Rigol and production

[smgvbest]

The hobbyist doesn't need a complete SCPI command set, nor does the hobbyist need to build complex test automation apps. The hobbyist is not doing production of anything with a worth while amount of quantity. Rigol products are perfect for them.

Thanks for making us hobbyist feel like crap and like we don't mater.

[XFDDesign]

The hobbyist doesn't need a complete SCPI command set, nor does the hobbyist need to build complex test automation apps. The hobbyist is not doing production of anything with a worth while amount of quantity. Rigol products are perfect for them.

Thanks for making us hobbyist feel like crap and like we don't mater.

*matter.

Is anything I said untrue? Tell me how you have worked to automate the production test of the last widget you've made. I would love to hear all about it. I would also love to hear how you've connected the idea of certain features that are important to production testing equates to "hobbyists are crap and don't matter." Do you buy DMMs with robust automation features? Most hobbyists on this board salivate on $50 or $100 meters, not $1,200+ meters with all sorts of back end support they don't need or won't use. Why would a hobbyist pay a lot more money for features they won't use? How many hobbyists concern themselves with system level integration, across multiple instruments, and cross-platform support (i.e. reusable code for specific purposes)? How many want to pay for that when they don't need it? Many hobbyists are happy to manually log data. The list can go on for a very long time, and is all objectively based on the specific needs and tasks of a production environment. What you feel is irrelevant.

[rx8pilot]

I did not read that as a hobbyist jab, but rather the reality that production lines need a higher level of gear than a hobbyist. Features and reliability are directly tied to the livelihood of all the people that work for that company. If a hobbyist has to fiddle a bit with some gear the is half the price or less - who cares? The low cost options are a fantastic opportunity for non-professionals to have access to advanced tools that were far out of reach until recently.

In a tiny production line, say you have an hourly operating cost of maybe $120. This would cover a small staff and a modest sized room with modest equipment. That is $2 per minute. If you have a piece of equipment that can save 30min per day for whatever reason that is $60 per day. $300 per week. $15k per year. A hobbyist would never see that and would be better off saving the money from the initial purchase.

[mikeselectricstuff]

The hobbyist doesn't need a complete SCPI command set, nor does the hobbyist need to build complex test automation apps. The hobbyist is not doing production of anything with a worth while amount of quantity. Rigol products are perfect for them.

Thanks for making us hobbyist feel like crap and like we don't mater.

*matter.

Is anything I said untrue? Tell me how you have worked to automate the production test of the last widget you've made. I would love to hear all about it. I would also love to hear how you've connected the idea of certain features that are important to production testing equates to "hobbyists are crap and don't matter." Do you buy DMMs with robust automation features? Most hobbyists on this board salivate on $50 or $100 meters, not $1,200+ meters with all sorts of back end support they don't need or won't use. Why would a hobbyist pay a lot more money for features they won't use? How many hobbyists concern themselves with system level integration, across multiple instruments, and cross-platform support (i.e. reusable code for specific purposes)? How many want to pay for that when they don't need it? Many hobbyists are happy to manually log data. The list can go on for a very long time, and is all objectively based on the specific needs and tasks of a production environment. What you feel is irrelevant.

And how much money do hobbyists lose from downtime?

[all_repair]

It shall also depend on the quality of technicians maintaining the equipment.  I am seeing Agilent and Keithley gears being "repaired" to almost unserviceable or unserviceable state.   My gears are mostly used HP, used Fluke, and if new are China Rigol or Array.  The overheating problem that I had seen on Rigol was likely due to overclocking of some chips in their design.  But 10-20 years are a very long time for company with hardworking engineers like Rigol. 

[Bud]

Rigol DS1000 and DS2000 oscilloscopes are defective products. Their hardworking engineers over 10-20 years could not learn how to build a clock oscillator. Both DS1000 and DS2000 have chaotic master clock and no sane person should be using their garbage for hobby, let alone in production. Don't you see they show you middle finger at the apex of their "master clock"

[smgvbest]

The hobbyist doesn't need a complete SCPI command set, nor does the hobbyist need to build complex test automation apps. The hobbyist is not doing production of anything with a worth while amount of quantity. Rigol products are perfect for them.

