[ecclesand]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpudHarris /img/forum/go_quote.gif Aren't the 63's just the single versions of the 64? if so they should sound slightly better. Now where did I put that flame proof jacket??

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif so 2x singles don't sound better than a single dual? due to the increased loss of the crappy browndogs maybe? I honestly don't know....when I first tried the 49720NA on my brand new unused STX, it was oscillating like crazy(the sound was wooshy as you wouldn't believe)....so I put back the stock 2114D for a day, then put them back and the sound was OK(anemic bass and artificial SS of course). the STX DIP8 sockets are the lowest quality you can find on the market...both your Claro Halo and the Prodigy cards carry machined sockets, so the contacts are much tighter...yet, maybe they were poorly seated somehow anyway, even today w/ fresh ears I can't hear any trebles resonances and vocals sound like you're right there in the studio cabin...very impressive!

I can't say whether the singles would sound better than the dual or vice versa, but I don't recall the LT1363s sounding this good. I need to compare...perhaps it's just my brain playing tricks on me. This happens to us older folks.

 

[12Bass]

Reliably perceiving the difference between op amps can be very difficult, especially if one is comparing listening sessions at different times, using different music, different headphones, volume levels unmatched, etc.... easily numerous confounds.

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12Bass /img/forum/go_quote.gif Reliably perceiving the difference between op amps can be very difficult, especially if one is comparing listening sessions at different times, using different music, different headphones, volume levels unmatched, etc.... easily numerous confounds.

Very true. That is why this thread is really only about subjective opinion.
We all have to test for ourselves of the unit in question.
Add to the that everybody is using different circuits, applicaitons and playback gear..etc.

I figured when I started this thread it would be a good place for people to post what units they are working with and which ones are new or worth checking out. That's all this thread is, a bunch of people testing and talking about opamps.

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ecclesand /img/forum/go_quote.gif I can't say whether the singles would sound better than the dual or vice versa, but I don't recall the LT1363s sounding this good. I need to compare...perhaps it's just my brain playing tricks on me. This happens to us older folks.

Based on many of the units I have tested, A dual single channel module tends to sound better then it's dual channel brother. Perhaps it is due to circuit isolation? -I don't pretend to know exactly why this seens to happen.

 

[levin]

LT1364 is great for vocals and classicals as it has a huge sound stage which gives my akg702 and even bigger sound stage. but any music with mid bass or so is quite lacking =( so you don't hear the bass guitarist or if you do its really flat. the low level bass is quite good tho. i might need to change my combination... maybe its the HDAM moon that is causing it to be like this. i'll find out when i put in some AD797s that are coming in soon

 

[Pluto2]

Hi Nigel,

What about AD8599, how would you rank this chip?

 

[leeperry]

LT1364 is not perfect, the mid bass might be lacking indeed...but low end is perfect(very percussive), vocals sound holographic, trebles are not whiney and SS is very natural.

I've read a lot of praising all over the internet about the LM4562NA/49720NA....which is really uncalled for IMO. SS is too wide and meaningless, trebles are ear piercing, low end bass is completely AWOL

but good point, I might just try to add a bassy op-amp as final buffer like the OPA2111KP.

 

[SpudHarris]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pluto2 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi Nigel, What about AD8599, how would you rank this chip?

Good point, haven't listened to it for a while but do remember seeing it written that it has a place in any self respecting ''Rollers'' chip collection. I will have a listen this evening if I get a mo and report back

 

[12Bass]

Just replaced the LM4562 I had in the main (1/2) outputs of my Echo Gina24 with an OPA2211A. Echo originally used NJM2068s which sound a bit hazy to me. Think it sounds a bit more vibrant and alive now with the OPA2211A. Seem to be hearing a little more detail and maybe a bit more fullness in the lows... hard to say for sure as it took some time to swap chips. Lost a couple of SMD circuit pads while doing the swap, so I doubt I'll want to do any more swapping on this card. Had to make some hardwired traces. Do think it sounds a bit better, however....

 

[leeperry]

well, I've added the OPA2111KP as buffer behind the two LT1364(used as ±9V AK4396 LPF)...and it goes through the high gain JRC4580 afterwards to drive my cd1k.

vocals still sound good, and mid bass is improved I think, low end is even more slamming and controlled...gotta love messing w/ op-amps to shape the sound YOU want. I'll try a 2132/2604(stock)/1361 as buffer afterwards, but the 2111 is teh bass monster I think...and the 1364 are staying as LPF

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpudHarris /img/forum/go_quote.gif Good point, haven't listened to it for a while but do remember seeing it written that it has a place in any self respecting ''Rollers'' chip collection. I will have a listen this evening if I get a mo and report back

The AD8599 seems to get recommended a great deal when asking about AD opamps. Along with the AD8620, AD8610 and others. I used this chip for awhile in a particular circuit. Post your recommendation and impressions.

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12Bass /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just replaced the LM4562 I had in the main (1/2) outputs of my Echo Gina24 with an OPA2211A. Echo originally used NJM2068s which sound a bit hazy to me. Think it sounds a bit more vibrant and alive now with the OPA2211A. Seem to be hearing a little more detail and maybe a bit more fullness in the lows... hard to say for sure as it took some time to swap chips. Lost a couple of SMD circuit pads while doing the swap, so I doubt I'll want to do any more swapping on this card. Had to make some hardwired traces. Do think it sounds a bit better, however....

The 211's, 2211's seem to be getting good reviews from those doing the testing. I found the series quite good and built a few more modules the other day.
If your swapping on a SMD circuit there is a adapter avialble from brown dog that allows you to solder it in to a SMD footprint and ont he other end is a Dip8 adapter. If I am understanding you correctly it may be something you might find useful for future mods on that audio interface or others. I will see if I can find the link for you.

Edit: Here it is: SMD to Dip8 adapter

 

[12Bass]

FWIW, I've found the AD8599 a little warmer than other Analog Devices chips that I've tried, at least in my test circuits. Low noise, and still detailed, but not as clear as LM4562 or OPA2211A. For bipolars, the OPA2211A is my present favorite. It sounds more open, natural, and alive than the LM4562, which can sound a bit thin and sterile, IMO.

Thanks for the info about the SOIC->DIP adapters. Don't think I'll use any on this card. Wasn't really intending to be swapping at all, but figured that the OPA2211A sounded better in other circuits, so I should try it on the Gina24, as it is my main source. At the moment, I'm happy with the improvement.

On a side note, I thought I'd compare the output of my modded Digi96/8 PST with the freshly modded Gina24. The Digi96/8 has an AD8397 at the output (which replaced an LM4562); I used this particular part because the main output can be used to drive headphones, and the AD8397 offers far more current for that purpose.

Anyway, even with the two cards fairly well matched in volume (within 1dB), there are noticeable differences. I'm not sure how much is the digital clocks, and how much is op amps and/or DA converters. The RME uses the AD1852, while the Echo uses the AK4393. Swapping the master and slave clocks had a noticeable effect on imaging.

 

[ROBSCIX]

I am also a fan of the 211 family. I just mentioned the adapter as you may have been planning on trying some other chips or have other circuits where it might be useful.
I have a few circuits with SMD opamps and I think I may just design a drop in circuit to allows for replacing opamps. Similar to the adapter I showed you in theory but different in design and use.

 

[12Bass]

Will have to try OPA1611/12 and see if they are different than OPA211/2211A. I suspect not, though I've not looked into what the numbers say....

After listening a bit more, I'm wondering if some of the comments about the OPA2211A having a somewhat recessed midrange might be true. Though it's really difficult to say due to the time between chips and all of the other variables. I do think it sounds better than the LM4562 with my K702s. However, my Energy Pro22 speakers are already a little lean in some parts of the midrange.

I recall when I was testing a number of op amps in my Eden bass amp that the LM4562 did a particularly nice job of clearly reproducing the midrange. When I would swap in another chip, the "voice" of my bass would become less apparent. As I recall, I thought that the OP2211A did as well or better, but sounded more open and organic, and had a bit more roundness in the lows.

Still have LME49860, AD797, ADA4898-1, and maybe even LME49722 around waiting to be tested. Ack!

Oh, and about the AD8599, while I've found many or the AD op amps to be somewhat forward sounding, perhaps even tending toward edgy, IMO, the AD8599 sounds quite smooth and mellow, with a nice roundness throughout. Not harsh at all, at least in my experience.