GDS-2000A series New economic oscilloscope by GW Instek comes to market - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 12:05:31 am
content: Hello, what do you think about the new GDS-2000A series?GW Instek web here.You can download manual or specification there. It seems to be a serious competitor for Rigol DS2000 series. The price for GDS-2000A is quite the same. 100 MHz, 2-channels GDS-2102A is sold for $1,143at Testequity.Please do not confuse the GDS-2000 with GDS-2000A, they are totally different. See attached pictures. Yes, I do not know, why they chose the GDS-2000A name...And features, as specified by the manufacturer.*300MHz/200MHz/100MHz/70MHz Bandwidth ,2 or 4 Input Channel*2GSa/s Real-time Sampling Rate and 100GSa/s Equivalent Time Sampling Rate*2MegaPoints Record Length (When using one channel, probably...)*1mV /div to 10V/div of Vertical Range*1ns/div to 100s/div of Time Base Range*80,000 wfm/s of Waveform Update Rate (I wish it was true...)*8 inch 800*600 High Resolution TFT LCD Display (Very good!)*Built-in Segmented Memory and Waveform Search Functions to Optimize the Efficiency of Record Length*Zoom Window and Play/Pause can Rapidly Navigate the Waveforms*36 Automatic Measurement Functions Offers Various Measurement Selections*Optional 8 or 16 digital channel with Logic analyzer(MSO)*Optional Function Generator (but probably only to 3 MHz)*Flexible Remote Control Connectivity(Standard:USB ;Option:LAN/GPIB)Finally, it has a better XY mode than Rigols... It has cursors in XY mode.Update:Photos and screenshots here. Please note that I was not an experienced user of this scope, when I took the pictures.https://plus.google.com/photos/106264218831814439783/albums/5857196858625060337Dave's videoTeardown made by Dave

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 12:18:28 am
content: It has 4 channels and mixed signal capability. The Rigol DS2000 is no match for that.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 12:20:42 am
content: I just noticed mention of the function gen (the two unlabled connectors presumably, dual channel?)But they have no specs on that...Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 12:21:50 am
content: Clearly aimed at the Agilent 2000X series.Even has the multi channel demo signal connectors.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 12:29:22 am
content: Ah, dual channel 3MHz DDS function gen. It's in the datasheet.LAN/SVGA is optional, just like on the Agilent.Dave.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 12:52:14 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on January 11, 2013, 12:21:50 amAccording to the user manual, the "Trig Out" signal can be set to these connectors. So it should be quite easy to measure if it really has the 80,000 wfm/s of Waveform Update Rate. You would only need a frequency counter.I wonder if this GW Instek is better made and if it has less bugs than Rigol DS2000... Who knows?GW Instek is a company founded in 1975 with quite good raputation...http://www.gwinstek.com/en/Brandorigin_0.aspxRigol was founded in 1998...http://www.rigol.com/html/about/history.shtml

author: mAJORD
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 12:57:35 am
content: Yeah, the func gen and logic analyser appear to be plug in upgrade modules.$245 for the func gen$570 for 8c Logicfrom tequipment.net

author: mAJORD
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 01:08:09 am
content: Can't seem to edit in tapatalk, and work has blocked eevblog (lol) so sorry about these posts..Was going to say, the upgrades also appear cheaper than Agilents equivilent "soft" upgrades.Only downside is no bw upgrades

author: Hypernova
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 02:40:27 am
content: Looks like serious competition to the 3000X, with the wavegen and MSO options it is feature wise very close yet way cheaper.For a 4+16 MSO with wavegen at 100MHz:$1,694+$830+$245=$2,769Just saw that it has color mode on the digital phosphor too, that's pretty nice. Not having colour mode was one of my disappointments with my 3000X especially after seeing it in action on the Lecroy's at work.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 06:58:19 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on January 11, 2013, 12:52:14 amInstek makes nice oscilloscopes, and everything is fine as long as they work. They let us badly down when we needed to get one repaired. They pointed to the distributor we bought from (authorized and all that), who wasn't at all equipped to service the oscilloscope and shipped the oscilloscope to yet another distributor who also failed to service it. From there it went to a third distributor, still not a real repair workshop. The couldn't even come up with a cost estimate. Month later it was returned unrepaired to the first distributor who returned it unrepaired to us. And in the end we were blamed for dareing we asked to get it repaired, and the first distributor had the galls to bill the shipping costs for that desaster to us.During all this Instek "support" in Taiwan couldn't care less. The showed the typical Asian attitude, going into stelth mode the moment there was a problem.We scraped the oscilloscope and blacklisted Instek.

author: Nermash
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 07:27:07 am
content: I am glad to see that they fixed IMHO the bigest failing point of their GDS 3000 line, which was abysmally small capture memory depth of 25 kpoints...

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 10:31:44 am
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on January 11, 2013, 06:58:19 amHere in Finland we've gotten our Instek scope repaired a couple of times without problems.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 08:44:41 pm
content: Well, the GDS-2000A is probably so new, that nobody has bought it yet...

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 08:50:21 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on January 11, 2013, 06:58:19 amWell, do you think that Rigol, Owon or Tekway are better? Anyway, if I needed a oscilloscope for my company, where the instrument runs 12 hours a day, I would buy an Agilent, or so. But for hobby use the GW Instek could be OK...

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 10:28:34 pm
content: Has anyone seen these working? Claiming 800x600 screen resolution, but all the screen images I can find look really crappy - not just shonky in-house fonts, it looks more like they're doing pixel doubling.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 10:42:18 pm
content: The problem with the GW-Instek DSOs seems to be getting your hands on one to try. On paper, both this and the GDS-3000 series seem very nice - but I couldn't even get GW-Instek to respond to a couple of emails when trying to locate a 3000 series to evaluate. Perhaps I wasn't a big enough customer? I never did figure out what the problem was.In any case, even though their DSOs appear well-designed and feature-laden, if they really want to succeed in the lower end of the market, they really need to do some work on their distribution and customer-interface mechanisms - even before tackling after-sales support.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 11, 2013, 11:44:01 pm
content: Agreed. I've tried SEVERAL times over the last 2 yrs to get responses from them on a few of their products.Even applied for QTY pricing - as LONG AS they answered some questions ... NADA or bugger all reply.I also don't like that the FEW resellers they have, ALL have pretty much EXACTLY the same price ! Sus.I'll definitely be waiting until we get a few reports from brave? pioneers :-)

author: mAJORD
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 12:42:13 am
content: Quote from: Chalky on January 11, 2013, 10:28:34 pmFound this on their site.. Some doofus saved it in JPG though instead of PNGhttp://www.gwinstek.com/webmanage/IMG/uploadfiles/DS0020.jpgQuote from: Hydrawerk on January 11, 2013, 10:28:34 pmI'd say the opposite vs those brands.. Instek are positioned more towards budget commercial than 'hobbiest' . Like a poor mans HP / Agilent.I wouldn't lump Rigol in with OWON either..

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 12:43:37 am
content: Combing through the data sheet and owner's manual, it mentions that the DSO can capture up to 2048 successive waveform segments with a time-tag resolution of 8ns.Hmm... do they mean the same thing by those terms as I understand them to mean? If so, that implies a waveform update rate of 125M wfrm/s - the reciprocal of 8ns. For example, the Rigol DS2072 can capture up to 65000 successive waveform segments at a minimum time-tag resolution of 20us - the reciprocal of 50k wfrm/s.

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 09:27:16 am
content: I call bullshit on GW-Instek (and Hantek & Owon).I am very sus of these budget scope makers who have rushed out larger screen 'resolutions'. I have had a good zoomed-in look at the images for both their 800x600 screens, the Owon is certainly using vertical pixel doubling for thewaveformdisplay. The Instek seems to be doubling (or worse) as well, but some doubt must be given due to no decent images available yet.Have a look at the attached images - every single waveform pixel is actually 2 dots tall, by 1 wide (compare to 1x1 graticule dots for reference) . Now I realise that screen resolution does not equal measurement resolution, but if the scope is joining the dots, as per the default display mode, then I expect an expensive 800x600 scope to actual use that resolution for drawing the bl**dy lines! This is not just 'oh we've used a 2-pixel thick line' - the displayed line only steps up or down 2 pixels at a time. Seems to me the usual story - buy Rigol or better!

author: mAJORD
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 11:21:50 am
content: I'm not 100% sure how they normally go about it, but on such a square waveform (i.e the Instek screenshot) , I think you'll find the Rigol , and others for that matter would still show two pixel jumps on an 8 bit DAC. I can't see how you could interpolate those pixels below 2.. Maybe at a pinch on the second high transision there where it's a bit rounded off.The fact the little noise blips on the top are 3 pixels high suggests it's not pixel doubling??I think you'd need a Sinewave screenshot before even suspecting that to be honest

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 12:59:54 pm
content: Quote from: mAJORD on January 12, 2013, 11:21:50 amHi mAJORD, yeah I agree re the Instek 2000A & square wave, there might be something else going on there. Have attached a sine wave showing more clearly. If it's pixel doubling, it's the wrong approach, since the 8-bit ADC would then need 256x2=512 pixels to display, most of these scopes have less than that in visible waveform area on screen - so then it becomes not a 'nice' display issue, they are actually not able to represent all available information. I think their displays are just terrible. Contrast that with Rigol and Agilent who seem to be doing their line(between 2 samples)-to-bitmap rendering correctly.

author: andersm
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 03:09:37 pm
content: Is it a real issue beyond looking ugly? For accurate readings you have to use the cursors anyway, trying to count pixels doesn't really work. The display issues could be solved by using anti-aliasing, but the used chipsets may not be up for that.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 04:17:04 pm
content: Quote from: Chalky on January 12, 2013, 09:27:16 ami have to quote this.First of all you can't simply take a unknown pictures from unknown setups and compare them.Attached pictures from Tekway/Hantek, screen_1.png shows a typical screenshot, here with avg. wave. We can perfectly seethe 2x2 pixels when we zoom (screen_1_zoomed).png <- i've made a small scale so you can count pixels, one DIV is 50pix high.But simply let snap that what the DSO is capable to do -> screen_1.png which is a noisy waveform. Can you see the diffin the zoomed picture ? So yes, Tekway/Hantek can do 1x1 pixels on the screen.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 05:52:29 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on January 11, 2013, 10:42:18 pmThere will be a trade fair in my city...http://www.amper.cz/The Micronix company will probably display GW Instek products there.http://eshop.micronix.cz/merici-technika/elektricke-veliciny/osciloskopy/digitalni/stolni/gds-2102a.htmlWell, do you think that Rigol is better than GW Instek?

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 06:51:08 pm
content: Quote from: andersm on January 12, 2013, 03:09:37 pmYep, agree 100% - it is exactly a display issue. Enough to put me off buying though - I'm upgrading from typical 320x240. Agree, you wouldn't pixel count! Cheers.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 07:00:40 pm
content: Quote from: Chalky on January 12, 2013, 06:51:08 pmBut displays on oscilloscopes (both digital AND analog) are always imperfect devices. There is always 'interpolation' between the real sampled signal and the output. On the Rigol Ultravision series, the actual screen area used for waveform display is 700x400 pixels - so you can imagine what happens with 8-bit data translated for full-screen output. Honestly, I would never rely on the displayed data for the best precision - if you want the most accurate data your DSO can produce, you need to stop it running and save/read the actual voltage levels in the sample memory for processing.

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 07:04:07 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on January 12, 2013, 04:17:04 pmThanks Tinhead, that's really good to see - shame they didn't choose to draw all the waveforms in 1x1 or 2x2, would have looked a lot cleaner! Good stuff, thank you.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 07:26:19 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on January 12, 2013, 05:52:29 pmHard to say. The Instek 'looks' very nice (on paper) but I'd want to get my hands on one to test it. The Rigol DS2000, while it does have bugs in the firmware which need to be fixed, is a powerful, feature-laden DSO which I've actualy used.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 07:54:50 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on January 12, 2013, 05:52:29 pmYou should definitely go check it out if you can. IF you do go, check the following: with the 3000 series, it appears (in some photos and videos) as if there is plastic installed in front of the LCD which causes bad reflections at certain angles or lighting conditions - check if the 2000A has the same thing.One other point: as bad as Rigol seems to be sometimes in terms of customer support, etc. it appears as if GW-Instek is even more inept. So whichever DSO you end up buying, make sure you get it through a dealer who you trust to handle any problems. If you do decide to go with Rigol, I recommendwww.silcon.cz. Maybe he can offer you a special rate as EEVBlog member

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 08:26:46 pm
content: Well, the GDS-3000 series has a protective plastic installed in front of the LCD, I saw it personally on an expo a few years ago. It is not bad... But this scope is too expensive for me, it has what the hell only 25kpts per channel and unspecified waveform update rate...Then, there is a scope shop 30 minutes from my house... And it has been there for a long time.http://www.elexbrno.cz/detail.php?proId=710&secId=182Not sure if I would buy from silcon.cz...

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2013, 08:37:39 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on January 12, 2013, 08:26:46 pmMy point was, based on the images I've seen, the 2000A looks like the same case design - probably has the same plastic. If so, I don't like it.QuoteYour decision, of course. I bought from silcon - not because of the distance from my house (I live in NL) - but because I believe the owner is the foremost expert on all things Rigol on this forum - and considering the breadth and depth of the knowledge on this board - that's saying a lot. Plus I got a good deal from him

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2013, 06:49:14 am
content: In case it wasn't clear what a faster waveform update rate means, it's simple: the concept is similar to the movie player

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2013, 10:21:00 pm
content: According to the manual, this GW scope doesn't have the Hi-res mode, it is always 8-bit. The Rigol DS2000 series is 12-bit when timebase > 5us/div.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 14, 2013, 10:58:58 pm
content: It seems that GDS-2000A has no fine vertical resolution setting, no "Vernier".

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 15, 2013, 10:03:23 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on January 14, 2013, 10:58:58 pmSeriously?Dave.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 15, 2013, 09:49:11 pm
content: Yes, Vernier is probably not there. I have read the manual.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2013, 09:43:00 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on January 11, 2013, 06:58:19 amWell, please, what was the exact type of the Instek oscilloscope? And who was your reseller? Do you live in USA, or Europe?

author: cybergibbons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2013, 09:14:17 am
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on January 11, 2013, 06:58:19 amWho was your distributor? I used Aspen Electronics and they have been fine.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 04, 2013, 09:21:44 pm
content: Well, if GW Instek sent Dave a GDS-2000A scope for teardown & review, they would sell more new units... Just like Rigol does. Does anybody here work at GW Instek?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 13, 2013, 10:14:52 am
content: I found a comparison picture.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 14, 2013, 03:44:43 pm
content: There are some GDS-2000 videos, probably made by the manufacturer...https://www.youtube.com/user/gwinstek1975But I miss an complete overview of all functions. They should learn from Dave.

author: offrds2
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 10, 2013, 12:01:45 am
content: When can we expect Dave to to a review or tear down the GDS-2000A scope. I'd like to know whats inside and the built quality. I have seen scopes look good on paper, but look and feel like toy (hantek/owon....).It does not have to be a 40 minute review, maybe Dave can make a list or speadsheet of product reviews. It would also be interesting for Dave to teardown his own ucurrent.I am looking at getting a GDS-2204A if the quality/reviews are thumbs up.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 10, 2013, 02:11:55 pm
content: Well, GW Instek should sent Dave one scope, that's for sure.

author: shadowcomputer
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 11, 2013, 09:48:36 pm
content: Does anybody know if all models have the 80,000 waveform update rate? I read through the manual and didn't see where it says. I did notice however that the logic analyzer comes with I2C, SPI, and UART decoding only. Nothing else.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 11, 2013, 10:09:26 pm
content: 80,000 waveforms/s update rate seems too high, who knows what is reality.

author: offrds2
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 13, 2013, 03:59:03 pm
content: I Guess this model is just to new for anyone to review or make comments on. What about the gds-3000 series should be the same build quality as the 2000 series. The quality of the boards, display, accuracy, switches, plastic housing. There got to be someone out there that has them right?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 13, 2013, 04:11:46 pm
content: Well, the GDS-3000 series was released in 2011. It probably was not popular among hobbyists. The GDS-3000 was very expensive and had only 25kpoints per channel! It had unspecified waveform update rate. There are a few videos on youtube. Many of them might have been made by GW Instek employees or sellers. No owner video probably.youtubeAnd there is already a thread, but no review yet.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/looking-for-a-instek-gds-3000-series-scope-review/15/

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 12:01:27 am
content: I went to a trade fair to see the GDS-2000A in action. Now just briefly. The scope looks really good, the LCD is bright and has wide viewing angle. Photos and screenshots here:https://plus.google.com/photos/106264218831814439783/albums/5857196858625060337It has many useful features. It can perform 8 automatic measurements and cursors at the same time. The scope is easy to use.Two minor bugs, maybe??The set/clear button often does not work. The scope displays "Not supported under this mode."It was not possible to measure the waveform update rate. There might have been an internal problem in the GDS-2000A.The guys at the stall could not solve these two problems. They said that a new firmware might fix these problems.Anyway, I think that GDS-2000A is a well made product. It is normal to have a few bugs, when the instrument is brand new. I hope that it will be fixed soon.(It is possible that I did something wrong, but I don't think so.)

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 12:07:09 am
content: Next pictures

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 12:45:12 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 20, 2013, 12:01:27 amWell, I'm not sure if I see the frequency correctly displayed on the Hameg - is that 271Hz it's showing? But in any case, if you were trying to see if the GW-Instek would do 80k waveforms per second, you have it set to the wrong horizontal timebase. No DSO does it's maximum wfrm/s at every timebase setting - it varies dramatically. According to the GW-Instek documentation, you have be at the 500ns setting to get the 80k rate - and it seems you have it set to 10ns. So there's no way to know - without running tests - what the average wfrm/s update rate is at that setting - unless it's ~270.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 12:58:55 pm
content: Quote from: shadowcomputer on March 11, 2013, 09:48:36 pmYeah that was disappointing to see. I got a little excited about this scope until I saw that - I kind of need/want CAN too so if I'm going to go with a MSO I want to it be able to handle that as well. Too bad there are no reviews anywhere on this thing so far.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 01:46:39 pm
content: Quote from: shadowcomputer on March 11, 2013, 09:48:36 pmGW-Instek have published documents stating that the scope canreach80k wfrm/s - and I would suppose that it's true (the company seems to be careful about publishing specs they can hit). And why wouldn't it be? It's not unbelievable given the current new generation of DSOs (i.e. Agilent InfiniiVision X series [50k - 1M], Rigol UltaVision series [50k - 110k], etc). Besides, as mentioned many times before - that would be the FASTEST the DSO could capture - at just ONE particular timebase setting. As shown inthis chart I created for the Rigol DS2000, waveform update rates change constantly based on timebase settings, channels turned on, etc.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 02:28:48 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on March 20, 2013, 01:46:39 pmMarmad - I wasn't commetning about the wfm/s - I'm assuming you just hit "quote" on my post rather than reply.I'm tempted to suck it up and order one of these to be the guinea pig for everyone - but I'd hate to get screwed in some aspect of it. I've been looking for a good bench scope to complement/replace my Picoscope 3206A as I don't like having to lug my laptop to my bench all the time and, on paper at least, the price/performance/features on this are looking good. I'm slightly cautious based on the interface, I'm not sure I'm loving it (compared to the Rigol/Agilent interfaces) from what little I've seen.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 02:37:07 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 20, 2013, 02:28:48 pmHa ha - yeah, sorry, I just noticed the mistake I made with the quote - and went back and edited it to the correct one.Quote from: grego on March 20, 2013, 02:28:48 pmWell, of course, I would be happy if you would be a guinea pig and review one of these- but I understand your reticence. I agree with you in all your points; I actually think between the three fairly similar options (this scope, a Rigol UltraVision, and an Agilent X), perhaps the GW-Instek is the best bang-for-the-buck (although the current version of firmware on Rigol DS2000s allows you to keep the 'options' indefinitely - so that adds a lot of value), Rigol has the best interface, and Agilent wins hands down in the support department (not only service but external software, etc).

