Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Sound level meter

A sound level meter (SLM) is an electronic instrument, typically handheld, designed to measure levels in a standardized manner by detecting acoustic variations via a and processing them into (dB) readings, which logarithmically quantify relative to the threshold of human hearing. These devices incorporate frequency weightings, such as to approximate human ear response, and time weightings like fast, slow, or impulse to capture instantaneous or averaged levels, enabling assessments compliant with international standards like IEC 61672. Sound level meters are classified into precision grades—Class 1 for laboratory and high-accuracy field use with tolerances around ±0.7 dB, and Class 2 for general purposes—ensuring reliability in diverse measurement scenarios. Primarily applied in occupational health and safety to monitor workplace noise exposure and prevent , SLMs also support mapping, building acoustics evaluations, and for sources including machinery, , and activities. Historical development traces back to early 20th-century efforts, with formal standards emerging in through organizations like the Acoustical Society of America, evolving from analog galvanometer-based meters to modern digital models with data logging and capabilities. Advancements continue toward integration with mobile applications and wireless systems, enhancing portability and real-time monitoring while maintaining adherence to performance criteria for accurate and mitigation strategies.

History

Early Developments and Precursors

The quantification of predated electrical methods, with mechanical devices like the Rayleigh disk, invented by Lord Rayleigh in 1882, serving as an early precursor by measuring acoustic through the deflection of a suspended disk in a sound field, thus indirectly assessing . A pivotal advancement occurred in when physicist George W. Pierce developed the first electro-acoustical apparatus for measurement, employing a molybdenite crystal rectifier coupled with a and to convert acoustic pressure variations into detectable electrical signals, enabling more precise and repeatable assessments than prior mechanical techniques. In 1917, engineers constructed an early sound-level meter for applications, consisting of bulky components including a linked to amplification and metering circuits, which facilitated institutional evaluations but lacked portability due to its size and power requirements. Comparative auditory matching persisted as a supplementary approach; for instance, in 1925, H.W. Lemon employed a pre-calibrated whose output was adjusted until it masked the target , providing relative intensity estimates reliant on human perception rather than absolute electrical . These innovations, bridging mechanical acoustics and electrical instrumentation, addressed the limitations of 19th-century frequency-focused tools like Savart's (1830s) by prioritizing pressure-based intensity, setting the stage for standardized devices amid rising industrial noise concerns.

Initial Standardization and Commercialization

The commercialization of sound level meters commenced in the early amid rising industrial demands for quantifying noise from machinery, broadcasting equipment, and urban environments. General Radio Company released the first commercial model in 1933, featuring a , , and indicating meter to assess acoustic intensity in decibels relative to a reference pressure of 0.0002 dynes/cm². This instrument, weighing about 19 kg due to vacuum-tube electronics, included a single frequency weighting network approximating human ear sensitivity and was marketed for applications like testing and factory noise surveys. Concurrent standardization efforts addressed inconsistencies among early devices, where readings on identical sounds could vary by up to 6 across manufacturers. In , the Acoustical Society of America began developing the inaugural American Standards Association (ASA) specification, leading to tentative approval of Z24.3 for sound level meters by 1935. The resulting Z24.3-1936 standard formalized instrument characteristics, including electrical network tolerances, microphone response, and a reference sound pressure set at the human hearing threshold, to promote measurement reproducibility for noise control and audiometric purposes. These advancements reflected causal links between technological maturation—such as improved microphones and amplifiers—and practical imperatives like mitigating occupational deafness risks documented in 1920s-1930s industrial studies, though initial devices remained laboratory-oriented rather than portable.

Analog to Digital Transition

The transition from analog to digital sound level meters began in the 1980s with the integration of microprocessors, which enabled internal computation of multiple acoustic parameters and basic data storage, surpassing the limitations of analog devices that relied on mechanical needle displays and analog rectification circuits with narrow dynamic ranges of 15-20 dB. Analog meters, dominant through the 1970s, used transistor-based amplification from the 1960s onward but processed signals via continuous analog filters and detectors, restricting them to simple metrics like instantaneous sound pressure levels without efficient integration for equivalents like Leq. By the early 1990s, digital signal processing (DSP) emerged as a pivotal advancement, allowing real-time frequency analysis without cumbersome analog filter banks; for instance, the Brüel & Kjær Type 2260, released in 1994, incorporated DSP for 1/3-octave band measurements, enhancing precision and reducing equipment bulk compared to prior rack-mounted analog systems. Microprocessor-equipped models like the Brüel & Kjær Type 2231 from the 1980s further bridged the gap by supporting modular precision measurements with chips such as the RCA 1802, facilitating handheld portability and preliminary digital readouts. Digital meters became predominant after the turn of the , with direct analog-to- replacing analog front-ends entirely, expanding dynamic ranges to over 50 and enabling advanced features like statistical logging and environmental corrections in compact units. This shift, accelerated by improvements in A/D converters and computing power, allowed devices like the Cirrus Research Optimus series around 2010 to perform simultaneous multi-weighting calculations, improving with standards such as IEC 61672 while minimizing errors from analog drift and overloads inherent in earlier designs. Overall, the digital era yielded greater accuracy, data integrity, and usability for applications in occupational and , though legacy analog systems persisted in niche calibrations due to their simplicity.

Principles of Operation

Fundamental Acoustic Principles

Sound waves in air are longitudinal mechanical disturbances that propagate as alternating compressions and rarefactions of the medium, resulting in localized deviations from the equilibrium . These deviations, termed , are quantified as the instantaneous difference between the total pressure and the , typically on the order of pascals () or fractions thereof for audible sounds. The root-mean-square () sound pressure, p_{\text{rms}} = \sqrt{\frac{1}{T} \int_0^T p^2(t) \, dt}, represents the effective value over a time period T, accounting for the quadratic mean of the fluctuating pressure waveform. The sound pressure level (SPL), the primary quantity measured by sound level meters, is expressed on a logarithmic decibel (dB) scale to handle the vast dynamic range of acoustic pressures, from approximately $2 \times 10^{-5} Pa (audible threshold) to over 100 Pa (pain threshold). It is defined as L_p = 20 \log_{10} \left( \frac{p_{\text{rms}}}{p_0} \right) dB, where p_0 = 20 \times 10^{-6} Pa is the standard reference pressure in air, equivalent to 0 dB SPL and approximating the threshold of human hearing for a 1 kHz tone in a free field. The factor of 20 arises because acoustic intensity (power per unit area) scales with the square of pressure, I \propto p_{\text{rms}}^2 / (\rho c) where \rho is air density and c is the speed of sound (approximately 343 m/s at 20°C), necessitating a doubling of the logarithmic base-10 coefficient relative to intensity levels (which use 10 log). This formulation reflects the near-logarithmic response of human audition to pressure amplitude, as established by psychophysical studies such as those underlying the Weber-Fechner law, enabling concise representation of ratios spanning 12 orders of magnitude. A doubling of corresponds to an SPL increase of 6 , while perceived doubles roughly every 10 , underscoring the distinction between physical pressure and subjective perception. In measurement contexts, SPL assumes a progressive wave in a semi-free field or diffuse field as per standards like IEC 61672-1, with microphones calibrated to capture pressures independent of frequency within their operational band (typically 10 Hz to 20 kHz).

Key Components and Signal Processing

A sound level meter comprises a , unit, and display as its core components. The functions as the electroacoustic , converting acoustic pressure oscillations into corresponding electrical signals proportional to the sound pressure. Typically, precision microphones are employed due to their wide and accurate , often meeting specifications in standards like IEC 61094-6. The amplifies the weak output to a level suitable for subsequent processing, minimizing noise addition and preserving . In the stage, the amplified electrical signal undergoes weighting via digital or analog filters to emulate human hearing sensitivity or provide unweighted measurement; common filters include (emphasizing mid-frequencies around 1-4 kHz), C-weighting (flatter response for high levels), and Z-weighting (linear across the audible spectrum). These weightings adjust the response based on empirical data of auditory perception, with tolerances specified for accuracy classes in IEC 61672-1:2013. Following frequency weighting, the signal is squared to compute , then exponentially averaged using time-weighting filters—fast (F) with a 125 ms or slow (S) with 1 s—to simulate perceptual of fluctuations. The (RMS) detector then extracts the square root of this average, yielding the effective level, which is logarithmically converted to decibels referenced to 20 micropascals ( re 20 μPa). Peak detectors, often applied to C-weighted signals, capture the maximum instantaneous crest without time averaging, essential for assessing impulsive noises. Digital signal processors (DSPs) in modern instruments enable precise implementation of these operations, including for equivalent continuous levels (Leq).

Classification and Types

Conventional versus Integrating Meters

Conventional sound level meters, also referred to as non-integrating meters, measure the instantaneous level (SPL) by applying time functions, typically fast (125 ms ) or slow (1 s ), to mimic the ear's response to sound fluctuations. These devices display levels suitable for steady-state noises or quick spot checks but do not accumulate energy over extended periods, requiring manual averaging for variable sounds. Integrating sound level meters, often called integrating-averaging types, differ by computing the equivalent continuous (Leq), which integrates the squared instantaneous over a user-defined time and takes the logarithmic to yield a single value equivalent to a steady producing the same total acoustic . This process, formalized in standards like IEC 61672-1:2013, enables precise assessment of cumulative exposure in fluctuating environments by accounting for both and . The key distinction arises in handling intermittent or varying noise: conventional meters capture peaks or troughs via metrics like Lmax or Lmin but overlook total , potentially underestimating in pulsed sounds, whereas integrating meters provide Leq and sound exposure level (SEL), aligning with regulatory needs for dose calculations. For instance, occupational standards such as the UK's Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 mandate Leq for daily personal exposure (LEP,d), rendering integrating capability essential over conventional for compliance.
AspectConventional MetersIntegrating Meters
Primary OutputInstantaneous SPL (e.g., LAF, LAS)Time-averaged Leq, SEL
Time Handling averaging over short constants over full period
Best ApplicationsSteady noises, monitoring/intermittent noises, limits
Limitations averaging needed for totalsRequires defined duration
Both types conform to IEC 61672 performance classes (1 or 2), with class 1 offering tighter tolerances (e.g., ±1.5 overall uncertainty vs. ±2.5 for class 2), but integrating functionality is specified separately to ensure verifiable computations. Modern devices often combine both modes for versatility, though pure conventional use persists in basic acoustic surveys where integration adds unnecessary complexity.

