New EEVBlog-Branded Multimeter Coming?

[exe]

Thanks, Dave, for explaining the situation. Have a nice vacation! (BTW, sorry for asking again, if required, I could sign an NDA, etc to help with the firmware. But I understand that I don't have enough trust/reputation to be given access.).

joeqsmith, I see your point, please see mine about not being able to see tests of final product. Sorry if my point seems to be stupid to you. I'm not an EE, I don't have even 5% of your experience.

Anyway, I stay positive. I wanted some EEVBlog swag, now I have it.

I'd try making my own FW, but without an SDK or a working "hello world" example I have zero chances to succeed. But hopefully other forum members are smarter than me.

[Mr. Scram]

The firmware will get refined.
If you have an issue then report it in the thread for this:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/eevblog-121gw-multimeter-issues/

Not that I don't appreciate your continuous efforts, but make sure to get some rest and not spend too much time dealing with the forums or customer support. Taking some distance from your day to day affairs is invaluable!

[BU508A]

Dave,

go on vacation! Now!

 

You and your family, have a good time.

Andreas

[Fungus]

I don't understand the big surprise about the slow autorange. 

Me either, but I am getting a certain amount of shadenfreude from the wails of anguish in these threads.

A whole load of people seem to have bought this meter without watching any of the videos Dave/joe has been posting or reading any of the threads on what it is or where it comes from. I guess that's the EEVBLOG effect in action.

Reality check: It's mostly an off-the-shelf, 0.05% meter*. It's not a meter designed by Dave, it's not been built to his specifications.

It's a good meter for the money. It's safe, it has data logging, it has Bluetooth, it has a bunch of features that not many other meters in this class have, eg. display of power. These extra features are the reason you'd buy this meter, IMHO.

It doesn't have any of the fancy laser-trimmed resistors, etc., that make Flukes what they are. If it was a Fluke 87 for half the money but with loads more features then we'd have known about this brand a long time ago.

(*) It appears to do better than 0.05% in tests but you'd have no right to complain if it didn't.

[amspire]

(*) It appears to do better than 0.5% in tests but you'd have no right to complain if it didn't.

Did you mean 0.05% ?

[Fungus]

(*) It appears to do better than 0.5% in tests but you'd have no right to complain if it didn't.

Did you mean 0.05% ?

Yes, sorry. 0.05%, post edited.

(and only 0.05% on a subset of the DC voltage ranges)

[mikeselectricstuff]

Anyway, I personally want to keep the conversation technical. And for me the biggest questions are: 1) can community help somehow with the issues

Apart form reporting issues, no they cannot. UEi are in control of the firmware.
I have the actual firmware but we have not even tried to compile it.

Have you taken a browse through it to get an impression of if it's well structured, commented etc. or just a spaghetti mess ?

[joeqsmith]

FYI the U1282A which uses the same chipset auto ranges from OL to short in 2.5 to 3 seconds(still rather slow) so a speed increase with new firmware may be possible.

I spent a little time looking for a review of this meter and the UNI-T I mentioned and did not find anyone showing the speed.  Thank you for posting this.   

[joeqsmith]

Me either, but I am getting a certain amount of shadenfreude from the wails of anguish in these threads.

A whole load of people seem to have bought this meter without watching any of the videos Dave/joe has been posting or reading any of the threads on what it is or where it comes from. I guess that's the EEVBLOG effect in action.

This sure seems to be the case.  Maybe just wanting to be part of something, hard to say.   If the meter did have known problems, I could see where producing a full review may have hurt sales.  I guess it depends on your long and short term goals.   

Reality check: It's mostly an off-the-shelf, 0.05% meter*. It's not a meter designed by Dave, it's not been built to his specifications.

It's a good meter for the money. It's safe, it has data logging, it has Bluetooth, it has a bunch of features that not many other meters in this class have, eg. display of power. These extra features are the reason you'd buy this meter, IMHO.

I agree, the meter does have some nice features that make it unique and if you had the need why not.  Personally, I would want to see those unique features fully working before I bought one but the price makes it fairly low risk which may also help explain people buying on faith.     

It doesn't have any of the fancy laser-trimmed resistors, etc., that make Flukes what they are. If it was a Fluke 87 for half the money but with loads more features then we'd have known about this brand a long time ago.

(*) It appears to do better than 0.05% in tests but you'd have no right to complain if it didn't.

LOL.  I somehow don't get the feeling we will see the same level of quality from UEI as Fluke.  History my prove me wrong. 

[mikeselectricstuff]

[quote ]

A whole load of people seem to have bought this meter without watching any of the videos Dave/joe has been posting or reading any of the threads on what it is or where it comes from. I guess that's the EEVBLOG effect in action.[/quote]

This sure seems to be the case.  Maybe just wanting to be part of something, hard to say.   If the meter did have known problems, I could see where producing a full review may have hurt sales.  I guess it depends on your long and short term goals.   

[/quote]
I think it's quite reasonable to expect a meter with the EEVBLOG branding on it to meet certain minimum standards, like acceptable autorange speed.

[joeqsmith]

I think it's quite reasonable to expect a meter with the EEVBLOG branding on it to meet certain minimum standards, like acceptable autorange speed.

This is the reason for unbiased reviews.  The meter has a lot of features and minimum standards will mean something different depending who you ask.  Even if Dave felt uncomfortable with producing a review because of the bias (perceived or otherwise), I was hoping he would send a few off to the large YT channels to review before offering them.  I thought the guy that offered that high speed camera had the right idea.  Sure there were sites that it was wasted on but a few sites really took the time to show it off.   I think that paid off. 

I think we are just starting to scratch the surface on the UEI meter.  Give it a few months.   I did go back and look at my Gossen BTW doing a side by side comparison and I would say the settling time is a wash between the two.   The Gossen is ever so slightly faster (half second or so).   

[exe]

I think it's quite reasonable to expect a meter with the EEVBLOG branding on it to meet certain minimum standards, like acceptable autorange speed.

Absolutely!

A whole load of people seem to have bought this meter without watching any of the videos Dave/joe has been posting or reading any of the threads on what it is or where it comes from. I guess that's the EEVBLOG effect in action.

Guys, please stop this nonsense. Nobody seen/reviewed the final version of the meter. There weren't any reviews and the meter has very obvious problems. Problems that if Dave was reviewing this meter it wouldn't get a good score, imho.

There are problems that are fixable and I'd like them to be fixed. Please stop telling "but this a unique product, it is still worth the money". It's not about it, it's about stupid problems the meter has.

BTW, most people who say "stop whining" don't actually own it.

[mikeselectricstuff]

I think it's quite reasonable to expect a meter with the EEVBLOG branding on it to meet certain minimum standards, like acceptable autorange speed.

This is the reason for unbiased reviews.  The meter has a lot of features and minimum standards will mean something different depending who you ask.  Even if Dave felt uncomfortable with producing a review because of the bias (perceived or otherwise), I was hoping he would send a few off to the large YT channels to review before offering them.  I thought the guy that offered that high speed camera had the right idea.  Sure there were sites that it was wasted on but a few sites really took the time to show it off.   I think that paid off. 

I think we are just starting to scratch the surface on the UEI meter.  Give it a few months.   I did go back and look at my Gossen BTW doing a side by side comparison and I would say the settling time is a wash between the two.   The Gossen is ever so slightly faster (half second or so).

The point I was making is that you'd expect that  Dave, would tell the manufacturer that it needs to meet certain minimum standards.
It has features that make it unique, but if it's inadequate in other areas, it lessens its value as a general-purpose meter that improves upon the competition and becomes more of a niche instrument that only gets used when the unique features are needed

[Iagash]

Well, Dave wrote it on the kickstarter campaign:

Risks and challenges

Like all hardware projects, hardware is hard, and "sh!t happens".

So yes, I think one can expect some quirks when buying an initial revision. I just got it today and can confirm some of the complaints in the issue thread and even found some new ones.
I'll report those seperately. I'm not gonna whine about them.

This is not my only meter, but the only one, that has SD-card logging and bluetooth.

I guess most people bought it (like me) because they wanted some swag or a toy, so I got what I wanted.
Until it proves otherwise I consider it a toy and I think I got a nice one.

If the issues get fixed, maybe some day it'll become a tool.

[amspire]

I am actually delighted at the quality. It is a Kickstarter campaign, I have one of the first 500 meters made, and so far the hardware seems  really excellent. I expected the firmware to be imperfect, but it is very close. Do you think the firmware on the very first production units from Fluke, Keysight, etc to be perfect? The truth is you never see these units. You see meter 1000 or 100000. They are pretty good by then.


Slow autoranging, beeping, the autoranging bug in VA readings, Bluetooth issues, inability to be able to download SD files via Bluetooth. I don't see any of those as significant problems at this stage. They will improve for sure.

Did I want to wait an extra month of two for the firmware to be perfected? Absolutely not. It still would have had bugs anyway. When Dave starts selling on Amazon,  the meters will have had firmware and perhaps even hardware fixes. If you want a polished meter, then of course you should wait for the Amazon meters.

[hayatepilot]

I will get my meter in the second Kickstarter batch. 

The problems so far don't worry me very much since they can (all?) be fixed with firmware updates.
It may take a significant amount of time until the firmware is "perfect" but I'm sure we will get there eventually. 

Greetings

[dcac]

Do we know the actual update rate on the bargraph?  the manual only states “fast updating" and then there is the “5 times per second nominal”.   

Could we get a figure or estimate on the bargraph update speed? (or is this info also >hidden< in some now deleted videos or comments thread)

[steverino]

I don't understand the big surprise about the slow autorange. 

Me either, but I am getting a certain amount of shadenfreude from the wails of anguish in these threads.

A whole load of people seem to have bought this meter without watching any of the videos Dave/joe has been posting or reading any of the threads on what it is or where it comes from. I guess that's the EEVBLOG effect in action.

Reality check: It's mostly an off-the-shelf, 0.05% meter*. It's not a meter designed by Dave, it's not been built to his specifications.

It's a good meter for the money. It's safe, it has data logging, it has Bluetooth, it has a bunch of features that not many other meters in this class have, eg. display of power. These extra features are the reason you'd buy this meter, IMHO.

It doesn't have any of the fancy laser-trimmed resistors, etc., that make Flukes what they are. If it was a Fluke 87 for half the money but with loads more features then we'd have known about this brand a long time ago.

(*) It appears to do better than 0.05% in tests but you'd have no right to complain if it didn't.

I'm sorry.  I didn't know this was a charity donation.

[dcac]

should I take your statement as a confirmation that the 121GW is indeed slow?

I wouldn't know.

A whole load of people seem to have bought this meter without watching any of the videos Dave/joe has been posting or reading any of the threads on what it is or where it comes from. I guess that's the EEVBLOG effect in action.

The speed of the auto-ranging is a fairly basic question, but I guess you did not pay much attention to the videos yourself(?)
 

[joeqsmith]

I think it's quite reasonable to expect a meter with the EEVBLOG branding on it to meet certain minimum standards, like acceptable autorange speed.

This is the reason for unbiased reviews.  The meter has a lot of features and minimum standards will mean something different depending who you ask.  Even if Dave felt uncomfortable with producing a review because of the bias (perceived or otherwise), I was hoping he would send a few off to the large YT channels to review before offering them.  I thought the guy that offered that high speed camera had the right idea.  Sure there were sites that it was wasted on but a few sites really took the time to show it off.   I think that paid off. 

I think we are just starting to scratch the surface on the UEI meter.  Give it a few months.   I did go back and look at my Gossen BTW doing a side by side comparison and I would say the settling time is a wash between the two.   The Gossen is ever so slightly faster (half second or so).

The point I was making is that you'd expect that  Dave, would tell the manufacturer that it needs to meet certain minimum standards.
It has features that make it unique, but if it's inadequate in other areas, it lessens its value as a general-purpose meter that improves upon the competition and becomes more of a niche instrument that only gets used when the unique features are needed

I agree with you and assume that the time required the the meter to settle was considered to meet their minimum standards.  However, that does not mean it meets your minimum standards.   

[joeqsmith]

Do we know the actual update rate on the bargraph?  the manual only states “fast updating" and then there is the “5 times per second nominal”.   

Could we get a figure or estimate on the bargraph update speed? (or is this info also >hidden< in some now deleted videos or comments thread)

I read the manual and you appear correct.  I had made a video showing the speed of the prototype compared with my BM869s and UT181A.  These are some of the fastest ones I have come across.   I can tell you that the prototype was not as fast but still impressive.    I could make that clip public but would rather someone run the released version instead as the results may be different. 

