Author Topic: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A  (Read 40330 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1523
  • Country: no
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #25 on: July 11, 2014, 02:29:52 pm »
Stupid question:

The scope has Bandwidth, and there is Sample rate.

Do you need higher sample rate if BW is higher?

E.g. 70 MHz, 2G Samples/s per channel.
What if you patch the scope to 300 MHz. Will 2G samples/second still do?

Why would one need 4G samples/second (as in the MSO4000 series)?

Why is 1G samples/second not enough (as in the MSO1074Z)?
 

Offline jmt

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 7
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #26 on: July 11, 2014, 02:35:21 pm »
70 MHz bandwidth is the bandwidth of the analog frontend which is then sampled at 2GS/s in the case of the MSO2072A. However, if you use both channels then this drops to 1GS/s per channel. Same thing with the MS4000 series, as you use more analog channels the sampling rate for each channel is reduced.

The amount of bandwidth you need really depends on what your application is.
 

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1523
  • Country: no
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #27 on: July 12, 2014, 07:48:28 am »
The sample rate of 1G samples/second seems high, and enough for most application.
Can you name an example where this would not be enough?

Are you sure that 2G samples/second is split on the DS2072A when using both channels?
I thought that this was 2G samples/second for EACH channel.

Same for the DS4000 series. 4G samples/second for EACH channel.

For the DS1074Z and MSO1074Z series it is a different story. There it is 1G samples/second if only one channel is used, 500 MB samples/second if 2 channels are used, and 250 MB samples/second if 4 channels are used.

But you say that same structure applies to the more high-end models?
 

Offline miguelvp

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5550
  • Country: us
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #28 on: July 12, 2014, 11:43:12 am »
Are you sure that 2G samples/second is split on the DS2072A when using both channels?
I thought that this was 2G samples/second for EACH channel.

First post here:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/first-impressions-and-review-of-the-rigol-ds2072-ds2000-series-dso/
 

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1523
  • Country: no
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #29 on: July 24, 2014, 08:31:25 am »
I would like to get feedback on the loudness of the fan.

Who has an MSO2072A out there? Is it noisy?

Who has a DS2072A out there? Is it noisy?
I have heard from people that this model in particular is very quite, and therefore expect MSO2072A should be same or better. (Newer models should be less loud?)

What about MSO1074Z and DS1074Z?
I have heard that DS1074Z is very noisy. Maybe the new MSO1074Z is quiter? (New and quieter?)

Appreciate feedback on the loudness of these models: DS2072A, MSO2072A, DS1074Z, MSO1074Z.
 

Offline WesleyK

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 18
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #30 on: July 24, 2014, 07:15:29 pm »
I got mine last week, still have a lot to learn as this is my first scope but I do have some experience with a Tektronix TDS2024B. Great scope, so far :). Menu's are quite easy to navigate through, some things could be better but not bad for a Chinese scope.
The fan is relatively loud, I thought it would be louder reading all the "complaints" about the fan and figured I would have to replace it. After hearing it myself I don't think I will bother to replace the fan, it's not that loud, noticeable is a better word to describe the fan. I think you can compare it to an old (Pentium 4 "age") regarding the computer noise level.

I might be able to do some measurements for you later this week.
 

Offline Mark_O

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 937
  • Country: us
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #31 on: July 25, 2014, 05:40:03 pm »
My solution looks like this.

- Ventilation grille removed.
- Fan is rotated, blow the inside.
- Mounted with cable ties.
- Rear housing cover removed.

That's a lot quieter.

Define "a lot".  As in, how many dB SPL reduction has that yielded?

Even if you're satisfied with the outcome, this isn't a mod I would recommend anyone else emulating.
 

Offline f1rmb

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 180
  • Country: fr
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #32 on: July 25, 2014, 05:46:26 pm »
Hi,

    It's a bit hardcore IMHO  :scared:

Cheers.
---
Daniel
 

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1523
  • Country: no
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #33 on: July 25, 2014, 08:05:22 pm »
Are all your Rigol scopes too loud?

I have worked with a Rigol DS2102A last week, and could hardly notice it. So that one is quiet.
My understanding is that Rigol DS2072A should be the same, so quiet.

