I have a dScope III and would never go back to using a sound card. It is just false economy if you are a serious developer. I was using a Creative Labs EMU0404 external sound device and I thought it was pretty good at the time until I measured the jitter using the dSCope III and it was very average
It is not just about the hardware ! All of the software has been written over the years to carry out a broad suite of tests and Prism like AP are always adding more to their arsenal of testing regimes. The newavguy articulates this very well in an article he wrote about audio measurement equipment and why soundcards are false economy !! NwAvGuy: Testing Methods
What was missing for me in the Averlab was an input attenuator to test high powered amps otherwise it was a good price and a lot cheaper than anything that AP or Prism has to offer except for the newer dScope M series devices. Also AP now have a software front end designed to work with recommended soundcards but this is not that cheap.
cheers
There is an article in the March AudioXpress issue, where SY (our SY) has an extensive test report using the ADI-2 Pro FS with my autoranger front end and Virtins software.
Total system cost around $ 2k, and it does everything the big guys do, and then some. So I definitely don't see the false economy, unless you put a value on the AP logo on your graphs.
I have owned a dScope III and found the performance unimpressive, even if the software was nice.
Jan
Interesting. Excuse my ignorance but is this article available online or it's subscription only?
So your setup does all of the standard AES-17 tests out of the box that the dScope offers plus J-test jitter tests etc and can it match the performance of an APx555B ?? If it can I would be very interested in it
It cannot replace an APx555B, no. It probably can not do all that out of the box, but it can be set up to do that. For about 5% of the cost of an APx555B it gets very close, and that was the point of the article.
Now you don't have to chose between a $ 40k AP or bad performance, now you can have very good performance for $ 2k, that was the point.
Jan
Now you don't have to chose between a $ 40k AP or bad performance, now you can have very good performance for $ 2k, that was the point.
Jan
You can make this argument with any analyser, even including the 555B. Any non-linearities in the test instrument will add to those of the DUT, and the whole argument can get quite existential!
(before I get corrected: I realise it can go both ways, where inaccuracies cancel each other out, making you think your DUT is better than it is!)
I will be getting the edition of Audio Xpress. As someone with about 6 analysers in the workshop, I can state for a fact that keeping them all in tip-top condition is a worry. I only keep the 2722 in order to have that logo on test results... Last time I checked (I don't think it's been on for over a year...), it was 100%. But were it to break down, that would be a massive headache. It could easily cost over half what it's worth to fix. The UPVs are in a similar situation, but I'm more philosophical about them, as they pay their rent by being in use daily (and - as shown at this forum - there are a fair amount of faults that you can fix yourself in a UPV, as I have done).
A soundcard + autoranger, that delivers around -110 THD+N, for the fraction of the cost of a dedicated AA is something that is very interesting. When it comes to unveiling a design in public, sure, use the AP / R+S for the specs. But for daily use, the soundcard + ranger is attractive.
(before I get corrected: I realise it can go both ways, where inaccuracies cancel each other out, making you think your DUT is better than it is!)
I will be getting the edition of Audio Xpress. As someone with about 6 analysers in the workshop, I can state for a fact that keeping them all in tip-top condition is a worry. I only keep the 2722 in order to have that logo on test results... Last time I checked (I don't think it's been on for over a year...), it was 100%. But were it to break down, that would be a massive headache. It could easily cost over half what it's worth to fix. The UPVs are in a similar situation, but I'm more philosophical about them, as they pay their rent by being in use daily (and - as shown at this forum - there are a fair amount of faults that you can fix yourself in a UPV, as I have done).
A soundcard + autoranger, that delivers around -110 THD+N, for the fraction of the cost of a dedicated AA is something that is very interesting. When it comes to unveiling a design in public, sure, use the AP / R+S for the specs. But for daily use, the soundcard + ranger is attractive.
I don't see the problem with verification - it's simple to do a dry run with no DUT, but yes it costs extra time. It's a tradeoff with that, or getting a 2nd mortgage ;-)
I am not trying to stop AP from doing business! I have an AP 2722 myself. As well as an ADI-2 Pro FS R. So I have a view of both systems.
Jan
I am not trying to stop AP from doing business! I have an AP 2722 myself. As well as an ADI-2 Pro FS R. So I have a view of both systems.
Jan
I'm sorry to see Averlab going. It was a good platform. Its possible that the QA401 addressed that market well enough.
Its very possible to cobble together cost effective solutions that come very close to SOTA for a few parameters and are more than adequate for a hobbyist or experimenter, but depending on your application self contained solutions (APx or QA401) will get you what you need faster and easier. If you make a living designing or manufacturing products time spent fiddling with soundcards/software/Windows upgrades is time not generating money. I have a QA401 and Virtins (they work well together) so I have a good perspective on them.
Validating the performance of an analyzer is not easy but your real goal is 10 dB better than your DUT. If you are designing or servicing general commercial equipment a QA401 or a soundcard based solution is fine. The QA401 (and QA402 in development) coming as a system (and very cost effective) makes a lot of sense. If you are pushing the envelope or a commercial application with HDMI or Bluetooth inputs/outputs you are stuck in the very high priced world with an optioned APx. But in that world the APx is still a small part of the investment. And its a limited market. The R&S stuff was part of a number of cell phone manufacturing lines so they got some good business. The Keithley 2015 was in that market as well. That market has changed and not as much sold into it, maybe some China market only solution is handling it all. And if you are pushing SOTA audio performance the APx555B is already not quite good enough to meet that 10 dB margin for accuracy.
Working at a bench troubleshooting audio usually has me back to a traditional analog analyzer with its immediate response. For the same reason I use my digital scope which emulates an analog scope and not the USB scope sitting next to it. Its much faster for troubleshooting. The USB scope and interface (soundcard,QA401, RTX) plus Virtins (etc.) are great for capturing and sharing complex details, qualities that make them less convenient when probing 10 different signals on a headphone driver that is not working.
Its very possible to cobble together cost effective solutions that come very close to SOTA for a few parameters and are more than adequate for a hobbyist or experimenter, but depending on your application self contained solutions (APx or QA401) will get you what you need faster and easier. If you make a living designing or manufacturing products time spent fiddling with soundcards/software/Windows upgrades is time not generating money. I have a QA401 and Virtins (they work well together) so I have a good perspective on them.
Validating the performance of an analyzer is not easy but your real goal is 10 dB better than your DUT. If you are designing or servicing general commercial equipment a QA401 or a soundcard based solution is fine. The QA401 (and QA402 in development) coming as a system (and very cost effective) makes a lot of sense. If you are pushing the envelope or a commercial application with HDMI or Bluetooth inputs/outputs you are stuck in the very high priced world with an optioned APx. But in that world the APx is still a small part of the investment. And its a limited market. The R&S stuff was part of a number of cell phone manufacturing lines so they got some good business. The Keithley 2015 was in that market as well. That market has changed and not as much sold into it, maybe some China market only solution is handling it all. And if you are pushing SOTA audio performance the APx555B is already not quite good enough to meet that 10 dB margin for accuracy.
Working at a bench troubleshooting audio usually has me back to a traditional analog analyzer with its immediate response. For the same reason I use my digital scope which emulates an analog scope and not the USB scope sitting next to it. Its much faster for troubleshooting. The USB scope and interface (soundcard,QA401, RTX) plus Virtins (etc.) are great for capturing and sharing complex details, qualities that make them less convenient when probing 10 different signals on a headphone driver that is not working.
Does your thing do sweep testing ie THD+N, IMD etc vs frequency or amplitude ? Can't see it on their website RTX6001 Audio Analyzer with Multi-Instrument Full Package | Virtins Technology
Virtin's does to all of that and lots more. However there is a learning curve. Typically the more complex and versatile the software the steeper the learning curve, especially if you want to do something complex. But you can do those plots.
The RTX is only available secondhand. Its a great platform but did not make a lot of business sense for RTX.
The RTX is only available secondhand. Its a great platform but did not make a lot of business sense for RTX.
Not sure what you mean by my 'thing', but these tests are pretty much standard everywhere. They are a software function of course, nothing to do with the hardware.
Jan
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.