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 03:37:57 pm
content: A couple of other concerns I have without more information.A) 8x10 divisions kind of bothers me - scopes in this price range should be at least 12 horizontalB) Sample rate is listed as "Max 2Gs/s" -- but it doesn't say if that's per channel, interleaved, what? If you have a 4 channel scope does that mean if you're using all 4 channels you're now at 500Ms/s, or are the separated?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 03:55:33 pm
content: According to the specs, the GDS-2000A series has 1GSa/s per channel, but if you use half channels, it will be 2GSa/s. So I think that If you use all four channels, each one will have 1GS/s.The Trig out signal was very unstable and yes, it was about 270 Hz... What was wrong?? As you wrote, the Rigol's update rate varies a lot, but it is still a few thousands waveforms/sec. Worse than Agilent, but still not bad at all.Quote from: marmad on November 04, 2012, 11:23:38 amThe DSOX-2000 update rate does not go lower when you set a faster timebase...

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 04:08:21 pm
content: Well, the waveform update rate of your former Owon SDS7102 wasslow, but the Trig out signal wasstable. Why not at GDS-2000A??? What else to say? The plug-in modules with 3MHz waveform generator and probably even the logic analyzer cannot be bought today, because they are still under development. They were not shown at the trade fair. Unfortunately there was no complex signal source (e. g. video signal) to check the digital phosphor (or visual persistance) capabilities. Theautosetprocess is rather slow. There is no protective glass in front of the display, that you marmad, do not like.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 04:21:30 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 20, 2013, 04:08:21 pmThe 8 channel LA module is available for sale from tequipment.net -- the 16 is a "contact us" thing. The DDS is also listed for sale from tequipment ($245 USD).

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 04:38:30 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 20, 2013, 03:55:33 pmAlthough, to be objective, these are Agilent's own published stats. Probably (more or less) accurate, but I wouldn't mind seeing a third-party with no financial incentive run those tests on a DSOX-2000.Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 20, 2013, 04:08:21 pmWell, to be fair, you were at a trade show. Are you sure the cable wasn't faulty - or some other minor thing? Hard to know for sure under those conditions.QuoteThat's good - I'm glad they ditched that. The display does look nice.Quote from: grego on March 20, 2013, 04:21:30 pmBTW, Rigol is currently developing LA and DDS modules for the UltraVision line as well. I doubt they will be backward compatible with older models (like mine) but I don't really care since I prefer a separate AWG and LA. But I thought it might be interesting for people thinking about purchases.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 04:43:53 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 20, 2013, 04:21:30 pmI don't know... Maybe it is an preorder only.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 04:57:53 pm
content: marmadI think that the cables were OK. The other Demo signals were good. It looks like there was an error in the GDS-2000A.The Agilent DSOX-2000should havea good update rate, because they use a special custom designed ASIC, that does all the stuff. Rigol and probably GW Instek have nothing like that.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 05:03:16 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 20, 2013, 03:37:57 pmThis brings up one of the things that bothers me about DSO manufacturers - a way they can 'juke' the stats.They mention the screen size in pixels - but they don't bother to mention what portion of screen real-estate the waveform is actually mapped to. The Agilent X2000 series is 10x8 (non-square) divisions mapped to only 640x400 pixels of screen space. I'm happy that the Rigol UltraVision series at least increased that to 700x400 (with 14x8 square divisions).BTW, the number of horizontal divisions is also a factor in blind time calculations. So if you calculate their fastest waveform update rate by divisions, you get the following:Agilent DSOX2000: 54k * 10 = 540kRigol DS2000: 50k x 14 = 700kSo, at least at the 20ns timebase setting, the Rigol DS2000 series has a 23% less average time to capture a glitch than the Agilent DSOX2000 series.Edit:Although to be fair, the Rigol is not displaying a chunk of the vertical scale (and gaining some corresponding speed because of that) - I couldn't say what the Agilent does in this regard, but it's another way in which manufacturers can bend statistics in a desirable way.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 05:30:35 pm
content: New videos made by ITTSBEurope.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 05:35:26 pm
content: One other point I want to mention connected to my post above (since this is a thread about the new GW-Instek): since the number of divisions affects the blind time calculations, you might notice that the Rigol DS2000 and the GW-Instek 2000 series are closer in this respect than you might first think:Rigol DS2000: 700k divisions per second maximum.GW-Instek GDS-2000: 800k divisions per second maximum.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 05:47:16 pm
content: The method of measuring the waveform update rate according to GW Instek presentation. Well, nothing special at all.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 05:48:58 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 20, 2013, 05:30:35 pmThanks Hydra - that was more than we've really seen anywhere else.I will admit I'm really turned off by that interface. I don't know what it is but for some reason it just looks (to me anyway) extremely ugly.Marmad the Rigol 4104 is the one I'm comparing this against (and one I'm looking at as well, either that or a used Agilent MSOX2024A). Rigol just seems, for the most part, have their act together. It's anecdotal for me, and it's not like I need anything crazy so usability is a huge factor (mainly model railroad electronics work with square-wave AC stuff and CAN bus).I'm with you though - knowing how the manufacturers actually use the screen real-estate is something sorely lacking in all the specs.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 06:14:44 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 20, 2013, 05:48:58 pmYes, I'm not thrilled by their design aesthetic either - although I do give them kudos for using 750x480 of the 800x600 screen for waveform mapping. But unfortunately, like the Agilent, they go with a non-square graticule, with 75x60 pixel divisions. What is up with equipment manufacturers doing that?Instead, they should have increased the horizontal divisions to 12 - and used 720x480 with square divisions. This would have decreased their publishable waveform update rate but it would have, imo, increased the usability of the scope.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 07:36:14 pm
content: Bottom line until someone buys one and shares their experiences with it we're going to keep guessing.Part of me wants to go "sure, I'll do it" but for my first bench scope replacing my USB scope I'm a bit nervous about jumping in. Honestly if the interface didn't look like it was made 10+ years ago I'd probably be more willing to be the guinea pig but I'm waffling back and forth right now.Come on Instek - send Dave a demo unit so we can find out about this thing!

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 07:50:04 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 20, 2013, 07:36:14 pmHonestly, I would be more worried about GW-Instek's seemingly complete lack of ability to promote, market, followup, and (according to some) service their scopes then I would be about the interface. I wrote them two detailed emails (cc'ed to various GW-Instek facilities around the globe) expressing interest in the 3000 series without the tiniest response from them - and I've heard many similar reports from others. Just look at the 3000 series - it was out for a couple of years and the only 'reviews' of it on the web were videos created by GW-Instek employees. I would be seriously worried about ever getting firmware updates from them to fix bugs.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 08:06:50 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on March 20, 2013, 07:50:04 pmA completely valid point. And a good one too. It's one thing to get no support on a $400 piece of kit, but if I'm spending $2000+ on something I'd like to know it'll be supported. Makes you wonder how they stay in business. I may stick with my plan of a Rigol 4014 or the used Agilent MSOX2024A.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 08:24:23 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 20, 2013, 07:36:14 pmWhat exactly don't you like?? I think that this scope is easy to use, I tried it... But yes, it has no pushable knobs and it even hasno finevertical scale setting. But on the other hand, Tektronix also has almost no pushable knobs. Maybe Tek guys think that pushing knobs are unreliable...

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 08:27:36 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 20, 2013, 08:06:50 pmI'd go with the Rigol DS4014 (if I could have afforded the 4 channels I would have bought one of those instead of the DS2072) - I couldn't live with the miserly 100k of memory on the X2024. Have you seen thereview and teardown of the DS4014that was posted in the last week?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 08:42:36 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 20, 2013, 08:24:23 pmThis one is simply personal preference but I don't like the Tek interface either. Too much blue, the fonts look dated, etc. Again, highly subjective. Sometimes you like what you like. I personally prefer the "cleaner" (again, opinion here) look of the Agilent and Rigol (black backgrounds, etc). That's simply esthetics, and I get it, but it's something individuals have to keep in mind. The pushable knobs I don't really care about overall - that's pretty minor (and can be annoying if selections change as you're pressing).I look at a 'scope like a car - everyone has things they want, everyone has things they like. No one will ever agree about everything.I am, however, glad to hear that you found it pretty easy to use at the show. At least someone here on the forums has touched the beastie! Out of curiousty how would you compare the output (screen display) in person compare to, say, a Rigol or Agilent? The pictures posted are all a mess - considering that the screen is 800x400, the pictures are larger than that so you can't use them to identify pixel doubling and whatnot. I ask because it's sometimes hard to get an idea from the straight video.Marmad: yeah I hear you - someone on this forum said something that I try to live by: buy once, cry once. I'd rather wait an extra month or so and buy something that has more headroom for me to "grow into" since it's hopefully a piece of kit I'll have around for years and years.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 20, 2013, 11:50:49 pm
content: Well, the Agilent interface is also nice... The Tektronix is dated in general...The display of GDS-2000A looks good. It has better viewing angle than Rigol DS6000. The Rigol DS2000 was not presented at the trade fair. I don't know why. The GDS-2000A has even the color gradation, is it useful? It surely is a not common feature among middle class scopes...

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2013, 12:12:40 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 20, 2013, 11:50:49 pmI hate to keep pestering your posts with mine yet again, Hydrawerkbut I just thought I'd point out (once again) that you can do color-gradations on the Rigol UltraVision scopes using my add-on software. You can't do it real-time - like with the GDS-2000A - but you can do it with any group of captured waveforms - and you can use any color-lookup-table or gradient that you want - and do it in 2D or 3D.O.k. - that's it! I promise I won't needle you again

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2013, 02:03:57 pm
content: OK.It looks nice.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 22, 2013, 08:17:03 pm
content: I expect that ITTSB will publish more videos.https://www.youtube.com/user/ITTSBEuropeHere is forum topic:http://www.ittsb.eu/forum/index.php?topic=449.0

author: mzzj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 24, 2013, 07:16:38 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on March 20, 2013, 05:03:16 pmScreen fonts are another thing, I prefer the OWON 7102 display over DS2202 Rigol as Owon has better resolution and 14x10 divisions.(I have both scopes)

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 24, 2013, 08:44:50 pm
content: Quote from: mzzj on March 24, 2013, 07:16:38 pmOwon is actually 15x10 (7.5/7.5) divisions mapped to 750x500, using 50 pixel squares. I like that they used a square graticule and so much of the screen area - both I prefer the overall look (fonts, menus, screen colors, etc) of the Rigol - which I think has a distinctive modern look to their interface. Plus I think Rigol put a lot of thought into their ergonomics - and got much of the physical design and layout exactly right on the UltraVision series - better than the Agilent Xs in many regards (although the Agilent's can kick their asses in some areas of functionality).

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 24, 2013, 09:36:22 pm
content: Agilent DSOX2000 is better for hunting random glitches, but how many people need it? On Rigol I don't like the fact that the cool multifunction knob is used probably only for records and for maybe nothing else. Am I right? And I am looking forward to the new firmware...

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 24, 2013, 10:15:26 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 24, 2013, 09:36:22 pmNo, Hydrawerk, you're not aware of one of the many nice ergonomic features of the Rigol - you use the navigation knob a lot. Watchthe videostarting from 15:15 and you'll see what I mean.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 25, 2013, 01:38:26 am
content: OK, I see.http://youtu.be/gAY1GQEjrfc?t=15m15sThanks.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2013, 08:26:58 pm
content: I exchanged some email with Instek USA about the unit and they are apparently working on the CAN/LIN decode as well as a firmware update (yay) for their LA module. They also already support RS485 in their RS232 decode which is also nice. Additionally they provided a comparison between the Agilent 2000X and the GDS. Yes, it's not apples-apples and the memory and decode option change things on the 2000 side but it's still interesting (attached).-G

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2013, 09:27:58 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 28, 2013, 08:26:58 pmIt's interesting they're not comparing it to the Rigol UltraVision series, which seems closer in price and features than the Agilent. But maybe that's because the Agilent's are the marker leaders - or maybe because the Rigol's match or surpass it in a couple of the comparison categories.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2013, 09:37:03 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on March 28, 2013, 09:27:58 pmIt's more because I said I was also looking at the Agilent 2000X than anything else. Don't read too much into it.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2013, 11:25:50 pm
content: GDS-2000A has (?) 80 000 waveforms per second... But forwhatsetting?? In is not specified anywhere in the manual. And I was unable to prove it when measuring theTrig Outsignal. Even Rigol says clearly, when the scope reaches 50 000 waveforms/sec. The GDS-2000A has quite poor signal generator, only 3MHz, but there is no closer info.Until someone proves it, I don't believe the 80 000 waveforms per second.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2013, 11:30:15 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 28, 2013, 11:25:50 pmIt says it right in the instructions you posted here:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/msg205355/#msg205355500ns/div, single channel, short record length = 80k wfrm/s

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2013, 11:35:23 pm
content: ANd GDS-2000A has no fine vertical scale setting. Why?? And even no pushable rotating encoders. But it's still an interesting scope. As seen in the datasheet: It has a three year warranty - but excluding the lcd panel. Oh why?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2013, 11:37:19 pm
content: OK,marmad, but it is not an official datasheet... And then the 80000 wfrms/s is a peak value, nobody knows, what it is like at 20ns or so...

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 28, 2013, 11:47:51 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 28, 2013, 11:35:23 pmThe pushable encoders isn't really a big deal. Pretty minor actually. The warranty is slightly more annoying on the LCD - and I have a question out to their US sales team asking why this scope isn't limited lifetime like their other gear.The lack of fine scale vertical is more annoying however. Still, you can get a 2204A for about $1765 here in the US which is a fair amount of scope for the price. The 16 port LA seems to cost about ~$800 and I believe it comes with all the decode options as part of it. So base it's about $500 less than the Rigol 4014. Not apples-apples again (Rigol has way more memory, faster sample rate, faster wfm/s published, etc) but the Instek has the built in LA function. One other thing though that caught my eye is no 50 ohm option on the Instek, it's 1M only.As usual it all kind of depends on what your application is to determine which scope. If the Rigol 4000 had a published upgrade to add the LA option to the existing family of scopes it'd be almost a no-brainer but they don't, so it isn't.I will say that the Instek response has been decent - sales response took a day or two but I did get a response as I noted. Admittedly this is in the US so YMMV based on your location.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 12:10:53 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 28, 2013, 11:37:19 pmPublishing the peak value is what DSO manufacturers do - it's always 'up to XX wfrm/s' becauseallDSOs have much slower wfrm/s rates due to timebase and memory barriers. The rates always follow a curve.For example, when you set the Rigol DS2000 series to 56MPt sample length, it does approximately 35 wfrm/s at every timebase setting <= 50us. Why? Because at 2 GSa/s (the fastest sample rate of the Rigol) it takes 28ms to fill 56MB of memory. 28ms * 35 wfrm/s = .98 seconds (2% blind time).

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 12:35:51 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on January 14, 2013, 10:58:58 pmI'm not 100% sure this is true. The manual says the vertical is 1mV ~ 10V, but mentions 1 - 2 - 5 increments. Could it be momentum based? No clue. But there is definitely no direct mention of fine vertical setting.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 01:50:43 am
content: There is no mention of the fine (=Vernier) vertical scale setting. Check the menu tree in the user manual. The GDS-3000 is the same, look into the manual, too.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 02:15:59 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 29, 2013, 01:50:43 amRight but the mention of the increment may mean the encoder has acceleration. In other words as you turn it faster the increments grow larger. Kind of like how an iPod scrolls with the wheel.

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 05:06:10 am
content: Quote from: grego on March 29, 2013, 02:15:59 amNo, the 1-2-5 refers to the standard pattern of oscilloscope vertical amplification settings that have been around forever.For example: 1V, 2V, 5V, 10V, etc. with each click of the dial.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 05:28:46 am
content: Quote from: grenert on March 29, 2013, 05:06:10 amAh. I'm used to USB scopes so have no point of reference. Thanks for the clarification.

author: icon
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 02:15:09 pm
content: I've been trying to think of an instance on a DSO where a lack of uncalibrated vertical control would be a show-stopper. On an analogue scope you might use it for making rise-time measurements, but this DSO will just tell you.What am I missing? I'm trying to think of reasons to remove this scope from my shopping list!CheersJohn

author: grenert
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 02:21:03 pm
content: Vertical vernier is nice to maximize the size of the trace on the screen. You might have a waveform that is just a little over half the height of the screen, but when you go to the next higher amplification to get a better look, it becomes too big and clips off at the extremes. The vernier allows you to shrink it back down to fit in the screen.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 02:31:49 pm
content: Quote from: grenert on March 29, 2013, 02:21:03 pmIt's interesting to note that of the two lower-cost scopes with large screens that use the most vertical screen real-estate for waveform display - this one, with 480 vertical pixels (8x60 pixels), and the Owon SDS line, which uses 500 vertical pixels (10x50 pixels) - neither has vertical vernier controls. It makes me wonder if it's somehow connected to the extrapolation of the ADC values to the larger number of display pixels.

author: icon
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 02:52:15 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on March 29, 2013, 02:31:49 pmOr is it 600 pixels?http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349Not trying to be an arse, just trying to establish whether we're talking about the same thing.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 03:07:56 pm
content: Quote from: icon on March 29, 2013, 02:52:15 pmNope, it's 480 - I'm talking about the waveform display area, not the LCD size. Why would text info/icon/menu sizes or placement have an affect on ADC extrapolation/vertical vernier? The GW-Instek has 8 vertical divisions of 60 pixels = 480 pixels.

author: icon
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 03:12:27 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on March 29, 2013, 03:07:56 pmAh, I see what you mean. Thanks for clarifying.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 03:27:57 pm
content: Quote from: icon on March 29, 2013, 03:12:27 pmNo problem- I'll go back and edit the original post for clarification.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 03:46:22 pm
content: I think I will be getting this scope. I am waiting for a response to another email to their sales team here in the US and based on that I will make a final decision. As a complement to my picoscope and for my needs this one looks good and it will finally allow for some active time with this scope so I can provide some detail on its usage. Could I spend a bit more for a "better" scope? Sure with the Rigol 4014 but there are trade offs there and the price difference can be used for other needed equipment. Instek has a solid reputation here in the USA so I don't think I'm going to get burned.The key is their responses to my email. It seems to be about a 2 day lag on the response so I should hopefully hear back by Mon/Tue.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 03:50:27 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 29, 2013, 03:46:22 pmSo presumably this means you're thinking of getting the 4-channel version? Which BW - 200MHz?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 03:53:22 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on March 29, 2013, 03:50:27 pmCorrect. The 2204A is what I am thinking.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 04:07:35 pm
content: Quote from: grego on March 29, 2013, 03:53:22 pmYes, at this point in time, the GW-Instek GDS2204A is quite a bit cheaper than the Rigol DS4024 - although I suspect Rigol may drop their prices in the not-too-distant future (just as Agilent has quickly introduced new 'options' for the X2000 series in response to Instek).The main difference between the Instek and the Rigol (aside from VGA output and other non-essential things) appears to be the memory size - and the desirability of that in the work that you do. I do a lot of data-stream logging and analysis, so a large amount of memory for segmenting is fantastic and I couldn't bear to live without the 56MB in my Rigol - I've gotten so used to it- but for most DSO users it's irrelevant.BTW, one other thing you might consider: in the current firmware of the DS2000 series, it's very easy to 'keep' all of the expensive 'trial' options (triggering, decoding, etc) indefinitely. I don't know if that's true for the DS4000 series, but if I was considering getting a 4-channel scope, I'd try to find out from a current owner. That's quite a lot of money later down the line.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 04:29:08 pm
content: @Hydrawerk: I just looked at your video again and spotted why you were getting an erratic image and measurements in your attempt to count the wfrm/s of the Instek: you had the timebase on the Hameg set to 1ms! That means, for example, if you wanted to see one trigger pulse per screen division on the Hameg - the waveform capture rate coming from the Instek would have had to be 83Hz. Whoops!That's way too slow for counting the Instek's rate at the 10ns/div setting - which I imagine is >10kHz.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 04:57:32 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on March 29, 2013, 04:07:35 pmFor my applications the MSO decode and triggering with the digital channels has value. I work with RS485 and CAN so being able to handle that on top of signal acquisition is useful. Which is why I've been so interested in this scope. The Agilent 2000X as well but this seems to be more bang for the buck with a decent reputation (no its not near Agilent).If Rigol puts out something about a 4000 series with MSO capabilities I might change my mind but it'll have to be soon.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 05:03:10 pm
content: Well, even the guys who presented the GDS-2000A could not make it better. I still think that there was an internal problem in the GW Instek scope. I have written an email tohttp://www.trinstruments.cz/stolni-osciloskopyThey answered that they still don't know what was wrong with the scope. They probably didn't manage to find the problem yet.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 05:49:48 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on March 29, 2013, 05:03:10 pmWell, I don't know what else was tried since I wasn't there, but all I can tell you is that the settings of the Hameg in your video are not good for the measurement you were trying to perform. Look at the attached image from my Rigol, using the same settings of the Hameg - and an input square wave of 50kHz with a 5% duty cycle. This is with a sample rate of 1MSa/s - I can't get the Rigol to go down to the 500kSa/s rate of the Hameg:

author: Christopher
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 06:06:36 pm
content: We have a couple of these at work. Not really touched em as they look very cheap and crappy compared to Tek scopes.Still the software seems good for a chinky scope. One design engineer at work swears by them.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 29, 2013, 06:18:23 pm
content: Quote from: Christopher on March 29, 2013, 06:06:36 pmYou sure it's a 2000A and not the older 2000? The 2000a series just came out in the last couple of months.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 12:34:23 pm
content: Looks like Instek is taking the question of wfm/s seriously. They posted a video about it:

