new RIGOL DS1000Z  and... MSO4000 - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / testgear

author: zachBH4RTO
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 08:54:08 pm
content: There are new scope on rigol Chinese webhttp://www.rigol.com/prodserv/DS1000Z/100M analog bandwidth; 4 channel, max 1G sample / sec and build in two channel arbitrary waveform generator O.olist price $1000http://www.rigol.com/prodserv/DS4000/which added 16 digital channel

author: hans
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 09:01:26 pm
content: Mirror for the DS1000Z page, as it seems to have gone offline:http://translate.google.nl/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gk-z.com%2Fshare_news%2F585040.htmlIts quite an upgrade from old DS1000 E series, 4-channels, 12Mpts, 30k wfms/sToo bad it doesn't have a seperate trigger channel.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 09:23:29 pm
content: Looks good but I am afraid of the bugs...http://www.eeworld.com.cn/Test_and_measurement/2013/0506/article_7270.html

author: maiakaat
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 09:57:53 pm
content: They said a DS4000 with digital channels was due out this year, out of my price range, the other looks a good 4 channel alternative.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 10:33:00 pm
content: $1K?I don't get it, that the same price point as the 2000 series

author: helloworld922
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 08, 2013, 11:15:08 pm
content: Pluses (compared with the 2000 series):1. Four channel vs. two channels for 2000 series (currently)2?. Hopefully standard RS232/SPI/I2C triggering and decode? It doesn't really specify, though it's somewhat doubtful since I can't think of many scopes with standard decode. Triggers are standard for 2000 series, decode is optionalDownsides:1. 12 Mpts standard, 24 Mpts optional for 1000z series vs. 14 MPnts standard, 56 Mpts optional 2000 series2. 30k wfms/s vs. 50k wfms/s3. 1 GSPS vs. 2 GSPS (I'm guessing 1000Z might have 2 ADC's with 1/2 coupled and 3/4 coupled, though even this is slightly disappointing)4. 7 inch screen vs. 8 inch screen5. Lower vertical resolution (2mV min vs. 500uV min)6. Lower max bandwidth models available (no 200 MHz version for 1000z)Everything else seems like the 1000z takes a lot of form factor from the 2000 series, might have a few other differences.I suppose it would be useful if you really needed a 4-channel scope for fairly cheap (100 MHz 1004z scope ~$1000 USD claimed, 100 MHz 2102 scope is listed at ~$1100 USD). Other than that, I'm not sure I would go for it over a 2000 series scope.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 01:10:23 am
content: Quote from: helloworld922 on May 08, 2013, 11:15:08 pmYes, it's kinda in that awkward spot of costing the same as the 2000, but having less capability, apart form the 4 channels.It's a rather unusual move IMO if it is attempting to replace the venerable 1000E series.

author: ivan747
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 01:31:55 am
content: An even worse spot is the one the DS1000CA is living on. It's just a DS1000E with twice the sample rate, higher wfrm/s, but the same software and costs $950. And what's going on with the logic analyzer option for the DS1000D? As far as I know it doesn't decode anything. Except for the DS1000E, Rigol's DS1000 category is all messed up.Another thing: There's already a 4 channel DS1000 oscilloscope: the DS1000B has 4 channels, so their product range is even more overlapping and confusing. At least they have an excuse to discontinue the DS1000B: the sampling memory is of a size only Tektronix can get away with, i.e. tiny.

author: Deckert
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 09:04:48 am
content: Thanks, hans, for the mirror link.It would not surprise me if they're aiming to discontinue the 1000E series. The DS1000Z might just use the new ASIC that they developed for the DS2000, thereby scaling up volumes for it and possibly bringing down prices. The DS1000Z can be a rather nice replacement for the DS1000E series, but oh dear, now you have to control 4 channels with only one set of vertical control knobs!--deckert

author: ivan747
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 10:24:47 am
content: If it is supposed to replace the DS1000E series, then it really needs a lower price point. And a lower price point doesn't make sense when they have other DS1000 series oscilloscopes for terrible prices!

author: Deckert
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 10:34:26 am
content: Here's a translation of a more "official" page:http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq%3Drigol%2Bds1000z%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3Dytj%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official&rurl=translate.google.co.za&sl=zh-CN&u=http://cn.rigol.com/prodserv/DS1000Z/&usg=ALkJrhhQjHODuFsX6KidUyC3IAnew_WfZQThey list theDS1074Z(70MHz 4-channel) for 3,980 yaun, which Google says is649 US Dollar. That's not a bad kick-off price for a newly released product.TheDS1074Z-S(70MHz 4-channel with dual 25MHz wavegen) version lists for926 US Dollar. Mighty attractive indeed.--deckert

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 01:42:19 pm
content: Well, this seems to me like a cheap crap scope... Why only 250MS/s per each channel?? Come on, even the terribly old Tek TDS220 or old Rigol DS1000B has 1GS/s per each channel... Where has the large multipurpose knob gone? Why doesn't each channel have its own separate knobs? Are the encoders expensive or what? Well, they aren't.eshopOn the other hand, thefunction generatorlooks nice and it seems that the XY mode was improved, maybe cursors added?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 01:51:11 pm
content: Isn't the dark blue channel too dim?If someone can read chinese, here is the datasheet:http://cn.rigol.com/download/China/DS/Datasheet/DS1000Z_DataSheet_CN.pdf

author: Deckert
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 04:16:32 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 09, 2013, 01:42:19 pmIt's clear that they use a single ADC for the job, so with one channel you get 1GSa/sec, two channels gets you 500MSa/sec and 4 channels gets you 250MSa/sec. All digital scopes do this to a certain extent. The DS1000E series share an ADC over two channels, the new Rigol DS2000 series share two ADCs over 4 channels.I still think the Z scope is good value for money - it's certainly in a lower bracket than the DS2000 but still has fabulously fast waveform update rates. If you want higher-speed sampling rates that only halve once, separate channel knobs and a big rotating multi-purpose knob, that's what the DS2000 and DS4000 is there for (at a higher price).This is definitely a more smaller/compact unit aimed at those who might have bought the DS1052E in the past.--deckert

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 04:46:21 pm
content: Quote from: Deckert on May 09, 2013, 10:34:26 amLooks like Rigol's approach to the Logic Analyzer segment of the market is to include LA functions (digital signal triggering and some optional decoding) but within the confines of up to 4 channels (not 8, 16, etc.).What do people here think about this "pathway" to learning to use and apply LA functionality? Seems like for just geting started with basic LA functionality it might be useful but maybe the uitlity rolls off too fast for users who need to get past 4 channels? (Unless Rigol has some other card to play with an exansion piece of hardware.)

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 08:05:58 pm
content: Rigol has gotten so big they are now buying cheap scopes from other Chinese companies and re-branding them as Rigols!!!! Wouldn't that be funny!!

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 08:45:04 pm
content: Quote from: Deckert on May 09, 2013, 04:16:32 pmNot really. Some do, but a lot of the better scopes don't interleave the ADCs.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 09, 2013, 09:43:50 pm
content: Oh, those1Gs/s per each channelscopes were developed in (or before) year 1996, right?

author: zlabsoft
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2013, 12:33:48 am
content: Quote from: Deckert on May 09, 2013, 04:16:32 pmAre you sure? DS2000 series seen only have 2ch?

author: Wuerstchenhund
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2013, 05:26:59 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on May 09, 2013, 09:43:50 pmSome yes, some no. An example for an older scope with non-interleaving ADCs is the venerable HP 54510A (1GSa/s per channel) from 1991.

author: Deckert
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2013, 08:50:24 am
content: Quote from: zlabsoft on May 10, 2013, 12:33:48 amAgreed, my bad. It's got one ADC which it shares over two channels, i.e. halves the sample rate as the second channel is switched on.--deckert.

author: nack
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 10, 2013, 01:07:39 pm
content: Size wise the DS1000Z is more comparable to the DS1052E series. I've also noticed the 12 divisions instead of the 14 divisions on the DS2000/DS4000.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2013, 12:45:01 am
content: Quote from: nack on May 10, 2013, 01:07:39 pmYes, this is clearly part of the tweaking to help keep the waveform update rate high with less powerful hardware; I see that the 30k wfrm/s rate is specified for single channel, dots mode, 50ns time base, and Auto memory setting - which means 30k waveforms per second with a non-interpolated 600 byte sample length (1GSa/s = 1ns * 50 * 12).The 12 divisions also corresponds to the 12MB of memory, which means that single channel sample lengths will be 12k / 120k/ 1.2M / 12M (or double: 6k / 60k/ 600k / 6M or triple/quadruple: 3k / 30k/ 300k / 3M).I have to say, although I appreciate Rigol expanding their product line, I think they're making a mistake with the screen size - especially for four channels. If they're going to reduce to a 7" diagonal screen, I think it should be 800x600 - the extra vertical pixels being so critical for displaying multiple waveforms. Honestly, a 5:3 aspect screen just seems wrong for more than 2 channels.Here are the actual waveform display areas of the DS1000/2000/4000 compared:

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 11, 2013, 07:35:14 am
content: Quote from: nack on May 10, 2013, 01:07:39 pmThat looks impressively compact.Perhaps the smallest 4 channel scope on the market?

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 11, 2013, 07:47:13 am
content: Quote from: marmad on May 11, 2013, 12:45:01 amI tend to agree.If you are buying a 4 channel scope, you want to be able to make good use of it, and not be crippled by a small screen.Same thing for any mixed signal scope. The Tek MSO2000 series is a classic example. 4 analog channels AND 16 digital channels on a lousy 480 × 234 screen. Crazy.

author: Deckert
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2013, 09:44:11 am
content: I'll admin that I am slightly perplexed by the 4-channel model instead of 2-channel (or an option between the two), but maybe they figured they can add the additional two extra channels at minimum cost. As a 2-channel scope it will still be a very capable unit.The WaveGen outputs at the back are a bit of a bummer, maybe a mod to bring the two BNCs out to the front-panel knockout (which may be reserved for digital I/Os) will be an interesting project. I see that there is a pass/fail and trigger out BNC at the back, so one would be able to measure the waveform update rate at other time bases and m/depths.--deckert

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2013, 02:45:28 pm
content: Quote from: Deckert on May 11, 2013, 09:44:11 amWell, I really like that they've created an entry-level-priced 4-channel scope - I think it's a great idea. I just wish they had gone with a 4:3 aspect ratio screen instead of the 5:3 - but I suppose they've become more expensive in our HD-shaped world.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 11, 2013, 03:25:46 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 11, 2013, 07:35:14 amHameg HMO1000 series is even more compact, but it has only 2000 waveforms per second. And it is not a bang per buck.http://www.hameg.com/614.0.html?L=0Not much suitable for hobbyists...

author: alank2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 02:45:31 am
content: Isn't the 1000Z screen resolution the same as the 2072 even though it is 7"?

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 12:54:58 pm
content: Yes, it is.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 02:20:52 pm
content: Quote from: alank2 on June 21, 2013, 02:45:31 amit is the same resolution on DS1000Z/DS2000/DS4000/DS6000, so the whole discussion about resolution/screen size is pointless, nobody will see "more" on DS6000 than on DS1000Z.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 02:30:13 pm
content: Quote from: Deckert on May 09, 2013, 10:34:26 amIs there a cheaper and comparable 4 channel scope I wonder?It's past midnight, I can't remember....

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 02:53:14 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on June 21, 2013, 02:20:52 pmSorry [I seem to be disagreeing with you a lot lately] but if that were true, that any discussions about DPI (or pixels-per-inch) would also be pointless. There is a point where you will lose detail because of a pitch that is too small.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 03:15:25 pm
content: I'm more curious as to when these things are going to hit the US.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 03:39:48 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on June 21, 2013, 02:53:14 pmright, between other dimensions this makes a huge diff, but here not ...Quote from: marmad on June 21, 2013, 02:53:14 pm.. as on 7" display with 800x480 resolution single dots are still huge. On 4" that resolution would be already crap.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 04:04:16 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on June 21, 2013, 03:39:48 pmMoot point. I'd rather look at 4 waveforms stacked on top of each other on 8" or 9" or bigger display. Actually, as mentioned before, IMO it's ridiculous they don't use 4:3 displays for 4-channel DSOs or MSOs. A 16:10 or 16:9 display is silly.

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 05:28:10 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on June 21, 2013, 04:04:16 pmsure, it is, like all these things which one prefer but other not.Quote from: marmad on June 21, 2013, 04:04:16 pm16:9/10 can be sometimes useful. Rigol have now more than 8 DIVs horiz., menu can be on left and right side and almost full high is for wave area. With 4:3 you would have to cut on right or if you don't want to lose horizontal space cut on bottom, which results in shorter (horizontaly) ~16:9 wave area. It would look like on Owon, no thanks.If i would have the chance to choose display. I would prefer something like 1024x600, with 800x500 for wave area (18x10DIV), 50 top and 50 bottom for status messages/pinned measures and 112 on left and right side for menu, etc. Or even 10.1" display with 1280x800^^.

author: lgbeno
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 06:20:26 pm
content: Funny, I just went and looked back at Dave's tear down of ds2072, there are 2 extra holes in the sheet metal where the sig gen ports are in ds1000z

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 06:28:08 pm
content: Quote from: tinhead on June 21, 2013, 05:28:10 pmI'm making a distinction between 2 and 4 channels - 16:9/10 is fine for two. Four channels on 400 pixels = maximum 100 pixels per channel; too small, IMO.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 06:49:37 pm
content: Anyway, remember thatDS1000Zis a 4×250MSa/s scope. Not much good. DS2000 is 2×1GSa/s.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 07:14:08 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on June 21, 2013, 06:49:37 pmThat's just one specification. OTOH, it's an (ostensibly) $650 4-channel DSO with up to 30k wfrm/s, intensity grading, and many of the other features of the UltraVision line. I think it will be a new low-price for both a 4-channel bench-top DSO - and for one with intensity grading.

author: WBB
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 21, 2013, 08:15:45 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on June 21, 2013, 07:14:08 pmThis. A 4 channel DSO with intensity grading at that price seems fantastic. It has more than enough sample memory for 99.9% of hobbyist. Same goes for update rate. What's the difference between 50k and 30k wf/s to hobbyist? Nil. Intensity grading is one of the truly great things to hit digital scopes and more channels is always a good thing. Screen could be bigger and it needs more knobs, but we can't have everything.

author: iloveelectronics
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2013, 01:22:50 pm
content: I pulled the trigger and ordered a DS1104Z scope directly from China! The waveform recording and replaying feature on the 1000Z series is optional but I decided to add that to the order anyway. In retrospect I guess it was a bit of an impulse buy (especially the optional item considering that I don't even know if I'm going to like it!), but oh well. It is going to take a few days for the shipping so hopefully I will have it in my hands some time next week.Overall I paid slightly less than I would for a DS2072, which is the main alternative I was also considering. To be honest the DS2072 has a lot more going for it in terms of features and capabilities, such as higher waveform capture rate, deeper memory, larger screen, more knobs, and simply much more feature rich in general.However, I really like to be able to own a 4-channel scope as I think it will help me as a learner to be able to see waveforms at various stages of a circuit. I also like the fact that it's 100Mhz instead of 70Mhz. For about the same money it all came down to the decision on whether to take a risk and go for a new 100Mhz 4-channel scope with more than adequate features in other departments (30k wfm/s, 64-level intensity grading, 12Mpts memory, 7" 800x480 screen), or a proven solid 70Mhz 2-channel DS2072. I chose to risk itI hope I won't regret it...

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2013, 01:40:02 pm
content: Quote from: iloveelectronics on June 25, 2013, 01:22:50 pmI can't speak for the DS1000Z series, but I don't think anyone has found any difference whatsoever between the DS2072 and DS2102 other than the model number printed on the face plate (and held in memory) - and the price.But, regardless, please give us a review or your impressions if possible - I'm really curious about the new model

author: alank2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2013, 01:53:56 pm
content: On the screen, what is most important to me is the resolution. I agree that more is better, but it 800x480 is still a far cry from the 320x234 I'm still using these days (as in 5 times the pixels). I don't care if it is a 7" or 8", in fact I prefer the smaller size of the Z. I do see your point marmad on the 400 pixel height for 4 channels, but I agree you can't have it all.I think the Z is quite a scope for what it is. I love that it has 4 channels for its price. My only gripe with it is the sample rate and to a lesser extent that it comes with cheaper probes. If they had made the sample rate 2gsa/1gsa/500msa for 1/2/4 channels, I'd be all over it without question, but the 1gsa/500msa/250msa for 1/2/4 channels is limiting. If you want 10 samples per cycle, then it becomes 100MHz/50MHz/25MHz for 1/2/4 channels... For me that still fits the bill of the type of stuff I mess with, but the faster sample speed of the DS2072 really calls to me...

author: iloveelectronics
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2013, 02:27:59 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on June 25, 2013, 01:40:02 pmDamn, I might have just wasted $100 there then!QuoteI'm just a novice so there's no way I'll be able to give any proper review but I'll try to at least take a few pictures and offer a few comments. The 1000Z doesn't seem to be available for sale in any markets outside China yet so hopefully my layman's impressions will be helpful to a few other people in the months to come as they get rolled out in other markets.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2013, 02:31:51 pm
content: Quote from: iloveelectronics on June 25, 2013, 02:27:59 pmWell, I wouldn't worry about it because it probably isn't true for the DS1000Z series - different front end and filters (no 200MHz model).QuoteAny info at all would be appreciated. Is it your first DSO - or can you at least compare the feel of it against a previous model you've owned?

author: iloveelectronics
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2013, 02:43:54 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on June 25, 2013, 02:31:51 pmIt's not. I have an Owon SDS7102 at home, which I bought before I knew about this forum but I don't really use it very often mainly due to severe space limitation of my setup. I now have a proper office/lab and am looking to spend more time learning the basics of electronics. I also have a cheap 40Mhz 30-year-old used Kikusui analog scope which I actually find a pleasure to use comparing to the more complex operation of a DSOAnd as you probably read from the other thread I also had a very brief experience with the Uni-T UT2102CM so hopefully all these will help me provide some more useful feedback.

author: KuchateK
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2013, 05:26:49 pm
content: I think the most important question is:When Dave can rev... take one apart for us?

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 25, 2013, 05:31:35 pm
content: Quote from: KuchateK on June 25, 2013, 05:26:49 pmMaybe ilovelectronics can take his apart for photos - sometimes early versions of a new model don't even have the warranty sticker yet.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 26, 2013, 02:54:10 am
content: "I can't speak for the DS1000Z series, but I don't think anyone has found any difference whatsoever between the DS2072 and DS2102 other than the model number printed on the face plate (and held in memory) - and the price."Marmad, are you saying that the DS2072 has the same bandwidth as the DS2102 (100MHz)? Thx, EF

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 26, 2013, 09:02:32 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on June 26, 2013, 02:54:10 amAs far as I know, yes.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 26, 2013, 12:31:04 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on June 26, 2013, 02:54:10 amThe Rigol factory might change it in future, who knows.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 26, 2013, 04:14:48 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on June 26, 2013, 09:02:32 amIs this something that is known because someonetested (measured)the bandwidth on both a 2072 and a 2102, or is this just something believed to be the case because someone observed similar parts, circuits, etc? Thanks

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 26, 2013, 05:12:08 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on June 26, 2013, 04:14:48 pmThis is known mainly because of measurements many people have made already (such as the attached chart from Wim13).

