Products > Test Equipment
is Rigol DS1054Z still hackable ?
<< < (3/30) > >>
Fungus:

--- Quote from: ebastler on February 21, 2018, 11:05:54 am ---
--- Quote from: hussamaldean on February 19, 2018, 04:53:43 pm ---I ordered one and how can I know if the received one is original ?

--- End quote ---
You can simply take that for granted. I am not aware of any reports at all of "fake" Rigol scopes.

--- End quote ---

Yes, the idea is ridiculous.

Cloning a Chinese-manufactured oscilloscope where they already counted every last bean on the production line? Not going to happen.

Edit: Added the word "yes" for clarity
ebastler:

--- Quote from: Fungus on February 21, 2018, 11:33:42 am ---The idea is ridiculous.
Cloning a Chinese-manufactured oscilloscope where they already counted every last bean on the production line? Not going to happen.

--- End quote ---

Didn't I just say that? "No point in faking the cheap stuff"?
Well, those 7000+ posts don't come out of thin air... (Or maybe some of them do.)  :P
Fungus:

--- Quote from: ebastler on February 21, 2018, 11:39:05 am ---
--- Quote from: Fungus on February 21, 2018, 11:33:42 am ---The idea is ridiculous.
Cloning a Chinese-manufactured oscilloscope where they already counted every last bean on the production line? Not going to happen.

--- End quote ---
Didn't I just say that?

--- End quote ---

Yes, I'm agreeing with you.

(at least I though I was)

Try drinking less coffee.
rhb:
@fungus

Did you look at the step responses I linked to?  The 2072E step is not very good even if the rise time indicates  more than 70 MHz BW. There are a fair number of specs besides BW that a DSO must meet.  I do not consider the 2072E a 100+ Mhz DSO even if the rise time indicates higher BW.  It's a 70 MHz scope I bought to use for developing FOSS FW for Zynq based DSOs.  I had the good fortune to get it from Amazon for less than the price of my Zybo Z7-20 dev board.

If evaluations of scope performance before and after "hacking" are so common why have I never seen one?  Provide a link.  I've seen a lot of claims, but I've never seen even a step response, much less a full performance check.  A cal lab evaluation would cost almost as much as a new DSO, so it's quite unlikely that anyone will ever do it unless someone like Dave does.

I very much doubt that top tier scopes use entirely discrete inputs.  They do all use some discretes,  but that's a different matter.    I don't have one to open up, but I can't imagine trying to justify using all discretes for the input amplifier of a 500 MHz DSO when there are ICs that will do that consistently. 

Try building an amplifier which is flat from DC to 100 MHz or above.  If you get the first one to work build a second one and compare the results.  You'll find it quite educational.  There are no perfect parts.  And tight tolerance parts are expensive.

I've repaired several analog scopes including a Tek 465.  Doing that has given me a very healthy respect for the problems posed by the front end of a good scope.  If you read the service manual for something like a 465, you'll see lots of parts with "selected" next to the part number.

But if you want to trust that  a hacked DS1054Z meets all the specs of a DS1104Z be my guest.  Without a lot of test gear and time, you'll never know the difference.
Gandalf_Sr:
Back to the question of the OP, yes the Rigol DS1054Z is still hackable.

For deeper questions like:
- does the bandwidth hack actually do anything other than show a placebo number on the display? or
- what is the meaning to life, the universe, and everything

the answer is 42.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod