Rigol HDO1000 and HDO4000 12bit oscilloscopes launched in China

[skander36]

On the HDO1K the probe stay on 10X after Autoset.
Maybe you should upgrade to 02.04 or active probe interface wait for confirmation (which would be a bug of course).

[Martin72]

Thankyou for the hint, firmware is avaible on the rigol eu site, but must ask batronix before of course.

[skander36]

I was able to downgrade to ver. 02.00 from Rigol site, but still the Autoset does not modify probe to 1X.
Maybe if you get permission to upgrade you will be able to isolate the problem.

For the HDO1K  users, on the chinese Rigol site they put the Fw. 02.04 on the DHO1K section along with the release notes and instructions. Release notes file does not tell anything about the improvements but intention is important 
Also the firmware is the same for both lines (4K and 1K) as I suspected before. (DHO1000-DHO4000(ARM)Update)

[Martin72]

I was able to downgrade to ver. 02.00 from Rigol site, but still the Autoset does not modify probe to 1X.
Maybe if you get permission to upgrade you will be able to isolate the problem.

Hi,

It´s not a bug, it´s a feature...
Today I´ve played a bit with the utility menu, there is a point called "Auto Config".
In this sub-menu you can choose if the channel coupling will be kept or not when activating the auto function...
So this was solved.
I got the permission from batronix to change the firmware and so I did the upgrade.
Whatever this will do, without release information.
After this I let it warm up (going out of the room, the fan noise is killing me...) and did a self cal.
Nice: It shows when it was the last time calibrated.
Self cal procedure takes appx 10min, that is fast.
Touchscreen response is good and like on my HD (and all other scopes I know) the rigol freezes the waveform shortly when moving.
I also got a look at the Acquire menu, the different modes.
Normal, average, peak, hires and ultra.
What I lke :
Hires mode you can select between 14 bit and 16 bit and the resulting bandwith will be displayed(depending on the memory depth) - Want to have this on my HD too...
BTW, memory depth:
Interesting the 1st: Default setting is NOT auto, it is 10k.
Interesting the 2nd: In averaging and hires mode, auto mode is not possible.
Interesting the last: in averaging mode the maximum memory depth is only 10M instead 250M 

The ultra mode is a little bit confusing as you can choose between several displaying modes (adjascent, overlay, waterfall, mosaic), but nothing will happen or weird things but not what you expect to see.
But I got a little idea what the reason could be and will check this tomorrow.

Martin

[Fungus]

Interesting the last: in averaging mode the maximum memory depth is only 10M instead 250M 

Does it change with the number of averages?

[Martin72]

No, plus the limitation is mentioned also in the manual - But without giving a reason.

[skander36]

Glad you sorted out.
For the UltraAquire I have to set the display frame number and timeout.

[Martin72]

Ah and my idea was it has something to do with the display freeze mode.
Thanks, will try it out "tomorrow".
You have a 1000, right ?

[skander36]

Yes HDO 1072.

[markone]

I was able to downgrade to ver. 02.00 from Rigol site, but still the Autoset does not modify probe to 1X.
Maybe if you get permission to upgrade you will be able to isolate the problem.

For the HDO1K  users, on the chinese Rigol site they put the Fw. 02.04 on the DHO1K section along with the release notes and instructions. Release notes file does not tell anything about the improvements but intention is important 
Also the firmware is the same for both lines (4K and 1K) as I suspected before. (DHO1000-DHO4000(ARM)Update)

Download file is the same but HDO1K/4K but firmware files are different, it's enough to browse the GEL file container to see that.

Anyway, it's a common good practice to put in test instruments with latest FW version available, especially if we compare them with other devices.

[skander36]

Download file is the same but HDO1K/4K but firmware files are different, it's enough to browse the GEL file container to see that.

I said this for those users who expressed doubt that the previous firmware was not for HDO1K.
Probable you are calling firmware the FPGA app files.
We know whats inside the gel file - https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hacking-the-hdo1khdo4k-rigol-12-bit-scope/msg4572985/#msg4572985

[markone]

Download file is the same but HDO1K/4K but firmware files are different, it's enough to browse the GEL file container to see that.

I said this for those users who expressed doubt that the previous firmware was not for HDO1K.
Probable you are calling firmware the FPGA app files.
We know whats inside the gel file - https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/hacking-the-hdo1khdo4k-rigol-12-bit-scope/msg4572985/#msg4572985

FPGA bins are part of firmware set, I made this clarification beacuse reading "the firmware is the same for both lines" could be misleading.

[skander36]

There is one firmware file that can be applied to both 4k and 1K models.

[dreamcat4]

a program like binwalk (or other similar firmware unpacker tools) should let you see what is the outline structure of those firmware regions. to examine better the regions and layout

[Martin72]

Today I didn't have much time, but I could play a bit with the FFT function.
I was a bit surprised how little you can adjust/select.
There are no FFT modes like the Siglent(Normal/Peak/Average).
Also you can't set a number of points, overall the FFT features are very meager on the Rigol.
I then had a 1khz sine wave fed in with the SDG2122X, 50 ohms, 775mVpp.
I noticed two things, next to the fundamental there seems to be a small disturbance that makes the peak look a bit grinded.
Then the next thing, the change from hanning to flattop.
You can't adjust anything, so take it as it is, just how the displayed looks, that is quite different from my siglent scope.
That the function is displayed in a window is first of all a fine thing.
But the shifting to hit the point where the representation on the screen changes, is a bit fiddly, there is then the selection in the menu at the siglent a bit more practical, but that's just my impression.
But there is again a point, I would also want to have with my siglent:
The vertical scaling is on the right side, which I find only logical, that the fundamental is to be located either rather left or in the middle.
You can read it better when it is on the right.
But that is only a question of software (hello, siglent..  ).

Edit: Damn, pics are shuffled..again.

[Martin72]

Additional,

Siglent and rigol with their tables, judge for yourself what looks "better".
For me I like more the white background of the rigol table.
You also can see the advantage of having an averaging fft mode(siglent pic).

[Fungus]

Controls aside: The noise floor on the Rigol looks to be more than 10dB lower so the peaks on the right hand side of this image stand out a lot more. The pastel color of the text is also a lot easier to read (in the screenshots at least).

Rigol:


Siglent:

[Martin72]

And that means what ?

[2N3055]

Controls aside: The noise floor on the Rigol looks to be more than 10dB lower so the peaks on the right hand side of this image stand out a lot more. The pastel color of the text is also a lot easier to read (in the screenshots at least).

Fungus,

how much there is noise floor in FFT is very dependent on FFT settings. Namely bin width is very important, because, math..
One big problem with FFT on HDO1000/4000 as it is is that you cannot control some important parameters and it isn't clear what exact parameters is it using.. So direct comparison is moot.

Truth is that SDS2000X HD has few percent less noise than HDO4000 in general.
HDO4000 has a bit less noise at low frequencies and SDS2000X HD has less noise at higher frequencies..
But that is irrelevant because they are in the same ballpark.

But if software doesn't let you get the benefits, you still get suboptimal results.

For instance, on my SDS2000X HD i can easily get 15-20 dB less noise than what is shown for Rigol in Martin's images. Around -115 to -120 dB at same input sensitivity.. Just by choosing right parameters. And since Siglent did it right, I can do that repeatably and predictably.
Rigol made decent hardware. GUI looks nice. Now they should fix the actual scope software part, as i pertains to actual usage of the scope.
They started posting some fixes. Good. Hope for the best.

[tv84]

Siglent and rigol with their tables, judge for yourself what looks "better".
For me I like more the white background of the rigol table.

I appreciate the new Rigol UI. It's starting to look like a LeCroy. 

BUT the font they use is still reminiscent of the chinese way of dealing with the latin alphabet. They don't have much sensibility to choose the best charater font.

The font alone makes the UI feel somewhat cheap! Don't make me explain it better, it's in my guts.

[Fungus]

And that means what ?

The whole point of an FFT is to find those, so... 

how much there is noise floor in FFT is very dependent on FFT settings. Namely bin width is very important, because, math..

In the images posted so far the peaks were much more visible on one of the two 'scopes.

Finding peaks is important in FFTs so I thought I'd mention it, that's all.

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

[2N3055]

And that means what ?

The whole point of an FFT is to find those, so... 

how much there is noise floor in FFT is very dependent on FFT settings. Namely bin width is very important, because, math..

In the images posted so far the peaks were much more visible on one of the two 'scopes.

Finding peaks is important in FFTs so I thought I'd mention it, that's all.

I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition.

 
Cmon,

I was polite and factual. And explained something.

And peaks are easily visible on both, and better on Siglent because you can better control the process.
And I gave a solution to Rigol to make it better..
My post was completely bona fide..

[Martin72]

Rigol made decent hardware. GUI looks nice. Now they should fix the actual scope software part, as i pertains to actual usage of the scope.
They started posting some fixes. Good. Hope for the best.

In the few days I have the rigol here I can say (from my point of view, of course) that the GUI is another level, especially when you compare it to "older" models like the MSO5000.
Directly, there is no contest, this point goes to the new HDO (or DHO, whatever).
And I like it more than siglent´s GUI, partly.
Hope I can do further playings in the later afternoon..
BTW, anyone got a clue why the flattop window looks so drastically different on the rigol ?

[Fungus]

Pet peeve: Can we please say "UI" instead of "GUI"? 

[2N3055]

Rigol made decent hardware. GUI looks nice. Now they should fix the actual scope software part, as i pertains to actual usage of the scope.
They started posting some fixes. Good. Hope for the best.

In the few days I have the rigol here I can say (from my point of view, of course) that the GUI is another level, especially when you compare it to "older" models like the MSO5000.
Directly, there is no contest, this point goes to the new HDO (or DHO, whatever).
And I like it more than siglent´s GUI, partly.
Hope I can do further playings in the later afternoon..
BTW, anyone got a clue why the flattop window looks so drastically different on the rigol ?

On that FFT setting menu I don't see any mention of either of number of points or number of bins or bin width. It seems it "automagically" decides on those and they are very important as to how it will look.
But it does look weird...