I think Scopes are going the way computers did over time. Back in the days of DOS/Windows 3.1, the user had to have a much better understanding of the computer and had to do a lot of things manually. Now computers are used by a huge amount of people where the majority have no idea of what's actually going on in the background.
I notice exactly the same trend with scopes. Back in University, the newest cutting egde scope we had was the Tektronix 2465, which had just been released around that time. There was no Auto buttons, no decoding, no auto-measurements and as for colours... Green is fine for all 4 channels and the limited readouts the scope offered. But we were taught every detail of the scope and how to take measurements. The closest thing to "Auto" was the "Find Trace" button. So you either really deeply understood the instrument or it was pretty much useless.
Today people expect the scope to almost do everything for them and do it perfectly, and I don't think newer enthusiasts are really spending the time required to fully understand how it all works and how to extract the information they want to measure. I really like all the fancy new options that the Rigol (and other) scopes offer (and yes I really own one), but I still don't trust anything that I haven't configured myself.
I have a feeling that many of the "naysayers" are of the newer generation, who put way too much trust in the scopes abilities and have expectations, that many of the older users don't. A scope is a tool, the capability to take accurate measurements should come from the user.
I have a feeling that many of the "naysayers" are of the newer generation, who put way too much trust in the scopes abilities and have expectations, that many of the older users don't. A scope is a tool, the capability to take accurate measurements should come from the user.
I am not sure I understand the rationalizing behind the need of a scope to deliver the full capability of its hardware. Why?
I admit they need to deliver to specs, but the whole idea of lock keys and having multiple models is that they are selling different capabilities and specs at additional price points.
In vertical can do far more accurate than 1% DC even with 8bit ADC (using sampling noise).
In vertical can do far more accurate than 1% DC even with 8bit ADC (using sampling noise).
According to the specs, the accuracy is about 4% of full scale - 5 bits. I don't think there's any reason for them to understate it, but who knows, I'm not a marketer.
The resolution is 8 bits, so (8 - 5) = 3 bits are already redundant. With oversampling, you can increase resolution further, but this will not improve accuracy.
The resolution is 8 bits, so (8 - 5) = 3 bits are already redundant. With oversampling, you can increase resolution further, but this will not improve accuracy.
I assume MrWolf was referring to the PicoScope, the only true digital data acquisition system, which probably has better specs.
While they do not help with accuracy, they do improve the resolution.
The resolution is 8 bits, so (8 - 5) = 3 bits are already redundant. With oversampling, you can increase resolution further, but this will not improve accuracy.
With oversampling you can improve accuracy also, taking advantage of sampling noise. 0.1% of range no problem with scope DC spec +-3% of full scale, if have access to unaltered data.
Then hope that the scope does not drift out of calibration...
I see you've found rf-loop's work and for those that have not seen it already:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/
It just follows on from other work this long sever member did many years ago, I think in his first post on the forum.
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/rigol-ds1000e-series-possible-errorfail-in-sin(x)x-interpolation/
If you switch it off, I assume the scope reconstructs the signal by simple "connect the dots" interpolation of the samples. That, of course, will reduce the apparent amplitude since the peaks are not properly reconstructed.
Hi All,
This is my first post to this forum and thread.
I am interested in upgrading my current oscilloscope and I have been looking at the Rigol DS1054Z
I watched Dave's video EEVblog #703 - Rigol DS1054Z Oscilloscope Review Summary
However I'm confused about something you said at 7:25 on this clip.
You say that there is no Software or hardware filter.
I am confused because I read in the manual on page 135 - chapter ch6-21 on Filters
http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/UserGuide/MSO_DS1000Z_Plus_UserGuide_EN.pdf
It says the MSO1000Z/DS1000Z provides 4 types of filters (Low Pass Filter, High Pass Filter,
Band Pass Filter and Band Stop Filter). The specified frequencies can be filtered by setting the bandwidth.
Can someone please try and clear this up for me as I am used to using a scope with these types of filters.
Thanks
Stuart
I see you've found rf-loop's work and for those that have not seen it already:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/
I see you've found rf-loop's work and for those that have not seen it already:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/
I am not seeing this on my scope, but I am feeding 10 MHz pulse. Is this still repeated on current firmware? I may need a faster signal.
Hi All,
This is my first post to this forum and thread.
I am interested in upgrading my current oscilloscope and I have been looking at the Rigol DS1054Z
I watched Dave's video EEVblog #703 - Rigol DS1054Z Oscilloscope Review Summary
(video link snipped)
However I'm confused about something you said at 7:25 on this clip.
You say that there is no Software or hardware filter.
I am confused because I read in the manual on page 135 - chapter ch6-21 on Filters
http://www.batronix.com/pdf/Rigol/UserGuide/MSO_DS1000Z_Plus_UserGuide_EN.pdf
It says the MSO1000Z/DS1000Z provides 4 types of filters (Low Pass Filter, High Pass Filter,
Band Pass Filter and Band Stop Filter). The specified frequencies can be filtered by setting the bandwidth.
Can someone please try and clear this up for me as I am used to using a scope with these types of filters.
Thanks
Stuart
I am not seeing this on my scope, but I am feeding 10 MHz pulse. Is this still repeated on current firmware? I may need a faster signal.
Of course can not see. First you need knowledge and after then also tools. Now there is both missing.
How I know both are missing. Just when you tell "but I am feeding 10MHz pulse". Please explain what was real theory and idea behind this.
I see you've found rf-loop's work and for those that have not seen it already:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/rigol-ds1074z-weird-signal-level-problem/
I am not seeing this on my scope, but I am feeding 10 MHz pulse. Is this still repeated on current firmware? I may need a faster signal.
You say that there is no Software or hardware filter.
Can someone please try and clear this up for me as I am used to using a scope with these types of filters.