[jcx]

circuit type, Vsupply are helpful guides


as to the value of these subjective comparisons how about actually having 2 instances of the circuit you're evaluating with the different op amps being rolled in each at the same time so the listening tests can switch in the few seconds that our much higher resolution short term memory is useful - probably not just different op amps in R/L - though that's a start

add the requirement of level matching to 0.1 dB and I'd guess that fewer than single digit % of the posted subjective opinions meet even minimal known basics for valid subjective audible comparisons

as to why I don't "just listen" - I believe I'm as subject to sensory and psychological limitations as the rest of the human race and the above mentioned conditions/controls and a blinding protocol would be the minimum to even try to listen for artifacts way below those of good Codecs - as an example of a well documented and extensively studied subject using subjective evaluation

Turning subjective listening impressions into actionable engineering guidance is a incomplete and controversial subject better pursued in the Sound Science forum (the gettoization I mentioned) but the occasional reminder that the implicit assumption in this thread that you can "just listen" for differences is ignoring the basics could move some to investigate the subject more closely

 

[Slash47]

The Burson is the only way I know to make a soundcard sound analogue. I always use it as the last opamp, both on the HD2 or the ST(X).

However, the opamps before that can be ic's without it sounding 'worse'. You actually gain some detail with a AD8599, LM4562 or LT1364. It really can't be underestimated how much of an issue EMI and RFI is with these IC chips, though. Digititis is very easy to catch.

And the HD2 does use +- 9V, but it can be modded for +-11,5 with 12V regulators. I use alkaline batteries for my own card

 

[leeperry]

ok ok, but I want numbers

someone said on a french forum that if NJM5532 was 0%, LM4562 would be 70% and the (old) burson 100%.

quite seriously, the LT1364 sounds amazingly analog to me...I can almost see the 2" reel rolling, but I'm also using the Waves SSL EQ in foobar to kill ear resonances...this thing sounds too awesome

as you said, it often gives the feeling to be right in the studio w/ the band playing before your eyes..and the cleaner the recording, the more amazing it gets. seriously catchy.

 

[ROBSCIX]

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. 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

Why would you be hearing reverb? I can see personal taste varying from person to person but when I tested the LT1057 there was no "reverb" sound. IIRC, Cynips uses them and has never reported hearing "reverb"... I haven't tested those units in a while and don't use them personally.
The OP2107's are a great opamp and I have uesed them with great sucess in a few circuits.

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slash47 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The Burson is the only way I know to make a soundcard sound analogue. I always use it as the last opamp, both on the HD2 or the ST(X). However, the opamps before that can be ic's without it sounding 'worse'. You actually gain some detail with a AD8599, LM4562 or LT1364. It really can't be underestimated how much of an issue EMI and RFI is with these IC chips, though. Digititis is very easy to catch. And the HD2 does use +- 9V, but it can be modded for +-11,5 with 12V regulators. I use alkaline batteries for my own card

There are a few guys using discrete opamps around here on cards and external circuits. I have been testing discrete also in a few circuits and have even been testing a custom discrete which sounds very good based on initial testing. I agree with you though as I found most of the discrete I have tested bring back the "analog" flavoring to a circuit that sounds more digital stock. If that makes any sense

 

[bbbretzel]

Hi everybody !
I've just put my brand new HDAM OPA MOON into the DAC section of my Zero and I'm wondering what is the best combination of opamp in the headphones section with the MOON ???
I'm sure you've tried a million of combinations, but can you give me some advice ?

 

[Cynips]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROBSCIX /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why would you be hearing reverb? I can see personal taste varying from person to person but when I tested the LT1057 there was no "reverb" sound. IIRC, Cynips uses them and has never reported hearing "reverb"... I haven't tested those units in a while and don't use them personally.

Well, I can't for the life of me hear any "reverb" quality with the LT1057's in my setup. I'm thinking that maybe the spec's for this opamp somehow doesn't match a setup where you get such an artifact in the output signal. I'm inclined to accept that I personally have some serious synergy going on, but these negative reports make me suspect something else than just a mismatch of audio properties.

 

[leeperry]

hehe, it was dead obvious to me, the center channel just vanished to the sides and it felt like a huge hollow reverb...and crossbone just confirmed the exact same thing on his Asus ST.

your Beyerdynamic DT150 doesn't have a very wide SS, does it? anyway, we all hear differently...and maybe the buffer op-amps matters too, I use the high gain NJM4580 to drive my headphones.

PS: woohah, I remember the TrueHD track of Transformers 1 was amazing....but in Transformers 2 w/ the LT1364

 

[ROBSCIX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynips /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, I can't for the life of me hear any "reverb" quality with the LT1057's in my setup. I'm thinking that maybe the spec's for this opamp somehow doesn't match a setup where you get such an artifact in the output signal. I'm inclined to accept that I personally have some serious synergy going on, but these negative reports make me suspect something else than just a mismatch of audio properties.

When I tested them, I never heard any type of spacial anomolies. I liked them but this "reverb" post has me wondering what is going on with some of these circuits.
Oh well....

 

[gurubhai]

I never heard any reverb from LT1057 either.
They were a hell of a combo with the HD595, though with HD580 I experienced slightly recessed mids.
Also they somewhat lack in lower bass.

 

[SpudHarris]

Quote:

Originally Posted by croissant /img/forum/go_quote.gif The OPA132UA makes my ears rejoice. With Calexico's beautiful acoustic music, it's simply perfect... musical, precise, subtle, energetic... everything. It's exactly the same with the EELS' not-so-acoustic rock, etc. Second favorites LT1677 and LT1028. Third the LT1363.

I'm with you there reference the OPA132UA (and your earlier post reference senses)

However, I am giving the LT1363's a good trial because I think they may be my joint favorites with the OPA132's...

 

[mark2410]

hmm this thread feels like a different language

 

[crossbone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROBSCIX /img/forum/go_quote.gif When I tested them, I never heard any type of spacial anomolies. I liked them but this "reverb" post has me wondering what is going on with some of these circuits. Oh well....

Well i will cite myself from another thread here. There seriously is some reverb. Not that much, but it IS noticeable

Quote:

Originally Posted by crossbone /img/forum/go_quote.gif Today my first LT Samples arrived: 2xLT1057 2xLT1358 2xLT1364 After listening about 10 hours to the following cited combo: I swapped in the 2 LT1057 for I/V so i got: 2xLT1057 I/V + OPA2134 Buffer Headphones: Quite similar to the 2107 actually... though some slight differences: 2107 has a wider soundstage sounds a bit more airy. Highs with LT1057 are more in the background than with the 2107. I don't mean the highs are less or something, they just position a bit more backward soundstage wise. Perhaps a little mit more refinement in highs with the 2107. Mids are stronger on the LT1057. Upper Bass is stronger, too. Deep Bass is a bit weaker, though better controlled. I can't help but with the LT1057 there's also some echo/reverb or however it is called in english. Some Dream Theater Tracks i listened to (6:00, Caught In A Web) sound as if they are presented in a Jazz-Cellar hard to describe, but the soundstage really differs from the 2107 Stereo Speakers: Not tested yet, i will stay with headphones anyway, till i get some new speakers. Summing it up, there are some similarities with the 2107 (in terms of frequency response) but the presentation is different. I really can't tell which one is "better" both are nice. I think it depends on your type of music. The slight reverb i can hear is a bit misleading on some quiet tracks. But then the Music is much more "in your face" at higher volumes. The LT1057 are often suggested for Electronic Music and i would sign that statement. Bye cross

 

[crossbone]

So and now i am going to swap in the LT1364 for another testing. After having the 2107 in my ST for the last weeks. I will report soon

 

[crossbone]

First impression after some Minutes:
The LT1364 is actually more OPA2107 than the LT1057

No Reverb, deepbass is better on the OPA2107. Highs and "s" tones seem to be a bit harsh with the LT1364. Soundstage is smaller than with the OPA2107. But this results in a more "in your face sound" at least a bit.

So long... i will let them burn in now