EEVblog Electronics Community Forum
Products => Test Equipment => Topic started by: WOPR73 on April 16, 2014, 05:30:33 am
-
Rigol DS1074Z
Hey Guys & Gals,
I just wanted to get everyone's input on Rigol DS1074Z... Because I just order one. My first Oscilloscope ever and wanted to get me something that will last me for a few years. I hope all the past threads I have read are correct and will allow my DS1074Z to be a worthy and upgradeable product if I follow the past instructions. I did look at the DS2072A and it was tough... but, I thought that the diversity would go a lot further than all that power that I am more than likely never going to use, for I am a tinker, maker new to this world. ::) So, did I make the right choice? Or do I need to quickly cancel that order if I can? :-+ or :-- :o
WOPR
-
I say the DS1074Z is definitely a good choice for a beginner scope. I purchased one too recently and I'm very happy with my choice. I went trough Owon an UNI-T cheapos and regarding value for money the DS1074Z is definitely the best and actually the first one presenting a decent oscilloscope in my opinion.
In comparison to the DS2072A I would say it depends on what you want, I personally didn't encounter a situation yet, where I couldn't have done with a 100MHz scope and would have needed a 200MHz scope, but I would have liked a 3rd or 4th channel from time to time and you won't find a better 4 channel scope for that price. Sure the lower noise floor and the included 50Ohm termination are interesting, but I just put a preamp on my 'Project to do List' and I think external 50Ohm termination isn't that big of a deal either.
PS: Regarding upgrading, all you need is http://riglol.3owl.com/ (http://riglol.3owl.com/) it's practically self-explanatory. Thanks to all the guys who worked on that and made that script possible, I will be forever grateful (http://i.imgur.com/X1w2UKp.gif)
Max
-
I went for a DS1074Z too as my first scope. I can't say I've used I enough or am experienced enough to give you a decent evaluation, but I still think it's a good choice. I mostly do microcontroller stuff and could probably have got away with a logic analyser for a lot of stuff I do. The 4 channels definitely swayed me more than raw (and probably unused) performance.
-
It wasn't my first scope, but it was (and is) my only digital scope.
It's a good scope, no question. Cheers to Rigol for making it at the price point that it is available at. I understand that Tek and Agilent/Keysight don't really want to hit the "bottom dollar" market, as it could tarnish their brand, but I think that they could/should pull a Toyota and create a second brand for the low end market to win back some mindshare from Rigol.
Toyota created Lexus so that they could create high-end vehicles without people associating the Toyota brand with unnecessarily expensive cars. Agilent/Keysight and Tek might consider doing the same, in reverse.
-
My First Scope was a DS2072A
i haven't used the DS1074Z
but i do know this,...
- Rigol is a Cheaper Scope, than, let's say Tektronix
- My Scope is a 2 Ch, Yours is a 4 Ch (This is a question of personal preference and needs)
- My scope is a 70MHz upgraded to 300MHz
- I have 2GSa/s you have 1
- I have 56Mpts Memory depth, You have 24Mpts i think
all these things come down to personal choice and needs
as far as the scope itself is concerned
Regardless of Model, All the Rigol's are a good first scope
even the OLD DS1052E
i don't recommend the old Technology, but.. Hey, if that's your budget and you want a decent first scope, Rigol is a Good Little Scope to work with,
i don't think you'll regret the decision
I'm comparing my scope with a freind who bought a Tek about 7 Years ago it had 200MHz, 4 CH anaolgue Input, i think 24Mpts memory depth
he still swears by his scope as being reliable, but thinks that mine is better than his
but , in all fairness, I"m comparing a new Rigol with an Old Tek (it's not a fair comparison)
Tektronix is better than Rigol any day of the Week, if you can stomach the Budget to get one, if you can't .. Get a Rigol
i think, you've done well in your choice
enjoy Your Scope
-
It's a bit unfair. If you compare price vs. features on *non hacked* scopes and check your needs I think the 1074Z is perfect for it's price. If you need or like to work with 4 channels you have this good choice at Rigols lower price end. 70MHz bandwidth is more than enough for most personal DIY stuff.
BTW I don't like to hack any product or Software because there are mostly hard working people and there families behind this products. (I am working in the SW businnes, I can tell you.) The update options are a nice way to stretch your investment. You can upgrade if you really need some feature. On the other hand companys give special offers to better match the market like Hameg & Agilent did. ;)
But I also understand another aspect of hacking things. It's interesting to see how it works in depth. I grew up and learn a lot this way. Modifikation to your needs have a long tradition in electronics. That's ok until you bring in your ideas and not only switch on the work of others.
-
I have a DS2000, and for test temp a DS1000z next to it.
The DS1000 works very well and i am impressed what you get for you money
But for the long run, if you buy a DS1000z, you will buy also in a few years something like a DS2000.
The DS2000 performance is for deep analyses better.
The DS1000Z is very handy to have next to it for quick measurements. ( also 4 channels )
The UI of the DS1000z looks almost the same as the DS2000
The DS1000z has no RTC.
There is a button on the DS1000z to switch off the sin(x)/x, but thats is behaving very strange ( see pictures).
-
my first and only scope is the rigol ds1074z, I dont think i could have got much better for the price, even if i could afford it i still wouldnt have got the ds2000 due to only 2 channels, the 4 channels is a realy usefull featur, i cant think of another scope with 4 channels for the price, unbelievable, i think rigol have done better than agilent or tek, the agilant scopes are a bit crap with the short memory its so dumb.
-
Thanks for everyone's comments. It's good to here everyone's perspectives. :-+ I have hopes that unlocking the DS1074Z will be adding a little more to the scope allowing a little more range and features. Which does anyone know what version it unlocks too? Will I be able to get the 100MHz and extra functions? Perhaps the DS2000 functions? Anyone care to answer please send private message. =)
So, I really didn't plan to spend that much, but looking online and finding out that even the DIY up to the hand helds were 50-250+ and the reviews were really not good enough to keep my interest. Plus the limitations were from one extreme to another. Once I found this forum, and did some price checking with other versions like Tek, Siglent, Owon, Hantek, Atten, etc; All pointed towards Agilent for best quality. ;D I watched that video of the guy using an Agilent that cost 500k. WoW! what a machine!!! I didn't understand half of what he was talking about, but I couldn't pull myself away. There were hours of reading specifications and what makes a Oscilloscope. Some of them had everything, but one or two things were sub-par, cutting costs on something, that ended turning me away. Those that didn't really cut corners you differently saw it in the price. And I was tempted with the DS2074Z and a few others. So many were happy with Rigol models in my price range and also the fact that they are able to be unlocked perked my interest. I am sure I will buy another once I have a need and learn lot more. But, for now...I think I am good. ;D
-
Hi,
Does unlocking work well with this scope ? Could you kindly share your experience and the firmware version number. Is it possible to undo the upgrade ?
regards
-
It meets my basic requirements for a DSO:
1. It has a graded index display. None of my current old DSOs do but I have analog oscilloscopes for this.
2. It has a high waveform acquisition rate. None of my current old DSOs do but I have analog oscilloscopes for this.
3. It supports peak detection. (I think. I have not tested it.) All of my current old DSOs have this except for one.
4. It has delayed trigger support.
But there are two things it lacks which it would need before I bought one:
1. It throws away the FFT phase results instead of displaying them.
2. It lacks a dual timebase mode.
-
Manufacture: RIGOL
Model:DS1074Z - 4 CH 70MHz 1G
Software:00.02.03.SP5 (Shipped with this version, most current)
USING :1.03c web
:-+ Hat's off to you guys! :clap: Well done! :clap: Thank you! :-+
Adding 2 photos. I hope. :-//
-
And some direct screen shots too! :clap:
-
Hmm...
it seems that there is a new Software for the DS1074Z out there.
I got mine two days ago and my Firmware Version is the following:
00.04.00
Does anybody know what was changed in this FW?
Maybe there's a changelog somewhere on the internet...
-
Hi,
is the upgrade with the keygen still working with the new release?
Could you test it please?
Thanks
Karsten
-
It's still working, can confirm it.
I wonder whether the faulty 500uV resolution was fixed? Maybe I should test that in the next days...
-
I wonder whether the faulty 500uV resolution was fixed? Maybe I should test that in the next days...
I wondered about that myself, I assumed I must be doing something wrong when I found that range not working properly.
I guess I will give the new software a try.
-
What's the sampling architecture of that scope? I mean it is one ADC unit for all 4 channels? Or maybe 2 common ADCs for 2 channel pairs? 1Gsps would be rather low to be divided amongst 4 channels.
-
One ADC for all four, with 3 or 4 channels on you get 250MSa/s and max 6Mpt memory.
As my typical application with four channels would involve brushless motor drives (+DC bus voltage or current) or SPI, the full sample rate doesn't matter to me, but it may for other people. I can think of a few applications where you'd use the full 100MHz across four channels but they're rare enough for this not to be an issue for me.
-
It is one ADC for all channels so 1 channel = 1 Gsps, 2 channels = 500 Msps, 3 and 4 channels = 250 Msps.
Still a good scope tho. I'm happy so far. Has anyone the new firmware as a download?
Greetings
-
Its a good starter scope. I've only had one time where measuring spi at a higher rate the clock line was more sine wave than square due to the shared adc.
But full of features for the price and great for hobbiest.
-
One ADC for all channels would indicate an analog channel switch which seems rather unlikely given the existence of inexpensive 8 bit 1 GSample/second ADCs and the difficulty of high speed analog multiplexing. Inexpensive designs have an ADC on every channel but are digitally multiplexed with one memory bus and one bank of memory which is what limits the record sizes and sample rates when multiple channels are used.
There are high end oscilloscopes which do analog multiplexing to support higher sample rates than one ADC will easily support but they still use one ADC per channel and the multiplexing allows them to interleave more than one ADC on a given channel when not all channels are used.
-
I am a retired EE. I have used some of "The Classics" of analog scopes, and a few of the more recent DSOs. I must say I am impressed by what Rigol has done with the DS1074Z. A nicely packaged set of functionality, realized in appropriate technology, and delivered at a reasonable price point. Well done, Rigol. And TEquipment, too. Ordered 2PM on Tuesday, April 29; delivered to my door in Chicago before lunch on Tuesday, May 6. Not bad for an item in short supply.
My unit had software version 00.00.03.SP5. The extremely helpful options upgrade procedure went off without a hitch. Many thanks to the eevblog contributors who made such a maneuver so accessible.
As for whether the DS1074Z is a good first scope, I have two minds. 1: Yes, of course. The need to see and record electric signals in the time domain will always be with us, and this Rigol scope will work fine within its well-publicized limits. 2: The Tek technology from 20 (even 30!) years ago is oh-so-nice; they represent almost a way of life, not just a way of making test tools. At least try to use one, it's a very tactile experience.
-
Am I the only one that would like to see a 2-channel version of the 1000Z series? I think this could potentially be a full replacement for the DS1052 which is very old and probably time to retire.
Also, I STILL WANT TO see Dave review the 1074z. One of you guys send yours to him to play with for a while. ;D
-
Hi,
can anyone confirm that there is NO USB-icon in the lower right corner of the screen while the ds1074Z (FW 00.004.00) is connected via USB to the PC? With the older FW it is indicated when the scope is connected via USB.
Thanks for answer,
Karsten
-
Am I the only one that would like to see a 2-channel version of the 1000Z series?
Yes.
I think this could potentially be a full replacement for the DS1052 which is very old and probably time to retire.
They will retire the DS1052 when it stops selling.
I am assuming the reason you're pining for a 2-channel 1000Z is because you think/hope it would be significantly cheaper than 4-channels. The problem being, it wouldn't.
Removing 2 BNC connectors and a handful of front-end parts from the PCB would have minimal cost impact.
-
One ADC for all channels would indicate an analog channel switch which seems rather unlikely given the existence of inexpensive 8 bit 1 GSample/second ADCs and the difficulty of high speed analog multiplexing. Inexpensive designs have an ADC on every channel but are digitally multiplexed with one memory bus and one bank of memory which is what limits the record sizes and sample rates when multiple channels are used.
Well, I own one so can confirm it drops to 250MSa/s and 6Mpts with all 4 channels active.
The ADC costs $80 for a single gigasample channel. That's not particularly cheap for a $580 instrument. I think internally the ADC is probably implemented as 4x250MSa/s channels with an internal multiplexer. Someone linked to the ADC datasheet previously but I can't find that anymore. The data is streamed into an FPGA which has ~32MB of DDR2 and ~1MB of SRAM. The FPGA probably acts as a "camera" for the Freescale i.MX device which controls the LCD directly (unlike the 2000 series where there is a second FPGA for the display management.)
-
I wonder whether the faulty 500uV resolution was fixed? Maybe I should test that in the next days...
I wondered about that myself, I assumed I must be doing something wrong when I found that range not working properly.
I guess I will give the new software a try.
How can you say the 500uV vertical range is faulty or not working properly on the DS1000Z series? It's not a supported feature on the model - it's like saying the non-existent 2G sample rate is not working properly.
If anything is faulty, it's the keygen hacks which are causing that range to appear on the DSO display; it's likely a DS2000 code remnant in the FW (the UltraVision FWs are filled with code from the entire line) which is being incorrectly activated by the keygens.
-
I wonder whether the faulty 500uV resolution was fixed? Maybe I should test that in the next days...
I wondered about that myself, I assumed I must be doing something wrong when I found that range not working properly.
I guess I will give the new software a try.
How can you say the 500uV vertical range is faulty or not working properly on the DS1000Z series? It's not a supported feature on the model - it's like saying the non-existent 2G sample rate is not working properly.
If anything is faulty, it's the keygen hacks which are causing that range to appear on the DSO display; it's likely DS2000 code in the FW (the FWs are filled with code from the entire UltraVision series) which is being incorrectly activated by the keygens.
I guess that's the answer then, I didn't know that was the case. Updating won't make it work then, which is fine by me, it would have been a bonus if it had.
-
I guess that's the answer then, I didn't know that was the case. Updating won't make it work then, which is fine by me, it would have been a bonus if it had.
Well, perhaps it's an option feature they will offer and sell at a later date - but at this point in time, it's not.
-
The problem with the 500 uV/div is that not even the 1 mV/div is working properly. It has triggering issues.
-
Has anyone figured out how to decode .wfm files saved from the DS1000Z series? Obviously I can load them directly on the scope, but it would be nice to look at them on a computer. Unfortunately they seem to be in a completely different format from .wfm files saved from the DS2000 series, so none of the existing tools (that I have found so far) are compatible with it.
-
One ADC for all channels would indicate an analog channel switch which seems rather unlikely given the existence of inexpensive 8 bit 1 GSample/second ADCs and the difficulty of high speed analog multiplexing. Inexpensive designs have an ADC on every channel but are digitally multiplexed with one memory bus and one bank of memory which is what limits the record sizes and sample rates when multiple channels are used.
Well, I own one so can confirm it drops to 250MSa/s and 6Mpts with all 4 channels active.
The ADC costs $80 for a single gigasample channel. That's not particularly cheap for a $580 instrument. I think internally the ADC is probably implemented as 4x250MSa/s channels with an internal multiplexer. Someone linked to the ADC datasheet previously but I can't find that anymore. The data is streamed into an FPGA which has ~32MB of DDR2 and ~1MB of SRAM. The FPGA probably acts as a "camera" for the Freescale i.MX device which controls the LCD directly (unlike the 2000 series where there is a second FPGA for the display management.)
My reply was directed toward Suffer1981de but I should have been more clear.
If one 1 GS/s ADC was shared among four channels, then the analog channel switch would need to multiplex four vertical channels together and be fast enough to settle within the sampling period which would be very difficult. Some early slow DSOs (but higher bandwidth than the DS1074Z!) worked this way but they were quickly replaced with designs that used digital multiplexing and separate digitizers.
Earlier Rigol oscilloscopes and I assume this one use separate digitizers for each channel which may themselves be composed of interleaved ADCs and have a set of channel switches which can direct each input channel to multiple interleaved digitizers for higher sampling rates when using fewer than 4 channels. This is a pretty standard design which has been around for 30+ years now.
-
Earlier Rigol oscilloscopes and I assume this one use separate digitizers for each channel which may themselves be composed of interleaved ADCs and have a set of channel switches which can direct each input channel to multiple interleaved digitizers for higher sampling rates when using fewer than 4 channels. This is a pretty standard design which has been around for 30+ years now.
The correct information about the ADC has already been known for some time: the DSO has been opened and photographed already a few times by different people - it uses a single ADC. In fact, so does the Rigol DS2000 as well - and the DS4000 uses 2 ADCs for 4 channels. And these are all of Rigol's newest DSOs. In fact, many of the newer Chinese DSOs introduced in the last 3 years or so are using just a single ADC (or 2 for 4 channels).
-
Earlier Rigol oscilloscopes and I assume this one use separate digitizers for each channel which may themselves be composed of interleaved ADCs and have a set of channel switches which can direct each input channel to multiple interleaved digitizers for higher sampling rates when using fewer than 4 channels. This is a pretty standard design which has been around for 30+ years now.
The correct information about the ADC has already been known for some time: the DSO has been opened and photographed already a few times by different people - it uses a single ADC. In fact, so does the Rigol DS2000 as well - and the DS4000 uses 2 ADCs for 4 channels. And these are all of Rigol's newest DSOs. In fact, many of the newer Chinese DSOs introduced in the last 3 years or so are using just a single ADC (or 2 for 4 channels).
This confusion is why I tried to distinguish digitizer from ADC in my post. I would not consider a single IC with 4 ADCs to be a single ADC.
I looked for detailed information about this particular model and did not find much. Do you have a link?
This discussion thread says it has 4 ADCs in the form of a quad but the photo looks to me like there is a single quad 1 GS/s ADC and the lower sample rate with multiple channels is caused by limited memory bandwidth on the digital side because I see no analog multiplexing which is what I suggested originally:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-inside-picture/ (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-inside-picture/)
-
This confusion is why I tried to distinguish digitizer from ADC in my post. I would not consider a single IC with 4 ADCs to be a single ADC.
I looked for detailed information about this particular model and did not find much. Do you have a link?
This discussion thread says it has 4 ADCs in the form of a quad but the photo looks to me like there is a single quad 1 GS/s ADC and the lower sample rate with multiple channels is caused by limited memory bandwidth on the digital side because I see no analog multiplexing which is what I suggested originally:
Ahh... semantics. I assumed most people involved in the discussion were using the term 'ADC' to refer to actual packages - especially since the original poster of the question, poorchava, used the phrase, "...one ADC unit..." when posing his question.
I also assumed that most of the participants understood that 1 ADC package per 2 channels means a dual channel ADC chip which is internally interleaved for one channel - and 1 ADC package per 4 channels means a quad channel ADC chip which is internally interleaved for one or two channels (as tom66 explained quite clearly). There have been many discussions on this board on this topic - involving the Owons, Rigols, and other brands using similar designs employing TI ADC08D500, ADC08D1000, ADC08D1020, etc, or Chinese-made clones of those chips.
-
Ahh... semantics. I assumed most people involved in the discussion were using the term 'ADC' to refer to actual packages - especially since the original poster of the question, poorchava, used the phrase, "...one ADC unit..." when posing his question.
I also assumed that most of the participants understood that 1 ADC package per 2 channels means a dual channel ADC chip which is internally interleaved for one channel - and 1 ADC package per 4 channels means a quad channel ADC chip which is internally interleaved for one or two channels (as tom66 explained quite clearly). There have been many discussions on this board on this topic - involving the Owons, Rigols, and other brands using similar designs employing TI ADC08D500, ADC08D1000, ADC08D1020, etc, or Chinese-made clones of those chips.
We do not disagree about how it works but whether the ADCs are interleaved when fewer channels are used or decimated when more channels are used is significant and saying the oscilloscope has 1 ADC because of packaging just makes that determination more difficult although I can imagine marketing being that obtuse.
Has anybody tested these oscilloscopes for aliasing caused by the interleaving? Since the ADCs are integrated I imagine these oscilloscopes perform pretty well in this respect. With oscilloscopes that do not support equivalent time sampling I often find that this is the factor limiting their performance. Agilent has a good application note on the subject:
http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5732EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5732EN.pdf)
-
We do not disagree about how it works but whether the ADCs are interleaved when fewer channels are used or decimated when more channels are used is significant and saying the oscilloscope has 1 ADC because of packaging just makes that determination more difficult although I can imagine marketing being that obtuse.
Has anybody tested these oscilloscopes for aliasing caused by the interleaving? Since the ADCs are integrated I imagine these oscilloscopes perform pretty well in this respect. With oscilloscopes that do not support equivalent time sampling I often find that this is the factor limiting their performance. Agilent has a good application note on the subject:
http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5732EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5732EN.pdf)
Thanks for the link. I'm not aware of detailed tests of the ADCs in this DSO (or others in the series). And because of copying and cloning that seems to be rife, some Chinese manufacturers (Rigol especially) seem to be reticent about releasing detailed info about their hardware - Rigol going so far as to grind off chip markings.
-
We do not disagree about how it works but whether the ADCs are interleaved when fewer channels are used or decimated when more channels are used is significant and saying the oscilloscope has 1 ADC because of packaging just makes that determination more difficult although I can imagine marketing being that obtuse.
Has anybody tested these oscilloscopes for aliasing caused by the interleaving? Since the ADCs are integrated I imagine these oscilloscopes perform pretty well in this respect. With oscilloscopes that do not support equivalent time sampling I often find that this is the factor limiting their performance. Agilent has a good application note on the subject:
http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5732EN.pdf (http://cp.literature.agilent.com/litweb/pdf/5989-5732EN.pdf)
Thanks for the link. I'm not aware of detailed tests of the ADCs in this DSO (or others in the series). And because of copying and cloning that seems to be rife, some Chinese manufacturers (Rigol especially) seem to be reticent about releasing detailed info about their hardware - Rigol going so far as to grind off chip markings.
I included the link because I knew that it is a rather obscure issue considering its impact.
I have noticed before that a lot of these real time DSOs seem to show a lot more noise on fast edges and high frequency signals then my old DSOs operating with equivalent time sampling so I am suspicious that what the displays are actually showing is aliasing produced by their interleaved ADCs. I have not had one to test though since becoming aware of the issue.
My 2440 using interleaving to produce 500 MSamples/second is terrible in this regard but equivalent time sampling at 12.5 GSamples/second clears it right up like it should. I do not think modern DSOs can pull this trick off easily with digital triggering because the aliasing will have already occurred in the trigger path. My guess is that their solution is to digitally calibrate out the phase and amplitude errors from the interleaving after sampling and before triggering.
-
Hello,
I am in the market for a new entry level 4-channel digital scope and am considering both the Rigol DS1074Z, as well as the DS1104Z. Basically, my question is that if cost is a major factor would I get basically the same scope for my money with the lower model, in terms of the 100 MHz bandwidth if I enter the hacked unlock codes? In a nutshell, it seems safe to assume that its not worth spending the extra money for the DS1104Z.
I thank everyone in advance for their replies.
~Robert
-
Yes, it seems that both models have the same hardware.
-
Hi;
I'm an happy owner off a DS1074Z. Until now everything is fine. I upgrade from a DS15052E. I was not disapointed with this either!
I not hacked the scope yet, i will let the trial options expire, then i do the hack.
The version of firmware is 4.0.
-
Hi Guys,
I am thinking about buying a new scope for a "hobby" use. DS1074 seems to be the best solution since a used equipment is not easy to get and prices are much higher in our country. Especially in a comparison with US ebay offers. Shipping costs and import charges kill a good offer as well.
I went through discussions (haven't finished yet) and the biggest concern about DS1074z seems to be a sample rate, which drops down to 250MSPS when four channels are used. I've been thinking about that recently:
Dave reviewed famous HP/Agilent 54622d / 54645d several weeks ago with a good result which is not surprising at all. I think it somehow affected ebay prices and for me it is a hard to get scope. This 200MSPS two channel scope, which I wanted before, costs nearly as much as DS1074z (for me it is about 460€ shipped for Rigol). Is there something else I overlooked ? I think a combination of OLS and ds1074z is hard to beat and a lot of people is still crazy for 54622d according to eBay. Of course I love old true quality test & measurement gear but Rigol has changed the hobby market a lot.
Any comments, recommendations (Yeah I know ds2000) or thoughts?
Best Regards
Jiri
-
1074Z works for me about 5 months now and I'm very happy with it's performance.
I wish it always came with serial decoders and extended memory, oh well ...
Not limited to 1074z but I do like function to save screenshots/waveforms. I consider myself to be a learning hobbyist and being able to document what I'm doing is nice.
Again not unique to the Rigol scope, one thing I didn't realize was how bandwidth is important in digital electronics. I mean 10Mhz square wave distortion in 70Mhz bandwidth is huuuge ;-), but then in 1MHz range (and even more 100kHz RS-SPI-I2C and analog - where I spend most time) everything seems to be perfect. I wish I could compare to some high quality high bandwidth scope.
-
Thanks for your input Opty.
Sure, the sampling rate and the bandwidth limitation are obvious, but I have a possibility to use top class equipment at work (Waverunner etc.) also for my hobby stuff, when really needed :-DMM
Our head of department is a cool guy and don't ask questions when it is pointless...
I use open logic sniffer for digital stuff decoding and I want a scope for stuff like DC-DC converters and analog stuff which I mainly focus to. OK, I am going to order one :-BROKE
-
I've just got my DS1074z from a local distributor. Horayy :-+ The first impression is very good. Nice compact thing waiting for my first state of the art design.
-
The DS1047Z is definitely a terrific bang-per-buck value as long as you do not need more than 70MHz bandwidth. I'm not sure anything comes remotely close to matching it even before you factor in the easy all-features and 100MHz upgrade hacks.
-
Grrrr I've just found out that I got the "S" version by an accident. It would be a nice-to-have thing, but I did pay only for the ds1074z :scared: so I need to contact a distributor tomorrow and return it back. What a shame 8)
Interesting thing is that besides the functionality itself and a marking on the package (which I found later), a system menu does not show the "S" presence. System info just shows a ds1074z variant without mentioning the "S". There is nothing on a housing either.
-
But you do have the Signal generator output on the back?
And you can actually use the Signal generator functionality in the UI as well?
-
I've just found out that I got the "S" version by an accident. ...besides the functionality itself and a marking on the package...
But you do have the Signal generator output on the back?
And you can actually use the Signal generator functionality in the UI as well?
Nope, no signal output BNCs on the back. And no sig gen settings in the Menu. Combined with nothing on the screen SysInfo, or front label, to suggest it's an -S model. Just those two sig icons in the lower right corner. That explains why the OP commented here on how strange that was, and now has to send it back. ::) :palm:
[/sarcasm]
-
Grrrr I've just found out that I got the "S" version by an accident. It would be a nice-to-have thing, but I did pay only for the ds1074z :scared: so I need to contact a distributor tomorrow and return it back. What a shame 8)
Interesting thing is that besides the functionality itself and a marking on the package (which I found later), a system menu does not show the "S" presence. System info just shows a ds1074z variant without mentioning the "S". There is nothing on a housing either.
So how do you know if you have the S version ? it looks like the Z version . I am in the market of obtaining one of these scopes on Ebay and would like to unlock some of the features too. Is there anything I should look for so I get a proper version that can be unlocked ?
I presume asking the seller is the best option, but I am looking at sellers from China aswell.
Thanks for your help :)
-
I need to clarify that because my post seems to be confusing for others :-//
I opened up a package without paying extra attention for a bar code sticker with a model description. After playing with the scope for a while I realized that I have a function generator inbuilt. I would expect that the "S" version will be noted in a system info menu and on the scope housing too. Neither of it is a true.
The practical difference between "S" and non "S" variant is a presence of "Source" button next to a vertical amplifier knob and two extra BNCs for signal generator outputs. I found that next day after my post. It is quite obvious now but for someone who has never had DS1074 in hands it might be confusing.
It is clearly visible on these pictures:
http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1074Z.html (http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1074Z.html)
http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1074Z-S.html (http://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Rigol-DS1074Z-S.html)
note: be carefoulf, ebay shops often show a DS1074z-s for DS1074z auctions. Eg. here:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/161313572512 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/161313572512)
-
Thanks Warhawk for the reply, yes you are right about the confusion about people that don't actually own the scope. Thanks very much for clarifying that up for me.
So given the model of scope, are you able to use the codes from the keygen to actually unlock the SPI, I2C, 100mhz, 24mpts etc ? with that model you have/had ?
Best regards
-
Your welcome Hexpope. I brought a non-s version to home this morning. A guy in the shop was very happy with me returning the better scope. He would have payed the loss from his own pocket probably and I feel much better, especially when I got a discount before :-+
I have not tried to hack it yet. The scope has a "trial" period for all mentioned features, but I will try it anyway and keep you and others informed. I will probably not hack it to 100MHz unless I really need to. It won't improve analog bandwidth either.
edit: I had ds1074z-s and now I have ds1074z.
-
I had ds1074z-s and now I have ds1074z.
Other than honesty, why would you prefer the Non "S" version without the FG ?
I noticed on that ebay listing the seller is listing it as a Non "s" version on the title, but in the description it states it has the FG in it.
So I gather looking at the price the seller is selling it for, it is actually just a normal DS1074Z version and not the "S" version ?
Sorry for all the questions, as I am really thinking of purchasing the unit. I currently have a OWON SDS7102V scope at the moment and looking to upgrade, and this seems like it's really nice for the price with the I2C and SPI decoding
-
I had ds1074z-s and now I have ds1074z.
Other than honesty, why would you prefer the Non "S" version without the FG ?
I noticed on that ebay listing the seller is listing it as a Non "s" version on the title, but in the description it states it has the FG in it.
So I gather looking at the price the seller is selling it for, it is actually just a normal DS1074Z version and not the "S" version ?
Sorry for all the questions, as I am really thinking of purchasing the unit. I currently have a OWON SDS7102V scope at the moment and looking to upgrade, and this seems like it's really nice for the price with the I2C and SPI decoding
I am not saying that a standard version without a generator is better, but I simply think that the tracking generator in "S" version is not worth the money. The second thing is that I do not consider having a generator in oscilloscope as a cool thing. BNCs on the back and a shared GUI for generator and oscilloscope is not my cup of coffee either.
For that price you can buy a used generator on ebay (last time I missed a great price for Tabor electronics generator) which are usually more powerful/handy.
To that ebay link - I think sellers use a general description for both variants. Regarding the price, it is definitely version without a generator.
-
I might want the built in AWG if it was uniquely useful in combination with the oscilloscope but for the most part that is not the case. I would expect such an instrument to do automatic low frequency scalar and vector network analysis but almost none of them do.
Some of the old Tektronix TDS oscilloscopes can do this with any external edge generator and some of the high end LeCroy oscilloscopes can also.
CircuitGear makes some USB oscilloscopes with built in AWGs which do this:
http://www.syscompdesign.com/CircuitGear-Mini_p_29.html (http://www.syscompdesign.com/CircuitGear-Mini_p_29.html)
http://www.syscompdesign.com/CircuitGear_p_8.html (http://www.syscompdesign.com/CircuitGear_p_8.html)
-
I have not tried to hack it yet. The scope has a "trial" period for all mentioned features, but I will try it anyway and keep you and others informed.
I've got the DS1104Z for about a month now and hacked it the second day. ;) I used this c-source file:
http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol.c (http://gotroot.ca/rigol/riglol.c)
Compiled according to the instructions in the beginning of the file (used xubuntu linux). Works perfectly! (I have firmware version 4.00)
Unlocks other rigols too (DS2000/4000, DP832 etc. Have a look at the show_help function)
-
The DS1074 looks like a contender, and a four-channel unit is a plus. Unfortunately, they weren't available when I bought my scope last August, so I ended up with a (now hacked) DS2072.
-
Got the scope today, and I must say it's a big plus from my older scope. I am really happy with it, and DSAB,DSAC,DSAE,DSAJ,DSEA gen works perfectly.4.01 SP2 Board version 0.1.1
-
released yesterday September the 15th the 50MHz verison DS1054Z
this model will not come with FG integrated (S versione) and neither MSO
Euro price 299
http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z (http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z)
:-+
-
So guys, start placing bets?
Wonder if the old hacks still work on this one as well. If so, the value-for-money just jammed through the roof for the DS1000Z series.
Though I'm probably not getting my hopes up just yet.
-
So guys, start placing bets?
Wonder if the old hacks still work on this one as well. If so, the value-for-money just jammed through the roof for the DS1000Z series.
Though I'm probably not getting my hopes up just yet.
I don't know if that scope that gmit77 stated in the post above my previous one will support the Keygen. I presume somebody will have to buy one and test it.
