Rigol reliability

[Smith]

Is still wonder why people nag about quality for a 400 dollar scope. Most descent second hand 100MHz scopes cost more. You get lots of features, 4 channels...
Of course they could make it a better quality scope and improve support, so people could nag why the damn thing has to cost over a grand.

I had my share of experiences with expensive gear that failed prematurely or had very bad support.

I have had gear with some quality control issues. I contacted the right people, and they replaced the gear without any costs, and sonetimes even throw in extras or upgrades as a compensation. If that device would be the first gear I received from them I might have gotten the idea they would sell bad stuff. But they don't, someone can make a mistake, even if it is by mistake, or on purpose.

In most support cases the quality is verry much depending in who you are talking too/mailing with. Some people love their job and would like to help you out, other people don't or had a shitty day and would like to tell you to go f#ck yourself. Of course when you talked to one of them you know all about the quality of their service.

Lots of people are happy with their Rigol product, so in the end it's not that bad.

I only used the DS6xxx series scope, and I loved it. It's so much faster and feels so much better than my 15K tek scope. I don't know about quality on the long run, so well see.

[Gary350z]

Rigol are running lean though, very few employees for a very productive organization.

I've spoken to Rigol NA several times. They are very nice people. They have said "they will do what ever they can to make me happy".  They also said they only have 7 or 8 people in the whole United States.

[wraper]

Is still wonder why people nag about quality for a 400 dollar scope. Most descent second hand 100MHz scopes cost more. You get lots of features, 4 channels...
Of course they could make it a better quality scope and improve support, so people could nag why the damn thing has to cost over a grand.

I had a problem with Rigol multimeter. Price was about 80% of similar Agilent (Keysight) meter. Their service completely sucked, replacement, which I got in the end, was a filthy used unit. Half a year spent (sitting there for months, travelling back and forth to Germany because they didn't admit the fault) to replace the unit which developed a fault within a week from purchase  .

[Gary350z]

I had a problem with Rigol multimeter. Price was about 80% of similar Agilent (Keysight) meter. Their service completely sucked, replacement, which I got in the end, was a filthy used unit. Half a year spent (sitting there for months, travelling back and forth to Germany because they didn't admit the fault) to replace the unit which developed a fault within a week from purchase  .

My Rigol scope was repaired in 2 weeks by Rigol NA. Brand new main board. Excellent returned condition.
I've read many times Rigol repair/service in other countries is crap.

[Smith]

Yes, service quality usually depends on which country you live. For some companies I always contact their USA headquarters, local offices tend to take much longer if they react at all.

[nctnico]

Don't bother because if that would actually work there wouldn't be so many bugs in Rigol (and Siglent) scopes today. The fact is these products are just cheap toys for hobbyists and tinkerers. Sure their scopes can display a signal but there are just too many bugs and checkbox features (functions with no practical use) to be used in any professional setting. If you spend a bit more the number of bugs goes down exponentially and the number of useful features goes up. As Hydrawerk already wrote GW Instek is a major step up from Rigol and Siglent.

I'm not sure why you say 'don't bother'. The bug list in Rigol products seems to shrink substantially with each iteration of software they release for a given product (and yes, they occasionally introduce new bugs. That happens in software development. It's not good, per se, but no regression testing regimen is perfect). Surely having an actively curated 'to do' list on our part couldn't hurt, would provide a single point of reference for our community itself, a reference for them, and we know for a _fact_ that Siglent listens actively. I'm willing to bet that Rigol would cock an ear as well.

Rigol and Siglent may be listening but that doesn't stop them from throwing half assed products on the market and waiting years to fix the bugs listed on this forum. If I buy a scope (or any other piece of equipment) I want it to work as advertised when I receive it. I don't want to wait years for the firmware to become functional. What Rigol and Siglent are doing is using their customers as their software test department so as a customer you are basically paying for testing their product. How dumb is that?

Ofcourse people keep raving on about bang for your buck but if you put the (unhacked) Rigol DS1074Z next to the GW Instek GDS2074E you'll see that the latter is cheaper ($860 from Tequipment versus $1293), has more features, deeper memory with 4 channels on, etc.

[Fungus]

Ofcourse people keep raving on about bang for your buck but if you put the (unhacked) Rigol DS1074Z next to the GW Instek

 

Yes, but nobody would ever do that. They'd put a hacked DS1054Z next to it and that would make your GW Instek look like very poor value for money.

[nctnico]

Ofcourse people keep raving on about bang for your buck but if you put the (unhacked) Rigol DS1074Z next to the GW Instek

Yes, but nobody would ever do that. They'd put a hacked DS1054Z next to it and that would make your GW Instek look like very poor value for money.

For as long as you CAN hack it and IF Rigol never decides to undo the hacks with a firmware update. But you are making my point perfectly: Rigol wouldn't sell any of their 1000Z series if people had to pay full price.

[Fungus]

For as long as you CAN hack it and IF Rigol never decides to undo the hacks with a firmware update.

This isn't Microsoft. Rigol can't force a firmware update on anybody.

But you are making my point perfectly: Rigol wouldn't sell any of their 1000Z series if people had to pay full price.

Rubbish. I'd still have bought my 1054Z even if it was hard-locked to 50MHz. 50MHz is plenty for my tinkering and an oscilloscope is a must-have piece of equipment (preferably with 4 channels).

You really should have to ask yourself why the GDS2074E you keep pointing us to has a [urlhttps://www.testequipmentdepot.com/instek/oscilloscopes/digital/70-mhz-4-channel-digital-storage-oscilloscope-gds2074e.htm]30% discount[/url]? Can we say "they're dumping them because they're not selling any"? I think we can.

It's not really surprising because at the original retail price I could buy three DS1054Zs for the price of one GW Instek. The specs are very similar, nobody in their right mind would pay $1150 for a GDS2074E when there's $400 Rigols around.

[nctnico]

Oddly enough GW Instek's alternative (GDS-1054B) for an unhacked DS1054Z is cheaper (at Tequipment) than the DS1054Z while it offers 1Mpts FFT, faster update rates, more memory with 4 channels enabled, higher samplerate with 4 channels enabled and most importantly: way less bugs. You'd be utterly stupid the buy the DS1054Z and not hack it because there is no value for money at all without hacking it!

And sure Rigol isn't forcing you to upgrade but what if there is the choice between fixing those irritating bugs versus losing the hacked options? Nobody knows when Rigol is going to plug the hole!

Besides that you are casually forgetting about the many bugs and shortcomings of the DS1000Z series. It can make a lot of sense to spend some more money on a better product than going for the ultimate value for money and ending up with a tool you can't really use (=just wasting money).

[Fungus]

Nobody knows when Rigol is going to plug the hole!

Are you a betting man? I'm happy to take your money on that one. 

[JPortici]

I'd only be sad to lose the serial decoding.. but not that much to be honest.
I wonder if the GW has also a more stable triggering
Too bad the price is 150~200 euros more than the rigol here in europe

[MT]

Don't bother because if that would actually work there wouldn't be so many bugs in Rigol (and Siglent) scopes today. The fact is these products are just cheap toys for hobbyists and tinkerers. Sure their scopes can display a signal but there are just too many bugs and checkbox features (functions with no practical use) to be used in any professional setting. If you spend a bit more the number of bugs goes down exponentially and the number of useful features goes up. As Hydrawerk already wrote GW Instek is a major step up from Rigol and Siglent.

I'm not sure why you say 'don't bother'. The bug list in Rigol products seems to shrink substantially with each iteration of software they release for a given product (and yes, they occasionally introduce new bugs. That happens in software development. It's not good, per se, but no regression testing regimen is perfect). Surely having an actively curated 'to do' list on our part couldn't hurt, would provide a single point of reference for our community itself, a reference for them, and we know for a _fact_ that Siglent listens actively. I'm willing to bet that Rigol would cock an ear as well.

Rigol and Siglent may be listening but that doesn't stop them from throwing half assed products on the market and waiting years to fix the bugs listed on this forum. If I buy a scope (or any other piece of equipment) I want it to work as advertised when I receive it. I don't want to wait years for the firmware to become functional. What Rigol and Siglent are doing is using their customers as their software test department so as a customer you are basically paying for testing their product. How dumb is that?

Its not dumb, its sneaky greedy behavior! The institutionalized (intentional deliberate board room decision) mentality to pack boxes full of bugs is sneaky and its a international trend seen all over the electronic industry.

