A competitor for the Rigol? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: DJPhil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 07:21:49 am
content: Discussion in an adjacent threadturned up aninteresting scope from Instek. It seems like a decent competitor for the Rigol scope we all know and love, aside from the bandwidth hack of course. Instek's got a wholewebpage dedicated to their jibba jabbaabout their sampling system, and I think it'd be enlightening to see it put to the test against the Rigol. Perhaps for some (most?) of us the difference (if there is one) would be enough to justify the lower bandwidth. Of course, I'm still a newb, and the whole thing might be moot.I think this may be the first case of another manufacturer attempting to put up a fight in the low end market aside from Owon'ssomewhat underpowered offerings. I think that tequipment.net might be the only folks with comparable pricing on the Instek so far, as a quick scan online shows the same Instek model up near $700US everywhere else.I think it would make for an interesting review, so I thought I'd throw it up here in the suggestions section. Maybe tequipment will help out again with a demo unit to review!What do you guys think?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 07:42:40 am
content: I think that Instek would be more of a competitor to the faster update rate Rigol 1000A series instead of the cheaper 1000E series.Lifetime Warranty?$415 sounds like a terrific price!http://www.tequipment.net/InstekGDS-1062A.htmlDave.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 11:24:02 am
content: I'm all for it. One thing I like besides the spec, is the position of the power cord and the folding handle. The 1052E has tiny feet, nearly useless, to change the tilt. In a bench at certain angles, the Rigol needs to be propped up a bit for better view.The Instek handle is a time tested equipment handle able to adjust to a large number of positions. It also has the power cord coming off the back, while the Rigol annoyingly comes off the side.Also the Manual and support docs on the Instek are very high quality.Lifetime warranty is fantastic but that also means folks, don't Mod me and goof because tata warranty!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 12:09:51 pm
content: Hmm, I just can't help but think at this almost giveaway price from Tequipment, this Instek has the Rigol beat hands down.2Msamples @ 1GS/s for almost the same price as the Rigol that only has 16K @ 1GS/s can't be beat. And it can supposedly do 1GS/s on both channels (at 1Msamples) which the Rigol can'tAnd yeah, the big tilting bail looks to have that old world feel to it.If the Aussie $ wasn't low I'd trade my Rigol for it.Dave.

author: cybergibbons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 12:28:05 pm
content: I thought the Rigol had 1Mpoint. Glad I went for the Instek then!

author: ngkee22
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 01:49:12 pm
content: Does anyone know how good Instek's quality and service is?

author: cybergibbons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 02:18:10 pm
content: I have posted these before, in relation to power supplies and scopes:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=683.msg8665#msg8665https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=683.msg8705#msg8705https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=730.msg8827#msg8827

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 02:25:18 pm
content: They have a solid reputation; I didn't know much of them personally, but more experienced EE know them well for good quality and support. They are a Taiwanese company that began in 1975 with factories mostly in Taiwan and some in PRC. Rigol is no where as old, and a pure PRC company.You can read of them here:http://www.gwinstek.com/en/about.aspxMy experience with them in a recent purchase is here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=633.msg7553#msg7553Quote from: ngkee22 on June 22, 2010, 01:49:12 pm

author: ngkee22
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 03:33:33 pm
content: I am glad they have a good reputation. All I have used is Agilent and Tektronix in college. I hadn't heard about most of these companies till I started reading this blog a few months ago.Out of curiosity, what about some other companies. I have seen scopes, multimeters, and power supplies by BK Precision and PtoTek. I first saw these at a local electronics store. What kind of quality/reputation do these companies have?

