Rigol MSO7000 Unboxing & First Impressions

[David Hess]

No, specification clearly tell that 1mV and 2mV/div are magnification from 4mV/div
Look specs note [2]

So they do.  I saw the footnote marker but searched the whole datasheet for the footnotes and missed them.

[Muxr]

Time is money as they say. If you're looking at this class of scope then you probably just want a known quantity. I really don't see a point in getting a Rigol with its spotty history. Some of the specs do look quite tempting I must admit, but that UI and all the bugs it entails is something you gotta live with. At the entry level you have no choice, but there is much better choice in this price bracket.

I personally wouldn't take a chance on Rigol if I had $3-4K+ to spend on a scope. That R&S RTM 3000 looks mighty fine however.

[Karel]

Don't swallow the continual BS Nico keeps splurting about mature products at release.

Instead, we should swallow the BS from a siglent salesman?

Don't buy anything from siglent if you are not sure you don't want to sell it on Ebay later...

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-they-filed-a-_wrongful-trademark-claim_/

[bitseeker]

Don't buy anything from siglent if you are not sure you don't want to sell it on Ebay later...

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-they-filed-a-_wrongful-trademark-claim_/

That was almost three years ago and it keeps coming back like the Yaigol thread. Ancient history.

Recent history of used Siglent gear actually sold on eBay:

SDS1052DL, 10 days ago
SSA3021X-TG, 14 days ago
SDG5082, 15 days ago
SDS1052DL, 16 days ago
SDG830, 26 days ago
SDG805, 31 days ago
SDS1202XE, 36 days ago
SDS1102X, 40 days ago
SDS1052DL, 42 days ago
SDS1102CML, 42 days ago
SDS1052DL, 43 days ago
SPD3303X-E, 53 days ago
SDS1102CML, 54 days ago
SDS1202X-E, 64 days ago
SDS1102CML, 65 days ago
SDS1052DL, 79 days ago
...
etc.

It's OK to argue, but don't just regurgitate outdated material as supporting evidence.

(Disclaimer: I currently don't own any Siglent equipment, nor do I have any affiliation with Siglent)

[2N3055]

The FFT function discards phase information.  I am still looking or a modern DSO which supports this.

Agree. I really don't understand why it is so hard.

No peak-to-peak triggering.

Would you please explain what you mean. Auto trigger level in middle od P-P of signal? Or peak detection trigger? Both would nice.

No trigger after delayed sweep.

I just use zoom and position.

Supports windowed measurements.

Couldn't find that in a manual. Do you mean gated, meaning you can select with cursors which portion of data to apply measurement to. It has that as far as I could see.

No high resolution acquisition mode?  Does that mean that again measurements are made on the display record?

No high res mode. Fail. OTOH, measurements are made on a 1M decimated data in normal mode ( Keysight 3000 I believe works on  a 64K decimated data), or in full buffer mode so on full 500M if you have it.

1mV/div sure looks like x5 or x10 digital magnification but the specifications unambiguously say 1mV/div sensitivity.

Yes 1 and 2 mV are digital zoom from 4mV. Datasheet. But, Keysight 3000/4000 does the same. R&S 2000/3000/4000 is much better for that than both.

Marketing materials advertise shortened overload recovery time but no specification is given.  Cleverly, this is done as an image so a text search does not find it but it sure caught my eye.

Yes, there are many things like that. Not good.

I could see the interface lag when Dave was operating it.  How slow does it need to be?

It could be faster. I don't see why are there delays redrawing screen on 1 uSec/DIV.

Regards,

Sinisa

[tautech]

Don't swallow the continual BS Nico keeps splurting about mature products at release.

Instead, we should swallow the BS from a siglent salesman?

Don't buy anything from siglent if you are not sure you don't want to sell it on Ebay later...

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-they-filed-a-_wrongful-trademark-claim_/

Oh really that old chestnut again.   

Do you need reminding of this post in that thread :
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/siglent-they-filed-a-_wrongful-trademark-claim_/msg784401/#msg784401

[2N3055]

Time is money as they say. If you're looking at this class of scope then you probably just want a known quantity. I really don't see a point in getting a Rigol with its spotty history. Some of the specs do look quite tempting I must admit, but that UI and all the bugs it entails is something you gotta live with. At the entry level you have no choice, but there is much better choice in this price bracket.

I personally wouldn't take a chance on Rigol if I had $3-4K+ to spend on a scope. That R&S RTM 3000 looks mighty fine however.

I agree in principle. Problem is that unlocked 100MHz MSO version, R&S RTM 3000 MS is 10000€ with VAT(7500€ without VAT ).  MSO7104 unlocked is 5700 € with VAT(4800€ without VAT).

[nctnico]

Time is money as they say. If you're looking at this class of scope then you probably just want a known quantity. I really don't see a point in getting a Rigol with its spotty history. Some of the specs do look quite tempting I must admit, but that UI and all the bugs it entails is something you gotta live with. At the entry level you have no choice, but there is much better choice in this price bracket.

I personally wouldn't take a chance on Rigol if I had $3-4K+ to spend on a scope. That R&S RTM 3000 looks mighty fine however.

I agree in principle. Problem is that unlocked 100MHz MSO version, R&S RTM 3000 MS is 10000€ with VAT(7500€ without VAT ).  MSO7104 unlocked is 5700 € with VAT(4800€ without VAT).

The big question is: do you get the same in reality? If you only need 100MHz there are other options out there like the R&S RTB2000 or GW Instek MSO2000 series.

[2N3055]

The big question is: do you get the same in reality? If you only need 100MHz there are other options out there like the R&S RTB2000 or GW Instek MSO2000 series.

If it works, DS7000 has many things those mentioned don't..

But it remains to be seen if it some advanced prototype or fully featured product.
I have so far compiled few objections:
1. No high res mode. It can do averages from multiple triggers, but not high-res running average mode. Big fail.
2. Still there is visible lag from button changes to starting redraw with new settings. Frankly, it's not a problem, but it simply shouldn't be there. Optimization of that is in order.
3.  It is not low noise front end. It is in DSOX3000/4000 class though, but worse than R&S.. Or Lecroy WS3000 which is also 8 Bit.
4.  No math on math. That's no good. For instance: apply filter, that pipe that to differentiation.  Otherwise you just get too much noise. Especially when you don't have low noise input, and you didn't implement Hires. Fail.
5. Thinking about that, filters should be separate from math. I should be part of channel setup, together with normal hardware bandwith limiting.
6. There is no custom math formulas. Math is worse than (except FFT) than in DS4000. In fact , it is pretty much same as on DS1000Z. Fail.

I'm sure if I had chance to try it I would find more...

Thing is, hardware is capable of being so much more.  We will see if Rigol is capable to bring it to it's full potential.
And of course, how long will it take if they do.

[bitseeker]

Maybe those features are for the DS8000.

[David Hess]

No peak-to-peak triggering.

Would you please explain what you mean. Auto trigger level in middle od P-P of signal? Or peak detection trigger? Both would nice.

Peak-to-peak automatic triggering continuously sets the trigger level to a percentage of the peak-to-peak signal level; it is similar to triggering with AC coupling but it ignores duty cycle.  It is great for fast hands free operation when you are probing around in a circuit.  Automatic level triggering sets the trigger level after the trigger times out which is much slower and annoying if the level drifts to a point where it barely triggers preventing timeout.

I do not know of any modern oscilloscopes which have this feature but that does not stop me from noting its absence.

No trigger after delayed sweep.

I just use zoom and position.

Trigger after delayed sweep removes jitter.  It was more important in video applications but it still has its uses like if I want to view reverse recovery of a diode in a switching regulator where the duty cycle is not stable and I cannot trigger on the reverse recovery itself.

Supports windowed measurements.

Couldn't find that in a manual. Do you mean gated, meaning you can select with cursors which portion of data to apply measurement to. It has that as far as I could see.

Windowed means the measurement area is set by cursors which I found in the manual.  I do not like to use the term gated for this because that more properly means that the measurement window is controlled by some other signal as with a gated frequency counter.

3.  It is not low noise front end. It is in DSOX3000/4000 class though, but worse than R&S.. Or Lecroy WS3000 which is also 8 Bit.

If they say low noise then they should specify the noise level.  The automatic RMS measurement function should be able to measure the noise level directly but on some DSOs, RMS measurements only work on high level noise free signals.

Like "fast overload recovery" and "unlimited internet", everybody has a "low noise front end" when they do not have to specify it.

4.  No math on math. That's no good. For instance: apply filter, that pipe that to differentiation.  Otherwise you just get too much noise. Especially when you don't have low noise input, and you didn't implement Hires. Fail.
5. Thinking about that, filters should be separate from math. I should be part of channel setup, together with normal hardware bandwith limiting.

Something else I always look for is being able to average the output of the FFT and not the input which is handy for making noise measurements.  I would also like to have an FFT normalized to SqrtHz when this is done.  Computers are good at this sort of thing yet I usually end up doing the normalization manually.

[iMo]

Some short videos I've found:
EDIT: all short videos at RigolTech
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLzhNnl9a0-RZz7VyTrkcHw

[1anX]

I wonder what progress has been made by Dave on the teardown and review, anyone know?

[snoopy]

I wonder what progress has been made by Dave on the teardown and review, anyone know?

Hopefully Dave will compare it with the equivalent Keysight scope because Rigol seems to only want to compare it with the Tek MDO3000. Seems a very one sided comparison.

cheers

[1anX]

I wonder what progress has been made by Dave on the teardown and review, anyone know?

Hopefully Dave will compare it with the equivalent Keysight scope because Rigol seems to only want to compare it with the Tek MDO3000. Seems a very one sided comparison.

cheers

Good point and I'm betting it will be compared to Keysight as well as other comparable scopes Dave has experience with in his lab.

The thing that concerns me at the moment is that he did a preliminary tear down and as yet we have heard nothing more. I cant help but wonder if he has encountered a serious flaw/bug and has contacted Rigol for their input before continuing with a review.

He has been given the opportunity by Rigol to do an early review of their product and as yet no show and tell from Dave!

[Pinkus]

A review remains unchanged for years on the Internet - even though the firmware has long since been updated several times. If there are major problems now, I think it's only fair if Dave informs Rigol and requests a feedback (or maybe he was promised a rush job of bug fixing of the firmware and he is waiting for this).
Anyway: I am sure, creating a large review with comparisons to other scopes will take days. If the video has 60 minutes, I am sure shooting and editing will take much much longer.

[iMo]

There is an user who owns 7000 for several weeks and he has already found an issue
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds7000/msg1749839/#msg1749839

A review remains unchanged for years on the Internet - even though the firmware has long since been updated several times. If there are major problems now, I think it's only fair if Dave informs Rigol and requests a feedback (or maybe he was promised a rush job of bug fixing of the firmware and he is waiting for this).

I do not think so.
An independent review shows the reality as-is at the time of the review.
Otherwise you will wait forever.. And the review is not independent anymore as it depends on the vendor's will..

[JPortici]

Yes 1 and 2 mV are digital zoom from 4mV. Datasheet. But, Keysight 3000/4000 does the same. R&S 2000/3000/4000 is much better for that than both.

Keysight's ASIC is several years old though.

[Pinkus]

There is an user who owns 7000 for several weeks and he has already found an issue
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/new-rigol-ds7000/msg1749839/#msg1749839

A review remains unchanged for years on the Internet - even though the firmware has long since been updated several times. If there are major problems now, I think it's only fair if Dave informs Rigol and requests a feedback (or maybe he was promised a rush job of bug fixing of the firmware and he is waiting for this).

I do not think so. An independent review shows the reality as-is at the time of the review. Otherwise you will wait forever.. (and the review is not independent anymore as it depends on the vendor's will)..

Well, we disagree here. In my opinion it is a sign of good journalism to give others the opportunity to express themselves on reproaches. If Dave should have found bigger bugs (which he did not mention anywhere and which is pure speculation!), then it is absolutely legitimate to give Rigol the possibility to provide an answer, most of all as this is a brand new product which can never be bug free. And should Rigol say: "Please wait another week with the review, because we are developing and testing a new and much much better firmware", then it is in the interest of all future potential buyers to postpone the review for this long. That doesn't mean he shouldn't mention the problems! But it would be much more helpful and professional to add an "already fixed" to this.

Postponing/waiting has nothing to do with 'not being independent'. EEVblog is not  "Fox News" or "The Sun". And Dave certainly won't wait forever. But if it's just a few days, it's good for all of us (win-win) as you get a review of a device including the latest firmware.
What you are asking for is a bashing now ('hurry before they come up with bug fixes') with showing bugs that would be fixed long before the device is delivered to you. But in the end would only be good for entertaining some, not for providing hints if to buy the product or not. That doesn't help anyone - so it would be a loose-lose situation (well OK: a win for the entertaining).

[iMo]

Well, we disagree here. In my opinion it is a sign of good journalism to give others the opportunity to express themselves on reproaches.

Sure, after the independent review has been provided the vendor may express himself and clarify whether it is a bug or a feature and what he wants to do with it.
Mind the product has been thrown on the market already (2 months back afaik).
Nobody seeks an entertainment or bashing here - that is a nonsense, the people seriously look for an independent review.

[tautech]

Well, we disagree here. In my opinion it is a sign of good journalism to give others the opportunity to express themselves on reproaches.

Sure, after the independent review has been provided the vendor may express himself and clarify whether it is a bug or a feature and what he wants to do with it.
Mind the product has been thrown on the market already (2 months back afaik).
Nobody seeks an entertainment or bashing here - that is a nonsense, the people seriously look for an independent review.

This:

A review remains unchanged for years on the Internet - even though the firmware has long since been updated several times. If there are major problems now, I think it's only fair if Dave informs Rigol and requests a feedback (or maybe he was promised a rush job of bug fixing of the firmware and he is waiting for this).
Anyway: I am sure, creating a large review with comparisons to other scopes will take days. If the video has 60 minutes, I am sure shooting and editing will take much much longer.

Is bang on ! 

Dave did a fine job with an off the cuff and unedited first look and I'm quite sure few could replicate it !
The next step is indeed a proper look and even Dave has said it's a mammoth task to do fully so to wizz through each of the features to give us a taste of its capabilities he's quite likely to have stumbled on something not quite right and given Rigol a chance to fix it.
High profile reviews like Dave does can determine buyers decisions for years to come, something Dave is more aware of in today's truly international marketplace.

[Wolfgang]

I agree. If you review something, you do it on what the product does or does not at the time of the review.
You may mention comments on future updates by the manufacturer, but a review is a snapshot of facts and not the intentions or plans.

I remember Daves review of the first DP832s; The review was put online, RIGOL reworked their mainboard fixing some problems (even replacing the mainboards of existing customers free of charge) and Dave did a follow-up review where he stated that its OK now.

If you want to be perceived as unbiased you should avoid all notions of "embedded" journalism where the manufacturer is given some control of what you say and what not.
The borderline between marketing and journalism must be very clear.

PS: In Germany car journalists are only given new cars for testing if their reviews in the past have been pleasent. All other ones have to wait until the car is on the market.

[iMo]

..High profile reviews like Dave does can determine buyers decisions for years to come, something Dave is more aware of in today's truly international marketplace.

Do you think a reviewer with "his hands tied together with such a tremendous responsibility" can provide a truly independent review??

[tautech]

..High profile reviews like Dave does can determine buyers decisions for years to come, something Dave is more aware of in today's truly international marketplace.

Do you think a reviewer with "his hands tied together with such a tremendous responsibility" can provide a truly independent review??

Dave says it as he finds it but a full review of new products is a very daunting proposal. It's not until you've been involved beta testing product and then after release bugs get reported that you wonder how you missed them.
Modern equipment is very complex and what doesn't seem like a bug to you might be to me and vice versa.
Dave will give us a good look at this new model but in only an hour he can't be expected to look into every nook and cranny or under every stone.

[2N3055]

Of course he can. It's one thing not to lie, and it's other not to be an irresponsible asshole.
If there was a delay, you can be sure he will say that too.

But we might be overreacting. It takes a lot of time to make a decent review, even a not very detailed one. And then editing and posting. It's been two weeks since he got one. I takes a day just to go through manual.. I believe he has other things to do in life... So it might simply just going slow..

We'll see.