What you feel is irrelevant.

What I feel to production is irrelevant,  I totally agree with that statement. 
My interpretation of what you said was you are clearing saying hobbyist do no do anything of quality which means in my interpretation is we do crap and Rigol equipment seems to be crap so its perfect for us.  use your own word for crap, that's just my choice of words.  I'm very pleased I'm not a professional who looks at hobbyist this way.

[pickle9000]

I see no problem with using Rigol, Siglent, Agilent for a particular job provided it can do the job. This is a typical engineering decision and cost matters. No point putting high end gear where it's not necessary (easily stolen or whatever). Regardless of the job the brand name is only part of the equation. Bad equipment is all over and to say it's not is fooling yourself.

[slurry]

What I feel to production is irrelevant,  I totally agree with that statement. 
My interpretation of what you said was you are clearing saying hobbyist do no do anything of quality which means in my interpretation is we do crap and Rigol equipment seems to be crap so its perfect for us.  use your own word for crap, that's just my choice of words.  I'm very pleased I'm not a professional who looks at hobbyist this way.

He wrote quantity and you read quality, and there's a slight difference there 

As a hobbyist you seldom make any large series of equipment, maybe 10 or so at most,
in a production environment where every bean counts reliable measuring equipment is vital.

As the hobbyist usually not count any beans, turn pennies and counting seconds and minutes he or she can put huge amounts of time and effort in a project reulting in a extremely high quality, far from any sped-up production or assembly line.
So no one can generally say that hobbyists=low quality, that is BS.

Rigol is more than good enough for most electronics hobbyists, not for all of course, but for most.
Rigol is also good for some small scale production, not all of course, but some.

[Smith]

Just used a Rigol 6104 yesterday. Yes its the fastest most expensive one, but it felt faster than my (twice as expensive) Tek DPO4000 series. First impression is good, it looks and feels like a good quality unit. Not exactly what I expected. It has some nice features too.

I wouldn't use it for myself. Its for a simple signal comparisson. I would hate to debug gear with a scope that still has bugs. I trust my Teks, I trust my HP, I trust my Philips, I dont trust the Rigol. But then again, it might be just as good (or better) but it didn't had the time to prove itself.

I think it comes down to your company. Some companies use their gear until it's far beyond economical recovery. Other companies replace their gear every 3-7 years. I think most rigols will easily do 5 years with basic day to day use. Teks will probably do quite some time longer. Time will tell.

[Armxnian]

The hobbyist doesn't need a complete SCPI command set, nor does the hobbyist need to build complex test automation apps. The hobbyist is not doing production of anything with a worth while amount of quantity. Rigol products are perfect for them.

Thanks for making us hobbyist feel like crap and like we don't mater.

Don't let him put you down. This is the internet, every man and his dog is a professional and knows everything about anything 

The poorly organized block of words basically said a hobbyist does not need certain features. Ignorant statement because those features can be used for education purposes to teach yourself, they don't have to be there for the sole purpose of monetary gain. Product reliability and support is what needs to be evaluated. If a product from Keysight does something a unit from Rigol cannot and you require it, then you don't consider the Rigol unit. You only consider it when they both offer the capabilities you need; OP seems to be past that stage.

Rigol DS1000 and DS2000 oscilloscopes are defective products. Their hardworking engineers over 10-20 years could not learn how to build a clock oscillator. Both DS1000 and DS2000 have chaotic master clock and no sane person should be using their garbage for hobby, let alone in production. Don't you see they show you middle finger at the apex of their "master clock"

Right, which is why 143/146 reviews for the ds1054z on tequipment are 4 and 5 stars. Also why the owner of the forum, I think his name is Dave, you might have heard of him, uses the ds1054z in the majority of videos. But of course all of the tests conducted by those users are invalid since the scopes are defective.

To OP: It seems most in this thread are generalizing all products based on brand. Why is the ds1054z being compared to anything Keysight or the other big brands offer to begin with? The scopes currently worth purchasing from those brands start at $3000+. Rigol also makes higher end scopes that offer good features.