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 06:15:15 pm
content: B&K had been around since the 1950s, but my personal experience with them was in school in the 1970s-80s. They are based in CA. Protek began in the mid 1990s, I know little or have experience with them, as they are relatively younger and based in NJ. They are both reputable, but I would rate B&K higher; it has weathered many economic storms and is still around.However, both are less OEM or factories for equipment, I don't know if they do any design of their own, but much of their equipment come from ODM or OEM. Some are fairly obvious, some are not.In the 1980s, BK sold analog oscilloscopes made by Kenwood, still known as Trio in Asia, then an upcoming Japanese brand that is now well established as a brand name, Kenwood gear is sold mostly in Asia as top brand.My experience is BK knows how to choose ODM, so often its a marker of a good upstart. For example, these LCR meters, both branded by Agilent and BK of another ODM:Quote from: ngkee22 on June 22, 2010, 03:33:33 pm

author: ngkee22
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 07:11:26 pm
content: Thanks for all the information.I have been trying to decide what is my best option for getting some new equipment. I like the price on the Rigol scope, but not too impressed with the information on their website and I can seldom find much about their equipment. I do like Instek and BK Precision. Atleast their websites have more information available and their products seem to be a little better made and have a more extensive and established line of products. As for Protek, I am still researching them. From what I have been reading, I am leaning towards getting Instek equipment.

author: RayJones
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 07:57:56 pm
content: I personally find tilting bails a pain in the butt especially when you need to stack a CRO on a sig gen etc.. They just always get in the way.This of course is not much of an issue with a unit that is not so deep though unless you like seeing test equipment tumble to the ground.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 10:10:07 pm
content: Quote from: saturation on June 22, 2010, 06:15:15 pmBK Precision used to design and manufacture their own gear in the USA, but like everyone have since outsourced a lot of that. But they still do their own in-house design on gear where they have the expertise. Like all these companies (like Extech) that have massive diverse ranges of gear, they can't possibly have expertise in all those areas.I've been talking with them recently and they are sending me their new model LCR meter which they have redesigned.That model LCR meter was designed by Escort which used to be rebadged under many brands until Agilent bought out Escort. BK Precision obviously still had some sort of rights to it, but have since redesigned it. Their new model is coming out in a few weeks.Dave.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 10:44:00 pm
content: The Rigol 1052e doesn't sit well to be stacked since the off/on switch is on top. Both these DSOs are narrow but the Instek is flat on top and the power switch is upfront, so it can be stacked. I don't own this Instek scope but I have one of their frequency generators; the bail can be folded completely backward so the top is clear, and its designed so it does not require rear clearance beyond what already projects off the rear case, in the FG its just the AC cable socket.The limited lifetime warranty of this scope is misleading, as far as lifetime is concerned. I just read the terms:Good only for the original owner"Lifetime" means the product lifetime. If the product model line is discontinued by Instek, which is inevitable given the speed new models are introduced, the warranty ends 5 years later.Shipping to the repair is paid for by the owner.Warranty is void if the scope is purchased from a non-authorized dealer.So in toto, the warranty is longer than the usual 3 years Instek warranty.Quote from: RayJones on June 22, 2010, 07:57:56 pm

author: allanw
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 22, 2010, 11:09:10 pm
content: Tek's "lifetime" warranty on their cheap line of scopes is pretty similar though:http://www.tek.com/service/warranties/tds1k_2k/faq.htmlJust with the minimum guarantee of 10 years.

author: ngkee22
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2010, 12:18:20 am
content: I read the Limited Lifetime warranty too. I noticed the catches in the warranty also. It has a very limited lifetime warranty.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 23, 2010, 02:20:59 am
content: Cheesy, but you get a little look inside Instek.Why don't companies ever shoot real behind the scenes video so customers can see what really goes on?A video camera and some friendly faces is all it takes to make companies much more appealing to their customers.Dave.

author: allanw
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2010, 02:27:07 am
content: You've got to be kidding me, their other videos demoing their scopes use TTS as narration.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 23, 2010, 04:44:30 am
content: Even Fluke does it, seven years after it's discontinued, but at least ten years. Ever wonder why companies introduce minor -B or -V revisions of their products?

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2010, 10:04:30 am
content: Yes, its like at least Flukes and Teks, so no different from key makers in the industry. A key thing is in 5-10 years something better would likely be around so it may not be worth going through the hassle of repairing.Note the LCD is warranted only for 1 year, regardless.Quote from: ngkee22 on June 23, 2010, 12:18:20 am

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 23, 2010, 10:05:33 am
content: The video and more info helps, but the best look inside Instek is dissecting their gear and seeing how they put it together.Quote from: EEVblog on June 23, 2010, 02:20:59 am

author: slburris
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2010, 03:37:03 am
content: So has anyone picked up one of these scopes yet?I have to admit the better specs tempt me to sell myDS1052E and upgrade....Scott

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2010, 04:23:29 am
content: Quote from: saturation on June 23, 2010, 10:05:33 amhttp://welecw2000a.sourceforge.net/docs/Hardware/GW_Instek_GDS-1152A.pdfThe pictures are far from complete (can't see what CPU is used, for instance - it's probably on the other side of the main board or on the display board), but what there is looks good. It overclocks the ADCs just like the Rigol does. The FPGA is an EP3C16 series, which I believe is a higher end part than the EP3C5 in the Rigol. The Instek uses SD cards while the Rigol uses more versatile USB drives.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2010, 11:28:11 am
content: A fantastic review! I wonder why I never bothered google-ing it, it comes up as a top search URL.I like that Instek did not attempt to erase the chip markings like Rigol did. The soldering is perfect, looks all machine done, and the minor bug the reviewer found in the FFT can easily be fixed with a firmware upgrade ... let Instek be aware of it so they can work on it.I much prefer that tilting bale than the useless Rigol 1052E feet.Although they appear similar in design and function, and even the ADC are similar, the interiors show its not a copy of the Rigol, or vice versa.To refresh memories, you can compare some of the circuit boards from here:http://www.eevblog.com/2009/10/12/eevblog-37-rigol-ds1052e-oscilloscope-teardown/Other comparisons do exist from prior models:The Rigol remains good value particularly as a hacked version. But as is, at Tequipment's price offering to date, on paper and looking at Instek's assembly quality, its a winner as a 50 Mhz.Quote from: NiHaoMike on July 04, 2010, 04:23:29 am

author: cybergibbons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2010, 11:50:51 am
content: I've only taken mine apart to a superficial level, as in the PDF. I didn't notice there were only 4 dual channel ADCs at 100MS - I saw the markings and assumed 5 of them.Still 100->125MS is a much smaller jump than the 40->100MS (is that right?) found in the Rigol.The bug with the cursors does not exist on mine - in fact, the only bug I know that still exists concerns the zoom window, and it is easy to workaround.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 04, 2010, 01:13:20 pm
content: Quote from: cybergibbons on July 04, 2010, 11:50:51 amNot really, because you can be pretty sure the 40MHz silicon is exactly the same as the 100MHz silicon. So if this if true, as most suspect it is, Rigol aren't actually overclocking, they are just being smart.Instek on the other hand are definitely overclocking because 100MHz is the fasted speced part available.Dave.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2010, 02:24:05 pm
content: I wonder if the Instek could be upgraded to 150MHz. If so, it would be a clear winner.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2010, 05:03:40 pm
content: That would be a coup. I can't find out how someone figured out the Rigol 1052E firmware hack, its so specific that it suggests it might have been released by someone close to the company, insiders, authorized repairs etc., as its hard to imagine someone tried a series of trial and errors given you can brick the scope if you do it wrong.Comparing prices, the 100MHz cost more per MHz than either then 60 or 150, ~$6.9/MHz versus $8.GDS-1062A 60MHz 2-Channel Lightweight Digital Storage Oscilloscope with Color LCD Display$415.00GDS-1102A 100MHz 2-Channel Lightweight Digital Storage Oscilloscope with Color LCD Display$805.86GDS-1152A 150MHz Digital Storage Oscilloscope with Color LCD Display\$989.10Quote from: NiHaoMike on July 04, 2010, 02:24:05 pm

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2010, 05:59:32 pm
content: I'm sure the 60MHz version could be upgraded to 150MHz with less than 1/100th the cost difference. (And you'll need to replace the probes, which would cost more than the modification but still far less than the cost difference.)

