Rigol's New DHO800 Oscilloscope unbox & teardown

[Fungus]

Does anyone know if for cursor measurements one set of cursors can  be disabled?

I don't think so. You have to have all four enabled at once.

[tautech]

Does anyone know if for cursor measurements one set of cursors can  be disabled?

I don't think so. You have to have all four enabled at once.

No X or Y, just both ?
 

[Fungus]

The plasticky smell seems much less today... maybe becasue it was warm all day yesterday and had a fan moving air through it.

[TK]

Does anyone know if for cursor measurements one set of cursors can  be disabled?

I don't think so. You have to have all four enabled at once.

No X or Y, just both ?
 

I checked both the scope and the manual, it looks like only both.  But if it can handle, why not?  You can move the axis you don't want out of the screen until delta is 0, if it bothers you.  What I don't like is that there is no knob that can move both X1 and X2 or Y1 and Y2 at the same time once you have the delta fixed

[mawyatt]

Nice screen, but dim.

Mine seems plenty bright enough but I guess it depends on your ambient lighting.

I haven't found a brightness control anywhere.

Compared to our Siglent SDS2000X+, KS34465A and other instruments, the DHO814 screen is much dimmer, even in this image it shows, and it actual visual use much dimmer than on the image displayed. Trace brightness is not even close to Siglent trace brightness, which is set to just 52%.

The reflective screen makes this even more difficult for viewing. Just barely acceptable IMO, and will be a tad more difficult in a bright environment.

Best,

[Martin72]

I noticed this right away, strangely enough this gets a little better in the next 10min after power on, but overall the base brightness is about MSO5000 level(after its improvement).

[Fungus]

The reflective screen makes this even more difficult for viewing. Just barely acceptable IMO, and will be a tad more difficult in a bright environment.

I've ordered a couple of matte screen protectors (2 different brands) to see what happens. There's not a lot of reflection where I've been using it I know I prefer my Micsig with a matte protector on it.

They're only a couple of $$ each so let's see what happens. 

[DaneLaw]

The front panel has some nice-but-impossible-to-photograph lighting.

I think the blue of button 4 is outside the sRGB spectrum, ie. no monitor will display it. You can sort of see it projected on the panel in the dark insert, but... not really.

The pink/magenta of button 3 doesn't really come out either. You'll just have to get your own DHO to see them in person. 

Looks nice, not sure if it's too much disco in an actual semi-dim-lit environment (nahh, no such thing as too much disco), but at least they are using the LEDs behind the channel buttons.(yeah, Im looking at you Micsig, putting LEDs behind it, and not even using it https://tinyurl.com/3a267tyw  )

[ebastler]

Compared to our Siglent SDS2000X+, KS34465A and other instruments, the DHO814 screen is much dimmer, even in this image it shows, and it actual visual use much dimmer than on the image displayed. Trace brightness is not even close to Siglent trace brightness, which is set to just 52%.

The reflective screen makes this even more difficult for viewing. Just barely acceptable IMO, and will be a tad more difficult in a bright environment.

This must somehow be rather subjective, or depend strongly on the room lighting. EDIT: Specific details of the room lighting, not just overall brightness. Because e.g.:

Dave must have shot his review video under pretty bright lights -- he did complain that the little white LED indicators (slope, button mode etc.) were hard to see, and that shows up in the video too. But he seemed totally fine with the main LCD's brightness, and it looks great to my eyes in the video.

So what gives? Dave obviously took care that no direct reflections from the studio lights were visible in the display. (Which admittedly may not always be easy, depending on a room's geometry and given the glossy display.) Are such reflections your main problem, maybe, or does the display appear too dim even when you take care to avoid them?

[mawyatt]

Compared to our Siglent SDS2000X+, KS34465A and other instruments, the DHO814 screen is much dimmer, even in this image it shows, and it actual visual use much dimmer than on the image displayed. Trace brightness is not even close to Siglent trace brightness, which is set to just 52%.

The reflective screen makes this even more difficult for viewing. Just barely acceptable IMO, and will be a tad more difficult in a bright environment.

This must somehow be rather subjective, or depend strongly on the room lighting. EDIT: Specific details of the room lighting, not just overall brightness. Because e.g.:

Dave must have shot his review video under pretty bright lights -- he did complain that the little white LED indicators (slope, button mode etc.) were hard to see, and that shows up in the video too. But he seemed totally fine with the main LCD's brightness, and it looks great to my eyes in the video.