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 01:01:08 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 02, 2013, 12:34:23 pmHa, ha... these GW-Instek videos crack me up. Brand X! I haven't heard that terminology used since TV commercials of my childhoodBut, Greg, have you been doubting that the DSO could actually do 80k wfrm/s? GW-Instek is a reputable company producing quality goods - I never thought they would advertise a spec they couldn't meet. But you noticed how he specifically mentioned setting the timebase to 500ns - and specifically mentioned setting the record length to short? Single channel, smallest sample size, 500ns timebase = fastest update rate. But the question is, what is it at other settings? So far, only the Agilent (with it's MegaZoom ASIC) has managed to reach a high rate and maintain it over several timebase settings.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 01:02:42 pm
content: I sure wish Dave had one to teardown, for the price these will be hard to beat if they'll last.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 01:12:16 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on April 02, 2013, 01:01:08 pmI agree - I saw that and it kind of cracked me up too. Really - "Brand X"? With a little piece of paper over the manufacturer name? Hah!No, I wasn't really doubting it at all - I'm sure it hits the numbers they specify but as you said it's really performance under less than ideal conditions that will be more interesting. For my needs I think this is the way I will be going as I said, just waiting for the response from their US sales guy to my follow-up questions before I pull the trigger on it. I could get a 2024 Agilent for about $400 more, and I'm still thinking about that, but then have to add a few $$ for the additional memory, segmented memory, LAN and any decodes I want - so realistically it's more like $3100 in the end. Meh. I hate decisions like this.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 01:19:00 pm
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on April 02, 2013, 01:02:42 pmYou might have to be the first who tears one down, DoctorBut honestly, Instek has been producing quality products longer than Rigol. The prices on these new 2000As is very aggressive - they've priced the 2-channel versions precisely the same as Rigol's DS2000 line - so it really comes down to features and firmware - but the 4-channel versions are well under the Rigol DS4000s - so if I was in the market for a 4-channel scope, I might be willing to be the first to take the plungeQuote from: grego on April 02, 2013, 01:12:16 pmWill possible downtime of your DSO lose your money? If so, choose the Agilent. Will you be extensively using third-party analysis software (MatLAB, LabView, etc) or needing full remote control capability of the DSO? If so, choose the Agilent. Other than that, save yourself some money - and get an Instek or Rigol - which will do most other jobs just as well - or better.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 01:27:22 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on April 02, 2013, 01:19:00 pmI will. I'm exceptionally good at hand-wringing.And no, downtime won't affect me other than piss me off. This is a hobby, not a job.

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 01:32:34 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on April 02, 2013, 01:19:00 pmPerhaps, I've emailed them to see what OS the scope runs on. I do happen to be in the market for an item in this range.And of course, if I end up with it, it will come apart that day!

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 03:22:53 pm
content: It maybe seems that this scope GDS-2000A is the same case as Tektronix DPO2000 series. The update rate is quite good (6200 waveforms/s) up to 100ns/div, and then at 20ns/div it drops dramatically down to only 160 waveforms/s.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 03:29:12 pm
content: GDS-2000A might still be a good cheaper scope for those who don't care about waveform update rate and rather need color gradation, long 2MB memory with marks and search and need eight automatic measurements while still using cursors. Agilent DSOX2000 doesn't give you that... But it has the lovely WAVEGEN 20MHz generator.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 05:26:11 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 02, 2013, 03:22:53 pmHow are you drawing that conclusion? We don't have any numbers other than their "ideal" at this point.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 05:36:23 pm
content: Why is the Tektronix label hidden with a piece of paper?? Everyone knows the TDS2000... And it's a crazy idea to use about 12 years old scope for comparison... Other companies compare their products withoud hidding the other's scope name...http://youtu.be/7j9-0jKP_O0http://youtu.be/fTI8fp-z4y0Then checking a 200MHz scope GDS-2000A with 1MHz signal? Why? It would be very interesting to use a 40MHz test signal, or so.Anyway, this is how a scope should be tested.Testing a 100MHz scope with variable 70...100MHz test signal. This will tell you about the scope's real capabilities.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 05:38:36 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 02, 2013, 05:26:11 pmAccording to the setting that I had in this video... But it is not a conclusion, it's only a hypothesis.

author: icon
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 07:01:37 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 02, 2013, 03:22:53 pmJust to clarify, you're not saying that the GDS-2000A actually has comparable update rates to the Tek DPO2000, but that, like the Tek, there's a 'headline rate' (80k wfm/s, in the GDS-2000A's case) which rapidly (more rapidly than the Agilent) drops off as you move away from the optimum? Also, am I imagining things or does the Rigol DS2000 do a similar thing? I'm sure I saw a table somewhere, but I can't find it now.Isn't it fun playing oscilloscope Top Trumps?CheersJohn

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 07:14:27 pm
content: Quote from: icon on April 02, 2013, 07:01:37 pmHi John,Sure, all scopes have a wfrm/s rate that changes - always dropping towards the slower timebases because of the limiting factor of time: e.g. at 1ms/div, assuming the display is 10 divs, each sweep is 10ms - meaning the absolute maximum rate possible (with an impossible 0% dead time) is 100 waveforms per second. At the upper timebases, it appears that most DSOs (aside from the Agilent X series with their new ASICs) have a peak setting - and then begin to drop again to the smallest timebase setting. As far as the GDS-2000A series goes, we have no hard evidence of what it does in any range - except Instek's own demonstrations which appear to make it clear that it's peak setting is at 500ns/div.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 09:12:16 pm
content: Quote from: icon on April 02, 2013, 07:01:37 pmYes, the top waveform update rate of GDS-2000A is better than Tek DPO2000.Here is the waveform update rate as measured bymarmad. It also drops down at shorter timebase settings, but it is although quite good.Quote from: marmad on November 04, 2012, 11:23:38 amhttps://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/first-impressions-and-review-of-the-rigol-ds2072-ds2000-series-dso/30/

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 09:38:49 pm
content: I've made a command decision and I will be getting the 2204A. My reasoning is price/performance.I actually just got off the phone with the regional sales manager here in the US (a nice gent named Frank Paz) in Chino, CA. I had a couple of questions for him which he answered satisfactorily to me.1. Where is it serviced if there is a problem?It's actually serviced here in the States. They have a repair facility in Chino, CA to handle service.2. If it needs recal where does it have to go?Again, their US service facility will handle the recal. Negative for them is the recommended annual recal vs Agilents 2 or 3 year cycle but whatever. It's done here in the US and has a 2 week turnaround.3. CAN decode.As I mentioned earlier its in their next firmware update I believe. Either way its coming and it's not an addon. I actually use this so it's kind of important if I have a LA that it can do CAN.4. Fine vertical (or lack thereof)This is on their firmware roadmap with no scheduled release date. Frank mentioned he had just heard back from the factory from my earlier query about this. Instek has a decent rep here in the US so I don't think he's blowing smoke up my ass. Then again there's no release date scheduled so it could be tomorrow or 2 years from now. Not a deal breaker though.From tequipment.net I can get this for $1765 and add in the LA a little later after I mess with the scope. That's $100 less than the best price listed for then 2000x used on eBay, and when you add in all the upgrades for the Agilent to bring it to par with the Instek it's a significant amount (memory upgrade, segmented memory, decodes, etc).Stay tuned.Greg

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2013, 10:00:03 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 02, 2013, 09:38:49 pmGood for you, Greg - early adopters rule!I'm looking forward to hearing about it, and I hope you'll consider doing some kind of review here.

author: tequipment
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2013, 05:50:49 pm
content: If you want EEVblog price for this GDS unit drop me an email, salesteam@tequipment.net Ref the EEVblog and me, Evan Cirelli.I will authorize a discount.One again everything thanks for the business.Evan CirelliVice President of TEquipment.NET

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2013, 06:12:32 pm
content: Quote from: tequipment on April 04, 2013, 05:50:49 pmDoes this apply to other manufactures as well?

author: tequipment
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2013, 06:44:27 pm
content: Yeah for the most part. I think I am going to set up a EEBlog coupon or discount. In the future we can give EEBlog pricing as a login but for now email us for a quote.I want to be as honest and open with you guys as possible with pricing. We want your business.ThanksEvan

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 04, 2013, 06:49:48 pm
content: Quote from: tequipment on April 04, 2013, 06:44:27 pmYou are my new best friend!

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 02:02:18 pm
content: While looking through the manual carefully, I noticed something which is buried in there (page 110):The 2MPts of sample memory areonlyusable in single channel - single trigger mode (or as segments). When using normal/auto triggered modes, it's 1MPt for a single channel - or 500k when using 2 channels.Granted, 1M/500k is adequate for most tasks so it's not necessarily a problem. It's just that GW-Instek perhaps should make this a little more clear in documents/adverts for the DSO - otherwise it seems slightly disingenuous.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 04:15:35 pm
content: Someone should measure the waveform update rate for more timebase settings. I am afraid it will be worse than Rigol DS2000.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 04:34:45 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 05, 2013, 04:15:35 pmIt's not.http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.htmlJust use table 3 as your data as we're discussing the validity of the other 2 tables.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 04:55:58 pm
content: Thanks for the link.http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.htmlThe Trig Out is quite weird, but it might not be a problem... Unless you want to use it synchronise another instrument... It should be like 0...5V signal.QuoteWhat?Marmadused his multimeter to measure waveform update rate of his Rigol DS2000 and it was OK.http://youtu.be/gAY1GQEjrfc?t=2m51s

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 05:02:15 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 05, 2013, 04:55:58 pmWell, I can't find any specifications from either Rigol or GW-Instek about what the levels are for their Trigger Output terminals on those DSOs. I wonder if they might be optically-coupled, requiring a pull-up resistor to get a decent higher level voltage. But in any case, my Fluke 87 III doesn't seem to have much trouble reading the Rigol's output.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 05:12:55 pm
content: Rigol doesn't specify the Trigger output level, but it will be maybe 0 to 5V?At Agilent it is like this:

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 05:15:07 pm
content: At a normal /non GW Instek/ scope it is no problem to measure the Trig Out with a low-end counter or multimeter... You've probably seen this my video.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 05:22:51 pm
content: QuoteJust measured the Rigol and it appears to have a Trigger Out voltage level of ~3.5V DC into 1M; ~1.5V into 50 Ohm.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 05:56:15 pm
content: Well it's moot for me now. I just finished ordering mine from tequipment.net -- great pricing.I should have it in my grubby little hands by the middle of next week.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 06:19:49 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 05, 2013, 05:56:15 pmWell, if you dare take it apart, I'm sure there are loads of members who'd love to see what's inside

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 08:12:12 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on April 05, 2013, 05:22:51 pmThat's how it should be. I suspect that there is a hardware bug in early batch of GDS-2000A. The manufacturer knows it. The Taiwanese businessman at the trade fair told me not to use a multimeter to measure theTrig Out.I will not buy any GW Instek product, because the company has no subsidiary in Europe.Are you from USA,grego?Then it's OK. The scope is nice and feature rich. Suitable for those who need the mask pass/fail test.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 08:55:41 pm
content: Well, I like the feature set of the Instek - especially some things sorely missing from the DS2000. But I don't care about the expandability because I would never buy any of that stuff (I like a separate LA and AWG). I definitely prefer the design and interface of the Rigol by a large margin - even the type and method of displaying screen information, IMO, is better on the Rigol (the GW-Instek doesn't even show you the sample rate on the screen). And I love the low-noise 500uV front end and large memory of the Rigol. So I think if I was choosing 2-channels today, I would probably still go with the Rigol.But as far as 4-channels goes, the GW-Instek issignificantlycheaper than the DS4000 for a similar DSO - so it's much more attractive.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 09:08:00 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 05, 2013, 08:12:12 pmYep. I'm outside Chicago here in the US of A.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 09:20:08 pm
content: GDS-2000A has no High resolution mode, only 8 bit all the time.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 05, 2013, 09:27:30 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 05, 2013, 09:20:08 pmCorrect - that was a known for me. Not a huge deal for me considering the other options that are of use to me.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 09, 2013, 03:19:31 pm
content: Well the 2204A is in transit now. I should have it on Friday. More to follow once it's up and running.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 09, 2013, 03:49:03 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 09, 2013, 03:19:31 pmNice to hear - you'll be having some fun soonAny chance you 'll do a small written or video review here?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 09, 2013, 04:02:33 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on April 09, 2013, 03:49:03 pmAbsolutely - I'm not really set up for video but I will see what I can do.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2013, 05:46:24 pm
content: It has arrived... and yes, that green tape is our friends at Homeland Security and Border Protection having opened my box when it hit the shores in Long Beach. Go-go government bureaucracy!(more coming later once I get home and play with it over the weekend)

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2013, 06:42:41 pm
content: Well, it's a decent scope with great screen. It looked good at the trade fair in Czech Republic. But I bought the DSOX2002A instead, it is a sweet scope especially if you need a 20MHz function generator. Moreover, it is very easy to download and install the firmware.Please check if the set/clear button works on your GDS-2000A . It should place marks. But there seems to be a software bug.Then there might be a problem with the Trig Out signal, it is too low. It might be impossible to use it for synchronising with other test equipment...

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2013, 07:00:39 pm
content: Set clear works. I just grabbed the square wave demo signal in single shot, turned on search and started setting/clearing marks. You get "not supported in this mode" if you don't have search turned on.I'll check the trig out on mine when I get it home. Interestingly the FW version is already up to 1.08.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2013, 08:07:27 pm
content: Ok - played with it for about 30 mins or so now - I'm at my office so can't generate any signals other than the demo signals on the scope so that'll have to wait until I get home.As mentioned I had no problem with set/clear with search turned on.It seems pretty responsive when changing settings, etc. Demo signal is a simple 1kHz square wave (see pic). I will admit I prefer the "look" of the screen on the Rigol but I will also say this screen is huge - at least it feels like it. There is no pixel doubling as far as I can tell. What's interesting is the saved picture doesn't look as good as the image on the screen. Go figure. The screen is bright, clear and crisp.A couple of things I wasn't thrilled with, and I knew these going in but it is a little annoying - since the knobs are not pushable I you have to default a fair amount if you get all sorts of stuff on your screen (marks, cursors, settings, measurements, etc). I'd love to be able to "push to center" like on the Agilent.The fan is noticeable but pretty quiet. Not too bad. There don't appear to be any "warranty void" stickers so I'll open mine up this weekend and take some pictures.Unfortunately I only have a 1Mhz func gen at home right now (damn you Rigol for not getting me my 4062!) but I'll run some tests with various signals with that. Including marmads infamous "wfm/s" test -- after I check the trig out voltage to make sure my fluke can read it.I should add that the default is sin x/x, but you can turn it off if you want under display options.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2013, 10:16:42 pm
content: So probably there is no bug with the set/clear button. It can be used only in search mode. Couldn't those business guys at the trade fair tell me that???https://plus.google.com/photos/106264218831814439783/albums/5857196858625060337Anyway, this scope might be not so easy to use as my DSOX-2002A, but this GW Instek is much more feature rich. Ir has longer memory, segmented memory function and even pass/fail. On the other hand, the function generator is not free and it is only up to 3MHz.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2013, 10:40:17 pm
content: Yeah but to be honest I always planned on getting an external func gen anyway (Rigol 4062) to supplant my crappy 1Mhz generator.I'm going to start digging into this thing this evening. Gotta start making my bug/feature request list for the Instek folks.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 12, 2013, 11:41:42 pm
content: The 20MHz generator in my scope is not arbitrary... But new firmware brings new functions! They recently added FM, AM and PSK modulation.The arbitrary function may appear in two years or so. Who knows??

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 02:51:54 am
content: Wellsomeonefollowed Dave's advice *ahem* and "took it apart". Aforementioned someone has some pictures, one below. Wasn't a full tear-down but the skirt was lifted and some photos taken.More coming as it gets put together. There didn't appear to be any dodgy solder jobs, no flux I could see on the board, everything looked pretty tight actually. At least that's what "someone" told me.

author: JimmyMz
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 05:30:38 am
content: Quote from: grego on April 13, 2013, 02:51:54 amI'm trying to research the ICs, and even with a photo magnification program, I'm having major issues viewing the model numbers. Would it be possible for "someone" to take some quality close-up photos, aiming for clarity? I'd really appreciate it. By the way, I grew up in LaGrange, also right outside Chicago.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 06:47:17 am
content: Interesting, AD Blackfin DSP just like in the Rigol.I'd bet U1400 (the big one) is a Xilinx FPGA. Perhaps the other two heatsunk devices PLD's or smaller FPGA's.

author: Hypernova
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 08:18:02 am
content: The wavgen signals are coming from the removed cards on the PIC-E slots? Got any pics for the generator cards?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 01:19:50 pm
content: I am not sure if grego actually bought the signal generator plug-in module...

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 01:28:02 pm
content: Quote from: Hypernova on April 13, 2013, 08:18:02 amNo - those slots are for expansion (LAN or the logic analyzer). I think the generator is a software key upgrade. I didn't really look into it since it's only a 3Mhz generator.Quote from: JimmyZ"Someone" has some more photos so I'll see about getting them up. Shoddy camera work I know.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 01:37:34 pm
content: There are a couple of bugs I have found. Well one I'm not sure is a "bug" but might be a poor design decision.BUG (and this is pretty damn minor):- The graticule dots are on top of the image - e.g. they overlap the waveform. Really the graticule should be the lowest layer and the waveform should overlay it.BUG/POOR DESIGN?:The trig out, as had been mentioned elsewhere, is pretty damn low voltage - ~180-220mVAC as far as my Fluke 289 can tell me.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 02:15:09 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 13, 2013, 01:37:34 pmThanks for the continual updates, Greg. Hopefully those 'bugs' you found will be the extent of it

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 02:16:37 pm
content: The DDS 3MHz generator is a plug-in module according to the datasheet. But it is difficult to find any closer information. The Trig Out signal is damn low. The Taiwanese businessman at the trade fair told menot to use a multimeter!Use another scope instead. It is crazy.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 02:17:29 pm
content: Some more pictures.Just the back case off - power input module visible and heavy shielding.Channel input stages:Broad shot:Closeup of the main DSP:

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 05:18:49 pm
content: The scope looks nice. But the power supply seems to be somehow cheap. It has quite small heatsinks. On the other hand there is a real 230V power switch and easy replaceable glass fuse. And it seems that the whole scope is like 50% full of air...The fan is quite small.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 05:56:52 pm
content: In complete silence you notice the fan - it's not loud but it's a small fan so you do notice it. With the normal noise I have around me (computer, music, etc) you don't notice it at all. That's my general rule with fans - if I don't notice it when I have the stuff I normally have on it's all good.The power supply seemed pretty solid to me - good components, no weird solder joints, silastic where it's needed, etc. No clue what the MTBF is on it though. I've checked the scope a couple of times while running and it runs quite cool - the fan is constantly on mind you but I've never noticed any hot spots but you're right - there's a lot of "space" inside the case -- which is a good thing!

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 06:23:14 pm
content: Ok - finally got my scope stuff straightened out. I hooked the trig out to my picoscope and pulled a trace - 80k wfm/s as specified @ 500ns - and the output is actually fine voltage wise as you can see with the attached. I think it's just too fast for my Fluke to be happy with it.I'll run it through various time-bases and collect the data.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 07:22:14 pm
content: Metrics of wfm/s. Please note that this was done via my Picoscope and I'm not 100% happy with how it was reading some of the lower timebases so take it with a SLIGHT grain of salt.All measurements taken with a 500kHz sine wave. All results are in 1000s of wfm/s. Scope set to short memory depth.Timebase Min Max Avg Notes10us 6.85 8.4 7.885us 7.81 15.79 14.192us 19.23 34.25 22.811us 38.46 53.81 40.7500ns 35.71 83.33 77.23200ns 28.17 83.34 57.16100ns 23.15 83.34 47.0850ns 28.02 83.34 58.7920ns 18.72 48.9 27.48 Picoscope started having problems calculating here10ns 13.97 53.66 25.39 Picoscope started having problems calculating here

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 08:25:59 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 13, 2013, 07:22:14 pmThanks, Greg, for finally (after the whole Kiriakos thing) doing this correctlyRespectable numbers across all ranges. I'm curious why 500ns is the sweet spot for the Instek - I wish I knew more about modern DSO design to comprehend what that reveals about the nitty-gritty of the circuit/firmware choices.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 08:38:11 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on April 13, 2013, 08:25:59 pmI'm going to redo this when I have time to sit down. I kind of winged it and need to better optimize the pico and such but these numbers, at least down to about 50ns, I feel pretty good about. I'll do the entire range when I re-run it. I also will run some additional testing once my func gen decides to get here (its apparently on a slow-boat from Taiwan) and get some better pictures/video of the persistance, signal acquisition, etc. I'm really not set up for video so trying to figure out how to stealth buy an entry level HD camera without my wife going bezerk on me.The change from a USB scope to a bench scope is huge. I never realized how much easier it actually is with knobs than menus.Overall I'm very impressed so far with the Instek. I hope that all this data helps others in the same situation I was in trying to decide which way they want to go. The build quality and response on the Instek seems to be top-notch and the price is competitive -- it basically fits in between the Rigol 2000 and 4000 (minus the memory depth, but adds in the MSO option) in features and price which is a good place to be if you ask me.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 08:44:28 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 13, 2013, 08:38:11 pm"It will be perfect for vacation!"

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 09:07:58 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 13, 2013, 07:22:14 pmSo you say that the Trig out frequency is unstable and changes a lot? This is strange. Trig Out should be stable. CheckMarmad'svideo.http://youtu.be/gAY1GQEjrfc?t=2m49s

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 09:12:08 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 13, 2013, 09:07:58 pmNo, trig out is perfectly stable. See the screenshot from my picoscope a couple of posts back. The problem was me futzing with my picoscope so it was starting to have trouble at the lower timebases.The previous information about trig out being unstable is completely wrong - at least as far as I can see with my picoscope. It's solid, consistent and about 1.2V.

author: JimmyMz
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 09:48:26 pm
content: Those pictures. Are you sure the lens is clean? I think maybe you might not want certain information visible, quite possibly? I don't know, but I really wanted to see which GSI chips it has hooked up to the FGPA. I read great write-ups regarding their quickness, but they have about 8 or so different classes (I don't mean MHz). I appreciate your effort, so please don't feel that I don't. I'm considering this scope also, as I found the Rigol DS1102E to be less than I wanted. Greg have you ever had/used a Rigol oscilloscope? If not, have you ever owned/used a oscilloscope, other than the Picoscope, like in college maybe?Why am I asking? I want to know if you have a reference for build quality, with an oscilloscope that I'm also familiar, so you could tell me just how solid the scope truly is. I thought the Rigol was pretty nice in the build department, minus the toy looking 'front-end/display panel' (not the screen, but that was an issue too). I'm slightly worried though, because I don't have 4-channel-$$ this rip, and the two channel has a gaudy looking empty space on the front panel. Good Will is retarded for that one! Plus that name, aghhh; I can see it now"I bought a GoodWill scope."Really, someone threw one out?No, it cost me $830 dollars.What?Yeah, I bought it online from ....fill in the blank.Oh! I thought you got it from the GoodWill store.Aghh!Unlikely around people who know electrical measurement equipment brands, but with all others, this conversation could very likely happen. I can't say that I'd like to have it, and I know I still couldn't stop myself from talking about the new scope I just bought with other people. LOLAnyways, what do you think about the build quality, such as: plastic density of the paneling, knob quality (would you trust me to step on it, knowing it wouldn't break?), screen quality (is the real estate squandered?), operating system usability (is it friendly?). I know it's hard to knock something you just bought, for numerous reasons, but could you be objective? Thanks grego!

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 10:17:11 pm
content: Quote from: JimmyMz on April 13, 2013, 09:48:26 pmIMO, from all I can tell from the specs, if you are only going for 2 channels, the Rigol DS2000 series still offers the best bang for the buck (better than the Instek GDS-2000A 2 channelorAgilent DSOX-2000). Since they all have very similar waveform update rates (you won't be able to tell the difference between 30k - 80k wfrm/s in daily use), you have to look at the other features to decide. OTOH, if you are going for 4-channels, the GDS-2000A definitely seems to be the new leader in best value for money.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 13, 2013, 11:56:49 pm
content: Quote from: JimmyMz on April 13, 2013, 09:48:26 pmFor the GSI chips the first pic I posted has them nice and clear (and yes, my Nikon is older and needs a good cleaning I admit!).https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/msg217179/#msg217179

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 12:06:29 am
content: Quote from: marmad on April 13, 2013, 10:17:11 pmI would tend to agree with Marmad on this -- if you're only going to splurge for a 2-channel the Rigol series probably provides the best bang/buck unless you need the MSO functionality. 4 Channel I'd say unless you need the crazy memory depth and/or 4GS/s of a Rigol 4000 that the Instek is a clear winner (so far) in that category. And if you need MSO then it's even easier.Build quality is solid. None of the buttons are the "gel" type - they are all firm and respond well to touches. Knobs are the same way - a good solid feel to them. Some have detents (vertical for example) some don't (horizontal offset) but the "feel" of the knob is the same regardless. It's solid, feels good in the fingers and turns easily. To be honest while I wish I had "push to center" I enjoy the fact that I don't have "push to select" since I always end up changing the option.One thing which may just be cultural is that, to me, the variable knob (the one that selects menu options) rotates "backwards". You go clockwise to go up, counter-clockwise to go down. I sort of get it because the left side of the knob which is closest to the menu is going up or down but I'm used to CW means "down" and CCW means "up". I'm going to mention it to Instek as I write everything up. It's pretty minor, like the display bug but its one of those "Hmmmm..." things.As for standing on it - I never thought about it. I wouldn't be worried about the main board - that freaking shielding is thick. The plastic frame is your normal injection-molded stuff - it could probably take a normal person's weight standing on it but it's not something I'm going to go try.I've only used USB scopes until now so this is a whole new experience for me. Gotta say though I'm relieved now that I've used this thing -- I was nervous being "first" as far as I could see of people on this forum and shelling out >$1700 is a decent chunk of change but so far my fears have been alleviated. There are things I know they are adding in firmware (CAN decode), and things they are adding to their firmware roadmap (vertical vernier) and then things that I HOPE they add (hi-res mode) but overall I don't think you can argue with the bang for buck on this thing.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 09:45:28 am
content: Quote from: grego on April 14, 2013, 12:06:29 amI would add one more comment: if you're going to go with GW-Instek and spend >$1600, the choice between getting the GDS-2202A (200MHz / 2-channels / $1626) and the GDS-2104A (100MHz / 4-channels / $1694) seems a no-brainer. All of the models in each of these modern DSO series (Agilent X / Rigol UltraVision / GDS-2000A) are identical inside - so all of them can do every bandwidth in the range with simple firmware trickery. So there's always a chance that either a hack will be discovered - or, more likely, that as competition in the price range heats up, bandwidth upgrades will be sold. But adding 2 more channels is never going to be a option.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 12:14:59 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on April 14, 2013, 09:45:28 amTrue - and with the pricing coming out of tequipment.net (I saved about 13% off list) the Instek has the edge there as well.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 03:20:44 pm
content: I like the big variable knob. On some scopes like Agilent or Rigol it is small.OK, but the Rigol has another large multi knob.Quote from: grego on April 14, 2013, 12:06:29 amAre you sure that you will be able to downoload a new firmware for GW Instek? It's not on their website! At Agilent it is very easy to download firmware from their website and there are even Release Notes (= changelog).The GDS-2000A scope is nice, but I decided not to buy it because there is no GW Instek subsidiary in Europe... If yougregolive in USA, you have a subsidiary there.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 03:23:21 pm
content: According to the regional sales manager here in the US yes I will be able to download it once its available. And I totally agree about having support. I wouldn't have bought this if there wasn't a US based sales and support team. I verified that all support for scopes here in the US is done by their local repair team in Chino, CA so it doesn't have to go out of the country.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 03:41:08 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 14, 2013, 03:20:44 pmYou're wrong. As I mentioned before (and in my review), the Rigol has2xvariable knobs. The giant spring-loaded navigation knob doubles as a variable-changing knob whenever you're changing any variable that has a wide range. In fact, IMO, in terms of screen and front-panel design and ergonomics, the Rigol UltraVision scopes beat either the Agilent X or GDS-2000A hands down.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 03:48:51 pm
content: If you look at the GDS-3000, it has no vernier (=fine vertical control). But it has hi-res mode. There seems to be no way to download firmware...http://www.gwinstek.com/en/download/downloadfilelist.aspx?id=1290The GDS-3000 is quite expensive scope. It has never been popular among hobbyists due to high price and short memory only 25kpoints per channel.I don't think they are going to implement vernier in GDS-2000A. But never mind, it is a good bang per buck anyway.I don't know why there is no three-year warranty for the LCD display.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/?action=dlattach;attach=42473;image

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 03:59:07 pm
content: MarmadWell, the GDS-2000A front panel looks somewhat oldschool and uninteresting. Like it was saying honestly: "OK, folks, I am a cheap scope and it's no secret."On the other hand, Tektronix also uses almost no pushable knobs, do they think that pushable knobs are not reliable or what? Well, they are not very innovative at all. Although I like their Wave Inspector feature.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 04:04:42 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 14, 2013, 03:48:51 pmVernier has been added to the firmware roadmap - e.g. it could come in a couple months or it could take a year - but at least it's on the map.As for downloading - you have to register your scope (which I've done) by serial number so you get notifications and links to the new firmware. Or so I've been told. I registered so we'll see what happens.No scope is going to be perfect - the other threads discussing the Agilent and Rigol highlight that. They are all idiosyncratic in one way or another - you just have to make a determination on what will fit your needs at the time you go to buy one. Service & support are huge and you can't go wrong with Agilent in that regard. As I mentioned I wouldn't have bought the Instek if they didn't have a US-based service and support center which gave me peace-of-mind. Couple that with the built-in MSO, the price, the 1mV vertical resolution (real resolution), etc, etc, etc and it all worked out. That and Instek has been around quite some time with a good reputation here in the US.My hope in all this is to provide anyone else looking for a scope all the information they need to be able to effectively evaluate the various options out there. In my case I could have gone with the Agilent as easily as this one but it would have cost me $100 more out the gate, then about another $1200 for the decode options I want plus memory expansion, segmented memory and the LAN. With the Instek I will end up paying about another $750 for the MSO option but that includes all the decodes so it's ~$2500 vs ~$3000+ which was kind of a no-brainer for me. That $500 saved is going towards some additional gear that I need.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 04:06:01 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 14, 2013, 03:59:07 pmI thought that as well initially until I realized the reason why is the Agilent only has one set of soft keys (bottom) -- which means they HAD to put more buttons on the thing to make up for it so they could get all the functions in.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 14, 2013, 04:17:09 pm
content: I hope you will be happy with your GDS-2000A, I was quite impressed at thetrade fair, that I almost bought it.Anyway, a good 4-channel scope should have eight automatic measurements and not just four as on Agilent DSOX-2002A.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2013, 09:50:43 pm
content: Firmware update released - my scope arrived with 1.08 and I received 1.13 -- waiting for release notes from Instek now.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2013, 10:10:14 pm
content: How does theMeasurement summarylook like? Does it update constantly? At my DSOX-2002A it doesn't. And it is even non-transparent.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 15, 2013, 10:14:54 pm
content: Yes it updates constantly. See attached (still image, I know, but trust me the numbers are updating constantly).My func gen is in sweep mode in this example.-Greg

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2013, 12:33:25 am
content: It looks very good.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 16, 2013, 08:52:44 pm
content: Revision notes for the new firmware:V1.13- Enhanced maximum frequency module output to 5MHz- Enhanced free run limit for Segment- Fixed duty cycle setting errorV1.12- Added remote command for option- Added GPIB & FG- Added GDB03 Demo Mode App- Added DVM App- Added FG Function- Fixed self-calibration language error- Fixed ATL Trigger level letting error- Fixed vertical self-calibration progress missing line- Fixed Segment State reading error- Fixed cursor error under Segment- Fixed roll mode error

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2013, 08:45:29 pm
content: Well I shot a whole little video this morning on this beastie. Then loaded it in my computer and realized I didn't zoom in close enough to the screen so while I'm demo'ing thigns all you can really clearly see if the waveform. D'oh! I'll reshoot shortly.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2013, 08:55:11 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 17, 2013, 08:45:29 pmStill to come: light problems requiring reshoots; sound problems requiring reshoots or overdubbing; etc; etc.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 17, 2013, 10:26:26 pm
content: Gonna have to try it with my old Sony MiniDV camera. My wifes compact video camera is blurry as all hell for the close up shots.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2013, 02:08:12 pm
content: @Greg:I theorized in another thread that perhaps the reason most of the new DSOs with fast update rates (Rigol UltraVision, Agilent InfiniiVision X, R&S RTO, etc) don't seem to be implementing ALT trigger mode is either to maintain their wfrm/s speeds - or perhaps as an implementation difficulty that arises from using digital triggers. Since the GDS-2000A series seems to be one of the few (or maybe the only one?) that still includes this feature, I wondered if perhaps for your video (or even just as a written post here) you could do a single test?Set the scope to any timebase you want (maybe 500ns is good since it's the fastest) and check the waveform update rate first with 2 channels and any normal single trigger (Edge, Pulse, etc) - and then with 2 channels using the ALT trigger mode.I'd be very curious to see if the results shed any light on this issue.

author: bonanz
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2013, 08:46:07 pm
content: i would really love to see your video.I was this close to finally pulling the trigger on a DS2102 and then saw this thread and the Instek GDS-2104A now looks very interesting to me... i like the 4 channels...i really like the funcgen module, but it seems to not be able to load arbs...but then i saw the news of the 2000-s which marmad was thinking it appears it may be able to load arbs...also, i think at some point i'd want to add a logic analyzer and the instek has that capability, and then i see the rigol 2000s with unused button holes and conspiracy theories and dreams of hacking up a scope run wild in my mind...i love the work marmad has done with his remote software...that alone is almost a selling point for the rigol... uggh... now i'm all messed up...back on topic. VIDEO PLEASE gregoeven blurry without hollywood lighting and makeup would be fantastic as long as your voice sounds like morgan freeman as you give your impressions of the instek

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 19, 2013, 09:44:27 pm
content: Well, have you seen these videos?https://www.youtube.com/user/gwinstek1975/videos?view=0&flow=gridhttps://www.youtube.com/user/ITTSBEurope?feature=watchbonanzConsider buying the GW Instek if there is a subsidiary near to your home. There is no GW Instek subsidiary in Europe, for example.http://www.gwinstek.com/en/globalsite.aspx

author: bonanz
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2013, 12:17:23 am
content: thanks for those links, i had seen some, but not all of them. I take every demo stuff by the producing company with a slight grain of salt. I'm curious about some of the signal processing stuf like FFT amongst other user impressions

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2013, 02:58:38 am
content: I'm trying! I got some video shot with my old Sony DCR-PC100 (mini-DV tapes FTW!) but it's pretty crappy. I'm still trying to assemble something while I scamper around looking for something that can do more high definition.@marmad I'll give that a try Sunday or Monday - I'm going to be out all day tomorrow so won't be able to poke at it.On the flip side guys - if you are in the US the support has been FANTASTIC from Instek. Couldn't ask for me. I found a crash bug, notified their regional folks and they got it through to the engineers already to verify and (hopefully) patch soon.Also, they seem to like what I'm doing -- I mentioned on my blog I was waiting for a DG4062 and they offerred to send me an AFG-3081 to check out instead! Mind you it's not a fair comparison - the 3081 is a $2700 list AFG and the DG, even at the "high" end is $1300. I'm not really set up to review equipment here but I might have to anyway. I was just doing the 'scope as a community contribution more than anything.@bonanz if you only need a 2 channel scope I can't argue with the Rigol - it's a fantastic piece of kit. If you want 4 channels though and like the idea of the MSO option the Instek is pretty damn good. Don't go for the func-gen though as it sucks currently. I don't even know why they have it. 5Mhz, and only does square, sine and triangle. It's a waste of an expansion port if you ask me. I have the LA16 on order right now and should get it next week so I'll be able to poke around with that as well.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2013, 11:14:59 am
content: Quote from: grego on April 20, 2013, 02:58:38 amThanks, Greg. Looking forward to any/all info you report about the DSO. BTW, as long as you're in communication with GW-Instek, perhaps you can push them to actually start actively distributing their products in the EU (and I'd be more than happy to review anything they might lend me).Mark

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2013, 02:07:43 pm
content: Well, it's easy to buy a GW instek product in Europe or Czech Republic... But what would the support be like? You can buy athttp://www.trinstruments.cz/stolni-osciloskopyorhttp://eshop.micronix.cz/merici-technika/elektricke-veliciny/osciloskopy/digitalni/stolni?page=8

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2013, 02:20:06 pm
content: GW Instek published an user manual for the plug-in function generator module. It's quite poor. Really basic. Even the WAVEGEN in my DSOX-2002A is much more advanced. Check the attached PDF.There is in the manual:QuoteThere is no way to have a two-channel function generator. The two BNCs at the front panel are only for fun. You will not get signal from both of them at the same time.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2013, 02:28:58 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 20, 2013, 02:07:43 pmThis is meaningless - of course I know you canbuyInstek in Europe; you can buy almost anything anywhere in the world. For a company to actively pursue sales somewhere is something totally different.Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 20, 2013, 02:20:06 pmDude, seriously? You are re-posting basically the same information that an actual owner of the DSO posted 2 messages before! These threads are long enough without repeating stuff that was just posted.Quote from: grego on April 20, 2013, 02:58:38 am

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 20, 2013, 02:46:14 pm
content: OK, we all know that the function generator is probably basic, but till 11th April 2013 there was no specification published. There was no closer information.Gregodidn't say a word about the PDF published.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2013, 02:54:24 am
content: Quote from: marmad on April 19, 2013, 02:08:12 pmSo I went and tried it this evening. With multiple channels up, single trigger, no matter what kind of trigger I was using (edge, pulse, timeout, etc) and no matter what channel I selected it was consistently at 80k wfm/s @ 500ns. Turn on alt triggering and things started getting a little wonky. To be honest my picoscope couldn't figure it out frequency-wise so I don't have any "numbers" to display.So to sum up - single trigger, no matter what kind and no matter how many channels, I was getting 80k wfm/s. ALT triggering and I don't have a good answer, but I can say that it didn't appear to be nearly as quick just based on visual reference.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2013, 04:18:46 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 22, 2013, 02:54:24 amThanks, Greg! So, it appears that using the ALT mode probably significantly reduces the wfrm/s; which is no problem - as long as you're aware of the tradeoff - but might deter some manufacturers of fast update rate DSOs from including it, which is a pity.

author: tequipment
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2013, 05:33:24 pm
content: 2000A is new but someone off EEVblog did buy one from me if not more than 1 person.ThanksEvan CirelliTEquipment.NET