author: cybergibbons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 04, 2010, 06:51:15 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 04, 2010, 01:13:20 pm"Same as" doesn't mean they will perform the same though. It's like 10% resistors - if you assume that you can look though a box of 10% resistors to find one within 1% of rated value, you'll be disappointed. All the ones within 1% of rated value are in the box of 1% resistors somewhere, as they simply bin them by how close they are to rated value.The same is true of ICs - they'll have been binned by frequency. So unless there is a huge market demand for 40MSPS ADCs, any that perform at 80MSPS will be sold as AD9288-80. But then when you look at the highest band, the AD9288-100, you don't have an upper cut off point. They will want a certain proportion of the output to yield 100MSPS parts, so it is fair to assume that a number of them will perform better than 100MSPS.So overclocking a 40MSPS part to 100MSPS is almost certainly pushing it further than the manufacturer intended. Overclock a 100MSPS part and you're just taking advantage of them wanting a decent yield of 100MSPS parts.I've seen this with FPGAs - the lower spec parts in a range won't clock faster than the part above them. But with over-volting you can get the top of the range part to go much much faster.It also seems curious that Rigol feel the need to sand the tops of the ICs.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2010, 12:40:19 am
content: Quote from: cybergibbons on July 04, 2010, 06:51:15 pmAs the manufacturers fine tune the process, more and more parts would perform as the top model. Soon enough, almost all the parts would be top models, except a few with minor defects. They then "downgrade" most of them in order to sell them. (One of the main reasons why they would optimize the process even if low end models are mass market is because if a process yields a lot of those, there'll also be a significant number that couldn't even do that and are therefore worthless.)There is a significant market for ADCs around the 40MHz range - CCD digitizers in cameras and analog component video inputs on LCD monitors and TVs, just to name a few.Both Rigol and Instek probably do a lot of automated testing on the ADCs since they would have to match up 4 or 5 to use in one unit.

author: ngkee22
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 16, 2010, 01:07:20 pm
content: I was curious if we ever came to a group agreement that the Insket 1000A series oscilloscopes are the better buy? After reading more about the Instek models, I am probably going to buy a 100Mhz or 150Mhz Instek soon. I think that the Instek is better, but I wanted to see if everyone else has had a chance to read up on it any.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 16, 2010, 10:47:21 pm
content: Quote from: ngkee22 on July 16, 2010, 01:07:20 pmBased on the specs, and that Instek isn't a bad company, I think it has to be better value for money.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 16, 2010, 06:53:30 am
content: Update:I was hoping to get the Instek for review, but that has fallen through. Instek are not interested in anyone (maybe just me) reviewing their scope.Dave.

author: ThunderSqueak
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 16, 2010, 07:30:03 am
content: Well you did get thousands of makers, hackers, and engineers to hack a rigol into a more expensive version :> Maybe they are scared of you now.That or they are scared you will take apart the scope and show some cut corners in its manufacture? You do give an unbiased review, not every manufacturer likes that, especially when they have something to possibly hide.oh and BTW, thanks for putting the first 13 episodes onto itunes

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 16, 2010, 08:18:39 am
content: Quote from: ThunderSqueak on August 16, 2010, 07:30:03 amI didn't do anything. No idea why they weren't there before and have only just appeared??Dave.

author: ThunderSqueak
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: August 16, 2010, 08:52:58 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 16, 2010, 08:18:39 amReally? Weird, they showed up on my subscription to the podcast last friday. Apple has been doing a lot of updates lately... 2 iphone updates in the last week! Perhaps they changed something to "fix" it... like case sensetive issues? who knows :>