-
released yesterday September the 15th the 50MHz verison DS1054Z
this model will not come with FG integrated (S versione) and neither MSO
Euro price 299
Wow, that's a great price - although that's without VAT.
-
So guys, start placing bets?
Wonder if the old hacks still work on this one as well. If so, the value-for-money just jammed through the roof for the DS1000Z series.
Though I'm probably not getting my hopes up just yet.
I don't know if that scope that gmit77 stated in the post above my previous one will support the Keygen. I presume somebody will have to buy one and test it.
I have ordered one, hopefully it will come soon :-/O
-
I have ordered one, hopefully it will come soon :-/O
Let us how you get on when you get it regarding the Keygen !
-
Even if the keygen does not work, it's an absolute bargain for 355 euros (Batronix). Tektronix and Agilent is not going to like this with their low-cost bottom of the market models.
If I was in marketing at Tek and Agilent I would offer also a 4 channel, 50 MHz scope for the same or cheaper price (including 4 probes) :-DD
-
I've been saving up for a DS1074Z for ages (and wondering how to explain it to my wife), endlessly trying to convince myself the DS1052E wouldn't be bad (old design, only two channels).
Then today I saw this!!
If the keygen works then it's a sale. Today. Take my money, Rigol!
(Even if it doesn't...I might buy it anyway. I don't _really_ need the extra bandwidth but the serial decoder, etc. would be nice to have).
-
Just got a shipping update, will have it in about 2 weeks time ;D
-
Just got a shipping update, will have it in about 2 weeks time ;D
Two weeks ? Is the unit actually not released yet ? or backlog ? Or are they shipping it by snail mail ?
-
Even if the keygen does not work, it's an absolute bargain for 355 euros (Batronix).
Two weeks ? Is the unit actually not released yet ? or backlog ? Or are they shipping it by snail mail ?
For those interested in one of the DS1054Zs here in the EU, I strongly suggest you PM (or email) EEVblog member Drieg (Petr Smid) to see if/when he might have them in stock (I don't see them listed on his site yet (http://www.silcon.cz/index.php?route=product/category&path=20_59_67)), because he will meet (and sometimes beat) Batronix deals - plus he's the nicest, most attentive dealer I've ever dealt with. He always sends me the latest FW updates as soon as he receives it. I would never buy a Rigol product (or anything he carries) in Europe without checking in with him first.
I sent my DS2000 to him for warranty repair of the Horizontal scale encoder, and he turned it around incredibly fast. Then months later, when he lent me a Siglent SDS2000 for review, he included 5 spare small knobs for my Rigol and a note which read, "I noticed a couple of cracks in your smaller knobs when I did the repair, but forgot to replace them - here are some extras." And I had never even noticed the cracks! He's just a great person to do with business with.
-
I strongly suggest you PM (or email) EEVblog member Drieg (Petr Smid) ...
Totally agree, in fact, I bought my DS2072 to him.
-
@marmad,
Now that sounds like the best customer service you can receive. I must bookmark that site for friends and future needs.
Thanks :)
-
The DS1054Z is listed on Allied Electronic as a Keysight and currently uncategorized for $212 less than the DS1047Z. (I'm looking at Canadian prices - $456 vs $668)
If Allied had it in stock, I would have ordered one right now - I had been itching to get a DS1047Z for personal use for many months and was planning to buy one by the end of the week (I almost checked out on Allied an hour ago) before I read this.
-
Just got a shipping update, will have it in about 2 weeks time ;D
Two weeks ? Is the unit actually not released yet ? or backlog ? Or are they shipping it by snail mail ?
They will receive the stock in a week, then another week for shipping/customs. Got it from Tequipment.
-
Just got a shipping update, will have it in about 2 weeks time ;D
Two weeks ? Is the unit actually not released yet ? or backlog ? Or are they shipping it by snail mail ?
They will receive the stock in a week, then another week for shipping/customs. Got it from Tequipment.
Thanks for letting me know. ;)
-
@marmad,
Now that sounds like the best customer service you can receive. I must bookmark that site for friends and future needs.
Thanks :)
No problem. People often complain about Rigol's customer service and responsiveness - and often for good cause, since they can be shit at it. But the best way to bypass that possible problem is to buy from a dealer that is quick, responsive, and committed (and being a great guy doesn't hurt either ;) ) .
-
If Allied had it in stock, I would have ordered one right now - I had been itching to get a DS1047Z for personal use for many months and was planning to buy one by the end of the week (I almost checked out on Allied an hour ago) before I read this.
Me too. I was just checking the bank account and checking out the DS1047Z whan I saw this. I'd have been very upset if it appeared right after I paid for a S1047Z (like I said, I don't _really_ need the bandwidth, it's the 4 channels I'm after).
-
@marmad,
Now that sounds like the best customer service you can receive. I must bookmark that site for friends and future needs.
Thanks :)
No problem. People often complain about Rigol's customer service and responsiveness - and often for good cause, since they can be shit at it. But the best way to bypass that possible problem is to buy from a dealer that is quick, responsive, and committed (and being a great guy doesn't hurt either ;) ) .
Might have to check him out....
-
Me too. I was just checking the bank account and checking out the DS1047Z whan I saw this. I'd have been very upset if it appeared right after I paid for a S1047Z (like I said, I don't _really_ need the bandwidth, it's the 4 channels I'm after).
Hehe, much the same here. Even 20MHz would be enough for 99% of what I do on a regular basis - mainly troubleshooting power-related issues - and four channels makes monitoring multi-rail devices for potentially correlated glitches a heck of a lot more convenient.
For the remaining 1% of what I want to do, scopes generally fall in the "if you need to ask for the price, you cannot afford it" range.
-
What's going to happen to the DS1052E?
There's now only 60 Euros difference between a DS1052E and a DS1054Z. Who's going to go for the old 2-channel 'scope with smaller screen and less functions?
I expect to see people dumping them real soon.
PS: Anybody got hold of a DS1054Z yet...?
-
released yesterday September the 15th the 50MHz verison DS1054Z
this model will not come with FG integrated (S versione) and neither MSO
Euro price 299
http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z (http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z)
:-+
Heh. That thing was listed on TEquipment for a few days when I was shopping for my scope, and then, suddenly, it disappeared. I'm guessing it is back now.
-
released yesterday September the 15th the 50MHz verison DS1054Z
this model will not come with FG integrated (S versione) and neither MSO
Euro price 299
http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z (http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z)
:-+
Heh. That thing was listed on TEquipment for a few days when I was shopping for my scope, and then, suddenly, it disappeared. I'm guessing it is back now.
ciao, yes it happens when you generate a new page, you activate it for few second just to check it and immediately disable till the official release day.
-
released yesterday September the 15th the 50MHz verison DS1054Z
this model will not come with FG integrated (S versione) and neither MSO
Euro price 299
http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z (http://www.batterfly.com/shop/rigol-ds1054z)
:-+
Heh. That thing was listed on TEquipment for a few days when I was shopping for my scope, and then, suddenly, it disappeared. I'm guessing it is back now.
ciao, yes it happens when you generate a new page, you activate it for few second just to check it and immediately disable till the official release day.
You can still access it, it is just not linked to any other pages. I guess they are waiting for when the stock arrives. I already ordered, and they estimate shipping on the 24th, so I guess it will show up then again.
-
What's going to happen to the DS1052E?
There's now only 60 Euros difference between a DS1052E and a DS1054Z. Who's going to go for the old 2-channel 'scope with smaller screen and less functions?
- someone who doesn't have the extra 60 Euros to spare
- someone taking advantage of new clearance pricing on the 1052E (likely forthcoming)
- someone wanting 25 GSa/s ETS
- someone wanting dual-timebases (alternate channel triggering)
- someone wanting 100 MHz BW (the 1052E is easily hacked)
- someone wanting to talk to it over RS232
- someone annoyed with having all those extra channels on the Z "in the way" <grin>
That's all I could think of, off the top of my head. There may be others.
-
DS1054Z available in stock right now!
-
- someone wanting dual-timebases (alternate channel triggering)
Just to point out: I've mentioned a few times that the Delay trigger on the Rigol works perfectly fine as alternate channel triggering - though granted, it's an 'Option' on the UltraVision DSOs.
-
What's going to happen to the DS1052E?
There's now only 60 Euros difference between a DS1052E and a DS1054Z. Who's going to go for the old 2-channel 'scope with smaller screen and less functions?
- someone who doesn't have the extra 60 Euros to spare
- someone taking advantage of new clearance pricing on the 1052E (likely forthcoming)
- someone wanting 25 GSa/s ETS
- someone wanting dual-timebases (alternate channel triggering)
- someone wanting 100 MHz BW (the 1052E is easily hacked)
- someone wanting to talk to it over RS232
- someone annoyed with having all those extra channels on the Z "in the way" <grin>
That's all I could think of, off the top of my head. There may be others.
After Your post I started searching about real time sampling and equivalent time sampling and this is what I found.
http://www.tek.com/document/application-note/real-time-versus-equivalent-time-sampling (http://www.tek.com/document/application-note/real-time-versus-equivalent-time-sampling)
Conclusion is that RTS is way better than ETS, ETS is used only when the real-time bandwidth is lower than the analog bandwidth.
"The TDS 620 and TDS 640 digital scopes have a 500 MHz bandwidth and 2 GS/s sample rate. Their theoretical real-time bandwidth is 2 GS/s divided by 2.5 = 800 MHz. Since the TDS 600 scopes cannot pass signals higher than 500 MHz without distorting them, their real-time bandwidth equals their analog bandwidth. Because the two bandwidths are the same, these scopes can easily acquire signals in real-time up to the analog bandwidth of the scope. Digital scopes only require equivalent-time sampling when the real-time bandwidth is lower than the analog bandwidth. Since the TDS 600 scopes can acquire signals up to the bandwidth of the scope with one trigger event, they offer only real-time sampling."
So on DS1074Z using 2 channels (500MS/s) we get 500MS/s / 2,5S = 200M/s (200MHz) theoretical real-time bandwidth. Even on 4 channels we still get 100MHz theoretical real-time bandwidth. Even considering that Rigol scopes needs 2 times more samples to create decent result we wont go lower than 50MHz theoretical real-time bandwidth.
So there is no point in using worse method which is ETS and this is why its not pointed in DS1000Z data sheet.
So "25 GSa/s ETS" isn't something that makes DS1052E better than DS1074Z which also can be hacked.
-
So on DS1074Z using 2 channels (500MS/s) we get 500MS/s / 2,5S = 200M/s (200MHz) theoretical real-time bandwidth. Even on 4 channels we still get 100MHz theoretical real-time bandwidth. Even considering that Rigol scopes needs 2 times more samples to create decent result we wont go lower than 50MHz theoretical real-time bandwidth.
So there is no point in using worse method which is ETS and this is why its not pointed in DS1000Z data sheet.
So "25 GSa/s ETS" isn't something that makes DS1052E better than DS1074Z which also can be hacked.