That being said, Rigol seems to aim mostly to the consumer market. A normal consumer/hobbyist does not make a living on what they do. That is the difference. A hobbyist can wait a few weeks for a new firmware that fixes bugs. A professional cannot. A hobbyist can wait a few weeks for a response from the manufacturer's customer service. A professional cannot. Products from the big brands are guaranteed to work in such environments. There is a reason Rigol products are calibrated and tested using multimeters, power supplies, and scopes from Keysight, Fluke. Etc.. and not other Rigol equipment. Such gear ends up paying for itself in one way or another. The new Rigol stuff is built well and may survive in a factory, but it is built down to a price, and that alone is enough to inspire fear and not worth the risk of losing your business.

[slurry]

Teks will probably do quite some time longer. Time will tell.

We have two Tektronix 465 at work, still in use regularly, calibrated every year 

(that may be a sign of quality..)

[Smith]

Teks will probably do quite some time longer. Time will tell.

We have two Tektronix 465 at work, still in use regularly, calibrated every year 

(that may be a sign of quality..)

Comparing analog and digital scopes? I've seen a lot of digital tek scopes fail, where the analog ones got replaced with digital nes, or are still being used.

Btw I fixed one of those last year, their build like tanks.

[slurry]

Teks will probably do quite some time longer. Time will tell.

We have two Tektronix 465 at work, still in use regularly, calibrated every year 

(that may be a sign of quality..)

Comparing analog and digital scopes? I've seen a lot of digital tek scopes fail, where the analog ones got replaced with digital nes, or are still being used.

Btw I fixed one of those last year, their build like tanks.

.. i forgot to mention that our 15 year old digital Tektronixs have failed, all four of them 

[Smith]

Rigol DS1000 and DS2000 oscilloscopes are defective products. Their hardworking engineers over 10-20 years could not learn how to build a clock oscillator. Both DS1000 and DS2000 have chaotic master clock and no sane person should be using their garbage for hobby, let alone in production.

 

Compare them to tek TDS2000 series. I hate those things, and they cost 4 times as much as the Rigol 1054. The Rigol has (had) some problems with their clock. I think 99% of the users wont even notice or matter. For basic measurements and debugging it's not that big of a deal. For the few percent that does, go spend that extra cash and buy a Tek/Agilent/whatever. I would do to for profesonal use. But for home use I would definetly go for the Rigol and spare some big bucks. Actually I would buy a second hand tek/hp, but thats another thing.

Sometimes a Rigol could be the only option due to budget reasons. If one should  start their own buisness, I think the Rigol would be the first choice, due to budget factors.

Maybe its just you and your boss having enough money to buy big brands.

Its like comparing Fluke multimeters with a cheap china brand ones. The Flukes are better, but most of the world seem to do just fine with the cheap ones.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Rigol DS1000 and DS2000 oscilloscopes are defective products. Their hardworking engineers over 10-20 years could not learn how to build a clock oscillator. Both DS1000 and DS2000 have chaotic master clock and no sane person should be using their garbage for hobby, let alone in production. Don't you see they show you middle finger at the apex of their "master clock"

That's a completely ridiculous statement. Scopes are not precision measuring instruments.
Low-cost gear will always have some compromises.  Rigol have proved themselves to be good enough for a large section of the market - if it's not good enough for you then go buy something more expensive, but don't try to pretend that a minor issue that you seem to find upsetting makes it unuseable for anyone else.
Looking at the specs, I don't see a specification for clock noise/jitter, so it can't be described as defective. Lacking, possibly, but not defective.

[tautech]

Teks will probably do quite some time longer. Time will tell.

We have two Tektronix 465 at work, still in use regularly, calibrated every year 

(that may be a sign of quality..)

Comparing analog and digital scopes? I've seen a lot of digital tek scopes fail, where the analog ones got replaced with digital nes, or are still being used.

Btw I fixed one of those last year, their build like tanks.

