Author Topic: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?  (Read 3986 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1378
  • Country: no
Are there still many software bugs out there in the Rigol DS1052E? Or has the firmware become 100% bug free over the years?

Does Rigol still release SW updates for this old oscilloscope?

Obviously the Rigol DS1054Z wins clearly in terms of performance and features, but it has still a significant amount of software bugs in the latest firmware.

Would it therefore make sense to still get a brand new Rigol DS1052E as a low-end reference oscilloscope to verify some measurements in case of doubt?

Or would it be better to use that extra money for buying a GW-Instek oscilloscope or a higher end Rigol DS2072A?

Which one has the most software bugs of the two comparisons below?

Comparison 1: Rigol DS1052E versus Rigol DS1054Z: Which one has the most SW bugs in the latest FW?

Comparison 2: Rigol DS1054Z versus Rigol DS2072A: Which one has the most SW bugs in the latest FW?
« Last Edit: August 07, 2016, 05:37:15 AM by pascal_sweden »
 

Online hammy

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
  • Country: 00
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #1 on: August 07, 2016, 09:12:27 AM »
Get an old Hameg HM-203. No software bugs.  :-DD

I own both, the 1052 and the 1054. The latest firmware for the 1054 is ok. Still a bug in RMS measurement, but everything else is quite fine for daily use and simple measurements - it is just a cheap device, what do you expect?

Don't buy a Rigol if you want an error free (?) device without quirks. Get an oscilloscope from a high-end brand. There is no free lunch.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2016, 09:20:15 AM by hammy »
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6995
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #2 on: August 07, 2016, 08:17:21 PM »
Or would it be better to use that extra money for buying a GW-Instek oscilloscope or a higher end Rigol DS2072A?

Why are you so sure that GW-Instek is bug free?
 

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1378
  • Country: no
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2016, 08:26:24 PM »
That's indeed one big advantage of analog scopes: there are hardly any analog bugs :)

Digital bugs come in many, while analog bugs are very scarce! :)
 

Online hammy

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 387
  • Country: 00
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2016, 10:19:15 PM »
Have a look for the Hameg in EEVBlog #842.
The HMO1002 ranges between 50 and 100MHz, while the HMO1202 comes with 100, 200 or 300 MHz.

Maybe this would be a better choice in respect to quality and "bug free" firmware?

EDIT: http://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/digital-oscilloscope-comparison-chart/
« Last Edit: August 07, 2016, 10:20:46 PM by hammy »
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6995
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #5 on: August 07, 2016, 10:36:44 PM »
Have a look for the Hameg in EEVBlog #842.
The HMO1002 ranges between 50 and 100MHz, while the HMO1202 comes with 100, 200 or 300 MHz.

Maybe this would be a better choice in respect to quality and "bug free" firmware?

I agree. The HMOs are much nicer than GW-Instek, and better built. If the tiny amount of Rigol bugs are really unacceptable to you then that's the way I'd go.

YMMV. There's only one real bug left in the Rigols and it may be fixed soon.

Nobody can deny that $400 for 4 channels, 100MHz, serial decoders, etc. is a real bargain. RMS bug or not.



 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 12973
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #6 on: August 07, 2016, 11:00:07 PM »
The value for money in the HMO1000/1200 series is piss poor compared to the GW Instek GDS2000E series especially if you need to buy the decoding options ($1000 extra). The HMO1000/1200 series has only 2 analog channels, up to 1Mpts per channel with both channels enabled (1200 series) and a tiny screen (versus 4 analog channels with 10Mpts each on the GDS2000A or GDS2000E series). The build quality of the HMO1000/1200 is also quite poor and obviously optimised for quick assembly and not durability. The input BNCs are not bolted onto the chassis so everytime you connect/disconnect a probe you are putting force on the soldering joints of the BNC connectors and twisting/flexing the PCB. Also the main PCB is mounted in the bottom of the scope without supports in the middle so everytime you put the scope down all the G forces (and they add up to a lot more quickly than you might expect) go straight into flexing the PCB. I'm surprised Dave didn't spot these issues in his HMO1000/1200 teardown because they are quite serious.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2016, 11:12:46 PM by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline Mechatrommer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7546
  • Country: my
  • reassessing directives...
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #7 on: August 07, 2016, 11:50:29 PM »
Obviously the Rigol DS1054Z wins clearly in terms of performance and features, but it has still a significant amount of software bugs in the latest firmware.
Would it therefore make sense to still get a brand new Rigol DS1052E as a low-end reference oscilloscope to verify some measurements in case of doubt?
Or would it be better to use that extra money for buying a GW-Instek oscilloscope or a higher end Rigol DS2072A?
yes DS1054Z has more bugs but... i dont think you are thinking clearly. are you willing to throw away the 2 extra "hardware" channels just because few "software" or "bell and whistle" bugs that you may never use? are you going to buy a scope just to count "pluses"? or doing an extensive "software emulated" math? i can see a reason to buy 2GS/s DS2072, but i dont see a reason to buy an older scope with less 2 channels, no level gradation display and only 1MB of memory, its utterly darwinian, for saving just a few of $$$.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2016, 11:52:44 PM by Mechatrommer »
if something can select, how cant it be intelligent? if something is intelligent, how cant it exist?
 

Online metrologist

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 875
  • Country: 00
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #8 on: August 07, 2016, 11:56:43 PM »
Obviously the Rigol DS1054Z wins clearly in terms of performance and features, but it has still a significant amount of software bugs in the latest firmware.

I think this needs to be qualified. I am only aware of three bugs:

  • Spelling error of Pluses vs. Pulses.
  • RMS measurement error only on an adjacent n+1 channel.
  • Waveform timebase offset when capturing multiple channel data via SCPI. (which could be a SMOP for the user)

 

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1378
  • Country: no
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #9 on: August 07, 2016, 11:59:39 PM »
What about serial decode which is only done on what is visible on the screen?
In my opinion that's a wrong implementation (aka a bug), or is it considered as a "feature"? :)
 

Online metrologist

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 875
  • Country: 00
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #10 on: August 08, 2016, 12:04:19 AM »
EDIT: http://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/digital-oscilloscope-comparison-chart/

Did I read somewhere that Rigol has a 4 channel scope in the DS2000 class, based off the DSO4000 series?
 

Online JPortici

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1850
  • Country: it
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #11 on: August 08, 2016, 12:09:02 AM »
Have a look for the Hameg in EEVBlog #842.
The HMO1002 ranges between 50 and 100MHz, while the HMO1202 comes with 100, 200 or 300 MHz.

Maybe this would be a better choice in respect to quality and "bug free" firmware?

I agree. The HMOs are much nicer than GW-Instek, and better built. If the tiny amount of Rigol bugs are really unacceptable to you then that's the way I'd go.

YMMV. There's only one real bug left in the Rigols and it may be fixed soon.

Nobody can deny that $400 for 4 channels, 100MHz, serial decoders, etc. is a real bargain. RMS bug or not.

i do, being used to better (and pricier) scopes. i tried the rigol saying myself i wouldn't be that disappointed... the fan noise alone will make you go nuts if you have a quiet workplace as i do.
then comes the triggering.. the noise... the difficulty of having reliable serial deconding.. the lag between turning a knob and seeing the result.. then you turn it faster but goddamn the scope thinks you turned 10 times intead of 1 so th screen will show the trace one minute before/after the trigger

I can live with the TPS2000 i have on the workbench at work with its lack of features and 2.5kpts memory, i can't live with the rigol and its shitty software, despite the potential greatness of its hardware.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2016, 12:10:46 AM by JPortici »
 

Online JPortici

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1850
  • Country: it
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #12 on: August 08, 2016, 12:13:50 AM »
What about serial decode which is only done on what is visible on the screen?
In my opinion that's a wrong implementation (aka a bug), or is it considered as a "feature"? :)
i won't say that's a bug. a bug is something that should work but doesn't, isn't it?
i think that the team in charge of the software decoding made a decision.
the scope when it's set up properly CAN decode what's on the screen with no issue, so if you make a full memory acquisition and you put it all on the screen you will have all the trace properly decoded in a big messy picture
(unlike other scopes that really decode what's on the screen buffer so changing the time base after the acquisition will change the results. that didn't happen on my rigol)
 

Offline Mechatrommer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7546
  • Country: my
  • reassessing directives...
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #13 on: August 08, 2016, 12:15:27 AM »
What about serial decode which is only done on what is visible on the screen?
In my opinion that's a wrong implementation (aka a bug), or is it considered as a "feature"? :)
then what about serial decode for DS1052E? nothing wrong implemented, because its not implemented ;) you need to buy another decoder... again "nothing" wrong with that ;)
if something can select, how cant it be intelligent? if something is intelligent, how cant it exist?
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6995
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #14 on: August 08, 2016, 12:25:49 AM »
Obviously the Rigol DS1054Z wins clearly in terms of performance and features, but it has still a significant amount of software bugs in the latest firmware.

