Got your VM -- was entertaining grandkids at the time! (They ate, between themselves, a pound of shrimp and a pound of linguini.)
I have a modified macro of "FFT-Scaling for Noise" which simply converts the y-Axis to V/Rt Hz, and the x-axis to log, and an opportunity to adjust for the gain of the LNA.
The “Audio Precision” Box is a tool to help an ANALOG/DIGITAL ELECTRONIC ENGINEER to understand or verify that the electronic product is correctly working. It also used with a DVM, OSCILLSCOPE and other tools to in production testing.
If you are not skilled in a form of science, how can you say it cost to much.
If you are not skilled in a form of science, how can you say it cost to much.
Strange statement...
Any EE "engineer" doesn't need a "“Audio Precision” Box" to get feedback vs their design, unless they need to be "high" in the ranking of ASR.
Any EE "engineer" goes "deeper" by default, using smarter measurement devices ...
Any EE eng, use : DSO / sampling scope / VNA / SA
No EE eng, use a "AP" device to draw conclusions,
phile1,Hi,
rough reply vs the many threads related to the thsi subject :
AudioPrecision devices are for the guys like Amir from ASR that are lazy and want "result", without thinking about "what's below?"
The kind of of guy that does't want to have his brain "pushed too far", or even nicer pushed to "non-sense" vs physics... blabla bla...
The best answer to this kind of threads => go deeper !
buy the awesome LiteVNA and TinySA for 1/100 price of any AudioPrecision stuff
then, thru measurements using LiteVNA & TinySA => you end to some info & conclusions.
If this infos from TinySA & LiteVNA don't rig a bell to you =>
1. you realize this game is to big for you, no brainer => you'll learn very nice stuff ahaed, and gonna be ccol
2. you're stuck to AudioP devices => you're ****** / fooled
why this ? => AudioP devices/ measurements, are like sniffing the exhauts pipe of a jet or piston engine and "guess" what right/wrong INSIDE the engine without knowing anything about this inside of the engine. Weird isn't it ?
all the best for the ones that looks deeper
and good luck for the another ones
You had a previous post with similar content already.
If you want to feel good and look down on others by claiming you don't need an AP to do your job then suit yourself. But you don't have to bring it up and brag every now and then.
What do you propose to measure linearity? And SINAD or SNR to the accepted standards?
oups...
I'm not trolling
I just like to understand things, so I use basic measurement devices like
1. "time-domain" analyzers
2. "frequency-domain" analyzers
both above are "basic" analyzers...
"basic" in the sense : "raw"
Audio Precesion is not "raw"...
To be clear : how many companies compete with AudioPresision ? none
Why ?
because it is a doggy market, so all Keysight / R&S & co : they go away vs this market.
Only AP remains...
oups...
I'm not saying AP is total crap
I'm just pointing that AP are "black box" that give "results"
So, as a "I don't know anything but I can learn" guy, feel free to
1. explain a AP measurement is relevant
2. vs a combo time/freq-domain analysis using common measurement devices
oups ! I've forgotten a key point about AP stuf : they are plug&play or plug&measure (depends how you want to call it)
but "fair" measurements are not plug&play.... I admit that's a PITA but we have to cope it
@phile1: I am not sure what you mean, but IIUC AP is a standard ADC sampling to PCM and a software doing standard time -> frequency math. The hw does some signal conditioning (like merging the stream from two digitally filtered ADC channels, one direct (bandpass filtered) and second via notch (bandstop filtered) - but it's just to gain resolution, the result is again PCM. The final numbers (like THD, IMD, etc.) are always a result of some parameters (bandwidth, etc.) so we can see discussions why e.g. REW yields slightly different numbers than the AP software. But those are minor differences due to slightly different input parameters to the calculation.
You are not trying to understand things. You give nonsense opinions and insults based on ignorance. You are a troll.
Jan
be cool !
"troll" stuff : it's the very common garbage you can see all around this days. Not my cup of tea.
If you find smth wrong in my tests/ results => do your own to compare.
Then, no brainer, we share results etc...
I'm just trying to understand things...
You say "troll" vs me =>
1. why not
2. what kind of measurement ever you perform of any "electro" device ?
3. just share you experience instead of "woo vs that" !
Again, What do you propose to measure linearity? And SINAD or SNR to the accepted standards? those are accepted standards that generally need specialized instruments to evaluate. Same for eye-patter or return loss/crosstalk on CAT cables etc. etc. You may be able to measure frequency response with an oscillator and a meter (really tedious) however distortion requires some method to remove the source and evaluate the residual. Spectrum analyzers today are not good enough to measure the distortion residuals of current audio products.
AP analyzers are expensive but they have well understood performance that can be verified with a few other simiar devices (Shibasoku?)
AP analyzers are expensive but they have well understood performance that can be verified with a few other simiar devices (Shibasoku?)