Which scopes do you have? Your photo does not look like a DS1074Z, neither MSO1074Z.
So which one is too loud? The DS1074Z, MSO1074Z or DS207A, or MSO2072A?
 

Offline Mark_O

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 937
  • Country: us
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #34 on: July 25, 2014, 08:45:58 pm »
Define "a lot".  As in, how many dB SPL reduction has that yielded?

I could only make a comparison measurement with the iPad2, DS1000Z and MSO2000A.
Measurements from the front were all the same.
The perceived loudness is better reproduced with a lateral measurement.

Thanks.  That is a substantial improvement.  Comparing (2) and (4), -8 dB average, and -5 dB peak.

(I'm assuming (1) is ambient room level.)
 

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1523
  • Country: no
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #35 on: July 28, 2014, 12:27:11 pm »
How good is the logic analyzer in the MSO1074Z?

Can anyone out there make a YouTube movie on this? =)

 

Offline josem

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 63
  • Country: gb
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #36 on: July 28, 2014, 10:26:13 pm »
Started playing with the I2C triggering/decoding on the MSO2072A (I2C on the LA side) and ran into lots of problems. More than once the MSO completely froze and needed a restart (including unplugging the leads to give me time to reset the triggers, since I had it set to restart to last settings). None of the buttons did anything, full lockup.

Even more crazyness broke out when I started using the zoom function: values didn't update etc.. Reminded me of Dave's review of the DS2072A where the values weren't updating during playback of the waveforms. It is a bit better now, at least there's some scroll, but it's very unreliable and there's a ton of bugs still.

I hope the firmware will improve otherwise the MSO functionality will be not much more than a toy for my purposes and can't be trusted. It's a shame as the combination of scope and logic analyzer with decoding would be fantastic and put it miles ahead of separate instruments for my purposes.
 

Offline Mark_O

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 937
  • Country: us
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #37 on: July 29, 2014, 04:19:06 am »
I hope the firmware will improve otherwise the MSO functionality will be not much more than a toy for my purposes and can't be trusted. It's a shame as the combination of scope and logic analyzer with decoding would be fantastic and put it miles ahead of separate instruments for my purposes.

It's not uncommon for a first release of new software functionality to have some glitches in it.  But I agree that they need to get it corrected quickly.  People aren't paying 50% more than the DS2000, for MSO functionality that doesn't work.   >:(
 

Offline WesleyK

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 18
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #38 on: July 29, 2014, 08:04:09 am »
I haven't tested the LA functionality properly yet, but in the few minutes I have played with it I managed to freeze the whole scope. It also makes the scope a bit unresponsive, I hope that also improves. It would suck if I would still need to buy a separate LA after paying over €300 to get it integrated.

Edit: was sleeping
« Last Edit: July 29, 2014, 08:36:19 am by WesleyK »
 

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1523
  • Country: no
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #39 on: August 01, 2014, 01:34:01 pm »
What is the performance on the 16 channels of the Logic Analyzer itself? (Sample rate, Memory depth)

Does it outperform or perform less good as the Zeroplus Logic Cube?

Can it decode the protocols on the digital channel side as well?
(Some scopes do protocol decoding on the analog channels).
 

Offline Mark_O

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 937
  • Country: us
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #40 on: August 01, 2014, 08:29:18 pm »
What is the performance on the 16 channels of the Logic Analyzer itself? (Sample rate, Memory depth)

I know this is a radical concept, but have you ever considered looking at a Spec sheet?   :o   ;D

It doesn't take long to find that it's 500 MSa/s, in 16-channel mode.  Twice that with only 8-channels enabled.  Depth is 7/14M normal, and twice that with Optional expansion (on the MSO2000).  [the MSO1000 is 6/12M, and double that, Optionally.  Sample rates are the same as the 2000.]

Quote
Does it outperform or perform less good as the Zeroplus Logic Cube?

Which one?  Last I checked, there were 6 models of the Cube.  And what's your definition of "perform"? 