[saturation]

My 2c, I've worked with GWInstek devices off/on for >= 35 years, and they consistently field devices that live up to their spec sheets once released for sale, function reliably over years of use, with whatever bugs that existed tending to be non-critical if nonexistent; otherwise the spec sheet would be a lie at the time it was released for sale. 

One really wants to focus on the project at hand not on applying bug fixes and hacking the device, unless the project itself is simply just hacking and exploring the device. 

The 'GW' was their old trade name 'Good Will' from the 1970-1990s and you can still see their gear sold with that name on eBay from the early 1980s.  GW now is the name of their corporate holding company with Instek, IIRC comes from "Instrument Technology" is the subsidiary that produces T&M gear which they adopted from the 1990s.

That said, they only issue I've ever had in using their devices is performance for price; when they started they competed against Heathkit, B&K, Leader, Trio, Global Specialties, Radio Shack, etc., and may have even been OEM for those brands.   Today, there are in a niche carved on their own, higher than B&K types today, but much less under Keysight compared to its early days.

When Rigol came out with the 1000E series in 2007-8?and the 1052e in particular, it was stellar and bug free.  But over the years, QC management has worsened, it can be seen in more products than just the 1054Z; all you need do is google 'Rigol problems' and read of complaints or see videos, and its not just at eevblog.

Granted, Rigol's issues can all be fixed at some point, but you have to wait and live through it, and lose that time meant for other things in your project had you gotten another brand.

Comparing the two scopes you mention contrast their management style as well as engineering savvy. 

Oddly enough GW Instek's alternative (GDS-1054B) for an unhacked DS1054Z is cheaper (at Tequipment) than the DS1054Z while it offers 1Mpts FFT, faster update rates, more memory with 4 channels enabled, higher samplerate with 4 channels enabled and most importantly: way less bugs. You'd be utterly stupid the buy the DS1054Z and not hack it because there is no value for money at all without hacking it!

And sure Rigol isn't forcing you to upgrade but what if there is the choice between fixing those irritating bugs versus losing the hacked options? Nobody knows when Rigol is going to plug the hole!

Besides that you are casually forgetting about the many bugs and shortcomings of the DS1000Z series. It can make a lot of sense to spend some more money on a better product than going for the ultimate value for money and ending up with a tool you can't really use (=just wasting money).

[rf-loop]

It's not really surprising because at the original retail price I could buy three DS1054Zs for the price of one GW Instek. The specs are very similar, nobody in their right mind would pay $1150 for a GDS2074E when there's $400 Rigols around.

Specs are similar, quality is similar  if you compare GDS2074E to DS1054Z (even if hacked to 100M). Really?
Other is serious tool and other is bottom entry level toy (but still not at all bad if think features and price specially for some "many kind of" hobby use).

[saturation]

I saw Dave's review of the GWInstek 1000B series fairly late and checked into scope prices at tequipment.net last week.  Naturally, many DSO in the entry level are compared against Rigols 1000's these days.

They had ~800 1054Z in stock on May 14, and yesterday it was down to 467.  That's amazing if true.  At that rate they should be out by end of May 2016. 

Regardless of its problems, it striking how many scopes they sell and I presume, reflects overall general interest in electronics at the entry level or hobbyist end. 

For later reference here's a snapshot from yesterday.

[MT]

Rigol, beyond measure!  If GW would dump the price to 450, 50 bucks above Rigoletto i bet Rigoletto's sales would plumet!
The only defense Rigoletto would have is to lower  price even further, and this would start a price race, lowest price wins no
matter how many bugs!

[nctnico]

Rigol, beyond measure!  If GW would dump the price to 450, 50 bucks above Rigoletto i bet Rigoletto's sales would plumet!
The only defense Rigoletto would have is to lower  price even further, and this would start a price race, lowest price wins no
matter how many bugs!

The only thing Rigol has going for them is the hackability. If the DS1000Z couldn't be hacked they would not sell a single unit. I'm wondering how fast the stock goes on other DS1000Z models so I just checked Tequipment and they have 10 units at most for the other 1000Z models.

[Fungus]

Rigol, beyond measure!  If GW would dump the price to 450, 50 bucks above Rigoletto i bet Rigoletto's sales would plumet!

I'd take that bet (and win!)