So what gives? Dave obviously took care that no direct reflections from the studio lights were visible in the display. (Which admittedly may not always be easy, depending on a room's geometry and given the glossy display.) Are such reflections your main problem, maybe, or does the display appear too dim even when you take care to avoid them?

The answer is simple. The new DHO814 has the dimmest display (especially noticeable on actual waveform traces) of ANY instrument we have in our lab with exception of an old HP34401A which has a failing display which needs replacing. This includes the SDS2000X+, SSA3021X+, 3 KS34465A, DMM6500, AG34401A, 3 SDP3303X, SDG3022X, SDG6022X, SDL1020X, SFM3065X, 2 KWR102, KWR103, GPP4323, TH2830, IM3536 and so one......get the picture!!!

Our lab is somewhat dark, not bright, however the intended use will be in a very bright shop like environment. We are evaluating this for a client which may decide to include with their product, which will end up in bright shop environments.

So use here for client is questionable, and should know by end of next week when the scope is evaluated in this shop type environment with non-electrical folks. Physical size, connector accessibility, general UI, limited electrical performance are all good and meet expectations, but if potential users can't see/read display in the shop environment, it's a no go!!

Don't misconstrue our comments, we call them as we see them, and pull no punches, that's why we were called upon for evaluation.

This little scope is impressive in many ways, however screen brightness is NOT one of them. The hardware build and quality is superb from the case standpoint (haven't taken it apart, and don't intend to). Display quality (outside intensity) is very nice, and also displays nice on an external HDMI monitor, the additional HDMI resolution is appreciated....EXCEPT the waveform doesn't seem to scale up resolution-wise 

Electrical performance is good so far, altho we haven't spent much time outside of clients needs, same goes for UI, and other features. The VESA mounting is also a plus (and planned on using such), the fan noise is slightly annoying but not issue since the shop noise will be much greater. The fan noise might be a concern for some folks tho, since one must get really close to the tiny screen to read the display, thus apparent fan noise is higher.

Overall impressions so far are generally quite good, especially considering the cost  

Best,
 

[ebastler]

The answer is simple. The new DHO814 has the dimmest display (especially noticeable on actual waveform traces) of ANY instrument we have in our lab [...]

Our lab is somewhat dark, not bright, however the intended use will be in a very bright shop like environment. We are evaluating this for a client which may decide to include with their product, which will end up in bright shop environments. So use here for client is questionable [...]

Many thanks for the additional details and color, also on the non-display-related aspects. I really appreciate how you are approaching this from an impartial viewpoint, without a personal agenda beyond finding a solution that meets your client's needs.

I still can't quite square your observations on display brightness with how the scope comes across in Dave's video (screen brightness vs. LED brightness vs. room lights). Well, as mentioned earlier -- I will look for an opportunity to see one of these hands-on. That also seems important for the other "ergonomics" aspects, like fan noise and size of the display for viewing as well as touch operation, where expectations and perception will be somewhat subjective.

[mawyatt]

The answer is simple. The new DHO814 has the dimmest display (especially noticeable on actual waveform traces) of ANY instrument we have in our lab [...]

Our lab is somewhat dark, not bright, however the intended use will be in a very bright shop like environment. We are evaluating this for a client which may decide to include with their product, which will end up in bright shop environments. So use here for client is questionable [...]

Many thanks for the additional details and color, also on the non-display-related aspects. I really appreciate how you are approaching this from an impartial viewpoint, without a personal agenda beyond finding a solution that meets your client's needs.

I still can't quite square your observations on display brightness with how the scope comes across in Dave's video (screen brightness vs. LED brightness vs. room lights). Well, as mentioned earlier -- I will look for an opportunity to see one of these hands-on. That also seems important for the other "ergonomics" aspects, like fan noise and size of the display for viewing as well as touch operation, where expectations and perception will be somewhat subjective.

The display dimness is relative to everything else we have/use in our lab. It's acceptable for our use, but just barely. This is especially true wrt the actual trace which is dimmer than the other text and stuff on the screen. We have everything maxed out on the display, so this is the top limit.

Not sure what Rigol's thinking is here, seems a user would want the waveform display the brightest or at least as bright as the surrounding text and such. The Siglent trace is as bright as everything else on the screen, the DMMs displayed numbers are as bright as everything else, same for power supplies, LCR meters and such. Hopefully this is just some internal control on the display that can be corrected by firmware updates.

When you get your hands on one you'll immediately "see" what we are talking about. Others that have these hands on, also commented about this display dimness.

BTW we don't use the Touch-Screen much on anything that supports a wireless mouse. Can report the mouse works well on this, so haven't used the touch much. With an external display, the mouse is not as responsive as with directly on the screen tho.

Best,

[Bidi533]

Considering the already quite high idle power draw and the toastieness of the dho8xx, the dimm screen might be a "mitigation" as bright screens can increase power draw quite substantially.

[Martin72]

Here an example taken from my working room, all screens are looking as they have the same brightness...

https://youtu.be/UOFe9wmdIKk

[Mechatrommer]

VisaDSO (1.1.0) now supports DHO800 (possibly DHO900, DHO1000 and DHO4000 too, but untested)

[Fungus]

Considering the already quite high idle power draw and the toastieness of the dho8xx, the dimm screen might be a "mitigation" as bright screens can increase power draw quite substantially.

Nope. The backlight won't be more than 3-5W at most.

I'm not seeing a brightness problem here.

Not sure what Rigol's thinking is here, seems a user would want the waveform display the brightest or at least as bright as the surrounding text and such.

Maybe it's just that the Rigol traces are much thinner and the screen pixels are smaller.

1 pixel instead of 2 = half the perceived brightness. Smaller pixel=less light.

Here it is next to my Micsig. The Micsig is at full brightness.

Pic 1 at 5ns/div - thinner traces on the Rigol:


Pic 2 -  I changed the timebases to fatten up the traces a bit.



The Rigol screen is definitely more contrasty than the Micsig.

[Martin72]

Let's be clear about this, so that potential buyers are not put off:
The brightness of the Rigol display is sufficient in any case.
It is only slightly darker in direct comparison, but that is not a flaw.

[ptluis]

Considering the already quite high idle power draw and the toastieness of the dho8xx, the dimm screen might be a "mitigation" as bright screens can increase power draw quite substantially.

Nope. The backlight won't be more than 3-5W at most.

I'm not seeing a brightness problem here.

Not sure what Rigol's thinking is here, seems a user would want the waveform display the brightest or at least as bright as the surrounding text and such.

Maybe it's just that the Rigol traces are much thinner and the screen pixels are smaller.

1 pixel instead of 2 = half the perceived brightness. Smaller pixel=less light.

Here it is next to my Micsig. The Micsig is at full brightness.

Pic 1 at 5ns/div - thinner traces on the Rigol:


Pic 2 -  I changed the timebases to fatten up the traces a bit.



The Rigol screen is definitely more contrasty than the Micsig.

I was about to ask you for a side by side photo between your Micsig and the Rigol and the effective area of the Rigol is so small I wonder how things look like if you have 4ch active with signals, should we buy a magnifying glass? or an external monitor?

[2N3055]

Considering the already quite high idle power draw and the toastieness of the dho8xx, the dimm screen might be a "mitigation" as bright screens can increase power draw quite substantially.

Nope. The backlight won't be more than 3-5W at most.

I'm not seeing a brightness problem here.

Not sure what Rigol's thinking is here, seems a user would want the waveform display the brightest or at least as bright as the surrounding text and such.

Maybe it's just that the Rigol traces are much thinner and the screen pixels are smaller.

1 pixel instead of 2 = half the perceived brightness. Smaller pixel=less light.

Here it is next to my Micsig. The Micsig is at full brightness.

Pic 1 at 5ns/div - thinner traces on the Rigol:


Pic 2 -  I changed the timebases to fatten up the traces a bit.



The Rigol screen is definitely more contrasty than the Micsig.

I was about to ask you for a side by side photo between your Micsig and the Rigol and the effective area of the Rigol is so small I wonder how things look like if you have 4ch active with signals, should we buy a magnifying glass? or an external monitor?

Well this was obviously photographed in very dark room.
How does it look with actual light needed to do any work. Is screen glossy?

[Fungus]

I was about to ask you for a side by side photo between your Micsig and the Rigol and the effective area of the Rigol is so small I wonder how things look like if you have 4ch active with signals, should we buy a magnifying glass? or an external monitor?

It is what it is. 

It would be cool if you could put traces in separate windows but I can't find a way to do that. You can't create new windows of type "Signal" (or whatever it would be called).

You can use math functions to do it... but it would be nice to do it natively.