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2013, 06:23:14 pm
content: Quote from: tequipment on April 22, 2013, 05:33:24 pmYep that was me. If you're in the US folks tequipment was great for it - got it out to me quick. No complaints about service or pricing. And no, I'm not a shill - it really was painless and positive.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 22, 2013, 11:54:15 pm
content: I got news today from InstekUSA and from the engineers back in Taiwan. They've already fixed the crash bug I found (which is nice) and have added high-res mode to the firmware roadmap as well. Which is cool. Makes me happy.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 23, 2013, 09:43:44 pm
content: Hopefully I'll have some better video over this weekend - just ordered a new Canon HF M500 camera so it should make my life a lot easier. Stay tuned.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2013, 12:13:59 am
content: Could you post some pictures with FFT or mask test?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 24, 2013, 01:07:10 am
content: Quote from: grego on April 23, 2013, 09:43:44 pmThat's got the HD CMOS Pro image sensor, it'll give you some great shots. I have the HF M400 as my 2nd camera and it works a treat. The internal mics are good too.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2013, 01:31:37 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 24, 2013, 12:13:59 amSee attached. Found another bug in the process. When you exit mask limit testing the min/max boundaries stay on the screen. You have to clear it with the default button.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2013, 01:35:54 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on April 24, 2013, 01:07:10 amAwesome! Looking forward to it. It should be arriving on Friday.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2013, 03:20:58 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 24, 2013, 01:31:37 amThanks for pictures. The bug is really small.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 24, 2013, 03:22:33 pm
content: Yeah but its one of those "that's annoying" things that should be easy to clean up.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 25, 2013, 05:08:59 pm
content: Just received the DS2-16LA module so I'll be poking at that over the next few days. Hopefully sometime next week I'll have a video review of the unit as a whole to show.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 01:21:26 pm
content: Ok - first video complete. Be gently, it's my first time.http://youtu.be/kbNKVD-ZoIYI'll try to be a bit more organized and go point by point through some of the more interesting features the next time.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 02:33:10 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 27, 2013, 01:21:26 pmThanks for posting, Greg - I'm sitting down with a snack to watch right now

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 02:46:50 pm
content: (Still watching...) One quick comment/question about the screen: do you think Instek is doing anti-aliasing during display (I mean pixels - not waveforms) but not for screen caps (i.e. better looking while running)?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 03:11:00 pm
content: Definite possibility. I will ask InstekUSA if they can get an engineer to confirm.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 03:37:21 pm
content: Ahhh... the sweet, sweet "where was that?" of early device ownershipNice, Greg - thanks for making and posting that. It was great to see it in action outside of the ridiculous robotic Instek engineers' videos (they really need to get these out to others for review instead of leaving it to their engineers)I will definitely have requests for the next video (I think you already know one from my PM to you).One question: it wasn't completely clear from the video - can you turn off interpolation completely (i.e. just sample dots)?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 03:49:40 pm
content: Yes you can do dots or vectors.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 03:59:25 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 27, 2013, 03:49:40 pmAhh... good to hear!Another suggestion for the next video: (I'm really not trying to harp on thisbut I really think Instek needs to be a little more clear in their promotional literature - it's kind of hidden*), is to explain in detail exactly how the Instek uses it's memory. Because with the 4-channel version, you can have 1M record lengths in AUTO/NORMAL modes by using channels from alternate banks - but it's impossible to do that with the 2-channel version, so prospective buyers should know that the 2-channel versions are basically a 1M / 500k DSO (except in single-shot mode).Edit:* In the Features list of the User Manual it's written:...- All models feature a real-time sampling rate of 2GSa/s and an equivalent time sampling rate of 100GSa/s.- Deep memory: 2M points record length.- Waveform capture rate of 80,000 waveforms per second.......which I think is a little misleading for 2-channel buyers.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 05:29:00 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on April 27, 2013, 03:37:21 pmYou can see the menu option on the left at 10:45 for example.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 05:33:24 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 27, 2013, 05:29:00 pmDoh!Yeah, seems obvious now - I was looking elsewhere during that part and only thought of it when you mentioned sin(x)/x.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 27, 2013, 11:51:54 pm
content: Thanks for the video. It has good quality.Well, does the scope really crash when you pressMeasureandDisplay allsoft button? It's strange.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 12:08:08 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 27, 2013, 11:51:54 pmYep - it does - well, you hit display all and it crashes when you select your source. Instek confirmed the bug and it's apparently already fixed in the next revision which should be available shortly.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 12:14:42 am
content: When you set theRecord Lengthtoshort, how long is it? Is it 8kpoints, 100kpoints per channel or what?Anyway, the statistics feature looks great although I am not sure if i would need it as a hobbyist...

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 12:18:11 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 28, 2013, 12:14:42 amI mentioned it in the video - but it sets it to 1M.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 12:43:57 am
content: Quote from: grego on April 28, 2013, 12:18:11 amI would think it would be 500k or 1M, depending on the mode you're in and other channels being on, no?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 01:14:30 am
content: Quote from: marmad on April 28, 2013, 12:43:57 amYes - but the reference to 1M was the memory depth in short mode - not depth per channel/ADC. Two separate things.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 12:16:01 pm
content: Hi Greg,I'm very curious about the Instek's LA module. An in-depth demonstration of it's decode/analysis abilities would be greatly appreciated, if you have a circuit around to demo on.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 12:32:43 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on April 28, 2013, 12:16:01 pmThat's in the works. I need to get one of my eval boards set up to demo it properly. Plus have some free time.But I'll have that in the next week or so.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 02:39:30 pm
content: Grego, it seems that your Trig Out signal is 1.2 Volts peak-peak. That's low but still acceptable. What do you think about scope that was bought by Kiriakos A. Triantafillou?http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.htmlHe wrote:QuoteI think that some of the GDS-2000A scopes have a hardware problem. But your instrument is OK, it seems. As seen here:

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 02:53:46 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 28, 2013, 02:39:30 pmMine is actually higher than that as you can see in:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/gds-2000a-new-economic-oscilloscope-by-gw-instek-comes-to-market/msg217468/#msg217468More like 1.5-1.6V which is fine.I don't think it's a hardware problem - I can't say without being there but I haven't seen anything to indicate any issues.I'm not going to generalize with "some of the GDS-2000A scopes have a hardware problem". Especially since I appreciate what Kiriakos has done but I don't think he's measuring things 100% correctly -- I wish he had a second scope at his place to verify his data with.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 03:05:07 pm
content: Hey Greg - Another thing I'd love to see you measure - since Rigol / Agilent X / GW-Instek don't provide this info in their specs (as used to be common with analog scopes) - is the Trigger Out delay. This is easily accomplished by feeding the Trigger Out into one of your other channels.Here is an image I just made of the Rigol's delay (which appears to be ~220ns).

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 03:17:58 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 28, 2013, 02:53:46 pmWell, it seems that Kiriakos measured the 80 kHz spikes with his multimeter. Multimeter never shows you Vpp, it shows Vrms.But he also wrote that most multimeters cannot measure the output frequency. That's bad. My DSOX-2002A has Trig Out 5Vpp, so it can be measured by any multimeter...

author: jahonen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 05:26:20 pm
content: For me it looked like that the waveform capture is not continuous, picoscope screenshots showed long periods with no trigger out pulse at all. I think I saw this in Instek marketing video too. Perhaps this could be further checked?Regards,Janne

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 07:13:12 pm
content: Quote from: jahonen on April 28, 2013, 05:26:20 pmSure - but remember the 80k wfm/s is the average peak so you would expect things to be faster/slower depending on what the scope is doing.I'll check it again but I don't want us all to get wrapped up in it. Personally I think it's a display issue with the pico because at a lower timebase you don't see any delays.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 07:36:07 pm
content: Playing around, I just found out that I can make the Rigol count it's own wfrm/s rate fairly accurately by just feeding it's Trigger Out into one of it's own channels (the other channel is turned off), turning on the frequency counter for that channel, and then sending a 1MHz square wave to the External Trigger In. The displayed frequency is very close to the numbers I recorded using my Fluke for counting. Maybe this works for the Instek as well?

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 09:29:03 pm
content: While looking atthis Agilent docabout waveform update rates, I noticed that the Tek DPO3000 series listed in their tables (and also the Tek DPO2000/4000 to a lesser degree) has a very similar wfrm/s output graph to the GDS-2000A series. And by output graph, I don't mean the absolute rates (the Instek is clearly faster at many timebase settings) - I mean that both of their wfrm/s rates ramp up - and then stay high - to the 50ns/div setting (or thereabouts), and then drop way down for the final few settings. It makes me wonder if there is some design similarities in the strategies both Tek / Instek used for intensity-grading, etc, that makes the graph the way it is (as opposed to the Agilent or Rigol). I'd love to know more about particular design choices being made in this area - although I guess they're all guarding their secrets closely

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 10:45:42 pm
content: The GDS-2000A screen design is quite similar to Tektronix DP04000. Even both scopes have no pushable knobs...QuoteWell, really? Then it means that measurements by Kiriakos are wrong.http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.htmlEDIT: Once he measured 154870 waveforms per second. That's strange.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 11:01:17 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on April 28, 2013, 10:45:42 pmOf course, it was obvious when he posted them that his equipment wasn't reading the low-level signal correctly - and that his figures for < 50ns were wrong. I tried to explain that to him but he didn't seem to understand; he seems to think he discovered something that the GW-Instek engineers overlooked

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 11:09:31 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 12, 2013, 05:46:24 pmHey, my brand new DSOX-2002A was not packed in a plastic bag. Oh, why?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 28, 2013, 11:11:15 pm
content: And it seems to me that Rigol DS2000 and Agilent DSOX2000 have better shielding. Their power supplies are completely hidden in a metal box. Not at GDS-2000A.

author: bonanz
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2013, 03:29:27 pm
content: greg thanks for the video good work.i dunno why you were so worried and apologetic about quality etc. I thought it was all fine. looking forward to follow ups.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2013, 05:27:06 pm
content: It's called "terror of the unknown".I'm trying to find some time to do some follow-up work - marmad had a couple of questions he PM'd me and I know there's interest in the LA module so that'll likely be my next effort. I just have to get one of my dev kits set up to provide some RS-232 and I2C and such so I can demonstrate it.If I ever get off my butt I may do a teardown as well.Ah, if only I didn't have a job and a family and had unlimited funds this would be so much easier!Thanks for the thumbs up.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2013, 12:43:04 am
content: According to the manual the GDS-2000A has nofinevertical or horizontal setting. Just like Owon SDS series... But Rigol, Agilent and others havefinevertical and horizontal settings.This might be not a big disadvantage.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2013, 01:03:09 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 01, 2013, 12:43:04 amI called this out a couple times already. And in the video. And I talked to Instek about it -- they have added it to their firmware roadmap.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2013, 08:27:08 pm
content: @Greg:Perhaps you can do a quick test (no need to add it to your video) if you're able to generate a 10MHz sine wave (1MHz or 5MHz would likely work fine as well)? Following in the lines ofthis post from another thread, you would just send the test signal to one channel, and then slow down the time base until you're at a sample rate of 100 or 200MSa/s. Then either stop the DSO and zoom into the ~50ns/div range - or enter zoom mode (as in the images) and zoom to the smaller range. Then do a screen grab and post it here. I'm guessing that the Instek will reproduce the waveforms symmetrically just as the Rigol and LeCroy do - but that the Agilent X-Series appears unable to do.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2013, 10:10:58 pm
content: I can give that a whirl. Only up to a 1MHz right now but I will post the results.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2013, 10:26:01 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 01, 2013, 10:10:58 pmGreat! Also, if you noticed us measuring the Trigger Out delay over in the Rigol thread, I'd be curious to know what it is on the Instek.BTW, in a possibly (un)related note, I noticed in the 2000A manual that the No-Go Output was optically-isolated, requiring a pull-up for proper output voltage. I wonder if the Demo 1 output used for the Trigger Out could be similarly configured, explaining the low voltage level.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2013, 10:57:28 pm
content: Demo signal optically isolated? Why? It's unlikely.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 02, 2013, 03:18:53 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 01, 2013, 10:57:28 pmHe was talking about the fact that Trigger Out is on the Demo 1 pin, not that it's a demo output.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 02:57:47 pm
content: Hey Greg,You've had the DSO about 3 weeks now - I'm curious where things stand for you: likes, dislikes, general feelings about the UI, etc. I don't really need more video if time is tight for you - just some scribblings and a screen cap or two would suffice

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 04:47:20 pm
content: I haven't had as much time as I would like to fart around with it of late but overall my thoughts:1. The scope "feels" good. I like they layout of the controls. One thing I kind of wish they did was provide a rubberized ring on the outside to improve the feel of the rotary knobs a little bit.2. I wish the traces were a little bit finer - it doesn't look like there's pixel-doubling going on but for lack of a better term the "thickness" of the traces. Not major.3. Scope is very responsive to control changes which is great. No delays.4. Feature-rich for the price - I mean really, I got it for ~$1700 USD for a 200Mhz 4 channel scope with good manufacture, quality components and a company that has a solid reputation here in the US.5. As I mentioned before the responses from Instek have been top-notch. I just got a reply back from engineering on my latest complaint of not being able to remove the Go-NoGo min/max lines. They outlined the 'procedure' to remove it and added they are sending it back into engineering to make it easier (because, to be honest, what they outlined was stupid).6. I wish I could speak more about the LA but I just have NOT had time to sit down with it yet so I can't speak to it. However, I know you can decode off the digital lines at least.Overall, I'm really happy with the expenditure, with the caveat that I need to spend time with the LA to justify that $800 purchase. I mean for what I need it's a scope that I will be able to use for years. I completely understand that I 'overbought' on equipment - I didn't NEED 200Mhz, I didn't NEED the MSO function but it's all helpful and to be hones the price delta wasn't large enough for me to really worry about it. So for a first bench scope to replace my Pico 3206-A I'm completely satisfied.There will be more coming once I have some breathing space to sit down and cover some more features. Between work, my kids soccer schedule and school for me I've been pretty busy. And heck, Iron Man 3 opens this weekend too. ;-)

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 05:01:13 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 03, 2013, 04:47:20 pmThanks! That fills in some of the missing blanks - and the review of the LA I can easily wait for.My only other ongoing desire-to-know is: with all of the posting about interpolation / type of interpolation / affect on sampling, etc. that a number of us have been doing these last weeks, I'd like to know what a waveform looks like on the Instek when undersampled. The Rigol switches to linear interpolation - which, although a little boxy, is symmetrical - and the Agilent just makes a total mess of it (I don't even know what it's doing - but it's screwing up the samples somehow). Is the Instek still using sin(x)/x at slower sampling speeds? If so, how does it look? The test I mentioned before (with a reasonably fast sine wave) would satisfy my curiosity - whatdayasay? Huh? Puh-leeeeze? (I'm banking on your reveal of fatherhood)QuoteHe's kind of like a walking, talking MSO

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 06:14:12 pm
content: Try how is the waveform update rate affected by turning on more channels, eight auto measurements, FFT or cursors. On my DSOX2002A it is not affected at all by anything. On the other hand, you have only 4 auto measurements + DVM, it's not much for a four channel scope.Well, my scope is 2 channel, but it could be 4 channel.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 07:10:41 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 03, 2013, 06:14:12 pmYou seem to think waveform update rate is the most important thing, but it's not - it's not even in the top three most important. As long as I have a reasonably fast update rate with a certain sample length at a couple of time base settings, that's enough - because if I want to specifically look for jitter, anomalies, etc. I will use those settings. But it appears that the Agilent X-Series is trading waveform fidelity at slower sampling speeds (which, IMO, is much more important) for more uniform waveform update rates - and that is much worse than just having slower rates caused by using more functions.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 08:08:32 pm
content: Oh, not really, if you work mainly with digital signals, you may rather need long 56Mpoints memory and you don't care about waveform update rate because you use Single shot most often.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 09:44:49 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 03, 2013, 05:01:13 pmHere you go - 1Mhz sine, dropped down to 10ms which gave me a 10MSPS rate, single-shot, zoomed in to 200ns. Looks like it's keeping sin(x)/x to me.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 09:56:59 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 03, 2013, 09:44:49 pmGreat, thanks very much for that! Yes, it's definitely sin(x)/x - and it looks good too.I'm only wondering how you know your sample rate; I don't see it on the Instek's display.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 10:03:30 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 03, 2013, 09:56:59 pmIt's under the Acquire menu (which I didn't leave up in this since it was single shot). Basically, bring up the Acquire menu and one of the buttons shows the sample rate. I upped the timebase until it read 10MSPS and then single shot it.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 10:08:58 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 03, 2013, 10:03:30 pmNice... any chance you can do the exact same thing one more time in 'dots' mode (no interpolation)? I know, I know, I'm keeping you from your kid's soccer - or Iron Man 3 - but it won't take too much more time

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 03, 2013, 10:10:30 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 03, 2013, 08:08:32 pmHuh? Why would you necessarily need single shot mode more fordigitalsignals? And I don't think there's a serious EE in this forum who thinks the waveform update rate is the most important specification of a DSO.

author: Hypernova
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 04, 2013, 11:56:24 am
content: Quote from: grego on May 03, 2013, 04:47:20 pmHeh, what does that make me, a guy that spent 4 months salary on my MSOX3014? I'm quite possibly the only private person in the whole of Taiwan to do such a thing. Good thing my parents live in New Zealand so all they could do when I told them was yell at me over Skype.A few thing that you can check if you got the time:Can you try the responsiveness of the scope when you have every feature turned on? The Tek scope I used before at work grind to a halt if you turn on max memory, FFT, measurements and digital all at once. We are talking screen update time in the order of seconds. It's one of the reason I bought Agilent, I just don't want to stroke a turtle for work any longer.Does the digital channels also work in Roll display mode, Tek scopes don't which is retarded. And if they do how far does the bus decode display lag behind the channel signals, on my Agilent the decoded signals be it I2C or parallel bus the display falls behind like they are runners on a track but will "catch up" smoothly if I press stop.FFT resolution, the Lecroy's at work here only get down to 200Hz even if you dial the sample time up, with Agilent I can get down to to sub Hz. if I sample long enough.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2013, 02:45:04 pm
content: You can never go wrong with Agilent.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2013, 03:13:11 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 04, 2013, 02:45:04 pmOh, believe me, you can. BTST.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2013, 03:15:18 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 03, 2013, 10:08:58 pmAttached. Interestingly at the lower timebase it looks like its connecting the dots -- I included two so you can clearly see it's in dots rather than vectors.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2013, 03:34:57 pm
content: WuerstchenhundOh, I know.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/testgear/agilent-u1272a-crappy-soldering/Or do you have another bad experience?

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2013, 03:43:41 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 04, 2013, 03:15:18 pmThanks for taking the time, Greg. Though I'm not 100% sure I'm understanding whats happening: are you saying it's displaying the dots until you go below a certain time base setting - and then all of a sudden the interpolation comes back on again? If so, that sounds like it might be a bug - there would be no logical reason for having the firmware override your settings.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2013, 03:59:24 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 04, 2013, 03:43:41 pmThat's what I'm saying - those two pictures above were the exact same capture, the only difference is the time base setting I zoomed in to. I can't think of anything else that's happening there since it's a continuous line in the 200ns image.

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2013, 04:08:08 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 04, 2013, 03:34:57 pmYes, unfortunately with gear that's a bit more expensive. As mentioned in another thread, we had quite a lot of problems with our Agilent Infiniium scopes (54800A Series, the first gen running Win95/98, and also with some 86100As which suddenly stopped recognizing plugin modules). 'My' not that old DSO9404A at work has already had two repairs, luckily enough covered by warranty but still not great.Of course these could have been all just Monday morning lemons but it's still not great. At the end of the day, just because product made by a manufacturer are great doesn't mean another product from the same manufacturer is, too. Generally Agilent makes really good and reliable kit, but like other manufacturers they have their fair share of problems, too.Therefore I think saying you can't go wrong with Agilent is a bit naïve.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 04, 2013, 05:02:06 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 04, 2013, 03:59:24 pmStrange - I'd pass that along to the GW-Instek folks you've been in contact with. As I said, it seems like a bug since the main point of turning off interpolation is usually to zoom in and examine the actual sample points.Of course, you could test the parameters easy enough (you don't even need a signal - zero volts input works just the same) by just stopping and zooming into various time/div settings. Maybe there is a particular factor that invokes it.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 06:05:29 pm
content: I passed the dot/vector thing along to Instek yesterday. In the meantime (this morning) I was notified of a new firmware release (fast and furious from these guys):The V1.14 update history includes- Enhance EXT Channel Trigger Stability- Fixed „Measure display all" issue- Fixed Horizontal Line display error- Fixed Search issue- Fixed bus decode issue- Fixed FG setting issue on default

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 04:54:05 pm
content: Quote from: grego on April 30, 2013, 05:27:06 pmHi grego,Just a nudge to say whenever you get a chance to do a review of the LA functionality (especially for I2C and maybe SPI?) it would be great to get your impressions! Thanks!