author: DJPhil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2010, 11:00:40 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on August 16, 2010, 06:53:30 amBummer.I still may pick one up, but it'll be a while. Mid-October at the earliest, assuming I don't buy anything else in the meantime. I'm always needing parts of some kind though.If I do get one I'll post a bunch of pics at least and answer questions.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2010, 10:12:12 am
content: I do own an older Instek GDS DSO. I would again buy from the GDS-2000 series or seriously consider the GDS-1000A series for replacement.Instek's support is not worth to mention. From time to time they answer questions, from time to time they don't. Instek's PC software is junk. They do have usable programming manuals online. If you need PC software you can do your own. The good news is their USB interface is a COM port emulation, not the unusual USB Test & Measurement class. That makes it easier to program. They also have LabVIEW drivers. I never tried those.As for hacking, there is a mechanical hack around to reduce the fan noise of a GDS-2204. I haven't done it. It should work for all GDS-2000 oscilloscopes. Originally the fan is directly mounted on the inner chassis, with the inner chassis having almost no clearance to the enclosure grill. The fan so close to the grill is supposed to create the fan noise.The hack is to offset the fan from the inner chassis by inserting a one inch long PVC pipe between the fan and the chassis. The pipe should have the diameter the size of the fan diameter. Moving the fan inwards also requires to move the internal power supply PCB by an inch with some DIY brackets.There is also arumorthat it is possible to convert a 60 MHz GDS-1062 into a 100 MHz GDS-1102 by changing some DIP switches inside the oscilloscope. But with the GDS-1000A series on the market I wouldn't consider a new oscilloscope from the GDS-1000 series. A cheap used one is another story.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2010, 10:56:36 am
content: Thanks, very helpful. That sounds about equal to Rigol. So Rigol has a chance of upping them over time.Quote from: BoredAtWork on August 22, 2010, 10:12:12 am

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2010, 02:50:05 pm
content: Quote from: saturation on August 22, 2010, 10:56:36 amHaving dealt both with Instek support and with Rigol support in the past, my money is on Instek. Rigol service is not even a contender. They are a no-show. A completely lost case.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 22, 2010, 03:04:34 pm
content: Ah, thank you. we are back to Instek being better than Rigol! As we suspected. Does the scope you use live up to its specifications as published in the manual?Why did you have to call Rigol, what do you own of theirs that was a problem?Quote from: BoredAtWork on August 22, 2010, 02:50:05 pm

author: ngkee22
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2010, 03:35:53 pm
content: I have emailed Instek a couple of time and have always got a response in about a day. I have talked to Customer Service and an Engineer there when I was getting some information on the scopes. They answered my questions each time, so I think their customer support is working well.I have also emailed Rigol, but never hear back. I tried a couple of times, but still no response.Right now, I am going to buy the Instek GDS-1000A series scope, just trying to decide which bandwidth model to go with. I think Instek is probably the better company.

author: cybergibbons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 23, 2010, 05:01:01 pm
content: Instek support has been fine for me - 24 hour reply to mail, answer the phone if you call. Another big plus for me is that I bought from a largish test equipment supplier in the UK who also respond to queries and honour the guarantee.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 24, 2010, 11:26:02 am
content: When you buy it can you review it for us here? I have an old post about the cost effectiveness of the models, bang for buck it either the 150 MHz versus the 60 MHz at least using tequipment.net prices.Quote from: ngkee22 on August 23, 2010, 03:35:53 pm

author: McPete
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2010, 11:20:53 am
content: Well, I ordered mine tonight- I'm happy to lend it to our host, if he'd like to review it... How long does the cheapest shipping from the Tequipment take to get to Australia?Edit; Ooops, goofed my order- Ordered by credit card, and the whole deal with sending documents isn't something I'm prepared to do... I've asked them to cancel my order, but it may be next week before I can reorder... Gah -_-

author: McPete
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2010, 08:11:49 pm
content: Due to some unexpected financial constraints, I had to place my order on hold, but yesterday, I picked up my new Instek GDS-1062A from the post office.Along with the scope, I got two probe kits, a manual, and a little USB SD card reader, as well as a US wall plug to IEC socket lead.My immediate thoughts, coming from an old 15MHz Trio analogue scope are;• Holy Geez, this thing is small! I have space on my bench again!• Nice, clear screen... and no parallax error!• Being able to see your trigger level and assign a precise value is damn handy!• Wow, the ripple on my little bench supply is quite pronounced.•The UI took me about 15 minutes to adjust to for most of the usual stuff- triggering, coupling, all that sort of gear. It's pretty simple, but coming from a super-simple analogue scope, I was feeling my way along there for a while! I haven't found the post/pre trigger capture settings yet, but that is my next job.•The included probes are pretty smart- Not sure about the pink identifying bands they come with though!•Compared to the scope I have at work (Tek 2230), the update rate is a revelation... It's not in the same league as say, a Fluke 199C or a YEW DLM2000, but for me, it's a nice upgrade.If there's anything in particular anyone would like me to try with it, please let me know and I'll endeavour to get back to you with a result.P.

