They are equally accurate (or inaccurate, depending on how you look at it). The controversy seems to be over a bouncing needle (analog) allegedly being easier to read than a changing digital readout. I don't quite understand this since, when calibrating with Avia or DVE, the readout, either digital or analog, goes to it's reading and stays there. It doesn't bounce. With the digital, occasionally, I get a reading (subwoofer) that moves back and forth between two consecutive numbers (74, then 75, then 74, then 75, etc.) so I just take the higher of the two. If you were using the analog, then it's needle would be vacillating as well.
On the digital meter the scale runs from -10dB to +10dB. In other words, if you have the meter set to 70dB, the meter shows readings from 60dB to 80dB. On the analog the scale only runs from -10dB to +6 dB. This means less switching of the scale on the meter when taking readings.
I mount my meter on a tripod, and in order to get an accurate reading you need to position yourself far enough from the meter that you own body neither absorbs or reflects the signal from the speakers thereby having no effect whatsoever on the reading. I find the nice big digital readout easier to read from a distance than the small scale on the analog. YMMV.
The less expensive analog will do the job just fine. No need to spend more for the digital, unless you want the features it provides. I prefer the digital.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, RANDY!
