Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[boggy]

Greetings everybody, congratulations for a new forum!

I'm in planning phase for buying stand alone (bench, reference) audio analyzer and I find
 (not very expensive like AP):
Stanford Research Systems - SR1 - Dual-domain audio analyzer.
web link: http://www.thinksrs.com/products/SR1.htm
user manual: http://www.thinksrs.com/downloads/PDFs/Catalog/SR1c.pdf



Can someone share his experiences with it, if it is in his possession or daily access.

Any (possible) comparison with high quality audio card (Lynx TWO series or better?) and some
decent measurement software will be highly appreciated.

Thanks!

[JGreenslade]

Interesting question, Bogic. I got a demo of one of these at the summer AES and am very tempted.

On the positive side:

It offers a lot of facilities and a good spec for the price

Stanford is a respected name in test gear

It's a standalone unit and doesn't need a host computer.

On the negative side:

It's humungous  and will occupy a lot of space on the bench. You can't just 'throw' it into a soft bag and take it on location

Because Stanford doesn't have the cachet in audio circles that say, AP has, I wonder about residual prices... I can think of other firms that have entered the pro audio market with good products, only to see their products discontinued and selling for a tenth of retail a couple of years later on Ebay. Of course, if it's as good as it seems, regardless of residuals, you should get your money back on it in a short time on your bench, right?

Anyway. I like it. If it were the same size as my Tek colour scope I would've bought it by now. It's a big old boy. Keep us posted if you do get one.

Justin

[JGreenslade]

btw - I reckon you should rent an AP for the day and do a shoot out between the two if you're serious. Stanford should loan you one. Tell them you intend to post the results here, where potential clients lurk - it's in their interests. I'm not aware of any high profile audio designers using the unit. Even at the academic level, endorsements count in audio methinks.

Justin

[JGreenslade]

Bruno said this at the other forum: http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/378245/0/

[boggy]

Interesting question, Bogic. I got a demo of one of these at the summer AES and am very tempted.

On the positive side:

It offers a lot of facilities and a good spec for the price

Stanford is a respected name in test gear

It's a standalone unit and doesn't need a host computer.

and automated (even via GPIB) measurements are a some advantage, that pc based measurement softwares usualy doesn't have it (even if this is only some more programming )

On the negative side:

It's humungous  and will occupy a lot of space on the bench. You can't just 'throw' it into a soft bag and take it on location

Yes,... and it's a bit too heavy for my taste... 

Because Stanford doesn't have the cachet in audio circles that say, AP has, I wonder about residual prices... I can think of other firms that have entered the pro audio market with good products, only to see their products discontinued and selling for a tenth of retail a couple of years later on Ebay. Of course, if it's as good as it seems, regardless of residuals, you should get your money back on it in a short time on your bench, right?

Automated measurements are one of reasons why I thinking about standalone audio analyzer.

Anyway. I like it. If it were the same size as my Tek colour scope I would've bought it by now. It's a big old boy. Keep us posted if you do get one.

Ok, I'will

Bruno said this at the other forum: http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/378245/0/

Ah, I see,.... old story... I missed that one, sorry 

THD is really 0.0003% and that is comparable to my Lynx L22, but SR1's price isn't too high, and if I remember good, SR1's performances are better than Neutrik A2 analyzer. (yes, I check it, 0.001% is A2's measurement minimum for THD)

Thank you very much, Justin, for your response.

Regards

Bogic

[Jim Williams]

You can get a used System One AP for around $3~4K. Hard to beat for analog measurements. Mine does .0003% THD, .0001% CCIF IMD. I can't imagine using anything other than Audio Precision. Their new stuff is even better with 1 meg hz measurement bandwidth now, great for class D amp testing, etc.

[boggy]

You can get a used System One AP for around $3~4K. Hard to beat for analog measurements. Mine does .0003% THD, .0001% CCIF IMD. I can't imagine using anything other than Audio Precision. Their new stuff is even better with 1 meg hz measurement bandwidth now, great for class D amp testing, etc.

I agree, for analog only measurements, that is a best solution... used AP System One.

Best regards

[Bruno Putzeys]

Their new stuff is even better with 1 meg hz measurement bandwidth now, great for class D amp testing, etc.

That's what they say, isn't it? The strange thing about it is that I've worked with just about every variation on the theme "class D" one can think of (digital, analogue, mixed, multilevel, clocked, self-oscillating you name it), both in theory and in practice, and I can't for the life of me imagine what I should need their wideband analyser for. Seriously! People who believe they need that toy in order to understand what their amp is doing won't understand it any better once they bought it. For audio performance you need only the audible bandwidth. The meaning of the spectrum between that and a few 100s of kHz is all about loop dynamics which is entirely covered by calculations and the occasional simulation. The deviation between calculated and actual loop behaviour is just a bit of distortion which is irrelevant from a control theory perspective and inasmuch as it matters for audio is fully covered by older instruments. Further up is EMC territory, covered by all the usual RF gear.
I really wonder whether Audio Precision actually speaks with class D people. Remember that other must-have item, the AUX0025, a passive filter to prevent the switching residual from overloading the AP's inputs. I don't have one. Never needed one. So far I found that whenever a passive filter was in order, the amplifier under test produced EMI levels exceeding legal limits by 30dB or more. Anything remotely approaching EMC compliance does not cause distortion in the AP's inputs and all you need is the AES17 option to keep the autoranging circuits from overscaling. Yet, every lab I've ever visited that had some class D related work got themselves one. Just because Audio Precision tells them so! Is there any other trade where salespeople can barge in and say "you do this kind of work so you need this item" and everyone goes "wow thanks, I didn't know that, emmachizit?" Apart from hoovers perhaps? The only use I've found for the AUX0025 is retrofitting system ones which don't have AES17 filters.

[Rader Ranch]

Is there any other trade where salespeople can barge in and say "you do this kind of work so you need this item" and everyone goes "wow thanks, I didn't know that, emmachizit?"

Dolby does pretty well at that, and Avid tries.

[John Roberts {JR}]

Not to quibble, but the main reason I use test equipment is to see and measure stuff I can't easily hear, so it is comforting to me to measure higher (lower, wider) than I can hear. Of course I am not sure I would pay a premium to range more than a few octaves up.  Years ago I used an old spectrum analyzer on my test bench that topped out at 35kHz (only had 40 dB of dynamic range too), but it was useful enough when reading the product output of my modest THD analyzer

That said there is a "more is better", school of equipment hot-rodders who swap in the fastest opamps they can find, claiming sonic benefits down in the audio bandpass from using them. I suspect they would find the measurement bandwidth attractive. The customer is always right and all that.

I will stop now before this veers into less technical topics. 

JR

 

[Jim Williams]

You can never be too thin, too rich or have enough good test gear.