Hantek 6022BE 20MHz USB DSO

[Mark_O]

This thread shows why we need open source software!

There's nothing stopping you from writing some, and sharing it.

[SideshowBob]

Hi, new here and found this great forum, blog and youtube channel after searching for info on the 6022BE, I have one on order.  Kudos to Richard K for his hard work & generosity in creating Open6022BE, I have been playing with 1.0 Pre Beta 18 in demo mode.  I find that the V RMS measure for a square wave (Artificial) is incorrect even with a duty cycle of 100 % (a straight DC signal): for 0 - 5 V I get RMS calculated as 5.69543 V (p-p & mean both 5.01961 V).  Is this a fault just with demo mode?  With the scope attached would this value come from the scope or be calculated by the software?

Great job by RichardK, just a small thing: I would love to see the measured output taking up less vertical space (esp when has several values) and would humbly suggest putting it below the "Measure" list panel.

[Mark_O]

Hi, Bob.  Welcome to the group.

Hi, new here and found this great forum, blog and youtube channel after searching for info on the 6022BE, I have one on order.  Kudos to Richard K for his hard work & generosity in creating Open6022BE, I have been playing with 1.0 Pre Beta 18 in demo mode.  I find that the V RMS measure for a square wave (Artificial) is incorrect even with a duty cycle of 100 % (a straight DC signal): for 0 - 5 V I get RMS calculated as 5.69543 V (p-p & mean both 5.01961 V).  Is this a fault just with demo mode?  With the scope attached would this value come from the scope or be calculated by the software?

I doubt it's restricted to Demo mode.  It's probably the same when Live.  The value certainly doesn't come from the scope module.  However, I'm not sure to what extent Richard is relying on DLL functions for this.  There is an error in the software, but it could be Richard's code or Hantek's.

Great job by RichardK, just a small thing: I would love to see the measured output taking up less vertical space (esp when has several values) and would humbly suggest putting it below the "Measure" list panel.

I can see why you'd suggest that.  And looking only at that screen, it seems quite reasonable.  However, as new Outputs are added, I'm pretty sure they populate horizontally, in that (now) mostly empty space.  There's very little room left under the Measure panel, and what do you do when there's more than just the 1?  Better just to have a collapsable Outputs panel.

[SideshowBob]

Hi, Bob.  Welcome to the group.

Hi, new here and found this great forum, blog and youtube channel after searching for info on the 6022BE, I have one on order.  Kudos to Richard K for his hard work & generosity in creating Open6022BE, I have been playing with 1.0 Pre Beta 18 in demo mode.  I find that the V RMS measure for a square wave (Artificial) is incorrect even with a duty cycle of 100 % (a straight DC signal): for 0 - 5 V I get RMS calculated as 5.69543 V (p-p & mean both 5.01961 V).  Is this a fault just with demo mode?  With the scope attached would this value come from the scope or be calculated by the software?

I doubt it's restricted to Demo mode.  It's probably the same when Live.  The value certainly doesn't come from the scope module.  However, I'm not sure to what extent Richard is relying on DLL functions for this.  There is an error in the software, but it could be Richard's code or Hantek's.

Thanks for the welcome and the quick answer, after I posted I did download the API and have a look for a RMS function when I get a chance.

Great job by RichardK, just a small thing: I would love to see the measured output taking up less vertical space (esp when has several values) and would humbly suggest putting it below the "Measure" list panel.

I can see why you'd suggest that.  And looking only at that screen, it seems quite reasonable.  However, as new Outputs are added, I'm pretty sure they populate horizontally, in that (now) mostly empty space.  There's very little room left under the Measure panel, and what do you do when there's more than just the 1?  Better just to have a collapsable Outputs panel.

In full screen (maximised not fs mods) there is plenty of room under the measure list (YMMV I have a largish screen) on the lhs and having 3 active measurements at the bottom vertically compresses the scope screen distorting the xy ratio.  Just an optimisation tweak for larger screens, a floating measurement window would be another way to achieve the same thing or stacking the measurement results horizontally then vertically.  Not a big issue at all.

[SideshowBob]

I had a quick look at the very sparse SDK API and looks like all measurements are in the software.

[RedOctobyr]

Hi all. I have been looking for a low-cost option for getting a basic oscilloscope. Mainly for learning more about some electrical issues in a hobby of mine, not for use as an EE or anything I wanted something that could capture data, for review later.

I just ordered a 6022BE. Out of the different USB options, this seemed the most viable for me, while still being under $100.