[ptluis]

I was about to ask you for a side by side photo between your Micsig and the Rigol and the effective area of the Rigol is so small I wonder how things look like if you have 4ch active with signals, should we buy a magnifying glass? or an external monitor?

It is what it is. 

It would be cool if you could put traces in separate windows but I can't find a way to do that. You can't create new windows of type "Signal" (or whatever it would be called).

You can use math functions to do it... but it would be nice to do it natively.

What about the minimum voltage this scope can operate? nobody tested that yet

[iMo]

Another happy user (oscope in action - tube amp?)..

[mawyatt]

Let's be clear about this, so that potential buyers are not put off:
The brightness of the Rigol display is sufficient in any case.
It is only slightly darker in direct comparison, but that is not a flaw.

Yes lets be perfectly clear, so as not to misconstrue such!!!

Here's images with local lab bench lights off and on, judge for yourself. The images don't show the difference in contrast as much as viewed, which is common for images with high contrast subjects due to image sensor DR limitations (basically dynamic signal compression). Reflections are an issue as can be seen, we have 3 large computer monitors behind our lab bench and they reflect in the smaller screen, but no so much with the larger mattel screen from any angle. Highly reflective screens require bright displays, some Apple monitors are also highly reflective, but also very bright.

Also when booting, the large "RIGOL" shows up initially very bright and contrasty (nice!), then dims, then appears to brighten a little, then the screen appears and begins to dim again. The screen does seem to brighten some after warming up tho.

Maybe this screen is defective, not sure??

For our client's use this may not be acceptable as we mentioned, as will always be operated in a very bright shop with overhead lighting and lots of bright objects around. They will decide next week when we hand over this DHO814 after our more complete evaluation.

If for our use, we would accept as a drawback (considering the price), as we need to get close to the DSO anyway to see the tiny screen (our eyes aren't that good). Perfectly viewable up close tho, with fine detail. The larger screens are usually viewed from a distance, and thus need to be brighter. Our DSOs are recessed back away from the workspace, if we were to use the DHO814 it would be mounted on a flexible VESA arm, so we could swing into place when using to view, this is the intended use likely for our client, mounting on a VESA arm to allow swinging out of the way.

Something that's come out of this evaluation, when we move into the computer controlled project version with a detailed screen, a bright matte screen will be the baseline design parameter, certainly not a reflective screen.

Question, recall the earlier Siglent SDS2000X+ screens were somewhat reflective but they changed to a more matte screen with later builds. We have both, but the earlier is with a client, not in our lab, so can't compare.

Anyway, as always YMMV!!

Best,

[rpro]

Also when booting, the large "RIGOL" shows up initially very bright and contrasty (nice!), then dims, then appears to brighten a little, then the screen appears and begins to dim again. The screen does seem to brighten some after warming up tho.

You may have a defective scope...

On my DHO804 the initial RIGOL logo starts bright, them dims and then brightens again.

With ADB you can change the brightness of the screen:

1>  adb connect scope-ip-address:55555                     [Connect via network]
2>  adb shell settings get system screen_brightness        [Returns 102.  Range is 0-255)
3>  adb shell settings put system screen_brightness 200    [This actually dims my screen, as explained below (*)]
4>  adb shell settings put system screen_brightness 255    [This brightens the screen back to Max]

(*)The shell script that starts the scope (.../start_rigol_app.sh) seems to override the android system value (set to 102) to 255 via line 149 in the script: 

echo 255 > /sys/devices/platform/backlight/backlight/brightness

I conjecture that the scope is bright at hardware/start-up, then the system dims it to 102, and then it gets reset by the Rigol start-up script to 255.

In my scope, omitting step 3> above, and setting it to 255 directly,
doesn't make the screen any brighter, consistent with my conjecture, in that:

(1) The start-up script seems to be overriding the system set value from 102 to 255.
(2) On my scope, the initial RIGOL splash screen starts bright, dims and returns to (and stays) bright, and the screen is as bright or brighter that any other instrument I have. (I also use a 22 inch hdmi monitor, which I have actually set dimmer than the scope screen.)

The value set in 3> or 4> above persists after a reboot. I have reset mine to 102, and still get the Max 255 brightness, as I have just described.

[Fungus]

Here's images with local lab bench lights off and on, judge for yourself.

I'm still not convinced your other 'scope is "brighter", just that it has more/bigger pixels illuminated on the trace.

(Yes, I'm aware that means there's more light coming out of it ... I'm just saying the Rigol's backlight isn't "dim" per se)