Accuracy Classes and Performance Criteria

Class 1 sound level meters, designated for precision applications in and field settings, must adhere to stricter tolerances than Class 2 instruments, which are suited for general . These classes are defined in IEC 61672-1:2013, the international standard for electroacoustical performance, encompassing requirements for , , , and environmental robustness. Class 1 meters typically achieve an indicative overall accuracy of ±0.7 dB, while Class 2 meters permit ±1.0 dB, reflecting differences in maximum permitted errors during pattern evaluation and periodic testing. Performance criteria are evaluated through specific tests, including electrical (over a exceeding 70 without exceeding tolerance limits), acoustic frequency weighting accuracy (e.g., for , Class 1 requires tolerances as low as ±0.5 from 63 Hz to 4 kHz, extending to narrower bands beyond), and self-generated levels below 17 (A) for Class 1 versus 20 (A) for Class 2 under specified conditions. Class 1 microphones are calibrated for free-field response, minimizing directional errors up to ±1.1 , whereas Class 2 uses random-incidence correction with looser limits up to ±1.5 . Overload thresholds and time-weighting fidelity (fast, slow, impulse) further differentiate classes, with Class 1 ensuring lower at high levels (above 120 ) and precise exponential averaging. Environmental performance criteria mandate minimal variation under temperature fluctuations (±0.5% per °C for Class 1 versus ±1% for Class 2 between 0–50°C) and , ensuring to primary standards via accredited . , ANSI/ASA S1.4-2014/Part 1 aligns closely with IEC 61672-1, using Type 1 for (equivalent to Class 1) and Type 2 for general use, though older Type 0 designations for laboratory-grade instruments have been phased out.
Performance ParameterClass 1 ToleranceClass 2 Tolerance
Indicative Overall Accuracy±0.7 ±1.0
A-Weighting Tolerance (1 kHz reference)±0.4 ±0.7
Self-Generated Noise (A-weighted)≤17 ≤20
Directional Response (free-field)±1.1 ±1.5 (random incidence)
These specifications ensure Class 1 meters support applications requiring high fidelity, such as regulatory compliance in quiet environments, while Class 2 suffices for broader surveys where marginal errors do not compromise outcomes.

Personal Noise Dosimeters and Wearables

Personal noise dosimeters are portable instruments designed to be worn by individuals, typically clipped to clothing near the ear, to quantify cumulative noise exposure over extended periods such as a full work shift. They integrate time-varying sound pressure levels to compute metrics like the noise dose (percentage of permissible exposure) or time-weighted average (TWA) sound level, enabling assessment of compliance with occupational limits such as OSHA's permissible exposure limit of 90 dBA for an 8-hour day using a 5 dBA exchange rate. Unlike handheld sound level meters, which provide instantaneous readings for area or source evaluation, dosimeters perform continuous personal monitoring to capture variable exposure from movement through different noise zones, with microphones positioned to approximate ear-level incidence. These devices adhere to standards including ANSI/ASA S1.25-1991 (R2020) for personal noise dosimeters and IEC 61252:2017 for personal sound exposure meters, requiring operation across frequencies with for equivalent continuous sound level (LAeq) and C-weighting for peak levels up to at least 140 dB. Accuracy is specified within ±2 dB for Class 2 instruments relative to reference levels, verified through field calibration using acoustic calibrators emitting 94 dB or 114 dB at 1 kHz before and after measurements. Dosimeters feature data logging for post-shift analysis, often with connectivity for real-time transfer to software that generates reports on metrics like 8-hour LAeq, maximum levels (LAFmax), and projected dose, supporting regulatory documentation under frameworks like OSHA 29 CFR 1910.95. Wearable variants extend this functionality into compact, lightweight forms such as badge-style units or integrated into safety vests, emphasizing ergonomics for unobtrusive all-day use in industries like , , and . Advanced models incorporate 1/1-octave band analysis for frequency-specific exposure and audio recording for event verification, with rugged designs rated IP65 for and resistance. Emerging consumer wearables, including smartwatches, attempt noise monitoring via built-in microphones but often fall short of professional standards; for instance, evaluations show readings correlating with dosimeters yet deviating by up to 5 dB in dynamic environments, rendering them unsuitable for sole without against Class 1 or 2 references. Professional dosimeters maintain superior reliability, with studies confirming consistent measurements across steady and impulsive noises when properly positioned and calibrated.

Measurement Parameters

Frequency Weightings and Their Rationale

Frequency weightings in sound level meters apply standardized filters to the measured spectrum, adjusting levels to reflect auditory or to capture unweighted data. These filters, defined in IEC 61672-1:2013, include A, C, and Z weightings, each with specified tolerances for implementation in Class 1 and Class 2 instruments. The rationale stems from the non-uniform sensitivity of hearing across frequencies, as quantified by equal-loudness-level contours in ISO 226:2003, which map levels perceived as equally loud at different frequencies for listeners with normal hearing. A-weighting, the most widely used, approximates the ear's response at moderate sound levels around 40 , attenuating frequencies below 500 Hz (e.g., -50.5 at 20 Hz, -8.6 at 100 Hz) and above 10 kHz while emphasizing frequencies between 1-6 kHz. This curve derives from early equal-loudness data, such as Fletcher-Munson contours from 1933, refined in subsequent ISO standards to better correlate readings with subjective and in environmental and occupational settings. Its adoption prioritizes measurements relevant to hearing risk and community , where low-frequency rumble contributes less to perceived impact than mid-frequencies. C-weighting provides a flatter response, with milder low-frequency (e.g., -8.4 at 20 Hz, +1.2 at 100 Hz) and extension to higher levels up to 100 , aligning with increased sensitivity at louder sounds exceeding 85 . This weighting captures contributions from low-frequency sources like machinery or explosions more accurately for peak pressure assessments or when evaluating overall energy where underrepresents effects. Z-weighting, or zero weighting, applies a linear response across 10 Hz to 20 kHz with ±1.5 tolerance, omitting perceptual adjustments to measure true acoustic energy for applications requiring full-spectrum analysis, such as or into non-auditory effects. While A and C emulate psychoacoustic responses validated through empirical balancing tests, Z ensures to unfiltered without bias toward human hearing limits. Selection depends on context: A for and metrics, C for high-intensity or low-frequency dominance, and Z for raw data integrity.

Time Weightings and Averaging Methods

Time weightings in sound level meters implement exponential averaging with defined time constants to characterize the temporal response to fluctuating sound pressures, facilitating measurements that approximate perceptual or practical assessment needs. The IEC 61672-1 standard specifies Fast (F) and Slow (S) time weightings as mandatory for Class 1 and Class 2 instruments, with (I) as optional. These weightings originated from analog meter dynamics but persist in digital implementations to standardize response characteristics across devices. Fast time weighting applies a 125-millisecond , allowing the meter to track rapid changes with higher resolution, which is advantageous for analyzing transient or variable noises such as or . In contrast, Slow time weighting uses a 1-second , yielding a damped response that emphasizes overall levels in relatively steady environments, reducing the influence of short-term fluctuations. Impulse time weighting features a 35-millisecond for quick capture and a 1.5-second , tailored to impulsive events like impacts or gunfire, where it holds elevated levels longer to reflect cumulative exposure effects. This differs from quasi-peak detection in older standards, prioritizing energy integration over strict mimicry. Averaging methods in sound level meters distinguish between exponential (time-weighted) processing for real-time indications and linear (energy) averaging for integrated metrics. Exponential averaging, inherent to F, S, and I weightings, computes a weighted root-mean-square (RMS) value that exponentially decays prior data, providing ongoing level estimates without fixed integration periods. Integrating-averaging meters, per IEC 61672-1, calculate quantities like the equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) by linearly averaging squared sound pressures over specified durations, then converting to decibels, which better represents total acoustic exposure than instantaneous readings. Maximum levels under Fast weighting (e.g., LAFmax) track peak exponential averages during intervals, combining time response with event detection for assessments like event noise limits.

Specific Metrics: Leq, Lmax, Lmin, and Peak Levels

The equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) represents the steady-state sound level that, over a specified measurement period T, possesses the same acoustic energy as the actual time-varying sound. It is computed using the formula L_{eq} = 10 \log_{10} \left( \frac{1}{T} \int_0^T 10^{L(t)/10} \, dt \right), where L(t) is the instantaneous sound pressure level in decibels. Sound level meters compliant with IEC 61672-1 calculate Leq by integrating the squared sound pressure over time, making it essential for assessing cumulative noise exposure in environments with fluctuating levels, such as traffic or industrial sites. Variants like LAeq apply A-weighting to approximate human ear sensitivity. The maximum sound level (Lmax) denotes the highest root-mean-square (RMS) value of the time-weighted sound pressure level occurring within the measurement interval, reflecting peak events under the meter's selected time constant (e.g., Fast or Slow). Similarly, the minimum sound level (Lmin) captures the lowest RMS time-weighted value during that period, aiding in characterization of noise variability and background levels. These metrics, often denoted as LAFmax or LAFmin with A-weighting and Fast time response, are critical for identifying transient loud events in occupational settings, where Lmax exceeding 140 dB(A) may trigger immediate controls per standards like those from OSHA. Peak level (Lpeak or Cpeak) measures the maximum instantaneous without RMS averaging or time weighting, typically C-weighted to capture broadband impulsive noises like impacts or gunfire that evade RMS detection. Unlike Lmax, which smooths via over the detector's integration time (e.g., 125 ms for Fast), Lpeak records the absolute crest of the , with thresholds like 140 (C) indicating potential for immediate auditory damage in regulations. Integrating meters per IEC 61672 must support peak hold functions for such unweighted peaks, distinguishing them from time-averaged metrics to ensure accurate assessment of hazardous impulses.

Calibration and Standards

Calibration Procedures and Traceability

Sound level meters undergo to verify and adjust their and , ensuring measurements align with specified accuracy classes under standards such as IEC 61672-1, which defines performance for Class 1 and Class 2 instruments. typically involves acoustic verification using a dedicated sound calibrator that emits a known level (SPL), most commonly 94 or 114 at 1 kHz, coupled directly to the meter's . This process checks the meter's electroacoustic response, with adjustments made if the displayed level deviates from the reference by more than the permissible tolerance, such as ±0.5 for Class 1 devices per IEC 61672-3 periodic testing guidelines. Field calibration procedures are performed before and after measurements to detect drifts from environmental factors like or mechanical shock. The steps include: positioning the calibrator's snugly over the without gaps; activating the calibrator to output the stable tone; observing the meter's reading in unweighted or A-weighted mode; and, if necessary, using the meter's built-in adjustment to match the reference level exactly. These checks are limited to the calibrator's (typically 1 kHz) and do not fully assess response or across the meter's (e.g., 20 Hz to 20 kHz). Manufacturers recommend field verification at least daily during extended use, with no adjustment if within tolerance to preserve . Laboratory calibration extends beyond field checks, encompassing full-range acoustic tests, electrical verification via injected signals, and sweeps using reference microphones and anechoic or coupler setups. Conducted annually or biennially per regulatory requirements (e.g., for occupational compliance), these procedures follow IEC 61672-3, evaluating tolerances like ±1.1 overall uncertainty for Class 1 meters at multiple SPLs from 50 dB to 140 dB. Accredited labs also test time weighting circuits and integrate functions if applicable. Traceability ensures calibration validity through an unbroken chain linking the meter's adjustments to primary standards, ultimately to units via national institutes like NIST. calibrators are themselves calibrated against pistonphones or condenser references, which derive SPL from fundamental parameters such as piston area, velocity, and phase, with uncertainties below 0.1 at 1 kHz. NIST-traceable certificates accompany calibrators and meters, documenting this chain, including environmental conditions during tests (e.g., 23°C, 50% ). Without such , measurements lack legal standing in standards-compliant applications, as emphasized in IEC 61672-1 requirements for documented .

International and Regional Standards

The primary international standard governing sound level meters is IEC 61672, developed by the (IEC) Technical Committee 29 on Electroacoustics, in collaboration with the (ISO) Technical Committee 43, Subcommittee 1 on . This standard, first published in 2002 and revised in 2013 as IEC 61672-1:2013, specifies electroacoustical performance requirements for three types of instruments: time-weighting sound level meters, integrating-averaging sound level meters, and integrating sound level meters. It defines two performance classes—Class 1 for higher precision applications and Class 2 for general purposes—based on tolerances in frequency weighting, time weighting, level , and other parameters, with instruments intended for sounds in the human hearing range. IEC 61672 comprises three parts: Part 1 for specifications, Part 2 for pattern-evaluation tests to verify compliance during type approval, and Part 3 for periodic testing to ensure ongoing performance. Regionally, the adopts IEC 61672 as EN 61672, harmonized under the Directive for conformity assessment, ensuring meters meet essential health and safety requirements for noise measurement in occupational and environmental contexts. In the United States, ANSI/ASA S1.4-2014 (Parts 1, 2, and 3) directly incorporates IEC 61672, adopted by the Acoustical Society of America in 2014 to align U.S. specifications with international norms for sound level meter performance, evaluation, and testing. National variants include BS EN 61672 in the and DIN 61672 in , both equivalent to the IEC standard for regulatory compliance in noise assessments. These adoptions facilitate global interoperability while allowing for minor regional interpretations, such as in pattern approval processes required for legal in trade and enforcement. Compliance with these standards is mandatory for meters used in regulated applications, like occupational noise exposure under directives such as EU Directive 2003/10/EC or U.S. OSHA requirements, verified through accredited calibration traceable to national metrology institutes.

Pattern Approval and Testing Protocols

Pattern approval, also termed type approval, certifies that a specific model of sound level meter conforms to established metrological standards, enabling its use in legal measurements such as occupational assessments or environmental . This process involves rigorous testing of the instrument's design and performance by accredited bodies, like the (PTB) in or Laboratoire National de Métrologie et d'Essais (LNE) in , to verify accuracy, reliability, and before production and deployment. The core protocols derive from IEC 61672-2:2013, which outlines pattern-evaluation tests to confirm adherence to the specifications in IEC 61672-1 for classes 1 and 2 instruments. These tests encompass acoustic signal generation across specified frequencies and levels, assessing parameters including level linearity (typically over 80 dB range with tolerances of ±0.4 dB for class 1), frequency weightings (A, C, Z), time weightings (F, S, I), and up to 3 for class 1 or 10 for class 2. Multi-channel meters undergo per-channel testing where applicable, with environmental influences like (±0.5 dB tolerance over 0–40°C for class 1) and humidity also evaluated. The (OIML) Recommendation R 58 (1998) supplements these by providing a test scheme for and of conventional meters, drawing from IEC standards to ensure suitability for trade and regulatory purposes. Initial post-approval involves subset tests from IEC 61672-3:2013, such as basic level accuracy (±1.1 dB for class 1 at 1 kHz) and overload indication, while full re-evaluation is required for design modifications. Successful approval results in a certificate, often displayed via markings, allowing subsequent units to undergo simplified periodic checks rather than full retesting. Testing protocols emphasize to primary standards, using calibrated acoustic sources in controlled anechoic or environments to minimize extraneous influences like mechanical vibrations, which can affect performance. Non-conformance in any test, such as exceeding errors, invalidates the , necessitating redesign and retesting.

Applications

Occupational and Industrial Noise Assessment

Sound level meters are employed in occupational and industrial settings to quantify noise exposures from machinery, processes, and environments such as manufacturing plants, construction sites, and , where levels often exceed safe thresholds and contribute to (NIHL). These devices facilitate initial area surveys to map noise hotspots, enabling targeted interventions like or administrative measures before proceeding to personal for precise employee exposure profiles. In the United States, the (OSHA) mandates monitoring under 29 CFR 1910.95 when exposures reach or surpass the action level of 85 over an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA), with permissible exposure limits (PEL) set at 90 for the same duration, requiring integration of continuous, intermittent, and impulsive sounds from 80 to 130 dB. For comprehensive assessments, sound level meters configured to and slow time response are used for walkaround surveys to identify areas exceeding 85 , followed by full-shift measurements to compute TWAs and doses, often with thresholds set to 80 dB for hearing conservation compliance. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommends an exposure limit of 85 over 8 hours, advocating sound level meters or for preliminary evaluations and noise mapping in facilities. Internationally, ISO 9612 outlines engineering methods for occupational noise determination, permitting hand-held sound level meters for stationary tasks or short durations alongside personal exposure meters, emphasizing and positional accuracy near the ear. Industrial applications extend to verifying control efficacy, such as post-installation of barriers or enclosures, where Type 1 or Class 1 meters ensure precision in variable noise fields from equipment like presses, grinders, or systems. Periodic reassessments are required following changes or equipment upgrades, with data logged for regulatory reporting; for instance, Cal/OSHA specifies ANSI or IEC-compliant meters for compliance determinations. While sound level meters excel in area monitoring, they complement rather than replace dosimeters for mobile workers, as hybrid approaches yield the most reliable exposure estimates under standards like IEC 61672-1.

Environmental and Community Noise Monitoring

Sound level meters are employed in environmental and community noise monitoring to quantify acoustic pollution from sources such as road traffic, aviation, rail operations, and industrial activities, enabling assessment of impacts on residential areas and public health. These measurements support regulatory compliance, urban planning, and mitigation strategies by capturing time-varying sound levels that correlate with human annoyance and physiological effects like sleep disturbance. Instruments typically classified under IEC 61672-1 as Class 1 provide the precision required for such applications, outperforming Class 2 meters in low-level or variable environments due to tighter tolerances on frequency response and self-noise. Key metrics include the A-weighted equivalent continuous sound level (LAeq), which averages fluctuating over specified periods such as (LAeq,16h from 07:00 to 23:00) or nighttime (Lnight from 23:00 to 07:00), reflecting total acoustic energy exposure. The day-night average (Ldn or DNL), used extensively by agencies like the EPA, computes a 24-hour LAeq with a 10 penalty applied to nighttime levels (22:00 to 07:00) to account for heightened sensitivity during hours. , the day-evening-night level (Lden) extends this by adding a 5 penalty for evening hours (19:00 to 23:00) alongside the 10 nighttime adjustment, as mandated under the Directive 2002/49/EC for strategic noise action plans. The recommends community outdoor LAeq,16h below 55 and Lnight below 45 to minimize health risks, based on epidemiological data linking higher levels to and in children. Measurement protocols follow ISO 1996-2:2016, positioning at 1.5 to 4 meters above ground—often 4 meters for fixed stations to reduce surface reflections—and integrating data over long terms (e.g., annual averages) while excluding non-relevant transient events like bird calls. Fixed monitoring networks, deployed in urban hotspots, log LAeq and statistical levels (e.g., L90 for ) via weatherproof enclosures with data transmission for real-time analysis, as required for noise mapping covering agglomerations over 100,000 inhabitants and major . Portable surveys complement this by verifying complaints or pre-construction baselines, with fast-time weighting (125 ms integration) capturing peak events like overflights. In the U.S., guidelines target exterior Ldn below 55 dB for residential development, influencing zoning near highways where levels often exceed 70 dB. Challenges include meteorological influences on (e.g., downwind ) and the need for periodic traceable to national standards, yet these tools enable evidence-based limits that prioritize empirical dose-response relationships over subjective perceptions. For instance, EPA assessments near airports use Ldn to delineate 65 contours for land-use compatibility, derived from community surveys showing 20-30% rates above this threshold.

Building Acoustics and Product Testing

In building acoustics, sound level meters are employed to assess sound insulation performance between adjacent spaces, such as walls, floors, and ceilings, by measuring levels generated in a source and transmitted to a receiving . This involves generating or similar broadband via a in the source , recording the levels with a Class 1 sound level meter in both rooms across one-third octave bands from 50 Hz to 5 kHz, and calculating metrics like the weighted (Rw) or apparent sound reduction index (R'w) per field measurement standards. Such measurements ensure compliance with national building regulations, such as those limiting airborne transmission to 50-55 dB for residential partitions, by quantifying to mitigate disturbances from speech, footsteps, or HVAC systems. Impact insulation testing uses a tapping machine to simulate footfall, with the meter capturing normalized impact levels (Ln,w) in the receiving under controlled conditions. For reverberation time assessment in rooms, sound level meters facilitate measurements or interrupted noise methods, where decay rates are logged post-excitation to derive T60 values, informing acoustic design for auditoriums or offices to achieve target of 0.5-1.0 seconds at mid-frequencies. These applications demand traceable to standards like IEC 61672-1, ensuring below 1 , as field conditions like below 10 dB(A) are critical for accuracy. In , meters determine emissions from appliances, machinery, and consumer goods by measuring levels in controlled environments to compute levels (Lw), required for regulatory declarations under directives like the EU 2006/42/EC. Testing follows ISO 3744 for engineering methods in semi-anechoic chambers, positioning the meter at multiple locations on a hemispherical or surface around the product at 1-2 meter distances, integrating A-weighted levels to yield LwA values, such as 70-90 dB for household appliances during operation. ISO 3745 applies comparison methods for smaller sources, correlating product levels to a reference sound source, enabling pass/fail verification against limits like 80 dB(A) for outdoor power equipment. These metrics support environmental product declarations (EPDs) and , with data logged for frequency-weighted spectra to identify dominant sources like fan blades or motors. Precision requires environmental corrections for and temperature, typically limiting tests to facilities with noise floors under 15 dB(A).

Limitations and Criticisms

Technical Constraints and Measurement Errors

Sound level meters (SLMs) conforming to IEC 61672-1 are categorized into Class 1 and Class 2 based on electroacoustical performance tolerances, with Class 1 instruments exhibiting lower maximum permissible errors, such as ±1.0 in the 1 kHz to 4 kHz band under reference conditions, compared to ±1.5 for Class 2. These classes impose constraints on operational range, typically limited to the human audible spectrum (approximately 20 Hz to 20 kHz), excluding accurate measurement of or without additional specialized filters. Directionality further constrains measurements, as SLMs are optimized for sound incidence from the principal axis (0°), with deviations up to ±2.0 allowed for Class 1 at 90° incidence in certain bands, potentially underestimating levels from off-axis sources like diffuse fields. Frequency weightings introduce systematic errors by approximating rather than replicating the full acoustic spectrum; , the most common, attenuates low frequencies below 500 Hz by up to 50 relative to 1 kHz, underestimating contributions from sources like wind turbines or HVAC systems where low-frequency content predominates. mitigates this for peak levels up to 140 (C) but still filters higher frequencies, while Z-weighting provides a flat response yet remains bounded by and electronics limitations. Time weightings exacerbate transient capture issues: fast response (125 ms constant) and slow (1 s) may oversmooth impulsive noises, whereas impulse weighting's 1.5 s fall time fails to accurately reflect content for non-standard impulses, leading to discrepancies in or Leq metrics. Measurement errors arise from environmental factors, including wind-induced turbulence on the , which generates low-frequency artifacts exceeding 10 at speeds above 5 m/s without windscreens, corrupting assessments. variations affect condenser microphones in SLMs, shifting sensitivity by up to 0.1 /°C outside 0–40°C ranges, while alters response, introducing errors in prolonged field use. contributes , requiring subtraction methods or error treatment when it exceeds 10 below the signal, as unaccounted inflates Leq by logarithmic ratios. drift necessitates periodic per IEC 61672-3, with self-noise floors limiting detection below 20–30 (A) for many devices. Overall combines these via root-sum-square, often reaching ±2–3 in practical scenarios influenced by observer positioning and multipath reflections.

Discrepancies with Human Auditory Perception

Sound level meters primarily rely on to approximate the frequency of the ear, which attenuates low and high frequencies to reflect reduced auditory acuity outside the 1-4 kHz range. However, this weighting derives from equal-loudness contours measured at moderate levels around 40 phons, failing to capture the level-dependent shifts in where to low frequencies increases at higher intensities. As a result, A-weighted measurements underestimate the perceived impact of low-frequency components in loud environments, such as industrial machinery or traffic noise exceeding 80 dB SPL, where equal-loudness contours flatten and low frequencies contribute more substantially to overall . Human loudness perception follows a nonlinear, compressive function of sound pressure, with a roughly logarithmic relationship where a 10 dB increase typically doubles subjective loudness for mid-frequencies, but this varies across the spectrum and integrates psychoacoustic elements like temporal masking and spectral balance not replicated by standard meter readings. Sound level meters compute root-mean-square pressure levels in decibels, applying fixed time weightings (e.g., fast at 125 ms or slow at 1 s) that approximate averaging but diverge from the human auditory system's ~200-400 ms integration window for loudness judgments, leading to mismatches in fluctuating or impulsive noises. For instance, impulse sounds like gunfire may register lower on slow-weighted scales than their peak-perceived annoyance, as the ear emphasizes rapid onsets differently from meter's exponential averaging. Further discrepancies emerge in low-frequency and infrasonic content, where imposes steep roll-offs (e.g., -50 dB at 20 Hz), ignoring that thresholds rise but persists at elevated levels, potentially causing or physiological not reflected in readings. This inadequacy stems from the weighting's basis in pure-tone headphone tests on limited subjects, overlooking real-world cues, individual variability in hearing (e.g., age-related shifts), and non-frequency factors like spatial localization that modulate perceived intensity. Consequently, while useful for regulatory , sound level meter outputs correlate imperfectly with subjective , often requiring supplementary psychoacoustic metrics like those in ISO 532 for precise prediction.

Practical Challenges in Field Use

Field measurements with sound level meters encounter significant interference from wind, which generates turbulent noise through stagnation pressure on the microphone and intrinsic pressure fluctuations from distant atmospheric eddies, producing broadband low-frequency artifacts that can overwhelm acoustic signals and degrade accuracy, particularly below a few kHz. Windscreens made of porous foam reduce stagnation effects by averaging turbulence but offer limited mitigation against intrinsic sources, often necessitating data exclusion when wind speeds exceed 5 m/s to maintain reliability. Temperature gradients and variations further complicate field accuracy by altering sound propagation: daytime lapse conditions refract sound upward, reducing measured levels, while evening inversions bend it downward, potentially elevating them by several over distances beyond 100 m; a drop in relative from 80% to 20% at 15°C or a rise from 15°C to 30°C at constant can attenuate levels by up to 3 at 800 m for 1000 Hz tones. exacerbates this, with downwind propagation focusing sound and increasing levels while upwind conditions create shadows exceeding 20 reduction, requiring simultaneous logging and preference for downwind orientations within ±45° for conservative estimates per regional guidelines. Proper positioning demands at 1.2–1.5 m height on stable tripods to simulate level, oriented for free-field response toward dominant sources in directional fields or random incidence for diffuse , while avoiding reflective surfaces, operator shadowing from handheld use, or obstructions that introduce errors via or multipath. Operator-induced issues, such as selecting incorrect (e.g., A over C for low frequencies), range overflow, or failure to verify field calibration with a pistonphone before and after sessions, can compound inaccuracies, with rugged outdoor handling risking microphone contamination or electronic drift from vibration and moisture. Long-term deployments face additional hurdles like battery depletion in cold conditions, inadequate weatherproofing against rain or dust ingress, and the need for weighted tripods on uneven terrain to prevent wind-induced movement, often mandating hybrid setups with data loggers for unattended operation despite portability trade-offs. These factors underscore the necessity of site-specific protocols, including pre-measurement weather assessments and post-processing corrections, to align field data with traceable standards.

Recent Advancements

Digital Enhancements and Data Logging

() in sound level meters, prominent since the early 2000s, enables direct analog-to-digital conversion from the pre-amplifier stage, with algorithms handling and time weightings, , and statistical computations. This shift from analog hardware reduces complexity, expands to approximately 50 compared to 15-20 in analog systems, and supports simultaneous across multiple parameters and bands, such as 1/3-octave spectra. High-resolution ADCs, typically 24-bit since around 2000 and advancing to 32-bit by 2014, further enhance measurement precision and auto-ranging for handling rapid sound fluctuations. Data logging capabilities in contemporary digital sound level meters facilitate automated recording of time-history profiles, capturing variations in parameters like Leq (equivalent continuous ), Lmax, Lmin, and peak levels across A, C, and Z frequency weightings and Fast, Slow, or time responses. Logging intervals range from 10 ms to several seconds, depending on the device, enabling detailed documentation for compliance with standards such as IEC 61672-1:2013 Class 1 or 2. Storage options include internal memory (e.g., 8 expandable to 32 ) or SD cards up to 16 , with automatic or manual modes supporting sampling rates from 1 to 3600 seconds. Exported data, often in formats compatible with Excel or specialized software like NoiseTools, allows for post-processing, statistical , , and audio integration such as VoiceTags for contextual . These features support long-term environmental or occupational by minimizing manual intervention and enabling firmware-updatable enhancements, such as remote updates for added filters or connectivity. Devices like the Optimus CR:150B and REED R8070SD exemplify compliance with Type 2 accuracy (±1.0 at 1 kHz) while providing direct SD card exports without .

IoT Integration and Wireless Systems

Integration of sound level meters with the (IoT) enables continuous, remote noise monitoring by transmitting to cloud platforms, facilitating automated analysis and alerts for exceeding thresholds. These systems typically incorporate low-power wide-area networks (LPWAN) such as LoRaWAN for extended range and battery efficiency, allowing deployment in urban or industrial settings without frequent maintenance. For instance, LoRaWAN-based sensors like the IOT-S500NOIS measure noise levels across wide ranges and relay data via gateways to centralized dashboards, supporting applications in smart cities and environmental compliance. Wireless systems often employ , , or cellular (/) connectivity for data logging and remote access, with devices like the INFRA C50 offering over six weeks of battery life in compact, outdoor-rated enclosures for unattended operation. IoT-enabled meters maintain compliance with standards such as IEC 61672 for Class 1 or Class 2 accuracy, integrating with embedded processors for on-device before to minimize use. Platforms like NoiseScout from multiple wireless meters, providing 24/7 monitoring with features for live viewing and event-triggered recordings. Advancements include plug-and-play modules, such as the SB41 Class 1 meter, which interface directly with or PCs for custom setups, enabling scalability in noise mapping for construction or festivals. Low-cost sensors, validated in field studies like EcoDecibel, achieve accuracy within ±2 dB of reference Class 1 meters while supporting geotagged data collection at one-second intervals via GPS-integrated nodes. By 2025, these integrations emphasize cloud-based analytics for predictive noise management, reducing reliance on manual spot checks and enhancing regulatory reporting in noise-sensitive areas.

Smartphone Apps and Low-Cost Alternatives

Smartphone applications designed to measure sound pressure levels using built-in microphones have gained popularity as accessible alternatives to professional sound level meters, particularly for occupational noise screening and personal exposure monitoring. The NIOSH Sound Level Meter app, developed by the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, provides A-weighted measurements with an accuracy of ±2 dBA when validated against standards in a reverberant chamber. When paired with an external calibrated microphone, its accuracy improves to within ±1 dB compared to Type 1 reference devices across a range of frequencies using pink noise signals. Independent evaluations confirm the app's readings align closely with conventional meters, often within 0.5 dB(A) in controlled and real-world settings. However, accuracy varies significantly across apps due to inconsistencies in smartphone microphone quality, frequency response, and lack of user-accessible calibration. Studies comparing multiple apps to professional meters report mean deviations of 2-3 , with some apps exhibiting errors exceeding 3 in dynamic environments like nightclubs or fitness classes. Major limitations include the inability to calibrate internal microphones pre-measurement, restricted dynamic range (typically 30-130 ), and poor performance at low frequencies below 31.5 Hz or high amplitudes, rendering them unsuitable for precise acoustical assessments or . Apps may also mislabel metrics or fail to apply proper time or frequency weightings, leading to unreliable data for applications beyond rough screening. Low-cost hardware alternatives, such as digital sound level meters priced under $100, offer improved reliability over apps by incorporating dedicated microphones with broader responses (e.g., 31.5 Hz to 8 kHz) and basic A/C weighting options. Devices like the UNI-T UT353 provide Type 2 equivalent measurements with fast/slow response times, though they lack advanced logging or standards certification, limiting use to non-critical monitoring. Entry-level models from brands like Extech achieve accuracies around ±1.5 but suffer from drift over time and inadequate windscreen protection for outdoor use, making them preferable for hobbyist or preliminary field checks rather than professional calibration. For data-recording needs, options like the REED 8080 support up to 18 hours of logging but remain below Type 1 standards. These alternatives generally outperform apps in consistency but require verification against meters for any quantitative reliance.

