hehe, soundcards have evolved since the soundblasters ya know..AK4396 is a good chip(128X oversampling all the way!), and the RMAA measurements of that card look good..it's got good quality caps as well.Remember it's always a computer soundcard... and that you've got two chips ahead of the Burson... So what's more outstanding in the end? The chips, the Burson, or the combination? All within the limits of a soundcard installed in a PC of course.
well, the LT1124ACN8 provides the Burson(used as final buffer) w/ very good low pass filtering, and then that burson will feed into the external amp that uses monstruous caps/PSU and 2 more discrete op-amps....I can definitely see it working
and atm my headphones are driven by a $0.3 JRC4580, it's already amazing tbh, but this is VERY much holding back the burson's true potential IMO...
oh, it's not trying to say that going discrete is a night & day w/ an IC...it's just saying that plugging headphones to a line-out is a very bad idea.It doesn't "prove" that IC sounds worse that a complete discrete stage.
Last edited:
Yes it is. But you don't need an obscure testing site to tell you that - just look at the specs published by manufactures and you will see when the limiting of the output ocures for certain chips.
Using that as an argument for "op ampas IC sound bad, discrete sounds better" is just silly. There are buffer IC now days made specific for that - see the BUF line from BB.
Using that as an argument for "op ampas IC sound bad, discrete sounds better" is just silly. There are buffer IC now days made specific for that - see the BUF line from BB.
is that what they say on their website? I'll read it again...anyway, I was just saying that the JRC4580 is really an astonishing chip to drive headphones..many high end designs are using it as well.
I don't have a high opinion of the 5532, but the 4580 does the headphones driving job amazingly well.
I don't have a high opinion of the 5532, but the 4580 does the headphones driving job amazingly well.
BUF are good for headphone driver (up to 250mA output):
FEATURES
l HIGH OUTPUT CURRENT: 250mA
l SLEW RATE: 2000V/ms
l PIN-SELECTED BANDWIDTH:
30MHz to 180MHz
l LOW QUIESCENT CURRENT:
1.5mA (30MHz BW)
l WIDE SUPPLY RANGE: ±2.25 to ±18V
l INTERNAL CURRENT LIMIT
l THERMAL SHUTDOWN PROTECTION
8-Pin DIP Package
SO-8 Surface-Mount Package
G = 1
®
APPLICATIONS
l VALVE DRIVER
l SOLENOID DRIVER
l OP AMP CURRENT BOOSTER
l LINE DRIVER
l HEADPHONE DRIVER
l VIDEO DRIVER
l MOTOR DRIVER
l TEST EQUIPMENT
l ATE PIN DRIVER
indeed, a friend of mine bought this thing: HA INFO NG27 - Headphone Amplifier USB - iPod - PCM2702 DAC
and he's really raving about it, his Asus Essence STX is hardly being used anymore
plus it works w/ the third party ploytec USB drivers, so gets bit-perfect KS/ASIO...he's put an OPA2132P and loves it. He might try some LT1028ACN8 soon or later, but they might not be beefy enough to drive headphones..only one way to find out
and he's really raving about it, his Asus Essence STX is hardly being used anymore
plus it works w/ the third party ploytec USB drivers, so gets bit-perfect KS/ASIO...he's put an OPA2132P and loves it. He might try some LT1028ACN8 soon or later, but they might not be beefy enough to drive headphones..only one way to find out
BUF are good for headphone driver (up to 250mA output):
Yup, definitely they are.
Last edited:
Ah, so the output of the 4580 is buffered...The link to the Azuentech sound card is childish as an argument. They are buffering the outputs of the IC OpAmp's to compensate for the low and variable impedance of the headphones. It doesn't "prove" that IC sounds worse that a complete discrete stage. If you look ate their pic you will see the IC OpAmp there.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Anyway, I'm sure that used properly the 4580 (like my amp's 4570) can sound brilliant. Or the Accuphase DP-400 wouldn't be as good as they say.
I've considered replacing the 4570, but on the sonic side of things, I just don't see a need for taking the risk (because it would be so)...
Last edited:
...I don't really get why that AD op-amps designer talks to us like complete retards, but well nvm
Go for it, but please don't attribute me with YOUR interpretation of my motivations. Again I question my own posting under a real names policy. So ante up in a real situation where you could choose either way, be wrong? How about it?
Lol... I can't keep up with this
You're not kidding.
Have anyone used LT1028 or LT1115 comp pin out to an external buffer?
After the LT1028 hype I'm very tempted to try one of them. LT1028 is so very expensive here in Sweden. LT1115 is affordable. How much better do you find LT1028? As I understand it it's the same circuit with differences in DC precision.
After the LT1028 hype I'm very tempted to try one of them. LT1028 is so very expensive here in Sweden. LT1115 is affordable. How much better do you find LT1028? As I understand it it's the same circuit with differences in DC precision.
Lynx almost uses 5532's exclusively, but RME puts a lot of NJM2068 on their latest PCI serie.Personally, I found that NJM2068 sonds a tad better in a line amplifier.
bah, reading their thread is quite unbearable..I've completely given upHa ha, those "clever" head-fi'ers that want to bias their opamps into class A at all costs, even that of sound quality
actually, I don't even have the feeling that we speak the same language...so by any means, please ignore us if you may.Go for it, but please don't attribute me with YOUR interpretation of my motivations. Again I question my own posting under a real names policy. So ante up in a real situation where you could choose either way, be wrong? How about it?
Last edited:
Thanks for the NJM 4580 datasheet. Could you also link me a datasheet for the NJM 4570? That'd be nice!
Anyhow, the 4580 looks good enough to justify its use in the Accuphase in place of the NE5532. In particular, it has a higher quiescent current that could bring a smoother sound, and a higher (15 vs. 9 MHz) bandwidth. Also its Ib is better (half of that of the NE5532), and its output current seems at least twice as much.
actually, I don't even have the feeling that we speak the same language...so by any means, please ignore us if you may.
No problem, though I put no one one on an ignore list.
I dont't know how much the same they are... they sound similar superficially, yet the LT1115 has a different tonal color (exactly like its numbers command! The 5 is heard as a redish dominant color, vs. the neutral to greenish/brownish that the LT1028 has in consequence of its 2 and 8, believe it or not...or just compare them). Besides, the LT1115 sounds kind of sweeter, less "open window" transparent; more forgiving, if you will. I think they're both worth trying, but what I prefer is the LT1028CS8 or ACN8 (these do sound identical).Have anyone used LT1028 or LT1115 comp pin out to an external buffer?
After the LT1028 hype I'm very tempted to try one of them. LT1028 is so very expensive here in Sweden. LT1115 is affordable. How much better do you find LT1028? As I understand it it's the same circuit with differences in DC precision.
No, I haven't tried the comp pin out. On the other hand, I use the LT1028 as the line out buffer of my DACs, where it wouldn't be a good idea.
Hmm, well... you're welcome like anyone else, as far as I'm concerned.No problem, though I put no one one on an ignore list.
Andrea, please!! they're not ready for the whole op-amps numerology/colors, just yetLT1115 has a different tonal color (exactly like its numbers command! The 5 is heard as a redish dominant color, vs. the neutral to greenish/brownish that the LT1028 has in consequence of its 2 and 8
what does LT1124ACN8 say btw? coz I'll prolly get it soldered together w/ the burson anytime soon.
- Home
- Amplifiers
- Chip Amps
- The best sounding audio integrated opamps