New Rigol DS1054Z oscilloscope

[duracell]

You won't be making a mistake with the 1054Z.  If it comes from current inventory, it will have the latest firmware 00.04.04.SP1.  To the best of my knowledge, all bugs have been eliminated EXCEPT for a spelling error "Pluses" where it should be "Pulses".  I can live with it...

I would suggest you read this thread only as far back as Nov 2016.  That was when the lastest firmware was released.  Issues with firmware older than that seem to have been fixed.  Who really cares about issues at the margins way back when the scope was first introduced?  They have been fixed.

There are alternatives, of course.  The thing is, they cost a lot more money.

As boring as it seems, do try to read the User Manual.  These is a lot of capability in the scope that you just won't find unless you read about it first.  It has a lot more capability than just displaying wiggly lines.
In fact, you can download and read the manual while you wait for your scope to arrive.  At least skim over it and see what it can do.  You can get down to button-pushing when the scope arrives.

Thank you very much. That's the kind of the info I've needed.  I was worried about many bug reports regarding this scope.
I will purchase one tomorrow.
Thanks again for your tips.

[alsetalokin4017]

Possible PEBCAK error. Probably no defective scope. Recommendation: RTFM. 

BTW: The scope reacts in this case when the trigger condition on channel 1 is matched (even when the channel 1 is deactivated). Then it shows the signal of channel 4.

Please look in your manual about:

Trigger- source (to a channel)
Trigger- modes: Auto, normal and single.

Manual DS1054Z Download as Pdf.

Note that the scope is in "AUTO" trigger mode. It should be showing a trace on any active channel, regardless of whether it is triggered or not, regardless of whether a trigger condition is met on the Trigger channel or not.

I think we need a little more information, but at first glance there does seem to be something wrong (possibly in addition to PEBCAK.)

See here: (no inputs to any channels, but since scope is in AUTO trigger mode, the active CH4 shows a trace -- as expected. When scope is in Normal trigger mode, no trace appears since it is WAITing for a trigger event on the trigger channel.)

[tooki]

Note that the scope is in "AUTO" trigger mode. It should be showing a trace on any active channel, regardless of whether it is triggered or not, regardless of whether a trigger condition is met on the Trigger channel or not.

I think we need a little more information, but at first glance there does seem to be something wrong (possibly in addition to PEBCAK.)

See here: (no inputs to any channels, but since scope is in AUTO trigger mode, the active CH4 shows a trace -- as expected. When scope is in Normal trigger mode, no trace appears since it is WAITing for a trigger event on the trigger channel.)

I've found that at certain timebases (relatively slow ones IIRC), AUTO trigger fails, as it oscillates between NORMAL and AUTO. Setting it manually to NORMAL gets a reliable trace.

But for sure you have to have a trigger channel active. (AUTO trigger only means that it chooses the trigger mode automatically, not the channel.)

[David Hess]

Sometimes if I think there is a problem with automatic triggering, I temporarily use the line trigger source to at least get a trace.

[ProBang2]

Note that the scope is in "AUTO" trigger mode. It should be showing a trace on any active channel, regardless of whether it is triggered or not, regardless of whether a trigger condition is met on the Trigger channel or not.

I think we need a little more information, but at first glance there does seem to be something wrong (possibly in addition to PEBCAK.)

See here: (no inputs to any channels, but since scope is in AUTO trigger mode, the active CH4 shows a trace -- as expected. When scope is in Normal trigger mode, no trace appears since it is WAITing for a trigger event on the trigger channel.)

You are correct.
Furthermore I have made a second false claim:"Channel 1 is deactivated."   
Nope...
Indeed: All four channels are activated. (Channel numbers lighten up in their colors instead of grey.)   

With this settings the oscilloscope should draw the trace.
I am not be able to reproduce the failure.   

At this time (with the given informations) it seems to be really a faulty device.   

 

[tautech]

With this settings the oscilloscope should draw the trace.
I am not be able to reproduce the failure.   

Unless the waveform DC offset placed the waveform off the display.

[rstofer]

Oddly, the Tektronix DSO training material may provide the answer:  Use the Auto button!  Yup!  Right from the factories mouth (ok, text editor), use the Autoset button Step 3 of first project.  I assume Tek Autoset == Rigol Auto

http://www.tek.com/sites/tek.com/files/courseware/ST_Arduino_Labs_Combined.pdf

Then consider AC coupling and see if that doesn't work a little better.

[tautech]

Oddly, the Tektronix DSO training material may provide the answer:  Use the Auto button!  Yup!  Right from the factories mouth (ok, text editor), use the Autoset button Step 3 of first project.  I assume Tek Autoset == Rigol Auto

http://www.tek.com/sites/tek.com/files/courseware/ST_Arduino_Labs_Combined.pdf

Then consider AC coupling and see if that doesn't work a little better.

A better one is to have some idea of the amplitude and frequency of a signal before you connect a scope to it.

Have no idea ?
Set the inputs and probes to 10:1 and use Autoset. 

[Karel]

To the best of my knowledge, all bugs have been eliminated EXCEPT for a spelling error "Pluses" where it should be "Pulses".

Unfortunately, there are at least two more open bugs which can be considered not important if you decide not to connect the scope to a pc
but can be very important in case you do connect it to a pc:

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-(ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models)-bugswish-list/msg1107838/#msg1107838

https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1000z-series-(ds1054z-ds1074z-ds1104z-and-s-models)-bugswish-list/msg1109064/#msg1109064

Still, I believe the DS1054Z is a bargain for hobby use.

[Fungus]

1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. 

And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. 


a) For $400 the DS1054Z is a complete bargain, if you unlock all the optional features then you'll have to pay $1000+ to get something that's really better*.

b) The DS1102E is much older/outdated, it has a smaller screen, it only has two channels...

c) Rigol posts bug fixes. There's not much left to fix in the latest firmware and a special new firmware is due to arrive any day (In December Rigol said it would be "January/February").


(*) I'm talking in general terms. If you have a special need then there maybe something that does a particular thing better than a DS1054Z, eg. signal analysis/FFT - the DS1054Z isn't amazing at doing that.

[alsetalokin4017]

With this settings the oscilloscope should draw the trace.
I am not be able to reproduce the failure.   

Unless the waveform DC offset placed the waveform off the display.

No, in that case you should still see a "trace" but it would be pegged to the top or bottom of the trace display graticule.

See: Here is a 5 VDC applied to CH4, with nothing on CH1 and scope in Auto trigger mode. Note the blue trace at the top graticule line.

[DG41WV]

I recently bought a ds1054z and most of the time the trace disappears from the screen. Is this a known bug or have I got a defective unit? btw does Tequipment pay for shipping a defective unit back to them or do I have to pay for it?

I tested it further and it appears to be a fault in the device. the self cal doesn't even work(fails or hangs) and the problem with the trace disappearing(the waveform actually freezes and when I push the clear button it doesn't come back) happens most of the time when changing something like vertical scale, mem depth,etc.

[alsetalokin4017]

Oddly, the Tektronix DSO training material may provide the answer:  Use the Auto button!  Yup!  Right from the factories mouth (ok, text editor), use the Autoset button Step 3 of first project.  I assume Tek Autoset == Rigol Auto

http://www.tek.com/sites/tek.com/files/courseware/ST_Arduino_Labs_Combined.pdf

Then consider AC coupling and see if that doesn't work a little better.

The big "AUTO" button on the top right row of 4 buttons activates the Rigol Autoset feature. This is not the same thing as the "Auto" Trigger Mode, which is set in the Trigger area on the right side of the control panel (you have Auto, Normal, Single modes available). At the top left of the display area, just to the right of the yellow "RIGOL", one can see the Trigger state indicator, which will say "Auto" if Auto trigger mode is selected (the default) and will either say "WAIT" or "T'D" or "STOP" in other trigger modes. When the scope is in Auto Trigger Mode there should be a trace visible for any channel which is turned on (CH button LED lit) even if the signal's DC offset is offscreen (see above).
If the scope is in "Normal" trigger mode, or "Single", and no trigger event is detected on the selected Trigger channel, there may be no trace but the indicator will say "WAIT" in flashing green. If the indicator says "Auto" there should be a trace regardless of whether a trigger event is detected on the trigger channel.

[alsetalokin4017]

1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. 

And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. 

Please post links to where "people" have bought 1102E instead of 1054z due to "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.

[metrologist]

1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. 

And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. 

Please post links to where "people" have bought 1102E instead of 1054z due to "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.

One of the posters was considering the E just because of reading all the Z bugs, just a few posts up...

[metrologist]

The big "AUTO" button... If the indicator says "Auto" there should be a trace regardless of whether a trigger event is detected on the trigger channel.

I noticed the Auto indicator is not lit up. Is there some way to get the scope trigger to be in AUTO mode, but not active? I sort of recall something like that after pushing the single auto buttons, but I do not recall if it said stop or wait... Anyway, AUTO was not lit...

[rstofer]

The big "AUTO" button... If the indicator says "Auto" there should be a trace regardless of whether a trigger event is detected on the trigger channel.

I noticed the Auto indicator is not lit up. Is there some way to get the scope trigger to be in AUTO mode, but not active? I sort of recall something like that after pushing the single auto buttons, but I do not recall if it said stop or wait... Anyway, AUTO was not lit...

Depress the trigger Mode button?  You should step through Auto-Normal-Single

[alsetalokin4017]

1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. 

And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. 

Please post links to where "people" have bought 1102E instead of 1054z due to "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.

One of the posters was considering the E just because of reading all the Z bugs, just a few posts up...

That post refers to the DS1052E, not the DS1102E. But the point still stands: Please post links to where "people" have actually purchased either of those two channel scopes _instead_ of a DS1054Z  due to the "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.

[Fungus]

That post refers to the DS1052E, not the DS1102E. But the point still stands: Please post links to where "people" have actually purchased either of those two channel scopes _instead_ of a DS1054Z  due to the "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.

And if we can't, you 'win'? 

We've got one guy debating whether to get a DS1052E instead of a DS1054Z because of what he's been reading. I've bene called all sorts of names for defending Rigol here but this is 100% proof of the real reason why I do it.

a) The bugs are minor, most of them took about six months before anybody even noticed them.
b) The difference between a hobbyist owning a DS1054Z and not owning one is about ten parsecs wide.
c) The difference between owning a DS1054Z and owning an equivalent-feature 'scope with no spelling mistakes in the menus is about this ->.<- much... but you have to pay two or three times the price for that. 

[alsetalokin4017]

The big "AUTO" button... If the indicator says "Auto" there should be a trace regardless of whether a trigger event is detected on the trigger channel.

I noticed the Auto indicator is not lit up. Is there some way to get the scope trigger to be in AUTO mode, but not active? I sort of recall something like that after pushing the single auto buttons, but I do not recall if it said stop or wait... Anyway, AUTO was not lit...

When the scope is in "AUTO" trigger mode, the mode indicator at top left flashes. Depending on when the scope captures the screen image, you may see the indicator bright green (lit up), or dull green (dark). Regardless of whether a trigger event is detected on the trigger channel, when the scope is in Auto trigger mode you should see traces on all channels that are currently turned on.

That post refers to the DS1052E, not the DS1102E. But the point still stands: Please post links to where "people" have actually purchased either of those two channel scopes _instead_ of a DS1054Z  due to the "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.

And if we can't, you 'win'? 

If you can't,  then you are posting "alternative facts". If that's OK in your world ... sad.

We've got one guy debating whether to get a DS1052E instead of a DS1054Z because of what he's been reading. I've bene called all sorts of names for defending Rigol here but this is 100% proof of the real reason why I do it.

a) The bugs are minor, most of them took about six months before anybody even noticed them.

Wrong again,  several times over.  More alternative facts?

b) The difference between a hobbyist owning a DS1054Z and not owning one is about ten parsecs wide.
c) The difference between owning a DS1054Z and owning an equivalent-feature 'scope with no spelling mistakes in the menus is about this ->.<- much... but you have to pay two or three times the price for that. 

Any consumer item at whatever price point should do what it says it will do in the specifications. Perhaps you yourself never encountered the bugs because all you need a scope to do is to show some wiggly colored lines. Other users may expect more -- like they might expect the scope to do what it is supposed to do, without freezing, giving incorrect RMS measurements, having all measurements stop working, miscounting "pluses" or any of the other "minor bugs" that have been noted over time.
"It's only 400 dollars, what do you expect" gets kind of old after a while.


And I'm still waiting to see some evidence for your claim that "people" have bought 1102E instead of 1054z due to the discussions about bugs.

[metrologist]

1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. 

And ... let's have a big round of applause for all the people who post endlessly about (mostly minor/unimportant) bugs in the DS1054Z. You've got people buying DS1102Es instead of DS1054Zs. 

Please post links to where "people" have bought 1102E instead of 1054z due to "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.

One of the posters was considering the E just because of reading all the Z bugs, just a few posts up...

That post refers to the DS1052E, not the DS1102E. But the point still stands: Please post links to where "people" have actually purchased either of those two channel scopes _instead_ of a DS1054Z  due to the "minor/unimportant" bugs that have been reported here.

Well, I'm confused on which post is "that" post. Following the discussion, "that" post would be the one to which I'm referring, here:

Should I buy DS1052E or DS1054Z ?
Price is almost the same.

He is asking about the DS1052E, which I referred to as the E model.

1054Z is also faster and has more memory, but I am worried about the software bugs with 1054Z. 

Seems like he is concerned because of what he has been reading here, but we seem to be correcting the issue, see:

Thank you very much. So am not gonna make a mistake buying a 1054Z instead of 1052E ?
My budget is max 500$, so high end devices are for now out of question.

Note that this poster posted in another topic the same concerns. More bugs were presented, and he was chastised for double posting.

[rstofer]

Any consumer item at whatever price point should do what it says it will do in the specifications. Perhaps you yourself never encountered the bugs because all you need a scope to do is to show some wiggly colored lines. Other users may expect more -- like they might expect the scope to do what it is supposed to do, without freezing, giving incorrect RMS measurements, having all measurements stop working, miscounting "pluses" or any of the other "minor bugs" that have been noted over time.
"It's only 400 dollars, what do you expect" gets kind of old after a while.

As of 00.04.04.SP1 firmware are any of these bugs current? I know about the spelling error but I thought we had squared away all of the other issues a long tiime back.  Or, put another way, I don't see any of them.  There is no question that there have been bugs over the 2 year history of the scope but a lot of things have changed as of Nov 2016.

That's why this thread needs to be read from Nov 2016 forward.  Everything before that time is ancient history!

Other then Tektronix or Keysight, has ANY scope manufacturer ever released a 'prefect' scope?  Or, again put another way, when did programmers all of a sudden get things right?

[kcbrown]

b) The difference between a hobbyist owning a DS1054Z and not owning one is about ten parsecs wide.
c) The difference between owning a DS1054Z and owning an equivalent-feature 'scope with no spelling mistakes in the menus is about this ->.<- much... but you have to pay two or three times the price for that. 

Any consumer item at whatever price point should do what it says it will do in the specifications.

True as that may be, that's independent of the value proposition.

The value proposition is determined by what the consumer item will do properly, intersected with what the buyer needs it to do, versus its price.

Even if the DS1054Z doesn't meet all of its specifications, it is still a better value proposition than anything else out there as long as everything the specific buyer needs it to do intersects with that which it does properly.

Perhaps you yourself never encountered the bugs because all you need a scope to do is to show some wiggly colored lines. Other users may expect more -- like they might expect the scope to do what it is supposed to do, without freezing,

Do units with the latest firmware freeze?

giving incorrect RMS measurements, having all measurements stop working, miscounting "pluses" or any of the other "minor bugs" that have been noted over time.

That a bug has been noted does not mean it hasn't been fixed.  Are any of the bugs you cite here still in existence in the latest firmware, save for the spelling error (to call a spelling error a "bug", where one can easily infer the intended word, is laughable; miscounting, on the other hand, is quite obviously a bug)?

The bug history of the model is logically irrelevant to a prospective buyer.  What matters is the set of bugs that remain outstanding, and whether or not they intersect with the buyer's use cases.

"It's only 400 dollars, what do you expect" gets kind of old after a while.

It may get old, but that doesn't mean it gets any less valid, particularly when the remaining bugs are but a subset of the original list.

[gojimmypi]

wow, 134 pages of posts to a topic started almost 3 years ago. impressive.

with a wide range of opinions and perspectives, I thought I'd add mine.

The DS1054 is a low end oscilloscope. There's no denying that. I mean, seriously: $399?!

My degree is in electronic engineering from a few decades back. Needless to say, the magic of the DS1054 back then would have cost probably tens of thousands of dollars. Times change, eh?

I came to the eevblog some time ago looking for a good hobbyist oscilloscope. These days I work as a pure software engineer, but my heart is still in electronics. I was really happy to find Dave's review of the DS1054. That sealed my decision on the DS1054.

There are certainly many better, more feature packed, higher bandwidth, better this-n-that oscilloscopes. But for me, for hacking on the weekend - for the price - I really like my DS1054.

If you've come here with a similar situation, I say go for the DS1054. If you are a professional and the company has an unlimited budget, then buy something better, for sure.

But for a "basic" oscilloscope (I mean seriously, I started out with a dual trace analog tek many years ago that worked just fine, this one is awesome)....  the DS1054 can't be beat, yes, even with the occasional quirks.

The only thing I don't like? The fan. They could have spent just a few bucks more and included a silent fan. Feature requests? Well, the screen is somewhat small. An HDMI connector would be really awesome.

Just another opinion fwiw.

[Fungus]

Any consumer item at whatever price point should do what it says it will do in the specifications.

So... if you bought a car that cost half as much as rivals but only went 198km/h instead of the advertised 200km/h you'd take it back?

You wouldn't be able to see any value in it at all? You wouldn't be able to understand people recommending it to others?