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 07:49:39 pm
content: Yeah I know - I've been planning on getting to it for a week or so now just haven't had time. Darn kids and their soccer tournaments. And Mother's Day! Like they need a day for themselves. Sheesh!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 10, 2013, 10:57:55 am
content: FYIGoodwill are sending me a GDS-2000A direct for teardown.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2013, 12:56:20 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 10, 2013, 10:57:55 amHooray! I knew if I kept pestering them they'd get around to it sooner or later!

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2013, 10:06:07 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 10, 2013, 10:57:55 amThat's great... I am looking forward to a comparison with DSOX2000 or Rigol DS2000.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2013, 03:46:39 am
content: Marmad pointed me to your video  and I have to echo everyone else in saying nice work for a first video! It was a very helpful first introduction to the scope for me, and I'll be eagerly waiting with the others to learn more in your future videos (when life allows)![edit - somehow forgot to mention who I was writing to!]

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2013, 03:47:01 pm
content: Daveorgrego, could you please make a comparison table of GDS-2000A like this?Kiriakos already made a table, but the results look strange.http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.htmlQuote? ? ? ?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 14, 2013, 06:25:58 pm
content: Thanks for the video, grego.Well, I like the permanent clock on the screen. It has even seconds.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2013, 04:14:14 pm
content: Another video made by GW Instek guys.

author: Teneyes
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2013, 04:41:25 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 24, 2013, 04:14:14 pmI think the Instek Demo Guy is incorrect in commenting at the end of the demo about the Overshoot and Under-Shoot, which I think are just Sin(x)/x interpolation effect like the one shown below.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2013, 06:07:44 pm
content: Quote from: Teneyes on May 24, 2013, 04:41:25 pmBut he does highlight a problem with the Brand X-2000: on the DS2000, you can go all the way down to 2ms/div without the sample rate dropping below 2GSa/a - and I think on the Instek you can go down to 50us/div.

author: mike1305
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2013, 09:36:50 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 10, 2013, 10:57:55 amAny news on this front, Dave?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2013, 10:24:45 pm
content: I finally watched the video.Well, that's no new information that GDS-2000A has longer memory. But you can buy a memory upgrade for DSOX2002A (or someone should hack it). GDS-2000A doesn't have longest memory in its class, it's rather Rigol DS2000 (unless you need 4-channel scope.) GW Instek guys should buy a better camera IMHO.I wonder what's the waveform update rate of GDS-2000A at timebase 10ns... Probably about 500 waveforms per second or so??Why does the GW Instek guy talk aboutbrand X oscilloscope?The video looks amateurish anyway...

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 24, 2013, 10:35:09 pm
content: Quote from: mike1305 on May 24, 2013, 09:36:50 pmIt is sitting right next to me.Might do a rough unboxing and "first impressions" video today.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2013, 10:37:26 pm
content: I am looking forward to it!

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2013, 11:00:09 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 24, 2013, 10:24:45 pmYou posted it here but didn't watch it?QuoteNew for who? I doubt the video was made for EEVBlog members.QuoteBut obviously he is making a comparison of base models - not options you need to spend extra money on.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 25, 2013, 08:04:06 pm
content: Hi Greg,Just a couple more requests for when you get to testing/reviewing/reporting on the Instek LA capabilities1. Here is a question/comment from an earlier poster:"Does the digital channels also work in Roll display mode, Tek scopes don't. And if they do how far does the bus decode display lag behind the channel signals, on my Agilent the decoded signals be it I2C or parallel bus the display falls behind like they are runners on a track but will "catch up" smoothly if I press stop."- Please let us know how the Instek fares along these lines. Thx2. Here is a link to a youtube video.It happens to show an Arduino clone but more interesting toward the middle end of the video it shows an admittedly very expensive Tek MDO (mixed domain) scope in operation that has some pretty nice LA / analog (RF) signal integration including decoders. I realize the Instek doesn't do RF signals (although those could be a proxy for other wired analog signals) but any chance you might take a peek at this and share and thoughts regarding how the Instek's capabilities might compare and contrast?Mostly interested in how well the analog and digital signals on the Instek stay synchronized and if the decodeers work as nice as the RS232 decoder showed in the video.Thanks!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 01:30:45 am
content: I shot a video playing with the GDS2000A series for the first time. I must say I was rather disappointed and underwhelmed.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 01:38:18 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 01:30:45 amHave you posted the video, Dave?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 02:03:50 am
content: Quote from: marmad on May 26, 2013, 01:38:18 amRendering now. It's 1:10 long!Will take all day to upload and process.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 02:05:48 am
content: For these ridiculously long videos I'm very temped to trancode to 1280x720 instead of full 1920x1080, just to get the upload time down to a reasonable figure.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 02:21:34 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 01:30:45 amDid you miss the pushable knobs? I don't know why GW Instek doesn't use them. Are they expensive or what?Anyway, I think that the GDS-2000A is quite feature rich scope but not so easy to use. I like the color gradation feature but what is it good for?

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 02:37:59 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 02:03:50 amThanks. Looking forward to your thoughts.Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 02:05:48 amWould you lose too much detail?

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 02:50:44 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 26, 2013, 02:21:34 amIt's just an alternative way (as opposed to a single color gradient) to display the frequency of occurrence of signals at particular X-Y locations; I do the same thing in the Rigol software I wrote for segments.It's a shame more manufacturers don't add it as a feature; it's super easy to do in code and wouldn't add much overhead (you just use a color lookup table between the gradient values and the display), because it's sometimes a more informative way to observe frequency.

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 04:09:04 am
content: Quote from: EEVblogOH NO. That doesn't sound like a good start - thanks for the pre-notification. I'm quite interested in the DSO, x-ing fingers.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 04:22:20 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 26, 2013, 02:21:34 amYes, I ranted excessively about that.QuoteI thought it was a complete gimmick. Probably not completely useless, but far from the nice analog-like intensity graded display I was expecting of this "VPO" technology.When you turn off the colour grading, it reverts back to just one intensity old-school cheapo DSO mode (a.la Rigol 1052E)I compared it to the Rigol DS2000 and there is simply no contest.It also lacked a dedicated intensity knob.So those things added up kinda rubbed me the wrong way.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 04:28:03 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 01:30:45 amThanks Dave! Been looking forward to it and am very excited to watch it!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 04:38:53 am
content: Quote from: digsys on May 26, 2013, 04:09:04 amWell, to be fair, I was probably ab it overly harsh on it, and really I made quite a few mistakes and wrong assumptions at first.It's probably a better scope than my ranting will make out.But bottom line is it doesn't seem to have the same spit'n'polish like the Rigol and Agilent does.I need more time to learn to drive it properly.Also, the function gen is very basic. just sine/square/triangle to 5MHz and no modulation or AWGAlso the dual channel is a bit of a con. You need to buy two separate modules to get both channels. Thus using up all your slots. So no room left for the logic analyser or LAN modules. BUt grant, you can just swap them as needed.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 04:40:27 am
content: Also, it's quite big, the fan is a bit loud, and they need a better industrial product designer. IMO it looks a bit cheap and toy like.The problem is that I had fairly high expectations for this, and on first use it didn't shape up.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 05:56:31 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 04:38:53 amDave, we're just glad you make the videos - between the product info, the EE insights, and the entertainment they are excellent!It's hard for us potential users to judge new products from a distance but based on the initial attention the Insteks have been getting alongside the Rigols and Agilents it's not to surprising to hear that the spit n polish aren't quite as strong on the Insteks as the Agilents. Agilent sets the bar very high in a lot of areas and definitely in spit n shine, and Rigol is doing an increasingly fine job themselves. My guess is the Instek is a bit more utilitarian, but a very good utilitarian.As for the function generator, while everyone would like one and should have one, it just doesn't seem like the built in units are all that strong relative to what can be purchased on a standalone basis - and this seems to go doubly so for the Instek. It just doesn't look like their best accessory. For not a whole lot more Rigol (and maybe others) provide some great standalone units. And then you can free up the slots for something truly useful - like the Logic Analyzer (and/or the LAN/SVGA).When you look at the big picture of the Instek 2000A series (bandwidth and analog channels, GSa/s and waveforms per second, the LA (assuming it's a good one - hope it's in your review), the measurements/navigation/search, etc. and especially the price it's hard to see who has a better value in terms of price/performance and features if you want a MSO (combined analog and LA).Thanks in advance for what will be a fine and fun video no doubt!

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 06:24:27 am
content: One possible "negative" outcome - IF* the Instek doesn't end up with a favourable review AND IF Rigol places any weight onDaves' opinion would be that Rigol wouldn't bother discounting to match the new "beter value / featured" contender.Especially in the 4ch / 200MHz plus arena. Fingers still X-ed

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 06:24:47 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on May 26, 2013, 05:56:31 amSorry, but it's not a "fine" video, nor a review. It's me playing randomly with the thing for an hour after opening the box.I'll wait for inevitable complaints...

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 06:26:01 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 04:40:27 amI think you nailed it - they should hire someone who does the knobs and buttons and maybe the rest of the cosmetic packaging for Lexus, or Agilent- but I'm still betting that if the LA is good that the 2000A product series will succeed despite the less than Apple quality packaging.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 06:30:51 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on May 26, 2013, 06:26:01 amThe LA at least has full threshold voltage settings on every channel, so in that respect it's a "real" logic analyser. I have not tried it any further with actual data yet.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 06:45:50 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 06:24:47 am- It's you doing what you do - it will have valuable and timely info and it will be fun to watch. Being a strong Electrical Engineer and an Entrepreneur and Steven Spielberg isn't something everyone can do. Come to think of it, it's been a while since we've seen Steven Spielberg make a film, with himself as the only actor, presenting, operating, explaining, and critiquing fairly complex analog and digital test equipment - while entertaining people with his charm and candor. Keep up the Good Work!!

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 06:56:25 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 06:24:47 amNo problem, Dave. I am excited to see a review on it, of course - not to mention a tear down! - and I'm sure lots of other people are anxious to see one too. Even just seeing you get some hands on time will be great though, and a big help for everyone curious about this new scope! Some may complain without cause, but you're doing us quite a service and we should all be grateful for it - so hope you can shrug them off and not be bothered.I fall victim to the decision paralysis it seems a few people around here get, and have been going back and forth on a scope. I'm getting frustrated with my indecision though so I think I may just spring for a cheap 2-channel scope soon. Then I'll be able to wait a while till whenever you get time to do a proper review of the Instek - whether next week or next month. Although by that time maybe someone else will release a new model and throw everything off again lol.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 08:54:15 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 04:38:53 amHey - that's the off-the-cuff Dave Jone's style we've come to expect - and I wouldn't want anything different. Wrong assumptions might be in there, but so are honest initial reactions - which are harder to capture. You can always make a follow-up comparison video or something if your opinions change.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 09:01:38 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 04:40:27 amYes, one of my hesitations - if I was in the market - would be the industrial and GUI design; both the Rigol and Agilent series 'look' modern and sexy - it does not.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 03:10:52 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 04:38:53 amI think that you will never get a real two channel signal generator.Thank you for the video!

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 05:47:57 pm
content: Dave, what firmware version is that scope on?

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 06:07:02 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 26, 2013, 05:47:57 pmHe mentions it in the video - I think he said 1.14

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 07:14:09 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 06:30:51 amI don't think individual thresholds per channel is very useful, and if there is no way to set them all globally, it would be a total PITA to have to set them individually.

author: Spike101
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 07:16:03 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 26, 2013, 03:10:52 pmI don't understand it. Why does it have two function gen outputs to begin with, if you can only enable one at a time?

author: mikeselectricstuff
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 07:20:08 pm
content: RS232 rather than LAN is just ridiculous these days.Trigger in on front panel is useful on a 2-channel scope, less so with 4 channels.The module thing is also rather dumb as it limits how many options can be used together - especially silly for those that already have dedicated connectors.Would be very interested to see what's in those boxes.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 07:28:38 pm
content: Remember that GW instek is focused on Asia market - maybe they still use RS-232 there.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 07:33:14 pm
content: I would guess a PCI interface chip and a basic DDS chip attached to a PGA stage, along with a switch set to select either the digital sine wave, the digital triangle or a simple square wave output. Quite a bit of overshoot on the square wave output there. Basic function gen, nice to have it integrated with a decent display and better UI though.LA would be the FIFO, the 2 port RAM and the digital interfacing, the logic conversion being done on the pod, and the decoding being done by the main processor.

author: roli_bark
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 07:39:20 pm
content: Quote from: Spike101 on May 26, 2013, 07:16:03 pmI'm not sure that is the case with Dave's review.What can seen is basically 2 extension slots that can populate either: 2 Gens,or 1 Gen + 1 LAN, or 1Gen + LA, or 1 LA + 1 LAN, ...etc2 Gens, because otherwise it would have had only 1 BNC for 1 Gen .

author: Spike101
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 07:45:41 pm
content: Quote from: roli_bark on May 26, 2013, 07:39:20 pmYeah, but look at the manual, that Hydrawerk posted. It says:Quote??

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 08:48:01 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 26, 2013, 09:01:38 amGDS-2000A's screen looks like Tektronix...I am not familiar with those expensive Teks. The intensity gradation is reallycrap.Dave, could you please test theTrigger outputand maybe make a comparison table?

author: Skimask
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 26, 2013, 09:50:30 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 26, 2013, 06:24:47 amI'm reminded of that scene in Star Trek IV...where Spock has to make a guess, McCoy makes a comment, and Kirk has to explain to Spock that "he feels better about your guesses than most people's facts".E.g. I'd rather watch Dave twiddle knobs for an hour and get practically nothing accomplished vs. watching some marketing clown explain an item's operation.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 12:37:29 am
content: AndDave,what do you think about the fact that this scope has nofinehorizontal or vertical control? It's strange. Most scopes do havefinesettings (at Rigol and Agilent you only must push the knob). Well, only Owon doesn't havefinesettings, as far as i know.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 02:20:51 am
content: Thanks for the first impressions Dave! Noticed this just now in the Youtube comments and looking forward to it!Matt Cysiewski 11 hours agogoing to do a? teardown?EEVblog 3 hours agoOf course. Likely tomorrow.?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 02:33:45 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 27, 2013, 12:37:29 amAgain in Insteks defense this feature is on the firmware roadmap. It's goofy for now but it will be added. And thankfully Instek seems to be rather aggressive with their firmware update schedule.Remember thus scope has only been on the market a couple of months. That's not an excuse but we do need to take care about comparing it to more mature products.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 02:32:45 pm
content: Well, I am not sure. The expensive GDS-3000 from 2011 has no fine controls till today.EDIT:http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1290

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 03:01:35 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 27, 2013, 02:32:45 pmthat was 2yrs ago, the market was complettly different at that time.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 03:06:51 pm
content: Are you familiar with the GDS-3000 scope? Was there a better implemented digital phospor technology (aka intensity grading)?

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 03:53:55 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 27, 2013, 03:06:51 pmwhat do you mean with better? There is nothing wrong on GDS-2000A, use color grading and you a winner.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 04:20:27 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on May 27, 2013, 03:53:55 pmSorry, tinhead, but even though I personally like color grading and would appreciate having it for certain kinds of signals - it's neither as intuitive as intensity grading (which is closer to the way we perceive things) nor as similar to analog oscilloscopes (which many people are used to).But even more importantly, Dave's video raises the issue of howwellGW-Instek is implementing their VPO technology - given their claimed wfrm/s rates. And poor implementation of VPO would affect both intensity AND color grading.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 04:26:35 pm
content: Lets not read too much into it yet. Let Dave do his tear down and full review.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 04:35:44 pm
content: i don't see any problem with color grading implementation, all you need is to set base color (and maybe have way to invert them,e.g. from blue to red spectrum). This seems to work on GDS-2000A good. The benefit of color grading you need only these256 colors and not waveform intensity crap (yes, on analog scope there is no color, but hey, wh cares? my TV is color since40yrs already ...)Where is maybe (Dave or grego need to test it) something worng is how fast the intensity ischanging when turning the knob, all i saw was Dave turning wild knob to right, to left and back and beeing complainedabout the waveform colorsHowever, for a fraction of second you can see good picture (like in the middle picture of the link below), even with single color.Check herehttp://www.gwinstek.com/vpo/on the bottom the intensity pictures, on Daves video i saw only max or min^^So when this is an error, then only in way how fast the intensity is changing (and i can clearly see that on Rigol you need toturn the knob for an hour ^^ to get from min to max).Quote from: grego on May 27, 2013, 04:26:35 pmright, it was first touch only.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 04:42:44 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 27, 2013, 04:26:35 pmA) I'm not saying it's impossible that Dave's settings were off - and better results might be gotten - but honestly, Greg, the intensity grading in the video you posted doesn't look very good to me (and that was at a time base that the Instek supposedly does ~13,000 wfrm/s). You could help sort this out by posting an image from the Instek which is similar to this one I just captured from my Rigol:B) I doubt whether Dave will ever do a full review - he never went back and did one of the Rigol DS2000 (which is a DSO he likes quite a lot). He did a 1'12" impressions video - so I would suspect we will see a teardown and little else (although I could be wrong).

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 04:51:26 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on May 27, 2013, 04:35:44 pmColor grading uses a lookup table from the intensity values - if the intensity values are coarse, the color grading will be as well..QuoteAgain, you're spouting nonsense about the Rigol which is untrue. There is rarely a time when you have to turn a knob very long on the Rigol - it uses TWO knobs (slow/fast) for any variable that has a wide range - plus it has software acceleration implemented on it's encoders - which the Instek seems to be lacking.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 05:26:16 pm
content: There is some DPO... But yes, these were quite slow-changing signalsBut the AM modulation in Dave's video looks definitely crap.EDIT: See the Agilent screenshots. This is how AM should look like.Not like this:http://youtu.be/cRe9b7iV6Kc?t=42m53s

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 05:30:35 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 27, 2013, 04:51:26 pmehm you don't know how it is implemented on GDS in detail, me either. All i can see is that it works as it should whenset to color grading.Quote from: marmad on May 27, 2013, 04:51:26 pmwell, i can clearly see on video, Dave turning for seconds knob from min to 3/4 (video 43:02 to 43:35) and thenfrom min to max on GDS in shorter time (at 48:50). I don't give a shit if there is acceleration or 20 knobs and 6 buttonsfor super fine intensity on Rigol - all i need to see is there on video - meaning how long it takes and what he is doing.For sure the grading looks better (no, i don't like it, not on Rigol nor Agilent, but it looks better as on GDS with single color,it is somehow analog-blur kind of. However, i prefer anyway the color grading, so what.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 05:31:41 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 27, 2013, 04:42:44 pmMaybe because you did before him? Why not.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 05:59:10 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on May 27, 2013, 05:30:35 pmI know how any sane programmer would code it - but no, I don't know if they did it a different way than that - but possibly they did, given some of the stupid things they've done in the firmware. And if by, 'it works as it should' you mean it displays colors - yes, you're right, it does - but in the video it looks coarsely done to me - as does the intensity grading. Again, it might just be that Dave has things set incorrectly - I don't know - but it would be nice to see it demonstrated more.QuoteI guess you don't have to give a shit because you're full of it. Dave is clearly PLAYING with the intensity setting on the Rigol during those 33 seconds of video - turning it up and down, taking his hand from the knob, then turning it up and down again, etc. - to demonstrate the grading for the camera. Then you post this ridiculous shit about those 33 seconds:Quote...when in reality, it takes exactly 3.5 rotations of the knob to get from minimum to maximum (you can do it in ~2 seconds).

author: jahonen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 06:25:45 pm
content: To me it looks like GDS-2000A is unable to do shading in "density"-fashion (something that velocity modulation of electron beam produces in analog oscilloscopes). That prevents it working for AM modulated signal. For example, I get the attached image with my Agilent MSO6034A when singleshotting an AM modulated signal. From advertisements, it looks like the shading/color-grading works only on subsequent sweeps.Regards,Janne

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 06:30:21 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 27, 2013, 05:59:10 pmno, i'm not from US, so no chance, not full of brainshit. Jealous? or simply menstruation?You should know me better Mark. Cool down a bit.Quote from: marmad on May 27, 2013, 05:59:10 pmnot the frakking 33 seconds exact. What i'm talking about is how he did the compare, 0% to 75% on rigoland 0% to 100% on Instek is not fair , especially when you check the time how long it took to turn the knob onRigol (these 75% was slower reached) and on Instek (these 100% was faster reached).I'm sure it was not his intention, he did it simply to get something on display while playing with knobs and talking to camIt wasn't review nor real compare to other product. I think he simplydon'tlike color grading (is it like that Dave?) andwas simply not satisfied with single color grading vs. big VPO announcement, that's all.Quote from: jahonen on May 27, 2013, 06:25:45 pmexact, this is what i meant as i said "analog-blur kind of"

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 07:05:25 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 27, 2013, 04:51:26 pmThe instek does have acceleration on its encoders which I mentioned in my own video.On an airplane now or I'd write more.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 07:07:27 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 27, 2013, 07:05:25 pmThe instek does have acceleration on its encoders which I mentioned in my own video.here we go, thank you for clarification.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 07:16:51 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on May 27, 2013, 06:30:21 pmI'm sorry, Thomas, but you need to take your own advice - you were the one who started interjecting 'shit' into the conversation - in writing and metaphorically.Quote from: jahonen on May 27, 2013, 06:25:45 pmI believe I've figured out what the problem really is - but I'm going to post it over in the thread about Dave's video.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 07:44:15 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on May 27, 2013, 06:30:21 pmFyi, I used the "report to moderator" link below Tinhead's post above. "This post escalated personal attacks beyond reason. Wasn't the first post in the series but this or the post it quotes went over the top."I'm usually pretty impressed with the respect everyone shows each other (even with there's no basis for said respect haha) and the good taste in the language used. Some disagree about "sh*t", and Dave uses it himself occasionally, but it's over my line for use in public. Further, a general statement about a whole country and a dig on women has no place here - at least not on this part of the forum.Sorry to be "up tight" but hopefully all posts involved are removed or edited and this is put in the past without further issue.Edit: clarification

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 07:56:23 pm
content: Quote from: jneumann on May 27, 2013, 07:44:15 pmWell, it's your prerogative to report this, but you should know that Thomas and I have a personal relationship - having exchanged many private messages and emails - so speaking for myself (and I hope Thomas felt the same), I never felt the attacks were personal, but were merely 'roughhousing' (that, admittedly, we perhaps pushed too far).

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 08:15:41 pm
content: Quote from: jneumann on May 27, 2013, 07:44:15 pmin Europe we can (still) luckily speak free, about womans, Al Quida, US, what so ever ... we don't have any problems with whatsoeverskin color, abortion, jesus, asgards, islam, 09/11 magic planes or G.W.B.I know most younger US citizens can't believe that, but really, there is different world outside USAnd btw, a general statement that chinese manufacturer producing only crap/copycat is ok? Wakeup, G.W.B. is not anymore.Quote from: marmad on May 27, 2013, 07:56:23 pmyes i do

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 08:26:46 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on May 27, 2013, 07:56:23 pmAh, I wasn't aware. That's a little better I suppose. I'm so used to the "Internet" being a place for anonymous people to attack each other in stupid, offensive ways that I assumed that's what was happening. I expect that on the Huffington Post and Fox News webpages but was pretty taken aback to see that here on EEVblog!Quote from: tinhead on May 27, 2013, 08:15:41 pmThe right to speak free is fine and good - as an American I believe it in too - but sometimes one chooses to be polite and chooses not to exercise their right to be rude. I can tolerate quite a bit of insult about the USA (and acknowledge some is deserved) but there are few enough women in electronics the way it is. We may as well try to make them feel welcome, eh?It's really the combo of all four - the personal attack, the language, the country, and the women that pushed me to not ignore it. And again, on another website I might've still ignored it haha.Anyhow, I see now you and Marmad are friends so that's good - I know how that goes haha. Just maybe realize if you're goading each other in a public space you may raise eyebrows among those who don't know better.

author: ddavidebor
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 08:32:22 pm
content: What do the dvm module?

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 08:39:44 pm
content: Quote from: jneumann on May 27, 2013, 08:26:46 pmWell, Tinhead is a little nervous these days because the Rigol thread is closing on him - so he wants to smack it down

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 08:50:30 pm
content: I haven't had a chance to watch Dave's unboxing in-toto yet but I can start to see a bit of Agilent-style bias. Looking at it Rigol copied the Agilent path and Instek copied the Tek path. I'm not here to say one or the other is better but there does seem to be a bit of bias since the Instek doesn't function like Dave expects it to - e.g. like the Agilent.There are definite issues with the Instek - which I also have pointed out - and I'm going to make sure the Instek guys check out Dave's unboxing video if they haven't already and get some answers from them on various items - but one that I think is unfair is complaining about some things because they are different (e.g. the test key being a "waste of a key" for example). I value Dave's opinion but we all need to remember it's just that - opinion.One thing I will be grilling the US based Instek guys about though is the persistence levels since that kind of irks me a little bit and I would like a straight answer.-G

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 08:51:42 pm
content: Quote from: jneumann on May 27, 2013, 08:26:46 pmstop here ... to make it simple "menstruation is not illness or disorder and womans are not animals", so yes we can speakabout even if we never ever would know what we talking about. And every woman know how it feels in the first 2-3 days,and many of them knows how "easy explosive" they are. So when i speak "do you have menstruation" don't see this as"ahh a woman, haha" but simply "shit, what's wrong with you? is there something bugging you?".Side note: actually my mother spoked like that to my sisters, heh, and to me (when i was running crazy) "go out, run a round and take a piss".As i was young i never got why she was like that, now having (as well adult) children i know what she meant.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 08:52:21 pm
content: Quote from: ddavidebor on May 27, 2013, 08:32:22 pmI could not find any info anywhere. (GW Instek web, user manuals...)

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 08:58:55 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 27, 2013, 08:50:30 pmWell, Rigol is quite different from Agilent. They have their very own style. DS2000 and DSOX2000 are not similar especially with the screen layout.And when copying Tek they should implement the DPO. Even the old and still sold expensive TDS3000 has a decent intensity gradation.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 09:00:50 pm
content: Quote from: grego on May 27, 2013, 08:50:30 pmGreg, I don't know if you sawthis post of mine, but you could probably figure out fairly easily (using intensity or colors) how many levels of gradation the Instek is actually doing. Perhaps it varies based on some other setting (persistence?), but I can only find evidence of 16 in screenshots.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 09:02:27 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 27, 2013, 08:52:21 pmprobably nothing else than displaying some values, however to me it looked like when enabled the DSO is going slower.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 09:04:28 pm
content: Ok, we know that the DPO is not a strong point of GDS-2000A. Now let's discuss it's other features. IMHO the XY mode is well implemeted and sophisticated (see manual) but I don't know what is it useful for.My DSOX2002A almost never goes slower.Because it can show only 4 auto measurements and has rather small memory 50kpoints per channel. And no statistics feature.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 09:25:07 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 27, 2013, 09:04:28 pmhmm, i would say it does have nice VPO colors, it peaks at 80k wfms/s, so it's ok.Everything else need to be really compared/tested.Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 27, 2013, 09:04:28 pmbuy a Tektronix and you will see how slow the UI can be when something enable. It is very hard to explain WHY isTektronix still worth money when this or that is not working that smooth as it should be.Simply check the MDO video, crazy. Somehow funny to see that asia manufacturer who produceTEK look&feel DSOs/DPOs are doing exact the same, imeplementig lag here and there ... a real bad habit.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 11:23:23 pm
content: Quote from: jneumann on May 27, 2013, 07:44:15 pmGuys, cool it down.There is one very simple rule on this forum - no personal attacks.You can use the word shit all you like. A product is shit, that soldering is shit, etc, but just don't use it in relation to a person, that then becomes a personal attack. Repeat offenders will get banned.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 11:25:17 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 27, 2013, 12:37:29 amI didn't notice that. If that's the case then that's stupid, they need to fix that.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 27, 2013, 11:48:49 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 27, 2013, 11:25:17 pmYeah - that was called out previously - even mentioned it in my video too. Instek has confirmed it's on the firmware roadmap though - just not clear on "when" but it's there.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 12:03:56 am
content: Having gone back and watched all of Instek's videos from both the GDS-2000A series - and the previous 3000 series which it's heavily based on - it's clear to me now that their VPO technology is only doing 16 levels of intensity gradation; it's strikingly obvious once you look for it.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 12:10:47 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 27, 2013, 11:25:17 pmWell, they should, but this expensive GDS-3000 also has nofinevertical or horizontal controls.http://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1290Note that GDS-3000 is definitely not an entry level scope. It's the best scope ever manufactured by GW Instek. It was introduced in 2011. It has 5GS/s and 500MHz bandwidth. On the other hand, it has only WTF 25kpoints memory per channel.I am afraid that GW Instek scopes have always been a bit weird.

author: Hypernova
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 01:14:06 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 27, 2013, 09:04:28 pmXY mode is handy when viewing phase information or any 2 waveform with xy relationship. One application is in AB encoders where you get sin cosine outputs, If your xy plot is an oval you know the read head is not positioned right.And what do you mean no stats? isn't that in the same place as the measurement menu?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 01:52:04 am
content: This statistic feature isonly on DSOX3000,not on DSOX2000.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 01:56:28 am
content: GDS2000A has advanced XY cursors, but I don't understand it.

author: snoopy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 05:03:50 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on January 11, 2013, 12:05:31 amI just saw daves videoWhat an anticlimax !!However lets give the crew at GW a chance to address and hopefully fix the issues before everyone bags the crap out of itAs it stands the Rigol 2000 series runs rings around it IMO !!regards

author: roli_bark
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 06:20:12 am
content: Quote from: Hypernova on May 28, 2013, 01:14:06 amAgree, and more over:If you want a MEASURED frequency/phase shift info in XY mode between 2 sinusoids, it would be nice to have the exact ellipse [deviation from an ideal circle), or ellipse-rotation rate.

author: egonotto
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 04:39:49 pm
content: Hi Hydrawerk,"GDS2000A has advanced XY cursors, but I don't understand it"The cursors shows the coordinates in cartesian and polar form and the product and the quotient.As example you can use it to calculate phase or modulation factor.Best Regardsegonotto

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 11:35:31 pm
content: Thanks for teardown, Dave.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2013, 11:52:27 pm
content: Well, there are those weird things on the function generator PCB. Someone apparently forgot to draw a route on the PCB. Well, i didn't see this inside Rigol or Agilent scopes.EDIT: OK, the "?" marked thing onGDS-2000A FGN01.pngis just a glue.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 29, 2013, 12:11:24 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 28, 2013, 11:52:27 pmThat's just some left over hot snot.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2013, 12:13:43 am
content: No shielding over the switched power supply? Oh, Rigol and Agilent have shielding. Folks, this GDS-2000A looks overall designed to be as cheap as possible... (Even no pushable knobs...)

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2013, 01:39:51 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 29, 2013, 12:13:43 amSeriously? Man, you have had a hard-on for being negative on this thing since you bought a 2002. Did you listen to Dave's commentary during the teardown? From a build quality standpoint it's all top-notch components throughout with top-notch build quality? Set aside any software issues for a moment and the quality of the build is fantastic. I'm sure there were some design/cost decisions (I'm curious about the lack of a FPGA to drive the display and such as well) but you can not complain about their choice of circuitry from the passives through the ICs.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2013, 02:07:57 am
content: Well, no problem. Although the hardware is maybe not as modern as it could be, I expect thatthis scope will last long.It looked quite good at the trade fair where I took pictures. It's quite feature rich.At my student's lab at university we have two 60MHz GDS-806C from year 2004 or so. They are not much modern, they have only 100MSa/s ADCs. But they are still going strong, no problems with buttons, knobs or PSU.And note that the logic analyzer of your GDS-2000A is probably good andRigol has nothing like it yet.Tek DPO2000 has probably also unshielded PSU.https://plus.google.com/photos/104378593109746079667/albums/5860030731124964769?banner=pwa&authkey=CIH3roH_-ImCcwMaybe it's not a big disadvantage.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2013, 08:52:36 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 29, 2013, 02:07:57 amYeah, where is the Rigol 2000 Logic Analyzer?And the Rigol 4000 Logic Analyzer?How and when do we get those?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 29, 2013, 09:52:59 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on May 29, 2013, 08:52:36 amI thought someone mentioned on here it's in the pipeline?

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2013, 10:16:45 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 29, 2013, 09:52:59 amThey are, I talked specifically with Rigol about this at the Dayton Hamvention. A "couple months" was the timeline mentioned.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 29, 2013, 11:58:09 am
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on May 29, 2013, 10:16:45 amIs that for the 2000 series?

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2013, 12:10:49 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 29, 2013, 11:58:09 amI was specifically asking about the 4000, I believe someone else commented about the 2000 MSO. I have the engineers card, I could ask them if anyone is interested?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2013, 03:58:15 am
content: I got a note back from InstekUSA today - they escalated to engineering in Taiwan and we should be seeing some responses from them on this forum in the near future.QuoteThey also released firmware 1.15 with a few minor fixes.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2013, 11:22:02 am
content: Quote from: grego on May 30, 2013, 03:58:15 amThanks for the info, Greg - although I don't know how much GW-Instek is going to reveal about their actual design techniques (possible overclocking, etc). But there are a couple of questions which are just specification clarifications which are missing from their data sheets - which it seems that they could just answer immediately:Color depth of LCD (it appears to be 256 maximum).Levels of intensity grading (Likely 16; 32 maximum given 4 channels and 8-bit color-depth).

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2013, 11:44:00 am
content: I think they are going to be commenting on the color-grading issue (since I brought that up in my email) among other things. I specifically asked about that and the stuttering Dave saw at times. I also pointed them at the video itself and both this thread and the one about the specific episode and begged to get an engineering to watch and respond.I agree I don't think they will discuss specific details on construction but hopefully the software-related ones we can get some feedback.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2013, 11:56:46 am
content: Quote from: grego on May 30, 2013, 11:44:00 amJust as a follow-up, I think it's reasonably clear what they've done in terms of design and FW. I think it's clever - in terms of keeping costs down for a 4-channel scope (look at the upcoming Rigol 4-channel response: smaller screen, single 2GSa/s split between all 4-channels, etc) - trade-offs have to be made for those price levels. But I do think it makes the DS2000 a better choice for 2-channels (unless you need MSO capabilities).

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2013, 04:16:41 pm
content: Well, nobody still has found out what's the GW Instek's logic analyzer like. It might be better than in my DSOX2002A (not enabled by code yet.) At least the GW will have longer memory, I think.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2013, 06:04:16 pm
content: Just for comparison I found a few pictures of intensity grading of Tek DPO2000. The LCD has funnily small resolution, but the DPO feature is OK, as it should be.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 01:49:37 am
content: Well, there is only one oscilloscope with true dual function generator.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 02:17:13 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 31, 2013, 01:49:37 amInterestingly, the 2000X and 3000X of course have the same capability built in, but it's only on the demo outputs signals.I've always wondered if you could somehow dump an ARB waveform into the 2nd channel by remote and somehow get it out the demo connector....They obviously do this in the firmware when using 2 demo outputs to generate signals.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 02:41:42 pm
content: So all the demo signals come from the MegaZoom IV ASIC? Interesting...

author: mike1305
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 06:18:00 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 30, 2013, 04:16:41 pmWe've played with it a bit here. A boon is that it comes with a few serial decode abilities for free with the analyzer. So that's pretty cool. An unfortunate limitation is that you can't decode serial buses using analog channels. To see analog channels and decode you have to double probe the signal, which of course doubles the loading effects on the DUT. Big bummer there.We are working on FW 1.14 and waiting for 1.15 as we speak so perhaps that changed?

author: ddavidebor
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 06:53:56 pm
content: well, it does not double.logic analizer usually have 100kohm internal impedance, while oscilloscope 1Mohm

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 06:58:07 pm
content: Quote from: mike1305 on May 31, 2013, 06:18:00 pm1.15 is available now but the notes don't refer to that, just a couple of simple fixes.

author: mike1305
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 07:07:53 pm
content: Yep, just installed it. Nothing much changed. According to their changelog:QuoteTrying to figure out what that last one is.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 08:14:08 pm
content: Quote from: mike1305 on May 31, 2013, 07:07:53 pmDownload it and tryhttp://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349Select the Download tab, then scroll down to Software, last entry in that section.QuoteQuote

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 08:33:09 pm
content: TheHorizontal Exansion APPdoesn't seem to be much useful... It even doesn't look like an APP.But GW Instek added an info about the DVM APP. It might be more useful, but there's still too few information... I am not sure if you need a DVM when you have eight auto measurements...And what's the DVM's maximal frequency? Is it trigger independent?At my DSOX2002A the DVM runs only to 100kHz, it's trigger independent and you even have to buy this option...But I got it for free together with Wavegen.

author: mike1305
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2013, 08:53:25 pm
content: Thanks for the context there guys. I notice they have an APP section in the scope. Seems like an interesting way to add extra features later. Although I agree, this horizontal app should just be embedded in the UI somewhere instead of a standalone application....

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 07:23:40 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 30, 2013, 04:16:41 pmHydrawerk, have you had any experience using the LA in your DSOX2002A? Or nothing yet? If yes, what do you like about it, what would like to see different - any and all thoughts on the LA functions would be welcome. If you have already posted somewhere regarding the LA (or know of posts on the LA by other users) please let us know the link(s). Thanks, EF

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 07:29:44 am
content: I remember speculation about whether installing two function generator modules would allow both outputs to be used at the same time.At least a couple sellers say yes, it's possible:http://www.tequipment.net/InstekGDS-2304A.html"Two function generators can be used at the same time to provide dual output signals."http://www.bellnw.com/manufacturer/Instek/GDS-2072A.htm"Two function generators can be used at the same time to provide dual output signals."HOWEVER,Page 4 of the "Quick start guide for DS2-FGN" herehttp://www.gwinstek.com/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349says differently:"Note: Even though it is possible to install two function generator modules, only one function generator option can be used at any one time."And yet, the "GDS-2000A brochure" (found at the same url) says exactly the same thing found on the sellers' websites. I'm sure the sellers are simply making direct quotes from page 2 of the brochure.To add to the confusion, not only does Instek appear to both be saying only 1 can be used at "any one time" (even with 2 installed) AND both can be used at the "same time" if 2 are installed, they ALSO appear to be saying both outputs can be used with a single module installed! See page 23 of the "GDS-2000A user manual" (same url), where it says:"The function generator outputs are used with an optional function generator module."Okay, so it's a small stretch to interpret the last quote as definitively stating one module will allow both outputs to be used at once - but if this was the only quote a person had to go on I do think it's reasonable to interpret it that way. "Outputs" are used with "an" optional "module"(singular). If that doesn't mean multiple outputs are used with only one module installed, then I think it really ought to have been written more clearly.Three different messages in the manufacturer's own documentation! What a mess!Of course, if I had to guess which document is correct I'd assume it's the "Quick start guide for DS2-FGN".