Max sample rate on the Cubes is 200 MSa/s.  But they can sync to a System Clock, up to 100M (State Mode), and the Rigols can't, at any speed.  That right there could buy you 10x.  They can be had up to 32-bit wide models, but max depth is 2M samples on any model (though they have a Compression mode the Rigols lack, which can vastly exceed the Rigol capacity... runs up to 8M+ samples use only 1 memory slot).  The Cubes have way more protocol decoders, and are extensible, while the Rigols, not.  Rigols are standalone, while the Cube requires a PC.  But the Cube provides way better analysis/display capabilities, and enhanced triggering.  The Rigol is better at real-time probing, while the Cube blows it away for post-mortem exploration.  The Cube models can be had for just over $100, while the LA add-on to the Rigols adds $400 to the 2000 and $250 to the 1000.  Lastly, the Rigols can show you logic signals along-side time-correlated analog signals, and the Cubes can't show analog at all (so if your problem is in the analog domain, you'll never see it).

I have a brain-teaser for you... "Does (a socket wrench) outperform or perform less good as (a crescent wrench)?"

Quote
Can it decode the protocols on the digital channel side as well?
(Some scopes do protocol decoding on the analog channels).

Let me check my crystal ball...  "RTFM says Yes!".   ;)
 

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1523
  • Country: no
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #41 on: August 05, 2014, 09:09:10 am »
Are there other people out there with practical experience on the Logic Analyzer in the MSO2072A or MSO1074Z series?

Actual YouTube movie is welcome as well of course =)
 

Offline Gandalf_Sr

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1725
  • Country: us
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #42 on: August 05, 2014, 05:04:31 pm »
I've just ordered an MSO2072A and I'm concerned about a few things:

1. Does the Logic Analyzer work OK? WesleyK seems to say his locks up?
2. To do the JTAG sniffing, what JTAG interface to I need?  There's an Olimex ARM-USB-OCD and an ARM-USB-OCD-H - I don't understand what the difference is between these 2?

Thanks
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer
 

Offline Macman

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 77
  • Country: gb
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #43 on: August 05, 2014, 11:33:03 pm »

1. Does the Logic Analyzer work OK? WesleyK seems to say his locks up?
2. To do the JTAG sniffing, what JTAG interface to I need?  There's an Olimex ARM-USB-OCD and an ARM-USB-OCD-H - I don't understand what the difference is between these 2?


I've had a MSO2072A for a few weeks. I've had it lock up a few times but not while using the logic analyser.
Tonight I had a play with the RS232 decode which mostly worked OK. One problem I did find was that the memory depth had to be left in 'Auto' otherwise the decode didn't work correctly. Also if the time-base is set to a large value and you then zoom in the decode fails even though there look enough resolution in the data.

I used a cheapo £4 USB blaster from ebay to dump the memory for the hack.
 

Offline Gandalf_Sr

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1725
  • Country: us
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #44 on: August 06, 2014, 09:30:18 am »
I've had a MSO2072A for a few weeks. I've had it lock up a few times but not while using the logic analyser.
Tonight I had a play with the RS232 decode which mostly worked OK. One problem I did find was that the memory depth had to be left in 'Auto' otherwise the decode didn't work correctly. Also if the time-base is set to a large value and you then zoom in the decode fails even though there look enough resolution in the data.

I used a cheapo £4 USB blaster from ebay to dump the memory for the hack.
The lock ups are not good but, using the JTAG route to get the upgrade keys, it should be good to apply future firmware upgrades as they come out.  I think that setting a large time base could prevent decoding at zoom because, eventually, you would not have enough resolution to track the timing of the 1's and 0's.

I see MANY USB blasters on eBay, please confirm the one you bought was the Altera kind?  Those are sold by Mouser for $300 but a Google search reveals the schematic and it's nothing more than an FTDI USB chip, a buffer IC, and a couple of discretes.

I'd like to know the steps to use Windows to do the JTAG dump, I've followed the instructions on page 163 of the Mega-Thread and have down loaded blackfin-toolchain-win32-2014R1.exe, questions....

1.  Is this the right file?
2. Will it install on Win 7 64 bit?
3. When I run it, what are the steps? The instructions say something about having 2 CMD windows open at once?

Thanks for any help, I will share my experiences.
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer
 

Offline Macman

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 77
  • Country: gb
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #45 on: August 06, 2014, 11:09:48 am »
I did the memory dump under Linux because that was what was shown in the tutorial post (page 163 of the sniffing the I2C bus thread) and also I saw some reports of people having problems using Windows to do the dump. I have had no prior experience of Linux but did not find it too difficult.

I used 'Universal USB Installer' (UUI) to make a boot USB pen drive. XUBUNTU was selected for the distribution and I set a reasonable value for the persistent file size. The blackfin tool chain file I used was blackfin-toolchain-2013R1_45-RC1.i386.tar.bz2.
In order to boot from the USB stick I had to change the BIOS boot mode setting on my laptop to CSM.

The link to USB Blaster I used is USB Blaster.This uses a Silabs F321 and a 74LCV125 chip.
When the dump starts the scope will become unresponsive.
It took about three hours to get the dump but it may have been slowed down by running from USB stick.
There are two bits of software you have to run at the same time, a proxy application that works as a server and the client application. To open the terminal windows I just navigated in the file explorer to the directory and right clicked on the directory and selected open terminal here. You will need to read  page 163 of the sniffing the I2C bus thread to get the details of the commands.

While the dump is taking place you will see a log as each section of the memory is dumped.
The resulting .bin file that is stored in the home directory was then copied on to another USB stick.

Using a Windows PC copy the dump file to the rigup directory and use the rigup program: rigup ds2072a DumpFile.bin (replace Dumpfile.bin with the name of the file you used).
The rigup program will now give you the keys you need.
The following shows the use of rigup:

rigup ds2072a DumpFile.bin
rigup ds2072a - Version 0.4

Serial number: DS2F162XXXXXX

NSEH:  XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX    All options, no bandwidth upgrade
NSER:  XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX    All options, bandwidth 100 MHz
NSEQ:  XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX    All options, bandwidth 200 MHz
NS8H:  XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX    All options, bandwidth 300 MHz


I then install the key directly from the scope by selecting utility - Option -Setup - Editor ON

When opening you scope you can avoid damaging the warranty stick if you follow mikeselectricstuff http://youtu.be/KGcNS5g9ygg?list=UUcs0ZkP_as4PpHDhFcmCHyA method and use a piece of label backing to gently remove and protect the sticker. 
« Last Edit: August 06, 2014, 11:13:55 am by Macman »
 

Offline Gandalf_Sr

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1725
  • Country: us
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #46 on: August 06, 2014, 11:50:29 am »
Neato!  Thanks Macman  :-+
If at first you don't succeed, get a bigger hammer
 

Offline pascal_sweden

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1523
  • Country: no
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #47 on: August 09, 2014, 01:22:23 pm »
Isn't there any special "mini" firmware, that you could install on the scope (through a USB stick) to read out the keys and dump them on the screen?

After you can put back the normal firmware. That would be the most easy process to get the keys WITHOUT opening the scope.

Are the software images encrypted, or can any one make his own binary compatible SW image for the scope?
 

Offline AntiCat

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 12
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #48 on: August 12, 2014, 09:24:55 pm »
NSEH:  XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX    All options, no bandwidth upgrade
NSER:  XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX    All options, bandwidth 100 MHz
NSEQ:  XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX    All options, bandwidth 200 MHz
NS8H:  XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX-XXXXXXX    All options, bandwidth 300 MHz

I then install the key directly from the scope by selecting utility - Option -Setup - Editor ON

Sorry for asking a dump question in my very first post. Did you just enable options?
Or were you able to change the bandwidth of the scope?
 

Offline Macman

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 77
  • Country: gb
Re: First impressions on Rigol MSO1074Z and Rigol MSO2072A
« Reply #49 on: August 13, 2014, 01:09:22 am »
Sorry for asking a dump question in my very first post. Did you just enable options?
Or were you able to change the bandwidth of the scope?

I used the NSEQ key which gave all the options and changed to bandwidth of the scope from 70Mhz to 200Mhz.  I didn't go for 300Mhz because like others here have said, 300Mhz would be pushing it a bit with a 2/1Ghz sample rate.

On subsequently testing the scope's bandwidth it was confirmed to be well over 200Mhz.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2014, 01:11:23 am by Macman »
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf