Shameless self-promotion, but I figure people here would be interested.
Rigol DS4014 review:
And teardown:
A 100MHz bandwidth does seem like quite a limiting reagent for a scope like that. I was seriously close to purchasing the 200MHz version (DS2024) but I just couldn't bring myself to spend $3500 (after shipping) for an oscilloscope.
Thank you for these videos.
It has a nice large cooling fan. Please measure the waveform update rate by connecting a counter to the Trig Out BNC.
Saw it this morning, nice video. Shows a reliable & fast scope.
It has a nice large cooling fan. Please measure the waveform update rate by connecting a counter to the Trig Out BNC.
square wave signal Vpp=4V, f=1MHz
Counter says: f=105.896kHz (=wfm/s), when timebase set to get a steep edge. Setup similar to Mark Madel's video "REVIEW of the DS2000".
No problem.
square wave signal Vpp=4V, f=1MHz
Counter says: f=105.896kHz (=wfm/s), when timebase set to get a steep edge. Setup similar to Mark Madel's video "REVIEW of the DS2000".
No problem.
Sure, so it basically meets its spec for best case scenario... what is the lowest reading you can get (I imagine when memory depth is maximum)?
It would be nice to make a comparison like this.
square wave signal Vpp=4V, f=1MHz
Counter says: f=105.896kHz (=wfm/s), when timebase set to get a steep edge. Setup similar to Mark Madel's video "REVIEW of the DS2000".
No problem.
Sure, so it basically meets its spec for best case scenario... what is the lowest reading you can get (I imagine when memory depth is maximum)?
Yes, I only wanted to check if it meets the maximum wfm/s. When choosing full memory depth of 140MPts as expected it slows down to a few wfm/s
around 30wfm/s. But that's OK, any scope slows down.
But: in this case the scope still writes the 140MPts with a sample rate of 4GS/s, so you get a high sampled shot of a signal of a long time period that
you can zoom in if you like & search for the details.
If you search for rare glitches you don't use that mode because update rate is more important related to a small time window of a signal than memory depth.
It would be nice to make a comparison like this.
Without doing the test I expect the Agilent to produce more wfm/s, they're using selfmade ASICs which are faster than FPGAs.
We've got many Agilents in our company beginning with the old 54622D scopes, the DSO6034A to the really very expensive
high end models - they all have in common to have fast ASICs.
But wfm/s is not the bottom line buying a scope - and the memory of the DSO2000X is simply to small for many purposes. Because of that
even the DSO2000X is an expensive scope compared to both Rigol type series.
If Agilent, better start with DSO3000X instead of DSO2000X. So I came to the Rigol DS4012 instead of buying the DSO2000X, would do it
again immediately.
It is a pity that the Rigol has quite no tools to manage the large memory. No search function, no possibility to place marks or anything similar to Tek's Wave Inspector.
It is a pity that the Rigol has quite no tools to manage the large memory. No search function, no possibility to place marks or anything similar to Tek's Wave Inspector.
Even without your attachements which I don't read since I know the tools of other manufacturers well it's only a pity if you buy a scope before testing it and wake up too late to notice that such tools are not there.
Missing add ons are acceptable, as long as the interface can be used to communicate to Labview or getting an easy API to implement an application to your needs, but missing memory of the DSO2000X is something that can't be replaced trough anything - and that's really a pity for many requirements of todays measures.
Agilent knows very well why they don't provide much memory for the DSO2000x series and can't be extended afterwards and the DSO3000x is really much more expensive than Rigol's 2000/4000 units.
Concludingly, searching for needles in the hay and always firing the last bullet makes no sense, a scope with less memory is like a Ferrari with a powerful engine and no fuel to drive it: you've to stop where others pass you by with a simple sedan.
The QFN device located between the ADCs is most likely a PLL-based clock generation and distribution IC, something like one of the TI LMK series. As a first guess I'd speculate it might be one of these:
http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/lmk04906.pdfThe high speed connector footprint looks like a Samtec QSS / QTS series. Maybe it was used to aid FPGA development, connected to a probe or development board of some kind?
http://www.samtec.com/documents/webfiles/pdf/qss.pdfThe Micrel part marked '8051' is a KSZ8051, 10/100 Ethernet PHY:
http://www.micrel.com/_PDF/Ethernet/datasheets/ksz8051mnl-rnl.pdfNot sure on the unmarked device near the battery, but Altera CPLDs use a 2x5 programming header like the one next to it. It wouldn't surprise me to find that device is a MAX II providing some essential glue logic that's needed at power-up before the FPGAs have booted.
Thanks for showing the usability and the responsiveness of the scope...
well it's only a pity if you buy a scope before testing it and wake up too late to notice that such tools are not there.
I have not bought any digital scope yet.
Thanx for the videos. I'll watch them tonight on my Apple TV
. Gonna make some popcorn, turn off the lights, crank up the volume, Dolby 7.1 of course..... %-B
The video shows the PRINT button and it's mentioned that a printer has to be connected.
Additionally you can use that button for saving a screenshot on an USB stick - works fine.
Kind rgds
Gunb
I'm on the fence right now - between a Rigol 4014, a Rigol 2102 (which would let me also buy a nice AFG) or a used Agilent 2024A (from Agilent, with a full warranty and cert). The 4014 and the 2024A are both the same price.
I'm leaning a bit towards the Rigol at this point - just trying to decide between the 4000 or the 2000 -- mainly because of the deeper memory. I could use the MSO functions on the Agilent but not so much that it's a "must have" (and not being able to do serial decode on the 2000 is a serious bummer).
Bottom line is thanks for the review - all this information is helpful in organizing my thoughts.
Nice review and welcome to the forum.
Great videos, been subbed to your channel for a while
It is a pity that the Rigol has quite no tools to manage the large memory. No search function, no possibility to place marks or anything similar to Tek's Wave Inspector.
My
software utility for Rigol UltraVision scopes allows dropping markers in Delayed Sweep (Zoom) mode and jumping between them. It also does auto-scrolling of the Zoom window left or right at adjustable speeds. A search function will be added in the future - once the bugs in sample memory reads has been ironed out of the DS2000 firmware.
Yes, I agree, this application is really nice.
Checked it for a few minutes last week with the DS4012. It seems to be much better than many tools
provided from other scope manufacturers concerning their own tools.
My scope is connected to the host PC per WLAN (two access points) and still the running trace is updated
very fast on the PC-side - most apps offer to make a screenshot only.
The only problem I had was to connect to the scope, I needed a few attempts. Maybe because the WLAN
instead of direct LAN or USB connection. Maybe it would help to give a bit more time between request and
response time during link connection?!
However, thank you very much for your efforts, really a successful application.
Yes, I agree, this application is really nice.
Thanks, Gunb!
The only problem I had was to connect to the scope, I needed a few attempts. Maybe because the WLAN
instead of direct LAN or USB connection. Maybe it would help to give a bit more time between request and
response time during link connection?!
This is a bit of a problem with the VISA WLAN routines. I also sometimes have connection problems using WLAN and Rigol's UltraSigma software. Does your DSO use a fixed IP address? Next release of RUU will have config files - which should at least solve the problem when using fixed addresses.
Hi marmad,
yes, I'm using fixed IPs for all devices.
I mean, no problem if it can't be improved, I'm patient enough to do a few attempts.
Don't know if possible, but maybe your app could try several times automatically to establish communication? For instance 3x with a definite
time interval and the attempt to get an reponse from the scope each time.
Rgds
Gunb
