intrigue? It might be better to simply post the code rather than have everybody jump through hoops. I suppose it's because those with "power" enjoy making noobs dance.
Regarding clutter why are people being forced to beg for the secret code? This is supposedly available to all EEvblogers so why the intrigue? It might be better to simply post the code rather than have everybody jump through hoops. I suppose it's because those with "power" enjoy making noobs dance.
It has been posted a few times, but Evan of Tequipment asked people not to post it again.
You only need it if you want to order when Tequipment is closed... which is kind of pointless since they won't process the order until they're open again.
Where has it been posted? The first page of this thread has someone asking for the code, and so does the last...Most posts with the info have been either edited or deleted.
It has been posted a few times, but Evan of Tequipment asked people not to post it again.
You only need it if you want to order when Tequipment is closed... which is kind of pointless since they won't process the order until they're open again.
Where has it been posted? The first page of this thread has someone asking for the code, and so does the last...
Batronix don't seem to update firmware in my experience so you get what's been factory shipped. Two other Rigol suppliers I've used do open the box up and update the firmware as necesary. However, if it's right off the boat I suspect it'll have a very recent firmware on it anyway.BTW, how to get notification of newer f/w releases (apart of perusing EEVblog forum :D)?
I'd download the current firmware just in case it disappears. That has the infamous jitter fault resolved at least.
Batronix don't seem to update firmware in my experience so you get what's been factory shipped. Two other Rigol suppliers I've used do open the box up and update the firmware as necesary. However, if it's right off the boat I suspect it'll have a very recent firmware on it anyway.BTW, how to get notification of newer f/w releases (apart of perusing EEVblog forum :D)?
By sending the scope registration card (or its electronic equivalent) to Rigol?
Btw. are there any discount codes for European resellers like Batterfly or Batronix?
Unlocked with key from Riglol zipfile Linux command-line keygen, compiled for my system, no problem whatsoever.Where can I get that tool?
Unlocked with key from Riglol zipfile Linux command-line keygen, compiled for my system, no problem whatsoever.Where can I get that tool?
My scope should arrive this month :-)
:palm: Why do I even bother?
TLDR syndrome. Probably the best way is to make a new topic with the right keywords, put the info in it and post it, then lock it and ask an admin ( Simon, Seppy or Dave) to make it sticky, so it will show up in the first page of posts in test equipment.Unlocked with key from Riglol zipfile Linux command-line keygen, compiled for my system, no problem whatsoever.Where can I get that tool?
My scope should arrive this month :-)
Works till the first page gets full, when an admin will have to make a decision as to which ones go unsticky. That way when a TLDR chimes in, or there is an update, you can simply point them to the thread, and updates you as originator can unlock, post then relock the thread.
:palm: Why do I even bother?
A couple of posts ago I mentioned that a link to the hack is now available on the first post in this thread.
Btw. are there any discount codes for European resellers like Batterfly or Batronix?
I don't know about discount codes, but Batronix sent a mail that prices will increase very soon. I don't have the mail anymore (at least at home), but the DS1054Z will rise to about 400 Euros including VAT. Many many other items will get more expensive, too, because of the adverse USD:EUR exchange rate shift in the last months. So if you want it, better get it today. As far as I recall, the new prices will be in effect next week...
MCS in the UK are currently offering 10% off their Rigol kit if you use the code 'rigolcomp' at checkout. Their prices go up on the 15th, though, and they don't have the DS1054Z in stock.Thanks. I already received my unit from eleshop.eu. One friend is also interested about buying one.
My problem now seems to be intermittent. The CH4 offset issue comes and goes, with some dramatic screen glitches on the CH4 trace.Check your probe for an intermittent X1/X10 switch - out of my two DS1054Z, I have three probes with chronic switch issues on the X1 position and two or three more I wouldn't trust either.
As for the offsets, the channel offsets on both of my scopes jump around depending on which channel combination is enabled and some channels drift by as much as 2/5th of a division over time. Some people have said offsets can even vary depending on the order channels are enabled but I have not noticed that specific quirk on mine.
Hopefully I'll remember "I like the way you think!" if you ever have a post about being scammed, etc.
I'd download the current firmware just in case it disappears. That has the infamous jitter fault resolved at least.
Any url's where to download that ?
I can't seem to find it at Batronix , and at Rigo i have to request it (doesn't have a SN, as i have not gotten the unit)
/Bingo
Btw. are there any discount codes for European resellers like Batterfly or Batronix?
I don't know about discount codes, but Batronix sent a mail that prices will increase very soon. I don't have the mail anymore (at least at home), but the DS1054Z will rise to about 400 Euros including VAT. Many many other items will get more expensive, too, because of the adverse USD:EUR exchange rate shift in the last months. So if you want it, better get it today. As far as I recall, the new prices will be in effect next week...
I'd download the current firmware just in case it disappears. That has the infamous jitter fault resolved at least.
Any url's where to download that ?
I can't seem to find it at Batronix , and at Rigo i have to request it (doesn't have a SN, as i have not gotten the unit)
/Bingo
The most current update (as of Jan 2015) is here --> http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-0576/1/-/-/-/-/DS1000ZUpdate.zip?sid=tips2o74i (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-0576/1/-/-/-/-/DS1000ZUpdate.zip?sid=tips2o74i)
The proper procedure is to request for a firmware update under the Software tab on this page ---> http://www.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/ds1000Z/ (http://www.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/ds1000Z/)
What sort of budget solutions are people using for differential measurements & clip on current measurements with their DS1054Z scopes? Both differential and current probes can easily exceed the cost of a DS1054Z and I figured the resourceful owners of this scope have more budget oriented solutions. :)Welcome to the world of advanced measurements.
Welcome to the forum.Thanks.
Welcome to the world of advanced measurements.Based on my searches of the forum, per your suggestion, there is no such thing as a low cost clip on current probe that is reasonably accurate for AC & DC but there are a few low cost crappy ones for sale. Likewise there are no high voltage low cost differential probes.
For accurate and trusted measurements there are few options.
Use the Search button close to your profile, not the one top right.
You should be able to find several recent threads on these topics.
HelloThe license key is generated starting from a private key (which is different for each Rigol model, but not each S/N).
I am also waiting for a DS1054Z and I have a doubt, which is the private key and where can I get?
thanks for answering, so to say that just need to enter the series of the scope and the software will fill the keygen field and generate new keys? :clap:To try it before your DSO arrives, find one of the many YT videos you can find with a 'rigol hack' search, and pick *their* S/N ;D
thanks for answering, so to say that just need to enter the series of the scope and the software will fill the keygen field and generate new keys? :clap:To try it before your DSO arrives, find one of the many YT videos you can find with a 'rigol hack' search, and pick *their* S/N ;D
Today, I checked and if I get to Riglol in Internet Explorer, then I get, a version without a number, which displays the error 'Invalid Private Code' because it did not generate one. If, on the other hand, I get to Riglol, at the same Web address, in Mozilla Firefox, then I get version 1.03, this time a Private Code is generated from the Serial Number and it all works correctly.
Just got my DS1054 and it is a nice scope. Tried to unlock features and got the invalid license message (has 00.04.02 SP4). Anyone have any ideas or suggestions. Thanks in advance. Also what can I do to get around the "install avoid for 12 hours"?
This is the message that appears.
print screen
For me, using Linux, "telnet" is the easiest way
I forgot to say...
I mentioned earlier that my scope had a bad glitch on CH4 and I posted a few screenshots.
Sure, it's very easy to do.I forgot to say...
I mentioned earlier that my scope had a bad glitch on CH4 and I posted a few screenshots.
Could you do a short post about setting up the pass/fail , and what limits you are using ?
I have my DS1054Z on the way.
TIA
/Bingo
Could you do a short post about setting up the pass/fail , and what limits you are using ?On the topic of Pass/Fail (although I have DS2000)
/Bingo
@Bingo: You're welcome! I also demonstrate this use of the Pass-Fail Mask function in my "unboxing and testing" video for the replacement scope:
Scoposcopy: Rigol DS1054z, Take Two: Replacement, Unboxing, PassFail testing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zY34Kyakflw#ws)
@Jeroen: Is your scope "hacked" to unlock the I2C trigger options to "Official" versions, or have your unhacked "trail" times run out perhaps? What does the screen say when you select Utility>(bottom grey button to second page) Options>Installed ?
Hello,
Since a couple of weeks I have a ds1054z with serial decode/trigger, yesterday I was debugging I2C bus everything worked. But today it will nog trigger on any of the I2C options (start/stop/adress/nack) is there something I can do ?
@Teneyes: That's interesting, thanks very much. Is the "triggering bug" a manifestation of the "trigger jitter" problem that has been discussed here? I notice your horizontal trigger offset is quite near 500 microseconds... is this fixable by upgrading to later firmware than what you are running?The AC trigger bug, That I reported in July 2013, and Highlighted by Dave Jones was fixed by the latest FW for both the DS2000 & DS1000Z. The 'AC Jitter bug' caused such bad jitter that this bug could not be observed until the Jitter bug was Fixed.
The math on the Pass Fail counts is also verry interesting... a programmer's "variable type" fail. Maybe that should be noted in the "wish list" thread for submission to Rigol for future firmware updates?For the pass/fail rollover error, No Patience neccessary,
I have not the patience to wait for some billions of waveforms in testing, though, but someday I may need to, so I think this should be made right, whether or not I might use it myself. Just as the "measurements" units should agree with what the math trace units are....
@Teneyes:50MHZ BW maybe too Slow
I've been trying for a half hour or so to reproduce the trigger bug (I read your posts and looked at the pictures) and I have not been able to do it. I'm using a 16 MH pulse signal of around 6V p-p amplitude with rise and fall times of about 3.8 - 4.2 ns, and I've looked at both rising and falling edges.
But that doesn't mean it won't do it, just that I haven't been able to do it with the signal I'm giving it. I'll try to set up a signal that's more like what you were using, low amplitude and lower frequency but still with fast rise and fall edges, later on this evening.
Hello,
Since a couple of weeks I have a ds1054z with serial decode/trigger, yesterday I was debugging I2C bus everything worked. But today it will nog trigger on any of the I2C options (start/stop/adress/nack) is there something I can do ?
Can you see a valid I2C signal if you use a simple edge trigger?
McBryce.
It may be something as simple as not having the correct scl and sda lines selected. Or maybe you don't have the trigger level set correctly - if you have ch2 set as sda, try setting it to the start bit and moving the trigger level up and down along the waveform of ch2 with the triggering set to "normal" until you get a trigger. Try setting the horizontal to various values such as 100us for example and the voltages to around 2.5. Sometimes just resetting everything to default using "storage button" and "default" and starting over will get you back to where you were.
I just got one from TEquipment. Ordered Friday, delivered Tuesday - normal for ground shipment from PA to MA. (TEquipment is based in NJ but my scope was shipped from PA.)FWIW, TEquipment has multiple warehouses (can get confusing, particularly when an order is filled from different locations, = doesn't all come in one box; and may not arrive on the same day either), and all of my shipments really have originated from TEquipment based on the UPS label/tracking information.
Interestingly, the UPS notification of the shipment said that it was sent from Ingram Micro, though the shipping label says it was sent from Interworld Highway LLC. (Interworld Highway is a holding company that owns TEquipment and a couple of other companies - no secret, it's mentioned on the TEquipment home page.) Ingram Micro is a distributor - perhaps these scopes are being drop-shipped directly from distributor stock rather than being warehoused at TEquipment. That would explain the mystery that some people reported earlier of a free extra being shipped separately - the scope and the extras aren't REALLY being shipped from the same place even though the labels say they are. (The label needs to have the Interworld Highway address because that's where the scope should be returned to if it is undeliverable for some reason.)
I just got one from TEquipment. Ordered Friday, delivered Tuesday - normal for ground shipment from PA to MA. (TEquipment is based in NJ but my scope was shipped from PA.)FWIW, TEquipment has multiple warehouses (can get confusing, particularly when an order is filled from different locations, = doesn't all come in one box; and may not arrive on the same day either), and all of my shipments really have originated from TEquipment based on the UPS label/tracking information.
Interestingly, the UPS notification of the shipment said that it was sent from Ingram Micro, though the shipping label says it was sent from Interworld Highway LLC. (Interworld Highway is a holding company that owns TEquipment and a couple of other companies - no secret, it's mentioned on the TEquipment home page.) Ingram Micro is a distributor - perhaps these scopes are being drop-shipped directly from distributor stock rather than being warehoused at TEquipment. That would explain the mystery that some people reported earlier of a free extra being shipped separately - the scope and the extras aren't REALLY being shipped from the same place even though the labels say they are. (The label needs to have the Interworld Highway address because that's where the scope should be returned to if it is undeliverable for some reason.)
I do not recall anything about a third party screen capture tool, can you, please advise, I would be most interested to try anything like that.Peter Dreisiebner's "Bildschirmkopie" (screen copy) works great for me: http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/ (http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/). The software is about two orders of magnitude lighter weight than Rigol's mess of a PC software... Also available for Mac and Linux, and works via USB or LAN connection.
Hi GaryThanks... My scope is on its way, so I will investigate when it arrives.
Keep in mind that noise doesn't come only from the fan, but also from the metal in front of it. To lower noise you also have to draw back the fan from the chassis.
Side note, I have been providing your issues and feedback to the application engineers to send back
to Rigol in China, so keep coming.
Tried using both telnet and Ultra Sigma and can not uninstall the trial version. |OOptions enable as a Trial are based on Run time of the DSO , as discovered Early in the Hack thread,
Hi Folks,
Is it possible to send a screen shot, from my DS1054Z, to my computer via the LAN connection? I have no difficulty doing it using a USB Memory Stick, but would like to do it direct! Any ideas, please?
73 Dick G8BNR
Is it possible to send a screen shot, from my DS1054Z, to my computer via the LAN connection?I expierience the same with my DS1204B.
Over USB everything works fine, over LAN there exists a spaghetti of programs, libraries, extensions and codes but nothing works.
Peter Dreisiebner's "Bildschirmkopie" (screen copy) works great for me: http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/ (http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/). The software is about two orders of magnitude lighter weight than Rigol's mess of a PC software... Also available for Mac and Linux, and works via USB or LAN connection.Did you give Peter's "Bildschirmkopie" a try yet? The web site does not specifically list the DS1204B as being compatible, but I think it should be. Definitely worth a try -- simple, lightweight, and with cross-platform capability as an added bonus for non-Windows fans.
Peter's web page is in German only, but if I recall correctly, the software can be switched to English. Don't have it up and running on the PC I am currently writing from, unfortunately.
Is it possible to send a screen shot, from my DS1054Z, to my computer via the LAN connection?I expierience the same with my DS1204B.
Over USB everything works fine, over LAN there exists a spaghetti of programs, libraries, extensions and codes but nothing works.Peter Dreisiebner's "Bildschirmkopie" (screen copy) works great for me: http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/ (http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/). The software is about two orders of magnitude lighter weight than Rigol's mess of a PC software... Also available for Mac and Linux, and works via USB or LAN connection.Did you give Peter's "Bildschirmkopie" a try yet? The web site does not specifically list the DS1204B as being compatible, but I think it should be. Definitely worth a try -- simple, lightweight, and with cross-platform capability as an added bonus for non-Windows fans.
Peter's web page is in German only, but if I recall correctly, the software can be switched to English. Don't have it up and running on the PC I am currently writing from, unfortunately.
I do not recall anything about a third party screen capture tool, can you, please advise, I would be most interested to try anything like that.Peter Dreisiebner's "Bildschirmkopie" (screen copy) works great for me: http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/ (http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/). The software is about two orders of magnitude lighter weight than Rigol's mess of a PC software... Also available for Mac and Linux, and works via USB or LAN connection.
Peter's web page is in German only, but if I recall correctly, the software can be switched to English. Don't have it up and running on the PC I am currently writing from, unfortunately.
Does anyone know if there is a button or button combination that can be held during boot-up that will reset a scope to factory defaults? Some such may come in handy some day if a scope should freeze or become unresponsive for some reason, and if it stays stuck after power cycling.
My (replacement) scope is still working fine, I'm just worried about the future, since I've seen some people report occasional freezes or lockups.
I tried the procedure on my MSO1000Z and ended up with a constant beeping noise (as if I'd pressed the button too many times), but no reset. It's possible that I did something incorrectly. I'll give it another shot tonight after work.
It is the 5th gray button on the left (not the bottom gray button). When you press it during power on it will beep a couple of times until the Rigol screen comes up. Keep pressing it. You'll know it worked when you see Chinese!
For the DS2000 , I use RUU (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/software-tips-and-tricks-for-rigol-ds200040006000-ultravision-dsos/msg171575/#msg171575)Hi Folks, Is it possible to send a screen shot, from my DS1054Z, to my computer via the LAN connection? I have no difficulty doing it using a USB Memory Stick, but would like to do it direct! Any ideas, please?I expierience the same with my DS1204B.
73 Dick G8BNR
Over USB everything works fine, over LAN there exists a spaghetti of programs, libraries, extensions and codes but nothing works.
http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol-103d/ (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol-103d/)Try re-updating the page a couple of times to see whether you get stable keys. Double and triple-check whether you got the serial number right and entered the key correctly.
i have inserted the serial and DSFR, after generating i have inserted the generated code. after that - invalid license :-//, after few tries, i have "install avoid for 12 hours "
but the fact that you tried this unsuitable option despite the many recommendations to the contrary suggests that you have jumped into this "hacking" rather unprepared.unfortunately you are right. i was unprepared :scared: |O. on youtube it looked like very easy :phew:. and i dont seen this forum before. |O i guess i need to wait 12 hours and try to insert the code again. or exist some faster method?
i guess i need to wait 12 hours and try to insert the code again. or exist some faster method?
that the scope must be switched ON for 12 hours.at this moment it switched on about 6 hours. if i try to insert the code before is it possible that the clock became to count another one 12 hours?
Recently I was trying to figure out why one of my RP2200 probes was completely unusable at 1:1 attenuation. The switch seemed to be a bit dicky so I took the plastic bit off and here is what I found.
I don't know whether this was done on purpose or it's just a flash from injection molding, but it seems to prevent the switch from sliding into the '1x' position properly. So I scraped this bit off and sanded the area with a small file, and guess what - my probe is usable at 1:1 once again!
Did you send this message to the customer service department?
Or should Rigol read the recommendation on this forum? =)
i guess i need to wait 12 hours and try to insert the code again. or exist some faster method?Why the hurry? If you *need* the full functionality right now you should be able to get it via the trial licenses that are factory-installed.
Just got a new DS1054Z with Firmware 00.04.02.SP4 and cannot get codes to work, does anyone know if the firmware is back-datable on this model?
Just got a new DS1054Z with Firmware 00.04.02.SP4 and cannot get codes to work, does anyone know if the firmware is back-datable on this model?
Just got a new DS1054Z with Firmware 00.04.02.SP4 and cannot get codes to work, does anyone know if the firmware is back-datable on this model?hi, like a said before , the problem is DSFR code, with this option the scope does not confirm the code. USE the DSER code for SP4! with this code i did it in first time
hey everyone). i did it . the problem i guess, is the dsfr codeyou was unprepared like me)
http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol-103d/ (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol-103d/)Try re-updating the page a couple of times to see whether you get stable keys. Double and triple-check whether you got the serial number right and entered the key correctly.
i have inserted the serial and DSFR, after generating i have inserted the generated code. after that - invalid license :-//, after few tries, i have "install avoid for 12 hours "
Do NOT use the DSFR option, since it includes the 500µV/div (which does not work on the DS1000Z series). Use the DSER option instead. This cannot be the cause for the difficulties you have had; but the fact that you tried this unsuitable option despite the many recommendations to the contrary suggests that you have jumped into this "hacking" rather unprepared.
Just bought a new DS1054Z from Batronix in Germany.
In view of the price (plus minus 400 euros tax and sipment included) this device is an absolute gem.
Meanwhile I enabled all options with the hack as described before. It just makes it even better.
It did not work at the first attempt but I simply made a typo.
After correction I had immediately all options enabled.
I can confirm that the code that you need is DSER. This will generate a key to enable all options, except the 500uV, which is useless anyway.
I also have firmware revision 00.04.02.SP4.
For generating the activation key I used http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/. (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/.)
Cheers,
Peter
__author__ = 'RoGeorge'
#
# Modified to work with DS2000 by miguelvp
# using vxi11 by Alex Forencich and Michael Walle
# [url]https://github.com/alexforencich/python-vxi11[/url]
#
import vxi11
import time
import sys
import os
# Update the next lines for your own default settings:
path_to_save = ""
IP_DS2000 = "192.168.1.6"
expected_len = 1152067
TMC_header_len = 11
terminator_len = 2
company = 0
model = 1
serial = 2
# Check parameters
script_name = os.path.basename(sys.argv[0])
# Print usage
print
print "Usage:"
print " " + script_name
print
print "This program capture the image displayed"
print " by a Rigol DS2000 series oscilloscope, then save it on the computer"
print " as a BMP file with a timestamp in the file name."
print
print " The program is using LXI protocol, so the computer"
print " must have LAN connection with the oscilloscope."
print " USB and/or GPIB connections are not used by this software."
print
print " No VISA, IVI or Rigol drivers are needed."
print
# Create/check if 'path' exists
# Check network response (ping)
response = os.system("ping -n 1 " + IP_DS2000 + " > nul")
if response != 0:
print
print "No response pinging " + IP_DS2000
print "Check network cables and settings."
print "You should be able to ping the oscilloscope."
# Open a modified VXI11 session
instr = vxi11.Instrument(IP_DS2000)
instrument_id = instr.ask("*IDN?")
# Check if instrument is set to accept LAN commands
if instrument_id == "command error":
print instrument_id
print "Check the oscilloscope settings."
print "Utility -> IO Setting -> RemoteIO -> LAN must be ON"
sys.exit("ERROR")
# Check if instrument is indeed a Rigol DS2000 series
id_fields = instrument_id.split(",")
if (id_fields[company] != "RIGOL TECHNOLOGIES") or \
(id_fields[model][:3] != "DS2"):
print
print "ERROR: No Rigol from series DS2000 found at ", IP_DS2000
sys.exit("ERROR")
print "Instrument ID:"
print instrument_id
# Prepare filename as C:\MODEL_YYYY-MM-DD_HH.MM.SS
timestamp = time.strftime("%Y-%m-%d_%H.%M.%S", time.localtime())
filename = path_to_save + id_fields[model] + "_" + timestamp
# Ask for an oscilloscope display print screen
print "Receiving..."
buff = instr.ask_raw("display:data?", expected_len)
print "Processing..."
# Strip TMC Blockheader and terminator bytes
buff = buff[TMC_header_len:-terminator_len]
# Save as BMP
scr_file = open(filename + ".bmp", "wb")
scr_file.write(buff)
scr_file.close()
print "Saved file:", filename + ".bmp"
instr.close()
@bingo, how fast is the screen capture on the DS1000z scope? I would think that because it supports png it's probably about 5.5 seconds to transfer a 37KB file already in png format but still transferring data at a mere 57344 bps
# Save as PNG
im = Image.open(StringIO.StringIO(buff))
im.save(filename + ".png", "PNG")
print "Saved file:", filename + ".pn
@miguelvp
Did you modify Alec's VXI11 in order to run the program ?
I might give it a shot , but miss a "short stepguide" in order to install it (vxi11) , and the other ones he has.
/Bingo
@miguelvp
Did you modify Alec's VXI11 in order to run the program ?
I might give it a shot , but miss a "short stepguide" in order to install it (vxi11) , and the other ones he has.
/Bingo
I'm a total layman. Maybe the ethernet controller is connected by USB and causes a bottleneck?@miguelvp
Did you modify Alec's VXI11 in order to run the program ?
I might give it a shot , but miss a "short stepguide" in order to install it (vxi11) , and the other ones he has.
/Bingo
I got 4 seconds transfers via VXI-11, way faster than even a thumb drive attached to the scope.
I'm following this subtopic here:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/python-based-instrument-control/msg676772/#msg676772 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/python-based-instrument-control/msg676772/#msg676772)
This probably applies to other rigol tools as well that are slower on ethernet than using usb, like Marmad's RUU
I got 4 seconds transfers via VXI-11, way faster than even a thumb drive attached to the scope.
Can someone PM me the Tequipment.net discount code. I need a new 'scope!PM sent.
Thank you.
Darryl
Recently I was trying to figure out why one of my RP2200 probes was completely unusable at 1:1 attenuation. The switch seemed to be a bit dicky so I took the plastic bit off and here is what I found.
I don't know whether this was done on purpose or it's just a flash from injection molding, but it seems to prevent the switch from sliding into the '1x' position properly. So I scraped this bit off and sanded the area with a small file, and guess what - my probe is usable at 1:1 once again!
I don't want to read 500 posts. Is the jitter problem, as well as any other bugs, fixed now for the DS1054Z? Will I have to upgrade the firmware if its fixed, or will it come fixed?It should be sufficient to read the first post of this thread, where rolycat is maintaining a short FAQ section which answers this and other questions.
A friend received his 1054Z last week and it came with the latest firmware (4.02?) and that fixes the jitter problem.
I don't know about fixes for anything else, it was also still "hackable" if that matters to you.
If you decide you want to write some code, my DS1074Z responds to TCP ports 5555 and 5566. You should be able to telnet on those ports also.
Anyone has lost USB connectivity upgrading to 04.03? Something weird going on here. Device is seen in Windows with proper IVI driver loaded, but not detected.
I just got one of these. I did the auto-calibrate. When my probe is not hooked up to anything it still reads 160mV. Should I do a manual calibration or is this normal for all scopes??
I have just RMA'ed my DS1054Z at Batronix :(
I have had it just a week.
It locks up after a few hours turn on time , and all buttons are dead.
Sometimes it locks up showing the captured waveform , and sometimes it crashes and shows garbage on the screen, like the attached picture.
Will let you know how it goes :'( :'( :'(
/Bingo
I'm new. What does anti-aliasing do under the Acquire menu?There is a separate thread concerning anti-aliasing filters in oscilloscopes here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/what-type-of-antialiasing-filter-is-used-in-a-digital-scope/msg387414/#msg387414).
This is also discussed in this thread, beginning around here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg519868/#msg519868).
Why can't I turn off SIN(x)x, it's ON and greyed out. My coupling is set to DC if it matters.
All of the above modules and more can be activated for "free". If you search for "Riglol" on the internet, you will find a method to enable the modules for free. Besides the modules, you can also increase the bandwidth of the Rigol DS1054Z to 100Mhz. And you can increase the vertical sensitivity to 500 µV/div!
Just placed my order for one of these today. However, I was wondering about the affects of the 100 MHz upgrade on the warranty when I ran across this bit of information:
http://ds1054z.com/ (http://ds1054z.com/)
All of the above modules and more can be activated for "free". If you search for "Riglol" on the internet, you will find a method to enable the modules for free. Besides the modules, you can also increase the bandwidth of the Rigol DS1054Z to 100Mhz. And you can increase the vertical sensitivity to 500 µV/div!
However, using this method will void your warranty. Also, the method is irreversible, so if your scope breaks down, you can not revert to its original state to claim warranty. Therfore the "Riglol" method should not be used!
While this Web page looked like a "genuine" Rigol Web page, its domain is actually registered to ELESHOP.NL, so not much use, I guess... ;^)
Be careful... as far as I know Eleshop is no official Rigol Reseller. At least I could not find him on the Distributor List on Rigol.eu.Yes, and although I do not know of any negative experiences with eleshop.nl, I would strongly advise to buy your Rigol stuff at arbenelux.nl (If you live in the Netherlands). They are an official Rigol reseller and their service is absolutely excellent.
Better choose an official one who offers the same Price and can guarantee first Level Support.
... I ran across this bit of information:
http://ds1054z.com/ (http://ds1054z.com/)
All of the above modules and more can be activated for "free". If you search for "Riglol" on the internet, you will find a method to enable the modules for free. Besides the modules, you can also increase the bandwidth of the Rigol DS1054Z to 100Mhz. And you can increase the vertical sensitivity to 500 µV/div!
However, using this method will void your warranty. Also, the method is irreversible, so if your scope breaks down, you can not revert to its original state to claim warranty. Therfore the "Riglol" method should not be used!
While this Web page looked like a "genuine" Rigol Web page, its domain is actually registered to ELESHOP.NL, so not much use, I guess... ;^)
... I ran across this bit of information:
http://ds1054z.com/ (http://ds1054z.com/)
All of the above modules and more can be activated for "free". If you search for "Riglol" on the internet, you will find a method to enable the modules for free. Besides the modules, you can also increase the bandwidth of the Rigol DS1054Z to 100Mhz. And you can increase the vertical sensitivity to 500 µV/div!
However, using this method will void your warranty. Also, the method is irreversible, so if your scope breaks down, you can not revert to its original state to claim warranty. Therfore the "Riglol" method should not be used!
While this Web page looked like a "genuine" Rigol Web page, its domain is actually registered to ELESHOP.NL, so not much use, I guess... ;^)
Two statements, two pieces of mis-information on that web page. The 500µV/div option is not compatible with the DS1000Z scopes, as already mentioned by others. And the activated options are reversible, via an SCPI command, as discussed multiple times in this thread.
Since the scope has ethernet, they can with a newer firmware upgrade get a phone-home system installed to void your illegally installed modules.
I may be wrong, but I don't think that 04.02 SP4 still has the jitter issue.
McBryce.
Well in the firmware doc, the 00.04.02.04.07, which I believe shows as 04.02.SP4 on the scope,
is dated December 31, 2014. I don't think the jitter fix was available then was it?
Well in the firmware doc, the 00.04.02.04.07, which I believe shows as 04.02.SP4 on the scope,
is dated December 31, 2014. I don't think the jitter fix was available then was it?
That is the release with the jitter fix. No one knows what they changed in 04.03 (apparently nothing big).
Well in the firmware doc, the 00.04.02.04.07, which I believe shows as 04.02.SP4 on the scope,
is dated December 31, 2014. I don't think the jitter fix was available then was it?
That is the release with the jitter fix. No one knows what they changed in 04.03 (apparently nothing big).
Actually there is quite a list of bug fixes for 04.03. Do you have the firmware history doc from Rigol?
Oops, obviously not. Where is it?
Oops, obviously not. Where is it?
I PM'd you the link. Don't know if Rigol would get cranky about posting it on the forum.
Note, there are two changes and 10 additional bug fixes in 04.03.
Oops, obviously not. Where is it?
I PM'd you the link. Don't know if Rigol would get cranky about posting it on the forum.
Note, there are two changes and 10 additional bug fixes in 04.03.
Can you send that to me too? Many thanks.
Also, the 500uV/div option, does it hurt the scope if installed? Does it hurt the scope if used? Or just not useful due to the hardware limits/offset?
Josh
I think that we'd all like to know the bug fixes in 4.03. Can you PM them to me too?
I think that we'd all like to know the bug fixes in 4.03. Can you PM them to me too?
If you already requested the firmware update, the same link that they mailed you for the release notes works for the updated release notes. It did for me, at least.
But here's a copy/paste of the list of changes:
Does Rigol still require the contact method to download firmware or do they have a direct link?
This page currently provides a link to the 4.03 update (even though it says 4.02): http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
Does Rigol still require the contact method to download firmware or do they have a direct link?
This page currently provides a link to the 4.03 update (even though it says 4.02): http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
Thanks
Hi all
I've been tinkering with retro consoles for just under a year and its got to the point where im in need of a scope plus i just want to understand better what im doing rather than just follow instructions.
i was about to buy a DS1052E until i came across the DS1054Z. It looked like a lot better choice for a little more money but it seems to have its issues and being my first scope i wouldn't have the experience to troubleshoot issues . My rational was that i would future proof myself a bit with the DS1054Z as i got more experienced.
I got a reply email from a Rigol tech saying that the 00.04.03 firmware resolved the issues, but he would wouldn't he..
so what should i do? should i just stay away from the DS1054Z get a old faithful DS1052E? They are cheapish and i am just getting into this side of things.
cheers
Hi all
I've been tinkering with retro consoles for just under a year and its got to the point where im in need of a scope plus i just want to understand better what im doing rather than just follow instructions.
i was about to buy a DS1052E until i came across the DS1054Z. It looked like a lot better choice for a little more money but it seems to have its issues and being my first scope i wouldn't have the experience to troubleshoot issues . My rational was that i would future proof myself a bit with the DS1054Z as i got more experienced.
I got a reply email from a Rigol tech saying that the 00.04.03 firmware resolved the issues, but he would wouldn't he..
so what should i do? should i just stay away from the DS1054Z get a old faithful DS1052E? They are cheapish and i am just getting into this side of things.
cheers
What type of Retro consoles are you tinkering with? Depending on what they are, you might be better off going one higher and getting one with a Logic Analyser? I repair 8-Bit computers (Late 70's to early 90's) and an LA is well worth having.
McBryce.
I repair 8-Bit computers (Late 70's to early 90's) and an LA is well worth having.
McBryce.
So the bugs everyone is talking about aren't major or crippling?Correct.
im just this guy ,ya know?Nein, Zaphod's just zis guy, you know?
game consoles,NES, SNES, still got to crack open that N64 and work out how to get RGB out of a turbo express. you know, the usual RGB mods. Got a C64 waiting in the wings but its the sega CDX that has got me stumped. i have replace the laser on a few but i came across one that needs calibration. i looked for the service manual and it turns out i will need a scope for the job, also its a excuse to get a scope and acquire some more skills down the electronics path.
thanks for the reply'sThere's a discount from TEquipment.net (http://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/), which is located in the US. They do ship internationally however, so PM sent. :-+
i was a bit on the fence about the bugs. wasn't sure if it was the glitchy brick people were making it out to be. ill have to start hunting down a supplier. Ive seen it mentioned that there is some sort of discount for EEVblog members, is that true? could i get some details if anyone knows.
ill look into getting a LA too
cheers all :-+
thanks for the reply'sThere's a discount from TEquipment.net (http://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/), which is located in the US. They do ship internationally however, so PM sent. :-+
i was a bit on the fence about the bugs. wasn't sure if it was the glitchy brick people were making it out to be. ill have to start hunting down a supplier. Ive seen it mentioned that there is some sort of discount for EEVblog members, is that true? could i get some details if anyone knows.
ill look into getting a LA too
cheers all :-+
For an alternate source, Emona (http://www.emona.com.au/products/electronic-test-measure/oscilloscopes/ds1054z.html#.VYFwhzgo5aQ) would be worth a look given your location.
Do note that the free shipping offer is only for the continental US, not international delivery.thanks for the reply'sDo note that the free shipping is only for the continental US, so there will be a shipping fee to OZ.
i was a bit on the fence about the bugs. wasn't sure if it was the glitchy brick people were making it out to be. ill have to start hunting down a supplier. Ive seen it mentioned that there is some sort of discount for EEVblog members, is that true? could i get some details if anyone knows.
ill look into getting a LA too
cheers all :-+
There's a discount from TEquipment.net (http://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/), which is located in the US. They do ship internationally however, so PM sent. :-+
For an alternate source, Emona (http://www.emona.com.au/products/electronic-test-measure/oscilloscopes/ds1054z.html#.VYFwhzgo5aQ) would be worth a look given your location.
awesome! thanks for that, think ill get it from TEquipment, i can wait for free post. AUSTPost is quite costly, are there any accessorys i should pick up from them while im at it?
thanks for the reply's
i was a bit on the fence about the bugs. wasn't sure if it was the glitchy brick people were making it out to be. ill have to start hunting down a supplier. Ive seen it mentioned that there is some sort of discount for EEVblog members, is that true? could i get some details if anyone knows.
ill look into getting a LA too
cheers all :-+
My DS1054Z arrived today, upgrade went great!Unless you know that a newer firmware version fixes one or more bugs which are an issue for you, I'd leave well alone.
Came with 04.03.00 installed - I see the newest download update is 04.03.00.01 - Are they the exact same version and the scope just doesn't show the least significant digits or should I try an update?
thanks for the reply's
i was a bit on the fence about the bugs. wasn't sure if it was the glitchy brick people were making it out to be. ill have to start hunting down a supplier. Ive seen it mentioned that there is some sort of discount for EEVblog members, is that true? could i get some details if anyone knows.
ill look into getting a LA too
cheers all :-+
The major bug at the moment is that with a specific time base setting, AND a longer than minimum persistence setting, AND the memory depth set to auto, SOME scopes lock up. It is a major bug because the scope should NEVER lock-up, but it's so easy to avoid that it's completely a non-issue. Believe me, with all the hair pulling, cursing and face palming I've had to do over the years to track down and make workarounds for bugs in various pieces of equipment, I'd kill to have this be the worst I'd ever have to run into!
Another day, and other 5 minutes of test:
The first image is of a 130MHZ signal (50% AM modulated by 1khz sine) just to push the scope to its limits.
The second is about the trigger out jitter time (3nS) measured from the rear output.
Moreover following results are measured by a calibrated 5334B and 1MHZ square wave:The acquistion modes doesn't affect the wps rate.
- in dot mode the best wfps i saw was 52.8k @50nS/div 600 pts memory.
- in vector mode it was 28.8k @50nS/div 600 pts memory.
These results simply make me sad because now I have to get one! ;D
This means that there is something seriously wrong at Rigol. The only thing I can think of is that _some_ DS1054Z units have some defective, or at least "differently abled" hardware that made it into the scopes. (For newcomers: This bug happens in susceptible units regardless of whether or not the scope is "virgin" unhacked, and regardless of firmware 4.02 or 4.03.) So _some_ DS1054Z scopes are better than others.... the ones that don't lock up are obviously better.
I'm afraid that I don't agree with that. If we cannot expect identical hardware to behave identically in identical situations, how are we to design anything with confidence?This means that there is something seriously wrong at Rigol. The only thing I can think of is that _some_ DS1054Z units have some defective, or at least "differently abled" hardware that made it into the scopes. (For newcomers: This bug happens in susceptible units regardless of whether or not the scope is "virgin" unhacked, and regardless of firmware 4.02 or 4.03.) So _some_ DS1054Z scopes are better than others.... the ones that don't lock up are obviously better.
It doesn't mean that at all, and I explained at least once or twice in the other thread how "identical" hardware can exhibit different behavior, especially if you're dealing with some sort of race condition (and I would bet that we are).
I'm afraid that I don't agree with that. If we cannot expect identical hardware to behave identically in identical situations, how are we to design anything with confidence?
I see that the Rigol upgraded firmware is now sporting version 00.04.03.SP1 inside the posted zip fileThat SP1 makes me think they found some important regression from the 00.04.03.0x, so indeed it would be good to know what was fixed.
Some more findings with the new firmware: After the self calibration routine kept failing, I attempted to revert to firmware 04.03 - which also returned a failure message. So as yet, I would recommend not to install the new firmware! Of course, these are all findings with my particular DS1054Z, others may behave differently. If the problems persist, I will wait for the next firmware revision and if this wouldn't sort the difficulties, undo the hack and return my o'scope to the distributor for repair.
Add-On: The calibration procedure finally terminated successfully -- at the fourth attempt! I guess I'll be a little more reluctant when the next update is available :-)
Cheers,
Thomas
Does anyone have a "change log" for this latest firmware update? 00.04.03.01.05, identified as 00.04.03.SP1 on the System Information screen when installed.
New owner of a DS1054Z here, my first 'scope!
I'm beginning to understand the relationship of memory depth to screen update speed, as well as persistence.
One thing I don't understand is why does the scope drop down from 1GSa/s to 500MSa/s even in single shot mode when I switch from 500us to 1ms timebase?
It's clearly not that some memory is slower than the rest, as if I force memory depth to 24M points and capture a single shot at 500us timebase, and then I can zoom out to 2ms timebase with a 1GSa/s sample. If I do the same capture starting with a 2ms timebase I get 250MSa/s.
Is there a good reason for this? I can't figure it out.
One thing I don't understand is why does the scope drop down from 1GSa/s to 500MSa/s even in single shot mode when I switch from 500us to 1ms timebase?
Is there a good reason for this? I can't figure it out.
There are enhancements to the FFT as well.
Does anyone have a "change log" for this latest firmware update? 00.04.03.01.05, identified as 00.04.03.SP1 on the System Information screen when installed.
It's available at the same URL as the previous one. The first four are "enhancements" the rest "modifications". Here's what it says:
Version:00.04.03.01.05
Date:2015-06-16
1. System menu adds support for French.
2. Added the remote command and function for inter-connection with DG4.
3. The module of Math increase the function of filter.
4. Added the remote command which can set the invert and format of picture (:DISP:DATA? {<color>,<invert>,<format>})
5. Optimized the algorithm of LF calibration and self-calibration and increase the prompt of failure.
6. Turned on delay scanning and force stop the system,then the trigger position of waveform changed.
7. In scanning mode,turned on the Zoom display and setted the AC as the trigger coupling,then adjusted the timebase of Zoom zone and the waveform display error.
8. In mixed mode,use logic channel as trigger source and turn off the logic channel and stop the system,then adjust the timebase to the minimum,the part of analog signal disappeared.
9. In mixed mode,use logic channel as trigger source and turn off the logic channel,then the analog signal shifted.
10. The wave of channel1 can not be displayed while open the scan mode then switch the channel2 over and over again.
11. The waveform will be move downward while change the trigger type from the pattern type to the edge type.
12. In scanning mode,turned on the delay scan,the display of the first waveform is wrong.
13. It can not display the waveform of trace when load the file of trace data in “STOP” mode and math module is on.
14. Adjust the timebase offset can make the system crashed when run the “I2C Decoder”.
15. Save the waveform when turned on FFT function and use the momery data to operate and turn on split display,then load the waveform of saved,but the display of waveform is error.
16. Save the waveform when turned on the delay scan and only the logic channel turned on and trigger source is logic channel,then default the system setting and load the waveform of saved,but the display of waveform is error.
There are enhancements to the FFT as well.
Works quite well.
Randy
Do all the unlocked options still work with the latest firmware??
Do all the unlocked options still work with the latest firmware??
There are enhancements to FFT as well.
There are enhancements to the FFT as well.
Works quite well.
Randy
That is nice. One of the big drawbacks of the FFT on the Rigols was the small data set.
Does anyone have a "change log" for this latest firmware update? 00.04.03.01.05, identified as 00.04.03.SP1 on the System Information screen when installed.It's available at the same URL as the previous one. The first four are "enhancements" the rest "modifications". Here's what it says:
And what is that URL please?
And what is that URL please?
It's on page 102, but for your convenience:
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
Model:DS1xxxZ
SN:DS1Zxxxxxxxxxxx
Manufacturer:RIGOL TECHNOLOGIES
Board Ver:0.1.1
Firmware Ver:0.2.3.11
BOOT Ver:0.0.1.2
CPLD Ver:1.1
SoftWare Ver:00.04.03.SP1
So... what is the difference between the "Firmware" and the "Software" as labelled here?
When we upgrade what we have been calling "Firmware" does this also upgrade or change what Rigol is calling "Firmware" here? I don't know because I didn't save a "Param" file before my recent "firmware" upgrades.
Model:DS1xxxZ
SN:DS1Zxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Manufacturer:RIGOL TECHNOLOGIES
Board Ver:0.1.1
Firmware Ver:0.2.3.11
BOOT Ver:0.0.1.1
CPLD Ver:1.1
SoftWare Ver:00.04.02.SP4
And what is that URL please?It's on page 102, but for your convenience:
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
And what is that URL please?It's on page 102, but for your convenience:
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
Sorry I wasn't clear. I was asking what the URL is for the change log.
JimmyK
You need to uninstall all options to remove the 500uV option by using the SCPI command :SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall, then reboot the oscilloscope. The SCPI command must be sent via the USB or LAN port.
Then reinstall your desired options (use DSER for all options except 500uV option).
I've installed all options and it works fine. The 500µ does not work correctly, but's usable. I see no other issues with this option installed.
JimmyK
You need to uninstall all options to remove the 500uV option by using the SCPI command :SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall, then reboot the oscilloscope. The SCPI command must be sent via the USB or LAN port.
Then reinstall your desired options (use DSER for all options except 500uV option).
When I look at the KeyGen page gotroot, I don't see any DSER option. Do you use that input code anyway?
Also, if you upgraded DS1054Z previously to all options can't you just ignore the 500uS string and simply not use it, or, does having it on your scope affect your scope.
One more thing, can you just select upgrading one option at a time and do not pick that one? Like Memory upgrade, Record upgrade etc.?
I updated my 1054z yesterday without any problems.
It failed at the first self cal attempt, but succeeded in the second try. :-+
Greetings
Is there a known software code that can restore my scope to its configuration before I applied the 'DSER' upgrade?You don't have to use UltraSigma, you can use any method that will send SCPI commands to the scope. I use telnet over the LAN connection. Several people have developed and posted software that will talk to the scope and send the SCPI commands, using USB or LAN. Check back in the thread.
Or is UltraSigma the only way to do it?
:SYST:OPT:UNINST is fine as well.
It's all described here (page 157): http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/ProgrammingGuide/MSO1000Z_DS1000Z_ProgrammingGuide_EN.pdf (http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/ProgrammingGuide/MSO1000Z_DS1000Z_ProgrammingGuide_EN.pdf)
I suppose the statement is incorrect.
Correct would have to be :SYST:OPT:UNIN
I have not tried it, but in the firmware, there is only UNINstall and UNIN.
Peter
lower case characters are optional so partial names will work:
UNIN
UNINS
UNINST
UNINSTA
UNINSTAL
UNINSTALL
should all do the same thing.
Thanks for the response however the new f/w referred to stated that it was 00.04.03 SP2. The previous f/w update was 00.04.03 SP1 from last month. It may of course be a mistake and there is no later f/w update this month!
John
After reading the entire internet (twice) in my lunch break, I've decided it must be a typo. For a start the FFT improvement happened in 04.03 SP1 (I tested it last night on my scope). One month between releases just sounds too quick too and I can't find any other mention of 04.03 SP2 on the interwebs.
After reading the entire internet (twice) in my lunch break, I've decided it must be a typo. For a start the FFT improvement happened in 04.03 SP1 (I tested it last night on my scope). One month between releases just sounds too quick too and I can't find any other mention of 04.03 SP2 on the interwebs.
This document (found by another member here) seems to be Rigol's definitive list of versions: http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-05ba/1/-/-/-/-/DS1000Z%20Firmware%20Release%20Notes.pdf?sid=ErJFAfDAl (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-05ba/1/-/-/-/-/DS1000Z%20Firmware%20Release%20Notes.pdf?sid=ErJFAfDAl)
It shows:
00.04.03.01.05 Date?2015-06-16
00.04.03.00.01 Date?2015-05-05
00.04.02.04.07 Date?2014-12-31
00.04.02.03.00 Date?2014-10-21
00.04.01.02.00 Date?2014-07-28
The SPx has always corresponded to the 4th digit (i.e. 01). If the 4th digit is zero, the scope doesn't display SP0.
ya, but's not the latest one form 2015-06-16 / 00.04.03.01.05
00.04.03.SP1 seems to be this one 00.04.03.SP1 ( 00.04.03.00.01 Date 2015-05-05 )
Maybe already answered, but is 00.04.03.SP1 hackable?
I wanted to share an interesting message I received and happened to capture when recording a video.
I provided the screen shot, the erro was "BW option outdated" and this came from 04.03
Found 3 messages in firmware 04.03.SP1:
Record option outdated!
Decode option outdated!
BW option outdated!
Peter
I wanted to share an interesting message I received and happened to capture when recording a video.What were you doing to get the error? Can you reproduce it and get a screen capture from the scope?
I provided the screen shot, the erro was "BW option outdated" and this came from 04.03[\quote]
So BW is still in what I thought was the latest firmware until I read about SP1.What did you read and where?
Maybe some parts of it are needed for the 50Mhz to 100Mhz option to work even though they don't offer it as an option and apparently it's outdated also.Rigol does offer BW as an option. You purchase the desired model: DS1054Z, DS1074Z or DS1104Z.
So if it's outdated does that mean maybe the scope is not really getting the 100Mhz update option when people apply it?
Im curious so I may have to redo my steps after the 04.03.SP1 update and see if it still,shows the outdated message. Originally I was thinking if I apply individual options without the 500uV then it would keep the name the same if I didn't use the update all to generate the key. But I forgot the BW option is not officially offered and I think that's why the name changed.I have the DS1074Z version that I added all the options except the 500uV/div. Since then I've updated the firmware 6 times without removing any options before the updates. I have not had problems with the self-calibration either. However, I've only done the self-cal after using the scope for more than a hour. I'm thinking people aren't allowing their scope to warm up long enough before doing the calibration.
Is it recommended to remove options before doing a firmware update and then apply them after the update, or can the firmware update be ran even with a non officially supported option applied?
Found 3 messages in firmware 04.03.SP1:How are you seeing these messages?
Record option outdated!
Decode option outdated!
BW option outdated!
MarkF, mine shows exactly same options list plus 100MHz Official.Mine shows the 100MHz option now too. The list was expanded as part of one of the latest firmware versions. That screenshot was from firmware version 00.02.00.SP1 in Feb 2014.
I'd like to get a copy of the coupon code too, if available. Could someone PM it me, please?
Thanks! Tim
Looking to place an order, could someone kindly PM the coupon code.PM sent
Regards,
Matt
Hi guys
First post here. I'm very new to EE tinkering. I recently started playing with Arduino and RasPi, and I have a couple of UNI-T devices (UT61E DMM and their UT325 thermocouple logger).
I just bought my first ever scope, the DS1054Z. I should get it tomorrow (paid extra for Saturday delivery!)
But I've just realised I might have possibly made a bit of a mistake. I really wanted a 'PC' scope, ie one I could control from the PC. A lot of the sampling I will do will need to end up as PC screenshots, and anyway I'm a software/developer type guy - I'm most comfortable on the computer by far.
Thanks very much Howard and alsetalokin!
Howard, thanks, that all makes sense - and it's nice to have my purchase validated, of course :)
alseta, thank you, I hadn't seen DSRemote before. It looks excellent, with just one minor inconvenience - it looks from that page that it's Linux only at the moment? I'm running Windows as my primary platform right now. But I see it's written in QT, so perhaps it might compile on Windows. At least the app part of it, not the driver - and I'd guess it wouldn't know how to interface with the Rigol driver without specific support, which it won't have unless it was targetted for Windows. Perhaps LAN connect would work.
Has anyone heard any discussion of DSRemote being compiled and run on Windows? If not is no big deal, I have a Raspberry Pi here, and/or I can easily set up a Linux VM.
Anyway I'm really glad to have the scope setup and am enjoying fiddling with it already- even though I don't know a huge amount what I'm doing! :) I did watch Dave's entire one hour feature review, as well as about 2 hours of general "How to use an oscilloscope" type YouTube videos (mostly from mjlorton)
Unless you have a special project, I think you'll use the scope directly and not want to operate it remotely.
I've written many QT programs and if you can get it compiled on Windows or find a Windows executable, it should be totally transparent whether you're running it on Linux or a Windows system. After all that's the main purpose of QT (to be cross platform compatible). If you have trouble, I may be able to make time to compile it for you.
Why not buy a USB floppy disk drive? It costs only 5 EUR in China these days :)
Why not buy a USB floppy disk drive? It costs only 5 EUR in China these days :)
Because u need floppys too and have to plug it from scope to PC, to scope, to pc... For what ? A 1GB-stick cost the same, ist much smaller and don't need this crappy slow floppys.
Maybe someone build in a Wifi module like an ESP8266.
http://www.adafruit.com/search?q=ESP8266&b=1 (http://www.adafruit.com/search?q=ESP8266&b=1)
But I do not really know for what it should be good for. For this 3 Pix in a year ?
This thread might provide some insight as to why the device behaves as it does:
>https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/some-important-points-to-remember-when-evaluating-waveform-update-rates/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/some-important-points-to-remember-when-evaluating-waveform-update-rates/)
@TheBloke
DSO's share the capture system between channels. First, you noticed and charted your results that get's you a two thumbs up, :-+ :-+ . Try checking your numbers with only Channel 1 on. If you like try some of these combinations 1+2 on 1and3 on. To save time just set the highest sample rate.
You did good, it takes time to build trust in equipment and these type of observations will serve you well in the long run.
One thing that does affect me though, and I'm still curious to know: should I leave Mem Depth on Auto, or should I set it to the maximum 24Mpts? Or should I sometimes have Auto, sometimes set 24?
I've now read through the whole manual, and it doesn't really help on this question. I don't even understand why the Mem Depth setting is there - why would the user ever want to use less than the maximum available Mpts? So my first reaction is that I would always want to set it to 24Mpts, especially as Auto doesn't seem to ever use 24 automatically (another thing I don't understand.)
But maybe there's some disadvantage to using more Mpts than is required? Perhaps it slows the scope down? If anyone knows I'd be most grateful!
A possible answer could be that allways using the maximum memory lowers the waveform update rate.
I haven't done it myself but you can do this by connecting one inputchannel with the trigger output at the back of the scope.
A signal which reflects the current oscilloscope capture rate can be output from
[Trigger Out] connector each time a trigger is generated by the oscilloscope. If this
signal is connected to a waveform display device to measure the frequency, the
measurement result is equal to the current capture rate.
Can you rudimentary compare it with feeding a 50Hz TV signal to an LCD flat screen, where the LCD back panel physically either supports 50Hz or 100Hz, but where the software and the scaler in the TV uses special techniques to increase the refresh rate up to 200-600 Hz? :)
Just a quick update to say I've got DSRemote running on my Linux VM and it definitely seems to be the best of the available apps.
How come some Tektronix scopes can do 1 Million waveform/s update rates on all memory depths?I don't know which scopes you're talking about but really, it's all about how long it takes to fill the selected amount of memory at the selected sample rate (and then the scopes processing time in between each trigger event)
is latest firmware/newest production models unlockable to 100MHz etc... ??? has anyone tried?
thanks!
STOP PRESS! Rigol has authorized a price drop on their DS1074Z 70MHz scope to $499 & DS1074Z-s (+AWG) down to $699 in case you need another 20MHz bandwidth....I seem to recall there is another way to get those extra 20 (or 50) MHz... ;-) But this lowers the entry price for the -S models, which is nice.
I don't fully understand how the DS1054Z is setting Samples/second and MPts based on timebase.
does 1054z firmware 00.04.03.01.05 unlockable?
does 1054z firmware 00.04.03.01.05 unlockable?
MarkF Thank You! You are so smart!
why dont your read the page yourself more carefully!
Thanks Again!
Hi, in the case of single-shot triggering, is there a way to have the scope only record what happens after the trigger event, rather than splitting the memory half before and half after? As it is, half the memory is being wasted at times. Perhaps I shouldn't complain with 24M of memory. :P
What about moving the trigger point to the left w/ the horizontal controls?
Should do the trick, or not?
Cheers
What about moving the trigger point to the left w/ the horizontal controls?
Should do the trick, or not?
Cheers
Yep, simple enough. Thanks. Only complaint at this point is that the trigger point keeps moving around a bit as I change the time base. Any way to anchor it to the left side? It would be nice if the horizontal position knob zeroed the trigger point to the center on the first click and to the left on the second click, or had a setting somewhere specifying whether zero is the center or the left.
Just set it manually wherever you want it before doing a single-shot capture. Is this terribly inconvenient?
Just set it manually wherever you want it before doing a single-shot capture. Is this terribly inconvenient?
It can be inconvenient at times. For example, if I don't know how long a pulse train is going to be, then I have to keep changing the time base and repositioning the trigger point. I've resigned myself to just sticking with the center of the screen as the trigger zero point, at least until I've learned more about the waveform under observation.
I was about to buy a 1054z but sadly to say i had a second thought because i come across the 1054 bug and wish list and the fact the input bandwith is dived among the channels but my problem is i dont need all the fancy bells and whistles, i happily trade RS232, SPI, maths etc, etc for increased bandwith/speed and simplicity.What i need is scope that do example 400Mhz, FFT, freq counting,PW and and who can do screen dumps in a suitable bitmap format for similarly amount of money and that's about it. I dont have the time or patience to read all the million posts about different scopes but with my requirements i'm i stuck with old secondhand analogs market or is there something new like this around?
Thanks for any info and your time regarding this!
alsetalokin4017I actually was about to do (old 1Ghz Lecroy for 300usd) but got distracted by Daves used-care-salesman approach in the end of the 1054z video! :)
Well.... if you can find a 4-channel secondhand analog scope with 400 MHz bw that will do FFT, Frequency counting, pulse width and screendumps for 400 dollars, and comes with 4 probes... buy it, by all means!
Otherwise, get a Rigol 1054z, unlock it to 100 MHz and just don't use the features you don't want. Do you really need 400 MHz bandwidth, on your budget?The hack is great dont get me wrong on this but that is not part of my scope request, 500Mhz is also fine as well as 1Ghz etc.
Is there some kind of scope that acts differently? Don't we all do just exactly this when we are looking at a waveform for the first time?
I was about to buy a 1054z but sadly to say i had a second thought because i come across the 1054 bug and wish list and the fact the input bandwith is dived among the channels
" analog scope with 400 MHz bw that will do FFT"
how schould an analog scope do FFT?
" analog scope with 400 MHz bw that will do FFT"
how schould an analog scope do FFT?
What i need is scope that do example 400Mhz, FFT, freq counting,PW and and who can do screen dumps in a suitable bitmap format for similarly amount of money and that's about it. I dont have the time or patience to read all the million posts about different scopes but with my requirements i'm i stuck with old secondhand analogs market or is there something new like this around?
I was about to buy a 1054z but sadly to say i had a second thought because i come across the 1054 bug and wish list and the fact the input bandwith is dived among the channels
Either you are using the wrong terminology or you're getting mixed up with the difference between sample rate and bandwidth. All 4 channels always have 100mhz of bandwidth (or 70, or 50 depending on model). It is the sample rate that gets divided and that happens only if you have the extra channels enabled.
Quotealsetalokin4017I actually was about to do (old 1Ghz Lecroy for 300usd) but got distracted by Daves used-care-salesman approach in the end of the 1054z video! :)
Well.... if you can find a 4-channel secondhand analog scope with 400 MHz bw that will do FFT, Frequency counting, pulse width and screendumps for 400 dollars, and comes with 4 probes... buy it, by all means!QuoteOtherwise, get a Rigol 1054z, unlock it to 100 MHz and just don't use the features you don't want. Do you really need 400 MHz bandwidth, on your budget?The hack is great dont get me wrong on this but that is not part of my scope request, 500Mhz is also fine as well as 1Ghz etc.
For instance i could tomorrow order a Rigol DS6102 for 7620 usd from my local supplier, but why on earth would i spend such a fortune just to look at high speed signals?
Is there a scope like box where i can attach a old PC screen to display the measured 477Mhz wave? Basically i dont need an oscope in traditional sense if you get my hint!
I need a Ghetto style high speed wave display! :)
Quotealsetalokin4017I actually was about to do (old 1Ghz Lecroy for 300usd) but got distracted by Daves used-care-salesman approach in the end of the 1054z video! :)
Well.... if you can find a 4-channel secondhand analog scope with 400 MHz bw that will do FFT, Frequency counting, pulse width and screendumps for 400 dollars, and comes with 4 probes... buy it, by all means!QuoteOtherwise, get a Rigol 1054z, unlock it to 100 MHz and just don't use the features you don't want. Do you really need 400 MHz bandwidth, on your budget?The hack is great dont get me wrong on this but that is not part of my scope request, 500Mhz is also fine as well as 1Ghz etc.
For instance i could tomorrow order a Rigol DS6102 for 7620 usd from my local supplier, but why on earth would i spend such a fortune just to look at high speed signals?
Is there a scope like box where i can attach a old PC screen to display the measured 477Mhz wave? Basically i dont need an oscope in traditional sense if you get my hint!
I need a Ghetto style high speed wave display! :)
I dont have the time or patience to read all the million posts about different scopes but with my requirements i'm i stuck with old secondhand analogs market or is there something new like this around?
Thanks for any info and your time regarding this!
Is it DSER or DSFR cause there is not listing for the DSER and everyone keeps saying it but no listing using the link below.
As far as upgrades... The bandwidth and memory depth are the most important for me. The extra triggers and decoders I've used to a lesser degree. If you're going to upgrade, do them all and be done with it. Use DSER. Do NOT enable the 500uV/div option as it doesn't work properly.
Version 00.04.03.SP1 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0) is the latest. Disregard the zip filename and see the directory name inside.
And Firmware Release Notes (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-05ba/1/-/-/-/-/DS1000Z%20Firmware%20Release%20Notes.pdf?sid=ErJFAfDAl).
pt.7:
In scanning mode,turned on the Zoom display and setted the AC as the trigger coupling,then adjusted the timebase of Zoom zone and the waveform display error.
Is it DSER or DSFR cause there is not listing for the DSER and everyone keeps saying it but no listing using the link below.
http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/ (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/)
Everyone keeps saying DESR because that is what you should use. USE DSER NOT DSFR!!!!!
Version 00.04.03.SP1 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0) is the latest. Disregard the zip filename and see the directory name inside.
And Firmware Release Notes (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-05ba/1/-/-/-/-/DS1000Z%20Firmware%20Release%20Notes.pdf?sid=ErJFAfDAl).
Does pt.7 in the Release Notes mean that Rigol has repaired the zoom freeze bug ?Quotept.7:
In scanning mode,turned on the Zoom display and setted the AC as the trigger coupling,then adjusted the timebase of Zoom zone and the waveform display error.
Yes, and no. :)
Yes, and no. :)
Thanks for the detailed reply ;)
Really....
Why?
I have read a couple places now that Rigol is to release a firmware update in October. Rigol has been very responsive to issues that have apperared. :-+
With the number of DS1000Z sales, it sure looks like it's in their best interest NOT to block the hack.
Rigol has been very responsive to issues that have apperared.
Rigol has been very responsive to issues that have apperared.
Not with the DS6000 series. They come with a very old firmware and the LAN connection is useless
(at least when you use direct tcp-connection). Just send the command :WAV:DATA? and the scope will freeze.
A hard lockup which can only be undone by switching off the power of the scope.
I reported this bug more than two months ago and they confirmed it. Yet still no fix.
It's their most expensive DSO.
USB connection works, but downloading deep memory waveform data stops after +/-25%. Useless!
How is their software quality control?
I think I found a bug or am I that stupid???
I got a DS1054z scope upgraded , last night I was calibrating my probes for each channel but when I only had probes in channel 3&4...The cal signal from the scope would not stabilize unless I had a probe on channel 1 then the signal is stabilize is usable...
I'm considering purchasing a DS1054Z before the next firmware upgrade. Am I correct in concluding from the various posts that the units that are currently shipping are still easy to hack?
Ok cause I have no problems on Channels 1&2 but 3&4 is when the signal starts flipping out .. I will have to find out how to change the triggers and see if it helps
It is not limited by hardware. (depends how want think)
Highest true sensitivity in DS1000Z is 5mV/div.
After then 2mV and 1mV/div is only digitally vertically "zoomed".
What you get more if you zoom more.
ADC have 8 bit. 256 theoretical levels. (if look more deeply not really even this, ENOB, analog front end noise etc)
2mV/div (simplification) 128 levels.
1mV/div (simplification) 64 levels
do you want zoom more.
If you look this scope quite noisy front end (analog front end + ADC) noise, do you get something more if you zoom more.
It is totally other case IF there is good low noise amplifier before ADC so that with 5mV pp signal it use ADC full scale. (around 10 div vertically on the display)
Finally: Lowest true sensitivity in DS1000Z is 5mV/div.
This is truth least in my DS1074Z.
It is not limited by hardware. (depends how want think)
Highest true sensitivity in DS1000Z is 5mV/div.
After then 2mV and 1mV/div is only digitally vertically "zoomed".
What you get more if you zoom more.
ADC have 8 bit. 256 theoretical levels. (if look more deeply not really even this, ENOB, analog front end noise etc)
2mV/div (simplification) 128 levels.
1mV/div (simplification) 64 levels
do you want zoom more.
If you look this scope quite noisy front end (analog front end + ADC) noise, do you get something more if you zoom more.
It is totally other case IF there is good low noise amplifier before ADC so that with 5mV pp signal it use ADC full scale. (around 10 div vertically on the display)
Finally: Lowest true sensitivity in DS1000Z is 5mV/div.
This is truth least in my DS1074Z.
Hi RF-Loop,
where you have this info from?
The reality is that 2mV/div is the lowest TRUE vertical sensitivity on DS1000Z!
ONLY 1mV/div is magification
Regards
Tom
Just received my brand new DS1054Z. DSER options worked just fine!
Beauty!
Just received my brand new DS1054Z. DSER options worked just fine!
Beauty!
Congrats, good choice. Don't forget to update the firmware. Here's the link:
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
After the update, when you check system info, you'll see software version 00.04.03.SP1.
Batronix (official rigol distributor) Euro 339 + VAT + free shipping within Europe. 100.- cheaper !
Batronix (official rigol distributor) Euro 339 + VAT + free shipping within Europe. 100.- cheaper !
Don't forget to update the firmware. Here's the link:
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
How hard would it be to restore a hacked DS1054Z to the factory setting and what would you need ???You'll need a computer and USB cable in order to feed SCPI commands.
How hard would it be to restore a hacked DS1054Z to the factory setting and what would you need ???You'll need a computer and USB cable in order to feed SCPI commands.
The command to uninstall the upgrades is ... :SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall (alternatively, you can also use :SYST:OPT:UNINST, as it's the letters in CAPS that = the actual command).
Even though I have the 500uV option installed, the smallest volts/div I can go down to is 5mV/div. Did Rigol eliminate the 500uV/div with SP4, since the 1054z hardware doesn't support it?You probably have the probe scale factor set to 10X
If I never go down to 500uV/div would the problem affect higher volts/div?No.
I think I need to put in the correct hack of DSER, and upgrade the firmware, and I'm not sure in what order to do that.Doesn't matter.
Even though I have the 500uV option installed, the smallest volts/div I can go down to is 5mV/div.
Did anyone ever figure out how to get into what Rigol calls "project mode". On the DS2K/4K series you press the trigger menu button (set to edge) and then the buttons in the lower right followed by system. Then system info shows more detail and version info. I recall seeing a screenshot where someone got a DS1xx4Z in this mode once, but could never reproduce the keys to do it.I don't remember seeing such a screenshot, but if you ask the scope to save "Param" to a .txt file on the USB stick, then look at the text file, you'll see a lot of information on the scope's "software" which is what we are calling firmware, the actual "firmware" and "Boot" versions, and the scope's current settings.
Awesome, thank you edavid and hayatepilot. This forum is very active!Selecting Storage>Default resets the scope's user settings to the factory defaults, except for the Language (and installed Options). This is useful for clearing out a complicated multichannel setup, for example.
Oh, of course the probe is in 10x... :palm: Switching it to 1x does indeed get the scope to a funky looking 500uV.
I'm working on resetting the scope now. Getting timeout errors when I try to send *RST and :SYST:OPT:UNINST. Going to try sending the commands over telnet/LXI when I get back from class tonight.
Then I just need to wait to hear back from Rigol about the firmware upgrade. Only company I've ever seen that doesn't just post the firmware as a download on their site, and instead makes you email them to request it. :-//
I don't remember seeing such a screenshot, but if you ask the scope to save "Param" to a .txt file on the USB stick, then look at the text file
I don't think uyou lost your warranty, because you don't change anything at the scope himself or in the software. All you do is activate a few options, thats forbidden of course, but why you should lost your warranty than? You everytime can change it back to the original setup without any options.
But, u have 30 Days all options for free, so why u want hack them now,directly after you got your scope? Wait this 30 days... Its a long time running the scope 30 Days... THAN you always can "hack" it.
Is there a link anywhere to the preferred method of upgrading the firmware on a DS1000Z ? Is there a bootup and press the help button repeatedly type way to do this like on the DS2000 series?
Is there a link anywhere to the preferred method of upgrading the firmware on a DS1000Z ? Is there a bootup and press the help button repeatedly type way to do this like on the DS2000 series?
I live in Norway and I really want this scope. First of all, the scope is not available here, and on eBay it costs like 530$ plus an additional 170$ import tax, and finally around 50$ in shipping. Does anyone of you know of a Scandinavian distributor or reseller? Or where I can get this scope at anywhere near the bargain price which makes it so attractive?
... Does anyone of you know of a Scandinavian distributor or reseller? Or where I can get this scope at anywhere near the bargain price which makes it so attractive?
RIGOL DS1054Z Promo Sale, Free shipment to Europe and discount:
http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z (http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z)
Hello,... Does anyone of you know of a Scandinavian distributor or reseller? Or where I can get this scope at anywhere near the bargain price which makes it so attractive?
http://www.batronix.com/versand/rigol/DS1000Z.html (http://www.batronix.com/versand/rigol/DS1000Z.html)
LG Wolfgang
…and elfa.se have a package deal on Fluke 87 + Fluke 62 I thermometer for 310$ which is a bargain:o omg that's an amazing price, anyone in Sweden willing to forward it to me in Switzerland? (Of course the Swiss office of elfa/Distrelec has that bundle for $600+…) Needless to say the elfa.se website will not send to any other country….
Dammit, after reading this thread and watching Dave's videos on the DS1054Z my finger slipped and I "accidently" ordered one. (That's my excuse to my wife and I am sticking with it :-DD)
...
So this is now the second oscilloscope that I have purchased simply because I saw it on the EEVblog..... Oh well there are worse things I suppose :-DD
It would be interesting (at least to me) to know if these newly-received DS1054Z scopes can reproduce some of the various bugs that we've noticed.This is not the newest FW !
It would be interesting (at least to me) to know if these newly-received DS1054Z scopes can reproduce some of the various bugs that we've noticed.
The Freeze Bug:(please "vote" in the poll as to whether or not you can reproduce this one)
The Math horizontal error bug (see first screenshot below)
The Trigger horizontal error bug (see the second and third screenshots below)
The zoom Trigger bug (see the fourth screenshot below)
Note that the timebase settings need to be set as in the scopeshots for these Trigger and Math bugs to occur.
The "freeze bug" settings are shown in the video and talked about in the thread; in particular they need Mem Depth "Auto" and Persistence set to 100 ms or higher.
It would be interesting (at least to me) to know if these newly-received DS1054Z scopes can reproduce some of the various bugs that we've noticed.This is not the newest FW !
Please update to SP1 and repeat the check.
It would be interesting (at least to me) to know if these newly-received DS1054Z scopes can reproduce some of the various bugs that we've noticed.This is not the newest FW !
Please update to SP1 and repeat the check.
LG Wolfgang
Model:DS1104Z
SN:DS1ZA170300673
Manufacturer:RIGOL TECHNOLOGIES
Board Ver:0.1.1
Firmware Ver:0.2.3.11
BOOT Ver:0.0.1.2
CPLD Ver:1.1
SoftWare Ver:00.04.03.SP1
How I include the youtube code here ?That works, looks ugly.
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0xSdAz_Phm8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I meant same like alsetalokin4017 did it here..
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg781316/#msg781316 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg781316/#msg781316)
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xSdAz_Phm8[/url]
Hello,
is this a new unknown bug?
At TRIGGER MENU > Settings > Coupling ...
At DC and HFR the Trigger-Level-Display is ok.
At AC and LFR the T-Symbol and Line disappear.
At TRIGGER MENU > Settings > Coupling ...
At DC and HFR the Trigger-Level-Display is ok.
At AC and LFR the T-Symbol and Line disappear.
This is intentional, in my understanding: When the trigger is AC coupled, there is no absolute trigger level, hence there is nothing to display.
Yes, if the TRIGGER-Source is AC, then it's possible ok.
NO, when you set the TRIGGER-Coupling to AC, you can vary the Trigger-Level - check it!
It makes sense!
My old TEK TDS210 shows in all 4 Modes (DC,AC,LRF,HRF) the Trigger-Level and let ist vary.
LG Wolfgang
is this a new unknown bug?
PS: 00.04.03.SP1???
@alsetalokin4017
I can not repoduce your math and trigger errors. All of them working fine with the 00.04.03.SP1 firmware.
Please can you send me your scope-setup files so I can check it again ? Maybe your setup was wrong at your measurments.
The only issue I have is the persist 100ms / memory bug with the hang up. Please someone else can check the persist / memory error with the hanging up ? Shown in the video few posts up.
/Edit
okay, forget it, found the Bug/wishlist thread here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-(ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models)-bugswish-list/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-(ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models)-bugswish-list/)
With the latest firmware installed, the scope still freezes with the 2GB drive, but is fine with the 512MB. Both use FAT16.
The manual doesn't specify anything about compatible USB storage devices. Is there a maximum size?
It is recommended that the capacity of the USB storage device being used with this oscilloscope is no larger than 8 GBytes.There's no reason at all the disk size would make a difference, it's just numbers.
I have used a Corsair 32GB FAT32 formatted stick to update a DS1045Z without any problems.
Also, I used a Kingston 16GB FAT32 formatted stick with a clusterzise of 16384 bytes to update a DS6104 without any problems.
It is recommended that the capacity of the USB storage device being used with this oscilloscope is no larger than 8 GBytes.There's no reason at all the disk size would make a difference, it's just numbers.
Cluster sizes? Sure - buffer overruns and all that.
Not total disk size though.
@rosbuitre
Nice!
Did you notice any changes/improvements?
Were any of the bugs (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-%28ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models%29-bugswish-list/) fixed?
Greetings
@rosbuitre
Nice!
Did you notice any changes/improvements?
Were any of the bugs (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-%28ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models%29-bugswish-list/) fixed?
Greetings
Hi
I had no time to try it, only just install
Regards
+1, I would also like to know. :-+
New firmware received by mail from RIGOL
Regards
Hi,New firmware received by mail from RIGOL
Regards
Do you mind to share ?. I just checked the rigol's website, and only previous version is listed.
Cheers.
---
Daniel
Hi,New firmware received by mail from RIGOL
Regards
Do you mind to share ?. I just checked the rigol's website, and only previous version is listed.
Cheers.
---
Daniel
Shared, please confirm if they can download.
Following the instructions I could not install, recognizes new version when you insert the pen drive.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6F_CSCAsnsoS0dtQ3BLNV9yUTg/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6F_CSCAsnsoZjFyRmdkVUQzZ3M/view?usp=sharing
Regards
Did you notice any changes/improvements?Yes, many German incorrect translations which I had reported.
I'm looking to buy a new DS1054z.. Can someone give me the discount code eevblog members? Thanks in advance.
My first quick check with the new Update:Has the UI become sluggish with this newest release?
No Trigger Bug more - all ok ;D
snip
I see you have 4 pages of 'horizontal' measurements on the left! I only have 3 with SP1.Yes, look here:
Hello,
one important info: "After install new firmware >>> Selfcalibration !!!"
Before I saw the Math-Bug, after the Selfcalibration it was gone!
I'm saving to get a scope, but this mess on the cheap range makes me very undecided
I'm saving to get a scope, but this mess on the cheap range makes me very undecided
Don't worry. This scope is worth having even with the freezing bug. I've never seen it and I've had mine for a year.
(And fingers crossed it will be fixed soon...)
So... once again we have some conflicting reports. Several people who have installed the new firmware have reported that the scope still freezes and that the Math horizontal error is still there. Other people report that these bugs, and the trigger zoom bug, are fixed in the new firmware. Hmm....
Hello,
with 00.04.03.SP2
1) now I can't see the Math bug - can anyone check it too (what procedure?)
3) now: NO !! Freeze bug as shown here
snip
I see you have 4 pages of 'horizontal' measurements on the left! I only have 3 with SP1.
Anybody have the release notes for SP2? I asked Rigol for new firmware, but they sent me the old one.
Sorry sir,
I haven't changelog file, all I know is it increase four measure
items : +Pulses,-Pulses,+Edges,-Edges.
And it increase the remote command of : image type and image format of
image storage function ; filter of Math function ; set image type in image
storage.
And it fixed some bugs.
Mine is already full option DS1104Z. :-+I bet volumes mounted read only as it is configured on most embedded OS. So no open/locked files. I think it is pretty safe to switch it of by power button.
This thing is really light years ahead of the usb crap that I was using before...
P.S.
This thing runs on linux right? How come It doesent need "soft" shut down?
I feel really bad by pressing the button which just cuts power to the scope...
This thing runs on linux right?
No freeze bug here; exact same settings (all open; persist; mem depth; zoom...). I can fiddle around all day with the zoom. No freeze. Very recent scope.
Input all open. Persist time set to 100ms, memory depth auto and it should be freezed if u turn on the zoom.
with 00.04.03.SP2
1) now I can't see the Math bug - can anyone check it too (what procedure?)
Turn on all channels, set to average mode. MATH Chanel A+B
The Freeze Bug, I can't reproduce it.3) now: NO !! Freeze bug as shown hereInput all open. Persist time set to 100ms, memory depth auto and it should be freezed if u turn on the zoom.
This thing runs on linux right?
I don't think so, for two reasons:
1. There's nowhere written, neither in the pdf manual nor the printed manual, that the instrument uses GPL'ed software and that the sourcecode
of it can be requested (which is obligatory when using GPL software).
That easily could be proprietary.Don't know about it, had no opportunity to play with it.
2. If they should use Linux, they shouldn't have such a slow and buggy tcp/ip stack.
Firmware is official now. (00.04.03.02.03)
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
QuoteThat easily could be proprietary.
Rigol has updated their Firmware Release (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0) page today. It contains the newest DS1000Z firmware, installation procedure and release notes.
A oscilloscope is not a Multimeter. :-DMM
Following on from my previous message using Channels 2 or 3 or 4 individually and using full screen I have a range of 362 mv to 342 mv for 22 plus displayed cycles to 1 displayed cycle. This is an acceptable accuracy for a general purpose scope. Other equipment would be used for higher accuracy. So do not try and measure too many Channels simultaneously perhaps this is the best way forward. Although my Channel 1 does seem to be accurate, as mentioned previously, with multiple channels displayed.
Displayed Cycles on Screen CH1 mv CH2 mv Ch 3 mv CH 4 mv
~50 368 365 366 364
~24 367 371 370 369
~11 368 371 378 377
~5 369 392 392 391
~2 360 427 425 424
~1 344 477 474 473
Selecting Auto Channels displayed as 4 separate traces.
HiChannel 1 is clipping on the top screen ??, move it down a bit and see what happens to the RMS value.
As before and 1 click in Vertical scale CH1
Regards
HiChannel 1 is clipping on the top screen ??, move it down a bit and see what happens to the RMS value.
As before and 1 click in Vertical scale CH1
Regards
For correct AC RMS measurements always use AC coupling, else you can be deceived by small DC offsets on your signal.
It could be QNX for example. Non GPL unix like OS.QuoteThat easily could be proprietary.
What do you mean? You can distribute proprietary GPL'ed software? Never heard of it.
Or did you mean something else?
It could be QNX for example. Non GPL unix like OS.QuoteThat easily could be proprietary.
What do you mean? You can distribute proprietary GPL'ed software? Never heard of it.
Or did you mean something else?
I am having trouble downloading the update file on a dial up connection it gets to about 30% then fails.
I would like to know if others have this issue and if the file can be acquired from a different site .
Most downloads resume when i click them after a failure but the Rigol site.
Probably variation took the bandwidth safety margin a bit higher than usual. Mine with the "hack" tests well over 200 MHz with the risetime method, very close to the theoretical upper limit of their frontend design.
That's... an interesting glitch my 1kZ picked up in the middle of otherwise reasonable operation.That is a scope hardware problem !
What the hell? :-//
That's... an interesting glitch my 1kZ picked up in the middle of otherwise reasonable operation.That is a scope hardware problem !
What the hell? :-//
... I decided to do a bandwidth test.look here:
I did it long before.
LG Wolfgang
I did it long before.
LG Wolfgang
Whether you have done it "long before" has nothing to do with the issue I am describing. My scope does not have the 100 MHz hack. That's the point. Your graph simply shows the response of the scope with the hack. Mine has essentially a 100 MHz bandwidth without doing a hack. :-//
Did you terminate at the scope with a 50 ohm through terminator?
The 1074Z I have had a 90MHz bandwidth measured with an RF signal generator (and thru terminator), it's about 140MHz with the 100MHz liberation measured the same way.
Did you terminate at the scope with a 50 ohm through terminator?Yes, I did. Dirctly on the scope input. No use of probes.
Yes, I did. Dirctly on the scope input. No use of probes.
Did you terminate at the scope with a 50 ohm through terminator?
Yes, I specifically stated as such in the first post ...QuoteThe 1074Z I have had a 90MHz bandwidth measured with an RF signal generator (and thru terminator), it's about 140MHz with the 100MHz liberation measured the same way.
I don't know what to tell you. Mine is the DS1054Z - a 50 MHz scope, and I have measured the bandwidth numerous times today correctly, and it's about ~100 MHz. If I did anything wrong I be very happy to listen. :-//
Sorry, I missed that you'd already stated that.