author: slburris
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 05:17:17 am
content: Can you check out the SD card slot? Any issues with various capacities below and above 2GB?Does it support FAT16 and FAT32 formatted cards?The Rigol DS1052E seems to work with pretty much any FAT formatted USB stick.The Hantek DSO-1060 I have doesn't like FAT format, only FAT32, not a big dealbut an undocumented annoyance.Scott

author: bogdan546
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 08:01:14 am
content: please make a movie with rectangular signal to calibrate the probesto me it is so. how is you?

author: allanw
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 08:21:36 am
content: That is already perfectly calibrated.Here's what an uncalibrated probe looks like:http://www.scienceprog.com/wp-content/uploads/2007i/osc_probes/probe_compensation.jpg

author: bogdan546
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 09:09:40 am
content: I was curious what it looks like

author: cybergibbons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 09:25:07 am
content: Quote from: slburris on November 11, 2010, 05:17:17 amI've not tried FAT16, but the GDS-1152A works fine with 4Gb cards. Painfully slow to transfer whole memory to it though.

author: McPete
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 10:21:08 am
content: Quote from: slburris on November 11, 2010, 05:17:17 amI just tried an 8Gb SD HC, formatted FAT32- No problems at all. Scope recognises it quickly, stores a snapshot. The included SD card reader also works with my OS 10.5 Macbook straight up, no issues.I was a little worried that it wouldn't support SD HC. So far as I can see, it just works! Given that a snapshot is 32Kb or so, anything more than a 1Gb card is most likely overkill!Quote from: bogdan546 on November 11, 2010, 08:01:14 amBogdan,The top of the wave should be flat and "square"- Like the wave on the right of your second picture. Anything else means you still need to adjust your probes. I can take a movie if you REALLY want me to, but it isn't really going to show you anything new.P.

author: bogdan546
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 10:32:33 am
content: so the vertical line is not one continuous piece

author: FreeThinker
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 04:18:22 pm
content: Quote from: bogdan546 on November 11, 2010, 10:32:33 amThis is more likley due to the resolution of the display.Get a piece of graph paper and draw a line on it at an arbitrator angle ie not Horizontal or vertical.Look closly and you will see that the line sometimes is contained within the square and sometimes it covers two squares,your screen cannot light up half a pixel so has to decide which one is closer to the ideal line hence the offset or 'Jaggies' .Try zooming in and you may notice a improvement.

author: bogdan546
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 05:36:52 pm
content: This is more likley due to the resolution of the display.Get a piece of graph paper and draw a line on it at an arbitrator angle ie not Horizontal or vertical.Look closly and you will see that the line sometimes is contained within the square and sometimes it covers two squares,your screen cannot light up half a pixel so has to decide which one is closer to the ideal line hence the offset or 'Jaggies' .Try zooming in and you may notice a improvement.Thank you for explanations

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2010, 07:19:48 pm
content: I'm happy for you. If you could tell us how well it works:Frequency response to its rated 60MhzHow well its fast fourier mode looks like before the noise floor makes reading the harmonics unusableENJOY! and thanks for posting.Quote from: McPete on November 10, 2010, 08:11:49 pm

author: McPete
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 14, 2010, 07:56:38 am
content: Quote from: saturation on November 11, 2010, 07:19:48 pm1 & 2) This will happen on Tuesday, barring my forgetfulness.3) No worries mate, glad to be of service.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 14, 2010, 10:59:02 am
content: Thanks a gigabunch McPete, those are the major features it differs from a stock 1052E Rigol.Quote from: McPete on November 14, 2010, 07:56:38 am

author: McPete
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 18, 2010, 06:13:47 am
content: Sorry for the delay folks, here, slightly belatedly, are some snapshots from my testing of my 1062A. The standard used, if you're interested, is a Fluke 5520A with the scope option, although a few may be with function generators.First image; 400mV P-P sine wave at 20MHz, with FFT as well. Note, the fundamental and first three harmonics are pretty clear. Note; This signal was produced using a function generator.Second image; using cursors on the same signal as above, to measure the FFT reading; X2 (the solid red cursor) is on the 5th harmonic, which is still discernible above the noise. Note; This signal was produced using a function generator.Third image; 60Mhz Sinewave, 30mV P-P no FFT.Fourth image; 100Mhz sinewave, 30mV P-P no FFT.Fifth image; 200MHz sinewave, 30mV P-P, no FFT.Sixth image, 30Mhz sinewave, 30mV P-P, no FFT.If anyone would like more specific tests done, please let me know and I'll see what I can do.McPete

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 19, 2010, 12:19:51 am
content: Thanks a Gogol for the quick tests, McPete, its reads like the noise floor is just as noisy as the Rigol.Could you run the same tests you did but use a square wave instead? It would qualitatively show the bandwidth and any nonlinearity. The sine wave tests show it rolls off gently and seems useful for measurements up to 100MHz.At least look at 6 MHz [ which should be quite rectangular] versus 10 MHz, the roll off on the edges would be pretty obvious [ as the edges represent the 9th harmonics or 54 Mhz and 90 MHz respectively.]

author: DJPhil
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 19, 2010, 05:55:59 am
content: A big thanks to McPete, and to all those who contributed for all the hard work.For me at least, the Instek is really looking good. I think I'll be ordering one when I finish saving up.

author: colinbeeforth
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2011, 08:37:10 am
content: saturation said:"How well its fast fourier mode looks like before the noise floor makes reading the harmonics unusable"Yes, most FFTs on most DSOs are poor like this. The problem is this - 8 bits vertical resolution = dynamic range of only 20log(10)255 or 48dB. Since most fast acquisitions only have effective bits around 6 bits (not 8 bits, caused by noise and timing errors), then the effective dynamic range is only about 35dB in reality. No Chinese manufacturer quotes effective bits at speed, so new buyers have no idea what it is. In practice FFT is only of very limited use in modern DSOs. Earlier LeCroy DSOs had a nice averaging mode which allowed you to trade off horizontal samples for vertical samples. It only worked for lower frequencies where you could be sure of horizontal over sampling, and that is only possible if you have long acquisition memory, you could average the signal and achieve up to 3 bits of vertical enhancement. It was based on sub sampling by counting the number of times natural noise flipped a sampled point into upper and lower bins. Complex maths, but the end result for lower frequency signals was the equivalent of 11 bits vertical, so FFT could be more useful. To get this mode, you needed: slow speed signals much lower than max sample rate, long memory, advanced math processing, the ability to chain math processing ending in FFT. It made the scope run a bit slow but gave useful results. Modern cheap DSOs simply can't do that stuff, the acquisition memory is too short to start with. Weirdly, the LeCroy had a Motorola 68020 processor, so modern DSOs should be able to beat that, but it doesn't seem that Chinese scopes have got to the point of doing any real clever signal processing. Maybe there just isn't enough demand.

author: saturation
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2011, 04:24:58 pm
content: Thanks for the insights, Colin. I see your posts on the Hantek/Tekway thread which also has similar limits to its FFT, given the theoretical limits of 8 bits and hardware, do you have the facilities to actually measure therealnoise floor of your Tekway?Quote from: colinbeeforth on May 04, 2011, 08:37:10 am

author: pablo
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2011, 01:44:53 pm
content: hello McPeteWould you mind to tell how much ripple noise (peak to peak) your oscilloscope has when you short out the probe to ground?I have one of those Instek GDS1062A oscilloscopes and mine shows a bigger ripple when probe's switch is on 10x.I would really appreciate it if you test both positions (1x and 10x)thank

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 03, 2011, 04:48:50 pm
content: Quote from: pablo on June 03, 2011, 01:44:53 pmSounds like inductive pickup in the loop between the tip and the ground. The voltage would increase for equal current if you increase the input impedance. Try minimizing the loop area by shorting the probe tip to the ground collar with something conductive like aluminium foil.