Ironically, a thread that describes the drawbacks of the product (especially the software) actually inspired me to buy it, as a result of the amazing work that Richard K has done. Thank you Richard!! I hope that Hantek is paying attention.

I do have a question. I want to look at voltage dips/spikes in a 6V source. That's too high for the probes in x1. If I go to x10, will I lose a lot of voltage resolution? 8 bits of resolution, across a 100V total range (+/- 50V), implies ~0.4V steps? That would make the steps quite coarse, for looking at just a 6V signal. My apologies if this isn't actually how it works.

[Mark_O]

In full screen (maximised not fs mods) there is plenty of room under the measure list (YMMV I have a largish screen) on the lhs and having 3 active measurements at the bottom vertically compresses the scope screen distorting the xy ratio.  Just an optimisation tweak for larger screens, a floating measurement window would be another way to achieve the same thing or stacking the measurement results horizontally then vertically.  Not a big issue at all.

Good points.  Maybe that's something Richard could make configurable, once he reaches the optimization phase of his implementation.  Maximizing the space for signal traces is certainly a worthwhile objective.

[TomC]

Hi all. I have been looking for a low-cost option for getting a basic oscilloscope. Mainly for learning more about some electrical issues in a hobby of mine, not for use as an EE or anything I wanted something that could capture data, for review later.

I just ordered a 6022BE. Out of the different USB options, this seemed the most viable for me, while still being under $100.

Ironically, a thread that describes the drawbacks of the product (especially the software) actually inspired me to buy it, as a result of the amazing work that Richard K has done. Thank you Richard!! I hope that Hantek is paying attention.

I do have a question. I want to look at voltage dips/spikes in a 6V source. That's too high for the probes in x1. If I go to x10, will I lose a lot of voltage resolution? 8 bits of resolution, across a 100V total range (+/- 50V), implies ~0.4V steps? That would make the steps quite coarse, for looking at just a 6V signal. My apologies if this isn't actually how it works.

You are right that the resolution for 8 bits is about 0.4% of total range, that equals about 0.4V steps for a 100V total range as you said. However, the way I see it, you wouldn't have to use 100V total range with the probe set to x10. For a +6V signal with a 1Vpp ripple the range must cover about 14V total (+7/-7). So it seems to me that you could use 2V/Div with a total range of 20V (+10/-10). Beware that even with the probe set to x10, if you use 1V/Div, it will clip anything above +5V.

Edit: The original post calculated the total range based on 8 vertical graticule divisions, it was corrected to 10 graticule divisions since although only 8 are visible the ADC provides data for 10.

[TomC]

Here are a couple captures related to the above. The subject is the output of a wall wart rated at 7.5VDC, but in reality it's output is closer to 8VDC. The trigger is set to single shot at a level of about 9.5V. With the probe attached I suddenly connect a 7.5 ohm resistor across the output, if the transients reach 9.5V the scope triggers and captures the transients. Note on #1 that the transients try to extend above +10V but get clipped off. This is due to the 6022's input protection circuit. Since the setting is 2V/Div the total range is -8V/+8V but there is a little leeway and you can get away with up to +10V signals. #2 shows the left hand side of the signal at 200ns/div to get a better look at the clipped signal.

[RedOctobyr]

Ahh, I see. Thank you, TomC. The screenshots from actual use, at 8V, using x10, are very helpful, BTW.

I had assumed that the 8-bit resolution was always applied across the whole +/-5V actual input range to the scope (whether using x1 or x10 probes). This was apparently a bad assumption. I'm guessing the 8-bit resolution is actually applied maybe to just the available range, based on the volts/div setting you're using. Which is great news.

[TomC]

Ahh, I see. Thank you, TomC. The screenshots from actual use, at 8V, using x10, are very helpful, BTW.

I had assumed that the 8-bit resolution was always applied across the whole +/-5V actual input range to the scope (whether using x1 or x10 probes). This was apparently a bad assumption. I'm guessing the 8-bit resolution is actually applied maybe to just the available range, based on the volts/div setting you're using. Which is great news.

Yes, that's right, on the setup of the screenshots (2V/Div), the range is 20V (-10V/+10V). So the resolution is 0.4% of 20V which comes to 80mV steps. However, these scopes don't use a true attenuator for all the range settings. For example, on x10, only the 1, 2, 5, & 10V/Div range settings are obtained via the attenuator circuit which consists of an operational amplifier with 4 switchable gain resistors. The range settings below 1V/Div and above 10V/Div are obtained by zooming the image in or out. For example, the 100V/Div range setting is obtained by setting the gain to 10V/Div and zooming out by x10. So as far as what the ADC is seeing, the resolution, and the maximum swing that you can see before clipping, the 100V/Div range setting is the same as the 10V/Div range setting. The only difference is that the signal takes less room on the display.

Edit: The original post calculated the total range based on 8 vertical graticule divisions, it was corrected to 10 graticule divisions since although only 8 are visible the ADC provides data for 10.

[TomC]

For the last few days I've been exploring some 6022 peculiarities related to the way that it displays signals that should span the full height of the graticule. The results depend on the V/Div setting and the baseline setting. What happens, in my opinion, is not always intuitive. So I decided to write down my explanation of this effects and to take screenshots of some of my experiments.

The attached PDF, "Some 6022 Peculiarities", is my attempt at explaining what happens and why. This isn't all new material and many of you may already be familiar with it, but I found it helpful to have it all together in the 3 PDF pages. The attached screenshots are experimental results obtained by scoping the output of my Function Generator. They are intended to help support the write-up. Note that the "Measurement Output" provided by the 6022 is incorrect in some of these screenshots, specifically #1, #2, #8, #9, #10. So pay attention to the file names, the actual scope settings, and read the displayed signal values yourself.

[Matchless]

Hi TomC,
             This info will be very helpful to some people! I would gladly include it in the user manual if you agree.
I will also put your name to this if you can let me have the pdf in maybe a docx format. If you do not want your name to it, can I use your forum handle?
Thanks.

[TomC]

Hi TomC,
             This info will be very helpful to some people! I would gladly include it in the user manual if you agree.
I will also put your name to this if you can let me have the pdf in maybe a docx format. If you do not want your name to it, can I use your forum handle?
Thanks.

Hi Matchless,

Here is the PDF in odt format, I don't have word, but you should be able to open odt in the later word versions. I don't know if the page format will be completely accurate, but it should be close. I normally just use my forum handle for anything I publish. You are welcome to use any or all of this info and/or edit it if you wish!

[Mark_O]

Hi TomC,
             This info will be very helpful to some people! I would gladly include it in the user manual if you agree.

I too thought Tom's explanations were well done, and did a good job of capturing the important limitations within which the 6022BE works (along with the reasons why).

I couldn't help thinking though, as I was looking at his clipped screen shot on Page 2, where he wrote:  "...will appear clipped. Although this is normal, it may be confusing to the user, since, in general, it would be reasonable to expect an 11.5Vpp signal to display properly within a 16Vpp full screen range." that he was certainly right about it being confusing to the user.  Especially so for newbies, who may be using this as their first scope.  But even old-timers, who have to constantly stop and think, as they're adjusting gains and offsets, "Hmm, baseValue x scaling + offsets >+limit, or <-limit?  Ah yes, THAT's why it's truncated."  Or perhaps it really IS truncated at some level, and you're wondering, "is that because of the front-end limitations?" even when it's not.

When one is using a scope, they expect to be shown what's actually there (a visualization tool), not silently (invisibly) bump into the measurement limitations, and shown something not reflecting reality.  That's why I've always thought that as the ranges get changed, and the offsets get shifted, the display screen should dynamically make those boundaries instantly obvious, without requiring any mental gymnastics.  I.e., red band regions at top and/or bottom, or a cross-hatched region for same, that clearly and immediately delineates where the scope input can never display valid output. 

I was saving that as an enhancement suggestion for Richard, since obviously Hantek would never want to do something so user-friendly, which would call attention to the device's inherent limitations.  But I think that would go a long way toward minimizing confusion from stumbling into the invisible boundary conditions on the 6022BE.  Make them visible, and half the problems go away (the 'not being sure where they are at the moment' part).  Then at least you can adjust to (partly) avoid them.

[JonnyVolts]

Just my 2 cents as a novice with a little over a year into my E.E. degree and now putting in a year of some hands on while I get my business up and running before pursuing more school.
I've only had the unit for 2 days but most people researching the unit just want to know, should I buy one for basic analysis?

I was told whatever I do, absolutely do not, under any circumstances, do not buy a Hantek or Sainsmart USB oscilloscope.
I'm glad I found this forum.

For general audio circuits, fancy light circuits and general low speed analog devices that aren't on the cutting edge of technology, this unit is perfectly acceptable.
I'm just designing musical instrument preamps, oscillators, delays, synthesizers, microphone preamps, simple light effects and maybe the occasional hobby ESC or sensor on the car.

I will be the guy who suggests the same 10 dictators appearing on every forum someone asks about buying a cheap scope have something to gain by blacklisting these and pushing Rigol unrelentingly.
If you're not trying to repair satellites, work for the cable company, repair ultrasonic visualizers and other pieces of equipment costing tens of thousands of dollars or at least very high speed devices, what's the harm in starting off with a $60 USB scope?
Nothing unless you're the guys selling $350 bench scopes that are only a few steps up in performance and quality but the way you pay for your winter vacation.

Of course it may very well just be gear snobbery which is a despicable trend in consumerism culture.
My point is I'm happy with the purchase and in another year, yes I'll probably buy a 100mhz bench scope but for most of us dealing with common analog circuits well below the bar of cutting edge technology, this is a reliable tool.
If you're not an engineer or equivalent through hands on industry employment, odds are you're just a hobbyist building RC gadgets or a guy running a car stereo installation business.
A $65 scope is more tool than you will ever actually need for such work.

I won't call it a "hack" but if you set the software to 50Mhz, screen capture with a decent program and then playback in slow motion...guess what??
It's not fancy.
It's not direct perfect.
It is however a useful tool as opposed to the "toy" most gear snobs have labeled it.

[Rasz]

snobs? dude, you just agreed this toy is ok for audio frequencies only

[JonnyVolts]

snobs? dude, you just agreed this toy is ok for audio frequencies only

I didn't use the word only so next time you think you have the power and right to speak for me, you should message me first and not rely on computer armor to pull that kind of crap.

The unit is an absolute champ on my laptop but this beta software is a disaster.
On my desktop the OEM won't even install, the beta development does but it runs like crap with an absurd amount of latency.
My desktop is 10x the machine my laptop is but it's also about 5 years old.

Feel free to read what I said again and if necessary, message me since English clearly isn't your first language or civility and basic human decency are qualities you like most people online do not possess.

The scope runs great on the right computer which tells me everyone pushing Rigol has a personal agenda.

[olrowdy01]

Quote from: JonnyVolts on Today at 01:06:32 AM>Quote from: Rasz on October 26, 2014, 02:13:04 PM

snobs? dude, you just agreed this toy is ok for audio frequencies only

I didn't use the word only so next time you think you have the power and right to speak for me, you should message me first and not rely on computer armor to pull that kind of crap.

This is an open forum and you'll have to get used to comments by others.

Nor did you call the Hantek a toy. Rasz put that title on it in his post.  But ...... YOU could have been more diplomatic in your response.

The unit is an absolute champ on my laptop but this beta software is a disaster.

On my desktop the OEM won't even install, the beta development does but it runs like crap with an absurd amount of latency.
My desktop is 10x the machine my laptop is but it's also about 5 years old.

All programs don't run perfectly on all computers.

Feel free to write your version of the software. RK has made a great improvement over the original OEM software that runs fine (such that it is) on my old and newer computers.
[snip]

The scope runs great on the right computer which tells me everyone pushing Rigol has a personal agenda.

"Everyone"?  Come now, there must be someone pushing Rigol that doesn't have a personal agenda.  Perhaps they just expect more from a scope than the Hantek offers and they are only snobs.   

The specs on the Rigol do appear to be better than the much cheaper Hantek. 

Just roll with the punches and buy/use whatever scope YOU like.

[Mark_O]

Hi, Jonny.  Welcome to the EEVBlog Forum.  You've certainly landed with a splash. 

Just my 2 cents as a novice with a little over a year into my E.E. degree and now putting in a year of some hands on while I get my business up and running before pursuing more school.  I've only had the unit for 2 days but most people researching the unit just want to know, should I buy one for basic analysis?

Congrats on jumping in, getting your hands dirty, and gaining some real experience!  I'm sure it will accelerate your learning process.  I would suggest though that the decision-making process for some might be a bit more involved.  For no reason other than their "basic analysis" may not be the same as yours, or mine.

I was told whatever I do, absolutely do not, under any circumstances, do not buy a Hantek or Sainsmart USB oscilloscope.
I'm glad I found this forum.

It's true that those two USB scopes (amongst others) are often disparaged, though sometimes it's simply for their lack of knobs and screens.  But on a performance scale, one can not simply lump them all into one basket.  Hantek, for example, has a whole range of USB DSO's.  Some quite expensive and powerful.  The 6022BE is simply at the bottom of their price & performance chain, which is achieved by stripping out everything they possibly could, to minimize costs.  Leaving only core functionality intact.  Devices like the Sainsmart simply went a bit farther than they should have.

For general audio circuits, fancy light circuits and general low speed analog devices that aren't on the cutting edge of technology, this unit is perfectly acceptable.  I'm just designing musical instrument preamps, oscillators, delays, synthesizers, microphone preamps, simple light effects and maybe the occasional hobby ESC or sensor on the car.

I would agree that as long as you know the limits of the 6022BE (which many here have contributed to understanding), and are using Richard's improved software, this unit can be very usable for many folks, even beyond the limited domains you enumerated.

I will be the guy who suggests the same 10 dictators appearing on every forum someone asks about buying a cheap scope have something to gain by blacklisting these and pushing Rigol unrelentingly.

You're certainly entitled to hyperbole if you like, but you'll earn more respect here if you remain a bit more balanced.  People recommending a Rigol (or a Siglent or even Hantek) standalone scope aren't trying to "blacklist" anything.  They're simply letting folks with limited experience know in advance about limitations in cheaper devices, that may cause one to outgrow it sooner than an integrated unit.  Labeling them 'dictators' doesn't help make your case.

If you're not trying to repair satellites, work for the cable company, repair ultrasonic visualizers and other pieces of equipment costing tens of thousands of dollars or at least very high speed devices, what's the harm in starting off with a $60 USB scope?

There is no harm at all in starting with "a $60 USB scope".  Unless the limitations of the device and/or it's software make such a negative impression or are so difficult to use, that the newbie gets turned off to electronics as a result.  Or it winds up just sitting on the shelf unused, because the effort expended doesn't justify the results obtained.

Nothing unless you're the guys selling $350 bench scopes that are only a few steps up in performance and quality but the way you pay for your winter vacation.

And again, you're exaggerating.  $350 bench scopes are NOT "only a few steps up in performance".  They have capabilities that go far beyond what the 6022BE can muster.  Each individual needs the information, so they can decide whether they need the extras, or can get by OK with what the 6022BE can do.  Sometimes you don't need a Swiss-Army knife.  Just a simple knife will do the job.  OTOH, in many cases, using the 6022BE will take you longer than it would have with a bench scope.  Even a cheap $20 used analog one.  Certainly far longer than a DSO with functioning trigger capabilities.  But even that doesn't make it worthless.

Of course it may very well just be gear snobbery which is a despicable trend in consumerism culture.

IMO, it's rather amusing to consider someone suggesting a $350 bench scope is a "gear snob".

My point is I'm happy with the purchase and in another year, yes I'll probably buy a 100mhz bench scope but for most of us dealing with common analog circuits well below the bar of cutting edge technology, this is a reliable tool.

I'm glad you're happy with your 6022BE.  There are many others here who find it useful as well.  And as long as you know where it's limits are, yes, it can be reliable.

If you're not an engineer or equivalent through hands on industry employment, odds are you're just a hobbyist building RC gadgets or a guy running a car stereo installation business.  A $65 scope is more tool than you will ever actually need for such work.

That may actually be true.  However, it does not mean that even those folks can not benefit from what others here with more experience have posted on using the 6022BE more effectively.  The efforts of knowledgable people have also gone into producing better User Manuals, and better PC software.  That can be a huge help to even the most casual hobbyist, increase their understanding, and save them a lot of time and frustration.

I won't call it a "hack" but if you set the software to 50Mhz, screen capture with a decent program and then playback in slow motion...guess what??
It's not fancy.  It's not direct perfect.  It is however a useful tool as opposed to the "toy" most gear snobs have labeled it.

And again with the over-the-top characterizations of those not praising the 6022BE.     Carrying such a big chip on your shoulder can get tiring.  You may want to set it down for a bit, and relax.  You've found a thread here where like-minded folks have gathered, not to bury the 6022BE or to praise it, but to find ways to get the most out of the least-expensive piece of decent kit around.

[Matchless]

I hope RichardK is still around! I was thinking that with the onset of winter he is hopefully going to have some time available again.

Mark_O  well said!

Just to add, if I could afford those "snob" devices I would be doing so, as I am a bit of a gadget freak, but unfortunately or fortunately my wallet makes the call!

[wazzokk]

Hi All
First and main reason for post is huge thanks and admiration for the work by RichardK and also Matchless and all those who have helped progress the project.
I am seriously considering parting with some green and getting the BE or maybe the BL, I feel Hantek should be paying commision, if RichardK had a tip box I for one would glad feed it.