The 1074Z I am giving as an example, inside the front end is the same as the 1054Z, it has 70MHz already liberated out of the box. There are some digitally controlled analogue* filters in the front end that are relaxed depending in the model, or how it's liberated.
It's not 100MHz if it's 3.5dB down, it'll be something a little short of that, maybe 95MHz or so, just saying, just splitting a hair or two.
One further note, I assume this was on a single channel too, at 1GSa/s sampling. The interpolation can play some funny tricks with pulse and step generators, but as you're doing this with a sine wave it would seem unlikely.
If you're happy with your current circa 100MHz then that's cool. But you could also squeeze quite a bit more out it if you wanted to. The step test I did on my liberated 1074Z with a <50ps step generator and it showed bandwidth in excess of 150MHz (2.3ns rise time) - see 16:24 here:
I don't know what to tell you. Mine is the DS1054Z - a 50 MHz scope, and I have measured the bandwidth numerous times today correctly, and it's about ~100 MHz. If I did anything wrong I be very happy to listen. :-//
126 pages on the topic... wow thats too much for me, forgive me but i have to ask.
Can ds1054z be hacked into fully functioning 100MHz scope or not? I'm considering buying this one.
You got lucky!
Do the hack and see what you get. :popcorn:
A 'hack' is available to enable 100MHz bandwidth and a number of other features which are normally only available at additional cost. Users considering this should be aware that it is not approved by Rigol and may void the warranty. A website featuring the code generator to enable the features can be found at http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/. (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/.) The code DSER enables all features except 500uV vertical resolution, which should not be used since it is not supported on this scope and will cause problems.
Can anyone provided further DETAIL(s) on the "Nature" of the "Problems Caused" by enabling the 500uV vertical resolution ?
Thanks & Cheers from Orion12 . . . I have an DS1054Z on it's way :clap:
:)ok many thanks! :palm:you can use the Ultra Sigma software in windows? Or you need Linux? You must use wireless LAN or you can also connect USB?
Then the word * IDN?
It should be replaced with: SYSTem OPTion Uninstall
Words have the letters in upper case and the lower case?
There are the spaces between the 3 words?
Excuse me, but are not practical writing with SCPI commands
BINGO the procedure it's succefully!!! Il the list of options "official" not appeared the function 500uV... it's correct?
I think the Reason this Question on the 500mV / DS1054Z Functionality has come up Repeatedly is BECAUSE their has Not Been Enough SPECIFIC Data posted on EXACTLY What Problems setting this 500mV Option ON will produce on the DS1054Z . . . ? ? ? ( I know I also Posted about this Question )
It's been mentioned on this thread that the DS1054Z does NOT have 500vM Hardware support . . . Rigol obviously Makes this AVAILABLE in the Options Menu so WHAT Happens IF this Option is Turned-On ?
Does it Lock-Up the Scope or Create OTHER Problems ?
Or does it Simply Not Accurately Display 500mV Signals & Voltages at this 500mV / Division Setting ?
If SOMEONE could Please post some further DETAILS on this Topic . . . This confusion could be dispelled . . . Many Thanks & Cheers from Orion12 :-+
My understanding is two fold.
1) A lot of noise in the 500uV/div setting, and
2) The 500uV/div setting is NOT calibrated. You may not even be able to see the trace or adjust it to be on the screen.I think the Reason this Question on the 500mV / DS1054Z Functionality has come up Repeatedly is BECAUSE their has Not Been Enough SPECIFIC Data posted on EXACTLY What Problems setting this 500mV Option ON will produce on the DS1054Z . . . ? ? ? ( I know I also Posted about this Question )
It's been mentioned on this thread that the DS1054Z does NOT have 500vM Hardware support . . . Rigol obviously Makes this AVAILABLE in the Options Menu so WHAT Happens IF this Option is Turned-On ?
Does it Lock-Up the Scope or Create OTHER Problems ?
Or does it Simply Not Accurately Display 500mV Signals & Voltages at this 500mV / Division Setting ?
If SOMEONE could Please post some further DETAILS on this Topic . . . This confusion could be dispelled . . . Many Thanks & Cheers from Orion12 :-+
NOT A CHANCE. Because people are unwilling to read! This has been discussed on page 113 of this thread. ONLY 14 pages back!
Sorry but I count how many times this has been discussed.
My understanding is two fold.
1) A lot of noise in the 500uV/div setting, and
2) The 500uV/div setting is NOT calibrated. You may not even be able to see the trace or adjust it to be on the screen.I think the Reason this Question on the 500uV / DS1054Z Functionality has come up Repeatedly is BECAUSE their has Not Been Enough SPECIFIC Data posted on EXACTLY What Problems setting this 500uV Option ON will produce on the DS1054Z . . . ? ? ? ( I know I also Posted about this Question )
It's been mentioned on this thread that the DS1054Z does NOT have 500uM Hardware support . . . Rigol obviously Makes this AVAILABLE in the Options Menu so WHAT Happens IF this Option is Turned-On ?
Does it Lock-Up the Scope or Create OTHER Problems ?
Or does it Simply Not Accurately Display 500uV Signals & Voltages at this 500uV / Division Setting ?
If SOMEONE could Please post some further DETAILS on this Topic . . . This confusion could be dispelled . . . Many Thanks & Cheers from Orion12 :-+
NOT A CHANCE. Because people are unwilling to read! This has been discussed on page 113 of this thread. ONLY 14 pages back!
Sorry but I count how many times this has been discussed.
Correct, it has been discussed many times. These are my findings:
The 500uV is derived digitally, the ADC resolution doesn't improve, so you get to see the discrete ADC steps very obviously on the display.
The DC offset isn't calibrated out: in my case, one channel's not too far off, but the other three are miles out, and some are so far out they cannot be manually pulled onto the display at all.
Many thanks for this Level of Detail & Understanding of this Topic . . . For ME this Answers most of MY Questions . . . This Of Course LEAVES the Question . . . CAN a CALIBRATION METHOD BE DEVELOPED ?
For NOW I'm NOT Going to OPT for the 500uV Option when I receive my NewBee DS1054Z which should come in Thursday . . . :scared:
Maybe you can use it to investigate your keyboard. The caps lock key seems to have an intermittent fault.
Many thanks for this Level of Detail & Understanding of this Topic . . . For ME this Answers most of MY Questions . . . This Of Course LEAVES the Question . . . CAN a CALIBRATION METHOD BE DEVELOPED ?
Many thanks for this Level of Detail & Understanding of this Topic . . . For ME this Answers most of MY Questions . . . This Of Course LEAVES the Question . . . CAN a CALIBRATION METHOD BE DEVELOPED ?
Sure it can. You need to get a software developer job with Rigol...... ;D
People are unwilling to read! This has been discussed on page 113 of this thread. ONLY 14 pages back!
Sorry but I count how many times this has been discussed.
People are unwilling to read! This has been discussed on page 113 of this thread. ONLY 14 pages back!
Sorry but I count how many times this has been discussed.
The problem is that in this forum there is a thread for all about a device, then if someone has "something" to do in his life other than reading the forum he can't read ALL the posts looking for a topic... :)
Hence, the SEARCH button!
The search boxisn't as effectiveis completely useless.
Many thanks for this Level of Detail & Understanding of this Topic . . . For ME this Answers most of MY Questions . . . This Of Course LEAVES the Question . . . CAN a CALIBRATION METHOD BE DEVELOPED ?
Sure it can. You need to get a software developer job with Rigol...... ;D
If I did that THEN I'd Be Feeding the Conventional Corporate Money System . . . We ALL Know Where that Leads . . . ( You know - Retirement on a Private Island - Maybe in Your Dreams )
No! He would remove all the Rigol "fun" and get totally insane in the process. And finally the firmware would end totally broken, not because of you but their insane ways.
btw : I just recieved my NewBee Rigol DS1054Z or should I say DS1104Z 100Mhz Scope . . . What a Nice New Techie Toy . . . Thanks again for ALL of Your Inputs & Advises :clap:
Cheers from Orion12 :)
btw : I just recieved my NewBee Rigol DS1054Z or should I say DS1104Z 100Mhz Scope . . . What a Nice New Techie Toy . . . Thanks again for ALL of Your Inputs & Advises :clap:I'm GLAD you are ENJOYING it! I like mine ALSO - even WITHOUT the hack it is BETTER than I expected.
Cheers from Orion12 :)
:-+ :clap: 8)
@Karel, look 4 posts up ;)
Back to topic, okay ?!
...but do you think that a well-structured forum would be too simple to use? ;)
Look, i.e., at homestudioitalia forum: there is a thread for each topic, then you don't have to fish for something in a vegetable soup :D
In Test Equipment there would be a sub section >DSO, then >Rigol, then >DS1054Z issues / DS1054 mods / DS1054 hits and in each one a thread for each topic, in which each one talks about the same thing!
...but do you think that a well-structured forum would be too simple to use? ;)
Look, i.e., at homestudioitalia forum: there is a thread for each topic, then you don't have to fish for something in a vegetable soup :D
In Test Equipment there would be a sub section >DSO, then >Rigol, then >DS1054Z issues / DS1054 mods / DS1054 hits and in each one a thread for each topic, in which each one talks about the same thing!
Yes.
Anyway ... I am amazed that the device manages to represent quasi 5 channels. Channels 1 + 2 = + differential signal + channel 3 +. 4. And it remains still fluid operated. I know older, essential expensive devices that does not make it. So do not just look at what it can not. :)Set it up like that with a Math trace, put up some Measurements, and wait a while and see what happens...
It's normal when switching timebase from let's say 1sec to 2sec or greater to have a huge delay (tens of seconds) till the scope is active again ?Yes.
It will not show any refreshed trace during this time.
Also, moving probe wire even if the probe is GND connected will increase or decrease the noise on trace.
Isn't this supposed to be a steady "ground" reference ?Welcome to the real world!
It's normal when switching timebase from let's say 1sec to 2sec or greater to have a huge delay (tens of seconds) till the scope is active again ?Yes.It will not show any refreshed trace during this time.
It won't start again until it fills up the internal memory buffer (which is adjustable in size...there's your clue!)
Indeed, if I set the MemDepth to 12K is much faster than Auto. But not instantly as I have seen on different other oscilloscopes (regular ones) Cheers for that :)
Check 25.30
https://youtu.be/CzY2abWCVTYAlso, moving probe wire even if the probe is GND connected will increase or decrease the noise on trace.
Only if you set it to 1mV.
You mean 10mV? I don't have such a low voltage set into mine.
Problem is even on 20mV is the same. And using the calibrator signal the horizontal lines from trace get bolder or thinner doing the same.Isn't this supposed to be a steady "ground" reference ?Welcome to the real world!
Radio noise is everywhere, even inside oscilloscopes.
Yes, you can probably see it there, too.Also, moving probe wire even if the probe is GND connected will increase or decrease the noise on trace.Only if you set it to 1mV.You mean 10mV?
Set it up like that with a Math trace, put up some Measurements, and wait a while and see what happens...
Anyway ... I am amazed that the device manages to represent quasi 5 channels. Channels 1 + 2 = + differential signal + channel 3 +. 4. And it remains still fluid operated. I know older, essential expensive devices that does not make it. So do not just look at what it can not. :)Set it up like that with a Math trace, put up some Measurements, and wait a while and see what happens...
Set it up like that with a Math trace, put up some Measurements, and wait a while and see what happens...
Hi alsetalokin4017,
I watched your video and the others on your YouTube channel, and thought I'd try to duplicate the math hang. Please see attached image. I let it run for 8,332 counts (which is a lot more than I saw in your videos) and took a snapshot, it never stopped. Even as I'm posting this it's still running over 10k counts now.
When I put in the USB stick to save the image, I had forgot that the firmware update file was still there that I had used last time to update the machine, and I accidentally selected "OK" and it re-updated the firmware file as it was taking statistics, but even that didn't make it hang - interesting.
If you want me to try something different I'll see what I can do here. :)
Edit: Now over 11k counts ...
Anyway ... I am amazed that the device manages to represent quasi 5 channels. Channels 1 + 2 = + differential signal + channel 3 +. 4. And it remains still fluid operated. I know older, essential expensive devices that does not make it. So do not just look at what it can not. :)Set it up like that with a Math trace, put up some Measurements, and wait a while and see what happens...
Frankly enough time goes on it for it to discover the error in my circuits. The possible error of Rigol are not surfaced with me so far and I've measured very much with the device. Clearly it has quirks, but nothing that significantly affects the function. I've been using the device since about 1 month. In a silly incorrect measurement a few tracks and a few transistors are vaporized me, but the unit has survived without complaint. :)
The bug seems to come along with the SP2 firmware. The measurements will freeze at random times when the conditions are met. Rarely for me will it go to 8k or 10k counts but it can indeed wait that long sometimes.
I've reported this to Rigol USA and they have reproduced the bug on their test scopes without difficulty. ...
I've attached a simple Setup file (inside a zipfile for upload here) which you can use to try to reproduce the bug. Don't worry, it's nothing fancy, just normal Math using two channels and pretty much default settings everywhere else. Unzip it, copy to a USB stick and load it into your scope. Provide some signals for the Math to work on, and wait and watch.
Anyway ... I am amazed that the device manages to represent quasi 5 channels. Channels 1 + 2 = + differential signal + channel 3 +. 4. And it remains still fluid operated. I know older, essential expensive devices that does not make it. So do not just look at what it can not. :)Set it up like that with a Math trace, put up some Measurements, and wait a while and see what happens...
Frankly enough time goes on it for it to discover the error in my circuits. The possible error of Rigol are not surfaced with me so far and I've measured very much with the device. Clearly it has quirks, but nothing that significantly affects the function. I've been using the device since about 1 month. In a silly incorrect measurement a few tracks and a few transistors are vaporized me, but the unit has survived without complaint. :)
Really? Does your scope do this:
So at 3 or 4 sample counts per second it could take an hour or more for the measurements to stop, or it could take as little as one minute or even less.
Anyway ... I am amazed that the device manages to represent quasi 5 channels. Channels 1 + 2 = + differential signal + channel 3 +. 4. And it remains still fluid operated. I know older, essential expensive devices that does not make it. So do not just look at what it can not. :)Set it up like that with a Math trace, put up some Measurements, and wait a while and see what happens...
Frankly enough time goes on it for it to discover the error in my circuits. The possible error of Rigol are not surfaced with me so far and I've measured very much with the device. Clearly it has quirks, but nothing that significantly affects the function. I've been using the device since about 1 month. In a silly incorrect measurement a few tracks and a few transistors are vaporized me, but the unit has survived without complaint. :)
Really? Does your scope do this:
???? What are the scaling options in the Math menu?
Here everything is correct:
Hello,
what's that?
Sorry, I don't know what I did before.
1) Suddenly T'D changed to blinking AUTO and the signals ... ??? grrrr
AmplitudeError.mp4
https://youtu.be/mtfrbv4rSuQ
2) Suddenly some buttons don't work and MATH is freezing !
MathMeasure-Freeze#1.mp4
https://youtu.be/YFlbXBPpsos
LG Wolfgang
So at 3 or 4 sample counts per second it could take an hour or more for the measurements to stop, or it could take as little as one minute or even less.
Welp ... I let mine go for about 1.6 hours - over 20k counts and it kept right on truckin'. I saw no sign of the stats freezing so I stopped it. I doubt I'd ever use it like that for that long anyways. :-//
But - some people might let it run all night.
However, I will use your setup file and conduct a test later this afternoon. Be interesting to see what happens. If it does freeze ... be interesting to speculate on the reason.
Stay tuned ... :popcorn:
Can you do a display of your complete System Information screen so we can see your scope's full software suite? To get this display you have to press, in the Trigger area, Menu>Menu>Force>Menu very rapidly, then in Utility>System>System Info. If you don't succeed at first, press the button sequence faster.
I loaded your setup file and did another test. It hung up at 3466 counts. So, it's interesting that using the same signals, it couldn't get nearly as far. I wonder what the quirk is about it? See attachments.I wonder too. You could go through the settings in my .stp file and compare them with yours to see if there is some critical difference lurking in there. We both seem to be running the same software suite at least.Can you do a display of your complete System Information screen so we can see your scope's full software suite? To get this display you have to press, in the Trigger area, Menu>Menu>Force>Menu very rapidly, then in Utility>System>System Info. If you don't succeed at first, press the button sequence faster.
Please see attachment.
I would love to use the spare time while waiting for it to arrive to learn how to really use a DSO correctly
to avoid this -> :-BROKE Any advice is very much apreciated! thanks! :)
I would love to use the spare time while waiting for it to arrive to learn how to really use a DSO correctly
Hi fungus,
At first I have to say that I already watched the video some weeks before as I am going through all his videos right now. But I actually knew that already, I did even find a mistake in one of the lab experiments we do at university which lead to random distruction of the tek DSOs they are using because the experiment wanted you to measure the mains with one channel and a circuit connected to mains with the other channel.. And the experimental mains outlet and the outlet for the oscilloscopes were both mains earth referenced.. So I actually know how not to fry my scope :) shouldn't have used that emoticon I guess..
So what I wanted to know was mainly, if there are some special points in handling the rigol scope, or if there are common mistakes done by CRT to DSO switchers that could be avoided. Stuff beyond the manual I mean.
So what I wanted to know was mainly, if there are some special points in handling the rigol scope, or if there are common mistakes done by CRT to DSO switchers that could be avoided. Stuff beyond the manual I mean.
Might be useful: https://courses.physics.illinois.edu/phys193/Labs/XYZs_of_Oscilloscopes.pdf :)
I don't have any type of DSO,but from the various threads on this forum,it seems like the DS1054Z,& modern DSOs in general,are fairly
user-friendly------much more so than the early ones,which were nightmarish!
No.ok
Below You will find step response of my hacked Rigol DS1054Z (100MHz). This test was performed using Tektronix 284 70ps pulse generator to check if there is any ringing."quite good" isn't an engineering term.
Pictures for time base settings: 5ns/div and 50ns/div.
Results: quite good.
First things first - hi everyone!Despite the bugs, it's still quite usable and one heck of a bargain as well (can't be beaten on value ATM in fact). As per fixing the bugs, Rigol has been working on it (firmware release notes from 6/16/2015 are attached as an example as they're not the latest).
I have a question to the DS1054Z users: despite all the recent problems with the scope (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-freeze-up-bug/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-freeze-up-bug/)), is it still worth buying it? Are there any known "big" problems that make the daily usage of the scope problematic? Is Rigol known for fixing their bugs? The Christmas is coming and I still didn't decide whether to buy the scope and hope for the fixes or wait/buy another model.
Thanks in advance for your opinions.
Below You will find step response of my hacked Rigol DS1054Z (100MHz). This test was performed using Tektronix 284 70ps pulse generator to check if there is any ringing."quite good" isn't an engineering term.
Pictures for time base settings: 5ns/div and 50ns/div.
Results: quite good.
There's a button over on the left that displays a value labelled "rise time" on screen... :popcorn:
First things first - hi everyone!Despite the bugs, it's still quite usable and one heck of a bargain as well (can't be beaten on value ATM in fact). As per fixing the bugs, Rigol has been working on it (firmware release notes from 6/16/2015 are attached as an example as they're not the latest).
I have a question to the DS1054Z users: despite all the recent problems with the scope (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-freeze-up-bug/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-freeze-up-bug/)), is it still worth buying it? Are there any known "big" problems that make the daily usage of the scope problematic? Is Rigol known for fixing their bugs? The Christmas is coming and I still didn't decide whether to buy the scope and hope for the fixes or wait/buy another model.
Thanks in advance for your opinions.
My recommendation is go ahead and buy one. :)
How Rigol will manage Boot version 0.0.1.2 faulty oscilloscopes ?Just as information, for my DS1074Z-S there was a boot firmware update.
AFAIK the boot version can not be updated or fixed without using an external programmer.
Sparrow(ARM)update_00.04.00.00.00
Sparrow(Boot)update_00.04.00.00.00
Peter
How Rigol will manage Boot version 0.0.1.2 faulty oscilloscopes ?Just as information, for my DS1074Z-S there was a boot firmware update.
AFAIK the boot version can not be updated or fixed without using an external programmer.
Sparrow(ARM)update_00.04.00.00.00
Sparrow(Boot)update_00.04.00.00.00
Peter
Seems that 1000z series received that boot update a long time ago when the firmware was 00.04.00.00.00
It will be interesting to know which number was before and after that boot update.
I've tried today to go back from (04_03_01_05) to (04_02_04_07) :)
Guess what, still not possible. So, the problem with downgrading the firmware is not only for the latest release (04_03_02_03) :phew:
I got a boot update for my early DS1104Z last year.
If you look at the 00.04.00.00.00 release, the firmware update and the boot update are separate gel files.
If you look at this this upgrade file you will see it has the boot update and the regular update:Actually, it does. :)
http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z (http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z)
Version 04.01.02 is also posted there but does not have the boot update in it.
Anyway brave enough to experiment with it???
If you look at this this upgrade file you will see it has the boot update and the regular update:Actually, it does. :)
http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z (http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z)
Version 04.01.02 is also posted there but does not have the boot update in it.
Anyway brave enough to experiment with it???
You get 2 folders when you expand it; Sparrow(Boot)update_00.04.00.00.00 and Sparrow(ARM)update_00.04.00.00.00.
Oops. The second file you mentioned is what stuck in my head. :palm:If you look at this this upgrade file you will see it has the boot update and the regular update:Actually, it does. :)
http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z (http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z)
Version 04.01.02 is also posted there but does not have the boot update in it.
Anyway brave enough to experiment with it???
You get 2 folders when you expand it; Sparrow(Boot)update_00.04.00.00.00 and Sparrow(ARM)update_00.04.00.00.00.
That is exactly what I said...
The 4.0.0.0 I linked to has the boot update in it. The 4.01.02 does not have it - I mentioned the 4.01.02 because in a previous post it was mentioned that version had the boot update.
has anyone tried the bootloader update from version 4.0.0.0 after installing newer firmware?I gave it a try as well to no avail. Hopefully Rigol will fix this.
And it has in it, but your download source is incomplete. That site is not very well maintained, but merely lists what people upload, bad or good.If you look at this this upgrade file you will see it has the boot update and the regular update:Actually, it does. :)
http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z (http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z)
Version 04.01.02 is also posted there but does not have the boot update in it.
Anyway brave enough to experiment with it???
You get 2 folders when you expand it; Sparrow(Boot)update_00.04.00.00.00 and Sparrow(ARM)update_00.04.00.00.00.
That is exactly what I said...
The 4.0.0.0 I linked to has the boot update in it. The 4.01.02 does not have it - I mentioned the 4.01.02 because in a previous post it was mentioned that version had the boot update.
DS1000Z
00.04.03.02.03
/sys/SparrowAPP.out
/sys/SparrowFPGA.hex
/sys/SparrowDGFPGA.hex
/sys/logo.hex
/sys/guiResData.hex
/sys/guiPicData.hex
/sys/SparrowConfig.hex
/sys/SparrowWaveTable.hex
/sys/SparrowCalFile.hex
/sys/SparrowBootloader.sb
I'm certain I've seen this here and have been trying to find it with no success.
What was the combination to activate the "extended" info menu, which shows the full version number and startup times?
I'm certain I've seen this here and have been trying to find it with no success.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-freeze-up-bug/msg790130/#msg790130 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-freeze-up-bug/msg790130/#msg790130)
What was the combination to activate the "extended" info menu, which shows the full version number and startup times?
To display the full version information:
- In the trigger area on the front panel, press MENU > MENU > FORCE > MENU <<< press this sequence very quickly
- In the menu area, press UTILITY > SYSTEM > SYSTEM INFO
Anyone have a tip on how to keep the decoder values on screen when I scale in and position? The software seems to only want to keep the decoded i2c values on screen when the address r/w is visible. Here is zoomed out then zoomed in on decoded value 15 (https://imgur.com/a/hLCOG).
According to https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-tables/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-tables/) (and my own observations), with 1ms/div and 12M memory depth, the scope samples with rate of 500MS/s. Shouldn't it actually be 1GS/s?
According to https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-tables/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-tables/) (and my own observations), with 1ms/div and 12M memory depth, the scope samples with rate of 500MS/s. Shouldn't it actually be 1GS/s?
Depends on how many channels you have active.
1GSa/s is _only_ available with a single channel active.
You have to go to 500 us/div or faster to get the 1GSa/s sample rate with 12M (or Auto) memory depth.Yes, I know. The question is: why? 12ms * 1GS/s is 12M samples, so this should fit into 12M memory.
So I need to use the code DSER ?Yes.
Yes, I know. The question is: why? 12ms * 1GS/s is 12M samples, so this should fit into 12M memory.point #1: at 1ms/div, let say we can fit 10 period sine in 1 div, thats 10KHz signal, whats the point of higher sampling rate when you can just barely see the 10KHz signal packed together? 100KSample/s is adequate at that time range. you got 500MS/s 5000X more than it should be, what are you complaining?...
point #1: at 1ms/div, let say we can fit 10 period sine in 1 div, thats 10KHz signal, whats the point of higher sampling rate when you can just barely see the 10KHz signal packed together? 100KSample/s is adequate at that time range. you got 500MS/s 5000X more than it should be, what are you complaining?...No. Unless you just look at sine waves, which is sort of boring.
which will result in various degrees of garbage on the screenexactly like what you get on rigol screen with large enough time/div and large enough frequency content exist in the signal in peak acquisition mode... a fat thick yellow (CH1) trace..
you need long enough memory to keep the sample rate high enough to fulfill nyquist.no need long enough memory, just how much screen horizontal pixels count is all it needs, excess memory maybe used for color graded super impose, or zoom or time shift or what not. you may calculate time span on the screen divided by pixel count, thats your nyquist requirement, times 2 if you want more peace of mind. the simplest... with 800 pixels @ 12ms span, you only need 66.66666666666666666667 KSamples/s to fill the whole screen of 800 memory, lets make it 133KS/s for peace of mind. do not interpolate like china rigol's sinx did, just vector point to point straight line connect, to avoid false data, of course higher content will looks like garbage or lost in the scene due to aliasing, not much different if you sample at higher (even the famous 1GS/s) rate (peak acquisition)...
Have been out of the loop for a while, i wonder if anyone con confirm weather or not a firmware update will cause any issues with the scope features being unlocked.
Also are there any known issues with the current stable firmware?
I have tested and can confirm i get the lockup bug described in this (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-freeze-up-bug/) post.
Other question i have is per the attached pic, how do i properly remove the stats?
If i use the delete option in the menu, and then add a stat again the deleted ones re-appear in a greyed state taking up screen space.
If you go to the Measure menu, second page, and select "Font Size" and select Large or Extra Large, you can then Select Item, which will then let you choose which of the 5 current measurements to display. (Large font allows 3, Extra Large allows 2, of the 5 possible ones.) This is only a partial solution for the "greyed out inactive measurements taking up space" feature (not a bug) but it's better than nothing.
Hi, quick question. Is it possible to decode CAN with the ds1054z?
Hi, quick question. Is it possible to decode CAN with the ds1054z?
You can (no pun intended) but only if you have the option (or you "unlocked" your scope) and for what I hear you can only decode what is on the scope screen, you can't decode from memory even if the scope can capture quite a bit of data. But I have not done it myself, so this is hear say.
Hi, quick question. Is it possible to decode CAN with the ds1054z?
Hi, quick question. Is it possible to decode CAN with the ds1054z?
No, it's not possible.
I don't think it's safe to assume anything about software from a company that lets stuff like this get through:
I don't think it's safe to assume anything about software from a company that lets stuff like this get through:i can understand your nitpicking comment if you are not the one who develop softwares.... do you believe its intentional?
I don't think it's safe to assume anything about software from a company that lets stuff like this get through:i can understand your nitpicking comment if you are not the one who develop softwares.... do you believe its intentional?
Nitpicking?i saw your pluses report scattered everywhere. post it in bug/wishlist thread, report to rigol and hope for the best. in the mean time dont use it or if its really important how many pluses on the screen, then you need to eyeball it. imho the bug has not enough merit to decide to buy or not i my self havent a need for it yet. the OP may search the forum for complete bug list, then he can make the decision whether is that important or not. the pluses bug is hillarious though..
Nitpicking?i saw your pluses report scattered everywhere. post it in bug/wishlist thread, report to rigol and hope for the best. in the mean time dont use it or if its really important how many pluses on the screen, then you need to eyeball it. imho the bug has not enough merit to decide to buy or not i my self havent a need for it yet. the OP may search the forum for complete bug list, then he can make the decision whether is that important or not. the pluses bug is hillarious though..
If your car could only make left turns... would you consider that important or not? It might not be to some people, but if you sold it to someone without telling them... they might not be too happy. Meanwhile... people complain about the _fan noise_ in the Rigol, or the fact that they need to be careful pushing the knob-buttons, but don't seem to care about things like the pulse miscount or the measurements stopping completely !!! :-DD
If your car could only make left turns... would you consider that important or not?when you buy an DSO, do you expect it to have pulses mesurement? go buy gwInstek and hope you have those statistics, pulses etc.. 17 math functions... 20 digital and 17 analog mesurements like rigol has... i dont give a damn, but its nice to have. you car analogy is not good enough as you are talking about the core functionality (the purpose of a car is to move around right and left that its core functionality), if you want to make car analogy, it'll be suitable if its like the stickers on the car, full face vs not full face, accesories etc and whatever "bell and whistle" they have put in, a car is still a car without them, but a car that cannot turn left is not a car. so what is a DSO core functionality? its laughable when people expect a DSO to be a spectrum analyzer, remember those gwInstek fanboys? :palm:
when you buy an DSO, do you expect it to have pulses mesurement? go buy gwInstek and hope you have those statistics, pulses etc.. 17 math functions...
If your car could only make left turns... would you consider that important or not?
Total long shot here. I think it is safe to assume the DS1054Z has some sort of recovery mode in the bootloader to recover from a failed flash.I don't think it's safe to assume anything about software from a company that lets stuff like this get through:
Total long shot here. I think it is safe to assume the DS1054Z has some sort of recovery mode in the bootloader to recover from a failed flash.I don't think it's safe to assume anything about software from a company that lets stuff like this get through:
Apparently you can load firmware during boot by pressing the 'help' key:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-firmware-downgrade- (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-firmware-downgrade-)*is*-possible-and-here-is-how/
These are functions that I've never used after over a year of ownership. I will probably never use them so I simply don't care.:-DD
Hey... I don't care if there are typos in the Chinese menus... because I don't speak read or write Chinese. How boring is that?
This new 50MHz version of the 4-channel DS1000Z series scopes is being discussed in several threads, particularly this one (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-oscillosope/). However, the price/performance is so outstanding that it surely deserves its own.
A 4 channel, 12 Mpts memory, 30 000 waveforms/second, intensity graded scope of this quality for around 399 USD/299 EUR/235 GBP (plus tax) is nothing short of astounding, even before the hacking possibilities are considered.
Dave has announced that he is getting one, so hopefully we can look forward to a review in the not too distant future, and - unless he finds any unexpected gotchas - a new default recommendation for entry level scopes.
Due to the ever-growing length of this thread, I have added an FAQ section about the scope:
(Additions/corrections welcome - send me a PM)
The scope (and some other Rigol models) originally had some issues relating to excessive jitter which were corrected by a firmware update to SW version 00.04.02.SP4 in December 2014. Subsequently shipped scopes are likely to have been fixed already. A link to the update was posted on the forum by Rigol and can be found here (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0). This currently links to a newer SW version (04.03) which also fixes some other minor bugs.
The oscilloscope does not have a real time clock, and therefore cannot add the current time and date to saved screenshots and other data. A number of trial options are initially enabled which will expire after 35 hours runtime (not 35 hours since first use).
A 'hack' is available to enable 100MHz bandwidth and all of the trial features which after expiring are normally only available at additional cost. Users considering this should be aware that it is not approved by Rigol and may void the warranty. A website featuring the code generator to enable the features can be found at http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/. (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/.) Do not use the DSFR code suggested on the website. Codes for 500uV vertical resolution are intended for oscilloscopes such as the DS2000A series which have the necessary hardware for this feature. The code DSER enables all features except 500uV, which is not supported on the DS1000Z series and will cause erroneous results at this setting.
The US vendor TEquipment offers a discount on this oscilloscope and other products to EEVBlog members. This is available if you mention the offer when ordering. You can also use a discount code, but TEquipment have requested that it not be reproduced on the forum. There is a forum topic where the code can be requested from other members here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/special-price-for-eevblog-members/).
Some of the RP2200 probes supplied with the scope have been found to have intermittent contacts when switched to the 1X setting. A fix for this issue is described here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg669159/#msg669159).
Dave has a number of blogs featuring this scope and its siblings:
A first look: EEVBlog 522 (http://www.eevblog.com/2013/09/20/eevblog-522-rigol-ds1000z-oscilloscope-quick-look/)
Teardown: EEVBlog 674 (http://www.eevblog.com/2014/10/15/eevblog-674-rigol-ds1054z-teardown/)
Reverse engineering: EEVBlog 675 (http://www.eevblog.com/2014/10/22/eevblog-675-how-to-reverse-engineer-a-rigol-ds1054z/)
Jitter problems: EEVBlog 683 (http://www.eevblog.com/2014/11/14/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/)
Jitter fix: EEVBlog 699 (http://www.eevblog.com/2015/01/05/eevblog-699-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope-jitter-fix-testing/)
Summary review: EEVBlog 703 (http://www.eevblog.com/2015/01/15/eevblog-703-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope-review-summary/)
Features review: EEVBlog 704 (http://www.eevblog.com/2015/01/15/eevblog-704-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope-features-review/)
Probe performance: EEVBlog 707 (http://www.eevblog.com/2015/01/22/eevblog-707-rigol-oscilloscope-probe-performance/)
(There is apparently also a performance testing review which has not yet been released.)
Hi all,
I am trying to find the link to FAQ for DS1054Z. Any plans for it?
jtbili
No need to use putty. Just enter the following command in the console:
telnet <ip-address> 5555
Checked on Linux.
Right, it works perfect in Linux. But in my company laptop I have win only, no chance for changing or adding new system.
I had to find quick, easy and simple solution. Telnet in Win7, 8 had problems with connection, puTTYtel - never.
Is it possible do external trigger with this 4 ch rigol?
Is it possible do external trigger with this 4 ch rigol?
Just to make shure if i understood this..., if i just need from channel 1-3 to show signal, i still have the channel 4 as a tigger source (in this case, turned into a external trigger)?
As i´m returning to electronics world, planning to buy a RIGOL, need study more, instead of make silly questions again.
A terrific feature, now that these oscilloscopes include an Ethernet interface, would be NTP synchronization, so that captures would be accurately timestamped.
That's so much better than a RTC, having the correct time within several milliseconds.
A terrific feature, now that these oscilloscopes include an Ethernet interface, would be NTP synchronization, so that captures would be accurately timestamped.
That's so much better than a RTC, having the correct time within several milliseconds.
A terrific feature, now that these oscilloscopes include an Ethernet interface, would be NTP synchronization, so that captures would be accurately timestamped.
That's so much better than a RTC, having the correct time within several milliseconds.
I would never connect a commercial test/measuring instrument to the internet, not even via a firewall.
Test/measuring instruments are not designed with security in mind.
I would never connect a commercial test/measuring instrument to the internet, not even via a firewall.
Test/measuring instruments are not designed with security in mind.
I know, but you can do it safely if you are behind a NAT router.
I would never connect a commercial test/measuring instrument to the internet, not even via a firewall.
Test/measuring instruments are not designed with security in mind.
Agreed.I know, but you can do it safely if you are behind a NAT router.
To each his own. Routers get hacked too, especially consumer-grade ones with shoddy manufacturer firmware.
NTP usually just syncs the time and then uses an RTC to keep the time so it's not going to be that accurate anyhow, plus do you want to burden the already overworked processors and slow the scope down slightly more? I don't see a big gain on this since it can't be precise enough to sync say two pieces of test equipment to the point that the data will align perfectly.A proper implementation of NTP in a proper operating system (read, not Windoze, where NTP seems to be like rocket science, according to the nightmares experienced by ham operators running JT modes) not just reads time, sets it, but it can slow down or accelerate the system clock so that it's really well adjusted.
Maybe you'll be able to sync them to +- 10ms, what will that give you?The ablity to determine which of a flood of debugging messages can correlate to, for example, an anomaly detected on a power line.
Take into account that the time kept after sync depends on the scopes internal timing and two crystals will alias from each other because they are just not going to be at the same exact frequency and there is little you can do to compensate for that. And syncing for better than 1ms, forget about it without additional hardware and/or software if for example you could use the CPU instruction counter but that will drift with temperature or uptime.
The ablity to determine which of a flood of debugging messages can correlate to, for example, an anomaly detected on a power line.
I stand by NTP not being too useful for a DS1054Z, as for being done properly and not needing "time after sync" do you care to elaborate?In operating systems that support it, generally Unix systems, NTP can adjust the clock frequency to minimize error. So it's not just a program reading the time from a server and setting it afterwards, as ntpdate does.
Maybe you should read this:
http://www.ntp.org/ntpfaq/NTP-s-algo.htm (http://www.ntp.org/ntpfaq/NTP-s-algo.htm)
I could see some benefit for nanosecond synchronization but the hardware needed would be cost prohibited for entry level scopes.
NTP isn't rocket science and it's widely implemented (and works just fine under Windows, not sure where that came from). It's the bog-standard interface for network time delivery. If there was going to be some sort of time synchronization it seems silly to use anything else.Microsoft claims that their implementation does not support synchronization to a precision of one or two seconds, what they call high accuracy environments.
NTP isn't rocket science and it's widely implemented (and works just fine under Windows, not sure where that came from). It's the bog-standard interface for network time delivery. If there was going to be some sort of time synchronization it seems silly to use anything else.Microsoft claims that their implementation does not support synchronization to a precision of one or two seconds, what they call high accuracy environments.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/939322
This certainly reflects what I've seen in the WSJT mailing lists, where people seem to be solving puzzles in order to keep an accurate time on Windows. Otherwise, why would anyone recommend a third party time synchronization program?
It's not really a claim, more a statement of fact by the software provider,I stand corrected (English is a second language for me) :)
Calibration date sheet (certificate of calibration): 25-dec-2015 ....(working at xmas???)
Att
Calibration date sheet (certificate of calibration): 25-dec-2015 ....(working at xmas???)
Att
Christmas isn't a holiday in China.
McBryce.
Any good (and working) site to generate the keys to unlock all features?
Calibration date sheet (certificate of calibration): 25-dec-2015 ....(working at xmas???)
Att
Christmas isn't a holiday in China.
McBryce.
I know kkkk. :-+..but it is strage ins´t? :o i was with my family eating the xmas dinner...and someone in the other side of the world was at his job calibrating a oscilloscope... a world with many cultures...nice!
a "world" with many cultures...nice!there are "countries" with many cultures. and each culture's holiday is the nation's holiday. isnt it nice? or nicer? or not?
Edit: but then again, there is GPIB (IEEE-488) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE-488 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE-488)Then again, there is PTP (IEEE-1588) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_1588
It would probably make more sense to trigger on a pulse width of that longer high value at the beginning of the trace.Yes, that's what I said (or meant to say) in my second paragraph.
Also, there is an easy solution for 24M points going away :)The same easy solution might also be required to retain the advanced triggering capabilities ;)
It would probably make more sense to trigger on a pulse width of that longer high value at the beginning of the trace.Yes, that's what I said (or meant to say) in my second paragraph.Also, there is an easy solution for 24M points going away :)The same easy solution might also be required to retain the advanced triggering capabilities ;)
After setting 24MPTS it triggered. But just at 10ms horiz.That's just a coincidence. You slowed down your scope to the point where period of sampling and period of signal line up for good triggering. It has nothing to do with 24 Mpts specifically and it is not a universal solution, it will fail on some other signal.
After setting 24MPTS it triggered. But just at 10ms horiz.That's just a coincidence. You slowed down your scope to the point where period of sampling and period of signal line up for good triggering. It has nothing to do with 24 Mpts specifically and it is not a universal solution, it will fail on some other signal.
Use triggering on pulse with or some other feature for complex signals. That's why all those advanced triggering things are there.
Hi!
It looks like the rigol is triggering just fine, but it's doing it a lot faster than the Tek and so it catches all the edges, not just the first. The Tek is set at 10m/div and the Rigol is at 5 - that may make a difference.
If you set your holdoff time to > ~100ms it should only trigger at the beginning of the packet. TriggerMenu->Setting->Holdoff
--
Mihai
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=207653;image)
:-// Looks like it's triggering perfectly to me.
ie. There's always a rising edge under the orange marker labelled with a 'T'
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=207653;image)
:-// Looks like it's triggering perfectly to me.
ie. There's always a rising edge under the orange marker labelled with a 'T'
Yes u´re right. Maybe i used the wrong term. It is T´D, but the waveform is not stable to read...it keeps running on the screen... Look the latest video...that´s what i want..tks.. ;)
How many more times do we want to ask and answer that same question today? :-//
What do you expect... it's only 400 dollars!
:popcorn:
How many more times do we want to ask and answer that same question today? :-//
Isn't that what Forums like this are for?
Isn't that what Forums like this are for?
It is. Don't get stressed. It was just a remark. ;)
How many more times do we want to ask and answer that same question today? :-//
What do you expect... it's only 400 dollars!
:popcorn:
and what about a link that unlock all teh features?Hint: go to your favorite search engine, and type in "Riglol 1.03d".
and what about a link that unlock all teh features?Hint: go to your favorite search engine, and type in "Riglol 1.03d".
Once you get to the page, type in your unit's S/N in the first field, type in DSER in the Options field, and leave Privatekey blank. Then click Generate. Enter the generated key into the scope, and that's it (how-to is in the .pdf manual).
Doesn't get any easier than that. ;D
@bingo, how fast is the screen capture on the DS1000z scope? I would think that because it supports png it's probably about 5.5 seconds to transfer a 37KB file already in png format but still transferring data at a mere 57344 bps
$ time rigol_1000z_screenshot 10.42.0.42 test.bmp
Saved screenshot to test.bmp
real 0m4.094s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.044s
The image is 800 x 480 x 24 and ~1.1MB in size.
... I don't think you can get much faster than that on the Rigol 1000z series scope.
The image is 800 x 480 x 24 and ~1.1MB in size.
... I don't think you can get much faster than that on the Rigol 1000z series scope.
I can !
With my programm via LAN I can get the screen in ~0.9 .. 1.2s
The format is png 800x480 size ~30KB .. 60KB (depends on content).
The image is 800 x 480 x 24 and ~1.1MB in size.
... I don't think you can get much faster than that on the Rigol 1000z series scope.
I can !
With my programm via LAN I can get the screen in ~0.9 .. 1.2s
The format is png 800x480 size ~30KB .. 60KB (depends on content).
DSRemote does the job in less than a second.
... the image data transferred from a ds1000z series scope is bitmap only and it seems there is no way to change it to png ...Why don't you believe me? Transmitted as png and under 1 second.
The image is 800 x 480 x 24 and ~1.1MB in size.
... I don't think you can get much faster than that on the Rigol 1000z series scope.
I can !
With my programm via LAN I can get the screen in ~0.9 .. 1.2s
The format is png 800x480 size ~30KB .. 60KB (depends on content).
DSRemote does the job in less than a second.
I just gave dsremote a try - to me it seems to also be in the 4 seconds range? (my ethernet link speed is 100 Mbps)
... the image data transferred from a ds1000z series scope is bitmap only and it seems there is no way to change it to png ...Why don't you believe me? Transmitted as png and under 1 second.
Look here for testing:
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/zelinkaw54/upload/_Rigol-DSClient.rar (http://homepage.univie.ac.at/zelinkaw54/upload/_Rigol-DSClient.rar)
Programming Guide 07-2015 p.79:
:DISP:DATA? ON,0,PNG // transfers a screen as PNG
... the image data transferred from a ds1000z series scope is bitmap only and it seems there is no way to change it to png ...Why don't you believe me? Transmitted as png and under 1 second.
Look here for testing:
http://homepage.univie.ac.at/zelinkaw54/upload/_Rigol-DSClient.rar (http://homepage.univie.ac.at/zelinkaw54/upload/_Rigol-DSClient.rar)
Programming Guide 07-2015 p.79:
:DISP:DATA? ON,0,PNG // transfers a screen as PNG
Seems that PNG support did come with one of the firmware updates
(because the programming guide dated 09-2014, page 2-63, does not mention any parameters for the DISPLAY:DATA? command).
Will this work with any firmware? I'm thinking of picking a brand new one up sometime this week. Please advise. Thanksand what about a link that unlock all teh features?Hint: go to your favorite search engine, and type in "Riglol 1.03d".
Once you get to the page, type in your unit's S/N in the first field, type in DSER in the Options field, and leave Privatekey blank. Then click Generate. Enter the generated key into the scope, and that's it (how-to is in the .pdf manual).
Doesn't get any easier than that. ;D
Will this work with any firmware? I'm thinking of picking a brand new one up sometime this week. Please advise. ThanksYes. :) The unlock code that's generated is based on the unit's S/N, not the hardware/firmware/software revisions.
Thanks for the clarification. Very much appreciated and now I feel at ease about the purchase ;D.Will this work with any firmware? I'm thinking of picking a brand new one up sometime this week. Please advise. ThanksYes. :) The unlock code that's generated is based on the unit's S/N, not the hardware/firmware/software revisions.
(snip)
Why o why does one have to submit a request form for Rigol firmware and then wait an arbitrary amount of time for someone at Rigol to mail back a link to the firmware??? |O |O |O
My god Rigol, will ya just make the bloody firmware readily available for direct download on the related product pages - no hiding! Please!
Will this work with any firmware? I'm thinking of picking a brand new one up sometime this week. Please advise. Thanksand what about a link that unlock all teh features?Hint: go to your favorite search engine, and type in "Riglol 1.03d".
Once you get to the page, type in your unit's S/N in the first field, type in DSER in the Options field, and leave Privatekey blank. Then click Generate. Enter the generated key into the scope, and that's it (how-to is in the .pdf manual).
Doesn't get any easier than that. ;D
Will this work with any firmware? I'm thinking of picking a brand new one up sometime this week. Please advise. Thanksand what about a link that unlock all teh features?Hint: go to your favorite search engine, and type in "Riglol 1.03d".
Once you get to the page, type in your unit's S/N in the first field, type in DSER in the Options field, and leave Privatekey blank. Then click Generate. Enter the generated key into the scope, and that's it (how-to is in the .pdf manual).
Doesn't get any easier than that. ;D
One of my DS1054Z units has a problem, it won't boot, all I get is all lights on and a continuously clicking relay (at approx 5Hz). Anyone had the same problem?
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
This page points to a document that says last firmware is Version?00.04.03.02.03 Date?2015-10-20
My 1054Z came today and it says : Software Version 00.04.03.SP2
Which one is the latest ? Is it worth to update ( downgrade ?) to 00.04.03.02.03 ...? :-//
Anyhow...Riglol did his duty... 8) 8)
A.
One of my DS1054Z units has a problem, it won't boot, all I get is all lights on and a continuously clicking relay (at approx 5Hz). Anyone had the same problem?
A quick search on the interwebs revealed this:
http://www.jackenhack.com/rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope-hangs-boot/ (http://www.jackenhack.com/rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope-hangs-boot/)
Only problem with the factory reset procedure is that the menu defaults to Chinese, so you'll have to change that back.
As far as they state on that post, it does retain upgrades if any were made.
Edit: but the freeze on boot on that case showed the Rigol logo so I'm not sure if it is the same problem, worth trying I think.
One of my DS1054Z units has a problem, it won't boot, all I get is all lights on and a continuously clicking relay (at approx 5Hz). Anyone had the same problem?
A quick search on the interwebs revealed this:
http://www.jackenhack.com/rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope-hangs-boot/ (http://www.jackenhack.com/rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope-hangs-boot/)
Only problem with the factory reset procedure is that the menu defaults to Chinese, so you'll have to change that back.
As far as they state on that post, it does retain upgrades if any were made.
Edit: but the freeze on boot on that case showed the Rigol logo so I'm not sure if it is the same problem, worth trying I think.
Not the same problem, no. Jackenhack is probably describing the "freeze bug" that I discovered and reported on last year, which seems to afflict many but not all DS1054z scopes with Boot Version 0.0.1.2 when certain user settings are input. Scopes with Boot Version 0.0.1.3 don't seem to suffer from this particular bug.
Yes, it would be nice to know if the Factory Reset (5th left grey button) procedure fixes the problem Mark has.
Software Version 00.04.03.SP2
You can display the _complete_ System Info screen by pressing the Trigger section buttons (extreme right hand side) Menu-Menu-Force-Menu very fast, then Utility-System-System Info. If you don't see the complete system info screen, keep trying, you might not be pressing the Menu-Menu-Force-Menu sequence fast enough.
It is not possible, as far as I know, to "downgrade" or roll back to an earlier firmware (software) version once a later version is installed.
Another way to tell if you have the 00.04.03.02.03 firmware installed is if you have the Pulses and Edges counters in the Horizontal Measurements menus, and the "Pluses" spelling error when you display these as Measurements.
How are you getting 7.3V on a 5V square wave?
How are you getting 7.3V on a 5V square wave?
And what's your vertical scale?
QuoteHow are you getting 7.3V on a 5V square wave?
And what's your vertical scale?
Well, part of it is just the overshoot/ringing on the transition. Here's zoomed in and I've highlighted what I think is kind of strange. The measurements say max voltage in the waveform is at 5.6V, but the waveform is above the trigger level which claims to be set to 6.4V. Maybe I haven't gotten the hang of what the measurements mean -- there are so many crazy ones to choose from.
This is 5V/div and the waveform looks to go to about 7V on the graticule. I wouldn't swear to how well 0V is lined up to the division below though. The ringing/overshoot goes down about the same amount too. Which I took to be what Vpp is measuring, but if the measurements are just based on what appears on the screen, then 7.8V makes sense vs. what appears against the graticule and who knows what the Max is getting at.
Anyhow, I am very new to this scope and although I have seen all the videos, I still am having trouble groking the features.
the measurements are taken from what is displayed on-screen
, so your Vmax and Vpp should be a lot closer than what your measurement numbers are saying.
The Trigger level and etc. seem to be indicating OK.Yep.
They are NOT calculated by looking at the original incoming voltage.Well sure, they only measure with 8bit. How else could you do that? Unless you have the range properly adjusted you will simply not have any valid information.
by looking at screen pixels.More like by looking at the raw data Points, so the actual Votage measured at each given point. If that would not be correct one could simply not see a Vmax of a very fast peak when looking at a larger timescale. I have not run into that problem so far - the Vmax does not change by zooming in or out of the Timescale when there is only that one max peak.
by looking at screen pixels.More like by looking at the raw data Points
Hi, I've tried searching but can't find a solution.Check manual section 13- 3 (User's Guide Jan.2014)
I'm trying to save a file:
1) Press File and Save buttons are greyed out?
I can only save to internal memory if the storage type is Param or Setups.
No issues saving to external storage.
I can only save to internal memory if the storage type is Param or Setups.
What is the general consensus about the serial decoding ability of the 1054Z ? How would it compare to a Salaea LA ? [I tried searching here but most of the hits related to serial numbers, not serial decoding...]
Another piece of software that gets the data via lan/usb, apply fft and do serial decoding? does it exist?
I've read chapter 7 on serial decoding in the DS1054Z manual several times now, and still not clear - can you configure the 1054 to trigger on a certain character or string of serial characters ? I've sure I'm missing something obvious...
I've read chapter 7 on serial decoding in the DS1054Z manual several times now, and still not clear - can you configure the 1054 to trigger on a certain character or string of serial characters ? I've sure I'm missing something obvious...
I haven't been able to successfully trigger a spi bus with trigger in spi-mode. if you can't too, use trigger holdoff or trigger every nth pulse, so that every new window is a number of readings instead of triggering at each packet. zooming out i was able to successfully decode series of about sixteen 16bit messages at the same time (thank you, gigantic amount of memory)
which was a better result than with a picoscope 2202a
Will this work with any firmware? I'm thinking of picking a brand new one up sometime this week. Please advise. Thanksand what about a link that unlock all teh features?Hint: go to your favorite search engine, and type in "Riglol 1.03d".
Once you get to the page, type in your unit's S/N in the first field, type in DSER in the Options field, and leave Privatekey blank. Then click Generate. Enter the generated key into the scope, and that's it (how-to is in the .pdf manual).
Doesn't get any easier than that. ;D
It did worked for me! I bought a brand new one from tequipament, one month ago. Used the DSER with no problems.
Will this work with any firmware? I'm thinking of picking a brand new one up sometime this week. Please advise. Thanksand what about a link that unlock all teh features?Hint: go to your favorite search engine, and type in "Riglol 1.03d".
Once you get to the page, type in your unit's S/N in the first field, type in DSER in the Options field, and leave Privatekey blank. Then click Generate. Enter the generated key into the scope, and that's it (how-to is in the .pdf manual).
Doesn't get any easier than that. ;D
It did worked for me! I bought a brand new one from tequipament, one month ago. Used the DSER with no problems.
It did not work for me...I have the latest firmware version, and it does not accept the code with DSER. Somehow it autofills the "privatekey" field. Can this be the problem?
This is quite a downer to be honest, need the SPI decoding NOW, and might need to cough up the doh for an official key....which was actually not part of the business case.
Thanks for an awesome thread btw :)
I am still considering getting this scope. Is is still "upgrade-able"? It is really tempting for €400.
Cheers.
Guys any new fw for the osciloscope?.
1. No, I don't. Maybe someone else does. When did you buy your scope?The build date is on the screenshot. 9/11 2015. Bought on 4/29 2016, delivered one day later.
2. I don't know. Does your scope still have all the bugs we have been discussing?Not sure which bugs are included in the last software version. Even not sure if my equipment is sufficient to detect them. At least I can confirm the "Pluses" and their counting error.
3. No, I don't think so. I don't think it's possible to upgrade the Boot Version with the "firmware update".Disappointing. So you still have version 1.2 or 1.3 on your scope?
Yes, the "build date" is the date of the firmware update you have. You bought your scope quite recently so the scope itself was probably built much more recently than September of 2015, hence it has the 0.0.1.4 Boot Version.1. No, I don't. Maybe someone else does. When did you buy your scope?The build date is on the screenshot. 9/11 2015. Bought on 4/29 2016, delivered one day later.
Well, there are several that you could check for, that have been discussed in various places. You could check for slow response to controls like the Vertical positioning control. You could see if you get RMS voltage reading measurements on channels with no actual inputs and even ground-coupled. You could check for the Measurements Freeze bug that causes all measurements to stop updating after some random time when Math is in use (using the Statistic "on" and Stat.Sel. "difference" settings to keep track of the number of updates before they stop). You could check for the Math horizontal offset/scaling error at 500 ns/div when in Average acquire mode and some two-channel Math function is being used. These are probably the most easily checked bugs that plague us.Quote2. I don't know. Does your scope still have all the bugs we have been discussing?Not sure which bugs are included in the last software version. Even not sure if my equipment is sufficient to detect them. At least I can confirm the "Pluses" and their counting error.
Yes, the unit I have now is the one Rigol sent me after the Freeze Bug issue that affects scopes with Boot Version 0.0.1.2. It came to me with Boot Version 0.0.1.3 installed but the previous "software" version. I installed the 00.04.03.02.03 version myself, which did not update any Boot Version. I think if Rigol could have simply updated my old scope's Boot Version, they would have done it rather than sending me a whole new scope. I asked them several times about updating the Boot Version in the old scope with 0.0.1.2 and never got a real answer, so I think it can't be done. Some people with really early software versions reported that a "firmware" update did update their Boot Version, but that a long time ago and I don't think it is possible any more, for some reason only Rigol knows.Quote3. No, I don't think so. I don't think it's possible to upgrade the Boot Version with the "firmware update".Disappointing. So you still have version 1.2 or 1.3 on your scope?
I agree with no. 1: the responsiveness of the vertical offset is horrendously bad...
Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk.
I agree with no. 1: the responsiveness of the vertical offset is horrendously bad...
Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk.
So... what Boot Version do you have?
Perhaps the later Boot Version has fixed the Measurements Fail bug. If so, that's great! But please try again with some other Math function, like a 2-channel addition or multiplication. If you have the bug the failure time seems completely random, sometimes it will fail in just a few iterations, sometimes much longer. But three hours is pretty long, maybe it's fixed, or maybe it doesn't fail with FFT selected in Math. Anyhow, please try again if you have time.You can bet on it: I will do this.
The Math 500 ns/div horizontal offset/scale bug will show up better, if you have it, if you use signals that have several full cycles displayed on the screen.
Also your math is adding Ch1 to itself, not to Ch2.:wtf: :palm: |O I thought, I had done the right settings? Yeah! Murphy gets me. Everytime...
I don't know if that makes any difference,
but please try an actual 2-channel Math function anyhow.
(You have to select the Source channels for A and B in the Math menu.):palm: |O |O |O
Boot version 0.0.1.2With Boot Version 0.0.1.2 you _may_ have the Freeze Bug that I discovered and that is discussed here:
Build date Sep-11-2015 (lol @ that date)
What I kinda fail to understand though, is why they have incorporated at least some part of hardware driver into bootloader that is designed to not be user-replaceable.
Bad design IMO.Not really. If all the bootloader does is load the main firmware into memory, then ... what's to replace? :-//
What I kinda fail to understand though, is why they have incorporated at least some part of hardware driver into bootloader that is designed to not be user-replaceable.
Whatever the problem is, it's not caused by the bootloader.
Plenty of people have that particular bootloader and don't have the problem.Bad design IMO.Not really. If all the bootloader does is load the main firmware into memory, then ... what's to replace? :-//
"Bad design" would be system that can be bricked by users trying to update their bootloader when there's no need.
Er.... no. Every case that I know about of a scope that can be "locked up" due to the Freeze Bug is running Boot Version 0.0.1.2, no matter what "firmware" the scope is running.
I really can't imagine that any code in the bootloader is being used once the system is up and running.Unless it performs some hardware initialization, as it can happen with peecees and their "BIOS".
Er.... no. Every case that I know about of a scope that can be "locked up" due to the Freeze Bug is running Boot Version 0.0.1.2, no matter what "firmware" the scope is running.
(snip)
If it was purely the bootloader then all scopes with that bootloader would have the problem. They don't.
(snip)
I agree with Fungus. I think that those blaming the bootloader are falling into the logical trap of assuming that correlation implies causation.
Is the datasheet for this processor part available without NDA? The errata list would be an interesting read.
Just for fun I had compared the system information in the upper post with mine.
It has changed since last time. Now my scope displays the following:
(No trick, no fake, no joke!) :wtf:
What the hell is going on? :o ???
This is where someone usually chimes in and says "What did you expect, it's only 400 dollars..." |O
Feel free to present evidence that Boot Version 0.0.1.2 is _not_ the cause of the Freeze Bug problem.
This is where someone usually chimes in and says "What did you expect, it's only 400 dollars..." |O
I don't know what you people expect - the thing is only $400 ... :palm:
Meanwhile -- if you know of a DS1054Z scope that is subject to the Freeze Bug but does NOT have Boot Version 0.0.1.2 installed, please report it. And if you know of one that DOES have Boot Version 0.0.1.2 installed but does NOT have the Freeze Bug, please let me know and I'll send a .stp setup
I expect it to do "what it says on the box". The manufacturer says it will do certain things, and sets the price point. So people purchase it at that price point and then find out that it does not perform as the manufacturer said. Is the purchaser at fault for expecting it to perform as claimed, whatever the manufacturer decides to sell it for?This is where someone usually chimes in and says "What did you expect, it's only 400 dollars..." |O
I don't know what you people expect - the thing is only $400 ... :palm:
Its possible, that the connection is opposite. Boot 0.0.1.2 doesn't cause freeze bug. Maybe fixing the bug required some change in hardware and this hardware needed changes in bootloader, and hence 0.0.1.3 came to be.That's a pretty big stretch, since Rigol evidently didn't know about the Freeze Bug until I reported it, and by that time all the scopes in the lab at RigolUSA were already running Boot Version 0.0.1.3 and couldn't reproduce the bug.... so they asked me to return my scope with 0.0.1.2 and replaced it with one having 0.0.1.3. Note that I did not initiate this swap, it was offered by Rigol USA and they even sent me the replacement _before_ I sent the earlier version back, so I had three days or so to test the two scopes side-by-side.
Sent from my HTC One M8s using Tapatalk.
QuoteMeanwhile -- if you know of a DS1054Z scope that is subject to the Freeze Bug but does NOT have Boot Version 0.0.1.2 installed, please report it. And if you know of one that DOES have Boot Version 0.0.1.2 installed but does NOT have the Freeze Bug, please let me know and I'll send a .stp setup
Hi alsetalokin4017, boot version 0.0.1.2 here, never been able to reproduce the freezing bug, happy to test your .stp file :-)
I expect it to do "what it says on the box". The manufacturer says it will do certain things, and sets the price point. So people purchase it at that price point and then find out that it does not perform as the manufacturer said. Is the purchaser at fault for expecting it to perform as claimed, whatever the manufacturer decides to sell it for?
It seems that some people think so.
OK... try this. You'll have to unzip it because I can't upload a .stp file directly to the forum. If your scope _does_ freeze you can get it unfrozen by using the "5th grey button on left while booting" procedure to get it back to factory defaults, and the scope will come up in Chinese....
OK... try this. You'll have to unzip it because I can't upload a .stp file directly to the forum. If your scope _does_ freeze you can get it unfrozen by using the "5th grey button on left while booting" procedure to get it back to factory defaults, and the scope will come up in Chinese....
Nope, can't reproduce :-//
Loaded your setup file, tried with 1,2,3 and 4 channels, with and without signal applied.
Repeated every single step in your video starting from minute 1:20 and also followed your 5 points instructions
and abused Horizontal knob with and without zoom on...but no freeze here.
Attached my scope infos for reference.
You have a scope with the "old" Boot Version 0.0.1.2, but you have it switched on only 10 times?
I take it 5ns is the smallest time scale? Even with the 1104Z?Hacked 1074Z, 5 ns as well.
You have a scope with the "old" Boot Version 0.0.1.2, but you have it switched on only 10 times?
Well, good, thanks for trying.
@ProBang2:
Thanks for testing! Now I know I'm not totally crazy... yet.
Has anyone considered creating a Rigol DS1000Z bug thread, for confirmed issues? I keep thinking about this scope and end up getting distracted.
Has anyone considered creating a Rigol DS1000Z bug thread, for confirmed issues? I keep thinking about this scope and end up getting distracted.
Something like this, maybe?
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-%28ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models%29-bugswish-list/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-%28ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models%29-bugswish-list/)
Has anyone considered creating a Rigol DS1000Z bug thread, for confirmed issues? I keep thinking about this scope and end up getting distracted.
Someone mentioned 5ns/ is the lowest resolution time setting. I'm confused, if this is a 100MHz scope, and the 1052 goes down to 2ns? What would be the point?
Doesn't Rigol or there distributors give refunds? With all these reported problems, I would expect the users to have returned the scope for credit and used the funds to buy something else. See? No more problems!
(and no, a 20-year old green-screen Tek that occupies a whole table by itself isn't an option)If you don't need the protocol decoding, there are old Lecroys that are really capable: the LC and LT series :box:
Someone mentioned 5ns/ is the lowest resolution time setting. I'm confused, if this is a 100MHz scope, and the 1052 goes down to 2ns? What would be the point?The 1000Z have 50 pixels/div horizontally where as the 1000E only has 25.
But somebody has pointed out that even this may not be a "real" setting but is actually a digital zoom of the 10 ns/div timebase screen data.No, that's not true. But keep in mind that at 5ns/div there are only 5 samples per div. So one sample per 10 pixels.
5 ns/div is the fastest setting available, whether "virgin" 50 MHz or "unlocked" 100MHz. But somebody has pointed out that even this may not be a "real" setting but is actually a digital zoom of the 10 ns/div timebase screen data. I don't know how to test or confirm this though.
Has anyone considered creating a Rigol DS1000Z bug thread, for confirmed issues? I keep thinking about this scope and end up getting distracted.
Someone mentioned 5ns/ is the lowest resolution time setting. I'm confused, if this is a 100MHz scope, and the 1052 goes down to 2ns? What would be the point?Signals on oscilloscopes aren't usually shown by connecting the dots, they're reconstructed using interpolation functions (eg. sin(x)/x ). Theoretically you can go much smaller than the data sample rate and still see useful information.
Some of what I've read seem to be related to obscure settings.
Other's I'm not sure about, mostly because I do not have the scope or anything similar that I can experiment with.
Some of what I've read seem to be related to obscure settings.
Yes. Some of them seem to be obscure batches of hardware that most people will never own.Other's I'm not sure about, mostly because I do not have the scope or anything similar that I can experiment with.
The DS1054Z is a very useful device at an unbelievable price. You're not doing yourself any favors by reading these "bug" threads. You have to work hard to get most of the bugs to appear. Some people take several attempts to get the settings just right (see previous page). In normal use you'll never see them (insert somebody saying "those settings are normal for me")
If a function is really, really important to you then make sure it's not on the list.
Otherwise ... just get one. You certainly won't regret it.
(and the next firmware update might even fix the few remaining bugs being debated here)
Ok thanks but I want to be able to look at saved files from my flash drive without hooking my scope up to my computer will this allow that?
Some of what I've read seem to be related to obscure settings.
Yes. Some of them seem to be obscure batches of hardware that most people will never own.Other's I'm not sure about, mostly because I do not have the scope or anything similar that I can experiment with.
The DS1054Z is a very useful device at an unbelievable price. You're not doing yourself any favors by reading these "bug" threads. You have to work hard to get most of the bugs to appear. Some people take several attempts to get the settings just right (see previous page). In normal use you'll never see them (insert somebody saying "those settings are normal for me")
If a function is really, really important to you then make sure it's not on the list.
Otherwise ... just get one. You certainly won't regret it.
(and the next firmware update might even fix the few remaining bugs being debated here)
Ok thanks but I want to be able to look at saved files from my flash drive without hooking my scope up to my computer will this allow that?
You don't need ultrascope for that. Just plug the flash drive into your computer, there's the files.
Just plug the flash drive into your computer, there's the files.Lol ok... But my computer does not know how to open them......
Just plug the flash drive into your computer, there's the files.Lol ok... But my computer does not know how to open them......
OK, so you know what to do next. Find out!
That's why I posted here..... I let my computer search with no luck. I downloaded ultrascope for 1104Z and no luck and I have searched online with no luck.....
That's why I posted here.....OK, so you know what to do next. Find out!Just plug the flash drive into your computer, there's the files.Lol ok... But my computer does not know how to open them......
But... you didn't tell us what sort of file you're looking at and trying to open.And didn't tell either what type of computer is being used that operation.
.wfm files. I was using ultra scope to look at them with my ds2052e but now I can't do that. I save them on my flash drive at my shop then bring them home and if I have any questions about the data I can open it on my laptop or desktop at home which are both running windows 7. Sorry I thought I posted all of this the first time I asked about it.That's why I posted here.....OK, so you know what to do next. Find out!Just plug the flash drive into your computer, there's the files.Lol ok... But my computer does not know how to open them......
But... you didn't tell us what sort of file you're looking at and trying to open.
There is 12M memory.
About how long in seconds of a typical 115kbps serial comm could it record, and then would it be able to decode any segment later, once positioned in the display?
Could this saved signal be transferred in some way to a computer, perhaps as CSV or other data format, and then analyzed on a PC with other software (such as Rigol's or other)?
Anyone knows when they had changed the Boot Version to "0.0.1.4"?
And why the change was necessary?
(Is the new Boot Version included in the software update?)
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=223211;image)
I have not been successful with the 1054Z speed upgrade. Invalid key err. I hope I am missing something. It's just so straight forward.
edit: I think I'll try telnet from a fedora 23 box. Just have to find the process in the manual. Wish me luck.
@ metzjtm
Please modify your post to do the quote correct.
Indeed I had no problem to hack the scope (Trigger, Memory, Bandwidth) with the generated key from the known website.
Hello. I am interested in buying an oscilloscope and I would like to know some things.
1) For ds1054z, what it shows if I put a sine wave 70Mhz? Is it showing something different than if the ds1054z is hacked to 100Mhz?
2) For hacked ds1054z, is 100Mhz the absolute limit? What it shows for 110Mhz signals?
... I assume that it shows wrong frequency. Right?
Anyway, does the hack actually affect the signal trace of higher frequencies? You mentioned the 3dB point, so is this artificially induced on non-hacked scopes? Or what is the effect of this one hack?
Although the hardware frequency counter can be wrong under certain circumstances, when I compared mine using the output of a calibrated function generator that I borrowed, it was spot on to the last decimal place.
I think I would rather rely on the cursors. Anyway, does the hack actually affect the signal trace of higher frequencies? You mentioned the 3dB point, so is this artificially induced on non-hacked scopes? Or what is the effect of this one hack?@Metrologist
Hi bitseeker, what I was referring to in that post was the high frequency of 440 MHz, which cannot be measured by the hardware freq. counter.
Oh, I see. Is the amplitude just too small to trigger the hardware counter properly at that frequency?
You mentioned the 3dB point, so is this artificially induced on non-hacked scopes?
You mentioned the 3dB point, so is this artificially induced on non-hacked scopes?
Yes.
The hack just turns off the artificial inducement.
Do you lose features by hacking it?
Do you lose features by hacking it?
Yes, the 50MHz bandwidth limiter is disabled.
Ohh Shit.. :wtf: This is a serious loss. I will not upgrade.
You also lose the length properties of the trigger menu and internal RAM.Ohh Shit.. :wtf: This is a serious loss. I will not upgrade.Do you lose features by hacking it?Yes, the 50MHz bandwidth limiter is disabled.
You also lose the length properties of the trigger menu and internal RAM.
Oh, I see. Is the amplitude just too small to trigger the hardware counter properly at that frequency? I don't know how steep the low-pass filter is on the input, but at some point the signal will be too small to count even though it's visible on the screen.
As xrunner stated in his post that the hardware counter already stops working at 103 MHz, it can't be due to the amplitude drop. There must be some other, timing-related limitation in the counter's implementation.
You also lose the length properties of the trigger menu and internal RAM.Man I thought you were bullshitting. Tell me seriously. Why should I believe you?
I may play around with it some more today. I'd like to know from somebody with an unhacked DS1054Z, what the frequency limit is on that hardware counter.
It's easy enough to remove the "hack" and restore the original 1054z configuration, so you can test your own scope in both "hacked" and "virgin" mode.
Send the SCPI commands to the scope using your favorite method (I like telnet over LAN):
Use ":SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall" to go back to virgin DS1054Z (without the quotes)
Use ":SYSTem:OPTion:INSTall XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX" to enter a key, where XXX is your 28 character key (without hyphens or quotes...)
It's easy enough to remove the "hack" and restore the original 1054z configuration, so you can test your own scopeI have file/ email with all the different option keys commands for my scope, I just cut and paste when switching options to test
Use ":SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall" to go back to virgin DS1054Z (without the quotes)
Use ":SYSTem:OPTion:INSTall XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX" to enter a key, where XXX is your 28
If it doesn't already have the latest version, 04.02.SP2, I would stay a version behind unless you really need the new changes. The latest firmware is very SLOW to respond to the controls.
The ability to do FFT from memory (instead of just the on-screen trace) is also available in SP1. I don't recall how long ago Rigol added the feature, but my scope is at SP1 and it's there.
The FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) now can be calculated not only from the screen points but also on 16k points from the acquisition memory. This new enhancement enables the customer to perform FFT analyis in the frequency domain with increased frequency resolution."[/i]
Source:
http://www.arbenelux.com/en/improved-fft-on-rigol-msods1000-series/ (http://www.arbenelux.com/en/improved-fft-on-rigol-msods1000-series/)
If it doesn't already have the latest version, 04.02.SP2, I would stay a version behind unless you really need the new changes. The latest firmware is very SLOW to respond to the controls.
I haven't tried it to have a clue but what I know is that SP2 contains serious FFT upgrades that without it the FFT is not deep enough to be useful.
I would support MarkF's recommendation here. Yes, the FFT is improved in SP2 (although it is still not great).
The FFT (Fast Fourier Transform) now can be calculated not only from the screen points but also on 16k points from the acquisition memory. This new enhancement enables the customer to perform FFT analyis in the frequency domain with increased frequency resolution."[/i]
Source:
http://www.arbenelux.com/en/improved-fft-on-rigol-msods1000-series/ (http://www.arbenelux.com/en/improved-fft-on-rigol-msods1000-series/)
Get it from a source, or ... get it directly from the horse:
Well, I looked at my source (i.e., my SP1 scope) before I posted and it has the option to do FFT from memory or trace. So, what's new in SP2? More points from memory than SP1?
15. Save the waveform when turned on FFT function and use the
momery data to operate and turn on split display,then load the waveform of
saved, but the display of waveform is error.
M - Modifications. Changes to improve performance on
existing features
C:\Windows\system32>telnet 162.168.0.78 5555
Connecting To 162.168.0.78...Could not open connection to the host, on port 5555: Connect failed
I got it too. No problem with Riglol.This sounds to me like you either don't have the IP address configured properly in the scope, or perhaps you are mistyping the address. Typically the address would be something like:
Just have to learn from scratch how to use DSO again. It was long time ago since I have used analog one.
Very capable piece of equipment. Really there is nothing better in this price range.
EDIT:
Just cannot get telnet working. Any advice? Win10Code: [Select]C:\Windows\system32>telnet 162.168.0.78 5555
Connecting To 162.168.0.78...Could not open connection to the host, on port 5555: Connect failed
Hi,
I have a DS1054z which I purchased a bit more than a year ago, and I’ve been quite happy with it (really great value for the money). After I received it, I did one firmware update (to 00.04.02.SP4) to help with the Jitter Problem.
Been working essentially fine, since then. Now I see that I missed the “04.03.SP1” and “04.03.SP2” updates in the intervening time. Some Forum members seem to recommend staying one-Rev-back from “04.03.SP2” (to avoid slower performance & ‘Pluses’, etc.). The improved FFT stuff is not relevant, in my use of the 'scope.
However, I cannot get/find that zip or GEL file from the Rigol site… they only offer the ‘most recent’ firmware. Does anyone know where I can d/l the “00.04.03.SP1” update file?
Thanks for any guidance!
——————————
Details (if helpful):
My hardware “Board Version” is 0.1.1
The Firmware I have installed shows onscreen as “00.04.02.SP4”
The file I have on my computer (that I think I used for the f/w update) has a filename (when unpacked) of “DS1000Z-04_02_04_07.7z”. Weird… wrong file?
The version that seems to be recommended is firmware update 00.04.03.01.05, which is identified in the System Information screen as “00.04.03.SP1”. Yes? No?
The Param text file showed:
Board Ver: 0.1.1
Firmware Ver: 0.2.3.11
BOOT Ver: 0.0.1.2
CPLD Ver: 1.1
SoftWare Ver: 00.04.02.SP4
(BTW: Yes, I've spent several hours looking back through this thread, going back to late last year).
However, I cannot get/find that zip or GEL file from the Rigol site… they only offer the ‘most recent’ firmware. Does anyone know where I can d/l the “00.04.03.SP1” update file?
I got it too. No problem with Riglol.This sounds to me like you either don't have the IP address configured properly in the scope, or perhaps you are mistyping the address. Typically the address would be something like:
Just have to learn from scratch how to use DSO again. It was long time ago since I have used analog one.
Very capable piece of equipment. Really there is nothing better in this price range.
EDIT:
Just cannot get telnet working. Any advice? Win10Code: [Select]C:\Windows\system32>telnet 162.168.0.78 5555
Connecting To 162.168.0.78...Could not open connection to the host, on port 5555: Connect failed
192.168.0.78 5555
That is, where you have "162" typically one would have "192" from most DHCP routers.
Can you show a screenshot of your LAN setting page, as below?
I got it too. No problem with Riglol.This sounds to me like you either don't have the IP address configured properly in the scope, or perhaps you are mistyping the address. Typically the address would be something like:
Just have to learn from scratch how to use DSO again. It was long time ago since I have used analog one.
Very capable piece of equipment. Really there is nothing better in this price range.
EDIT:
Just cannot get telnet working. Any advice? Win10Code: [Select]C:\Windows\system32>telnet 162.168.0.78 5555
Connecting To 162.168.0.78...Could not open connection to the host, on port 5555: Connect failed
192.168.0.78 5555
That is, where you have "162" typically one would have "192" from most DHCP routers.
Can you show a screenshot of your LAN setting page, as below?
You are right Sir. But it didn't work with right IP address neither. Funny store it just worked straight when I have tried to log in from my Raspberry Pi.
Funny things - Windows...
However, I cannot get/find that zip or GEL file from the Rigol site… they only offer the ‘most recent’ firmware. Does anyone know where I can d/l the “00.04.03.SP1” update file?
Here it is:
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
However, I cannot get/find that zip or GEL file from the Rigol site… they only offer the ‘most recent’ firmware. Does anyone know where I can d/l the “00.04.03.SP1” update file?
Here it is:
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
No, I believe that's not what FlyIt was looking for. He wanted the 4.3.SP1 firmware, i.e. the one that came out before the most recent (and somewhat sluggish) SP2. What you linked to is the current SP2 firmware, isn't it?
He wanted the 4.3.SP1 firmware, i.e. the one that came out before the most recentCheck:
~/Downloads/rigol$ find . -name "*.GEL" | xargs md5sum
45520cfa7a38c37b6a2399877fee88d1 ./DS1000Z(ARM)Update_00.04.02.04.07/DS1000ZUpdate.GEL
141b0f9588f58da44409e3ad07d29d73 ./DS1000ZUpdate_00.04.03.00.01/DS1000ZUpdate.GEL
37de059757e7b54b1091cb1765dd33ed ./DS1000Z(ARM)Update_00.04.03.01.05/DS1000ZUpdate.GEL
7b6d1316f6e84622ce4520be8796a3f2 ./DS1000Z(ARM)Update_00.04.03.02.03/DS1000ZUpdate.GEL
Several people sent me the SP1 update, which I was then able to compare against one another (and subsequently the checksums were posted).
Thanks everyone!
Can you upload SP1 fw somewhere for me too?
Check:
http://gotroot.ca/rigol/ (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/)
For old Firmware.
Quote from: IwanushkaCan you upload SP1 fw somewhere for me too?
Per Teneyes:Quote from: TeneyesCheck:
http://gotroot.ca/rigol/ (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/)
For old Firmware.
The file you want is "DS1000Z-04_03_01_05.7z"
... and the MD5 checksum (should you want to check it) is "37de059757e7b54b1091cb1765dd33ed"
Cheers!
First of all I'd like to ask if Rigol ships the ds1054z with the latest firmware and boot version to their distributors.Broken Vrms measurement. https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/ds1054z-issue/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/ds1054z-issue/)
I guess this would make sense in some way. So I guess the scopes now bought have the boot version 0.1.3 and
the firmware 00.04.03.02.03 (04.03.SP2 shown on the scope). Those are the latest right?
What bugs are to be expected in this case?
So I guess the scopes now bought have the boot version 0.1.3 andI think there is a boot version 0.1.4, but the latest firmware is indeed 00.04.03.02.03 as far as I know.
the firmware 00.04.03.02.03 (04.03.SP2 shown on the scope). Those are the latest right?
What bugs are to be expected in this case?Slow response to controls, especially vertical position, along with some others. But to be fair the SP2 firmware does fix some previously annoying bugs. It's too bad that it doesn't fix all the old bugs, and it introduces several new ones. The failure of all measurements after a random time when Math is in use is particularly annoying to me.
First of all I'd like to ask if Rigol ships the ds1054z with the latest firmware and boot version to their distributors.I just saw a DS1054Z from an Australian distributor (today), and it's:
I guess this would make sense in some way. So I guess the scopes now bought have the boot version 0.1.3 an
the firmware 00.04.03.02.03 (04.03.SP2 shown on the scope). Those are the latest right?
Software: 00.04.03.02.03How do you show all the data on the system info menu? i can't find how
Board: 0.1.4
Boot: 0.0.1.4
Firmware: 0.2.3.11
CPLD: 1.1
Build Date: Sep 11 2015
I asked a distributor in Germany who said that the scope comes with
boot version: 0.0.1.4
firmware: 00.04.03
So is the Firmware the SP1 version?
How do you show all the data on the system info menu? i can't find how
5 bugs at once:
No, these aren't the only bugs left.5 bugs at once:
These are the only known bugs left in the current FW?
1. Measurement freeze - I have not seen this. Is there a robust way to facilitate the issue or some precondition?
2. Math offset - check, with 500 ns period and trace averaging enabled; otherwise, OK.
3. RMS measurement incorrect - check, with multiple channels on. I think Ch1 is always correct, and all other channels are correct individually. Someone mentioned something like SW cross-talk as possible cause?
4. Pluses spelling - is this feature entirely new in the latest FW version? That's the way it seems from the release notes.
