Horizontal zoom would do it, where is it?
No, on the DS1054z you cannot get "pretty much any timebase value you want" like you can on most analog scopes. You are limited to the same set of timebase values offered by the normal Horizontal Scale knob, and 5 ns/div is the fastest timebase available whether in "zoom" or not. And you may not even be able to zoom that far, depending on how the normal Horizontal Scale is set and what Memory Depth you are using in Acquire.
No, on the DS1054z you cannot get "pretty much any timebase value you want" like you can on most analog scopes. You are limited to the same set of timebase values offered by the normal Horizontal Scale knob, and 5 ns/div is the fastest timebase available whether in "zoom" or not. And you may not even be able to zoom that far, depending on how the normal Horizontal Scale is set and what Memory Depth you are using in Acquire.
I see. That's indeed quite poor.
You only have 1GS/s sample rate so there's not much point in zooming further than 5ns/div. It already has more than one horizontal pixel per sample.
No, on the DS1054z you cannot get "pretty much any timebase value you want" like you can on most analog scopes. You are limited to the same set of timebase values offered by the normal Horizontal Scale knob, and 5 ns/div is the fastest timebase available whether in "zoom" or not. And you may not even be able to zoom that far, depending on how the normal Horizontal Scale is set and what Memory Depth you are using in Acquire.
I see. That's indeed quite poor.
Why?
You only have 1GS/s sample rate so there's not much point in zooming further than 5ns/div. It already has more than one horizontal pixel per sample.
Sure, you could always zoom further but it doesn't seem worth bashing the 'scope over that tiny limitation.
No need to freak out, no-one bashes the scope you so clearly feel fond of. It's just somthing that could have been implemented a bit better. I doubt it's a deal breaker for a $400 scope.
No need to freak out, no-one bashes the scope you so clearly feel fond of. It's just somthing that could have been implemented a bit better. I doubt it's a deal breaker for a $400 scope.
You still talk like it's a Rigol-specific problem though,
which isn't true. Plenty of much-more-expensive 'scopes can't do it either.
It might even be true that the majority of DSOs can't do it, that's you'd have trouble finding one that does.
There's simply not much need for it in a DSO and it could complicate the hardware a lot (you'd need to resample the data in real time - not fun!)
No, not really. There are plenty around that can zoom in into a waveform outside the fixed timebase spacing, like the Agilent/Keysight Infiniium 8000A/9000A/80000A/90000A Series, or the Infiniium S/X/V/Z Series (not sure if the DSOX can do that). Or the LeCroy 9300/LC/WR LT/WR2LT/WP900/WR 6k(A)/WP 7k(A)/WM 8k(A)/WS400/WSXs(-B)/WRXi(-A)/WP7zi(-A)/WR6zi/WM8zi(-A)/WR8k/LM9zi/LM10zi/WS3k.
On the other hand, trigger delay limited by sampling rate and buffer size can be a problem. But that is something that comes with the how digital triggering concept is usually implemented..
I agree it could be implemented by postponing buffer acquisition by any arbitrary amount, and probably not even very hard to do, but I guess it was not important enough..
Luckily, so far I could get by by using deep memory, but agree that it could be a problem..
On the other hand, trigger delay limited by sampling rate and buffer size can be a problem. But that is something that comes with the how digital triggering concept is usually implemented..
I agree it could be implemented by postponing buffer acquisition by any arbitrary amount, and probably not even very hard to do, but I guess it was not important enough..
Luckily, so far I could get by by using deep memory, but agree that it could be a problem..
It comes about because despite what the manual implies, the 1000Z series does not implement delayed sweep/acquisition. They call it that but it is just a horizontal zoom. Marketing trumps engineering.
There is *nothing* about digital triggering which prevents delayed sweep/acquisition. Detect the trigger in real time as usual, acquire as usual, and then continue to acquire overwriting the beginning of the acquisition record.
Thinking about it you are right, it doesn't have delayed triggering at all, but by using zoom you can simulate it to the some extent... And as I said delayed trigger could be easily implemented... But since you can use zoom for a "sort of delay trigger" I guess they figured they don't need the real one...
Marketing decided it was good enough ..
I have pointed out this connection with Moore's Law and increasing integration before. The reason these oscilloscopes do not have analog triggering and equivalent time sampling has nothing to do with performance; it is because digital triggering is cheaper.
Hate to state the obvious, but I don't see the point in stating that 20000$ and up list price scopes have more bandwidth, nicer and bigger screens, more and more sophisticated features, beautiful and responsive GUI .. etc. etc. etc.. than equipment that costs 10-20 times less...
No need to freak out, no-one bashes the scope you so clearly feel fond of. It's just somthing that could have been implemented a bit better. I doubt it's a deal breaker for a $400 scope.
You still talk like it's a Rigol-specific problem though,
No, I don't. I actually never never said that it's Rigol-specific, this is just you being hyper-sensitive again.Quotewhich isn't true. Plenty of much-more-expensive 'scopes can't do it either.[/qb]
And plenty more of much-more expensive scopes can, so what?QuoteIt might even be true that the majority of DSOs can't do it, that's you'd have trouble finding one that does.
No, not really. There are plenty around that can zoom in into a waveform outside the fixed timebase spacing, like the Agilent/Keysight Infiniium 8000A/9000A/80000A/90000A Series, or the Infiniium S/X/V/Z Series (not sure if the DSOX can do that). Or the LeCroy 9300/LC/WR LT/WR2LT/WP900/WR 6k(A)/WP 7k(A)/WM 8k(A)/WS400/WSXs(-B)/WRXi(-A)/WP7zi(-A)/WR6zi/WM8zi(-A)/WR8k/LM9zi/LM10zi/WS3k.QuoteThere's simply not much need for it in a DSO and it could complicate the hardware a lot (you'd need to resample the data in real time - not fun!)
No, it wouldn't. There's no need to resample (which some of the scopes above can do easily). Zoom doesn't generate new data, it simply takes a segment of the sample data to create a closer look.QuoteAnd there is clearly some need for variable zooming, which is why most of the more advanced scopes have it.
There's little reason why even cost-cutting hardware like the DS1054z could implement a fully variable zoom instead of the stepped approach.I guess the reason it's done is because people coming from analog scopes might find the concept of a 'delayed timebase' with fixed steps easier.
Anyways, my original comment was aimed at David Hess and his suggestion that variable timebase is not available on a DSO.
They better do for that price!!
Instead of "stating the obvious" you could have just read properly what Fungus and I wrote (including the part you didn't quote), which was:
.......
It shouldn't take a reading genius to figure out that I listed much more expensive scopes because the particular argument included much more expensive scopes, so it's a bit silly to complain that I listed much more expensive scopes
Or maybe somebody realized that equivalent time sampling makes assumptions about the nature of the signal. If you get one shot at the signal, ET sampling doesn't buy much.
For the DS1054z, look in the Trigger menu for some delayed trigger options.
Trigger Menu>Type>Delay, then set up your options as required.
Also you can scroll horizontally through the memory so that you can look at sections of the waveform that are far distant in time from the trigger point.