[HKJ]

We know Dave have seen many prototypes, so he must be familiar with the update speed, except if it is due to the last change to the ohm range (Something about the the highest ohm range).

Anyway I would say around 3 second in ohm range would be fairly normal.

I am looking forward to get the meter in a month or two and check it out (I will do a review). The main reasons I got the meter was the low burden voltage and the 15V diode mode. I wonder if the VA mode is useful, I will probably continue to use my meter with a real W mode.

[mikeselectricstuff]

I think it's quite reasonable to expect a meter with the EEVBLOG branding on it to meet certain minimum standards, like acceptable autorange speed.

This is the reason for unbiased reviews.  The meter has a lot of features and minimum standards will mean something different depending who you ask.  Even if Dave felt uncomfortable with producing a review because of the bias (perceived or otherwise), I was hoping he would send a few off to the large YT channels to review before offering them.  I thought the guy that offered that high speed camera had the right idea.  Sure there were sites that it was wasted on but a few sites really took the time to show it off.   I think that paid off. 

I think we are just starting to scratch the surface on the UEI meter.  Give it a few months.   I did go back and look at my Gossen BTW doing a side by side comparison and I would say the settling time is a wash between the two.   The Gossen is ever so slightly faster (half second or so).

The point I was making is that you'd expect that  Dave, would tell the manufacturer that it needs to meet certain minimum standards.
It has features that make it unique, but if it's inadequate in other areas, it lessens its value as a general-purpose meter that improves upon the competition and becomes more of a niche instrument that only gets used when the unique features are needed

I agree with you and assume that the time required the the meter to settle was considered to meet their minimum standards.  However, that does not mean it meets your minimum standards.   

Would a 7 sec autorange meet anyone's minimum standards ?

[joeqsmith]

I think it's quite reasonable to expect a meter with the EEVBLOG branding on it to meet certain minimum standards, like acceptable autorange speed.

This is the reason for unbiased reviews.  The meter has a lot of features and minimum standards will mean something different depending who you ask.  Even if Dave felt uncomfortable with producing a review because of the bias (perceived or otherwise), I was hoping he would send a few off to the large YT channels to review before offering them.  I thought the guy that offered that high speed camera had the right idea.  Sure there were sites that it was wasted on but a few sites really took the time to show it off.   I think that paid off. 

I think we are just starting to scratch the surface on the UEI meter.  Give it a few months.   I did go back and look at my Gossen BTW doing a side by side comparison and I would say the settling time is a wash between the two.   The Gossen is ever so slightly faster (half second or so).

The point I was making is that you'd expect that  Dave, would tell the manufacturer that it needs to meet certain minimum standards.
It has features that make it unique, but if it's inadequate in other areas, it lessens its value as a general-purpose meter that improves upon the competition and becomes more of a niche instrument that only gets used when the unique features are needed

I agree with you and assume that the time required the the meter to settle was considered to meet their minimum standards.  However, that does not mean it meets your minimum standards.   

Would a 7 sec autorange meet anyone's minimum standards ?

I assume it met Gossen's minimum as well as again, the one I have is on par with the UEI.   I am not suggesting that I wouldn't want a meter that could auto range faster but the speed of the UEI would not prevent me from using it.  For what you use it for, it seems this is not be the case.  There are a lot of products out there and there is certainly nothing wrong with finding one that suits you.

As a side note, some of the meters I have looked at were painfully slow in the capacitance mode as well.  It's not a feature I typically use so it's never caused me any problems.   

[dcac]

Do we know the actual update rate on the bargraph?  the manual only states “fast updating" and then there is the “5 times per second nominal”.   

Could we get a figure or estimate on the bargraph update speed? (or is this info also >hidden< in some now deleted videos or comments thread)

I read the manual and you appear correct.  I had made a video showing the speed of the prototype compared with my BM869s and UT181A.  These are some of the fastest ones I have come across.   I can tell you that the prototype was not as fast but still impressive.    I could make that clip public but would rather someone run the released version instead as the results may be different.

Thanks for the info, the bargraph on BM869s updates 60 times/sec according to the manual, so hopefully the 121GW at least is considerably faster than the nominal 5 times/sec stated for its main display, which seems to beg the question (again) why is the auto-ranging then so slow?