5. Pulses miscounted - check, I forget if this is related to 500 ns rate or if there are any preconditions. Again, a new feature?
Thanks!
No, these aren't the only bugs left.5 bugs at once:
These are the only known bugs left in the current FW?
1. Measurement freeze - I have not seen this. Is there a robust way to facilitate the issue or some precondition?
2. Math offset - check, with 500 ns period and trace averaging enabled; otherwise, OK.
3. RMS measurement incorrect - check, with multiple channels on. I think Ch1 is always correct, and all other channels are correct individually. Someone mentioned something like SW cross-talk as possible cause?
4. Pluses spelling - is this feature entirely new in the latest FW version? That's the way it seems from the release notes.
5. Pulses miscounted - check, I forget if this is related to 500 ns rate or if there are any preconditions. Again, a new feature?
Thanks!
It's not easy to display the slow control response in a still image, but many people who have loaded the SP2 firmware have noticed this.
It also can take a _long_ time to save a screen image to a USB stick, especially if the scope is not Stopped before saving. The more channels and functions in use, the longer it can take to save the image (but this does not seem to be the case when using DSRemote over a LAN connection to save a screenshot.)
Something that really is annoying to me is that the FFT function display resets the Center Frequency, Hz/Div, etc. when switching Mode from Memory to Trace (or the other way around.) The new firmware added the Memory option to the FFT which is nice, but they forgot to have it keep its display settings when switching back and forth between Memory and Trace.
Sometimes the Hardware Frequency Counter delivers strange results like double or half actual frequency, depending on Trigger Level setting, for certain waveforms where it really shouldn't have any trouble.
I don't know if CH1 RMS is "always correct" when other channels without inputs are showing large RMS values. I need to research this bug further.
To reproduce the Measurements failing, use two channels and activate a Math trace, like A+B etc. Then turn on some measurements. To keep track of how many updates happen before they stop working, select the Statistics ON and in Stat. Sel. choose "Difference" which will show the update count. I have seen the measurements stop in just a few updates, or sometimes it takes thousands of updates; as far as I can tell the time is completely random. Yes, I reported this bug to Rigol USA back when I first encountered it and they were immediately able to reproduce it on their test scopes, so they know it's really a bug, not just in my unit. Once the displayed Measurements stop updating, then _all_ H or V measurements no longer work and the only way to get them working again is to power-cycle the instrument. The "workaround" which is hardly satisfactory is to keep the Math trace set up but turned OFF except for brief periods when you want to look at it. Still, this doesn't always work and if you're unlucky the Measurements will freeze during the time you have the Math trace turned On.
Yes, the "Pluses" spelling error and indeed the Pulse and Edge counters came along with the latest firmware. No, the miscounting doesn't seem to be related to the 500 ns horizontal rate and doesn't always happen.
There may be more bugs, or "features", that I've not listed or encountered yet.
My scope has Boot Version 0.0.1.3 and I see that current scopes are being shipped with a Boot Version 0.0.1.4. I don't know whether this change in Boot Version affects any of these bugs, or if the Boot Version actually does anything besides starting up the instrument. Somehow I think that it does have some additional effects but I can't prove it.
What I don't understand is why you still have the scope. It's only $400, you could offload it for $300 and move on to something much better. Why keep fighting the same Math problems?
i'll add one to the mix: internal memory or any external usb drive, the last screenshot is not saved.
I press print once: it stops and save the screenshot, when i check there is no screenshot.
Though it might only be me
Isn't Rigol America following the Rigol threads on this forum?
Why don't they step in and get their act together?
It should be very straightforward to fix the remaining bugs with the help of Rigol America.
i'll add one to the mix: internal memory or any external usb drive, the last screenshot is not saved.
I press print once: it stops and save the screenshot, when i check there is no screenshot.
Never seen that (and it's something I'd notice).
Though it might only be me
That would make no sense either. What sort of 'external USB drive' are you using?
Isn't Rigol America following the Rigol threads on this forum?
Why don't they step in and get their act together?
It should be very straightforward to fix the remaining bugs with the help of Rigol America.
Yes, it's weird that they don't take more interest.
There have definitely been cases on EEVBLOG where they actually listened and fixed things.
There was even a case where Rigol USA swapped somebody's scope for a new one because they couldn't reproduce a bug on any of theirs.
Lately though? Silence. And no firmware updates for a very long time. What's going on? :-//
If I were a manufacturer I'd see EEVBLOG as a valuable resource for a) Product testing/feedback, and b) A place where you can earn a lot of brownie points by interacting and responding to problems.
There are no exaggerations in my bug reports.
...especially if the scope is not Stopped before saving. The more channels and functions in use, the longer it can take to save the image.
Isn't Rigol America following the Rigol threads on this forum?
Why don't they step in and get their act together?
It should be very straightforward to fix the remaining bugs with the help of Rigol America.
It should be very straightforward to fix the remaining bugs with the help of Rigol America.Why should they? Even with those bugs, it's still a bestseller.
They will not sell more after fixing some bugs, so why do the effort?
Once there's some real competition in this price class, they will start to fix some bugs.
Still haven't seen another scope that can beat the price/performance of the DS1054Z.Yep. Nothing else is close when it comes to displaying wiggly lines on a screen.
Perhaps Instek will add more pressure in this segment.
They have a nice four channel 'scope for $400 but it's locked to 50MHz and no hack available. The 100 MHz version costs twice the price.Hopefully you won't freak out. I'd pass as minor bug some of the advanced math being broken in it, but I wouldn't call broken RMS measurement being a minor bug. Also 50 MHz Instek have 5 ns rise time vs 7 ns in 50 MHz Rigol and 5ns in 70 MHz Rigol. As rise time is exactly the same as DS1074Z has, IMO it could be compared with that regarding to bandwidth. Analog performance of Rigol have downsides either, such as insufficient offset range in many circumstances. If you don't need serial decoding of IMO questionable quality, then Instek can offer many advantages without serious downsides. As example, advanced math is much more powerful in Instek and is not partially broken either. It can add automated measurments into expression:
Yes, it has a better FFT but it also has no serial decoders. They're important too.
$400 extra to get rid of a couple of minor bugs? That's a tough sell.
Measurement Adds automatic measurements to the expression.Nothing like that is possible even in more expensive DS2000A
Not all automatic measurements are supported.
Measurement Pk-Pk, Max, Min, Amp, High,
Low, Mean, CycleMean, RMS,
CycleRMS, Area, CycleArea,
ROVShoot, FOVShoot, Freq,
Period, Rise, Fall, PosWidth,
NegWidth, Dutycycle, FRR, FRF,
FFR, FFF, LRR, LRF, LFR, LFF,
Phase
Ya, your Instek is awesome. But we got a Rigol, read the topic.On the previous page was brought a point that DS1054Z has no competitors at all at this price, therefore all of the crap they do must be forgiven. Obviously it's not true, and hopefully Rigol will be brought back on the right track by punishing their wallet.
Perhaps Instek will add more pressure in this segment.
They have a nice four channel 'scope for $400 but it's locked to 50MHz and no hack available. The 100 MHz version costs twice the price.
Hopefully you won't freak out. I'd pass as minor bug some of the advanced math being broken in it, but I wouldn't call broken RMS measurement being a minor bug.
insufficient offset range in many circumstances.
Why should they price themselves much lower than Rigol while having better capabilities. GDS-1054B is already cheaper than DS1054Z and offers significantly more out of the box at a slightly lower price. You talk as if Rigol hacked options are included in the price already from the factory :palm:. None of those things people call as advantages come out of the box.Perhaps Instek will add more pressure in this segment.
They have a nice four channel 'scope for $400 but it's locked to 50MHz and no hack available. The 100 MHz version costs twice the price.
Yep, hence the "add more pressure" phrase. However, it seems that Instek tends not to price themselves too low.
Also 50 MHz Instek have 5 ns rise time vs 7 ns in 50 MHz Rigol and 5ns in 70 MHz Rigol. As rise time is exactly the same as DS1074Z has, IMO it could be compared with that regarding to bandwidth.
You talk as if Rigol hacked options are included in the price already from the factory :palm:
We could do a survey if you want, but... I'll bet that nobody here bought a DS1054Z thinking they were getting a 50MHz 'scope with basic triggering, 12Mb RAM no serial decoders.Actually it would be interesting to make a poll like:
Ya, your Instek is awesome. But we got a Rigol, read the topic.On the previous page was brought a point that DS1054Z has no competitors at all at this price, therefore all of the crap they do must be forgiven. Obviously it's not true, and hopefully Rigol will be brought back on the right track by punishing their wallet.
And, yes, you can get a scope that's twice as good for 3 times the money. So what?And for only three times more money you can get one that's twice as good as that.
You can get better scope at a bit lower price from a more reputable manufacturer but without possibility of hacking options, so what? Is hacked Rigol twice as good at the same price? Are there so much value in those hacked options?Ya, your Instek is awesome. But we got a Rigol, read the topic.On the previous page was brought a point that DS1054Z has no competitors at all at this price, therefore all of the crap they do must be forgiven. Obviously it's not true, and hopefully Rigol will be brought back on the right track by punishing their wallet.
Except that only two people on an obscure forum even care. Everybody else is price driven and quite satisfied with the scope. Sure, it would be nice if it were perfect but since it is software based, it never will be.
And, yes, you can get a scope that's twice as good for 3 times the money. So what?
*I hacked my scope but would rather trade hacked frequency and decoding for absence of bugsyep.
You can get better scope at a bit lower price from a more reputable manufacturer but without possibility of hacking options, so what? Is hacked Rigol twice as good at the same price? Are there so much value in those hacked options?
the endless debate :palm:
the endless debate :palm:At TME there is promotion tight now. Not on 1054B, but other 1000B and 2000E scopes are sold much cheaper, for example GDS-1074B and GDS-2072E are sold cheaper than 1054B. If you search much enough, probably someone sells discounted 1054B too. Also getting it from Tequipment and paying the import taxes is not so bad either.Quote*I hacked my scope but would rather trade hacked frequency and decoding for absence of bugsyep.
unfortunately GWi is out of the question for us europeans as their prices are nearly double than what tequipment asks (at least, from TME and farnell. i didn't find gwi on other distributors)
You can get better scope at a bit lower price from a more reputable manufacturer but without possibility of hacking options, so what? Is hacked Rigol twice as good at the same price? Are there so much value in those hacked options?Ya, your Instek is awesome. But we got a Rigol, read the topic.On the previous page was brought a point that DS1054Z has no competitors at all at this price, therefore all of the crap they do must be forgiven. Obviously it's not true, and hopefully Rigol will be brought back on the right track by punishing their wallet.
Except that only two people on an obscure forum even care. Everybody else is price driven and quite satisfied with the scope. Sure, it would be nice if it were perfect but since it is software based, it never will be.
And, yes, you can get a scope that's twice as good for 3 times the money. So what?
Here is a poll:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054zds1000z-poll-are-hacked-options-actually-useful-for-you/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054zds1000z-poll-are-hacked-options-actually-useful-for-you/)
what is the leading competitor to the DS1054Z?
Of course the additional bandwidth and memory depth are worthwhile. I'm not sold on the decoding but it's pretty cool that it's free! So, if there is another scope at 50 MHz BW with no possibility of free upgrades and costs roughly the same, it's not going to win in the market.
Rigol Germany made me suffer a lot in the past. Like none of other any equipment manufacturer (any, including consumer), nobody even comes close. Psychological trauma, you know :-DD.
Here is a poll:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054zds1000z-poll-are-hacked-options-actually-useful-for-you/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054zds1000z-poll-are-hacked-options-actually-useful-for-you/)
That poll displays a rather interesting attitude!
Rigol Germany made me suffer a lot in the past. Like none of other any equipment manufacturer (any, including consumer), nobody even comes close. Psychological trauma, you know :-DD.Aha! Now we've found the real heart of your issue with Rigol! :o :P :-DD
particularly between support centers in different countriesProbably it would be better if there was no support at all, would save me some brain cells.
Rigol Germany made me suffer a lot in the past. Like none of other any equipment manufacturer (any, including consumer), nobody even comes close. Psychological trauma, you know :-DD.
At $400 per scope, Customer Support isn't really necessary. It isn't even worth the hassle to box it up and drive it over to the UPS Store. Just chuck the thing and buy something else.That wasn't $400 scope but $1000 (EU price) DM3068 multimeter, maybe 20% cheaper than Agilent 34401A at that time.
At $400 per scope, Customer Support isn't really necessary. It isn't even worth the hassle to box it up and drive it over to the UPS Store. Just chuck the thing and buy something else.
If you think having a scope is worth a buck a day, at the end of the year, you're just about even. Everything beyond that is just gravy.
Even better, you would perhaps be chucking the Rigol and given the opportunity to try out the Instek. Think how many people will applaud that opportunity!
Hey,What exactly will you be using it for? :-//
I'm just about to pull the trigger on buying a ds1054z from batronix (although conrad is another option, i'm not sure which to choose, and any advice on this is welcome). I'm concerned that the reports on SP2 suggest a degree of sluggishness in the UI, and given that it seems to be impossible to roll back to SP1 I would like to ask just how serious of an issue this is for you existing users.
I am selling my beloved and coddled tektronix 475 scope with dm44 (and near unused crt) in order to finance this purchase, and really want to make sure i'm not locking myself in to a world of frustration.
Thanks for the feedback!
Th.
Hey,What exactly will you be using it for? :-//
I'm just about to pull the trigger on buying a ds1054z from batronix (although conrad is another option, i'm not sure which to choose, and any advice on this is welcome). I'm concerned that the reports on SP2 suggest a degree of sluggishness in the UI, and given that it seems to be impossible to roll back to SP1 I would like to ask just how serious of an issue this is for you existing users.
I am selling my beloved and coddled tektronix 475 scope with dm44 (and near unused crt) in order to finance this purchase, and really want to make sure i'm not locking myself in to a world of frustration.
Thanks for the feedback!
Th.
Meaning will you be using the advanced settings and all four channels simultaneously? Or just a couple of channels and few, if any of the advanced features most of the time?
That is the 400 euro question indeed :)Just turn off a couple of channels (i.e. 2 & 4 or 1 & 3) if you need to run the math trace. If this isn't possible, you'll just have to wait for it to do the computations. And if you're just after common measurements, you don't have to run the math trace for those.
I love my tek475, but doing the number crunching manually is starting to get old, and the built in math functions of the rigol are a major selling point for me, besides the storage of course, which is the most significant reason above all. Besides that, for microntroller peripheral stuff the serial decoding is a big plus. Is it the case that the sluggishness is limited if you engage the math functions on only a channel or two? I'm just trying to get a sense of perspective on the matter. Is it a major setback, or just a minor quibble? that sort of thing...
Most of the people on this forum bought the Rigol because they use the "extra" features and bandwidth that they unlocked and either don't run into, work around, or ignore the existing bugs. In other words, the features offset the bugs. I rarely run into the bugs, so they don't get in my way. YMMV
If you don't have a need for the "extras" and/or you often need to use the functionality on the Rigol that have issues, then you might consider, for example, the GW Instek 1054B. I especially like that it has separate controls for each of the four channels.
So, it really depends what you need/will use it for.
But by the time you get up to 100 MHz AND 4 channels (without decoding), you move up to the GDS-1104B and it's $733 at TEquipment - nearly twice the cost of the DS1054Z. And you still don't have decoding...
having read a lot in this forum, but obviously not everything, I have a question to my new 1054z, which I got yesterday.
I was surprised when I saw that I still have board version 0.1.1, but the newest FW 00.04.03.02.03. Regarding to the "used look" of the display, I am quiet sure, that I got a kind of "refurbished" one in just a new packiging.
[...]
I have a question to my new 1054z, which I got yesterday.
I was surprised when I saw that I still have board version 0.1.1, but the newest FW 00.04.03.02.03. [...]
[...]
On page 38/39 someone mentioned that his board version changed during this activation process from 0.2.2 to 0.1.1
[...]
Most of the people on this forum bought the Rigol because they use the "extra" features and bandwidth that they unlocked and either don't run into, work around, or ignore the existing bugs. In other words, the features offset the bugs. I rarely run into the bugs, so they don't get in my way. YMMV
If you don't have a need for the "extras" and/or you often need to use the functionality on the Rigol that have issues, then you might consider, for example, the GW Instek 1054B. I especially like that it has separate controls for each of the four channels.
I'm not joining the ever-recurring arguments. Everyone's needs, wants, budgets, etc. are different. There are other scopes on the market and people will have to make their own decision, for better or worse. Hopefully, they'll choose the one that works best for them.
Hello,
having read a lot in this forum, but obviously not everything, I have a question to my new 1054z, which I got yesterday.
I was surprised when I saw that I still have board version 0.1.1, but the newest FW 00.04.03.02.03. Regarding to the "used look" of the display, I am quiet sure, that I got a kind of "refurbished" one in just a new packiging.
Is there any reason to stick to this first board version or do the newer ones have a significant advantage? Of course I haven't touched the activation of the additional options yet. On page 38/39 someone mentioned that his board version changed during this activation process from 0.2.2 to 0.1.1, which could underline my assumption, that the dealer sold me something old, I am not willing to pay for, when he just did a reset in order to sell it to the next twit...
Any hint or opinion is appreciated, maybe someone experienced the same issue...? Thank you very much!
Cheers!
Was it in a double box (box in box) or just a single box. This would be the biggest tell-tale of whether it's been refurbished.
McBryce.
Hello,
having read a lot in this forum, but obviously not everything, I have a question to my new 1054z, which I got yesterday.
I was surprised when I saw that I still have board version 0.1.1, but the newest FW 00.04.03.02.03. Regarding to the "used look" of the display, I am quiet sure, that I got a kind of "refurbished" one in just a new packiging.
Is there any reason to stick to this first board version or do the newer ones have a significant advantage? Of course I haven't touched the activation of the additional options yet. On page 38/39 someone mentioned that his board version changed during this activation process from 0.2.2 to 0.1.1, which could underline my assumption, that the dealer sold me something old, I am not willing to pay for, when he just did a reset in order to sell it to the next twit...
Any hint or opinion is appreciated, maybe someone experienced the same issue...? Thank you very much!
Cheers!
Was it in a double box (box in box) or just a single box. This would be the biggest tell-tale of whether it's been refurbished.
McBryce.
Hello single box doesn't mean the unit is refurbished. They used to come in box to box but when the import get big quanitties it will be single box only to save space into the container.Of course, but a clearly refurbished item sold as a new unit should also be returned if the buyer is not happy, whether or not it "seems faulty".
Of course if the unit seems faulty must be returned under warranty :-+
Hello single box doesn't mean the unit is refurbished. They used to come in box to box but when the import get big quanitties it will be single box only to save space into the container.Of course, but a clearly refurbished item sold as a new unit should also be returned if the buyer is not happy, whether or not it "seems faulty".
Of course if the unit seems faulty must be returned under warranty :-+
Hello single box doesn't mean the unit is refurbished. They used to come in box to box but when the import get big quanitties it will be single box only to save space into the container.
Of course, but a clearly refurbished item sold as a new unit should also be returned if the buyer is not happy, whether or not it "seems faulty".Totally agree.
It might have been used for a week in a peanut factory. It could kill you if you have a peanut allergy.Now imagine if they made it from peanut based bioplastics... :o >:D
Guys,
Somehow my google-fu failed me, IIRC someone made nice FFT app that can do "unlimited" points from saved waveform, can someone point me in right direction?
Thanks
Boot version 0.0.1.2mine is
Build date Sep-11-2015 (lol @ that date)
I bought from Tequipment. Came relatively fast. It was what I expected.
Is this our DS1054Z Q&A topic?
I was looking at the record option. If my sweep is set to 100 ms, I notice I can set my interval to less than 1.2 seconds (but when I twiddle the knob there, it reacts very slow). I think Interval is the time between the start of one recorded frame and the next. How can I set the interval to something less than my total sweep? Will the recorded frames just contain overlapping data? Also, I can record over 5000 frames (what they call Length :-//), up to 10 seconds apart. That's over 13 hours! What happens if I am in normal trigger and nothing triggers? Do I just get the same frame (current screen) recorded at each interval, or will it wait for a trigger to record the frame (I kind of think the former)?
Thanks!
I bought from Tequipment. Came relatively fast. It was what I expected.
Is this our DS1054Z Q&A topic?
I was looking at the record option. If my sweep is set to 100 ms, I notice I can set my interval to less than 1.2 seconds (but when I twiddle the knob there, it reacts very slow). I think Interval is the time between the start of one recorded frame and the next. How can I set the interval to something less than my total sweep? Will the recorded frames just contain overlapping data? Also, I can record over 5000 frames (what they call Length :-//), up to 10 seconds apart. That's over 13 hours! What happens if I am in normal trigger and nothing triggers? Do I just get the same frame (current screen) recorded at each interval, or will it wait for a trigger to record the frame (I kind of think the former)?
Thanks!
You can't do overlapped recordings. The interval is the minimum gap between the end of one trace and start of the next. In normal trigger mode, if nothing triggers, you get nothing. You must have a trigger of some description in normal mode to get a trace whether in record mode or not. So each frame needs a trigger.
I bought from Tequipment. Came relatively fast. It was what I expected.
Is this our DS1054Z Q&A topic?
I was looking at the record option. If my sweep is set to 100 ms, I notice I can set my interval to less than 1.2 seconds (but when I twiddle the knob there, it reacts very slow). I think Interval is the time between the start of one recorded frame and the next. How can I set the interval to something less than my total sweep? Will the recorded frames just contain overlapping data? Also, I can record over 5000 frames (what they call Length :-//), up to 10 seconds apart. That's over 13 hours! What happens if I am in normal trigger and nothing triggers? Do I just get the same frame (current screen) recorded at each interval, or will it wait for a trigger to record the frame (I kind of think the former)?
Thanks!
You can't do overlapped recordings. The interval is the minimum gap between the end of one trace and start of the next. In normal trigger mode, if nothing triggers, you get nothing. You must have a trigger of some description in normal mode to get a trace whether in record mode or not. So each frame needs a trigger.
Thanks Howard. I see it is the time between frames. So if my signal drops below trigger, I get nothing. I think I can test that easy enough.
Model | DS1054Z |
SN | (ommitted) |
Software Version | 00.04.03.02.03 |
Board Version | 0.1.4 |
Boot Version | 0.0.1.4 |
Firmware Version | 0.2.3.11 |
CPLD Version | 1.1 |
Build Date | Sep 11 2015 09:42:... (ommitted) |
Model | DS1104Z |
SN | (ommitted) |
Software Version | 00.04.03.02.03 |
Board Version | 0.1.4 |
Boot Version | 0.0.1.4 |
Firmware Version | 0.2.3.11 |
CPLD Version | 1.1 |
Build Date | Sep 11 2015 09:42:... (ommitted) |
I love my tek475, but doing the number crunching manually is starting to get old, and the built in math functions of the rigol are a major selling point for me, besides the storage of course, which is the most significant reason above all. Besides that, for microntroller peripheral stuff the serial decoding is a big plus. Is it the case that the sluggishness is limited if you engage the math functions on only a channel or two? I'm just trying to get a sense of perspective on the matter. Is it a major setback, or just a minor quibble? that sort of thing...
There has been third-party information (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/my-new-(i-suspect-faulty)-ds1054z/msg971719/#msg971719) that a firmware update is coming in a month or so.
Let's hope they at least give the new firmware an honest try (and have the spellings reviewed by native speakers of each available language) before they release it into the wild.
Rigol would do well to take a page from the IT industry's playbook about how to produce, document, and deploy updates.
LOL! Microsoft is not a good example.I "believe" you :palm: typical enthusiast without any experience in professional sector.
Side note: I've used Linux, OS X, and Windows for a long time. Of the three, Windows has been and continues to be the most irritating, infuriating, and productivity sapping platform.
There has been third-party information (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/my-new-(i-suspect-faulty)-ds1054z/msg971719/#msg971719) that a firmware update is coming in a month or so.
Oh, dear. That's bad news for certain forum members...
There has been third-party information (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/beginners/my-new-(i-suspect-faulty)-ds1054z/msg971719/#msg971719) that a firmware update is coming in a month or so.
Oh, dear. That's bad news for certain forum members...
Forgive my ignorance, but why would this be a bad thing? I just got mine today, and wondering to apply the 'upgrade' now or wait until new firmware comes out.
Although I do find it amusing sometimes to see people saying stuff like "I never use that setting, so stop complaining that it doesn't work properly for you. After all, it's only 400 dollars."
Although I do find it amusing sometimes to see people saying stuff like "I never use that setting, so stop complaining that it doesn't work properly for you. After all, it's only 400 dollars."
LOL - I'd like to ask people - at what price, exactly, is everything on an oscilloscope supposed to work properly, if not at $400?
$425 ...
$495
$517 ...
:popcorn:
Forgive my ignorance, but why would this be a bad thing?
I just got mine today, and wondering to apply the 'upgrade' now or wait until new firmware comes out.
b) Firmware updates don't magically transform your oscilloscope and make everything better.Yes they do:
b) Firmware updates don't magically transform your oscilloscope and make everything better.Yes they do:
(snip)
Me? I haven't applied last November's update yet. I'd probably do it it I needed a better FFT, but I don't, so... :-//
(snip)
......
And yet, you seem to be critical of those of us who have applied that update and are not happy with the problems it introduces.
I'm only critical of people of the people who invade every single thread that mentions the DS1054Z and try to turn it into their own personal Rigol-bashing thread.
eg. The "DS1054Z noise" thread that you recently invaded.
If by "patch" you mean the hacks for BW, Trigger, Decoders and Memory, it doesn't matter when you apply them. Updating the firmware doesn't change the what has been applied. If you do, be sure to use DSER for everything except the 500uV/Div which doesn't work.
And yet, you seem to be critical of those of us who have applied that update and are not happy with the problems it introduces.
I'm only critical of people of the people who invade every single thread that mentions the DS1054Z and try to turn it into their own personal Rigol-bashing thread.
eg. The "DS1054Z noise" thread that you recently invaded.
Rigol-bashing? Moi? Surely you jest. I use the scope every day in my work and I've helped many people understand the scope's quirks and limitations. It gives me great amusement. And I've never once complained about the "loud" fan
When are you going to update your scope to the latest firmware, so that you can have as much fun with it as the rest of us?
@ technogeeky:
So what's up with this transistor?
Rigol-bashing? Moi? Surely you jest. I use the scope every day in my work and I've helped many people understand the scope's quirks and limitations. It gives me great amusement. And I've never once complained about the "loud" fan
That's because you work in a noisy room.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-ds1000z-fan-noise/msg649480/#msg649480 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-ds1000z-fan-noise/msg649480/#msg649480)When are you going to update your scope to the latest firmware, so that you can have as much fun with it as the rest of us?
Is the "latest" firmware available to the public yet?
When are you going to update your scope to the latest firmware, so that you can have as much fun with it as the rest of us?
Is the "latest" firmware available to the public yet?
And I also know how to press the encoder shaft-buttons so as not to turn them at the same time -- something that seems to be beyond the ability of some users, who have even gone so far as to tear their scopes apart to replace the encoders.
The latest firmware
No need to be sorry for being annoyed by that "feature". Rigol should've used a rotary encoder with detents for the menu. A smooth one is suboptimal for this purpose.
And I also know how to press the encoder shaft-buttons so as not to turn them at the same time -- something that seems to be beyond the ability of some users, who have even gone so far as to tear their scopes apart to replace the encoders.Good usability shouldn't require the user to learn a fiddly method just to perform an everyday function. Rigol screwed the pooch on this. A non-detended encoder without software hysteresis is just terrible.
Occurs the problem with the multipurpose encoder after some time of using?
Or just on day one?
Honest: I have no problem with it (at least until now). :-//
Even if a detent button would have been nicer...
$ strings SparrowAPP.out | grep -i -e limited\! -e pluses
+Pluses
-Pluses
Function Limited!
Parameter Limited!
$ strings SparrowApp.out | grep -i version
Version:
A newer software version detected.
An older software version detected.
The same software version detected.
Has anyone found a way to modify the small font (i.e. replace it with another one)?
QuoteHas anyone found a way to modify the small font (i.e. replace it with another one)?
That is my primary interest too. Something like a traditional monospace Xterm font (LucidaTypewriter Medium 9 pt!) would make the instrument so much more comfortable to use.
It seems to be running MQX as its RTOS.
Has anyone found a way to modify the small font (i.e. replace it with another one)?
All files have 24 byte extra header where from first:
This can be done if You strip 24 bytes from beginning.
So file have then packed file signature: 5D 00 00 80
h = int('280', 16) + 24 <----------- here
i = h + int('10A814', 16)
out = b[h:i]
open('sys/SparrowAPP.out', 'wb').write(out)
Has anyone found a way to modify the small font (i.e. replace it with another one)?
I may have missed this, but -- has anybody been able to change anything in the firmware, and then make the Rigol accept it for a firmware update? I would assume that there are checksums in the firmware files, which need to be revised if the firmware is changed anywhere. Is the position and the calculation scheme for the checksums known?
This would be the very first thing to try. Change some really obvious piece of text and get the scope to accept the change.
May I suggest to move the firmware analysis to another thread ?
I'm interested too in it (I've also done some experiments before using binwalk)
and I'd like to help (time permitting).
but I guess it will be more easy to focus to the task in a dedicated thread :-)
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.04.00.07 2016/07/19
- Added the full-screen display in the XY mode
- Modified the Trace data of average sample mode
- Fixed the bug of system halted for wave persistance in the Zoom mode
- Fixed bugs about Measure
Hi,
I have install the latest version (with the latest versions of NI Drivers and Ultra Sigma) of Ultra Scope Software_00.01.01.06 (2016-05-26)
and i have a problem. There is no update in Horizontal parameters so finaly i can't see nothing (waveform) in the main screen. Connected under USB and LAN.
In a strange way, the FFT Window as you can see in the posted photos below, works fine!
If i go back to an older version everything is OK!
Have anyone else this issue ?
Thanks!
Altough I've posted this to the bugs/wishlist thread, good to have it here.
New firmware!!
http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3 (http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3)
Who dares now? :popcorn:
I tried it. I can't see much difference. It still says "pluses" in the measurements.What about the UI responsiveness? There were complaints regarding the previous version.
I tried it. I can't see much difference. It still says "pluses" in the measurements.
I tried it. I can't see much difference. It still says "pluses" in the measurements.What about the UI responsiveness? There were complaints regarding the previous version.
I tried it. I can't see much difference. It still says "pluses" in the measurements.
With an assumption that you've "riglol-ed" yours, the new firmware does not affect that, right ? >:D
Altough I've posted this to the bugs/wishlist thread, good to have it here.
New firmware!!
http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3 (http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3)
Who dares now? :popcorn:
I tried it. I can't see much difference. It still says "pluses" in the measurements.
The XY mode is all-new though.
Altough I've posted this to the bugs/wishlist thread, good to have it here.
New firmware!!
http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3 (http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3)Code: [Select][Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.04.00.07 2016/07/19
- Added the full-screen display in the XY mode
- Modified the Trace data of average sample mode
- Fixed the bug of system halted for wave persistance in the Zoom mode
- Fixed bugs about Measure
Who dares now? :popcorn:
RMS measurement error on other channel(s) still present... :palm:
The XY mode is all-new.Care to share a screenshot of the changes in X-Y?
The new XY is neat. But failing to address even the simplest of bugs (i.e., misspelled labels) is :palm: :palm:.
No matter. Soon, we'll start fixing things ourselves. >:D
Does anyone know if the firmware can be simulated? Like would it be possible to run the firmware in an emulator?
Jesus christ. What the hell have they been working at? :palm:
The XY mode is all-new.Care to share a screenshot of the changes in X-Y?
There's two display modes. One is "split" which shows the X and Y traces at the top of the screen with X/Y plot below that.
I did not see any capability to trigger on a given pulse length (e.g. min. 340µs or whatever). Is it hidden somewhere or is that not possible with this scope?
I may be wrong but I seem to remember Pluses was also in the menu and if so that was fixed. The labels indeed say Pluses.
I may be wrong but I seem to remember Pluses was also in the menu and if so that was fixed. The labels indeed say Pluses.
I tried it. I can't see much difference. It still says "pluses" in the measurements.What about the UI responsiveness? There were complaints regarding the previous version.
Seems the same to me. :-//
I think the complaints were only when all 4 channels were on and you were doing math.
I guess somebody would have to put two of them side-by-side to show a difference.
Contacted Rigol Chinese HQ about the malfunctioning front panel LED after upgrading. I have to send the scope back for repair.
I will avoid Rigol in the future...
Contacted Rigol Chinese HQ about the malfunctioning front panel LED after upgrading. I have to send the scope back for repair.
I will avoid Rigol in the future...
Why didn't you contact RigolUSA?
http://www.rigolna.com/ (http://www.rigolna.com/)
https://www.rigolna.com/tech-support/ (https://www.rigolna.com/tech-support/)
RIGOL Technologies Inc.
10200 SW Allen Blvd., Suite C
Beaverton, OR 97005
Email Us
Phone: 877-4-RIGOL-1
Fax: 877-4-RIGOL-1
I see, thanks for the detailed reply.
When you tried re-flashing, did you use the same copy of the firmware you used initially? Have you tried re-downloading, re-extracting and using a fresh copy of the firmware?
It's worth a shot.
For the problem, all the LED lights up at start up, and they do not respond to any button press. 1-10 minutes later some LED randomly turn off, but they still don't respond to controls. Everything else work fine. Yes I tried pressing the 5th dark button on the left to reset the scope, reflashing the same version of firmware, unhack the options, and unplug and plug in again.
While I like the idea of the fullscreen x-y display, I'd still like to know if some of the other bugs have been fixed before I update my firmware. The one I'm most interested in is the Measurements Fail bug that causes _all_ measurements to stop updating after a random time interval when Math is in use.
While I like the idea of the fullscreen x-y display, I'd still like to know if some of the other bugs have been fixed before I update my firmware. The one I'm most interested in is the Measurements Fail bug that causes _all_ measurements to stop updating after a random time interval when Math is in use.I tried to recreate the bug and stopped the test when the cnt. was over 37k (needed the scope for something else). Had 4 measurements (with statistics), 4 channels on as well as math doing AxB.
No - didn't try it prior to the upgrade. I rarely do 4 measurements when 4 channels are on. Let alone with math.
But when I read about the bug it intrigued me but I fell short of being able to reproduce it.
Is there anybody out there who has the 'freezing' bug who's tried the new firmware?No and i don't really intend to for a lot of time. If something can be understood from the chinglish in the changelog nothing of substance was fixed or even addressed.
I wonder where all the Rigol-bashers went to . They're surprisingly absent in the last few days. :popcorn:They're all waiting to see if the new FW is ay good. :popcorn:
To be frank i stopped caring when i read that they didn't even fix the Pluses. I'll keep it until i will have the funds for a GWI-2000A/E (or the newest siglent 2 chan mso) then sell the 1054 for some penny and move on.
I hope you understand that i see the failure to solve the most basic thing after many months as a sign of them really not giving two shits
This scope is unreliable and very frustrating to use for me since 4.3.2.3 ver. firmware.
And RMS bug is not that simple...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpgEC9ghXgE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpgEC9ghXgE)
Please if you did not watch it before , take a closer look
Now all my faith is in the custom hacked firmwareWhat?!?! is there a custom hacked firmware for 1054Z?!.. Where?
Again, this video shows the Vrms problem in the latest firmware CONFUSED by a boy who has NO IDEA how to operate his scope!!! He is using regular coax cable but keeps changing the Probe setting from the 1X setting it should be.
So the phantom CH2-4 Vrms bug is the kind of thing that irks me. ... I mean, I know that there shouldn't be a reading without a probe in...
Would you at least concede that two channels connected to the exact same signal should report the same RMS value for that signal?What happens when you swap the trigger to the other channel?
Both CH1 and CH2 connected to the probe calibrator output:
Would you at least concede that two channels connected to the exact same signal should report the same RMS value for that signal?What happens when you swap the trigger to the other channel?
Both CH1 and CH2 connected to the probe calibrator output:
Would you at least concede that two channels connected to the exact same signal should report the same RMS value for that signal?What happens when you swap the trigger to the other channel?
Both CH1 and CH2 connected to the probe calibrator output:
This. :popcorn:
To me, the pulses/pluses update is nearly meaningless. I know what they mean. I don't use an oscilloscope for a language lesson. I want measurements.
So the phantom CH2-4 Vrms bug is the kind of thing that irks me. I don't have enough money or accurate enough secondary equipment to know if some values are wrong, or have high statistical (or in this case, systematic) error. I mean, I know that there shouldn't be a reading without a probe in, but once you get into the realm of plausibility, I will have to accept the results the scope gives me.
I am hopeful that this community will make progress unpacking/decoding the firmware and we'll being to take more control over it ourselves.
Again, it's not THAT important but it is (to me) a sign that they are not taking things seriously, i can understand a spelling error, nobody's perfect, i can't understand not solving it because it is really so simple to fix.. and they are still not fixing or rather "fixing" other bugs and nuisances 'on the side'
so, i can't trust them...
Again, it's not THAT important but it is (to me) a sign that they are not taking things seriously, i can understand a spelling error, nobody's perfect, i can't understand not solving it because it is really so simple to fix.. and they are still not fixing or rather "fixing" other bugs and nuisances 'on the side'
so, i can't trust them...
+1. This is the issue exactly, and is not brand-specific. It's a matter of being able to have a reasonable amount of trust in the equipment. The manufacturer's failure to address little things makes you wonder what more important problems are being overlooked or ignored.
Would you at least concede that two channels connected to the exact same signal should report the same RMS value for that signal?What happens when you swap the trigger to the other channel?
Both CH1 and CH2 connected to the probe calibrator output:
This. :popcorn:
This:What happens when you swap the trigger to the other channel?This. :popcorn:
The periodic RMS seems more accurate. This makes sense (it will look for a complete wave so it's less dependent on horizontal scroll position).So almost 50% higher RMS reading on second channel on your own screenshot is nitpicking? Someone (who that might be?) a while ago told that for some guys these are bad news about new firmware coming out.
Anything else is interesting... but nitpicking. Oscilloscopes are for looking at the shapes of things, not precise voltage measurements. Between 8-bit DACs and background noise you're never going to achieve more than about 10% accuracy.
So almost 50% higher RMS reading on second channel on your own screenshot is nitpicking?
Does it tell you how many pulses are reasonable enough so you can trust it?So almost 50% higher RMS reading on second channel on your own screenshot is nitpicking?
It's not 50% when you get a reasonable number of pulses on screen
It's never 50% on the "Per.VRMS" reading.
Does it tell you how many pulses are reasonable enough so you can trust it?So almost 50% higher RMS reading on second channel on your own screenshot is nitpicking?
It's not 50% when you get a reasonable number of pulses on screen
It's never 50% on the "Per.VRMS" reading.
Does it tell you how many pulses are reasonable enough so you can trust it?
Reminds me of EE101 lab. First year in undergrad the lab supervisor made sure we would never trust a scope (or any other T&M) ever again. Simply spoken - until you understand exactly what the scope does everything it shows is meaningless. Everything. (This was mid 80's so this was Tek and HP scope days - none of this Rigol stuff).
In this specific instance I would assume an easy way to know if your RMS reading has stabilized is to add more cycles (change Timebase). At some point the VRMS would stabilize.
Again, it's not THAT important but it is (to me) a sign that they are not taking things seriously, i can understand a spelling error, nobody's perfect, i can't understand not solving it because it is really so simple to fix.. and they are still not fixing or rather "fixing" other bugs and nuisances 'on the side'
so, i can't trust them...
+1. This is the issue exactly, and is not brand-specific. It's a matter of being able to have a reasonable amount of trust in the equipment. The manufacturer's failure to address little things makes you wonder what more important problems are being overlooked or ignored.
And in this case it IS meaningless, because:Does it tell you how many pulses are reasonable enough so you can trust it?So almost 50% higher RMS reading on second channel on your own screenshot is nitpicking?
It's not 50% when you get a reasonable number of pulses on screen
It's never 50% on the "Per.VRMS" reading.
Reminds me of EE101 lab. First year in undergrad the lab supervisor made sure we would never trust a scope (or any other T&M) ever again. Simply spoken - until you understand exactly what the scope does everything it shows is meaningless. Everything.
until you understand exactly what the scope does everything it shows is meaningless.And you certainly don't know the mechanism how it gets it's RMS reading wrong.
And you certainly don't know the mechanism how it gets it's RMS reading wrong.
And in this case it IS meaningless, because:Does it tell you how many pulses are reasonable enough so you can trust it?So almost 50% higher RMS reading on second channel on your own screenshot is nitpicking?
It's not 50% when you get a reasonable number of pulses on screen
It's never 50% on the "Per.VRMS" reading.
Reminds me of EE101 lab. First year in undergrad the lab supervisor made sure we would never trust a scope (or any other T&M) ever again. Simply spoken - until you understand exactly what the scope does everything it shows is meaningless. Everything.Quoteuntil you understand exactly what the scope does everything it shows is meaningless.And you certainly don't know the mechanism how it gets it's RMS reading wrong.
Actually you do - Fungus fully screen-shot the process he used to characterize the scopes' operation and show how the edges of the displayed traces affected the measurement. Now he knows when to use RMS - a long sample of a random audio input for example or PerRMS - when he wants to measure the RMS value of a 1 cycle of a repetitive signal.No you don't. All he did is measured only one particular signal at different timebases. It is as far as the moon from being characterized. What happens if there is sine wave, triangle and what else at different amplitudes and frequencies?
This sub-discussion about a spelling error is actually very good lesson to show non-English speakers about how the English speaking market treats spelling errors.
In countries where a spelling bee is a cultural icon, spelling is one of the fundamentals of trust. This lack of trust will continue to contaminate whatever Rigol is or will be doing right - until they resolve it.
Actually you do - Fungus fully screen-shot the process he used to characterize the scopes' operation and show how the edges of the displayed traces affected the measurement. Now he knows when to use RMS - a long sample of a random audio input for example or PerRMS - when he wants to measure the RMS value of a 1 cycle of a repetitive signal.No you don't. All he did is measured only one particular signal at different timebases. It is as far as the moon from being characterized. What happens if there is sine wave, triangle and what else at different amplitudes and frequencies?
Do you really expect to hook up anything and just trust it? We never trusted Fluke nor Tektronix nor HP (those were the only things we had in the Navy lab), nor Anritsu or HP or Tabor (in the university lab) or even the expensive stuff like Bruel & Kjaer. Why would you trust a Rigol any more than that???Do you expect anyone with sane mind to use broken feature for anything even remotely serious, by characterizing amount of it's brokenness? (unless you are on a Mars and this is you're only scope). What is broken, must be fixed and not considered small nuisance that probably can be characterized.
This sub-discussion about a spelling error is actually very good lesson to show non-English speakers about how the English speaking market treats spelling errors.
In countries where a spelling bee is a cultural icon, spelling is one of the fundamentals of trust. This lack of trust will continue to contaminate whatever Rigol is or will be doing right - until they resolve it.
I'm italian :)
Do you really expect to hook up anything and just trust it? We never trusted Fluke nor Tektronix nor HP (those were the only things we had in the Navy lab), nor Anritsu or HP or Tabor (in the university lab) or even the expensive stuff like Bruel & Kjaer. Why would you trust a Rigol any more than that???Do you expect anyone with sane mind to use broken feature for anything even remotely serious, by characterizing amount of it's brokenness? (unless you are on a Mars and this is you're only scope). What is broken, must be fixed and not considered small nuisance that probably can be characterized.
properly characterized
Turning on AC coupling gives completely different numbers.Learn how RMS works. 1.5V is correct value.
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=243210;image)
nb. The correct RMS for a 3V square wave should be 2.12V (3/sqrt(2))
Turning on AC coupling gives completely different numbers.Learn how RMS works. 1.5V is correct value.
(image snipped)
nb. The correct RMS for a 3V square wave should be 2.12V (3/sqrt(2))
Hi everyone...
@Fungus, you have 4.3SP1 firmare on your scope i think. Can you do this simple test for me and send screenshots.
First connect your probes on probe calibration terminal:
I have 4.3SP2 firmware and these are my screenshots...
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=243318;image)So Per.Vrms is broken too :palm:
Hi everyone...
@Fungus, you have 4.3SP1 firmare on your scope i think. Can you do this simple test for me and send screenshots.
First connect your probes on probe calibration terminal:
1. Set your probes at 10x, and on the scope comp. 10x also (both channels DC coupled),
2. Set scope time base 500us,
3. Select for both channels RMS measurement from left vertical menu (not Per.Vrms),
4. Set Cursor Mode:Auto/ Auto Item:Quick2 (indicates Ch2 RMS, it may Quick1 select accordingly),
5. Set Ch2 10V/per.div and position -30V,
6. Set Trigger on Ch2,
7. Please take a screenshot with quickprint button,
8. Set Ch1 to AC Coupling,
9. Take another screenshot,
10. Now set Ch1 Coupling to GND and take last screenshot.
I have 4.3SP2 firmware and these are my screenshots...
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=243318;image)So Per.Vrms is broken too :palm:
I concur the findings. Interesting. Tried the same with Ch1 and Ch3 - but didn't get the same results - are you getting this behavior for any combination of channels?
OK... based on JohnPen's posts I have pulled the trigger and updated my scope to the current firmware 00.04.04.00.07.
I am very happy to report that the Math Horizontal Error at 500 ns/div seems to be GONE !! The Math trace now displays correct time relationships to the input signals.
I am still testing for the Measurements Fail bug. This one was totally random in the time it took to fail so it may take me a while to be confident that it is gone.
The interface doesn't seem quite as sluggish as it was before, but that might just be subjective.
Color me a happy scoposcopist! Yay Rigol! :clap:
Now if we could only get rid of that "Pluses" thing.....
I concur the findings. Interesting. Tried the same with Ch1 and Ch3 - but didn't get the same results - are you getting this behavior for any combination of channels?
Thank you for checking this.
If you gonna try other channels, try like this;
Ch1 =leaks=> Ch2, Ch2 =leaks=> Ch3, Ch3 =leaks=> Ch4 ;D
Just fantastic!
A corollary - if you increase the Y axis even more - the error in Vrms calculation increases. That is also "broken".
Thanks @Fungus. But your cursor setting is not what i told (it must Cursor/Mode:Auto-Auto Item: QuickX (ch2 RMS))
the Math Horizontal Error at 500 ns/div seems to be GONE !!
I am still testing for the Measurements Fail bug. This one was totally random in the time it took to fail so it may take me a while to be confident that it is gone.
The interface doesn't seem quite as sluggish as it was before, but that might just be subjective.
If I were to speculate, it is a problem how they handle data for RMS calc.. RMS is calculated as a running filter on a circular buffer... multiplexed between channels.. could be that some data in some buffer leaks to a next channel or something like that..
I am very happy to report that the Math Horizontal Error at 500 ns/div seems to be GONE !! The Math trace now displays correct time relationships to the input signals.
I am still testing for the Measurements Fail bug. This one was totally random in the time it took to fail so it may take me a while to be confident that it is gone.
Instead of that, all of the CH buttons lit up, the scope speaker generated a continuous tone, and it destroyed my USB drive! Yes, you read that right. Now the nice high-speed 32GB USB drive I put the firmware on won't even connect to any device or computer I try.
A corollary - if you increase the Y axis even more - the error in Vrms calculation increases. That is also "broken".
If the trace goes off screen it will fail because the 8-bit ADC will be saturated to readings of 0 & 256.
There's nothing anybody can do about that.
Also, are you guys doing the self-cal on the scope as requested, after firmware upgrade? I only ask because I now see a new button on the Self-Cal menu that I haven't seen anyone mention.
It now reads:
- Start
- End
- LFCal
- Output
Was this there before? I certainly don't remember it.
I tried LFCal, it does something and then says it failed. It looks like it might need a probe attached or something.
Instead of that, all of the CH buttons lit up, the scope speaker generated a continuous tone, and it destroyed my USB drive! Yes, you read that right. Now the nice high-speed 32GB USB drive I put the firmware on won't even connect to any device or computer I try.
Unless it has changed in newer firmware, according to the Dec. 2015 documentation the largest USB drive that's supported is still only 8GB (see Ch. 17).
Interestingly, the manual now states that only FAT32 is supported (see Ch. 14), whereas earlier versions didn't specify. So, that definitively establishes what I had suspected when I was having trouble with smaller USB drives (FAT16 and large clusters).
Also, are you guys doing the self-cal on the scope as requested, after firmware upgrade? I only ask because I now see a new button on the Self-Cal menu that I haven't seen anyone mention.
It now reads:
- Start
- End
- LFCal
- Output
Was this there before? I certainly don't remember it.
I tried LFCal, it does something and then says it failed. It looks like it might need a probe attached or something.
I don't see that...
Also, are you guys doing the self-cal on the scope as requested, after firmware upgrade? I only ask because I now see a new button on the Self-Cal menu that I haven't seen anyone mention.
It now reads:
- Start
- End
- LFCal
- Output
Was this there before? I certainly don't remember it.
I tried LFCal, it does something and then says it failed. It looks like it might need a probe attached or something.
I don't see that...
For purposes of making screenshots, I have used an identical 32GB FAT-formatted flash drive in the 1054z. It worked fine, and detected it as 32GB (or whatever, 31GB).
However, this doesn't come near to explaining why it murdered my drive. It's so tiny of a drive it will be near impossible to take apart.
I am very happy to report that the Math Horizontal Error at 500 ns/div seems to be GONE !! The Math trace now displays correct time relationships to the input signals.
I am still testing for the Measurements Fail bug. This one was totally random in the time it took to fail so it may take me a while to be confident that it is gone.
Thanks alsetalokin4017 and JohnPen. So far, so good on the rectification of those functional issues.
OOPS.....
More weirdness: Turning CH1 off with its button removes the trace from the screen but does not stop its Measurements: they continue to be updated with apparently correct values except for the missing Average and Deviation. (It does stop the Math computation though.) Setting CH1 coupling to Ground stops them,
:-//
Instead of that, all of the CH buttons lit up, the scope speaker generated a continuous tone, and it destroyed my USB drive! Yes, you read that right. Now the nice high-speed 32GB USB drive I put the firmware on won't even connect to any device or computer I try.
How do I completely clear a measurement? I was trying to set my scope to duplicate some of the setups here and if I pressed the wrong measurement, I can't figure out how to make it go away completely. If I delete it, it stays grayed out and a new measurement will just be added.
You can "clear" all of them, but individual "removed" ones won't go away until they're replaced with a different one. Unfortunately, it doesn't remove a measurement and move the remaining ones to close the gap, as one would expect.
... they have an offset of 3-4 mV on that scale (0,3-0,4 of div) ...
... they have an offset of 3-4 mV on that scale (0,3-0,4 of div) ...
Well, an Oscilloscope isn't made to measure voltages. It's made to show you voltage characteristics.
Cheers
hammy
I know how to use scope for quite some time, and I do measure voltage with my 6.5 digit voltmeter when I need precision.. :-DMM
But you don't know that so I thank you for you just being friendly and trying to teach me.. :-+
Please correct me any time if I don't make sense in the future too....
I know how to use scope for quite some time, and I do measure voltage with my 6.5 digit voltmeter when I need precision.. :-DMM
But you don't know that so I thank you for you just being friendly and trying to teach me.. :-+
Please correct me any time if I don't make sense in the future too....
No offense intended! :-+ ;)
I see your point ...
You did it correctly. When you "delete" number 3, it's just grayed out. If you add the same one again, it's just re-enabled in the same location. If, instead, a new one is enabled, then the others shift to replace the grayed out ones and the new one is added at the end. I guess you could call the behaviors enable/disable/replace -- no delete.
... they have an offset of 3-4 mV on that scale (0,3-0,4 of div) ...
Well, an Oscilloscope isn't made to measure voltages. It's made to show you voltage characteristics.
Cheers
hammy
How do I completely clear a measurement? I was trying to set my scope to duplicate some of the setups here and if I pressed the wrong measurement, I can't figure out how to make it go away completely. If I delete it, it stays grayed out and a new measurement will just be added.
Long-pressing the 'Measure' button clears all the measures :-)LOL as soon I get to lab I'm gonna try it... Epic...
But here is a screenshot I sent to Rigol (and got no reply :() . All three channels are connected to the compensation terminal, are all identical probes, etc. The only difference is V/div. This is more than a 400% mistake. Does that fall under the definition of "precision" or "accuracy"? I don't think so. I call this a Bug.
Long-pressing the 'Measure' button clears all the measures :-)LOL as soon I get to lab I'm gonna try it... Epic...
Long-pressing the 'Measure' button clears all the measures :-)LOL as soon I get to lab I'm gonna try it... Epic...
I read that in the manual now, press and hold measure to clear all measurements. But if you enable one (I enabled the last one), they all come back grayed out, except the last one enabled. The same thing if I use the All Items Delete button. So how do I get rid of them all and just enable only one again, without excess grayed out clutter coming back?
But here is a screenshot I sent to Rigol (and got no reply :() . All three channels are connected to the compensation terminal, are all identical probes, etc. The only difference is V/div. This is more than a 400% mistake. Does that fall under the definition of "precision" or "accuracy"? I don't think so. I call this a Bug.
BTW, this signal has some jitter and the voltage spikes you see are real. Vrms seems off. :-//
BTW, this signal has some jitter and the voltage spikes you see are real. Vrms seems off. :-//
What happens if you look at "Per.RMS" instead or put a decent number of waveforms on screen?
If you didn't notice, CH2 and CH3 are set to the same V/div.. CH3 also seems to have a slightly higher offset and yet CH2 reading is 4-5 times higherBut here is a screenshot I sent to Rigol (and got no reply :() . All three channels are connected to the compensation terminal, are all identical probes, etc. The only difference is V/div. This is more than a 400% mistake. Does that fall under the definition of "precision" or "accuracy"? I don't think so. I call this a Bug.
The scope specs are rated full scale. If I had a 160V full scale panel meter and fed it 3V, how much absolute error would you expect on that voltage reading? Then it's digital 8 bit with a resolution of 1 bit and consider there is real analog noise, what voltage range are we talking now? Now take that figure and perform some floating point math and see where we are.
I'm not saying the scope is right, but I also think we should keep some things in perspective.
I'm not saying I'm an expert either, but is anything in my screenshot out of spec?
I understand what you folks are saying, but is the number outside the specification? I showed that the same measurement set up more reasonably is within spec. It's the same signal and same measurement.
If you take your trusty high accuracy DVMs and feed them 0.01 volts and have it set to a 100+V range, are you going to complain if one meter says 0.01 and another is 400% off (0.04)?
I totally understand that it is a software bug and could be fixed, but if both channels were closer in value yet still just as far off, then what? It's in spec! (I think anyway...)
I understand what you folks are saying, but is the number outside the specification? I showed that the same measurement set up more reasonably is within spec. It's the same signal and same measurement.
If you take your trusty high accuracy DVMs and feed them 0.01 volts and have it set to a 100+V range, are you going to complain if one meter says 0.01 and another is 400% off (0.04)?
I totally understand that it is a software bug and could be fixed, but if both channels were closer in value yet still just as far off, then what? It's in spec! (I think anyway...)
I said I understood it was a bug, but what real world measurement fails for you, that is my point? It's a nice anecdote; however, if you were really measuring low-level DC or noise in the low mv range, who would be setting the scale to 160V?
Of course, I could be wrong and this is certainly a nuisance, but I've found it's best to use equipment in ways that enhance its performance rather than in ways magnify its weaknesses. That is true for anything.
BTW, I think in single channel mode, the performance of the scope is outstanding, and that is why I think this bug is nuisance, because it certainly need not be this way.
I said I understood it was a bug, but what real world measurement fails for you, that is my point? It's a nice anecdote; however, if you were really measuring low-level DC or noise in the low mv range, who would be setting the scale to 160V?
Of course, I could be wrong and this is certainly a nuisance, but I've found it's best to use equipment in ways that enhance its performance rather than in ways magnify its weaknesses. That is true for anything.
BTW, I think in single channel mode, the performance of the scope is outstanding, and that is why I think this bug is nuisance, because it certainly need not be this way.
I don't know if you for some reason refuse to read what I wrote or you're making fun of me... :-// :-DD
NO milivolts... Read again.. CH1 AND CH2 on 1V/DIV , probe connected only to CH1
NOTHING on CH2, disconnected, no probe connected...
RMS on CH1 2.07V, RMS on CH2 1.9V !!!
With nothing connected to the CH2 BNC. |O
CH2 with NOTHING connected to it measures cca 80% of whatever you are measuring on CH1 ( not flecking micro-volts, but 80 % of data from CH1.....:wtf:)
That fails EVERY real world measurement criteria for that channel and particular RMS measurement..... :--
If I have NOTHING connected to CH2(no probe, BNC is empty), I can't have spillover from CH1 to CH2 of 1.9V RMS... That is 2 DIVs :palm:
But is a serious thing if you need RMS... I can just measure on CH2 and CH3 as a workaround but it is a serous flaw anyways.. And I didn't buy 4CH scope to use it as a 1CH...
I could have gone with 2CH DS2000 series with just a little more money but I needed 4CH for the things I do...
So I want all channels to work normally.. Of course I will make do with it for the time being.. But it should be fixed eventually.. :clap:
I don't want this to become an argument of a sorts. I'm persistent because you seem not to understand the problem, and despite your good will to help, you are talking about unconnected things..
I just want to untangle misunderstanding.. :-+
All the best..
I understand what you folks are saying, but is the number outside the specification? I showed that the same measurement set up more reasonably is within spec. It's the same signal and same measurement.
If you take your trusty high accuracy DVMs and feed them 0.01 volts and have it set to a 100+V range, are you going to complain if one meter says 0.01 and another is 400% off (0.04)?
I totally understand that it is a software bug and could be fixed, but if both channels were closer in value yet still just as far off, then what? It's in spec! (I think anyway...)
+4 digits Can be within spec on a DMM - especially a 4-5-6 digits one. That's least significant digit.
My example was 1 extra digit. But it was most significant digit. And channel 3 set up the same was perfect.
Also, in your example, DMM 1 would usually read higher than DMM 2 but still in spec. In the example channel 2 adds 10 most significant digits only because of CH1. In the same example setting CH1 to GND will get CH2 reading to go from 12 to 2 V RMS.
So no - it has nothing to do with ranges.
...
6. Set CH2 to20V/div..
On CH1 I get 2.07 VRms and on CH2 that has NOTHING connected I read 37. 9V VRms |O :-// :bullshit:
...
6. Set CH2 to20V/div..
On CH1 I get 2.07 VRms and on CH2 that has NOTHING connected I read 37. 9V VRms |O :-// :bullshit:
This part is confusing to me, so I will take a look tonight.
You also said that CH2 is set to 1V/div and you measure 1.9V RMS on CH2 with no input.
That's about the same error either way, so I wonder what would the actual RMS measurement be if you were feeding channel 2 with a signal more appropriate for the channel setup, such as 150V, or even 80V, or even 20V just to see if there is any effect. Why would there be?
Thanks folks for all the efforts. It is all for learning something for me. I'm not sure how we can progress conversations that are simply one-sided. I've said I acknowledge the RMS issue when showing an erroneous measurement on a channel that has no input. One sided because nobody answers why that matters?
Meka is giving a good sample of data that seems reasonable. I would contend that the only sample that matters is the one with the scope showing 20V RMS and the meter 17.5V RMS as a best case, and that is because the tool is being used near its potential. I would not discount the other measurements, however, as they may actually illustrate the problem more specifically.
Anyway, with this best case sample, if we take the meter as absolute truth, is the scope showing data out of spec?
There are two questions in my post here. Dismiss them as you like and continue to parrot your POV, and hence we will not progress. Just keep in mind that I have conceded and acknowledge the issue as you've presented it.
Meka, it does not help to show sxs measurements of two different instruments and just state that the better is your expectation. That is only because I am looking at specs and taking them at face value. I know the ds1054z can do it the same, and that is why I say it's a shame that there is this bug. But again, are those measurements out of spec? Are they, please...?
I've said I acknowledge the RMS issue when showing an erroneous measurement on a channel that has no input. One sided because nobody answers why that matters?Because we have no idea why it is happening, so we don't know what other situations will also cause erroneous measurements, so we can't trust the RMS function at all.
Anyway, with this best case sample, if we take the meter as absolute truth, is the scope showing data out of spec?It's a meaningless question, because Rigol does not specify the operation of the RMS function (or most of the other functions of the scope for that matter). We're left to figure it out for ourselves, which is what we are trying to do here.
I understand what you folks are saying, but is the number outside the specification? I showed that the same measurement set up more reasonably is within spec. It's the same signal and same measurement.
If you take your trusty high accuracy DVMs and feed them 0.01 volts and have it set to a 100+V range, are you going to complain if one meter says 0.01 and another is 400% off (0.04)?
I totally understand that it is a software bug and could be fixed, but if both channels were closer in value yet still just as far off, then what? It's in spec! (I think anyway...)
I think you're missing the point... I'l try to explain, because his example is too elaborate and confusing..
Try this:
(This is with 10X probes and channels set for them)
1. Set timebase to 100 uSec/div..
2. Enable CH1 and CH2, DC coupling, and trigger on CH1, setup trigger to 1.5V to have a stable trace..
3. Set VRMS measurement on both CH1 and CH2..
4. Plug in the probe ONLY to CH1 and connect it to CAL. DO not connect anything to CH2..
5. Set CH1 to 1V/div..
6. Set CH2 to20V/div..
On CH1 I get 2.07 VRms and on CH2 that has NOTHING connected I read 37. 9V VRms |O :-// :bullshit:
It gets even better... now disable CH1... it is still the same... Grounding the coupling or disconnecting the cable will make it go away...
This proves there is a spillover of data from CH1 to CH2 for VRMS... It measures about 10% less than CH1 in raw data, and multiplies that with vertical amplifier ratio.
This is not about how accurate is RMS algorithm and details like such... :popcorn:
It is about the fact that CH2 is showing you data form ANOTHER channel while you don't have anything connected to it ... |O :wtf:
Another thing, Per Vrms is good only for periodic signals... You need this broken RMS for noise, DC and such... So yeah I need this fixed...
Regards..
CH2 Timebase | Small (mV) | Large (V) | Large/Timebase |
1 | 50 | 1.93 | 1.93 |
2 | 56 | 3.86 | 1.93 |
5 | 267 | 9.67 | 1.93 |
10 | 387 | 19.3 | 1.93 |
20 | 791 | 38.6 | 1.93 |
Thanks folks for all the efforts. It is all for learning something for me. I'm not sure how we can progress conversations that are simply one-sided. I've said I acknowledge the RMS issue when showing an erroneous measurement on a channel that has no input. One sided because nobody answers why that matters?
Meka is giving a good sample of data that seems reasonable. I would contend that the only sample that matters is the one with the scope showing 20V RMS and the meter 17.5V RMS as a best case, and that is because the tool is being used near its potential. I would not discount the other measurements, however, as they may actually illustrate the problem more specifically.
Anyway, with this best case sample, if we take the meter as absolute truth, is the scope showing data out of spec?
There are two questions in my post here. Dismiss them as you like and continue to parrot your POV, and hence we will not progress. Just keep in mind that I have conceded and acknowledge the issue as you've presented it.
There is no DC error in channel data.. traces look ok... other measurements seem to be ok but I will be checking soon...
It is probably some stupid counter variable, global variable, array index or something stupid like that in RMS calc..
These things are made as running circular buffers, and when you have few of them its easy enough to not move pointer properly...
It might be that they used ready made RMS function or lib and did not implement it properly..
Any ways, should be easy enough to fix..
How do we make Rigol fix it ? That is the question now...
There is no DC error in channel data.. traces look ok... other measurements seem to be ok but I will be checking soon...
It is probably some stupid counter variable, global variable, array index or something stupid like that in RMS calc..
These things are made as running circular buffers, and when you have few of them its easy enough to not move pointer properly...
It might be that they used ready made RMS function or lib and did not implement it properly..
Any ways, should be easy enough to fix..
How do we make Rigol fix it ? That is the question now...
It might help if we can isolate an exact source of the particular number we're finding. In my case, I found this common ratio that was a single relationship between CH1 and CH2. (e.g., in my case, 1.93 was the minimum voltage).
This thread has really been sidetracked, there's been hardly any discussion of how great it is that all the major bugs seem to be fixed now.
There's no more lockups, the math is fixed... the scope is now at 99.999999% of its full potential. :-+
(Apart from the user interface paradigm of pushing a twisty knob to do everything)
So, just to simplify: the last update is really worth, right?
This thread has really been sidetracked, there's been hardly any discussion of how great it is that all the major bugs seem to be fixed now.Koombiah. But then again if it is an easy fix to eck out even better results - why not?
3.FFT works nicer than before
Long-pressing the 'Measure' button clears all the measures :-)LOL as soon I get to lab I'm gonna try it... Epic...
I read that in the manual now, press and hold measure to clear all measurements. But if you enable one (I enabled the last one), they all come back grayed out, except the last one enabled. The same thing if I use the All Items Delete button. So how do I get rid of them all and just enable only one again, without excess grayed out clutter coming back?
I sent it to Rigol a few days ago. I actually got a response - but before you get hopes high - a response that says where did I get the scope from? So since I got it from Tequipment I assume I'll get a follow up from Rigol NA sometimes in the near or mid or distant future.This thread has really been sidetracked, there's been hardly any discussion of how great it is that all the major bugs seem to be fixed now.Koombiah. But then again if it is an easy fix to eck out even better results - why not?
Sure, but three days ago the RMS thing even wasn't on the radar. The only things being discussed were the math offset and the measurements freezing.
It's amazing how fast things can change. :-//3.FFT works nicer than before
In what way?
So, just to simplify: the last update is really worth, right?
There doesn't seem to be any downsides to updating.
But ... the old curmudgeon in me would like to say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".
Don't upgrade just to see the version number change on screen. There's always a non-zero chance that a failed firmware update will brick a device (any device!)
If the bugs aren't affecting you and you don't need the new XY mode then wait for the next one. You can always apply this update if one day you need to use the math functions (or whatever).
I wasn't able to reproduce the freeze bug yet, so I'm not affraid of that.
I'll just upgrade to this new version to have a nicer XY mode. I just want to know in which firmware version the RMS problem started, or if it is an issue since the beggining.
I wasn't able to reproduce the freeze bug yet, so I'm not affraid of that.
Only 40% of people could reproduce it in the poll that was done here.I'll just upgrade to this new version to have a nicer XY mode. I just want to know in which firmware version the RMS problem started, or if it is an issue since the beggining.
Probably since the beginning.
If you're on an older firmware you can easily check yours before upgrading. That way you'll know if upgrading will make it worse. All you need is two probes and the test signal on the front of the 'scope.
Thanks. I'll check that and if the RMS issue appear in my firmware version I'll upgrade it anyway. I haven't noticed it before, but I think I just got lucky by measuring only with one channel in use.
Thanks. I'll check that and if the RMS issue appear in my firmware version I'll upgrade it anyway. I haven't noticed it before, but I think I just got lucky by measuring only with one channel in use.
Meka77's post contrasting the RMS voltmeter and oscilloscope measurements makes me question the accuracy even when using one channel.
Meka77's post contrasting the RMS voltmeter and oscilloscope measurements makes me question the accuracy even when using one channel.
I've allways been warned that you should never fully trust a scope voltage measure. They are good for "measure" voltage over time, not very accurate measuring just voltage, and those errors with just one channel doesn't seem so off to me, or am I seeing it wrong?
I'm sure it doesn't help that the waveform is clipped at the bottom even though we've said about a million times that the Rigol works with on-screen data.
Even if it wasn't: It's a 8-bit DAC with a very sensitive, very high impedance input and a slight DC offset error. It can only ever be about 5% accurate.
The reading looks entirely reasonable to me when the wave isn't clipped.
I've allways been warned that you should never fully trust a scope voltage measure. They are good for "measure" voltage over time, not very accurate measuring just voltage, and those errors with just one channel doesn't seem so off to me, or am I seeing it wrong?
Those measurements should be accurate to within the oscilloscope specifications but they are not even that. They are also not wrong in a consistent way which points to an algorithm or design problem instead of a calibration problem. The stuff with phantom measurements on other channels is just broken.
There have been other discussions about measurement problems with these Rigol oscilloscopes where measurements change depending on trace positioning and scaling. I suspect that is a problem of design where measurements are made on the display record instead of the acquisition record.
As far as the expected accuracy of a DSO, my old DSOs are all well within their specifications after warming up and automatic calibration. So are my analog oscilloscopes which have measurement capability.
In the second picture amplifier volume pot at MAXIMUM, multimeter and scope are showing closer value, BEACUSE Ch1 IS GROUND COUPLED!!! (That means RMS phantom error voltage does not affect Ch2 anymore) :--
With all respect i'll give up!
If you don't understand what i'm saying or showing, it must be me myself have a problem.
And i'm very sorry to share this confusing issue with you.
Whatever. Anyone curious about that problem click on my profile and read about it from my older posts.
I'm tired, and again i'm sorry.
Have a nice life. ;)
With all respect i'll give up!
If you don't understand what i'm saying or showing, it must be me myself have a problem.
And i'm very sorry to share this confusing issue with you.
Whatever. Anyone curious about that problem click on my profile and read about it from my older posts.
I'm tired, and again i'm sorry.
Have a nice life. ;)
It's a 8-bit DAC with a very sensitive, very high impedance input and a slight DC offset error. It can only ever be about 5% accurate.
The reading looks entirely reasonable to me when the wave isn't clipped.
@Fungus
I'm sorry but you are looking this completely wrong way...
So, just to simplify: the last update is really worth, right?
There doesn't seem to be any downsides to updating.
It's a 8-bit DAC with a very sensitive, very high impedance input and a slight DC offset error. It can only ever be about 5% accurate.
The reading looks entirely reasonable to me when the wave isn't clipped.
@Fungus
I'm sorry but you are looking this completely wrong way...
Fair enough, but the point about 8-bit DAC, etc. still stands.
If you only turn on a single channel or if you only measure on channels 1 and 3 then are the RMS readings reasonable?
If you own a decent true RMS multimeter then make the RMS measurements with that.
Use the scope to look for distortions, clipping, etc., in the output (ie. what it's meant to be used for).
Actually i'm contacted to Rigol Turkey in March about this RMS and other 4.3SP2 related issues. And i got responses too...
meka: houston we have a problem!
rigol: are you hacked your scope?, becasue if you did it, it's gonna out of warranty and scopes do this kind of problems when hacked. (trying to ditch warranty :box: )
meka: no, i'm not! (beacasue it's true, it came already updated from former user... in the background *UninstAll ;D )
rigol: ok. please send your serial number and your problem description
Channel to Channel Isolation: DC to maximum bandwidth: >40 dB
...
Problem is in the third spec: channel separation.... Channel separation should be on order of 10000x, meaning that 10000 mV (10V) connected to one channel, should not induce (yes induce, trough parasitic capacitors and inductances inside scope) more than 1mV of phantom signal in other channels, and that's from DC to 100MHz...
And looking at the traces it seems that scope does that better then specs too, electrically at least.....
Except in RMS measurements.
In which, channel separation between consecutive channel seems to be cca 7.7dB (cca 2.43 times voltage difference) because of stupid software bug...
...
So none of your reasons to downplay this have merit.. I know you just want to make sure all is right and precise and relevant and such..
Thank you for a nice discussion that I hope now resulted in good explanation of what is wrong and why this is important and need to be fixed.. Much more than that HUUGe "pulses/pluses" bug :-DD
@2n3055:
But there is one thing: You can make nice screenshots of your scope very easily, simply and clearly by using several different methods. The resulting screenshot (if you select the PNG default format) is less than 1/5 the filesize of the photos you posted and displays at a reasonable and easy to read 800 pixels wide. Just put a USB thumbdrive into the front panel jack and press the green "print" button underneath the Help button.
Of course it may take a while for the image to be saved to the USB drive.... but the result is generally much better than taking a photograph of the screen.
:-+
Channel to Channel Isolation: DC to maximum bandwidth: >40 dB
...
Problem is in the third spec: channel separation.... Channel separation should be on order of 10000x, meaning that 10000 mV (10V) connected to one channel, should not induce (yes induce, trough parasitic capacitors and inductances inside scope) more than 1mV of phantom signal in other channels, and that's from DC to 100MHz...
And looking at the traces it seems that scope does that better then specs too, electrically at least.....
Except in RMS measurements.
In which, channel separation between consecutive channel seems to be cca 7.7dB (cca 2.43 times voltage difference) because of stupid software bug...
...
So none of your reasons to downplay this have merit.. I know you just want to make sure all is right and precise and relevant and such..
Thank you for a nice discussion that I hope now resulted in good explanation of what is wrong and why this is important and need to be fixed.. Much more than that HUUGe "pulses/pluses" bug :-DD
A few notes:
1. That the 3rd spec is the problem is not saying it like it is. The specification is for the analog front end (where noise floors are established and most channel leakage are created). In fact - the trace for CH2 looks fine even if the RMS text has an error. The problem is not in the 3rd spec - it is in the mathematical function that does the RMS calculation.
Once Math gets involved (any math) there can be a dependency between channels. For example, A+B or AxB or any other function negates the 40dB for the participating channels.
3. Nobody is down playing - (I even sent this to Rigol and will resend my email if I don't hear back from them) - I think the question is what do you do in the meantime. Is this scope No Good? Depends. Certainly, if you must have the ability to measure 4 channels RMS - then this scope, with current firmware, is NO GOOD TO YOU. If you can do with less channels, then I guess what we "down players" (as you call them/us) say is PLEASE DO NOT MEASURE RMS using CHX and CHX+1 until (and if) Rigol issues a software fix.
For me, I personally think all scopes are SH*T - they all have quirks, and you learn to work around them. But this is based on my experience working at a university fab and then at a defense research lab both with unlimited funds (10 years of working with Tek and HP and Anritsu and B&K and many other brands) - over time realizing - or being mentored to realize - that getting a useful physical property from a DMM or a Scope is always hard and needs attention to endless details for the measuring chain. Good research lab rats are always 100% sceptics - for a good reason.
Problem is in the third spec: channel separation.... Channel separation should be on order of 10000x, meaning that 10000 mV (10V) connected to one channel, should not induce (yes induce, trough parasitic capacitors and inductances inside scope) more than 1mV of phantom signal in other channels, and that's from DC to 100MHz...
Not really.Actually i'm contacted to Rigol Turkey in March about this RMS and other 4.3SP2 related issues. And i got responses too...
meka: houston we have a problem!
rigol: are you hacked your scope?, becasue if you did it, it's gonna out of warranty and scopes do this kind of problems when hacked. (trying to ditch warranty :box: )
meka: no, i'm not! (beacasue it's true, it came already updated from former user... in the background *UninstAll ;D )
rigol: ok. please send your serial number and your problem description
Ah, so Rigol helpdesk script is currently like:
1) Greetings
2) ask "Have you hacked your scope?"
3) if NO, ask "What's your problem?"
Interesting... :D
Absolutely correct Karel.. thanks!! It was late, im defense... |O But all reasoning is nevertheless correct..Problem is in the third spec: channel separation.... Channel separation should be on order of 10000x, meaning that 10000 mV (10V) connected to one channel, should not induce (yes induce, trough parasitic capacitors and inductances inside scope) more than 1mV of phantom signal in other channels, and that's from DC to 100MHz...
You made a mistake here. 40dB = 10000x in terms of power ratio.
It is, however, 100x in terms of voltage ratio...
Happened all the time when everybody wanted to root their smartphone and threatened to sue the retail store and the manufacturer when we found out (after they lied to us) and refused to repair them under warranty.It's not the same. You haven't modified the software in an undocumented way, you just fed it a license code, which is an entirely different matter. Of course it would be a problem (and real "hacking") if you patched the firmware, for example, in order to change a logo or whatever. That would be a Modification (capital M intentional).
You have modified the software. We have no idea of what else you did when you touched where you weren't supposed to *washing both hands*
@Fleetz
If you are in Australia Emona Instruments are the best option, the DS-1054Z is $579 AUD plus 10% GST so round $640 odd, I can't link from this device but you can Google them, the $399 price referred to was in US dollars.
Happened all the time when everybody wanted to root their smartphone and threatened to sue the retail store and the manufacturer when we found out (after they lied to us) and refused to repair them under warranty.It's not the same.
You have modified the software. We have no idea of what else you did when you touched where you weren't supposed to *washing both hands*
It means that you are not entitled to complain about a serial decode failure unless you actually purchased the license.Makes totally sense. And that's also why there is an evaluation period of 60 hours ("Try Before You Buy")
And those warnings about voiding warranty when you update the firmware firmware following manufacturer's instructions? I am sure it wouldn't stand in court.i'm afraid it's up to you (or to your government) to verify that (AGCOM here does that sort of things)
The license agreement vou have agreed to says so. If you modify the firmware it is at your own risk, void warranty. You don't like that? Go deal with someone else
CH1 CH2 CH3 CH4
1.69V 1.81V 1.82V 1.82V
Disable Ch2
1.69V ***** 1.82V 1.82V
Disconnect Ch2 probe
1.69V ***** 1.82V 1.82V
Enable Ch2 probe (still disconnected)
1.69V 691mV 1.69V 1.82V
Reconnect Ch2 probe
1.69V 1.81V 1.82V 1.82V
Same as above, but performing the same cycle with Ch3
1.69V 1.81V 1.82V 1.82V
1.69V 1.81V ***** 1.82V
1.69V 1.81V ***** 1.82V
1.69V 1.81V 683mV 1.69V
1.69V 1.81V 1.82V 1.82V
Same as the first two, except I moved the trigger to Ch4
and am performing the cycle with Ch1
1.69V 1.81V 1.82V 1.82V
***** 1.81V 1.82V 1.82V
***** 1.81V 1.82V 1.82V
27.8mV 1.67V 1.82V 1.82V
1.69V 1.81V 1.82V 1.82V
The E.U. directive 1999/44/EC concerning the rights of the consumer with regard to warranty, among other things, stipulates that it is not possible for a EULA or something similar to deny the consumer the right to warranty in such a case. There have been multiple court cases in various European countries that have served to show this is the case, often regarding the 'jailbreaking' of iphones and the like. Unfortunately, having a right and by extension using that right is not always possible without a fight, but at least for the EU market, you *should* officially be able to hack the software without losing your warranty, no matter what the manufacturer claims or what you might agree to as a consumer before or after a purchase.
Yeah, agreed. What good is a warranty for a 400e scope if you have to go to court to get it? But hey, things will improve with time I hope. It's important to remember though that here in the EU, the company you bought the end product from is responsible for honoring the warranty, and not Rigol for example, so choose carefully where you place your order. I've had great success dealing with Batronix (DE) in that regard, and chose them over a supplier in my own country because of their reputation for good service.thought that it was the manufacturer for the first year* (in this case Rigol Technologies EU GmbH, if the scope is an "european" model and it is not imported from outside the union) and the seller for the following years*
I know the fft function of the DS1054Z is very limited, but what kind of stuff would it still be useful for? Can anyone give any examples where the fft function would still be adequate? Would it be of any use on a guitar effects pedal circuit (9-volt preamp circuit) ? Thanks!
Yep. Just because there's better FFTs out there it doesn't mean the DS1054Z FFT is useless. It does a good enough job for many things.I know the fft function of the DS1054Z is very limited, but what kind of stuff would it still be useful for? Can anyone give any examples where the fft function would still be adequate? Would it be of any use on a guitar effects pedal circuit (9-volt preamp circuit) ? Thanks!It is not very limited.
You can use it for all non-serious spectrum analysis stuff, like checking for resonances in function generators, on power supplies, on audio, etc.
It is not very limited. The FFT when taken from memory (only certain timebases) is very good. You can also use the trace version with PC software here (http://hackaday.com/2015/09/22/a-better-spectrum-analyzer-for-your-rigol-scope/) and/or pull all of the data points from memory (very slow, but it works), and you can get a great result.
The main limitation is the 8-bit ADC, and this can be partially overcome by hires or averaging mode.
You can use it for all non-serious spectrum analysis stuff, like checking for resonances in function generators, on power supplies, on audio, etc.
I know the fft function of the DS1054Z is very limited, but what kind of stuff would it still be useful for? Can anyone give any examples where the fft function would still be adequate? Would it be of any use on a guitar effects pedal circuit (9-volt preamp circuit) ? Thanks!
It is not very limited. The FFT when taken from memory (only certain timebases) is very good. You can also use the trace version with PC software here (http://hackaday.com/2015/09/22/a-better-spectrum-analyzer-for-your-rigol-scope/) and/or pull all of the data points from memory (very slow, but it works), and you can get a great result.
The main limitation is the 8-bit ADC, and this can be partially overcome by hires or averaging mode.
You can use it for all non-serious spectrum analysis stuff, like checking for resonances in function generators, on power supplies, on audio, etc.
Hi there,
new to the forum, I registered to throw my hat in the RMS bug arena.
So, I happen to be the incarnation of laziness and my scope (1054Z) is still unhacked and with the firmware it came from the factory more than a year ago.
This means 00.04.02.SP4 (which, I guess, is v00.04.02.03.00).
I did try this verbatim
1. Set timebase to 100 uSec/div..
2. Enable CH1 and CH2, DC coupling, and trigger on CH1, setup trigger to 1.5V to have a stable trace..
3. Set VRMS measurement on both CH1 and CH2..
4. Plug in the probe ONLY to CH1 and connect it to CAL. DO not connect anything to CH2..
5. Set CH1 to 1V/div..
6. Set CH2 to20V/div..
and I do not experience wild values for the RMS voltage on channel 2.
On the contrary, while ch1 is rock solid a 2.10 Vrms, ch2 at 20 V/div (and no probe connected to that channel) shows a rms voltage of 566 mV. Not exactly nil but I believe it to be in line with the background noise and computation errors at that scale. (at 100 V/div the reading becomes 2.83 V)
With the probe connected to channel 2 and to the CAL output, I get at 20 V/div a RMS voltage of 2.04V (which goes to stable 2.10 V at 1V/div)
Did I miss something, or is this proof that the RMS bug has been introduced in later versions of the firmware?
Is there anybody that can confirm or deny this?
(I wanted to update the firmware to the latest version to get the better X-Y mode but now I am doubtful)
You should connect both channels to the CAL terminal to see the bug.
The RMS bug was first introduced with firmware version 00.04.03.01.05 from 2015-06-16. It had been discussed exhaustively about a year ago already (for the new owners of a DS1000Z ;) ). The only disappointment is that Rigol didn't fix it in the recent update. So no need to get nervous about that now, all of those who installed the mentioned update learned to live with that bug and surely will survive the next several months until Rigol comes up with a fix (I'm quite optimistic they will...).
Cheers,
Tom
Ok - Just got confirmation and a case number from Rigol NA for both the Meka77's RMS bug and the Spelling Error. They were able to recreate both and stated that I will be alerted when resolved.
I think the measureable difference will be tiny in practice.
I agree, it is somewhat of a moot point because the sample rate is not there if using more than one channel anyway.
1ch = 1GSa = 10 samples per second @ 100 MHz
2ch = 500MSa = 10 samples per second @ 50 MHz
4ch = 250MSa = 10 samples per second @ 25 MHz
Then general rule of thumb is this:
To reproduce a sine wave with 5% envelope accuracy IF you are using sinx/x interpolation requires 2.5 samples per cycle NOT per second.
So for 1 GS/s the DIGITAL part of the scope could accurately reproduce 400 Mhz sine waves that look like they were modulated 5%. However, most square waves have significant frequency components to at least the 5th harmonic . So this scope in single channel mode could do 80 MHz square waveforms. BUT this is further limited by the analog bandwidth of the scope.
Since you have to reproduce the 5th harmonic reasonably accurately to have square wave a 100Mhz scope would reproduce only a 100/5 or 20 MHz square waveform accurately using sinx/x interpolation. This would also require 100/2.5 samples PER CYCLE or 250MS/s. Stated another way a 100MHz Rigol should be able to accurately reproduce a 20 MHz square wave on all fours channels simultaneously. The same scope would also only be able to do 20 MHz square waves on 2 channels because the analog bandwidth assumed here is 100MHz. The Digital storage bandwidth would however be 40 MHz on square waves. Once again not usable because of the analog bandwidth limitations.
If the interpolation is linear only, and some scopes are. then the 2.5 quote above becomes 10 , which lowers the bandwidth by a factor of 4!
Also certain scopes, Notably Agilent for a long time required a factor of 4 rather than 2.5 due to the interpolation algorithm used. This reduced the usable bandwidth at any given sample rate.
I seem to be able to get this running on Linux (Gentoo specifically), however PyDSR, sigrok, and DSremote all seem to not be able to communicate with my scope over USB. I know it is not simply a permissions issue. DSremote works over LAN.
DSremote worked before I upgraded to the latest firmware. Any Linux using 1054Z owners have any ideas?
You mean not just terrible anymore, just fully broken?
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-usbtmcvisa-interface-is-really-terrible/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-usbtmcvisa-interface-is-really-terrible/)
And what does that mean?
Does the the Rigol app (UltraSigma or UltraScope) still work to send scpi commands?
You mean not just terrible anymore, just fully broken?
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-usbtmcvisa-interface-is-really-terrible/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-usbtmcvisa-interface-is-really-terrible/)
And what does that mean? Does the the Rigol app (UltraSigma or UltraScope) still work to send scpi commands?
BTW, is this where to download the firmware? When I try to navigate from the rigolna site, I get to a form where I have give them all my contact info and serial number.
http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3 (http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3)
I seem to be able to get this running on Linux (Gentoo specifically), however PyDSR, sigrok, and DSremote all seem to not be able to communicate with my scope over USB. I know it is not simply a permissions issue. DSremote works over LAN.
DSremote worked before I upgraded to the latest firmware. Any Linux using 1054Z owners have any ideas?
The latest firmware update (version 00.04.04.00.07) breaks the usbtmc interface.
I seem to be able to get this running on Linux (Gentoo specifically), however PyDSR, sigrok, and DSremote all seem to not be able to communicate with my scope over USB. I know it is not simply a permissions issue. DSremote works over LAN.
DSremote worked before I upgraded to the latest firmware. Any Linux using 1054Z owners have any ideas?
The latest firmware update (version 00.04.04.00.07) breaks the usbtmc interface.
Thank you, at least I can't not worry about trying to track down where the problem is.
I spun up a VM and installed UltraSigma & such and while it appears XP correctly sees and device and installs the driver, nothing seems to actually be able to use it. I however, cannot verify if that is a problem with the scope's firmware or my software setup as I only set things up now to test. However, I can verify it works over LAN in windows as well as with DSremote.
The latest firmware update (version 00.04.04.00.07) breaks the usbtmc interface.
I have my DS1104Z-S updated with firmware 00.04.04.00.07.
My program 'Rigol Bildschirmkopie' works with the USB connection.
But there is no response to the command '*IDN?'.
A combination with other commands work, eg.'*IDN?;:SYST:ERR?'.
Peter
I think the above poster meant to say PyDSA. I can also run PyDSA in Mac OSX.
That said, it seems like the FFT on-scope with the Memory (instead of Trace) option is better than what you can get with PyDSA. And PyDSA for me, is ending in weird ways which require me to reset the USB connection and restart it.
I'll investigate further, later.
Any news about it? Fft function is better on pyDSA or in-scope? I would like to buy this scope and fft function is important for me. Could you please add a screenshot from pyDSA and in-scope fft if possible? Thanks.
Any news about it? Fft function is better on pyDSA or in-scope? I would like to buy this scope and fft function is important for me. Could you please add a screenshot from pyDSA and in-scope fft if possible? Thanks.
From what I gather, FFT is not a strong feature on the 1054Z. See EEVBlog #845.
Again, I think this is somewhat old news. I'm not saying the 1054z is a strong signal analysis tool, but the FFT with Memory mode on is a great deal better than it was back when Dave tested it.
I mostly gonna use the scope for software engineering
if I have to question my tool from time to time, then I rather spend a little more money on something that's more robust. Nothing is worst than having to troubleshoot your tool in the middle of troubleshooting if you know what I mean.
I mostly gonna use the scope for software engineering
I'm not sure what that means....but, in the oscilloscope world bandwidth is king. Ask anybody.
A hacked Rigol has more bandwidth.
PS: In reality you don't spend much time moving the traces up/down, and exactly how much better is the Instek at that? There's two or three people in this forum who criticize Rigols endlessly but no side-by-side comparison videos from them.
Sorry I should have said I will use it for embedded software engineering. The highest SPI/IC2 speed I've encountered is 4 MHz so 50 MHz bandwidth should be enough for me. Not to say more bandwidth is not welcomed. Plus the diff between a 100 MHz and a 50 MHz is not much.
You can watch Dave's GW Instek unboxing video and some other guy's metube video complaining about 1054z UI lag for a comparison. Can you post a video with the latest firmware showing the UI speed of the trace movements?
Have you tried cal signal of your scope?
Can you give us picture of that cal signal?
In the digital realm and oscilloscope's "bandwidth" has very little relation to the frequency of the signal you're looking at.
eg. Imagine you have a single rising edge on screen - that's a 0Hz signal.
On a 100MHz 'scope the trace will rise in half the time that it takes on a 50Mhz 'scope and that's a big difference.
If you're doing digital work and basing a purchasing decision on that rather than bandwidth and number of channels then you're doing it wrong.
Me? I say 4 channels/100Mhz/Serial decoders is a minimum requirement for digital/microcontroller work.
I really don't care what brand you buy, but: Make a shortlist based on that specification then compare prices. Now consider if moving the trace up and down a bit faster is worth that much money.
Fixed it... Turns out it wasn't anything with the scope... or firmware.
I also changed the power extension cord (it's a power splitter as well). I guess it wasn't making good connection and/or some hell of a noise was picked up from somewhere...
In the digital realm and oscilloscope's "bandwidth" has very little relation to the frequency of the signal you're looking at.
eg. Imagine you have a single rising edge on screen - that's a 0Hz signal.
On a 100MHz 'scope the trace will rise in half the time that it takes on a 50Mhz 'scope and that's a big difference.
We're only talking about 2x speed improvement so 5 nSec vs 2.5 nSec? All of the timing specs I've worked with (in embedded software) are in units of uSecs. And I do not design nor implement my software to have tolerances in the tenths of nSecs. So an extra 2.5 nSecs buys me nothing. I can see that you probably would want the best speed possible if you're designing a microcontroller system from scratch. But if you're in that situation, you'd probably want something much higher than 100 MHz. For me (and probably most hobbyist) whom will most likely only use the scope to troubleshoot serial buses, GPIO controlled devices, then the difference between a 50 MHz and a 100 MHz is minimal.
In the digital realm and oscilloscope's "bandwidth" has very little relation to the frequency of the signal you're looking at.
eg. Imagine you have a single rising edge on screen - that's a 0Hz signal.
On a 100MHz 'scope the trace will rise in half the time that it takes on a 50Mhz 'scope and that's a big difference.
We're only talking about 2x speed improvement so 5 nSec vs 2.5 nSec? All of the timing specs I've worked with (in embedded software) are in units of uSecs. And I do not design nor implement my software to have tolerances in the tenths of nSecs. So an extra 2.5 nSecs buys me nothing. I can see that you probably would want the best speed possible if you're designing a microcontroller system from scratch. But if you're in that situation, you'd probably want something much higher than 100 MHz. For me (and probably most hobbyist) whom will most likely only use the scope to troubleshoot serial buses, GPIO controlled devices, then the difference between a 50 MHz and a 100 MHz is minimal.If you're doing digital work and basing a purchasing decision on that rather than bandwidth and number of channels then you're doing it wrong.
Me? I say 4 channels/100Mhz/Serial decoders is a minimum requirement for digital/microcontroller work.
I really don't care what brand you buy, but: Make a shortlist based on that specification then compare prices. Now consider if moving the trace up and down a bit faster is worth that much money.
Do a search for "Rigol 1054z problem" on youtube and watch NatureAndTech's video and see if you'd want to live with that kind of lag. I don't feel serial decoder is a must have because after all, all serial protocols are asychronous so once you capture one transaction waveform manually and examined and debugged it to make it work, then all subsequent transactions will work. What's the point of having a decoder to tell me what my data is? It's nice to have, but not really needed at lease at the software development role. Plus having a serial decoder won't remove the requirement of manually inspecting the transaction waveforms especially if you're doing bit banging.
My list looks like this
1. 4 channels
2. 50 MHz minimum. 100 MHz ideal.
3. Deep capture memory depth (none of that Tek 12.5K point crap)
4. Robust.
Spoken like a true softie :)
100MHz was barely adequate for digital logic in the 1970s, and speeds have increased a little since then. Even jellybean logic parts have setup and hold times of ~1ns and propagation times of ~2ns.
You should realize that a 50 MHz square wave running into a 50 MHz scope will display as a sine wave. There is just not enough bandwidth to allow the 3rd, 5th, 7th ... harmonics. Even a 25 MHz square wave will look odd because there isn't enough room for the odd harmonics.
The point is, you may or may not be able to see exactly what a signal looks like or where it is switching. This gets particularly important with clocked protocols like SPI.
I like the SPI decoding on the 1054Z. I know it is only decoding what is on the screen but with a 1 MHz clock, I can get 12 bytes across the screen with perfect decoding. No, I can't decode the Library of Congress from the buffer. I have printf() for that kind of nonsense. Once I have a set of functions that correctly transfers data, I will probably not be using the scope on those signals again. But I need to see the setup time on CS', I need to understand the relationship between MOSI & MISO edges versus CLK. In fact, I want to use the cursor to measure the setup and hold times just to be certain I am in spec. Partly because 1 MHz is terribly slow and I'll eventually want to kick it up to 10 MHz or higher.
I bought my 1054 SPECIFICALLY for the 4 channels. I actually gave up bandwidth over my Tektronix 485 which can do 350 MHz. Four channel decoding of SPI is EXACTLY why I bought the thing. I am working with the W5500 TCP/IP chip and everything is transferred over SPI. Faster is better than slower...
* I have other Irks - like the slow saving of screenshots to USB memory (I love to annotate debugging or problem resolution sessions, and screenshot a lot - and that drives me nuts sometimes).
Were I to use it for work - depending on the type of work - of course - it may not be up to the job. But as a home lab having the extra features at an affordable price makes sense.
Spoken like a true softie :)
100MHz was barely adequate for digital logic in the 1970s, and speeds have increased a little since then. Even jellybean logic parts have setup and hold times of ~1ns and propagation times of ~2ns.
Precisely my point. If you're gonna do hardware design, you probably want something better than 100 MHz. What I'll mostly do is to interface say something like a Raspberry PI, Arduino, Beagle Board or what not to external peripherals like ADCs, DACs, cameras, LCDs, LEDs, etc.. I won't be designing my own Raspberry PI nor any of the external peripherals. So we're talking about serial bus and GPIO debugging mostly. Max SPI speed is 4 MHz, UART you'll be mostly be under 1 MHz, hack even DVD video is only like 9 Mbps. So a 50 MHz is fully capable of debugging all these things over a serial bus.
Don't get me wrong, I'd delighted to get a 100 MHz scope, but if I have to choose between a slugish/buggy 100 MHz and a fluid/robust 50 MHz, I think I will choose the 50 MHz.
I don't remember when was the last time I had to look at anything higher than 4 MHz.
Just write the code to work at 10 Mhz, then when you're ready, just cut all the setup time and clock by 8 and you've got 80 MHz.
I don't remember when was the last time I had to look at anything higher than 4 MHz.
Equating signal bitrate to oscilloscope bandwidth after reading the last couple of pages tells us something.Just write the code to work at 10 Mhz, then when you're ready, just cut all the setup time and clock by 8 and you've got 80 MHz.
Also: Believing that digital signals aren't affected by the pieces of wire they have to travel down...they just arrive, right? If the code is correct, that's all that matters. :-+
:scared:
Also: Believing that digital signals aren't affected by the pieces of wire they have to travel down...they just arrive, right? If the code is correct, that's all that matters. :-+Depends on what you are debugging. If you are paying attention to software maybe you don't need to look into signal integrity unless you see something really odd.
You could use a "microprocessor brake" to slowdown your system during debugging phase.
Similar as what was possible with the "Amiga Bremse" from Rex Datentechnik to slow down the Motorola 68000 microprocessor in the Commodore Amiga 500 computer :)
http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=1704 (http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=1704)
I actually have this product, but have never found the time up to now to test it on my Amiga 500 :)
Depends on what you are debugging. If you are paying attention to software maybe you don't need to look into signal integrity unless you see something really odd.
If you wish to continue to snip and ignore points about signal integrity, then that's your choice.
Quoting a digital signal speed in MHz "Max SPI speed is 4 MHz" is revealing, and indicative.
There is a lot of difference between something capable of basic visualisation of UART/SPI/GPIO levels (a 10MHz scope would suffice), and a 50/100NHz scope.
If you wish to continue to snip and ignore points about signal integrity, then that's your choice.
Quoting a digital signal speed in MHz "Max SPI speed is 4 MHz" is revealing, and indicative.
There is a lot of difference between something capable of basic visualisation of UART/SPI/GPIO levels (a 10MHz scope would suffice), and a 50/100NHz scope.
I will mostly use off the shelf modules, ie Arduinio and its shields etc, so signal integrity should not be an issue. But even a 50 MHz scope is capable of troubleshooting "signal integrity" for a 10 MHz signal no? I don't know how a 100 Mhz one is much better than a 50 MHz one. Slightly better, but you'll still leave wanting more.
Ok. So you have all convince me, maybe I spend more $ to get a 100 or even a 200 MHz one.
I will mostly use off the shelf modules, ie Arduinio and its shields etc, so signal integrity should not be an issue. But even a 50 MHz scope is capable of troubleshooting "signal integrity" for a 10 MHz signal no?
I don't know how a 100 Mhz one is much better than a 50 MHz one.
I think you have already agreed with my statement that the serial decoder not much of use when you said "In fact, I want to use the cursor to measure the setup and hold times just to be certain I am in spec.". If you have to measure the waveform with the cursor, then why do you still need to use the decoder? I have worked with quite a few people over the years and with one exception one time when some guy brought in an expensive logic analyzer with build in SPI decoder and we played with it a little like a toy, I have not see a single person use any serial decoder ever.
Two words: "Square edges".
Square waves, single rising edges, anything with a square corner is made up of an infinite series of frequency components (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_wave#Examining_the_square_wave).
A 10Mhz square wave shown on a 50Mhz scope will only have the first and second harmonics intact, the third will be attenuated by 3dB and the fourth harmonic will be almost gone.
Only two-and-a-bit harmonics is a serious distortion of the input signal. Not square at all. A 50Mhz 'scope simply cannot display a 10MHz square wave properly even with perfect, inductance-free wires and connections (which don't exist).
On a 100Mhz 'scope you'll have the third, fourth and fifth harmonics intact, plus some of the sixth. That's not a small difference from a 50MHz 'scope, it's huge.
PS: And in reality a hacked DS1054Z has about 130MHz bandwidth (measured) so you'll have all of the sixth harmonic and a lot of the seventh. And that's why we like them, slightly sluggish vertical movement notwithstanding. $400 for that much bandwidth and four channels is something that can't be ignored.
As I said earlier: Find that performance from other manufacturers and compare the price. If slightly faster controls is worth that much to you, go ahead...
We don't put up with the DS1054Z's idiosyncrasies because we're ignorant, unrefined clods who don't appreciate the finer things in life like you do. We put up with them because we can have a decent 'scope plus a whole lot of other toys besides - $600-$800 buys a lot of other stuff.
According to Agilent the rule of thumb is f(bw) = 5 * f(clk) to get the 5th harmonic.
Nope. 5 * f(clk) is only the second harmonic.
f(clk) is the base frequency
3*f(clk) is the first harmonic
5*f(clk) is the second harmonic
7*f(clk) is the third harmonic
etc.
Nope. 5 * f(clk) is only the second harmonic.
f(clk) is the base frequency
3*f(clk) is the first harmonic
5*f(clk) is the second harmonic
etc.
So you're saying the Agilent doc is wrong?
5 times the fundamental is the 5th harmonic, or 4th overtone. However, it is the 3rd /component/ of the square wave.
Harmonics are just the integer multiples of the fundamental (the first harmonic being 1*f), the even ones just happen to have a zero amplitude in a square wave.
OK.
Whatever naming scheme we use it's a fact that:
a) A 50MHz 'scope shows less than the first three harmonics of a 10MHz square wave.
b) That's not very square (see image above).
Also: One of the ideas of having more bandwidth is to know whether the slow rise times you're seeing are due to the 'scope or due to the wires. To do that you need a 'scope that's faster than the wires, not the same speed.
(in theory you can never have enough bandwidth)
So ... 50MHz bandwidth to look at a 10MHz signal? It's too close to the limit for my liking.
* I have other Irks - like the slow saving of screenshots to USB memory (I love to annotate debugging or problem resolution sessions, and screenshot a lot - and that drives me nuts sometimes).
Why don't you connect the scope directly to your pc instead of using a usb-pen?
That works much faster. Screenshots are saved on the pc almost instantly.
No need to hassle with a usb-pen.
Were I to use it for work - depending on the type of work - of course - it may not be up to the job. But as a home lab having the extra features at an affordable price makes sense.
I can't imagine a professional who uses a scope in this priceclass at work.
Imho, this is a scope for hobbyists for use at home.
Nothing wrong with that.
If you wish to continue to snip and ignore points about signal integrity, then that's your choice.
Quoting a digital signal speed in MHz "Max SPI speed is 4 MHz" is revealing, and indicative.
There is a lot of difference between something capable of basic visualisation of UART/SPI/GPIO levels (a 10MHz scope would suffice), and a 50/100NHz scope.
I will mostly use off the shelf modules, ie Arduinio and its shields etc, so signal integrity should not be an issue. But even a 50 MHz scope is capable of troubleshooting "signal integrity" for a 10 MHz signal no? I don't know how a 100 Mhz one is much better than a 50 MHz one. Slightly better, but you'll still leave wanting more.
Ok. So you have all convince me to maybe spend more $ to get a 100 or even a 200 MHz one.
But they are not! The edges are different. Read the paragraph
It doesn't really matter if the frequency is 1GHz or 1 Hz, the key parameter is the rise/fall time and that is the source of all our problems.
OK.
Whatever naming scheme we use it's a fact that:
a) A 50MHz 'scope shows less than the first three harmonics of a 10MHz square wave.
b) That's not very square (see image above).
Also: One of the ideas of having more bandwidth is to know whether the slow rise times you're seeing are due to the 'scope or due to the wires. To do that you need a 'scope that's faster than the wires, not the same speed.
(in theory you can never have enough bandwidth)
So ... 50MHz bandwidth to look at a 10MHz signal? It's too close to the limit for my liking.
I have to disagree. If you look at the Agilent screen shots here http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf) of a 100 Mhz signal captured using a 500 Mhz and a 1 GHz scope, the two square waves look almost identical.
I have to disagree. If you look at the Agilent screen shots here http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf) of a 100 Mhz signal captured using a 500 Mhz and a 1 GHz scope, the two square waves look almost identical.
I have to disagree. If you look at the Agilent screen shots here http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf) of a 100 Mhz signal captured using a 500 Mhz and a 1 GHz scope, the two square waves look almost identical.
You mean this?
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=246700;image)
Pure marketing crap.
Obviously you don't believe a word I say, so... I'll throw it open: Who here can measure a square wave at 20% of their scopes rated bandwidth and get a beautiful image like that?
Back here in the real world we have images like this:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=246702;image)
That's a 10MHz signal on a 25MHz 'scope (http://shalewyn.com/indexer.php?m=6502homebrew&n=6502construction), and guess what? It agrees perfectly with the theory of harmonics I posted above.
( it's the best image I could find in ten seconds of googling...but it demonstrates it beautifully)
If you're happy with square waves that look like that then carry on reading Siglent sales brochures. :popcorn:
I meant in the scope of this argument :) why 50 MHz is no good when it should be.. and as an example i brought an arm mcu which is used by a lot of hobbyistBut they are not! The edges are different. Read the paragraph
It doesn't really matter if the frequency is 1GHz or 1 Hz, the key parameter is the rise/fall time and that is the source of all our problems.
Is it critical races you are trying to find? I can't say I love a good race condition error - but to say that that is "the source of all our problems" which I assume to mean "the only use for a scope" - I strongly disagree. I like using a scope on analog circuits as well, on sensors, as well as for power supplies, and sometimes even to see if a silly circuit is doing anything or stone dead...
However, if races are your thing - and especially with high speed digital circuits - the DS1054 is probably not your scope.
I have to disagree. If you look at the Agilent screen shots here http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf) of a 100 Mhz signal captured using a 500 Mhz and a 1 GHz scope, the two square waves look almost identical.
You mean this?
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=246700;image)
Pure marketing crap.
Obviously you don't believe a word I say, so... I'll throw it open: Who here can measure a square wave at 20% of their scopes rated bandwidth and get a beautiful image like that?
Back here in the real world we have images like this:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=246702;image)
That's a 10MHz signal on a 25MHz 'scope (http://shalewyn.com/indexer.php?m=6502homebrew&n=6502construction), and guess what? It agrees perfectly with the theory of harmonics I posted above.
( it's the best image I could find in ten seconds of googling...but it demonstrates it beautifully)
If you're happy with square waves that look like that then carry on reading Siglent sales brochures. :popcorn:
Not even close to identical...
On the 100 MHz scope the rise time is 2.986 ns
On the 500 MHz scope the rise time is 812 ps
On the 1 GHz scope the rise time is 615 ps
And, finally, on the 2 GHz scope the rise time is about right at 520 ps.
The difference between the 100 MHz and 500 MHz scope is huge. At 5x, things start to look better but it's not until 20x that the waveform is nearly right. Pick 10x... This is consistent with most other measurement 'truisms'. If you want to measure to 0.x V, make sure the meter can read to 0.0x V.
I have to disagree. If you look at the Agilent screen shots here http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf) of a 100 Mhz signal captured using a 500 Mhz and a 1 GHz scope, the two square waves look almost identical.
You mean this?
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=246700;image)
Pure marketing crap.
Obviously you don't believe a word I say, so... I'll throw it open: Who here can measure a square wave at 20% of their scopes rated bandwidth and get a beautiful image like that?
Back here in the real world we have images like this:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=246702;image)
That's a 10MHz signal on a 25MHz 'scope (http://shalewyn.com/indexer.php?m=6502homebrew&n=6502construction), and guess what? It agrees perfectly with the theory of harmonics I posted above.
( it's the best image I could find in ten seconds of googling...but it demonstrates it beautifully)
If you're happy with square waves that look like that then carry on reading Siglent sales brochures. :popcorn:
25 MHz doesn't even give the 3rd harmonic. You need to cover at least the 3rd harmonic (a 30 MHz scope) to get some kind of square wave. A 50 MHz scope would give you a nice square wave.
You are missing the point. the difference is in the edge because of the different risetime of the scope, which is heavily influenced by the channel bandwidthNot even close to identical...
On the 100 MHz scope the rise time is 2.986 ns
On the 500 MHz scope the rise time is 812 ps
On the 1 GHz scope the rise time is 615 ps
And, finally, on the 2 GHz scope the rise time is about right at 520 ps.
The difference between the 100 MHz and 500 MHz scope is huge. At 5x, things start to look better but it's not until 20x that the waveform is nearly right. Pick 10x... This is consistent with most other measurement 'truisms'. If you want to measure to 0.x V, make sure the meter can read to 0.0x V.
Cycle period of 100 MHz = 10 nSecs. The error between the 1GHz and the 500 Mhz scope is 0.2 nSecs. Relative error between the two scopes compared to the signal frequency is 0.2/10 = 2%. 2% error should be ok for home use no?
You are missing the point. the difference is in the edge because of the different risetime of the scope, which is heavily influenced by the channel bandwidth
You are missing the point. the difference is in the edge because of the different risetime of the scope, which is heavily influenced by the channel bandwidth
I guess I'm really missing the point. I know the rise time is not gonna be as accurate as the one with the higher bandwidth (but the higher bandwidth is not exactly the same as the actual rise time anyway), but say a 50 MHz scope has 15 nSecs extra error over a 100 MHz one, if I write my code to add at least say 30 nSecs over any timing specs, then why does a 15 nSecs error matter? And at 10 Mhz, I can comfortably add 30 nSecs to any timing spec.
Sigh. What on earth makes you think that in a real system you will have an ideal input signal, e.g. like a square wave from a signal generator
In the real world you have imperfect signal sources transmitted through imperfect interconnections to imperfect receivers. Then you have to add in the effects of imperfect power and grounds, e.g. ground bounce and decoupling. Not to mention crosstalk and interference.
All of those real world effects are classified "signal integrity", and lead to intermittent operation. If you want something to work reliably, then you have to measure the analogue effects that will affect your "digital" signals. That means measuring transients that are within your logic's response times - and those are independent of your circuit's clock rate.
But don't worry; many expensive consultants make a good living sorting out problems cause by that kind of lack of understanding.
Sigh. What on earth makes you think that in a real system you will have an ideal input signal, e.g. like a square wave from a signal generator
In the real world you have imperfect signal sources transmitted through imperfect interconnections to imperfect receivers. Then you have to add in the effects of imperfect power and grounds, e.g. ground bounce and decoupling. Not to mention crosstalk and interference.
All of those real world effects are classified "signal integrity", and lead to intermittent operation. If you want something to work reliably, then you have to measure the analogue effects that will affect your "digital" signals. That means measuring transients that are within your logic's response times - and those are independent of your circuit's clock rate.
But don't worry; many expensive consultants make a good living sorting out problems cause by that kind of lack of understanding.
We're switching from rise/fall time to "signal integrity" again? I mean come on, I'm driving a SPI/IC2 signal from the uC to some chip/module at home. How imperfect could it get? Unless your home is a power substation, then you shouldn't have to worry about "signal integrity". I mean if you really want to catch all possible signal integrity problems, then mine as well skip the 100 MHz ('cause it ain't much different than a 50 Mhz if you looking at a 10 MHz signal) get a 1GHz and get it over with.
I have to disagree. If you look at the Agilent screen shots here http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5733EN.pdf) of a 100 Mhz signal captured using a 500 Mhz and a 1 GHz scope, the two square waves look almost identical.
You mean this?
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=246700;image)
Pure marketing crap.
Obviously you don't believe a word I say, so... I'll throw it open: Who here can measure a square wave at 20% of their scopes rated bandwidth and get a beautiful image like that?
Back here in the real world we have images like this:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=246702;image)
That's a 10MHz signal on a 25MHz 'scope (http://shalewyn.com/indexer.php?m=6502homebrew&n=6502construction), and guess what? It agrees perfectly with the theory of harmonics I posted above.
( it's the best image I could find in ten seconds of googling...but it demonstrates it beautifully)
If you're happy with square waves that look like that then carry on reading Siglent sales brochures. :popcorn:
25 MHz doesn't even give the 3rd harmonic. You need to cover at least the 3rd harmonic (a 30 MHz scope) to get some kind of square wave. A 50 MHz scope would give you a nice square wave.
After checking out the link you showed me, although the 4 MHz capture on a 25 MHz looks passable for home use, but I think you're right, I do want at least a 100 MHz scope. Thanks for showing me the way!
Transition time and signal integrity are intimately intertwined. You very deeply fail to understand, and have some reading to do.
For a taster, have a look at http://www.edn.com/collections/4435129/Bogatin-s-Rules-of-Thumb (http://www.edn.com/collections/4435129/Bogatin-s-Rules-of-Thumb)
I suggest an order of 0, 8, 7, 19, then the others.
If you don't understand why inductance and capacitance are important, then please don't design/integrate any hardware for a system that has to be reliable.
A 1-pole AFE filter would only make sense if you had plenty of sample rate to burn. Most scopes are more aggressive.
Dropping CS' is a separate line of C that occurs before spi.write() because the datafield can be arbitrarily long. Same with raising CS'. There's not much chance I can violate the setup and hold times using C but it's good to measure anyway. It sometimes happens that the SPI gadget is still shifting when CS' is raised. Since I didn't write the mbed SPI library, I don't know whether they waited for transmission of the last byte to be complete or returned after the last byte was stuffed in the shift register.
I didn't use the cursors to check the SCK MOSI or MISO, I just shifted the traces up over the SCK so I could check the edges and verify I was in mode 0.
Another gotcha with C is using bitfields. They aren't guaranteed to be in any particular alignment within an unsigned char and that can make a HUGE difference (easily discovered by decoding the SPI string) when writing the 3rd byte of the W5500 command. I had to scrap that idea. But I WANT bit fields! So, I'm looking at coding the thing in Ada.
But, you're right, for your needs the more responsive controls are the deciding factor. I simply don't care about the HMI. I don't spend nearly as much time twiddling the knobs as I do analyzing the screen display. And I didn't want to spend much money on a digital scope...
Rigols have very shallow rolloffs. The DS1102E in the video dedicates 60% of its Nyquist bandwidth to rolloff as opposed to nameplate bandwidth! This cost Rigol dearly -- they had to overclock, dither, and pull all sorts of tricks to get there at their price point -- but it shows in the smooth response that doesn't ring. You aren't just seeing the 5th harmonic, but also the 7th and 9th, and 11th with increasing attenuation. That's why it's smooth, and that's one reason why Rigol comes so heavily recommended. Use a brick-wall filter and you'll get your ringing.
Rigols have very shallow rolloffs. The DS1102E in the video dedicates 60% of its Nyquist bandwidth to rolloff as opposed to nameplate bandwidth!
Surely a Tek, Agilent, GW Instek can match that no?
Rigols have very shallow rolloffs. The DS1102E in the video dedicates 60% of its Nyquist bandwidth to rolloff as opposed to nameplate bandwidth!
Surely a Tek, Agilent, GW Instek can match that no?
But not OWON?
Even though it's just a single capacitor and a resistor (according to your spice simulation....)
it is exactly the same, look at the edges. that's because the square wave is bandlimited so its risetime is < 12ns, according to the datasheet, and it will be like this at all frequencies.A 1-pole AFE filter would only make sense if you had plenty of sample rate to burn. Most scopes are more aggressive.
I found a video showing a 10 MHz and 20 MHz on a 100 MHz Rigol scope. Of course the 10 Mhz looks better, but to me the 20 MHz is doable for home use. The peak voltage measured are the same and so are the rise/fall times. 4:21 and 4:31 time mark.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQjwZey-Y1Q (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQjwZey-Y1Q)
According to Agilent the rule of thumb is f(bw) = 5 * f(clk) to get the 5th harmonic.
Nope. 5 * f(clk) is only the second harmonic.
f(clk) is the base frequency
3*f(clk) is the first harmonic
5*f(clk) is the second harmonic
7*f(clk) is the third harmonic
etc.
heatbreak is correct,as he is using the correct terminology.
Hello. Can I enter a bnc antenna like this
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1040mm-Telescopic-Antenna-Q9-BNC-Connector-12mm-Dia-Portable-FM-Radio-Scanner-/201507365072?hash=item2eeac660d0:g:OoEAAOSwuAVW1Yv~ (http://www.ebay.com/itm/1040mm-Telescopic-Antenna-Q9-BNC-Connector-12mm-Dia-Portable-FM-Radio-Scanner-/201507365072?hash=item2eeac660d0:g:OoEAAOSwuAVW1Yv~)
in the ds1054z? Thanks
heatbreak is correct,as he is using the correct terminology.
Using the correct terminology makes a 50MHz scope able to display a 10MHz square wave perfectly.
Got it! :-+
heatbreak is correct,as he is using the correct terminology.
Using the correct terminology makes a 50MHz scope able to display a 10MHz square wave perfectly.
Got it! :-+
No,but making up your own terminology on the spot makes you look like you don't know what you are talking about.
Yes,5 times the fundamental frequency will allow you to display a useable square wave,
It will obviously not be a perfect rendition.
In that part of your argument you are correct.
I was pointing out that heatbreak's quoted "rule of thumb" was correct (as far as it goes),& that your understanding of harmonics seemed to be a bit confused.
I am a bit at odds with the "5f(clk)" rule,as it seems to assume a fairly strange response curve,where the response is still flat at (for the above case) 50MHz.
Many "50 MHz" 'scopes would be 3dB down at that point.
The rule I learnt many years ago was "7 times the fundamental",which would move the 5th harmonic out of the rolloff,with a more accurate (but still not perfect) rendition of the 10MHz square wave.
A square wave will start to look square at the 3rd harmonic.
Maybe some really strong rf signals or not? I have a raspberry which acts as transmitter with https://github.com/F5OEO/rpitx for different frequencies and modulations.The RF spectrum is really busy and polluted. Radio receivers must do quite a filtering in order to pull a useful signal.
The rule I learnt many years ago was "7 times the fundamental",which would move the 5th harmonic out of the rolloff,with a more accurate (but still not perfect) rendition of the 10MHz square wave.
Maybe some really strong rf signals or not? I have a raspberry which acts as transmitter with https://github.com/F5OEO/rpitx for different frequencies and modulations.I am using a cheap SDR dongle for that. don't want to trash money on a spectrum analyzer if i only need to check wether the signal is present
A square wave will start to look square at the 3rd harmonic.
Of what importance, other than to an artist, is what is "looks like", i.e. its appearance?
What's important is the effect a waveform has on the circuit, or the significance of the measurements that can (and cannot) be made.
In a circuit where the electronics respond to a 1ns event (e.g. reflection transient, crosstalk, ESD, or noise) then who cares what a 1Hz waveform "looks like" on a 10MHz scope.
A square wave will start to look square at the 3rd harmonic.
Of what importance, other than to an artist, is what is "looks like", i.e. its appearance?
What's important is the effect a waveform has on the circuit, or the significance of the measurements that can (and cannot) be made.
In a circuit where the electronics respond to a 1ns event (e.g. reflection transient, crosstalk, ESD, or noise) then who cares what a 1Hz waveform "looks like" on a 10MHz scope.
Yes you're right. I finally understand what you all meant by it's the rise time that counts. It's because
riseTime_nSecs = 0.35 / bw_ghz
riseTime_nSecs = 0.35 / 0.05 = 7 nSecs for a 50 MHz scope
riseTime_nSecs = 0.35 / 0.1 = 3.5 nSecs for a 100 MHz scope
So if a signal has a rise time of 3.5 nSecs, then it has the potential to produce frequencies up to 100 MHz and if this signal is picked up by a part of the circuit that acts like a filter that allows, say, 100 Mhz to pass, then you'd have a 100 Mhz signal in your system. Am I close? If so, then I see why you'd want as high a bandwidth in your scope as possible. Thanks for all that replied. I learned something new.
Forget the concept of "0V" or ground or earth, since they are all fiction that has some use in some limited instances.
Forget the concept of "0V" or ground or earth, since they are all fiction that has some use in some limited instances.
After reading that, I felt like asking if there is such a thing as a standard voltage (or standard ground), kinda like we have a GPS frequency standard and some way of determining absolute power (dBm). But then what you are saying suggests that V is merely relative, like dB. Yet, V seems to be a fundamental component of power.
Forget the concept of "0V" or ground or earth, since they are all fiction that has some use in some limited instances.
voltage is a difference of two potentials between two points in the space.
zero is and can only be arbitrary
difference
that's the key word. voltage, difference of potentials, is a result of an integral which is always a difference between two quantities. "Zero Volts" only means that the two points you are measuring are at the same potential.
Forget the concept of "0V" or ground or earth, since they are all fiction that has some use in some limited instances.
After reading that, I felt like asking if there is such a thing as a standard voltage (or standard ground), kinda like we have a GPS frequency standard and some way of determining absolute power (dBm). But then what you are saying suggests that V is merely relative, like dB. Yet, V seems to be a fundamental component of power.
If such thing was needed, the earth is the absolute 0.
eg. I could (theoretically) examine two objects in complete isolation and tell you the voltage difference between them when they are brought together.
Forget the concept of "0V" or ground or earth, since they are all fiction that has some use in some limited instances.
After reading that, I felt like asking if there is such a thing as a standard voltage (or standard ground), kinda like we have a GPS frequency standard and some way of determining absolute power (dBm). But then what you are saying suggests that V is merely relative, like dB. Yet, V seems to be a fundamental component of power.
If such thing was needed, the earth is the absolute 0.
If only that was true, it would make engineering certain systems much simpler.
Start by considering why, in a thunderstorm, you are advised to keep your two feet together (amongst other advice). Consider what happens when there is a lightning strike nearby and large currents flow through the ground you are standing on. Hint: you don't want sufficient potential difference between your feet that some current goes throught your body.
If you don't like high current engineering, then consider antennas. Start by considering the physical processes by which monopole antennas "appear" to be twice their physical length. Hint: it is because currents flowing in the earth create a virtual image of the real physical antenna.
Huh? You mean, without having a common reference potential to refer to in you examination of the individual objects?
As far as standards go, there's the Josephson voltage standard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephson_voltage_standard). Interesting stuff.
Forget the concept of "0V" or ground or earth, since they are all fiction that has some use in some limited instances.
After reading that, I felt like asking if there is such a thing as a standard voltage (or standard ground), kinda like we have a GPS frequency standard and some way of determining absolute power (dBm). But then what you are saying suggests that V is merely relative, like dB. Yet, V seems to be a fundamental component of power.
If such thing was needed, the earth is the absolute 0.
If only that was true, it would make engineering certain systems much simpler.
Start by considering why, in a thunderstorm, you are advised to keep your two feet together (amongst other advice). Consider what happens when there is a lightning strike nearby and large currents flow through the ground you are standing on. Hint: you don't want sufficient potential difference between your feet that some current goes throught your body.
If you don't like high current engineering, then consider antennas. Start by considering the physical processes by which monopole antennas "appear" to be twice their physical length. Hint: it is because currents flowing in the earth create a virtual image of the real physical antenna.
You are considering extreme conditions. But even in that conditions, the lightning strike just flows to the phisical ground because the earth doesn't have any potential and the current allways flows to the lowest potential possible with less resistence. So I don't see your point...
And also, I don't see any significan simplicity considering earth as the absolute 0V. Like some guys said here, voltage is just a matter of potential difference and the earth potential is a bit irrelevant.
The whole "how much bandwidth is necessary to display a square wave" issue is why I prefer to think of oscilloscope performance in terms of rise and fall time. And "peak detect glitch capture" when discussing DSOs.
Huh? You mean, without having a common reference potential to refer to in you examination of the individual objects?No, I mean with a common reference potential.
OK, that I can understand, thanks for clarifying. I would not call that "examining them in complete isolation", though, since you need the reference "connection" between them.
OK, that I can understand, thanks for clarifying. I would not call that "examining them in complete isolation", though, since you need the reference "connection" between them.
The 'connection' can be an agreed-upon voltage standard, it doesn't have to be the same physical object.
You could use two "reference objects", which you have brought together and brought to the same potential at some point in the past, and then carried one to the moon.
Hmm, we are still not on the same page here.good luck :palm:
You could use two "reference objects", which you have brought together and brought to the same potential at some point in the past, and then carried one to the moon.
OK, I see the confusion: The point is that you can create those two reference objects in complete isolation.
(using a universal standard for voltage reference objects)
I pasted a link earlier about the method used to establish a voltage standard. However, it would be best to move this discussion to its own thread. Perhaps create it in the metrology forum? It's a good topic and deserves to be fully explored.
Forget the concept of "0V" or ground or earth, since they are all fiction that has some use in some limited instances.
After reading that, I felt like asking if there is such a thing as a standard voltage (or standard ground), kinda like we have a GPS frequency standard and some way of determining absolute power (dBm). But then what you are saying suggests that V is merely relative, like dB. Yet, V seems to be a fundamental component of power.
If such thing was needed, the earth is the absolute 0.
If only that was true, it would make engineering certain systems much simpler.
Start by considering why, in a thunderstorm, you are advised to keep your two feet together (amongst other advice). Consider what happens when there is a lightning strike nearby and large currents flow through the ground you are standing on. Hint: you don't want sufficient potential difference between your feet that some current goes throught your body.
If you don't like high current engineering, then consider antennas. Start by considering the physical processes by which monopole antennas "appear" to be twice their physical length. Hint: it is because currents flowing in the earth create a virtual image of the real physical antenna.
You are considering extreme conditions. But even in that conditions, the lightning strike just flows to the phisical ground because the earth doesn't have any potential and the current allways flows to the lowest potential possible with less resistence. So I don't see your point...
And also, I don't see any significan simplicity considering earth as the absolute 0V. Like some guys said here, voltage is just a matter of potential difference and the earth potential is a bit irrelevant.
In what way, exactly, do antennas represent "extreme conditions"?
If you want something "closer to home", consider the current flows in ground planes on PCBs. The naive think that, because copper is a good conductor, a PCB everywhere on a ground plane is at the same potential. Unfortunately not, and the more experienced hardware engineers know it. Start by realising that if there is a signal conductor between a transmitter and receiver, then the return current doesn't go back directly from the receiver to the transmitter. Instead, at high frequencies, it is concentrated underneath and follows the signal conductor. And current flow is intimitely related to potential differences, and vice versa.
Exactly analogous phenomena occur in electrical distribution networks, except that the frequencies tend to be lower and the currents higher.
So no, the phenomena I allude to are real and important, not theoretial and esoteric.
Forget the concept of "0V" or ground or earth, since they are all fiction that has some use in some limited instances.
After reading that, I felt like asking if there is such a thing as a standard voltage (or standard ground), kinda like we have a GPS frequency standard and some way of determining absolute power (dBm). But then what you are saying suggests that V is merely relative, like dB. Yet, V seems to be a fundamental component of power.
If such thing was needed, the earth is the absolute 0.
If only that was true, it would make engineering certain systems much simpler.
Start by considering why, in a thunderstorm, you are advised to keep your two feet together (amongst other advice). Consider what happens when there is a lightning strike nearby and large currents flow through the ground you are standing on. Hint: you don't want sufficient potential difference between your feet that some current goes throught your body.
If you don't like high current engineering, then consider antennas. Start by considering the physical processes by which monopole antennas "appear" to be twice their physical length. Hint: it is because currents flowing in the earth create a virtual image of the real physical antenna.
You are considering extreme conditions. But even in that conditions, the lightning strike just flows to the phisical ground because the earth doesn't have any potential and the current allways flows to the lowest potential possible with less resistence. So I don't see your point...
And also, I don't see any significan simplicity considering earth as the absolute 0V. Like some guys said here, voltage is just a matter of potential difference and the earth potential is a bit irrelevant.
In what way, exactly, do antennas represent "extreme conditions"?
If you want something "closer to home", consider the current flows in ground planes on PCBs. The naive think that, because copper is a good conductor, a PCB everywhere on a ground plane is at the same potential. Unfortunately not, and the more experienced hardware engineers know it. Start by realising that if there is a signal conductor between a transmitter and receiver, then the return current doesn't go back directly from the receiver to the transmitter. Instead, at high frequencies, it is concentrated underneath and follows the signal conductor. And current flow is intimitely related to potential differences, and vice versa.
Exactly analogous phenomena occur in electrical distribution networks, except that the frequencies tend to be lower and the currents higher.
So no, the phenomena I allude to are real and important, not theoretial and esoteric.
That's true. But you also must know that a ground plane on a PCB isn't the same as an earth connection.
That occours on a ground plane due to copper resistence and due to high frequencies (you don't give time to the copper potential balances).
In a thunderstorm you don't have that high currents for too long, I think...
But I think that a lightning strike only affects a small portion of the earth, and not the entire earth potential...
That's true. But you also must know that a ground plane on a PCB isn't the same as an earth connection.
That occours on a ground plane due to copper resistence and due to high frequencies (you don't give time to the copper potential balances).
The analogy is still valid; the speed of light and distance are the relevant parameters. As I explicitly stated, with electrical distribution networks the relevant frequencies are lower. Obviously you realise that lower frequencies imply longer time periods.QuoteIn a thunderstorm you don't have that high currents for too long, I think...
True, but that doesn't affect the point under discussion.QuoteBut I think that a lightning strike only affects a small portion of the earth, and not the entire earth potential...
And how, exactly, are you going to measure "the entire earth potential"? Your answer should take account of the speed of light.
You really, really should have a look at the precautions taken in industrial systems to take account of differing "earth" potentials.
That's true. But you also must know that a ground plane on a PCB isn't the same as an earth connection.
That occours on a ground plane due to copper resistence and due to high frequencies (you don't give time to the copper potential balances).
The analogy is still valid; the speed of light and distance are the relevant parameters. As I explicitly stated, with electrical distribution networks the relevant frequencies are lower. Obviously you realise that lower frequencies imply longer time periods.QuoteIn a thunderstorm you don't have that high currents for too long, I think...
True, but that doesn't affect the point under discussion.QuoteBut I think that a lightning strike only affects a small portion of the earth, and not the entire earth potential...
And how, exactly, are you going to measure "the entire earth potential"? Your answer should take account of the speed of light.
You really, really should have a look at the precautions taken in industrial systems to take account of differing "earth" potentials.
You don't need to measure the entire earth potential. You just need to try to "send" the lightning strike to another earth connection than the one used by you, no?
I don't know almost anything of the industrial protection systems and how they deppend on earth connections, what I know is that the earth plane created in each build (house, factory, High voltage line supports, whatever) has a lot of testing in order to reach a regulated resistance value (in the order of mOhm). With this I just want to make clear that an earth point is virtually isolated from another point few meter away. If you just put a wire on the ground you won't have (it just won't work, believe me) an earth point.
That's true. But you also must know that a ground plane on a PCB isn't the same as an earth connection.
That occours on a ground plane due to copper resistence and due to high frequencies (you don't give time to the copper potential balances).
The analogy is still valid; the speed of light and distance are the relevant parameters. As I explicitly stated, with electrical distribution networks the relevant frequencies are lower. Obviously you realise that lower frequencies imply longer time periods.QuoteIn a thunderstorm you don't have that high currents for too long, I think...
True, but that doesn't affect the point under discussion.QuoteBut I think that a lightning strike only affects a small portion of the earth, and not the entire earth potential...
And how, exactly, are you going to measure "the entire earth potential"? Your answer should take account of the speed of light.
You really, really should have a look at the precautions taken in industrial systems to take account of differing "earth" potentials.
You don't need to measure the entire earth potential. You just need to try to "send" the lightning strike to another earth connection than the one used by you, no?
I don't know almost anything of the industrial protection systems and how they deppend on earth connections, what I know is that the earth plane created in each build (house, factory, High voltage line supports, whatever) has a lot of testing in order to reach a regulated resistance value (in the order of mOhm). With this I just want to make clear that an earth point is virtually isolated from another point few meter away. If you just put a wire on the ground you won't have (it just won't work, believe me) an earth point.
And there we have the source of your statements, and your ignoring several examples (e.g. monopole antennas).
You partially understand how domestic 50Hz electrical systems work in a house.
You are (incorrectly) generalising that to non-domestic systems.
You are (incorrectly) generalising that to >>50Hz systems.
You are (incorrectly) generalising that to physically large systems.
Hello. Is it possible to connect ds1054z with lan cable to pc and see fft from matlab?
Hello. Is it possible to connect ds1054z with lan cable to pc and see fft from matlab?
https://www.mathworks.com/products/instrument/supported/rigol-technologies.html (https://www.mathworks.com/products/instrument/supported/rigol-technologies.html)
Thanks for the reply but I saw this before. There is no driver for ds1054z in any of two categories.
I think that page is just old. The command interface on the DS1054Z is the same as all the other Rigol models in the list.
FWIW: The official DS1054Z programming manual has a whole chapter on how to use a one with MATLAB. Section 3-7 even gives example code to grab some data from a DS1054Z and generate an FFT.
http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/ProgrammingGuide/MSO1000Z_DS1000Z_ProgrammingGuide_EN.pdf (http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/ProgrammingGuide/MSO1000Z_DS1000Z_ProgrammingGuide_EN.pdf)
(Disclaimer: I haven't personally done it...)
Hello. The normal is 1 or 2 boxes for a brand new ds1054z?
Hello. The normal is 1 or 2 boxes for a brand new ds1054z?
Hello. The normal is 1 or 2 boxes for a brand new ds1054z?
Hello. The normal is 1 or 2 boxes for a brand new ds1054z?I ordered mine from TEquipment on Amazon (not Prime or FBA), and it came in one box. ???
One thing I don't think I saw mentioned: how is the UI responsiveness with 04.04.00.07 compared with 04.03.01.05 (04.03.SP1)? I've intentionally kept my scope on 04.03.01.05 in order to avoid the issues with SP2 (especially the UI issues), but if the UI responsiveness is the same for both 04.04 and 04.03.SP1 then it sounds like there's little reason to remain on 04.03.SP1.Be carefull. My ds1054z fw is 04.03.SP1 and i don't have rms bug, like people with last two versions of firmware. So, for full screen X-Y mode, for me is not worthy to update to latest firmware.
One thing I don't think I saw mentioned: how is the UI responsiveness with 04.04.00.07 compared with 04.03.01.05 (04.03.SP1)? I've intentionally kept my scope on 04.03.01.05 in order to avoid the issues with SP2 (especially the UI issues), but if the UI responsiveness is the same for both 04.04 and 04.03.SP1 then it sounds like there's little reason to remain on 04.03.SP1.No improvement noticed. Still slow as hell
***
I don't think for a second that the delay on filtering is a bug. You should know that math is calculated from data on the screen buffer.
i don't know how exactly they are filtering, probably the same fir which taps gets 'compressed' for higher cutoffs so the delay between the first input and the first output increases... before that there is no data.
yeah. and it is interesting in the options you can set the start and end point of the filter. Totally cool!!!The shape depends heavily on the phase and roll-off characteristics of the filter.
Maybe it's me, but why would using a low pass filter set to 20 khz cause so much ripple on a 1 khz square wave? Lowering the filter smooths it out, and that makes sense. OK, maybe it makes sense, I guess, if the 20th (or so) harmonic really contributes to the squareness - I was just thinking of the discussion of how much bandwidth is required to show a square wave as a square...
The shape depends heavily on the phase and roll-off characteristics of the filter.
A simple RC-like filter (1st order, slow roll off, phase shift) will give a "smoothed" wave, but a perfect brick-wall, no phase shift filter gives you a rippling waveform, see the attachment.
Such a filter is impossible in reality as its time-domain response extends infinitely in the future and in the past, so it can only be approximated (easier in the digital world, I would say).
For a nice animation, see Gibbs phenomenon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibbs_phenomenon).
See page 6-22 of the manual.
Unless you have selected a Math Operator function (e.g., Intg) in the Operator menu that uses the output of the fx Operator function in the Options menu, changing the latter won't have any effect on the former.
Perhaps they should then be grayed out, like some of the other options. It was not really clear what would be the point of those options anyway.Yeah, lots of equipment have interaction design issues.
I'm not near the scope, but aren't these settings already on the top level menu for the other math operators (and BTW, filter is under the Math menu, so assumed it is one of the math functions)?
I probably got caught by this when evaluating a Tektronix MSO5204 a couple years ago. It has both hardware and DSP bandwidth limiting and to my surprise, they did *not* match at high frequencies with the DSP filters
I have read the SCPI commands automatically from the SDRAM.
Below is the list of commands from the firmware 00.04.03.01.05 (00.04.03.SP1).
A few commands are undocumented in the Programming Manual.
The parameters necessary to determine itself.
Peter
Edit: Undocumented commands are indented with a tab.
It was compared to the programming manual of December, 2015.
Some commands are described in the programming manual from the DS2000.
DSO1000Z = visa('ni','TCPIP0::192.168.1.101::INSTR');
DSO1000Z.InputBufferSize = 2048;
fopen(DSO1000Z);
fprintf(DSO1000Z, ':wav:data?' );
data= fread(DSO1000Z,2048);
Hello. I am trying to read more than 1212 points in matlab but I cant.Code: [Select]DSO1000Z = visa('ni','TCPIP0::192.168.1.101::INSTR');
DSO1000Z.InputBufferSize = 2048;
fopen(DSO1000Z);
fprintf(DSO1000Z, ':wav:data?' );
data= fread(DSO1000Z,2048);
Matlab reads 1212 points whatever input buffer size I enter. Any tips?
I'm currently doing researching programming interfaces of DS1054Z, including commands. Searching for strings is trivial, but that returns just parts of the commands. I'm curious - how did you manage to rebuild the full commands? did you discover some pointer tables or lists that point to partial strings? Could you share how they are structured?
I found a table and wrote a program to read with Xojo.
I can not enough English to describe the table exactly.
I understood the fields not complete. However, it is sufficient to create the commands.
By reading out the wave data I've done experiments, see picture.
I get the same filter delay on 04.03.01.05. Unfortunately, I can't save a screenshot right now because the scope doesn't like my made-in-China thumb drive. Irony? :-DD
All the buttons stop functioning after inserting the drive. It's a 2GB formatted using FAT32 and I tried 1K, 2K and 4K cluster sizes. Oh, well. I'll have to find the one I used for firmware updates before. That one worked.
Anyway, the delay looks the same as what IAmBack posted.
Hi, first post here so if I'm doing something wrong please be kind :)a) Yes.
I recently purchased a rigol ds1054z and I want to unlock it.
I've done some reading about it on the forum, the content in there is really a lot and I still have some doubts about it:
My scope came with SW version 00.04.03.SP2, if I hack it can I upgrade the firmware after it? (for example to 00.04.04)
If I upgrade before the hack, will it work on 00.04.04? Is the upgrade worth it?
please forgive my poor English.
Unlocked all features (except the 500uV option, as described in the forum (quite an easy task)
In the unfortunate event of something wrong I can revert the hack with the SCPI console of Ultrasigma, can't I?
I did the upgrade, I hacked all option except the 500uV (DSER) and finally an autocal. Everything works perfectly and I haven't had any problems during the procedure.Being calculated from on-screen data the rise time measurement will vary with the timebase (of course) but also with the amplitude, number of active channels and memory depth (at that speed, high wfm/s, the scope jitter...)
As you said (I've haven't seen the post since I was doing the work in that precise moment) I should have waited to do the unlocking, but I couldn't resist.. during my inital check everything worked and now there is no apparent change.
BTW In the unfortunate event of something wrong I can revert the hack with the SCPI console of Ultrasigma, can't I?
I also quickly "checked" the bandwidth with a fast risetime generator (based on a 74AC14) and the rise time changed from approx 3.2ns to 2.4ns.
Overall I'm super happy with my new purchase,this product feels very good, it's not even comparable with my old scope (beaten up 20MHz analog).
Thank you all!
Edit: forgot the ic code
Rigol can't ever stop these codes from working because they sell them as upgrades. They can't put out a firmware update that stops legitimate keys from working.
Hello, please help how to run a continuous signal recording on a flash drive? I want to use this oscilloscope as recorder to monitor one signal source (record time in about several days). Maybe there is a normal software for PC to carry this record?
Hello, please help how to run a continuous signal recording on a flash drive? I want to use this oscilloscope as recorder to monitor one signal source (record time in about several days). Maybe there is a normal software for PC to carry this record?You can connect a USB cable and use (eg.) a Python script to grab data. There's lots of examples on the web.
Rigol can't ever stop these codes from working because they sell them as upgrades. They can't put out a firmware update that stops legitimate keys from working.
Well, in principle they could introduce a new, stronger coding scheme for the unlock codes, hoping that no one breaks that too soon, and offer a "trade-in" program for legitimate buyers of old unlock codes/options. But I agree that this is very unlikely to happen, given the hassle it would mean for Rigol (verifying proof of purchase for legitimate options) and for users (having to obtain new codes after a firmware update to get options back).
The hack made Rigol famous and the current number one hobby scope. I don't know if it was on purpose or not, but that doesn't matter now. It was a good thing to happen to Rigol.
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14
- Supported the multi-inteface of LXI
- Fixed bugs about Measure
Rigol has been "allowing" it for quite a long time now. The previous generation DS1052E was also unlockable to a DS1102E.For Rigol it's a good trick to get rid of all potential warranty claims.
It's safe to say they know all about Riglol and they know that people are unlocking them.
For Rigol it's a good trick to get rid of all potential warranty claims.
I can confirm that v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14 fixes RMS bug!
Good job on this one Rigol...
I will check more but this was only serious gripe for me at the time..
I can confirm that v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14 fixes RMS bug!
Good job on this one Rigol...
I will check more but this was only serious gripe for me at the time..
And the UI isn't slow anymore?
And, btw, how about the "Pluses"?
I can confirm that v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14 fixes RMS bug!
I can confirm that v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14 fixes RMS bug!
Good job on this one Rigol...
I will check more but this was only serious gripe for me at the time..
And the UI isn't slow anymore?
And, btw, how about the "Pluses"?
I don't find UI to be bothersome... I will check it more later..
And it does say +Pulses and -Pulses, so I guess that is fixed, not that I care... I understood what it meant anyways.. Funny, but not important... But RMS measurement was serious thing and I'm very glad it works now..
And now of to work ...
Cheers!
Well thank you about that! Now this is a update that I'm going to make this weekend.
Nice to know that they finally have heard the costumers and fixed the issues (some of them a bit late, but it's solved anyway).
Well thank you about that! Now this is a update that I'm going to make this weekend.
Nice to know that they finally have heard the costumers and fixed the issues (some of them a bit late, but it's solved anyway).
I wonder if they've started reading this... :popcorn:
I don't find UI to be bothersome... I will check it more later..On the menu, yes...on the on-screen measurement it's still Pluses. :-DD
And it does say +Pulses and -Pulses [snippety snip]
Is the UI a tad more responsive? Or just placebo effect?
Hopefully they won't fix it to "+Pluses" and "-Minuses" ;)I don't find UI to be bothersome... I will check it more later..On the menu, yes...on the on-screen measurement it's still Pluses. :-DD
And it does say +Pulses and -Pulses [snippety snip]
Ah well, I will not complain for my scope having so many pluses over the competition...
Is the UI a tad more responsive? Or just placebo effect?
I think I noticed a difference, but it might be just my memory...maybe someone with the old version (you?) could confirm:Is the UI a tad more responsive? Or just placebo effect?
I'm thinking of a way to quantify that before I upgrade mine. I want to compare before/after.
OTOH if the difference isn't instantly obvious then they probably didn't change it.
However, it can take several seconds for the trace to resume after you've stopped moving the trace up/down.I predict that with the trigger in its default mid-screen position it will take about 6 seconds (at 1s/div) >:D
They seem to have tweaked it a little bit.Thanks you, Fungus, for reassuring me about the working state of what's left of my neurons! ::)
OK, I just updated mine.
Before I did it I had a good fiddle with the vertical position to get a good idea of what it was like before.
They seem to have tweaked it a little bit.
The way it works is that the trace on screen doesn't move until you stop twiddling the knob, only the little marker at the side of the screen moves. This is the same before+after.
The movement of the little marker is much better after the update. Before it was easy to overshoot and have to go back a little bit. That doesn't happen any more. It's much easier to get the marker to a specific place on screen first time.
A tiny improvement, but it's there. It shows they're working on it.
I assume this update doesn't undo any "liberated" features either?
McBryce.
I assume this update doesn't undo any "liberated" features either?
McBryce.
That's strange... Just upgraded my firmware too, but on mine, the trace moves in time with the vertical position knob and the baseline marker catches up when I stop moving the knob. This behaviour depends somewhat on the timebase setting.
.. And I guess this update doesn't break my precious Riglol hack either? :)
Copy the .GEL firmware file to a USB thumbdrive that you know works in your scope.
With the scope already running, insert the USB drive in the front panel socket of the scope.
The scope should identify the new .GEL file by version number and ask if you want to install it. The newly released file is version 00.04.04.01.01.
Tell the scope that you do want to install the new firmware.
Make sure you don't have any power failure during the update and don't remove the USB drive until it finishes.
Once the scope tells you that the update has completed, remove the USB drive and cycle the power.
Let the scope warm up for at least a half hour in the environment where you intend to be using it. (Ambient temperature changes affect the calibration.)
Remove all inputs from all BNC connectors.
Run the Self-Calibration routine found in Utility>Self-Cal>Start
It can take 20 minutes or so for the Self-Cal routine to complete.
After the Self-Calibration is done, cycle the power again.
Now connect to a signal source and go and make some pretty colored squiggly lines!
Note that you cannot roll back to an earlier firmware once a later one is installed. (Actually I haven't tested this with the very latest firmware but I expect it still to be true.)
The partial System Info screen will identify the new firmware as 00.04.04.SP1. To see the complete System Information screen, press _very fast_ the buttons in the Trigger section: Menu Menu Force Menu, then Utility>System>System Info. This will show the complete version numbers for the entire software suite in the scope.
Copy the .GEL firmware file to a USB thumbdrive that you know works in your scope.
With the scope already running, insert the USB drive in the front panel socket of the scope.
The scope should identify the new .GEL file by version number and ask if you want to install it. The newly released file is version 00.04.04.01.01.
Tell the scope that you do want to install the new firmware.
Make sure you don't have any power failure during the update and don't remove the USB drive until it finishes.
Once the scope tells you that the update has completed, remove the USB drive and cycle the power.
Let the scope warm up for at least a half hour in the environment where you intend to be using it. (Ambient temperature changes affect the calibration.)
Remove all inputs from all BNC connectors.
Run the Self-Calibration routine found in Utility>Self-Cal>Start
It can take 20 minutes or so for the Self-Cal routine to complete.
After the Self-Calibration is done, cycle the power again.
Now connect to a signal source and go and make some pretty colored squiggly lines!
Note that you cannot roll back to an earlier firmware once a later one is installed. (Actually I haven't tested this with the very latest firmware but I expect it still to be true.)
The partial System Info screen will identify the new firmware as 00.04.04.SP1. To see the complete System Information screen, press _very fast_ the buttons in the Trigger section: Menu Menu Force Menu, then Utility>System>System Info. This will show the complete version numbers for the entire software suite in the scope.
Thanks for comprehensive reply. It gives me the confidence to do the upgrade and others will no doubt find this in future too.
I just made a video guide to updating the firmware and unlocking:
*IDN?
RIGOL TECHNOLOGIES,DS1104Z,DS1ZA123456XX,00.04.04.SP1
I didn't know you could do it with telnet, I thought you had to install that horrible driver software from the CD.
Edit: I just tried it and it works :)Code: [Select]*IDN?
RIGOL TECHNOLOGIES,DS1104Z,DS1ZA123456XX,00.04.04.SP1
I thought you had to install that horrible driver software from the CD.
Not reading my posts? :clap:
I've posted on the use of telnet to talk to the scope several times (at least nine times in fact). See my posts from July of 2015 for example:
http://www.teuniz.net/DSRemote/ (http://www.teuniz.net/DSRemote/)
It might take a little packet sniffing to see how things work.
Follow up on the panel LED not turning off problem...
I have been using the scope with faulty panel lights because I can't afford to be without my scope for two weeks.
I plug the usb drive with new firmware in the scope right after I switch on the scope.
This time, the scope turn on and the lights are normal. It fixed the problem without upgrading the firmware.
I suspect the scope did some sneaky things (write flash?) without user confirmation.
It might take a little packet sniffing to see how things work.
No need to. Everything is documented (in theory and besides bugs):
http://int.rigol.com/File/TechDoc/20151218/MSO1000Z&DS1000Z_ProgrammingGuide_EN.pdf (http://int.rigol.com/File/TechDoc/20151218/MSO1000Z&DS1000Z_ProgrammingGuide_EN.pdf)
cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-6717EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-6717EN.pdf)
So yes, a BIG improvement. Massive. Looks like the DS1000Z firmware team have returned. :-+
Oh, BTW: does it matters to have only one or all four channel when doing an autocalibration?
I cannot check the detailed systeminfo. I cannot tip faster.
There is NEW Firmware available now for the MSO/DS1000Z Oscilloscopes
FW Version: 00.04.04.01.01
Released: 2016/09/14
o Added support for the multi-inteface of LXI
o Fixed bugs with Auto-Measurement functions
http://int.rigol.com/File/ProductSoftWare/20160914/DS1000Z(ARM)update.rar (http://int.rigol.com/File/ProductSoftWare/20160914/DS1000Z(ARM)update.rar)
There is NEW Firmware available now for the MSO/DS1000Z Oscilloscopes
FW Version: 00.04.04.01.01
Released: 2016/09/14
o Added support for the multi-inteface of LXI
o Fixed bugs with Auto-Measurement functions
http://int.rigol.com/File/ProductSoftWare/20160914/DS1000Z(ARM)update.rar (http://int.rigol.com/File/ProductSoftWare/20160914/DS1000Z(ARM)update.rar)
Coming thick and fast now!
They've changed the way the vertical movement works so it's now continuous movement while you turn the knob.
With one channel on it's very fast. Not quite analog, but not bad.
Two channels a little bit worse.
Three channels... a bit worse.
Four channels... a bit laggy and some overshoot. OK with a delicate touch, hamfisted youtube bloggers need not apply.
On the whole, I'll say it's an improvement - with one and two channels enabled it's definitely better.
Even faster than you think ;D
Just checked the extended system info (menu,menu,force,menu) on my recently purchased 1054Z and I get the following versions:-
Software 00.04.04.00.07
Just checked the extended system info (menu,menu,force,menu) on my recently purchased 1054Z and I get the following versions:-
Software 00.04.04.00.07
That's the previous one.
Looks like they're reading this forum... :popcorn:
Just checked the extended system info (menu,menu,force,menu) on my recently purchased 1054Z and I get the following versions:-
Software 00.04.04.00.07
Firmware 0.2.3.11
So a little confused as to what the latest actually is?
Looks like they're reading this forum... :popcorn:... but are you?
I have a vague recollection that there is still Pluses spelling and a couple things about offset math trace, but I forget which one now, one of the filters or something about when downloaded via scpi?
Do any of these fix the lockup bug that some of us are afflicted with? For reference, there's a thread on the issue here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-freeze-up-bug/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-freeze-up-bug/)
I have a vague recollection that there is still Pluses spelling and a couple things about offset math trace, but I forget which one now, one of the filters or something about when downloaded via scpi?
It's all a lie. There's no new version (yet!)
I actually downloaded it without looking too hard at the number. When I plugged in the USB stick in it gave me the "That's the same version as before!" message. :-DD
This version is the one that fixed the RMS bug.
I have a vague recollection that there is still Pluses spelling and a couple things about offset math trace
Well, I don't really care if it's "pluses", as long as it counts them right ;)
For some reason I thought I've seen "faster FFT" in changelogs somewhere. It's strange that they made full memory FFT, but left all the protocol decoders restricted to on-screen memory. I guess this was done on purpose to make higher end models more attractive.
I read that new versions of firmware don't allow you to downgrade and make the scope less responsive, so I haven't updated for a long time. Is it still true for the latest firmware?
My scope has no freeze bug or any other issues, but I want the pulse counter and faster FFT ::)
Think I'm bang up to date now, so the latest firmware date was 23rd Aug 2016 according to the build date...
@StuUK
Where did you get the files you used for the update? The files available at http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0) are older.
There is NEW Firmware available now for the MSO/DS1000Z Oscilloscopes
FW Version: 00.04.04.01.01
Released: 2016/09/14
o Added support for the multi-inteface of LXI
o Fixed bugs with Auto-Measurement functions
http://int.rigol.com/File/ProductSoftWare/20160914/DS1000Z(ARM)update.rar (http://int.rigol.com/File/ProductSoftWare/20160914/DS1000Z(ARM)update.rar)
Edit: I see now (thanks to 'alsetalokin4017') that 'IAmBack' reported this firmware release in 'Reply #2878' on September 14, 2016. https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1026216/#msg1026216 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1026216/#msg1026216) I don't know how I missed seeing this. :palm: If you go back and read the reply's after his post you will see responses to the fixes.
@StuUK
Where did you get the files you used for the update? The files available at http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0) are older.
We've just bought ourselves a new DS1074Z-S Plus for our hackspace.
We've been trying to unlock it using Riglol but having no luck, we always get "Invalid licence". This is with both manually entering in the licence key and using Telnet.
Are the current scopes hackable? We are using the latest firmware, just updated it.
Does anyone know how I could possibly reset the FRAM (for the Factory default settings)? This is not a new issue for me, as I have never been able to accomplish a Rest with this or any previous FW/Software versions on this unit.
Hello:
I have a DS1074Z with Software 00.04.04.01.01, Board 0.1.1, Boot 0.0.0.11, Firmware 0.2.3.11, CPLD 1.1. The issue I have is that repeatably pressing the 5th key down (or any other) on the left side of the LCD will NOT provide a Factory Reset for me (Rest FRAM / Factor Default in Chinese). Of course I'm assuming that this is due to my having Boot version 0.0.0.11.
Does anyone know how I could possibly reset the FRAM (for the Factory default settings)? This is not a new issue for me, as I have never been able to accomplish a Rest with this or any previous FW/Software versions on this unit.
Thank you very much for any suggestions, Wally
Does anyone know how I could possibly reset the FRAM (for the Factory default settings)? This is not a new issue for me, as I have never been able to accomplish a Rest with this or any previous FW/Software versions on this unit.
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-02f4/1/-/-/-/-/file.pdf (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-02f4/1/-/-/-/-/file.pdf)
Does anyone know how I could possibly reset the FRAM (for the Factory default settings)? This is not a new issue for me, as I have never been able to accomplish a Rest with this or any previous FW/Software versions on this unit.http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-02f4/1/-/-/-/-/file.pdf (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-02f4/1/-/-/-/-/file.pdf)
Too many buttons!
I'm very sure that the Factory Rest function is built in the Boot Loader
Does anyone know how I could possibly reset the FRAM (for the Factory default settings)? This is not a new issue for me, as I have never been able to accomplish a Rest with this or any previous FW/Software versions on this unit.
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-02f4/1/-/-/-/-/file.pdf (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-02f4/1/-/-/-/-/file.pdf)
Too many buttons!
Is this the reset that even resets the language back to Chinese?
Or, does this reset do anything more than using the menu Default button?
v00.04.03.00.01 2015/05/05
- Added DS1104Z Plus and DS1074Z Plus
- Fixed pass/fail test
- Fixed FFT operation
In firmware Release Notes I find this information about Pass/Fail test:Quotev00.04.03.00.01 2015/05/05
- Added DS1104Z Plus and DS1074Z Plus
- Fixed pass/fail test
- Fixed FFT operation
LOL, let's hope this is not the same solution Volkswagen adopted for their car's emissions...
:-)
I'm sure I've seen someone else with this issue before, but I can't remember if there is a solution other than a new main board:I think I've seen this kind of waveform in my scope. There was solution - to switch on/off the x10/x1 slider on the probe for a few times. But possibly in my case there were no random "pluses :)" when signal was in the "low" state. Anyway, it is worth to check the probe.
Applying the probe compensation square wave to channel 1 and a mask test reveals occasional glitches.
LOL, let's hope this is not the same solution Volkswagen adopted for their car's emissions...
:-)
Another good reason for using/demanding opensource software.
if (detect_EU_test()) {
apply_cheat();
}
LOL, let's hope this is not the same solution Volkswagen adopted for their car's emissions...
:-)
Another good reason for using/demanding opensource software.
Have you seen the analysis of how the VW cheat works? It's really really well hidden.
It's not:Code: [Select]if (detect_EU_test()) {
apply_cheat();
}
It's obviously designed to get past code reviews, etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZSU1FPDiao (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZSU1FPDiao)
I don't know how many 'eyes' you'd need on the code to see it if you didn't know it was there.
they must be aware by now that their hardware is being upgraded for free.Well:
Do higher HW sales compensate for lower unlock sales? Perhaps. But even if it was a marketing decision to give out free features - it a far cry from fraud... Competitive yes - fraud no.Rigol would sell almost zero DS1054Zs if they weren't unlockable.
I heard there's an option that the hardware doesn't support.
How on earth can somebody even talk about unlocking the features unless you mention the correct code DSER?
How on earth can somebody even talk about unlocking the features unless you mention the correct code DSER?
What makes that the "correct" code? :-//
The other codes work just fine. I'm just wondering why somebody would go around saying that bandwidth unlocking doesn't work.
And who said the bandwidth option doesn't work? Link please.
I'm wondering why somebody would want to only unlock a few of the working options by entering separate codes one at a time
That post does not say that the bandwidth option doesn't work.And who said the bandwidth option doesn't work? Link please.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1037407/#msg1037407 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1037407/#msg1037407)
I'm wondering why somebody would want to only unlock a few of the working options by entering separate codes one at a time
Because "DSER" isn't listed on the Riglol site?
(anybody know who's in charge of that site?)
But it is talked about and listed on _this_ site, many times, since long ago, along with the fact that it isn't documented in the Riglol site or the instructions that come with Riglol. I knew about it even before I got my scope in April 2015.
But it is talked about and listed on _this_ site, many times, since long ago, along with the fact that it isn't documented in the Riglol site or the instructions that come with Riglol. I knew about it even before I got my scope in April 2015.
Sure... but apparently the new guy who just came in here has never heard of it.
I'm wondering why somebody would want to only unlock a few of the working options by entering separate codes one at a time
Because "DSER" isn't listed on the Riglol site?
(anybody know who's in charge of that site?)
But it is talked about and listed on _this_ site, many times, since long ago, along with the fact that it isn't documented in the Riglol site or the instructions that come with Riglol. I knew about it even before I got my scope in April 2015.
Also, are you guys doing the self-cal on the scope as requested, after firmware upgrade? I only ask because I now see a new button on the Self-Cal menu that I haven't seen anyone mention.
It now reads:
- Start
- End
- LFCal
- Output
Was this there before? I certainly don't remember it.
I tried LFCal, it does something and then says it failed. It looks like it might need a probe attached or something.
I've just got my DS1054Z. Very pleased with it, except that I can't get the upgrade hacks to work. I have tried it several times, working from the beginning each time, and double-checking everything, but no dice. It is now shutting down any code recognition for 12 hours so I can't try it very often!.
Have Rigol at last closed the loophole? Quite likely knowing my luck! The SW version is 00.04.04.SP1, Board 0.0.1. Anyone got any useful suggestion?
As far as I am aware, all DS1054z "DSER" option unlock codes start with the same two initial groups of 7 characters: RDJ9JBB N3SWWUS xxxxxxx xxxxxxx.
The first problem is that 'telnet' is not accepted (windows 10)!
Do you have the S or Plus model? I could be wrong but I believe the simple code hack doesn't work with those versions of the DS1054Z.
The first problem is that 'telnet' is not accepted (windows 10)!
Enable-WindowsOptionalFeature -Online -FeatureName TelnetClient
I am not sure if this is real time or running time of the scope. It certainly hasn't had 12 hours running time since the last attempt.
I am not sure if this is real time or running time of the scope. It certainly hasn't had 12 hours running time since the last attempt.
Since the DS1054Z does not have a real time clock, it has to be 12 hours running time.
And, for your sake, add Linux to your computer. It will give you freedom to do what you want. Unlike other operating systems (which i happen to use but alongside with the penguin)...
The telnet client hasn't been installed by default since Windows 7. For Windows 10, run PowerShell as an administrator and enter:Code: [Select]Enable-WindowsOptionalFeature -Online -FeatureName TelnetClient
That's why I love PuTTY .. simply works!! Take care!The telnet client hasn't been installed by default since Windows 7. For Windows 10, run PowerShell as an administrator and enter:Code: [Select]Enable-WindowsOptionalFeature -Online -FeatureName TelnetClient
I usually use PuTTY when on Windows. Thanks for this tip. Installed and works.
As far as I am aware, all DS1054z "DSER" option unlock codes start with the same two initial groups of 7 characters: RDJ9JBB N3SWWUS xxxxxxx xxxxxxx.
I can confirm that.
Hi!
I just got an MSO1104Z scope, and I'm trying to get the decoder option to work. I've connected 8 data bits to the first eight channels on the logic analyzer, and applied a clock signal on the 9th channel.
However, no matter what I do I can't enable the parallel decoding option, even though it's installed! Why is it greyed out like this?
...Which of course will cost far more than the scope itself did.
Or, if you are on a budget, get a good quality 100x passive probe.
Or, if you are on a budget, get a good quality 100x passive probe.
I am not sure if this is real time or running time of the scope. It certainly hasn't had 12 hours running time since the last attempt.
Since the DS1054Z does not have a real time clock, it has to be 12 hours running time.
Hence the last few time you tried you might have been doing everything right, but the scope was simply locked off and could not accept any code.
Leave it on for 12 hours and then try again more carefully.
And, for your sake, add Linux to your computer. It will give you freedom to do what you want. Unlike other operating systems (which i happen to use but alongside with the penguin)...
Will this mean it's gone forever?No.
It's a long thread so forgive me if I've missed it, but am I right in thinking that the very latest DS1054Z's with the latest firmware as bought brand new from Rigol are still hackable ?
I'm trying to decide between a new Rigol DS1054Z and a used Keysight DSOX2002A which I believe I can get for around the same money, both hacked of course ! The DSOX2002A has the advantage of having the unlockable MSO and signal generator options and having a slightly larger screen, while the DS1054Z has the advantage of being slightly cheaper, new and having four channels. Also the DSOX2002A can be upgraded to a higher bandwidth (200MHz vs 100MHz) and has double the sample rate and about double the waveform update rate, but has 1/24th of the sample memory. (1Mpt vs 24Mpt)
Yes.Thanks, that's great to hear - I'm not sure I'd have wanted a Rigol if I wasn't able to keep the firmware up to date with the hacks enabled but this makes it a viable option.
Are you sure the Keysight is hacked to enable all features?The Keysight isn't hacked but I'd do that myself to enable all the options, along with making my own Ethernet adapter from the published schematics.
It's a tough decision. The Keysight specs are good, the signal generator is a plus, but ... 1Mpt of memory is a bummer. So is only 2 channels. If you need 200Mhz but you only have 100MHz it's not the end of the world. You can do a bit of signal reconstruction in your head. If you need 3 or 4 channels but you only have 2 then you've got a problem.
I think the number of channels should be the deciding factor. What do you normally use an oscilloscope for?
As for the MSO / signal generator part, I guess I could ask to see if I could get a DS1074Z / DS1074Z-S for DS1054Z money
For the motor stuff I think I could live with just 2 channels if I needed to (You only care about current for stepper motors, although brushless motors could do with three channels) but 4 would be really handy. (Being able to see quadrature encoder inputs etc)The MSO option of the Keysight could show the encoders but 4 'real' channels is easier to use.
I'm not so much worried about the bandwidth
Thanks for sharing it! I looked at the table and it's close to my results, but not exactly the same.
The're many complications to explain how exactly the data-length work.. I'll try to summarize it shortly
(..)
It actually fluctuates in a deterministic way, but it's tricky on many levels:
- the varying max-data-length follows a certain pattern
- but that pattern shifts randomly after each measurement
- and also the 'full/half/quarter' mode of the device is quite nasty thing, because you can't easily read it (you have to check few things and deduce it), and can't easily configure it (it is selected automatically at BOOT TIME depending on the number of selected channels at BOOT TIME, and seems to be locked until SHUTDOWN -!aargh!-)
However, I've got many aspects of that analyzed already. I'll write a post about it during the weekend and write back here.
Anyways if there are any pages wikis or other threads I missed I'd be grateful for links or contact to mantainers :)
~/rigol/riglol-20140717/bin/linux$ ./riglol DS1ZA181204679 DSER
RDJ9JBB-N3SWWUS-QBEEZZS-SYZMRHA
I'm not sure you meant DS1074Z. That's a totally pointless purchase - get a DS1054Z and hack it.From their site, it looks like the DS1074Z has the MSO connector on the front and is software-upgradable for MSO functionality. The site says "MSO Ready - Can be upgraded to 16 digital channels", although the keygen below doesn't list the option for it ? The DS1054Z doesn't have the connector so I'd have to get the DS1074Z for that. As I say though, I have a Logic 8 so I'd only get that if I could get them to upgrade it for free.
if you meant MSO1074Z / DS1074Z-S then be aware that they're a lot harder to hack than a plain DS1054Z. You need to open it up and go in with a JTAG programmer. Even then it's not 100% clear how to do perfectly it every time.
The 'MSO' also option needs an external box of electronics to work. (does the Keysight?)
The MSO option of the Keysight could show the encoders but 4 'real' channels is easier to use.I think you're right. I think I can get the Keysight for new DS1054Z money but I think the extra channels will be far more valuable.
...
If you don't care about the bandwidth then go for the DS1054Z unless you can get the Keysight really cheap. Four channels good, two channels bad.
Curious. I get this:Code: [Select]~/rigol/riglol-20140717/bin/linux$ ./riglol DS1ZA181204679 DSER
RDJ9JBB-N3SWWUS-QBEEZZS-SYZMRHA
The serial number is DS1ZA1-----
The online generator produces the same correct code that smithnerd got using the script. :-//
RDJ9JBB-N3SWWUS-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX
the Rigol 1054Z is limited by software to be a 50 MHz scope at the factory...That part is true (it's the reason you can unlock them!)
...after testing determines which scopes are somehow deficient at higher bandwidth.That part isn't true.
Has there been much testing on the accuracy or efficiency of the unlocked 1054Z at higher bandwidth compared to the actual Rigol scopes that were bought badged to be 100 MHz?Yes, there has been extensive testing here. No differences have been found.
Has there been much testing on the accuracy or efficiency of the unlocked 1054Z at higher bandwidth compared to the actual Rigol scopes that were bought badged to be 100 MHz?Yes, there has been extensive testing here. No differences have been found.
The scopes are built with the same hardware but after testing, the lesser performing scopes are simply limited and badged at 50 MHz. Has there been much testing on the accuracy or efficiency of the unlocked 1054Z at higher bandwidth compared to the actual Rigol scopes that were bought badged to be 100 MHz?
First, it doesn't seem to be so hard for them to manufacture a large quantity of 100 MHz scopes. This is not like semiconductor manufacturing where your yield for different performance levels will probably vary.
Second, the testing would add cost and, given factor one, probably isn't really needed :)
has anybody posted the before and after results of a transient response test? I have been watching for this but never found it.
I've seen numerous website posts...
has anybody posted the before and after results of a transient response test? I have been watching for this but never found it.
Yes, many times. It's buried somewhere in the massive DS1054Z threads. Measured bandwidth on these scopes is about 140MHz.
The theory of 50/100MHz operation is also well understood. Dave did a "reverse engineering" video and found a switchable capacitor across the input that acts as a 50Mhz filter when enabled. It really is as simple as that.
has anybody posted the before and after results of a transient response test? I have been watching for this but never found it.
Yes, many times. It's buried somewhere in the massive DS1054Z threads. Measured bandwidth on these scopes is about 140MHz.
Like I said, I specifically watched for this and never saw any results posted. I just did another search and found nothing except for a depressing number of posts by me on the subject.
A time domain test would be redundant to the frequency sweeps that have been made. These scopes have no fancy DSP, so the time domain response can be inferred from the frequency domain response, which is known to be a smooth rolloff.
Did you use the forum search? It's :-DD bad.
I will go through the discussion thread you linked ... again ... but I don't remember finding anything definitive.
What about the video on the first page?
What about the video on the first page?
Unfortunately the test conditions in the video are not ideal. He has to use an external feedthrough termination on the Rigol but does *not* check it against the internal terminations on the other oscilloscopes so we do not know what effect it had.
The hacked Rigol's settling time seems reasonable but that 5ns ramp after the edge indicates a problem and doubly so since the ETS DSOs he used indicate that the pulse has real overshoot. That is exactly the sort of thing I would expect on a DSO hacked for extra bandwidth because the transient response would look better at lower bandwidth. Most users would never notice it however, it does *not* meet the specifications of a good 100 MHz oscilloscope.
"has anybody posted the before and after results of a transient response test?"
That may be true but your question was this:"has anybody posted the before and after results of a transient response test?"
We know how the 'scope works internally so we know there's no physical difference between a DS1054Z and a DS1104Z.
The video shows a rise time on a hacked DS1054Z that indicates 150MHz bandwidth.
What more do you want? It's a $400 'scope... :-//
An oscilloscope is a time domain instrument so I want the transient response to be as good as possible; if I saw the result shown in the video and it was accurate, then I would assume that the oscilloscope is broken or in need of calibration.
Maybe I should have been more specific. Has anybody posted any rigorous transient response test results?
We know how the 'scope works internally so we know there's no physical difference between a DS1054Z and a DS1104Z.
The designs and production may be identical but Rigol could be grading them after production for the ones which will support 100 MHz with good transient response and the ones which will not. As I recall, the design includes no adjustments so alternatively maybe they do board rework which takes time adding to the cost.
QuoteThe video shows a rise time on a hacked DS1054Z that indicates 150MHz bandwidth.
What more do you want? It's a $400 'scope... :-//
It *is* a great deal but if the results shown in the video are accurate, then the hacked model may not be a 100 (or 150 MHz) oscilloscope in the same sense that that the genuine model is which is what everybody is claiming. An oscilloscope is a time domain instrument so I want the transient response to be as good as possible; if I saw the result shown in the video and it was accurate, then I would assume that the oscilloscope is broken or in need of calibration.
If I wanted just bandwidth, then I could tweak the high frequency compensation of on oscilloscope and get it at the expense of transient response. Tektronix actually did this as an option on their old 7704A which came in 200 and 250 MHz versions.
There is a guy on Ebay who takes 150 MHz Tektronix 2445Bs, bypasses the fixed bandwidth limiting filter between the delay line and vertical CRT amplifier, reconfigures them, and sells them as 400 MHz 2465Bs. Do they actually perform like real 2465Bs? They do unless the user looks closely and most users lack a 50ps reference level pulse generator which would reveal what is going on and they would not notice when using standard passive probes with their high circuit loading except under very controlled conditions. These hacked "2465Bs" have lower bandwidth and poorer transient response than real ones and can never be adjusted to meet the 2465B specifications.
QuoteWe know how the 'scope works internally so we know there's no physical difference between a DS1054Z and a DS1104Z.
The designs and production may be identical but Rigol could be grading them after production for the ones which will support 100 MHz with good transient response and the ones which will not. As I recall, the design includes no adjustments so alternatively maybe they do board rework which takes time adding to the cost.
After recalibration the 500µV also worked fine. Without recal the 500µV where horizontal moved.
An oscilloscope is a time domain instrument so I want the transient response to be as good as possible; if I saw the result shown in the video and it was accurate, then I would assume that the oscilloscope is broken or in need of calibration.
David, what about the trace makes you assume that? The trace looks very similar on the following Tek 2467B with a little more than 1/3 the rise time. The following Tek and Agilent show overshoot. What should the trace actually look like?
Maybe I should have been more specific. Has anybody posted any rigorous transient response test results?
Apparently not, at least in terms you are willing to accept
QuoteQuoteWe know how the 'scope works internally so we know there's no physical difference between a DS1054Z and a DS1104Z.
The designs and production may be identical but Rigol could be grading them after production for the ones which will support 100 MHz with good transient response and the ones which will not. As I recall, the design includes no adjustments so alternatively maybe they do board rework which takes time adding to the cost.
Then how could I call up and get a secret squirrel code to implement the higher bandwidth? All of the upgrades are just a matter of firmware passcodes. Under your scenario, we could get an upgrade code but the scope wouldn't actually perform any better than the 50 MHz variant. This is patently false. It has been shown that the frequency domain bandwidth is in excess of 150 MHz and for all practical purposes, that is adequate.
QuoteQuoteThe video shows a rise time on a hacked DS1054Z that indicates 150MHz bandwidth.
What more do you want? It's a $400 'scope... :-//
It *is* a great deal but if the results shown in the video are accurate, then the hacked model may not be a 100 (or 150 MHz) oscilloscope in the same sense that that the genuine model is which is what everybody is claiming. An oscilloscope is a time domain instrument so I want the transient response to be as good as possible; if I saw the result shown in the video and it was accurate, then I would assume that the oscilloscope is broken or in need of calibration.
If I wanted just bandwidth, then I could tweak the high frequency compensation of on oscilloscope and get it at the expense of transient response. Tektronix actually did this as an option on their old 7704A which came in 200 and 250 MHz versions.
There is a guy on Ebay who takes 150 MHz Tektronix 2445Bs, bypasses the fixed bandwidth limiting filter between the delay line and vertical CRT amplifier, reconfigures them, and sells them as 400 MHz 2465Bs. Do they actually perform like real 2465Bs? They do unless the user looks closely and most users lack a 50ps reference level pulse generator which would reveal what is going on and they would not notice when using standard passive probes with their high circuit loading except under very controlled conditions. These hacked "2465Bs" have lower bandwidth and poorer transient response than real ones and can never be adjusted to meet the 2465B specifications.
I suspect you are going to have to do your own tests although I am not certain of the end game. It's just a simple 100 MHz scope. If anybody wants serious bandwidth, this isn't where they'll start.
The passcodes adjust what restriction are imposed on the analog bandwidth filters and we even have schematics to show how they are implemented courtesy of Dave. The test in the video shows higher bandwidth at the expense of transient response. Are you suggesting that the passcodes should fix the transient response? That is possible but the video does not show it.
Thanks, David. Are you suggesting that the passcodes break the transient response, so an unhacked scope is preferable in this regard, or that the entire line is broken?
The pulse generator I have handy is not fast enough.
I was just playing around with my scope. What does this mean? Does it say anything about the transient response?
How about LiPo battery (perhaps with a cap in parallel) and a mercury switch, short leads, to 50 ohm pass through?
I may be naive, but so far I am rather pleased with my measurement. You said it (presumably the transient response of the scope) was not very good. I understand that we (I) cannot verify the actual signal response, and my test was not highly repeatable (usually would completely fail to capture an edge and I'd get flat or diagonal trace), but I did get several very similar signals ranging from 1.9 to 2.1 ns.
I'm going to keep looking for a more reliable signal. I do not like the avalanche diode as I want a longer pulse width. I do have some microwave stuff around. Maybe I'll find something with an SRD or tunnel diode, and I also read that there is some kind of driver in HDD's. I do want to know how my scope actually performs.
I was just playing around with my scope. What does this mean?
I may be naive, but so far I am rather pleased with my measurement.
I'm going to keep looking for a more reliable signal. I do not like the avalanche diode as I want a longer pulse width.
I'm going to keep looking for a more reliable signal. I do not like the avalanche diode as I want a longer pulse width.
A very simple, but well tested circuit for sharp edges:
Indeed, that circuit not only that it has horrible ringing and ugly asymmetric transient response, but it also has 500 ps only for the falling edge. The rising edge is about 2 ns, nothing spectacular. |O
Curiosity: What's the rise time produced a simple mechanical switch with very short wires? :popcorn:
Guys ... as contribution back to this community, look what I got there, the free DS1104Z vs my friend's DS1054Z that I helped him to procure it while ago. All this time I borrowed that DS1054Z a lot as I helped him in the "upgrade" it too, now he really hates me once he knew I have DS1104Z. :-DD
Tell me what you need, and please, don't ask me to do teardown comparison, as the DS1054Z is brand new and still within warranty.
I can't promise though on the timeline, what I have in mind is to do head to head comparison at the 50Mhz to 100Mhz hack. Or any idea please just ask, I will consider it.
PS : Is it better to make this comparison at separate thread ? or just put them in this giant overcrowded thread ?
Guys ... as contribution back to this community, look what I got there, the free DS1104Z vs my friend's DS1054Z that I helped him to procure it while ago. All this time I borrowed that DS1054Z a lot as I helped him in the "upgrade" it too, now he really hates me once he knew I have DS1104Z. :-DD
I can't promise though on the timeline, what I have in mind is to do head to head comparison at the 50Mhz to 100Mhz hack. Or any idea please just ask, I will consider it.
PS : Is it better to make this comparison at separate thread ? or just put them in this giant overcrowded thread ?A separate thread might be good.
Edit: On the UK Rigol site, the DS1054Z also has the extra "source" button so maybe it's a new addition: https://www.rigol-uk.co.uk/Rigol-DS1054Z-Digital-Oscilloscope-p/ds1054z.htm (https://www.rigol-uk.co.uk/Rigol-DS1054Z-Digital-Oscilloscope-p/ds1054z.htm)
The page says DS1054Z, but the photo is of a DS1104Z.Good spot ! That explains that - They must have just used a stock photo.
The DS1104Z looks to have another "source" button on the front, I thought they were meant to be exactly the same apart from the bandwidth ?
I shortened up my leads and went to a much larger cap, 50 ohm input terminated.
A little cleaner setup and some exercising the switch seems to have improved repeatability.:-+
Here's a question: Does anybody know if a genuine DS1104Z can be downgraded to a DS1054Z by doing a ":SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall"?
I imagine it can, I was just wondering. :popcorn:
I'd go for lots of small caps in parallel. The idea is to reduce ESR/ESI.
(lots of larger caps in parallel works too)
Ceramic caps of course... for fastest response.I'd go for lots of small caps in parallel. The idea is to reduce ESR/ESI.Thanks!
What is the expected external trigger signal delay? I'm getting 350 ns. I have not seen specs on the ext trigger output, nor signal levels...
Anyone running the current v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14 firmware? I updated today from an older 4.03...something and now I get random reboots and lockups.
I'm running v00.04.04.SP1 which should be the latest (Brand new scope, was updated and dispatched by Telonic on Tuesday) on board version 0.1.4 and haven't seen any lock-ups or reboots - Not that I've been using it for very long.
This version is listed as the latest as of the 24th of Oct, so might want to try this:
http://www.rigol-uk.co.uk/Get-the-latest-RIGOL-firmware-p/firmtest.htm (http://www.rigol-uk.co.uk/Get-the-latest-RIGOL-firmware-p/firmtest.htm)
Anyone running the current v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14 firmware? I updated today from an older 4.03...something and now I get random reboots and lockups.
Anyone running the current v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14 firmware?
I updated today from an older 4.03...something and now I get random reboots and lockups.
Like IAmBack said, links for ds1000z vanished from official download site.
Link from RoGeorge to beyond measure points to fw image from 2016/09/14 ver. v00.04.04.01.01.
IIRC that one had a short name of 04.04.SP1
The latest firmware and release notes for the DS1000Z can be found at http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
I tried to replicate the 5us Jitter issues and it didn't really seem to show up
I tried to replicate the 5us Jitter issues and it didn't really seem to show up
Dave did a follow-up video showing it was fixed about a year ago.
Yeah I saw his video, but here is the funny thing, I did the test for jitters before I did frimware update and it was better than his after the fix. After the firmware update, it looks worse :palm: LOL. I went from 04.03 to 04.04
Yeah I saw his video, but here is the funny thing, I did the test for jitters before I did frimware update and it was better than his after the fix. After the firmware update, it looks worse :palm: LOL. I went from 04.03 to 04.04
I think it was fixed in version 04.02
How's this?
Signal source is a MTron MTO-T1-S3 oscillator chip at 1.000000 MHz (CH1) connected by normal 10x probe to channel input.
CH2 is the output from the "trigger out" BNC connector on the rear of the instrument, connected by a 50 ohm BNC patchcord and 50 ohm thru-terminator at the channel input.
Since Rigol missed the problem for months and then released a bunch of different fixes for the sampling jitter problem and they only improved some but not all instruments, I have always been dubious that it was fixed for all instruments.
Is there any possibility that the jitter is from your signal source? I guess not if it changed when the firmware changed.
Since Rigol missed the problem for months and then released a bunch of different fixes for the sampling jitter problem and they only improved some but not all instruments, I have always been dubious that it was fixed for all instruments.
Is there any possibility that the jitter is from your signal source? I guess not if it changed when the firmware changed.
I thought it might be something with source but it goes away when I set it to 0 so I can't see it being source since it only shows up at the 5us intervals. The other thing is once I move the trigger over past 5us it shows up and then wont go away till I zero the trigger again, Even if I get off the 5us intervals. I just cant figure out why out of the box with the updates that fixed jitters already installed it was fine then got worse after the latest firmware.. hmm
Since Rigol missed the problem for months and then released a bunch of different fixes for the sampling jitter problem and they only improved some but not all instruments, I have always been dubious that it was fixed for all instruments.
Is there any possibility that the jitter is from your signal source? I guess not if it changed when the firmware changed.
I thought it might be something with source but it goes away when I set it to 0 so I can't see it being source since it only shows up at the 5us intervals. The other thing is once I move the trigger over past 5us it shows up and then wont go away till I zero the trigger again, Even if I get off the 5us intervals. I just cant figure out why out of the box with the updates that fixed jitters already installed it was fine then got worse after the latest firmware.. hmm
With the delay set to 0, the trigger follows any jitter whether inside or outside of the oscilloscope so there is nothing to display.
The original problem was that the PLL filter was not implemented correctly and Rigol managed to fix it, or sort of fix it, by updating the firmware to adjust the PLL settings. Since the PLL reference frequency was 200 kHz, the PLL was producing sidebands at 200 kHz and the jitter was maximum every 5uS, 15uS, 25us, etc. from the trigger point.
Since your oscilloscope is new, it might just be broken. What about returning it as a warranty claim?
Since your oscilloscope is new, it might just be broken. What about returning it as a warranty claim?
Well thats what I am thinking but, I ran the hack on it since it was working just fine before the update. Unless there is a way to uninstall the hack.
Well that did the trick thank you.. :phew:
Also was doing a little playing around its not the 5us stuff like i thought its actually any time i move the horizontal trigger off the screen to the left. I can move horizontal triger left as long as it stays on screen no jitter. Soon as its off the screen I get ahat you see in my pictures. If I go all the way right nothing happens stays nice and clean.
Im going to see about a replacement. Of course it did show up in a single box with a fist sized hole in it. But was fine till firmware update. So who knows..
Got a hold of Rigol and they are having me send screen shots and directions on how to replicate it. He said he hasn't heard of this happening after a firmware update if it was working correctly at first.Well that did the trick thank you.. :phew:
Also was doing a little playing around its not the 5us stuff like i thought its actually any time i move the horizontal trigger off the screen to the left. I can move horizontal triger left as long as it stays on screen no jitter. Soon as its off the screen I get ahat you see in my pictures. If I go all the way right nothing happens stays nice and clean.
Im going to see about a replacement. Of course it did show up in a single box with a fist sized hole in it. But was fine till firmware update. So who knows..
Before you do, run autocal again, but leave scope on for an hour to warm up nicely... Than try again... If still iffy, try to get replacement...
Status Update,
Well after going back and forth with Rigol they decided to take my scope back and try to see what happen when the firmware got updated.
They also pulled their firmware update off their site until they can look more into what caused my scope to develop the jitters after firmware update.
Didn't expect all that to happen. So far been extremely happy with how fast they dealt with the problem.
Trigger output delay and jitter on Rigol scopes
I hope this may be of interest for some of the readers.
What does that mean?
Apparently, the trigger out phase jitter of the two lower models isn´t related to PLL jitter since the 5000th slope is virtually jitter-free. The trigger out phase jitter must have its origin somewhere in the signal processing downstream of the triggering logic / slope discrimination itself. The relatively long delay between the trigger event itself and the signaling at the trigger output also indicates that something´s got to be going on there. Maybe the triggering is done in software. This may also explain the high phase jitter of 8ns on both the DS1000Z and the MSO2000A machines (the same is probably valid for all the models in the corresponding classes).
On the contrary, the MSO4000 series almost for sure has implemented the triggering logic completely in hardware (FPGA). The extremely short delay of the trigger out (about 30ns) and the virtually not present jitter is a clear indication for this.
Yet, I always had the impression that FPGAs also support asynchronous logic (have to ask a collegue here, I´m not at all into FPGA programming...) and using this, it should be possible to program a digital "comparator" like the ancient TTL ´688. The delay of such a device should just depend on the individual gate delays and not on any pipeline or clocked circuitry. And in my opinion, a system like this will be necessary to get a stable image of the waveform (maybe it´s done like this on the 4000 series -- as far as I know this model doesn´t support equivalent time sampling). The trigger itself cannot rely on a lower frequency than the sampling rate, otherwise the waveform will always show some jitter. But it is well possible that the trigger point is evaluated after the ADC data has been transferred to memory, i.e. at multiples of the sampling time. And this can happen as a pipelined (or partially parallel) processing as you suggested and would exactly result in the trigger out jitter observed on the DS1k and DS2k machines, provided the sampling clock and the FPGA pipeline clock are not synchronized. If they were, one should be able to observe the synch out jitter to be time discrete and not (more or less evenly) spread over the whole interval.Most (All?) FPGAs support multiple clocks, so yes they do support asynchronous logic. The issue with the 1000Z series is that the ADC chip itself has this 128 nanosecond delay before the signal even gets to the FPGA. In order to ease synchronisation of everything, they do the triggering in the digital domain rather than having a separate comparator on the analog side and trying to synchronise the delay with the digitised waveform.
But because of the jitter, the trigger out happens at any random time within that 8 ns.
yes, making the external trig out useless unless your timing needs are not that critical.
I can't recall ever using a trig out from a scope anyway. Is this something other's use or useful in a particular application? I'm not seeing it...
I can't recall ever using a trig out from a scope anyway. Is this something other's use or useful in a particular application? I'm not seeing it...
yes, making the external trig out useless unless your timing needs are not that critical.
I can't recall ever using a trig out from a scope anyway. Is this something other's use or useful in a particular application? I'm not seeing it...
It is useful... you can trigger external logic analyzer on an analog signal for instance...
But many people will use it very rarely.... I'm more in a situation to trigger the scope from a logic analyzer than vice versa for instance...
But I find it annoying, because I guess it can be done right if they would want to......
Well, they are more responsive to firmware issues than in the past. I don't recall them pulling firmware before and rather quickly. So, although it's a bummer that there's yet another problem, they are taking action.
I agree, they seem to react much better..That is very good.. We'll see the results though, I guess...
yes, making the external trig out useless unless your timing needs are not that critical.
And at slower time/div settings, the trigger output jitter will not even be visible.QuoteI can't recall ever using a trig out from a scope anyway. Is this something other's use or useful in a particular application? I'm not seeing it...It is useful... you can trigger external logic analyzer on an analog signal for instance...
But many people will use it very rarely.... I'm more in a situation to trigger the scope from a logic analyzer than vice versa for instance...
I have used the trigger output to trigger another oscilloscope effectively adding more channels but of course not on the same display. Sometimes I have used it to trigger a second oscilloscope using the advanced trigger capabilities of the first oscilloscope. You might have a 50 ohm input instrument like a frequency counter and the trigger output allows the use of the oscilloscope's 1M signal conditioning to trigger it. A vertical output may even be more useful for this but they are rare.
A gate output is much more useful compared to a trigger output; it can serve as a trigger output but can also be used to gate another measurement instrument. So for instance I can connect the B gate output from one of my analog oscilloscopes to my external universal counter and make a 9+ digit measurement on a part of the waveform defined by the B sweep. So the oscilloscope is selecting the portion of the waveform where the measurement is taking place *and* displaying which part that is visually. Some old analog oscilloscopes include this capability with their built in hardware universal counter; it is incredibly useful if you have a need for this sort of thing.
Some modern DSOs have "hardware" universal counters but I am dubious of their claims when they only return a low number of digits. That is hardly better than the firmware counters in my DSOs.QuoteBut I find it annoying, because I guess it can be done right if they would want to......
Fixing it would involve adding a variable delay between the FPGA and output and why bother? Most users will never notice it and fewer have an application that would require it.
I just wish Rigol had included the jitter in the trigger output specifications. To do otherwise is misleading.
I agree, they seem to react much better..That is very good.. We'll see the results though, I guess...
Yeah. I guess I lucked out because my boot version is 0.0.1.3 and my scope has been fine, so far, on the recalled firmware. If I had one version older, I might not be a happy camper.
I think problem was with versions lower than 0.0.1.3. ... I have the same and is also running fine...
I can't recall ever using a trig out from a scope anyway. Is this something other's use or useful in a particular application? I'm not seeing it...
It's for linking multiple devices together. If you've never done that then you probably never used it.
On the DS1054Z it also outputs 'fail' pulses when you're doing pass/fail testing. You could use it to sound an alarm or something.
I just wish Rigol had included the jitter in the trigger output specifications. To do otherwise is misleading.
I just wish Rigol had included the jitter in the trigger output specifications. To do otherwise is misleading.
Do they even publish a trig out spec?
OMG then I basically wasted about 400€ on Z... :palm: Now looking at Pico specs...
https://www.picotech.com/oscilloscope/2000/picoscope-2000-specifications (https://www.picotech.com/oscilloscope/2000/picoscope-2000-specifications)
"3 ps RMS typical" for 2208B and "30 ps RMS typical" for even most basic 100€ model!
Is it same "jitter spec" I assume?
No it's not.. Those are specs for scope timebase... Not trigger..
[...] Yesterday did read 1-70 pages of this thread [...]
No it's not.. Those are specs for scope timebase... Not trigger..
Ok, any idea what is the same timebase spec for Z? I'm not Pico salesman I'm just trying to understand what I did buy...
Currently I have Z(ero) trust in it above 25MHz...
Yesterday did read 1-70 pages of this thread - already gearing up to buy 100MHz lowpass filters... (+100EUR).
You cannot expect to see clean 50 MHz squarewave on any 100Mhz scope from ANY manufacturer..
What is expected jitter?
Good explanation. How does the circuit know which of the 8 magnitude comparitors sampled the event if they are all looking at the signal at the same time? Seems they'd have to be sequenced at the sampling rate and not parallel.
I just tried and for all other complex trigger types except "timeout" "trig out" pulse relative to trigger event spread is cca 5ns..
Funny enough, for said "timeout" there is no jitter at all....
I just tried and for all other complex trigger types except "timeout" "trig out" pulse relative to trigger event spread is cca 5ns..
Funny enough, for said "timeout" there is no jitter at all....
I am not sure what "cca" means but was the latency different?
I'll have to watch that later, but there has to be a clock that multiplexes them at the sampling rate (1GHz). It seemed from the description that the trigger circuit does not run that fast.
I will that add that without additional hardware like a variable delay line, it does not matter if the FPGA knows the exact trigger position or not because it can only create a trigger output signal aligned with its own internal clock signal. So it does not matter if sin(x)/x reconstruction happens before the trigger qualifier or not; a more accurate determination of the real trigger point will not make the trigger output more precise.
Oh well, I hope I didn't confuse the newbies too much with my testing of the trigger output characteristics of the Rigol scopes...
Oh well, I hope I didn't confuse the newbies too much with my testing of the trigger output characteristics of the Rigol scopes...
Don't worry. Newbies are already confused. I went to anaphylactic shock because I already had discovered that it pulls channels phase diff data out of its well ventilated rear. Waveform averaging was on (1024 wfms). Wave was steady. But phase diff number jumped around by about 5 degrees much faster than averaging settle time. So currently my only option is get a magnifying glass and phase diff data from waveform by cursors.
firmware request form from Rigol
3) In XY mode, any old 2 channel analogue scope is better for animations, demos or games display. Bear that in mind, so don't get too excited about the fullscreen XY-mode.
Could somebody please give me feedback about the firmware? My Rigol will arrive tomorrow...
Board Version
0.1.1
To get the expanded System Info display push Menu-Menu-Force-Menu over in the trigger block and then Utility->System->System Info
The latest firmware doesn't 'break scopes'! It MAY break older models with older bootloaders or something like that but it clearly doesn't break newer scopes. I installed the latest firmware before it was removed and it works fine.
And I learned great things today.. Latest rigol fw breaks scoops.. ^-^
I hoop they will release the new "fixed" firmware soon, can't wait to see that full screen mode.. ;)
So glad I found this thread. My 1054z is arriving in 2 days and I was planning on upgrading to the latest firmware without checking the board/bootloader version. My scope could be older stock for all I know.
Just to be clear, if the scope I get is newer(what is the cutoff point for new vs old?) is it 100% safe to upgrade to firmware 04.04.01.01?
If not, I'll obviously wait for a safe version to come out. If my trial runs out before the fix, I did want to "hack" it for the extra bandwidth/features - it's one of the reasons I got it as opposed to something else.
If I have a newer scope that can take the update, should I upgrade first and then unlock or vice versa?
Thanks.
Just to be clear, if the scope I get is newer(what is the cutoff point for new vs old?) is it 100% safe to upgrade to firmware 04.04.01.01?
If not, I'll obviously wait for a safe version to come out. If my trial runs out before the fix, I did want to "hack" it for the extra bandwidth/features - it's one of the reasons I got it as opposed to something else.
If I have a newer scope that can take the update, should I upgrade first and then unlock or vice versa?
Rigol answered (wow - that was really fast) that they had some trouble with the latest firmware update.
They'll release a new firmware (hopefully without problems) late january / beginning of february next year. :-+
Just a comment...
I ordered a DS1054Z last week from their distributor in Moscow and it arrived today with a build date in late September. The firmware was 0.04.04 with trailing numbers and board 01.04
I added the "all options" code and everything worked as usual.
Anyone tried these 10x-only probes?
http://www.sefram.com/en/products/accessories/GE2511-250mhz-passive-oscilloscope-probe-x10-300v.html (http://www.sefram.com/en/products/accessories/GE2511-250mhz-passive-oscilloscope-probe-x10-300v.html)
Around 35€ w/VAT, accessories included. Seems good match with DS1000Z.
Anyone tried these 10x-only probes?
http://www.sefram.com/en/products/accessories/GE2511-250mhz-passive-oscilloscope-probe-x10-300v.html (http://www.sefram.com/en/products/accessories/GE2511-250mhz-passive-oscilloscope-probe-x10-300v.html)
Around 35€ w/VAT, accessories included. Seems good match with DS1000Z.
I am sure they will work fine up to 100 MHz but they would be poor for random 250 MHz oscilloscopes do to lack of high frequency compensation adjustments. There are lots of 100 MHz probes suitable for the Rigol DS1000Z including switchable x1/x10 probes.
There's been a few threads testing cheapo probes and there's not much difference between them up to about 300mHz.
There's been a few threads testing cheapo probes and there's not much difference between them up to about 300mHz.I have seen a few at 300MHz and higher that were absolutely horrible.
No, it says -42.4dBV. With these settings it is about 40dB above the noisefloor.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn GT-P5110 met Tapatalk
Input coupling set to GND puts the noise at 1.2mV. That's the quantization noise I guess (resolution is 0.4mv at this setting)
Wait, I wasn't looking at the numbers, just eyeballing. I'm not that well versed on FFT here, so I took the top line as saying 10 dBV per division. I think the sensitivity is on the next menu? Or what does that 10 dBV mean?I quickly set one of the two cursors on the signal of interest (B). The other cursor (A) is just moved away, so ignore the delta.
Your cursors show Ay as -42 and By as -113, and the math is -71 dBV (and that does not match the graphic if the scale is 10 dBV/Div, and then shouldn't that delta be in terms of dB rather than dBV?).
The DS1000Z series (and DS2000A series? Others?) lacks the hardware to support ground coupling in the sense that other oscilloscopes do. Instead it changes the gain of the integrated variable gain amplifier so noise from all of the previous stages is removed.Ah, are they cheating? Did not realize that :-\
To measure the actual noise, short out the BNC or attach a 50 ohm coaxial termination or attenuator.
QuoteTo measure the actual noise, short out the BNC or attach a 50 ohm coaxial termination or attenuator.Ah, are they cheating? Did not realize that :-\
QuoteThe DS1000Z series (and DS2000A series? Others?) lacks the hardware to support ground coupling in the sense that other oscilloscopes do. Instead it changes the gain of the integrated variable gain amplifier so noise from all of the previous stages is removed.
To measure the actual noise, short out the BNC or attach a 50 ohm coaxial termination or attenuator.
Ah, are they cheating? Did not realize that :-\
With 50 Ohm termination I see 190uV rms (yeap 1mV scale)
How exactly did you arrive at 190uV RMS of noise? I assume you used the built in RMS measurement capability. That *should* work however 190uV RMS of noise seems high to me and I would want to verify that RMS measurements work correctly with wide bandwidth noise. Maybe something weird is going on there which seems to be a ubiquitous problem with Rigol DSOs.Yes I used the built-in function AVG. The noise is measure in normal acquisition mode. In High Res mode were you average over a number of over captured values (not sure about what it exactly does), the noise goes down to 85uV. I'm not talking about trace averaging. If I do trace averaging, I still measure around 70uV. That could indicate there is some offset, or a systematic error (crosstalk, quantisation error?)
QuoteHow exactly did you arrive at 190uV RMS of noise? I assume you used the built in RMS measurement capability. That *should* work however 190uV RMS of noise seems high to me and I would want to verify that RMS measurements work correctly with wide bandwidth noise. Maybe something weird is going on there which seems to be a ubiquitous problem with Rigol DSOs.Yes I used the built-in function AVG. The noise is measure in normal acquisition mode. In High Res mode were you average over a number of over captured values (not sure about what it exactly does), the noise goes down to 85uV. I'm not talking about trace averaging. If I do trace averaging, I still measure around 70uV. That could indicate there is some offset, or a systematic error (crosstalk, quantisation error?)
Using averaging or high resolution acquisition mode is note going to return a proper or comparable measurement of noise. Either will attenuate high frequency noise (and are useful for this reason); my measurements were over the full bandwidth of roughly 100 MHz. (1) The fact that you measured 85uV RMS and 70uV RMS with high resolution and averaging indicates to me that something is very wrong; the noise should have been much much lower because of limited bandwidth.I averaged to see if it is actually random noise. And it is not. Default display:
The measurement should *not* change significantly at different sample rates or record lengths (although it may look visually different); if it does, then something is wrong and this is easy to demonstrate.I checked, it does not change with memory depth settings.
The same test done at 50us/div displays a much wider noise band and it reports 500uV RMS noise. That should not happen. Hi RES solves that and lowers the noise back to 70uV (also single shot). And that's not averaging. With averaging the noise drops to 0-40uV (and the display is a nice noiseless line). Sample rate is 1Gs, mem depth 1.2M
QuoteUsing averaging or high resolution acquisition mode is note going to return a proper or comparable measurement of noise. Either will attenuate high frequency noise (and are useful for this reason); my measurements were over the full bandwidth of roughly 100 MHz. (1) The fact that you measured 85uV RMS and 70uV RMS with high resolution and averaging indicates to me that something is very wrong; the noise should have been much much lower because of limited bandwidth.
I averaged to see if it is actually random noise. And it is not. 1024 traces averaged were all the noise is uncorrelated should bring the trace back to the vertical quantization resolution of 40uV (about 20uV rms) (1mV/40). I can clearly see a 125MHz signal. That's what I also found in the FFT result from the raw samples.
If I use the raw sample data I have a bandwidth up to sample rate/2. That's 5 times oversampling for a scope bandwidth of 100MHz. I think I have shown clearly that the rigol has a lot of noise and a spur. I don't consider the scope to be defective though, it's just not the high quality that other scopes might offer.
QuoteThe measurement should *not* change significantly at different sample rates or record lengths (although it may look visually different); if it does, then something is wrong and this is easy to demonstrate.
I checked, it does not change with memory depth settings.
It does go up (a lot) when I change the time base. The same test done at 50us/div displays a much wider noise band and it reports 500uV RMS noise. That should not happen. Hi RES solves that and lowers the noise back to 70uV (also single shot). And that's not averaging. With averaging the noise drops to 0-40uV (and the display is a nice noiseless line). Sample rate is 1Gs, mem depth 1.2M
Perhaps I've had too much wine, but... I cannot find these values in the pictures you attached.I only attached the 100ns/div pictures. This time the same but at 50us. It should be the same. but it is not. Now it actually depends on the chosen memory depth |O
You say with NORMAL acquisition at 50ns/div you get 500 uV RMS noise, but the first attached picture shows 164 uV RMS measure.
You say in averaging the noise drops to 0-40 uV and yet the picture with AVERAGE acquisition mode, 1024 averages at 1GS/s and 1.2 point of memory shows 72.3 uV of rms noise.
What am I not understanding?
It is interesting that it was able to trigger on it as all; that 125 MHz signal must be pretty large. Averaging is especially useful for extracting a signal below the noise level if you have an external trigger signal available. It makes sense that a spurious signal would be 125 MHz since that is or related to the external ADC clock frequency.No it was not triggered. The wave shown is correlated to the internal timing of the scope. So it looks like it is triggered, but it's just free running. The 128MHz displayed is present in the sampled data and about equally sized as the noise.
Today I discovered that the 1mV scale is just the 2mV scale multiplied by two. This means the ADC resolution is the same in 2mV and in 1mV.
BTW, couldn't all this inconsistency be a side effect of the fact the DS1000Z compute quantities based on what is displayed on screen? This might all boil down to the algorithm that chooses which points to show on the screen. At the fastest timebases, all points are used. When you slow it down, it has to make choices, and this might be the source of all discrepancies.
QuoteIt is interesting that it was able to trigger on it as all; that 125 MHz signal must be pretty large. Averaging is especially useful for extracting a signal below the noise level if you have an external trigger signal available. It makes sense that a spurious signal would be 125 MHz since that is or related to the external ADC clock frequency.
No it was not triggered. The wave shown is correlated to the internal timing of the scope. So it looks like it is triggered, but it's just free running. The 128MHz displayed is present in the sampled data and about equally sized as the noise.
Today I discovered that the 1mV scale is just the 2mV scale multiplied by two. This means the ADC resolution is the same in 2mV and in 1mV. All other vertical settings result in about 10/13 division of which you see 8 on your screen.
Is this not ADC interleaving together with small non-linearity and offset differences between the ADCs? I see a similar thing on my MSO1074Z-S.
Typically these can be cal'd out, but this is dependent on the cal routine and the application of any of those corrections working.
What is it you're intending to use the scope for that will cause this to be a problem for you? I'm not saying it won't be, I'm just trying to figure out the case where this internally generated noise would be a problem for you, bearing in mind that once you've got your probe in there there'll be plenty of other places for noise to come in.
If the acquisition is done using averaging, then how did the trigger point get synchronized with the 128MHz signal (125MHz? 128MHz?) except by triggering on it?This is a correlated signal, so regardless of the trigger moment is always "sees" the same signal.
Making RMS noise measurements is one of the few reasons I would upgrade from an analog oscilloscope to a DSO. The procedure is time consuming on an analog DSO. In this case, the Rigol fails on two counts being both noisy and not making RMS measurements correctly.
I'm not really interested in the noise. I responded on someone asking if the noise of his scope was an issue. Gained quite some insight from all the measurements I made. About the ADC interleaving. I thought it's a 1GHz flash type ADC converter but indeed it could actually be interleaved. I'll recalibrate the scope to see if it makes a difference.
Subranging or pipelined ADCs replaced flash ADCs a long time ago.Commercial pipelined ADCs (1970s) predate flash ADCs (1980s), so its interesting that flash ADCs for more than 4 or 5 bits ever appeared.
Afaik, the win source uses the same algorithms like the web app.
I'm also having some trouble with the unlock codes. Its a brand new MSO1104Z
Any hints would be helpful. I've been double-checking every letter twice.
Hi, how can i remove the hook from the probe (Rigol PVP2150) ?
1) Can I update to the last FW without having the last bootloader ?Yes.
2) What is the last stable FW for the scope ?04.04.01.01
2a) Is the last FW hackable ?
1) Can I update to the last FW without having the last bootloader ?Yes.2) What is the last stable FW for the scope ?04.04.01.01
2a) Is the last FW hackable ?
Yes.
The last firmware has apparently a bug on SOME devices, which seems to be linked to some older boot loader version. This has caused Rigol to withdraw the last firmware from its download site and it is expected that a corrected firmware will be published in January 2017.
- People who already had flashed that last firmware and experienced no problem are fine.
- People who got a new device delivered with that last firmware are fine.
- People who flashed the firmware and had problems (apparently 1 person so far), sent the device in for repair/downgrade.
So:
Do you have the last firmware? Yes: Great! No: Then do not upgrade it with the problematic firmware. Wait for the new release and only use firmware from Rigol's website.
You like living on the razor's edge? Get the last firmware and flash it. Chances are, it will just work.
I never read about a "reboot after so many hours" problem, though.
All I have written here, has been posted in the Rigol DS1054Z related threads.
Regards,
Vitor
So I've understood that the mine version (SP2) correspond to the latest official version of the FW of the scope.
I've tried to install all the option but with the 5mV/div the signal level goes down out of the screen, also after the calibration. So , with telnet, I've removed all the option and reinstalled with the option DSER (all but without the 5mV/div).
So I've understood that the mine version (SP2) correspond to the latest official version of the FW of the scope.
I've tried to install all the option but with the 5mV/div the signal level goes down out of the screen, also after the calibration. So , with telnet, I've removed all the option and reinstalled with the option DSER (all but without the 5mV/div).
Yes, that option doesn't work. :)
It is possible to roll back to an older version ?
I've checked my scope the FW is the following:Were do you find this info? Utility -> System -> System Info is what I do, but I do not get Firmware version, Boot version or CPLD version. I also tried the *IDN? SCPI command and get the same info except Board Version is not present.
Model:DS1104Z
SN:DS1ZA181xxxxxx
Manufacturer:RIGOL TECHNOLOGIES
Board Ver:0.1.1
Firmware Ver:0.2.3.11
BOOT Ver:0.0.1.4
CPLD Ver:1.1
SoftWare Ver:00.04.03.SP2
I've checked my scope the FW is the following:Were do you find this info? Utility -> System -> System Info is what I do, but I do not get Firmware version, Boot version or CPLD version. I also tried the *IDN? SCPI command and get the same info except Board Version is not present.
Model:DS1104Z
SN:DS1ZA181xxxxxx
Manufacturer:RIGOL TECHNOLOGIES
Board Ver:0.1.1
Firmware Ver:0.2.3.11
BOOT Ver:0.0.1.4
CPLD Ver:1.1
SoftWare Ver:00.04.03.SP2
It is possible to roll back to an older version ?
Strangely not.
I've checked my scope the FW is the following:Were do you find this info? Utility -> System -> System Info is what I do, but I do not get Firmware version, Boot version or CPLD version. I also tried the *IDN? SCPI command and get the same info except Board Version is not present.
Model:DS1104Z
SN:DS1ZA181xxxxxx
Manufacturer:RIGOL TECHNOLOGIES
Board Ver:0.1.1
Firmware Ver:0.2.3.11
BOOT Ver:0.0.1.4
CPLD Ver:1.1
SoftWare Ver:00.04.03.SP2
The last firmware has apparently a bug on SOME devices, which seems to be linked to some older boot loader version. This has caused Rigol to withdraw the last firmware from its download site and it is expected that a corrected firmware will be published in January 2017.
- People who already had flashed that last firmware and experienced no problem are fine.
- People who got a new device delivered with that last firmware are fine.
- People who flashed the firmware and had problems (apparently 1 person so far), sent the device in for repair/downgrade.
So:
Do you have the last firmware? Yes: Great! No: Then do not upgrade it with the problematic firmware. Wait for the new release and only use firmware from Rigol's website.
You like living on the razor's edge? Get the last firmware and flash it. Chances are, it will just work.
I never read about a "reboot after so many hours" problem, though.
All I have written here, has been posted in the Rigol DS1054Z related threads.
Regards,
Vitor
I have just ordered a DS1054. I assume it will be on FW: 04.03.02.03. I would like to "hack" my unit and get the upgraded features. Once I apply the hack will it still be possible to update to the new firmware when it is released later this month?
My question is: Is it possible to let the scope calculate the VRMS, Vp-p and frequency on the "math curve", like it can on the four independent channels?
I'm unable to access the "network settings" portion of the web interface on a ds1054z (04.04.SP1) The page prompts for credentials but the defaults (empty username, "111111" as password) don't work.
Interestingly enough it is possible to successfully change the password in a different part of the web interface (no username is required to do this) using "111111" as the old password. So the default password does seem to be valid. Any thoughts on this?
I'm unable to access the "network settings" portion of the web interface on a ds1054z (04.04.SP1) The page prompts for credentials but the defaults (empty username, "111111" as password) don't work.
Interestingly enough it is possible to successfully change the password in a different part of the web interface (no username is required to do this) using "111111" as the old password. So the default password does seem to be valid. Any thoughts on this?
I mailed this question to Rigol support for my scope and received next answer:
Could you try this user name / password with your device, please?
username: test
password.: 111111
Please note: password / user name doesn't work on some units.
If you have the same behavior this will be reworked with next firmware update (planned end of January 2017).
I hope this helps.
Hi!
I have a question about the math functionality. A few days ago I was probing the output of a 24v class D amplifier, where both the plus and the minus output is driven for maximal amplitude. To accomplish the "rectified signal" has a DC component referenced to ground, so if I'm going to measure the speaker output, I'll have to do a differential measurement.
The math operation suitable for this is the A-B operation, and the result is displayed as a purple wave at the screen. My question is: Is it possible to let the scope calculate the VRMS, Vp-p and frequency on the "math curve", like it can on the four independent channels? At the moment I've been using the cursors, but it would be much better if it could do it automatically!
You can read the password with this SCPI command:
:LAN:PASSword?
For the user name I know of no SCPI command.
Peter
You're right, the program can do nothing better than Telnet. I have programmed the program for myself, and also made available to others. Sorry, I did not want to advertise, I deleted my post.
Peter
telnet do the same as your program. Okay, I can't use a mouse, that's all.
You're right, the program can do nothing better than Telnet. I have programmed the program for myself, and also made available to others. Sorry, I did not want to advertise, I deleted my post.
Peters website (Swiss language)You mean German? (There is no "Swiss language" as such — though there are Swiss German and Romansh — and .at means Austria, which is German-speaking.)
http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/ (http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/)
You're right, the program can do nothing better than Telnet. I have programmed the program for myself, and also made available to others. Sorry, I did not want to advertise, I deleted my post.
Peter
I wouldn't make you sick. I'm sorry.
Peters website (Swiss language)
http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/ (http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/)
Screenshots
http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/screenshots.htm (http://peter.dreisiebner.at/rigol-bildschirmkopie-lan/screenshots.htm)
telnet can handle the scope without any desktop backgrounds.
telnet do the same as your program.
I'm unable to access the "network settings" portion of the web interface on a ds1054z (04.04.SP1) The page prompts for credentials but the defaults (empty username, "111111" as password) don't work.
Interestingly enough it is possible to successfully change the password in a different part of the web interface (no username is required to do this) using "111111" as the old password. So the default password does seem to be valid. Any thoughts on this?
I mailed this question to Rigol support for my scope and received next answer:
Could you try this user name / password with your device, please?
username: test
password.: 111111
Please note: password / user name doesn't work on some units.
If you have the same behavior this will be reworked with next firmware update (planned end of January 2017).
I hope this helps.
It's rigollan/111111 - I just grepped it out of the firmware strings and tried it on my scope.
... has a web UI, so I can just enter the IP of the scope and I will get a UI in my browser, ...Yes, so it is!
... has a web UI, so I can just enter the IP of the scope and I will get a UI in my browser, ...Yes
Check it !... has a web UI, so I can just enter the IP of the scope and I will get a UI in my browser, ...Yes
Didn't know that.
Oh, that kind of UI, not instrument UI. What would be the utility of it?
$ strings 4411/SparrowAPP.out | grep -C 3 "111111"
/lxi/identification/LXIIdentification.xsd
/sys/lxi_web.hex
rigollan
111111
CONFIG
%2x%2x%2x%2x%2x%2x
Exif/JPEG
Oh, that kind of UI, not instrument UI. What would be the utility of it?
This time I logged in with blah/111111 so it's not fussy (this particular scope is still running 04.03.02.03).
Has anybody tried an empty username and '111111'?
Glad you got it working. I never cleared those out when I used it, but it was some time ago. Enjoy your scope!
[...]One thing that seems odd about this one, though, is The build date, calibration date, and their relation to the versions of the board and software. maybe I'm seing it wrong, but it seems like the unit was calibrated 11 months after the manufacture date. go figure.
Software (firmware) 00.04.03.02.03
board ver 0.1.4
boot ver 0.0.1.4
build date Sept 11 2015
The factory calibration page date is July 11, 2016.
Some clones of the original (and now unavailable) Riglol website have a bug and produce the wrong activation code.
Attached is a DOS version of the Riglol software (all credits go to the authors). It will work in a CMD window even on Windows 10 64 bit, so no need to use Linux.
It will produce the correct code and I am posting it for future reference.
Regards
Well the thing is, the website isn't broken for everyone, it seems. I used the website just fine. (And since I don't run Windows, downloading an .exe isn't an option anyway.)Some clones of the original (and now unavailable) Riglol website have a bug and produce the wrong activation code.
Attached is a DOS version of the Riglol software (all credits go to the authors). It will work in a CMD window even on Windows 10 64 bit, so no need to use Linux.
It will produce the correct code and I am posting it for future reference.
Regards
After having issues with the unlock code I got from the listed website I tried running riglol.exe in the windows command prompt and it gave the correct code straight up!
The program can be downloaded from the website if you scroll down to the bottom and download the raw code. If you go back to the above quoted reply there is a direct link to download the file.
Might be worth linking to this program on page 1 of this thread for the benefit of all?
Well the thing is, the website isn't broken for everyone, it seems. I used the website just fine. (And since I don't run Windows, downloading an .exe isn't an option anyway.)Some clones of the original (and now unavailable) Riglol website have a bug and produce the wrong activation code.
Attached is a DOS version of the Riglol software (all credits go to the authors). It will work in a CMD window even on Windows 10 64 bit, so no need to use Linux.
It will produce the correct code and I am posting it for future reference.
Regards
After having issues with the unlock code I got from the listed website I tried running riglol.exe in the windows command prompt and it gave the correct code straight up!
The program can be downloaded from the website if you scroll down to the bottom and download the raw code. If you go back to the above quoted reply there is a direct link to download the file.
Might be worth linking to this program on page 1 of this thread for the benefit of all?
If I were a programmer, perhaps. I am not.
I do wonder why the website occasionally spits out incorrect data, while working correctly for most people. I had no trouble using it to generate the unlock code for my scope.
Well guys,
I just got my RMA replacement scope and it still has jitter but not nearly as bad as the last one. BUT this doesn't look right what do you guys think?
This is with a Probe Attached to the scope but nothing attached to it.
I'm seeing conflicting info on the latest firmware revision. The latest Rigol wants to give me is 00.04.03.02.03 but my system screen has a later revision of 00.04.04.SP1. Is there a later revision? I apologize if this info is somewhere else but I can't seem to find it. (The first page of this thread says there is a v00.04.04.01.01 (don't know if thats later than what i have or not) but the link it goes to only has 00.04.02.01.00 available.)
Should I buy DS1052E or DS1054Z ?
Price is almost the same.
Should I buy DS1052E or DS1054Z ?
Price is almost the same.
The 1054 has 4 channels and that's just a lot more useful than 2 channels.
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//FWIW, given the size of the DSO 1xxx user base, Rigol has been on top of solving issues. ;)
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
The DS1054Z had many bugs. Rigol fixed many (most?) of them, which is why it's beneficial to buy something that has been on the market for a couple of years or more. We may find new bugs, but meanwhile we make use of the tool and it works for us.
If this scope will do what you need and is in your budget, worry less and make more stuff. :-+ If you have a higher budget, you might consider a higher-end scope if that will help you worry less. ^-^
Thank you very much. So am not gonna make a mistake buying a 1054Z instead of 1052E ?
My budget is max 500$, so high end devices are for now out of question.
Thank you very much. So am not gonna make a mistake buying a 1054Z instead of 1052E ?The additional 2 channels are nice to have when you need them, as are the software features after unlocking it (i.e. decoding capabilities). Unlocking also doubles the memory IIRC.
My budget is max 500$, so high end devices are for now out of question.
Remember: Don't fix it if it ain't broken. Any firmware update has a risk of going wrong. Only apply firmware updates if you really need to.
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
The DS1054Z had many bugs. Rigol fixed many (most?) of them, which is why it's beneficial to buy something that has been on the market for a couple of years or more. We may find new bugs, but meanwhile we make use of the tool and it works for us.
If this scope will do what you need and is in your budget, worry less and make more stuff. :-+ If you have a higher budget, you might consider a higher-end scope if that will help you worry less. ^-^
Thank you very much. So am not gonna make a mistake buying a 1054Z instead of 1052E ?
My budget is max 500$, so high end devices are for now out of question.
You won't be making a mistake with the 1054Z. If it comes from current inventory, it will have the latest firmware 00.04.04.SP1. To the best of my knowledge, all bugs have been eliminated EXCEPT for a spelling error "Pluses" where it should be "Pulses". I can live with it...
I would suggest you read this thread only as far back as Nov 2016. That was when the lastest firmware was released. Issues with firmware older than that seem to have been fixed. Who really cares about issues at the margins way back when the scope was first introduced? They have been fixed.
There are alternatives, of course. The thing is, they cost a lot more money.
As boring as it seems, do try to read the User Manual. These is a lot of capability in the scope that you just won't find unless you read about it first. It has a lot more capability than just displaying wiggly lines.
In fact, you can download and read the manual while you wait for your scope to arrive. At least skim over it and see what it can do. You can get down to button-pushing when the scope arrives.
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=292123;image)
Possible PEBCAK error. Probably no defective scope. Recommendation: RTFM. :phew:
BTW: The scope reacts in this case when the trigger condition on channel 1 is matched (even when the channel 1 is deactivated). Then it shows the signal of channel 4.
Please look in your manual about:
Trigger- source (to a channel)
Trigger- modes: Auto, normal and single.
Manual DS1054Z Download as Pdf. (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-050a/1/-/-/-/-/MSO1000Z%26DS1000Z_UserGuide.pdf)
Note that the scope is in "AUTO" trigger mode. It should be showing a trace on any active channel, regardless of whether it is triggered or not, regardless of whether a trigger condition is met on the Trigger channel or not.I've found that at certain timebases (relatively slow ones IIRC), AUTO trigger fails, as it oscillates between NORMAL and AUTO. Setting it manually to NORMAL gets a reliable trace.
I think we need a little more information, but at first glance there does seem to be something wrong (possibly in addition to PEBCAK.)
See here: (no inputs to any channels, but since scope is in AUTO trigger mode, the active CH4 shows a trace -- as expected. When scope is in Normal trigger mode, no trace appears since it is WAITing for a trigger event on the trigger channel.)
Note that the scope is in "AUTO" trigger mode. It should be showing a trace on any active channel, regardless of whether it is triggered or not, regardless of whether a trigger condition is met on the Trigger channel or not.
I think we need a little more information, but at first glance there does seem to be something wrong (possibly in addition to PEBCAK.)
See here: (no inputs to any channels, but since scope is in AUTO trigger mode, the active CH4 shows a trace -- as expected. When scope is in Normal trigger mode, no trace appears since it is WAITing for a trigger event on the trigger channel.)
With this settings the oscilloscope should draw the trace.Unless the waveform DC offset placed the waveform off the display.
I am not be able to reproduce the failure. :-//
Oddly, the Tektronix DSO training material may provide the answer: Use the Auto button! Yup! Right from the factories mouth (ok, text editor), use the Autoset button Step 3 of first project. I assume Tek Autoset == Rigol Auto:)
http://www.tek.com/sites/tek.com/files/courseware/ST_Arduino_Labs_Combined.pdf (http://www.tek.com/sites/tek.com/files/courseware/ST_Arduino_Labs_Combined.pdf)
Then consider AC coupling and see if that doesn't work a little better.
To the best of my knowledge, all bugs have been eliminated EXCEPT for a spelling error "Pluses" where it should be "Pulses".
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
With this settings the oscilloscope should draw the trace.Unless the waveform DC offset placed the waveform off the display.
I am not be able to reproduce the failure. :-//
I recently bought a ds1054z and most of the time the trace disappears from the screen. Is this a known bug or have I got a defective unit? btw does Tequipment pay for shipping a defective unit back to them or do I have to pay for it?I tested it further and it appears to be a fault in the device. the self cal doesn't even work(fails or hangs) and the problem with the
Oddly, the Tektronix DSO training material may provide the answer: Use the Auto button! Yup! Right from the factories mouth (ok, text editor), use the Autoset button Step 3 of first project. I assume Tek Autoset == Rigol Auto
http://www.tek.com/sites/tek.com/files/courseware/ST_Arduino_Labs_Combined.pdf (http://www.tek.com/sites/tek.com/files/courseware/ST_Arduino_Labs_Combined.pdf)
Then consider AC coupling and see if that doesn't work a little better.
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. :palm:
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. :palm:
Please post links to where "people" have bought 1102E instead of 1054z due to "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.
The big "AUTO" button... If the indicator says "Auto" there should be a trace regardless of whether a trigger event is detected on the trigger channel.
The big "AUTO" button... If the indicator says "Auto" there should be a trace regardless of whether a trigger event is detected on the trigger channel.
I noticed the Auto indicator is not lit up. Is there some way to get the scope trigger to be in AUTO mode, but not active? I sort of recall something like that after pushing the single auto buttons, but I do not recall if it said stop or wait... Anyway, AUTO was not lit...
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. :palm:
Please post links to where "people" have bought 1102E instead of 1054z due to "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.
One of the posters was considering the E just because of reading all the Z bugs, just a few posts up...
That post refers to the DS1052E, not the DS1102E. But the point still stands: Please post links to where "people" have actually purchased either of those two channel scopes _instead_ of a DS1054Z due to the "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.
The big "AUTO" button... If the indicator says "Auto" there should be a trace regardless of whether a trigger event is detected on the trigger channel.
I noticed the Auto indicator is not lit up. Is there some way to get the scope trigger to be in AUTO mode, but not active? I sort of recall something like that after pushing the single auto buttons, but I do not recall if it said stop or wait... Anyway, AUTO was not lit...
That post refers to the DS1052E, not the DS1102E. But the point still stands: Please post links to where "people" have actually purchased either of those two channel scopes _instead_ of a DS1054Z due to the "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.
And if we can't, you 'win'? :popcorn:
We've got one guy debating whether to get a DS1052E instead of a DS1054Z because of what he's been reading. I've bene called all sorts of names for defending Rigol here but this is 100% proof of the real reason why I do it.
a) The bugs are minor, most of them took about six months before anybody even noticed them.
b) The difference between a hobbyist owning a DS1054Z and not owning one is about ten parsecs wide.
c) The difference between owning a DS1054Z and owning an equivalent-feature 'scope with no spelling mistakes in the menus is about this ->.<- much... but you have to pay two or three times the price for that. :-//
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. :palm:
Please post links to where "people" have bought 1102E instead of 1054z due to "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.
One of the posters was considering the E just because of reading all the Z bugs, just a few posts up...
That post refers to the DS1052E, not the DS1102E. But the point still stands: Please post links to where "people" have actually purchased either of those two channel scopes _instead_ of a DS1054Z due to the "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.
Should I buy DS1052E or DS1054Z ?
Price is almost the same.
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
Thank you very much. So am not gonna make a mistake buying a 1054Z instead of 1052E ?
My budget is max 500$, so high end devices are for now out of question.
Any consumer item at whatever price point should do what it says it will do in the specifications. Perhaps you yourself never encountered the bugs because all you need a scope to do is to show some wiggly colored lines. Other users may expect more -- like they might expect the scope to do what it is supposed to do, without freezing, giving incorrect RMS measurements, having all measurements stop working, miscounting "pluses" or any of the other "minor bugs" that have been noted over time.
"It's only 400 dollars, what do you expect" gets kind of old after a while.
b) The difference between a hobbyist owning a DS1054Z and not owning one is about ten parsecs wide.
c) The difference between owning a DS1054Z and owning an equivalent-feature 'scope with no spelling mistakes in the menus is about this ->.<- much... but you have to pay two or three times the price for that. :-//
Any consumer item at whatever price point should do what it says it will do in the specifications.
Perhaps you yourself never encountered the bugs because all you need a scope to do is to show some wiggly colored lines. Other users may expect more -- like they might expect the scope to do what it is supposed to do, without freezing,
giving incorrect RMS measurements, having all measurements stop working, miscounting "pluses" or any of the other "minor bugs" that have been noted over time.
"It's only 400 dollars, what do you expect" gets kind of old after a while.
Any consumer item at whatever price point should do what it says it will do in the specifications.
wow, 134 pages of posts to a topic started almost 3 years ago. impressive.
Other then Tektronix or Keysight, has ANY scope manufacturer ever released a 'prefect' scope? Or, again put another way, when did programmers all of a sudden get things right?
* Fixed the system crash randomly which caused by the ¡§Advance Math¡¨ function
* Fixed the AD malfunction under certain circumstances
...
* Added USBDelay command in order to solve the USB data leaks for WIN10.
* Fixed the ext trigger of roll mode which may cause the system crash.
* Fixed the zoom state malfunction for horizontal position command.
* Changed the value range of trigger hold off command: the minimum value changed to 4ns from 10ns.
wow, 134 pages of posts to a topic started almost 3 years ago. impressive.Change "gojimmypi" to "newbrain", "dual trace analog tek" to Fairchild 304-A, and I could have written this word by word.
with a wide range of opinions and perspectives, I thought I'd add mine. :)
The DS1054 is a low end oscilloscope. There's no denying that. I mean, seriously: $399?!
My degree is in electronic engineering from a few decades back. Needless to say, the magic of the DS1054 back then would have cost probably tens of thousands of dollars. Times change, eh?
I came to the eevblog some time ago looking for a good hobbyist oscilloscope. These days I work as a pure software engineer, but my heart is still in electronics. I was really happy to find Dave's review of the DS1054. That sealed my decision on the DS1054.
There are certainly many better, more feature packed, higher bandwidth, better this-n-that oscilloscopes. But for me, for hacking on the weekend - for the price - I really like my DS1054.
If you've come here with a similar situation, I say go for the DS1054. If you are a professional and the company has an unlimited budget, then buy something better, for sure.
But for a "basic" oscilloscope (I mean seriously, I started out with a dual trace analog tek many years ago that worked just fine, this one is awesome).... the DS1054 can't be beat, yes, even with the occasional quirks.
The only thing I don't like? The fan. They could have spent just a few bucks more and included a silent fan. Feature requests? Well, the screen is somewhat small. An HDMI connector would be really awesome.
Just another opinion fwiw. :)
1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. :-//
And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. :palm:
Please post links to where "people" have bought 1102E instead of 1054z due to "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.
One of the posters was considering the E just because of reading all the Z bugs, just a few posts up...
sorry if I caused any trouble with my question ^-^
Any consumer item at whatever price point should do what it says it will do in the specifications.
So... if you bought a car that cost half as much as rivals but only went 198km/h instead of the advertised 200km/h you'd take it back?
You wouldn't be able to see any value in it at all? You wouldn't be able to understand people recommending it to others?
This is common on cars, but are those valid reasons to negate the value of the entire thing.
Some prospective buyers of the DS1054Z are concerned about software bugs. These have been extensively documented due to the instrument's huge popularity, but at the time of writing (February 2017) most have been resolved by firmware updates. There are likely to be a number of bugs with most newly launched budget oscilloscopes, but these typically have less visibility due to much lower sales volumes.
Unless you have specific requirements not met by this model, it is still the default recommendation in its price range.
is it still hackable with latest firmware?
and the dp832 power supply too?
is it still hackable with latest firmware? and the dp832 power supply too? great if someone knows this because i think of buying some new lab equip.
The only question I've searched and can not find. Has anyone used DSER hack and needed warranty work done? Did Rigol honor the warranty?
The only question I've searched and can not find. Has anyone used DSER hack and needed warranty work done? Did Rigol honor the warranty?
The options can be removed. I don't remember the command offhand but it's in this thread many times.
If you ever need it, just ask here...
$ telnet 192.168.1.15 5555
(replace the ip address with the one of your scope):SYST:OPT:UNINST
$ echo ':SYST:OPT:UNINST' > /dev/usbtmc0
As a partial answer to the original question, I don't believe there has ever been a documented instance of Rigol refusing to honour the warranty on a hacked 'scope,
It seems Rigol has given up on updates and bug fixes.
We were promised to get the new update by end of January.
It seems Rigol has given up on updates and bug fixes. We were promised to get the new update by end of January. Anyone knows about any upcoming news?
v00.04.04.00.07 2016/07/19
- Added the full-screen display in the XY mode
- Modified the Trace data of average sample mode
- Fixed the bug of system halted for wave persistance in the Zoom mode
- Fixed bugs about Measure
It found it can't decode a longer 8n1 RS232 115.2k baud packet without incorrectly setting the data length to 7 bits.
Is this a known bug or a bug list I can add this to, I would like to use 115k as that is my most common debugging speed.
Where can I find the faq of th Rigol DS1054Z oscilloscope?
Thanks for the reply, right on the first post I found the comment that there should be a FAQ, but I cannot find the link. There are many links there, but I didn't find a link pointing to the FAQ.
Apart from turning up the brightness to Max, anyone got any suggestions for making such pulses show up more clearly???
Thanks guys.
Hadn't seen that it's possible to dim the grid without turning it off. Nice.
I think it would help a lot if I could turn down the room brightness as well ;)
btw. what principles does the scope follow when AUTO setting memory depth ?
Is it worth, on average, leaving it on a manual setting?
ps alsetalokin4017 in your first post certain screenshots channel 4 appears at two levels of time scale on the same screen. How does one achieve that?
btw. what principles does the scope follow when AUTO setting memory depth ?
Is it worth, on average, leaving it on a manual setting?
Just received my DS1054Z. So far I am somewhat happy with it - but some of the UI I just don't get.
Right now I am struggling with the Auto Measurement Items.
I press a button and the item appears - but how do I make it disappear again?
The manual only talks about "activating" them.
When I press it again it says "Existed item!"
Let's forget about that grammar - but I must be missing something.
Just received my DS1054Z. So far I am somewhat happy with it - but some of the UI I just don't get.
Right now I am struggling with the Auto Measurement Items.
I press a button and the item appears - but how do I make it disappear again?
The manual only talks about "activating" them.
When I press it again it says "Existed item!"
Let's forget about that grammar - but I must be missing something.
Just received my DS1054Z. So far I am somewhat happy with it - but some of the UI I just don't get.
Right now I am struggling with the Auto Measurement Items.
I press a button and the item appears - but how do I make it disappear again?
The manual only talks about "activating" them.
When I press it again it says "Existed item!"
Let's forget about that grammar - but I must be missing something.
Page 6-26 of the user's guide -
https://www.sicamax.ch/downloads/mso1000zds1000z_userguide_en.pdf (https://www.sicamax.ch/downloads/mso1000zds1000z_userguide_en.pdf)
Indeed, it's annoying. This is how it always was.
The only workaround I know (in order to make the unwanted measurements to go away) is to cycle the power of the scope, but this is totally unpractical.
I just wanted save a screenshot to demonstrate - but seems like it does not like any of my USB sticks.
It just keeps saying "No USB disk!" >:(
I press a button and the item appears - but how do I make it disappear again?
The manual only talks about "activating" them.
When I press it again it says "Existed item!"
Let's forget about that grammar - but I must be missing something.
Being someone who has worked in the UX area I want to slap whoever came up with that UI.
there is no way to make individual measurements disappear.
It's one of the worst examples of interaction design I've seen in a long time.
Quotethere is no way to make individual measurements disappear.
Wrong.
Quotethere is no way to make individual measurements disappear.
Wrong.
Second, as soon as a new measurement is added, the old (unselected or deleted) ones appear back, but as greyed out.
Quotethere is no way to make individual measurements disappear.
Wrong.
Meh, not exactly.
First, it's cumbersome, and it is useful only to prepare a nice screen for a capture.
Second, as soon as a new measurement is added, the old (unselected or deleted) ones appear back, but as greyed out.
Brightness effect noted (!!) the pulse width distortion is nuts. Would never have figured that one out. Thanks.
OK I see there's a clear consensus to play with mem depth after everything else is right. One of the reasons I asked was that so far the scope seems to systematically use a mem depth setting that is VERY low compared to its capacity. Even accounting for numbers of channels and so forth. That seemed strange.
Will experiment more.
I just wanted save a screenshot to demonstrate - but seems like it does not like any of my USB sticks.
It just keeps saying "No USB disk!" >:(
I just wanted save a screenshot to demonstrate - but seems like it does not like any of my USB sticks.
It just keeps saying "No USB disk!" >:(
Works now - after a restart. ???
This means when you want to add a measurement that is already displayed as invisible measure "4" or "5", the scope says "measurement already added". The only way to display that measure, is first to add 2 more other measurements that you do not need, and then select the one you need again...No, that's not right either, if I am understanding you correctly. You just need to use the "Select Item" list to turn off one of the measurements of the three that are displayed, then you can turn on the one you need again.
Sure, the Rigol software often appears to be a set of "kludges" that were cobbled together by a committee of junior programmers who have never actually used an oscilloscope... but who remember playing with those complicated Chinese puzzle boxes as kids.
Some of these responses puzzle me. I have no trouble displaying just the measurements I want to show, turning others off, adding new ones or displaying old, previously turned off measurements. Of course I actually use the scope every day to make measurements (however quirky or wrong or misspelled they may turn out to be) so I am very familiar with how the system operates. It appears that some people weren't even aware of the "Select Item" list or haven't used it very much. I suggest playing around with this feature a bit; eventually it will "sink in" and you'll be able to use it to display what you want, without being troubled by the "greyed out, inactive but displayed anyway" problem. Use the "Select Item" list to remove undesired greyed-out items from the screen display.
Perhaps it may help to think of the measurement display as a sort of list buffer that holds the last five that you have selected and allows you to turn on or off any of those using the "Select Item" list. When you want to add a sixth one, it goes in the fifth place and pushes the rest down one position, and the old "first" one is gone. It gets slightly more complicated when you have Large or ExtraLarge fonts selected since only three or two of the five can be displayed at one time, or if you insist on displaying your chosen measurements in some particular order.QuoteThis means when you want to add a measurement that is already displayed as invisible measure "4" or "5", the scope says "measurement already added". The only way to display that measure, is first to add 2 more other measurements that you do not need, and then select the one you need again...No, that's not right either, if I am understanding you correctly. You just need to use the "Select Item" list to turn off one of the measurements of the three that are displayed, then you can turn on the one you need again.
Sure, the Rigol software often appears to be a set of "kludges" that were cobbled together by a committee of junior programmers who have never actually used an oscilloscope... but who remember playing with those complicated Chinese puzzle boxes as kids.
But what did you expect, it's only 400 dollars. :horse: Shouldn't you be happy that it even "pretends" to do measurements at all? :palm:
I have no trouble displaying just the measurements I want to show, turning others off, adding new ones or displaying old, previously turned off measurements. Of course I actually use the scope every day to make measurements (however quirky or wrong or misspelled they may turn out to be) so I am very familiar with how the system operates. It appears that some people weren't even aware of the "Select Item" list or haven't used it very much.
Perhaps it may help to think of the measurement display as a sort of list buffer that holds the last five that you have selected and allows you to turn on or off any of those using the "Select Item" list. When you want to add a sixth one, it goes in the fifth place and pushes the rest down one position, and the old "first" one is gone. It gets slightly more complicated when you have Large or ExtraLarge fonts selected since only three or two of the five can be displayed at one time, or if you insist on displaying your chosen measurements in some particular order.
Sure, the Rigol software often appears to be a set of "kludges" that were cobbled together by a committee of junior programmers who have never actually used an oscilloscope...
But what did you expect, it's only 400 dollars. :horse: Shouldn't you be happy that it even "pretends" to do measurements at all? :palm:
Has it always been this way?
Why this inconsistency in the UI?
P.S.
Also, a curiosity is my DS1054z the only one to have UV measles?
I looked at it with an UV torch: it's full of tiny yellow phosphorescent dots! Hope it's not catchy.
Now, warranty expired yesterday so paranoia is kicking in...
Why can't I make it accept the number of averages by clicking the rotary encoder?
Turn on the scope, wait for trace to appear.
Go to the Acquire menu, push top button (Mode) and select "Average" with the rotary selection knob .
When you press the selecting knob the item is memorized.
"Averages" item lights up and says "2".
By turning the little selection knob I can choose any power of 2 I want but...
If I press the rotary knob to confirm it, I get "Parameter Limited!" and number of averages goes back to "2".
If I press the blue button next to the Averages item, though, the number of averages I select is accepted.
Has it always been this way?
Why this inconsistency in the UI?
P.S.
Also, a curiosity is my DS1054z the only one to have UV measles?
I looked at it with an UV torch: it's full of tiny yellow phosphorescent dots! Hope it's not catchy.
EDIT: some typos - not all, of course.
Also, a curiosity is my DS1054z the only one to have UV measles?
I looked at it with an UV torch: it's full of tiny yellow phosphorescent dots! Hope it's not catchy.
I assume you had to wait for a very long time to get the unit, and you barely managed to close the door behind you before you started unboxing...maybe it's...jizz? ;D
I uploaded a picture. I probably need to apologize to my cat. The drops are too small. Maybe it's that Oust deodorant I sprayed in the room when one of those stinky bugs decided to immolate itself on a 200W alogen lamp.
[...]
March 25 2017
I just got my brand new DSO1054 today.
[...]
Firmware is 00.04.04.01 (00.04.04 SP 1)
Yeah, apparently the fact that it's cheap means we forfeit the right to wish the software was better... :palm: :-DD |OSure, the Rigol software often appears to be a set of "kludges" that were cobbled together by a committee of junior programmers who have never actually used an oscilloscope... but who remember playing with those complicated Chinese puzzle boxes as kids.
But what did you expect, it's only 400 dollars. :horse: Shouldn't you be happy that it even "pretends" to do measurements at all? :palm:
I will try the way you suggest, never tried that before, thanks for the tip.
Please don't get me wrong, I really like this scope and its extremely good value for money, but just wanted to point out the measurements could be a bit more user friendly (the select item list I did not use so far). I wanted to point this out because maybe some Rigol programmer wouldread this, and they might update this in the next firmware release. For me it was in no way meant as a bashing of Rigol.
The fact that some people here don't find it problematic doesn't mean that it's a good design.
If you are not used to quality you don't know any better. For example: Recently I bought a caliper from a cheap brand because my old caliper (Mitutoyo) had an accident. I used it a couple of times but it just didn't feel right and it also had a lot of play in the jaw so I bought a Mitutoyo.QuoteThe fact that some people here don't find it problematic doesn't mean that it's a good design.
Does the fact that lots of people buy and use the scope happily mean it's a bad design?
The fact that lots of people buy it and use it happily says absolutely nothing about whether it's a good design or not, only that it's not so bad as to be a deal-breaker. People tolerate poor designs all the time, for various reasons (mostly for lack of alternatives, or because it's too expensive to replace something that's already purchased). Only once it goes beyond a particular pain threshold do we take action. That threshold is very individual. (For me, it's low: it's why I can't stand using Windows and Linux, the little tiny usability problems in them drive me nuts. Most people have a higher threshold, and that's fine.)QuoteThe fact that some people here don't find it problematic doesn't mean that it's a good design.Does the fact that lots of people buy and use the scope happily mean it's a bad design?
Oh, I don't exactly disagree with you....You've done nothing but disagree with everyone who complains about this bad UI.
but.... "you get what you pay for", and sometimes, with Chinese stuff, you get even less.For one, price has little correlation with the quality of usability. Many very expensive products have terrible user interfaces. (For example, the first generation of BMW's iDrive became famous for how terrible a UI it was.) If anything, you often see the opposite, that expensive (i.e. non-mass-market) products have terrible UIs because they're made in such small numbers that the manufacturer can't invest in big UX projects.
You've done nothing but disagree with everyone who complains about this bad UI.
Sure, the Rigol software often appears to be a set of "kludges" that were cobbled together by a committee of junior programmers who have never actually used an oscilloscope... but who remember playing with those complicated Chinese puzzle boxes as kids.
The fact that lots of people buy it and use it happily says absolutely nothing about whether it's a good design or not, only that it's not so bad as to be a deal-breaker. People tolerate poor designs all the time, for various reasons (mostly for lack of alternatives, or because it's too expensive to replace something that's already purchased). Only once it goes beyond a particular pain threshold do we take action. That threshold is very individual. (For me, it's low: it's why I can't stand using Windows and Linux, the little tiny usability problems in them drive me nuts. Most people have a higher threshold, and that's fine.)
Does the fact that lots of people buy and use the scope happily mean it's a bad design?
Does the fact that lots of people buy and use the scope happily mean it's a bad design?
No, the fact that many functions are broken and Rigol is deceptive and lies about its capabilities makes it a bad design.
You even quoted me yourself:I don't see how that quote supports any argument you're making.QuoteSure, the Rigol software often appears to be a set of "kludges" that were cobbled together by a committee of junior programmers who have never actually used an oscilloscope... but who remember playing with those complicated Chinese puzzle boxes as kids.
What I -have- done is explain how many of the problems people have reported are user-related, often due to not RTFM or not understanding how a particular control actually works."user related problem" is what shitty designers say to justify their shitty designs. Do users sometimes make mistakes? Of course. But when you've got something that routinely confuses and/or annoys users, it's a shitty design. UIs should be designed around human needs. If you can't make sense of a UI without the fucking manual, it's a shitty design. Good user interfaces are self-explanatory.
Funny... I am often criticised by certain individuals as being a Rigol-basher, and now I'm accused of being a fanboy. Make up your minds, people! If you don't like the scope, DON'T USE IT -- unless of course you absolutely need to use a scope and it's the only one handy --- or affordable. And by all means... RTFM !!!I didn't make any claims as to you being a Rigol basher or fanboy. I'm saying that you're talking out of your ass with regards to user interfaces, and as someone with both a formal background and professional experience in that field, I stand by that opinion.
Well tooki, here's the way I look at it. I've got one and other than the quirks we all talk about, it's perfectly acceptable for my ham radio/electronics hobby needs and that's what many people use it for. I ain't trying to fix the Superconducting Super Collider with it. I, like alsetalokin4017, have used some of the best test equipment made when I was working (I'm retired now). I know what a piece of total junk is like to work with. This thing is really perfectly acceptable for the price and performance.
The thing is, look at the forum stats. This thread is in the Top Ten forum thread list by relies AND by views. This thread is 139 pages now! If this scope was a total piece of s*** the talk would have long since stopped after a few pages of reviews and replies, and the scope would not be selling like it is. It's a tantalizing situation, in that it's very good for the price, and what a lot of people think is how a few more hours of work by Rigol on the thing would make it better, but they don't seem to want to go that last mile, for whatever reason. OK, well, they probably think that since it's selling so well and recommended so much, why do it. I don't know - I don't run the company. But again, the thing is it's so good for the price it's been examined down to a gnat's ass and that's what all the posts are about - people using it for all sorts of tasks and exposing the last few irritating bugs.
But what do I know? :popcorn:
I don't see how that quote supports any argument you're making.
You've done nothing but disagree with everyone who complains about this bad UI.
We're 139 pages into this thread, I had hoped we would have moved on from this point by now. Is there an emergency stop button anywhere around here?
You may be the expert you claim to be, but I find your language and your approach to this discussion offensive. Do you talk to people like that when you are face-to-face with them?Absolutely, when my patience has run out. I feel no obligation to pussyfoot around someone who's been nothing but a pain in the ass to people attempting to have a real discussion about a real problem that bothers them. I tried to reason with you, it didn't work.
In your mind perhaps. But explaining HOW the Rigol software got to be how it is is not germaine to the discussion. You have only dug your heels in in claiming it's the users' fault for not being able to use the bad measurement UI, and that because it's an inexpensive instrument, we have no right to complain. With both of those opinions I vociferously disagree.QuoteI don't see how that quote supports any argument you're making.
That is right, you don't see. Do you see this:QuoteYou've done nothing but disagree with everyone who complains about this bad UI.
The quote to which you refer directly contradicts your statement and proves that you are wrong about me.
Do you actually own a DS1054z? One wonders why you bother with this thread at all.Yes, I do own it, and the measurements drive me nuts. So yeah, I'm personally invested in this.
For one, price has little correlation with the quality of usability.
Many very expensive products have terrible user interfaces.
(For example, the first generation of BMW's iDrive became famous for how terrible a UI it was.)
If anything, you often see the opposite, that expensive (i.e. non-mass-market) products have terrible UIs because they're made in such small numbers that the manufacturer can't invest in big UX projects.
While there's no question that the DS1054Z's user interface has problems, exactly what would be the justification for Rigol to spend the extra money on people who know how to design solid user interfaces, given their target market and general market strategy? How would you expect them to recover their increased costs as a result?
Yes, I do own it, and the measurements drive me nuts. So yeah, I'm personally invested in this.
Absolutely, when my patience has run out. I feel no obligation to pussyfoot around someone who's been nothing but a pain in the ass to people attempting to have a real discussion about a real problem that bothers them. I tried to reason with you, it didn't work.
i'm pretty sure the first pages would be flooded by yours "it's only 400$" comments.
While there's no question that the DS1054Z's user interface has problems, exactly what would be the justification for Rigol to spend the extra money on people who know how to design solid user interfaces, given their target market and general market strategy? How would you expect them to recover their increased costs as a result?
If you are experiencing a "failure to communicate"... maybe you should look to your style of communication as being at least part of the problem.
I wonder how many of the "complainers" bought their scopes, as I did, because of our kind host's rave reviews, and then found out about the various bugs and UI problems, which weren't mentioned at all in his reviews.
You ask some very good questions, but I'm worried about further derailing this thread by going even farther astray from the concrete product at hand!For one, price has little correlation with the quality of usability.
Really?
What inexpensive items can you think of that nevertheless have excellent usability and aren't clear derivatives of more expensive items of the same type?
People who know what they're doing cost money, period. If you want a good user interface in a commercial product, you have to get it designed by someone who knows what they're doing when it comes to user interfaces, and that costs more than having it designed by someone whose expertise lies with some other area that is necessary for the project. More precisely, it is not uncommon for software, especially, to have its user interface designed by the same people who designed and implemented the rest of the software, since the necessary expertise to design and code the software is much more fundamental to the success of the software than is user interface expertise. While someone who doesn't know a whole lot about user interfaces can put together a poor but functional one, someone who doesn't know a whole lot about coding can't design and code a functional piece of software at all.
Indeed, as regards user interfaces, it's even worse than that. A good user interface not only adheres to general usability principles, it's designed so that the target users can properly use it. That means that the usability expert has to not only have expertise in user interfaces, he must also have expertise in the domain the product is intended to target. As regards oscilloscopes, it means the user interface expert must understand the features of the oscilloscope and how they are to be used. Merely being good at designing user interfaces isn't enough.QuoteMany very expensive products have terrible user interfaces.
Yes. But that alone doesn't break the correlation. While many very expensive products have terrible user interfaces, few inexpensive products have good user interfaces (but see below, as there are clear exceptions to that). Good user interfaces are more easily found in expensive products than in inexpensive ones. Look at Linux and Windows, in contrast with Mac OS, for an excellent example. Apple products command a premium in part because Apple spent the money up-front on usability, and focused so much on it that usability became their signature trait.Quote(For example, the first generation of BMW's iDrive became famous for how terrible a UI it was.)
Yes. How long did it continue to have a terrible UI? The first generation of anything isn't necessarily a good metric to use for determining whether there's a correlation between expense and quality of the UI.QuoteIf anything, you often see the opposite, that expensive (i.e. non-mass-market) products have terrible UIs because they're made in such small numbers that the manufacturer can't invest in big UX projects.
Then how is it that Windows, a mass market product with many more seats than Mac OS, has a much worse UI than Mac OS?
There are products that are relatively inexpensive which have solid user interfaces, but those tend to be mainstream products for which a poor user interface would be a major competitive disadvantage, or which are heavily regulated (e.g., avionics), or which have to be competently implemented because a screwup on the part of the operator could cost lives (e.g., cars, for which the controls for the major systems are almost always well-designed).
In the end, it comes down to the ability and willingness of the manufacturer to spend the needed extra money on user interface design. That money will increase the cost, so the expenditure has to be justifiable somehow.
While there's no question that the DS1054Z's user interface has problems, exactly what would be the justification for Rigol to spend the extra money on people who know how to design solid user interfaces, given their target market and general market strategy? How would you expect them to recover their increased costs as a result?
It desperately needs a competitor.
Perhaps people here can Gang up on Daniel and have him drop Keysight prices?
for what it's worth i find the new keysight to be an excellent competitor, for a fraction of keysight's cost you get a real keysight. i am willing to put aside every ""shortcoming"" one could find and get something that on paper might be less, but in facts is actually more.
Perhaps people here can Gang up on Daniel and have him drop Keysight prices?
I don't think Daniel has that power.
I wonder how many of the "complainers" bought their scopes, as I did, because of our kind host's rave reviews, and then found out about the various bugs and UI problems, which weren't mentioned at all in his reviews.
It desperately needs a competitor.Yep.
Is there no bean-counter from another company watching those numbers? The Rigol is 2+ years old now so it must be possible to build something cheaper using more integrated chips, etc.The same bean counters who decided to outsource oscilloscope manufacturing in the first place, and teaching several Chinese manufacturers to make oscilloscopes as a result :)
It certainly wouldn't silence the haters. They'd just find something else about it to bash.
We've seen it in this thread a hundred times - every time a bug is fixed the Rigol-haters instantly just move on to something else. Not enough bugs left? Lets moan about the UI instead. :horse:
Would they really prefer a world with no $400, 4-channel, 100MHz oscilloscopes in it? Where oscilloscopes are all perfect but start at $5000?
I wonder how many of the "complainers" bought their scopes, as I did, because of our kind host's rave reviews, and then found out about the various bugs and UI problems, which weren't mentioned at all in his reviews.
If I found any bugs I would have shown them and mention them.
How can a reviewer possibly be expected the test every combination and permutation of every feature to find every bug? That's a totally unrealistic expectation.
Is there no bean-counter from another company watching those numbers? The Rigol is 2+ years old now so it must be possible to build something cheaper using more integrated chips, etc.
I have not visited this thread in a long time, and I'm amazed. Such hate for an entry level $400 scope, and the company behind it is embarrassing to read. :--
The new Siglent 1000X-E will be cheaper than the 1054Z, albeit only two channels.
I have not visited this thread in a long time, and I'm amazed. Such hate for an entry level $400 scope, and the company behind it is embarrassing to read. :--
I have not visited this thread in a long time, and I'm amazed. Such hate for an entry level $400 scope, and the company behind it is embarrassing to read. :--You haven't felt the hate directed towards anybody who tries to defend it.
I think mine's great. It ticks all the right boxes for what I want from a hobby 'scope. :popcorn:
Do you think any of this month's newcomers is going to unseat it, eg. the Keysight in your latest video? (Is pricing still secret for that one?)
The new Siglent 1000X-E will be cheaper than the 1054Z, albeit only two channels.I haven't memorized the exact specs of that model, but if the External trigger can be used as a third digital channel then it might not matter.
so those bitching about the Rigol UI should just sell it and shell out a few more bucks and buy a Keysight.
If I could only have one scope in the lab, probably the Rigol purely because of the 4 channels.
I forgot the GW Instek, it's a player too.
It can't. I mention that in my latest repair video which uses the 1000X-E
It should be noted that Rigol practically created and pioneered the low cost scope market.Note that I own one (I purchased the 1074Z) and I don't regret buying it at all. Quite the contrary, ¡I am happy with it! Obviously it has its limitations, but it works for me.
That should at least confer them some respect.
I have not visited this thread in a long time, and I'm amazed. Such hate for an entry level $400 scope, and the company behind it is embarrassing to read. :--
The UI could use some work, particularly the menu system* and the left/right scrolling when zoomed.
(*) Using a rotary knob to go up/down menus and select things when it has up/down arrow buttons next to the menu? :palm:
i became dubious of selling my 1054 after i saw the post of that guy that installed linux on it, hope is not yet lost
i became dubious of selling my 1054 after i saw the post of that guy that installed linux on it, hope is not yet lost
Mind sharing a link? I've searched all the forums (and google..) for linux + rigol and/or 1054 and it seems I can't find this post :-)
(*) Using a rotary knob to go up/down menus and select things when it has up/down arrow buttons next to the menu? :palm:Are you sure you want to do that? Some of the lists are a bit long and it's faster to scroll down with an encoder.
Given an encoder with detents......which it doesn't have.
Given an encoder with detents......which it doesn't have.
(and would probably cost them $0 to implement)
What about the colors for the channels?
- Yellow
- Light blue
- Pink
- Dark blue
Ick. Why two variation of blue - it's confusing. There are other colors out there Rigol - green, red, brown, orange. I really don't want pink on my scope in any case. How could any serious manufacturer have decided to use those colors? I guess for $400 I suppose.
Colors?! Come on, xrunner -- I'm sure you can come up with something even more trivial than that! How bout criticizing the color of the enclosure, or maybe the choice of the "Z" suffix in the model designation, or the font they chose for that "Z"? :palm:
If you really want to discuss colors: I am mildly color-blind, and am happy to confirm that your choice of colors (green, red, brown, orange) is about the worst set of four someone could come up with for the about 8% of males affected by that...
I haven't been diligently following the firmware hacking thread for this scope, but perhaps one day we'll be able to adjust the colors ourselves. :-/O
I haven't been diligently following the firmware hacking thread for this scope, but perhaps one day we'll be able to adjust the colors ourselves. :-/O
But then, how do I hack the colors on the front panel and on the probe tips? ;)
What extra money? I bought this funny box, paid money for it, spent about 2 months dissecting it's programming & GUI based on my ~20year pro experience in GUI/software design. Did gave feedback incl. directly to Rigol, for free (as many others have done before!). Result? 0.
It's not about the money.
It's about some amateurs (regarding GUI design / math at least) getting a high ranking position in company.
Luckily for them if product is cheap enough there always will be fanboys who will find excuse for every flaw or situation as whole.
So at least can agree with fanboys on one point - I this box insults your intelligence - sell it. It's not going to get better anytime soon.
You only have to spend about 3dB more to get combination of two other products that will do almost everything miles better.
You ask some very good questions, but I'm worried about further derailing this thread by going even farther astray from the concrete product at hand!
Most of what you ask is addressed by my prior statement that people will tolerate a bad UI up to a point; Windows is a perfect example of this. It's not as good as Mac, but not so bad as to make most users run and scream.
You are right that good UIs cost money, and absolutely 10000% correct that the designer must truly understand the task at hand. (Having worked in UX, and having had to spend 6 months immersing myself in library science for one project, I truly cannot agree with you more!) But I think your examples are kinda flawed: Microsoft spends a fortune on UX research and design, but various other factors resulted in bad UIs despite this. Linux is really the example of what happens when there's little investment in UX.
It's hard to find examples of things that are good and cheap and "not derivatives" because the normal progression of technology is for things to begin expensive and then get copied cheaper.
But look at the context of this discussion: a cheap scope which is clearly "derivative" of more expensive DSOs, and we have people arguing that because it's cheap, we must accept the bad UI.
Nonetheless, I would posit that there's lots of inexpensive software, for example, with excellent UIs. And lots of expensive software (*cough* Eagle *cough*) whose UIs make me want to gouge my eyes out.
[...]
March 25 2017
I just got my brand new DSO1054 today.
[...]
Firmware is 00.04.04.01 (00.04.04 SP 1)
Obviously: The repealed Version 00.04.01.01 is on delivery.
But still not as update. IIRC because the problems with some older boards. How hard can it be to check the board version in the installer program?
Do anyone know if the coming update version contains something else as the "old board solution"?
(Imagine: The legendary "pluses" error would be corrected...)
Is there something new known?
I´m curious if there will be any advantage in updating the 1054z if it runs already with the software version 00.04.01.01.
BTW: Something known about "LFCal" and "Output" in the expanded SelfCal menue?
Perhaps they are related to the LA and FG option of the 1074z-s?
Or, what are they supposed to do in the 1054z?
You realize you're trying to explain UX basics to someone who did UX professionally for years? ;) All valid points, to be sure! But going well afield of the scope of this thread, methinks!You ask some very good questions, but I'm worried about further derailing this thread by going even farther astray from the concrete product at hand!
Fair enough.QuoteMost of what you ask is addressed by my prior statement that people will tolerate a bad UI up to a point; Windows is a perfect example of this. It's not as good as Mac, but not so bad as to make most users run and scream.
And how is the Rigol's UI any different?QuoteYou are right that good UIs cost money, and absolutely 10000% correct that the designer must truly understand the task at hand. (Having worked in UX, and having had to spend 6 months immersing myself in library science for one project, I truly cannot agree with you more!) But I think your examples are kinda flawed: Microsoft spends a fortune on UX research and design, but various other factors resulted in bad UIs despite this. Linux is really the example of what happens when there's little investment in UX.
Well, if MS spent that kind of money on the UI of Windows, it certainly doesn't show...
But then, if they did spend that kind of money, then it illustrates nicely that spending money on UI expertise is necessary but not sufficient -- you have to actually make good use of that expertise.
It's not clear to me how much Linux really counts. It is the way it is because it's mostly a purely volunteer effort. Because it doesn't compete in commercial terms as a general rule (people can use it or not as they see fit, and don't have to pay directly for it), the normal rules regarding competitiveness and user interface really don't apply to it. And because it essentially has "evolved" to where it is now, it is supremely difficult to make its UI cohesive, since was never designed with the user experience in mind from the start.
And that brings me to a point that I don't think has really been raised: usability has to be baked in from the beginning. You can't just paste it on top of something that doesn't have it. I dare say that Rigol's user interface issues aren't just skin deep -- fixing them would require rearchitecting the UI from the ground up, if only because consistency is one of the necessary traits of a good UI.QuoteIt's hard to find examples of things that are good and cheap and "not derivatives" because the normal progression of technology is for things to begin expensive and then get copied cheaper.
Precisely.QuoteBut look at the context of this discussion: a cheap scope which is clearly "derivative" of more expensive DSOs, and we have people arguing that because it's cheap, we must accept the bad UI.
They're not arguing that we "have" to accept the bad UI. They're arguing that the UI is the natural outcome of the company putting its resources elsewhere, and that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Something would have to give if the company put more resources into the UI than it did.
It doesn't help that user interfaces, like all other aspects of computing, are an "intellectual property" minefield. Look, for instance, at what Apple did to Samsung over the UI of the phone.
I happen to think that the main reason the Rigol UI is the way it is is because the people who designed it were coders first, and UI designers second. It takes a specific commitment on the part of the company to hire people who specialize in UI design.QuoteNonetheless, I would posit that there's lots of inexpensive software, for example, with excellent UIs. And lots of expensive software (*cough* Eagle *cough*) whose UIs make me want to gouge my eyes out.
Sure. But again, you have to look at the target market. The inexpensive software that has good UIs either targets a relatively large market (and thus, the company putting it out can afford the up-front expertise necessary), or is designed and implemented by a company that already has the necessary UI expertise on hand. Sometimes, the people designing the software happen to already come with a UI-oriented background and thus already have much of the necessary expertise. So of course, there will be examples where the UI is good, the software relatively inexpensive, and the target market small nonetheless. But I would regard those cases as exceptional, most especially because commercial software tends to be rushed to release.
I also found the choice of dark blue and cyan to be a bad choice!What about the colors for the channels?
- Yellow
- Light blue
- Pink
- Dark blue
Ick. Why two variation of blue - it's confusing. There are other colors out there Rigol - green, red, brown, orange. I really don't want pink on my scope in any case. How could any serious manufacturer have decided to use those colors? I guess for $400 I suppose.
Colors?! Come on, xrunner -- I'm sure you can come up with something even more trivial than that! :P
How about criticizing the color of the enclosure, or maybe the choice of the "Z" suffix in the model designation, or the font they chose for that "Z"? ::)
If you really want to discuss colors: I am mildly color-blind, and am happy to confirm that your choice of colors (green, red, brown, orange) is about the worst set of four someone could come up with for the about 8% of males affected by that...
You realize you're trying to explain UX basics to someone who did UX professionally for years? ;)
Given an encoder with detents......which it doesn't have.
(and would probably cost them $0 to implement)
However, like with the fan, it's a mod that one could make. :-+
and if they had such a person then their implementation wouldn't have these shortcomings in the first place.
Of course it is. You weren't there on their design staff, working on the product from the start, for free, were you?
Again, I have to ask, because you didn't answer the question (though it was asked of tooki), how would you expect Rigol to recover their costs of hiring a competent UI person who also has expertise in T&M equipment use?
and if they had such a person then their implementation wouldn't have these shortcomings in the first place.
Thats a conundrum indeed... Possibly only thing that could shake things up is market pressure (dropping sales) but if people are quite happily buying stuff then things will stay as is. It is important to avoid "whitewash" by "forum gurus". Best give objective advice like yep its cheap, 4 channels, this and that quite good, BUT things 1, 2, 3 are bit problematic, buy if sure you do not need them (working). If the poor noob cant trust forum gurus, who can he trust?
Well... I can see problems with fixing major stuff. But sometimes little things can change a lot. But yet again this would require some specialist-in-command to understand why something needs to be fixed... And if there is none... :palm:
QuoteAgain, I have to ask, because you didn't answer the question (though it was asked of tooki), how would you expect Rigol to recover their costs of hiring a competent UI person who also has expertise in T&M equipment use?
With Z-box its probably too late. However they surely have next gen product in works. If they continue in same manner with next gen its not gonna end well, especially with A-brands showing interest in hobby market.
So if they hire proper UI and Q&A stuff now, might do better in coming years. And good people are not that expensive, just hard to find. Expensive are people giving impression that they are good... They do much better than actually good specialists often quietly sitting years on same job...
And if anyone raises objections to the description of the Rigol as a 100MHz 4 channel scope with deep memory, decoding, etc., remember that what matters in the hobbyist market is the actual capability of the device once in the hands of the customer, not the capability as shipped. Put another way, in the hobbyist market, which is the market we're talking about here, the hacked capabilities are the ones that really matter on the ground.
Yep. If it wasn't hackable we'd all be buying the $400 GW-Instek.
With Z-box its probably too late. However they surely have next gen product in works. If they continue in same manner with next gen its not gonna end well, especially with A-brands showing interest in hobby market.
Expensive are people giving impression that they are good...OT: wisest words of the day
I expect that's a very small set of people, and chances are there are very few indeed who aren't already employed by a T&M manufacturer somewhere.
Yep. If it wasn't hackable we'd all be buying the $400 GW-Instek.
GWI 1054B has surprisingly high non-hacked bandwidth. Same with my Pico. Very sharp edge square will show -3dB only at 200MHz, on 100MHz unhacked scope (Many Rigol BW claims are made using square also).
(I fear I will regret intervening....)
I expect that's a very small set of people, and chances are there are very few indeed who aren't already employed by a T&M manufacturer somewhere.
Well exactly, one might be already employed. Worst case if employed for long time. High chances one gets paid less than market value. Market actually do not know that person even exists and so on... So I would insist on "hard to find" more than on "expensive". Good specialist is often not good salesman and lacks skills to make himself even properly visible on the market. Not everyone is born YouTube star etc :)
Recently I did meet one inventor who is extremely good in mechatronics but totally incapable of finding matching employer. Inventor refuses to go for boring job, rather stays unemployed. Cutting edge R&D job actually needing his talents - nowhere in sight in this pond-of-a-country. Rather sad situation overall. Gifted him one of my scopes... but probably should have bought ticket to Boston Dynamics office instead :-DD
No doubt that could have helped. :D
Actually, you indirectly bring up a good point here: geographic location matters. In what locations can most of the UI expertise be found? I suspect it'll be in locations where UI expertise is routinely used. Places like Silicon Valley. But here, we're talking about Rigol. They're in China. While I expect that eventually such expertise will be more readily available there, as with anything else, it'll take time for them to ramp up. That doesn't help a company like Rigol that needs such expertise now.
In light of that, it might be a bit remarkable that the Rigol UI isn't worse than it is...
While I am sure that many elements of good UI design transcend cultures, I suspect that some elements are culture dependent.
While I am sure that many elements of good UI design transcend cultures, I suspect that some elements are culture dependent. It would be surprising if it weren't since music, art and other forms of interaction are significantly different between cultures. Perhaps for someone embedded in Chinese culture the 1054Z is better than European culture derivatives find it to be. And surely they have as much capacity to disdain other cultural views as we do.The UI is not very well thought-out. Menus don't seem to be logically grouped, and functions nested within sub-menus makes the operation difficult. I don't think this is a cultural artefact -- it's just poor design.
Think about the Hakko Fx-888 UI.
Yep. If it wasn't hackable we'd all be buying the $400 GW-Instek.
GWI 1054B has surprisingly high non-hacked bandwidth. Same with my Pico. Very sharp edge square will show -3dB only at 200MHz, on 100MHz unhacked scope (Many Rigol BW claims are made using square also).
Perhaps I've misunderstood what you're trying to say, but that's not how bandwidth is traditionally measured.
Either the 3dB point of a sine wave is used, or the rise time of a rectangular wave is used to derive it.
Think about the Hakko Fx-888 UI.I'd rather not.
Think about the Hakko Fx-888 UI.I'd rather not.
;)
While it is not usually a problem with low bandwidth oscilloscopes, the relationship between the -3dB bandwidth and transition time depends on the shape of the passband so measuring only the transition time may not be sufficient.
How do we get twenty functions into two buttons? :palm:
But how am I ever going to be satisfied with my Rigol's UI now... it doesn't even include "Whack" triggering !
While it is not usually a problem with low bandwidth oscilloscopes, the relationship between the -3dB bandwidth and transition time depends on the shape of the passband so measuring only the transition time may not be sufficient.
Actually I did it properly also, with ETS and all, real -3dB point is 140MHz, cross checks with pure sine.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/picoscope-2000/msg1153233/#msg1153233 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/picoscope-2000/msg1153233/#msg1153233)
Mentioned 200MHz with square on purpose, because Z-box owners often do not have 100MHz+ high fidelity sine sources and will do their bw testing with square. Point being that if classical frontend unhacked 100MHz will do -3dB at 200MHz with square, then 50MHz would probably do -3dB at 100MHz etc...
Meaning its not like you cannot measure timing related things @100MHz quite ok with any proper 50MHz scope.
In short: this whole bw hackability thing is bit overrated in this case (especially considering Sinc trickery). Real point of hacking is IMHO more in getting all other stuff unlocked.
This does not follow.
It all comes down to what you need it for.
If just look at it and presume Sinc=OFF is actual analog response of DS1000Z then its roughly -5dB at @100MHz, which they compensate with non-standard Sinc producing bit silly amplitude gain @100MHz with Sinc=ON. Input in this test is perfect sine. There is theory around that Sinc=OFF applies some lowpass filter but I do not buy it. Rather Sinc=ON applies artificial bandwidth boost. Actually quite logical thing to do at first glance but easy to lose track with reality of actual input signal...
If just look at it and presume Sinc=OFF is actual analog response of DS1000Z then its roughly -5dB at @100MHz, which they compensate with non-standard Sinc producing bit silly amplitude gain @100MHz with Sinc=ON. Input in this test is perfect sine. There is theory around that Sinc=OFF applies some lowpass filter but I do not buy it. Rather Sinc=ON applies artificial bandwidth boost. Actually quite logical thing to do at first glance but easy to lose track with reality of actual input signal...
I don't understand what problem you see here? You have chosen to sample at only 2.5x the signal frequency (at 100 MHz), so of course the sin(x)/x correction becomes relevant. If you switch it off, I assume the scope reconstructs the signal by simple "connect the dots" interpolation of the samples.
I don't understand what problem you see here? You have chosen to sample at only 2.5x the signal frequency (at 100 MHz), so of course the sin(x)/x correction becomes relevant. If you switch it off, I assume the scope reconstructs the signal by simple "connect the dots" interpolation of the samples.except it doesn't
Could you elaborate on that, please? My comment was intended to be constructive; yours does not help me so far. Thanks for explaining.I see you've found rf-loop's work and for those that have not seen it already:
yes, sorry for that. the "sinc interpolation" button is enabled only if you have more than two channels active, otherwise it says "ON" and is greyed out.I don't understand what problem you see here? You have chosen to sample at only 2.5x the signal frequency (at 100 MHz), so of course the sin(x)/x correction becomes relevant. If you switch it off, I assume the scope reconstructs the signal by simple "connect the dots" interpolation of the samples.except it doesn't
Could you elaborate on that, please? My comment was intended to be constructive; yours does not help me so far. Thanks for explaining.
Yep. If it wasn't hackable we'd all be buying the $400 GW-Instek.
GWI 1054B has surprisingly high non-hacked bandwidth. Same with my Pico. Very sharp edge square will show -3dB only at 200MHz, on 100MHz unhacked scope (Many Rigol BW claims are made using square also).
Perhaps I've misunderstood what you're trying to say, but that's not how bandwidth is traditionally measured.
Either the 3dB point of a sine wave is used, or the rise time of a rectangular wave is used to derive it.
While it is not usually a problem with low bandwidth oscilloscopes, the relationship between the -3dB bandwidth and transition time depends on the shape of the passband so measuring only the transition time may not be sufficient.
Once you enable sin(x)/x interpolation, the signal and its amplitude get properly reconstructed, as expected.
It is not only what you want it for, but also what are your expectations. For someone that has used and /or owned new or used top end scopes, it may very well be a letdown. If you are like me, where the last scope you used and owned was a Tek 535a 30 years ago, the Rigol is a incredible thing to use. I'm pleased with the scope. Of course I see better scopes out there, but the Rigol was affordable to me now. In the future, I will probably outgrow it and want something better, but it will fill my needs learning and most things fairly well.
Instead i think that many of us (hanging in this thread) do not know if something look right or not, i know i certainly didn't when i got my Z. Let's not forget this scope is aimed at hobbyist/students.. it is important to remind that there are flaws that cannot be swept under the rug by the "it's only 400" broom. The flaws are there, period.
you have to know which are so when you question what is on the screen you can decide if the flaw or the bug is affecting your measurement or not and in which amount.
I'm pretty sure most of us are able to know when something doesn't look right, and know to question and validate the results. Whether it's a Rigol or Keysight/Tek/LeCroy/R&S, you should always be in a position to be able to know about what to expect, and use the scope to verify. When it doesn't look right you need to be able to analyse and troubleshoot your findings. Most of the time it will be the DUT itself, but sometimes anomalies will be a problem with your test regime, and occasionally that will be the tool you are using. I am certain most of us are capable of figuring out which it is.Well said - but it is always amazing how many people believe a display, especially a digital one.... I think it may be a religion (The LED G-d; or is it a segment g-d?).
correct. i'll edit previous post to add the obviousInstead i think that many of us (hanging in this thread) do not know if something look right or not, i know i certainly didn't when i got my Z. Let's not forget this scope is aimed at hobbyist/students.. it is important to remind that there are flaws that cannot be swept under the rug by the "it's only 400" broom. The flaws are there, period.
you have to know which are so when you question what is on the screen you can decide if the flaw or the bug is affecting your measurement or not and in which amount.
This is true of all test gear, not just the ones you have a personal mania against.
I think Scopes are going the way computers did over time. Back in the days of DOS/Windows 3.1, the user had to have a much better understanding of the computer and had to do a lot of things manually. Now computers are used by a huge amount of people where the majority have no idea of what's actually going on in the background.Automation is usually an excellent way to reduce the need for skills and ability. Unfortunately not demanding skills tends to make them wither, and then people can't understand why the automation isn't doing what they expect. :)
I notice exactly the same trend with scopes. Back in University, the newest cutting egde scope we had was the Tektronix 2465, which had just been released around that time. There was no Auto buttons, no decoding, no auto-measurements and as for colours... Green is fine for all 4 channels and the limited readouts the scope offered. But we were taught every detail of the scope and how to take measurements. The closest thing to "Auto" was the "Find Trace" button. So you either really deeply understood the instrument or it was pretty much useless.
Today people expect the scope to almost do everything for them and do it perfectly, and I don't think newer enthusiasts are really spending the time required to fully understand how it all works and how to extract the information they want to measure. I really like all the fancy new options that the Rigol (and other) scopes offer (and yes I really own one), but I still don't trust anything that I haven't configured myself.
I have a feeling that many of the "naysayers" are of the newer generation, who put way too much trust in the scopes abilities and have expectations, that many of the older users don't. A scope is a tool, the capability to take accurate measurements should come from the user.
I have a feeling that many of the "naysayers" are of the newer generation, who put way too much trust in the scopes abilities and have expectations, that many of the older users don't. A scope is a tool, the capability to take accurate measurements should come from the user.
I am not sure I understand the rationalizing behind the need of a scope to deliver the full capability of its hardware. Why?
I admit they need to deliver to specs, but the whole idea of lock keys and having multiple models is that they are selling different capabilities and specs at additional price points.
In vertical can do far more accurate than 1% DC even with 8bit ADC (using sampling noise).
In vertical can do far more accurate than 1% DC even with 8bit ADC (using sampling noise).
According to the specs, the accuracy is about 4% of full scale - 5 bits. I don't think there's any reason for them to understate it, but who knows, I'm not a marketer.
The resolution is 8 bits, so (8 - 5) = 3 bits are already redundant. With oversampling, you can increase resolution further, but this will not improve accuracy.
The resolution is 8 bits, so (8 - 5) = 3 bits are already redundant. With oversampling, you can increase resolution further, but this will not improve accuracy.
I assume MrWolf was referring to the PicoScope, the only true digital data acquisition system, which probably has better specs. ;)
While they do not help with accuracy, they do improve the resolution.
The resolution is 8 bits, so (8 - 5) = 3 bits are already redundant. With oversampling, you can increase resolution further, but this will not improve accuracy.
With oversampling you can improve accuracy also, taking advantage of sampling noise. 0.1% of range no problem with scope DC spec +-3% of full scale, if have access to unaltered data.
Then hope that the scope does not drift out of calibration... ;)
I see you've found rf-loop's work and for those that have not seen it already:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/)
It just follows on from other work this long sever member did many years ago, I think in his first post on the forum.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/rigol-ds1000e-series-possible-errorfail-in-sin(x)x-interpolation/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/rigol-ds1000e-series-possible-errorfail-in-sin(x)x-interpolation/)
If you switch it off, I assume the scope reconstructs the signal by simple "connect the dots" interpolation of the samples. That, of course, will reduce the apparent amplitude since the peaks are not properly reconstructed.
Hi All,
This is my first post to this forum and thread.
I am interested in upgrading my current oscilloscope and I have been looking at the Rigol DS1054Z
I watched Dave's video EEVblog #703 - Rigol DS1054Z Oscilloscope Review Summary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETCOhzU1O5A&t=4s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETCOhzU1O5A&t=4s)
However I'm confused about something you said at 7:25 on this clip.
You say that there is no Software or hardware filter.
I am confused because I read in the manual on page 135 - chapter ch6-21 on Filters
http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/UserGuide/MSO_DS1000Z_Plus_UserGuide_EN.pdf (http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/UserGuide/MSO_DS1000Z_Plus_UserGuide_EN.pdf)
It says the MSO1000Z/DS1000Z provides 4 types of filters (Low Pass Filter, High Pass Filter,
Band Pass Filter and Band Stop Filter). The specified frequencies can be filtered by setting the bandwidth.
Can someone please try and clear this up for me as I am used to using a scope with these types of filters.
Thanks
Stuart
I see you've found rf-loop's work and for those that have not seen it already:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/)
I see you've found rf-loop's work and for those that have not seen it already:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/)
I am not seeing this on my scope, but I am feeding 10 MHz pulse. Is this still repeated on current firmware? I may need a faster signal.
Hi All,
This is my first post to this forum and thread.
I am interested in upgrading my current oscilloscope and I have been looking at the Rigol DS1054Z
I watched Dave's video EEVblog #703 - Rigol DS1054Z Oscilloscope Review Summary
(video link snipped)
However I'm confused about something you said at 7:25 on this clip.
You say that there is no Software or hardware filter.
I am confused because I read in the manual on page 135 - chapter ch6-21 on Filters
http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/UserGuide/MSO_DS1000Z_Plus_UserGuide_EN.pdf (http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/UserGuide/MSO_DS1000Z_Plus_UserGuide_EN.pdf)
It says the MSO1000Z/DS1000Z provides 4 types of filters (Low Pass Filter, High Pass Filter,
Band Pass Filter and Band Stop Filter). The specified frequencies can be filtered by setting the bandwidth.
Can someone please try and clear this up for me as I am used to using a scope with these types of filters.
Thanks
Stuart
I am not seeing this on my scope, but I am feeding 10 MHz pulse. Is this still repeated on current firmware? I may need a faster signal.
Of course can not see. First you need knowledge and after then also tools. Now there is both missing.
How I know both are missing. Just when you tell "but I am feeding 10MHz pulse". Please explain what was real theory and idea behind this.
I see you've found rf-loop's work and for those that have not seen it already:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/)
I am not seeing this on my scope, but I am feeding 10 MHz pulse. Is this still repeated on current firmware? I may need a faster signal.
You say that there is no Software or hardware filter.
Can someone please try and clear this up for me as I am used to using a scope with these types of filters.
Note that Sinc is good for sine or some other "smooth" waveforms. It is NOT best in all cases for fast square-rectangle types of signals.
@rf-loop, I like the way that scope (not Rigol) shows the actual samples with brighter dots when drawing in dot mode. That's a nice feature. I agree that it would be nice if it did that in sin(x)/x mode (via contrasting color).
The main point is that the display data is being manipulated when it shouldn't. rf-loop seemed to indicate you cannot get the raw adc value either, so the data always has some kind of manipulation and you do not know what that is because it is some kind of smoothing function that differs from sin(x)/x. And we know all measurements are performed from display data. And with the dropping amplitude at different sweep rates, it just draws the instrument into serious question.
But the HW counter is wayyy off at just over 100MHz.
But when is this really an issue? All the examples seem to deal with signals that are somewhat on the edge, or outside of the capabilities of this device.
Given the specs of the DS1000Z series, I would assume 1GSa/s is OK for the projected 100MHz (10 samples per cycle - not awesome, but acceptable).
it just draws the instrument into serious question.
Ok. So there is something strange about the implementation of the interpolation and the issue with not getting the raw ADC values. Also, (because of this, or something totally different) the amplitude of the displayed waveform changes on different time-bases.
But when is this really an issue? All the examples seem to deal with signals that are somewhat on the edge, or outside of the capabilities of this device. Given the specs of the DS1000Z series, I would assume 1GSa/s is OK for the projected 100MHz (10 samples per cycle - not awesome, but acceptable). But that does not mean, you should get sane representations of a signal at the upper limits of that. A 100MHz scope just is not the right tool to look at 100MHz signals IMO.
But when is this really an issue? All the examples seem to deal with signals that are somewhat on the edge, or outside of the capabilities of this device.
Correct. It's not an issue in real use.
But when is this really an issue? All the examples seem to deal with signals that are somewhat on the edge, or outside of the capabilities of this device.
Correct. It's not an issue in real use.
Well, it depends on what your real use is. As always, it boils down to knowing your tools and their limitations, quirks, bugs, etc. Hence, I enjoy seeing these investigations even if they are edge cases in order to better understand how and when this scope works or doesn't.
But when is this really an issue? All the examples seem to deal with signals that are somewhat on the edge, or outside of the capabilities of this device.
Correct. It's not an issue in real use.
Well, it depends on what your real use is. As always, it boils down to knowing your tools and their limitations, quirks, bugs, etc. Hence, I enjoy seeing these investigations even if they are edge cases in order to better understand how and when this scope works or doesn't.
Agreed. Knowing the capabilities and limitations of any tool is important. That is why it is somewhat OK to disparage a tool which does not achieve its published performance. But it is just silly to say a tool is useless because it has limitations.
Rant: Why do some people need to categorically dismiss a product because of limitations that affect their use cases? Why not say "I found it too limiting for my needs" and explain why so we can all be careful and kowtow the thought care and rigorousness of presenting the evidence - rather than the offensive "Rigol is useless shit" (which also bears bad on the poster - being of a rather childish disposition)?
Having read all the comments in this thread, my conclusion is that, for most hobbyists,
the Rigol DS1054Z is still the recommended scope in it's price class.
Having read all the comments in this thread, my conclusion is that, for most hobbyists,
the Rigol DS1054Z is still the recommended scope in it's price class.
Now, we can close the thread after 145 pages. Thank everyone for attending! :clap:
Having read all the comments in this thread, my conclusion is that, for most hobbyists,
the Rigol DS1054Z is still the recommended scope in it's price class.
One thing is absolute, this scope is certainly not a toy as some have tried to convey. It is a serious instrument,
Having read all the comments in this thread, my conclusion is that, for most hobbyists,For most professionals the DS1054Z is just fine, too. The majority of professional engineers are currently working on things where any high speed signals are confined within a single package, where a scope can't get at them.
the Rigol DS1054Z is still the recommended scope in it's price class.
Now, we can close the thread after 145 pages. Thank everyone for attending! :clap:
Having read all the comments in this thread, my conclusion is that, for most hobbyists,
the Rigol DS1054Z is still the recommended scope in it's price class.
There you go folks. The summary we've been waiting for.
Now, we can close the thread after 145 pages. Thank everyone for attending! :clap:
Unless you have specific requirements not met by this model, it is still the default recommendation in its price range.
Curiously positive posts. I am not used to that...
You know back in the day engineering had to do with numbers. But times are changing... now it's more about love, acceptance... feeling of being embraced by community, grooming your friends fur...
Lone madmen trying to check the numbers are luckily either banned, hunted down or given up and floating in sea of love, embraced by church of Z :clap: It's all for the best. I look forward into flying robot planes engineered by these kind and loving people when they outgrow $400 budget...
part are still free to indulge in feelings of superiority...
Cats in the 1054 thread. It has really jumped the shark now. :-DD
Shall we see???Now, we can close the thread after 145 pages. Thank everyone for attending! :clap:
LOL. But, actually, it may still be a useful thread...for the next firmware update. Who knows how many pages that'll generate. :-DD
Wow, indeed!Shall we see???Now, we can close the thread after 145 pages. Thank everyone for attending! :clap:
LOL. But, actually, it may still be a useful thread...for the next firmware update. Who knows how many pages that'll generate. :-DD
Looks like Rigol just posted new firmware version 00.04.04.03.02
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
[Supported Model] All the MSO/DS1000Z Series Digital Oscilloscopes
[Latest Revision Date] 2017/03/24
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.04.03.02 2017/02/06
- Improved the LXI module
- Fixed the freeze problem when upgrading based on the boot version of
0.0.0.13
- Improved the menu in the language of Traditional Chinese and Korean
- Modified the failure when downloading waveform to the source module
- Fixed bugs about reading the memory data through SCPI commands
- Fixed bugs about Measure
- Fixed bugs about Filter
Wait a minute....
When I went through the menu at the Rigol site, it still says to fill out a form to get a copy. On top of that, the release notes on the webpage that was referenced is the same number as the release that was pulled, and the latest dates in it are 2015.
Version Information
Released version: 00.04.03.02.03
Release Date: 10/20/2015
In other words, not the new release, just the old one that was pulled it seems.
[Supported Model] All the MSO/DS1000Z Series Digital Oscilloscopes
[Latest Revision Date] 2017/03/24
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.04.03.02 2017/02/06
- Improved the LXI module
- Fixed the freeze problem when upgrading based on the boot version of
0.0.0.13
- Improved the menu in the language of Traditional Chinese and Korean
- Modified the failure when downloading waveform to the source module
- Fixed bugs about reading the memory data through SCPI commands
- Fixed bugs about Measure
- Fixed bugs about Filter
Someone brave ? ;D
Sigh ... really tempting but really scared, especially my old boot version ... :scared:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/just-upgrade-my-rigol-ds1054z-to-the-4-04-firmware/?action=dlattach;attach=269424;image)
OK! Just another succesive update. PLUSES still remain!Honestly, we'll miss it the day they fix the typo!!! :horse:
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.04.03.02 2017/02/06
- Improved the LXI module
- Fixed the freeze problem when upgrading based on the boot version of
0.0.0.13
- Improved the menu in the language of Traditional Chinese and Korean
- Modified the failure when downloading waveform to the source module
- Fixed bugs about reading the memory data through SCPI commands
- Fixed bugs about Measure
- Fixed bugs about Filter
- Fixed bugs about Measure
- Fixed bugs about Filter
OK! Just another succesive update. PLUSES still remain!Honestly, we'll miss it the day they fix the typo!!! :horse:
" - Fixed bugs about Measure"
16k for measurements like for FFT? Hmm... Probably not... But maybe fixed mess with <> signs etc. Would be interesting what exactly is fixed now.
Lone madmen trying to check the numbers are luckily either banned, hunted down or given up
You're the expert. :popcorn::-// don't have it. Almost willing to make bet that if it has 16k calculus now, will buy one again and go over it with LICKI couple times out of great joy. But bet goes both ways not sure what I would want you to go over with LICKI so better not :scared:
I noticed that the rise times say "<XXus" when you're zoomed out. Did it do that before? I don't remember.
Did pressing a soft button scroll through the options before? I never knew it did that. Much better than the indent-less knob....
Just press another button (I usually go for the 'down' button) to clear the menu from the screen.Did pressing a soft button scroll through the options before? I never knew it did that. Much better than the indent-less knob....
Yes, it always did that, but you still have to press the knob to confirm the selection, otherwise the popup menu stays on the screen. :palm:
McBryce.
After updating to the latest firmware and running the self-calibration afterwards, I had a strange double-trace happening. It is gone now and I still need to reproduce it, but have not seen such behavior before :/
Maybe it was a hick-up, or something radiating into my signal path - I will do some further investigation...
What multiplier setting is set in the "probe" menu item?
double check your mains ground too.
I noticed that the rise times say "<XXus" when you're zoomed out. Did it do that before? I don't remember.
I noticed that the rise times say "<XXus" when you're zoomed out. Did it do that before? I don't remember.
i've always seen it happen.. probably when there are not sufficient points to calculate. zoom in and the magic happens
(is there another update?)
Looks like Rigol just posted new firmware version 00.04.04.03.02
http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)
the USB bug...
the USB bug...I'm sorry, I forgot the detail of this... it does not affect use of the Rigol software and use with USB, right?
the USB bug...
I'm sorry, I forgot the detail of this... it does not affect use of the Rigol software and use with USB, right? You were using it with Linux and DSRemote?
OK! Just another succesive update. PLUSES still remain!Honestly, we'll miss it the day they fix the typo!!! :horse:
I'm starting to think that's an inside joke at Rigol... :popcorn:
IIRC it was something with using a USB cable to control it instead of Ethernet.
(which seems pointless anyway, what's wrong with Ethernet?)
After update it starts earlier but also stops earlier. whatever
Look what happens if you just touch the "start" control.
Good news is that it looks like the multi-channel waveform data download bug...has been resolved.
Rigol, it's not too hard.
OK, there is new Firmware posted here in April. It fixed a problem with the previous version locking up old scopes.
What does this version fix otherwise? Does anyone have info on any possible suspects for the following?
- Bugs about measure.
- Bugs about filter.
- Bugs about SCPI reading memory data.
- Bugs about downloading waveform to source module
[Supported Model] All the MSO/DS1000Z Series Digital Oscilloscopes
[Latest Revision Date] 2017/03/24
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.04.03.02 2017/02/06
- Improved the LXI module
- Fixed the freeze problem when upgrading based on the boot version of
0.0.0.13
- Improved the menu in the language of Traditional Chinese and Korean
- Modified the failure when downloading waveform to the source module
- Fixed bugs about reading the memory data through SCPI commands
- Fixed bugs about Measure
- Fixed bugs about Filter
[History]
-------------
v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14
- Supported the multi-inteface of LXI
- Fixed bugs about Measure
v00.04.04.00.07 2016/07/19
- Added the full-screen display in the XY mode
- Modified the Trace data of average sample mode
- Fixed the bug of system halted for wave persistance in the Zoom mode
- Fixed bugs about Measure
v00.04.03.02.03 2015/10/20
- Added commands concerning the type and format of the image
- Added four measurement items (+Pulses, -Pulses, +Edges, -Edges) and
related commands
- Added commands concerning the digital filter
- Added more information to the last setting
- Fixed option installation
- Fixed Intg operation
v00.04.03.01.05 2015/06/16
- Added French in system language
- Added the mutual communication with DG4000 Series
- Added the digital filter
- Supported using memory data to carry out FFT operation
- Supported invert and format setting when reading a image remotely
- Fixed bugs when the data of the digital channel is saved in the CSV
format
v00.04.03.00.01 2015/05/05
- Added DS1104Z Plus and DS1074Z Plus
- Fixed pass/fail test
- Fixed FFT operation
v00.04.02.04.07 2014/12/31
- Fixed triggering function
- Fixed storage function
- Fixed bugs of jitter in the signal under the AC or low-frequency
coupling
v00.04.02.03.00 2014/10/21
- Added commands concerning remote reading and download of pass/fail test
rules
- Improved the command set for decoding and waveform recording
- Fixed bugs in RS232 decoding
v00.04.01.02.00 2014/07/28
- Added traditional Chinese language for the measurement menu
- Optimized the event table display
- Pressed and held [Measure] to remove all the measurement items
- Added hardware version number to the displayed system information
- Fixed bugs in storage function
- Fixed bugs in the Undo operation for AUTO
- Fixed bugs in signal source function
v00.04.00.00.00 2014/03/18
- Added remote reading of LA waveform data
- Added commands concerning the measurement of MATH waveform
- Optimized the prompt message of LA probe calibration
- Fixed bugs in triggering function
...
...
...
... i wonder if the multitransfert bug was really solved or just hid under the rug
better question: why don't you?... i wonder if the multitransfert bug was really solved or just hid under the rug
If you have a DS1054Z, why don't you try and let us know? If you don't, why do you care?
I did demonstrate that one of the fixes wasn't a fix on a function i happen to use a lot. I think i have the right to be skeptical and say do not take the changelog as gold
yes, there are, with selectable cutoff frequency. i should mention they are also bugged as i have shown in the screenshots above: the filtered trace is shifted on the right and the filtering is not applied to the whole displayed trace
(I assume that behavior stems from Rigol's approach of using only the display data for all measurements and calculations.
If they use some FIR filter, that needs a bit of runway, i.e. needs to be fed prior data points before it can output anything. Not nice, but I can't see how they could provide a filtered trace across the whole display width without accessing data before and/or after the displayed section. EDIT: So Rigol should be applauded for displaying only mathematically correct information in this case, instead of "faking" something! ;))
yes, there are, with selectable cutoff frequency. i should mention they are also bugged as i have shown in the screenshots above: the filtered trace is shifted on the right and the filtering is not applied to the whole displayed trace
Anyway, the range of cutoff frequencies depend on the selected timebase
better question: why don't you?... i wonder if the multitransfert bug was really solved or just hid under the rug
If you have a DS1054Z, why don't you try and let us know? If you don't, why do you care?
After update it starts earlier but also stops earlier. whatever
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=305532;image)
Sure, but the peaks and troughs line up nicely with the original signal so where's the bug?
better question: why don't you?... i wonder if the multitransfert bug was really solved or just hid under the rug
If you have a DS1054Z, why don't you try and let us know? If you don't, why do you care?
Because I don't make assumptions based on nothing.
If with "multitransfert bug" you mean the multi-channel waveform download bug,
I checked it and it seems to be resolved like I wrote before.
yes, there are, with selectable cutoff frequency. i should mention they are also bugged as i have shown in the screenshots above: the filtered trace is shifted on the right and the filtering is not applied to the whole displayed trace
Anyway, the range of cutoff frequencies depend on the selected timebase
I saw your screenshots but I was tired and did not pay much attention to them.
So the filters are applied on the math channel? Not directly on each channel?
Does this mean that you can apply a filter on just one channel at a time?
The cutoff freqs depend on the timebase on the 1052 too. But I learned to juggle around it and get the band I wanted with relatively nice results.
But if I cannot apply filters on each channel at the same time, it is a bit of a deal breaker for me.
I do not really need the 4 channels or any of the digital trigger stuff. I mostly work with audio. I just wanted to upgrade for the nice big screen.
i can count two:Sorry for you!
- doesn't use the full trace, can't see why it shouldn't
- "end" control doesn't do nothing
Indeed, Rigol MATH functions are using only the displayed points to calculate the result, so for a filter to cover the whole display it would mean to rewrite a big part of the scope's functions in order to access some extra data points from the scope's memory, instead of accessing only the displayed data points. I bet Rigol will never do that for DS1000Z.
- doesn't use the full trace, can't see why it shouldn't
I can't lay claim to being an expert on digital filters either. They do introduce phase delays, and I assume that Rigol shifts the filtered output to the left to correct for that (i.e. make the filtered and unfiltered traces line up better). That would cause the missing output on the right side of the screen.
Rigol, it's not too hard.
Hard vs. easy doesn't seem to be a factor. One word: "Pluses". :horse:
I admit that digital filters are not my area of expertise, but from what i remember for an M tap filter i would expect that the first M output samples would be """wrong""" and i can see why they would be discarded. what i don't see is a reason to discard the samples on the right
Hello,i can count two:Sorry for you!
- doesn't use the full trace, can't see why it shouldn't
- "end" control doesn't do nothing
Ther is no bug or issue. It's the algorithm of calculation IIR, FIR or what ever Filter you want of a limited range of data points. (See Mathematica or other math program an the theorie of digital filters ...)
LG Wolf
So, the filter is filtering correctly, now if you want we have to decide what start and end should doI have no idea what RIGOL it had thought. I have currently no application for it. But likely to restrict the datarange what it does well.
So, the filter is filtering correctly, now if you want we have to decide what start and end should do
Can someone compile a list of all the known bugs from the previous firmware release together with some pointers on how to reproduce the issues?
I need to admit that I lost track of all the quirks in the course of this thread, but would be happy to test on the new firmware and share my findings.
:D Frederik :-/O
Can someone compile a list of all the known bugs from the previous firmware release together with some pointers on how to reproduce the issues?
I need to admit that I lost track of all the quirks in the course of this thread, but would be happy to test on the new firmware and share my findings.
:D Frederik :-/O
There is a separate thread for this: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-(ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models)-bugswish-list/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-(ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models)-bugswish-list/)
Katie, the original poster, has done a great job keeping the initial post update for a while, but I believe it has now gone out of date. Maybe we can revive it? In any case, please let's keep the bug collection in that thread, rather than start a new one here.
Now we have this filter endpoint bug
There is a separate thread for this: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-(ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models)-bugswish-list/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-(ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models)-bugswish-list/)
Katie, the original poster, has done a great job keeping the initial post update for a while, but I believe it has now gone out of date. Maybe we can revive it? In any case, please let's keep the bug collection in that thread, rather than start a new one here.
Thanks,
I totally forgot about that and basically it just popped up after I wrote the request here.
Katie posted a message there today calling for a volunteer to manage the bug thread.
Anyone experienced with using the SPI decoder?
I have also something one could call a bug in the I2C trigger, if i'm able to reproduce it (basically, set it up so you can trigger on start condition. power down, power up: same settings, can't trigger. change trigger type, change it back to I2C, now it can trigger.
Anyone find anything else with the new firmware? The frenzy seemed to die pretty quick.
Anyone find anything else with the new firmware? The frenzy seemed to die pretty quick.
I think that now very few people are willing to try an update.
Anyone find anything else with the new firmware? The frenzy seemed to die pretty quick.
I think that now very few people are willing to try an update.
It is nice that Rigol still publishes the occasional firmware update, but there are no major problems anymore (and no breakthrough improvements in the firmware). Overall, that's a good state of affairs in my view. :)
Anyone find anything else with the new firmware? The frenzy seemed to die pretty quick.
I think that now very few people are willing to try an update.
Why would that be the case?! We have not seen a huge wave of reports on this firmware update, but the ones that were posted did not suggest any negative side effects, and confirmed a few improvements.
I think we have simply moved to "business as usual" with the DS1000Z. It's not the scope itself anymore that is the hobby, or a "project" of it's own, but people simply use it. It is nice that Rigol still publishes the occasional firmware update, but there are no major problems anymore (and no breakthrough improvements in the firmware). Overall, that's a good state of affairs in my view. :)
Anyone find anything else with the new firmware? The frenzy seemed to die pretty quick.
I think that now very few people are willing to try an update.
Because on the last update some users got a faulty scope.
And, unlike usual, we didn't see that much user reports here on the forum related to the new firmware. Just some occasional thumbs up to the update, but not a big discussion.
This makes me believe that not much people did the update...
It's not the scope itself anymore that is the hobby, or a "project" of it's own, but people simply use it.
New firmware is available - or do my eyes deceive me? :-//
2017-04-18 is today ...
Strangely when I downloaded the firmware, in the release note it says:
v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14
- Supported the multi-inteface of LXI
- Fixed bugs about Measure
and the firmware version on the download link is something totally wrong!! WTF!
Strangely when I downloaded the firmware, in the release note it says:
v00.04.04.01.01 2016/09/14
- Supported the multi-inteface of LXI
- Fixed bugs about Measure
and the firmware version on the download link is something totally wrong!! WTF!
I just tried an update and the scope says I already have the same version! :rant:
So, what's the deal with the new date? Just part of the web site snafu?
'fess up, deep down you hoped for that "Pluses" fix!
So, what's the deal with the new date? Just part of the web site snafu?These Chinese companies still don't know much about brand image and all that crap. Just look at the Rigol logos.
And compare to the logo here:
http://int.rigol.com (http://int.rigol.com)
In case anyone wonders: Latest Software is v.00.04.04.03.02 ...
"Innovation or Nothing"
What an odd statement. ::)
Updating the bootloader seems possible through a different firmware file, see: page 79 of this thread (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/1950/). Please go from there :)
Also, here is some info on unique capabilities of the older boot version: How to downgrade DS1000Z FW (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-firmware-downgrade-*is*-possible-and-here-is-how/)
How well your scope likes the new firmware without boot version update, I don’t know. In case you are fearless and go for the whole experience, please let us know how it all went and also:
If someone can point us / me towards the latest "Boot Version" update file, that would be nice. I would want to include that in the buglist / update thread.
Post #1964, on page 79 of this thread, mentions version 04.00.00.00 as the last one confirmed to include a boot loader update. A copy is hosted at http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z (http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/DS1000Z-04_00_00_00.7z) (in 7-zip format, whatever that is...).
Edit: I made an account over at the "official" Rigol forum (http://rigol.desk.com) and filed a request for some info on upgradeability of boot version vs. software version and asked for the latest boot version update files etc.
Will keep you posted..
My friend doing flash erase damaging device
ds1054z
thanks
My friend doing flash erase damaging device
ds1054z
thanks
Haiku?
Pastel lines fly past:
Brief signals frozen in time
Flawed tools can do much.
OK, the forum has been played through its endgame. We can all go home now.My friend doing flash erase damaging device
ds1054z
thanks
Haiku?
Pastel lines fly past:
Brief signals frozen in time
Flawed tools can do much.
Bought DS1104Z-S for the company, a couple of things pissed me off right away. Didn't have time to perform upgrades, ...Don't cry! Update - SelfCalibrate - ... and learn :popcorn:
Bought DS1104Z-S for the company, a couple of things pissed me off right away...
1. The channel zero marker on the left is lower than the GND level, by as much as 0.2 grid height, it's painfully visible.
DC Offset Accuracy: ±0.1 div ±2 mV ±1% offset value
DC Gain Accuracy: <10 mV: ±4% full scale ?10 mV: ±3% full scale
I am not sure where did you get the idea about the 5000 * 12k points. It simply dumps either whatever is on the screen, if you select "Screen" as the source or the entire memory of the scope, if you select "Memory". There is no concept of "frames" there - what are you referring to?I'm pretty much certain he was thinking about segmented memory recording. At 12k points per frame / segment / trigger event, that would be 500 waveforms to fill the 6Mpts memory per channel though.
I have not tried segmented memory yet but I'm guessing the memory dump function only dumps the currently selected segment.
I set MDepth=120kpts... store a CSV format file on the USB stick... the file is only 120k lines long
Can anyone tell me if there's a simple work-around for this?
Is it easy to program SCPI commands to retrieve the data?
I'm trying to capture and download about 10 seconds of single channel audio waveform which is roughly 50-100mV P-P. I set MDepth=120kpts and TScale=100ms/div and the scope solves for SRate=100kpts/sec. I was able to record the waveform (I'm using the trial version of the recording feature) and store a CSV format file on the USB stick. However, the file is only 120k lines long which is only 1.2 seconds worth of data.
Can anyone tell me if there's a simple work-around for this?
I'm trying to capture and download about 10 seconds of single channel audio waveform which is roughly 50-100mV P-P. I set MDepth=120kpts and TScale=100ms/div and the scope solves for SRate=100kpts/sec. I was able to record the waveform (I'm using the trial version of the recording feature) and store a CSV format file on the USB stick. However, the file is only 120k lines long which is only 1.2 seconds worth of data.
Can anyone tell me if there's a simple work-around for this? Is it easy to program SCPI commands to retrieve the data?
About amplifying the signal, sorry for the dumb Q, but how does that make it less noisy? And what's the point of having millivolt ranges if you have to use op-amps prior to sending the signal to the scope?
About amplifying the signal, sorry for the dumb Q, but how does that make it less noisy? And what's the point of having millivolt ranges if you have to use op-amps prior to sending the signal to the scope?
p.s.: why do you want to record multiple frames (with time gaps between them)?
Most people want to download the waveformdata as one contiguous block of samples.
About amplifying the signal, sorry for the dumb Q, but how does that make it less noisy? And what's the point of having millivolt ranges if you have to use op-amps prior to sending the signal to the scope?
The input stage has a JFET or MOSFET source follower acting as an impedance converter leading to a tradeoff between noise and bandwidth. A small area (low capacitance) FET is needed for high bandwidth but small area FETs have higher noise. Higher bandwidth oscilloscopes have less sensitive volts/div settings and this is why; it does not make much sense to have higher sensitivity if it just results in more than a division of displayed noise.
Since I'm mostly interested in low-frequency (<20KHz) and low amplitude signals, maybe this scope isn't the best tool for the job? Do you have any alternative suggestions?
The input stage has a JFET or MOSFET source follower acting as an impedance converter leading to a tradeoff between noise and bandwidth. A small area (low capacitance) FET is needed for high bandwidth but small area FETs have higher noise. Higher bandwidth oscilloscopes have less sensitive volts/div settings and this is why; it does not make much sense to have higher sensitivity if it just results in more than a division of displayed noise.
Ok, thanks for that explanation. Since I'm mostly interested in low-frequency (<20KHz) and low amplitude signals, maybe this scope isn't the best tool for the job? Do you have any alternative suggestions?
Looking at the True Rta site and the usb options the Scarlett Solo could be a good option and the Tascam, which I recently looked closely at could be exceptional. Current models of both are usb2 and sample up to 192k.The Tascam has a rated 123db dynamic range. The QuantAsylum devices are good and self contained. I have a 1054z and a QA400 for audio work.The input stage has a JFET or MOSFET source follower acting as an impedance converter leading to a tradeoff between noise and bandwidth. A small area (low capacitance) FET is needed for high bandwidth but small area FETs have higher noise. Higher bandwidth oscilloscopes have less sensitive volts/div settings and this is why; it does not make much sense to have higher sensitivity if it just results in more than a division of displayed noise.
Ok, thanks for that explanation. Since I'm mostly interested in low-frequency (<20KHz) and low amplitude signals, maybe this scope isn't the best tool for the job? Do you have any alternative suggestions?
An amplifier is one option; the gain of the amplifier effectively divides the noise from the oscilloscope front end. One interesting option for this is the old Tektronix AM502 1MHz differential amplifier (http://w140.com/tekwiki/wiki/AM502) (1) which not only supports gains from 1 to 100k but has differential inputs and variable low and high pass filters; the output from the AM502 plugs into a singled ended oscilloscope or other instrument giving it differential input capability.
Some old and out of production lower bandwidth oscilloscopes have high sensitivity and low noise but that is probably not the best option and if you want to do audio analysis, then a general purpose oscilloscope or DSO is not the best instrument. They are good for development work and tracking down high frequency spurious oscillations though.
For audio, some sound cards are a good option when combined with audio analysis software. The thing I would look for however is differential inputs because otherwise ground loops will prevent low noise operation. That is one of the big advantages of the Tektronix AM502 mentioned above and it could be used with a sound card.
Some useful links:
http://www.clarisonus.com/Research%20Reports/RR001-SoundCardEval/RR001-PCsoundCards.html (http://www.clarisonus.com/Research%20Reports/RR001-SoundCardEval/RR001-PCsoundCards.html)
https://trueaudio.com/rta_abt1.htm (https://trueaudio.com/rta_abt1.htm)
https://trueaudio.com/rta_usb.htm (https://trueaudio.com/rta_usb.htm)
https://quantasylum.com/products/qa401-audio-analyzer (https://quantasylum.com/products/qa401-audio-analyzer)
(1) I have one AM502 and a pair of 7A22s which are basically the same thing but built into an oscilloscope. I use them for small signal audio work and noise analysis.
I'm trying to capture and download about 10 seconds of single channel audio waveform which is roughly 50-100mV P-P. I set MDepth=120kpts and TScale=100ms/div and the scope solves for SRate=100kpts/sec. I was able to record the waveform (I'm using the trial version of the recording feature) and store a CSV format file on the USB stick. However, the file is only 120k lines long which is only 1.2 seconds worth of data.
Can anyone tell me if there's a simple work-around for this?
You have to do two things, I think:
(a) Increase your time base setting, to 1s/div. Otherwise, why should the scope take 10 seconds' worth of data? It will only capture one screen's width of data.
(b) Increase MDepth, as 120 kpts/10s are probably not enough for audio sampling.
The problem is that if you increase the time base setting past 100ms/div, then for some reason the Record menu item (under the Utility/Record menu) is greyed out as OFF and cannot be changed to ON. If the time base is 100ms/div or less, then it is enabled and can be changed to ON.
page 11-1
Note: The horizontal time base must be set to Y-T mode during waveform record.
page 3-5
Roll Mode
In this mode, the waveform scrolls from right to left to update the display. The horizontal position and trigger control of the waveform are not available. The range of horizontal scale adjustment is from 200 ms to 50.0 s.
Note: When Roll mode is enabled, the waveform "horizontal position", "Delayed Sweep", "Protocol Decoding", "Pass/Fail Test", "Waveform Record", "To Set the Persistence Time" and "To Trigger the Oscilloscope" are not available.
Slow Sweep
Slow sweep is similar to Roll mode. In YT mode, when the horizontal time base is set to 200 ms/div or slower, the instrument enters "slow sweep" mode in which the instrument first acquires the data at the left of the trigger point and then waits for a trigger event. After the trigger occurs, the instrument continues to finish the waveform at the right of the trigger point. When slow sweep mode is used to observe low frequency signal, DC "Channel Coupling" mode is recommended."
but you'd only need one segment. I mean single capture then download the full trace and expand it.
Hi All,
I am just wondering if there is a way to permanently remove the measurement items that display at the bottom of the scope screen.
Measure - Clear - All ItemsYes I see that and have tried that....
:WAV:SOUR CHAN(i) - i designates which channels are on
:WAV:MODE RAW
:WAV:FORM BYTE
:WAV:STAR 1
:WAV:STOP 250000
:WAV:DATA? (The scope beeps twice. I can't make out the first message displayed)
(then I chop off the first 11 bytes and send it to an array)
:WAV:STAR 250001
:WAV:STOP 300000
:WAV:DATA? (Again the scope beeps twice. I can't make out the first message displayed)
(then I chop off the first 11 bytes and append to the previous array)
(repeat the above process for however many channels are used, with the array index growing for how many channels there are)
:WAVE:XINC?
(gave the wrong integer when 4 channels where selected)
[Array - :WAV:YREF? - :WAV:YOR?]*:WAV:YINC?
(gives the waveform)
I'm having issues reading the RAW data with labview. Sometimes I receive the wrong X increment value when calling "XINC?". Sometimes my signal is squished to a portion of the total points in "MDEP".
Here is a representation of the code, after the device is triggered and is in STOP mode.Code: [Select]
:WAV:SOUR CHAN(i) - i designates which channels are on
:WAV:MODE RAW
:WAV:FORM BYTE
:WAV:STAR 1
:WAV:STOP 250000
:WAV:DATA? (The scope beeps twice. I can't make out the first message displayed)
(then I chop off the first 11 bytes and send it to an array)
:WAV:STAR 250001
:WAV:STOP 300000
:WAV:DATA? (Again the scope beeps twice. I can't make out the first message displayed)
(then I chop off the first 11 bytes and append to the previous array)
(repeat the above process for however many channels are used, with the array index growing for how many channels there are)
:WAVE:XINC?
(gave the wrong integer when 4 channels where selected)
[Array - :WAV:YREF? - :WAV:YOR?]*:WAV:YINC?
(gives the waveform)
I don't have any wait times between operations, however I've run the code with wait times applied and still appear to receive errors sometimes.
Yes I see that and have tried that....
I am just wondering if there is a way to permanently remove the measurement items that display at the bottom of the scope screen.
Measure - Clear - All Items
I said -But as soon as you activate a new measurement, all the remaining measurement "slots" come back, with their grayed-out names. (As a user interface designer, this reeks of the UI exposing the implementation details, because grayed-out measurements make no sense whatsoever.)QuoteMeasure - Clear - All Items
This in fact does as you asked - I just tried it. All the measurement items displayed are completely removed from the screen - not greyed out. They are gone. So I have no idea what it is you are asking ... :-//
But as soon as you activate a new measurement, all the remaining measurement "slots" come back, with their grayed-out names.
But as soon as you activate a new measurement, all the remaining measurement "slots" come back, with their grayed-out names.
That wasn't what he was asking about though ... :(
Your suggestion allow for the temporary removal of the measurement items at the bottom of the screen.
way any longer. :)
Of course I'm not wrong. [...]Famous last words... ;)
Of course I'm not wrong. [...]Famous last words... ;)
He asked "I am just wondering if there is a way to permanently remove the measurement items that display at the bottom of the scope screen."
Your suggestion allow for the temporary removal of the measurement items at the bottom of the screen.
He asked "I am just wondering if there is a way to permanently remove the measurement items that display at the bottom of the scope screen."
Your suggestion allow for the temporary removal of the measurement items at the bottom of the screen.
Simple solution: Put some duct tape over the buttons at the side of the screen and don't use them. :palm:
I think we can agree that the implementation of the measurement display control is non-intuitive and just a bit odd...
Just USE the silly thing, don't obsess about it!
Man oh Man such drama over what I though was a simple question.
Of course I am talking about that fact that the measurement values are not permanently deleted
unless you turn the scope off.
My goodness.
As a newbie.... seeing all that drama makes me think twice before asking another question.
Man oh Man such drama over what I though was a simple question.
Of course I am talking about that fact that the measurement values are not permanently deleted
unless you turn the scope off.
As a newbie.... seeing all that drama makes me think twice before asking another question.
Man oh Man such drama over what I though was a simple question.
Of course I am talking about that fact that the measurement values are not permanently deleted
unless you turn the scope off.
Some things are more complex than they first appear on the surface. Not being able to permanently delete stuff, as you now see, has more going on.QuoteAs a newbie.... seeing all that drama makes me think twice before asking another question.
Just as there's no perfect oscilloscope, there's no perfect forum. Don't let that stop you from asking questions. Simply ignore the drama and benefit from the answers. There's much of value here, with a little drama to boot, just like real life.
Welcome to forum, Stuart.
Excuse me to be new and start studying electronics now.
Have buy a rigol ds1054z, be the first oscilloscope
If I measure voltage with 1x probe after bridge graetz get frequency 100hz and this is correct.
If I measure voltage with probe 10x after bridge graetz get 50hz and this is incorrect.
You can explain me???
thank you
I want to stay connected ground oscilloscope.That is a fantastically good idea, but be sure to watch Dave's video on scope grounding before progressing.
Remember I'm beginner ask for help understanding 10x 1x probe |O |O
Remember I'm beginner ask for help understanding 10x 1x probe |O |O
It's very simple: Don't use 1x.
No it's not a joke.
Other than that, I'd rather everyone just ship fixed 10x probes with all devices. Fixing the probe to 10x would improve their performance slightly, but more importantly it would stop people from making mistakes and frying the inputs of their oscilloscopes.
Remote control software? Dave said in his review the Rigol lab software sucked but better had been written by the community. Anyone have a link or name for it?
One oddity is when dumping raw BYTE waveforms, the samples are prepended with 11 bytes of '#900000xxxx' garbage and 1 byte of '\n'. I'm not sure if this is the scope's fault or the Python library I'm using, but easy to fix.
Quick question: is there a way to limit the sample rate for CSV export? It takes incredibly long as-is.Limit memory size, or use PC software like this one (i recommend it, it dump whole memory in few seconds.) https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/rigol-feat-higher-bitfloat-accuracy-general-purpose-deep-mem-fft-sw/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/rigol-feat-higher-bitfloat-accuracy-general-purpose-deep-mem-fft-sw/)
Considering the various DSOs for around $300 (Rigol 1054 / Siglent SDS1072 / Hantek dso4072-5102), is Rigol a good choice for audio applications? Would you call it the best choice?Welcome to the forum.
Is the FFT function usable for assessing THD of less than, say, 0.5%? I know it's no spectrum analyzer, but still.
Welcome to the forum.Thank you!
Consider adding SDS1202X-E to your list. Bit dearer than a 1072 @ $379 but 200 MHz and excellent FFT.
It will be better than the others on your list due to its 1 Mpts FFT.Welcome to the forum.Thank you!
Consider adding SDS1202X-E to your list. Bit dearer than a 1072 @ $379 but 200 MHz and excellent FFT.
I certainly don't need high bandwidth (or do I just not realize that I need it?), but excellent FFT is definitely a selling point. So, will FFT actually be useful for seeing small (inaudible) distortions of audio signals?
Welcome to the forum.Thank you!
Consider adding SDS1202X-E to your list. Bit dearer than a 1072 @ $379 but 200 MHz and excellent FFT.
I certainly don't need high bandwidth (or do I just not realize that I need it?), but excellent FFT is definitely a selling point. So, will FFT actually be useful for seeing small (inaudible) distortions of audio signals?
Considering the various DSOs for around $300 (Rigol 1054 / Siglent SDS1072 / Hantek dso4072-5102), is Rigol a good choice for audio applications? Would you call it the best choice?
Is the FFT function usable for assessing THD of less than, say, 0.5%? I know it's no spectrum analyzer, but still.
none of the entry-level scopes are suitable for audio work which requires the analysis of signal to noise, harmonic distortion etc. at high dynamic range.Thank you, that's exactly what I needed to know. Then I will try to get Rightmark Audio Analyzer software working (I even happen to have the great - and highly regarded - EMU 0404 USB interface which is quite suitable as a reference DAC/ADC).
none is good.Gotcha. Looks like you just saved me upwards of $300. I wanted to have a standalone device with its own screen and controls rather than being tethered to a laptop, but if the several hundred dollar scopes aren't even good then it's just waste of money.
-8 bit digitizer
- too much noise (a side effect of having a very high bandwidth
an audio interface, or a dc coupled audio interface, and a software suite is probably the best choice before ending up spending multi thousand dollars on audio analyzers
FFT aside, is there a significant difference between the DSOs in question as far as audio applications go?
FFT aside, is there a significant difference between the DSOs in question as far as audio applications go?
none is good.Gotcha. Looks like you just saved me upwards of $300. I wanted to have a standalone device with its own screen and controls rather than being tethered to a laptop, but if the several hundred dollar scopes aren't even good then it's just waste of money.
-8 bit digitizer
- too much noise (a side effect of having a very high bandwidth
an audio interface, or a dc coupled audio interface, and a software suite is probably the best choice before ending up spending multi thousand dollars on audio analyzers
Gotcha. Looks like you just saved me upwards of $300. I wanted to have a standalone device with its own screen and controls rather than being tethered to a laptop, but if the several hundred dollar scopes aren't even good then it's just waste of money.an used ipad perhaps
(maybe it's an excuse to buy a Windows-based tablet, which is a 10000x better choice than iPad if you want to get some work done)That's a great idea! I do have an x86 (Intel Atom) Windows 10 tablet at work, and I already tried installing the drivers for my USB audio interface there and connecting the thing - everything works. I was considering buying such a tablet as a fan-less alternative to a laptop for listening to music in headphones (fan noise sucks even when it's really quiet), and now you're pointing out that the same device can be used for signal analysis using the same audio interface. A thing to consider indeed.
none is good.
-8 bit digitizer
- too much noise (a side effect of having a very high bandwidth
an audio interface, or a dc coupled audio interface, and a software suite is probably the best choice before ending up spending multi thousand dollars on audio analyzers
have to agree, i had a surface 3 for some time and it was a really neat tool
I want to decode I2C... Would one of those $6 eBay logic analyzes work better for this?
can we possibly download the whole 14Mpts data and plot FFT in PC like DS1054Z 24Mpts FFT like below?It will be better than the others on your list due to its 1 Mpts FFT.Welcome to the forum.I certainly don't need high bandwidth (or do I just not realize that I need it?), but excellent FFT is definitely a selling point. So, will FFT actually be useful for seeing small (inaudible) distortions of audio signals?
Consider adding SDS1202X-E to your list. Bit dearer than a 1072 @ $379 but 200 MHz and excellent FFT.
Some screenshots:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-siglent-sds1000x-e-oscilloscope-based-on-xilinx-zynq-7000-soc-architecture/msg1192654/#msg1192654 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-siglent-sds1000x-e-oscilloscope-based-on-xilinx-zynq-7000-soc-architecture/msg1192654/#msg1192654)
can we possibly download the whole 14Mpts data and plot FFT in PC like DS1054Z 24Mpts FFT like below?Outside my field but I'll see what I can do. Bookmarked.
can we possibly download the whole 14Mpts data and plot FFT in PC like DS1054Z 24Mpts FFT like below?
Probably, but... it's still an 8-bit ADC and that's the real limiting factor. No amount of buffer will remove the noise introduced in the signal by the ADC.8 bit means means ~48 dB SNR, is that why it's limiting? Subsequently, a perfect sine wave quantized in 8 bits would exhibit a certain (rather high) THD percentage due to that -48 dB random noise added to it. Am I getting it right?
8 bit means means ~48 dB SNR, is that why it's limiting? Subsequently, a perfect sine wave quantized in 8 bits would exhibit a certain (rather high) THD percentage due to that -48 dB random noise added to it. Am I getting it right?
8 bit means means ~48 dB SNR, is that why it's limiting? Subsequently, a perfect sine wave quantized in 8 bits would exhibit a certain (rather high) THD percentage due to that -48 dB random noise added to it. Am I getting it right?
You'll see all the big frequency peaks but the noise will mask the small ones.
Can you provide a link to VISADSO please.It is this software: http://www.soasystem.com/download/visadso/ (http://www.soasystem.com/download/visadso/)
Hope that this isn't off-topic.
Does anyone who's purchased one lately know whether the upgrade hacks still work? I'm getting closer to buying one, figuring that eventually they will make it harder to permanently enable what they offer as trial features and that my old Tektronics may decide to retire soon.
Thanks in advance for any info!
I understand that all options can be remove, but I have been unable to find and download the UltraSigma software. Do any anyone here have a working download link, or can provide me with this program?
Is the bug only when reducing the amplitude to 500uv?
Hi, I have the Rigol SD1054z, and used the http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/ (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol/) page for the modification.I haven't tried it but code DSER should install everything but the 500uV/div feature. It's not listed on the webpage you used but it should work once you've reset all the options. I wouldn't mess with the 500uV feature if your scope doesn't have the hardware for it.
Unfortunately I wasn't aware of this forum until now, and have installed all options DSFR and was not aware there was a bug at 500uV (I've not seen this bug myself)
I understand that all options can be remove, but I have been unable to find and download the UltraSigma software. Do any anyone here have a working download link, or can provide me with this program?
Is the bug only when reducing the amplitude to 500uv?
Peter
I may don't know how to recognize the bug, but my work just fine on 500uV
Maybe that is a more sophisticated bug other than just see the waveform on 500uV
The DS1000Z series only has 2 analogue ranges, with an attenuator switched in for 500mV/div up to the max of 10V/div.
All other gain control is done digitally inside the HMCAD1511 ADC (it has internal precision >8 bits, and thus can do digital gain control over a fairly wide range), which Rigol has taken advantage of in order to make the analogue front end very inexpensive. However this digital gain has a max of 50x, with missing codes at gains higher than 32x (see HMCAD1511 datasheet).
rigol DS1054Z bandwidth
rigol DS1054Z bandwidth : I measured it a risetime of 2,95 ns
FWIW, unlocking adds the features that are only available as 30 day trial runs IIRC (one could argue about both the memory increase as well as the scope's BW however).rigol DS1054Z bandwidth : I measured it a risetime of 2,95 ns
Unlocked to 100MHz, I presume.
FWIW, unlocking adds the features that are only available as 30 day trial runs IIRC (one could argue about both the memory increase as well as the scope's BW however).
Unlocking codes (purchased or generated by Riglol) can be used to permanently enable all options originally incuded as time-limited trials.Quite true; I wasn't paying sufficient attention to the details of my post. :palm: My deepest apologies. :-[
These include decoders, advanced triggering, and also the increased memory capacity.
rigol DS1054Z bandwidth : I measured it a risetime of 2,95 ns
Unlocked to 100MHz, I presume.
another signal hooked , rise time 2.550 ns , BW > 130 MHZ
If i saw that signal i would be worried. what is wrong?
I've got my DS10x4Z already for a few years but only now got to check the rise time with a half-way decent square source -- my recently constructed Rb 10MHz source with multiple outputs, among them three pretty fast 74LVC drivers with a symmetrizised (sp?) square. These outputs directly connected to the DS...Z's input via RG58 and a proper terminator result in rise/fall times round about 1.6....1.7ns, single channel enabled. See attached screenshots/files for details. I didn't expect the "lil'Rigol" to be so fast. Impressive!
Cheers,
Tom
Attention, I never said that the test signal was the one provided by the oscilloscope to calibrate the probes! Of course I tried with an external signalIf i saw that signal i would be worried. what is wrong?
It's probably a problem with probing.
(nice alliteration...)
I've got my DS10x4Z already for a few years but only now got to check the rise time with a half-way decent square source -- my recently constructed Rb 10MHz source with multiple outputs, among them three pretty fast 74LVC drivers with a symmetrizised (sp?) square. These outputs directly connected to the DS...Z's input via RG58 and a proper terminator result in rise/fall times round about 1.6....1.7ns, single channel enabled. See attached screenshots/files for details. I didn't expect the "lil'Rigol" to be so fast. Impressive!
Cheers,
Tom
Impressive indeed, but what happens if you expand the timebase so that you can see the most of the rising/falling edge? remember that this scope makes measurements based on the screen's pixels (measurements are made on screen buffer) and not on acquired data
I've had my DS1054Z for about a week now and am amazed at what it can do. Right now I've got it set up to calibrate the head alignment of an old TEAC A-6300 reel-to-reel tape deck. I'm feeding the Left line out from the deck to Channel 1 on the scope and Right line out from the deck to Channel 2 on the scope. My question is, is it possible to lock the V/division of Channel 1 and Channel 2 together so if I want to adjust the gain (V/division) of the vertical I don't have to individually select Channel 1 and Channel 2 to change the vertical gain to match each other.
...My question is, is it possible to lock the V/division of Channel 1 and Channel 2 together so if I want to adjust the gain (V/division) of the vertical I don't have to individually select Channel 1 and Channel 2 to change the vertical gain to match each other.
echo ":CHANnel1:SCALe 1" | nc -w1 192.168.1.3 5555
echo ":CHANnel2:SCALe 1" | nc -w1 192.168.1.3 5555
echo ":CHAN1:SCAL 1" > /dev/usbtmc0
Impressive indeed, but what happens if you expand the timebase so that you can see the most of the rising/falling edge? remember that this scope makes measurements based on the screen's pixels (measurements are made on screen buffer) and not on acquired data:-//
The 5ns/div time base TurboTom used (in the second and third screenshot) is the fastest timebase the DS1000Z series offers.
I've had my DS1054Z for about a week now and am amazed at what it can do. Right now I've got it set up to calibrate the head alignment of an old TEAC A-6300 reel-to-reel tape deck. I'm feeding the Left line out from the deck to Channel 1 on the scope and Right line out from the deck to Channel 2 on the scope. My question is, is it possible to lock the V/division of Channel 1 and Channel 2 together so if I want to adjust the gain (V/division) of the vertical I don't have to individually select Channel 1 and Channel 2 to change the vertical gain to match each other.
Or via USB. No additional software or IP-address needed. In a console just enter:Code: [Select]echo ":CHAN1:SCAL 1" > /dev/usbtmc0
Impressive indeed, but what happens if you expand the timebase so that you can see the most of the rising/falling edge? remember that this scope makes measurements based on the screen's pixels (measurements are made on screen buffer) and not on acquired data
:-//
The 5ns/div time base TurboTom used (in the second and third screenshot) is the fastest timebase the DS1000Z series offers. The rise time is clearly a fraction of one division, approx. 1/3 of a division. So I don't think the fast rise time is an artefact of the on-screen measurement in any way. (More data points or a faster time base would give you a more precise measurement of the rise time, but won't make it larger than 1.7 ns.)
Oh well, I can live with having to change each channel individually :)
I've had my DS1054Z for about a week now and am amazed at what it can do. Right now I've got it set up to calibrate the head alignment of an old TEAC A-6300 reel-to-reel tape deck. I'm feeding the Left line out from the deck to Channel 1 on the scope and Right line out from the deck to Channel 2 on the scope. My question is, is it possible to lock the V/division of Channel 1 and Channel 2 together so if I want to adjust the gain (V/division) of the vertical I don't have to individually select Channel 1 and Channel 2 to change the vertical gain to match each other.
Made a new video, with instructions on how to reset the options that were requested a few times and a quick way to enable them via USB
Made a new video, with instructions on how to reset the options that were requested a few times and a quick way to enable them via USB:
UltraSigma is big as hell but simple, most the alternatives I found require weird installation processes.
Where in forum is enhancement suggestion list being kept ?
2) Chart recorder function coupled with PC API. There are times
I need to look at very slow rate events, circuits, that want strip
chart like functionality.
Item 2 another user has suggested to me to use the programming manual
and write code to do this.
Regards, Dana.
this thread deals with bugs as well as suggested improvements and features.
2) Chart recorder function coupled with PC API. There are times
I need to look at very slow rate events, circuits, that want strip
chart like functionality.
Item 2 another user has suggested to me to use the programming manual
and write code to do this.
Regards, Dana.
If I understand your request, then I would like that too. I think I will try to configure Microsoft Excel to communicate with the scope using the example in the programming manual.
I would like to get a screen plot of a long event, such as charging/discharging batteries, so something like a 1 hr/div sweep would seem appropriate.
After writing that, I wonder if using X-Y mode and manually controlling the sweep would work? (I'm away now).
If it's a tool you're familiar with, why not?
It seems like the wrong tool for the job to me. Do you really want your 'scope to be tied up for days doing something like monitoring a battery?
Why not use something like an Arduino instead? It has more ADC bits, uses less power, less space, connects directly to a PC, etc. There's a ton of data logging software available for them, etc.
It seems like the wrong tool for the job to me. Do you really want your 'scope to be tied up for days doing something like monitoring a battery?
Why not use something like an Arduino instead? It has more ADC bits, uses less power, less space, connects directly to a PC, etc. There's a ton of data logging software available for them, etc.
Quote from: fungusWhy not use something like an Arduino instead? It has more ADC bits, uses less power, less space, connects directly to a PC, etc. There's a ton of data logging software available for them, etc.The problem with such approaches is that the measurement itself soon becomes an end rather than a medium.
If I understand your request, then I would like that too. I think I will try to configure Microsoft Excel to communicate with the scope using the example in the programming manual.
I would like to get a screen plot of a long event, such as charging/discharging batteries, so something like a 1 hr/div sweep would seem appropriate.
After writing that, I wonder if using X-Y mode and manually controlling the sweep would work? (I'm away now).
:scared:
It seems like the wrong tool for the job to me. Do you really want your 'scope to be tied up for days doing something like monitoring a battery?
Why not use something like an Arduino instead? It has more ADC bits, uses less power, less space, connects directly to a PC, etc. There's a ton of data logging software available for them, etc.
Or use a multimeter with logging functionality (either on-board or to a PC via USB or Bluetooth), which comes complete with a front end for monitoring voltage, current ... over wide ranges. If the software supplied with the meter does not cut it, Sigrok can log data from many meters, including low-cost options.
I may use an Arduino since I have 'em, but will need to design a circuit so I can accurately measure high voltages.
I'm not sure why, but it seems to be somewhat offensive to desire a much longer sweep period than 50s/div. Is it really unreasonable?
I'm not sure why, but it seems to be somewhat offensive to desire a much longer sweep period than 50s/div. Is it really unreasonable?
I'm not sure why, but it seems to be somewhat offensive to desire a much longer sweep period than 50s/div. Is it really unreasonable?
fun fact, the Lecroy boat anchor i have over here has 10kS/s as the longest timebase :|
that's a 27 hours long record
Where in forum is enhancement suggestion list being kept ?
I would like to add following to it -
Not sure if someone has already covered this but I would like
added into firmware -
...
2) Chart recorder function coupled with PC API. There are times
I need to look at very slow rate events, circuits, that want strip
chart like functionality.
Item 2 another user has suggested to me to use the programming manual
and write code to do this.
Regards, Dana.
python DS1054Z_logger.py 3600 192.168.1.7
fun fact, the Lecroy boat anchor i have over here has 10kS/s as the longest timebase :|
that's a 27 hours long record
Am I the only one who got a 72 hour trial instead of 36?
I'm trying to understand persistence time. I am triggering a 1pps signal and watching 10 MHz slowly drift on the second channel. I was expecting to set persistence time to 500ms and see two traces after the second trigger, and then the persisting trace would fade away before the 3rd trigger. It looks like a 1sec persistence time persists a trace for 20 seconds, 500ms persists for 11 seconds, and 100ms persists for 3 seconds. :-//That seems odd. Triggering issue? Averaging mode set? 'Auto' trigger set instead of normal?
I'm trying to understand persistence time. I am triggering a 1pps signal and watching 10 MHz slowly drift on the second channel. I was expecting to set persistence time to 500ms and see two traces after the second trigger, and then the persisting trace would fade away before the 3rd trigger. It looks like a 1sec persistence time persists a trace for 20 seconds, 500ms persists for 11 seconds, and 100ms persists for 3 seconds. :-//
*RST
:TRIG:MODE EDGE
:TRIG:EDGE:SOUR CHAN1
:TRIG:EDGE:LEV 1
:TRIG:EDGE:SLOP POS
:RUN
:TRIG:EDGE:SWE SING
:WAV:SOUR CHAN1
:WAV:MODE RAW
:WAV:FROM BYTE
:WAV:PRE?
I'm still having a bit of a hard time correctly transferring waveform data.
After searching Google, I cannot seem to find a satisfying answer to the following question: is it possible to record waveforms on the DS1054Z in a way that they can be exported and played back on a arbitrairy signal generator in any sort of reasonable and usable fashion? Or am I looking for something that I am not going to find?If you have Rigol AWG you can connect them directly with USB and do that directly between instruments without PC...
After searching Google, I cannot seem to find a satisfying answer to the following question: is it possible to record waveforms on the DS1054Z in a way that they can be exported and played back on a arbitrairy signal generator in any sort of reasonable and usable fashion? Or am I looking for something that I am not going to find?
If you have Rigol AWG you can connect them directly with USB and do that directly between instruments without PC...That actually sounds really good. What is this function called? I have searched for 'record', 'replay' and similar terms along with the DS1054Z and the Rigol DG1000Z series, but came up with nothing. Other than someone having a hard time exporting anything at a reasonable speed from the DS1054Z, that is. There does not seem to be a lot of information out there.
That's going to depend more on the signal generator than on the DS1054Z.Yes, it seems that my Google skills are not up to par at the moment. Garbage in, garbage out.
A DS1054Z can export data in various formats, you can grab data from a DS1054Z via a cable and use it for things.
So... if your google search term included the word "DS1054Z" then it was probably wrong. :)
It seems I found something in the message below. No source of the information, though.What do you mean no source of information... :-//.... If you connect DS1000Z series scope and DG1000Z series via usb cable you get menu to transfer waveform..
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-dg1022z/msg1075992/#msg1075992 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-dg1022z/msg1075992/#msg1075992)
What do you mean no source of information... :-//.... If you connect DS1000Z series scope and DG1000Z series via usb cable you get menu to transfer waveform..Sorry, not having the correct terminology made it a bit hard to find. No luck with 'transfer', 'import', 'record', 'replay', or a number of other terms. Eventually, looking for 'USB' led me to the following result in the Rigol DG1022Z manual:
Download manual for DS1000Z and DG1000Z it is in there.... That's your source..
TMC DS: seamlessly interconnect with the RIGOL DS that meets the TMC standard. Read and store the waveform data collected by the DS and rebuilt waveform losslessly.
https://rigol.desk.com/customer/en/portal/articles/2287264-direct-waveform-transfer-from-a-ds1000z-scope-to-a-dg4000-generator
The differences between the boards . First is from the scope that showed Dave , and 2 and 3 is from my scope .I did, yet I'm still lost. :-//
I wrote in the text ... footprints for logical analyzer ... read the post .
Thank you !
HI nanofrog ,You're just absolutely determined to make me open mine up and check out the internals aren't you.... :o :P
In teardown of the 1054Z you can see that there are pads (circled with red by me on Dave's pic) for one FPGA and one memory chip that serves as the interface for logic analyzer ( from connector that is already empty ).
In my version of the board as you can see in my pic , there are no more pads for IC interface but pads for connector are in their place and they leads to FPGA ( Xilinx ) . So this make me to think that they are chosen to simplify the design of the logic analyzer (mostly like by economic reasons) . This make more easy to mod this scope by adding a connector and some voltage regulators , than solder BGA components ...
The firmware is the same for 1054Z and for 1074Z Plus , so this is not a problem . Biggest problem is finding values for the missing discrete components and finding a way for adding a button and cutting a hole in the front mask . For the LA button are contacts on the keyboard , even with its own functional LED .
Yes , is better to have a separate logic analyzer . A clone of Saleae cost 18 S on Ebay , but mod is justified by itself ...:)
By ,
The difference between boards is puzzling. While an LA might be possible without the second FPGA, I wonder where do they store the LA samples, because the additional RAM chip is missing too.
skander36, can you connect some wires, then "press" the missing LA button under CH4, and see if your oscilloscope enters into Logic Analyzer mode? If yes, then it would be interesting to wire one or two lines from the LA connector pads to outside of the oscilloscope's case and test if it really works as an LA.
Has anyone found difficulty uninstalling options with the 00.04.04.03.02 firmware?
I don't think I am doing anything wrong but
:SYST:OPT:UNINST
does nothing over USB or LAN. No error messages and nothing returned to the PC.
The "Plus" version of the DS1000Z series comes with the LA connector populated but without the probes necessary to use it. It's priced between the MSO and DS non-plus models (and is only available for 70MHz+ by the looks of it). I assume they are just sharing the PCB design between the "Plus" and non-Plus models.
The LA channels disable 1 or 2 analog channels when in use, which is awful and makes the MSO pointless in my opinion, but that's how they avoided adding more RAM/FPGA resources to the Plus/MSO version!
Has anyone found difficulty uninstalling options with the 00.04.04.03.02 firmware?
I don't think I am doing anything wrong but
:SYST:OPT:UNINST
does nothing over USB or LAN. No error messages and nothing returned to the PC.
Has anyone found difficulty uninstalling options with the 00.04.04.03.02 firmware?
I don't think I am doing anything wrong but
:SYST:OPT:UNINST
does nothing over USB or LAN. No error messages and nothing returned to the PC.
Case is important :
:SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTall
Thanks skander36
I didn't think to try that. The command needed is
:SYST:OPT:UNINSTALL
SCPI is not case sensitive, as bitseeker pointed out. By convention in documentation the lower case parts are supposed to be optional.
So unless this is a bug and :SYST:OPT:UNINST used to work on previous FW releases the manual is wrong and should say
:SYSTem:OPTion:UNINSTALL
Which is pretty unusual since the parts of SCPI commands are not more than 5 characters in general
Lets say that Rigol is not a prime example of scpi implementation...
Lets say that Rigol is not a prime example of scpi implementation...
You'll probably find it works perfectly if you send an SCPI newline instead of copying/pasting with a Windows newline.
I don't know if the Rigol accepts a carriage return + linefeed
:WAV:MODE:NORM
:syst:err?
-113,"Undefined header; keyword cannot be found"
:WAV:MODE NORM
:syst:err?
0,"No error"
:WAV:MODE STAR 1201
:syst:err?
-220,"Parameter error"
:syst:err?
0,"No error"
So far all good, as expected.:WAV:STAR 1201
:WAV:STAR 120
:syst:err?
That's it, SCPI hangs until the next power on.
NEW BUG (Software 00.04.04.SP3, Board 0.1.1): When a bad SCPI command is followed by another command, then query the error queue using ":SYST:ERR?", the SCPI will become unresponsive until the next power cycle.
It would be more interesting to know wether they fixed the design problems with the PLL circuitry.
Why, what problem is it causing?
A few but Fungus doesn't really want to answer this fully.It would be more interesting to know wether they fixed the design problems with the PLL circuitry.
Why, what problem is it causing?
I was planning on a SDS2000X at 3.5x the price of the DS1054Z, but programming was a total showstopper.
A few but Fungus doesn't really want to answer this fully.It would be more interesting to know wether they fixed the design problems with the PLL circuitry.
Why, what problem is it causing?
Members MarkL and Bud are those that narrowed it down to design problems with the PLL and then Dave did a vid on it.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/)
Then Bud started looking hard at his own DS2000A, which he documented in full:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/project-yaigol-fixing-rigol-scope-design-problems/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/project-yaigol-fixing-rigol-scope-design-problems/)
So yes, if there is a new revision MB it will be interesting to see if these things have been addressed,
A few but Fungus doesn't really want to answer this fully.It would be more interesting to know wether they fixed the design problems with the PLL circuitry.Why, what problem is it causing?
Members MarkL and Bud are those that narrowed it down to design problems with the PLL and then Dave did a vid on it.
You can find it easy on Daves site:A few but Fungus doesn't really want to answer this fully.It would be more interesting to know wether they fixed the design problems with the PLL circuitry.Why, what problem is it causing?
Members MarkL and Bud are those that narrowed it down to design problems with the PLL and then Dave did a vid on it.
And... then what happened?
It looks like a few people don't want to tell the whole story, they prefer to keep on hating. :palm:
For anybody wondering:
3) Rigol issued a firmware update.
4) Now it all works perfectly.
Dave even did another video to confirm it but I guess you lost the URL to that one, right?
If anybody knows where I can find the steps to reproduce the PLL/jitter problems, please tell me, and I'll give it another try.You won't reproduce it unless you roll back to very early firmware...........that's if you can. Sometimes there's firmware locks to prevent this.
I just tested my DS1054Z for jitter, and it's rock solid, no jitter at all.
In the pic is more than 10 minutes of run with infinite persistence for either sinus and square waveform.
I was planning on a SDS2000X at 3.5x the price of the DS1054Z, but programming was a total showstopper.
Can you elaborate on that?
You won't reproduce it unless you roll back to very early firmware...........that's if you can. Sometimes there's firmware locks to prevent this.Since the bug is not present in my oscilloscope, I thought that maybe I didn't used the correct settings/signals to reproduce it, so I asked for more detailed steps to reproduce.
IIRC at the time there were doubts the jitter issue could be masked with firmware but it was bad enough that I think a new record was set for the fastest FW release. :)
To answer the question from a couple of days ago, yes, the PLL jitter was fixed.
(and some of them don't even own a DS1054Z...)
I do not need to own a DS1054Z to know that it is a poorly designed and low quality instrument.
Some of them do not own a Rigol DSO because their evaluations of both documentation and instrument revealed that Rigol is deceitful and makes poor quality products.
I do not need to own a DS1054Z to know that it is a poorly designed and low quality instrument. That flawed PLL design should have been caught by quality control. So should the likely hook problem reported in another discussion recently.
I do not need to own a DS1054Z to know that it is a poorly designed and low quality instrument.
Anyway, everyone is entitled to have an opinion, and mine it is that Rigol is not deceitful.
Again, it was not a PLL design issue, it was a software bug, and it was fixed.
Anyway, everyone is entitled to have an opinion, and mine it is that Rigol is not deceitful.
Yes, sometimes there are bugs, but most of them were just corner cases, nothing that will make the whole oscilloscope unusable.
All complex instruments have bugs, because all of them are, after all, software driven. Even the very expensive ones from the biggest manufacturers have bugs.
I do not need to own a DS1054Z to know that it is a poorly designed and low quality instrument.
So? It's still amazing value for money and a really useful thing to own. You want better? Spend more money.
Some of them [forum member] do not own a Rigol DSO because their evaluations of both documentation and instrument revealed that Rigol is deceitful and makes poor quality products.
I do not need to own a DS1054Z to know that it is a poorly designed and low quality instrument. That flawed PLL design should have been caught by quality control. So should the likely hook problem reported in another discussion recently.
It is a great value for the money even with its warts. I spent less for better however I knew exactly what would be sufficient for my needs.
A few but Fungus doesn't really want to answer this fully.It would be more interesting to know wether they fixed the design problems with the PLL circuitry.
Why, what problem is it causing?
Members MarkL and Bud are those that narrowed it down to design problems with the PLL and then Dave did a vid on it.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/)
Then Bud started looking hard at his own DS2000A, which he documented in full:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/project-yaigol-fixing-rigol-scope-design-problems/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/project-yaigol-fixing-rigol-scope-design-problems/)
So yes, if there is a new revision MB it will be interesting to see if these things have been addressed,
The component values and ADC settings prevented the PLL from locking.A few but Fungus doesn't really want to answer this fully.It would be more interesting to know wether they fixed the design problems with the PLL circuitry.
Why, what problem is it causing?
Members MarkL and Bud are those that narrowed it down to design problems with the PLL and then Dave did a vid on it.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/)
Then Bud started looking hard at his own DS2000A, which he documented in full:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/project-yaigol-fixing-rigol-scope-design-problems/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/project-yaigol-fixing-rigol-scope-design-problems/)
So yes, if there is a new revision MB it will be interesting to see if these things have been addressed,
Again, what problem is the hardware PLL issue causing?
I've still never seen anyone show any negative affect because of it (not jitter, that was fixed with a firmware update before yaigol).Yes, fixed by masking with firmware of the PLL design errors. Not all scopes were affected to the same level, such is the minor differences in component batch values:
Yes, fixed by masking with firmware of the PLL design errors.
Daves screenshots of before and after firmware:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/msg578859/#msg578859 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/msg578859/#msg578859)
Yes, fixed by masking with firmware of the PLL design errors.
Fixed by configuring the PLL parameters such that it runs stably with the original component values. What's wrong with that?
Why would you call that "masking errors"?I didn't.
Daves screenshots of before and after firmware:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/msg578859/#msg578859 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/msg578859/#msg578859)
The side bands are 70dB down with the new PLL configuration. Looks good to me.
So rather than keep pointing fingers, somebody open the latest unit and have a look.
For reference, pics of the ADC and PLL componentry:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/msg553418/#msg553418 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/msg553418/#msg553418)
I've been following these issues for some years and I'm still not convinced the design is "beyond measure" but if there has been a HW change and if indeed PLL component values are what they should be then we know the product has been improved.
Oh puh-leez. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But it is clearly better than nothing, which is exactly what the alternative would have been for me. Unlike USA, there is practically no used test gear market here, so since my budget didn't allow for a big-name scope, it was the rigol or nothing. And so far, I haven't really run into something the rigol really failed at where a better one would have worked. So all in all, my learning has been huge thanks to it. And heck, learning to know the limitations of equipment is also a really important lesson.(and some of them don't even own a DS1054Z...)
Some of them do not own a Rigol DSO because their evaluations of both documentation and instrument revealed that Rigol is deceitful and makes poor quality products.
I do not need to own a DS1054Z to know that it is a poorly designed and low quality instrument. That flawed PLL design should have been caught by quality control. So should the likely hook problem reported in another discussion recently.
My Scope (purchased a few days ago) came with firmware 04.04.SP3.
Is this version newer than v00.04.04.03.02?
Trying to upgrade to the publicly available v00.04.04.03.02 gives me an "Caution: An older software version detected" error and fails to update.
Unfortunately, I couldn't find any information on the 04.04.SP3 firmware.
Last week I bought another DS1054Z for a students lab at our university. The scope now comes with PVP2150 probes (https://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-06be/1/-/-/-/-/PVP2150%20User%27s%20Guide.pdf) instead of the RP2200 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-019c/1/-/-/-/-/file.pdf).That change was made last year, FYI. They look comfier to use than the older ones, what do you think?
The probes are all black and the 1x / 10x switch is recessed. 1x rise time is much better, RP probes have 20cm longer cables. Other than that both types seem pretty comparable and come with the same accessories.
That change was made last year, FYI. They look comfier to use than the older ones, what do you think?
... on the RP2200 the switches tend to have a live on their own ...
Since the bug is not present in my oscilloscope, I thought that maybe I didn't used the correct settings/signals to reproduce it, so I asked for more detailed steps to reproduce.
Looking at the PLL's spectrum in the Dave's video, it seems that the PLL jitter bug was fixed (not only masked) long time ago, so no further questions. I have no intention to reproduce fixed bugs, thank you.
To answer the question from a couple of days ago, yes, the PLL jitter was fixed.
Anyway, I have the 500uV installed, and it always worked (as far as I can remember). The only problem with it was that if you don't recalibrate after installing the 500uV/div option, then the trace can have a big offset on the screen.I do not believe that the 500 uV/div setting is part of the calibration process. If it works for you, consider yourself lucky the cal settings work for you. For most the sweep is off the screen.
Hi
Quick question:
This is my first digital scope, and on my analog one, I could just look at all the buttons and knobs, and know my settings.
On this, I have to remember that I set some offset, or trigger on CH3 or something and hunt for it before I can actually use it.
Is there a button/option somewhere in those menus that "reset" my capture settings to some sane default?
Hi!
Just out of interest, how much work has been done into reversing the Rigol 1054 schematics? - I know Dave has a video showing how he did it for one vertical channel of part of the acquitision PCB, which I've seen, but did anyone go beyond that?
I'd be much more keen on putting £100 a month aside towards one if there's schematic-help in exsistence!
Chris Williams
Just out of interest, how much work has been done into reversing the Rigol 1054 schematics? - I know Dave has a video showing how he did it for one vertical channel of part of the acquitision PCB, which I've seen, but did anyone go beyond that?
I guess you could do the power supply, but... there's not really much to see there either. :-//
I guess you could do the power supply, but... there's not really much to see there either. :-//
Actually, I've been dreaming to replace the whole power supply module space which is quite big, with self contained rechargeable Li-Ion cells to make it full portable with charging circuit in it too.
Not sure if this is even possible. But this is beyond my kung-fu level. :-//
Hi
Is there a button/option somewhere in those menus that "reset" my capture settings to some sane default?
What is default password for Rigol DS1054Z in web GUI and what is best software to manage it via PC/MAC?
The site says: “SunZhe”
I could not find any further reference in the documentation or the FAQs.What is default password for Rigol DS1054Z in web GUI and what is best software to manage it via PC/MAC?
Thank you
I've just ordered a DS1054Z-B from Tequipment.net, is there something different about the '-B' version or is it just the latest hardware?It can be a refurbished instrument. That means a lower price than usual. But the supplier has to mention that it is a refurbished one and not a brand new one. Didn't you notice such an announcement? And was it the usual price or not?
At Tequipment the -B seems to indicate B-stock and demo units with full warranty.
It is the same device as any other 1054Z but might have been a returned unit.
For 315$ it sounds like a nice deal.
Anyway, I was using my DS1054Z to look at a 0 to 40V 1kHz square wave I was making in a driver output stage. I increased the gain to look at the shape and noise on the low level of the square wave and found that I could only zoom in about 1 or two clicks from 10V/box before the input stage seemed to behave very very badly on saturation.
I want to look at the signal with much better resolution than 2 or 5 V/box. Is it possible I'm doing something stupid? I don't see what. This is very very disappointing behavior and is making me wonder if I should have just spent a bit more...
Anyway, I was using my DS1054Z to look at a 0 to 40V 1kHz square wave I was making in a driver output stage. I increased the gain to look at the shape and noise on the low level of the square wave and found that I could only zoom in about 1 or two clicks from 10V/box before the input stage seemed to behave very very badly on saturation.
I want to look at the signal with much better resolution than 2 or 5 V/box. Is it possible I'm doing something stupid? I don't see what. This is very very disappointing behavior and is making me wonder if I should have just spent a bit more...
Any thoughts?
Doug
Yeah, maybe my expectations are unreasonable, but (perhaps naively) I didn't think this seemed a terribly challenging scenario.
Here are the screenshots at 10v/box 5v, and 2v. I really want a much closer look at this waveform under a bunch of different load conditions. I'm not sure I can with this 'scope, unless there's something I'm missing or unaware of.
cheers,
Doug
Yeah, maybe my expectations are unreasonable, but (perhaps naively) I didn't think this seemed a terribly challenging scenario.
Here are the screenshots at 10v/box 5v, and 2v. I really want a much closer look at this waveform under a bunch of different load conditions. I'm not sure I can with this 'scope, unless there's something I'm missing or unaware of.
cheers,
Doug
I just have to ask... you are using your probe at 10x, and channel setting to match, right?
Anyway, I was using my DS1054Z to look at a 0 to 40V 1kHz square wave I was making in a driver output stage. I increased the gain to look at the shape and noise on the low level of the square wave and found that I could only zoom in about 1 or two clicks from 10V/box before the input stage seemed to behave very very badly on saturation.
"Not all accessories may be included" according to Tequipment. If that should mean missing probes, it would not be quite such a nice deal. But you could probably still get four replacement probes at less than the price difference.Yeah, you're right that it is a refurb unit but it better have the probes or I'll return it. One reviewer said it came with the wrong power cord - I don't care about that - but the other 2 reviewers said they were open-box units with all the accessories.
I think what you're describing is called "overload recovery" (https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=opamp+overload+recovery), it's a general problem with all opamps (not just the ones in the DS1054Z).
I think what you're describing is called "overload recovery" (https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=opamp+overload+recovery), it's a general problem with all opamps (not just the ones in the DS1054Z).
Operational amplifiers started being used in oscilloscope front ends to control drift of the input source follower starting in the early 1980s and those oscilloscopes did not have this problem. Unless this particular Rigol is broken, what is going on is due to a design flaw.
I think what you're describing is called "overload recovery" (https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=opamp+overload+recovery), it's a general problem with all opamps (not just the ones in the DS1054Z).
Operational amplifiers started being used in oscilloscope front ends to control drift of the input source follower starting in the early 1980s and those oscilloscopes did not have this problem. Unless this particular Rigol is broken, what is going on is due to a design flaw.
Really? Most manufacturers have discussion of this on their web sites, eg.:
https://www.tek.com/document/competitive/overdrive-recovery (https://www.tek.com/document/competitive/overdrive-recovery)
https://www.keysight.com/upload/cmc_upload/All/ADMF2008_SwitchingModePowerMeasureUsingScopes.pdf (https://www.keysight.com/upload/cmc_upload/All/ADMF2008_SwitchingModePowerMeasureUsingScopes.pdf)
I think what you're describing is called "overload recovery" (https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=opamp+overload+recovery), it's a general problem with all opamps (not just the ones in the DS1054Z).
Operational amplifiers started being used in oscilloscope front ends to control drift of the input source follower starting in the early 1980s and those oscilloscopes did not have this problem. Unless this particular Rigol is broken, what is going on is due to a design flaw.
Really? Most manufacturers have discussion of this on their web sites, eg.:
https://www.tek.com/document/competitive/overdrive-recovery (https://www.tek.com/document/competitive/overdrive-recovery)
https://www.keysight.com/upload/cmc_upload/All/ADMF2008_SwitchingModePowerMeasureUsingScopes.pdf (https://www.keysight.com/upload/cmc_upload/All/ADMF2008_SwitchingModePowerMeasureUsingScopes.pdf)
Can someone else with this 'scope please see if they can replicate this problem? I don't have any reason to think mine is defective, but
I'm quite disappointed by this performance... (0V to 40V 1kHz square wave, and look at it at 2V/div)It's not something that's usually listed in datasheets.
Can someone else with this 'scope please see if they can replicate this problem? I don't have any reason to think mine is defective, but
There's been other threads on it, eg.:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-vertical-distortion-problem/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-vertical-distortion-problem/)I'm quite disappointed by this performance... (0V to 40V 1kHz square wave, and look at it at 2V/div)It's not something that's usually listed in datasheets.
Solutions: You could rectify your signal or clamp it with a zener diode to reduce the peak to peak voltage. It'll only cost $1 or so.
It's not something that's usually listed in datasheets.Yes it is. It is called offset range. But ofcourse the scope should be able to deal with it properly.
According to the manual the DS1054Z offset range is better with the probe on 1x setting. You could fiddle around with that.
It brings its own set of problems though, you might want to enable the 20MHz bandwidth limiter.
It's not something that's usually listed in datasheets.
Yes it is. It is called offset range. But of course the scope should be able to deal with it properly.
That depends entirely on how the offset circuit has been designed. If it is designed to look at a signal with a large DC offset and not at a detail of a large signal (what DougM wants) then it will fail.It's not something that's usually listed in datasheets.
Yes it is. It is called offset range. But of course the scope should be able to deal with it properly.
Offset range and the offset function have nothing to do with overdrive recovery.
According to the manual the DS1054Z offset range is better with the probe on 1x setting. You could fiddle around with that.
It brings its own set of problems though, you might want to enable the 20MHz bandwidth limiter.
Yes, you're right. It doesn't even seem to specify the offset range at 10x. 1x looks more promising. I will try that and report back.
Offset range and the offset function have nothing to do with overdrive recovery.Exactly..Overdrive is related to dynamic headroom of signal path.. Full P-P signal amplitude that the signal path will let pass through it without clipping, and if it does clip, how it will recover.. Offset is to compensate for constant DC component, or just position traces on screen. Adding DC offset to clipping signal will only complicate things, making overdrive more severe and asymmetric...
I was referring to this connection, it harms the oscilloscope.
I immediately unlocked it using riglol and the DSEF code.
Nothing is connected to the BNC jacks. Only CH1 is active, and it's coupled to ground. But it doesn't matter which channel you select. As you can see, a 62.5MHz signal (and its harmonics) can definitely be seen.
Not sure what that code unlocks. The recommended code is DSER (ie. everything except 500mV).
The "coupled to ground" thing isn't true. The DS1054Z disconnects the input signal but it doesn't connect the ADC input to ground. You might get less noise with something connected (dummy BNC).
Anyway: Less than 0.5mV of noise at this price range is quite good. The 1mV range is right on the limit for a DS1054Z.
PS: 62.5MHz could be a TV signal.
OK, so I did some more testing. If I short the BNC with the coupling set to GND, there is absolutely no difference. But if I change the coupling to DC or AC (even with the BNC shorted) the noise floor goes up.
Also the voltage on the trace shows zero change when shorting the BNC. So it does look like the coupling to ground is working.
I‘d say the first thing this shows is that your little wire loop is not working. ;-). Better use a properly shielded terminator.
But on the other hand, whatever the scope does when you select GND mode for the input, seems to be reasonably effective. I do recall posts where users have tested with proper external shortening of the input and obtained the same results, with the weak 62.5 MHz signal. So that signal seems to sneak in at a later stage of the input chain. As you already said in your first post, nothing to worry about.
I‘d say the first thing this shows is that your little wire loop is not working. ;-). Better use a properly shielded terminator.You mean a 50 Ohm terminator? I'm pretty sure my paperclip has less than 50 Ohms ;)
That paper clip is an antenna.
You mean a 50 Ohm terminator? I'm pretty sure my paperclip has less than 50 Ohms ;)
But on the other hand, whatever the scope does when you select GND mode for the input, seems to be reasonably effective.Yes, but people seem to expect it to work like an old analog 'scope which had a physical switch to connect the beam control to ground.
But on the other hand, whatever the scope does when you select GND mode for the input, seems to be reasonably effective.
Yes, but people seem to expect it to work like an old analog 'scope which had a physical switch to connect the beam control to ground.
At least they didn't cheat by simply replacing the input data with digital zeros to get it "perfect".
Where exactly do you try to login? The web interface (http on port 80) does not require a login.
I could not find working credentials to access the »Networks Settings« page ./DS1000Z_NetworkSettings.html though.
...
The »Network Settings« login window reads: ...
user: rigollan
password: 111111
Where is a source for the new firmware?
Can´t find any...
It seems, the usual website (This (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)) only provides the old version 00.04.03.02.03.
I thought Rigol released an official update?
Dear admins, can we have a Rigol subsection PLEASE! The stickies are all about that 121 meter and because of the clutter, we are seeing new posts about the same old DS1054z topic every couple of days. There have to be a gazillion redundant ones by now asking about the hack and firmware etc.
Can we haz subsection please?
Dear admins ...
Can we haz subsection please?
Send a PM request to admins and CC it to Dave, as this post will be drowned into the abyss and forgotten.
Rigol has somewhat of a chaos with firmware updates.
Where is a source for the new firmware?
Can´t find any...
It seems, the usual website (This (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)) only provides the old version 00.04.03.02.03.
The stickies are all about that 121 meter
The stickies are all about that 121 meter...because that's an EEVBLOG meter.
I’m aware of that. Might be just my personal preference to have things neatly sorted in perfectly well labeled boxes, so I can always find what I was looking for.
How would you find things you weren't looking for?
This is a forum, not a library.
Where is a source for the new firmware?
Can´t find any...
It seems, the usual website (This (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0)) only provides the old version 00.04.03.02.03.Read this thread:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-firmware-ds1000z-00-04-04-03-05-2018-05-09-(2018-02-28)/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-firmware-ds1000z-00-04-04-03-05-2018-05-09-(2018-02-28)/)
You'll find a download link in message #70. It's an edited firmware without the 'pluses' errors... ;)I thought Rigol released an official update?
They did...
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-firmware-ds1000z-00-04-04-03-05-2018-05-09-(2018-02-28)/msg1531235/#msg1531235 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-firmware-ds1000z-00-04-04-03-05-2018-05-09-(2018-02-28)/msg1531235/#msg1531235)
Yes, well I navigated to post #70 as instructed and found a rogue ZIP file attached.
Hi guys, please is there any way to feed math results to measurement functions controlled by the left-side buttons? Typically measuring parameters of a differential signal calculated by A - B.
Fantastic, thanks a lot!
Fantastic, thanks a lot!
It's really a user interface fail, IMHO.
When you press 'math' twice there's a little light that lights up next to the multifunction knob to let you know that the vertical controls will apply to the math trace but the measurement icons on the left don't change to match.
Note that you can also add the math values to 'Measure all':
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=470024;image)
..
Just purchased a secondhand DS1054Z which has had the 100MHz hack upgrade applied. Currently the firmware is reported as being 00:04:02:SP3 board is reported as 0.1.1 looking at the release notes the firmware date is 21/10/2014 (Australian date convention as all will be below)
Where I am confused is if I go to the Rigol website http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3 (http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3) and go to support the latest firmware is showing as 00:04:04:03:02 dated the 2/6/2017.
...
Where I am confused is if I go to the Rigol website http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3 (http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3) and go to support the latest firmware is showing as 00:04:04:03:02 dated the 2/6/2017. Now I have found another member here "Shock" post up this url as where you get the firmware update from http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0) where it is shows the latest firmware is 00:04:04:03:05 dated the 28/4/2018. In the release notes of this firmware version it doesn't recognise 00:04:04:03:02??? Is "beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com" an official Rigol site, is this where the latest is at?
All the release updates up and until the variation I have listed above are the same. It is only the latest update that differs.
..
Just purchased a secondhand DS1054Z which has had the 100MHz hack upgrade applied. Currently the firmware is reported as being 00:04:02:SP3 board is reported as 0.1.1 looking at the release notes the firmware date is 21/10/2014 (Australian date convention as all will be below)
Where I am confused is if I go to the Rigol website http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3 (http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3) and go to support the latest firmware is showing as 00:04:04:03:02 dated the 2/6/2017.
...
If you are confused by the versions naming, there's a way (menu-menu-force-menu in the trigger IIRC) and then go to look at the FW version again in your scope and will appear as the full code. Also shows a few other options in different parts of the scope. Turn off and on and go back to normal life.
JS
I have found another member here "Shock" post up this url as where you get the firmware update from http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0) where it is shows the latest firmware is 00:04:04:03:05 dated the 28/4/2018.
Would appreciate those in the know letting me know what is the official Rigol latest firmware is?
Also is there any issue applying firmware updates to a hacked DS1054Z?
How in the world did I miss Rigol's #1 DS1000z fan dissing their UI?
"I saw in some earlier post that doing an update with bootloaders 0.0.1.3 and earlier cause an issue and some scope were bricked. I believe this was with earlier firmware updates, can anyone confirm if the latest F/W update v00:04:04:03:05 has address the earlier bootloader version update issue and in particular the bootloader version I have of 0.0.1.2??"
My scope had a bootloader and revision that suggested it would be prone to that bug but I have been able to update without trouble. I am currently on the patched version mentioned above and all is well.
Enabling 100MHz does not make the scope do anything it isn't designed to do already. It simply enables functionality that is turned on by default on the DS1104Z, but was disabled on the DS1054Z.
If i unlock 100MHz bandwidth in my new 1054z then warranty is void.
Will be overheat?
Hmm.. but Rigol knows about it.
It is simple and fast! But 1054 have a cost 350$, however 1104z - 600!!! Why?? |O
Rigol is stupid?
Hmm.. but Rigol knows about it.Depends.
It is simple and fast! But 1054 have a cost 350$, however 1104z - 600!!! Why?? |O
Rigol is stupid?
Buy 1104z is meaningless..
Hmm.. but Rigol knows about it.
It is simple and fast! But 1054 have a cost 350$, however 1104z - 600!!! Why?? |O
Rigol is stupid?
Buy 1104z is meaningless..
Hmm.. but Rigol knows about it.
I'm just worried about the fact that it can be damaged on the larger bandwidth.
may be input amplifier will be overheat or ADC or etc (on larger frequrencies) and radiator is not installed for 1054 modification or other ..
I just do not believe in miracles :-//
I'm just worried about the fact that it can be damaged on the larger bandwidth.
may be input amplifier will be overheat or ADC or etc (on larger frequrencies) and radiator is not installed for 1054 modification or other ..
I just do not believe in miracles :-//
I'm just worried about the fact that it can be damaged on the larger bandwidth.
may be input amplifier will be overheat or ADC or etc (on larger frequrencies) and radiator is not installed for 1054 modification or other ..
I just do not believe in miracles :-//
can someone give a link where there is a comparison: before unlocking and after? or comparison of entrails
I already purchased the device. And I do not want to break it or lose the warranty. To open too it would not be desirable for self check. The case is sealed by sticker
ps. a man of the intellect is inclined to doubt :)
ps. a man of the intellect is inclined to doubt :)
Did Dave's teardown and semi reverse engineer of the front end use an 1104 or 1054? Somehow it was always established in my mind the hardware is exactly the same and these are software only enabled features (except the 500uV vert sensitivity).
just apparently no one really knows ..
The unlocked Rigols do not perform like good 100 MHz oscilloscopes should
may be input amplifier will be overheat or ADC or etc (on larger frequrencies)
The unlocked Rigols do not perform like good 100 MHz oscilloscopes should
That's complete rubbish. An unlocked Rigol behaves exactly like a DS1104Z (which is a good oscilloscope).
How _should_ a "good" 100MHz scope perform, then?Measure on the main window, not on the zoom !
return the rigol, buy keysight. I believe its a good scope with a good money (price)... if someone expect bettle car performs like ferrarri, then just buy ferrarri.The unlocked Rigols do not perform like good 100 MHz oscilloscopes shouldThat's complete rubbish. An unlocked Rigol behaves exactly like a DS1104Z (which is a good oscilloscope).
It seems he was actually saying that Rigol scopes do not perform like good scopes should.
That's complete rubbish. An unlocked Rigol behaves exactly like a DS1104Z (which is a good oscilloscope).It seems he was actually saying that Rigol scopes do not perform like good scopes should.
if someone expect bettle car performs like ferrarri, then just buy ferrarri.
How _should_ a "good" 100MHz scope perform, then?Measure on the main window, not on the zoom !
I don't think there's a difference either, the scope is sampling at 1GSa/sHow _should_ a "good" 100MHz scope perform, then?Measure on the main window, not on the zoom !
I'm wondering how that matters to me, that Rigol measures screen data, along with there only being 7 bits shown on the screen. I guess I should be able to figure that out.
The unlocked Rigols do not perform like good 100 MHz oscilloscopes should
That's complete rubbish. An unlocked Rigol behaves exactly like a DS1104Z (which is a good oscilloscope).
:palm:
just apparently no one really knows .. but still thanks for the answers
in life everything is not easy and everything has its causes and consequences
How _should_ a "good" 100MHz scope perform, then?Measure on the main window, not on the zoom !
I'm wondering how that matters to me, that Rigol measures screen data, along with there only being 7 bits shown on the screen. I guess I should be able to figure that out.
This thread has lost the plot. :popcorn:
What is unknown is if the DS1104Z 100MHz model and unhacked DS1054Z 50MHz model display the same behavior.
But seriously, stop being a smartass and accept that the DS1054Z has been out for years, and that nearly everyone who has one has hacked it, and that there are no reports of damage (or malfunction) due to the hack.
Really. I though I had got insane when I tried Leo Bodnar's pulse generator.
I own both a Siglent SDS1202X-E and a Rigol DS1074Z. The Siglent did the right thing. The Rigol still added some interpolation in dots mode.
Scope is solid.
Really. I though I had got insane when I tried Leo Bodnar's pulse generator.
The Rigol still added some interpolation in dots mode.
Most probably sin(x)/x was on when testing, or some other acquisition settings were different between the two 'scopes.
That is a claim, but all I have seen so far are assumptions (based on the models using the same hardware). Thus, unless you can provide/link to proofs (measurements, not just assumptions), it is nothing more than educated guess. (Which could be right, though. I'd make the same guess on their behavior, but I would not claim it is "known", per se, without something to back it up.)What is unknown is if the DS1104Z 100MHz model and unhacked DS1054Z 50MHz model display the same behavior.No it isn't.
You know the hardware is identical, right?You know the identical hardware is being used ever so slightly differently in those two models, right? (Edit: And I think that identical hardware does not need more proving. Merely pointing here to that usage difference.)
How _should_ a "good" 100MHz scope perform, then?Measure on the main window, not on the zoom !
I'm wondering how that matters to me, that Rigol measures screen data, along with there only being 7 bits shown on the screen. I guess I should be able to figure that out.
What, someone doesn't think the zoom window is telling the truth? Or is telling less truth than the unzoomed screen? Other than being compressed vertically?
You know the identical hardware is being used ever so slightly differently in those two models, right?
Sorry if that all sounds a bit like :popcorn: ... it is a bit of that, but also a bit of my desire to see facts and good explanations instead of the typical internet opinions and assumptions. There is too much latter all over the place.
If referring that first part you quoted above, then with that particular part I was not expecting Fungus to prove his previous sentence, I was pointing out the mistake that he is showing only relying on identical hardware -idea, leaving out the different usage. Thus, some of the assumptions, based only on the identical hardware, may not necessarily be valid. (On my claim of different usage: If the hardware is identical, it must be used differently; this is pure logical deduction, otherwise the models would behave exactly the same way with bandwidth as is, and no bandwidth hacks would be needed. I think Fungus knows all that, but just didn't consider it in this context.) (Lets see if I can modify the earlier message to clarify a bit... Done.)You know the identical hardware is being used ever so slightly differently in those two models, right?Aren't you making the same baseless claim, and really adding nothing of what you want to the discussion?
Sorry if that all sounds a bit like :popcorn: ... it is a bit of that, but also a bit of my desire to see facts and good explanations instead of the typical internet opinions and assumptions. There is too much latter all over the place.
I'm not at all interested in the 1054 vs 1104 debate. Who cares? All that matters is the absolute performance of the instrument, so we don't need to compare the 1104 unicorn, almost nobody has one anyway.You might not be interested on it (and maybe not many others, either), but since it is out there and fungus replied, I tried to point on the weaknesses on Fungus' arguments, in the hopes that something more solid might appear. If nothing happens, no big deal.
What is unknown is if the DS1104Z 100MHz model and unhacked DS1054Z 50MHz model display the same behavior.
No it isn't.
You know the hardware is identical, right?
Most probably sin(x)/x was on when testing, or some other acquisition settings were different between the two 'scopes.
sin(x)/x is my guess, too. Turn it off if you don't like it.
Borjam's claim that "dots should be samples" is just an unfounded assumption on his part.
PS: Who looks at pulse generators in dot mode anyway? You can't calculate rise times from dots. :-//
If the hacks are so common as some claim, and reverting the hack also claimed to be easy, and those Rigol scopes as popular as some others claim, it should be trivial to get quite a few more results to prove both cases one way or another. (Well, I didn't look what kind of measurement David Hess was looking for, maybe those are not as trivial.)
I'm also trying to understand exactly what David is explaining above, so I provided my interpretation of what a good trace would look like, and the region where the Rigol is not good...
If referring that first part you quoted above, then with that particular part I was not expecting Fungus to prove his previous sentence, I was pointing out the mistake that he is showing only relying on identical hardware -idea, leaving out the different usage. Thus, some of the assumptions, based only on the identical hardware, may not necessarily be valid. (On my claim of different usage: If the hardware is identical, it must be used differently; this is pure logical deduction, otherwise the models would behave exactly the same way with bandwidth as is, and no bandwidth hacks would be needed. I think Fungus knows all that, but just didn't consider it in this context.) (Lets see if I can modify the earlier message to clarify a bit... Done.)
Also, indeed I am not trying to add any Rigol facts to discussion, I'm merely pointing that if there is an argument going, the parties should try to provide more info (not necessarily instantly), especially if the other side has some measurements or other provable facts (potentially) showing otherwise.
Otherwise things end easily like in my mind: one side refers to earlier measurements showing a potential difference, another side replies with "nonsense, identical hardware", and I get to think "what kind of answer is that, the 'identical hardware' doesn't even consider different usage of the hardware, which could explain something, and even if different usage was considered and somehow ending with idea that the scopes should behave exactly the same, the different measurement results (contradiction of another assumption) should still be explained somehow, even if found out to be just user error."
You might not be interested on it [1054 vs. 1104] (and maybe not many others, either), but since it is out there and fungus replied, I tried to point on the weaknesses on Fungus' arguments, in the hopes that something more solid might appear. If nothing happens, no big deal.
Also note that David Hess' question is not a comparison between 1104 and 1054, but comparison between hacked 1054 and both unhacked models. Getting results just from the unhacked 1054 would already be an improvement to the situation. And he has noted the possibility of that (minor) deficiency on that "absolute performance" of the hacked 1054, so that question should then be of interest to you, too, though not necessarily a major interest.
That looks like a different problem if it is one. The change in slope from negative to positive indicates that if there was an overload, the amplifier has recovered by the time you indicate. I kept a copy of the photograph where I first noticed it shown below.
It would be practically impossible for improper transient response calibration to produce that response (it should be wavy instead of straight) and it is way too fast for it to be a thermal tail. It does look like the result of overload due to exceeding the maximum slew rate of a linear amplifier driving a transistor into cutoff or saturation.
I did not think much of it until I saw a second example and a user took measurements of bandwidth versus vertical sensitivity which showed something was going on. The same problem could cause both behaviors.
A hacked 100MHz DS1054Z should be compared to a 100MHz DS1104Z. Interpreting this should be much easier since it is a comparison of supposedly identically performing DSOs. If the 100MHz DS1104Z shows signs of overload from the fast edge, then maybe they do perform identically but that indicates nothing good about the DS1104Z.
I had posted some images of mercury switch generated edge - will be challenging to find.
Hmm.. I had made an assumption there myself, that of the different bandwidth models actually having different (analog) bandwidth and/or rise times (in the front end path). Which, afaik, requires, for example (might have more to it), hardware low pass filter being enabled/disabled/adjusted in the hardware (via software control on the basis of the model), thus my idea of "hardware used differently". (Put in other words: both models having the filters there = "same hardware"; one disabling a piece of it = "used differently".)If referring that first part you quoted above, then with that particular part I was not expecting Fungus to prove his previous sentence, I was pointing out the mistake that he is showing only relying on identical hardware -idea, leaving out the different usage. Thus, some of the assumptions, based only on the identical hardware, may not necessarily be valid. (On my claim of different usage: If the hardware is identical, it must be used differently; this is pure logical deduction, otherwise the models would behave exactly the same way with bandwidth as is, and no bandwidth hacks would be needed. I think Fungus knows all that, but just didn't consider it in this context.) (Lets see if I can modify the earlier message to clarify a bit... Done.)But I do not agree that the hardware is being used differently at all. Generally, there are simply limits placed in software to stop a parameter setting from going beyond a certain constant value. The hack likely just changes those constants from one value to another. For example, software limit the sweep speed setting. I see no way to deduce that a 1054, a 1054 hacked, and an 1104 ALL set to the identical user settings would be 'being used differently.' That seems nonsensical, but perhaps you could fabricate an example for discussion to provoke some open thought?
Wasn't hard. First was a charged capacitor and fast switch. I do not recall what I was doing on the second, but probably something similar with different triggering. What should I be looking for?
We know the design is the same or at least I assume it is. We do not know if Rigol grades or selects them.
A hacked 100MHz DS1054Z should be compared to a 100MHz DS1104Z.
I also took a reading at 250MSa/s. Funny enough, the input divider relay is now actuated between 250 and 245mV/div. The difference of the rise time between the two settings now is neglible but something ugly goes on with the sin(X)/x trace reconstruction. It becomes obvious that even in dot mode (not only vector display), the 'scope uses this correction function (or something else...
One may say Rigal is "cheating" in the DS1000Z, and strictly speaking that's probably correct. But what difference does it make for the average hobby user working on audio or low-speed microcontroller stuff? I guess the result is still good enough for the job, if something better is really necessary, the options are plentiful.
To add more to the confusion, here are some screenshots of my "liberated" 1054Z, fed with a signal from a Leo Bodnar fast edge square generator through a 50R BNC terminator to channel 1 (the other channels perform identical). The scope was configured in dot mode and fine vertical control. The single input divider relay of the DS1000Z switches between 330 and 335mV/div and this makes a big difference: at 335mV selection, the input amplifier "sees" much less signal and the VGA integrated in the A/D converter is adjusted at high gain. I kept that as a reference trace while I changed input sensitivity to 330mV, resulting in the input amp being driven with a much larger signal. The trace shapes and rise times differ by more than 1ns, but both appear to be well within the 100MHz range.
I also took a reading at 250MSa/s. Funny enough, the input divider relay is now actuated between 250 and 245mV/div. The difference of the rise time between the two settings now is neglible but something ugly goes on with the sin(X)/x trace reconstruction. It becomes obvious that even in dot mode (not only vector display), the 'scope uses this correction function (or something else...maybe a high pass filter to compensate for the input amp's high frequency dropoff) to modify the data readings. Unfortunately, the sin(x)/x "optimization" can only be disabled at 250MSa/s so it's difficult to get a better understanding of what kind of mathematical methods are used (see the third and fourth screenshots).
One may say Rigal is "cheating" in the DS1000Z, and strictly speaking that's probably correct. But what difference does it make for the average hobby user working on audio or low-speed microcontroller stuff? I guess the result is still good enough for the job, if something better is really necessary, the options are plentiful.
Are there any differences between the DS1054Z and DS1104Z models hardware-wise? Possible, but I doubt it. The instrument is too inexpensive for the manufacturer to go through the hassle of component or instrument selection.
Cheers,
Thomas
Your measurements show a plus or minus 1.3 dB difference between the all the different conditions at the highest frequency.
Your measurements show a plus or minus 1.3 dB difference between the all the different conditions at the highest frequency.
Did you even look at PDF? :-//
@100MHz
3.500V gen out displayed.
Demod reports 3.147V on gen (scope not connected), 2.841V on scope connector. Note that demod lowers value and is for relative not absolute measurements.
Scope reads:
3.440V at 1GSa/s, Sinc
2.080V at 250MSa/s, w/o Sinc
Sink it in. ~2V vs ~3.5V!!! When twisting knobs that should only affect signal fidelity, not amplitude.
I will write a direct message to the Rigol and ask whether it is possible to hack ds1054z and what consequences :)
I will write a direct message to the Rigol and ask whether it is possible to hack ds1054z and what consequences :)
Your measurements show a plus or minus 1.3 dB difference between the all the different conditions at the highest frequency.
Did you even look at PDF? :-//
@100MHz
3.500V gen out displayed.
Demod reports 3.147V on gen (scope not connected), 2.841V on scope connector. Note that demod lowers value and is for relative not absolute measurements.
Scope reads:
3.440V at 1GSa/s, Sinc
2.080V at 250MSa/s, w/o Sinc
Sink it in. ~2V vs ~3.5V!!! When twisting knobs that should only affect signal fidelity, not amplitude.
...
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/?action=dlattach;attach=122082;image)
200n-dots-sinxOff.png
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/?action=dlattach;attach=122084;image)
100n-dots-sinxOff.png
* 20 MHz sine wave (I can't generate a 70MHz sine wave easily)
Because I want know truth and also I want of course change my opinion about this situation if the new information overrides the old one.
Most probably sin(x)/x was on when testing, or some other acquisition settings were different between the two 'scopes.You can't disable it unless you enable several channels. That's an oddity.
You need to know some long standing, very knowledgeable and respected members better; from 2014:Because I want know truth and also I want of course change my opinion about this situation if the new information overrides the old one.
Dunno why, have a feeling that you will only change your opinion once you become a Rigol distributor, instead of current Siglent, really wish one day you carry both at your shop, as I respect your technical experiences at oscilloscopes especially at the boat anchor types.
I sell also Owon and have previously sold Hantek and Rigol.
(also Owon have very low failure rate but not exatly zero but ~1%)
Hantek - so much warranty time problems and also so much just DOA units from factory. Never want this catastroph repeating. In worst phase incoming Hanteks failure percent in my quality control was well over 25% (~40%). (depending how to count lots). It was finally - game over.
Rigol - long time ago I sell also R. - never get any answer from Rigol for solve any problems. So, I stopped. In my own use for some dedicated purpose I have also new Rigol (1000Z series) but I do not even think to sell these.
Scope reads:
3.440V at 1GSa/s, Sinc
2.080V at 250MSa/s, w/o Sinc
Sink it in. ~2V vs ~3.5V!!! When twisting knobs that should only affect signal fidelity, not amplitude.
First 3 images:
200ns/div ; Sin(x)/x OFF scope show normal level (as also with more low speeds)
100ns/div ; Sin(x)/x OFF level drops down and then stay same level from this speed down to 5ns/s
005ns/div ; Sin(x)/x OFF level drops down
Next 3 images:
200ns/div ; Sin(x)/x ON level ok (as also with more low speeds)
100ns/div ; Sin(x)/x ON level ok
005ns/div ; Sin(x)/x ON level ok
Also if think typical criteria for sin(x)/x interpolation there is 250MSa/s and input is 70MHz sinewave. Samplerate/input frequency = 3.57 what is ok. Even with 100MHz it is still in acceptable range (2.5)
Now they need name it Rig(x)/x
to arrange dishonestly for the result of something, for example an election, to be changed
* 20 MHz sine wave (I can't generate a 70MHz sine wave easily)
What you're saying is that when you sample a signal then don't do a proper sinc reconstruction, the answer is wrong? Is that correct?
Are you implying that "proper sinc reconstruction" is rising signal level over 4dB compared to actual recorded sample points?
Also you seem to be on position that signal max amplitude should be somehow related to sampling rate (of course given some minimal sufficient set of points to account for aliasing etc).
Is it so? ::)
Where are you getting "actual recorded sample points" from?
Quote from: Fungus link=topic=36920.msg1806275#msg1806275Where are you getting "actual recorded sample points" from?
One should be getting then from Sinc=OFF trace...
Did you even look at PDF? :-//
It would be more interesting if I knew more about your test setup and equipment. What's the uncertainty of the signal flatness and then of the system? Are you relying on the flatness of a signal generator sweep or are you leveling at the input?
Yes, but but it's not a legal requirement and we know that in this particular case one isn't.
Yes, but but it's not a legal requirement and we know that in this particular case one isn't.
Good business to consumer relationship is about trust and following best practices, not legal requirements...
* 20 MHz sine wave (I can't generate a 70MHz sine wave easily)
If you look my tests it is pretty adequate at that frequency, circus starts at about 50MHz when number of samples per wfm feature gets low and rig(x)/x kicks in heavily. So if analog-related tasks lie below 50MHz no prob.
If you look my tests it is pretty adequate at that frequency, circus starts at about 50MHz when number of samples per wfm feature gets low and rig(x)/x kicks in heavily. So if analog-related tasks lie below 50MHz no prob.
This is complete rubbish. The only "problem" is that the dots don't conform to your (unfounded) expectations in dot mode with sin(x)/x turned off, they match the original waveform instead.
ie. The problem is in your head, not in the 'scope.
Your "50MHz" figure is also pulled out of your butt because you're ignoring that fact that you're not running at full sample rate, ie. that "analog-related tasks" can run at 100MHz with 10 samples per wfm on this 'scope.
What about testing a 100MHz DS1104Z against another 100MHz DS1104Z ? Shouldn't it be considered also in these "scientific" analyses?
Wasn't hard. First was a charged capacitor and fast switch. I do not recall what I was doing on the second, but probably something similar with different triggering. What should I be looking for?
Hmm.. I had made an assumption there myself, that of the different bandwidth models actually having different (analog) bandwidth and/or rise times (in the front end path). Which, afaik, requires, for example (might have more to it), hardware low pass filter being enabled/disabled/adjusted in the hardware (via software control on the basis of the model), thus my idea of "hardware used differently". (Put in other words: both models having the filters there = "same hardware"; one disabling a piece of it = "used differently".)
Look for cause why scope which clearly does not have actual 200MHz analog frontend reports such rise time ;) 0.35/1.65ns=0.212GHz
Plotting amplitude response graph to sinusoidal signal sweep might give some clues.
The single input divider relay of the DS1000Z switches between 330 and 335mV/div and this makes a big difference: at 335mV selection, the input amplifier "sees" much less signal and the VGA integrated in the A/D converter is adjusted at high gain. I kept that as a reference trace while I changed input sensitivity to 330mV, resulting in the input amp being driven with a much larger signal. The trace shapes and rise times differ by more than 1ns, but both appear to be well within the 100MHz range.
We know the design is the same or at least I assume it is. We do not know if Rigol grades or selects them.
Lots of people have tried to find a difference over the years, all have failed.
(And there's absolutely no reason to think they're using borderline components that might go one way or the other during manufacturing).
A hacked 100MHz DS1054Z should be compared to a 100MHz DS1104Z.
It's been done several times over the years and no difference found.
An oscilloscope is primarily a visualization tool, with some capability to make low precision measurements.
The individual man hours spent discussing this subject are worth more (in cash) than the money needed to buy a better scope!!
I am not totally sure what the complaint is in this post, but I noticed that it was disclaimed as an old test. I think the complaint is the amplitude change when sin(x)/x is off on dots mode. So I made some animations of a current oscilloscope with the 2nd to latest firmware.
Scope set to 5ns/div.
3.500Vpp sine @100MHz reported by gen:
20GSa/s ETS - linear: 2.747Vpp
1GSa/s RTS - Sinc: 2.639Vpp; linear: 2.592Vpp
500MSa/s RTS - Sinc: 2.703Vpp; linear: 2.576Vpp
250MSa/s RTS - Sinc: 2.675Vpp; linear: 2.677Vpp
I am not totally sure what the complaint is in this post, but I noticed that it was disclaimed as an old test. I think the complaint is the amplitude change when sin(x)/x is off on dots mode. So I made some animations of a current oscilloscope with the 2nd to latest firmware.
I am not totally sure what the complaint is in this post, but I noticed that it was disclaimed as an old test. I think the complaint is the amplitude change when sin(x)/x is off on dots mode. So I made some animations of a current oscilloscope with the 2nd to latest firmware.
Somebody else needs to watch that video. The importance of not turning off the sinc filter really can't be understated - you're not recreating the original signal without it. Any "measurements" you make while it's disabled are automatically suspect.
I am not totally sure what the complaint is in this post, but I noticed that it was disclaimed as an old test. I think the complaint is the amplitude change when sin(x)/x is off on dots mode. So I made some animations of a current oscilloscope with the 2nd to latest firmware.
Somebody else needs to watch that video. The importance of not turning off the sinc filter really can't be understated - you're not recreating the original signal without it. Any "measurements" you make while it's disabled are automatically suspect.
I appreciate the video link, which I will watch. But I don't necessarily need to be told what to do.
Most users lack either the equipment or experience to find this sort of difference.
I am not totally sure what the complaint is in this post, but I noticed that it was disclaimed as an old test. I think the complaint is the amplitude change when sin(x)/x is off on dots mode. So I made some animations of a current oscilloscope with the 2nd to latest firmware.
Somebody else needs to watch that video. The importance of not turning off the sinc filter really can't be understated - you're not recreating the original signal without it. Any "measurements" you make while it's disabled are automatically suspect.
I appreciate the video link, which I will watch. But I don't necessarily need to be told what to do.
Sorry for not being clear: I didn't mean you need to watch it (although it's a good idea if you haven't seen it yet), I meant whoever posted that there's a difference in readings with sinc on/off. This difference won't surprise anybody who understands signal theory.
That video makes it very clear what the sinc function ("reconstruction filter") is, and why it's necessary.
The importance of not turning off the sinc filter really can't be understated - you're not recreating the original signal without it. Any "measurements" you make while it's disabled are automatically suspect.
That is an extremely good video. I really appreciate the link! I don't think he actually mentions 'sinc function' explicitly, either.
Actually if you want to do any sort of postprocessing either in scope or in MatLab etc it is absolutely critical to have raw data, otherwise you are properly locked out of various wonders of DSP magic.
How is that done, Fungus? I had a full pulse (rise and falling edges) centered on screen, but the csv does not look like a full pulse. I see all 15 points both on screen and in the csv, but they are not at all the same points. I used memory instead of screen and was expecting more data than screen data, and why is there only ch1?
where does 1200 come from (100 pixels per division, but only 15 points?)?
But it cannot return a 1200 point peak detected record in 1200 8-bit words; it would take 2400 words. I assume the FPGA always returns a 1200 word record but in peak detect mode, the record is composed to 600 pairs and in normal mode, it is 1200 separate points. At least that is how other DSOs handle it. By returning a record which is twice as long as necessary in normal mode, peak detection mode does not visibly halve the horizontal resolution.
Actually 1200 points are probably related to peak detection feature:
Effective resolution for measurements on screen is 300 points, experimentally proven:
Yet again you just dump a huge list of numbers on the world with no explanation and expect people to believe a conclusion based on that.
We've already seen that some of your basic assumptions can be wrong, eg. "dots mode doesn't use sinc".
My second plot represents what I see on the screen, with 5ns/div sweep and 250MSa/s, that is only 15 points possible. How does Rigol get more?
Why do I not have 15 points that look like what's on screen
In general, manual says that Sinc is "optional" and in the menu there is clear option Sinc=OFF. So it is fair assumption that it should be OFF, not replaced by god knows what.
We do not really know
You see this trace, and I will save it as CSV screen data. What I should get? I get all 4 channels and 1200 points.
When I change only the data source to memory, I get 15 points, ONLY channel 1 (when ch3 is active)
looks like a bug. I shut off other 3 channels and saved memory (now 60pts), and the wave represents.
In general, manual says that Sinc is "optional" and in the menu there is clear option Sinc=OFF. So it is fair assumption that it should be OFF, not replaced by god knows what.Says who?
Maybe it works like that $12,000 keysight 'scope I mentioned earlier:
How is that done, Fungus?
So are you saying that expecting that OFF is OFF is unfair assumption
As for "screen sampling", even Rigol itself has moved on:
looks like a bug. I shut off other 3 channels and saved memory (now 60pts), and the wave represents.
When you shut off 3 channels the 'scope will force sin(x)/x on and it will have more samples/MHz.
For this sort of work you should always try to maximize the sample rate, on a Rigol DS1054Z that might mean using one channel.
How is that done, Fungus?
There are many tools available to download the raw internal memory waveform data from the scope
to your pc.
The one I use is DSRemote. It saves the data in EDF format which can be opened in Octave, Scilab,
Matlab and EDFbrowser for further analysis.
Never use csv format.
There are many tools available to download the raw internal memory waveform data from the scopePerhaps we are working in the field or on antenna towers and having PC interface is difficult.
to your pc.
The one I use is DSRemote. It saves the data in EDF format which can be opened in Octave, Scilab,
Matlab and EDFbrowser for further analysis.
The values in the BYTE format map directly to vertical screen pixels so I believe these numbers are the raw sample data from deep inside the 'scope. These numbers are as accurate as it gets. 8)
Why are these numbers subtly different from the .csv numbers?
Did you check for Sinc=ON|OFF @250MSa/s? Does raw data amplitude stay same or still changes like on screen? Of course you would need feed in 100MHz or so.
Does the trigger circuitry do sin(x)/x.
Does the trigger circuitry do sin(x)/x.
It makes sense to do heavy pre-conditioning of the signal before trigger process, otherwise it would be indeed a complete mess. rig(x)/x => [trigger =>] sin(x)/x. So if there are two passes of heavy conditioning it explains why response becomes so aggressive at low sample counts.
One question that springs to mind while doing this is:
Does the trigger circuitry do sin(x)/x.
If it doesn't do it then there'd be a lot of horizontal jitter at these extremes - the trigger crossing would happen at different times depending on where the ADC happened to sample the wave.
But there isn't. The trigger is perfectly stable no matter what the settings, even with all channels on and close to 2.5 samples per wave.
What's going on there?
Does the trigger circuitry do sin(x)/x.
It makes sense to do heavy pre-conditioning of the signal before trigger process, otherwise it would be indeed a complete mess. rig(x)/x => [trigger =>] sin(x)/x. So if there are two passes of heavy conditioning it explains why response becomes so aggressive at low sample counts.
I have not seen problems in Rigol1kZ digital trigger engine fine interpolation system between true sample points for positioning waveform if also think its own performance and price category in this question.
Frequency response is another key consideration in your selection criteria. Sampling oscilloscopes do not use digital signal processing (DSP) correction, so the frequency response rolls off slowly and looks more Gaussian in shape. Real-time oscilloscopes can implement DSP to correct their frequency response. For instance, Keysight’s S-Series oscilloscope has a very flat frequency response across its bandwidth, which means its gain will not vary by more than 1 dB across the entire band.
Post-correction of A/D Converters
Error correction of ADCs has received increasing attention during the
last two decades. Several methods have been proposed and evaluated
during this time, e.g., [HSP00, LASH02a, IHK91, Mou89, TL97, Hum02,
RI87, Iro86]. These methods have in common that the ADC to be corrected
is treated as a closed entity, i.e., internal signals and states of the
ADC are not available, and the calibration and correction methods must
operate outside of the converter. Moreover, the correction is dependent
on the output signal x(n) of the ADC to be corrected. That is, the
correction is an operation incorporated after the ADC, hence the name
post-correction.
In this chapter we will first review some of the ADC post-correction
methods that have been proposed in the past. This will then lead to the
introduction of a generalized post-correction method.
We are mainly concerned with look-up table correction methods.
These are, as the name suggests, methods that produce a corrected ADC
output value through the use of a look-up table (or possibly several tables
– see Chapter 5 for a scheme incorporating two look-up tables),
where pre-calculated values are stored. A distinction between static and
dynamic correction is made. If the correction for a sample x(n) is a function
only of the value x(n), i.e., not depending on past or future samples,
signal derivatives, signal frequency, etc., then the correction is said to be
static. Else, it is said to be dynamic.
Fungus just reported that sample points downloadable from memory correlate with Sinc=ON|OFF in GUI. So they cannot be true "analog" sample points in principle.
can only conclude that substantial pre-processing by whatever means is taking place before trigger (which is digital AFAIK).
Fungus just reported that sample points downloadable from memory correlate with Sinc=ON|OFF in GUI. So they cannot be true "analog" sample points in principle.
That doesn't mean they aren't "true analog sample points" in ADC memory, only that we haven't found a way to access an unprocessed version of them.can only conclude that substantial pre-processing by whatever means is taking place before trigger (which is digital AFAIK).
Nope, completely wrong
Trigger units work in parallel with the ADC to generate a horizontal timing offset for aligning waveforms on screen. That's it.
It's easy to demonstrate, here's a pulse in dot mode:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=519464;image)
Here's another capture of the pulse. Notice that the dots aren't in the same horizontal positions - they've been offset in that axis using timing information from the trigger unit:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=519542;image)
Finally, here's a whole bunch of them, overlaid. There's captures at many different times but they all line up and overlay beautifully, no horizontal difference between each wave:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=519476;image)
If the signal was being reconstructed for display (as you claim) then there would always be a dot exactly on the horizontal trigger position and the third image (dots at every possible horizontal position) would be impossible.
And now, turn off Sinc and this Gibbs phenomenon disappear (because it is not in real input signal and produced by Sinc interpolation. And in these cases Sinc do not reconstruct true input signal right (even in theory it can not, rules are included in theory) . (Gibbs "ear" is not error, it is Sinc interpolation normal "feature" specially if input signal violate rules))
I think we might finally be getting to the bottom of the Rigol "sinc" mystery (and why there's no truly "raw" data available).
Why are these numbers subtly different from the .csv numbers?
How subtle?
I've converted the differences between the two datasets into raw ADC values and they're all less than one ADC step (the majority are less than half an ADC step).
nb. One ADC step is exactly two pixels on screen so in physical terms the majority of differences between RAW and .csv are less than a pixel.
Seems like some sort of a rounding error to me. Maybe csv is done with fixed-point math.
Conclusion: RAW data is slightly better but using CSV isn't a real problem.
Maybe you've accidentally hit on the reason why Rigol decided to enable the "sinc on/off" button when you get to the extremes, ie. to see how much Gibbs is on screen. :-+
Conclusion: RAW data is slightly better but using CSV isn't a real problem.
You mean if less than 3 channels are active?
...but can you trigger on that supposed sin(x)/x distortion (specifically over- or undershoot)?
If yes plot thickens
Triggering is completely digital...
...but can you trigger on that supposed sin(x)/x distortion (specifically over- or undershoot)?No.
Very interesting, but can you trigger on something that over or under (eg not visible) supposed Gibbs-suppressor filter
I can do much better than that:
I set the thing up so that the peak goes either side of a horizontal grid line when you turn sin(x)/x on/off, eg.:
If you switch to dots mode and push the trigger upwards towards the peak, it only triggers when one of the physical sample points is above the trigger line.
Just to be sure, so this is with Sinc=OFF, yes?
(but I need a different trigger level for each one because the peak moves up/down when I switch between them)
To make it look more like regular scope they use Sinc=OFF feature, which is indeed just a filter then to suppress suspicious wfm features.
But they overdid it all a little. Both post corrector and suppressor.
What's a "regular scope"?
For everybody else? No problems.
Afterwards started building some experimental analog contraption involving heavily non-linear components. When started testing almost went mad. It did not produce designed signals no matter what I did, non-linearities were all wrong. For days I debugged and tested and calculated until finally I found the culprit deep in the PS software menus... Sin(x)/x on by default. After switching it OFF discovered that contraption was working as designed from the day 1. So maybe one can get away with 2.5 samples per wfm (PS actually had 4 at max freq, all ch in use) for very well known situations... but for heavily experimental stuff only thing that counts is raw data, period. When you start replacing raw data with math fantasy you usually get string theory or something, not maglev trains :)
What's a "regular scope"?One with dots staying put and good for further (custom) DSP.
Watch the video again, those dots will be aliased, therefore lies.
Very interesting, but can you trigger on something that over or under (eg not visible) supposed Gibbs-suppressor filter
I can do much better than that:
I set the thing up so that the peak goes either side of a horizontal grid line when you turn sin(x)/x on/off, eg.:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=520436;image)
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=520442;image)
Now if I move the trigger point up to to that grid line I lose trigger when I turn sin(x)/x off:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=520448;image)
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=520454;image)
Why you show all images using 16 waveform average.
It is nice to see this first image with example 1s persistence on and without averaging.
Edit: Here's the same thing with sin(x)/x off. Triggering is much tighter:
I'm not sure what conclusions can be drawn with my really crappy probing though.
What you mean triggering is much tighter. I can not see any difference.
What you mean triggering is much tighter. I can not see any difference.
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=520640;image)
This reason is of course not trigger.
Conclusion: RAW data is slightly better but using CSV isn't a real problem.
You mean if less than 3 channels are active?
I mean that using the CSV format is just as good as grabbing the data over LAN with DSRemote (or whatever).
This reason is of course not trigger.
OK, a big part of that signal seems to be my horrible probing. I poked the bottom of the Arduino with the probe instead of clipping onto a the Dupont wire and it all got better.
Images have been removed to avoid wrong conclusions. If nobody steps up with a proper pulse generator+BNC then I might try again later with the little probe spring directly onto the AVR chip.
Well, I have not used those tools, but you're saying the result is the same? Data is shifted half a screen late and you missed half the pulse?
And what I see there, there is signs of corners wobbling (one form of aliasing) and perhaps tiny part of Gibbs
and maybe time for some of you to take on an electronics project for a change? :P
Previous raw data points (Dot mode) plus persistence.And what I see there, there is signs of corners wobbling (one form of aliasing) and perhaps tiny part of Gibbs
There's 130Mhz+ of signal going into something with Nyquist limit of 125Mhz. You can't expect perfection (or zero wobble!)
PS: What's going on at these corners?
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=520850;image)
This is turning into a "scopology" thread...
Time for me to unsubscribe from this thread,
Previous raw data points (Dot mode) plus persistence.
Only can be done with a waveform source with low jitter and in true real dots mode.
Yep, probing technique excused. ;)Previous raw data points (Dot mode) plus persistence.
Only can be done with a waveform source with low jitter and in true real dots mode.
OK, so a bit like this:
......Pic.............
PS: What's going on at these corners?
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=520850;image)
PS: What's going on at these corners?
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=520850;image)
I wasn't expecting such square corners. Is that what's expected? How close do we think these devices are representing the actual pulse waveform?
Here's the same thing with sin(x)/x off. Triggering is much tighter:
I'm not sure what conclusions can be drawn with my really crappy probing though.
This reason is of course not trigger.
OK, a big part of that signal seems to be my horrible probing. I poked the bottom of the Arduino with the probe instead of clipping onto a the Dupont wire and it all got better.
Images have been removed to avoid wrong conclusions. If nobody steps up with a proper pulse generator+BNC then I might try again later with the little probe spring directly onto the AVR chip.
This "horrible" probing is not at all what I look. I can filter these kind of things out from thinking and look important things what I think are trigger jitter and alising and fact that of course it can not do ideal Sinc reconstruction what is not even suitable in practical oscilloscope because reconstruction need be fast and only over some true sampled points. And what I see there, there is signs of corners wobbling (one form of aliasing) and perhaps tiny part of Gibbs but then (not my thinking but you told) most parts of overshoot is in your signal.
These example images are old and not at all for compare. These are from "theory and practice lesson" where I try simply way demonstrate things not at all if scope is good or bad etc but common principles. (and not even perfectly if think scalability to more speed without also BW scaling accordingly).
Yes these are made using 1us sample period. No matter. It can scale.. Reason was just that I can very accurate control rise and fall times etc and range is well below BW so that sure enough harmonics are there and I know enough sure what ADC really see.
Important is. Risetime 3.5us fall time 1us. Sampling period 1us. Of course fall have strong alias but also there is 3.5 sample in rising edge and also there can see some corner wobble.
If rise and fall is 1.5 sample period corners wobble reduce lot of.
I wasn't expecting such square corners. Is that what's expected? How close do we think these devices are representing the actual pulse waveform? Here is another sample.
Note that the sample rate in that image is only 1Msa/s and it's not a pulse (it's a slope). The reason the corners are so square is because of the huge bandwidth discrepancy between the analog bandwidth of that oscilloscope and the sampling rate being used (1000:1 ratio). This gives it the equivalent of a brickwall filter on the input.
ie. It's a sales demo, deliberately staged to fool people (and to be difficult to reproduce at home).
Related to sampling speed now analog BW before ADC is nearly like super wide so that ADC can see (and there is used it) up to very high over Nyquist. (also I have explained why I want ADC can see lot of over Nyquist...
Could what Fungus is doing considered as oversampling?
Otherwise it is quite weird that rise time stays ~const (on all Sinc=ON examples).
Isn't that what sinc filter is for? :popcorn:
If you look then in rf-loop example Sinc is ON yet averaging it could not result in true trace.
This is the reason the corners are nice and square compared to the other image that was posted.
(and to be difficult to reproduce at home)How this can be difficult. There is nothing difficult at all. If this is difficult then...<advance censored>.
How this can be difficult. There is nothing difficult at all. If this is difficult then...<advance censored>.
Just simple basic simple generator and basic simple scope, one cable and turn knobs.
This is why it is good to have opportunity to always turn all interpolations off (exept trigger engine internal "what ever"...). Just because only real data what we have are true sample points level and time and nothing else. Independent of what Keysight or who ever talks. There money talks.
If Photoshop a little rf-loop example it can be seen that averaged low-samplerate ack could not ever match true risetime:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=521297;image)
What averaged? There is nothing averaged.
Even at 100MSa/s there will be 99 more samples between each dot in the image, sinc will be fine with that.
No (if we stay here in entry or near entry level scopes segment)
Me? I'm not doing anything.
Edit: Maybe that's the true rise time of a pin on an Arduino Uno after all the capacitances, etc. have been taken into account. We need somebody with a better oscilloscope to measure one.
Edit: Maybe that's the true rise time of a pin on an Arduino Uno after all the capacitances, etc. have been taken into account. We need somebody with a better oscilloscope to measure one.
Rise times differ by about 1.5ns against Fungus's tests but the shape of the edge differs considerably. I'm very surprised by the sharp edges that my DS1000Z shows at 250Msps.
Finally I attached a screenshot of the aliasing frequency of the Rb source signal at low sample rate to get an idea of the accuracy of the internal reference -- I'ld say it's also mediocre at 11ppm (at least for my DS1000Z), YMMV :)
it's fun trying to understand what's going on inside and how Rigol managed to turn an apparently (less than) mediocre harware into something useful
Finally: Your images make me suspect that the Arduino pulse is indeed around 4.5ns.
But this material where from images are is finnish language so you can not understand it due to fact that finnish language is like "enigma" for example google translator. And I have also explained previously why I pick up these images here. If you really do not understand then tell it directly that you did not understand instead if this indirect way tell same.
This (http://www.siglent.fi/oscilloscope-digital-aliasing-sampling.html) (one part) of "teaching" material for peoples who do not have so much knowledge about digital oscilloscopes. Some kind of common bottom entry level information. Examples are made using Siglent but all these can do using nearly what ever this era entry level digital oscilloscope.
Now I ask - math is math. How on earth Rigol manages to overshoot like crazy at 250MSa/s: 14% at Sinc=ON, 6% Sinc=OFF
at 500MSa/s it manages 7%
The 14% is a sum of real electrical overshoot + Gibbs + aliasing.
Sinc = off? Electrical overshoot + only Rigol knows what.
The 14% is a sum of real electrical overshoot + Gibbs + aliasing.
Sinc = off? Electrical overshoot + only Rigol knows what.
Look image below. There is no electrical / physical overshoot:
The 14% is a sum of real electrical overshoot + Gibbs + aliasing.
Sinc = off? Electrical overshoot + only Rigol knows what.
Look image below. There is no electrical / physical overshoot:
So ... that parameter will be zero. :popcorn:
...all the magic you see on the screen ;)
Also can see that without Sinc there is not so much wobbling in corners and edges upside and downside from trig level. Also this is normal ok. This is one reason why it is good that oscilloscope can always turn to true sample dots without any interpolation (poormans partially emulated RIS mode what is good for some kind of waveforms where Sinc is not best and vice versa.) (of course separate trigger engine interpolation is working if or when it exists independent of displayed wfm interpolation) endependent of what example Keysight say or advertise or produce.
Also can see that without Sinc there is not so much wobbling in corners and edges upside and downside from trig level. Also this is normal ok. This is one reason why it is good that oscilloscope can always turn to true sample dots without any interpolation (poormans partially emulated RIS mode what is good for some kind of waveforms where Sinc is not best and vice versa.) (of course separate trigger engine interpolation is working if or when it exists independent of displayed wfm interpolation) endependent of what example Keysight say or advertise or produce.
The wobbling (1) is because even with an input signal completely within the Nyquist bandwidth, the non-linearity in the digitizer mixes the signal and sample frequencies producing mixing products above the Nyquist frequency and then sin(x)/x reconstruction fails because essentially there are multiple solutions. Just the aliasing of the input signal by itself will not do that (2) although I think it would screw up digital triggering. It can be thought of as looking as a lightly modulated AM signal.
This is why I much prefer ETS which raises the sampling rate so high that the mixing produces no aliasing and as a bonus, there is none of that pre-shoot and post-shoot nonsense. Averaging helps if you have nothing better but not as much as ETS.
Your later example on the Siglent shows it better and it is exactly what I see on ancient DSOs with sin(x)/x interpolation and no ETS. HP/Agilent/Keysight likes to make fun of Tektronix's interleaved digitizers which tend to suffer more from this due to poorer linearity. Even Rigol seems pretty good in this respect except for that 100 to 200 MHz overload problem in the analog signal conditioning.
(1) I've been calling this wobulation. If you see it, then your have exceeded the capabilities of your DSO.
Yes but ETS is not real time scope at all. ETS can do even with 1Hz sampling speed for reconstruct 1GHz signal... if we look only alone fully repetitive signals... (who need scope only for these) ETS is ok.
Example Siglent do it. So it is possible to run in SARI mode (Sequential Acquisitions Random Interleave). It can reconstruct signal far over fNyquist if run dots mode with decimated samplerates.
There's no noticable difference of the performance between the individual channels of my DS1000Z.
So can Rigol. This image was produced at full sample rate earlier in the thread:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=521462;image)
Example Siglent do it. So it is possible to run in SARI mode (Sequential Acquisitions Random Interleave). It can reconstruct signal far over fNyquist if run dots mode with decimated samplerates.
So can Rigol. This image was produced at full sample rate earlier in the thread:
(https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/?action=dlattach;attach=521462;image)
Here we see signal completely different between 2 sampling rates. Also we see degradation of rise time at 250MSa/s like it should, yet corners are ~90 degree, yet smooth corner seen at 1GSa/s is lost :-//
This "triger engine" is perhaps partially guilty who produce fake signal shape.
I've seen other people measuring close to 200Mhz measured bandwidth on their DS1054Z in the past but others have measured around 135MHz.
Maybe the higher numbers are more accurate and it all depends on the probing technique and signal generator used. I don't know.
Neither should happen in a properly designed oscilloscope. Rigol screwed up.
Neither should happen in a properly designed oscilloscope. Rigol screwed up.
Rigol put a 4-channel, $399 oscilloscope with the performance shown on the market three years ago. That's hardly a screw-up.
Neither should happen in a properly designed oscilloscope. Rigol screwed up.
Rigol put a 4-channel, $399 oscilloscope with the performance shown on the market three years ago. That's hardly a screw-up.
Every time someone says things like that I say - What do you want for$399$349? :-//
Hi all,
I have an extremely strange issue with my DS1054z, whereby it is not displaying any trace at all on any of the 4 channels.
I have started a thread here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/ds1054z-no-waveform-on-any-channel/msg1828157/#msg1828157 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/ds1054z-no-waveform-on-any-channel/msg1828157/#msg1828157)
But then I wondered if I ought to mention it in this 1054z "De Facto" thread!?
I expect this sort of shortcoming to be documented as part of the specifications.
I expect this sort of shortcoming to be documented as part of the specifications.
How would they word that, exactly?
Bandwidth* (-3 dB): 250 MHz (200 MHz ±50 mV range)
*Quoted bandwidth is with supplied probes or at BNC when 50 Ω impedance selected.
From random scope spec:QuoteBandwidth* (-3 dB): 250 MHz (200 MHz ±50 mV range)
*Quoted bandwidth is with supplied probes or at BNC when 50 Ω impedance selected.
I expect this sort of shortcoming to be documented as part of the specifications.
How would they word that, exactly?
I think D.Hess is referring to this image (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1804028/#msg1804028):
Something about the input amplifier overloading a tiny bit when the DS1054Z clicks down below 500Mv mode and you then fine tune the range up to to 400mV manually (ie. towards the limits of the low-range input amplifier).
And if that is what he's referring to, how would it be worded in a manual so that he wouldn't feel "deliberately mislead"?
Hi all,
I have an extremely strange issue with my DS1054z, whereby it is not displaying any trace at all on any of the 4 channels.
I have started a thread here: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/ds1054z-no-waveform-on-any-channel/msg1828157/#msg1828157 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/ds1054z-no-waveform-on-any-channel/msg1828157/#msg1828157)
But then I wondered if I ought to mention it in this 1054z "De Facto" thread!?
I got in touch with rigol china if it is in warranty, I was delayed almost a month, but they advised me to correct the problem, that if I sent them as 10 mail, they asked for images and videos which I uploaded to youtube. Today more than 5 months of the problem (humidity) I am 100% satisfied with the oscilloscope, for $ s319. I have a very good product.
I'm having trouble understanding this post.
Does it mean that Adrian_Arg had the same problem with no traces, but everything else working on his DS1054z? Did the problem turn out to be high humidity? Did the cure simply involve opening it up and gently drying with warm air?
If I turn on another channel, the "measurement" varies wildly, even changing sign.
If I turn on another channel, the "measurement" varies wildly, even changing sign.
I notice the frequency has changed a lot as well (looks to me like the "30kHz" was correct, "25kHz" isn't".
I wonder if it's related to the fact the CH4 is "FGin". Does it happen with other channels or if you change that?
How come probe is set to 10 x in the first 1x in the second?
I wonder if it's related to the fact the CH4 is "FGin". Does it happen with other channels or if you change that?
Uh... it's just a label, there is nothing even plugged into CH4 at all. Yes, it happens with other channels too.
And I warmed the scope up for about 4 hours, then ran a self-calibration before making the test.
Do you think I can trust this integral, that doesn't quite return to zero over the full waveform? It doesn't change when I turn on other channels.
You'd think somebody would have noticed by now if the frequency changed when you turned channels on.
You'd think somebody would have noticed by now if the frequency changed when you turned channels on.Of course it changes because counter sensitivity varies with sampling rate.
At 30kHz?
But it does look like the whole CH1 trace is very slightly moved down in the second shot.
A quick trial using a 30Khz triangle waveform on my scope duplicated the extra CH/CH4 effect on Per Area. The Area statistic remains relatively stable. The enabling of an extra Channel does have a small impact on the trigger level but this is quite marginal. However in my case enabling a third channel, no signal on it, changes the Per Area statistic back to the the original reading for the CH1 alone. Adding the fourth channel has no effect so it seems enabling any single channel to the displaying channel changes the value of Per Area displayed but adding any third or more channels returns the reading to the single channel value. Please note this is not a thorough check as my PerArea readings do float around a bit, like by 10%, the enabling of the second channel however changes the reading by approx X5.
But it does look like the whole CH1 trace is very slightly moved down in the second shot.
With the trigger level near the top edge of the trace, that's probably why the trigger counter is dropping from 30kHz to 25kHz, one of the edge trigger's hysteresis levels slipping off the top of the waveform.
With the trigger level near the top edge of the trace, that's probably why the trigger counter is dropping from 30kHz to 25kHz, one of the edge trigger's hysteresis levels slipping off the top of the waveform.
The Area statistic remains relatively stable.
Noise, enough to affect even the sign of the reading, caused simply by turning on one other channel? And removed by turning on another channel?
That's a bug.
I'm dealing with tiny differences between small values and I'm using an inadequate instrument for the purpose, but I'm trying to get the best most reliable result possible under the circumstances. If this waveform or similar ones from this project can be shown consistently to be "negative" in area, even by a tiny bit, that would justify deploying the "big guns" for a further examination at greater and more reliable precision.
I'm trying to get the best most reliable result possible under the circumstances.
Why, still there??: http://www.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3 (http://www.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3)
Even if it's not readable (for many...), the most current firmware versions can be found on the chinese site.
Dana, check the measurement history to confirm that the statistics are being calculated over all the samples that the display persistence is showing for the cursor measurement. In the screenshot, it doesn't look like the stats included the same set of data.Those aren't Stats, they're Cursor measurements.
Dana, check the measurement history to confirm that the statistics are being calculated over all the samples that the display persistence is showing for the cursor measurement. In the screenshot, it doesn't look like the stats included the same set of data.
Each measurement stats were cleared, then scope allowed minutes of measurement time.
The measurement has always been done in "Normal" trigger.
I also thought my Hi Res setting for acquire might be doing it, so set that
to "Normal" as well.
Signal source is HW PWM, so it should be "reliable". Reliable in the sense continuous
running, the jitter from it not so much. But to your point I will see if I can get a trigger
on a missing pulse scenario. As well on an excessively wide pulse. Also if I have time do
further testing on my Tek 754A.
Regards, Dana.
The modulation is actual jitter in a clock, ESP8266 module.
bitseeker -
I do not see any setting, other than choice to apply measurement to "screen"
or "cursors", to control sample set. I have it set to screen, and cursor measurement
looks correct. Stats does not.
If the statistics were not examining all sweeps, even if this were true, over time it would,
all things being equal, get a sample for all possible values. Eg. the jitter would produce
multiple samples for same point in time, over long acquisition periods. I have done hours
to see see if the measurement would converge, does not.
ANYONE GETTING AN ERROR ABOUT PRIVATE KEY:
YOU ARE ENTERING YOUR SERIAL NUMBER WITH A 8 INSTEAD OF AN 'S' AND THE SCRIPT IS NOT RECOGNIZING IT. SERIAL NUMBERS ARE DS NOT D8
I was able to get pass/fail working to stop when a trace falls outside the mask, but can anyone tell me if it is possible to record only failed traces with DS1054Z?
It seems that if I have pass/fail active, then the record menu is dimmed out, and vice versa. |O
:wtf:
Wow, that's a really, really stupid limitation.
...then move to the next segment of memory.
...then move to the next segment of memory.
The logic is obvious, yes, but things that seem simple/obvious aren't always easy/possible to implement when you get into the details.
maybe it has no ability to "rewind" when a wave passes.
Maybe it doesn't know if a wave has passed/failed until several more waves have arrived and are in memory so a "rewind" would overwrite those newer waves and there might be bad ones in there.
So a waveform Search feature that you can change the settings for and also transfer to the trigger might suit your needs better ?
Have a squiz at this:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1204x-e-released-for-domestic-markets-in-china/msg1370717/#msg1370717 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-sds1204x-e-released-for-domestic-markets-in-china/msg1370717/#msg1370717)
Quotemaybe it has no ability to "rewind" when a wave passes.
I don't see why RAM wouldn't be random access.
It's not a PC. The sample memory in a DSO is just a big circular buffer being fed by the ADC. The main CPU has very limited access, most access is done through an FPGA whose main job is downsampling the data into a format suitable for display on screen.
What you're proposing would mean that pieces of sample memory need to copied around (you have to save only the interesting stuff, accumulating it in the memory). It might be impossible to do that in a DS1054Z (at least; impossible without stopping the ADC, in which case you'd be moaning that it misses waves when they all come along at once).
:popcorn:
I'm still very happy with it overall, but I did get a big surprise that this one wasn't there.
Obviously feasible "in principle" -- you essentially want two memory buffers: a short-term one for interim storage until a trace has been classified, and a long-term memory to retain outlier traces. But that may not be supported by the Rigol hardware.
Anyway, this is just speculation.
There might be no way to copy sample data around in the sample memory, eg. Only the ADC has write access.
We know the sample data has to be downsampled to "screen" resolution before it can be compared with the pass/fail mask. This introduces a time delay between sampling/classification.
If there's a time delay between sampling/classification and no way to move sample data around then you can't do it. Period.
Is this an application for a SCPI automated test solution?
On 1000Z, they could add option to save a screen capture on fail, like Keysight and MSO5000/7000 do.
Ok newbie at DSOs using DS1054Z connected using UltraSigma and UltraScope over LAN ok.....its clunky but crappy.
I know its been discussed but wanted to ask...what other software to does it better? Things like I can screen capture but images are crappy and are trace colours and background. So asking before I tear my hair out.....thanks
Ok newbie at DSOs using DS1054Z connected using UltraSigma and UltraScope over LAN
Are then any others like Sigrok? Also looking for more advanced. Bildschirmkopie looks great for simple screen grabs but also need ....more options.
need ....more options.
need ....more options.
Like what? I can't read minds at this distance.
For screen grabs you can also put in a USB stick and press the "Print" button.
Grrrrr maybe I need to watch some videos or find a cheat sheet. I’ve figured it out mostly myself....press enough buttons you’ll get it working ;)
Grrrrr maybe I need to watch some videos or find a cheat sheet. I’ve figured it out mostly myself....press enough buttons you’ll get it working ;)
Hmm, there is a manual. :popcorn:
Grrrrr maybe I need to watch some videos or find a cheat sheet. I’ve figured it out mostly myself....press enough buttons you’ll get it working ;)
Hmm, there is a manual. :popcorn:
Actually to tell the truth..... I didn't even know till after i posted in this thread :palm: I had the quick start booklet...I thought that was it. Found the manual downloading ultra scope. I've downloaded it now .....but meh...I'm a hanger pilot much more fun pushing buttons.....it'll work if you push enough! ;)
I have a 100Mhz signal connected (from an Si5351 clock generator). It reads the signal fine, and identifies it as 100Mhz. Should this be possible without having installed the hack that enables the 100Mhz bandwidth option?
no settings changes on the scope, it is AC coupled, so why does it move?
no settings changes on the scope, it is AC coupled, so why does it move?
It moves exactly because it is AC coupled. The average voltage of your signal changes as you vary the PWM duty cycle. And AC coupling puts this average voltage at the center of the scale.
new (last month) 1054Z with all upgrades and SP4 firmware.
When viewing the cal signal - as I change the time base, the displayed rise time changes.
The signal does not change so why does the displayed rise time change?
Thanks, so for sample shown the 3.00µs is the closest, except that is most affected by the sample rate so it varies a lotnew (last month) 1054Z with all upgrades and SP4 firmware.
When viewing the cal signal - as I change the time base, the displayed rise time changes.
The signal does not change so why does the displayed rise time change?
Because all calculations on a DS1054Z are done using the "on screen" data. You get most accurate numbers when you zoom in.
...all calculations on a DS1054Z are done using the "on screen" data. You get most accurate numbers when you zoom in.It seems like it varies more that the sample rate would indicate.
What else affects it?
1. My rigol has 04.04.03 firmware i patched it in past to enable all features including 100mhz bandwitch , now i wants to update firmware to latest available and i dont know how? , should i delete feature hack after update it to latest firmware and patch again to enable all features ?
2. There are few pc-apps to communicate with rigol by using pc and store captured data but this isnt enough for my projects , lets say i need to store 50 - 100 captured traces of similiar signal each trace individually triggered
This feature is working by using function called waveform record , it can store many traces by recording and later is possibly to playing trace by trace/next trace etc. but these waveforms are recorded and stored inside rigol memory
So my question is about is possibly to download somehow from rigol all this recorded waveforms to PC after ? not live but after all recordings done
1. thanks1. My rigol has 04.04.03 firmware i patched it in past to enable all features including 100mhz bandwitch , now i wants to update firmware to latest available and i dont know how? , should i delete feature hack after update it to latest firmware and patch again to enable all features ?
No need to remove keys. Just roll the update - licenses will be carried over. The "hacked" keys are official keys due to bad implementation of key encryption. :)2. There are few pc-apps to communicate with rigol by using pc and store captured data but this isnt enough for my projects , lets say i need to store 50 - 100 captured traces of similiar signal each trace individually triggered
This feature is working by using function called waveform record , it can store many traces by recording and later is possibly to playing trace by trace/next trace etc. but these waveforms are recorded and stored inside rigol memory
So my question is about is possibly to download somehow from rigol all this recorded waveforms to PC after ? not live but after all recordings done
You can simply write the recorded waveforms to a USB memory stick via the front USB port.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-and-mso1000z-exporting-waveform-to-computer/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-and-mso1000z-exporting-waveform-to-computer/)it seems nobody is still understanding me :)
I can't recall such a feature in various 1054z related software.@ebastler thanks i will check dsremote soon when i have access to linux system
Check the programming guide, it may be possble to do by scpi command.
btw. have another question i think there is just one rigol osciloscope model who has external reference clock input (this function and port doesnt exist in DS1000 series)
Using one of the channels (no need to display it) would do as a replacement for an external trigger, but I think lfldp was asking for an external reference clock, to be used in place of the internal oscillator e.g. to synchronize several instruments or for better time precision.btw. have another question i think there is just one rigol osciloscope model who has external reference clock input (this function and port doesnt exist in DS1000 series)
It's missing from many (most?) 4-channel 'scopes. The trick is to use one of the 4 channels instead.
ok@PeDre i understand about you wants to release something which i missed but only for currently used instruments by you (but i can do it myself too by adapting SCPI commands right?)
I have a DS1000Z and a self-programmed program. I can extend the program so that you can save the records from memory. You only have to specify the required data format. The program does not store any data at the moment.
Peter
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.04.04.02 2019/02/26
- Add new encoder drivers
A new firmware is available.
https://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-0576/1/-/-/-/-/DS1000Zver_04.04.04.02.zip (https://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/attachment/1579/f-0576/1/-/-/-/-/DS1000Zver_04.04.04.02.zip)Quote[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.04.04.02 2019/02/26
- Add new encoder drivers
No need to fill in any forms, here you can download the firmware directly from the Chinese Rigol website:
https://rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3 (https://rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3)
Continuing my test https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1109785/#msg1109785 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1109785/#msg1109785) with the same source signal i.e. the 100MHz SDRAM clock of the STM32F769 discovery board, now testing with a 500MHz 8pF Tek probe, it turns out my lovely Rigol has over than 300MHz bandwith (1.3 ns rise time as seen) :)
It also varies with signal level and volts/div setting which indicates that something uncouth is going on.
It also varies with signal level and volts/div setting which indicates that something uncouth is going on.
It also varies with signal level and volts/div setting which indicates that something uncouth is going on.
I think the problem is due to not zooming to maximum zoom. The DS1054Z does all calculations using "on-screen" pixels so for most accuracy in things like rise times you need to zoom in on the area of interest.
It also varies with signal level and volts/div setting which indicates that something uncouth is going on.
I think the problem is due to not zooming to maximum zoom. The DS1054Z does all calculations using "on-screen" pixels so for most accuracy in things like rise times you need to zoom in on the area of interest.
That has an effect on accuracy but reports of bandwidth vary over more than a 2:1 range. Some are more than 3:1. The DSOs I have used have no problem making accurate edge measurements over a 10:1 range in displayed signal amplitudes. The shape of the waveform should not vary with amplitude.
Like we have discussed in the past, I suspect one of the amplifier stages suffers from slew rate limiting causing saturation or cutoff which also explains the odd 10 nanosecond recovery time under certain conditions.
-3dB point is between 130 and 140 MHz. Period. Measured with frequency sweep from a siggen, 50 OHm pass trough terminator scope side .
The only way.
Actually, that doesn't reflect the complete situation: The DS1000Z has two physical, relay-switched sensitivity ranges in the input voltage divider. Further sensitivity adjustments are arranged via the internal digital gain modules in the HMCAD1511 ADC (https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=2ahUKEwiNrdCakenjAhWJ66QKHVzdAYoQFjAAegQIBBAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.analog.com%2Fmedia%2Fen%2Ftechnical-documentation%2Fdata-sheets%2Fhmcad1511.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3Gu4X1M4lcGx6j-l0cGQ5k).
As long as the high sensitivity range is selected (this means a less than 330mV/div true input sensitivity), the mentioned figures are correct. But if you change the sensitivity to 335mV/div or above and thus select the low gain input configuration, the 3dB bandwidth increases to somewhere around 220MHz. Of course, this test requires a generator that's capable of some decent output amplitude since the use of a terminator at the scope input is mandatory at these frequencies.
Anyway, the owners buy a 50MHz scope, convince it to believe it's a 100MHz version and then want to use it up to 150+MHz? Sounds weird... ;)
Anyway, the owners buy a 50MHz scope, convince it to believe it's a 100MHz version and then want to use it up to 150+MHz? Sounds weird... ;)
Don't you think the DS1054Z and the DS1104Z share the same hardware and that, by using a software key the artificially limited bandwidth can be upgraded?
I understood TurboTom's comment as just stating that us DS1054Z owners are a greedy bunch. ;)
Buy 50 MHz, cheat your way into 100 MHz, then hope to get 150 MHz and beyond... 8)
Anyway, the owners buy a 50MHz scope, convince it to believe it's a 100MHz version and then want to use it up to 150+MHz? Sounds weird... ;)
Don't you think the DS1054Z and the DS1104Z share the same hardware and that, by using a software key the artificially limited bandwidth can be upgraded?
I understood TurboTom's comment as just stating that us DS1054Z owners are a greedy bunch. ;)
Buy 50 MHz, cheat your way into 100 MHz, then hope to get 150 MHz and beyond... 8)
Indeed. That is my biggest expectation for the MSO5000 is something proportionately for nothing :)The MSO5000 is frustrating. It's so close to absolutely crushing anything out there yet the slow UI and unsophisticated case design are letting it down. I have the feeling that the difference isn't even very significant in terms of NRE and manufacturing.
I wish they’d hurry up and fix the bugs
David -
your assumption regarding the input amplifier getting close to saturation at higher input levels (or encountering problems because of its limited slew rate) sounds reasonable, but it doesn't actually appear to be the case. I just re-checked the bandwidth in the high sensitivity range of my DS1000Z at a setting of 5mV/div with an input signal level of round about 40mVpp.
If your assumption would be correct, I'ld expect a noticably higher bandwidth than with the scope set at 330mV/div, just before the relay switches in the additional analog divider, and fed with an input signal of 1.5Vpp (that's the maximum my SDG6000X will provide with the additional 50 ohms terminator at up to 350MHz). Actually, the bandwidth even appears to be a little higher at the higher input level.
Continuing my test https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1109785/#msg1109785 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg1109785/#msg1109785) with the same source signal i.e. the 100MHz SDRAM clock of the STM32F769 discovery board, now testing with a 500MHz 8pF Tek probe, it turns out my lovely Rigol has over than 300MHz bandwith (1.3 ns rise time as seen) :)
Just to put some oil in the fire, here is the same signal, same Tek probe, but seen with 1.5GHz 8GS/s HP infinium. So compared to the rigol, we see a peak at the beginning of each pulse, where this peak is observed i.e. after the front. On rigol is at the end of the pulse - before the front. Any explanation? Bad interpolation?
Is using the window trigger the only way to get get a waveform across all the sample points? For some reason, I cannot move the trigger position to the left in Edge trigger mode.
Perhaps there was an update which allows the trigger position to be moved to the far left while in edge trigger mode? Weird.
Indeed. That is my biggest expectation for the MSO5000 is something proportionately for nothing :)The MSO5000 is frustrating. It's so close to absolutely crushing anything out there yet the slow UI and unsophisticated case design are letting it down. I have the feeling that the difference isn't even very significant in terms of NRE and manufacturing.
I wish they’d hurry up and fix the bugs
I have a MSO5000.Moving signals across the screen is very sluggish. That's not really acceptable in a device in this bracket.
I absolutely do not understand how it's UI is could be considered slow.
The Tektronix MSO4034B I have at work running the latest firmware, is far slower and crashes often when I do simple scope usage tasks like just changing the channel voltage scaling.
Moving signals across the screen is very sluggish. That's not really acceptable in a device in this bracket.
Feel free not to buy one.Please read my comment delfinom quoted.
You'll miss out on getting a four channel, 350MHz, 8GSamp/sec., 400Mb memory, 'scope for under $1000 though.
Your choice. :popcorn:
Is using the window trigger the only way to get get a waveform across all the sample points? For some reason, I cannot move the trigger position to the left in Edge trigger mode.
Perhaps there was an update which allows the trigger position to be moved to the far left while in edge trigger mode? Weird.
Hmm -- I may be misunderstanding the question? When you say "move the trigger to the left", you mean the left edge of the screen?
To my knowledge, this has always been possible with the DS1054Z, in any trigger mode, and it certainly is possible now. In fact, you can move the trigger point well beyond the left edge of the screen. The "delay" display in the upper right of the screen will then tell you the time difference between the trigger point and the time window visible on the screen.
For you, what happens when you rotate the "horizontal position" knob to the left?
If I turn the knob counterclockwise, the trigger position appear to move left (shown in attached picture), however the trigger position is still at time 0 seconds. So if I save and plot the data, the signal will begin around halfway into the signal array.
However if I use a window trigger (shown in attached picture) and move the time to to (Samples)/(Samplerate)/2,
or as shown in the picture (1200[points]/5e8[points/sec])/2 = 1.2e-6 seconds.
then when I save and plot the data, the sinewave starts at the beginning of the array.
The problem cannot be interpolation when there is nothing to interpolate. 1 GS/s on the Rigol is a point every nanosecond so unless the Rigol is mangling the original sample points, there should be no problem.
On age degradation the only thing that worries me is the crappy feet. They feel like they’re going to die first.
The problem cannot be interpolation when there is nothing to interpolate. 1 GS/s on the Rigol is a point every nanosecond so unless the Rigol is mangling the original sample points, there should be no problem.
There's often mentions around here that the rigol's displayed 'dots' are interpolated, I dunno meself.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-vs-siglent-sds1202x-e/msg2483973/#msg2483973 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1054z-vs-siglent-sds1202x-e/msg2483973/#msg2483973)
Just to put some oil in the fire, here is the same signal, same Tek probe, but seen with 1.5GHz 8GS/s HP infinium. So compared to the rigol, we see a peak at the beginning of each pulse, where this peak is observed i.e. after the front. On rigol is at the end of the pulse - before the front. Any explanation? Bad interpolation?
The problem cannot be interpolation when there is nothing to interpolate. 1 GS/s on the Rigol is a point every nanosecond so unless the Rigol is mangling the original sample points, there should be no problem.
Are there any sub-$500 oscilloscopes that you know of which DO have hard, plastic, tactile, satisfying-to-press buttons?Doubtful, since tactile buttons (in particular, the button caps themselves and the additional assembly cost) cost a lot more than rubber membrane buttons, so they’re kinda the first thing to go when cost-cutting...
Are there any sub-$500 oscilloscopes that you know of which DO have hard, plastic, tactile, satisfying-to-press buttons?Not all buttons need to be plastic nor do they want to be as it restricts the designers to not being able to use LED backlight to show certain modes are selected.
Are there any sub-$500 oscilloscopes that you know of which DO have hard, plastic, tactile, satisfying-to-press buttons?
Are there any sub-$500 oscilloscopes that you know of which DO have hard, plastic, tactile, satisfying-to-press buttons?18000 USD Keysight MSOX3104T has rubber keypad...
$100k comms test sets have rubber keypads. There no longer seem to be any other types used in new equipment.Are there any sub-$500 oscilloscopes that you know of which DO have hard, plastic, tactile, satisfying-to-press buttons?18000 USD Keysight MSOX3104T has rubber keypad...
Of course you can make plastic buttons that illuminate. It just pushes the cost even higher! :PAre there any sub-$500 oscilloscopes that you know of which DO have hard, plastic, tactile, satisfying-to-press buttons?Not all buttons need to be plastic nor do they want to be as it restricts the designers to not being able to use LED backlight to show certain modes are selected.
Hi All,
Not sure is this is the best place to post this but, here goes.
I wanted let you guys know that I have made a Bode Plotter for the DS-1000Z scopes.
I knew that the DS1054Z could not create Bode plots, but that did not stop me wanting to create one.
So I started searching for viable solutions.
I first found Dave's YouTube clip showing a way you can sort of do it, but not quite.
See here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMH2hGvqhlE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMH2hGvqhlE)
So I continued to search for more inspiration.
I then came across this python script https://github.com/jbtronics/DS1054_BodePlotter (https://github.com/jbtronics/DS1054_BodePlotter)
Which shows a DS1054z Scope connected to a JDS6600 AWG.
So I thought maybe I can make my own. So I got to work writing my own Python script and a week or two later I finished it.
I works with a DS1000Z Series Scope connected to a DG4000 Series AWG.
I think the code could be easily modified to work with pretty much any AWG that has a LAN connection and supports scripting commands.
Here are some screen shots of a basic low pass filter.
I was blown away by the accuracy.
Hope you guy's like it.
the valuesI don't know how to move values yet. I tried to move the panel down, but then the trigger value is at the wrong level in relation to other values.
but they say that with the latest version of the firmware, that error also appears. What is the last one really? v00.04.04.04.03 30/05/2019 this does not correct the error
serif fontsI inspected all 6 fonts in guiResData.hex, they are non-serif, so to change serif fonts we need find it in SparrowAPP.out. No idea how to do that.
You need to learn to use triggering.
You can trigger on specific UART characters in boot sequence..
i have a device which has an uart interface. I am capturing the boot log using a ds1054z, i see the signal on the scope and want to decode it.
[...] is there a way to save the captured signal exactly as it was read and decode it later?
i have a device which has an uart interface. I am capturing the boot log using a ds1054z, i see the signal on the scope and want to decode it.
[...] is there a way to save the captured signal exactly as it was read and decode it later?
Are you sure you want to do this via the Rigol at all? If you need to analyze a larger chunk of serial data, and its timing relative to other output signals is not relevant, I would strongly recommend that you read it into a PC directly (via a serial-to-USB interface and a terminal program). Much easier to search or filter the data on the PC screen.
Navigational WarningThought the Chinese made a general update for the Z, E series, and it turned out Z-E is a separate model and broke its Rigol DS1054Z. The oscilloscope had firmware 00.04.04.04.03, confusing the update file, instead of DS1000Z downloaded DS1000Z-E versions 00.06.02.00 01 from here https://www.rigolna.com/firmware/. (https://www.rigolna.com/firmware/.) The set received an update, rebooted and as a result works, but there are no two channels, channels 1 and 2 work. Channels 3 and 4 are not enabled. As I realized - poured firmware for DS1202Z-E. Tried to upgrade with the 00.04.04.04.03 version, but the set does not see the update... Is it possible to restore DS1054Z?
Don't flash the Z-E firmware in the old DS1000Z scope!
Because it seems Rigol made an error and it's possible to flash the 1st released version in the older machine, limiting it to 2 channels.
Is it possible to restore DS1054Z?
I managed to restore the full functioning of the oscillograph in my own way, by substituting, but now I will look at your method. Now I'm not afraid to kill the machine - everything is easily restored.Is it possible to restore DS1054Z?
I think this file should solve your problem.
(It should have been Rigol to solve it...)
Report if it is ok as I don't touch this stuff for many moons.
The changes you made to the firmware file interest me.
wrote your file to USB, but the oscillograph says "USB device detected" and does not see the update. Your way didn't work. I replaced the version text in the original firmware file and changed the firmware name, only then the oscillograph restored its functionality with 4 channels. When I sewed the device with the Z-E version, there was a 2ns scan, we need to try to add this scan to the original firmware.The changes you made to the firmware file interest me.
Here. (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-dsxxxx-gel-firmware-file-format/msg1479419/#msg1479419)
Long ago this stopped from being rocket science...
Supposedly you can flash my crafted FW anytime as it will flash the 00.04.04.04.03 stock file over the DS Z-E 00.06.02.00.01.
[...] we need to try to add this scan to the original firmware.
wrote your file to USB, but the oscillograph says "USB device detected" and does not see the update. Your way didn't work.
Of course I unpacked, and how else I made updates with similar files. I placed this file in a DS1000ZUpdate.GEL USB stick root. The bootloader checks the update version, which is located at 10h in the firmware file, and the version is lower than the one that is already firmware ignores. I changed the entry 00.04.04.04.03 to 00.06.02.00.01, that is, to the one that was already in the memory of the oscillograph, but he again did not accept it. I had to change the name of the firmware from DS1000ZUpdate.GEL to DS1000Z-EUpdate.GEL, only after that the oscillograph adopted the update. All 4 channels are fully operational.wrote your file to USB, but the oscillograph says "USB device detected" and does not see the update. Your way didn't work.
Did you unzip it? :-//
I changed the entry 00.04.04.04.03 to 00.06.02.00.01, that is, to the one that was already in the memory of the oscillograph, but he again did not accept it. I had to change the name of the firmware from DS1000ZUpdate.GEL to DS1000Z-EUpdate.GEL, only after that the oscillograph adopted the update. All 4 channels are fully operational.
Thank you.And I will completely love when I manage to add a 2ns scanthe valuesI don't know how to move values yet. I tried to move the panel down, but then the trigger value is at the wrong level in relation to other values.
I added some changes and edited previous post. Now I love my ds1054z.
I made changes to the original firmware file 00.04.04.04.03 before you sent me your file.I changed the entry 00.04.04.04.03 to 00.06.02.00.01, that is, to the one that was already in the memory of the oscillograph, but he again did not accept it. I had to change the name of the firmware from DS1000ZUpdate.GEL to DS1000Z-EUpdate.GEL, only after that the oscillograph adopted the update. All 4 channels are fully operational.
Did you do these changes in a stock FW or in my FW?
I made changes to the original firmware file 00.04.04.04.03 before you sent me your file.
Navigational WarningDid you kill your oscillograph with a Z-E firmware, too?
Don't flash the Z-E firmware in the old DS1000Z scope!
Because it seems Rigol made an error and it's possible to flash the 1st released version in the older machine, limiting it to 2 channels.
Navigational WarningDid you kill your oscillograph with a Z-E firmware, too?
Don't flash the Z-E firmware in the old DS1000Z scope!
Because it seems Rigol made an error and it's possible to flash the 1st released version in the older machine, limiting it to 2 channels.
I agree, I'm just lucky ;DI made changes to the original firmware file 00.04.04.04.03 before you sent me your file.
So that means Rigol disabled the footer verification of the header's version # in the Z-E! :palm:
Everyone can downgrade a Z-E just by changing the version # in the file header. Let's see for how long...
is there a way to save the captured signal exactly as it was read and decode it later? if no, how can i decode on the fly only a particular time interval of the uart output? thanks in advance
Firmware is 00.04.04.04.03 with no modifications to the binaries -- just GUI resources and logo.Just stumbled upon this, and saw no feedback. A shame, because I really like it. Good work.
....
Feedback is welcome; for any issues, please, try to include screenshots and model for me to understand how the things are laid out at your device.
Does anyone know of a screen replacement that works with this oscilloscope? (more exactly, the 1104z, but that one doesn't seem to have a thread) i'm asking since mine is currently being shipped, not in the original packaging, and post office people here are awful at handling things, so it may arrive broken and i'd like to be prepared if that happens.Any update? Did it arrive OK?
Thank you!
Does anyone know of a screen replacement that works with this oscilloscope? (more exactly, the 1104z, but that one doesn't seem to have a thread) i'm asking since mine is currently being shipped, not in the original packaging, and post office people here are awful at handling things, so it may arrive broken and i'd like to be prepared if that happens.Any update? Did it arrive OK?
Thank you!
IIRC from when I took mine apart to put in a quieter fan and replace the rotary encoder with one with detents, the LCD actually has a fairly thick plastic panel over it. I suspect they can take a bit of abuse, compared to a “naked” TFT like in non-touchscreen laptops, etc.
Is possible to restore the original firmware for DS1054Z?
I think this solves the problem.
Unfortunately, unchanged. The update attempt ends with a mistake: "Update was failured"
There is a firmware version on the next photo.
:( Love that msg. Let me have another look.
Try this one.
Is this the same problem as discussed here?
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/error-updating-rigol-ds1054z/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/repair/error-updating-rigol-ds1054z/)
I think the solution then was something like this file attached. Flash it over a DS1kZ with wrong DS1kZ-E FW.
Again the same error.
I think it's a waste of time for that.
Thank you tv84 for your help. Maybe in the future someone will find a solution. And now ... the two channels are worse than four but better than nothing ;-)
We are missing a step. According to sebastos08's msg in that thread, BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING, you have to flash the 00.06.02.00.01 (here (https://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/ct/1579/p-00ac/Bct/-/-/ct67_0/1/d?sid=TV2%3AQ2jKaGpUj)).
I think only after that you can flash my previous file.
Try and report.
Sounds like a crash and watchdog reboot. Possibly RAM/CPU issue.Also could be a brownout detection and reset by power monitor because of some of the power buses having sags or increased ripple, or some other combination of problems on power buses. What sucks is that you need a scope to troubleshoot that ....
Also could be a brownout detection and reset by power monitor because of some of the power buses having sags or increased ripple, or some other combination of problems on power buses. What sucks is that you need a scope to troubleshoot that ....
Hi! since i've had this oscilloscope, it ocasionally reboots itself seemingly at random.
Sounds like a crash and watchdog reboot. Possibly RAM/CPU issue.
Also could be a brownout detection and reset by power monitor because of some of the power buses having sags or increased ripple, or some other combination of problems on power buses. What sucks is that you need a scope to troubleshoot that ....
You could use a multimeter to check the power supply voltages inside the 'scope to make sure they're OK.
This sort of stuff is why I’d rather pay 2x as much for a similar spec Keysight.
Issue is a similar spec Keysight is 4x as much >:(
This sort of stuff is why I’d rather pay 2x as much for a similar spec Keysight.
This sort of stuff is why I’d rather pay 2x as much for a similar spec Keysight.
Issue is a similar spec Keysight is 4x as much >:(
This sort of stuff is why I’d rather pay 2x as much for a similar spec Keysight.
I had a couple of spontaneous reboots when I had a DS1054Z so perhaps it’s semi normal crashing (crappy software triggering the WDT). If it’s doing it constantly though I’d be suspicious.
I had a couple of spontaneous reboots when I had a DS1054Z so perhaps it’s semi normal crashing (crappy software triggering the WDT). If it’s doing it constantly though I’d be suspicious.
Weird that nobody else's DS1054Z is rebooting from that exact same software, don't you think?
1. Lets propose 100% of devices crash occasionally.
2. 10% of people report that, which is a realistic figure.
1. Lets propose 100% of devices crash occasionally.
2. 10% of people report that, which is a realistic figure.
This thread alone has 4500 posts. How many of them report on spontaneous crashes of the DS1000Z?
If you have a problem with 20% of your product base crashing, then that rounds down to very little data other than usually one pissed off and fuming customer who will tear you a new asshole the moment you say "weird that nobody else's DS1054Z is rebooting from that exact same software, don't you think?
[Support product model] All MSO/DS1000Z series oscilloscopes
【Latest revision time】 2021/06/01
[Contents of this update]
v00.04.05.01.00 2021/06/01
-Modify the vertical display
[History version description]
v00.04.05.00.00 2020/12/29
-Add and modify some measurement functions
-Math problem modification
-Modify some SCPI command errors
-Trigger problem fix
v00.04.04.04.03 2019/05/30
-Solve the problem of waveform display error during playback
v00.04.04.04.02 2019/02/26
-Update encoder driver
v00.04.04.03.05 2018/04/28
-Solve LXI-Web login failure
-The average value of the DC signal is measured incorrectly
-In some cases, the machine starts abnormally
-Information display related issues
the traces seems thicker to me, and brighter, much brighter. It's a sunny summer day outside but still had to dial down the intensity. :-//
Anybody else seeing thicker and brighter traces with the latest firmware?
Not sure yet, but I'll look for some older screen captures from former projects, redo the same settings and capture the same waveforms again, to compare the old and new captures on the PC. Probably not gonna do this today, but if I'll do it sometimes in the weekend, I'll post here the results, either the same or not the same.
So far I've tested the jitter/phase noise (because the change log is mentioning something about "trigger problem fix").
- jitter/phase noise seems about the same, maybe smaller than I measured a couple of years ago :-+
- I see some strange trace wiggling on the smallest time base and strong clean signal, when I synchronize from the signal generator :--
I don't recall seeing that before. Again, need to find some old screen captures made in similar conditions for a fair comparison. Not sure if I have any, but the wiggling around the trigger point goes away when the sampling rate goes to 1GSa/s (by disabling all channels except the first)
By wiggling I mean the trace thickens and widens before and after the trigger point, in an X shape. Need to measure more careful and find some older captures before calling that a bug. Will add some screen captures later.
I'm not sure if the upgrade was justified for me, because it was working just fine before the upgrade, but now I'm not so sure and need to spend time for extra checking to decide if it's just an illusion or it really is worst than before. :-\
...I noticed a new Rigol logo (blue) on the DS1054Z in De-Os his post...
It won't allow me to reinstall an older firmware, is there a way to do it? :-//
It won't allow me to reinstall an older firmware, is there a way to do it? :-//
To downgrade do the following:
-Copy the .GEL file with the firmware version you want to a USB stick that you know is compatible with the DS1000Z series.
-With the scope powered OFF plug the USB stick into the scope.
-Power the scope on.
-When the splash screen with “Rigol” appears you should hear a quick beep which indicates it sees a USB device.
-As soon as you hear the beep press the “Help” button 3 times quickly.
-In a few seconds you should see the channel 1 LED blinking - this indicates it is flashing the firmware.
-Once done flashing the scope will boot as normal and tell you it found a firmware update with the same version it just flashed, you can press cancel.
-You can then verify the new detailed version info by pressing “menu menu force menu” quickly, then pressing “utility”,“system”, “system info”.
-I'd reboot at this point before using the scope just for good measure.
It won't allow me to reinstall an older firmware, is there a way to do it? :-//
Try this:QuoteTo downgrade do the following:
-Copy the .GEL file with the firmware version you want to a USB stick that you know is compatible with the DS1000Z series.
[...]
You gave only an excerpt from the first post of an earlier thread on this forum. But the subsequent discussion in that thread indicates that this downgrading method only works with very early bootloaders: https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-firmware-downgrade-*is*-possible-and-here-is-how/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-firmware-downgrade-*is*-possible-and-here-is-how/)
So unless Adrian's scope is a very early version, I don't think this will work for him.
Did the upgrade, then recalibrate. The previous version was
00.04.04.SP3, now it's
00.04.05.SP1
Couldn't identify any visible changes in the math or measurement functions.
Still works just like before the upgrade, won't bother trying to downgrade it back, but the traces seems thicker to me, and brighter, much brighter. It's a sunny summer day outside but still had to dial down the intensity. :-//
Anybody else seeing thicker and brighter traces with the latest firmware?
Is there any good list of what the benefits, feature additions, and feature removals / breaking changes have come with the various
specific firmware revisions, bootloader revisions, hardware revisions, et. al.?
I've got a fairly old model which is running whatever its original firmware / bootloader was and I'm sure there may have been some beneficial
changes but I've heard about things getting broken / worse / limited, too, by firmware "upgrades".
So I'm in a similar position as others have commented here lately: So FW vx.y is available along with many others -- the question : SHOULD (and can) I upgrade, and to which version, and why / at what cost & risk?
I've heard about things getting broken / worse / limited, too, by firmware "upgrades".
To downgrade do the following:[/quote]
-Copy the .GEL file with the firmware version you want to a USB stick that you know is compatible with the DS1000Z series.
-With the scope powered OFF plug the USB stick into the scope.
-Power the scope on.
-When the splash screen with “Rigol” appears you should hear a quick beep which indicates it sees a USB device.
-As soon as you hear the beep press the “Help” button 3 times quickly.
-In a few seconds you should see the channel 1 LED blinking - this indicates it is flashing the firmware.
-Once done flashing the scope will boot as normal and tell you it found a firmware update with the same version it just flashed, you can press cancel.
-You can then verify the new detailed version info by pressing “menu menu force menu” quickly, then pressing “utility”,“system”, “system info”.
-I'd reboot at this point before using the scope just for good measure.
Try this:QuoteTo downgrade do the following:
-Copy the .GEL file with the firmware version you want to a USB stick that you know is compatible with the DS1000Z series.
-With the scope powered OFF plug the USB stick into the scope.
-Power the scope on.
-When the splash screen with “Rigol” appears you should hear a quick beep which indicates it sees a USB device.
-As soon as you hear the beep press the “Help” button 3 times quickly.
-In a few seconds you should see the channel 1 LED blinking - this indicates it is flashing the firmware.
-Once done flashing the scope will boot as normal and tell you it found a firmware update with the same version it just flashed, you can press cancel.
-You can then verify the new detailed version info by pressing “menu menu force menu” quickly, then pressing “utility”,“system”, “system info”.
-I'd reboot at this point before using the scope just for good measure.
After trying 1000 times I do not know what happened, today the first attempt it worked, I tried with almost all the firmware versions and it did not work, until a revision that corrects the problem of the 24 Mbit of depth and the measurement does not come out, I do not return to install . :scared: :scared:
(https://i.ibb.co/vxy3X3h/DS1-Z-Quick-Print1.png) (https://ibb.co/27VvZvS)
in spanish
Despues de intentarlo 1000 veces no se que paso, hoy al primer intento funciono, probe con casi todas las versiones de firmware y no funcionaba, hasta que no salga un revision que corrija el problema de los 24 Mbit de profundidad y la medicion, no vuelvo una instalación
I bought my DS1074Z back in 2014 and never had any problems upgrading the firmware. I'm currently running 00.04.04.04.03Hi! I see your system info shows boot, firmware, CPLD, Build date, and startup counter. Is there a way to enable that information? or is that linked to the model? in mine i can only see manufacturer, model, SN, software version and board version. My software version says 00.04.04.SP4 I installed that version a few months ago, this year, when it was the latest version available. My board version is also 0.1.1 so i think it's not a hardware thing that i can't see the other information? Thank you!
The most important upgrade that I can think of is the phase-lock-loop tuning to fix the jitter problem.
Dave did a couple videos on it.
I have never upgraded the bootloader.
Download the 00.04.04.04.03 release (https://www.rigolna.com/firmware/), unzip it onto a thumb drive that you know works with the scope and install.
The zip file also has the install instructions and release notes.
This version has been out for a long time and there doesn't appear to be any reasons not to install it.
Then you can decide if you want the new version. (Personally, I'm going to wait until it hits the north america site.)
As you have probably read, it is next to impossible to revert to an earlier version.
I see your system info shows boot, firmware, CPLD, Build date, and startup counter. Is there a way to enable that information?
I see your system info shows boot, firmware, CPLD, Build date, and startup counter. Is there a way to enable that information?
Yes, as written above:
- quickly press buttons MENU -> MENU -> FORCE -> MENU on "TRIGGER" buttons group
- then go to info panel by pressing buttons UTILITY -> SYSTEM -> SYSTEM INFO in the "MENU" buttons group
Try this:QuoteTo downgrade do the following:
-Copy the .GEL file with the firmware version you want to a USB stick that you know is compatible with the DS1000Z series.
-With the scope powered OFF plug the USB stick into the scope.
-Power the scope on.
-When the splash screen with “Rigol” appears you should hear a quick beep which indicates it sees a USB device.
-As soon as you hear the beep press the “Help” button 3 times quickly.
-In a few seconds you should see the channel 1 LED blinking - this indicates it is flashing the firmware.
-Once done flashing the scope will boot as normal and tell you it found a firmware update with the same version it just flashed, you can press cancel.
-You can then verify the new detailed version info by pressing “menu menu force menu” quickly, then pressing “utility”,“system”, “system info”.
-I'd reboot at this point before using the scope just for good measure.
After trying 1000 times I do not know what happened, today the first attempt it worked, I tried with almost all the firmware versions and it did not work, until a revision that corrects the problem of the 24 Mbit of depth and the measurement does not come out, I do not return to install . :scared: :scared:
...
All of them, the 185 x 25 posts each?!? :D
Thank you very much! Could you please link the post where they mention that? I've read pretty much the entire thread but i think i've missed it :palm: Thanks again! :)
# identify your USB drive, mine was /dev/sde
lsblk
# cd to the directory where the Rigol sign disk was unpacked, then dd it to /dev/sde
sudo dd if=card_FAT32_w_SIGN_manually_added_103E00 of=/dev/sde
# ignore any dd warnings/errors caused by any disk size mismatch
# but force a physical write on the USB before ejecting/unmounting/unplugging it
sync
# now plug the USB disk again into PC, copy any DS1000ZUpdate.GEL firmware
# then unplug from the PC and plug the USB disk into oscilloscope
# the oscilloscope should detect the USB disk and the firmware,
# and pop a message asking if OK/Cancel to upgrade
RoGeorge, probaste si se corrigio el problema dela sincronización con capturas a 24 megabits, porque en mis pruebas no!
https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/517690/rigol-ds1074-oscilloscope-shows-very-wrong-timing
For the Windows guys, I can confirm that the key disk can be created using Win32DiskImager and RoGeorge's file. I can upgrade and downgrade as I want. However, I don't get the extra menus. Do I have to press any buttons or it just shows up at drive insertion?
Thanks RoGeorge!
The service menus are reachable only while the the USB drive with 'Rigol sign disk' is inserted. You need to navigate to those service menus by pressing buttons. For Example:
- press 'Storage' -> 'DiskManage' and you should see an extra disk called "Local SYS". Rotate the "Intensity" knob to select the SYS disk, then press the 'Intensity' knob to see the file names. "Local SYS" disk and files are not visible without a plugged USB with "Rigol sign disk".
- press 'Utility' -> 'Down arrow to move the dot to the second Utilities page" -> "TestModel", and it will show some service menus. "TestModel" menu is not visible without a plugged USB with "Rigol sign disk".
Always active persistence in Rigol DSOs does not cause problems / inconveniences?
scope = icdevice('rigol_IVI.mdd', 'Rigol')
connect(scope)
%%%% Channel 1 %%%%
Range = 1;
Offset = 0.0;
Coupling = 0;
Enabled = true;
Probe_attenuation = 1;
invoke(scope.Configurationchannel,'configurechannel',"CHAN1",Range,Offset,Coupling,Probe_attenuation,Enabled)
Input_impedance = 1000000
Max_frequency_hertz = 50000000
invoke(scope.Configurationchannel,'configurechancharacteristics',"CHAN1",Input_impedance,Max_frequency_hertz)
%%%% Channel 2 %%%%
Range = 1;
Offset = 0.0;
Coupling = 0;
Enabled = true;
Probe_attenuation = 1;
invoke(scope.Configurationchannel,'configurechannel',"CHAN2",Range,Offset,Coupling,Probe_attenuation,Enabled)
Input_impedance = 1000000
Max_frequency_hertz = 50000000
invoke(scope.Configurationchannel,'configurechancharacteristics',"CHAN2",Input_impedance,Max_frequency_hertz)
%%%% Acq settings %%%%
Acquisition_type = 0;
invoke(scope.Configurationacquisition,'configureacquisitiontype',Acquisition_type)
Time_per_record_s = 0.0008
Minimum_record_len = 5000
Acquisition_start = 0
% getting "invalid input" on oscilloscope screen on this invoke if Minimum_record_len > 1200
invoke(scope.Configurationacquisition,'configureacquisitionrecord',Time_per_record_s, Minimum_record_len, Acquisition_start)
%%%% Trigger %%%%
Trigger_type = 1
Trigger_holdoff_s = 0
Trigger_coupling = 1
invoke(scope.Configurationtriggerbaseconfigure,'configuretrigger',Trigger_type,Trigger_holdoff_s)
invoke(scope.Configurationtriggerbaseconfigure,'configuretriggercoupling',Trigger_coupling)
Trigger_source = 'CHAN2'
Trigger_lvl_v = 0.05
Trigger_slope = 1 % positive
invoke(scope.Configurationtriggeredgetrigger,'configureedgetriggersource',Trigger_source,Trigger_lvl_v,Trigger_slope)
%%%% acquisition %%%%
waveform_len = invoke(scope.Configurationconfigurationinformation, 'actualrecordlength')
waveform_array = zeros(waveform_len, 1);
% getting the matlab error here
[waveform_array, points, x0, dx] = invoke(scope.Waveformacquisition, 'readwaveform', 'CHAN1', waveform_len, 10000000, waveform_array)
plot(waveform_array)
disconnect(scope);
delete(scope);
clear scope;
Here.Thank you. Already upgraded with attached file. Don't see any difference. Maybe some minor fixes were done.
【This update】
v00.04.05.02.00 2021/07/24
- new version update
Support product models] All MSO/DS1000Z series oscilloscopes
【Latest revision time】 2021/07/24
[Contents of this update]
v00.04.05.02.00 2021/07/24
- new version update
[History version description]
v00.04.05.01.00 2021/06/01
-Modify the vertical display
v00.04.05.00.00 2020/12/29
-Add and modify some measurement functions
-Math problem modification
-Modify some SCPI command errors
-Trigger problem fix
the truth this time I do not feel like taking risks !!! :-// of not being able to reinstall a previous version as I almost happened with the previous one :phew:
tested if the synchronization problem with captures at 24 megabits was correctedNope, same problem.
I have just changed Fan to Gelid Silent 5 Fan. What a difference. It is almost silent now.
If someone has still a factory fan it is really worth doing modifications.
I have just changed Fan to Gelid Silent 5 Fan. What a difference. It is almost silent now.
If someone has still a factory fan it is really worth doing modifications.
Yep. The fan mod is definitely worth doing!
The fan only cools the PSU or does it cool the board too?
What about temperatures?
We're not removing the fan or blocking it, just putting in a different one.
I only raised the objection because this one sentence (someone has exchanged the fan and not noticed that this did not ran ...)
someone could suggest someone that it could go without throughput.
Changes log inside the firmware zip translates "new version update" (Google translate): :-//Code: [Select]Support product models] All MSO/DS1000Z series oscilloscopes
【Latest revision time】 2021/07/24
[Contents of this update]
v00.04.05.02.00 2021/07/24
- new version update
Maybe someone will remind me how to view the extended system information, updated the firmware and could not see it. Thanks.
Version: 00.04.05.02.02 Date: 2021-09-22
1. Solve the problem of abnormal display when measuring overshoot in some cases
2. The change description table of the new version is at the front.
Version: 00.04.05.02.01 Date: 2021-08-30
1. Add SCPI command to query all product information and determine whether to enter engineering mode
2. Add SCPI command to read self-calibration and low-frequency compensation status
Version: 00.04.05.02.00 Date: 2021-07-24
1. Compatible with Lx25, Lx45 logic chip
2. Open deep storage, advanced triggering, decoding, waveform recording option
Version: 00.04.05.01.00 Date: 2021-06-01
1. Solve the problem that the interface display function is unavailable after default
Version:00.04.05.00.00 Date:2020-12-29
1. Solve the problem of loading the old version ref file, causing the device to hang up M
2. Modify the tracking cursor. When a is out of the screen, modify the value of B and affect the value of A M
3. In the roll mode, the tracking cursor does not move with the waveform after stop M
4. SCPI sends the amplitude parameter of DG module 4.020vpp, and the return value is 4.019 M
5. Revision: FUNC:WREP:FMAX? Command is used to query the current maximum number of playable frames M
6. Modify the problem that trigger Hold off is not applied when the trigger type without triggering Hold off function is switched back to the trigger type with triggering Hold off function M
7. :CURSor:MANual:SOURce set and query command add off parameter to set the source to none M
8. Modify the average mode, Pass fail test channel confusion problem M
9. Modify the maximum gear limit of exp operation to 1gv M
10. When math is closed, math's automatic gear is opened, vertical gear is modified, and automatic gear is updated M
11. Modify the problem of rising edge delay measurement and cursor position deviation in automatic cursor mode M
12. Modify the error of the maximum time measurement value in the automatic cursor mode M
13. Modify the single trigger mode, the last value restart, no waveform trigger problem M
14. Modify the problem of amplitude error when saving the CSV file with channel offset M
15. Modify SPI timeout trigger, when the data bit is less than 8, all bit function settings are unsuccessful M
16. Limit the upper and lower limit of trigger level to ± 5 * vertical gear - vertical offset M
17. Modify XY mode, the full screen and half screen frequently switch, leading to the problem of splash screen M
18. Revision: WAV:XOR? Return value error M
19. Revision: WAV:PRE? Partial return value problem M
20. Modify the problem that the gear is still adjustable when the channel is closed M
21. Modify the welcome page, and the web identification indicator button will not jump M
22. Modify after opening LXI, modify the host name, and the instrument crashes M
23. Fix GPIB communication failure M
24. Add: STOR:IMAGe [:STARt] <file_ Spec > command (same as ds2000), take a screenshot, and save the picture to the path specified in the parameter E
25. Add different edge delay measurement function between channels E
26. Fix LXI socket communication hang up problem M
27. GD spiflash and nandflash are compatible M
28. Factory boot compatible with Gd spiflash and nandflash M
Version:00.04.04.03.02 Date:2017-2-6
1. Fixed the period measure value is error while system is average acquire mode and 12K pts memdepth; M
2. Fixed the phase linear offset of the Filter operation results; M
3. Fixed the error of Math waveform,while system is average acquire mode and horizontal time bass is 500ms ; M
4. Fixed the location error of trigger level,when pressing the Auto button; M
5. Fixed the waveform is error while horizontal time bass is 100ms and 12M pts memdepth,when display in the “X-Y” horizontal mode; M
6. Fixed the overlap error of memory waveform,when the Scope read memory waveform data; M
7. Fixed the problem of save memory data was wrong when the channel invert was opened; M
8. Fixed the event table can’t close while it is openning and Loading waveform file M
9. Fixed the not measured parameters are still displaying ,when the font size after modified M
10. Fixed the return value parameter of XOR can’t refresh correctly whlie Changed the horizontal offset M
11. Fixed the problem of the reference wave of the digital channels position is error; M
12. Fixed the frequency response curve of Digital filter is error; M
13. Fixed the measure error of average parameter when the measured signal is a DC signal; M
Version:00.04.04.03.00 Date:2016-12-20
1. Changed the Prompting English information of LA channel, when closed the button of D7–D0; M
2. Fixed the rules of Pass/Fail created again,when the main time base changed; M
3. Fixed the problem of the position of big grids of main time base is error ,when split display in the “X-Y” horizontal mode ; M
4. Modified a low position of trigger label to the all-measurement window; M
5. Fixed the offset error of memory waveform,when the Scope read memory waveform data; M
6. Fixed the bug of not downloading waveform to signal source; M
7. Fixed the problem of save memory data was wrong when the channel invert was opened; M
8. Fixed the problem of the reference wave of the digital channels position is error while save the reference wave of FFT channel; M
9. Fixed the problem of power off, when horizontal delay is on and opening the waveform recorded ; M
10. Fixed the problem of unable to waveform recording,when main time bass is 100ms and Zoom time base is 100ms; M
11. Translated some traditional Chinese and Korean menus ; M
Version:00.04.04.02.00 Date:2016-10-21
1. The effective value measurement result is disturbed M
2. Self-calibration modification and perfect M
3. Improved LXI, affecting web pages, LAN communication and other related issues M
4. Turn off the low-version boot machine after upgrading, increase the CPU clock M in the APP
Version:00.04.04.01.01 Date:2016-08-23
1. Fixed the Math status of shelter from Measure M
Version:00.04.04.01.00 Date:2016-08-19
1. Supperted the multi-interface of LXI M
2. Fixed the bugs about measure M
Version:00.04.04.00.05 Date:2016-05-30
1. Fixed the bug of not stopping the DSO when Pass/Fail checked failure M
Version:00.04.04.00.04 Date:2016-05-24
1. The menu of decoder can’t refresh correctly when changing the source M
Version:00.04.04.00.03 Date:2016-05-06
1. Fixed the problem of wave and the label of position is error when full display in the “X-Y” horizontal mode; M
2. Fixed the problem of the number of grids of main timebase is error when split display in the “X-Y” horizontal mode; M
3. Fixed the problem of the first frame of record data is error when horizontal delay is on; M
4. Fixed the problem of the label of logic channel is not show when horizontal delay is on; M
5. Fixed the problem of the range of manual cursor is not updated when horizontal delay is on; M
6. Fixed the problem of the line of trigger level disappeared when moved the trigger level to the bottom of screen and horizontal delay was on; M
7. Fixed the problem of the warning tone sounded randomly while the Pass/Fail function wss failure; M
Version:00.04.04.00.00 Date:2016-04-14
1. Increase the function of split display wave in the “X-Y” horizontal mode; E
2. Increase the function of which can use the file name that the user last used in storage module; E
3. Fixed the period measure value is error while system is average acquire mode and 12K pts memdepth; M
4. Fixed the problem of the Math measure items unit is error; M
5. Fixed the problem of the system state is error while undo the “Auto” function; M
6. Fixed the problem of the data type of RS232 decoder event table is error; M
7. Fixed the problem of the system trigger state is error while load the setup file of saved in Single mode; M
8. Fixed the problem of the horizontal offset is error while undo the “Auto” function in system setup of timescale greater or equal to 200ms and horizontal offset greater than 1s; M
9. Fixed the problem of the reference wave of the analog channels position is error while save the reference wave of FFT channel; M
10. Fixed the problem of the slope trigger low level can not be adjusted while the input signal has offset component; M
11. Fixed the problem of the low level of the pulse trigger can not be seted while use the remote command; M
12. Fixed the problem of the setup file can not be loaded by PC software; M
13. Fixed the problem of the decoder can be opened by used the remoted command while the system has not decoder option; M
14. Fixed the problem of the measure item of the pulse counter was wrong; M
15. Fixed the problem of draw cursor position was delayed when adjust the cursor position; M
16. Fixed the problem of save memory data was wrong when the channel invert was opened; M
17. Fixed the problem of read the wave data of memory was wrong when channel 1 and chanel 2 was opened in “Single” mode; M
Version:00.04.03.02.03 Date:2015-09-11
18. Fixed the bug of the trigger option be installed while only the decoder option be installed. M
Version:00.04.03.02.02 Date:2015-09-07
1. Fixed the bug of the REF source can not select the open channels. M
2. Fixed the bug of the function of storage can not store the waveform while analog channel and logic channel are open and the memory depth is 12Mpts. M
3. Fixed the bug of the system can not use the function of Single while the system stoped and trigged. M
Question is... will it break the Riglol license(s)?
Question is... will it break the Riglol license(s)?
That question must have been asked and answered dozens of times in this thread. And it gets re-asked for every new firmware update, it seems.
From the scope firmware's perspective, "Riglol licenses" are the same as the officially bought upgrades -- exactly the same license codes. How would Rigol ever be able to cancel those licenses?
The only way would be to introduce a new licensing scheme and issue new keys to all customers who have bought licenses officially. Fat chance that they have separate records on all those customers around the world, over the past 7 (?) years... No, I am quite confident that Rigol will keep the original licensing scheme for the lifetime of this scope series.
The licenses remain valid over firmware upgrades, and the key was cracked, not stolen or leaked. Pleas don't argue based on assumptions only.
Anybody have a screen capture to attach here with the new Rigol logo in blue, please?
After upgrade and a full power off/reboot; it was acting very strange. I ended up doing a full recalibrate:
- Auto mode would never set positions or scale right for either vertical or or horizontal
- Auto mode kept kicking CH2 on even without a probe attached and then using that to base scaling on
I gave up early on in figuring out what was messed up, it was easier to kick off recalibrate and walk away for half an hour instead. It's back to working fine.
This documentation is designed to provide guidance to customers on how to
upgrade the MSO/DS1000Z series digital oscilloscope to the version in the
"DS1000Z(ARM)update.rar" file.
The applicable models include DS1XX4Z, DS1XX4Z Plus, DS1XX4Z-S Plus,
MSO1XX4Z and MSO1XX4Z-S.
New versions of firmware are available at the following website.
http://int.rigol.com/Support/SoftDownload/3
[Notices]
- Before upgrading, please carefully refer to the
"MSO_DS1000Z Release Notes.txt" file to obtain the updated information of
the firmware version.
- Please make sure your USB disk can be read correctly. MSO/DS1000Z series
is required to use a USB Flash drive disk with FAT32 format.
- During the upgrade process, please do not cut off power and pull out the
USB disk, otherwise the instrument will fail to work normally.
- MSO/DS1000Z series digital oscilloscope does not support the downgrading
operations.
[Upgrading Procedures]
1. Copy the upgrade file DS1000ZUpdate.GEL to the root directory of the USB
disk.
2. Keep the instrument in the power-on state, then insert the USB disk into
the USB HOST interface (next to the Power key).
3. A prompt message is automatically displayed on the interface, reminding
you that an upgrade file has been detected and ask you whether to upgrade
it. You can click Ok to start to upgrade.
4. During the upgrade, the instrument interface will display the current
upgrade progress.
5. When the interface displays "Upgrade finished!", restart the instrument.
6. Check whether the firmware version number has been updated
(press Utility -> System -> System Info).
7. After upgrading has been completed, perform the self-calibration
operation. Make sure that the instrument has been warmed up or has been
operating for more than 30 minutes before the self-calibration.
a. Disconnect all input channels;
b. Press Utility -> Self-Cal, then click Start to perform the
self-calibration.
c. It takes about 30 minutes to perform the self-calibration.
d. After the calibration has been completed, a prompt message will be
displayed on the interface. Then, restart the instrument.
[Troubleshooting]
- If the instrument failed to read the upgrade file from the USB disk,
please try to replace the USB disk.
- If the problem still persists, please try to re-download the upgrade file.
- If the problem still persists after performing the above two operations,
please visit the website int.rigol.com to find contacts in your area.
Did you write the firmware of this scopes?
No? Then don't discard any possibility.
What proof do you have that the private key has been cracked? Could even be leaked on purpose by Rigol. Eg: if riglol didn't exist, I would have bought a 4 channel 100 MHz scope from Siglent instead of the DS1054Z.
Rigol could even change the public/private key and tell the costumers that installed purchased licenses to reinstall them again with new codes.
ie. Rigol has just given everybody the options for free. Anybody who installs this firmware will get them, even the oldest customers.
ie. Rigol has just given everybody the options for free. Anybody who installs this firmware will get them, even the oldest customers.
Was it Rigol? :-DD
ie. Rigol has just given everybody the options for free. Anybody who installs this firmware will get them, even the oldest customers.
Was it Rigol? :-DD
Rigol has two lines of 'scopes. Some that are really, really easy to hack and others that are really difficult (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/sniffing-the-rigol_s-internal-i2c-bus/).
It seems obvious to me that Rigol unofficially "allows" the hacking. They'd all be in the "really difficult" category otherwise.
It's not as if they don't know it happens.
The Riglol hack produces serials that are 100% identical to the official ones. How should a new FW invalidate illegitimatly activated options?
AFAIK EEVBlog user cybernet is the one that threw some stones at the Rigol firmware, then poked it with a stick and it soon became obvious, that the encryption must have been implemented by an unpaid intern - or something along that line.
Related: http://poke152.blogspot.com/2013/07/riglol.html (http://poke152.blogspot.com/2013/07/riglol.html)
Once a keygen is released for a test equipment, it becomes very difficult for the manufacturer to close the door.
Unless the number of sold devices is reduced, so that the new FW can contain the serials and respective options of all devices, it is basically impossible to change the license mechanism without having all legitimate customers entering new keys.
The Riglol hack produces serials that are 100% identical to the official ones. How should a new FW invalidate illegitimatly activated options?
It is perfectly safe to install new DS1054Z FW releases and meanwhile it has been made public how to revert to older FW by use of a magic USB disk.
Regarding the other questions: I am not at home and I have not tested anything.
Regards,
Vitor
I am pretty sure that Rigol has more important R&D in course than improving this low-end device hack. I would even say that this hack was tolerated as it considerably increased sales and put Rigol on the map.
If you want to do it properly, you would include a whitelist with all serial numbers and respective legitimate options. While I accept that 8 bit might be enough to code all possible options of a DS1000Z series oscilloscope, the serial numbers will require much more bits. I would say you would need 8 bytes for serial + model and then another byte for the active options. Lets go with 8 bytes (aka 64 bits). For one million devices out on the market, you would require an extra 8MB flash space. I doubt that is feasiable on these device.
Also, the upgrade process would take quite a while: check the serial number against the white list, generate new keys for legitimate options listed in whitelist, replace private key with new one.
The next question is: how long would it take for a new keygen?
I am pretty sure that Rigol has more important R&D in course than improving this low-end device hack. I would even say that this hack was tolerated as it considerably increased sales and put Rigol on the map.
Bicurico, did you test if the synchronization problem was corrected with captures at 24 megabits?Hello Adrian,
the error still exists.
Peter
Thanks PeDre, it seems that it is an error without solution, since they have released several firmware and they have not solved it :-\
I at the time sent the link where the error and own captures are discussed and he will answer that it was solved and it was not.Thanks PeDre, it seems that it is an error without solution, since they have released several firmware and they have not solved it :-\
Is Rigol aware of this error? I'm asking because when I confronted the EU service rep years ago with the lack of solving the pulses/pluses error, he answered "We just heard of it" while it was already an issue on this forum for a long time. Several months later it was fixed...
The instructions of how to use it are in the same place where Rigol_sign_disk.zip is attached, https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg3613778/#msg3613778 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg3613778/#msg3613778)
First, you extract the content from the zip. You will get a file named "card_FAT32_w_SIGN_manually_added_103E00". Then, you use either dd (in Linux) or Win32DiskImager (in Windows), as Miti tested in the next reply after the one linked. Once you prepared the disk, you copy any firmware you want and then do the update procedure.
1. Why do you need the disk?
2. What exactly is not working on your oscilloscope?
3. What did you tried so far and what are the results?
Could somebody please provide me a link to the 00.04.05.02.02 firmware? The link including the Chinese characters doesn't work for me, I always receive an empty file.
Thanks!
feel free to see this, my tests, my upgrades, noisetesting dso at more than nyquist sampling rate (>= 500MHz), what you see is aliasing... btw upgraded to 4.5.2 thanks for update people but i need to recalibrate since the upgrade introduce voltage offset on unconnected input.. fwiw...
https://webx.dk/rigol/
The link http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0 (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0) still contains the old 00.04.04.04.03 version and a release memo of a version 00.04.03.02.03 of 2015...that's why I haven't tried that one.
The upgraded firmware for a DS1Z Series Scope can be downloaded from hereand a file named "DS1000ZUpdate.zip" will be downloaded. Inside the .zip, there is the firmware file, called "DS1000ZUpdate.GEL", and another text file called "MSO_DS1000Z Release Notes.txt" (inside the same .zip) with brief explanations of what was changed in the new firmware. This info file is missing from the EU .rar file, but not needed by the oscilloscope.
DS1ZUpdate.ZIP
What was actually fixed? I haven't updated in a couple years (maybe 04.04.04.03), so any reason to do so?
Same here. Updated to 00.04.05.02.02 (aka 00.04.05.SP2) and everything looks fine. :-+
ie. Rigol has just given everybody the options for free. Anybody who installs this firmware will get them, even the oldest customers.
Figured... Never saw it explicitly stated in my reading around, but was starting to get the idea. Kind of expected that setting the DSER would overwrite the original, but that's what happens when you expect vs experiment...
I take it that having the 500uV feature on doesn't cause any problems, other than unreliable vertical readings when you use it? I'll still clear it out, of course. Probably recal again too, so it doesn't try to cal the "500uV" setting.
Off to do some Telnetting...
500uV/div is very handy, especially when the scope is in high resolution mode, same for the averaging mode ("Acquire" -> "Mode" set to "Average") when the signal is very small but repetitive.
As an example measuring very small resistances with the oscilloscope, milliohms range, for a contact resistance, or the internal resistance of a battery, etc):
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/oscilloscope-with-trace-averaging-as-a-lock-in-amplifier-(rigol-ds1054z)/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/oscilloscope-with-trace-averaging-as-a-lock-in-amplifier-(rigol-ds1054z)/)
I have the 500uV/div option since the very beginning, and it works very well, despite the urban legend that it's bad. It's a software option. It brings no damage and no inconvenience to any other options. Can be removed later if not wanted.
Is anybody up for a definitive test? Can you apply a small voltage to one of the inputs then do a self-cal and see if the 500uV range changes?
(I don't have my DS1054Z any more so I can't do it)
Is anybody up for a definitive test? Can you apply a small voltage to one of the inputs then do a self-cal and see if the 500uV range changes?
I'm not curious to find that
500uV/div is very handy, especially when the scope is inhigh resolution mode, same for theaveraging mode ("Acquire" -> "Mode" set to "Average") when the signal is very small but repetitive.
As an example measuring very small resistances (millioms range) with the oscilloscope, like measuring a contact resistance, or the internal resistance of a battery, etc:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/oscilloscope-with-trace-averaging-as-a-lock-in-amplifier-(rigol-ds1054z)/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/projects/oscilloscope-with-trace-averaging-as-a-lock-in-amplifier-(rigol-ds1054z)/)
I have the 500uV/div option since the very beginning, and it works very well, despite the urban legend that it would be bad. It's a software option. It brings no damage and no inconvenience to any other options. Can be removed later if not wanted.
Does the v00.04.05.02.00 2021/07/24 update affect the 100MHz limit?
Yes, this is normal. you are triggering on channel 1, so all the rising edges get shown on top of each other. If you switch to any other channel and switch the trigger source to the same channel, you will see the same exact thing.
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.05.02.04 2023/02/28
-Added new nandflash driver and original nandflash compatibility
the readme says that it is compatible for the rigol ds1000z versions, it would be necessary to see if it works for mine, which I acquired in 2018, since it is to update the nandflash controller.
Looks like a minor update as only the last digit is changed in the version number. But the rev. history discloses more important information.
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.05.02.04 2023/02/28
-Added new nandflash driver and original nandflash compatibility
v00.04.05.02.03 2022/03/25
-add system file backup, solve the problems of red screen when booting, buzzer beeping, keyboard flashing
Must be a problem for newer hardware versions. My DS1054Z is from 2015 or so, and never had boot problems. Since it's working fine and there are no new features in the recent firmware, I see no reason to upgrade.
The red screen problem has been around for a while (no idea how frequent it is). See https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-red-screen-of-death/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-red-screen-of-death/)
It's not a cultivated memory device like eMMC. Rigol still uses raw NAND Flash chips so it's the programmer's burden to perform error handling, bad block management, wear leveling. Longevity of the product depends on how well it is implemented. Only Rigol knows the actual quality of its SW in that regard. In worst case, first bad block appearance results in device failure. "solve the problems of red screen when booting" might mean improvement in Flash housekeeping code.
I reverse engineered a fair bit of the DS1054Z firmware, including the NAND filesystem code a few years ago. I can't comment on recent firmwares, because I haven't looked at them, but I was left with the impression (on 00.04.04.03.02, I think) that the flash handling was somewhat basic.
I reverse engineered a fair bit of the DS1054Z firmware, including the NAND filesystem code a few years ago. I can't comment on recent firmwares, because I haven't looked at them, but I was left with the impression (on 00.04.04.03.02, I think) that the flash handling was somewhat basic. This code was present in both the bootloader and the application firmware:Community is power, but full reverse engineering of a system of that complexity seems quite difficult.
https://github.com/rickyzheng/uffs
In their "mature" instruments, Rigol stores frequently altered data in a separate FRAM chip that's virtually inert against write wear. Not sure for all their recent gear, but at least the DG800/900/2000 series of AWGs still contains an FRAM chip (MB85RC16) (https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiLuOfQ0v3-AhUewAIHHdSuDvwQFnoECAgQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fujitsu.com%2Fus%2FImages%2FMB85RC16-DS501-00001-8v0-E.pdf&usg=AOvVaw08SQbZ-iLoH7RvNRBXpC_j).Yes it is. Looks like Rigol has a huge stock of that parts, as exactly the same part can be found on the DS1054Z PCB. So the hardware is there. Let's hope the NAND Flash is indeed saved from all frequent writes.
There is a new version of firmware on the Chinese page https://www.rigol.com/products/detail/DS1000Z (https://www.rigol.com/products/detail/DS1000Z) it has a date 2023-04-10
Inside in readme file, there are two dates:
[Supported Model] All the MSO/DS1000Z Series Digital Oscilloscopes
[Latest Revision Date] 2022/03/25
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.05.02.04 2023/02/28
-Added new nandflash driver and original nandflash compatibility
[Supported Model] All the MSO/DS1000Z Series Digital Oscilloscopes
[Latest Revision Date] 2022/03/25
[Updated Contents]
--------------------
v00.04.05.02.04 2023/05/16
-Added startup exception reminder
[History]
--------------------
v00.04.05.02.04 2023/02/28
-Added new nandflash driver and original nandflash compatibility
[...]
- What does a "startup exception reminder" do, that needs 14% more firmware space?
- Why the heck two updates with the same number?Poor version control management? (i.e. get current source, patch it, recompile and release - forgetting to increase the version counter)
...This is the latest file at Rigol Chinese website as mentioned in Reply#4732 by PawelW....
The nand flash entry came with the February update and I agree, that this might not be of interest for older scopes.With the conventional version numbering scheme, changed rightmost number means a minor maintenance update, e.g. because of new parts type. But it seems Rigol uses the numbering in a more creative way. Let's hope the space usage is increased because the code was compiled in a bit different way so now it's of greater size but runs faster. Besides, there can be a UI differences. For instance, v.00.04.05.02.03 can be differentiated from v.00.04.05.02.02 by additional items in the left-side menu (see https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-buglist-continued-(from-fw-00-04-04-03-02)/msg4855160/#msg4855160 (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-buglist-continued-(from-fw-00-04-04-03-02)/msg4855160/#msg4855160)). There are two new items indeed. So the only way to find out what's actually new in the 00.04.05.04.04 is to install it.
But the "startup exception reminder" from May could be useful.
I ask myself:
- Why the heck two updates with the same number?
- What does a "startup exception reminder" do, that needs 14% more firmware space?
- Will itblendbrick?
;D
If anyone has other versions from Rigol they can link, please do so.
Update the firmware of my choice, that ok with you?
... tricking the scope into thinking it's a newer version but it's really not. You can see if you do this a lot you might surpass the next update from Rigol.
Update the firmware of my choice, that ok with you?
can not update the scope to an older firmware version
You care if I'm OK with that? That would have been nice. :)
Though it sounded like you were aggressive for no reason.
I was hoping you were making some reverse engineering, and looking for something in particular, something you were hoping might be found in the past versions, that's why I've asked what for do you need them.
Personally, I run the latest firmware from the Rigol North America site and don't fool with these strange versions on the China site. It almost seems like the latest few on the China site are really 'release candidates' that have not been flushed out yet. IMHO, I believe the North America firmware is slightly slower to get updated but it's a more stable version.Yes but it seems currently the units are shipped from the factory with a more recent firmware. For that units, the "stable" version may be unsuitable. So there is a mechanism that prevents downgrading. Of course, if one is curious and determined enough, he can find a way to bypass it, to invoke more trouble on himself. OTOH, the latest China versions actually incorporate a new feature, which is related to "one-key measurement of 37 parameters". They finally replaced the Variation nonsense with something more useful (AC.Vrms). It's not possible to enjoy it with the versions from the NA and EU web sites.
They have a bug as big as a barn when the scope is on a certain time base at a certain memory depth
Rigol 1054z and 1074z timing problems at 500ms timescale and 24M memory depth
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-1054z-and-1074z-timing-problems-at-500ms-timescale-and-24m-memory-depth/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-1054z-and-1074z-timing-problems-at-500ms-timescale-and-24m-memory-depth/)
rob040, Can you share the download link from the latest firmware update?www.rigol.com/products/detail/DS1000Z (http://www.rigol.com/products/detail/DS1000Z)
Seems like a small barn to me, on a road rarely travelled... But on the other hand it should not be that difficult to fix, so I understand Sredni's annoyance.
At some point I sent an email to Rigol with that problem, they replied that the problem was solved, then I sent them an image of the installed firmware version and a video with the error, they never responded to me.
Have you read the entire version string, or just the major few numbers that are shown by default?
To read the detailed version, under the trigger level knob, press fast
'MENU' -> 'MENU' -> 'FORCE' -> 'MENU', then press normally
'Utility' -> 'System' -> 'System Info'
What version is displayed now on your oscilloscope's screen?
Does it show the build date? What is the software build date?
@Adrian_Arg.: The AC Vrms was already implemented one update earlier, see the posts from mid-September.
But was caused the struggle to update your ‘scope?
2GB limit?