What does "Rigol DS1054Z is the best oscilloscope for hobbyists" mean?

[alsetalokin4017]

however while i don't share fungus' enthusiasm (it hasn't improved that much in speed in doing basic things like moving the trace up/down/left/right) it must be said that it has improven a lot since the beginning of this year.

It's not "enthusiasm" it's just that everybody here is on a constant downer about it.

If it has 100 functions and one of them has a bug then on here it's somehow useless, not to be trusted for anything, a piece of junk.

What about all the other 99 things it does brilliantly? Do they count for nothing? 

And the idea that if one function has a bug then nothing else is to be trusted is farcical. If just one other function didn't work then you'd know all about it and be posting it here. Guaranteed.

This weeks firmware update has fixed everything that matters. Can we just enjoy our 'scopes now?

it's a very serious scope. NASA could use it just like they could use any other modern advanced 100MHz digital scope.
5 years ago this would have been a very advanced scope worth 10 times the price.
10 years ago it would have been an extraordinary bit of kit most would have lusted over.

Exactly.

Oh come on. If that "one function" out of 100 is the one you happen to need to work properly for your usage and purposes, you can bet that it will be complained about, and validly so, since the scope should do what it says "on the tin", that is, work properly. That makes it useless if that one out of a hundred features is your required use. Like the RMS bug that was so serious Rigol got off their... er... chairs and fixed it with a quick firmware update.

And over the past two years we have indeed identified several show-stoppers. Fortunately most of them have been fixed by firmware updates. Some or maybe even most of these major bugs might never have been fixed had not users called them to the attention of Rigol in these threads or by direct contact with the Support team at Rigol.

And I am _not_ a Rigol basher, however much you like to characterize me. I use the scope every day, I have had good luck with their Support, and I like the scope. I just think that one should be _realistic_ about its shortcomings... which includes acknowledging that it isn't perfect. But it's getting better all the time, and no doubt will continue to improve as the firmware is refined. For sure it's a lot better than it was 2 years ago.

[alsetalokin4017]

I can imagine that if a measurement instrument has bugs, it may not be a good idea to use it as incorrect measurements and incorrect scientific findings may result.

If it had that serious a bug it would have been found by now by the community.

Actually it was. VRMS measurment "digital crosstalk" bug.

And at least two more: The Freeze bug which could make the scope freeze during use and even _start up_ completely non-responsive to the controls (except the power switch and the "5th left button" reset procedure) when Persistence and Horizontal Zoom were in use, and the Measurements Fail bug where all Measurements stopped working after a random time, requiring a power-cycle reboot to get them working again. I have posted video demonstrations of these serious bugs.
 
Both of these were found by the community     and brought to Rigol USA's attention, and have been fixed in software updates over the past year or so.

[alsetalokin4017]

As far as "academic" use goes.... sure. It should be the scope that sits on every undergrad student's workbench in the lab. Should it be the scope the _professor_ uses in academic research for publications? Maybe not, depending on the details of the research. Should NASA use it for critical applications? Let the astronauts decide that one.

Is it the best oscilloscope for hobbyists? That depends on your hobby. If you are doing TTL circuits or Arduino or robotics or low frequency ham radio or stuff like that, sure. If you are developing microwave drone shoot-down systems in your garage, maybe not.

[eeguy]

i get easily pissed off by its lag to be productive so i mostly use an analog whenever possible.

Many years ago I bought a digital oscilloscope (20MHz, 25MS/s real-time sample rate, 1.25GS/s equivalent sampling rate). The lag was so bad that I also got pissed off and gave it to somebody else. Know the source of the lag? It would be nice if I could see how the lag is like after the just released firmware update for the DS1054Z. If the respond of the updated DS1054Z is similar to that of what I got in the past, I have to forget about it.

[wraper]

I can imagine that if a measurement instrument has bugs, it may not be a good idea to use it as incorrect measurements and incorrect scientific findings may result.

If it had that serious a bug it would have been found by now by the community.

Actually it was. VRMS measurment "digital crosstalk" bug.

And at least two more: The Freeze bug which could make the scope freeze during use and even _start up_ completely non-responsive to the controls (except the power switch and the "5th left button" reset procedure) when Persistence and Horizontal Zoom were in use, and the Measurements Fail bug where all Measurements stopped working after a random time, requiring a power-cycle reboot to get them working again. I have posted video demonstrations of these serious bugs.
 
Both of these were found by the community     and brought to Rigol USA's attention, and have been fixed in software updates over the past year or so.

Those don't count as incorrect "incorrect measurements and incorrect scientific findings may result", though. Annoying yes, but don't produce misleading readings. RMS bug AFAIK hasn't been fixed yet.

[2N3055]

Those don't count as as incorrect "measurements and incorrect scientific findings may result", though. Annoying yes, but don't produce misleading readings. RMS bug AFAIK hasn't been fixed yet.

Actually it was, in a new firmware from few days ago...

 v00.04.04.01.01  2016/09/14

[wraper]

Actually it was, in a new firmware from few days ago...

 v00.04.04.01.01  2016/09/14

Have a link with a bugfix stated or people actually tested it?

[2N3055]

People actually tested it, myself included..

[rstofer]

i get easily pissed off by its lag to be productive so i mostly use an analog whenever possible.

Many years ago I bought a digital oscilloscope (20MHz, 25MS/s real-time sample rate, 1.25GS/s equivalent sampling rate). The lag was so bad that I also got pissed off and gave it to somebody else. Know the source of the lag? It would be nice if I could see how the lag is like after the just released firmware update for the DS1054Z. If the respond of the updated DS1054Z is similar to that of what I got in the past, I have to forget about it.

Then forget about the DS1054Z!  The lag is still there; I don't see one iota of improvement.  Turn on 4 channels with Auto memory depth and the lag is huge!  Others have reported an improvement so there you go, differing opinions.  Or, maybe their firmware was even more out of date than mine before the latest upgrade.

Analog scopes are the only ones that respond in real time to changes in settings.  Digital scopes can only approximate that response and some don't do it very well.

[nctnico]

I just think that one should be _realistic_ about its shortcomings... which includes acknowledging that it isn't perfect. But it's getting better all the time, and no doubt will continue to improve as the firmware is refined. For sure it's a lot better than it was 2 years ago.

Exactly. The problem with many low end scopes is that they are put onto the market while the firmware is far from ready and it takes years for the major bugs to get fixed and functionality to be completed. AFAIK only the most recent DS1000Z firmware has taken the instrument to a level where you could say the DS1000Z does what it promises but how many years has it been on the market already?

[JPortici]

i get easily pissed off by its lag to be productive so i mostly use an analog whenever possible.

Many years ago I bought a digital oscilloscope (20MHz, 25MS/s real-time sample rate, 1.25GS/s equivalent sampling rate). The lag was so bad that I also got pissed off and gave it to somebody else. Know the source of the lag? It would be nice if I could see how the lag is like after the just released firmware update for the DS1054Z. If the respond of the updated DS1054Z is similar to that of what I got in the past, I have to forget about it.

video in the background just to prove everything is happening in real time. enjoy (and i didn't even use the horizontal knob)

I was excited at first because the scope booted on the only timebase/memory depth combination where the lag is almost absent

[Bicurico]

"What does "Rigol DS1054Z is the best oscilloscope for hobbyists" mean?"

It means that it is the purchase with the best price/feature ratio for hobbyists, with the main reason being that hobbyists can unlock ALL cost-options for free, without any legal consequence. This might not be the case for companies or schools.

A hobbyist uses the oscilloscope (or any other equipment) for personal projects, which are not profit driven. Mostly the hobbyist does not gain any profit at all with his activities, hence why it is not reasonable/affordable to use expensive equipment designed for high end professional use.

That does not mean that there aren't hobbyists with high end equipment.

BUT: The fact that this is the best buy for hobbyists, doesn't disqualify the oscilloscope for professional profit driven applications!

The question is: what are you using it for?

Example: an engineer implementing CMM machines, CNC machines or robot cells, may use the DS1054Z at his advantage for example on motor/encoder calibration. Actually, any oscilloscope might do the job, because you are basically tuning motors/encoders, so that the waveform is shaped as close as possible against specification. Having the DS1054Z is probably a luxury compared to an old CRT analog scope.

Also, if said engineer needs to figure out the RS232 parameters on an undocumented CNC controller, in order to do DNC: sure, one can systematically try all combinations (300, 600, 900, 1200, 2400, 4800, 9600, 19200, 38400, 56600, ... baud, 7 or 8 stop bit, even or par, 1 or 2 data bit - yes, I have done it like this in the past, it takes hours), but with the DS1054Z, you can actually SEE the RS232 communication and deduce the parameters in a few minutes (I know you can use a logic analyser, a RS232 sniffer or a PC with two serial ports and sniffer software, too).

In these examples, you could do the same with a 10x more expensive scope. Higher specs, better precision, better GUI, etc. But in the end of the day, the DS1054Z would give you more profit.

If, however, you are into some kind of electronics repair or development, the DS1054Z might be less productive, offer too little bandwidth, to small sample memory, to little precision... All this has been explained on the several threads.

The only thing I really want to add on this discussion, is the value on academic articles (I lecture at university, also).

If a paper is discussing results based on MEASUREMENTS then yes, the equipment used to obtain said measurements needs to withstand any questioning: it has to be done within manufacturer's specs, with traceable calibration. Using equipment from a reputable brand helps.

If the paper is discussing a proceedure or technique, which requires a given instrument, then I find it absolutely acceptable to use the most competitvely priced equipment, as long as the choice is correctly justified. If the OP is using the oscilloscope to show how to calibrate the robot's encoders to increase overall positioning precision of the robot and if the oscilloscope is used to tune the accelaration curves of the motors, which are magnitudes under the specified capabilities of the oscilloscope, then there is nothing wrong in using a Rigol for the job. Especially if the OP explains the benefit of said device in the paper by discussing price/benefit ratio.

The use of expensive equipement per se does not justify anything and does not make a paper more credible. The opposite is the case: if too expensive equipment is used for no apparent reason and without any justification, then it gives a bad note to the paper.

My opinion is: if it takes the OP so long and so many questions/threads to make up his mind, then it seems he doesn't really need the oscilloscope at all!

If he knows what he needs the oscilloscope for, then he just needs to compare his requirements against the oscilloscope' specs.

All the rest has been said and discussed at length.

Regards,
Vitor

[nctnico]

If he knows what he needs the oscilloscope for, then he just needs to compare his requirements against the oscilloscope' specs.

The problem is that on paper many cheap devices look just as good as more expensive devices. The difficulty is to figure out whether buying a more expensive device is wise or a waste of money before spending the money.

[Bicurico]

If he knows what he needs the oscilloscope for, then he just needs to compare his requirements against the oscilloscope' specs.

The problem is that on paper many cheap devices look just as good as more expensive devices. The difficulty is to figure out whether buying a more expensive device is wise or a waste of money before spending the money.

You are correct, however, I don't recall the OP mentioning his specific requirements, so the whole discussion is a little futile.

Saying it is for robot research and then asking what it means that the Rigol is the best for hobbyists just doesn't make much sense. It's the same with cars: you have the Renault Clio and the Mercedes S300. Both are cars, one costs less than the other. Yet, both can be used for private and/or professional use. What does that mean? Nothing at all!

I don't want to sound harsh by any means and no offense to the OP, either.

[joseph nicholas]

Hi all, could someone post a link to where you can buy this scope for $400.00 US shipped?

[rstofer]

Hi all, could someone post a link to where you can buy this scope for $400.00 US shipped?

http://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?v=7401

Sales tax may drive the $399 price over the top.

[bitseeker]

Hi all, could someone post a link to where you can buy this scope for $400.00 US shipped?

http://www.tequipment.net/Rigol/DS1054Z/Digital-Oscilloscopes/?v=7401

Sales tax may drive the $399 price over the top.

Using the EEVBlog discount will help with that.

[eeguy]

i get easily pissed off by its lag to be productive so i mostly use an analog whenever possible.

Many years ago I bought a digital oscilloscope (20MHz, 25MS/s real-time sample rate, 1.25GS/s equivalent sampling rate). The lag was so bad that I also got pissed off and gave it to somebody else. Know the source of the lag? It would be nice if I could see how the lag is like after the just released firmware update for the DS1054Z. If the respond of the updated DS1054Z is similar to that of what I got in the past, I have to forget about it.

video in the background just to prove everything is happening in real time. enjoy (and i didn't even use the horizontal knob)

I was excited at first because the scope booted on the only timebase/memory depth combination where the lag is almost absent

Thanks for the video but I am very sorry that I see a big lag between knob turning and the signal moving vertically accordingly. The lag is similar to the Fluke 123 handheld oscilloscope I used many years ago. As far as I recall, the Yokogawa DL 1540 oscilloscope I used (sweep time: 5nd/div to 50s/div, 56kword (4-channel), 150MHz, display rate of max 60 displays/sec when 4 channels are used)  did not have this problem. From EEVblog #701, the Keysight 3000T also has no lag. What is the reason for the lag? Which specification should I look for if I want a digital scope without the kind of lag shown in this video?

[EEVblog]

Nobody is going to take a paper or presentation seriously unless the equipment itself is serious and that isn't Rigol.  If it isn't Keysight, everything falls apart from there.

Are you serious?

[nctnico]

Nobody is going to take a paper or presentation seriously unless the equipment itself is serious and that isn't Rigol.  If it isn't Keysight, everything falls apart from there.

Are you serious?

I think yes. I have been involved in using test equipment for measurements which needed to stand up in court. I let the customer buy a Tektronix scope + traceable calibration for that job. Not that Tektronix is so great or the value for money is good but it prevents a boat load of silly questions you are likely to get when you arrive with a cheap B-brand scope.

[Stwspoon]

I went through this about 6 months ago. My requirements were 100 MHz,at least 2 channels, low input noise (>5mv RMS), and Mac OS support through USB or Ethernet. Desired was serial decoding and MSO options if only 2 channels and reasonable support.
I chose the Rhode & Schwarz HMO1212. I was impressed by Dave's tear down video and other videos on YouTube. I have been very happy with it. I got mine from Tequipment for around $1300 with the EEVblog discount. (Just ask when ordering).
I have been burned by cheap tools (literally in one case :-), so I was willing to spend more to get something I could feel confident about. If you can get a student discount, the HMO Max bundle could be a good deal.

good luck,
Stan

[eeguy]

In general, how is the GDS-2204E compared with the DS1054Z? Does it have the lag I mentioned in Post 30? From , it looks like there is no lag.

[JoeO]

In general, how is the GDS-2204E compared with the DS1054Z? Does it have the lag I mentioned in Post 30? From , it looks like there is no lag.

Only YOU can determine if the lag would be troublesome to YOU!

[ebastler]

In general, how is the GDS-2204E compared with the DS1054Z? Does it have the lag I mentioned in Post 30? From [...] , it looks like there is no lag.

If you look at the screen during the discussion of memory depth in that video (around 2:15), you will see that it was set to 10 kpoints only. I can't read the memory depth in JPortici's video of the DS1054Z lag, but would assume that it was set much higher. I don't have the Rigol scope in front of me, but seem to recall that the UI lag is significantly reduced at lower memory depths. Hence, not an entirely fair comparison.

Nevertheless, the GDS2000E series has the advantage of its Zynq chipset, which allows tight integration of the real-time sample processing in FPGA and the microprocessor-based UI. I have never used one of these scopes, but if GW Instek has made good use of the chipset, would expect them to have an edge over the Rigol in the responsiveness of the UI.

[rf-loop]

So, why many people consider it to be the "best" oscilloscope for hobbyists?

It's not just for hobbyists, but simply put it's the best "bang-per-buck" you can get for the money.

Is it just because it is cheap? Does that mean it is just like a toy for hobbyists rather than a piece of instrument for serious scientific research and academic use at graduate/postdoc level?

Nope, it's a very serious scope. NASA could use it just like they could use any other modern advanced 100MHz digital scope.
5 years ago this would have been a very advanced scope worth 10 times the price.
10 years ago it would have been an extraordinary bit of kit most would have lusted over.

I can imagine that if a measurement instrument has bugs, it may not be a good idea to use it as incorrect measurements and incorrect scientific findings may result.

If it had that serious a bug it would have been found by now by the community.

Some times it is difficult to detect if you are joking or serious.

Can we get some special emoction for this purpose so that also kids and bottom entry level inexperienced hobbyist can clearly detect when you are joking and when you are serious.

Perhaps NASA the happy end use it but as we know, they happy use what ever. After all, it is (some times) like an expensive adult playground science club. (emoction: seriously joking)

But this is not joking, it is just one reason why I set this multifunctional <censored> for recycle out from my workshop.