.. i forgot to mention that our 15 year old digital Tektronixs have failed, all four of them 

Made in Asia?

[tautech]

Rigol DS1000 and DS2000 oscilloscopes are defective products. Their hardworking engineers over 10-20 years could not learn how to build a clock oscillator. Both DS1000 and DS2000 have chaotic master clock and no sane person should be using their garbage for hobby, let alone in production.

 

Compare them to tek TDS2000 series. I hate those things, and they cost 4 times as much as the Rigol 1054. The Rigol has (had) some problems with their clock. I think 99% of the users wont even notice or matter. For basic measurements and debugging it's not that big of a deal. For the few percent that does, go spend that extra cash and buy a Tek/Agilent/whatever. I would do to for profesonal use. But for home use I would definetly go for the Rigol and spare some big bucks. Actually I would buy a second hand tek/hp, but thats another thing.

Sometimes a Rigol could be the only option due to budget reasons. If one should  start their own buisness, I think the Rigol would be the first choice, due to budget factors.

Maybe its just you and your boss having enough money to buy big brands.

Its like comparing Fluke multimeters with a cheap china brand ones. The Flukes are better, but most of the world seem to do just fine with the cheap ones.

I know which one I would trust. 

Also plenty of Flukes are made in China.......are they crap....not likely. 

[HighVoltage]

I have built plenty of test stands over the years for many different clients.
Some customers insist of high end gear and some want low cost scopes.

In one case I used 2 Rigol scopes. The test stand is used every day in a clean production environment and the scopes are working perfectly alright. The way these scopes are used, a Keysight or Tektronix scope would not have added any benefits. Years later, the customer is still happy with them.

On the other hand, for more difficult measurements, I use only Keysight scopes for my test stands. It always depends on the application and also the environment of use and so on.

In some cases I use only old FLUKE PM3394B scopes for stability and features, that modern scopes do not offer for these applications.

[MarkL]

If this equipment is going to be sitting in a rack under computer control, I wouldn't trust Rigol.

Rigol's SCPI implementation, at least on a DS1054 evaluation I did, was extremely buggy.  Many commands did not work as documented, some worked inconsistently, and some caused the remote interface to completely lockup, requiring a reboot.

This provided a pretty clear message to me that Rigol is not very focused on remote automation.  Remote control seems more like a "me too" item for them.

[Bud]

Rigol have proved themselves to be good enough for a large section of the market

Have proved by what? By selling sh!t which only advantage is being cheap? They have not prove anything, it is us sheeps who make it look as if it made a revolution on the market because we all love to sing the holy Cheap Mantra.

- if it's not good enough for you then go buy something more expensive,

You are late with your advice, already did.

[slurry]

Have proved by what? By selling sh!t which only advantage is being cheap? They have not prove anything, it is us sheeps who make it look as if it made a revolution on the market because we all love to sing the holy Cheap Mantra.

It's not hard to guess that you are a metrologist 

No one said that Rigol made a revolution,
the only thing they are doing is selling "modern" scopes loaded with functionality and with a price many hobbyists can afford (there are of course a few other brands as well)
and that is one of the main reasons to why they're so popular.

What you think of Rigol does not matter as it wont stop the 'sheeps' wanting as much value as possible for their money.

[mikeselectricstuff]

Rigol have proved themselves to be good enough for a large section of the market

Have proved by what?

Massive sales, good reviews and few complaints.

[all_repair]

- if it's not good enough for you then go buy something more expensive,

You are late with your advice, already did.

What did you buy wrongly?  Oscillator or oscilloscope?  Agilent rebranded Rigol, it must prove something, unless Rigol hasn't been improving from that point but regressing downwards. 

[Smith]

I hear a lot of complaints about Rigol, but besides bud  who was talking about the masterclock and MarkL about the SCPI implementation there was no real proof there products are bad. It's more about the "it's chinese, thus crap".

I'm not saying I think their good products are as good or better than other brands. But their products do look to be improving in a rapid rate.  Looking at the price I don't think there is much to complain about. Time wil tell if their product lifetime is as good as the bigger brands.