new RIGOL DS1000Z and... MSO4000

[Deckert]

I'll admin that I am slightly perplexed by the 4-channel model instead of 2-channel (or an option between the two), but maybe they figured they can add the additional two extra channels at minimum cost. As a 2-channel scope it will still be a very capable unit.

The WaveGen outputs at the back are a bit of a bummer, maybe a mod to bring the two BNCs out to the front-panel knockout (which may be reserved for digital I/Os) will be an interesting project. I see that there is a pass/fail and trigger out BNC at the back, so one would be able to measure the waveform update rate at other time bases and m/depths.

--deckert

[marmad]

I'll admin that I am slightly perplexed by the 4-channel model instead of 2-channel (or an option between the two), but maybe they figured they can add the additional two extra channels at minimum cost. As a 2-channel scope it will still be a very capable unit.

Well, I really like that they've created an entry-level-priced 4-channel scope - I think it's a great idea. I just wish they had gone with a 4:3 aspect ratio screen instead of the 5:3 - but I suppose they've become more expensive in our HD-shaped world.

[Hydrawerk]

That looks impressively compact.
Perhaps the smallest 4 channel scope on the market?

Hameg HMO1000 series is even more compact, but it has only 2000 waveforms per second. And it is not a bang per buck. http://www.hameg.com/614.0.html?L=0
Not much suitable for hobbyists...

[alank2]

Isn't the 1000Z screen resolution the same as the 2072 even though it is 7"?

[Hydrawerk]

Yes, it is.

[tinhead]

Isn't the 1000Z screen resolution the same as the 2072 even though it is 7"?

it is the same resolution on DS1000Z/DS2000/DS4000/DS6000, so the whole discussion about resolution/screen size is pointless, nobody will see "more" on DS6000 than on DS1000Z.

[EEVblog]

They list the DS1074Z (70MHz 4-channel) for 3,980 yaun, which Google says is 649 US Dollar. That's not a bad kick-off price for a newly released product.

Is there a cheaper and comparable 4 channel scope I wonder?
It's past midnight, I can't remember....

[marmad]

it is the same resolution on DS1000Z/DS2000/DS4000/DS6000, so the whole discussion about resolution/screen size is pointless, nobody will see "more" on DS6000 than on DS1000Z.

Sorry [I seem to be disagreeing with you a lot lately  ] but if that were true, that any discussions about DPI (or pixels-per-inch) would also be pointless. There is a point where you will lose detail because of a pitch that is too small.

[grego]

I'm more curious as to when these things are going to hit the US.

[tinhead]

but if that were true, that any discussions about DPI (or pixels-per-inch) would also be pointless.

right, between other dimensions this makes a huge diff, but here not ...

There is a point where you will lose detail because of a pitch that is too small.

.. as on 7" display with 800x480 resolution single dots are still huge. On 4" that resolution would be already crap.

[marmad]

.. as on 7" display with 800x480 resolution single dots are still huge. On 4" that resolution would be already crap.

Moot point. I'd rather look at 4 waveforms stacked on top of each other on 8" or 9" or bigger display. Actually, as mentioned before, IMO it's ridiculous they don't use 4:3 displays for 4-channel DSOs or MSOs. A 16:10 or 16:9 display is silly.

[tinhead]

.. as on 7" display with 800x480 resolution single dots are still huge. On 4" that resolution would be already crap.

Moot point. I'd rather look at 4 waveforms stacked on top of each other on 8" or 9" or bigger display.

sure, it is, like all these things which one prefer but other not.

Actually, as mentioned before, IMO it's ridiculous they don't use 4:3 displays for 4-channel DSOs or MSOs. A 16:10 or 16:9 display is silly.

16:9/10 can be sometimes useful. Rigol have now more than 8 DIVs horiz., menu can be on left and right side and almost full high is for wave area. With 4:3 you would have to cut on right or if you don't want to lose horizontal space cut on bottom, which results in shorter (horizontaly) ~16:9 wave area. It would look like on Owon, no thanks.

If i would have the chance to choose display. I would prefer something like 1024x600, with 800x500 for wave area (18x10DIV), 50 top and 50 bottom for status messages/pinned measures and 112 on left and right side for menu, etc. Or even 10.1" display with 1280x800^^.

[lgbeno]

Funny, I just went and looked back at Dave's tear down of ds2072, there are 2 extra holes in the sheet metal where the sig gen ports are in ds1000z

[marmad]

16:9/10 can be sometimes useful. Rigol have now more than 8 DIVs horiz., menu can be on left and right side and almost full high is for wave area. With 4:3 you would have to cut on right or if you don't want to lose horizontal space cut on bottom, which results in shorter (horizontaly) ~16:9 wave area. It would look like on Owon, no thanks.

I'm making a distinction between 2 and 4 channels - 16:9/10 is fine for two. Four channels on 400 pixels = maximum 100 pixels per channel; too small, IMO.

[Hydrawerk]

Anyway, remember that DS1000Z is a 4×250MSa/s scope. Not much good. DS2000 is 2×1GSa/s.

[marmad]

Anyway, remember that DS1000Z is a 4×250MSa/s scope. Not much good. DS2000 is 2×1GSa/s.

That's just one specification. OTOH, it's an (ostensibly) $650 4-channel DSO with up to 30k wfrm/s, intensity grading, and many of the other features of the UltraVision line. I think it will be a new low-price for both a 4-channel bench-top DSO - and for one with intensity grading.

[WBB]

Anyway, remember that DS1000Z is a 4×250MSa/s scope. Not much good. DS2000 is 2×1GSa/s.

That's just one specification. OTOH, it's an (ostensibly) $650 4-channel DSO with up to 30k wfrm/s, intensity grading, and many of the other features of the UltraVision line. I think it will be a new low-price for both a 4-channel bench-top DSO - and for one with intensity grading.

This. A 4 channel DSO with intensity grading at that price seems fantastic. It has more than enough sample memory for 99.9% of hobbyist. Same goes for update rate. What's the difference between 50k and 30k wf/s to hobbyist? Nil. Intensity grading is one of the truly great things to hit digital scopes and more channels is always a good thing. Screen could be bigger and it needs more knobs, but we can't have everything.

[iloveelectronics]

I pulled the trigger and ordered a DS1104Z scope directly from China! The waveform recording and replaying feature on the 1000Z series is optional but I decided to add that to the order anyway. In retrospect I guess it was a bit of an impulse buy (especially the optional item considering that I don't even know if I'm going to like it!), but oh well. It is going to take a few days for the shipping so hopefully I will have it in my hands some time next week.

Overall I paid slightly less than I would for a DS2072, which is the main alternative I was also considering. To be honest the DS2072 has a lot more going for it in terms of features and capabilities, such as higher waveform capture rate, deeper memory, larger screen, more knobs, and simply much more feature rich in general.

However, I really like to be able to own a 4-channel scope as I think it will help me as a learner to be able to see waveforms at various stages of a circuit. I also like the fact that it's 100Mhz instead of 70Mhz. For about the same money it all came down to the decision on whether to take a risk and go for a new 100Mhz 4-channel scope with more than adequate features in other departments (30k wfm/s, 64-level intensity grading, 12Mpts memory, 7" 800x480 screen), or a proven solid 70Mhz 2-channel DS2072. I chose to risk it  I hope I won't regret it...

[marmad]

However, I really like to be able to own a 4-channel scope as I think it will help me as a learner to be able to see waveforms at various stages of a circuit. I also like the fact that it's 100Mhz instead of 70Mhz.

I can't speak for the DS1000Z series, but I don't think anyone has found any difference whatsoever between the DS2072 and DS2102 other than the model number printed on the face plate (and held in memory) - and the price.

But, regardless, please give us a review or your impressions if possible - I'm really curious about the new model 

[alank2]

On the screen, what is most important to me is the resolution.  I agree that more is better, but it 800x480 is still a far cry from the 320x234 I'm still using these days (as in 5 times the pixels).  I don't care if it is a 7" or 8", in fact I prefer the smaller size of the Z.  I do see your point marmad on the 400 pixel height for 4 channels, but I agree you can't have it all.

I think the Z is quite a scope for what it is.  I love that it has 4 channels for its price.  My only gripe with it is the sample rate and to a lesser extent that it comes with cheaper probes.  If they had made the sample rate 2gsa/1gsa/500msa for 1/2/4 channels, I'd be all over it without question, but the 1gsa/500msa/250msa for 1/2/4 channels is limiting.  If you want 10 samples per cycle, then it becomes 100MHz/50MHz/25MHz for 1/2/4 channels...  For me that still fits the bill of the type of stuff I mess with, but the faster sample speed of the DS2072 really calls to me...

[iloveelectronics]

I can't speak for the DS1000Z series, but I don't think anyone has found any difference whatsoever between the DS2072 and DS2102 other than the model number printed on the face plate (and held in memory) - and the price.

Damn, I might have just wasted $100 there then! 

But, regardless, please give us a review or your impressions if possible - I'm really curious about the new model 

I'm just a novice so there's no way I'll be able to give any proper review but I'll try to at least take a few pictures and offer a few comments. The 1000Z doesn't seem to be available for sale in any markets outside China yet so hopefully my layman's impressions will be helpful to a few other people in the months to come as they get rolled out in other markets.

[marmad]

Damn, I might have just wasted $100 there then! 

Well, I wouldn't worry about it because it probably isn't true for the DS1000Z series - different front end and filters (no 200MHz model).

I'm just a novice so there's no way I'll be able to give any proper review but I'll try to at least take a few pictures and offer a few comments. The 1000Z doesn't seem to be available for sale in any markets outside China yet so hopefully my layman's impressions will be helpful to a few other people in the months to come as they get rolled out in other markets.

Any info at all would be appreciated. Is it your first DSO - or can you at least compare the feel of it against a previous model you've owned?

[iloveelectronics]

Any info at all would be appreciated. Is it your first DSO - or can you at least compare the feel of it against a previous model you've owned?

It's not. I have an Owon SDS7102 at home, which I bought before I knew about this forum but I don't really use it very often mainly due to severe space limitation of my setup. I now have a proper office/lab and am looking to spend more time learning the basics of electronics. I also have a cheap 40Mhz 30-year-old used Kikusui analog scope which I actually find a pleasure to use comparing to the more complex operation of a DSO And as you probably read from the other thread I also had a very brief experience with the Uni-T UT2102CM so hopefully all these will help me provide some more useful feedback.

[KuchateK]

I think the most important question is:
When Dave can rev... take one apart for us?

[marmad]

When Dave can rev... take one apart for us?

Maybe ilovelectronics can take his apart for photos - sometimes early versions of a new model don't even have the warranty sticker yet.