LM4880?
Sep 27, 2003 at 9:59 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 8

MisterX

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
3,880
Likes
23
I was reading a thread on anot[h]er forum concerning noise problems when powering a Cmoy amp from a computers PSU.
One of the frequent posters replied with a detailed reply and a portion of the post went something like.........

Quote:

this chip is *designed* to be a headphone amp unlike the small signal "oooh! it's burr brown! it *has* to be good!" op-amps that everyone seems to use for reasons I can't understand...


I just wanted to know if you people think the LM4880 (pdf) has the makings for a good DIY headphone amp?
Please be nice.
wink.gif

Thanks for your answers if you bother to reply to this.
biggrin.gif
 
Sep 27, 2003 at 3:59 PM Post #2 of 8
Looks like the only way to see what it sounds like is to build it. The specs look decent.

As to the guys comments about chip choices- Because a chip is designed to drive headphones does not prove it will sound better then a chip designed as, say, a line driver or video driver. If a chip can output enough current to drive the load, then it can do the job, no matter what it's "design intentions" are. After that it becomes a question of how well it does the job. The chips that are regularly used around here have proven ability to do the job, and sound good doing it.
 
Jul 24, 2004 at 2:15 PM Post #3 of 8
Has anyone tried to build an amp based on one of these chips, lm4880/lm4881 or the tpa6111?
It seems like it could be a pretty tiny amp possibly driven off 3 x AAA batteries.
 
Jul 25, 2004 at 9:30 AM Post #6 of 8
Quote:

Originally Posted by Earwax
Once again proving TANSTAAFL
tongue.gif



What did you call me?
biggrin.gif




Quote:

Originally Posted by Earwax
(nor good sound on low voltage)


Sad but true.
frown.gif
 
Jul 25, 2004 at 7:24 PM Post #8 of 8
Quote:

Originally Posted by Earwax
Once again proving TANSTAAFL
tongue.gif




(nor good sound on low voltage)



That's a great motto, someone should put that on a flag. :wink:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top