Audio-gd discrete op-amps reviewed: OPA-Earth, OPA-Moon, OPA-Sun v.2
May 14, 2009 at 2:43 PM Post #167 of 396
Horse, good thing for you opamps aren't made by IKEA. Then they'd have a name instead of a number.

Your condition is called synesthesia. Some people have it others don't. Colors can be associated with a lot of things like sounds, shapes, numbers and letters. No wonder we perceive sound differently.
 
May 15, 2009 at 9:16 AM Post #168 of 396
I also suffer from chromaesthesia (relating sound timbre with a color) but I don't relate the colors with the numbers. The rules of numbering are different an depend on the manufacturer and its policies regarding the op-amp architecture, the application an the parameters.
 
May 15, 2009 at 7:11 PM Post #169 of 396
Sure it's no suffering. Another sense communication is that I recognize the taste of the sound - it might be sweet, sour... I haven't experienced bitter.
smily_headphones1.gif
 
May 29, 2009 at 6:02 PM Post #170 of 396
I compared new Burson opamp with Sun V2. Burson's tonal balance is more like Earth rather than Sun V2 but it provides better resolution (even better than Sun V2 itself). I suggest to upgrade to Burson opamp if possible because they're making a sale in ebay now.
 
May 29, 2009 at 6:05 PM Post #171 of 396
Quote:

Originally Posted by WindowsX /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I compared new Burson opamp with Sun V2. Burson's tonal balance is more like Earth rather than Sun V2 but it provides better resolution (even better than Sun V2 itself). I suggest to upgrade to Burson opamp if possible because they're making a sale in ebay now.


Audio-GD makes Burson's HDAMs.

.
 
May 29, 2009 at 7:09 PM Post #172 of 396
And burson upgrades it few months ago. If it was old burson like year ago, Sun is better. Now, it's burson's.
 
May 31, 2009 at 6:26 PM Post #173 of 396
Sorry to hijack but this seems like a thread with a lot of knowledge on opamps in general. Does any one know ok a good opamp that has a wider sound stage then the LT1364 and that I can find in 8pin somewhere. I have been digging all over the place and so far this thread seems like the place to ask.
 
May 31, 2009 at 6:57 PM Post #174 of 396
This is the thread to look at, have you read it?

*************************************
*************************************
On another note, I can't believe it took this long to get the Equine Scat out of this thread! At least Majkel had a blast...

.
 
Jun 1, 2009 at 9:30 AM Post #177 of 396
Quote:

Originally Posted by majkel /img/forum/go_quote.gif
OPA2227 is terrible, worse than the OPA2134.


Just wondering, do you have a tailored working environment for each opamp do you use a socket only and push in different types in the same circuit? If that is the case I think it's a bit unfair to rule out some good opamp just because it isn't professionally designed in, only replaced. It would have been OK if the test criteria was how does the opamp sound in a standard circuit. Somehow I have interpreted this "how good is opamp in an optimal environment".
 
Jun 1, 2009 at 9:38 AM Post #178 of 396
Quote:

Originally Posted by NelsonVandal /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I took a look at the graphs in the data sheets, and most of them are identical. They must have used the same graphs for both LM4562 and LME49860, and if they did they must think that the amps are absolutely the same.


It's confirmed that those types are the same. A National guy has confirmed this and the reason was marketing. LME is the new series where the "E" stands for enhanced (performance). The reason for having LM4562 available is (my guess) that customers don't want to change thier product documentation.
 
Jun 1, 2009 at 12:04 PM Post #179 of 396
Quote:

Originally Posted by peranders /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Just wondering, do you have a tailored working environment for each opamp do you use a socket only and push in different types in the same circuit?


Do you find the environment posted at the beginning as unfair or suboptimal? Please tell me what places of the circuit make the comparison unfair. You can visit Lukasz Fikus' website to review the schematic. It's stated explicitly what the environment was and your remark is just a reminder, isn't it?
The application where the OPA2227 was really bad was the Cmoy with passive, transistor based current mirror virtual ground. And it was more than two years ago. I just repeated the comparison to confirm this one sounds bad. It's easily explainable - the uncompensated version OPA2228 isn't very fast as for today's op-amps, so the compensation needs high capacitance to work fine. Capacitors implemented in a silicon die aren't the best available.

Regarding the LME - they might have the same schematic but be produced on different technology lines, so this makes a difference in terms of parameters or sonic behavior. When you qoute "a guy from NI" please give his name and position, otherwise it's unauthorized statement to be considered like a rumor.
 
Jun 1, 2009 at 1:20 PM Post #180 of 396
Quote:

Originally Posted by majkel /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Regarding the LME - they might have the same schematic but be produced on different technology lines, so this makes a difference in terms of parameters or sonic behavior. When you qoute "a guy from NI" please give his name and position, otherwise it's unauthorized statement to be considered like a rumor.


The National guy is member at diyaudio but right know I haven't the thread.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top