There is a problem with your logic. The 4-channels-ON BW of the DS1074Z is nothing close to a usable 100MHz. Sin(x)/x interpolation is worthless because the frequencies above the Nyquist rate aren't attenuated nearly enough - which means you should really always use linear interpolation with 3 or 4 channels on, making the functionable real-time bandwidth more like 25MHz.
This 2.5x ratio is considered JUST adequate when you have very good BW frequency response. As a LeCroy document states: "SinX interpolation works very well only when this ratio is greater than 2:1 - 3:1 is a good ratio with 4:1 usually working almost perfectly."
But even then, as this Yokogawa document states, "This formula only applies to sinusoidal (single frequency) signals, which allows the instrument's sinusoidal interpolation feature to be used. For more complex signals, the sampling rate should be well over 2.5 times the highest frequency component of interest, in order to faithfully reproduce the waveshape."
In other words, you have to build a DSO to work well with linear interpolation. That's why a sampling rate of 10x the BW is the standard formula for most modern DSOs. For example, the Rigol DS2000 has a sampling rate of 2GSa/s - allowing a 200MHz maximum BW (and making their 300MHz DS2000A slightly suspect).
-
DS1054Z We have 60 shipping 9/23. If you are in Italy order from batterfly. If not feel free to contact us.
Thanks
Evan Cirelli
-
The 4-channels-ON BW of the DS1074Z is nothing close to a usable 100MHz. Sin(x)/x interpolation is worthless because the frequencies above the Nyquist rate aren't attenuated nearly enough - meaning you should always use linear interpolation with 3 or 4 channels on, making the functionable real-time bandwidth more like 25MHz.
So .... the "50MHz" version will work just as well as the "100MHz" version with all 4 channels on?
-
We have them coming in 7 days. Buy from someone who knows product and knows Rigol!
-
The 4-channels-ON BW of the DS1074Z is nothing close to a usable 100MHz. Sin(x)/x interpolation is worthless because the frequencies above the Nyquist rate aren't attenuated nearly enough - meaning you should always use linear interpolation with 3 or 4 channels on, making the functionable real-time bandwidth more like 25MHz.
So .... the "50MHz" version will work just as well as the "100MHz" version with all 4 channels on?
Maybe better. Actual response of a 100 MHz 1000Z is down -3 dB around 130 MHz, and extends well past that, with significant detection. With 3 or 4-channels on, sampling at its max of 250 MHz, higher frequencies that may exist in your circuit will not be attenuated enough, resulting in spurious aliases.
The key there is not to use sinx/x, and stick to linear interpolation. Unless you enjoy chasing ghosts. I believe the 1000Z does have the option to disable sinx/x interpolation. Which is good, as long as you remember to use it when necessary.
-
So on DS1074Z using 2 channels (500MS/s) we get 500MS/s / 2,5S = 200M/s (200MHz) theoretical real-time bandwidth. Even on 4 channels we still get 100MHz theoretical real-time bandwidth. Even considering that Rigol scopes needs 2 times more samples to create decent result we wont go lower than 50MHz theoretical real-time bandwidth.
The problem with sampling waveforms at rates barely above Nyquist is that near your maximum input frequency, you barely manage to capture two points per cycle which is not much of a wave form - you cannot see any details in signal components close to that.
If you are looking at a waveform which may have important details near 100MHz, you would want 10+ samples per cycle of those details and this means you would need the DS1xxxZ's whole 1GSPS focused on a single channel to get reasonable detail. This is where an ETS can come in handy: for repetitive signals, you can fill in gaps between samples by phase/delay-shifting the trigger without needing huge sampling rates.
-
Is there a firmware update for the DS1074Z? Mine is 00.04.00.
Problem is that multiple of the math operators seem to bug. FFT took a lot of fiddling around to get it to display anything. Now I'd need the diff operator and it just brings up a trace called "FFT" that just seems to display random peaks that do not correlate with the waveform in any way.
-
I just ordered my DS1054Z...
-
In most cases, you wouldn't need the full 70/100MHz bandwidth across four channels. Typical use case for four channels: motor drives, SPI analysis, I2C analysis + DAC output, etc. 20MHz filter can be turned on to avoid aliasing.
-
Hi folks, new member here, I was going to buy a scope today (have been waiting for DS1074Z stock) but suddenly the DS1054Z showed up and had me thinking. So I signed up here to investigate. If someone could make a quick check on the DS1074Z software hacks when their DS1054Z arrives I'd be very thankful. I'll be following any updates!
-
I will also be getting the DS1054Z in the next week.
Hopefully somebody else will already try the "DSER" code. ;D
-
In most cases, you wouldn't need the full 70/100MHz bandwidth across four channels. Typical use case for four channels: motor drives, SPI analysis, I2C analysis + DAC output, etc.
The least typical use I have had for high bandwidth and sampling rate was locating a nasty noise source on a PCB by putting two probes across the ground plane and measuring the time delay between the noise spikes at both locations to calculate the source's distance from the probes. Turned out it was a driver conflict between my FPGA and an external bidirectional buffer - the FPGA was switching from in to out faster than the external chip could so I had to tweak timings a little further to fix my ground/power bounce issue.
-
I will also be getting the DS1054Z in the next week.
Hopefully somebody else will already try the "DSER" code. ;D
Nothing to be scared of. Rigol might do something so the keygens don't work any more but they're not going to brick scopes just because somebody enters an invalid code. They'd gain nothing and the user backlash simply wouldn't be worth it.
-
I wonder why Rigol does not offer any ETS in DS1000 and higher series. As You guys said it can help in some waveforms where some peaks could appear. Maybe Multi-level Intensity Grading Display is something what is designed to replace ETS, what do You think?
-
Intensity grading is completely different to ETS... you can have one and/or the other...
Since almost all function in the DS1000Z is on one massive FPGA, it may have come down to availability of logic space.
-
I wonder why Rigol does not offer any ETS in DS1000 and higher series. As You guys said it can help in some waveforms where some peaks could appear. Maybe Multi-level Intensity Grading Display is something what is designed to replace ETS, what do You think?
It would certainly help with repetitive waveforms.
My guess is that they figure their high real time sample rates are good enough even though they are lower, in many cases orders of magnitude lower, then the equivalent time sample rates of very old DSOs.
Don't current low end real time Tektronix DSOs also forgo support for equivalent time sampling?
For two channel DSOs which have digital internal triggering and an external trigger, there is also a problem of supporting equivalent time sampling with both internal and external triggering. How does the external trigger on a Rigol DSO which uses digital internal triggering perform? Is there sample jitter between the external trigger and vertical input? I have never seen this tested.
-
I will also be getting the DS1054Z in the next week.
Hopefully somebody else will already try the "DSER" code. ;D
Nothing to be scared of. Rigol might do something so the keygens don't work any more but they're not going to brick scopes just because somebody enters an invalid code. They'd gain nothing and the user backlash simply wouldn't be worth it.
I got my DS1054Z today. The "DSER" code seems to work.
-
Awsome news. Guess this means I'm ordering it in the next week or so. :-+
Thanks.
-
Intensity grading is completely different to ETS... you can have one and/or the other...
Since almost all function in the DS1000Z is on one massive FPGA, it may have come down to availability of logic space.
I do not think ETS requires much logic at all to implement: you do exactly the same thing as real-time and simply have a programmable trigger delay for each trigger; the digital persistence logic should be able to merge dots from multiple trigger passes into a dot accumulation waveform with little to no modifications.
To me, the most tricky part looks like it would be correlating the trigger's timing to the sampling clock so each trigger pass can be fitted correctly in the reconstructed waveform... easiest way I can think of would be to time the number of ETS clock cycles between trigger and ADC clock to calculate the relative offset between the two and where the pass' samples fit in the overall waveform.
-
I will also be getting the DS1054Z in the next week.
Hopefully somebody else will already try the "DSER" code. ;D
Nothing to be scared of. Rigol might do something so the keygens don't work any more but they're not going to brick scopes just because somebody enters an invalid code. They'd gain nothing and the user backlash simply wouldn't be worth it.
I got my DS1054Z today. The "DSER" code seems to work.
SWEET! O0
Edit: Does that bump you up to 100Mhz?
-
The least typical use I have had for high bandwidth and sampling rate was locating a nasty noise source on a PCB by putting two probes across the ground plane and measuring the time delay between the noise spikes at both locations to calculate the source's distance from the probes. Turned out it was a driver conflict between my FPGA and an external bidirectional buffer - the FPGA was switching from in to out faster than the external chip could so I had to tweak timings a little further to fix my ground/power bounce issue.
That's a pretty slick technique. Thanks, Daniel. :-+
-
That's a pretty slick technique. Thanks, Daniel. :-+
When you have overpowered tools, it always feels nice to come up with different and sometimes unexpected ways to use them. Before that incident, I never really thought I would actually find a need to measure voltage across a ground plane.
-
I got my DS1054Z today. The "DSER" code seems to work.
DS1104 at price of 1054!!!!!!WTF
-
I got my DS1054Z today. The "DSER" code seems to work.
DS1104 at price of 1054!!!!!!WTF
Don't forget with all "offcial" options.
I'm tempted but I don't need it.
-
Hi, I've just wanted to inform you, that I was able to generate all codes here:
http://riglol.3owl.com/ (http://riglol.3owl.com/)
except "recorder option"
edit: hmm I used ds2000 section, I think DS1000z is new. I will check it out right after my holiday.
-
I got my DS1054Z today. The "DSER" code seems to work.
SWEET! O0
Edit: Does that bump you up to 100Mhz?
bump!
please verify?
-
I just ordered my DS1054Z...
I'm getting one too. Amazing price point for a 4 channel scope.
Anyone know if they have changed the hardware from the 1074Z? Or just decided to now offer a 50MHz software limited version at a lower price point?
-
What's going to happen to the DS1052E?
There's now only 60 Euros difference between a DS1052E and a DS1054Z. Who's going to go for the old 2-channel 'scope with smaller screen and less functions?
I expect to see people dumping them real soon.
Yep, it's now almost totally redundant, and about time, it is very long in the tooth.
-
I just ordered my DS1054Z...
I'm getting one too. Amazing price point for a 4 channel scope.
Anyone know if they have changed the hardware from the 1074Z? Or just decided to now offer a 50MHz software limited version at a lower price point?
Wouldn't it cost them more to set up a separate production line for this scope than they'd save by removing a couple of components? (I assume the 1074Z is already pared to the minimum by now).
Me? I suspect this is preparation for dropping the DS1052E from their product line (which will save them money).
-
Who from Dave?
Dave said:
I'm getting one too. Amazing price point for a 4 channel scope.
Anyone know if they have changed the hardware from the 1074Z? Or just decided to now offer a 50MHz software limited version at a lower price point?
-
I'm getting one too.
Anyone know if they have changed the hardware from the 1074Z? Or just decided to now offer a 50MHz software limited version at a lower price point?
I'm sure there's an EEVblog video in there somewhere....
-
Wouldn't it cost them more to set up a separate production line for this scope than they'd save by removing a couple of components? (I assume the 1074Z is already pared to the minimum by now).
Yeah, I suspect it's the same, but I'm just floating the idea out there. Maybe the 1074Z was borderline margin wise and they had to shave a few cents somehow?
It's usually not that expensive overall to run the same board and populate less parts for a lower model, if that's possible.
The 1054Z doesn't have the generator option. But I thinks that's the only difference?
Me? I suspect this is preparation for dropping the DS1052E from their product line (which will save them money).
No doubt.
Explains why they didn't do it a the initial release, they still had some sort of investment in the 1052E, maybe a whole bunch of parts they didn't want to write off?
-
Who from Dave?
Emona in Oz, they will have it for AU$439 ex
Insane price. I paid $700 for my 1052E!
-
The 1054Z doesn't have the generator option. But I thinks that's the only difference?
Neither does the 1074Z.
Maybe you're thinking of the 1074Z-S (which costs a lot more than the 1074Z).
-
Neither does the 1074Z.
Maybe you're thinking of the 1074Z-S (which costs a lot more than the 1074Z).
Yes, I meant there is no 1054Z-S model.
So that could indicate different internals. But most likely just a marketing position thing.
-
I got my DS1054Z today. The "DSER" code seems to work.
SWEET! O0
Edit: Does that bump you up to 100Mhz?
bump!
please verify?
I unfortunately don't have the right equipment to measure that at home, but the scope thinks its an DS1104Z in the system info.
-
........a photo with model up left and the model on the screen will convince us......
-
........a photo with model up left and the model on the screen will convince us......
Riiiight, because photoshop doesn't exist.
PS: Why on Earth would he lie...?
-
I unfortunately don't have the right equipment to measure that at home, but the scope thinks its an DS1104Z in the system info.
I'd like to see the Info screens, just to note stuff like versions, etc.
-
I unfortunately don't have the right equipment to measure that at home, but the scope thinks its an DS1104Z in the system info.
I'd like to see the Info screens, just to note stuff like versions, etc.
-
i see same fw with 1074
thanks for the photo andse :-+ :-+ :-+
-
are the codes working to unlock the MSO1074 also ??? ;) there should be a mso1054 to replace the DS1052 ?
-
I'd like to see the Info screens, just to note stuff like versions, etc.
<screens provided>
Thanks very much.
-
DS1052E and other comparable scopes use 10 interleaved 60msps ADCs overclocked to 100mhz. ETS is accomplished by using a CPLD to generate phase offset clocks in a deterministic way. This is possible since the sampling clocks are a low 100mhz.
DS2k and DS1074 series use higher integrated ADCs.
DS2k uses a National dual channel ADC with internal sample bridging. DS1074Z uses a Hittite quad ADC overclocked that internally bridges for higher rate. Sampling clocks are much faster.
To support ETS with these designs you will need a method of adjusting sampling phase with low jitter (you can't use an FPGA PLL for this).
Instead you need a more specialized RF synthesizer chip, or clock jitter cleaner, each which adds another $15 to the BOM. So there you go. You can't apply the CPLD method since you'd have to drop the sample clock way down, and yoru ETS would drop by a factor of 10, which makes it just the same as your 1gsps real time.
-
DS1052E and other comparable scopes use 10 interleaved 60msps ADCs overclocked to 100mhz. ETS is accomplished by using a CPLD to generate phase offset clocks in a deterministic way. This is possible since the sampling clocks are a low 100mhz.
DS2k and DS1074 series use higher integrated ADCs.
DS2k uses a National dual channel ADC with internal sample bridging. DS1074Z uses a Hittite quad ADC overclocked that internally bridges for higher rate. Sampling clocks are much faster.
To support ETS with these designs you will need a method of adjusting sampling phase with low jitter (you can't use an FPGA PLL for this).
Instead you need a more specialized RF synthesizer chip, or clock jitter cleaner, each which adds another $15 to the BOM. So there you go. You can't apply the CPLD method since you'd have to drop the sample clock way down, and yoru ETS would drop by a factor of 10, which makes it just the same as your 1gsps real time.
I think you are confusing equivalent time sampling with interleaving.
Interleaving requires phase aligned sampling clocks and as you point out, it an integrated function of many ADCs now.
Equivalent time sampling requires a measurement of the time between the trigger and sample clock so that once the waveform record has been acquired, it may be aligned with the display record. This can be done either in the analog domain at the time of the trigger or in the digital domain after the triggering occurs and the waveform is stored in the acquisition memory.
Both interleaving and equivalent time sampling require low jitter in the sample clock.
-
Insane price. I paid $700 for my 1052E!
One has to wonder if they are positioning to sell a zillion of these like they did with the 1052E. The conditions are similar in terms of price and the "capability" to user improve them.
I ordered one last night. $375.06 out the door with the eev blog discount and free shipping.
-
I ordered one last night. $375.06 out the door with the eev blog discount and free shipping.
Ditto here (today)...
BTW: For those choosing to pay TEquipment by PayPal for their purchase, you can still enter the discount code after you log into PayPal. Before your final "Agree to Terms" and "Submit Order", on that page you will also see a place to enter the discount code. Once the code is entered, you will immediately see the adjustment to your final price before submitting your order. Could be a little bit confusing, but it works fine... :)
:-+ Thank you TEquipment for your support of forum members!!! :-+
-
I think you are confusing equivalent time sampling with interleaving.
Interleaving requires phase aligned sampling clocks and as you point out, it an integrated function of many ADCs now.
Equivalent time sampling requires a measurement of the time between the trigger and sample clock so that once the waveform record has been acquired, it may be aligned with the display record. This can be done either in the analog domain at the time of the trigger or in the digital domain after the triggering occurs and the waveform is stored in the acquisition memory.
Both interleaving and equivalent time sampling require low jitter in the sample clock.
Right, but as you described, ETS can be accomplished by precisely measuring the jitter at the trigger, or by precisely controlling said jitter by a known amount. If you have any more info on how its accomplished in the former manner, I'd be interested. I'm only familiar with the latter method.
-
You shouldn't post the code in the forum, tequipment asked not to do so.
It's fine to let people know to PM tequipment to get the code.
The reason I know is because I did the same mistake a while back but deleted it from my post after being told about the policy.
-
Right, but as you described, ETS can be accomplished by precisely measuring the jitter at the trigger, or by precisely controlling said jitter by a known amount. If you have any more info on how its accomplished in the former manner, I'd be interested. I'm only familiar with the latter method.
If the sample clock is delayed from the trigger by a specific amount, then normally that is considered to be sequential equivalent time sampling versus random equivalent time sampling. Precision implementations of sequential equivalent time sampling often both control the sampling time with respect to the trigger *and* measure the resulting time difference.
As far as practical time to digital converters, this is a good place to start:
http://www.ko4bb.com/~bruce/TDC.html (http://www.ko4bb.com/~bruce/TDC.html)
Digital storage oscilloscopes which implement digital triggering may also implement equivalent time sampling by using something similar to the transition midpoint timing TDC discussed at the above link. Older digital storage oscilloscopes typically use a dual slope/ramp TDC. Analog sampling oscilloscopes use time to amplitude conversion.
There are several old Tektronix DSOs which support equivalent time sampling and have complete service documentation including schematics and circuit descriptions. The Tektronix 2432 and 2440 for example measure the trigger to sample clock delay with a resolution of better than 40 picoseconds using a relatively simple dual slope/ramp TDC design.
-
Neither does the 1074Z.
Maybe you're thinking of the 1074Z-S (which costs a lot more than the 1074Z).
Yes, I meant there is no 1054Z-S model.
So that could indicate different internals. But most likely just a marketing position thing.
The -S models have a dedicated AWG board:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jameslothian/sets/72157645222357567/ (https://www.flickr.com/photos/jameslothian/sets/72157645222357567/)
That puts it as an artificial limitation, like "you want that extra option? You have to buy stuff you may not need" - similar to Apple Macbooks where you can't upgrade storage on the i5 laptops compared to i7 models.
|O
Nevertheless, I paid 700 euro's for my DS1074Z-S and I'm very happy with the bang per buck. I still use a 4yr old TDS1001B at work, which is really rather depressing if you compare the price difference and what you get (although we all know by know how Tek is on their low-end range scopes).
-
Hi Everyone,
So I'm spoiled by the DS2000 thread that Marmad has with all the great information, what firmware versions there are, etc. Is there any equivalent for the DS1000Z? What versions of firmware are known? Are they hosted anywhere?
Thanks,
Alan
-
I just ordered myself a DS1074Z. Still thinking if I should cancel the order (while I can) and get the DS1054Z. Any news on the DS1054Z hack, does it really work with 100 MHz signal? :scared:
-
It looks like everyone who hacked ds1054z to "ds1104z" don't have a 100MHz+ generator to test it untortunetly.
Dave please do it for us :)
I just ordered myself a DS1074Z. Still thinking if I should cancel the order (while I can) and get the DS1054Z. Any news on the DS1054Z hack, does it really work with 100 MHz signal? :scared:
If I were You I would cancel it and wait a few days to be sure, You can save a lot of money.
-
It looks like everyone who hacked ds1054z to "ds1104z" don't have a 100MHz+ generator to test it untortunetly.
So why even need that? :)
Actually it would be easier to measure rise time. Creating a 2ns edge is super easy and cheap. 1054Z is claimed 7ns, while 1014Z is 3.5ns.
-
It looks like everyone who hacked ds1054z to "ds1104z" don't have a 100MHz+ generator to test it untortunetly.
Dave please do it for us :)
I haven't heard about my unit yet, and I don't know what the hack is?
If I were You I would cancel it and wait a few days to be sure, You can save a lot of money.
Yeah, you can save some serious money here, enough to buy a good multimeter or a low end signal gen.
-
It looks like everyone who hacked ds1054z to "ds1104z" don't have a 100MHz+ generator to test it untortunetly.
I will get mine probably tomorrow.
Since I don't have high speed signal generator I will try to measure rising edge on Arduino Due (84Mhz) and Rasspberry Pi: http://goo.gl/YF9MdW (http://goo.gl/YF9MdW)
But I don't have 50 Ohm feed through terminator so I'm not sure if my measurements will be valid.
-
Look what just came through the door...
-
...and guess what was inside! :-DD
-
I never got this thing of double packing...
once in the department we bought 10 DS4024... we unpacked them... and unpacked them again due to the double box... -_-
it seems they make a matrioska game :D
-
Yeah, thanks for the advice. The order has cancelled by itself. It seems the local dealer didn't have DS1074Z in stock. I guess I'll order a 1054Z from batronix.
-
I never got this thing of double packing...
Maybe somebody at Rigol is an ex-postman.
If you look at the first pic there's a wrinkle in the cardboard at top-right. Looks like it was dropped on that corner.
PS: I just powered it on. So far, so good...
-
I like the double packing, gives more protection and provides a nice inner box to keep for storage.
-
I agree. I saw once the way the packages are thrown all over by the guys paid to handle them... |O
-
Hi,
I never got this thing of double packing...
Maybe somebody at Rigol is an ex-postman.
If you look at the first pic there's a wrinkle in the cardboard at top-right. Looks like it was dropped on that corner.
PS: I just powered it on. So far, so good...
I got my DS2072A and DP832 with this double packing.
Cheers.
---
Daniel
-
DS1054Z arrived here too! Upgrades like a charm :-+
-
Rise time pics before and after upgrade of DS1054Z
250mV does not really count :D
Generate at least 2.5Vpp signal.
-
Rise time pics before and after upgrade of DS1054Z
250mV does not really count :D
Generate at least 2.5Vpp signal.
Good luck with your comments
-
Rise time pics before and after upgrade of DS1054Z
250mV does not really count :D
Generate at least 2.5Vpp signal.
Good luck with your comments
What do you mean? :-//
-
It looks like everyone who hacked ds1054z to "ds1104z" don't have a 100MHz+ generator to test it untortunetly.
I will get mine probably tomorrow.
Since I don't have high speed signal generator I will try to measure rising edge on Arduino Due (84Mhz) and Rasspberry Pi: http://goo.gl/YF9MdW (http://goo.gl/YF9MdW)
But I don't have 50 Ohm feed through terminator so I'm not sure if my measurements will be valid.
If you have access to an analog VGA output, the sync and video signals are a pretty good source for clean and fast rise and fall time signals.
-
Tnx. I'll see what I can find. (I do have some old laptops)
The scope was delivered today but I'll get to play with it after I get home from work.
I also plan to make one of these 50ohm terminators: http://goo.gl/ICvuHB (http://goo.gl/ICvuHB)
-
For those interested in one of the DS1054Zs here in the EU, I strongly suggest you PM (or email) EEVblog member Drieg (Petr Smid) to see if/when he might have them in stock (I don't see them listed on his site yet (http://www.silcon.cz/index.php?route=product/category&path=20_59_67)), because he will meet (and sometimes beat) Batronix deals - plus he's the nicest, most attentive dealer I've ever dealt with. He always sends me the latest FW updates as soon as he receives it. I would never buy a Rigol product (or anything he carries) in Europe without checking in with him first.
i think you checked wrong category (2 channel)...see under 4 channel, he seems to have them ( Brand: Rigol
Product Code: DS1054Z
Availability: In Stock ), and on top (of nice price) delivery in eu is free.
i better contact him to check. ;)
-
If you have access to an analog VGA output, the sync and video signals are a pretty good source for clean and fast rise and fall time signals.
I connected it to the sync signal of a VGA output and saw approx. 4.7 ns Risetime. I don't have much electronic experience, so I don't know if it really handles 100Mhz.
On the colour signals I was not getting clean signals. Resolution of the signal was 1440x900 which should give 106Mhz.
-
I've been using a tactile switch just for fun to see how quickly it can drop and it seems to work reasonably well. One side of the switch is grounded and the other is run to a resistor to vcc. I then use the scope probe with the ground spring on the side of the switch connected to vcc. Set the scope to measure fall time, trigger on falling, set the threshold to the center, and press the button. On my ds2072 I get around 1.2nS or so. It seemed like last year when I was doing this I had it even lower than this though.
-
If you have access to an analog VGA output, the sync and video signals are a pretty good source for clean and fast rise and fall time signals.
I connected it to the sync signal of a VGA output and saw approx. 4.7 ns Risetime. I don't have much electronic experience, so I don't know if it really handles 100Mhz.
On the colour signals I was not getting clean signals. Resolution of the signal was 1440x900 which should give 106Mhz.
Bandwidth depends on transition time and not resolution. The last time I used a VGA output like this, even the sync signal edge times were faster than 300 MHz (*) so your 4.7 nanosecond rise time implies a bandwidth of 75 MHz (0.35 / 4.7e-9). I am not sure how much faster than 300 MHz they are because that is the bandwidth of the fastest oscilloscope I have tried this with which did indeed report about 1.15 nanoseconds.
The color signals are more difficult to use but green should have the sync signals embedded in it. If your oscilloscope supports TV triggering, then it should be able to use the green signal just like a composite video signal. All of my Tektronix oscilloscopes which support TV triggering have worked correctly with the green VGA signal as the trigger source which I thought was pretty amazing given that they were intended for NTSC and PAL. My ancient Tektronix 2440 DSO with the TV trigger option had no problems counting as many high definition scan lines as I could generate which was 1200 and more.
(*) VGA pixel clocks at high resolution require bandwidths of 300 MHz and higher but the performance implied by that bandwidth applies at any resolution. In the past, VGA card bandwidth was part of the specifications because even at lower resolutions, it has an impact on display clarity.
-
If your oscilloscope supports TV triggering, then it should be able to use the green signal just like a composite video signal. All of my Tektronix oscilloscopes which support TV triggering have worked correctly with the green VGA signal as the trigger source which I thought was pretty amazing given that they were intended for NTSC and PAL. My ancient Tektronix 2440 DSO with the TV trigger option had no problems counting as many high definition scan lines as I could generate which was 1200 and more.
It would be interesting to know how the Rigol responds to that, since it's spec sheet claims it maxes out at 576p. The DS2000 specs higher, but that could simply be a matter of product differentiation. Or, as you've mentioned before, Rigol could have imposed an artificial line-count limitation.
-
I connected it to the sync signal of a VGA output and saw approx. 4.7 ns Risetime. I don't have much electronic experience, so I don't know if it really handles 100Mhz.
On the colour signals I was not getting clean signals. Resolution of the signal was 1440x900 which should give 106Mhz.
Is that with a hacked or unhacked DS1054Z?
-
I just output an 8MHz square wave on a pin of my Arduino Uno and the rise time displayed on screen wobbles between 4.000 and 5.000ns.
(hacked 'scope, one active channel)
Edit: And very little ringing, I'm impressed....
-
I've been using a tactile switch just for fun to see how quickly it can drop and it seems to work reasonably well. One side of the switch is grounded and the other is run to a resistor to vcc. I then use the scope probe with the ground spring on the side of the switch connected to vcc. Set the scope to measure fall time, trigger on falling, set the threshold to the center, and press the button. On my ds2072 I get around 1.2nS or so. It seemed like last year when I was doing this I had it even lower than this though.
I tried it with a switch and got around 2 ns (1.9 was the best).
-
I connected it to the sync signal of a VGA output and saw approx. 4.7 ns Risetime. I don't have much electronic experience, so I don't know if it really handles 100Mhz.
On the colour signals I was not getting clean signals. Resolution of the signal was 1440x900 which should give 106Mhz.
Is that with a hacked or unhacked DS1054Z?
It is hacked with the 100 Mhz option.
-
If you have access to an analog VGA output, the sync and video signals are a pretty good source for clean and fast rise and fall time signals.
I connected it to the sync signal of a VGA output and saw approx. 4.7 ns Risetime. I don't have much electronic experience, so I don't know if it really handles 100Mhz.
On the colour signals I was not getting clean signals. Resolution of the signal was 1440x900 which should give 106Mhz.
Bandwidth depends on transition time and not resolution. The last time I used a VGA output like this, even the sync signal edge times were faster than 300 MHz (*) so your 4.7 nanosecond rise time implies a bandwidth of 75 MHz (0.35 / 4.7e-9). I am not sure how much faster than 300 MHz they are because that is the bandwidth of the fastest oscilloscope I have tried this with which did indeed report about 1.15 nanoseconds.
The color signals are more difficult to use but green should have the sync signals embedded in it. If your oscilloscope supports TV triggering, then it should be able to use the green signal just like a composite video signal. All of my Tektronix oscilloscopes which support TV triggering have worked correctly with the green VGA signal as the trigger source which I thought was pretty amazing given that they were intended for NTSC and PAL. My ancient Tektronix 2440 DSO with the TV trigger option had no problems counting as many high definition scan lines as I could generate which was 1200 and more.
(*) VGA pixel clocks at high resolution require bandwidths of 300 MHz and higher but the performance implied by that bandwidth applies at any resolution. In the past, VGA card bandwidth was part of the specifications because even at lower resolutions, it has an impact on display clarity.
It worked now, but the Risetime was lower on the color channles than on the sync signal (10-15ns / 4.7).
-
It is hacked with the 100 Mhz option.
I wonder if it is _any_ different unhacked. I've got one coming Tuesday. I'll test it before and after.
-
I've been using a tactile switch just for fun to see how quickly it can drop and it seems to work reasonably well. One side of the switch is grounded and the other is run to a resistor to vcc. I then use the scope probe with the ground spring on the side of the switch connected to vcc. Set the scope to measure fall time, trigger on falling, set the threshold to the center, and press the button. On my ds2072 I get around 1.2nS or so. It seemed like last year when I was doing this I had it even lower than this though.
The ancient Tektronix type 109 pulse generator uses this technique with a mercury wetted reed relay to generate 250 picosecond rise time pulses up to 300 volts.
http://w140.com/tekwiki/wiki/109 (http://w140.com/tekwiki/wiki/109)
-
ciao, yes RIGOL has pretty often the double package and it is really good for us since we are more confident to ship instruments to users.
there are some items very difficult to predict as the DS1052E, it comes very often with single pkg, in this case we add one more bo with some soft protection insede, trying not to make the new pkg too big.
I agree. I saw once the way the packages are thrown all over by the guys paid to handle them... |O
-
Guys do you have any idea if there is a chance to get rid of the YT screen when I enable XY ? I mean I would like to have XY mode all over the screen.
If not, is there a SW which can show XY mode in better resolution ?
-
Just got my DS1054Z in a double box. It is now unboxed, and a DS1104Z with all options... ;)
-
Guys do you have any idea if there is a chance to get rid of the YT screen when I enable XY ? I mean I would like to have XY mode all over the screen.
If not, is there a SW which can show XY mode in better resolution ?
I've asked the same question to the Rigol official support and they told me it is not possible. :--
Mauro
-
I've asked the same question to the Rigol official support and they told me it is not possible. :--
It is possible allright, they just have to change their software...
-
I've asked the same question to the Rigol official support and they told me it is not possible. :--
It is possible allright, they just have to change their software...
Actually the answer was something like "NO because the XY mode is gathered from what is displayed on the YT plot" :-//
Mauro
-
I never got this thing of double packing...
once in the department we bought 10 DS4024... we unpacked them... and unpacked them again due to the double box... -_-
it seems they make a matrioska game :D
I do installations and service for an ophthalmic equipment supplier. Most of the table-top instruments are packed in a fitted, solid styrofoam support in an inner box, which is suspended on all 8 corners by 1" foam supports inside the outer box. The outer box is sometimes gouged or crushed on a corner, but I've never in 12 years seen an instrument damaged. I've also never seen direct cardboard to cardboard double boxing either, but I suspect it is only to stiffen the box.
-
I've also never seen direct cardboard to cardboard double boxing either, but I suspect it is only to stiffen the box.
I have, and that's not the only reason. The second layer of boxing protects the outside of the product box. Sometimes purchasers appreciate this, but mostly it enables the product to be returned, and still have an undamaged original box. Thus it can be shipped out again (with new labels, markings, etc.) just reusing or replacing the outer box. The inner product box is still "new".
-
For those interested, I compared the High Res mode of DS1000Z and DS2000 - and there at least three big differences in the implementation:
1) High Res can not be applied to a captured waveform (stopped DSO) on the DS1000Z; you can only use it when running.
2) High Res on the DS1000Z is destructive, as opposed to the DS2000 - i.e. the original samples are lost. As seen in the set of test images below made with a 10MHz, 2.5Vpp sine wave acquired in High Res and then stopped (images labelled STOP) - on the DS2000, you can turn High Res back OFF (or ON) after capturing a waveform - removing or applying the filter at will. On the DS1000Z, once the DSO is stopped, you can't recover the original waveform. This might explain the extra 32Mx16 DRAM (beyond sample memory + 8M) that the DS2000 (96Mx16 DRAM) has over the DS1000Z (32Mx16 DRAM).
3) Most importantly: on the DS1000Z, High Res mode appears to be implemented after display decimation - or at least, in some kind of incorrect combination with decimation - resulting in some aliasing and other funky artifacts. As already seen in the previous images, the High Res'ed 10MHz sine wave produces aliasing on the DS1000Z - when it should just be around -18dB, as seen on the DS2000.
12-bit high-resolution requires averaging every 256 samples together, resulting in a low pass filter - with nulls (0V valleys) at the sample rate / 256 (and harmonics). One of those harmonics is 15.625MHz, shown at a vertical scale of 2mV/div on the DS1000Z and DS2000 below. Also shown is the previous 10MHz sine wave at 2mV/div vertical scale on the DS1000Z.
-
Well, having had a chance to play around with it some more, I'd say that High Res mode doesn't actually work (correctly) on the DS1000Z - or, at the very least, it's not really useful. I'm surprised I haven't seen it mentioned before, but perhaps it's been broken in the latest FW revision (I'll report it to Drieg to relay to Rigol).
One last example - a full screen of >25MHz, 3Vpp noise magnified to 100mV/div - first in Normal mode, then High Res - on DS1000Z, then DS2000 (note: the DS2000 has double the sample rate @ 2ms/div, but the results are the same for it's timebases down to at least 1s/div - I didn't bother checking past there).
-
Well, having had a chance to play around with it some more, I'd say that High Res mode doesn't actually work (correctly) on the DS1000Z - or, at the very least, it's not really useful. I'm surprised I haven't seen it mentioned before, but perhaps it's been broken in the latest FW revision (I'll report it to Drieg to relay to Rigol).
One last example - a full screen of >25MHz, 3Vpp noise magnified to 100mV/div - first in Normal mode, then High Res - on DS1000Z, then DS2000 (note: the DS2000 has double the sample rate @ 2ms/div, but the results are the same for it's timebases down to at least 1s/div - I didn't bother checking past there).
Why are all your DS2000 hi-res images from the last two posts, except for one image, a plain horizontal line?
-
Why are all your DS2000 hi-res images a plain horizontal line?
The High Res Mode on DSOs does averaging on the sampled data. Unlike the Average Mode, which does successive capture (i.e. waveform) averaging, the High Res Mode does successive sample averaging - adding together consecutive input sample points to get a single output (display) point - to remove noise and improve the apparent resolution.
As a rule of thumb, 1 bit of resolution improvement may be achieved for each factor of four in samples (e.g. averaging by 64 would improve resolution by about 3 bits; by 256 improves resolution by about 4 bits, etc). But the trade-off for increased resolution is bandwidth: correct successive sample averaging acts like a low pass filter - with null points that are at the frequency of (sample rate/samples averaged) and its harmonics. The LPF function it applies has a -3dB point approximated by the formula 0.433*(s/N), where s = sample rate and N = number of samples averaged.
So to answer your original question: High Res on the DS2000 is working correctly, filtering out the high frequency signals I send it and displaying an amplitude of 0V (or close). Doing 12 bit High Res mode at a sample rate of 1GSa/s or slower should attenuate everything above 10MHz by at least -18dB.
-
Hi Marmad
Thank's for looking at HiRes modes of DS2000 vs DS1000Z series, this is actually pretty interesting and seldom being done or look during most "reviews".
Your tests are even more interesting for me as after playing with my DS1104Z at HiRes mode I get feeling that is is acting bit "strange". But while I do not have experience with other scopes couldn’t tell if that is the problem with implementation of HiRes in DS1000Z or it is just the way HiRes is working. So Your comparison with DS2000 is very interesting.
Could You do bit more comparison of HiRes modes, including Noise Test but with lower frequency, so HiRes engine could actually show how it is handling noise signal, just practical case where HiRes should give different results from Averaging.
And also I very much would like to see how HiRes is working with FFT at DS2000 as per my experiments HiRes FFT's done at DS1104Z are rather far from 14 or even 12 bits FFT's so if You could run some HiRes FFT's of few sinewaves on both scopes would be great.
Rosendorfer
-
Thank's for looking at HiRes modes of DS2000 vs DS1000Z series, this is actually pretty interesting and seldom being done or look during most "reviews".
You're welcome. :)
Your tests are even more interesting for me as after playing with my DS1104Z at HiRes mode I get feeling that is is acting bit "strange". But while I do not have experience with other scopes couldn’t tell if that is the problem with implementation of HiRes in DS1000Z or it is just the way HiRes is working.
No, there are definitely some strange things going on with the implementation on the DS1000Z. The DS2000 follows the mathematical model of successive sample averaging quite well, while the DS1000Z seems to be doing things poorly in comparison.
It's not clear exactly when/how well it works for each possible memory depth setting - the 12k and 120k setting seem to do some averaging in the us/div range, while the 1.2M and higher settings seem to do almost nothing unless in the ms/div and slower ranges (perhaps higher memory depths overwhelm the ability of the engine to keep up unless at slower sample rates). There also seems to be a problem with higher frequencies leaking past the stopband sometimes, as shown by the alias of the 10MHz sine in my previous images (and in the image of the sweep roll-off @ 12k below).
One thing I wanted to mention: I really think the name "High Resolution" is a bit of a misnomer. You won't all of a sudden get more pixels on your DSO display, or a more detailed vertical scale - the results of the averaging still have to be downsampled again for display memory. So it really should just be called "Sample Average" to avoid confusion (with normal Average renamed to "Waveform Average").
It's basically just a low pass filter with a sharp roll-off to a null, then subsequent peaks and nulls through the stopband (as shown in my previously posted image). To better illustrate this, I sent a repeated sine sweep pattern to my DS2000 in Normal mode:
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS2_Sweep_Normal.png)
When I turn on High Res (@ 1.4M), you see the sweep BW roll-off, just as you should:
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS2_Sweep_High_Res.png)
When I switch the memory depth to 14k, the roll-off gets sharper because of the lower sample rate (thus lower bandwidth):
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS2_Sweep_High_Res_14k.png)
Here is the same signal to the MSO1000Z:
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS1Z_Sweep_Normal.png)
When I turn on High Res (@ 12M), there is very little change:
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS1Z_Sweep_High_Res.png)
When I switch the memory depth to 120k, there is a roll-off, but fairly gentle:
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS1Z_Sweep_High_Res_120k.png)
When I switch the memory depth to 12k, there is a sharper roll-off, but then a rise again - almost like a notch filter:
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS1Z_Sweep_High_Res_12k.png)
Could You do bit more comparison of HiRes modes, including Noise Test but with lower frequency, so HiRes engine could actually show how it is handling noise signal, just practical case where HiRes should give different results from Averaging.
Average mode is good for removing non-repetitive noise - no bandwidth is lost, but the trade-off is some throughput (wfrm/s).
High Res mode is good for removing both repetitive and non-repetitive noise - no (or little) throughput is lost, but the trade-off is quite a bit of bandwidth (depending on desired bits of resolution).
Here's a link for a good .PDF document describing the two types of averaging (http://www.daysalive.com/share/EffectsofAveragingtoRejectUnwanted Signals.pdf).
It's hard to get/make a perfect example to demonstrate, but here is a 500Hz sine wave w/repeating high frequency spikes, in Normal mode, Average mode, and then High Res - which recovers the original sine wave fairly well:
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS2_Sine_Normal.png)
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS2_Sine_Average.png)
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS2_Sine_High_Res.png)
And here is a sine wave FFT - in Normal, then High Res/Deep memory (then High Res/Low memory on DS1000Z):
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS2_FFT_Normal.png)
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS2_FFT_High_Res.png)
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS1Z_FFT_Normal.png)
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS1Z_FFT_High_Res_1.2M.png)
(http://www.daysalive.com/share/DS1Z_FFT_High_Res_12k.png)
-
Hi Marmad
First thanks for finding time for doing this , very much apreciated !
DS1004Z is still very nice little scope with plenty of features but...
For now, looks like HiRes mode on DS1000Z is rather marketing feature to put on the box, than real thing.
Looking forward to more of Your tests and hopefully review of DS1054Z.
Have a look at 53000 or even 63000 wfms/s @ 50ns in dot mode at this litle scope.
Rosendorfer
-
For now, looks like HiRes mode on DS1000Z is rather marketing feature to put on the box, than real thing.
Well, this at least explains why the specs for a DS2000A list:
"High Resolution: 12 bits of resolution when >=5 us/div @ 1 GSa/s (or >=10 us/div @ 500 MSa/s).
And the specs for a DS1000Z list:
"High Resolution: 12 bit (max)"
In other words, it does do 12 bits of resolution when you hit just the right magical combination of sample rate and memory depth (I'm guessing one of the very slow timebases, although I haven't found it yet). ;D
Looking forward to more of Your tests and hopefully review of DS1054Z.
Well, I have an MSO1074Z, so I will definitely be doing a review of the LA part, although I'm not sure about the rest of it.
-
Well, I have an MSO1074Z, so I will definitely be doing a review of the LA part, although I'm not sure about the rest of it.
Keep up the good work! Look forward to the LA part review on YouTube :) Drop us a note when the video is online.
-
Posted some more comparison (DS2000/DS1000Z) info here (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds1054z-oscilloscope/msg537081/#msg537081).
-
I bought my MSO1074Z a month ago and have recently been trying to unlock the trial versions. I've tried the gotroot generator and every code it kicks out has been rejected as an invalid license. I've tried 1.03c and d, and even pulled the MSO private key out of their July patch as my SN starts DS1ZC (not DS1ZD as shown in the patch). I'm running FW 4.00.
Any ideas?
-
Yesterday I received a new DS1074Z from TEquipment.net. I 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!
-
Yesterday I received a new DS1074Z from TEquipment.net. I 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!
Go to www.rigolna.com (http://www.rigolna.com), go to the Tech Support page, then click on the firmware request page (link in last paragraph of text). Click Request firmware at the bottom of the page (latest revisions will display, fill it out, and submit).
It's convoluted, but that's what they have set up. :(
-
Bit of an update on the firmware: Rigol posted a direct link to the latest version (http://beyondmeasure.rigoltech.com/acton/fs/blocks/showLandingPage/a/1579/p/p-0019/t/page/fm/0) (source (https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog/eevblog-683-rigol-ds1000z-ds2000-oscilloscope-jitter-problems/msg578208/#msg578208)).