new RIGOL DS1000Z and... MSO4000

[zachBH4RTO]

There are new scope on rigol Chinese web

 http://www.rigol.com/prodserv/DS1000Z/   
100M analog bandwidth; 4 channel, max 1G sample / sec    and    build in  two channel arbitrary waveform generator  O.o
list price $1000

 
http://www.rigol.com/prodserv/DS4000/
which added 16 digital channel

[hans]

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.html

Its quite an upgrade from old DS1000 E series, 4-channels, 12Mpts, 30k wfms/s   

Too bad it doesn't have a seperate trigger channel.

[Hydrawerk]

Looks good but I am afraid of the bugs... 
http://www.eeworld.com.cn/Test_and_measurement/2013/0506/article_7270.html

[maiakaat]

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.

[EEVblog]

$1K?
I don't get it, that the same price point as the 2000 series 

[helloworld922]

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 optional

Downsides:

1. 12 Mpts standard, 24 Mpts optional for 1000z series vs. 14 MPnts standard, 56 Mpts optional 2000 series
2. 30k wfms/s vs. 50k wfms/s
3. 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 screen
5. 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.

[EEVblog]

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.

Yes, 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.

[ivan747]

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.

[Deckert]

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

[ivan747]

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!

[Deckert]

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_WfZQ

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

The DS1074Z-S (70MHz 4-channel with dual 25MHz wavegen) version lists for 926 US Dollar. Mighty attractive indeed.

--deckert

[Hydrawerk]

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. eshop

On the other hand, the function generator looks nice and it seems that the XY mode was improved, maybe cursors added?

[Hydrawerk]

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

[Deckert]

Well, this seems to me like a cheap crap scope... Why only 250MS/s per each channel??

It'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

[Electro Fan]

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_WfZQ

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

The DS1074Z-S (70MHz 4-channel with dual 25MHz wavegen) version lists for 926 US Dollar. Mighty attractive indeed.

--deckert

Looks 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.)

[Smokey]

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!!

[Wuerstchenhund]

It'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.

Not really. Some do, but a lot of the better scopes don't interleave the ADCs.

[Hydrawerk]

Oh, those 1Gs/s per each channel scopes were developed in (or before) year 1996, right?

[zlabsoft]

Well, this seems to me like a cheap crap scope... Why only 250MS/s per each channel??

the new Rigol DS2000 series share two ADCs over 4 channels.

--deckert

Are you sure? DS2000 series seen only have 2ch?

[Wuerstchenhund]

Oh, those 1Gs/s per each channel scopes were developed in (or before) year 1996, right?

Some yes, some no. An example for an older scope with non-interleaving ADCs is the venerable HP 54510A (1GSa/s per channel) from 1991.

[Deckert]

Are you sure? DS2000 series seen only have 2ch?

Agreed, 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.

[nack]

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.

[marmad]

I've also noticed the 12 divisions instead of the 14 divisions on the DS2000/DS4000.

Yes, 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:

[EEVblog]

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.

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

[EEVblog]

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.

I 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.