References

  1. [1]
    What Is A Sound Level Meter? - HBK
    A sound level meter (SLM) is an instrument (commonly hand-held) that is designed to measure sound levels in a standardized way.
  2. [2]
    Sound level meter basics: how does it work? | What is used for?
    A sound level meter (SLM) is a hand-held device that measures sound pressure levels by converting them from Pascals to decibels (dB).
  3. [3]
  4. [4]
    IEC 61672 - A Standard for Sound Level Meters Explained
    Jul 26, 2012 · Sound level meters conforming to the requirements of this standard have a specified frequency response for sound incident on the microphone from ...
  5. [5]
    Sound Level Meters | AIHA
    A sound level meter (SLM) is a device used by occupational and environmental health and safety professionals to measure sound pressure levels and identify ...
  6. [6]
    History of the sound level meter in standards - AIP Publishing
    Mar 1, 2018 · In 1932, the Acoustical Society of America started work on the first American Standards Association standard for sound level meters.
  7. [7]
    Sound Level Meter History and Milestones | Brüel & Kjær
    This article looks at the history and evolution of sound level meters, delving into history, and the new trends that are shaping their future.
  8. [8]
    Professional Sound Level Meters - Scarlet Tech
    Oct 15, 2025 · A sound level meter is a handheld device with a sensitive condenser microphone that turns minute air-pressure changes from sound waves into an ...<|separator|>
  9. [9]
    The History of Audio and Sound Measurement
    May 31, 2015 · The earliest actual measurements were made by Pierre Gassendi (1592-1655) and Matin Mersènne (1588-1648). Mersènne used a pendulum to measure ...
  10. [10]
    A Simple Method of Measuring the Intensity of Sound - jstor
    A SIMPLE METHOD OF MEASURING THE INTENSITY. OF SOUND. By George W. Pierce. Presented January 8, 1908. Received January 4, 1908. I. Introduction. In the ...
  11. [11]
    Crystal Rectifiers for Electric Currents and Electric Oscillations. Part ...
    Pierce, Phys. Rev., Vol. 25, pp. 31-60, 1907 ; G. W. Pierce, "A Simple Method of Measuring the Intensity of Sound," Proc. Am. Acad., Vol. 43, p. 377, February, ...
  12. [12]
    [PDF] Sound Level Meters – The Past, Present and Future
    The earliest methods of sound level measurement were often of a comparative rather than absolute approach; Lemon (1925)11 used an approach with a pre-.
  13. [13]
  14. [14]
    A history of ASA standards - AIP Publishing
    Jan 4, 2019 · By 1935, the Executive Council approved tentative standards on Noise Measurement (Z24.2) and Sound Level Meters (Z24.3) and sent them back to ...
  15. [15]
    Historical Development of the Sound Level Meter
    When the first standard sound level meters were made in about 1936, if different makes read within. 6 db on a given sound, it was considered quite accepta-.Missing: initial | Show results with:initial
  16. [16]
    Sound level meters of 50 years - AIP Publishing
    Aug 11, 2005 · The reference sound pressure, in the first American Tentative Standards for Sound Level Meters Z24.3‐1936, was chosen as the threshold of ...
  17. [17]
    Sound Level Meter History and Milestones | Brüel & Kjær - HBK
    This article looks at the history and evolution of sound level meters, delving into history, and the new trends that are shaping their future.
  18. [18]
    Sound pressure and intensity | Architectural Acoustics Class Notes
    Sound pressure is a fundamental concept in acoustics that quantifies the local pressure deviation from the ambient atmospheric pressure caused by a sound wave ...
  19. [19]
    Sound Pressure Level - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    Sound pressure level (SPL) is defined as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the measured effective sound pressure to a reference ...
  20. [20]
    What is Sound Pressure Level (SPL) and how is it measured?
    Oct 15, 2019 · Sound pressure level (SPL) is the pressure level of a sound, measured in decibels (dB). It is equal to 20 x the Log 10 of the ratio of the Root Mean Square ( ...
  21. [21]
    Sound Pressure Level (SPL) | Svantek Academy
    The sound pressure level is a logarithmic measure of the effective pressure of a sound relative to a reference value, defined in dB (decibel).
  22. [22]
    ISO 9614-1:1993(en), Acoustics — Determination of sound power ...
    The reference sound pressure is 20 μPa. Sound pressure level is measured in decibels. 3.2. instantaneous sound intensity,. mml_m1.<|separator|>
  23. [23]
    Measurement In Decibels: What Is the Difference Between dB and ...
    May 14, 2019 · Thus, the reference quantity is the smallest pressure change detectable by the ear (hearing threshold), 20 µPa in air, which corresponds to 0 dB ...
  24. [24]
  25. [25]
    [PDF] IEC 61672-1 - iTeh Standards
    A sound level meter may be comprised of separate components in one or more enclosures and may be capable of displaying a variety of acoustical signal levels.
  26. [26]
    Sound Measurement Terminology - Larson Davis
    A glossary of noise and sound measurement terminology used for sound level meters and noise dosimeters.
  27. [27]
    Components of a Sound Level Meters & Calibrators - GAO Tek
    Components of a Sound Level Meters & Calibrators · Microphone: · Preamplifier: · Analog-to-Digital Converter (ADC): · Digital Signal Processor (DSP): · Display:.Missing: key | Show results with:key
  28. [28]
    What is an Integrating Sound Level Meter? | Cirrus Research plc
    Definition: An integrating sound level meter is an instrument that measures sound energy over a period of time. Explanation: Picture a varying noise level drawn ...
  29. [29]
    [PDF] A guide to sound level meters - Institute of Acoustics
    The specification standards prior to that, IEC 60651 'Sound level meters' and IEC 60804 'Integrating-averaging sound level meters', provided specifications for ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  30. [30]
    IEC 61672-1:2013
    Sound level meters specified in this standard are intended to measure sounds generally in the range of human hearing. Two performance categories, class 1 and ...
  31. [31]
    Integrating Sound Level Meters for Noise at Work
    ### Summary of Integrating Sound Level Meters
  32. [32]
    Integrating sound level meters and Leq explained - Pulsar Instruments
    Feb 1, 2018 · Leq is the equivalent continuous sound level, measured by integrating-averaging sound level meters, and is vital for noise measurements under  ...
  33. [33]
    Sound level meter - difference between class 1 & class 2 meters
    Oct 1, 2018 · Class 1 sound level meters need to measure sound over a wider frequency than Class 2 meters and meet narrower tolerances for all performance criteria.
  34. [34]
    How to choose the best sound level meter? I Buyers Guide - SVANTEK
    The IEC 61672-1 standard outlines the performance requirements for professional sound level meters, categorizing them into Class 1 and Class 2 based on their ...
  35. [35]
    [PDF] NOISE-CON 2020 What defines a Sound Level Meter in the US has ...
    Nov 16, 2020 · What defines a Sound Level Meter in the US has changed. ANSI/ASA S1.4 equals IEC 61672. Understanding the differences. Brian MacMillan, NTi ...
  36. [36]
    What's the Difference Between a Class 1 and Class 2 Sound Level ...
    A Class 1 sound level meter will need to measure over a wider frequency range than a Class 2 instrument and meet tighter tolerances for all of its performance ...
  37. [37]
    Occupational Noise Exposure - Overview - OSHA
    With noise, OSHA's permissible exposure limit (PEL) is 90 dBA for all workers for an 8 hour day. The OSHA standard uses a 5 dBA exchange rate. This means that ...Standards · Hearing Conservation Program · Exposure & Controls · Health EffectsMissing: IEC | Show results with:IEC
  38. [38]
    1910.95 App G - Monitoring Noise Levels Non-Mandatory ... - OSHA
    A dosimeter is like a sound level meter except that it stores sound level measurements and integrates these measurements over time, providing an average noise ...Missing: IEC | Show results with:IEC
  39. [39]
    When should you use a sound level meter or a noise dosimeter?
    Mar 26, 2020 · Use Sound Level Meters when you need to know the noise level of a particular task or process, or how noisy a piece of machinery or area is. Use ...
  40. [40]
    Noise Dosimeter SV 104 - SVANTEK
    SV 104 meets IEC 61252 ed1.2 (2017) and ANSI/ASA S1.25-1991 (R2020) performance requirements for personal noise dosimeters.
  41. [41]
    [PDF] CHAPTER 39 NOISE DOSIMETERS - CDC Stacks
    the OSHA regulations and the ANSI S 1.25 standard require that dosimeters operate properly up to 140 dB. NIOSH studies have found that personal noise.
  42. [42]
  43. [43]
    How to choose the best noise dosimeter for workplace monitoring?
    Dosimeter features must include capabilities for A/C-weighting, real-time measurements, 8-hour LAeq, peak measurements up to 140 dB, and calibration ...
  44. [44]
    Evaluation of a wearable consumer noise measurement device in a ...
    Jul 20, 2022 · Despite not meeting the ANSI criteria for sound level meters, in some cases, these smartwatches still provide a reasonable degree of accuracy ...
  45. [45]
    [PDF] Comparison of Apple Watch to Commercial Noise Dosimeters - DTIC
    Dec 13, 2021 · This study was designed to measure the accuracy and feasibility of the Apple Watch's microphone, and its ability to capture occupational noise ...
  46. [46]
    Personal noise dosimeters: accuracy and reliability in varied settings
    All dosimeters studied measured steady noise source accurately and consistently, with strong positive correlations across all instruments. Measurements acquired ...Missing: wearable | Show results with:wearable
  47. [47]
    Understanding A-C-Z noise frequency weightings - Pulsar Instruments
    Jul 22, 2021 · The sound level meter standard IEC 61672 specifies the performance and tolerances for the frequency weighting curves to be used. Frequency (Hz) ...Missing: rationale | Show results with:rationale
  48. [48]
    Equal Loudness Curves - HyperPhysics
    This illustration seeks to show the difference between the more recent ISO 226:2003 set of equal-loudness curves and the Robinson & Dadson curves. Most notable ...
  49. [49]
    ISO 226:2003 - Acoustics — Normal equal-loudness-level contours
    This International Standard specifies combinations of sound pressure levels and frequencies of pure continuous tones which are perceived as equally loud by ...
  50. [50]
  51. [51]
    Frequency-Weightings for Sound Level Measurements - NTi Audio
    Frequency weightings are used when describing sound levels. For example, maximum noise levels at work, as recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), ...Missing: rationale | Show results with:rationale
  52. [52]
    The ABCs of Frequency Weighting | Acoustical Engineer
    C-weighting is less severe on low frequencies than A-weighting and represents the response of the human ear to loud sounds (over 100 dB). C-weighting is more ...
  53. [53]
    Fast, Slow, Impulse Time Weighting - What do they mean? - NTi Audio
    The IEC 61672-1 standard describes two different time weightings, Fast (F) and Slow (S). They both dampen the reaction of the displayed level to a sudden change ...
  54. [54]
    What does Fast and Slow Time Weighting signify for real-time audio ...
    Jul 31, 2017 · The IEC 61672 specifies the time weightings to be Fast and Slow for determining the speed at which the instrument responds to changing noise levels.
  55. [55]
  56. [56]
    Fast, Slow, and Impulse Time Weighting: What's the difference?
    Aug 29, 2019 · A sound level meter set to a fast setting responds to changes in sound in 0.125 seconds (125 milliseconds). That's about eight times faster than ...
  57. [57]
    Sound level Time-weightings Terms and Definitions
    Most sound level meters have two exponential time-weightings, F = Fast and S = Slow. Some also have an impulse time-weighting, a quasi-peak detection ...
  58. [58]
    Sound Level Measurement | Dewesoft
    Rating 4.8 (28) How does a sound level meter work? A sound level meter uses four main components - a microphone, a preamplifier, signal processing, and a display. The ...Missing: key | Show results with:key<|separator|>
  59. [59]
    Leq Equivalent Continuous Sound Level | Svantek Academy
    Leq Sound Level Meter measures the average sound pressure level over a specific time, used in noise assessments.Missing: methods | Show results with:methods
  60. [60]
    What are LAeq and LAFmax? - NTi Audio
    LAeq and LAFmax are a couple of the many indicators used to describe sound and noise level values. Here is a basic explanation of the most commonly-used of ...Missing: methods | Show results with:methods
  61. [61]
    Acoustic glossary of sound measurement - Pulsar Instruments
    LAFmax – The maximum Sound Level with 'A' Frequency weighting and Fast Time weighting during the measurement period.
  62. [62]
    Leq, LAeq and LAeq,T : Equivalent Continuous Sound Levels
    Leq (equivalent continuous sound level) is the steady sound level, which over the measurement period has the same total energy as the fluctuating noise.
  63. [63]
    Equivalent Continuous Sound Level (Leq): Noise Exposure Metric
    Oct 11, 2025 · Leq is defined by L_eq = 10 · log10 ( (1 / T) ∫0T 10^(L(t)/10) dt ), where L(t) is the instantaneous sound pressure level in decibels and T is ...<|separator|>
  64. [64]
  65. [65]
    Leq, LAeq, Equivalent Continuous Sound Level - Gracey & Associates
    Leq is the preferred method to describe sound levels that vary over time, resulting in a single decibel value which takes into account the total sound energy.
  66. [66]
    L : Sound and Vibration Terms and Definitions - Acoustic Glossary
    Lmax, the maximum sound level, during a measurement period or a noise event, Often includes other descriptors, for example LAFmax, and sometimes written as Max ...
  67. [67]
    Learn the difference between Lmax, Lmin and Peak - Castle Group Ltd
    Lmax is the highest RMS sound pressure level within the measuring period. · Lmin is the lowest RMS sound pressure level within the measuring period. · Peak is the ...
  68. [68]
    ONOSOKKI - Technical Report-What is sound level meter?
    The maximum time weighting sound level within a certain measurement time is expressed as Lmax, and the minimum time weighting sound level is expressed as Lmin.
  69. [69]
  70. [70]
    Peak Sound Measurement - NoiseMeters
    This is the peak level of the sound pressure wave with no time constant applied. For Noise at Work measurements the Peak level should be C weighted.
  71. [71]
    No.44 Differences between L max and L peak of Sound level meter
    The PEAK value is the level of the maximum instantaneous sound pressure value within a certain measurement time without calculating the RMS value, so it is not ...
  72. [72]
    [PDF] Sound Level Meters - DigitalOcean
    Aug 7, 2025 · Peak sound level (IEC 801-22-15) - greatest instanta- neous value of a standard-frequency-weighted sound pressure level, within a stated time ...
  73. [73]
    Sound Levels and Sound Level Meters, Terms and Definitions
    Sound Level is the ratio of the sound pressure to the reference sound pressure of 20 μPa. Integrating Sound Level Meters are the modern solution to the age-old<|separator|>
  74. [74]
  75. [75]
    Sound Level Meter Calibration - HBK
    Sound Level Meters are calibrated to the requirements in the standards they are designed to: IEC 61672, IEC 60651/ 60804, BS 7580, ANSI S1 4, and/or ANSI S1.43.
  76. [76]
  77. [77]
    [PDF] TPS 49 IEC 61672 Testing of Sound Level Meters - UKAS
    Dec 3, 2022 · Where sound level meters are manufactured to more than one standard, Calibration Laboratory procedures for review of requests, tenders and ...
  78. [78]
    Calibration matters: I. Sound level meter basics - ScienceDirect.com
    The IEC 61,672–1 standard on sound level meter specifications is explained. •. Sound level meter components, functions, and usage settings are discussed.<|separator|>
  79. [79]
    [PDF] Traceability of Acoustical Instrument Calibration to the National ...
    calibrators are then used to provide quick or field- check calibrations (over a limited frequency band) of sound level meters or personal sound exposure meters.
  80. [80]
    Metrological Traceability: Frequently Asked Questions and NIST Policy
    Metrological traceability requires the establishment of an unbroken chain of calibrations to specified reference measurement standards: typically national or ...
  81. [81]
  82. [82]
    EN 61672 vs. ANSI S1.4 Sound Meter Certification - Patsnap Eureka
    Jul 16, 2025 · EN 61672 is the European standard for sound level meters, developed by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and adopted by the ...
  83. [83]
  84. [84]
    What is Type or Pattern Approval? | Cirrus Research plc
    Type Approval, or Pattern Approval, is a method where a recognised test laboratory, such as the PTB in Germany or LNE in France in the case of sound level.Missing: protocols | Show results with:protocols
  85. [85]
    IEC 61672-2:2013+AMD1:2017 CSV
    In stockApr 4, 2017 · The aim is to ensure that all laboratories use consistent methods to perform pattern-evaluation tests. This second edition cancels and replaces ...
  86. [86]
  87. [87]
    The Influence of Mechanical Vibrations on their Performance
    Download Citation | Pattern Approval Tests of Sound Level Meters: The ... In the method the test panel covers an aperture in a sound-proof wall between two rooms.
  88. [88]
    Understand Noise Exposure | Noise and Hearing Loss - CDC
    Feb 16, 2024 · The NIOSH recommended exposure limit (REL) for occupational noise exposure is 85 A-weighted decibels (dBA) over an eight-hour shift.
  89. [89]
    Noise Measurement | Hearing Protection | 3M - US
    Step 1. Perform a walkaround survey · Step 2. Conduct sound level surveys in noisy areas · Step 3. Create a noise sampling plan · Step 4. Monitor employee noise ...
  90. [90]
    1910.95 - Occupational noise exposure. - OSHA
    All continuous, intermittent and impulsive sound levels from 80 decibels to 130 decibels shall be integrated into the noise measurements. 1910.95(d)(2)(ii).1910.95 App G · 1910.95 App A · Audiometric Test Rooms · 1910.95 App B
  91. [91]
  92. [92]
    NIOSH Sound Level Meter App | Noise and Hearing Loss - CDC
    Feb 16, 2024 · The NIOSH Sound Level Meter (SLM) app measures workplace noise to determine if workers are exposed to hazardous noise.
  93. [93]
    ISO 9612:2009 - Determination of occupational noise exposure
    ISO 9612:2009 specifies an engineering method for measuring workers' exposure to noise in a working environment and calculating the noise exposure level.
  94. [94]
    Occupational noise measurements - SVANTEK
    The most popular approach to occupational noise measurement is to take 8-hour measurements with wearable sound level meters called noise dosimeters.Catalogue · Noise Measurement Techniques · Measurement Equipment
  95. [95]
    [PDF] Hazardous Occupational Noise
    Accurate within +/- 2 dB. The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) also specifies technical requirements for sound level meters and dosimeters.
  96. [96]
    SoundTrack LxT Workplace Noise Sound Level Meter - Larson Davis
    It is fully compliant with IEC and ANSI standards for Class 1 or Class 2 sound level meters. In addition, LXT files are fully compatible with the ISO 9612:2009 ...
  97. [97]
    Environmental noise pollution | Measurements | Examples - SVANTEK
    Following ISO 1996-2 noise monitoring terminals meeting IEC 61672-1 sound level meter performance are used for noise monitoring applications. Requirements ...
  98. [98]
    [PDF] Chapter 11. Environmental noise - World Health Organization (WHO)
    The first two indicators are used particularly for noise monitoring and exposure assessment. The third is used for measuring leisure noise exposure. For ...
  99. [99]
    Sound Level Meters: How They Work, Best Models & More | Guide
    This chart summarizes the main sound level meter types to help you identify the right solution for your application. Type, Accuracy, Measurement Purpose ...
  100. [100]
    [PDF] Environmental Noise Measurement (br0139)
    Day-Night Average Sound Level (DNL), Ldn : A 24-hour equivalent continuous level in dB(A) where 10 dB is added to nighttime noise levels from 2200 hours to 0700 ...
  101. [101]
    Noise | In-depth topics | European Environment Agency (EEA)
    Jun 24, 2025 · Reducing noise is a key objective under the EU's Zero Pollution Action Plan and the Environmental Noise Directive (END).
  102. [102]
    Noise Monitoring | Why is pattern approval to IEC 61672 important?
    Pattern approval to IEC 61672 is crucial for noise monitors for several reasons: Standardization and Consistency: IEC 61672 is a standard set by the ...Missing: protocols | Show results with:protocols
  103. [103]
    Noise - European Environment Agency (EEA)
    The EEA devised an electronic noise data reporting mechanism in 2007 in order to facilitate the reporting of noise data in line with the principles set out in ...
  104. [104]
    Noise Ordinance N/Forcer | Sound Level Meter - Larson Davis
    SoundTrack LxT N/Forcer offers accurate, citation-ready noise data for community noise ordinance enforcement and nuisance complaint response.
  105. [105]
    24 CFR Part 51 Subpart B -- Noise Abatement and Control - eCFR
    It is a HUD goal that exterior noise levels do not exceed a day-night average sound level of 55 decibels. This level is recommended by the Environmental ...Missing: monitoring | Show results with:monitoring
  106. [106]
    Noise Emission Measurements for Regulatory Purposes - epa nepis
    The International standard on precision sound level meters [43] requires that instrumentation complying with that standard be able to measure the ...
  107. [107]
    Chapter: 3 Metrics for Assessing Environmental Noise
    The sound-level meter was standardized in the early 1930s when microphones and electronic circuits were being developed. Ideally, the standard sound-level meter ...
  108. [108]
    Building Acoustic Measurements I NTi Audio
    Measure the sound insulation between two rooms. Do this by generating a sound in a room, and by comparing this sound level with the level measured in a, ...What to measure · How to measure airborne... · How to measure impact sound...
  109. [109]
    (PDF) Field Measurement of Sound Insulation in Buildings and ...
    Jan 25, 2021 · The purpose of sound insulation is to reduce noise transmission between adjacent dwellings or rooms and units and also between dwellings or ...
  110. [110]
    [PDF] MEASUREMENT OF SOUND LEVELS IN BUILDINGS ANC Guidelines