I think this needs to be qualified. I am only aware of three bugs:

  • Spelling error of Pluses vs. Pulses.
  • RMS measurement error only on an adjacent n+1 channel.
  • Waveform timebase offset when capturing multiple channel data via SCPI. (which could be a SMOP for the user)

Don't let Pesky Facts enter into an obvious Rigol-bashing thread, that would never do.
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6995
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #15 on: August 08, 2016, 12:28:06 AM »
The value for money in the HMO1000/1200 series is piss poor compared to the GW Instek GDS2000E series

The value for money and build quality in the GW Instek GDS2000E is piss poor compared to a Rigol DS1054Z. That isn't holding you back.
 

Online rstofer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3349
  • Country: us
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #16 on: August 08, 2016, 01:14:16 AM »
What about serial decode which is only done on what is visible on the screen?
In my opinion that's a wrong implementation (aka a bug), or is it considered as a "feature"? :)

That was a design choice.  It works exactly the way it was designed so it is not a bug.  If you need a logic analyzer, buy one!

Seriously, you really shouldn't buy the 1054Z, the bugs will bother you forever and you may as well assume they will never be corrected.  There are a lot of scopes that are twice as good for about three times the price.  Pick one...  You'll never be happy with the 1054Z.


 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 12973
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #17 on: August 08, 2016, 01:50:47 AM »
The value for money in the HMO1000/1200 series is piss poor compared to the GW Instek GDS2000E series
The value for money and build quality in the GW Instek GDS2000E is piss poor compared to a Rigol DS1054Z. That isn't holding you back.
Indeed. I need decoding to work right (for starters) and since the DS1000Z decodes only what it on screen it would be an utter waste of money for me. Yes, I have used a Siglent scope which only decodes what is on screen so I know how seriously limited that way of decoding is.

I'm interested though why you believe the Rigol DS1000Z is so much better build than the GDS2000E series though. I just looked at Dave's teardown of the DS1000Z to take a look and I'd say they both have an equal build quality.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline Fungus

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6995
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #18 on: August 08, 2016, 02:00:00 AM »
I'm interested though why you believe the Rigol DS1000Z is so much better build than the GDS2000E series though. I just looked at Dave's teardown of the DS1000Z to take a look and I'd say they both have an equal build quality.

In Daves' teardown of the GoodWill Instek he specifically compares it to the Rigol (somewhere near the end of the video...)

« Last Edit: August 08, 2016, 02:02:18 AM by Fungus »
 

Offline Muxr

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1273
  • Country: us
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #19 on: August 08, 2016, 02:13:07 AM »
The value for money in the HMO1000/1200 series is piss poor compared to the GW Instek GDS2000E series
The value for money and build quality in the GW Instek GDS2000E is piss poor compared to a Rigol DS1054Z. That isn't holding you back.
Indeed. I need decoding to work right (for starters) and since the DS1000Z decodes only what it on screen it would be an utter waste of money for me. Yes, I have used a Siglent scope which only decodes what is on screen so I know how seriously limited that way of decoding is.

I'm interested though why you believe the Rigol DS1000Z is so much better build than the GDS2000E series though. I just looked at Dave's teardown of the DS1000Z to take a look and I'd say they both have an equal build quality.
Rigol's hardware is generally pretty darn good.. it's their software/firmware that can leave a lot to be desired. Did you not have PSU noise issues with your GW Instek?

GW Instek looks impressive on paper, it's a newer scope too.. but Rigol did look a bit more solid in construction based on Dave's video imo.
 

Online nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 12973
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #20 on: August 08, 2016, 03:08:42 AM »
Noise as in that the PSU in my GDS2204E made a (to me audible) whining noise. Also the fan noise improved to acceptable levels by using simple rubber fan mounts.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 
The following users thanked this post: Muxr

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 6377
  • Country: lv
Re: Rigol DS1052E or Rigol DS1054Z - Which one has the least SW bugs?
« Reply #21 on: August 08, 2016, 03:19:39 AM »
The value for money in the HMO1000/1200 series is piss poor compared to the GW Instek GDS2000E series

The value for money and build quality in the GW Instek GDS2000E is piss poor compared to a Rigol DS1054Z. That isn't holding you back.
Didn't notice that build quality is any better even in Rigol DS2000 (disassembled both of them myself). But there are serious design flaws/errors in Rigols for sure. And Crapxon used in 1054Z PSU instead of decent capacitors.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf