Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Technical Questions Digital vs. Analog RS SPL Meter

Hi all,
While I am on vacation in the US this week I thought I'd stop by a local Radioshack and pick up an SPL meter for tweaking calibrations when I get home. Not that I've looked hard, but I have checked my local Radioshack's (ok fellow canuck's - The Source by Circuit City now purchased by Bell) once or twice and they haven't had them available. So long story short, I see the they have a digital and analog meter available within ~$5 of each other. Anybody have experience/recommendations whether to go digital or analog? Thanks!

I've always like the analog version, as I like watching the meter and it is easier to see the big picture. Never used the digital display, but I think it would not be as easy to monitor watching numbers change.

You're on vacation and you want to go to Radio Shack? I'm so sorry, man.

Good point Sirquack, never thought of it that way - just figured that digital would be more 'exact'.

Pmbuko - Maybe that's why my wife likes to call me 'techno geek'? I just don't get it

You know what I don't understand? Why does the digital SPL meter have that big knob to set the range? Same as the analog one. I mean it's digital, does it really need that knob?

Dan, before I bought my SPL meter I had an opportunity to use both the analog and digital models which were owned by acquaintances. I preferred the digital by a clear margin and bought one. To me, seeing an actual number indicating the sound level was easier than interpreting the position of a needle on a scale. In addition, the digital model has additional measurement modes which are important to me, such as the maximum level reached mode.

I much prefer reading an analog needle than a digital readout..

"the needle is pointing around 75 3/4"
is easier to read than
"Find the mean of: 75.7/75.6/75.9/75.2/76.1/75.8"

Bren R.

Ya, that digital read out is so much harder to guesstimate with the last decimal point bouncing around and all

Actually the RS meter doesn't read down into the tenths only whole numbers and it would just flicker between 75 and 76 using Bren's example.

I'm with John. I prefer using the digital over analog and yes Jay is correct, the digital meter only reads whole numbers.

Mine is digital and constantly flickers by .5
I usually calibrate by setting them all so they are flickering between nn.0 and nn.5

Serves my purpose but I'd prefer analogue for the Geiger Counter look if nothing else.

I like Digital for my visual perception, plus the ability to save Hi dB peaks. Sounds like we have been of little help in arriving at a consensus. Got a coin? ;o)
It seems to come down to, are you a 'needle' or 'LCD' guy?
(hint: go LCD and be winner!)

I actually own one at home, but I've used the analog one at work about 100x more often. I stand corrected... I think mine has whole numbers and a ".5" that lights up. Been a while since I used it.

Bren R.

Hi,

There really is no consensus. I prefer the analog version because I grew up watching analog meters. I don't much like digital speedometers on cars, either. Come to think of it, I installed a back-lighted digital voltmeter on my car, which I do like.

At Axiom, we have an expensive calibrated digital SPL meter but the values are always jumping around by fractions of a dB--kind of annoying.

Regards,
Alan

I also prefer analog clocks - at a glance, you can get an idea of the rough time, or look a fraction of a second longer and get the precise time. I find it's faster than having my mind process the 3 or 4 numbers that make up a digital clock readout.

And worse than anything else is the digital multimeter... trying to read anything with a changing value is maddening.

Bren R.

Well thanks for the input y'all! I have reached the official consensus of...I don't know! At least I know I can't be wrong with whichever version I get. It'll depend on what they have in stock - or if I'm feeling old school or new school at the time

Pics and updates of the new HT soon to come!

Can't decide? everything considered equal, save a few bucks on the analogue.

Does the analog have the output connector (RCA) like the digital does? Very useful for programs like REW.

Hi Dewd,

Yes, the analog meter does have the RCA output. I just checked mine.

Regards,

That's interesting. I would think that a nice calibrated digital meter like that would have some kind of mode where it could do 'smoothing' to the response. Kind of like how analog meters have 'slow' and 'fast' settings.

I have the traditional radio shack analog meter, and it works well. The decision on which to get is the same argument as to whether you want a digital or analog watch. It's whichever you prefer.

Peter,

The calibrated one does have a "peak-hold" function but no averaging setting.
I like the "slow-fast" settings on the analog Radio Shack meter. I don't think the digital version has a quasi-averaging setting.

Regards,

There's a slow/fast response button on the digital too.

The digital has slow-fast setting. It is really steady when doing the mains, but it jumps a bit for the sub (but not so much that you can't get a good reading).

*Notice I said 'good' reading, which is different from 'accurate'.

Hi,

Oh, OK. Well, that makes the comparison even closer and the decision harder between the digital and analog meters. Of course, you could get both and do comparisons of accuracy, returning whichever meter came second.

Hey, another fun vacation project!

Cheers,

Does the analog have an output like the digital one does? I seem to remember it not having one, if not the digital can be used as a mic for REW(Room EQ Wizard) to plot room response etc.

yep, the analog one has an output, that is how I graphed with REW.

I see an output on my analog. I've never used it.

Dang, I thought that might be the trump card.

How do you hook up that output to what?

You can use that to hook up to allow the SPL meter to act as a mic by hooking it up to a soundcard's input and then use REW or similar to graph responses.

yup

Well, just to close the loop - I am back from vacation and while away I purchased the digital meter. In the end I liked the ability to 'hold' the max SPL feature (thanks JohnK!). This could be handy for my motorcycle. Funny how a non HT related thought made my decision for me. Thanks for the input and discussions. I am looking forward to using it this weekend with the new setup which arrived this week - woohoo!

Very good, Dan. Yes, as I commented before, the added modes on the digital meter, especially the Max modes, give it a substantial advantage over the analog meter. Although most of the discussion seemed to center on the relative ease in reading the two, in my view the modes are an even more important consideration.

I have used digital and analog sound level meters for many years, and find the following: As the defination of digital is to count, and the defination of analog is to measure. The selection should depend on your goals using either type of sound level measuring device.
Digital will be more accurite for absolute level determination.
Analog will be easier to determine trend information.

I prefer to use both systems in my work as a sound engineer.

Welcome to the forum!!