Rat Shack SPL meter: Analog or Digital?


I decided to buy a Rat Shack SPL meter (to test the frecuency response of my speakers and subwoofer) but I'm not sure which one, the analog or the digital? Robert Harley suggests in his book to buy the analog one but he does not explain why. Is there any reason to choose the analog one over the digital one? or it does not matter?
Thank you for any input.
jorge_err
It is not calibrated for the digital meter. We found a fair amount of difference between the digital meter and the analog. The digital is actually closer to linear than the analog, but it was less consistent from various units--it's also harder to use. Our tracks would give you better results than a flat response, but they are not precise for the digital unit. I would recommend getting the analog version.
When I was demoing audio gear, I considered buying one of these to allow me to do a more fair comparison -- apparently it is very hard to set gear to identical volumes, and the louder gear sounds better.

I was told elsewhere, though, that the accuracy of the meters is not good enough to help in this project (I think it's +/-2db?). Is that the opinion here also?

Thanks,

Eric
Eric, the meter is very reproducible, and you would likely be setting levels with a calibrated pink noise, rather than individual test tones. For you what you propose I think the meter would be very well suited, except in the case of comparing an electrostatic with a dynamic speaker. The dispersion patterns of these two are very different and I would question whether or not it's really the same volume. At the moment, I can't really conceive of an alternate method.
The digital version actually has a bar-graph analog display that is just as good as a moving pointer. And the numeric readout sure makes it easier to log results as you vary the speaker setup etc. The digital/analog issue is just about readout convenience...actual performance characteristic of the devices (including any deficiencies) is identical.