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 26, 2013, 05:28:45 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on June 26, 2013, 05:12:08 pmThanks for the chart. Just to clarify, it would seem that this chart indicates the 2202 (not the 2102) outperforms the 2072. So I would interpret this chart to say that the two products (2202 and 2072) are not the same (certainly not identical). Having said that, it looks like the red line (MHead) on the 2072 shows the scope exceeds it's specs; not so sure about the green line (50 ohm). (I would have expected to see the green line cross 70 MHz at or above 0.0 dB.) But maybe I am misunderstanding some things.Comments? Thx

author: tinhead
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 26, 2013, 05:52:40 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on June 26, 2013, 12:31:04 pmthey can't change that, the bw is controlled by LMH6518, you can set the it only to following values:20, 100, 200, 350, 650, 750MHz and full (900MHz).From measurments i collected the DS0272 model seems to be set to 100MHz, the DS2202 to 350Mhz, however there is some gain loss in the other part of the fronend, so total bw at -3dB for 200MHz models is 220-250MHz. I have no information from DS2102, so they could be set to 100Mhz (as the DS2072) but as well to 200MHz. With the extra gain loss this means they by -3dB at ~150MHz, however that my thought and not confirmed by any measurments.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 26, 2013, 06:38:34 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on June 26, 2013, 05:28:45 pmBandwidth is always specified within a +0 to -3 dB range. According to the chart, the BW of the DS2072 at 50E is ~110MHz.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 27, 2013, 10:23:20 am
content: FYI, I should be able to get my hands on both of these new scopes for a little bit in the coming months.

author: claude3386
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2013, 11:54:16 am
content: Hello,this is my first post.I recently received the visit of Rigol. They came to present their new MSO, they have bring the MSO4054 with all software decodes installed.The device is very nice and I found very good to have both DSO and LA and in one machine, the decode option is a nice addition as well.The downside is that the internal fan is pretty noisy in my opinion.I have ordered the MSO4014 with I2C/SPI decode option, I should get it in early August.Claudewww.atobit.com

author: Agurri
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: July 10, 2013, 12:20:24 pm
content: That's what I call sexy.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2013, 12:29:27 pm
content: Quote from: claude3386 on July 10, 2013, 11:54:16 amI wish we knew the street price here in the states!

author: sacherjj
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2013, 01:06:48 pm
content: Quote from: grego on July 10, 2013, 12:29:27 pmT Equipment is showing just under $6k. This is without the software options. I'm wondering pricing on those as well.http://www.tequipment.net/RigolDS4054.html

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2013, 01:16:59 pm
content: Quote from: sacherjj on July 10, 2013, 01:06:48 pmThat is the DS, not the MSO.

author: sacherjj
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2013, 01:24:04 pm
content: Quote from: dr.diesel on July 10, 2013, 01:16:59 pm

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2013, 01:25:47 pm
content: You had me excited for a sec, thought the new MSOs were starting to appear here in the states!

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 10, 2013, 03:28:02 pm
content: Here's my dilemma - I will shortly be without a scope and was hoping these would be coming out soon enough that I can defer. May not be able to hold off though if it's going to be a few months.Oh well.

author: crt
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 28, 2013, 10:14:22 am
content: BumpFinally after a month of waitingthis things have only 71 hours of trail option

author: tequipment
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 06:30:22 pm
content: I will have pricing on these later today or tomorrow online with the 1st units coming in 4 weeks. Pre orders are being taken in 1 day.Thanks!Tequipment.NET

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 01, 2013, 06:35:29 pm
content: Quote from: tequipment on August 01, 2013, 06:30:22 pmThe 1000Z or the MSO4000? Or both?

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 02, 2013, 09:21:30 pm
content: Quote from: tequipment on August 01, 2013, 06:30:22 pmTomorrow - almost - over

author: ahnuts72
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2013, 03:57:25 pm
content: He has them up on the tequipment.net site prices look pretty good

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2013, 04:19:22 pm
content: Yeah the 1000Z is up now. $979 for the 100Mhz model, not too shabby!Now, pricing on the MSO4000 ... when do we get to see THAT?

author: ahnuts72
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2013, 05:01:50 pm
content: ]DS1074Z $585.00DS1074Z-S$818.00DS1104Z $747.00DS1104Z-S$979.00

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2013, 07:01:30 pm
content: Quote from: grego on August 05, 2013, 04:19:22 pmYeah, I was REALLY hoping to see the 4000s hit with the Zs.However, that's a heck of a value for a < $1000 scope.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2013, 09:04:03 pm
content: I understand the 2000 has the following advantages over the 1000Z:1. larger screen2. higher waveform capture rate3. deeper memory4. more knobsIn addition to the above what performance parameters and features might be most missed by a user on the 1000Z vs the 2000? (What are the other key differences that might cause someone to give up the 2 extra channels and go with the 2000 series?) Thx

author: alank2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2013, 09:06:40 pm
content: Most importantly:1. SAMPLE RATE.

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2013, 09:10:52 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on August 05, 2013, 09:04:03 pmSo as far as I'm concerned, if given the choice, Dave's son Sagan would pick the 2000 series over the 1000Z because of the knobs...

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2013, 11:03:48 pm
content: Quote from: alank2 on August 05, 2013, 09:06:40 pmOK, very good point; how about the next several that should be on the list? Thx

author: alank2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 05, 2013, 11:16:25 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on August 05, 2013, 11:03:48 pmBest way is to download both datasheets and dig through the specifications section. There was another thread around here I think that had some comparisons in it...Good luck,Alan

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2013, 12:20:01 am
content: Quote from: alank2 on August 05, 2013, 11:16:25 pmPart of it is sorting through spec tables. I've done a lot of that with many products here (too many maybe), but even after you sort thru and find the difs then you have to evaluate the significance/value/impact of the difs - part of that is subjective (depends on your use case of course), but part of it could be best/better judged by people who have more experience. Anyway, I'm not expecting anyone to do work for me, but if anyone has any opinions and they enjoy sharing their opinions that's what I was seeking. Thx (Obviously, the 1000Z is a new product but I bet someone with much more scope experience than me is looking at the tradeoffs between the 2000 series and the 1000Z. I'm open to any opinions on the tradeoffs between the two, especially anything that is really useful in the 2000 that is missing in the 1000Z.)

author: alank2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2013, 12:32:34 am
content: Here is what I came up with looking at both - hopefully no errors:To me the biggest pain there is the sample rate loss...

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: August 06, 2013, 08:16:17 pm
content: From what I understand we won't see the MSO4000 series here in the states until closer to the end of the year, more like November. A little disappointing but it is what it is. Hopefully we at least get some US pricing before that.

author: bob_60
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: August 07, 2013, 08:46:10 am
content: One important feature that apparently is only available as an option you have to pay for on the 1000Z, is the waveform record feature:In the 1000Z specs, it's listed as:"Up to 60,000frames Real-time Waveform Record(Opt.)"

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2013, 10:25:29 pm
content: Now the DS1000Z can be bought athttp://www.silcon.cz/index.php?route=product/product&path=20_27&product_id=120

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 21, 2013, 10:36:50 pm
content: The 2000 has 14 horizontal screen divisions, the 1000 is only 12. Same resolution though. The font text on the 1000Z is really tiny, not good for the vision impared.Unless you need 4 channels, the 2000 is the much better scope in every area. But of course it costs more.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2013, 11:35:29 pm
content: The DS1000Z is good for you if you need four channels at 250MSa/s. Sometimes you might want 4 channels but not so much single shot bandwidth. With that 25MHz built-in generator it might be great for audio and other low frequency circuits.But the good old DS2000 giver you 1GSa/s for each channel.

author: bbjk7
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 23, 2013, 02:40:51 pm
content: Long time fan, 1st postI'll just leave this here for us Aussieshttp://www.eyou.com.au/category/rigol-ds1000z/

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 23, 2013, 11:54:33 pm
content: Quote from: bbjk7 on September 23, 2013, 02:40:51 pmbbjk7, Thanks for posting, and Welcome!Grego, for you:http://www.eyou.com.au/product/1834/Rigol MSO4012 100MHz, 4Gs/S, 2-Ch (Analog) 16CH (Digital) 9" color LCDSomething to further the anticipationEF

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2013, 03:13:49 am
content: Hah - but what I really need is for it to show up on the US distributor sites!That price seems a bit high for the device too - $3300 USD (with exchange rate) when the DSO is $2400? Something ain't kosher there.Oh wait - that's $3300 for the 2 channel? That's even worse - the $2400 is for the DSO4014. The 2 Channel is only $1999 - so yeah, definitely something smells with that price.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2013, 04:36:59 am
content: Quote from: grego on September 24, 2013, 03:13:49 amI don't think the exchange rate explains the pricing but if it does translate into US$s I think what Rigol would be saying is "we dare you to buy an Agilent".

author: bbjk7
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2013, 11:43:14 am
content: Quote from: grego on September 24, 2013, 03:13:49 amHah - kosher he saysMate, while the people who import to Aus are probably jews, I can assure you they know NOTHING about kosher.Even digital media that doesn't even need to pass the borders... Go to the Australian site and you'll pay 50% more even with the conversion rate.To prove my pointAdobe CS6 Master Suite on US site: $2599 USDAdobe CS6 Master Suite on AU site: $3949 AUD ($3714.03 USD)/end rant

author: iloveelectronics
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 24, 2013, 12:33:42 pm
content: If you think that price is high try buying one in China, where these things are actually made...it will cost you even more! I really don't get Rigol's pricing in different markets.Quote from: grego on September 24, 2013, 03:13:49 am

author: Orange
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2013, 07:48:40 am
content: Batronix now offers the DS1000Z series in Europehttp://www.batronix.com/shop/oscilloscopes/Four-Channel-Oscilloscopes.htmlNo affiliation to Batronix, just a happy customer

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 26, 2013, 08:14:46 am
content: Quote from: iloveelectronics on September 24, 2013, 12:33:42 pmI spoke to Rigol about this, and thye said China imposes a 70% tax within China. If you sell outside China, the manufacturer does not pay it, hence lower prices in the US than China.

author: iloveelectronics
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2013, 09:21:57 am
content: They must have a more complex taxing system than a flat 70% rate then, perhaps based on categories of equipment or price brackets or something. What I have noticed is that the higher end (i.e. more pricey) the equipment, the more obvious the difference between the US and Chinese prices. The DS1104Z for example which I bought from China is still cheaper than in the US, while the higher end models such as the DS2000 or 4000 would be cheaper in the US than in China.Quote from: EEVblog on September 26, 2013, 08:14:46 am

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 26, 2013, 09:28:40 am
content: Quote from: iloveelectronics on September 26, 2013, 09:21:57 amYes, I'm not sure of the exact structure, but the Rigol guy I spoke to mentioned that figure. There is possibly also the issue of dealing inside and outside designated free trade zones, although I'm not sure how that works for Chinese manufacturing exporters like Rigol.For example, one company in China that produced our product for us had to operate within the (physical area around Shanghai) free trade zone in order to be competitive on pricing.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Economic_Zones_of_the_People's_Republic_of_China

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 26, 2013, 02:08:28 pm
content: I paid a 17% tax on electronic stuff I bought in Shanghai. Perhaps that's what your contact was trying to say, instead of 70%.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 26, 2013, 02:31:29 pm
content: Quote from: Wytnucls on September 26, 2013, 02:08:28 pmHis English wasn't that great, so maybe!

author: echen1024
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2013, 03:08:49 am
content: No, it's pretty much what the Chinese want to do. They taxed me 30% for bringing my watch in, but only 18% for my iPhone.

author: Wytnucls
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2013, 07:54:45 am
content: You're talking customs duties. I'm talking VAT on goods inside China.http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/China_VAT_system_en/$FILE/China_VAT_system_en.pdf

author: Sparky
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 27, 2013, 11:49:29 pm
content: Quote from: grego on September 24, 2013, 03:13:49 amMSO4000 series now listed on Rigol NA website with prices!http://www.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/mso4000/Does not show on Tequipment.net but I image it will be added soon.Also DS1000Z added:http://www.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/ds1000Z/

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2013, 01:47:07 am
content: Finally! Now just give me an order link for crying out loud!I will admit I am a little disappointed in their pricing however. $1300 delta for the MSO version seems a bit much compared to others in its class. Plus the decode licenses on top of it. Plus the price jump for bandwidth seems weird. It's +$500 from a 4014 to a 4024, but then +$2300 from a 4024 to a 4034. Yeesh

author: bob_60
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2013, 10:40:44 am
content: Anyone knows what the noise level of the fan is in the 1000Z scopes - compared to the old -very- noisy DS-1052E.

author: kripton2035
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2013, 12:00:31 pm
content: there are NO software decoding options for the msoxxxx, instead there are these options for the DSxxxxso can we hope the software decoding are included in the mso series??the price would be very attractive then.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2013, 12:51:48 pm
content: Quote from: kripton2035 on September 28, 2013, 12:00:31 pmNope because if you read the data sheet you see they are optional. A t the end of the specifications under "decoding options". It's an addon.

author: kripton2035
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2013, 01:36:07 pm
content: Quote from: grego on September 28, 2013, 12:51:48 pmat the end of the datasheet, the software decoding options are referenced "xxx-ds4000" and not "xxx-mso4000"the datasheet is common with ds4000 series and mso4000on the web site, under accessories you have the options for the ds4000 and not for the mso4000so all this makes me think the software decoding options are included in the mso series

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2013, 01:57:17 pm
content: Quote from: kripton2035 on September 28, 2013, 01:36:07 pmWhile that would be fantastic I highly doubt it - since the entire package of decodes for the DS4000 costs $1500 as a bundle currently it's unlikely. Especially since that's less than the $1300 delta to go from the DSO to MSO option. I can hope for otherwise but I am willing to bet the decodes are extra.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2013, 04:03:05 pm
content: I jumped in the deep end. Just ordered a MSO4000 from tequipment.net (it's not on their site yet but you can pre-order if you contact them and ask for a quote). Shipping in (expected) 4-6 weeks.Pricing, with the eevblog discount was about 6% under what Rigol has on their site.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2013, 04:09:53 pm
content: Quote from: grego on September 30, 2013, 04:03:05 pmCongrats! Hope it turns out to be outstanding!Decoding options are the same price as they have been all along for the DS4000?

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2013, 04:12:56 pm
content: Based on my understanding, yes, since those are the only part numbers referenced in the datasheet.I didn't want to add in any options yet - get the scope, make sure it's all copacetic, and then add options.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2013, 04:47:43 pm
content: Grego, do you still have that Agilent MSO6000? Now you will have two scopes... Well, the MSO4000/DSO4000 is probably of quite decent quality and with powerful hardware, but the price is not for a poor hobbyist from Europe...

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2013, 04:52:23 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on September 30, 2013, 04:47:43 pmNope - that one had to go back due to some hardware issues which left me looking for a scope again. I'm hopeful that I'm now DONE. This is getting a little ridiculous.It'd be easier if I could afford to buy a MSOX3000 with the decodes but that's just too much out of the budget. And the fact that the 2000 doesn't do decodes on its digital channels killed it for me or I'd have gone that route.The MSO4024 is the limit of my budget. Literally. I'm about $60 under my absolutely max I would spend. As it is I'm going to have to defer some other stuff I was going to do this year (I've been eyeballing a CNC machine for example) because of it. But a good scope is tool #1.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2013, 05:06:07 pm
content: Quote from: grego on September 30, 2013, 04:52:23 pmHow old was that scope and what was the problem (if known)? It is sad to hear about a defective Agilent.Well, hardly any scope has so much memory (140MB) as the Rigol MSO4000 has.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2013, 05:12:28 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on September 30, 2013, 05:06:07 pmI was getting some goofy readings off of it when using the various measurements function. Agilent offered to repair it of course but since it was a used and not premium used I didn't want to get stuck with a failure six months later on a scope that doesn't have a warranty. Agilent agreed - they even paid the return shipping which I thought was pretty cool of them.

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 30, 2013, 06:06:39 pm
content: OK, at least Agilent have a good customer service.

author: opty
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2013, 07:17:39 pm
content: All,Signal generator is S version seems good value for money 14bit (2 channels?) 200Msmp/s (again is this 100 per channel?) for around 180 Euro (prices on Batronix Europe).My question is if there is any benefit of having the sig gen builit into oscilloscope. I mean something like trigger synchonization with generates signal, or else ?Cons I see is that if gen is separate it is easier to change/update in the future...So if you needed to buy in the future both awg and oscilloscope would you go for S version?Thanks,R

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2013, 09:23:12 pm
content: Quote from: opty on October 05, 2013, 07:17:39 pmPossibly yes. It is at my DSOX2002A. Well, there is no full user manual of DS1000Z-S yet, so we do not know...http://www.eu.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/ds1000Z/ds1104z-s/

author: JDubU
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 06, 2013, 12:04:13 am
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on October 05, 2013, 09:23:12 pmThere is one but it is in Chinese:http://www.rigol.com/prodserv/DS1000Z/document/?act=view&itemid=1268Google translate errors out when attempting to translating the whole PDF file but it works if you copy and paste sections of text into:http://translate.google.com/?hl=en&prev=_t&sl=zh-CN&tl=en#zh-CN/en/

author: opty
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 07, 2013, 06:32:14 pm
content: Quote from: Hydrawerk on October 05, 2013, 09:23:12 pmI don't get it. They sell a product and there is no spec attached. (At Batronix spec points to 2000 series)The scope may not me as good as 2072 (if you don't need 4 chs) but value/price ratio is good and for a total beginner (like me) it good be a good entry level scope.I do hope Dave will make a sound review before end of year.R

author: dr.diesel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2013, 11:00:37 am
content: MSO4000s are up on Teq:http://www.tequipment.net/RigolOscilloscopes.html#MSO4000

author: algorath
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 08, 2013, 03:05:31 pm
content: can´t wait for the 1000z review, looks like a nice piece of kit for the price. especially for hobby noobs like me who mostly don´t need an oszilloscope anyway. any eta on the review dave?

author: metalphreak
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 09, 2013, 02:51:17 pm
content: Ordered a DS1074Z-S yesterday. Leadtime for stock arrival to emona is towards the end of next week apparently. Should arrive within a couple of weeks I guess. The North America Rigol site lists 4-6 weeks...For me, it was 4 channels and function gen for the same price as base model DS2000. The other stuff isn't so important to me. There have been many times where I wished I had at least 3 channels (3 phase BLDC motors etc).

author: bigmessowires
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 09, 2013, 04:15:04 pm
content: I have a DS1074z coming that's supposed to be delivered on Friday. I'll post a mini-review soon after.

author: cidcorp
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 09, 2013, 04:39:57 pm
content: Quote from: metalphreak on October 09, 2013, 02:51:17 pmI have to agree here, I really do like the DS2000 series scope but I'm ALWAYS regretting that it's only 2 channels (3000 was out of my price abilities). I need 3-4 channels especially to get the best use out of some of the decoding options. If anyone in Canada picks one of these models up and wouldn't mind letting me know the costs associated to getting it across the border (if ordered through RigolNA), and their opinion on the device it would be greatly appreciated.

author: Bugware
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2013, 10:52:34 am
content: The new Rigol DS2000A-S Series apparently has a Sig-Gen with Arbitrary Waveform Frequency Range 0.1 Hz to 10 MHz and length 2 to 16 kpts in 10 internal Storage locations.I found a Datasheet here:http://int.rigol.com/download/Oversea/DS/Datasheet/DS2000A_DataSheet_EN.pdf

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 10, 2013, 07:13:26 pm
content: Yes, it is better than signal generator in DSOX2000A series.

author: icpart
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2013, 08:58:45 pm
content: Hi guys I have little official information from distributor of Rigol in my country that the new models of oscilloscopes are expected to arrive in the Europe in October 28 and after that they will be distributed among the distributors to fulfill pre-orders.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 18, 2013, 10:10:15 pm
content: Quote from: cidcorp on October 09, 2013, 04:39:57 pmPlease tell us more about the specific extra decoding capabilities you would like/enable with 4 channels vs 2 channels. Thanks

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2013, 03:25:10 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on October 18, 2013, 10:10:15 pmElectroFan, I'm not sure if you're being serious or not, but I'll assume so, for the sake of discussion.First off, the DS2000 series has two Bus Decoders. I don't know why. I2C requires an SDA and SCL line, which is two channels. No channels left for Decoder2. RS232 has RX and TX lines (self clocking with start/stop bits). Again, uses both channels 1 and 2.SPI requires 4 channels, all by itself, which Rigol seems to manage to gloss over by simply referring again to SDA and SCL in their manual. But SPI is a full-duplex communications link, a 4-wire bus with MOSI, MISO, CLK, and SS/CS (Slave or Chip select) lines. How are you supposed to handle that with 2 channels? The DS1000 with 4-channels can support full SPI directly, butthe DS2000 can not. The best it can do is "half-SPI", where you can monitor and decode one side of the data stream (along with a clock). And even that is crippled, because SPI is a bus, and without a Select line to determine which device is talking, you can't separate out what you want from all the bus chatter. Unless you limit yourself to Master + SingleSlave-only systems. And again, only one decoder can be used, because you've exhausted your channels.I thought perhaps they might have some trick whereby the Ext.Trigger channel could be used to provide a 3rd input (say run the Clock in there, with MOSI on Chan1 and MISO on Chan2), but not according to anything in the manual. EXT appears to only be available as a Trigger Source in Edge mode.Lastly is "Parallel Decode", and I can't even figure out what that's supposed to be, from their documentation. It sounds like it's intended to work with an MSO (not DSO), since it refers to "up to 20 channels". Presumably 4 analog, and 16 digital. You assign one channel to a Clock, and the next channel to data, and, well... you're done. Doesn't seem very parallel to me.So the 4-channel DS1000Z not only allows for handlingfull SPI, but can also potentially make use of both Bus Decoders, by handling two protocols at once... e.g., I2C on one, and RS232 on the other. Have you ever worked on an embedded system where you needed to track comms across more than one interface bus? With only 2 channels on the DS2000, your options are severely limited. Even something as simple as running one protocol Decoder on channels 1 & 2, while monitoring channel 3 as a trigger does not seem to be possible. (The Rigol docs indicate the Ext.Trigger cannot be used as a source when in protocol decoder modes.) But say you wanted to see the power supply thresholds where comms started or cut out. Kinda hard to do with only 2 channels. Or maybe you're probing around trying to correlate some other signal in the system to find where/when a comms channel is picking up glitches. Again, you're SOL.So the only use I can see for Decoder2 on the DS2000 is to have two independent sets of parameters config'ed, and be able to turn one or the other on quickly. On a 4-channel scope like the DS1000Z, you can actually use both decoders at the same time.Unfortunately, I'm at a bit of a disadvantage... not having a DS2000 here to play with, I have to go by what's in the manual (and what bits I've read here). And that may not fully reflect the instrument's capabilities. E.g., in their screen shots, Rigol doesn't even show SPI decoding as SPI... it's listed as "SDIO". Sadly, fairly typical of Rigol documents (though they're usually well ahead of the rest of their Chinese competition.) Unless there's an option to customize the Label set for each decoder, that I missed in the manual.Hopefully this will give you at least a partial answer to your question.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2013, 04:30:33 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on October 19, 2013, 03:25:10 amThe complaint about the weak implementation of the External Trigger channel (which should be able to be used as a source for at least a few other trigger modes) was passed on to Rigol a little while before they released the last version of the firmware. They confirmed the 'problem', with promises that they would work on addressing it (although they mentioned it wouldn't be in the [at that time] soon-to-be released v.1.0.0.2). So hopefully it will still be expanded in a later FW version.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2013, 05:21:14 am
content: Quote from: marmad on October 19, 2013, 04:30:33 amThanks for the info, Mark. That's good to hear. Kind of a shame to have a channel so under-utilized.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2013, 05:25:38 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on October 19, 2013, 05:21:14 amYes - one of my main disappointments with the DSO. I work with I2C a lot and just being able to use that External Trigger as a source for SDA or SCL would mean a free channel for another signal in the circuit - a big time saver.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2013, 08:13:19 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on October 19, 2013, 03:25:10 amHi Mark_O,Thanks! I was definitely being serious and your reply was outstanding. I've been trying to gain a better understanding of the practical capabilities and limitations of the decode functions on the DS2000 series for a while now and your reply is the most definitive discussion of this topic I've seen.I've also been trying to figure out the 2 decode button layout and like you have been trying to decipher the manual and other documentation.I had just about decided that the DS2000 was the right scope given that most of my work initially will probably be RS232 and I2C with SPI as the likely 3rd decode protocol I'd like to work with. I realize that SPI would be (much) better with 4 channels but I was thinking maybe the DS2000 get the job done to some extent in "workaround mode"; you and Marmad and others have me wondering if 2 channels will become a notable limitation sooner than later. The DS2000 seems like a pretty good step up from the DS1000Z in several respects such as waveforms per second, memory, screen size, and maybe the big Nav dial too but maybe those are worth giving up for the 2 extra channels on the DS1000Z.I don't think I'll be needing to work with 2 different protocols at once but I understand your views with respect to SPI and triggering/signal correlation and I appreciate the time you took to type out specifics. I hope you will be up for adding more thoughts as they come to you. Thanks again, EF

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2013, 08:48:18 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on October 19, 2013, 08:13:19 amIn reality, it's nice to be able to do some simple decoding on the DSO, but if you need to do a serious amount of it - or you need something more than the VERY simple trigger definitions built into MSOs - you really need a logic analyzer. IMO, you should concentrate mostly on theoscilloscopefunctions you need/want when buying a DSO - and worry about the bus decoding aspect less.

author: grego
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2013, 12:32:24 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on October 19, 2013, 08:48:18 amWhat he said.You buy a scope for the scope part, not the decodes. At least that's the primary category.In my case I look at the decodes because I have two separate signals - one CAN and one square wave AC that are present. So I need to be able to trigger off specific CAN messages and see the resulting DCC signal (the square wave AC) so having MSO options is important to me.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 19, 2013, 04:58:23 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on October 19, 2013, 08:13:19 amYou're welcome. I'm glad your question wasn't tongue-in-cheek, and my reply was useful.QuoteI'll admit that when you're trying to make a buying decision based on anticipating what you might need, to handle things you haven't encountered yet, it can be difficult. Especially when you're getting started. "What do I chose? What do I chose?"QuoteI was kind of hoping that someone who actually has a DS2000 would jump in and tell me I was FOS, and that the limitations implied by the manual were not present in the scope itself.QuoteWell, it's certainly possible to "work around" many limitations in your test instruments. All of us have done it at one point or another, and some of us have to do it every day. But just because you can finagle things around doesn't mean that you'd want to, or it would be a productive solution. Let me illustrate the problem with half-SPI on the DS2000 with a very specific example (analogy) that's probably closer to home for you, and may be easier to grok.When you're working on a system with an RS232 comms channel, you're monitoring RX and TX lines. You may be looking at Requests or Commands on the TX, and seeing the replies on the RX. The two are pretty closely tied together, and being able to see the specific response to the specific request may be fundamental. Now imagine if you could only hear (see) half the conversation. You could either monitor outbound requests, but not see what was being sent back. OR you could see responses, not knowing what request they were relating to. AND you couldnotsee the time-interval between the two. Does that slow you down any? How much fun will you have moving your probes around, to check RX and then TX, one at a time?That's what's going on with SPI on the DS2000. You only get to see half the conversation at one time, because one of your two available channels HAS to be used for the Clock. On a SPI bus, the CPOL and CPHA are critical (polarity and phase), because they determine when to sample the data bits. That leaves only one channel for data, yet there are two (MISO and MOSI, similar to RX and TX). Not only can you not see both sides at the same time, you also can't see the timing relationship between them. To me, that's like working in the dark. And why I was hoping the DS2000 had an undocumented capability (missing from the manual) to use the Ext.Trig for say, Clocking, leaving Chan1 and 2 open for MISO/MOSI. Not having the 4-th channel (a Select line, for CS or SS) will certainly be detrimental on a multi-slave SPI bus, but that at least you can find ways to work around (have the other slave devices shut-up). With the DS1000Z, you don't have to.That's why it seemed like a bit of a stretch to me for Rigol to claim that the DS2000 even handles SPI. Sure, it can trigger on it (and handle CPOL and CPHA), and decode the bit-stream to turn n-bits into bytes or words... for one half of the comms. But that's pretty crippled, in my book.QuoteThat's one area where I think you and many others are making a fairly big mistake. There's no doubt that the DS2000 IS a good step up from the 1000Z in many key performance metrics. It's an excellent device. Greater bandwidth, higher sample rates, deeper memory, etc. But unless you're a "more isalwaysbetter" kind of guy, you have to put that into some perspective. Do you reallyneed200 MHz? Or would 100 MHz be enough? The answer isn't the same for everybody, but even the lower specs of the 1000Z, coupled with 4-channels, would be incredible for many, many users. Especially hobbyists or beginners. And 4-channels at under $600? Are you nuts? That was simply unheard of. There's a reason you don't see very many 4-channel scopes out there... until recently they cost an arm and a leg, and they simply weren't an option for anybody without deep pockets. That doesn't mean we didn't want to have one!And cursed our bad luck the minute we needed to have channel #3 in a test setup.QuoteYou probably won't, at least not right away. But consider that if you'll be doing any embedded systems work, or working on devices that are uProc-controlled, there's often a lot of internal communicating going on between subsystems (a huge amount of I2C and SPI, in my experience). And being able to see the interactions between two separate comms channels will sometimes be fundamental to finding your problem. Even just monitoring ONE internal comms bus, the minute you need to see and coordinate it with any other external signal you come up short.And if you're doing your own embedded-systems development work (as opposed to trouble-shooting existing systems), one thing you may find exceptionally useful is to have your micro emit your own trigger pulses at specific points, as markers, to flag when some condition or event has occurred (or the interval where it's active, as a Gate signal). No digging through a long trace trying to find a correlation, you flagged it yourself in your code, triggered on it, and can see what's happening at the exact spot, as well as the timing. How do you do that when you have only 2 channels, and they're already tied up? You don't.How does having twice the bandwidth you needed, or 10x the memory depth you needed, or being able to oversample 5x higher than required help you out there?QuoteWell, this was a bit more. Enough for one posting. Possibly more later, as time allows.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2013, 04:19:52 am
content: Hi Mark_O,Thanks for your most recent post (#136 above) - it isexcellent- exactly the type of info I have been hungry for.I think you might have brought me around from the DS2000 series to the DS1000 series.You should probably be a four channel scope sales rep -- the two channel scope sales reps would have a hard time selling against youYour use case examples were clear and meaningful, and compelling. I get all these concepts I just haven't had the chance to work hands-on with some of these things and I can see from your discussions much more clearly why 4 channels are going to provide a lot more headroom for signal analysis including the abilty to observe signal relationships/correlations.I'm familiar with MISO and MOSI but CPOL and CPHA were terms I had to research; I found this (in case anyone is interested):http://www.diolan.com/dln_doc/spi-transfer-modes.htmlI think I can live with the smaller screen and hopefully the lesser memory, and in studying the 1000Z User Guide it looks like maybe the lack of the big Nav knob on the DS2000 isn't going to be a major give-up (but if anyone thinks different, I'd be happy to hear why).Overall, I have a hunch that your post is probably going to influence other scope buyers trying to make the 2 vs 4 channel decision.So I'm almost there but now I'm somewhat back to a question that got me started about half a year ago when I first discovered EEVblog: Is there any reason to maybe quit trying to turn a low end DSO into a low end MSO (scope + 8/16 channel logic analyzer) or pseudo MSO (4 channel scope without a LA but with protocol triggering and decoding), and just get a decent DSO (again, maybe the DS2000 series) and add a decent USB logic analyzer (such as the Intronix LogicPort - at less than $400)?One of the things that started me on this journey was a desire to see analog signals and digital signals well correlated, which I'm not sure a scope plus LogicPort does quite as well/seamlessly as say the DS1000Z (at least up to the point that 4 channels is sufficent vs. 4+16). [So, the question might be framed as: would you rather have a DS2000 + a LogicPort, or a DS1000Z?, or is the answer start with a DS1000Z and see if a need for a LogicPort develops later?]. Any more thoughts you might have along these lines?Thanks again! EF

author: nowlan
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2013, 04:52:48 am
content: Wasnt there a hack to let the logic analyser trigger your scope?

author: Pinkus
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 22, 2013, 07:09:29 am
content: Exactly: buy the 2072 and then the Intronix Logicport. The result: you will have best of breed and you are not limited!The decoding part of the scope is always a nice to have but it is often NOT useful as it is much easier to work with a dedicated logic analyzer. And yes, the Logicport can be enhanced to trigger the scope.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2013, 04:52:27 pm
content: Quote from: Mark_O on October 19, 2013, 04:58:23 pmHi Mark_O,One more revisit on the 4 channel (DS1000Z) vs 2 channel (DS2000) question(s).I've discovered that the Decoder functionality gives you not just two Decode channels, but that each Decoder channel allows you to set the decode simultaneously for two Decodes - one for receive and one for transmit. So, in total, you can show 4 decodes at the same time. This could be two for TX/RX for binary and two for TX/RX ASCII on channel 1 all at the same time, for example. Or, you could have TX/RX for binary on channel 1 and TX/RX for binary on channel 2 all at the same time, for example.The user can only decode on two of the 4 analog scope channels - so you don't have the ability to decode across 3 or 4 analog channels at the same time, but you could be looking at two analog channels without decodes and two more analog with decodes (each showing the TX and RX decodes) for 6 total "views" into signal information.Given that the decodes do only work on two of the 4 analog channels at one time and given that those two channels can each observe the TX and RX at the same time (for 4 total simultaneous decodes), is it still your firm opinion that the 4 channel scope (DS1000Z) would be needed to do the type of work you described above, or is it possible that with the TX/RX x 2 capability that maybe the 2 channel scope (DS2000) could get closer to being sufficient?The reason for asking is that I think part of the challenge is to simultaneously observe desired signals and see them time correlated, but part of the challenge is then being able to subsequently navigate through the signals (and here I think the DS2000 might have some either small or medium size advantages).Thanks! EF

author: iDevice
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2013, 06:12:58 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on November 11, 2013, 04:52:27 pmI guess you are confusing channels and decoders.You have 4 input channels and 2 decoders.If you take as example the serial decoder for RS-232, one decoder can simultaneously decode and display TX and RX, that is correct.But to be able to do that, it will uses two channels, one for TX and one for RX.Now if you want to fully decode 2 rs-232 streams simultaneously, you will have to use the second decoder which will need the 2 remaining channels, one for TX and one for RX.So you will have something like:TXa on ch1RXa on ch2TXb on ch3RXb on ch4So all your channels will be used for 2 rx/tx rs-232 decoders.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2013, 10:18:15 pm
content: Quote from: iDevice on November 11, 2013, 06:12:58 pmI get that; I understand:With a DS1000Z you could have two rx/tx rs232 decoders, and also have two more analog channels free, no doubt.With a DS2000 you just have the two rx/tx rs232 decoders (4 paths decoded), but no more channels available, of course. The question is (what I don't understand/know) is whether the ability to decode 4 paths (2 TX and 2 RX) might somehow address the needs of say, SPI where you have clock, MOSI, and MISO. I am presuming SPI is a clear cut case where a 3rd or 4th analog channel might be needed in addition to the 4 paths (2 TX and 2 RX) that can be decoded by both the DS1000Z and the DS2000."But to be able to do that, it will uses two channels, one for TX and one for RX."It is not clear to me that this is how it works - it might, of course, however it is my impression (based on the labeling and overall decoder setup process) that one analog input channel can decode a TX and a RX signal, as opposed to one channel providing 2 TX decoders and another channel providing 2 RX decoders. To be square, I don't quite see how it might do this as the probe is attached to one pin for TX and one pin for GND, and yet the 1000Z decoders (1 and/or 2) ask you to specify both TX and RX and they both display both as if they are two separate pieces of info.I guess it comes down to getting my head around how probing two pins (TX and GND) can somehow provide a signal that the scope decodes as both Send and Receive (maybe those are just two labels - but why have two labels if it is only decoding one thing?). It seems like we are just probing a simplex transmission (not a half-duplex signal, and definitely not a full-duplex transmission). The scope setup process asks for both the TX and RX setup info on a single channel but I can't see how it can derive both from two pins being probed. That, I think is the source of my confusion.

author: iDevice
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: November 11, 2013, 11:27:36 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on November 11, 2013, 10:18:15 pmI'm afraid you aren't...QuoteNope, 2 x rx+tx means 4 channels, it's elementary math, so you don't have two more analog channel free.QuoteI'm sorry wrong again, with a 2000, you can only decode one rs-232.QuoteThat's why it is not possible to decode a full SPI with a DS2000, only two channel ! So it is either MISO +CLK or MOSI + CLKQuoteWhat you call path is a channel. 2 channels on a 2000, 4 on a 1000Z or 4000.So for full SPI decoding you need a 1000Z or a 4000 (the fourth channel is used for CS if you have a multi slave bus)QuoteThis is where you have your problem, I guess.RS-232 uses at least 3 wires, TX, RX and GND.RX and TX are 2 different signals referenced to GND, so you need 2 scope channel to display/decode them.QuoteWell it seems you answer yourself ! RX and TX are indeed two pieces of different signals, thats why you have to specify on which channel you connect each of them. One channel for Tx one different channel for Rx.Of course the scope allows you to specify two times the same channel without warning, which might be confusing, but it is an operator error. It will still function but you will decode 2 times the same signal which is useless.QuoteI hope it clearer now !

author: JDubU
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2013, 12:29:24 am
content: I've been using the RS232, I2S and SPI smart triggers on my DS2000 to synchronize a Saleae logic analyser via the scope's trigger output. The Saleae currently only has edge triggering so the scope can provide data based trigger conditions. The obvious limitation is that the DS2000 cannot be used to view addition analog waveforms when both channels are being used for the trigger function. Also, the Saleae's max sampling rate is only 24 Msps. The upside is that I can display seven data channels (in addition to the eighth channel used for trigger input from the scope). Also, the interactive user interface on the Saleae is far better than that of the scope's.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2013, 03:33:03 am
content: Quote from: JDubU on November 12, 2013, 12:29:24 amGreat idea!

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2013, 04:09:09 am
content: Hi, EF. I see that iDevice has done all the heavy lifting of explaining the details to you. Just a few additions...Quote from: Electro Fan on November 11, 2013, 10:18:15 pmIt cannot do so. Probing TX and Gnd can provideonlyTx, not Rx at all.QuoteI can see why you might be confused. However, the scope does not know what signal is on each channel. So it letsyoudefine the labels. Just because you set the labels for RX and TX on (say) Channel one, doesn't change the fact that channel one would only be TX. So the RX assignment you made (which should have been assigned to Channel 2), is just a duplicate of TX. You're seeing exactly the same thing, with two different labels (one of which is wrong). This will not be helpful to you in troubleshooting.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2013, 04:31:16 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on November 12, 2013, 04:09:09 amHi Mark_O and iDevice,Thanks again to you guys for getting me squared away. You guys are good teachers.I think the labeling flexibility might have got me off the track but with your help I'm getting it sorted out.So, where I've just been probing the TX pin and the GND pin on a PC RS232 port, is there a practical way to probe and monitor the RS232 comminications between two PCs with the 2 decoders?iDevice suggested this:TXa on ch1RXa on ch2TXb on ch3RXb on ch4Seems like it might require a special cable where the TX and RX lines/pins could exposed and probed?

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2013, 04:33:16 am
content: Quote from: JDubU on November 12, 2013, 12:29:24 amJDubU,If you ever get a chance to make a video showing how you have configured and operated this setup, that would make for a great post here. Thanks, EF

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2013, 05:22:52 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on November 12, 2013, 04:31:16 amThat's for two complete RS232 links. To monitor comms between 2 PCs (or any two devices), you only need to use two channels. That's because the TX from Dev1 goes to RX on Dev2, and vice-versa.QuoteA "special cable" would do the job. And you could certainly splice one together yourself. Even easier would be a non-molded cable, with screw shells on each end. Just open one end and voila!, your signal lines exposed for probing.Other options would be a breakout box. Or an RS232 switch-box you may have laying around, which would expose the signal lines on the wiring inside.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2013, 08:47:13 pm
content: Ok, how about one of these Breakout Boxes to enable the scope to access nice probe points so the scope could monitor the flow of communications between two PCs? (It would require two DB25 to DB9 adapter cables.)PC RS232 port - DB9 Cable to DB 25 Adapter cable - Breakout Box - DB 25 to DB9 Adapter Cable - PC S232 PortThe DS1000Z could probe the Breakout Box? (I think the jumper cable connection points near the switches could be viable probe points, right?)Seems like the LEDs on the box might provide some value-added info (and the switches and jumper cables might provide some extra flexibility). The box sells for about $25. Anyone have any experience with one of these? Or maybe someone has a better way of providing a scope with wire by wire tap points into a live RS232 communications flow?Thanks!-----Pocket-Sized RS-232/Serial Break Out BoxRS232 is a data signal standard used in many computer serial ports for connection between terminals and data communications equipment, such as modems and other communications devices. These boxes are pocket-sized for convenience and easy transportation, providing you with an on-the-go RS232 break out and testing solution. Furthermore, the box features 24 switches for circuit break out and reconfiguration/patching of 24 active positions. Using these boxes, you can enjoy the highest quality connection testing and configuration experience that only superior boxes can deliver.Typical Applications:RS232 circuit break out.RS232 reconfiguring/patching.RS232 signal, wire, and circuit testing/monitoring.Features:Access to all RS232/V.24 circuitsTwelve LED's to monitor key circuit isolationTest points on each side of the switches to enable cross patching with jumper leadsDevice is used to test and rewire RS232 interface. Put the RS232 connector cable that comes out of the box and plug it into the port of the interface card.There are 10 interface signal powered LED's to permanently monitor TD, RD, RTS, CTS, DSR, CD, TC, RC, DTR, (E)TC and two LED's for spare.24 miniature switches enable you to break out circuits or reconfigure and patch any or all of the 24 active positions.No extra power required.20 piece jumper cables included.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2013, 09:44:05 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on November 12, 2013, 08:47:13 pmYep, that would work fine.QuoteThat's the only hassle, and a bit of extra expense, as well.QuoteYes.QuoteCertainly.QuoteI've used several, they work just fine (which is why I suggested them to you in the first place), and 25 bucks is very reasonable (ignoring the extra adapter cable requirement).QuoteWell, as I mentioned, if you have (or can find) a DB9 serial cable with screwed together shells on the ends (instead of the usual molded), you can just take the screws out on one end, pop off the shell halves, and the signal lines are right there to tap in to. Cheaper, simpler, and less to muck around with, or get lost.

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 12, 2013, 10:00:24 pm
content: Quote from: Mark_O on November 12, 2013, 09:44:05 pmCool - looks like other than the finding older style/screwed together shell connectors on a cable the breakout box plus the adapter cables will be the lowest cost solution and for a few $ more it might provide some extra functionality and flexibility.The study of RS232 and related scope learning will move forward accordinglyThanks!

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2013, 05:03:33 am
content: New question, about the USBee SX. Apparently it will handle voltages up to 5V; the RS232 signals I've been decoding out of the PC are roughly +/-7V (about 14V peak to peak).In the USB Suite Manual it says:Please note that the USBee Test Pod digital inputs are strictly 0-5V levels. Any voltage outside this range on the signals will damage the pod and may damage your hardware. If your system uses different voltage levels, you must buffer the signals externally to the USBee Test Pod before connecting the signals to the unit.Maybe the USB is good for embedded RS232 but maybe not for analyzing data out of a PC port? (Or what's the easiest way to buffer signals down to 0-5V levels?)Thanks

author: Sparky
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2013, 05:37:05 am
content: Quote from: Electro Fan on November 13, 2013, 05:03:33 amSomething like this might suit your need:https://www.sparkfun.com/products/449

author: Phili76
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: November 13, 2013, 07:27:02 am
content: And you will need two of them for each line.Philipp

author: Electro Fan
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2013, 05:13:57 am
content: http://www.ebay.com/itm/USB-to-SPI-I2C-UART-TTL-ISP-Multifunction-USB-serial-communication-RS232-/300917008132?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item46100d2704#ht_4535wt_819Any chance one of these might be a worthwhile test fixture for experimenting (scope decoding, etc.) with I2C and SPI (and RS232)?(software user interface and documentation? might be tough unless you have some Chinese language skills)

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 08, 2013, 11:00:51 pm
content: Good news.TheProgramming Guidefor the DS1000Z series isfinally available, on the Rigol International site. It's Dated Dec02'13.I've been waiting for this to show up, and I haven't had an opportunity to go through it yet. I was just about to email Drieg and ask if he could find out when it might arrive, and decided to go look once more before inquiring.

author: Dave Turner
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 09, 2013, 09:08:18 pm
content: I used to use a passive breakout box configured by jumper leads. No led's or power requirements. It was used to confirm/access cable pinouts, and occasionally to temporarily convert straight through to crossover cable and vice versa.This type of device is probably ideal for you. I'm sure they are still available.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2013, 10:54:12 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on December 08, 2013, 11:00:51 pmI had a chance to take a quick look, and compare it against the DS2000-series, as a 'reference standard'.+ IEEE488.2 Common Commands: adds *WAI+ :REFerence Commands+ [:SOURce[<n>]] Commands (DS1000Z-S Only)- :TLHAlf- :BUS<n> Subsystem~ :CALCulate Subsystem (uses :MATH instead, why?)- :FUNCtion Subsystem- :LAN Subsystem- :WAVeform Subsystem- :WAVeform:POINts- :WAVeform:BEGin- :WAVeform:END- :WAVeform:RESet- :WAVeform:STATus?I'd be curious to hear from marmad what effect these differences would have on RUU (beyond the lack of support for Channels 3 & 4).Also, I'm not clear that the information for either the 1000z or 2000 is actually correct and complete? E.g., the 2000 has no :REF commands? Seems odd. Similarly, the 1000Z may support commands that are not documented. One would certainly hope so, because loss of the :BUS commands would be unpleasant, and loss of the :FUNC commands means no support for the Record function at all.Lastly, I'm unsure which command(s) are used to select each segment in a recorded set, so their data can be transferred to a PC. So I'm wondering if that's even possible on the 1000Z, as documented?I haven't done a deep dive into the lower details yet, so there may be other incompatibilities lurking, to be discovered.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2013, 11:25:59 am
content: I had already taken a quick look through the 1000Z Programming Guide and had noticed what appears to be large changes to the WAVeform reading routines. On the DS2000/4000/6000 models those routines are identical: the DSO uses a 2MB buffer to store packets of waveform data to send to the PC, which polls it to find out how many bytes are ready - or whether the current transfer is finished. They appear to have gotten rid of these commands (and perhaps the buffer?) on the DS1000Z - which would - along with the lack of the FUNC subsystem - make integration within RUU considerably more complicated (as opposed to just checking the model number, as I did to make the DS4000 work with the software).QuoteDocumented where? One of the big weaknesses of the entire UltraVision line is the inability to save and load segments (i.e. frames) - and no easy routines for doing it.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2013, 12:44:13 pm
content: Thanks for the info, marmad.Quote from: marmad on December 10, 2013, 11:25:59 amThat's very disappointing. I thought the lack of :WAV:POINTS was non-critical, because :WAV:START/STOP could be used to set the bounds, and thus the point count. And yes, the lack of :WAV:BEGIN/END/STA means the fast, buffered transfers could not be handled in that way.But does the 2000 really lack any :REF manipulation commands? That seems odd.QuoteAs for transferring to a PC, I thought RUU could do that? As far as saving & loading segments, heck, the 1000Z can't even Save a simple 1M capture to a memory stick. There's apparently a bug that causes it to crap out at about 100K.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 10, 2013, 01:13:19 pm
content: Quote from: Mark_O on December 10, 2013, 12:44:13 pmI had never noticed before, but it appears (looking through the manual) that you're correct. Although I'm not quite sure what use there might be in manipulating those externally - they're basically just trace images superimposed on the display for visual comparison - they have no measurable or quantifiable properties.QuoteYes, RUU can transfer (and save) segments - but there is no way to ever get them back into the DSO.QuoteWell, I imagine Rigol will fix the bugs involving file handling. The DS2000 had some transfer bugs that weren't fixed until the 2nd FW release.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2013, 02:02:01 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on December 10, 2013, 10:54:12 amHas anyone with a DS1074Z had a chance to send SCPI commands to it, and see how it responds (if at all) to :BUS and :FUNC commands? Those would be serious omissions in support.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2013, 03:03:09 am
content: Quote from: Mark_O on December 29, 2013, 02:02:01 amRigol seems to be bad about keeping up to date with their literature. I've recently been working on RUU and tested the REF commands on the DS2000 - and they work fine (although with slightly different syntax and extra commands thrown in as compared to the DS1000Z). The only thing I can't implement for REF is the IMPORT and EXPORT functions - perhaps they exist, but if so, I haven't discovered the syntax or commands for them.I've also found quite a few other totally undocumented commands that aren't in the prog. manual - so it's quite likely BUS and FUNC will function on the DS1000Z - although lacking some functionality and with possibly different syntax.

author: Mark_O
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 29, 2013, 03:34:12 am
content: Quote from: marmad on December 29, 2013, 03:03:09 amThanks, marmad. I agree about Rigol and updated literature. And this IS their very first release of the Programming document for the 1000Z-family. Glad to hear the 2000 does have some variant of the :REF command.We found similar situations back in the olden days of the 1000E/1000D, with SCPI commsnd in the units that worked fine, but didn't show up in the document until the 2nd or 3rd Rev. (As much as a year later.)QuoteThis is what I would hope to be the case. Unfortunately, the latest firmware rev distribution (for the 1000Z) is processed so that the clear text is no longer visible.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 02:39:46 pm
content: There don't seem to be any current DS1000Z/DS1074Z threads, so I'll post this in a couple of places to try to get the info:I'm expanding my Rigol UltraVision Utilities (RUU) to include the DS1000Z series. I'm almost finished, but since I don't own the DSO I'd appreciate some help with the following:In the DS4000 series, 250 values from the ADC are mapped to the 400 vertical bits of the display, but in the DS2000 series, the DSO crops that for the display and uses just 200 values. This allows you (in RUU) to expand the display to 10 divs to see 250 values.I suspect the DS1000Z series is the same as the DS2000 (it allows the DSO to get better wfrm/s), but I need an owner to test this for me. You only have to do the following:Input a signal and fine-adjust the vertical scale until the signal expands beyond the edges of the screen <=1 div (as in image #1).STOP the DSO.Reduce the vertical scale.If there is headroom, you will see the full waveform (as in image #2).If there is no headroom, you will see a clipped waveform (as in image #3).Thanks in advance!

author: iloveelectronics
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 03:00:24 pm
content: I have a DS-1104Z. It behaves like your image #3.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 03:06:10 pm
content: Quote from: iloveelectronics on January 12, 2014, 03:00:24 pmThanks, iloveelectronics... I appreciate it.

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 03:10:40 pm
content: I make your test. It has headroom. See the first two pictures. But the headroom is asymmetrically. See the last two pictures. The amount of asymmetrically varies with different vertical scales. Maybe part of the DC offset compensation.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 03:40:13 pm
content: Quote from: sync on January 12, 2014, 03:10:40 pmIf your signal level was the same for all images (3V), then the headroom might the same (2 divs or 20% - same as DS2000). In the 300mV image, your signal would occupy 10 divs - so within range. In your 100mV image, your 3V signal would occupy 30 divs, so it would be extremely clipped. To test the 10 div scale at 100mv, you would need a signal < 1V & > 800mv

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 03:56:02 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on January 12, 2014, 03:40:13 pmThey were two different signals. Sorry, I didn't mention that. The signal of the first two pictures was a 3Vpp sine wave like yours. The last two pictures are from a 1.4V triangle wave.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 04:06:51 pm
content: Quote from: sync on January 12, 2014, 03:56:02 pmOh, ok - that makes sense. But this asymmetry is strange - I can't imagine what the point of doing that would be. And how / when does it kick in - and it's ratio to scale?

author: Phili76
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 04:19:21 pm
content: Hi marmad,I did the test on my DS1104Z-S, using the internal signal generator.1V, 100mV/div, Signal complete,1.1V, lower cutoff1.2V even more lower cutoffIf I move the position in the negative direction the cutoff changes, positive is ok.thanksPhilipp

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 04:31:12 pm
content: Quote from: Phili76 on January 12, 2014, 04:19:21 pmThanks, Philipp! So with your test and sync's, we've seen up to 6 divs over the current voltage scale (1.4V @ 100mv/div). Can I ask you to test 1.6V and 2V signals @ 100mV/div? That would be 2x and 2.5x the voltage scale (16 divs and 20 divs). I want to see when the signal clips at the top (I suspect it might be at > 2x scale).

author: Phili76
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 05:13:05 pm
content: 1.6V still ok, above 1.7V it starts clipping.around 1.68V is the last change in peak voltage.If you need any other test, no problem :-)philipp

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 05:13:41 pm
content: I tested the clipping on different vertical scales. I used a 16 div. pp triangle signal on each scale to make comparison easier. Stopped the scope, reduced the scale and make the screen shot. The values in the file names are the scale settings of the measurement.

author: Phili76
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 05:22:35 pm
content: just tried the other channels, with only 500MS/s complete different behavior ...philipp

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 05:36:25 pm
content: Thanks, guys!It appears that the DS1000Z is mapping even less of the ADC to the display than the DS2000. In sync's images, whenever the scale is increased by 2x, you can see that the waveform occupies ~5.5 divs peak to peak - which means it clips at ~11 divs full scale.That means that the DS4000 does 250 to the 400 vertical pixels of the waveform display area; the DS2000 does 200, but it seems the DS1000Z is something like 184.

author: Phili76
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 05:46:41 pm
content: @sync: does it change when you disable the second channel?philipp

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 06:36:41 pm
content: The clipping varies with the vertical scale, numbers of channel used and maybe other things. For this measurement I used the Vpp measuring function on a reduced scale to measure the clipping.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 06:47:33 pm
content: Quote from: sync on January 12, 2014, 06:36:41 pmWow... that's a total mess. There seems to be no standard - which would make recreating the display on the PC or another device a major pain-in-the-ass (unlike the other UltraVision DSOs).But even worse: the fact that you sometimes see less than half the scale of the ADC on the DSO screen (and often between ~50 - 70%) kind of sucks.

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 07:24:52 pm
content: Quote from: marmad on January 12, 2014, 06:47:33 pmDoesn't the DSOs scale/normalize the samples before sending to a computer? I would expect that.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 07:52:15 pm
content: Quote from: sync on January 12, 2014, 07:24:52 pmPerhaps - and I need to find that out. On the DS2000/DS4000, display memory reads always return values between 0 - 255 (equating to ADC values). I need to know how those values scale to the vertical display area in order to make the waveform look correct when displaying it real-time. As mentioned, on the DS2000, it's always 1 step = 2 pixels / on the DS4000, it's always 1 step = 1.6 pixels.If you've got the NI VISA drivers installed, you can test what the DSO is outputting from the display memory using the attached small program. Just start it, then select channel(s) (it doesn't matter if the channel is ON or OFF at the DSO), and click read.You'll see a decimal list of the bytes from the display memory for that channel, including a summary at the bottom of the lowest/highest value in the list. If the channel is OFF (at the DSO), you would normally get all 127s - ADC half-scale (flat line).Adjust a signal so that the top and bottom are close to the top and bottom of the full display area, then STOP the DSO, and use the vertical position knob to make the waveform exactly touch the upper or bottom grid line - then do a read. That will give you the max (or min) at that edge - which is what I need to know. You can also check that the same values (at display edge) are returned regardless of scale or number of channels on.On the DS2000, a waveform touching the bottom edge of the display area always produces the value = 28 (min) and the top edge produces the value = 227 (max).EDIT:BTW, USB connection is fastest and automatically detected - but if you're using LAN, you'll have to enter your IP address when the program starts using the following format (copy and paste, but replace the shown IP with your correct one):TCPIP::192.168.1.200::INSTR

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 10:36:50 pm
content: I can't run your program. I'm a Linux user. But I captured a few waveforms via USB. The values are like the DS2000 (:WAVeform:FORMAT BYTE). The values are clearly from the display memory not the ADC/ sample memory. Are you sure that the DS2000 gives the ADC values?I had problems with :WAVeform:MODE MAX and :WAVeform:MODE RAW. They gave wrong or no data (error message on the scope). I don't know if this a problem with the scope firmware or my setup.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 10:55:18 pm
content: Quote from: sync on January 12, 2014, 10:36:50 pmI'm not looking for the actual ADC values - those are easy to get and not a problem - but you can't do it real-time while the DSO is running. OTOH, the display memory is a series of vectors derived from interpolation and peak-to-peak decimation which are EQUATABLE to ADC values - giving back a value between 0 - 255 that are ALWAYS mapped (on the DS2000) - regardless of scales or number of channels - precisely the same way to the display. If you clip the signal on the top or bottom, the returned value for that part will always end up at 0 or 255.I need to find someone who can run the small program and discover what the scale if for the DS1000Z - and if it's fixed or not.

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 11:16:18 pm
content: On the DS1000Z it's 0-255. 127 in the middle. 25 values per division. So 201 values for the displayed 8 divs.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 12, 2014, 11:21:55 pm
content: Quote from: sync on January 12, 2014, 11:16:18 pmBut this doesn't match up with your previous data. I'm not sure how both this and the chart you published before could be accurate. The display memory is a reflection of what's been captured. If you stop the DSO with part of the waveform off the screen, it will be either clipped or not clipped if you reduce the scale. If it's not clipped, it means the data has been captured by the ADC and was already present in the display memory.EDIT:Ahh.... I just realized that the DS1000Z must be doing magnification of the ADC values!

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 12:02:38 am
content: I just checked on the DS2000:When running at the small scales (<= 5mv/div) EXCEPT for 500uV (which we already learned over in the other thread is a magnification of 1mv/div), the clipping always happens at 10 divs - meaning the full ADC is mapped to 10 divs. But at 500uV/div, the clipping happens at 20 divs - which shows that it's actually 1mv doubled.If the clipping is happening at a larger number of divisions than 10 - depending on different settings of the DS1000Z - you have to imagine that it's actually using magnification of the ADC values to produce those values.Depending on the magnification value, if Dots display is turned on, you can sometimes see streaks in the displayed pattern.

author: Phili76
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 12:03:45 am
content: just tested, 1.4Vpp 200mV/div, 39 min 215 maxrescaled to 178mV, 29 min 227 maxso should be like DS2000philipp

author: Hydrawerk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 12:08:29 am
content: Quote from: marmad on January 13, 2014, 12:02:38 amI think that this is not mentioned in the datasheet.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 12:12:55 am
content: Quote from: Phili76 on January 13, 2014, 12:03:45 amThanks, Philipp. I had assumed this was correct.We just got side-tracked by the fact that the DS1000Z appears to use magnification of ADC values depending on the number of channels ON and the scale. On the DS2000 this is a constant - unless you are on the 500uV/div or vernier setting.

author: Dave Turner
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 12:16:25 am
content: MarmadI have a DS1074Z-S software version 00.02.00.SP1, which I'm still learning to use effectively. I'd be happy to try tests which do not screw the warranty or potentially brick it as I can't afford a replacement. If I can help as a control please give me idiot proof destructions.Dave

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 12:40:25 am
content: Quote from: marmad on January 12, 2014, 11:21:55 pmYes, it scales the ADC values to the display values. And :WAVeform:DATA? returns the display values.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 12:57:29 am
content: Quote from: sync on January 13, 2014, 12:40:25 amBut as mentioned, it shouldn't really be doing that unless it's specified in the datasheet - which it isn't (just as the 500uV magnification isn't specified in the DS2000 datasheet). And it appears to be doing it a lot and at many different settings. When are you actually seeing > 75% of the ADC's full scale?

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 01:02:27 am
content: Quote from: marmad on January 13, 2014, 12:57:29 amSimpler (low cost) analog front end. The DS1000Z is not a high fidelity scope.Edit:the programming guide is clear about the :WAVeform:DATA? values::WAVeform:YREFerence?Query the vertical reference position of the specified channel source in the Y direction. The YREFerence is fixed at 127 (the bottom of the screen is 0 and the top is 255).The middle of the display = 127.0 and 255 for bottom and top of thescreenis obviously wrong.:WAVeform:YINCrement?Query the waveform increment of the specified channel source in the Y direction. The unit is the same as the current amplitude unit.Explanation YINCrement= VerticalScale/2525 values per division.Bottom gratitude line: 27 = 127 - 4 * 25Top gratitude line: 227 = 127 + 4 * 25

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 01:34:15 am
content: Quote from: sync on January 13, 2014, 01:02:27 amThis has nothing to do with it. Rigol has been pretty good about being fairly honest and following established procedures for their documentation, but in this regard they're not (look at other DSO manufacturers specifications). If scales are actually magnified ADC values (beyond what is necessary for translation to pixels), it should be noted. 256 values are already a small amount - if they're only showing you 50% of that, you should know.QuoteI have never been unclear about the :WAVEform:DATA values - but I think you have.I only needed to know how the values were mapped to the display - as noted many times already, it varies between the DS2000 and DS4000.QuoteAs mentioned many posts ago, bottom line is 28 - top is 227. It's 200 points inclusive.

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 01:55:12 am
content: Quote from: marmad on January 13, 2014, 01:34:15 amYes, you are right. I measured a screen shot. The distance between top and bottom of a clipped waveform are 398 pixels. It uses vertical pixel doubling. So 200 points inclusive.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 02:05:16 am
content: Quote from: sync on January 13, 2014, 01:55:12 amI should hope so - I've been writing software that reads and displays the Rigol display memory on screen for over a year nowQuoteBut that's only doubling to the screen - which any 8-bit DSO has to do to some degree with higher resolution screens. But your DSO appears to be multiplying smaller subsets of the real ADC values in order get faster waveform update rates. If I was a DS1000Z owner, I would want to know from Rigol exactly WHEN and HOW MUCH of that is going on.

author: sync
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 02:19:13 am
content: Quote from: marmad on January 13, 2014, 02:05:16 amI don't think it's about faster waveform rates. It's more computing for the additional scaling (magnification) than a simple 1:1 mapping. I think it's a cheaper analog front end. The analog gain and offset doesn't need to be accurate set. The correction is done in software.

author: marmad
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 13, 2014, 02:30:30 am
content: Quote from: sync on January 13, 2014, 02:19:13 amThere is no such thing as a simple 1:1 mapping. There is decimation, interpolation, and the intensity-buffer. Any additional scaling of the ADC values will be done at the same time as it upscales for the display - just one scaling operation - that's why you can often see horizontal blank lines running through the waveform display when it does it. So I would think that having less values to interpolate, etc, would save time - but I don't know for certain.But if it was just about the quality of the front end, why would the DS1000Z change the scaling when more channels are turned on?