Well they are listed as RP3300A.
Well they are listed as RP3300A.
I can't even find an RP3300A probe listed anywhere online - it's like a cheaper version of the RP3300 that they've produced specifically to include with the DSO. Kind of sucks for you, man.
Perhaps they had it planned from the beginning - but didn't start producing them until later - so had to include the more expensive RP3300; I've no idea. But the online datasheet (from June 2012) lists the standard probe as RP3300 - and so does the User Manual (May 2012). So it might be you have a very early model.
Edit: What was your calibration date?
its a very new model.
dated 4th June 2013
the manual, has a satin feel to the outside cover... and I can only see my single set of finger prints on it... I'd bet the manual had never been opened before, the glued edge, hasn't had a crease to it yet.
and the english half of the manual, definitely says Mar 2012 .... of course cant read the other half ;-)
You can always demand the RP3300 probes - saying that you read the probe specs in the online material before you bought it. Those materials post-date the manual.
and the english half of the manual, definitely says Mar 2012 .... of course cant read the other half ;-)
the problem is that the Rigol has user-selectable sample lengths - the Agilent does not. And it seems Rigol didn't figure out an elegant way to deal with this (e.g. forcing the sample length to a specific size).
If you don't think it's possible, you should be getting an Agilent owner to prove me wrong. For example:
@Hydrawerk - can you please demonstrate? For example, send a 100kHz sine into the DSO - and adjust the horizontal scale until the sampling rate shows 100kSa/s - then grab a screen shot and post it here?
So the issue here is that Rigol gave you enough rope to hang yourself? While Agilent thought the user does not know any better and picked the "correct" sample rate for you
Ok . I'm curious what Agilent will show for 100 khz signal sampled at 100 ksps, at 10ms time base. but sounds like this picture will not be possible to obtain (since Agilent does not allow use override ).
Well they are listed as RP3300A.
I can't even find an RP3300A probe listed anywhere online - it's like a cheaper version of the RP3300 that they've produced specifically to include with the DSO. Kind of sucks for you, man.
Perhaps they had it planned from the beginning - but didn't start producing them until later - so had to include the more expensive RP3300; I've no idea. But the online datasheet (from June 2012) lists the standard probe as RP3300 - and so does the User Manual (May 2012). So it might be you have a very early model.
Edit: What was your calibration date?
its a very new model.
dated 4th June 2013
the manual, has a satin feel to the outside cover... and I can only see my single set of finger prints on it... I'd bet the manual had never been opened before, the glued edge, hasn't had a crease to it yet.
and the english half of the manual, definitely says Mar 2012 .... of course cant read the other half ;-)
Well they are listed as RP3300A.
I can't even find an RP3300A probe listed anywhere online - it's like a cheaper version of the RP3300 that they've produced specifically to include with the DSO. Kind of sucks for you, man.
Perhaps they had it planned from the beginning - but didn't start producing them until later - so had to include the more expensive RP3300; I've no idea. But the online datasheet (from June 2012) lists the standard probe as RP3300 - and so does the User Manual (May 2012). So it might be you have a very early model.
Edit: What was your calibration date?
its a very new model.
dated 4th June 2013
the manual, has a satin feel to the outside cover... and I can only see my single set of finger prints on it... I'd bet the manual had never been opened before, the glued edge, hasn't had a crease to it yet.
and the english half of the manual, definitely says Mar 2012 .... of course cant read the other half ;-)
With respect to Rigol manufacture dates, I have read this somewhere. In checking the 5 different Rigol instruments that have been in my hands this seems to hold true. For example: serial # DS2A1436xxxxx. The 14 represents 2012 ( the 14th year Rigol has been in existence). This agrees with their website stating they were established in 1998. http://us.rigol.com/html/about/history.shtml
The 36 represents the 36th week of 2012.
RigolNA also told me that a while ago, some units were sent back to be reworked. I received a 4022 that had been reworked but still was supplied with the pre-rework cal certificate. At turn-on, the menus were set for Chinese. I'm not sure if any of the 2000 series were reworked.
Hope this helps,
But it is funny to see that this lead to the discovery that the 500uV mode is in fact no "true" 500uV mode and only a digitally scaled 1mV version.
They could also offer a 250uV or 125uV setting with this method.
@marmad:
It can still be a problem of the CSV data export within the scope, but if this would not be the case, I have no another explanation for the same amount of values in histogram.
It's also a question if not mentioning something is really lying :-)
What would be a proof for you?
The procedure which lies between sample data and display data reshapes the data (interpolation / Decimation / ...) and pixels might not translate back 1:1 to ADC values, so depending on the level of interpolation/decimation, in between values can be shown on the display.
I got a confirmation from Rigol, that the 500uV mode is a scaled mode.
I got a confirmation from Rigol, that the 500uV mode is a scaled mode.
What do you mean 'WE'.. ..,
I am glad , I have 500uV, with 200uV Noise @BW=20MHz
and 20 uV resolution, how ever it is derived.
I did not understand how the resolution in 500uV/Div normal mode can be 20uV?
If it was scaled 1mV/Div I would expect a 40uV resolution.
this would be a kind of filtering and the BW should go down.
Maybe EV or Wim can do a Sweep with DS2000 set @ 500uV, I only did from 4-40 MHz