The only defense Rigoletto would have is to lower  price even further, and this would start a price race, lowest price wins no
matter how many bugs!

Nope.

a) Most people aren't seeing the Rigol bugs - they're too obscure (I've only seen them because I followed instructions and went looking for them in the right sub-sub-menus, if I hadn't done that, then, meh).

b) GW Instek would also have to raise the bandwidth to 100Mhz and give the serial decoders away if they want to compete. Even then they only have two channels vs. Rigol's four. What use are serial decoders on a two-channel 'scope? 

Nope. To get a better oscilloscope then a hacked DS1054Z from GW-Instek you're not looking at the base model, you're looking at something that costs three times as much.

[rstofer]

Rigol, beyond measure!  If GW would dump the price to 450, 50 bucks above Rigoletto i bet Rigoletto's sales would plumet!

I'd take that bet (and win!)

The only defense Rigoletto would have is to lower  price even further, and this would start a price race, lowest price wins no
matter how many bugs!

Nope.

a) Most people aren't seeing the Rigol bugs - they're too obscure (I've only seen them because I followed instructions and went looking for them in the right sub-sub-menus, if I hadn't done that, then, meh).

b) GW Instek would also have to raise the bandwidth to 100Mhz and give the serial decoders away if they want to compete. Even then they only have two channels vs. Rigol's four. What use are serial decoders on a two-channel 'scope? 

Nope. To get a better oscilloscope then a hacked DS1054Z from GW-Instek you're not looking at the base model, you're looking at something that costs three times as much.

It would seem that the GW Instek equivalent of a hacked DS1054Z would be the GDS-1104B and TEquipment has it for $730.  Rigol certainly knows that users are going to upgrade their scopes and have taken no actions to prevent it.  They KNOW they are selling a 100 MHz scope for a 50 MHz price and don't care.  Well, that kind of works for me.  There may be a more appropriate GW scope to compare but I want to compare it with a hacked DS1054Z because that's why I bought it.

Dave's recommendation and video carry a lot of weight.  I don't know anything about a business relationship but Dave's enthusiasm made a big impact on my decision to buy.

I just watched Dave's teardown of a GW Instek GDS-1000B and he didn't seem all that impressed with some of the design decisions (cooling, shielding) but thought the use of a Zynq FPGA was clever (and it is!).  The only thing worthwhile, from my point of view, was the interest it generated in playing with the Zynq.  I guess I'll have to buy a Digilent board.

I didn't find a teardown or review of the GDS-1104B.  If there is one, I would certainly like to see it.  I would really like to see a side-by-side comparison.

Of course, we have to acknowledge that the GDS-1104B is absolutely without fault as opposed to the truly buggy nature of the Rigol.  Or we can skip over that bit and use the cost difference to buy beer.  We're never going to work in the corners anyway.

Without question, we can find better scopes that cost more money.  There's a reason that some scopes cost $2k, $10k or even more.  I don't know what it is exactly but it must be impressive.

Yup, the 1054 is a hobby grade entry level scope.  Exactly why I bought it.

[Keysight DanielBogdanoff]

And another example of poor support, or how Keysight deals with a 3 years old bug (starts at about 22:03):

I discussed this on another thread that I won't dig up.  But basically here's what's going on:

Essentially, it comes down to an ideology that we hold here at Keysight scopes.  That is: “Don’t compromise the waveform update rate!”

Keysight auto trigger mode works like this:

0. Assume a stable trigger was found
1. Wait for another valid trigger event
     a.wait time = maximum of (4 * total time on screen) or 50 µs
             i.note: on the 2000 and 3000A scopes, the wait time = maximum of (1/2 * total time on screen) or 50 µs.  This is what we changed in firmware.
     b. If a valid trigger event is found before (a) has passed, repeat (1)
     c. If no event found, go to (2)
2. Enter “autotrigger” (or free-run) mode: acquire and display signals as fast as possible
     a. The “as fast as possible” will be the fastest update rate available at that time/div setting
3. While doing (2), check trigger circuitry every 250ms to see if there was a valid trigger event in the past 250 ms
     a. If there was a valid event, go to (1)
     b. If there wasn’t a valid event, go to (2)

So here’s what is happening.  For the 1 Hz cardiac pulse, because the pulses are so far apart and only happening once, the scope essentially stays in auto trigger mode (2). E.g. if there was a pulse in the previous 250ms period then it will wait for another pulse, but will time out before the required 750ms has elapsed unless the time/div setting is high enough (see 1). For example, put the cardiac pulse on and set the time/div to 25ms.  Because the screen is then showing 250 ms of time, the wait period will be 4*250 ms = 1s and you will see the regular trigger. 

