[FallenAngel]

Uhm... jcx - listen for yourself, at least compare a couple before making such a claim. It'll cost you $20 but you'll know for yourself instead of speculating.

 

[Apocalypsee]

I'm back on using LT1677, it wasn't as bad as I heard from before. The instruments imaging definitely better than LT1363, and it seems like it don't put the vocal to center stage, and best of all, the bass is a bit more punchy so I don't need to use my subs

 

[crossbone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif ok I've just rolled the LT1057ACN8, I very much prefer the LT1364CN8 the SS is wider, but less natural....the mids aren't natural either, and the low end bass is AWOL. they clearly sound one notch lower to me, ah....the mids are really wonky in comparison, "computer" sound is the best analogy I could come up w/, it sounds like a Soundblaster or sumthing...and the sound is very reverb'ed, it feels totally unrealistic(like an empty room w/ nothing remaning in the middle channel, all the audio went to the side channels). these are not going to stay next on the list are LT1361/LT1469

I tried the LT1057 before, too. I think we have quite the same opinion about those. Especially the reverb you mentioned sounded awful to me. As if the music was played in a cheap jazz-bar/cellar or something

May i give you one advise? Have you yet tried the OPA2107? That's the one i'm settled with right now. For me it's hard to believe any other OPAMP will surpass these.
In Comparison to the LT1057 soundstage is wider, bit more detail, not so tubby mids, no reverb. For me it just makes everything a tad better

Greetings from Germany!
cross

 

[Cynips]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clap Hands /img/forum/go_quote.gif As much as I admire your technical competence, your views here simply prove (if there was still the need to) the extreme narrowness of the purely scientific view of reality.

Don't judge the scientific process based on that troll. Actually, everyone should go read a book on science theory before engaging in any discussion on the matter on an internet forum. Believe me, I'm a scientist myself and it really gets tiresome watching all the ignorance.

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by crossbone /img/forum/go_quote.gif I tried the LT1057 before, too. I think we have quite the same opinion about those. Especially the reverb you mentioned sounded awful to me. As if the music was played in a cheap jazz-bar/cellar or something May i give you one advise? Have you yet tried the OPA2107? That's the one i'm settled with right now. For me it's hard to believe any other OPAMP will surpass these.

alright, sounds like a plan! but I kinda gave up on BB...I'll roll this one, though

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clap Hands /img/forum/go_quote.gif The LT1363 is great but... like the poster above, I feel that the LT1677 is an improvement. I'll switch back in a moment. Regarding the OPA2107 - it is nice, better than the LT1057, but there are many better choices... starting from (the great) 2x OPA132UA thing. Mind you, OPA132UA, not OPA132U. The former would be the revised version of the original OPA2132 spoken of on Audio Asylum. No, I haven't myself compared the two.

ok! the final fight will be 1028/1363/1677 then...but this will be LT1028CS8, not ACN8(won't fit!) but music never sounded as good as the 1364 to me so far...it feels like using some very pricey external amp

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcx /img/forum/go_quote.gif if all those op amps sound different perhaps your imagination is overactive? how do you decide between these propositions without DBT? [..] surely the thread could stand the occasional (every few hundred pages?) reminder to newbies that there is a strongly skeptical position which is always shouted down or gettoized

don't pay attention to the OP, he likes to prove everyone that he knows better. he's a mod on the guru3d forum, he thinks he's a mod here as well

 

[SpudHarris]

Hmmm don't know about all that. But I do know that the LT1363's are mighty fine Opamps in my set up. For now I think I may have found a replacement for my beloved OPA132UA's. I sometimes find an Opamp with an initial 'Wow' factor only to find them fatitiguing or lacking after a while so I'll hold back judgement for now as I've only got about 2 hours on them. They do seem to have everything though......

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clap Hands /img/forum/go_quote.gif So, in absolute terms, I seem to prefer LT1677 and OPA132UA to LT1363. But you know, I've lived with the LT1363 for more than a week, it could also be that, well, I enjoy a change... What the OPA132UA does seem to have is a slightly drier midbass than the LT1363's and my speakers (in their current setting) seem to appreciate that, giving back an impression of better midrange articulation..

the 132U has a very "digital" sound to me, the tubiness of the 1364 just sounds too good to be true.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Clap Hands /img/forum/go_quote.gif The LT1028CS8 (ACN8 doesn't fit my modified little DAC either) is a top contender as well. At this level it all comes to synergy with the rest of the system (or within the DAC or other), and to personal liking. It's impossible to choose an absolute winner.

yeah, hopefully I'll have a hard time choosing between the 3

 

[Currawong]

Ok, tried the OPA211 (whichever the DIP8 version is, sorry I forgot). It reminds me of the Moon HDAM, with slightly sucked-out mids, giving a sense of soundstage. I still prefer the OP27GP, which wins on mids and has a nice balance overall, but then I'm listening often with HF-2s at the moment. I'll try LT1028s next. The LT1364 is an interesting thought, as I remember it being generally excellent, but getting hot quickly back when I put it in the DAC section of the Zero (though I don't have a Zero now). So our crazy Italian friend is suggesting the LT1363?!?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcx /img/forum/go_quote.gif if all those op amps sound different perhaps your imagination is overactive?

Their respective outputs are tonally different. They are miniaturised amplification circuits, different ones of which have different degrees of measurable distortion of an analogue music signal. I have it in mind actually to RMAA different opamps to see what different results they produce. Otherwise, it's just cheap fun mucking around with different ones.

 

[FallenAngel]

Just as a note - you guys really have to start stating what the opamp is ACTUALLY DOING in the circuit to have it meaningful. Some are good for I/V, others as line-drivers, others as headphone-drivers, etc. Simply saying "this one is good" means almost nothing

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have it in mind actually to RMAA different opamps to see what different results they produce.

RMAA Testing of Audio IC Op Amps

 

[SpudHarris]

Well guys I have the same set up for buffers and ground/V.Ground on my P3+ which seems to work nicely with almost all Opamps I roll in L/R.

My favourites for L/R being LT1363's then OPA132AU's then LT1357's in that order. I'm listening as I type with the 1363's and I really think they are everything I like and more..... Can't see these coming out for a while.

 

[12Bass]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ok, tried the OPA211 (whichever the DIP8 version is, sorry I forgot).

OPA211/2211A are not available in DIP. I have both in SOIC, installed on BrownDog DIP adapters. Do you mean SOIC, or might you be talking about a different chip?

 

[SpudHarris]

Possibly the 2111KP?? Hmm not tried that since I got the buffers and ground set up.

 

[12Bass]

Samuel Groner has published a fairly thorough test of various op amps, recently updated with the OPA211 and OPA827. Bit of a large download, but worth a look, IMO.

http://www.sg-acoustics.ch/analogue_...distortion.pdf

 

[Slash47]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FallenAngel /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just as a note - you guys really have to start stating what the opamp is ACTUALLY DOING in the circuit to have it meaningful. Some are good for I/V, others as line-drivers, others as headphone-drivers, etc. Simply saying "this one is good" means almost nothing

Good point. Voltage is also important.

My favorite IC's:

LT1363/4/5
Great for buffers, not so hot for something with high gain like I/V or amplification. Sometimes, but only sometimes, you feel like you're in the studio or concert hall... Can be a bit bright and anemic if it isn't supplied well.

And whoever said 2x LT1363 sounds better...

AD8599/AD8597
My favorite for pre amps and cmoy's, stuff like that. If you use it as a buffer or for I/V it's too sparkly, it should be the last one in the chain for some reason. Female vocals can take up 2/3 of the stage, like some sort of huge mythological entity is singing from the clouds. Very weird! If you like hip-hop, use this because the bass is complete awesomeness. The most detailed chip as well, surprisingly. One last thing that it's pretty unique in: some music, namely trip-hop or alt-rock or something hippy, should really 'radiate' into the room or (or your ears) like there's this bubble of sounds. That's quite difficult to achieve. You can also hear it in a good saxophone solo, when the player blows some air over the inlet (sorry for the crappy English), it really blows into your room. And when a chair creeks, you almost get a heart attack because you think something's happening in you room. (I listen loud...) Really cool! This is normally something that requires a really expensive tube or discrete output stage.

AD797
Awesome, but not a drop in replacement. Neutral, like a perfectly designed extension of the DAC chip itself which is a very big compliment in my book. Sounds like an intellectual AD8597.

AD8397
Great for a cmoy or as an output stage when you have up to +- 9V. Great PRaT and dynamics. Not the most realistic or smooth.

OPA(2)604
Great with +- 20V in class A for a very cheap output stage. And it's FET. I refuse to spend on OPA627BP, so I use this when it must be FET. Neutral sound, very good actually, but it's a bit fuzzy which pisses some people off. I don't care. Good soundstage and tone.

I'd say the coolest ones are definitely the OPA2604 and AD8599 because:

1) They make your head bob, which is awesome.
2) They have a cool name.
3) They're easy to use.
4) They're cheap. (Not that I'm cheap, but I'd rather give it to charity

)
5) They're a nice couple. (OPA2604 -> AD8599)
6) They piss self proclaimed wannabe 'pro's' and 'engineers' off. (Who tend to be anti-social psychopaths, no offense. I only mean the wannabe's, you know who you are!

)

Honorable mentions:
LT1028 (AD797's nemesis), LM4562/LME49xxx

For audio, the most useless ones imo are:
OPA2107 (the OPA627's ugly sister), OPA2134 (worse then a NE5532), OPA2111, LT1057, OPA211 (too expensive), OPA627 (same), OPA637 (...), LM6171/2, AD843, AD845, AD826, AD823, AD744, AD8620 LT1469, AD8022 and plenty of others. I wouldn't waste my time with them because they're obsolete in my book.

If you can afford a OPA627BP, you might as well go discrete or use a tube stage... Maybe an M3 is the lone example where a OPA637 is best.

The only one that I have heard that is not a compromise in any way is the AD797.

On my modded Audiotrak Prodigy HD2 soundcard with +- 12V I like:

2x LT1364 -> LM4562, AD8599, AD8397 (hot), LT1361 (don't know why, but this sounds better here then another LT1364)
2x OPA2604 class A 3k3 resistors -> AD8599
2x AD8599/LT1364 -> Burson Opamp (you can fold it pretty flat so it only takes 1 extra slot if you replace some caps.)
3x Burson Opamps (takes a lot of space)