Again, this is great to see the overall picture, but it can lead to confusion, and will give a different curve than RTA, with exactly the same signals. So, the 80dB 1000 Hz sound in our example will show a value lower than 80dB. The effect of this is a nice smooth graph, but peaks (and valleys) get less sharp. The definition of this type of smoothing is that for say, 1/3 octave smoothing, any given point is averaged algorithmically with the 1/6 octave above and below it.
#Studio rta full#
If you think about the filters in an RTA as "gates", that let through certain frequencies while stopping others, if the frequency is within the gate, it gets through un-attenuated, and will show its full level. This will always show an 80dB bar in RTA, whether in octave or 1/3 octave more. Think of a 1000 Hz sine wave that reads 80dB on an SPL meter. Again RTA will only display one stored curve.ĭifference #8: RTA bar levels vs. FFT can have much more detail showing.įFT can also show a stored curve alongside a running FFT curve, for visual comparison. RTA does not have this since their is no more detail to see by zooming. Pinch to zoom in or out, down to a single octave.
RTA does not have this, since the bands are too wide to show an exact frequency.įFT has frequency scale zooming. If we did this in FFT it would just clutter the screen.įFT has an option to turn on peak tracking, which will show the exact value of loudest current frequency. This option, when turned on, keeps track of the highest and lowest levels that a bar has reached since resetting it (by double-tapping the screen). So, although we could add them, they would not be technically correct.Īgain only in RTA. Why? Because all of the noise standards are written specifically for octave or 1/3 octave band filters, which RTA has and FFT does not.
These include various noise standards, such as NCB, NR, or PNC. RTA has overlay curves that can be selected. Although you can get useful information without knowing much about these, you will get much more information from the app if you do know your way around. This can be a huge advantage in a live situation, or when you don't have a lot of time to spend tweaking parameters, not to mention the learning curve that is required to really get the most out of FFT.įFT has settings for FFT size (128 to 16384 points, and equal points per octave), smoothing (none, 1/24th 1/12th, 1/6, 1/3, octave), and decay speed (0.5 to 8 seconds, peak, average), which all interact. RTA has very few parameters to set: octave or 1/3 octave, and how fast do you want the display to react. And this brings us to number 2:ĭifference #2: RTA is easier and faster to use Depending on the smoothing setting in FFT, you can see all of the individual frequency components. And, there are many cases where various acoustical tests and standard are looking for 1/3 or octave band measurements.įFT on the other hand has much finer resolution, just a few Hz in some cases. That's not so great when you are trying to EQ a room with a tone generator, but when pink noise or program material (music) is playing, it's really quite useful. Every other sine wave that fits in that band could be at 84.9dB, or even 85dB, and the bar would not be any higher. This means that even if there is just one sine wave at 1000 Hz at 85dB, the 1000 Hz octave or 1/3 octave band will show 85dB.
RTA works by literally running 10 ANSI octave band filters, or 30 ANSI one-third octave band filters on the input signal in real time. dB" page to understand what the SPL numbers mean, and why they might be different on different modules.ĭifference #1: RTA is octave (or 1/3 octave) based This page will try to sort out the differences for you, so that you can make an informed choice.īoth are great apps, and both give you information about frequency level, but there are differences.Īlso, see our "dB vs. And, since Apple does not allow trying out apps, it can make the decision that more difficult.
#Studio rta download#
We get questions about whether its better to download our RTA app, or FFT.
0 kommentar(er)
