GRUMPYOLDGUY
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2016
- Posts
- 1,146
- Likes
- 341
1. If they're getting 40dB error, then they need new test equipment.
2, The audibility of something is irrelevant when characterizing the hardware. The hardware is the hardware, period.
3. And I doubt if I comb through these forums I will find a single post that says "Oh boy, 10dB noise figure? Man I'm glad they used an A weighted measurement, that's so much more relatable to me now!! Praise the sun god!"
1. If your profession was audio engineering you'd know that every single audio performance measurement system from the multi-kilo$ AP right down to the free REW includes several standardized weighting filters. Every SPL meter worth anything over $10 has weighting filters. No new equipment needed. It's a question of relevance. And correctly applied weighting in noise measurements is very, very relevant.
2. Not if it's audio hardware. Sorry, that's completely naive. In audio equipment the measurement "holy grail" is audible correlation of measured parameters. In fact, it's about all that matters.
3. You won't. Because there's no such thing as a 10dB noise figure. All noise figures must reference something like full output, a specific sound pressure, even thermal noise in a stated resistor, there MUST be a reference, and the noise figure is a ratio.
What you wouldn't understand unless you've done it is, you can measure two devices unweighted, they measure very close to, or exactly the same noise level, but one sounds much quieter than the other. So, what do you do? Publish unweighted and misleading noise specs? That's what weighted measurements attempt to reconcile. To understand why one device (or acoustic space) sounds noisier than another you must...absolutely MUST...take hearing response into account. Every single audio engineer knows this, and applies it. You can take hearing response into account with fixed weighting filters, or plotted curves and spectrum analysis, but you have to do it or you aren't engineering anything.
1. Just because they include features to alter the actual measurement, doesn't mean they should. By the way, I was addressing your point that if you don't use weighting you somehow end up with a 40dB error... The implication of needing weighting to correct a 40dB error in the raw measurement is that your test equipment is completely broken. 40dB is a lot. A LOT.
2. This is absolutely ridiculous... If the dynamic range measures 120dB, then the dynamic range is 120dB, full stop. This is the measurement of the hardware. If you change that value because the ear behaves differently than your test equipment, you're no longer characterizing the hardware, you're characterizing a system that includes the hardware and some industry organization's definition of the standard ear. This is dumb. When I look at hardware specs, I want the damn hardware specs.