[CiccioB]

Hello,
I'm new to the forum.
I registered just to know what is the status of the project.
I have just bought a Hantek 6022BL USB Oscilloscope.
I have downloaded latest 18 beta version of the program, and I have used the HTMarch.dll coming with 6022BL SW in order to make it run. Though this app is a bit of an improvement over the original SW, I still find there are some problems with it.
In particular I can't grab data at speed faster than 10us. If I select 5us and below, the application stops acquiring data in continuous mode and to show properly on the screen the few acquisition it makes. The blinking led becomes green very rarely, while when grabbing data correctly it become red periodically.
No trigger is also available at those speeds. On slower speed I can scroll all at left of the window buffer and see the triggered data. On faster speed the scrolling "knob" on top of the graph becomes completely unreliable, with the T moving even outside of the wave form and loosing the capability to scroll on the far left. Even trying to grab the window and scroll it as with the original SW, but that doesn't work. The shown window is very small (sometimes it is even not full of data) and the scroll is very short. No trigger is performed.

With such limitations it is difficult for me to grab an I2C clock that runs at 100KHz, which is a speed well below the advertised 20MHz the HW is capable of.
I know that it is a SW limitation, not an HW one as with the original SW, with lot (but really lot)of patience I manage to find the trigger point in the buffer using a faster speed than those 10us and I could measure the period of the clock.
At least, with this SW trigger works when using slow time data acquisition (about one second/div), though the buffer is not filled. The original SW stops triggering slow signal which makes measuring 1Hz sqaure waves a pain to measure.

So, what I would like to know is if the project is still alive or if there are chances that the code is made open. If none is working on it I believe it is the only chance to have a working version of the SW.
I do not think Hantek will ever provide a fix for all those bugs and low usability in the original SW.

Thanks in advance

BTW: I'm a SW developer though I have really no time to follow such a project. If the code will ever become free I could give it some spare look. I would really like to improve the interface for more usability more than the "background" data management.
What compiler is used and which language? Visual C++ with GDI for the graphics drawings?

[Mark_O]

So, what I would like to know is if the project is still alive or if there are chances that the code is made open.

RichardK has indicated that while he's busy with other things ATM, he does plan to return to it, when time becomes available.

I do not think Hantek will ever provide a fix for all those bugs and low usability in the original SW.

I doubt you will find anyone here who will argue with you.

I would really like to improve the interface for more usability more than the "background" data management.

What you're attributing to "BG data management" may be more a limitation of the hardware itself.  There is no actual hardware triggering, in the sense most would think of it.  On longer/slower acquisitions, it just captures blindly, then looks to see if there's a trigger in there somewhere.  On fast and short acquisitions (1k), it does detects a trigger event, if it occurs anywhere in that buffer.  Then ships it to the PC.  But the "trigger" could as easily have occurred on sample #1 of 1024, or #1024.  That means it will always be very unstable in any continuous updating mode.  Unfortunately, it does not capture into a circular buffer, nor can it select any pre/post trigger sample position.  You can provide that information to it via the API, but it will be ignored.

What compiler is used and which language? Visual C++ with GDI for the graphics drawings?

RichardK answered this Q, and also the plan for the future, back in Feb...

"...it's being written in C++, specifically using CodeGear's RAD Studio (formally Borland C++ Builder)...

Once I have the major parts done I'm going to run through the code and clean it up, because this whole project has been a learn as you go, trial and error, and in some cases, reverse engineer the hell out of the stock software (simply because of the giant lack of information on the SDK)... Actually, I'm currently reverse engineering the stock software to figure out how the hell to use the HTDisplayDLL's HTDrawWaveInXY() for XY support.

As a result, the code is a bit messy and needs to be cleaned up and commented, and some parts rewritten (now that relevant information has been obtained).  After the code is cleaned up and properly documented with comments, I'll be uploading the whole thing to it's own source forge page, for anyone to modify it to their hearts content."

[CiccioB]

Thanks for the answer

I'm happy there's still a chance for this SW to evolve.
What I meant with "interface" vs "background" was that I supposed the application does two separate tasks: one is to grab data and put it correctly in a buffer and then there's a (or more) computation procedure(s) that finds triggers, scale data and does anything needed to correctly present that buffer on the dispaly. Computations that take care of user actions like the will of a fast scrolling to the right position.
The buffer filling requires knowing well how the HW works and the communication API with the device, while the analisys of the buffer to create a particular presentation does not require it.
That's why I'd rather work on the latter, as I have not the time and patience that is required for the reverse engineering RichardK is doing.

I'll look forward to the time when the code will be made open to try to improve it.
Many thanks to RichardK if this will ever happen.