What Tek and some other vendors do is build in a wait time after every single capture.  I think Tek has an initial wait time of 4*time on screen, the switches to 2*time on screen after each subsequent trigger event. We spend the majority of the free-run time (2) acquiring and plotting instead of waiting.

The 3000T, 4000 X-Series, and 6000 X-Series scopes all follow the 1a guidelines, while the older 2000 X-Series and 3000A scopes keep the 1ai scheme.  Ultimately, I don’t see this as a bug. I’m not just saying that because I work for Keysight, but as I’ve looked at this closer it seems to be more of a difference in ideologies about how auto trigger mode should work and how auto trigger mode is implemented, especially in the free-run portion of the state machine. 

Another thought I had here is that our built-in DVM could run on the side and let you know immediately if the pulse stops because the frequency will change.  Our DVM will work on the same channel you are probing, too, so no extra probing is necessary.

I hope this makes sense, I’d be happy to discuss further or clarify if I wasn’t clear enough.

[nctnico]

Dave's recommendation and video carry a lot of weight.  I don't know anything about a business relationship but Dave's enthusiasm made a big impact on my decision to buy.

IMHO that is not always a good idea. Dave overlooks a lot of things because he only does a very limited review of a product. I like Dave's teardown videos but his reviews are less informative than the datasheet of a piece of equipment. Especially with Chinese equipment I want to know if all the functions are really there and whether they are actually useful or just a checkbox item. Basically a full functional check but I do understand that really is too much to ask (and probably makes a really boring video) so when trying to get more info on a product I go through what is available on internet with a fine comb to get facts and not opinions (even if they come from Dave).

[madires]

I discussed this on another thread that I won't dig up.  But basically here's what's going on:

Essentially, it comes down to an ideology that we hold here at Keysight scopes.  That is: “Don’t compromise the waveform update rate!”

Thanks for the detailed explanation! Still, it took 3 years to give the customer a feedback?

[GlowingGhoul]

What does everyone think about this?

The forums aren't full of people complaining, so...  I guess you had bad luck

Be happy that you got good support.

If you want an industrial grade instruments, save more $$$ and buy some Keysight gear.

Oh, a Keysight fanboi...

My goodness, you sound like the guys that drive clapped out Korean cars with racing stripes and a fartcan exhaust scoffing at clearly superior vehicles and their owners.

Your Rigol is good value for the money.  In comparison to Keysight it's an entry level toy. I realize that may be painful to hear. On the other hand, maybe you're just much smarter than the professionals who overwhelmingly favor Keysight (I have never seen a Rigol in a professional environment, have you?).

Of course, I could be wrong, and even if money were not an object you'd choose Rigol over Keysight for some inexplicable reason. Is that the case? 

[rstofer]

There is also the matter of risk.  How much money is at risk should the product prove unsatisfactory?  I can afford to toss a $400 scope but I would probably have to fight with Customer Service over a $2000 scope.  I would drive to the factory for a $10,000 scope.

One thought that runs through my mind:  All of the Chinese scopes are crap.  Some crap is more highly refined but still crap.  I know going in that there will be some number of problems with likely good results away from the edges of the specs.  Now I can decide how much money to risk. It's a balance between acceptable performance and acceptable risk.  As a hobbyist, my acceptable risk is much lower than if I were writing a Purchase Req for a large corporation.  Not my money, the boss' money!

In the measurement business there are two, may three companies.  Fluke if you want to measure things, Tektronix if you want to see things and maybe, just maybe, Agilent on their better stuff.  But even the biggies are selling rebadged Chinese tools so how do you decide which ones are suitable?  Price is one way but it just doesn't work for hobbyists.  The prices are so off-putting that nobody will do more than look and drool.  Then it's on to the Chinese products.

I'm not interested in a company with a great Customer Service department.  I want to do business with a company that doesn't need one!  Alas, my world doesn't work that way...