Analog meter advantages?

[Hobby73]

I was watching one of Dave's videos and while scanning all the equipment behind him I noticed everything is digital except for one unit which has an analog panel meter (shown just to his right in the attached screenshot).  I thought modern digital displays are preferred for a variety of reasons and the analog display is a legacy visualization format.  Is there any special case where analog meters are preferred?

[MK14]

Older equipment (still perfectly usable/useful today, in many cases) is my best guess. Before digital metering became commonplace.

One of the main (still remaining) advantages to analogue meters, is that they will work, even in UNPOWERED (no need to plug into mains, or have any batteries) equipment. E.g. a light or sound meter, where the sensor creates enough signal power, to drive the meter. Such meters, need only tiny amounts of power.

[AlphZeta]

Also, if the voltage (or current) under measurement is oscillating at a low frequency (e.g. less than 20 Hz) you can actually see the needle swing accordingly. Whereas for most digital meters, the numbers just jump around rather randomly.

[vk6zgo]

Also, if the voltage (or current) under measurement is oscillating at a low frequency (e.g. less than 20 Hz) you can actually see the needle swing accordingly. Whereas for most digital meters, the numbers just jump around rather randomly.

Or if you have to adjust something---a DMM,say,jumps from reading to reading,making it hard to find a peak or null setting.
You can,of course,use an Oscilloscope to peak/null a voltage,-----a bit harder with current.

[skipjackrc4]

I have quite a few pieces of equipment with analog meters simply because they're old and still work.  Things like electrostatic voltmeters don't need the visual precision than digital meters can give you since the precision isn't there in the instrument to begin with.

[mos6502]

There are no advantages. Analog meters are inherently inaccurate, hard to read and bulky.

Yes, an analog display can be useful. But somehow everyone in this thread seems to forget that most decent multimeters have an analog bargraph, for exactly that reason. Only, the bargraph is better than an analog meter: it has no lag, no overshoot and decent meters like the Fluke 87V have a bargraph zoom mode that gives you a center-null bargraph with 10 times the sensitivity, which can be used with the rel mode even in the millivolt range, making peaking and nulling much faster and more accurate than with an analog meter. The Fluke 87 original series and 87III even have a high resolution bargraph that is at full scale at 1/4th of the range.

[Hobby73]

... Analog is not a legacy visualisation format. Digital wristwatches came and went...

Ah, good point on watches and clocks! 

[vk6zgo]

There are no advantages. Analog meters are inherently inaccurate, hard to read and bulky.

Yes, an analog display can be useful. But somehow everyone in this thread seems to forget that most decent multimeters have an analog bargraph, for exactly that reason. Only, the bargraph is better than an analog meter: it has no lag, no overshoot and decent meters like the Fluke 87V have a bargraph zoom mode that gives you a center-null bargraph with 10 times the sensitivity, which can be used with the rel mode even in the millivolt range, making peaking and nulling much faster and more accurate than with an analog meter. The Fluke 87 original series and 87III even have a high resolution bargraph that is at full scale at 1/4th of the range.

All the bargraphs I've seen on DMMs do have lag,are too small for easy reading,& are basically just an "after thought",but I'll take your word for it.

It is more than nostalgic clinging to the past-----many people find the analog meter format easier to use.
There is no extraneous information,like a bargraph has----you concentrate on the "needle".

A fast,large display digital "rendition" of an analog meter can be produced,which offers the best of both worlds.

Ham Radio Transceivers tried going the bargraph route,but nowadays all have their "S"meter as a "rendered" analog scale.

Automotive speedometers tried using  real digital readouts ,but they were horrible,as it was difficult to see your speed at a glance.
The next thing was digitally driven analog displays,& a very few bar graphs.
Interestingly, mechanical bargraph displays were used for a while in the 1950s & fell out of favour,so maybe bargraphs looked a bit "retro",but not in a good way.

Today,they are a mix of a few bargraphs & many rendered "analog" displays,with most people preferring the latter.

[zlymex]

I have at least five DMMs around me at the moment but there is one analog that I use the most often.
A DMM need to press the power button to use. And in the case of Fluke 289, I have to wait 8 second while it boost, that is the thing I hate.

[Brumby]

My No. 1:

Also, if the voltage (or current) under measurement is oscillating at a low frequency (e.g. less than 20 Hz) you can actually see the needle swing accordingly. Whereas for most digital meters, the numbers just jump around rather randomly.

My No. 2:

... if you have to adjust something---a DMM,say,jumps from reading to reading,making it hard to find a peak or null setting.
You can,of course,use an Oscilloscope to peak/null a voltage,-----a bit harder with current.

My No. 3:
No batteries required for voltage or current measurements.

Analog meters are inherently inaccurate, hard to read and bulky.

- Accuracy depends on need.  An analogue meter can tell me my 12v supply is alive and in the ballpark. It often doesn't matter if it's 11.8v or 12.1v.
- Hard to read?  Well, when you've grown up with them, I don't find that a real problem.  Have to have a mirrored scale, though.
- Bulky?  In some cases, maybe - but my very first meter (analogue, of course) was about the same size as my BM235

They are sensitive to rough handling, though.

[Brumby]

... and excessive over-range.

[ivaylo]

They are "natural". If you are a beginner it's current through a coil what's moving that needle and that's all you should care about. No need to understand fancy voltage standards, sampling rates, averaging, integration and all that...

[Brutte]

There are no advantages. Analog meters are inherently inaccurate, hard to read and bulky.

The pros and cons depend on the level of discussion. Is it the front-end or the display that is to be compared?
From robustness/mechanical accelerations point of view, at fixed price/accuracy/size an analog display is a delicate stuff. I'd say the advantage is that these things run on burden voltage, whole range (volts, amperes, frequency, power, power factor, etc). That is all the energy these devices need to operate correctly. I use an old bench analog ammeter just because of that - you can leave it connected to a circuit for months not worrying about the powering. Also, the advantage is the display size and ease of readout. Just a glimpse of an eye and you can tell if the readout is within expected range. No need to interpret the data, as with digital ones.
I think mechanical indicator could be substituted with an LCD/bargraph/gauge but I have never seen an adequate implementation as available bargraphs are coarse/grained when compared to a smooth analog readout.

The disadvantage of analog display w.r.t. digital is that it would have been darn hard to implement an autorange feature in purely analog way.

[Fungus]

Digital wristwatches came and went.

"went"?

LOL!

[Zbig]

One advantage is you can sell them to hipsters and spend the money to get a proper, modern, digital one.

[tautech]

One advantage is you can sell them to hipsters and spend the money to get a proper, modern, digital one.

Name another?

[tszaboo]

I had one of those Chinese crap Tenma power supply on my desk, powering some equipment, which can (but shouldnt at that moment) draw a lot of power (300W). And the screen was glitching. And every time the screen glitched I had a small hearth attack that the thing on my desk is going to heat up explode, whatever. After I dumped that PSU for a decent one.
So yes an analog meter has advantages. No firmware, no JTAG headers, no 50 lines in the BOM, trouble seeing awful LCD or having seizure due to LED multiplexing no bullshit. Connect, and it works.

[sync]

Automotive speedometers tried using  real digital readouts ,but they were horrible,as it was difficult to see your speed at a glance.

I have a digital and an analog speedometer in my car. I'm only looking at the digital one. Much easier, faster and more precise.

[MrSlack]

+1 for NANDBlog.

I'll still throw a analogue meter in something over a digital meter if I need an approximate voltage or current readout In fact most of what I do is around the 5% tolerance mark anyway so it's fine for most things. 1% - probably still use one. Dead simple, requires only a shunt or series resistor for programming. No separate power supply. Need high impedance or low loading, just sling in a couple of JFETs. Takes virtually no current. Low brain overhead. Dirt cheap. Need a custom or calibrated scale (watts/dB/oC/lumens)? Dig out my 0.1mm technical pen and draw one.

[Fungus]

I had one of those Chinese crap Tenma power supply on my desk, powering some equipment, which can (but shouldnt at that moment) draw a lot of power (300W). And the screen was glitching. And every time the screen glitched I had a small hearth attack that the thing on my desk is going to heat up explode, whatever. After I dumped that PSU for a decent one.
So yes an analog meter has advantages.

The other really big advantage is the meter response is slow enough to hide glitches.

[Fungus]

+1 for NANDBlog.

I'll still throw a analogue meter in something over a digital meter if I need an approximate current readout

Yep. The burden voltage will ensure it's always approximate. 

[MrSlack]

Yep. The burden voltage will ensure it's always approximate. 

Ammeters always have a burden voltage. Some of the newer ones are horrible to the point I rarely measure current.

Better to measure voltage over a known resistor in circuit using a high impedance meter (JFET+moving coil ) or scope.

[vk6zgo]

Automotive speedometers tried using  real digital readouts ,but they were horrible,as it was difficult to see your speed at a glance.

I have a digital and an analog speedometer in my car. I'm only looking at the digital one. Much easier, faster and more precise.

I think modern speedo update rates may be better--------the early ones I encountered were completely unreadable during acceleration.

[MrSlack]

If it's any reference, my 2013 Citroen C3 digital readout is shit. Every time I jam on the anchors when I see a speed camera it takes 1-2 seconds to let me know whether or not I am going to get a speeding ticket 

[sync]

Automotive speedometers tried using  real digital readouts ,but they were horrible,as it was difficult to see your speed at a glance.

I have a digital and an analog speedometer in my car. I'm only looking at the digital one. Much easier, faster and more precise.

I think modern speedo update rates may be better--------the early ones I encountered were completely unreadable during acceleration.

It has about ~4 reading per second. It's close to my preferred 5 reading per second on DMMs.