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 08:24:23 am
content: Quote from: jneumann on June 01, 2013, 07:29:44 amForget the documents. Reality trumps document, every time.And Dave showed us the reality. A single output at a fixed pin of the function generator. No chance that module can put out two separate signals.Further, Dave's hi-res stillshttp://www.flickr.com/photos/eevblog/8872848654/#sizes/o/in/set-72157633773967624/show that the GEN1 output is directly connected through to both expansion sockets. (unless they do some magic under the sockets)So no chance two of that shown function generator modules can work at the same time. Maybe not even if you hack one and change its output pin to GEN2. The oscilloscope software probably doesn't support it.On the other hand, the GEN2 output (the one not used) seems to receive some special treatment between the two sockets (R1506, R1507 are visible and R1506 apparently allowing to connect GEN2 to GEN1). I can't see if the resistors are populated or if there is maybe some magic going on at the other side of the PCB. However, giving Instek the benefit of the doubt, it seems they could make another function generator module with two outputs, or another single output module that could use GEN2.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 12:35:47 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on June 01, 2013, 08:24:23 amIn Dave's video, the FG module is first using the GEN2 output. Later, after he's swapped the modules in back, the FG module is using the GEN1 output.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 02:12:12 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on June 01, 2013, 12:35:47 pmThe software said it would. Big difference. And Dave had to reboot because the instrument was acting funny.With a simple, fixed output pin on the module, and the GEN1 connection going straight through to both sockets I leave it up to you to explain how you think that magic can happen.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 02:21:34 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on June 01, 2013, 02:12:12 pmI was just responding to your statements about the GEN2 output. I'm not saying one way or the other if the DSO can support 2 FGs.Quote from: Bored@Work on June 01, 2013, 08:24:23 am

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 02:52:30 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on June 01, 2013, 07:23:40 amWell, I don't have the digital probes, but I could start the 30-day trial so i tried the LA a bit.You can connect signals directly to the digital connector of your scope. It works.You don't need any special digital probe with built-in electronics. But now my trial has gone and I am not gonna buy the LA option licence DSOX2MSO...http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-1953247-pn-DSOX2MSO/infiniivision-2000-x-series-oscilloscope-mso-upgrades?cc=CZ&lc=eng

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 02:55:40 pm
content: Unfortunately, this is the only picture I took. It was in the demo mode, so there was nothing connected to the digital port. Well, the DSOX2002A logic analyzer hasquite small memory, only 50kpoints. I don't know if it can be upgraded but probably not.DSOX2MEMUPupgrades only analog channels I think. On the ither hand, it probably maintains the high waveform update rate even if you turn on all channels. And it's 1GSa/s per each digital channel.Note that GDS-2000A logic analyzer has 2Mpoints per channel. It's much better.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 06:19:46 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on June 01, 2013, 02:55:40 pmI'm really liking the "2M record length (per channel)" in the picture you attached, but given the discrepancies in Instek documentation I mentionedhereI'll believe it when someone verifies it.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2013, 06:55:40 pm
content: Quote from: jneumann on June 01, 2013, 06:19:46 pmWell, there seems to be 16M x 16 {32M x 8} of DRAM available - so assuming they mean 2M maximum when none of the analog channels are on, it's possible. Greg would be able to verify this reasonably quickly.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2013, 06:06:12 pm
content: I haven't seen anyone ask this yet, but maybe I've missed it. Could a GDS-2000A owner please confirm the external dimensions of the scope? Including knobs and all protrusions, ie, what are the inside dimensions of the smallest rectangular box that would just barely fit the scope?The specs I found list 380mm x 220mm x 145mm, which is about 15.0" x 8.7" x 5.7" (inches). I'd rather have real-world, end-user measurements though, please.Thanks!Edit: The scope only, probes, power cord, and logic analyser or other protruding options removed.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2013, 06:08:45 pm
content: Quote from: jneumann on June 03, 2013, 06:06:12 pmHave any owners had the chance to measure its dimensions yet?Quote from: Hydrawerk on June 01, 2013, 02:55:40 pmMaybe most know this by now, but I just found what might be bad news in themanual. The last sentence on page 114 reads: "Please note that digital channels are not supported for measurement using segments."And here, I thought the segmented memory would be a big help with capturing a string of messages on a bus. Of course, the decode only works on the digital channels. So it appears you can either:1) Use the analog channels to capture up to 2048 messages and scroll through them one by one (possibly over the course of several seconds or even minutes+). You then have to decode them yourself.OR2) Use the LA channels to capture a single, normal 2M aquisition and the scope will decode whatever messages are found. This will most likely only be a very short time frame since you'll have a constant sampling rate throughout the aquisition. If you need the 500MS/s rate you'll only be able to look at however many messages occur in a fraction of a second. So if messages are separated by more time than that, and the DUT can't be made to only produce parts of sequences, there will be a lot of work with offsets and delayed triggers etc to try to capture messages deeper in the communication.Also, of possible interest is the manual's section on record length that's already been talked about, with "short" confirmed to be 1Ks. Page 109 has the typo about short memory being 1M, and page 110 has a table with two columns (normal and auto) duplicated. Why not just have two columns, "Single" and "Normal/Auto" or "Normal and Auto"?Edit June 6th: My display name has recently changed from "jneumann" to "Yaksaredabomb"

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2013, 06:19:14 pm
content: Quote from: jneumann on June 05, 2013, 06:08:45 pmOh, I believe what they say in the user manual(EDIT)about dimensions.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2013, 06:32:32 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on June 05, 2013, 06:19:14 pmYou're kidding, right?Joking aside I'd still prefer to hear someone's actual measurements. Not much different than asking for a screenshot showing the memory depth at a certain sampling rate, video showing the intensity grading with a certain signal, or a hands-on account of any other feature.Edit June 6th: My display name has recently changed from "jneumann" to "Yaksaredabomb"

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 06, 2013, 01:21:23 pm
content: I'm heading out of town this weekend for a week but I'll see if I can get that for you before I go.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2013, 02:20:50 am
content: Note that GW Instek provides no photo of scope's intensity gradation like this.http://www.rigolna.com/images/products/DS2000.jpgTheir photo has no gradation shown.http://www.gwinstek.com/product/images/picture/FC_2012109144736.jpg

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 07, 2013, 02:37:07 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on June 07, 2013, 02:20:50 amThen again, Instek's photo shows several digital inputs while Rigol's photo doesn't show any....

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 08, 2013, 02:59:15 pm
content: Dave, this GDS-2000A deserves some more investigation. I believe that it has some strong points... When youdon't needlong memory (7MB or so), fast waveform update rate or intensity gradation.The LA might be fine??And hey, is the scope design much simpler, when they did not implementfinevertical or horizontal scale? Owon did the same.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 11, 2013, 09:54:34 pm
content: Quote from: Yaksaredabomb on June 05, 2013, 06:08:45 pmInteresting -this postover in the "EEVblog #474 - GW Instek GDS-2000A Series Oscilloscope Unboxing & First Impression" topic has a video from TEquipment showing segmented memory working with the logic analyzer. So yet another direct contradiction to what's in the manual, though this time it is a positive contradiction.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 25, 2013, 04:21:32 am
content: There is new firmware for this scope that fixes a lot of stuff apparently:http://webfile.gwinstek.com/ftp/GDS-2000A/GDS2K_V1.17.upgWill go install it now.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2013, 04:44:43 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 25, 2013, 04:21:32 amThanks for the link! Just visited their site and it wasn't obvious how to get to it from there. I won't have a chance to install it myself until next week, but I'm very curious to know how it goes for you and what the updates are!

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 25, 2013, 04:56:45 am
content: Quote from: Yaksaredabomb on July 25, 2013, 04:44:43 amHere are the changes:http://www.ittsb.eu/forum/index.php?topic=547.0

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 25, 2013, 05:06:18 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 25, 2013, 04:56:45 amInteresting. Hope the knob sensitivity adjustment fixes the bug where the selection occasionally goes against the direction of rotation a step or two when turning the knob slowly. That's been one of the more annoying things for me so far - makes the knob feel really cheap and wishy-washy. Thanks for the extra info!

author: hmlittle59
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: July 31, 2013, 10:30:21 pm
content: Hello All,Wanted to purchase the Rigol DS2102 today and talked to a "Tech" at the location and he preferred the GDS-2102A over the Rigol DS2102. What's ya'll thoughts on that. Besides the Instek is on SALE now at "TEquipment".This is making my head spin. Once again "OWON" is out after reading all the reviews.RIGOL 2102orGDS - 2102A(I don't like the non-expandable memory).This is my first scope to buy and I work on Parallax Micro-Controllers.Thanks for any helpHoward

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 31, 2013, 11:15:20 pm
content: For a 2 channel the Rigol hands down.I had a 2204A from Instek and I ended up returning it.

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 31, 2013, 11:22:01 pm
content: Quote from: hmlittle59 on July 31, 2013, 10:30:21 pmI don't know anything about Micro-Controllers, but I do know you can buy a Rigol DS2072 (70 MHz) and upgrade it to 200 MHz with just a licence code. Some people have even figured out how to do that for free. Rigol display is way better than Instek I reckon. Much easier on my eyes.

author: hmlittle59
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 02:32:20 am
content: The Tech said that the Instek had a better Quality Display and better trigger capture, whats your thoughts on that. It would be nice to have a larger memory but I'm not even sure that I would even use whats comes with the Instek.(for now anyway). I've saw one video on the breakdown of the Rigol and getting ready to check out the Instek now.Howard

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 03:30:19 am
content: Instek has more pixels, but the display is far inferior to the Rigol. Not just the waveform, but all of the display, incl. menus etc. Rigol's advance triggers on Rigol can be unlocked with a key code, same as the bandwidth. Some people have figured out how to make those codes with a keygen, but the proper way to obtain them is to purchase them.

author: hmlittle59
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 04:19:32 am
content: Well my mind was set on the Instek til I seen you last post about un-locking more triggering points. I don't mine paying a little more if it will make it a Head -to- Head matchup. I will be paying USA prices and both were at $1143.00 but the Instek is on sale for $971.00. I do like the ability to expand the Instek with the Two(2) modules. I may never use the 2 meg. memory but it does seem a bit low by todays standards.Dave seems to be the main Man for doing all the Main testing, do you know if a Head -to- Head was ever done on these Two(2) units? I could not find any true test on this Website.Thanks again.Howard

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 08:32:49 am
content: US$839 for the Rigol DS2072 would be price I'd look for.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 01:12:10 pm
content: Quote from: hmlittle59 on August 01, 2013, 04:19:32 amThe 2 meg is a bit of a marketing gimmick. It's only 2 meg in single-shot mode. Otherwise it's 1 meg. And if you use both channels it's 500k. Just FYI.

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 08:44:53 pm
content: Yea, that's the problem with most of these scopes. Marketing gimmicks. But I still think, for what you're paying, just go buy an Agilent.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 10:18:01 pm
content: Quote from: echen1024 on August 01, 2013, 08:44:53 pmLike I'd buy an Agilent 2000 X-Series over a Rigol DS2000 series.Talk about throwing money away for less features!

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 11:39:18 pm
content: Quote from: echen1024 on August 01, 2013, 08:44:53 pmAgree with Marmad 100%. DS2072 is great. I considered Agilent, before buying the Rigol, glad I didn't waste my money.

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2013, 12:18:53 am
content: Probably. After looking in detail at the Rigol DS2000 series, I can say it's significantly better at a lower price. The only thing I miss is 4 channels.

author: hmlittle59
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2013, 12:44:04 am
content: Thanks....You guys are not helping with this, have to buy now mood I was in. Now I will go and look at the Agilent 2000 series.Thanks for all the input...Howard

author: hmlittle59
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2013, 11:03:37 pm
content: Hello Again,Another day in the Scope search. After looking at more You Tube video's, I going to buy the Rigol 2072. Looking a the comparison with the Owon 3000 series, that made up my mind.Thanks for all the help. I was set on the Owon until I saw all the reviews and demo video's.Thanks againHoward

author: rbola35618
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2013, 12:41:11 am
content: One of the things that I did not like was that in certain settings the rigol's display looked very dim even when the intensity was set to high. I experience this on a ds4000 scope. Does the Rigol ds2000 have the same problem?Robert

author: Chalky
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 03, 2013, 01:46:44 am
content: Quote from: hmlittle59 on August 02, 2013, 11:03:37 pmFor a 2-channel scope, nothing beats it (DS2072) on price. Specially once it's laden with all the extra features!

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2013, 08:18:39 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 25, 2013, 04:21:32 amQuote from: EEVblog on July 25, 2013, 04:56:45 amHas anyone had a chance to try out the new firmware yet?This scope definitely isn't a "clear winner" for everyone and does have its shortfalls and annoyances, but for a budget 4-channel DSO with relatively inexpensive MSO and decoding options it doesn't seem too bad. I was tired of waffling back and forth on my scope decision and procrastinating on projects that would benefit from a scope (or even require one) so I bought a GDS-2204A a few weeks back. I do find the extra vertical pixels come in handy (LCD is 800x600), especially with the 4 analog channels or when using the 8 digital channels (there's a 16-channel option too but I only bought the 8-channel version).Sadly I'm still swamped and haven't had a chance to try out the update myself. We'll see about this weekend. I hope the knob sensitivity adjustment smoothes out the knob action. The enhanced SW and VPO performance also sounds great - maybe someone will be clever enough to find a way to measure the performance improvements?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2013, 01:02:10 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 25, 2013, 04:56:45 amWell, oh...At Agilent it is very easy to find newfirmwareandchangelogontheir websitehttp://www.home.agilent.comAnd you do not need any registration.It is strange to find the GW Instek changelog on a greek forum...

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2013, 01:03:18 am
content: Have you seen this competitive datasheet DPO2000B vs. GDS-2000A?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2013, 01:05:04 am
content: Well, come on... The GW Instek has a search function, too. Don't you know it, Tektronix guys??

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2013, 01:37:00 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 13, 2013, 01:02:10 amFelt off-topic at first getting into how Agilent does things but I see how it's relevant as a comparison. Would be nice if Instek took a page from Agilent's book on firmware updates.Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 13, 2013, 01:03:18 amOn thisgwinstek.compage you can find their own "Comparison fact sheet between GDS-2000A and Tek MSO/DPO2000B". Of course it's biased to show the Instek having more checks and the Tek having more x's haha.Also note that, although prices vary, I got my GDS-2204A and 8-channel LA option for about $1000 USD less than the Tektronix DPO2024B costs without any options. So of course you would expect the Tek to significantly outperform or have other desirable features to justify the cost (and I'm not saying it doesn't).Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 13, 2013, 01:05:04 amNice catch - I've actually used the search feature and it's kind of nice. Way better than scrolling and scrolling and scrolling. Still a little "clunky" but I might not notice that as much when I'm more used to how it works.So - has anyone tried the new firmware yet? I see I still can't find it very easily on gwinstek.com so maybe it's still pending final release. Or maybe this is as close as we'll get.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2013, 03:15:48 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 13, 2013, 01:03:18 amMarketing speak. Honestly, Tek needs to get their crap together and come out with something people really want. They are getting killed in the lower end scope ranges.Notice (not that this is the only real point of comparison mind you) that they don't even mention wfm/s? That's because the Tek is only 5000 wfm/s max whereas the Instek is 80,000. That's not a metric you want to highlight.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2013, 03:51:24 pm
content: Well, Tektronix DPO2000B can have active probes (that are bloody expensive). But that is not a big advantage for a hobbyist.

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2013, 08:39:14 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 13, 2013, 03:51:24 pmI don't think their target market is hobbyists. I think they are targeting the 1000 unit/order, institutional type.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 13, 2013, 09:49:10 pm
content: Quote from: echen1024 on August 13, 2013, 08:39:14 pmI wonder who would possibly have a need to order 1000 scopes at once? Maybe if all the universities in a state (or several states) all got together and decided on one?Not meaning to be critical or take you too literally - it just provoked my imagination and now I'm wondering.

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 14, 2013, 04:48:05 am
content: Quote from: Yaksaredabomb on August 13, 2013, 09:49:10 pmI don't know either. Just a random figure.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 16, 2013, 12:23:02 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on July 25, 2013, 04:21:32 amSo is the scope better now? Was the intensity grading feature improved?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2013, 06:42:37 pm
content: Now GW Instek published their firmware directly on their website. That's good.http://www.gwinstek.com.tw/en/product/productdetail.aspx?pid=3&mid=7&id=1349Go to theDownloadsection. Then go to theSoftwaresection.Also please download theFirmware upgrade guide.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 30, 2013, 08:57:39 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on August 30, 2013, 06:42:37 pmSweet! Thatisgood news - thanks!

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2013, 04:50:22 pm
content: Quote from: Yaksaredabomb on August 07, 2013, 08:18:39 pmHow about a report on the waveforms per second rate when you have the DSO set to AUTO record length? Using the tiny 1k SHORT length (which is how they measure their 80k wfrm/s) is a serious drawback for getting decent sample speeds at most timebases - so I'd like to see an honest chart reflecting the wfrm speeds when using a reasonable record length size.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2013, 10:27:04 pm
content: And what do you think about theTrig Outsignal? It has a very low level. Kiriakos wrote:Quotehttp://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Wfms%20measurments.htmlBut he was wrong with waveform update rate measurement...

author: digsys
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 27, 2013, 12:26:17 pm
content: Any updates on the GDS-2304A ? TM have a "show special?" at ~OZ$1770 (no options).What was the comparison consensus / outcome? Thoughts?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 06, 2013, 10:32:52 pm
content: New videos. Well, GW Instek guys should buy a HD video camera.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 09, 2013, 09:57:20 pm
content: GW Instek GDS-2000Ais now sold rebranded asTexio DCS-9700 Series.DCS-9700??http://www.texio.co.jp/en/03prod_01_03_DCS-9700.html

author: AndersAnd
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2013, 07:03:56 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on November 09, 2013, 09:57:20 pmGood Will Instrument Co., Ltd. [a.k.a. GW Instek] is now the owner of Texio [formerly Kenwood TMI] according to Texio's website:Company:http://www.texio.co.jp/en/02comp_02.htmlQuoteHistory:http://www.texio.co.jp/en/02comp_03.htmlQuote

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2014, 12:54:07 am
content: A review by Kiriakos.http://www.ittsb.eu/GDS-2102A%20Mini%20review%20.html

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2014, 02:45:39 pm
content: As Dave mentioned before, the VPO performance is not good at GDS-2000A scopes.This is how it should look like.http://youtu.be/_TSr9nFN1GU?t=12m20s

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 21, 2014, 02:57:23 pm
content: Other examples of good VPO performance.

author: Prismattery
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: March 24, 2014, 08:58:17 am
content: Fast question. This GW instek GDS-2072A vs RIGOL DS2072A. Which one to choose?Will be used for hobby projects and some more advanced power electronics projects.

author: Yaksaredabomb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 24, 2014, 12:54:37 pm
content: Quote from: Prismattery on March 24, 2014, 08:58:17 amFor 70 MHz, 2 analog channels, and no digital channels most will probably agree the Rigol is better.I wanted more bandwidth (200MHz) and 4 channels, though, so I went with the Instek as it was far more cost effective than anything else with the same specs at the time I bought it. Plus there was a great deal on the 8-channel LA option at the time (slightly over 50% off) so I went for that too - which wouldn't have been a possibility with the Rigol. Sadly I *still* have yet to use it much so I can hardly say anything about how well I like it. There are several hobby projects I was pretty excited about but the rest of life keeps getting in the way.Good luck!

author: Joel_l
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2014, 02:19:55 am
content: Hi,I'm thinking about returning the Siglent SDS1204 I just bought ( not very happy with many aspects of it ) and trying the GDS-2204A. I see that there has been several FW updates since the lack of a fine adjustment on the vertical scales was brought up and fed back to Instek. Does anyone know if fine vertical adjustment been added?ThanksJoel

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2014, 02:35:07 am
content: I do not think so... Fine control was not added IMHO.It seems that this scope is suitable for you if you need quite cheapfour channelscope and you do not need good VPO performance or high waveform update rate. Also the search function might be useful. You have probably seen Dave's video, have you?Note the crap function generator. Nowadays you can buy Rigol DS2000 with arbitrary generator.On the other hand, GW Instek will last longer IMHO. It does not have such a powerful hardwware, but it should be durable.And I think that even that expensive GDS-3000 series has no fine vertical control.Contact your authorized dealer for more info.

author: Joel_l
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2014, 02:52:41 am
content: I did watch parts of Dave's video ( a lot of skipping ahead ). What I want from a scope I thought was basic, stable display of simple wave forms and reasonably accurate measurements. I get neither from the 1204. It would also be nice to have independent control of timebase and sample rate within the abilities of the scope and memory depth. On paper the GDS -2000A's look interesting.Joel

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2014, 08:06:55 pm
content: Oh, was it so bad with that Siglent? They sell the same model as LeCroy WaveAce, I think.http://teledynelecroy.com/oscilloscope/oscilloscopemodel.aspx?modelid=6886&capid=102&mid=504

author: Joel_l
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: April 08, 2014, 10:17:39 pm
content: I did hear back from Siglent on my issues and they said they were addressed in the latest firmware. Now I waiting to hear why FW x.12 (on their website) is later than FW x.33 ( on my scope ). In the end, if the issues are addressed, I will be happy with the 1204. To keep things on topic in this thread, see my thread SDS1204CFL to track progress on this issue if you are interested.Joel