Fergus
100+
Done a David Ike and is now known as Godkin
Posts: 197
|
Post by Fergus on Jun 14, 2006 20:54:39 GMT
I see that amongst Hower's ongoing mods for the X-DAC V3 is the removal of all 6 (yes 6!!!) of the JRC 5532 op-amps and there replacement with the much superior BURR BROWN (BB) OPA 2107APs. However, these op-amps, as Hower notes, are really expensive (£12-£14 each). Since we can take it for granted that Michaelson's "choice" of op-amp for the X-DAC V3 is utterly crap ("a pretty cheap, low-end chip"), then what would be a more "suitable", and less expensive, upgrade chip? Elsewhere, Mike has experimented with various op-amps for the CHAIRRA amplifier. One of those auditioned was the BB OPA 2604, which is a "compatible, hassle-free drop-in" for the 5532. Would it be right to assume that the rest of the op-amps auditioned by Mike - including the AD 823 AN - would also be "suitable" for the X-DAC V3? Fergus
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Jun 14, 2006 22:41:34 GMT
I see that amongst Hower's ongoing mods for the X-DAC V3 is the removal of all 6 (yes 6!!!) of the JRC 5532 op-amps and there replacement with the much superior BURR BROWN (BB) OPA 2107APs. However, these op-amps, as Hower notes, are really expensive (£12-£14 each). Since we can take it for granted that Michaelson's "choice" of op-amp for the X-DAC V3 is utterly crap ("a pretty cheap, low-end chip"), then what would be a more "suitable", and less expensive, upgrade chip? Elsewhere, Mike has experimented with various op-amps for the CHAIRRA amplifier. One of those auditioned was the BB OPA 2604, which is a "compatible, hassle-free drop-in" for the 5532. Would it be right to assume that the rest of the op-amps auditioned by Mike - including the AD 823 AN - would also be "suitable" for the X-DAC V3? Fergus IMO the 5532 is one of the best audio opamps on the planet (if not "the" best) It's not trendy and it's not modern so people look at it (incorrectly) as a load of rubbish and go spend piles of money on an inferior sounding "super chip" and then spend ages trying to convince themselves it sounds better than the 5532. I've been guilty of this myself and it's all too easy to get carried away with the "herd" who would call you the antichrist if you dared to admit you used a 5532 and would tar and feather you if you said you liked the sound of it. You generally don't just "pop" an opamp in and expect to get the best out of it, there's a bit more to be done than that, but yes...... the 2134 is pretty much a drop in replacement for the 5532 with a slightly warm, chocolaty signature. Try sourcing some NOS philips 5532's, they sound great much better than the modern ones IMO. You may find Douglas Self's website interesting, he compares quite a few opamps: www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/ampins/webbop/opamp.htm
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Post by rickcr42 on Jun 15, 2006 2:11:07 GMT
all about everyone wanting a "single stage do it all" opamp so they look at the output current specs and if not over 30mA the part disregarded even though more often than not those same persons will be using a buffer/follower stage which makes the current output of the opamp a moot point,even for class-a output which is at best in the 5-7ma area-easily reached by any audio opamp. There is also the very popular three channel topology to consider.Since the "center" opamp must drive both channels of the stereo pair the current needs to be adequate and since humans like balance more often than not all three channels will use the same devices-again a high current output part. Finally audio has turned more fanboy than "on the merits" so as soon as a chip becomes old or out of fashion it is ripe for replacing as the first step in any considered equipment mod (power supply improvement then RF bypasses followed by the coupling caps should be the order but whatever ;D ) and whether it actually sounds better being of secondary importance to be able to post "I replaced the crap XXX opamp with the much better sounding YYYY chip......." because everyone else has.Then when it is realised the part sucks in any but specific amps designed to use the part from the start lablelled crap also never again to be considered a contender Look to some very expensive pro and/or consumer gear that is known to have good sonics and you may be surprised to find what is actually inside if the "audiphile forums" are your bible to good sound rather than what your ears tell you,plus it takes balls to go against the "in" crowd and try please yourself intead of try to be accepted by others as being cool
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Jun 15, 2006 8:30:01 GMT
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Post by rickcr42 on Jun 15, 2006 11:48:29 GMT
Not surprising.I expect we will all have to adjust our habits and favorite parts over the next year or two as ALL available parts go to RoHs compliancy.No choices except in the very iffy surplus market or premium prices payed to hoarders The part of this that really sucks wood is no longer being able to know what combinations work well together or which parts are sonic marvels so instead of just ordering parts and assembling the item knowing how it will voice it will be more like starting out all over gain which in my case will be flushing close to 40 years of DIY Audio down the toilet and starting from zero. Remember when a few years back the formerly great sounding Holco resistors went to steel leads ? What was a nice part for audio became a "don't use this part under any circumstances" item and that was just changing the lead material on a single part.Imagine the carnage when everything is changed and that PERMANANTLY with no options and no looking back then add to that the move to a pure digital path Switching power supplies,DSPs or CODECs performing all processing,digital amps and compressed digital music easy to download to your average cell phone so you too can be cool and never know what real music sounds like.All dirt cheap,all with a built in obsolescence,all meant to be replaced yearly so stock moves to the consumer at speed,all mediocre Perfect sound forever ? More like perfect profit path forever. The future of audio is anything but bright unless you are a reviewer who will get to play with all this garbage then pronounce it GREAT becuse the front panel has $1K in gold plating.Flashy cosmetics WILL replace performance as the mnain selling point once everything universally sucks
|
|
|
Post by hower on Jun 15, 2006 11:58:29 GMT
Honestly, I have not tried putting in a cheaper alternative. To make thing easier for me to start, I choose the expensive OPA2107 to start with. Maybe I could have done with a cheaper 2604 or 2134 and get similar result.
|
|
FritzS
Been here a while!
Sound of Blue Danube
Sound of Blue Danube
Posts: 1,364
|
Post by FritzS on Jun 15, 2006 17:47:57 GMT
In my old Philips CD 650 I have best experience with the dual OP-Amp OP275, sounds very natural and with air between the instruments. But you should them spend some bypass caps near the power pins. Before in the CD 650 are 5532 used. More about: www.stockhammer.at/hifi/cd650.php
|
|
Fergus
100+
Done a David Ike and is now known as Godkin
Posts: 197
|
Post by Fergus on Jun 15, 2006 20:15:22 GMT
Hower, Don't bemoan the fact that you didn't use the BURR BROWN OPA 2604, as, according to Mike, its sonic character is "very warm, very laid back" and "slightly veiled in the detail department." Elsewhere, the OPA 2604 has been described as follows: "distortion is not very low, even with no load... inferior to the 5532." The OPA 2134 is, supposedly, a "relatively modern and sophisticated op-amp" with "ultra low distortion... (and) fully specified for audio purposes." But whether it would outshine the 5532, the "ideal op-amp", is another thing. In the X-CAN V1 it works very well: Mike replaced the stock 5532 chip for the 2134 with very good results. I must say that it is very disconcerting to discover that Anthony Michaelson has actually fitted a "high quality" component to one of his products. The 5532, as I just learned, is "pre-eminent" in the audio world and "very hard to beat." The AD OP-275 has, apparently, "excellent sonic characteristics" and is one of the few op-amps "specifically marketed as an audio device." However, just as I'm about to be bedazzled by AD sales spiel, I find out that it is not all it seems to be: "expensive... nothing special... best avoided." So, I'm back to square one. No point replacing components simply for the sake of it. If there is nothing significantly better than the old 5532, then upgrading or, as it seems to me, downgrading to a more modern, but sonically inferior, op-amp would simply be a waste of time. Fergus
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Jun 15, 2006 21:06:40 GMT
Hower, Don't bemoan the fact that you didn't use the BURR BROWN OPA 2604, as, according to Mike, its sonic character is "very warm, very laid back" and "slightly veiled in the detail department." Elsewhere, the OPA 2604 has been described as follows: "distortion is not very low, even with no load... inferior to the 5532." Hi Fergus, Don't believe everything you read about opamps as "fact", people's opinions are just that..... "opinions" and some of these guys have just thrown opamps into an unoptimised circuit and compared them back to back without hearing them at their best. My comments on the 2604 in the Chiarra will be very different to my comments with the same chip in a different amp.. it all depends on the amp, the surrounding components and of course the persons ears.. you can't just say "opa-2604 sounds warm / period" it all depends where you are using it and what you're using it for. It's all down to personal taste and "all" of them are worth trying IMO, the differences are subtle but worth trying if you like driving yourself insane... be warned, opamp rolling can lead to madness and you may just find you come round full circle to that 5532 you are so desperate to replace [/quotye]The OPA 2134 is, supposedly, a "relatively modern and sophisticated op-amp" with "ultra low distortion... (and) fully specified for audio purposes." But whether it would outshine the 5532, the "ideal op-amp", is another thing. In the X-CAN V1 it works very well: Mike replaced the stock 5532 chip for the 2134 with very good results. [/quote] Plenty of one liner quotes there but they mean nothing in the context of your particular application. As I say, NE5532 in a DAC could be the wrong choice but in an amp it may be a different story, then again it could sound shite in another brand of amp. You really have to try them all for yourself and don't go by other people with these "OPA2132 is laid back, glassy highs, tubby bass etc. etc." quotes cause you really can't generalise on the sonic characteristics of a particular opamp across the board. 5532 is the cheapest opamp on the planet and a staple in the audio industry, that doesn't mean it's the "best" in "every" application and it can be bettered in a lot of cases but the law of diminishing returns will kick in and replacing your 20 pence 5532 with a £20 OPA627BP will not bring about 100 x improvement. You really have to be prepared to enter a world of obsession and madness if you are to try all the different chips, I've been there and it isn't pretty Good fun though ;D Again, random quotes which mean nothing in your application. Well worth a try, OP-275 can be fantastic in certain applications. Start with a good bread and butter (cheap) chip like the OPA2132 then move on to something like an OPA 2777, OPA 2604, AD 823 etc. When you get the hang of it an the obsession really kicks in then try single chips on Browndog adaptors (single to dual) OPA 627, AD-825, AD-8610 etc. If you really want to go mad try the LM6172 but this is one chip you really will have to be careful with and ensure the circuit is fully optimised for it. There are tons to choose from
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Post by rickcr42 on Jun 16, 2006 13:14:30 GMT
|
|