![]() ![]() So theoretically 8 bits gives you 48 db, 12 bits 72 db and 16 bits would be 96 db. In an ideal world 1 bit of data equals 6 db of dynamic range. Yes very true, most digital scopes only have 8 bit ADCs. Noise Dosimeter tool for measuring noise dose with various threshold and criterion levels, with 3, 4, and 5 dB exchange rates.īenbradley wrote:DSOs like the Rigol are great for what they do (like checking the rise and fall times of square and sawtooth waves), but the sample depth is only 8 bits (maybe 10 or 12 bits on a high-end DSO), just good enough for a 256-pixel high display, but certainly not good enough for "CD quality.".Room Analyzer tool for estimating room acoustics parameters from impulse response data (T20, T30, T60, EDT, Clarity, Definition, Center Time).Flat, A, and C-weighted equivalent (Leq), time-weighted (Lp), and percentile-exceeded (Lx) sound levels.Signal mean, variance, and standard deviation values.Crest factor and rms, peak, and peak-to-peak signal levels.Maybe worth a look?Īctually their most advanced package would be better: ![]() Maybe not as advanced as FuzzMeasure (?) but SignalScope Pro is pretty nice. They will do everything you need except phase and they have two advantages over modern audio analysers: NO FANS and they work standalone without Windows. If you think $1k is expensive check what they used to cost new in 1980s money. The industry standard before AP came along was the HP 8903B and you can pick these up relatively cheaply now. I was almost tempted though, but decided I was better off with some decent plotting software and correct data. When I contacted SMUG about it it soon became apparent that I was talking to Mac heads generating eye candy with no experience of proper test equipment or any interest in making any. Don't forget that you lose a bit resolution for every 6dB lower you measure and are limited by the sample rate and anti aliasing filters. accuracy.įuzzmeasure looks like it does the job, but is no better than the sound interface on your computer and there needs to be a way of calibrating it. You need to integrate a precision noise source aver a long time to get an accurate response curve. Well an FFT analyser won't do that, it measures the harmonic content of a signal, not the response of a device. My Rigol scope has an FFT, so that is a start. While not common in Eurorack, I'm interested in doing this, including prototype testing for evaluation / comparison of competitor products, etc.Įnoughstatic wrote:As for what I'm wanting to test: mainly frequency response, phase relationship (lead/lag), and noise floor (not so much for SNR, but absolute noise floor levels, weighted or unweighted). My Rigol scope has an FFT, so that is a start.įreq response and phase relationship are of most interest with filter modules.Īlso, I build my own studio preamps, and effects pedals, so this is for a broader application than just eurorack / modular stuff.īTW, I should mention that this is also for publishing specs. As for what I'm wanting to test: mainly frequency response, phase relationship (lead/lag), and noise floor (not so much for SNR, but absolute noise floor levels, weighted or unweighted). I do have the above equipment (I've been servicing pro audio gear for over 20 years, so I have a nice collection of good test gear). So for me other than a real good frequency counter, real good DVM, decent oscilloscope and my ears I don't need much more. ![]() Distortion I don't even think about, I'm more interested in the noise level and tuning. Typically their distortion and noise levels aren't that great. I don't consider synths audiophile quality. Emmaker wrote:So what do you want to measure? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |