wakeride74 and PFKMan26, the Supermini uses op-amps (dual) for both the L/R channel and the 3/4 channel. The Supermicro and the new Reference use FET's.
dw6928, please realize that my ranking on the Move is based on 10 hours of burn in. I wrote that due to this it would require a second look into, just like the Supermini IV will get re-evaluated when Vorlon1 receives it with the post 4/11 and late May mods. Thanks for the kind words.
Boomana you got a deal on a meet! I also want to listen to a LaRocco PRII with the AD8620 which I have never listened.
Jamato8, what does "IF the Reference hits the pavement. . . . " mean?
Vorlon1 and HiFlight, please send me your comments so they can be added and we continue with the "Siskel and Ebert & the Movies" motive.
MrArroyo & Vorlon1 - What can I say. SUPERB work guys! and SUPERB write-ups!
It is not easy to judge 2 different amps, let alone 26
The thing that I liked the most is that I have that feeling your impressions are not clouded by any discontentment with any particular amp maker - purely SQ - that's the way it should be.
When I visit US in Feb 2008, I will do my best to set up a meet with you guys...just for the kick
Originally Posted by subfocus /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for all the hard work guys. Would be interested to know the current op-amp set up in the Supermacro LE thats impressing you so much....
My LE was running the OPA2134 in L&R, with single HA5002 buffers. 3/4 is the LMH6643 (buffers bypassed)
The 2134/5002 is a very synergistic combination. This current configuration is the only one that has thus far completely satisfied me. Very difficult to differentiate from the 2 References that we had available for comparison when all switch settings are set to default. BTW, my LE has probably accumulated around 600 hours of use to date. It does sound fuller than my Micro, but mine is one of the originals, with no update tweaks at all. The latest Micro does have a larger, airier soundfield.
I think this LE combo sounds every bit as good as my SM-IV did. Unfortunately, it is still at Dr Xin's for repair, so I cannot compare them side-by-side at this time.
The first statement is wrong. The Supermicro DOES use op amps, although they differ from some others because they are CMOS op amps.
The second statement may be a little misleading but is not incorrect. FETs are generally thought of as discrete devices or an input stage of an op amp, but technically CMOS transistors are a type of FET. If you look at the data sheet for the OP amp used in the SuperMicroIV, it talks about being CMOS but doesn't mention FET. If you look at the OPA2134 datasheet it highlights it's FET input but the rest of the op amp is bipolar. Xin likes to mention FETs because for some people they bring to mind a tube-like sound. This concept probably started with speaker amps that had MOSFET output transistors instead of the bipolar transistors that most amps use.
This was a huge undertaking and the authors are to be congratulated for a well written, detailed review.
I would like to highlight one important statement:
"Any of the amps ranked 1 through 10 will provide the user with excellent service and make him/her very happy. Any of the amps ranked 1 through 5 are very close and IMO it is more a matter of what you like than any one being better than the other."
I have a love/hate relationship with ratings and rankings. I find that they provide greater clarity, and I have used them myself...I used them in my amp review posted back in 2001. However people should use them in context of the full review and for additional information rather than any absolute rating or ranking. As always, individual preferences will dictate deviations to any other person's list.
I have directly compared the SuperMicro IV (post 4/07) with the Hornet M. While I probably preferred the SMIV most of the time based on SQ, I couldn't state that one is better than the other because that would depend on what sound you preferred, not to mentioned what headphones and source was used. I would not flatly state that one amp is a better sounding amp than the other. Of course there are other considerations as well; the SMIV is cheaper and smaller, whereas the Hornet is better built, has a 3 position level switch, great channel matching and better measurements, etc.
Since I have a large wine collection I follow many wine reviewer's reviews. The most influential person in the industry is Robert Parker, who has his palate insured by Lloyd's of London for $1M, and many wineries world wide wait until seeing his pre-release reviews before they set their prices. I value his reviews, but do not blindly follow them but instead carefully read the details of his reviews. For example, he likes ripe wines and I don't, so I carefully look for his comments regarding this. This is the same scrutiny that I would apply to any audio equipment review.
I'd say they're CMOS. The marking looks like BKA to me (AD8615) but someone mentioned to me that Xin quoted 250mA, which would be AD8531. Either way, it'd be a CMOS op-amp. You can see from the circuit that op-amps are being used. It's L/R/IG/OG which is essentially the same basic topology as something like the PINT or Mini^3.
I think Xin has also referred to the chips as rail-to-rail, which rather strongly suggests CMOS as well. I can't think of a high output current, r-r fet input op-amp that runs at 6V and comes in SOT-23 at the moment (and has that type of branding on it), but maybe someone else can.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