    Jun 1, 2020 · These guidelines cover the measurement of sound pressure levels in buildings from all sources; they supersede both Part 1[1] and Part 2[2] of ...
  111. [111]
    Building acoustics: Applications - SVANTEK
    Building acoustics measurements such as airborne and impact sound insulation with SVANTEK sound level meters and mobile applications.
  112. [112]
    Building Acoustics Measurements - Larson Davis
    Learn more about building acoustics and room acoustics - from measurement parameters to measurement tools - sound level meters and sound sources.<|separator|>
  113. [113]
    Building Acoustics Measurements with Bedrock Elite Sound Level ...
    Key Applications of Sound Level Meters in Building Acoustics · Sound Insulation Testing. Sound insulation is critical to prevent noise transmission between ...
  114. [114]
    ISO 3740:2019 - Acoustics — Determination of sound power levels ...
    In stockThe International Standards which describe the basic methods for determining emission sound pressure levels at work stations and at other specified positions ...
  115. [115]
    B&K 2245 SLM + Product Noise Partner | Brüel & Kjær
    Measuring and reporting of sound power levels in accordance with ISO 3744 and ISO 3746 standards to demonstrate product compliance with noise specifications for ...
  116. [116]
    Determination of Sound Power Levels and Noise Emissions - ISO ...
    ISO 3744 and ISO 3745 compliant sound power level and noise emission testing · Suitable for industrial, commercial, consumer, and specialist equipment.
  117. [117]
    [PDF] B&K 2245 Sound Level Meter with Product Noise Partner BZ-7303 ...
    Uses. • Easy acquisition and reporting of sound power levels in accordance to ISO standards. • Fulfilment of certain sound levels for CE compliance.
  118. [118]
    Sound Power Measurement | Dewesoft
    Rating 4.8 (28) Dewesoft's sound power measurement solution complies with key international standards, ensuring accurate and reliable noise assessments: ISO 3741 / ISO 3743 – ...
  119. [119]
    [PDF] 0° and 90° Reference Directions for a Sound Level Meter - HAL
    For sound level measurements performed in accordance with IEC 61672 [1], the sound level meter is supposed to be pointed towards the source (0° incidence). For ...
  120. [120]
    Understanding A-Weighted and C-Weighted Noise Levels at Work
    Apr 16, 2025 · These limits use A-weighting because they reflect how the human ear experiences noise over time. Peak Noise Limits (C-weighted – dB(C)). 140 dB( ...
  121. [121]
    Everything You Wanted To Know About Sound Level Meters (SLMs)
    Jan 27, 2012 · All weighting curves are equal in level at 1,000 Hz, the standard reference frequency that SLMs are calibrated to using acoustic calibrators.Missing: limitations | Show results with:limitations
  122. [122]
    The effect of microphone wind noise on the amplitude modulation of ...
    Jul 12, 2016 · Microphone wind noise is known to corrupt many outdoor measurements. In particular, measurements of amplitude modulation (AM) from wind turbines ...
  123. [123]
    Sound Measurements | Standards | Instrumentation | Techniques
    Modern sound level meters can detect and account for these factors to improve the accuracy of measurements. Wind. Wind can cause significant measurement errors, ...
  124. [124]
    [PDF] Environmental effects on microphones and type II sound level meters
    For four different manufacturer's Type II sound level meters numerous experimentally-determined data concerning the effects of fre- quency, temperature ...
  125. [125]
  126. [126]
    When measuring sound pressure level (SPL) on a signal, how can I ...
    Jul 12, 2022 · To exclude background noise, remove noise in signal-free bands, subtract background energy, or treat noise as a measurement error. Measuring ...
  127. [127]
    [PDF] UNCERTAINTY OF MEASUREMENTS MADE WITH SOUND LEVEL ...
    Uncertainty depends, in part, on the instrument used for the observation. The instrument and observer may also influence the quantity to be measured. A sound ...
  128. [128]
    [PDF] Uncertainties associated with the use of a sound level meter
    Measurement uncertainty for A-weighted noise emission levels is proposed, based on verification data and practical considerations of sound level meter ...
  129. [129]
    What is A-Weighting? - Ansys
    Apr 5, 2022 · A-weighting is an adjustment applied to sound measurement to reflect how a noise is perceived by the human ear.<|control11|><|separator|>
  130. [130]
    A-weighting in detail - Lindos Electronics
    A-weighting is a curve for sound level measurement, based on the 40-phon equal-loudness contour for human hearing, used for low, medium and high loudness ...
  131. [131]
    Loudness Perception - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    There is no direct relationship between the physical sound level (in dB SPL) and the sensation of loudness. There are many reasons for this, but an important ...
  132. [132]
    It is too loud! - PMC
    Low-frequency or high-frequency sounds are not perceived to have the same loudness as mid-frequency sounds—this has significant consequences for how a sound's ...<|separator|>
  133. [133]
    Frequency and loudness perception – Understanding Sound
    Equal loudness curves play a role in sound level meters. Since loudness is not measurable, engineers who design sound level meters transform the data picked ...
  134. [134]
    None
    ### Summary of Key Arguments on A-Frequency Weighting Inadequacy
  135. [135]
    [PDF] As the Wind Blows: Turbulent Noise on Outdoor Microphones
    This article focuses on microphone wind noise, with a limited discus- sion of other “wind sounds.” Atmospheric Turbulence. Before examining wind noise, it is ...
  136. [136]
    Weather effects on environmental noise measurements - HBK
    Temperature and humidity affect sound measurements. With a fixed temperature at 15ºC, a decrease in relative humidity from 80% to 20% would decrease the sound ...
  137. [137]
    [PDF] MITIGATING THE EFFECT OF WEATHER ON ENVIRONMENTAL ...
    The most significant factors affecting measurements, even over short periods, are wind speed and direction. Wind blowing from the noise source towards the ...
  138. [138]
  139. [139]
  140. [140]
    How to use the sound level meter correctly to reduce errors? - GVDA
    Jan 19, 2024 · Start the sound level meter and set it to a measurement range of 50-100dB with time weighting of "Fast" and frequency weighting of "A".
  141. [141]
    [PDF] Noise Measurement Field Guide Final Report - FHWA-HEP-18-066
    Jan 6, 2018 · Weigh the tripod down if there is a slope or if breezy wind conditions are expected. Documentation. □ Fill out general information on the ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  142. [142]
  143. [143]
    REED R8070SD Data Logging Sound Level Meter
    Real time data logger with integrated SD memory card measures/records general sound levels and meets IEC 61672-1 Type 2 standards.Missing: enhancements | Show results with:enhancements
  144. [144]
    Noise Sensors and IoT: the Perfect Pair for Environmental Monitoring
    Jan 24, 2025 · IoT technology significantly enhances noise sensor capabilities by automating data collection, transmission, and analysis: - Data Collection and ...
  145. [145]
    LoRaWAN Sound Level Noise Sensor | IOTNVR US
    In stockIOT-S500NOIS is a LoRa sound level sensor with integrated microphone. It can not only measure a wide rangeof noise levels and send various kinds of noise level ...
  146. [146]
    Sound Level Meter | Device Repository for LoRaWAN
    The IoTsens Sound Level Meter has an integrated microphone (sound sensor) that can monitor noise levels. The collected data is transmitted over the LoRaWAN® ...
  147. [147]
    infra c50 - Wireless Sound Level Meter & Noise Monitor - Sigicom
    The INFRA C50 is a wireless compact sound level meter and noise monitor for remote use. Great battery life that last 6+ weeks. Robust design.
  148. [148]
    SB41 plug-and-play smart sound level meter for IoT integration and ...
    This smart design allows you to embed a fully compliant Class 1 (SB41) or Class 2 (SB42) instrument directly into your PC, Raspberry Pi, or any computer-based ...
  149. [149]
    NoiseScout Unattended Noise Monitoring I NTi Audio
    NoiseScout provides a comprehensive but easy-to-use 24/7 noise monitoring solution. Noise levels are recorded on-site by the Sound Level Meter.
  150. [150]
    24x7 outdoor wireless sound level measurement: the IoT ...
    24/7 live measurment data​​ Anytime and anywhere access to the latest sound level measurements, including GPS coordinates of the sensor, on the IoT Dashboard+.
  151. [151]
    A low-cost and IoT-based device for noise measurement
    This study aims to develop and validate EcoDecibel, a low-cost, IoT-based sensor system for continuous noise monitoring, addressing the gaps in existing noise ...
  152. [152]
    How IOT & Smart integration are reshaping to Sound Level Meter ...
    In 2025, sound level meters are evolving beyond handheld devices—they're becoming integral parts of smart infrastructure. The rise of IoT connectivity, cloud- ...
  153. [153]
    NIOSH Sound Level Meter - App Store
    Rating 4.7 (15,360) · Free · iOS- Tested and validated (accuracy ± 2 dBA) according to standards in a reverberant chamber at NIOSH acoustics lab – the only proper method to validate accuracy.
  154. [154]
    The potential use of a NIOSH sound level meter smart device ... - NIH
    The team found the average accuracy of this app to be within ±1 dBA when using calibrated external microphones with a type 1 reference device and measuring pink ...
  155. [155]
    Assessing the Usefulness of Mobile Apps for Noise Management in ...
    Nov 14, 2023 · The readings of the NIOSH Sound Level Meter app were the most accurate, with measurement readings within 0.5 dB(A) of the conventional SLM ...
  156. [156]
    How Accurate Are These Smartphone Sound Measurement Apps?
    They do not provide accurate measurements of situational noise, and should not be used as the sole determinant to the length of permissible exposure limit.
  157. [157]
    Smartphone-based sound level measurement apps: Evaluation of ...
    Jan 1, 2021 · On average, the measured level deviated 2.93 dBA from the true value on iOS devices and 2.79 dBA on Android devices. They concluded that mobile ...<|separator|>
  158. [158]
    Evaluation of smartphone sound measurement applications (apps ...
    Oct 14, 2016 · Another major constraint presented by the built-in microphones is the lack of access and inability to perform periodic or pre-measurement ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  159. [159]
    Sound Level Meter Apps – How Accurate Are They? - Cirrus Research
    An evaluation of 25 sound level meter apps on the Google Play Store showed that only 6 labelled the metric being displayed correctly. Where this wasn't the case ...
  160. [160]
    Cheap, reasonable quality, cheap sound level meter ? - EEVblog
    I have the UNI-T UT353. It's nice construction, reasonable quality. You can improve it by opening it, and replacing the internal IL7660 (or ...Missing: alternatives | Show results with:alternatives
  161. [161]
    Recommendations for an inexpensive but dependable SPL meter?
    The best you can do today for cheap is the bottom of the line Extech meter which is around $100. Avoid the more expensive Extechs which do not have a bar graph.
  162. [162]